Bingo! Rush just said it all...

[Calabrio]

It doesn't matter whether we reverse EVERY foreign policy decision this country has made in the past century. It doesn't matter if every single American troop was off foreign soil. The Islamic-terrorists are looking for parity. Ayman al-Zawahiri is on the record as having said:

"We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill 4 million
Americans - 2 million of them children - and to exile twice as many and
wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore, it is our right to
fight them with chemical and biological weapons, so as to afflict them with
the fatal maladies that have afflicted the Muslims because of the
[Americans'] chemical and biological weapons."

 

[MonsterMark]

Let's all hold hands and sing 'Give Peace A Chance" and we'll all be safe.:shifty:

 

[MonsterMark]

I feel sorry for the hundreds of thousands of Americans that gave their lives during the 1st, 2nd, Korean, Vietnam and Gulf Wars.

All we got out of those wars was a majority now of ungrateful pansy-ass entitlement loser Americans.

 

[04SCTLS]

No good deed goes unpunished

 

[MonsterMark]

No good deed goes unpunished

Real nice comment.

Why don't you be the 1st liberal to stand up and beg the jihadist for forgiveness. I'm sure he will.

Be a man for once in your life. Watch the video. The whole thing.

For every one else, graphic violence.

Sorry I had to do it, but this guy needs a clue.

 

[04SCTLS]

In the rules of debate, the person who resorts to calling his opponent names is losing,
I don't like religious extremists of any faith but these guys are blowback for US foreign policy of the last 50 years.
They can't challenge our military might so they use religion to breed human bombers which seem to scare the hell out of you.
The terrorist is the one with the small bomb.

 

[MrScalia]

And if Paul doesn't get the nom and Romney does, Romney will have to do a better job of convincing me that he won't add new gun legislation or else I'll sit it out.

Ron Paul ??

Just what makes that little old ant
Think hell move that rubber tree plant
Anyone knows an ant, cant
Move a rubber tree plant

But hes got high hopes, hes got high hopes
Hes got high apple pie, in the sky hopes

 

[MonsterMark]

...I don't like religious extremists of any faith but these guys are blowback for US foreign policy of the last 50 years.

Did you watch the video?

 

[fossten]

Ron Paul ??

Just what makes that little old ant
Think hell move that rubber tree plant
Anyone knows an ant, cant
Move a rubber tree plant

But hes got high hopes, hes got high hopes
Hes got high apple pie, in the sky hopes

Your mocking does not impress me. An actual, reasoned, logical argument might. Haven't heard one yet. "He can't win" or "he's a nutbag" doesn't work. You don't seem to get it. Ron Paul's chance to win is NOT my reason for voting for him. Otherwise, I'd be a lemming like the rest of the party members. I'm voting for the best candidate in my opinion rather than following the party line. Even you Republican diehards admit that McCain is a shoddy candidate. No wonder voting for him makes you queasy.

I voted for Bush twice. He called me a racist for opposing his shamnesty bill that Ted Kennedy wrote. He's compromised the party principles too much already. I'm not going to compromise my principles this time.

 

[04SCTLS]

Yes I watched the video.
Made to appall and disgust and instill fear in typically squeemish western audiences.
They know we have a soft stomach for this stuff.
We never do see videos of children and civilians blown apart and dismembered by colateralal damage from errant american bombing.
Only glimpses from suicide bomber explosions.

we've killed and injured a lot more of their people than they have us.

 

[Calabrio]

we've killed and injured a lot more of their people than they have us.

You fail to acknowledge the countless Americans who have died because of our government's policy to SPARE innocent life. To do everything in our power to limit those deaths, at the expense of our own.

You also fail to note that those same people we fight have killed FAR MORE of those innocent people ON PURPOSE than we regretfully might have.

The "blowback" you refer to has little to do with us. The U.S. has far less involvement in the Middle East than people tend to think. We didn't plant flags there. We didn't draw the boundaries. In fact, virtually all the interference people like you tend to note came primarily from the colonist intentions of the Europeans, NOT America. Same goes for Africa. Same goes for Asia.

 

[04SCTLS]

The CIA overthrough the elected government of Iran and put the Shah on his puppet throne. He was deposed in the 1979 Iranian Revolution and we were humiliated with the taking of hostages, which started this whole islamic thing rolling.

 

[shagdrum]

I voted for Bush twice. He called me a racist for opposing his shamnesty bill that Ted Kennedy wrote. He's compromised the party principles too much already. I'm not going to compromise my principles this time.

I think you speak for every conservative there. Peggy Noonan claims that Bush broke the republican party. I think that is pretty accurate.

 

[shagdrum]

we've killed and injured a lot more of their people than they have us.

That's the sign of an effective military. Kill more of your enemy then the kill of you. The question should be asked, which side has purposly targeted and killed more innocent civilians. America hasn't killed one. How many have they killed?

 

[Calabrio]

The CIA overthrough the elected government of Iran and put the Shah on his puppet throne. He was deposed in the 1979 Iranian Revolution and we were humiliated with the taking of hostages, which started this whole islamic thing rolling.

No. You're simply not accurate.

To say that the CIA was able to over through the government in Iran gives that organization far, far too much credit. The operations in Iran were a cluster f#(k, at best.

You also fail to note that it was BRITAIN that initially sought to influence the government of Iran following Prime Minister Mossadegh's decision to nationalize the oil fields, robbing the British of their investment. If I remember right, Mossadegh was also cozy with the Soviets.

You also don't seem to know that the Shah vastly improved the quality of life in the country, investing heavily and modernizing the infrastructure of Iran. Anything that resembles the 20th century left in Iran to this day is the remnant of the Shah's autocratic control of the country. That's why Iran doesn't look like Afghanistan and has some chance at reformation from the inside. NOTE: We didn't place the Shah, him and his family were in power already. We simply supported him.

Thank Jimmy Carter for dropping the ball on that and allowing that country to turn into the viper nest it is.

America's interest in Iran WAS NOT oil- it was simply to prevent the soft expansion of the Soviets. The Europeans WERE involved for the oil.

But back on point, it didn't get this "Islamic thing rolling," it had started long before that. Frankly, I don't have the time, and you don't have the interest to understand Middle Eastern politics, the distinctions between Pan-Arabism and Pan-Islamism, ect... but that ball "was rolling" LONG before 1979.

However, after Carter's failed foreign policy looked the other way and then abandoned the Shah, Iran was able to become a breeding ground for that radicalism.

 

[MonsterMark]

we've killed and injured a lot more of their people than they have us.

Good! Let's keep it that way.

Let me get this straight.

Did Saddam invade Kuwait or was that a figment of the United States imagination?

 

[Calabrio]

Good! Let's keep it that way.

Let me get this straight.

Did Saddam invade Kuwait or was that a figment of the the United States imagination.?

You also might have been imagining Saddam launching missiles on America jets patrolling the no fly zone.

You might also have been imagining that Saddam attempted to assassinate President George HW Bush.

You might also have been imagining that Hussein had been a sponsor of terrorism through the region.

And you must have also been imagining the fact that Hussein had a nuclear and biological weapons program that undeniably existed, though in a suspended state, waiting for the impending lifting of UN sanctions at the behest of France and Germany, and the inevitable fortunes from oil revenues that would be freed to fully fund it.

Not to mention the various genocides Hussein carried out while in power, including the Kurds and the marsh arabs.

Clearly, you have a very vivid imagination.

 

[Machspeed]

The CIA overthrough the elected government of Iran and put the Shah on his puppet throne. He was deposed in the 1979 Iranian Revolution and we were humiliated with the taking of hostages, which started this whole islamic thing rolling.

You know, you could have done yourself better by saying that our support for Israel is what got this whole ball rolling. With that, you might, at the very least, have presented yourself in a more credible way.

 

[Calabrio]

You know, you could have done yourself better by saying that our support for Israel is what got this whole ball rolling. With that, you might, at the very least, have presented yourself in a more credible way.

No, that would have been incorrect to.
Historically, the U.S. HAS NOT supported Israel. That's a more recent policy.

It's certainly used as a propaganda tool, just as the Iranian revolution is, but it's a dishonest argument.

 

[04SCTLS]

AIPAC has a virtual lock on the US Congress and the state department.
Any politician who criticizes Isreal is systematically targeted and run out of office at election time.
I truly believe that the last plane on 9/11 was targeted to hit congress and not the white house to kill as many Isreal supporters as possible.
To Isreal it's a matter of life and death survival being surrounded by a hundred million people taught from childhood to hate them.
It is something that's easy to understand.
This is all based on envy of course as Jews are overall very smart and successful.
Unfortunately they did not have the strength to run all the arabs out of Palestine in 1948. The other arab countries don't really care about these people who have only called themselves Palestinians since 1961 and would sell them out in a minute if it suited their purposes.
For now they are a convenient excuse for hating Isreal as they could easily be absorbed into the neighboring arab states.

 

[Calabrio]

AIPAC has a virtual lock on the US Congress and the state department.
Any politician who criticizes Isreal is systematically targeted and run out of office at election time.

Absolutely NOT TRUE.

I truly believe that the last plane on 9/11 was targeted to hit congress and not the white house to kill as many Isreal supporters as possible.

You're a fool if you think the aggression directed at the U.S. is honestly caused by our allegiance to Israel. And you're a coward if you think we should abandon the only free country in that region.

To Isreal it's a matter of life and death survival being surrounded by a hundred million people taught from childhood to hate them.

Israel was able to defend itself remarkably well before the U.S. started giving the aid with strings attached. In fact, Ron Paul is right, they were stronger before we got involved. What's a matter of debate is whether they became weaker because we got involved or simply because they became fatigued after a half century of defensive wars.

It is something that's easy to understand.
This is all based on envy of course as Jews are overall very smart and successful.

... do I detect a tinge of antisemitism here? Are they all good with money too?

Unfortunately they did not have the strength to run all the arabs out of Palestine in 1948.

THEY HAVE NEVER TRIED TO RUN THE PALESTINIANS (or whatever they want to call themself) OFF. There is a significant number of Palestinians, and other Middle Eastern minorities, living as citizens of Isreal, happily and successfully.

Israel has been more than powerful enough to dominate the region, but that has NEVER been their goal. If you honestly had even a tiny understanding of the history of the region, you would know this. After being attacked countless times, they responded defensively and seized a defensive border.... then gave the rest of the territory back.

Hell, the Israelis could have marched on Cairo if they really wanted to.

The other arab countries don't really care about these people who have only called themselves Palestinians since 1961 and would sell them out in a minute if it suited their purposes.

Not only WOULD they, they HAVE.
Those Arab countries have all seized the land designated to the Palestinians, then abandoned them.

 

[shagdrum]

Absolutely NOT TRUE.


You're a fool if you think the aggression directed at the U.S. is honestly caused by our allegiance to Israel. And you're a coward if you think we should abandon the only free country in that region.


Israel was able to defend itself remarkably well before the U.S. started giving the aid with strings attached. In fact, Ron Paul is right, they were stronger before we got involved. What's a matter of debate is whether they became weaker because we got involved or simply because they became fatigued after a half century of defensive wars.


... do I detect a tinge of antisemitism here? Are they all good with money too?



THEY HAVE NEVER TRIED TO RUN THE PALESTINIANS (or whatever they want to call themself) OFF. There is a significant number of Palestinians, and other Middle Eastern minorities, living as citizens of Isreal, happily and successfully.

Israel has been more than powerful enough to dominate the region, but that has NEVER been their goal. If you honestly had even a tiny understanding of the history of the region, you would know this. After being attacked countless times, they responded defensively and seized a defensive border.... then gave the rest of the territory back.

Hell, the Israelis could have marched on Cairo if they really wanted to.




Not only WOULD they, they HAVE.
Those Arab countries have all seized the land designated to the Palestinians, then abandoned them.

:I

 

[04SCTLS]

I never said we should abandon Isreal and saying that anti semitism is based on envy is not an anti semitic statement.

 

[fossten]

This is all based on envy of course as Jews are overall very smart and successful.

How is this statement anti-semitic? Seems very complimentary to me.

 

[Calabrio]

How is this statement anti-semitic? Seems very complimentary to me.

Because often times it would be followed with, "and they're good with money." Perpetuating a positive stereotype is still perpetuating a stereotype based on perceived prejudice, be it positive or not. That apparently not what he meant to do. It's not that "Jews" are smart and successful, it's that the state of Israel, which includes it's diverse population, has been successful.

The envy argument is very true, it's a critical component of the Anti-Israel rhetoric there.

Israel is a thriving, successful country in the middle of that sandy hell that is the Middle East. And despite not have been blessed with rich oil reserves to rely upon, the Israeli people have had to be industrious and use their human talents. It stands in stark contrast to the other countries in the region. So, it's not difficult to convince uneducated, angry, emerging radicals that the success of Israel is do, not to their hardwork, but because they stole it from the Muslims.