Forums | MacLife

This thread has More or Less gone to hell.

Farmerkev wrote:

Hank Rearden wrote:

Frankly anyone, of any reasonably mainstream political stripe, should abhor torture.

Even if I just want to use it on one or two particular individuals?

If you get to choose one, can I choose the other?

Hank Rearden wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

Hank Rearden wrote:

Frankly anyone, of any reasonably mainstream political stripe, should abhor torture.

Even if I just want to use it on one or two particular individuals?

If you get to choose one, can I choose the other?

gozer wrote:

resedit wrote:

ukimalefu wrote:

Next debate should be done using only "yo mamma" jokes.

That would be worth watching.
Obama would win though.

i assume you mean because he's more quick thinking and intelligent than mccain and not because he's black.

I think it's because he's clean and articulate... and bright.

bratboy wrote:

That was a direct response to what you posted above, and had nothing to do with John McCain.

I'm unsure as to why you persist in placing quotation marks around statements that I haven't made.

I originally asked "didn't McCain change his position on waterboarding?"  I've acknowledged that McCain voted against applying the Army Field Manual standards to the CIA, after stating that those standards were sufficient.  Congress did not vote on a bill specifically banning waterboarding alone. 

Will this preempt any further whining from you?

I've gone from an internet tough guy to a whiner?  Man, I'm just all over the place today.  Glad I have you to inform me.

How about you just admit that McCain has never changed his position on waterboarding, or on anything deemed as "torture" for that matter, which would pretty much explain why he has never "been called on it."

The funny thing is you not being able to realize that one tends to not be called on something that isn't true.

bratboy wrote:

This thread has More or Less gone to hell.

Don't get in a huff.

Hank Rearden wrote:

Dick Tater wrote:

Splashing water on a towel on their faces while yelling at them doesn't seem all that harmful to me.  But it sure does get the liberals all upset.

I think that you'd get upset if it happened to you.

OK, here's the deal. Torture belongs in the realm of fascism, communism - totalitarianism in general.

If associating yourself with such ideologies is fine with you, then I find you exceedingly repugnant. And the nausea comes from the bottom of my conservative ilium.

So you think our troops who would have the misfortune to be captured in either Iraq or Afghanistan, would be gravely concerned at the threat of facing a simulated drowning?  Really, that's the big issue for you right about now?

I really laugh at the idea you think I give a crap if you find me repugnant or not, especially with your misplaced priorities.  I personally would do many an unmentionable thing if I could have the pleasure of being in presence of one of the al Qaeda leadership.

Any intel gleaned would just be a bonus.

See, to me, I feel that I should hold them to their own standards and laws.  I do not feel Western law applies to them anymore the Shari'ah Law applies to my life.

I find the idea that the US Constitution protects these human wastes of space repugnant, but after my thirst for vengence was whetted I'd have no problem allowing the few who gave me the intel or were respecful of their circumstances the parade of Western justice just to appease the moral sensiblities of those.... who have them.

But it will only be for show, only for the media war.

Sound familiar at all?

Hank Rearden wrote:

Dick Tater wrote:

I could have the pleasure of being in presence of one of the al Qaeda leadership.

I'm sure that the CIA would be interested in that statement.

Oh yes, I am sure they would.  Most red blooded American males do not feel much differently than me on that point.

Hank Rearden wrote:

Dick Tater wrote:

See, to me, I feel that I should hold them to their own standards and laws.

I'd ask you why you don't hold to your own standards, but I fear that I'd find out that your standards matched theirs.

Why should Western Law apply in the jurisdiction of Shari'ah Law?

Is not the parallel to your argument that Shari'ah Law would then be used to judge American's captives?

Hank Rearden wrote:

Oh, and by the way, I'm not American.

Which is why you don't understand, nor should you care.  But I guess it's the socialist in you that likes to tell other's what they should do and how they should do it.

Last edited by Dick Tater (2008-09-27 10:03 pm)

Are you guys letting MoL post over at the clubhouse these days?

Let's see. . .

Dick Tater wrote:

Most intelligent people were not expecting that to happen.  Why were you?

since they kept implying it it would make sense to show it. Making the claim that "most intelligent people were not expecting it to happen" doesn't mean it's acceptable that they kept on implying it, but couldn't actually show it.

Dick Tater wrote:

I wonder if that lack of proof had anything with Saddam blocking weapon's inspections and flaunting various UN resolutions that dated back to as far as 1991.

Flaunting? ? ? ummmm. . . I've made this point many times before. We have sufficient ariel surveillance capability to see them moving weapons. It was often claimed that he had time to move them because we told him where we were going to be. . . well we do have the capability to do geosynchronous orbital survaillance over time. Nuff Said. Since we couldn't come up with anything. . . I guess items in question went the same way as those bogus Mobile chem bio weapons labs? ? ?

Dick Tater wrote:

You're doing more linking of Iraq to 9/11 than Dick Cheney.

and you're deliberately taking my quote out of context. . . but most intelligent people expect you to do nothing to change that behavior.

Dick Tater wrote:

I wonder if all the flailing around since 1991 has since been resolved?

Making a point. The US military has thought nothing of wasting tons of money on a high maintenance dictator WE installed. . . again, dance with the devil. . . and if not, we wouldn't be there in the first place. The failed state is our responsibility. Yeah, Saddam was a cruel dictator. We were perfectly happy with him killin' his own people until he started biting the hand that fed him.

Dick Tater wrote:

Except the PR for the war is not the justification for the war.  You, like most slack jawed major news outlet watchers, are just a victim of the media war.

PR is the way the propanda is disseminated to the people, and mass media is the only reason we got stuck with this clown in charge in the first place. . . but I guess that's what happens when you whack off to one too many pictures of Ann Coulter. . . I don't watch teevee, or buy the propaganda books, so perhaps you should throw away the script they give you and actually make some valid points.

Dick Tater wrote:

And this means Obama's plan for military pullout by, well I think we'd have been out by now, would've done what with that corner we painted ourselves into?

How's the surge working out, btw?

Well, I guess the "slack jawed institutional media watchers" such as yourself would echo what the warmongers want you to believe via the mass media. . . the surge is workin' out jus fine and McSame will end it before a first term is served out and bring all our boys and girls home and see to the needs of all the vets. . . yeah, right. . . he'll strut around like a peacock with hemerhoids and that stupid smirk pasted to his face. . .  funny, in 2003 I predicted we'd still be here in 2010. Looks like we're all set to wildly exceed my expectations, eh?

We need to get ourselves out of the corner.

Dick Tater wrote:

Wait, we supported this jerk because we hated another bunch of jerks even more?

Gosh, here's a thought for you to ponder.  Did it ever occur to you that while, in the media, it made sense to use 9/11 for the public support for our fixing of the "flailing about since 1991" with Iraq... when in fact we are seeking to not only stabilize this failed state... but pretty much quarantine what I will simple call a slightly problematic region?

Perhaps you are the one who should do the pondering. Perhaps the mystical wing of the neocon party should commune with the spirit of Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. . . . dance with the devil. . . you get burned. . . again and again and. . . . ahhhh, you'll never learn.




PR firms pay twits like yourself a few cents a click to post to forums and bilously pretend you're one of the grown ups who has some concept of realpolitik. . . Personally, I think it's comical. . . the same old crap. . . we never do anything wrong, we never make any foreign policy mistakes of, if we do, it's not being tough enough as opposed to just being morally wrongheaded. . . and you always give yourselves away because you never deviate from the script.

The policies of the last 4 administrations have sunk us into a hole. Generally the way to get out of a hole is to stop digging.

I'll have nothing more to do with you, dick, because I'm not going to waste any more of my time. Go ahead, take the last word.

Geez, don't you get enough playing Sybill with the Col Panic alternick.

Oh damn. It's more or less. Not Freakout Jackson. Not that it makes a difference, really.