THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
SDR
This election is between Jimmy Carter and
Ronald Reagan... all over again.
I don't think Americans feel safe, secure, and
fuzzy warm in this world. Therefore
The choice is between striking back hard if/when
we're hit or trying to understand/rationalize the
attack... to accept our losses and seek to engage
the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
And I don't think Americans are the kinds of
whopping morons who'd vote in Jimmy again,
or his stand-in Kerry.
This election is over. But we're going to have to
put up with a couple of more months of crap about
type faces and purple hearts, endlessly pointless
budget deficit numbers no voter could possibly
relate to his day-to-day & other numbing total
irrelevancies to whom/what we should vote for:
The point is that, unlike the Spanish (who voted
their blind dumb anger), the Americans are going to
vote their immediate fears & long-term insecurities.
And that means you buy the raving dog that barks
at the door, not the fluffy cat that purrs in yer lap
(even if it does look eerily like Herman Munster).
S D Rodrian
http://poems.sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://democracy.sdrodrian.com
Art
SDR wrote:
>
> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
>
> This election is between Jimmy Carter and
> Ronald Reagan... all over again.
>
Now, there you go again...
> I don't think Americans feel safe, secure, and
> fuzzy warm in this world. Therefore
No. Even with 100,000 more cops on the street it's not a good idea to
walk alone in Cicero after dark. George Alarm company is making a
killing or killing and robbery. Why, it's highway robbery!
Lock your house. Lock your car. Lock your locker. And now they have
these terrorists running around.
>
> The choice is between striking back hard if/when
> we're hit or trying to understand/rationalize the
> attack... to accept our losses and seek to engage
> the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
Yes, this sums up the debate over America's Heathcare system to a "T."
>
> And I don't think Americans are the kinds of
> whopping morons who'd vote in Jimmy again,
> or his stand-in Kerry.
Yabut, Carter didn't have three purple hearts. Just one that was bleeding.
>
> This election is over. But we're going to have to
> put up with a couple of more months of crap about
> type faces and purple hearts, endlessly pointless
> budget deficit numbers no voter could possibly
> relate to his day-to-day & other numbing total
> irrelevancies to whom/what we should vote for:
Eh. They haven't dropped a DUI story yet. That happens the Friday before
the election.
>
> The point is that, unlike the Spanish (who voted
> their blind dumb anger),
Spelled: f e a r.
"If you would crucify him, then do it yourselves. I'm busy washing my hands."
> the Americans are going to
> vote their immediate fears & long-term insecurities.
> And that means you buy the raving dog that barks
> at the door, not the fluffy cat that purrs in yer lap
> (even if it does look eerily like Herman Munster).
All politics are loco.
---
Art
"No; I have not been charged with that.
In fact, nobody has said that to me yet."
---Lee Oswald
(1963)
Michael Cook
"Art" <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:41472569...@yahoo.com...
> All politics are loco.
heh.
yes indeed.
Dale
Bush isn't really all that much like Reagan, who - despite his decrepit
stupidity still had enough of the "real politik" in him to avoid large
and unwinnable wars, concentrating mostly on easy targets like Grenada,
and being able to cut and run when things went south. He also - unlike
Bush - merely paid lip service to the righteous right, and gave them
almost nothing. In most ways - as awful as he was - Bush actually beats
him to the bottom of the pickle barrel.
You're probably correct about Bush's re-election, although I couldn't
care less. But you're wrong about Kerry: he's certainly no Carter, and
he's as aggressive as Bush, and just as likely to whomp even the most
innocent of asses. Democrats - as a matter of fact - have often felt a
need to be tougher than their opponents to make up for this rather
superficial idea. Kerry hasn't met many weapons systems he wouldn't
marry in an instant, if he wasn't married to a weapons system already.
Even a cursory look at history will show that the Pentagon doesn't
suffer at ANYONE's hands, (as neither does Israel) and that war is waged
by both sides for little or no reason. And - really - the entire
conception of an America living under a massive threat is pure bullshit.
There is no great threat to the U.S. that couldn't be almost entirely
eliminated byu removing our troops from areas where almost all the
threats are concentrated in. Another action like 9/11 might happen, but
it isn't all that probable, and it is now quite unnecessary: we put the
lunchbox right in the tiger's cage.
dmh
Art
Those dubious reports from Vietnam are still unsubstantiated.
> Democrats - as a matter of fact - have often felt a
> need to be tougher than their opponents to make up for this rather
> superficial idea.
Kososvo was a testosterone thingy? This means Korea and Vietnam were the
Dems marking their territory, I suppose.
> Kerry hasn't met many weapons systems he wouldn't
> marry in an instant
But, as with all his marriages, he would NEVER pay for any of them...
> , if he wasn't married to a weapons system already.
Ketchup ain't a WMD, is it? Well, maybe: if ya shove it rather than pour it.
> Even a cursory look at history will show that the Pentagon doesn't
> suffer at ANYONE's hands,
If I recall correctly, the DOD budget did, in fact, shrink under the
Carter Admin. But the way these things shrink in D.C. is to grow by
leaps instead of bounds.
> (as neither does Israel) and that war is waged
> by both sides for little or no reason. And - really - the entire
> conception of an America living under a massive threat is pure bullshit.
No one's said 'massive' but you. A second 9/11 style triple attack with
75% effectiveness would constitute a 'massive' or 'eminent' threat. But
how can you stop it? I can think of at least three ways. Read today's
reports coming from Iraq to discover one of them.
Murrah Federal Buildings, World Trade Centers, El Trains, the Pentagon,
the Super Dome--knock these down and you're gonna get people pissed at
you. Go figure.
Russians just learned there are more dangerous people than Eric Harris.
A Clear and Present Danger is what it is.
> There is no great threat to the U.S. that couldn't be almost entirely
> eliminated byu removing our troops from areas where almost all the
> threats are concentrated in. Another action like 9/11 might happen, but
> it isn't all that probable, and it is now quite unnecessary: we put the
> lunchbox right in the tiger's cage.
Yes, let's remove our troops from everywhere. The PLA is demanding some
elbow room.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> SDR wrote:
> >
> > THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> >
> > This election is between Jimmy Carter and
> > Ronald Reagan... all over again.
> >
> Now, there you go again...
>
> > I don't think Americans feel safe, secure, and
> > fuzzy warm in this world. Therefore
>
> No. Even with 100,000 more cops on the street it's not a good idea to
> walk alone in Cicero after dark. George Alarm company is making a
> killing or killing and robbery. Why, it's highway robbery!
>
> Lock your house. Lock your car. Lock your locker. And now they have
> these terrorists running around.
And while I was out, the bassers stole the lock.
But I still have the key.
Heh.
> >
> > The choice is between striking back hard if/when
> > we're hit or trying to understand/rationalize the
> > attack... to accept our losses and seek to engage
> > the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
>
> Yes, this sums up the debate over America's Heathcare system to a "T."
> >
> > And I don't think Americans are the kinds of
> > whopping morons who'd vote in Jimmy again,
> > or his stand-in Kerry.
>
> Yabut, Carter didn't have three purple hearts. Just one that was bleeding.
Yabut /we've/ got Cheney, and Cheney has a purple heart that is also
bleeding.
"The best of both possible worlds."
> >
> > This election is over. But we're going to have to
> > put up with a couple of more months of crap about
> > type faces and purple hearts, endlessly pointless
> > budget deficit numbers no voter could possibly
> > relate to his day-to-day & other numbing total
> > irrelevancies to whom/what we should vote for:
>
> Eh. They haven't dropped a DUI story yet. That happens the Friday before
> the election.
> >
> > The point is that, unlike the Spanish (who voted
> > their blind dumb anger),
>
> Spelled: f e a r.
And why not? An "unaffiliated splinter" (or six) of Al-Qaeda
infests Morocco, its "avowed goal" to bring Spain back into the
Islamic Empire.
This is in addition to the usual Basque Separatists.
Now you can blame Isabella for /both/ of them as well as for
secondhand smoke.
>
> "If you would crucify him, then do it yourselves. I'm busy washing my hands."
Some cheeses are like that. Try tomato juice.
Heinz, maybe.
>
> > the Americans are going to
> > vote their immediate fears & long-term insecurities.
> > And that means you buy the raving dog that barks
> > at the door, not the fluffy cat that purrs in yer lap
> > (even if it does look eerily like Herman Munster).
>
> All politics are loco.
Naaah, it's just that Thing can't open the ketchup unless Kerry
holds the bottle.
Or do I have the wrong big cheese?
Excalibur*
What a friend we have in cheeses
All the mold the milk will bear
'Til the flavor only pleases
Though the smell will kink your hair.
You may vote for Herman Muenster
And the Edams Family,
And the pasty-white Green dunce, stir
In Home Land Security:
What a blend this cottage cheese* is,
Drawn from stone through anvil's glare
Here's Rheingeld beyond von Mises:
"Go away, I will not share."
--
-------(m+
~/:o)_|
The most essential gift for a good writer is
a built-in, shock-proof, shit detector. -- Hemingway
http://scrawlmark.org
Dennis M. Hammes
Yabut lookit the circus, and the tiger only ate Roy /once/...
Beau Blue
No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
country because we let fear overrule good sense. Now we're in it for
the long haul, whether we like it or not, and that's shrubya's
blunder. Igniting the 'forever war', and dammit you don't reward
blunders this large.
And the neocons can muddy up the waters all they want, but it was
their policies that led to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, & the first
thousand dead soldiers for WMDs 'just not there'.
"Here we see a mobile lab truck." To the entire world? Geez, wonder
why our neighbors are worried? How can Kerry possibly do better than
shrubya? Well, at least he starts without having dummied up a
slideshow for the UN. At least he knows what a battlefield really
looks like. Everyone in his administration will know ahead of time not
to write memos on how and when and where the USA can skirt geneva. A
Kerry administration will be more competent at fighting this war
shrubya's thrust on us. How do I know this? 'Cause, so far, our
foriegn policy couldn't have been conducted any worse. There's no
where to go but up. But first, shrubya's gotta go!
-blue
Bill Oliver
Beau Blue <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>
>
>No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
Heh.
billo
Art
"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
>
> No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> country because we let fear overrule good sense.
Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
early win' in your opinion?
> Now we're in it for
> the long haul, whether we like it or not, and that's shrubya's
> blunder. Igniting the 'forever war', and dammit you don't reward
> blunders this large.
>
> And the neocons can muddy up the waters all they want, but it was
> their policies that led to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, & the first
> thousand dead soldiers for WMDs 'just not there'.
It's obvious your opinions are a direct result of the Bush Policy.
Everything he's done in Iraq has been targeted to produce such condemnation.
>
> "Here we see a mobile lab truck." To the entire world? Geez, wonder
> why our neighbors are worried? How can Kerry possibly do better than
> shrubya? Well, at least he starts without having dummied up a
> slideshow for the UN. At least he knows what a battlefield really
> looks like. Everyone in his administration will know ahead of time not
> to write memos on how and when and where the USA can skirt geneva. > A
> Kerry administration will be more competent at fighting this war
> shrubya's thrust on us. How do I know this? 'Cause, so far, our
> foriegn policy couldn't have been conducted any worse. There's no
> where to go but up. But first, shrubya's gotta go!
There's a good chance (50-50 is a good chance considering he's an incumbent)
Shrubya will be fired in Novemeber. No matter what your politics, it's hard
to see how one could believe, on the face of it all, that any of them
wouldn't fuk it up beyond all repair. It is, after all, what they do.
---
Art
Jonathan
"SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
>
> This election is between Jimmy Carter and
> Ronald Reagan... all over again.
>
> I don't think Americans feel safe, secure, and
> fuzzy warm in this world. Therefore
"It's the economy stupid'
Reagan did NOT win because of Iran, but because Carter
botched the economy like no one else.
The election campaign is just now beginning. It's the
last two months that count. And Bush is now
on the defensive as Kerry is shifting to domestic
issues.
Kerry's big mistake was to challenge Bush on Iraq.
Everyone knows we're boxed into a corner on Iraq
policy, stay tough is the only path now. Kerry should be talking
tougher on Iraq by supporting more troops and tougher
actions to get it over with quicker. Instead of a slow
bleed that weakens the chance for democracy.
Domestic issues are another matter. Be prepared
to see the polls begin shifting towards Kerry.
Besides, Florida is still ticked over the last one, there'll
be a huge turnout in Florida which favors Kerry.
Ohio too I bet. Those two states will decide it.
Remember, Gore was five points down the day before
the election. I almost didn't watch election night cause
I thought it was already....decided.
Jonathan
s
Bill Oliver
>
>"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
>>
>> No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
>> terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
>> country because we let fear overrule good sense.
>
>Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
>critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
>early win' in your opinion?
>
It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
billo
Jonathan
"Art" <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:2qpjo0F...@uni-berlin.de...
>
> "Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> >
> > No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> > terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> > country because we let fear overrule good sense.
>
> Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
> critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> early win' in your opinion?
>
It's important to think about the effects of the Iraq war. There have
been plenty of terrorist attacks since 9/11, and guess where
they've been occurring?
Not here!
They take place....now....in Islamic countries, mostly for
supporting us. That's right, this is called ....'taking the war to the enemy'.
The terrorists are forcing the Islamic countries to take the
lead on fighting terrorism. For their own survival.
Besides, the ultimate cause of terrorism is a lack of democracy
and freedom in the Islamic world. It's a shame we have to
resort to shoving it down their throats. But that's their fault
for believing they could placate terrorists and extremists
and simply stay in power by pointing them ....our way.
The Iraq war has changed all that.
Chuck Lysaght
Heh-heh. That was good.
http://chucklysaght.envy.nu/MyDailyRant.html
Zero
news:10kf7ha...@corp.supernews.com...
for anyone who isn't familiar with Billo, this is classic Billo.
this is what he does.
he's as blind and stupid as partisans come.
he's the king of obfuscation.
he's a self-proclaimed mystic, besides.
-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
"those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
-- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
Vote Kerry!
Don't let the world blame us Americans voters
for our evil fucking greedy fanatical leaders.
SDR
in message news:<41472D...@citilink.com>...
> war is waged
> by both sides for little or no reason
What?!?!?! ALL WARS are waged by BOTH sides
for the best of all possible reasons: Because
(and, no, not "just" that): How long ya expect'em
ta keep yelling at each other: "Oh yeah?"
"Yeah!"
"Oh yeah?"
"Yeah!"
"Oh yeah?"
"Yeah!"
"Oh yeah?"
"Yeah!"
http://music.sdrodrian.com "Oh yeah?"
"Yeah!"
"Oh yeah?"
... certainly at some point reason must prevail
and demand war!
"Oh yeah?"
Dale
Instead of the poison gas and expertise we gave him absolutely free?
Seems a step up, capitalistically speaking. But it wouldn't have helped
ther "war on terror" much since Saddam wasn't involved in terrorism.
dmh
Art
Hmm. Then Salman Pak is just an invention of the Langely Studios then?
---
Art
Bob (this one)
Woulda, coulda, shoulda...
Partisan manure. Particularly stupid partisan manure.
Talk about what is, not what your fantasies are...
Pastorio
Arleen
news:BMSdnYsrWYw...@adelphia.com...
>
> he's a self-proclaimed mystic, besides.
>
what does that have to do with anything?
aj
--
http://ajartworks.com/tuesdays-child
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not
only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the
American public." ---Theodore Roosevelt
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zero
in message news:2qq1sgF...@uni-berlin.de...
> "Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote:
> > he's a self-proclaimed mystic, besides.
>
> what does that have to do with anything?
it's just the truth, that's all.
he's also a self-proclaimed scientist.
methinks that the quote of Billo's i commented
on here shows which of his self-proclamations
he uses to argue his politics upon, and thus just
where his mysticism is based in the spiritual
battle between Good and fricken' Evil.
he's a warmonger/hatemonger apologist. hello.
-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
"those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
-- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
Vote Bush OUT!
Don't let the world (nor our children)
blame us voters for our evil fucking
stupid greedy fanatical leaders.
Byron Canfield
>
> This election is between Jimmy Carter and
> Ronald Reagan... all over again.
Only in the minds of the neo-cons (on both counts).
--
Byron "Barn" Canfield
-----------------------------
"Politics is a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles."
-- Ambrose Bierce
Byron Canfield
news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
>
> we're hit or trying to understand/rationalize the
> attack... to accept our losses and seek to engage
> the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the striking,
instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
Davida Chazan - The Chocolate Lady
--
Davida Chazan (The Chocolate Lady)
<davidac AT jdc DOT org DOT il>
~*~*~*~*~*~
"What you see before you, my friend, is the result of a lifetime of
chocolate."
--Katharine Hepburn (May 12, 1907 - June 29, 2003)
~*~*~*~*~*~
Links to my published poetry - http://davidachazan.homestead.com/
~*~*~*~*~*~
Bill Oliver
Bob (this one) <B...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>Woulda, coulda, shoulda...
>
>Partisan manure. Particularly stupid partisan manure.
>
>Talk about what is, not what your fantasies are...
>
If you want to talk about fantasies, I suggest that you
ask the Kerry campaign about the forged documents they
passed to CBS.
billo
Dale
Byron Canfield wrote:
> "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
>
>> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
>>
>> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
>> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
>> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
>
>
> I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
> striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
>
>
I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
want to strike at us in the first place,and then do something about that.
Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
dmh
SDR
in message news:<edN1d.47411
$vkm....@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
> > The choice is between striking back hard if/when
> > we're hit....
>
> ummm...if that is the case, why are you
> wasting time and resources in Iraq,
> who never attacked you?
Iraq attacked "my" petroleum (which is my life's
blood): Imagine tomorrow all motor vehicles were to
cease functioning, all "motors" for that matter...
It'd make the Depression look like Disney Land).
Where would I get my food? It's all delivered to me
by trucks now, or diesel trains... it's all sown,
grown, and processed by gas-electrical machines
(when's the last time you saw a mule pulling a plow?).
No: The nuclear war that's coming soon will be fought
between China and America, and it will be over OIL
(oh, I'm sure they will all say it's over Taiwan and
freedom & democracy BUT)... trust me on this, it will be
over a much more important matter: our life-blood OIL.
> Why is the guy who greased you and pumped you hard
> still running loose?
Because Muslims have petroleum and we don't want to
push too hard people who pump our life-blood. Had they
no petroleum, we'd probably nuked them by now (as this
is the usual human response). Pakistan knows this; even
though ALL Muslims think of themselves as the enemies of
Mankind--Jihad is "The War Against Mankind" Islam has
been waging for 1434 years now (since the birth of The
Anti-Christ Mohammed). NOTE that the nuclear war will not
be against Muslims, but only "caused" by Muslims. Satan
likes to "play games" with the lives and souls of men.
> Why was Iran given 4 more years to develop its weapons
> systems?
Because it's hard to bite the bullet and risk killing millions
of people, even if there's no getting around it. We can live
under great threats, but Iraq crossed the line when it tried
to grab Kuwait & Saudi Arabia. Iran may play games for a long
while yet... juggling threats to our life-blood... who knows how
long... perhaps even until the nuclear war that's coming.
Is that all?
Art
Jonathan wrote:
>
> "Art" <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:2qpjo0F...@uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > "Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> > >
> > > No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> > > terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> > > country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> >
> > Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
> > critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> > early win' in your opinion?
> >
>
> It's important to think about the effects of the Iraq war. There have
> been plenty of terrorist attacks since 9/11, and guess where
> they've been occurring?
>
> Not here!
>
> They take place....now....in Islamic countries, mostly for
> supporting us. That's right, this is called ....'taking the war to the enemy'.
> The terrorists are forcing the Islamic countries to take the
> lead on fighting terrorism. For their own survival.
>
> Besides, the ultimate cause of terrorism is a lack of democracy
> and freedom in the Islamic world. It's a shame we have to
> resort to shoving it down their throats. But that's their fault
> for believing they could placate terrorists and extremists
> and simply stay in power by pointing them ....our way.
>
> The Iraq war has changed all that.
Horseshoes and government work, sure.
Which this ain't.
The ultimate cause, if there is one discernible ultimate cause, is not a
'lack of democracy.' That's Gop toothpaste ad copy: "9 out of 10
political analysts agree...Iraqis have a brighter, whiter smile since
the Crusade."
Byron Canfield
Indeed, look to the motivation and deal with that, rather than making silly
assumptions about the motivation (i.e., they hate our freedom, etc.).
Art
A King then. No; a PHILOSOPHER King. One who would send an emissary to
Kabul to ask the leaders of /The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against
the Jews and Crusaders/ to explain what they'd already broadcast in a
dozen Fatwas.
"Sammy; WTF?"
Pst: A) They want a Neo-fascist Islamic Super State in the Persian
Gulf--for starters. B) America is standing in the way. C) They want the
Jews O-U-T--the diaspora didn't last nearly long enough. D) America is
standing in the way. E) They want control of a lion's share of the oil
as the Oil Era draws to a close. F) America is standing in the way.
B-D-F.
Zero
> Bob (this one) <B...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >Woulda, coulda, shoulda...
> >
> >Partisan manure. Particularly stupid partisan manure.
> >
> >Talk about what is, not what your fantasies are...
>
> If you want to talk about fantasies, I suggest that you
> ask the Kerry campaign about the forged documents they
> passed to CBS.
next up: Billo focusses all of his attention and brainpower
on some potentially forged documents purporting to defraud
the American public into believing that there actually IS
something called the Bill of Rights.
as well as some documents designed to defraud the American
people into believing that the laws of gravity actually work.
he certainly won't be spending his time showing how the laws
of gravity are a bunch of Liberal propaganda.
why? because the bowling balls that he and his "hopeful"
ilk have been secretly throwing up into the sky keep
consistently falling back down on their throbbing heads.
Art
SDR wrote:
>
> "Conservative Guy" <sdd...@whdsgafdses.usa> wrote
> in message news:<edN1d.47411
>
> $vkm....@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
>
> > > The choice is between striking back hard if/when
> > > we're hit....
> >
> > ummm...if that is the case, why are you
> > wasting time and resources in Iraq,
> > who never attacked you?
>
> Iraq attacked "my" petroleum (which is my life's
> blood): Imagine tomorrow all motor vehicles were to
> cease functioning, all "motors" for that matter...
> It'd make the Depression look like Disney Land).
> Where would I get my food? It's all delivered to me
> by trucks now, or diesel trains... it's all sown,
> grown, and processed by gas-electrical machines
> (when's the last time you saw a mule pulling a plow?).
A couple of years ago when I passed by an Amish farm. Except it was a
horse, not a mule.
>
> No: The nuclear war that's coming soon will be fought
> between China and America, and it will be over OIL
> (oh, I'm sure they will all say it's over Taiwan and
> freedom & democracy BUT)... trust me on this, it will be
> over a much more important matter: our life-blood OIL.
The last century of the Oil Era began in 1972. China's five-year plans
are built around the acquisition of more secure foreign supplies of oil,
certainly. It's why she was in bed with Saddam when the One-Oh-One
knocked down the door.
The PLA officer corps is, reportedly, generally comfortable with the
fact that the war will be fought against America in the next ten years.
Nobody's thinking TNW, though. Nobody left around the neighborhood's
stupid enough to think they could stand up to The United States Space
Command. In fact, America's not stupid enough to USE the USSC; nor will
a President, in his right mind, actually declare war on another
nation--/because/ of the USSC.
Dale
Byron Canfield wrote:
> "Dale" <dm...@citilink.com> wrote in message
> news:4148344B...@citilink.com...
>
>>
>>Byron Canfield wrote:
>> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
>> > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
>> >
>> >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
>> >>
>> >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
>> >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
>> >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
>> >
>> >
>> > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
>> > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
>> >
>> >
>>I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
>>want to strike at us in the first place,and then do something about that.
>>
>>Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
>
>
> Indeed, look to the motivation and deal with that, rather than making silly
> assumptions about the motivation (i.e., they hate our freedom, etc.).
>
>
But then you're asking for a president who contemplates and cogitates,
and - unfortunately - the great American public appears to confuse the
actual (slow and deliberate) thought process with being some sort of
"pussy" and prefers "men of action" who bomb now and forget to think
later. The declining state of our education systems and the brazen
whoredom of our media can only make this worse, so there's not much hope
on the horizon it seems. As it is going, we'd do as well to elect a
chimp for president (I know - we already have, several times!), and
place it before a board full of buttons ("bomb," "kill," "kiss a CEO"
etc.) and let the damn thing punch buttons at random. Might even be
better all in all.
Bush is a lying dry drunk, and Kerry's a pointless anecdote waiting for
the joke to fail: what can you do, but try and make your own life
better, and hope you don't get trapped in someone else's debris?
If the candidates waiting in the wings are any indication of what we
destined to be "led" by (McCain, Hillary, etal) I think we should start
developing that chimp-control board system right now.
dmh
Bob (this one)
<LOL> Nah. The subject is your partisan manure, not what anyone else
has done. But nice try, as usual, at diversion and evasion. Only
missing the big red nose, Billo...
I note that all your partisan manure is only aimed at dems.
Definition; identity. Repubs make no errors worth noting.
Karzai is effectively the mayor of Kabul with most outlying
territories comfortably in control of insurgents or warlords in
Afghanistan. The Iraq war is going swimmingly with US forces in
control in damn near half the country we "freed." No mistakes there.
Brilliant strategy for winning and keeping the peace. (I can't wait
for the "explanation" why we're doing exactly the right things.)
See? You *only* do partisan manure. Repubs are perfect. <LOL> I bet
it's going to be "more perfect" like "more perpendicular."
HTH
Pastorio
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Art <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Dale wrote:
> >>
> >> SDR wrote:
> >> > THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> >> >
> >> > This election is between Jimmy Carter and
> >> > Ronald Reagan... all over again.
> >> >
> >> > fuzzy warm in this world. Therefore
> >> >
> >> > we're hit or trying to understand/rationalize the
> >> > attack... to accept our losses and seek to engage
> >> > the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
> >> >
> >> > whopping morons who'd vote in Jimmy again,
> >> > or his stand-in Kerry.
> >> >
> >> > This election is over. But we're going to have to
> >> > put up with a couple of more months of crap about
> >> > type faces and purple hearts, endlessly pointless
> >> > budget deficit numbers no voter could possibly
> >> > relate to his day-to-day & other numbing total
> >> > irrelevancies to whom/what we should vote for:
> >> >
> >> > The point is that, unlike the Spanish (who voted
> >> > their blind dumb anger), the Americans are going to
> >> > vote their immediate fears & long-term insecurities.
> >> > And that means you buy the raving dog that barks
> >> > at the door, not the fluffy cat that purrs in yer lap
> >> > (even if it does look eerily like Herman Munster).
> >> >
> >> > http://poems.sdrodrian.com
> >> > http://physics.sdrodrian.com
> >> > http://democracy.sdrodrian.com
> >>
> >> stupidity still had enough of the "real politik" in him to avoid large
> >> and unwinnable wars, concentrating mostly on easy targets like Grenada,
> >> and being able to cut and run when things went south. He also - unlike
> >> Bush - merely paid lip service to the righteous right, and gave them
> >> almost nothing. In most ways - as awful as he was - Bush actually beats
> >> him to the bottom of the pickle barrel.
> >>
> >> You're probably correct about Bush's re-election, although I couldn't
> >> care less. But you're wrong about Kerry: he's certainly no Carter, and
> >> he's as aggressive as Bush, and just as likely to whomp even the most
> >> innocent of asses.
> >
> >Those dubious reports from Vietnam are still unsubstantiated.
> >
> >> Democrats - as a matter of fact - have often felt a
> >> need to be tougher than their opponents to make up for this rather
> >> superficial idea.
> >
> >Kososvo was a testosterone thingy? This means Korea and Vietnam were the
> >Dems marking their territory, I suppose.
> >
> >> Kerry hasn't met many weapons systems he wouldn't
> >> marry in an instant
> >
> >But, as with all his marriages, he would NEVER pay for any of them...
> >
> >> , if he wasn't married to a weapons system already.
> >
> >Ketchup ain't a WMD, is it? Well, maybe: if ya shove it rather than pour it.
> >
> >> Even a cursory look at history will show that the Pentagon doesn't
> >> suffer at ANYONE's hands,
> >
> >If I recall correctly, the DOD budget did, in fact, shrink under the
> >Carter Admin. But the way these things shrink in D.C. is to grow by
> >leaps instead of bounds.
> >
> >> (as neither does Israel) and that war is waged
> >> by both sides for little or no reason. And - really - the entire
> >> conception of an America living under a massive threat is pure bullshit.
> >
> >No one's said 'massive' but you. A second 9/11 style triple attack with
> >75% effectiveness would constitute a 'massive' or 'eminent' threat. But
> >how can you stop it? I can think of at least three ways. Read today's
> >reports coming from Iraq to discover one of them.
> >
> >Murrah Federal Buildings, World Trade Centers, El Trains, the Pentagon,
> >the Super Dome--knock these down and you're gonna get people pissed at
> >you. Go figure.
> >
> >Russians just learned there are more dangerous people than Eric Harris.
> >A Clear and Present Danger is what it is.
> >
> >> There is no great threat to the U.S. that couldn't be almost entirely
> >> eliminated byu removing our troops from areas where almost all the
> >> threats are concentrated in. Another action like 9/11 might happen, but
> >> it isn't all that probable, and it is now quite unnecessary: we put the
> >> lunchbox right in the tiger's cage.
> >
> >Yes, let's remove our troops from everywhere. The PLA is demanding some
> >elbow room.
> >
>
> No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> terror could've been an early win,
That's downright /funny/, seeing that we've been fighting it in this
mode /in this country/ since 1967.
And that every time we find a weapon that works, the Democrats not
only "forbid" it but hand it over to the enemy, such as he was.
"Equality," you know.
> 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> country because we let fear overrule good sense. Now we're in it for
> the long haul, whether we like it or not, and that's shrubya's
> blunder. Igniting the 'forever war',
That's downright /funny/.
I shall be sure to pass on the jocularity to Martel, Charles,
Rolland, the Cid, Isabella, and the city fathers of Constantinople
at a dead minimum.
Or maybe you can just e-mail Madrid about it today.
> and dammit you don't reward
> blunders this large.
No matter who started the fight, you don't remove a commander until
he starts losing.
Babies who dress up dollies in the Powowers to do it for them can
not understand this, of course. When you have dressed up the dolly,
the Thing is Done.
And you will have a *feeling* at anybody who points out that it is
not.
This is NOT what is meant by "drinking tea from an empty cup,"
however every dolly-dressing baby in the country thinks he knows
how.
He calls it "voting."
>
> And the neocons can muddy up the waters all they want, but it was
> their policies that led to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, & the first
> thousand dead soldiers for WMDs 'just not there'.
Illiterate. Nothing in that "paragraph" but parrot monkey.
/You/ "believe" that the noises have the Powower to "Condemn," of
course.
Makes you a particular /kind/ of monkey, nothing more.
Eh?
A monkey who thinks the Prick you're sucking can stomp the one
you're Pointing To.
What did you /think/ I meant, after you went to such pains to do
it in public?
>
> "Here we see a mobile lab truck." To the entire world? Geez, wonder
> why our neighbors are worried? How can Kerry possibly do better than
> shrubya? Well, at least he starts without having dummied up a
> slideshow for the UN. At least he knows what a battlefield really
> looks like.
Kerry knows what the inside of a boat really looks like.
The Shrub knows what the inside of a plane really looks like.
I know what the inside of an M-2 Browning looks like.
McCain knows what the inside of a real POW camp (not the Gitmo
Resort or Abu Grabass Hotel) looks like.
You know what the inside of your playpen looks like.
You're not competent to /have/ an opinion on the subject.
And you haven't earned the right to express it in public.
> Everyone in his administration will know ahead of time not
> to write memos on how and when and where the USA can skirt geneva. A
> Kerry administration will be more competent at fighting this war
> shrubya's thrust on us. How do I know this? 'Cause, so far, our
> foriegn policy couldn't have been conducted any worse.
You talkin' 'bout the Foreign Policy results Allbright handed over
to Powell?
You should be.
You talkin' 'bout the little ones Clinton let turn into big ones?
Or 'bout the ones he /turned into/ big ones by doing far too
little with our name on it?
You should be.
> There's no
> where to go but up. But first, shrubya's gotta go!
>
> -blue
>
>
> >---
> >Art
> >
> >"No; I have not been charged with that.
> >In fact, nobody has said that to me yet."
> > ---Lee Oswald
> > (1963)
--
-------(m+
~/:o)_|
The most essential gift for a good writer is
a built-in, shock-proof, shit detector. -- Hemingway
http://scrawlmark.org
Dennis M. Hammes
> > country because we let fear overrule good sense.
>
> critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> early win' in your opinion?
We get Pat Sajak to send Frodo on a free vacation to Hawaii, see,
for solving "Thing: W_AP_NS _F _ASS __STR__T__N," see, and he
throws the magic ring (it's on his cell phone) into Mauna Loa, see,
and the Evil Eastern Reaches of Sauron Hussein dry up while the
Saruman Mosque explodes in flames and drowns in the Euphrates.
I think it's called "Final Fantasy VIII.IV."
>
> > Now we're in it for
> > the long haul, whether we like it or not, and that's shrubya's
> > blunder. Igniting the 'forever war', and dammit you don't reward
> > blunders this large.
> >
> > And the neocons can muddy up the waters all they want, but it was
> > their policies that led to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, & the first
> > thousand dead soldiers for WMDs 'just not there'.
>
> It's obvious your opinions are a direct result of the Bush Policy.
> Everything he's done in Iraq has been targeted to produce such condemnation.
And it worked, too.
Which leaves our poor little monkey with the problem of condemning
a leader for succeeding.
Oh. Wait.
That's the standing Democratic platform.
I forgot.
> >
> > "Here we see a mobile lab truck." To the entire world? Geez, wonder
> > why our neighbors are worried? How can Kerry possibly do better than
> > shrubya? Well, at least he starts without having dummied up a
> > slideshow for the UN. At least he knows what a battlefield really
> > looks like. Everyone in his administration will know ahead of time not
> > to write memos on how and when and where the USA can skirt geneva. > A
> > Kerry administration will be more competent at fighting this war
> > shrubya's thrust on us. How do I know this? 'Cause, so far, our
> > foriegn policy couldn't have been conducted any worse. There's no
> > where to go but up. But first, shrubya's gotta go!
>
> There's a good chance (50-50 is a good chance considering he's an incumbent)
> Shrubya will be fired in Novemeber. No matter what your politics, it's hard
> to see how one could believe, on the face of it all, that any of them
> wouldn't fuk it up beyond all repair. It is, after all, what they do.
WHAAAT?
Politicians fuk things up?
Oh. Wadeaminnit.
They're lawyers.
Carry on.
>
> ---
> Art
Art
"Dennis M. Hammes" wrote:
>
> Art wrote:
> >
> > "Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> > >
> > > No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> > > terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> > > country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> >
> > Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
> > critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> > early win' in your opinion?
>
> We get Pat Sajak to send Frodo on a free vacation to Hawaii, see,
> for solving "Thing: W_AP_NS _F _ASS __STR__T__N," see, and he
> throws the magic ring (it's on his cell phone) into Mauna Loa, see,
> and the Evil Eastern Reaches of Sauron Hussein dry up while the
> Saruman Mosque explodes in flames and drowns in the Euphrates.
> I think it's called "Final Fantasy VIII.IV."
I was pissed at you guys for not letting me coax him(her?) into
answering. But THIS was worth it.
:-)
Bill Oliver
Bob (this one) <B...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>See? You *only* do partisan manure. Repubs are perfect. <LOL> I bet
>it's going to be "more perfect" like "more perpendicular."
>
Bob, you are becoming incomprehensible. I understand you
wish I wouldn't criticize Kerry. Get over it.
billo
Dennis M. Hammes
> > >
> > > No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> > > terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> > > country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> >
> > Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
> > critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> > early win' in your opinion?
> >
>
> been plenty of terrorist attacks since 9/11, and guess where
> they've been occurring?
>
> Not here!
>
> They take place....now....in Islamic countries, mostly for
Only in Jon's World is Spain an Islamic country.
Funny, innit, that Islam *agrees* with Jon?
And that Morocco supports us?
Downright hilarious.
Couldn't improve it by painting it in neon pink on the side of a
blueberry Pacer.
Unless you added the knowledge, long kept secret by NASA, that
Russia is an Islamic country.
Fortunately, Jon smuggled the information out.
> The terrorists are forcing the Islamic countries to take the
> lead on fighting terrorism. For their own survival.
And coming into the Home Land stretch, Iran in the lead with Jordan
crossing over, Arabia looking a little Saudi from the mud, and, Yea,
men, Bush really burning up the track, Kerry hanging on the fence,
Oh, man, Pakistan ready to explode, Afghanistan looking a little
rocky, and -- (I'm gonna hafta sue Dan, 'e gypped me) -- Beetlebalm.
But there's only two doors on the Pacer, dammit.
And if I paint it on the roof, only NASA will see it.
/And they won't tell us/.
"N-e-t-t-k-o-p-p, Netcop."
>
> Besides, the ultimate cause of terrorism is a lack of democracy
> and freedom in the Islamic world. It's a shame we have to
> resort to shoving it down their throats. But that's their fault
> for believing they could placate terrorists and extremists
> and simply stay in power by pointing them ....our way.
Only in Jon's World is guerrilla training "placation."
Must be how those placid sponges took over Mars.
>
> The Iraq war has changed all that.
Martel and Isabella will be happy to hear /all that/.
So will Major Lawrence.
Dennis M. Hammes
> >>
> >> No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> >> terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> >> country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> >
> >Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
> >critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> >early win' in your opinion?
> >
>
> and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
>
A Democrat? "Sell"?
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> >Art <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> > >>
> > >> No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> > >> terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> > >> country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> > >
> > >Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of
> the
> > >critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been
> 'an
> > >early win' in your opinion?
> > >
> >
> > It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
> > and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
>
>
> this is what he does.
>
> he's as blind and stupid as partisans come.
>
> he's the king of obfuscation.
>
> he's a self-proclaimed mystic, besides.
>
>
> "those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
> -- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
>
> Don't let the world blame us Americans voters
> for our evil fucking greedy fanatical leaders.
Let the world blame us for our stupid, yellow ones.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> "Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:BMSdnYsrWYw...@adelphia.com...
>
> >
> > he's a self-proclaimed mystic, besides.
> >
>
> what does that have to do with anything?
>
> aj
Well, everything has something to do with something, /somewhere/,
and enough something is everything, and "any" thing is, after all,
/every/ thing, so it has something, somewhere, to do with some part
of anything.
I realise the explanation is both self-proclaimed and more than a
little mystical, but there you are then, already.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> "Arleen" <dropthisp...@givepeaceachance.com> wrote
> in message news:2qq1sgF...@uni-berlin.de...
>
> > "Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > he's a self-proclaimed mystic, besides.
> >
> > what does that have to do with anything?
>
> it's just the truth, that's all.
>
> he's also a self-proclaimed scientist.
>
> methinks that the quote of Billo's i commented
> on here shows which of his self-proclamations
> he uses to argue his politics upon, and thus just
> where his mysticism is based in the spiritual
> battle between Good and fricken' Evil.
That's "fricken'-fracken' Evil" to you, kid.
>
> he's a warmonger/hatemonger apologist. hello.
>
> -$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
>
> "those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
> -- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
>
> Vote Bush OUT!
> Don't let the world (nor our children)
> blame us voters for our evil fucking
> stupid greedy fanatical leaders.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Bill Oliver wrote:
> >
> >>"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> >>
> >>>No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> >>>terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> >>>country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> >>
> >>Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
> >>critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> >>early win' in your opinion?
> >>
> >
> >
> > It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
> > and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
> >
>
> Instead of the poison gas and expertise we gave him absolutely free?
> Seems a step up, capitalistically speaking. But it wouldn't have helped
> ther "war on terror" much since Saddam wasn't involved in terrorism.
>
> dmh
Neither was Afghanistan.
Neither is Saudi Arabia.
Neither is Pakistan.
Neither is Morocco.
Neither is Sudan.
Neither is Iran.
Just ask 'em.
Zero
message news:4148B2C6...@arvig.net...
> Zero wrote:
> > "Bill Oliver" <bi...@radix.net> wrote in message
> > >Art <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > >"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> > > >>
> > > >> No one should think the troops are coming home soon.
> > > >> This war on terror could've been an early win, 'til we
> > > >> pre-emptively attacked a country because we let fear
> > > >> overrule good sense.
> > > >
> > > >Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since
> > > >none of the critics seem to have thought the problem through--
> > > >how could it have been 'anearly win' in your opinion?
> > >
> > > It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
> > > and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
> >
> > for anyone who isn't familiar with Billo, this is classic Billo.
> >
> > this is what he does.
> >
> > he's as blind and stupid as partisans come.
> >
> > he's the king of obfuscation.
> >
> > he's a self-proclaimed mystic, besides.
> >
> > -$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
> >
> > "those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
> > -- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
> >
> > Vote Kerry!
> > Don't let the world blame us Americans voters
> > for our evil fucking greedy fanatical leaders.
>
> Let the world blame us for our stupid, yellow ones.
i'm not yellow, nor stupid. i'm Sicilian.
and we Sicilians know stupid leaders and stupid policies
when we see them.
and we are the absolute masters at detecting bullshit and/or lies.
and poorly reasoned strategies and strategists, such as Billo
and his fanatical-based crowd.
plus, our Italian-offshoot heritage has provided us with an
innate understanding of the creative processes, and reason.
(though sadly often neglected due to acheiving general
happiness too easily).
from Galileo to Leonardo to Enrico Fermez (sp)
to... um.... Columbo.
(although, i believe that Peter Falk is greek).
so...
think again.
> -------(m+
> ~/:o)_|
> The most essential gift for a good writer is
> a built-in, shock-proof, shit detector. -- Hemingway
yours is obviously on the blink.
or its working againsts its own interests, for some silly fanatical reason.
-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
"those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
-- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
Vote Bush OUT!
Don't let the world (nor our children)
blame us voters for our evil fucking
stupid greedy fanatical leaders.
Dennis M. Hammes
> >
> >
> > Bill Oliver wrote:
> > > In article <2qpjo0F...@uni-berlin.de>, Art <arty_...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >>"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> > >>
> > >>>No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> > >>>terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> > >>>country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> > >>
> > >>Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of
> the
> 'an
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
> > > and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
> > >
> >
> > Instead of the poison gas and expertise we gave him absolutely free?
> > Seems a step up, capitalistically speaking. But it wouldn't have helped
> > ther "war on terror" much since Saddam wasn't involved in terrorism.
>
>
> ---
> Art
Purest Potemkin Village stuff, Number Six.
You know: where we practice Synchronised Bombing and where to
place the 9mm so the schoolkids will twitch longest for the cameras.
--
-------(m+
~/:o)_|
The most essential gift for a good writer is
a built-in, shock-proof, shit detector. -- Hemingway
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Bill Oliver wrote:
>
> > In article <2qpjo0F...@uni-berlin.de>, Art <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> >>
> >>>No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> >>>terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> >>>country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> >>
> >>Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
> >>critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> >>early win' in your opinion?
> >>
> > It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
> > and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
>
>
> Partisan manure. Particularly stupid partisan manure.
>
> Talk about what is, not what your fantasies are...
>
PKB Award.
Three lines of monkey quotes of individual Holy noises that don't
string together into anything at all.
At least the pome being replied to stated two of its own
specifics.
And with an attempt at humor (irony: it only laughs when I hurt).
Father Luke
Everyone laughs when I post something funny. Well, this got a laugh from
me.
Thanks Billo.
Father Luke
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> > THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> >
> > we're hit or trying to understand/rationalize the
> > attack... to accept our losses and seek to engage
> > the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
>
You mean like we blew up the rice paddies in the 'Nam when we were
struck by Russian AK-47s loaded with Czech 7.62x39, by Russian-flown
MiGs, or SKSes in the hands of Chinese regulars?
Well, you see, we had already had plenty of practice shooting up a
chunk of Korea in Direct Response to AK-47s, MiGs, and SKSes in the
hands of those same people's Daddies.
And we, like, do what we know how to do.
> instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
Can you count, little boy?
Ah, yes.
"One, two, three, many, many, many-many, many-many..."
Let's see if I can even /make/ this simple enough for a monkey.
Count Russia.
Count China.
Now count Korea.
Count Viet Nam.
Count Iraq.
Oh, my, the little boy is about to inform me that there's no such
person as Count Russia, that his name is Count Chocula.
>
> --
> Byron "Barn" Canfield
> -----------------------------
> "Politics is a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles."
> -- Ambrose Bierce
Well, shitya.
A monkey /can't count/ his interests.
Hell, he can't even count his principal.
But he can worship Count Chocula for his Principles.
Especially when the Count will Save Him from those nasty Martian
booberries.
Dennis M. Hammes
We KNOW why "anyone" would want to strike at us.
It's for the blasphemy of having the peanut butter and the
penicillin to bomb them with whenever their shit hits their
air-conditioning.
(Please to observe that their air-conditioning is the same river
they drink from.)
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> "Conservative Guy" <sdd...@whdsgafdses.usa> wrote
> in message news:<edN1d.47411
>
> $vkm....@twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>...
>
> > > The choice is between striking back hard if/when
> > > we're hit....
> >
> > ummm...if that is the case, why are you
> > wasting time and resources in Iraq,
> > who never attacked you?
>
> Iraq attacked "my" petroleum (which is my life's
> blood): Imagine tomorrow all motor vehicles were to
> cease functioning, all "motors" for that matter...
> It'd make the Depression look like Disney Land).
> Where would I get my food? It's all delivered to me
> by trucks now, or diesel trains... it's all sown,
> grown, and processed by gas-electrical machines
> (when's the last time you saw a mule pulling a plow?).
>
> No: The nuclear war that's coming soon will be fought
> between China and America, and it will be over OIL
> (oh, I'm sure they will all say it's over Taiwan and
> freedom & democracy BUT)... trust me on this, it will be
> over a much more important matter: our life-blood OIL.
It's over those cheap Chinese /shirts/, I tell you.
NO BLOOD FOR BUTTONS!
NO BLOOD FOR BUTTONS!
NO BLOOD FOR BUTTONS!
Chandra P. Das
>
>
> Byron Canfield wrote:
> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> >
> >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> >>
> >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
> >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
> >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
> >
> >
> > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
> > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
> >
> >
> I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
> want to strike at us in the first place,and then do something about that.
Have you not purchased the new World Dictionary put out by the US
government? Interesting definitions. They define 'American' as someone
who's not a terrorist; and furthermore, a peace and freedom dispenser. A
'brownie' is defined as a terrorist or a potential terrorist. A
'European' is defined as a whiny pain in the ass.
'Terrorism,' however, is not defined, curiously enough.
> Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
Why don't Americans have the balls to vote for Nader?-- just to set an
example that a choice between two complete, shitheaded criminals will
not be tolerated? The answer is simple, I suppose: a large majority of
Americans have neither balls nor principles.
> dmh
>
Bob (this one)
> In article <10kh6ns...@corp.supernews.com>, Bob (this one)
> <B...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> See? You *only* do partisan manure. Repubs are perfect. <LOL> I
>> bet it's going to be "more perfect" like "more perpendicular."
>>
> Bob, you are becoming incomprehensible.
Only if you can't read.
> I understand you wish I wouldn't criticize Kerry. Get over it.
If that's what you "understand," then you understand nothing. And your
tough tone is just as much bullshit as the content.
I've told you that I like *neither* choice. I've told you that I think
they're *all* crooks. I support neither one because they're both
desperately flawed. See if you can factor that into your reflexive
replies, fuckwit.
You've decided to tell me what I mean. Bullshit, Billo. You're only
missing the red nose...
More, still more, endless metric assloads of Partisan Manure.
Pastorio
Chandra P. Das
> Dale wrote:
>
>>Bill Oliver wrote:
>>
>>>In article <2qpjo0F...@uni-berlin.de>, Art <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
>>>>>terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
>>>>>country because we let fear overrule good sense.
>>>>
>>>>Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
>>>>critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
>>>>early win' in your opinion?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
>>>and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
>>>
>>>billo
>>
>>Instead of the poison gas and expertise we gave him absolutely free?
>>Seems a step up, capitalistically speaking. But it wouldn't have helped
>>ther "war on terror" much since Saddam wasn't involved in terrorism.
>>
>>dmh
>
>
> Neither was Afghanistan.
> Neither is Saudi Arabia.
> Neither is Pakistan.
> Neither is Morocco.
> Neither is Sudan.
> Neither is Iran.
And neither is America, naturally.
> Just ask 'em.
Just ask the Americans.
Beau Blue
>Art wrote:
>>
>> "Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
>> >
>> > No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
>> > terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
>> > country because we let fear overrule good sense.
>>
>> Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
>> critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
>> early win' in your opinion?
You mean, before demonstrating to millions of young Iraqis and other
Arabs that we'll violate our own laws in fear of their terrorism?
Before we demonstated to the whole world we'd dummy up evidence to
back our invasions?
How could we have won early, if we'd kept faith with our laws and our
heritage? How could we have won early if we'd have said, "preemptive
war is wrong'? "Torture is wrong." How could we have an early win if
we'd have said, "hey, Saudi Arabia, you can't keep exporting this kind
of fanaticism," instead of giving into fear and doing something as
stupid as invading a country that had never threatened our homeland?
You can't see a path to an earlier win than we're now facing, now that
we've broken international law in our fear? And the mountains of
Pakistan still hold a lot of the men who planned and killed Americans
on 9/11. Why? A year off to go depose a thug. Oh thanks, shrubya, and
Haliburton thanks you, too. And all the other MIC companies thank you
for your starring role in the invasion of Iraq and igniting forever
war.
>
>We get Pat Sajak to send Frodo on a free vacation to Hawaii, see,
>for solving "Thing: W_AP_NS _F _ASS __STR__T__N," see, and he
>throws the magic ring (it's on his cell phone) into Mauna Loa, see,
>and the Evil Eastern Reaches of Sauron Hussein dry up while the
>Saruman Mosque explodes in flames and drowns in the Euphrates.
> I think it's called "Final Fantasy VIII.IV."
>>
>> > Now we're in it for
>> > the long haul, whether we like it or not, and that's shrubya's
>> > blunder. Igniting the 'forever war', and dammit you don't reward
>> > blunders this large.
>> >
>> > And the neocons can muddy up the waters all they want, but it was
>> > their policies that led to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, & the first
>> > thousand dead soldiers for WMDs 'just not there'.
>>
>> It's obvious your opinions are a direct result of the Bush Policy.
>> Everything he's done in Iraq has been targeted to produce such condemnation.
>
>And it worked, too.
> Which leaves our poor little monkey with the problem of condemning
>a leader for succeeding.
Planned by Saudis, paid for by Saudis, executed by Saudis. But the
world needs oil and Wa Ha BEE ism. And Pakistan has the A bomb, so
they're both our friends. Never mind who's hiding behind the curtain,
er who's in which mountains. Success? Choosing targets while blinded
by nickels and Haliburton contracts? That's success?
A thousand of our sons dead, no WMDs. That's success? No OBL. Success?
Tactics designed by money hungry mad men willing to believe any lie
that'll let 'em keep selling gasoline.
So, you'll go to battle with Dick & George and the friendly service
providers of Haliburton (and half the force needed to win) in a
country they had no right to invade in the first place? And that's
success to you? You'll sacrifice American lives and ask our sons to
kill Iraqis instead of pursuing the men who actually killed those New
Yorkers, Pennsylvanians and Virginians in 2001. That's how you
succeed? No wonder you live in MinnieSoda. Man you have GOT to get to
a warmer climate, Dennis.
Chandra P. Das
>
> Dale wrote:
>
>>Byron Canfield wrote:
>> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
>> > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
>> >
>> >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
>> >>
>> >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
>> >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
>> >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
>> >
>> >
>> > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
>> > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
>> >
>> >
>>I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
>>want to strike at us in the first place,and then do something about that.
>>
>>
>
>
> Kabul to ask the leaders of /The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against
> the Jews and Crusaders/ to explain what they'd already broadcast in a
> dozen Fatwas.
>
> "Sammy; WTF?"
>
> Pst: A) They want a Neo-fascist Islamic Super State in the Persian
> Gulf--for starters.
What utter nitwittery! Who's 'they'? Are 'they' a majority or a very
small minority? Are 'they' aligned in ideology? Cohesive? Is Musharaff
one of them? Is he Al-Qaeda's best friend? Think!
Why is reality so elusive for you, McNutt? Super States are not going to
materialize, my friend -- neither in the Middle East nor in Europe. Why?
Because different people don't get along with eachother, it's that
simple. The only Neo-fascist Super State possibility that we have to
worry about is right here in America. You're gonna sleep right through
it, mate, and it doesn't seem like a good slap is going to wake you. No,
McNutt, you need the full blow of a sledg hammer for a surefire delivery
into consciousness.
Well, on second thought: who knows? -- maybe there *will* arise a Super
State in the near future. Our policies and actions are rapidly uniting
not just the Muslim population but the whole world against us. How do
you like that prospect? Are we ready to fight the whole world, cowboy?
> B) America is standing in the way.
You call tossing thousands of bombs and missiles into a random country
'standing in the way'? Fuck's the matter with you? The US has always
been in everybody's way -- it knows no other manner of existence:
full-time interference across every habitable inch of the globe.
Now it just happens that some other people have gotten fed up and have
decided to get in *its* way for a change. But no problem, we've got
enough WMD to take care of 'em all.
Chandra P. Das
> "Bob (this one)" wrote:
>
>>Bill Oliver wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <2qpjo0F...@uni-berlin.de>, Art <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
>>>>>terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
>>>>>country because we let fear overrule good sense.
>>>>
>>>>Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
>>>>critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
>>>>early win' in your opinion?
>>>>
>>>
>>>It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
>>>and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
>>
>>Woulda, coulda, shoulda...
>>
>>Partisan manure. Particularly stupid partisan manure.
>>
>>Talk about what is, not what your fantasies are...
>>
>>Pastorio
>
>
> PKB Award.
> Three lines of monkey quotes
How come you only dispense your faggot-pricksucker-nigger-gook-raghead
rants in your AAPC and RAP posts? Oh, that's right -- in the poetry
groups you know that we know you're not a bigot. Here you are the great
scientist in the laboratory of language. It's all good.
Bob LeChevalier
>> Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
>
>Why don't Americans have the balls to vote for Nader?-- just to set an
>example that a choice between two complete, shitheaded criminals will
>not be tolerated? The answer is simple, I suppose: a large majority of
>Americans have neither balls nor principles.
Or they think one "complete, shitheaded criminal" isn't as bad as
having the other "complete, shitheaded criminal" in office for four
more years along with his cabinet of "complete, shitheaded criminals",
his "complete, shitheaded criminal" cronies in the Congress, probably
packing the Supreme Court with more "complete, shitheaded criminals"
who will work to maintain their ideological power for a generation or
more.
I don't especially agree with all of Nader's ideology either (nor has
Nader demonstrated executive ability, which is what the president's
job entails).
But however virtuous Nader might be, in our government system, having
a president who is not allied with one of the major parties probably
means having a very weak and ineffectual president who cannot get any
of his policies enacted into law.
I might still vote for a third party candidate if I thought the
alternatives were both bad, and the third party candidate seems like
he would be effective. Nader wouldn't be.
lojbab
--
lojbab loj...@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
Bill Oliver
Bob (this one) <B...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>If that's what you "understand," then you understand nothing. And your
>tough tone is just as much bullshit as the content.
>
>I've told you that I like *neither* choice. I've told you that I think
>they're *all* crooks. I support neither one because they're both
>desperately flawed. See if you can factor that into your reflexive
>replies, fuckwit.
>
>You've decided to tell me what I mean. Bullshit, Billo. You're only
>missing the red nose...
>
I am not telling you what you mean, I am observing what you mean.
You blather on about how you object to *both* Kerry and Bush. However,
you only obsessively run around as an anklebiter to pro-Bush and
anti-Kerry posts. You would be more convincing in your claims
if you ran around posting "partisan manure" after Rick/Josh/Crowfoot
diatribes about Bush. But you do not -- while you claim not
to be partisan, you only object to *one* side of the argument.
Your actions speak louder than your words.
billo
Art
> wrote in message news:uO32d.4797$VV2.1761@trndny06...
> Art wrote:
> >
> > Dale wrote:
> >
> >>Byron Canfield wrote:
> >> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> >> >
> >> >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> >> >>
> >> >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
> >> >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
> >> >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
> >> > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
> >>want to strike at us in the first place, and then do something about
that.
> >>
> >>Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
> >>
> >
> >
> > A King then. No; a PHILOSOPHER King. One who would send an emissary to
> > Kabul to ask the leaders of /The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against
> > the Jews and Crusaders/ to explain what they'd already broadcast in a
> > dozen Fatwas.
> >
> > "Sammy; WTF?"
> >
> > Pst: A) They want a Neo-fascist Islamic Super State in the Persian
> > Gulf--for starters.
>
> What utter nitwittery! Who's 'they'? Are 'they' a majority or a very
> small minority? Are 'they' aligned in ideology? Cohesive?
Of course I meant The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and
Crusaders (swim back upthread to Dale's statement). This also includes The
Islamic Brotherhood; a separate, older and overlapping group. And the
WIFJAJ&C's sister corporation, Egyptian based Al Jihad. Some of their goals
were outlined in 1996:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
But the guy who got closest was Nasser. All he needed was Nuclear Weapons.
> Is Musharaff
> one of them? Is he Al-Qaeda's best friend? Think!
Well, he's surely arresting them by the bushel basket! And Bin Laden has
tried to assassinate him twice, that we know of, since 9/11/01.
Not that he might not be doing the fence rider's tightrope. Who knows? Who
cares?
He's not speaking out against the USA publically anymore, and that's a
start. His heart may or may not be in it, but he's playing ball. That's a
GOOD start.
>
> Why is reality so elusive for you, McNutt? Super States are not going to
> materialize, my friend -- neither in the Middle East nor in Europe.
Yes, by George, I think you've GOT IT!!
Congratulations on a job well done, boys:
OPERATION: DESERT STORM Kuwait, 1991
OPERATION: ALLIED FORCE Kosovo, 1999
OPERATION: ENDURING FREEDOM Afghanistan, 2001
OPERATION: IRAQI FREEDOM Iraq, 2003
> Why?
> Because different people don't get along with each other, it's that
> simple.
What about the first caliphate? The Ottoman Empire? The Soviet Union? The
United Kingdom? The United States?
> The only Neo-fascist Super State possibility that we have to
> worry about is right here in America. You're gonna sleep right through
> it, mate, and it doesn't seem like a good slap is going to wake you. No,
> McNutt, you need the full blow of a sledg hammer for a surefire delivery
> into consciousness.
[Art reaches over and hits the snooze button...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz]
>
> Well, on second thought: who knows? -- maybe there *will* arise a Super
> State in the near future. Our policies and actions are rapidly uniting
> not just the Muslim population but the whole world against us. How do
> you like that prospect? Are we ready to fight the whole world, cowboy?
Yes, I believe we are. But I hardly think the rest of the world is up to
fighting us. That's how the Silverback BECOMES the Silverback.>
> > B) America is standing in the way.
>
> You call tossing thousands of bombs and missiles into a random country
> 'standing in the way'? Fuck's the matter with you? The US has always
> been in everybody's way -- it knows no other manner of existence:
> full-time interference across every habitable inch of the globe.
>
> Now it just happens that some other people have gotten fed up and have
> decided to get in *its* way for a change. But no problem, we've got
> enough WMD to take care of 'em all.
First factual statement you wrote in the entire post, Chandra.
---
Art
Josh Hill
wrote:
I haven't noticed you saying many kind things about Kerry, Billo.
--
Josh
Arleen
one of us was whooshed. i'm hoping it's not me. you said, "Don't let the
world blame us Americans voters for our evil fucking greedy fanatical
leaders."
he said, "Let the world blame us for our stupid, yellow ones."
our stupid, yellow leaders.
you're the leader of what country? i seem to have misplaced that particular
memory.
aj
Arleen
> Arleen wrote:
> >
> > "Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:BMSdnYsrWYw...@adelphia.com...
> >
> > >
> > > he's a self-proclaimed mystic, besides.
> > >
> >
> > what does that have to do with anything?
> >
> > aj
>
> Well, everything has something to do with something, /somewhere/,
> and enough something is everything, and "any" thing is, after all,
> /every/ thing, so it has something, somewhere, to do with some part
> of anything.
> I realise the explanation is both self-proclaimed and more than a
> little mystical, but there you are then, already.
wow. awesome.
next question: why am i here? or is it there?
aj
Zero
in message news:2qseevF...@uni-berlin.de...
> "Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote
> > "Dennis M. Hammes" <scraw...@arvig.net> wrote
> > > Zero wrote:
> > > > "Bill Oliver" <bi...@radix.net> wrote
Unicornia?
heh.
anyway, yeah, i guess i misread his implication.
probably because i cannot fathom anyone thinking Kerry
a coward, nor stupid, though i *can* fathom why someone
might percieve an anti-war advocate as both.
some are.
not moi.
anyway, you'll note the subsequent tweaks to my sig file.
more to come as i think it through.
-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
"those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
-- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
Vote Bush OUT!
Don't let the world (nor our children)
blame us voters for our evil fucking
stupid greedy fanatical leaders.
Dr Zen
Why must there be a why?
Seriously. That's the question.
Zen
Dr Zen
wrote:
How can the guy who fought be the "coward" and the guy who hid be the
"hero"?
Well, we know they can, but not in the terms of this debate.
>some are.
If "yellow" means "not willing to fuck other people up for my own
greed-impelled purposes", colour me sunshine, innit.
>not moi.
>
>anyway, you'll note the subsequent tweaks to my sig file.
>
>more to come as i think it through.
>
>
>-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
>
> "those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
> -- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
... just after we find the WMD.
>
> Vote Bush OUT!
> Don't let the world (nor our children)
> blame us voters for our evil fucking
> stupid greedy fanatical leaders.
You're underestimating the stupidity of the American people. The polls
don't lie. It's champagne in the Halliburton boardroom, I'm afraid.
Zen
Arleen
Arleen
<g> good one.
aj
--
http://ajartworks.com/tuesdays-child
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not
only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the
American public." ---Theodore Roosevelt
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zero
>"Zero" <shakub...@aol.com> wrote:
> >"Arleen" <dropthisp...@givepeaceachance.com> wrote
right. actually, i do think Kerry is a bit of a coward AND stupid
for not standing up more courageously on this matter.
but that's now. not then.
and it's a different kind of cowardice.
and a different kind of stupidity. political.
but he's certainly not a coward for doing his time in Vietnam,
nor for his later testimony against that stupid war.
> >some are.
>
> If "yellow" means "not willing to fuck other people up for my
> own greed-impelled purposes", colour me sunshine, innit.
yellow means scared to "fight" for what you believe or hold dear.
in this case, it makes Bush not only yellow, but since he was
(and is) pro-Vietnam war!... his cowardly hiding from active
duty makes him not only as yellow as the sun, but as yellow
a fricken black hole.
> >not moi.
> >
> >anyway, you'll note the subsequent tweaks to my sig file.
> >
> >more to come as i think it through.
> >
> >
> >-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
> >
> > "those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
> > -- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
>
> ... just after we find the WMD.
November 1st?
but even that wouldn't prove him and his ilk right.
Saddam was completely under control.
> > Vote Bush OUT!
> > Don't let the world (nor our children)
> > blame us voters for our evil fucking
> > stupid greedy fanatical leaders.
>
> You're underestimating the stupidity of the American people.
probably.
i just hope the rest of the world understands how gullible they are.
but our children certainly won't understand it.
nor will they forgive it it as easily.
> The polls don't lie.
that's ALL that the polls do. duh.
> It's champagne in the Halliburton boardroom, I'm afraid.
well, yeah. that's where most of the polls are designed.
but the American people may just surprise everyone this time.
you'll note that there are no giant adoring statues of Nixon yet.
-$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
"those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
-- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
Vote Bush OUT!
Art McNutt
Beau Blue wrote:
Oh. I see; we could won early if we'd stayed in bed. I must say I like
the way you think.
BTW, Kellogg, Brown & Root were there in Kosovo, too. Different
administration. Musta been the same pocket-lining scheme, though.
>
>>We get Pat Sajak to send Frodo on a free vacation to Hawaii, see,
>>for solving "Thing: W_AP_NS _F _ASS __STR__T__N," see, and he
>>throws the magic ring (it's on his cell phone) into Mauna Loa, see,
>>and the Evil Eastern Reaches of Sauron Hussein dry up while the
>>Saruman Mosque explodes in flames and drowns in the Euphrates.
>> I think it's called "Final Fantasy VIII.IV."
>>
>>>>Now we're in it for
>>>>the long haul, whether we like it or not, and that's shrubya's
>>>>blunder. Igniting the 'forever war', and dammit you don't reward
>>>>blunders this large.
>>>>
>>>>And the neocons can muddy up the waters all they want, but it was
>>>>their policies that led to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, & the first
>>>>thousand dead soldiers for WMDs 'just not there'.
>>>>
>>>It's obvious your opinions are a direct result of the Bush Policy.
>>>Everything he's done in Iraq has been targeted to produce such condemnation.
>>>
>>And it worked, too.
>> Which leaves our poor little monkey with the problem of condemning
>>a leader for succeeding.
>>
>
> Planned by Saudis, paid for by Saudis, executed by Saudis. But the
> world needs oil and Wa Ha BEE ism.
Actually, at least half the money came from Yemen. $150,000 of what is
estimated at $300,000 total for OPERATION: BITE GREAT SATAN IN THE ASS.
State won't give an opinion either way, but it seems some of the perps
might have trained in Salman Pak, the Iraqi training camp with the
decommissioned commercial airliner.
The House of Saud is pretty skeered of "Al-Qaeda" these days. Funny
thing, instead of a DEPHOMESEC, they decided to relax their regulations
about citizens carrying firearms. Would THAT work????? Go figure.
> And Pakistan has the A bomb, so
> they're both our friends. Never mind who's hiding behind the curtain,
> er who's in which mountains. Success? Choosing targets while blinded
> by nickels and Haliburton contracts? That's success?
>
> A thousand of our sons dead, no WMDs. That's success? No OBL. Success?
> Tactics designed by money hungry mad men willing to believe any lie
> that'll let 'em keep selling gasoline.
Well, the DOD has been extraordinarily careful not to release estimates
of enemy combatant casualties. They do, however, release estimates
(actual body counts) for specific operations. 30-1 casualty rates are so
fantastic as to not be believed.
Hopefully.
They say Zarqawi has moved out of his HQ in Iraq and is now directing
ops from Iran.
Coward. That's how so many generals lost their battles in W.W.I.
>
> So, you'll go to battle with Dick & George and the friendly service
> providers of Haliburton (and half the force needed to win) in a
> country they had no right to invade in the first place? And that's
> success to you? You'll sacrifice American lives and ask our sons to
> kill Iraqis instead of pursuing the men who actually killed those New
> Yorkers, Pennsylvanians and Virginians in 2001. That's how you
> succeed? No wonder you live in MinnieSoda. Man you have GOT to get to
> a warmer climate, Dennis.
You see? This opinion is so /tailor made/, so absolutely conducive to
sustaining the efforts of Al-Qaeda in Iraq--and so damn PREDICTABLE, the
theory that it was all a big set-up is almost irresistible.
Somebody, at least, actually DID learn the lessons of Vietnam. Or so it
seems.
---
Art
Bob (this one)
> In article <10khh1o...@corp.supernews.com>,
> Bob (this one) <B...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>If that's what you "understand," then you understand nothing. And your
>>tough tone is just as much bullshit as the content.
>>
>>I've told you that I like *neither* choice. I've told you that I think
>>they're *all* crooks. I support neither one because they're both
>>desperately flawed. See if you can factor that into your reflexive
>>replies, fuckwit.
>>
>>You've decided to tell me what I mean. Bullshit, Billo. You're only
>>missing the red nose...
>>
> I am not telling you what you mean, I am observing what you mean.
Sure you are. And then you alter then into unrecognizable shape with
content newly added.
> You blather on about how you object to *both* Kerry and Bush. However,
> you only obsessively run around as an anklebiter to pro-Bush and
> anti-Kerry posts.
<LOL> Lighten up on the caffeine, Billo...
I especially enjoy your loading it up with non-partisan manure. It's
good to know you have skills in more than one kind. Not surprising,
though. "Obsessively" is a good word to throw in. Likewise "anklebiter."
The *fact* is that I enjoy poking holes in your Hindenberg-sized hot
air balloon. You're so predictably transparent and so easy to hoist by
my petard that you'll suck along, screaming and pejorating (I just
made up that word and I like it) that you end up digging yourself into
deeper and deeper holes of illogic, obtuseness and pettifoggery. How
you like dose apples...?
> You would be more convincing in your claims
> if you ran around posting "partisan manure" after Rick/Josh/Crowfoot
> diatribes about Bush.
You try to include by implication in theirs what yours always contain,
Billo. Malice and bad intent. Accusations never quite fully stated,
innuendo and implications. Your posts are *only and always* partisan
and flatly dismissive of anyone or anything that doesn't utterly agree
with you. You offer respect to no one not like you.
< But you do not -- while you claim not
> to be partisan, you only object to *one* side of the argument.
Still don't quite get it, Billo. It's not about the argument. It's not
about the candidates. It's not about political parties. It's not about
the election.
I object to your *extreme* positions, your *extreme* attempts to smear
not only Kerry, but those who don't join you, your *extreme* and silly
methods of countering criticism of Bush and Repubs not by offering
information, but by offering a counter-example, no matter how
spurious, just to deflect...
> Your actions speak louder than your words.
Yes. They do. As do yours. But you don't believe that or you wouldn't
post your Partisan Manure quite as frenziedly. You might be able to
take a step back and look at how thin so many of your political
diatribes are. And how fully formed they are with skeletons of air and
wishes. Conclusions based on anger, frenzy and the fear of having the
entire house of cards come toppling down...
Bob
M.H.Benders
> I haven't noticed you saying many kind things about Kerry, Billo.
Ah, Josh 'Neocon' Hillbilly who vehemently supported the death of over
30.000 Iraqis and claimed Abu Graib was just a bad apple now thinks we
have to say nice things about Kerry.
For which neofascist will he be tomorrow's bottom boy?
Iraq, according to P.Hill, would be 'nothing but a mop-up operation'.
He lost all credibility in AAPC but apparantly he set up a new
nest in Misc.writing.
I would like to warn all the failed writers that camp up in
that particular bin not to take this crackerhead as an example.
I also request that you keep this crackerhead confined to
your newsgroup.
M.H.Benders
Jay
after the @#@#$ US election?
hello
I know how you feel. These messages are all being crossposted to other
unrelated groups as well.
Thanks a lot, Rodrian. You could at least have been considerate enough
to put "Off Topic" in your subject headers. >:-(
Bill Oliver
Josh Hill <Josh44...@snet.net> wrote:
>
>I haven't noticed you saying many kind things about Kerry, Billo.
>
I'm not the one claiming to be nonpartisan.
billo
Bill Oliver
Bob (this one) <B...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>Still don't quite get it, Billo. It's not about the argument. It's not
>about the candidates. It's not about political parties. It's not about
>the election.
>
>I object to your *extreme* positions, your *extreme* attempts to smear
>not only Kerry, but those who don't join you, your *extreme* and silly
>methods of countering criticism of Bush and Repubs not by offering
>information, but by offering a counter-example, no matter how
>spurious, just to deflect...
>
Right. Like my "spurious" claims the memos were forged. Sure.
OK. For you, it's all about me. You're an anklebiter. Feel
free to obsess and follow me around, but you are no longer
worth responding to. Ta ta.
billo
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Jonathan wrote:
> >
> > "Art" <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:2qpjo0F...@uni-berlin.de...
> > >
> > > "Beau Blue" <jjw...@cruzio.com> wrote
> > > >
> > > > No one should think the troops are coming home soon. This war on
> > > > terror could've been an early win, 'til we pre-emptively attacked a
> > > > country because we let fear overrule good sense.
> > >
> > > Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since none of the
> > > critics seem to have thought the problem through--how could it have been 'an
> > > early win' in your opinion?
> > >
> >
> > been plenty of terrorist attacks since 9/11, and guess where
> > they've been occurring?
> >
> > Not here!
> >
> > They take place....now....in Islamic countries, mostly for
> > supporting us. That's right, this is called ....'taking the war to the enemy'.
> > The terrorists are forcing the Islamic countries to take the
> > lead on fighting terrorism. For their own survival.
> >
> > Besides, the ultimate cause of terrorism is a lack of democracy
> > and freedom in the Islamic world. It's a shame we have to
> > resort to shoving it down their throats. But that's their fault
> > for believing they could placate terrorists and extremists
> > and simply stay in power by pointing them ....our way.
> >
> > The Iraq war has changed all that.
>
> Horseshoes and government work, sure.
>
> Which this ain't.
>
> The ultimate cause, if there is one discernible ultimate cause, is not a
> 'lack of democracy.' That's Gop toothpaste ad copy: "9 out of 10
> political analysts agree...Iraqis have a brighter, whiter smile since
> the Crusade."
>
> ---
> Art
Maybe that's why nine out of ten Iraqis who tried Camels preferred
women.
Dennis M. Hammes
This question immediately breaks down into two parts.
1. "Why?" E.g., why is an electron? Why is there air?
Well, without air, what would be blow up footballs with? Suppose
we had to blow up footballs with concrete. What would become of the
47-yard field-goal attempt? Besides the permanent retirement of
your place-kicker after one game, I mean. What would become of
Brett Favre's right arm? It would look (and most likely smell) like
his right guard's right leg. Ah, but think of the /running game/ in
the case. Stiff-arming a tackle becomes equivalent to kicking him
in the head. And think of the /English/ you could get on it. In a
single stroke, more English than any football player ever before
acquired in his entire life.
But if you have to blow up a football with concrete, you have to
throw the ball through the /same concrete/. Indeed, you have to
attempt your running game through concrete.
Thus, without air, there would be no football.
And so there was air, and God saw that it was /good/, unless
you're from Detroit.
2. "Am I here?"
Who's asking?
I mean, like, if you can't tell, what difference does it make?
Dale
Chandra P. Das wrote:
> Dale wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Byron Canfield wrote:
>> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
>> > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
>> >
>> >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
>> >>
>> >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
>> >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
>> >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
>> >
>> >
>> > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
>> > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
>> >
>> >
>> I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
>> want to strike at us in the first place,and then do something about that.
>
>
> Have you not purchased the new World Dictionary put out by the US
> government? Interesting definitions. They define 'American' as someone
> who's not a terrorist; and furthermore, a peace and freedom dispenser. A
> 'brownie' is defined as a terrorist or a potential terrorist. A
> 'European' is defined as a whiny pain in the ass.
>
> 'Terrorism,' however, is not defined, curiously enough.
How about..
Terrorism: the McGuffin that gets a bob re-elected. This year's "there's
a red under your bed"
dmh
>
>> Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
>
>
> Why don't Americans have the balls to vote for Nader?-- just to set an
> example that a choice between two complete, shitheaded criminals will
> not be tolerated? The answer is simple, I suppose: a large majority of
> Americans have neither balls nor principles.
Not that there aren't plenty of times I think most American's are stupid
to the marrow, but I really think most Americans are not as unprincipled
as they are stunned into pointlessness by a purposeful assault on their
intelligence and good-will by a brothel press and a politcal Punch and
Judy show of astounding irrelevance. Given REAL election reform, and a
public debate over important issues, the 50% of those who have (rather
intelligently) turned off of voting altogether will possibly find a
reason to go to the local voting whorehouse and make a reasoned
statement. But I'm not holding my breath or my water. The other choice
is to take up arms and be prepared to die for an idea, as Dennis talks
about (but he loves power, so it is unlikely he would do it.)
Nader's a better choice than what we've got, and he is (at least)
talking up deep election reform) but - despite his interesting stands on
a spectrum of issues - he is still a supporter of corporate structure:
he onlyb wants to reform it. I want it to eat dirt.
dmh
>
>
>
>> dmh
>>
>
Dennis M. Hammes
Why does a butter fly?
And if the butter does not fly, what becomes of the Mandarin?
Does he dream he is an orange?
That would be terribly wrong.
If, by contrast, the orange dreams it is a Mandarin -- it's
/right/.
Why does a cat always land on its feet?
And if you tie a slice of bread to the cat's back and make the
butter fly, will the cat land on its feet or will the butter side
land down?
Or will the butter side land down only if the cat sits under a
duck with the butter side up?
The cat might duck, butter kittens won't.
Dennis M. Hammes
The Y knot, basis of the bo's'un's chair, is properly called a
"bowline on a bight."
I can seldom go bowlin' on a bite; I need a proper meal.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> > Zero wrote:
> > > "Bill Oliver" <bi...@radix.net> wrote in message
> > > >Art <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> No one should think the troops are coming home soon.
> > > > >> This war on terror could've been an early win, 'til we
> > > > >> pre-emptively attacked a country because we let fear
> > > > >> overrule good sense.
> > > > >
> > > > >Finally, a voice of reason on this group. I'm interested, since
> > > > >how could it have been 'anearly win' in your opinion?
> > > >
> > > > It's simple. Kerry would just let France dictate our foreign policy,
> > > > and instead of dethroning Saddam, we'd sell him plutonium instead.
> > >
> > > for anyone who isn't familiar with Billo, this is classic Billo.
> > >
> > > this is what he does.
> > >
> > > he's as blind and stupid as partisans come.
> > >
> > > he's the king of obfuscation.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
> > > -- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
> > >
> > > Vote Kerry!
> > > Don't let the world blame us Americans voters
> > > for our evil fucking greedy fanatical leaders.
> >
> > Let the world blame us for our stupid, yellow ones.
>
> i'm not yellow, nor stupid. i'm Sicilian.
>
> when we see them.
Well, you've had so much /practice/.
>
> and we are the absolute masters at detecting bullshit and/or lies.
Then why are you still making piccolos by sauteeing flutes in olive
oil?
Just because frying them causes them to shrink?
Or because you can get good and drunk at the annual Mediterranean
Flute Fry?
>
> and poorly reasoned strategies and strategists, such as Billo
> and his fanatical-based crowd.
So give him a cell phone.
Then give him a Ring.
Let Gollum answer it.
>
> plus, our Italian-offshoot heritage has provided us with an
> innate understanding of the creative processes, and reason.
Right.
"I give him a reason he can't refuse."
Most creative.
> (though sadly often neglected due to acheiving general
> happiness too easily).
>
> from Galileo to Leonardo to Enrico Fermez (sp)
"Fermi." Inventor of Fermicelli.
When /that/ spaghetti splits, it takes you with it.
>
> to... um.... Columbo.
>
> (although, i believe that Peter Falk is greek).
Geek.
>
> so...
>
> think again.
>
> > -------(m+
> > ~/:o)_|
> > The most essential gift for a good writer is
> > a built-in, shock-proof, shit detector. -- Hemingway
>
> yours is obviously on the blink.
It doesn't even blink when it's being squeezed by a Black Hand.
>
> or its working againsts its own interests, for some silly fanatical reason.
"Interests"? I don't even work against my own principals.
>
> -$Zero... RealizeSomethingThatYouCan'tSeemToImagine...
>
> "those who oppose war will be proved wrong"
> -- Donald Rumsfeld (9/10/04)
>
> Vote Bush OUT!
> Don't let the world (nor our children)
> blame us voters for our evil fucking
> stupid greedy fanatical leaders.
Dennis M. Hammes
"Sicilian." Inhabitant of an island group off Cornwall.
Where /everybody's/ a little Scilly.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
...
>
> i just hope the rest of the world understands how gullible they are.
>
Pokemon, Chinese "steel," $200 Nikes, British Common Law, WMDs.
What was the question?
Josh Hill
Beau Blue
Adhering to our laws, international laws, and utilizing the world body
we helped design and implement is staying in bed? You don't get out
much, huh?
>
>BTW, Kellogg, Brown & Root were there in Kosovo, too. Different
>administration. Musta been the same pocket-lining scheme, though.
>
How many thousands of dead American soldiers in Kosovo? Different
Administration. How many? Seems a MUCH better pocket-lining scheme to
me. How many prison photos showing American soldiers "softening-up"
Serbs? Different Administration. How many major allies with us in the
Balkans? Different Administration.
"I believe that no discovery of fact, however trivial, can be
wholly useless to the race, and that no trumpeting of falsehood,
however virtuous in intent, can be anything but vicious."
H.L. Menken
Coward? Typical neocon retort. You want to kill something 'cause you
can and some of us won't hold your coat while you're doing it. A pack
of lies is not a foreign policy. A strategy formulated based on lies
is worthless and a tyranny to everyone shortchanged by the effort. And
that's just about everyone, nowadays, but the oil barons and the boys
sucking Texas tit. Oh, hi Art, how's the cream?
-blue
Byron Canfield
news:4148948C...@citilink.com...
>
>
> Byron Canfield wrote:
> > "Dale" <dm...@citilink.com> wrote in message
> > news:4148344B...@citilink.com...
> >
> >>
> >>Byron Canfield wrote:
> >> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> >> >
> >> >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> >> >>
> >> >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
> >> >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
> >> >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
> >> > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
> >>want to strike at us in the first place,and then do something about
that.
> >>
> >
> >
silly
> > assumptions about the motivation (i.e., they hate our freedom, etc.).
> >
> >
>
> But then you're asking for a president who contemplates and cogitates,
> and - unfortunately - the great American public appears to confuse the
> actual (slow and deliberate) thought process with being some sort of
> "pussy" and prefers "men of action" who bomb now and forget to think
> later. The declining state of our education systems and the brazen
> whoredom of our media can only make this worse, so there's not much hope
> on the horizon it seems. As it is going, we'd do as well to elect a
> chimp for president (I know - we already have, several times!), and
> place it before a board full of buttons ("bomb," "kill," "kiss a CEO"
> etc.) and let the damn thing punch buttons at random. Might even be
> better all in all.
>
> Bush is a lying dry drunk, and Kerry's a pointless anecdote waiting for
> the joke to fail: what can you do, but try and make your own life
> better, and hope you don't get trapped in someone else's debris?
>
> If the candidates waiting in the wings are any indication of what we
> destined to be "led" by (McCain, Hillary, etal) I think we should start
> developing that chimp-control board system right now.
Regarding the chimp-control board system, I thought that had already been
developed -- it's called the "two-party system". :)
--
Byron "Barn" Canfield
-----------------------------
"Politics is a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles."
-- Ambrose Bierce
Byron Canfield
> A) They want a Neo-fascist Islamic Super State in the Persian
> Gulf--for starters. B) America is standing in the way.
This is the claim of the Neo-Con Americans (the ones trying to stand in the
way, as it does not suit the economic benefit of transfer of government
control and wealth to the military/corporate industry); it is not, however,
substantiated by the statements and/or actions of the people in those
Islamic states.
> C) They want the
> Jews O-U-T--the diaspora didn't last nearly long enough. D) America is
> standing in the way.
And that's a problem because...? Would YOU like it if somebody walked in
your door and started living in your house and bossing you around claiming
that some ancient book grants them ownership of your home?
> E) They want control of a lion's share of the oil
> as the Oil Era draws to a close. F) America is standing in the way.
The control they want is of the oil that is already theirs. Not sure why
neo-con Americans think that's wrong.
Dennis M. Hammes
> >for solving "Thing: W_AP_NS _F _ASS __STR__T__N," see, and he
> >throws the magic ring (it's on his cell phone) into Mauna Loa, see,
> >and the Evil Eastern Reaches of Sauron Hussein dry up while the
> >Saruman Mosque explodes in flames and drowns in the Euphrates.
> > I think it's called "Final Fantasy VIII.IV."
> >>
> >> > Now we're in it for
> >> > the long haul, whether we like it or not, and that's shrubya's
> >> > blunder. Igniting the 'forever war', and dammit you don't reward
> >> > blunders this large.
> >> >
> >> > And the neocons can muddy up the waters all they want, but it was
> >> > their policies that led to Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, & the first
> >> > thousand dead soldiers for WMDs 'just not there'.
> >>
> >> It's obvious your opinions are a direct result of the Bush Policy.
> >> Everything he's done in Iraq has been targeted to produce such condemnation.
> >
> >And it worked, too.
> > Which leaves our poor little monkey with the problem of condemning
> >a leader for succeeding.
>
> Planned by Saudis, paid for by Saudis, executed by Saudis. But the
> they're both our friends. Never mind who's hiding behind the curtain,
> er who's in which mountains. Success? Choosing targets while blinded
> by nickels and Haliburton contracts? That's success?
>
> A thousand of our sons dead, no WMDs. That's success? No OBL. Success?
> Tactics designed by money hungry mad men willing to believe any lie
> that'll let 'em keep selling gasoline.
And it has you pissed enough to buy a rifle and take a job in a
Texas bookstore.
Ah. You have quit using your oil-powered computer.
Ah. You have quit buying gasoline, then.
Or have you only quit buying gasoline about as well as you've
started reading?
/I/ noted that he had "succeeded" at "producing [his] condemnation."
You come lunging up out of the depths after a few Holy Words tied
like feathers to tickle your fantasy, your mouth agape...
Ain't my feathers. I only dropped a bare bobber in the water.
(That she's a C-cup is none of /your/ business.)
The Saudis are about as far from "friends" as we have on the planet,
but they know who keeps everybody else out of their sandbox.
And that /they can't/.
So, like, you, they hate the one who points out to them they can't
do something -- by doing it for them. This particular juvenile
delinquency not only has a name, it has a number.
But as to our bedfellowing the Saudis (we know damned well who
funded "9/11" and a wad of other shit), you either know how to do
the math, and on what, so I don't have to post it publicly, or I'm
not going to post it publicly under any circumstances and you can
stay stupid.
>
> So, you'll go to battle with Dick & George and the friendly service
> providers of Haliburton (and half the force needed to win) in a
> country they had no right to invade in the first place?
Of course, it's /necessary/ that we had no right to shoot back at
Iraq for their religious promises, because it's necessary that we
have no right to shoot back at the Democrats for /their/ religious
promises.
Or the Republicans, I'm not particular.
This was old shit when I was kicking slats out of my cradle.
In fact, it was old shit at Sarajevo, but I don't care to film
/The Last Remake Of WWI/ in my own back yard, either.
Not enough extras to cart off the extras that can't get up when I
yell "cut."
And you ain't even payin' for the raw fillum.
> And that's
> success to you?
I don't think /anybody/ in this thread -- except you -- said, let
alone insisted so, that that was "success" to /anybody/.
You see the goddam food prices lately?
You got ANY GODDAM' IDEA WHY?
But it's why I absolutely refuse to pay extras for the privilege
of getting their mugs in /my/ stories.
Hint: "Gresham's Law is not worth a Continental."
> You'll sacrifice American lives and ask our sons to
Hell, boy, I wouldn't even sacrifice my own. Why I made it a point
of learning how to come back.
And I didn't /ask/ my nephews and sons as they came of age; I told
'em where the bear was. They didn't all go, no, but the percentage
is four times the national average.
Can /you/ say, "All-Volunteer Force"?
I.e., "stick it."
> kill Iraqis instead of pursuing the men who actually killed those New
> Yorkers, Pennsylvanians and Virginians in 2001.
When Santa Ana sacked the Alamo (TX), we invaded California.
When South Carolina fired on Ft. Sumter in 1861, we invaded
Virginia.
When the Sioux attacked Minnesota in 1875, we invaded Montana.
When Cuba blew up the Maine in 1898, we invaded the Philippines.
When Germany sneaked a telegram to Mexico in 1917, we invaded
France.
When Japan invaded Manchuko in 1939, we invaded Burma.
When Japan fired on Oahu (not even the United States) in 1941, we
invaded Morocco.
When China invaded South Korea in 1951, we invaded Japan.
When China invaded Tibet in 1955, we invaded Viet Nam.
When Russia shot up Budapest in 1956, we invaded Greece.
When Russia installed MRBMs in Cuba in 1962, we invaded Germany.
When Egypt invested Gaza in 1965, we invaded Turkey.
When some Saudi expats bombed Manhattan in 2001, we invaded
Afghanistan.
What part of this don't you understand?
> That's how you
> succeed? No wonder you live in MinnieSoda. Man you have GOT to get to
> a warmer climate, Dennis.
41 below keeps out the riffraff.
Or it useta, before UseNet.
Let's see, there was a... Right. "A thousand of our sons dead."
So you lost a son, then.
Oh. You're just a haranguing parasite on /somebody else's/ dead
son.
Yeah, that was old when I was cradle-kickin', too.
But let me address that in terms even you might be able to
understand.
When the 24th or the 3rd MI took the field for a week for exercises
(no shootin'), we came back 14 shy of what we went out with. The
Book calls this "acceptable losses," and Mommy paid Mommy's Servants
to Written the Book ("It Is Writ-ten...").
Now, we got three MI Divisions in Iraq (plus boocoo support plus
some sorta shootin' it seZ here, but anyway).
And we been in Iraq 56 weeks.
Which is good for 3024 sons shy of what we went in with just for
the main Divisions, just for holding a group-grope in the dark.
"A thousand..."
What Is Your Suken Little PROBLEM, boy?
You read Marion by watching Fox and Clausewitz by watching /The
Hour of Power/?
Oh.
I forgot.
You can't even read a newsfroup poast.
Figgers.
v.i.
"Byron Canfield" <barnN...@NOSPAMbyronc.com> wrote in message
news:1rZ1d.95170$3l3.55434@attbi_s03...
> "Dale" <dm...@citilink.com> wrote in message
> news:4148344B...@citilink.com...
> >
> >
> > Byron Canfield wrote:
> > > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> > > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> > >>
> > >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
> > >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
> > >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
> > > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
>
It is amazing. The liberals (particularly the liberal news media) realize
that AlQueda is all over the world--except in Iraq, of course. There was no
connection there--they say--with Saddam.
Now that's a hoot!
--v.i.
Dennis M. Hammes
Because we could only win the Forever War by staying in bed forever,
I like it even better.
Now where are the /girls/.
But we're not doin' the shootin', see?
The Ay-Rabs are shootin' at /us/, and killin' 30 Ay-Rabs of
theirsselfs fer ever one a usn's they gits.
Now that there is geblievable.
I seen it thereabouts.
And I seen it on these froups ever week, like.
>
> Hopefully.
>
> They say Zarqawi has moved out of his HQ in Iraq and is now directing
> ops from Iran.
>
> Coward. That's how so many generals lost their battles in W.W.I.
And the Russian Front (both sides). And the Civil War. And the
Revvie. And the Thirty Years' War. And the Armada. And the
Peloponessus.
>
> >
> > So, you'll go to battle with Dick & George and the friendly service
> > providers of Haliburton (and half the force needed to win) in a
> > country they had no right to invade in the first place? And that's
> > success to you? You'll sacrifice American lives and ask our sons to
> > kill Iraqis instead of pursuing the men who actually killed those New
> > Yorkers, Pennsylvanians and Virginians in 2001. That's how you
> > succeed? No wonder you live in MinnieSoda. Man you have GOT to get to
> > a warmer climate, Dennis.
>
> You see? This opinion is so /tailor made/, so absolutely conducive to
> sustaining the efforts of Al-Qaeda in Iraq--and so damn PREDICTABLE, the
> theory that it was all a big set-up is almost irresistible.
Replace "Dick & George" with "Dick & Lyndon" and "Halliburton" with
"Hughes" and "Baghdad" with "Saigon" an I hearn it all bafor.
Replace "Dick & George" with "Dick & Jane" an I hearn it all on
the fourth-grade playground.
Except wasn't nobody cryin' about my jackknife on the fourth-grade
playground, because they all had theirs, too.
An' most a'm were bigger'n mine.
>
> Somebody, at least, actually DID learn the lessons of Vietnam. Or so it
> seems.
The numbers are a dam' sight better for Baghdad and Fellujah than
they were for Saigon and Quang Tri.
You don't spoZe this "Blue" feller is actually a /Smurf/...
>
> ---
> Art
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Byron Canfield wrote:
> > news:4148344B...@citilink.com...
> >
> >>
> >>Byron Canfield wrote:
> >> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> >> >
> >> >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> >> >>
> >> >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
> >> >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
> >> >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
> >> > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>want to strike at us in the first place,and then do something about that.
> >>
> >>Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
> >
> >
> > Indeed, look to the motivation and deal with that, rather than making silly
> > assumptions about the motivation (i.e., they hate our freedom, etc.).
> >
> >
>
> But then you're asking for a president who contemplates and cogitates,
> and - unfortunately - the great American public appears to confuse the
> actual (slow and deliberate) thought process with being some sort of
> "pussy" and prefers "men of action" who bomb now and forget to think
> later. The declining state of our education systems and the brazen
> whoredom of our media can only make this worse, so there's not much hope
> on the horizon it seems. As it is going, we'd do as well to elect a
> chimp for president (I know - we already have, several times!), and
> place it before a board full of buttons ("bomb," "kill," "kiss a CEO"
> etc.) and let the damn thing punch buttons at random. Might even be
> better all in all.
>
> Bush is a lying dry drunk, and Kerry's a pointless anecdote waiting for
> the joke to fail: what can you do, but try and make your own life
> better, and hope you don't get trapped in someone else's debris?
By George, I believe he's got it.
>
> If the candidates waiting in the wings are any indication of what we
> destined to be "led" by (McCain, Hillary, etal) I think we should start
> developing that chimp-control board system right now.
Is there some reason the wires behind the buttons hafta go anywhere
besides the big colored lights?
What's the /largest single thing/ at the Dem and Rep National
Conventions?
>
> dmh
___________
The balloon-drop.
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Dale wrote:
> >
> > Byron Canfield wrote:
> > > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> > > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> > >>
> > >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
> > >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
> > >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
> > > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
> > >
> > >
> > I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
> > want to strike at us in the first place,and then do something about that.
> >
> > Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
> >
>
Fka "The Tyrant of Athens."
Trouble with The Tyrant of Washington (proposed long ago) is that
one day, he'll fall down and can't get up.
And then you're not only back to a bunch of monkeys, you're back
to a bunch of monkeys perfectly trained to Let George Do It.
Happened to Athens.
Happened to Alexander.
Happened to Julius.
Happened to Arthur.
Happened to Siegfried (or was that Roy).
Happened to Charlemagne.
Happened to Henry VII.
Happened to Jefferson.
Happened to Lincoln.
Happened to Roosevelt; babies complain that the replacement monkey
pushed the button on the Biggest Colored Light we had.
> One who would send an emissary to
> Kabul to ask the leaders of /The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against
> the Jews and Crusaders/ to explain what they'd already broadcast in a
> dozen Fatwas.
You still need an /explanation/?
(Yeah, I know who still needs an explanation.)
So I'll try a one-word explanation of /fatwa/ even a monkey can
understand:
*BOOM*
We replied in kind.
>
> "Sammy; WTF?"
>
> Pst: A) They want a Neo-fascist Islamic Super State in the Persian
> Gulf--for starters. B) America is standing in the way. C) They want the
> Jews O-U-T--the diaspora didn't last nearly long enough. D) America is
> standing in the way. E) They want control of a lion's share of the oil
> as the Oil Era draws to a close. F) America is standing in the way.
>
> B-D-F.
>
> ---
> Art
>
> "No; I have not been charged with that.
> In fact, nobody has said that to me yet."
> ---Lee Oswald
> (1963)
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> "Chandra P. Das" <
>
> vze1...@verizon.net
>
> > wrote in message news:uO32d.4797$VV2.1761@trndny06...
>
> > Art wrote:
> > >
> > > Dale wrote:
> > >
> > >>Byron Canfield wrote:
> > >> > "SDR" <sdro...@sdrodrian.com> wrote in message
> > >> > news:58087ec7.04091...@posting.google.com...
> > >> >
> > >> >> THIS ELECTION IS HISTORY.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The choice is between striking back hard if/when we're hit or
> > >> >> trying to understand/rationalize the attack... to accept our losses
> > >> >> and seek to engage the attacker, to feel his pain & empathize.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > I'd rather have a president that struck back at those that did the
> > >> > striking, instead of redirecting the attack against somebody else.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>I'd rather have a president who tried to figure out why anyone would
> that.
> > >>
> > >>Or I'd rather not have a president at all.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Kabul to ask the leaders of /The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against
> > > the Jews and Crusaders/ to explain what they'd already broadcast in a
> > > dozen Fatwas.
> > >
> > >
> > > Pst: A) They want a Neo-fascist Islamic Super State in the Persian
> > > Gulf--for starters.
> >
> > small minority? Are 'they' aligned in ideology? Cohesive?
>
> Of course I meant The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and
> Crusaders (swim back upthread to Dale's statement). This also includes The
> Islamic Brotherhood; a separate, older and overlapping group. And the
> WIFJAJ&C's sister corporation, Egyptian based Al Jihad. Some of their goals
> were outlined in 1996:
>
> http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
>
> But the guy who got closest was Nasser. All he needed was Nuclear Weapons.
>
> > Is Musharaff
> > one of them? Is he Al-Qaeda's best friend? Think!
>
> Well, he's surely arresting them by the bushel basket! And Bin Laden has
> tried to assassinate him twice, that we know of, since 9/11/01.
>
> Not that he might not be doing the fence rider's tightrope. Who knows? Who
> cares?
>
> He's not speaking out against the USA publically anymore, and that's a
> start. His heart may or may not be in it, but he's playing ball. That's a
> GOOD start.
>
> >
> > Why is reality so elusive for you, McNutt? Super States are not going to
> > materialize, my friend -- neither in the Middle East nor in Europe.
>
> Yes, by George, I think you've GOT IT!!
>
> Congratulations on a job well done, boys:
>
> OPERATION: DESERT STORM Kuwait, 1991
>
> OPERATION: ALLIED FORCE Kosovo, 1999
>
> OPERATION: ENDURING FREEDOM Afghanistan, 2001
>
> OPERATION: IRAQI FREEDOM Iraq, 2003
>
> > Why?
> > Because different people don't get along with each other, it's that
> > simple.
>
> What about the first caliphate? The Ottoman Empire? The Soviet Union? The
> United Kingdom? The United States?
>
> > The only Neo-fascist Super State possibility that we have to
> > worry about is right here in America.
Yabut Florida simply hasn't got the required MOABs (only a little
Sterno, as it turns out), and it seems that their only true trained
fighter/killer "was never in the service," so I pure can't see it
happening in /your/ lifetime.
But you can still hold your breath until you turn blue so that
Smurfette will come running to raise your pulse and temperature by
taking them.
> > You're gonna sleep right through
> > it, mate, and it doesn't seem like a good slap is going to wake you. No,
> > McNutt, you need the full blow of a sledg hammer for a surefire delivery
> > into consciousness.
And you need the full blow of Smurfette.
Good luck.
>
> [Art reaches over and hits the snooze button...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz]
> >
> > Well, on second thought: who knows? -- maybe there *will* arise a Super
> > State in the near future. Our policies and actions are rapidly uniting
> > not just the Muslim population but the whole world against us. How do
> > you like that prospect? Are we ready to fight the whole world, cowboy?
>
> Yes, I believe we are. But I hardly think the rest of the world is up to
> fighting us. That's how the Silverback BECOMES the Silverback.>
> > > B) America is standing in the way.
Whereas Chandra, rather than drawing a "cottage-cheese sword" from
the stone, is merely standing in the whey.
> >
> > You call tossing thousands of bombs and missiles into a random country
> > 'standing in the way'? Fuck's the matter with you? The US has always
> > been in everybody's way -- it knows no other manner of existence:
> > full-time interference across every habitable inch of the globe.
Heh. Yeh. Done it myself for four and a bit years.
Allowing you to speak broken English instead of broken Russian.
Look, you wanna pound your head in the sand five times a day, DO
IT.
'Sa free country.
You start dictating to me how I hafta *feel* for sand-pounders, I
won't even see your dick, tater, and raise a sword.
Just a nine-dolla /foil/.
And I'll welt you so you eat on tiptoe for a week.
> >
> > Now it just happens that some other people have gotten fed up and have
> > decided to get in *its* way for a change. But no problem, we've got
> > enough WMD to take care of 'em all.
>
> First factual statement you wrote in the entire post, Chandra.
First time he ever admitted to getting the point, too.
That, indeed, he knew it all along.
>
> ---
>
> Art
Dennis M. Hammes
>
> Is it ok to talk about writing in this group, or do I have to wait until
> after the @#@#$ US election?
I dunno which froup "this" is (this is aapc/rap), but it seems to
have escaped your attention that we are talking about writing.
All week (thread).
Bad writing.
Not to mention bad poultry.
And bad curriculum.
And shit that couldn't pass for the light of wisdom if the sun
went out; I've seen greater enlightenment from foxfire, and that
stuff's a /fungus/.
It doesn't have to have been written by /our/ several memberships,
ya know.
'Course, you might wanna write about writing on a Higher Plane
that isn't affected by the mundane, but it also doesn't pay your gas
-- after refusing diligently to get its wheels dirty by /landing/
anywhere.
Or maybe you think it's "wisdom" to stick two fingers in the air and
talk slow.
I alluZ found the greatest wisdom to be to survive /really fast/,
then speak at any rate I cared to about any subject I damwell
pleased.
But a "masterpiece" is something created by a writer/poet sitting
alone before a blank sheet of paper in an empty room with the door
shut.
If you don't like the way other people "talk about writing," you
could try that.
Beau Blue
[Snip adolescent bullshit]
Even dutchmen can recognize a Texas mammet.
-blue
Dale
Pull the plug!
dmh
The Apprentice
<g> You are absurdly delightful Monsieur Dennis.
aj
Art
Byron Canfield wrote:
>
> "Art" <arty_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4148742E...@yahoo.com...
> > A) They want a Neo-fascist Islamic Super State in the Persian
> > Gulf--for starters. B) America is standing in the way.
>
> This is the claim of the Neo-Con Americans (the ones trying to stand in the
> way, as it does not suit the economic benefit of transfer of government
> control and wealth to the military/corporate industry); it is not, however,
> substantiated by the statements and/or actions of the people in those
> Islamic states.
Bin Laden:
"Division of the land of the two Holy Places, and annexing of the
northerly part of it by Israel. Dividing the land of the two Holy Places
is an essential demand of the Zionist-Crusader alliance. The existence
of such a large country with its huge resources under the leadership of
the forthcoming Islamic State, by Allah's Grace, represent a serious
danger to the very existence of the Zionist state in Palestine. The
Nobel Ka'ba, -the Qiblah of all Muslims- makes the land of the two Holy
Places a symbol for the unity of the Islamic world. Moreover, the
presence of the world largest oil reserve makes the land of the two Holy
Places an important economical power in the Islamic world. The sons of
the two Holy Places are directly related to the life style (Seerah) of
their forefathers, the companions, may Allah be pleased with them. They
consider the Seerah of their forefathers as a source and an example for
re-establishing the greatness of this Ummah and to raise the word of
Allah again."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
Too much to integrate, allow me: The creation of a neo-fascist super
state would force out the zionists and put the true-believers in charge
of all the oil--thereby trumping the Crusader's atomic bombs. ("Seerah"
is the account of how Mohammed rose to conquer Arabia and finally
established Makkah as the capitol in AD 630)
Nasser:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamal_Abdel_Nasser
Muslim Brotherhood:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/M/MuslimB1r.asp
On the goals and motivations of Islamic Terrorists Organizations, there
really isn't anything more thorough than the 9/11 Commission report:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/
As for the ingrained religious-based hatred of jews, nothing is as much
of an eye opener than this:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm
Their own words, indeed.
>
> > C) They want the
> > Jews O-U-T--the diaspora didn't last nearly long enough. D) America is
> > standing in the way.
>
> And that's a problem because...? Would YOU like it if somebody walked in
> your door and started living in your house and bossing you around claiming
> that some ancient book grants them ownership of your home?
Pretty good description of what happened to the Jews. But no matter;
they're back now.
And to answer your question: If my granddad's house was occupied by some
unclean Kaffurs or Jew-dogs, sure, I'd be pissed about it. But, you
know, after a generation of not being the owner, I wouldn't be throwing
grenades into a Jewish Preschool in order to try to get it back.
Call me lazy.
My damn grandfather never left me his house ANYWAY. The bastard. I had
to get my own.
"Wherever I lay my hat is home..."
Hey, btw, did you know that the Palestinians were offered some territory
back, and a chance to call it their own? They started another bloody
intifada over it--it seems the offer was only 1/3 of what they expected.
You'd think 1/3 of a fantasy would be enough. But nnnnnnooOOOOOOOOooooo!
Back to the daily grind of strapping bombs under their shirts and
trudging up the lane to those Israeli checkpoints. Greedy Jews.
>
> > E) They want control of a lion's share of the oil
> > as the Oil Era draws to a close. F) America is standing in the way.
>
> The control they want is of the oil that is already theirs. Not sure why
> neo-con Americans think that's wrong.
Osama Bin Laden's oil? No, he's the son of a construction magnate--no
oil wells.
Whose oil? The proletariat's? The bourgeoisie's? The Emirs'? The Royal Families'?
One thing's for sure: if the Caliph was back in town, /it would ALL be his/.
Art
No more than I HAVE to.
> >
> >BTW, Kellogg, Brown & Root were there in Kosovo, too. Different
> >administration. Musta been the same pocket-lining scheme, though.
> >
>
> How many thousands of dead American soldiers in Kosovo? Different
> Administration. How many? Seems a MUCH better pocket-lining scheme to
> me.
Men, your job is to see to it THE OTHER poor dumb bastard dies for my money.
> How many prison photos showing American soldiers "softening-up"
> Serbs? Different Administration. How many major allies with us in the
> Balkans? Different Administration.
>
Using NATO as an excuse was bad precedent by a bad president, you betchya.
Coffee Aninny is saying that the 'unilateral' invasion of Iraq was
against international law. The NATO action, on the other paw, was
validated under the UN Genocide Treaty.
Pssst: there was less genocide in Kosovo than there were WMD's in Iraq.
The only reason it wasn't a travesty of International Law is ONLY
because ONLY Russia was sucking Malsonofabitch's dick. This time, in
Iraq, the entire fukin' Security Council was sucking Hussein's
dick--except...guess who?...that's right: the US and UK.
Why yes, yes I /would/ like to kill Zarqawi. I'd do it with my bare
hands too. But I never said that in the above post.
What I said was that it's cowardly to back up out of range of the
artillery while you still expect your soldiers to hang tough.
And it's stupid, 'cause the farther you get away from the battle lines,
the less likely it is that you'll make correct or timely decisions.
> A pack
> of lies is not a foreign policy. A strategy formulated based on lies
> is worthless and a tyranny to everyone shortchanged by the effort. And
> that's just about everyone, nowadays, but the oil barons and the boys
> sucking Texas tit. Oh, hi Art, how's the cream?
A lie is a lie, certainly. But then, Lies During Wartime are just
another weapon.
"This ain't no party, this ain't no disco..."
This is just a war of talking heads. Osama Bin Laden vs Dan Rather.
What's the frequency, Kenneth?