#51 2008-10-20 21:12:12
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
I do love the OED, but it's not the only dictionary, nor does it contain every word in the language - in fact, it never has. Its deficiencies are legion, especially for a yankee-doodle, but even for a Canuck.
Fuck the OED, Love the EOD.
(Crank up the volume)
Last edited by Emmeran (2008-10-20 21:12:28)
Offline
#53 2008-10-20 21:30:31
tojo2000 wrote:
Enough already with the Obama/Ayers arguments, we all know it's a ridiculous connection.
Offline
#54 2008-10-20 22:01:06
Emmeran wrote:
Enough already with the Obama/Ayers arguments, we all know it's a ridiculous connection.
This, on the other hand:
Joe Vogler was a nut
Offline
#55 2008-10-21 17:37:39
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
And let me add this - by the same essential logic, I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Sometimes the attitudes and actions of a nation engender justified acts of callous murder and destruction.
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.
Offline
#56 2008-10-21 17:44:14
Taint wrote:
Muckler. Je muckle. Tu muckles. Il muckle. Nous mucklons. Vous mucklez. Ils mucklent.
FUcking fRench!!!
Offline
#57 2008-10-21 17:45:08
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
And let me add this - by the same essential logic, I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Sometimes the attitudes and actions of a nation engender justified acts of callous murder and destruction.
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.
See, that's the difference between the left and the right...I don't think I have the right to do violence to someone who expresses an opinion that I don't agree with. I support the First Amendment.
What the hell is wrong with you people?
Offline
#58 2008-10-21 17:51:54
It's my curse, really. I spent years hating the French, for no real good reason other than some of them smell, I think French food is bad and they are rude and arrogant.
Now, my entire inner circle is filled with fucking French folks. 2 of my closest people are fucking French. You know how hard this is for me?
Imagine some devote skinhead, spending his life talking about nigger this and nigger that and so on, then having a bunch of black friends.
If I had a dime for every time I had to stop dead-up, mid-word in something I was saying.....
I blame the French.....
Fucking French fucks!!!
Offline
#59 2008-10-21 18:13:21
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
And let me add this - by the same essential logic, I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Sometimes the attitudes and actions of a nation engender justified acts of callous murder and destruction.
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.
Sure you would, Ptooey. It's so easy to threaten physical violence over the Internet, isn't it. Sure sign of a loser. Let me say it again, and direct it to you alone: I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Declare your impotent little fatwah, fuckwad.
Offline
#60 2008-10-21 18:14:16
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
And let me add this - by the same essential logic, I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Sometimes the attitudes and actions of a nation engender justified acts of callous murder and destruction.
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.
Sure you would, Ptooey. It's so easy to threaten physical violence over the Internet, isn't it. Sure sign of a loser. Let me say it again, and direct it to you alone: I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Declare your impotent little fatwah, fuckwad.
Around here we call it a fuckwah.
Offline
#61 2008-10-21 19:03:15
déjà vu via tool
Offline
#62 2008-10-21 19:51:00
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
And let me add this - by the same essential logic, I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Sometimes the attitudes and actions of a nation engender justified acts of callous murder and destruction.
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.
Sure you would, Ptooey. It's so easy to threaten physical violence over the Internet, isn't it. Sure sign of a loser. Let me say it again, and direct it to you alone: I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Declare your impotent little fatwah, fuckwad.
You're a worthless sad piece of shit to celebrate the senseless deaths of innocent women and children.
'nuff said
Offline
#63 2008-10-21 19:52:19
headkicker_girl wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
And let me add this - by the same essential logic, I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Sometimes the attitudes and actions of a nation engender justified acts of callous murder and destruction.
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.
See, that's the difference between the left and the right...I don't think I have the right to do violence to someone who expresses an opinion that I don't agree with. I support the First Amendment.
What the hell is wrong with you people?
The problem is, you don't disagree with said cunt.
Birds of a feather, and all.
Offline
#64 2008-10-21 19:54:31
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.Sure you would, Ptooey. It's so easy to threaten physical violence over the Internet, isn't it. Sure sign of a loser. Let me say it again, and direct it to you alone: I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Declare your impotent little fatwah, fuckwad.
You're a worthless sad piece of shit to celebrate the senseless deaths of innocent women and children.
'nuff said
This from an American. Get stuffed, hypocrite.
Offline
#65 2008-10-21 19:54:57
ptah13 wrote:
headkicker_girl wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.See, that's the difference between the left and the right...I don't think I have the right to do violence to someone who expresses an opinion that I don't agree with. I support the First Amendment.
What the hell is wrong with you people?The problem is, you don't disagree with said cunt.
Birds of a feather, and all.
Now, now, Ptah, I know you've had your feelings hurt, but you might want to count backwards from 100 and try to calm down before you say something you'll regret later.
Offline
#66 2008-10-21 19:58:53
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
Sure you would, Ptooey. It's so easy to threaten physical violence over the Internet, isn't it. Sure sign of a loser. Let me say it again, and direct it to you alone: I applaud the destruction of the twin towers. Declare your impotent little fatwah, fuckwad.
You're a worthless sad piece of shit to celebrate the senseless deaths of innocent women and children.
'nuff saidThis from an American. Get stuffed, hypocrite.
When have I ever celebrated the deaths of innocent women and children? Name once?
What a moron you are. It is no wonder HKG so quickly came to your aid.
Last edited by ptah13 (2008-10-21 20:00:47)
Offline
#67 2008-10-21 20:01:46
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
You're a worthless sad piece of shit to celebrate the senseless deaths of innocent women and children.
'nuff saidThis from an American. Get stuffed, hypocrite.
When have I ever celebrated the deaths of innocent women and children? Name once?
No idea. I don't read your thoughtless, illiterate posts. You have the personality and intelligence of a wet fart. Have a nice little right-wing day.
Offline
#68 2008-10-21 20:19:25
If I may interject:
Offline
#69 2008-10-21 20:20:55
ptah13 wrote:
headkicker_girl wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
If someone were to say this to my face, I'd have them taken out.See, that's the difference between the left and the right...I don't think I have the right to do violence to someone who expresses an opinion that I don't agree with. I support the First Amendment.
What the hell is wrong with you people?The problem is, you don't disagree with said cunt.
Birds of a feather, and all.
Could you maybe deviate from the typical Republican bullshit response for once?
Of course I don't condone what he said. I still defend his right to say it.
Offline
#70 2008-10-21 20:24:31
ptah13 wrote:
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
You're a worthless sad piece of shit to celebrate the senseless deaths of innocent women and children.
'nuff saidThis from an American. Get stuffed, hypocrite.
When have I ever celebrated the deaths of innocent women and children? Name once?
What a moron you are. It is no wonder HKG so quickly came to your aid.
No, I didn't come to his aid. I had thought that you might open your narrow little mind and question your irrational response...unless the First Amendment only applies to speech that you personally agree with.
Offline
#71 2008-10-21 20:24:54
Dmtdust wrote:
If I may interject:
If I may quote myself...
Offline
#72 2008-10-21 20:28:07
headkicker_girl wrote:
Could you maybe deviate from the typical Republican bullshit response for once?
Of course I don't condone what he said. I still defend his right to say it.
Damn HK, I hate you sometimes.
But you are correct, he can say anything he wants outside of direct threats against another. Although it must be said that WCL really stepped over the line this time; the world trade center bombing was a crime, not an act of war or a political statement. It was a crime commited against a culture that he shares and committed for no other reason other than to commit a crime against the culture of the west.
Although the old crusty jarhead within me agrees with ptah if only for the reason that it is the sort of underhanded attack which tends to justify violence in most minds.
Wilber - I'm very disappointed.
Offline
#73 2008-10-21 20:40:39
Emmeran wrote:
headkicker_girl wrote:
Could you maybe deviate from the typical Republican bullshit response for once?
Of course I don't condone what he said. I still defend his right to say it.Damn HK, I hate you sometimes.
But you are correct, he can say anything he wants outside of direct threats against another. Although it must be said that WCL really stepped over the line this time; the world trade center bombing was a crime, not an act of war or a political statement. It was a crime commited against a culture that he shares and committed for no other reason other than to commit a crime against the culture of the west.
Although the old crusty jarhead within me agrees with ptah if only for the reason that it is the sort of underhanded attack which tends to justify violence in most minds.
Wilber - I'm very disappointed.
How do we know he's not simply being a troll.? Fnord likes to go to black sites and stir the pot. What better way to troll than for a Canadian to say 9-11 was deserved? People should use their outrage for something useful...like trying to take the Republican party back from the nutjobs.
Offline
#74 2008-10-21 20:42:40
Emmeran wrote:
headkicker_girl wrote:
Could you maybe deviate from the typical Republican bullshit response for once?
Of course I don't condone what he said. I still defend his right to say it.Damn HK, I hate you sometimes.
But you are correct, he can say anything he wants outside of direct threats against another. Although it must be said that WCL really stepped over the line this time; the world trade center bombing was a crime, not an act of war or a political statement. It was a crime commited against a culture that he shares and committed for no other reason other than to commit a crime against the culture of the west.
Although the old crusty jarhead within me agrees with ptah if only for the reason that it is the sort of underhanded attack which tends to justify violence in most minds.
Wilber - I'm very disappointed.
I guess, in a way, my defense of the 1st has become somewhat jaded in my old age.
Try this on for size, HKG. If I were to find out that WCL was, say, jailed for simply saying the fucking horrible shit he says, I'd think that was wrong.
On the other hand, if he were to say such things to me, I don't know what I'd do.
Either way, singing your praise what happened on 9/11 is some sick shit but I'm not surprised, considering the source.
Offline
#75 2008-10-21 21:26:39
Idiots. There's no such thing as a "war crime" when you're fighting a callous, cynical and self-satisfied enemy such as the United States. There is only what you can do to jar their smugness and let them know that their reign of terror has limits in space and time. Of course I dislike the fact that innocents are killed, but so far you Americans still have much to atone for. 3000 deaths is nothing in the balance. As much as I'm very fond of many Amercans, including some of you, there is a fatwah on all your heads. It is just, and the only thing you can do about it is to apologize for the last 200 years of "might-makes-right" foreign policy and reform your imperialistic ways. You are worse than the country you broke away from.
If I had time I'd post a pictorial retrospective of American atrocities across the planet, but it's dinnertime, and nicer things await.
Offline
#76 2008-10-21 21:31:18
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
Idiots. There's no such thing as a "war crime" when you're fighting a callous, cynical and self-satisfied enemy such as the United States. There is only what you can do to jar their smugness and let them know that their reign of terror has limits in space and time. Of course I dislike the fact that innocents are killed, but so far you Americans still have much to atone for. 3000 deaths is nothing in the balance. As much as I'm very fond of many Amercans, including some of you, there is a fatwah on all your heads. It is just, and the only thing you can do about it is to apologize for the last 200 years of "might-makes-right" foreign policy and reform your imperialistic ways. You are worse than the country you broke away from.
If I had time I'd post a pictorial retrospective of American atrocities across the planet, but it's dinnertime, and nicer things await.
Damn, it is Lurker in disguise.
Either way, lest you forget Might does make Right. You can whine all you want but that one truth has not changed throughout history.
History my friend is written by the winners, the losers story is told only through archaeological digs.
Offline
#77 2008-10-21 21:36:06
this is getting to be the lamest thread in HS history. It reaks of hysterical self-righteous hypocricy from all corners.
Last edited by orangeplus (2008-10-21 21:36:53)
Offline
#78 2008-10-21 22:09:01
Emmeran wrote:
Either way, lest you forget Might does make Right.
No fear of forgetting - America is just to the south. And I do hope you'll remember the same thing. When the Towers went down, billlions of poor, disenfranchised people the world over took a collective breath out of respect for the dead...and then cheered and felt happy for days.
Offline
#79 2008-10-21 22:09:09
WilberCuntLicker wrote:
Idiots. There's no such thing as a "war crime" when you're fighting a callous, cynical and self-satisfied enemy such as the United States. There is only what you can do to jar their smugness and let them know that their reign of terror has limits in space and time. Of course I dislike the fact that innocents are killed, but so far you Americans still have much to atone for. 3000 deaths is nothing in the balance. As much as I'm very fond of many Amercans, including some of you, there is a fatwah on all your heads. It is just, and the only thing you can do about it is to apologize for the last 200 years of "might-makes-right" foreign policy and reform your imperialistic ways. You are worse than the country you broke away from.
If I had time I'd post a pictorial retrospective of American atrocities across the planet, but it's dinnertime, and nicer things await.
200 years? WTF are you talking about?
We had nearly an isolationist policy up till the 1940's?
Oh, and umm, aren't Canadians involved in nearly every military endeavor we set out on?
You're dumber than a bag of hammers, sir.
You really think "oh I'm sorry mr Islamic fundy guy" will cause the fundys to say, "ok, they said they are sorry, all is good".
On top of all that, I, for one, don't wish to live under Shiara(sp?) law.
It is the stated desire of the muslim faith to make the world Islam. Have you been to the UK lately? They are doing a great job there.
Oh, and hey, Canada is such a great example to set our standards to. You folks ban more books that Hilter.
idiot.
Offline
#80 2008-10-21 22:13:19
ptah13 wrote:
200 years? WTF are you talking about?
We had nearly an isolationist policy up till the 1940's?
Wilbur is completely full of shit, granted. You do your own arguement no service by your ignorance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Un … ory_events
Offline
#81 2008-10-21 22:17:27
(With apologies to RT)
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BLAH BLAH TROLL BLAH BLAH BLAH WILBER AND PTAH HAVE SLOPPY MAKEOUTS
Offline
#82 2008-10-21 22:32:22
I'll make this easy... Pictures!
http://www.adbusters.org/files/media/fl … meline.swf
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." In other words, a little learning in history... oh never mind.
Offline
#83 2008-10-21 22:33:06
orangeplus wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
200 years? WTF are you talking about?
We had nearly an isolationist policy up till the 1940's?Wilbur is completely full of shit, granted. You do your own arguement no service by your ignorance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Un … ory_events
I hardly see any attempts to take over the world in all of that....
Offline
#84 2008-10-21 22:38:10
ptah13 wrote:
I hardly see any attempts to take over the world in all of that....
That's good since no one said that.
Offline
#85 2008-10-21 22:48:09
orangeplus wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
I hardly see any attempts to take over the world in all of that....
That's good since no one said that.
I thought that is what he meant by "imperialistic".
When I hear that, I think of Japan taking over countless countries in matters of months. Or old England. Or the Germany of the early 40's. How about Russia of the late 40's?
How do you define "imperialistic", orange? Tell us of the great empire the US ruled during the, say, the 1890's. I'd love to learn more!
Offline
#86 2008-10-21 23:00:54
Considering that at 1800 we held an incomplete hold over the territories east of the Mississippi, I would say we are one of the world's most successful imperialist powers. Before 1900 we had taken the best parts of a continent, Cuba, The Phillipines, Panama, Hawaii, chunks of south pacific, and early on told the rest of the world that an entire hemisphere was our playground and no one else could play.
Definition: The expansion of a nation's authority by territorial conquest establishing economic and political powers in other territories or nations.
I can't even believe anyone would argue this. They taught this in high school world history, even in the south.
Offline
#87 2008-10-21 23:20:23
Ptah... are you on meds? Really. Tell yer pal Dusty. That is a shit load of interventions, subversions of duly elected gov'ts, and how could you not be aware of this?
Just askin'
Yer Pal,
Dusty
Offline
#88 2008-10-22 00:32:34
orangeplus wrote:
Considering that at 1800 we held an incomplete hold over the territories east of the Mississippi, I would say we are one of the world's most successful imperialist powers. Before 1900 we had taken the best parts of a continent, Cuba, The Phillipines, Panama, Hawaii, chunks of south pacific, and early on told the rest of the world that an entire hemisphere was our playground and no one else could play.
Definition: The expansion of a nation's authority by territorial conquest establishing economic and political powers in other territories or nations.
I can't even believe anyone would argue this. They taught this in high school world history, even in the south.
Well, C'mon. We're Americans. All that shit should be ours!
Sheech! I was talking about real places like Europe or 3 or 4 countries in Asia, not like helpless 3rd world shit. Ain't that shit up for grabs or what?
sheesh...
Offline
#89 2008-10-22 00:38:24
Dmtdust wrote:
Ptah... are you on meds? Really. Tell yer pal Dusty. That is a shit load of interventions, subversions of duly elected gov'ts, and how could you not be aware of this?
Just askin'
Yer Pal,
Dusty
Fuck dude, no joke.
I'll send you something. You'll laugh.
Offline
#90 2008-10-22 02:52:20
tojo2000 wrote:
It still didn't keep me from feeling like an asshole, of course, and it wasn't helpful that I was one of
these douchebags.
Getting back to more important post subjects.
While I imagine the long haired lass in the last row 3rd from left smells delightful and has bushy but soft and fine private parts, I would actually bypass the classic beauties, like the blond 2nd row 3rd from left, in favor of the mousy little one on the front row far left. I bet she would be like a horny march hare in bed. On the other hand the slighty heavy girl on the front row far right probably gives the best head in the bunch, they always do.
Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs
Offline
#91 2008-10-22 03:05:29
I'm all about the thin chick with the big hair and the giant glasses in the back row. Nerd chicks are the tightest.
Offline
#92 2008-10-22 03:18:13
ptah13 wrote:
orangeplus wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
I hardly see any attempts to take over the world in all of that....
That's good since no one said that.
I thought that is what he meant by "imperialistic".
When I hear that, I think of Japan taking over countless countries in matters of months. Or old England. Or the Germany of the early 40's. How about Russia of the late 40's?
How do you define "imperialistic", orange? Tell us of the great empire the US ruled during the, say, the 1890's. I'd love to learn more!
Well, beginning in 1890, as a matter of fact...
Offline
#93 2008-10-22 03:24:55
OP wrote:
Wilbur is completely full of shit, granted.
Completely? Mind you don't trip on a thoughtless absolutism. You spent several posts supporting my assertion of American imperialism (incredible anyone should have to). So maybe "Completely -1?" And what does that do to the notion of "granted?" An empacted colon makes a lovely premise, but when the authority of that premise is shaken? Now there's a slippery slope of epistemological skree. And do you know how to move on a slippery slope of epistemological skree? That's right...sideways. Like a crab, center low, lightly, lightly, claws akimbo, eye-stalks waving, ever watchful.
Doh!P wrote:
[ironyAlert]You do your own arguement no service by your ignorance[/ironyAlert]
Offline
#95 2008-11-12 22:29:47
Taint wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
orangeplus wrote:
That's good since no one said that.
I thought that is what he meant by "imperialistic".
When I hear that, I think of Japan taking over countless countries in matters of months. Or old England. Or the Germany of the early 40's. How about Russia of the late 40's?
How do you define "imperialistic", orange? Tell us of the great empire the US ruled during the, say, the 1890's. I'd love to learn more!Well, beginning in 1890, as a matter of fact...
As always, the liberal populace tries to disown that which empowered them. You cannot disavow the will of you the populace and blame those trangressions on the military. Every drop of blood shed along the way belongs to you and you alone; we are but the hammer.
Last edited by Emmeran (2008-11-12 22:30:47)
Offline
#96 2008-11-12 22:42:16
Emmeran wrote:
Taint wrote:
ptah13 wrote:
I thought that is what he meant by "imperialistic".
When I hear that, I think of Japan taking over countless countries in matters of months. Or old England. Or the Germany of the early 40's. How about Russia of the late 40's?
How do you define "imperialistic", orange? Tell us of the great empire the US ruled during the, say, the 1890's. I'd love to learn more!Well, beginning in 1890, as a matter of fact...
As always, the liberal populace tries to disown that which empowered them. You cannot disavow the will of you the populace and blame those trangressions on the military. Every drop of blood shed along the way belongs to you and you alone; we are but the hammer.
Who are you talking to?
Offline
#97 2008-11-12 22:44:37
tojo2000 wrote:
Emmeran wrote:
As always, the liberal populace tries to disown that which empowered them. You cannot disavow the will of you the populace and blame those trangressions on the military. Every drop of blood shed along the way belongs to you and you alone; we are but the hammer.
Who are you talking to?
To any citizen who claims to disown our sordid history or current actions; tis not possible to transfer the blame to the military. We have enough of our own issues without carrying yours.
Offline
#98 2008-11-12 22:47:42
Emmeran wrote:
tojo2000 wrote:
Emmeran wrote:
As always, the liberal populace tries to disown that which empowered them. You cannot disavow the will of you the populace and blame those trangressions on the military. Every drop of blood shed along the way belongs to you and you alone; we are but the hammer.
Who are you talking to?
To any citizen who claims to disown our sordid history or current actions; tis not possible to transfer the blame to the military. We have enough of our own issues without carrying yours.
I was a bit confused because ptah is a pseudo-conservative troll, at least on High-Street. I'd also take issue with your generalization that liberals are anti-military, but I'm in my cups and I don't really care right now.
Offline
#99 2008-11-12 23:00:58
tojo2000 wrote:
I was a bit confused because ptah is a pseudo-conservative troll, at least on High-Street. I'd also take issue with your generalization that liberals are anti-military, but I'm in my cups and I don't really care right now.
I'm in the cups with you buddy, and thus...
I do not for a second believe that liberals are anti-military; in fact they maybe more pro-military than the right-wing. Palin nailed it when she claimed that paying taxes wasn't patriotic, she and the media with her just don't get it. The liberals have a better understanding of the consequences of military action and I very much appreciate that; however they have fallen into a habit of disowning military actions as anti-American and listing the incursions as examples of the horrors committed by our military.
Those horrors are the heritage of America as a whole and our military is simply an extension of ourselves; to be a patriotic American does not require allegiance to a political party but it does require the acceptance of our actions as a people.
The deeds of our sons (and daughters) become our own...this is spoken as one who served in order to insure the right of others to disagee with his views.
Offline
#100 2008-11-12 23:03:49
tojo2000 wrote:
I'd also take issue with your generalization that liberals are anti-military
Did the Peruvian school you attended make you stand at attention every day for the national anthem? I'll know if you're lying.
Standing armies always strive to empire and exploit the weak. Fuck 'em.
That make me an anarchist? Very well, I'm an anarchist. I am large. I contain multitudes. I'm Wally Whitman. I'll be here all week.
Offline
