When Mitt Romney becomes president.... *FLUX THREAD!*

[guitarfool2002]

Never mind the fact that Iran actually signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, something that Israel (a country with at least five hundred nuclear weapons) hasn't.

Iran signed a treaty, that must mean something good!

Seriously?

It could ultimately be a "treaty" as meaningless and as dumb as the agreement Neville Chamberlain negotiated with Hitler in 1938.

[Jason]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

[guitarfool2002]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

And likewise I could say that last time I read my previous posts, I never called for nor did I advocate a "war" of any kind, yet the immediate responses suggested some kind of war-mongering with "build up the war propaganda" and similar statements.

I think we can ill-afford any additional deployment of troops other than what we already have and which are being terribly mismanaged by the current administration, not even touching on the notion of an additional war of any kind. Nor do I think it is our direct business to involve ourselves before-the-fact in certain global situations minus a direct threat.

However, at the same time, for as "terrorist" as a nation the US is as some of your statements claim, what then is the solution? It's a hard question, but an immediate concern: What does the US do if Iran should use a nuclear weapon? Or in some minds, is that not even a possibility worth considering?

Or can we buy into the nonsense that 1. The US has engaged in terrorism, therefore relative to the radical Islamists, we are terrorists too, and 2. Israel is the most terrifying nation on the globe, so we would be better to align and ally ourselves as a nation with those who seek to cripple if not destroy Israel, i.e. Iran and the PLO.

Those both have been the takeaway from certain circles including those populated by Jimmy Carter and his worldview.

[GreatUrduPoet]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/world/middleeast/netanyahu-warns-that-iran-bombmaking-ability-is-nearer.html?_r=0

I'm starting to think that Benjamin Netanyahu is the worst war criminal on this planet...and DAMN, there's tight competition. There is no nation on this planet more terrifying than Israel.

Uh...were you the guy that I saw chanting "Seig Heil" at the Westboro Baptist Church demonstartion on the news?

Godwin's law, argument over.

Sorry, Charlie. Rabid brainless anti-Antisemitism invites comparisons to the Fourth Reich...and Godwin's Law is not applicable in the case of such obvious Jew-hating bigots such as yourself. Go burn a Synagogue...you'll feel much better.

[Jason]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/world/middleeast/netanyahu-warns-that-iran-bombmaking-ability-is-nearer.html?_r=0

I'm starting to think that Benjamin Netanyahu is the worst war criminal on this planet...and DAMN, there's tight competition. There is no nation on this planet more terrifying than Israel.

Uh...were you the guy that I saw chanting "Seig Heil" at the Westboro Baptist Church demonstartion on the news?

Godwin's law, argument over.

Sorry, Charlie. Rabid brainless anti-Antisemitism invites comparisons to the Fourth Reich...and Godwin's Law is not applicable in the case of such obvious Jew-hating bigots such as yourself. Go burn a Synagogue...you'll feel much better.

What about my statement is antisemitic? And what about it proves that I hate Jews? Oh, right...you can't criticize Israel without being branded. I forgot. Silly me.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

And likewise I could say that last time I read my previous posts, I never called for nor did I advocate a "war" of any kind, yet the immediate responses suggested some kind of war-mongering with "build up the war propaganda" and similar statements.

I think we can ill-afford any additional deployment of troops other than what we already have and which are being terribly mismanaged by the current administration, not even touching on the notion of an additional war of any kind. Nor do I think it is our direct business to involve ourselves before-the-fact in certain global situations minus a direct threat.

However, at the same time, for as "terrorist" as a nation the US is as some of your statements claim, what then is the solution? It's a hard question, but an immediate concern: What does the US do if Iran should use a nuclear weapon? Or in some minds, is that not even a possibility worth considering?

Or can we buy into the nonsense that 1. The US has engaged in terrorism, therefore relative to the radical Islamists, we are terrorists too, and 2. Israel is the most terrifying nation on the globe, so we would be better to align and ally ourselves as a nation with those who seek to cripple if not destroy Israel, i.e. Iran and the PLO.

Those both have been the takeaway from certain circles including those populated by Jimmy Carter and his worldview.

Oh, the US has absolutely engaged in terrorism! Just ask most of Latin America....... It's not necessary for Jimmy Carter to tell you this. Ignore his ass and simply educate yourself. It's always easy to blast the bearer of bad news.

ter·ror·ism
   [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

We've been there, done it all!

[Jason]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

And likewise I could say that last time I read my previous posts, I never called for nor did I advocate a "war" of any kind, yet the immediate responses suggested some kind of war-mongering with "build up the war propaganda" and similar statements.

I think we can ill-afford any additional deployment of troops other than what we already have and which are being terribly mismanaged by the current administration, not even touching on the notion of an additional war of any kind. Nor do I think it is our direct business to involve ourselves before-the-fact in certain global situations minus a direct threat.

However, at the same time, for as "terrorist" as a nation the US is as some of your statements claim, what then is the solution? It's a hard question, but an immediate concern: What does the US do if Iran should use a nuclear weapon? Or in some minds, is that not even a possibility worth considering?

Or can we buy into the nonsense that 1. The US has engaged in terrorism, therefore relative to the radical Islamists, we are terrorists too, and 2. Israel is the most terrifying nation on the globe, so we would be better to align and ally ourselves as a nation with those who seek to cripple if not destroy Israel, i.e. Iran and the PLO.

Those both have been the takeaway from certain circles including those populated by Jimmy Carter and his worldview.

Oh, the US has absolutely engaged in terrorism! Just ask most of Latin America....... It's not necessary for Jimmy Carter to tell you this. Ignore his ass and simply educate yourself. It's always easy to blast the bearer of bad news.

ter·ror·ism
   [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

We've been there, done it all!

The notion that the United States is a terrorist state is not one just thrown out by the left. There are plenty on the right who have said the same. It's not exactly an outrageous conclusion but it's also not mainstream.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

And likewise I could say that last time I read my previous posts, I never called for nor did I advocate a "war" of any kind, yet the immediate responses suggested some kind of war-mongering with "build up the war propaganda" and similar statements.

I think we can ill-afford any additional deployment of troops other than what we already have and which are being terribly mismanaged by the current administration, not even touching on the notion of an additional war of any kind. Nor do I think it is our direct business to involve ourselves before-the-fact in certain global situations minus a direct threat.

However, at the same time, for as "terrorist" as a nation the US is as some of your statements claim, what then is the solution? It's a hard question, but an immediate concern: What does the US do if Iran should use a nuclear weapon? Or in some minds, is that not even a possibility worth considering?

Or can we buy into the nonsense that 1. The US has engaged in terrorism, therefore relative to the radical Islamists, we are terrorists too, and 2. Israel is the most terrifying nation on the globe, so we would be better to align and ally ourselves as a nation with those who seek to cripple if not destroy Israel, i.e. Iran and the PLO.

Those both have been the takeaway from certain circles including those populated by Jimmy Carter and his worldview.

Oh, the US has absolutely engaged in terrorism! Just ask most of Latin America....... It's not necessary for Jimmy Carter to tell you this. Ignore his ass and simply educate yourself. It's always easy to blast the bearer of bad news.

ter·ror·ism
   [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

We've been there, done it all!

The notion that the United States is a terrorist state is not one just thrown out by the left. There are plenty on the right who have said the same. It's not exactly an outrageous conclusion but it's also not mainstream.

Indeed.....

There are plenty airports in the world where Mr. Kissinger, Cheney, Rumsfield, Bush etc can't even consider landing their planes for fear of arrest/conviction/possibly execution for crimes against humanity....

[Jason]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

And likewise I could say that last time I read my previous posts, I never called for nor did I advocate a "war" of any kind, yet the immediate responses suggested some kind of war-mongering with "build up the war propaganda" and similar statements.

I think we can ill-afford any additional deployment of troops other than what we already have and which are being terribly mismanaged by the current administration, not even touching on the notion of an additional war of any kind. Nor do I think it is our direct business to involve ourselves before-the-fact in certain global situations minus a direct threat.

However, at the same time, for as "terrorist" as a nation the US is as some of your statements claim, what then is the solution? It's a hard question, but an immediate concern: What does the US do if Iran should use a nuclear weapon? Or in some minds, is that not even a possibility worth considering?

Or can we buy into the nonsense that 1. The US has engaged in terrorism, therefore relative to the radical Islamists, we are terrorists too, and 2. Israel is the most terrifying nation on the globe, so we would be better to align and ally ourselves as a nation with those who seek to cripple if not destroy Israel, i.e. Iran and the PLO.

Those both have been the takeaway from certain circles including those populated by Jimmy Carter and his worldview.

Oh, the US has absolutely engaged in terrorism! Just ask most of Latin America....... It's not necessary for Jimmy Carter to tell you this. Ignore his ass and simply educate yourself. It's always easy to blast the bearer of bad news.

ter·ror·ism
   [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

We've been there, done it all!

The notion that the United States is a terrorist state is not one just thrown out by the left. There are plenty on the right who have said the same. It's not exactly an outrageous conclusion but it's also not mainstream.

Indeed.....

There are plenty airports in the world where Mr. Kissinger, Cheney, Rumsfield, Bush etc can't even consider landing their planes for fear of arrest/conviction/possibly execution for crimes against humanity....

Well...I guess it doesn't matter. I mean, they only killed brown Semitic people...

OH WAIT.

Arabs are Semitic people, too. So we can get off of the childish "new antisemitism" BULLSH*T.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

We've even committed acts of terrorism on our own soil ala the Operation Condor/Orlando Letelier nightmare!

[Jason]

We've even committed acts of terrorism on our own soil ala the Operation Condor/Orlando Letelier nightmare!

Dude, in 1985, the MOVE house in Philadelphia was BOMBED by the city during a standoff. Six adults and five children died from the resulting fire that engulfed the house and threatened the block.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

We've even committed acts of terrorism on our own soil ala the Operation Condor/Orlando Letelier nightmare!

Dude, in 1985, the MOVE house in Philadelphia was BOMBED by the city during a standoff. Six adults and five children died from the resulting fire that engulfed the house and threatened the block.

Egad! Looking that up as we speak...... Horrendous!

[guitarfool2002]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

And likewise I could say that last time I read my previous posts, I never called for nor did I advocate a "war" of any kind, yet the immediate responses suggested some kind of war-mongering with "build up the war propaganda" and similar statements.

I think we can ill-afford any additional deployment of troops other than what we already have and which are being terribly mismanaged by the current administration, not even touching on the notion of an additional war of any kind. Nor do I think it is our direct business to involve ourselves before-the-fact in certain global situations minus a direct threat.

However, at the same time, for as "terrorist" as a nation the US is as some of your statements claim, what then is the solution? It's a hard question, but an immediate concern: What does the US do if Iran should use a nuclear weapon? Or in some minds, is that not even a possibility worth considering?

Or can we buy into the nonsense that 1. The US has engaged in terrorism, therefore relative to the radical Islamists, we are terrorists too, and 2. Israel is the most terrifying nation on the globe, so we would be better to align and ally ourselves as a nation with those who seek to cripple if not destroy Israel, i.e. Iran and the PLO.

Those both have been the takeaway from certain circles including those populated by Jimmy Carter and his worldview.

Oh, the US has absolutely engaged in terrorism! Just ask most of Latin America....... It's not necessary for Jimmy Carter to tell you this. Ignore his ass and simply educate yourself. It's always easy to blast the bearer of bad news.

ter·ror·ism
   [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

We've been there, done it all!

A sarcastic thanks for the tip about "educating myself", but I have done that and continue to do that on a daily basis, and I can do without the condescension, thank you.

Read my post, specifically what I said about the relativism bullcrap that some suggest "America is terrorist, therefore America can't knock Iran or Al Qaeda or any of them for terrorism". Relativism is a great diversionary tactic from the left-leaning thinkers of today. It erases any sense of right or wrong, and that's the ultimate goal of that mindset.

Try harder next time. And make sure you know of what you speak before suggesting someone "get an education". That is a lowbrow tactic.

[guitarfool2002]

We've even committed acts of terrorism on our own soil ala the Operation Condor/Orlando Letelier nightmare!

Dude, in 1985, the MOVE house in Philadelphia was BOMBED by the city during a standoff. Six adults and five children died from the resulting fire that engulfed the house and threatened the block.

I watched it on TV. Osage Avenue, definitely not a high point for the Democratic political machine which has run Philadelphia for decades.

Important to note than many still mistakenly blame Frank Rizzo for the bombing, yet Rizzo was not in office nor did he have anything to do with the order to drop the explosive on Osage Avenue that day.

Wilson Goode was mayor. Now his son Wilson Jr. is in City Council, and has been embroiled in a few scandals related to patronage jobs, paying people for work they don't do, or paying office staffers to work while news crews caught them out shopping during the day when they were on the clock. Not to mention shady contracts, no-bid handshake deals, all of the usual Philly corruption that gets whispered around but never acted on. "That's how it's done in Philly" is the stock wink-and-nod answer.

So Google that one, too, like father like son.

And enlighten us how, exactly, does the MOVE incident on Osage Avenue relate to the topic? A mayor did not and still doesn't have the authority to order dropping a bomb on his citizens, so I guess we're suggesting Wilson Goode and those officers under him were terrorists for dropping that bomb? It definitely had little to do with the US federal government ordering a bombing.

In that case you'd need to look at Pres. Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, and the whole David Koresh compound attack mess back in spring '93 for something to relate to a federal government attacking citizens.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

And likewise I could say that last time I read my previous posts, I never called for nor did I advocate a "war" of any kind, yet the immediate responses suggested some kind of war-mongering with "build up the war propaganda" and similar statements.

I think we can ill-afford any additional deployment of troops other than what we already have and which are being terribly mismanaged by the current administration, not even touching on the notion of an additional war of any kind. Nor do I think it is our direct business to involve ourselves before-the-fact in certain global situations minus a direct threat.

However, at the same time, for as "terrorist" as a nation the US is as some of your statements claim, what then is the solution? It's a hard question, but an immediate concern: What does the US do if Iran should use a nuclear weapon? Or in some minds, is that not even a possibility worth considering?

Or can we buy into the nonsense that 1. The US has engaged in terrorism, therefore relative to the radical Islamists, we are terrorists too, and 2. Israel is the most terrifying nation on the globe, so we would be better to align and ally ourselves as a nation with those who seek to cripple if not destroy Israel, i.e. Iran and the PLO.

Those both have been the takeaway from certain circles including those populated by Jimmy Carter and his worldview.

Oh, the US has absolutely engaged in terrorism! Just ask most of Latin America....... It's not necessary for Jimmy Carter to tell you this. Ignore his ass and simply educate yourself. It's always easy to blast the bearer of bad news.

ter·ror·ism
   [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

We've been there, done it all!

A sarcastic thanks for the tip about "educating myself", but I have done that and continue to do that on a daily basis, and I can do without the condescension, thank you.

Read my post, specifically what I said about the relativism bullcrap that some suggest "America is terrorist, therefore America can't knock Iran or Al Qaeda or any of them for terrorism". Relativism is a great diversionary tactic from the left-leaning thinkers of today. It erases any sense of right or wrong, and that's the ultimate goal of that mindset.

Try harder next time. And make sure you know of what you speak before suggesting someone "get an education". That is a lowbrow tactic.

I didn't mean it in a condescending way (honestly) but rather at those who use the time honored tactic of dropping the name of some "extreme leftist" like Carter in order to somehow nullify an argument. One can hardly accuse you of being uneducated based upon your posts, Guitarfool, and I never meant to insinuate that. Besides, when is too much education ever a bad thing? New insight can always be gained....

As for right and wrong in regards to the US (or anyone for that matter) behaving like terrorists or the actions of those whom we consider terrorists: IT'S ALL WRONG is my point!  

As for the Clinton/Reno Koresh travesty: you won't catch me defending that chaos in a million years. Can we quit this tit for tat, left/right merda? It gets us nowhere.

[Jason]

And the constant "antisemitism" bullshit to boot...

[guitarfool2002]

Nothing would make me happier than to see Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Seyyed Ali Khamenei toppled by the Iranian people. However, the media has been proven to have mistranslated many of his remarks about Israel.

It's also proven in Nicaragua v. United States that we sponsored terrorism. The overthrow of South American governments, Middle Eastern governments, Southeast Asian governments...we sponsored groups of people who slaughtered innocents by the thousands. If that's not sponsoring terrorism then I don't know what the hell is.

The world won't be better off if Ahmadinejad gets his way and "wins" because Israel is destroyed. Last time I checked, I never called for the destruction of Israel or any other nation.

And likewise I could say that last time I read my previous posts, I never called for nor did I advocate a "war" of any kind, yet the immediate responses suggested some kind of war-mongering with "build up the war propaganda" and similar statements.

I think we can ill-afford any additional deployment of troops other than what we already have and which are being terribly mismanaged by the current administration, not even touching on the notion of an additional war of any kind. Nor do I think it is our direct business to involve ourselves before-the-fact in certain global situations minus a direct threat.

However, at the same time, for as "terrorist" as a nation the US is as some of your statements claim, what then is the solution? It's a hard question, but an immediate concern: What does the US do if Iran should use a nuclear weapon? Or in some minds, is that not even a possibility worth considering?

Or can we buy into the nonsense that 1. The US has engaged in terrorism, therefore relative to the radical Islamists, we are terrorists too, and 2. Israel is the most terrifying nation on the globe, so we would be better to align and ally ourselves as a nation with those who seek to cripple if not destroy Israel, i.e. Iran and the PLO.

Those both have been the takeaway from certain circles including those populated by Jimmy Carter and his worldview.

Oh, the US has absolutely engaged in terrorism! Just ask most of Latin America....... It's not necessary for Jimmy Carter to tell you this. Ignore his ass and simply educate yourself. It's always easy to blast the bearer of bad news.

ter·ror·ism
   [ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2.
the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3.
a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

We've been there, done it all!

A sarcastic thanks for the tip about "educating myself", but I have done that and continue to do that on a daily basis, and I can do without the condescension, thank you.

Read my post, specifically what I said about the relativism bullcrap that some suggest "America is terrorist, therefore America can't knock Iran or Al Qaeda or any of them for terrorism". Relativism is a great diversionary tactic from the left-leaning thinkers of today. It erases any sense of right or wrong, and that's the ultimate goal of that mindset.

Try harder next time. And make sure you know of what you speak before suggesting someone "get an education". That is a lowbrow tactic.

I didn't mean it in a condescending way (honestly) but rather at those who use the time honored tactic of dropping the name of some "extreme leftist" like Carter in order to somehow nullify an argument. One can hardly accuse you of being uneducated based upon your posts, Guitarfool, and I never meant to insinuate that. Besides, when is too much education ever a bad thing? New insight can always be gained....

As for right and wrong in regards to the US (or anyone for that matter) behaving like terrorists or the actions of those whom we consider terrorists: IT'S ALL WRONG is my point!  

As for the Clinton/Reno Koresh travesty: you won't catch me defending that chaos in a million years. Can we quit this tit for tat, left/right merda? It gets us nowhere.

That's very fair, and a very well-stated reply! In general, I'd like to see more common sense, more "street smarts" of the kind where you know something when you see it and don't need reams of papers showing graphs and data for proof, and a general sense that what doesn't feel right and what isn't right should be called out, no matter which side of the aisle is doing it.

Both sides are guilty, the finger pointing is rampant, and it just creates theater for the audience watching. I think criticism should be applied evenly and justly, however I don't see either side doing it, and some things I do have to call out, like the MOVE issue. It has been labeled as something other than what it was, and ultimately it was an incompetent mayor trying to handle a sometimes violent activist group that had been causing trouble in Philly for years and making the wrong call to bomb the MOVE house/compound. In this case, it was what it was, and it was not Frank Rizzo or Reagan or American Imperialism or anything except Mayor Wilson Goode and his administration that gave the order.

I get carried away sometimes (If I get carried away I need to be brought back on occasion...), but again that was a very fair reply you gave and it is very much appreciated!

[Jason]

Both sides may be guilty but when both sides resort to code words to discourage or bully their critics, then it proves that their argument isn't as sound as one would think. Like the whole "if you criticize Obama you're a racist" or "if you criticize Israel you're an antisemite". Needless to say that the constant dropping of those terms do nothing but cheapen the negativity behind the words.

[SMiLE Brian]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/world/middleeast/netanyahu-warns-that-iran-bombmaking-ability-is-nearer.html?_r=0

I'm starting to think that Benjamin Netanyahu is the worst war criminal on this planet...and DAMN, there's tight competition. There is no nation on this planet more terrifying than Israel.

Uh...were you the guy that I saw chanting "Seig Heil" at the Westboro Baptist Church demonstartion on the news?

Godwin's law, argument over.

Sorry, Charlie. Rabid brainless anti-Antisemitism invites comparisons to the Fourth Reich...and Godwin's Law is not applicable in the case of such obvious Jew-hating bigots such as yourself. Go burn a Synagogue...you'll feel much better.

Go lead the charge into Iran tough guy. There is a huge difference between antisemitism and the political policies of a Israel's government. The 1948 UN plan between Israel and the Palestine meant equal land rights, but events changed all that.

[Jason]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/world/middleeast/netanyahu-warns-that-iran-bombmaking-ability-is-nearer.html?_r=0

I'm starting to think that Benjamin Netanyahu is the worst war criminal on this planet...and DAMN, there's tight competition. There is no nation on this planet more terrifying than Israel.

Uh...were you the guy that I saw chanting "Seig Heil" at the Westboro Baptist Church demonstartion on the news?

Godwin's law, argument over.

Sorry, Charlie. Rabid brainless anti-Antisemitism invites comparisons to the Fourth Reich...and Godwin's Law is not applicable in the case of such obvious Jew-hating bigots such as yourself. Go burn a Synagogue...you'll feel much better.

Go lead the charge into Iran tough guy. There is a huge difference between antisemitism and the political policies of a Israel's government. The 1948 UN plan between Israel and the Palestine meant equal land rights, but events changed all that.

History has proven that chickenhawks are chickenshits.

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

Thought this would be a good thread to post my favorite quote ever:

"If you're not a Liberal before you're 20, you don't have a heart. If you're not a conservative before you're 40, you don't have a brain."

As much as I love the "rebel" 70's type, I'm pretty conservative, and as a middle-class teenager dealing with parents who fight over bills and taxes... well, you catch my drift... 

[Heysaboda]

Both sides may be guilty but when both sides resort to code words to discourage or bully their critics, then it proves that their argument isn't as sound as one would think. Like the whole "if you criticize Obama you're a racist" or "if you criticize Israel you're an antisemite". Needless to say that the constant dropping of those terms do nothing but cheapen the negativity behind the words.

There are many valid, policy-based criticisms of Obama to be made.  (The Romney campaign doesn't seem to be making many of these, though.)

But, the whole birther thing was racist.

Notice, I never said "if you criticize Obama you're a racist".  Plenty of valid criticisms out there.

If the Republicans had spent the last 3 years on valid policy criticisms, instead of the birther racist nonsense, then they might have a shot now.

Many major Republican donors, as we speak, are moving their money into Senate races.  Romney is a lost cause.  A dead dog you might say.   

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

All truth, however I think that the "racist" criticisms are absolutely outrageous in today's age.

I mean, the man is black, but he's also more educated then most of the people shooting him with criticism.

Now I'm not an Obama fan, but I feel like some people don't have a valid reason to dislike him, besides the debt and raised taxes for the middle class.

[Heysaboda]

All truth, however I think that the "racist" criticisms are absolutely outrageous in today's age.

I mean, the man is black, but he's also more educated then most of the people shooting him with criticism.

Now I'm not an Obama fan, but I feel like some people don't have a valid reason to dislike him, besides the debt and raised taxes for the middle class.

All excellent points.  Except that Obama has actually LOWERED taxes on the middle class.  (the "payroll tax" cut).

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

True, i'd say the rises and falls are about even though, taxes change so rapidly it's hard to keep up!