Bush is a hero

“Pillars of Creation....”

Since: Jan 11

Into this world we're thrown

#160376 Mar 23, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Actually, it's a Joe Walsh solo song the Eagles added to their repertoire...
I'm just sayin'...
;-}
I've mentioned it to him before, but now that you've mentioned it, I'm sure the buffoon will take notice.
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey dude.
I am not in a gang.
I have no interest in wipeouts. I am a peace-loving guy.
I am very optimistic about the future.
Life's been good to me so far (Eagles).
I think most here would disagree with you not being in a gang. Most recall when they all showed up here to disrupt this thread like the children you guys are. your certainly considered a gang by the regulars on the thread you have invaded and are now destroying presently, like you destroyed the Prove theres a god thread.

I'm also hopeful for the future, but with a corrupt government looking out for the big guys at the expense of the little guy, it looks bleak. You know of my experience with lawyers, it doesnt surprise me in the least that Congress is full of them and we are in the situation we are in.

It seems life has been good to you so far Chaser. Just a question for you, have you ever been on the wrong end of a lawsuit? Not much makes me sicker then an overeager lawyer looking for his payday at the expense of someone who just got caught up in the wrong circumstances.

Have a good one..........

Since: Sep 10

United States

#160377 Mar 23, 2013
Rider on the Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
I've mentioned it to him before, but now that you've mentioned it, I'm sure the buffoon will take notice.
<quoted text>
I think most here would disagree with you not being in a gang. Most recall when they all showed up here to disrupt this thread like the children you guys are. your certainly considered a gang by the regulars on the thread you have invaded and are now destroying presently, like you destroyed the Prove theres a god thread.
I'm also hopeful for the future, but with a corrupt government looking out for the big guys at the expense of the little guy, it looks bleak. You know of my experience with lawyers, it doesnt surprise me in the least that Congress is full of them and we are in the situation we are in.
It seems life has been good to you so far Chaser. Just a question for you, have you ever been on the wrong end of a lawsuit? Not much makes me sicker then an overeager lawyer looking for his payday at the expense of someone who just got caught up in the wrong circumstances.
Have a good one..........
I have never been sued, nor have I ever sued a former client.

And that is very rare--disgruntled clients abound.

Who else showed up here?

“Jesus is coming soon”

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

#160379 Mar 24, 2013
Good morning everyone.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#160380 Mar 24, 2013
Good morning, Lawest :)
Josephine

Limoges, France

#160382 Mar 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Frankly, I'd like to see one President in my lifetime, tell those sandy little bastards to work it out, or we're going to nuke 'em ALL and be done, because we're tired of their crap.
I'm aware that's not a popular position.
Ah yes, the **AMERICAN WAY**... Mass murder through (or threat of) nuclear attack.

Incidentally, are you sure it is really "their crap," or is imperial ambitions from other countries (most notably America) that foment tension in the middle east and other resource-rich regions? Lately, it is American "intervention" that has left a trail of failed states across the middle east, Eurasia, and north Africa.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160384 Mar 24, 2013
Josephine wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah yes, the **AMERICAN WAY**... Mass murder through (or threat of) nuclear attack.
Incidentally, are you sure it is really "their crap," or is imperial ambitions from other countries (most notably America) that foment tension in the middle east and other resource-rich regions? Lately, it is American "intervention" that has left a trail of failed states across the middle east, Eurasia, and north Africa.
Imperial ambitions?

The last involvement by the United States in anyone's 'imperial ambitions' was aiding the French in their failed attempt to re-establish control of Indochina.

If you're going to talk about the effect of 'imperial ambitions' in middle east, Eurasia, and north Africa, you have to start with the former imperialist powers. Outside of the Philippines between 1900-1946, the United States was NEVER an imperialist power.

{You can make a semi-plausible case that the United States behaved in an imperialist manner (what Kwame Nkrumah called neo-colonialism) in this hemisphere until sometime in the middle of the 20th century, but that's still 60 years past - and not in the same neighborhood you're attempting to blame on the United States.)
yuri

Ukraine

#160385 Mar 24, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Imperial ambitions?
The last involvement by the United States in anyone's 'imperial ambitions' was aiding the French in their failed attempt to re-establish control of Indochina.
If you're going to talk about the effect of 'imperial ambitions' in middle east, Eurasia, and north Africa, you have to start with the former imperialist powers. Outside of the Philippines between 1900-1946, the United States was NEVER an imperialist power.
{You can make a semi-plausible case that the United States behaved in an imperialist manner (what Kwame Nkrumah called neo-colonialism) in this hemisphere until sometime in the middle of the 20th century, but that's still 60 years past - and not in the same neighborhood you're attempting to blame on the United States.)
how many countries does usa have troops in right now? How many countries is usa bombing right now?
yuri

Ukraine

#160386 Mar 24, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Imperial ambitions?
The last involvement by the United States in anyone's 'imperial ambitions' was aiding the French in their failed attempt to re-establish control of Indochina.
If you're going to talk about the effect of 'imperial ambitions' in middle east, Eurasia, and north Africa, you have to start with the former imperialist powers. Outside of the Philippines between 1900-1946, the United States was NEVER an imperialist power.
{You can make a semi-plausible case that the United States behaved in an imperialist manner (what Kwame Nkrumah called neo-colonialism) in this hemisphere until sometime in the middle of the 20th century, but that's still 60 years past - and not in the same neighborhood you're attempting to blame on the United States.)
corporate empires

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#160387 Mar 24, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Imperial ambitions?
The last involvement by the United States in anyone's 'imperial ambitions' was aiding the French in their failed attempt to re-establish control of Indochina.
If you're going to talk about the effect of 'imperial ambitions' in middle east, Eurasia, and north Africa, you have to start with the former imperialist powers. Outside of the Philippines between 1900-1946, the United States was NEVER an imperialist power.
{You can make a semi-plausible case that the United States behaved in an imperialist manner (what Kwame Nkrumah called neo-colonialism) in this hemisphere until sometime in the middle of the 20th century, but that's still 60 years past - and not in the same neighborhood you're attempting to blame on the United States.)
Perhaps, being technical, it's not imperialism.

How about "policeman of the world"?
Steve

Höst, Germany

#160388 Mar 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps, being technical, it's not imperialism.
How about "policeman of the world"?
"Policeman" suggests law enforcement (and at its best peace-keeper). But as Martin Luther King Jr observed back in 1967 -- and its only gotten worse in the intervening years --
... the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today [is] my own government.
And then he was assassinated (see King Family v. Loyd Jowers and co-conspirators for more on that...)

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#160389 Mar 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps, being technical, it's not imperialism.
How about "policeman of the world"?
The distinction between imperialism and U.S. involvement in the Northern Africa/Middle East/Asia is by no means merely technical.

The case for the U.S. as a neo-colonial power can only be made until the middle of the last century, a decade or more before (as far as I know) the phrase was coined.

Since that time, have we gotten ourselves involved in places we shouldn't have, backed people no better than the ones we opposed, ally ourselves with some very contemptible critters who marketed themselves as anti-Communists (and occasionally as Christian), sometimes created problems as big as the ones we thought we were going to solve, failed to follow up once a short term (and short sighted) objective was achieved?

Of course to all of those.

I don't have a problem with the U.S. picking (and fighting) its battles better, but I don't think blanket opposition to U.S. involvement anywhere makes any more sense than blanket support of U.S. involvement anywhere.

France was the identified location of the poster I originally replied to, and France was the colonial power of record for large sections of the geographic area the poster claimed were problematic because of U.S. "imperialism". The U.S. may not have behaved in an altruistic manner in those countries since the end of WWII (or 1956, depending on when you want to start the counter), but a great many of the problems of those areas have their roots in the colonial past.

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#160390 Mar 24, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>The distinction between imperialism and U.S. involvement in the Northern Africa/Middle East/Asia is by no means merely technical.
The case for the U.S. as a neo-colonial power can only be made until the middle of the last century, a decade or more before (as far as I know) the phrase was coined.
Since that time, have we gotten ourselves involved in places we shouldn't have, backed people no better than the ones we opposed, ally ourselves with some very contemptible critters who marketed themselves as anti-Communists (and occasionally as Christian), sometimes created problems as big as the ones we thought we were going to solve, failed to follow up once a short term (and short sighted) objective was achieved?
Of course to all of those.
I don't have a problem with the U.S. picking (and fighting) its battles better, but I don't think blanket opposition to U.S. involvement anywhere makes any more sense than blanket support of U.S. involvement anywhere.
France was the identified location of the poster I originally replied to, and France was the colonial power of record for large sections of the geographic area the poster claimed were problematic because of U.S. "imperialism". The U.S. may not have behaved in an altruistic manner in those countries since the end of WWII (or 1956, depending on when you want to start the counter), but a great many of the problems of those areas have their roots in the colonial past.
I never would suggest isolationism.

But we often mess where we shouldn't, and everyone pays a huge price.

The price includes a very poor image in the rest of the world.

I'm not surprised the two recent posters criticizing our foreign policy, are foreign.

(Can't wait to face Lyndi's outrage at my unpatriotic, uninformed, socialistic, newcomer-without-full-rights post. But first will come her minions--just watch.)

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#160391 Mar 24, 2013
Josephine wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah yes, the **AMERICAN WAY**... Mass murder through (or threat of) nuclear attack.
Incidentally, are you sure it is really "their crap," or is imperial ambitions from other countries (most notably America) that foment tension in the middle east and other resource-rich regions? Lately, it is American "intervention" that has left a trail of failed states across the middle east, Eurasia, and north Africa.
As I said, I'm aware it's not a popular position. I'm also aware that carrying out said threat would be counter-productive. In fact, a lot of the folks doing the 'fomenting' over there, have agendas which have also precluded our 'nuking the lot of them'. I'm just really sick and tired of being held hostage, simply because they have resources the biggest kids on the block are interested in, to a bunch of squabblers who don't want to share the sandbox, with the kids next door

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#160392 Mar 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>As I said, I'm aware it's not a popular position. I'm also aware that carrying out said threat would be counter-productive. In fact, a lot of the folks doing the 'fomenting' over there, have agendas which have also precluded our 'nuking the lot of them'. I'm just really sick and tired of being held hostage, simply because they have resources the biggest kids on the block are interested in, to a bunch of squabblers who don't want to share the sandbox, with the kids next door
The world is not a rose garden.

But we're all here at the same time, and we should do our best to share it, doing the least harm possible.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#160393 Mar 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The world is not a rose garden.
But we're all here at the same time, and we should do our best to share it, doing the least harm possible.
And I guess it's a good thing I'm not the President of the United States. I don't have the patience for the job.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#160394 Mar 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
But we often mess where we shouldn't, and everyone pays a huge price.
Perhaps you can name 1 or 2 places where you think we shouldn't have "messed"?
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The price includes a very poor image in the rest of the world.
I'm not surprised the two recent posters criticizing our foreign policy, are foreign.
So you're much more interested in our global image, than actually doing the right thing? And let's not quibble about what the "right thing" is. If you know right from wrong, there'll be no question about it.
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
(Can't wait to face Lyndi's outrage at my unpatriotic, uninformed, socialistic, newcomer-without-full-rights post. But first will come her minions--just watch.)
Uh huh, you're a real Karnak. But I'm sure you'll have your broken arm fixed in no time.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#160395 Mar 24, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The world is not a rose garden.
But we're all here at the same time, and we should do our best to share it, doing the least harm possible.
That's an uber-naive declaration designed for a perfect or near perfect world. Even if you lived the part, there are too many bad actors that won't.

“Weak People Blame Others”

Since: Jul 08

Location hidden

#160396 Mar 24, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Sounds like a bunch of excuses for leaving the Embassy open to attack. But dang, ain't plausible deniability grand??
Reagan let nearly 300 marines get killed in Lebanon and he's a GOP Demi-god. Freakin hypocrites

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#160397 Mar 24, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you can name 1 or 2 places where you think we shouldn't have "messed"?
<quoted text>
So you're much more interested in our global image, than actually doing the right thing? And let's not quibble about what the "right thing" is. If you know right from wrong, there'll be no question about it.
<quoted text>
Uh huh, you're a real Karnak. But I'm sure you'll have your broken arm fixed in no time.
I am interested in doing the right thing.

And if we do, our global image will be improved.

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#160398 Mar 24, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
That's an uber-naive declaration designed for a perfect or near perfect world. Even if you lived the part, there are too many bad actors that won't.
Maybe. So you go ahead and cross swords in the jungle, and I'll try to do what I can to avoid conflict
and try to work things out.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Homeowners lose Katrina insurance flood case (Aug '06) 2 min DBullock 12
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 min truth 665,632
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 28 min crucifiedguy 284,739
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 31 min It aint necessari... 723
donald trump will not fulfill all campaign prom... 2 hr crucifiedguy 62
women watching men naked on webcam (Mar '12) 3 hr str8hairymarried 85
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 hr truth 88,545
The Future of Politics in America 6 hr River Tam 313
More from around the web