Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Smell The Hypocrisy

Comments Filter:
  • WMD is something of a distinction.
    But I've got to concur: our government and media choice of priorities is most fascinating.
    • The only report of Chemical Weapons by Assad? Unconfirmed and dubiously sourced assertions channeled via Israeli military intelligence.

      There are confirmed uses by the "rebels" - foreign mujahedeen fighters.

    • Chemical weapons? WMD is something of a distinction.

      *sigh* Are you still really trying to sell the war? Be patient. We have to soften up the target a bit first. Total destruction (the true purpose) will come soon enough. Right now it's more profitable to keep them shootin' at each other until the survivors are so exhausted that they cannot defend themselves, and then like SPECTRE, we strike!

      • I saw one Syrian rebel face on the news assert WMD usage by Assad.
        If you have to accuse me of a sales pitch, well, it's your accusation.
        No, having spent 2011 in Afghanistan, I'm amply convinced that redistributing power and increasing voter involvement is key to walking back military adventurism.
        • I saw one Syrian rebel face on the news assert WMD usage by Assad.

          Wow, I'm convinced...

          ...I'm amply convinced that redistributing power...

          By force?

        • AP had a photo...

          The EXIF data was scrubbed.

          You want analytical breakdown of the "veracity" of claims? Follow "Moon of Alabama" blog. B has taken down a number of these disinformation efforts in the past.

        • ...walking back military adventurism.

          ..."trying to find reverse in a Soviet tank."

          You are doomed

          • As long as Zimbabwe Ben Bernanke prints the frogskins, I fear you're correct.
            • Heh, sometimes I have to wonder if you really are just pretending or not...

              • I am as serious as lung cancer, boss. I got into some hyperbole and sarcasm with damn_registrars.
                • Yeah well, making this Ben Barnacle person out to be some evil genius behind all this is positively comedic. Truly the butler did it. Makes you sound about as smart as lung cancer...

                  A man takes his father to the doctor.

                  At the office, the doctor tells the old man, "I'm sorry, sir, but you have lung cancer. You'll be dead in a year."

                  On the way home, the old man turns to his grief-stricken son and says, "Quit all that cryin'! I'm not depressed. I've lived 75 great years. How 'bout you and me go to my favorite

      • by mcgrew (92797) *

        Are you still really trying to sell the war?

        If he is he can forget it until at least the next election. No Democrat President has started a war since Kennedy, and no Republican President has failed to start one since Ford. If he wants a war he should vote for whoever the Republicans run.

        • No Democrat President has started a war since Kennedy, and no Republican President has failed to start one since Ford.

          Oh please! What difference is that supposed to make? Why do you people keep on insisting that the battling Bickersons are in some kind of opposition to each other? And why stop at Kennedy? I mean, aside from some propaganda value? Let's go back to Teddy Roosevelt and see how this 'war' thing balances out. Fuck it, let's go back to the Canaanites. I'm sure all the appropriate analogies can be

          • by mcgrew (92797) *

            Well, both parties seem to be opposed to my views, at least the ones that matter to me -- drug laws, copyright insanity, patent insanity, etc. Both parties are indeed pro-business and anti-human.

            The two parties seem to switch sides every few generations. It used to be that Democrats always started wars but were good for the economy and we were at peace, but with Republicans they wrecked the economy.

            After the Civil war it was the Dems who were racist and the Repubs who were for an egalitarian society and tha

            • There is no 'both' parties... They are bickering factions of the same thing. It is pointless to search for any distinctions, which amount to nothing more than method. There is but one goal.

              As to "why stop at Kennedy,"...

              Kennedy was only 50 years ago. You analogy is like playing a slot machine for 30 seconds and then complaining that it doesn't pay out its stated percentage.

              And watch out for the Greens. I've seen some of the alliances they make, and it ain't pretty. They all talk big when nobody's paying att

              • by mcgrew (92797) *

                There is no 'both' parties... They are bickering factions of the same thing.

                I can't disagree with that. I was just pointing out an odd piece of recent history. I don't worry about the Greens, they're not going to win anyway. It's like voting "none of the above" so they can't say "apathy." Only half those eligible do vote and the rest are accused of apathy when in fact there's nobody worth voting for, one will be as bad as the other.

                • I can't disagree with that. I was just pointing out an odd piece of recent history.

                  If you don't disagree, then why would you point something like that out? What is 'odd' about that segment of our history? What difference does it make if the politician declaring war is a democrat or a republican? It's not like they are the ones making the choice out of their own free will. They're just following orders like the rest of us. Hell, I can blame Johnson for taking Vietnam as far as he did, and at the same time I

There are worse things in life than death. Have you ever spent an evening with an insurance salesman? -- Woody Allen

Working...