Appeasement, blaming America first and other conservative lies

quote:For the record:

1) Talking is NOT appeasing. I know a lot of people think Chris Matthews is a clown, but the smackdown he put on that right-wing flunkie yesterday was pure gold. These fools don't know history, and don't understand what happened with Chamberlain & Nazi Germany, one iota.

2) American actions in the Middle East have motivated attacks against us. That is NOT justification. If you don't want to talk about that, if it makes you uncomfortable, if the truth is just too much for you to handle...excuse yourself from the conversation on national security. You don't belong in it, and your feeble attempts to say "they attack us for our freedoms" prevents a truly honest conversation on terrorism.

3) The options in both Iraq and the "WOT" (as you like to call it) are not Bush's bomb first & ask questions later, or surrendering. I'm so tired of apologists asking me "what were we supposed to do after 9/11?" when challenged about Iraq. It's embarassing.
******************************************************************
The only thing that's "embarrassing", is that I have to call you Liberals "fellow Americans", when you have neither the COURAGE or the RESPECT to call yourselves Americans. You SPIT on the Hundreds of THOUSANDS of Soldiers, Sailors, Air Force and Marines, who gave their LIVES so assholes like YOU could BASH this Graet Nation, and BLAME this country, when SCUM COWARDS, who SEND THEIR CHILDREN INTO CROWDED CIVILLIAN LOCATIONS, TO MURDER INNOCENTS. Just like they flew FOUR JUMBO JETS INTO THE TWIN TOWERS, THE PENTAGON, AND AIMED FOR THE WHITE HOUSE, BUT A HERO NAMED TODD BEAMER STOPPED THE FOURTH.

These SCUM, who go by a thousand year-old ORDER, TO KILL THE INFIDEL- They don't CARE about YOU, or your "Liberal Beliefs"! They see you ONLY as a weak, timid pussy! And if YOU were in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or ANYWHERE in the Muslim world, and one of them kidnapped YOU, or your sister, wife, daughter, or Mother, after they were finished RAPING you and your family, they would SLIT YOUR THROAT LIKE A PIG TO BE BUTCHERED!
CAN YOU NOT READ?
"God's curse be upon the infidels! Evil is that for which they have bartered away their souls. To deny God's own revelation, grudging that He should reveal His bounty to whom He chooses from among His servants! They have incurred God's most inexorable wrath. An ignominious punishment awaits the unbelievers." (Q 2:92-6)

"... Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you. Idolatry is worse than carnage." (Q 2:190-3)

"When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them." (Q 9:5)

"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate." (Q 9:73)
These are direct quotes from the Koran, translated but not "interpreted." No interpretation is necessary, as the meaning is clear.
Again, this repression is sanctioned by the Koran, which promises a garden of sexual delights to those who martyr themselves in the name of Islam
***********************************************************
Your no.2, above- Did Pres. Bush "Bomb first, and ask later", as you so didhonestly state our policy, Saddam Hussein, as soon as he got in, for trying to KILL his a United States PresidenT? NO. He didn't start "bombing", until the AMERICAN PEOPLE DEMANDED ACTION, AFTER THESE SCUM MURDERED 3,000 INNOCENT AMERICAN CIVILIANS, AND DESTROYED THE TWIN TOWERS, IDIOT!
************************************************************

oH, DID FAGBOY OLBERMANN'S GIRLFREINDS SEE THIS, BEFOR?

The gay butterfly is that Self-Important Lying Moran, "Bathtub Boy Olbermann! I have a REAL funny story about him, from a NEWS GROUPIE he picked up! ASfter having sex, which she said was "awful", HE QUOTED SHAKESPEARE, IN A PHONY ENGLISH ACCENT, Haaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaha!

Something like, "Oh, Madam, thank you so kindly for that sublime release."
What an ASSHOLE, Bwaaaaaahahahahahahaha!
 
That's interesting. You didn't answer this question:

"So....would you say our actions in the Middle East over 3 decades had absolutely no effect whatsoever on people there, and plays no part at all in why terrorists do what they do?"

I have found that it's one connie-cons are very afraid of. They love to pull out the "blame America first" line, but they are incredibly frightened to consider the possibility that maybe - just maybe - American actions motivate attacks against us.

Wanna give it another go? Can you answer "yes" or "no" to the question above? (betcha can't).

Also - you were the one who brought up "talking to terrorists." I'm focusing on Iran, since that was the main part of Bush's point & the talking points for all connie cons since his little speech yesterday.
 
Our actions all over the world have affected hundreds of millions of people.....

They aren't starving as much as would have without our charity and help
They share in our inventions, from transistors and microchips to computers and medicine to give them better lives...
Some enjoy democracy and freedom the would not have been possible without us

We've had a profound affect throughout the world....thats why I'm so very proud to be an American, to have served my country, etc....
 
bravo said:
Our actions all over the world have affected hundreds of millions of people.....

They aren't starving as much as would have without our charity and help
They share in our inventions, from transistors and microchips to computers and medicine to give them better lives...
Some enjoy democracy and freedom the would not have been possible without us

We've had a profound affect throughout the world....thats why I'm so very proud to be an American, to have served my country, etc....
Click to expand...

Knew ya couldn't answer it....
 
President Bush was in the oil-rich country Friday hobnobbing with King Abdullah and you would have us believe that this US interference in the Middle East is what "caused" 9/11.....
Our being in Saudi Arabia caused OBL to attack the US.....

In plain english...if was our fault.....

Look Lorax, we're done....there is nothing more to discuss...arguing with a narrow-minded, Bush hating hack is a waste of my time... and yours....
 
bravo said:
President Bush was in the oil-rich country Friday hobnobbing with King Abdullah and you would have us believe that this US interference in the Middle East is what "caused" 9/11.....
Our being in Saudi Arabia caused OBL to attack the US.....

In plain english...if was our fault.....

Look Lorax, we're done....there is nothing more to discuss...arguing with a narrow-minded, Bush hating hack is a waste of my time... and yours....
Click to expand...

So, so afraid. What is it with the connie cons? This is why they have to turn it around, into the idea that people are 'blaming American first' and 'hate America.'

It also makes us less safe, because we are unable to have an honest discussion on national security because of their fear. It's annoying.

Still, I'd be curious; if our actions in the Middle East have existed in some kind of vacuum, and haven't motivated our enemies in the slightest....why do you think they attack us, bravo? Why do they spend years getting visa's, training to be pilots, coordinating attacks & sacrificing their lives?

Because they hate our freedoms so much?
 
Darla said:
"You're the most ignorant con on here;"

Onceler, how did you finalize them and come to this conclusion? I have been trying to figure this out ever since we have had this influx of them. What ingredient makes Bravo stupider than say, Meme? I mean, this is some contest. I haven’t yet come up with the champ.
Click to expand...

you sure are obsessed with me..I find that a little creepy.
I'm truly flattered, but Please go find someone else to obsess over.:clink:
 
Onceler said:
That's an excellent question. I'm not sure what inspired me to classify Bravo that way; he just seems more sincere in his ignorance than, say, Meme, who clearly wants to just troll once in awhile.

Upon further review, I'd like to revise & amend my remarks. Bravo is among the most ignorant cons on here, a group that exemplifies ignorance in all its forms and who represent a larger group that is among the most ignorant and dim-witted in our society as a whole.

There. I think that works better.
Click to expand...

Oh boy..another ENLIGHTENED ONE.:rolleyes:
 
Hey girl...............!

meme said:
you sure are obsessed with me..I find that a little creepy.
I'm truly flattered, but Please go find someone else to obsess over.:clink:
Click to expand...


don't say that...she has obsessed over me for the last two years...the break was nice...take your turn in the darla barrel!:cof1:
 
Onceler said:
So, so afraid. What is it with the connie cons? This is why they have to turn it around, into the idea that people are 'blaming American first' and 'hate America.'

It also makes us less safe, because we are unable to have an honest discussion on national security because of their fear. It's annoying.

Still, I'd be curious; if our actions in the Middle East have existed in some kind of vacuum, and haven't motivated our enemies in the slightest....why do you think they attack us, bravo? Why do they spend years getting visa's, training to be pilots, coordinating attacks & sacrificing their lives?

Because they hate our freedoms so much?
Click to expand...

Ok...one last shot.....

1-According to some experts, and I quote, "they are motivated by the belief that U.S. foreign policy is an attack on Islam, its lands, and its believers."

2-Some say:
"We are hated and being warred against because we are “over there.”

3-Some say:
Under Bill Clinton, we again launched bombing raids against civilians—once against so-called "terrorist training camps" supposedly under bin Laden's control in Afghanistan and at the same time against a purported "chemical weapons factory" in Sudan that almost certainly was no such thing.

4-Some say:
Later again Mr. Clinton ordered more bombings in Iraq the day before Congress was scheduled to vote on his impeachment.

5-Some say:
It's because the terrorists are "evil"; they "hate democracy"; they are "fanatics," "barbarians" and "cowards."

6-Some say:
The answer is that the terrorists attacked us because they were paying us back for what we started.

So take your pick....I'd say 1,2 and 6 should fit your perception of the event...
They seem to shout, "Its the fault of US policy", "Its our fault"
--------------------------------------------
I seem to remember OBL actually complaining about US presence in his home country of Saudi Arabia.....

Of course the fact that we were in Saudi Arabia at the invitation of the ruling government of that country seems to be lost OBL....and probably you to...

Personally, I think this is the initial reason for 9/11..our presence in Saudi Arabia...
and then #1 above came to be the catch all motivation for Islamic fanatic terrorism.....
but the bottom line is...ITS NOT OUR FAULT....

If it is their insane belief that U.S. foreign policy is an attack on Islam, its lands, and its believers, that is totally THEIR delusion....
 
For those who like to point out that U.S. actions in the M.E. have "motivated" (or whatever you want to call it) terrorist attacks against the U.S, answer this question:

What would you have us do differently? Should we have simply allowed Saddam to invade Kuwait - a significant economic ally? Should we just tell Israel they are on their own and withdraw all economic and military support? Because if you want to be so "realistic" about what is behind the Islamic fundamentalist targeting the U.S., the above two points - and others - would be what IS required to change their minds about the U.S. as their enemy.

Would you have US foreign and economic policy set by terrorists or fear of terrorist retaliation?

In short, you can point to the terrorist motivations due to U.S. actions all you want. That does not make what the U.S. has done in the M.E. (prior to invading Iraq - a bone headed action) wrong, ignorant, or otherwise ill considered. And unless you want to advise how we should have handled things differently, talking about what motivated terrorist attacks against the U.S. is a pointless mental exercise. It's like discussing the motivations of a mugger by pointing out his victims are people who withdraw money from ATMs.
 
Onceler said:
"All he could keep shouting over and over is "we're talking about appeasement" "

It was classic. He used every context of "appease"...What did Chamberlain do? He appeased! What did Chamberlain do? It's about appeasement! What did Chamberlain do? He was an appeaser.

I think most of these guys have no idea what "appease" means, much less what Chamberlain did. Their historical knowledge stops at "Bush was right."
Click to expand...

So are you saying Chamberlain was correct? What is being conducted now, via UN and Europe is OK? Or are you saying that appeasement is wrong, whether under Chamberlain or Carter or the UN? What ARE you saying?
 
The fact is that regardless of what Chamberlain hoped to gain by the Munich Accord, regardless of his motivations for dealing with Hitler, it turned out badly because Chamberlain did not recognize Hitler for the subhuman scum he turned out to be. There are those who point out that the demands made by Germany at the time, seemed "reasonable" from a certain point of view. (OTOH, how would we feel today if Britain made the claim that all English speaking countries belonged under one rule?) But Hitler was NOT "reasonable" - he was a despotic mad man who USED the willingness of England and France to negotiate against them.

Now we come to modern times, and the controversy of how to treat with Islamic extremists. And the answer lies in their very title. Extremists are NOT "reasonable". Their mandate is world wide domination of Islam. What the heck kind of dialog can we hope to have with a people whose most immediate goal is the eradication of one of our allies, and long term goal is our complete subjigation?

The reason for comparing the situation to the lesson learned (or ignored?) from Hitler and WWII is that there are sometime people we must deal with who are NOT reasonable, no matter how reasonable they make themselves appear. Hitler was "reasonable" in his demands. But the problem is his desires for conquest did not end with the demands given him. And the mistake made was not recognizing that fact when Britain and France capitulated to the demands of the Munich Accord.

Likewise, we need to recognize that any dialog with Islamic extremists will only result in demands, which if capitulated to, will only yield additional violence on the part of the extremists, followed by more demands - it is what extremists with long term global domination agendas do. And that is why even trying to "reason" with these terrorists, let alone any HINT of appeasement, would be a grave mistake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top