You are not logged in. Login Now
 0-24   25-49   37-61   62-86   87-111   112-119     
 
Author Message
25 new of 119 responses total.
tod
response 62 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 18:39 UTC 2006

She'd make a good junkie hooker.
bru
response 63 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 19:18 UTC 2006

so we invaded another country or two, kicked their asses into submission, and
turned them into democratic states so the people could have a chance at a
descent life.  Big deal.

Fact is, despite you whineing, it seems to have worked.  Both Iraq and
Afganistan have held free elections and formed governments that are supported
by the majority of the people in those countries.  It isn't over yet, adn
won't be over for many years to come.  But it does seem to be working.

Jimmy carter FAILED as a president for the most part.  Was he a good, God
fearing, descent man?  Yes.  Was he intelligent?  Yes.  Was he a weak willed
easily manipulated by foreign powers take action only when cornered president?
YES!  What he should have done with Iran was launch an all out invasion
co-ordinated with a massive rescue of the hostages.  Because he didn't, Iran
is what it is today, an even bigger threat to world security, and he lost the
election to Ronald Reagan.  

A man who they knew would not sit and play paddycake with them for 444 days,
and so they turned their hostages over to him immediately.

Oh, and lest we forget, who was it that set the FBI to investigate and wiretap
and surrvaolance Mr. and Mrs. King?  Was it REagan?  No.  Was it Bush? No.
Was it Nixon?  No.  Was it John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert Kennedy and
that hero of the great society Lyndon Baines Johnson?  Yes.
marcvh
response 64 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 19:45 UTC 2006

Are we to believe that Bru still doesn't know the real story of why Iran
released the hostages?
tod
response 65 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 19:45 UTC 2006

 so we invaded another country or two, kicked their asses into submission,
 turned them into democratic states so the people could have a chance at a
 descent life.  Big deal.

The big deal is that we never found WMD nor did we capture bin Laden.
The big deal is that 19 of the hijackers were Sauds and we never held
the Sauds under the same sort of scrutiny for being an Axis of Evil nor
for being an Enemy of Freedom - yet, they ARE.
The big deal is the American military lives lost in Iraq under false pretenses
of stopping Hussein from the buildup of his imminently threatening WMD.
The big deal is the 25% UNACCOUNTED FOR of $100 billion spent on Iraq yet 
our own country continues to be whittled down to ill retards due to the cuts
in education, healthcare, VA benefits, and pollution.
The big deal is we did NOT kick anyone's ass into submission.  Maybe you 
haven't noticed, but election results turned out in favor of CLERICS.
The big deal is that a decent life should start at home first and its 
becoming just the opposite.

How can you say Big Deal?  

I shall respond Big Deal when the war veterans run these GOP thieves out of 
their offices and corporations and high paid executives are footing their
share of the bills in this country rather than exporting the entire
manufacturing economy out from under us and polluting our planet.

richard
response 66 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 19:50 UTC 2006

bru do you know how many people would have died in a full scale "all out"
invasion of Iran?!  Carter even said that the Pentagon brass wanted him to
nuke Tehran, and waste it like Hiroshima.  But that would have killed all the
hostages, and for what?  Revenge?  

Carter brought the hostages home alive.  All of them.  Fewer american military
personnel lost their lives during the four years of the Carter presidency than
under any other President searving a four year term in american history. 
Compare that to Bush, when we have soldiers coming home in flag draped coffins
by the dozens.  

The war in Iraq is NOT a success, we are losing.  The democracy over there
is meaningless because the constitution subordinates it to islamic law, and
anyway it will crumble the minute we leave.  
mcnally
response 67 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 19:51 UTC 2006

 re #63:  
 Holy shit!  I can't believe that's meant seriously, even coming from bru.

 > so we invaded another country or two, kicked their asses into
 > submission, and turned them into democratic states so the people
 > could have a chance at a descent life.  Big deal.  Fact is, despite
 > you whineing, it seems to have worked.

 And what a roaring success it's been, what with the rose petals and
 the statue toppling and the joyous greeting of the liberators.
 What the hell war have *you* been watching, Bruce?

 You do, totally by accident, turn an apt phrase, when you write about
 giving the people of Iraq and Afghanistan a chance at "a descent life."
 Because that's what many of them will be getting -- a descent into
 even more nightmarish conditions than the awfulness they started with.

 > and [Carter] lost the election to Ronald Reagan.  A man who [Iran]
 > knew would not sit and play paddycake with them for 444 days,
 > and so they turned their hostages over to him immediately.

 Actually, it's precisely because of Reagan's willingness to placate
 Iran (by illegally selling them weapons!) that the hostages were
 released when they were.  You don't even remember Iran-Contra, do you?

 > Oh, and lest we forget, who was it that set the FBI to investigate
 > and wiretap and surrvaolance Mr. and Mrs. King?  Was it John F.
 > Kennedy and his brother Robert Kennedy and that hero of the great
 > society Lyndon Baines Johnson?  Yes.

 Got any evidence that those presidents ordered the wiretapping,
 as opposed to J. Edgar Hoover, who was (in those days) basically
 running the FBI however he saw fit?
richard
response 68 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 20:00 UTC 2006

And Carter would have been reelected easily IF the hostage rescue mission had
succeeded, and if there hadn't been a gas shortage that year.
tod
response 69 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 20:03 UTC 2006

Iran-Contra put the USA into the mess its in right now.  Bush was involved
from the start.
marcvh
response 70 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 20:11 UTC 2006

I also would think that pro-Israeli partisans would at least give Carter
some credit for the Camp David Accords.
klg
response 71 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 20:24 UTC 2006

ARD LIES....RICHARD LIES....RICHARD LIES....RICHARD LIES....RICHARD LIES


The hostages in Iran were released after Reagan became president.


....RICHARD LIES....RICHARD LIES....RICHARD LIES....RICHARD LIES....RICH


The Camp David Accords were a success???  Must have been.  Look at how 
well things are going over there now.

You mean that if Carter had been a good president, he might have been 
re-elected, but since he was a terrible president he wasn't??  Can't 
disagree there.
keesan
response 72 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 20:25 UTC 2006

Doesn't anyone care about the killing of Iraqis and Iranis?
klg
response 73 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 20:28 UTC 2006

Well, Saddam Hussein certainly did.  He cared about killing as many as 
possible.
richard
response 74 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 20:59 UTC 2006

re #71 I didn't say a thing about the hostages getting released AFTER Reaagn
became President.  klg is hallucinating.  Although Reagan DID announce their
release after he took the oath of office.
klg
response 75 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:06 UTC 2006

richard
Richard J. Wallner
response 66 of 74:     Feb 10 14:50 EST 2006 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
bru do you know how many people would have died in a full scale "all 
out" invasion of Iran?!  Carter even said that the Pentagon brass 
wanted him to nuke Tehran, and waste it like Hiroshima.  But that would 
have killed all the hostages, and for what?  Revenge?  

Carter brought the hostages home alive.



Pardon me for misunderstanding the "Carter brought the hostages home 
alive."   How was I to know you were only kidding? 
 
richard
response 76 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:14 UTC 2006

Carter DID bring the hostages home alive, they came home alive BECAUSE OF HIM.
He negotiated the deal.
Not Reagan.
tod
response 77 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:18 UTC 2006

"See....well....there you go again...."
marcvh
response 78 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:18 UTC 2006

The Camp David Accords made peace between Israel and Egypt.  Twenty-five
years later there is still peace between Israel and Egypt.  They did not
result in complete peace and harmony in the entire region with all the
children joining hands and singing as golden silk streamed out their
asses, granted.  But I don't think that even kludge would try to argue
that the world would be a better place if they had never happened.

Reagan negotiated with hostage-takers and rewarded them for their
behavior, and once that precedent was established we saw more and
more hostage-taking in the future.
tod
response 79 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:22 UTC 2006

Reagan opened that pandora's box by letting Poindexter run a 2 for 1 sale
through the NSA.  GW is kinda doing the same thing with the Sauds and soon
with the Iraqis but we won't be hearing about it til he's out of office.
richard
response 80 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:25 UTC 2006

Im hard pressed to see why klg hates Carter, since klg wants a theocracy, and
Carter was a born again christian, the first one to be president, who probably
prayed before every decision he ever made in office.  Carter was also a
centerist who took a hard line towards the Soviet Union (grain embargo,
olympic boycott .etc)  
richard
response 81 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:27 UTC 2006

Carter also negotiated the peace between egypt and israel, the famous camp
david accords involving him, Begin and Sadat.  A considerable accomplishment,
which he made possible, a peace which lasts between those two countries to
this day.
tod
response 82 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:30 UTC 2006

Yea but he's a Whacko!  He's an enemy of freedom
He's lettin the terra ists win
You can't send mixed messages
Its a hard job!
cross
response 83 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:40 UTC 2006

This response has been erased.

tod
response 84 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:43 UTC 2006

Look at the bright side..2 million more jobs were created (forget that many
of them were for DHS, CIA, and FEMA out-of-state contractor gigs!)
richard
response 85 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:44 UTC 2006

bru still harbors under the illusion that we can make a country or region of
the world safer with sheer brute force.  Iran and Iraq are what they are, we
can change regimes, and force democracies on them, but we cannot change the
people, no matter how many troops we send in.  We haven't broken the Iraqis
will, quite the opposite, they are more mobilized against us now than ever.
The world is LESS SAFE now than it was before the invasion.  Considerably less
safe.
./
/
tod
response 86 of 119: Mark Unseen   Feb 10 21:55 UTC 2006

If anything, our military how revealed its weaknesses in urban warfare to al
Qaeda with nothing to show for it.  Iran is not a military option.  
 0-24   25-49   37-61   62-86   87-111   112-119     
Response Not Possible: You are Not Logged In
 

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss