Another rhyme of history: military service and family strife
During the Vietnam years, it wasn’t unusual for fathers and sons to stop talking to each other over issues connected with the war and military service. Most often the father, usually a veteran who’d served in World War II, couldn’t understand or accept the son who felt his conscience dictated leaving the country or faking an illness.
Now the worm has turned. Certain fathers–perhaps in some cases those very same sons of long ago–are rejecting children who enlist:
My brother is an Army Ranger in Afghanistan…His choice to join after 9/11 was not easy. He was one year away from graduating from ASU with a law degree, and he believed the nation needed another soldier more than it needed another lawyer. His choice did not come without consequences, though.
His choice was not supported by our father, and his reaction to my brother’s choice was typical of a 1960s throwback; my brother is no longer welcome in my parent’s home.
My brother told me that he can understand our father’s reaction to the decision. They come from opposite ends of the ideological spectrum.
There are many tragedies in war, and one of them is this estrangement of the generations. Note that in this particular case, the son seems to have an unusually mature–you might almost say “liberal,” in the generic sense of the word–reaction to the father.
[ADDENDUM: Austin Bay, whose radio request for responses from military members to John Kerry’s recent gaffe led to the letter I’ve quoted in this post, has written an eloquent soliloquy on Kerry. Hint: Austin is not one of Kerry’s biggest fans.]
Yes Sergey
He should have said
‘Now watch this put…’
Grrr Kerry! I could tear him apart with my bare hands!!!!!The arrogant bastard!!!!
No, seriously to be a politician, you need charisma, or luck, Kerry has neither in the required amount.
You are full of crap neo. There isn’t by any stretch of the imagination a generational divide in regards to Iraq. The divide is between right wing US christians and the rational world.
You enter every discussion with an overt agenda. To do so as a therapist would be very destructive to your clients. My guess is that if you actually are a therapist you have got to be as incompetent as the government you support.
Dude, this is _her weblog_. If she can’t express her “agenda” here, where can she?
Why are liberals so hot to stifle everyone else’s freedom of speech?
Talk about naked aggression!
The Army can use you, Mark.
Gosh,
It’s nice to see Mark enter every discussion with an open mind and no agenda, his opinions are always unpredictable and surprising. If we all could achieve such levels of dispassionate inquiry the world would be a far different place.
Mark: I leave your comment up, as I’ve done with so many other trolls, because I think you are such a bad advertisement for your own cause. You are banned, as well, although we’ll see whether that takes.
The guy has a rigid, dogmatic mind.
I just spent a number of posts dealing with him accusing me of saying something that he read into what I wrote, which was never there, and then he demanded I explain myself. He can’t read anything straight, it’s all twisted with by weight of his emotional baggage.
He has an interior dialog that he projects on others. It leaves you in a Kafka fog.
Or he has no integrity.
There isn’t by any stretch of the imagination a generational divide in regards to Iraq.
It it almost entirely a generational divide on Iraq.
The dippy old hipsters on the losing side of history (again).
I wish the Baby Boomers would get over Vietnam so we could fight the Mohammedans….
Bah, balderdash & folderol! Mark is merely a poltroon and a mountebank.
The divide is across a number of a groups. I would agree that those Baby Boomers of the dippy hipster type are against the war, and their children more likely to be for it. Its simply more complex than any one simple divide, and I did not read Neo’s post as asserting that was the dichotomy, just one among many.
“divide is between right wing US christians and the rational world.” That’s the kind of response you can expect from the rigid, dogmatic atheists I despise. They give atheism, as well as rational thought, a bad name. What a maroon.
No offense to any of you, but the guy is no different than the fire-and-brimstone, the-word-of-God-is-what-I-say-it-is, religionists.
Strangely, my father (a Vietnam vet) and I are pretty much in agreement about the war in Iraq – we saw valid reasons for it and were willing to give the administration and the military a chance to set things right over there. My father-in-law, on the other hand, is of the WWII generation and cannot stand Bush or the war. I know people in the military who think the whole thing stinks, and others who were all for it. One thing I am personally not seeing, however, is the kind of friendship-breaking, family-dividing passion that supposedly characterized the Vietnam era. Maybe I’ve just been lucky. I see it mostly online. Maybe the Internet is functioning as a safety valve for all those feelings.
As for atheism – which has nothing to do with the discussion but seems to keep working its way in – I guess with any belief system, there are “live and let live” folks and there are “activists” who aren’t happy unless they’re changing the world to suit themselves. A sensible atheist might accept reality and just study Christianity and other religions as cultural artifacts rather than damning them as genocide-inducing mental illnesses. Ariel seems pretty sensible to me.
There’s a reason that I see so many Army ads that are actually targeted at parents rather than the potential recruit. Of course there is an “I don’t want my child shot at” element in play these days but, lest I bring up Kerry’s little gaffe, the sentiment that the military is poor second place to just about *anything* else a person can do has been in play for quite a long time.
As to someone who’d disown their child… what are the chances that they’d disown them for acting against their wishes in some other way, chosing the wrong profession or the wrong spouse? If there is one “escape” the military is especially good for, it’s getting away from home in a way that can’t be undone by family bullying or histrionics or financial blackmail.
There aren’t a lot of those escapees in the military, but there are a few.
Bugs,
You nailed it. That’s why I pointed out his rigid, dogmatic version of Atheism, usually a sign of immaturity or extreme, suppressed anger. But to make such an irrational, hate-filled comment shows he has deeper problems. As I said earlier, I felt like a protagonist in a Kafka story, dealing with his projection of meaning onto anything I wrote.
Anyway, as an atheist I am ashamed of his type or kind or whatever word doesn’t have some secret-handshake meaning. I used to feel the same way about Madalyn Murray O’Hair. Oddly, she was a very nice person when you met her off the podium.
I will do my best to let it go know.
My typing. “now”
To bad the father is an al-Qaeda apologist, fighting the war has been just, necessary, and noble — anyone with a tranche of democratic and social principles should agree with that.
mark,
Put the crack pipe down and walk slowly away from the keyboard.
mark is a fine example of the left at it’s “best”. All full of stupidity, irrational anger bordering on the psychotic, hatred and presumptious assumptions. If anyone is in need of psychological help it is you, mark. Get some before you end up hurting yourself or others.
One other thing…
Riddle me this, mark.
Where in that article did it say that the son was a “right wing US christian”?
Neo, it might have been a tragedy when the sons of WWII veterans just hang loosed and partied hardy into the 60s and 70s, but it isn’t a tragedy now. Now, it is called a return, the Hegira.
To do so as a therapist would be very destructive to your clients.
If fake liberals stopped going to the therapist every day, they might not have anything to complain about.
Why are liberals so hot to stifle everyone else’s freedom of speech?
Trimegistus | 11.04.06 – 2:30 pm | #
Cause they actually like goose stepping in jackboots.
I don’t think it’s generational, as much as a left/right point of view. There’s a saying to effect of, “If you aren’t a Democrat when you’re young, you lack a heart. And if you haven’t become Republican when you mature, you lack a brain.” I think a lot of the Baby Boomers who marched on campus and were tear-gassed in the 1960’s and 70’s over Vietnam are now Republicans and supporters of the War on Terror. If we were NOT, the Republicans wouldn’t still be winning election after election.
I would also like to point out that the example, neo-neocon started off with is once again of a “liberal” throwing out and not speaking to someone he perceives as being “rightwing”. Since we were bombed on 9/11 and this whole debate started, I have yet to see a rightwing person, a Republican, or a war supporter refuse to speak to a Democrat. But I have seen LOTS of “liberals” striking out verbally and physically at Republicans (or war-supporters), and when that doesn’t work, striking us from their social lists.
I wonder if that’s out of frustration that they can’t martial enough facts to make a lucid argument, or if they actually *do* see us as baby-killers (like anti-abortionists see abortion-rights supporters) or why there is such an over-the-top reaction.
Finally, I’d like to point out that in the family being discussed, the son is not welcome in the “parent’s house”. What does that say about the mother? Has she been beat into submission by the maniac father, or does she, too, reject her soldier son? Is she related to Cindy Sheehan by any chance, if she does?
Yes Neoneo but remember George Castanza’s father disowned him when George said he wanted to grow up to be a clown…(which he did anyway I guess).
Interesting point though, but thankfully we can disagree on matters…
so Neoneo I hope you are not actually banning Mark from posting, I mean it is amusing at least.
LOL Maybe you could edit his posts like Yossarian in the beginning of Catch 22…
but just the ‘profanity’ (even though Im partial to it…) ma’am not the substantials…but it’s your universe, just giving you a maladroit mischievous troll’s perspective…I should change my name to Loki…hmmm to get in touch with my roots too…
“Talk about naked aggression!
The Army can use you, Mark.”
-George
Mark could use the Army. Not sure they’d take him, though.
Neo,this isn’t a rhetorical question,but why do you draw trolls?Just curious as to what is going on. I haven’t a clue.
‘I haven’t a clue’
that’s a good first step…at least you’re honest with yourself…
Kerry’s gaffe, was it intentional or not, revealed integral part of neo-leberal world-view: elitist contempt for ordinary people. This is core belief of Gramshians, that working class and everybody else, except themselves, have “false” class conscience, and the main goal of intellectuals is to re-educate these poor guys and install in them “true” class conscience, that is their own ideology. This paternalistic attitude explains all typical leftist points: free spech suppression on campuses, PC, speech codes, arrogance of mainstream media outlets and their pundits, calling themselves “the Forth Power” and usurping rights to break the law when it pleases them.
renminbi:
In general, the more eloquent and smart the blog, the more it draws screaming trolls. Some of the dis-agreers here are not trolls and can marshal a decent argument.
I leave it to my fellow commentators to list their “favorite” trolls.
We have such a wide choice…
Another example of this attitude:
BY MARK STEYN Sun-Times Columnist
My face time with John Kerry has been brief but choice. In 2003, I was at a campaign event in New Hampshire chatting with two old coots in plaid. The senator approached and stopped in front of us. The etiquette in primary season is that the candidate defers to the cranky Granite Stater’s churlish indifference to status and initiates the conversation: “Hi, I’m John Kerry. Good to see ya. Cold enough for ya? How ’bout them Sox?” Etc. Instead, Kerry just stood there nose to nose, staring at us with an inscrutable semi-glare on his face. After an eternity, an aide stepped out from behind him and said, “The senator needs you to move.”
“Well, why couldn’t he have said that?” muttered one of the old coots. Why indeed?
The article cited can be found on
(http://www.suntimes.com/news/steyn/123615,CST-EDT-steyn05.article)
Great blog Neo
As a lifelong conservative I want to encourage you to hang in there. Though you may not agree with every conservative issue, your clear thinking is needed to win the GWOT, in which my son currently fights.
So I salute your bravery.
Sergey . . .
I always enjoy your posts, and I just have to ask…are you writing from Russia? Naturally, you don’t have to answer if this will get your head chopped off or some such, but I’d really like to know.
One reason I’m addicted to the internet is that the people posting on it are so far-flung.
Thanks for your reply.
Austin Bay wants to “kick Kerry with steel toed boots”.With that kind of toughness you folks could march clear to Moscow! Weren’t Kerrys remarks taken out of context? Is that what neo means by “gaffe”? It is unclear you understand his intended meaning.Is there any empirical evidence behind this father-son divide theory? Smokescreen for an agenda?
I don’t see it as being a gaffe, what Kerry said. I think he said exactly what he was thinking in words of one syllable, and it wasn’t until a couple of days later of feverish thinking and brainstorming that his staff were able to come up with the “joke” alibi. If it was a “joke” in the first place, why didn’t he say so in his attack diatribe right after when he said he’d never apologize?
It is unclear you understand his intended meaning. Right – that’s us alright. We’re just as dumb as the soljers stuk in Irak.
Of course there is empirical evidence but I don’t know that there is enough data to prove a trend. From my experience (and what I’ve heard military recruiters say) and events we know about such as anti-recruitment movements (such as in San Francisco) and the banning of ROTC from elite universities, the attitude of a great many people is very negative toward military service.
Is this a “father-son” divide?
I’m not certain, but it does seem to be a clear divide. What I’m unsure is entirely clear is if the younger generation has a more favorable view of military service than their parents *in general*. It may be more cases of individual disagreement, most young people *agreeing* with their parents.
As for Kerry’s gaffe. I don’t know how it could be taken out of context because the context is very clearly that he’s telling students to study hard and try to be smart so as to avoid this “thing”. If he mispoke the “thing” doesn’t matter all that much. The couplet is clearly saying work hard in college or this bad thing will happen to you. It could have been “digging ditches” or “flipping burgers”, but it’s a common sentiment and we’ve all heard it.
And what if Kerry really did mean to say “try to be smart, or you’ll be stupid and get us into Iraq like Bush?” Many people have pointed out that the couplet becomes, “work hard, be smart, or else become president of the United States.”
It was a stupid statement.
“Why are liberals so hot to stifle everyone else’s freedom of speech?”
Google “Marcuse” + “repressive tolerance”.
As a longtime fan of Neoneocon I’ve often wondered, like Renminbi, why she draws so many trolls. My theory is that her blog persona is feminine and maternal, and that she retains the style, if not the substance, of the conventional liberal she used to be. In other words, she’s a permissive mother. That brings out the boundary-testing brattiness of some in her blog brood.
No – she is full of shit. Like you.
Just utter bullshit passed off as legitimate discourse.
The guys out here are full of shit too.
Like all neoconservatives….
Like the first guy said – there is no generational gap – most Americans are opposed to the war. Period.
The gap, however, is between jewish war propagandists(Neo) and their Christian right supporters and the rest of the world…
Anonymous:
Let’s see…from your own words…Sherlock Holmes would deduce that you are:
0) an aforementioned troll;
1) Too cowardly to further identify yourself;
2) Antisemitic Academic (most likely “Social Science” major;
3) Embittered atheist un-convert from mainstream religion;
4) Unacquainted with statistical methods;
5) Living off Mommy and Daddy.
How am I doing so far?
2) Antisemitic Academic (most likely “Social Science” major;
Doubt that it’s graduated yet. Still taking a half-load of political science and philosophy courses, going to frat parties every night, and living off of mommy and daddy’s largesse while learning Marxist tenets enough to complain about capitalism. Since it likes to be anonymous, probably doesn’t volunteer a lot in class, and pulls down a “C” average which is alright since everything is plagiarized off the internet.
I suggest you all read Thomas Friedman’s wednesday editorial and keep in mind that he was a vocal proponent of the Iraq war in 2003. The worst joke this week wasn’t from Kerry. It was Bush swearing to keep Rumsfeld to the end. If you can’t find Friedman’s editorial, just read you Army Times, Navy Times, etc.
Right on target I’m sure, Good Ole Charlie! I get a mental image of a squalid room, empty Yoohoo bottles on the floor and clove cigarettte butts in the ashtray.
I think all neo-cons are opposed to how the war has been administered.
Paul Bremer’s disbanding of the Iraqi Army and the Abu Ghraib incident made things a mess — although now that the Iraqis control that prison, the way the American handled it was like 5 star hotel by comparison — but show be a Left with any sense of perspective and I’ll sell you swamp land on the moon.
The initiation of the war was JUST and NECESSARY.
Without UN intervention, the onslaught from Turkey, Iran, and Arabia to redraw a Shia Caliphate or a Sunni Caliphate across the Middle East would have made the genocide in Rwanda look like a friendly Rubgy match.
Well thank you to neo-conservatives who said NO MORE of this anti-war capitulation to pathological dictators! Strange how the conservatives have come to champion the soul of liberalism — but who cares who does it as long as it is done.
This may get me in trouble. I know Iraq isn’t Vietnam, but for some reason I keep imagining Donald Rumsfeld as this war’s MacNamara.
Lincoln had to go through a lot of generals before he found U.S. Grant. Maybe Bush needs to think about that before swearing undying loyaly to Rumsfeld.
Just wondering what folks think, since the issue was brought up in a previous comment.
To Promethea:
Yes, I post from Moscow, Russian capital (I heard you also have a town in US named Moscow). They don’t anymore chopped heads here, at least for such trivial activity as using Internet. In many aspects, Russia is now more free country than US, we have no politcorectness here, and my daughter in Moscow University never was intimidated for her views. Even outright fascists, alas, can demonstrate on streets; though gay parades are banned here. (I must confess that I have nothing against this ban.)
With out a doubt bugs
“The initiation of the war was JUST and NECESSARY.
Without UN intervention, the onslaught from Turkey, Iran, and Arabia to redraw a Shia Caliphate or a Sunni Caliphate across the Middle East would have made the genocide in Rwanda look like a friendly Rubgy match.”
Isaiah Hunahun | Homepage | 11.05.06 – 4:02 pm | #
What a load of dribble. You are trying to say the US SAVED Iraq from invasion?
Oh my, you couldn’t make this stuff up.
Our ruling class is cynical and corrupt to the bones, but it has one tremendous advantage before Communist rulers: they have NO ideology to speak about, and are totally impotent to produce one. For the vast majority of population the same is true.
Iraq was an imploding state — who would have filled the void?
What a nonsense. Why don’t you just do what all the other neocons are doing and pretend that the war was someone else’s idea and/or fault.
Even neonut extraordinaire Ledeen is claiming he opposed the war now, despite the overwhelming evidence of all the ‘articles’ he wrote calling for it.
Ahhh neocons. You’d have to laugh if they weren’t such bloodthirsty murderous savages.
Generation gaps occure when dying ideology can no more win over young men’s natural scepticism and seeking for their own ways. Age range for socialization is rather short, and these formative years greatly influence the whole age cohort. If sons do not anymore trust their parents in value judgments, it means that father’s ideology is bankrupt. War always is catalyst for such change of heart; this was true in Vietnam era, this is true now, only direction of change is reversed.
Sergey | 11.05.06 – 5:16 pm | #
If I’m a “bloodthirsty murderous savage” — who has never killed anyone
Then what are Islamofascist? Kitty cats? Your non-existing perspective renders your argument null and void — and I didn’t have to lift a finger. This is too easy :
“Even neonut extraordinaire Ledeen is claiming he opposed the war now, despite the overwhelming evidence of all the ‘articles’ he wrote calling for it.”
We have that problem among Democrats who voted for the invasion when they thought it might be politically prudent to pretend to support these efforts. Now they, (Kerry as an example), like to carry as if they had always opposed invasion despite plenty of direct quotes saying they did once support it.
BTW: Whats a Ledeen?
Then what are Islamofascist?Isaiah Hunahun | Homepage | 11.05.06 – 5:58 pm | #
Another silly neocon fantasy. That’s what.
“We have that problem among Democrats who voted for the invasion when they thought it might be politically prudent to pretend to support these efforts. Now they, (Kerry as an example), like to carry as if they had always opposed invasion despite plenty of direct quotes saying they did once support it.
BTW: Whats a Ledeen?
harry | 11.05.06 – 6:05 pm | #
I agree, I’m not excusing anyone who voted for or supported this trumped up war. Only a fool would have believed the pack of lies that was peddled in support of this illegal and immoral crime against humanity.
Ledeen is a leading neocon/zionist pundit who masquerades as a journalist. One of neo’s favourites I’d imagine. A warmonger.
If you don’t know what the reference to Islamofascist is, then who’s planting IED’s . . . freedom fighters?
Are they fighting for human freedom?
This isn’t difficult.
But to those who supported, (Democrats then), the invasion, ther was nothing “trumped up” to it. They believed as Bush had because Clinton was also saying the same things in his administration. To them it was also a “slam dunk” case.
And of of course, that the invasion of Iraq was an “illegal and immoral crime against humanity.” is your opinion, shared by the likes of Kerry today, but not yesterday.
It would also seem that you are pretty selective with your outrage.
Arent all crimes illegal and immoral? Especially the ones against humanity?
Why must the rhetoric be so redundant?
“But to those who supported, (Democrats then), the invasion, ther was nothing “trumped up” to it. They believed as Bush had because Clinton was also saying the same things in his administration. To them it was also a “slam dunk” case.”
Supposition on your part in that they believed. I don’t accept that anyone blieved the rhetoric. Ordinary people the world over knew it was all lies.
It would also seem that you are pretty selective with your outrage.
harry | 11.05.06 – 7:12 pm | #
How so? I have no respect for anyone who supported the war but I have particular disgust for the architects and the promoters. I have nil respect for the Democrats but even that is more than I have for the Repub administration.
If you don’t know what the reference to Islamofascist is, then who’s planting IED’s . . . freedom fighters?
Are they fighting for human freedom?
This isn’t difficult.
Isaiah Hunahun | Homepage | 11.05.06 – 7:04 pm | #
Iraqis who don’t want your troops occupying their country are planting the ieds, and they probably see it as fighting for their freedom.
What are american troops fighting for?
Oil.
The term islamofascist is a puerile simplistic nonsense that deserves only scorn.
Are American troops in Iraq the real fascist? After all, everyone’s a volunteer.
How are ordinary soldiers benefiting from the theft of Iraqi oil? Or am I being sarcastic because they aren’t there for the oil, the soldiers I mean, but simply have been duped into fighting for a neocon Imperialist land grab?
“Supposition on your part in that they believed. I don’t accept that anyone blieved the rhetoric. Ordinary people the world over knew it was all lies.”
Supposition based upon what these same Democrats were saying at the time. Im not sure what information these so-called “ordinary people of the world” of yours were getting I was not privileged to, but when not only my nations leaders, (Democrat & Republican) were saying the same things echoed by other world leaders at the time, (Blair, Howard etc), then Id have to conclude they had a firm belife in what they were saying was true as they knew it.
The “ordinary people of the world had no special insight, they just got lucky in this case.
Oh, just to be clear, I meant “this case” as relating to Husseins possesion of WMD’s.
What are american troops fighting for?
Oil.
spotter | Homepage | 11.05.06 – 7:38 pm | #
I thought you said previously that we were fighting for Zionism or a Christian Empire or for the Bush Dynasty?
Fighting for resources is just and right. People have always fought for water, land, food and oil.
At least we are paying them top dollar for the oil we are stealing!
I think you have a personal problem masquerading as a political view….
“Are American troops in Iraq the real fascist? After all, everyone’s a volunteer.”
Does one party have to be a fascist now?
I’m sure you think you’re very clever, but you sound like a not very bright 12 year old to me. In my experience people like you don’t understand the term fascist anyway.
The “ordinary people of the world had no special insight, they just got lucky in this case.
harry | 11.05.06 – 7:49 pm | #
No insight necessary. The evidence from the weapons inspectors and the reporting of years of cruel sanctions in the press outside the US was overwhelming. Few people believed Blair or Howard even in their respective constituencies.
I don’t believe for a second that Howard or Blair believed their own rhetoric and nor do I believe that any US politician did either.
In both Australia and Britain there was roughly 80% opposition to the war yet democracy failed and narrow commercial interest won out over the wills of the people.
The neocons have nil respect for democracy.
“Are American troops in Iraq the real fascist? After all, everyone’s a volunteer.”
Does one party have to be a fascist now?
I’m sure you think you’re very clever, but you sound like a not very bright 12 year old to me. In my experience people like you don’t understand the term fascist anyway.
The “ordinary people of the world had no special insight, they just got lucky in this case.
harry | 11.05.06 – 7:49 pm | #
No insight necessary. The evidence from the weapons inspectors and the reporting of years of cruel sanctions in the press outside the US was overwhelming. Few people believed Blair or Howard even in their respective constituencies.
I don’t believe for a second that Howard or Blair believed their own rhetoric and nor do I believe that any US politician did either.
In both Australia and Britain there was roughly 80% opposition to the war yet democracy failed and narrow commercial interest won out over the wills of the people.
The neocons have nil respect for democracy.
Synova “becomes, “work hard, be smart, or else become president of the United States.” It was a stupid statement.”
Well maybe thye meant become ‘this ‘ president of the US, then it makes alot of sense, but then again…
Nahncee – Kery has used the joke b4, with its proper wordage, that was the point, that’s why ppl were sickened when Bush ran with it, but you know…you cant stop an oragutang from flinging shit.
Isahah – Where do you get your info that Iraq’s neighbors were poised to attack so the US got in there first?
That’s just more retrospective apologetic rationalization, kind of like WMDs. You mark my words sunshine, Turkey will invade the north soon, when it couldn;t have b4.
Spotter 7.38pm – Im afraid yours is the only staement that comes close to the realpolitik that the others think they are using to justify.
Critising Bush or this Administration does not make you a ‘bad’ conservative….If I were conservative I’d be more livid than I am now at them….
But I have to disagree with all on this point….Everyone, EVERYONE knew that there were no WMDs in Iraq…If you dont admit this to yourself well….you need to take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror.
I aslo forgot to add that the selective outrage I was referring to was your condemnation of current US policy in Iraq and the invasion as an ” illegal and immoral crime against humanity.” It would seem that to you, Islamic extremism isnt an actual threat and that while Hussein may have murdered millions within his own borders, invaded another country in a true illegal war of aggression for oil and supported terrorist activities elsewhere in the mid-east, that never quite rises to the level of “illegal and immoral crime” to you.
Why not?
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner…
“Spotter” is now inducted into the Vast Left Wing Antisemitism Conspiracy. Congrats, Spotter. You join a long list of distinguished horrors, not excluding the Late Great Josef Visaronivich Djugashivilii (aka Stalin).
You might want to take a leaf from the writings of said J. V. Stalin and denounce rootless cosmopolitans while you’re at it.
Go for it, pal. Your use of the word “zionist” gave you away, comrade. It always does…
Harry – A judge at Nuremberg said that the US war in Iraq is illegal and that Bush and Blair are liable for war crimes…
As for John Howard (Bush’s hamster)
he’s insignificant.
Saddam was punished for the Kuwait war. The UN was taking care of the Iraq population.
If Bush 43 had done a Bush 41 I would have supported it, but I knew in my gut it was wrong, so do you.
Wake up…
I aslo forgot to add that the selective outrage I was referring to was your condemnation of current US policy in Iraq and the invasion as an ” illegal and immoral crime against humanity.” It would seem that to you, Islamic extremism isnt an actual threat and that while Hussein may have murdered millions within his own borders, invaded another country in a true illegal war of aggression for oil and supported terrorist activities elsewhere in the mid-east, that never quite rises to the level of “illegal and immoral crime” to you.
Why not?
harry | 11.05.06 – 8:11 pm | #
Ah, look I’m not going to engage your strawmen. You know its a strawman, I know its a starwman, why bother if you have an argument that will stand up?
Thanks but no thanks.
As for Saddam supporting terrorism. Bull.
Good ole Charlie
I don’t know if youve ever heard of a ‘conservative’ guy called Adolph Shicklegruber, but he was a bit of a zionst himself….it’s all in his book…Mein Kampf….
Go for it, pal. Your use of the word “zionist” gave you away, comrade. It always does…
Good Ole Charlie | 11.05.06 – 8:16 pm | #
Ah, so it is now “antisemitic” to mention zionism now? Sounds suspiciously like paranoia to me. I not that you’ve not commented on the antisemitism sp prevalent in neo’s writings and the blatherings of most of the commentors here.
You’re pathetic.
Go for it, pal. Your use of the word “zionist” gave you away, comrade. It always does…
Good Ole Charlie | 11.05.06 – 8:16 pm | #
Ah, so it is now “antisemitic” to mention zionism now? Sounds suspiciously like paranoia to me. I not that you’ve not commented on the antisemitism sp prevalent in neo’s writings and the blatherings of most of the commentors here.
You’re pathetic.
Correction, Shicklegruber – believed in a zionist conspiracy –
“Isahah – Where do you get your info that Iraq’s neighbors were poised to attack so the US got in there first?”
You mean U.S. led International Coalition?
–and–
Iraq would have eventually imploded under sanctions. The absence of Saddam with international forces would have produced unmitigated violence. Would Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey just sat on the sidelines as refugees poured towards their borders? Isn’t it realistic to suppose that they would have stepped in?
Fighting for resources is just and right. People have always fought for water, land, food and oil.
Gray | 11.05.06 – 8:08 pm | #
If you say so. I suppose you have no problems with the mob and their just and right struggle.
Interesting view. Not surprising coming from a selfconfessed proponent of genocide I guess, but interesting nonetheless.
If and when the US is humbled economically and you are under threat, do you think you’ll have the same philosophy?
Nighty night all
🙂
.
If and when the US is humbled economically
Not gonna happen, although you obviously wish it would:
The US economy is the strongest it has been in years! No other country is close….
and you are under threat, do you think you’ll have the same philosophy?
We are ‘under threat’.
I do have the same philosophy because I like bacon.
I’ll fight for bacon; pork products; bikinis; oil; funny pictures of Mohammed; free speech; freedom of religion; the right to charge interest on a loan…
Y’know, all the things that are ‘haram’ under the vicious yoke of the Musselman.
Spotter, are you a Mohammedan or just a mullah-sniffing sympathizer?
What’s the root of your big beef with America?
Reasonable to put forward Isaiah, but not the most plausible scenario…in my opinion.
Aslo with regards to ‘Coalition,’ Blairs motives were very very complex…and honorable it will show. Despite what ‘Britishers’ think of Blair I think when you get to the bottom of it he is a decent man with decent principles, compromised as politicians are by the game they are in…ofcourse the overwhelming majority of politicians are…well..you know…
More Later
Goodnight.
If and when the US is humbled economically
Not gonna happen, although you obviously wish it would:
The US economy is the strongest it has been in years! No other country is close….
Well you just keep on drinking the kool aid gray. The US economy is a train wreck in the making.
The economy consists of more than stock market indices. In fact the high SMIs are a warning sign. Your $ is way overvalued and at risk.
But what would I know? You neocons have all the answers.
How are you going to pay off the biggest debt in human history when all you export these days is dollars?
And no I am not a muslim, I am an antitheist in fact. I just don’t beliieve that the US or Israel have any right to kill and mame and bully their way around the world.
To even talk of democracy with your current policies is sickening hypocrisy.
You are the biggest threat to the world. You represent an existential threat not only to the muslim world, but with the apocalyptic zealous mindset apparent in Washington and Tel Aviv, seemingly to the human species.
Wow, Spotter…. That was a good rant.
What the heck is an ‘antitheist’? Is that someone who believes there is a God but opposes him?
Why not just go ahead and be a Satanist? The chicks are hotter and better rituals :)….
So you’re just a mullah-sniffing sympathizer who hates America so badly that you hope the Musselman kills us.
Don’t you like bacon, or sausage? Or, y’know, religious freedom?
An antitheist is an atheist who is morally opposed to organised religion.
“So you’re just a mullah-sniffing sympathizer who hates America so badly that you hope the Musselman kills us.”
You are just a stinking contemptible redneck with an irrational fear syndrome and an unwarranted superiority complex.
Your economic (lack of) knowledge is proof of the latter.
You’re not Ted Haggard are you, Gray?
An antitheist is an atheist who is morally opposed to organised religion.
Man, that is funny!
Is this an organized opposition? How would an organized religion know they are being opposed?
Do you guys have meetings and stuff?
Do you keep a little score sheet on how many of the 10 Commandments you have broken? ‘Cuz, it would be your moral duty to break them….
Then why aren’t you in favor of Our Current War with the Mohammedans–‘cuz whomever wins; some organized religion loses!
Or do you not consider Islam an ‘organized religion’?
You are just a stinking contemptible redneck with an irrational fear syndrome
Hahaha! Yeah, why would I be afraid when people so obviously love stinking contemptible rednecks?
and an unwarranted superiority complex.
No. I earned this superiority complex fair and square! But really, what does my Scottish heritage have to do with this?
Your economic (lack of) knowledge is proof of the latter.
Economic growth at nominal levels with unemployment below what was previously considered the ‘frictional unemployment’ level.
It looks good by any measure notwithstanding how you feel about the economy. It doesn’t care how you feel–it just keeps chugging along making Americans rich….
Man, I’d sure like to get you on a waterboard and find out what you really believe.
No. I’m not Ted Haggard: I don’t have a penchant for ‘The Turkish Vice’.
Gray,
Are you Scot? That would explain a lot when reading your posts.
Gray,
Are you Scot? That would explain a lot when reading your posts.
The spooter insult generator: What a load of dribble … What a nonsense … bloodthirsty murderous savages … Another silly neocon fantasy … illegal and immoral crime against humanity … warmonger … puerile simplistic nonsense … nil respect for democracy … Bull … You’re pathetic … You are the biggest threat to the world … You are just a stinking contemptible redneck …
Interesting argumentative technique, no? And entirely representative of the contemporary left-lib.
As a favor to everyone, including the spootster himself, here’s a shorter spoot: You’re all stupid and really really bad, and I’m not, nyah nyah. Feel free to copy and paste, spooter — I know you’re not worried about repeating yourself, after all.
Are you saying I’m drunk?
Above was to Ariel….
LOL No, blunt, take no s*** nor prisoners. Suffer fools not at all.
When Gibson, was filming Braveheart, he asked one of the cast, a Highlander (no spotty, he’s not immortal), whether he wore something under that kilt, the Highlander’s reply “no, laddie, just your mother’s **** “. This from an extra, and no Gibson didn’t fire him.
I have an Angus in my family tree, as does my wife, unfortunately she inherited the Highlander backbone, I didn’t.
Yeah…. Great Grandaddy Gray and all my Okie relatives are Scottish; making me a redneck….
A stinking contemptible one!
I did some looking around on the “If America Knew” website that Spooter has listed as his homepage.
“If America Knew” is a website and organization run by some wierd old antisemitic bat named ‘Alison Wier’
She’s a David Duke wannabe and has some stuff published at National Vanguard–a white racial neo-nazi site.
The leftist/muslim/neo-nazi nexus is a fascinating one!
It’s bizarre!–in one breath the neo-nazis will denounce blacks and mexicans and in the next breath they will make common cause with the arabs ‘cuz they are killing jews.
The filthy leftists, at the same time, will embrace minorities and in the next breath will make common cause with the neo-nazis ‘cuz they support the arab minorities.
The amazing thing is watching a leftist who will make common cause with the neo-nazis denigrate rednecks and christians!
The only thing holding these groups together is antisemitism masquerading as ‘anti-zionism’.
Hey Spotter, are you just a filthy leftist or some kind of neo-nazi or white supremicist?
I can’t tell them apart anymore….
Gray, you just can’t accept that people don’t have to “belong” to some ism or organization can you? Not much of a free thinker. It shows. You’re a good German though.
As for your economy, you should listen to actual economists, not politicians. You are getting poorer, not richer. And, faster than ever before. Heard of the national debt?
Gosh Sally, that is just so clever, my sides are splitting. You righties are so pleasant and rational in your discourse, of course. Hahaha.
The only thing holding these groups together is antisemitism masquerading as ‘anti-zionism’.
Groups? I can see that you are in need of a group for your identity. I don’t need a crotch.
But I am curious as to how you would discern how anti-zionism disguises itself as antisemitism. That needs some explaining.
Let’s hear it.
The only thing holding these groups together is antisemitism masquerading as ‘anti-zionism’.
Groups? I can see that you are in need of a group for your identity. I don’t need a crotch.
But I am curious as to how you would discern how anti-zionism disguises itself as antisemitism. That needs some explaining.
Let’s hear it.
Gray, you just can’t accept that people don’t have to “belong” to some ism or organization can you?
Nope, you could certainly be a freelance jew hater, but I don’t think you are.
I think you are a neo-nazi shill.
Are you Canadian by chance? Strangely they have a lot of neo-nazi jew-haters up there.
Not much of a free thinker. It shows. You’re a good German though.
Hahaha! You’re just making up insults now!
(Nice one on the good German thing–might throw them off the neo-nazi trail–sneaky, sneaky, mein herr….)
But I am curious as to how you would discern how anti-zionism disguises itself as antisemitism.
No, the other way around….
Hahahahaha! Your freudian slip is showing!
Just admit it: I’ve pretty much outed you as a jew-hating neo-nazi here.
I’m good like that.
I know the kind, we had a troll earlier who went on how everyone else was a racist, he of course was only anti-zionist. When he throw a verse out on how jews could treat non-jewish women (essentially a twisted quote from the Qu’ran, not the Talmud ) I nearly spat my coffee all over my computer, I knew that quote from the Aryan Nation website.
However, I will agree that spotty doesn’t need a “crotch”. Clearly a Darwin Award recipient to be.
Anti-zionism disguising itself as antisemitism. I think it’s a full blown dress, not just a slip.
Spooty: I don’t need a crotch.
I think he/she/it could use a crotch, alright, but just doesn’t have one. I think it’s a program, not a being.
Spooty: I don’t need a crotch.
I think he/she/it could use a crotch, alright, but just doesn’t have one. I think it’s a program, not a being.
Oh gosh, you guys are just sooooo clever, speaking about me amongst yourselves in the 3rd person like that. I just feel soooooo inferior.
Ariel you are such a master. Neo is soooo lucky to have you.
But she is even luckier to have you, silly little boy.
Just admit it: I’ve pretty much outed you as a jew-hating neo-nazi here.
I’m good like that.
Gray | 11.06.06 – 1:15 am | #
This takes some nerve from someone who openly espouses genocide against semitic people.
What happens in your own mind is your business, but if you can’t see the difference between a state and a people ….????
The nazis were antisemitic and so are you. How do you reconcile that?
Ariel and Sally are both clearly antisemitic too, as is neo. Geez how do you people live wiyth yourselves.
No discussion about the national debt chaps? That is where I’d like to hear your “thoughts”. Hahahahahaha. Thoughts. Theres a hope.
Oh my Gord, I’m not sure my quotes archive has ever grown so quickly before. And for so many consecutive days! You guys need to keep talking.
Turnspeak on your part?
Where do you live Ariel? Trainspotting somewhere out near Futtbuck, Idaho, no doubt.
Spotty,
You do know what turnspeak is don’t you?
Your last two posts were clear examples of it.
Spotty,
So you don’t know what turnspeak means, do you?
Spotty,
Let’s see, you equate Germans with Nazi, you’re anti-semitic (by the way, Jews are related to assyrians, babylonians , and kurds, not Arabs, DNA tracking is amazing), you’re an ageist, and now you make gay-bashing remarks about Idahoans. Geez, my poor little child, you’ll be making sexist remarks about women next.
Is there no limit to your shame?
“Spotty” is just an insult generator, Ariel — it doesn’t “know” anything, it just cranks out random variations on the “you’re pathetic” theme, interspersed with some material from other comments. “Turnspeak” would be one of the easier algorithms to program.
Sally,
How have you been?
Yes, spotty may just be a bit of software on some server.
Spotter,
There was no strawman in my question to you earlier. Im just interested in what it is to you that constitutes moral illegality. I know you think we are the worst criminals lately, (hell, maybe of all time), but I am wondering who else is on your list. Did Hussein make your list at all?
You can understand why I would want to ask you a question like that, being it seems your the authority on moral illegality and who-is and who-aint. Would that not be a valid question to ask of you?
Gourney:
“Saddam was punished for the Kuwait war. The UN was taking care of the Iraq population.”
God thats funny!
Hussein lost essentially nothing in the deal with the exception he was not allowed to keep what he had stolen and a few army divisions to boot. He stayed in power, crushing an uprising in a manner that might to a few people may consider to be morally illegal. UN officials helped themselves to a sweet-heart oil deal that did nothing to help the Iraqi population. Another instance of what a handful of people might consider to be morally illegal. But your going to tell me none of this is true arent you?
Folks, do you understand that it is senseless waste of time to be involved in any discussion with anti-Semites? No decent person here, in Moscow, would make this mistake. We stop any talk with them as soon as we recognize them.
For me the very existence of such guys as Husseyn in power is enough causa belle. He was as dangerous to ME as Hitler was to Europe. You need not wait direct provocation to topple him. If WWII was launched in 1939, as Churchill wanted, instead of 1940, millions of lives could be saved.
An aside, to Ariel: I’ve been fine but busy — thanks for asking. How’ve you been?
Hi Ariel, so you’re scottish and armenian???? Dont tell, just keep dropping hints.
Sergey –
I was in hospital 6 months ago and shared a room with an old Latvian man. He seemed nice, very nice but he talked too much but that was ok. The day I left his wife came and he was saying to me…
“Ok goodbye you are nice people (he said plural) you are good Christian people, not like Jews I hate Jews…” he continued, I felt sick and betrayed. I left feeling that he had betrayed my humanity that I had invested in him. I didn;t want to talk to him again or even look at him, I felt disgusted too.
However many many ppl from central northern europe are like this many many.
This “central northern Europe” is located between Poland and Russia, and during last 400 years was under the rule of one or another. In both these countries anti-Semitism was rampant, and often used by governments as a safety valve to channel popular resentment. Almost half of Nazi death camp’s security guards and zondercommandes was recruted from these regions. So no wonder to meet Latvian or Lithuanian anti-Semite; just as Arabs, they were most enthusiastic Nazi helpers.
Spotter said, “I don’t need a crotch.”
We’ll isn’t that interesting — lol
spotter looks to be our old friend conned.
Gourney,
The Armenian is an aunt from my childhood, who was close for a time and told me many things. Scot is part of my mother’s side, a side that could never make up its mind so there is English, French, possibly Irish, and certainly Amerinid as well. The family has been here since circa 1690.
Sergey,
According to spotty, we are all anti-semites.
Sergey,
Do you read French? There’s a very interesting piece in today’s Le Figaro on how the Russia and the West eternally misunderstand one another. I’d be very interested in your opinion of it. (Since we’re friends here, I have to admit to a sneaking admiration for your sardonic President Putin)
http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/20061104.FIG000000606_c_est_avant_tout_sur_leur_vision_du_monde_que_russes_et_occidentaux_s_opposent.html
Sergey, as usual, posting words of wisdom:
Folks, do you understand that it is senseless waste of time to be involved in any discussion with anti-Semites?
You just have to ‘out’ them first.
Anti-semitism is a strange one–more of a mental condition than a political view….
Somebody got a problem with trainspotting?
(Sorry – just thought I’d start yet another pointless argument on a completely unrelated subject.)
The generational problem, in my opinion, goes back to that 1960s-1970s left. they associated anti war or anti-US policy positions with helping socialist causes, ones which they might have disagreed with on some level but where they thought they had good ideas in Marxism, Engles, Commnism, etc. However, the Radical Islamic dogma is a complete opposite of the stuff that people on the “pink left” might have liked about Communism. Instead of equality for women, repression. Instead of emphasis on the arts, repression and even outright bans in some areas. Instead of extreme state separation from religion in official stuff, there would be a state religion and all other faiths (or lack of) subjugated. Also, for the talk of equality under Islam, that is certainly not the case in Sudan, where the black population is being systematically wiped out by more north African elements. Seriosuly, I wonder sometimes how some on the far left are not the first in line to oppose folks like AlQuaeda, Al Quaeda in Iraq, the Taliban, the government in Iran, etc.
To armchair pessimist:
No, I barely can read French. All I was able to understand from this, is de Custen quote in which he compared Russians with Arabs, calling the former “Arabs blondes”. This is complete BS, because Arabs always were nomads and herd shepherds, and Russians – settled farmers. Also, climat and landscape are as different, as they could be: very hot desert in Arabia and very cold, forested land in Russia. Arabs are notorious for laziness, which is natural in their habitat; but simply to survive in sub-arctic, you need to be very industrious. So I can see no rationale for this comparison. Abovementioned differences always were seen by ethnologists as the most fundamental.
“Anti-semitism is a strange one–more of a mental condition than a political view….”
Exactly. There is even medical description of this condition – paranoidal aggressive xenophobia stemmed from inferiority complex. Epidemic amongst bad losers.
There was a very non-PC epigram about one Russian poet. In my translation:
Poet is humpback, and his verse – the same. Who are to blame? Jews are to blame!
Sergy:
“Folks, do you understand that it is senseless waste of time to be involved in any discussion with anti-Semites?”
Well Sergy, I understand where your coming from, but claims of anti-Semitism have been denied by our left-wing guests.
Im still wondering if I can get an objective opinion as to who else besides the evil “proto-fascist” Bush administration might qualify as “immoral & illegal”. Im mean, to me, a guy who ethnically cleanses his own population would win that title over a guy who invaded that sovereign nation and put an end to that form of government. But I might just be off my rocker. I dont know.
Just curious.
Our Spotty repeated lies from Vanity Fair about Ledeen and other conservatives who, as was falsely stated, retracted their support for Iraq war. See this:
“Even neonut extraordinaire Ledeen is claiming he opposed the war now, despite the overwhelming evidence of all the ‘articles’ he wrote calling for it.”
and this:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com
Vanity Unfair: A Response To A Misleading Press Release
National Review Online has a symposium of people quoted in a press release by Vanity Fair that purported to show neoconservative abandonment of the Iraq war. VF had agreed not to release the artice before the midterm elections, but in a bit of dishonesty, repackaged quotes out of context in order to build interest in the article. Now, the sources of those mangled quotes strike back at VF.
David Frum:
There has been a lot of talk this season about deceptive campaign ads, but the most dishonest document I have seen is this press release from Vanity Fair, highlighted on the Drudge Report . Headlined “Now They Tell Us,” it purports to offer an “exclusive” access to “remorseful” former supporters of the Iraq war who will now “play the blame game” with “shocking frankness.” … My most fundamental views on the war in Iraq remain as they were in 2003: The war was right, victory is essential, and defeat would be calamitous.
And that to my knowledge is the view of everybody quoted in the release and the piece: Adelman, Cohen, Ledeen, Perle, Pletka, Rubin, and all the others.
Michael Ledeen (a very good friend of CQ):
So it is totally misleading for Vanity Fair to suggest that I have had second thoughts about our Iraq policy. But then one shouldn’t be surprised. No one ever bothered to check any of the lies in the first screed, and obviously no fact-checker was involved in the latest “promotion.” I actually wrote to David Rose, the author of the article-to-come, a person for whom I have considerable respect. He confirmed that words attributed to me in the promo had been taken out of context.
Richard Perle:
Vanity Fair has rushed to publish a few sound bites from a lengthy discussion with David Rose. Concerned that anything I might say could be used to influence the public debate on Iraq just prior to Tuesday’s election, I had been promised that my remarks would not be published before the election.
I should have known better than to trust the editors at Vanity Fair who lied to me and to others who spoke with Mr. Rose. Moreover, in condensing and characterizing my views for their own partisan political purposes, they have distorted my opinion about the situation in Iraq and what I believe to be in the best interest of our country.
I believe it would be a catastrophic mistake to leave Iraq, as some are demanding, before the Iraqis are able to defend their elected government. As I told Mr. Rose, the terrorist threat to our country, which is real, would be made much worse if we were to make an ignominious withdrawal from Iraq.
Michael Rubin:
Vanity Fair’s agenda was a pre-election hit job, and I guess some of us quoted are at fault for believing too much in integrity. What the article seeks to do is push square pegs into round holes. Readers will see that the content of the piece does not match the sensational headlines. …
I absolute
sergey: could you provide a link to the article about how Vanity Fair misquoted its sources? I haven’t been able to find one. Thanks!
Tha article:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzgxYzUzYmRlNjhmNzMyNjI2MDM4YmRjNTFhODA4MGQ=
So Vanity Fair lied and the truth died. Wonderful.
I recommend an article called ” The Jacksonian Tradition.” http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_1999_Winter/ai_58381618
It outlines different schools of thought within the US – from attitudes towards military service to religion to international relations. Sample summary: Jacksonians tend to view military service as noble and part of a code of honor in how to behave. In the waging of war – Jacksonians believe in humane treatment of prisoners for enemies who follow the “code” (of proscribed behavior) for those who are seen as not following the code – no rules apply to how to wage war against them – with examples of the Indian Campaigns (i.e. the American West), fire bombing Tokoyo to Jacksonian attitudes in dealing with terrorists.
It is a fascinating take on identifiable segments of American society – written in 1999.
“I don’t need a crotch.”
Must be tough to go to the head, then.
I’m reminded that the UK word for zits is “spots”…seems like our troll is probably of the age to still possess them. My G*d, what a load of drivel he’s spewed!
Sergey, I’m so glad you’ve chosen to visit Neo’s blog—your comments are always well worth reading.
“Let’s see, you equate Germans with Nazi, you’re anti-semitic (by the way, Jews are related to assyrians, babylonians , and kurds, not Arabs, DNA tracking is amazing),”Arielsometime.
You’re a bit behind the times, you silly old fool. Jews, Bedouins, Saudis all identical according to the latest American research. Look it up you moron.
Nice try, maybe Megaphone can help you out here.
I do not feel “remorseful,” since I had and have no involvement with our Iraq policy. I opposed the military invasion of Iraq before it took place and I advocated—as I still do—support for political revolution in Iran as the logical and necessary first step in the war against the terror masters.
Michael Ledeen in NRO. Hahahahahaha.
Whew. 138 comments. You certainly struck a nerve. Here’a how I see the generation gap: Grandfather served in WWII or Korea (maybe both) and knew that there are times when you either fight or give up the idea of the country. Father grows up, goes to Berkeley, learns that America is the Root of All Evil, that war is never the A.N.S.W.E.R., marches in the streets, goes to Canada during the draft. Son somehow manages to see that there are some things worth fighting for, joins the military. Father can’t see past the end of his protest signs.
Son ends up making a double sacrifice: serving his country and losing his family. It would be easy enough to say that such a parent is but little loss, but it can’t be easy for the son.
From one of Sergey’s posts:
“Well, why couldn’t he have said that?” muttered one of the old coots. Why indeed?”
Because the Senator does not speak to such persons.
Spooter,
Did. Moron. You have to understand it. There you are shortchanged.
Ariel, everyone needs a punching bag, and on the internet, you don’t even need to wear gloves.
Hoekstra blames Bush for putting nuclear secrets in arabic on the internet. Hahahahahahahahaha. Rethuglican’ts falling to pieces.
Can Diebold save you?
Shill be right, Ariel, I’ll listen to real experts in the field, not the pretend ones.
But, personally, I prefer a real punching bag, not a virtual one. It is not the same, really. As aggressive as you may or may not think I am, the aggression of the people you deal with here is both wild, uncontrolled, and self-destructive. Beware it does not do you ill will.
Said it before, will repeat: This bullshit won’t end until all the Boomers – liberal and conservative – are dead, buried, and forgotten.
Except neo, of course. She gets a pass cos I said so.
Bugs – ‘the bullshit wont end …etc.’
Now that is naive.
Im still wondering if I can get an objective opinion as to who else besides the evil “proto-fascist” Bush administration might qualify as “immoral & illegal”. Im mean, to me, a guy who ethnically cleanses his own population would win that title over a guy who invaded that sovereign nation and put an end to that form of government. But I might just be off my rocker. I dont know.
Just curious.
harry | 11.06.06 – 1:38 pm | #
Oh gee, could it be both?
Are you 12? You claim this isn’t a strawman but you keep repeating the false positive? Grow up.
Spotter – You are underestimating Diebold?
The good thing about Bush being a proto-fascist is that justaguy and spotter wouldn’t be walking around and breathing at the same time. Too bad bush isn’t a fascist of any kind or form. At least he’d be decisive then and get rid of some people.
You’re of draft age aren’t you Y? Hope the jihadis get you.
“Are you 12? You claim this isn’t a strawman but you keep repeating the false positive? Grow up.”
What “false positive” are you referring to? Im not seeing it.
Those who have no sense of history are doomed to remain ignorent slaves to their current environs. Instead of taking a close look at the cause and effect of world events and taking into consideration the law of unintended consequences, they rely upon bumper sticker slogans and the measured drivel produced by the MSM.
Pink emotions replace grey logic and the rhetoric descends into childish profanity, name calling and finger pointing. The paranoid personality blames everyone else for their own singular dysfunction.
The rants we’ve seen on this page aptly demonstrate the divide between posters with honest questions and discussions and those who’se sole contribution is to try and throw sand into the machinery in a childish display of anti-authoritarian bravado. Sound and fury, signifying nothing. Deserving nothing.
Life must be joyless and bitter for humorless folks such as these. No wonder their rants are filled with such bile. I bite my thumb. -cp
WRT the generational or intergenerational issue:
I did the civil rights thing in 67 and 68. That was several years after the famous Freedom Summer and after anybody got killed doing it–which is nice to know now although we weren’t all that sure then.
The Civil Rights movement and its participants got enormous, unprecedented moral credibility, much of which they promoted themselves. Unlike the Greatest Generation, or the current soldiers, they/we never said, “Just doing my job.”
IMO, the civil rights community fit reasonably well into the antiwar movement, although there were actually very few genuine civil rights activists, other than those who taught themselves to chord “We Shall Overcome” on a cheap fourstring and thought themselves very fine folk.
The antiwar movement got all the civil rights movement’s credit, although they deserved very little, if at all.
Point is, there are very many people ranging from fifty, say, to maybe sixty-five whose formative years were taken up with the self-absorption of being one of the Anointed (see Vision of The Anointed).
It’s hard to overcome the Big Idea of your late adolescence, and being antiwar in the sense that the US is always wrong and leftist murderers always right was the Big Idea of the time.
Very many of those folks are not antiwar as a policy today. They are antiwar as a permanent part of their personality. Which, IMO, is why they are so irrational. And why they lie. Reality is not important, except as a serious inconvenience. They remain convinced in their heart of hearts that they remain the virtuous, embattled minority, and to think otherwise based on crap like facts is simply impossible for them to contemplate.
And to have a son who differs….
Justaguy.
I was there, chin-deep in the whole thing.
I lived the facts.