3
   

New roll-out (propaganda campaign) for war with Iran?

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2007 05:11 pm
I bet he wished he had done.

I know which I would have chosen as my fate.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2007 05:15 pm
au-

I have read Mr Galbraith's book on the very subject of the Crash. Twice.

I might try it again now you have reminded me. It might be even funnier now.

I enjoy a good laugh and Mr Galbraith was very droll I must say.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2007 05:19 pm
I refer to him as "JK" in conversation. The thought that nobody knows who I mean would send me looking for new friends.

He's not as funny as Veblen though.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2007 06:38 pm
spendius wrote:
Ghandi eh?

Quote:
Gandhi was criticized by some Congress party members and other Indian political groups, both pro-British and anti-British. Some felt that opposing Britain in its life or death struggle was immoral, and others felt that Gandhi wasn't doing enough. Quit India became the most forceful movement in the history of the struggle, with mass arrests and violence on an unprecedented scale.[13] Thousands of freedom fighters were killed or injured by police gunfire, and hundreds of thousands were arrested. Gandhi and his supporters made it clear they would not support the war effort unless India were granted immediate independence.


So he helped Hitler, he caused "violence on an unprecedented scale" and the above means he would have supported the war had he got what he wanted.

He used "non-violence" as a "weapon".

He "helped Hitler"? The Quit India Resolution says nothing about Hitler. Your use of a questionable entry in Wiki doesn't provide much support for he "helped Hitler" You might want to at least read the Quit India Resolution.

However you required the name of someone that would not respond by getting his teeth all bared. Non-violence is NOT violence by the very nature of the word. You have presented no evidence of Ghandi getting his teeth all bared.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 6 Sep, 2007 06:56 pm
spendi has a very creative mind - and language.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 06:19 am
Well- parados can be a Ghandi fan all he wants. It's a free country. I'm not a Ghandi fan. Nor a Mandela fan. And I'll bet that when the Dalai Lama ruled Tibet there were squalid dungeons and other stuff.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 07:36 am
cicerone imposter
Guru in Training



Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 45773
Location: Silicon Valley in California
Posted: September 6th 2007, 21:56 Post: 2842003 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
spendi has a very creative mind - and language.

_________________
SF gathering was a huge success! Thanks to all the particpants.



spendius
Veteran Member



Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 24752

Posted: September 7th 2007, 09:19 Post: 2842343 -

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well- parados can be a Ghandi fan all he wants. It's a free country. I'm not a Ghandi fan. Nor a Mandela fan. And I'll bet that when the Dalai Lama ruled Tibet there were squalid dungeons and other stuff.


I rest my case. LOL
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 09:14 am
Do you mean that you've proved that I have "a very creative mind-- and language."

You needn't have bothered c.i. Everybody alkready knows. It just takes you longer than most to get up to speed.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 09:31 am
True dat.
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 09:54 am
Spendius
You are the most bushlike poster on this site. That is to say you are without a clue.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 10:28 am
Well clue me in.

One is supposed to give aid to the afflicted in a Christian culture.

I wouldn't assert that you hadn't a clue for that very reason. It would involve me in responsibilities to my fellow man.

What exactly do I not have a clue about. It can't be everything can it? I know that gold spot was $704.50 about half an hour ago and I invested in the lovely stuff at $320. So it can't be that.

Could you narrow it down and then we might be able to examine this assertion of yours and try to discover its origins in the region of apron strings and check out its validity without which, of course, it must logically be bullshit type material and possibly still warm and uncongealed.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 11:06 am
If you invested in Gold at $320, then you obviously don't have a clue since you haven't accounted for the change in currency rate since you purchased the gold using dollars.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 11:35 am
Now, here's a book review you all want not to miss... from the AEI site:
Quote:
The Iranian Time Bomb

Start: Monday, September 10, 2007 2:00 PM

End: Monday, September 10, 2007 3:30 PM

Location: Wohlstetter Conference Center, Twelfth Floor, AEI
1150 Seventeenth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036
Directions to AEI

Iran has now taken its rightful place at the center of our debate on the war. Hardly a day goes by without new revelations about Iran's penetration of Iraq either by supplying weapons, money, guidance, and intelligence to both Sunni and Shiite terrorists, or, in some cases, sending soldiers from the Quds Force--an elite unit within Iran's Revolutionary Guard--to confront American and Iraqi forces. And in the background we hear the leitmotif of the Iranian nuclear program, which continues apace despite international sanctions and negotiations.

An intensified debate has resulted: Is our current strategy adequate? Should we be more vigorous in confronting the Islamic Republic or should we--as under secretary of state for political affairs R. Nicholas Burns has recently argued--continue to use diplomacy as the primary component of our Iran policy? If we decide to take more active measures, what should they be?

In his latest book, The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots' Quest for Destruction
(St. Martin's Press, September 2007), AEI Freedom Scholar Michael A. Ledeen reviews the history of Iran's long-standing war against the West and discusses American policy toward Iran from the fall of the shah to the present. He analyzes the Iranian regime's treatment of its own citizens, presents a detailed assessment of the mullahs' vision of the future, and proposes an effective strategy for thwarting their global ambitions.

Former CIA director R. James Woolsey and General Jack Keane, U.S. Army (retired), will join Michael A. Ledeen in discussing these and other questions upon which so much of America's future depends.

1:45 p.m. Registration

2:00 Speakers: General Jack Keane, U.S. Army (retired)
Michael A. Ledeen, AEI
R. James Woolsey, former CIA director

3:30 Adjournment


So, a celebration and discussion of Ledeen's new book. Some other earlier words from Ledeen...
Quote:


Note how all but the last of these could have come easily from the mouths of Zahawiri or any other insane muslim extremist.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 11:38 am
ps...sorry...those quotes from wikipedia
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 02:18 pm
Bernie-

I think all the quotes you present from Mr Ledeen express at least approximations to the truth.

If they render the liberal conscience into the tremblies and challenge the self-reassuring view it has of itself as "sweet pretty things" which ought to be in bed at this time of night it has nothing to do with Zahawiri or anything else. Cricket is like that which is why umpires are necessary. The UN is, as yet, an ineffective umpire.

What's your problem with them? Darwinian evolution theory would entirely agree with the first five. And you're a Darwinian I think. Clausewitz would have agreed I think.

Somebody earlier spoke about getting the troops "out of harm's way". Well that's what troops are for isn't it? They are professional people who have volunteered to put themselves in harm's way. The Draft would be a different matter. If you got to the point, as we have, where more truck drivers are killed than military personnel you would make the brass band parades look silly.

One thing I did notice recently is Gen Petreus had a medal display on his chest which reminded me of the displays on Soviet general's chests and look what happened to them.

The guy is telling the truth. Yoy just want to be a nice guy whilst blissfully taking advantage of the spoils of war. And you are free to do that of course. But not to join an intellectual debate about the matter coming from the goody-goody two-shoes side and smearing patriots with cheap jibes and asserted insults.

By calling them insane you axiomatically grant them permission to say you are unless you claim the right to insult people as a monopoly of your side.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 02:39 pm
spendius wrote:


The guy is telling the truth. Yoy just want to be a nice guy whilst blissfully taking advantage of the spoils of war. And you are free to do that of course. But not to join an intellectual debate about the matter coming from the goody-goody two-shoes side and smearing patriots with cheap jibes and asserted insults.


Spendius thinks that supporting the pillars of Ledeen makes one a great patriot. I guess a man permenantly forcing himself on a woman makes him also more of a man.

Fortunately, this is the view of a very small segment of the American population....one that will in a short time stand in proud company with the flat earth society.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 03:23 pm
I don't support anything in that way. It doesn't matter a damn what I think.

Disagreeing with those things Bernie put up is like disagreeing with the clouds or the waves. We would all like them not to be true I suppose and allow the military to become as Phil Silvers portrayed it. I don't think you lefties have a monopoly on such ideas. In fact it is a respectable view that it is you who are holding up progress towards it.

You self evidently haven't bothered reading Dr Greer's analysis of the relations between bourgeoise man and his lady from which grew feminism. Bit of a challege is that.

Why do you lefties always get the cheap smear out when you have nothing else to fall back on?

You really do need to give Spengler a go.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 03:26 pm
spendius wrote:
I don't support anything in that way. It doesn't matter a damn what I think.

Disagreeing with those things Bernie put up is like disagreeing with the clouds or the waves. We would all like them not to be true I suppose and allow the military to become as Phil Silvers portrayed it. I don't think you lefties have a monopoly on such ideas. In fact it is a respectable view that it is you who are holding up progress towards it.

You self evidently haven't bothered reading Dr Greer's analysis of the relations between bourgeoise man and his lady from which grew feminism. Bit of a challege is that.

Why do you lefties always get the cheap smear out when you have nothing else to fall back on?

You really do need to give Spengler a go.


Sorry, but this -

Quote:

-"Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business"


Is not akin to the 'clouds and waves.' It is not axiomatic. It's a horrible opinion, and if you agree with it, you are agreeing with a horrible opinion.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 05:26 pm
I took particular care to exclude No 6 as you will see if you take the trouble to read my post. Not that I expect you to but if you do you will see that is the case.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Sep, 2007 05:27 pm
I had missed that and apologize for the error.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/10/2025 at 03:23:25