Ionus
 
  -2  
Tue 17 May, 2011 04:17 pm
@JTT,
So you approve of Iraq's invasion, you overweight unadulterated hippy you.....

Like I said, you like war crimes . Your meaningless existence would be vapid without hating something...fortunately you have found the USA to hate...otherwise you might have to criticise real war criminals .

Quote:
I know that those who you have cited here have made no claims to be countries or even people that follow the rule of law.
Kuwait isnt a country that was attacked ? The USA wasnt a country that was attacked ? These terrorists, did they come from Mars in a new fangled space ship or did they come from a country here on earth ? Apart from you, who protects them ?

Would you really prefer Saddly Insane or Garbage bin Laden were running the world ? Why dont you live with the Taliban ? I am sure they need cheap nasty sex like you could provide .
JTT
 
  1  
Tue 17 May, 2011 04:29 pm
@Ionus,
Quote:
You are not at all concerned with what state sponsored terrorism has done to the west.


What state sponsored terrorism?
Ionus
 
  -3  
Tue 17 May, 2011 04:45 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
What state sponsored terrorism?
Never heard of Al Quada in Afghanistan ? The PLO in Lebanon ? Hamas in Syria ? And who can forget Libya and Lockerbie.....of course you dont know about these...you have a selective memory....oh and what about your little darlings the North Vietnamese ? They never did any harm in the South, their guns shot rose water...
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Tue 17 May, 2011 04:59 pm
@Ionus,
Quote:
So you approve of Iraq's invasion,


You have the brain of a gnat. The only difference between you and a gnat is that the latter has better reading comprehension. I neither said I approved or disapproved of it.

So you approve of the UK carving out what historically was a piece of Iraq, the US/UK cabal setting up a dictatorship, which "brutally suppressed the country's small democracy movement, intimidated and censored journalists, and hired desperate foreigners to supply most of the nation's physical labor under conditions of indentured servitude and near-slavery".

Talk of hypocrisy! You know so damn little of so so much. Your ignorance is astounding.

So you approve of the US backstabbing its good friend and ally, Saddam Hussein. That's part of that honor thing that your pappy taught you, right?

As that great war criminal H Kissinger says, the only thing more dangerous than being America's enemy is being her ally.

Ionus
 
  -3  
Tue 17 May, 2011 05:03 pm
@JTT,
Quote:
So you approve of the UK carving out what historically was a piece of Iraq, the US/UK cabal setting up a dictatorship
You make a good point....Saddly Insane wasnt responsible for the deaths he caused....it was the Romans for abandoning the province to the Arab conquests ....

Quote:
I neither said I approved or disapproved of it.
I suppose you will neither confirm or deny that you are truly compulsive/obsessive with delusional tendencies .
JTT
 
  -1  
Tue 17 May, 2011 05:38 pm
@Ionus,
So you approve of the UK carving out what historically was a piece of Iraq, the US/UK cabal setting up a dictatorship which "brutally suppressed the country's small democracy movement, intimidated and censored journalists, and hired desperate foreigners to supply most of the nation's physical labor under conditions of indentured servitude and near-slavery", do you?

So you approve of the US backstabbing its good friend and ally, Saddam Hussein, do you?
Ionus
 
  -3  
Wed 18 May, 2011 12:36 am
@JTT,
So you approve of the Romans burning Carthage do you ? You are one sick war criminal .
JTT
 
  3  
Wed 18 May, 2011 08:03 am
@Ionus,
Perfectly illustrative of your dumb gruntness.
Ionus
 
  -2  
Wed 18 May, 2011 05:48 pm
@JTT,
Worked out where Khmer is ? Who Pol Pot was ? Hint : he is not an USA president but it is in asia...
JTT
 
  -1  
Wed 18 May, 2011 06:14 pm
@Ionus,
Quote:
Worked out where Khmer is ? Who Pol Pot was ?


Yup, I have. Anymore questions?

Quote:
The Long Secret Alliance:
Uncle Sam and Pol Pot

by John Pilger

Covert Action Quarterly Fall 1997

...

In 1980, under US pressure, the World Food Program handed over food worth $12 million to the Thai army to pass on to the Khmer Rouge. According to former Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke "20,000 to 40 000 Pol Pot guerrillas benefited." This aid helped restore the Khmer Rouge to a fighting force, based in Thailand, from which it de stabilized Cambodia for more than a decade.

Although ostensibly a State Department operation, KEG's principals were intelligence officers with long experience in Indochina. In the early 1980s it was run by Michael Eiland, whose career underscored the continuity of American intervention in Indochina. In 1969-70, he was operations officer of a clandestine Special Forces group code-named "Daniel Boone," which was responsible for the reconnaissance of the US bombing of Cambodia. By 1980, Col. Eiland was running KEG out of the US embassy in Bangkok, where it was de scribed as a "humanitarian" organization. Responsible for interpreting satellite surveillance photos of Cambodia, Eiland became a valued source for some of Bangkok's resident Western press corps, who referred to him in their reports as a "Western analyst." Eiland's "humanitarian" duties led to his appointment as Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) chief in charge of the South east Asia Region, one of the most important positions in US espionage.

In November 1980, the just elected Reagan administration and the Khmer Rouge made direct contact when Dr. Ray Cline, a former deputy director of the CIA, secretly visited a Khmer Rouge operational headquarters inside Cambodia. Cline was then a foreign policy adviser on President-elect Reagan's transitional team. Within a year, according to Washington sources, 50 CIA agents were running Washington's Cambodia operation from Thailand. The dividing line between the international relief operation and the US war became more and more confused. For example, a Defense Intelligence Agency colonel was appointed "security liaison officer" between the United Nations Border Relief Operation (UNBRO) and the Displaced Persons Protection Unit (DPPU). In Washington, sources revealed him as a link between the US government and the Khmer Rouge.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/UncleSam_PolPot.html

Ionus
 
  -3  
Wed 18 May, 2011 06:25 pm
@JTT,
I know you are not responsible for your actions, but was Pol Pot ? In your hatred for the USA, do you even begin to think you are letting real war criminals off the hook ? We cant blame your friends in North Korea or Hamas, can we ? Terrorists and war criminals are not guilty because somehow you can find a link to the USA . Never mind a bigger link to other countries, they dont fit your agenda .

Give my regards to that whore Fonda and that idiot Alda .
JTT
 
  0  
Wed 18 May, 2011 06:48 pm
@Ionus,
Your focus is terrible, Ionus. The facts are right in front of you, as they have been for months on end and all you want to do is make excuses for the most horrific war crimes, instances of mass murder, torture, rape, ... .

Quote:

The Imperial Mythology of World War II

An Ethical Blank Check

By RICHARD DRAYTON

...

Five years ago, Robert Lilly, a distinguished American sociologist, prepared a book based on military archives. Taken by Force is a study of the rapes committed by American soldiers in Europe between 1942 and 1945. He submitted his manuscript in 2001. But after September 11, its US publisher suppressed it, and it first appeared in 2003 in a French translation.

We know from Anthony Beevor about the sexual violence unleashed by the Red Army, but we prefer not to know about mass rape committed by American and British troops. Lilly suggests a minimum of 10,000 American rapes. Contemporaries described a much wider scale of unpunished sex crime. Time Magazine reported in September 1945:

"Our own army and the British army along with ours have done their share of looting and raping ... we too are considered an army of rapists."

The British and American publics [not to mention the Australian one] share a sunny view of the second world war. The evil of Auschwitz and Dachau, turned inside out, clothes the conflict in a shiny virtue. Movies, popular histories and political speeches frame the war as a symbol of Anglo-American courage, with the Red Army's central role forgotten. This was, we believe, "a war for democracy". Americans believe that they fought the war to rescue the world. For apologists of the British Empire, such as Niall Ferguson, the war was an ethical bath where the sins of centuries of conquest, slavery and exploitation were expiated. We are marked forever as "the good guys"and can all happily chant "Two world wars and one world cup."

http://www.counterpunch.org/drayton05102005.html

reasoning logic
 
  1  
Wed 18 May, 2011 07:46 pm
@Ionus,
Ionus wrote:

So you approve of the Romans burning Carthage do you ? You are one sick war criminal .
What is it that made you bring this up? Thanks
Ionus
 
  -1  
Thu 19 May, 2011 01:37 am
@JTT,
You cite every ratbag with an similar agenda to you . You tell us the war criminals are not responsible because in your psychotic mind all war crimes everywhere since the dawn of time can be traced back to the USA .

Quote:
all you want to do is make excuses for the most horrific war crimes
You know nothing of war crimes . You never mention Bosnia, Chechnya, Khmer, Vietnam or Korea . All you rant about is how much you don't like the USA . Well get over it . Who cares what you like ? Now prove I am a war criminal like you said I was or admit you are one fucked up looney .
Ionus
 
  -1  
Thu 19 May, 2011 01:39 am
@reasoning logic,
JoinTalibanTerrorism does not recognise any war crimes that can not be attributed to the USA indirectly . I wanted to see how the USA was responsible for the Romans burning Carthage . To the psychotic mind everything is possible, even blame where there is none .
JTT
 
  -2  
Thu 19 May, 2011 01:47 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
Khmer, Vietnam or Korea


You're lying again, son. If you'll recall I just brought you up to speed on Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.

Quote:
In 1982, the US and China, supported by Singapore, invented the Coalition of the Democratic Government of Kampuchea, which was, as Ben Kiernan pointed out, neither a coalition, nor democratic, nor a government, nor in Kampuchea. Rather, it was what the CIA calls "a master illusion." Cambodia's former ruler, Prince Norodom Sihanouk, was appointed its head; otherwise little changed. The Khmer Rouge dominated the two "non-communist" members, the Sihanoukists and the Khmer People's National Liberation Front (KPNLF). From his office at the UN, Pol Pot's ambassador, the urbane Thaoun Prasith, continued to speak for Cambodia. A close associate of Pol Pot, he had in 1975 called on Khmer expatriates to return home, whereupon many of them "disappeared."


...

Even the World Health Organization refused to aid the country. At home, the US denied religious groups export licenses for books and toys for orphans. A law dating from the First World War, the Trading with the Enemy Act, was applied to Cambodia and, of course, Vietnam. Not even Cuba and the Soviet Union faced such a complete ban with no humanitarian or cultural exceptions.

The Singapore connection allowed the Bush administration to continue its secret aid to the "resistance," even though this assistance broke a law passed by Congress in 1989 banning even indirect "lethal aid" to Pol Pot. In August 1990, a former member of the US Special Forces disclosed that he had been ordered to destroy records that showed US munitions in Thailand going to the Khmer Rouge. The records, he said, implicated the National Security Council, the president's foreign policy advisory body.




JTT
 
  0  
Thu 19 May, 2011 02:03 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
I wanted to see how the USA was responsible for the Romans burning Carthage .


I doubt that RL actually expected that you would reply to this one. But you just seem completely unable to resist making a fool out of yourself.

Considering the fabulous research that we've seen from you to date, I think that we'll leave this one to you.
Ionus
 
  -1  
Thu 19 May, 2011 02:09 am
@JTT,
You bringing me up to speed...thats a laugh . Are you even remotely aware of what was done in those countries or is everything the fault of the USA ? Why did you leave out Chechnya and Bosnia ? Why is it the North Vietnamese never committed any war crimes ? It is because you are only pretending to be against war crimes . Youy are against the Great Satan arent you ? Do you work on the propaganda staff at an embassy somewhere ? Is it your job to do the rounds of the internet with anti-USA sentiment ?

Perhaps you are just another psychotic with a computer .
Ionus
 
  -1  
Thu 19 May, 2011 02:12 am
@JTT,
Quote:
I doubt
Do you really think your opinion is important to me ?

Do you think saying over and over and over how you hate the Great Satan is NOT making a fool of yourself ?

Quote:
Considering the fabulous research that we've seen from you to date
Yeah, about that...you finding other psychotic hippies who agree with you is not fabulous research....just pass the bong along, hippy...you've been hogging it .
JTT
 
  -2  
Thu 19 May, 2011 02:36 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
Why did you leave out ... Bosnia ?


Quote:

Bill Clinton's War (in Yugoslavia)

...

But instead of trying a myriad of peaceful options, Clinton, Albright, and NATO reached for the old, unreliable one: Send in the bombers. They didn't bother themselves with international law. They flouted it. International law clearly states that one country can attack another one only when it is itself under attack, about to be attacked, or when the U.N. Security Council grants permission. Belgrade was not attacking the United States or any of the NATO countries involved in the bombings. And the United States intentionally avoided the Security Council because Russia and China were likely to veto any military action.

Nor, for that matter, was the bombing in accordance with U.S. Iaw: Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the sole power to declare war, and there was no formal declaration of war in this case. Congress shirked its responsibilities by approving a measure that fell short of a war declaration but supported the President's decision to send in the bombers.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Yugoslavia/BillClintonsWar_Yugo.html
 

Related Topics

The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Atheism
  3. » Page 271
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 06/02/2024 at 07:08:20