America has lost the war in Iraq.

Tarantulas wrote:

Yes, and I'll be glad to see Laura doesn't have to move all of her stuff out of the White House for another four years.

And the rest of the world will weep.

0 Replies

The United States took a neutral position for years in WWII while six million Jews were systematically 'exterminated' to use Nazi vernacular. Saddam was doing the same thing to the Kurds before the Gulf War (George the first) and was prevented from resuming that particular genocide via a militarily enforced no fly zone in the north. The torture chambers, brutal executions, and rape rooms continued in the rest of Iraq, however. The Serbs were focused on killing all Croations before they were militarily stopped during the Clinton administration.

Two wrongs don't make a right. This is true. But there comes a time when when doing nothing is the most wrong thing to do.

0 Replies

Fedral wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
I just saw with my own eyes and heard with my own ears on CNN the following:

Likely voters polled give Bush a 5% lead over Kerry because of his handling of the war on terror.

Same likely voters feel Kerry would do a better job with the economy.

Same likely voters believe the economy to be the number one issue.

Conclusion:

Polled likely voters will vote for the man they feel will do the worse job on the number one issue because they feel he'll do a better job on the number two issue.

Polled likely voters, who see nothing and hear about nothing but the "War on terror" have successfully had the **** scared out of them.

America may have lost the war in Iraq, but bush has won it, because it's entire purpose is to broaden his power base and keep him in office.

Personal conclusion:

bush is undoubtably the number 2 man, if you take my meaning. :wink:

If the man we choose to be President doesn't do that great a job on the 'Number One concern', some businesses will fail and some people will be out of work.

If the man we choose to be President doesn't do that great a job on the 'Number TWO concern', Thousands, perhaps more, people could die and god knows how many could be injured...

I think the fear of death, dismemberment and destruction of our way of life will carry the vote towards Bush because of the consequences of failure.

Yes and bush inc. is playing to those fears with every fibre in their being and every tool in their arsenal. Without this war bush would have the shittiest most unpopular president since Hoover. bush inc. are disgusting opportunistic pukes IMO, and if protection from death and dismemberment means living in bushs' America, then we've gained nothing but our lives, and a life with no quality is no different from the life of the pigs and turkeys they raise in Eastern NC for profit.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

The Serbs were focused on killing all Croations before they were militarily stopped during the Clinton administration.

.

Croatia killed 2 million Serbs during WWII. They had their own little holocaust which has somehow been lost in history.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Yes and bush inc. is playing to those fears with every fibre in their being and every tool in their arsenal. Without this war bush would have the shittiest most unpopular president since Hoover. bush inc. are disgusting opportunistic pukes IMO, and if protection from death and dismemberment means living in bushs' America, then we've gained nothing but our lives, and a life with no quality is no different from the life of the pigs and turkeys they raise in Eastern NC for profit.

Damn BPB! Are you really having that tough of a time? Do you want me to get the ladies together for a group hug?

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Yes and bush inc. is playing to those fears with every fibre in their being and every tool in their arsenal. Without this war bush would have the shittiest most unpopular president since Hoover. bush inc. are disgusting opportunistic pukes IMO, and if protection from death and dismemberment means living in bushs' America, then we've gained nothing but our lives, and a life with no quality is no different from the life of the pigs and turkeys they raise in Eastern NC for profit.
Damn BPB! Are you really having that tough of a time? Do you want me to get the ladies together for a group hug?

It is the sheep who are fearful bill, I have no such fear. I know a pack of lying, profiteering dicks who trade with the flesh and lives of others for gain when I see them and you are cordially invited to stick the inference up your ass. :wink:

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Yes and bush inc. is playing to those fears with every fibre in their being and every tool in their arsenal. Without this war bush would have the shittiest most unpopular president since Hoover. bush inc. are disgusting opportunistic pukes IMO, and if protection from death and dismemberment means living in bushs' America, then we've gained nothing but our lives, and a life with no quality is no different from the life of the pigs and turkeys they raise in Eastern NC for profit.
Damn BPB! Are you really having that tough of a time? Do you want me to get the ladies together for a group hug?

It is the sheep who are fearful bill, I have no such fear. I know a pack of lying, profiteering dicks who trade with the flesh and lives of others for gain when I see them and you are cordially invited to stick the inference up your ass. :wink:

What the hell was that all about? I guess it's true what they say about good deeds getting punished. Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Yes and bush inc. is playing to those fears with every fibre in their being and every tool in their arsenal. Without this war bush would have the shittiest most unpopular president since Hoover. bush inc. are disgusting opportunistic pukes IMO, and if protection from death and dismemberment means living in bushs' America, then we've gained nothing but our lives, and a life with no quality is no different from the life of the pigs and turkeys they raise in Eastern NC for profit.
Damn BPB! Are you really having that tough of a time? Do you want me to get the ladies together for a group hug?

It is the sheep who are fearful bill, I have no such fear. I know a pack of lying, profiteering dicks who trade with the flesh and lives of others for gain when I see them and you are cordially invited to stick the inference up your ass. :wink:
What the hell was that all about? I guess it's true what they say about good deeds getting punished.

Just farting around and being manly bill, that's why the wink......maybe I better gather the ladies for both of us.... Laughing

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Yes and bush inc. is playing to those fears with every fibre in their being and every tool in their arsenal. Without this war bush would have the shittiest most unpopular president since Hoover. bush inc. are disgusting opportunistic pukes IMO, and if protection from death and dismemberment means living in bushs' America, then we've gained nothing but our lives, and a life with no quality is no different from the life of the pigs and turkeys they raise in Eastern NC for profit.
Damn BPB! Are you really having that tough of a time? Do you want me to get the ladies together for a group hug?

It is the sheep who are fearful bill, I have no such fear. I know a pack of lying, profiteering dicks who trade with the flesh and lives of others for gain when I see them and you are cordially invited to stick the inference up your ass. :wink:
What the hell was that all about? I guess it's true what they say about good deeds getting punished.

Just farting around and being manly bill, that's why the wink......maybe I better gather the ladies for both of us....

I guess so... or I'm liable to start crying or something. Laughing

0 Replies

My testosterone detector is....PEAKING!!

0 Replies

panzade wrote:

My testosterone detector is....PEAKING!!

nahhhh...it's just your bullshit detector :wink:

0 Replies

Wilso wrote:

Croatia killed 2 million Serbs during WWII. They had their own little holocaust which has somehow been lost in history.

With all due respect, this remark is completely false and also not quite understandable. Let's start with that: Does your remark means that Israelis or Jews generally would be allowed to kill all Germans today or their actions would be more understandable because of WW2?

More important, this remark is completely false. After WW2, all Yugoslavia claimed a bit less then 2 million victims (people of all nationalities!) and even that number was later disqualified because some researchers admited that they pumped it to get bigger war reparations (more simply: number of "victims" is actually number of victims plus average number of children they would have if haven't been killed). However, number should not be issue with genocide or holocaust, but that also does not mean that someone is allowed to pump numbers, especially in such a shallow matter.

Finally, during WW2 croatian government was nazi-puppet government, and they really made some terrible crimes (they were killing everybody though, including all Croats that meant differently) but also, which is very important and I am pretty sure why you are not mentioning that - many leaders of anti-nazi movement in all Yugoslavia (therefore not only Croatia) were Croats, with Josip Broz Tito (Croat) as main leader of movement.
And Croats made much more clearly on which side they are as nation in WW2 then Serbs did. Oh, just to make myself clear - I am talking about Croats from Croatia and Serbs from Serbia. Serbs from Croatia and Bosnia were brave fighters against Nazi's, while Serbs from Serbia are not in that category - after all, croatian, bosnian and slovenian towns and cities are almost without example liberated by partisan troops, while that is not the case with Serbia.

And finally (once again lol), all serbian "pumping" about WW2 is pure nonsense. As I said, are Jews today allowed to kill all Germans or to take over some parts of Germany? Although this is very bad example, because Croats-Serbs relation in WW2 was not even near Germans-Jews relation.

0 Replies

Wilso, Foxfyre got it wrong concerning who between the Croations and Serbians was praciticing genocide. And you used hyperbole, but it is clear, you got it right.

"The greatest genocide during World War II, in proportion to a nation's population, took place, not in Nazi Germany but in the Nazi-created puppet state of Croatia. There in the years 1941-1945, some 750,000 Serbs, 60,000 Jews and 26,000 Gypsies - men, women and children - perished in a GIGANTIC HOLOCAUST...

...The magnitude and the bestial nature of these atrocities makes it difficult to believe that such a thing could have happened in an allegedly civilized part of the world."

The above quote is from book by:
Professor Edmond Paris
"Genocide in Satellite Croatia"
published by "The American Institute for Balkan Affairs", Chicago, 1961.
The quote is from the first page of the introduction to the book.

"...IN BOSNIA... THE CROATIAN FASCISTS BEGAN A MASSACRE OF SERBS WHICH, IN *THE WHOLE ANNALS OF WORLD WAR II*, WAS SURPASSED FOR SAVAGERY ONLY BY THE MASS EXTERMINATION OF POLISH JEWS"

The above quote was repeated for many decades in Encyclopedia Britannica. You can find it in all the versions of Britannica from 1971 to 1987 under entry: "Macropaedia, Yugoslavia, World War II".

0 Replies

your numbers, Billy, are also exaggerating (serbian author of monument for victims of Jasenovac, concentration camp in "satellite croatia" as you correctly point out, and most of the jewish researchers are calculating that approximately 200-300.000 people were killed by croatian nazi-puppet government, which is, of course, terrible crime). Crime is crime and generally crime has no nationality and war criminals are "nationality" of their own, but it's quite a hipocracy to point out small countries such as Croatia (or Latvia for example at Baltics) in that matter - I suppose Dresden or Hiroshima are events that are not "difficult to believe that can happen in allegedly civilized world"? In the light of that, as well as we can (mentioned previously) "approve" or "understand" Jews if they decide to kill Germans today, we can also "approve" or "understand" Japanese attack on USA, or Germany attacking Britain. And once more - most of croatian people fought in partisan guerilla, and leader of anti-nazi movement of ALL "Yugoslav" nations was Croat (as well as other things: first anti-nazi guerilla act was in Croatia in April of 41'st, first partisan troops were formed in Croatia /by people of all nationalities that lived in Croatia/, communistic movement /which at the time was strongest opposition to Hitler/ was by far strongest in Croatia both before and during WW2...)
And most important - explaning genocide today with something that happened 50 years ago (not to mention the fact that it's very shallow and twisted "truth" itself) is pathetic and it's quite surprising that someone can actually buy it - of course if Billy Falcon is not just a nickname for Borivoje Sokolic.

So, I still don't see an answer about where exactly is Foxfyre wrong, because he wasn't writing about WW2, he was writing about modern times - modern times in which Serbia made agression on Slovenia (very short luckily), then Croatia, then Bosnia, then even "inner-genocide" in Kosovo (which is serbian territory)...let me also remind you that, until NATO attack, not a SINGLE bullet was fired on serbian territory (of course, every Milosevic's fan can make this fact wrong, because according to serbian official politics in 90's Serbia was everywhere where there are few Serbs, at least everywhere in Balkan), while many croatian and bosnian towns were completely destroyed.

0 Replies

Foxfyre is a she, and she doesn't give a damn about anything that remotely resembles the truth.

0 Replies

MyOwnUsername wrote:

Wilso wrote:

Croatia killed 2 million Serbs during WWII. They had their own little holocaust which has somehow been lost in history.

With all due respect, this remark is completely false and also not quite understandable.

No, it's not.

0 Replies

uuuuuh, such a strong argument! try to read my post, to answer questions and to make your point if you think that I'm wrong, that's the purpose of forums - remarks like "uh, huh, no it's not" or "foxfyre is she" /oh damn, then I have to delete my post/ are not very argumentative.
But, of course, when you are facing arguments and when you are facing someone that is not your opposite pole and considers croatian mythology as dumb as serbian one then nothing is left then saying "no, it's not"...because Tito itself is enough for average intelligent man or woman too reject serbian WW2 mythology.

Ironic part - Damn, those Croats did nothing but killing Serbs all the time and those Serbs are such a heavenly nation that they despite that choose Croat from Croatia as their leader (leader of Serbs of course, cause it's quite known fact that only Serbs fought against Nazi's), and not only that, but after the war they invited their slaughterers to live together. Pure saints those Serbs. Too bad that their bravery made them wonder across other "yugoslav" republics and helping them get rid of Nazi's, so in the mean time Belgrade had to be liberated by Russian Red Army.
But maybe that's also because of that croatian bastard Tito? He is just the same, eh? He didn't care that he is the only good Croat in WW2, noooo sir, he still wanted to free Croatia first...and all Serbs run to help him...gee, good thing that Russians came, without them, who knows, maybe Serbia would be still under Nazis? Oh, oh....-end of ironic part

Oh, by the way, I still can't see an answer on my question how exactly fact that someone commited genocide (numbers, once again, are actually irelevant) 50 years ago makes genocide in modern times smaller?

0 Replies

MyOwnUsername wrote:

uuuuuh, such a strong argument! try to read my post, to answer questions and to make your point if you think that I'm wrong, that's the purpose of forums - remarks like "uh, huh, no it's not" or "foxfyre is she" /oh damn, then I have to delete my post/ are not very argumentative.
But, of course, when you are facing arguments and when you are facing someone that is not your opposite pole and considers croatian mythology as dumb as serbian one then nothing is left then saying "no, it's not"...because Tito itself is enough for average intelligent man or woman too reject serbian WW2 mythology.

Ironic part - Damn, those Croats did nothing but killing Serbs all the time and those Serbs are such a heavenly nation that they despite that choose Croat from Croatia as their leader (leader of Serbs of course, cause it's quite known fact that only Serbs fought against Nazi's), and not only that, but after the war they invited their slaughterers to live together. Pure saints those Serbs. Too bad that their bravery made them wonder across other "yugoslav" republics and helping them get rid of Nazi's, so in the mean time Belgrade had to be liberated by Russian Red Army.
But maybe that's also because of that croatian bastard Tito? He is just the same, eh? He didn't care that he is the only good Croat in WW2, noooo sir, he still wanted to free Croatia first...and all Serbs run to help him...gee, good thing that Russians came, without them, who knows, maybe Serbia would be still under Nazis? Oh, oh....-end of ironic part

Oh, by the way, I still can't see an answer on my question how exactly fact that someone commited genocide (numbers, once again, are actually irelevant) 50 years ago makes genocide in modern times smaller?

You seem to be under the impression that I"m trying to defend some groups actions, or make light of some other groups actions. I don't know how that came about. And I don't really care.

0 Replies

As for the issue of the deaths of those particular Serbs, I saw it on a history program which had a very deep look at the conflict of these groups through the ages during the major part of the conflict there. A few conversations with both Croations and Serbians that I worked with didn't dispute the fact.

0 Replies

well, I am sorry if my impressions are wrong, but I can't see other explanation for reacting on someones post about serbian actions in 90's with remark such as "well, no, that's not true, Croats were killing Serbs in 40's"??? EVEN if your words would be completely true (and they're not) that would still be totally unappropriate comment.

Imagine Japan attacking USA today and claiming that Vermont is ancient japanese territory (and, of course, USA being too weak to defend itself since by some miracle Japan has all of its weapons) and you pointing it out, and then me or someone else replying "no, that's not true, Americans are bad, don't you know what happened in Hiroshima?"

0 Replies

America has lost the war in Iraq.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know