1
   

Will the anti-war crowd denounce this idiot?

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2005 08:49 pm
mysteryman wrote:
parados wrote:
mysteryman wrote:



Set,
By this statement can we infer that after the US killed 3000 Japanese after Pearl Harbor we should have stopped?
Can we also infer that after the Us killed as many germans as they killed
American sailors,that we should have stopped?

And Iraq attacked the US when?


When they invaded Kuwait for one.
They attacked,captured,and occupied the US Embassy in Kuwait City.


Oh jeeze, you're making this burroshito up as you go along. The following exerpt is from The Iraqi Invasion of Kuwait: An Eyewitness Account, Lt. Col. Fred L. Hart, Jr. After describing his arrival with his family in 1989, and detailing the deteriorating situation with Iraq and Kuwait in early 1990, he goes on to an account of the invasion. He then describes the day upon which he went with his family to the U.S. Embassy for his and his family's saftey.

Lt. Col. Hart wrote:
At approximately 1130hrs [on August 7, 1990, five days after the Iraqi invasion] a civilian man, westerner in appearance showed up at our villa gate, announced he is from the U.S. Embassy, and had come to escort us in. I had been assigned at the embassy for a year and I knew all the personnel assigned to the post, and I did not recognize this individual. I immediately radioed the embassy and they verified his identity. I then recognized the foreign national driver who was with him, so once we got that straighten out I called CW3 Gene Lord, a close neighbor to coordinate a link-up with him and his family so that we all could convoy in together. The USLOK [United States Liaison Office, Kuwait--a military liaison office] administrative NCO, who was a neighbor of ours, also joined in the trek into the embassy. We began our journey into the embassy with great trepidation of what was waiting for us. Our plan was to use the foodstuffs, cigarettes, and alcohol as bribes to get through the roadblock. I had also taken the precaution to hide the American citizen listing that had been brought to me. The list contained over 500 names and addresses of U.S. citizens living and working in Kuwait. As we pulled out of the Salwa neighborhood, my wife and children were shocked at the destruction that was so close to our house, now they could understand all the shelling, booming and rattling of windows for two days and most importantly why they had to remain away from windows. As we rode in, almost every official Kuwait government building along the route had been shelled, torched, or destroyed. Wrecked and smoldering vehicles littered the highway some with the charred remains present. The once well manicured and green medians were now brown, dried up and trashed. As we came to First ring road Iraqi soldiers and tracked vehicles formed a checkpoint but our lead vehicle, with the Palestinian foreign national who worked for the embassy, spoke with what appeared to be an Iraqi officer. After the brief stop and exchange, the Iraqi road guards waved us through. We turned off First ring just short of the Kuwait International hotel and down a back street to the embassy's rear entrance. Iraqi soldiers and combat vehicles had the entire compound surrounded. Strangely, the Iraqis were now manning the guard post the Kuwaiti National Guard troops had previously occupied. Our embassy foreign nationals told me that the Kuwaiti guards literally stripped off their uniforms and fled when they spotted the Iraqis on the morning of 2 August. We were allowed to proceed and the anxiety did not subside until we crossed over the steel barrier gate and into the enclosed parking lot. The embassy security officer informed us that we would be billeted in the Marine house. This was the small complex used as the living compound for the five Marine guards stationed at the embassy.


So, what is your source for stating that the Iraqis "attacked, captured and occupied" the United States embassy? I would have thought that by now, MM, you'd have learned not to make up historical fairy tales in any thread in which you see me participating. Immediately after the invasion and all throughout the occupation, the United States Embassy maintained a radio communication network within Kuwait City, and provided haven for as many westerners--primarily Americans--as possible. Any foreign nationals, and especially military personnel, loose in Kuwait City were fair game, and they knew it. The embassies were inviolable (the Japanese Embassy, for example, provided have for many Kuwaiti government officials and military officers), and that always works that way, because no belligerant wants their embassies shut down overseas. I'm not even gonna bother with the rest of your fairy tale.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2005 08:56 pm
mysteryman wrote:
Set,
Are you actually going to deny that Iraq helped terrorists?
Has your memory gotten that bad?


You speak as though "the terrorists" are some unitary nationality. The incident you refer to later in this post--the attack on the cruise ship--was not carried out by those who attacked the United States on September 11th, nor is there any evidence of Iraqi support for those who did attack the United States then. By your criterion, we've got a shopping list of countries to invade, all the nations which have ever been accused ot giving aid and comfort to anyone ever alleged to have been a terrorist. Of course, that may be just fine with you, after all it's not your ass on the line.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2005 09:02 pm
mysteryman wrote:

Set,
By this statement can we infer that after the US killed 3000 Japanese after Pearl Harbor we should have stopped?

Can we also infer that after the Us killed as many germans as they killed
American sailors,that we should have stopped?


The Empire of Japan attaacked the United States without a prior declaration of war. The First Air Fleet consisted of their six largest carriers, two fast battleships, two fast cruisers, six submarines and a destroyer division consisting of a light cruiser and a dozen of their newest model destoryers. They subsequently bombed American military installations on Luzon from bases on Taiwan. They seized American businesses and killed and interned American citizens in China, and all over the western Pacific rim.

Are you so dense as to suggest that there is anything even remotely resembling such concerted acts of war which were perpetrated on the United States by Iraq?

Logical comparisons are not your long suit, are they?
0 Replies
 
Mills75
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2005 09:07 pm
JustWonders wrote:
Mills75 wrote:
JustWonders, thanks for proving my point just wonderfully. The exercise of my freedom of speech has been absolutely no hindrance to the exercise of your freedom of speech. The purpose of our freedom of speech is to foster vigorous debate; the offering of ideas, and the critique of ideas. If, however, you wish to exercise your freedom of speech, you must accept the risk that your speech will be criticized.

As for tolerance of other's speech--tolerance doesn't mean stating your opinion (even of the speech of others) in passive terms; if I think your speech amounts to little more than horse dung, I will say as much. Tolerance to other's speech means doing nothing to deprive them of their freedom of speech. Criticizing your speech is not depriving you of your freedom of speech. However, if I attempted to get you fired for your speech, then I would be attempting to deprive you of your freedom of speech and, thus, showing intolerance. It wasn't Daly who showed intolerance for right-wing ideology, but Beach and her right-wing organization who showed intolerance for his critique of their ideology.

I will agree that Daly "cut and ran." However, an adjunct professorship isn't worth fighting for. As I mentioned earlier, an adjunct faculty member of a college or university is, by definition, a temporary employee. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't even Daly's main job. He doesn't, however, remind me of Howard Dean, and we sorely need more Howard Deans.


Mills75 wrote:
The exercise of my freedom of speech has been absolutely no hindrance to the exercise of your freedom of speech.


No. You said "shovel the right-wing b.s. elsewhere". By doing so, you have shown yourself to be intolerant of the postings of others.

Mills75 wrote:
The purpose of our freedom of speech is to foster vigorous debate; the offering of ideas, and the critique of ideas. If, however, you wish to exercise your freedom of speech, you must accept the risk that your speech will be criticized.


Spare me the lecture on free speech. You weren't fostering vigorous debate, nor offering ideas, but merely ordering me to post elsewhere.

Mills75 wrote:
Tolerance to other's speech means doing nothing to deprive them of their freedom of speech.


Then you should take your own advice and refrain from telling others to "shovel it elsewhere". Not that I would listen to one as intolerant as you, but it would clearly be depriving me of my right to free speech. (You really could use that seminar).

As for the rest of your baloney, I'm neither interested, nor do I care about Daly's prospects for future employment. Anyone reading his email....carefully....would immediately realize he's unsuited for the profession (in which case he'll probably be hired immediately by one of the liberal Ivy-leagues LOL).

Are you still here? I thought I told you to shovel that right-wing b.s. elsewhere.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Nov, 2005 10:14 pm
Mills is just doing what all the lefties do when they can't address an issue.

Like the freak that threatened the conservative student.

Hey, DALY QUIT when he knew he'd been busted. Now, cram that lefty BS.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 09:33 am
Setanta: Thanks for posting that information regarding the US embassy in Kuwait. In reading Mysteryman's claim that the Iraqis "attacked, captured, and occupied" the embassy, I was certain that it was the product of a febrile Freeper phantasmagoria, but I didn't have the time to track down the evidence to prove it.

The interesting thing now is to see how MM responds. Normally, when one is caught in an outright fabrication, the proper response is to admit the error and apologize. I don't expect that to happen. Perhaps he'll explain that "attack, capture, and occupy" have different meanings in his world, perhaps akin to the words "surround, annoy, and inconvenience" that others use every day in normal discourse. But no, that would be too clever by half. No, I expect that MM will respond with sullen indifference. Indeed, I would be surprised to see him to return to this thread again.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:00 am
Joe, i recalled hearing at the time that the Embassy had set up as a quasi-communication center from inside Iraqi lines, so i was not about to let MM's statement go by unchallenged. What surprised me is the ease with which i found the evidence i needed.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:06 am
Even if it had been true, that would be a justification only for the first Gulf War, not for this one.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:11 am
I was gonna make that point as well, Miss Duck, but then i decided his BS needed to be deflated . . .
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:12 am
Yep. Yours was the best road. Thought I'd throw the other out there too just for the sake of it.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:15 am
talk72000 wrote:
The Hebrew language at that time didn't have vowels . . .


You know, this has been buggin' me since i first saw this . . . if the Hebrews didn't have no vowels, what the hell did they do when they needed to poop? ! ? ! ?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:19 am
Wnt 2 th crppr.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:20 am
gr8.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:20 am
H3br3w - the first script kiddie language.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:30 am
Setanta wrote:
talk72000 wrote:
The Hebrew language at that time didn't have vowels . . .


You know, this has been buggin' me since i first saw this . . . if the Hebrews didn't have no vowels, what the hell did they do when they needed to poop? ! ? ! ?


Much more astonishing that they seem to have had an alefbet.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:31 am
This is a wry crowd indeed . . .
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:33 am
Hmm, Caucasians, I suppose.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:33 am
Setanta
Setanta wrote:
This is a wry crowd indeed . . .


Do you want mustard on your wry?

BBB
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 11:37 am
Gobzigga ! ! !
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Nov, 2005 12:20 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
No, I expect that MM will respond with sullen indifference. Indeed, I would be surprised to see him to return to this thread again.


I suspect he'll run back to the thread with the same title he has running at another site - where they aren't much on research.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 06:52:06