1
   

Lessons of Iraq War

 
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 08:39 pm
Brandon9000 wrote:
blueveinedthrobber wrote:
I'm sorry I can't see too well for brandon's smokescreen. What was this thread about?

You're just some dweeb who hangs around these threads posting irrelevant jibes at your betters as they actually debate the topics.


link? I demand a link to back up your assertation.....in addition.....

dweeb
One entry found for dweeb.


Main Entry: dweeb
Pronunciation: 'dwEb
Function: noun
Etymology: origin unknown
slang : an unattractive, insignificant, or inept person

I am not insignificant. I am squinney's significant other.
I am not found unattractive by most people.
I am not inept. I am practically expert at annoying you and others like you.

Take that Mr.Captain Of The Debate Club. Cool
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 08:46 pm
BVT:

I thought he was talking about himself ... it is so descriptive if him!!

Anon
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 08:55 pm
I thought Brandon was some young guy whose ignorance could be excused by youth, turns out he is 52!
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:31 pm
Interesting how Asher, McGen, Brandon, et al extricate themselves from a discussion by saying "I don't have to say anything -so and so said it for me"-- when 'so and so' didn't say anything in the form of a discussion about the article posted. Why? Because there is not a thing that they could argue with. It's all true and can be proven. And they know it.

(Is it true Brandon doesn't know how to do a google search? Shame on ya. )
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:35 pm
McGentrix wrote:
I thought Asherman summed it up nidely. I don't believe any more is neccessary.



See Laughing Laughing Sure, no more is necessary because he can't come UP with anything. Asherman summed it up nidely? (What is nidely?) All Asher said was 'clap trap'. Hey, that's debate in its finest form eh?

Clue: you take the article, point-by-point, and you show where it is wrong. And you back it up with proof, not just your say-so which IS clap-trap.

Bushwacked bunch of dummies.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 18 Mar, 2006 11:39 pm
From first post on this thread:

And everyone lied about Vietnam -- President Kennedy about the extent of our involvement, President Johnson about the Gulf of Tonkin and President Nixon about the secret bombing of Cambodia. They all claimed the war was to keep South Vietnam free of communism, but really wanted to keep South Vietnam as an American outpost at the edge of the Asian continent.

Yes, everybody lied about Vietnam. They did not attack our boats in the Gulf of Tonkin; the administration lied to start that war. Daniel Ellsburg had all the Top Secret information at the tme, and subsequently wrote his book "Secrets," that reveals all the lies to the American People to start the war.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 12:42 am
pachelbel wrote:

Is it true Brandon doesn't know how to do a google search? Shame on ya.

No, what's true is that only an imbecile makes assertions on a message board, and when then asked to provide evidence, claims that it is everyone else's responsibility to do the research to support his assertions. Virtually everyone on Earth knows that if you claim something in a debate, you are the one responsible to provide evidence that it might be true, not the rest of the world.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 08:32 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
detano inipo wrote:

..This is the most corrupt administration in US history, still there are some Bush fans who don't get it....

Yet you are unable to produce one single example, as have been 99% of the other A2K libs who've made this assertion.


That's not true, Brandon and you know it.
0 Replies
 
detano inipo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 09:12 am
Re: Lessons of Iraq War
pachelbel wrote:
Lessons of Iraq War Start With US History

by Howard Zinn

On the third anniversary of President Bush's Iraq debacle, it's important to consider why the administration so easily fooled so many people into supporting the war.

I believe there are two reasons, which go deep into our national culture.

One is an absence of historical perspective. The other is an inability to think outside the boundaries of nationalism.

If we don't know history, then we are ready meat for carnivorous politicians and the intellectuals and journalists who supply the carving knives. But if we know some history, if we know how many times presidents have lied to us, we will not be fooled again.

President Polk lied to the nation about the reason for going to war with Mexico in 1846. It wasn't that Mexico "shed American blood upon the American soil" but that Polk, and the slave-owning aristocracy, coveted half of Mexico.

President McKinley lied in 1898 about the reason for invading Cuba, saying we wanted to liberate the Cubans from Spanish control, but the truth is that he really wanted Spain out of Cuba so that the island could be open to United Fruit and other American corporations. He also lied about the reasons for our war in the Philippines, claiming we only wanted to "civilize" the Filipinos, while the real reason was to own a valuable piece of real estate in the far Pacific, even if we had to kill hundreds of thousands of Filipinos to accomplish that.

President Wilson lied about the reasons for entering the First World War, saying it was a war to "make the world safe for democracy," when it was really a war to make the world safe for the rising American power.

President Truman lied when he said the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima because it was "a military target."

And everyone lied about Vietnam -- President Kennedy about the extent of our involvement, President Johnson about the Gulf of Tonkin and President Nixon about the secret bombing of Cambodia. They all claimed the war was to keep South Vietnam free of communism, but really wanted to keep South Vietnam as an American outpost at the edge of the Asian continent.

President Reagan lied about the invasion of Grenada, claiming falsely that it was a threat to the United States.

The elder Bush lied about the invasion of Panama, leading to the death of thousands of ordinary citizens in that country. And he lied again about the reason for attacking Iraq in 1991 -- hardly to defend the integrity of Kuwait, rather to assert U.S. power in the oil-rich Middle East.

There is an even bigger lie: the arrogant idea that this country is the center of the universe, exceptionally virtuous, admirable, superior.

If our starting point for evaluating the world around us is the firm belief that this nation is somehow endowed by Providence with unique qualities that make it morally superior to every other nation on Earth, then we are not likely to question the president when he says we are sending our troops here or there, or bombing this or that, in order to spread our values -- democracy, liberty, and let's not forget free enterprise -- to some God-forsaken (literally) place in the world.

But we must face some facts that disturb the idea of a uniquely virtuous nation.

We must face our long history of ethnic cleansing, in which the U.S. government drove millions of Indians off their land by means of massacres and forced evacuations.

We must face our long history, still not behind us, of slavery, segregation and racism.

And we must face the lingering memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

It is not a history of which we can be proud.

Our leaders have taken it for granted, and planted the belief in the minds of many people that we are entitled, because of our moral superiority, to dominate the world. Both the Republican and Democratic Parties have embraced this notion.

But what is the idea of our moral superiority based on?

A more honest estimate of ourselves as a nation would prepare us all for the next barrage of lies that will accompany the next proposal to inflict our power on some other part of the world.

It might also inspire us to create a different history for ourselves, by taking our country away from the liars who govern it, and by rejecting nationalist arrogance, so that we can join people around the world in the common cause of peace and justice.

Howard Zinn, who served as a bombardier in the Air Force in World War II, is the author of "A People's History of the United States" (HarperCollins, 1995). He is also the co-author, with Anthony Arnove, of "Voices of a People's History of the United States" (Seven Stories Press, 2004).

© 2006 The Progressive


brandon, you have not shown one single proof that this article is not telling the truth. Attacking the poster is not good enough.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Sun 19 Mar, 2006 10:07 am
One could dispute much of what Zinn says but it is an opinion. Some might dispute the Truman assertion, for instance. That said, only imbeciles demand that proof is required for every opinion stated on the internet.

IMO there is much truth in the totality of what Zinn says.
0 Replies
 
pachelbel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Mar, 2006 12:11 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
pachelbel wrote:

Is it true Brandon doesn't know how to do a google search? Shame on ya.

No, what's true is that only an imbecile makes assertions on a message board, and when then asked to provide evidence, claims that it is everyone else's responsibility to do the research to support his assertions.

Virtually everyone on Earth


Ahhhhhhhhh.....that's the problem. Brandon is not on planet Earth.
Can't blame him for not knowing anything. Cool
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Mar, 2006 12:17 am
That's the SOP of Brandon et al. They want us to prove their point by finding evidence for them on Search. Talk about simple minded...
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 0.03 seconds on 05/11/2024 at 04:04:41