posted on July 17, 2005 10:02:25 AM
To the "Just Nuke 'em" crowd, it's too bad you didn't pass on your wealth of information to British authorities, they could've just "nuked" the whole town of Leeds and prevented that disaster in London. Where were you?
posted on July 17, 2005 12:30:22 PM
Actually Britain has an advantage over US. They should just declare Islam an outlaw religion, the practice of which results in immediate deportation and nationalization of your possessions. In the case of terrorist acts the family and mosque members of the culprits should be similarly ejected(aiding and hiding a terrorist). If their original country of origin refuses to let the plane land, push 'em out of the plane with an automatic parachute.
The records of the mosque's in the UK should be utilized and all former Muslim's should be issued an ID and number. When there is any terrorist activity resulting in death and the murderer's homeland is in question, pick some at random and oust them. Start at both ends, those collecting transfer payments and those that have assets. Those that are trouble-makers and those that are criminals. A 100 to 1 sounds just about right. If 10 get killed, a 1000 get ousted.
Oh, and paint with a broad brush, like the Coobans and the Muriel boat lift. Let them argue with the embassy in their country of origin. Don't forget to close the embassy in any terrorist supporting country.
JMHO.
__________
The Islamofascist fig-puckers are fighting to spread their culture and religion, and to destroy ours
posted on July 17, 2005 02:10:43 PM
Yeah! And while they're at it they can make them wear little stars on their sleeves! And round them up into ghettos! And ship them off to special camps!
Oh wait. That's been tried. It didn't go over to well with public opinion.
Certainly the UK doesn't go as far as we do with the concept of freedom of religion, but to outlaw a specific religion? Don't think they could get away with it.
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on July 17, 2005 04:17:32 PM
posted on July 17, 2005 10:02:25 AM To the "Just Nuke 'em" crowd, it's too bad you didn't pass on your wealth of information to British authorities, they could've just "nuked" the whole town of Leeds and prevented that disaster in London. Where were you?
Where was I?. Back in Texas, but I spend a lot of time in the UK. I have ridden the Kings Cross underground many times and the last time I was in London in June 2002 for the Queen's Jubilee, I ate a sandwich sitting on a bench in Russell Square where the bus was blown up. That's getting a little close for me. If I had had the information and they asked me, I would certainly said "Just nuke em". When it's your body parts and your blood in danger, I think you would say the same.
posted on July 17, 2005 04:21:11 PM
So blowing up the entire town of Leeds to prevent an attack is your idea of fighting terrorists. Maybe the NON terroists in Leeds might just object....or if it's not YOU then it's OK?
If YOU KNEW THEY WERE IN LEEDS WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL SOMEONE ?????
posted on July 17, 2005 04:42:33 PM
OK, so you believe that if terrorists were known to be in Leeds you believe in nuking the whole town (and, duh, quite a bit of the surrounding countryside).
Hey, great idea....now what happens when there is a terrorist group in Philadelphia ?
posted on July 17, 2005 04:55:43 PM
You 've accused me of name calling, shouting, and now are posting nonsense and threats.....do you have to announce so balantly that you lost the argument
posted on July 17, 2005 05:07:14 PM
Yes, when you resort to wanting someone killed because they disagree with you you have lost the argument.
You have never answered a straightforward question when challenged, the sign of a coward. But that's obvious because you want me dead so I can't prove you wrong.
posted on July 17, 2005 05:28:23 PM
Neocon is more radical that just conservative. Scott McConnell, a conservative University of Chicago professor describes the irrational neocon warmongers here....
The 'war on terror' as conceived by the neocons is:
immoral, as it further punishes the victims of Western aggression;
insane, as it advocates stopping terrorism by increasing the activity that caused the terrorism in the first place; and
senseless, as it simply cannot be won.
Scott McConnell...from an interview in the American Conservative.
posted on July 17, 2005 05:35:40 PM
This saying came from Viet Nam. "Kill them all and let God sort the good from the bad".
Now after 50,000 dead American troops, American companies are using the cheap labor in Viet Nam to make clothes and sell them in the U.S. market. "KILL THEM ALL" didn't work in Viet Nam.
Saddam in a way nuked the Kurds with chemicals. Isn't that one reasons Bush/Cheney started the Iraq war? KILL THEM ALL didn't work for Saddam either.
etexbill better hope there isn't a East to West wind blowing when his side nukes New Orleans. Old nuke-bill might start glowing and wind up with useless balls the size of Long Horn Bulls.
Better yet nuke-bill why don't all the countries with nukes nuke the whole World and let God sort the good from the bad.
posted on July 17, 2005 05:51:26 PM
Like I posted before.....the radicals here have their very own definition.
Some believe that the true meaning of the use of the word 'neocon' [also know as - neoconservative or neoconservatism - means a person who once was left leaning in their political positions - and now has become more conservative.
Others believe this is what the term means:
[Adapted From: WordNet 2.0 Copyright 2003 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.]
neoconservativism
A noun
neoconservativism
an approach to politics or theology that represents a return to a traditional point of view (in contrast to more liberal or radical schools of thought of the 1960s)
---------
==================
Neoconservatism in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
(Redirected from Neoconservatism (United States))
''Neoconservatism'' is a somewhat controversial term referring to the political goals and ideology of the "new conservatives" in the United States. The "newness" refers the term's origination as either describing converts new to American conservatism (sometimes coming from a liberal or big-government New Deal background) or to being part of a "new wave" of conservative thought and political organization.
The neoconservatives, often dubbed the neocons by supporters and critics alike, are credited with (or blamed for) influencing U.S. foreign policy, especially under the administrations of Ronald Reagan (1981â€"1989) and George W. Bush (2001â€"present).
Neoconservatives have often been singled out for criticism by opponents of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, many of whom see this invasion as a neoconservative initiative.
Compared to other U.S. conservatives, neoconservatives may be characterized by an aggressive moralist stance on foreign policy, a lesser social conservatism, and weaker dedication to a policy of minimal government, and a greater acceptance of the welfare state, though none of these qualities are necessarily requisite.
Neoconservatism is a controversial term whose meaning is widely disputed. Most people described as "neoconservatives" are members of the Republican Party. The term is used more often by those who oppose "neoconservative" politics than those who subscribe to them; indeed, many to whom the label is applied reject it. The term is frequently used pejoratively, both by self-described paleoconservatives, who oppose neoconservatism from the right, and by Democratic politicians opposing neoconservatives from the left.
Recently, Democratic politicians have used the term to criticize the Republican policies and leaders of the current Bush administration.
Critics of the term argue that the word is overused and lacks coherent definition. For instance, they note that many so-called neoconservatives vehemently disagree with one another on major issues. They also point out that the meaning has changed over time.
Whereas the term was originally used for former Democrats who embraced the welfare state but aggressively opposed the Soviet Union, now the term is primarily used to describe those who support an aggressive worldwide foreign policy against radical Islam and terrorists.
The term is also used to describe those who are accused of adopting a "unilateral" foreign policy rather than relying on United Nations consensus and actions.
In academia, the term refers more to journalists, pundits, policy analysts, and institutions affiliated with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and with Commentary and The Weekly Standard than to more traditional conservative policy think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation or periodicals such as Policy Review or National Review.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
posted on July 17, 2005 08:08:20 PM
"Classic we need your baseball saying LOL"
ya got it Big
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Baseball season has started,but they have it all wrong.3 strikes and you're out,4 balls you walk.I can tell you right now a man with 4 balls could not possibly walk
posted on July 17, 2005 08:39:02 PM
Well..dang..Tex..here I go and apologize to you and next thing I read you're wanting to Nuke New Orleans, just down the street from me....now..I'll have to re-think my position again! LOL
.............................................
There was a little girl who had a little curl
Right in the middle of her forehead.
When she was good, she was very, very good.
But when she was bad........
She got a fur coat, jewels, a waterfront condo, and a sports car.
posted on July 18, 2005 09:07:00 AM
Maggie, you and I both know that New Orleans looks like it's been "nuked" already. I love to visit, but I can't wait to leave.
posted on July 18, 2005 09:15:41 AM
And you all know that I am speaking with tongue in cheek about nuking anything except mingotree. I explained, as did others, the reasoning behind the bombs in Japan.
Although clearing out New Orleans and then starting over might not be a bad idea. Where else would you build a city below sea level and below the river that's running through it.
Where else would you leave abandoned cars on the Freeway until they rust. Where else would you let your drainage pumps get out of date when you depend on them to keep you from drowning and then build a SuperDome that your great-grandchildren will still be paying for and already want to nuke it and build another bigger and more expensive. Where else are most of your ex-officials and governor serving time in the big house.
Maybe we should add New Orleans to the mingotree list.
posted on July 18, 2005 09:41:47 AM new
"Nope, just repeating what I've said in previous posts."
Like these statements?
Philly? Nuke em New Orleans? Nuke em Sacramento, New York? Nuke em, Nuke em. That's getting a little close for me. If I had had the information and they asked me, I would certainly said "Just nuke em" Terrible times sometimes require terrible measures. Why not blame the people who criticize so much?? [i]Better yet, Nuke em.
posted on July 18, 2005 09:58:41 AM new
Helen, you have seen my posts regarding what I believe. I explained my thoughts on the dropping of the bombs in Japan. You have seen the posts from your buddies saying "drop em where, tell me where". I explained that too. I then decided to go along with your inane "where, when, why" mouthings and say everywhere. Now, just because you have a reading comprehension problem also, don't subject others to your problem.
I have seen at least 5 others here with the same thoughts on the bombing of Japan. Go take your problems with me to them also. Try to re-read and see if you can find those posts.
Could it be because I tell it like it is to you, and mingotree. I am sorry that you can't take it.
That is my final say. So now you are free to take your best shots. Fire away and I'm sure that you will.
posted on July 18, 2005 11:51:51 AM new
Great description of New Orleans, Tex! You forgot to mention how bad the Quarter smells too! LOL..I only visit when company comes down and wants to see the sights..I'm not big on crowds these days. Although, we did take a nice riverboat cruise last year, and that was fun.
Yes, I realize that you were speaking with tongue in cheek and fighting fire with fire as I'm sure most did...but you too must realize that many here are sensitive when it comes to talk of violence regardless of how it was meant..
I personally read/see a softie under that hard exterior..
posted on July 18, 2005 11:56:52 AM new
Thanks again. I'm glad that we understand where each other is coming from. Lots of luck and when you come over this way, give me a holler.
