Phil Donahue gives 'Billy' O'Reilly a wedgy

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87
The mentality of some of you people is that of a 2nd grader. If you arent willing to give this thread an honest discussion then dont bother coming back.

Maybe you should put your mentality under review? The assertion that we shouldn't consider the human costs of a foreign war to our own side because the soldiers knew they would be sent off to fight is not only absurd, it's disgusting. Another armchair general.

Where did I state "We shouldnt consider the human cost of war"?

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87
The mentality of some of you people is that of a 2nd grader. If you arent willing to give this thread an honest discussion then dont bother coming back.

Maybe you should put your mentality under review? The assertion that we shouldn't consider the human costs of a foreign war to our own side because the soldiers knew they would be sent off to fight is not only absurd, it's disgusting. Another armchair general.

Where did I state "We shouldnt consider the human cost of war"?

Sigh. I learned a long time ago that you were a waste of time. I should have kept my mouth shut.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Well, I don't sail by the winds of polls.

And no, I would not agree that there's nothing anyone could say that would change my mind about the war.

That begs the question, what would they have to say to do so? What would it take?

Probably notification that he was being drafted to go fight over there.

I like how a lot of people seem to project their own feelings onto everyone else. Just because they would soil their pants in panic about going to Iraq, they assume everyone would become as Bush-hating as them if they were sent 'over there.' :roll: Perhaps because they lack integrity (intellectual and character) they cannot empathize with those who have it.

In any case Don Vito, I'm not sure what someone would have to say. I'll I can tell you now is that everything I've heard up until this point falls into A) nonsensical conspiracy, or B) there is simply a fundamental difference of opinion.

 

[Moonbeam]

O'Reilly should be shot. He said that the Iraq War could be a tactical error and has not been waged properly. The bastard is a Communist traitor and is aiding and abetting and comforting our terrorist enemies and giving them hope. What an ass.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87
The mentality of some of you people is that of a 2nd grader. If you arent willing to give this thread an honest discussion then dont bother coming back.

Maybe you should put your mentality under review? The assertion that we shouldn't consider the human costs of a foreign war to our own side because the soldiers knew they would be sent off to fight is not only absurd, it's disgusting. Another armchair general.

Where did I state "We shouldnt consider the human cost of war"?

Sigh. I learned a long time ago that you were a waste of time. I should have kept my mouth shut.

I think you should have learned long ago to not put words into other peoples mouths. That advice will serve you a lot better than not conversing with me.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87
The mentality of some of you people is that of a 2nd grader. If you arent willing to give this thread an honest discussion then dont bother coming back.

Maybe you should put your mentality under review? The assertion that we shouldn't consider the human costs of a foreign war to our own side because the soldiers knew they would be sent off to fight is not only absurd, it's disgusting. Another armchair general.

Where did I state "We shouldnt consider the human cost of war"?

Sigh. I learned a long time ago that you were a waste of time. I should have kept my mouth shut.

I think you should have learned long ago to not put words into other peoples mouths. That advice will serve you a lot better than not conversing with me.

"If the soldiers in Iraq didnt want to fight or be put into a position to fight. They shouldnt have volunteered for duty. Nobody put a gun to their head. And most over there want to be over there as noted by the high amount of reups we are seeing in our volunteer army."
'
But it's perfectly fine for you to clairvoyantly think and speak for thousands.

 

[conjur]

heh heh....awesome.


O'Lielly is just a loud-mouthed blowhard.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87
The mentality of some of you people is that of a 2nd grader. If you arent willing to give this thread an honest discussion then dont bother coming back.

Maybe you should put your mentality under review? The assertion that we shouldn't consider the human costs of a foreign war to our own side because the soldiers knew they would be sent off to fight is not only absurd, it's disgusting. Another armchair general.

Where did I state "We shouldnt consider the human cost of war"?

nooo it's ok that he wants to march em off to die...

he has a link to woundedwarriors..see? he cares when they come back chewed up
What a MAN..please gen...pack your sh1t and sign up, and grow up..you could deal with a dose of reality not fed to you in soundbytes from talking heads too cowardly to have served themselves.
:roll:

 

[Moonbeam]

What I saw was two people who passionately believe in their point of view intelligently and passionately put forth their points of view. Each had good points which highlighted his opposite's weaknesses.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87
The mentality of some of you people is that of a 2nd grader. If you arent willing to give this thread an honest discussion then dont bother coming back.

Maybe you should put your mentality under review? The assertion that we shouldn't consider the human costs of a foreign war to our own side because the soldiers knew they would be sent off to fight is not only absurd, it's disgusting. Another armchair general.

Where did I state "We shouldnt consider the human cost of war"?

nooo it's ok that he wants to march em off to die...

he has a link to woundedwarriors..see? he cares when they come back chewed up
What a MAN..please gen...pack your sh1t and sign up, and grow up..you could deal with a dose of reality not fed to you in soundbytes from talking heads too cowardly to have served themselves.
:roll:

lmao this coming from you is hilarious. Dont you have some ranting about Whitebread neighborhoods to do?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

In any case Don Vito, I'm not sure what someone would have to say. I'll I can tell you now is that everything I've heard up until this point falls into A) nonsensical conspiracy, or B) there is simply a fundamental difference of opinion.

It seems to me you're conceding that, essentially, nothing COULD change your mind about the war, but you're still clinging to the hypothetical possibility that something could.

Why do you support it? Why did we go to war in the first place, and is that the same reason we're still there? Is there any number of civilian casualties that, if true, would change your mind? What about American casualties? Do you think, as you look back, that the costs of the war, both economically and in terms of human life, have been and will continue to be worthwhile? Do you think we're safer for having gone to war?

It seems to me these are the kinds of questions that have caused others to change their minds about the war, but for whatever reason there are people who aren't comfortable asking themselves these things.

I myself was ambivalent about the war when it started (at the time I was an active-duty military member and frankly felt a certain amount of obligation to support American military objectives), but it's become transparent to me since then that the war was undertaken to further what I consider a corrupt and rather naive political agenda that had nothing at all to do with any of the reasons the administration cited at the time.

I can't support what I see as the cynical misuse of our military, based on very obvious misrepresentation. It was pretty easy to smell a rat even before the war started, based on the way the administration changed its cited rationale for war on a nearly-daily basis. First it was because SH wouldn't allow weapons inspectors, then it was his alleged development of WMDs, then it was his alleged ties to 9/11, then his alleged ties to al Qaeda, then, when it was clear none of the others were likely true, we were told we should support the war so the Iraqi people deserved to be free. It was like a shell game, and all the more shameless given that we were ignoring our the close ties our allies (esp. SA and Pakistan) had to al Qaeda and international terrorism, as well as the fact that NK was, at the time, very openly developing nuclear weapons.

I sincerely HOPE President Bush is right, and the PNAC plan was a wise one. If the PNAC eggheads were right that war in Iraq can lead to peace and democracy in the Middle East, history will vindicate their views, and the world will be a better place for it. I just can't see it (to this point, OIF seems to belie their plan), and I can't abide seeing so many American lives flushed down the toilet in the process.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Genx87
The mentality of some of you people is that of a 2nd grader. If you arent willing to give this thread an honest discussion then dont bother coming back.

Maybe you should put your mentality under review? The assertion that we shouldn't consider the human costs of a foreign war to our own side because the soldiers knew they would be sent off to fight is not only absurd, it's disgusting. Another armchair general.

Where did I state "We shouldnt consider the human cost of war"?

nooo it's ok that he wants to march em off to die...

he has a link to woundedwarriors..see? he cares when they come back chewed up
What a MAN..please gen...pack your sh1t and sign up, and grow up..you could deal with a dose of reality not fed to you in soundbytes from talking heads too cowardly to have served themselves.
:roll:

lmao this coming from you is hilarious. Dont you have some ranting about Whitebread neighborhoods to do?

don't need to, you already have the keyboard commando thing going on.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: cwjerome

In any case Don Vito, I'm not sure what someone would have to say. I'll I can tell you now is that everything I've heard up until this point falls into A) nonsensical conspiracy, or B) there is simply a fundamental difference of opinion.

It seems to me you're conceding that, essentially, nothing COULD change your mind about the war, but you're still clinging to the hypothetical possibility that something could.

No. Obviously something COULD... like if Bush went on national tv and admitted he did the whole thing enrich a company (or two). Right.

All I'm saying is I don't accept any anti-war arguments enough to significantly change my mind. But I'm always open.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

No. Obviously something COULD... like if Bush went on national tv and admitted he did the whole thing enrich a company (or two). Right.

All I'm saying is I don't accept any anti-war arguments enough to significantly change my mind. But I'm always open.

Again, though, I question whether you're as open as you think. It seems to me the war's alleged premises have been pretty much comprehensively disproven, the administration rather obviously had no real exit strategy from the beginning, and the situation there seems to be getting worse rather than improving. If none of that changes your mind, and if, as you say, the only thing that WOULD is essentially an impossibility, you have to acknowledge you fit into one of a fairly small number of possibile views:

1) You believe passionately in the idea that the war will help "tame" the Middle East, making the whole world safer and leading to new economic and strategic opportunities for the US and Israel (i.e., the PNAC view, and the one held by every credible pro-war person I know, including some for whom I have great respect, although we differ on this subject).

2) You believe so passionately in President Bush and/or the Republican party that you don't care whether the justifications for the war made any sense or were, in fact, completely false.

3) You haven't thought about the root cause of the war and/or are just not disposed to question authority.

4) You so dislike the anti-war movement that you're supporting the war out of sheer orneriness.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
But it's perfectly fine for you to clairvoyantly think and speak for thousands.

OMG. The irony of that statement is just overwhelming.

 

[cwjerome]

DonVito, we differ on this subject. What is the point of you search into my individual beliefs? That with the proper language I'll see the light and convert? I appreciate your interest, but let's agree to disagree. Maybe some other day we can have a lengthy personal discussion about OIF.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
But it's perfectly fine for you to clairvoyantly think and speak for thousands.

OMG. The irony of that statement is just overwhelming.

You noticed? :laugh:

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
DonVito, we differ on this subject. What is the point of you search into my individual beliefs? That with the proper language I'll see the light and convert? I appreciate your interest, but let's agree to disagree. Maybe some other day we can have a lengthy personal discussion about OIF.

That's a reasonable question. I guess it's that a lot of my job consists of pinning people down on things, so it's reflexive. I think the topic has importance, because I really do consider OIF one of the stupidest, worst-thought-out major military operations in American history, and quite possibly THE stupidest.

It's certainly not obvious to me that the best solution is to cut and run (actually I don't think it is), but part of crafting a coherent plan for moving forward in Iraq and/or redeploying is acknowledging the missteps that got us here. From what I've seen, President Bush has an almost pathological inability to do this, so the electorate has to to it for him.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

i wouldn't suggest trying to argue with cwjerome and his radical views. ask him what he thinks about abortion, it'll make you think twice that he is a sane human being. the man would rather have a ruthless dictator who was against abortion as opposed to a Democrat. he is a radical Christian, with extremely radical views. your not going to get him to change.

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Genx87

If the soldiers in Iraq didnt want to fight or be put into a position to fight. They shouldnt have volunteered for duty. Nobody put a gun to their head. And most over there want to be over there as noted by the high amount of reups we are seeing in our volunteer army.

I take it you're not in the Army, nor do you know anyone who is. I do, and left active duty earlier this year.

The Army, facing enlistment shortfalls at a time it had a great need for enlistees (last spring and summer), implemented large increases in reelistment bonuses. IMO this is the largest reason for the increased reenlistment numbers.

I know a lot of people in the Army, but don't know anyone who WANTS to be in Iraq, other things being equal. It seems to me that if you're so enthusiastic about the fun and camaraderie of being in a combat zone, you're free to enlist yourself - you're 18, right? You can also enlist at 17 with your parents' permission.

Is there a reason you're speaking in sentence fragments like that? It's rather jarring to read.

:beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer:
:beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer:

It's a full case for you Don...

Future Shock

 

[NoSmirk]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
i wouldn't suggest trying to argue with cwjerome and his radical views. ask him what he thinks about abortion, it'll make you think twice that he is a sane human being. the man would rather have a ruthless dictator who was against abortion as opposed to a Democrat. he is a radical Christian, with extremely radical views. your not going to get him to change.

Yeah, anyone even remotely against abortion is extremist to you. I'm strongly against abortion, and I don't go to church, I don't belong to a church, I haven't been in a church since I was probably 12 years old.. Yet, I guess I am a radical christian to you too.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
i wouldn't suggest trying to argue with cwjerome and his radical views. ask him what he thinks about abortion, it'll make you think twice that he is a sane human being. the man would rather have a ruthless dictator who was against abortion as opposed to a Democrat. he is a radical Christian, with extremely radical views. your not going to get him to change.

I am very not-religious and I have never participated in an abortion thread... ever.



You truly are an idiot

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: TravisT
I have 3 family members in the military. None supported Kerry.

All 3 are making careers out of being in the military. Why would they want to support the left, who in history, has only taken their jobs away from them?

It's not about supporing Kerry - it's about supporting TRUE CONSERVATIVE values. Brent Scowcroft, Bush Senior, McCain, Colin Powell - fsck it, nearly every Republican leader who had ever BEEN in uniform himself did NOT support the invasion of Iraq.

Afghanistan - absolutely.

But only the chickenhawk NEO-CONS, most of which have never had the nerve to go into combat (like Bush Jr.), or who "had other priorities" (like Cheney) wanted us to go in to Iraq.

This isn't about Republican vs. Democrat - this is about knowing from military history that we were starting something that we had little chance of ending well.

Future Shock

Proud member of Ronald Regan's local NY campaign staff, 1980 election
and current "Anyone else but Bush" supporter

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
But it's perfectly fine for you to clairvoyantly think and speak for thousands.

OMG. The irony of that statement is just overwhelming.

You noticed? :laugh:

Yeah. And I just hate myself for noticing.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Well, I don't sail by the winds of polls.

And no, I would not agree that there's nothing anyone could say that would change my mind about the war.

That begs the question, what would they have to say to do so? What would it take?

Probably notification that he was being drafted to go fight over there.

I like how a lot of people seem to project their own feelings onto everyone else. Just because they would soil their pants in panic about going to Iraq, they assume everyone would become as Bush-hating as them if they were sent 'over there.' :roll:

Who said anything about Bush Hating Jerome, I was just guessing at what it might take to get you to change your mind about supporting that war. Since your response to my guess was some kind of nonsensical Ad Hom I venture to say my guess was wrong:laugh:

Perhaps because they lack integrity (intellectual and character) they cannot empathize with those who have it.

What's that have to do with your case?