Get out if you want Sharia Law......

[Extra Stout]

So I guess if we put together all of OG's arguments, killing for your own political cause is OK, because the USA exists only as a result of white people killing others.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Well, then unless you are a full-blooded member of one of the First Nation tribes, I guess you better get yourself a plane ticket and skedaddle back to wherever your people came from since you are so morally opposed to the existence of our country.

just what I'd expect from a neocon. If you don't agree with us, leave the country.

[Extra Stout]

just what I'd expect from a neocon. If you don't agree with us, leave the country.

I'm just asking you to be coherent in your ideology. If you are morally opposed to the creation of the USA, then how can you stand to be a citizen of it?

That's like somebody being an atheist and then turning around and joining a Southern Baptist church and getting baptized.

Or... are you here for some other reason? You are opposed to the existence of America... you support murder in pursuit of political ideals...

[Extra Stout]

So according to OG, it would be OK to kill a bunch of American civilians simply because you are opposed to the existence of America, and that should be considered legitimate political expression.

I have another word for it...

[Extra Stout]

Things are becoming clearer about your opposition to the war on terror.

It can't be because innocent civilians are getting killed, because you've already said that killing people in pursuit of political goals is OK.

It can't be strategic, because you've established that you think the existence of the country in the first place is immoral.

In fact, it's interesting how much you agree with al-Qaeda!

Conclusion: OG opposes the War on Terror because he is a terrorist sympathizer.

Off to Gitmo with you!

[Oh, Gee!!]

Things are becoming clearer about your opposition to the war on terror.

It can't be because innocent civilians are getting killed, because you've already said that killing people in pursuit of political goals is OK.

It can't be strategic, because you've established that you think the existence of the country in the first place is immoral.

In fact, it's interesting how much you agree with al-Qaeda!

Conclusion: OG opposes the War on Terror because he is a terrorist sympathizer.

Off to Gitmo with you!

yeah, because calling a movement misguided means "completely agrees with the use of violence."

just like a W supporter, complete disregard for truth. Just try to smear people's names and call them terrorists or unpatriotic for disagreeing with your view on the war. People like you make me afraid for the future of this country.

[Extra Stout]

just like a W supporter, complete disregard for truth. Just try to smear people's names and call them terrorists or unpatriotic for disagreeing with your view on the war.

I don't remember stating my views on the war. I just took your own statements to their logical conclusions. Or would you like to recant something?

People like you make me afraid for the future of this country.

So, given that by your own statements, you oppose this country, that would mean you are afraid that people like me will cause the nation to thrive. High praise. Thank you.

[Oh, Gee!!]

I don't remember stating my views on the war. I just took your own statements to their logical conclusions. Or would you like to recant something?


So, given that by your own statements, you oppose this country, that would mean you are afraid that people like me will cause the nation to thrive. High praise. Thank you.

Edit: just like a W supporter, complete disregard for truth. Just try to smear people's names and call them terrorists or unpatriotic for disagreeing with your view on "anything." (I assume this includes the war)

I never said I oppose this country, but unlike you I recognize that this country was taken by deceit and violence. Of course, I should have my citizenship stripped for saying that according to mouth breathers like you.

[Mr. Peabody]

I never said I oppose this country, but unlike you I recognize that this country was taken by deceit and violence. Of course, I should have my citizenship stripped for saying that according to mouth breathers like you.

Unless you view this country and its history through red, white, and blue-colored glasses, you should be branded unpatriotic and shipped of to France!

This country has never done any wrong, never been on the wrong side of any conflict and always acts with the purest and most noble aims in mind. At least that's what they told me in 5th grade history class.

[Extra Stout]

I never said I oppose this country, but unlike you I recognize that this country was taken by deceit and violence. Of course, I should have my citizenship stripped for saying that according to mouth breathers like you.

Did you or did you not make a moral equivalence between being an American citizen (which apparently implies assent for past atrocities) and killing people in support of political goals?

I forget, was killing people quasi-acceptable or "misguided?" So if murder is "misguided," and morally it's the same as being an American citizen by your own words, then choosing to be an American citizen would be "misguided."

So if you yourself continue to maintain your citizenship, that would be a misguided decision, according to your own statements.

I suppose it's possible you're not a dangerous terrorist. It could just be that you are young, idealistic, yet logically incoherent and really have no clue what the you think you believe.

[Extra Stout]

Unless you view this country and its history through red, white, and blue-colored glasses, you should be branded unpatriotic and shipped of to France!

This country has never done any wrong, never been on the wrong side of any conflict and always acts with the purest and most noble aims in mind. At least that's what they told me in 5th grade history class.

And because America did bad things in the past, it has no moral authority to defend itself now and should accept its destruction as punishment.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Did you or did you not make a moral equivalence between being an American citizen (which apparently implies assent for past atrocities) and killing people in support of political goals?

I forget, was killing people quasi-acceptable or "misguided?" So if murder is "misguided," and morally it's the same as being an American citizen by your own words, then choosing to be an American citizen would be "misguided."

So if you yourself continue to maintain your citizenship, that would be a misguided decision, according to your own statements.

I suppose it's possible you're not a dangerous terrorist. It could just be that you are young, idealistic, yet logically incoherent and really have no clue what the you think you believe.

I never said killing was okay. I said that the weathermen and SLA were fighting against oppression but they were misguided.

You said I had skewed morals for being sympathetic with their causes because they killed people. I reminded you that this country was founded on violence.

You want to label me a terrorist , unpatriotic, send me to prison, strip my citizenship, etc.

I think it is you who is the dangerous one. Thanks for playing though.

[Extra Stout]

Since liberals are the moral arbiters of society, they should get started on their own res ution for America's past sins ahead of everybody else.

Please burn down your homes and kill yourselves. Then the scales of justice will be even.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Since liberals are the moral arbiters of society, they should get started on their own res ution for America's past sins ahead of everybody else.

Please burn down your homes and kill yourselves. Then the scales of justice will be even.

Funny. Seems like you're the one advocating violence. What's that called again?

[Oh, Gee!!]

Hypocrisy.

[Mr. Peabody]

And because America did bad things in the past, it has no moral authority to defend itself now and should accept its destruction as punishment.

No, I was pointing out the flaw in your argument that somehow because one acknowledges the violence and deceit that this country was founded upon it makes the person opposed to this nation. Not everyone wears blinders. I think it is possible to acknowledge the terrible things this country has done (and continues to do) and still be a good American citizen.

[Extra Stout]

You said I had skewed morals for being sympathetic with their causes because they killed people. I reminded you that this country was founded on violence.

So then your ing little game of tying all conservatives to people who blow up abortion clinics is bull , right?

Oh did widdle lefty baby get his feewings hurt?? Waaah. You're a pussy.

[Extra Stout]

No, I was pointing out the flaw in your argument that somehow because one acknowledges the violence and deceit that this country was founded upon it makes the person opposed to this nation. Not everyone wears blinders. I think it is possible to acknowledge the terrible things this country has done (and continues to do) and still be a good American citizen.

OK, so you're logically coherent. You might want to point out to your friend OG how that works.

[Oh, Gee!!]

So then your ing little game of tying all conservatives to people who blow up abortion clinics is bull , right?

Oh did widdle lefty baby get his feewings hurt?? Waaah. You're a pussy.

Give up, ES. You're making it worse on yourself. Step away from the keyboard and try again another day.

[Extra Stout]

Funny. Seems like you're the one advocating violence. What's that called again?

I would be advocating violence if I supported having others destroying your property or killing you.

You have the privilege of self-determination in this country. Use it.

[Extra Stout]

Give up, ES. You're making it worse on yourself. Step away from the keyboard and try again another day.

Worse on myself? Why, because some radical thinks less of me?

[2centsworth]

Give up, ES. You're making it worse on yourself. Step away from the keyboard and try again another day.

ES kicked your ass.

[Extra Stout]

Here's the thing:

We hear all these people that get all bent out of shape about America being this horrible Nazi warmongering oppressor nation, scourge of the earth, denier of human rights, murderer of innocent Iraqi children, Bush equals Hitler, blah blah blah.

We hear this knee-jerk bull about how the war is just an imperial land grab, we're murdering Iraqis to grab their oil. Blah blah blah.

So you would think that the deal is that leftists are just opposed to human killing, they're pacifists, they're sick of the progression of -for-tat over history, of people who did nothing to deserve it having a bomb land on their house, etc.

But, no. We get lovely folks like OG who say, well, in certain cases, if they're doing it for the right political reasons, it's misguided, though since they're pursuing the same ideals as him, he can't really come down too hard on them.

Oh, so it's not about that pacifist idealism, peace, love and harmony?

So wait, what's all this gnashing of teeth about Iraq? I mean, at least I could understand all this vitriol if people were just reflexively opposed to seeing people die in a war, but if there's a lefty who grows ambivalent if people get murdered by leftists acting for a cause... then the politics of Iraq must be about something else.

I mean, I'm thinking Iraq's not such a hot strategic idea because I don't think you can control the political aspirations in the minds of Sunni, Shia, and Kurd communities with tanks and Humvees, you can't stay there forever, and as soon as you leave, the factions are going to fight it out for power no matter how much they talk the democratic talk while your troops are there. I'm thinking that Saddam was an asshole, but at least he was a predictable asshole, and if I'm trying to wipe out al-Qaeda, he hates them as much as I do, so hey let's cut a deal. I'm realizing that the whole WMD thing was blown out of proportion to make a case for war, but so was the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the Zimmerman memo, and the sinking of the Maine, so let's not act like this is some new tactic of deceit here.

But despite all that, I'm viewing Iraq as a thoroughly dumb decision made by a President who did it because his policy advisers told him that the best way to make America safe and beat terror was to turn the despotic Middle East into a conglomeration of moderate democracies. So I don't hate the guy, but I think his decision-making sucks.

And I'm thinking, well, if leftists also want the best for America, then hopefully they can see that this is a up rather than the advancement of evil, right?

Unless of course the problem with Iraq to them is not so much that innocent people or being killed or that it's a strategic blunder so much as that it's being carried out by a right-wing government. As in, if you're not a lefty, you're evil. And to people like that, all I can say is you and the horse you rode in on.

I'm not exactly the epitome of fire-breathing theocratic neo-con whatever. If I had to estimate, I'm probably halfway between John McCain and Chuck Hagel on a lot of things. Right-wing, sure, but not exactly the "base." I'm the kind that thinks most of the other side is worth working with, that there can be a lot of compromise made on a lot of issues, that on a lot of things 75% of us agree to enough extent to get something done if only we could get the fringes to shut up for a while.

But, OG, I don't think I could work with you. I've managed to find common ground now and then even with NBA-freakin'-Dan. But you're one person I couldn't stand having a stake in the future of this country.

[Mr. Peabody]

But despite all that, I'm viewing Iraq as a thoroughly dumb decision made by a President who did it because his policy advisers told him that the best way to make America safe and beat terror was to turn the despotic Middle East into a conglomeration of moderate democracies. So I don't hate the guy, but I think his decision-making sucks.

And I'm thinking, well, if leftists also want the best for America, then hopefully they can see that this is a up rather than the advancement of evil, right?

I guess it depends on what perspective you are viewing the war through. Here in the U.S., we have the luxuxry of looking at the war and saying it was a " up." How would you view this war if it was your country that was invaded by a world superpower and subsequently devolved into chaos. I think many people in that situation would view the invading country's actions as evil. I think this is how many people in the world see our actions. That's the part that bothers me.

Don't get me wrong. I don't lay the blame for this "dumb decision" entirely on the President, his administration, or even the Republican Party. There were plenty of Democrats that for whatever reason supported this war and are now crying foul. Where were these people when the decision was being made to commit our troops to this action? It seems that some politicians now realize that it is politically popular to protest the war and so they are jumping on the gravy train.

I say screw the whole damn lot of them!

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Pick a Southern Baptist congregation.

Call me when they start blowing up and beheading people.

Do you actually know any Muslims?

Hmm, let's see, I took a senior seminar on the history of Islam. There was 22 people in the class, only 3 of us were Americans, the rest were all foreigners who prayed five times a day. Do the math.

The best part about that class was they were very open on their world views, views of those in the Mideast, etc.

Don't get me wrong, they weren't all suicide bombers in training or anything, but we read the Qur'an and Hadith in that class, and it's pretty damn cut and dry as to what laws should govern society.

I stand by my comment.