Sunday, October 2, 2011
Will the Warmonger Continued
To call a person "pro-war" simply because they were in favor of one solitary and readily defined military mission (the dismantling of al Qaeda in Afghanistan) over the past 30-PLUS years, an action that the vast majority of the rest of the country also supported, an action that was completely and utterly justified (al Qaeda attacked us and, yes, let's face it here, if it wasn't for the heroism of those brave first responders, that 3,000 dead figure could have very readily climbed to 30 or 40,000) is, in my estimation, beyond loathsome................................................................................................And I also want to ask this knuckle-dragger, "Where in the hell is your righteous indignation toward President Obama?" The way that I see it here, THAT fellow is far, FAR, MORE pro-war than THIS fellow has ever been, or ever in fact will be. a) He escalated the Afghanistan War (can you say, George W. Bush, Richard Nixon?). b) He nearly quadrupled the number of drone strikes in Pakistan (there evidently haven't been any casualties with that, I guess). And c) he's also got us involved in frigging Libya and Yemen (actually, I do approve of the way that Mr. Obama literally blew that shithead, al Aulaqi, all the way to Kingdom Come). I mean, what, because he's a liberal Democrat, the idiot can't go after him as viciously?..................................................................................................You know what, folks? I think that we just have to face the fact here that there are certain individuals (many of them no doubt unemployable, angry, and looking for scapegoats) out there who flat-out cannot deviate from the script. THEY JUST DON'T HAVE THE FRIGGING WIRING FOR IT!...................................................................................................P.S. I apologize for the tenor of this post, folks. But when an individual crawls out of the woodwork, comes to my blog and idiotically extrapolates from one singular position that I am somehow "pro war", nah, no, not gonna happen. I was against the Vietnam War. I was against the first Gulf War (I've since admitted that I was wrong on that one). I was against the Bosnia/Kosovo action. I was against the Iraq War. I was against our involvement in Libya. And I was against the occupation of Afghanistan. Yes, people. I DID want to blow to smithereens the people who attacked us on 9/11. SUE ME!....And, also, all of this bullshit about civilian casualties; a) drones markedly limit the extent of this and b) the fault of these civilian casualties lies not with us BUT WITH AL QAEDA (the fact that they attacked us first and clearly love to hide behind civilians)!! Fuck this blaming America for every fucking thing nonsense.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
You've blown a gasket because I refuse to go along with your ridiculous assertion that war with limited objectives is somehow not war? You've posted numerous times regarding how you were gung-ho to go into Afghanistan (if only for a limited time and with limited objectives). War is war Will.
And I've never said that Obama isn't pro-war. There have been causalities from Obama's drone strikes, and I am very displeased with him for what he's done in that regard. And I already told you I was against our involvement in Libya.
I never said anything about degrees, so I don't know why you're bringing that up as a defense. On a pro-war scale of 1 to 10 I'd say you rank very low. But anyone who would CHOOSE to go to war when we don't have to? I call those people pro-war. If that makes me a "knuckle-dragger", then so be it.
Me, I'd apply that term to anyone who would chose to go to war instead of negotiating. War should be a LAST resort, not the first one. I guess not easily accepting unnecessary deaths easily is something to criticize someone for.
And I don't know who you think I'm scapegoating. You? You think I said Will Hart was responsible for the Afghanistan war?
Fuck blaming America? Despite what you thought we should do... we did not do that. We're still in Afghanistan 10 years later and thousands of innocent civilians have been killed. But we're NOT responsible?
btw, the "action" was not completely and utterly justified... it was illegal under international law. Why the hell do you think bush spent so much time trying to convince the UN? WHY would he do that if invading Afghanistan was "totally justified"?
Why would he say, after he failed to convince the UN, that the US doesn't "need permission" to defend itself? Maybe because he knew he was breaking international law?
I've only stated my position... which isn't in agreement with yours. Am I supposed to lie about my position so as to not offend you? Disagree with me... I don't care, but this attack post crosses the line.
But this isn't the first time this has happened with Will... obviously he's got a temper. I wonder if he'd try to physically assault me if we were in the same room having this discussion.
Will, you nasty evil warmonger, you can't fool me, I know you love the smell of napalm in the morning.
Well,he had me fooled BB.I thought Will wanted to kill every arab responsible for 9-11....I mean every last one one of them wearing their underware on their heads.If he in fact did than Will is a war monger of the first rate and I salute him.WD,on the other hand can best be discribed as a panty waist who sees injustice around each corner....bless his heart,for he knows not what he does.
I know Will likes women in movies,mainly old black and white movies.Well,tonight I watched Sea of Love with Al Pacino and Ellen Barkin....Im here to tell you Ellen Barkin,with her crooked smile was hotter then the hinges of hell.....just my opinion,I could be wrong....but I dont think so.
Will...This is why I gave up on political discussions in general. It's all so hopeless. If this isn't enough check out WD's "moderates are crazies" blog entry. Funny...all I want is for the country to right itself yet by WD's standard, you, me or anyone else who doesn't walk in lockstep with party orthodoxy are branded the lunatics...
Marcus: If this isn't enough check out WD's "moderates are crazies" blog entry. ...you, me or anyone else who doesn't walk in lockstep with party orthodoxy.
It's going to be pretty hard to check out that post, since the only place it exists is in Marcus' imagination. What I really said is nothing at all like what Marcus thinks I said.
The post says Moderates who think Progressives have moved the goalposts (and that, according to them you've got now to be on the "FAR Left" to qualify as Progressive) are crazy.
The post says absolutely nothing about walking in lockstep with "party orthodoxy". The fact is I'm against that and do not MYSELF do that (walk in lockstep with Democratic party orthodoxy).
Is what Marcus said an example of Moderate craziness? They perceive faults in others (which defines their superiority)... and no matter what you say, if you're not in agreement with them... you've got those faults?
For the record, I do NOT think Will is a "warmonger". He used that word, not me. Also, his interpretation of what I meant when I said he was "pro-war" is also wrong... because he was only for this one war, and he wanted to keep it short. So, broadly speaking, Will is not pro-war.
I only used the term because he was pro-war FOR THIS WAR. A war I strongly believe was completely unnecessary... and it was also illegal under international law (which isn't a strong belief, but a fact).
But, if I'm wrong... I don't understand why Will is getting so angry with me... What can I do about it if I'm wired to be a knuckle dragger? He said it was impossible for me to deviate from the script! So really, what choice do I have?
btw, I do have righteous indignation toward President Obama (who I do not consider a Liberal Democrat... at all). And I've got problems with his killing of al-Awlaki... mainly because the man was a American Citizen.
WD. You question my perception? Here is a sample of comments from your Blog Post:
"You are convinced that everyone who doesn't agree with your far left philosophy is a moron." John Myste
mmm...Seems to me, Bucko, you pass plenty of judgment on others....especially those who don't agree with you. Apparently I am not alone in this sentiment.
Moreover, if you twist someone's position, yeah they are gonna get a bit hyped. I am done with you...you may return to the sandbox with the other children...
I was pro military action one time in 35 years. If that makes me pro-war, then that also makes hundreds of millions of other Westerners pro-war, too. And I've also said on many occasions that I would have brought the bulk of the troops home after the demolition of al Qaeda was complete. No nation-building, no propping up of Karzai, Bush mucked up.......Crossing the line? Calling somebody pro-war after an entire lifetime of opposing war - that's crossing the line.
And, no, I'm not a violent person. I work with the elderly and in 2008 was honored by the Alzheimer's Association as one of the outstanding caregivers in CT. If we were "in the same room", I'd show you my plaque.
And I think that your "critique" of moderates is ludicrous. I can't for the life of me think of more than one or two issues that I wouldn't be willing to compromise on.
Oh, and, yeah, Ellen Barkin - BOOYAH!!
I'll retract my comment about Will being pro-war (I never used the term "war monger"). It isn't reflective of his overall record and is only applicable to his stance regarding the illegal and unnecessary invasion of Afghanistan.
I won't apologize though. Not after the numerous posts where he basically called me stupid for thinking bush should have negotiated with the Taliban... which would have resulted in a conviction of bin Laden... TEN freaking years ago!
He argues against turning over bin Laden to the OIC because Saudi Arabia was a member... but Saudi Arabia kicked bin Laden out of their country and revoked his citizenship.
Also, a lot of these Islamic countries have been victims of terrorist acts of al Qaeda themselves. Why would they declare bin Laden innocent and set him free?
WD said: "illegal and unnecessary invasion of Afghanistan"
Will has never discussed such an invasion. He has only discussed the legal and necessary retaliation against the government of Afghanistan.
Sorry, the proclamations of armchair attorneys, genocidal antisemites, and wild-eyed cranks don't count as international law.
dmarks, you don't believe international law counts as international law. I cited you the portions of the UN Charter that bush violated (Articles 33 and 39).
Also, I've NEVER cited the "proclamation" of a single armchair attorney, genocidal anti-Semite, or wild-eyed crank. Zero.
Post a Comment