165
Legal case for drone strikes on Americans : Swingers Discussion 2164301041
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsLegal case for drone strikes on Americans
TOPIC: Legal case for drone strikes on Americans
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Start   41 to 50 of 86   End
User Details are only visible to members.
OK, so you did claim to null and void my speech, which you can't do. Pretty much the way it goes with liberals, must be that impotency thang.

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I'm stating, most simply, that your argument against my stance isn't worth the time it took you to write it since it's not relevant to the argument you're presenting against me.

TO wit...I don't believe the people in the twin towers were anything more than innocent bystanders in a "first strike" against America. At that time, we hadn't declared war against anyone...HOWEVER, via my post, I do believe that anyone who CHOOSES, either by their own free will or through more nefarious means, to stay in a combat zone becomes a potential casualty of war at their own risk.

To put it its most basic form...You've been warned that we are coming for those who seek to harm us. If you choose to stay, we can not be held responsible for our actions during combat with our enemies.

This has sweet fuck all to do with Sandyhook, Aurora, or NYC.

Long Beach CA
 
 
Username hidden
(1755 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Well said M! ;)

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Please explain what you null and voided, my speech or myself? You can't do either, but that is not the point. Why do you liberals always stick you foot in your mouth and then try to dance at the same time.

Most liberals are ignorant, the rest are just downright stupid.

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Interesting PB. Here is what Chomsky said about accountability. When you posted that in war, there are no innocents, I was reminded of this, from Power and Terror (Post 9/11 talks and interviews):

"Another interesting thing about the Vietnam War is we have no idea what the costs were to the Vietnamese. I mean, for the United States we know down to the last person. And the big postwar issue is finding the bones of American pilots. But nobody has any idea how many Vietnamese died or are still dying, for that matter. The guesses literally vary within millions. Because, who cares, you don't consider it when you slaughter other people.

Just a couple of weeks ago, there was a front-page story in all the papers. Some scientists have discovered that it would be possible to construct what are called "dirty bomb" -- bombs that would have a lot of radiation but not much destructive impact and to put them in NY somewhere. They calculated the effects and they said there wouldn't be many deaths, just a small number, but maybe a lot of disease, and it would certainly cause panic.

The same day, there was a conference in Hanoi, in which leading US scientists participated, people who had worked on dioxin, the main poisonous ingredient and Agent Orange. The conference was concerned with the effect of US chemical warfare on South Vietnam, only South Vietnam. The North was spared this terror. And an American scientist at the conference tested dioxin levels in various parts of the country.

Of course those who had been subjected to the crop destruction and other uses of Agent Orange had very high levels, in fact hundreds of times as high as permissible in the US.

Partly it's just internalization of values. I mean, you don't consider that what you do to other people matters. It's not just journalists. It's true of scholarship, for example. It's true of the intellectual world.

For example, if you take a poll among US intellectuals, support for bombing Afghanistan is just overwhelming. But how many of them thing that you should bomb Washington because of the US war against Nicaragua, lets say, or Cuba or Turkey or anyone else? If anyone were to suggest this, they would be considered insane. But why? I mean if one is right, why is the other one wrong?

When you try to get someone to talk about this question, they can't comprehend what you r question is. They can't comprehend that we should apply to ourselves the standards you apply to others. That is incomprehensible. There couldn't be a moral principle more elementary. All you have to do is read George Bush's favorite philosopher [Jesus]. There's a famous definition in the Gospels of the hypocrite, and the hypocrite is the person who refuses to apply to himself the standards he applies to others.

I mean, the response is just total hysteria and irrationality. But that's not so unusual. I bet you anything, if you went back to Japan in the 1930's or 1940's and you did a poll of intellectuals on war, you would probably get the same reaction. I know it was true in Germany and France and everywhere else. It's just standard. It's ugly but it's standard."

Colts Neck NJ
 
 
Username hidden
(16497 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Lets recap...

YOU ~ Every soldier who kills a innocent should be tried and executed.

ME ~ Your argument loses any relevance once you try to define the word "innocent" FJ. No one in a WAR is innocent. Not one.

YOU ~ I'm sure nobody in the towers was innocent either? Right?

ME ~ As far as I remember, we weren't at "War" with the middle east when the towers were hit. So your rebuttal there is completely null and void. I do appreciate your effort though.

~~~~~~~~

You'll notice the subtle use of the word WAR (I've embiggened it to make it easier to spot) in my original post to define when I feel innocence should be questioned. Your attempt to tie my beliefs (which are clearly stated in my original post and unable to be twisted to suit a specific agenda) to anyone in the twin towers in NY, which occurred PRIOR to any WAR the US was a part of, isn't a relevant rebuttal to your side of the debate.

I hope that clears any confusion up.

Long Beach CA
 
 
Username hidden
(1755 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Yes you did! What then were you referring to, was it some kind of insult that I am null and void. What a joke, are you that much of a ninny?

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I never once said that your SPEECH on a public forum was null and void.

I simply stated that your REBUTTLE is null and void in the CONTEXT that your ARGUMENT was that the folks in the twin towers were INNOCENT combatants in a WAR which couldn't be true since we hadn't STARTED the WAR yet.

THEREFORE, for the purposes of this debate and this debate alone, your comment isn't applicable to the benefit of your own argument.

Ferfuxxake...I'm trying to help you out dude. Don't look a gift liberal in the mouth.

Long Beach CA
 
 
Username hidden
(1755 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Did you cry too for the Sandy Hook victims while you cheered at the deaths of innocent children overseas?

Most liberals are hypocrites, the rest are too dumb to know they are.

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Go procreate yourself, you can't null and void another persons speech on here, only the SLS admin can do that.

Typical liberal!

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Start   41 to 50 of 86   End
TOPIC: Legal case for drone strikes on Americans