LawTalkers - A Forum for Grinches and Ho-Ho-Hoes

Wasn't that a video game in the seventies?

(ETA - but seriously, what about his post on Lebanese desires for freedom warranted a neocon reference? Totally lost me.)

Adder

02-21-2005 01:37 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
I'm not sure what my post has to do with neoconservatism, but the answer is no. I just agree with the administration that supporting the spread of freedom, human rights, and, if possible, democracy, is both a moral imperative and the the best course for protecting American interests.

preferably with nuclear weapons, right?

Replaced_Texan

02-21-2005 01:38 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Wasn't that a video game in the seventies?

(ETA - but seriously, what about his post on Lebanese desires for freedom warranted a neocon reference? Totally lost me.)

My understanding is part of the neocon plan is to "spread freedom," and I've been in a few arguments about whether the Lebanese looking to get away from Syria is proof that the grand plan is working.

Tyrone Slothrop

02-21-2005 01:40 PM

Apparently this is popular among the Conservative Political Action Conference

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
What are you, a fucking Canadian?

I was going to say, "...see?" But then "see" would have been in there twice. Sorry to contaminate your Washington's Birthday with a hint of our friends to the North.

bilmore

02-21-2005 01:40 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by Adder
preferably with nuclear weapons, right?

Wow. This is how you react to the Lebanese movement for freedom?

Are you that incensed that it might just reflect well on Bush's ideas?

sgtclub

02-21-2005 01:41 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by Adder
preferably with nuclear weapons, right?

I'm not sure I understand this, but if you are trying to make some assinine argument about spreading freedom at the point of a gun, save it.

Adder

02-21-2005 01:41 PM

Baathist to Surrender?

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub

The so-called insurgency has long consisted of two main elements, the al Qaeda-linked terrorists, most of whom are not Iraqis, and Baathist Sunnis whose objectives are more narrowly political. It sounds as though some of the latter group, at least, are ready to throw in the towel. Their violence had two main strategic objectives: first, to prevent President Bush from being re-elected; second, to prevent the Iraqi election from going forward. Both failed. If they give up, the terrorists will be isolated and can much more easily be defeated.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/

eft

Um... 1 and 2, eh?

ltl/fb

02-21-2005 01:43 PM

Baathist to Surrender?

Quote:

Originally posted by Adder
Um... 1 and 2, eh?

What IS it with you PEOPLE and your CANADIANNESS? gwinky is not going to fuck you just for saying "eh"

Adder

02-21-2005 01:44 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Wow. This is how you react to the Lebanese movement for freedom?

Are you that incensed that it might just reflect well on Bush's ideas?

I said nothing about Lebanon. I merely mocked the concept of spreading democracy with military force.

And how, exactly, is Syria's assissination by car bomb, the precipitating event in Lebanon, a part of Bush's ideas?

bilmore

02-21-2005 01:46 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by Adder
And how, exactly, is Syria's assissination by car bomb, the precipitating event in Lebanon, a part of Bush's ideas?

Ask, instead, how quickly Lebanese would have been parading on the streets Bashar-bashing two years ago, and if you can think of any reason for a difference.

Did you just call me Coltrane?

02-21-2005 01:47 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
My understanding is part of the neocon plan is to "spread freedom," and I've been in a few arguments about whether the Lebanese looking to get away from Syria is proof that the grand plan is working.

freedom
liberty
terrorists
insurgents

I'm glad these words have been overused and abused so much lately that they currently have no value or meaning.

bilmore

02-21-2005 01:51 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
freedom
liberty
terrorists
insurgents

I'm glad these words have been overused and abused so much lately that they currently have no value or meaning.

They have specific and significant meaning for quite a few of us. We already understood about the rest of you.

Adder

02-21-2005 01:51 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
Ask, instead, how quickly Lebanese would have been parading on the streets Bashar-bashing two years ago, and if you can think of any reason for a difference.

True. It does help one's courage to know that there is someone who will get your back when you act out.

In other news, who do you think is going to be appointed the first governor of greater Judea?

Did you just call me Coltrane?

02-21-2005 01:52 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
They have specific and significant meaning for quite a few of us. We already understood about the rest of you.

Fuck you. My cousin is in Iraq right now. Fighting for "freedom." So fuck you. Drink the kool-aid, you sheep.

bilmore

02-21-2005 01:54 PM

Freedom on the March

Quote:

Originally posted by Adder
True. It does help one's courage to know that there is someone who will get your back when you act out.

Syria has long held Lebanon in a rather tyrannical, despotic grip.

Lebanese are just now starting to feel emboldened to try to expell the foreign invaders.

How sad that you think of this as "acting out".

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:12 PM.

Page 234 of 334

234

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page