Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by taxwonk
What's that asinine phrase you use right before you launch into a long-winded ham-fisted personal attack on someone you don't agree with? What is it you accuse them of again?

dissent! the posts you question are squarely in the range of normal given Penske's abnormalities.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Oh, so it's only the politics of personal destruction when you say stuff like this



about me?

It wasa plea to get you stop expressing such a level of hatred towards me for expressing a faithful memoriam to our fallen heroes. At virtually the same time I reached across the divide with a message of unity. Why do you slap the hand of unity and friendship of a fellow American?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
You always seem to quote, or refer to, pathetic statements or assertions. "The man seems to believe his own lies": what does that mean? If you believe it to be true then it is not really a lie. So are they saying he is delusional? How can this person claim to have any inlking to what is going on in Bush's mind? And everything he says or does is well thought out and prepared by a group of advisors - are they all delusional? "suffering from a God complex" - what does that mean? unless you define what you mean by a God complex this statement is just vapid criticism - "shout things out of existence" - who is shouting?

This person doesn't like Bush but can't come up with any substantive criticism so they are simply throwing irrational and unsubstantiated claims at him. It is the standard strategy of idiots: Someone has to be crazy or sinister to disagree with me. Therefore if I don't like what they are doing I can claim they are being one or the other.

The only person with a God complex is the person that made this statement because they are claiming they are omniscient.

2. the approach you describe is consistent wiht the lefts strategy of labeling Bush an idiot from day one. Most of the people who make this statement, including some here, should be so lucky as to have 80% of the IQ that Bush has, but they are so much more successful and influential in the world (judging by the time and effourts that they put forth here) that they can confidently and smugly (and without a hint of the hypocrisy that they wreak of) label the President of the US, the CinC, the leader of the free world as "Dumya".

And they blame for the divide in the country. It would laughable if it wasn't so sad.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
You always seem to quote, or refer to, pathetic statements or assertions. "The man seems to believe his own lies": what does that mean? If you believe it to be true then it is not really a lie. So are they saying he is delusional? How can this person claim to have any inlking to what is going on in Bush's mind? And everything he says or does is well thought out and prepared by a group of advisors - are they all delusional? "suffering from a God complex" - what does that mean? unless you define what you mean by a God complex this statement is just vapid criticism - "shout things out of existence" - who is shouting?

This person doesn't like Bush but can't come up with any substantive criticism so they are simply throwing irrational and unsubstantiated claims at him. It is the standard strategy of idiots: Someone has to be crazy or sinister to disagree with me. Therefore if I don't like what they are doing I can claim they are being one or the other.

The only person with a God complex is the person that made this statement because they are claiming they are omniscient.

Sorry you didn't like it.

eta: I posted something calling both Clinton and Bush liars, which I thought would be the paradigm of even-handed centrism.

eata: You did understand that I was posted a comment made by someone else somewhere else, right?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Here was Hitchen's response to a jeering Bill Maher audience on at a recent taping of HBO's Real Time. I think this is a good ideological response to the collaborationists, appeasers and other left wing nattering nabobs of negativity.......

I saw Hitchens on C-Span discussing the bombing of Dresden and Hamburg. He felt these actions were completely unecessary and unbelievably barbaric. He said the same of the fire bombing of Tokyo. These bombings were directed at civilians to kill their moral and he said, not only is that not acceptible strategy in war (to directly target civilians) but didn't work anyway.

He made a very compelling case.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
I saw Hitchens on C-Span discussing the bombing of Dresden and Hamburg. He felt these actions were completely unecessary and unbelievably barbaric. He said the same of the fire bombing of Tokyo. These bombings were directed at civilians to kill their moral and he said, not only is that not acceptible strategy in war (to directly target civilians) but didn't work anyway.

He made a very comelling case.

You could say the same thing about most of the strategic bombing in WWII, in that there wasn't much of an effort to hit specific targets. Indeed, I think I have said the same thing here.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Spanky
I saw Hitchens on C-Span discussing the bombing of Dresden and Hamburg. He felt these actions were completely unecessary and unbelievably barbaric. He said the same of the fire bombing of Tokyo. These bombings were directed at civilians to kill their moral and he said, not only is that not acceptible strategy in war (to directly target civilians) but didn't work anyway.

He made a very compelling case.

He was a socialist, obviously some of the disease still lingers within him. One day at a time.......

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
eta: I posted something calling both Clinton and Bush liars, which I thought would be the paradigm of even-handed centrism.

good one!

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You could say the same thing about most of the strategic bombing in WWII, in that there wasn't much of an effort to hit specific targets. Indeed, I think I have said the same thing here.

And when the strategy didn't produce victory in the accepted time frame would you have been advocating withdrawing......maybe let the league of nations deal with Germany and Japan?

My only problems with Roosevelt were that he lied about his intent to go to war in order to get re-elected, and he fucked up at Yalta with his appeasement of and collaboration with Uncle Joe in sentencing hundreds of millions of central and eastern europeans to oppressive communism. In the middle he did good.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You could say the same thing about most of the strategic bombing in WWII, in that there wasn't much of an effort to hit specific targets. Indeed, I think I have said the same thing here.

Yes you did and you made a good case. I have always questioned the wisdom of the bombings after I heard MacNamera say that he heard Curtis LeMay say, that "if the war doesn't go our way we will certainly be prosecuted for war crimes" and I think Hitchens just solidified my doubts. He focused more on the nightime raids of the British because they were completely non targeted. In Japan he focused on the fact that the fire storms were directed at the civilian areas because Japanese homes were very susceptible to flames.

The thing about Hitchens is that he is such a "take no prisoners" and "give no quarter" type when it comes to foreign policy. To say that he is a hawk would be a gross understatement. MacNamara said that Vietnam was a mistake. Hitchens thinks we should have done "what was necessary" to win that war.

I think those facts make the criticisms from Hitchens especially damning.

And the more I learn about LeMay the more I am becoming to believe the man may have been a psychopath.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
eta: I posted something calling both Clinton and Bush liars, which I thought would be the paradigm of even-handed centrism.

Recently, ABC had a TV show that pretty much did the same thing. Yet Clinton and all of his apologists and sychophants went nutso.

Go figger.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
And when the strategy didn't produce victory in the accepted time frame would you have been advocating withdrawing......maybe let the league of nations deal with Germany and Japan?

In the speech I saw Hitchens give, he blasted Chamberlin and reiterated that the Nazis were incredibly evil and needed to be taken out by force, and that we had to demand unconditional surrender. He also said that the bombing of factorys and rail lines was strategically important and vital to the war effort.

The point he was making is that the British, after the Battle of Britain, decided to target civilians partially as pay back and partially for destryoing their moral. His point was that neither rational really justified deliberately targeting civilians. If they are collateral damange, such are the fortunes of war, but specifically targeting them was wrong.

He pointed out that the daylight bombing raids by the Americans in Europe were more strategic and therefor less of a problem. But in Japan LeMay specifically targeted the civilian population.

Hitchens is no surrender Monkey and he made a compelling case.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Recently, ABC had a TV show that pretty much did the same thing. Yet Clinton and all of his apologists and sychophants went nutso.

Go figger.

What did ABC fabricate about Bush?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
And the more I learn about LeMay the more I am becoming to believe the man may have been a psychopath.

Wasn't he the advocate of "bombing North Vietnam back to the Stone Age"?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Recently, ABC had a TV show that pretty much did the same thing. Yet Clinton and all of his apologists and sychophants went nutso.

Go figger.

Thing is, if Clinton hadn't been lying so much and derelict in carrying out the duties of his office, Bush never would have been in a situation where he could have been criticised for the things he has. And 911 would just a be an ordinary calendar date. and an emergency services phone number.