Dumb Wars

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 5:13 pm

Irn-Bru, why do you hate America?

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 5:15 pm

ATV wrote:Irn-Bru, why do you hate America?

Now see I asked him a reasonable question and you diluted it with this retarded post. Thanks.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 5:19 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
Cappster wrote:
FFA wrote:
Cappster wrote:It's nice to see that Mad TV is wanting our country to fail and making a dollar off of it.

. . .or exercising their free spech. . .

That is a very sad way to portray it........

They aren't saying that they want the USA to fail in Iraq, they are pointing out the USA's failure (and George Bush's attitude toward it).

Why is it sad to call that sketch free speech?

What you said is what they are actually saying, but it's true Democrats do want us to fail and are doing everything in their power to make it so. I just thought the iRack was clever enough to be actually funny.

While there are a lot of problems in Iraq, they are not nearly as bad as the left portrays them to be, but it's Bush's job to defend himself and he doesn't. Why would I want to do his job for him?

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 5:32 pm

Democrats do want us to fail and are doing everything in their power to make it so.

No evidence provided. Lie.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 5:34 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:You surprised me with this comment, Irn-Bru.

Now I've commented that liberal humor is usually dull to me because it's typically just an exaggeration based on their own accusations, but this one actually is clever enough that it's pretty funny. I enjoyed it.

I enjoyed it too, which is partly the reason why Cappster's comment didn't make too much sense to me.

But regardless, they made fun of Bush (free speech) and Cappster commented on them (free speech). He didn't say they shouldn't be allowed to do it, he just criticized them for it.

Right, and I likewise wasn't saying Cappster doesn't have his right to free speech (just as I'm not claiming you haven't a right to post contra my opinion, etc.)

Cappster reacted to the video, which was a parody on Bush's attitude towards Iraq, by saying that MAD TV hopes America will fail and that they were hoping to make a dollar off of that failure. Neither of these seemed like a particularly rational reaction to the clip. (Well, not to me anyway).

Cappster is free to criticize, but that doesn't make his summary any less bunk in my view.

Kazoo wrote:I'm not getting the issue either way. Doesn't free speech cover both the mocking iRack commercial and criticizing the makers of the mocking iRack commercial?

It does. It also covers people criticizing the criticizers (me), and people questioning or criticizing the criticizers of the criticizers (you). It also protects people as far down the string as you'd like to go.

I wasn't addressing Cappster's free speech with my post, I was criticizing his estimation of the sketch. Even Republicans should be able to laugh at that video clip without getting tense and defensive. Not everyone that criticizes this war and the president has motivations of hating America or wanting to see Democrats in office.

(Qualification: I also understand that conservatives are quite jaded with the media's ridicule of George Bush).

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 5:45 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:What you said is what they are actually saying, but it's true Democrats do want us to fail and are doing everything in their power to make it so.

The Democrats actually seem to me to be pro war in the middle east. Hillary has been markedly pro-war in her never-ending attempts to appear moderate. Obama has not ruled out taking military action against Iran. No Democrat, that I know of, is for immediate withdrawal from the country.

The best the Democrats have been able to muster against this war is trash. They are relentless against Bush because he's a Republican, but few of these same Democrats would criticize the war in this way if Bill Clinton was in office (Democrats were quite hawkish in the mid to late 90's, really).

Ironically, the only presidential candidate that has voted against Bush's war on every occasion, maintaining a principled stance against it, is a Republican. :shock:

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 6:04 pm

Obama has not ruled out taking military action against Iran.

When has he ever even come close to suggesting this? Please provide a link. That's like saying Rudolf Giulianni has not ruled out invading Mars.

No Democrat, that I know of, is for immediate withdrawal from the country.

Why, are you for immediate withdrawl? Nearly every Democrat is for withdrawl in one form or another, as I am. Some more immediate than others.

The best the Democrats have been able to muster against this war is trash.

Huh? What trash? Explain.

They are relentless against Bush because he's a Republican, but few of these same Democrats would criticize the war in this way if Bill Clinton was in office

There's some truth to this, as would be if the statement read "They are relentless against Clinton because he's a Democrat, but few of these same Republicans would criticize the war in this way if Bob Dole was in office".

Cappster · Post by **Cappster** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 6:28 pm

OK, maybe "wanting our country to fail" was a little over the top. I just found it to be a poor skit (just like most of mad tv's skits are). It just reinforces the fact that a lot of people, even though they say they support our troops, don't. Making fun of the soldiers over there that are fighting (yes it is making fun of the troops) is not funny to me. When they have comments like they were making is just a slap in the face to the armed forces in my opinion. They can have all the free speech they want. Just like I can be critical of what they are saying.

People need to find a way to be critical of Bush with out going through the troops. Directly or indirectly, it shouldn't be done.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 6:37 pm

ATV wrote:When has he ever even come close to suggesting this? Please provide a link. That's like saying Rudolf Giulianni has not ruled out invading Mars.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/1%2C73 ... %2C00.html

Why, are you for immediate withdrawl?

Yes.

Nearly every Democrat is for withdrawl in one form or another, as I am. Some more immediate than others.

How is this different than Republicans and Bush? They don't want war for war's sake, they want victory. So, they want withdrawl, too, but their timeline is longer than some Democrats.

Huh? What trash? Explain.

The best anti-Iraq war statement I've seen is a symbolic, non-binding resolution. Why not go after the president if they really were against this war?

There's some truth to this, as would be if the statement read "They are relentless against Clinton because he's a Democrat, but few of these same Republicans would criticize the war in this way if Bob Dole was in office".

I agree.

(There's a saying, "Republicans love to spend our money, so long as it is to fund war and empire. And Democrats love war and empire, so long as they get to spend our money on it.")

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 6:39 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:What you said is what they are actually saying, but it's true Democrats do want us to fail and are doing everything in their power to make it so.

The Democrats actually seem to me to be pro war in the middle east. Hillary has been markedly pro-war in her never-ending attempts to appear moderate. Obama has not ruled out taking military action against Iran. No Democrat, that I know of, is for immediate withdrawal from the country.

The best the Democrats have been able to muster against this war is trash. They are relentless against Bush because he's a Republican, but few of these same Democrats would criticize the war in this way if Bill Clinton was in office (Democrats were quite hawkish in the mid to late 90's, really).

Ironically, the only presidential candidate that has voted against Bush's war on every occasion, maintaining a principled stance against it, is a Republican.

As ever we can find some debate but not really any deep disagreement.

The Democrats want us to fail in Iraq because they view that as a success for themselves. I disagree, Americans don't succeed if America fails, but they don't see it that way. They view any price to regain power as being worth the cost and they naively just think they'll just fix everything they screwed up in an effort to get power back.

Now you said and I agree they are pro-War in the middle east and the two biggest libs in the debates on THN Crazyhorse and ATV both stated support for Gulf War I, Afghanistan and maintaining our deep military presence thourgh the middle east.

Which is my point, they say how different they are only because after going hand in hand into Iraq they stepped away and pointed fingers on one issue. As I compared before they want to burn the house down becasue Republicans painted the laundry room one shade of white different then they wanted it even though the rest of the house is identical.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 6:51 pm

Cappster wrote:OK, maybe "wanting our country to fail" was a little over the top. I just found it to be a poor skit (just like most of mad tv's skits are). It just reinforces the fact that a lot of people, even though they say they support our troops, don't. Making fun of the soldiers over there that are fighting (yes it is making fun of the troops) is not funny to me. When they have comments like they were making is just a slap in the face to the armed forces in my opinion. They can have all the free speech they want. Just like I can be critical of what they are saying.

People need to find a way to be critical of Bush with out going through the troops. Directly or indirectly, it shouldn't be done.

There is no doubt Democrats want us to fail, there is nothing over the top in saying that. They not only want us to fail but are doing everything in their power to make it happen.

Riddle me this. If you were a party who wanted us to fail and felt justified in doing everything in your power to make it so except actually call for our failure, what would you do that the Democrats are not doing to make us fail?

Wouldn't you

- Shout out every failure (every soldier's death, every homocide bombing)

- Put nothing in perspective (like the # of deaths for the size of the country occupied and how long it was occupied)

- Give no credit for every failure rectified and just stop talking about it (like the power, water, infrastructure issues)

- Downplay every success (like most of the country is peaceful, they have had several elections and formed a government)

- Insist we pull out while their government is not fully formed

- Attack every military policy

- Attack funding

- Ignore the vast majority of generals who support the miliary and obsess on the few who don't.

- Ignore the vast majority of families who support the miliary and obsess on the few who don't.

- Project our desire to pull out to the opponents of the government to give them incentive to move on

- Tie the military's hands (like conveying US Constitutional rights to trial and lawyers to terrorists never in the US)

- Attack our military (like Abu Grab and Guantanamo where allegations were investigated and the guilty prosecuted)

I can think of nothing more they could do then what they are. Can you?

As I said I want to not be in Iraq or the middle east at all. That does not mean that now that we are I want us to fail or that Democrats following 98% of the Republicans middle east policies are sufficiently different to support over the Middle East.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Sun Mar 18, 2007 7:01 pm

Obama's quote was taken from an Israeli news source, where they butchered it. Obama said "And while we should take no option, including military action, off the table, sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions should be our primary means to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons." Could you tell me who hasn't ruled out military action versus Iran? Obama did not say we should invade or attack Iran. Any wise representative would leave at that, as he did.

How is this different than Republicans and Bush?

Hasn't Bush continuously been saying for four years that there should be no timeline? Hadn't the Republican rubber-stamp congress refused to even bring a timeline up? Where's the confusion?

they want withdrawl, too, but their timeline is longer than some Democrats

You wrote that you wanted an immediate withdrawl. Wouldn't this mean that you would also be more for a plan that called for a more immediate withdrawl?

The best anti-Iraq war statement I've seen is a symbolic, non-binding resolution.

Yes, the best official statement from Congress, as a whole. Both Congress and the Senate struggled over stronger and more binding resolutions, that didn't have enough votes, i.e., not enough Republicans would sign onto it. Were you aware of this?

The Democrats want us to fail in Iraq

Still no evidence provided. Lie.

ATV....stated support for....our deep military presence thourgh the middle east.

No evidence provided. Lie.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 4:41 pm

Nice......

http://goofyblog.net/the-best-sign-from ... -protests/

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 5:29 pm

ATV wrote:Nice......

http://goofyblog.net/the-best-sign-from ... -protests/

That's because they are (assuming it's a Democrat protesting Republicans) protesting one party that got us into this mess and supporting the other party that got us into this mess.

Um...protester dude, you're still fvcking protesting this *sh$t* because you are as stupid dumb ass partisan Democrat who can't buy a clue.

Like our own ATV.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:11 pm

Ok I get it now. You're intentionally acting moronic and immature, right? That's pretty good - You had me there for a while, until it occured to me that nobody is intelligent enough to type, yet retarded enough to keep saying the same nonsensical things over and over again. Good job, but seriously - How did you find the time to do it? Are you disappointed that I finally caught on?

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:47 pm

ATV wrote:Ok I get it now. You're intentionally acting moronic and immature, right?

Wow, you're bright. Figure that out by yourself there did you swiftie? :roll:

Let's see, was your first clue when I TOLD YOU THAT.

Short history recap.

- You kept telling us in every conversation what Howard Dean thinks of every topic discussed

- I tried to engage you in debate and discussion

- You kept telling me what Howard Dean thinks

- I started insulting you and asked you to go away and agree to not address each other's posts

- You kept telling me what Howard Dean thinks

- I tried again to engage you in discussion and debate

- You kept telling me what Howard Dean thinks

- Now the tricky part. I said any real discussion with you is pointless and I'm going to just insult you. I have advocated Republicans, called you a faggot, done whatever I could think of to annoy you.

- You clued in I'm being intentionally moronic with you. An amazingly lucid moment for you, considering you weren't bright enough to pick up on it when I kept telling you that.

-----------------------

Basically you have 3 choices.

- You can for once write a post that's not retarded and I'll be glad to start having serious conversations with you.

- You can agree to my ongoing offer to not address each other's posts. It just has to be total, you can't address me directly or indirectly.

- I'll keep insulting you and writing nothing but drivel in response to your drivel posts.

The choice is yours. But I'm impressed that after telling you over and over my posts to you were drivel, all of a sudden you CAUGHT ON!

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 8:52 pm

Hehehe,....ok, jokes over. Again, good job.

skinz74 · Post by **skinz74** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 11:15 pm

Let me step in here for 2 seconds. This coming from the mouth of someone who has fought in 4 different conflicts in two different branches of service. The majority of military personnel involved in these conflicts strongly believe in their purpose. Let me tell you one of the few things that boil our blood the worst. Media, and uber-humans telling the world how we feel about things. Whether you believe me or not, the media is always sniffing around for that one person who's gonna spill their guts about how awful everything is...(and here's a clue for you...there's one of these kinds of people in EVERY SINGLE JOB IN THE WORLD.) And they'll run with this story. All of a sudden, the soldiers/sailors/airmen/marines have lost hope and want to come home. Sure, we all want to come home...when our time's up. Stop telling the world how we feel. There is enough of us around who can speak for ourselves. /end rant.

*&*%$ $.02

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:22 am

Media, and uber-humans telling the world how we feel about things.

I agree, we should listen to what the troops have to say....

http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

Here's what Obama has to say......

http://action.barackobama.com/page/content/iraq/

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:52 am

skinz74 wrote:Let me step in here for 2 seconds. This coming from the mouth of someone who has fought in 4 different conflicts in two different branches of service. The majority of military personnel involved in these conflicts strongly believe in their purpose. Let me tell you one of the few things that boil our blood the worst. Media, and uber-humans telling the world how we feel about things. Whether you believe me or not, the media is always sniffing around for that one person who's gonna spill their guts about how awful everything is...(and here's a clue for you...there's one of these kinds of people in EVERY SINGLE JOB IN THE WORLD.) And they'll run with this story. All of a sudden, the soldiers/sailors/airmen/marines have lost hope and want to come home. Sure, we all want to come home...when our time's up. Stop telling the world how we feel. There is enough of us around who can speak for ourselves. /end rant.

*&*%$ $.02

Yeah but they'll take the answer to a question and turn it into a rant.

example:
Media -Did you miss being home for the holidays?
Service member -yeah I missed my mom's cooking and seeing my family and friends, but I understand what we are doing here and hope to be home for next year's holidays.
Story running on front page - U.S. serviceman longs for mom's home cooking and doesn't understand why the goverment won't let him go home.

flamethrower · Post by **flamethrower** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:24 am

skinz74 wrote:Let me step in here for 2 seconds. This coming from the mouth of someone who has fought in 4 different conflicts in two different branches of service. The majority of military personnel involved in these conflicts strongly believe in their purpose. Let me tell you one of the few things that boil our blood the worst. Media, and uber-humans telling the world how we feel about things. Whether you believe me or not, the media is always sniffing around for that one person who's gonna spill their guts about how awful everything is...(and here's a clue for you...there's one of these kinds of people in EVERY SINGLE JOB IN THE WORLD.) And they'll run with this story. All of a sudden, the soldiers/sailors/airmen/marines have lost hope and want to come home. Sure, we all want to come home...when our time's up. Stop telling the world how we feel. There is enough of us around who can speak for ourselves. /end rant.

*&*%$ $.02

I could not have said it better skinz74. And I totally agree with what you said in your rant. =D>

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:45 am

example:
Media -Did you miss being home for the holidays?
Service member -yeah I missed my mom's cooking and seeing my family and friends, but I understand what we are doing here and hope to be home for next year's holidays.
Story running on front page - U.S. serviceman longs for mom's home cooking and doesn't understand why the goverment won't let him go home.

Prove it. Where's the link?

If the troops could have had their way they would already have been out of Iraq......

http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

From February 28, 2006, "An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year."

The poll was taken over a year ago. I'm sure that number is significantly higher now.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:59 am

ATV wrote:
example:
Media -Did you miss being home for the holidays?
Service member -yeah I missed my mom's cooking and seeing my family and friends, but I understand what we are doing here and hope to be home for next year's holidays.
Story running on front page - U.S. serviceman longs for mom's home cooking and doesn't understand why the goverment won't let him go home.

Prove it. Where's the link?

If the troops could have had their way they would already have been out of Iraq......

http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

From February 28, 2006, "An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year."

The poll was taken over a year ago. I'm sure that number is significantly higher now.

I'm not going to play battle of the links with you I talk to people that serve, have served and will serve over there. I'll take their word over whatever you may chose to dig up.

Prove the people in you link actually went over there and took a poll (without providing a link)

flamethrower · Post by **flamethrower** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:06 am

He can't. But will continue his babble w/links. I have a better Idea. He needs to really go over there. Instead of pretending that he supposedly has.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:13 am

LOL, yea, I really had to dig that up. Zogby, the most respected polling service in the business - I'm sure they just made it up,....prolly just sent a couple High School graduates down the road to get the opinion from a few Boy Scouts. OMG. Unreal. Some of you people are in such denial it's unbelievable. "Prove the people in you link actually went over there"....LOL!