Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Open Letter to Obama from ex-Republican


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
38 replies to this topic

#25 JeramiahCopperfield

JeramiahCopperfield

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-December 08
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 565
  • Reputation: 4
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 11:16 AM

Look at the tyranny of party--at what is called party allegiance, party loyalty--a snare invented by designing men for selfish purposes--and which turns voters into chattles, slaves, rabbits, and all the while their masters, and they themselves are shouting rubbish about liberty, independence, freedom of opinion, freedom of speech, honestly unconscious of the fantastic contradiction; and forgetting or ignoring that their fathers and the churches shouted the same blasphemies a generation earlier when they were closing their doors against the hunted slave, beating his handful of humane defenders with Bible texts and billies, and pocketing the insults and licking the shoes of his Southern master.

- "The Character of Man," Mark Twain's Autobiography

#26 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,130
  • Reputation: 1,529
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 11:20 AM

The Pubs have lost their way and are too much under the sway of the radical fundementalists, but to suggest a President ignore the other side of the aisle is retarded.



Radical fundamentalist?

Someone who believes in blowing people up because it is Allah's will is a radical fundamentalist. Someone who believes abortion is wrong is just someone who has a different opinion than some of the others do, and has a right to advocate that position as long as violence is not used.

#27 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,176
  • Reputation: 5,288
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 11:31 AM

Radical fundamentalist?

Someone who believes in blowing people up because it is Allah's will is a radical fundamentalist. Someone who believes abortion is wrong is just someone who has a different opinion than some of the others do, and has a right to advocate that position as long as violence is not used.


no, that's a terrorist. nothing in the phrase radical fundamentalist implies violence.

#28 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,130
  • Reputation: 1,529
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 11:54 AM

Radical fundamentalist are considered those that supports terrorist, or at least have similar goals. For example, in 1994/1995, the FBI started a unit whose purpose was to investigate groups such as Al Qaeda. They called it the RFU, or Radical Fundamentalist Unit. The DIA labeled Al Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, and Egyptian Islamic Jihad as radical fundamentalist groups that use terror.

While not all radical fundamentalist are terrorist, the two are considered related.

There are fundamentalist in the Christian world. They are not radical, unless you consider voting a radical thing.

Edited by Davidson Deac II, 14 February 2009 - 12:00 PM.


#29 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,795
  • Reputation: 2,493
Moderators

Posted 14 February 2009 - 12:45 PM

If the Islamic jihadists had an army like ours, they wouldn't have anything to do with the terrorists.

#30 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,130
  • Reputation: 1,529
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 01:00 PM

If the Islamic jihadists had an army like ours, they wouldn't have anything to do with the terrorists.


Probably true, but so what? If they had a fleet of starships, they probably wouldn't use terrorist tactics either.

Edited by Davidson Deac II, 14 February 2009 - 01:03 PM.


#31 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 14,027
  • Reputation: 442
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 01:15 PM

Probably true, but so what? If they had a fleet of starships, they probably wouldn't use terrorist tactics either.


or if they had other people to carry out their terrorism for them they wouldn't be terrorists either.

#32 Murph

Murph

    Joe Cool

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,965
  • Reputation: 310
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 01:21 PM

I have to admit that all this talk of doom and gloom unless the stimulus is passed is a bit...well too much? If this thing helps, it is going to look like he saved us. The media is helping this whole thing with articles and titles like this

http://news.yahoo.co...stimulus_stakes

Yet his own speechs last fall told us that we needed to do most of the work to pull ourselves out of this mess. If it works, I wonder how the credit will be spread around?

#33 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,130
  • Reputation: 1,529
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 01:38 PM

or if they had other people to carry out their terrorism for them they wouldn't be terrorists either.


Actually, they do have other people to carry out their terrorism for them. Thats why you don't see Osama strapping bombs to himself.

#34 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,983
  • Reputation: 1
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 02:14 PM

I don't get the whole "let's understand the terrorists" mentality. They are what they are. Once you cross that line, you're dog poo. JMHO

#35 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 18,130
  • Reputation: 1,529
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 02:28 PM

I don't get the whole "let's understand the terrorists" mentality. They are what they are. Once you cross that line, you're dog sh*t. JMHO


Its a military axiom that one has to understand the opponent to defeat them. One of the reasons we struggled in Iraq in the beginning was that we went in with very little understanding of the situation. We now understand things better, and its part of the reason why the situation has improved.

We need to understand why a person becomes a terrorist in order to try to prevent them from becoming terrorist, and to try to defeat them if they do become terrorist.

#36 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,983
  • Reputation: 1
HUDDLER

Posted 14 February 2009 - 02:36 PM

Its a military axiom that one has to understand the opponent to defeat them. One of the reasons we struggled in Iraq in the beginning was that we went in with very little understanding of the situation. We now understand things better, and its part of the reason why the situation has improved.

We need to understand why a person becomes a terrorist in order to try to prevent them from becoming terrorist, and to try to defeat them if they do become terrorist.


Isn't that what we were trying to do in Iraq? Establish a democracy, hope it takes, and give these animals another alternative?