Charles is boiling in rage about a Daily Kos diary talking about how America needs to feel the damage inflicted on Iraq by getting "invaded" and "occupied".
It should be noted that LGF Watch doesn't support the idea that America should be invaded or occupied, however the reactions at the little green loony bin are just rich:
#12 looking closelyActually, no. They don't.
I hear Al Queda in Iraq is still looking for recruits.
Maybe this diarist ought to volunteer.
To address the thin gruel of his post, the Iraqis *WANT* the US military to be there. So why should we leave?
#16 Bubblehead IIOf course it's totally obvious that the destruction those darn mexicuns are causing all over America, even in a neighborhood near you, is legitimately comparable with the carpet-bombing of Iraqi cities during the invasion, in which a few tens of thousands have died, especially that loads of Mexicans are productive members of American society and taking up jobs that even the lizardoid army would refuse to do. Can I get a "Nuke Mexico!" now?
re: #4 phoenixgirl
Mexico. It's already happening, The invasion, the war torn streets, the destruction of entire neighborhoods, ect.
#30 galloping grannyNo comment needed.
re: #17 JamesTKirk
Can we start with Berkeley?
As far as I am concerned, anyone who wants Berkeley is welcome to it. Glad to hand it over. Might even pay somebody to take it. What a waste of oxygen that crew is. They spout enough hot air to be responsible for "global warming" all by themselves!
#50 zmdavidGreat, and I'm sure that the millions of Iraqi civilians who have lost innocent family members and are leading this kind of dandy life regard all of that as "no cost". Nice, eh?
We need someone to come, kill all the violent terrorists in our country and rebuild our infrastructure at no cost to us?
I'm all for it.
#67 BeerDrinking_VictoryMonkeySure, 9/11 was bad enough, but comparing this one-time incident with a since-5-years-unresolved and ongoing conflict that has taken a few hundred-fold more lives and a much greater toll on the lives of the remaining population is a bit dishonest, no?
We don't know what it's like to be in a war zone, prick? There were war zones in lower Manhattan, the Pentagon and over the skies of Pennsylvania on 9/11/01. Just don't question their patriotism.
/SPIT
Now, in response to the Berkeley remark:
#77 samsgran1948.. and don't you dare call them racist!
re: #30 galloping granny
But you need to make sure that the People's Republic of San Francisco is included with Berkeley.
And on and on it goes. It's not as if they were really opposed to the Iraq war either. Deskchair warrior-ism at its best!
28 comments:
Sure, 9/11 was bad enough, but comparing this one-time incident with a since-5-years-unresolved and ongoing conflict that has taken a few hundred-fold more lives and a much greater toll on the lives of the remaining population is a bit dishonest, no?
Did you loons here on LGF Watch catch the tacit minimization of the tragedy called 9/11 by the guest host Sphinxter? More people were killed by the attack on 9/11 than Pearl Harbor, but hey there's worse things!
Most of you clowns are as blind to Sphinxter's American hating as you were to Obama's racist church.
And Sphinxter for you: We toasted about 200,000 Japanese for less than 9/11. You would do well to remember that.
how can you attack Sphinx for 'minimization'? He merely pointed out that compared to the anarchy and mass murder unleashed in Iraq that the bodycount is significantly less. Is this not fact?
As for 'toasting' 200,000 Japanese for less than 9/11. The difference being that Japan attacked the US, Iraq didn't.
The Sphinx is right, comparing 9/11 to the Iraq War is dishonest.
"Did you loons here on LGF Watch catch the tacit minimization of the tragedy called 9/11 by the guest host Sphinxter? More people were killed by the attack on 9/11 than Pearl Harbor, but hey there's worse things!"
Nobody has denied that 9/11 wasn't really that bad. Of course it was terrible. But if you really think that 9/11 was the worst tragedy to hit humanity, then you're just either ragingly dishonest, or painfully blind.
"Most of you clowns are as blind to Sphinxter's American hating as you were to Obama's racist church."
Keep on raving Tex. Keep on raving.
"And Sphinxter for you: We toasted about 200,000 Japanese for less than 9/11. You would do well to remember that."
I never thought that would be something one could be proud of and boast about. Says a lot about how much you care for human life.
...and comparing 9/11 to Pearl Harbour to justify the Iraq War is equally dishonest. Not that it stops every wingnut keyboard commando doing it.
9/11, as horrible as it was, is the wingnut's pet tragedy.
"Nobody has denied that 9/11 wasn't really that bad"
OOPS, sorry about that. What I meant was "Nobody has CLAIMED 9/11 wasn't really that bad".
My apologies. Sometimes I should proof-read my own comments.
Sphinx,
When you are attacked, you fight back.
Do you really believe one person should be killed for every person killed? Is that 'proportional' to you?
So I ask you...
The World Trade Center and Pentagon was blown up.
Would it have been 'proportional' to then blow up the Iranian parliament and financial centers in Tehran, killing and wounding the same numbers of civilians?
According to you, that is totally justified!
Do you not see the insane illogic of claiming 'proportionality'? It is the most idiotic and insane arguments I have ever seen.
It literally means that in response to terror aimed at civilians, there should be Arab civilian purposely mass murdered. For instance, according to your 'proportionality' claim, it would have been justified for the IDF to walk into a mosque, after the Mercaz yeshiva massacre, and mass murder 8 mosque goers, and wounder another 10. That would have been perfectly 'proportional.' According to you, you should not actually go after jihadists, but you should 'proportionally' attack civilians, purposely.
This is the insane world you are justifying.
But I will go one step further, that also means jihadists always win, as they call the shots. They always get to strike first, and the only thing the US or Israel or 'the West' can do is react.
Shocking and inhumane policy you believe in.
Can’t get on LGF so I came here. How come I never make the highlight reel?
9/11, as horrible as it was, is the wingnut's pet tragedy.
Indeed.
RT, alright, let's recap a bit on your logic:
If some terrorists kill themselves and take the lives of many civilians with them, then it's just perfectly ok to unleash all your firepower and attack whatever country you don't like in a complete sawed-off-shotgun manner, without caring about killing civilians there, let alone killing hundreds of times more civilians than you have lost.
The question is: How does this make you any better than terrorists? (Hint: It doesn't)
Your problem is, you set the clock back to zero as soon as the other side attacks and thus wipe off any guilt that the side you support is carrying. Otherwise you wouldn't have forgotten, that very shortly before the tragic attacks on the school in Jerusalem happened, there were about 120 Gazans murdered by the IDF, many of them children (i.e. a state-controlled act of terrorism). But do you care? Well hardly..
To show what kind of irrational thinking goes through that thick head of yours: You suggested attacking Iran straigt after 9/11 even though Iran had nothing to do with 9/11. None of the hijackers were Iranian, and the current Iranian Government didn't exist by then. So yes, such an attack would have been an unprovoked act of terrorism.
Add to that, that whichever side you're on, you should not attack civilians. Simple as that. If the other side does, then they're murderers. But if you retaliate by murdering other civilians, you're no better than they are.
Um, no, Sphinx.
I am only responding to your ludicrous argument about 'proportionality.'
You claim somehow that the US should be 'proportional' in its responses. That means purposely mass murdering civilians in response to the purposeful mass murder of civilians. Thus, that is essentially what you are arguing.
Or, alternatively, you now are arguing that somehow the US/Israel should be pacifists and just sit back and be annhilated, because it is "no better" than the other side to respond.
Your ideology is 'humane' why, exactly?
RT,
Has it occured to you that your version of 'proportionality' is exactly what the US pursues? In fact the US goes beyond the call of duty and kills 10 civilians for every one of its own civilian killed. As with so many things, US portions are simply bigger than everywhere else...
X,
The US does not aim for civilians purposely. At least not since WWII. So your point has no relevance whatsoever.
I would say that I agree that the US is not 'proportional' when it attacks others. I also say I would not want to live in a country that was.
RT: The US government launched a war in full knowledge that not only would *some* Iraqi civilians get killed, but that quite a lot would likely die as a result of the aftermath. How do you think tens of thousands died in Iraq and Afghanistan, mowed down by cruise missiles, aerial bombardment and US automatic weapons? Did they throw themselves into the line of fire? Or was a US thumb on the trigger, and behind that thumb a commander, and behind that commander a commander in chief, and behind that commander in chief...the people?
X,
RT: The US government launched a war in full knowledge that not only would *some* Iraqi civilians get killed
Killing a civilian accidentally and in the heat of battle is completely different than AIMING for civilians. Or are you saying the US = Al Queda?
, but that quite a lot would likely die as a result of the aftermath.
Nope.
The US, sadly, did not adequately prepare for the aftermath of the battle against the Ba'ath party in Iraq. You decry thsi regularly. Yet not when it is convenient not to.
How do you think tens of thousands died in Iraq and Afghanistan, mowed down by cruise missiles, aerial bombardment and US automatic weapons?
More died as a result of Al Queda and suicide bombing. The US tries to bomb Al Queda in Iraq to PREVENT civilian death. Yet somehow you equate that with purposely killing civilians.
Skewed moral compass you have there.
I am only responding to your ludicrous argument about 'proportionality.'
You claim somehow that the US should be 'proportional' in its responses.
Proportional or not, the response to 9/11 should be targetted at the people responsible. Iraq wasn't.
RT, if you claim that the US troops are going out of their way to prevent civilian deaths, then there is exactly one of two explanations why so many Iraqi civilians died:
Either they don't care about civilian deaths and damage to their property (Evident by the carpet bombing of entire cities, and random ransacking of Iraqi houses and apartments), OR they are too stupid to prevent these deaths and go after the right people.
Either way, they are causing much, much more unnecessary damage than the terrorists ever can, and have absolutely no business trying to "liberate" and "build up" another sovereign country.
Sphinx,
It is clear why civilians died.
Terrorists routinely fire from civilian locations.
This is why you are a rampant Islamophobe when you claim how evil the US is, compared to, for instance, Al Queda. You refuse to denounce the very nation that is acting, however perhaps often ineptly, to protect Muslim life.
I really do hate Islamophobia, I have to tell you!
When you are attacked, you fight back.
Yes. You fight back. Against the people who actually attacked you. Or would you have responded to Pearl Harbor by bombing Thailand?
The US does not aim for civilians purposely.
Which is very comforting to the dead.
Killing a civilian accidentally and in the heat of battle is completely different than AIMING for civilians.
Not to the civilian in question, it isn't.
Or are you saying the US = Al Queda?
Osama bin Laughin' has killed his thousands, and george w. bush his hundreds of thousands.
The US tries to bomb Al Queda in Iraq to PREVENT civilian death.
There was no "Al Qaeda in Iraq" before george w. bush started dropping bombs.
I never thought the LGF crowd could be even more fucktarded than trying to connect Iran to 9/11, as the red tulips jackass has been insinuating.
And people wonder why the rest of the world hates us.
I am sitting right now in a house formerly owned by one of the men who planned the Iraq war. Any search even just on Google will show every last company he has worked with and how they all end up with contracts in Iraq. Do not tell me that this has not been war for profit nor that it has done a single thing to "fight back" against al Qaeda.
I named my main blog "What Would Charles Martel Do?" for a reason. I DO believe in fighting back when invaded and attacked, as the al Qaeda terrorists DID DO on 9/11/01. What that has to do with our troops in Iraq in March of 2008 I don't know other than a hell of a lot of people down here high enough up at CENTCOM/MacDill AFB, Tampa, Florida are sitting very pretty as a result.
General "Rifle" Mike DeLong. Google him.
Sphinxter,
RT, if you claim that the US troops are going out of their way to prevent civilian deaths, then there is exactly one of two explanations why so many Iraqi civilians died:
There is only one explanation. Your brothers-in-arms are killing their own, including now your loving Muslim mothers turning their trick. Funny how the civilian deaths dramatically dropped when your cousin Al-Qaida started getting their asses kicked from Iraq straight to hell. I doubt you noticed.
Sphinxter,
That's it. Lay the blame on your faith's major league failings on somebody else. Always looking for the excuse and playing victim trying to excuse the cesspool your ilk has created.
But the key point - and I'm repeating it again - is that the invasion wasn't to root out al Qaeda, but Al Qaeda is in Iraq because of the invasion. Maybe if you'd reflect on that for a while, you wouldn't be making a fool of yourself in front of everybody.
And once again I say it is brilliant policy implemented if that is exactly what we have done. Al Qaeda flocks to Iraq and we kill them. Absolutely brilliant in saving America lives. And yes, I consider your worth far less than I do any American.
You may be a legend in your own mind Sphinxter but I don't see many flocking to your cause...
This one's rich: "And yes, I consider your worth far less than I do any American."
Isn't this mentality exactly what allowed the Holocaust to happen? I thought this is exactly the way that zealots view different human beings. Didn't you believe in God a while ago? I thought belief in God came hand-in-hand with the belief that all humans are created equal.
But doesn't really surprise me that you think in this fashion. You were always "that guy", you know..
And for the third time already in this comment section: "When Al Qaeda kills civilians, it's despicable"
This is already the THIRD time I write this, and you act as if I've never said it.
You're either illiterate, blind, or insanely stupid. Sometimes I wonder if you're acting stupid on purpose just to confuse me and make me think that I must be the crazy one. Great job, it's not working one bit.
Me an Islamophobe. Some great logic, Miss Red "Islam-is-rotten-to-the-core and Gaza-deserves-war-crimes-against-it" Tulips.
This is ridiculous enough. I'm out of this discussion.
Sphinx,
And for the third time already in this comment section: "When Al Qaeda kills civilians, it's despicable"
This is already the THIRD time I write this, and you act as if I've never said it.
That is because you say that the US is worse than Al Queda. So actually, you minimize Al Queda's murders and maximize the US's response in defending *mostly Muslims* against these murders. You have said that the US is worse than Al Queda again and again and again.
What part of "Muslimophobe" do you not understand?
Anyway, I want to thank you, Sphinx, as you have inspired me. I plan on taking this nationwide, "Muslimophobia Awareness Week." I am going to expose the shocking hate and disregard you (and millions and millions like you) have for your co-religionists.
Thank you for this productive exchange.
I also would like to thank you for libelling me. You stated I am Miss Red "Islam-is-rotten-to-the-core and Gaza-deserves-war-crimes-against-it" Tulips. Given I never said such things, it only shows you what steps you have to resort to after you haev been proven to be the Muslimophobe you are.
What I find amazing is that I, a Jewish American Zionist, care more about the rights of Muslims than you, an Egyptian Muslim. Says everything, doesn't it?
Sphinxter,
Talk about rich...
Isn't this mentality exactly what allowed the Holocaust to happen? I thought this is exactly the way that zealots view different human beings. Didn't you believe in God a while ago? I thought belief in God came hand-in-hand with the belief that all humans are created equal.
Is that what they are teaching you over in Egypt? Rabid Jews butchering innocent Nazis. You a student of the Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini's teachings? Superior analogy and one I would expect with your superior intellect.
You like to note and emphasize words. Well, quid pro quo...note the word "created." However, folks don't end up that way. Decisions have consequences and you continue to choose poorly.
Hey folks, the Iraq war is all about liberation. The US is liberating them from life. And should't the dead be grateful??? (No pun intended abt the rock group.)
Post a Comment