DankNuggs 305 Posted March 1, 2012 I'm calling BS on this. The only parts of the Koran drobeski has ever read were short snippets taken out of context on right-wing websites to work hardcore conservatives in to a tizzy. No way drobeski has read the actual Koran. None. The gory stuff in the koran is no different than the gory stuff in the old testament. Difference is that they still see themselves living in the same barbaric world that existed at the time of the book. In alot of ways they still do live in that same barbaric world. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,317 Posted March 1, 2012 The gory stuff in the koran is no different than the gory stuff in the old testament. Thanks for admitting that much. I dunno, I don't really want to get in to another debate about Islams and the Koran. The last one was enough for a while. I just find it nearly impossible to believe that drobeski has read most of the Koran. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted March 1, 2012 Yeah, starving people revolt very well. Desperate people rise up. You get enough of the population in a desperate situation and the sh!t will hit the fan. Even if it doesn't, it's not our responsibity to feed them so the asshats in charge can stockpile weapons. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DankNuggs 305 Posted March 1, 2012 Desperate people rise up. You get enough of the population in a desperate situation and the sh!t will hit the fan. Even if it doesn't, it's not our responsibity to feed them so the asshats in charge can stockpile weapons. liberals believe in the appeasement of the poor... Let them live crappy lives with little chance of upward mobility, stuck in the dependancy cycle, but toss em enough chicken bones so they don't b1tch. They think this BS strategy works with evil dictators, toss them enough rice sacks and hope they don't use their nukes to blow people up... Its amazing these deals get made, laughable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,895 Posted March 1, 2012 Today's Republican party has no interest in diplomacy because they have a huge interest in war - they use it to cow the populace into voting for them and to pay back their war profiteer campaignn contributors. For all of George W. Bush's hardline diplomacy, he accomplished nothing: He launched one sort of just war in Afghanistan, one stupid war in Iraq, lost them both and foisted the problem off to his successor, and North Korea was building up its nuclear capabilities the whole time. He utterly failed to do anything to prevent 9/11 and actually made us weaker by spreading our military thin on pointless nation-building exercises. You'd think the GOPers on this site would see how stupid this approach is, but they don't care about reality - they care about having a belligerent moron cowboy at the helm to make them feel like tough guys. It wasn't always like this - Ronald Reagan famously reached out to the USSR when they were considered a greater threat to the US than radical Islam is today and he's mostly lauded for it. If he was around today though, the Republican party would paint him as a limp-wristed libturd appeaser. They'd rather have a fatarsed bigmouth lobbyist like Newt Gingrich in charge. Maybe another four years in the wildneress will bring the party back to saner territory? We'll get to see, because Obummer is a virtual lock to win this year. Not because of the media or voter suppression or racism or any of the other excuses you'll hear at FFT. Because anyone old enough to vote remembers how the GOP's insane foreign policy ends up. hth Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DankNuggs 305 Posted March 1, 2012 Today's Republican party has no interest in diplomacy because they have a huge interest in war - they use it to cow the populace into voting for them and to pay back their war profiteer campaignn contributors. For all of George W. Bush's hardline diplomacy, he accomplished nothing: He launched one sort of just war in Afghanistan, one stupid war in Iraq, lost them both and foisted the problem off to his successor, and North Korea was building up its nuclear capabilities the whole time. He utterly failed to do anything to prevent 9/11 and actually made us weaker by spreading our military thin on pointless nation-building exercises. You'd think the GOPers on this site would see how stupid this approach is, but they don't care about reality - they care about having a belligerent moron cowboy at the helm to make them feel like tough guys. It wasn't always like this - Ronald Reagan famously reached out to the USSR when they were considered a greater threat to the US than radical Islam is today and he's mostly lauded for it. If he was around today though, the Republican party would paint him as a limp-wristed libturd appeaser. They'd rather have a fatarsed bigmouth lobbyist like Newt Gingrich in charge. Maybe another four years in the wildneress will bring the party back to saner territory? We'll get to see, because Obummer is a virtual lock to win this year. Not because of the media or voter suppression or racism or any of the other excuses you'll hear at FFT. Because anyone old enough to vote remembers how the GOP's insane foreign policy ends up. hth I'd be happy as a pig in $hit if our military strategy shifted to basically: "if you mess with us, we'll send a drone to blow up your house while you sleep." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,895 Posted March 1, 2012 I'd be happy as a pig in $hit if our military strategy shifted to basically: "if you mess with us, we'll send a drone to blow up your house while you sleep." If you mess with us, sure. But the GOP foreign policy these days amounts to encouraging military conflict with nations that barely pose a threat to us but one day might. Iran posts ZERO threat to us, but the GOP constantly calls the president weak or an appeaser for failing to take a "hardline" stance on Iran and all off the candidates have pledged to treat Israel like it's a US territory. Diplomacy isn't the end all be all, but it's not even a bullet in the chamber for the GOP. It's a fact that we can't bomb our way to safety or militarily disable or destroy every potential threat on the planet, but many Republicans seem to think this juvenile Candyland fantasy is the basis for a serious foreign policy. It's not. It's what chubby jerkoffs with manbewbs like Breitbart spew about in their air conditioned living rooms from the safety of a blog. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted March 1, 2012 If you mess with us, sure. But the GOP foreign policy these days amounts to encouraging military conflict with nations that barely pose a threat to us but one day might. Iran posts ZERO threat to us, but the GOP constantly calls the president weak or an appeaser for failing to take a "hardline" stance on Iran and all off the candidates have pledged to treat Israel like it's a US territory. Diplomacy isn't the end all be all, but it's not even a bullet in the chamber for the GOP. It's a fact that we can't bomb our way to safety or militarily disable or destroy every potential threat on the planet, but many Republicans seem to think this juvenile Candyland fantasy is the basis for a serious foreign policy. It's not. It's what chubby jerkoffs with manbewbs like Breitbart spew about in their air conditioned living rooms from the safety of a blog. why do you hate the jews ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mungwater 588 Posted March 1, 2012 Iran poses no threat to the US? Swims away Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 5,209 Posted March 1, 2012 Iran poses no threat to the US? Swims away Yeah, that's a tough one. What would you even say in response, and hope to have an intelligent discussion? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,895 Posted March 1, 2012 Yeah, that's a tough one. What would you even say in response, and hope to have an intelligent discussion? You could start by telling me how some tiny little country with a 3rd rate military halfway around the world is going to attack the United States? And whether it's really worth bombing or invading them, as has been proposed by every GOP candidate aside from Ron Paul, to mitigate such a tiny threat? I'll hang up and listen, thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745 Posted March 1, 2012 2 more today, ya there's nothing evil about that book at all... http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/03/01/2-troops-killed-by-afghan-soldier-civilian/ KABUL – Two American soldiers were killed Thursday in a shooting by an Afghan soldier and a literacy teacher at a joint base in southern Afghanistan, officials said, the latest in a series of deaths as anti-Americanism rises following the burning of Korans by U.S. soldiers. Both were killed on the same day that the top NATO commander allowed a small number of foreign advisers to return to work at Afghan ministries after more than a week of being locked down in secure locations because of the killing of two other Americans. Related Stories Obama says his apology over Koran burnings calmed anti-US violence in Afghanistan Some NATO advisers returning to Afghan ministries American gym teacher dies in north Iraq shooting Bombing near Turkey's ruling party headquarters injures 10 Liberia considers jailing homosexuals Thursday's killings raised to six the number of Americans killed in less than two weeks amid heightened tensions over the Feb. 20 burning of Korans and other Islamic texts that had been dumped in a garbage pit at Bagram Air Field near Kabul. More than 30 Afghans also were killed in six days of violent riots that broke out after the incident. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/03/01/2-troops-killed-by-afghan-soldier-civilian/#ixzz1nswDA1OJ Oh, I see, so they weren't "executed" as claimed, they were killed in street violence in a place they shouldn't be in the first place. Gotcha. why do you hate the jews ? I don't. I don't really give enough of a fock about them to send Americans to die over though. They chose to found their state in a bad neighborhood, its not our problem. Iran poses no threat to the US? Swims away Pretty much yeah. We pose far more threat to them than they do to us. Let's review the last 50ish years of Iranian history... We backed a puppet ruler over their country (the Shah). He had secret police, and was generally a bad guy, but he gave us dino juice on the cheap, so whatever. Later, we sold arms to both sides of the Iran-Iraq war. How many Iranians have a dead relative with a piece of good ole made in the USA weaponry. Then, we invade the country on their eastern border, and have occupied it for about a decade now. Then, we invade the country on their western border, install a new puppet government, and occupy it for several years. Oh, and the whole time, we b!tch that they better not build nukes, all the while pointing ICBMS at their head, and with a nuclear armed carrier group doing donuts near their coast. Oh, and we probably have a couple of their citizens locked up in Gitmo for a decade with no due process whatsoever. So they hate us? Yeah, probably. If they had backed a dictator that oppressed and killed us, then sold arms to our bitter enemy while we fought them, then conquered Canada and Mexico, and read us the riot act about nukes, while a nuclear fleet tooled around the Gulf of Mexico, we'd probably hate them too. Let's face some facts... 1. Iran will get nukes. We are talking 1940's technology here for focks sake. It's gonna happen. 2. Islam isn't going anywhere. You can't kill em all. You talk to em like grown ups, and grow the fock up. The world isn't a John Wayne movie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted March 1, 2012 I'm still trying to figure out how Kim Il Lucy teeing up the football for Charlie Obama is somehow a feather on Zero's cap. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted March 1, 2012 I'm still trying to figure out how Kim Il Lucy teeing up the football for Charlie Obama is somehow a feather on Zero's cap. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,317 Posted March 1, 2012 I'm still trying to figure out how Kim Il Lucy teeing up the football for Charlie Obama is somehow a feather on Zero's cap. I thought the same thing until I saw that conservatives like DankNuggs actually think it's a bad idea to reach out to the new guy in North Korea. So I guess the feather in Obama's cap is that he is actually trying to take advantage of the situation by encouraging North Korea to rejoin the world community. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vikings4ever 496 Posted March 16, 2012 http://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-says-launch-long-range-rocket-042546009.html North Korea announced plans Friday to blast a satellite into space on the back of a long-range rocket, a provocative move that could jeopardize a weeks-old agreement with the U.S. exchanging food aid for nuclear concessions. The North agreed to a moratorium on long-range launches as part of the deal with Washington, but it argues that its satellite launches are part of a peaceful space program that is exempt from any international disarmament agreements. The U.S., South Korea and other critics say the rocket technology overlaps with belligerent uses and condemn the satellite program as a disguised way of testing military missiles in defiance of a U.N. ban. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DAVID RUFFIN 1 Posted March 16, 2012 I'm gonna need a link here. American servicemen were allowed, by the military and Obama, to be executed by Afghans? I don't buy it. But I'll make you a deal... prove it, and I promise I will not vote for Obama. I want in on this but you should have added that he must vote for Obama if he comes up empty. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gocolts 300 Posted March 18, 2012 http://news.yahoo.com/north-korea-says-launch-long-range-rocket-042546009.html :crickets: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mobb_deep 917 Posted March 18, 2012 If you mess with us, sure. But the GOP foreign policy these days amounts to encouraging military conflict with nations that barely pose a threat to us but one day might. Iran posts ZERO threat to us, but the GOP constantly calls the president weak or an appeaser for failing to take a "hardline" stance on Iran and all off the candidates have pledged to treat Israel like it's a US territory. Diplomacy isn't the end all be all, but it's not even a bullet in the chamber for the GOP. It's a fact that we can't bomb our way to safety or militarily disable or destroy every potential threat on the planet, but many Republicans seem to think this juvenile Candyland fantasy is the basis for a serious foreign policy. It's not. It's what chubby jerkoffs with manbewbs like Breitbart spew about in their air conditioned living rooms from the safety of a blog. This guy gets it. Iran is a huge "threat" to us, because they're enriching uranium. NK actually has a bomb and they're just "crying for rice". It's just a coincidence that NK is on a bare piece of frozen rock and Iran has oil in and all around it. It's all a facade. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 3,317 Posted March 18, 2012 :crickets: Well it's no surprise, is it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,564 Posted March 18, 2012 President Obama has stated clearly and in no uncertain terms that Iran will not be allowed to develop nukes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gocolts 300 Posted March 18, 2012 Well it's no surprise, is it? Not to me it isn't. I knew the libs would run away like scared little girls after reading that. By the looks of some of the posts, it looks like the libs actually thought the defacto dictator Obama would work his magic wand and bring peace and prosperity to N Korea. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gocolts 300 Posted March 18, 2012 President Obama has stated clearly and in no uncertain terms that Iran will not be allowed to develop nukes. He certainly did. Paving the way for an October surprise war with Iran to save his job as POTUS. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 3,980 Posted March 29, 2012 http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/29/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-deal/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 Do we need to even have the election? Well, that didn't last long: U.S. suspends food aid to North Korea over missile plan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gocolts 300 Posted March 29, 2012 Well, that didn't last long: U.S. suspends food aid to North Korea over missile plan :lol: Some folks are pretty gullible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted March 29, 2012 :lol: Some folks are pretty gullible. Unfortunately, one of the most gullible spends his day wiping his boogers under the desk in the Oval Office. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Little Rusty 17 Posted March 29, 2012 1st the Jerk moves in the Whitehouse, now he's giving away the food that real Americans paid for. * is Whitehouse now a racist term ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted April 4, 2012 Here is another "feather" for the White-African-American POTUS. CANADIAN PM BLASTS OBAMA ON KEYSTONE: THE U.S. IS AN UNRELIABLE ENERGY PARTNER President Barack Obama’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline taught Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper one thing: it’s time Canada expand its list of oil buyers. In an interview with the Canadian Wilson Centre think tank, the Prime Minister said the pipeline’s rejection — even if only temporary — was enough to underscore the need to find other buyers for oilsands crude. “ Look, the very fact that a ‘no’ could even be said underscores to our country that we must diversify our energy export markets,” Harper said. “We cannot be, as a country, in a situation where our one and, in many cases, only energy partner could say no to our energy products. We just cannot be in that position.” The Prime Minister also mentioned that Canada has been selling oil to the United States at a discounted price. But now that the Great White North is expanding its oil export market, that discount will probably disappear. Get that? The U.S. will not only have less access to Canadian oil but it will also have to pay more for it because the market for oilsands crude is expanding (and therefore more competitive). “We have taken a significant price hit by virtue of the fact that we are a captive supplier and that just does not make sense in terms of the broader interests of the Canadian economy,” Harper said. “We’re still going to be a major supplier of the United States. It will be a long time, if ever, before the United States isn’t our number one export market, but for us the United States cannot be our only export market.” “That is not in our interest, either commercially or in terms of pricing,” he added. Now keep in mind President Obama said Republicans in Congress were to blame because they imposed “an arbitrary timeline on him to decide on the project, which he said did not allow enough time for sufficient reviews,” Sun News Network reports. But his claim is at odds with the fact that the Keystone project had been under review for three years. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/canadian-pm-blasts-obama-on-keystone-the-u-s-is-an-unreliable-energy-partner/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 4, 2012 Here is another "feather" for the White-African-American POTUS. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/canadian-pm-blasts-obama-on-keystone-the-u-s-is-an-unreliable-energy-partner/ ROFL Just took a quick look around your website of the day. The Blaze!! Theblaze.com seems like yet another in your non-partisan, objective websites you love to read every day. It's no wonder you're a brainwashed retard. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted April 4, 2012 ROFL Just took a quick look around your website of the day. The Blaze!! Theblaze.com seems like yet another in your non-partisan, objective websites you love to read every day. It's no wonder you're a brainwashed retard. It has direct public quotes from the Canadian PM, Bubbles. Feel free to refute them, or just about who is reporting the quotes. Either way, I don't care. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,564 Posted April 4, 2012 Well, that didn't last long: U.S. suspends food aid to North Korea over missile plan Alas... Same-Same-Same as it ever was... Hopefully things go better for Myanmar/Burma Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 4, 2012 It has direct public quotes from the Canadian PM, Bubbles. Feel free to refute them, or just about who is reporting the quotes. Either way, I don't care. Nor do I. There's an election that will show you how much the public really cares about all the propoganda and BS srticles morons like you throw at teh wall every day. I'll tell you one thing, it's hilarious watching you in desparation mode. Full-retard all the way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted April 4, 2012 Nor do I. There's an election that will show you how much the public really cares about all the propoganda and BS srticles morons like you throw at teh wall every day. I'll tell you one thing, it's hilarious watching you in desparation mode. Full-retard all the way. Went with As expected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 4, 2012 Went with As expected. No one knows like you do, my little pussie friend. You've been turning on the waterworks for four years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryskids 5,209 Posted April 4, 2012 Nor do I. There's an election that will show you how much the public really cares about all the propoganda and BS srticles morons like you throw at teh wall every day. I'll tell you one thing, it's hilarious watching you in desparation mode. Full-retard all the way. What part is the propaganda? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NewbieJr 540 Posted April 4, 2012 What part is the propaganda? Check out all of RP's anti-Obama threads on the first two pages. And his anti-Obama posts in the threads he didn't start. Everything he regurgitates from his conservative blogs is propoganda. But you're a conservative too, so you aren't bright enough to see it. FRom a non-hater's point of view, the desparation is hilarious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DankNuggs 305 Posted April 4, 2012 I thought the same thing until I saw that conservatives like DankNuggs actually think it's a bad idea to reach out to the new guy in North Korea. So I guess the feather in Obama's cap is that he is actually trying to take advantage of the situation by encouraging North Korea to rejoin the world community. you are really naive as to how this system works... You think the son of an evil dictator, who strives to follow in his fathers footsteps is going to veer 180 degrees from the exact same playbook they have been using for decades... With all these feathers for maintaining the status quo, CNN will start dubbing Zero as a Native-american-white-african-american. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted April 4, 2012 What part is the propaganda? I posted an article with quotes from the Canadian PM that shows Obama in a negative light. Any article that does this is automatically propoganda. In his response to your post he crawfished and changed the subject to my posts, not the articles I post that he clearly referenced as propoganda. Moving the goal line when cornered is what he does. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted April 5, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erYpXzE9Pxs&feature=youtube_gdata_player Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Recliner Pilot 61 Posted April 5, 2012 Someone should tell our White-African-American POTUS that these meetings with leaders of other countries might be video taped. What, with all the press and cameras and such all over the place. Might want to mix it up a little. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites