patrick.net

Dan8267 says

1. Liberals don't support affirmative action. That's leftists. I'm the biggest liberal on this site and I don't support AA.

2. Yes, AA is a violation of the 14th Amendment as I have mentioned before -- and was accused of racism by a racist leftist for saying that.

There is a big misunderstanding among many about what AA is supposed to be, and what it often turns out to be. At it roots, AA is something that few would object to: taking action such as outreach, recruiting in lesser served areas, etc., in order to expand (and in some cases help develop) the pool of QUALIFIED applicants to include those who might not have been included before. Quotas and the like, except in very specifically targeted cases designed to correct a specific wrong or injustice, was not supposed to be at its core. But with many of the various formulas (e.g., 4/5ths rule), statistical analyses, etc., it has essentially turned into a quota-type system that infringes on others rights.

Dan, in a previous thread K-R-I-S jumped on you for referring to "minorities," and claimed that you were wrong because it was targeted only for blacks due to slavery. You were right, he was wrong, as evidenced by the words in the original Executive Orders creating AA to begin with. I backed you up in general in that thread, but K-R-I-S, the intellectual coward, deleted the posts.

FortWayne says

I don't think polygamy is right, I see it as victimization.

Whether or not you see polygamy as victimization doesn't mean jack diddly shit unless you are husband number 3 of a woman. What matters is whether or not wife 2 and 3 of a man see it as victimization, which clearly isn't so. If a woman did not prefer to be wife 2 or 3 of a rich man instead of wife 1 of 1 of a middle class man, she would not make that choice.

Polygamy is simply the adoption of capitalism in the marriage market. Monogamy is the elimination of the free market.

Now I'm not personally for polygamous marriages as it certainly is not in my own personal interest, but that doesn't mean there is any legal justification for making such marriages illegal when monogamous marriages are legal.

FortWayne says

That was the result of the sexual revolution, and it has hurt the society. We have less marriages, more children growing up without both parents. And it's just how that slippery slope started, a lot of social ills came about from it.

I would say it's more a result of the pill, but that's another matter.

Regardless of whether or not society is better because of the changes in the mating market, the fact remains that government should not have any say whatsoever in the matting market. It's not illegal for people to have premarital sex and the government should not have the power to make it illegal. Are you for letting the government outlaw premarital sex?

It is clearly observable that countries in which the government regulates the sex lives of their populations are not countries in which you or I would want to live. Think Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Social problems only have social solutions. They do not have governmental solutions. Just take a look at the drug war: utter failure. Isn't it the GOP that always complains about the nanny state trying to fix problems that should be left to the individual to solve for himself? How isn't sexual relations a perfect example of a problem set that only a nanny state would tackle?

FortWayne says

And I just feel like we as a nation slipping into anarchy, losing our moral core. Next one will be polygamy, which I hear is legal in Utah already.

Our nation lost its moral core the day we said torturing people is OK. I'd much rather live in an America with rampant polygamy than one in which torture is considered acceptable.

I simply cannot understand why consensual sex flares up your morality alert system, but torture, false imprisonment, and drone assassination does not.

OMG! We're all heading to Sodom and Gomorrah!

Not even registering on my moral compass

Nope, still not.

I think your moral imperatives need sorting.

FortWayne says

Next one will be polygamy, which I hear is legal in Utah already.

Polygamy was the norm in Mormon societies until the American Mormons gave it up to get protection from the U.S. military.

Utah was a state created for Mormons. The Mormons wanted a much larger land mass for a state called Deseret, but the Mormons were hated by Congress and so Congress chipped away the land area until they establish Utah as the Mormon state.

There is an excellent series from 2010 on the History Channel called "How the States Got Their Shapes" that goes into the cultural and economic reasons why the states are shaped the way they are.

And by torture, you mean the war being waged against people that smoke pot. I couldn't imagine a worse, anti-freedom, vision of a nation state then this current open air prison police state.

errc says

And by torture, you mean the war being waged against people that smoke pot.

No, I mean torture.

Dan8267 says

And just because a person is found guilty doesn't mean that person did commit the crime, either.

So do you honestly think that he didnt engage in any sexual activity????

Dan8267 says

No not a USA drone attack...your posting lies... that was from Sabra and Shatila some 30 years ago.
once again your anti- USA rant are useless. Perhaps the Patriot Act was a good idea after all. You sure are making a good case for it.

The Sabra and Shatila massacre was the slaughter of between 762 and 3,500 civilians, mostly Palestinian and Lebanese Shia, by a Lebanese Christian Phalangist militia in the Sabra and Shatila Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut, Lebanon from approximately 6:00 pm 16 September to 8:00 am 18 September 1982.[3]

The massacre was presented as retaliation for the assassination of newly elected Lebanese president Bachir Gemayel, the leader of the Lebanese Kataeb Party. It was wrongly assumed that Palestinian militants had carried out the assassination, which is now generally attributed to native, pro-Syrian militants.

chanakya4773 says

than people fighting against torture/death ?

because we dont have torture to speak of.. you want torture..

go talk to the KGB / Stazzi / North Koreans.. they will talk to you about torture.

Of course the terrorists who have sent videos to the world showing how they decapitate their victims, from ear to ear, is certainly torture many on the left dont talk about.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/torture-al-qaeda-style

MAY 24--In a recent raid on an al-Qaeda safe house in Iraq, U.S. military officials recovered an assortment of crude drawings depicting torture methods like "blowtorch to the skin" and "eye removal."

Along with the images, which you'll find on the following pages, soldiers seized various torture implements, like meat cleavers, whips, and wire cutters. Photos of those items can be seen here.

The images, which were just declassified by the Department of Defense, also include a picture of a ramshackle Baghdad safe house described as an "al-Qaeda torture chamber." It was there, during an April 24 raid, that soldiers found a man suspended from the ceiling by a chain. According to the military, the victim had been abducted from his job and was being beaten daily by his captors.

In a raid earlier this week, Coalition Forces freed five Iraqis who were found in a padlocked room in Karmah. The group, which included a boy, were reportedly beaten with chains, cables, and hoses. Photos showing injuries sustained by those captives can be found here. (12 pages)
Torture, Al-Qaeda Style

Meccos says

So do you honestly think that he didnt engage in any sexual activity????

As I've said many times, Bill Clinton had plenty of sex with plenty of women. That's not illegal and that's quite frankly none of your business. What Clinton did not do was commit perjury. The entire impeachment was a political move by Republicans and had nothing to do with justice. The Republicans were abusing our court systems for political gain, plain and simple.

chanakya4773 says

The Question should be : Why are there more people fighting for equal marriage rights to gay couples than people fighting against torture/death ?

Every citizen should be fighting for both. Yes, the human rights violations are far, far worse, but the civil rights violations are hardly tolerable as well.

thomaswong.1986 says

No not a USA drone attack...your posting lies... that was from Sabra and Shatila some 30 years ago.

A lie is an intentional deception. You are full of shit when you claim that I am lying. I simply don't believe in that strategy as things are clearly verifiable in the Internet age. So, like always, you are talking bullshit.

As for your claim that the particular photograph is not the result of a drone strike, I cannot confirm or deny that claim based on the reverse image search I just did.

However, I got the image from doing a Google Image search on children killed in drone strikes. It was the very first image and the title of the image is "children-killed-drone-strike.jpg". Perhaps the photo name and Google search turned up misinformation, but to claim that I lie is utter bullshit and speaks more of the accuser than it does of me. Clearly, I've had reasonable reason to believe the photo to be of drone strike victims. The page on which the photo appears is titled Children killed by drone strike.

But even if that photo was mislabeled by the site above, and even if that site is completely wrong, for you to argue that children have not been killed by U.S. drone strikes is a bold face lie.

A List Of Children Killed By Drone Strikes In Pakistan and Yemen

Some Afghan kids aren’t bystanders

A recent Marine Times article ran the alarming headline “Some Afghan kids aren’t bystanders” on December 3, reporting on the death of three children in Afghanistan. They were apparently targeted by a U.S. military drone because they appeared to be digging a hole in a road. Three individuals hit were 12, 10 and 8.

U.S. Drone Strikes Have Killed 176 Children in Pakistan Alone

U.S. drones are killing children and terrorizing families abroad. Earlier this year, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism found that 176 children have been murdered in Pakistan alone. And along with drone attacks, an average of 4.8 children are killed per day in Afghanistan where earlier this year, a U.S. sergeant is reported to have killed 9 children.

You want to challenge me on whether or not shitloads of children as young as one-year-old have been killed by U.S. drones? Go ahead. I've got mounds of evidence.

thomaswong.1986 says

go talk to the KGB / Stazzi / North Koreans.. they will talk to you about torture.

Of course the terrorists who have sent videos to the world showing how they decapitate their victims, from ear to ear, is certainly torture many on the left dont talk about.

Ah, the old excuse, "other people do bad things, therefore we should be allowed to do bad things too without being criticized or held accountable".

Yes, I know scumbags in other countries torture. As an American citizen, there's nothing I can do to hold those politicians accountable. However, I sure as hell can hold the politicians in my country accountable for the torture they support by voting their asses out of office. And that is a moral imperative.

By the way, it's pretty hard to fix problems in other countries when those same problems are running rampant in your own. Who was it that said

How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

I'm sure I read that in a book somewhere. Can anyone recall the name of that book? I think it had a black cover.

Dan8267 says

I've got mounds of evidence.

Typical mound of shit more like it.

Dan8267 says

As for your claim that the particular photograph is not the result of a drone strike, I cannot confirm or deny that claim based on the reverse image search I just did.

another bullshit lie. You should check your sources before posting... there is plenty of staged photos coming from Arabs of so called atrocities.. They will shot their own and say we did it.

Dan8267 says

You want to challenge me on whether or not shitloads of children as young as one-year-old have been killed by U.S. drones? Go ahead. I've got mounds of evidence.

How many children died in 9/11 ? Any concern over them... any concern how many
more IN THIS COUNTRY will get killed while douch bags like you look the other way...

I guess DEAD AMERICANS is OK in your Book...

Dan8267 says

As I've said many times, Bill Clinton had plenty of sex with plenty of women. That's not illegal and that's quite frankly none of your business. What Clinton did not do was commit perjury. The entire impeachment was a political move by Republicans and had nothing to do with justice.

in the company's offices
during company hours
with the companys staff

did I miss something or had this been in private industry, Billy Bob would had been packing his stuff and walked out of the building with a security guard...

"HP CEO Mark Hurd Resigns After Sexual-Harassment Probe"

yes ...if it applies to every worker... sure applies to Billy Bob.

http://www.UEmjwR0Rs20

since when is he above the law ?

and yes, it is my business ! I am fucking paying for it! I am the tax payer !

Public trust ... not his strong side.

... yes ... he lied when he actually came out and admitted he did have sex with her.

thomaswong.1986 says

Dan8267 says

I've got mounds of evidence.

Typical mound of shit more like it.

Again, are you challenging the fact that U.S. drone strikes have killed children? Are you challenging the links I posted which list children who died in drone strikes?

I guess any evidence that counters your lies is, by definition, bullshit.

thomaswong.1986 says

another bullshit lie.

I have more than demonstrated the complete lack of dishonesty on my part including walking through the mechanics of how I got the picture. But you know what, you picked on only one of many pictures I posted and you still haven't shown that my point was incorrect. My case that U.S. drone strikes have killed children does not rest on a single photograph as all the links you chose to ignore demonstrate.

thomaswong.1986 says

How many children died in 9/11 ? Any concern over them... any concern how many

more IN THIS COUNTRY will get killed while douch bags like you look the other way...

I guess DEAD AMERICANS is OK in your Book...

What a fucking bullshit Straw Man argument. To suggest that I ever said anything even remotely close to "dead Americans is OK in my book" is the biggest fucking lie you have ever told, and you've told some whoppers.

Furthermore, to suggest that murdering foreign children who had nothing, whatsofuckingever to do with 9/11, many of whom weren't even born in 2001, is okay because 9/11 was wrong is a purely evil philosophy. And quite frankly, anyone who holds such an despicable and grotesque political position should be ridiculed and ostracized by civil society.

Meccos says

Dan8267 says

What Clinton did not do was commit perjury.

Are you serious? He got away with it on a technicality that ruled oral sex was not considered "sex". Also im sure everything stopped at oral sex and sticking cigars up her vagina...nothing else. YUP.

No, Clinton "got away" on the technicality that he didn't commit perjury, which is pretty intrinsic to the charge of perjury. Clinton was asked, "did you have sexual relations with that woman?". As everyone, except dumb ass Republicans trying to entrap a president, "sexual relations" is a euphemism for sexual intercourse not for fellatio. The Republicans should have asked, "did you get a blow job from that woman?". Put simply, the Republicans fucked up at their own game. Clinton's answer was the truth.

Meccos says

Dan8267 says

That's not illegal and that's quite frankly none of your business.

Actually it is illegal. Adultery is illegal and so was lying about it.

Also it becomes everyone's business if you run for political office and decide to cheat and lie about it.

Although there may be adultery laws on the books from the 19th century, such archaic laws would not stand up in court or the Republicans surely would have used them. Furthermore, any such law would be considered Unconstitutional by almost any jury as a violation of the First Amendment. An adultery criminal charge levied against the president would make the Republicans look even more ridiculous than they already did. And it would have backfired on all the Republicans who themselves were committing adultery.

And no, the private sex lives of politicians are not any of your business whatsoever as long as those politicians aren't hypocritically making laws and policies that they themselves are violating, and only Republicans do that.

What you should be upset about is a president lying about another country having weapons of mass destruction or lying about the true reasons for going to war, how much the war is going to cost, and how long it is going to last. You should also be upset about a president lying about water-boarding not being torture or about the government's use of torture on people. You should also be upset about the government lying about who is and who is not a terrorist. Yet, these lies don't seem to upset you.

Meccos says

Dan8267 says

The entire impeachment was a political move by Republicans and had nothing to do with justice. The Republicans were abusing our court systems for political gain, plain and simple.

Sure, it was political. but the democrats never would do such a thing... right?

When they do, I'll be bitching and moaning about them.

Don't fall into the trap of "the other side would do it, so it's ok for us to do it". Only children think like that.

thomaswong.1986 says

and yes, it is my business ! I am fucking paying for it! I am the tax payer !

You literally pay over a billion times as much for wasteful military spending then you paid for Clinton's salary. Get your priorities straight.

Again, if the worst thing you can bitch about Bill Clinton was that he got a blow job in the Oval Office, then you should be damn grateful he was such a great president. The best things I can say about Bush and Obama are far worse than that.

Dan8267 says

Again, are you challenging the fact that U.S. drone strikes have killed children? Are you challenging the links I posted which list children who died in drone strikes?

anyone can post some photo can call it "US Drone Kills Children" including terrorists and their cronies and have no accountability for it are you too stupid to realize that .. or part of the foreign propaganda attack machines..what else is new !

Dan8267 says

Again, if the worst thing you can bitch about Bill Clinton was that he got a blow job in the Oval Office, then you should be damn grateful he was such a great president.

on the job ! with the staff during office hours... Billy Bob wasnt that great of president.. he did nothing .. Clinton inherited the economic fixes from GH Bush that were implemented before he took office.

Just keep on lying Tommy. You're just making your hole deeper.

Dan8267 says

Clinton was asked, "did you have sexual relations with that woman?". As everyone, except dumb ass Republicans trying to entrap a president, "sexual relations" is a euphemism for sexual intercourse not for fellatio. The Republicans should have asked, "did you get a blow job from that woman?". Put simply, the Republicans fucked up at their own game. Clinton's answer was the truth.

He lied and admitted he lied ... see his admission to the public (video above).

Dan8267 says

Just keep on lying Tommy. You're just making your hole deeper.

Your the one pumping Arab propaganda...

I know where my allegiance belongs.

Dan8267 says

What you should be upset about is a president lying about another country having weapons of mass destruction or lying about the true reasons for going to war, how much the war is going to cost, and how long it is going to last.

you sure have a short memory...

as do so many other Liberals... CLINTON ON WMD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zp6YmEevHE0#at=18

from the so called Clinton's great presidential term so said ... Dan

Bill Clinton: Clear Evidence of Iraqi WMD Program

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=S0f5u_0ytUs

thomaswong.1986 says

Your the one pumping Arab propaganda...

As I stated, the picture was the very first Google Image search result for "drone strikes kill children", is labeled as such, and appeared on a website about the deaths of children by drones. Furthermore -- and I don't know why I have to repeat this to even an idiot like you -- my case that US drone strikes have killed many children is not dependent on that picture as it is supported by a plethora of evidence, none of which you have the balls to even attempt to refute.

So to accuse me of "pumping Arab propaganda" is an outlandish lie that illustrates just how weak your position is.

thomaswong.1986 says

I know where my allegiance belongs.

Yes, but not to the truth or America. Your allegiance is to the Republican party even when it deliberately sabotages America like it has for the entire Obama administration.

You lie about what Democrats do -- which is stupid because there is more than enough real things to complain about Democrats -- and then you lie about the evils that Republicans do.

But here's your chance to show a little bit of rationality. Name ten terrible things about G.W. Bush's presidency. If you can't do that, then you are a worthless partisan shill.

thomaswong.1986 says

from the so called Clinton's great presidential term so said ... Dan

Bill Clinton: Clear Evidence of Iraqi WMD Program

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=S0f5u_0ytUs

Wow, that video came from 1998, three years before Bush claimed Saddam had WMD and the UN thoroughly disproved that claim repeatedly. I guess that means that Clinton stopped Saddam from getting WMDs without even going to war. You're point is well-made, Clinton was far better than I gave him credit for.

I particularly like the part where Clinton, in his wisdom, said @ 1:45,

But there is no better example, again I say, than the U.N. weapons inspection system itself. Yes, he has tried to thwart it in every conceivable way, but the discipline, determination, year-in-year-out effort of these weapons inspectors is doing the job. And we seek to finish the job.

I also like the part that went

But Saddam Hussein could end this crisis tomorrow simply by letting the weapons inspectors complete their mission. He made a solemn commitment to the international community to do that and to give up his weapons of mass destruction a long time ago now. One way or the other, we are determined to see that he makes good on his own promise.

And, of course, those of us who listen to history rather than trying to rewrite it, will remember that Saddam did not interfere with the U.N. inspectors and that every one of those inspectors said there was no evidence of WMDs in 2001. Oh yeah, and as the Manning Memo shows, Bush planned to invade Iraq regardless of WMDs and, in fact, was pushing for war before the U.N. could say they looked every possible place for WMDs and found none.

Once again, Clinton solves a problem, and Bush created another.

Dan8267 says

But here's your chance to show a little bit of rationality.

you want show... here it is..

you can GO AND BURN IN HELL

along with your Arab terrorist friends and cronies.

Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About The Conflict In Iraq

http://www.rightwingnews.com/column-2/debunking-8-anti-war-myths-about-the-conflict-in-iraq/

here’s a quote from the 800 pound gorilla of the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, that was made on Oct 8, 2002:

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.”

Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About The Conflict In Iraq

http://www.rightwingnews.com/column-2/debunking-8-anti-war-myths-about-the-conflict-in-iraq/

Saddam Hussein had no ties to terrorism. It’s amazing to me that today in 2005, people are still trotting out that oft-disproven quip. Christopher Hitchens was also apparently surprised when Ron Reagan, Jr. made a similar assertion recently and you may find his response to be most enlightening:

“CH: Do you know nothing about the subject at all? Do you wonder how Mr. Zarqawi got there under the rule of Saddam Hussein? Have you ever heard of Abu Nidal?RR: Well, I’m following the lead of the 9/11 Commission, which…

CH: Have you ever heard of Abu Nidal, the most wanted man in the world, who was sheltered in Baghdad? The man who pushed Leon Klinghoffer off the boat, was sheltered by Saddam Hussein. The man who blew up the World Trade Center in 1993 was sheltered by Saddam Hussein, and you have the nerve to say that terrorism is caused by resisting it? And by deposing governments that endorse it? … At this stage, after what happened in London yesterday?…

RR: Zarqawi is not an envoy of Saddam Hussein, either.

CH: Excuse me. When I went to interview Abu Nidal, then the most wanted terrorist in the world, in Baghdad, he was operating out of an Iraqi government office. He was an arm of the Iraqi State, while being the most wanted man in the world. The same is true of the shelter and safe house offered by the Iraqi government, to the murderers of Leon Klinghoffer, and to Mr. Yassin, who mixed the chemicals for the World Trade Center bombing in 1993. How can you know so little about this, and be occupying a chair at the time that you do?”

Mr. Hitchens is entirely correct. Saddam provided “safe haven” for terrorists with “global reach.” Among them were terrormaster Abu Nidal, Abdul Rahman Yassin, one of the conspirators in the 1993 WTC bombing, “Khala Khadr al-Salahat, the man who reputedly made the bomb for the Libyans that brought down Pan Am Flight 103 over…Scotland,”Abu Abbas, mastermind of the October 1985 Achille Lauro hijacking and murder of Leon Klinghoffer,” & “Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, formerly the director of an al Qaeda training base in Afghanistan” who is now believed to be leading Al-Qaeda’s forces in Iraq.

Without question, Saddam Hussein had extensive ties to terrorism.

thomaswong.1986 says

Dan8267 says

But here's your chance to show a little bit of rationality.

you want show... here it is..

you can GO AND BURN IN HELL

along with your Arab terrorist friends and cronies.

Ah, a perfect demonstration of your maturity level and capacity for rational discourse. I couldn't have made a better argument against your position or against you as a human being than your own post does.

As for me being cronies with Arab terrorists, laugable as that is, it is impossible to rectify that accusation with the statements I made about Arab culture a mere six months ago on this very site, when I compared Western culture to Arabic culture

By the way, there is a correct answer to my question. The correct answer is

Hell NO! Of course we shouldn't respect a cultural or religious belief that girls and women should be murdered for being too westernized, i.e., independent. Some cultures are superior to others. A culture that respects the equality of people regardless of gender is superior to a culture that stones women when the men feel they are getting too independent.

To refresh everyone's memory, I was stating that Western culture is far superior to Arab culture and that we should not respect a culture that practices honour killings. Political correctness has no place when human lives and human rights are on the line.

Of course, I can't exactly be an Arabic terrorist propagandist if I am outspoken against the atrocities in Arabic culture and when I say that our culture is objectively superior. That completely blows away little Tommy boy's theory that I'm in cohouts with the "Arab terrorists" as he calls them. But when does reality every get in the way of thomaswong's writings.

thomaswong.1986 says

Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About The Conflict In Iraq

Another Straw Man argument. No one is saying Saddam was a good guy. But the fact is that Bush didn't start a war for the sake of rescuing the people of Iraq -- one million of whom Bush killed in this war -- from Saddam. Bush's intentions were evil. He wanted oil. And intentions matter. They matter shitloads when it comes to war.

One cannot serve two masters. One cannot server the cause of freedom and greed. They are mutually exclusive. How the war was executed, how the Iraqi people were treated, how Iraqi exists today can all be traced back to the intentions of G.W. Bush. And guess what... Fucked up intentions leads to a fucked up results. And Iraq today is totally fucked up. It will remain fucked up until we spend a hell of a lot more blood and money under good intentions. And that is the legacy of George W. Bush.

Oh, and if you care so much about Iraq, how much are you willing to spend to rebuild it? $1 trillion? $10 trillion?

Dan8267 says

Our nation lost its moral core the day we said torturing people is OK. I'd much rather live in an America with rampant polygamy than one in which torture is considered acceptable.

I simply cannot understand why consensual sex flares up your morality alert system, but torture, false imprisonment, and drone assassination does not.

I never agreed to torture either. That was the decision made purely by government officials and contractors who were paid to torture. And it was one reason why Bush was and still is despised so much. He was an incompetent right winger.

I think that administration didn't realize that what goes around comes around. The more we torture people, the more they'll hate us. Eventually their children grow up with desire for revenge.

---

Let me share an experience with you Dan, hope you'll find it interesting. Many years ago I had a customer (already passed away), older than I, who migrated here from Israel with his family. Many of his prior generation family members were murdered by Muslim extremists years before, and he grew up with hatred. He hated these people and wanted revenge, and I could see much of his message stuck with his children. Jewish Zionists and Muslims will never get along, there is too much blood between them now.

And my point about that story is that we US got involved into that age old war, into those politics and history of murder and hatred, into that fight between nations that have no reconciliation and now we are suffering because of it. It didn't start with Bush or Obama as you know, but there is sure as hell no easy way out of it now.

FortWayne says

Many of his prior generation family members were murdered by Muslim extremists years before, and he grew up with hatred. He hated these people and wanted revenge, and I could see much of his message stuck with his children.

This is also exactly why drone attacks and invasions cause terrorism and why the Middle East and America are far worse off than before the Iraq war.

FortWayne says

Jewish Zionists and Muslims will never get along, there is too much blood between them now.

On that I disagree. How much blood was spilt between Britain and France during the 100 Year War alone? How horrific were the atrocities committed by white Americans against African slaves and Native Americans? Yet people whose ancestors were mortal enemies can and do co-exist, often as a single society. This has happened countless times throughout history in both the small and large scale.

With every generation, there exists the possibility of not carrying over the hatred and sins of the past, or at least diminishing those hatreds. I do not hold it impossible that descendants of Jews and descendants of Arabs cannot co-exist, even intermarry, given enough time. Secularization would greatly speed up this process. The replacement of religious beliefs with scientific education would bury past conflicts in the past.

Dan8267 says

On that I disagree. How much blood was spilt between Britain and France during the 100 Year War alone? How horrific were the atrocities committed by white Americans against African slaves and Native Americans? Yet people whose ancestors were mortal enemies can and do co-exist, often as a single society. This has happened countless times throughout history in both the small and large scale.

100 year war is almost a 1000 years ago. People don't remember it anymore, too many generations passed. But I'm sure first several generations of and after the war held onto the memories while it was still fresh.

Middle east is still a fresh battle ground, conflicts, injury and sorrow are still felt today. They are still fighting each other. And you'd need several generations of peace to pass for that to no longer be relevant. I bet it won't happen in our lifetime.

Dan8267 says

How horrific were the atrocities committed by white Americans against African slaves and Native Americans?

How about the Asian so called atrocities against the world.. wipped out half of Europe.
... the Black Plaque came along for the ride with the Mongols.

Native Americans gave the world Syphilis.. several untold millions perished for the next 500 years because of that.

And today.. Slavery of several millions found in Africa and South Asia.

But you keep blaming the ills of the world on whites.... laughable.

Dan8267 says

When they do, I'll be bitching and moaning about them.

Oh the left never politicize anything... when was your last post bitching about the left?

Dan8267 says

Don't fall into the trap of "the other side would do it, so it's ok for us to do it". Only children think like that.

Once again you clearly misread my comments. I have been saying ALL along that both the left and right have issues and I have never justified the wrongs of "the right" because of the wrongs of "the left". My point is that all you do is bitch about the right... You are no independent as you claim as your views are CLEARLY biased.

BTW, you should heed your own advice... unless you are a child, then I suppose it is ok by your own accord.
Dan8267 says

I would argue that as the commander in chief, lying about the reasons for going to war, victimizes a whole world.

The day that Bush, Cheney, Rice, and Obama are hung for crimes against humanity is the day you can reopen the Clinton case.