"jim--" wrote in message ...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
Charles wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:

jim-- wrote:

tug, tug...yank, yank....dance for me Krause, I am your puppet
master. LOL!



You keep repeating that, crap-for-brains, but only you and your circle
jerk of righties believe it, and only because most of you are dumb as
doorknobs.


In a way, krause is about as big an idiot as b'asskisser. Deny, deny,
deny.

-- Charlie

What a dumb ass.

We finally agree on something....Krause certainly is a dumb ass.

Ah, you're too stupid to follow a thread, I see.

Charles wrote in message ...
basskisser wrote:

Charles wrote in message ...
Harry Krause wrote:

jim-- wrote:

tug, tug...yank, yank....dance for me Krause, I am your puppet master. LOL!



You keep repeating that, crap-for-brains, but only you and your circle
jerk of righties believe it, and only because most of you are dumb as
doorknobs.


In a way, krause is about as big an idiot as b'asskisser. Deny, deny, deny.

-- Charlie

What a dumb ass.

My ass is dumb, but at least it's located on my backside. Yours is
between your ears.

-- Charlie

Another ignorant post from the village idiot.

Harry Krause wrote:

No, you are a neocon because you are a rigid, mindless fool who accepts
virtually every line of bull**** the neocons feed you.

As opposed to the bull**** you constantly feed us?

-- Charlie

We can never win this war on terrorism by killing people. Even Tenet
says that to call the war on terrorism a war is incorrect, it is no
more a war than the war on crime or the war on drugs neither of which
will ever have an endpoint.

We have probably increased the number of terrorists 10 fold by
invading Iraq. There are millions upon millions of potential recruits
throughout the world.

The solution to the terrorism problem has been staring us in the face
for 40 years but I'm afraid we are just too blind to see it. We
unconditionally support Israel as they commit what basically amounts
to genocide. We support a cadre of ruthless dictators as long as they
share our interests. At the same time we talk about democracy and free
elections. The hypocracy is so shameful as to render our proclamations
of freedom utter nonsense.





(Gould 0738) wrote in message ...
Let's think about the choices we have. You could be:

A. With us, in that you support the elimination of world-wide
terrorism by whatever means necessary.

B. Against us, which means that you feel that active terrorist groups
killing innocent civilians is acceptable behavior in a civilized
world.

C. Neutral. You want to hide your head in the sand and pretend the
problem will fix itself.

So which are you?

Dave

I'm stunned. Not one of the choices you offered.

According to what you just wrote:

If I am not in favor of carpet bombing the entire middle East with
thermo-nuclear devices (an example of "any means neccessary" to eliminate
terrorism), then my only other choice is to declare that
active terror groups killing innocent civilians........(as opposed to high tech
super powers with thermo nuclear bombs killing innocent civilians)......is
absolutely OK.

Doesn't work for me.

I'm in favor of capturing or killing the individual criminal *******s involved
in terrorist activities, by any reasonable means that won't result in our
creating far more innocent civilian casualties than the
terrorists have already.

I'm not in favor of invading our way through a check list of third world
countries under the guise of "fighting terrorism". (But I bet you already knew
that)

Yes, I know that neocons are all about limiting choices. But you guys have a
ways to go in this country before you can presume to tell me how I must think,
(choice A or choice B).

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Dave Hall wrote:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 12:53:49 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:08:13 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:
it's just that
they stand firm in their resolve. They make the hard decisions
rather
than engaging in endless debates from infinite angles.

Even when their assumptions are wrong and events prove their thinking
is
leading to one disaster after another.

No one has yet to prove that those decisions were wrong (your biased
and ill-informed opinions do not count), or that these decisions have
been a "disaster".

Bush's "war against terrorism" is a fraud and a disaster, no matter how
you and the other binaries try to spin it.

I'm still waiting for you (or anyone else) to substantiate that claim
with something other than biased, hate-filled rhetoric, opinion and
conjecture.



What you call "Bush's stupidity" may very well be a cleverly organized
and well thought out effort. 20 years from now, and we'll look back a
bit differently than we are now.


Are you competing for the "Today's Laugh" prize?

No, I don't have a chance. You've got that one in the bag.



Rigid personality disorder, eh?

No, it's called doing what's right, even if it makes some people
uncomfortable in the short term.

There's nothing right about Bush policies, except, of course, that they
are mostly extremely right...wing.

So doing nothing is preferable to what we're doing now? Maybe you'd
rather send Al Qaeda a case of French wine and ask them nicely to not
fly any more planes into our buildings?

Dave



Uh, when your policies are wrong, and you keep on promulgating them, and
they keep on delivering death and destruction, and you keep on
promulgating them, then perhaps it is time to come up with some new
policies.


I see that you have finally come on board about Johnson's Great Society.

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
So doing nothing is preferable to what we're doing now?

Binary.

Excludes the possibility of doing anyting "different" than what we're
doing
now, and assumes that our present course is the only possible alternative
to
"doing nothing."

You are sitting in a tree and there is a lion at the base of the tree that
wants to kill you and eat you. You have a gun. How are you going to free
yourself from the tree?

Very good Chuck! That sounds like the perfect plan. Now all we need to
do is call the Starship Enterprise and have them scan the plant for
the DNA signatures of all the terrorists so that we can beam them all
into a detention cell on some outer world controlled by the Klingons.

Or, failing that, we can occupy every country where there ever was, is, or
might someday be a terrorist. To make sure we get them all, we need to kill off
anybody we even suspect, in the least, might have terrorist tendencies.
Probably no more practical than the Starship Enterprise.

Wake up! We haven't yet found OBL, his top henchmen, or the Iraqi
insurgents. The terrorists hide in countries that will not allow us in
to search for them (Pakistan). How do you resolve this? If there are
countries who support the terrorists either overtly or covertly, then
how do we apprehend them?

Bush: Hello, General XYPHAHUANG?

General X: Yes, Mr President! My closest friend and honored ally! How are Laura
and the twin Bushes?

Bush: Fine, general. Seems we have a small problem, however. A group of
criminal terrorists thugs blew up a bunch of
stuff here in the US and killed a helluva lot of innocent folks. Turns out
these criminals are hiding in your country.

General X: Pajukistan does not support terrorism!

Bush: Of course not, and I'm glad to hear you say that. This is a courtesy call
to let you know that we will be sending a few thousand Army Rangers and Navy
Seals into your country by the end of this week.

General X: You mean you are going to invade us? What about the treaty?

Bush: Invade, shamde. This is a law enforcement action. We don't want to
acquire any territory, we don't want to topple your government, we want to
avoid civilian causalties. This is your opportunity to *invite* us to search
for these *******s.

General X: And if I don't choose to invite you?

Bush: Well, in that case we're coming anyway and this is a courtesy call to let
you know to expect us.

General X: This will pizz off my people! I'll be lucky to remain in power! You
can't do this! Don't forget, we've got a nuclear bomb!

Bush: Yes, we can. And we will. There's no doubt that you do not want to start
a nuclear war with the United States. The good news is, you won't need to. You
do have an alternative to our presence, of course. Deliver Osama bin Ladin or
his verifiable corpse to your border within 96 hours. If you can find him, do
so. If you can't we're coming to "help" you.

**************

So, that's how. In my opinion. Beats hell out of calling the Starship
Enterprise or killing every Muslim on the face of the earth, anyway.

This is a boat newsgroup. Plonk.

This is a boat newsgroup. Plonk.

"basskisser" wrote in message

Another ignorant post from the village idiot.

HEY! WAIT A MINUTE!!!

Last week you said I could be the Village Idiot! No fair! No fair!