*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


You make it way too easy Chuck. ;-)

Well at least you do not disagree that using the War on Terror as a vehicle
to attack the Republican party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosophical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, thanks.

I'm pretty confused abaout your reference to a "war on terror". Surely
you couldn't possibly mean the invasion of Iraq? If that's a war on
terror, we're losing big time- there are a lot more terrorists in Iraq
now than when Saddam was running the show- (he was a lot more effective
at catching them than we seem to be, and he was enough of a ******* to
keep them in check. Our problem? We can't be as big a ******* as Saddam
used to be
in order to keep some remote resemblance of order there and still
promote our "noble motives" or claim to be helping the Iraqi people).
We are hoping for a victory where somebody shows up, surrenders, and
signs a peace treaty. How quaint. There is no "somebody" in charge over
there who can call off all the religious fanatics from the various
sides. If you are waiting for terrorism to stop in order to declare a
"victory", good luck with that. We're inciting more terrorism than
we're stopping.

You won't find many liberals shedding tears for guys like that
high-ranking Al Qaida member who was taken out by a CIA drone last
week. That's what the "war on terror" is about, IMO.

Chuck,
Are you using a national calamity into an opportunity for political
mudslinging?


wrote in message
ups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always
insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


You make it way too easy Chuck. ;-)

Well at least you do not disagree that using the War on Terror as a
vehicle
to attack the Republican party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosophical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, thanks.

I'm pretty confused abaout your reference to a "war on terror". Surely
you couldn't possibly mean the invasion of Iraq? If that's a war on
terror, we're losing big time- there are a lot more terrorists in Iraq
now than when Saddam was running the show- (he was a lot more effective
at catching them than we seem to be, and he was enough of a ******* to
keep them in check. Our problem? We can't be as big a ******* as Saddam
used to be
in order to keep some remote resemblance of order there and still
promote our "noble motives" or claim to be helping the Iraqi people).
We are hoping for a victory where somebody shows up, surrenders, and
signs a peace treaty. How quaint. There is no "somebody" in charge over
there who can call off all the religious fanatics from the various
sides. If you are waiting for terrorism to stop in order to declare a
"victory", good luck with that. We're inciting more terrorism than
we're stopping.

You won't find many liberals shedding tears for guys like that
high-ranking Al Qaida member who was taken out by a CIA drone last
week. That's what the "war on terror" is about, IMO.

Touché !!


"Lord Reginald Smithers" Ask me about my driveway leading up to my manor.
wrote in message ...
Chuck,
Are you using a national calamity into an opportunity for political
mudslinging?


wrote in message
ups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always
insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


You make it way too easy Chuck. ;-)

Well at least you do not disagree that using the War on Terror as a
vehicle
to attack the Republican party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosophical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, thanks.

I'm pretty confused abaout your reference to a "war on terror". Surely
you couldn't possibly mean the invasion of Iraq? If that's a war on
terror, we're losing big time- there are a lot more terrorists in Iraq
now than when Saddam was running the show- (he was a lot more effective
at catching them than we seem to be, and he was enough of a ******* to
keep them in check. Our problem? We can't be as big a ******* as Saddam
used to be
in order to keep some remote resemblance of order there and still
promote our "noble motives" or claim to be helping the Iraqi people).
We are hoping for a victory where somebody shows up, surrenders, and
signs a peace treaty. How quaint. There is no "somebody" in charge over
there who can call off all the religious fanatics from the various
sides. If you are waiting for terrorism to stop in order to declare a
"victory", good luck with that. We're inciting more terrorism than
we're stopping.

You won't find many liberals shedding tears for guys like that
high-ranking Al Qaida member who was taken out by a CIA drone last
week. That's what the "war on terror" is about, IMO.

wrote in message
ups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

George Fillioa wrote:
If it happened today.
Sad but true.

http://tinyurl.com/clpcf


What's sad, but obviously true, is that certain factions always
insist
on turning national calamities into opportunities for political
mudslinging.

Have you no shame or decency at all?


Chuck, the left, you included, have taken the War on Terror into
opportunities for political mudslinging for months now.

Where is your shame and decency?


Well at least you do not disagree that using Pearl Harbor as a vehicle
to attack the Democratic party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosohpical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.


You make it way too easy Chuck. ;-)

Well at least you do not disagree that using the War on Terror as a
vehicle
to attack the Republican party is shameless and indecent, and the best
defense you can mount for your philosophical ally is "you or somebody
else did worse, first, or whatnot." Frankly, that's a more reasonable
response than I thought I might see.

Imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, thanks.


It just worked so well.



I'm pretty confused abaout your reference to a "war on terror". Surely
you couldn't possibly mean the invasion of Iraq? If that's a war on
terror, we're losing big time-........snip

yadayadyada............

sigh

Lord Reginald Smithers wrote:
Chuck,
Are you using a national calamity into an opportunity for political
mudslinging?

Since we seem to agree that the invasion of Iraq is a national
calamity.........

The answer would be no. Not in the same sense that the right wing
cartoon did, at least.
Please look through my post and see how many specific political names,
references to specific political parties, etc you find. My comments
were directed to a failing foreign policy, not blaming
specfic individuals or portraying others as extremist buffoons.

I would say the Islamic extremist war against the west is exactly the same
as the Jap attacking the US.

You seem to like to insult and belittle other political parties, politicians
and those who support those politicians and portray them as buffoons, but
you are very creative in establishing extremely tight rules for who is not
playing fairly. That way, you can never be including in those who you
think should be chastised.

Very creative, and shows your above average IQ, but if you believe your own
PR, you have fooled yourself.


wrote in message
oups.com...

Lord Reginald Smithers wrote:
Chuck,
Are you using a national calamity into an opportunity for political
mudslinging?

Since we seem to agree that the invasion of Iraq is a national
calamity.........

The answer would be no. Not in the same sense that the right wing
cartoon did, at least.
Please look through my post and see how many specific political names,
references to specific political parties, etc you find. My comments
were directed to a failing foreign policy, not blaming
specfic individuals or portraying others as extremist buffoons.

Lord Reginald Smithers wrote:
I would say the Islamic extremist war against the west is exactly the same
as the Jap attacking the US.

The "Jap"?

Anyway,

The Japanese used an organized military force representing an
established government to attack another organized military force
representing an established government. The Japanese were under the
mistaken impression that a formal declaration of war had been presented
to the opposing government.

To compare the Japanese to the theocratic or anarchist religious
fanatics now sneaking around with bombs to blow up innocent civilians
defames the Japanese and unduly credits the terrorists.

To believe we will defeat the terrorists in the same manner and with
the same methods we defeated the Japanese, or that the war will ever
end, or that there is anyone who can execute a surrender document that
would bind all the splinter groups of competing fanatics to stop
committing acts of terror would be simple minded.

Chuck,
I used Jap like I use Dem or Rep. a quick abbr.

How would you recommend we protect ourselves from the terrorists?


wrote in message
oups.com...

Lord Reginald Smithers wrote:
I would say the Islamic extremist war against the west is exactly the
same
as the Jap attacking the US.

The "Jap"?

Anyway,

The Japanese used an organized military force representing an
established government to attack another organized military force
representing an established government. The Japanese were under the
mistaken impression that a formal declaration of war had been presented
to the opposing government.

To compare the Japanese to the theocratic or anarchist religious
fanatics now sneaking around with bombs to blow up innocent civilians
defames the Japanese and unduly credits the terrorists.

To believe we will defeat the terrorists in the same manner and with
the same methods we defeated the Japanese, or that the war will ever
end, or that there is anyone who can execute a surrender document that
would bind all the splinter groups of competing fanatics to stop
committing acts of terror would be simple minded.

Harry,
Would you like to elaborate on this subject?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Lord Reginald Smithers wrote:
I would say the Islamic extremist war against the west is exactly the
same
as the Jap attacking the US.

The "Jap"?

Anyway,

The Japanese used an organized military force representing an
established government to attack another organized military force
representing an established government. The Japanese were under the
mistaken impression that a formal declaration of war had been presented
to the opposing government.

To compare the Japanese to the theocratic or anarchist religious
fanatics now sneaking around with bombs to blow up innocent civilians
defames the Japanese and unduly credits the terrorists.

To believe we will defeat the terrorists in the same manner and with
the same methods we defeated the Japanese, or that the war will ever
end, or that there is anyone who can execute a surrender document that
would bind all the splinter groups of competing fanatics to stop
committing acts of terror would be simple minded.



Smithers thinks the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was the same as the
9-11 attack?

He really is an idiot.

--
SUPPORT BUSH'S ENEMIES BUY CITGO GAS.

Lord Reginald Smithers wrote:

Chuck,
I used Jap like I use Dem or Rep. a quick abbr.

How would you recommend we protect ourselves from the terrorists?

There are still a few folks around who actually fought in that war. They
remember the Jap culture and unpunished atrocities of the time. They are
not so PC and will properly call them Japs till their dying day. Japs
are very prejudiced against anything not Japanese. They believe
themselves the superior race and have extremely protectionist trade
policies to this day.

--
Skipper