JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

3) If you're a competent leader, you realize that the enemy is driven by
the exact same religious zeal that drives your own decisions, and which
also makes you unfit for the office you hold.
What are you talking about?

This is probably too long a response for you to cope with, but your answer
is within.

There's a very short list of reasons why politicians do things which are
doomed to failure before they even leave the planning stage. It doesn't
matter whether it's a war, or some lame-ass public works project. A few
weeks ago, I watched with great joy as a city councilman was brutally
interrogated by a couple of citizens at a public comment meeting for a
ridiculous apartment project that will destroy a beautiful waterfront park,
and which only the politicians are in love with. The consultants for this
plan think 400 apartments would be feasible. The councilman insisted that
"the area could probably support 1000 units". One by one, the two citizens
went through the list of reasons below, and when they got to #6, the
councilman turned red and left the meeting.

1) Too stupid or incompetent to see what a bad plan they're in love with.
2) Too young to be aware of history and too proud or stupid to listen.
3) Old enough to know better, but too stupid to learn from the past.
4) Ego out of control - must do something, ANYTHING with the hope of being
remembered. "I'm a WAR president!"
5) Blind faith in the idea. This takes training, which I believe is most
likely found in religion.
6) Crooked: The politician is receiving some kind of incentive for his love
affair with the idea.

Your president certainly falls into category 1, 3, 4 and 5. Guaranteed.

He is our President!

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

You are really full of yourself today!

wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:25:20 -0400, JohnH wrote:

How does one tell the difference between a dead civilian and a dead
terrorist? Please don't say the terrorist will have a rifle in his hands.
--
Those infant terrorists were the sneakiest little *******s

Read any good sociology books lately?

Don White wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
Don White wrote:

Bert Robbins wrote:


All you have to do is get past your hatred for the Bush
administration and "Big Oil" and things will become clear.


Since you brought up Bush.... caught part of his newsconference from
the ranch yesterday. He didn't look or sound that good.
Too much RnR?


You aren't worth the effort...


You can't dream up an excuse for your exaulted ruler? What kind of yes
man are you?

A better one than you, Don. I don't suffer from an inferiority complex
like you and others.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
. I am 100% sure that his world view
is based on his pastimes, as well as a religion which promotes the
concept
of a savior.

Pardon me, but is there really anything wrong with believing in a
"Saviour"?


No. Not until you begin to believe that YOU are the savior. You, and
soldiers who just happen to be somebody else's children.

Keep your religion apart from your political decisions. This requires
strength. I can only think of ONE politician who was able to correctly do
this. Sadly, he has returned to private law practice.

You can't separate politics and religion. The real question is what is a
religion.

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...
basskisser wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 21:58:47 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

wrote:
Don White wrote:

Why are you dissin' the French? They softened the Viet Cong up for
you
al through the 50's and you still couldn't win.
Courtesy of the Paris "peace" talks?

I'll diss the french on that one
What's absolutely amazing is that we didn't seem to learn much from
our
war against Vietnam and its various "insurgencies." I'm hearing the
same
sorts of really stupid talk from our Prez and company about our war
against Iraq as I remember from the late 1960s and early 1970s, and
there is still a large percentage of American people who actually
believe the Chimp-in-Chief and his henchmen. When will they ever
learn?
I'm not sure you can directly analogize the Vietnam conflict with the
Iraqi War, but I get your point.
No, the conflicts are not the same, but the callousness, stupidity, and
b.s. coming from our national leaders is pretty much the same. I watched
Rumsfeld testifying last week, no, telling one lie after another last
week. It was an incredible performance.
Hell, all of the talk radio Fox news types are saying we are in WW3 and
claiming that this is just like the rise of the Nazis in the late '30s.

All you have to do is get past your hatred for the Bush administration and
"Big Oil" and things will become clear.
You've got it backwards. Any chance that if Bush had NOT invaded Iraq, he
would have more friends, or at least more people who would patiently wait
for him to vanish from public life? Or, do you think a person's deeds are
not connected with his reputation?

Pre-war Iraqi output = more than 2.2 million barrels
In May, 2006 output = 1.1 million barrels. Even Bert should be able to
figure out that yes, BushCo DID help cause our current conditions.


Why are you complaining, Bush has succeeded in reducing our dependence
upon foreign oil by 50% from Iraq.

Holy ****!!! Do you honestly believe that, Bert? Let's see the
data!!!!!!

wrote in message
oups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
Keep your religion apart from your political decisions. This requires
strength. I can only think of ONE politician who was able to correctly do
this. Sadly, he has returned to private law practice.

If you are saying politican, instead of POTUS,

Don't forget the WWII general
or, the one assasinated in Dallas,
the one buried on his texas ranch.
The one who wasn't a crook.
The one who stumbled getting off a plane

Those are the ones I remember,
Of course, except for Gerald, they're all dead now.


My comment was written in haste, in the middle of doing 8 different things.
I should've said there was only one I know who was deeply religious and knew
how it fit with his duties while in public office. I knew because he
explained it so well. He still does, occasionally, and not in terms intended
for (and obviously originating with) a simpleton. Every now and then, he
tells people they should stop dreaming about his running for president.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 00:43:15 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Can you put an actual number or range of number on your "little or no
cost
to us" assertion.

You can help. How many pilots did we lose during the period when we were
enforcing the no-fly zone?
The problem was how many muslin civilians we were killing. That came
home to bite us on 9-11. "Death from the air" with no danger to us got
turned back on us by Islam. We can sit here and say 6 billion muslims
spread around the 3d world don't mean much and there is nothing they
can do to us but a wise person knows that isn't true. They have TV too
and they see our air power is simply bullying the weak.

It is signifcant that we had the same amount of support for the no fly
zones from our european allies when Clinton lerft office as we do for
the war now. Most of europe think it is folly to screw with these
crazy SOBs. It is pretty much just us and the brits.

This is all true. It's interesting, though, that some here can create a
house of cards in their minds which justifies sending our kids over there
because of misplaced valor.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 00:20:47 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

Saddam could've been contained
forever

So you think we could still be flying 100 sorties a week over Iraq
bombing them and the world would be fine with it?

Absolutely, although I think it wouldn't have lasted more than another
year or two, for other reasons which you may remember.


There was talk of how much suffering we were causing because food or
medicine couldn't reach innocent civilians, although that criticism was
directed more at the oil trade limitiations. Whether it was true or not, I
think that would've ended our involvement simply for reasons of public
image.

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

3) If you're a competent leader, you realize that the enemy is driven
by the exact same religious zeal that drives your own decisions, and
which also makes you unfit for the office you hold.
What are you talking about?

This is probably too long a response for you to cope with, but your
answer is within.

There's a very short list of reasons why politicians do things which are
doomed to failure before they even leave the planning stage. It doesn't
matter whether it's a war, or some lame-ass public works project. A few
weeks ago, I watched with great joy as a city councilman was brutally
interrogated by a couple of citizens at a public comment meeting for a
ridiculous apartment project that will destroy a beautiful waterfront
park, and which only the politicians are in love with. The consultants
for this plan think 400 apartments would be feasible. The councilman
insisted that "the area could probably support 1000 units". One by one,
the two citizens went through the list of reasons below, and when they
got to #6, the councilman turned red and left the meeting.

1) Too stupid or incompetent to see what a bad plan they're in love with.
2) Too young to be aware of history and too proud or stupid to listen.
3) Old enough to know better, but too stupid to learn from the past.
4) Ego out of control - must do something, ANYTHING with the hope of
being remembered. "I'm a WAR president!"
5) Blind faith in the idea. This takes training, which I believe is most
likely found in religion.
6) Crooked: The politician is receiving some kind of incentive for his
love affair with the idea.

Your president certainly falls into category 1, 3, 4 and 5. Guaranteed.

He is our President!

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

You are really full of yourself today!


I've disowned him. He's YOUR president. His father was another story. I
didn't agree with everything he did, but I was still willing to use the word
"my" with regard to him.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

3) If you're a competent leader, you realize that the enemy is driven
by the exact same religious zeal that drives your own decisions, and
which also makes you unfit for the office you hold.
What are you talking about?
This is probably too long a response for you to cope with, but your
answer is within.

There's a very short list of reasons why politicians do things which are
doomed to failure before they even leave the planning stage. It doesn't
matter whether it's a war, or some lame-ass public works project. A few
weeks ago, I watched with great joy as a city councilman was brutally
interrogated by a couple of citizens at a public comment meeting for a
ridiculous apartment project that will destroy a beautiful waterfront
park, and which only the politicians are in love with. The consultants
for this plan think 400 apartments would be feasible. The councilman
insisted that "the area could probably support 1000 units". One by one,
the two citizens went through the list of reasons below, and when they
got to #6, the councilman turned red and left the meeting.

1) Too stupid or incompetent to see what a bad plan they're in love with.
2) Too young to be aware of history and too proud or stupid to listen.
3) Old enough to know better, but too stupid to learn from the past.
4) Ego out of control - must do something, ANYTHING with the hope of
being remembered. "I'm a WAR president!"
5) Blind faith in the idea. This takes training, which I believe is most
likely found in religion.
6) Crooked: The politician is receiving some kind of incentive for his
love affair with the idea.

Your president certainly falls into category 1, 3, 4 and 5. Guaranteed.
He is our President!

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

You are really full of yourself today!


I've disowned him. He's YOUR president. His father was another story. I
didn't agree with everything he did, but I was still willing to use the word
"my" with regard to him.

You really are an idiot.