The Goat Pen

AlabamAlum wrote:IB,

So, because Prof disagrees with you, or doesn't recognize your view as correct and obvious, he is a 'malignant douchebag'? Is such language Christ like?

No it is not Christlike. Sorry for that, that was wrong.

But I didn't curse him because he disagreed with me. I don't care that he disagrees with me. I cursed him because he KNEW what I was talking about (when I made my point) and he went out of his way to twist my words around in an attempt to be snarky with his welfare queen comment.

Even if the second amendment was repealed, it doesn't mean guns would necessarily be illegal. Same with Roe v. Wade. It's pretty obvious what would happen if both were struck down, the dark blue states would have legalized abortion and strict gun laws, the dark red states would have much less restriction on gun and more restrictions (if not outright bans) on abortions. Everybody else would have some combination. Then you just move to the state that suits your views, if either of them really mean that much to you. If not, just stay where you are and grumble about "the government" and be generally disgruntled with your shitty life. Nobody else gives a shit, about you or anything else. The only thing anybody really cares about is themselves, their immediate fambly, and being able to do whatever they want to do whenever they want to do it and being against anything they happen to not want to do themselves...

crashcourse wrote:I like to think those thousands of lives eventually took out benladen and multiple alqueda #2"s

if anything iraq attracted multiple foreign fighters into iraq and intel from them and hussein led to some good intel

was it worth 3000 lives and 10K injured and maimed--not to their families it wasnt

but its nice being on irans back door with a country that at least is somewhat friendly to us

Moth to the flame. Moth to the flame.

Better to fight and kill them there instead of letting them train and plan to attack us here.

Called forward defense. Check into it.

bluetick wrote:cnsnews... lol

Your donations to us will stop the liberal media!

And tick is back to true form. No comment on the content of the article/column just a witty one liner trying to disparage the source.

Very lazy.

Easy to say when it's somebody else doing to killing, eh, puter?

AlabamAlum wrote:I think I'm missing a post.

Who is saying that?

There have been plenty of d pols calling for confiscation. Many more for registration etc.

As I said many years ago on whatever site we were on at the time: registration leads to confiscation. Everywhere it has been put in place one leads to the other. Countries very similar to ours: Canada, UK, and Australia.

hedge wrote:Easy to say when it's somebody else doing to killing, eh, puter?

Fair point. But people volunteer to join the service and all who went in after 9/11 were aware of what we were doing.

I revere the military and the sacrifices they make in both time way from family and of course ultimate sacrifices.

I had my app to the USAF academy filled out and ready to go until I found out I couldn't fly fighters cause of corrected vision. Cold war was still going on when I was at UT and one reason I went into EE was I thought a technical degree combined with surgery for vision (RK as laser wasn't around yet) might provide some kind of boost if I went ROTC. Hell I even took 2 semesters of Russian, but then the wall fell and there was no demand for pilots at all.

And for the record you could take what you said and apply it to every war ever fought.

Nothing we've done in the middle east (pick your country) in the past 10+ years has done anything to prevent the next terrorist attack. No amount of military action could. Just like no amount of police action could stop what's his name from bombing the federal building on Oklahoma. But evidently the idea spending billions (trillions?) of dollars and thousands of lives in a pointless action against an essentially faceless enemy makes some people (like you) feel more "secure". Not me.

I would say the odds are very great that there will be another terrorist action in America in our lifetimes. Whether it's conducted by foreigners or a good ol homegrown Amurcan, I don't know. Hell, why aren't we calling that shit at Sandy Hook a terrorist attack? But the only reaction I see in here about that is "there's nothing you can do when somebody goes crazy like that, it's a tragedy, yes, but there's not much you can really do to stop it, certainly not even HINT at guns having ANYTHING to do with it, blahblahblah". Status quo all the way. But when a raghead or some "foreigner" does it? Pull out the checkbook, load up the guns, we're by god going to kill some motherfuckers, I don't care how much it costs or how many of our guys die in the process. Ooo, boy, we're really tough.

Again I say: Mighty easy to take that position when it's somebody else's life on the line. Mighty easy to sit in our living room and watch TV every night and drink beer and rant and rave on the internet while somebody else does the shit work and gets blown apart in the process, irregardless of how much you or anybody else "reveres" them. Your reverence and 2 dollars will buy them a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Just keep it...

Moth to the flame. Moth to the flame.

Better to fight and kill them there instead of letting them train and plan to attack us here.

Called forward defense. Check into it.

Not that simple.

1. The 9/11 terrorists trained to fly airplanes in Florida. I don't recall anybody advocating that we invade Florida.

2. If we do temporarily succeed in driving a terrorist group from a particular country, they'll just go someplace else and start over. Look at a map of the Middle and and North Africa, and subtract Israel That will show all the places terrorists can move to and operate from. Are you ready to attack, spend a decade and a trillion nation and five thousand American lives on each one? If the past decade has taught us anything, it is that invading every country that terrorists move to operate from, and then spending the next decade and a trillion dollars and a few thousand soldiers nation building, is a really, really stupid idea. You may like it, but that puts you in the 2% of the American public that would agree with you.

3. The biggest anti-terrorist success in the past decade was a combination of intense intelligence gathering and a special ops ops raid. That took place in Pakistan, a country which we thankfully didn't invade, occupy, and nation build. THAT is the the most effective way to fight terrorism, not delusional neocom megalomania.

AlabamAlum wrote:IB,

So, because Prof disagrees with you, or doesn't recognize your view as correct and obvious, he is a 'malignant douchebag'? Is such language Christ like?

Other recent Christ like posts from IB, the Christian counselor of couples, include:

Fuck everyone else

and

(on edit: can't get that fucking linked into youtube)

and

Bullshit.

and

That stung like a motherfucker

and

Fast forward 5 years later and because you never loved him or respect the sacament of marriage you stard fucking one of your old boyfriends

and

and you hope that your husband doesn't come home from work early and catch your boyfriend with his dick in your ass.

IB, with your propensity for language like that, what kind of "Christian counselor" are you?

hedge wrote:Nothing we've done in the middle east (pick your country) in the past 10+ years has done anything to prevent the next terrorist attack. No amount of military action could. Just like no amount of police action could stop what's his name from bombing the federal building on Oklahoma. But evidently the idea spending billions (trillions?) of dollars and thousands of lives in a pointless action against an essentially faceless enemy makes some people (like you) feel more "secure". Not me.

I would say the odds are very great that there will be another terrorist action in America in our lifetimes. Whether it's conducted by foreigners or a good ol homegrown Amurcan, I don't know. Hell, why aren't we calling that shit at Sandy Hook a terrorist attack? But the only reaction I see in here about that is "there's nothing you can do when somebody goes crazy like that, it's a tragedy, yes, but there's not much you can really do to stop it, certainly not even HINT at guns having ANYTHING to do with it, blahblahblah". Status quo all the way. But when a raghead or some "foreigner" does it? Pull out the checkbook, load up the guns, we're by god going to kill some motherfuckers, I don't care how much it costs or how many of our guys die in the process. Ooo, boy, we're really tough.

Again I say: Mighty easy to take that position when it's somebody else's life on the line. Mighty easy to sit in our living room and watch TV every night and drink beer and rant and rave on the internet while somebody else does the shit work and gets blown apart in the process, irregardless of how much you or anybody else "reveres" them. Your reverence and 2 dollars will buy them a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Just keep it...

If you are talking about a few guys or even one on their own doing something, sure. I would expect that to happen some point in the future. 911 type level a vastly different story. That takes serious planning and coordination and training. That is where disrupting them by fighting them there makes a difference. And that doesn't mean it has to be thousands of troops on the ground it could mean forward bases for special forces, combined with fighters and drones. It's a helluva lot harder to plan and train when you are worried about spec ops, hellfires, and/or GBU's wiping you from the face of the earth.

As to your other point...well the what the hell do we have a military for? If someones life is at risk, we shouldnt do anything? Were you the one person who voted no on declaring war on japan after pearl harbor?

I'm not allowed to have an opinion cause I'm not there? That's a load of crap. You don't think it's doing anything and a waste of time and lives. If you feel that way I get your opinion, but I disagree. Its almost impossible to stop the one guy or few guys from shooting up a mall, or car bombing etc. I would argue that AlQ would be more effective if they just had people over here doing what terrorists do in Israel with small attacks all the time. However the big attack like 9/11 is what we have had an impact on.

Professor Tiger wrote:

Moth to the flame. Moth to the flame.

Better to fight and kill them there instead of letting them train and plan to attack us here.

Called forward defense. Check into it.

Not that simple.

1. The 9/11 terrorists trained to fly airplanes in Florida. I don't recall anybody advocating that we invade Florida.

2. If we do temporarily succeed in driving a terrorist group from a particular country, they'll just go someplace else and start over. Look at a map of the Middle and and North Africa, and subtract Israel That will show all the places terrorists can move to and operate from. Are you ready to attack, spend a decade and a trillion nation and five thousand American lives on each one? If the past decade has taught us anything, it is that invading every country that terrorists move to operate from, and then spending the next decade and a trillion dollars and a few thousand soldiers nation building, is a really, really stupid idea. You may like it, but that puts you in the 2% of the American public that would agree with you.

3. The biggest anti-terrorist success in the past decade was a combination of intense intelligence gathering and a special ops ops raid. That took place in Pakistan, a country which we thankfully didn't invade, occupy, and nation build. THAT is the the most effective way to fight terrorism, not delusional neocom megalomania.

1. True. But there was plenty warning signs all over the globe and that was the first attack and we weren't at war.

2. No. I am fine with what the military feels is most effective. If its drones, bombs, and spec ops...fine by me.

3. Im okay with that. I just want us to be aggressive in pursuing them.

I'm all for invading Florida.

I'm also for dead arabs.

Me too on the 2nd thought. Not the 1st. Sorry. I like orange juice.

I'm sitting here at my in-laws place in Venice FL - 3 miles from the dinky airport (or sky ranch) where Atta learned how to fly a 747.

puterbac wrote:

bluetick wrote:cnsnews... lol

Your donations to us will stop the liberal media!

And tick is back to true form. No comment on the content of the article/column just a witty one liner trying to disparage the source.

Thanks puter. Your support means a lot.

Just keep your beef away from Cincy.

"Are you ready to attack, spend a decade and a trillion nation and five thousand American lives on each one?"

Puter and his buddies are, as long as they're not one of the 5000 who are going to die. But that's ok, he "reveres" them, so that makes it all worth it to everyone involved...

"It's a helluva lot harder to plan and train when you are worried about spec ops, hellfires, and/or GBU's wiping you from the face of the earth."

Yeah, like Prof said, it was so hard for the 9/11 terrorists to train in Florida. And I've never bought this bullshit about how "sophisticated" and "advanced" and "difficult" the 9/11 attacks were. They were ingenious for one reason, that they took full advantage of the fact that it had never happened before and that people in planes would take for granted that even if they were being hijacked, the hijackers would be wanting some kind of ransom and would therefor land the planes and that nobody would die (which I'm sure is what they were saying over the intercoms the whole time to keep everybody in check). But it didn't take any great level of training or planning to simply get some pilot training, buy a dozen plane tickets for flights that were taking off at about the same time and then take advantage of the fact that it would never occur to anybody that even though their plane was hijacked, they were going to die in a suicide mission.

This is very obvious from the simple fact that something like that could NEVER happen again in the U.S. and probably not anywhere else, either. The next time some raghead gets up in a crowded plane with a freaking box cutter and tells everybody he's taking over the plane, every man, woman and child is going to be on his ass in seconds flat and literally tear him apart. Even if they had guns, there's no way a plane full of American passengers is going to let hijackers take over that plane. Hell, even the guy on Flight 93, just from hearing about the reports of the other planes, forced it down into an open field. Tragic loss of life, yes, but also showed the heroic nature of the passengers who reclaimed the plane (or at least foiled the hijackers mission). And we don't need the TSA or any other government agency or program to "defend" us from this happening again, the general public is fully capable of defending themselves, and any would-be hijacker damn well knows it...

"
I'm not allowed to have an opinion cause I'm not there?"

I never said you weren't allowed to have an opinion b/c you're not the one putting your balls on the table. I merely said it's very easy to have the opinion you and your neo-con couch commandos seem to always settle on when you don't have your own balls on the table. But I know, you "revere" those guys, blahblahblah...