Re: The Bush Problem (OT)


Schizoid Man wrote:
> ScottW wrote:
> > "Schizoid Man" <schiz@xxxxxx> wrote in message
>
> >>Gross oversimplification. It's quite apparent by the stupidity of the
> >>above statement that you see the world in black and white and are quite
> >>incapable of any empathy for human suffering or loss,
> >
> > You've demonstrated no empathy for the suffering of the Iraqi's under
> > Saddam. Your hypocrisy is boundless.
>
> Fine then, where is your empathy for the suffering of the whites in
> Zimbabwe, the Tutsis in Rwanda, the Arabs in Israel

are they being killed?

> or the Brazilians in
> the UK?

A tragic victim of terrorists.

>Shall we start invading them all?

Same tired argument. If you can't fix all the worlds ills...do
nothing.
Hey... since we can't rescue everyone from New Orleans today...we
shouldn't rescue anybody... cuz well the first ones are probably
getting preferential treatment and we can't have that so .... they
should all just swim for it.
(Note to sarcasm challenged... I'm being sarcastic).

>
> Isn't it time you came off your moral high horse?

I you think I'm on a high horse you should consider the origin of your
own perspective.

>
> > Just keep making *** up. It's quite apparent that you're simply a
> > wussified
> > pacifist who has ignored every atrocity the peaceniks like you ever
> > enabled.
>
> Really, because that's news to me? Why don't you read some of my posts
> and please tell exactly where I equate common sense with pacifism?

Sorry I missed your common sense post.. mostly all I see is sideline
anti-everything do-nothing whining which plays perfectly into the plans
of the insurgents.

>
> >>In fact, how many times a day do you actually pause to reflect beyond your
> >>car, house, contract, hairpiece or latte?
>
> Lack of response noted.

I like to let comments that reflect more about the writer than the
responder just
lie there and continue to reflect. This is one of your better
attempts.

>
> >>Gross misrepresentation indeed. Lest you forget, the first one was with
> >>the full endorsement and aid of the United States. Iraq has not invaded
> >>anybody in the last decade, which is more than can be said of America.
> >
> > That's right. If you had any balls you'd renounce citizenship and move
> > to France. Lionel will take you in.
>
> Again lack of response noted.

I'm sorry your cognitive ability is too limited to recognize a
response following an insult.

> I suppose it was OK to invade Iran as long
> as Ollie North and Reagan were arming Saddam to the teeth.

No it wasn't. I haven't closely studied the origins of that war but I
do know we felt it wasn't in our interest to allow Iran to win and our
aid increased to prevent just that.

>
> Mon ami, it is yoru hypocrisy that is quite boundless.
>

> >>These two invasions that you so casually mention occured within 7 years of
> >>one another almost 15 years ago.

HEY... HERES THE RESPONSE... YOU THINK THIS MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO DO
WITH RESTRAINING SASDDAM SINCE KUWAIT?

> > And they were under UN sanctions with militarily enforced no fly zones to
> > protect the Iraqis from the murderous Saddam for that entire time.
>
> I never have even once protested the UN no fly zones.

And yet you refuse to recognize that Saddam was effectively shackled
from conducting any aggressive military actions due to them and
sanctions. Instead you stupidly grant him credit as peaceful. Amongst
the dumbest claims ever made.

>
> >>But then again, like McKelvy, you never let incoveniences like facts get
> >>in your way.
> >
> > Keep spouting BS. I'm sure Dave is loving every meaningless word.
> >>Ok, let's start with Israel in that case. Liberate them all, I say...
> >
> > Didn't that start with a UN thing? What is it...you only pay attention
> > to the UN when you agree with it?
>
> > All or nothing..... you're simply frozen in place. You belong
> > in Cindy's wagon train with the rest of the nuts.
>
> Personally, I do think Dubya did the right thing by not meeting with
> her. And (I'm sure to your horror) I do agree with some of her
> detractors - she is trampling on her son's grave.

Well, I am pleasantly surprised.

ScottW

.