14 Mar 2011, 4:48 pm
14 Mar 2011, 6:05 pm
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas
14 Mar 2011, 8:10 pm
so you're all just fine with the military/industrial complex status quo, huh? figures. y'all probably just LOVE big pharma, big oil and your beloved insurance companies as well. conservatives- hmmph. 
14 Mar 2011, 8:51 pm
auntblabby wrote:
so you're all just fine with the military/industrial complex status quo, huh? figures. y'all probably just LOVE big pharma, big oil and your beloved insurance companies as well. conservatives- hmmph.
I can't even begin to guess why I'd be for the oil and pharmaceutics industries just becase i believe in a strong national defense.
What it is is that you didn't like being in the army so in your mind there should be no army or any other branch of the armed forces and waste is okay as long as it's for social spending.
This topic is going nowhere.
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas
14 Mar 2011, 10:02 pm
Raptor wrote:
I can't even begin to guess why I'd be for the oil and pharmaceutics industries just becase i believe in a strong national defense.
right wing types such as yourself, are,more often than not, reliably in the corner of big business in general, over all other concerns. you would prefer walmart and stockholders over mom and pop stores with no stockholders.
Raptor wrote:
What it is is that you didn't like being in the army so in your mind there should be no army or any other branch of the armed forces and waste is okay as long as it's for social spending.
that statement makes about as much sense, as a soup sandwich. wanting the military to bear its share of economizing is not the same as wanting to eliminate it. you are supposed to be smarter than that, so my guess is that you are just being truculant because you hate my guts for daring to be different from yourself.
Raptor wrote:
This topic is going nowhere.
only because you hijacked it and are deliberately torpedoing it with your bullying, intended to scare other people off. this thread is not going in your direction so you say it is "going nowhere." i hope you are happy now.
14 Mar 2011, 10:40 pm
auntblabby wrote:
Raptor wrote:
I can't even begin to guess why I'd be for the oil and pharmaceutics industries just becase i believe in a strong national defense.
right wing types such as yourself, are,more often than not, reliably in the corner of big business in general, over all other concerns. you would prefer walmart and stockholders over mom and pop stores with no stockholders.
Raptor wrote:
What it is is that you didn't like being in the army so in your mind there should be no army or any other branch of the armed forces and waste is okay as long as it's for social spending.
that statement makes about as much sense, as a soup sandwich. wanting the military to bear its share of economizing is not the same as wanting to eliminate it. you are supposed to be smarter than that, so my guess is that you are just being truculant because you hate my guts for daring to be different from yourself.
Raptor wrote:
This topic is going nowhere.
only because you hijacked it and are deliberately torpedoing it with your bullying, intended to scare other people off. this thread is not going in your direction so you say it is "going nowhere." i hope you are happy now.
The OP, which YOU started, is a torpedo magnet if there ever was one and you knew it would be.
It's too childish (even subversive) to be taken seriously.
Don't cry now that you getting what you baited for.
You reap what you sow...........
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas
14 Mar 2011, 10:49 pm
15 Mar 2011, 12:11 am
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas
15 Mar 2011, 10:11 am
Inuyasha wrote:
Well at least Rush Limbaugh actually can take criticism and be rational.
rational
there is no communicating with you. east is east, west is west, and never the twain shall meet. you stick with your rushiebaby and i will stick with my michael moore.
15 Mar 2011, 12:40 pm
auntblabby wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Well at least Rush Limbaugh actually can take criticism and be rational.
rational
there is no communicating with you. east is east, west is west, and never the twain shall meet. you stick with your rushiebaby and i will stick with my michael moore.Again you aren't being rational. Pacificism only works when no one wants to use force to get what they want. It takes 2 people to make peace, it only takes 1 to start a war.
Right now we have nutcases in Libya, Iran, and North Korea that wouldn't hesitate to try to conquer their neighbors if we weren't there to stop them. Additionally, Russia would probably be more than willing to forcibly take over Ukraine and other countries.
What you are advocating may look good on paper, but what looks good on paper doesn't usually work in real life.
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas
15 Mar 2011, 8:08 pm
whatever
15 Mar 2011, 9:01 pm
15 Mar 2011, 9:11 pm
auntblabby wrote:
whatever
That's all? How about you explain why it is irrational to think that pacifism doesn't work if one side is uncompromising and willing to use force either as a means to a goal or as the goal itself? You keep harping about rationality, so how about bringing something to the table instead of just bailing out?
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 113,748
Location: the island of defective toy santas
15 Mar 2011, 9:35 pm
AceOfSpades wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
whatever
That's all? How about you explain why it is irrational to think that pacifism doesn't work if one side is uncompromising and willing to use force either as a means to a goal or as the goal itself? You keep harping about rationality, so how about bringing something to the table instead of just bailing out?are you a black-and-white thinker also? just because i mentioned that our military is among the most wasteful of taxpayer dollars of all armies in the world, you insist that i believe in total disarmament? just because i prefer that america avoid getting itself involved in foreign entanglements [that george washington warned us about] and figure out how to curb the military/industrial/congressional complex [that eisenhauer warned us about], that i must be automatically in favor of the invading commie hordes that wanna take away your guns and women? you are not making any sense to me, and i don't give a good god-damn if i'm not making any sense to you. go back to your rushiebaby teet.
15 Mar 2011, 9:53 pm
Seems to have an obsession with Limbaugh.....................hmmm.
15 Mar 2011, 10:03 pm
AceOfSpades wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
whatever
That's all? How about you explain why it is irrational to think that pacifism doesn't work if one side is uncompromising and willing to use force either as a means to a goal or as the goal itself? You keep harping about rationality, so how about bringing something to the table instead of just bailing out?Hm, I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding of Pacifism. Pacifism does not necessarily imply one should not be prepared to defend themselves but rather should never be the one going on the offensive. I consider myself a pacifist but I also have background in martial arts (karate) and I read passages from Sun Tzu - The Art of War every day in addition to at least a yearly perusing of The Prince
