Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

What does this have to do with the modern day situation? Are you saying that Bush staged 9/11, if that is the case... you are beyond reasoning and a waste of time to bother with any further.

Nice dodge there. So you're convinced that Bush had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. What's your case? Now, understand that I don't have any case to present that Bush did have a hand in perpetuating 9/11, such as deliberately NOT preventing it. All I have is vague suspicions, based on evidence that Bush lied, tortured, kidnaped, etc.


I know you don’t trust Mises, but surely you can take a trip to Promontory, Utah, and see for yourself. Please do so. The real story is that the railroad companies that were supposed to meet there were ripping off the taxpayers. http://mises.org/story/2522 The same sad old story of the government not acting in the best interest of us schmucks. (I found that within a minute after entering ‘railroad’ in the search box. I’m sure you can find many more horror stories in mises.org).

Originally posted by Augustine2004

Nice dodge there. So you're convinced that Bush had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. What's your case?

The fact that after over 5 years, not a single piece of evidence has been shown that Bush had a thing to do with 9/11...

Now, understand that I don't have any case to present that Bush did have a hand in perpetuating 9/11, such as deliberately NOT preventing it. All I have is vague suspicions, based on evidence that Bush lied, tortured, kidnaped, etc.

Oh? And what is this evidence? More of Lew Rockwells article where he downright lies about how the government works? Sorry dear but even if Bush lied, tortured, and kidnapped people, it does not follow that he also caused 9/11. 9/11 was caused by a series of failures that started back in the 1980's where we decided to help the Afghanistan rebels defeat forces from the USSR and did nothing to help rebuild their country. Not only did we and the Russians leave piles of weapons for them to use against us, but we showed them that the only we cared was to give Russia a black eye and when the job was done, we just washed our hands and walked away. In many ways, you can blame the entire government for the past 20 years that lead to one failure after another. We should of done something in the first terrorist attack in the 1990's against the World Trade Center by sending our terrorist friends a welcome package they wouldn't forget and show them that you don't mess with us. Instead we let them get away with it and that is what lead to 9/11. So you want to point fingers? Start with Carter and end with this president, that is who is to blame.

I know you don’t trust Mises, but surely you can take a trip to Promontory, Utah, and see for yourself. Please do so. The real story is that the railroad companies that were supposed to meet there were ripping off the taxpayers. http://mises.org/story/2522 The same sad old story of the government not acting in the best interest of us schmucks. (I found that within a minute after entering ‘railroad’ in the search box. I’m sure you can find many more horror stories in mises.org).

Awww, anybody who agrees with you is automatically true, regardless of the fact that much of the laws the government made in the late 19th to early 20th century against the railroads were for safety, but keep trying. Anything to support your objective that government = evil, eh? The truth just gets in the way of that, huh?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

More of Lew Rockwells article where he downright lies about how the government works?

Huh? Please point them out.

Not going to Utah, are you? Every assertion that I make is automatically wrong, therefore a trip there would be a waste of time and money.

Still dodging. Anyway, do you agree that when a president starts a war like the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan, and perhaps sometime in Iran, civilians will die, probably by the hundreds, if not hundreds of thousands? More than a million deaths, even. If we use nukes in Iran, wow what a time. How could some of those deaths NOT be murder?

Originally posted by Augustine2004

Huh? Please point them out.

The foaming at the mouth Lew Rockwell articles? There are plenty of them out there for your viewing pleasure.

Not going to Utah, are you?

Utah is over a 12 hours drive for me. I'm not going half way across the country just to prove or disprove your silly little point.

Every assertion that I make is automatically wrong, therefore a trip there would be a waste of time and money.

Most of them pretty much are wrong, shoot you believe articles that say the US military is trained just to kill, kill, kill and that is a total lie. The military is trained to save lives (as well) and to not engage people who are not actively attacking.

Still dodging. Anyway, do you agree that when a president starts a war like the ones in Iraq and Afghanistan, and perhaps sometime in Iran, civilians will die, probably by the hundreds, if not hundreds of thousands? More than a million deaths, even. If we use nukes in Iran, wow what a time. How could some of those deaths NOT be murder?

Sorry dear, but millions have not died in Iraq and there are plans to invade Iran? There are also plans to invade, North Korea, China, and Russia too, that is what the military does, it plans out how to attack the enemy if the need ever arises and just because there are plans does not mean they will be acted upon. We had plans to invade the USSR since the 1940's, yet we didn't act upon them. So do you have a real argument not besides 'Duh, the US military has plans on how it would invade Iran!' as if that is some kind of grand revolution. They had plans since the 70's or 80's when Iran begin to become a serious threat and yet... have they even acted upon them? No, so just because the plans exist, does not mean they will be acted upon, unless of course you have some actual evidence that they are going to be acted upon, do you?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

The foaming at the mouth Lew Rockwell articles? There are plenty of them out there for your viewing pleasure.

I still think you're dodging. What stands out in your mind as the worst lying article?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Utah is over a 12 hours drive for me. I'm not going half way across the country just to prove or disprove your silly little point.

But until you go out there and see for yourself you have to concede, at least temporarily.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Most of them pretty much are wrong, shoot you believe articles that say the US military is trained just to kill, kill, kill and that is a total lie. The military is trained to save lives (as well) and to not engage people who are not actively attacking.

So all those reports of civilian deaths are all lies? Not even a baby's life was lost?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Sorry dear, but millions have not died in Iraq and there are plans to invade Iran? There are also plans to invade, North Korea, China, and Russia too, that is what the military does, it plans out how to attack the enemy if the need ever arises and just because there are plans does not mean they will be acted upon. We had plans to invade the USSR since the 1940's, yet we didn't act upon them. So do you have a real argument not besides 'Duh, the US military has plans on how it would invade Iran!' as if that is some kind of grand revolution. They had plans since the 70's or 80's when Iran begin to become a serious threat and yet... have they even acted upon them? No, so just because the plans exist, does not mean they will be acted upon, unless of course you have some actual evidence that they are going to be acted upon, do you?

That is somewhat irrelevant, but it does tend to confirm that the Department of Defense is incorrectly named.

Originally posted by Augustine2004

I still think you're dodging. What stands out in your mind as the worst lying article?

Perhaps how he just asserts the military is murders? It's kind of hard to decide.

But until you go out there and see for yourself you have to concede, at least temporarily.

I'm not going to concede because I refuse to drive 12 or 15 hours to prove or disprove your silly little point. Give me something here and now please.

So all those reports of civilian deaths are all lies?

Can you develop a plan and weapons that magically miss civilians 100% of the time while always hitting the bad guy 100% of the time? There is a reason we have guided bombs and that is to minimize unnecessary death instead of just carpet bombing the area like happened in the 1940's. Can you come up with a better system? I'm all ears....

Not even a baby's life was lost?

Again, can you develop a system that doesn't kill anybody that it isn't suppose to? If so... take your idea up to the President and Congress, I'm sure they would love to hear about your new weapon system.

That is somewhat irrelevant, but it does tend to confirm that the Department of Defense is incorrectly named.

Always whine, but never offer up ideas, huh? Now develop a weapon system that always takes out the bad guy and never ever kills anybody it shouldn't. If you can develop that system, you'd be everybodys best friend! Shoot, you'd win all kinds of prizes for that. Now let me see your idea please. I'm waiting...

Ah, now we come to the crux of the problem. You do realize after all that when one starts a war in modern times that civilians, including babies, are going to die. How that does not bother you? I wonder if it's after all a waste of time arguing with you. Maybe you do have a murderer's mentality.

Originally posted by Augustine2004

Ah, now we come to the crux of the problem. You do realize after all that when one starts a war in modern times that civilians, including babies, are going to die. How that does not bother you? I wonder if it's after all a waste of time arguing with you. Maybe you do have a murderer's mentality.

So I suppose we shouldn't do anything and just let people like Saddam rule the world. Would that make you happy? Again... name a better plan and solution. Can you or are you just going to whine some more and just call anybody who dares to disagree with you murders?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

So I suppose we shouldn't do anything and just let people like Saddam rule the world. Would that make you happy? Again... name a better plan and solution. Can you or are you just going to whine some more and just call anybody who dares to disagree with you murders?

Oh, boy. Who is ruling whom now? Tell me what the Military Commissions Act is.

Originally posted by Augustine2004

Oh, boy. Who is ruling whom now? Tell me what the Military Commissions Act is.

I'm still waiting for you to develop a better plan. Got one yet? And if you really think the US is trying to rule Iraq, you are dead wrong. Did you know that half of the raids in Iraq against insurgents are not done by Americans, but the Iraqi military and almost all raids are done with the Iraqi military or with their permission? So tell me... if we wanted to rule Iraq, why did we set up elections? Why do we coordinate military campaigns with their government?

I regard the Iraqi ‘government’ as a puppet of the USA federal government. Can you prove otherwise? Nations having elections does not prove anything. The Soviet Union had elections regularly. I still suspect Bush stole both his POTUS elections.

The upcoming POTUS election is practically meaningless.

We are building more than 50 PERMANENT bases in Iraq. The Bush Administration refuses to say that they are permanent, but they sure as hell look permanent to me. If I’m right, so tell me ... what are they for?


The author of this article is a former USAF Lt. Col. One point that she makes is that most of our weapons are impossible to use discriminately and justly. It matters not how careful we are to use them. We must never use them except in rather exceptional situations. http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkows...kowski211.html

Have you already forgotten my suggestion of letters of marquee and reprisal combined with rewards and diplomatic negotiations with foreign countries?

Originally posted by Augustine2004

I regard the Iraqi ‘government’ as a puppet of the USA federal government. Can you prove otherwise? Nations having elections does not prove anything. The Soviet Union had elections regularly. I still suspect Bush stole both his POTUS elections.

And your evidence would be.... From what it's looking your evidence is 'I don't like Bush, so let me make up things

The upcoming POTUS election is practically meaningless.

In other words...

"I can't find anything, so let me just make up something and run with it."

Unless you have some... any evidence that bush stole any kind of election, you are pretty much lying about people to further your own cause. Are you going to produce evidence or offer an apology for making up things about people that you can't prove?

We are building more than 50 PERMANENT bases in Iraq. The Bush Administration refuses to say that they are permanent, but they sure as hell look permanent to me. If I’m right, so tell me ... what are they for?

Ever been to a base in the Middle East? I have and guess what dear, most of those buildings are trailers or buildings known as 'semi permanent' and many of those bases have a US side and a host nation side. You can take pictures of Al Dhafra AB in the UAE and say, 'HAHA, look the US is building permanent bases!" in reality... those buildings are operated by the UAE Air Force and not the US military, in fact... we can't even go into most of those buildings. I bet the same thing is going on over there too. In fact, let me show you a picture of the largest air base in the Middle East:

postcard-qatar.jpg

Although that picture is written as a joke, that is really what you find in bases over in the Middle East. So if you want to keep speaking out of ignorance, go ahead, but remember... I am a military member and I have been there done that.

The author of this article is a former USAF Lt. Col. One point that she makes is that most of our weapons are impossible to use discriminately and justly. It matters not how careful we are to use them. We must never use them except in rather exceptional situations. http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkows...kowski211.html

Aww, the great source of Lew Rockwell who spreads lies about the Military being a machine of mass murder. Sorry dear but yet again you expose that you don't know what you are talking about. Our guided weapons are very accurate and they have saved thousands of innocent lives. Ever see pictures of Germany after WWII? That is what Iraq would look like if it wasn't for guided weapons. So either this LT Col was misquoted (which I suspect) or she doesn't have a clue what she's talking about.

Have you already forgotten my suggestion of letters of marquee and reprisal combined with rewards and diplomatic negotiations with foreign countries?

And you really think writing people like Saddam and saying "You're a mennie" Is going to change their attitude? Please letters of protest don't always work, you can go ask quite a few countries about that. Did letters of protest stop China from arresting innocent people and throwing them in jail? Not really, they still do it. Did letters of protest stop the slaughter of innocent people in Africa? Nope.Hate to tell you this, but that doesn't always work, sometimes you need to take action.

You’ve been clever at dodging tough questions.

So, you will never accept lewrockwell.com as a repository of evidence. Not too surprising considering how statist or even imperialist you are. I’ve been reading him and his associates for years now, and consider them to be reliable. For example, some of them warned about the big Fannie and Freddie bust-ups. He and some others said the Iraq war would a gigantic boondoggle for the government-military-industrial complex. If you want I can cite other examples.

I don’t know why you would cite a base in UAE and another in Qatar as counters to my arguments, unless they are red herrings. In any case, those buildings still look like they could be around for years. How ‘semi-permanent’ anyway?

There has to be evidence that the Iraqi government is independent of the USA government. Indeed there may be an occasional report of an act by the former that could be cited as an indication of independence. However, in my judgment, considering everything, I still contend that the former is a puppet of the latter. Consider that polls consistently say that the Iraqi people by margins of 3 to 1 want the USA to leave. While the Iraqi government does make some sort of noise about a timetable for it, I think it’s just PR, something to pacify the people. Also consider that the Iraqi government is unpopular. It probably would fall within days after the USA leaves. Also, look at how many warlords there are. A hundred or so. Al Sadr is hardly the only one.

You don’t remember what letters of marquee and reprisal are, do you? Why don’t you google that?

Originally posted by Augustine2004

You’ve been clever at dodging tough questions.

Whatever you want to say.

So, you will never accept lewrockwell.com as a repository of evidence.

Yep, because it's crap.

Not too surprising considering how statist or even imperialist you are.

Great rebuttal to a word I said, just call anybody you disagree with an imperialist. So Augustine, we are such imperialist, why didn't we take over Europe when we had the chance? Care to explain?

I’ve been reading him and his associates for years now, and consider them to be reliable. For example, some of them warned about the big Fannie and Freddie bust-ups. He and some others said the Iraq war would a gigantic boondoggle for the government-military-industrial complex. If you want I can cite other examples.

Too bad that unlike you, I am actually a member of the military and actually know what is going on. Ever been to the middle East? Nope. Ever see a Middle East base? Nope. Ever lived in a tent? It's not fun and so what is the issue with make more confortable living conditions for the troops in Iraq by building something they can be confortable? I guess you prefer that we slept in tents for 10 or 15 years?

I don’t know why you would cite a base in UAE and another in Qatar as counters to my arguments, unless they are red herrings. In any case, those buildings still look like they could be around for years. How ‘semi-permanent’ anyway?

The UAE and Qatar have some of the biggest bases in the Middle East. Al Udeid AB, Qatar is the largest Air Force base in the Middle East and they only have a few dorms that are permanent structures. Yes, they do look like they can be around for years because we have been there for years. Would you prefer that we all lived and slept in tents? Would that make you happy and help you sleep better at night? Believe it or not, it doesn't take more than a few days to knock down a building and a building can be use for more than military purposes. So just because we are building buildings that actually are not tents, does not mean we are going to be there forever and ever nor does it imply that we are building 50 permanent bases in Iraq, shoot we don't have that many in all of Europe! When this is all said in done, you might find 1 to 5 in Iraq, if they let us stay.

There has to be evidence that the Iraqi government is independent of the USA government. Indeed there may be an occasional report of an act by the former that could be cited as an indication of independence. However, in my judgment, considering everything, I still contend that the former is a puppet of the latter.

So even though the evidence doesn't support your conlcusion, you still think that. Never ever open up to any other conclusion other than 'duh the US is evil!' huh?

Consider that polls consistently say that the Iraqi people by margins of 3 to 1 want the USA to leave.

And I have heard polls that say the opposite. So I guess you prefer we leave Iraq in a state of total chaos. That would make you happy?

While the Iraqi government does make some sort of noise about a timetable for it, I think it’s just PR, something to pacify the people. Also consider that the Iraqi government is unpopular. It probably would fall within days after the USA leaves. Also, look at how many warlords there are. A hundred or so. Al Sadr is hardly the only one.

So in other words, you want the US to leave an unstable country and let it fall to crap and become 10 times worse than it already is. Great plan, perhaps next we can cause the entire world to fall into total chaos? Would that make you happy?

You don’t remember what letters of marquee and reprisal are, do you? Why don’t you google that?

And again, do you really think writing letters of protest and/or cutting of some materals to a country is going to make their leaders step down? We did that to Iraq for how many years and did Saddam ever step down? Nope. We've been doing that to Cuba since my father was a baby and yet... has Castro stepped down? Nope. So can you explain how this is suppose to stop anything?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Great rebuttal to a word I said, just call anybody you disagree with an imperialist. So Augustine, we are such imperialist, why didn't we take over Europe when we had the chance? Care to explain?

We don't have total dominance. However, there is some degree of control. We have bases all over the world. You've been in a base or bases in Germany yourself, correct? Why have bases in Germany anyway, now that the Soviet Union is history? How many bases do we have in Okinawa? Why so many? What is the need? What the hell are we doing in Georgia? Why provoke a powerful nation (Russia)?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Too bad that unlike you, I am actually a member of the military and actually know what is going on.

A mechanic? Pooh.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Ever been to the middle East? Nope. Ever see a Middle East base? Nope.

Ever been to Fallajah after they rained white phosphorous on it? Nope.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Ever lived in a tent?

Yes! So!?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

for 10 or 15 years?

At last you concede unwittingly that the structures are indeed permanent.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

because we have been there for years.

Why may I not take that as evidence of an intent of imperialism?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Would you prefer that we all lived and slept in tents?

Except for letter-of-marquee-and-reprisial teams trying to capture terrorists or kill them, I would prefer that they sleep here in the USA.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Would that make you happy and help you sleep better at night?

It's rather expensive to maintain armed forces abroad. Cheaper to maintain a defense right on USA soil.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Believe it or not, it doesn't take more than a few days to knock down a building

Why, for god's sake? Of course government is like that.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

50 permanent bases in Iraq

How many and what authority can you cite?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

When this is all said in done, you might find 1 to 5 in Iraq, if they let us stay.

Babble. Of course they don't want to let us stay, and the permanent look of those bases makes them resistive.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Never ever open up to any other conclusion other than 'duh the US is evil!' huh?

Never ever open up to any other conclusion other than 'duh Cheney and Bush are evil' huh?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

And I have heard polls that say the opposite.

What polls? References?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

So I guess you prefer we leave Iraq in a state of total chaos. That would make you happy?

What, no chaos there now? Since Petraeus ordered his men to keep our boys and girls out of combat as much as possible, things have become much quieter. I do think things will become better when we leave. Some violence may still occur from time to time, though, like in the USA.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

So in other words, you want the US to leave an unstable country and let it fall to crap and become 10 times worse than it already is. Great plan, perhaps next we can cause the entire world to fall into total chaos? Would that make you happy?

Oh, I wish you would come to the small government thread.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

And again, do you really think writing letters of protest and/or cutting of some materals to a country is going to make their leaders step down? We did that to Iraq for how many years and did Saddam ever step down? Nope. We've been doing that to Cuba since my father was a baby and yet... has Castro stepped down? Nope. So can you explain how this is suppose to stop anything?

Babble. Your head is a mess. You're a poor reader.

Originally posted by Augustine2004

We don't have total dominance. However, there is some degree of control. We have bases all over the world. You've been in a base or bases in Germany yourself, correct? Why have bases in Germany anyway, now that the Soviet Union is history? How many bases do we have in Okinawa? Why so many? What is the need? What the hell are we doing in Georgia? Why provoke a powerful nation (Russia)?

Actually, we only have two air bases in Germany. Also, if you haven't noticed it is the over seas bases in places like Germany that give the US the global reach capability. For example jets flying from the Middle East to the US can stop in Germany for re-supply and crew rest before moving on and they are guaranteed protection

A mechanic? Pooh. Ever been to Fallajah after they rained white phosphorous on it? Nope.

Yep, because everybody knows that on a day to day bases, the US military rains down white phosphorous on people. Now do you have any proof of this or did you stop to think... there was a reason for it or do you just do what you do best... mentally throw up something and call it an argument?

Yes! So!? At last you concede unwittingly that the structures are indeed permanent.

99% of those buildings are trailers. Nothing all that permanent about a trailer that is designed to be moved in a few days. Even if the US military is building permit structures, so what? Believe it or not... buildings built by the US military can be used by more than just the US military and indeed do come down a lot eaiser than they went up. So again the argument that "HAHAHAHA the US is building permit buildings in the Iraq so therefore they want to be there forever and ever" is not an argument or proof of anything. We have built plenty of bases and turned them over for civilian use, one example is in my home town where the former air base was turned into an airport. In fact, many airstrips and airports in the US owe their existence to US military bases back during WWII and the 50's.

Why may I not take that as evidence of an intent of imperialism?

Because we have built dozens of permit bases throughout the world that are not being used by the US military and believe it or not... a building/air strip/etc built by the military can be used by more than just the US military. You also seem to forget that we spent 4 years fighting WWII and yet... how many of those countries we were in did we keep bases around? A few, but that is only because either the country let us stay (such as Iceland or Brittan) while others were done by treaty (Japan or Germany), but the vast majority of countries... we did not stay on and gave them their land back and in Iraq... do you have any proof that the US isn't going to turn Iraq back over or is your unreasonable fears of 'imperialism' that you have no proof of all you have?

Except for letter-of-marquee-and-reprisial teams trying to capture terrorists or kill them, I would prefer that they sleep here in the USA. It's rather expensive to maintain armed forces abroad. Cheaper to maintain a defense right on USA soil. Why, for god's sake?

If you haven't noticed almost every war in US history (with the exception of the Civil war) has been with foreign powers. So would you rather fight a war in the US and destroy the country or would you rather take the fight to the enemy and destroy his base of operations? Take a look at all the major wars the US has fought in, only the civil war was fought because of internal struggles within the US (two if you count the Revolution as a rebellion) all the other major wars... were against foreign powers so does it make sense that we want to keep a military presence outside the US. Also, you are forgetting that it is the US isolationist policies that lead to WWII, if we would of been more active in the world, Germany couldn't of built up the strength it had to fight the war in the first place. So as you can see, the historical examples we have of this, ended up in failure. So why would it work now?

Of course government is like that.How many and what authority can you cite?Babble. Of course they don't want to let us stay, and the permanent look of those bases makes them resistive.

Oh please, "Duh, this base looks permanent, so America is imperialist." is an absurd argument that only you would use. Believe it or not... buildings can be used for more than just military uses. Shoot, take a look at major and smaller airports, bet they have a history and may of even been built by the US military at some point in their history. We have old bases all over the world that are being used by other country military's or by civilians.

Never ever open up to any other conclusion other than 'duh Cheney and Bush are evil' huh? What polls? References?What, no chaos there now? Since Petraeus ordered his men to keep our boys and girls out of combat as much as possible, things have become much quieter. I do think things will become better when we leave. Some violence may still occur from time to time, though, like in the USA.

What are you ranting about? I have heard all kind of stats and stats are a wonderful thing, you can make them say pretty much anything you want as long as you know who to ask and/or what to ask.

Oh, I wish you would come to the small government thread.
Babble. Your head is a mess. You're a poor reader.

Of course I'm a poor reader because if I wasn't, I'd agree with Augustine, but since I don't, I must be a poor read. More of your logic I see, now when you have a real argument or some real evidence to present forward, I might take your seriously. For now... I don't nor will I. Thanks for playing, but keep showing you haven't got a clue what you are talking about.