ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Ah, the good old practice of deflecting blame by finding a person to ridicule.

***

BTW, we'll be getting ready to entertain out of town guests in a few minutes. Get your licks in soon or you'll have to wait until tomorrow for a reply.

That should be real fun...

:thumbsdown:
 
I didn't use a movie as a source, you did, as its the only source for that info. You specifically wrothe that the US firebombed Fallujah with white phosperous, that did not happen.

Just to be clear, I wouldn't have cared if they had, just like I don't care that we firebombed Dresden or Tokyo. We were in a War, if it saved US troops lives I'm good with it, but I'm not good with you or anyone changing history to push an agenda.

 
so, 2016 #WarOnWomen moment? nah, of course not, doesnt count if the vic is (1)a Republican or (2)Pretty and especially if (3)both

 
  • Like
Reactions: drawing_dead
we don't need to do any finding

There's an ancient family joke in that sentence that involved my oldest sister. From now on your internet voice for me will be hers. If it's any consolation to you she's a brilliant woman and funny enough to light up a room. In retaliation you can use this one for me:

 
Ive always been curious at the cries for killing people more humanely during war. What an oxymoron.

"OMG YOU KILLED THEM IN SUCH A CRUEL MANNER!!" As if there was a nice way to kill people.

IDC, but he's trying to deflect from Obama's use of drones killing civilians, by creating an event in Fallujah that didn't happen.
 
IDC, but he's trying to deflect from Obama's use of drones killing civilians, by creating an event in Fallujah that didn't happen.

Oh I know. It just shows the left will complain about literally anything a REP does. Even the method of killing enemies, as if theres a humane way to kill people.
 
I think what Moe is trying to say is that we should have dropped a MOAB on Fallujah. That would have been the humanitarian way to go about it. Or, we could have just sent them a twitter message and told them that we were "strongly disappointed" in them.
 
I can't view the video, but we used white phosperous bombs on targets, but we didn't firebomb the city.

One can see from the video that white phosphorous is not a precision weapon. The ground is alight where it has fallen. This wasn't part of a screed -- this is CNN** which was just following the war. If you go to Youtube, you can see the phosphorous come down like rain.

**Several different embedded reporters filed stories on it.
 
I think what Moe is trying to say is that we should have dropped a MOAB on Fallujah. That would have been the humanitarian way to go about it. Or, we could have just sent them a twitter message and told them that we were "strongly disappointed" in them.

I've explained several times what I was doing. Since I've been called a liar, I followed up on it. If I hadn't been called a liar, my original comment would have been enough.
 
I've explained several times what I was doing. Since I've been called a liar, I followed up on it. If I hadn't been called a liar, my original comment would have been enough.

You did lie, or you're just not very bright. You specifcally said the US firebombed Fallujah with white phospherous which killed or injured 4000 civilians, that is a lie. Do you know what firebombing even is?

Why don't you try googling what the numbers depicting the rounds on the screen? It's a round used for smokescreens and cover for troops.

I'm sure there were people injured by its use,simply because the insurgents were using civilians as shields, but it wasn't used as a way to firebomb the city. Thats simply not accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ymmot31
I've explained several times what I was doing. Since I've been called a liar, I followed up on it. If I hadn't been called a liar, my original comment would have been enough.
Not going back to look, but the reason you were called a liar is that you explicitly stated that we firebombed Fallujah with white phosphorus and that 4000 civilians were killed as a result. That whole conversation occurred because you intentionally "misunderstood" a statement about the main stream media, as the henchmen of the left, spending two days talking about a speech and not mentioning news the rest of the world is holding us liable for.

I don't comment on subjects that I don't understand, you seem to have no such throttle.
 
I would like to welcome our NSA/Secret Service guests
Yet another instance of you not being able to read and understand what is being discussed. He was talking about Michael Moore and I can assure you the NSA does not care.
 
Michael Moore predicts Trump will win the election. Shocking.
I didn't see that as an actual prediction based on a cold assessment. He's just trying to rally the troops, same thing with Christians saying in a few years they will be prosecuted/persecuted, or conservatives saying that now, finally, the media is open and no longer pretending to be neutral. Note his supporting argument - all the old white guys will soon be dead, thank God, but there's 40 million of them and they'd crawl through broken glass and turn off FoxNews for the chance to vote for a fellow bigot. Heh. It's got some fire up the troops, some projection, some nasty, lot of stuff going on there.
 
White phosphorous burns those it touches.It's a terrible weapon and it shames us to have used it. It's like the bombing of Dresden. You can string together words to defend it but the words would have been better that persuaded us to do it a different way.
We have been using white phophorous long before this time frame and the government knows what it does so, they are not ashamed. But, you are right about it being a terrible weapon. Water does not stop the burn, mud slows it down but, you mostly have to cut it out or dig it out of the wound.
 
I didn't use a movie as a source, you did, as its the only source for that info. You specifically wrothe that the US firebombed Fallujah with white phosperous, that did not happen.

Just to be clear, I wouldn't have cared if they had, just like I don't care that we firebombed Dresden or Tokyo. We were in a War, if it saved US troops lives I'm good with it, but I'm not good with you or anyone changing history to push an agenda.
White phophorous is used primarily for marking and spotting not for killing. There is however collateral damage as there is for any weapon or military attack.
 
You did lie, or you're just not very bright. You specifcally said the US firebombed Fallujah with white phospherous which killed or injured 4000 civilians, that is a lie. Do you know what firebombing even is?

Why don't you try googling what the numbers depicting the rounds on the screen? It's a round used for smokescreens and cover for troops.

I'm sure there were people injured by its use,simply because the insurgents were using civilians as shields, but it wasn't used as a way to firebomb the city. Thats simply not accurate.

Not sure why you're digging in on this position. White phosphorous was used for incendiary purposes in the Fallujah assault, meaning the intended use was to inflict casualties. We've admitted to its use as a weapon on numerous occasions, our justification is that it was used as a conventional weapon.

In the end, the results of its used are close to that of traditional munitions if the intention is to eliminate enemy targets, just a tad more burn-y.

Y'all have taken up ~ 2 pages debating something that was laid out clearly by Moe but in the end is extraneous to the discussion of collateral damage. Slow news day so far I'm assuming.
 
Last edited:
I sure hope so. You know the funny thing? When you quote Obama's policies to people, without his name associated with them, most people approve them. Like the sign at the teabagger rally, "Keep the government out of my Medicare." Put his name to the query. People reject the policies. I wonder why?

And by "funny", of course, I mean "tragic". For the last seven years we've had a calm rational adult as president. Record low interest rates. We could have fixed so much in this country. And yet, Republicans vowed to block everything. Seven years of fixing infrastructure. Seven years of growth. All blocked. For what?

Funny i just saw a video asking clinton supporters about alot of trumps policies and attached her name and they all LOVED the ideas. Liberals are the ones who blindly follow a candidate. As a middle leaning republican, i have no qualms about dissing a candidate if needed. I did it with ol mittens romney. Libs wont even admit she lied about her emails when thr FBI director told us she did.


And oh yaah, didnt obama have a dem controlled senate over half his presidency? How easily you forget to push your narrative of republicans screwing up all his great plans. Ridiculous
 
  • Like
Reactions: ymmot31
Not sure why you're digging in on this position. White phosphorous was used for incendiary purposes in the Fallujah assault, meaning the intended use was to inflict casualties. We've admitted to its use as a weapon on numerous occasions, our justification is that it was used as a conventional weapon.

In the end, the results of its used are close to that of traditional munitions if the intention is to eliminate enemy targets, just a tad more burn-y.

Y'all have taken up ~ 2 pages debating something that was laid out clearly by Moe but in the end is extraneous to the discussion of collateral damage. Slow news day so far I'm assuming.

It was laid out falsely by Moe, fallujah was not firebombed with white phosperous causing 4000 deaths and injuries. He is trying justify killing civilians with drones, which doesn't bother me a bit, by exaggerating what happened in Fallujah.

In my first or second response I agreed that it was used, and I'm sure civilians were injured by it, but firebombing at least in my mind is a whole different level of destruction. The number he used is simply pulled out of thin air for wow factor.

Like Warrior said, white phosphorous is bad, it burns so hot it fuses metal.
 
Ivanka

e13f56c30c6ebe1475b87ffe906b7dbe93f92824acfb06adfdcf6f4e5e85a0fd.jpg
 
I would go with:

Four score and seven years ago our fathers faced the great depression. Now we are met here for a convention to nominate a President. Our opponent wants to allow terrorist into our nation so they can remain in power.
We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our nation, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, We have nothing to fear but fear itself. Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Supreme Lord Z
Not sure why you're digging in on this position. White phosphorous was used for incendiary purposes in the Fallujah assault, meaning the intended use was to inflict casualties. We've admitted to its use as a weapon on numerous occasions, our justification is that it was used as a conventional weapon.

In the end, the results of its used are close to that of traditional munitions if the intention is to eliminate enemy targets, just a tad more burn-y.

Y'all have taken up ~ 2 pages debating something that was laid out clearly by Moe but in the end is extraneous to the discussion of collateral damage. Slow news day so far I'm assuming.

Not just that purpose (traditional munition) once again, it is primarily used for marking and spotting. It is sometimes used to destroy enemy equipment as well. Now, that is not to say it is not used to kill but, that is a by product if you will and a deterrent when considering its effectiveness for bringing fear to the enemy considering the damage and pain associated with the difficulties in trying to counteract its effects.
 
I don't even know why people do campaign speeches anymore. All it is bullshit. Pure 100% bullshit. There's nothing of any substance. It's the same repeated verbal vomit every fours at these conventions. Just mind you, all these politicians with their self-inflated speeches don't fool me. Son, I sniff these MF'ers out within 5 minutes.

I'm already envisioning the sewer that will spew from Hillary's mouth. There will be so many pauses for *audience clapping* to make you wish you had E Coli.

These Trump kids. IDGAF. IDGAF about the meat puppets propped on the DNC stage. Living with all you party nut hugging rah rahs can lick my balls. What ever you defend yourself, I know better. You can't me fool me you bastards.
 
Except I didn't make the argument that movie made. Didn't use it as a source. You did that. We did attack Fallujah. We did use white phosphorous. [source Bill Derington, if needs be.] In the various military assaults on the city around half the homes were destroyed. There were 4000 casualties. I didn't say or imply that the only weapon used was the white phosphorous. You -- and others -- made that inference. I singled out white phosphorous because it has dreadful consequences on anyone it touches. I came to the subject of Fallujah as connected to the recent drone killing of Syrians. I used it as evidence of how civilians get hurt during military actions. What didn't happen -- or at least can't be proved -- were the lurid details from an Italian documentary about headless corpses and stuff. You seem to think that if the lurid stuff didn't happen then nothing bad happened. Which is nonsense.

I haven't jumped in on the Fallujah thing yet . But you most definitely implied that we killed 4000 with white phosphorus. I read your statement and thought, "How did I miss out on hearing about that? Seems like that would have been headline news around the world for a long time." Why can't people simply admit it when they misspeak? It's not that difficult.

Right now I don't know if we did or didn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhattyJ4UK
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT