The BigAss 2nd term thread

[ShaqAttack3234]

dick cheney apologists are an embarassment. how about you go back to arguing with rocketsgreatness in the NBA forum? nobody in this thread gives a fvck about your opinion.

First of all, I don't even like Cheney. But I know for a pansy like yourself, anyone who doesn't throw around words lightly and essentially label someone the most vile type of person on earth(and we can agree that a murderous sociopath fits that description, right?) must be a Bush/Cheney lover.

As for RocketGreatness? Does he even still post here? Last account of his I remember had to be about a year ago.

So please, tell me, how exactly is it embarrassing to claim the highest level of American governance during the enactments of these fatal policies are murderous? The sociopathy is a different matter but I'd bet my hat on it.

First, this is exactly why the Saddam analogy doesn't work with Bush.

Saddam is certainly responsible for those bodies having sparked the brewing conflict, and in the two decades afterwards he was harsh and repressive and murderous towards his own civilians.

Unless you want to make those same claims against Bush, you simply can't compare the 2.

Killing enemies during war is completely different than flat out murder. I would think this much should go without saying. Which is why one is illegal, and the other one wasn't. It was an ill-advised and costly war, one that ultimately has done more harm than good. It was simply a big mistake and the black mark that will define Bush's legacy. But there's a huge leap from that to murderous sociopath.

[Nanners]

First of all, I don't even like Cheney. But I know for a pansy like yourself, anyone who doesn't throw around words lightly and essentially label someone the most vile type of person on earth(and we can agree that a murderous sociopath fits that description, right?) must be a Bush/Cheney lover.

As for RocketGreatness? Does he even still post here? Last account of his I remember had to be about a year ago.



First, this is exactly why the Saddam analogy doesn't work with Bush.



Unless you want to make those same claims against Bush, you simply can't compare the 2.

Killing enemies during war is completely different than flat out murder. I would think this much should go without saying. Which is why one is illegal, and the other one wasn't. It was an ill-advised and costly war, one that ultimately has done more harm than good. It was simply a big mistake and the black mark that will define Bush's legacy. But there's a huge leap from that to murderous sociopath.

"ill-advised and costly war" - well put asshole

yeah i am sure the family members of the 100k+ dead iraqi civilians would agree with you about that. its not just the war either, we are still running that illegal indefinite detainment torture prison too.

the only difference between ted bundy and these guys is that bundy didnt have air craft carriers and predator drones.

[MMM]

Killing enemies during war is completely different than flat out murder. I would think this much should go without saying. Which is why one is illegal, and the other one wasn't. It was an ill-advised and costly war, one that ultimately has done more harm than good. It was simply a big mistake and the black mark that will define Bush's legacy. But there's a huge leap from that to murderous sociopath.

In what world is what happened in Iraq over a few decades considered legal???
just because laws in place can not be adequately enforced doesn't mean laws were not broken.

[ShaqAttack3234]

In what world is what happened in Iraq over a few decades considered legal???
just because laws in place can not be adequately enforced doesn't mean laws were not broken.

I mean the act of war itself. Of course the government breaks laws with their methods. Probably too many to count in every administration.

"ill-advised and costly war" - well put asshole

Gotta love the internet. You compare George Bush to Ted Bundy, and I'm the asshole? Alright. But I'm sure you can find people in your drum circle who will agree with the Bush/Bundy analogy.

yeah i am sure the family members of the 100k+ dead iraqi civilians would agree with you about that. its not just the war either, we are still running that illegal indefinite detainment torture prison too.

Of course any country who we're at war with will hate us. I wouldn't expect any to agree.

the only difference between ted bundy and these guys is that bundy didnt have air craft carriers and predator drones.

Actually, there are many differences. The primary difference is that Bundy was a regular citizen, not in war, or authorized to go to war who killed other people for pleasure.

[RidonKs]

Killing enemies during war is completely different than flat out murder. I would think this much should go without saying. Which is why one is illegal, and the other one wasn't. It was an ill-advised and costly war, one that ultimately has done more harm than good. It was simply a big mistake and the black mark that will define Bush's legacy. But there's a huge leap from that to murderous sociopath.

I mean the act of war itself. Of course the government breaks laws with their methods. Probably too many to count in every administration.

You really think the act of initiating the Iraq War was legal? Just because Bush and Cheney aren't in The Hague facing their own personal ICC tribunals?

Everybody outside the US and the UK understands why the Iraq War was illegal. Plenty of people inside those two countries do as well. The invasion was literally a case in point of exactly what the UN Charter, the foundation of international law that as it happens the US was explicitly involved in writing, expressly forbids. Here's the quote.

All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations

Pretty straight forward. The only legal basis for it is Saddam failing to let in UN nuclear inspections on a regular basis -- but that's UN business. And therefore requires a UN resolution, which would have been impossible with the Russian and Chinese veto power.

There are many people who attempt to argue the US/UK forces were merely an extension of UN resolutions in the early 90s designed to protect Kuwait. Those people don't have a leg to stand on and everybody knows it.


It was an illegal act of horrific aggression on the flimsiest of bases that, for whatever nationalistic or ideological reason, you refuse to call immoral or murderous. It's just a "mistake" that hindsight has called into question. This in spite of the fact that an entire world was calling it disastrous and catastrophic the moment the Bush administration that planned the whole thing announced it.

This isn't unique to the Iraq War. It's precisely what mainstream America calls Vietnam, even to this day. The support for colonial France, calling off democratic elections called for by the Geneva Accords, the invasion of South Vietnam, the eventual bombing of Indochinese peasants in half a dozen countries from Laos to Cambodia. You can find similar words describing international terrorism all over Central America, including in Nicaragua which the ICJ officially declared an unlawful use of force -- a ruling ignored by the Reagan admin.

These military and intelligence operations aren't immoral. They certainly aren't illegal. They're just mistakes, carried out with the best of intentions, that occasionally and unfortunately cause more harm than good.

Why? For no other reason but because it just so happened to be your country committing the atrocities.



If you want to make absurd distinctions of morality and the definition of "murderous" and "sociopathic", that's up to you. One thing I'm certain of is the hideous insult to the victims of all five of these murderous sociopaths -- Hussein, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice -- to make any distinctions of the sort. They took actions with predictably deathly consequences for ulterior motives and each and every one of them should be viewed in that light first and foremost.

[Nanners]

If you want to make absurd distinctions of morality and the definition of "murderous" and "sociopathic", that's up to you. One thing I'm certain of is the hideous insult to the victims of all five of these murderous sociopaths -- Hussein, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice -- to make any distinctions of the sort. They took actions with predictably deathly consequences for ulterior motives and each and every one of them should be viewed in that light first and foremost.

very well said, thank you.

Where is KevinNYC? I am suprised he has not been doing his usual routine of copy-pasting msnbc articles in response to PRISM.

Kevin, what do you think about the NYT saying that the Obama Administration has lost all credibility?

[rufuspaul]

very well said, thank you.

Where is KevinNYC? I am suprised he has not been doing his usual routine of copy-pasting msnbc articles in response to PRISM.

Kevin, what do you think about the NYT saying that the Obama Administration has lost all credibility?

Like he had much credibility to begin with. He's a slick politician who was the lesser of 2 evils in 2 presidential elections. Sad state of affairs but business as usual in Washington. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

[kNicKz]

nobody wants to talk about drones

i guarantee that more than half of America doesn't even know what a Drone is

[rufuspaul]

nobody wants to talk about drones

i guarantee that more than half of America doesn't even know what a Drone is

A type of bee?

[KevinNYC]

very well said, thank you.

Where is KevinNYC? I am suprised he has not been doing his usual routine of copy-pasting msnbc articles in response to PRISM.

Kevin, what do you think about the NYT saying that the Obama Administration has lost all credibility?

I'm doing pretty good. Yourself?

[Nanners]

I'm doing pretty good. Yourself?

i cant complain. work has been slow today but thats ok.

so you agree that obama has lost all credibility?

[KevinNYC]

i cant complain. work has been slow today but thats ok.

so you agree that obama has lost all credibility?

I've been staying out of this, because I don't believe many people actually understand how the NSA program works and why judges have found that it's legal and constitutional.

To me those are the prerequisite to having a rational debate on this.

[Nanners]

I've been staying out of this, because I don't believe many people actually understand how the NSA program works and why judges have found that it's legal and constitutional.

To me those are the prerequisite to having a rational debate on this.

Oh good

i was worried you were having some kind of existential crisis after learning that the constitutional law professor you idolize has been busy trampling all over the constitution.

[Crystallas]

So when it's hearsay about your opponent, you run with it as if it's fact. When it's about your guy, you take a "wait and see, let's be fair" approach. Not that I care, do whatever makes you feel better and make you believe your right. Not my problem.

[Nanners]

So when it's hearsay about your opponent, you run with it as if it's fact. When it's about your guy, you take a "wait and see, let's be fair" approach. Not that I care, do whatever makes you feel better and make you believe your right. Not my problem.

KevinNYC is the king of cognitive dissonance and doublethink, he is the ultimate hypocrite.

Its absolutely absurd that he gets mentioned as one of the smartest posters on ISH. In reality he is just a pseudo intellectual hack who completely lacks original thoughts. In every post he is simply parroting the views of the "blue team" and his favorite political bloggers.

Everything is wrong when red team does it, everything is okay when blue team does it.