Liberal memorial to those that died

NOT what you expect.

Published on June 23, 2005 By Moderateman In Politics

With all the crap being spewed by the left about how the poor terrorist are being treated, it's only a matter of time before they get
public enemy number 1 {george I bought the Democratic party soros} to erect a monument to those brave freedom fighters, that died a glorious death fighting Republican oppression.

Maybe a statue with all 19 terrorist, surrounded by virgins would be right, with a saying under the monument reading.

HERE lies the remains of these brave 19 freedom fighter that gladly gave there lives flying jets into a buildings containing vicious civilians that would have become future nazis, women that would have gave birth to more future nazis.

Our hearts are with you brave men, signed the Democratic party.

Comments (Page 2)

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

Please do not be so bold as to think that because I disagree with you, I must have not have a valid view point.

nevere shades... I respect your point of view, even when I diagree with them , you ALWAYS politely make your case the way youn see it.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

12 by shadesofgrey
Thursday, June 23, 2005

do not buy the two wrongs make a right argument. You might not agree with what Durbin or Dean or whoever said, but that does not make your comments any less hurtful. Stooping to the level of those you disagree with should not be an admirable character trait.

you of course are correct about two wrongs shades, But all i did was hypothisise where dean and durbim have accussed out brave fighting men to nazis.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

14 by Andrew J. Brehm
Thursday, June 23, 2005

I still firmly believe that we need to address the causes of terrorism, not simply the manifestations of it."

And presumably the causes of terrorism do not include Arab fascism and religious fanaticism, and the real causes would be addressed by not interfering with the region terrorism comes from?

You see, I also believe that we need to address the causes of terrorism, which is why I think that a failed culture of fundamentalism and fascism has to be replaced with a democratic system by force, just as it was done in Germany and Japan.

And I also think that we should not fight simply the manifestations of terrorism, that is why I think we should attack the countries sponsoring terrorism (yes, that included Iraq) and not just wait for terrorists to attack us and fight them back a bit until they regroup.

But perhaps this is what you meant?

Could European fascism be fought forever at the British border or was it necessary to go to Germany and take out fascism's roots and life blood?

good points all.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

16 by shadesofgrey
Thursday, June 23, 2005

Then we should be quite willing attack Saudi Arabia as well--as that is where the majority of the 9/11 terrorist were from.

But perhaps this is what you meant?

Perhaps you enjoying assuming I am stupid. I will return the favor.

agreed the saudis are scum and we will have to deal with them sooner or later.

NO I do not think for a second you are stupid/

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

assume that originally "dying for one's faith" was meant as the last line of defence, not the first and only line of attack...

Incidentally, why don't the "spiritual leaders" ever die for their faith?

andrew, because the so called leaders are to bizy sending kids to blow themselves up and to bizy hiding.

As far as them being willing to die for their faith, I would be happy to accomodate them.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

13 by Dr. Guy
Thursday, June 23, 2005

think we already know what feeds them. Envy and hatred. Envy that they are not top dogs and hatred for everything they cannot control. Their leaders are no different from the despots of the past. The only difference now is these are stateless, the despots of yesterday and today had a state.

And a huge fear of women doc, that's why they use the koran to keep the women down.

shadesofgrey

on Jun 23, 2005

nevere shades... I respect your point of view, even when I diagree with them , you ALWAYS politely make your case the way youn see it.

that comment was directed at Rightwinger, not you.

I'm calling it quits for the night--enjoy your debate.

Moderateman

on Jun 23, 2005

Reply By: shadesofgreyPosted: Thursday, June 23, 2005nevere shades... I respect your point of view, even when I diagree with them , you ALWAYS politely make your case the way youn see it.that comment was directed at Rightwinger, not you. I'm calling it quits for the night--enjoy your debate.

ok shades... enjoy your evening.

Dr Guy

on Jun 24, 2005

Incidentally, why don't the "spiritual leaders" ever die for their faith?

Meglomaniacs inspire others to destruction, while reaping the rewards of their blood. IN that they are no different than the other despots the world has known.

Dr Guy

on Jun 24, 2005

I think we should attack the countries sponsoring terrorism

Then we should be quite willing attack Saudi Arabia as well--as that is where the majority of the 9/11 terrorist were from.

Note he said sponsoring Terrorism. Saudi Arabia clearly is not. Some of its private citrizens clearly are, but do you want to be tried for the policies of the president just because you are a citizen of the USA? That is what you are advocating in reverse.

Rightwinger

on Jun 24, 2005

And presumably the causes of terrorism do not include Arab fascism and religious fanaticism, and the real causes would be addressed by not interfering with the region terrorism comes from?

Good point....not unlike the isolationists of the pre-WWI and pre-WWII eras, these folks, for all their talk of good international relations and such, think it's best to just put our heads in the sand and ignore the problem, and maybe it'll just go away. The only problem there, that I can see, is that radical Islam is just a little bit imperialist in its own right, and, given the power and backing, would not stop until their ideals dominate.
Those who think we should just not interfere in that area of the world only want us to "interfere" where they think we should, areas that of course do NOT include, for example, North Korea, Syria or Iran, and they seem to think we should just let Isreal slide away.

Please do not be so bold as to think that because I disagree with you, I must have not have a valid view point.

I respect you POV, I just don't agree, that's all.

liberalwithbackbone

on Jun 24, 2005

"the saudis are scum"?

are you implying that all people in Saudi Arabia are scum?
because if you are, you are acting the same as the terrorists do, you just are on a different side.
terrorists believe that all people in america are scum and heathen, if you believe the same about Saudis, you are going down the path of extremism.

liberalwithbackbone

on Jun 24, 2005

"areas that do NOT include, of course North Korea, Syria, or Iran"

last I checked, I was in favor of Stopping NK and Iran, and I was seriously looking at Syria.

Furry Canary

on Jun 24, 2005

'NOT what you expect'
No, ABSOLUTELY what I expect from you MM. Yawn.

Dr Guy

on Jun 24, 2005

'NOT what you expect'
No, ABSOLUTELY what I expect from you MM. Yawn.

You are consistent. Yawn.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!