Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 34    Average: 3.1/5]
46 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 15284
Rating: 3.1
Category:
Date: 03/20/11 08:43 AM

46 Responses to Liberal Blogger: Who`s to blame for the war?

  1. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31762 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 8:43 am
    Link: Liberal Blogger: Who`s to blame for the war? - Not Obama! It`s WOMEN and JEWS! Obama just couldn`t stop them! So the spinning begins...
  2. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10443 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 9:02 am
    I can feel this website coming apart at the seams.

    How is this supposed to relieve my boredom? I can make fun of 5cats, sure, but that will only get me so far...
  3. Profile photo of fivezones
    fivezones Male 40-49
    1021 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 9:06 am
    What happened to this once great web site?
  4. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36176 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 9:09 am

    I Am Bored - because of this post.

    Maybe Oystah and I could exchange recipies or something to relieve the boredom? Or DixieRarr and I could swap dating horror stories...

  5. Profile photo of Milo_Pretzel
    Milo_Pretzel Female 18-29
    180 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 9:17 am
    UGH..LAME
  6. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 9:19 am
    Anyone bothered who was the main push behind the war?

    No, me neither.
  7. Profile photo of Volsunga
    Volsunga Male 18-29
    1548 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 9:21 am
    So an anti-war douchebag is desperately trying to find every possible reason why we shouldn`t protect people from genocide. Is anyone surprised that somebody wrote something like this? I wouldn`t apply this idiocy to liberals in general. Besides, France is taking the lead on this one (first time taking an active role in international politics since WWI), we are just providing support.
  8. Profile photo of vorpalsword
    vorpalsword Male 18-29
    1452 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 9:47 am
    god one thought worthy post and melodramatic wrist cutters wont stop crying about how their life is miserable because of IAB not agreeing with them.
  9. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5385 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 9:57 am
    *total shock facial expression*

    It`s a great big interweb out there people. If you don`t like this post go somewhere else! *shocked facial expression*


    </sarcasm>
  10. Profile photo of jamie76
    jamie76 Male 30-39
    2346 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 10:14 am
    so when a deomcrat president intervenes in a JUST cause to save millions from being killed by a dictator it is a bad thing to republicans???

    but when we go to war with a country for oil that is good...

    ok got it.
  11. Profile photo of ak2nc1
    ak2nc1 Female 18-29
    859 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 10:15 am
    This link almost gave my computer a virus...
  12. Profile photo of elkingo
    elkingo Male 30-39
    5385 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 11:07 am
    @jamie76 --

    Good thing we fought that oil war, it would suck if oil went so high that gas prices went over 3.50 a gallon.. oh wait.. n/m.
  13. Profile photo of paddy215
    paddy215 Male 18-29
    1677 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 11:14 am

  14. Profile photo of TheGrinder
    TheGrinder Male 13-17
    29 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 12:10 pm
    Hilary Clinton is the biggest retard ever.
  15. Profile photo of OutWest
    OutWest Male 50-59
    546 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 12:38 pm
    So our President did not make his own decision?
  16. Profile photo of BrimstoneOne
    BrimstoneOne Male 30-39
    2229 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 1:08 pm
    I call BS to the article, since it`s all neo- liberal/ conservatives want/need war as many wars as possible to be happening, so that they maintain THEIR power, and kill off or "drown" in debt their opposition. It`s the ordinary regular working people that are taking the hit for all of the aggressive poo the United States is doing. Obama is part of the establishment, thus part of the problem.

    Kudos for being the first black President and all, but if he doesn`t help the people or helps those that are trying to subdue, suppress(oppress), or out right attack of the people then he becomes part of the problem; and an enemy of the state of the people.
  17. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12151 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 3:08 pm
    I can always tell from the description, before I click, which links were submitted by 5Cats. He hasn`t let me down yet.
  18. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25406 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 3:15 pm
    meh
  19. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31762 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 4:08 pm
    Thank you @vorpalsword & @elkingo (and @Volsunga too) for appreciating my efforts to enlighten the Bored Masses.
    I`m sorry if it bores you the the "neutral unbiased" MSM is in fact IN BED with a certian political party. That distorting facts and blaming "women and neoconservatives" (ie: Jews) brings you yawning fits!
    If Barak had said "Ok Momar, cut that out or else!" I`d have cheered! Insted he hid behind the skirts of his women, and also went golfing twice.
    So try to observe, with an open mind, as the MSM points the finger at everyone EXCEPT the President. And ask yourself "did Bush get this `kid gloves` treatment?" Nope.

    I await the MASSIVE anti-war rallies! In 3... 2... what? They ain`t happening? Gee I wonder why.
  20. Profile photo of Kougaiji
    Kougaiji Male 18-29
    604 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 4:25 pm
    This isn`t liberalism, idiots.
  21. Profile photo of pfkdxius
    pfkdxius Male 18-29
    314 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 5:01 pm
    Thank you Kougaiji, for pointing out the obvious that everyone else seems to have missed. Whoever wrote the description doesn`t know the basics of politics or wants liberals to get a bad name.
  22. Profile photo of bigbangbilly
    bigbangbilly Male 13-17
    698 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 5:22 pm
    Based on the description that sounded like an extremist conservative.
  23. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 6:31 pm
    [quote">"Ok Momar, cut that out or else!"[/quote">

    Obama did say something to that effect
  24. Profile photo of SmilinSam
    SmilinSam Female 18-29
    3599 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 7:27 pm
    the guy that wrote this article seems to be barely literate. so i have no problem disregarding everything he has to say, and go laugh at the pics of cats now...
  25. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31762 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 7:35 pm
    vv Icanhascheezburger @SmilinSam? It`s my daily injection of teh cute!
  26. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 11:25 pm
    Hi. Arab here.

    I was against the Bush Wars.
    I am in favour of attacking the Libyan government.

    Just like I`m in favour of drating ladies when they ask, but not in favour of drating them when they ask me not to.

    This is not a confusing concept.
    Invading lands against the will of their people: Bad
    Invading lands with the support of the lands people: Awesome.

    The Libyan situation is everything the Republicans pretended the Iraq was.
  27. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    March 20, 2011 at 11:27 pm
    "I can always tell from the description, before I click, which links were submitted by 5Cats. He hasn`t let me down yet."

    Agreed. 100% hit rate so far.
  28. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 12:03 am
    Incidentally I`m also against certain Arab bodies sending troops into Bahrain to suppress protesters.

    It`s all about applying thought to individual circumstances. That`s not hypocritical.

    What would be hypocritical is this:
    1) Claiming you wanted to invade a country (Iraq) for it`s people (who didn`t want it), against the world`s advice (UN said no), and claiming it could have a domino effect of removing dictators across the middle east (which it didn`t).

    2) When all your stated reasons are now TRUE in the case of Libya, and NOW when every one of those things is ACTUALLY TRUE, you`re against it.

    That is hypocrisy.
  29. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 12:12 am
    [quote">Claiming you wanted to invade a country (Iraq) for it`s people (who didn`t want it), against the world`s advice (UN said no), and claiming it could have a domino effect of removing dictators across the middle east (which it didn`t).[/quote">

    Ah yes brings back pleasant memories.

    Now in THAT case the "domino effect" was opposite of what we wanted. Yet communism has suffered one massive reversal after another.

    Nonetheless, in both cases the French of all people told us NOT to go in.
  30. Profile photo of Lardcarcass
    Lardcarcass Male 40-49
    254 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 2:45 am
    Cajun247,
    If I could borrow part of your quote for a moment, "...invade a country (Iraq) for it`s people (who didn`t want it),..." is a falacy believed by those willing to accept the rubbish fed to us by the media, who, no matter how professional they may profess or even truly attempt to be, always write a story with an agenda.
    My opinion is based on first hand experience rolling around the Sunni Triangle talking to people in the first year we were there. What the vast majority told me was "Bush good. Bush good. Saddam shoes."
    (In Iraq showing someone the bottom of your shoe is the equivilant of the bird in the U.S.)
    Of course, that wasn`t the feeling of the people in the social circles of minority who were doing the oppressing.
    To get to my point, I`m all for supporting people who are willing to stand up to break the shackles of oppression, no matter who the president is. However, we really don`t know complex situation on the ground just by
  31. Profile photo of Lardcarcass
    Lardcarcass Male 40-49
    254 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 2:48 am
    ...listening to what others report.
  32. Profile photo of SvampeBob
    SvampeBob Male 18-29
    3076 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 4:48 am
    TL;DR
  33. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 6:15 am
    Lardcarcass:
    My opinion isn`t exactly garnered from major American news sources. You might be able to tell from my profile pic. It`s from speaking to Iraqis.

    However, skipping anecdotes and going on the facts here:
    2004: 92% of Iraqis see Americans as Occupiers.
    2005: 82% Strongly opposed to presence of troops. <1% think that US-UK is helping to improve security.
    2006: 95% believe the security situation has deteriorated since the arrival of US forces.
    2007: 82% express lack of confidence in Coalition forces. 69% thinking the US occupation has exacerbated the situation.
    Etc.


    Overall 25% view Bush Favourably. 55% Unfavourably.
    Saddam is 10% Favourable to 80% unfavourable.

    The numbers are in already. It looks like you`re quite wrong.
  34. Profile photo of osirisascend
    osirisascend Male 40-49
    3039 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 6:56 am
    @ Baalthazaq: As an American who has lived (Iran), worked (UAE), and unfortunately fought in SW Asia, thank you for as always, weighing in with reason, and FACTS. People on this little water-covered rock need to start showing a little more common sense.

    Our American media leaves much to be desired. With all of the upheaval, and winds of revolution blowing across the world, our media decides to concentrate on Lindsay Lohan, and Charlie Sheen?

    It took a disaster with planet-wide implications to break away from that?

    Disgusting.

    For the record, you`re right on the money about Bahrain. The Saudis? (You won`t point the finger, but I will) In Bahrain shooting civilians? Where is the world outrage? We`re certainly not hearing it here.

    BTW, the new profile pic suits you. I approve.
  35. Profile photo of Canoas
    Canoas Male 18-29
    427 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 9:51 am
    @Baalthazaq
    And how many people did you speak with? 2000? 3000? and from all over the country or just your neighbours?
    I love it how statistics just fall from the sky into people`s heads.
  36. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 1:27 pm
    Here`s another comparison:

    During WWII: it took the west (starting with Europe) ten years to get Germany under control. They were an empire with a popular leader and an absolute threat to the world.

    Now fast forward to the second Gulf War. Iraq was far from a threat (nope no massive WMD program sorry Bush-Kool-Aid drinkers), with a VERY UNPOPULAR leader, and very far from being an empire. It takes the United States with some backing from Europe almost 10 years to get Iraq under control.
  37. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 1:28 pm
    I mean shouldn`t the second time around been easier?
  38. Profile photo of osirisascend
    osirisascend Male 40-49
    3039 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 1:39 pm
    @ Cajun: If King George the First had let us continue on to Baghdad, we wouldn`t be in the mess we are now. Last time around, the Iraqi people WANTED us to help them... and we hung them out to dry... Saddam subsequently began to massacre the Kurds in the North.

    We hung the Iraqi people out to dry the first time. Of course they didn`t trust us for sh*t the second time around.

    If you were Iraqi and knew our previous track record in your country, would YOU trust us?
  39. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 2:20 pm
    @osirasecond

    I suppose not.
    On the other hand, are sure about that king? Because last I checked he was a king before America even existed.
  40. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12151 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 2:50 pm
    @ Cajun: He`s referring to Bush Sr, and the first Gulf War.
  41. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 4:38 pm
    @davymid

    Ah gotcha. You can also blame him for trashing their infrastructure as well.
  42. Profile photo of r66tramp
    r66tramp Male 40-49
    674 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 6:16 pm
    "During WWII: it took the west (starting with Europe) ten years to get Germany under control."

    That seems odd as WWII is clocked in the history books as a six year event.
  43. Profile photo of r66tramp
    r66tramp Male 40-49
    674 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 6:40 pm
    "So three or four" "seem to believe" "there is a chance of" "such as"

    That is taken from the first paragraph alone! I could not read further. Pure rubbish! How can the world take you serious if you do not know how to read and write?
  44. Profile photo of Lardcarcass
    Lardcarcass Male 40-49
    254 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 7:25 pm
    Baalthazaq,
    That is a very nice set of statistics you bring to the discussion. I don`t know where they came from, but I do not even dispute the latter ones. However, when I left in March 2004 nobody wanted us to leave. Correction Saddam`s suppporters and Al Qaida wanted us to leave. The other 70% of the population were happy we came and just wanted clean drinking water, electricity more than 2 hours a day, security, and jobs.
    I am quite sure no Kurds took part in any of those surveys, though, and not many Shia, at least not until after Muqtada got going.
    Again, my point is really that, though I believe it is a great thing to support and even fight for people who are being oppressed, here at the house, we don`t really know what`s going on with "the people", i.e. which people, how many, how bad is it for them, etc. especially if we only hear from a few with their own views.

    BTW, I have an agal, too. I don`t know how to spell agal, but I have one.
  45. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 7:48 pm
    That seems odd as WWII is clocked in the history books as a six year event.

    I`m referring to the war and subsequent occupation actually.
  46. Profile photo of r66tramp
    r66tramp Male 40-49
    674 posts
    March 21, 2011 at 9:07 pm
    "I`m referring to the war and subsequent occupation actually."

    Dot your I`s and cross your T`s! That NOTE of yours should have been added in subtext.

Leave a Reply