T1B

Mister Bushice wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:

BSmack wrote: WTF does that have to do with anything?

Christ Tom, get some fucking booze in you again. You used to make sense.

The entire cartoon is a piece of fiction about somebody being "wrong" and being held accountable to a penguin. The guy draws real well, and the cartoon is funny. Nevertheless the statement it is making, is incorrect.

Is the author held accountable for spreading incorrect information ? Seems the author holds others' accountable.

You're right.

I think we should all mill about in the street calling for Tom Tomorrows death, kill some people and burns some buildings down and stuff.

I declare "jihad" on the penguin. He must be beheaded.
I mean, a bird that can't fly? Come on...

mvscal wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Actually, the correct response to 9/11 would have been to get the guy responsible for it, i.e., Osama bin Forgotten. Our fools' errand in Iraq distracted from that.

Wrong. We never left Afghanstan and we have not stopped looking for bin Laden.

Compare the number of troops in Iraq and the number of troops in Afghanistan. Then ask yourself what this Administration's priority is.

Uncle Fester wrote:I think Tom in VA's point is that it's easy to play the armchair cartoonist and take easy, cynical pot shots at complex problems.

You could say the same about SNL, the Daily Show, Rush Limbaugh, etc.

Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, etc... etc...




Thanks for "getting it" Fester.

BSmack wrote:

Tom In VA wrote:The entire cartoon is a piece of fiction about somebody being "wrong" and being held accountable to a penguin. The guy draws real well, and the cartoon is funny. Nevertheless the statement it is making, is incorrect.

Is the author held accountable for spreading incorrect information ? Seems the author holds others' accountable.

You're right Tom. It is true that penguins can't really talk. Do you feel better?

Brian, this is the 1st time I've laughed "with" you in 4 to 5 years. You used to be a damn good poster..

mvscal wrote:exactly how long was Iraq supposed to take and who lied about how long it would take.

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/tal ... _hertzberg
summed up well.

mvscal wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Actually, the correct response to 9/11 would have been to get the guy responsible for it, i.e., Osama bin Forgotten. Our fools' errand in Iraq distracted from that.

Wrong. We never left Afghanstan and we have not stopped looking for bin Laden.

Believe it or not, our military is able to walk and chew gum at the same time.

Unfortunately, the ability of their CinC to walk and chew pretzels at the same time has been compromised.

Martyred wrote:I declare "jihad" on the penguin. He must be beheaded.
I mean, a bird that can't fly? Come on...

We object.

signed,

Emus, Ostriches, Kiwis, Rheas

mvscal wrote:How about a link to these alleged abuses of power granted post 9/11?

Here ya go, Skippy. :D

I agree that it is easy. The insane number of failures regarding this war make it incredibly easy.

Maybe now.

But political jabbering aside, 9/11 was an event that changed everything. When the intel folks started talking about Iraq and WMDs, I gave them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe that was naive on my part, but what the fuck, I'll never forget the sights and sounds from that day in New York.

Bush is a moron, but he was dealt a tough hand to play on that day.

Bizzarofelice wrote:

Uncle Fester wrote:I think Tom in VA's point is that it's easy to play the armchair cartoonist and take easy, cynical pot shots at complex problems.

I agree that it is easy. The insane number of failures regarding this war make it incredibly easy.

After Vietnam the officer ranks filled up quickly with administrator-types that weren't warriors. It became frustrating when those pencil pushers had influence on tactics and strategy. Clinton was just a by-product of his generation that took the balls out of the US fighting mentality.

I had no respect for him or the fucksticks that were o-5's and higher. These current "generals" you see on TV can line up and kiss my ass. They are nothing but administrators that sit behind a desk. They aren't fighters either. They are misplaced politicians that would even fail at that.

mvscal talked about many leaving the military 15 or so years ago and it's true what he said.

Bace, by any reasonable military standard this second invasion into Iraq went every bit as well and was just as much of a "cakewalk" as the first one.

Our troops rolled in and took over in a minimum amount of time.

So, nope, nobody lied about the "cakewalk" in your link.

It's the politically hamstrung aftermath that's become a bit of a quagmire, not the military conquest of Saddam's Iraq. If our only goal was to conquer and then destroy Iraq then yep, this was and would've been a "cakewalk".

That wasn't our only goal. Instead, we've decided to try and institute a new government in there, while being as nice to and as careful with the locals as possible.

In a country with the population size of Iraq that was never going to be a quick and clean job and nobody ever promised it would be, inclluding the promise of a set time table.

Uncle Fester wrote:

I agree that it is easy. The insane number of failures regarding this war make it incredibly easy.

Maybe now.

But political jabbering aside, 9/11 was an event that changed everything. When the intel folks started talking about Iraq and WMDs, I gave them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe that was naive on my part, but what the fuck, I'll never forget the sights and sounds from that day in New York.

Bush is a moron, but he was dealt a tough hand to play on that day.

I predicted on 9-12-2001 that the 9-11 attacks would result in a loss of personal liberty and unnecessary wars. I'm not sure if mvscal was around. But if he was, I'm sure he called me a name.

Uncle Fester wrote:Bush is a moron, but he was dealt a tough hand to play on that day.

RACK but ....

I think 'moron' is a bit much, he's a WASP, a rich one and hasn't been exposed to certain things .... kind of socially clumsy the way Ford was physically clumsy ....

Goofy, but "moron", nah.

Uncle Fester wrote:

I agree that it is easy. The insane number of failures regarding this war make it incredibly easy.

Maybe now.

But political jabbering aside, 9/11 was an event that changed everything. When the intel folks started talking about Iraq and WMDs, I gave them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe that was naive on my part, but what the fuck, I'll never forget the sights and sounds from that day in New York.

Bush is a moron, but he was dealt a tough hand to play on that day.

America has perpetrated many 9/11's on the world.

When it happened to you (blowback) you fucking melted down, shit your pants,
and declared a new page being written in the history of the world.

Fuck off.

No, he is indeed a moron. That much I'm sure of.

Martyred, when the United States finally decides to truly declare a new page to be written in history we'll let you know.

In fact, we won't have to. Even you'll get it.

Suffice it to say, we're still only taking tentative steps so far. We haven't truly let loose and said consequences be damned, enough is enough.

When we do, there will be no mistaking it.

BSmack wrote:Tom Tomorrow is the best cartoonist on the Interwebs...if you're a leftist and you don't surf anything else but leftist sites.

FTFY.

Sorry, but even putting politics aside (and Tom T's politics suck), it's just stupid to say he's the best out there.

And guys, the idea of most of you passing judgment on whether Dubya's a moron or not...



...that's all I've got to say about that.

mvscal wrote:
Saddam is the one who lied about WMD not Bush.

Wow.
You truly do live in an alternate reality.

Van wrote:Martyred, when the United States finally decides to truly declare a new page to be written in history we'll let you know.

In fact, we won't have to. Even you'll get it.

Suffice it to say, we're still only taking tentative steps so far. We haven't truly let loose and said consequences be damned, enough is enough.

When we do, there will be no mistaking it.

Why? You haven't murdered enough civilians?
I understand bloodlust is giving you a boner. That would be considered a mental defect.

Van wrote:It's the politically hamstrung aftermath that's become a bit of a quagmire, not the military conquest of Saddam's Iraq. If our only goal was to conquer and then destroy Iraq then yep, this was and would've been a "cakewalk".

You don't say.

That wasn't our only goal. Instead, we've decided to try and institute a new government in there, while being as nice to and as careful with the locals as possible.

So you're saying that we were not going in there only to dethrone Saddam, but to also start a new government over there? Huh. So do we have troops over there or something? Has this "new government" thingee gone well? I mean, it was something we expected to do all along so surely we had a plan for it, and its gone according to plan.

In the beginning, all we heard about was how quick this was going to be. We heard about how cheap this war was going to be. Were we mistaken?

mvscal wrote:

Martyred wrote:America has perpetrated many 9/11's on the world.

Link?

We spoke of Central America earlier.

You didn't care then, either.

Marty bleated: America has perpetrated many 9/11's on the world.

Shouldn't you be out somewhere walking under doors or straining on your tippy toes next to bar skanks?

You must be this tall

-----------
|
|
|
38"
|
|
|


-to ride the One Board.

Doesn't change my point about the Administration's priorities:

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

"I want justice...There's an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'"
- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01, UPI

"...Secondly, he is not escaping us. This is a guy, who, three months ago, was in control of a county [sic]. Now he's maybe in control of a cave. He's on the run. Listen, a while ago I said to the American people, our objective is more than bin Laden. But one of the things for certain is we're going to get him running and keep him running, and bring him to justice. And that's what's happening. He's on the run, if he's running at all. So we don't know whether he's in cave with the door shut, or a cave with the door open -- we just don't know...."
- Bush, in remarks in a Press Availablity with the Press Travel Pool,
The Prairie Chapel Ranch, Crawford TX, 12/28/01, as reported on
official White House site

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:I predicted on 9-12-2001 that the 9-11 attacks would result in a loss of personal liberty and unnecessary wars. I'm not sure if mvscal was around. But if he was, I'm sure he called me a name.

What "personal liberty" have you lost?

Have you been in an airport the last 5 years?

A subway?

A federal building?

Have you tried to drive down Interstate 87?

Just to name a few. Had I been born arab or muslim, I'm sure I could add a few more to the list.

Martyred wrote:
Why? You haven't murdered enough civilians?

Tard, this pretty much ends your semi-cred of existence. Do you want to rethink this or is this how your bitch-ass really thinks? I hope you are not MPerk.

Just to name a few. Had I been born arab or muslim, I'm sure I could add a few more to the list.

No worries there. The Pinkertons are too busy patting down old ladies, X-raying crippled war vets, and shaking down diaper bags for that.

The politically correct pantload out front should have told ya while confiscating your toenail clippers.

Uncle Fester wrote:politically correct pantload

That would make an excellent title for an album.

Maybe porgy would use it.

mvscal wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Doesn't change my point about the Administration's priorities:

"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."
- G.W. Bush, 9/13/01

"I want justice...There's an old poster out West, as I recall, that said, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive,'"
- G.W. Bush, 9/17/01, UPI

"...Secondly, he is not escaping us. This is a guy, who, three months ago, was in control of a county [sic]. Now he's maybe in control of a cave. He's on the run. Listen, a while ago I said to the American people, our objective is more than bin Laden. But one of the things for certain is we're going to get him running and keep him running, and bring him to justice. And that's what's happening. He's on the run, if he's running at all. So we don't know whether he's in cave with the door shut, or a cave with the door open -- we just don't know...."
- Bush, in remarks in a Press Availablity with the Press Travel Pool,
The Prairie Chapel Ranch, Crawford TX, 12/28/01, as reported on
official White House site

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)

So what? Bin Laden is a figurehead.

Try selling your right-wing bullshit to the survivors of the 9/11 victims.

I'm not buying it.

mvscal wrote:Yes, I have and I'm not aware of any lost civil liberties and neither are you....fucking liar.

Awwww... did I hurt your wittle feelings?

Watching America implode by way of it's own paranoia is practically a spectator sport.

Keep destroying yourselves, I'll get more popcorn and beer.

mvscal wrote:Your insults to intelligence do not hurt my feelings.

That's OK. We know how sensitive your neocon types can get. Especialy when your dreams of a new "American Century" are laying in a shambles.

mvscal wrote:

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Try selling your right-wing bullshit to the survivors of the 9/11 victims.

Nice try at emotional pandering, gimp. Oh wait...no it wasn't.

What can I say? I learned from your masters -- Rove, Bush, et al.

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:your dreams of a new "American Century" are laying in a shambles.

What country are you from again?

I'm from the America that WASN'T trying to rule the world.

Hillary is from New York right?

Atomic Punk wrote:Hillary is from New York right?

No, she's (unfortunately) just our junior senator.

It involves questionable residency rules and a hell of a lot of gullible voters.

Mike, I was kidding. Remember I used to live 30 minutes from Manhattan.

Atomic Punk wrote:Mike, I was kidding. Remember I used to live 30 minutes from Manhattan.

No, I don't remember that. I should have, since Mrs. LabRat hails from Manhattan. Chalk it up to advancing age and the legacy of a misspent youth.

BTW, I am not fond of Hillary. I don't have the "bull seeing red" hatred of her, but there's no way in hell she should be representing the interests of NY, and she has done absolutely nothing for upstate NY.

Al D'Amato was a scumbag, but dammit, he brought home the bacon.

Oh, and he's an Alpha Chi Rho, like me. Fun guy in person, once you get past the speech impediment.

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:I'm from the America that WASN'T trying to rule the world.

The PNAC isn't about "ruling the world", you stupid fuck.

It's about maintaining our present position as the world's political, military and economic center of gravity.

If you, as an American, find that objectionable...you're a fucking traitor. Straight up. Yes, I am questioning your patriotism, BTW. It's clear you have none anyway.

Keep saying that while they haul you off to the gallows. Or would you prefer cyanide Herr Goering?

So now it is unpoatriotic to oppose the aims of the PNAC. The word ponderous comes to mind.

BSmack wrote:

mvscal wrote:

BSmack wrote:I'm from the America that WASN'T trying to rule the world.

The PNAC isn't about "ruling the world", you stupid fuck.

It's about maintaining our present position as the world's political, military and economic center of gravity.

If you, as an American, find that objectionable...you're a fucking traitor. Straight up. Yes, I am questioning your patriotism, BTW. It's clear you have none anyway.

Keep saying that while they haul you off to the gallows. Or would you prefer cyanide Herr Goering?

So now it is unpoatriotic to oppose the aims of the PNAC. The word ponderous comes to mind.

Let's not forget this little gem from the PNAC report, frightening in hindsight:

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings about revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/Rebui ... fenses.pdf

That's at page 51.

Terry in Crapchester wrote:

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings about revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor.

That's at page 51.

Motive for Bu$h to read 'my pet goat' while Rome burned and I never hear about it except on the internets. Left wing media my ass.