Trent

Wouldn't it seem more reasonable to honor the Canadians who came to the US to train with our soldiers to go to Vietnam for what they felt was a good cause? How about honoring the Canadian veterans that Canada sent to Vietnam? Oh wait, sorry... it's much cooler to subtly say "fuck you" to the US nowadays. My bad. Oh, hello again!

What's that got to do with the statue? Oh, hello again!

Apparently that doesn't work anymore. Why else would NK and Saddam have been talking so much shit? Because they knew that the rest of the world would not let the US or anyone for that matter use nukes. Do you think someone like Kim-Jong-whatever and the Iranian wacko-s give a flying shit about the rest of the world? Well, shit man, we should just hand them out because that would be most equitable. Hey, lets give them to the Basque separatists and Osama too, after all... the true European can't stand any sort of inequality, right? Good thinking. Oh, hello again!

De-facto lack of minimum wage requirement. Just as an aside though, many of the landscaping and construction jobs obtained by illegals pay well above current US minimum wages. Or we could just reduce or eliminate minimum wage altogether and let the market dictate pay. How about making people on state dole take the jobs? I bet there would be a supply of domestic workers willing to do the work, but employers won't hire them since they're slightly more risky as far as reporting wages and minimum wage laws are concerned. I agree, and it won't happen under a democrat... or anyone who wants to win state with large immigrant populations. In general, it just seems that the republicans want to ignore the issue and the democrats want to give illegals social services and the right to vote. I disagree with both policies. Oh, hello again!

But what do you do about nations building armaments that could not possibly used as a means of DEFENSE. Nukes, Chem, shit like that? I'm really starting to think that the European view of "laissez-faire" is a result of them somehow thinking that they were much happier and better off when they had to fear a war at any moment (cold war). It really just seems that Europe prefers everyone be armed any way they like so that we can all go back to brinkmanship. Oh, hello again!

*sigh* Do you think that since America bashing is a worldwide pastime, that one day history will educate these jack-offs? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132971,00.html Oh, hello again!

Yes, it was the first place men's freestyle team. As Ron said, if our video guy forgot to turn on the camera, I would expected to be as screwed as if I forgot the routine we were performing. I have a feeling these rules will be modified by next year. Oh, hello again!

This'll be my last post until we get back from Brazil, so don't think I don't love you if I don't respond again... Answer me this, if the majority of people committing terrorism today are arab muslim extremists and male, should we ignore that altogether because there are some others thrown in the mix? I know it sounds "fair" to ignore this fact, but it's also stupid. Bill, whether you will ever accept it on these boards or not, I cannot believe that you are that intellectually dishonest to not think that islamic fundamentalism is a problem, and WILL be for WHOEVER is the "great satan" of the time. Fortunately, we have a government that will not nuke an entire section of the world just because some of us are REALLY fired up. Islamic fundamentalists DO have leaders that will plan attacks just because they beleive their own hype. So read what you wrote above... then read this... At what point does their freedom of speech become plotting illegally? So there is some forms of free speech that are dangerous? How about laws against inciting riots or encouraging violence? Again, you're ignoring reality. Bill, come on. We've had this discussion already. For the extremists and terrorists... it suits their ends to claim that every single death in Iraq is a civilian. According to the militia leaders, I bet not one of the "mahdi army" guys has met allah according to al-sadr. So according to you now, there is NO right way to fight this fight. LOL, you think that those that want America demonized would let that happen? We're damned if we do, damned if we don't. I honestly think you have a lacking in the understanding of middle eastern culture. So they'd risk world economic collapse to raise prices? That sounds like good business... how much do you think it would cost them to reduce supply and raise prices to make up for losing the US market? In all likelihood, it'd mean global economic disaster... until France sacked up and invaded to take their oil. The USSR wasn't fighting "for religion". I think that communism was a failing enterprise from the start. Reagan just accellerated the failure by spending them to death. Not exactly an applicable example here. Again, you're saying lets be nice to the extremists and they'll stop misbehaving. Sorry, I'm not willing to bet my life on that strategy. al queda hates us because of our support for Israel... errr wait... because of our bases in Saudi Arabia... err wait... because of our lack of morals.... er wait... because we haven't seen the truth of allah... Bill... you can lie to me about this shit, but not to yourself. Be honest. And I'll argue with you more when I get back!

So, yes, you do see a problem with it? But instead of confronting a spreading culture of hate (islamic fundamentalism), you'd rather pretend that this isn't a problem that is growing? Except for the rhetoric that got the hijackers of September 11th to do their jobs, right? Rhetoric leads to situations that DO hurt. You're not being intellectually honest. So, they'd have to have actually killed Americans in a large quantity to make you want to stop them? You're a re-active guy instead of a pro-active then I take it. Sorry Bill, you've got to wake up... these extremists of islam DO have a lot of support. Watch the news, read al jazeera. There is direct support from all over the world, tacit support from people who do nothing to oppose it, and popular support from the people you see running around like idiots in Fallujah, Najaf, Iran, etc. If we ignore them, they won't just go away, Bill. Economics doesn't work that way. Just because our HUGE demand would go down, doesn't mean the demand worldwide would go up. And you're saying that rather than us dealing with it, you'd rather pass the buck to the French or whoever? That won't SOLVE anything. That's silly. If it becomes a threat, we'll deal with it. Are you suggesting that we coulda just ignored Germany under Hitler and Japan and the problem would have just gone away? Also, remember... how many Arabs were we killing that was enough for Al Qaeda to attack us? We weren't actively fighting a war over there at that time were we? Did we all miss something, or do you want to justify their actions? Oh, hello again!

So many bad guys, so little time... Seriously though... you, Bill, being a self-proclaimed liberal, can't possibly see that there is something wrong with the islamic-fundamentalist movement? I mean, in all your efforts to "understand" them and why they hate us, you find no problems with their relentless perpetuation of the anti-western rhetoric? Do you really think that it's okay for them to think they can kill any non-muslim because we are filthy infidels? This is a systematic problem with islamic fundamentalism, whether we're paying attention to it or not. So, you support the war in Iraq then, yeah? Seeing as how they regularly took pot shots at our planes patrolling the no-fly zone, and how they tried to assassinate Bush 41, and how they encouraged terrorism with their "shaheed family payouts"... That's naive... "The West" has had problems with islamic terrorism since Munich. Go read the terror groups' manifestos... then come back and honestly tell me that you think they'll stop trying to wipe out the non-muslims whenever they can. And just because someone else may become the bigger bad guy, doesn't mean that these turds won't always be a problem. What do you think they'll do if we figure out how to use garbage to power our flux-capacitors in our cars and no longer need oil? You think they'll be content to settle back into the desert, or will we be the bad guys for cutting off trillions of dollars in income for them? Oh, hello again!

So would it be as constructive to just have us out to get all the "Bad People"? Or would narrowing it down a bit help? Do you really refuse to see what is clearly a HUGE problem in the islamic world? Notice I'm using terms like islamic-fundamentalists and extremists and terrorists in my posts. Don't just assume that I'm indicting an entire religion becuase it makes it easier to disagree with me. Oh, hello again!

And honestly, who cares what they call themselves? By acknowledging their "cause" or names it makes them feel just a little more credible. They are islamic fundamentalist fuck-bags. Yeah, but there's a pretty darned good chance that these ARE islamic-fundamentalist fuck-bags. Ignore THAT at your own peril. Oh, hello again!

I posted this a while back and thought it might be pertinent here. It is a response to someone's question like "Who cares what Kerry did 30 years ago?" Oh, hello again!

I usually spell pretty well.... Oh, hello again!

At least HE's not running on his war record. Oh, hello again!

I don't suppose you paid much attention to Chechnya before this event last week, did you? Did you pay enough attention to actually seek out the websites run by the terrorists? I seem to remember a few... www.kavkaz.net, www.qoqaz.net, www.azzam.com. Guess what? SURPRISE they had video and pictures as well as letters written by fellow terrorists in the region and they were, in large part, arabs. So if you want to deny that the Chechen terrorist movement has any ties to radical islam... go ahead, you'll just be wrong. Here's a new idea for you... just because someone lives in Chechnya and fights with the Chechens, doesn't make them a Russian. I'll tell you who told me... observations of REALITY. I'm glad that it makes you angry, maybe you'll figure out that it is the bastards using Islam as a reason to kill who you should be angry with... not the people who point out that radical islam IS a problem. Oh, hello again!

Yes, it is an excellent idea. And here's how it would probably work... Companies within countries on list #2 who drill oil, mine rare metals and industrial diamonds realize that if they want to survive they'll pretty much have to deal with companies in the US, who are most likely some of their largest customers. See, companies tend to do what is in their best interests regardless of what country they call home. In fact, it has been the subject of many college business classes that companies will eventually be stateless entities. So, unless you convince the rest of the world's companies to stop liking money, it'd sort itself out. They're not going to ignore the wealthiest market on the planet. That wasn't so hard was it? Oh, hello again!

Correct, they've had it much rougher than we have. Wrong. Chechens have been struggling against Russia for a long time. Why? Independence. In the last 10-12 years, that independence has become synonymous with establishing an islamic government in Chechnya. After the first couple of times the Russian military and Chechen rebels fought... there weren't too many Chechens left. The remaining "freedom" fighters began to resort to terrorism and attacks on non-military targets, thanks, in no small part, to foreign islamic fighters from Afghanistan and other arab nations. Guess what? Reports on the school attack mention that of the 30-something terrorists... there was no shortage of Arabs in the mix. It doesn't matter where these people lived, or where their passports were from, they are islamic-fundamentalist terrorists. They have been, and most likely still are, funded from the arab world. It's time for the civilized people of the world to stand up to what reality is in front of us. Oh, hello again!

We did this before... if the fact that heads of state are condemning the attacks makes MY nightly news... you'd think that heads of a religion condemning the attacks would too. In fact, I remember seeing statements from the Pope against terrorism. I remember seeing statements from the Pope against the war in Iraq. You'd think that if I saw all this in the news, any condemnation of any sincerity or weight would appear if it came from Muslim leaders who actually had any sort of power in that religion. The real problem is that you don't see any type of rallying against this type of behavior from islam, even IF it exists in any kind of majority. Call a spade a spade. Oh, hello again!

From the article: I've been asking this question since September 11th, 2001. To date, no one has given me any viable answer. Oh, some people pointed at some minute articles, that received no publicity, about some group or leader here and there making a token "terrorism is bad" effort. But no widespread denunciation has occurred... and if it has... why haven't we seen it on a large public scale? Oh, hello again!

Cop-Out, Bill. Way to go. I'm debating one simple thing here that YOU simply cannot see. Never did I ever say that the US is 100% right. Never did I say that everyone that has died in Iraq "deserved it"! Go ahead and quote me where I say those things. It's hard for me to imagine that someone who takes the time to look over the numbers can honestly say that they think that every single one of the "7,000" dead in Iraq are innocent civilians. Do you REALLY think that everyone killed by a US troop or missile is innocent? I guess you're right, the US is just using those poor people for target practice without any sort of restraint. Want to fantasize about the pure evil of our government and GWB? Go ahead... ignoring facts and assuming that the US is the bad guy first will do just as little to help us in the long run. But keep blindly believing large numbers if it makes your argument look better. Remember, if you only look critically at things you disagree with, you can almost convince yourself that you're right!! Oh, hello again!

Here then, I don't think that civilian casualties should limit our engagement in Iraq at all. Like I, and others, have said... we try not to kill civilians, but it will happen. The terrorists and militants have chosen this type of war now, we can't leave because people die. We're fighting to stabilize Iraq, contrary to what the loco-muslims are trying to do. Sure, we destabilized it by showing up to remove Saddam, now we clean up. Am I reading your statements correctly when I get the "we should pull out of Iraq and leave them to whatever fate befalls them" vibe? You and Bill really make it seem like the US forces are doing nothing but killing civilians over there. Do you really think that's what's going on? Oh, hello again!

Well, boys, I figured that since everyone is so into the REAL story here that it might make sense to point out that the numbers at IBC are a bit misleading. Do you agree? If people are going to run around using the "10,000 dead civilians" argument, they'd better be able to back it up when questioned. They seem to like 10,000 because it just looks like so many... it's probably more effective for them to use that than say... 4,000 or whatever the nebulous "real" civilian casualty rate may be. I happen to think there is a difference between 10,000 and 4,000 or 3,000 or 5,000. So, if that argument about the count is over... I'll answer your question: No amount of civilian deaths are "good". It should be understood that in war, civilians have always died, even though they may not have specifically been targeted. I also find it stupid to blame one side alone for any civilian deaths. As ugly as it may be to you, the goal of a war is to win. To do that, people will die. My opinion is that the US takes more care to NOT target civilians than any other nation would. If you think that there should be a firm number of civilian deaths before an army pulls out, let me know. We'll work from there. Oh, hello again!

Kev, go read the argument and realize how luda-chris it is for Bill, or anyone, to assume that every death in the IBC is an "innocent" civilian. Really, it's mind-bogglingly naive. And as for empathy... I see his point, and I'm sure he's wrong. How's that work for you? I've never disputed that civilians haven't been killed, just that the "evidence" that people use to say the US has killed 11,000 innocent people is complete bullshit. If anyone looks closely, they'll see the differences as well. Oh, hello again!

Your true colors are showing, you know what we're talking about and you deliberately are being obtuse. I feel sorry for you if you can't tell the difference, or even see the light of reality. Case closed. Actually, Bill, I claim that there is a website that SAYS there's about 6500 people that may have died in a hospital or morgue in Iraq. I claim that of these 6500 people, there were probably just a hair more than a handful who weren't "innocent" civilians, but terrorists and militants. If you looked, REALLY LOOKED, at the circumstances of the deaths, and the dates, you'd also start to think that maybe there are some Iraqi military deaths in there too. I wonder if you could educate us on how you can tell the difference between the body of a militant in civvies and that of an actual civilian. Please... show us the way... Oh, hello again!