Neoprog Posner sucks up to Chicoms

[charlou]

Torturing ira members was wrong. If our values are worth fighting for, they are worth displaying. There's a lot to be said for magnanimity, in my book. If we want to be the good guys, let's be good.

Nicely put.

[Toontown]

Torturing ira members was wrong. If our values are worth fighting for, they are worth displaying. There's a lot to be said for magnanimity, in my book. If we want to be the good guys, let's be good.

Be good to our enemies? And treat our allies like shit, of course. Like pseudo-moralistic leftist posers have made an obsession of doing to Americans.

Hey, How about we set the psychopaths up in nice apartments in Paris and other places of interest. That would be less expensive than trying them in court and then keeping them in prison or paying other countries hundreds of millions to take them off our hands. Plus, it would show what weak-minded pussies....er, I mean, what good guys we are.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Welcome back tt. I see your break didn't help you to calm down. Never mind. Perhaps you had time to think about directing your tirades against ideas and not people.

[Toontown]

Welcome back tt. I see your break didn't help you to calm down. Never mind. Perhaps you had time to think about directing your tirades against ideas and not people.

That wasn't a tirade. That was incisive sarcasm.

As for directing it against ideas and not people, I don't really see what the difference is. It is people who shit the turdish ideas. So attacking a turd-like idea is essentially the same as attacking the asshole that pinched it off.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Welcome back tt. I see your break didn't help you to calm down. Never mind. Perhaps you had time to think about directing your tirades against ideas and not people.

That wasn't a tirade. That was incisive sarcasm.

As for directing it against ideas and not people, I don't really see what the difference is. It is people who shit the turdish ideas. So attacking a turd-like idea is essentially the same as attacking the asshole that pinched it off.

Do you ever calm down? You should try deep-breathing exercises - perhaps yoga. Maybe then you would see that others see your ideas in a similar light but refrain from attacking you, personally, in a similar way. Good night. Try hard to keep to our guidelines and still be here when I get back tomorrow.

[Hermit]

As for directing it against ideas and not people, I don't really see what the difference is.

Oh, another one who can't see the difference between playing the man and playing the ball. How tedious.

Looking forward to not seeing you again, Toon.

[Toontown]

I think Merkins should be careful about mentioning the Geneva convention considering you signed the convention then congress did not ratify it .

To an American, the convention is useful only as ass-wipe. It's unrealistic constraints are near impossible to observe in real- world war, especially when none of our enemies have ever even attemped to observe it, preferring instead, along with thier leftist allies, to try to hog-tie the U.S with it. And turds all over the world dance in their fucked-up streets when American civilians are brutally slaughtered by the thousands. And then stinking leftist/anarchist cunts like Churchill and Chomsky rush to justify the slaughter.

That's the kind of ear-fucked, hypocrisy-dribbling monkeyworld you inhabit, Feck. You're not trying to hold that monkeyworld up as an example, are you? Because that would just be fucking nuts.

[Twiglet]

I think Merkins should be careful about mentioning the Geneva convention considering you signed the convention then congress did not ratify it .

To an American, the convention is useful only as ass-wipe. It's unrealistic constraints are near impossible to observe in real- world war, especially when none of our enemies have ever even attemped to observe it, preferring instead, along with thier leftist allies, to try to hog-tie the U.S with it. And turds all over the world dance in their fucked-up streets when American civilians are brutally slaughtered by the thousands. And then stinking leftist/anarchist cunts like Churchill and Chomsky rush to justify the slaughter.

That's the kind of ear-fucked, hypocrisy-dribbling monkeyworld you inhabit, Feck. You're not trying to hold that monkeyworld up as an example, are you? Because that would just be fucking nuts.

In fact, the US is a signatory to the convention: http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebSign?Rea ... d=375&ps=P as is easily verified. Obviously, in signing up to the convention, they assessed that its terms are both reasonable and practical. A casual review of the articles of the convention which relate to the treatment of PoWs and civillians under occupation makes it easy to see why.

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b28 ... 1e004a9e68

Moreover, a brief summary of "grave breaches" of the convention are given below for those who don't want to spare the time to review the entire treaty:

Grave breaches

Not all violations of the treaty are treated equally. The most serious crimes are termed grave breaches, and provide a legal definition of a war crime. Grave breaches of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions include the following acts if committed against a person protected by the convention:
willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments
willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health
compelling one to serve in the forces of a hostile power
willfully depriving one of the right to a fair trial.

Further, major objections towards circumventing the convention were raised by US generals in relation to how non-compliance would compromise the safety of members of the armed forces in the event of capture by a foreign power.

Which directly speaks to the views of the chiefs of staff and US government about the convention, which, coincidentally, Bush did not withdraw from. Obviously their views are not consistent with yours, toontown, but I'm sure Bill O'Reilly would probably agree with you....

[Toontown]

Welcome back tt. I see your break didn't help you to calm down. Never mind. Perhaps you had time to think about directing your tirades against ideas and not people.

That wasn't a tirade. That was incisive sarcasm.

As for directing it against ideas and not people, I don't really see what the difference is. It is people who shit the turdish ideas. So attacking a turd-like idea is essentially the same as attacking the asshole that pinched it off.

Do you ever calm down? You should try deep-breathing exercises - perhaps yoga. Maybe then you would see that others see your ideas in a similar light but refrain from attacking you, personally, in a similar way. Good night. Try hard to keep to our guidelines and still be here when I get back tomorrow.

I've been calm the whole time.

And why would they be so hostile to such obvious facts that they have to go through all kinds of contortions to try to obfuscate them? Hmm. Come to think of it, I just asked and answered the question in one sentence.

Oh, yeah, they've done a helluva job of not insulting me. But I'm from the pre-moderated days of boards like the Godless Zone. Their mincing, moderator-fearing efforts are pathetic by comparison.

I'll be starting a Chomsky-bashing thread shortly. If the past is any indicator, the resulting outraged shrieking and caterwauling could easily last until the erstwhile false god departs this earthly plane. He's not looking at all well lately. And that's pretty much the only reason I would even want to be here tomorrow.

[Twiglet]

Oh, yeah, they've done a helluva job of not insulting me. But I'm from the pre-moderated days of boards like the Godless Zone. Their mincing, moderator-fearing efforts are pathetic by comparison.

Do you think you are losing the arguments because we are playing nice? Do you somehow imagine them stronger in a mod free zone, where you can be e-tough


O how we lefties **ph33r** the force of your views in an unmoderated environment... how we ******quake******

I'll be starting a Chomsky-bashing thread shortly. If the past is any indicator, the resulting outraged screeching and caterwauling could easily last until the erstwhile false god departs this earthly plane. He's not looking at all well lately. And that's pretty much the only reason I would even want to be here tomorrow.

You poor bugger, if your sole jollies come from waiting for an old man to pop his clogs off. Still, I'm sure I speak for many people in expressing my eager anticipation of your "Chomsky bashing" thread. I'm sure you will bring something new to the table, which has never been heard before.....

Oh ***swoon***

Hmmm looks like beer o'clock again.

[Toontown]

Do you think you are losing the arguments because we are playing nice? Do you somehow imagine them stronger in a mod free zone, where you can be e-tough.

Again with the attempted fobbing off of the usual false premise.

I haven't been losing any arguments, but you have. coito ergo sum has been repeatedly handing you your ass. I won''t toot my own horn, but you appear to have been ear-fucked on the subjects of the Geneva accords and Guantanamo by some neoprog propaganda-monkey, whereas coito ergo sum has the straight scoop and has been hammering you with it.

You poor bugger, if your sole jollies come from waiting for an old man to pop his clogs off. Still, I'm sure I speak for many people in expressing my eager anticipation of your "Chomsky bashing" thread. I'm sure you will bring something new to the table, which has never been heard before....

Chomsky is widely touted as being at once as widely-read and thoroughly debunked as the Babble. His imminent demise should therefore be widely lamented and celebrated. But of course you've thoroughly misunderstood my remark. I don't actually expect Chumpsky's demise tomorrow, so my interest in being here tomorrow, such as it is, derives solely from an interest in further debunking the twat and infuriating his ear-fucked spawn.

Oh ***swoon***

Hmmm looks like beer o'clock again.

How maudlin. If you're as disinterested in my discourse as you pretend, then why go to the trouble of eliciting a response from me?

Your words belie your pretenses.

[Twiglet]

If you're as disinterested in my discourse as you pretend, then why go to the trouble of eliciting a response from me?

Well I never claimed to be disinterested, now did I?

I won't claim to be particularly curious about your arguments, because beyond about some Nebraska senator, you don't really seem to have any arguments. Forgive me if I missed them......

As for eliciting responses from you... it's up to you what you choose to respond to, you appear to need no encouragement from me to carry on anyway....

You should be thanking me, without someone to disagree with, you would be all alone with your . Maybe I just enjoy your e-company

[Toontown]

As for directing it against ideas and not people, I don't really see what the difference is.

Oh, another one who can't see the difference between playing the man and playing the ball. How tedious.

Looking forward to not seeing you again, Toon.

You can bet your bottom dollar the feeling is mutual. The only place I'd ever want to see you is across a poker table from me.

[Toontown]

If you're as disinterested in my discourse as you pretend, then why go to the trouble of eliciting a response from me?

Well I never claimed to be disinterested, now did I?

I won't claim to be particularly curious about your arguments, because beyond about some Nebraska senator, you don't really seem to have any arguments. Forgive me if I missed them......

As for eliciting responses from you... it's up to you what you choose to respond to, you appear to need no encouragement from me to carry on anyway....

You should be thanking me, without someone to disagree with, you would be all alone with your . Maybe I just enjoy your e-company

Please do not feel obligated on my account to post long, error-laden responses to my supposed non-arguments, as you've been doing. If you hadn't done so in the first place, then coito ergo sum wouldn't have been so annoyed at your indoctrinated ignorance as to take up the cudgel against you after my temporary banishment.

[Twiglet]

Please do not feel obligated on my account to post long, error-laden responses to my supposed non-arguments, as you've been doing.

The difference between my points and your "arguments" is that I back mine up with sources and references. I'm not actually arguing with you, tbh, I'm just pointing out where you're wrong. It seems pretty closely correlated with your proximity to a keyboard....

If you hadn't done so in the first place, then coito ergo sum wouldn't have been so annoyed at your indoctrinated ignorance as to take up the cudgel against you after my temporary banishment.

He didn't seem especially annoyed to me, he just disagrees with some of my politics, but there is a difference between disputed politics and points of law. Most of the things you have chosen to disagree about are points of law, easily looked up. Blindly continuing to disagree with facts (i.e. that the US has signed the Geneva convention, US generals have stated the convention protects US troops, or the issues about enemy combatants not being treated in accordance with the convention) is hardly an illustration of my ignorance.

If you wanted to be smart about your arguments, you would simply maintain the view that the Geneva convention doesn't matter, rather than trying to refute my political stance on it. You would argue, as others have before, that "might is right" - which is a point I disagree with, but I certainly can't refute it.

The trouble is you seem to want to win the argument on what you consistently think are my terms - i.e. moral authority - which lays YOU open to charges of hypocrisy. You'd be better off arguing that the US can do what it damn well wants and to hell with anyone trying to stop them.

The thing is, you seem to want to have that argument, but you can't stand being thought of as the bad guy.

Either own it, or disown it. Otherwise you just end up looking like a pussy who can't make his mind up.