You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, <a href="/profile.php?mode=register">join our community today</a>!
Post subject: DHS: Concerns about a re-emergence of right wing extremists
Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2009 9:18 pm
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:06 pm Posts: 240
Created as a tool for tracking - and sometimes harassing - foreign nationals, the department of homeland security now, in an amusing twist, ventures inward and sets its eyes on our own homegrown batch of nutcases:
The government is concerned about the possibility of right-wing extremists mobilizing away from political activity again - now that the Rumsfeld warcrimes' gravy train went a bit off-track, and perhaps also because mercenary armies are becoming a tad more accountable by local/international laws, thus making paid foreigner-shooting vacations slightly less scenic - and moving back into violence ala 1995 - Oklahoma city bombing.
I guess DHS is not a complete "government-expansion" waste of resources in this case at least ;) Irony... at least these nuts are lucky that Guantanamo is getting shut down.
Let's see if I get this right.
Extremist, religious fruitcakes, armed and trained terrorists that have blown up US buildings in the past -as long as they wave a stars and stripes should be called "political rivals." and be left alone, not even investigated even though they live in your own country and have committed atrocities in the past.
But if they live in caves at the other side of the planet, it warrants invading sovereign nations and spending trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of human lives, at least if the flag they wave is a star and crescent?
Let's see if I get this right. Extremist, religious fruitcakes, armed and trained terrorists that have blown up US buildings in the past -as long as they wave a stars and stripes should be called "political rivals." and be left alone, not even investigated even though they live in your own country and have committed atrocities in the past.
You just identified Iraqi war veterans as "Extremist, religious fruitcakes, armed and trained terrorists that have blown up US buildings in the past". If you want to talk about nuts, you will get a close up view in the mirror.
Quote:
But if they live in caves at the other side of the planet, it warrants invading sovereign nations and spending trillions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of human lives, at least if the flag they wave is a star and crescent?
Um, no. But preempting attacks on innocents does warrant invading terrorist islamo-fascist states.
You just identified Iraqi war veterans as "Extremist, religious fruitcakes, armed and trained terrorists that have blown up US buildings in the past". If you want to talk about nuts, you will get a close up view in the mirror.
I did not. What I implied and what is implied by the department of homeland security is that you'll find such fruitcakes among veterans. It doesn't require a leap of faith to imagine that.
Quote:
Um, no. But preempting attacks on innocents does warrant invading terrorist islamo-fascist states.
But at the same time, preempting such attacks doesn't even warrant investigation of domestic terrorist groups ? Besides, invading and occupying sovereign nations isn't likely to prevent such attacks. Its much more likely to cause them. Then again, you don't count the 1M dead and 1.5M seriously injured Iraqi or Afghan civilians as innocent, since they wave the wrong flag. Out of curiosity though, when you say "innocents", does that include US military in Iraq or Afghanistan ?
But at the same time, preempting such attacks doesn't even warrant investigation of domestic terrorist groups ?
The first person they should watch is one of Obama's close political friends, Bill Ayers. You know, the Bill Ayers that was convicted for bombing the Pentagon. The unrepentant terrorist that said he wished he set off more bombs. The FBI most wanted list has more environmentalists on it than anything else. No surprise there. Maybe for you that is a surprise however.
Quote:
Besides, invading and occupying sovereign nations isn't likely to prevent such attacks. Its much more likely to cause them.
The US has not had a single terrorist attack since 911. Can you discredit yourself any more?
Quote:
Then again, you don't count the 1M dead and 1.5M seriously injured Iraqi or Afghan civilians as innocent
No, I don't. Mainly because there weren't a million dead.
Quote:
Out of curiosity though, when you say "innocents", does that include US military in Iraq or Afghanistan ?
US military deaths are near peacetime levels.
Ronald Reagan (1981-1988) . . .17,191
G.H.W. Bush (1989-1992) . . . . 6,223
Bill Clinton (1993-2000) . . . .7,500
G. W. Bush (2001-2007) . . . . .9,690
20 yr avg. (1981 - 2000) . . . .1,546 / year
G. W. Bush avg. (2001 - 2007) . 1,384 / year
Iraq or Afghanistan civilian deaths were already through the roof. Over 400,000 people found in mass graves in Iraq. No need to mention what the Taliban did to Afghani's.
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html
What you should be counting are the dead and injured, since the results for the families of maimed soldiers can be worse than for the families of the dead. But the counting does not stops there in our modern wars, since you should also include all the uninjured people who end up filing for disability few years after the war itself has ended, due to exposure to agent orange, depleted uranium, whatever.
Iraqis, serbs, bosnians, palestinians and citizens from a few different african countries already show symptoms of "gulf war syndrome" after DU munitions were used in their countries. Vietnamese have more birth anormalities due to all the dioxins used on them during the war, and many american soldiers died of cancer and other problems shortly after the war. One third of the soldiers who went to the first gulf war had already died, filed for disability or other problems a decade later, but all this stuff seems not to get in the statistics.
You do know that many of those deaths (and many more that Tony Blair seems to be ignoring) are results of the daily bombings and severe economic sanctions imposed by the US and UK from 1991 to 2003, and that killed a million people, right?
Last edited by rcf on Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You can keep posting that chart 'noid, ignoring the mercenaries and mostly, the injured. 360.000 veterans with brain damage, 800.0000 that have been discharged and eligible for VA care, about half the total number of soldiers that served there. 1000 suicide attempts per month.. I still don't know if you consider those innocent victims or not though ?
As for the afghan and iraqi cilivlan casualty number, you are still saying its 10.000, right? Or was it 100.000 ? Or does it even matter to you ? Probably not.
Quote:
The US has not had a single terrorist attack since 911. Can you discredit yourself any more
You do know that many of those deaths (and many more that Tony Blair seems to be ignoring) are results of the daily bombings and severe economic sanctions imposed by the US and UK from 1991 to 2003, and that killed a million people, right?
Whats more is that its ironic those estimates come from the WHO. When that same WHO posts estimates of civilian deaths since the invasion, using the same methodology, then paranoid claims them to be bogus.
Then again, what does he care. Like Allbright said, half a million dead Iraqi children is a price worth paying.. I dont quite seem to remember what their death achieved though.
You do know that many of those deaths (and many more that Tony Blair seems to be ignoring) are results of the daily bombings and severe economic sanctions imposed by the US and UK from 1991 to 2003, and that killed a million people, right?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
