You should, because you apparently don't know the difference between a couple of thousand dead in a morally questionable cause, and a couple of million dead in a morally inexcusable cause. Or between killing some to save many, as opposed to killing many in order to kill many more.
One day you'll find a way to exit that moral vacuum you inhabit. At least, sane people hope so. If you should manage to stumble out--on accident or on purpose--the rest of us stand ready to help you.
Pinochet=Saddam, the ultimate exercise in moral equivalency. What's next, Bush=Hitler? Oh, right, you were already there.
You should, because you apparently don't know the difference between a couple of thousand dead in a morally questionable cause, and a couple of million dead in a morally inexcusable cause.
Sure I do. What makes you think I don't? Because I mentioned Pinochet? Why would you think that I'm saying they're the same? Did I say they were the same? No. Did Rosemary ask for things to celebrate that were equal? No. Did anyone at all say they were equal crimes? No.
You've made a long trip in a pretty damn leaky canoe.
What's next, Bush=Hitler? Oh, right, you were already there.
Usually, I just think you have trouble figuring shit out, Dean. Other times I think you must have half a dozen imagined conversations going on at the same time with supposed enemies. I think it's the latter, because I have never, ever said that Bush = Hitler. Not once, not ever, not even close.
So you either imagined it, or are a cowardly and mean-spirited liar. Or you've been drinking.
Tim_the_Soldier (aka thread killer and nun thriller) (mail):
Uh, did I miss something? Why the uncalled for personal attacks? Dean, it's obvious that you backed the wrong horse (Bush and his administration's war "plan"), and you're willing to alienate anyone and everyone who thinks Bush made some major mistakes. No reasonable person believes that Bush=Hitler. No reasonable person believes that Saddam was a good man. No reasonable person believes that the world would be better with Saddam still in power. However, dude, this administration has failed in 8/10 areas after 9/11, and that failure was primarily due to gross incompetence and a flawed world view. Personally, I think Bush is probably a good guy, but if he wasn't born a Bush, he'd be the assistant manager of a Baskin Robins somewhere outside Crawford, TX as opposed to running the free world.
Sounds like someone needs some New Year's cheer and a hug. Hey, why don't you go and see Borat...it'll be a hoot.
"What makes you think I don't? Because I mentioned Pinochet?"
Personally, I wouldn’t much worry about someone who thinks they’ve found moral superiority in either Pinochet’s motives or his body count, or, for that matter, someone who taunts others about children who’s future he’s helped to ruin through his own stupidly misguided political advocacy.
I don't, Shep. I just figured that Dean should be called on his bullshit drive-by shootings. Notice that if can't ban someone from posting then he doesn't do much more than spit venom and flees?
"I just figured that Dean should be called on his bullshit drive-by shootings."
He should be. It's another rather obvious strategy to avoid arguments (and arguers) where he knows he'll lose. But I suspect that he also does it because he hopes others may mistake his self-importance for actual importance, so it can also help that charade to call him out.
I'll have to take your expert word on that.
One day you'll find a way to exit that moral vacuum you inhabit. At least, sane people hope so. If you should manage to stumble out--on accident or on purpose--the rest of us stand ready to help you.
Pinochet=Saddam, the ultimate exercise in moral equivalency. What's next, Bush=Hitler? Oh, right, you were already there.
Oh, right: you wouldn't know.
Sure I do. What makes you think I don't? Because I mentioned Pinochet? Why would you think that I'm saying they're the same? Did I say they were the same? No. Did Rosemary ask for things to celebrate that were equal? No. Did anyone at all say they were equal crimes? No.
You've made a long trip in a pretty damn leaky canoe.
Usually, I just think you have trouble figuring shit out, Dean. Other times I think you must have half a dozen imagined conversations going on at the same time with supposed enemies. I think it's the latter, because I have never, ever said that Bush = Hitler. Not once, not ever, not even close.
So you either imagined it, or are a cowardly and mean-spirited liar. Or you've been drinking.
Which is it?
Sounds like someone needs some New Year's cheer and a hug. Hey, why don't you go and see Borat...it'll be a hoot.
All I know for sure about 2007 is that it won't be different enough from 2006. This thread is a perfect example of that.
Personally, I wouldn’t much worry about someone who thinks they’ve found moral superiority in either Pinochet’s motives or his body count, or, for that matter, someone who taunts others about children who’s future he’s helped to ruin through his own stupidly misguided political advocacy.
Typical.
He should be. It's another rather obvious strategy to avoid arguments (and arguers) where he knows he'll lose. But I suspect that he also does it because he hopes others may mistake his self-importance for actual importance, so it can also help that charade to call him out.
He spits venom and fleas!