RATM speaks the truth in Election 2008

evenflow82

Rage's politics are completely laughable.

You can get the same anarchistic opinions from a bum on the corner

my2hands

evenflow82 wrote:

I'd like for them to name one politician who they support instead of bitching about everyone.

i would like that too...

MLC2006

radiohead33 wrote:

That there is a generation of young black and latino brothers and sisters that are gonna force everyone in this country to make a decision very soon about what side they're going to stand on. And they're a generation of kids who don't give a fuck about national politics. They care about bread. They care about water. They care about housing and they care about justice. And they ain't gonna fucking stand for any of that shit. They're just gonna take it.

"This new generation of blacks and latinos *indecipherable* are gonna make this country an offer it can't refuse. So wake up!

where is this new generation of blacks and latinos?? the young blacks and latinos I see are mostly concerned with creating out-of-wedlock babies, killing each other in the street, and dropping out of school. is there a secret society of blacks and latinos hiding in the batcave with Batman?

fanch75

radiohead33 wrote:

You've got another thing coming

GREAT song by the mighty Judas Priest!

godpt3

MrBrian wrote:

and?...It needs help, something new has to come around. perhaps a trillion dollars (like the trillion spent on the iraq war) could have started a really great thing if it was used in america to help Americans.

Show me one point in history... ever, where simply throwing money at a problem has solved anything.

godpt3

radiohead33 wrote:

"Now we know brother Obama. We know brother Obama. But I tell you what, if he comes to power come November and he doesn't start pulling troops out of Afghanistan, I know a lot of people who are gonna stand up and burn down every office of every Senate.

I imagine these are the very same people currently sitting on their couch, too stoned to get up and change the channel.

I bet you buy your Che shirts at Target

fuck

America has 4,000 people killed in a tragedy, but responds - with the full backing of most citizens in the U.S. - by killing hundreds of thousands of Afghanis.

If a country decided to kill hundreds of thousands of Americans, what the fuck would we do then? Nuke that country and kill millions of civilians?

cause MrBrian knows how the ratio system works.

slightofjeff

Afghanistan was completely justified. Zach's heart is in the right place, but he's kind of a dumb shit.

cincybearcat

slightofjeff wrote:

Afghanistan was completely justified. Zach's heart is in the right place, but he's kind of a dumb shit.

Ya think?

fuck

slightofjeff wrote:

Afghanistan was completely justified. Zach's heart is in the right place, but he's kind of a dumb shit.

apparently the killing of hundreds of thousands of people is justified? displacing many thousands of people from their homes is justified?

slightofjeff

_outlaw wrote:

apparently the killing of hundreds of thousands of people is justified? displacing many thousands of people from their homes is justified?

When a country essentially attacks you, retaliation is justified.

Was WWII justified?

Commy

Zach is the man, and him along with a very good majority of this country are fucking sick of militant capitalists spreading their culture with violence.

violence seems to be a language they understand and if that's what it takes for them to listen, fuck it, maybe that's the language we will use.

fuck

slightofjeff wrote:

When a country essentially attacks you, retaliation is justified.

retaliation? is that what you call deliberately attacking hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent civilians?

and you know damn well it's not as simple as another country attacking us; this was a much bigger issue in general, and there were much better ways to deal with it then killing more people. if that's what gets you off though, I guess it's fine. after all, what's another abdul dead, right?

cincybearcat

_outlaw wrote:

this was a much bigger issue in general, and there were much better ways to deal with it then killing more people.

What ya thinkin'?

slightofjeff

_outlaw wrote:

retaliation? is that what you call deliberately attacking hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent civilians?

and you know damn well it's not as simple as another country attacking us; this was a much bigger issue in general, and there were much better ways to deal with it then killing more people. if that's what gets you off though, I guess it's fine. after all, what's another abdul dead, right?

You're kind of being offensive now, and I did nothing to deserve it.

A country attacks you, it's your right -- and, possibly, your obligation -- to strike back. I guarantee without the offensive in Afghanistan, we would have had another terrorist attack in this country within the last seven years.

Innocent civilians die in war. It's terrible. But it happens. I mentioned WWII in my other post, and here's one difference between Japan and Afghanistan: In Japan, the US went OUT OF ITS WAY to kill innocent civilians. That was the point of the A-Bombs. In afghanistan, innocent civilians have died, but the U.S. has gone out of its way -- at times at the peril of its own military personnel -- to avoid collateral damage.

It can't be completely avoided, and that sucks, but it can be minimized. I don't believe at any point in the Afghan campaign anyone has said, "Let's go blow up a wedding full of completely innocent people! Yee hah!"

But back to justification: If Afghanistan was unjustified, then every war in the history of the world has been unjustified.

If you want to argue that all war is unjustified, fine. That's a viewpoint you're allowed to have. But if that's indeed your belief, there's no sense in us even discussing this further. We're operating in two separate universes.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Commy wrote:

Zach is the man, and him along with a very good majority of this country are fucking sick of militant capitalists spreading their culture with violence.

violence seems to be a language they understand and if that's what it takes for them to listen, fuck it, maybe that's the language we will use.

It does work like that, but it also kicks everything up a notch at the same time, and that has it's own consequences for corruption within itself. Once the damage is done in a relationship, it never really quite gets back to the way it used to be without a lot of reparations....it's almost exponential but favoring the shit side.

Dual edged sword. I prefer the route that somehow neutralizes the situation sans genocide...

searchlightsoul

MrBrian wrote:

Yep, no more religions. No more war right?

Pretty much.

searchlightsoul

slightofjeff wrote:

When a country essentially attacks you, retaliation is justified.

Was WWII justified?

You just called Zach a dumb shit but then you went on to equate militarised 1940's Japan with Afghanistan. Hmmmmm...

Maybe its just me, but there might be a few scholars who would disagree with that comparsion.

BTW how did a band of terrorists suddenly amplify to country status?

TDMize15

slightofjeff wrote:

You're kind of being offensive now, and I did nothing to deserve it.

A country attacks you, it's your right -- and, possibly, your obligation -- to strike back. I guarantee without the offensive in Afghanistan, we would have had another terrorist attack in this country within the last seven years.

Innocent civilians die in war. It's terrible. But it happens. I mentioned WWII in my other post, and here's one difference between Japan and Afghanistan: In Japan, the US went OUT OF ITS WAY to kill innocent civilians. That was the point of the A-Bombs. In afghanistan, innocent civilians have died, but the U.S. has gone out of its way -- at times at the peril of its own military personnel -- to avoid collateral damage.

It can't be completely avoided, and that sucks, but it can be minimized. I don't believe at any point in the Afghan campaign anyone has said, "Let's go blow up a wedding full of completely innocent people! Yee hah!"

But back to justification: If Afghanistan was unjustified, then every war in the history of the world has been unjustified.

If you want to argue that all war is unjustified, fine. That's a viewpoint you're allowed to have. But if that's indeed your belief, there's no sense in us even discussing this further. We're operating in two separate universes.

I missed when "Afghanistan" attacked the U.S.?

kenny olav

honestly, it's rants like these that make me realize why I'm not such a big RATM fan anymore. i mean, burn down every office in Senate? #1 it's insane to even presume that could happen just because Obama won't pull troops out of Afghanistan. no one is going to fucking do that. honestly, i understand the rage, but the rage is retarded. piss poor, zack.