It's Occupation, Not War

2

Comments

  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I'll let other people make up their minds about that.

    All I'l say is, how about you take a look at what I was responding to?

    (And how many people on the M.T are of the opinion that you are one and the same person as GouchoB?)

    Serioulsy, Jlew once admitted that he uses various usernames on the board...Jlew gets banned...you appear for the first time on the M.T almost immediately afterwards and take off where he left off in the same tone, and on the same subjects...then GouchoB appears and starts saying all the things that we know you were aching to say. Hmm, all seems just a little bit too suspicious if you ask me.

    seriosuly, what is your hard on for this jlew guy? get over it.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I get it now. you are allowed to insult people and not get banned because you are the mods little lacky. makes sense now.

    Anyone here could be mistaken for thinking that you/GouchoB/Jlew or whoever, are simply here to bait me and try to goad me into getting banned.
    I mean, when all is considered, you haven't contributed anything constructive to any thread, you've done nothing but throw personal insults around the M.T, and now you're pretending to be offended at my calling you out.

    Anyone else on the board care to comment?
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Anyone here could be mistaken for thinking that you/GouchoB/Jlew or whoever, are simply here to bait me and try to goad me into getting banned.
    I mean, when all is considered, you haven't contributed anything constructive to any of thread.,
    I am involved in many discussions. look around
    Byrnzie wrote:
    you've done nothing but throw personal insults around the M.T,
    I do nothing more then you do.
    Byrnzie wrote:
    and now you're pretending to be offended at my calling you out.
    offended? calling me out? you are doing neither.
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Anyone else on the board care to comment?

    ah thats it. cry out to your fellow board buddies and the mods. you are somethin else.
  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I am involved in many discussions. look around

    Actually, I did look around. You rarely address the points other people make, you completely twist people's words and put words into their mouths.

    Well, I guess I'm off celebrating the humane nature of the nazis again. See you later.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Collin wrote:
    Actually, I did look around. You rarely address the points other people make, you completely twist people's words and put words into their mouths.

    Well, I guess I'm off celebrating the humane nature of the nazis again. See you later.

    I actually address them with a counter point (you know, something we like to call debate) and people like you and the other guy get all teary eyed and start calling for the mods to take action.
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I actually address them with a counter point (you know, something we like to call debate) and people like you and the other guy get all teary eyed and start calling for the mods to take action.
    no. don't forget your trademark one liner is 'enjoy your ban'. usually said after you try and provoke someone into an altercation of some sort and they retaliate.

    just look at your reply to my queston where i was actually looking for help/guidance in the 'ignore' thread. you offered nothing but sarcasm.
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    no. don't forget your trademark one liner is 'enjoy your ban'. usually said after you try and provoke someone into an altercation of some sort and they retaliate.

    just look at your reply to my queston where i was actually looking for help/guidance in the 'ignore' thread. you offered nothing but sarcasm.

    I like to debate issues. this isnt the right forum to ask such stupid questions about the ignore feature. and plus, I gave you sound advice. I suggest you follow it.
  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I actually address them with a counter point (you know, something we like to call debate) and people like you and the other guy get all teary eyed and start calling for the mods to take action.

    How exactly did you answer my question in that other thread when you said:

    "so you and your buddy roland want to celebrate that fact that the nazis were humans too? great, have a good time."

    That's right, you didn't. That is not a "counter point" but it's a low insult, something which is not called debate.

    Since I started posting here I have never reported anything to the mods.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • AnonAnon Posts: 11,175
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I like to debate issues. this isnt the right forum to ask such stupid questions about the ignore feature. and plus, I gave you sound advice. I suggest you follow it.
    i did use the wrong forum and i apologize for that. i can't do anything about that now, hopefully the mods will move it. i'm sorry YOU consider it 'such a stupid question', clearly i didn't, or i would not have asked it. seriously, who the fuck do you think you are?
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Pj_Gurl wrote:
    i did use the wrong forum and i apologize for that. i can't do anything about that now, hopefully the mods will move it. i'm sorry YOU consider it 'such a stupid question', clearly i didn't, or i would not have asked it. seriously, who the fuck do you think you are?

    apology accepted.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I actually address them with a counter point (you know, something we like to call debate) and people like you and the other guy get all teary eyed and start calling for the mods to take action.

    I'm just gonna bide my time until you're gone. With any luck it'll be for good this time.
    I doubt I'll have to wait long.
    Perhaps then people can post, discuss, and debate on the M.T again without having to put up with anymore of the juvenile horseshit you and your alter ego have been throwing around here lately.
  • lazymoon13lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I'm just gonna bide my time until you're gone. With any luck it'll be for good this time.
    I doubt I'll have to wait long.
    Perhaps then people can post, discuss, and debate on the M.T again without having to put up with anymore of the juvenile horseshit you and your alter ego have been throwing around here lately.

    again with the high road. why is it ok for you to insult people?
  • JordyWordyJordyWordy Posts: 2,261
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    again with the high road. why is it ok for you to insult people?


    why is ok for you to insult people?
  • spiral outspiral out Posts: 1,052
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I am involved in many discussions. look around

    I do nothing more then you do.

    offended? calling me out? you are doing neither.

    ah thats it. cry out to your fellow board buddies and the mods. you are somethin else.

    It is blatantly obvious that you are jlew and GouchoB.
    Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!

    The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
  • lazymoon13 wrote:
    I actually address them with a counter point (you know, something we like to call debate) and people like you and the other guy get all teary eyed and start calling for the mods to take action.

    You seem to toss about insults freely, but can't handle the slightest hint of one without derailing threads.

    You also seem to like derailing threads as soon as they are posted if you disagree with them by personally insulting the OP.

    Why is that?
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • GauchoBGauchoB Posts: 224
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I'll let other people make up their minds about that.

    All I'l say is, how about you take a look at what I was responding to?

    (And how many people on the M.T are of the opinion that you are one and the same person as GouchoB?)

    Serioulsy, Jlew once admitted that he uses various usernames on the board...Jlew gets banned...you appear for the first time on the M.T almost immediately afterwards and take off where he left off in the same tone, and on the same subjects...then GouchoB appears and starts saying all the things that we know you were aching to say. Hmm, all seems just a little bit too suspicious if you ask me.


    WTF is with that? And WTF is with you having a problem because there are maybe one or two people on here who don't buy into your propaganda blitz? Your only real response is to try to bully people into thinking you will cry to your Mommy if someone takes you on. Maybe that worked in the sandbox and maybe it will work here but im sure in the real world you probably would just get your ass kicked.
  • GauchoBGauchoB Posts: 224
    Byrnzie wrote:
    I'll let other people make up their minds about that.

    All I'l say is, how about you take a look at what I was responding to?

    (And how many people on the M.T are of the opinion that you are one and the same person as GouchoB?)

    Serioulsy, Jlew once admitted that he uses various usernames on the board...Jlew gets banned...you appear for the first time on the M.T almost immediately afterwards and take off where he left off in the same tone, and on the same subjects...then GouchoB appears and starts saying all the things that we know you were aching to say. Hmm, all seems just a little bit too suspicious if you ask me.

    Now I am lazymoon AND Jlew? If that's what your MT friends think so be it. Who cares
  • GauchoBGauchoB Posts: 224
    spiral out wrote:
    It is blatantly obvious that you are jlew and GouchoB.


    It's GauchoB and I am from Santa Barbara, California. Id sure appreciate it if you people stop with your baseless accusations.
  • Sick people.... sick world....
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • GauchoBGauchoB Posts: 224
    Sick people.... sick world....

    We actually agree on something
  • GauchoB wrote:
    We actually agree on something


    There's much easier ways of proving a point my friend...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • GauchoBGauchoB Posts: 224
    There's much easier ways of proving a point my friend...

    Dont patronize me. We ain't friends. Were words on a web site.
  • JordyWordyJordyWordy Posts: 2,261
    GauchoB wrote:
    Dont patronize me. We ain't friends. Were words on a web site.

    I think you'll find it's pronounced "Pah-tronize"
  • GauchoB wrote:
    Dont patronize me. We ain't friends. Were words on a web site.


    you scary freak bastidge....


    hehe
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • GauchoB wrote:
    For all your self serving political views, just like the person who started the Anti Obama thread. Just put all your opinions in one place on the board to save space. thanks

    Um... people do put their opinions in one place on the board. It's called The Moving Train. Maybe you've heard of it?
    Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    GauchoB wrote:
    but im sure in the real world you probably would just get your ass kicked.

    Hopefully one day you'll get the opportunity to find out.
  • GauchoBGauchoB Posts: 224
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Hopefully one day you'll get the opportunity to find out.


    What a tough guy. Threats from behind a keyboard. I think if you saw me in person you would.....run.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    GauchoB wrote:
    I think if you saw me in person you would.....run.

    You can't be that ugly, surely? :confused:
  • ClariceClarice Posts: 256
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Most people don't realize that the U.S invaded South Vietnam. The wording may baffle some people. But the U.S invaded South Vietnam.

    Invasion Newspeak: U.S. & USSR
    Noam Chomsky
    FAIR, December, 1989
    http://www.chomsky.info/articles/198912--.htm

    'Consider the following facts. In 1962, the United States attacked South Vietnam. In that year, President John F. Kennedy sent the U.S. Air Force to attack rural South Vietnam, where more than 80 percent of the population lived. This was part of a program intended to drive several million people into concentration camps (called "strategic hamlets") where they would be surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards. This would "protect" these people from the guerrillas whom, we conceded, they were largely supporting.

    The direct U.S. attack against South Vietnam followed our support for the French attempt to reconquer their former colony, our disruption of the 1954 "peace process," and a terrorist war against the South Vietnamese population. This terror had already left some 75,000 dead while evoking domestic resistance, supported from the northern half of the country after 1959, that threatened to bring down the regime that the U.S. had established. In the following years, the U.S. continued to resist every attempt at peaceful settlement, and in 1964 began to plan the ground invasion of South Vietnam. The land assault took place in early 1965, accompanied by the bombing of North Vietnam and an intensification of the bombing of the south, at triple the level of the more publicized bombing of the north. The U.S. also extended the war to Laos and Cambodia.

    The U.S. protested that it was invited in, but as the Economist recognized in the case of Afghanistan (never in the case of Vietnam), "an invader is an invader unless invited in by a government with some claim to legitimacy," and outside the world of newspeak, the client regime established by the U.S. had no more legitimacy than the Afghan regime established by the USSR. Nor did the U.S. regard this government as having any legitimacy; in fact, it was regularly overthrown and replaced when its leaders appeared to be insufficiently enthusiastic about U.S. plans to escalate the terror. Throughout the war, the U.S. openly recognized that a political settlement was impossible, for the simple reason that the "enemy" would win handily in a political competition -- which the U.S. therefore deemed unacceptable.

    For the past 25 years I have been searching to find some reference in mainstream journalism or scholarship to a U.S. invasion of South Vietnam, or U.S. aggression in Indochina -- without success. Instead I find a U.S. defense of South Vietnam against terrorists supported from outside (namely, from Vietnam), a defense that was unwise, the doves maintain'.

    Tks for sharing.
  • Byrnzie wrote:
    You can't be that ugly, surely? :confused:


    nobody is that ugly.... hehe
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
Sign In or Register to comment.