1,352 Forum Posts by "Commander-K25"
At 6/24/03 10:17 PM, TheShrike wrote: The goat wishes to be your friend. We even added a rope sso you can dominate him, ted.
AUGGGGHHHHHHH!!
Did you have to mention the rope!? The images in my mind just became many times more disturbing!
At 6/24/03 10:28 AM, FUNKbrs wrote: Think about it. What do two young men (well at least one) do all alone in a "sugar shack"? There's nothing wrong with it, but I thought things in Canada used more modern terminology these days.
You might have to relate things to goats to get your point across ;-)
At 6/23/03 11:36 PM, nailbomb wrote:
No guards. :)
20/20 hindsight.
It may have turned out that the guards fled or were not present, but the Coalition had no way of knowing this for certain.
At 6/23/03 10:58 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: Hey, I make maple syrup with one of my friends each year! (Damn fat bastard. Sits in the cabin drinking while I do the work....)
You just reinforced soooo many Canadian stereotypes.
At 6/23/03 10:58 PM, nailbomb wrote: We live in an age of docu-dramas and info-mercials. It's quite pathetic how some people will believe anything they see on TV or read in their government-approved textbook.
Yes, but remember that it works both ways.
At 6/23/03 11:19 PM, nailbomb wrote: She was captured and held as POW in a hospital? with no soldiers watching her?
No soldiers? I somehow doubt that she was completely unguarded.
There wasn't any, even though Lynch was supposed to be an innocent POW being held captive by the evil Iraqis. It does matter if you're a POW, they're going to keep you in a box or a jail or something besides a hospital.
A POW is a POW, no matter where you put them. Location does not magically change their status. She was captured by the Iraqi army in a time of war and therefore a POW.
The question that was supposed to be at hand here was "Were they justified in sending in soldiers to get her?"
The answer is yes, because they had no way of knowing what size the enemy force was. Even if there was none, sending in soldiers to a war zone is an understandable and wise precaution.
You seem to be trying to argue that because it was a hospital, that it had some special status where the realities of war didn't apply. That's just not true.
At 6/23/03 11:05 PM, nailbomb wrote:
So all the troops that came back home were also resuced?
You're being too literal. She was captured; They went in and got her back. Therefore, she was rescued. This should be a simple point to grasp.
It was a hospital, read the article I linked a few posts ago.
I know it was a hospital. I heard that the night it happened.
It doesn't matter what the building happened to be. What mattered was that it was in an unsecured zone in a war with no clear battle front. You don't wander into the middle of a potential combat area saying, "Well, it' a hospital so I'm sure there's no enemy around and I'm sure they'd never attack us."
If you want a Right Wing blog, read Turnabout. He discusses a bit of Catholicism, too, but read it for the politics.
The media's been blowing stuff out of proportion for years. This is nothing new, unfortunantely. It's not political, it's about pandering to the fears of the audience to gain ratings.
At 6/21/03 10:27 AM, nailbomb wrote: We most certainly did. Although there is no proof of a "rescue"
She's out of Iraq, therefore rescued.
I don't think the rescue was hyped that much. Yes, they sent in some soldiers to get her out, but who else were they supposed to send? This was a war zone and even though there may not have been clear intelligence saying that there were Iraqi soldiers in the area, one must always assume that the enemy is around in a war zone. Sending in soldiers was a proper precaution.
At 6/22/03 03:10 PM, JudgeMeHarshX wrote: Why, then, is it wrong for the working man and not the CEO?
Because the CEO owns the company. It is their property.
Why should he not be allowed to fly it? I don't have any strong feelings either way, but it's his choice. He could fly an Iraqi or North Korean flag for all I care.
At 6/20/03 01:26 AM, poxpower wrote: Wrestling is just funny, like a circus or something, it's just guys who train and stuff to put up a funny show for people ( some with lesser intelect I'll admit) to enjoy. But I don't like it anyways.
Yeah, pro wrestling is entertainment, not sport.
But, the alternative is real, olympic-style wrestling and that's just boring.
At 6/19/03 08:59 AM, D2KVirus wrote: Both Commander and Sween on my case?!? Damn, I didn't know Debate Stiflers went pack hunting...
Debate Stiflers?
So that's your accusation of the day?
At 6/17/03 10:49 AM, Lyddiechu wrote: hey commander, dont you ever wonder what europe would be like today if bismarck had remained in control of german politics and kaiser wilhelm hadnt fucked it all up by screwing up germany's alliances and allowing austria-hungary to drag it into WWI??? maybe there wouldnt have ever been a 3rd reich (that wouldnt have helped my european ancestors, stalin killed all of them, but that wasnt genocide since stalin killed everyone regardless of race!!)
This is a bit off-topic as far as the actual thread goes, but anyway:
I don't really think Bismarck could have done that much even if he didn't resign. He was in his eighties at the time and I believe he died only a few years afterwards. I think Wilhelm could have done better by maintaining relations with Russia and thus avoiding a two-front war, or WWI at all. He and Czar Nicholas II were, after all, cousins.
If WWI had been avoided, it would all be different, no WWII, no Holocaust, no Cold War, no communist revolutions, no Iron Curtain, no arms race.
Of course, these things may very well have been replaced with similar things but just in different circumstances.
BTW, I set up my own forum with a board for these sort of topics. Go to http://commanderk25.proboards19.com if you're interested.
At 6/19/03 09:24 AM, D2KVirus wrote: usual stuff
Thanks for listening....
At 6/18/03 07:30 PM, alejandro1 wrote: Sad thing is we have no way of telling when someones in a coma if he/she will recover, unless of course they show a sign of life, then of course we wouldn't kill them.
Yes, but let's argue the topic, not the metaphor.
But I don't quite consider a fetus a 'coma patient' because they haven't developed yet; they could still die when inside the mother.
And you could be killed by a meteor while walking outside. Anything could happen, but shouldn't they be givern the benefit of the doubt. Most fetuses don't die and the infant mortality rate is very low.
At 6/18/03 07:10 PM, torq wrote: So this kind of God solves one problem: where did matter come from? God did it. Now the only problem is figuring out what caused God to exist.
Then you're talking about things beyond the realms of physics, science and even reality. We can't even begin to fathom the possibilites or pretend to be able to know.
At 6/18/03 07:08 PM, Rydia_Lockheart wrote: Women are going to continue having abortions whether or not they are legal. In that case, they should have the option to have them done safely by professionals.
If women are going to run to "back-alley abortionists" as you fear, then why was the death toll from illegal abortions, before it was legalized, only 200-300 deaths per year?
In 1972, a year before Roe v. Wade, there were only 39 maternal deaths from abortion. This is a far cry from the figures of thousands that are usually stated in the pro-choice literature.
Most illegal abortions before legalization were done by physicians, not the feared "back-alley butcher" or "coathanger" that pro-choice advocates like to conjure up the images of.
"....Second, and even more important, the conference [on abortion sponsored by Planned Parenthood] estimated that 90 percent of all illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians...."
-Dr. Mary S. Calderone, former director of Planned Parenthood
At 6/18/03 06:59 PM, nailbomb wrote: Exactly, at early stages it's only an organism, not a person.
You're misinterpreting my use of organism. People are organisms, and a fetus is a person, just not fully developed yet.
So killing a virus that you caught from someone else would be an abortion?
That's a completely invalid comparison. A virus you caught from somebody else is an entirely different matter than what we're talking about.
There is a difference between a virus and human life, is there not? A virus is not human, it is a parastie completely unrelated to the issue of abortion.
We could discuss the morality of killing flies as well, but that wouldn't make it relevant.
If it doesn't have a pulse or any brain activity it can't even be considered human.
Says who? You?
Do brain activity and pulse start magically at birth? No, they don't.
Answer me this, would you get an abortion if you were raped and the rapist had impregnated you?
I do recognize that there are some special circumstances and in some cases it might be acceptable.
At 6/18/03 12:47 PM, AmericanBADASS wrote: All it is, is some people looking for a chance to act like animals, injure, kill, steal, and cause mayhem.
Complete and utter assholes.
True. It's like the Rodney King riots, "A black man was killed and we live in the ghetto so let's....uh....BURN AND LOOT THE GHETTO!"
At 6/18/03 06:54 PM, alejandro1 wrote: Sometimes we do. When someone has experienced a large amount of head trauma and would be extremely crippled if they woke up from the coma, then we might consider letting the person die. Or if the insurance ran out and the person showed no response to waking up from the coma, then we might let the person die too.
But not when we know that they will recover. The fetus will develop into a sentient human child, so they are like a coma patient that, although brain dead at the moment, will recover. It's just a metaphor.
At 6/18/03 10:56 AM, D2KVirus wrote: Bill Hicks, summing up your "act" perfectly.
I forgot: Your opinion is the only one that matters, right?
Nice argument anyway, a unrelated passage from a second-rate comedian.
Why does this bug me? Is it because I don't agree? No, I will disagree with you and you can disagree with me, but what I hate is hypocrisy.
You denounce me for even using the words "anti-american" or "anti-christian", no matter what the context, yet you say nothing when some idiot makes a whining, unsupported rant that blames everything on Christians and the right for no particular reason other than that he hates them. Do you denounce him for his bigotry or blindness to any sort of other side? No, you continue to attack me for any little thing.
At 6/18/03 10:58 AM, D2KVirus wrote: Tick, tock, tick, tock, tick, tock...so, so predictible, one and all.
Before you criticize, I would look at yourself.
At 6/18/03 04:41 PM, Slizor wrote: The bombs were dropped on the cities that had the least damage done to them, thus the full extent of the power of an atomic weapon could be shown. America had already been bombing cities vital for the war effort, and these cities would have been bombed if they were vital for the war effort.
I don't know where you're pulling these assertions from. Hiroshima and Nagasaki had not been left untouched before the atomic bombs were dropped and we certainly had not been able to suppress Japanese industry beforehand, despite the conventional bombing, because Japan was still in wartime production.
At 6/18/03 01:51 AM, alejandro1 wrote: And you think human babies are intelligent beings, let alone fetuses? Scientists have proven that chimp newborns are truly smarter than human newborns. Drop a human baby and a chimp baby in the woods; which one would survive?
It's what it will develop into. We don't kill patients in comas simply because their brains are inactive at the moment, do we?
At 6/18/03 01:34 AM, alejandro1 wrote: If you think killing is wrong, I could say you're hypocritical because I can guarantee you've killed something before you've eaten it, or had someone else kill it for you (this is just an assumption, you could eat things while they are still alive, I wouldn't know).
This is not an argument against all killing. I am not a vegeterian because animals are not intelligent beings.
I think it's great that women have the choice for abortion, but you have to remember: just cause the choice is there doesn't mean that everyone will have an abortion. When I was discussing this topic with my girlfriend, she was glad that our society is pro-choice, but she said that she could never go through with an abortion if the oppertunity came up.
Yes, and you should be glad that she's sensible. However, it often gives a feeling of a free license to many that diminishes the sense of consequences from their actions. Some women don't care if they get pregnant because they can just go to a clinic and have it killed, and cheaply too.
At 6/15/03 03:14 AM, mikehrt wrote: I find it hard to beleive that bush got a 1200 on his SAT. It's more likely that they outlawed bush bashing than that he scored that high.
Or, it smore likely that you're too stubborn to admit that he might not be dumb as you've been told to believe.
At 6/17/03 07:03 PM, mwazzap wrote: I blame gullible christians...
No seriously. WTF was the topic started smokin. Here's what I think, we already fucked up their country, their environment (or what they had of it), their social structure, and their government (what they had of it)... lets leave em with their dignity. Lets not be terrorists, playing command and conquer. And lets not use their pollutent oil fields for ourselves.
We ARE NOT TO AMERICANIZE OTHER COUNTRIES.
What the hell was that UN thing about?
I dunno I forget, I was to busy bullying them and pillaging other countries in the name of stupidity and gullibility.
Leave them alone. BAD! BAD! America. Stop that. NOT your country! Land of the free my ass. You stupid shit. Id like to knock your brain in. Damn right I'm beligerent, what kinda of <republican> diea was this.
*growl*
Calm down and you might make a coherent argument.
I'm not even going to respond to the rest of this drivel because all you seem to know how to do is blame Christians and Republicans and then have the audacity, the sheer hypocrisy, the ABSOLUTE ARROGANCE to call other people brainwashed when what you spout makes you nothing more than a member of the Blame America/Blame Religion cult.
Please come back when you have something meaningful to say.
