soundingboard on November 9, 2007 at 3:24 AM
Warranted?
Wake Island.

jdkchem on November 9, 2007 at 9:08 AM

And…

Nanking.

Pearl Harbor.

Battan.

Unit 731.

Etc. etc.
The “?” was a rhetorical device.

soundingboard on November 9, 2007 at 3:24 AM

Warranted?

Wake Island.

d3a4c8229ae5…

The only vindictive carpet bombing I can think of during that war was of Dresden. That was British RAF anyways, not us…

mojowire on November 6, 2007 at 11:05 AM

Well, America hit Tokyo pretty hard with incendiaries, and I’ll bet there were a few vindictive mutterings from flight crews to the effect of; That’ll teach you people to live in paper houses”.

Warranted?

rockhauler on November 9, 2007 at 1:20 AM

You’re too kind!

Following the constitution and taking care of Americans before we give our money away overseas, how much thinking is involved in that?

muyoso on November 7, 2007 at 4:01 PM

ROFLMAO Exactly the point, ‘how much thinking is involved in that’.

Naivet’e thy name is muyoso.

muyoso on November 7, 2007 at 3:59 PM

Interviews and speeches are nothing more then talk. Saying and doing are two different animals. Thanks for proving my point about the paultards. When faced with anything that runs counter to their beliefs they replay the sound bite and call the non-believers ignorant. Naturally had I really “listened” I would be singing the praises of the messiah. No, my unwillingness to “listen” only proves that I an one of the ignorant sheeple who cannot think for themselves. What makes this humorously pathetic is the paul-monkeys fail to see the irony in their cult like response.

What the Paultards have done to the Internet is the same thing spam did to email.

The little fireants don’t understand overkill.

Connie on November 8, 2007 at 1:56 AM

What specifically do you dislike about Ron Paul, Connie? Is it his stance on debt and taxes, border security and immigration reform, home schooling, social security, emminent domain and personal property rights, abortion, or is it his views on the war in Iraq and our foreign policy? Certainly, as a conservative, you must like his honesty and belief in a smaller, less obtrusive government. I suspect, like most people, you don’t like his foreign policy views and the fact that we are fighting a war in Iraq. Good issues to disagree with Paul, as they are controversial and much debated issues. Can you please tell me what your understanding is of why we attacked Iraq and why we are fighting a war there? Did we not once support Saddam in his fighting a war only to turn around and have to fight him twice? Can you tell me honestly that our support for Israel does not ignite a hatred for us around the Muslim world (1 billion + Muslims in the world)?

I am not saying that I agree with Ron Paul and all of his issues, just like you most likely cannot say that your agree with John Rudy Thompson Romney’s every issue. Does that make you a Rutard or a Fredbot? I would say probably not. Why do you feel the need to jump in head first with a Paultard comment? I would simply point you to a one doriangrey on this site to give you a great example of an idiot. He will support whatever Republican that gets the nomination (except for Paul) but yet feels the need to try to impress everyone with his ‘genius.’ I will freely admit that there are some who support Paul who I wouldn’t want to call a friend or associate, but all candidates have that.
You want to debate the merits and demerits of Ron Paul, let’s do it. You want to hurl insults and sound clever, go to the DKos or HuffPo.

The little fireants don’t understand overkill.

King of the Britons on November 6, 2007 at 8:55 AM

I reached my limit years ago.

Even the conservatives seek safety and solutions from the government. I can’t distinguish them from the left most of the time.

King of the Britons on November 7, 2007 at 6:54 AM

I thought our discourse was pretty civil. But I still reserve my right to mock Paul’s foreign policy for being ridiculous and naive. We’re cool just as long as you’re not a truther and you stick to your word regarding the general election (even if Paul runs as a 3rd candidate for some reason).

Take it easy dude.

I would be willing to bargain that a majority of the people listening to Paul in the debates AGREE with his positions. You might contend that Paul isnt a thinker, maybe he isnt. His viewpoints are so common sense that it surely wouldnt take a thinker to formulate them. Following the constitution and taking care of Americans before we give our money away overseas, how much thinking is involved in that?

It doesnt when he specifically mentions that he supports trade in several of his interviews and speeches. But if you are too ignorant, which is obvious by reading your grammatical abortion of a post, to simply read up on him to get a REAL understanding about where he stands on issues, then I guess you will have to remain in the assumption that you agree with none of his viewpoints.

Hows that?

saiga on November 7, 2007 at 3:38 PM

Have you heard him in any of the debates? Have you checked out any of his positions? The vast majority of people who have listen to him, grab their heads and groan…what the he11 is this retard doing here.

No Paul is not a thought provoker, he is a headache provoker.

doriangrey on November 7, 2007 at 3:19 PM

Hows that?

saiga on November 7, 2007 at 2:38 PM

No Paul is not a thought provoker, he is a headache provoker.

have an nice day

offroadaz on November 7, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Thank you I will, you too…….. :)

doriangrey on November 7, 2007 at 12:47 PM

I think both you guys miss the point. Ron Paul is a controversial guy that gets the juices flowing. That is a good thing and appreciate it for what it is. He will not be elected, but he will influence the conversation and offer a totally different point of reference rarely visited.

have an nice day

offroadaz on November 7, 2007 at 10:46 AM

Thank you I will, you too…….. :)