Jump to content

Jauronimo

Community Member
  • Posts

    14,758
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Jauronimo

  1. Yeah fighting in Afghan for >10 yrs, continued drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere, making up WMD stuff and invading Iraq, daring raid to assassinate bin laden, spending more on defense than rest of world combined, ETC ETC ETC all make us look us very weak. Yeah if thats not enough than more war must be answer. Always is right?

     

    The intellectual vacuum on this board never ceased to amaze. Really embarressed for buffalo these days , and not just the team

    Who made up the WMD threat again?

     

    "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

     

    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

     

    "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

     

    "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

     

    "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

     

    "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

     

    "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

     

    "There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

     

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

     

    You mean democrats and republicans were in total agreement regarding the threat posed by Saddam's regime? So both parties must have colluded to lie?

     

    Seems a little far fetched. What other explanations could there be?

  2. Easy for you to toss around generic labels far removed from harms way. You might feel different if it were you or a family member in a hot spot like that and some !@#$s in america were stirring the spot. Its a horrible situation to put our representatives overseas in.

    I'm pretty sure they're aware of the risks of representing the U.S. in Libya.

     

    Do you really think those responsible needed much of a reason to murder Americans? Were they just ordinary citizens who happen to have a few extra rocket propelled grenades laying around? Was this a fit of passion or temporary insanity, or was this already in the works? The Al Qaeda insignia certainly suggests the reason was mere opportunism.

     

    These men need no provocation. If its not this movie, its the Van Gogh movie, or a danish cartoon, or occupying Arab lands, or anti-burka laws, or Palestine, or backing the Shah, or supporting Israel, or American Idol and Baywatch, or the f@#$ing Crusades.

  3. And nobody has said it was justified. But knowing there's minority segment of Muslim population who could react this way made it wholly irresponsible on the film makers part .... 4 innocent people are dead due in part to their wreckless and selfish behavior. It's more than just being an ass

    That sounds like rationalization and appeasement to me. Which is the root of the problem? Someone making movies or a segment of the population acting irrationally and violently every time they get their feathers ruffled?

     

    And not it isn't more than someone behaving like an ass. If I made this film and substituted Mohammed for Jesus, no one would give a sh$t because its already been done a hundred times without incident. I could build the worlds largest toilet on my property and flush 1 million bibles and there would be no violence what so ever. But if the Koran is mistreated or if the prophet is depicted at all, not even necessarily poorly, then heads will roll, literally. Its not the behavior as I've clearly demonstrated, its the reaction.

     

    Appeasement will never work, Joe_the_Neville_Chamberlain. If we compromise our own freedom of speech now, where does it end? Dangerous precedent.

  4. Oh F%#K IT!!! Toronto or L.A. Can have the damn team. I don't give a s#%t anymore. I've got my seasons and I'll continue to go but I think all my hope is lost. I'm slowly inching towards the edge of the cliff. It's only a matter of time before I swan dive off this motherf%%ker.

    Why are you here? Seems to me that a Bills forum is an odd place for someone who doesn't care about the team, wants them to move, and is near suicide. Perhaps your last remaining moments on earth would be better spent amending your will, writing a poignant note or running a hot bath?

     

    Or are you just throwing a tantrum?

  5. Part of participating in this global society of ours is tolerating views and practices which may make you upset or uncomfortable. Making that video pretty much makes you an !@#$, but by no means does it justify any violence. Assigning equal blame in this instance as if Muslims are somehow incapable of exercising restraint or judgement when they're angry is beyond foolish. Appeasement has never worked, and will never work.

  6. I'm about to take a look at the all access 22 film for Sundays game vs the Jets. My plan was to come back after and break down the series and posts pictures as well. I presented this to the shout box and a couple posters were interested in some specific areas of the game. Anyone else want to hear about anything specific? So far I've been asked about the LB play on passing downs, let me know here and I can take a look.

    I am baffled as to how Jets WR had such separation on quick drops. Some light on that issue would be interesting.

  7. Turnovers are always a killer, but the fact that all of them were converted into points is alarming. It shouldn't be automatic that an INT at the 50 turns into 7. Our defense couldn't get off the field on 3rd down all game. 3rd and long was automatic, and our revamped pass rush was non-existent. Fitz played his worst game as a Bill yesterday and probably the worst game of his career, but our D gave him no help after any of those mistakes.

     

    I recognize that Fitz is a flawed QB and will throw his share of INTs, so while his performance was revolting, its not totally unexpected. I believed that our defense would be good enough to keep any game against the Jets within striking distance. I was more disappointed in our effort on that side of the ball.

  8. Breaking news is your crazy thread about "the bills will lose because the giants defense stunk against the cowboys" actually is true!

     

    Congrats to you my man on the insight. I was wrong, our D does stink because the Giants D stinks!

    Coincidence isn't insight. If I told you that it will rain tomorrow because the moon is made out of green cheese and the very next day water falls from the sky does that mean that a celestial body is really comprised of aged stilton?

  9. Yes, that's what I was suggesting. Middle class people lack relevance. Jesus.

     

    Again: the president insists he will grow the economy from the middle class out. I have no idea how this economic plan works and I am simply and genuinely asking supporters of the president how he plans to accomplish this because the only thing the president suggests is that it includes taxing the 1%. While that is done to make things fair, it does not explain how it expands the economy from the middle out.

     

    That's all i'm asking. Nothing more. What is the president talking about and how does it work?

    And there you have it. In 3 short steps, the discussion devolved into "well, you're anti-middle class!"

     

    Clockwork.

  10. State University to announce later today that controversial professor Dr. Van Nosehair's tenure has been revoked after repeatedly stopping a lecture to check his invisible friend Norman for a hernia. Norman is believed to be between 10 and 9 feet tall.

  11. I get it, you are against education, retard.

     

    /Fan in San Diego

    Why do so many arguments with liberals devolve into, "well you're against XYZ!"

     

    Lets begin with the basics.

     

    http://mat.usc.edu/u...ld-infographic/

     

    The U.S. currently spends well more per capita on education than any nation on earth. If spending were the driver of education then certainly the American dominance would be reflected in test scores or some quantifiable measure. Yet the U.S. seems to lag a few nations in core subjects like math and science that spend considerably less per student. It reasons that spending is not the issue, and that spending more on education makes little sense until the root problem is identified. But if you propose that we freeze or even cut spending on education, which seems very reasonable given a quick review of the facts, well then you're anti-education. The only way to prove you're not anti-education is to spend, spend, spend, however stupidly it may be.

     

    If you suggest that we cut entitlements that have proven to be unsustainable economically, then you hate the poor. If you oppose the ACA, then you want to kill grandma. If you think that a religious institution shouldn't be forced by the federal government to provide birth control to their employees thus contradicting their own practices and beliefs, then you're waging war against women.

     

    I'm pretty sure I could run for office on the Free Pizza platform. If anyone questions the wisdom of spending all of my county's tax revenue on pepperoni pizza, I'll simply label them anti-pizza. And what kind of un-American, Al Qaeda sympathizing f#$% hates pizza?

  12. no, thats not what i said. the consumer determines the price... yes leverage is debt, which is not what im talking about. im talking about the division of labor...

    Thats the f#$%ing point! If you're not talking about debt, then don't use the term leverage, which means debt. You don't know what these terms you toss about haphazardly actually mean, which is why you're unfit to discuss anything related to finance or economics. And that may be the least of your problems.

     

    Moving back to your original post...

     

    yes walmart can outcompete others with access to cheap labor and capital leverage... see small business getting wiped out by walmart all over country you stupid !@#$...

     

    What part of that snippet describes division of labor to you? Why on earth did you feel the need to add that worthless line about the consumer setting the price? What relevance does that have to anything we've mentioned? You have absolutely, no clue what you're talking about, I can't stress that enough.

     

    You don't even possess the wherewithal to distinguish my posts which blatantly parody your nonsense from serious replies! That's a whole new level of obliviousness.

  13. Corporations are a legal entity which separate individuals from risk and liability, both financial and criminal. They are probably not a good idea, but they aren't "evil", just as Frankenstien's monster wasn't "evil". If anyone can be properly charged with wickedness, it would be the creators.

    Clearly, you didn't see The Corporation. Did you know that if you anthropomorphize a corporation and then psychoanalyze said inanimate legal entity that the tests conclude that corporations are.....wait for it.....psychopaths?!?!?! What more proof could you need that corporations are evil?

×
×
  • Create New...