Communist/Globalist Meltdown: Christiane Amanpour Explodes At CNN Panel...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-sdO6pwVHQ]Help Kickstart World War III! - YouTube[/ame]
 
Why have all the Libtards become admitted and overt sociopaths in the past two weeks?

Why do many of them have portraits of demonic looking avatars, like [MENTION=25283]Sallow[/MENTION] ?

Which has what to do with my post?

Well what does your post have to do with anything? The "if you don't like this aspect of America then you should leave" argument rests on the ridiculous notion that there is only one issue of importance that should dictate whether someone stays or goes, and that that issue is always completely black and white. Never mind the fact that the person making this argument inevitably will disagree with the U.S. government on some issue, and not feel it necessary to leave the country over that issue. It's just a dumb lazy argument.

Well no it isn't.

Quite the opposite. It's your folks arguments which are lazy. Governing is hard work. Dealing with the real world is hard work. Libertarianism? It's never done the hard work of governing or dealing with the real world. The American hero of this particular ideology, Ron Paul, has an illustrious career as basically a hypocrite. He has not gotten much done, except, lots and lots of complaining. He lards shit into bills he doesn't vote for and his particular brand of "old man jowling" has metastasized into the obstructionist Tea Party.

This country has achieved great things, and will do so in the future.

But it wasn't and won't be as a result of Libertarians or Randians.
 
17 trillion in debt. A failing economy, school systems, infrastructure, endless war, etc...

Oh yeah, the big federal government is doing a wonderful job of "achieving great things".

You're such a lazy, ignorant sycophant, Shallow.
 
Which has what to do with my post?

Well what does your post have to do with anything? The "if you don't like this aspect of America then you should leave" argument rests on the ridiculous notion that there is only one issue of importance that should dictate whether someone stays or goes, and that that issue is always completely black and white. Never mind the fact that the person making this argument inevitably will disagree with the U.S. government on some issue, and not feel it necessary to leave the country over that issue. It's just a dumb lazy argument.

Well no it isn't.

Quite the opposite. It's your folks arguments which are lazy. Governing is hard work. Dealing with the real world is hard work. Libertarianism? It's never done the hard work of governing or dealing with the real world. The American hero of this particular ideology, Ron Paul, has an illustrious career as basically a hypocrite. He has not gotten much done, except, lots and lots of complaining. He lards shit into bills he doesn't vote for and his particular brand of "old man jowling" has metastasized into the obstructionist Tea Party.

This country has achieved great things, and will do so in the future.

But it wasn't and won't be as a result of Libertarians or Randians.

Which has what to do with my post?
 
It's time for Amanpour to bow out gracefully. Her credibility is shot.
 
The one good thing from the Bush years after the Iraq disaster.

What the fuck is wrong with you? Don't you remember a little event called 9/11?

september-9-11-attacks-anniversary-ground-zero-world-trade-center-pentagon-flight-93-smoke-tower_40014_600x450.jpg


After an even smaller event casualty-wise, FDR destroyed two civilizations, killed MILLIONS of people, burned MILLIONS of civilians alive including men women AND CHILDREN, turned thousands of square miles of Cities into smoldering ruins and, under Truman, dropped two Nuclear Bombs on Japan.

Bush was downright pacifist in his reaction to what al Qaeda did.

I would have carpet-bombed Afghanistan into the Stone Age, sent heavy Divisions in there and killed anything that moved. I would have reduced Kabul to Rubble and I would have told ANYBODY that was dancing in the streets celebrating the Deaths of 3,000 Americans that they were next.

I guess what I'm trying to say is.... Go to the Bank, make a withdrawal, then go somewhere and BUY A FUCKING CLUE!!!

Here's a clue for free: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Here's a clue for free: Nobody said it did.
 
What the fuck is wrong with you? Don't you remember a little event called 9/11?

september-9-11-attacks-anniversary-ground-zero-world-trade-center-pentagon-flight-93-smoke-tower_40014_600x450.jpg


After an even smaller event casualty-wise, FDR destroyed two civilizations, killed MILLIONS of people, burned MILLIONS of civilians alive including men women AND CHILDREN, turned thousands of square miles of Cities into smoldering ruins and, under Truman, dropped two Nuclear Bombs on Japan.

Bush was downright pacifist in his reaction to what al Qaeda did.

I would have carpet-bombed Afghanistan into the Stone Age, sent heavy Divisions in there and killed anything that moved. I would have reduced Kabul to Rubble and I would have told ANYBODY that was dancing in the streets celebrating the Deaths of 3,000 Americans that they were next.

I guess what I'm trying to say is.... Go to the Bank, make a withdrawal, then go somewhere and BUY A FUCKING CLUE!!!

Here's a clue for free: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Here's a clue for free: Nobody said it did.

Ace was talking about Iraq, and Edge responded with some nonsense regarding 9/11. Bit of an indication that that's exactly what he was saying. Perhaps you should leave the clue-giving to people more suited to it, like this guy:

blues+clues.jpg
 
Amanpour was in full meltdown simply because her and her fellow Communist/Globalists didn't get their War. It's as simple as that.
 
Less & less Americans want your World's Policeman Globalism.

The one good thing from the Bush years after the Iraq disaster.

What the fuck is wrong with you? Don't you remember a little event called 9/11?

september-9-11-attacks-anniversary-ground-zero-world-trade-center-pentagon-flight-93-smoke-tower_40014_600x450.jpg


After an even smaller event casualty-wise, FDR destroyed two civilizations, killed MILLIONS of people, burned MILLIONS of civilians alive including men women AND CHILDREN, turned thousands of square miles of Cities into smoldering ruins and, under Truman, dropped two Nuclear Bombs on Japan.

Bush was downright pacifist in his reaction to what al Qaeda did.

I would have carpet-bombed Afghanistan into the Stone Age, sent heavy Divisions in there and killed anything that moved. I would have reduced Kabul to Rubble and I would have told ANYBODY that was dancing in the streets celebrating the Deaths of 3,000 Americans that they were next.

I guess what I'm trying to say is.... Go to the Bank, make a withdrawal, then go somewhere and BUY A FUCKING CLUE!!!

yep.

If you plan to get into a WAR, conduct it in a way the WAR is conducted.

then you will be RESPECTED by your friends, your allies and your ENEMY.
The latter ones will HATE you, but nevertheless, RESPECT.

Bush got involved in a WAR and the war instead of being the one turned out to be a clown PC parade.

Therefore Bush is hated and disrespected by enemies, allies and even the friends are critical.

If you don't know how to conduct a war - don't get into one.
 
Less & less Americans want your World's Policeman Globalism.

The one good thing from the Bush years after the Iraq disaster.
Iraq is much less of a disaster to its neighbors today than it was before the invasion. As a matter of fact Iraq itself is far less of a disaster today than it was before the invasion. After all, the left was throwing out that millions of children died from sanctions and the oil embargo. How soon we forget the inconvenient
 
The Communists/Globalists have to get over it. Times are changing. The People don't have to be Sheeple anymore. They can say no.

ACTUALLY, YOU ARE rush SEANBECK'S SHEEPLE, AND ALL YOU can SAY IS NO...lol

You think it's some new PUB POLICY, but it's just pure obstruction, for dupes only.
 
Americans no longer want to be al quaeda's ally.

Do you think we should be Assad's? Maybe the rebels will be better than Assad. In any case it's not morally right to allow him to use chemical weapons on women and children. We need to weigh our options.
 
The dupes seem to believe all the rebels are jihadists now lol...I'll go with the CIA and the facts- they're never more than about 15 per cent- huge a-holes lol.

If we weren't in the W/Pub Great World Recession, most of them could find a real job instead of having to go the gang route...
 
Last edited:
The dupes seem to believe all the rebels are jihadists now lol...I'll go with the CIA and the facts- they're never more than about 15 per cent- huge a-holes lol.

If we weren't in the W/Pub Great World Recession, most of them could find a real job instead of having to go the gang route...

Opposition forces battling Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria now number around 100,000 fighters, but after more than two years of fighting they are fragmented into as many as 1,000 bands.

The new study by IHS Jane's, a defence consultancy, estimates there are around 10,000 jihadists - who would include foreign fighters - fighting for powerful factions linked to al-Qaeda..


Syria: nearly half rebel fighters are jihadists or hardline Islamists, says IHS Jane's report - Telegraph

You always have been a stupid fuck.

Bammy is arming these folks....maybe people close to you will have to pay for this....its called Karma.

And I will laugh at you.
 

Forum List

Back
Top