Thursday, July 27, 2006
Well, time is winding down on the one-year anniversary of Freder_Frederson putting his foot in his mouth last August.
I came across His Idiocy today over at RWN (comment thread here) and, of course, he was spouting his usual anti-Bush/pro-socialist stuff that reveals every time what a fool he is. He even used an anti-Israel site to back up one of his stupidities, then tried to challenge everyone when they laughed at him.
Of course, I prefer to bury these sorry excuses for arguments rather than simply laugh at them (at least most of the time).
Well, you all talk tough, but are any of you willing to make the sacrifices necessary to actually achieve the goals you seek? What you are implying is full-scale war in the middle-east including destroying countries that we traditionally consider our allies (e.g., Jordan and Saudi Arabia) along with Iran and Syria.
To do that we are going to have to put up with severe hardships including extreme shortages of gasoline, mandatory rationing and high prices. We are also going to need a much bigger military and much higher defense spending. That means higher taxes and if we can't get enough volunteers, a draft.
We're also going to have to do it totally alone. Even our good friends the Australians and the British are going to turn their backs on us. Also, when and if American soldiers are captured on the battlefield or American politicians leave the country they will probably face international war crimes trials since no one will recognize the exemptions to the ICC we have negotiated.
by Freder_Frederson on 2006-07-27 11:03:11
A lot of people stepped up to the plate to take this one on. Here's my response:
First of all, I can't remember every really considering Jordan or Saudi Arabia "allies", especially after 9/11. If Saudi Arabia were really our allies, they would have done a lot more to fight terrorism, especially given the majority of the 9/11 terrorists being their own nationals.Notice the "invitation" to discuss our upcoming anniversary. Of course, he responded with his usual gloating-but-wrong crap.
Extreme shortages of gasoline could easily be averted if enviro-nutjobs would back off and stop working to hinder the efforts of those who would get the oil we already know we have on our own soil. Most of them come from your side, Freder. Care to try and persuade? After all, we already have higher prices, especially on gasoline, to the point that rationing is already in place because of them. Higher taxes wouldn't be necessary at all if the politicians in Washington, DC would simply repeal all the unconstitutional socialism of the last century and apply the difference to the military, which happens to be constitutional. Again, most of them come from your side.
The idea that the Brits and Aussies would turn their backs is pure speculation, but even if they did, it cannot be denied that this is a war that MUST be fought and won. The very cause of freedom in America and the world is threatened.
Oh by the way, Freder. Only 23 days to go...
by RightWngRocker on 2006-07-27 11:38:14
Yeah well, looks like I'm somewhere between 1/2 and 2/3's right. We are looking at a Shiite dominated government in Iraq (sympathetic to Hezbellah and not friendly to Israel, women's rights are being severely curtailed and parts of the south--e.g., Basra--is operating under Sharia law) and I don't know what other description you can use to describe the situation besides Civil War.Can you say "delusional"? What a fucking moron. Things get better every day in Iraq, and he calls the situation "deteriorating". Can a hard head get any harder? So I called him on the carpet with his own words.
Now, as usual, I underestimated the sheer stubborness and refusal to face reality of the Bush administration. In the face of the deteriorating situation, they plow on as though nothing has changed and things are just fine. Troop levels remain where they are and they are not discussing any withdrawls. I think it is significant that they apparently can't increase troop levels and are only shifting troops into Baghdad to quell the violence there rather than increasing the total number of troops in the country.
by Freder_Frederson on 2006-07-27 12:32:31
You crack me up Freder. Let's take a look at what we discussed, shall we?And lose he will. Comments like this are proof that he has no clue. I wouldn't be surprised to find out he gets his news from Al-the-Jizzeater. I did feel it important to credit a prediction from a comment Doncos made here at the RWRepublic.
One year from now Iraq will either be in a full scale civil war or have an Iranian friendly Shiite dominated theocracy. Our troops will be withdrawing or thrown out of the country and there will be no way for the administration to either claim that we have won, or you, as much as you may try, to blame the loss on the liberals and the MSM.
by Freder_Frederson on 2005-08-19 11:31:12
No full-scale civil war, Shi'ites are there, but not running the show to the point where no one gets a say, and quite frankly, the whole thing is pretty America-friendly, and since nothing has been lost, well it's no different that Vietnam, except that we haven't cut and run. The MSM and the Left are still trying to portray it that way, but unless there's a big change in 23 days or less, confirmable by ArmyBryan or his designee, you have lost.
by RightWngRocker on 2006-07-27 12:40:28
However, I will yield that the winner in the discussion (the one being most right about the outcome) appears to be Doncos:Big thanks go out to Kingfisher for kind words when he thought I had shut Freder up for good, but even a fool would know better (as did both Kingfisher and I, of course).
So it doesn't really matter. Any outcome whatsoever will be twisted by Freder into something he "predicted" and it will be all our faults. This is the kind of BS that moved me to the right.
Doncos 08.25.05 - 12:05 pm
Good call, man.
by RightWngRocker on 2006-07-27 12:42:25
Nah, Kingfisher - see my quote from Doncos.He actually did something along those lines in dealing with another comment, which I found hilarious. He even used the Chickenhawk Slur. I guess he forgot to read Jeff Jacoby this week.
He's probably just trolling for a "neutral" confirmation of his idiocy.
by RightWngRocker on 2006-07-27 12:55:00
There were some really revealing comments from Freder about how great socialism is, but I made sure I took care of those. I think I basically nailed it with these (patting self on back)...
We wouldn't have rural electrification or phone service, nuclear power, most of the hydropower in the west, or paved roads in most of the country if it wasn't for the government. (Freder)Anyway, Freder is toast on the 19th. I will be out of town, but will post on the matter sometime in the days before or after. Confirmation of the REAL situation in Iraq is expected from military sources, particularly ArmyBryan and those close to him.
Yes we would.
Socialists really piss me off when they do this. they claim that since the government has been doing something (often something it shouldn't), that that's the only way it will ever happen.
by RightWngRocker on 2006-07-27 16:24:40
It's simply because the risk and expense of a space program is too great to be borne by private industry. (Freder)
If it's too great a risk for private industry, who's the knucklehead that decided it's not too great a risk for the government? (spelling error corrected)
by RightWngRocker on 2006-07-27 16:28:30
Not only do I not expect to find Iraq in a "full-scale civil war..", but I actually expect to be told that things are better on August 19, 2006 than they were on August 19, 2005. But maybe that's just my pie-in-the-sky dreaming ... Nah. I think not.