http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDkhzHQO7jY

Nice clip, Frank. I like the part where he says, [2:20]

We’re good at [war]. And it’s a good thing we are. We’re not very good at anything else anymore. Huh? Can’t build a decent car. Can’t make a TV set or a VCR worth a fuck. Got no steel industry left. Can’t educate our young people. Can’t get healthcare to our old people. But we can bomb the shit out of your country alright! Especially if your country is full of brown people. Oh, we like that don’t we? That’s our hobby. It’s our new job in the world. Bombing brown people.

But you’re referring to the part where he says [5:15]

To me war is a lot of prick waving. OK? Simple thing. That’s all it is. War is a lot of men standing out in a field waving their pricks at one another. Men are insecure about the size of their dicks and so they have to kill one another over the idea. … And since war is the ultimate competition, basically men are killing each other in order to improve their self esteem.

Congratulations, Frank. You’ve hit Farris-level. You’ve linked to something that exactly contradicts your point. Well done.

It actually has occurred to me. And I’m certain that, if Bush/Cheney et al are investigated that the Repubs will retaliate by launching an investigation of Obama/Biden et al (or whoever the most recent Dem Pres/VP are).

I don’t thikn that’s justification for not investigating possible crimnial acts. I don’t think a murder suspect (to pick an extreme example for clarity) should be let go because they might try to kill anyone who might testify against them.

But just to make sure I don’t mistakenly say you’re in favor of something because you describe how it turns out without a “denounce” or a “deplore”, state it planly for us.

Do you believe criminals should not be investigated/prosecuted because they will retaliate if they are?

Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.

Just a reminder.

Them? Is Frank really Stacy Brown?

Yeah, I’ll agree that what you see as “bold and decisive” I see as brutal and oppressive. And that you firmly believe that Britain’s failure is that they weren’t brutal and oppressive enough.

Yeah, I agree that by being resolved and strong India won independence. And despite being aggressive, brutal and violent Britain failed to win.

Any rational person would see this as an argument for NOT following the tyrant’s method. But not you, Frank.

(And what’s this obsession you’ve gotten with your penis size? You’re the only one who keeps mentioning them. Touched a nerve?)

From the same page : “Our hope is to organize the single largest day of service in U.S. history on the 10th anniversary of 9/11″

So, forget that nonsense.

As to that war and penises issues, I regret to inform you that I found only one expert on the issue: the late philosopher, military strategist and geopolitician — George Carlin.

Here ya go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDkhzHQO7jY

Sean : we agree to disagree – nonaggression and nonviolence gave India victory; failure to act boldly and decisively in protecting her own interest, gave Britain Defeat.

And will all you clowns stop acting like I am in favor of this or in favor of that , because I describe how it turns out without a “denounce” or a “deplore”?

Well, the Brits did teach them cricket, after all.

Let’s just hope you have good insurance….

Seriously, this gets more incredible with each sentence. Britain maintained it’s occupation of India with a brutal fist. And shame on India for not loving their oppressors once they left?

Hope you’re never on a jury in a wife-beating case, Frank.

Proving my point. The British were brutal, oppressive, better armed and wielded their might. The Indians were determined, resolved. And victorious.

I know. I found it almost unbelieveable when I first read it. Frank really believes tyrants are the good guys.

I didn’t say it was good or bad. Britain could have been far more brutal, but they saw that the Indians were determined. Whether they should have left India in 1948 , or bled slowly until 1968, the fact is, the accommodation of the British did not lead the Indians to stay in the Empire: weren’t they supposed to love the British? After all, Canada stayed in the Commonwealth.

One more thing – I’d like to work on that “penis and warfare” thing , but I have to go to the hospital I am fighting a bacteria called “clostridium difficile”.

By the way, Jaim, you insensitive prick, your father may be in diapers one day, if you ever develop a conscience , you’ll regret remarks like that — you ageist asshole.

And, the government doesn’t pay for anything, you jimoke – the taxpayers do. Since you’re working out of country, you’re not paying taxes, which means you are paying nothing for my care, you 씹새끼
.

Here is a quote for you -

“Today President Barack Obama created a historic, enduring and compassionate legacy that truly honors the 9/11 victims and their families, first responders and rescue and recovery workers, the soldiers who have take up arms to defend our freedom and safety, and the many volunteers who spontaneously contributed their efforts in the immediate aftermath of 9/11,” said David Paine, founder and president of MyGoodDeed.org, the nonprofit group that led a seven-year campaign to formally establish 9/11 as an annually recognized day of service and remembrance. “There isn’t a better or more fitting way to remember 9/11 than for all of us as Americans to voluntarily set aside time on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks to help others in need.”

“As a 9/11 family member, I cannot think of more inspiring, appropriate and constructive tribute to my late brother and all those who perished, were injured or rose in service – to rekindle at least for one day each year the remarkable spirit of compassion and service that unified our country,” said MyGoodDeed.org co-founder and vice president Jay S. Winuk, whose younger brother Glenn J. Winuk, an attorney, volunteer firefighter and EMT, died in the line of duty in the collapse of the World Trade Center. “This groundbreaking national service legislation will greatly benefit the nation in so many meaningful ways as we face these challenging times.”

http://www.citizencorps.gov/news/press/2009/9-11-dayofservice.shtm

And, if you’re going to use our country’s fallen soldiers to pimp your point, it’s a 21gun-salute, not a 9 gun-salute. Get it straight. It’s the least you could do.

Failure to act aggre…? What? The British murdered thousands. Imprisoned tens of thousands. Enforced colonial rule with armed occupation.

Didn’t “act aggressively and assertively”?

Holy cats, Frank, that’s an amazing statement.

If we’d gone around shooting people we still would have lost it, just slower and with many, many, many more dead people involved.

Not as if it was ours in the first place.

PLease show proof of your work. After all, as with which VP is second worse ever, one should be able to provide all sorts of support for their opinion.

I know what’s on my mind better than either you or Zython ( poor fellow, he often doesn’t know what’s on his mind).

SO you not only know your mind better than anyone else, you know Zython’s better, too. At least you’re consistent in having a double standard and accusing others of exactly what you do yourself.

authoritarian nations will respond favorably to strength, but sneer at accommodation, which they view as weakness.

Who said anything about accommodation? Did Ghandi accommodate? Choosing not to throw your weight around isn’t accommodation. But naturally you can’t see anything short of going in with all guns blazing as anything else.

As a result of Britain’s failure to act aggressively and assertively in India, they lost India , thus proving MY point, not yours.

So, again, you conclusively show that you believe entirely that might does make right and that anyone who can oppress a people should do so.

Nice, Frank.

Many political and strategical analysts ( I wouldn’t say all, but I am tempted) agree that nearly all nations, especially aggressor / authoritarian nations will respond favorably to strength, but sneer at accommodation, which they view as weakness. No penises are mentioned in the analysis.

The example of India is a poor one. As a result of Britain’s failure to act aggressively and assertively in India, they lost India , thus proving MY point, not yours.

You mean it isn’t obvious?

“We must stop this attitude that anything must be done rather than military action, …

“asserting ourselves as the greatest nation earth …”

and so on and etc and beat your chest and damn the torpedoes (or innocents) because that’s just what happens in war and it’s essential the US assert itself because what’s the use of having the biggest cock in the world if you don’t get to show it off use it once in a while.