You lost long ago, you just aren't bright enough to have figured it out yet.
Also, Roosevelt said "Nazi" because... that's what their political party was called. It wasn't a pejorative made up by their enemies, it's based on the first two syllables of the name of their party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei). I'm no expert on German, but it seems likely that they even used the names for themselves.
Um, who was worse to the Jews than the Nazis? That's seriously a new one on me.
Here's the answer to you inquisitive types.
Projecting power at a distance is ruinously expensive. It always has been, and it always will be.
It is the downfall of every empire from the Babylonian to the Egyptian to the British to ours. You get stretched out too far, spread too thin, and the next thing you know, the vandals are knocking down the gates.
So isolation is the answer?
Nope. That doesn't work either.
Things come, and things go. We were a brilliant light on the world for hundreds of years. We are one of the oldest forms of govenment on the planet. Our reach is tremendous.
As you know, however, if you are conscious, we are living in the decline of the American "Empire", the least selfish and most benevolent "empire" in history, if you can even call it that.
So eat. Drink. Be merry. For tomorrow, we could all die.
I think "Them" =
http://www.watchdogpublishing.com/TM_front.jpg
He was a Terrorist.
You still haven't factually justified the term Islamofascists.
Nazis are tied with many people for most douchey to the Jews.
Do you even have a fucking clue what our "form of government" is? It's not a Greek-style democracy, which is about the only thing you can possibly be referring to. Representative democracy (which is radically different) was a pretty revolutionary idea back in the 18th century, we aren't even close to "one of the oldest forms of government".
If you're serious about winning this war though, its going to take far more than troops and bombs. And much more strategy and grace than has been displayed.
We can't out fanatiscize the fanatics, nor should we even attempt to try. We also can't very well reason with or intimidate them while they lurk in caves and the shitholes of semicivilization. We can only kill and corall them, but even that isn't easy. And despite what some baseless propoganda might tell you, Obama will continue killing and coralling them when given the chance. But heres where the strategy and grace come into play.
We can keep spending fortunes and lives killing them, but new fanatics will always sprout up to take their place so long as we ignore the sources. Before your instincts click in, I'm not talking about appeasing these nut jobs, but we can't bomb our ideology into them. Forgive the cliche, but its time to work smarter, not harder in this regard. Its pretty clear McCain is gung-ho for the macho approach, but its a self defeating attitude that will only keep costing our money and our soldiers. Theres a much better way, and I don't know if Obama can do it, but I know McCain can't.
Dude, they didn't ask "How do Germans tie their shoes?" "In little nazis" because of some linguistical bend; the propaganda machine was much more powerful then than now.
As an aside, the National Socialist Party in Germany was left wing. Seriously left wing. Like it's in their name. Government control of everything, cradle to oven to grave. Other left wing governments have been in place in Cambodia, the Soviet Union, and several banana republics. They all failed, but ours would work, 'cause we're better than those people, right? Yeah...
I seriously don't remember the last time the US took the UN seriously. We took cover behind their ridiculous 17 blown "one last chance" warnings to Hussein to enlist countries otherwise on the fence; other than that, we don't even pay our rent there. Tear it down. It's useless.
Islamofascist is a useful portmanteau of "Islam" and "fascist". You know, as in the fascists belonging to the group Islam. It's really not that complicated. You can pretend we're at war with "terror", but that's a tough target to lock onto.
God I hate typing so much because I miss all your wonderful rebuttals. brb
Projecting power is expensive. You know what's more expensive than projecting? I'll give you a hint. It starts with a "W" or even an "A".
When you try to assert said power it becomes exponentially expensive.
You're right on two things here that I'll give you some credit for. On getting stretched too thin and too far. You're right, only an idiot fights a war on two fronts.
And while isolation isn't the answer, neither is an all out open war.
Oh shit, it's Jonah Goldberg.
Nazis weren't socialist. They didn't fulfill the definition in any real regard. I'm guessing you don't know about what socialism means anyways.
By the way, the people we are fighting aren't fascists. Fascism means something.
It's called leading by example - a virtue for which this country used to be respected for. Bush is well known for his ability to mislead by example, and this is just another instance of that fact.
Two part answer for this one:Do you guys really thing the rest of the world has some magical answer to how to get along with islamofascists, and we're just not getting the memos?
- Human beings have been trying to get along for thousands of years. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. There are any number of reasons for countries to either ally or go to war - territorial, economic, political, and so on. I've actually come to terms with the fact that humans beings are never going to be able to fully eliminate the urge to wage war, because it's a translation of the survival instinct into "sentient" or "civilized" terms. Does that mean we shouldn't strive to seek peace, or even not to speak with those who would do us harm, in order to gain some understanding or maybe even to fight off that surivival instinct for a few days? Without question.
- Do you think using the term "islamofascists", which is both innacurate and insulting to millions of muslims around the world including those who are citizens of this country, is going to solve anything?
See previously mentioned paragraph on humanity and the war instinct. And Paris burned because people were discriminated against on a social and economic level. If I remember correctly, this country also has its history of social and economic discrimination.Paris burned. London burned. Madrid blew up.
Conservatives didn't pick, or start this war. Greedy fuckers did. And they're certainly not in it for the win.And yes, conservatives fight wars. Difference is, when we pick 'em, we fight 'em to win.
No. Vietnam was a loss because we got involved in the first place. Just like Iraq is a loss for the same damn reason.To the dude saying the McCain should have died in Viet Nam and that the Viet Nam war was a loss, I am curious: Do you really think the lives of 58,671 Americans are the same as 3.5 million Vietnamese? That always seemed racist to me. Oh, that's right, we lost because we left.
Absoultely. They are doing quite fine with the Awakening and Sons of Iraq movements, and their military is finally back up and running. They have even said that they want us to get out. Iraqi is not the codependent child that Bush and his oil buddies expected.And we should leave Iraq, amirite?
Projecting power at a distance is a euphamism for war. And I'm right on most counts. Just some of you don't know that yet.
And don't get it yet. Be young. Enjoy your youth. Get drunk. Get laid. And when you start seeing huge chunks of your paycheck go to the IRS, think twice before wanting to raise taxes on the "rich". 'Cause don't you want to be rich?
Old testament God?Um, who was worse to the Jews than the Nazis? That's seriously a new one on me.