Libs Need to Wake Up to the Power of Hatred

Adam's Apple

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2004
4,092
449
48
--in more ways than one.

The Power of Hatred
By Ralph Kinney Bennett for Tech Central Station
06/28/2005

The Islamoterrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan have shown a resilience that some have found surprising. They have learned fast and learned much - about how to build more effective roadside bombs, for instance, and about the futility of engaging American forces directly in firefights. They have shown an ugly ruthlessness about spilling Muslim blood.

They have demonstrated an extraordinary ability or extraordinary luck in preserving their leadership, sometimes with hairbreadth escapes. And, although they may be scraping a barrel or two while husbanding their "finest" for later operations, they have thus far produced enough recruits (some with their hands taped to steering wheels) to continue their fight despite heavy losses.

Give them credit where credit is due. And credit them, too, for shedding light on a dark reality many Americans would prefer to ignore - the power of hatred.

It is fashionable to praise the power of an uplifting idea, but it makes us uncomfortable to admit the power of festering hatred. Yet it is pure hatred that is abroad and alive in the bomb-laden cars that ply the streets and roads of Iraq and in the calculated fury that leaves children dismembered in a market place and young policemen executed with their hands tied behind their backs.

All the efforts to comb the Koran and extol the virtues and ideals of "mainstream" Islam will not camouflage nor expiate the murderous hatred of the Islamofanatics at work in Iraq and around the globe.

http://www.techcentralstation.com/062805D.html
 
All good points. But don't forget that the people that we are trying to liberate (in Iraq and in Afganistan) are muslims too.
 
Liberals are some of the best practitioners of the fine art of hatred...just ask any one of them about the current administration to get a first hand example!
 
Ask a conservative about his thoughts on the Clinton administration, and you will get the same thing.
 
deaddude said:
Ask a conservative about his thoughts on the Clinton administration, and you will get the same thing.
True enough in some cases, yet I haven't seen the same vehemence regarding Clinton that I see applied towards the current President.
 
CSM said:
True enough in some cases, yet I haven't seen the same vehemence regarding Clinton that I see applied towards the current President.

Clinton was an idiot, but he didn't send 1,700 American soldiers to their deaths in a war of hatred.
 
Clinton was bad but if you cant see what bush is doing to this nation you must be wearing blinders. I see more hatred on the conservative side than the liberal side but I bet all muslims are laughing at all the hatred within the US period.

Bush will eventually get more of our soldiers killed than saddam ever dreamed of but saddam was the bad gfuy right?
 
Gabriella84 said:
Clinton was an idiot, but he didn't send 1,700 American soldiers to their deaths in a war of hatred.
War of hatred? Man, each day your ignorance shines through.

No, but he did let 18 Rangers get killed in Somalia because he REFUSED to send them the armour the soldiers on the ground requested. They begged his administration to send them tanks and Bradleys and he refused and therefore, 18 Rangers were killed and over 90 injured in an operation they had no business partaking in. I suggest you read the book "Blackhawk Down".
 
Ca_lib said:
Clinton was bad but if you cant see what bush is doing to this nation you must be wearing blinders. I see more hatred on the conservative side than the liberal side but I bet all muslims are laughing at all the hatred within the US period.

Bush will eventually get more of our soldiers killed than saddam ever dreamed of but saddam was the bad gfuy right?
I have a feeling you and Gab are one in the same.

But to reply to you, you are and idiot too. Hatred from the Conservatives? LMFAO!

Please tell me, what is Bush doing to this country other than defending it as he, as Commander in Chief, took an oath to do? Grow up.
 
freeandfun1 said:
I have a feeling you and Gab are one in the same.

But to reply to you, you are and idiot too. Hatred from the Conservatives? LMFAO!

Please tell me, what is Bush doing to this country other than defending it as he, as Commander in Chief, took an oath to do? Grow up.
:laugh: Oh well, unless there's a reason to be suspicious, we'll let 'em play. Probably some friends. We just had 'goat boy' now 'CA whatever...'

Free, you are using too much logic regarding CIC, this is all about 'feelings' and group hugs and 'Why do they hate us????'
 
freeandfun1 said:
I have a feeling you and Gab are one in the same.

But to reply to you, you are and idiot too. Hatred from the Conservatives? LMFAO!

Please tell me, what is Bush doing to this country other than defending it as he, as Commander in Chief, took an oath to do? Grow up.

wow I can see that I was wrong, conservative are all just charming people!

well call me whatever but 18 dead to 1700 is a mighty big indifference.

We didn't need Iraq, we needed to go to Iran and handle issues there or is that wrong too?
 
Ca_lib said:
wow I can see that I was wrong, conservative are all just charming people!

well call me whatever but 18 dead to 1700 is a mighty big indifference.

We didn't need Iraq, we needed to go to Iran and handle issues there or is that wrong too?

gee, I thought every soldier was important? Guess not to you.
 
Kathianne said:
gee, I thought every soldier was important? Guess not to you.

That is not what I meant and obviously if im complaining about the dead in Iraq you could see the difference. I was suggesting that 18 although unfortunate is better than lsing what we are now. you people don't care how many die so long as you can say bush is doing a great job, that is pretty sad.
 
Ca_lib said:
That is not what I meant and obviously if im complaining about the dead in Iraq you could see the difference. I was suggesting that 18 although unfortunate is better than lsing what we are now. you people don't care how many die so long as you can say bush is doing a great job, that is pretty sad.
Where was your outrage for the 18 killed in Somalia for naught?

This war has a reason. That conflict had none. If you can't see that, you are as ignorant as you come across as being.

Were the tens of thousands lost in WWII worth it to you? Probably not. You are a "peace at all cost" kind of person aren't you?

Well, if you have your way, you'll be wearing a Burka or beheaded in the not too distant future. That is what the radical Islamofacists are striving for.... world wide Sharia law.
 
Ca_lib said:
wow I can see that I was wrong, conservative are all just charming people!

well call me whatever but 18 dead to 1700 is a mighty big indifference.

We didn't need Iraq, we needed to go to Iran and handle issues there or is that wrong too?

CA Lib, welcome.

So should I assume that if Bush decides our "exit strategy" for Iraq is to turn east and topple the Iranian government, you would be in favor of that?
 
Ca_lib said:
That is not what I meant and obviously if im complaining about the dead in Iraq you could see the difference. I was suggesting that 18 although unfortunate is better than lsing what we are now. you people don't care how many die so long as you can say bush is doing a great job, that is pretty sad.

Gee you said the same thing again. There are those on the right saying 1700 is certainly better than the libs projected, actually still hoping for as far as casualties. Certainly better than previous wars. Now you are saying 18 is better than 1700, wouldn't 0 be better? Then of course, we'd have to dismantle the military, since there are deaths occuring through accidents, even here in the states. Gee, what is it you do mean? :dunno:
 
gop_jeff said:
CA Lib, welcome.

So should I assume that if Bush decides our "exit strategy" for Iraq is to turn east and topple the Iranian government, you would be in favor of that?

I would favor that but it wont happen, or at least I dont think it will.
thing is we are supposedly protecting our country from terrorism right? so how does Iraq pose more of a threat than Iran or North Korea?
 
Kathianne said:
Gee you said the same thing again. There are those on the right saying 1700 is certainly better than the libs projected, actually still hoping for as far as casualties. Certainly better than previous wars. Now you are saying 18 is better than 1700, wouldn't 0 be better? Then of course, we'd have to dismantle the military, since there are deaths occuring through accidents, even here in the states. Gee, what is it you do mean? :dunno:

nice condescending reply. maybe once you realize that these soldiers are dying needlessly and we are attcked in a form of terrorism by real terrorist you will understand what I am trying to say.
 
Ca_lib said:
I would favor that but it wont happen, or at least I dont think it will.
thing is we are supposedly protecting our country from terrorism right? so how does Iraq pose more of a threat than Iran or North Korea?
Think beyond your partisan nose.
 
Ca_lib said:
nice condescending reply. maybe once you realize that these soldiers are dying needlessly and we are attcked in a form of terrorism by real terrorist you will understand what I am trying to say.
Wouldn't call that condescending, rather realistic reply to your totally naive way of addressing the situation. Cutting and running is not going to work. That much should have been made 9/11-WHICH IS NOT IMPLYING ANY CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THAT ACTUAL EVENT AND IRAQ, RATHER THE CONNECTIONS OF APPEASEMENT AND TERRORISM IN THE MACRO.
 

Forum List

Back
Top