So, It's Official.
North Korea DOES have nukes, having successfully tested one such device. The estimated yield was 20 Kilotons, which translates to as many as 200,000 dead, including everyone within a five mile radius of the blast.
I imagine this makes Japan more than a little nervous. And all the civilized world can do is demand more 'multi-lateral' talks. And where has that gotten us? The same place it'll get us when Iran successfully emulates North Korea... Nowhere.
Why are men so afraid to consider options other than talk? Especially when talk has alreadly shown itself to have been a complete waste of time; men have always done as they pleased, why should we expect differently from North Korea and Iran?
I imagine this makes Japan more than a little nervous. And all the civilized world can do is demand more 'multi-lateral' talks. And where has that gotten us? The same place it'll get us when Iran successfully emulates North Korea... Nowhere.
Why are men so afraid to consider options other than talk? Especially when talk has alreadly shown itself to have been a complete waste of time; men have always done as they pleased, why should we expect differently from North Korea and Iran?
from the mind of... Eric | 1:41 AM
57 Comments:
"Why are men so afraid to consider options other than talk?"
Um, maybe because civilizized nations have regarded war as a last resort, well behind diplomacy -- until Bush's War in Iraq.
Oh, wait. I said "civilized" nations. You know, ones that don't torture prisoners, don't ignore their own constitutions, stuff like that.
Oh, what the hell. Nuke 'em and let God sort it out. This country, under the Bush administration and a lapdog GOP Congress, hasn't much left to lose, ethically or morally.
Well, while you're waiting for talks to actually accomplish something more than filling the air with empty words, why don't you drop those trousers-- Kim Jong Il is feelin' frisky. Squeal like a pig, boy!
This country needs a little deliverance from the stupidity of Leftists like you.
Shield Maiden,
How about making your points without resorting to personal attacks? Think you can manage that?
It's fine with you that monsieur Redneck makes personal attacks, but you're offended by mine?
When, pray tell, are talks deemed fruitless, and action accepted as the only responsible course adjustment? When NKorea or Iran irradiate a few cities? What do you think war is? Let me answer that for you...
It's a personal attack upon a nation, ethnic group, or individuals, by another nation, ethnic group, or individual. But wars are not fought with swords alone. Wake up, O King, before the sword finds you snug in your bed!
All they know how to do is criticize... and make personal attacks, Shield Maiden of... (?) Rohan?
Thanks for stopping by.
ER makes a valid point on an important debate, and gets called a stupid leftist just because he's not calling for nuking anyone.
And rather than call this person out, you take this opportunity to accuse the left of making personal attacks? I'm disappointed.
I thought all opinions were welcome here as long as they were thoughtful and respectful. Am I wrong?
No, you're not wrong, but after studying Shield Maiden's comments I don't see her calling for the nuking of anyone... only for "action" other than mere words.
If she's disdainful of Leftists, well, so am I.
As for ER, anyone who refers to the war in Iraq as 'Bush's War' is, with no apology from me, a Leftist. But this doesn't mean I don't appreciate his comments or his views. I just happen to disagree. As does Shield Maiden.
What, the Left doesn't engage in personal attacks? But to be fair, I don't recall ER engaging in personal attacks here, only partisan loopiness. Shield Maiden, however, is new here, and I'm not going to judge too harshly based on two relatively tame (in my estimation) comments. ER's been a commentor here for a while now, and we all know what to expect. AND most us respect his opinions, despite any disagreement. Admittedly, in this regard, I cannot speak for Shield Maiden, and I won't censor her simply because others might disagree. Besides which she hasn't violated the 'Rules of Engagement'...
What kind of debate would it be without spirited disagreements?
Excellent points, El, and I agree with most of what you wrote.
I wasn't advocating that you censor Shield Maiden. Just pointing out that she might get a bit farther if she doesn't automatically assume anyone she disagrees with is stupid.
The one thing in your reply I disagree with is that anyone with ER's views on Iraq is a leftist. Pat Buchanan and a lot of other conservatives saw this as an unwise war of Bush's choice.
Hoo hoo. Cracks me UP to be called a Leftist for opposing this war. Uh, not. Shield Madien, et al. fdon't even know what the word means, apparently.
Anti-Bush? Check.
Democrat? Check.
Anti-war-as-a-first-option? Check.
Leftist? Hardly. Jeez. Reasd some books, would y'all?
Now on economics and the federal government's role in the economy and in social welfare -- I am what used to be a standard Dem on that. Nowadays, tho, thanks to the "leadership" of the GOP Congress and the White House, I'm regarded as a Leftist for that.
Nope. A [lain ol' liberal is all. And I wear *that* label proudly.
Let me ask you, ER:
SInce the U.N. has proven itself a hopeless failure when it comes to enforcing resolutions and keeping countries whom we can ALL agree shouldn't have a photograph of a nuclear weapon, what do you suggest we do to get real results?
More talks, and harsher sanctions, as the U.S. and Japan are likely to as the U.N. to pass are pointless in N.Korea. The common folk there are starving, and Il is making bombs despite the sanctions already imposed on him.
I don't think we should go to war as a first option, either, but to be frank, we've already tried diplomacy and it got us an undesirable country forcing it's way into the nuclear club.
Since they don't respect the U.N. or diplomacy, and only the general population, not the gov't. suffers under sanctions, what other options do we have?
Il is a bully, and sometimes the only thing a bully understands is a sound spanking.
ER is not a Leftist, not a Socialist, and not a Communist.
He is WORSE.
He is a person who would PUT Leftists, Socialists, and Communists in charge of ALL Public Policy, just because he hates the current Administration, and their foriegn policies.
If it were not for Democrats in office, Kim Jong Il would still be 25 years from being able to detonate a Nuclear Weapon.
You can lay the blame for this current crisis with NKorea, (if indeed it IS a crisis,) squarely at the feet of Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, and "Jimmah Cahtah."
I hope that America enjoyed being led and represented to the World by Democrats during the '90s.
Because the bill for voting for Democrats is coming due very soon.
Chill out, Tug, you're foaming at the mouth.
That's great how, after 12 years of a Republican congress and nearly 6 years of Republican control over every branch of government, you still manage to think everything is the Dem's fault.
In fact, even though Republicans have been wrong, wrong wrong about everything, and have made a complete mess out of our foreign policy, you're still arrogant enough to demonize anyone who disagrees with the course we're on.
Yep, still stuck in the rightwingoverse.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
You said that the last time, Sol.
Clinton GAVE North Korea the Nuclear material that they have used to construct their Weapons with, Albright brokered the deal, and Carter (as a private citizen, no less) meddled in the process every step of the way.
This IS the fault of Democrats, and now it is (once again) left up to Republicans to clean up the mess that YOUR GUYS MADE.
And I am not foaming at the mouth.
I am just SICK TO DEATH of listening to you guys mouth off about how Republicans are ruining the World, when the inaction and incompetence of the Democrats who preceeded the current Administration has caused ALL of the problems that you guys are blaming on them.
As I said before, the bill for allowing Democrats any power is now coming due, and a high price will be paid.
By ALL of us.
And I don't have to link to any puny little propagandist website.
I REMEMBER WHEN THESE THINGS HAPPENED.
I know that they happened, because I saw this unfolding, even back then.
Solomon, you are never going to enlighten me. I already see.
I have been watching these events coming together for YEARS.
And I fully understand why they are happening.
Now, tell me that I am living in an alternate universe, and that I am foaming at the mouth, drinking the right wing Kool-Aid, whatever.
It still will not change the fact that I KNOW WHY THINGS ARE THE WAY THEY ARE.
You are the one who has been misled, my friend.
Tug, I understand (and have understood for a long time) that that's the way you see things.
I disagree. I think we were on a much better course, especially in the middle east, before Bush took power.
So we have a difference of opinion. A lot of smart, respectable people agree with you, and a lot of smart, respectable people agree with me and ER.
What bugs me on these blogs is when people are repeatedly denounced, demonized and called anti-American for making reasonable criticisms of their government.
I happen to believe (and you can argue the point, that's fine) that folks like me and ER are standing up for the ideals our country was founded on. Standing up for Habeas Corpus, against torture, for due process, and the need for healthy and careful debate before rushing off to war is all part of that. You can argue with us, but these opinions certainly don't make us un-American, communist, socialist, or leftist.
(And by the way, any time you want to stop SHOUTING with capital letters, that's fine with me.)
I AM NOT SHOUTING!
Just kidding.
So we have agreed to disagree, then?
My points are as valid as yours, then?
I mean, after all, we are both Americans, and are entitled to our own opinions?
Very well.
I will go out in November, and again in 2008, and vote my conscience.
As will you.
God Bless America.
And if you will kindly notice, I was the one who said that ER was not Leftist, Not Socialist, and Not Communist.
And I assume the same about you.
You guys are worse.
Beacuse you would sell out your own country to those types, simply because you do not understand the reasons and strategy behind a War in which we, as a Nation, find ourselves engaged.
Everything leads back to Iraq with you guys.
Let me ask you...
What would you have us do about NKorea?
Go to them, with hat in hand, and beg them to stop?
Beg the U.N. to help us?
Argue about it on various Blogs?
Give NKorea a Nuclear Weapon from our very own Arsenal?
What?
I am curious...
Tug, take a pill.
Re, "you are never going to enlighten me ..."
Re, " ... simply because you do not understand ..."
You assert the first because your mind is closed. You assert the latter because you think your opinions, because they are your opinions, are unassailable.
That makes ya not worth the time it takes me to type this.
But I'll add: I don't think you're a fascist. Your worse. You're just a sheep.
You drew first blood with me today, and I answered it. Now, enough.
Tug, if you will kindly notice, I have never advocated selling out my country to leftists, socialists, or communists.
Also, kindly notice that I have never personally criticized Bush's policy on N. Korea. So, I don't feel like I need to have an alternative proposal all ready to lay out for you.
You're right, everything does go back to Iraq. Which shows that my disdain for Bush is not irrational, but is based on his actions.
Afghanistan: Good idea.
Iraq: Really bad move.
I give credit where it is due, and criticism where it is deserved.
And now the bill is coming due on the bad move. $2 Billion a week, and we are less safe and less able to deal with threats in Iran and North Korea (and a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan).
So, yeah, I'm carping on Iraq again. Sorry if you're tired of that, but I'm tired of the mounting consequences of that decision, with no ideas coming out of the White House to improve the situation.
My mind is neither closed, as you claim it is, nor clouded by hatred, the way yours and Solomon's are.
Neither of you can enlighten me, simply because the light is not in you.
If I am not worth the time it takes to refute me, then don't waste your time.
And I could make a crack about your 'sheep" comment, along the lines of "The Lord is my shepherd", but I have had enough of your misguided theology. (Small "T".)
My eyes are wide open.
I wish that I could believe the same about you and your defender here.
But I cannot.
Continue in your arrogance and ignorance.
I cannot seem to help either of you.
Oh, and Solomon...
"I give credit where it is due, and criticism where it is deserved.
How magnanimous of you.
Except that you don't really.
Iraq is a work in progress.
Declaring it a failure at this point is akin to declaring a brain operation a failure just because the top of the patient's head is off.
The Left (Leftists) in America has NEVER TRIED (Sorry to yell at you...I know that your ears are sensitive) to understand the good work that is being done there, nor have they (you) tried to support the effort that has been undertaken there.
Iraq is THE frontline of the War on Terror.
We have successfully gathered most of the Terrorist forces of the world in one centralized location so that we do not have to wage the war on Terror in Seventy-Five different Countries all over the World.
Nobody ever said that this would be easy, but after four years, we still have not lost as many soldiers there as we lost in ONE DAY on the Beach at Normandy in WWII.
I think that the U.S. Action in Iraq has over-all ben a rousing success.
But you choose not to see that fact.
Once again, because of your refusal to see success where it exists, and your blinding hatred for the current Administration, I cannot help you.
Carry on.
Okay, wrap this one around your noodles...
Today the UN Security Council nominated South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon as the next secretary-general. Imagine that, the UN Secretary General; a South Korean. I suspect this will go over like a lead life-jacket in NORTH Korea.
As to the discussion thus far... Surprise, surprise, I'm with Tug on North Korea... and Iraq. You guys on the left are delusional. Well-meaning, but delusional nonetheless. Following Shield Maiden's tack, the time to pick up the sword is not after our severed limbs lie on the ground... and strangely, that puts me in mind of Monty Python.
Iraq is THE frontline of the War on Terror.
It is now, Tug! We've created a terrorist's dream there.
We have successfully gathered most of the Terrorist forces of the world in one centralized location so that we do not have to wage the war on Terror in Seventy-Five different Countries all over the World.
Ahh, so this insurgency was all part of Bush's plan? Sorry but that's a crock. We are creating more terrorists than we are killing every day. How many times has this administration told us we've turned the corner over there?
Your charges are false. I am hoping against hope that the situation in Iraq gets turned around. I no longer have faith in this administration to do that, though.
Here's hoping the Baker commission shows some real independence and comes up with some better alternatives for us in Iraq.
And here's hoping we get some more congressional oversight in November to prevent another fiasco like it.
The sad truth is, treason no longer holds the stigma it once held in the hearts and minds of the American public. I am not at all troubled by the posturing and rationalization of fools. But neither will I sit back and allow their venom to infect the whole of this nation.
To our host I say, Be steadfast, keep a watchful eye... there are jackals in the ranks.
Do you honestly believe that had we not "invaded" Iraq, that Afghanistan would not now be the Front-Line in the War on Terror?
That level of naivete, is astoundingly dangerous.
I didn't say that the insurgency was part of Bush's plan.
If President Bush had a Crystal Ball, then this would all have gone perfectly.
War is, by it's very nature, unpredictable.
I was commenting on the reality of the situation.
The War has killed less Iraqis than The Saddam Hussein Regime would have killed, had he been left in power.
If your charge is that the War has not been prosecuted as agressively as it should have been, then I can agree with you.
We should have bombed Baghdad with Nuclear Weapons on the second day of the War, in my opinion.
We missed an excelent chance to show the whole world, in no uncertain terms, that the U.S. is not a nation to be trifled with.
Had we done this, Thousands, if not Millions of lives would have been saved not only in Iraq, but all over the world, over the next few decades.
But we didn't.
So now we have to fight it the way we are fighting it.
And it is dificult, and time consuming, and costly.
And all the while, we have to listen to the constant detraction, carping, and mealy mouthed criticism of people like you, who are the very ones that the Bush Administration had hoped to placate by NOT using nukes to end this mess quickly and efficiently.
You add nothing to the process of ending this struggle in a positive way.
Your useless rehtoric becomes ever more tiresome.
Now, since it was the original topic of discussion before you derailed it with your obsession with Iraq, I will ask you again, Oh Enlightened Liberals...
What would you, in your Boundless Wisdom, have us do about the current situation concerning NKorea?
Speak up now, if you have any suggestions.
Or is your Wisdom dependant in all cases upon 20/20 Hindsight, as it has been with Iraq?
The world seems to be coming to a consensus on N Korea. We should work with the world. Note, I did not say "the UN."
If BushCo. had never gotten on his high "moral" God-put-me-here horse in the first place with N Korea, maybe the idiot Il wouldn't be so desperate.
Diplomacy? What fricking diplomacy? There hasn't BEEN ANY under this "president." Wre're too *good* to sit down with rhe pipsqueak and tell him like it is? What lunacy. It's dereliction of duty on the part of Bush -- again!
Here's the solution for Iraq:
Dems take the House and Senate and impeach Bush *and* Cheney. It's the only way we can regain the high road, the only way we as a nation can repent for the sin, shame and crime of Bush's war in Iraq. That'd be a good start.
We give the a--holes over there a firm deadline. Take it or leave it. We're gone after X date. "If y'all can't get your crap together by X, you never will." Then, let the false "nation" of Iraq split up into the ethnic geography it *should* have and we all start over.
HA HA. That's gonna happen. Bottom line is it IS about the oil. George W. Bush couldn't give a rat's backside about democracy, or people, or history -- or anything. He's a awl man! I know the type well. I've spent my whole adult life among 'em. Shallow as the stripper wells in Oklahoma and North Texas. Ig. Nurnt.
Bush isn't worth hate, Tug, but I reckon you can keep pretending that that's what it's all about. I pity him and his blind followers. Lord knows you got plenty of other pretend things to keep you busy.
Since you brought it up, theology and all, I mean: Are you still pretending that God "told" you not to go to church??? You still a Loner for Jesus? That *does* explain a lot. You imagine the face of the Lord and it's your OWN. God love ya, but I pretty much quit taking you seriously, on faith and church matters, when you said God told you to remain apart from the rest of us. What a hoot.
No, go away boy, ah say, go away boy, ya bother me.
(Let's see, that first blood and an answer, and second blood and an answer ... Ooooh the blood on this blog's gonna get to the level of the horse's bridles! [in a metaphorical sense of course.])
Or is your Wisdom dependant in all cases upon 20/20 Hindsight, as it has been with Iraq?
Nothing hindsight about it. I never went to a protest in my life until Bush said he was going to invade. Then I did, in January 2003. That's how strongly I felt well before he invaded.
Your suggestion that we should have nuked Baghdad is one of nothing more than cold-blooded murder.
SM, disagreeing with a government's policy does not make someone a traitor, nor does it mean they support our country's enemies. Period.
I am so sick of having to remind people of that. It should go unsaid.
I find much of my inspiration in the writings of people like Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine.
And Patrick Henry- who El quoted this past week warning of the need to defend against the overreach of his own government.
El, I'm not sure what to make of your question. Is it a serious one, and if so, will you clarify?
Wouldn’t it depend on how you define the "Front line in the War on Terror?" Do you mean “would things be better in Afghanistan if we hadn't invaded Iraq?" Yes, I do think that.
For the record, Tug:
I have no opinion and no criticisms to offer on NK. There are only so many issues one can pay close attention to and NK has not interested me as much as the Middle East and the War on Terror. Although I feel the Bush administration could have given this issue more attention than it has, I am not going to second-guess Bush on something I have not followed more closely.
ER, WHO ARE YOU TO DECIDE WHAT THE LORD TOLD ME?
I stopped taking you seriously when you proclaimed that we as Christians should allow Sin into the body of the Church.
That was along about the time you started putting the word "President" in quotation marks.
Oh, and were back to this Idiocy again...
It's all about the Oil, Empeach Bush and Cheney, Moral High Ground...
Rubbish.
Horse Hockey.
ER,I will surely be glad when you are once again convicted of your folley, and repent of the Beam in your own eye, so that you can cease endlessly trying to point out the Mote in mine.
So, Solomon, your only objective all along has been to re-direct this whole thread into a discussion on the propriety of the war in Iraq?
Or, failing that, your plan was to talk out of your hat about NKorea, and to offer no suggestions, only criticism of your own Country, and it's Elected Leaders?
That's all I needed to know.
"It's dereliction of duty on the part of Bush"
And had Clinton not been derelict in HIS duties, NKorea wouldn't be this far along in their nuclear program. Remember, it was the Clinton Admin that gave the NKorea everything they needed.
What I mean Solomon, is: it is idiocy to believe that an insurgency would not have developed in Afghanistan, with suicide bombings, foreign fighters, assassinations... much of that goes on now. Afghanistan would likely be the same as Iraq in terms of level of violence. Which means the Left would be wringing shite from their britches over Afghanistan and calling Bush a liar-- Osama was never in Afghanistan, this is Bush's war, Bush lied-people died.
Of course, all this is speculation... as is your comment that things would be better. Fact is, no one here knows anything for certain. But the Left seems particularly fond of believing these fairy tales despite all evidence to the contrary.
SM-- Thanks, I will.
Gee, step away from the computer for a few hours and see what happens?
Ummm, one question for those who are "tired of talking" with the N. Koreans: What are you advocating instead of talking?
Bombing a sovereign nation? Based upon what?
UN Treaty violations? But I thought you didn't think UN opinion matters, it doesn't for us, right? WE'RE free to ignore UN treaties, right?
So, what shall you bomb a sovereign nation based upon? That they want to have nukes? WE have nukes, shall we bomb ourselves?
Or are you not advocating the attack of a sovereign nation - what exactly would you like to see done?
And, although it should go without saying, I'll say it: I ask these questions not because I hate my country nor because I love Il and N. Korea but because I don't believe in anarchy nor lawlessness nor rogue nations placing themselves above the law.
I don't believe in these things because
1. I think they make us LESS secure, not more, and
2. It is immoral to place ourselves above laws that we expect other nations to live by.
And, on a tangent, Tug said:
"The War has killed less Iraqis than The Saddam Hussein Regime would have killed, had he been left in power."
When what he meant was:
"The Iraq Invasion has killed fewer people SO FAR than Saddam did back in the days when Reagan was supporting him."
And a question: Will the war become immoral/illegal/wrong when we HAVE killed more civilians than Saddam?
Who am I Tug? I'm your brother. And you can't stand it. I don't know what sin you're talking about, unless you're saying the last church you went to, before the Lord "told" you "not to go," was sinless.
Dude, if you think God told you not to go to church, any church, then you are a cult of one and your leader is yourself. In which case, maybe I am not your brother. Because what I am is a Christian, much-maligned word, or as I prefer, a Jesusian.
The thing that gets me is "BushCo."
*groan*
That is such a piece of lesftista-speak that my head starts automatically hurting.
"BushCo," as opposed to the US. It's a way of differentiating the US, which we love and treasure, from the current administration, which we believe to be a threat to world peace.
What's wrong with that?
Tug, Re-read the posts, your charge is silly. I entered to comment on some unnecessary rancor in this thread as I'm getting sick of that crap. It wasn't me who brought Iraq up. And I still haven't uttered one criticism about NK, so shut up about that.
El, it's not like there are a fixed number if Islamic radicals in the world and if we don't fight them in place A we would fight them in place B. That is pure fantasy.
Remember how Bin Laden was wringing his hands over his dying movement until we invaded Iraq and provided it with the greatest recruiting poster ever? It's not about how many of them we kill, it's about how much fuel we give to their ideology. (It's also about how much credibility and how many allies we lose in the process).
Plus, most of the violence in Iraq is home-grown sectarian violence that would not have been exported to Afghanistan.
Plus, we'd be in a better position to defend and rebuild Afghanistan had we not... oh, you know.
Besides, Tug, it's all linked in the axis of evil, remember?
From today's front page:
Nearly five years after President Bush introduced the concept of an "axis of evil" comprising Iraq, Iran and North Korea, the administration has reached a crisis point with each nation: North Korea has claimed it conducted its first nuclear test, Iran refuses to halt its uranium-enrichment program, and Iraq appears to be tipping into a civil war 3 1/2 years after the U.S.-led invasion.
Each problem appears to feed on the others, making the stakes higher and requiring Bush and his advisers to make difficult calculations, analysts and U.S. officials said. The deteriorating situation in Iraq has undermined U.S. diplomatic credibility and limited the administration's military options, making rogue countries increasingly confident that they can act without serious consequences.
No fair using logic and reason, Solomon.
Nuke the Bastards!
How's that for logic and reason!
What is illogical is letting a known wound fester to the point of eruption!
We should have nuked NK decades ago!
But those Democratic administrations just never have the guts to do the right thing when confronted with a problem. They leave it to the Republicans to make the hard choices then work like hell to cause those choices to fail.
That's the record. Read it and weep, Libs. You can try to rewrite history, but history is just that--history!
"Nearly five years after President Bush introduced the concept of an "axis of evil" comprising Iraq, Iran and North Korea, the administration has reached a crisis point with each nation: North Korea has claimed it conducted its first nuclear test, Iran refuses to halt its uranium-enrichment program, and Iraq appears to be tipping into a civil war 3 1/2 years after the U.S.-led invasion."
Sounds to me like Bush was right on the money with his claims.
Why are leftists yellow-bellied procrastinators?
Because the problems they provide gives them opportunities for furure power!
"Who am I Tug? I'm your brother"
I am absolutely convinced that Christ is not in you, Reverend Redneck.
You worship the father of lies--you stand with him, you defend him.
I have no doubt--you're no kin to me or my brethren--that's for sure!
So, does Daddio talk for all of you who are "tired of talking"? DO you want to nuke a sovereign nation?
And if so, on what legal basis?
Calm down, Brother, let's leave talk of nuking anyone off the table. We're no where near that point yet.
As for legalities. Someone please explain to me the sense in being allowed to create and stockpile nuclear weapons and then prattle on about the legal use of said weapons. It's like saying it's okay for Smith & Wesson to manufacture guns but no one is allowed to buy or use them. It's like walking into a fireworks store, but not being about to buy and use them.
Legalities? With nuclear weaponry? Since when has it ever been legal to obliterate 100's of thousands of people, innocent or otherwise, in one fell swoop? And, pray tell, how will talk, predicated upon deceit, keep the insane from using such weaponry against us? Sanctions? NKorea is already starving, so what else?
While peering down upon us lowly concervatives make sure you don't present too large a target. There're snipers out there who don't give a rat's patootie about legalities.
I'm between broadcasts so I don't have time for more.
Ciao, for now.
Boom-boom, out go the lights!
Oh-that's right--there ain't no lights on in N Korea, are there?
"Why are men so afraid to consider options other than talk?"
It ain't men who are afraid--it's pansy-@ssed capitualting yellow-bellied faux Christian America-hating leftists and "conservative" politicians who don't have any gonads!
They ain't men--they're mice!
There's a time for negotiation (in most cases). There's also a time for kick-@ss!
Hey, Dad. GREAT advertisement for Jesus, dude.
Here, my other cheek. Whack at it, too!
Oh, I'll save you the trouble:
"I am absolutely convinced that Christ is not in you, Reverend Redneck.
"You worship the father of lies--you stand with him, you defend him.
"I have no doubt--you're no kin to me or my brethren--that's for sure!"
Ha! You are gonna be soooo surprised at who ya find in heaven, brother. Take your pill and simmer down.
Love ya! You too, Tuggy!
At this point, Reverend, I am confident I'll not meet you there.
But maybe you'll come to the knowledge of the truth one day and repent of your unbelief.Maybe one day you will realize what a mockery you make of Christ and recieve the free-gift He offers.
I hope so.
This, from the fella who wants to turn Iran into a "sea of glass" in the name of Christ...
Keep your faux concern, Daddio.
I could say the exact same thing about you. I won't because I DON'YT KNOW YOUR HEART. And you don't know mine. So, I'd back off the sending-ER-to-hell business. That'd be God's job -- if he hadn't already taken care of that.
For you to accuse me of mocking Christ -- for YOU, of all people, to accuse me of that -- absolutely boggles the mind.
We're both sinners, dude. Were both saved through no act of our own. We're both gonna be there in the by and by.
If you are convinced otherwise, the devil's done got a hold on your ears, man. Shake loose.
If the devil has a holt of my ears, pal, it's at your hand!
BTW, I have NEVER claimed to be a good representative of Christ. You do continually. Your postings clearly indicate that you think way too much of yourself.
(Anyway....what was this thread about, EL? Oh yeah--having the manhood to take care of things before they get out of hand instead of being a pansy-@ss and allowing small wounds to fester--you know, calling evil what it is instead of condoning sin and immorality within the church.)
"This, from the fella who wants to turn Iran into a "sea of glass" in the name of Christ..."
Really, Dan! Must you distort EVERYTHING?
I suspect the answer to that question would be, "YES!
You really should quit lying if you intend to go on accusing people of lying!
LOL. Every time ANY church lets ANY of us in, it is condoning sin and morality in the church! Until you understand this, Dad, you're sucking on spiritual Similac! LOLOLOL.
Try meat. It's better for grown boys.
"LOL. Every time ANY church lets ANY of us in, it is condoning sin and morality in the church!"
Dude! Better check back--I've NEVER said anything even RESEMBLING that(what a shameless liar and manipulator you are!).
This is just more evidence of your lapse into insanity a blogging pal tesified about witnessing first-hand.
Post a Comment
<< Home