Do you just try to start fights?
Posted By: sbMT on 2008-10-21
In Reply to: are you aware all caps is yelling? - MTPockets
I asked you a simple question. You got out of whack about it. Yes, I know caps is yelling. I wasn't yelling at you I was yelling because you are making me crazy with your freak out of "stop picking on me!!" Please, grow up. It is unfair for you to make statements without backup. If you can't take someone asking you questions, don't post slander on this board. End of story.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
take your fights somewhere else please
you are not going to force me to do anything and I will not be forced to leave this board simply because you disagree with what I posted
Why Israel Fights
Why the Israeli attack helps the US by taking on Hamas now and why this time Israel may succeed in Gaza. A well-written perspective on Gaza, Israel, Hamas. This adds more to consider as we all discuss this war.
Why Israel Fights
By WILLIAM KRISTOL
Published: January 4, 2009
The Israeli assault on Hamas in Gaza is going to be a replay, we’re told, of the attempt to subdue Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in the summer of 2006. And the outcome, it’s asserted, will be the same: lots of death and destruction, no strategic victory for Israel and a setback for all who seek peace and progress in the Middle East.
Obviously, war is an unpredictable business, so I say this with some trepidation: I think the conventional wisdom will be proved wrong. Israel could well succeed in Gaza.
For one thing, southern Lebanon is a substantial and hilly area, bordered by northern Lebanon and Syria, through which Hezbollah could be re-supplied, both by Syria itself and by Iran. Gaza is a flat, narrow strip, bordered by Israel, as well as by the sea and by Egypt, no friend to Hamas. By cutting off the northern part of Gaza from the southern, Israel has basically surrounded northern Gaza, creating a military situation very different from that in Lebanon in 2006.
What’s more, the Israeli leadership seems aware of the mistakes — political, strategic and military — it made in Lebanon. That doesn’t mean it won’t make them all over again. The same prime minister, Ehud Olmert, is in charge, after all. But, today’s defense minister, Ehud Barak, is very different from his predecessor, the weak and unqualified Amir Peretz. So far as one can tell, the Gaza operation seems to have been well-planned and is being methodically executed, in sharp contrast to the Lebanon incursion. Barak has also warned that the operation could be long and difficult, lowering expectations by contrast with the Israeli rhetoric of July 2006.
In addition, in Lebanon, Israel proclaimed war goals that it couldn’t achieve — such as retrieving its two kidnapped soldiers and disarming Hezbollah. Now the Israeli government says that it seeks to weaken Hamas, lessen its ability to fire rockets from Gaza and secure new arrangements along the Egyptian-Gaza border to prevent Hamas from re-arming. These may well be achievable goals.
And, of course, not all military efforts against terror fail. Recall Israel’s incursion into the West Bank in the spring of 2002, when, under the leadership of Ariel Sharon, Israel succeeded in ripping up established terror networks and began the defeat of the second intifada. Israel also was able to avoid a long-term re-occupation, while retaining the ability to go back in on anti-terror missions. What’s more, the 2002 bloodshed didn’t seem to do lasting damage to hopes for progress or moderation on the West Bank. After all, it’s Gaza, from which Israel withdrew in 2005, not the West Bank, that became a Hamas stronghold.
An Israeli success in Gaza would be a victory in the war on terror — and in the broader struggle for the future of the Middle East. Hamas is only one manifestation of the rise, over the past few decades, of a terror-friendly and almost death-cult-like form of Islamic extremism. The combination of such terror movements with a terror-sponsoring and nuclear-weapons-seeking Iranian state (aided by its sidekick Syria) has produced a new kind of threat to Israel.
But not just to Israel. To everyone in the Middle East — very much including Muslims — who aren’t interested in living under the sway of extremist regimes. And to any nation, like the United States, that is a target of Islamic terror. So there are sound reasons why the United States — whether led by George W. Bush or Barack Obama — will stand with Israel as it fights.
But Israel — assuming it succeeds — is doing the United States a favor by taking on Hamas now.
The huge challenge for the Obama administration is going to be Iran. If Israel had yielded to Hamas and refrained from using force to stop terror attacks, it would have been a victory for Iran. If Israel were now to withdraw under pressure without accomplishing the objectives of severely weakening Hamas and preventing the reconstitution of a terror-exporting state in Gaza, it would be a triumph for Iran. In either case, the Iranian regime would be emboldened, and less susceptible to the pressure from the Obama administration to stop its nuclear program.
But a defeat of Hamas in Gaza — following on the heels of our success in Iraq — would be a real setback for Iran. It would make it easier to assemble regional and international coalitions to pressure Iran. It might positively affect the Iranian elections in June. It might make the Iranian regime more amenable to dealing.
With respect to Iran, Obama may well face — as the Israeli government did with Hamas — a moment when the use of force seems to be the only responsible option. But Israel’s willingness to fight makes it more possible that the United States may not have to.
Looks like the fights are already starting in the WH
between Pelosi and the O.
"The California Democrat is pushing the president-elect to make good on a campaign promise that attracted some of the harshest criticism during the election -- that Mr. Obama is a typical tax-and-spend Democrat who would raise taxes once in office.
Mr. Obama has fought that label, emphasizing that any tax increase would be directed at those making more than $250,000. However, since the election, Mr. Obama has been reluctant even to raise taxes on people making that much.
Lawrence Summers, Mr. Obama's choice for director of the National Economic Council, signaled again Sunday that repealing the Bush tax cuts would not be a priority.
"Our overall focus is going to be on increasing spending," Mr. Summers said in a broadcast interview. "Beyond that, there's going to be a substantial tax cut for the American people."
See article.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123229863849393891.html
I wish he would start! nm
Yes, why don't we start with them?
You are definitely the chosen people: Chosen to be banned from heaven. This is what the people who pretend to support you really believe. And it must be true, because according to them, you and I will be spending eternity together, and no doubt that will be hell for us both.
Jerry Falwell: Jews and Muslims Can't Go to Heaven
Jerry Falwell gets further and further out there. His latest knucklehead theory is that Jews and Muslims can't go to heaven.
While I am a strong supporter of the State of Israel and dearly love the Jewish people and believe them to be the chosen people of God, I continue to stand on the foundational biblical principle that all people -- Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Jews, Muslims, etc. -- must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ in order to enter heaven. -Jerry Falwell
March 14, 2006
Wow...where to start....
Yes, I do agree about those entering our country to a point. I believe that they need to have respect for our laws or not be here. Yes, we are a government of the people BY the people. There is no clause that says "unless we don't find that convenient right now."
Respect for those in office...not so much unless it is earned. Respect for their office itself, yes.
Now, I'm not so sure about the rest of your post or where that came from about me believing I have a final word on everything and my way is the only way and that I am a one person catalyst to change. That was really out there, especially for the very little I have posted. I don't care for the daily Kos. I have never said where I get my news. I do not believe everything everyone tells me...actually very little that anyone tells me. My research is very accurate, however. Though I have never posted any of it on this board and have never needed to as I tend to stay out of these little spats because of the level to which they quickly degenerate. I don't mix emotion with politics. That's the wrong road for me and it is my belief that it's a big problem with politics today. People take hot button emotional issues and try to legislate with them and politicize them. BS as far as I'm concerned, and I don't really care what anyone else's opinion is of that.
So! If you want me to answer to all that, you'll have to actually explain what planet or universe it's coming from first because I am at a loss.
Why don't you start? How much do YOU think?
0%, 10%, 20%? Flat tax? Only some types of income? No taxes at all, and we pay as we go for everything, like school, toll roads, police, fire, federal sales tax?
here's a start
Eliminating Wasteful Spending
Stop Earmarks, Pork-Barrel Spending, And Waste: John McCain will veto every pork-laden spending bill and make their authors famous. As President, he will seek the line-item veto to reduce waste and eliminate earmarks that have led to corruption. Earmarks restrict America's ability to address genuine national priorities and interfere with fair, competitive markets.
Leadership, Courage And Choices: Reducing spending means making choices. John McCain will provide the courageous leadership necessary to control spending, including:
Eliminate broken government programs. The federal government itself admits that one in five programs do not perform.
Reform our civil service system to promote accountability and good performance in our federal workforce.
Reform procurement programs and cut wasteful spending in defense and non-defense programs.
Gee....where to start??....
I would close the borders. Nobody in unless comes through the LEGAL channels.
Then I would get rid of Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Jack Murtha, and others who ride their coat tails.
And then I would give myself the power of line item veto.
I could probably list more, but you only wanted 3. LOL.
i should start using a name on here
i was the one who asked about the father's rights and i agreed to your comment.
It may be a start.......... sm
but like I said, I think energy costs and environmental conservation will be the last thing on folks minds in a few short years.
Then I would start with....
taking away the right for christians to assemble. What you guys don't seem to realize is that when you start taking away rights, it sets a precedence for others to follow.
LOL....that's a start...(sm)
I would mess with you about the foot channel, but since you took the time to agree with me, I'll let it go this time.
MEOW
But why start
at the bottom? Why not set an example and tell congress, sorry you are NOT getting your raise?
I think we should all start asking
to speak to an American when we get phone calls or call a place and get an ESL on the line. Maybe if we refuse to speak to them....they might realize they need to hire some Americans.
Are we really going to start this again?
Let it go, already.
Me too! They always start my day off
And we keep some of her posts behind the desk in the Emergency Room, too. They've proven to be reliable emetics in poisoning cases.
I don't know where to start...
Lead him down the right path? and you do that by calling people dysfunctional, disgusting, etc, and all the other things I have seen you post. Patty, I won't argue this with you as I am afraid I may say something pretty unChristian. I am out of here.
That's start of the war in *2003* nm
Again, what if? That was my question to start with.
I'm not accusing anyone, I merely asked *what if*? I can't say with complete certainty that this happened anymore than you can say with complete certainty that it didn't. Minority status is fine with me, given the evidence and pervasive secrecy and lying of this administration. Have a nice day.
Very good start...sm
Thanks for the info LVMT.
What I wanted to know to start with...
is how can I know that Democrats/liberals/the left, WHOEVER, will keep this country safe, when half of them deny there is a threat and the other half have no idea how to deal with it? What I said it was not political, I meant it. Both sides should be trying to protect this country, but frankly I only see one who seems to understand the threat. As I have said numerous times, I am not a registered Repbulican. I am not thrilled with any party in this country right now, but I have to register as SOMETHING to vote, so I am registered independent. Yes, I am conservative, I have conservative moral values and I believe if we had stuck closer to moral values we would have a lot fewer issues these days, but I digress. My concern is, Dem, that I don't think your party and many of its members grasp what a real threat radical Muslims are, and if you don't perceive the threat you don't take steps to fight it, and that is the reason I referred to Clinton, because in all honesty I do not think he perceived the threat. I do not want to think that he did and ignored it. And my point is, I don't think your party to this day perceives the enormity of the threat, and yes, that scares me. This is not rhetoric. This is the way I, me, personally, feel and has nothing to do with left or right Dems or Republicans, other than the Republicans do seem to have a better grasp on the threat than the Dems do. What I would like to see is America united against the threat, with politics out of it. That is what I would REALLY like to see.
Here's why SP need to start vetting
OK. I'll take a crack at breaking this down for you. While SP was building her candidate resume back at the hut in Wasilla, her predecessor in the governor's office teed her off after he SELECTED her (not an elected position) as Chairman of the Ethics Committee. When she started whistle-blowing on those entrenched Juneau cronies, he tended not to take her housekeeping recommendations to heart. Being such a strong and powerful woman, she launched a campaign of her own to take his seat away from him based on her ethics platform. Once in that chair, she spent a great deal of time and taxpayer's money scrapping more than 300 of his development plans in the name of fiscal responsibility and kicked out 30-some-odd of his other appointees, being the woman scorned and all.
FF back to the future. Once JM has ridden to victory on her coattails and puts her back in that token female corner where she belongs, McWayne proceeds to run the same style of corrupt, unethical administration of his mentor, the W. She takes the backseat VP position and waits for him to become incapacitated and gets bored waiting around to cast a tie-breaking vote in the senate. She falls back on the only experience she has…ethics butt-kicking.
She's not afraid to bulldoze her own party members, as her record so clearly indicates, so kick butt she does. If she can't successfully take aim at her boss man, like she did before, maybe JM will simply expire and thrust her up into the Prez chair. Failing that, riding on the crest of the hypnotic spell she has cast over the pub party and taking advantage of the leftover collective amnesia the nation finds itself suspended in the aftermath of the 2008 pub campaign, she mounts a successful pub candidacy for Prez, in which case she will need to choose a running mate. Got the picture?
Oh, REALLY? Like you guys don't start to -sm
soil your panties everytime you come across another person who doesn't think exactly like you in every way?
I know -- but everytime you start to
feel a scintilla of sympathy for them, they lunge at ya with the retracted lips and missing, yellowed teeth.
Not to start a race war
People can raise this question over and over again but what I would like to know is this: Has anyone ever raised the same questions regarding white candidates in this and/or past elections and why people voted for them? Of course not...I wouldn't care if Obama were multicolored - people are going to vote for whomever they choose and I for one am weary of the constant references to race...
Start at the top and work you way down.
then why not remove yourself from the dialog?
Oh brother - where to start is right.
His father left his mother when he was a baby? Yet Obama was able to write a whole book based on him? He has some communication with Kenyan relatives but not all? Where did you hear this? Wait...from him? Is that his explanation? So where did you study African Tribal Family Structures and the American family strucures? I think maybe people should take a break from the Survivor TV show. If the sheeple want to be led around blindly and actually buy into the same ol retoric of oh poor Obama, he didn't know he had an aunt or a cousin or an uncle because that's the way the "tribes in Africa" are, but he knows about all these others relative (Cheney & Irish ones). Glad I'm awake through all of this. Staying away from Survivor and doing some research does the mind some good.
You could start by considering Lincoln's
and take it from there. Keep in mind, Lincoln was republican. IMHO, Obama could do worse when it comes to mentors.
That was not necessary. Let's not start bashing again
Had enough of that before the election. She voiced an opinion. Let it rest.
And to think, the head of the KKK at the start
nm
I DID NOT START THIS, THE LYING 'M' DID..n/m
n/m
start a phoney war
Even mr. So? cheney admitted they were going to do it whatever the results of inspections were, let people drown in Katrina, let the terrorists kill 2000 people -- but dodge that shoe, and my, my what a great leader you are. Groan. I am so glad the majority of citizens woke up.
start a phoney war
Even mr. So? cheney admitted they were going to do it whatever the results of inspections were, let people drown in Katrina, let the terrorists kill 2000 people -- but dodge that shoe, and my, my what a great leader you are. Groan. I am so glad the majority of citizens woke up.
AND, this is it. The start of government
Before you know it, no more talk shows, no more Christian radio stations, no more Christian music. Just government taking over EVERYTHING.
Dems can say horrible things about Bush, but GOD FORBID IF ANYONE DARE SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT OBAMA.
American is no more. YOU ALL WANTED CHANGE, YOU SURE AS HECK GOING TO GET YOUR CHANGE.
Off to a good start? Do you have a TV?
He's is so NOT off to a good start to the point his white house (MY white house) is being overwhelmed with phone calls of the American people saying NO, NO, NO! They want his stimulus package dumped! How is that off to a good start? Nobody even wants anything so far he has to offer..............
If that's the case, why did you start this one?
x
Didn't you start this?
Aren't you the original poster? Who were you trying to speak for? Maybe you should follow your own advice. There are plenty of people who didn't see this as a racial cartoon, but you sure had to put it out there.
When you start talking about...(sm)
free healthcare, you start getting into the pockets of the drug companies and those they support, and guess who that is.
That would be a nice start...
but don't see it happening!
Those two morons deserve each other, though. Talk about two people that can open mouth and insert foot.
They are going to HAVE to start arming
nm
He did not start that term FYI!
He was quoting what others had nicknamed the man already. You just can't let crazy people be crazy people, can you? Instead you have to pick some conservative leaning person to blame everything on. The man who shot Tiller is to blame for this...no one else.
Or how about this....if Tiller had never aborted so many fetuses late term for questionable reasons, other than the mother's health, he never would have been under investigation and he would never have been publically exposed. So whose fault is this really? I personally feel that if Tiller had stayed within the guidelines on this, he never would have made nation wide news in the first place.
However, regardless of his actions and whether or not I find them to be disgusting, he still should not have been gunned down. The man who killed him is a crazy wacko. No one told him to do it. He took it upon himself to do it. He is to blame for his actions....not Bill O'Reilly. So how about you stop the spin, stop the blame game, and actually make people take responsibility for their own actions.
That is a big problem with our country today. Too many people pointing the finger at others and not enough people admitting their own faults and taking blame for what they have done. Much easier to point the finger and blame someone else.
You really don't want to start the war of the videos, do you?
x
Then ACORN should start by getting rid of
nm
I'm going to have to start watching his show...nm
One more question...and I am NOT trying to start a fight....
just curious as to what you mean by "extremely conservative viewpoint?" Could you give examples? I won't even respond if you do not want me to...I just want to know what you consider an extremely conservative viewpoint.
Thanks!
That is a good place to start...
and just outlawing abortion in the case of rape, incest, or endangering the life of the mother would stop 90% of all abortions in this country. Yes, a staggering 90+% of abortions in this country are "oops" abortions...a horrific form of birth control. I personally believe it is wrong for any reason; however, it is even more horrific to be done because someone could not bother to be responsible for her own body. There SHOULD be some responsibility here. As for the developmentally delayed child, who are we to decide whether or not that child's life is miserable? The baby that spurred the Infant Born Alive law had down's syndrome. That's all. Down's syndrome. Have you seen Down's children? Most of them are VERY happy children, the sweetest, kindest, most innocent individuals on the planet. And being a Down's baby was his death sentence. There is no way in this world that is right. No way, no how, not in my books.
Again, we agree to disagree. If you are pro choice, and vote for a law that allows it, you are pro abortion, because you are enabling it. Sadly, you can't have it both ways. And no living thing, I don't care what stage it is in, deserves to be hacked to bits and sucked out of a place where it should be safe. That is horrific, heinous, and it amazes me that anyone with any compassion at all could be pro abortion or pro letting someone choose to do that to another human being.
I will admit it. I was pro life BEFORE I viewed that video...and still that video has FOREVER changed my perception.
why did you even bring this up - looks like you are trying to start a fight
Everytime a subject is brought out you seem to like to interject a bash to Sam. I've been reading the posts and nowhere in response to my post here did I see sam post a "message with the express intent of wreaking havoc and instigating argument". I'm reading the responses to my post about issues and I'm not seeing one from sam called "let the games begin", so I have no idea what you are talking about. If your talking about another post awhile back, then start a new thread, but for Pete's sake don't drag it into mine. Forget sam - it looks like you are the one who is trying to start arguments. Leave your personal hatred out of this and be an adult for once. Posts like this I would expect from my 12 year old, but we are adults here. What's frustrating is to finally start reading about a lot of issues that both sides would like to know about and info they are sharing with us and then all of a sudden - bam, here comes your post bashing sam. I'm sitting here now looking at all the responses to my post and I'm not seeing the one you are talking about. Lets stick to issues and facts. It also sounds like some other posters want that too.
Then start a thread. No one is stopping you.
nm
Too early to tell, but this looks like a good start! =)
nm
Liberals work? When did that start?
nm
|
