Tim Kennedy's right wing views?

[Groundmaster]

Sure thing. Because their economy is so great right now...

It is NOT one of the worst in the world (actually it is in the better 50%) and it wasn't that good in the 1980s (when there was still apartheid you know). You must be really clueless or just not ashamed at ushering a blatant lie.

 

[lfd0311]

The US went in under a deliberatly planted false flag operation (much like Germanys invasion of Poland).

Stopped taking what you had to say seriously right there. That alone proves the level of ignorance we're dealing with.

But you are - obviously.

That's outright hilarious, especially after what you posted above...

 

[Groundmaster]

Stopped taking what you had to say seriously right there. That alone proves the level of ignorance we're dealing with.

So they did not lie about the existence of WMDs? They did not use this false pretext as an excuse to invade Iraq? They did not cause a major upheaval which cost countless lives?

 

[lfd0311]

So they did not lie about the existence of WMDs? They did not use this false pretext as an excuse to invade Iraq??

Nope. Like I said, you're completely clueless about the circumstances around the US invasion of Iraq.

They did not cause a major upheaval which cost countless lives?

Absolutely we did. But to sit here and pretend that those are "civilian casualities" is almost as absurd as what you posted above.

 

[Groundmaster]

Nope. Like I said, you're completely clueless about the circumstances around the US invasion of Iraq.

So this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovHrd-Q3Av0 never happened? Are you living in complete denial?

Absolutely we did. But to sit here and pretend that those are "civilian casualities" is almost as absurd as what you posted above.

Women children and male noncombatants - in one word civilians.

 

[lfd0311]

So this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovHrd-Q3Av0 never happened? Are you living in complete denial?.

LOL, This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're completely ignorant. It's so easy to lead people like you down the path I want you to go, it's sad. Do you even know where this information came from? Like where it really came from, and not just what the Liberal Media will tell you for political reasons? I'm guessing that's a big "no"

Women children and male noncombatants - in one word civilians.

Another massive intentional misinterpretation of information for political purpouse. There have been about 100k people killed total, the vast majority of those armed fighters, in Iraq in the time we were there. Suggesting that we killed 100,000 unarmed woman and children in nothing short of absurbly ignorant.

 

[Groundmaster]

LOL, This is exactly what I'm talking about. You're completely ignorant. It's so easy to lead people like you down the path I want you to go, it's sad. Do you even know where this information came from? Like where it really came from, and not just what the Liberal Media will tell you for political reasons? I'm guessing that's a big "no"

Ah you are a conspiracy theorist. That explains a lot. No reason to continue arguing with you.

Another massive intentional misinterpretation of information for political purpouse. There have been about 100k people killed total, the vast majority of those armed fighters, in Iraq in the time we were there. Suggesting that we killed 100,000 unarmed woman and children in nothing short of absurbly ignorant.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131015-iraq-war-deaths-survey-2013/

 

[lfd0311]

Ah you are a conspiracy theorist. That explains a lot. No reason to continue arguing with you.

..... Ah conspiracy theorist? I have no idea how you came to this conclusion based on what I said. On top of that, aren't you the one who claimed this was a "false flag operation" predicated on intentional lies told by the government? And that isn't Troofer cultish?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/10/131015-iraq-war-deaths-survey-2013/

Did you even read the article you posted, or did you just click on the first thing you googled?

More than 60 percent of the excess deaths of men, women, and children reported from 2003 to 2011 were the direct result of shootings, bombings, airstrikes, or other violence, according to the study. The rest came indirectly, from stress-related heart attacks or ruined sanitation and hospitals.

That means that right up front they're admitting that 162,000 of the deaths they are attributing to the war are out right BS and don't belong in their study. Doesn't really bode well for the authenticity of the rest of the study, does it? Iraqbodycount.org is a very left wing, very anti war organization that keeps track of ALL death by violent means, related to us or not, and attributes it to "civilian casualties", and even their totally scewed, biased count has it at 188,000 deaths, total. Like I said, you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.

 

[nixkid]

I love how a group can invade an area, subjugate its people and make them second class citizens in their own homeland. Kill, rape and steal for 300 years. And, in spite of all of this, the world is supposed to judge the opposition by how their oppressors view them and allow the oppressors to set the parameters for how they can be engaged by the opposition. And this all sounds normal and logical to many of you. It sounds like white privilege to me.

300 years of oppression...no problem but kill a few hundred civilians (AFTER many attacks on blacks by the Apartheid government) and thats just taking it too far.

 

[lfd0311]

I love how a group can invade an area, subjugate its people and make them second class citizens in their own homeland. Kill, rape and steal for 300 years. And, in spite of all of this, the world is supposed to judge the opposition by how their oppressors view them and allow the oppressors to set the parameters for how they can be engaged by the opposition. And this all sounds normal and logical to many of you. It sounds like white privilege to me.

300 years of oppression...no problem but kill a few hundred civilians (AFTER many attacks on blacks by the Apartheid government) and thats just taking it too far.

Feel free to point out a single post in this thread where someone has defended Apartheid

 

[nixkid]

Feel free to point out a single post in this thread where someone has defended Apartheid

That is in effect what you're doing when you make the claim that a people don't have the right to free themselves from a repressive government by ANY matter in which they are able to including violence. If you are oppressing a group by force, you don't get to decide which reactions that group responds with are off limits.

 

[Groundmaster]

..... Ah conspiracy theorist? I have no idea how you came to this conclusion based on what I said.

Because you refuse the obvious. The US administration wanted tro attack Iraq. They lied about the reasons to get public support. This is well documentated. A conspiracy theory is no longer one if all the facts are spilled.

That means that right up front they're admitting that 162,000 of the deaths they are attributing to the war are out right BS and don't belong in their study.

No it does not mean that. Ppl who died bc US bombs destroyed the hospitals in which they would have been treated are just as dead because of the USs actions as those shot by a US sniper.

also:

The US went in under a deliberatly planted false flag operation (much like Germanys invasion of Poland) and supplanted a violent militaristic dictator with an unstable democracy being (directly or indirectly) responsible for the deaths of well over a 100k civilians.

 

[lfd0311]

That is in effect what you're doing when you make the claim that a people don't have the right to free themselves from a repressive government by ANY matter in which they are able to including violence. If you are oppressing a group by force, you don't get to decide which reactions that group responds with are off limits.

Now please point out where somebody said THAT? What people have been saying, truthfully, is that this invention of Mandela being a smiling, friendly old grandfather figure who stood for racial equality and understanding is nothing more than an invention of the Western Left Wing media that even Mandela said he didn't quite understand.

 

[lfd0311]

Because you refuse the obvious The US administration wanted tro attack Iraq. They lied about the reasons to get public support.

That isn't "obvious" though. I've asked already, do you know where that information came from? The sources and how it was gathered? That isn't some stupid conspiracy theory, it's documented fact, so why do you keep not answering that question?

This is well documentated

It is well documented. You'er also reaffirming with this post that you haven't the faintest idea what your'e talking about

No it does not mean that. Ppl who died bc US bombs destroyed the hospitals in which they would have been treated are just as dead because of the USs actions as those shot by a US sniper.

162,000 people did not die because of any hospital that may or may not have been destroyed, especially when you take into consideration that avoiding that kind of
collateral damage was an objective from the outset. You're just repeating nonsense.

The US went in under a deliberatly planted false flag operation (much like Germanys invasion of Poland) and supplanted a violent militaristic dictator with an unstable democracy being (directly or indirectly) responsible for the deaths of well over a 100k civilians.

And then posted a link to an article that claimed there were 405,000 civilian casualties in Iraq, of which 243,000 where directly a result of combat. Your numbers are all over the place and completely off base

 

[Groundmaster]

truthfully, is that this invention of Mandela being a smiling, friendly old grandfather figure who stood for racial equality and understanding is nothing more than an invention of the Western Left Wing media that even Mandela said he didn't quite understand.

The reason why this picture (while decidedly untrue for the Mandela of the 1950s) is the overriding one is that the end of the apartheid regime came with music and party not with death and violence. Not one of the former regime was sentenced to death. The main point was unity not revenge.

 

[Groundmaster]

That isn't "obvious" though. I've asked already, do you know where that information came from? The sources and how it was gathered? That isn't some stupid conspiracy theory, it's documented fact, so why do you keep not answering that question?

So you concede that Powell lied to the UN?

162,000 people did not die because of any hospital that may or may not have been destroyed

That was YOUR example - or rather the one you quoted.

, especially when you take into consideration that avoiding that kind of
collateral damage was an objective from the outset. You're just repeating nonsense.

They did not WANT to do it - oh then its all good.

And then posted a link to an article that claimed there were 405,000 civilian casualties in Iraq, of which 243,000 where directly a result of combat. Your numbers are all over the place and completely off base

I said well over 100k civilians. This is bc I know that estimates are anywhere between 100k and 1.5 million. I choose the article bc I'd say that national geographic is a well respected magazine.

 

[lfd0311]

The reason why this picture (while decededly untrue for the Mandela of the 1950s) is the overriding one is that the end of the apartheid regime came with music and party not with death and violence. Not one of the former regime was sentenced to death. The main point was unity not revenge.

And I'm sure that was because of Western influence, not because of Mandela. Mandela was a killer, and unapologetically so. Not that that is a denegration on him.

 

[Groundmaster]

And I'm sure that was because of Western influence, not because of Mandela.

And I am sure that you are wrong. Not that mandela did this - but that african societys are more 'flexible' when it comes to forgive and forget.
Mandela was just the figurehead of the movement and also (together with De Clerc) the one who stood against revenge.

 

[lfd0311]

So you concede that Powell lied to the UN?

Nope. Was the information he had incorrect? yes it was. Did they lie? Nope. For the third time, do you know where this info came from? Any clue? Even an inkling?

That was YOUR example - or rather the one you quoted.

LOL, from an article you used as "proof" of what you where talking about. Are we actually going to debate that 162,000 is 40% of 405,000? Really?

They did not WANT to do it - oh then its all good.

Nope, it outright didn't happen. Not to the extent that it would have caused 162,000 deaths over 8 years. That's complete absurdity

 

[lfd0311]

And I am sure that you are wrong. Not that mandela did this - but that african societys are more 'flexible' when it comes to forgive and forget.

LOL, what Africa are you talking about? estimates suggest that 40,000 white people have been killed specifically because of their race since Mandela took over.