And people wonder why leftists are equated with traitors...

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-07-11 05:35pm

And I don't mean ALL leftist, by any stretch of the imagination. But you have to admit, the so-called "peace" movement can say and do some things that are pretty hateful. This ranks right up there with that famous "we support our troops when they shoot their officers" sign.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... 272984.DTL

Note the 5th letter down, a letter to the editor in the San Francisco Chronicle:

Editor -- The constant loss of U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- after the war is "won" -- is a tragedy. However, if this is what it takes to retire the Bush administration at the next election, the sacrifice is justified.

SANDY JANE WONG
Mountain View

This woman is basically saying it's alright for American soldiers to be killed, and for their wives to be widowed, their children to be orphaned, their loved ones to go through the tortuous anguish of losing them before their time, etc. as long as it gets Bush defeated at the next election.

The sheer spitefulness, pettiness and hatred of people like these is disgusting. As much as I detested Clinton, you certainly didn't see me cheering the deaths of the 18 soldiers we lost in Somalia because I thought it might hurt him in the election.

Ms. Sandy Jane Wong is a shitty excuse for a human being.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-07-11 05:41pm

Ugh. I won't cheapen myself as a human being by clicking on that link.

Anarchist Bunny · Post by **Anarchist Bunny** » 2003-07-11 06:33pm

Hmmmm, this thread is giving me ideas for the "If life was like GTA..." thread.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-07-11 09:53pm

Not to be a contrarian, but how is this any worse than Axis Kast declaring that considerable loss of American and Iraqi life is perfectly acceptable if it keeps oil prices down?

TheFeniX · Post by **TheFeniX** » 2003-07-11 10:16pm

Darth Wong wrote:Not to be a contrarian, but how is this any worse than Axis Kast declaring that considerable loss of American and Iraqi life is perfectly acceptable if it keeps oil prices down?

It's really not. It just shows that both side claim to be working for "the greater good" when all most (all) politicians care about is getting re-elected.

I would also like to see the article where they declared that Oil > Soldiers lives. Seems like an interesting read.

I'm still sketchy on exactly what we accomplished in Iraq, but I do know one thing: I support the troops over there because they are the ones actually fighting and doing the work. I have 3 friends in Iraq (well, two now, one came back after having a tank shell blow up in his hand, don't ask) and I would prefer to think that their lives mean more than some asshole getting their way politically.

Unfortnately, I'm living in a pipe-dream.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-07-11 10:24pm

I'm still sketchy on exactly what we accomplished in Iraq

We took down a bad regime we were partially responsible for and got a new base of operations in the Middle East, which will allow us to take a harder line with the Saudi desert sheiks in the future.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-07-11 10:55pm

Er....Sandy Jady Wong did not write that editorial. It was written by

Editor -- The constant loss of U.S. soldiers in Iraq -- after the war is "won" -- is a tragedy. However, if this is what it takes to retire the Bush administration at the next election, the sacrifice is justified.

ARIE L. BLEICHER

Mill Valley

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-07-11 11:14pm

How is this any different from saying that it's justified for someone to consider all right-wingers racist bigots if one redneck in Bunktussel, Alabama joins the army so he can go and kill him some sand-niggers and glorify Bush Almighty?

Let's not pretend that one side is benevolent in this ordeal. The extremists on each side are just as bad and just as stupid.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-07-11 11:25pm

No one ever said they weren't; the extremists on my side of the debate have said some pretty scary shit, too. Go read some John Derbyshire columns at NRO; this guy has seriously advocated nuking the entire third world if the war on terror doesn't go our way.

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-07-11 11:30pm

Perinquus wrote: This woman is basically saying it's alright for American soldiers to be killed, and for their wives to be widowed, their children to be orphaned, their loved ones to go through the tortuous anguish of losing them before their time, etc. as long as it gets Bush defeated at the next election.

The sheer spitefulness, pettiness and hatred of people like these is disgusting. As much as I detested Clinton, you certainly didn't see me cheering the deaths of the 18 soldiers we lost in Somalia because I thought it might hurt him in the election.

Ms. Sandy Jane Wong is a shitty excuse for a human being.

Now, just putting this out here, but wasn't that the exact same argument used by Bush in his speeches promoting war in Afghanistan and Iraq - that the costs would be justified by removing the regime from power?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-07-11 11:32pm

weemadando wrote:
Perinquus wrote: This woman is basically saying it's alright for American soldiers to be killed, and for their wives to be widowed, their children to be orphaned, their loved ones to go through the tortuous anguish of losing them before their time, etc. as long as it gets Bush defeated at the next election.

The sheer spitefulness, pettiness and hatred of people like these is disgusting. As much as I detested Clinton, you certainly didn't see me cheering the deaths of the 18 soldiers we lost in Somalia because I thought it might hurt him in the election.

Ms. Sandy Jane Wong is a shitty excuse for a human being.

Now, just putting this out here, but wasn't that the exact same argument used by Bush in his speeches promoting war in Afghanistan and Iraq - that the costs would be justified by removing the regime from power?

Advancing that argument to get rid of a piece of shit, terror-supporting regime like the Taliban is one thing; advancing it to get rid of a President who isn't even remotely on par with that regime that you disapprove of is quite another.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-07-11 11:33pm

Durran Korr wrote:Go read some John Derbyshire columns at NRO; this guy has seriously advocated nuking the entire third world if the war on terror doesn't go our way.

Hmm...could someone please explain the negatives of such an action to me?
It seems like these SOBs out there just want to kill americans...we might as
well kill them before they kill us.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-07-11 11:35pm

Hmm...could someone please explain the negatives of such an action to me?
It seems like these SOBs out there just want to kill americans...we might as
well kill them before they kill us.

Enlightenment has merged with Sheppard!

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-07-11 11:39pm

Durran Korr wrote:No one ever said they weren't; the extremists on my side of the debate have said some pretty scary shit, too. Go read some John Derbyshire columns at NRO; this guy has seriously advocated nuking the entire third world if the war on terror doesn't go our way.

Perinquus makes it seem like the left is the only side with total dolts populating it. So I'll be happy to step in and remind everyone that any point of view, no matter how correct, is held by a complete, utter fucking moron, somewhere out there.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-07-12 12:40am

Durran Korr wrote: Enlightenment has merged with Sheppard!

There IS something to be said for getting them before they get
us....which is essentially the base of most counter-terror black
ops, killing known terrorists before they spring their schemes on
us...

Way I see it, if they're going to be brutally honest with us about
teh fact that they want to kill Americans, then I'll be honest with
them too - that I wouldn't shed a tear if they should somehow
die "accidentially" preferably the kind of "accident" involving the
words "AGM-86B" and "nuclear detonation"

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-07-12 06:38am

Durandal wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:No one ever said they weren't; the extremists on my side of the debate have said some pretty scary shit, too. Go read some John Derbyshire columns at NRO; this guy has seriously advocated nuking the entire third world if the war on terror doesn't go our way.
Perinquus makes it seem like the left is the only side with total dolts populating it. So I'll be happy to step in and remind everyone that any point of view, no matter how correct, is held by a complete, utter fucking moron, somewhere out there.

Just because you are inferring that, does not mean for an instant that I am suggesting, or even implying it. If you pick my post apart with a fine-toothed comb, nowhere will you find even a hint that I am suggesting that there are not conservative crackpots out there. The fact that I am silent on crackpot conservatives in this post indicates nothing more than the fact that that is not the subject of this thread.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-07-12 02:09pm

Not to be a contrarian, but how is this any worse than Axis Kast declaring that considerable loss of American and Iraqi life is perfectly acceptable if it keeps oil prices down?

It's not simply "keeping oil prices down," Wong. It's ensuring geopolitical outcomes consistent with American ambitions and denying future opponents - the European Union, Russian Federation, and People's Republic of China - any foothold of their own in Iraq.

Perinquus · Post by **Perinquus** » 2003-07-12 04:22pm

Small correction BTW. Looks like the name should be Ari L. Bleicher, not Sandy Jane Wong. Took the name from above the article instead of below it.

The Albino Raven · Post by **The Albino Raven** » 2003-07-12 04:53pm

I still fail to see how this letter to the editor differs from the war on terror. They both follow the same "ends justify the means" philosophy. I disagree with both. One problem that I do see within the liberal ranks these days is a type of hypocricy towards speech. They advocate it, unless it says somehting they don't like, then they fight it tooth and nail. If I can spout the values of socialism from the rooftops, I'm not justified trying to gag the fascist the next roof over.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-07-12 05:13pm

Perinquus makes it seem like the left is the only side with total dolts populating it. So I'll be happy to step in and remind everyone that any point of view, no matter how correct, is held by a complete, utter fucking moron, somewhere out there.

Jesus fucking Christ, Dur, the first thing that Perin points out is that he is NOT trying to condemn all leftists, and he still gets this bullshit thrown at him.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-07-12 05:52pm

Durran Korr wrote: Jesus fucking Christ, Dur, the first thing that Perin points out is that he is NOT trying to condemn all leftists, and he still gets this bullshit thrown at him.

There's a reason I refer to Durandal by a certain name

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-07-12 06:27pm

I withdraw my comments and apologize for not reading the post thoroughly enough.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-07-12 06:39pm

Perinquus wrote:
Durandal wrote:Perinquus makes it seem like the left is the only side with total dolts populating it. So I'll be happy to step in and remind everyone that any point of view, no matter how correct, is held by a complete, utter fucking moron, somewhere out there.
Just because you are inferring that, does not mean for an instant that I am suggesting, or even implying it.

No, the implication that you actually made was that leftists are all traitors.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-07-12 06:40pm

MKSheppard wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:Enlightenment has merged with Sheppard!
There IS something to be said for getting them before they get us ...

Funny ... that's exactly what Osama Bin Laden uses as his justification for terrorizing and killing people. Two sides of the same coin ...

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-07-12 06:44pm

Darth Wong wrote: Funny ... that's exactly what Osama Bin Laden uses as his justification for terrorizing and killing people. Two sides of the same coin ...

Wow, so you think that killing Osama Bin Laden back in 2000, when he had
plans of the WTC in his hands, and was planning the hijacking of the jets
is the same as detonating a shrapnel filled bomb in a crowded shopping mall?

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

And people wonder why leftists are equated with traitors...

And people wonder why leftists are equated with traitors...

Re: And people wonder why leftists are equated with traitors

Re: And people wonder why leftists are equated with traitors