A Los Angeles woman is suing Toyota for *$10 MILLION* over a marketing campaign that she claims "punked" her into incorrectly believing she was being stalked.
She even made her longtime boyfriend sleep with a club and mace next to the bed for protection.
Yeah, you need $10 million to cover that. Only in USA.
This also makes me wonder; maybe she had something to hide because she got so scared?
Leave it to some asshole to say this is an endemic problem with being a citizen of the USA. Maybe opting in to receive advertisements from Toyota is a little different than signing up for a stalkeresque marketing assault. By your logic, it would be completely within my legal rights to personally visit every single person on my opt-in advertising distribution group, and punch them in the face as a part of my new "ad campaign", then when they sue me and press assault charges I can simply claim they opted-in so they have no legal recourse.
People like you, making comments like these, are the reason people like me consistently tell you that a) you are really a fucking asshole, b) you clearly belong in totalitarian, egalitarian, corporatist or socialist society which the US is not, and finally c) if you're this big of a piece of shit and you live in the US, GET THE FUCK OUT and stop trying to change our country into some European colony (I know, the irony...)
I imagine the US is Fred, Velma, Daphne, Shaggy, and Scooby (aka Scooby and the gang). This makes China the classic Scooby-Doo villain. I can hear China in my head as I type this... "If it weren't for those meddling kids!"
One reason not to use Cloud Computing is that I can avoid Ribbon Interface crapola (as was in Office 2007), and just keep using my older software. Or I can ignore Vista/ME and just keep using older XP/98 operating systems. With cloud computing using older programs won't be an option, because it will be forced upon you.
Yeah? You can also knit your clothes by hand, but I'm sure you already know all about looms.
DDO uses DirectX for rendering, and it would take a LOT of effort/money to recode the graphics engine at this point, and since the number of Mac people who would pay money would be fairly low, the return on investment would be so low that it would be a money losing effort. Then again, you KNEW that the selection of games that support Mac was fairly low when you bought your computer, so if you want to play games, you should have known that you would need to set up Windows to play the vast majority of games.
You also have to look at how many people on a given platform may turn into paying customers early in the program development cycle. If you do not expect many Mac people to buy your game, and it will cost $1 million in development costs to support that platform, do you REALLY see it as a wise investment? DDO started as a regular MMO with a subscription, and Free to Play only came out YEARS after the initial release. With this in mind, would you REALLY expect that the Mac platform would have made Turbine a profit?
Doesn't WINE work on Mac? I thought I downloaded the Mac version during the Lame Duck Challenge on the slim chance I would decide to spend frivolously on a computer.
http://cedegawiki.sweetleafstudios.com/wiki/Dungeons_and_Dragons_Stormreach
After reading those instructions, I have to wonder why so many zealots bitch and moan about Microsoft, knowing that a game is designed around that specific platform... I personally wouldn't cry that Mario was designed to run on Nintendo because I can jump through 1000 hoops to make it work on my Sega. I'm just sayin...
I know this a joke, but it does remind me of something. One of the arguments that people on the far right have tried to use to convince the public that Iran is trying to build bombs and not energy is: "Iran has so much oil, why would they care about nuclear energy?"
Easy, sherlock... they aren't going to have oil forever. Iran might be thinking ahead. They might not want to make the same mistake that the U.S. made it comes to oil dependency.
Having said that, I still think that Iran's program is to make a bomb... but I think that argument is idiotic.
I hope you realize that the US made a strategic decision decades ago (thinking ahead) to deplete foreign oil reserves before their own.
I firmly believe Iran's intentions are to deny the Jewish Holocaust happened, to deny Israel as a legitimate state, and (as clearly stated to multiple countries multiple times by their fanatic religious leader and fanatic secular leader) to destroy Israel and it's peoples.
I sincerely hope that Israel nukes Iran's nuke site the very femtosecond it becomes operational.
Last first: you only need commas before reported speech, and then only when you have a pause for clarity. Mine had no pause for clarity, and besides, it's paraphrased, not a quote.
First last: punctuation that doesn't belong to the quote belongs outside the quotation, otherwise you're misquoting. Did Armstrong say, "One small step for [...] man?" No. He wasn't confused. Hence Webster's English is wrong wrong wrong on that point.
Yawn. I hope you realize there is a difference between American English, and English.
If the US didn't interfere with genocidal maniacs goals, there is a high probability the Earth would no longer be inhabited by the Jews. I thank God that we did interfere, and it saddens me that we don't have the troops or resources to interfere in more places.
Besides your response is just half a step away from Godwin's Law, equating the US's response to Pearl Harbor with its unilateral or majority acts of war since is ridiculous to the extreme.
Just, WOW. Really? You really fucking think it's relevant to cite Godwin's Law when we are talking about genocide, and the fucking Nazi Gustapo were like the mother of all genociders? FFS...
You might want to read up on World War II, because to actually fucking think that we liberated the Jews because of Pearl Harbor, you are severely undereducated on the subject.:(
I can happily arrange an experiment, one in which you illegally perform a wiretap on me, and one in which I alert the authorities of your behavior. Would you like to participate?
Now that's some seriously skewed logic... by you arranging the "wiretap" in question, you're directly consenting to the recording. Now, let's look at what you just said:
I can't consent to illegal activities. Your circularly flawed logic does not compute.
Yes let's run around in more circles and go back to what I said.
I can happily arrange an experiment, one in which you illegally perform a wiretap on me, and one in which I alert the authorities of your behavior. Would you like to participate?
As a citizen I cannot give you permission to violate the law. That means that inviting you to participate in an experiment where you commit an illegal activity in no way gives my consent for you to commit said illegal activity. For you to be correct, I would have had to have worded it not only specifically without the qualifier "illegally," but also without the word "experiment." So, it would have looked more like the following sentence:
I can happily arrange for you to perform a wiretap on me, would you like to?
That would be an invitation and consent to do a wiretap, not an invitation and consent to break the law.
Once again, you're not consenting to illegal activity in a case where you're the one offering to arrange the event, given the fact that it would then be perfectly legal.
Once again, you are trying to use your circularly flawed logic, but as I said before it does not compute.
If you're going to accuse someone of lacking basic logic skills, you should probably make sure you're not the one in need of an education.
What is your level of formal education, anyhow?
3 years of technical college for computer programming (Fortran/Pascal/C/C++), 2 years of community college for mathematics (calculus), English, and Japanese, and 1 year of university for Japanese.
I very easily see your circular logic. I can, in fact, write your argument compared to mine in pseudo code to prove that yours is basically a silly infinite loop.
Half that stuff happened during the bush and reagan years. Were those guys socialists or totalitarians? Or are you saying that it's France's fault we sit on our ass watching people die unless they're white or have oil?
France, among other countries, is overseas yes. However, you can't blame a single man (in your case, the President of the US of A). You blame Congress and all of our foreign diplomats. For over 30 years they have been trying to turn the US into some bastard child from Europe.
After reading a lot of history about my homeland (US of A) I'm a firm believer that the we did better as a mostly isolationist country, and that things have gone severely downhill since the beginning of the Cold War and all these foreign trade agreements. It's allowed these new politicians personal gain, when their job is to serve the people. It's allowed these people to turn a civic duty into a career path. As such, they make deals that benefit them personally and cause great harm to the working middle class, which built this country.
It's these selfish, greedy politicians and corporate lobbyists that prevent us from doing the "right" thing, because often times the "right" thing will piss off all of our foreign trade partners, and thus shrink their personal pocket books. It's their fault we only act on possibility of profit. I'm quite sure that if the Jewish Holocaust were to happen today, that our Congress and our President would rather sit around and talk about it than act to put a stop to it.
So naive - they've been killing kurds over there so long it's practically tradition. Are we going to invade turkey for killing kurds? Did we care about them during the iran/iraq war? Are we doing anything about darfur? No, we seem to care about genocide when it suits us.
Given that, we should have used our limited means to go after afghanistan, which is what we're moving towards now.
Correction: we currently seem to care about genocide when it suits us because currently our leaders (in the USA) have so many ties to the socialists, totalitarians, corporatists, and egalitarians overseas. If we cut those ties, and stop caring about what they think, I believe you would find us invading more places where humanitarian injustices and things like genocide are occurring.
I just love it when the frothing-at-the-mouth liberals try to blame a single, US "official" for doing something EVEYRONE FUCKING KNOWS was the right thing to do, even if the reason was falsified.
Sorry, but now that there is a "liberal" in office, it's the other guys that get to do the frothing at the mouth. Well, except for the libertards, they get to froth at the *mouth* regardless of who is in office. Not that it really matters, US congress seems to be stacked with retards anyway, no matter which party they claim to represent. In the land of the blind...
As for everyone fucking knowing it was the right thing to do...why all the lies then? Surely if putting Saddam out of business was something we'd all be squarely behind about there was no need to fabricate a brick of lies to justify doing so?
The reason for all the lies is actually rather simple. You see, for 30 some odd years the US has been under attack by socialists, corporatists, egalitarians and totalitarians. As such, many people currently in power have loyalties that lie outside of the US borders. This means they must at all cost avoid pissing off their backroom-deal-making-foreign-allies. My guess is that it took a lie to get the majority of people on board, regardless of how many socialists it pissed of.
How about the asshole who gave the asshole gassing the Kurds the gas in the first place?
Oh right, that would be Donald Rumsfeld who completed that deal during the Reagen administration, not Richard Cheney.
I'm sorry when exactly do you think Regan took office? The Iraqi's were trying to kill all the Kurds since about 1960. Killing the Kurds and stealing their oilfields. So what if the gas was purchased and used later, the genocide attempt was going on for 20 years prior.
I just love it when the frothing-at-the-mouth liberals try to blame a single, US "official" for doing something EVEYRONE FUCKING KNOWS was the right thing to do, even if the reason was falsified.
I'm sorry, I lost the thread - are you actually saying that killing kurds was the right thing to do and that only frothing libs care about that? Really not sure what you're on about.
Yes you lost the thread. I'm saying I don't care if it was a lie that was the final motivation to get the US to invade. It was the right thing to do, and politics is not a game that can be played while a genocide is occurring.
Such an asinine statement. Who has more ethics, the asshole gassing the Kurds or the asshole that bombs the asshole gassing the Kurds (regardless of the reason)?
Neither one. One 0 is not greater nor less than another 0.
Parent attempts to contradict the assertion that Cheney unethically falsified intelligence by pointing out that Saddam Hussein was also unethical. So what?
That is a red herring.
If you think its OK to lie to congress if you have a good reason, just say so.
As is, parent's post is simply a fallacy.
I think everyone is a lying asshole. I think when there is a genocide in progress, if the truth doesn't provide proper motivation to interfere than a lie is appropriate. I'm glad we invaded, and I'm glad the genocide was stopped by our hand.
Oh, and it's "Reagan", not "Regan". Sometimes it can be "Raygun". Sometimes it can be standing in front of a bunch of veterans telling them "I was in uniform once".
Since we're being grammar assholes, punctuation belongs inside the quotation marks. Oh, and a comma before quoted speech, as in I say, "Fuck you."
I don't blame any one person. I blame the entire electorate for falling for Cheney's fearmongering (which he himself was a victim of, having asked for a list of threats, rather than the usual filtered list of threats presented by order of magnitude -- if you don't know what I'm talking about, please research it before wasting my time on a response on that particular issue... moving right along...).
Yes, the genocide was wrong and should have been curbed many decades earlier. But the way the US went about it was manipulative (of the American people and the US's allies) and underhand (internationally). It was an abuse of power like none we've ever seen.
You don't win a battle of minds with dirty tricks, and international politics is all mind games.
At least you agree there was a genocide in progress that the US put a stop to.
We shot Iraqi people, We bombed Iraqi people, and we occupied their land.
We also at this point have likely reduced Kurdish autonomy for better cooperation with Turkey.
We didn't even hit Suddam with a bomb, so saying we bombed the asshole gassed the Kurds is absurd on the face of it.
We bombed many locations owned and operated by Saddam and his regime. I remember some awesome pictures of some hamburger patties formerly known as his sons Uday and Qusay. We bombed the shit out of them, they were identified by dental records:)
Blame it on years of us frothing-at-the-mouth liberals trying to explain rationally all the factors of complex foreign policy to batsh*t crazy conservatives who only look at the world in terms of black and white and get their information from Fox News as opposed to actually reading books on the subject.
Haha, are you the same "you suck cuz you watch Fox News" jerk that's trolling me on several threads thinking that I watch Fox News? R O F L
Errr... the genocide was going on for decades beforehand.
Also in several other places.
Why does it seem to be so hard for Americans (particularly Republican'ts) to understand why people the world over do not like the US setting itself up as "World's Policeman"?
If I was a smartass, I would have just said:
So what you are really saying is that you don't support unilateral military action against genocide in foreign countries while similar genocide takes place unnoticed in other countries, and preventing it no matter what the social, political, environmental, and economic fallout is, is wrong. Nice. See you in Starbucks my friend.
FTFY.
Why is it so hard for non-Americans (particularly sociashits) to understand that people in the US don't care about people in any other country, unless there is a) a humanitarian issue, b) a strategic military issue, or c) a natural resource issue?
If the US didn't interfere with genocidal maniacs goals, there is a high probability the Earth would no longer be inhabited by the Jews. I thank God that we did interfere, and it saddens me that we don't have the troops or resources to interfere in more places.
Wait a sec, have the goal posts moved again? It was about weapons of mass destruction, then it was about bringing democracy to masses yearning for it, then it was about protecting the Sunnis from the Shiite forces that we kind of, um, unleashed on them, and now it's payback for the Kurds?
I think the real motivation was to revive the corpse of Gilgamesh and create a new race of super-warriors, but that's just my theory.
Payback? You don't seem to understand the United States' need to interfere with genocidal maniacs' motives, especially when there is something to lose...
I dunno, my readings say that Saddam killed approximately 300,000 Kurds. A lot of them with gas. But what do I or anyone that wrote books about it know? I still don't care, as I said, I have no problem dispatching assholes with or without a lie to get me motivated.
Other than that, perhaps rock-solid stability, ZFS, or it's package management system (admittedly I don't use much Linux, but the pkg_add utility and the ports tree in fbsd are excellent). Oh and did I mention Linux binary compatibility?
Slashdot Mirror
A Los Angeles woman is suing Toyota for *$10 MILLION* over a marketing campaign that she claims "punked" her into incorrectly believing she was being stalked.
She even made her longtime boyfriend sleep with a club and mace next to the bed for protection.
Yeah, you need $10 million to cover that. Only in USA.
This also makes me wonder; maybe she had something to hide because she got so scared?
Leave it to some asshole to say this is an endemic problem with being a citizen of the USA. Maybe opting in to receive advertisements from Toyota is a little different than signing up for a stalkeresque marketing assault. By your logic, it would be completely within my legal rights to personally visit every single person on my opt-in advertising distribution group, and punch them in the face as a part of my new "ad campaign", then when they sue me and press assault charges I can simply claim they opted-in so they have no legal recourse.
People like you, making comments like these, are the reason people like me consistently tell you that a) you are really a fucking asshole, b) you clearly belong in totalitarian, egalitarian, corporatist or socialist society which the US is not, and finally c) if you're this big of a piece of shit and you live in the US, GET THE FUCK OUT and stop trying to change our country into some European colony (I know, the irony...)
I imagine the US is Fred, Velma, Daphne, Shaggy, and Scooby (aka Scooby and the gang). This makes China the classic Scooby-Doo villain. I can hear China in my head as I type this... "If it weren't for those meddling kids!"
One reason not to use Cloud Computing is that I can avoid Ribbon Interface crapola (as was in Office 2007), and just keep using my older software. Or I can ignore Vista/ME and just keep using older XP/98 operating systems. With cloud computing using older programs won't be an option, because it will be forced upon you.
Yeah? You can also knit your clothes by hand, but I'm sure you already know all about looms.
DDO uses DirectX for rendering, and it would take a LOT of effort/money to recode the graphics engine at this point, and since the number of Mac people who would pay money would be fairly low, the return on investment would be so low that it would be a money losing effort. Then again, you KNEW that the selection of games that support Mac was fairly low when you bought your computer, so if you want to play games, you should have known that you would need to set up Windows to play the vast majority of games.
You also have to look at how many people on a given platform may turn into paying customers early in the program development cycle. If you do not expect many Mac people to buy your game, and it will cost $1 million in development costs to support that platform, do you REALLY see it as a wise investment? DDO started as a regular MMO with a subscription, and Free to Play only came out YEARS after the initial release. With this in mind, would you REALLY expect that the Mac platform would have made Turbine a profit?
Doesn't WINE work on Mac? I thought I downloaded the Mac version during the Lame Duck Challenge on the slim chance I would decide to spend frivolously on a computer.
http://cedegawiki.sweetleafstudios.com/wiki/Dungeons_and_Dragons_Stormreach After reading those instructions, I have to wonder why so many zealots bitch and moan about Microsoft, knowing that a game is designed around that specific platform... I personally wouldn't cry that Mario was designed to run on Nintendo because I can jump through 1000 hoops to make it work on my Sega. I'm just sayin...
I know this a joke, but it does remind me of something. One of the arguments that people on the far right have tried to use to convince the public that Iran is trying to build bombs and not energy is: "Iran has so much oil, why would they care about nuclear energy?"
Easy, sherlock... they aren't going to have oil forever. Iran might be thinking ahead. They might not want to make the same mistake that the U.S. made it comes to oil dependency.
Having said that, I still think that Iran's program is to make a bomb... but I think that argument is idiotic.
I hope you realize that the US made a strategic decision decades ago (thinking ahead) to deplete foreign oil reserves before their own.
I firmly believe Iran's intentions are to deny the Jewish Holocaust happened, to deny Israel as a legitimate state, and (as clearly stated to multiple countries multiple times by their fanatic religious leader and fanatic secular leader) to destroy Israel and it's peoples.
I sincerely hope that Israel nukes Iran's nuke site the very femtosecond it becomes operational.
Screw my last mod point for the day, this sounds really fucking cool.
No, just spelling. And your grammar's wrong.
Last first: you only need commas before reported speech, and then only when you have a pause for clarity. Mine had no pause for clarity, and besides, it's paraphrased, not a quote.
First last: punctuation that doesn't belong to the quote belongs outside the quotation, otherwise you're misquoting. Did Armstrong say, "One small step for [...] man?" No. He wasn't confused. Hence Webster's English is wrong wrong wrong on that point.
Yawn. I hope you realize there is a difference between American English, and English.
At least you agree there was a genocide in progress that the US put a stop to.
Erm, we weren't debating that.
You have a point?
You do?
If the US didn't interfere with genocidal maniacs goals, there is a high probability the Earth would no longer be inhabited by the Jews. I thank God that we did interfere, and it saddens me that we don't have the troops or resources to interfere in more places.
Besides your response is just half a step away from Godwin's Law, equating the US's response to Pearl Harbor with its unilateral or majority acts of war since is ridiculous to the extreme.
Just, WOW. Really? You really fucking think it's relevant to cite Godwin's Law when we are talking about genocide, and the fucking Nazi Gustapo were like the mother of all genociders? FFS...
You might want to read up on World War II, because to actually fucking think that we liberated the Jews because of Pearl Harbor, you are severely undereducated on the subject. :(
Let's go back to what you said before.
I can happily arrange an experiment, one in which you illegally perform a wiretap on me, and one in which I alert the authorities of your behavior. Would you like to participate?
Now that's some seriously skewed logic... by you arranging the "wiretap" in question, you're directly consenting to the recording. Now, let's look at what you just said:
I can't consent to illegal activities. Your circularly flawed logic does not compute.
Yes let's run around in more circles and go back to what I said.
I can happily arrange an experiment, one in which you illegally perform a wiretap on me, and one in which I alert the authorities of your behavior. Would you like to participate?
As a citizen I cannot give you permission to violate the law. That means that inviting you to participate in an experiment where you commit an illegal activity in no way gives my consent for you to commit said illegal activity. For you to be correct, I would have had to have worded it not only specifically without the qualifier "illegally," but also without the word "experiment." So, it would have looked more like the following sentence:
I can happily arrange for you to perform a wiretap on me, would you like to?
That would be an invitation and consent to do a wiretap, not an invitation and consent to break the law.
Once again, you're not consenting to illegal activity in a case where you're the one offering to arrange the event, given the fact that it would then be perfectly legal.
Once again, you are trying to use your circularly flawed logic, but as I said before it does not compute.
If you're going to accuse someone of lacking basic logic skills, you should probably make sure you're not the one in need of an education. What is your level of formal education, anyhow?
3 years of technical college for computer programming (Fortran/Pascal/C/C++), 2 years of community college for mathematics (calculus), English, and Japanese, and 1 year of university for Japanese.
I very easily see your circular logic. I can, in fact, write your argument compared to mine in pseudo code to prove that yours is basically a silly infinite loop.
Half that stuff happened during the bush and reagan years. Were those guys socialists or totalitarians? Or are you saying that it's France's fault we sit on our ass watching people die unless they're white or have oil?
France, among other countries, is overseas yes. However, you can't blame a single man (in your case, the President of the US of A). You blame Congress and all of our foreign diplomats. For over 30 years they have been trying to turn the US into some bastard child from Europe.
After reading a lot of history about my homeland (US of A) I'm a firm believer that the we did better as a mostly isolationist country, and that things have gone severely downhill since the beginning of the Cold War and all these foreign trade agreements. It's allowed these new politicians personal gain, when their job is to serve the people. It's allowed these people to turn a civic duty into a career path. As such, they make deals that benefit them personally and cause great harm to the working middle class, which built this country.
It's these selfish, greedy politicians and corporate lobbyists that prevent us from doing the "right" thing, because often times the "right" thing will piss off all of our foreign trade partners, and thus shrink their personal pocket books. It's their fault we only act on possibility of profit. I'm quite sure that if the Jewish Holocaust were to happen today, that our Congress and our President would rather sit around and talk about it than act to put a stop to it.
So naive - they've been killing kurds over there so long it's practically tradition. Are we going to invade turkey for killing kurds? Did we care about them during the iran/iraq war? Are we doing anything about darfur? No, we seem to care about genocide when it suits us.
Given that, we should have used our limited means to go after afghanistan, which is what we're moving towards now.
Correction: we currently seem to care about genocide when it suits us because currently our leaders (in the USA) have so many ties to the socialists, totalitarians, corporatists, and egalitarians overseas. If we cut those ties, and stop caring about what they think, I believe you would find us invading more places where humanitarian injustices and things like genocide are occurring.
I just love it when the frothing-at-the-mouth liberals try to blame a single, US "official" for doing something EVEYRONE FUCKING KNOWS was the right thing to do, even if the reason was falsified.
Sorry, but now that there is a "liberal" in office, it's the other guys that get to do the frothing at the mouth. Well, except for the libertards, they get to froth at the *mouth* regardless of who is in office. Not that it really matters, US congress seems to be stacked with retards anyway, no matter which party they claim to represent. In the land of the blind...
As for everyone fucking knowing it was the right thing to do...why all the lies then? Surely if putting Saddam out of business was something we'd all be squarely behind about there was no need to fabricate a brick of lies to justify doing so?
The reason for all the lies is actually rather simple. You see, for 30 some odd years the US has been under attack by socialists, corporatists, egalitarians and totalitarians. As such, many people currently in power have loyalties that lie outside of the US borders. This means they must at all cost avoid pissing off their backroom-deal-making-foreign-allies. My guess is that it took a lie to get the majority of people on board, regardless of how many socialists it pissed of.
I'm sorry, are you trying to debunk the events as a series of skirmishes instead of a genocide?
You already consented to being recorded. How would I be breaking the law by recording a conversation between us?
I can't consent to illegal activities. Your circularly flawed logic does not compute.
I can happily arrange an experiment, one in which you illegally perform a wiretap on me
You are free to break the law. You are also bound by it, and may be required to suffer the consequences of doing so.
How about the asshole who gave the asshole gassing the Kurds the gas in the first place?
Oh right, that would be Donald Rumsfeld who completed that deal during the Reagen administration, not Richard Cheney.
I'm sorry when exactly do you think Regan took office? The Iraqi's were trying to kill all the Kurds since about 1960. Killing the Kurds and stealing their oilfields. So what if the gas was purchased and used later, the genocide attempt was going on for 20 years prior.
I just love it when the frothing-at-the-mouth liberals try to blame a single, US "official" for doing something EVEYRONE FUCKING KNOWS was the right thing to do, even if the reason was falsified.
I'm sorry, I lost the thread - are you actually saying that killing kurds was the right thing to do and that only frothing libs care about that? Really not sure what you're on about.
Yes you lost the thread. I'm saying I don't care if it was a lie that was the final motivation to get the US to invade. It was the right thing to do, and politics is not a game that can be played while a genocide is occurring.
Such an asinine statement. Who has more ethics, the asshole gassing the Kurds or the asshole that bombs the asshole gassing the Kurds (regardless of the reason)?
Neither one. One 0 is not greater nor less than another 0.
Hehe. I love your handle, and your post :)
Parent is not insightful whatsoever.
Parent attempts to contradict the assertion that Cheney unethically falsified intelligence by pointing out that Saddam Hussein was also unethical. So what?
That is a red herring.
If you think its OK to lie to congress if you have a good reason, just say so. As is, parent's post is simply a fallacy.
I think everyone is a lying asshole. I think when there is a genocide in progress, if the truth doesn't provide proper motivation to interfere than a lie is appropriate. I'm glad we invaded, and I'm glad the genocide was stopped by our hand.
Oh, and it's "Reagan", not "Regan". Sometimes it can be "Raygun". Sometimes it can be standing in front of a bunch of veterans telling them "I was in uniform once".
Since we're being grammar assholes, punctuation belongs inside the quotation marks. Oh, and a comma before quoted speech, as in I say, "Fuck you."
You won't love me then.
I don't blame any one person. I blame the entire electorate for falling for Cheney's fearmongering (which he himself was a victim of, having asked for a list of threats, rather than the usual filtered list of threats presented by order of magnitude -- if you don't know what I'm talking about, please research it before wasting my time on a response on that particular issue... moving right along...).
Yes, the genocide was wrong and should have been curbed many decades earlier. But the way the US went about it was manipulative (of the American people and the US's allies) and underhand (internationally). It was an abuse of power like none we've ever seen.
You don't win a battle of minds with dirty tricks, and international politics is all mind games.
At least you agree there was a genocide in progress that the US put a stop to.
We shot Iraqi people, We bombed Iraqi people, and we occupied their land.
We also at this point have likely reduced Kurdish autonomy for better cooperation with Turkey.
We didn't even hit Suddam with a bomb, so saying we bombed the asshole gassed the Kurds is absurd on the face of it.
We bombed many locations owned and operated by Saddam and his regime. I remember some awesome pictures of some hamburger patties formerly known as his sons Uday and Qusay. We bombed the shit out of them, they were identified by dental records :)
Blame it on years of us frothing-at-the-mouth liberals trying to explain rationally all the factors of complex foreign policy to batsh*t crazy conservatives who only look at the world in terms of black and white and get their information from Fox News as opposed to actually reading books on the subject.
Haha, are you the same "you suck cuz you watch Fox News" jerk that's trolling me on several threads thinking that I watch Fox News? R O F L
Errr... the genocide was going on for decades beforehand.
Also in several other places.
Why does it seem to be so hard for Americans (particularly Republican'ts) to understand why people the world over do not like the US setting itself up as "World's Policeman"?
If I was a smartass, I would have just said:
So what you are really saying is that you don't support unilateral military action against genocide in foreign countries while similar genocide takes place unnoticed in other countries, and preventing it no matter what the social, political, environmental, and economic fallout is, is wrong. Nice. See you in Starbucks my friend.
FTFY.
Why is it so hard for non-Americans (particularly sociashits) to understand that people in the US don't care about people in any other country, unless there is a) a humanitarian issue, b) a strategic military issue, or c) a natural resource issue?
If the US didn't interfere with genocidal maniacs goals, there is a high probability the Earth would no longer be inhabited by the Jews. I thank God that we did interfere, and it saddens me that we don't have the troops or resources to interfere in more places.
Wait a sec, have the goal posts moved again? It was about weapons of mass destruction, then it was about bringing democracy to masses yearning for it, then it was about protecting the Sunnis from the Shiite forces that we kind of, um, unleashed on them, and now it's payback for the Kurds?
I think the real motivation was to revive the corpse of Gilgamesh and create a new race of super-warriors, but that's just my theory.
Payback? You don't seem to understand the United States' need to interfere with genocidal maniacs' motives, especially when there is something to lose...
I dunno, my readings say that Saddam killed approximately 300,000 Kurds. A lot of them with gas. But what do I or anyone that wrote books about it know? I still don't care, as I said, I have no problem dispatching assholes with or without a lie to get me motivated.
As a UNIX/Linux veteran, I have to admit that I've almost no experience with FreeBSD. Could someone summarize why one might prefer it over Linux?
FreeBSD is unix-like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeBSD.
You might prefer it over Linuxes for some of the same reasons you might prefer Apple's Mac OS X http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS_X#History.
Other than that, perhaps rock-solid stability, ZFS, or it's package management system (admittedly I don't use much Linux, but the pkg_add utility and the ports tree in fbsd are excellent). Oh and did I mention Linux binary compatibility?