What to Do About U.S. Traitors

>>>Anybody who leads America into war with nothing but propaganda and pretexts to go on needs to forfeit everything. It's been going on for such a long time that leaders are thinking it is acceptable.

 

Right, because we have GAINED so much by keeping the Son of Sam, the BTK Killer, Charly Manson & others like these mass murderers alive, to spare the slightest bit of GUILT to Liberal whiners!

I have a new 40 Power scope that I would love to test on these slimers, which would be easy compared to what they did to young innocent people!!!

 

So you have NO PROBLEM with ISLAMIC SCUM coming here and KILLING over 4000, or you agree with Saddam that it was his RIGHT to MASS MURDER his citizens to stay in Power?? Mr Bush showed them that we as a Nation of PATRIOTS, minus Liberal whiners, wouild not put up with it and TODAY the World is a better place!!

LBJ & TRUMAN took us into some Wars we didn't need to be in, and I agree on the CLINTONS, as they are TRAITORS to AMERICA, and OBIE is heading that direction!!

 

not talking about the civilian, he is not subject to the UCMJ
UCMJ=Uniform Code Of Military Justice

 

LOL Way to propagandize the event. Actually it was less than 3000 and Muslims died in the world trade centers - both as workers and firefighters.

Well if that was the basis why did Reagan and Clinton continue supplying him arms whilst he was carrying out these atrocities?

Well firstly, liberal mostly supported the war, and in fact those that opposed it included realists of the right, liberals, conservatives and libertarians.

Secondly the world is actually far less safer. The CIA warned the Bush admin BEFORE the war that its would have a negative effect on world security. As early 2004 George Tent (Director of the CIA) noted Iraq had become the new Afghanistan of the 1970s - ie a war zone in which innocent people were being radicalized due to the knowledge they had been unjustly invaded and occupied.

Actually if that is the criteria for 'traitors' Reagan, Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush 1 and 2 - in fact just about every President since 1890 could be called a traitor as they have all engaged in wars and foreign policies that have endangered the US and served the interests of small special interest groups.
You obviously forget Reagan trained the Taliban and Osama, whilst Kennedy established Saddam in Iraq.

 

Here's a good piece of trivia;

Which of the following countries have been found by the International Court of Justice to have violated the prohibition in international law on
the use of force against other States?
a. Argentina
b. El Salvador
c. France
d. Germany
e. Iran
f. Israel
g. Nicaragua
h. USA
i. USSR/Russia



Answer: only h.

 

I firmly believe that anyone who thinks that they have the authority to represent hundreds of millions of people is self-serving and morally questionable.

 

Yes but the heads of America aren't self interested - rather they have pursued policies to expand US hegemony and power. This has been the leading philosophy of US foreign policy since the 40s. Its not that they actively seek out to be imperialists, but rather the nature of overgrown government results in this. Its like Adam Smith's analogy of the two business men talking in a corner - one should assume they are plotting against the general welfare not because it is in their nature or because they actively want to, but rather because of the inherent nature of their trade and position of power.

 

I understand your argument and I am well aware of the neoliberal economic policies that fit hand in hand with government foreign policy. However, I do feel that the position of politician is one that is glorified and thus, highly sought as one of the highest rungs on the social ladder, despite its claim to be one of servitude. Politicians are self-interested in as much as their approach to securing their position and their legacy. I could say something about absolute power and corruption but that seems pretty hackneyed nowadays.

 

Yes but in a state capitalist system politicians are a collective group mostly determined to further certain interests particular not to themselves as individuals, although this can occur, but rather to special interest groups that control government and establish doctrines of procedure and practice as well as goals.

 

I can agree with that. Late night essay writing has warped my brain to the point where I didn't correctly process your first post. My bad, guy.

 

I think, they should execute the US soldiers. All of them. Except the ones who post at Political Forum. Kill 'em all, let God sort it out.

 

could you repost that in English? i don't read Troll.

thanks in advance.

 

Don't you guys in Arizona speak Spanish meanwhile?

 

(i'm not really in AZ)

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UfK7iEYSDw&feature=related"]Yep, kill 'em all[/ame]

 

I see! You only want Homeland Security to believe, you are in Arizona, mikezila, or should I say, Julian?

 

I knew it!!

 

>>>I have a problem with it. I also have a problem with Bush telling the Taliban he can pave their streets with gold or with bombs.

>>>If that was the case, why do we have that famous photo of Rummy shaking hands with Saddam and why did Reagan supply Saddam with chemical weapon precursors.

>>>LMAO

>>>My point exactly. LBJ should have swung for his so-called "Tonkin Incident" which was totally contrived.

 

You're argument doesn't hold water!

It has nothing to do with left or right democrat or republican!

Rather lies and deceit.....good Roman values in the amphitheatre and senate!

International laws with the morality and honour to implement these laws are totally ignored......by the AIPAC sponsored bought senators in the US.
George Bush....that intelligent icon and paragon of virtue did exactly as he was told.
Republican or democrat...... ALL alike, sheep to the AIPAC slaughter!

Regards
Highlander

 

One of the biggest problems in the whole world is government secrecy, any government. If governments can't stop leaks, they wouldn't be able to get away with a lot of the stuff they do.

They say the information Assange leaked put American lives at risk. Why are American lives special? Assange NOT leaking that information could cost the lives of non-Americans...an equally unacceptable prospect. Seen this way, Assange was duty-bound to leak his information.

I'm about an inch from declaring Assange a hero. Anything that peeks through the age-old secrecy-excuse that governments use to spill blood all around the world is a good thing.

 

agree. I think I may have said before that if Assange wasn't a weedy Australian nerd, but an American Bruce Willis clone - and the leaks were Russian, or Chinese or Iranian based ... or Iraqi prior to the invasion - he would be lauded as a hero on this forum.

 

I'm confused - what exactly in my post doesn't hold water?

The facts are there for all to see - Lyndon committed actions far worse during his term as POTUS then George Bush ever did. Yet, the hard-core liberal left Democrats somehow choose to ignore this stain on their history, and instead rail against George Bush like he's the devil incarnate.

Also, consider this... Unlike Lyndon, George Bush has never been accused of being complicit in the assassination of his predecessor.

 

I see you have succumbed to inane drivel in your attempt to ridicule me......Have I offended you.............or you're Zionist Tory roots....or perhaps not surrendering to you're establishment creed!

But then again............. I crawl to no one!

Everyone is entitles to be treated properly......even you!

AND DEMOCRATICALLY ENTITLED TO THEIR VIEWS TO BE HEARD!
But you enjoy the sheep...back to the fens old son!
Regards
Highlander