As soon as the US government's military begins to do its' duty, and nothing more, it will have my support. As long as it's used as a bloodsoaked agent for empire building, it will not.

Again, as a Southerner, I know full well the type of empire building murder the US government is capable of, it has been doing this for 140 years, almost nonstop.

That will have to change, and change quickly.

You think only one part of the government is after gun owners, but another part, the military, is not a problem?

Guess again. The federal government is of a piece; the same government that will someday try to confiscate all high performance firearms is the same government that illegally invaded Iraq.

You need to reevaluate your knowledge and understanding of this government. Be quick about it.

Kudos:
you stopped watching (and soaking in/wallowing in) fox news long enough to come up with this gem.

Why is Fox so villified?...They are the closest thing to true objectively news has, and they only occupt a fraction of the total media pie...Do you not find it interesting that ABC, cBS, NBC, et al are not villified? Do you know why?...Because those news organizations are truly biased propaganda arms for the Democrat party. They are simply adjuncts, subsidiaries. They are the mouth-piece for the Democrat party and their progressive causes.

Liberals are brainwashed and closed-minded as they only watch or read the biased news media and leftist blogs. They criticize Fox News because they have been instructed to do so by their sources, it is one of their talking points. One of their hate-Fox sources is the idiotic Keith Olberman on MSNBC. It's his obsession. Those toward the center and right have a much more balanced perspective. They can't really escape the lies and distortion of the mainstream media, but can mitigate the effects with news sources on the Internet, talk radio, and Fox news.

914:

I take it you really believe that FOX is "fair and balanced"?

Respectfully, you are beginning to sound like the clone of another poster!!!

<G>

Why is Fox so villified?
Because so much of what they spout is crap. Also, you presumed that I endorsed the other networks because I criticized fox: bad presumption, although the thought process is consistent with your leader's dictum that "you're either for us or against us" (an all or nuthn' zero sum game kind of thought, which rarley leads to good, unless you really are playing a game).

Head and shoulders more fair and balanced than the mainstream leftist media. FoxNews goes out of their way to appear objective...The same cannot be said of the rest...FoxNews accounts for a fraction of the media pie.

“I know a lot of you believe that most people in the news business are liberal. Let me tell you, I know a lot of them, and they were almost evenly divided this time. Half of them liked Senator Kerry; the other half hated President Bush.”
— CBS’s Andy Rooney

No. They are villified because they expose the lie and reveal the truth...This is why they are villified, evidenced by 99% of their criticism coming from the political left or the duped middle who wouldn't know politics from a hole in the ground.

So much of what they spout is crap?...Example (something like Dan Rather's forged documents would work perfectly)?

I really don't watch much of Fox news or other network news for that matter. Usually the TV is on the Today show and local news in the morning. In the evening, NBC news and if I've nothing else to do I'll switch on Fox for awhile, check CNN, and stop on the first show building a hot rod or bike. But I can really pick up the bias coming out of the Today show people, as well as Brian Williams. I think Fox is much more to just report the news straightforward, or ask the tough questions. The others mostly give democrats softball questions, or fawn over their most admired (Gore, etc.). But even Fox has Geraldo, and I don't like that other broad with the crooked mouth.

The last one is a strange claim given your previous statement of support for the "freedom fighters" in Iraq who routinely kill children with their suicide bombs, blow up mosques, and kidnap people off the street. Bakers were on the menu this week. Bakers!! Your moral stance is bizarre at best and absent at worst.

I don't consider them forged. To me that implies it was an attempt to recreate a bogus copy of an original document using copies of signatures. The evidence was that the documents were totally phony and complete fakes. Everything was wrong with them - the dates, the military terminology, as well as denials by the people working in Bush's National Guard unit at that time. And of course - they were typed out using Microsoft Word.

Of course, in the spirit of freedom fighting and all.

Touche...or in the spirit of liberalism, "douche"

First of all, your logic is flawed (as usual). If Saddam had 500 chemical shells, he was not "limited to just 500 of each munition," only 500 of the chemical munitions.

They would not last more than a couple of hours if used in place of conventional artillery shells against a "near peer" like the cold war US and Soviet Union. If used properly against a less prepared nation or as an instrument of terror against civilians, they could easily kill hundreds of thousands. Obviously, if used in an actual war you would selectively use them and mix them among the conventional shells. You sure don't give your buddy Saddam and your friends the "freedom fighters" much credit. The contents of one Sarin shell released in a city subway system would create unimaginable havoc and kill hundreds.

I'm not a "former" airman. I am an Airman (why must you always categorize folks to suit your argument?). I am currently in the AF Reserve and wore my flight suit to work all last week......and I spent all this week in my DoD job developing Army tactics. The rest of my team is testing joint AF/Navy tactics, techniques, and procedures. It is not your father's military....or your's. We all work together in the "joint" world. We work together to kill your friends....the "freedom fighters" that torture and mutilate young soldiers of your country that they take prisoner. We will not stop until every last one is dead or in prison...

Saddam was under sanction, in a box, limited by the oil for food program. He was persecuted for weapons he did not have.

It turns out he did have them, gee, he lied about it. Really a shocker a head of state like El Jefe would lie, go figure. It also turns out the oil for food program was a bit leaky. They make some very nice equipment for manufacturing pharmaceuticals in Germany, hmm. Naw, there is no way they would sell that stuff to anyone from the middle east.

Oh, and by the way, all y'all that say, "Big deal, old munitions", how about we crack one open in your driveway, or even better yet, we take one to your next family reunion and toss it on the bbq pit to see what happens. He was supposed to have none, not a few old ones.

"Freedom Fighters" are admirable, type of folks who hijack a few busloads full of workers and their families, kidnap all of them for a while, turn the kids and women loose eventually, and all the men disappear. Still, they are not bad people, I am sure they limit it to killing all the males older than 12, no sense killing women and children, be a bad Muslim if you did that.

Do me a solid guys, knock off on quoting pat, there is a reason he is on my ignore list, and you fellas defeat that function every time you quote him

Yes you will, you will stop when enough of we Americans tell you to stop, or you will be in prison.

The US government, against advice from anyone with a brain, invaded Iraq. The US government is therefore responsible, under the law, for the security of everyone in the country right down to the job of the lowly traffic cop.

I, and many others, have been demanding the US government get out of Iraq since March of 2003, that was almost 2500 "young soldiers" ago in case you're weak on the point that these soldiers are being killed for invading Iraq against the will of enough Iraqi's to keep up their insurgency indefinitely. The US government couldn't prevail there if 100% of Americans supported the occupation, instead of the 30% which actually do. It was never a winnable war, never will be a winnable war.

Now the US government has the problem of how to withdraw and declare victory when so many Americans are fully aware of the failure and its' causes. Another problem will be to keep the oil flowing in a post US government situation, which the Chinese and Indians have a vested interest in seeing maintained since they're buying most of it. Maybe the US government can turn over Iraq to those two countries as a joint mandate. Talk about embarassing.

If they were collaborating with the invader then they'd be legitimate targets, just like the French resistance targeted collaborators.

Quote:

Maybe you could start that race war and we could re-fight the Civil War. What a patriot you are.

:confused:

Yeah...except the majority of Iraqi's killed by your "Freedom Fighters" have nothing to do with the US forces at ALL. Bakers, children, and unemployed men collaborating...Weak. Oh, yeah, the bombing of the Mosque at Samara was such a strong blow against "collaborationists" Please!!!

The notion that you even compare the Iraqi insurgency with the French Resitance is disgusting and morally repulsive. Next you'll be saying Zaq was just like MLK.

The more you try to justify these types of statements the more morally abhorrent and pathetic it becomes.

The US government went to Iraq and loosed all of these events.

Looks to me like you're beginning, just, to acquire the knowledge of why the Hussein government was what it was, but you're still spouting information from the US government on who is dying and why.

The US government must be forced out of Iraq, then there won't be a problem for the US government beyond where to send the reparations checks.