Wednesday, January 18, 2006

Attacking?

I don't usually post something on Wednesday other than the Wednesday Hero post, but this is something I had to do. Please take a look at this. Somehow, Za feels that me writing this post was an attack on him. Because of this line;
"Now that I got that ***sy Liberal crap out, just for you Za..."

Please read it and tell me if you think the post was an attack.
Filed under Miscellaneous

15 comments:

Za said...

It wasn't just an attack on me, it was just that the post did nothing except attack. As I said - it was your tired old "evil Iranians", "stupid Liberals", "panys Za" post.

Za said...

I should also point out that you didn't actually suggest anything that would solve it - just claiming that the individual's comments made this "WW3". Highly intelligent response.

DeoDuce said...

Who the Hell cares if it was an attack on Za?

Who the Hell cares about anything to do with Za...period?

Keep on plugging along Chris, making those crazies foam at the mouth!

Za will now leave some dark, crytic comment on something totally unrelated to what we are talking about. The End. :)

Za said...

lol
Hardly dark or cryptic, I just want to thank Deo for admitting that she has no moral fibre, nor any cares for diversity of opinion.

Indian Chris said...

"or any cares for diversity of opinion"

And you do? Because you sure don't show it.

Za said...

Riiiight. If I didn't care about diversity of opinion, I wouldn't read your blog at all. Or hadn't that occured to you?

If I didn't value diversity of opinion, I wouldn't bother posting either - because through posting I make you think about what you believe.

Indian Chris said...

Not necessarily. I read and comment on Liberal blogs but I could care less what their opinions are. And I sure don't value them.

Za said...

And if you look at the difference in our opinions, you might see why that is.

My view on foreign policy: "Issues can actually be worked through."

Your view on foreign policy: "If they disagree, bomb the crap out of them."

And that difference REALLY shows through.

Indian Chris said...

Once again, you see what you want to see. If I believed in bombing those who disagree with us, then I would be calling for the bombing of France, Germany, Russia, Canada and others. Have I? I don't believe I have. I believe issues can be worked through, with some. But if you think you can sit down and talk to people like Saddam, bin Laden or Ahmadinejad, then you're more naive than I thought. Do you think Hitler could have been talked to?

Za said...

You've suggested bombing France. I don't recall you commenting much on Russia. Germany you've had plenty of harsh words against, but given that the US has had jack all to do with them since they dived into Iraq, you haven't had any reason to mention them... and Canada you seem to dismiss as weak and irrelevant.

It's interesting that you compare Saddam and bin Laden to Hitler. See, Hitler did not sit down with CIA agents and make deals with the US government through them. Saddam and bin Laden both did. Similarly, Saddam and bin Laden have yet to attempt to conquer the whole of Europe. Saddam conquered Iraq - but stopped at bombing Iran for screwing with their oil prices. And Bin Laden doesn't want conquest - he wants changes in political policy. And as for Ahmadinejad, he's done... why absolutely nothing except talk.

Indian Chris said...

No, bin Laden just wants to kill as many Jews and other infidels as possible. And you know, Hitler did a lot of talking about exterminating the Jews and no one really too him serious. Guess they were wrong.

Za said...

Um... No actually. He's waging a defensive war against America because it supports Israel, Russia, India and other countries that fight Muslim militants (or so says the old head of the CIA's bin Laden unit anyway). His basic motivation (as anyone who's studied him in-depth will tell you) is the defense of Arab nations. He does have a grudge since the Saudis got the US to defend them instead of him, but that's kinda the point - he wanted to defend them.

And then there's the whole fact that he doesn't rule a fricking country, which puts a fairly large spanner in your comparison.

Za said...

If you really want to know the difference between Bin Laden and Hitler, I have a condensed form of Bin Laden's motives here.

Hitler did what he did of his own volition, and without anyone doing anything against him.

So an entirely different motivation.

Indian Chris said...

You can try to rationalize their differences, but there's one universal similarity. One that out weighs any differences in their reasoning or policies. They both want(ed) to kill those who don't follow.

Za said...

And you want to kill plenty of people who don't follow your version of morality.

Your own yardstick condemns you.