HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Oh NOES!1! A South Korean...

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:19 PM

 

Oh NOES!1! A South Korean rapper said something bad about our TROOPS!!!11!!

Someone, call the police! Call the fire department!!!

I'm gonna go code brown!!11!!!


Everytime you say something bad about our HEROIC, GLORIOUS SOLDIERS Jesus goes and kills one!

184 replies, 16028 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 184 replies Author Time Post
Reply Oh NOES!1! A South Korean rapper said something bad about our TROOPS!!!11!! (Original post)
Taverner Dec 2012 OP
MADem Dec 2012 #1
Taverner Dec 2012 #2
Dr. Strange Dec 2012 #4
Taverner Dec 2012 #7
Dr. Strange Dec 2012 #12
Taverner Dec 2012 #18
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #25
Taverner Dec 2012 #27
hack89 Dec 2012 #30
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #33
Taverner Dec 2012 #34
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #42
Taverner Dec 2012 #46
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #50
Taverner Dec 2012 #51
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #52
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #166
Kingofalldems Dec 2012 #184
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #54
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #61
MADem Dec 2012 #160
Jack Rabbit Dec 2012 #69
Violet_Crumble Dec 2012 #170
pinboy3niner Dec 2012 #171
lbrtbell Dec 2012 #177
Jack Rabbit Dec 2012 #182
rollin74 Dec 2012 #95
KamaAina Dec 2012 #116
MADem Dec 2012 #130
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #142
MADem Dec 2012 #145
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #151
MADem Dec 2012 #156
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #139
MADem Dec 2012 #146
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #147
MADem Dec 2012 #158
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #3
Taverner Dec 2012 #5
Union Scribe Dec 2012 #8
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #13
Taverner Dec 2012 #16
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #23
Taverner Dec 2012 #28
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #40
Taverner Dec 2012 #41
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #43
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #55
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #68
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #72
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #81
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #86
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #89
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #92
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #100
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #110
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #123
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #125
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #128
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #132
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #135
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #168
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #173
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #167
MADem Dec 2012 #161
11 Bravo Dec 2012 #64
MADem Dec 2012 #159
Earth_First Dec 2012 #9
lbrtbell Dec 2012 #178
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #181
Union Scribe Dec 2012 #6
dionysus Dec 2012 #10
Taverner Dec 2012 #17
dionysus Dec 2012 #19
Taverner Dec 2012 #29
hack89 Dec 2012 #39
Taverner Dec 2012 #14
cali Dec 2012 #20
Taverner Dec 2012 #31
MineralMan Dec 2012 #105
Taverner Dec 2012 #106
dionysus Dec 2012 #21
Taverner Dec 2012 #32
dionysus Dec 2012 #35
Taverner Dec 2012 #36
dionysus Dec 2012 #37
Taverner Dec 2012 #38
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #45
Taverner Dec 2012 #47
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #49
MineralMan Dec 2012 #59
Taverner Dec 2012 #62
MineralMan Dec 2012 #65
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #70
Taverner Dec 2012 #71
MineralMan Dec 2012 #76
MineralMan Dec 2012 #83
william cail Dec 2012 #153
Taverner Dec 2012 #154
stranger81 Dec 2012 #183
alp227 Dec 2012 #169
TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #11
Taverner Dec 2012 #15
NCTraveler Dec 2012 #174
bhikkhu Dec 2012 #163
quinnox Dec 2012 #22
great white snark Dec 2012 #26
great white snark Dec 2012 #24
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #53
Enrique Dec 2012 #44
pinboy3niner Dec 2012 #48
MineralMan Dec 2012 #56
PennsylvaniaMatt Dec 2012 #60
MineralMan Dec 2012 #63
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #75
MineralMan Dec 2012 #79
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #87
MineralMan Dec 2012 #94
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #98
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #101
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #115
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #121
MineralMan Dec 2012 #104
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #82
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #57
Taverner Dec 2012 #58
MineralMan Dec 2012 #73
Taverner Dec 2012 #99
MineralMan Dec 2012 #102
Taverner Dec 2012 #108
MineralMan Dec 2012 #111
Taverner Dec 2012 #112
MineralMan Dec 2012 #117
Taverner Dec 2012 #119
MineralMan Dec 2012 #122
Taverner Dec 2012 #152
MineralMan Dec 2012 #157
Taverner Dec 2012 #164
MineralMan Dec 2012 #165
lbrtbell Dec 2012 #179
truebluegreen Dec 2012 #77
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #74
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #78
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #84
MineralMan Dec 2012 #85
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #93
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #91
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #107
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #113
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #118
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #124
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #129
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #134
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #136
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #140
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #144
jberryhill Dec 2012 #88
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #96
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #97
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #103
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #109
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #114
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #120
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #126
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #127
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #131
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #133
AlexSatan Dec 2012 #137
Daniel537 Dec 2012 #138
slackmaster Dec 2012 #66
craigmatic Dec 2012 #67
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #143
craigmatic Dec 2012 #148
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #149
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #150
craigmatic Dec 2012 #155
get the red out Dec 2012 #80
Posteritatis Dec 2012 #141
bunnies Dec 2012 #90
bhikkhu Dec 2012 #162
NuttyFluffers Dec 2012 #172
lbrtbell Dec 2012 #180
Odin2005 Dec 2012 #175
lbrtbell Dec 2012 #176

Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:22 PM

1. Link? Reference? I can't read your mind.

Is this the "Hey, Sexy Lady" Gangnam guy?

Who cares?

He has a right to his opinions; perhaps he has relatives in the north and dreams of a day when his nation and the nation of the "Sexiest Man Alive" are reunited? He certainly looks like Little Kim's slimmer brother, in any event...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:23 PM

2. Well exactly

 

My OP was snark if it wasn't clear

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:33 PM

4. Here:

Kill those fucking Yankees who have been torturing Iraqi captives
Kill those fucking Yankees who ordered them to torture
Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law and fathers
Kill them all slowly and painfully

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/12/psy-kill-american-soldiers-rap.html


Hooray for violence against women! Or at least women who are related to Yankee soldiers. All you other women are safe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr. Strange (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:41 PM

7. Considering what our "brave boys and girls" have been doing overseas

 

I'm surprised he wasn't more angry

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:54 PM

12. I'm angry too.

Of course, I haven't had any desire to slowly torture or kill someone's daughter over it. Much less rap about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr. Strange (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:09 PM

18. No - but you can see where that anger comes from

 

And yes, it's justified righteous anger

Put yourself in someone else's shoes - and America, our troops, our corporations, all look very different

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #18)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:18 PM

25. If it weren't for "American Imperialism"

 

Psy would be bowing to Kim Jung-un.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #25)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:22 PM

27. Well, if SK had built up their military instead of relying on ours...

 

Chances are your statement would be untrue.

I actually think NK would fall like toothpick bridge if they ever tried to attack.

There is no control outside of Pyongyang. In the villages, the NK soldiers have to protect themselves from angry locals, who will take their food, guns, whatever they can.

We act as if NK is this big boogeyman, but what you see is a ruse. The Kims made sure that the only place foreigners could visit would be Pyongyang. Then, they moved all of the loyalists there. SOP for Stalinist countries BTW.

There is no threat from NK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #27)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:27 PM

30. In 1950 there was a very real threat

and the SK military was not strong enough to stop the NK invasion by themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #27)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:28 PM

33. Oh, so you support countries spending more

 

on military. Gotcha.

Anyway, S.Korea had the military they had. And if it weren't for "American Imperialism" Psy would be bowing to Kim Jung-in, just like I said.

BTW, ever see how much of an outcry there is in places when we reduce our "Imperialism"? They hate us so much that they don't want us to go, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #33)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:30 PM

34. No I just don't support our self appointed role as World Police

 

You do

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #34)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:57 PM

42. As always, wrong.

 

I think we should pull our military out of most places in the world.

But I don't hate our military for protecting those like you who are fine with seeing others raped, murdered and crushed under dictators and juntas. And I would roll over in the name of peace. I think freedom is worth fighting for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #42)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:02 PM

46. As usual, straw men and hyperbole

 

And as usual, REALLY FUCKING WRONG

Have you ever dealt with these things called "facts?"

We are not the world's police - no one ever asked us to be and the world does fine without us

Syria is NOT our problem. And if it were, invading will probably be the final nail in our empire's coffin.

No, it would be a war for oil, plain and simple. Just like Iraq. Just like Kuwait. Just like Afghanistan. Just like Iran.

Like a junkie, we justify all this pain and suffering so we can get our fix. Then we lie to ourselves and say we're spreading freedom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #46)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:20 PM

50. Wow. Just Wow.

 

Now you seem to think you know my opinion better than I do.

Well, since you think dead people are free, you are right, the innocent Syrians will be fine.

I remember all of the oil we got from Korea and Vietnam, as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #50)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:21 PM

51. Well considering you were brainwashed by the best (the US Military)

 

I have a keen idea what you might be thinking

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #51)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:31 PM

52. Really? You taught the brainwashing?

 

If not, then how do you know, better than me?

BTW, as anyone who served would know, there is a bit of brainwashing in basic training and the missiles career field but the stuff from basic washes off after about a month, if it took at all.

Your ignorance on what military training is about is astounding, especially considering how much you think you know.

So, please enlighten us all. Please tell us what you think everyone in the military thinks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #50)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 09:55 PM

166. One million dead Iraqis. Countless maime, some tortured to death, others scarred

for life, and babies being born deformed from our WMDs not to mention the half a million children killed by our sanctions before we even got to the rest.

Nearly six thousand of our own troops dead and how many more maimed for life also? All for oil.

Did you support that war? I did not because it was based on lies and I knew that people would die, innocent people and you are correct, dead people are not free, at least not on this planet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #42)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 05:13 PM

184. Wait a minute,'As always wrong'??

How would you know if a long time DUer is wrong all the time when you have only been here since Oct 30th? I don't get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #33)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:37 PM

54. So why are we still in SK?

Its one thing to have helped them in the 50s, but now they have their own military that is far more capable than the North's. Why should we be using what happened decades ago as an excuse to continue occupying their country? I don't blame South Koreans for being angry that we are still occupying their country at a time when they don't need us. And i didn't see any outcry from Iraqis when we left that country. Are you going to argue otherwise?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #54)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:47 PM

61. Not at all

 

I think we should cut to a minimal presence in S. Korea.

BTW, most S. Koreans like us being there for A) our money and B) the security.

I think the official reason we are still there is that we are concerned that, should the North try to move South, they would take the entire peninsula before we had a chance to respond and help the S. Koreans (since their active army is the size or ours and S. Korea's combined and knowing they have 8 million reservists)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #54)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:19 PM

160. Occupying their country? That would be a surprise to the Government of South Korea....

We're there with their permission and approval, and, if we were "occupiers" we'd surely have a say in the decisions made by their government--and that ain't happening.

There are a lot of people in the Chinese government who would love the unfettered access to the sea that South Korea enjoys....to say nothing of the other riches in both human and natural resources of that nation.

Wiki primer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korea%E2%80%93United_States_relations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr. Strange (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:53 PM

69. Oh . . .

OK, I had a problem with the Bush Junta torturing people. My solution to that was (and remains) putting top ranking Bush Junta officials, including Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, on trial for war crimes.

I'm going to reserve judgment since an artist often creates a character that doesn't represent his own views or personality in order to ridicule that point of view or that personality. I don't know much about Psy other than he has a video out in which he performs a silly looking dance and sings in Korean, causing him to be severely criticized by the xenophobes at FoxNews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jack Rabbit (Reply #69)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:07 AM

170. Hey, Jack. A bit of background...

As faddy and talentless as PSY is, I feel I have to stick up for him a bit here, not that I think yr attacking him, but I've seen others do it...

He didn't even write those lyrics that he's being attacked for. He sang it, but it's a cover of a song from another Korean band.

When he said the stuff he said, it was back in Bushco's day and he was reacting to a US tank running over two South Korean kids on the side of a road. I don't blame for him being emotional and angry at the time.

Back in the early noughties, the US was a subject of much dislike and contempt around the world. It's unfair on PSY to take what he said out of context and fall into the RW trap of trying to turn him into a monster. Let's focus on the important stuff, how much his commercially driven, boring brand of music sucks...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #170)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:28 AM

171. Agree--with a correction

The reaction to the U.S. armored vehicle running over and killing two 14-year-old girls in South Korea occurred in 2002. That was when PSY smashed a toy U.S. tank onto the stage in protest.

When PSY sang the lyrics to the N.E.X.T. song that people are now up in arms about, it was a later, different protest--and those lyrics were a response to U.S. torture of prisoners.

Also, Jack clearly is on the same page with us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #170)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:37 PM

177. Psy talentless? WTF??

He's been in the music industry for 11 years, writing his own songs, directing videos, having a great deal of input in his choreography and extravagant stage shows.

The songs he writes are a wide variety of styles. His lyrics are often beautiful, highly inspiring or bringing a tear to one's eye.

Just because the world noticed ONE funny video he did, people like you are unfairly pigeonholing him. Go to YouTube and find some English subbed versions of his hits like "It's Art", "Champion", or "Right Now".

Unlike most K-pop acts, he's not manufactured in the least. Music industry insiders told him to get plastic surgery, but he refused. He released his first few albums on his own independent label, so he wouldn't have to conform to K-pop standards.

The controversy he's embroiled in now is one thing. But it's a flat-out lie to accuse Psy of being a fad with no talent. PSY IS AN ARTIST, one of the few true artists to come out of South Korea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Violet_Crumble (Reply #170)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 03:43 PM

182. Thanks, Violet

Your review of Psy encourages me to continue to do what I have been doing: paying him little or no attention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr. Strange (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:30 PM

95. "Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law and fathers ...Kill them all slowly and painfully "

wtf?

this guy has serious issues

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr. Strange (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:59 PM

116. Wow! At least our American rappers never advocate violence against women

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr. Strange (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:16 PM

130. Thanks for taking the time to give me the context/explanation.

I didn't understand the who/what/when/where/why of this story from the OP, at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #130)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:57 PM

142. The additional context that a lot of people seem to be ignoring..

... is that he was covering somebody else's song shortly after the invasion of Iraq began. But we all know that in the current media climate everything everyone thinks is not only unchanging, but defined entirely by the most negative thing they've ever said. Because we all know people the opinions people have in their mid-20s are going to be the exact ones they hold for the rest of their life with the exact level of force they originally word them with.

If Psy was old enough to have said something like that about, say, Grenada, and nothing happened between then and now except for his current video, because of the Fox tantrum the other day we'd probably have people howling in outrage about what a monster he is in the present because of something he'd have said in 1983.

Basically, people put some real effort into stirring up outrage over this, and it seems to be paying off for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #142)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:11 PM

145. He has also apologized for his harsh language. I think this will blow over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #145)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:47 PM

151. And an actual "I recognize the not-coolness of what I said" apology too; nice. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #151)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:49 PM

156. Yep--it was for real, not one of those "If I offended anyone..." mealymouth things! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:50 PM

139. Bill O'Reilly threw a tantrum about Gangnam Style and the media got out their knives. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #139)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:23 PM

146. Psy's beautifully composed apology must be ruining Bill's day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #146)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:27 PM

147. I actually imagine everyone frothing about this will simply ignore that, sadly.

Which is a pity, since I think decent people who are willing to actually own their mistakes need a lot more attention on that aspect of their characters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #147)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:52 PM

158. Probably true; but also probably the same crew that believes that

Money Boo Boo was "robbed!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:30 PM

3. Call the police? No

 

Invite him to the Washington Christmas special? No.

http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/384350/psy-to-perform-before-us-president-obama-at-christmas-in-washington#.UMI2KIM5zng

And he didn't say they something bad. He said they should all be killed "all slowly and painfully".

In the theme of rape this week, what if he said women should be all killed slowly and painfully. Would that be acceptable to you as well?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:38 PM

5. "Women" didn't kill an innocent Afghani family

 

"Women" didn't gang rape a Japanese woman in Okinawa

"Women" didn't torture and kill inmates at Abu Gharaib

Your jingoism is showing...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:41 PM

8. "Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law and fathers"

You are truly embarrassing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:05 PM

13. Women have killed plenty of people

 

Did all soldiers kill Iraqis of Afghanis? Nope
Did they all rape women? Nope

Should all women be lumped together with those women who have raped and killed? Of course not.

And neither should our military personnel.


Let's not forget that Psy also said to "Kill daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law and fathers .

Your hatred of our military personnel is showing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:07 PM

16. OK - you might want to sit down for this

 

Our military - their job - the reason we send them all over the world - is to - wait for it - kill other people

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #16)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:13 PM

23. Ignorance is not a virtue

 

I was in the military to 20 years and I was (gasp) not assigned or even trained to kill people.

Anyone who actually served knows the goal is to AVOID combat and prevent death. Accomplishing the mission with zero deaths or injuries ( on either side) is the goal.

Do we have nukes so we can use them? Nope. We would have already done so if that were the case. The goal is to prevent violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #23)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:26 PM

28. My eyes are rolling so back into my head, it hurts...

 

But you can live in that rose colored world where the US is the good guy, and we never invade other countries, etc...

And re: Nukes. We almost did, and the Generals were foaming at the mouth to do so. Cuban Missle Crisis. All you need to know.

You should know better - war does not make peace. It's like fucking for virginity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #28)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:54 PM

40. Yep, we do invade countries

 

But the goal is not to kill people. That is an unfortunate in meeting the geo-political objectives. Most presidents since WWII have ordered our troops to kill people to meet his objectives.

Nukes: we didn't. If we wanted to, we would have.

And you are wrong. War does make peace. Or are we still fighting against the Third Reich? Oh, I forgot, you would be fine with just being peacefully content under their rule so there would have been no fighting. The Brits and the French are glad those like you were not in power 70 years ago. Oh, and the Jews.

The only way to have peace without war is to always roll over to bullies. Do you roll over on command? Good puppy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #40)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:56 PM

41. Look, just drop the pretense and admit you like war

 

And that killing innocents doesn't really bother you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #41)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:58 PM

43. When you stop beating your wife. (nt)

 

Since you support Psy and his supporting violence against innocent women, that obviously won't happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #40)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:40 PM

55. And what "geo-political objective" did we get out of Iraq?

You sound like a deranged neo-con apologist. What the fuck does an Iraqi family who had their family killed by our military care what
"geo-political objective" Bush had in mind?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #55)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:52 PM

68. Does it matter?

 

The civilian leadership of this country determines those objectives and the military follows orders. If Psy wants to hate on Bush, more power to him. If he wants to hate on military members who committed crimes, more power to him. However, to want to kill and torture all military member and their families is reprehensible.

But, to answer your question, Bush's official geopolitical objectives were to remove the threat of WMDs from Iraq and force full compliance with UN inspections to establish stability in the region. There are more, and more details, but that is the essence.

As we all know, it didn't work out like he had hoped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #68)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:55 PM

72. Oh, i disagree. It went exactly as Bush wanted.

He knew there were no WMDs, he just wanted to scare the shit out of us into re-electing his sorry ass and get his oil buddies rich in the process, and unfortunately for us, his plan worked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #72)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:03 PM

81. Um, actually, he wanted a quick victory

 

to be able to claim he stabilized the region and do what Clinton didn't. Oh, and yes, to get our oil companies in there (but that didn't work out so well either)

And no, he did not know there were no WMDs. I believe he truly thought they were there--as did the intelligence analysts. I worked in the intelligence world (MASINT) beginning in '04 and to a person the analysts said they screwed up on the Iraq intel.

Yep, Bush did cherry-pick the intel that he thought would be most effective at persuading the masses. But you don't need to rewrite history to find all sorts of ways he screwed up--like listening to Rumsfeld, for starters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #81)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:20 PM

86. Please. Bush knew there was nothing in Iraq.

Notice how he didn't even give the inspectors time to finish their job. He was going in no matter what. Nobody "screwed up". They did as they were told. If Iraq had stabilized soon after the war, there would have been calls here at home to leave Iraq sooner than Bush wanted. The instability played perfectly into his hands. That whole "finish the job" bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #86)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:23 PM

89. How many years

 

did you work in the intel world? What clearance did you hold?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #89)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:28 PM

92. That's the thing, i didn't need any clearance or experience

in the so-called "intel world" to know that Iraq didn't have WMDs. I was proved right, while people like you, so-called experts, were proved wrong. Why should anybody ever believe people like you about anything?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #92)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:40 PM

100. Actually

 

I wasn't in the intel world at all until 2004. And I actually spoke to analysts from many different agencies/organizations. I'm not self-smart like you.


And, as you pointed out (and they agreed) they were wrong.

I think you just proved my point. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #100)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:54 PM

110. Yep, they were wrong, we were right.

So why ask me what intelligence experience i have? Its not like they were of any use.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #110)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:05 PM

123. You implied

 

you knew what the analysts knew, what they were told, and what they told leadership.

I thought you might be able to back that up since they told me they screwed up and you seem to think they didn't get it wrong and that Bush knew the "truth" they knew but ignored it and told the US people the opposite..

Oh wait, you just said the intel folks got it wrong, which means they told Bush wrong.

So which is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #123)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:08 PM

125. I actually did some reading around that time.

The UN inspectors hadn't found any WMDs in the time they were in Iraq in early 2003, Scott Ritter, the formed lead inspector, said they didn't have any. So, yeah, it didn't take too much to know the facts. If Bush thought there were really WMDs there, why did he not allow the inspectors more time? After all, wouldn't finding WMDs have proved his case for war? Like i said, he knew and he didn't care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #125)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:13 PM

128. Just because they were not found

 

doesn't mean they were not there. It turns out they weren't, but Saddam intentionally played games of cat-and-mouse with inspectors and didn't allow them to inspect certain sites as certain times to give the possibility that he might have stuff that he had and was moving.

He was trying to avoid admitting to the region that he had nothing and showing weakness. Yes, that strategy bit him in the butt.

Bush didn't want to give him more time because it made him (Bush) look week and, if there were WMDs it allowed them to develop them further. Saddam had been playing games with the inspectors since at least '98.

You should read more or you would have known all of this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #128)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:29 PM

132. Lol, please don't tell me you think Saddam sent the WMDs to Syria?

Your defense of Bush's handling of that phony crisis sounds straight from the Billy Kristol book on foreign policy. I've read more than enough on this subject, it looks your just making excuses for something that should have never happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #132)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:37 PM

135. Nope

 

I pointed out they didn't exist. But that is irrelevant because Saddam intentionally gave false clues to make the world's intel community (not just our) believe they existed.

And yes, I do believe you think you have read enough on the topic. And yes, in the perfect world our intel will never be wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #81)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:16 PM

168. You're either lying about your background in military intelligence or you

 

are willfully ignorant. Saddam Hussein's son in law defected to Jordan in 1994 and was debriefed there BY U.S. INTELLIGENCE. SH's son-in-law had been in charge of the pre-1990 WMD programs and, when debriefed, said he had personally presided over the destruction of all Iraqi WMD after the conclusion of Operations Desert Storm and Desert Shield on SH's express orders. The analysts who debriefed SH's son in law unanimously concluded that he was telling the truth and that all of Iraq's pre-war WMD had been destroyed.

There was no convincing intel after 1994 that SH had resumed his WMD programs. NONE whatsoever, except for the lies cooked up in the Office of Special Plans and stove-piped through Cheney's office to the NY Times and then back to the civilian policy-makers whom you seemingly laud.

In short, the 'intel' you claim existed that analysts got wrong was all 'lies' by charlatans and con artists like Chalabi and Curve Ball. And most people in power knew they were lies, including many of the CIA analysts whom Cheney threatened and intimidated.

So, you're left in a position of endorsing war crimes and crimes against humanity and all based on lies. So, unless you have any links to support your lies masquerading as assertions (you do not), you should just return to whatever NeoCon hole whence you slunk.

I back up my assertions with facts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hussein_Kamel_al-Majid.

Read it and weep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #168)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:45 AM

173. Have you even read the classified NIE? (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #68)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 10:07 PM

167. Lol. Are you trying to be funny? Bush wanted to remove the threat of WMDs in Iraq???

This is a Democratic Forum. Lying to get us into War never worked on Democratic Forums. That lie never went over big with anyone but rabid Freepers, even rational Republicans knew it was a lie.

I'm assuming you were joking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #23)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:22 PM

161. Power projection is the term most often used.

Our goal was to be the fallback position if diplomacy failed.

We were the last resort--not the first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:49 PM

64. I'll be fucked! That Lynndie England person at Abu Ghraib sure LOOKED like a woman!

Thanks for setting us (and his gynecologist) straight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:09 PM

159. Abu Ghraib was an equal opportunity clusterfuck.

Specialist Sabrina Harman was sentenced on May 17, 2005 to six months in prison and a bad conduct discharge after being convicted on six of the seven counts. She had faced a maximum sentence of five years. Harman served her sentence at Naval Consolidated Brig, Miramar.
Specialist Megan Ambuhl was convicted on October 30, 2004, of dereliction of duty and sentenced to reduction in rank to private and loss of a half-month’s pay.
Private First Class Lynndie England was convicted on September 26, 2005, of one count of conspiracy, four counts of maltreating detainees and one count of committing an indecent act. She was acquitted on a second conspiracy count. England had faced a maximum sentence of ten years. She was sentenced on September 27, 2005, to three years confinement, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to Private (E-1) and received a dishonorable discharge. England had served her sentence at Naval Consolidated Brig, Miramar.

...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse#Courts-martial.2C_non-judicial_punishment.2C_and_administrative_reprimands


Two female commissioned officers were reprimanded as well. Who knows the gender of the "other agency" intelligence personnel, or what happened to them? That kind of thing is never publicized.

The notion of women "in the rear with the gear" safely behind the lines rolling bandages and typing up orders is an outdated one, despite the continued limitations (which will soon fall, I suspect) on combat participation. There are no "front lines" anymore--there haven't been for a long, long time, actually.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:42 PM

9. :facepalm:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:41 PM

178. HE DID NOT WRITE THAT LYRIC

He was one of 3 artists who performed it, yet he's the only one taking heat for it. What about the band that wrote it? Why no media-fueled outrage toward them?

Doesn't anybody use Google anymore?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lbrtbell (Reply #178)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 03:33 PM

181. Who said he did?

 

Are the other two invited to sing before the President?

Does repeating something that is repugnant absolve him for the words he said?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:41 PM

6. Looking like a clown in the thread itself wasn't enough eh?

Pal, if you're cool with the idea of torture-murdering soldiers' FAMILIES (read the damn lyrics) then that's the sort of thought you really ought to keep to yourself. Not repeat over and over on this forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:42 PM

10. i'm getting a good chuckle over this guy making a fool of himself...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #10)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:08 PM

17. I'm getting a good chuckle watching all you hoo-ra types defending our atrocities

 

Because we're MURICA! Fuck yeah!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:10 PM

19. you're not doing a very good job of putting words in other people's mouths you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #19)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:27 PM

29. Hey I'm not the one throwing around insults...that's you

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:52 PM

39. I can condemn atrocities and still feel ...

that someone advocating "Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law and fathers" of our soldiers is an A-1 asshole.

Try it some time - holding nuanced views on something is not hard and doesn't hurt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:05 PM

14. Oh forgot, "America, fuck yeah!!! Boot in their ass!!! Love it or leave it!!!"

 

I guess imperialism is OK now...got it.

Seriously, have you ever thought of viewing the world from a perspective other than that of an American?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:11 PM

20. you illustrate just beautifully simplistic black/white thinking, honey.

It's not de facto imperialism because one finds lyrics about killing people slowly and painfully repugnant. Hey, I know you'd support lyrics by a country singer about killing Afghans slowly and painfully.

gad.

And the guy's "music" is as sucky as it gets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #20)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:27 PM

31. I'm confused, your post doesn't make sense to me

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #31)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:48 PM

105. That's hardly surprising, somehow.

Perhaps you should read it again, but more carefully.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #105)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:49 PM

106. I knew you'd be digging into your insult bag soon enough

 

Is that what the DNC tells you to do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:11 PM

21. nothing shows how peaceful and anti war you are like defending the notion of torture killings...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #21)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:28 PM

32. No I just don't buy into the military fetishism you warmongers like so much

 

In fact, I do NOT support our troops

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:30 PM

35. there you go, flailing again

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #35)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:31 PM

36. Hmmm, defending your opinion is "flailing" - I'll remember that now

 

You're like that guy in an argument, who's entire defense is "YOU SUCK" and and then he high fives his friends

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #36)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:32 PM

37. carry on with your tantrum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dionysus (Reply #37)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:33 PM

38. There you go again with your tantrum

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #38)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:00 PM

45. "I know you are but what am I"?

 

Really?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #45)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:03 PM

47. When a monkey throws shit at you, throw it back

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #47)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:17 PM

49. Unless you are evolved

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:45 PM

59. Please continue, guvnor...

PSY also mentioned their wives and daughters as who should be killed and tortured. How are you with that?

Do continue....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #59)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:47 PM

62. So you are more outraged by these lyrics, than the atrocities our military commits every day

 

Got it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #62)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:51 PM

65. No. You're incorrect.

I'm deeply offended by both. You, however, seem quite OK with this rapper's words. You obviously know what he rapped.

I've been opposed to every US war, starting with Vietnam. I've also served in the Military, but wasn't taught to kill anyone. I learned Russian, instead. You, however, apparently support killing US military personnel, along with their families. I would not defend the person who said that in any way.

Please continue, as you please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #65)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:53 PM

70. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #65)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:54 PM

71. No, I do this little excersize called "put yourself in their shoes"

 

Imagine your country has been occupied all of your life, and as far back as anyone can remember.

Imagine your entire defense is at the will and whim of another country.

Imagine that the occupying forces have a little rape problem themselves, as well as nearby bases.

And let's saw that the occupying country is an empire, with little to no regard for human life.

I'd be pretty pissed too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #71)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:58 PM

76. Ah, but you're not in that position.

Do you, or do you not approve of PSY's lyrics? Be clear and straightforward with us.

One can be opposed to the USA's military ventures and still find the words of the person you're championing offensive and vicious.

Answer the question, and I'll continue. Don't, and I'll just make my own assumptions about your opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #71)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:09 PM

83. I see. Well, I recently bought a car made in South Korea.

Odd, isn't it? Were you aware that U.S. soldiers and civilians have raped women in this country, too. Individuals commit rapes and murder, all around the world. Most who do that aren't military at all. How about that?

And yet, they're building cars in SK to send here. They're not doing that in NK. Odd, isn't it?

So, how do you feel about that rapper's lyrics. Do you also think the families of military personnel should be tortured and killed? I'd be curious to know how you feel about that, Taverner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:58 PM

153. The Hate USA crowd.

I find it sickening to read comments that degrade the armed forces. They put their lives on the line so out of touch fringe types can type insults about our brave men and women.

My grandfather served his country during WWII. If anyone on this message board thinks that going to war is never a choice needs to grow up.

WWII brought us Hitler. If American sat on our hands during WWII we be under Nazi rule.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to william cail (Reply #153)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:00 PM

154. Your empty jingoism is amusing

 

Keep going...

And I don't hate America. I hate what it does, and if you for a minute stepped outside your bubble, you would see that other people in the world, who don't live in the US, view us a bit differently than we view ourselves.

But...It's not worth my time to try and reason with you. You've got red,white and blue shades on, and you think we're the greatest country on Earth, ever!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to william cail (Reply #153)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 03:50 PM

183. Please.

Many of our soldiers aren't there to "protect our freedoms," or whatever else Fox Newz says they're doing. They're there for the opportunity to kill themselves some brown folks, all with Uncle Sam's stamp of approval. Been that way since 1898.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #14)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:01 AM

169. Remember that song with "we'll put a boot in your ass, it's the American way"?

Conservatives actually defended that song after ABC snubbed it in 2002...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021945534

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 01:44 PM

11. Is this guy worth defending to this extent?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:06 PM

15. To be honest, I don't give a rats ass about PSY

 

I do worry that we look at our empire with rose colored glasses

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #15)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:15 PM

174. These days PSY is looking at our empire with rose colored glasses. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:32 PM

163. He said it in 2002, as we were torturing the shit out of people

Plenty of people were afraid to say anything back then. I think he's worth defending (though I still don't care for rap).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:12 PM

22. you are going to need some fainting couches

 

for the many duers who seemed royally outraged over recent military themed threads such as a woman giving the finger *GASP* to our most high honored war dead, or not showing proper respect and admiration to the loyal and gallant soldiers guarding the unknown soldiers tomb, be prepared for the righteous outrage! This is America, buddy, and our military is the most revered and worshiped symbol we got!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quinnox (Reply #22)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:19 PM

26. As opposed to the pearl clutching when our troops are honored?

Nobody is forcing you to honor or revere. Nice strawmen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 02:15 PM

24. You know, Democrats are allowed to support the troops. It in no way makes us more like Repubs.

In fact Dems truly support unlike Repubs using for political gain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to great white snark (Reply #24)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:33 PM

53. Yes, and that's why folks who support our troops oppose foreign occupations

Its bad for the people there and its bad for our country. Can't blame PSY for being pissed about the murder of two of his fellow citizens by a US tank.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:00 PM

44. i was going to suggest him for Sec. of State

but no way he'll get confirmed now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #44)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:06 PM

48. Darn! And we're so overdue for Gangnam-Style diplomacy.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:41 PM

56. 'Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law and fathers '

This is what you are supporting? Really?

Feh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #56)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:46 PM

60. +1

I agree. You don't have to be a Democrat or Republican to know that when someone advocates "Kill their daughters, mothers, daughters-in-law, and fathers", that crosses a line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PennsylvaniaMatt (Reply #60)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:47 PM

63. Apparently not for some here, though.

Disgusting, IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #63)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:57 PM

75. Get over it.

He said it 10 years ago after some of our troops murdered two South Korean girls. I don't blame him for being pissed off after that. I wonder if you find the killing of those two girls "disgusting", or is it just words that "offend" you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #75)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:01 PM

79. Of course that was disgusting. I thought so at the time.

One disgusting thing, however, does not justify another. It never has, and never will.

If you don't mind, I won't take your order to "get over it." I'm not good at taking orders, especially from people I don't even know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #79)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:22 PM

87. This isn't the military, i'm not giving you orders, just advice.

Comparing some statements this guy made when he was angry does not compare to the killings of two human beings. False equivalency at its worst.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #87)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:30 PM

94. Oh, advice. Well, then.

Two little girls were found killed right here in the US. The military did not kill those South Korean girls. An individual did. An individual killed the 11 and 7 year old girls here, too. Individuals kill and rape.

The military also kills. But the military does not rape and murder. Individuals do that.

I have some advice for you, too: Don't give advice to people you don't know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #94)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:36 PM

98. I'll give advice to whom i wish, and you can do as you please with it.

The fact is those two girls were killed by people who represented our country in an official capacity, so i will not cast judgement on what this man said when he was rightfully angry over the killings of his two fellow citizens. To compare what he said in anger to the murder of two young girls is despicable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #98)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:41 PM

101. I can't remember, were the ones

 

who committed those killings invited to sing before the President?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #101)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:58 PM

115. Yeah you know, the US military has this thing

where they represent and defend our country wherever they go. I don't know, its sort of an official thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #115)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:02 PM

121. Yep

 

And when they break the rules, they are removed from that position and go to jail.

They are not invited to sing before our President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #98)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:44 PM

104. Oh, I will do as I please, certainly.

As I said, I don't know you. I don't know your expertise, if any. I don't know your life experiences. So, I'll just ignore your advice and orders. You'll understand, I'm sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #75)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:06 PM

82. He must hate America a LOT then

 

because that has happened here quite a few times. Heck, just this week they found the bodies of two more that it happened to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:43 PM

57. Americans get outraged over lyrics.

But they don't get outraged over the killings of civilians in wars that our politicians start. Must be nice not to have foreign troops occupying your cities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #57)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:45 PM

58. +1000

 

Just watch out for the Patriotism Police...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #58)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:56 PM

73. So, tell us whether or not you approve of

the PSY lyrics we're talking about. We'll wait. Do you approve of his suggestions about our military and their families? If so, you've picked a very strange hero to champion here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #73)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:38 PM

99. He's not my hero - and you guys accuse me of being binary, black and white

 

I don't approve, but I can sympathize

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #99)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:42 PM

102. You can sympathize with an opinion

that the families of military personnel should be tortured and killed? Really?

I never took you for someone who sympathized with violence and torture, somehow.

I don't sympathize with our current military ventures, and I don't sympathize with torture and murder of innocents. That you do is revealing. You seem rather selective in your sympathies, it appears to me.

No thanks. I'll not have any of your sympathies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #102)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:50 PM

108. Go ahead, put words in my mouth. Tell your employer it's hippie punching time.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #108)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:54 PM

111. My employer? I haven't had one of those since 1974.

I put nothing in your mouth. I'd be afraid to do anything of the sort. You're the one who said you sympathized with this rapper who thinks torturing and killing the families of military personnel is a good idea. I didn't put that in your mouth, or your fingertips, for that matter.

I'm not even sure where your second sentence came from. Maybe you could explain what you meant by "Tell your employer it's hippie punching time." Please clarify. BTW, I'm an old hippie myself. You seem confused this afternoon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #111)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:56 PM

112. Most of us here have you figured out

 

It's about time to stop the charade

The DNC has never been happy with us liberals, so now that you've won the election, time to go punch hippies eg get rid of the left

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #112)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:59 PM

117. Really? You think I work for the DNC?

So, are you saying I'm being paid to post here on DU? I'm not. In fact, it often keeps me from my work at my own business. Posting on DU costs me money, rather than earning money.

But, you're saying I'm paid to post here? You really believe that? It's laughable.

I don't write about political issues for money. Never have. Never will. Today, I worked on web pages about commercial packaged HVAC rooftop systems for a website I'm doing the content for. Very boring stuff. That's how I earn my money. That's my business. You can click the link in my signature line to learn more, and to see all the other businesses for which I've written websites.

DNC?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #117)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:00 PM

119. Considering how everything you've ever said has been a DNC talking point...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #119)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:03 PM

122. Boy, have you misread.

I'm not a professional political writer in any way. I write the content for small business websites. It pays the bills. You are confused today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #122)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:55 PM

152. No, I just know a con job when I see or read it

 

Although I will give you this: You are not some spineless crybaby when engaged. You never once alerted on me, which I would say gives you a certain amount of credulity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #152)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:51 PM

157. You don't know shit.

If you think I work for the DNC, you are full of what you don't know.

And no, I haven't alerted on you. I hardly ever alert on anything, except for personal attacks. I consider your assertion that I'm paid to post here to be a personal attack. But I don't alert on posts directed at me, either, so you get a pass.

What I post is is what I think and believe. If you don't like what I think and believe, there it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #157)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:49 PM

164. I never accused you of alerting on me

 

In fact, I laud the fact that you HAVEN'T

Look - we're at an impasse here

Everyone hates me in some places and loves me in others

Let's make nice

Today was an especially harsh day for me, IRL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #164)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:52 PM

165. Sorry you had a bad day. Truly.

Now I'm having one. I don't like being accused of some things, and shilling is one of those things. I don't do it. Never have. Never will. It's one of the worst possible insults one can make about a professional writer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #73)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:55 PM

179. No I don't approve

But it wasn't "his" suggestion. He didn't write the lyrics. 2 other artists performed them at the same time. Why aren't you outraged at them, or the band that wrote the lyrics?

Because you're ready to embrace this xenophobic, fact-deficient attack. There is such a thing as checking facts before you rail against somebody.

Read my other posts in this thread, about how Psy has changed dramatically between that time and the present.

And yes, he IS a hero to me. He turned his life around. He had gotten arrested for possession of marijuana (horrors!) and was in jail when his grandfather's funeral was being held. He was quite messed up until he got married. Now, he's a family man with twin daughters, who is kind, caring, and generous.

I also admire him because he succeeded in Korea without succumbing to pressure to change his music and have plastic surgery. He succeeded on his own terms, on his own indie label. His video went viral, and he's been working insanely hard to please his fans by traveling around the world, giving FREE concerts. He was recently hospitalized for exhaustion from working.

So why are people accusing him of changing solely to make money in the USA, when he didn't even intend to pursue U.S. or international fame at all?

Racism and xenophobia. Just look at Bill O'Reilly's recent "news story" about him, and you'll see it clearly.

Finally, I admire him for staying true to himself and succeeding where all other manufactured South Korean acts have failed--scoring a huge hit in the USA.

So yes, he's a hero to me. He's not perfect, for he's a human being--and he was a troubled human being in his youth. But the fact that he overcame all that to become a kind, generous family man is definitely admirable in my book.

If people can't respect someone who made a sincere effort to change his life, it says more about them than it does about him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Reply #58)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:59 PM

77. Ditto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #57)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:56 PM

74. Ever been to S. Korea

 

Ask them which of the following options they would prefer:

A) The US have the current presence in their country "occupying" their cities
B) the US completely leave
C) the North Koreans occupying their cities

I did. During the N. Korea famine of '97-'98

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #74)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:00 PM

78. I don't believe anybody but US citizens should be setting our foreign policy, first of all.

So irrespective i think we should withdrawal our troops from there, but the fact is anti-US sentiment there has been on the rise in recent years, especially after the killings of those two girls. And their military is more than well equipped enough to deal with any threat from the North, which ultimately, is their responsibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #78)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:13 PM

84. And what makes you think that?

 

"And their military is more than well equipped enough to deal with any threat from the North"

And what do you base that on? Please expand on your vast knowledge of the capabilities of each.

BTW, you do realize that the Koreans do want us there

"While the relationship is rooted in the Korean War, 84 percent said they wanted to maintain the US alliance even if North and South Korea are unified, according to the survey by the Asian Institute for Policy Studies."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5i7vGA2claNhtEoHEO20YOqQt0jww?docId=CNG.9c8ff903f2483b2a6a044cdbcbaf225b.941

AND they had thousands of troops in Iraq, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #84)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:17 PM

85. Now, see, you're confusing that poster with actual information.

That's just not fair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #85)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:30 PM

93. Lol, information?

Maybe if your a Weekly Standard subscriber. The idea that South Koreans supported the Iraq war is laughable to no end. But keep living in your little bubble all you want, boys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #84)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:26 PM

91. How does "maintain an alliance" translate into having thousands of troops occupying their country?

I want to have an alliance with most of the world, doesn't mean i want their troops on our borders. Yes, they had troops in Iraq, and it was extremely unpopular with the people of South Korea, hence why they withdrew them. For someone who claims to know so much about the Koreas, you know so little. You are aware that the North's military equipment is outdated and its troops are starving? I won't do your homework for you, so please look it up for yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #91)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:50 PM

107. Yes, they did withdraw them

 

After FIVE years. When we were withdrawing ours.

Hmmm, so 9 MILLION hungry troops would not be a threat to a country on their border with lots of food. Is that what you are trying to convince yourself of?

Why do you think the S. Koreans were especially worried in '97/'98 when there was a famine in the north? But for the record, the NK soldiers are better fed than the general population.

"Around 6 percent of the respondents said U.S. troops should completely withdraw from South Korea, while another 45 percent said they should leave gradually. The combined figure, 51 percent, rose steadily from 39 percent in 2003 to a peak of 62 percent last year. About 34 percent said they want U.S. troops to stay for a significant period, while another 15 percent said they wanted continuous U.S. presence."

Only 6% of S. Korean want our troops gone.
http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/article.aspx?aid=2895206

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #107)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:57 PM

113. Lol, nice way to spin things.

But i can do the same. Only 15% want us there permanently. See how that works? And yes, i know the North Korean military is better fed than the people, that doesn't mean they still eat good. And the South Korean presence in Iraq was unpopular throughout that whole period, just as our occupation of Iraq was as well. But politicians tend to be hawks, surprise surprise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #113)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:00 PM

118. Yep

 

150% more want us there permanently. I win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #118)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:05 PM

124. Lol, not even close.

51% want us out sooner rather than later. Yeah, i think, maybe, just maybe, that's a majority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #124)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:15 PM

129. Under what definition it "gradually"

 

the same as "sooner than later"?

grad·u·al Show IPA
adjective
1.
taking place, changing, moving, etc., by small degrees or little by little: gradual improvement in health.
2.
rising or descending at an even, moderate inclination: a gradual slope.

Dictionary.com

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #129)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:34 PM

134. Under what definition is significant?

A year? A week? Th questions weren't exactly precise, so i assume the ones who said gradual instead of significant want our troops out quicker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #134)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:40 PM

136. Most people have functioning brains

 

Considering our troops have been there for 60 years, most people would consider a significant amount of time to be decades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #136)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:51 PM

140. Most people also have reading comprehension skills

I said the ones who said we should gradually decrease our presence want us out sooner than those who want us to stay a significant amount of time. And they make up the majority. What part of that did you not get, hawk?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #140)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:02 PM

144. Um, OK

 

regardless, 94% still want level near the current levels for the near-term and half want them there long-term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #78)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:22 PM

88. The current plan is that the ROK will be self sufficient in defense in another few years


However, the current ROK defense plan is that in the event of a PRK invasion, the ROK command structure itself reverts to the US.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #88)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:31 PM

96. Not according to Sung Kim

 

http://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/korea/fewer-bases-same-number-of-troops-in-south-korea-us-ambassador-says-1.168633

"The new U.S. ambassador to South Korea said this week that the only impending change to the U.S. military presence on the peninsula will be the relocation of servicemembers to a smaller number of bases — not a decrease in troop levels."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #88)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:31 PM

97. And that's the problem.

Their defense should not be our responsibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #97)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:43 PM

103. "FU, I've got mine"

 

I'll bet your friends don't even bother asking you to help move anymore, do they?

I guess you don't even know what alliances are about? Yikes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #103)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:53 PM

109. So you think we need to fight wars on behalf of other countries?

Boy, that's a great strategy. That Vietnam War was such a success. Why wouldn't we want to replicate that? I guess i must have glanced over that part of the constitution that says our troops swear to protect our country, and any others our politicians decide to send them to. Lovely. I'm willing to bet i won't be seeing you on the battlefield anytime soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #109)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:58 PM

114. England and France

 

and much of Europe are sure glad we did.

But, yes, I do believe we should help our allies. If not, why bother with alliances?

And you might want to reread the Constitution. The military swears to uphold it and it says the President is the CINC. "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;"

And I will be on the battlefield if they call me out of retirement to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #114)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:01 PM

120. Ah yes, the WWII card.

Because every war is just like that one. I'm sure General Noriega had plans to invade the mainland US, lol. Helping our allies is one thing, actually fighting full out wars for them is another, especially when you consider most of our allies have well equipped armies and the two you mentioned have nukes. Your definition of alliances doesn't square with mine, and the constitution doesn't define it either, so to each his own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #120)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:09 PM

126. Um, we have a lot fewer troops

 

in S. Korea than the S. Koreans do. In fact, they have more in their Army than we have in our entire army. And the have a lot of reserves as well.

So who said anything about fighting it for them? Besides, didn't you say they already had the ability to defeat NK? So are we carrying the lion's share of the load or are they? You can't have it both ways.

And yes, all wars are different. Which is why I gave a very important example of a war where we fought a war on behalf of other countries. I don't remember many French troops landing at Normandy with us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #126)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:12 PM

127. Well, if you support a US military presence in South Korea

you are basically conceding that we will fight the war for them since a North Korean invasion means we take command. No two ways around that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #127)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:20 PM

131. So you believe fighting is the same as command?

 

Do you think the generals actually do the fighting in the war?

Are they the ones who die in battle?

Wow. You CERTAINLY have never been in the military. Or seen it. Or read about it. O r really thought about it.

If our troops make up 20% of the fighting force, we are fighting the war for them? HI-larious. You crack me up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #131)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:31 PM

133. Oh yes, of course, because the only US troops who will do the fighting are the ones in SK

There won't be any additional troops sent whatsoever. Wow. You are such a military expert. How many medals do you have?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Daniel537 (Reply #133)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:44 PM

137. Yep more would be sent

 

But considering the majority of the initial lift (vehicles/troops) is by ship, that would take a while and our numbers still wouldn't come close to the number of S. Koreans.

I have 7 medals. And obviously a bunch of ribbons on top of that.

OK, technically I have fewer medals than that because some have leaf clusters indicating I've received that same level of medal multiple times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlexSatan (Reply #137)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:49 PM

138. Well with your expertise

i'm sure the ROK will value your assistance. Just don't drag the rest of our troops along with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:52 PM

66. At least he didn't use the "N" word or try to say something witty about rape

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 03:52 PM

67. Well if this offends you you probably shouldn't listen to the Coup, Immortal Technique, Public Enemy

, etc. Remember Uncle Same ain't the baker he's the butcher/we're all on punked with no Ashton Kutcher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to craigmatic (Reply #67)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:00 PM

143. I recently discovered Immortal Technique

Mostly in a case of "that's too awesome a stage name not to make me curious," but been listening to some of his stuff since then.

I've started trying to make a point of finding more political musicians now and then whose views are far enough apart from mine, or worded in different enough manners from mine, to make listening to them kind of uncomfortable. It can be an insightful experience and has been taking a bit of the edge off some of the kneejerk-reaction-to-such-and-such responses I (like everyone else) have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #143)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:28 PM

148. They say rage against the machine is pretty good.

Personally I love the coup. Go check out their song called fat cats and bigger fish. It's pretty good. These guys are pretty far left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to craigmatic (Reply #148)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:38 PM

149. RATM I'd discovered some time ago. ;)

I've spent the last couple years kind of exploring hip-hop and neighboring genres as a whole, since it was almost completely off my mental radar. It's been worth it I think, between some incredibly talented people here and there and the fact that some real fire's getting poured into some of that work.

A lot of political music these days tends to be kind of tepid, just dealing in standard cliches or being really cloyingly pro-The-System and badly written to boot (I'm looking at you, "Let's Roll"). Then I go and stumble across Immortal Technique collaborating with Lowkey and am like, "hell-o..."

I'll check out The Coup right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to craigmatic (Reply #148)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:46 PM

150. And that one was interesting - I like how he kind of left the ending hanging

"I'm getting hussled / Only knowing half the game.."

I see a lot of "we need to do such-and-such and it'll get better" in protest music, but not many people do "I'm going to define the problem, but I'm not sure what to do about it yet."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #150)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:01 PM

155. True but the best thing about them is that it's leftist music that you can dance to.

They have so many songs you can dance to that sound like old school funk. Me and Jesus the Pimp, Sho yo ass, and pretty much any song off pick a bigger weapon. These are the guys who had the world trade center blowing up on their album cover in the months leading up to 9/11.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:01 PM

80. I get tired of media contrived "problems"

Some guy has an opinion, ok, so what? I believe everyone should have a right to their opinions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to get the red out (Reply #80)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:52 PM

141. Especially when they have to dig back a decade to find something to get outraged over. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 04:24 PM

90. Code brown?! Uh oh. Yer gonna need this....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 08:29 PM

162. He said it in 2002, as we were filling guantanamo and torturing the shit out of people

Plenty of people were saying "bad" things about that back then. Plenty of people were also afraid to say bad things about that back then.

In any case, he made a very well-stated apology more recently, basically for any harm that the non-specificity of his statements might have caused.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:28 AM

172. huh, just heard. Psy's covering Shin Hae Cheol's band N.E.X.T.

it's like covering... Public Enemy or Ice T or Beatles or Black Sabbath or any other utterly seminal artist that has a corpus of controversial songs.

Shin Hae Cheol was, and still prides himself in being, a major bad boy from the Korean music scene. i absolutely love his early work. though i admit he does come off as abrasive, even in his live N.E.X.T. sets. but that's the nature of the artist: he has an opinion, he's free to do so, he also makes great art, listeners learn to deal.

to lay this all on Psy's feet for doing a cover is misplaced at best. it's probably FOX sour grapes at anything foreign coming to our shores successfully. besides, covering a controversial song from a legendary artist at a rather timely context isn't bad -- it's artistically appropriate and engaging use of art.

letting one's delicate sensibilities rattle from this, well, it's your free choice to react (or overreact, in my view) as you please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NuttyFluffers (Reply #172)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 03:03 PM

180. +1,000,000,000

Finally, an informed opinion!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 01:43 PM

175. Looks like he just killed a big chunk of his new fan-base.

He was bigger than Jesus, now he's just as big as Jesus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taverner (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 02:31 PM

176. Psy DID NOT WRITE THOSE LYRICS!

He was only one of THREE artists invited on stage to rap them during a protest concert.

Why is there no outrage against the other guest artist, or how about the South Korean metal band who wrote the lyrics?

Can you say, "Racist resentment of Psy's international fame," boys and girls? That's a major reason the right-wingers are picking up on this story. They've been trashing Psy from the start, on shows like "The O'Reilly Factor".

If the media would actually do their jobs, they would have also reported that Psy was much younger and controversial back then. Since getting married, having kids, and doing military service (twice), he's a changed man.

He even wrote a song about it, called "It's Art"--in which he says that he was a "beast" before he met the woman he loves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread