Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

SomethingFishy

(4,876 posts)
70. Even if I did believe this was a war, and I don't,
Wed Feb 6, 2013, 07:12 PM
Feb 2013

Blind faith is required no matter what. Unless you are in the middle of it you have no idea if what you are being told is true or not. When they bomb some "suspected insurgents" does that make you happy? I see those words used all the time "suspected insurgents". What the fuck does that even mean? Am I a "suspected insurgent" for typing this?

I see pictures of bloody and dead children and am told that this "collateral damage" is necessary to the security of the United States. And what? I'm just supposed to take their word for it? That there is no other way to survive this "war on terror"? That we cannot win without "collateral damage"?

I'll say this again, blind faith is a requirement. How many people believed the Jessica Lynch "Rambo" story? How about Abu Grahib? How about the billions of missing dollars? Pat Tillman? Do you think had these stories not been exposed you would know the truth? Blind faith.


One last thing, If this is a war, you are not going to win this by killing terrorists. All killing terrorists does is create more terrorists.

Then it MUST be a good thing. right? rustydog Feb 2013 #1
What if the American citizen is a member gholtron Feb 2013 #53
Supporting drones kinda makes you not 'liberal' tblue Feb 2013 #2
Agreed -- IMNSHO n/t markpkessinger Feb 2013 #54
Just read that a legal framework will soon be proposed in the House & Senate JaneyVee Feb 2013 #3
Supporting a drone policy "which administration officials refuse to discuss" MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #4
What the fuck does this have to do with anything? Dawgs Feb 2013 #5
That's Very Disappointing. dballance Feb 2013 #6
It's not about the tool (drones) it's the justification for using it.n/t NOVA_Dem Feb 2013 #7
This goes beyond that. This is about the death penalty. cherokeeprogressive Feb 2013 #8
DU is a different place. Dawgs Feb 2013 #11
DU is more critical of Drones than Democrats as a whole as my DU poll in GD suggests stevenleser Feb 2013 #13
Again. The use of Drones and this most recent policy on drone strikes of Americans are not the same. Dawgs Feb 2013 #90
I think it's about defending Obama at all costs.. NOVA_Dem Feb 2013 #14
Support the use of drones? Sure. But to do what. aikoaiko Feb 2013 #9
Would "77% of Liberal Democrats" support President Romney's use, I wonder. WinkyDink Feb 2013 #10
Thanks for the perspective, Steven. Cha Feb 2013 #12
I guess that means killing people without trial is now a "liberal" value. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #15
Or we disagree with your interpretation of it. nt stevenleser Feb 2013 #16
Of what? Killing? Liberal? or "Value"? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #18
You have decided to interpret it that way. I see it the way the Magistrate explains it. stevenleser Feb 2013 #20
So, where's the part about killing people without trial being "liberal"? Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #24
Phrasing the question that way would make it a push poll. nt stevenleser Feb 2013 #25
OK. Let's try it this way. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #26
That is a separate issue. All Liberals and Democrats would answer the same way. stevenleser Feb 2013 #35
I guess that makes Obama not a liberal. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #40
Nope, he would answer the same way the way you framed the question. nt stevenleser Feb 2013 #41
Did Southern Soldiers during the Civil War Get Trials or Were They Killed? Yavin4 Feb 2013 #66
LBJ was the greatest. I supported him then and know. He would have beaten Nixon. graham4anything Feb 2013 #36
He carried on a genocidal war against people that posed no threat to this country. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #39
LBJ would have beaten Nixon in 1968. And Nixon sabatoged the peace negotiations. graham4anything Feb 2013 #42
Losing may not have been an option (politically) but it was a reality. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #45
No, LBJ would not have won; he knew the political calculus then better than you now. WinkyDink Feb 2013 #63
LBJ vs. Nixon head to head, LBJ would have won. Ugly match, but LBJ would have won graham4anything Feb 2013 #71
Kind of like Iraq and Afghanistan. WinkyDink Feb 2013 #62
And his explanation is valid as long as you blindly trust your government. SomethingFishy Feb 2013 #34
Blind trust is not required, no. stevenleser Feb 2013 #60
al Qaeda is (insert insugency group du jour here) sadalien Feb 2013 #69
Even if I did believe this was a war, and I don't, SomethingFishy Feb 2013 #70
Nope, that is not required at all. stevenleser Feb 2013 #80
LOL.. Look I respect you and what you do but... SomethingFishy Feb 2013 #91
We are at war. gholtron Feb 2013 #56
Oh, pish. GMAB. Why not just say we're going to go after "the bad guys"? WinkyDink Feb 2013 #64
okay. We're going after the bad guys. gholtron Feb 2013 #67
The same was said of Vietnam. Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2013 #75
That 77% may be Democrats, but they are certainly not liberal davidn3600 Feb 2013 #17
Got that F'in Right!! DearHeart Feb 2013 #59
The old grey mare (donkey), she ain't what she used to be whatchamacallit Feb 2013 #19
Since when does majority opinion matter when it comes to cali Feb 2013 #21
Well, a DU jury for one example. stevenleser Feb 2013 #22
That's rather a shabby comparison. cali Feb 2013 #23
That is an often repeated canard, it's not true. You are conflating Iraq and torture with drones. stevenleser Feb 2013 #27
plus ten zillion graham4anything Feb 2013 #43
That's an egregious misuse of the word canard. cali Feb 2013 #47
I stand by my earlier statement. You cannot come up with a single example. stevenleser Feb 2013 #50
what? what? what? cali Feb 2013 #52
I disagree. Bonobo Feb 2013 #85
So DU juries are an acceptable way of judging right from wrong? cherokeeprogressive Feb 2013 #83
drones are not the issue... mike_c Feb 2013 #28
Thank you! This is about Due Process and Assassinations of US Citizens... NOVA_Dem Feb 2013 #31
no it is not. the issue is drones. nothing else. graham4anything Feb 2013 #44
Who is doing the diverting depends on your perspective. I think it is you. stevenleser Feb 2013 #32
LMFAO.. yeah.. I'm sure all these liberals will feel the same way SomethingFishy Feb 2013 #29
Easy remedy for that, right? Don't move to Yemen and sign up with Al Qaeda. nt stevenleser Feb 2013 #33
Yeah I don't plan on it. However within the next 5 years SomethingFishy Feb 2013 #37
And that's when the FEMA Camps come into play. JoePhilly Feb 2013 #49
Yeah ok. SomethingFishy Feb 2013 #58
If 77% of Liberal Democrats walked off a pier, would you? (facepalm) Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #30
Well, I guess I'm either in the minority or not a liberal Democrat. Comrade Grumpy Feb 2013 #38
Funny, they never asked me. RoccoR5955 Feb 2013 #46
And if Bush was president, 90% would oppose it LittleBlue Feb 2013 #48
Nope, that is an oft repeated canard. stevenleser Feb 2013 #51
good point nt ecstatic Feb 2013 #57
And some of us who were, are. WinkyDink Feb 2013 #61
LOL, you believe that? If Romney did this we would be up in arms. Nice try. n-t Logical Feb 2013 #65
Nice try yourself. If it's so obvious, provide an example stevenleser Feb 2013 #76
no they woudln't, many supported him going into Afghanistan , but didn't support Iraq JI7 Feb 2013 #72
Why did we use a drone to kill Anwar al-Awlaki? Kolesar Feb 2013 #55
Well that's disheartening Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 #68
Just proves how worthless the contemporary definition of "liberal" has become. marmar Feb 2013 #73
"Liberal" = "Obama bumper sticker" n/t lumberjack_jeff Feb 2013 #74
That's one interpretation. The other is more likely. stevenleser Feb 2013 #77
This message was self-deleted by its author marmar Feb 2013 #86
"to interdict terrorist groups planning to hurt them" marmar Feb 2013 #89
Killing them (AS USUAL) with the facts Number23 Feb 2013 #78
In Vietnam, I wonder how many B Calm Feb 2013 #79
In Vietnam, if we'd had more liberal Democrats, about 99% of the eventual total KIA. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #88
That is heartbreaking and nauseating all at the same time. ScreamingMeemie Feb 2013 #81
I'm part of the 23% who doesn't support it. Apophis Feb 2013 #82
A limited and judicious use of drones is inevitable and can be warranted fujiyama Feb 2013 #84
The whole reason we have a Bill of Rights is to protect us from tyranny of the majority. BlueCheese Feb 2013 #87
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»WaPo/ABC Poll from last F...»Reply #70