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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
92. Unwarranted. You could have added your data without talking like that.
Thu Sep 11, 2014, 02:16 AM
Sep 2014

Last edited Thu Sep 11, 2014, 02:55 AM - Edit history (1)

Americans know what the Australians suffered in WW2 on behalf of the BE as part of the Allies, in the Pacific Theater. It's well documented and part of the reason Australia is part of the Five Eyes that is also part of fighting ISIL.

What has the current Australian economy have to do with WW2 and the commitment of all of the ALLIED forces of which Australia was a part?

You should go to the Wiki page on WW2 casualties to edit it with your data instead of what you said about the graphic. It does not exclude Australia.

It is emblematic of my point, that the Axis did not suffer as much as the Allies did. What has those lives lost got to do with one single graphic? Does it say they were lost in vain?

I don't think so. I respect their sacrifice. I respect my father who fought in the Pacific and went from one island to another until they reached China and cleaned up what the Japanese left in retreat. Australians know this. Americans know this.

I'll try to explain the point of my post, that is about a national will and how we came to be what we are in the world. Note how The Five Eyes include both Australia and NZ:

...The treaty sharing info goes back to WW2.

The entire Anglosphere has been sharing a lot of information offically on the same basis it did during that war. Below is a post by Devon Rex, but most of us knew this for years, just not this well laid out:

I'll spell it out:

UKUSA. It's the SIGINT Intelligence Agreement. BRUSA.


Might as well be signed in blood.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement

United Kingdom – United States of America Agreement (UKUSA, /juːkuːˈsɑː/ ew-koo-sah) is a multilateral agreement for cooperation in signals intelligence between the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The alliance of intelligence operations is also known as Five Eyes (FVEY). It was first signed in March 1946 by the United Kingdom and the United States and later extended to encompass the three Commonwealth realms of Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The UKUSA Agreement was a follow-up of the 1943 BRUSA Agreement, the World War II agreement on cooperation over intelligence matters. This was a secret treaty, allegedly so secret that it was kept secret from the Australian Prime Ministers until 1973.

The agreement established an alliance of five English-speaking countries for the purpose of sharing intelligence, especially signals intelligence. It formalized the intelligence sharing agreement in the Atlantic Charter, signed in 1941, before the entry of the U.S. into the conflict.

History

The agreement originated from a ten-page British–U.S. Communication Intelligence Agreement, also known as BRUSA, that connected the signal intercept networks of the U.K. Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) at the beginning of the Cold War. The document was signed on March 5, 1946 by Colonel Patrick Marr-Johnson for the U.K.'s London Signals Intelligence Board and Lieutenant General Hoyt Vandenberg for the U.S. State–Army–Navy Communication Intelligence Board. Although the original agreement states that the exchange would not be "prejudicial to national interests", the United States often blocked information sharing from Commonwealth countries. The full text of the agreement was released to the public on June 25, 2010.

Under the agreement, the GCHQ and the NSA shared intelligence on the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China, and several eastern European countries (known as Exotics). The network was expanded in the 1960s into the Echelon collection and analysis network.

In July 2013, as part of the 2013 Edward Snowden revelations, it emerged that the NSA is paying GCHQ for its services, with at least £100 million of payments made between 2010–13.

Collection mechanisms

The UKUSA alliance is often associated with the ECHELON system; however, processed intelligence is reliant on multiple sources of information and the intelligence shared is not restricted to signals intelligence.

The "Five Eyes" in question are –

USA – National Security Agency
United Kingdom – Government Communications Headquarters
Canada – Communications Security Establishment
Australia – Defence Signals Directorate
New Zealand – Government Communications Security Bureau

Global coverage

Each member of the UKUSA alliance is officially assigned lead responsibility for intelligence collection and analysis in different parts of the globe.

Australia

Australia hunts for communications originating in Indochina, Indonesia, and southern China.

Canada

Formerly the northern portions of the former Soviet Union and conducting sweeps of all communications traffic that could be picked up from embassies around the world. In the post-Cold War era, a greater emphasis has been placed on monitoring satellite, radio and cellphone traffic originating from Central and South America, primarily in an effort to track drugs and non-aligned paramilitary groups in the region.

New Zealand

The Waihopai Valley Facility—base of the New Zealand branch of the ECHELON Program.
New Zealand is responsible for the western Pacific. Listening posts in the South Island at Waihopai Valley just south-west of Blenheim, and on the North Island at Tangimoana. The Anti-Bases Campaign holds regular protests in order to have the listening posts closed down.

United Kingdom

Europe, Africa, and European Russia.

United States

Monitors most of Latin America, Asia, Asiatic Russia, and northern China.

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023492002#post7

Devon Rex wrote:

'Might as well be signed in blood.'

That is true. Millions of people died in that war and that's still taken seriously. True, it was before most of us were born but it formed the world we live in.

Australia has supported the actions of the USA and UK for many years since WW2. Do you think NZ and Australia should leave this alliance now?

I'm not getting where the fire is coming from, all out of proportion to my point. I have neither said nor posted anything to offend Australia or NZ.

I made a narrow point, focused on the will of the American people to be involved in stopping ISIL. You have not addressed the point of my comment.

How would DU react to the 1930s and Hitler? [View all] Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 OP
ISIS = Hitler? Hoo boy. marmar Sep 2014 #1
Obviously you can't read. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #4
Sorry. I was bedazzled by the really bad analogy. marmar Sep 2014 #7
No problem. I accept your apology. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #8
Translation: I can't counter the merits of you entire post, so I will try to mock it. joeglow3 Sep 2014 #170
What merits? Hissyspit Sep 2014 #201
The ones you choose to ignore. joeglow3 Sep 2014 #209
Point them out to me. Hissyspit Sep 2014 #263
I guaran-fucking-tee, you will not admit to anything joeglow3 Sep 2014 #269
Bernard Sanders (I-VT) - "There is no question that ISIS is a dangerous and brutal organization," FrodosPet Sep 2014 #97
ISIS is engaging in ethnic cleansing on an historical scale. pnwmom Sep 2014 #173
“Harder than anything we’ve tried to do thus far in Iraq or Afghanistan” is how one U.S. general Hissyspit Sep 2014 #198
Amnesty International lancer78 Sep 2014 #234
Did it really? thucythucy Sep 2014 #251
here is link lancer78 Sep 2014 #282
Thanks. thucythucy Sep 2014 #283
Analogy FAIL AgingAmerican Sep 2014 #2
+1 - raven mad Sep 2014 #253
There is no Germany behind ISIL RobertEarl Sep 2014 #3
ISIS is no long term threat? Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #5
ISIS/ISIL/al Nusra/FSA/al Qaeda/Mujahideen, etc Boreal Sep 2014 #22
How did DU react to the Bush gang's 'terror' claims? You don't have to go back to Hitler sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #33
You're wrong about Germany Lurks Often Sep 2014 #151
Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #158
good point, david! bettyellen Sep 2014 #163
I see you here too. I don't take orders from anonymous, strangers on the internet. As I was saying sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #169
Fewer than the US. GeorgeGist Sep 2014 #127
Trashed? Really? sammythecat Sep 2014 #141
It goes to show what an upstanding DU member so are when they make statements like that davidpdx Sep 2014 #159
The president as well as others have pointed out that our enemies are no longer nations davidpdx Sep 2014 #157
I believe that some of them do have boarders. RoccoR5955 Sep 2014 #248
Hitler started out as one crazy man, before he got a country's government behind him. pnwmom Sep 2014 #174
most of my posts against hitler and what i suggest we should do would be hidden samsingh Sep 2014 #6
First, they complain about a speech before it's made, then about a war that hasn't begun. NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #9
A war that hasn't begun? Hissyspit Sep 2014 #51
We're never supposed to try to act to prevent things, Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #145
We are supposed to wait until the war starts then get called unpatriotic Jamastiene Sep 2014 #148
No kidding. Major Hogwash Sep 2014 #69
Michael Moore is a heartthrob? First time I ever heard that. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #80
I have never heard anyone claim that on DU or otherwise. Jamastiene Sep 2014 #149
I know. The claim is ridiculous. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #152
In the way Elizabeth Warren is treestar Sep 2014 #176
Reading comprehension is often lacking. I read what DI said and agreed, but others RKP5637 Sep 2014 #130
ISIS isn't the military powerhouse that Germany was. ISIS can field about 20,000 fighters whereas neverforget Sep 2014 #10
Neither was al-Qaeda and yet, they managed to give us the most devastating attack on American soil. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #11
And look where that got us? A war in Afghanistan that we are still fighting, Al Qaeda still exists neverforget Sep 2014 #15
Do tell Boreal Sep 2014 #16
It was Saudis who launched that attack, and it only succeeded because the normal precautions sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #36
And do you know what made it so devastating? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #146
And now we find it on DU Hissyspit Sep 2014 #196
The people who invaded the US on 9/11 were not al-Qaeda RoccoR5955 Sep 2014 #249
Looked it up, here is what Wiki has to say krawhitham Sep 2014 #266
So wiki is the end all, and be all of your research? RoccoR5955 Sep 2014 #267
Next time I'll put on a tin foil hat and go down the conspiracy rabbit hole just for you krawhitham Sep 2014 #272
That's interesting... OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #24
And Hitler took over a country with a willing populace, vast resources and a military that was neverforget Sep 2014 #28
Yet. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #34
Where would ISIS get the nukes? Israel? Iran? neverforget Sep 2014 #35
Yes, Iran. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #53
Iran doesn't have nukes. They have nuclear reactors but no nukes and Iran wants nothing to do neverforget Sep 2014 #62
Why no troops on the ground? Because they're currently not necessary. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #70
so basically we're going to bomb them like we did AL Qaeda but neverforget Sep 2014 #156
No. We become isolationists joeglow3 Sep 2014 #171
and look where intervention has got us: Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. neverforget Sep 2014 #224
And we look at what isolationism got us in WWII joeglow3 Sep 2014 #237
so we continue to do what we've been doing and expect a different result? it makes no sense neverforget Sep 2014 #243
Well, we have been doing nothing about Isis and look where it has led joeglow3 Sep 2014 #256
They started bombing weeks ago AgingAmerican Sep 2014 #259
I disagree with Iran supplying nukes to a group that hates them. The reason we are in Afghanistan is freshwest Sep 2014 #73
I didn't intend to suggest that Iran would ally themselves with ISIS/ISIL. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #75
You're most welcome. I nearly got flamed below. Meh. freshwest Sep 2014 #93
I did. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #95
I have to add, that I agree with you, but that Iran has a powerful backer: Russia. freshwest Sep 2014 #98
Let's hope so, fresh.. ‘Apocalyptic’ Isis beyond anything we've seen, say US defence chiefs .. " Cha Sep 2014 #107
What I find most concerning is the speed and acceptance. As you said, "They want a new home RKP5637 Sep 2014 #136
It's only a delusion if it doesn't come to pass. The caliphate is a tangible vision.. freshwest Sep 2014 #227
Thank you, as always, freshwest! Incredibly interesting!!! n/t RKP5637 Sep 2014 #242
Iran is Shiite AgingAmerican Sep 2014 #117
So you supported the Bush Doctrine then? Don't know if you noticed, but apparently it has sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #39
No. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #57
That could be a result of staying out of it treestar Sep 2014 #162
Apples and Oranges from delete_bush Sep 2014 #56
what nukes? who are they going to get them from? Why the scaremongering? neverforget Sep 2014 #61
Right. Kim Jong-un delete_bush Sep 2014 #66
Hair on fire nonsense AgingAmerican Sep 2014 #118
Ah hah! The long forgotten partner in the Axis Of Evil Capt. Obvious Sep 2014 #131
so when are we invading North Korea? they're a far bigger threat neverforget Sep 2014 #225
The consequences of attacking N. Korea Progressive dog Sep 2014 #226
I responded to post 66 as he brought up North Korea. neverforget Sep 2014 #229
I responded to your response Progressive dog Sep 2014 #233
and you didn't take into account the context of that neverforget Sep 2014 #244
Yes I did Progressive dog Sep 2014 #245
Once upon a time the Nazis were just a bunch of blowhards and malcontents Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2014 #116
+1, n/t RKP5637 Sep 2014 #140
our security is a different question now treestar Sep 2014 #161
That was a delightful little righteous rant. JaneyVee Sep 2014 #12
It was. 4b5f940728b232b034e4 Sep 2014 #85
Sheesh Boreal Sep 2014 #13
Given the love for Putin, I think I can guess how some would react. eom MohRokTah Sep 2014 #14
Yawn! GeorgeGist Sep 2014 #129
anti-interventionist is not necessarily irrational MattBaggins Sep 2014 #17
No, you're not pointing out our hypocrisy. Hissyspit Sep 2014 #18
This OP was more entertaining when I read the original bullwinkle428 Sep 2014 #19
"A few bombs" LeftyMom Sep 2014 #20
History much? NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #23
Exactly. History. Western intervention set this shitstorm brewing. LeftyMom Sep 2014 #26
And Hitler was brought to power via our intervention in World War I. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #40
My point is that intervening has only made the situation worse, LeftyMom Sep 2014 #45
So how many Iraqis should ISIS kill first? jeff47 Sep 2014 #204
You're right, this hole isn't nearly deep enough and we should keep digging. Great plan. nt LeftyMom Sep 2014 #206
You're free to say you don't care about them. jeff47 Sep 2014 #208
I don't think bombing is going to make for a reduced casualty count. LeftyMom Sep 2014 #213
Considering it already has, your expectations might be off. jeff47 Sep 2014 #214
Or we could be rational phil89 Sep 2014 #280
That is a very stupid argument MFrohike Sep 2014 #60
Analogy Fail 2.0 AgingAmerican Sep 2014 #119
How about we quit doing the same thing over and over again Jamastiene Sep 2014 #150
So you too supported the Bush Doctrine?? And here I thought DU was opposed to sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #43
There has been a disturbing tendency with dems BlindTiresias Sep 2014 #236
That depends. In this scenario, would our nation be arming the Germans? SolutionisSolidarity Sep 2014 #21
I will say this: Raine1967 Sep 2014 #25
A smart guy said something about this. LeftyMom Sep 2014 #27
This is more than a humanitarian problem. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #42
There is zero credible argument that Isis is a threat to the US. LeftyMom Sep 2014 #47
Just as there was zero credible al-Qaeda was a threat to the US, right? Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #50
Do you even listen to yourself? Without embarrassment? LeftyMom Sep 2014 #54
You think it's goofy treestar Sep 2014 #165
PDB! Was ignored by Bush! GeorgeGist Sep 2014 #133
That first paragraph does not describe what Obama said treestar Sep 2014 #164
I fear that some are making believe they live in Luxembourg or some tiny place... NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #29
I know, right? Some here were even against us getting rid of Saddam! Maybe they love dictators and Chathamization Sep 2014 #30
I remember, those who opposed that illegal invasion were Saddam Lovers. Just saw sabrina 1 Sep 2014 #46
Yep. People here are saying the same thing that Bush and his lackeys were saying in '03. Chathamization Sep 2014 #124
No they aren't. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #177
Perhaps if you can see why "ISIS" is not like Hitler you can also see how silly it is to compare Chathamization Sep 2014 #180
Not like 1930s Hitler. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #184
More like parallels to the rhetoric that got us into Iraq. No, not parallels; the same arguments. Chathamization Sep 2014 #189
Did Obama make a Hitler analogy? OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #191
Eh, nice nonsequitur. You and the OP made the analogy; no one accused Obama of making it. N/T Chathamization Sep 2014 #200
Actually, you did. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #211
Wha…? That statement says nothing about Obama. You and the OP are made the analogy, and that’s what Chathamization Sep 2014 #215
Oh, yes they are. Hissyspit Sep 2014 #202
"I can't imagine why people would think that way." OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #212
You're not surprised I can think critically? Hissyspit Sep 2014 #218
No I'm not. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #221
This message was self-deleted by its author Hissyspit Sep 2014 #260
Well, since you've got nothing but attack on (and presumption about) me. Hissyspit Sep 2014 #264
Your analogy isn't perfect in every single way... Silent3 Sep 2014 #31
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Sep 2014 #32
The much-closer analogy is how did DU respond MannyGoldstein Sep 2014 #37
Saudi Arabia needs to step up and take care of their affairs. The rest of us can only lament. mia Sep 2014 #38
I do agree with you there... Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #44
Let the Arab states form their own coalition. mia Sep 2014 #49
It's about time we clean up the mess. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #52
Yes by all means ... GeorgeGist Sep 2014 #135
No, we don't own it. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #147
After reading this, all I can say is that it might be time for you to become "Sober Irishman". n/t BlueStater Sep 2014 #41
LOL! nt City Lights Sep 2014 #154
FDR's fireside chats arguing for lend-lease would have been met with mockery and disgust Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #48
You've got that right! eom MohRokTah Sep 2014 #72
No doubt. delete_bush Sep 2014 #74
Very True treestar Sep 2014 #167
So now ISIS that no one heard about a few months ago former9thward Sep 2014 #55
Go home BlindTiresias Sep 2014 #58
Most Americans held that view until Pearl Harbor, then WTC. Excellent rant, though. freshwest Sep 2014 #59
What a disgusting graphic Buddha2B Sep 2014 #71
Australia? You only exist because we let you live. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #84
Unwarranted. You could have added your data without talking like that. freshwest Sep 2014 #92
"You'd actively dismiss the deaths of millions"? Old Crow Sep 2014 #63
This wasn't his only nonsense post of the day: Hissyspit Sep 2014 #193
That's a particularly nasty thread, QC Sep 2014 #255
K&R treestar Sep 2014 #64
+1 ... 1StrongBlackMan Sep 2014 #182
power corrupts, I think that's the nature of humanity. I agree with you & President Obama, Sunlei Sep 2014 #65
The choice isn't (fill in the blank) or do nothing.... Spitfire of ATJ Sep 2014 #67
we know how the Putinistas here would react, they'd be talking about geek tragedy Sep 2014 #68
This bullshit got old around 1946, I think. JackRiddler Sep 2014 #76
Completely unrecommended. Enthusiast Sep 2014 #77
The Hitler problem should be turned over to the League of Nations bluestateguy Sep 2014 #78
It'll still end up in our Department of War. OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #83
FDR didn't call Hitler JV in 1938. rug Sep 2014 #79
In January 1938 he could have. Hitler had not yet 'reunited' the ethnic Germans in Austria and pampango Sep 2014 #172
Ermächtigungsgesetz (1933), Dachau (1933), Nuremburg Laws (1935), Saarland (1935), rug Sep 2014 #188
You're on quite a roll. Union Scribe Sep 2014 #81
+1 LOL! Old Crow Sep 2014 #82
Did I miss the point where Obama said he'd put boots on the ground? Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #89
We don't need to put boots on the ground? Hissyspit Sep 2014 #197
LOL! Rex Sep 2014 #232
The Psychopathic Maniacs Who Cut Off Heads? cer7711 Sep 2014 #86
The Drunk's money shot: "irrational anti-interventionist ideology." blkmusclmachine Sep 2014 #87
You're absolutely right. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #90
We helped create this. Live and Learn Sep 2014 #105
We helped create Hitler. Didn't mean we didn't step in to fix it. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #109
Or you could learn from it and not to it over and over. Live and Learn Sep 2014 #111
Our involvement in World War I ultimately led to his rise a few years later. Drunken Irishman Sep 2014 #115
I don't think we helped create Hitler treestar Sep 2014 #168
How about a straw man? treestar Sep 2014 #166
I like it rpannier Sep 2014 #88
Looks like you got your answer. Behind the Aegis Sep 2014 #91
no surprise from me. Looking at all the "Obama is a war monger" threads, I wouldn't expect anything still_one Sep 2014 #101
Not the same Vots Sep 2014 #94
Not sure it will instantly make us safer Live and Learn Sep 2014 #103
Okay Vots Sep 2014 #178
Hitler and the Nazi regime was unique in all human history committing industrial scale genocide. gordianot Sep 2014 #96
There have actually been quite a few in the history of man. You also left out China and the still_one Sep 2014 #100
The list in the 20th century is almost endless but Nazi Germany is still unique for all time. gordianot Sep 2014 #143
I would say that the House of Saud is a piss-poor stand in for Churchill Tom Ripley Sep 2014 #99
How did DU react when Obama ordered the seals to illegally enter Pakistan and eliminate bin laden? still_one Sep 2014 #102
Not well. Some were appalled. Some were jubiliant. The first group hated on the second. freshwest Sep 2014 #112
there's another reason to support this war Enrique Sep 2014 #104
I think a lot of them would have posted to say Hissyspit Sep 2014 #106
I actually LOL'ed at this Capt. Obvious Sep 2014 #175
war is groovy. will get it right this time because obama! KG Sep 2014 #108
Putin and Ukraine is your answer. joshcryer Sep 2014 #110
Well said. The OP and most responses have focused on ISIS and what the US should and shouldn't do pampango Sep 2014 #120
Thank you get the red out Sep 2014 #113
This is all from Limbaugh's show! RandiFan1290 Sep 2014 #114
Oh wow! Very interesting. Oilwellian Sep 2014 #207
So did you listen to Russ yourself, Progressive dog Sep 2014 #223
Dr Frankenstein insists we must fight the monster CJCRANE Sep 2014 #121
Divided Opinion - Same As Now sub.theory Sep 2014 #122
Pretty much the same way my grandfather did after the "Anschluss" in 1938. hobbit709 Sep 2014 #123
What ISIS lacks is the industrial capacity to wage a large-scale war. baldguy Sep 2014 #125
You're liable to break the internet ... GeorgeGist Sep 2014 #126
I Putin/Ukraine is a better analogy distantearlywarning Sep 2014 #128
The America's Always Wrong Brigade sub.theory Sep 2014 #137
Does O'Reilly object to you quoting him verbatim? Doctor_J Sep 2014 #235
What a BS comparison. Threedifferentones Sep 2014 #132
Biggest bucket of fail on the board this week. 99Forever Sep 2014 #134
K & R. n/t FSogol Sep 2014 #138
Based upon hindsight melm00se Sep 2014 #139
Huge K&R... SidDithers Sep 2014 #142
ISIS, really? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #144
Most likely, I'd react the way we reacted Algernon Moncrieff Sep 2014 #153
It's a good thing we have people here that love to complain about DU Rex Sep 2014 #155
"bring a little bit of sanity back to the planet" reorg Sep 2014 #160
You forgot the first rule of analogies. First one to make a Hitler comparison, loses the argument NightWatcher Sep 2014 #179
A few points DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2014 #181
Did you buy this same argument when it was about Saddam Hussein? Iggo Sep 2014 #183
If we had funded, and continued to find Hiltler in the first place, we'd suggest prosecuting those grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #185
Many DUers would throw Roosevelt under the bus and say it was all his fault. stevenleser Sep 2014 #186
Actually many DUers would say Hissyspit Sep 2014 #190
Right, the same DUers who are all over DU saying the war on ISIS is the same as the 2003 Iraq war stevenleser Sep 2014 #192
No. Hissyspit Sep 2014 #203
Sure sign of someone losing an argument is when a ROFL is used instead of actually making one. Dawgs Sep 2014 #271
Exactly! And they are the same members who have complained about Obama daily. Major Hogwash Sep 2014 #252
Um Hissyspit Sep 2014 #262
nothing. Hitler would have shut us down long ago. librechik Sep 2014 #187
To quote Johnny Carson: OilemFirchen Sep 2014 #195
Or, for a more accurate comparison, The Tonkin Gulf Incident. Tierra_y_Libertad Sep 2014 #194
55 recs so far for this mindless smear. Hissyspit Sep 2014 #199
And as posted above... Oilwellian Sep 2014 #210
How would DU react to Executive Order 9066... SidDithers Sep 2014 #205
Precisely treestar Sep 2014 #250
^^A Voice of Sanity^^ Progressive dog Sep 2014 #216
Oh, it's not even CLOSE to a voice of sanity. Hissyspit Sep 2014 #217
Notice 114 provided no link to the show Progressive dog Sep 2014 #222
Well, why don't you explain to me how this trashy Limbaugh-like smear of an OP, Hissyspit Sep 2014 #261
Oh now it's a "Limbaugh-like" smear Progressive dog Sep 2014 #268
The one in the OP. Hissyspit Sep 2014 #273
You linked to 114 which did Progressive dog Sep 2014 #274
I didn't read it as a literal claim, you did. nt Hissyspit Sep 2014 #275
It made a literal claim, so you didn't read it as written Progressive dog Sep 2014 #276
Saudia Arabia beheaded 4 people this week.. 3 for Hash charges SomethingFishy Sep 2014 #219
I bet the anti-war members Capt. Obvious Sep 2014 #220
For starters, ther would have been no Hitler Jackpine Radical Sep 2014 #228
just like reading freeperville in 2001 Doctor_J Sep 2014 #230
Wow. WilliamPitt Sep 2014 #231
WarKillGood, man. Iggo Sep 2014 #238
Your moral argument is as juvenile and dishonest as it was when Rumsfeld made it. Marr Sep 2014 #239
Thank you. QC Sep 2014 #240
Actually I doubt HE would be so craven. Puglover Sep 2014 #241
And he can probably construct a simple analogy QC Sep 2014 #254
LOL, is this a serious post? Or just messing with us? nt Logical Sep 2014 #246
hypocracy, my ass! RoccoR5955 Sep 2014 #247
+ a trillion. Excellent Excellent post. The Best in the topic. nationalize the fed Sep 2014 #265
k/r 840high Sep 2014 #257
Google "Abraham Lincoln Brigade" eridani Sep 2014 #258
To me, there is no distinction between the rhetoric in the OP and the rhetoric of the hard right. nt Romulox Sep 2014 #270
Hefty Pantload whatchamacallit Sep 2014 #277
Whatever gets us into war phil89 Sep 2014 #279
We've tried this. We can't fix it. phil89 Sep 2014 #278
I lived through WWII. I was born in 1939. RebelOne Sep 2014 #281
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»How would DU react to the...»Reply #92