Comments on: Assange on Colbert http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/ believe nothing... Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:34:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: shcb http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196801 shcb Wed, 21 Apr 2010 22:40:42 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196801 But of course you have once again twisted my words, dare I say you have lied? I said they did pose a threat. And since they did, yes it has been worth the effort and money. But of course you have once again twisted my words, dare I say you have lied? I said they did pose a threat. And since they did, yes it has been worth the effort and money.

]]> By: enkidu http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196799 enkidu Wed, 21 Apr 2010 21:44:01 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196799 Well over a trillion so far, with all the medical care and ptsd the total cost of the Iraq war is in the trillions ($2.5 to $3 trillion by some estimates). Plus we'll probably be there with 30 to 50,000 troops for decades... Good thing we got all that oil! What? hfs we didn't even get the oil?!? heck of a job bushie Well over a trillion so far, with all the medical care and ptsd the total cost of the Iraq war is in the trillions ($2.5 to $3 trillion by some estimates). Plus we’ll probably be there with 30 to 50,000 troops for decades…

Good thing we got all that oil! What? hfs we didn’t even get the oil?!?

heck of a job bushie

]]> By: NorthernLite http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196796 NorthernLite Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:52:49 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196796 So I guess you still think it was worth charging over a trillion dollars (and counting) to your national credit card to invade a country that posed a zero threat and did not attack you? Not to mention how much you fed right into the terrorist recruitment strategy. So I guess you still think it was worth charging over a trillion dollars (and counting) to your national credit card to invade a country that posed a zero threat and did not attack you? Not to mention how much you fed right into the terrorist recruitment strategy.

]]> By: shcb http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196795 shcb Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:04:29 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196795 But you are right, he may have been an ally against Al Qeada at some point with someone, but not at that time But you are right, he may have been an ally against Al Qeada at some point with someone, but not at that time

]]> By: shcb http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196794 shcb Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:03:06 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196794 What people here don’t seem to understand is this is like multi player chess, you may not even be an ally but if his interests help you, you are on his side even if you are positioning yourself to attack him later. Just because Sadam and Al Qaeda weren’t friends doesn’t mean either of them like us. If Al Qaeda can weaken the west enough for Sadam to take over a section of his little world that would be fine with him. Also, just because one of them is using religion as its purpose and the other isn’t that doesn’t make one less of a threat than the other. Maybe you guys just haven’t been involved with business or politics enough to have the experience of this dynamic. What people here don’t seem to understand is this is like multi player chess, you may not even be an ally but if his interests help you, you are on his side even if you are positioning yourself to attack him later. Just because Sadam and Al Qaeda weren’t friends doesn’t mean either of them like us. If Al Qaeda can weaken the west enough for Sadam to take over a section of his little world that would be fine with him. Also, just because one of them is using religion as its purpose and the other isn’t that doesn’t make one less of a threat than the other. Maybe you guys just haven’t been involved with business or politics enough to have the experience of this dynamic.

]]> By: NorthernLite http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196793 NorthernLite Wed, 21 Apr 2010 15:03:40 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196793 But the sick irony is that Saddam probably would have been an ally against Al Qaeda. I know you have a beef with “Muslims” but Saddam was pretty secular, especially for that part of the world. If him as an ally sounds messed up just remember that he once was an ally in the 80s when you armed him, and so was OBL, when you armed him. LOL, I’m starting to see why things keep getting f*cked over there. Perhaps it’d be better if you just stayed away for a while. But the sick irony is that Saddam probably would have been an ally against Al Qaeda. I know you have a beef with “Muslims” but Saddam was pretty secular, especially for that part of the world. If him as an ally sounds messed up just remember that he once was an ally in the 80s when you armed him, and so was OBL, when you armed him.

LOL, I’m starting to see why things keep getting f*cked over there. Perhaps it’d be better if you just stayed away for a while.

]]> By: shcb http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196792 shcb Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:03:35 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196792 I know that is what they mean, I just wanted them to explain it since it makes so little sense. Their analogy would fit if you said the reason we <em> didn’t</em> attack Mexico and Sweden was because they didn’t have anything to do with 911 <em>and </em> they posed no threat. Just like “the USA didn’t attack Mongolia (or China or every other Asian nation) after Pearl Harbour because they didn’t have squat to do with the attack” ,em>and </em> they posed no theat. I know that is what they mean, I just wanted them to explain it since it makes so little sense. Their analogy would fit if you said the reason we didn’t attack Mexico and Sweden was because they didn’t have anything to do with 911 and they posed no threat. Just like “the USA didn’t attack Mongolia (or China or every other Asian nation) after Pearl Harbour because they didn’t have squat to do with the attack” ,em>and they posed no theat.

]]> By: NorthernLite http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196664 NorthernLite Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:12:19 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196664 If I may... I think what they're saying is that the USA didn't attack Mongolia (or China or every other Asian nation) after Pearl Harbour because they didn't have squat to do with the attack. It would've made as much sense as attacking Iraq after 9/11... If I may…

I think what they’re saying is that the USA didn’t attack Mongolia (or China or every other Asian nation) after Pearl Harbour because they didn’t have squat to do with the attack. It would’ve made as much sense as attacking Iraq after 9/11…

]]> By: shcb http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196055 shcb Sat, 17 Apr 2010 22:50:55 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196055 i don't understand please explain. i don’t understand please explain.

]]> By: knarlyknight http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-196045 knarlyknight Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:12:47 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-196045 "I guess we should have ignored Japan and bombed the fuck out of Mongolia after Pearl Harbor in order to stop those evil Asians. That seems to be the best fit for shcb’s latest [...] analogy." “I guess we should have ignored Japan and bombed the fuck out of Mongolia after Pearl Harbor in order to stop those evil Asians. That seems to be the best fit for shcb’s latest [...] analogy.”

]]> By: shcb http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195977 shcb Sat, 17 Apr 2010 14:41:55 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195977 What does religion and race have to do with my point or bigotry for that matter? I’m talking about strategy, alliances, and practicality. Just because I used the name of a religion in a sentence doesn’t mean that is the subject, unless all you are doing is skimming for a few keywords, but that is hardly a discussion. It is easy though. What does religion and race have to do with my point or bigotry for that matter? I’m talking about strategy, alliances, and practicality. Just because I used the name of a religion in a sentence doesn’t mean that is the subject, unless all you are doing is skimming for a few keywords, but that is hardly a discussion. It is easy though.

]]> By: knarlyknight http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195830 knarlyknight Sat, 17 Apr 2010 07:51:01 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195830 thx Smith you saved me a lot of time and said it better than I might have. thx Smith you saved me a lot of time and said it better than I might have.

]]> By: Smith http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195669 Smith Sat, 17 Apr 2010 01:13:42 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195669 I guess it really wouldn't do much good to point out that Saddam was probably less of a religious extremist than Palin or Dubya since: "Now you know all those mud hut people look the same. How can shcb be expected to know the difference between Osama and Saddam?" I guess we should have ignored Japan and bombed the fuck out of Mongolia after Pearl Harbor in order to stop those evil Asians. That seems to be the best fit for shcb's latest racist analogy. I guess it really wouldn’t do much good to point out that Saddam was probably less of a religious extremist than Palin or Dubya since: “Now you know all those mud hut people look the same. How can shcb be expected to know the difference between Osama and Saddam?”

I guess we should have ignored Japan and bombed the fuck out of Mongolia after Pearl Harbor in order to stop those evil Asians. That seems to be the best fit for shcb’s latest racist analogy.

]]> By: shcb http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195582 shcb Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:22:54 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195582 The logic is that we are at war with Islamic radicalism, not Osama, we were at war with Japan not Yamamoto, killing the architect of the Pearl Harbor attack would not have stopped Japan, just as killing Osama would not stop the Arabs. The rest of you posts just defy logic, Japan wasn’t much of a threat in the 1920’s either, so what? And there is also that old line an enemy of my enemy is my friend. We didn’t care much for the Russians before or after WWII but they were our allies. But we’ve been down this road before and the logic seems to escape you, probably always will. The logic is that we are at war with Islamic radicalism, not Osama, we were at war with Japan not Yamamoto, killing the architect of the Pearl Harbor attack would not have stopped Japan, just as killing Osama would not stop the Arabs. The rest of you posts just defy logic, Japan wasn’t much of a threat in the 1920’s either, so what? And there is also that old line an enemy of my enemy is my friend. We didn’t care much for the Russians before or after WWII but they were our allies. But we’ve been down this road before and the logic seems to escape you, probably always will.

]]> By: knarlyknight http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195518 knarlyknight Fri, 16 Apr 2010 08:18:10 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195518 On the database, you might want to look at the results for total terrorist attacks in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran. Go to the modify search button at bottom of page then click on the country tab on the left and change the search criteria, then press search button. On the database, you might want to look at the results for total terrorist attacks in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran. Go to the modify search button at bottom of page then click on the country tab on the left and change the search criteria, then press search button.

]]> By: knarlyknight http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195513 knarlyknight Fri, 16 Apr 2010 08:04:35 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195513 Also, to putting terrorist threats in perspective, the following looks like good analysis and the comments below are enlightening especially the ones dispensing with the counter-argument that terrorist nuclear attack would be a game changer. www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/04/terrorist_attac.html Strange how small a piece of pie islamic extremists actually comprise (required reading for wwnj's) : www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/ shcb: re: rpg launcher, yes it looks like a rpg launcher in the video. Thanks for helping me with that. Also, to putting terrorist threats in perspective, the following looks like good analysis and the comments below are enlightening especially the ones dispensing with the counter-argument that terrorist nuclear attack would be a game changer.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/04/terrorist_attac.html

Strange how small a piece of pie islamic extremists actually comprise (required reading for wwnj’s) :
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/

shcb: re: rpg launcher, yes it looks like a rpg launcher in the video. Thanks for helping me with that.

]]> By: knarlyknight http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195511 knarlyknight Fri, 16 Apr 2010 08:02:50 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195511 It does not seem that "logic" applies to shcb rationalizing. That's also apparent from shcb's other comment, if I understand shcb correctly: shcb thinks that starting open warfare against another country's cities makes people in those other cities less motivated or less likely to strike back? Well, has it? Or have the number of terrorist attacks against american interests (i.e. excluding regions of war like Afghanistan and Iraq) spiked since the invasion of Iraq? So I look and it does not show a spike, it shows a decline that looks slightly outside of what othewise might be explained by the the data set's natural variations. So no easy points scored against shcb here. FYI - it is a pretty good database (University of Maryland) funded by your government. If you haven't seen this resource before, to start here's a chart of the full data set (1970-2007), for the USA (I chose to exclude acts against abortion facilities and exclude acts not aimed at attaining a political, economic, religious, or social goal): www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?expanded=no&casualties_type=b&casualties_max=&start_yearonly=1970&end_yearonly=2007&criterion1=yes&dtp2=all&country=217&target=6%2C1%2C8%2C9%2C7%2C2%2C10%2C11%2C4%2C12%2C13%2C3%2C14%2C15%2C16%2C17%2C18%2C19%2C20%2C21%2C22&ob=GTDID&od=desc&page=1&count=100 My main conclusion is that the significance of terrorist acts in the USA pales in comparison to what was happening in the 1970's. It does not seem that “logic” applies to shcb rationalizing. That’s also apparent from shcb’s other comment, if I understand shcb correctly: shcb thinks that starting open warfare against another country’s cities makes people in those other cities less motivated or less likely to strike back?

Well, has it? Or have the number of terrorist attacks against american interests (i.e. excluding regions of war like Afghanistan and Iraq) spiked since the invasion of Iraq? So I look and it does not show a spike, it shows a decline that looks slightly outside of what othewise might be explained by the the data set’s natural variations. So no easy points scored against shcb here. FYI – it is a pretty good database (University of Maryland) funded by your government. If you haven’t seen this resource before, to start here’s a chart of the full data set (1970-2007), for the USA (I chose to exclude acts against abortion facilities and exclude acts not aimed at attaining a political, economic, religious, or social goal):
http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?expanded=no&casualties_type=b&casualties_max=&start_yearonly=1970&end_yearonly=2007&criterion1=yes&dtp2=all&country=217&target=6%2C1%2C8%2C9%2C7%2C2%2C10%2C11%2C4%2C12%2C13%2C3%2C14%2C15%2C16%2C17%2C18%2C19%2C20%2C21%2C22&ob=GTDID&od=desc&page=1&count=100

My main conclusion is that the significance of terrorist acts in the USA pales in comparison to what was happening in the 1970′s.

]]> By: knarlyknight http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195508 knarlyknight Fri, 16 Apr 2010 07:52:32 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195508 Yanamoto was Japanese. Osama was (is?) not Iraqi. Saddam would have shot Osama had he come within range of his pistol. Where's the logic? Yanamoto was Japanese. Osama was (is?) not Iraqi.

Saddam would have shot Osama had he come within range of his pistol.

Where’s the logic?

]]> By: shcb http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195460 shcb Fri, 16 Apr 2010 03:57:41 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195460 By that logic we should have stopped the war against Japan after we killed Yamamoto. By that logic we should have stopped the war against Japan after we killed Yamamoto.

]]> By: Smith http://www.lies.com/wp/2010/04/13/assange-on-colbert/#comment-195412 Smith Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:15:41 +0000 http://www.lies.com/?p=4226#comment-195412 Now you know all those mud hut people look the same. How can shcb be expected to know the difference between Osama and Saddam? Now you know all those mud hut people look the same. How can shcb be expected to know the difference between Osama and Saddam?

]]>