FutureCop #fundie

FutureCop #fundie city-data.com

Liberals just want to sit around, let jerkoffs attack us, and wait for more. No, screw that. I want to go to war, I want to wipe them out, and I want my country to protect me. Clinton didn't protect us and Obama won't either. Don't tell me war isn't the answer. You think those in Al-Queda jerkoffs are going to give up if we don't attack them back? They're not attacking us to bully us around and try to make us look like geeks like a little schoolboy, they're attacking us to take us the **** out. I say we wipe them all out. What do you do if someone shoots you in the arm once? Stand there and have a pep talk with them? No, you kick his little ***. 9/11 was like a bullet in the heart, war is the answer in this case.

74 comments

old comment by Allegory for Jesus

"Liberals just want to sit around, let jerkoffs attack us, and wait for more."

Turn the other cheek, muthafecker. But seriously...preventative measures are first priority, retailiatory measures are second priority, and invading random countries under the justification of retailiation...in the high thousands.

"I want to go to war"

You sure do.

"Clinton didn't protect us and Obama won't either"

Protect us from what?

"think those in Al-Queda jerkoffs are going to give up if we don't attack them back?"

I don't know. We don't even know what their motives were to begin with. But, of course, few people are against attacking al-Qaeda, you douche.

" they're attacking us to take us the **** out."

No, I'd say bullying was the better analogy. Do you really think that 4 hijacked planes count as trying to wipe us off the map? It was a catastrophic nuisance, at best, not an attempt to annihilate us.

"What do you do if someone shoots you in the arm once? Stand there and have a pep talk with them? No, you kick his little ***."

On a similar vein to the above, if you were going to liken the nation to a person, 9/11 was much less a mortal wound and more like a bruise. It wasn't a gunshot, but more like a single, firmly planted punch to the nose. Whether you use diplomatic or violent measures to respond is entirely a matter of debate at that point, but either might be acceptable.

"9/11 was like a bullet in the heart, war is the answer in this case."

Republicans: being emo about 9/11 since 9/11. Using 9/11 as a justification for violence since 9/12.

old comment by

Attacking a country for NO GOOD REASON, is not going to deter Al-Qaeda. Moreover, it's going to CONFIRM Al-Qaeda's idea that United States is a danger for their interests. War, baby, is the answer, WHEN A COUNTRY, with the resources and the status of country attacks you and you want to defend yourself. Al-Qaeda is not a country(no matter how much you look at it, Iraq IS NOT Al-Qaeda, Iran is not Al-Qaeda and neither is any Islamic country), it's a terrorist group. If Bush was unable to tract them and finish them with the resources he has for this cases, it's a failure of him. Making war to a country which has nothing to do with the organisation(on the contrary, a country which was able to CONTROL the most radical elements)was Bush's worst mistake(as Iraqui post-war demonstrates). If you don't know this basic facts, you're not going to pass the exams to become a cop(I wonder how old is this poor idiot).
Conservative and proud, COME ON, you can do it better. Troll with more class.

old comment by Brain_In_A_Jar

You think those in Al-Queda jerkoffs are going to give up if we don't attack them back?

Umm, you did attack them and they still didn't give up. It's been seven fucking years and they are nowhere near surrender. That's longer than the Great War, the Second World War, the American Civil War, and almost as long as the American Revolutionary War. The only major American engagement I can think of offhand that lasted significantly longer is Vietnam, and you didn't exactly come out on top there.

Not to mention, one of the countries you're dealing with is fucking Afghanistan - this country broke the military back of the entire Soviet Union, and they're certainly going to remember that (and you idiots supported them! You're fighting the very people you deliberately strengthened to fight a proxy was against the USSR! A little short-sighted there, weren't we?). What possible chance do you think there is of defeating them now, short of nuclear genocide?

old comment by Rebellious Scot

Kudos Tween on using Wilfred Owen quote. Plus lets look up definition of Liberal for the uneducated.

lib·er·al (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.
1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
5.
a. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
n.
1. A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
2. Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.
[Middle English, generous, from Old French, from Latin lberlis, from lber, free; see leudh- in Indo-European roots.]
liber·al·ly adv.
liber·al·ness n.
Synonyms: liberal, bounteous, bountiful, freehanded, generous, handsome, munificent, openhanded
These adjectives mean willing or marked by a willingness to give unstintingly: a liberal backer of the arts; a bounteous feast; bountiful compliments; a freehanded host; a generous donation; a handsome offer; a munificent gift; fond and openhanded grandparents. See Also Synonyms at broad-minded.
Antonym: stingy

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
liberal
Adjective
1. having social and political views that favour progress and reform
2. generous in temperament or behaviour
3. tolerant of other people
4. using or existing in large quantities; lavish: the world's finest gadgetry, in liberal quantities
5. not rigid; free: a more liberal interpretation
6. (of an education) designed to develop general cultural interests and intellectual ability
7. Liberal of or relating to a Liberal Party
Noun
a person who has liberal ideas or opinions [Latin liber free]
liberalism n
liberally adv

Oh by the way, this means you lose. This clearly states the latter to your definition. Plus, is it the case, "Do as we do, not as we say." you want us to drop liberalism but forgot to even think or read. Sounds like a new dark age.

Religion main ideal is freedom, freedom to preach. That's liberal. Jesus was a liberal, even though you may disagree nearly all prominant peaceful figures were liberal. They all were free thinkers. So shut the fuck up!

FutureCop #fundie city-data.com

74 comments

Confused?