IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New So simple.
Wrong, n. == The United States of America did it.
Wrong, v.t. == What the United States does to people.
Wrong, v.i. == What the United States does.

Nice to deal in such simplicity, isn't it?
Regards,
Ric
New It's very simple to refute me.
Wrong, n. == The United States of America did it.
Wrong, v.t. == What the United States does to people.
Wrong, v.i. == What the United States does.

Nice to deal in such simplicity, isn't it?
Well, it does seem to save YOU the trouble of reasoning.

Or is there any facts that I've presented that you can refute?

I didn't think so.

We were wining and dining members of the "evil" Taliban in Texax in 1997.

We knew how they treated their people.

We just didn't care.

As long as we're getting what we want.

Of course, >YOU< can refute me.

Just present ANY bit of evidence that >YOU< were opposed to the Taliban in 1997.

Yet you're celebrating TODAY that they've been defeated.

And you're claiming that the people in the red neck bars are important.

Dude, in 1997, you didn't even KNOW who/what/where the Taliban was.

Hell, you didn't even know right up until September, 2001.

Then you're all too eager to believe that they are some terrible threat to the US.

You're a prime example of why those idiots in the red neck bars do NOT matter. You'll believe whatever propaganda is fed to you.

You won't even THINK about the history or ANY of our previous dealings with them.

You exist only in the moment.

That does tend to yield a specific type of moral certainty.

Nothing we've done to them or supported them in in the PAST has any meaning.

The US exists in a closed bubble of non-effect.

Things just sort of happen to us.

Because the people who do the bad things are bad people.

So, explain to me why, when a bunch of SAUDI fanatics hijack planes and crash them into the WTC at the command of a SAUDI millionaire are we bombing a bunch of AFGHAN civilians?

At which point your filters start to kick in and NONE of that makes any sense to you. It's simply to alien for your mode of "thought".

So you retreat into a non-fact space.

Anyone who disagrees with you >MUST< think that anything the US does is "wrong".

There, that's all sorted out. Now you can shut your brain down and start voting Republican again.

Don't think about the scary stuff. Don't think that in another 43 years (I'll still be alive), nuclear weapon technology will be 100 years old. It will still, somehow, someway, be too difficult for any terrorist to make one. Somehow. Despite the trend in EVERY other technology.

It just won't happen so we don't have to think about it.

Make the scary lunatic shut up, mommy.
     Thinking the unthinkable - (marlowe) - (38)
         If you've got the weapons . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (11)
             Tactical Nukes - (nking) - (5)
                 Not as effective as might be hoped. - (JayMehaffey) - (4)
                     You mean old-old tech - (nking) - (3)
                         Sort of - (JayMehaffey) - (2)
                             Armor? - (Ashton) - (1)
                                 What it says . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
             Yes, ' plan' is not the deed. More is implicit. - (Ashton) - (2)
                 Uh, Ash, think about it a bit more. - (Ric Locke) - (1)
                     "Disinformation, Age of" - see under "Current Events" - (Ashton)
             Re: As usual - balanced well reasoned logic ... - (dmarker2) - (1)
                 Bush 2 imitates Reagan? - (wharris2)
         Not so unthinkable - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
             Iran on the enemy list - (wharris2)
         Ummm, this has been our doctrine..... - (Brandioch) - (23)
             Strategic Doctrine - (Ric Locke) - (22)
                 20 years is the limit of my personal experience. - (Brandioch) - (20)
                     Re: 20 years is the limit of my personal experience. - (Ric Locke) - (19)
                         Not that thinking. - (Brandioch) - (18)
                             What was the Clancy novel? - (wharris2) - (1)
                                 Red Storm - (dlevitt)
                             Re: Not that thinking. - (Ric Locke) - (15)
                                 India and Pakistan. - (Brandioch) - (14)
                                     Agreed - down to the root issues - - (Ashton) - (5)
                                         Ashton, you said it. - (Arkadiy) - (1)
                                             If there were a simpler explanation - (Ashton)
                                         Aston..I must disagree... - (Simon_Jester)
                                         Koki Annann on Charlie Rose, last night - (Ashton) - (1)
                                             (cough, cough) Kofi Annan that is. :) - (a6l6e6x)
                                     India and Pakistan. - (Ric Locke) - (7)
                                         Whatever. - (Brandioch) - (6)
                                             Oh. Drift. - (Ric Locke) - (5)
                                                 Who, what, where? - (Brandioch) - (4)
                                                     Ah, yes. - (Ric Locke) - (3)
                                                         Step #1. Knowledge. - (Brandioch) - (2)
                                                             So simple. - (Ric Locke) - (1)
                                                                 It's very simple to refute me. - (Brandioch)
                 Well-enough put, but only part of the scenario IMhO - (Ashton)

Geothermal powered!
167 ms