NUKE_CLEVELAND

QUOTE(YASNY @ Feb 17, 2006 -> 09:53 AM) The perception that the US wouldn't respond started in, iirc, 1968 with the USS Pueblo incident with North Korea. Of course, the bombing of the Beirut marines barracks and the Iran hostage crisis just added to that perception. So did the bombing of the Air Force barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 and the Cole bombing in 2000.

QUOTE(CrimsonWeltall @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 07:27 PM) haha muslim freedom fries More like Jihad fries or something like that.

QUOTE(Jordan4life_2006 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 12:39 AM) ^^^^ Dye more than earned his money last year. ^^^^ What he said. Letting Maggs walk and bringing in Dye was the best move of KW's many good ones last off-season.

QUOTE(knightni @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 12:50 PM) They will regret not trading Contreras when he had the most value. Mark me down as a Count skeptic. Everybody was a count skeptic when he struggled last year but that proved to be false. As far as Im concerned the burden of proof is on the count haters.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 11:04 AM) I think it's going to be a great season to watch, but I do have to admit, I just can't say I feel as desperate to win one as I did last year.. The bar is certainly set a lot higher this time around. The hunger isin't quite what it was last season but theres no doubt that a repeat would be twice the fun.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 02:11 PM) We know the Yankees, Astros, and Cardinals are going to sell out quick to. It is very possible that we will surpass the entire 2005 attendence before a single pitch is thrown... at spring training. Wow. Thats just amazing!! I guess we can finally lay the attendance b****ing threads to rest.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:42 PM) A Federal Judge has ruled that the government has 20 days to turn over documents related to the program to the court in a case brought by civil liberties groups. The DOJ will almost certainly appeal, and there will be a lot more delays due to that, but it's a start. SCOTUS will probably shoot that down..........in a couple of years when it finally gets there.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:56 PM) This I agree with, and he can be very petty at times. I think this is maybe a stretch. He certainly likes to make Bush look bad, but he isn't going to intentionally make the US as a country look bad. Doesn't attacking the sitting president in that manner have that effect? Surely he knows this.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:54 PM) I agree. Terrorists are criminals. And like all criminals, US citizen or not, we have an obligation to treat them with some manner of justice when we have them in our custody. Indefinite detention is not justice - its Soviet-style muscle law. As I alluded to earlier, these people are simply not treated as horribly as some would have us believe. They are allowed to worship freely, get better health care than a good many American citizens, eat better than they probably ever have and on and on........ Once again, our people should be so fortunate to be treated that way. When they get a hold of one of ours it usually ends with the person in question starring on an Al Qaeda highlight reel.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:24 PM) Sorry, I stand corrected. Same question, though. Do you think he wanted to incite hatred? I think its pretty obvious that what he was trying to do was create a common ground to stand on. Now, he may have been misguided (or some might think just plain stupid) in his methods. But how can you think for a second that Al Gore would WANT to incite hatred? I think Al Gore is still bitter he lost the 2000 election. All he's done since his defeat is run off at the mouth about how horrible America is. He will say or do anything to make the government of this nation look bad.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:47 PM) Well if they were Afghani or Iraqi, soldiers? Soldiers wear uniforms and belong to a legitimate and recognized government. People who are dressed in civillian clothes, hide among the populace, indiscriminantely kill civillians, plant roadside explosives, terrorize remote villages to coerece them into hiding both fugitives and weapons, behead people on television etc.........etc........etc. have one word to describe them. Terrorists.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:36 PM) Bravo. If they had just done things like this to begin with, instead of inciting violence, then I'd have a lot more respect for their government. ^^^^^ What he said.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:45 PM) Funny how you think that even a majority of the people at Gitmo are actually terrorists. What else would you call people picked up on the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq?

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:42 PM) Funny how you think human rights and being forthright equals coddling. Funny how you think terrorists who want you dead are saints or something.

Anne Coulter is one bad weekend away from being Pat Robertson. I really dont have a lot of use for her or her attitude. She does the conservative movement a disservice every time she opens up her yap.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:03 PM) I'm just taking your logic to its extension. You said that the behavior of a group of asshats determines the reputation for the whole group. If you don't like the way that I applied your logic then perhaps it is your logic that is faulty and not my example. Only problem with that is that in your twisted little world the US is the root of all evil in the world and you use any opportunity you can grasp to try and make that point.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) Please tell me you don't actually think that Gore intended to incite violence. That's ridiculous. Read my post again please. His intent was to incite hatred not violence.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 04:06 PM) And no one could ever accuse you of that either. We shouldn't discriminate between foreign combatant or Prisoner of War or US Citizen. We believe that all men are created equally. As such, we should treat them so. And we should let the world see clearly that this is exactly what we're doing. Why? The law says that there's a clear distinction between enemy combatant, POW and American Citizen. Not only does our own law draw a clear distinction between the 3 but so does international law. Why should we extend the same rights our own citizens enjoy to a bunch of thugs who are doing everything in their power to hurt us as a nation and kill our citizens? -Handling terrorist scum with kid gloves is going to do nothing at all to stop the islamo-fascist movement from wanting to atack us. -Its going to do nothing to stop them from indoctrinating their young with vile "Death to America" crap from the time they can understand a spoken word. The only thing coddling terrorists ever did is make their mission easier.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 03:55 PM) But but but but I thought the House of Saud was our ally? Followers of the Bush Cult of Personality (I don't dare say conservative anymore because there is a difference between the Bush platform and actual conservatism -- conservatism, I at least have respect for) can't have it both ways. You can't be an apologist for the Bush relationship with the House of Saud and then blast Gore for making a speech there in Saudi Arabia. As for actual conservatives who believe that the American relationship with the primary creator of these dangerous fundamentalist madrassas is dangerous, continue with your well-reasoned discussion. What Gore said is cited by facts. Most of the people at Gitmo get released with no charges (much like those detained in Iraq) It is antithetical to the spirit of the Constitution (due process, etc.) Sure we can say "We don't have to play by the rules anymore!" but does that really make us better than those we say we oppose? If we're ready, willing and able to give up liberties in the name of security, haven't the terrorists already won? There's no excuse for not charging these people. There's no excuse for Bush to go around FISA. There's no reason that the PATRIOT Act allows the federal authorities to go through any "tangible records" (that's the library book provision -- it actually says tangible records meaning any...tangible records) but does not allow the government to look at gun purchases made. They can find out that you read the whole Nancy Drew series as an adult but not if a person on the (dubiously created because it is pretty damn inaccurate) terrorist watch list has purchased a firearm. Get your outrage in the right places, people. Tell me what the similarity is between the US having the Saudi Kingdom as an ally and Al Gore going over there making a speech which is designed for no other purpose than to incite hatred of the United States?! Your not making any sense.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 03:39 PM) The Muslim cartoons were published in September, making those old hat. The new Abu Ghraib photos getting published -- I just love the outrage over publishing them. As if publishing them is the evil act here. Sorry if I have a little logic and reason but it seems f***ING ABUSING PRISONERS IN CUSTODY is the crime here. And allow me to grab a stick and stir the pot a little bit, but many of the people expressing their "outrage" about these photos being published have made lump generalizations in the past (i.e. the Danish drawings) saying that the actions of those rioting really spoke about the major beliefs of Islam and the way people think with Nuke even saying "So much for a religion of peace". Well, if we apply that logic to the Abu Ghraib/Taguba Report/photos scandal, then can we make the same lump sum generalization about the US military? I mean if you're going to put Islam in one boat using that generalization based on the actions of a few, then you should be more than ready to do the same for the US military. Note: That was just to the people who said that the riots etc. for the Danish papers spoke about all of Islam, not the sane rational people who said that the rioters were asshats and didn't represent all of Islam. I figured youd show up here eventually. I love how you're trying to equate Muslim thugs who are burning down everything in sight with the US military. I expected no less from the likes of you but you're forgetting one thing. While the Islamo-fascist governments of Iran and Syria are stirring up the pot trying to make as much out of this nothing as they can, the US government has punished those responsible for Abu Ghraib and they now sit in jail. Apples and Oranges.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 11:03 AM) Well, that's the point I think.... if all you're getting is a guided tour of Gitmo what's the point really? It's like taking the visitor's tour of the White House and writing and exposee on the life of Presidential staffers. They probably saw it as adding nothing. And in reality, they were/are probably right about that. But you're right too. They should have made the tour. Of course they saw it as adding nothing. The whole purpose of this is little more than a hatchet job. They weren't the least bit interested in objectivity.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 10:06 AM) A multinational organization opposes a prison camp for foreign fighters whose host government says that international law (Geneva Conventions) don't apply to their treatment and refuses to give them any legal process. And you think that's wrong. Its wrong when that multinational organization is corrupt, hypocritical and been taking bribes and kickbacks from our enemies for years. Its also wrong when that same organization prepares a blatant hatchet job without even allowing for the US to tell its side of the story. Ive said it before and I'll say it again. An American who is captured by these people ( who you are trying to annoint with sainthood ) would be lucky to be treated as well as the detainees at Gitmo are treated. Instead of being allowed to worship freely, being given 3 squares a day ( these f***ers are gaining weight there for chrissakes! ), they would get their heads chopped off and the video posted on Al Jazerra. These people are terrorist scum and they dont deserve any sympathy.

QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 10:29 AM) Right, we should tell everyone, "Do as I say, dont do as I do." Uniforms are a pathetic argument. You call it pathetic, I call it following precedent. We've been over this ground many many times before and you lefties just cant get it through your heads that the Geneva Convention does not apply to terrorists. Based on the precedent of the SCOTUS's Qurin ( sp ) decision of the 1940's it is the job of the military to handle these people.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Feb 16, 2006 -> 08:38 AM) An accident is not much of a story, a drunk VP shooting someone is a story. How will the American public know the difference? We could just accept the White House explaination, and for many that is reasonable. But of course that would be the GOP fans. Same as the Dem fans felt a blow job was a non story. But so far Clinton brought up? check Vince Foster? check Al Gore? check media blamed? check Sounds like a GOP victory. Who needs a free press when you have news releases from the government? First of all as I said earlier, without any evidence assertions the Veep was drunk are just that. The media are trying to blow this story out of any proportion and they totally deserve to be called out on it. Secondly, I think its totally fair and appropriate to call out Hillary Clinton when she runs off at the mouth about something that she herself is guilty of.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Feb 15, 2006 -> 11:54 PM) What's the first result from google of the word "failure?" The REAL failure is that of the Democratic party to forment any kind of opposition. If their message was more substantive and less shrill in their criticism they might actually get somewhere.