Debate audience goes crazy cheering when Gingrich says "We'll kill our enemies."

page: 7
40
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by mossme89

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by mossme89
 


What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here.

The problem is that it leads to an endless cycle of bloodshed. We're all human and we all live on the same planet. We need to stop killing each other and learn to talk things out like sane people.

Part of the reason we have enemies is because we stick our noses where they don't belong.


While I agree with the fact that the US federal govt sticks its nose in the business of other countries and even the US citizen, I still have no problem with the statement of killing your enemy.

Talk only goes so far. Look at the UN. That is the biggest bloated group of wind bags that could ever have come together.
Lots of talk, no results or resolutions.



Arguably untrue. The UN, although not decisive (because it lacks power to immediately enforce decisions taken by its members), has been a force for good in the world. Maybe it doesn't seem like it to some because the supranational organization has not been able to stop aggressive wars between nations, but it does its best to prevent it and maintain peace around the globe. Keep in mind the 'useless' UN gave the US the legal pretext and blessing it wanted to go to war with Afghanistan (or at least, the Afghani Taleban).




posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by mossme89
 


This is just insanity. What is this nation coming to? Where we no longer have compassion for our fellow men? on what grounds? because they are different than us? I am truly terrified that these are irrevocably dangerous times for mankind... how much longer will the chorus of hate and fear continue to be sung around the world as we have experienced in the past decade? This festering, open wound needs to be sealed up and allowed to heal.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Diablos

Originally posted by ShiftTrioPlease do not feed the trolls =)


The many conservatives who agree with me must be "trolls" as well.


Not sure where this idea came from that conservatism automatically means you support war.

Fake conservatives actions and mentality betray both Christianity and proper conservatism.

The devil is dancing in South Carolina.
edit on 18-1-2012 by L00kingGlass because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-1-2012 by L00kingGlass because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ismail

I find it curious that when a certain type of americans see a group of muslims chanting "death to America", they equate them to fanatical barbarians, but when the same feelings of bloodlust and hatred are expressed in public by their own compatriots, it's "not an issue".

These warmongering conservatives should maybe pause at some point, and reflect on which country the world as a whole perceives as the greater threat. A third world muslim state, engaged in a fumbling effort to devellop nukes, or the worlds greatest military power, that has been engaged in constant state of war since the middle of last century, and that is slowly but surely producing generation after generation of dim-whitted fundamentalist christians who unfortunatly get to vote (and are, on occasion, elected president).

Think about it.


I can't think about it because you didn't address the underlying problem or provided any constructive comments apart from the usual communism propaganda.
Satan = murderer
Christ = love your enemies

So do you really believe that any true Christian would support his statements? Of course not. If you cannot realise how the enemy destroys from within to further his own goals, then the sickening consequences will be lost on you. They are NOT OF GOD IF THEY SUPPORT NEWTS STATEMENTS. End of story. Black and White. No grey. We, as a nation, are now the lackeys of Satan, doing his military work for Him. We have a nation filled with athiests and many false Christians all accomplishing Satan's work for him. And your comments lumping all those "Christians" together - suggesting that they shouldnt have a right to vote - is just communist propaganda designed to wipe out true Christianity because it is given to you by the Synagogue of Satan. Whose only goals I might add is to undermine and prevent true faith. God is love, God is merciful and God is just. These people are therefore NOT OF GOD.

Think about it.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:01 AM
link   
reply to post by L00kingGlass
 


That is correct. I consider myself a conservative and I'm a Christian but the wars have got to stop. Most people do now anyways but have you noticed a push to relight the flame? There is a new movie about Tom Hanks being killed in 9/11. A little boy that lost his dad. Add that to the garbage flowing from Gingrich, you start getting people warm and fuzzy about killing. Most people don't even know the difference between the Taliban and Al Qaeda.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:10 AM
link   
"Don't drink the water; they've put something in it, to whiten your teeth. I don't even remember how I got here".



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Well im sure there is enough room for you and all those people cheering to get on the boat/flight, and go and kill your dangerous enemies dead.
You come across as being a little like a pre-teen who wants their fear of things hiding under the bed to go away.
How very disappointing it is, that even after 10 years of war the blood lust of "realy? Nice savages" still is not sated.
Maybe you should be on the front line, maybe then after you "Get some" you'll be able to sit down and be nicely engorged.
I really hope you get what you need.
edit on 18-1-2012 by The X because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Not watching the debate and watching the clips on this means what?
Did not know you hold the final say in who can and can't comment.

I like the thought of getting rid of your enemies.


"A man without enemies is a man without friends" - anon



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:24 AM
link   
reply to post by mossme89
 


but but we love jesus, we go to church, it's ok for us to be bloodthirsty war mongers! they aren't white christians! they are not our equals in the lords eyes!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:32 AM
link   
If the choice is between warmongering, pea brained Derpmerica and rapacious, irredentist, commie China, I choose...

Cyanide. ~_~



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:34 AM
link   
I want you to think about the easiest way for the MSM to manipulate the media that they present to us.

...canned laughter, canned applause, and canned boo's.

They could also edit in shots of crowd reactions taken at earlier times during the debate
where the crowd is reacting to something entirely different than what is presented.

Now please go back to the video, and take a good long look at the few seconds of
crowd reaction that is presented. There is something fishy about the timing, something
is not "right" about the crowds reaction. It is almost as if the reaction is to the punchline
of a joke. The smiles I see are not smiles of agreement, they are smiles of laughter, at
something funny, the smiles are genuine, from the heart, and fun. They are not the smiles
of warhawks, justified in their opinions, smug, and clever.

I call hoax on the crowd reaction shot. and I also want everyone to keep a wary eye on
the crowd reactions that are presented in future debates.

WE ARE being manipulated...of that I AM SURE.

And of all the techniques that can be utilized to manipulate our opinions, this group-think
crowd-reaction technique is the safest, easiest and most effective technique I can think of.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 06:43 AM
link   
So the crowds in these debates cheer at the thought of killing others, cheering on the death penalty and cheering on the idea that people should be left to die if they have no insurance.






What a lovely bunch



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 





So the crowds in these debates cheer at the thought of killing others, cheering on the death penalty and cheering on the idea that people should be left to die if they have no insurance.



Ooh! - doesn't that make you mister compassionate 'enlightened' moral high ground!, as opposed to the retarded masses.

.....................but then maybe you have taken the bait, sold yourself short for a little ego massage, maybe you should think about what these people are actually for! - but then you wouldn't be special anymore would you?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   
I'd expect nothing less here on the forum. You all just keep thinking this little show represents South Carolina. We don't particularly care for you to visit Our state. You just keep thinking the way you do..... You just remember all those 'programs' you saw on tv, yup were exactly like that, just like Deliverance, In the heat of the night and Dukes of Hazard, all bib overall wearing, inbread, toothless, red neck, shine sippin, incest lovin hillbillies. Yep, each and every one of us. I promise, so give us a wide birth, stay away. And boy, you put us all in our place, sure'nuff.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Drew99GT

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by mossme89
 


What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here.


I agree; however the HUGE exception is this: it's obvious the US government under the NDAA, the DHS, and FEMA classifies many US citizens as "enemies" because they do not agree with certain policies of the government. Newt said what he said; does he think US citizens who are classified as enemies of the US government should be killed?

The way certain legislation has been written recently and the growing police and military state domestically, it could be a slippery slope and it's BLATANTLY unconstitutional. The US Constitution was written to give citizens the ability to disagree with the government. It's why the country was founded.


And we have a winner.
Yes, that is the hesitation I have with the Govt.
But, with that aside, I still stand behind what I stated. With again, that issue removed.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by P12SOLD

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by P12SOLD

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by P12SOLD
 


Kind of like a really big Suicide Bomber, huh?
Yeah, you go ahead and believe that Iran would not do it.


Thats a false analogy. And, what prove have you got to show Iran would fire first upon Israel, if it had a nuclear weapon? Israel, it seems is carrying out covert actions inside Iran. Has Iran been as belligerent, as Israel?
edit on 17-1-2012 by P12SOLD because: (no reason given)


I am not going to do your research.
There are many quotes for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other groups stating they would strike if given the opportunity.
And yes, Iran has been on the covert, just like other countries.


My research undertaking would probably be lot different to your kind of research, mate. Tell me now do you speak Persian? If you do. Then you wouldn't be saying these are true quotes. He never said he strike first your telling lies here.


Learning Persian would be really great.
I would also love to learn Chinese and Farsi.
But, My technical studies and family rule my time. Maybe when I retire.
Please, I would love to review any research you have found.
I am always up for learning a new trick and gleaning a little more truth.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by JohhnyBGood
 


Just pointing out that the only other countries who cheer for the death of their enemies and for corporal punishment are usually found in the Middle east, you know those people you want to wipe of the face of the planet.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE

The title of this thread is...............
Debate audience goes crazy cheering when Gingrich says "We'll kill our enemies.",

The first paragragh from the O.P. is..................
I saw this on the South Carolina debate last night and am utterly disgusted at how the audience went ballistic cheering. This clip isn't even half of it. A few seconds later, the camera showed people almost falling off their seats in utter joy. If this the attitude of our country, I have officially lost hope. We're doomed to continue the vicious cycle of bloodshed.

And your first response is......What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here

Am I wrong in assuming that your response is supporting Gingrich's words ?

Supporting what?
I have no problem with striking down enemies.


Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
Am I wrong in assuming that you see no disgust in the audience response as the O.P. expresses in his post ?

No, no I don't.
I do not live in the false world in thinking that we can just live together, being enemies. As, my enemy is set for my destruction, so I will deny them that.



Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
Your cavilier approch to killing is disheartining.




Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
No honest person wants to go to war and no honorable will walk away from it when theatened,

I never said I want war. You, have your liberal knee jerk reaction to thank for your wrong assumption.



Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
but for one to fight there must be a cause and a purpose not just accusations and assumptions.

Yes, I also stated this as well.
When my enemy has threatened, and then has the means to carry out said threats, I have no problem with striking them down.
You do realize there are more then just one way to strike down your enemy?
Your thinking is very 1 dimensional. I thought Hippies were supposed to be the creative type, and savages like myself very myopic?




Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
That is where your moral compass is broken. ( your quote)......Don't see the issue here. (I guess you don't.)


Again, your opinions hold about as much value to me as used bubble gum under a table.

I challenge you again.
Please provide me proof, any proof, for your past statements. And not just BS conjecture.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by colbyforce

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by mossme89
 

.k
What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here.


You also kill many innocent people, numbskull. What about them? Ares you going to go apologize to the parents whose kids were blown to bits? Hey, blame it on the "bad guys " right? Everything's so simple isn't it? Kill 'em dead. Problem solved.


Another 1 dimensional response.
But, war is hell. I never stated I was under the false idea/thinking that innocent people would not be killed.
I do not condone nor want innocent to die under warfare.
But again, war is hell.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by 6Eyengineer

Originally posted by macman

Originally posted by ararisq

Originally posted by macman
What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here.


Who are our enemies again? Anyone labeled a "Terrorist" + Iranians? Chinese? Russians? Libyans? Egyptians? Syrians? Venezuelans? Cubans?

Anyone that threatens the US.
Very simple.


Nice. But instead of threaten, How about If you attack us or our allies, then its game on? Threatening is a bit to vague.


I refer back to a threat, with means to carry out said threat enough for me.
I value my life more so then someone with the abilities from the above.





top topics
 
40
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum