what a funny joke about how Obama authorized the killing of a bunch of people (maybe terrorists, maybe not) with drones! impressive wit DO

I love how after all the talk of calling both sides out on their shit, James suddenly only has eyes for Obama.

Will the Nazis so murdered be white?

@ghug

one joke in RESPONSE to a DO claim = "only has eyes for"

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ the logic it's glorious

Man you're actually krellin...

That's the most spot on thing you've ever said ghug

A) lumping neo-Nazis in with innocent drone strike victims in the Middle East for a joke feels more like punching down than a picture of a cat and a handful of puns about Nazis

B) Obama's revamp of the drone policies and authorizations killed more civilians than any other president, and he took humor in drone strike deaths

C) I don't think you quite understand how pretentious you are

actually Krellin? no he got way too offended over stuff

Well in fairness to JY, it was Obama who massively increased the use of drones to kill 'terrorist' targets. I mean, it was probably a direct result of new drones technology becoming available, and any US president would have done the same thing if presented with the same advice - ie i suspect the military/intelligence agencies wereinterested in pushing this adgenda.

But when the US decides to kill a US citizen, with no due process, and you don't criticise that because the president happens to be a democrat... Well that is talkig with blinders on. Partisan blinders...

the destruction of habeas corpus came with the Patriot Act. that's why i hate neocons

Note: when I say killed more people I mean with regards to the policy.

A) It's satirizing the people who are simultaneously OK with drone strikes and against punching Nazis. It's not a joke at the expense of the innocents who get killed by drones.

B) Yes. Fuck Obama. What's your point?

C) Hypocrisy seems to be the big thing today, doesn't it?

A) I said "feels more like," as it put Nazis on the receiving end of a policy where civilians are victims. Comparatively speaking that's more likely to be seen as punching down than a picture of a cat and a handful of puns and is therefore more likely to be harmful.

B) it's impossible to dissociate Obama from the policy so trying to attack James as only having eyes for Obama for making the association is ridiculous

C) I take it self-awareness isn't?

@ghug

"It's satirizing the people who are simultaneously OK with drone strikes and against punching Nazis. It's not a joke at the expense of the innocents who get killed by drones."

umm... who here is ok with drone strikes? even ND has condemned Obama's use of drones so recklessly. i mean that's an absolute horrible satirization. so are you saying that DO is not funny? that's sexist man, and that's not ok.

in the eyes of a life-long hypocrite, an opponent's ideological consistency appears entirely illogical

We only use drones on Arabs. White terrorists have free speech rights and deserve safe spaces

@James: Truth. I am not a big fan of drone strikes. There needs to be more congressional oversight on it. I've been saying that for a long time.

What is the purpose of this thread? Is it to suggest that murder is okay? If so is that not breaking forum rules for advocating violence, murder and mayhem?

We actually droned an American citizen some years ago, I forget his name, but I thought that was messed up because Obama disregarded his constitutional rights to a fair trial and just unilaterally decided to drone him.

A. The key here is that one is intended to make a point and the other is "Nazis are funny".

B. The key *here* is that James is spending all his time in the other threads criticizing people for only calling out one set of violent protesters because of political blinders and then turns around and does the same thing with drone strikes. Obama deserves to be criticized for it, but he's certainly not alone in it, and James chose to single him out following a joke criticizing drone strikes unilaterally because he had political motives.

C. You tell me.

@Yanik, the fact that you feel the need to bring Demon's gender into places where it's in no way relevant perfectly exemplifies why I have no interest in engaging you seriously on these subjects.

This forum used to have much cooler people to disagree with. Y'all are terribly disappointing.

if the nazis kill anyone or incite direct killing, i want the full force of the government brought down on them.

so far in charlottesville, that has happened for the mruderer, but not for the other violent protestors. THAT part of the argument really shouldn't be at odds with anyone right now... although i'm happy to agree with the fact that the police should have stepped in sooner

i think there is something we can ALL agree on here: there were violent white supremacists who got away with assaulting people at that rally.

yeah? good to agree on that?

there were some violent antifa folks who should have been arrested for assault as well. all good with that?

speculate about the ratios of those two groups all you want, i don't have any number so i can't make a qualified claim but if you guys have theories or estimates shout em out

Dubya was the first POTUS to allow American citizens to be categorized as enemy combatants.

@ghug

"A. The key here is that one is intended to make a point and the other is "Nazis are funny". "

no, DO made a joke about drones killing potential civilians, potential terrorist in the middle east is a policy we should use on all nazis, regardless of whether or not they're being violent, and apparently this is satire because conservatives like drone strikes.

except conservatives hate drone strikes under obama.

that failed on all levels.



"B. The key *here* is that James is spending all his time in the other threads criticizing people for only calling out one set of violent protesters because of political blinders and then turns around and does the same thing with drone strikes. Obama deserves to be criticized for it, but he's certainly not alone in it, and James chose to single him out following a joke criticizing drone strikes unilaterally because he had political motives. "

I was responding to DO, so i turned her own ideological tables on her. i could have included Bush, but it was a joke

something you still fail to understand


"C. You tell me.

@Yanik, the fact that you feel the need to bring Demon's gender into places where it's in no way relevant perfectly exemplifies why I have no interest in engaging you seriously on these subjects. "

YES. BECAUSE THESE ARE ALL JOKES


"This forum used to have much cooler people to disagree with. Y'all are terribly disappointing."

You meanwhile were never cool to disagree with. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

@ghug

would Hitler prefer:

1. everyone being afraid of the word Nazi decades after his reign ended, so that all jokes about it were met with utter disgust

2. some kid making jokes about hitler and his cat being equivalent, being entirely flippant and insulting towards everything that he held dear?

stop doing what Hitler wants ghug

A) making fun of Nazis is funny because laughing at awful people is key to making sure their ideology isn't taken seriously

B) if he didn't have anti-Nazi statements included in other threads, your point might be a little more relevant here

C) I went to a rich public school but also value my family coming from poorer origins, and that, in shortest terms to avoid writing an entire essay, has led me to being very self-aware. You, however don't seem to be. And you've attached an image of me from when I was in high school and used that as your basis for my personality ever since. I'm still pretentious, not trying to question that, but not AS pretentious.

I don't give a shit that you made a joke. I give a shit that you're a bad person.

DO said "centrists" right there in her post. There's nothing about conservatives. Reading is fundamental.

Either way if DO is arguing that entire groups of people should be murdered with a drone then that should be censored because it is inciting violence and against forum rules.

Ah yes it was specifically just the centrists who are pro-drone strike. The conservatives and liberals can rally around that issue together to oppose the centrists. That's exactly what she meant.

When you're going around telling people how self-aware you are, it's usually a sign that you aren't.

"I don't give a shit that you made a joke. I give a shit that you're a bad person."

except you said my post was "inappropriate" and got offended by it.

so now you're hypocrite AND a liar


"DO said "centrists" right there in her post. There's nothing about conservatives. Reading is fundamental."

centrism is based off of conceding points. she was obviously combining the far left view of killing nazis with a far right view of strong military against islamic terrorism

the problem with her satire is that the drones were most often (YES MOST OFTEN THAT'S STATISTICALLY TRUE) an Obama era occurrence

also, YOU called it satire yourself, meaning YOU recognized the attempt to mock a side. that Is what satire is.

so ghug, were you making a failed attempt to mock the right, or were you rightfully mocking democrats?

because any choice beyond those two, means you're contradicting yourself.