On Chickenhawks

[IBC]

Chicken hawks are real and dangerous


November 26, 2006
by Steve Hammons

"Chicken hawk" is a term that has been tossed around for the last few years. The term usually refers to someone who strongly advocates war, but did not serve in combat or the military, or may have even actively avoided combat and the military.

This may be simplistic. The concept of a chicken hawk seems to be much more complex.

Most recently, the chicken hawk label has been put on politicians and people in government, think tanks, various organizations as well as average Americans who pushed for and supported the invasion of Iraq, but avoided service in Vietnam when they were younger.

The first part of the term, "chicken," obviously refers to someone who was afraid of going to war themselves. In Vietnam for example. However, many young men avoided going to Vietnam for many reasons. It does not necessarily mean that they lacked courage.

This would hold true now. Many people do not want to volunteer to go to the Iraq War. That does not mean they are afraid, though intelligent fear of dangers can be a good thing. Sometimes, going along with the crowd and doing what authorities want you to do is the easy way, and it might require courage to think and act independently.

In Vietnam and other wars, many people choose to serve in the military in non-combat positions. They may not want frontline combat, killing, seeing others killed and wounded and getting killed or terribly wounded themselves. They mayjoin the Navy or Air Force for example, where there are many positions that do not involve direct combat roles.

Does that mean they are "chicken?" If someone wanted to be a sonar technician on a submarine, does that make him less courageous than aNavy SEAL, a guy in the Marine Recon or an Army Airborne Ranger? Well, maybe. Depends on your point of view. Is a military warrior who loves the killing and destruction of war always honorable? No. Sometimes they are disturbed psychologically. Is a Marine who serves in peacetime different from a Marine who serves in combat?

How about a jet aircraft or chopper pilot? Flying an aircraft is dangerous, but many people learn to do it. Flying at a high altitude and dropping bombs is not the same as flying a chopper to land in a "hot" area, with bullets, mortars and RPGs coming at you. As many high-altitude bomber pilots have said, they are insulated from the death they rain down on others far below. This sometimes comes back to haunt them in later years. Is flying amilitary aircraft in peacetime highly dangerous? Could be. More so than flying a civilian aircraft?

So, the "chicken" part of chicken hawk seems somewhat complex. It's not black and white in many cases.

The word "hawk" in chicken hawk might be somewhat easier to clarify, but also has complicating aspects. A hawk is generally considered someone who strongly advocates going to war or taking some kind of strong, usually military, action. A hawk might choose war as a first option, rather than a last option.

(Article Continues Below)

In our society, hawks sometimes have links to defense contractors who profit from war. This does complicate the definition of the word. A person could be a hawk because they truly believe strong and forcefulmilitary action is the best approach to a situation. Or, are they interested in war profiteering?

Are they psychologically compensating for never having proved themselves in a dangerous situation, so they talk tough (an aspect of chicken hawks)?

Are there situations where being a hawk is the correct moral position? There could be many reasons for being a hawk.

When we think of the term chicken hawk, we usually think of males. But, the same ideas could apply to females also.

In addition, the term to could be expanded to include someone who seems to be a chicken hawk not for themselves, but for their teen oryoung adult children. For example, many people are middle-aged or over, and are beyond the normal age limits for military and combat service, though these limits have recently been expanded. What if a parent was a hawk for war, but didn't want their own teen or adult children to be at risk. What if they were for a war, but only if other parents' kids went? That seems to be a kind of chicken hawk too.

Why do people become chicken hawks? As mentioned previously, it could be financial. They might benefit in some way from the defense business. Is that always bad? It could be political. If they are part of the political system, they might score points with certain members of the public, defense lobbyists and campaign contributors for being a pro-war hawk. It could be that someone just feels it's patriotic to be a hawk.

But, again, being a hawk does not necessarily mean the person is a chicken hawk. A robust defense establishment in itself is not bad, and can even keep the peace if used wisely. Many hawks have proven themselves on the battlefield, so they cannot be classified as chicken hawks. Some with a hawkish view might not have served in combat, yet they are intelligent and have the normal and adequate amount of courage and dedication. For one reason or another, maybe they did not have the opportunity to be tested "under fire."

For those who might be legitimately called chicken hawks, some probably are compensating for not being tested under fire. They have not been in dangerous situations or served in combat, seen others killed and blown to pieces or been wounded themselves. They talk tough to possibly compensate for their own self-doubts, and the doubts others may have about them. The psychological and emotional nature of these people is a contributor to being chicken hawks. And, this may combine with the financial, political or other elements that come into play.

So, the term chicken hawk is not so simple, though it does seem to have a legitimate use in some or many cases. Chicken hawks do exist and they can be very dangerous to others. They can advocate sending brave and honorable people to be killed and wounded. They can trigger the deaths of and injuries to innocent people, and children too.

It seems sometimes that brave and honorable people in the military and in civilian life may assume that their "leaders" also have the same courage, honor and fellowship. People may "project" their own positive qualities onto their leaders, when, in fact, it does not exist there. That is, like amovie projector, people project what is within them onto others.

A brave military warrior may look at tough-talking leaders and assume that they have been tested like he has. That they know the sacrifice, danger and pain of war. That they share the fellowship, love and respect for fellow warriors and their families.

Chicken hawks probably don't fully understand these things. And that is another reason why they are so dangerous.

[Nixon's Head]

http://www.princegeorgeva.org/EmerCrew/Chicken_Hawk_Small.gif

[IBC]

http://www.princegeorgeva.org/EmerCrew/Chicken_Hawk_Small.gif

Dick Cheney????

[Vegas]

Dick Cheney????

What did you have to say about Clinton when he sent troops to Bosnia and Kosovo?

[LSU]

What did you have to say about Clinton when he sent troops to Bosnia and Kosovo?


"At least they weren't there 4 years"?

[Vegas]

"At least they weren't there 4 years"?

But that doesn't change the fact that Clinton is a chickenhawk as defined in the article.

[LSU]

But that doesn't change the fact that Clinton is a chickenhawk as defined in the article.




Oh, I see what you're saying.


I'll be back with a smartass comment later. Maybe.

[BoredWithNoSB]

But that doesn't change the fact that Clinton is a chickenhawk as defined in the article.

At least he didn't pretend not to be.

[Vegas]

At least he didn't pretend not to be.

How do you figure that?

[BoredWithNoSB]

How do you figure that?

He said he didn't approve of the war and used the system to avoid going. Read the transcript of his interview with Koppel.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/draftletter.html

Its amazing reading how level headed and inclusive he tries to be compared to today's politicians (on both sides).

[Vegas]

He said he didn't approve of the war and used the system to avoid going. Read the transcript of his interview with Koppel.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/draftletter.html

Its amazing reading how level headed and inclusive he tries to be compared to today's politicians (on both sides).

But Clinton still meets the definition from the article:

The term usually refers to someone who strongly advocates war, but did not serve in combat or the military, or may have even actively avoided combat and the military.

[ryr8828]

"At least they weren't there 4 years"?

I'm pretty sure we still have military personnel there now.

[LSU]

But Clinton still meets the definition from the article:


I suppose that's open to interpretation as to what "strongly advocates" means...and perhaps the definition of "is" as well.

[LSU]

I'm pretty sure we still have military personnel there now.



In the same amount of violence as there was to begin with?

[Vegas]

I suppose that's open to interpretation as to what "strongly advocates" means...and perhaps the definition of "is" as well.

How can someone who doesn't "strongly advocate" the military send troops to fight in a foreign land?

[LSU]

How can someone who doesn't "strongly advocate" the military send troops to fight in a foreign land?



No, it says strongly advocate "war". Not the military.

[Vegas]

No, it says strongly advocate "war". Not the military.

What do you call what Clinton sent the troops to do? Dance?

[LSU]

What do you call what Clinton sent the troops to do? Dance?



Defend?

Was it a war?

Was it his last option or his first choice?

To me, "strongly advocates" means top choice...first thing...war first.

Thus, it depends on what "strongly advocates" means.

[LSU]

After reading a bit more, I notice you left a bit of the story out regarding the definition, Vegas.

"Chicken hawk" is a term that has been tossed around for the last few years. The term usually refers to someone who strongly advocates war, but did not serve in combat or the military, or may have even actively avoided combat and the military.

This may be simplistic. The concept of a chicken hawk seems to be much more complex.

and this


A hawk might choose war as a first option, rather than a last option.

[Vegas]

Defend?

Was it a war?

Was it his last option or his first choice?

To me, "strongly advocates" means top choice...first thing...war first.

Thus, it depends on what "strongly advocates" means.

Every politician will say that war is their last choice. Some mean it and some don't, but I think most do mean it.

[Vegas]

After reading a bit more, I notice you left a bit of the story out regarding the definition, Vegas.

And of course it probably has a lot to do with party affiliation.

[LSU]

And of course it probably has a lot to do with party affiliation.



It might.

Is Lieberman a chicken hawk?

Hillary?

There have been liberals that backed the war, just as there have been conservatives that have been against it from the start.


But it can be partisan if that's the way we want the argument to go.

[LSU]

Every politician will say that war is their last choice. Some mean it and some don't, but I think most do mean it.



So then it would be open to debate whether or not those people were chicken hawks or not...or hawks or not...or chickens or not.

[Vegas]

So then it would be open to debate whether or not those people were chicken hawks or not...or hawks or not...or chickens or not.

Someone from your own party is a patriot and is doing the right thing. Someone from the other party is a chickenhawk.

[LSU]

Someone from your own party is a patriot and is doing the right thing. Someone from the other party is a chickenhawk.



I disagree. Someone of your opinion is a patriot, someone with a different opinion is a chicken hawk. Party be damned.

[Vegas]

I disagree. Someone of your opinion is a patriot, someone with a different opinion is a chicken hawk. Party be damned.

I stand corrected.

[IBC]

Someone from your own party is a patriot and is doing the right thing. Someone from the other party is a chickenhawk.
Well, John Kerry would not have been a chickenhawk. Who in this admonistration isn't? Call out Clinton. Typical.

[Vegas]

Well, John Kerry would not have been a chickenhawk. Who in this admonistration isn't? Call out Clinton. Typical.

It's not typical when you call out Bush?

[Potomac Yank]

What did you have to say about Clinton when he sent troops to Bosnia and Kosovo?
*
*

Here's something that your Chicken Hawks over at PNAC had to say.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/balkans_pdf_04.pdf

[Potomac Yank]

I see where the Fearless Chicken Hawk from Crawford Texass, and his side kick 5 Deferments Sleazy Dick, have extended the time of service in Iraq, to all of the men and women that they placed in harms way.

BTW, during GW's time in the Texas Air National Guard, wasn't it "Read My Lips" that found a lush job for little George in somewhere Alabama?
The job consisted of little George helping one of Daddies friends in an election.

Not only did the guy lose the election, but no one ever recalled seeing little George at any of the required military gatherings in Alabama.
If anything, it gave Barbara Bush's spoil brat a chance to try out some good ol' southern moonshine, and kill some time in Alabama.

With Daddy's help ... he was a Chicken Hawk in training. :)

[ryr8828]

I see where the Fearless Chicken Hawk from Crawford Texass, and his side kick 5 Deferments Sleazy Dick, have extended the time of service in Iraq, to all of the men and women that they placed in harms way.

BTW, during GW's time in the Texas Air National Guard, wasn't it "Read My Lips" that found a lush job for little George in somewhere Alabama?
The job consisted of little George helping one of Daddies friends in an election.

Not only did the guy lose the election, but no one ever recalled seeing little George at any of the required military gatherings in Alabama.
If anything, it gave Barbara Bush's spoil brat a chance to try out some good ol' southern moonshine, and kill some time in Alabama.

With Daddy's help ... he was a Chicken Hawk in training. :)

A friend of mine was a fighter pilot in Vietnam. He was one of Bush's biggest supporters early on when I was considering someone else. He still is.

He says, and I agree, that no one should discount service in the Guard or Reserve.

[Potomac Yank]

A friend of mine was a fighter pilot in Vietnam. He was one of Bush's biggest supporters early on when I was considering someone else. He still is.

He says, and I agree, that no one should discount service in the Guard or Reserve.

*
*

As a matter of fact, it is no longer just a kids war with the Guard and the reserves around.
If you look at the Fallen list that they show on TV, you'll notice that some of the ages of the fallen, are not unlike the ages on this board.
They are being worn out with repeated return trips.
I only spend one year in Korea.

My respect goes out to anyone that shoulders a weapon for his country.

But what I said about Alabama is true.

That's a great looking banner you have on top.

[Nixon's Head]

A friend of mine was a fighter pilot in Vietnam. He was one of Bush's biggest supporters early on when I was considering someone else. He still is.

He says, and I agree, that no one should discount service in the Guard or Reserve.
I thought old W bailed on that.

[IBC]

I thought old W bailed on that.

NO HE DIDN'T. And the Dan Rather incident proved it!

[Nixon's Head]

NO HE DIDN'T. And the Dan Rather incident proved it!Huh?

[Potomac Yank]

NO HE DIDN'T. And the Dan Rather incident proved it!

*
*

Are you saying that they've located someone that recalls seeing Read My Lips Jr at one of the military gatherings in Alabama?

Would you have the source to that please?

[IBC]

*
*

Are you saying that they've located someone that recalls seeing Read My Lips Jr at one of the military gatherings in Alabama?

Would you have the source to that please?

Sarcasm my friend, sarcasm.

[Potomac Yank]

Sarcasm my friend, sarcasm.

*
*

Usually I'm pretty good with sarcasm, giving and taking it. :) .. My bad.

Seriously, we know that Sleazy Dick put in for 5 deferments, has anyone, come up with anyone that recalls seeing the Chicken Hawk from Crawford Texas at an Alabama military meeting during the election gig???

[IBC]

*
*

Usually I'm pretty good with sarcasm, giving and taking it. :) .. My bad.

Seriously, we know that Sleazy Dick put in for 5 deferments, has anyone, come up with anyone that recalls seeing the Chicken Hawk from Crawford Texas at an Alabama military meeting during the election gig???

He was doing a boatload of blow man. A boatload.

[Potomac Yank]

He was doing a boatload of blow man. A boatload.


*
*

Barbara Bush's spoil brat, talks the talk, boatload of blow and all, but still doesn't pack it, to walk the walk.

Still no sign of the Bush Brigate, and his band of Parrots.

Atleast the men of the Lincoln Brigade, stood up and followed their convictions in the Spanish Civil War.

These band of Parrots, these Patriotic shirkers, will only send others to do, what they wouldn't do themselves.

Let's not tip toe through the Tulips, or beat around the bush.
Too many men and women, of all ages, are being killed while your playing word games about what is a chicken hawk?

The day that I see or hear, anyone of our Keyboard Commando's say, I believe in the war, and what bush is doing so much, that I'm signing up to go to Iraq.
That's the day, whether I believe in their cause or not, that's the day, that that person, earns my respect.

Unfortunately, I don't believe that the Keyboard Commando's have the conviction nor the pelotas, to follow through.
The are all in the image of GW Bush, and his 5 deferment side kick.

[ryr8828]

*
*

Barbara Bush's spoil brat, talks the talk, boatload of blow and all, but still doesn't pack it, to walk the walk.

Still no sign of the Bush Brigate, and his band of Parrots.

Atleast the men of the Lincoln Brigade, stood up and followed their convictions in the Spanish Civil War.

These band of Parrots, these Patriotic shirkers, will only send others to do, what they wouldn't do themselves.

Let's not tip toe through the Tulips, or beat around the bush.
Too many men and women, of all ages, are being killed while your playing word games about what is a chicken hawk?

The day that I see or hear, anyone of our Keyboard Commando's say, I believe in the war, and what bush is doing so much, that I'm signing up to go to Iraq.
That's the day, whether I believe in their cause or not, that's the day, that that person, earns my respect.

Unfortunately, I don't believe that the Keyboard Commando's have the conviction nor the pelotas, to follow through.
The are all in the image of GW Bush, and his 5 deferment side kick.

Did you criticize Clinton for not taking a rifle and himself going to Kosovo?

I seriously doubt it.

[Potomac Yank]

Did you criticize Clinton for not taking a rifle and himself going to Kosovo?

I seriously doubt it.

*
*

Are you saying to us, that you are going to be the first Neo Con Patriot to enlist in The Bush Brigade?

Proud of you mi boy.

[Vegas]

*
*

Are you saying to us, that you are going to be the first Neo Con Patriot to enlist in The Bush Brigade?

Proud of you mi boy.

Once again you didn't answer the question.

[Reagan Smash]

*
*

Are you saying to us, that you are going to be the first Neo Con Patriot to enlist in The Bush Brigade?

Proud of you mi boy.


More name calling I see. It's a shame you find yourself so much better then everyone else here. I was going to stay out of this conversation, but I can't. I hate to characterize someone, especially someone who fought in the military, but you are a bitter angry person. You don't respect anyone else's opinion, and right away begin with the name calling. If you want to complain about things, look in the mirror. It is people like yourself that keeps many who are on the fence about which way to go on the fence or the other way.

I don't really know what your advocating except a military state where all leaders have to had fought in the military to make decisions. I really don't know. Maybe I'm stupid, or a neo-con, or a chickenhawk, or something else.
However, what I do know is this. Your opinions and what you post are overshadowed by your bitterness and anger. In our country we should have a free exchange of ideas, and that is very difficult when one person resorts to name calling and personal attacks at every chance.

I've said my piece. Believe it or not this is not based on any political ideology, but my own personal experience on how people should attempt to behave themselves when trying to discuss and issue. Constant name calling and characterizations do not get things done, they only add to the problem.

[ryr8828]

More name calling I see. It's a shame you find yourself so much better then everyone else here. I was going to stay out of this conversation, but I can't. I hate to characterize someone, especially someone who fought in the military, but you are a bitter angry person. You don't respect anyone else's opinion, and right away begin with the name calling. If you want to complain about things, look in the mirror. It is people like yourself that keeps many who are on the fence about which way to go on the fence or the other way.

I don't really know what your advocating except a military state where all leaders have to had fought in the military to make decisions. I really don't know. Maybe I'm stupid, or a neo-con, or a chickenhawk, or something else.
However, what I do know is this. Your opinions and what you post are overshadowed by your bitterness and anger. In our country we should have a free exchange of ideas, and that is very difficult when one person resorts to name calling and personal attacks at every chance.

I've said my piece. Believe it or not this is not based on any political ideology, but my own personal experience on how people should attempt to behave themselves when trying to discuss and issue. Constant name calling and characterizations do not get things done, they only add to the problem.

I appreciate that post. I started this site for legitimate debate from both sides, everyone knows where I stand.
Constant attacks of the same nature add nothing. I don't feel that I have no say in how my tax dollars are spent just because the Vietnam war ended months before my 1A draft card came due for the lottery. On that issue, if only military men were allowed to make decisions as to foreign policy, we'd be at war all the fucking time.

I don't see anyone screaming babykiller in any abortion debates around here, although it is the same thing as the post you referred to.

Legitimate somewhat friendly debates is what I started this site for.

Just because I agree with something or someone, that does not make me a FUCKING PARROT.

[Potomac Yank]

Once again you didn't answer the question.

*
*

Took in a game last night, and one today, but enough about that ... I think Vegas wants a little attention.

Sorry Vegas, have to throw you back.
When it comes to tough questions, you're the side stepping prince of them all.
You're not a king, or a queen, you're a prince.
You have a lot to learn before you reach the upper level.
Your best entry is: "Once again you didn't answer the question."
Feeble, lame, weak and typical.
My advice, if you're living in Vegas, don't leave it.
Stay away from big cities.

Outside of that, you're a nice Neo Con.

[Potomac Yank]

More name calling I see. It's a shame you find yourself so much better then everyone else here. I was going to stay out of this conversation, but I can't. I hate to characterize someone, especially someone who fought in the military, but you are a bitter angry person. You don't respect anyone else's opinion, and right away begin with the name calling. If you want to complain about things, look in the mirror. It is people like yourself that keeps many who are on the fence about which way to go on the fence or the other way.

I don't really know what your advocating except a military state where all leaders have to had fought in the military to make decisions. I really don't know. Maybe I'm stupid, or a neo-con, or a chickenhawk, or something else.
However, what I do know is this. Your opinions and what you post are overshadowed by your bitterness and anger. In our country we should have a free exchange of ideas, and that is very difficult when one person resorts to name calling and personal attacks at every chance.

I've said my piece. Believe it or not this is not based on any political ideology, but my own personal experience on how people should attempt to behave themselves when trying to discuss and issue. Constant name calling and characterizations do not get things done, they only add to the problem.

*
*

I have come to the conclusion that you have the tenderous skin, east or west of the Pecos.

I strongly believe, that if anyone called out your name ..... you would accuse them of name calling.

I'm very concerned, and because of my concern, plus my normal reach out attitude towards my fellow human being ..... I say to you.

Never, but never give bad lip to a city chick, because she will kick your tender whinnying ass.

Now, would you like to have someone give you a hand getting off that cross?

[ryr8828]

*
*

I have come to the conclusion that you have the tenderous skin, east or west of the Pecos.

I strongly believe, that if anyone called out your name ..... you would accuse them of name calling.

I'm very concerned, and because of my concern, plus my normal reach out attitude towards my fellow human being ..... I say to you.

Never, but never give bad lip to a city chick, because she will kick your tender whinnying ass.

Now, would you like to have someone give you a hand getting off that cross?
I'm beginning to think you incapable of debate.

[Vegas]

*
*

I have come to the conclusion that you have the tenderous skin, east or west of the Pecos.

I strongly believe, that if anyone called out your name ..... you would accuse them of name calling.

I'm very concerned, and because of my concern, plus my normal reach out attitude towards my fellow human being ..... I say to you.

Never, but never give bad lip to a city chick, because she will kick your tender whinnying ass.

Now, would you like to have someone give you a hand getting off that cross?

You were bottle fed as an infant, weren't you?

You need to get over it.

[Potomac Yank]

I appreciate that post. I started this site for legitimate debate from both sides, everyone knows where I stand.
Constant attacks of the same nature add nothing. I don't feel that I have no say in how my tax dollars are spent just because the Vietnam war ended months before my 1A draft card came due for the lottery. On that issue, if only military men were allowed to make decisions as to foreign policy, we'd be at war all the fucking time.

I don't see anyone screaming babykiller in any abortion debates around here, although it is the same thing as the post you referred to.

Legitimate somewhat friendly debates is what I started this site for.

Just because I agree with something or someone, that does not make me a FUCKING PARROT.

*
*

I guess I was in error.
When I found your forum, and checked it out.
I said to myself, now this forum has the makings of a forum with Pelotas, and not a weak spineless forum like the one run by rage Dave.
Tell me RYR, who's ever heard of a war discussion while your having tea and crumpets, and wearing a bow tie.

If someone sounds like a broken recording, I'm going to tell them.
One other thing.
You three guys are whinnying about name calling.
Being that you guys sing out whatever your party sings.
I guess it's all right to question our Patriotism if we don't go along with you, we're against you.

Isn't that a name calling double standart?

Did I make a mistake, by thinking that RYR had more back bone than rage dave?

I can take anything, and everything you throw at me, are you saying you can't?

War, religion and politics, are the filthiest topics one could ever discuss.
Anyone the thinks otherwise, lives in a super protective zone, whatever that is.
Maybe Reagan can tell us about it.

[Vegas]

*
*

I guess I was in error.
When I found your forum, and checked it out.
I said to myself, now this forum has the makings of a forum with Pelotas, and not a weak spineless forum like the one run by rage Dave.
Tell me RYR, who's ever heard of a war discussion while your having tea and crumpets, and wearing a bow tie.

If someone sounds like a broken recording, I'm going to tell them.
One other thing.
You three guys are whinnying about name calling.
Being that you guys sing out whatever your party sings.
I guess it's all right to question our Patriotism if we don't go along with you, we're against you.

Isn't that a name calling double standart?

Did I make a mistake, by thinking that RYR had more back bone than rage dave?

I can take anything, and everything you throw at me, are you saying you can't?

War, religion and politics, are the filthiest topics one could ever discuss.
Anyone the thinks otherwise, lives in a super protective zone, whatever that is.
Maybe Reagan can tell us about it.

It has nothing to do with the one's ability to "take it" as you say. It has everything to do with having a civil discussion. Do you equate name calling with discussion?

[ryr8828]

*
*

I guess I was in error.
When I found your forum, and checked it out.
I said to myself, now this forum has the makings of a forum with Pelotas, and not a weak spineless forum like the one run by rage Dave.
Tell me RYR, who's ever heard of a war discussion while your having tea and crumpets, and wearing a bow tie.

If someone sounds like a broken recording, I'm going to tell them.
One other thing.
You three guys are whinnying about name calling.
Being that you guys sing out whatever your party sings.
I guess it's all right to question our Patriotism if we don't go along with you, we're against you.

Isn't that a name calling double standart?

Did I make a mistake, by thinking that RYR had more back bone than rage dave?

I can take anything, and everything you throw at me, are you saying you can't?

War, religion and politics, are the filthiest topics one could ever discuss.
Anyone the thinks otherwise, lives in a super protective zone, whatever that is.
Maybe Reagan can tell us about it.

You should read the rules.

Debate does not mean calling everyone who doesn't agree with you names, or a parrot. Believe me, I can call someone a cocksucker with the best of them, either in public or over the internet. That's not why this site is here though.

And I'd appreciate you not comparing me with that liberal pussy rage Dave who uses his mod powers to turn every discussion towards his own agendas.

[Potomac Yank]

I'm beginning to think you incapable of debate.

*
*

In other words.
The captured mind is saying:
"If you're not with us, you're against us." :)

[Vegas]

*
*

In other words.
The captured mind is saying:
"If you're not with us, you're against us." :)

Have you noticed that the majority of posters here are liberals and that you're the only one that's having a problem abiding by the rules?

[Potomac Yank]

You should read the rules.

Debate does not mean calling everyone who doesn't agree with you names, or a parrot. Believe me, I can call someone a cocksucker with the best of them, either in public or over the internet. That's not why this site is here though.

And I'd appreciate you not comparing me with that liberal pussy rage Dave who uses his mod powers to turn every discussion towards his own agendas.

*
*

I laughed my ass off with you, and not against you when you called little rage dave a pussy.
However, you are in error.
Dave is neither a Liberal, Republican or anything.
Like Reagan, he hasn't got a clue of what he is. .... you're giving him too much credit.
Reagan is still trying to find himself.
What he doesn't realize is, he's gotten long in the tooth, and that game is stale.

I'm sorry to see, that on you're site, it is common practice for you the owner, to use the words fucking, and cocksucker.
Your quote:
"Believe me, I can call someone a cocksucker with the best of them, either in public or over the internet."

*
*
Are you equating the word Parrot, with the word cocksucker???

If you are ... I can understand why you, li'l vegas, delicate Reagan and Bush, would shy away from Iraq.

Half a century ago, I use to help run a camp for inner city kids.
Kids that came from the very same streets tha I came from.
One of their favorite games, was a game called the dozens.
If the word Parrot touches a delicate nerve, and you've never played the dozens, you can thank whatever god you worship, that this is the internet and not in person.
I visualize your local emergency room, filled with delicate Neo Con trauma victims.

Has anyone taken Reagan off his cross yet?