you:”you know, guns. in every case they were squashed flat by a more numerous, better-trained, armed and supplied enemy. The same would happen if loonies ever tried “rising up” in the US – they’d discover why it is that the US military took baghdad so easily.”

google: noam chomsky+second amendment…..WOW..SHOCKKA!you two agree.

Your lesson is over, you get an “F” for lack of capacity due to liberal agenda.

“maybe if you were nicer to our resident clausewitz,he would explain it to you….right after unveiling the master plan for victory in the ME.”

Why is it that everyone wants to talk about Prussians?

” We will be together until the end ” achmenischlong to chavez, more or less stating the obvious, ” I’m going to get you killed since I want to commit suicide ”
(look up little hassan the imam in the well for referal)

And yet, another thread about why obammy supports communist dictators and mooslimes.

That happens everywhere. It tends to cause less of a fuss because the people you let in on VISAs are (a) vetted, (b) tend to be from places you’d probably take immigrants from anyway.

“they frown on verification such as E-verify, but they want to blame guns as soon as a terrorist doe’s his dirty deed”

Hasan was born in america. Back to you.

Sure, post some links. I’m interested. But I’m a bit confused as to why you think it’s relevant. What did I say that had anything to do with guerrilla warfare?

hmmmm.you have my interest,please proceed.

matthew:you are woefully misinformed about guerilla warfare,i would send you some links but i doubt you would read them.my advice is:try not learn military tactics from pacifistic,lefty professers.

maybe if you were nicer to our resident clausewitz,he would explain it to you….right after unveiling the master plan for victory in the ME.

Yeah. Right. So the allies were just kidding around for a couple of years, and weren’t really trying to beat the nazis?

“The people of Baghdad cheered and greeted our troops, that… I know for a fact”

Except for the soldiers who were fighting back, of course. I’m not quite sure why you think this is relevant?

“It won’t be our troops or national guard that take up weapons against the natural born citizens of these United States.”

And you tell ME I’ve got no grasp of history? Kent state, 1970. Los angeles, 1992. Ring any bells?

“The beltway snipers were islimes … They choose to murder in accordance with what their belief requires”

That doesn’t seem to be what the investigators thought. That guy was messed up, but religion per se was pretty insignificant in the collection of possible motives.

“There is NO known explanation of who mailed the anthrax”

*blink* Seriously? What about bruce ivins?

“Okay, now you are starting to piss me off because it is so boring having to tell you this again and again”

You’re not doing a very good job. You just keep repeating dogma – which is little more than opinion, in your case. And you keep getting facts wrong. Yes, I KNOW you don’t like muslims – but that by itself doesn’t prove anything about THEM. Make a proper argument, for goodness’ sake.

“It’s been weeks since eyewitnesses reported that Maj. Nidal Hasan shouted “Allahu akbar” before spraying Fort Hood with gunfire, killing 13 people”

Yep.

“Since then we also learned that Hasan gave a medical lecture on beheading infidels and pouring burning oil down their throats”

Er, no. Not so much. It was a weird presentation, I agree – I’m glad I didn’t have to sit through it. The slides really drag on in the second half.

“We also found out Hasan had business cards printed up with the jihadist abbreviation “SOA” for “Soldier of Allah.” Was that enough to conclude that the shooting was an act of terrorism”

No.

“Is it still too soon to come to the conclusion that the Fort Hood shooting was an act of terrorism?”

Yes. Read page 106 of the patriot act:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ056.107.pdf

Pay particular attention to section 802 (A), 5(b). Until his motive has been established, I can’t see how anyone can say whether he’s a terrorist or a plain old mass shooter. If you’re going to water down “terrorism” to include violence by anyone who’s somehow been radicalized, you’ve started to make the word a bit useless. Was the columbine shooting terrorism? They were definitely motivated by ideology. If you accept your implied definition, then the US has a lot more domestic terrorism than I think you’d like to admit. That’s the problem with your line of argument.

“Every jew in europe could have had their own personal 50 cal and rocket launcher, and the outcome would have been exactly the same. But I grant that it might have taken a little bit longer”

Oddly, we agree there but not for the same reason. If 6 million jews would of had even a single shot .22, they would of all taken one shot each and gone home.

The outcome would be the same with the nazis losing.

The people of Baghdad cheered and greeted our troops, that… I know for a fact. The side streets were lined with 100 of thousands cheering and waving with Iraqi Regulars standing down along the route.

It won’t be our troops or national guard that take up weapons against the natural born citizens of these United States.

Being a traitor won’t save you then.

I hope you spend some real world time preparing for your next lesson, it is up to you to have your facts straight before leaping off into the deep end with the swimmers.

Um, no. The french army had lots of guns – their outcome was no different. Every jew in europe could have had their own personal 50 cal and rocket launcher, and the outcome would have been exactly the same. But I grant that it might have taken a little bit longer.

“You don’t know your history, you know less about the US Constitution and what it requires and you have not a tiny ngats peckers worth of knowledge about how we took Baghdag. But you’re fear, the basis for your ideas, about losing out to the patriots of our nation is duly noted.”

You ALMOST got there – you came so close to making some sort of point, but then you failed. I can see what you’re alluding to, though – that the US army can’t deploy domestically. Well, let’s just see about that. It’s done it before In the meantime, the national guard can make my point for me.

I have to go – the real world intrudes. I’ll pop back later to continue the lesson.

and the obama 08 bumpersticker.

How’s that for entertaining, sparky?