A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Anything to do with gender and the status of women and men.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Belinda
Posts: 2800
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Belinda » Sun Jul 21, 2019 5:46 pm

Interpreting the results of WWII ain't so difficult.

In the event Hitler was not to be appeased . Ali Khamenei is not Hitler nor like Hitler, and diplomacy to reinstate observance of international law is best.

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Harbal » Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:21 pm

Walker wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:32 pm
So far he has been whipping to heel the fanatical government of Iran with sanctions.
Then someone had better tell the Iranian government they have been whipped to heel, because they are not behaving like they've been whipped to heel.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8164
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Sun Jul 21, 2019 11:38 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Tue Jul 16, 2019 5:12 am
Walker wrote: My God, based on life and not belief, that sounds monstrous.

What's worse for the believers in Che: killing nuns, killing babies in the womb, or killing the old?
You tell me as your troops in Vietnam did most of that and more, rape was very popular, whereas Che didn't.
A supporter of The Great Trump wearing that shirt (greatness in this case being empirically based on his job performance, and not belief*), would be as rare as a divine unicorn, of which Legend movies are made.

I'd bet a few understood this posting, but I wouldn't bet on the bad ponies who don't. :D


*Kind of a shame that among intelligent folks, the obvious requires so many qualifiers to pick at.
The Trumpette represents everything that conditioned your troops in Vietnam to indiscriminately kill the Vietnamese villages regardless of whether they were of the South or the North but since he is a draft-dodger with widdle bone-spurs he took the rich cowards way out. Ironically enough if he had served in the front-lines he'd more than likely have been fragged by his own men as he's clearly that kind of officer.
So, because he didn't join his fellow Americans in murdering Vietnamese villagers then he's a 'coward'? PC 'logic' never fails to entertain :lol:

Walker
Posts: 6834
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Walker » Mon Jul 22, 2019 11:44 am

Harbal wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:21 pm
Walker wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:32 pm
So far he has been whipping to heel the fanatical government of Iran with sanctions.
Then someone had better tell the Iranian government they have been whipped to heel, because they are not behaving like they've been whipped to heel.
That’s likely because the fanatical Iranian government misses the old days of Catchfart Obama giving them plane loads of untraceable cash for terrorism funding.

Do you think that if the squeeze is tight enough the sane citizens of Iran will revolt against their oppressive masters, or is the tribal mentality too strong in the ME for revolution to liberate the citizenry so they can again enjoy a more liberated lifestyle?

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11960
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Arising_uk » Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:49 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
So, because he didn't join his fellow Americans in murdering Vietnamese villagers then he's a 'coward'? PC 'logic' never fails to entertain :lol:
*Yawn*
Your monomania never fails to bore.

I have no problem with cowards, I do have a problem with those who claim they are not when their actions demonstrate otherwise.

You also ignore that whilst the Yanks out there did behave atrociously contrary to their view of themselves they also lost 58,,000 troops so some bravery was shown along the line.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8164
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:37 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:49 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
So, because he didn't join his fellow Americans in murdering Vietnamese villagers then he's a 'coward'? PC 'logic' never fails to entertain :lol:
*Yawn*
Your monomania never fails to bore.

I have no problem with cowards, I do have a problem with those who claim they are not when their actions demonstrate otherwise.

You also ignore that whilst the Yanks out there did behave atrociously contrary to their view of themselves they also lost 58,,000 troops so some bravery was shown along the line.
There is really nothing to say to such a generic fool with a pack mentality, who thinks that those who fight in wars are 'brave heroes' and those who don't are 'cowards'. It's because of drones like you that it's a lot braver to NOT go to war under conscription.

mickthinks
Posts: 784
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by mickthinks » Mon Jul 22, 2019 8:50 pm

Walker wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 11:44 am
... the old days of Catchfart Obama giving them plane loads of untraceable cash for terrorism funding.
lol You make it sound like the US policy of sowing unrest and bolstering armed resistance to regimes they deem unhelpful was invented in 2009. Clue: it's much older than that, dude.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11960
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Arising_uk » Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:10 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:37 pm
Arising_uk wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:49 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
So, because he didn't join his fellow Americans in murdering Vietnamese villagers then he's a 'coward'? PC 'logic' never fails to entertain :lol:
*Yawn*
Your monomania never fails to bore.

I have no problem with cowards, I do have a problem with those who claim they are not when their actions demonstrate otherwise.

You also ignore that whilst the Yanks out there did behave atrociously contrary to their view of themselves they also lost 58,,000 troops so some bravery was shown along the line.
There is really nothing to say to such a generic fool with a pack mentality, who thinks that those who fight in wars are 'brave heroes' and those who don't are 'cowards'. It's because of drones like you that it's a lot braver to NOT go to war under conscription.
I didn't call them 'heroes' I just said that acts of bravery would have been shown. I also said I have no problem with those who didn't go because they were scared of dying and opposed conscription. However I do have a problem with those like Trump who talk up the armed forces and about how brave they personally would be in the face of an armed enemy when they clearly were not in the past and did everything they could not to go

Belinda
Posts: 2800
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Belinda » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:19 am

Adil Salahi | Arab News


God describes the stupidity of



hypocrites in the following terms: “They seek to deceive God and



the believers, but they are only deceiving themselves, though they



may not realize it. There is sickness in their hearts, and God has



aggravated their sickness.” (2: 9-10)



Defining hypocrisy the Prophet (peace be upon him) says: “There are



four traits which, when present in any person, make that person a



pure hypocrite. Whoever has one of these has indeed a trait of



hypocrisy unless he abandons it: When he is assigned a trust he is



untrue to his trust; when he speaks to others he lies; when he



gives a serious promise he is deceitful; and when he is in dispute



he is too hard.” (Related by Al-Bukhari).



The Prophet defines the character of a hypocrite by four features



every one of which is a manifestation of untruth. By contrast, a



believer is a person whose actions give credence to his beliefs.



Whatever he claims is certainly true. These four traits represent



falsehood in intention, words and action. Hence, when a person



portrays all four his case is that of unmitigated hypocrisy. Anyone



of these four traits represents a quarter of the full extent of



hypocrisy.



Putting the case in such clear and graphic manner, the Prophet is



urging every Muslim to make sure that none of these traits applies



to them. If it does, then they must try hard to purge themselves of



it. The first is being untrue to one’s trust. A hypocrite thinks



nothing of violating his trust if there is anything to be gained by



such violation. Secondly, a hypocrite is a habitual liar. He thinks



that he can get away with anything by assuring his listener that



whatever he says is true when he is fully aware that it is not. The



third trait is being untrue to one’s promises. When he gives a



promise, a hypocrite knows that he will be violating it at the



first opportunity. He has no intention of remaining true to his



promises unless there is nothing to be gained by breaking them. The



last trait is being too hard when involved in a dispute. He goes



far beyond good manners. He resorts to exaggeration as well as



slandering and vilifying his opponent, paying no heed to Islamic



values.



It should be said that these four traits are the main features of



the character of a hypocrite. There are other features such as



exaggerated flattery, unwarranted praise of one’s bosses, putting



up a show of devotion in worship, etc. All these qualities



demonstrate falsehood in intention, speech and action.



It should be said, however, that falsehood is intended to deceive



others. When there is no intent of deception, resorting to



exaggeration in describing something, or in portraying events, does



not come under hypocrisy, particularly when no harm results from



such exaggeration.





From: Awaaze-dost@yahoogroups.com

But Dachshund wrote in his OP in the discussion about Muslim senators in the House
Could someone with more knowledge of the American legal system than I have please explain to me how it is that several Muslim Senators have recently been elected to the House ? Muslims are followers of Islam and with respect to its legal, cultural and social aspects, Islam is TOTALLY incompatible with, and actively hostile toward the American system of government (in general) as well as the fundamental tenets of the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Bill of Rights
.

I don't geddit ?


Regards


Dachshund
Muslim senators are compatible with fundamental tenets.

Like Arising uk and Muhammad, I too have a problem with hypocrisy.
However I do have a problem with those like Trump who talk up the armed forces and about how brave they personally would be in the face of an armed enemy when they clearly were not in the past and did everything they could not to go

Dachshund
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2017 6:40 pm

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Dachshund » Sat Jul 27, 2019 4:33 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:37 pm
Arising_uk wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:49 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
So, because he didn't join his fellow Americans in murdering Vietnamese villagers then he's a 'coward'? PC 'logic' never fails to entertain :lol:
*Yawn*
Your monomania never fails to bore.

I have no problem with cowards, I do have a problem with those who claim they are not when their actions demonstrate otherwise.

You also ignore that whilst the Yanks out there did behave atrociously contrary to their view of themselves they also lost 58,,000 troops so some bravery was shown along the line.
There is really nothing to say to such a generic fool with a pack mentality, who thinks that those who fight in wars are 'brave heroes' and those who don't are 'cowards'. It's because of drones like you that it's a lot braver to NOT go to war under conscription.
Vegetable,


You need to shut your stupid clacker before someone knocks your head off.

One reason is that women are psychologically incapable of truly understanding war/combat/sacrifice/duty.

The 58,000 GIs who died fighting in Vietnam which was BTW, a proxy war in the broader struggle against Soviet communism in the Cold war were each and every one brave and each and everyone a hero - each one a freedom fighter who made the ultimate sacrifice doing the right in a just war. You can't understand that because you're female, but I'd advise you not to broadcast your stupidity if ever you happen to be in the US. If ever my country were threatened by a foreign military force like an invading Islamic army, I be the first one to heed the call the arms and I'd be right up in the front line of the vanguard when they attacked with my SLR rifle - armed and ready to fire =, trying to kill as many of the Muslim bastards as I could as quickly as possible.

Finally, you fool, Mai Lai was an anomoly, a tragic, isolated incident. Shit like that happens in every war and on both sides, there are reasons for it ... stress, fatigue, shattered nerves, decent men can snap under the pressure of too much seeing too much horror. Villages like Mai Lai were very often harbouring Viet Cong guerrillas walk into the wrong one and chances are you're dead.

Dachshund (Der Uberweiner)

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8164
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Sat Jul 27, 2019 7:22 pm

Dachshund wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 4:33 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 6:37 pm
Arising_uk wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:49 pm

*Yawn*
Your monomania never fails to bore.

I have no problem with cowards, I do have a problem with those who claim they are not when their actions demonstrate otherwise.

You also ignore that whilst the Yanks out there did behave atrociously contrary to their view of themselves they also lost 58,,000 troops so some bravery was shown along the line.
There is really nothing to say to such a generic fool with a pack mentality, who thinks that those who fight in wars are 'brave heroes' and those who don't are 'cowards'. It's because of drones like you that it's a lot braver to NOT go to war under conscription.
Vegetable,


You need to shut your stupid clacker before someone knocks your head off.

One reason is that women are psychologically incapable of truly understanding war/combat/sacrifice/duty.

The 58,000 GIs who died fighting in Vietnam which was BTW, a proxy war in the broader struggle against Soviet communism in the Cold war were each and every one brave and each and everyone a hero - each one a freedom fighter who made the ultimate sacrifice doing the right in a just war. You can't understand that because you're female, but I'd advise you not to broadcast your stupidity if ever you happen to be in the US. If ever my country were threatened by a foreign military force like an invading Islamic army, I be the first one to heed the call the arms and I'd be right up in the front line of the vanguard when they attacked with my SLR rifle - armed and ready to fire =, trying to kill as many of the Muslim bastards as I could as quickly as possible.

Finally, you fool, Mai Lai was an anomoly, a tragic, isolated incident. Shit like that happens in every war and on both sides, there are reasons for it ... stress, fatigue, shattered nerves, decent men can snap under the pressure of too much seeing too much horror. Villages like Mai Lai were very often harbouring Viet Cong guerrillas walk into the wrong one and chances are you're dead.

Dachshund (Der Uberweiner)
What a mindless drone. Politicians sure do love morons like you. My Lai was NOT an anomaly. It only came to public knowledge years later, after there had been a cover-up. The leader of the slaughter, William Calley, was essentially let off by Nixon, serving 'house arrest' for three years. What a joke. Atrocities like that happen all the time in 'wars'. In fact, it's far safer to be in the military than to be a civilian! The atrocities that the general public becomes aware of are only the tip of the iceberg. It's the ordinary citizens who pay for the little games politicians like to play with each other, with their greedy political strings being pulled by the ever-present but insidious arms industry.
As someone pointed out, you are obviously taking the piss and 'pulling our (I forget whats), because no one could possibly believe the bullshit that you spew. Or are people STILL actually believing the same self-serving propaganda that they did when WW1 broke out? What the hell? Haven't they learnt anything? You can even Google search the 'reasons' for WW1 these days, and NOT ONE of them lists 'A noble and heroic battle for the freedom of humanity, fought by courageous young men who were willing to sacrifice their lives for the greater good'. Barf. Give me a break. Just look at your own little wanker Prince Harry. So desperate to get to Afghanistan that he practically had a seizure. But yes, a depressingly large proportion of the modern public are believing the same crap they have always been fed by politicians--perhaps now even more than ever. 'Soldiers are 'heroes', 'they fought/are fighting for our FREEDOM', ' they willingingly sacrifice their lives' (probably the biggest and most laughable load of codswallop of all), blah, blah f'ing blah........... Of course politicians need people to believe that. It's the reason the real heroes of war, the ones who refuse to go, get tormented and tortured and treated as pariahs by the moronic public mob. It's a lot braver to go against the mob than to go with it. I don't have a 'duty' to any ratbag politicians. Fuck them.
Many of the thugs in the ME are there for the free McDonalds and decent pay-- and the chance to torment the helpless with impunity. The rest are brain-washed drones like you, although I have a feeling you know all this but the thought of war gives you such a big hard-on that you choose to ignore the ovbious. There are few things lower than the 'underwear skid-marks of humanity' that comprise those with a war fetish.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:41 am

No real woman needs a, "role model." She only needs to be herself, because she is a woman, the highest form of life on this planet. Anyone who presumes to tell a woman how to be one, even another woman, has lost the capacity to enjoy and appreciate the source of all that really matters in this world, the source of all true romance, adventure, and love.

I reject all labels and -isms. I am not any kind of -ist except one; I am a radical philogynist. I love all women, but especially those who love themselves, and love being a woman.

A woman once told me about a particularly lovely and very feminine woman, "Oh, she thinks she's God's gift to men."

"Well, I don't know from whom it is, but she's definitely a gift, not only to men, but to everyone whose life she lights up with her charm," I said.

The world is a beautiful place to live and its chief beauty is its human flowers, women.

You may think this is just a man's perspective, but my wife agrees with me, and enjoys being loved they way every woman ought to be.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by RCSaunders » Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:09 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 7:22 pm
What a mindless drone. Politicians sure do love morons like you. My Lai was NOT an anomaly. It only came to public knowledge years later, after there had been a cover-up. The leader of the slaughter, William Calley, was essentially let off by Nixon, serving 'house arrest' for three years. What a joke. Atrocities like that happen all the time in 'wars'. In fact, it's far safer to be in the military than to be a civilian! The atrocities that the general public becomes aware of are only the tip of the iceberg. It's the ordinary citizens who pay for the little games politicians like to play with each other, with their greedy political strings being pulled by the ever-present but insidious arms industry.
As someone pointed out, you are obviously taking the piss and 'pulling our (I forget whats), because no one could possibly believe the bullshit that you spew. Or are people STILL actually believing the same self-serving propaganda that they did when WW1 broke out? What the hell? Haven't they learnt anything? You can even Google search the 'reasons' for WW1 these days, and NOT ONE of them lists 'A noble and heroic battle for the freedom of humanity, fought by courageous young men who were willing to sacrifice their lives for the greater good'. Barf. Give me a break. Just look at your own little wanker Prince Harry. So desperate to get to Afghanistan that he practically had a seizure. But yes, a depressingly large proportion of the modern public are believing the same crap they have always been fed by politicians--perhaps now even more than ever. 'Soldiers are 'heroes', 'they fought/are fighting for our FREEDOM', ' they willingingly sacrifice their lives' (probably the biggest and most laughable load of codswallop of all), blah, blah f'ing blah........... Of course politicians need people to believe that. It's the reason the real heroes of war, the ones who refuse to go, get tormented and tortured and treated as pariahs by the moronic public mob. It's a lot braver to go against the mob than to go with it. I don't have a 'duty' to any ratbag politicians. Fuck them.
Many of the thugs in the ME are there for the free McDonalds and decent pay-- and the chance to torment the helpless with impunity. The rest are brain-washed drones like you, although I have a feeling you know all this but the thought of war gives you such a big hard-on that you choose to ignore the ovbious. There are few things lower than the 'underwear skid-marks of humanity' that comprise those with a war fetish.
I have disagreed with you about some things, vegetariantaxidermy, but you are absolutely right about the horrors and ignorance of war. My grandmother used to say, there will always be wars until all the ignorant young people refuse to fight. There is almost no hope of that.

Most of those, like the thug, Dachshund, ["You need to shut your stupid clacker before someone knocks your head off," is the typical language of a thug], have never themselves been in war, seen it's horrors, heard the screams of the, "brave," men who only wanted to live, but didn't, or only came home as less than fully human. Most have never had to kill another person, or worse watch innocent individuals be burned to death or blown to bits. Most militaries consist of the dregs of their country's citizens because they are incapable of making anything of themselves outside a gang that has no purpose in life but to kill others and destroy property. The fools who get talked into fighting for, "freedom," are only fighting for a government, which is the business of destroying all freedom.

Nick_A
Posts: 4236
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 1:23 am

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by Nick_A » Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:20 am

The term "Xanthippe" has now come to mean any nagging scolding person, especially a shrewish wife.

Xanthippe was Socrates wife. Why have a wife like this you ask? She was a role model for the philosophers wife unlike the woman RCSaunders describes who make men happy. The philosopher needs more. He needs the ultimate feminist pain in the ass. Socrates explained in Xenophon's Symposium
Socrates adds that he chose her precisely because of her argumentative spirit:
It is the example of the rider who wishes to become an expert horseman: "None of your soft-mouthed, docile animals for me," he says; "the horse for me to own must show some spirit" in the belief, no doubt, if he can manage such an animal, it will be easy enough to deal with every other horse besides. And that is just my case. I wish to deal with human beings, to associate with man in general; hence my choice of wife. I know full well, if I can tolerate her spirit, I can with ease attach myself to every human being else.
The question becomes a role model for whom? From the man’s point of view the role model that makes you happy is not the same as the one who makes you a good philosopher.

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 8164
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: A ROLE MODEL FOR WOMEN

Post by vegetariantaxidermy » Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:59 am

RCSaunders wrote:
Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:09 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 7:22 pm
What a mindless drone. Politicians sure do love morons like you. My Lai was NOT an anomaly. It only came to public knowledge years later, after there had been a cover-up. The leader of the slaughter, William Calley, was essentially let off by Nixon, serving 'house arrest' for three years. What a joke. Atrocities like that happen all the time in 'wars'. In fact, it's far safer to be in the military than to be a civilian! The atrocities that the general public becomes aware of are only the tip of the iceberg. It's the ordinary citizens who pay for the little games politicians like to play with each other, with their greedy political strings being pulled by the ever-present but insidious arms industry.
As someone pointed out, you are obviously taking the piss and 'pulling our (I forget whats), because no one could possibly believe the bullshit that you spew. Or are people STILL actually believing the same self-serving propaganda that they did when WW1 broke out? What the hell? Haven't they learnt anything? You can even Google search the 'reasons' for WW1 these days, and NOT ONE of them lists 'A noble and heroic battle for the freedom of humanity, fought by courageous young men who were willing to sacrifice their lives for the greater good'. Barf. Give me a break. Just look at your own little wanker Prince Harry. So desperate to get to Afghanistan that he practically had a seizure. But yes, a depressingly large proportion of the modern public are believing the same crap they have always been fed by politicians--perhaps now even more than ever. 'Soldiers are 'heroes', 'they fought/are fighting for our FREEDOM', ' they willingingly sacrifice their lives' (probably the biggest and most laughable load of codswallop of all), blah, blah f'ing blah........... Of course politicians need people to believe that. It's the reason the real heroes of war, the ones who refuse to go, get tormented and tortured and treated as pariahs by the moronic public mob. It's a lot braver to go against the mob than to go with it. I don't have a 'duty' to any ratbag politicians. Fuck them.
Many of the thugs in the ME are there for the free McDonalds and decent pay-- and the chance to torment the helpless with impunity. The rest are brain-washed drones like you, although I have a feeling you know all this but the thought of war gives you such a big hard-on that you choose to ignore the ovbious. There are few things lower than the 'underwear skid-marks of humanity' that comprise those with a war fetish.
I have disagreed with you about some things, vegetariantaxidermy, but you are absolutely right about the horrors and ignorance of war. My grandmother used to say, there will always be wars until all the ignorant young people refuse to fight. There is almost no hope of that.

Most of those, like the thug, Dachshund, ["You need to shut your stupid clacker before someone knocks your head off," is the typical language of a thug], have never themselves been in war, seen it's horrors, heard the screams of the, "brave," men who only wanted to live, but didn't, or only came home as less than fully human. Most have never had to kill another person, or worse watch innocent individuals be burned to death or blown to bits. Most militaries consist of the dregs of their country's citizens because they are incapable of making anything of themselves outside a gang that has no purpose in life but to kill others and destroy property. The fools who get talked into fighting for, "freedom," are only fighting for a government, which is the business of destroying all freedom.
So true. Calling all soldiers 'brave heroes' is a brilliant piece of war marketing because the implication is that those who choose not to be political pawns are by default 'cowards', not 'heroes'.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests