J.HollaBack Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 you tell them kabar. good post. ps- this guy seems to be highly informed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grasshoppa Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Originally posted by BROWNer a day and half before the election, 11MILLION spaniards took to the streets to make their feelings known about the attacks and their revulsion to terrorism. when's the last time you did somethin' like that... ...they know thedifference between the war in iraq, and a war on al qaeda, unlike *some arrogant, head in the sand americans. you got cobwebs on your headpiece. who are you to criticize? if civil disobedience or political activism was any standard for nobility, stalin and hitler would be your chum buddies. no? more then 5.5MILLION germans died defending what they thought was righteous. millions more russians died then what spain experienced with it's clam bake. democracy should always remain true to the idea of majority rule, minority rights. if the people of spain truly believe that passivity is any means of resolution, then they have the complete authority and will to change that. but it has been proven that popular opinion does not always reflect what is right or what is infinitely good for the people. if spain ultimately submits to the terrorists and pulls out it's military i highly doubt the arrogance of victory will not bubble to the top of the terrorists ego. http://img27.photobucket.com/albums/v81/grasshoppa/kabar.gif'> http://img27.photobucket.com/albums/v81/grasshoppa/kabar.gif'> http://img27.photobucket.com/albums/v81/grasshoppa/kabar.gif'> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grasshoppa Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Originally posted by Tesseract And 9/11 was waaay worse than what happened in spain, how did bush deal with it? 2 wars and i see terrorists more powerfull than they where...what was the success over afganistan and whats the success over Iraq?...horseshit. that's a fucking HUGE complacent remark on your part tess. you can't measure deterrence anymore then you can measure failure. and if the destruction of potentially hundreds of thousands of small arms, explosives, and other hazardous materials is not enough to say that lives were saved, i think you missed the whole point of the war. this president will not be around much longer, i'll concede that. that's entirely due to a nation divided on a controversial election in which people choose to dissent rather then cooperate. it's cool to hate bush. it's mainstream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Originally posted by grasshoppa that's a fucking HUGE complacent remark on your part tess. you can't measure deterrence anymore then you can measure failure. and if the destruction of potentially hundreds of thousands of small arms, explosives, and other hazardous materials is not enough to say that lives were saved, i think you missed the whole point of the war. this president will not be around much longer, i'll concede that. that's entirely due to a nation divided on a controversial election in which people choose to dissent rather then cooperate. it's cool to hate bush. it's mainstream. Are you insane? Of course i missed the whole point of this war...If i remember correctly it was the destruction of WMD's that Saddam had stashed...A PROVEN LIE...now if you claim that your answer against terrorism is the destuction of small arms, explosives and other hazardous materials with the cost of your soldiers dying everysingle day for a year now you obviously need to reevaluate "deterrence" and "failure" I just cant believe you just said that... i wont even comment the mainstream comment... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Milk85 Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Personally I felt America had the legal obligation to invade Afghanistan to take the Taliban out of power and decapitate the base of al Qaeda and to go after bin Laden. They attacked us, and like any nation that gets attacked, we had the right to self-defense. What do you mean 'They attacked us?'...afghanistan didn't attack America, it's proven that the vast majority of those involved in 9/11 (over 90%) were from Saudi Arabia...not afghanistan. They were also trained in Saudi Arabia, but since the Bush's have a personal relationship with the Saudi royal family (who are perpetrators or some of the worst atrocities in the middle east), they couldn't attack them now, could they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 i'm not sure how to respond to the heap of crap i just read. the thread is about spain, and a major attack on spain. it seems to be a real thick headed chore to distinguish between things these days...iraq=terrorism..activism=hitler(nnniiiice buddy)... spain exercised some democracy.it seems clear to me you guys, from what i've just read, have complete contempt for this. beyond that, i'm lovin' 'islamist=nazi'..HAHA. kabar, you're like some drunken fool swinging your arms at every dark skinned person in the bar and missing by a mile. do you really believe putting a massive target on muslims the world over, and just blasting away is gonna make things better? terrorism is fucked up and a serious, disturbing problem. but..and this is the fundamental problem with the US. you can't solve all your problems with military brutality. and that's just too bad, cuz you sure have enough of it to pass around. it's a fairly simple equation..you bomb people and fuck with their lives and you create legitimate, deep grievances. go ahead now and read that as me defending terrorism or some other bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.HollaBack Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 BROWNER- I understand that you acknowledge that terrorism is fucked up, and you arent fond of the war in iraq, or of president bush correct? that being said, i'd like to hear what you think has got to happen (in detail) to resolve all of these problems... -terrorism -what to do about osama bin ladin / al queda? -if another president is elected or put in office, what he should do in the future reguarding this situation and how to improve our situation with other nations or whatever else you think he should do, id like to hear your opinion. -the palestine / isreali conflict (i know this is off topic, but id still like your input on the matter) describing a possible solution to the problem. i'd like a in depth reply to the above questions, based on what you see the solution being for all of these problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 And please solve world hunger, the scarcity of water, and discrimination. Thank you, BROWNz. And if you can't formulate a detailed and cohesive answer to all of these problems, it proves you shouldn't be allowed to have any opinions re: the current state of the world's affairs. Solve them all at once, or shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 i don't have time for indepth. nor do i have a whole bunch of answers growing on my answer tree. *if i have time later, maybe. it'll just fall on deaf ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.HollaBack Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Originally posted by Poop Man Bob And please solve world hunger, the scarcity of water, and discrimination. Thank you, BROWNz. And if you can't formulate a detailed and cohesive answer to all of these problems, it proves you shouldn't be allowed to have any opinions re: the current state of the world's affairs. Solve them all at once, or shut up. come on poops... its not like that, but everytime i see one of these threads, its always someone bashing the other side, and then saying why they think this or that SHOULDNT be going down a certain way, but they never offer a solution to the problem. and since im so misinformed, id just like to hear some of you more informed people's opinions for solutions. thats all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poop Man Bob Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Point taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grasshoppa Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Originally posted by J.HollaBack come on poops... its not like that, but everytime i see one of these threads, its always someone bashing the other side, and then saying why they think this or that SHOULDNT be going down a certain way, but they never offer a solution to the problem. and since im so misinformed, id just like to hear some of you more informed people's opinions for solutions. thats all. i completely agree. tease is only asking you bner to give your proposal for resolution. 4000 some odd posts and you don't have the time? pffft. what should be done about the nutty fundamentalists? should they just be ignored while spain meanders a socialist resolution and commits years to impartiality without realizing and misbelieving they are still a target? i seriously don't know what you, or any other liberals think. the question is ignored far more then any other topic on this debate. please, please inform us. i caught an article in the local newspaper this morning in which it mentions that hamas has vowed revenge towards not only iseral but also the u.s. even though the u.s. has repeatedly announced it had no forewarning of the assassination and absolutely no involvement. these boisterous and imprudent threats are exactly what has come and will continue to surface so long as the terrorists believe they have some existence. it is a doctrine of war they will apply to anything that disagrees with their beliefs, or more likely "wants." was 9/11 provoked? hardly to the point of cause and effect. and that is all the evidence you need to realize that terrorist warfare is malignantly menacing and should be dealt with immediately and not left to indecisive politicians or to "play it by ear" agendas. and please keep my posts in context. i don't want to have to be so overly spoken and detailed that i have to hold your hand while you read my posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 for one thing, the united states has to realize that it bears at least partial responsibility for the creation of terrorist and fundamentalist groups.. there is a long and sordid history in the united states of covert ops. we have fucked over a lot impoverished and downtrodden peoples. the united states needs to at least reduce its support of the israeli army. and reign in the extent of the deployment of troops in the world. (and where troops are stationed, they need to treat the native people with respect, and abide by their laws) ...we need to foster as many positive relations with people of volatile nations there needs to be human intelligence to defeat terrorists. which we can only get by treating people with respect, helping them rebuild their countries, not turn them into warzones and abandon them when our military objectives are completed.. if you don't believe the united states is the biggest terrorist who has ever existed, trying to impose her doctrine on the rest of the world by brute force, then read Killing hope by William Blum, open your eyes.. learn about the israel - palestine conflict. there's a few threads on it.. and the united states giving israel some 6 BILLION in aid PER YEAR for armed defense after planting israelis in the palestinian nation post wwII read 'A Peace to End All Peace' about the creation of the modern middle east post wwII and the fact that the middle east was a peaceful area prior to being drawn into that war. www.killinghope.com US foreign policy is brutal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grasshoppa Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Originally posted by !@#$% ...we need to foster as many positive relations with people of volatile nations there needs to be human intelligence to defeat terrorists. which we can only get by treating people with respect, helping them rebuild their countries, not turn them into warzones and abandon them when our military objectives are completed... is that not what we are doing now? to completely pull out as spain has done should be condemned, right? a few acts of american brutality should not be representative of the american people, just as the suicide bombings should not be representative of middle easterners. and i believe it has been proven that the american troops have shown a great deal of patience and composure with people that are trying to kill them daily. right now i'm reading howard zinn's "The People's History of the United States" http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0060528427.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg'> so i'll look into those titles when i get the time. please believe i'm not someone new to the united states' history of politics and economics. but i am still someone who believes in freedom and democracy, something the iraqi people could not experience till now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 no! i do not think that is what we are doing. look at afghanistan. our military presence there is low. the country is in shambles. they have nothing. we went in and bombed it, we destroyed the taliban, now we are pretty much looking for laden and that's it. what about nation building? soldiers are still dying there. in iraq, we cannot wait to hand over control to a provisional authority the u.s. handpicked, june 30!!?? who are they kidding. ...and who even knows when elections will actually happen....meanwhile, the american people get fucked by the contractors handpicked by the DOD to rebuild. uhhh....there are other exemples.. should we really get into all that? haiti? or what of our ignorance of what is going on in the Congo RIGHT NOW??? what of democracy for the people of somalia?? (who were backed by al-qaeda for real, not just for lies) why do some nations get bombed and abandoned, others ignored altogether? why is ther no consistency in american policy for the rest of the world to look to? what nations consider is friendly? where is the humint?? why do people hate our government so much? are people really that naive that they think everyone is happy?? in the economist opinion poll, about HALF of iraqis polled said they were WORSE off than a year ago..(www.economist.com) the poll was done by iraqi news outlets did anyone ask themselves... can democracy be forced on a nation? isn't democrcy a demand of the people? is that a demand they'd make? a lot of iraqis don't want democracy. they want an autocrat or a religious government. what will bush do when they get themselve an ayatollah?? bomb again!!?? 2cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.HollaBack Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 !@#$%- I agree with you about the united states playing some kind of role in creating terrorism, however, although i dont know every country we've ever invaded or bombed etc etc, i would think we went and did those things a) because it was somewhat necessary and B) other parts of the world somewhat wanted us to handle the situation. I might be wrong on that, but I that's what im assuming. now that ive acknowledged that the US was definately a part of the problem in the creation of terrorism, what are some steps that should be taken in trying to resolve terrorism? just as slavery was a problem, and has since been acknowledged as being something that was horribly wrong, simply acknowledging it as a problem isnt going to make up for the past or make the problem go away. Now we have to think of solutions for the problem. About pulling our troops out all over the world like you said, how is that going to help anything? The only thing I see that doing is giving the wreckless people in that land more opportunity to rise up against whoever they happen to be rising up against (whether they are terrorist, crazy groups of people, etc) so i cant see how that's a good solution. And that's the main point that I've been trying to point out, it seems like no matter what we or anyone else does, some of these problems are never going to end, there is no solution, ESPECIALLY in some of these peoples eyes (those with the problem). like the palestine / isreali conflict for example... it seems to me (although im not highly informed on the situation as yall know) that both sides think that they are entitled to land or something else, (once again i'm not positive on that) and will never agree on a "solution" to end all the violence and what have you. That is normally when i come out with my "comical relief" that is kind of retarded and stupid. Because the way i see it, these people are so stubborn and set in their ways, that it's like they enjoy fighting and killing one another... I mean, I would think / hope that they'd be smart enough to know that there is only so much land to fight over, and I dont care who pushed who off of the land, or what was lost or gained to the other side, they need to as a whole come up with a solution to give some land back, or draw a final line in the land, divide it up as best they can that is fair, AND BE DONE WITH IT. It boggles my mind how they act like they want every inch of land ever taken from them back, which as far as im concerned, it seems like they're never going to get back anyways, I don't see why they'd continue fighting an endless battle, rather than just acknowledging its a fucked up situation that they lost their land and all, but it would be better to get SOME land back, and hopefully agree upon something PEACEFULLY. that's where i get frusterated with matters and seem to spit out my retardisms which I know aggrivate others that are trying to stay on topic, but it just frusterates me and at that point i aim for comic relief. which i apoligize for now, but that's my reasoning for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.HollaBack Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Originally posted by !@#$% uhhh....there are other exemples.. should we really get into all that? haiti? or what of our ignorance of what is going on in the Congo RIGHT NOW??? what of democracy for the people of somalia?? (who were backed by al-qaeda for real, not just for lies) why do some nations get bombed and abandoned, others ignored altogether? why is ther no consistency in american policy for the rest of the world to look to? what nations consider is friendly? you named a bunch of other countries that are having problems to correct? are you saying that we should help them to? because i thought you wanted to pull out of the countries that we are in now? I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.HollaBack Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 ps- !@#$% is this the book you mentioned above: http://a1204.g.akamai.net/7/1204/1401/03122214011/images.barnesandnoble.com/images/7220000/7222393.jpg'> I plan on getting it, the other one you recommended, and the one that grasshoppa is reading as well. /going to get -somewhat- informed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 thats the book.. it's very educational, a tough read, thick with info and historical data. my point is that their is no consistency to u.s. foreign policy. peoples who are truly beaten down, countries where genocide is taking place now, we are not helping them.. but we decided to 'help' iraq.. the time for that long ago, maybe when WE installed saddam hussein in the 70's.. bullshit. on top of bullshit, it sucks. we weren't helping iraq. bush wanted revenge and cheap oil. it was a mistake. we can't leave now, the place is in chaos. but places where humans are desperate for u.s. help, like africa, are ignored (because they don't have resources we need cheap) i'm sick of our hypocrisy.. i hate the imperialist doctrine. it needs to end. i'm down to help those that need and want it.. we've got so much money. but the battles we fight are not to antion build or improve quality of life. that is why we are CREATING HATRED and thus, more terrorism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.HollaBack Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 Originally posted by !@#$% thats the book.. it's very educational, a tough read, thick with info and historical data. my point is that their is no consistency to u.s. foreign policy. peoples who are truly beaten down, countries where genocide is taking place now, we are not helping them.. but we decided to 'help' iraq.. first off, i got that book, and the one grasshoppa recommended or is reading rather. They are really big books (for me especially) going to take months on end to read them, but im motivated now. I'm going to come back in here as an educated nut shortly... ;) :smiles: about "helping" iraq... you act like we just up and decided that we'd go over there and start helping them... we're over there "helping them" if thats what you want to call it, because we brought a war to them... the helping part is from the aftermath of the war, its not like we're just over there lending a helping hand. those other countries that you mentioned that need our help... sure thats true and it would be nice to help everyone, but we didn't cause their problems. (we might have, i dont know, but im saying there is a difference between helping them and helping iraq, since we brought another war to iraq). ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 yes, but why did we go to war in the first place? that was what i was referring to when i said we 'helped' them. i say that sarcastically, we have not helped them, we blew their infrastructure to bits to accomplish a goal WE wanted. that's the difference. we decided what was best for iraq, then blew the fuck out of it, now we are sort of rebuilding, but so much is fucked, so many terrorists have flooded in there, not a whole lot is being effectively accomplished.. people in those other countries, they are begging us for help, and we are standing by and doing nothing because why? they have nothing to offer us. that's the ONLY reason we battled hussein..to accomplish bush's vengeance, and lust for cheap oil... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 a country we are helping, that also wants our help, is israel. too bad they are using our help to crush the opposition with force israel engages in terrorist acts too. but we continue to aid them..it's disgusting. our foreign policy is totally fucked. read killing hope too. it's an eye popper. www.killinghope.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.HollaBack Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 gotcha. well personally, im all for cheap oil. hehe. another thing i dont understand about this oil contreversy is, people act like bush is going to make a billion dollars off it even if he did control it. which to me seems silly. first off he'd be assasinated if that was true (that he was getting super rich off the oil) and two i dont think it could legally go down that way anyways. i was talking about this with that islamic friend of ours, and i dont see why everyone (other countries) is so up in arms about us possibly controlling the iraqi oil fields. from what he said, the iraqi people dont really care who is running the operation, because no matter what the oil is going to be sold to others no matter who is in charge. i think he said something about the only thing they want out of it is some say in the matter, or i froget exactly what he said, but it wasn't to much to ask for im sure. But the way I see it, if we were in charge of the oil fields, and regulating good oil prices for everyone (other countries included) not only would the operation be ran smoothly by good people who know what they are doing (that being us) and if we did it right, and maybe even cut some countries some slack / dicounts for the oil... it would improve our relationships with them. what do you think? also, i know we've blown a lot of shit up over there, and the people are in tons of turmoil, but i hope that one day things will get back in order, and this shit will be for the better, and i'm betting that they'll be better off than before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 what gives us the right to go into another country and take over their natural resources?? just because we think we're better?! who the fuck do we think we are!? that's retarded. what if europe stomped wisconsin because they felt france deserved to regulate the cheese industry? ridiculous i know, but so is a war for oil. the iraqi DO care about their natural resources. this is the wealth of their country. don't be so naive. to think that muslim iraqis would be ok with modern western christian power taking their industry over. what about OPEC??? they regulate oil or do you just think it would be cool if the u.s. controlled everything, and we'd all get along... where do you think al-qaeda came from? ****YO..this is getting off topic. there's already a ton of threads about shit like this.. you should bump a few if you wanna keep talking about iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villain Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Whoo... !@#$% you've been talking up a storm! Good job! Though I'd say you take it a lil easier on tease, I seriously think he is trying to honestly understand these issues but granted he's still got some fucked up ideas. Right, why not bump some of these other threads on iraq? Seems like people just start flaming outta nowhere and we already got the answers down pat. I think they just wait for the sun to go down or something so they can change into werewolves.... And now on to address kabar.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TEARZ Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Originally posted by !@#$% what if europe stomped wisconsin because they felt france deserved to regulate the cheese industry? now THAT would be a justified war. ;) hilarious. i'm impressed with the tease/!@#$% conversation... good job tease for thinking, good job !@#$% for sticking with the dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26SidedCube Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Not to interrupt with useless shit :lick:... But damn... Tease flexing that refined shit. Rock on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Originally posted by grasshoppa tease is only asking you bner to give your proposal for resolution. 4000 some odd posts and you don't have the time? pffft. blahblahblah. thanks for pointing that out. i honestly do not have time to e-spar with you. i've done my fair share, ask kabar. or any of the MIA pro war chumps that used to come here. funny how they disappeared. i'm kinda curious why the onus is on myself and others to delineate some of the hugely obvious problems with the 'war on terror' pt2. i'm glad you're reading zinn though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villain Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Re: BROWNer Kabar, kabar, kabar.... I have always respected your opinions alot, but this is the worst, most uninformed, prejudiced rant I've ever heard you say... and quite frankly I am dissappointed, like when Kobe is pulled up on rape charges. Originally posted by KaBar2 Eleven million Spaniards marched in the streets to demand that Spain pull out their 1,100 soldiers, is that correct? Those eleven million Spanish citizens should have been mobbing the recruiting offices of the Spanish Army, demanding to be sent to Iraq. Like that would ever happen. Terrorists like Al Quaeda want one thing and one thing only: POWER. They want control, over the Muslims in their own countries, and over as much of the western world as they can get. When you see the word Islamist, you should be thinking "Nazi." They will only get worse and worse, with each victory like the Spanish elections. They will never produce a democratic society that recognizes the rights of religious minorities, of women, of any of the things that 99.99% of the people on this board hold dear. Drinking alcohol of any type is enough to get you beaten with fan belts (Afghanistan under the Taliban), possession of a TV or a VCR gets you arrested and held without trial. Adultery results in prison, if you're lucky. Hell, in Saudi Arabia, they EXECUTED A SAUDI PRINCESS (a member of the Royal family, no less!) with a pistol shot, then beheaded her, for trying to run away with her Saudi boyfriend. The boyfriend was beheaded in a public execution, cold turkey. If you steal something, they cut off your hand. What do you suppose you'd get for grafitti? Rack a can of paint--CHOP. Well Kabar we are all well aware of the extreme forms of government that exist(ed) in the middle east. These ideas are given far more attention than they are probably worth because it has become an instrument of justifying our own questionable behavior. WE here in America can get a minimum sentence of 7 years in violent, drug ridden prisons for grand theft. It doesn't seem so far away from chopping hands off. Royal families the WORLD over are very, very picky about their interloping. Just look at Romeo and Juliet for crying out loud. Oh so I can't drink alchohol? Oh no! I would honestly rather be smoking hashish, and that is illegal here. Naziism and Terrorism. Both dreaded isms. So is capitalism by the way. You have failed to acknowledge the good things in the middle east. Turkey, Jordan, etc... But shit happens, like the coup in Iraq when Saddam took power with CIA backing.... Iraq was on it's way to becoming an oasis of peace in the middle east. Shit happens, like the assassination of Sadat. It just takes a real asshole to make shit happen. I'm afraid your words have made all muslims look bad. LET'S NOT FORGET WE PUT AL QUEDA IN POWER! Precisely because they are the badasses that they are. If you would look at the other threads on these subjects you would see our intimate relations with them up until fairly recent times. What the fuck is wrong with you guys? If these motherfuckers were to somehow take over the U.S., you people would be the very first ones to face their firing squads. All democratic nations should be pouring troops into Iraq and Afghanistan, not cowering because of one lousy train bombing. Hell, the Nazis levelled half of London, killing thousands, and the Brits came swarming out of there like a hornet's nest (armed with a shitload American rifles, mind you.) The radical Islamists hate everything about western culture. They will never be mollified. Given the chance, they would be overjoyed to see Spain enslaved under Sharia, just as it was hundreds of years ago. We either erradicate them now, while they are relatively weak, or we fight a real war with them twenty or thirty years from now. Personally, I think we should pour a serious, no-holds-barred effort into eliminating their movement completely. The argument that by killing a few of them now we create more terrorists is a fallacy. Those people would have eventually become terrorists anyway. If they announce now, that just means we have a chance of getting them now. I do not think we should release captured terrorists anytime soon, but I DO believe we should publicize the shitty conditions in which they will be held for years. Anybody we catch twice gets "life without parole in a Guantanamo dog cage," in the custody of the U.S. Marines. No Paradise for you , baby, just growing old day after day in Camp X-Ray. You cannot confront a faceless enemy! It is precisely why they fight like this because they cannot muster a direct confrontation! All we are doing by rolling the entire military over there and razing all hell is radicalising moderate (and probably even pacifists!) muslims. Put yourself in THEIR shoes for the love of god! Imagine that the west texas militia carried out a bombing attack in well... lets say Pakistan. Then pakistan flys hundreds of sorties over texas daily bombing the ever loving god out of everything, then sends in a wave of tanks and ground forces to fuck shit up even more.... then they leave texas a fucking ruins and imposes sanctions upon them which starves a million children in texas... and every once in a while you have cruise missles flying the fuck out of nowhere and blowing shit up and on the forth of july some crazy raghead in office gets his jollies by shooting more cruise missles at texas in some sadistic celebration. Then some other motherfucker bombs pakistan for being a bunch of punks and after fucking them up they decide to declare war on TEXAS again! Then it's essentially the same thing all over a fuckin gain. So how the fuck would YOU feel!?! If people spain doesn't want to support the united states in doing this, then good for them. They were probably muscled into it in the first place. Terrorists held prisoner should be subjected to intense, unrelenting re-education. Their guards should be 50-50 male and female NCO's, commanded by female Marine officers. They should be forced to obey women in command, since they hate women so much. (Marines obey their officers, regardless of the officer's gender.) The United States should stop fucking around and get serious about rebuilding Iraq. The loss of 500 or 600 soldiers (or for that matter 5,000 or 6,000) is TRIFLING compared to past wars. We lost 3,000 Marines the first day during the invasion of Okinawa. The Civil War cost us millions of soldiers. It was worth it. Wars are waged by soldiers. Waging war is dangerous and everybody knows it. The problem with Iraq is that we need about ten times as many soldiers there as we have, to crush the resistance with overwhelming numbers. The way things are now, they are nickle and diming us because we do not genuinely control the battlefield. You are right about we should be getting on the ball in rebuilding Iraq, but we don't need more and more troops over there. This is not how guerilla war is fought. Guerilla war is shoot, move, communicate.... it requires agility and intelligence. Not brute force. The sheer amount of violence, civilian casualties, and collateral damage and certainly radicalized more than we had faced in the beginning. And besides that our troops are stretched to the absolute limits, taxed, tired and getting very angry. They see mercy as weakness. It is better, in the Middle East, to be hated and feared, than hated and held in contempt. You guys are always talking about "gangsta this" and "gangsta that." Well, invading Iraq is REALLY gangsta, and not some two-bit neighborhood thug with a cheap nine millimeter either. All the whining should come to a halt and the U.S. should GO GET THESE TRAIN-BOMBING COWARDS WHERE THEY LIVE. Oh, wait. We're already doing that. More generalizations.... gangsta? Writers have more than a few differences with gang taggers. OH KABAR YOU ARE SO BADASS YOU SHOVED YOUR MASSIVE COCK INTO THAT SHITHOLE SANDBOX AND IT STARTED GUSHING AN ORGY OF OIL! YOU ARE SO COOL MAN! God I can't beleive you said this piece of trash.... Nothing but a vapid diatribe justifying nothing but your own insane desires.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villain Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 Originally posted by BROWNer blahblahblah. thanks for pointing that out. i honestly do not have time to e-spar with you. i've done my fair share, ask kabar. or any of the MIA pro war chumps that used to come here. funny how they disappeared. i'm kinda curious why the onus is on myself and others to delineate some of the hugely obvious problems with the 'war on terror' pt2. i'm glad you're reading zinn though. Yeah who is this grasshoppa cheerleader!?! Shut the fuck up herb.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.