TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- The DJ El Kay Dee War threads all in one
Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]

not using infantry? gosh those 6 US combat casualties must have dropped dead spontaneously guess i imagined seeing all those tanks too.

god u people are so dumb.

i know its 'cool' to be anti-war, but take a look at what you're actually saying and evaluate its merits.

hmm whats that smell.....

BULLSHIT.

*leaves thread to the idiots*

yeah, DJ El Kay Dee, that was a pretty stupid post.
In ALL aspects.

Break the cycle. No to war. Peace in this forum.

quote:

Originally posted by Eugene yeah, DJ El Kay Dee, that was a pretty stupid post. In ALL aspects.

BUSH DESERVES TO DIE

the us launced a missle towards iran
iran has nothing to do with it
iran and united states dont like each other
i doubt iran will let this pass

quote:

Originally posted by RedLunatik BUSH DESERVES TO DIE the us launced a missle towards iran iran has nothing to do with it iran and united states dont like each other i doubt iran will let this pass

that's what happens when you become a lunatik and your eyes are glazed as in the picture.

quote:

Originally posted by RedLunatik BUSH DESERVES TO DIE the us launced a missle towards iran iran has nothing to do with it iran and united states dont like each other i doubt iran will let this pass

Iran? since when was iran in this war? lay off the crack pipe...maybe tahts you in your sig when you're on crack

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee if all they wanted was a regime change, theres something called special ops... there would be death of only the ones they want to get rid of. and if their combat methods are tohave minimal loss of life, justify 100+ injured Iraqis and about 15 dead??

you're a fucking moron...yeah tehy do want a regime change so SPECIAL OPS ARE EMPLOYED in the war...they're used for retreaving information and working with other coalition forces as well

their combat method is a psychological one as they're trying to give shock value to the Iraqi regime by bombing specific sites not directly targeting residences of regime officials

in every war there will always be accidents and innocent civilian deaths...nobody's perfect...you're not going to avoid casualties so get over it...enough with your disillusional posts already

quote:

Originally posted by TuanAnh213 Iran? since when was iran in this war? lay off the crack pipe...maybe tahts you in your sig when you're on crack

haha watch the news idiot
theyre not in the war
but i guess bush wants more people dead since more of iraq has surrendered

that a us missle accidently launced to iran

quote:

Originally posted by Dom for fucks sake,wake up and smell reality! They are not DESTROYING BAGHDAD. They are hitting targets relevant to the Iraqi war machine, and the evil regime that runs it. They are using the methods of combat which ensure minimum loss of life, what the fuck are u talking bout 'non-combating'? do u think they are going to risk lives on purpose? The tactics being used are aimed at one thing, finishing the war as soon as possible, which will mean less deaths all round. Please, get a grip.

just like what they say in the news, etc... noone is gonna get hurt, minimal loss of life... blah blah blah

you probably don't realize how the people in that country suffer... living in fear, having to leave their homes and hide...

quote:

Originally posted by SportTrance I know of monkeys that can hold up a protest sign and make the peace sign with their hand. Unfortunately, monkeys dont have any solutions either.

And I know a monkey called SportTrance who whines about why people are sharing anti-war signs. As some1 above said, this thread is about signs. NOT solutions. If you wanna talk about solutions, open a new one, and lets discuss it there...

Yeah...why dont they make this war fair? I mean...Iraq is supposed to have 1,000,000 people in their military. The US only has 250,000 there. That's not fair at all. The US should bring over 750,000 more. Those cheating Iraqi's. *catch the sarcasm*

First off I dont want sass cause I'm a Canadian. Secondly, you can not solve anything world wide without violence. It sounds bleak and stupid but its true. Hitler was goin crazy tryin to take over the world, people asked him to stop and what it do? Jack shit. Saddam was attacking people in the gulf war, he was asked to stop, what it do? Jack shit. You cant control people in your own country without violence how do you expect to control other countries? War sucks, but sometimes you have to go to war to do whats best for the rest of the world. And you're Americans, what do you care? No one can beat your army, sit back and wait for it to unfold cause its too late to stop now. You cant lose, dont even worry about it.

I COMBINED THE THREADS, LIVE WITH IT OR I WILL DELETE THEM ALL !

Re: Re: Re: The immense cowardness in the so-called war

quote:

Originally posted by DJ El Kay Dee indeed...yet it was refered to as a "show" and meant to be "shocking and awesome" and if its not on equal strengths its basically proving the big bully theory

If you believe that then stick up for Hitler, he had the whole world after him. He'd have beat em all if he had to fight them one on one too. But you're wrong. War means one country fights another, winner is the one who wins. Fuck who has more people, you're thinking of starcraft not war.

I tell you one thing I think a lot of people here should shut the fuck up. No matter how much you whine and moan it ain't going to fucking change anything. All these protest were ok before yes people should have freedom of speech however we're at fucking war, don't these sad little fuckwits realise that the police have better things to do then follow them about watching them, when a terrorist could quite easily carry out an attack. But yet everyones too fucking selfish to notice this sort of shit, If a member of my family or a friend of mine died in a terrorist attack, because the cops were watching one of these protests, I'd quite happily walk down to the protest open fire on the crowd, and throw a couple of petrol bombs in there for good measure because its not fucking on.

And yes bloodwise I'm mostly Irish however my fathers British and I'm born in the Uk. So I will support the troops fighting over there, and when they come back they deserve a heroes welcome, nothing like how people acted towards Vietnam vets.

True calla.

It's like me, my mother's side is American and I support the Americans because of my heritage. Do I agree completely with the war, that's another matter but I have much respect for troops that are willing to lay down their lives for their country, now I know ppl will argue that the war is needless.

The war is not needless.

I dont like war, but I think this war is called for.

And I think Canada should be ashamed that they are not supporting it. What did I hear today, 70% of canadians support the prime minister's descision? Ridiculous.

quote:

Originally posted by fastmp3 and fuck the british puppies

Come to England..........try us out in the flesh. Twat.

quote:

Originally posted by SportTrance 1. You've been accused of having weapons of mass destruction and you have denied having any of them. The UN has does a number of inspections, and you do not comply completely. (why? who knows). 2. The US declares war on you. 3. You continue telling your people and the world you have no (or no longer) have weapons of mass destruction, and that the US is a war mongering greedy bully and should be fought against. Two choices. A. Would it be wiser to use those weapons of mass destruction to defeat your enemy and become an official visible liar to the entire world? (meaning, the UN and nations would agree, that the US was correct, and possibly join in the conflict) B. or would it be smarter to secretly destroy the weapons of mass destruction, and die with "dignity", knowing you possibly will never be proved of having such weapons, and in turn making the "war mongering bully" United States look like a fool to the entire world for being so sure of Iraq having such weapons. The right answer is B. By choosing A, he would prove the United States was correct, and I can assure you, several many more nations would jump in and support the take out. He would just be hurting himself. War tactics man, war tactics.

Man, this "SportTrance" guy never stops. At first he seemed to have a somewhat decent arguement but this is nothing but repetition and speculation I am afraid. Ill break it down for you SportTrance.. really simple here

A. We are not invading Iraq because they are a percieved threat (this war should be enough to convince you otherwise). We are also not invading Iraq because we are tired of Saddam Husseins "tyranny".. (read: A LOT OF OTHER COUNTRIES STILL HAVE DICTATORSHIPS or are "COMMIES" or otherwise non-democratic forms of government, (read: China for a good starter buddy, or how about North Korea)??, they just dont also happen to be sitting on the second largest oil reserves in the WORLD or happen to be complete PUSHOVERS (after years of UN weapon inspections stripping the Iraqis of what little weaponry they had). I don't give a fuck if you say we only know 1/4th of the picture, that may be true, but you only know 1/4th too buddy, so basically you are making an IRRATIONAL judgement because somebody 'higher up' obviously is looking out for american (or iraqi) civilian interest, thats how its supposed to work , but dream on.. you said it yourself, this world is not "Ideal".

B. It is only logical to assume that their is other "motives" behind this war. The *glaringly* obvious one, is oil.

C. The fact that the US military is trying to make this war look humanitarian with it's surrender conditions and such is nothing more than a cover... people are *still* dying even if it is less.

D. Your argument that Saddam Hussein is going to destroy those weapons to save face is absolutely fucking retarded and ill founded. IF SADDAM HUSSEIN even *HAD* those weapons and intended on destroying them wouldn't it have been *BETTER* to do it before the US declared war on him so he could 'supposedly' remain in power? *edit* You're little scenario doesn't take into the account Saddam is going to be dead come hell or highwater by the end of this war...

E. The US couldn't make its case before the UN(and in fact withdrew in the face of the veto). Iraq is being sentenced to death like a prisoner that was never given proper trial, that is the TRUTH.
(b). Their are *plenty* other ruthless "dictators" in the world, equally as horrible as Saddam Hussein and you don't see GWB campaigning for them to be brought to the ground, most of them a FAR more significant threat to US security than 'Saddam Hussein's regime'. So save me your "SEE YOU AGREE SADDAM IS RUTHLESS" because thats like a "duh".

F. If you can STILL support this war without refuting anything i just said above you are basically saying "Blood for Oil" is okay. Or you can insist that "peace" never solved anything. Either way, I hope that 5 cents you save on every gallon of gas justifies the 10,000 civilian lives that will be lost in this war (by the US intelligence's own estimate) and the countless others that will be wrecked.

quote:

Originally posted by Prototrance Come to England..........try us out in the flesh. Twat.

you knew by british puppies i meant blair and is pipi dogs ... no need to insult me

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Chrono The war is not needless. I dont like war, but I think this war is called for. And I think Canada should be ashamed that they are not supporting it. What did I hear today, 70% of canadians support the prime minister's descision? Ridiculous.

no you are ridiculous , why would they follow the us all the time ? WTF

Re: Re: Anti War TAs post here

quote:

Originally posted by beema

That's your 3rd post in this thread.

He knew it would turn into another argument when he posted it....

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.