|
Muslims are main perpetrators of terrorism (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Cyrus King |
The US does not conduct terrorism...it conducts STATE sponsored terrorism.
Why cant you numbskulls get this through your heads. |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
the poor kid is still regurgitating his program. terrorist training camp? from all the videos i've seen, it just looks like boot camp with a balance beam. you seem to think that i condone the acts of al-qaeda, while hating my country for fighting back. that's just not the case.
lol at yoepus for proclaiming that we have any form of an effective battle tactic. show me footage of the baghdad tinker tape parade and i'll shut up.
shame on them for not having billions in military spending to promote conventional warfare. i'm sorry i don't have my head in a hole regarding this issue, for i'm sure it's a lot more comfortable down there. image trying to fight a war in which your enemey is capable of striking you from thousands of miles away. all you have is a few guns and some makeshift bombs. pretty grim reality. now who are the cowards from that perspective?
this policy of ours is bull, and i suspect the bush team knows it. we're creating enemies at a faster rate than we're destroying them. no better way to involve ourselves in another 100 year war, which i suspect is what they want. a faceless enemy with no real way to destroy. it's a power-hungry maniacs wet dream. keep the populace in fear with the idea of the potential of another attack, and keep power indefinitly.
if someone wants to bomb me... em. i'll be back. at least i'm free from this mind trap your stuck in. |
|
|
| JM |
:toothless
hmm....yeah i think this is something that we all knew inside but weren't supposed to say...
>JM< |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
| uh-oh.. now i'm on the list:D |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
uh-oh.. now i'm on the list:D |
Join the club. ;) |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
The US does not conduct terrorism...it conducts STATE sponsored terrorism.
Why cant you numbskulls get this through your heads. |
Because we like to call that war ;) |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
Because we like to call that war ;) |
so do they.;) |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
so do they.;) |
so you're admitting their terrorism is state sponsored?:conf:
;)
edit: they're their what's the difference ?! |
|
|
| speedracer_mec |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
shame on them for not having billions in military spending to promote conventional warfare. i'm sorry i don't have my head in a hole regarding this issue, for i'm sure it's a lot more comfortable down there. image trying to fight a war in which your enemey is capable of striking you from thousands of miles away. all you have is a few guns and some makeshift bombs. pretty grim reality. now who are the cowards from that perspective?
this policy of ours is bull, and i suspect the bush team knows it. we're creating enemies at a faster rate than we're destroying them. no better way to involve ourselves in another 100 year war, which i suspect is what they want. a faceless enemy with no real way to destroy. it's a power-hungry maniacs wet dream. keep the populace in fear with the idea of the potential of another attack, and keep power indefinitly.
if someone wants to bomb me... em. i'll be back. at least i'm free from this mind trap your stuck in. |
So basically you are justifying these attacks on civilians because the terrorists have no means of technology/conventional means.:rolleyes:
Pretty sickening assumption.Oh well...thats your little brain at work.
But let me just say this,
My definition of a terrorist is someone who commits acts of violence against innocent civilians in an attempt to get what they want. By that definition, we Americans are definitely not terrorists. Have we tried forcing democracy on others? Yes, Vietnam and Iraq are two examples, one has failed and the other is still ongoing. Did we intentionally target innocent civilians, in my opinion, no.
We need to be careful though with our new strategy of 'democratization'. If we start forcing democracy on people who do not want it or are not ready for it, how is that democracy? It's not. Democracy has to happen by and from the people themselves. Our people wanted democracy, so we took it from England. Did we have help, of course, but ultimately, the American people wanted freedom and democracy so we made it happen.
Just because democracy has worked for us, doesn't mean it will work for all cultures. Many cultures do not encourage free thinking which results in a poor climate for democracy. Also, if we force democracy on other nations, that nations people will not look at it as a democracy, since it was imposed on them by another nation. I think both of these issues are in play in Iraq, which, in part, is why there is such resistance to the new government, even after Iraq's people have been freed from a tyrannical dictator.
And finally,
If the terrorists had conventional means/technology, I can almost gaurantee you they will use it on innocent civilians. No matter what they have or could have, they will target civilians. Whether it be a mom and child at a store or 1000 people; their technology gains will only increase the amount of civilian deaths. Its estimated that about 1million people were eliminated by Saddam's gasing. Mass graves can point to that estimation.
So pls dont sit here and justify attacks on civilians based on technology...it makes you look even more stupidier....than what you already are;) :eek: |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
roflmao:haha:
damn, i gotta go to work, i'll pick this little twerp apart tonight.:p |
|
|
| speedracer_mec |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
roflmao:haha:
damn, i gotta go to work, i'll pick this little twerp apart tonight.:p |
Im going to class too...so we can argue later ;) |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
okay, where were we?
| quote: | Originally posted by speedracer_mec
So basically you are justifying these attacks on civilians because the terrorists have no means of technology/conventional means.:rolleyes:
Pretty sickening assumption.Oh well...thats your little brain at work. |
i'm sorry you seem to confuse understanding tactics with condoning them. we live in turbulant times, but i'll save this for later.
| quote: | But let me just say this,
My definition of a terrorist is someone who commits acts of violence against innocent civilians in an attempt to get what they want. By that definition, we Americans are definitely not terrorists. Have we tried forcing democracy on others? Yes, Vietnam and Iraq are two examples, one has failed and the other is still ongoing. Did we intentionally target innocent civilians, in my opinion, no.
We need to be careful though with our new strategy of 'democratization'. If we start forcing democracy on people who do not want it or are not ready for it, how is that democracy? It's not. Democracy has to happen by and from the people themselves. Our people wanted democracy, so we took it from England. Did we have help, of course, but ultimately, the American people wanted freedom and democracy so we made it happen. |
I'm glad to hear that a small part of you is beginning to question the notion that we are in the right. that's the first step. The second step to this ongoing, never ending "twelve step" process to eye-opening is to acknowledge that terrorism, is in fact, the act of instilling terror on a given populace. the methodology is not the focal issue.
granted, it's what's been shoved in our faces for the past three years, so i can understand your resistance to the notion. we've experienced horrors that should not be dealt against innocents, and they seem to take advantage of our every weakness, when presented, but what choice would you take when dealing with the same scenario? If you lived in a society where throwing rocks was outlawed, but that was your only weapon to defend yourself... wouldn't you throw rocks when threatened? if you want to argue micro vs. macro, go to an evolution thread.
| quote: | | Just because democracy has worked for us, doesn't mean it will work for all cultures. Many cultures do not encourage free thinking which results in a poor climate for democracy. Also, if we force democracy on other nations, that nations people will not look at it as a democracy, since it was imposed on them by another nation. I think both of these issues are in play in Iraq, which, in part, is why there is such resistance to the new government, even after Iraq's people have been freed from a tyrannical dictator. |
well damn, that's inarguable
| quote: | And finally,
If the terrorists had conventional means/technology, I can almost gaurantee you they will use it on innocent civilians. No matter what they have or could have, they will target civilians. Whether it be a mom and child at a store or 1000 people; their technology gains will only increase the amount of civilian deaths. Its estimated that about 1million people were eliminated by Saddam's gasing. Mass graves can point to that estimation.
So pls dont sit here and justify attacks on civilians based on technology...it makes you look even more stupidier....than what you already are;) :eek: |
damn, i'm almost speechless to your final cling to your programming. to assume that these people would continue to take cheap shots at undefendable targets when presented with the ability to target strategic command points is like ignoring the pentagon attack in the wake on the world trade center atrocity. do you remember the third plane crash? just curious.
i'm sorry that your education has bought you no further than joe six pack's ability to view the world, but some of the best lessons in life are given outside of a formal classroom environment, so look up kid.:) |
|
|
|
|
