NationStates Jolt Archive

Osama Bin Laden, your time is short;
We'd rather you die, than come to court.
Why are you hiding if it was in God's name?
You're just a punk with a turban; a pathetic shame.



I have a question, about your theory and laws;
"How come you never die for the cause?"



Is it because you're a coward who counts on others?
Well, here in America, we stand by our brothers.


As is usual, you failed in your mission;
If you expected pure chaos, you can keep on wishing
Americans are now focused and stronger than ever;
Your death has become our next endeavor.



What you tried to kill, doesn't live in our walls;
It's not in buildings or shopping malls.

If all of our structures came crashing down;
It would still be there, safe and sound.

Because pride and courage can't be destroyed;
Even if the towers leave a deep void.



We'll band together and fill the holes
We'll bury our dead and bless their souls.



But then our energy will focus on you;
And you'll feel the wrath of the
Red, White and Blue.



So slither and hide like a snake in the grass;
Because America's coming to
kick your ass!!!

Stand by your brothers?
I suppose the poor americans aren't your brothers then. I mean it's just 1/8 of the entire population. Do the rich care about them?


And what Osama tried to kill is now dead. Where it once stood is now only a bloody remain.

So...... to show Osama Bin Laden that it is completely unacceptable to kill people... you want to kill him?

Hmm, maybe it makes sense.

Pssst... pride is a capital sin *cackle*

Stand by your brothers?
I suppose the poor americans aren't your brothers then. I mean it's just 1/8 of the entire population. Do the rich care about them?


And what Osama tried to kill is now dead. Where it once stood is now only a bloody remain.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Racculli, good post.

For the rest of you that are deciding to be asses, why not just stay out of this thread. This is not a day to heckle, joke, or be cynical ass-holes about what happened on 9/11 or the US's reaction.

Most of you seem to forget that on 9/11, our country showed the restraint and courage that most would not have. The world stood by with baited breath, waiting to see if we were about to unleash the hounds of war, and completely annihilate whatever target made itself visible first. So perhaps, instead of heckling us, joking at us, you should shut the hell up and mind your own business.

*recalls waiting for the first cruise missile to strike the cheering people in the Middle Eastern streets, and the infinite surprise of it not happening*

Racculli, good post.

For the rest of you that are deciding to be asses, why not just stay out of this thread. This is not a day to heckle, joke, or be cynical ass-holes about what happened on 9/11 or the US's reaction.

Most of you seem to forget that on 9/11, our country showed the restraint and courage that most would not have. The world stood by with baited breath, waiting to see if we were about to unleash the hounds of war, and completely annihilate whatever target made itself visible first. So perhaps, instead of heckling us, joking at us, you should shut the hell up and mind your own business.What do you mean?
I can't mention something like death, violence and war just because some man-made calendar tells you to cry over some dead people?
I don't know if you haven't discovered it yet, but your stupid country declared war on some other country because of some lame excuse. I have every right to critisize it whenever I wish to.

And the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq had nothing to do with your so called war-on-terror. You have caught nothing of value and I se no season why you should with the way you try to reorganize the world.

Racculli, good post.

For the rest of you that are deciding to be asses, why not just stay out of this thread. This is not a day to heckle, joke, or be cynical ass-holes about what happened on 9/11 or the US's reaction.

Most of you seem to forget that on 9/11, our country showed the restraint and courage that most would not have. The world stood by with baited breath, waiting to see if we were about to unleash the hounds of war, and completely annihilate whatever target made itself visible first. So perhaps, instead of heckling us, joking at us, you should shut the hell up and mind your own business.
Oh too bad, you already had the sympathies of the world. You abused them, you threw them away. You betrayed the world's goodwill by waging wars, killing *THOUSANDS* of innocent people. You lied to the world, you ignored the UN and I could probably go on and on about the many grave mistakes the US made during the last 3 years. When I see such hateful crap like the threadstarter posted, which is the cause for ever more terrorism in the world, then no thanks. You've had the sympathies of the world, no more. That you bring your own enemy upon yourself in your quest to kill Bin Laden seems to be something you ignore in your blind crusade for revenge - no matter the human cost.

Great Poem - and it's so true

Oh too bad, you already had the sympathies of the world. You abused them, you threw them away. You betrayed the world's goodwill by waging wars, killing *THOUSANDS* of innocent people. You lied to the world, you ignored the UN and I could probably go on and on about the many grave mistakes the US made during the last 3 years. When I see such hateful crap like the threadstarter posted, which is the cause for ever more terrorism in the world, then no thanks. You've had the sympathies of the world, no more. That you bring your own enemy upon yourself in your quest to kill Bin Laden seems to be something you ignore in your blind crusade for revenge - no matter the human cost.

Yes, those Talibs and Baathists were innocent people.

Your rhetoric is really getting thin. I'd rebut it but I have a wicked hangover.

What do you mean?
I can't mention something like death, violence and war just because some man-made calendar tells you to cry over some dead people?
I don't know if you haven't discovered it yet, but your stupid country declared war on some other country because of some lame excuse. I have every right to critisize it whenever I wish to.

And the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq had nothing to do with your so called war-on-terror. You have caught nothing of value and I se no season why you should with the way you try to reorganize the world.

First things first. Explain to me why Afghanistan should not have been liberated?

Let us mourn and remember the way we wish to, go harass someone else today. No man made calendar has told me to mourn, I was in Washington D.C. the day of 9/11/2001, I was 3 blocks from the Pentagon when it happened.

We won't forget 9/11, and we will always mourn our dead. I still set aside December 7th 1941 as an important day to remember and mourn the fallen as well.

I doubt that any of what I say will break through your thick, idiotic skull and that you'll let us remember as we please; but I forgot...it's us Americans who are the intolerant ones.

Reminds me of a quote I read as we were preparing to bomb an oil-rich nation back to the 19th Century:

"If love is blind, patriotism has lost all five senses"

If you feel like that, how do you think the ordinary Afghans, Iraqis, Bosnians, Vietnamese, much of Central Americans - feel?

Terrorism is the weapon of the poor. The technology difference is such that there will never be a "stand and fight" war between the west and the poor nations again - the only way the people who are being bombed / occupied / economically subjugated can fight back is through terrorism.

The three key demands of the peoples of the middle east at the end of the 90s were 1. the end of the occupation of Palestine and 2. the end of the American occupation of Saudi Arabia (through its military bases) and 3. the end of sanctions in Iraq.

If these demands had been heeded OBL, murdering bastard that he is, would not have popular support sufficient to carry out the 9/11 attacks.

There were three tragedies surrounding 9/11.

1. The violent occupation of Palestine (by Israel, through US support) and the death of up to (UN estimate) 1.5 millon innocent people in Iraq through economic sanctions.
2. The death of 3000 innocent people on 9/11.
3. The fact that the US, instead of taking stock, exacerbated the situation, and have attended to only one of the above demands by default - sanctions are now lifted because Iraq is now occupied.

And, whatever you think, OBL is not a coward - he's a multi-millionaire (if not billionaire) who could quite easily be kicking back in a palace somewhere. Hes not, because he's fighting for something he believes in. Just as you appear to be... I assume, from your "we're coming to get you" poem that you *are* in the US military?

*recalls waiting for the first cruise missile to strike the cheering people in the Middle Eastern streets, and the infinite surprise of it not happening*

The pictures of Palestinians celebrating in the streets which were transmitted on western TV as people celebrating the tragedy have since been proven to be stock footage that was years old.

First things first. Explain to me why Afghanistan should not have been liberated?
Oh, but I think it should have been liberated. However, the excuse was wrong.
I'd gladly liberate Iraq as well, but I wouldn't lie and say it's because Iraq is a threat to me.

Anyway, the american government was forced to invade Afghanistan because of the incident, but they didn't obtain any of the official goals.
They got a pipeline (the USA-appointed leader agreed to built one (surprise surprise)), but the terrorists had months to escape (which they probably did). TV gave away pleanty of false infomation on how close they were on catching their terrorists and they still claim they were close, but the entire mission was a faliure (considering the official goals only) based on another faliure (stopping the terrorist attack). The attack was just something the government was forced to do and then didn't do properly.

than why do you only cry beceause americans died?

(that was to the patriotic guy)

If you feel like that, how do you think the ordinary Afghans, Iraqis, Bosnians, Vietnamese, much of Central Americans - feel?

Do you speak for those people? No? Good, shut the fuck up.

Terrorism is the weapon of the poor. The technology difference is such that there will never be a "stand and fight" war between the west and the poor nations again - the only way the people who are being bombed / occupied / economically subjugated can fight back is through terrorism.

That explains why a large portion of Arab terrorists are rich and educated. Terrorism is not a weapon of the "poor", it's the use of non-discriminate violence to end force everyone else to accept some extremist goal.

The three key demands of the peoples of the middle east at the end of the 90s were 1. the end of the occupation of Palestine and 2. the end of the American occupation of Saudi Arabia (through its military bases) and 3. the end of sanctions in Iraq.

1. Palestine doesn't exist.
2. Saudi Arabia invited us to establish bases to protect itself against its neighbors.
3. The sanctions in Iraq were established and maintained by the UN.

If these demands had been heeded OBL, murdering bastard that he is, would not have popular support sufficient to carry out the 9/11 attacks.

That is pathetically naive.

There were three tragedies surrounding 9/11.

1. The violent occupation of Palestine (by Israel, through US support) and the death of up to (UN estimate) 1.5 millon innocent people in Iraq through economic sanctions.
2. The death of 3000 innocent people on 9/11.
3. The fact that the US, instead of taking stock, exacerbated the situation, and have attended to only one of the above demands by default - sanctions are now lifted because Iraq is now occupied.

1. "Palestine" - see above. As for the sanctions, the usual bullshit number tossed around by fuckwit leftists is 1 million, and the real reason those people are dead is because of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist goons, not because we refused to sell consumer goods to Iraq. Iraq was free to buy food and medicine, but the UN program doing that was so corrupt it ended up partnering with Saddam. Go figure.
2. Agreed.
3. The sanctions were lifted because the original aggressor has been removed from power.

And, whatever you think, OBL is not a coward - he's a multi-millionaire (if not billionaire) who could quite easily be kicking back in a palace somewhere. Hes not, because he's fighting for something he believes in. Just as you appear to be... I assume, from your "we're coming to get you" poem that you *are* in the US military?

You really need to get your head out of your ass because your ignorance is quite frigtening really.

First things first. Explain to me why Afghanistan should not have been liberated?

You can't be liberated from your own people - liberation in the context is to free from enemy occupation, so you cannot be liberated from your own government.

It may feel like a liberation (much the same as a democratic leader's failure to gain re-election may feel like liberation of sorts to us), but its not liberation.

The word has been abused by people who like to overthrow governments of sovereign countries. It doesn't matter how reprehensible they are / were, its not liberation.

Because I know alot of Americans. Most seem to forget that American does not just mean born here in this great country, but that those who live here and contribute to it's great success, all those that died in the Towers, the Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania....were Americans, whether they were of French descent, English descent, African Descent, Arab Descent (keeping the terrorists out of this classification)...I mourn American deaths, just as you mourn the deaths of your countrymen...or perhaps you don't.

Because I know alot of Americans. Most seem to forget that American does not just mean born here in this great country, but that those who live here and contribute to it's great success, all those that died in the Towers, the Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania....were Americans, whether they were of French descent, English descent, African Descent, Arab Descent (keeping the terrorists out of this classification)...I mourn American deaths, just as you mourn the deaths of your countrymen...or perhaps you don't.


but why dont you mourn for the iraqi's who were inosently murdered
and the afghans and the vietnamese...

Amen! I read this poem again even though I have gotten it in several emails in the last 3 years, but I was shocked to read the negative responses to it. Even non-Americans should at least show respect by keeping your comments to yourselves. As for the people who bask in the benefits of living free in the great United States of America, I am stupified when you criticize my brothers in arms while we protect your yellow backs.

Do you speak for those people? No? Good, shut the fuck up.



That explains why a large portion of Arab terrorists are rich and educated. Terrorism is not a weapon of the "poor", it's the use of non-discriminate violence to end force everyone else to accept some extremist goal.



1. Palestine doesn't exist.
2. Saudi Arabia invited us to establish bases to protect itself against its neighbors.
3. The sanctions in Iraq were established and maintained by the UN.



That is pathetically naive.



1. "Palestine" - see above. As for the sanctions, the usual bullshit number tossed around by fuckwit leftists is 1 million, and the real reason those people are dead is because of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist goons, not because we refused to sell consumer goods to Iraq. Iraq was free to buy food and medicine, but the UN program doing that was so corrupt it ended up partnering with Saddam. Go figure.
2. Agreed.
3. The sanctions were lifted because the original aggressor has been removed from power.



You really need to get your head out of your ass because your ignorance is quite frigtening really.
Is "Shut the fuck up", "That country doens't exist and therefore I will not accept your arguement" and "fuckwits made up that number" really your best defence?

Oh, but I think it should have been liberated. However, the excuse was wrong.
I'd gladly liberate Iraq as well, but I wouldn't lie and say it's because Iraq is a threat to me.

Anyway, the american government was forced to invade Afghanistan because of the incident, but they didn't obtain any of the official goals.
They got a pipeline (the USA-appointed leader agreed to built one (surprise surprise)), but the terrorists had months to escape (which they probably did). TV gave away pleanty of false infomation on how close they were on catching their terrorists and they still claim they were close, but the entire mission was a faliure (considering the official goals only) based on another faliure (stopping the terrorist attack). The attack was just something the government was forced to do and then didn't do properly.

You dolt. A private American company tried to work with the Talibs to build an oil pipeline, but their lobbying to the American government failed because we didn't even recognize the Taliban as the official rulers of Afghanistan. Only silly leftist conspirators would believe that we went into Afghanistan because the US government wanted an oil pipeline. That is FUCKING STUPID.

We've killed thousands of al-Qaeda and Talib terrorists in Afghanistan and you still crow about the fact that we didn't have a 100% capture rate. Makes me wonder if you're rooting for the terrorists.

We did succeed in denying aid and comfort to the terrorists (a stated goal) so they can't plan and train in comfort any more. And Afghanistan is holding elections soon, with over 90% of the electorate registered. But I guess none of those achievements count for anything because we failed to capture al-Qaeda's top brass. Right?

We did succeed in denying aid and comfort to the terrorists (a stated goal) so they can't plan and train in comfort any more. And Afghanistan is holding elections soon, with over 90% of the electorate registered. But I guess none of those achievements count for anything because we failed to capture al-Qaeda's top brass. Right?
Do you seriously mean thet terrorists can no longer plan and train their members?
So I suppose the attack in Spain was planned before Afghanistan was invaded?

but why dont you mourn for the iraqi's who were inosently murdered
and the afghans and the vietnamese...

If you mean the Iraqi's who were murdered by Saddam, I realize it's a sad thing to have happened and I am fortunate enough to not ever know what that's like, to not know the fear that the Iraqi people possessed.

If you mean the Afghan's killed by the war-lords and the al-qaeda controlled government, yes sad...but again I don't know the fear that they possessed.

I know not their fear, but I support their liberation, perhaps that's my way of mourning their deaths. I may not mourn for their deaths like I mourn for my countrymen's deaths, but I support liberating them as we have.

Is "Shut the fuck up", "That country doens't exist and therefore I will not accept your arguement" and "fuckwits made up that number" really your best defence?

No, they were just satisfying. I made plenty of legitimate arguments without cussing, you just didn't bother reading them.

As for the two things you mentioned, they have a point because:

1. You don't speak for any of the nationals that you mentioned. My Vietnamese grandfather happens to be glad that the US intervened there.

2. The "one million casualties in Iraq due to economic sanctions" canard has been debunked long ago. Many of those casualties were caused by Saddam's brutal suppression of Shiite and Kurdsh rebellions after Gulf I (and I will never forgive Bush I for abandoning them), and then by Saddam's use of oil-for-food as a personal income source.

Racculli, good post.

For the rest of you that are deciding to be asses, why not just stay out of this thread. This is not a day to heckle, joke, or be cynical ass-holes about what happened on 9/11 or the US's reaction.

Most of you seem to forget that on 9/11, our country showed the restraint and courage that most would not have. The world stood by with baited breath, waiting to see if we were about to unleash the hounds of war, and completely annihilate whatever target made itself visible first. So perhaps, instead of heckling us, joking at us, you should shut the hell up and mind your own business.
Our restraint was a mistake. We should have responded with nuclear strikes. We should have promised more if such acts were repeated.

You dolt. A private American company tried to work with the Talibs to build an oil pipeline, but their lobbying to the American government failed because we didn't even recognize the Taliban as the official rulers of Afghanistan. Only silly leftist conspirators would believe that we went into Afghanistan because the US government wanted an oil pipeline. That is FUCKING STUPID.

We've killed thousands of al-Qaeda and Talib terrorists in Afghanistan and you still crow about the fact that we didn't have a 100% capture rate. Makes me wonder if you're rooting for the terrorists.

We did succeed in denying aid and comfort to the terrorists (a stated goal) so they can't plan and train in comfort any more. And Afghanistan is holding elections soon, with over 90% of the electorate registered. But I guess none of those achievements count for anything because we failed to capture al-Qaeda's top brass. Right?


Pan-Arab Israel, they're sucking in Michael Moore's movie Farenheit 911. I doubt they'll ever understand, or want to understand, your points or mine.

No, they were just satisfying. I made plenty of legitimate arguments without cussing, you just didn't bother reading them.

As for the two things you mentioned, they have a point because:

1. You don't speak for any of the nationals that you mentioned. My Vietnamese grandfather happens to be glad that the US intervened there.

2. The "one million casualties in Iraq due to economic sanctions" canard has been debunked long ago. Many of those casualties were caused by Saddam's brutal suppression of Shiite and Kurdsh rebellions after Gulf I (and I will never forgive Bush I for abandoning them), and then by Saddam's use of oil-for-food as a personal income source.

but the majority of the people supported vietcong...
democracy...

That explains why a large portion of Arab terrorists are rich and educated.


Erm, your evidence?


Terrorism is not a weapon of the "poor", it's the use of non-discriminate violence to end force everyone else to accept some extremist goal.


Terrorism is the use of force to achieve a political goal. Which covers invasions of sovereign nations to depose governments, as well as the bombing of innocents by individuals.

If the Palestinians decided to declare war on the US and Israel, what would happen?.... that is why they don't. They fight back the only way they can.




1. Palestine doesn't exist.


Yes, it does. Its currently better known as "The Occupied Territories". Which, I believe, is the problem.



2. Saudi Arabia invited us to establish bases to protect itself against its neighbors.


The House of Saud invited you, not the Saudi people. And they don't like it.


3. The sanctions in Iraq were established and maintained by the UN.


Primarily, the harshest sanctions and delays in the process were caused by US and UK.

Whether you like it or not, this is OBLs agenda, and this is why he has support from the muslim & arab populace.



1. "Palestine" - see above. As for the sanctions, the usual bullshit number tossed around by fuckwit leftists is 1 million, and the real reason those people are dead is because of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist goons, not because we refused to sell consumer goods to Iraq. Iraq was free to buy food and medicine, but the UN program doing that was so corrupt it ended up partnering with Saddam. Go figure.


Check your facts. Several of the key member of UN staff in Iraq resigned because of the effect the UN sanctions, as enforced by the US and UK, were having on the Iraqi populace. One called it genocide.


You really need to get your head out of your ass because your ignorance is quite frigtening really.

I checked, and my head is not in my ass. Where is yours? In the sand?

The three key demands of the peoples of the middle east at the end of the 90s were 1. the end of the occupation of Palestine and 2. the end of the American occupation of Saudi Arabia (through its military bases) and 3. the end of sanctions in Iraq.

It amazes me how much bull$hit people will believe when they want to. Those 3 'demands of the peoples' were demands of they power-hungry leaders, and did not reflect the wishes of the 'peoples' at all. The middle east has proven for the last 2,000 years they they cannot take care of themselves and are in no position to make demands.

And as for the US government only going into Iraq because Bush promised them an oil pipeline is complete bull$hit. The 'government' wouldn't benefit a great deal from the pipeline, private industry would. And if you will recall, American oil companies had mutually beneficial agreements with the middle eastern companies - before Iraq's military siezed our facilities and equipment and booted our citizens that were working at them.

Do you seriously mean thet terrorists can no longer plan and train their members?

Yeah they can. In some dingy bombed out cave with SF looking for them.

So I suppose the attack in Spain was planned before Afghanistan was invaded?

It was planned before Gulf II and before Spain had a role in the coalition by a Moroccan/Algerian al-Qaeda cell.

1. You don't speak for any of the nationals that you mentioned. My Vietnamese grandfather happens to be glad that the US intervened there.
You mean a vietnamese citizen who was not murdered by bullets, explosive or napalm fires? Okay, I guess the rest of them must mean exactly the same since this one guy thinks that way. I'm terribly sorry that I did not see how happy the Vietnamese people were after the war. Perhaps we should just start a world war and then everybody would be happy.

but the majority of the people supported vietcong...
democracy...

You're a fucking idiot. The Vietcong guerillas were viewed as dangerous insurgents by the South and untrustworthy renegades by the North. As soon as the war ended the guerillas were sent to "re-education camps" along with all the people in South Vietnam.

You mean a vietnamese citizen who was not murdered by bullets, explosive or napalm fires? Okay, I guess the rest of them must mean exactly the same since this one guy thinks that way. I'm terribly sorry that I did not see how happy the Vietnamese people were after the war. Perhaps we should just start a world war and then everybody would be happy.

You know a bunch of reports and independent studies have shown that those kinds of atrocities, while committed in Vietnam, were not a mainstream item and were not as common place as some would have you believe.

It was planned before Gulf II and before Spain had a role in the coalition by a Moroccan/Algerian al-Qaeda cell.
You just wont admit that people can hide. Just like they did in USA before the attack there. They were trained in USA, but still you failed to see them?
People can train whereever they want to, in whatever country they'd like to. Terrorists don't wear little black hats.

You mean a vietnamese citizen who was not murdered by bullets, explosive or napalm fires? Okay, I guess the rest of them must mean exactly the same since this one guy thinks that way. I'm terribly sorry that I did not see how happy the Vietnamese people were after the war. Perhaps we should just start a world war and then everybody would be happy.

First of all, this is NOT Vietnam. Second, the American military did not go around wiping out villages of innocent civilians. Perhaps if you are so obsessed with television you should watch the factual History channel more and the whining liberal Hollywood Against America Presents: Vietnam Marathon less.

If America had done such horrible wrongs in trying to keep communism (look at the effect it is STILL having on Russia) from Vietnam, why did so many people move here, to the land of opportunity. I know I hate Afganistan, and I'm damn sure not moving there.

It amazes me how much bull$hit people will believe when they want to. Those 3 'demands of the peoples' were demands of they power-hungry leaders, and did not reflect the wishes of the 'peoples' at all. The middle east has proven for the last 2,000 years they they cannot take care of themselves and are in no position to make demands.

These are the aims as stated by OBL himself. The ones which the terrorists were signed up to.


And as for the US government only going into Iraq because Bush promised them an oil pipeline is complete bull$hit. The 'government' wouldn't benefit a great deal from the pipeline, private industry would. And if you will recall, American oil companies had mutually beneficial agreements with the middle eastern companies - before Iraq's military siezed our facilities and equipment and booted our citizens that were working at them.

I don't actually believe the we (the UK) and the US went in for the oil. I'm sure that the Bush administration genuinely did believe that the Iraqis would come out waving flags when the troops arrived and sign up for democracy, US style.

Unfortunately, that proved to be as naive as the Soviets who thought that taking over half of Europe would liberate the inhabitants from their capitalist oppressors and turn them into communists, while inspiring the rest of the continent to revolt.

First of all, this is NOT Vietnam. Second, the American military did not go around wiping out villages of innocent civilians. Perhaps if you are so obsessed with television you should watch the factual History channel more and the whining liberal Hollywood Against America Presents: Vietnam Marathon less.

If America had done such horrible wrongs in trying to keep communism (look at the effect it is STILL having on Russia) from Vietnam, why did so many people move here, to the land of opportunity. I know I hate Afganistan, and I'm damn sure not moving there.
Can you hate a country?
It's just a piece of dirt with a flag and some border. It changes all the time. Does your hatred then change too?

Erm, your evidence?

Go read the profiles of the 9/11 hijackers (Mohammed Atta is a good example). Then you look at people like Osama, KSM, Al-Zawahiri, all the leaders of Hezbollah and the PLO, yeah, the masterminds aren't exactly poor.


Terrorism is the use of force to achieve a political goal. Which covers invasions of sovereign nations to depose governments, as well as the bombing of innocents by individuals.

If the Palestinians decided to declare war on the US and Israel, what would happen?.... that is why they don't. They fight back the only way they can.

Nice redefinition. Too bad it doesn't hold any water. By your moronic definition, our war against the Axis in WWII was terrorist. My definition works better.

Oh, the Palestinians fight all right. By murdering schoolchildren.

Yes, it does. Its currently better known as "The Occupied Territories". Which, I believe, is the problem.

No, Palestine is a myth created by Arabs to perpetuate another myth, the "right of return".

The House of Saud invited you, not the Saudi people. And they don't like it.

Yeah, whatever. That's the dumbest argument yet.

Primarily, the harshest sanctions and delays in the process were caused by US and UK.

Whether you like it or not, this is OBLs agenda, and this is why he has support from the muslim & arab populace.

So, what's your point? Do you think OBL would have any less support if the UN lifted the sanctions against Iraq?

Check your facts. Several of the key member of UN staff in Iraq resigned because of the effect the UN sanctions, as enforced by the US and UK, were having on the Iraqi populace. One called it genocide.

Probably because they were pissed over their cut in the oil-for-food scam. LOL! Don't you get it? The UN is useless, corrupt and complicit in many international disasters.


I checked, and my head is not in my ass. Where is yours? In the sand?

Hurting, actually. I drank too much.

You mean a vietnamese citizen who was not murdered by bullets, explosive or napalm fires? Okay, I guess the rest of them must mean exactly the same since this one guy thinks that way. I'm terribly sorry that I did not see how happy the Vietnamese people were after the war. Perhaps we should just start a world war and then everybody would be happy.

Damn, the Vietminh sure were brutal.

Honestly, it was a harsh war and both sides committed atrocities. But claming that the Vietnamese people were happy after the war? WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Tell that to the thousands sent to the highland gulags, the minority ethnicities massacred by the communist government, the boatloads of refugees struggling to flee that hellhole.

You really need to get your facts straight.

Damn, the Vietminh sure were brutal.

Honestly, it was a harsh war and both sides committed atrocities. But claming that the Vietnamese people were happy after the war? WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? Tell that to the thousands sent to the highland gulags, the minority ethnicities massacred by the communist government, the boatloads of refugees struggling to flee that hellhole.

You really need to get your facts straight.
I was sarcastic, dumbass.

You just wont admit that people can hide. Just like they did in USA before the attack there. They were trained in USA, but still you failed to see them?
People can train whereever they want to, in whatever country they'd like to. Terrorists don't wear little black hats.

Huh? No, all the 9/11 hijackers trained in Afghanistan; only the pilots received flight training in the US.

Are you so stupid as to deny the importance of aid and comfort offered by a government (official or not) regime?

Nice redefinition. Too bad it doesn't hold any water. By your moronic definition, our war against the Axis in WWII was terrorist. My definition works better.

Its the CIA definition actually. Go figure...



Oh, the Palestinians fight all right. By murdering schoolchildren.

That was the Chechnyans, which is a whole different argument. Besides all military / terrorist action has "collateral damage".




No, Palestine is a myth created by Arabs to perpetuate another myth, the "right of return".

No, Palestine is, or at least was, a country.


Hurting, actually. I drank too much.

As a gesture of reconciliation then... try the hair of the dog. Always works for me :-)

Huh? No, all the 9/11 hijackers trained in Afghanistan; only the pilots received flight training in the US.

Are you so stupid as to deny the importance of aid and comfort offered by a government (official or not) regime?
Did you know that "training" is a part of the words "flight training"?

Its the CIA definition actually. Go figure...

How outdated. The CIA has been crippled by decades of leftist attacks.

That was the Chechnyans, which is a whole different argument. Besides all military / terrorist action has "collateral damage".

Collateral damage is unintenteded. Palestinians and the Beslan terrorists deliberately target innocents.

No, Palestine is, or at least was, a country.

Was a country. Perhaps the Palestinians should stop demanding that all peace agreements contain the clause "Kill all the Jews".

Did you know that "training" is a part of the words "flight training"?

So ignorant. The flight training was covert. The Afghanistan training camps were overt.

We stopped the overt training in Afghanistan. We still need to stop covert cells in the West.

So ignorant. The flight training was covert. The Afghanistan training camps were overt.

We stopped the overt training in Afghanistan. We still need to stop covert cells in the West.
That's right.
And how do you expect to do that?

Perhaps the Palestinians should stop demanding that all peace agreements contain the clause "Kill all the Jews".

I'm sorry to intrude but I'd like to see these peace agreements which contain this clause.

That's right.
And how do you expect to do that?

Quit trying to change the subject. We were talking about the legitimacy of the liberation of Afghanistan.

You got any more bullshit to say?

Was a country. Perhaps the Palestinians should stop demanding that all peace agreements contain the clause "Kill all the Jews".

Iwas starting to like you, but that's just plain racist.

It was a country, until it was illegaly occupied. An occupation which continues today. All sides publicly talk of an independent state, which is hopeful.

The sticking point in negotiations is that the Palestinians want the Israelis to return to within their borders. The Israelis don't want to do that. Nobody mentioned, as far as I am aware, killing everyone on the other side, during negotiations.

The Jews and Muslims (& Christians for that matter) peacefully coexisted within Palestine until relatively recently. Its surely not too much to hope that they can eventually do so again?

That's right.
And how do you expect to do that?
Why... bomb Germany back to the stoneage of course. After all, terrorists have been linked to German cities who apparently harboured them.

I'm sorry to intrude but I'd like to see these peace agreements which contain this clause.

I was joking.

But as I recall, the PLO charter promises the "destruction of Israel". In fact, after the Oslo Accords were signed, Arafat promised he will "drive the Jews into the sea" when he was questioned if he was deviating from the PLO charter.

What does that sound like to you?

Quit trying to change the subject. We were talking about the legitimacy of the liberation of Afghanistan.

You got any more bullshit to say?
Yes I do.

I don't think anything justifies a war.

Why... bomb Germany back to the stoneage of course. After all, terrorists have been linked to German cities who apparently harboured them.
I do admire your way of thinking. I mean, Germany invaded "my country" under the last war and several times before.
Let us level Germany and forever stop terrorism.

Iwas starting to like you, but that's just plain racist.

It is an acknowledged fact that many Muslims are open anti-Semites. The Palestinian school curriculum would put the Hitler Youth propaganda to shame.

It was a country, until it was illegaly occupied. An occupation which continues today. All sides publicly talk of an independent state, which is hopeful.

How is it illegal? Israel won that territory fair and square in wars instigated by Arab nations.

The sticking point in negotiations is that the Palestinians want the Israelis to return to within their borders. The Israelis don't want to do that. Nobody mentioned, as far as I am aware, killing everyone on the other side, during negotiations.

See above.

The Jews and Muslims (& Christians for that matter) peacefully coexisted within Palestine until relatively recently. Its surely not too much to hope that they can eventually do so again?

Because now the pesky Jews want to have a nation of their own. How selfish.

Iwas starting to like you, but that's just plain racist.

It was a country, until it was illegaly occupied. An occupation which continues today. All sides publicly talk of an independent state, which is hopeful.

The sticking point in negotiations is that the Palestinians want the Israelis to return to within their borders. The Israelis don't want to do that. Nobody mentioned, as far as I am aware, killing everyone on the other side, during negotiations.

The Jews and Muslims (& Christians for that matter) peacefully coexisted within Palestine until relatively recently. Its surely not too much to hope that they can eventually do so again?
Nope, it was part of a country called transjordan. Palestine was a region, not a nation. They still have a nation called jordan to go to, but their own countrymen don't want them because they would rather use the "palestinians" as a proxy army to attack israel.

I do admire your way of thinking. I mean, Germany invaded "my country" under the last war and several times before.
Let us level Germany and forever stop terrorism.
That would be a great solution eh. Unfortunately, terrorists don't just live in Germany. They are everywhere. Short from bombing the entire planet and erradicating mankind, nothing can stop terrorism because terrorists are like you and me before they commit their crimes.

Yes I do.

I don't think anything justifies a war.

OK, so you think going after al-Qaeda doesn't justify the liberation of a country run by al-Qaeda's good buddies, the Taliban, which conincidentally is a horrific theocracy that murders innocents every day?

So be it.

That would be a great solution eh. Unfortunately, terrorists don't just live in Germany. They are everywhere. Short from bombing the entire planet and erradicating mankind, nothing can stop terrorism because terrorists are like you and me before they commit their crimes.
You take away one idea and replace it with another.

Back to planning I guess...

a horrific theocracy that murders innocents every day

So be it.
Which country are we talking about? The US? Or Afghanistan? Or both?

Racculli, good post.

For the rest of you that are deciding to be asses, why not just stay out of this thread. This is not a day to heckle, joke, or be cynical ass-holes about what happened on 9/11 or the US's reaction.

Most of you seem to forget that on 9/11, our country showed the restraint and courage that most would not have. The world stood by with baited breath, waiting to see if we were about to unleash the hounds of war, and completely annihilate whatever target made itself visible first. So perhaps, instead of heckling us, joking at us, you should shut the hell up and mind your own business.

Restraint and courage... You really have to love the restraint and courage of murdering innocent Iraqi civilians, the restraint and courage of raping prisoners, the restraint and courage of torturing prisoners, the restraint and courage of attacking only nations that be easily defeated in war (but still remain unbowed)...
It seems the only restraint the Americans have shown are of civil rights and freedom. Chancellor Bush is the worst terrorist the world has seen.
Shutting the hell up? I can see you believe in free speech as long as that free speech agrees with you.
As far as minding our own business... Remember the Jewish tale of the person who said nothing and then they came for him?

I was joking.

But as I recall, the PLO charter promises the "destruction of Israel". In fact, after the Oslo Accords were signed, Arafat promised he will "drive the Jews into the sea" when he was questioned if he was deviating from the PLO charter.

What does that sound like to you?

Another joke, like the rest of your arguments.

OK, so you think going after al-Qaeda doesn't justify the liberation of a country run by al-Qaeda's good buddies, the Taliban, which conincidentally is a horrific theocracy that murders innocents every day?

So be it.
I'm glad you understand me.
You see, if terrorists were hiding in USA (there must be some) and some americans are oppressed (I know quite a lot), that wouldn't justify an attack on USA. Even if you leveled some buildings first.

Restraint and courage... You really have to love the restraint and courage of murdering innocent Iraqi civilians, the restraint and courage of raping prisoners, the restraint and courage of torturing prisoners, the restraint and courage of attacking only nations that be easily defeated in war (but still remain unbowed)...
It seems the only restraint the Americans have shown are of civil rights and freedom. Chancellor Bush is the worst terrorist the world has seen.
Shutting the hell up? I can see you believe in free speech as long as that free speech agrees with you.
As far as minding our own business... Remember the Jewish tale of the person who said nothing and then they came for him?
Bush is not a Chancellor. The German head of government is a Chancellor. Bush is the American Emperor Blessed by God himself.

It is an acknowledged fact that many Muslims are open anti-Semites. The Palestinian school curriculum would put the Hitler Youth propaganda to shame.

Oh, please! When did you last see either the palestinian school curriculum, or detailed hitler youth propoganda?



How is it illegal? Israel won that territory fair and square in wars instigated by Arab nations.

So if the US had declared West Germany the 51st state that would have been legitimate? That argument doesn't wash.


Because now the pesky Jews want to have a nation of their own. How selfish.

As I said, the aim of the peace negotiations for the Palestinian side is to get the Israelis to return to their own borders.

Another joke, like the rest of your arguments.

How about coming with some real counterarguments, smartass?

Here's article 15 of the PLO charter:

The liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national (qawmi) duty and it attempts to repel the Zionist and imperialist aggression against the Arab homeland, and aims at the elimination of Zionism in Palestine.

Blah blah blah. "The Zionist presence" is a common Arabic euphemism for the state of Israel, so this article does indeed call for the destruction of Israel and the killing of all its inhabitants.

but I forgot...it's us Americans who are the intolerant ones.

At least you're paying attention.

Oh, please! When did you last see either the palestinian school curriculum, or detailed hitler youth propoganda?

http://www.memri.org/ usually devotes itself to the Arab media but occasionally documents anti-semitism in Arab school materials. Check it out.

The Hitler Youth reference was a metaphor.

So if the US had declared West Germany the 51st state that would have been legitimate? That argument doesn't wash.

It would have been bad form. But the stated aim of WWII was the removal of the Nazi regime from Europe, not the establishment of an American colony in continental Europe.

As opposed to what the Soviets did in Eastern Europe, but that's another topic. ;)

As I said, the aim of the peace negotiations for the Palestinian side is to get the Israelis to return to their own borders.

Perhaps. Too bad the PLO will never allow a two-state solution.

Oh too bad, you already had the sympathies of the world. You abused them, you threw them away. You betrayed the world's goodwill by waging wars, killing *THOUSANDS* of innocent people. You lied to the world, you ignored the UN and I could probably go on and on about the many grave mistakes the US made during the last 3 years. When I see such hateful crap like the threadstarter posted, which is the cause for ever more terrorism in the world, then no thanks. You've had the sympathies of the world, no more. That you bring your own enemy upon yourself in your quest to kill Bin Laden seems to be something you ignore in your blind crusade for revenge - no matter the human cost.


You have that backwards, friend. The war on terror that you're so quick to criticize came about because Bin Laden brought the fight to our doorstep, NOT the other way around. And if you choose not to respect that this date will always bring back the memories of that horror, then you have some serious personality issues.
We didn't ask for the sympathy of the world, so spare us your self-righteous, hateful crap. Ignored the UN? You mean the way the UN ignores places like Sudan? Good! Just because people like you have being turning a blind eye to terrorism, doesn't mean it's a new thing. It's been around for far too long, and it's about time someone stood up to it. Russia tried to take the so-called "moral high ground" by staying out of Iraq, look what good it's done them. We at least try not to kill innocent people, terrorists don't care.
America has every right to remember September 11, 2001. You obviously aren't American, so you have no right to make comments like that. If you're going to insist on being a jerk, at least have the decency to wait until tomorrow.

At least you're paying attention.

Learn to read.

You have that backwards, friend. The war on terror that you're so quick to criticize came about because Bin Laden brought the fight to our doorstep, NOT the other way around. And if you choose not to respect that this date will always bring back the memories of that horror, then you have some serious personality issues.
We didn't ask for the sympathy of the world, so spare us your self-righteous, hateful crap. Ignored the UN? You mean the way the UN ignores places like Sudan? Good! Just because people like you have being turning a blind eye to terrorism, doesn't mean it's a new thing. It's been around for far too long, and it's about time someone stood up to it. Russia tried to take the so-called "moral high ground" by staying out of Iraq, look what good it's done them. We at least try not to kill innocent people, terrorists don't care.
America has every right to remember September 11, 2001. You obviously aren't American, so you have no right to make comments like that. If you're going to insist on being a jerk, at least have the decency to wait until tomorrow.
So basically it's better to murder terrorists as they rise than to prevent new terrorists from being made by removing the problems that trouble them?

So basically it's better to murder terrorists as they rise than to prevent new terrorists from being made by removing the problems that trouble them?

Unfortunately, the establishment of a global umma is quite out of the question. As is the murder of every Jew on the planet.

Appeasement doesn't work. Duh!

The pictures of Palestinians celebrating in the streets which were transmitted on western TV as people celebrating the tragedy have since been proven to be stock footage that was years old.

Really? Proven by who? Site your source, particularly since some of the footage of those people celebrating was live feed???

Amen! I read this poem again even though I have gotten it in several emails in the last 3 years, but I was shocked to read the negative responses to it. Even non-Americans should at least show respect by keeping your comments to yourselves. As for the people who bask in the benefits of living free in the great United States of America, I am stupified when you criticize my brothers in arms while we protect your yellow backs.

Did you remember to goose step and say "Sieg heil!" a lot while raising your right arm in the air after posting that?

Did you remember to goose step and say "Sieg heil!" a lot while raising your right arm in the air after posting that?

Time to add another fuckwit to the ignore list.

Unfortunately, the establishment of a global umma is quite out of the question. As is the murder of every Jew on the planet.

Appeasement doesn't work. Duh!
Sorry, but where did I say "fulfilling their current goals"?
Once (hundreds of years ago) some of they european countries wanted to make the entire world christian and they lead a war on most of the world. Though that was a gold once, it isn't today.
Changing ones gold is possible. Look at the germans. Once they wanted to take over the world, today they just about anybody pass through the country without killing them because they were once an enemy.

Sorry, but where did I say "fulfilling their current goals"?
Once (hundreds of years ago) some of they european countries wanted to make the entire world christian and they lead a war on most of the world. Though that was a gold once, it isn't today.
Changing ones gold is possible. Look at the germans. Once they wanted to take over the world, today they just about anybody pass through the country without killing them because they were once an enemy.

Well fuck me, since we're going back to the Middle Ages, didn't the muslims start that shit? Battle of Tours, anybody?

If you read the faith statements made by Arab terrorists today, many of them hearken back to the so-called "Islam's Golden Age" and yearn for a global Islamic nation, just like in the past. You try convincing them that is not possible.

Chancellor Bush is the worst terrorist the world has seen.

[QUOTE=Gigatron]Bush is not a Chancellor. The German head of government is a Chancellor. Bush is the American Emperor Blessed by God himself.

It was a comparison with Adolf Hitler. But I do stand corrected. The Pope must be really jealous!

How about coming with some real counterarguments, smartass?

Here's article 15 of the PLO charter:

The liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national (qawmi) duty and it attempts to repel the Zionist and imperialist aggression against the Arab homeland, and aims at the elimination of Zionism in Palestine.

Blah blah blah. "The Zionist presence" is a common Arabic euphemism for the state of Israel, so this article does indeed call for the destruction of Israel and the killing of all its inhabitants.

Well ok, first of all you called the nation of Palestine a myth, when in fact it was a landwith borders drawn up by the British at the end of the 1st world war. Second you talk of murdering school children when the number of Palestinian children killed are far higher than the number of Isreali children.
You insinuate that the Palestinian school curiculum is anti-semite when the children they teach are of semitic decent too.
You claim that every peace treaty drawn up demands the killing of all Jews, then you say its a joke afterwards, how are we supposed to distinguish at the time,whether you're joking or providing a real argument?

Well fuck me, since we're going back to the Middle Ages, didn't the muslims start that shit? Battle of Tours, anybody?

If you read the faith statements made by Arab terrorists today, many of them hearken back to the so-called "Islam's Golden Age" and yearn for a global Islamic nation, just like in the past. You try convincing them that is not possible.
Basically, yeah.
Why the fuck do you think I argue with you if I thought it didn't matter at all? I wont change your opinion, but I do spread something among those who read this.

The pictures of Palestinians celebrating in the streets which were transmitted on western TV as people celebrating the tragedy have since been proven to be stock footage that was years old.
go to www.scopes.com
they debunked that as an untrue rumor, that was footage from 9-11.

Learn to read.

Excellant post! Very well-written and thought out. I applaud you.

Excellant post! Very well-written and thought out. I applaud you.
Who said sarcasm?

Well ok, first of all you called the nation of Palestine a myth, when in fact it was a landwith borders drawn up by the British at the end of the 1st world war.

See a post made earlier about Transjordan.

Second you talk of murdering school children when the number of Palestinian children killed are far higher than the number of Isreali children.

I didn't mention anything about Israeli schoolchildren. And the IDF does not deliberately target women and children.

You insinuate that the Palestinian school curiculum is anti-semite when the children they teach are of semitic decent too.

Yes, the multiple sources of anti-semitism really makes those kids fanatics.

You claim that every peace treaty drawn up demands the killing of all Jews, then you say its a joke afterwards, how are we supposed to distinguish at the time,whether you're joking or providing a real argument?

If you're too stupid to recognize an obvious joke, you're too uninformed about the issue to join the debate.

Time to add another fuckwit to the ignore list.

I am continually amazed by your intellect! Bravo!

If you're too stupid to recognize an obvious joke, you're too uninformed about the issue to join the debate.
Obviously you're the one who don't understand a joke. Should you then go?


Anyway, what's the difference in killing men and women?

Obviously you're the one who don't understand a joke. Should you then go?

Point me back to a joke post you made.

Anyway, what's the difference in killing men and women?

Yeah, just a figure of speech. Palestinians target innocents. Israelis do not.

Palestinians target innocents. Israelis do not.
Rofl...

Palestinians target innocents. Israelis do not.

They allow your dog on the bus right?

Point me back to a joke post you made.



Yeah, just a figure of speech. Palestinians target innocents. Israelis do not.
You still can't see it, can you?


And no, Israel doesn't target civilians, but who the hell cares when they're using bulldozers and tanks?
It doesn't matter who they target as those beside them dies anyway.

You still can't see it, can you?


And no, Israel doesn't target civilians, but who the hell cares when they're using bulldozers and tanks?
It doesn't matter who they target as those beside them dies anyway.

The Palestinians routinely place their military assets next to schools and hospistals and inside private homes. It is a well-established tactic to push "international opinion" against Israel.

Your rhetoric about bulldozers and tanks is really pointless. In Jenin, the IDF deliberately conducted house-to-house raids with infantry to minimize civilian casualties, taking 19 KIA in the process. The Palestininans respond with claims of a massacre along with their Western sycophants, only to be discredited.

The Palestininans respond with claims of a massacre along with their Western sycophants, only to be discredited.

Not that the United States has ever done that along with Tony Blair...

The Palestinians routinely place their military assets next to schools and hospistals and inside private homes. It is a well-established tactic to push "international opinion" against Israel.

Your rhetoric about bulldozers and tanks is really pointless. In Jenin, the IDF deliberately conducted house-to-house raids with infantry to minimize civilian casualties, taking 19 KIA in the process. The Palestininans respond with claims of a massacre along with their Western sycophants, only to be discredited.
And yet people still die every once in a while.

Anyway, none of the parts have the ultimate right to claim the land. And I don't see why they can't make one country for both of them.

And yet people still die every once in a while.

Anyway, none of the parts have the ultimate right to claim the land. And I don't see why they can't make one country for both of them.

Don't know what you mean with the first statement, but as I already mentioned, the PLO will never accept a two-state solution and they will never live in peace inside Israel. The two-state solution was offered in 1948 but was rejected.

And yet people still die every once in a while.

Anyway, none of the parts have the ultimate right to claim the land. And I don't see why they can't make one country for both of them.
Maybe because israel is supposed to be a JEWISH state. It's supposed to be a place of refuge in case of nazi style persecution. If the palestinians are allowed to be citizens they will horribly oppress the resident jews. It would result in a bloody civil war. Plus the palestinians already have a nation. It's called jordan.

Erm, your evidence?

You provided that yourself. OBL is wealthy and educated.


Terrorism is the use of force to achieve a political goal. Which covers invasions of sovereign nations to depose governments, as well as the bombing of innocents by individuals.

If the Palestinians decided to declare war on the US and Israel, what would happen?.... that is why they don't. They fight back the only way they can.

No, terrorism, in this case, is the use of force to achieve a religious goal. That's why they call it "jihad", meaning "holy war." The majority of Muslims denounce this behavior.


Primarily, the harshest sanctions and delays in the process were caused by US and UK.

US and UK are only two countries in the UN. So we're suddenly the majority?




Check your facts. Several of the key member of UN staff in Iraq resigned because of the effect the UN sanctions, as enforced by the US and UK, were having on the Iraqi populace. One called it genocide.


Genocide is what Saddam was inflicting on the Kurds, and anyone else who opposed his Baath party. It had nothing to do with sanctions.

Restraint and courage... You really have to love the restraint and courage of murdering innocent Iraqi civilians, the restraint and courage of raping prisoners, the restraint and courage of torturing prisoners, the restraint and courage of attacking only nations that be easily defeated in war (but still remain unbowed)...
It seems the only restraint the Americans have shown are of civil rights and freedom. Chancellor Bush is the worst terrorist the world has seen.
Shutting the hell up? I can see you believe in free speech as long as that free speech agrees with you.
As far as minding our own business... Remember the Jewish tale of the person who said nothing and then they came for him?

What innocent Iraqi's have we killed? Do you mean the ones who picked up weapons and fired at us, the ones who helped to shoot at our planes, and the UN's enforcement of no-fly zones?

You mean the 6 MP's who were jackasses and are now on trial, 3 of whom have pleaded guilty? Sounds like our whole military should be judged by a couple of idiots; if that's the case I know quite a few idiots from other countries who obviously represent all citizens of the country.

Iraq had WMD's, Shipped them to Syria (this is my own speculation), it was obvious that Saddam had these wmd's and the capabilities to create them; or perhaps you'd like to deny that the tons of Sarin, and multiple other chemical agents, were ever found. Or how about the metallic tubes used to contain these chemicals inside of weapons?

No, I respect your right to say what you want; but I also respect my right to tell you to shut the hell up when you disrespect my country.

You just wont admit that people can hide. Just like they did in USA before the attack there. They were trained in USA, but still you failed to see them?
People can train whereever they want to, in whatever country they'd like to. Terrorists don't wear little black hats.


You mean you can spot a terrorist in a crowd? Damn, skippy, your skills must be in demand! We didn't "see" them because they didn't want to be seen, and we weren't expecting them. Do you think those guys run around with big neon signs reading "I'm a terrorist and I'm going to kill you all?" Don't be ridiculous. :headbang:

Awesome Poem man!

You mean you can spot a terrorist in a crowd? Damn, skippy, your skills must be in demand! We didn't "see" them because they didn't want to be seen, and we weren't expecting them. Do you think those guys run around with big neon signs reading "I'm a terrorist and I'm going to kill you all?" Don't be ridiculous. :headbang:
Actually they drive cars with bumper stickers that say "Jihad now, ask me how"

America is a great country. We were attacked by a brutal enemy. And how did we respond? Brought the guilty to justice and set millions of oppressed people free. I have a problem with the left in America who are so short sighted as to not support this every step of the way. Thank god Franklin Roosevelt did not have to put up with the conspiracy theorists, nay sayers, and radical doomsday prophets that President Bush has had to deal with.

What innocent Iraqi's have we killed? Do you mean the ones who picked up weapons and fired at us, the ones who helped to shoot at our planes, and the UN's enforcement of no-fly zones?

You mean the 6 MP's who were jackasses and are now on trial, 3 of whom have pleaded guilty? Sounds like our whole military should be judged by a couple of idiots; if that's the case I know quite a few idiots from other countries who obviously represent all citizens of the country.

Iraq had WMD's, Shipped them to Syria (this is my own speculation), it was obvious that Saddam had these wmd's and the capabilities to create them; or perhaps you'd like to deny that the tons of Sarin, and multiple other chemical agents, were ever found. Or how about the metallic tubes used to contain these chemicals inside of weapons?

No, I respect your right to say what you want; but I also respect my right to tell you to shut the hell up when you disrespect my country.
The no-fly zones were not backed by the UN. They were US-UK constructs, thats it.

And no, Iraq did not have WMD.

Which country are we talking about? The US? Or Afghanistan? Or both?


Using partial quotes is misleading. The original post specifically said the Taliban, which was in Afghanistan. If you're gonna make a point, don't take things out of context.

America is a great country. We were attacked by a brutal enemy. And how did we respond? Brought the guilty to justice and set millions of oppressed people free. I have a problem with the left in America who are so short sighted as to not support this every step of the way. Thank god Franklin Roosevelt did not have to put up with the conspiracy theorists, nay sayers, and radical doomsday prophets that President Bush has had to deal with.

You killed more innocents than they did. You just did in a slower time during a war using bombs and guns.

You killed more innocents than they did. You just did in a slower time during a war using bombs and guns.
The humanitarian reason is used to try and gain some moral highground. If it had been the reason, Bush could have said so before the UN and see what the reaction would have been. Alas, it is not the US business to decide for other countries how they are supposed to be run. The US are incapable of installing democracies all over the world - especially not in countries that have never had them. A democracy and a constitution need to be produced by the people themselves. Puppet governments will never have the required legitimation to call themselves a democracy.

As is usual, you failed in your mission;
If you expected pure chaos, you can keep on wishing
Americans are now focused and stronger than ever;
Your death has become our next endeavor.





Hahahaha... believe me, the world is in a hell of a lot more chaos than is realised..... terrorism has got all major superpowers fearing where the next attack will come from, powerless to stop it. And the acts of terrorism are becoming a lot more rash, as well. Taking a school hostage, for example. Now, the Russians will vent their anger. Meaning a lot more casualties. There's also Isreal and Palestine. Not to mention Tyrants and people like George Bush with a lower IQ than a 3 year old in power, and global poverty, the world is in a chaos that no-one cant get it out of.

Osama accomplished what he wanted. If he dies, he'll become a matyr. If he's captured, you can expect attacks on American/western soil demanding his release. Looks like we're fucked anyway you look at it..

You killed more innocents than they did. You just did in a slower time during a war using bombs and guns.


Why are you saying that I killed more innocents than the terrorists? Too my knowledge I have never fired a weapon or killed anyone. Don't tell me I did because I did not.

Restraint and courage... You really have to love the restraint and courage of murdering innocent Iraqi civilians, the restraint and courage of raping prisoners, the restraint and courage of torturing prisoners,


You sure you're talking about PRESIDENT Bush? That's sounds exactly like what Saddam was doing in Iraq, and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Oh, but that doesn't count, huh? Those people loved their leaders, and we just butted in and ruined everything. You people are so hell-bent on knocking America, yet you seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge what was happening in those countries before the war.

You provided that yourself. OBL is wealthy and educated.

yes, and he is but one terorrist. I see very little evidence that the majority of suicide bombers in whatever corner of the world they choose to kill and maim are wealthy.


No, terrorism, in this case, is the use of force to achieve a religious goal. That's why they call it "jihad", meaning "holy war." The majority of Muslims denounce this behavior.

As explained in an earlier post, this is the CIA definition. The Oxford dictionary describes a terrorist as " a person who uses or favours violent or intimidating methods of coercing a government or community."

It matters little to the dead whether it is OBL terrorising the inhabitants of New York, or GWB terrorising the inhabitants of Bagdhad.


US and UK are only two countries in the UN. So we're suddenly the majority?


Unfortunately, sanctions were managed through the Security Council and not the General Assembly. The US and UK used the veto and their vote on a number of occassions to ensure that the punitive sanctions remained.


Genocide is what Saddam was inflicting on the Kurds, and anyone else who opposed his Baath party. It had nothing to do with sanctions.

The death of thousands of Iraqis through the policy of the Iraqi government and the death of thousands of Iraqis through the policy of the US government. The dead don't notice the distinction.

What innocent Iraqi's have we killed? Do you mean the ones who picked up weapons and fired at us, the ones who helped to shoot at our planes, and the UN's enforcement of no-fly zones?

You mean the 6 MP's who were jackasses and are now on trial, 3 of whom have pleaded guilty? Sounds like our whole military should be judged by a couple of idiots; if that's the case I know quite a few idiots from other countries who obviously represent all citizens of the country.

Iraq had WMD's, Shipped them to Syria (this is my own speculation), it was obvious that Saddam had these wmd's and the capabilities to create them; or perhaps you'd like to deny that the tons of Sarin, and multiple other chemical agents, were ever found. Or how about the metallic tubes used to contain these chemicals inside of weapons?

No, I respect your right to say what you want; but I also respect my right to tell you to shut the hell up when you disrespect my country.

Seems like you're one of those people who think America is the best country ever.
I think he meant the innocent Iraqi's that were in thier homes when they were bombed.

I'm not saying that I'm judging the entire US army by six people, but it just goes to prove that only America can create this standard of psycho. So yes, there was WMDs. Not much point taking them out when you kill civlliand anyway trying to.

Freedom of speech seems to cover everything that so happens to be pro-American. You'd think think that if God, should he exist, would take sides with a country much older, not one that has only been properly inhabited by whites for only 500 years....

Osama accomplished what he wanted. If he dies, he'll become a matyr. If he's captured, you can expect attacks on American/western soil demanding his release. Looks like we're fucked anyway you look at it..

True. Dammit, superpowers have fucked up the world....

So basically it's better to murder terrorists as they rise than to prevent new terrorists from being made by removing the problems that trouble them?

Did you even read my post before responding to it? But since you want to go in that direction, I think anyone who deliberately targets children has no right to life. The Taliban wasn't murdering women in the middle of a stadium because they had problems. They did it because those women refused to bow down and be treated like less than animals. Saddam was not having people murdered by the thousands because of some useless sanctions, he was doing it because they opposed him. Terrorists claim to kill in the name of their faith, yet their fellow Muslims denounce what they do. Muhammed does not teach killing innocents for any reason. Terrorists do what they do to force their ideologies on others, and to kill the infidels. You want to make nice with them? Go ahead, they'd kill you just as quickly as they would me. Naivete won't make terrorism go away.

Did you remember to goose step and say "Sieg heil!" a lot while raising your right arm in the air after posting that?

Funny, I don't seem to recall the US attacking Germany first. Maybe you have a different version of history? The comparison is idiotic.

Iraq had WMD's, Shipped them to Syria (this is my own speculation), it was obvious that Saddam had these wmd's and the capabilities to create them; or perhaps you'd like to deny that the tons of Sarin, and multiple other chemical agents, were ever found. Or how about the metallic tubes used to contain these chemicals inside of weapons?

Any WMD found in Iraq was 12 years old or more, and more than 10 years past its use-by date, and, more to the point, dumped under tons of sand because it would never be used.

The "evidence" given by Powell to the UN was a sham, Bush and Blair's evidence and convictions have been proven false.

Anyone who listened to the *experts* (such as Hans Blix and Scott Ritter) would have seen, before the war, that in all probability Iraq had no usable WMD.

And even if he did, there was no chance he would attack America with them. He was not suicidal.

To my knowledge (and I'm sure I will be corrected) the only WMD attack against America were the Anthrax letters. Which used the US military's strain of Anthrax.

Did you even read my post before responding to it? But since you want to go in that direction, I think anyone who deliberately targets children has no right to life. The Taliban wasn't murdering women in the middle of a stadium because they had problems. They did it because those women refused to bow down and be treated like less than animals. Saddam was not having people murdered by the thousands because of some useless sanctions, he was doing it because they opposed him. Terrorists claim to kill in the name of their faith, yet their fellow Muslims denounce what they do. Muhammed does not teach killing innocents for any reason. Terrorists do what they do to force their ideologies on others, and to kill the infidels. You want to make nice with them? Go ahead, they'd kill you just as quickly as they would me. Naivete won't make terrorism go away.

That doesnt explain other teorrist actions against the west. The Taliban may have commited acts of terroism against the west over religous matters of their own, but I'm pretty sure others, such as the Russian school, for example, we're done over political problems. The Russian school incident may have been shown on the news everywhere, but they neglected to tell you that Russia had, through acts of their own, had killed a lot more. Most acts of terrorism are done over problems with the west, being wealthy, large, and well-supplied.

Actually they drive cars with bumper stickers that say "Jihad now, ask me how"


I don't know if that was intended as sarcasm, but it's funny! ROFL

That doesnt explain other teorrist actions against the west. The Taliban may have commited acts of terroism against the west over religous matters of their own, but I'm pretty sure others, such as the Russian school, for example, we're done over political problems. The Russian school incident may have been shown on the news everywhere, but they neglected to tell you that Russia had, through acts of their own, had killed a lot more. Most acts of terrorism are done over problems with the west, being wealthy, large, and well-supplied.

Agreed. The political problem in question in Chechnya is the continued Russian control. Reprehensible attrocities have been committed on both sides. One only has to remember the Russian ultimatum for everyone who didn't want to fight to leave the city, which was then bombarded.

The school seige and murders are just as terrible. I don't know enough about Chechnya to pass judgement on either side, but something needs to be done.

The issue with what is commonly called terrorism is that you are dealing with people who can't have a fair fight with their perceived oppressors, so have to fight dirty.

America is a great country. We were attacked by a brutal enemy. And how did we respond? Brought the guilty to justice and set millions of oppressed people free. I have a problem with the left in America who are so short sighted as to not support this every step of the way. Thank god Franklin Roosevelt did not have to put up with the conspiracy theorists, nay sayers, and radical doomsday prophets that President Bush has had to deal with.

It gets better. A lot of the nay sayers posting here aren't from the US. :rolleyes:

Actually they drive cars with bumper stickers that say "Jihad now, ask me how"

ROFL I'm not sure if this was intended as sarcasm or not, but it's funny. :D

ROFL I'm not sure if this was intended as sarcasm or not, but it's funny. :D

Are you trying to avoid me and Bunnybridge's posts? To hard to counter?

Come on, if you're so sure of your views, come fight your corner. If you can't, your admiting we're right

Come on, if you're so sure of your views, come fight your corner. If you can't, your admiting we're right


Just because they don't post when you command it dosen't mean they agree with you. Give me your address so I can mail you a crowbar to pull your head out of your ass.

yes, and he is but one terorrist. I see very little evidence that the majority of suicide bombers in whatever corner of the world they choose to kill and maim are wealthy.

And you won't see the wealthy ones. Because those wonderfully "brave" guys only send the poor among their followers, even paying their families compensation.



As explained in an earlier post, this is the CIA definition. The Oxford dictionary describes a terrorist as " a person who uses or favours violent or intimidating methods of coercing a government or community."[?QUOTE]

I'm not going by any particular group's definition. The middleeast terrorists consider themselves holy warriors. But the Oxford definition would apply in terms of coercing a community, the community being non-Muslims.


[QUOTE]Unfortunately, sanctions were managed through the Security Council and not the General Assembly. The US and UK used the veto and their vote on a number of occassions to ensure that the punitive sanctions remained.

The Security Council is still part of the UN.

The death of thousands of Iraqis through the policy of the Iraqi government and the death of thousands of Iraqis through the policy of the US government. The dead don't notice the distinction.

The dead don't notice the distinction, but the living (theoretically) know there is one. The US still did not and does not deliberately target innocents. And probably fewer innocents would be hurt if the terrorists wouldn't keep hiding in or near places where innocent people are.

Just because they don't post when you command it dosen't mean they agree with you. Give me your address so I can mail you a crowbar to pull your head out of your ass.

Thanks for the back up. :)

America is a great country.

Agreed. I have visited America three times in the past, and love it. Its a shame the newly enforced restrictions on entry from friendly countries mean I have to go to the US embassy some 400 miles away to get a visa before visiting in future.


We were attacked by a brutal enemy.

Agreed. The attacks on the US were as shocking as any military attack, made only more real by the fact that it was live on TV, unlike most disasters and attacks around the world on this scale.


And how did we respond? Brought the guilty to justice and set millions of oppressed people free. I have a problem with the left in America who are so short sighted as to not support this every step of the way. Thank god Franklin Roosevelt did not have to put up with the conspiracy theorists, nay sayers, and radical doomsday prophets that President Bush has had to deal with.

There are a number of issues at play here.

The first is that which people are oppressed, and which are not, is a subjective judement.

As mentioned in an earlier post, the Soviets in Moscow thought that the proletariat of eastern europe struggled under capitalist oppressors. Who decides who is oppressed or which government needs replaced?

This is not to deny that Iraqis did not suffer terrible hardships under Saddam, but so did/do a number of people in South Africa / Saudi Arabia / North Korea / Sudan.

We cannot, within international law, invade a sovereign country except in immediate self defence. Period.

These rules were set up for a reason. To prevent war.

It has also to be pointed out that if the Soviet Union still existed, Afghanistan and Iraq would not have been invaded.

The problem with current western politics is that it assumes that everyone should live by western rules, and the western economic system, and under their installed and/or supported governments.

When people rebel against this, they can only fight back through what is commonly termed terrorism.

This is not to be a "naysayer" this is just to state fact.

Are you trying to avoid me and Bunnybridge's posts? To hard to counter?

It's "Bonnybridge", not "Bunnybridge". I don't avoid anything I think is worth my time. Bonnybridge presents herself intelligently (my apologies if I got the gender wrong), and makes valid points. You, on the other hand...but if it will make you happy, I'll go back over your posts and see if there's anything worth responding to. Feel better now? :rolleyes:

And you won't see the wealthy ones. Because those wonderfully "brave" guys only send the poor among their followers, even paying their families compensation.

You're beginning to sound like Michael Moore! Are you talking about the US or Al-Quaeda?


The Security Council is still part of the UN.

Just because its part of the UN doesn't make killing hundreds of thousands of people through it correct. Thats why the UN staff quit.

I don't avoid anything I think is worth my time. Bonnybridge presents herself intelligently (my apologies if I got the gender wrong), and makes valid points.

Gender wrong :-/ Not to worry....

Just because its part of the UN doesn't make killing hundreds of thousands of people through it correct.

The only people we killed were enemy combatants. There was some collateral damage, but that can be expected in any military conflict.

The first is that which people are oppressed, and which are not, is a subjective judement.

This is not to deny that Iraqis did not suffer terrible hardships under Saddam, but so did/do a number of people in South Africa / Saudi Arabia / North Korea / Sudan.

We cannot, within international law, invade a sovereign country except in immediate self defence. Period.

And yet how can we sit by and watch these things happen? Isn't that part of what the UN is supposed to be doing, too?

These rules were set up for a reason. To prevent war.

The problem with current western politics is that it assumes that everyone should live by western rules, and the western economic system, and under their installed and/or supported governments.

When people rebel against this, they can only fight back through what is commonly termed terrorism.

This is not to be a "naysayer" this is just to state fact.

This still goes on the assumption that these are rebeling against us. Terrorists are rebeling, if this term can even be used here, against those who don't follow their extremist ideology. It doesn't matter if the country they work out of has been invaded or not. Their cause is eliminating everyone who is not their brand of Islam, proven by the fact that they just as quickly target their fellow countrymen.

Gender wrong :-/ Not to worry....

:( Sorry about that. I had a feeling that was the case. Always follow your instinct...

The only people we killed were enemy combatants. There was some collateral damage, but that can be expected in any military conflict.

the deaths in question were the one and a half million deaths (including 500,000 child deaths) as a result of UN sanctions (primarily enforced in a draconian fashion by the US and UK)

You're beginning to sound like Michael Moore! Are you talking about the US or Al-Quaeda?

Hey! I resent that! LOL But the US doesn't pay compensation to families of suicide bombers, we don't have any. And that has been in several news stories about Al Qaeda doing that.
Besides, Michael Moore is a jerk. I try not to be. ;)


Just because its part of the UN doesn't make killing hundreds of thousands of people through it correct. Thats why the UN staff quit.

True, but the UN is the ruling body, not the SC.

the deaths in question were the one and a half million deaths (including 500,000 child deaths) as a result of UN sanctions (primarily enforced in a draconian fashion by the US and UK)

The deaths as a result of the sanctions weren't carried out by the US & UK. The UN enforced the sanctions, but as a compromise, it set up the Oil for Food program. It didn't help very much that Saddam had his hand in the jar.

the deaths in question were the one and a half million deaths (including 500,000 child deaths) as a result of UN sanctions (primarily enforced in a draconian fashion by the US and UK)

I'm assuming you're meaning through starvation and sickness. That's awful, I don't dispute that. But those same sanctions didn't stop Saddam and his followers from living in palaces.

And yet how can we sit by and watch these things happen? Isn't that part of what the UN is supposed to be doing, too?

I agree that there is more that could be done about oppressive states, but it as to be within a legal framework that is safe from the common bribery which currently takes place on the security council.

We should also bear in mind that some nations are called developing for a reason, and it is only 150 years or so since slavery was outlawed in the US. Peoples should be allowed to develop their own nations.



This still goes on the assumption that these are rebeling against us. Terrorists are rebeling, if this term can even be used here, against those who don't follow their extremist ideology. It doesn't matter if the country they work out of has been invaded or not. Their cause is eliminating everyone who is not their brand of Islam, proven by the fact that they just as quickly target their fellow countrymen.

I am personally of the opinion that the religious reason for rebellion is a happy (for al-quaeda) coincidence. My personal beliefs are that people across the world are fairly rational human beings overall, and the majority are willing to live and let live if things were seen to be fair. Things are not fair.

Despite owning the worlds major energy source, the peoples of the arabian peninsula are not well off, and their rulers are supported by the richest people in the world. This can only make the peoples of the arabian peninsula upset.

If the west "got out of their face" by (1) getting out of Iraq (as soon as a viable government is in place, if that is possible) (2) get their military out of Saudi Arabia and (3) use their influence to bring Israel to a settlement, then things might be markedly different.

If the west "got out of their face" by (1) getting out of Iraq (as soon as a viable government is in place, if that is possible) (2) get their military out of Saudi Arabia and (3) use their influence to bring Israel to a settlement, then things might be markedly different.

The US has said that they will leave Iraq when asked by the Iraqi government, and military bases in Saudi Arabia have been abandoned and the troops are now where they are wanted, like Qatar.

Hey! I resent that! LOL But the US doesn't pay compensation to families of suicide bombers, we don't have any. And that has been in several news stories about Al Qaeda doing that.

Suicide bombers are only suicide bombers because they can't be normal bombers. They don't have planes, Americans do.

And surely the US military pays compensation to its fallen troops? I could be wrong? They're not suicide bombers, but they are fighting the same war.


Besides, Michael Moore is a jerk. I try not to be. ;)

I've met Michael Moore, and he's quite a nice guy. You sound fairly decent too though...


True, but the UN is the ruling body, not the SC.

The SC were in charge of the sanctions, and they (US&UK) used their position to enforce a draconian regime not far short of a middle-ages siege. This resulted in the deaths of several hundred thousand Iraqis and the resignation of several UN officials.

The US has said that they will leave Iraq when asked by the Iraqi government, and military bases in Saudi Arabia have been abandoned and the troops are now where they are wanted, like Qatar.

in all good conscience, I as a UK citizen (well, subject), could not support a UK/US withdrawal until the situation has been stabilised. The Iraqi government can't ask the "coalition" to withdraw until it's seem as legitmate by the majority of Iraqis. It can't be seen as legitmate unless the coalition are not there. Catch 22.

The only possible solution is for muslim & arab UN troops to take over the security detail. They can't take that over because the handover by the west can only cause trouble amongst the muslim/arab populace. Catch 22.

Arab & Muslim UN troops are required, however, to help the UN to deal with the moves towards towards democracy.

If the western troops have moved out of Saudi Arabia, it should be out of the Arabian Peninsula completely. That would be the first step towards reaching peace with al-quaeda.

The majority of the governments of arab states are seen as stooges by al-quaeda. The existence of western military bases can only be seen as proof.

in all good conscience, I as a UK citizen (well, subject), could not support a UK/US withdrawal until the situation has been stabilised. The Iraqi government can't ask the "coalition" to withdraw until it's seem as legitmate by the majority of Iraqis. It can't be seen as legitmate unless the coalition are not there. Catch 22.

If the western troops have moved out of Saudi Arabia, it should be out of the Arabian Peninsula completely. That would be the first step towards reaching peace with al-quaeda.

I'll admit that you make a good point and also agree that a pullout now would be a disaster. It may be a while until the new Iraqi government is seen as legitimate, but until then, we have to hunt down anyone that will pick up an AK-47 in opposition to it. If that means an invasion of Syria or Iran to do it, so be it.

Al-Quaeda will never make peace with anyone who won't adopt their point of view, so there will NEVER be peace with them, nor would we accept it. They would break the peace at the first chance they got and say the US forced them to.

Al-Quaeda will never make peace with anyone who won't adopt their point of view, so there will NEVER be peace with them, nor would we accept it. They would break the peace at the first chance they got and say the US forced them to.

You should realise however that the "other side" see the opposite - that if you don't go along with western policy, the west will never make peace.

What if the west were to meet their demands. Its not that hard.

(1) Israel withdraw to their own borders. That can be done. It might be hard for Israeli politicians, but we in the west could force the issue.
(2) Western forces leave the Arab peninsula. We have nothing we can't have by sailing air craft carriers in international water, so why have the hassle.
(3)We hand over power in iraq to muslim & arab UN troops. They (al-quaeda) have no one to fight, we're not there for them to fight.

Would any of these steps devalue anything we hold dear? Would anyone lose any sleep?

Then, if this could bring peace, why don't we try it?

Worst case scenario is we have air craft carriers in the gulf. Which we have already. What's to lose?

You should realise however that the "other side" see the opposite - that if you don't go along with western policy, the west will never make peace.

What if the west were to meet their demands. Its not that hard.

(1) Israel withdraw to their own borders. That can be done. It might be hard for Israeli politicians, but we in the west could force the issue.
(2) Western forces leave the Arab peninsula. We have nothing we can't have by sailing air craft carriers in international water, so why have the hassle.
(3)We hand over power in iraq to muslim & arab UN troops. They (al-quaeda) have no one to fight, we're not there for them to fight.

Would any of these steps devalue anything we hold dear? Would anyone lose any sleep?

Then, if this could bring peace, why don't we try it?

Worst case scenario is we have air craft carriers in the gulf. Which we have already. What's to lose?

1. Israel is already pulling out of Gaza. What else do you want? They can't do it all at once without looking like pushovers.
2. A large amount of infintry and armor can't operate from an aircraft carrier, nor can it be a peace keeping force by itself.
3. Arab peacekeepers are welcome, and have been welcome, to come to Iraq, yet they haven't.

1. Israel is already pulling out of Gaza. What else do you want? They can't do it all at once without looking like pushovers.
2. A large amount of infintry and armor can't operate from an aircraft carrier, nor can it be a peace keeping force by itself.
3. Arab peacekeepers are welcome, and have been welcome, to come to Iraq, yet they haven't.

(1) There is the small matter of the rest of Palestine.

(2) Peace keeping hasn't been necessary since Saddam was deposed. Assuming he was a threat. Which is a big if. And if it it was necessary, I'm sure we could land anywhere pretty quick

(3) Noone wants to come because its a death zone. Perhaps if we wanted to kill and privatise less, people would be more willing to help themselves.

(1) There is the small matter of the rest of Palestine.

(2) Peace keeping hasn't been necessary since Saddam was deposed. Assuming he was a threat. Which is a big if. And if it it was necessary, I'm sure we could land anywhere pretty quick

(3) Noone wants to come because its a death zone. Perhaps if we wanted to kill and privatise less, people would be more willing to help themselves.

1. Give it time. Like I've said, it can't happen overnight
2. Have you been on a deserted island for the past year? Car bombs have gone off and mortar rounds have been launched not just at coalition targets, but at the UN headquarters in Baghdad itself. As for quick strike capabilities, we should be able to land troops anywhere in at least 72 hours. For immeadiate strikes, cruise missiles and nukes are just about it.
3. Who want's to kill? You're certainly NOT talking about US (or UK) troops committing atrocities. That is just bullshit. Plain and simple.

It's getting late and i've got to go. You have your point of view and I have mine. I don't agree, but you do have the right to voice yours. Lets agree to disagree and call it a night.

Bye

You can't be liberated from your own people - liberation in the context is to free from enemy occupation, so you cannot be liberated from your own government.

It may feel like a liberation (much the same as a democratic leader's failure to gain re-election may feel like liberation of sorts to us), but its not liberation.

The word has been abused by people who like to overthrow governments of sovereign countries. It doesn't matter how reprehensible they are / were, its not liberation.

You've missed something...

When the government of the said nation IS The occupying ENEMY, Then Liberation is possible from people of the same nationality.

However you want to look at it, innocent live where lost three years ago today. and for that, I believe that anyone with a heart larger than a grain of rice (as well as those with less), should mourn the deaths of those men, women and children, who perished that day. No matter you think it was for the right reasons or not.

(Although I cannot begin to imagine how people grasp the idea that terrorism is right.)

You've missed something...

When the government of the said nation IS The occupying ENEMY, Then Liberation is possible from people of the same nationality.

However you want to look at it, innocent live where lost three years ago today. and for that, I believe that anyone with a heart larger than a grain of rice (as well as those with less), should mourn the deaths of those men, women and children, who perished that day. No matter you think it was for the right reasons or not.

(Although I cannot begin to imagine how people grasp the idea that terrorism is right.)

A lot of innocent of innocent lives were lost three years ago. A lot of innocent lives are lost daily. Usually, unfortunately, it is those who we oppress who die. On 9/11 they hit back.

Terrorism is absolutely wrong. 9/11 was absolutely wrong. No argument.

So was the bombing of Bagdhad ("Desert Fox" and "Iraqi Freedom"). So was the bombing of Afghanistan. So will be the threatened bombing of Iran. SO are threats against Syria. So are threats against Israelis, So are threats against Palestinians. So, closer to my UK home, are threats against protestants or catholics. So are threats against Russians, so are threats against Chechnyans.

Threats, and violence are wrong. Period.

My issue is not whether killing people, of whatever persuasion, is wrong. My issue is that killing is wrong. Period.

Osama Is Dead

Or

He Is Working For The United States


Either Way, The USA is more interested in using him to incite fear And support in american minds than killing him.

Osama is being held in a American military base on Afghanistan, and Bush will pull him out of his ass in the next few weeks.

... The Afghanistan training camps were overt...Nope they were Covert...

I am personally of the opinion that the religious reason for rebellion is a happy (for al-quaeda) coincidence. My personal beliefs are that people across the world are fairly rational human beings overall, and the majority are willing to live and let live if things were seen to be fair. Things are not fair.

Despite owning the worlds major energy source, the peoples of the arabian peninsula are not well off, and their rulers are supported by the richest people in the world. This can only make the peoples of the arabian peninsula upset.

If the west "got out of their face" by (1) getting out of Iraq (as soon as a viable government is in place, if that is possible) (2) get their military out of Saudi Arabia and (3) use their influence to bring Israel to a settlement, then things might be markedly different.

The rulers of the Arabian nations are among some of the richest in the world, not necessarily supported by them. Unfortunately, they also tend to control most of the money, leaving the rest of their people in poverty. That can cause a strain, true enough.
Religious fanatics, however, regardless of what religion they belong to, are rarely reasonable, and don't need much of a reason to attack others.

Suicide bombers are only suicide bombers because they can't be normal bombers. They don't have planes, Americans do.

But Americans don't deliberately target innocent people. Suicide bombers do.

And surely the US military pays compensation to its fallen troops? I could be wrong? They're not suicide bombers, but they are fighting the same war.

I'm a grown military brat :) so I'm not sure of the details, but I believe military personnel families do get something if their spouse or parent dies. But this is because they died, not because they're going to go kill themselves in a restaurant or bus stop. Al Qaeda was paying, I believe, $25,000 as a sort of bounty to the families of suicide bombers.



I've met Michael Moore, and he's quite a nice guy. You sound fairly decent too though...

I guess he's different in more casual settings than he comes across as in political settings. I feel he comes across as a jerk when discussing politics. And thank you. :)



The SC were in charge of the sanctions, and they (US&UK) used their position to enforce a draconian regime not far short of a middle-ages siege. This resulted in the deaths of several hundred thousand Iraqis and the resignation of several UN officials.

This can just as easily be tied into your point about how those countries are ran. The sanctions certainly were hurting the leaders.

A lot of innocent of innocent lives were lost three years ago. A lot of innocent lives are lost daily. Usually, unfortunately, it is those who we oppress who die. On 9/11 they hit back.

That was not a "hit back". The US hadn't done anything to Al Qaeda. You seem to be an intelligent guy, but that's just plain wrong.

Osama Bin Laden, your time is short;
We'd rather you die, than come to court....

Just imagine if this guy gets elected to the senate in Illinois! Shudder!!! :eek:

You mean you can spot a terrorist in a crowd? Damn, skippy, your skills must be in demand! We didn't "see" them because they didn't want to be seen, and we weren't expecting them. Do you think those guys run around with big neon signs reading "I'm a terrorist and I'm going to kill you all?" Don't be ridiculous. :headbang:
Congratulations. You got the point. Bong.

Did you even read my post before responding to it? But since you want to go in that direction, I think anyone who deliberately targets children has no right to life. The Taliban wasn't murdering women in the middle of a stadium because they had problems. They did it because those women refused to bow down and be treated like less than animals. Saddam was not having people murdered by the thousands because of some useless sanctions, he was doing it because they opposed him. Terrorists claim to kill in the name of their faith, yet their fellow Muslims denounce what they do. Muhammed does not teach killing innocents for any reason. Terrorists do what they do to force their ideologies on others, and to kill the infidels. You want to make nice with them? Go ahead, they'd kill you just as quickly as they would me. Naivete won't make terrorism go away.
If you cannot understand why terrorism exists, you will never be able to stop it. And answering terror with more terror will help nobody.

Dear Lord,

Although I am an atheist, please bring about another war in Europe. Please let Russia beat the crap out of Germany and Denmark and France. I know that American soldiers and families will never go there to protect them again, and I know we want our dead to be dug up and shipped back to our soil.

Let the people of Europe keep selling the weapons to our enemies so we can conquer them 100:1.

Dear lord, if this is not in your plan, then let us go and beat the crap out of Europe ourselves, just this one wish big guy.

Oh how I pray (in my atheist way) that Europe suffers a harm never dreamed of. I wish a nuclear reactor would melt, or a meteor would strike in your heartland. I would laugh my ass off and post on these boards how much you deserve it you piles of crap.

Dear Lord,

Although I am an atheist, please bring about another war in Europe. Please let Russia beat the crap out of Germany and Denmark and France. I know that American soldiers and families will never go there to protect them again, and I know we want our dead to be dug up and shipped back to our soil.

Let the people of Europe keep selling the weapons to our enemies so we can conquer them 100:1.

Dear lord, if this is not in your plan, then let us go and beat the crap out of Europe ourselves, just this one wish big guy.

Oh how I pray (in my atheist way) that Europe suffers a harm never dreamed of. I wish a nuclear reactor would melt, or a meteor would strike in your heartland. I would laugh my ass off and post on these boards how much you deserve it you piles of crap.Wow. You're a dick.

However you want to look at it, innocent live where lost three years ago today. and for that, I believe that anyone with a heart larger than a grain of rice (as well as those with less), should mourn the deaths of those men, women and children, who perished that day. No matter you think it was for the right reasons or not.

(Although I cannot begin to imagine how people grasp the idea that terrorism is right.)
Not right, but terror works.
Ireland was freed from UK by use of terror.

And if we were to shead a single tear for every person who died in this world, we wouldn't have been given eyes.

Not right, but terror works.
Ireland was freed from UK by use of terror.

And if we were to shead a single tear for every person who died in this world, we wouldn't have been given eyes.
Well, it partly worked in Ireland. Half of the country is still British. And it has sort of worked in Israel/Palestine in that it's gotten some people on both sides that there's eventually going to have to be a two-state solution, although neither side seems fully ready for that yet. But more often than not, terrorist tactics tend to work against the goal for which the terrorists are fighting.

That's what makes al Qaeda so scary--they don't seem to have an agenda, don't have a way to be bought off. They just want a war, and we in the US don't seem to be willing to give it to them. We're too busy fighting people who aren't a threat to deal with the people who attacked us.

Dear Lord,

Although I am an atheist, please bring about another war in Europe. Please let Russia beat the crap out of Germany and Denmark and France. I know that American soldiers and families will never go there to protect them again, and I know we want our dead to be dug up and shipped back to our soil.

Let the people of Europe keep selling the weapons to our enemies so we can conquer them 100:1.

Dear lord, if this is not in your plan, then let us go and beat the crap out of Europe ourselves, just this one wish big guy.

Oh how I pray (in my atheist way) that Europe suffers a harm never dreamed of. I wish a nuclear reactor would melt, or a meteor would strike in your heartland. I would laugh my ass off and post on these boards how much you deserve it you piles of crap.
Attack Europe for what reason?
To take all the cheese and butter stocpiled in France or capture the soon-to-be monarch (the Aussie bitch) in Denmark?
Why the fuck would anybody want to do that?

That was not a "hit back". The US hadn't done anything to Al Qaeda. You seem to be an intelligent guy, but that's just plain wrong.

The US has on a number of occassions dropped bombs directly onto where they though Al Quaeda was.

Putting that to one side, the continued American support for the Israelis in their dealings with the Palestinians (thousands of dead), the sanctions on Iraq (huindreds of thousands of dead), and military bases on the Arab peninsula were all seen, rightly or wrongly, as reasons for "hitting back".

But Americans don't deliberately target innocent people. Suicide bombers do.



I'm a grown military brat :) so I'm not sure of the details, but I believe military personnel families do get something if their spouse or parent dies. But this is because they died, not because they're going to go kill themselves in a restaurant or bus stop. Al Qaeda was paying, I believe, $25,000 as a sort of bounty to the families of suicide bombers.



I agree with GWB on one point - we (the west) are at war.

If we took stock and realised that "Terrorism" is a new way of fighting a war, which breaks all the "rules" of war, but is a method of fighting none the less, we might start to reach a conclusion.

Stop thinking that its just terrorism that is wrong. Start thinking of terrorism as war, and start thinking that war is wrong.

So, lets agree for a second that terrorism a new form of war in the context of a whole history of forms of war. Terrorism is a form of war which cannot be defeated in the traditional military sense. It is also a form of war which is unlikely to lead to victory for the terrorists either.

Why? Because you can't have a stand and fight war.

The next terrorist could be the guy who lives downstairs, the woman who works in the shop or the guy sitting next to you at work, or there might be no terrorists at all. You can't find them all, and you can't have surveillance on everyone (though you can make a good attempt).

Every time you kill a terrorist, you inspire more terrorists. Every time there is "collateral damage" you inspire even more terrorists.

Its a virus that military action can only make worse.

Stop looking to deal with the symptoms and start trying to deal with the causes.

If you cannot understand why terrorism exists, you will never be able to stop it. And answering terror with more terror will help nobody.

What do you suggest, then? OBL wants all non-Muslims out of the Arab pennisula, and advocates killing those that don't go. Fine, even Israel is trying to make that happen.OBL also wants to convert neighboring countries to his ideas, and advocates killing/attacking anyone who interferes with that conversion. So we're all just supposed to step back and watch, while he handles things anyway he wants? Terrorism exists for many reasons. None of which excuse the deliberate targeting of innocents. I understand exactly why terrorism exists, and I also understand it will never be stopped by caving in to it. There is a huge difference between what OBL did to us and our response to it. If you can't understand that, then your views of the world around you are entirely too simplistic. Bad things don't go away just because you choose to ignore them.

Congratulations. You got the point. Bong.

You, apparently, didn't.

The US has on a number of occassions dropped bombs directly onto where they though Al Quaeda was.

Yes, AFTER Al Qaeda slammed some of our commercial planes into some of our civilian buildings and the Pentagon.

Putting that to one side, the continued American support for the Israelis in their dealings with the Palestinians (thousands of dead), the sanctions on Iraq (huindreds of thousands of dead), and military bases on the Arab peninsula were all seen, rightly or wrongly, as reasons for "hitting back".

Bin Laden chose to attack us, true, because of our alliance with Israel, and because we have troops in the region. He believes, and this is directly from interviews with him, that no non-Muslims should be in the Arab pennisula. He advocates killing any that are, military or otherwise. To his thinking, if all we had in the region were a bunch of Red Cross folks, he'd still want them dead or gone. It's not the presence of a military force, per se, he has a problem with, it's with any non-Muslims being in their holy land. regardless of why. He also wants to convert neighboring countries, and views US presence as "the head of the snake" over these countires that prevents his conversion.
And this is after the US helped back him in his fight against Russian occupation of the region.

Yes, AFTER Al Qaeda slammed some of our commercial planes into some of our civilian buildings and the Pentagon.



Bin Laden chose to attack us, true, because of our alliance with Israel, and because we have troops in the region. He believes, and this is directly from interviews with him, that no non-Muslims should be in the Arab pennisula. He advocates killing any that are, military or otherwise. To his thinking, if all we had in the region were a bunch of Red Cross folks, he'd still want them dead or gone. It's not the presence of a military force, per se, he has a problem with, it's with any non-Muslims being in their holy land. regardless of why. He also wants to convert neighboring countries, and views US presence as "the head of the snake" over these countires that prevents his conversion.
And this is after the US helped back him in his fight against Russian occupation of the region.



054/\/\4 81|\| 14d3|\| 15 /\/\'/ |-|3|20

Stop looking to deal with the symptoms and start trying to deal with the causes.

The cause being OBL wants a region free of non-Muslims. But where do his boundaries end? How far do we back off before we ARE justified in fighting? Yes, terrorism is a new kind of war. But what's been happening recently is even a new kind of terrorism. I read an article today that talks of a Russian terrorist who was planning to kill an arch duke (early 1900's, I believe), but cancelled the attempt because he found the duke would be traveling with his wife and child. Now the targets don't even have to have political connections. How do we back away and allow innocent children to intentionally be made the targets? Do you honestly believe such things would stop if we just did what the terrorists want us to do? Or is it more logical to believe that if we give in now, they'll just come back with more demands? Yes, address the causes, but don't ignore the symptoms.

054/\/\4 81|\| 14d3|\| 15 /\/\'/ |-|3|20


I'm not a computer, a hacker, and definitely not a mathmetician. ;) Please respond in english.

I'm not a computer, a hacker, and definitely not a mathmetician. ;) Please respond in english.



Fuk|< 0FF

Fuk|< 0FF

There, see? You can use words...sort of. Feel better? :rolleyes:

You dolt. A private American company tried to work with the Talibs to build an oil pipeline, but their lobbying to the American government failed because we didn't even recognize the Taliban as the official rulers of Afghanistan. Only silly leftist conspirators would believe that we went into Afghanistan because the US government wanted an oil pipeline. That is FUCKING STUPID.
When you "Google" a search for "oil pipeline afghanistan". It truly is amazing what you will find, page after page of the search. To dismiss it as stupid would be remiss on your part?

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=oil+pipeline+afghanistan&btnG=Google+Search&meta=


We've killed thousands of al-Qaeda and Talib terrorists in Afghanistan and you still crow about the fact that we didn't have a 100% capture rate. Makes me wonder if you're rooting for the terrorists.
Because people bring thoughts, and facts forward, does not automatically make them cheerleaders for the terrorist cause. Examining the flaws is part of the game? Below is certainly an interesting read:

How al Qaeda slipped away

http://bulletin.ninemsn.com.au/bulletin/site/articleIDs/41AEF0150CDBAB75CA256C1400030863

We did succeed in denying aid and comfort to the terrorists (a stated goal) so they can't plan and train in comfort any more.
They still seem do be doing okay at what they do best.....Spain, Russia, 3 times in Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, etc. In fact, terrorism has increased since the war on terrorism started.

And Afghanistan is holding elections soon, with over 90% of the electorate registered. But I guess none of those achievements count for anything because we failed to capture al-Qaeda's top brass. Right?
You might want to check your figures, or perhaps you could offer a credible site that could back your claim?

BTW, I came across this:

Afghan vote threatens Bush's credibility

KABUL—With evidence mounting of plans for widespread vote-rigging in Afghanistan's upcoming elections, U.S. experts say the controversy could emerge as a serious liability for U.S. President George W. Bush's re-election campaign.

After voter registration centres closed across Afghanistan on the weekend, election officials acknowledged the number of voting cards issued far exceeded the estimated number of eligible voters — and that the illegal practice of multiple registrations is widespread.

"An Afghan election marred by allegations of fraud would be bad for President Bush's overall claim of promoting democracy in the Muslim world," said Husain Haqqani, an Afghanistan expert at the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "In the absence of good news from Iraq, the Bush administration needs Afghanistan as its success story."

For months, Bush has staked his claims on a successful democratic Afghanistan, saying it would serve as an example of how America can bring democracy, and free and fair elections to the developing world.

So ease up on the personal attacks and focus on what is being brought forward? Shouting down the opposition never wins the debate.