Except I stopped arguing in this thread a long time ago... care to read the posters names?lowing wrote:
LOL and what better way to dodge a point than by claiming the person that backed you in a corner is just ignorant, while all the time REFUSING to answer specific questions posed to you because you CAN NOT.......LMAOjonsimon wrote:
Sorry but your ignorance was the best way to point out the thread was dead.lowing wrote:
I would expect nothing less than this, from you especially. Continue the dance.
I don't understand, you're saying the UN was unfair? The scuds were launched, then the UN backed the gulf war. That's pretty fair, that Iraq attacked Kuwait and Israel, and then the UN backed war against Iraq, isn't it?
how about the 56 people blown up in that building, was that fair?
does it warrant condemnation from the rest of the world, ummm, yes.
like I said, if it were on Israeli sovreign ground and the same attacks were coming from Palestine, you'd have a point. But since Israel is occupying land illegally beyond their internationally recognized borders, you don't. There is no excuse for anti terror wars beyond your borders when you are OCCUPYING other sovreign land. You would have no argument. The world knows this and US is looking somewhat sheepish in an attempt to avoid a double standard by suggesting that Israel "calm down".
how about the 56 people blown up in that building, was that fair?
does it warrant condemnation from the rest of the world, ummm, yes.
like I said, if it were on Israeli sovreign ground and the same attacks were coming from Palestine, you'd have a point. But since Israel is occupying land illegally beyond their internationally recognized borders, you don't. There is no excuse for anti terror wars beyond your borders when you are OCCUPYING other sovreign land. You would have no argument. The world knows this and US is looking somewhat sheepish in an attempt to avoid a double standard by suggesting that Israel "calm down".
Only roblem with Iraq launching the Scuds into Israel was......................................Iraq WASN'T at war with Israel........Israel had nothing to do with the invasion of Kuwait or the UN.Spumantiii wrote:
I don't understand, you're saying the UN was unfair? The scuds were launched, then the UN backed the gulf war. That's pretty fair, that Iraq attacked Kuwait and Israel, and then the UN backed war against Iraq, isn't it?
how about the 56 people blown up in that building, was that fair?
does it warrant condemnation from the rest of the world, ummm, yes.
like I said, if it were on Israeli sovreign ground and the same attacks were coming from Palestine, you'd have a point. But since Israel is occupying land illegally beyond their internationally recognized borders, you don't. There is no excuse for anti terror wars beyond your borders when you are OCCUPYING other sovreign land. You would have no argument. The world knows this and US is looking somewhat sheepish in an attempt to avoid a double standard by suggesting that Israel "calm down".
As far as innocent civilians dying in a war is concerned: If Hezzbolah gave a shit about civilian casualites, maybe they would NOT hide among them at the same time they launch attacks into Israel.
You are actually saying that Israel has no right to the land it gained control of after the failed attempt of the Arab nations to total destroy Israel in 1967.......Lesson there is........Don't go to war with someone if: 1. You ain't sure you can win...2. You don't want to lose what you gamble with.
It cracks me up that you feel sorry for the muslims losing there land after they tried to take someone elses.............Am I the only one who can see the irony in that view point.??
P.S. check your history books.....the UN backed the gulf war BEFORE Iraq tried to pull Israel into the conflict, not after.
The condemnation from the rest of the world should go against Hezbollah, NOT Israel, for hiding and fighting, and launching attacks in and around civilians......Or, are you honestly suggesting that Israel just sit back and take the rocket attacks from these positions? Of course, you probably won't even acknowledge that Hezzbolah is using such tactitcs.
You obviously stopped arguing for good reason...............................You didn't have one.jonsimon wrote:
Except I stopped arguing in this thread a long time ago... care to read the posters names?lowing wrote:
LOL and what better way to dodge a point than by claiming the person that backed you in a corner is just ignorant, while all the time REFUSING to answer specific questions posed to you because you CAN NOT.......LMAOjonsimon wrote:
Sorry but your ignorance was the best way to point out the thread was dead.
so why do you keep bringing that up then?????lowing wrote:
Only roblem with Iraq launching the Scuds into Israel was......................................Iraq WASN'T at war with Israel........Israel had nothing to do with the invasion of Kuwait or the UN.Spumantiii wrote:
I don't understand, you're saying the UN was unfair? The scuds were launched, then the UN backed the gulf war. That's pretty fair, that Iraq attacked Kuwait and Israel, and then the UN backed war against Iraq, isn't it?
how about the 56 people blown up in that building, was that fair?
does it warrant condemnation from the rest of the world, ummm, yes.
like I said, if it were on Israeli sovreign ground and the same attacks were coming from Palestine, you'd have a point. But since Israel is occupying land illegally beyond their internationally recognized borders, you don't. There is no excuse for anti terror wars beyond your borders when you are OCCUPYING other sovreign land. You would have no argument. The world knows this and US is looking somewhat sheepish in an attempt to avoid a double standard by suggesting that Israel "calm down".
First you quote the relevance of the scuds then you refute their significance hmm
Occupying land is never right, no matter who tried it first. Who would you say was right if it were reversed and Israel was being occupied? the same thing? For Palestine? Obviously I acknowledge facts. Hesbollah is using those tactics. That's why you don't use PGMs on schools, and hospitals. You use ground troops.
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-07-31 23:53:51)
Cougar wrote:
This is true, however, the most important thing to take into account when talking about politics, ESPECIALLY in the middle east is:GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
people must have a misconception about the average suicide bomber. these arent your kamikaze pilots of ww2 that crash a plane full of explosives onto the deck of an aircraft carrier. these fuckers are usually young, naive and sometimes coerced and extorted. Their mission is not to blow up any targets of strategic value. Their mission is to get the nearest and most available "soft" target out there. CIVILIANS. so let me get this straight. since the IDF targets actual strategic and tactical targets, and since "they" (hezbollah,hamas,etc..) arent up to par to attack equally strategic targets, its acceptable for them to kill civilians, because they just cant get to the troops. these fuckers TARGET civilians. the IDF dont.
Action and Re-action, Cause and Effect,
For every action there is a re-action and for every re-action there is a cause and for every cause there is an effect and for every effect there is an action. This is the most basic law of the middle east and middle eastern policies and politics. You can see exactly what I am talking about in every day news and in the history of the area. Example:
Action: Arab and Jewish factions fight each other in the British controlled area known as Israel in the years following WWII.
Re-Action: The U.N. passes Resolution 181, creating a sovereign state called Israel. 13 countries voted against the resolution, mainly nations that would surround the new nation.
Cause: Resolution 181 creates Israel and also brings along a new and more intense hatred of the Jewish people living there. This is multiplied by the fact that millions of native Palestinians are removed from their homes and forced to live in refugee camps. The tension is further increased when millions of Jewish immigrants start flocking to the area in hope of a promised land.
Effect: In response to the Palestinian humanitarian crisis, Israels encroaching borders, and overall bad relations and politics, several Arab blockade and embargo the nation of Israel.
Action: Israel launches a pre-emptive attack on four different Arab nations.
Re-Action: The Six Day War.
Cause: The Six Day causes Israels borders to expand, inside and out of the country. This adds even more pressure to the Palestinian strife. This is only compounded upon due to increased Israeli "security" around the remaining borders of Palestine. Palestine, without an army, police force, fire departments, official working governments and lacking most if not all infrastructure is occupied by the IDF in 1967 (an occupation that continues to present day).
Effect: Occupation=Terrorism. 40 years of occupation=Fanatical Terrorism.
Israel brought this on themselves for using brawn over brains time and time again and illegally occupying a country for 40 years. In France it was called a resistance, but when Europeans and Americans aren't the "freedom fighters" it's called Terrorism. What would you as a person do if a foreign army invaded your home and forced you to live under martial law enforced by armed guards for FORTY YEARS!? These terrorist have no formal military training, no organized chain of command, no government to buy weapons for them, no sophisticated reconnaissance vehicles and equipment, no fighter jets, no tanks, and no hope.
Most of Palestine is lucky if they have running water for more than a week at a time or if they are able to make it to the grocery store without having to go through 15 Israeli checkpoints. These people are desperate like none of you know. They have fewer freedoms than probably anyone on earth and the living conditions are horrible. They are bombed constantly by IAF and IDF forces, their homes are destroyed to make way for Israeli settlements and they are denied the basic human rights that we all take for granted. They resort to blowing themselves up because they literally have nothing else to do. They have no other way to fight back and it is the only thing they can do that makes them feel like they are fighting for their freedom. Most of these attacks are in response to something Israel has done to them. But since we here in America are supposedly allies with the Israeli's, you only hear about the Israeli's getting bombed, not about the Israel's dropping bunker buster bombs on apartments in Palestine.
I suggest anyone wanting to debate Israel and their policies watch Peace, Propaganda & The Promised Land before attempting to do so.
yer nuts, I never refuted the significance of anything I said.....You claim Israel is the agressor, my question to that is.....If Israel is the agressor, why did Iraq launch scuds at her during the beginning of the gulf war? Israel did not provoke such an attack. Iraq knew if Israel retaliated, that all the other ( peace loving) Muslim nations would raise up against Israel bringing more allies for Iraq. THAT, is hardly an agressive stance on Israels parts.Spumantiii wrote:
so why do you keep bringing that up then?????lowing wrote:
Only roblem with Iraq launching the Scuds into Israel was......................................Iraq WASN'T at war with Israel........Israel had nothing to do with the invasion of Kuwait or the UN.Spumantiii wrote:
I don't understand, you're saying the UN was unfair? The scuds were launched, then the UN backed the gulf war. That's pretty fair, that Iraq attacked Kuwait and Israel, and then the UN backed war against Iraq, isn't it?
how about the 56 people blown up in that building, was that fair?
does it warrant condemnation from the rest of the world, ummm, yes.
like I said, if it were on Israeli sovreign ground and the same attacks were coming from Palestine, you'd have a point. But since Israel is occupying land illegally beyond their internationally recognized borders, you don't. There is no excuse for anti terror wars beyond your borders when you are OCCUPYING other sovreign land. You would have no argument. The world knows this and US is looking somewhat sheepish in an attempt to avoid a double standard by suggesting that Israel "calm down".
First you quote the relevance of the scuds then you refute their significance hmm
Occupying land is never right, no matter who tried it first. Who would you say was right if it were reversed and Israel was being occupied? the same thing? For Palestine? Obviously I acknowledge facts. Hesbollah is using those tactics. That's why you don't use PGMs on schools, and hospitals. You use ground troops.
So instead of condemning Israel for defending itself, why don't you condemn Hezzbolah for hiding behind women and children and using them as shields while they fight??
If you acknowledge Hezzbolh, is using such tactics, how is it you spend all your time questioning the morality of Israel, Especially by suggesting that they are wrong from preventing their enemies from fucking them over by turning the tables against them.
I am pretty much done with this, it has been several pages now and all I get is opinions and name calling in place of the requested links that back up your statements as to how fair and unbiased the UN is in comparison to her muslim enemies that surround her. For being so right, you sure have a hard time proving it.
My friend this may be the truest statement in these forums.topthrill05 wrote:
Justice is blind.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
first off, If Iraq and the scuds have nothing to do with Israel ( that snippet of fact is irrelevent and proves/states nothing pertinent to this argument) Then why do you keep asking about them? I told you, they fired missiles and you're right that was AFTER the UN condemned Iraq. What's your point? Iraq had it coming. I don't understand your point in mentioning scuds at all. Yes Israel is the centre of attention for the arab countries but what does that have to do, in any way, with the UN/ Israeli status? Why do you keep asking about it and when I ask why you ask you act as though it was irrelevant!!!!! It was and has nothing in common with your argument! Drop the scuds what do they prove?? The UN is made up of countries including those Muslim countries. At least THEY PARTICIPATE IT"S MORE THAN I CAN SAY FOR YOU. YOU CHOSE TO OPT OUT. They get the same treatment from g8 as does Israel! The only difference being the level of interference that US/UK decides to impart on them!!!!! BEING FAIR WOULD BE TO DO THE SAME THING TO ISRAEL!!!! But nobody will because that would be a DOUBLE STANDARD. Got it now?lowing wrote:
yer nuts, I never refuted the significance of anything I said.....You claim Israel is the agressor, my question to that is.....If Israel is the agressor, why did Iraq launch scuds at her during the beginning of the gulf war? Israel did not provoke such an attack. Iraq knew if Israel retaliated, that all the other ( peace loving) Muslim nations would raise up against Israel bringing more allies for Iraq. THAT, is hardly an agressive stance on Israels parts.Spumantiii wrote:
so why do you keep bringing that up then?????lowing wrote:
Only roblem with Iraq launching the Scuds into Israel was......................................Iraq WASN'T at war with Israel........Israel had nothing to do with the invasion of Kuwait or the UN.
First you quote the relevance of the scuds then you refute their significance hmm
Occupying land is never right, no matter who tried it first. Who would you say was right if it were reversed and Israel was being occupied? the same thing? For Palestine? Obviously I acknowledge facts. Hesbollah is using those tactics. That's why you don't use PGMs on schools, and hospitals. You use ground troops.
So instead of condemning Israel for defending itself, why don't you condemn Hezzbolah for hiding behind women and children and using them as shields while they fight??
If you acknowledge Hezzbolh, is using such tactics, how is it you spend all your time questioning the morality of Israel, Especially by suggesting that they are wrong from preventing their enemies from fucking them over by turning the tables against them.
I am pretty much done with this, it has been several pages now and all I get is opinions and name calling in place of the requested links that back up your statements as to how fair and unbiased the UN is in comparison to her muslim enemies that surround her. For being so right, you sure have a hard time proving it.
occupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupation Israel is the only country to violate the borders that's why. Don't ask for links and refuse to read / listen to them.
don't claim the Arab world to be the sole agressors when you refuse to look at half of the story.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/ … 15.doc.htm
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? … 2FShowFull
http://english.people.com.cn/200112/16/ … 6813.shtml
On a side note, the Chinese have nearly completed a 200000 man nuclear shelter underneath the city of Shanghai. They know what's coming. Half the people on here don't and can't because of stubbornness like yours! There's a big war a-comin. Iran will defend Syria, China will defend Iran. Nuclear war anyone? And China looks like they're just about ready, too. China condemns Israeli action.
Don't claim that the entire world (the UN ) has it out for Israel. That's more than ridiculous. Some countries do, and I'm not surprised that the UN (international community) is FAIR on Israel based on the status quo. They've been getting more intense scrutiny for 40 years, and haven't given up a thing. No wonder the UN is forced to be FAIR on ISRAEL. Fair means punishment as well as praise you know.
Nobody is allowed to occupy, whether muslim or jew. You missed my point
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-08-01 11:22:03)
The attacks on scud attacks on Israel IS relevant because it proves the mind set of the Muslim world....Iraq attacked Israel to try and FORCE them to attack Iraq. If that happened it would outrage the Muslim world and Iraq hoped the Arab nation would join the fight. The thought process being.....No Muslim nation gave a fuck if Israel GOT attacked and blown to shit, just Israel better not fight back or all hell would break loose.Spumantiii wrote:
first off, If Iraq and the scuds have nothing to do with Israel ( that snippet of fact is irrelevent and proves/states nothing pertinent to this argument) Then why do you keep asking about them? I told you, they fired missiles and you're right that was AFTER the UN condemned Iraq. What's your point? Iraq had it coming. I don't understand your point in mentioning scuds at all. Yes Israel is the centre of attention for the arab countries but what does that have to do, in any way, with the UN/ Israeli status? Why do you keep asking about it and when I ask why you ask you act as though it was irrelevant!!!!! It was and has nothing in common with your argument! Drop the scuds what do they prove?? The UN is made up of countries including those Muslim countries. At least THEY PARTICIPATE IT"S MORE THAN I CAN SAY FOR YOU. YOU CHOSE TO OPT OUT. They get the same treatment from g8 as does Israel! The only difference being the level of interference that US/UK decides to impart on them!!!!! BEING FAIR WOULD BE TO DO THE SAME THING TO ISRAEL!!!! But nobody will because that would be a DOUBLE STANDARD. Got it now?lowing wrote:
yer nuts, I never refuted the significance of anything I said.....You claim Israel is the agressor, my question to that is.....If Israel is the agressor, why did Iraq launch scuds at her during the beginning of the gulf war? Israel did not provoke such an attack. Iraq knew if Israel retaliated, that all the other ( peace loving) Muslim nations would raise up against Israel bringing more allies for Iraq. THAT, is hardly an agressive stance on Israels parts.Spumantiii wrote:
so why do you keep bringing that up then?????
First you quote the relevance of the scuds then you refute their significance hmm
Occupying land is never right, no matter who tried it first. Who would you say was right if it were reversed and Israel was being occupied? the same thing? For Palestine? Obviously I acknowledge facts. Hesbollah is using those tactics. That's why you don't use PGMs on schools, and hospitals. You use ground troops.
So instead of condemning Israel for defending itself, why don't you condemn Hezzbolah for hiding behind women and children and using them as shields while they fight??
If you acknowledge Hezzbolh, is using such tactics, how is it you spend all your time questioning the morality of Israel, Especially by suggesting that they are wrong from preventing their enemies from fucking them over by turning the tables against them.
I am pretty much done with this, it has been several pages now and all I get is opinions and name calling in place of the requested links that back up your statements as to how fair and unbiased the UN is in comparison to her muslim enemies that surround her. For being so right, you sure have a hard time proving it.
occupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupation Israel is the only country to violate the borders that's why. Don't ask for links and refuse to read / listen to them.
don't claim the Arab world to be the sole agressors when you refuse to look at half of the story.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/ … 15.doc.htm
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? … 2FShowFull
http://english.people.com.cn/200112/16/ … 6813.shtml
On a side note, the Chinese have nearly completed a 200000 man nuclear shelter underneath the city of Shanghai. They know what's coming. Half the people on here don't and can't because of stubbornness like yours! There's a big war a-comin. Iran will defend Syria, China will defend Iran. Nuclear war anyone? And China looks like they're just about ready, too. China condemns Israeli action.
Don't claim that the entire world (the UN ) has it out for Israel. That's more than ridiculous. Some countries do, and I'm not surprised that the UN (international community) is FAIR on Israel based on the status quo. They've been getting more intense scrutiny for 40 years, and haven't given up a thing. No wonder the UN is forced to be FAIR on ISRAEL. Fair means punishment as well as praise you know.
Nobody is allowed to occupy, whether muslim or jew. You missed my point
Fair does mean punishment...........Where is all the punishment for all the terror attacks AND state sponsored attacks on Israel?? Your own fuckin' video said that the violence is on both sides.YET the UN only seems to be able to "resolution" the shit out of Israel and no one else..........take the last word on this I could care less.
The fact that as soon as I asked for some info and links on UN fairness to Israel, most of you bailed on this thread.........That speaks volumes..........Goodbye.
occupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupationoccupation
The UN can condemn the military actions of a government, not the random acts of personal terrorism. The UN does condemn militaries for using weapons on civilians. Namely Israel. The Palestinians don't have a military. The Hesbollah members should have been all but rooted out by now by ground troops. There is no excuse for using this level of attack and you know it, we all know it.
The UN can condemn the military actions of a government, not the random acts of personal terrorism. The UN does condemn militaries for using weapons on civilians. Namely Israel. The Palestinians don't have a military. The Hesbollah members should have been all but rooted out by now by ground troops. There is no excuse for using this level of attack and you know it, we all know it.
Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-08-01 21:08:13)
I can tell you, who we are. We are people who practice the liberal freedom of speech. And since we know for a fact the results of militarism, we do have the best experience on how to avoid those results.lowing wrote:
Germany should sit in the fucking corner of the world and shut the fuck up........Who the hell are you to tell any other country how to act? the world had to kick your ass twice to keep you from trying take over the whole damn planet. So just sit in time out until you are told you can go play.Oberst-Moser wrote:
stryyker are you serious??? your country is breaking every and eacht rule every day.......in germany we say: dont throw rocks while sitting in a house made of glass. it's cruel for you, but don't you think it's cruel for afghans when they see their children get shot by gi joes?
BTW... Germany was branded the aggressor in WW1 by the French... though Germany's involvement in WW1 was simply the result of a stupid emperor called William II. And without the treaty of Versailles (which is basically a revenge treaty by the French to get back to the Germans for 1871) the world economy crisis 1929 would not have occured and a man like Hitler and his cronies would not have had the slightest chance of becoming a dictator.
And if you think, you can insult someone and tell him what to do in a way like that, you disqualify yourself. So go into the corner and shame on you.
there goes lowing again, insulting all and praising the USA and their allies
Well... since lowing thinks that military action in the Middle East is righteous, I suggest that he signs up with the US Army and goes over there voluntarily to fight for that in which he believes. I do have a severe problem with those types.... sitting in the comfortable chair debating about the righteousness of their countries wars without ever having been in the ditch bleeding. It is easy to point fingers while being some thousand miles away from the actual war....
Well as a matter of fact I am a veteran of the USAF, and although I was never in combat I offered myself to my country if such an event had warranted it during my 4 years of service. So yes I did put my money where my mouth is.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Well... since lowing thinks that military action in the Middle East is righteous, I suggest that he signs up with the US Army and goes over there voluntarily to fight for that in which he believes. I do have a severe problem with those types.... sitting in the comfortable chair debating about the righteousness of their countries wars without ever having been in the ditch bleeding. It is easy to point fingers while being some thousand miles away from the actual war....
How about you?? You willing to fight and even die for your freedom?? Apparently not. Most appeasers and apologist aren't. Peace at any price, right??
I'll fight for my freedom as soon as my freedom is endangered.lowing wrote:
Well as a matter of fact I am a veteran of the USAF, and although I was never in combat I offered myself to my country if such an event had warranted it during my 4 years of service. So yes I did put my money where my mouth is.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Well... since lowing thinks that military action in the Middle East is righteous, I suggest that he signs up with the US Army and goes over there voluntarily to fight for that in which he believes. I do have a severe problem with those types.... sitting in the comfortable chair debating about the righteousness of their countries wars without ever having been in the ditch bleeding. It is easy to point fingers while being some thousand miles away from the actual war....
How about you?? You willing to fight and even die for your freedom?? Apparently not. Most appeasers and apologist aren't. Peace at any price, right??
PROVE IT! OH WAIT> YOU CANT!jonsimon wrote:
I'll fight for my freedom as soon as my freedom is endangered.lowing wrote:
Well as a matter of fact I am a veteran of the USAF, and although I was never in combat I offered myself to my country if such an event had warranted it during my 4 years of service. So yes I did put my money where my mouth is.BEE_Grim_Reaper wrote:
Well... since lowing thinks that military action in the Middle East is righteous, I suggest that he signs up with the US Army and goes over there voluntarily to fight for that in which he believes. I do have a severe problem with those types.... sitting in the comfortable chair debating about the righteousness of their countries wars without ever having been in the ditch bleeding. It is easy to point fingers while being some thousand miles away from the actual war....
How about you?? You willing to fight and even die for your freedom?? Apparently not. Most appeasers and apologist aren't. Peace at any price, right??
Sure he can, give 3 or 4 years to the defense of your country, but I won't hold my breathrawls2 wrote:
PROVE IT! OH WAIT> YOU CANT!jonsimon wrote:
I'll fight for my freedom as soon as my freedom is endangered.lowing wrote:
Well as a matter of fact I am a veteran of the USAF, and although I was never in combat I offered myself to my country if such an event had warranted it during my 4 years of service. So yes I did put my money where my mouth is.
How about you?? You willing to fight and even die for your freedom?? Apparently not. Most appeasers and apologist aren't. Peace at any price, right??
your country was directly attacked and 3000 of your countrymen were killed, not to mention all the other attacks throughout the ninties.....you have no intention of defending anything. You will let others do it for you.
Last edited by lowing (2006-08-03 18:39:53)
it's not the country itself that matters so much: its the people, the culture, the languages... All this leads to a country, while a country does not necessarily lead to those things.
Ok fine.......3ooo PEOPLE from a western CULTURE who happen to speak English as their LANGUAGE were killed.....Now, are you going to do your part and make sure it never happens again??? Or are we gunna spend the next 5 pages discussing the definition of the word, country?Konfusion0 wrote:
it's not the country itself that matters so much: its the people, the culture, the languages... All this leads to a country, while a country does not necessarily lead to those things.
Country is a horrible genre of music.
LOL, I love the old stuff, 60's and 70's country.George Jones, Johnny Cash etc...Ikarti wrote:
Country is a horrible genre of music.
'Bout the only thing I can't stand is that Hip Hop, Kill a Cop, shit.
Last edited by lowing (2006-08-03 19:26:19)
Older is different entirely from what there is today. In my opinion same with hip hop. I stopped listening to it because it just started to flat out suck. 50 Cent and all that shit. Not to mention the south just completely killed the genre. But I'll stop hijacking the topic now.
LOL why stop, probably get more headway than the previous discussion.Ikarti wrote:
Older is different entirely from what there is today. In my opinion same with hip hop. I stopped listening to it because it just started to flat out suck. 50 Cent and all that shit. Not to mention the south just completely killed the genre. But I'll stop hijacking the topic now.
Having been to Afghanistan, Iraq, Albania, Liberia, Niger, Chad, Panama, Columbia.....just to name a few, I can say the only way to truly defeat the enemy is to use ANY tactic necessary to kill them. If we don't, we will just continue chasing them all over the world.