Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

 

Poll

Do you think the west will ever be attacked again?

Yes72%72% - 140
No7%7% - 14
Go fuck yourself20%20% - 39
Total: 193
2006-08-28 04:05:29
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6905|USA

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

No you know me better than that. It is not "ok" to lose military personel over in Iraq but at least they have weapons to defend themselves unlike the 3000 people on 911, or the 190 in Spain, or the london bombing that killed 50 or so and injured several hundred or Bali bombing that killed 2 hundred and injured as many. who were either, strapped in a seat, or sitting behind a cubacle, or riding trains to work or vacationing  totally unaware as to what was going to happen to them.

This is NOT a USA, Bush, Cheney world. Attacks are happening all over the world, please stop trying to tell me it is the actions of the US that is doing it or, if the USA will change its policy it will all come to an end. What does the Bali attacks have to do with the USA??

I am not the naive one here.
Answer me one question: How is the war in Iraq minimising terror and minimising the risk of terror attacks in the west?

I never said that US policy alone is the cause of terrorism. To believe that would be quite naive, which I'm not. The world is a complicated place - noone should view things in absolute terms.

The Bali bombing was an attempt to get at Australians, who vacation there in great numbers. They also happen to have troops stationed in Iraq, as do the UK and as did the Spanish. It's funny how Germany and France haven't been attacked yet. Or all of South America. Or China. Or a great many other countries around the globe.
The only reason Germany has not been attacked is because their intelligance networks foiled the plot. I agree the US presence in the world is huge, I am a big fan of leaving it all for the respective countries to sort it out, just don't bug the US when they don't. They can not have it both ways. They can not beg for help and handouts and expect the US to "mind its own business".

We all saw how Spain handled their terrorism, they fled, and succumbed to the terrorism. How proud all the liberals must be of them.
2006-08-28 04:17:33
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6809

lowing wrote:

The only reason Germany has not been attacked is because their intelligance networks foiled the plot. I agree the US presence in the world is huge, I am a big fan of leaving it all for the respective countries to sort it out, just don't bug the US when they don't. They can not have it both ways. They can not beg for help and handouts and expect the US to "mind its own business".

We all saw how Spain handled their terrorism, they fled, and succumbed to the terrorism. How proud all the liberals must be of them.
Number of terror attacks in Spain since Spain withdrew from that futile war? Zero. That's not to say that they won't get attacked again however.

You seem to suggest aid must be supplied to needy countries under certain conditions, i.e. if the US supplies aid they should not be expected to 'mind their own business' but to have a say in their affairs. Hardly the most selfless stance. The EU gives aid to all manner of countries relatively unconditionally. If someone is hostile to you then you can choose not to supply them with aid. It's really quite simple. Who's gonna bug the US if they don't sort out other countries shit? Not me, that's for sure.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-08-28 06:15:59)

2006-08-28 04:27:42
S3v3N
lolwut?
+685|6772|Montucky
Do you think the west will ever be attacked again?


Does a Fat Baby Poop?

yes.
2006-08-28 04:38:04
cl4u53w1t2
Salon-Bolschewist
+269|6727|Kakanien
let's not forget: iraq had nothing to do with terrorism or weapons of mass destruction. now it has to do with terrorism, but aimed against itself, thanks to operation iraqi freedom. now, there is terror camps and lots of fundamentalists in this country. the us-led invasion actually created terrorism. in iraq, terrorists get their "terror education". from iraq, terror will come back to the west. invading iraq is one of the biggest crimes ever committed by the usa.
i disagree about germany having avoided terrorist attacks. we were just lucky, for example like a week ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2oh3h3DvY0
2006-08-28 04:42:23
SpaceApollyon
Scratch where it itches
+41|6773|Finland
It seems that terrorist organizations have currently more support and motivation than they have ever had. If this is correct, then there is an obvious outcome. More attacks.
2006-08-28 04:47:19
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7011|Argentina

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

I've heard a lot of neo-cons going on about how 'we're fighting the terrorists over there rather than over here?', etc., etc. As such, they must assume terror attacks are unlikely ever to occur in the west again. Is that the case? They don't extend their logic over the fact that the 9/11 bombers were resident in the US for quite a while before the 9/11 attack and blended in relatively seamlessly and it would still be unbelievably easy for similar folk to sneak across the porous Mexican or Canadian borders to launch further attacks. The drive to commit such acts will also have increased as evidenced by the fully british muslims (born and bred) who have chosen to attack their own country out of sheer anger.
The usual three poll options have been made available.
I know more attacks are inevatible because there are too many terrorist lap dogs in America that are going to make sure we will never use every tool available to expose them. You yourself imply that they are already here, and i agree, however as long as the liberal element is toting the ACLU flag for "rights for everyone" including terrorists we will never win. I.E. We are not allowed to profile for the very people who are today carrying out such attacks. Too risky, we might hurt someones feelings.

Bottom line.....The liberals will make damn sure we are hit again.
Don't you have any thoguht that doesn't involve blaming liberals?  Why do you have to call terrorist lap dog to all liberals?  I hate terrorists and I'm liberal.  You are mixing things as always.  If anyone is making possible another attack is Bush.
I think it will happen again.  You can do nothing to stop it.  The more you fuck these terrorists, the more you will be hit then.  So, Bush unfriendly attitude with them is not keeping you safe at all.  It's a fact that these folks are making plans right now to hit the west again.
2006-08-28 05:02:04
Lisik
Member
+74|6754|Israel
u all saw what hapens to lebanon who was shooting katushas on israel... now think what israel were doing to iraq, who was shooting SCUDS on tel aviv!

if usa wasnt taking sadam off, israel were nucking iraq to hell!

add: and if israel were nucking iraq to hell... bin laden were attacking west with all his power!

Last edited by Lisik (2006-08-28 05:04:13)

2006-08-28 05:42:46
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6809

Lisik wrote:

u all saw what hapens to lebanon who was shooting katushas on israel... now think what israel were doing to iraq, who was shooting SCUDS on tel aviv!

if usa wasnt taking sadam off, israel were nucking iraq to hell!

add: and if israel were nucking iraq to hell... bin laden were attacking west with all his power!
The prophet of doom and war speaks again. Are you an official in the Israeli department of defense by any chance?
2006-08-28 07:18:44
James-m
Member
+28|6803|England
Look guys, nothing will stop the towl heads attacking any western country. No matter what we do, theyll always be pissed off and burn western flags. The people over there arent stable, theyre crazy. I mean, do we fire weapons in the streets? No, do we burn iraqi or syrian flags? No. If we changed our foreign policies, that still wouldnt stop them from killing more innocent people. They asked for it in iraq, they attack the usa what did they think would happen? Did they think theyd get away with it? Dont be silly. They dont care if they die, they think dieing for Allah is good, when its plainly a load of crap. But its what they believe, they will continue to do this until every single person in the world is a muslim. Im not talking about normal everyday muslims, im talking about these so called ismalic extremists. But i cant see, if theyre really that religious, that theyd pick up a gun, or worse, run into a crowd and kill people. To my mind, thats not religion its just stupid, a very poor excuse to kill people at that.
2006-08-28 07:26:32
James-m
Member
+28|6803|England

cl4u53w1t2 wrote:

let's not forget: iraq had nothing to do with terrorism or weapons of mass destruction. now it has to do with terrorism, but aimed against itself, thanks to operation iraqi freedom. now, there is terror camps and lots of fundamentalists in this country. the us-led invasion actually created terrorism. in iraq, terrorists get their "terror education". from iraq, terror will come back to the west. invading iraq is one of the biggest crimes ever committed by the usa.
i disagree about germany having avoided terrorist attacks. we were just lucky, for example like a week ago.
what about the crime committed by these so called religious people? Flying planes into towers? When these people did nothing wrong?
2006-08-28 07:50:02
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6809

James-m wrote:

cl4u53w1t2 wrote:

let's not forget: iraq had nothing to do with terrorism or weapons of mass destruction. now it has to do with terrorism, but aimed against itself, thanks to operation iraqi freedom. now, there is terror camps and lots of fundamentalists in this country. the us-led invasion actually created terrorism. in iraq, terrorists get their "terror education". from iraq, terror will come back to the west. invading iraq is one of the biggest crimes ever committed by the usa.
i disagree about germany having avoided terrorist attacks. we were just lucky, for example like a week ago.
what about the crime committed by these so called religious people? Flying planes into towers? When these people did nothing wrong?
Newsflash: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Unrelated people bore the brunt of misguided 'retaliation'.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-08-28 07:50:54)

2006-08-28 07:51:27
Tunacommy
Member
+56|6874|Massachusetts, USA

Lisik wrote:

u all saw what hapens to lebanon who was shooting katushas on israel... now think what israel were doing to iraq, who was shooting SCUDS on tel aviv!

if usa wasnt taking sadam off, israel were nucking iraq to hell!

add: and if israel were nucking iraq to hell... bin laden were attacking west with all his power!
It is like that movie Beyond Thunderdome (Mel Gibson) with that little midget riding on the back of that huge cro-magnon guy....Israel (the smart midget) points and says "attack!" and the U.S. (the big dumb guy) does so, blindly.....let's hope the terrorists don't have any whistles.....
2006-08-28 08:03:16
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6796|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:

James-m wrote:

cl4u53w1t2 wrote:

let's not forget: iraq had nothing to do with terrorism or weapons of mass destruction. now it has to do with terrorism, but aimed against itself, thanks to operation iraqi freedom. now, there is terror camps and lots of fundamentalists in this country. the us-led invasion actually created terrorism. in iraq, terrorists get their "terror education". from iraq, terror will come back to the west. invading iraq is one of the biggest crimes ever committed by the usa.
i disagree about germany having avoided terrorist attacks. we were just lucky, for example like a week ago.
what about the crime committed by these so called religious people? Flying planes into towers? When these people did nothing wrong?
Newsflash: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Unrelated people bore the brunt of misguided 'retaliation'.
Dude - stop duping people into the 9/11 argument in this thread.  People are tangenting their argument re: security is lax and 9/11 happened.   They are not saying "Iraq happened because of 9/11".  Both James & Lowing used 9/11 as an example of the threat coming to fruition - you are pressing the the "9/11 causation for Iraq" theory button...not them.

Thanks in advance.
2006-08-28 08:31:27
Sydney
2λчиэλ
+783|7097|Reykjavík, Iceland.
What's your definition of west? Mine would be western from Western Europe to the US, how about you?
2006-08-28 08:38:53
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6809

PBAsydney wrote:

What's your definition of west? Mine would be western from Western Europe to the US, how about you?
West for me = Europe, USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand.
2006-08-28 08:40:21
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6875|London, England
Terrorism's always gonna be attacking things. Not just the west. They (terrorists) hate more than the west. It's not a fucking east vs west cold war thing anymore.
2006-08-28 08:43:20
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7011|Argentina

CameronPoe wrote:

PBAsydney wrote:

What's your definition of west? Mine would be western from Western Europe to the US, how about you?
West for me = Europe, USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand.
Well, you forget South America.  Argentina suffered two attacks in the 90's from Hezbollah, killing more than 200 people.  It has the third jewish community in all the world.
2006-08-28 08:48:04
HOLLYWOOD=_=FTW=_=
Member
+31|6805
Im not really worried about another bombing more along the lines of a bio or chem attack
2006-08-28 08:49:40
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6809

sergeriver wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

PBAsydney wrote:

What's your definition of west? Mine would be western from Western Europe to the US, how about you?
West for me = Europe, USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand.
Well, you forget South America.  Argentina suffered two attacks in the 90's from Hezbollah, killing more than 200 people.  It has the third jewish community in all the world.
Sorry I should have included Argentina too. The rest of South America I classify as the developing world though (although Panama and especially Chile are getting there). The world bank and IMF kind of fucked over Argentina, one of the richest and best developed countries in SA, that's why I forgot to include you.
2006-08-28 09:16:00
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7011|Argentina

CameronPoe wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

West for me = Europe, USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand.
Well, you forget South America.  Argentina suffered two attacks in the 90's from Hezbollah, killing more than 200 people.  It has the third jewish community in all the world.
Sorry I should have included Argentina too. The rest of South America I classify as the developing world though (although Panama and especially Chile are getting there). The world bank and IMF kind of fucked over Argentina, one of the richest and best developed countries in SA, that's why I forgot to include you.
Don't worry.  We fucked ourselves dude.  But we are still rich, so we must pay for the corruption of former and present governments.  Chile is a very poor country, where 85% of the people are in poverty.  I've been there a couple of times and it's like this, you have two rich neighbourhoods, surrounded by hills, there live the 10% richer, and behind the hills the rest.  So, if you go for business perhaps you only see the "America like part", but not the ugly one.  Panama is saved with the channel.

Last edited by sergeriver (2006-08-28 09:20:35)

2006-08-28 10:29:23
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6898|Seattle, WA

CameronPoe wrote:

Newsflash: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Unrelated people bore the brunt of misguided 'retaliation'.
Newsflash: HOW DO YOU KNOW FOR SURE.  Yes that is the assumption, but there is no way to say that this is the absolute truth, you even said it yourself that people shouldn't think in absolutes as much (or something like that) and what are you doing with this statement............naive? I'm not one to judge.

Unrelated people?? Ok.  So than what? Put Saddam back in power, and leave? Great plan.  Instead of ALWAYS criticizing, how about offering your solution Cam.  What is your answer to the problem, what should the policy be?
2006-08-28 10:50:17
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6950|NJ

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

I've heard a lot of neo-cons going on about how 'we're fighting the terrorists over there rather than over here?', etc., etc. As such, they must assume terror attacks are unlikely ever to occur in the west again. Is that the case? They don't extend their logic over the fact that the 9/11 bombers were resident in the US for quite a while before the 9/11 attack and blended in relatively seamlessly and it would still be unbelievably easy for similar folk to sneak across the porous Mexican or Canadian borders to launch further attacks. The drive to commit such acts will also have increased as evidenced by the fully british muslims (born and bred) who have chosen to attack their own country out of sheer anger.
The usual three poll options have been made available.
I know more attacks are inevatible because there are too many terrorist lap dogs in America that are going to make sure we will never use every tool available to expose them. You yourself imply that they are already here, and i agree, however as long as the liberal element is toting the ACLU flag for "rights for everyone" including terrorists we will never win. I.E. We are not allowed to profile for the very people who are today carrying out such attacks. Too risky, we might hurt someones feelings.

Bottom line.....The liberals will make damn sure we are hit again.
Much better after agreeing with you once this one is making me feel better. The main and only problem with profiling in "terrorist" attacks means that they can slip there tools onto an other person. Means if I'm standing there not really paying attention someone could switch bags and put their bomb in with my bag. I mean some things needs to be clear on that like strip search's and things within reason should be Profiled..  We will never win this battle anyway because in this world there'll be a pissed off group.
2006-08-28 10:53:04
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6898|Seattle, WA

cpt.fass1 wrote:

1) Means if I'm standing there not really paying attention someone could switch bags and put their bomb in with my bag. I mean some things needs to be clear on that like strip search's and things within reason should be Profiled.. 

2)We will never win this battle anyway because in this world there'll be a pissed off group.
That is why people need to vigilant and not dumb tards and always know whats going on around them.  Its called "situational awareness".

2) Exactly.  I got searched and padded down while going on a flight from Heathrow to Seattle, did I care.............................




nope.

(Oh and I'm about as white as it gets, family heritage = Irish/Welsh = Whitey)
2006-08-28 10:58:33
Psycho
Member since 2005
+44|7030|Kansas, USA

CameronPoe wrote:

I've heard a lot of neo-cons going on about how 'we're fighting the terrorists over there rather than over here?', etc., etc. As such, they must assume terror attacks are unlikely ever to occur in the west again. Is that the case? They don't extend their logic over the fact that the 9/11 bombers were resident in the US for quite a while before the 9/11 attack and blended in relatively seamlessly and it would still be unbelievably easy for similar folk to sneak across the porous Mexican or Canadian borders to launch further attacks. The drive to commit such acts will also have increased as evidenced by the fully british muslims (born and bred) who have chosen to attack their own country out of sheer anger.
The usual three poll options have been made available.
I'm not following your logic here. It is mostly the right which states we are fighting them "over there" to prevent attacks here. However, I don't think anyone in there right mind believe that menas there will be no attempts. That is why the right is also more in favor of government intervention to thwart such an attack at home.

The fighting "over there" at least puts much of the terror resources locked into that region and puts the military in danger rather than the citizens.
2006-08-28 11:00:14
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6898|Seattle, WA

CameronPoe wrote:

the fact that the 9/11 bombers were resident in the US for quite a while before the 9/11 attack...
And how long were they here before they struck???

Edit: I'll answer for you.

The 9/11 Report wrote:

U.S. authorities believe the hijackers were in two groups: six core organizers, who included the four pilots and two others; and the remaining thirteen who entered the United States later in pairs in the spring and summer of 2001 via the United Arab Emirates.
A couple months is now
quite a while
Other than the organizers, thirteen entering at the same time only a couple of months before.  Some of them with red flags on their names.  Ok...

Last edited by AlbertWesker[RE] (2006-08-28 11:04:33)

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard