Yes. It violates a cease fire. Cease fires are broken all the time and throughout history. Saddam invading Kuwait = illegal invasion. US breaking a cease fire = stupid, but not illegal.ghettoperson wrote:
usmarine, can you answer my question, I'm curious about this ceasefire of yours.ghettoperson wrote:
How very clever of you. Good to see the US gov. plans for the future!
Doesn't that still violate the ceasefire though?
You know what, screw what I said. Let's talk about mistakes. Not preventing 9/11 and invading Iraq. BUT BUSH IS A GREAT PRESIDENT.
No, he is not. All politicians are idiots.Ikarti wrote:
You know what, screw what I said. Let's talk about mistakes. Not preventing 9/11 and invading Iraq. BUT BUSH IS A GREAT PRESIDENT.
I never said I was helping anyone. My point is to reveal the true intentions and actions of the US government. People commit terrorist acts against the US, the US government becomes outraged, fires up the nation, has us rallying around flags and singing God Bless America at baseball games (of all places), and invades countries. US government commits acts of terrorism on innocent Canadian civilians, people (including you) call it a simple "mistake" and say deal with it.usmarine2005 wrote:
What about the people in prison who are found to be innocent???? Why aren't you guys helping them?KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Me not taking out the trash cans this morning was a mistake. A government blindly imprisoning and torturing a man because they *think* he is a terrorist is a travesty, a violation of his human and civil rights, and utterly shameful. And still, the US is too fucking stubborn to apologize.usmarine2005 wrote:
I guess you have never made a mistake, or done anything incorrectly.
Its one thing to have terrorists attacking our government. Its another to have our government committing terrorist attacks.
Why the double standard? Why is it not OK for people to terrorize the US, but OK for the US to terrorize other parts of the world? What if you were taken by a foreign government and imprisoned for looking like a terrorist? When (and if) they released you, would you shake their hand, say, "honest mistake guys, no hard feelings"? That is ridiculous.
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-10-18 14:49:43)
No. But I doubt Mr. Arab would be on a forum defending me and speaking out against his country claiming to know better.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
What if you were taken by a foreign government and imprisoned for looking like a terrorist? When (and if) they released you, would you shake their hand, say, "honest mistake guys, no hard feelings"? That is ridiculous.
dude thats a pretty stupid comment manghettoperson wrote:
Have you been stuck in a jail cell for years, regularily having various forms of torture used on you? I'd take the IED's and snipers any day; at least if it happens it's quick. (Yes yes I'm fully aware it may not kill me)usmarine2005 wrote:
So...you have driven down raods just waiting for an IED to explode? Have you walked down a street just waiting to be sniped?Ikarti wrote:
You'd be surprised. Of course, you've never really been too sharp on this forum, so keep on telling people what they do and do not know if you wish.
Precision Guided Munitions and ground forces.
I think one way you don't fight such a war is with armies. An army needs a visible and named target to go after. Very few terrorists care much for being visible. Far better to fight terrorism using covert methods.GATOR591957 wrote:
How do you fight a war against terrorism. Especially when there are no guidlines outlining what does and does not constitute terrorism. I was reviewing this last night and it occured to me that Hitler was attempting the same thing in his war against the Jews.
Even 'covert methods' boil down to a man with a gun, and he needs a target too. Thus, it is impossible to fight the undefined concept of terrorism.EricTViking wrote:
I think one way you don't fight such a war is with armies. An army needs a visible and named target to go after. Very few terrorists care much for being visible. Far better to fight terrorism using covert methods.GATOR591957 wrote:
How do you fight a war against terrorism. Especially when there are no guidlines outlining what does and does not constitute terrorism. I was reviewing this last night and it occured to me that Hitler was attempting the same thing in his war against the Jews.
Well, the U.S. did help Saddam rise to power. We armed him heavily against the Iranians. So, the U.S. is at least responsible for keeping a murderer in power for a good decade or two. Now that we've taken him out, we ironically have created a situation where more terror exists in this region than before.usmarine2005 wrote:
Does that include innocents killed by Saddam......on purpose.GATOR591957 wrote:
Does that include innocent Iraqi's killed by us the USA?BigmacK wrote:
It's called military action, not deliberate suicidal mayhem.Ikarti wrote:
And then you attack the terrorists using terrorism!
No, the wrongful deaths of innocent people ammounts to terrorism.
It would seem that no matter what we do with Iraq, we screw it up. At this point, we just need to face the fact that invasion has not furthered our goal of thwarting terror.
We ought to turn our full attention to Afghanistan again. That way, we can kill off what remains of the Taliban, while we let the Iraqis "sort things out," if you know what I mean....
Yep. I wish they would take some responsibility for their country instead of trying to destroy it. I wish we would pull out. I am sick of having people die for people unwilling to help themselves.Turquoise wrote:
while we let the Iraqis "sort things out," if you know what I mean....
Amen to that...usmarine2005 wrote:
Yep. I wish they would take some responsibility for their country instead of trying to destroy it. I wish we would pull out. I am sick of having people die for people unwilling to help themselves.Turquoise wrote:
while we let the Iraqis "sort things out," if you know what I mean....
First off, terrorism is not an ideology. Terrorism is the means not the ends.GATOR591957 wrote:
How do you fight a war against terrorism. Especially when there are no guidlines outlining what does and does not constitute terrorism. I was reviewing this last night and it occured to me that Hitler was attempting the same thing in his war against the Jews.
A war against terrorism is by definition a war against anyone/ everyone and nobody at the same time. As such, it cannot be implemented, let alone be won. The purpose of such a war could be anything other than a fight against terrorists. Long story short: one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter (how silly does Rambo feel today?), read 1984 it pretty much says it all. Orwell's only mistake was the date: he set his novel 17 years early.
ƒ³
1984 sounded catchier than 2001: A Space Government Odyssey.oug wrote:
First off, terrorism is not an ideology. Terrorism is the means not the ends.GATOR591957 wrote:
How do you fight a war against terrorism. Especially when there are no guidlines outlining what does and does not constitute terrorism. I was reviewing this last night and it occured to me that Hitler was attempting the same thing in his war against the Jews.
A war against terrorism is by definition a war against anyone/ everyone and nobody at the same time. As such, it cannot be implemented, let alone be won. The purpose of such a war could be anything other than a fight against terrorists. Long story short: one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter (how silly does Rambo feel today?), read 1984 it pretty much says it all. Orwell's only mistake was the date: he set his novel 17 years early.
If you just had to be tortured for a few years but got your life back at the end, then it would be more appealing. But if you knew the torture would end in death, execution, or life imprisionment under awful conditions then it would make sense to choose the quick option.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
dude thats a pretty stupid comment manghettoperson wrote:
Have you been stuck in a jail cell for years, regularily having various forms of torture used on you? I'd take the IED's and snipers any day; at least if it happens it's quick. (Yes yes I'm fully aware it may not kill me)usmarine2005 wrote:
So...you have driven down raods just waiting for an IED to explode? Have you walked down a street just waiting to be sniped?
Obviously not dying would be preferable, but wouldn't most soldiers for the 'coalition' choose a death in combat and a hero's send-off over years of torture then execution simply because they were following orders and fighting for a cause they believed in? Wouldn't that lessen the suffering of their families compared to 10-years of anguish before they must deal with your death/permanent imprisonment?
Both the IED/sniper and imprisonment without trial have a significant amount of mental anguish involved in them, but you are getting paid for your suffering in one of the two situations. And since there isn't a draft, people still choose to sign up because they are aware of the dangers and believe they can cope. And there are get-outs for those who discover they can't, but no such option exists in prison.
Again.,. how was he tortured? What methods of "torture" were used on him?UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
Both the IED/sniper and imprisonment without trial have a significant amount of mental anguish involved in them, but you are getting paid for your suffering in one of the two situations. And since there isn't a draft, people still choose to sign up because they are aware of the dangers and believe they can cope. And there are get-outs for those who discover they can't, but no such option exists in prison.
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2006-10-18 17:05:34)
Make that two.Ikarti wrote:
Well, at least the concept of torture doesn't bother one of us.usmarine2005 wrote:
I bet it does.Ikarti wrote:
Lord, I doth protest! Secret CIA prisons, torture, detaining the innocent? Sounds like sheer terror to me.
Malloy must go
Sick fuck.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Make that two.Ikarti wrote:
Well, at least the concept of torture doesn't bother one of us.usmarine2005 wrote:
I bet it does.
We should force all advocates of torture or the death penalty to experience it first.
You take someone with said idealology beat the shit out of him until he doesn't like it.
Again, Ikarti fails. I define torture as permanent bodily harm, rape, mutilation, etc. What he considers torture.....which I do not, is sleep deprivation, food deprivation, denial of religion, loud noises, etc.jonsimon wrote:
Sick fuck.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Make that two.Ikarti wrote:
Well, at least the concept of torture doesn't bother one of us.
We should force all advocates of torture or the death penalty to experience it first.
Hey Marine, much respect for serving your country, Mr. Arab (me) would defend you, and so would a lot of other Mr. Arabs if you were to be wrongfully detained for any given reason, any level headed Homo Sapien would, I see were you are coming from with your arguments but i still would argue against any war started due to wrong intelligence, i completely oppose any kind of terrorist actions.. especially those that are said to be for religion. Islam never instructed anyone to commit murder, but i still think that there are better means of thwarting terrorism than fighting a war. My view is this.. find the cause of the terrorism.. what started it and fix it. It doesn't always mean find a person and kill them, but sometimes it does. Again.. much respect for wearing your uniform proud.usmarine2005 wrote:
No. But I doubt Mr. Arab would be on a forum defending me and speaking out against his country claiming to know better.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
What if you were taken by a foreign government and imprisoned for looking like a terrorist? When (and if) they released you, would you shake their hand, say, "honest mistake guys, no hard feelings"? That is ridiculous.
You are correct, but they don't call it murder. In modern times, I do not see people from Catholic, Baptist, or other faiths cutting off peoples heads in the name of God. Islam may or may not teach murder, but it sure as hell does not teach peace.ZuDragon wrote:
Islam never instructed anyone to commit murder
Oh, you mean that was the reason we decided to invade Iraq?!usmarine2005 wrote:
Does that include innocents killed by Saddam......on purpose.GATOR591957 wrote:
Does that include innocent Iraqi's killed by us the USA?BigmacK wrote:
It's called military action, not deliberate suicidal mayhem.
No, the wrongful deaths of innocent people ammounts to terrorism.
You mean, we don't like dictators who keep their smacktard subjects from engaging in a giant, urban, genocidal civil war capable of potentially throwing the whole area into chaos, by smoking a few of the most restless ones every now and then?
You mean, we don't approve of using secret police, torture, murder, and assassinations as a means of controlling a nation?
Right. So we're going to invade, err, "liberate" which nation from their evil, human rights abusing government next? Cambodia? Vietnam? North Korea? China? Oh, you mean that some of these countries might actually have the ability to fight back with an organized military, and/or they have nuclear weapons and/or they have no oil?
Oh well... For our next trick, maybe we'll just have to send a few gunships to blow shit up in some near stone-age African country, you know, so it seems "like we're trying to fight against The Man"
The hell?RoofusMcDoofus wrote:
Oh, you mean that was the reason we decided to invade Iraq?!usmarine2005 wrote:
Does that include innocents killed by Saddam......on purpose.GATOR591957 wrote:
Does that include innocent Iraqi's killed by us the USA?
You mean, we don't like dictators who keep their smacktard subjects from engaging in a giant, urban, genocidal civil war capable of potentially throwing the whole area into chaos, by smoking a few of the most restless ones every now and then?
You mean, we don't approve of using secret police, torture, murder, and assassinations as a means of controlling a nation?
Right. So we're going to invade, err, "liberate" which nation from their evil, human rights abusing government next? Cambodia? Vietnam? North Korea? China? Oh, you mean that some of these countries might actually have the ability to fight back with an organized military, and/or they have nuclear weapons and/or they have no oil?
Oh well... For our next trick, maybe we'll just have to send a few gunships to blow shit up in some near stone-age African country, you know, so it seems "like we're trying to fight against The Man"
I suggest that you do it by raising the stanbard of living to a level for all the people that there is no prevailing reaon for terrorism.GATOR591957 wrote:
How do you fight a war against terrorism. Especially when there are no guidlines outlining what does and does not constitute terrorism. I was reviewing this last night and it occured to me that Hitler was attempting the same thing in his war against the Jews.
Terrorism is easily defined as those who engage in warfare and murder against civilians, whilst wearing civilian clothes and honoring no flag.
If a peoples, such as the Muslims, have a serious grievance, they would further their cause better by forming an alliance, capitalizing on their domination of the worlds oil reserves, and fielding standing armies led by elected governments.
Instead...we have dirka dirka jihad mutha fukers to everyone including and usually their own fellow Muslims.
Notice I capitalize Muslims but you will never see me capitalize bill clinton.
In addition to raising the standard of living through modern sewer, education and electrical power we oversee free elections of people chosen by the people; and that includes Hamas if thats what they want.
But at the same time, if Hamas continues to fund and support the flagless terrorist, then they have to be removed.
In other words, stand and fight, or stfu and follow.
It is not in the worlds best interests for flagless terrorist to have WMD's. and if that means sacking a few governments and leveling a few cities, so be it.
edit
I object to you comparing Hitlers crimes to modern terrorism.
The so called acts of terrorism commited by German Jews in pre war Germany were spitting in the wind comparred to 9-11 and the U.S.S. Cole.
The unimaginable crimes committed by nazi Germany should never be trivialized.
Last edited by ATG (2006-10-18 20:52:41)