And most kids today just live in no regard to history and the facts. heck, I'm only 15, I know that having my own views is a good thing. I finally realized that thinking what other misinformed people say is true is bad.
Um... did you not notice that I specifically said that we SHOULDN'T attack all Muslims? We just have to kill the extremists. Granted, I know that's easier said than done.chuckle_hound wrote:
I'm only quoting your post because it's an example of the general American consensus.Turquoise wrote:
Hmmm.. the best way I can sum this up is that Islamists and Wahhabists must be silenced or otherwise disposed of in order for the world to progress beyond this point. Note that I'm not saying all Muslims should be dealt with this way, just the nutjobs.
Which is: "Kill all the muslims, they are all saying to kill all Americans".
Being perfectly honest, I think the rest of the civilised world should nuke Yankee land and the Middle East into the stone age. We'd be doing the planet a favour.
Apologies Turq, I've just read this thread from start to finish after a while the "you obviously don't see the threat" threads blur into one.
Plus it doesn't help that my head is burning like a cranial meltdown
Plus it doesn't help that my head is burning like a cranial meltdown
they are all noobs, all of them! we baserape them and they start crying!!!!
they will never win, evil never wins...NEVER!
they will never win, evil never wins...NEVER!
Would you condone killing everyone who wants to kill muslims? Or everyone in the KKK? Or anyone who is found guilty of discrimination? Killing people doesn't solve long-term problems. Southern whites tried to kill all the blacks, but they just kept coming.Turquoise wrote:
Um... did you not notice that I specifically said that we SHOULDN'T attack all Muslims? We just have to kill the extremists. Granted, I know that's easier said than done.chuckle_hound wrote:
I'm only quoting your post because it's an example of the general American consensus.Turquoise wrote:
Hmmm.. the best way I can sum this up is that Islamists and Wahhabists must be silenced or otherwise disposed of in order for the world to progress beyond this point. Note that I'm not saying all Muslims should be dealt with this way, just the nutjobs.
Which is: "Kill all the muslims, they are all saying to kill all Americans".
Being perfectly honest, I think the rest of the civilised world should nuke Yankee land and the Middle East into the stone age. We'd be doing the planet a favour.
Not a good analogy Lowing. The fight for Ireland was a just cause. When we won our freedom - that was that. We didn't want to continue on and annihilate the UK. The radicals aren't fighting a rational just cause. They're fighting a ludicrous cause akin to a mental illness - this illness instilled through indoctrination at religious schools. The tools: it's not difficult to persuade people islam is 'under attack' when Palestine is being raped and US bombs are flying all over the middle east. The combination of factors making the places in which they live miserable. It isn't hard to galvanise people against Mr. White Guy with the big tanks and the support for Israel. War can be the solution to problems. It's not the solution to this problem. Not yet anyway. You can kill and kill and kill until you've lost another ten thousand Americans in the process and it won't dent their recruiting strength or the existence of their ideology. Deal with thus: cause first, effect later.lowing wrote:
Hey Cam,
If war is never the answer, please explain the Irish independence that was fought for, that you are so proud of. How can you be proud of your indenpendence from England when you had to go to war to achieve it.
Does that not show that sometimes war is the only answer left?
Please stop enjoying the freedom that you bask in, if you do not support or agree with those that died giving it to you and their methods.
There is no other way to deal with readicals, it has been tried.
TIme to climb off the soap box Cam.
And what YOUR saying is that: America AND all of the middle east is wrong. You seriously cant be held accountable for what SHOULD happen when you say that "the rest of the 'civilised' world should nuke yankee land (RACIST) and the middle east into the stone age"chuckle_hound wrote:
I'm only quoting your post because it's an example of the general American consensus.Turquoise wrote:
Hmmm.. the best way I can sum this up is that Islamists and Wahhabists must be silenced or otherwise disposed of in order for the world to progress beyond this point. Note that I'm not saying all Muslims should be dealt with this way, just the nutjobs.
Which is: "Kill all the muslims, they are all saying to kill all Americans".
Being perfectly honest, I think the rest of the civilised world should nuke Yankee land and the Middle East into the stone age. We'd be doing the planet a favour.
and dude.. how smart is it to say that BLOWING UP 2 FUCKING CONTINENTS OFF THE FACE OF THE PLANET A GOOD THING?
not very.
No prob... I mean, I can't blame you for saying what you did. Sometimes my country and the Middle East both piss me off.chuckle_hound wrote:
Apologies Turq, I've just read this thread from start to finish after a while the "you obviously don't see the threat" threads blur into one.
Plus it doesn't help that my head is burning like a cranial meltdown
I wouldn't have a problem with killing all the KKK and all neo-Nazies.jonsimon wrote:
Would you condone killing everyone who wants to kill muslims? Or everyone in the KKK? Or anyone who is found guilty of discrimination? Killing people doesn't solve long-term problems. Southern whites tried to kill all the blacks, but they just kept coming.Turquoise wrote:
Um... did you not notice that I specifically said that we SHOULDN'T attack all Muslims? We just have to kill the extremists. Granted, I know that's easier said than done.chuckle_hound wrote:
I'm only quoting your post because it's an example of the general American consensus.
Which is: "Kill all the muslims, they are all saying to kill all Americans".
Being perfectly honest, I think the rest of the civilised world should nuke Yankee land and the Middle East into the stone age. We'd be doing the planet a favour.
I don't condone killing anyone, but both groups seem to focused on the fiery death of each other that it might be best to shove everyone who's contemplating.....hold on.....head sore.....imagine what I'd have written, it's not too hard at this point.jonsimon wrote:
Would you condone killing everyone who wants to kill muslims? Or everyone in the KKK? Or anyone who is found guilty of discrimination? Killing people doesn't solve long-term problems. Southern whites tried to kill all the blacks, but they just kept coming.Turquoise wrote:
Um... did you not notice that I specifically said that we SHOULDN'T attack all Muslims? We just have to kill the extremists. Granted, I know that's easier said than done.chuckle_hound wrote:
I'm only quoting your post because it's an example of the general American consensus.
Which is: "Kill all the muslims, they are all saying to kill all Americans".
Being perfectly honest, I think the rest of the civilised world should nuke Yankee land and the Middle East into the stone age. We'd be doing the planet a favour.
AARGH
Ok, nice point. right now the whole conflict isnt helping much. Im not sure on what SHOULD happen tho.CameronPoe wrote:
Not a good analogy Lowing. The fight for Ireland was a just cause. When we won our freedom - that was that. We didn't want to continue on and annihilate the UK. The radicals aren't fighting a rational just cause. They're fighting a ludicrous cause akin to a mental illness - this illness instilled through indoctrination at religious schools. The tools: it's not difficult to persuade people islam is 'under attack' when Palestine is being raped and US bombs are flying all over the middle east. The combination of factors making the places in which they live miserable. It isn't hard to galvanise people against Mr. White Guy with the big tanks and the support for Israel. War can be the solution to problems. It's not the solution to this problem. Not yet anyway. You can kill and kill and kill until you've lost another ten thousand Americans in the process and it won't dent their recruiting strength or the existence of their ideology. Deal with thus: cause first, effect later.lowing wrote:
Hey Cam,
If war is never the answer, please explain the Irish independence that was fought for, that you are so proud of. How can you be proud of your indenpendence from England when you had to go to war to achieve it.
Does that not show that sometimes war is the only answer left?
Please stop enjoying the freedom that you bask in, if you do not support or agree with those that died giving it to you and their methods.
There is no other way to deal with readicals, it has been tried.
TIme to climb off the soap box Cam.
I know what you're saying... and believe me, if I could do it, I would.chuckle_hound wrote:
I don't condone killing anyone, but both groups seem to focused on the fiery death of each other that it might be best to shove everyone who's contemplating.....hold on.....head sore.....imagine what I'd have written, it's not too hard at this point.
AARGH
Ahhhhhhh not a good analogy....ok and why?.......cuz, your cause is different..We were attacked!, we had been getting attacked for 10 years prior..the time for talking was over.......We were not in the ME on 910, we tried for 10 years to get Iraq to honor the UN resolutions that brought peace to Iraq in 91.CameronPoe wrote:
Not a good analogy Lowing. The fight for Ireland was a just cause. When we won our freedom - that was that. We didn't want to continue on and annihilate the UK. The radicals aren't fighting a rational just cause. They're fighting a ludicrous cause akin to a mental illness - this illness instilled through indoctrination at religious schools. The tools: it's not difficult to persuade people islam is 'under attack' when Palestine is being raped and US bombs are flying all over the middle east. The combination of factors making the places in which they live miserable. It isn't hard to galvanise people against Mr. White Guy with the big tanks and the support for Israel. War can be the solution to problems. It's not the solution to this problem. Not yet anyway. You can kill and kill and kill until you've lost another ten thousand Americans in the process and it won't dent their recruiting strength or the existence of their ideology. Deal with thus: cause first, effect later.lowing wrote:
Hey Cam,
If war is never the answer, please explain the Irish independence that was fought for, that you are so proud of. How can you be proud of your indenpendence from England when you had to go to war to achieve it.
Does that not show that sometimes war is the only answer left?
Please stop enjoying the freedom that you bask in, if you do not support or agree with those that died giving it to you and their methods.
There is no other way to deal with readicals, it has been tried.
TIme to climb off the soap box Cam.
I know what it says. And like I said, terrorists arent muslims, and I stand by what I have posted above.Kmarion wrote:
FFS read the fucking first few lines in the video.eagles1106 wrote:
MMM, immediately what they think of America and other countries applies to every damn citezen in that country, so therefor innocents deserve to die. Because of what some fat fuck over his little podium says , Muslim minds are pulled into believing this shit. They're not real Muslims. They're fucking animals. No, this video didnt brainwash me or make me believe anything. Some sand fuckers not even a fraction of the earths population are going to intimidate me or do anything. Bring it fuckers. Don't be afraid of this band of idiots. And yet, when we get off our asses and try to do something about it, after watching innocent people die due to them, were the ones at fault, and the only thing it does is strengthen their recruiting process because it makes us look like the bad guy.
Last edited by eagles1106 (2006-11-01 16:44:49)
You're an idiot.chuckle_hound wrote:
I'm only quoting your post because it's an example of the general American consensus.Turquoise wrote:
Hmmm.. the best way I can sum this up is that Islamists and Wahhabists must be silenced or otherwise disposed of in order for the world to progress beyond this point. Note that I'm not saying all Muslims should be dealt with this way, just the nutjobs.
Which is: "Kill all the muslims, they are all saying to kill all Americans".
Being perfectly honest, I think the rest of the civilised world should nuke Yankee land and the Middle East into the stone age. We'd be doing the planet a favour.
Actually, it is "Kill all the fucking extremists, they are all saying death to all of us"chuckle_hound wrote:
I'm only quoting your post because it's an example of the general American consensus.Turquoise wrote:
Hmmm.. the best way I can sum this up is that Islamists and Wahhabists must be silenced or otherwise disposed of in order for the world to progress beyond this point. Note that I'm not saying all Muslims should be dealt with this way, just the nutjobs.
Which is: "Kill all the muslims, they are all saying to kill all Americans".
Being perfectly honest, I think the rest of the civilised world should nuke Yankee land and the Middle East into the stone age. We'd be doing the planet a favour.
Islam is a good religion, its these fuckers that ruin it by jihading themselves into fucking buildings then still calling themselves Muslim. Real Muslims dont want to be associated with these bastards at all.
Last edited by eagles1106 (2006-11-01 16:50:40)
Guess what Lowing? The bad guys were in Afghanistan. They're still there actually. Taliban/Al Qaeda, based in Afghanistan attacks USA. US Response: ~18,000 troops to Afghanistan (2004 figure, area of Afghanistan: 652,090m2), ~130,000 troops to Iraq (2003 figure, area of Iraq: 438,317 km2). Fucked up prioritisation? You bet. Not to mention the fact that the action in Iraq turned a nation devoid of radical islam into the fucking CAPITAL of radical islam. Well done. The war of terror seems to be going swimmingly...lowing wrote:
Ahhhhhhh not a good analogy....ok and why?.......cuz, your cause is different..We were attacked!, we had been getting attacked for 10 years prior..the time for talking was over.......We were not in the ME on 910, we tried for 10 years to get Iraq to honor the UN resolutions that brought peace to Iraq in 91.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-11-01 16:52:42)
That's discrimination, so if we follow my plan, you die too.Turquoise wrote:
I wouldn't have a problem with killing all the KKK and all neo-Nazies.jonsimon wrote:
Would you condone killing everyone who wants to kill muslims? Or everyone in the KKK? Or anyone who is found guilty of discrimination? Killing people doesn't solve long-term problems. Southern whites tried to kill all the blacks, but they just kept coming.Turquoise wrote:
Um... did you not notice that I specifically said that we SHOULDN'T attack all Muslims? We just have to kill the extremists. Granted, I know that's easier said than done.
LOL, maybe it isn't going well, but that isn't the argument now is it?? +1 for the side stepCameronPoe wrote:
Guess what Lowing? The bad guys were in Afghanistan. They're still there actually. Taliban/Al Qaeda, based in Afghanistan attacks USA. US Response: ~18,000 troops to Afghanistan (2004 figure, area of Afghanistan: 652,090m2), ~130,000 troops to Iraq (2003 figure, area of Iraq: 438,317 km2). Fucked up prioritisation? You bet. Not to mention the fact that the action in Iraq turned a nation devoid of radical islam into the fucking CAPITAL of radical islam. Well done. The war of terror seems to be going swimmingly...lowing wrote:
Ahhhhhhh not a good analogy....ok and why?.......cuz, your cause is different..We were attacked!, we had been getting attacked for 10 years prior..the time for talking was over.......We were not in the ME on 910, we tried for 10 years to get Iraq to honor the UN resolutions that brought peace to Iraq in 91.
Attacked for ten years? There are three muslim terrorist attacks on US soil, ever. And two are surrounded by controversy and possible conspiracy.lowing wrote:
Ahhhhhhh not a good analogy....ok and why?.......cuz, your cause is different..We were attacked!, we had been getting attacked for 10 years prior..the time for talking was over.......We were not in the ME on 910, we tried for 10 years to get Iraq to honor the UN resolutions that brought peace to Iraq in 91.CameronPoe wrote:
Not a good analogy Lowing. The fight for Ireland was a just cause. When we won our freedom - that was that. We didn't want to continue on and annihilate the UK. The radicals aren't fighting a rational just cause. They're fighting a ludicrous cause akin to a mental illness - this illness instilled through indoctrination at religious schools. The tools: it's not difficult to persuade people islam is 'under attack' when Palestine is being raped and US bombs are flying all over the middle east. The combination of factors making the places in which they live miserable. It isn't hard to galvanise people against Mr. White Guy with the big tanks and the support for Israel. War can be the solution to problems. It's not the solution to this problem. Not yet anyway. You can kill and kill and kill until you've lost another ten thousand Americans in the process and it won't dent their recruiting strength or the existence of their ideology. Deal with thus: cause first, effect later.lowing wrote:
Hey Cam,
If war is never the answer, please explain the Irish independence that was fought for, that you are so proud of. How can you be proud of your indenpendence from England when you had to go to war to achieve it.
Does that not show that sometimes war is the only answer left?
Please stop enjoying the freedom that you bask in, if you do not support or agree with those that died giving it to you and their methods.
There is no other way to deal with readicals, it has been tried.
TIme to climb off the soap box Cam.
I think, any kind of western presence in the middle east, either having the nobelist of or sinister intentions, will see the radicals jumping out to combat it. Religious fundamentalist and zealots will always exist regardless of which dogma they follow. You cannot kill an idea, you let an idea die out and shrivel by itself. I HAVE FAITH. the democracy experiment in the middle east will succeed. I HAVE FAITH
The comment wasn't about whether the war was going well, it was about the fact that the war in Iraq was pointless. Your assertion that bullets and bombs fight the problem of radical islam is transparently incorrect when you look at the example of Iraq. From having a minute presence of radical Islam (Ansar Al Islam - a Kurdish group operating on the Iranian border) to having an entire nation infested with the exponentially growing problem of radical islam? Sidestep LOL. This isn't about whether it's going well in Iraq. My point was that you've created more radical islamists than there were before.lowing wrote:
LOL, maybe it isn't going well, but that isn't the argument now is it?? +1 for the side stepCameronPoe wrote:
Guess what Lowing? The bad guys were in Afghanistan. They're still there actually. Taliban/Al Qaeda, based in Afghanistan attacks USA. US Response: ~18,000 troops to Afghanistan (2004 figure, area of Afghanistan: 652,090m2), ~130,000 troops to Iraq (2003 figure, area of Iraq: 438,317 km2). Fucked up prioritisation? You bet. Not to mention the fact that the action in Iraq turned a nation devoid of radical islam into the fucking CAPITAL of radical islam. Well done. The war of terror seems to be going swimmingly...lowing wrote:
Ahhhhhhh not a good analogy....ok and why?.......cuz, your cause is different..We were attacked!, we had been getting attacked for 10 years prior..the time for talking was over.......We were not in the ME on 910, we tried for 10 years to get Iraq to honor the UN resolutions that brought peace to Iraq in 91.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-11-01 17:02:11)
Gee Jonsimon for you I will clarify........I really didn't mean EVERYDAY for the past 10 years..... Being attacked on US soil is not the only way terrorists attack the US.jonsimon wrote:
Attacked for ten years? There are three muslim terrorist attacks on US soil, ever. And two are surrounded by controversy and possible conspiracy.lowing wrote:
Ahhhhhhh not a good analogy....ok and why?.......cuz, your cause is different..We were attacked!, we had been getting attacked for 10 years prior..the time for talking was over.......We were not in the ME on 910, we tried for 10 years to get Iraq to honor the UN resolutions that brought peace to Iraq in 91.CameronPoe wrote:
Not a good analogy Lowing. The fight for Ireland was a just cause. When we won our freedom - that was that. We didn't want to continue on and annihilate the UK. The radicals aren't fighting a rational just cause. They're fighting a ludicrous cause akin to a mental illness - this illness instilled through indoctrination at religious schools. The tools: it's not difficult to persuade people islam is 'under attack' when Palestine is being raped and US bombs are flying all over the middle east. The combination of factors making the places in which they live miserable. It isn't hard to galvanise people against Mr. White Guy with the big tanks and the support for Israel. War can be the solution to problems. It's not the solution to this problem. Not yet anyway. You can kill and kill and kill until you've lost another ten thousand Americans in the process and it won't dent their recruiting strength or the existence of their ideology. Deal with thus: cause first, effect later.
Oh, so attacking our troops when we point guns at them counts too?lowing wrote:
Gee Jonsimon for you I will clarify........I really didn't mean EVERYDAY for the past 10 years..... Being attacked on US soil is not the only way terrorists attack the US.jonsimon wrote:
Attacked for ten years? There are three muslim terrorist attacks on US soil, ever. And two are surrounded by controversy and possible conspiracy.lowing wrote:
Ahhhhhhh not a good analogy....ok and why?.......cuz, your cause is different..We were attacked!, we had been getting attacked for 10 years prior..the time for talking was over.......We were not in the ME on 910, we tried for 10 years to get Iraq to honor the UN resolutions that brought peace to Iraq in 91.
I didn't know that failure to surrender constitutes an attack.
Last edited by jonsimon (2006-11-01 17:05:25)
the majority of attacks on the multi-national forces in iraq are either IED's or indirect fire. meaning, we dont know we're getting attacked till we get attacked.jonsimon wrote:
Oh, so attacking our troops when we point guns at them counts too?lowing wrote:
Gee Jonsimon for you I will clarify........I really didn't mean EVERYDAY for the past 10 years..... Being attacked on US soil is not the only way terrorists attack the US.jonsimon wrote:
Attacked for ten years? There are three muslim terrorist attacks on US soil, ever. And two are surrounded by controversy and possible conspiracy.
I didn't know that failure to surrender constitutes an attack.