IRAQ THREAD originaly "Seems at least one Brit agrees with me....er us."

[Jack_Dubious]

Originally posted by ShooterJM
Any reasonable, well-informed person, including many American Jews, will readily concede that the Israelis aren't saints.

This is off topic.....I see a lot of people use the term "American Jew", but shouldnt the term be "Jewish American"? Just wondering.


JDub

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by Jack_Dubious
This is off topic.....I see a lot of people use the term "American Jew", but shouldnt the term be "Jewish American"? Just wondering.
JDub

I dunnoe. I think if you're diferentiating between different Jews, then you use American to alter Jew. But if you're trying to distinguish between kinds of Americans, you use Jewish to modify American. That'd be my GUESS. Not the best with english and such. (and spelling as I'm sure you've noticed.)

[luke]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


I am not sure what is more cowardly. Flying a plane over an area that you know can not fire back

You call it cowardly, I call it smart.

[shartley]

Originally posted by luke


You call it cowardly, I call it smart.

[joeyjoe367]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
AS to saying these attacks are cowardly, I understand that they are killing civilians. But I am not sure what is more cowardly. Flying a plane over an area that you know can not fire over to drop a bomb on a building full of civilians and one terrorist (who happens to be the leader of a group), standing back and firing missiles into an apartment complex that you know you can't receive fire back, or walking into a crowd blowing yourself up and killing civilians around you. You can take any side you want, but I think both sides show cowardness.

This statement is rediculous beyond comprehension. Intentionally targeting civillians who have no means or intent to fight is cowardice.

Attacking an apartment complex via cruise missle isn't cowardice, it's Strategy and we happen to have the advantage. Thank the powerful US economy and reasearch and development for that one.

According to your logic we should go over to Iraq, pick out a guy on each side, American and Iraqi, have 'em duke it out with clubs to determine who wins the "war." That'd be just about the only "fair" way to resolve this conflict by your standards.

...now as cool and convenient as that would be, it ain't going to happen.


I'm actually beginning to understand your viewpoints Collegeboy. War won't solve the problem child that is the middle east. War won't stop violence, hate and terror. War won't stop just about anything. War *WILL*, however, prevent a murderous dictator from oppressing his own people and posing a risk to ourselves and others.

I bet it would be *GREAT* if we could get all the terrorist leaders in the world together, sit down for a "happy-talk", find out what everybody wants and make everyone happy, but that's not realistic. You can't just say, "You, stop shooting him, and you stop shooting him too, ok?" It doesn't work. Humans are creatures that hang onto old things, revenge, namely. What, in Kosovo these people want land back that was theirs 400 years ago or something right? We 'still have native americans that want this very soil that we stand on back. Throw religeon and people who believe that they have a god given right to land and you've got a BIG mess.

A non-war solution to the whole middle-eastern conflict; Hell ALL conflicts; could be easily solved if we were all machines and could simply wipe away feelings of resentment and ties to land and money.

....unfortunatly, Collegeboy, we are not so perfect so we have to make due with what we've got. War is like Chemo-Therapy (sp); No one likes it, but sometimes you gotta do it. Sometimes it'll work, sometimes it won't. In this case, with the information that's available to *ME* today, I believe that the Patient will die without this therapy.

Could waiting solve the problem? possibly, but given the present information, I doubt it. Is there a peaceful solution to this problem? I bet there is, but again, given the present information, I doubt we could make it work.

*edit* I just wanted to hightlight the quote in my sig. I've found it very true that evil always wins by default. I don't believe this case is any differant.

[Jack_Dubious]

Some people have been calling for a boycott of French products. Shouldnt we boycott the country that is the biggest customer of Iraqi oil?

Biggest Buyer of Iraqi Oil




JDub

[Restola]

Originally posted by Jack_Dubious
Some people have been calling for a boycott of French products. Shouldnt we boycott the country that is the biggest customer of Iraqi oil?

A liberal making anti-American statements?

I never thought I'd see the day...

[Jack_Dubious]

Originally posted by Restola

A liberal making anti-American statements?

I never thought I'd see the day...

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by Restola

A liberal making anti-American statements?

I never thought I'd see the day...

He is not making anti-American statements. He is just pointing out the facts. You just don't happen to like the facts. The question is why? The reason is you want to throw stones at those sinners the French while expousing our moral virtues as a nation.

There is nothing wrong with it. All sides are propagandists. Just don't be surprised when someone throws a stone or two back

[Collegeboy]

ShooterJM, that report is very one-sided (like all writings on this area). It doesn't go into intent and how ones "intent" can not be there actual intent. Take for example the time when Israel dropped a bomb on a building to kill one terrorist leader and maybe a couple of his laggies. Or the times that Israel fires missiles into an apartment building in order to kill one terrorist in one apartment (This was like a year and half ago I do think), or the time I heard of IDF forces opening fire on a group of Palestinians that contained 3 terrorist out of ten total Palestinians. Now Israel could always say there intent was to kill the terrorist, but that doesn't justify the force they used. They could have easily killed those people without using mass death tactics which they used. Same with Palestinians. One can always say their intent was to kill the male military members in the crowd. But the way they go about it doesn't back that intent. Both sides are guilty of killing civilians unnecessary. Notice I said unnecessary.

Luke, to each his own.

Sharltey. You probably know this. But the general idea of US soldiers in the Middle East is of them being cowards. They fly planes high in the sky dropping bombs on the enemy and sometimes civilians. All the while only going in face to face when there is no way that many lives will be lost. Again that is the view of many in the Middle East.

joeyjoey367

Read the above remarks

[shartley]

[shartley]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Sharltey. You probably know this. But the general idea of US soldiers in the Middle East is of them being cowards. They fly planes high in the sky dropping bombs on the enemy and sometimes civilians. All the while only going in face to face when there is no way that many lives will be lost. Again that is the view of many in the Middle East.

[Collegeboy]

Sharltey, I was saying that to point out many Middle Easterners opinion of the US soldiers.

I answered your question in the part adressed to ShooterJM.

I think both sides use cowardly messures to deal with each other.

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
ShooterJM, that report is very one-sided (like all writings on this area). It doesn't go into intent and how ones "intent" can not be there actual intent.

Wait. So when Hamas and terrorist organizations like that STATE that they intend to target civilians. That's not their intent? So they don't know their own intent and just what....have really bad aim? I tried to hit that tank, but I missed and hit that school bus? Are you serious? You have now passed into the ludarcis zone.


Ah yes very one sided. An indepenent article based on an anti terrorist multinational foundation....vs your article....writting by a member of a terrorist group.......

[Collegeboy]

I said mine was one sided.

I just tried to show you how that article didn't go into intent.

I never said they don't intentional target civilians. But they can always say there purpose is for the males in the crowd. Same with the Israelis. I can not help but think that sometimes they mean to kill civilians through the tactics they use.