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

[shartley]

Originally posted by 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.

And I guess shooting someone with a gun when they come at you with a knife is cowardly as well?

How about using a sniper to take out a hostage taker? The sniper might hit the hostage, and they are doing it from a great distance. Pretty cowardice right?

You just show your total lack of military knowledge and strategies. And I can tell you that if you DO join the Armed Forces like you stated you were going to, you will have one heck of a rude awakening. You will soon see that using the weapons available to you is NOT being a coward as long as you use them directed at the appropriate targets.

You have some strange definitions and ideas about cowardice. And I will not argue with you any more about it. Think what you want, we all see you for what you are.

[Jack_Dubious]

Originally posted by shartley

All I took away from that article is that the US is Iraqs biggest customer. No one said anything about them not being our biggest source, because that wasnt the point of the article. Im not sure what you think we are taking "out of perspective". I read it all and I saw the reason. All it says is that its fine to deal with Iraq as long as it makes economic sense, right?

JDub

[shartley]

Originally posted by Jack_Dubious



All I took away from that article is that the US is Iraqs biggest customer. No one said anything about them not being our biggest source, because that wasnt the point of the article. Im not sure what you think we are taking "out of perspective". I read it all and I saw the reason. All it says is that its fine to deal with Iraq as long as it makes economic sense, right?

JDub

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by shartley

And I guess shooting someone with a gun when they come at you with a knife is cowardly as well?

How about using a sniper to take out a hostage taker? The sniper might hit the hostage, and they are doing it from a great distance. Pretty cowardice right?

You just show your total lack of military knowledge and strategies. And I can tell you that if you DO join the Armed Forces like you stated you were going to, you will have one heck of a rude awakening. You will soon see that using the weapons available to you is NOT being a coward as long as you use them directed at the appropriate targets.

You have some strange definitions and ideas about cowardice. And I will not argue with you any more about it. Think what you want, we all see you for what you are.

The Palestinians use what they have available to them. I mean you have to judge both sides equally. If you call Israels actions noncowardly, you have to call Palestinian attacks noncowardly.

And what am I then.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
The Palestinians use what they have available to them. I mean you have to judge both sides equally. If you call Israels actions noncowardly, you have to call Palestinian attacks noncowardly.

And what am I then.

[Lone Brain Cell]

Originally posted by Collegeboy


What is worse flying over killing one terrorist while killing 15 civilians. Or walking into a resturant killing 15 innocents as well as 5 military members. Both are equally bad. Both should stop.

killing one terrorist while killing 15 civilians. MMMM if that one terrorist is stopped b4 he kills thousands with a bomb. I think it is a fair deal. Look at WW2 when you bombed Japan, the hundreds of thousands of ppl that died in these bombings saved 10 to 1 if the states had invaded & tried to fight them in the streets. now think of this, if OBL or even Hitler had been killed before they had committed their crimes & a handfull of innocents had been killed accidently at the same time so be it. I can live with that!

[Collegeboy]

\That building that they dropped a bomb on is one example. And don't even go into they was aiming at the terrorist. It is like me saying that the Palestinians are aiming at the guys and not the other people.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200207/23/eng20020723_100243.shtml

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V116/N21/saad.21o.html

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by Lone Brain Cell




killing one terrorist while killing 15 civilians. MMMM if that one terrorist is stopped b4 he kills thousands with a bomb. I think it is a fair deal. Look at WW2 when you bombed Japan, the hundreds of thousands of ppl that died in these bombings saved 10 to 1 if the states had invaded & tried to fight them in the streets. now think of this, if OBL or even Hitler had been killed before they had committed their crimes & a handfull of innocents had been killed accidently at the same time so be it. I can live with that!

Has it stopped Hamas?

[shartley]

Originally posted by Collegeboy

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Has it stopped Hamas?

[Lone Brain Cell]

If someone had killed Hitler in 1938, I would bet my left nut that ww2 wouldnt have gone ahead. If OBL had been killed by clintons tomahawks would Sept 11 have gone ahead?

In the 80's The us & the poms hit Gadaffi (sp) he at the time was one of the worlds worst funders of terrorisim, By sticking a bomb into his toilet window he has been very quiet. The statement the U.S made by bombing him was "we can get anytime anywhere"

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by shartley

You have to be careful with picking sides this is all I am saying here. You can throw around terms like terrorist or another term, but be carefull with it for it can be used to describe the other side.

What good as the bombing of that one guy done?

[Lone Brain Cell]

Originally posted by Collegeboy




What good as the bombing of that one guy done?

The States dont just bomb a guy for no reason at all, they know who he is, they know what he has done, they know what he is about to do. YOU dont know what good it has done because he wasnt able to do the things he was going to do. So it could have saved millions of lives you just dont know, he could have had access to nukes.

[cphilip]

all's I know is doing nothing sure hasn't been working. I not of the opinion that we can wipe out all the evil and hate in the world. But I am sure of the opinion that at least we ought to try. And not give up. I have an optomistic outlook that we can change things. But I am convinced ignoring and allowing things to get ahead of us are OBVIOUSLY not working. I for one am ashamed we sat around stupidly ignoring what was going on there for so long without trying to break it up. And people telling me to not do anything some more are not getting my ear anymore. Nor are they getting the ear of the MAJORITY of the world anymore. Even today people of the world are now flocking to the idea of action. Taking a proactive stance is now suddenly dawning on them as a option we needed to explore. Notice France now getting in line. Notice all the Countries and people scared to take a stand up untill now are getting on board. They always knew it was the right thing to do. They just were afraid to come forward and say it. And felt too safe and secure with us being the target. They know they would be next. One things for sure we got the guts to call it like we see it. And we are doing that now. It takes a while to wake us up and its happening.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by Lone Brain Cell


The States dont just bomb a guy for no reason at all, they know who he is, they know what he has done, they know what he is about to do. YOU dont know what good it has done because he wasnt able to do the things he was going to do. So it could have saved millions of lives you just dont know, he could have had access to nukes.

I thought those in Oz was sheltered from American propoganda TV. No that one Hamas leader could have never done that.

[ShooterJM]

Hmm how to state this clearly enough for you.


YOU'RE ARGUING THAT PALESTINIANS DON'T TARGET CIVILIANS WHEN THEY STATE THEY DO!


You continually refuse to address legality issues save ONE article by a member of a terrorist organization.

You ignore direct questions challenging your postions on the availablity of high tech weapons to the palestinians.

You want to know what the international definition of terrorism is?

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

That's the defination most world governments use. Sound like anything we've been discussing.

I'm not even going to dignify most of your latest conjectures with a statement. I've seen 12 yr olds put together better arguments. I don't know what to tell you except try to experience the world a bit, read closer, read some encylopedias, avoid terrorist writings and try to pick up some knowledge.

This is the first time I have EVER said this but you are TRUELY ignorant.

I know I've said this before, but my blood pressure can't deal with this kid. Someone else take over.