Wardialer From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1178 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2885 times:
Who thinks this war on terrorism is a bad idea? Well it is, because we will get the whole world fighting each other like Pakistan and India. It will be a like a domino effect slowly by slowly. Bush made a very terrible mistake!!!!
VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2806 times:
Hey pal; If we didn't take action than people like Osama would strike again I only hope Saddam and Gadahfi are next. If we didn't take action like Clinton we would get more attack and the people of Afghan would continue to suffer under the Taliban. now the people of Afghan has a lasting peace! After PA 103, Khobar Towers, USS Cole and 2 US Ebassies were blown up we have had enough. I wish the war started sooner. I'd be willing to join should there be a draft!
India and Pakistan has been fighting since 1947. There is nothing special about the war. It is the same damn thing over the full control state of Kashmeir which India and Pakistan are still fighing over. Right now both coutries have half each but Pakistan wants the whole thing. India accuses Pakistan of being soft on terrorism. Stop playing doom and watch the news kid!
You still haven't given a good reason. I just struck down your argument.
Flight152 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 3324 posts, RR: 7 Reply 2, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2796 times:
If it was up to you, we would just let all this terrorism go on and let it go unnoticed without any stop to it...yeah that is a good idea. Why don't we just let them contine and hide while not doing anything.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 2790 times:
Get a little clue about Geo-political events before spouting off next time, ok?
The current flare-up between Pakistan and India isn't related to Bush's war on terror, as you like to put it (I'd rather call it Osama's Big Mistake, not Bush's War On Terror). India and Pakistan have been on the edge for years now, and it's only coincidence that this latest brushfire between them happens when the U.S. is at war in the region.
Iainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2766 times:
What you are missing is the doplomatic efforts that the US and other nations push as hard as they can before the ass kicking takes place. India and Pakistan have been fighting for the last 50 years, it will not change.
Donder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, RR: 23 Reply 7, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2760 times:
''If we didn't take action like Clinton we would get more attack and the people of Afghan would continue to suffer under the Taliban. now the people of Afghan has a lasting peace''-Come on dude,don't try and make out that the US gives a shit about the Afghani people.
777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2760 times:
People who blow up buildings, themselves and others are terrorists to anyone with half a brain.
By your logic, the US, in Afghanistan, is a terrorist.
See? "Terrorist" can't be defined. You'll say "but the US is fighting for justice, peace yada yada yada. We have the right to etc" and i'm not saying that's wrong, BUT bin Laden and Al-Queda can say exactly the same thing.
I'll say it again, one country's terrorist is another country's freedom fighter
Wardialer From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1178 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2752 times:
To define a terrorist. A terrorist IS NOT just a group who hijacks planes or screws around with Weapons of Mass Destruction, a terrorist in my definition means for example like a serial killer, a rapist, a child molestor, a murderer, the Columbine shootings, etc. The meaning of my post is that this war is bringing to much retaliation. Look what happened in the past few days or weeks. Plus Im angry that no other country is helping us out, we are fighting this war alone.
777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2749 times:
Firstly, erm, i live in the UK. Last i heard, we were helping out. In fact, the SAS almost had bin laden, until you told the world that and gave us away :-\
Secondly, you still haven't defined a terrorist. A serial killer? The US has killed dozens of civilians in Afghanistan. They feel they're justified (and I do too), BUT by your definition they're a terrorist. Certainly, al-queda would view them as a terror group.
Yet again, one country's terrorist is another country's freedom fighter
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2742 times:
777236ER, as has been pointed out over and over...and over again, there's a difference between the deliberate killing of poeple like happened on 9-11, and when the suicide bombers blow themselves up in Israel, killing civilians, and the non-deliberate killing of civilians when a bomb or missle goes astray. The deliberate act is indeed an act of terror, and has nothing to do with "freedom fighting". The other is, has been, and always will be, a part of warfare. There's a big distinction.
And gee, we've killed "dozens of civilians" in Afghanistan. Dozens, huh? Mercy, that makes us as bad as Osama, doesn't it? Grow up.
And Wardialer, last I checked, Britian, Germany, Austrailia, and even Japan is giving help to this effort to get rid of Al Quaeda and bin Laden. And how come you're angry? You're against the war on terror anyway!
Jessman From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1506 posts, RR: 8 Reply 12, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 2737 times:
A terrorist operates purely to incite fear to a people/country. They will target specifically civilians and non military structures. They don't operate under the conventional rules of warfare. The us is not a terrorrist in Afghanistan because the US formally declared war, and was targeting the Afghan military and its suppliers.
Of course civilian casualities will happen, but as recently as WWII pilots were happy if they hit the right city. In vietnam God knows what the bombs were hitting under the jungle foliage. Now civilians get a stray bomb or two and it makes headlines.
Back to the India/Pakistan thing; hopefully it won't escalate to nuclear confrontation. It probably won't anyway, Israel has the bomb, but they don't nuke the rest of the arab world, they know it is counterproductive. Same with india/pakistan. Anyway it's quarreling neighbors, America just provided an excuse, someone else would have is the US didn't. It's unfair to blame the US for their problems with each other.
VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 2727 times:
Donder10 Don't put words in my mouth. I'm using that as an example. You can say that we hit two birds with one stone. for my guys at my old Ladder company here in NYC. Getting the Taliban is justice. I hope we do the same with Bin Laden. That punk killed nearly 3,000 men women including 6 kids. 10 guys from my ladder comapny are no longer around. I know a fire cheif that lost two tables of people at his wedding and my old professor knew a guy who lost 3 of his 5 sons. When I think of the things the Armed forces will do to Bin Laden (hopefully toture before a slow death) That is justice. I think of the people that tumbled down a 100 stories and were crushed to death by steel and other debries. On the following Saturday there were 21 funerals.
There were so many that Mayor Guliani, Fire commissioner Von Essen and Police Commisioner Kerik couldn't attend all of them as it's physically an metally impossible The deputy mayor and others had to take their places. Even retired fire and police officers were asked to come because it was physically impossible and it took a toll on the current PD and FD as most had visited more than 5 funerals. The average age of those who died we're 30. Many of them left behind families or we're just married. I'm still shocked about the 4 kids and their teachers on the AA 757. I think of the innocent who died including my fallen brothers. Justice will be served once Osama's head as well as whats left of Al Cadia and his damn sympathyers are shallacked and served on a platter.
It really shocks me that there are people who worry about "Osama's rights" or make the bs statements "The war on terrorism is wrong" or any other Hippy Malarky. This is an attack on my country and my people I hope we mop the landscape with the lot of em!
VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2722 times:
I wonder if the guy who started this topic is a hard left liberal from Berkley U out in California. That place is full of people like him. Hell the town council there actually sent a written plea to stop the bombing and use"good old fashioned police work" Last time I heard liberals were against that too
Wardialer From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1178 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2711 times:
If Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold ( my pals) were alive I would send them to each Middle Eastern country and have them blow and bomb the hell out of Al-Quaeda network and all the Arabic countries, Hitler style. Or I would throw Usama Bin Laden were psychotic criminals are like Jeffrey Dammer, they would take care of him.
Aviatsiya From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2706 times:
Right. People who blow up buildings, themselves and others are terrorists to anyone with half a brain. That has nothing to do with fighting for one's freedom.
Going by what you say here, Madiba is a terrorist. Yet most of the "western" world had sanctions against his country and openly supported him. In 1994 the whole world embraced Madiba with open arms and teary eyes. Madiba was invited to just about every country by foreign governments. He got standing ovations in the United Nations. When he speaks people stop and listen. They don't just listen, but they actually hear what he is saying. He is one of the most sought after people for speaking engagements.
Not bad for a terrorist huh?
BTW, read his autobiography "Long Walk to Freedom". You guys may just learn a thing or two.
EmiratesLover From Malta, joined Dec 2000, 341 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2697 times:
I respectfully disagree with Wardieler.
I think the United States has an obligation AND a a right to punish terrorists who murder the harm and the innocent, but only with the firm proviso that it does everthing in it's power to protect the innocent in the process.
I fail to see any link between the tragedy in Afghanistan and America with the situation in South Asia.It is just coincidental, and I do not feel ther has been a domino effect.
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4966 posts, RR: 46 Reply 18, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2677 times:
Speaking of those dozens of Afghan people killed: Last week I read that an AMERICAN professor had calculated (always using the most modest and lowest claims available) that the US bombing campaign has cost more civilian lives in Afghanistan than those killed in the WTC and Pentagon combined.
The article also stated that this report was simply NOT even reported by any US media. Makes you wonder...
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2669 times:
Scorpio, the difference is that Afghan civilians (true civilians, that is) were not the intended target, whereas in the New York attacks innocent civilians were the intended target from the beginning. There is a sizable moral distinction. The first is a tragic accident, but inevitable every once and a while, wheras the other is entirely intentional.
Scorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 4966 posts, RR: 46 Reply 23, posted (11 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2648 times:
You're not supposed to be reading my posts. As for where he gets the numbers? He took only those incidents which were reported by more than one independent source, and in each of those cases he took the lowest estimate. But then again, why do I even bother telling you this? He's just an anti-American American, isn't he? What would he know, he's just a professor...