Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway

lowing wrote:

Friluftshund wrote:

lowing wrote:


Well buddy, that would be all well and good except that as you know, terrorism on American interest and on American soil dates back to Clinton. 

I can't even say that this post was a nice try..Actually it was pretty lame.........But when you have no real facts to base an arguement i can understand that you would reach at straws such as your post
Not that its my place to object - but what on earth does your answer have to do with his post?

Sparl - Stupid President and stupid war...
lowing - Terrorism [...] dates back to Clinton...

Where is the logic? And you will have to admit that terrorism against US interests abroad doesn't compare to those felt at home. And 2001 was a terrorist attack that was felt.

So your post doesn't say very much about anything, except that terrorism has been around pre-2001. Good one...
Well simple..........he claims that the 911 attacks would never have happened if "I" didn't vote for Bush......So I just pointed out that terror attacks were occuring long before Bush was in office.

If you read further he also claims there were NO terror attacks before Bush....so I had to correct time on that little factoid as well.

Also, terrorism on Americans abroad may not compare to attacks at home, unless of course, it was your mother, father child killed in those attacks.
Aha! I could have sworn he said that you rooted for a stupid president and a stupid war. And that because of you (and all others who rooted for said president/war) american lives were now lost. Period.
I also assume any other iterpretations of his post comes from you, and frankly I don't reach the same interpretations.

Terror has always existed and is a very effective means of winning a war. The US uses it all the time in war, we used it in the resistance during WW2, the nazi's used it, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq... So yeah - terrorism has happened before.
Terrorism which were felt by a huge populance on american soil (against a United country) is not something that has happened more than once is it?
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

Friluftshund wrote:

lowing wrote:

Friluftshund wrote:

Not that its my place to object - but what on earth does your answer have to do with his post?

Sparl - Stupid President and stupid war...
lowing - Terrorism [...] dates back to Clinton...

Where is the logic? And you will have to admit that terrorism against US interests abroad doesn't compare to those felt at home. And 2001 was a terrorist attack that was felt.

So your post doesn't say very much about anything, except that terrorism has been around pre-2001. Good one...
Well simple..........he claims that the 911 attacks would never have happened if "I" didn't vote for Bush......So I just pointed out that terror attacks were occuring long before Bush was in office.

If you read further he also claims there were NO terror attacks before Bush....so I had to correct time on that little factoid as well.

Also, terrorism on Americans abroad may not compare to attacks at home, unless of course, it was your mother, father child killed in those attacks.
Aha! I could have sworn he said that you rooted for a stupid president and a stupid war. And that because of you (and all others who rooted for said president/war) american lives were now lost. Period.
I also assume any other iterpretations of his post comes from you, and frankly I don't reach the same interpretations.

Terror has always existed and is a very effective means of winning a war. The US uses it all the time in war, we used it in the resistance during WW2, the nazi's used it, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq... So yeah - terrorism has happened before.
Terrorism which were felt by a huge populance on american soil (against a United country) is not something that has happened more than once is it?
yes it has..........1993 WTC bombing by same terrorist group

to get the jest of our conversation you might have to back up some more

his point was that Bush is the cause of the terror attacks........my point is it was happening before Bush....even the 911 attacks were in planning stages during Clinton

Last edited by lowing (2006-03-11 06:59:46)

Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway
I acknowledge your point, but the first WTC bombing can't be said to have the same impact on lives as the second.
And I do believe that the cause of Sparks comment had to do with the war in the middle-east, which happened under the sitting administration.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

Spark wrote:

Really? Name one terrorist attack on the US in the US before 9/11.

That doesn't count flights going into the US.

Those 3000 people WOULDN'T be dead if

A. You didn't vote in Bush

B. You didn't allow him to go to Iraq.

Simple as that.
Here is what he said................what he "MEANT" I can't say or control...........This is what I am responding to

the point he is trying to make is...........we would not be in this war on terrorism if Bush wasn't in office.
Sadly he may be correct because any elected Democrat, like Clinton, would sit back and let it all happen to us, which is exactly what he did.

Terrorism would still be happening to America, it has been for the entire 8 yr Clinton administration. The only difference now is, we have a president who is fighting back.

Last edited by lowing (2006-03-11 08:05:06)

Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

Really? Name one terrorist attack on the US in the US before 9/11.

That doesn't count flights going into the US.

Those 3000 people WOULDN'T be dead if

A. You didn't vote in Bush

B. You didn't allow him to go to Iraq.

Simple as that.
Here is what he said................what he "MEANT" I can't say or control...........This is what I am responding to
I apologize - I became mixed up..
I thought the 3000 represented US troops in Iraq, not the victims of WTC.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

Friluftshund wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

Really? Name one terrorist attack on the US in the US before 9/11.

That doesn't count flights going into the US.

Those 3000 people WOULDN'T be dead if

A. You didn't vote in Bush

B. You didn't allow him to go to Iraq.

Simple as that.
Here is what he said................what he "MEANT" I can't say or control...........This is what I am responding to
I apologize - I became mixed up..
I thought the 3000 represented US troops in Iraq, not the victims of WTC.
no need for an apology.......we are on the same page now
Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway
Yeah - page 11 (this thread is long...)

But yeah - as far as the WTC attack are concerned it doesn't really matter which president you voted for, its more like what happened a good couple of years back.
herrr_smity
Member
+156|6856|space command ur anus

lowing wrote:

herrr_smity wrote:

and how far are you willing to go to stop it happening again. in terms of getting info
As far as has to be gone to insure our way of life......sorry


Oh by the way.............a little good news for you and the other apologists............Tom Fox the Christian peace activist and hostage has been found murdered in IRAQ..........So you guys scored another point for your good guys. congratulations i know you must be proud of them
i have never said that i support the terrorists. or the taking hostages, but i am opposed torturing prisoners of war.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA
Well, let me ask, and I am not being a smart ass here:

Tell me some ideas you have to combat insane, radical, fanatics, whose only purpose is to destroy us and our way of life??............I seriously doubt the ole flower in the gun barrel trick is gunna work here
LaidBackNinja
Pony Slaystation
+343|6937|Charlie One Alpha

iphtnax wrote:

Point out which bits xanthpi missed and I'll answer them for him.
How about you look for them yourself, you lazy bum? I remember you telling several other people to read the thread through before asking you stupid stuff. Goes both ways.

iphtnax wrote:

Oh I'm not a homophobe by the way.
Sure you aren't
I guess your other account got banned for nothing then.
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine SecuROM slapping your face with its dick -- forever." -George Orwell
Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway

lowing wrote:

Well, let me ask, and I am not being a smart ass here:

Tell me some ideas you have to combat insane, radical, fanatics, whose only purpose is to destroy us and our way of life??............I seriously doubt the ole flower in the gun barrel trick is gunna work here
FINALLY!!! after 11 loooooong pages we just migh get to the debate part!

You lay down rules in that post of yours - all of them (muslims? middle-easterners?) are 1) insane, 2) radical 3) fanatics 4)all they want is to destroy us...

1) I actually don't think there is anything wrong with their intellect
2) Radical - yes, by our standards extremely radical
3) Fanatics - I don't know about that one
4) Want to destroy us...

All they want is to preserve their own way of life and happiness from our interference.
^^ that's the opposite side of your claim.

First of all we should try to find out why they are doing what they are doing, could it be they are raging against what they perceive as an attack on them?
If so, what would happen if we stopped attacking? This is a solution which really hasn't been explored fully. take Iraq for example: "We need to stay and finish the job" <---- admirable quote, but why? Why do we need to stay there and further aggravate things?

I'm no fortune-lady, but who is to say that if we all pull out of Iraq and let them be happy isn't the way to go?

Will that mean they have won???
First of all: so what?! What if they "win"? Can't we swallow some pride in order to stop the war?
Second: It might not necesarily mean they win, it could mean that we'll stop losing people.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

Friluftshund wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well, let me ask, and I am not being a smart ass here:

Tell me some ideas you have to combat insane, radical, fanatics, whose only purpose is to destroy us and our way of life??............I seriously doubt the ole flower in the gun barrel trick is gunna work here
FINALLY!!! after 11 loooooong pages we just migh get to the debate part!

You lay down rules in that post of yours - all of them (muslims? middle-easterners?) are 1) insane, 2) radical 3) fanatics 4)all they want is to destroy us...

1) I actually don't think there is anything wrong with their intellect
2) Radical - yes, by our standards extremely radical
3) Fanatics - I don't know about that one
4) Want to destroy us...

All they want is to preserve their own way of life and happiness from our interference.
^^ that's the opposite side of your claim.

First of all we should try to find out why they are doing what they are doing, could it be they are raging against what they perceive as an attack on them?
If so, what would happen if we stopped attacking? This is a solution which really hasn't been explored fully. take Iraq for example: "We need to stay and finish the job" <---- admirable quote, but why? Why do we need to stay there and further aggravate things?

I'm no fortune-lady, but who is to say that if we all pull out of Iraq and let them be happy isn't the way to go?

Will that mean they have won???
First of all: so what?! What if they "win"? Can't we swallow some pride in order to stop the war?
Second: It might not necesarily mean they win, it could mean that we'll stop losing people.
Ok here it goes:

1. by mere definition, if you have no survival instincts,no will to survive,  you are insane.......IE HOMICIDE bombers....if you agree with their rationalizing their behavior I am deeply concerned.

2. radical by any civilized nation which has basic human rights defined

3.fanatic...I will let that one stand...since you couldn't argue against it, except to say they want to "WIPE ISRAEL OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH".if that isn't fanatical I dunno what is...genicide???? and you want to reason with this?

4. they have said as much in the videos Bin Laden and his LTs, have posted...I for one take him to his word.


If it is peace they wanted, then they could have started the process toward peace about 3000 years ago.....they have been killing each other since before Moses...Since our world is shrinking economically we are all getting more dependant on each other, naturally all of the violence has flowed over the borders.

you said: "I'm no fortune-lady, but who is to say that if we all pull out of Iraq and let them be happy isn't the way to go"?........my response to this is...........Noone has been "happy" over there for 3000 years, that is how long that region has been tearing itself apart..uhhhhhh we have only been there 4 of those years.

If we left now all that would be accomplished is a new haven for terrorist to train and operate....You show me facts to back up your notion that there will be peace in the middle east if we "just pull out" and I will support it.


they started this war........We were not in IRAQ or Afghanistan prior to 911.  these terror attacks were in progress for 8 years before Bush was in office and we went to war to stop it... 8 years of appeasment and the attacks continued...So you need to tell me exactly what makes you believe they were ever going to stop. What more had to happen before you personally had enough of your country being threatened by increased acts of terror? Do you really need to have your kids blown up in their school bus before you think maybe you had enough?........Well, their are some mothers and fathers all over the east coast that has had a belly full.

to bring it down a notch......no you could argue the death penalty does not deter murder.........but it does provide justice for the victims.and that is what is wanted.

Lastly, as far as "winning" goes...it is the most important victory in our nations history that we must have...If we loose this struggle, literally, the free world as we know it will be lost. Tuck your children into bed with that notion rattling around in your head...Some future they would have huh??
imortal
Member
+240|6893|Austin, TX

Friluftshund wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well, let me ask, and I am not being a smart ass here:

Tell me some ideas you have to combat insane, radical, fanatics, whose only purpose is to destroy us and our way of life??............I seriously doubt the ole flower in the gun barrel trick is gunna work here
FINALLY!!! after 11 loooooong pages we just migh get to the debate part!

You lay down rules in that post of yours - all of them (muslims? middle-easterners?) are 1) insane, 2) radical 3) fanatics 4)all they want is to destroy us...

1) I actually don't think there is anything wrong with their intellect
2) Radical - yes, by our standards extremely radical
3) Fanatics - I don't know about that one
4) Want to destroy us...

All they want is to preserve their own way of life and happiness from our interference.
^^ that's the opposite side of your claim.

First of all we should try to find out why they are doing what they are doing, could it be they are raging against what they perceive as an attack on them?
If so, what would happen if we stopped attacking? This is a solution which really hasn't been explored fully. take Iraq for example: "We need to stay and finish the job" <---- admirable quote, but why? Why do we need to stay there and further aggravate things?

I'm no fortune-lady, but who is to say that if we all pull out of Iraq and let them be happy isn't the way to go?

Will that mean they have won???
First of all: so what?! What if they "win"? Can't we swallow some pride in order to stop the war?
Second: It might not necesarily mean they win, it could mean that we'll stop losing people.
Okay, I think you are a liberal person, but I feel like you are someone who wants to actually make the world better, but (from my point of view)  just have a skewed way of thinking about it.  Believe it, when I am talking about a liberal, that is high praise, not an insult.

First, we KNOW why they are doing what they are doing.  It isn't a mystery, unless you listen to the mainstream media.  There are several groups of "they."  In Iraq, there are actually very few iraqis actually fighting.  By now, nearly all of the "insurgants" are from out of country; Iran, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.  Since before the US invaded Iraq, Iran has had people in place trying to build a force to take over Iran.  And I will assume you have heard the President of Iran speaking.

Why would we need to stay and finish?  In my opinion, a matter of responsibility.  We tore their country apart, and took apart a goverment that has been in place for over 20 years.  Unless we WANT the place to be lawless and prime for another dictator to take control, we owe it to the civilian population to at least make sure they have a stable goverment.  If we don't, we simply create a situation there that would benifit those who view violence as a way to make a point. 

And what would happen if we "stopped attacking"  The radicals that really don't like us... well they REALLY don't like us.  The radical view of Islam they have is that Islam should rule the world, and we stand in the way.  If we back off, even at all, in their culture, they will have won a victory, showing them they are on the true path to complete their goals.  In Islam, the only time you cease to kill your enemy is when you are weaker.  Then you are allowed to declare a peace JUST long enough to gain your strength to continue fighting.  They will not stop.  Or, to put it in a quote, "If you pay the Danegeld, you are never free of the Dane."

I do not think of them as insane.  It is the people that use the religion of Islam and twist it for their purposes... those are the people that I think are evil.  But it isn't just Islam.  There are Christains here in the US who feel the US deserves to die because they allow gays in the military.  There are Religious freaks all over.  The problem is that the culture of Islam is geared to allow them to prosper.


As to how I think we can end it... The probelm will not end until the more moderate muslims take back their culture.  We have to get them to police their own faith.  To do that, we have to show them a better way.  I goal to strive for.  By attacking them, directly or indirectly, we just firm opinions against us.  However, we need to suppress the violence long enough for those moderates to come to power and solidify their position.
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

imortal wrote:

Friluftshund wrote:

lowing wrote:

Well, let me ask, and I am not being a smart ass here:

Tell me some ideas you have to combat insane, radical, fanatics, whose only purpose is to destroy us and our way of life??............I seriously doubt the ole flower in the gun barrel trick is gunna work here
FINALLY!!! after 11 loooooong pages we just migh get to the debate part!

You lay down rules in that post of yours - all of them (muslims? middle-easterners?) are 1) insane, 2) radical 3) fanatics 4)all they want is to destroy us...

1) I actually don't think there is anything wrong with their intellect
2) Radical - yes, by our standards extremely radical
3) Fanatics - I don't know about that one
4) Want to destroy us...

All they want is to preserve their own way of life and happiness from our interference.
^^ that's the opposite side of your claim.

First of all we should try to find out why they are doing what they are doing, could it be they are raging against what they perceive as an attack on them?
If so, what would happen if we stopped attacking? This is a solution which really hasn't been explored fully. take Iraq for example: "We need to stay and finish the job" <---- admirable quote, but why? Why do we need to stay there and further aggravate things?

I'm no fortune-lady, but who is to say that if we all pull out of Iraq and let them be happy isn't the way to go?

Will that mean they have won???
First of all: so what?! What if they "win"? Can't we swallow some pride in order to stop the war?
Second: It might not necesarily mean they win, it could mean that we'll stop losing people.
Okay, I think you are a liberal person, but I feel like you are someone who wants to actually make the world better, but (from my point of view)  just have a skewed way of thinking about it.  Believe it, when I am talking about a liberal, that is high praise, not an insult.

First, we KNOW why they are doing what they are doing.  It isn't a mystery, unless you listen to the mainstream media.  There are several groups of "they."  In Iraq, there are actually very few iraqis actually fighting.  By now, nearly all of the "insurgants" are from out of country; Iran, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.  Since before the US invaded Iraq, Iran has had people in place trying to build a force to take over Iran.  And I will assume you have heard the President of Iran speaking.

Why would we need to stay and finish?  In my opinion, a matter of responsibility.  We tore their country apart, and took apart a goverment that has been in place for over 20 years.  Unless we WANT the place to be lawless and prime for another dictator to take control, we owe it to the civilian population to at least make sure they have a stable goverment.  If we don't, we simply create a situation there that would benifit those who view violence as a way to make a point. 

And what would happen if we "stopped attacking"  The radicals that really don't like us... well they REALLY don't like us.  The radical view of Islam they have is that Islam should rule the world, and we stand in the way.  If we back off, even at all, in their culture, they will have won a victory, showing them they are on the true path to complete their goals.  In Islam, the only time you cease to kill your enemy is when you are weaker.  Then you are allowed to declare a peace JUST long enough to gain your strength to continue fighting.  They will not stop.  Or, to put it in a quote, "If you pay the Danegeld, you are never free of the Dane."

I do not think of them as insane.  It is the people that use the religion of Islam and twist it for their purposes... those are the people that I think are evil.  But it isn't just Islam.  There are Christains here in the US who feel the US deserves to die because they allow gays in the military.  There are Religious freaks all over.  The problem is that the culture of Islam is geared to allow them to prosper.


As to how I think we can end it... The probelm will not end until the more moderate muslims take back their culture.  We have to get them to police their own faith.  To do that, we have to show them a better way.  I goal to strive for.  By attacking them, directly or indirectly, we just firm opinions against us.  However, we need to suppress the violence long enough for those moderates to come to power and solidify their position.
I agree 99.9%........less this point.........they ARE insane...........the kidnappings, beheadings ( while being taped ), torture, killing indiscreminently of those that are DIRECTLY trying to help you, HOMICIDE bombings, with no sense of self preservation, trying to start WW3 over cartoons. Openly stating that "Israel should be whiped off the face of the earth"..genicide!!! If this isn't insanity I don't know what is.
Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway
At least we have a discussion
Not some piece of quote-quote-quote-quote shit...

First of all. Please refrain from saying things like " because you couldn't argue against it" I can almost always argue against a position - but it often involves me learning new stuff to do it - and I don't have that time right now. So if I say " I don't know about that one" that's to mean I actually don't know

Insane? Lacking mental capabilities? Unable to make out a will? There are different grades of insanity, and I'll agree that by our layman understanding of the word they are insane - not that it makes a difference. (The word insane is just used to promote our cause, it's good rehetoric)

Sure their radical, i could probably list a few other groups of people with "radical" views, but again, I don't have time. (I have 1000 words to write about rituals in Islam due tuesday )

So yeah, they are fanatical - let's agree!!! Saves time i guess...

About bin Laden and co. I have to agree - they say as much in their videos.
Wheter or not those videos are real, or more importantly, matter is another discussion.

I'll paraphrase you on a few points here:
"They have been waging war for 3000 years in the middle east" - You'r gonna have to show me sources stating that (sorry)

And of course I can't show facts It's in the future

Now about who started what. If binLaden is a major figure in this, didn't he get his training/equipment from the West in order to combat the Russians?
I'll also freely point out that as you might know - we Europeans had a pesky little strife going on down there in the 11, 12, 13th centuries with holy war and such. Muslims don't forget - it's in their culture to pass down tales and stories as part of life.
Europeans are white, alot of people from the US are white - the difference arn't that big

I'm, just saying that if you want to flip the coin - here's a possibility of how they feel. Invaded, meddled with, used etc- all by a bunch of white people.

Again let me state - We might need to look for a different solution to the problem, as the one we have now doesn't seem to work.

Let me finish this post by saying: damn this is written poorly - I need to work on my posting/writing skills...

Edit: Damn - I quoted wrong I'll remove the paraphrase about fighting as long as your weak - since it isn't your point.. Sorry

Last edited by Friluftshund (2006-03-12 03:22:44)

Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway

imortal wrote:

Okay, I think you are a liberal person, but I feel like you are someone who wants to actually make the world better, but (from my point of view)  just have a skewed way of thinking about it.  Believe it, when I am talking about a liberal, that is high praise, not an insult.

First, we KNOW why they are doing what they are doing.  It isn't a mystery, unless you listen to the mainstream media.  There are several groups of "they."  In Iraq, there are actually very few iraqis actually fighting.  By now, nearly all of the "insurgants" are from out of country; Iran, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.  Since before the US invaded Iraq, Iran has had people in place trying to build a force to take over Iran.  And I will assume you have heard the President of Iran speaking.

Why would we need to stay and finish?  In my opinion, a matter of responsibility.  We tore their country apart, and took apart a goverment that has been in place for over 20 years.  Unless we WANT the place to be lawless and prime for another dictator to take control, we owe it to the civilian population to at least make sure they have a stable goverment.  If we don't, we simply create a situation there that would benifit those who view violence as a way to make a point. 

And what would happen if we "stopped attacking"  The radicals that really don't like us... well they REALLY don't like us.  The radical view of Islam they have is that Islam should rule the world, and we stand in the way.  If we back off, even at all, in their culture, they will have won a victory, showing them they are on the true path to complete their goals.  In Islam, the only time you cease to kill your enemy is when you are weaker.  Then you are allowed to declare a peace JUST long enough to gain your strength to continue fighting.  They will not stop.  Or, to put it in a quote, "If you pay the Danegeld, you are never free of the Dane."

I do not think of them as insane.  It is the people that use the religion of Islam and twist it for their purposes... those are the people that I think are evil.  But it isn't just Islam.  There are Christains here in the US who feel the US deserves to die because they allow gays in the military.  There are Religious freaks all over.  The problem is that the culture of Islam is geared to allow them to prosper.


As to how I think we can end it... The probelm will not end until the more moderate muslims take back their culture.  We have to get them to police their own faith.  To do that, we have to show them a better way.  I goal to strive for.  By attacking them, directly or indirectly, we just firm opinions against us.  However, we need to suppress the violence long enough for those moderates to come to power and solidify their position.
Hi!

I'll go right ahead and make one thing clear, and as you point out - there are different groups of they..
Personally I'd like to see every and all suicide-bomber lined up and shot, together with his family (who then can't avenge him) And his cousins, and their cousins. And a few friends, and some more people who might dislike the idea of me shooting ahmed suicide-bomber.

You have to agree this isn't the optimal solution (but you have to deal with everyone if your going to deal with one - says so in their culture)

I'll take your "Iran has tried building up a force to conquer Iran" is to mean "conquer Iraq..."
Yes - there is little love lost between Iran and Iraq, they have been at eachothers throats since the muslims broke out of the Arabian peninsula. And your 100% right about the "insurgents" which they arn't - they are mercenaries most of them, they move from country to country looking for work. (read: mamlûks)
I'll also say that I don't give much for what the President of Iran is saying - I'll explain in my next remark.

It's our responsibility... Well - What can I say? No, it's not - we helped them get rid of a dictator, here you go, here's your free country - rebuild it. That's all we need say. But we persist, we want to stay and we want to help, and if they don't want our help - well, they don't exactly have a choice now do they?
As far as the country being lawless, I'll stop you right there - it wouldn't be since they still have Sharía (the holy law) to govern them. And another dictator probably wouldn't ascend because the people now knew what to look for.
"They can only stop fighting when they are weak...Peacetreaty until..." - I'm dying to see where this comes from in the Quran.
Danegeld? never heard of that one - but it piqued my curiosity, what is it?

And as far as your closing points: Halleluja! (or Allahu Akbar?) I agree - Islam is a great religion (in the sense that any religion is OK) and people will twist it to suit their needs. This can't be blamed on religion, but on humanity.

I'll just close with saying: help them choose the right way, but not look like we're trying to impose our way is impossible. There cannot be peace and a solution while western forces are in the middle east - any religious leader would be mistrusted and most likely assasinated because he "sided with the white peole"

Last edited by Friluftshund (2006-03-12 03:39:02)

lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

Friluftshund wrote:

At least we have a discussion
Not some piece of quote-quote-quote-quote shit...

First of all. Please refrain from saying things like " because you couldn't argue against it" I can almost always argue against a position - but it often involves me learning new stuff to do it - and I don't have that time right now. So if I say " I don't know about that one" that's to mean I actually don't know

Insane? Lacking mental capabilities? Unable to make out a will? There are different grades of insanity, and I'll agree that by our layman understanding of the word they are insane - not that it makes a difference. (The word insane is just used to promote our cause, it's good rehetoric)

Sure their radical, i could probably list a few other groups of people with "radical" views, but again, I don't have time. (I have 1000 words to write about rituals in Islam due tuesday )

So yeah, they are fanatical - let's agree!!! Saves time i guess...

About bin Laden and co. I have to agree - they say as much in their videos.
Wheter or not those videos are real, or more importantly, matter is another discussion.

I'll paraphrase you on a few points here:
"They have been waging war for 3000 years in the middle east" - You'r gonna have to show me sources stating that (sorry)

And of course I can't show facts It's in the future

Now about who started what. If binLaden is a major figure in this, didn't he get his training/equipment from the West in order to combat the Russians?
I'll also freely point out that as you might know - we Europeans had a pesky little strife going on down there in the 11, 12, 13th centuries with holy war and such. Muslims don't forget - it's in their culture to pass down tales and stories as part of life.
Europeans are white, alot of people from the US are white - the difference arn't that big

I'm, just saying that if you want to flip the coin - here's a possibility of how they feel. Invaded, meddled with, used etc- all by a bunch of white people.

Again let me state - We might need to look for a different solution to the problem, as the one we have now doesn't seem to work.

Let me finish this post by saying: damn this is written poorly - I need to work on my posting/writing skills...

Edit: Damn - I quoted wrong I'll remove the paraphrase about fighting as long as your weak - since it isn't your point.. Sorry
Whewww.this is getting long......but ok

your first point.......I apologize

second point......insane is a good dicription of the events that are unfolding......will let that go anyhow

third point....never said there wasn't radicals elsewhere, we are talking about this group of radicals however.

forth point....we agree!!!!!!!!!! yeaaaaaaaaaaa

fith point.......we agree.......we are on a roll

sixth point......ummm a bible, a history book, a Quran I am sure but I admit never picked 1 up

seventh point.......yes we did arm and train Bin Laden, to fight. His country was invaded by the Soviet Union and needed our help to stop the aggressors..once again America does its part to save others from oppression.
those were the times......but like you, No in America has a crystal ball either. Not even Bush.....

eighth point......No they never forget.......nor should America about 911, or Spain about the Madrid bombings and on and on and on
Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway

lowing wrote:

Whewww.this is getting long......but ok

your first point.......I apologize

second point......insane is a good dicription of the events that are unfolding......will let that go anyhow

third point....never said there wasn't radicals elsewhere, we are talking about this group of radicals however.

forth point....we agree!!!!!!!!!! yeaaaaaaaaaaa

fith point.......we agree.......we are on a roll

sixth point......ummm a bible, a history book, a Quran I am sure but I admit never picked 1 up

seventh point.......yes we did arm and train Bin Laden, to fight. His country was invaded by the Soviet Union and needed our help to stop the aggressors..once again America does its part to save others from oppression.
those were the times......but like you, No in America has a crystal ball either. Not even Bush.....

eighth point......No they never forget.......nor should America about 911, or Spain about the Madrid bombings and on and on and on
Someone's radical is anothers moderate - radical by our standards but perhaps not by others???

I like agreements, and beer...

The Quran states that you can only bring war to those who bring war against you, and never to an innocent individual (no, muslims "can't" interpret that to mean that all people in the west are guilty)
Yes, you should make war to further Islam, but at the same time - religion can't be forced upon another.

So you see - part of the problem with the Quran is that it is filled woth contradictions.

The US did not arm binLaden out of the goodness of their hearts - tehy did it to halt communism who was the big bad wolf back in the day. in other words, they used Afghanistan to fight a war they didn't want to fight themselves.

No, we shouldn't, and won't forget - but we should remember all facets of history, not the biased, one-sided part being fed to us through the media...
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

Friluftshund wrote:

lowing wrote:

Whewww.this is getting long......but ok

your first point.......I apologize

second point......insane is a good dicription of the events that are unfolding......will let that go anyhow

third point....never said there wasn't radicals elsewhere, we are talking about this group of radicals however.

forth point....we agree!!!!!!!!!! yeaaaaaaaaaaa

fith point.......we agree.......we are on a roll

sixth point......ummm a bible, a history book, a Quran I am sure but I admit never picked 1 up

seventh point.......yes we did arm and train Bin Laden, to fight. His country was invaded by the Soviet Union and needed our help to stop the aggressors..once again America does its part to save others from oppression.
those were the times......but like you, No in America has a crystal ball either. Not even Bush.....

eighth point......No they never forget.......nor should America about 911, or Spain about the Madrid bombings and on and on and on
Someone's radical is anothers moderate - radical by our standards but perhaps not by others???

I like agreements, and beer...

The Quran states that you can only bring war to those who bring war against you, and never to an innocent individual (no, muslims "can't" interpret that to mean that all people in the west are guilty)
Yes, you should make war to further Islam, but at the same time - religion can't be forced upon another.

So you see - part of the problem with the Quran is that it is filled woth contradictions.

The US did not arm binLaden out of the goodness of their hearts - tehy did it to halt communism who was the big bad wolf back in the day. in other words, they used Afghanistan to fight a war they didn't want to fight themselves.

No, we shouldn't, and won't forget - but we should remember all facets of history, not the biased, one-sided part being fed to us through the media...
ok good it is getting shorter lol..

never said America armed afghanistan out of the goodness of their hearts.......we had an interest to see that communism didn't spread........we were in a cold war........uhhhhh we didn't join in the fight because they didn't ask us to and we weren't needed............you know we would have done whatever it took to push back that aggression......It was simply we didn't have to go that far.

Seems pretty hard to throw a media twist on the 911 events......I think America has shown great restraint in lew of the attacks........the most powerful nation on earth gets attacked and we are trying to surgically remove the threat with as little harm to the innocent civilians as possible, don't you think that is honorable??..........We could have ended all of this with a complete no holds barred invasion...easy to do when you could care less about killing civilians.......that is why the terrorists are still fighting.....they will take out 100 innicent people to kill 1 soldier.......America has more respect for life and Iraq than the terrorist "defending" her. how is that for media twist?

Last edited by lowing (2006-03-12 07:45:47)

Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway
Shorter because we're eliminating arguments - and focusing on others..

You say the west had an interest in stopping communism, and I say that could be interpreted as meddling with another country instead of letting them fight for themselves.
The west supplied weapons yes - but that was all, they didn't fight themselves. (3rd party warfare)

"We simply didn't have to go that far" is one way of puuting it. bottom line is you didn't - which is all that matter here.

You think it's hard to twist something as serious as september 11th? Try calling 911 so that more people remember it and it catches on quicker... everything that comes out of a TV or a newspaper is spun, everything.

Surgically removing the threat would be to assasinate Saddam Hussein in his sleep and be gone in time for his bodyguards to find his body dead of heart-attack in the morning...

Are you so sure you could have stopped this with a full on invasion? That didn't stop Norwegian/French/(every occupied country) from hitting back during WW2..
If by stopping this you mean eradicating everything then sure you could - but that wouldn't mean you'd have won...

An interesting point you make is that they will take out 100 innocents to kill one soldier (who might also be innocent of any killings/destruction by just having been assigned)
They needs to be defined to terrorists/mercenaries, and they need to be rooted out and brought to justice. But that doesn't justify an entire religion being dragged through the mud!
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

Friluftshund wrote:

Shorter because we're eliminating arguments - and focusing on others..

You say the west had an interest in stopping communism, and I say that could be interpreted as meddling with another country instead of letting them fight for themselves.
The west supplied weapons yes - but that was all, they didn't fight themselves. (3rd party warfare)

"We simply didn't have to go that far" is one way of puuting it. bottom line is you didn't - which is all that matter here.

You think it's hard to twist something as serious as september 11th? Try calling 911 so that more people remember it and it catches on quicker... everything that comes out of a TV or a newspaper is spun, everything.

Surgically removing the threat would be to assasinate Saddam Hussein in his sleep and be gone in time for his bodyguards to find his body dead of heart-attack in the morning...

Are you so sure you could have stopped this with a full on invasion? That didn't stop Norwegian/French/(every occupied country) from hitting back during WW2..
If by stopping this you mean eradicating everything then sure you could - but that wouldn't mean you'd have won...

An interesting point you make is that they will take out 100 innocents to kill one soldier (who might also be innocent of any killings/destruction by just having been assigned)
They needs to be defined to terrorists/mercenaries, and they need to be rooted out and brought to justice. But that doesn't justify an entire religion being dragged through the mud!
If the America "meddles" in others affairs, it is mainly because we were asked to do so...Kuwait asked for assistance against Sadam......It is also in the best interest of our national security........sleep good tonight knowing you are being watched over........not to mention...........if it weren't for our "meddling", i am pretty sure you would speaking German right about now.

next point.nope we didn't go that far.......seems we agree

next..911? sept. 11th...........how is that a spin here??............In order to make a point short and sweet it is referred to as 911.........we all agree when we here 911 we know what is being talked about......you can spin the events any way you want to........but 911 in itself is not a spin.


It is against US policy to assasinate world leaders ( officially)......but if it happens I would sleep ok with it.
If we did assasanate Sadam I think you would be on here condemning us for it. A no win situation for the US.

Your invasion point is well made......I think I have to concede that 1 to you. I must be honest with myself and admit, the resistance probably would never have stopped. Although I don't think the occupation would be ended by it.

Dragging the Islam faith through the mud is a task they alone seems to be handling all by themselves...they errupt in violence over a cartoon all over the world ....yet  show no outrage toward the beheadings videos.....As a bystander to their behavior I draw a very logical conclusion to it.......Nobody is dragging Muslims through the mud more than Muslims are.
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7065
This War is Fought in lands where they don't like Us ( Arab lands ) because we back a people who only use us ( Israel )

The War could have been prevented. Back when clinton jerked off instead of leading and making hard choices.

His inability to act emboldened the aggressors..

Bush is cleaning up the mess clinton turned a blind eye to after WTC 93 attack and about 8 others.

clintons " I just want my legacy to End clean at any cost " Cost us Very dearly. Now we are fighting.

This war is going well as can be expected.

Can you imagine the Support or ( lack of it ) a War against Hitler in 1937 would have had?

It would have been Easier to Defeat him earlier.

Or If we had made an effort to stop Japan before they moved into China?

Can you imagine all the lives that would have been saved in either situation?  or both?

Of course it would have wrecked our economy.

But hey, Bill me! Just don't wipe out a generation of people.

This War is like that.

If FDR had the balls to act early. Who knows what would have transpired. Maybe Europe's jews would not have been destroyed by Stalin, The Vichey French and Hitler, Maybe they would not have fled Europe,  Maybe we would not have felt " we owed the jews a Homeland for their plight " maybe they would have stayed in Europe? maybe we wouldn't be fighting now ?

another thing that's funny is Hitler's Quote " if you repeat something Enough, it becomes true. "

We had two Candidates in the 2000 election. Both went to The Same Ivy league school. Both had identical transcripts.

One party started the frenzied, moronic and insipid name calling and about half the people fell for it and are marching in lock step to this day.

    Its funny but these people who like like to believe they are " passionate and concerned "
Really just act like sheep. They bleat catchy slogans repeatedly. Like to organize protests and marches.
They are in fact the kind of rank and file you need to create a Fascist dictatorship like the Nazis.
Weak people who desperately need the reassurance of a group consensus.
A herd mentality makes for good little Nazis.
Not Stoic rugged individualist that make up my party, we couldn't care less what the heard does or thinks.
You can almost hear the hear the heard of dopes mooing "Heeeee's Duuuummmmb "
The Bartenders Son
Member
+42|6921|online
kill them all let god deal with them
Friluftshund
I cnat slpel!!!
+54|6941|Norway

lowing wrote:

If the America "meddles" in others affairs, it is mainly because we were asked to do so...Kuwait asked for assistance against Sadam......It is also in the best interest of our national security........sleep good tonight knowing you are being watched over........not to mention...........if it weren't for our "meddling", i am pretty sure you would speaking German right about now.

next point.nope we didn't go that far.......seems we agree

next..911? sept. 11th...........how is that a spin here??............In order to make a point short and sweet it is referred to as 911.........we all agree when we here 911 we know what is being talked about......you can spin the events any way you want to........but 911 in itself is not a spin.


It is against US policy to assasinate world leaders ( officially)......but if it happens I would sleep ok with it.
If we did assasanate Sadam I think you would be on here condemning us for it. A no win situation for the US.

Your invasion point is well made......I think I have to concede that 1 to you. I must be honest with myself and admit, the resistance probably would never have stopped. Although I don't think the occupation would be ended by it.

Dragging the Islam faith through the mud is a task they alone seems to be handling all by themselves...they errupt in violence over a cartoon all over the world ....yet  show no outrage toward the beheadings videos.....As a bystander to their behavior I draw a very logical conclusion to it.......Nobody is dragging Muslims through the mud more than Muslims are.
i'm just saying how things might be percieved in the Arab world, and that might be that the west is meddling in their affairs without actually knowing their culture/religion and what is best for them. it could just be that they don't agree with the way of life they have to live now.
Would you appreciate someone walking into your home and telling you not to do that and not to do this?

And I think the "we saved your but from hitler" card is over-used, and the most effective way to try to end a discussion. I don't care what you did - If you hadn't done it, I probably wouldn't have been here today.. Many people wouldn't have been here today. US troops going to Europe banging their girlfriends one last time before they went. Perhaps you or someone you know wouldn't be here today because of Hitler...

911 is the spin... September 11th is too long, you need something more catchy if people are going to remember it and talk about it. That's why f.ex bombings get names after where they occur.

About you assainating Saddam and my bitching about it - now you go ahead and tell me what I would have done or not done... First of all I wouldn't have known it was you - he died of a heart attack remember? And secondly, why would i care?! Do you think I liked the guy?!!!

Sure, terrorists are putting a bad name on Arabs, but what would happen if the media edicated us instead of playing on our fears? What if all they did was say: "Today someone blew himself up in the name of Allah - which was a stupid thing to do since he'll go straight to hell..." period.
Them getting publicity is part of why they keep doing it. Ofcourse I'm not advocating a shutdown of all press and media, but wouldn't it be nice if they didn't decide what we should think before airing something?
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6879|USA

Friluftshund wrote:

lowing wrote:

If the America "meddles" in others affairs, it is mainly because we were asked to do so...Kuwait asked for assistance against Sadam......It is also in the best interest of our national security........sleep good tonight knowing you are being watched over........not to mention...........if it weren't for our "meddling", i am pretty sure you would speaking German right about now.

next point.nope we didn't go that far.......seems we agree

next..911? sept. 11th...........how is that a spin here??............In order to make a point short and sweet it is referred to as 911.........we all agree when we here 911 we know what is being talked about......you can spin the events any way you want to........but 911 in itself is not a spin.


It is against US policy to assasinate world leaders ( officially)......but if it happens I would sleep ok with it.
If we did assasanate Sadam I think you would be on here condemning us for it. A no win situation for the US.

Your invasion point is well made......I think I have to concede that 1 to you. I must be honest with myself and admit, the resistance probably would never have stopped. Although I don't think the occupation would be ended by it.

Dragging the Islam faith through the mud is a task they alone seems to be handling all by themselves...they errupt in violence over a cartoon all over the world ....yet  show no outrage toward the beheadings videos.....As a bystander to their behavior I draw a very logical conclusion to it.......Nobody is dragging Muslims through the mud more than Muslims are.
i'm just saying how things might be percieved in the Arab world, and that might be that the west is meddling in their affairs without actually knowing their culture/religion and what is best for them. it could just be that they don't agree with the way of life they have to live now.
Would you appreciate someone walking into your home and telling you not to do that and not to do this?

And I think the "we saved your but from hitler" card is over-used, and the most effective way to try to end a discussion. I don't care what you did - If you hadn't done it, I probably wouldn't have been here today.. Many people wouldn't have been here today. US troops going to Europe banging their girlfriends one last time before they went. Perhaps you or someone you know wouldn't be here today because of Hitler...

911 is the spin... September 11th is too long, you need something more catchy if people are going to remember it and talk about it. That's why f.ex bombings get names after where they occur.

About you assainating Saddam and my bitching about it - now you go ahead and tell me what I would have done or not done... First of all I wouldn't have known it was you - he died of a heart attack remember? And secondly, why would i care?! Do you think I liked the guy?!!!

Sure, terrorists are putting a bad name on Arabs, but what would happen if the media edicated us instead of playing on our fears? What if all they did was say: "Today someone blew himself up in the name of Allah - which was a stupid thing to do since he'll go straight to hell..." period.
Them getting publicity is part of why they keep doing it. Ofcourse I'm not advocating a shutdown of all press and media, but wouldn't it be nice if they didn't decide what we should think before airing something?
America was sound asleep on sept. 10 2001.......we were not in the middle east........so I am alittle confused why you think America taking the offense in this war is "meddling"...If you or they thought that we were going to sit back and get sucker punched for the 8th time you were both wrong.

the hitler card is not over played.it is very relevent to our discussion, and here is why, WW2 took place 60 yrs ago....allot of the people who witnessed it is still alive, the countries involved still exist...So by you telling me America is meddling in other countries affairs today and you wish they would stop........in order to stand by your statement ............I can only draw the conclusion that America was meddling in your countries affairs 60 years ago......are you prepared to say our meddling back then was a mistake? America should have minded its own business in Europe? Let a ruthless dictator take over your country.......You tell me that....and I will concede this whole discussion to you............But I will not let you argue that it was good enough for your country back then but it is wrong for someone elses country today....Too easy to say that when you are already liberated

Last edited by lowing (2006-03-12 15:34:26)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard