Calm2Chaos said:And your idea would be to what ????? ... Deal with a terrorist organization?.... The only thing they understand is death... they deal in it on a global scale. It's all they respect..
Scarecrow Akhbar said:If you think I was only discussing Palestinians, I failed in my efforts at clarity. IMO, if it's necessary to use nuclear fire sterilize all territories outside of the United States to protect my family, then that's the acceptable course of action.
Scarecrow Akhbar said:What? If Hamas can't get any more protection money from Israel, what's preventing them from going to Iran, Libya, Syria, Saudi Arabia, etc?
What will really matter is how the sponsor countries view the usefulness of Hamas' activities.
Simon W. Moon said:What hateful and dehumanizing talk. And it comes with an endorsement of genocide.
What is one to think of folks who dehumanize their perceived enemies and call for them to be indiscriminately wiped from the earth?
Inuyasha said:I don't think they will find any help from the African nations. Most of them are so poor they can't afford to give any substantial aid to the Palestinians. I said in my post lets see what the Saudis do now. All one can do is speculate but SA hasn't help much up to now what makes you think they will step up their efforts to help these people who they, racially, look down on? Maybe if the Palestinians make more militant moves toward Israel but if Hamas wants to survive that doesn't seem like such a good idea. Iran is the only one that can help but nowhere can Arabs or the Iranians equal the monies poured into palestine buy the West (mostly us) and the Israelis.
Hoot said:Too bad Bush didn't ask himself this question before he started throwing civics texbooks out of the back of a humvee, thinking that's how easily democracy would sprout and grow.
GySgt said:It's like I always say....."The Persian and Arab elite are willing to destroy and murder Israelis to the very last Palestinian." They use the Palistinian / Israeli conflict as a diversion and the rest of the world focuses on this as some sort of travesty forced upon the Muslim world (The Saudi Arabs look down upon Palistinian Arabs). In the mean time, they abuse and oppress their people (at the fault of America, of course) into terrorism. The Muslim world is a mess. In the Middle East, specifically, the heavens are falling and the earth is wracked with failure. This region is full of celebrated and honored bigotry and our "Global Left" scours desperately for ways to make them happy. How can we make a civilization that can't even get along amongst themselves to get along with the "infidels" and "Zions?"
Scarecrow Akhbar said:There very easily could be some who would wish to spend the money to keep the region unstable and thus continue to tie down US forces. China, perhaps.
Inuyasha said:It's possible but weighed against the benefits China reaps from doing business with the US it is distant. When it comes to business and money the Chinese are far more sophisticated and advanced than the Muslim nations. I don't believe they would get involved here. But they do have both the money and the means.
Mostly, I was talking about he other 99.9%+ of the folks who would end up dead from the recommended measures.Scarecrow Akhbar said:"Perceived" enemy? You mean the goons that murdered stewardesses with plastic spoons so they could steal an airplane to fly into a building to murder thousands of others? That's only a "perception"?
There's a treatment for hoof and mouth disease. I'm just recommending we use it.
python416 said:You think that they are sitting in a cave, jumping up and down on carpets turned toward Mecca chanting death to America? And they are coming for your kids right now? And the only way to protect yourself for the evil that lurks around every corner is to clear it all up with Nukes?
Then you are an shining example of the sucess the Neo-conservatives have had with their fear-based marketing efforts.
I think a good start at getting the many in middle east to stop hating America is to stop supporting corrupt governments in return for military alliences, weapons sales, and of course access to oil.
Calm2Chaos said:If there to stupid to not know why there being punished then there are a lot more problems then just hammas. They know why there being punished. They know exactly who and what they elected to run there country. PArt of being free is living with your decisions
DivineComedy said:NO, they do not, “know why there being punished.” The world has given them mixed signals.
“Dear Sheikh Yassin,
We are writing to you regarding continued attacks against civilians for which the Islamic Resistance Movement (harakat al-muqawama al-islamiyya, Hamas) has claimed responsibility. We are aware of remarks by you and by other leading Hamas figures, including Dr. Abd al-Aziz al-Rantissi and Dr. Mahmoud Zahar, endorsing such attacks.”
http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/08/hamasltr080602.htm
“Strongly condemns the continuing grave violations of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, in particular the tragic assassination of Sheikh Ahmad Yassin on 22 March 2004, in contravention of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949;”
http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/22f431edb91c6f548525678a0051be1d/67606dfc79a1964e85256e62005bcd57!OpenDocument
“The Secretary-General strongly condemns Israel’s assassination of Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, which resulted in the deaths of eight others. He is concerned that such an action would lead to further bloodshed and death and acts of revenge and retaliation. He reiterates that extrajudicial killings are against international law and calls on the Government of Israel to immediately end this practice. The only way to halt an escalation in the violence is for the parties to work towards a viable negotiating process aimed at a just, lasting and comprehensive settlement.”
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/sgsm9210.doc.htm
Simon W. Moon said:Mostly, I was talking about he other 99.9%+ of the folks who would end up dead from the recommended measures.
Calm2Chaos said:First off I don't recall saying we should nuke anyone......
You seem to be the shining example of a common appeasing liberal.
Weaken weaken weaken... complain
Wow.....so when we get off the oil exactly how do we handle an economy that would be completely destroyed, Massive unemployment, rioting... Because that is what happens if we just quite oil. Since this is not an option we need to secure this product. And we need to make sure our allies have the abillity to fight there enemies. And are willing to help us fight ours.
You seem to share the same repugnant attitude toward human life as the violent Islamist jihadis. Would that make you an "animal" just like them?Scarecrow Akhbar said:Yeah, it's pretty sad that those people never spoke up and took action against the animals they let speak for them. I won't miss them.
python416 said:Does US need for mid-east oil imply that Scaredcrow's suggestion of "Nuclear fire" is valid? There are solutions to lessing the dependancy on oil, but the adminstration tosses those ideas aside like they were anti-Christian.
python416 said:On September 12th, 2001, the largest step to "get off oil" could have been taken,
python416 said:If you think the American economy can't survive reducing the need for oil, then you don't have enough faith in capitalism and innovation, and are not well versed in economics or science.
python416 said:And if you think killing at least 30,000 Iraqi civilians because mistakes in government operations let 19 pissed off radicals kill 3,000 innocents - then you are devaluing human life in a way that is disgraceful in a country that repeatedly asserts its basis in equality.
Simon W. Moon said:You seem to share the same repugnant attitude toward human life as the violent Islamist jihadis. Would that make you an "animal" just like them?
Scarecrow Akhbar said:Who said anything about oil? We should kill them because their a threat, a disease, a pestilent fly carrying sleeping sickness or malaria.
I never said a word about oil in relation to the issue of global terrorism.
Oh? Like what? I can take it as a fact that you don't have a clue about energy issues.
I'm better versed than you, and one thing's a fact: cold turkey ain't the way to change our national energy infrastructure.
30 of them for 3 of ours sounds like a **** poor trade, we need to kill 299970 more.
python416 said:You said "It would definetly quite the area down to a low hum...." in response to Scaredcrow Akhbar's suggestion that we Nuke the mid-east.
python416 said:Weaken, Weaken, Weaken?! I am weak because I don't by into the fear marketing that has everyone willing to sell out their national values for the illusion of security?
python416 said:Does my questioning of the need to move the country on a path divergent from that of the founders make me weak, or imply that people like me are weakening the country? Please.
python416 said:The administration has scared most of the country into doing anything for illusion of security, but it is only an illusion. The illusion of protection doesn't make you strong; it makes you fooled.
python416 said:Does US need for mid-east oil imply that Scaredcrow's suggestion of "Nuclear fire" is valid? There are solutions to lessing the dependancy on oil, but the adminstration tosses those ideas aside like they were anti-Christian.
python416 said:On September 12th, 2001, the largest step to "get off oil" could have been taken by asking the American public to work towards cutting ties with Saudi Arabia, increasing fuel standards for vehicles, car pooling, increase realistic awareness of nuclear fission and fusion reactions to generate power, etc. The American public and most of the world would have been behind it. Hell, if JFK can get a man on the moon in a decade in the 60's, GWB could have gotten the US off mid-east oil by 2010. But with all the ties to midest oil, the country's true national interests were sold out for administration cronism to the oil companies and to the war companies required to secure oil.
If you think the American economy can't survive reducing the need for oil, then you don't have enough faith in capitalism and innovation, and are not well versed in economics or science.
python416 said:And if you think killing at least 30,000 Iraqi civilians because mistakes in government operations let 19 pissed off radicals kill 3,000 innocents - then you are devaluing human life in a way that is disgraceful in a country that repeatedly asserts its basis in equality.
Pretty much the same.Scarecrow Akhbar said:No. I'm swatting flies. They are flies.
Calm2Chaos said:I was being sarcastic... And stating a simple fact... never said that I wanted to nuke them
Calm2Chaos said:What national values are you talking about?
Calm2Chaos said:your lack of concern over the security of the country would be whats weakening it. There is a faction out there that wants to kill anyone that does not agree with them. We have a border and security that is poris to say the least. we have those within our borders that would love to do harm to us. Do you feel any of these statements are untrue?
Calm2Chaos said:SO i was fooled into thinking we have security concerns? Attacks on our own soil and our interests and people overseas seem to bear out those concerns
Calm2Chaos said:I don't want to nuke the ME. I see no usefull purpose in it.
Calm2Chaos said:Our industries are pretty tied into petrolium. Ten years to break from oil would cause a catastrophy IMO. I am assuming your an econims and science guru from your above statement. Your going to flush a multi billion dollar industry and millions of jobs down the toilet and the economy will just hum along. ....OK .. you got me.... I'm not an econmist so maybe you know something I don't
Calm2Chaos said:And if you think it was only 19 people then you're a fool on a fools errand. There was a whole lot more then 19 people involved in this attack.
Multiple attacks on the wtc. Atacks on warships and military basis and embassies.. this isn't a shot in the dark, these are acts of war
Calm2Chaos said:The people that voted knew for whom and what they voted for. The entire globe knows what they voted for. This is the statement they want to make. Then they will have to live with there decisions. If you elect a terrorist organization to run your country, then you lose support and backing. Thats the way it is and thats the way it should be.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?