Should The USA Accept the Truce?

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Wait a second, we killed Bin Laden's fellow Muslims first (millions, not thousands I might add) and started this fight with the Islamic World. We are the aggressors.

When was this and don't give me any of that Noam Chomsky horseshit.

 

[BillyBadAss]

And now we have our infidel troops on their ever so important holy land. They don't appreciate it, quite.


Duke

I don't think anybody should negotiate with Bin Laden, but we should deal with some of the underlying causes of terrorism, like for instance, stop policies that kill millions of people around the world to protect our oil and economic interests. You do that and generally, people will leave you alone. If you don't address the underlying causes of terror, killing Bin Laden won't fix the problem, because their will just be more Bin Ladens to deal with. Really, I doubt that a "War On Terror" is exactly winnable, it's like "War on Drugs." People have this perception of America being this "good country" when their is alot of bad things about the US. Like the CIA was created by Nazis is a good example.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I don't think anybody should negotiate with Bin Laden, but we should deal with some of the underlying causes of terrorism, like for instance, stop policies that kill millions of people around the world to protect our oil and economic interests. You do that and generally, people will leave you alone. If you don't address the underlying causes of terror, killing Bin Laden won't do much good, because their will just be more Bin Laden's to deal with.

Underlying reasons? You mean like Islamic dominated educational institutions which teach their children all about Dr. Qubts policy of the rightousness of killing the infidel?

 

[BillyBadAss]

Underlying reasons? You mean like Islamic dominated educational institutions which teach their children all about Dr. Qubts policy of the rightousness of killing the infidel?

They wouldn't be teaching their children about America being "Satanic" if America wouldn't kill their people.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

They wouldn't be teaching their children about America being "Satanic" if America wouldn't kill their people.

What people where, did we have troops fighting in Iraq on September 11, 2001? I didn't ****ing think so. How about the U.S.S Cole, how about the African Embassy bombings, how about Somalia, how about the First World Trade center bombing?

 

[BillyBadAss]

What people where, did we have troops fighting in Iraq on September 11, 2001? I didn't ****ing think so. How about the U.S.S Cole, how about the African Embassy bombings, how about Somalia, how about the First World Trade center bombing?

What about the 1.5 million Iraqi children that US economic sanctions killed? What about US support for the Shah of Iran, a rather oppressive government that used secret police to lock up many people who did no wrong. What about past US support for Saddam when he launched a bloody war against Iran after the overthrow of the Shah? What about supporting the creation of Israel over the dead bodies of many Palestinians who were living their? What about US support for Saudia Arabia, another example of a rather oppressive government which serves our oil interests quite well?

 

[Duke]

Ok I see you don't want to surrender you just want to give into all of OBL's demands... you're right now I see the difference. :roll:

I notice that you did not even try to rebuke any of my points. I can't help but wonder why.

Not to give in to Bin Laden's "demands", but to find the cause of hatred and terrorism towards the USA, and deal with it, whatever that may entail. Are you not clear on what I am saying?


Duke

 

[BillyBadAss]

I notice that you did not even try to rebuke any of my points. I can't help but wonder why.

Not to give in to Bin Laden's "demands", but to find the cause of hatred and terrorism towards the USA, and deal with it, whatever that may entail. Are you not clear on what I am saying?


Duke

Americans are not very good at listening to other people.

 

[Duke]

Americans are not very good at listening to other people.

Not even other Americans........................................


Duke

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

What about the 1.5 million Iraqi children that US economic sanctions killed?

*ahem* UN sanctions not US sanctions buddy. And the sanctions were Saddam's fault not the UN's he should not have invaded his neighbors and slaughtered his own people. The fact of the matter is that it was the actions of Saddam to use the money for the oil for food program to spend on the building of palaces instead of food for the citizenry that led to the death toll, that and your numbers are totally inflated propoganda bullshit.

What about US support for the Shah of Iran, a rather oppressive government that used secret police to lock up many people who did no wrong.

The current Iranian government has killed more Muslims than the Shaw ever did.

What about past US support for Saddam when he launched a bloody war against Iran after the overthrow of the Shah?

The US gave half of 1% of foriegn arms to the Iraqi government during the Iran-Iraq war equivalent to the arms sold to the Iranians to support the Contras against the Sandidnistas in Guatamala, the majority of arms used by Saddam came from France and the Soviets.

What about supporting the creation of Israel over the dead bodies of many Palestinians who were living their?

What about all of the Israelis that have been killed by the Arabs who have waged war on Israel ever since its inception? Don't they count? The fact of the matter is that the U.S. didn't create Israel, the U.N. did. Our financial support to Israel is minimal at best we give more money to the Palestinians than we do to the Israelis. The truth is that the U.S. has been the largest benifactor to the peace inititiative.

What about US support for Saudia Arabia, another example of a rather oppressive government which serves our oil interests quite well?

As for Saudi Arabia, non-interventionalism does not equate to support, first you say that the U.S. should stop killing Muslims and then you imply that we're in the wrong for not ousting the Saudi government, so which is it should we kill Muslims or not?


Your regurgetated Chomsky horseshit is laughable in the extreme. Well laughable isn't really the right word ignorant of the facts is better but anti-U.S. propoganda is right on target.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I notice that you did not even try to rebuke any of my points. I can't help but wonder why.

Not to give in to Bin Laden's "demands", but to find the cause of hatred and terrorism towards the USA, and deal with it, whatever that may entail. Are you not clear on what I am saying?


Duke

Rebuke your points? Your point is that the U.S. should pull out of the Mid East, abandon our support for our allies, give into the demands of terrorist scum, and let an evil Islamic Caliphate descend over the entire middle east.

In short your points are identical to OBL's, you keep good company.

The cause of Anti-US hatred is radical Islamic fascists spewing forth their propaganda from their state run media and indoctirnation through their relgious controlled educational institutions who do not teach history they teach propaganda.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Americans are not very good at listening to other people.

And foriegners should get the fuc/k out!

 

[BillyBadAss]

Not even other Americans........................................


Duke

I remember talking to a World War II veteran who was a crewman on a bomber (don't remember exactly which bomber it was, whether it be a B-17 or another type bomber). He talked of some of his bombing missions and how the bombs he dropped killed German civilians. I asked him, "How do you feel about the fact that your bombs killed innocent civilians?" He laughed and said "Those civilians were not innoccent, they were helping the German war effort against us in those factories, they pay taxes to help the German war effort, their scientists helped design new war machines to kill us, they were not innocent."

So, now I remember reading about how Bin Laden said American civilians were not innocent, how the American people employ people in the US Army, their brainpower coming up with new machines of war and how American tax dollars help to support US policies abroad. The statements of Bin Laden and this World War II bomber pilot sure do sound the same, don't you think?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

I remember talking to a World War II veteran who was a crewman on a bomber (don't remember exactly which bomber it was, whether it be a B-17 or another type bomber). He talked of some of his bombing missions and how the bombs he dropped killed German civilians. I asked him, "How do you feel about the fact that your bombs killed innocent civilians?" He laughed and said "Those civilians were not innoccent, they were helping the German war effort against us in those factories, they pay taxes to help the German war effort, their scientists helped design new war machines to kill us, they were not innocent."

So, now I remember reading about how Bin Laden said American civilians were not innocent, how the American people employ people in the US Army, their brainpower coming up with new machines of war and how American tax dollars help to support US policies abroad. The statements of Bin Laden and this World War II bomber pilot sure do sound the same, don't you think?

One small difference we did not intend to kill civilians we were going after legitimate military targets against an enemy that had declared war on us, OBL deliberately targeted civilians in an unprovoked attack.

It's good to see that you side with the enemy though.

 

[BillyBadAss]

One small difference we did not intend to kill civilians we were going after legitimate military targets against an enemy that had declared war on us, OBL deliberately targeted civilians in an unprovoked attack.

It's good to see that you side with enemy though.

It's not about siding with the enemy, it's about going through the facts, using reasoning and logic to discern our actions and how it might have provoked terrorists to attack us. Bin Laden would argue that he was going after a legitimate US target, the US economy by hitting the WTC. But since you stated that we only go after legitimate military targets, how would you explain the bombing of Dresden? Their was no legitimate military target in Dresden, and yet, the US and Britian killed countless civilians and their was no military targets nor any targets that would help the German war effort.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

It's not about siding with the enemy, it's about going through the facts, using reasoning and logic to discern our actions and how it might have provoked terrorists to attack us. Bin Laden would argue that he was going after a legitimate US target, the US economy by hitting the WTC. But since you stated that we only go after legitimate military targets, how would you explain the bombing of Dresden? Their was no legitimate military target in Dresden, and yet, the US and Britian killed countless civilians and their was no military targets nor any targets that would help the German war effort.

Oh I see not only are you on the side of O.B.L. you're also on the side of Nazi Germany.

Your so called logic and reason is anti-U.S. propogandist horseshit.

You claim that the WTC attacks were legitimate and then you say you don't side with the enemy give me a fuc/king break.

 

[BillyBadAss]

Heh, really, when you think about it, by examing the facts and the totality of the circumstances, the US is not much better than the Bin Laden's of the world. Will the US ever decide to become better than the Bin Laden's of this world?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Heh, really, when you think about it, by examing the facts and the totality of the circumstances, the US is not much better than the Bin Laden's of the world. Will the US ever decide to become better than the Bin Laden's of this world?

Ya sure thing pal just keep saying it to yourself enough times and maybe it will become true. You're a Chomskyist akolyte propagandist and your horseshit is laughable.

 

[BillyBadAss]

Ya sure thing pal just keep saying it to yourself enough times and maybe it will become true. You're a Chomskyist akolyte propagandist and your horseshit is laughable.

Chomskyist? Don't know what you're talkin' about. Horseshit? Get real man.

 

[Billo_Really]

Why do we get all these revelations from the war on terror everytime the polls indicate the Administrations goose is cooked? We are nearing indictments on the Abramhoff scandel and what happens, we get new Bin Laden tapes. We go to the polls and what happens, they find Saddam. Or some other break in the war on terror that is earth shattering news comes out to distract us from the inevitable, which is that we voted in a despotic leader.

 

[Billo_Really]

If we don't accept the truce, then we don't care about peace.

 

[BillyBadAss]

If we don't accept the truce, then we don't care about peace.

We cannot appease Bin Laden or terrorist organizations or terrorist states. But we cannot be just as low down as Bin Laden either. Their should be no negotiations but then we should also change our policies to where we address some of the greviances that lead to terrorism. Appeasement has never worked and neither has acting in such a way that does not address the root cause of terrorism will ever work either. A strategy that does not include appeasement and on the same token that does address the reasons why terrorism comes into existance is our best course of action. For example, relying more on intelligence to go after terrorists, arrest them if possible and bring them to trial is a better course of action, this is not always possible, but when possible, arresting them and bringing them to a court of justice is ideal. One cannot eliminate terrorism completely, but we can minimize terrorism. If we do not act to minimize terrorism it can become a very serious threat.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

What about the 1.5 million Iraqi children that US economic sanctions killed?

Oh. I thought is was France, Germany, and Russia that was making all that money from Saddam's corruption of the oil for food program that was supposed to provide the necessities to the poor. When did the US get rich off that one?

What about US support for the Shah of Iran, a rather oppressive government that used secret police to lock up many people who did no wrong.

I think the Shah was dead before September 11, 2001.

What about past US support for Saddam when he launched a bloody war against Iran after the overthrow of the Shah?

That was a good thing. It gave Iran something to think about instead of raping Amenican embassy women.

What about supporting the creation of Israel over the dead bodies of many Palestinians who were living their?

Yeah, what about that? Does anyone give a ****? Does anyone think murdering a bunch of American office workers is going to change that by one little bit? If they do, they're WAY too stupid to negotiate with, and they're only good for target practice anyway.

What about US support for Saudia Arabia, another example of a rather oppressive government which serves our oil interests quite well?

Yeah, what about that? Seems to me that if bin Laden has an issue with his inbred cousins he could keep it in the family like polite people do. Not to mention that his own fortune descended directly from that assistance.

Frankly, amateurs without a nation standing behind them have no business in requesting negotiations or demanding truces. They're nothing but common criminals. Any invitation to a negotiation should be accepted only to get verification that the enemy is in a spot so we can drop precision guided munitions on him.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

It's not about siding with the enemy, it's about going through the facts, using reasoning and logic to discern our actions and how it might have provoked terrorists to attack us. Bin Laden would argue that he was going after a legitimate US target, the US economy by hitting the WTC. But since you stated that we only go after legitimate military targets, how would you explain the bombing of Dresden? Their was no legitimate military target in Dresden, and yet, the US and Britian killed countless civilians and their was no military targets nor any targets that would help the German war effort.

Dresden...that's that little village just to the north of Baghdad where they found Saddam hiding in the cesspool, wasn't it?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by BillyBadAss
We cannot appease Bin Laden or terrorist organizations or terrorist states. But we cannot be just as low down as Bin Laden either. Their should be no negotiations but then we should also change our policies to where we address some of the greviances that lead to terrorism. Appeasement has never worked and neither has acting in such a way that does not address the root cause of terrorism will ever work either. A strategy that does not include appeasement and on the same token that does address the reasons why terrorism comes into existance is our best course of action. For example, relying more on intelligence to go after terrorists, arrest them if possible and bring them to trial is a better course of action, this is not always possible, but when possible, arresting them and bringing them to a court of justice is ideal. One cannot eliminate terrorism completely, but we can minimize terrorism. If we do not act to minimize terrorism it can become a very serious threat.

We should act not to create it.