Troops in Iraq: Protecting our Freedom?

[Tashah]

btw Mr. Che...

The secular laws of Israel do not discriminate against homosexuals. Marriage in Israel is usually performed under the auspices of the religious courts. One can establish a gay common-law union in Israel, but one cannot be married by a religious court unless that particular religion recognizes gay marriages. To my knowledge neither Jewish, Muslim, nor Christian authorities in Israel recognize gay marriages per the tenets of their faith. In other words, the marriage situation in Israel is much the same as it is in most Westernized countries.

 

[ProudAmerican]

I don't think anyone needs your help, but some expliantion as to how rebuilding homes is terrorism or some actual proof the money didn't go to rebuilding homes would be much more helpful. Otherwise, your supposition is no better than anyone elses.

I dont need to provide you that proof. for me to do that would mean I accept your false premise that since the money was used to rebuild homes, somehow it didnt support the terrorists cause.

your contention that since the money went to rebuild homes it somehow doesnt support future terrorist acts is ludicrous. asking me for proof the money didnt go to rebuild homes is just a smokescreen to try and dodge the actual point of the debate. You know, the point that Saddam gave money to the families of terrorists, thereby supporting terrorism.

If I give money to the NAACP, but designate that money for educational purposes only.....am I still supporting the agenda of the NAACP? of course I am.

if I give money to the KKK, but designate that money only be used for hoods and robes, am I still supporting the agenda of the KKK? of course I am.

your argument is pathtically weak on its face.

but its fun to watch you try to justify terrorism.

 

[BigDog]

I dont need to provide you that proof. for me to do that would mean I accept your false premise that since the money was used to rebuild homes, somehow it didnt support the terrorists cause.

your contention that since the money went to rebuild homes it somehow doesnt support future terrorist acts is ludicrous. asking me for proof the money didnt go to rebuild homes is just a smokescreen to try and dodge the actual point of the debate. You know, the point that Saddam gave money to the families of terrorists, thereby supporting terrorism.

If I give money to the NAACP, but designate that money for educational purposes only.....am I still supporting the agenda of the NAACP? of course I am.

if I give money to the KKK, but designate that money only be used for hoods and robes, am I still supporting the agenda of the KKK? of course I am.

your argument is pathtically weak on its face.

but its fun to watch you try to justify terrorism.

Nonsense. He didn't give money to a group like the KKK; he gave it to citizens who had their homes destoryed. Again, you don't want to look and prefer to make assumptions as oppsed to investigate. Don't worry, the adminstration likes to function that way as well.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Nonsense. He didn't give money to a group like the KKK; he gave it to citizens who had their homes destoryed. Again, you don't want to look and prefer to make assumptions as oppsed to investigate. Don't worry, the adminstration likes to function that way as well.

no, he gave it to to a group like Hamas instead. those TERRORISTS were members of a TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.

and dont act like im the only one making assumptions in this argument. you are ASSUMING these were just innocent families that the evil israelies came and conquered for no reason.


so, if I give money to the family of a member of the KKK who had just hanged a black man......would I be supporting the KKK?

I GUARANTEE you would say yes.

 

[BigDog]

no, he gave it to to a group like Hamas instead. those TERRORISTS were members of a TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.

and dont act like im the only one making assumptions in this argument. you are ASSUMING these were just innocent families that the evil israelies came and conquered for no reason.


so, if I give money to the family of a member of the KKK who had just hanged a black man......would I be supporting the KKK?

I GUARANTEE you would say yes.

If you're actually paying attention, you'd know I have not assumed anything. The BBC reported the checks being handed out to family members. They did not report they were handed out to bombers.

So, we can only go with what is there. To go any place else is to assume and what is it they say about assuming?

 

[ProudAmerican]

If you're actually paying attention, you'd know I have not assumed anything. The BBC reported the checks being handed out to family members. They did not report they were handed out to bombers.

of course you are assuming. you are assuming the families are innocent of any wrong doing. you are assuming they didnt support, and even encourage their suicidal children to carry out the terrorist acts.

you also failed to answer my question (go figure)

if a KKK member kills a black person.....and then the black panthers burn down the house of the family of that KKK member.....and I give that family the money to rebuild their home........

would you then "assume" I supported the efforts of the KKK through my donation?

I think we both know the true answer.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Proud American:
intentionaly targeting and blowing up innocent women and children in a public market isnt martyrdom. its TERRORISM.

And so is deliberately destroying 75% of a city of 300,000 residents. Or dropping a 500 pound bomb on a hospital.

 

[ProudAmerican]

deleted because I dont care to be drawn into an argument where I must defend America against people that would falsley claim she is a terrorist nation.

odd that I would have to do that with a person that has claimed to support her troops.

how could you possibly support the troops of a country you think is a terrorist?

 

[LeftyHenry]

Easier? On the face of it Mr. Che, it seems that in your little world expediancy trumps principle.

How is it principle to give money bags to a religious state that slaughters a helpless poor state?

BTW Right at NYU, Palestine is democratic. You and I may not like who thy elect or why they elect him but hamas was democratically elected.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Proud American:
deleted because I dont care to be drawn into an argument where I must defend America against people that would falsley claim she is a terrorist nation.

odd that I would have to do that with a person that has claimed to support her troops.

how could you possibly support the troops of a country you think is a terrorist?

Where did I say we are a terrorist nation? You wanna go find that post? Go ahead, I'll wait...

...found it yet? Keep looking...

...how about now? Hmmmm....

Okay, so I throw the dog a bone:

• "We are a nation that has done its share of terrorist acts", billo really, June 2006 while talking to a god-damn American.

Happy? Not what you expected? Oh well, try again later, maybe your luck will change.

 

[Tashah]

How is it principle to give money bags to a religious state that slaughters a helpless poor state?

Israel is a democracy Che. I know this because I vote there.

Although it now has elections, Palestine is nevertheless a rogue state governed by an officially recognized terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Helpless no. Incompetent yes.

 

[BigDog]

of course you are assuming. you are assuming the families are innocent of any wrong doing. you are assuming they didnt support, and even encourage their suicidal children to carry out the terrorist acts.

you also failed to answer my question (go figure)

if a KKK member kills a black person.....and then the black panthers burn down the house of the family of that KKK member.....and I give that family the money to rebuild their home........

would you then "assume" I supported the efforts of the KKK through my donation?

I think we both know the true answer.

No, I have no evidence family members are doing anything wrong. There is a difference. If Billy John Bob is a member of the KKK, I cannot assume his father, brother or mother is without some evidence. Nor would it be correct to destroy the home of Timothy McVey's family because of what he did.

And if an Africa American took revenge on the family of an evil KKK member, that African American would be wrong and subject to proscecution under the law. We know that punishing someone else for a crime a relative did is wrong. And we know that any person who offered money to help that victim rebuild there house is not neccessarily a member of the clan.

You simply lack evidence and instead of presenting any try to psuh assumptions, but that just won't win the argument for you.

 

[Tashah]

Although lattitude is not necessarily a bad thing, let's try not to veer too far afield of this thread's OP: Troops in Iraq: Protecting our Freedom?

 

[BigDog]

Although lattitude is not necessarily a bad thing, let's try not to veer too far afield of this thread's OP: Troops in Iraq: Protecting our Freedom?

The answer is still no. Our freedoms were never in jepordy. In fact, they are more at risk today than they were prior to Iraq. The threat is from within and not from without.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Where did I say we are a terrorist nation? You wanna go find that post? Go ahead, I'll wait...

...found it yet? Keep looking...

...how about now? Hmmmm....

Okay, so I throw the dog a bone:

• "We are a nation that has done its share of terrorist acts", billo really, June 2006 while talking to a god-damn American.

Happy? Not what you expected? Oh well, try again later, maybe your luck will change.

while its true you make sure not to ever say exactly what you mean, I think its pretty clear you were equating our actions during war to the actions of suicide bombers.

if I got that wrong...forgive me.

if I got it right, then you still have a question to answer.

 

[ProudAmerican]

The answer is still no. Our freedoms were never in jepordy. In fact, they are more at risk today than they were prior to Iraq. The threat is from within and not from without.

unfounded opinion at best.

one could have certainly made the claim on 9-10-2001 that our freedoms were in no way in jeapordy from the actions of a small group of muslem fanatics.

on 9-11 that person would have been proven completely WRONG.

so we pro actively stopped Saddam before he ever became a threat. you certainly have NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that he would have never become that threat.

and before you say it, I will concede I have no hard evidence that he ever WOULD HAVE become that threat.

the difference is, my position makes sure he wont. your postition gives him the opportunity.

I like my position better.

 

[LeftyHenry]

Israel is a democracy Che. I know this because I vote there.

Although it now has elections, Palestine is nevertheless a rogue state governed by an officially recognized terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel. Helpless no. Incompetent yes.

And Israel does not crush palestinians with it's tanks?

 

[ProudAmerican]

And Israel does not crush palestinians with it's tanks?

LOL. i love the propaganda shots dont you?

its not at all possible that tank is searching out a stronghold for terrorists makings bombs and hoarding weapons.

not to mention, if you are dumb enough to confront a tank with a rock.....you deserve whatever you get.

 

[cherokee]

And Israel does not crush palestinians with it's tanks?

May I see the footage of the tank rolling over this kid please?

 

[MSgt]

And Israel does not crush palestinians with it's tanks?

How is it principle to give money bags to a religious state that slaughters a helpless poor state?

I simply will never understand this dream world you live in Che. It must be very convenient and luxurious to sit on the side line and act self-righteous and critical in comfy America (something that murdering American troops have provided for you through the centuries). Whether you want to see it or not, the world is very much full of evil men. Any argument used to show that there is no "evil" only points of views from different cultures, is only pathetic PC self-exonerations. There is a whole big world out there you seem to be missing....

Hamas, formed in 1987 at the beginning of a Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation, holds that the Middle East must be entirely Islamic. Jews can live in the region only under Islamic rule, not in an independent state.

Hamas has killed hundreds of Israelis in attacks since the violence resumed in 2000.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060604/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_4

In your quest to remain on some sort of high pedestal overseeing all us warmongers, you are merely unwittingly casting your support for bigots, religious fanatics and oppressors, terrorists, and murderers. It is appalling how so many people can have such despicable double standards when talking about Israel protecting itself from these monsters. If you believe the Middle East should be for Muslims only, then you must also be prepared to declare Africa is only for Blacks, Europe is only for Whites, and Asia is only for Orientals.

When is the last time you had to defend your home Che? This is what Israel has been doing. Palestinians are living off of myth and are merely a tool for Arabs and Persians elsewhere that need their scapegoat and diversion and could care less about Palestinian Arabs. Passed down traditions of hate and racism is unacceptable and I don't support it.

 

[PrimBabUB]

Yes. Our troops in Iraq are protecting our freedom much to the dismay of liberal moonbat morons.

Even the liberal moonbat moron's hero Clinton's director of counterterroism, Secretary of State, Halfbright, included Iraq among the seven countries designated as state sponsors of international terrorism in 2000.

Hell. This all has been argued to death to the point that it is quite boring.

I check in with the Queen of liberal moonbat morons occasionally just to see what's going on. So Oprah has on the author of 'Night', Elie Wiesel last week with her little contest for high school students on how the book affected them. Of course her liberal moonbat moron chant is 'Never Again' which references the extermination of Jews during WW11. Never once have I heard a word of condemnation from Okra about the 80% of the population of Iraq that was tortured or murdered by Saddam.

With Okra it's all about Dafur but she doesn't bother to go into any details like

"Darfur would be Sudanese President Lt. General Omar Hassan al Bashir's second genocidal campaign against his countrymen. He waged the first against the Christian and animist people of south and central Sudan, with most of the deaths occurring over a decade beginning in the early '90s and 2002. As Elie Wiesel wrote about the south, it was "genocide in slow motion." Over two million eventually perished and five million more were displaced before peace protocols — brokered largely through heroic efforts of the Bush administration — were signed last month. "

Or

"In both the south and in Darfur, the policies of the regime — which is an Arab Islamist military dictatorship — against ethnic African villagers have had racial and ethnic overtones and involved struggles over resources. But more significantly, the regime has been motivated in both cases by a radical Islamist agenda. Bashir attempted to Islamicize and Arabize the south through the forcible imposition of sharia (Islamic law). He launched, by his own definition, a "jihad" against the south when it resisted. "

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/shea200406300855.asp

Liberal moonbat morons are very selective about WHO deserves to be saved from evilness.

 

[BigDog]

Liberal moonbat morons are very selective about WHO deserves to be saved from evilness.

Thanks for taking the time to give a thoughtful response. I'll try and do the same. :roll:

 

[BigDog]

unfounded opinion at best.

one could have certainly made the claim on 9-10-2001 that our freedoms were in no way in jeapordy from the actions of a small group of muslem fanatics.

on 9-11 that person would have been proven completely WRONG.

so we pro actively stopped Saddam before he ever became a threat. you certainly have NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that he would have never become that threat.

and before you say it, I will concede I have no hard evidence that he ever WOULD HAVE become that threat.

the difference is, my position makes sure he wont. your postition gives him the opportunity.

I like my position better.

Again, Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 and was no threat to do anything to us, so while you seek to demean the deaths on 9/11 by misrepresenting to justify a wrong action, you still have to show some freedom of ours that Saddam threatened. He simply didn't have the ability to threaten our freedom. Maybes are poor reasons. They reek of fear. And I think we are too great a nation to be so afraid that we stop thinking.

 

[LeftyHenry]

May I see the footage of the tank rolling over this kid please?

Israeli soldiers kill 13 Palestinian civilians
Israeli troops kill 28 innocent civilians

will these do? There's more if you'd like.

I simply will never understand this dream world you live in Che. It must be very convenient and luxurious to sit on the side line and act self-righteous and critical in comfy America

Oh yeah the dreamy luxiourous world I live in on 125st :lol:. You have no idea who I am or where I live so don't pretend you do. And I guess since I disagree with you and haven't been in the army I should never speak again. There is a war at home that needs to be fought and it's called poverty, something you must have no clue about but I certainly do. You think all of america is as rich as you make it sound? You've got to be kidding.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
while its true you make sure not to ever say exactly what you mean, I think its pretty clear you were equating our actions during war to the actions of suicide bombers.

if I got that wrong...forgive me.

if I got it right, then you still have a question to answer.

I say exactly what I mean and I don't allow anyone to tell me different. No one is going to tell me what I mean. I know what I mean everytime I say it. The reality here is that you try to twist what I say into something that fits your own personal agenda. Which, in this case, is that I'm some left-wing wacko who hates America and doesn't know s.h.i.t. But that's not the underlying issue here. What is, is your zeal to falsify evidence to prove your dis-jointed and false premise.

I'm not going to call my country a terrorist nation. Although I am very ashamed of our actions abroad. Which, to keep this discussion on topic, is not making us safer, nor protecting our freedoms. In fact, while our armed, un-provoked aggression continues in the ME, here at home we are systematically being stripped of basic civil liberties, rights and laws (ie., Patriot Act, Domestic Surveillance, Eminent Domain, etc.).

What I want to know is how you can look at an incident like what happened in Ishagi and not be alarmed? Just like Haditha, military accounts differ from eyewitness accounts and police reports from those first on the scene. US accounts said they took fire from a house and destroyed it with the help of helicopter gun ships. Then the went in, found a suspect still alive arrested him, then found an al Qaeda suspect dead in the rubble, then left. However, when the Iraqi police that showed up just after the marines left, they said that as they were going through the rubble, they found 11 casualties in the same room. One man was found in one corner and the other 10 were found in other corner facing him...........in "HANDCUFFS!" Doctors said all the injuries were gunshots to the head and chest of the victims. Which ranged in age from 75 to 3. I don't know about you, but a handcuffed, 3-year shot in the head really bothers me, if this happens to be true.

The difference between you and me, which is the same difference between a good American and a bad one, is that if this is proven to be true, I will admit we did a very bad thing and the people responsible should be charged with war crimes. And this includes everyone up the chain of command to the very people that sent them in there in the first place. You on the other hand, will argue that our soldiers (in this incident) were just defending themselves against a terrorist 3-year old.