will the usa go into iran

[vidcc]

1 yes no question it's the right thing to do.

2 yes they will but it's not the right thing to do.

3 no they wouldn't because it's the wrong thing to do.

4 no they wouldn't because they are overstretched as it is.

5 no they won't but they should.

[{I}{K}{E}]

How to make a poll:
http://filesharingtalk.com/vb3/showthread.php?t=85679

[Biggles]

1 yes no question it's the right thing to do.

2 yes they will but it's not the right thing to do.

3 no they wouldn't because it's the wrong thing to do.

4 no they wouldn't because they are overstretched as it is.

5 no they won't but they should.

Number 4

Iran is 4 times larger than Iraq and has a population of over 60 million. The terrain and climate are awful and they have far more military equipment than Iraq had by the time of the invasion. The US could not contain Iraq and meet other commitments without drafting - which I believe is off the cards, non?

[Strangelove]

Easy one to start off with? :lol:

Option 4... But i bet he tries ;)

[TheDave]

i know you'll eat me for saying this but i hope they never get peace in iraq by america's plans. if they get a bloody nose it would be great for world peace because the whitehouse would know picking a fight with a competant enemy would be a stupod idea

[cpt_azad]

option 4, god i wanna watch america get their asses wooped like they did in vietnam, just in the ME. if i'm not mistaken, the war on Iraq is still not over, no matter what the "administration" says.

[TheDave]

option 4, god i wanna watch america get their asses wooped like they did in vietnam, just in the ME. if i'm not mistaken, the war on Iraq is still not over, no matter what the "administration" says.
that too, but held back from sounding h4r5h:01:

[ruthie]

I pick 2...and I do believe the draft will be reinstated..soon.

[BigBank_Hank]

Why does this poll imply that the talks in Iran are unilateral? It’s not only the US talking with the Iranians to get them to stop their developments.

There should be an option to vote for invasion only if the Iranians refuse to cooperate and refuse to stop developments, and military action is a last resort.

[vidcc]

Why does this poll imply that the talks in Iran are unilateral? It’s not only the US talking with the Iranians to get them to stop their developments.

There should be an option to vote for invasion only if the Iranians refuse to cooperate and refuse to stop developments, and military action is a last resort. then that would ( in your opinion) be 1

[Busyman]

option 4, god i wanna watch america get their asses wooped like they did in vietnam, just in the ME. if i'm not mistaken, the war on Iraq is still not over, no matter what the "administration" says.
Your a bitch.

I'd love to see you ass whooped.
Why not go to an address of my specification so some folks of mine can tape it?

STFU..ya gay pirate.

[BigBank_Hank]

then that would ( in your opinion) be 1

Yes Vid if:
invasion only if the Iranians refuse to cooperate and refuse to stop developments, and military action is a last resort.

[vidcc]

Yes Vid if:
well let's use Iraq as a mirror.... Bush does everything the same.

[tesco]

Well, so far everyone agrees that he wants to. ;)

[100%]

what about the option

"mind your own business"

[BawA]

4
Iran is not iraq nor its Afaganistan, it has more power then any other country in middle east(Ever thought why irans Currency's down) and the main thing is strong public unity, during iraq iran war iran had notting and iraq was supported from many countries like USA but still fight countinued for 8 years without losing. think now.. iran with all this weapon power!! i dont think USA will do such a mistake.
now if u talk about Suria it would be another 1 week war for USA :lol:

[vidcc]

what about the option

"mind your own business"
care to expand on that?

[100%]

I will expand

Will Bush send troops to Iran
yes he will because it's the right thing to do
yes he will but it's the wrong thing to do
no he won't because it's the wrong thing to do
no, but only because of lack of manpower
no, but he should

I did not even know that the us was intending to do so

none of the options in the poll state otherwise

so i guess there is no choice hence according to this poll
the us has Definet plans on doing so.

hence

add more options

as for my opinion

finish one thing first before complaining about the next
thus mind your own business

Do i actually have a choice in caring ?

no

Do as you please - a threat is threat even if it is not a threat

this is not a threat

[BigBank_Hank]

15 I do believe I said that in my original post that there aren’t enough options. There is no option on there about solving this problem diplomatically.

[Strangelove]

Thats because Bush doesnt know the meaning of that word, possibly...

Strange that the only country ever to use Nukes, is paranoid about anyone else developing them, and wont let the UN inspect (or stop development of) their own.

Even stranger that they are quite happy to put anyone in charge of that button (including someone suffering from Senile Dementia in the 80's).

The excuse that "Any Madman" can be put in charge of them just doesnt wash, when most of the world already think a madman is in charge of the largest collection of these weapons.

[BigBank_Hank]

Thats because Bush doesnt know the meaning of that word, possibly...

Strange you would say that as the U.S. along with other nations are trying to work out the situation with the Iranians and the Koreans.

[vidcc]

I will expand

Will Bush send troops to Iran
yes he will because it's the right thing to do
yes he will but it's the wrong thing to do
no he won't because it's the wrong thing to do
no, but only because of lack of manpower
no, but he should

I did not even know that the us was intending to do so

none of the options in the poll state otherwise

so i guess there is no choice hence according to this poll
the us has Definet plans on doing so.

hence

add more options

as for my opinion

finish one thing first before complaining about the next
thus mind your own business

Do i actually have a choice in caring ?

no

Do as you please - a threat is threat even if it is not a threat

this is not a threatthen that would be covered by
no he won't because it's the wrong thing to do. or no but he should
he is obviously making an issue of it.
if you have no interest the option is there....just don't vote.

[vidcc]

15 I do believe I said that in my original post that there aren’t enough options. There is no option on there about solving this problem diplomatically.
but the question was "will bush send troops in"

if you think he won't choose "no because it's the wrong thing to do"

[vidcc]

are any not voting because it's not anonomous......


i can't put every single option in there , it would be a mile long, so i put "bulk" options there. If you make a vote but wish to expand you have that ability.

[BigBank_Hank]

Vid I didn’t vote because I’m trying to see which one best describes how I feel about the situation.

As for the voting not being anonymous I think that they should all be public. If someone votes one way in this poll and says something different we need to hold them accountable for their voting record :D

[zedaxax]

I have never been to iran
but i have two good friends how are refuguees from there

they are good friends

[Strangelove]

Strange you would say that as the U.S. along with other nations are trying to work out the situation with the Iranians and the Koreans.Strange, the EU seems to be doing well until the US puts it's foot in and makes things go backwards.. How many times have the EU and Iran come to an agreement that is satisfactory to the UN and then the USA have blocked it so far this year?

This brings us back to the start each time... so making the situation, like everything else in the Middle East the US touches at the moment, worse.

As i said, as the only country that actually refuses to allow inspections (except Israel)... as far as im concerned, USA are the outlaw state here, not Iran.

[BigBank_Hank]

If you can’t see to difference between the U.S. and Iran’s nuclear program then you need help.

[Strangelove]

If you can’t see to difference between the U.S. and Iran’s nuclear program then you need help.
True...

The USA have enough to blow the entire planet apart 10 times over and are continuing to develop them.

Iran havent got 1 nuke..

The USA refuses to allow the relevant UN agency to inspect any of their facilities, Iran is open to inspection.

Quite a difference.

Its the USA's program that would be under suspicion in any non-biased atmosphere in these circumstances.

[Busyman]

True...

The USA have enough to blow the entire planet apart 10 times over and are continuing to develop them.

Iran havent got 1 nuke..

The USA refuses to allow the relevant UN agency to inspect any of their facilities, Iran is open to inspection.

Quite a difference.

Its the USA's program that would be under suspicion in any non-biased atmosphere in these circumstances.
Good point. When was last time we used nukes? What's the point of the US getting inspected? Cause everyone else does? We already admit we've got a shitload.

Also Bush is not a madman, he's an idiot without a clue.

Get it right.

[BigBank_Hank]

True...

The USA have enough to blow the entire planet apart 10 times over and are continuing to develop them.

Iran havent got 1 nuke..

The USA refuses to allow the relevant UN agency to inspect any of their facilities, Iran is open to inspection.

Quite a difference.

Its the USA's program that would be under suspicion in any non-biased atmosphere in these circumstances.


Yeah your probably right we shouldn’t develop any more nukes because why would the most powerful country in the world take any measures to protect itself. Hell I guess we should just disband the whole damn arm while we’re at it. :dry:

Like I said if you can’t see the difference between a nation that harbors terrorist and one the goes to great lengths to protect people around the world then you have a problem.

[Biggles]

Hank

You have a peculiarly rose tinted view of US foreign policy. Is this purely on current performance or is it back-dated at all?

The simple fact is that powers (good or bad) don't like new boys on the block. No one liked it when China, Israel, India and Pakistan went nuclear. We have learned to live with it. This is 1930s science, the genie will not stay in the bottle. North Korea almost certainly has gone nuclear and my view is that Iran is there also (if perhaps still to assemble the bits). We will have to learn to live with this also and ensure that the neceassry weights and measures are in place to effectively create a stalemate in the region. The Iranians will not unlearn the science they have acquired.

You are right though, the UN and the EU are the main players in the Iranian negotiations whereas the US is the main player in N. Korea. I do not see the US invading either unless there was a genuine threat of aggression. Such an action would be huge, messy and would result in a lot of deaths and the total disruption of the oil supply from that region if Iran were to be invaded. This would not make good business sense and whilst I have doubts about GW I do not believe he is anti-business.

[Strangelove]

@Busyman..

1/ USA is the only country EVER to use the Atom bomb.

2/ UK, France, India and Pakistan all admit they have Nukes and allow UN inspections. Why should anyone else if the biggest player wont do that?

@ Hank

The USA spends more on Defence than the next 5 largest spenders put together. Thats your business, you want to keep the Arms companies alive and let your people die because of a lack of basic Universal Health Care (unlike those countries that you have invaded such as Iraq and Grenada) then i have nothing against that.

However, to my mind both Grenada and Iraq showed more care for their own people than the USA does... and that includes the poltical disappearances and murders in the time of Hussain.

At least they could get Health Treatment when they were ill.

They had less malnutition before the USA invaded (nearly doubled since the invasion, really shows you care)

When i think of all the kids that die, just to keep the shareholders of American Arms Companies rich... well, it sickens me.

[Biggles]

Strangelove

Is it only five? I am sure I saw a report that said this had risen to the next 20 as most of Europe has cut Defence spending following the nasty outbreak of peace on the Russian front.

However, as you say, taxes can only go so far - it is a choice between schools and tanks (unless one introduces conscription for 5 years olds and have school tanks :)

[Strangelove]

Strangelove

Is it only five? I am sure I saw a report that said this had risen to the next 20 as most of Europe has cut Defence spending following the nasty outbreak of peace on the Russian front.

However, as you say, taxes can only go so far - it is a choice between schools and tanks (unless one introduces conscription for 5 years olds and have school tanks :)
You can understand it...

I mean, with their current policies, 1/3 of the world will be active enemies before long... and they need an excuse to keep the Defence Speanding that high.

This could well be the REASON for their foreign policy :lol:

[BigBank_Hank]

@ Hank
However, to my mind both Grenada and Iraq showed more care for their own people than the USA does... and that includes the poltical disappearances and murders in the time of Hussain.

I cannot believe that someone with a functioning brain could actually believe that. You sir live in the land of Oz.

[ruthie]

Yeah your probably right we shouldn’t develop any more nukes because why would the most powerful country in the world take any measures to protect itself. Hell I guess we should just disband the whole damn arm while we’re at it. :dry:

Like I said if you can’t see the difference between a nation that harbors terrorist and one the goes to great lengths to protect people around the world then you have a problem.

Um, Hank...we are harboring Bush..a terrorist. How about Kissinger..WAR CRIMES.

[Strangelove]

I cannot believe that someone with a functioning brain could actually believe that. You sir live in the land of Oz.
Im not a sir :P

And, if you believe any civilised country that doesnt have Universal Health Care gives a stuff about their citizens, then its YOU that are living n the land of Oz.

Hussain attacked his enemies only... so i assume that means ALL the poor are the enemy of the American Administration.

[Biggles]

Um, Hank...we are harboring Bush..a terrorist. How about Kissinger..WAR CRIMES.

Are the Chileans not looking to try Kissenger on War Crimes? However, like Pinochet, age will be the mitigating factor here. It would, as in the Milosovic case, take years to pursue through the courts even if they got him to court.

[cpt_azad]

Im not a sir :P

And, if you believe any civilised country that doesnt have Universal Health Care gives a stuff about their citizens, then its YOU that are living n the land of Oz.

Hussain attacked his enemies only... so i assume that means ALL the poor are the enemy of the American Administration.
bravo. although your statement is pretty weak, i'd have to agree on some very low level with you. honestly, saddam had more control in Iraq then your puppet gov't ever will, not control as in suppression, but freedom yes freedom. what is democracy? where people choose the gov't and have their say. well, call it dictatorship or not, i'd rather be under saddam's power than george's anyday. for cryin out loud, they had the basic necessities when mr. hussain was in power. oh well, no point in crying over spilt milk right? oh wait, 9/11 riiiiiite, that's how this whole Iraq thing started (w/ a little help from non-existant WMDs). for shame America, for shame. There is no hiding it, when the war was announced everyone in America was in on it, or agreeing with it, so you are all guilty, not just the Bush admin.

[ruthie]

I, for one, am NOT GUILTY

[Strangelove]

bravo. although your statement is pretty weak, i'd have to agree on some very low level with you. honestly, saddam had more control in Iraq then your puppet gov't ever will, not control as in suppression, but freedom yes freedom. what is democracy? where people choose the gov't and have their say. well, call it dictatorship or not, i'd rather be under saddam's power than george's anyday. for cryin out loud, they had the basic necessities when mr. hussain was in power. oh well, no point in crying over spilt milk right? oh wait, 9/11 riiiiiite, that's how this whole Iraq thing started (w/ a little help from non-existant WMDs). for shame America, for shame. There is no hiding it, when the war was announced everyone in America was in on it, or agreeing with it, so you are all guilty, not just the Bush admin.
My puppet Government has no conrol over Iraq..

Im in the 51st State.... :(

[Biggles]

I, for one, am NOT GUILTY

Ruthie,

I think in his less polemical moments the good Captain knows that.

He does do a cracking rant though! :lol:

If one were to be extremely Calvinistic for a moment, we are all guilty. :ph34r: *shiver* John Knox tapped on the window.

[BigBank_Hank]

Im not a sir :P

And, if you believe any civilised country that doesnt have Universal Health Care gives a stuff about their citizens, then its YOU that are living n the land of Oz.

Hussain attacked his enemies only... so i assume that means ALL the poor are the enemy of the American Administration.


Really? Then I have two words for you my friend MASS GRAVES!

And if you really think that free health care is as great as it sounds just look at Canada for an example.

[Biggles]

Unfortunately, the graves are not filling a whole lot slower since we went there either.

Edit: I thought the US drug companies were lobbying like crazy to stop Americans going to Canada to buy medicine - or did I dream that somewhere?

[ruthie]

Ruthie,

I think in his less polemical moments the good Captain knows that.

He does do a cracking rant though! :lol:

If one were to be extremely Calvinistic for a moment, we are all guilty. :ph34r: *shiver* John Knox tapped on the window.
Yeah, I know..I'm fond of Captain..we think quite alike. He cracks me up.

[Strangelove]

And if you really think that free health care is as great as it sounds just look at Canada for an example.





Using data from the National Center for Health Statistics and the World Health Organization, child injury death rates in the US were compared to those of Canada, England and Wales, France, Netherlands, and Norway. Except for the 1981 Canadian figure, overall US childhood injury mortality was greater than childhood injury mortality rates of all countries studied during each year. Injury mortality steadily declined in most other countries, whereas the US rate appears to be increasing.

Yeah Yeah, i think i'd prefer bring my kids up in Canada than the US... they have a greater chance of survival...

[ruthie]

Unfortunately, the graves are not filling a whole lot slower since we went there either.

Edit: I thought the US drug companies were lobbying like crazy to stop Americans going to Canada to buy medicine - or did I dream that somewhere?
Actualy, a bunch of women, children, and elderly were just "put" into a mass grave in Fallujah...burnt beyond recognition..napalm.

[Strangelove]

Really? Then I have two words for you my friend MASS GRAVES!


See ruthies post above

[BigBank_Hank]

Numerous graves were uncovered when we first got there.

I saw Ruthie’s post. I also noticed that she stayed quite when collation and Iraqi forces found slaughterhouses in Fallujah; Its where insurgents were holding civilian hostages and killing them.

[Strangelove]

They werent Coalition, they were American and Iraqi forces...

Shame you havent mentioned anything about how no males aged between 15-55 were allowed to leave before the attack... and that certain commanders told their troops to shoot people before accepting surrender (in case they were booby trapped)... thats the same as saying "Shoot ALL males between 15-55 in the city"...

How can they tell which of the dead are insurgents? They werent wearing uniforms... yeah, right....

[vidcc]

Numerous graves were uncovered when we first got there.

I saw Ruthie’s post. I also noticed that she stayed quite when collation and Iraqi forces found slaughterhouses in Fallujah; Its where insurgents were holding civilian hostages and killing them.
are you telling me you were suprised that "slaughter houses" were found ?... it's not like they tried to hide them. I mean they took video of the killings and put it on general release.
Gosh they must be worried now the secret is out.:unsure:

[ruthie]

Numerous graves were uncovered when we first got there.

I saw Ruthie’s post. I also noticed that she stayed quite when collation and Iraqi forces found slaughterhouses in Fallujah; Its where insurgents were holding civilian hostages and killing them.

Aw, Hank..you ought to know better by now..I don't hestitate to express myself. did you ask me about my thoughts on that particular topic? No, you did not. ROFL.
Yes, graves were uncovered..now we are making new ones, and covering them ourselves..aren't we nice? Of course places of hostage holding ans execution have been found..they do exist, unlike the WMD's.
Perhaps you are dismayed that Nick Berg's father is anti-war...we've heard him speak, been at rallies with him, watched him get arrested, and took pics while he was getting arrested. yes, they found where some of these events happened. They didn't have to look as hard to find the torture prison though, did they.

[Biggles]

Saddam was an evil man and killed a lot of people - particularly in his wars against Iran, the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs. If the Iraqi strategy was going to be successful we had to bring stability and peace quickly - we have not. A lot of innocent civilians have died as a result of this war. A lot of innocents have also died due to the looting of hospitals and destruction of sanitation facilities. The infant mortality rate in Iraq is awful. There are a lot of Iraqis who hated Saddam who now have little regard for us also - they were there for the winning over when we went in. The troubles of the Iraqi people have not lessened since Saddam fell 20 months ago they are simply different.

To return to the topic, it is experiences like this that will determine whether attempting something like Iran is practical. For starters I can't see an Iraqi government agreeing to another war with Iran from its territory.

[ruthie]

Yes, but an Iraqi government will have no choice..the gov't will be Bush's bitch.

[Biggles]

Yes, but an Iraqi government will have no choice..the gov't will be Bush's bitch.

Perhaps, but the Iraqi opinion polls do not currently favour pro US candidates.

I suppose it depends whether it is one man one vote on a bit of paper or those new fangled computer jobs. :ohmy:

[Strangelove]

It will be...


Bush is the man, and he'll cast the vote....

....a little like the US elections really :whistling

[Busyman]

bravo. although your statement is pretty weak, i'd have to agree on some very low level with you. honestly, saddam had more control in Iraq then your puppet gov't ever will, not control as in suppression, but freedom yes freedom. what is democracy? where people choose the gov't and have their say. well, call it dictatorship or not, i'd rather be under saddam's power than george's anyday. for cryin out loud, they had the basic necessities when mr. hussain was in power. oh well, no point in crying over spilt milk right? oh wait, 9/11 riiiiiite, that's how this whole Iraq thing started (w/ a little help from non-existant WMDs). for shame America, for shame. There is no hiding it, when the war was announced everyone in America was in on it, or agreeing with it, so you are all guilty, not just the Bush admin.
Typical terrorist thinking. :dry:

[TheDave]

the mass graves that were found at first were from the iran-iraq war

[TheDave]

Typical terrorist thinking. :dry:
for a start how many terrorists do you know? 2, i agree with azad, if you did what you were told under saddam you lived a relatively good life. there was no slave labour or random attacks on people. the only atrocity i know of against innocent people was revenge for when some of them tried to rise up.

now living as an iraqi you have no running water, no electricity, troops coming into your house breaking islamic law and turning the place upside down. to top it off you can get killed either by accident or for looking funny

[Busyman]

for a start how many terrorists do you know? 2, i agree with azad, if you did what you were told under saddam you lived a relatively good life. there was no slave labour or random attacks on people. the only atrocity i know of against innocent people was revenge for when some of them tried to rise up.

now living as an iraqi you have no running water, no electricity, troops coming into your house breaking islamic law and turning the place upside down. to top it off you can get killed either by accident or for looking funny
You obviously are not American with that, "Do what your told and you'll be OK" crap. :shit:


for shame America, for shame. There is no hiding it, when the war was announced everyone in America was in on it, or agreeing with it, so you are all guilty, not just the Bush admin.

As I said, typical terrorist thinking.....

[TheDave]

You obviously are not American with that, "Do what your told and you'll be OK" crap. :shit:


obviously not american. for non-americans can see the irony of your post

[Busyman]

obviously not american. for non-americans can see the irony of your post
I figured as much, for I see the irony in your thinking.

We'd still be under Great Britain with that rationale. :dry:

From the UK by any chance?

[vidcc]

I would like to know just exactly how that is "typical terrorist thinking"... i've read it over and over, i see disagreement with American foriegn policy...but "terrorist thinking" ??

[TheDave]

yes, england happens to be in the united kingdom. dont worry the rest of europe is also laughing.

the difference is in iraq saddam said "do what we say or i'll kill you", in america "do what we say or bin laden will kill you" or "not doing what we say is unpatriotic, asking why means you're a traitor".

at least with saddam the threat was real

[TheDave]

I would like to know just exactly how that is "typical terrorist thinking"... i've read it over and over, i see disagreement with American foriegn policy...but "terrorist thinking" ??
check my last example:unsure:

[Cheese]

the difference is in iraq saddam said "do what we say or i'll kill you", in america "do what we say or bin laden will kill you" or "not doing what we say is unpatriotic, asking why means you're a traitor".



Or you'll get accused of "typical terrorist thinking"...

[vidcc]

check my last example:unsure:
he was saying it to azed

[TheDave]

i know but i think busyman is in denial but doesn't want to be unpatriotic. so he denounces anything opposing "america" as terrorist thinking. i gotta say azad's a bit h4r5h, it's not their fault they're brainwashed

[Busyman]

I would like to know just exactly how that is "typical terrorist thinking"... i've read it over and over, i see disagreement with American foriegn policy...but "terrorist thinking" ??
RIF. Does everything have to be spelled out?

Here's a do over for the RInotF folks...


so you are all guilty, not just the Bush admin.

Read it over and over and over.....

Come back when you need more :helpsmili .

[Busyman]

i know but i think busyman is in denial but doesn't want to be unpatriotic. so he denounces anything opposing "america" as terrorist thinking. i gotta say azad's a bit h4r5h, it's not their fault they're brainwashed
Wow that was some bullshit spin.

You obviously haven't seen my posts with this denial, unpatriotic :shit:...not that I care anyway. :dry:

[Cheese]

RIF. Does everything have to be spelled out?

Here's a do over for the RInotF folks...



Read it over and over and over.....

Come back when you need more :helpsmili .

I dunno. You could try posting the whole sentence so it's in context.

Editing people's posts to fit your own agenda is just silly...

[TheDave]

most americans supported the war, doesn't that make them guilty of supporting an unjust war?

[Busyman]

I dunno. You could try posting the whole sentence so it's in context.

Editing people's posts to fit your own agenda is just silly...
Hmmm the first time it was the whole post. Then it was crunched further and further for the RInotF folks.

So it was in context before and actually is still in context.

Pretty straightforward. :unsure:

[Busyman]

most americans supported the war, doesn't that make them guilty of supporting an unjust war?
Read said post again, then comeback...it's not hard..just try it.

Say the words aloud if it helps...then comeback if you need :helpsmili .

Stop reading bullshit polls as well.

[Arm]

Number 4

Iran is 4 times larger than Iraq and has a population of over 60 million. The terrain and climate are awful and they have far more military equipment than Iraq had by the time of the invasion. The US could not contain Iraq and meet other commitments without drafting - which I believe is off the cards, non?
Damnit I was gonna say that. :angry:

But really, the US aint got the manpower or the resources to invade another peaceful country. We dont have nearly enough troops in Iraq and they are being killed left and right. Afganstain is a complete mess. Now Iran? Well they do got alot of oil (prime motivation of course) but the people of Iran wont let America rule their country. Again. ;) At least I dont think so. :no:

[Busyman]

Damnit I was gonna say that. :angry:

But really, the US aint got the manpower or the resources to invade another peaceful country. We dont have nearly enough troops in Iraq and they are being killed left and right. Afganstain is a complete mess. Now Iran? Well they do got alot of oil (prime motivation of course) but the people of Iran wont let America rule their country. Again. ;) At least I dont think so. :no:
Totally agree.

[TheDave]

Read said post again, then comeback...it's not hard..just try it.

Say the words aloud if it helps...then comeback if you need :helpsmili .

Stop reading bullshit polls as well.
i'm reading it. are you getting at the fact he says "all"?

[Cheese]

Hmmm the first time it was the whole post. Then it was crunched further and further for the RInotF folks.

So it was in context before and actually is still in context.

Pretty straightforward. :unsure:

Anyone can just quote someone (fully or edited) and make a random statement.

You still haven't actually explained what you mean. Can you? It's okay if you can't.

[Busyman]

i'm reading it. are you getting at the fact he says "all"?
We have a winner. :clap:

[Busyman]

Anyone can just quote someone (fully or edited) and make a random statement.

You still haven't actually explained what you mean. Can you? It's okay if you can't.
It's okay if you can't read or glean something from a crunched edit too. :D

[TheDave]

i dont think its typical terrorist thinking. just a stereotype people like you created

[Busyman]

i dont think its typical terrorist thinking. just a stereotype people like you created
Oh you mean like...."Arabs blow up everything"????!!11!!

How are people like me?

[vidcc]

RIF. Does everything have to be spelled out?

Here's a do over for the RInotF folks...


Quote:
Originally Posted by bullshittalker cpt_azad
so you are all guilty, not just the Bush admin.




Read it over and over and over.....

Come back when you need more :helpsmili .that's not terrorist thinking, that's anti american thinking perhaps, but not terrorist.

[Busyman]

that's not terrorist thinking, that's anti american thinking perhaps, but not terrorist.
I think terrorists think that way, so there's the logic...very easy logic to grasp, at least I thought so.

Maybe someone could buy a vowel next time.

[vidcc]

I think terrorists think that way, so there's the logic.just because you think terrorists think that way, doesn't mean they do

[Busyman]

just because you think terrorists think that way, doesn't mean they do
Just because I think you can read doesn't me...

vid..It's.............a............forum.............It's............opinion.........based..........many............times.

Besides I doubt I'm far off base here.

Notice I didn't bother much when he said people like me create this supposed stereotype. He doesn't have a clue. :dry:

[vidcc]

you make a statement and say it's "typical"... but then you shouldn't expect others to think the same way as you do, so sometimes if a theory is in your head yes you should spell it out. your "logic" isn't everyone else's logic..... or we wouldn't have opposing theories.

perhaps you should consider that before you make your typical condescending style comments about the views of others

[Busyman]

you make a statement and say it's "typical"... but then you shouldn't expect others to think the same way as you do, so sometimes if a theory is in your head yes you should spell it out. your "logic" isn't everyone else's logic..... or we wouldn't have opposing theories.

perhaps you should consider that before you make your typical condescending style comments about the views of others
Well, it wasn't hard to figure out.

Regardless of my logic there is something called context and reading comprehension. Even if I don't believe in something, I can still glean where someone is coming from.
It must be a lost art, you know, comprehension.

Both TheDave and cpt_azad can suck a dick for wishing ill on our soldiers.

Oh and my bad, terrorists don't hold us all accountable. Their aim was to kill soldiers on 9/11. :dry:

Ever heard "Americans kill Muslims, so Muslims will kill Americans"??

[BigBank_Hank]

I came back to this thread to read comments on my last post and its 3 or 4 pages back. Damn B you caused quite a stir in this one.

[Busyman]

I came back to this thread to read comments on my last post and its 3 or 4 pages back. Damn B you caused quite a stir in this one.
Typical terrorist thinking. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[BigBank_Hank]

How very unpatriotic of you :shifty:

[Busyman]

How very unpatriotic of you :shifty:
I guess, if cpt_azad is American.

One of mu best friend's cousin just got sent over to Iraq.

I offered to shoot her in the leg but she couldn't do it.

I hope she comes back alive. :( Thank goodness she's a she 'cause that helps.

[TheDave]

i dont wish ill on the soldiers to hurt the soldiers. i just want bush to be too embarrassed to try anything in iran.


the stereotype was about the sort of american who take fox news gospel and chant stuff like we're number one.


to be honest i dont think theres typical terrorist thinking. in fact i dont think any terrorist attack happens cos people are oppinionated. they happen because people are oppressed or have a real agenda. for example, having your country invaded and your family being killed

[Busyman]

i dont wish ill on the soldiers to hurt the soldiers. i just want bush to be too embarrassed to try anything in iran.

Hmmm


option 4, god i wanna watch america get their asses wooped like they did in vietnam, just in the ME. if i'm not mistaken, the war on Iraq is still not over, no matter what the "administration" says.

Then


that too, but held back from sounding h4r5h

That's the same as backing it up but being a bitch and not saying it yourself.


the stereotype was about the sort of american who take fox news gospel and chant stuff like we're number one.

Show me what post gives you that impression. Sounds like I took a position you just disagreed with so now I'm a stereotypical American. I smell bullshit!!! :shit:


to be honest i dont think theres typical terrorist thinking. in fact i dont think any terrorist attack happens cos people are oppinionated. they happen because people are oppressed or have a real agenda. for example, having your country invaded and your family being killed

Riiiiight. :dry:

"Americans kill Muslims so Muslims will kill Americans"

"We see American tanks and planes bomb our families"

"America is an ally with Israel, Israel is our enemy so America is our enemy"

You are right. They target civilians because they mistake them for soldiers. :ohmy:

[TheDave]

vietnam kept you quiet for a few years didnt it?

what are those quotes for at the end of the post? to show how fucking stupid you are?

[Busyman]

vietnam kept you quiet for a few years didnt it?

1. Fuck you. My boot in your mouth would keep you quiet too, what's your point?


what are those quotes for at the end of the post? to show how fucking stupid you are?

2. You already crossed that finish line. I could never seem to catch up to you.
Damn your good.

[TheDave]

1. the point is if iraq turned out like vietnam you may not wanna go into iran


2. stop obfuscating, its makes angry how you put effort into making no sense

[Busyman]

1. the point is if iraq turned out like vietnam you may not wanna go into iran


2. stop obfuscating, its makes angry how you put effort into making no sense
1. The point is you wish ill on our soldiers for whatever shit reason. Go fuck yourself.

2. Its makes angry? I guess that makes sense. :blink:

STFU before you hurt yourself. :lol: :lol:

[DanB]

I think terrorists think that way, so there's the logic...very easy logic to grasp, at least I thought so.

Maybe someone could buy a vowel next time.


So anybody that thinks anti-american is a terrorist? :blink:

[TheDave]

"Americans kill Muslims so Muslims will kill Americans"

"We see American tanks and planes bomb our families"

"America is an ally with Israel, Israel is our enemy so America is our enemy"

You are right. They target civilians because they mistake them for soldiers. :ohmy:

who started it. the isreal-palastine thing is a war over the holy land. legitimate reasoning there i suppose.


america have been dropping bombs on the middle-east for years. you invaded iraq and the official reason was to get al-qaeda. what do they have in common other than being muslims, on opposite ends of the muslim spectrum too


some terrorists see this as the arguement, many many more law abiding people do, in my oppinion its fair reasoning. it's almost as if you were trying to prove my point:huh:

[Busyman]

who started it. the isreal-palastine thing is a war over the holy land. legitimate reasoning there i suppose.


america have been dropping bombs on the middle-east for years. you invaded iraq and the official reason was to get al-qaeda. what do they have in common other than being muslims, on opposite ends of the muslim spectrum too


some terrorists see this as the arguement, many many more law abiding people do, in my oppinion its fair reasoning. it's almost as if you were trying to prove my point:huh:
What was your point?

You obviously missed mine. It's glaring you in the face.
You are stating some obvious things that I am not disputing then calling it a point.

[TheDave]

remind me then. what are you trying to say?

[vidcc]

So anybody that thinks anti-american is a terrorist? :blink:
come on...it's obvious...Busy shouldn't have to explain his opinion...look at the logic :whistling

[Busyman]

remind me then. what are you trying to say?
You say I'm proving your point with the quotes. How is that?

Typical terrorists blame all Americans for whatever reasons...

"Americans kill Muslims so Muslims will kill Americans"

"We see American tanks and planes bomb our families"

"America is an ally with Israel, Israel is our enemy so America is our enemy"

What was your point again?

[TheDave]

i dont think they blame all american people, but attacking civilians is a pretty effective way at getting at the government.

[Busyman]

So anybody that thinks anti-american is a terrorist?


come on...it's obvious...Busy shouldn't have to explain his opinion...look at the logic

Yeah it is obvious. It seems folks here twist what is said because it doesn't agree with them.

Logic....

Blame all Americans = typical terrorist thinking

It doesn't mean if you are anti-American you are a terrorist. It doesn't even mean if you think that way that you are a terrorist.

It means typical terrorists think that way. (all Americans are guilty)

Now after azad's first post was crunched once I figured you could read and understand but RmustnothavebeenF when you were coming up.

[Busyman]

i dont think they blame all american people, but attacking civilians is a pretty effective way at getting at the government.
Oh ok so I shouldn't go by just even some of what they say.

When they kill American's abroad on vacation, that's just to piss Bush off?

There is no hatred there, it's just business?

Shovel the :shit: elsewhere please. :)

[TheDave]

not to piss bush off but to try and get him out and get america/isreal out of the middle east through influence on the public

[Busyman]

not to piss bush off but to try and get him out and get america/isreal out of the middle east through influence on the public

....by killing....the public. Good point.

[TheDave]

you really believe terrorists hate all americans because of where they were born?


(here i go again) thanks to what the government have been telling you terrorists are just bad, full stop. bush even managed to win an election because of the bin laden tape saying dont vote bush. so terrorism has little of the desired effect on you.

terrorists dont wanna kill people but its the only option they have left. if one had the option do you think he'd kill 1000 civilians or one president bush?

[ahctlucabbuS]

Number 3.

Even Bush (or atleast his inner circle) must realize that attacking what is the capital of islam if I'm not mistaken, is a stupid idea.

[Biggles]

Presumably those Americans who hate all Muslims or those whom they deem even worse (the French) are also terrorists. Then again, perhaps not. :) If this definition were to be applied, most of Fox New's staff would need to be taken in for questioning.

Whilst it is true that a particular terrorist may have hate for all the population of whatever country they are at war with, it does not follow that somebody who hates everybody from a particular country is a terrorist. Someone given to extreme and irrational generalisations perhaps - but not necessarily a terrorist.

[Busyman]

you really believe terrorists hate all americans because of where they were born?

That has almost next to nothing to do with being American.


(here i go again) thanks to what the government have been telling you terrorists are just bad, full stop. bush even managed to win an election because of the bin laden tape saying dont vote bush. so terrorism has little of the desired effect on you.

Terrorists are bad and that's without Bush's say so.
If you think Bush won just because of a Bin Laden tape then haven't a clue.


terrorists dont wanna kill people but its the only option they have left. if one had the option do you think he'd kill 1000 civilians or one president bush?

Bush then......
1000 civilians.

Importance first, body count second.
Bush is not the beginning nor the end....

Terrorism is a culture now. It gains momentum with each successful terrorist bombing and each American or allies' fuck up.
It gains this momentum in Muslim circles almost exclusively.

[TheDave]

maybe they would go for the bodies second.

terrorism works through influence. look at the IRA and whats almost happened in palastine. terrorism has highlighted the cause, then peace talks followed

[Busyman]

maybe they would go for the bodies second.

terrorism works through influence. look at the IRA and whats almost happened in palastine. terrorism has highlighted the cause, then peace talks followed

Ok.

[TheDave]

ok.

[Busyman]

Gotta point?

[TheDave]

no, i just thought we finally found something we agree on :)

[Busyman]

no, i just thought we finally found something we agree on :)
Well I never refuted it.

It that case...it goes without saying.

[ruthie]

you really believe terrorists hate all americans because of where they were born?


(here i go again) thanks to what the government have been telling you terrorists are just bad, full stop. bush even managed to win an election because of the bin laden tape saying dont vote bush. so terrorism has little of the desired effect on you.

terrorists dont wanna kill people but its the only option they have left. if one had the option do you think he'd kill 1000 civilians or one president bush?
The bin Laden tape didn't say don't vote for bush. It said it didn't matter if kerry or bush got elected. and Bush is just one of many.

[Biggles]

The bin Laden tape didn't say don't vote for bush. It said it didn't matter if kerry or bush got elected. and Bush is just one of many.

I suspect that if there was a preference on Osama's part it was for Bush to stay. Kerry was not talking about changing policy - just bringing a pile more people into the region and confusing the issue.

He managed to be a lot more neutral than almost anybody else who commented on the election. :blink:

[BigBank_Hank]

I suspect that if there was a preference on Osama's part it was for Bush to stay.

:lol: Yeah I’m sure he would much rather someone in office that said they wanted him brought in dead or alive.

[DanB]

:lol: Yeah I’m sure he would much rather someone in office that said they wanted him brought in dead or alive.


That wanted tag has worked wonders so far hasn't it :huh:

[vidcc]

:lol: Yeah I’m sure he would much rather someone in office that said they wanted him brought in dead or alive.
actually think about it... Bush is on the world circuit incredibly unpopular....if you were osama would you want someone in office that could gather more support ?

[BigBank_Hank]

@ Dan - Yeah I guess you’re right considering the only thing he’s able to do know is send out videotapes instead of crashing planes into buildings :dry:

@Vid – I’m not really sure what you are saying :blink:

[DanB]

He ahs had the tag on his head for how long now, 3 years? No one is any the closer to catching him.

Some might even say he was instrumental into sending Al Quaeda to Iraq or did his top man just decide to go over there himself?

[vidcc]

@Vid – I’m not really sure what you are saying :blink:
I'm saying that he would want bush in office as he is unpopular on the world circuit, which means less worldwide support for his (bush's) causes thus making it easier for osama to operate.

[Busyman]

I'm saying that he would want bush in office as he is unpopular on the world circuit, which means less worldwide support for his (bush's) causes thus making it easier for osama to operate.
It's a shame that you had to explain that. Really. :dry:

[Busyman]

@ Dan - Yeah I guess you’re right considering the only thing he’s able to do know is send out videotapes instead of crashing planes into buildings :dry:


Like he does that very often or something... :dry:


I love those "we haven't been hit again so security must be working" folks. :lol:

[BigBank_Hank]

Well have been attacked again? No. Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 the only attacks he’s managed is over the airwaves. He’s gone from terrorist mastermind to being confined to a hole making videotapes.

[DanB]

Where there any attacks before 9/11 though? No, yet OBL and AQ were about long before that.

Although AQ are supposedly casuing havoc in Iraq so I guess they are still terrorising

[Busyman]

Well have been attacked again? No. Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 the only attacks he’s managed is over the airwaves. He’s gone from terrorist mastermind to being confined to a hole making videotapes.
Use the brain Hank.

You are sounding just like the stereotypical folks I described on the previous page.

Btw the first WTC bombing was over 10 years ago. I guess Osama is supposed to step it up after 4 years this time around to prove anything to, huh Hank?

Use the brain Hank. Use the brain.

[vidcc]

Well have been attacked again? No. Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 the only attacks he’s managed is over the airwaves. He’s gone from terrorist mastermind to being confined to a hole making videotapes.i have raised this point before that it may just be that they haven't attacked "yet" but it doesn't mean they won't...or it may be that they just haven't planned to attack.

In my opinion to think that they haven't attacked because they can't is going back to the arrogance we had pre 911.

[vidcc]

It's a shame that you had to explain that. Really. :dry:if someone doesn't get what i post i will gladly clear it up for them....without sarcasm.

[BigBank_Hank]

Where there any attacks before 9/11 though? No, yet OBL and AQ were about long before that.

Although AQ are supposedly casuing havoc in Iraq so I guess they are still terrorising

What about the first attack on the WTC? What about the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole? What about the bombing of Embassies overseas?


if someone doesn't get what i post i will gladly clear it up for them....without sarcasm.

More of the usual :dry:

[DanB]

Well USS Cole and the embassies weren't on your home turf so the increased security hardly helps there.

And, much to my embaressment I didn't know there was an earlier attack on the WTC :blushing:

[vidcc]

More of the usual :dry:
huh?

[Busyman]

if someone doesn't get what i post i will gladly clear it up for them....without sarcasm.
Can't you be a little more cryptic?

You know to fire up those neurons... :lol: :lol:

[BigBank_Hank]

huh?
Wasn’t aimed at you Vid.

[Strangelove]

What about the first attack on the WTC?
How many years before the 2nd atack was this?

Why do you feel safe now, as its less than half the time between the two attacks that has passed?

They can strike where and when they want, the Borders of the USA are a joke... but then so are just about anyones unless they build an electrified fence around that is constantly patrolled and monitored 24/7. Hell even then people will be able to get in/out if they know what they are doing... Berlin proved that.

[BigBank_Hank]

How many years before the 2nd atack was this?

Why do you feel safe now, as its less than half the time between the two attacks that has passed?

They can strike where and when they want, the Borders of the USA are a joke... but then so are just about anyones unless they build an electrified fence around that is constantly patrolled and monitored 24/7. Hell even then people will be able to get in/out if they know what they are doing... Berlin proved that.

You couldn’t even buy a clue if you tried. About ¾ of AQ have been killed or captured and OBL is hiding in a cave making videotapes that sound strangely like a Michael Moore movie.

[DanB]

Yeah okay :lol:

[vidcc]

You couldn’t even buy a clue if you tried. About ¾ of AQ have been killed or captured and OBL is hiding in a cave making videotapes that sound strangely like a Michael Moore movie.
Actually the 3/4 figure you use is 3/4 of the "known" or "suspected" leaders at the time of 911.... not 3/4 of AQ. and certainly not 3/4 of todays AQ. Fact is we don't know how many AQ members exist or if those leaders have been replaced, but many conservative estimates from intelligence communities worldwide have suggested the membership of active and potentially active operatives is between 15 and 20 thousand. That's not to say that they are all at this moment planting bombs. Like every organisation different people would have different functions. from fundraising, recruitment, training to actual perpatrators etc. etc.

[Strangelove]

You couldn’t even buy a clue if you tried. About ¾ of AQ have been killed or captured and OBL is hiding in a cave making videotapes that sound strangely like a Michael Moore movie.
Which is of course how they have managed about three times as much terrorism in the world as a whole over the last 3 years, than they managed in the decade beforehand....

You wont take clues when they are given to you on a silver platter...

[BigBank_Hank]

We’ve taken steps to protect ourselves and they are working. As hard as it is for you liberals to admit the steps we put in place are working. We aren’t invincible but the only attack OBL was able to mount before the election was a video. We have work to do but we have come a long way.

Security on the Mexican boarder is something that I’d like to see strengthened.

[BigBank_Hank]

Yeah okay :lol:
This coming from the person who didn’t even know that WTC was attacked before 9/11. That is what’s laughable.

[vidcc]

We’ve taken steps to protect ourselves and they are working. As hard as it is for you liberals to admit the steps we put in place are working. We aren’t invincible but the only attack OBL was able to mount before the election was a video. We have work to do but we have come a long way.

Security on the Mexican boarder is something that I’d like to see strengthened.
again you are ignoring the possibility that we weren't attacked before the election....because they just didn't plan to. to say it's because they are unable to is very dangerous thinking. It only takes ONE person to carry out an attack. Here in the USA that person doesn't even have to import weapons as they are freely available thanks to our NRA and other such groups. Heck a terrorist would know how to make explosives from stuff in any hardware store.

My opinion is that they didn't have to attack because the fear was already there...and the point of terrorism is to create fear.

OBL said in his video that he will bankrupt the USA. so even if we have made it harder for him, he is adapting.

[Strangelove]

This coming from the person who didn’t even know that WTC was attacked before 9/11. That is what’s laughable.And how many Terrorist Attacks in the UK can you name?

Remember that the 1st WTC attack came 10 years before the 2nd, and its "International News" to Dan...

I know i cant name many outside the UK that are current, even though i see them on the news all the time... never mind over 10 years ago.

Its laughable that even now, you appear to think that people in the UK give a monkeys about what happens in the USA as a rule, we dont. Just like most Americans dont care or know about what happens in the UK or the rest of Europe.

You do realise that you only consist of 6% of the worlds population, dont you?

Out of this 6%, less than half care enough about who runs your own country enough to actually vote.

Its almost unbelievable that you think your security is good, when they dont even have to smuggle the equipment into the USA... they just goto WalMart.

[DanB]

This coming from the person who didn’t even know that WTC was attacked before 9/11. That is what’s laughable.


I woukd have been 14/15 at the time. I didn't really have an interest in World Events then :dry:

As Strangelove said can you tell me any of the terrorist attacks we have had in the UK? :unsure:

[ahctlucabbuS]

OBL said in his video that he will bankrupt the USA. so even if we have made it harder for him, he is adapting.

And I'm sure the first step he had in mind was to get GWB reelected.

[Strangelove]

Well, he went from a surplus to a record Deficit in his 1st term... wonder what the deficit will be in 4 years :lol:

[BigBank_Hank]

And how many Terrorist Attacks in the UK can you name?

Remember that the 1st WTC attack came 10 years before the 2nd, and its "International News" to Dan...

I know i cant name many outside the UK that are current, even though i see them on the news all the time... never mind over 10 years ago.

Its laughable that even now, you appear to think that people in the UK give a monkeys about what happens in the USA as a rule, we dont. Just like most Americans dont care or know about what happens in the UK or the rest of Europe.

You do realise that you only consist of 6% of the worlds population, dont you?

Out of this 6%, less than half care enough about who runs your own country enough to actually vote.

Its almost unbelievable that you think your security is good, when they dont even have to smuggle the equipment into the USA... they just goto WalMart.

Strange and Dan the thing that you are missing is that I don’t know everything that’s going on in the world affairs like you two pretend to. I’ve never once said anything negative or positive about Tony Blair and the British government.

And to say that people in the U.K. don’t care what goes on in the U.S. is absolutely absurd. You are from the U.K and you sure seem to take and interest. And if no one cares what happens here then why did Bush make the cover of magazines in the U.K the day after the election? And also why did so many people from over there stay up to watch the results?

[Strangelove]

Strange and Dan the thing that you are missing is that I don’t know everything that’s going on in the world affairs like you two pretend to. I’ve never once said anything negative or positive about Tony Blair and the British government.

And to say that people in the U.K. don’t care what goes on in the U.S. is absolutely absurd. You are from the U.K and you sure seem to take and interest. And if no one cares what happens here then why did Bush make the cover of magazines in the U.K the day after the election? And also why did so many people from over there stay up to watch the results?
Because he is the most dangerous man in the world, its that simple... we would have stayed up for Israels results too....

[Rick Phlegm]

Ah well, looks like they'll be going into the Ukraine next anyway...


Since they "won't accept" the election result there :rolleyes:

[vidcc]

Strange and Dan the thing that you are missing is that I don’t know everything that’s going on in the world affairs like you two pretend to. I’ve never once said anything negative or positive about Tony Blair and the British government.

And to say that people in the U.K. don’t care what goes on in the U.S. is absolutely absurd. You are from the U.K and you sure seem to take and interest. And if no one cares what happens here then why did Bush make the cover of magazines in the U.K the day after the election? And also why did so many people from over there stay up to watch the results?
I think they are saying they don't care about every little thing that goes on in the USA ( what's news to us isn't to them)
This isn't to be confused with them caring about what the US is doing outside the US. and the world interest in this election was purely down to what the US is doing in the world.

[DanB]

Not just the US has condemned the Ukrainian election though.

It has been renounced worldwide as a set up.

Hank, that was 10 years ago, not current events.

[Strangelove]

Ah well, looks like they'll be going into the Ukraine next anyway...


Since they "won't accept" the election result there :rolleyes:
Does that mean that we have to go into the USA 'coz we find their results unacceptable?

:helpsmili

[ruthie]

I don't find the results acceptable either.

[Rick Phlegm]

You haven't held a threatening press conference about it tho have you?

The US should be more careful about its attitude nowadays.

[vidcc]

perhaps a new thread for the Ukraine topic

[Biggles]

Hank,

Whilst it is wonderful that there have not been any major attacks in the US this is not entirely surprising (presumably the anthrax thing was not them?).

AQ is at loggergeads with much of the world. Since 9/11 it has attacked in Spain, Morocco, Turkey, Algeria, Indonesia, as well as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kenya, Chechnya, Russia, Eygpt and Iraq. They have been busy boys. They have flexed their muscle and demonstrated there is hardly a part of the world they cannot reach. They have killed thousands since 9/11. If the judge of the war on terror is purely that the US mainland is not attacked then we are in partnership with the wrong ally. AQ is far from beaten and this is going to be a long haul with a lot more bloodshed. Osama is not a dictator or even interested in political power. He might be mad in our eyes but he is a religious and humble man. He has already decentralised AQ control so that his death or capture means little to organisation. The video with him looking ethereal dressed in gold robes suggest he already has an eye to the next world. His capture and removal to the US is probably the one thing that would result in another attack on the US mainland. I believe they were rather hoping he would be flattened in Tora Bora with nothing to mark he ever existed.

Vidcc

The situation in the Ukraine is regrettable but it is nice to see GW rooting for a Liberal. :)

[BigBank_Hank]

perhaps a new thread for the Ukraine topic

Vid did we highjack your thread?:ph34r:

[vidcc]

Vid did we highjack your thread?:ph34r:
not really i just think it's worth it's own thread....in the talkingdrawingwhatever room

[Busyman]

not really i just think it's worth it's own thread....in the talkingdrawingwhatever room
Silly, it's The Drawing Room er where we draw and stuff.

Get your construction paper and paste. I'll bring the crayons. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Voetsek]

What of Korea if he invades them they will nuke the us Korea have already said this just hope bush is not able to raise the troops 2 countries invaded no peace shambles waste of life

[vidcc]

What of Korea if he invades them they will nuke the us Korea have already said this just hope bush is not able to raise the troops 2 countries invaded no peace shambles waste of life
I don't think N. Korea is a possible target for invasion because it has close ties with China and any military action against it could invoke a serious problem. Also it is suspected that N. Korea already has nuclear weapons, so a diplomatic solution would be more likely because they have the ability to defend themselves.
just an opinion :)

[Voetsek]

part of the axis of evil so says president bush Iran the Korea then ww3

[vidcc]

part of the axis of evil so says president bush Iran the Korea then ww3
Oh he would like to i believe go in, however neither country is a soft target like "Iraq" was supposed to be.... and this is probably what's stopped him so far

[BawA]

part of the axis of evil so says president bush Iran the Korea then ww3
that would be great, mybe then we can be seen in next World war documentries or mybe in Next MOH and COD series :lol:

[Cheese]

that would be great, mybe then we can be seen in next World war documentries or mybe in Next MOH and COD series :lol:

This is a good point. I'm a little bored of games set in WWII and Vietnam. Time for some expansion ideas.

[Darth Sushi]

Recruitment in the armed forces (regular, reserve, and National guard) is down significantly. He'll have to start the draft.