Wmd

[the mask]

yes the Quran says to kill UNBELIEVERS, however it also says to be kind to everyone, so....... i will let you come to a conclusion on that question

what you have just said there danyj will be taken out of context. you must remember that the prophet mohammed (PBUH) did not go around just killing non-muslims, there was a diplomatic method implemented. messages were sent to other governments in that day for non-muslim leaders and countries to accept islam, if not then pay taxes to the muslims and if not then go to war. so stating that so harshly is a bit to much. as you know the word islam in arabic means peace, its just such a shame that a few fundamentalists are hijacking islam to promote their own agenda.

[bujub22]

[QUOTE]yes the Quran says to kill UNBELIEVERS,

i want to see a quote from there book on that! time for google

but that's kinda like juhovah witnesses they say only a few will see the holy land ,hell they even give a number

to me a johovah witness should be a more exclusive club , religion whatever
i don't think u want ol charlie skippin in front of u ,when all he did was show up to prayier and never donated but u get denied for being 1 number off and been faithful to your beliefs!

[the mask]

http://www.answering-christianity.com/no_murder.htm

islam does not allow the killing of innocent non-muslims

[danyj]

this is taken from the Quran.

9.123: O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

This proves that they have to kill the unbelievers, however like i said b4 the Quran says to be kind to everyone.

[bujub22]

u know ...this whole world goin to hell!

[BigBank_Hank]

Originally posted by vidcc@18 April 2004 - 16:38
It doesn't matter that he invaded another country a decade ago (we aren't exactly without guilt there)..he did what any leader would do concerning national security of their country.

So you honestly think that he invaded Kuwait because they were a security concern to Iraq? I bet that it had nothing to do with all oil fields that are in Kuwait.

We may have invaded countries but they were never to prosper from their riches it was to liberate them from someone who had.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank+18 April 2004 - 17:42--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (BigBank_Hank @ 18 April 2004 - 17:42)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-vidcc@18 April 2004 - 16:38
It doesn&#39;t matter that he invaded another country a decade ago (we aren&#39;t exactly without guilt there)..he did what any leader would do concerning national security of their country.

So you honestly think that he invaded Kuwait because they were a security concern to Iraq? I bet that it had nothing to do with all oil fields that are in Kuwait.

We may have invaded countries but they were never to prosper from their riches it was to liberate them from someone who had. [/b][/quote]
let me clarify that one....he was supposed to allow the inspectors in after the gulf war and i was talking about the inspectors and why he didn&#39;t want them. It has been argued that he was a vanquished agressor so he should let them in. I didn&#39;t say he invaded kwait because they were a security risk.
It has been debated on the forum before...why doesn&#39;t the usa "liberate" other countries such as Zimbabwe?...the plain truth is that it wouldn&#39;t benefit us so for those countries with little to offer we decide that "we have no business interfering "...but a country with oil..................
Where are the contracts going for the oil fields in Iraq? Who has the rebuild contracts? the Iraqis?..........................

[danyj]

bujub22 Posted on 18 April 2004 - 20:17
&nbsp; u know ...this whole world goin to hell&#33;

That means there is a god?

[BigBank_Hank]

I didn&#39;t say he invaded kwait because they were a security risk.

It doesn&#39;t matter that he invaded another country a decade ago (we aren&#39;t exactly without guilt there)..he did what any leader would do concerning national security of their country.

If we were just to liberate countries that are only rich in oil then what about Afghanistan? I guess that we sent troops in there because of their of all the oil fields that they have Its just not logistically possible to help every single country everywhere, you can&#39;t help everyone everywhere its just not possible.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@18 April 2004 - 20:24
If we were just to liberate countries that are only rich in oil then what about Afghanistan? I guess that we sent troops in there because of their of all the oil fields that they have Its just not logistically possible to help every single country everywhere, you can&#39;t help everyone everywhere its just not possible.

Afganistan was the war on terror...9:11 and the hunt fo bin laden...the taliban shielded him. (didn&#39;t the usa support the taliban because the practically stopped the opium trade?)

i fully agree about helping every country but i was responding to your post saying

We may have invaded countries but they were never to prosper from their riches it was to liberate them from someone who had.