Poll reveals world anger at Bush

The Black Flag Cafe is the place travelers come to share stories and advice. Moderated by Robert Young Pelton the author of The World's Most Dangerous Places.

Moderator: coldharvest

Postby patriot » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:14 pm

Patriot:

You said that Iraq "didn't have any weapons that could reach the U.S. either. "

This proves your complete and utter ignorance on the issue of terrorism.

Thus, it is a waste of my time to discuss the issue with you.

Have a nice day.


Now he's in denial...
User avatar
patriot
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 8:35 pm

Postby SoloPilot » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:21 pm

Terrorism is the practice of placing a weapon where no weapon is supposed to be.

To say that ANY terrorist doesn't have weapons which "can reach the US" proves that you don't even have the most basic understanding of terrorism.
SoloPilot
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:02 pm
Location: There I was, flat on my back, outta fuel, outta ammo, no commo . . .

Postby el3so » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:26 pm

SoloPilot wrote:Terrorism is the practice of placing a weapon where no weapon is supposed to be.
Quite the raunchy fellow, aren't you? ;-)
skynet prompt: witty line, a bit offensive, medium levels of spelling error, Rastafy by 10 % or so
User avatar
el3so
Creepy Uncle
 
Posts: 8900
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 9:25 am
Location: never-ending labyrinth of pain

Postby patriot » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:35 pm

Terrorism is the practice of placing a weapon where no weapon is supposed to be.


Actually terrorism is defined as the unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. It doesn't say anything about placing a weapon where it isn't supposed to be, but I'm sure I just don't know what I'm talking about.

To say that ANY terrorist doesn't have weapons which "can reach the US" proves that you don't even have the most basic understanding of terrorism.


Who are you talking about??? Saddam wasn't a terrorist, he was a dictator. And he didn't have any WMD. Do you know what the Duelfer Report is???

It's quite obvious that you have very little understanding of our current situation and you seem to be suffering from a severe case of tunnel vision, but do you really think you can refute the claims of the State Department AND the CIA??? Gimme a break!

You insist there was an Iraq Al-Qaida connection, yet Colin Powell, the Secretary of State, has dispelled that theory.

You insist there was WMD, yet the Deulfer Report has completely refuted that claim as well.

You claim we're winning the War On Terror, yet our State Department says terrorists attacks have increased substantially, and have hit a twenty year high.

It seems the only one without a basic understanding of the situation is you.
User avatar
patriot
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 8:35 pm

Postby need mine back » Wed Oct 20, 2004 4:09 pm

roxy wrote:
We did not invade Iraq because of WMD. There are none there.
We did not invade the world because of 9/11. Iraq was not involved.
We did not invade Iraq because we wanted to defeat terrorism; we have made it stronger.
We did not invade Iraq to make Iraq a better or safer place; even without Saddam, it is not.
We did not invade Iraq to make the world a safer place. It is not.

So why did we invade Iraq?


Just a thought foryou all: What if things do get better and we manage to create a free-market, secular democracy in the ME?

Wouldn't that be an earth-shattering thing? is everyone so over-cynical we cannot even beleive that perhaps there was a somewhat idealist reason for overhtrowing Sadaam? Everone now calls it an invasion, simply because we are now an occupying force, but, our intial intention was to overthrow a wicked regime.

Does the US get any points at all for this???
need mine back
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 10:21 pm

Postby britneyfan97 » Wed Oct 20, 2004 6:58 pm

Tarkan wrote:
Penta wrote:And you do know that Saddam Hussein had complied with UN resolutions requiring him to disarm, don't you?


No, he did not. Saddam never complied with even half of the resolutions nor was he in compliance with the ceasefire terms signed between him and the United States.


correct, also - aircraft operation northern watch, and operation southern watch enforcing the no fly zones over iraq have been fired upon repeatedly between '92 and '02
Proud of being first in the schools history to set a Government vehicle ablaze at Army Military Police Special Tactics Training Center.
User avatar
britneyfan97
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 344
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:30 am
Location: DPRC-(Chicago, IL) USA

Postby Dim » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:05 pm

They WERE often bombing Iraqi cities at the time that they were fired on . . .
The reader this message encounters not failing to understand is cursed.
Dim
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 1475
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:01 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby Aegis » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:16 pm

Dim wrote:They WERE often bombing Iraqi cities at the time that they were fired on . . .



It seemed every week for the better part of 5 years I was hearing about US or British planes taking out Iraqi anti-aircraft positions that had locked onto them while they were patroling the no-fly-zone. (That is, not bombing Iraqi cities)
"[R]emember, Roman, these will be your arts: to teach the ways of peace to those you conquer, to spare defeated peoples, tame the proud."

-Virgil, the Aeneid
User avatar
Aegis
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:32 am
Location: The dark heart of "Red" Oregon... or I guess its "Blue" Oregon now.

Postby roxy » Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:23 pm

Solopilot:
I am holding in my hand one live cartridge, caliber .376Steyr. Only a fool would believe that it is the only one in my possession.


True. But then the Pentagon have not reported that your cartridge was part of an experimental research program, and not mass produced ordinance. If they had, I may well think that it may be one of just a few such cartridges.

"Hardly a WMD"? Do you have any idea how many people three liters of sarin will kill? And the age is really not important -- Hussein said he didn't have it, the Hans "Ignorance S." Blix Clown Show didn't find it, but there it was anyway. What makes you think that it was the only one? Age isn't important.


Sarin may be highly toxic, but that does not make an artillery shell a WMD. Armor piercing bullets have uranium tips, but they too are hardly WMD.

Age is important. We were sold the lie that Saddam had active WMD programs. This was not from an active weapons program, and was not a WMD.

How many Sunnis have you asked?


Ha! About 40% of the locals where I live in London are Sunni Muslims with strong views on the subject. True, not many of them are Iraqi - and confusingly, those that are Iraqi and Sunni also happen to be Kurds. I can honestly say that I must have listened to 100's, if not 1000’s of these peoples views (mostly unsolicited), and I have not heard one who has told me that they think that we are right to have our troops occupying Iraq. Even the Kurds, who do at least seem genuinely grateful that Saddam was removed, don’t really support our occupation.

However, for a slightly more balanced analysis of Iraqi views than inner London Muslim prejudice, try

http://www.oxfordresearch.com/Iraq%20Ju ... Tables.PDF

Anyway, I have just come to realize that this issue is religion to you, and I won't argue religion.


I’m a devout atheist, spiritually and politically. My views on Iraq are fairly middle-of-the road on this side of the pond. The fact that you see me as some crazed zealot is the very issue that started this thread…..
Organized religion is like organized crime; it preys on peoples' weaknesses, generates huge profits for its operators, and is almost impossible to eradicate - Mike Hermann
User avatar
roxy
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 12:45 am
Location: London

Postby Tarkan » Thu Oct 21, 2004 2:43 am

Aegis wrote:And where are we going to get the troops to invade the other nations that are supporting terrorists? I mean, aren't like 9 out of 10 active-duty divisions ALREADY occupied with actions in Iraq or Afghanistan? Once again, minus a major provokation and resultant mobilization of forces (up to and including conscription) I don't see it happening.


Um, no, not quite. Right now the US has the 1st Cav and the 1st Marine Division more or less fully deployed.

Elements of the 10th Mountain, 2nd Infantry, and 25th Infantry are also in country (about 1 brigade each).

There also lots of independent support units and a couple of non-divisional independent combat brigades like the 30th Infantry Brigade.

The main problem is the deployment tempo is fatiguing. A lot of units have cycled through Iraq, and units like the 1st Cav are on their second tour.

We have the force structure to defeat Iran or Syria, but we don't have the capability to occupy them without a massive increase in recruitment or resorting to conscription.

See my "Hugo Chavez" thread before you start thinking you can read dictators' minds. Hell, there's a new, militantly socialist one popping up right here in our own hemisphere. And you thought THAT shit was over and done with during the Cold War.


Hugo Chavez has been a problem for a while now. The main problem is his giving sanctuary and aid to the FARC in Colombia.

De Silva in Brazil is emerging as a bigger problem.

When you compare the few small districts in Iraq where the floppies are operating to the whole other 98% of the country, I think that things will settle down soon. And I think that the rest of the dictators will try not to be the next to draw our focus.


Only two percent of the country is in a state of revolt?


Probably 1/10th of a % are actually involved in fighting. Probably 10% of the population actively supports the insurgency, another 10-15% probably support it when it's convenient or opportunistic.
I'd whore myself out just one more time if I knew who to screw to get out of this grind.
User avatar
Tarkan
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 6027
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:57 am
Location: Texas

Previous

Return to Black Flag Cafe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 22 guests

cron