Printable View
Stupid slaughters have gone on for ages and ages.
America was full of natives until they were killed-off with war and disease.
No people on this planet are "clean".
The biggest problem is people constantly fighting and holding grudges over "the sins of the father".
From this point on, any personal attacks here are going to result in an immediate ban. Either keep it civil or take it to Fight Club.
I'm especially addressing Yoshi, Almaci, diffusionx and Stone.
The slaughter of Armenians happened between the two worldwars after an insurgency instigated by France and the UK who were driven out of Anatalia by the rebel forces of Ataturk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stone
How exactly does that warrant terrorist actions in the 80s?
Actions designed to get an Armenian homeland on what has been Turkish soil for 8 decades now.
They knew they had no hope against the dictatorships of Iran or the Soviets so they took the target wich they deemed soft, Turkey.
Mind you after the fall of comunism in the former soviet Union they did get independance, independance wich they later chose to waive.
Dont gimme that crap that happened BEFORE the second world war, under that reasoning European Jews would have a right to start killing innocent Germans worldwide to establish a Jewish land on German soil.
Its as retarded as the other shit yer spouting here right now.
And no terorism is NEVER alright, gee youd think youd get the message after me having said as much dozens of times before.
I figured, since I'm not one of the boad conservatives, might as well post this:
There isn't a Republican alive who can honestly point the finger at Clinton when referring to Bin Laden, unless they're willing to take down two of their presidents and a shitload of congressmen with them. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by NightWolve
Clinton fucked up with Osmama, yes he did. But that's the point. He basically continued a failed policy regarding the Taliban that began over 20 years ago. He was one of the people responsible, but he sure as hell wasn't the only one.
Why not? Haven't we "marched right up into the heart" of two countries already? Didn't Bush say we would find him no matter what? How convenient to downplay the fact that Bin Laden is still out there. Suddenly he's not so important right now. I don't know if he's alive, but then, you don't know that he's not. And since we haven't the foggiest clue where he is or what he's doing, I guess we'll never know.Quote:
So, who is then? Is Howard Dean, if elected, gonna turn things around and march some troops right up into the heart of Pakistan to get him?? I'd like to know what the alternative plan is, if any, since "Bush failed to 'find' him..."
Funny how you put the word failed in quotations. I can't see how the state of Afghanistan or the hunt for Bin Laden can be put another way.
I've reread my post and couldn't find just about anything you referred to here, so you're sarcasm and wit was wasted.Quote:
Repeating "Bush can't find Bin Laden" over and over is not much of a fucking plan! Oh sure, we can make great snide remarks and have a good laugh about Bush catching the wrong guy, fine, but is there a solution anywhere here? No. Zip. Nadda. So, I guess I got your message man.. Bush sucks; he got the wrong guy; Iraq is Veitnam II and was a diversion to the 'bad' economy so that's that, I suppose... The "coalition of the unhappy" wants everyone else to feel the same way, boohoo. Equality in misery. Well, okie doke, thx. I learned my lesson, I'll never ever ever ever ever vote republican. To borrow that Dick's comment here, "Bush, a miserable, miserable failure..." Ya know, cause I'm sure Mr. 'Dick' Gephardt couldn't 'fuck' things up any worse than Bush has... Nobody could, har har friggity har.
There's no solution? Aren't you defending the man in charge? You mean he doesn't have a solution?
You're right though. We'll probably just humor Bin Laden for a few more years, let him bomb wherever he wants, and then blame the Democrat in power for not finding him. That's basically always been our policy anyway. So much for accountability!
I'd be much more forgiving of Mr. Bush's failure to find bin Laden or confirm his death if he found the WMD, he had a viable long-term plan for Iraq, he was willing to pull out of Iraq now, he hadn't alienated the rest of the world, he wasn't connected to corporate failures that have cost Americans their life savings, he managed to turn the domestic economy around significantly, or his adminstration stopped attacking civil liberties at home.
His successes since his "election" include the successful invasion of a totally inferior nation and finding its former tyrant in a rathole. Both of which may be a wonderful thing for Iraq but really don't benefit a single American at all save for the ones serving in Iraq who shouldn't even be there anymore.
Wow for once I'm not the one embroiled in a name-calling fest. But it's sad to see the same people whining about how these discussion turn to crap resorting to the same style they themselves dislike.
Anyways, does anyone actually see this thing ending? Finding Saddam could have been a good thing for Bush if he now decided to pull out of Iraq and let the Iraqis start governing themselves, but he won't. This occupation will continue until he's either voted out next November or he finishes destroying this country after his second term.
On a side note, did anyone see that report on the number of companies that are exported jobs overseas? That's what I'm talking about when I say there are more important issues than disposing of some two-bit dictator.
SC
Why do you guys want us to leave (not counting the monetary and human life costs)? Would it be good for the Iraqi people? Will they be able to govern themselves if we pull out now?
I'm not being a smart-ass; I really don't know.
I didn't make the list? :(Quote:
Originally Posted by burgundy