Defending the Truth

Is that what your little "Jim Jones".... Bush cult told you to think?


THE REPUBLICAN PARTY








(*Note: these people were actually murdred by the CIA.
The Guyana suicides were staged.)

You're a moron. A completely deluded moron.

I'm not wasting any more time on your stupidity.

Oh.... yeah.....sure......

Its 12:00PM Pacific Time.....

Sean Shammity is coming on....time for you to go drink your Kool Aide.



-----------

Yeah, that's pretty much what I was thinking too.

You're confused and full of shit. I can smell you from here.

Hey.....tell me again how your are better than the "terrorists."

Hey i never brought up ultimate goals. The argument from my side has always been the same... the methods used by the american government are more deadly, more destructive and completely counter-productive to their objective of peace.

Lik ei said two wrongs do not make a right. Terrorists use violence. It's wrong and they shoudl be condemned. But american offensives have been MORE deadly to the world than all terrorist attacks in history.

You know, it is sad that you are unable to look beyond the ethnicity and background of a person when evaluating an opinion. That is why you will always be roughly as sophisticated as a moderately intelligent simian in your opinions and argumentation.

This has NOTHING to do with ethnicity and religious bigotry.

It has to do with MUSLIM TERRORISTS INTENTIONALLY TARGETING INNOCENT CIVILIANS.

American soldiers do NOT do that.


Until you admit that, there is nothing more that you can say that I will even consider listening to. You're already hinting at it, without being willing to admit it. You might as well admit it and get it over with.

Just out of curiousity...
Is it just these specific circumstances that you base your reply on?
Or is it just policy in general which you don't feel the U.S. should follow, on any occasion?

I think the policy in general comes from a time-honored "rules of war" type policy whereby two warring nations are given time to gather their dead and bury them without fear of attack. A sign of respect to the fallen warriors.
Of course, there is a LOT that is different inbetween that "time-honored" policy, and this situation.

Personally, I think I would want to respect the boundaries of an actual church or mosque (the building) and not attack it, but I am significantly less inclined to balk at bombing these SPECIFIC targets in the cemetary.

It could be a huge political mess if you do though.
I guess one of my major concerns would be how the Muslim religion (not the extremists) would view such an attack. If such a move would cause serious religious feedback, it might be advisable to hold back, based on possible sympathy garnered towards the terrorists.

Just some additional thoughts...

That's a good point - even from a gay guy!

If there's no "honored truce" for anything, then even ambulances and hospitals become targets. Churches or mosques - where innocent people are legitimately going about their own form of worship - are targets.

But here's what I think is so infuriating... The Fundy Terrorists are hiding in ambulances, stockpiling munitions in mosques, and disguising themselves as civilians. THEY have completely thrown out all conventional "courtesies" of war. And many civilians are not only letting it happen, they're helping them.

So what is the right thing to do?