Giving the president authority for a preemptive nuclear strike!

[Omun]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/10/AR2005091001053.html
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

This is really scary giving the president authority for a preemptive authority for a Nuclear strike against weapons of mass destruction? Umm, if I remember correctly we (the United States government) are not very good at finding which countries have banned weapons in the first place. This really scares me. If we were to nuke somebody in this day and age it will for sure come back around to us. I need to move. :mad:

[Garden Knowm]

nukes suck!

[Bman719]

USA blows... let's all just move to canada....

[Ganj]

the doctrine states that presidential approval is all that's needed. the day of the mad scientist is near! muah-ha-ha-ha-ha!

[ermitonto]

Hey, here's an idea. How about we stop being so hypocritical and get rid of our own weapons of mass destruction? The world's nuclear arsenals are by far the biggest terrorist threat to our planet!

[Ganj]

Hey, here's an idea. How about we stop being so hypocritical and get rid of our own weapons of mass destruction? The world's nuclear arsenals are by far the biggest terrorist threat to our planet!


what are the world's people coming to?! first it's the mad scientist - what's next?! the mad grad-student?

(just a little futurama humor)

[GHoSToKeR]

This is what I find funny;

If we (we being the UK/USA) get rid of our WMDs then they (they being everyone else) will supposedly nuke us.

If they don't get rid of their WMDs then we will supposedly nuke them.

Hmmmm... There's something fundamentally not right with that.

[Torog]

Howdy Omun,

As bad as it sounds,this new authority is what we may need,in our upcoming confrontation with Iran...and a few other countries of ill-intent towards the Free World. I wish that we didn't have to nuke anyone ever again,but the survival of the Free World,may depend on it. Make no mistake,the arab world wishes nothing less-than the complete and total destruction of Israel and the murder of every Jew on the face of the planet..nukes may be the only way to persuade them otherwise.

Have a good one ...

[GHoSToKeR]

But don't you understand that when the first nuke is fired, there are going to be more nukes fired in retalliation? One nuke from the US could cause a nuclear war which would destroy the world, or most of it. Why would you want to risk that? I'm not just being paranoid. Remember what Fritz Strassmann said when he created the A-bomb? "I have become the destroyer of worlds". :(

[Torog]

But don't you understand that when the first nuke is fired, there are going to be more nukes fired in retalliation? One nuke from the US could cause a nuclear war which would destroy the world, or most of it. Why would you want to risk that? I'm not just being paranoid. Remember what Fritz Strassmann said when he created the A-bomb? "I have become the destroyer of worlds". :(

Howdy GhostToker,

I understand what yer trying to say,but it really depends on who we nuke,as far as we know,the iranians don't have any nukes to retaliate with,however,Egypt and pakistan could possibly nuke us back,but I doubt it. I don't think that the russians,chinese or the french would stand up and retaliate either...no matter how badly they want to keep doing business with the islamofascists. Israel,cannot allow Iran to git nukes..period. The mullahs of Iran,already have their NBC bunkers to escape to and they will consider their populace to be useful as martyrs,as soon as they have enough nukes,to accomplish their military and political goals,they will use them against Israel.

Have a good one ...

[BobBong]

"It's the end of the world as we know it"

[GHoSToKeR]

You thought, no you BELIEVED that Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction, and you were wrong.

So to nuke a country on the BELIEF that they don't have weapons of mass destruction with which to retalliate would be taking a very big risk indeed. That's all i'm saying.

Pressing that fabled Big Red Button could be the end of the US.

I'll ask again, why would you want to risk that?

[GHoSToKeR]

"It's the end of the world as we know it"
"..and I feel fine". :)

[Torog]

You thought, no you BELIEVED that Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction, and you were wrong.

So to nuke a country on the BELIEF that they don't have weapons of mass destruction with which to retalliate would be taking a very big risk indeed. That's all i'm saying.

Pressing that fabled Big Red Button could be the end of the US.

I'll ask again, why would you want to risk that?
Howdy GhostToker,

Well..it's my belief-and there's some evidence for it,that the russians and the french,helped to git rid of any wmd's that may have been present and advanced weaponery,and took it to Syria or back to the country of origin. The russians are very skilled at covering their tracks..and the french ain't far behind.

To me,the choice is clear-either stand and fight for the Free World..or be prepared to become a dhimmini(muslim slave),or a commie slave..if that appeals to ya..rather than fightin..then by all means..you best git started on yer conversion to Islam or join the communist party..if yer just interested in staying alive.

Have a good one ...

[GHoSToKeR]

But don't you have enough conviction in the West to believe that it would survive without blowing the crap out of everybody else?

I mean, when somebody questions your religion you don't shoot them do you? No, because you have conviction in your religion, you believe that it is right and that it will prevail in the end. So why do you beleive that if we don't blow the crap out of all the Muslims and Communits then we'll become Muslims or Communists? Can't we just defend ourselves when necessary instead of having to throw the first stone? Can't we all just coexist until somebody tries to threaten psychically threaten us? Ever heard of Peace through Strength?

[Az.]

In my last class this afternoon i was reading the Telegraph and read i little bit about this...the reasoning behind them plotting to use nukes is because
"only a nuclear blast is sufficiently powerful to destroy some biological agents"
so they are really doing this to protect themselves....but it is most blatently going to result in an even worse mess....

my theory of what is going to happen is...
US Bombs....Everyone bombs...war over and everyone is dead....happy days :)
(population of the world decresed by half :D)

[Torog]

But don't you have enough conviction in the West to believe that it would survive without blowing the crap out of everybody else?

I mean, when somebody questions your religion you don't shoot them do you? No, because you have conviction in your religion, you believe that it is right and that it will prevail in the end. So why do you beleive that if we don't blow the crap out of all the Muslims and Communits then we'll become Muslims or Communists? Can't we just defend ourselves when necessary instead of having to throw the first stone? Can't we all just coexist until somebody tries to threaten psychically threaten us? Ever heard of Peace through Strength?
Howdy GhostToker,

I git what yer saying..believe me-I do believe in peace through strength..maybe even trust-but verify..but there are certain folks intent on delivering the first blow to us,as was done on9/11/01..and we ain't gonna let em git away with it again..we are saying-that we do not want to sacrifice thousands more of our civilians,by taking another blow from the enemy..why should more of our civilians die-just so we can say they hit us first ? Iran wanting to nuke Israel..is a given..but if we know of a pending attack that we can stop,and it needs a nuke to stop it,especially when total incineration is required for biologicals or chemicals,then we should act to save our citizens. How many attacks on our soil,must we endure before we act to save our lives ? Or on British soil or anywhere in the Free World ?

I don't want to blow the whole world up and I hope that we don't have to use any nukes anywhere-ever again..but if the choice is the end of the Free World and the beginning of a New Dark Ages,under Islam or communism..maybe it would be best to blow everything up and start over from scratch..what say you ?

Have a good one ....

[jonhy2536]

instead of nukes, Bush should smoke a big joint and think of peace, not war... :mad:

[BobBong]

instead of nukes, Bush should smoke a big joint and think of peace, not war... :mad:

As much as we don't want to admit it.. Americans just love a fucking war.

[GHoSToKeR]

Howdy GhostToker,

I git what yer saying..believe me-I do believe in peace through strength..maybe even trust-but verify..but there are certain folks intent on delivering the first blow to us,as was done on9/11/01..and we ain't gonna let em git away with it again..we are saying-that we do not want to sacrifice thousands more of our civilians,by taking another blow from the enemy..why should more of our civilians die-just so we can say they hit us first ? Iran wanting to nuke Israel..is a given..but if we know of a pending attack that we can stop,and it needs a nuke to stop it,especially when total incineration is required for biologicals or chemicals,then we should act to save our citizens. How many attacks on our soil,must we endure before we act to save our lives ? Or on British soil or anywhere in the Free World ?

I don't want to blow the whole world up and I hope that we don't have to use any nukes anywhere-ever again..but if the choice is the end of the Free World and the beginning of a New Dark Ages,under Islam or communism..maybe it would be best to blow everything up and start over from scratch..what say you ?

Have a good one ....
Torog, I hope you can understand that this is a hard debate for me...

As you probably know by now, i'm against any kind of violence or war. I've even gone so far as saying that in an ideal situation ALL military worldwide would be disbanded, all weapons destroyed, etc, but i've come to my senses and can see that isn't possible. If we all went back to fighting with our fists, somebody would pick up a rock.. :rolleyes:

So when it comes to launching pre-emptive strikes against other nations, I don't know what to say. I understand that there are alot of countries (or groups of people) who would love to destroy the United States and the United Kingdom (and other countries too), and to murder every one of their citizens... so, the safest course of action would be to take these people out before they could take us out.

However, I could never bring myself to agree with one human being striking down another human. Never, no matter how necessary it may seem. I guess it comes back to that old question, doesn't it? You know the one... if you could go back in time to 21th April 1889, the day after Hitler was born, would you kill him as a baby years before he was able to do what he did?

In this scenario I can see the reason for doing it, and I may even argue why it should be done.. but I would never agree with it. Why should somebody be punished for something before they've actually done what they're being punished for?

Like I said Torog, this is a hard one for me. I could never condone (though of course it will never be entirely up to me.. thankfully) nuking anybody, but I could also never let somebody else do the same to us first.

Thank fuck i'm not a politician. Excuse my French. :)

[Melton420]

peace is sopmething we will never have, but armageddon is comming, and you need to repent and start praying, love and believe .... jesus is real.

[BobBong]

Jesus is real.. he's in my closet.

[stonerpoet]

This is what happens when you elect a jack ass to be our president

[mrdevious]

peace is sopmething we will never have, but armageddon is comming, and you need to repent and start praying, love and believe .... jesus is real.

yes yes melton420, jesus and armageddon are coming, you've told us many a times. just like they were coming according to every person at the beginning/end of every millenium, century, war, incident, political, or societal change. I was under the impression, however, that this was supposed to happen a thousand years after jesus, not 2 thousand. unless it just plain slipped gods mind last time.

as for this pre-emptive (sp?) nuclear strike stuff, it's bullshit. no person in the world should be given that type of power. I'm starting to feel like I'm just watching to fundamentalist nations fight, one christian and the other muslim (and perhapse a 3rd communist in the future). It doesn't matter how high and mighty and morally pure the US government thinks they are, we're allowing a nation to decide who's right, who's wrong, and who's to be removed or put in place, in accordance with their code of ethics and religious beliefs.
and now we're getting more and more policies in supposedly democratic nations that aren't far from fanatical themselves. like the US and Britain now having the authority to arrest people without charge so long as they're suspected to be a terrorist.

[doomfreak]

USA blows... let's all just move to canada....

The USA sounds good on paper...
Canada may be officially England's bitch, but practically speaking is really looking like it would be a much more favorable place to live.

[amsterdam]

damn,,,,,,a bunch of knee-jerk hyterical babies around here.

peace through superior firepower.

[daZenfmeister]

Nukes give me the willies, I laughed in class when I was watching that one movie about the making of the first ones, they were testing it and they said. Well it will either ignite the air and we'll all die, or it'll fizzle and pop. Soo hmmmm it will either end life and existence as we know it or it WONT work. They knew what it was supposed to do.

Kinda crazy if you actually think about it. Why would ANYONE take that kind of risk? Especially since they KNEW that the war could've been won by conventional means? I think they should've made the pre-emptive strike to save millions and millions of lives, because the cost of lives to end WWII conventionally would have been far less than all the people that will die in an instant if terrorists ever got ahold of a nuke.


Also arent we supposed to be worried about the TERRORISTS!?!?!?! It wasn't a country that attacked us or london it was a terrorist group so why is everyone all of a sudden talking about pre-emptive stikes against countries? They may be harboring terrorists but we cant kill terrorists with nukes without reducing every country in the world to radioactive rubble. Does everyone just not see this? Either way we lose:

1. We nuke a country that is/has harboured terrorists. We make alot of other countries very mad at us and will most likely get nuked back.

2. We nuke a few big groups of terrorists, all of a sudden every terrorist cell in the allied countries start blowing shit up. Imagine if every extremist, insurgent, terrorist just went to a large building, gas station, major gas line with a homemade explosive and set it off.



The only way we do this is by slowly eradicating terrorist and their leaders (not by a fullscale war like Iraq or Afghanistan). I think thats the best way to 'minimize' the damage.

[amsterdam]

the context of the pre-emptive strike was talked about in regards to using bunker buster nukes to destroy buried weapons.the rest is knee jerks.nothing more.

[Juggalotus17]

This is what happens when you elect a jack ass to be our president

Please. Now honestly, do you think Bush being the president effects Iran's stance on nuke's? President Bush isn't here to ruin the world, i don't give a fuck how much you believe it either. I know for absolute fact he is a good man, and if peace was an option we'd have it.

You have to understand that there are people in this world that would laugh and smile, jump up and down and celebrate with their friends and family to see you, an innocent civilian, shot up with sixteen rounds from an AK-47 just because you walk on American soil. Or just because you're country isn't an arab country. They want you dead because you're not willing to die for Allah, and destroy the infidel. They are sick, brainwashed, and pathetic.

Most of the people doing the suicide bombings TRULY believe they'll get their seven virgins and an eternity with Allah or whatever when they die for their cause.

But please, don't get the idea all Arabs and Muslims are hostile, and crazy. There is a small percentage of muslims that believe this, and they're the extremists. The religion of Islam is that of peace, love, and all that cute shit.

now, in closing:

STOP BLAMING EVERYONES FUCKING PROBLEMS ON PRESIDENT BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU'RE STUCK WITH HIM TILL '08! SUCK IT UP, BE A MAN, AND DEAL WITH IT. MAKE THE BEST OF IT!!! :mad:

[tokosan]

Israel,cannot allow Iran to git nukes..period. The mullahs of Iran,already have their NBC bunkers to escape to and they will consider their populace to be useful as martyrs,as soon as they have enough nukes,to accomplish their military and political goals,they will use them against Israel.




So true, Torog. They really ought to just go ahead and get it over with while they have the overhwelming military might.

With all the fickle "peace-loving" people in the US, its doubtfull whether we will be as good an ally to them as they have been to us in the future.

So... fuck you Iran, by being assholes you make yourself a target!

[Omun]

You have to understand that there are people in this world that would laugh and smile, jump up and down and celebrate with their friends and family to see you, an innocent civilian, shot up with sixteen rounds from an AK-47 just because you walk on American soil. Or just because you're country isn't an Arab country. They want you dead because you're not willing to die for Allah, and destroy the infidel. They are sick, brainwashed, and pathetic.

My understanding is they want the US and its allies out of the middle east. They wanted us out of Saudi Arabia and that's what 9/11 was over. We should have immediately pulled out of Saudi Arabia after 9/11 that's my opinion. Now some of you would say that's answering to the terrorist but hell I think it wasn't just the terrorist that wanted us out of there.

Now If we were to nuke somebody it will for sure come back and bite us in the ass. So we nuke the country and they can't nuke use back so we would be safe right, wrong. People living in other parts of the world would retaliate maybe not with nukes but definitely other forms of violence. They are not just going to sit back and watch us nuke there homeland. A guy from slashdot.org said it the best.. Nukes are 1940s technology it's time we learned how to get along.

[mf greg]

im sorry torog but there is a major difference between a musilim and a terrorist, contrary(sp) to stereotypical views, they are not all terrorists, in fact the ones that ARE terrorists arent really muslim. They are ISLAMIST EXTREMES, people who believe they are gods chosen people and must fight a jihad, but the real definition for jihad is the fight within ones self meaning that they are at war with the demons that one faces in everyday life. an example of a jihad would be FIGHTING the URGE to go home with that other woman when you are already married its a huge misunderstanding that not only islamist extremes and most of the "Free World" have that a jihad is a holy war waged against all who do not believe Islam is the true religion, and fyi in the aribac world the form of poligamy is only used when there is a widow or widower if you are a true muslim.

also Jews were the first group of people to use aribac writings and extremly faithful still do today, judaism was around earlier than christianity or any other extremly popular religion today.

it would be much appreciated if instead of using the much common stereotypes of terrorists that you would use a educated term instead of refering to an entire religion.

oh ya torog? you say in the new dark ages under islam or communism, try living like a true muslim for one week and maybe you will see that its not as bad as everyone assumes, and yes i am going personal with this last comment, so why dont you take your old uneducated ass to a grade 11 world religions course, and maybe try to clean up a little your starting to fall into the stereotype of a inbred redneck you joke.

[FunkyMonkey]

The USA sounds good on paper...
Canada may be officially England's bitch, but practically speaking is really looking like it would be a much more favorable place to live.


Sure , just dont forget to leave your guns at the border.We dont want you crazy americans drinkin some of our beer ( it has alcohol in it) and shootin up the place lol.


btw:nobody in this country under 75 years old gives a flying fuck about that ol douche queen of england.We are many generations past being her 'bitch' ..
Were a country founded on saying 'fuck you' to england so I dont know what youre on about.

[mrdevious]

All I can say is if we really wanted to take out terrorists, the american army would be occupying Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. I wonder why we didn't go for the saudi's instead? hmmmmmmm.......

[Torog]

im sorry torog but there is a major difference between a musilim and a terrorist, contrary(sp) to stereotypical views, they are not all terrorists, in fact the ones that ARE terrorists arent really muslim. They are ISLAMIST EXTREMES, people who believe they are gods chosen people and must fight a jihad, but the real definition for jihad is the fight within ones self meaning that they are at war with the demons that one faces in everyday life. an example of a jihad would be FIGHTING the URGE to go home with that other woman when you are already married its a huge misunderstanding that not only islamist extremes and most of the "Free World" have that a jihad is a holy war waged against all who do not believe Islam is the true religion, and fyi in the aribac world the form of poligamy is only used when there is a widow or widower if you are a true muslim.

also Jews were the first group of people to use aribac writings and extremly faithful still do today, judaism was around earlier than christianity or any other extremly popular religion today.

it would be much appreciated if instead of using the much common stereotypes of terrorists that you would use a educated term instead of refering to an entire religion.

oh ya torog? you say in the new dark ages under islam or communism, try living like a true muslim for one week and maybe you will see that its not as bad as everyone assumes, and yes i am going personal with this last comment, so why dont you take your old uneducated ass to a grade 11 world religions course, and maybe try to clean up a little your starting to fall into the stereotype of a inbred redneck you joke.
Howdy mf greg,

I realize that the violent,extremeist muslim jihadist,is a minority among muslims at this time,but that is changing,because the so-called 'good,true muslims',ain't condemning the violent muslims enough or often,as they should be. Why do you reckon that is the case ? Maybe it's because the koran says that all muslims shall lie and decieve infidels,till the moment to slash their throats-arises.

You say that I should try living a week as a true muslim,that it ain't so bad..well in a way..yer right-if one is a male muslim,you can be your own little dictator,it's great for the men..the women and children,barely have more rights than the family goat,and the muslim husband,can beat them or kill them,for almost any reason. Yup..it's great to be a male muslim..and Hell on earth,for the women and children..if that's the way ya like things..then Islam is the religion for you.

There ain't no way in heck,that I'd want to read a book about religion,that was written by liberals..lol. Yup..I'll admit that I dropped out of school,in the 11th grade,but then I went on to git my GED,then onto the Navy,where I had 2 years of college-level electronics,and after the Navy,2 more years of electronics at a civilian college,I passed the AC/DC circuits analysis class,which was nothing but a whole bunch of complex math...how is it-that an 'uneducated,inbred redneck ',can do such a thing ? I love it-when y'all snobby,elitist liberal types,continue to misunderestimate us Southerners..lol.

Why should I 'clean up' ? So that I can conform to your idea of what folks should look like ? I've been non-conforming since '72, I rejected the redneck image back then and I'm still doing it today..and I'll keep on till the day that God calls me back Home.

Have a good one ...

[mf greg]

just so you know, the whole concept that muslim "women and children,barely have more rights than the family goat,and the muslim husband,can beat them or kill them,for almost any reason" was actually the way life was for the afghanis when the taliban govnerned that region, not by all muslims. yes i agree the religion is a strict one if you follow it truely, but they only do that to protect women from the views that they see immoral.

[GHoSToKeR]

"the muslim husband,can beat them or kill them,for almost any reason. Yup..it's great to be a male muslim"

That's bullshit. I'm sorry but it is. Whether the Koran says this or not doesn't actually matter, because there are only a small, miniscule number of Muslims who actually do this. What you never seem to understand is that the majority of Muslims are normal, decent, every day people who would never want to harm a fly. Hell, even Lily420 is a Muslim and you don't see her trying to kill anybody, do you? And do you really think she'd stay a Muslim if she was getting beaten up by her Muslim counterparts?

Did you know that up until recently in the United Kingdom it was legal to rape your wife? Because the Christian marriage vows you make state that your wife must obey you, etc, so idf you raped her then legally there was nothing nobody could do about it.

So judging by your logic I state that, before this law changed, EVERY Christian married man was raping his wife.

If you disagree then you should also be able to see why your statements about Muslims are a load of bollocks.

:)

[NowhereMan]

But don't you have enough conviction in the West to believe that it would survive without blowing the crap out of everybody else?

I mean, when somebody questions your religion you don't shoot them do you? No, because you have conviction in your religion, you believe that it is right and that it will prevail in the end. So why do you beleive that if we don't blow the crap out of all the Muslims and Communits then we'll become Muslims or Communists? Can't we just defend ourselves when necessary instead of having to throw the first stone? Can't we all just coexist until somebody tries to threaten psychically threaten us? Ever heard of Peace through Strength?
one word

jihad

(we have been hit with first stone)

[Torog]

"the muslim husband,can beat them or kill them,for almost any reason. Yup..it's great to be a male muslim"

That's bullshit. I'm sorry but it is. Whether the Koran says this or not doesn't actually matter, because there are only a small, miniscule number of Muslims who actually do this. What you never seem to understand is that the majority of Muslims are normal, decent, every day people who would never want to harm a fly. Hell, even Lily420 is a Muslim and you don't see her trying to kill anybody, do you? And do you really think she'd stay a Muslim if she was getting beaten up by her Muslim counterparts?

Did you know that up until recently in the United Kingdom it was legal to rape your wife? Because the Christian marriage vows you make state that your wife must obey you, etc, so idf you raped her then legally there was nothing nobody could do about it.

So judging by your logic I state that, before this law changed, EVERY Christian married man was raping his wife.

If you disagree then you should also be able to see why your statements about Muslims are a load of bollocks.

:)
Howdy GhostToker,

What I said about muslims is true,in muslim countries with Sharia law and wahhabism..when I I lived in Saudi,under sharia law and wahhabism,it was certainly the case. Where are all these 'peaceful' muslims that you speak of ? I think that I can count on one hand,the number of peaceful muslims that condemn their violent counter-parts. I would feel better,if Lily were to weigh in on this thread and condemn the violent jihadists..has she yet,in any other threads ? As for gittin a beating from her future or soon-to-be ,muslim husband,she'd probably feel that she deserves it,and would mostly likely stay.

Like many non-Christian folks,you presume that Christian men treat their wives like muslim males do,when in fact,they serve each other and cherish each other,out of love and respect. Just because men should be the head of the household,doesn't mean that they are gonna rape their wives every night,that's more akin to a feminazi statement.

Islam despises and loathes,individual rights and liberty,which is why so many leave islamofascist regimes,opps..almost forgot another reason why they leave,the koran says their duty is to fool infidels into believeing that they are a non-threat-while at the same time-infiltrate their host countries political systems,till they gain control. The muslims in Canada,for instance,are pushing for Sharia law courts.

Have a good one ...

[GHoSToKeR]

Hey Torog,

No, I don't believe all Christan men are violent and that isn't what I was saying. In fact quite the opposite. Most people aren't violent at all, no matter what religion you are. I was just trying to point out that to say ALL Christian men are violent, just because a small number are, is as stupid as saying that ALL Muslims are violent or are terrorists or are extremists, just because some are. :)

I can't say I know enough about Islam to argue what the Koran says or doesn't say; you seem to know more about that subject than I do. But consider this;

If Islamic countries are so brutal and horrible, like you say they are (and in most cases I agree) then surely alot of the citizens living there (who were born into Islam) would want to leave and come live somewhere safer, like the UK or US, where they have more freedoms and protections? I know for a fact that there are alot of Muslims now living in the UK. Can't it be possible that these people just want to live a peaceful, non-violent life in a place that offers them the chance to do so? Alot of people are against unecessary violence, no matter what their religion tells them. Just the same way that most Christians ignore the parts of the Bible that tell them to murder homosexuals, or to cut somebody's hands off for stealing. Sure, at the time that the Bible or the Koran were written it might have been okay to do these kinds of things, but in the society we live in it isn't okay, so people, both Christian and Muslim, ignore these parts of their respective religious texts.

Peace.

[colton]

http://memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=817#

heres an interesting link

[Torog]

Hey Torog,

No, I don't believe all Christan men are violent and that isn't what I was saying. In fact quite the opposite. Most people aren't violent at all, no matter what religion you are. I was just trying to point out that to say ALL Christian men are violent, just because a small number are, is as stupid as saying that ALL Muslims are violent or are terrorists or are extremists, just because some are. :)

I can't say I know enough about Islam to argue what the Koran says or doesn't say; you seem to know more about that subject than I do. But consider this;

If Islamic countries are so brutal and horrible, like you say they are (and in most cases I agree) then surely alot of the citizens living there (who were born into Islam) would want to leave and come live somewhere safer, like the UK or US, where they have more freedoms and protections? I know for a fact that there are alot of Muslims now living in the UK. Can't it be possible that these people just want to live a peaceful, non-violent life in a place that offers them the chance to do so? Alot of people are against unecessary violence, no matter what their religion tells them. Just the same way that most Christians ignore the parts of the Bible that tell them to murder homosexuals, or to cut somebody's hands off for stealing. Sure, at the time that the Bible or the Koran were written it might have been okay to do these kinds of things, but in the society we live in it isn't okay, so people, both Christian and Muslim, ignore these parts of their respective religious texts.

Peace.
Howdy GhostToker,

I understand what yer saying..and I appreciate your good response.

You are more right than you realize,there are muslim families that leave Saudi,every weekend,to go and have fun in places like Jordan,which got kinda crazy,because there ain't no speedlimits on the main roads and you have them passing ya at a hundred miles an hour,in their mercedes...lol. They git tired of having holy men,looking at them all week for violations of the koran,and many do emigrate to other countries that believe in individual rights and liberty,if they can afford it.

Have a good one !

[colton]

http://memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S1#

heres a few more very interesting ones

[GHoSToKeR]

Thanks for the link, colton. It's kinda chilling how people who do these things appear to be completely normal. And I guess in most respects they are normal, they just get driven to these acts for a cause they believe is right. :(

[GHoSToKeR]

Hey Torog,

Exactly, man! So many Muslims are just normal, peaceful people. They wanna have a normal life, a family, a nice house and a car, and be able to go to their 'church' and pray to their God in peace, the same way everybody else can if they choose to. It's only a select few who want to kill anybody, and even fewer who actually do it. :)

Thanks Torog, it's been cool! :D

[mf greg]

ghostoker, thats what i was trying to say, but i used much more anger in my posts.

[colton]

Thanks for the link, colton. It's kinda chilling how people who do these things appear to be completely normal. And I guess in most respects they are normal, they just get driven to these acts for a cause they believe is right. :(

Pretty chilling eh? I also put the link up because someone said about woman in Islam and i think its horrible when that bloke says they 10 daughters arent worth 1 son, also i agree what your sayin about doing things for a cause they believe in but thats what Bush & Blair are doin aswell aint they?!

[firsttimefarmer]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/10/AR2005091001053.html
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

This is really scary giving the president authority for a preemptive authority for a Nuclear strike against weapons of mass destruction? Umm, if I remember correctly we (the United States government) are not very good at finding which countries have banned weapons in the first place. This really scares me. If we were to nuke somebody in this day and age it will for sure come back around to us. I need to move. :mad:

The president of the usa can wage war for 10 days without the consent of congress :mad:

[Omun]

The president of the usa can wage war for 10 days without the consent of congress :mad:

No he can't. Only congress declares war president can only send troops over there. Click on that washingtonpost link that you quoted and read. This is not how it always has been.

[Canadabis]

Nuke em all! burn baby burn :p

[Psycho4Bud]

As you probably know by now, i'm against any kind of violence or war. I've even gone so far as saying that in an ideal situation ALL military worldwide would be disbanded, all weapons destroyed, etc, but i've come to my senses and can see that isn't possible. If we all went back to fighting with our fists, somebody would pick up a rock.. :rolleyes:

Remember also, a population of any type is only controlled by starvation or the amount of preditors. Man is mans only real preditor.

[amydan420]

[B]SPOOKY

[Omun]

Nuke em all! burn baby burn :p
Your ignorant and stupid all at the same time! Thank god your not the president.