Troops in Iraq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GHoSToKeR

Exactly. You can't defeat an enemy that has no one signle home, no one single leader, no uniform or identifying mark. Shit, these "insurgents" as you call them are all over the world (9/11, the recent London bombings, etc...). I bet nobody even suspected those people until it was too late. Even if you nuke Iraq then like Zero Revolt said, they'll come from every country surrounding Iraq. And then what? You're going to nuke the whole Middle East? I think the rest of the world would have something to say about that, my friend.

Face it, Amdam.. You're getting nowhere over there. You might have killed a few thousand "insurgents" and you might have killed a hell of alot more civilians, but your efforts are futile. All you're doing is losing troops, getting your country into more debt and pissing alot of people off. Bush has proved his point, he started a fight, but he got beat... time to be a man and walk away.

---

Howdy GhostToker,

I disagree,we can defeat the terrorists and we are nowhere near defeat,we are closer to victory..than defeat. Besides,who cares what the rest of the world thinks,America was the one attacked, and subsequently,we will not bury our heads in the sand and hope that terrorists and the regimes that support,train and export them..will just go away..if we allow them to continue exercising their brutal control over their peoples.

You can surrender to the enemy if you want..but as for me..I have not yet begun to fight....

Have a good one ....

I think the idea of terrorism is what needs to be defeated though. Someone already said it, but another whole generation of these people are already being bred. It seems irresponsible to continue attacking with such force knowing for a FACT that we're only trimming back the growth.

Exactly, lemonboy.

Torog, you're forgetting that it's not only American cities being targetted. What about Bali, London, Madrid, and what about the Egyptian holiday resort, Sharm al-Sheikh? Not to mention terrorist attacks in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia. But of course, those countries aren't as important, are they, so obviously you just forgot about them...

What I don't understand is this. A foreign government allows these people to be trained (as terrorists), then they're sent over and they blow up a load of innocent civilians. There's an uproar over it, you all get your panties in a twist, and vow to stop these terrorists or insurgents or whatever you decided to call them that day.

But Britian, America and every other country trains people in the same way, then those people get sent over and whoops they kill a load of civilians too. But you don't get mad about that. In fact you don't seem to give a shit, you just shrug it off and say "shit happens.. it's war, deal with it."

If you can explain the difference to me in a logical way then I swear to you Torog i'll never doubt you again. But I doubt you'll be able to...

If you actually realise that there is no difference then I think you'll finally understand why this war is pointless, why every way is pointless. Killing people to stop them killing? Sounds pretty stupid to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GHoSToKeR

Exactly, lemonboy.

Torog, you're forgetting that it's not only American cities being targetted. What about Bali, London, Madrid, and what about the Egyptian holiday resort, Sharm al-Sheikh? Not to mention terrorist attacks in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia. But of course, those countries aren't as important, are they, so obviously you just forgot about them...

What I don't understand is this. A foreign government allows these people to be trained (as terrorists), then they're sent over and they blow up a load of innocent civilians. There's an uproar over it, you all get your panties in a twist, and vow to stop these terrorists or insurgents or whatever you decided to call them that day.

But Britian, America and every other country trains people in the same way, then those people get sent over and whoops they kill a load of civilians too. But you don't get mad about that. In fact you don't seem to give a shit, you just shrug it off and say "shit happens.. it's war, deal with it."

If you can explain the difference to me in a logical way then I swear to you Torog i'll never doubt you again. But I doubt you'll be able to...

If you actually realise that there is no difference then I think you'll finally understand why this war is pointless, why every way is pointless. Killing people to stop them killing? Sounds pretty stupid to me.

---

Howdy GhostToker,

I didn't forget about the others that have been targetted by terrorists,I was just gittin a concept across. The Free World,is being attacked..that others have been attacked,reinforces the need for the entire Free World to defeat terrorism and the regimes that support and export it. All countries in the Free World are important.

The civilians who support the terrorists and the regimes that export them,willingly..are no better than the terrorists. Unlike the terrorists,we don't intentionally target civilians,unless they are a part of the command and control centers or logistical support. The terrorists and the terrorist regimes,love to use civilians as human shields,so that we can be accused of deliberate targetting of civilians. The big difference is,is that we offer freedom...the terrorists only offer brutality and subjugation and slavery..we are the good guys and they are the bad guys..we offer the choice of democratic reform..they desire to only retain control of a brutal dictatorship...and then impose it on the Free World. Why is it,that you are blind to what it is that terrorists want ? In order to stop the killing,do you think that the Free World should just give up and surrender ? Do you think that we should all be converted to Islam,in order to stop the killing ? The muslim jihadists,desire the state of Darfur,a world-wide islamic state..should we just give into their most cherished goal ? Should we sacrifice Israel and every Jew on the face of the planet,in order to appease the muslim jihadists ? Do you really think that will appease them ? They will come after the Christians next,then every other non-islamic religion and finally,those who don't have any religion or belief in God.

I don't think that anything I say,,will change yer mind or make a difference..but I'm holding onto the hope that it will. I would rather die fighting on my feet..than become a dhimmini,a muslim slave..that might not bother you,since you are used to living under socialism and you have not experienced life in a brutal,fundy islamic country. It bothers the heck out of me..which is why I would rather go down fighting for my freedom..than to live in eternal shame and slavery..because I did not.

Have a good one ....

Torog, you'll probably never change my mind, and i'll probably never change yours. But there's no harm in trying, huh? lol :D

Refusing to launch an offensive attack on another nation (which I think every decent nation should do) is not the same as surrendering. Just because I don't believe in war doesn't mean I want us all to convert to Islam either. That makes no sense. But I do believe that, if a nation truely believes it's under threat from another nation or group of people, then it should do it's best to prevent that attack. Launching a pre-emptive strike is NOT a good way to prevent yourself being attacked. In fact it's a pretty good way to ensure that you ARE going to be attacked.

If we truely are better than them, then let them cast the first stone. We could spend all our time, money and effort making sure that stone barely grazes our cheek... but instead we spend our time, effort and money on making sure our stones are bigger than theirs. All this does is guarantee that everybody gets a bloody nose. :)

man has been fighting for one thing or another since the begining of time until there can be peace with out conflict there will be no peace. until man can except man as he is there will be no peace. until the tyrants of the lands stop trying own and rule every thing there will be no PEACE!