Pro-Bush Demonstrators Counter Sheehan

[Psycho4Bud]

so why not war with france? theyll just give up anyway

Love to!!! SERIOUSLY!!! But who wants to win over a country full of pussies! Oh yah, their good pals the Germans.

[Psycho4Bud]

OFF THREAD TOPIC!!! ALERT!!!

Pro-Bush Demonstrators Counter Sheehan

Have to agree with the Pro-Bush on this one....SHE'S A BITCH!!!

[Nicoli]

from what i gather, they fight for freedom rom american rule. from american opression. as ironic as that sounds. right now, if america came through canadian streets trying to impose their way on us, then fuck yeh im gonna be blastin some red white and blue ass. not because their american and i hate their freedom, but because someone is threatening my home for HIS/HER benefit.

Who's to say what's opressive and cruel? women arent viewed as having equal rights as a man? how are they wrong? how are we right? just because we let women vote and have a hand in everything doesnt make us some superior nation. we're just culturally different.

evil saddam has been deposed. and the jihadists that attacked on sep 11, 2001 WERENT FROM IRAQ. THEY WERE FROM SAUDI ARABIA. and guess what? id be willing to bet that if iraq owned about 7% of america like the saudis do, we'd be fighting evil iranian terrorists right now instead. I mean, shit. Theyre all a bunch of sandy arabs right?


I'd bet everything that if you grew up in an america where chinese fighter planes bombed your neighbourhood every week for years, and their people viewed you as some baseball playing savage, you'd travel to hong kong in a fucking second to make a stand that you wouldnt put up wit the shit any more.

Read what I put in bold and you can see a major flaw in reasoning here.

American Oppression? Come on, you canâ??t be serious, you and I both know that the American forces occupying Iraq are nearly as oppressive as the bathist regime was prior to its destruction. As for the idea of Iraqis fighting for freedom from American rule, well Iâ??d say such a claim is somewhat deceptive. It has become quite clear that a large percentage of the opposition we are now facing is the result of Iranian militants and supplies finding their way into Iraq. Letâ??s not forget that we are also helping them establish their own government, so why would they continue conducting attacks delaying that process resulting in a prolonged American presence in Iraq? (that is assuming they the Iraqiâ??s want us out)

Who's to say what's opressive and cruel? women arent viewed as having equal rights as a man? how are they wrong? how are we right? just because we let women vote and have a hand in everything doesnt make us some superior nation. we're just culturally different.

definition for cruel: 1 : disposed to inflict pain or suffering : devoid of humane feelings
2 a : causing or conducive to injury, grief, or pain <a cruel joke> b : unrelieved by leniency
synonym see FIERCE

Well thereâ??s not much room for interpretation when in comes to cruel and Iâ??d say radical Islam contains all the criteria to be correctly classified as an ideology of cruelty.
As for women why stop there? Suppose we considered radical Islam virtuous and true then how could we claim any other radical ideology is wrong? What made Stalinism wrong? What made Nazism wrong? Hey after all German culture, you know how that is.

So the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, but funny thing is we never bombed Saudi Arabia prior to or after 911. In fact not only have we not attacked the Saudiâ??s, but we also happen to do a good business with them, which they do profit from. Meaning that your little thesis concerning the motivations of terrorists is delusory to somewhat flawed at best. What is most surprising is you exposed the flaw in your own reasoning.

I do agree that the war in Iraq wasnâ??t necessary and wasnâ??t properly executed, but the war on terror is a must. Will we eliminate radical Islam? Yes. Is it a shame that such measures had to be taken? Yes. The fact is though that radical Islam was doomed to extinction anyway, because of the fact that radical Islam doesnâ??t allow an environment capable of supporting social evolution.(social evolution resulting from the free exchange of ideas)

[nicholasstanko]

Read what I put in bold and you can see a major flaw in reasoning here.

American Oppression? Come on, you canâ??t be serious, you and I both know that the American forces occupying Iraq are nearly as oppressive as the bathist regime was prior to its destruction. As for the idea of Iraqis fighting for freedom from American rule, well Iâ??d say such a claim is somewhat deceptive. It has become quite clear that a large percentage of the opposition we are now facing is the result of Iranian militants and supplies finding their way into Iraq. Letâ??s not forget that we are also helping them establish their own government, so why would they continue conducting attacks delaying that process resulting in a prolonged American presence in Iraq? (that is assuming they the Iraqiâ??s want us out)



definition for cruel: 1 : disposed to inflict pain or suffering : devoid of humane feelings
2 a : causing or conducive to injury, grief, or pain <a cruel joke> b : unrelieved by leniency
synonym see FIERCE

Well thereâ??s not much room for interpretation when in comes to cruel and Iâ??d say radical Islam contains all the criteria to be correctly classified as an ideology of cruelty.
As for women why stop there? Suppose we considered radical Islam virtuous and true then how could we claim any other radical ideology is wrong? What made Stalinism wrong? What made Nazism wrong? Hey after all German culture, you know how that is.

So the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, but funny thing is we never bombed Saudi Arabia prior to or after 911. In fact not only have we not attacked the Saudiâ??s, but we also happen to do a good business with them, which they do profit from. Meaning that your little thesis concerning the motivations of terrorists is delusory to somewhat flawed at best. What is most surprising is you exposed the flaw in your own reasoning.

I do agree that the war in Iraq wasnâ??t necessary and wasnâ??t properly executed, but the war on terror is a must. Will we eliminate radical Islam? Yes. Is it a shame that such measures had to be taken? Yes. The fact is though that radical Islam was doomed to extinction anyway, because of the fact that radical Islam doesnâ??t allow an environment capable of supporting social evolution.(social evolution resulting from the free exchange of ideas)

okay...wait a minute...i havnt smoked in a good long fucking while now and i cant make too much sense out of your arguement.


its probably just my nerves but what are you thinking that im trying to say? it looks as if you think i support the war or somthin.


help me out and ill be happy to input my opinion.

[Nicoli]

okay...wait a minute...i havnt smoked in a good long fucking while now and i cant make too much sense out of your arguement.


its probably just my nerves but what are you thinking that im trying to say? it looks as if you think i support the war or somthin.


help me out and ill be happy to input my opinion.

Ok to sum it up briefly, you seem to think terrorists attack us, because we attack and oppress them. This was after you said the terrorists involved in 911 came from Saudi Arabia. Note however how we never bombed the shit out of Saudi Arabia or oppressed Saudi Arabia. Like I said before they benefit greatly from us as a result of our need for oil. Based on your post about how I'd attack China if China was bombing my country implies that you think terrorists attacked us because we bombed them. It is clear however that this is not always the case.

[amsterdam]

[QUOTE=Nicoli]Ok to sum it up briefly, you seem to think terrorists attack us, because we attack and oppress them. This was after you said the terrorists involved in 911 came from Saudi Arabia. Note however how we never bombed the shit out of Saudi Arabia or oppressed Saudi Arabia. Like I said before they benefit greatly from us as a result of our need for oil. Based on your post about how I'd attack China if China was bombing my country implies that you think terrorists attacked us because we bombed them. It is clear however that this is not always the case.[/QUOTE}

all it has to do with is the spread of wahabbism,a distorted take of the great religon Islam.

[GHoSToKeR]

it has to do with is a distorted take of the great religon Islam.

Agreed. But I think it is alot more complicated than that. These people aren't killing people for no reason, are they? At least not in their minds.

[amsterdam]

it is complicated i agree,but freedom and democracy will prevail.

[GHoSToKeR]

I hope they do, Amsterdam. At last we agree!

[Torog]

Agreed. But I think it is alot more complicated than that. These people aren't killing people for no reason, are they? At least not in their minds.

Howdy GhostToker,

Yup..yer right,the jihadists have many reasons for wanting to murder in cold-blood,the koran instructs them to slay all Jews and infidels,the jihadists despise individual freedom for all and seek to impose a male-dominated society,where women and children,exist at their mercy,the jihadists resent the modernization of their countries by the infidels of America and other Free World countries and desire a return to the 7th century..yup..they have alot of reasons to murder the innocent in cold-blood.

Have a good one ...