John Kerry and Iraq Soldiers

[TinMan]

Hi again Tinman:

"the Muslim extremists who are there from all over the world with the soul purpose of killing Americans who threaten birth-given freedom of religion/beliefs."

They ARE the terrorists and they're NOT just killing Americans!!

That's why I went on about Muslim extremists, because they AREN'T.

Extremism isn't terrorism, it's activism to an extent that puts you in danger and breaks rules, kinda like a protest in a country where you aren't allowed to think. The worst thing you can do is to remain neutral through the fighting, so they aren't doing that, instead they're fighting for themselves, just like an American militia would do.

As for the terrorists who are killing civilians, of course they need to be wiped out.

As for the non-psycho hamas members, muslim extremists, and others out there fighting the US and other armed forces/terrorist groups who threaten their beliefs, good for them, they're in the right.

[maxpower]

PiCaSSo is meddling awesome, he is my idol. WOOT! There should be more people like him.

[Playah]

My 2 cents: Quote by PiCaSsO: "the terrorists or extremists" -- Like tinman already said: extremists aren't all terrorists but terrorists are all extremists.

Even today it's like in medieval times: IMO, too many people have their opinions from when they can think about the topic itself and they won't be able to think about it in a different way. Like the born given "Stage system" in the medieval times. Born in one of these stages, you can't get out of it.

So it doesn't make sense arguing about this stuff, as dt said. Once stating an opinion is ok though...

[PiCaSSo]

Tinman:  I'll clarify my response even more... You're completely mis understanding my response for the second time.

Your Quote:

"the Muslim extremists who are there from all over the world with the soul purpose of killing Americans who threaten birth-given freedom of religion/beliefs."

Then my response:

They ARE the terrorists and they're NOT just killing Americans!!

"They are" meaning:  THOSE who are there from all over the world with the soul purpose of killing Americans who threaten birth-given freedom of religion/beliefs."

Now for the second time you have mis interpreted the same reply! 

TINMAN, AGAIN it was YOU, NOT ME who used the words "Musllim Extremists"

Please get it right!

Thanks...

[pinobot]

There is no such thing as an "extremist", war is extreme.
People die for their country all the time, some do his by blowing themselves up, others let themselves be blown up, it's all the same.

[TinMan]

pinobot has it down, the Muslims from all over the world who are there for the purpose of fighting for their rights aren't terrorists, they're freedom fighters. You wouldn't call the Americans in the American Revolution terrorists, would you?

[jitspoe]

There is no such thing as an "extremist", war is extreme.

Jesse is a Bain Xtremist.

[PiCaSSo]

pinobot has it down, the Muslims from all over the world who are there for the purpose of fighting for their rights aren't terrorists, they're freedom fighters. You wouldn't call the Americans in the American Revolution terrorists, would you?

To my knowledge, Americans in the American Revolution fought like men against each other and did not kill innocent unarmed women and children so no I wouldn't call them "terrorists".

You used the word Muslims again so please don't confuse my next statement... 

Those TERRORISTS who are coming from all over the world and killing innocent, unarmed men, women and children ARE NOT there for the purpose of fighting for their rights or their freedom so they certainly are NOT "Freedom Fighters".  They are fighting against the ideal of over 1 million Iraqi's CHOICE of FREEDOM and Democracy.

Over one million Iraqi citizens are fighting for their FREEDOM.   The Iraqi Army, United States soldiers and allies are fighting to preserve their freedom and help them establish democracy as well as training Iraq soldiers to defend themselves hopefully someday without outside help.  It is these people who are the "FREEDOM Fighters"

Murdering innocent people on purpose is cowardice, inhumane and a TERRORIST action.

These people wish you DEAD just because of your Nationality, Race, & Religion.  They don't care whether you're in their country or in your own, they want you DEAD!  They believe this is what their GOD Allah wishes of them and that if they do it, they'll go to Heaven.  They believe if they die in the process they're guaranteed a seat next to their proclaimed prophet Muhammad.

These are not normal Muslim beliefs and most true Muslims condemn these extremist's beliefs.  Most people of the Muslim religion are kind and gentle.

These terrorists go against their very own religion and the basic principles of the Quaran because they are killing their own Muslim brothers and sisters.

The fact that anyone would defend these demented freaks makes me want to puke!

Again let's agree to disagree and kill this subject LOL

[TinMan]

To my knowledge, Americans in the American Revolution fought like men against each other and did not kill innocent unarmed women and children so no I wouldn't call them "terrorists".

Nor are the Muslims that I'm speaking of. You're thinking of the terrorists, I'm thinking of the insurgents that are ridding Iraq of their new invaders.

[PiCaSSo]

To my knowledge, Americans in the American Revolution fought like men against each other and did not kill innocent unarmed women and children so no I wouldn't call them "terrorists".

Nor are the Muslims that I'm speaking of. You're thinking of the terrorists, I'm thinking of the insurgents that are ridding Iraq of their new invaders.

Call them what you want they are not ridding Iraq of new invaders! They are murdering innocent unarmed men, women and children of their own race and religion which is strongly frowned upon by the Muslim religion and goes against the Quaran.

They are also killing those who are trying to fight for their freedom and democracy. 

Now when you speak of the insurgents I understand their anger about US occupation.  This is where I come to the "No Win" conclusion and my fear of what was going to happen if we initially went to war in Iraq.

It is where I have a million "what if we didn't stage it in Iraq, then where, how can you defeat an ideal, what should we have done in defense to 9/11, what could we have done?" type questions.

I don't have all the answers but again, purposely murdering innocent, unarmed men, women and children ANYWHERE is cowardice, inhumane and terroristic.  Beheading unarmed and innocent workers who are trying to help rebuild Iraq or performing some other productive or helpful service to Iraqis is gutless and immoral.

It's obvious that no one seems to like the way all this was handled by the bush administration, so I propose a question of anyone who has a realistic answer...

What should have been the way America responded to 9/11 and all the other atrocities committed by terrorists upon us as well as many of our allies prior to us going to Iraq.

[TinMan]

Again, you are only seeing the real terrorists, not the majority of Hamas members who don't kill civilians and strongly follow religious beliefs and ethics. I'm talking about the other people, the majority of whom Americans are killing.

[PiCaSSo]

Wrong again... I addressed both if you would pay attention and where do you get your facts when making this statement:  "I'm talking about the other people, the majority of whom Americans are killing."

The majority of whom Americans are killing are those who are firing upon Americans, their allies and Iraqi partners or those cells who are outed through whatever form of intelligence...

What FACT can you provide that specifies that the majority of people that Americans are killing are simple innocent insurgents who are NOT firing upon or plotting in some way to kill them other than a few isolated and uncalled for incidents by a few of our own troops. 

How would you differentiate between terrorists who are shooting at you and insurgents who are shooting at you....  The caliber of bullet that kills you?? Sheesh

Keep in mind I don't approve of many of the ways the Bush administration has handled the war in Iraq.

But then I beg of you to answer the question "What should have been the way America responded to 9/11 and all the other atrocities committed by terrorists upon us as well as many of our allies prior to us going to Iraq."

[TinMan]

What FACT can you provide that specifies that the majority of people that Americans are killing are simple innocent insurgents who are NOT firing upon or plotting in some way to kill them other than a few isolated and uncalled for incidents by a few of our own troops. 

The insurgents aren't innocent, anyone who fires a gun at another person isn't innocent, but they are standing up for their beliefs and fighting all threats to it. Find me a fact that says otherwise, from simply listening to Bush's statements on the news we get the general idea that a LOT more people who aren't in Al-Qaeda are being killed by US troops because they're being fired upon by them, or for other reasons. Its obvious that there aren't that many terrorists or Bush would have just bombed them all.

How would you differentiate between terrorists who are shooting at you and insurgents who are shooting at you....  The caliber of bullet that kills you?? Sheesh

Good point, why would anyone be stupid enough to enter a war where they don't even know who the enemy is?

But then I beg of you to answer the question "What should have been the way America responded to 9/11 and all the other atrocities committed by terrorists upon us as well as many of our allies prior to us going to Iraq."

There is no winning response to that, and we know it, but I'd have supported the targeting of known terrorists and known training facilities, none of the raids that are going on now. It seems that this war has split, it is now a war on terrorism, and a war on occupation of Iraq. I support the former.
I also agree with most of the statements made in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmxKXNb11P8

A strong defense is more important and ethically correct than being offensive.

[PiCaSSo]

"The insurgents aren't innocent, anyone who fires a gun at another person isn't innocent, but they are standing up for their beliefs and fighting all threats to it. Find me a fact that says otherwise,"

Well put and highly likely.

"from simply listening to Bush's statements on the news we get the general idea that a LOT more people who aren't in Al-Qaeda are being killed by US troops because they're being fired upon by them, or for other reasons. Its obvious that there aren't that many terrorists or Bush would have just bombed them all."

People would do good to seek other resources rather than make their assumptions based from simply listening to Bush's statements. LOL

"Its obvious that there aren't that many terrorists or Bush would have just bombed them all."

Might be a little tough to dissect them out from amongst civilians with bullets flying at you.

"Good point, why would anyone be stupid enough to enter a war where they don't even know who the enemy is?"

In the beginning they thought they did or at least we were led to believe they did...

"There is no winning response to that, and we know it, but I'd have supported the targeting of known terrorists and known training facilities, none of the raids that are going on now. It seems that this war has split, it is now a war on terrorism, and a war on occupation of Iraq. I support the former."

In the beginning that's what they did and they toppled Saddam's sadistic regime in the process. But then there are all the other little Saddam Hussein's running around.  Maybe they should have gotten out shortly after that because now they are into something that knows no end.  The war on terror is now an unbeatable war on an ideal.

Many think we never should have gone there in the first place but to them I ask the very same question of "What else could we have done"

"A strong defense is more important and ethically correct than being offensive."

Also very true!

[pinobot]

The only purpose of the American Army is to secure American interests.
So what are those interests in the Middle East?
Well, oil and oil and then there is also oil.
There are people on this planet that make a living by thinking through any scenario that could happen.We're not talking about today or tomorrow or even next year. For instance: Question: What would happen if we had a nuclear war in the Middle East? Answer: We're screwed.

[TinMan]

American interests that are involved in this are more of protection (killing them before they can strike again) and revenge/prosecution of past attackers.
I haven't heard of anything going on with American troops stealing Iraqi oil, it seems that we'd rather rip apart Alaska before any decisions would be made on conquering other countries in the middle east for the soul purpose of oil. I'm sure that we'd loose our allies by doing that too.
Nuclear war? I think not. If one nuke were to go off as an attack from any country to another, there would be a world war, and with today's technology, there would be no survivors. Scary, isn't it? The same technology that powers homes and buildings all over the world is a threat to us all.
A good movie to watch on this topic: War Games

[PiCaSSo]

Hahahaha War Games Rawks!!

How about a nice game of "Tic Tac Toe" or do you prefer "Global Thermal Nuclear War"

[maxpower]

No one except the dead see the end of war

I prefer tic tac toe with Global Thermal Nuclear War. The loser gets blown up by nukes. Sounds fun!
A simple flash file to explain what will happen in the near future.
http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end.php

[TinMan]

ZOMG! EOTW! OLD!! LAWLZ!

[Dirty_Taco]

Post removed