|
Norway28691 Posts
On June 22 2004 15:06 Chobohobo wrote:
Its a right war for a right cause for wrong reasons at a wrong time.
this is something I can actually agree with.
IF usa suddenly started going after EVERY dicatorship in the world that opressed it's people, regardless of their geopolitical importance and how much money they had, and they used "we need to liberate them and improve their life quality" as a reason in every single occasion, I would be far more inclined to agree with their wars.
however, that reasoning has only been used after it was proven that every single other of their reasonings were wrong. and usa only went for the most geopolitically important country as well as the one with the most natural resources.
=[
|
and StoneR, you should know that most of the Iraqi's don't like Saddam and most of them are happy we overthrew him. They just want us out.
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
lol ya sounds good drop a nuke on the middle east rename it east texas and let it all take care of itself ^^.
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
On June 22 2004 15:43 NerO wrote:
lol ya sounds good drop a nuke on the middle east rename it east texas and let it all take care of itself ^^.
shut up plz
|
actually all the muslim states are happy with a religious leader (dictator no matter how you put it)
really? how did you come up with this bullshit?
|
On June 22 2004 15:40 Liquid`Drone wrote: Show nested quote +On June 22 2004 15:06 Chobohobo wrote:
Its a right war for a right cause for wrong reasons at a wrong time. this is something I can actually agree with. IF usa suddenly started going after EVERY dicatorship in the world that opressed it's people, regardless of their geopolitical importance and how much money they had, and they used "we need to liberate them and improve their life quality" as a reason in every single occasion, I would be far more inclined to agree with their wars. however, that reasoning has only been used after it was proven that every single other of their reasonings were wrong. and usa only went for the most geopolitically important country as well as the one with the most natural resources. =[
it also just happens 2 be the country that tryed 2 assassinate our president's dad =0
|
On June 22 2004 15:44 StoneR wrote: Show nested quote +On June 22 2004 15:43 NerO wrote:
lol ya sounds good drop a nuke on the middle east rename it east texas and let it all take care of itself ^^. shut up plz
sarcasim u fucking idiot
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
Iraq invasion aside, wouldnt you all like to see terrorists eliminated? Its a no brainer in my opinion. These guys have been targetting men/women/and children even before we waged any sort of war against them.
The extremists are not going to ever negotiate any sort of treaty or cease fire on any culture they dislike. And since we will remain the target of violence, even though it ails me to say it, we must be violent back. We need grow some balls and do a little of evil of our own (killing) and wipe these guys out, it shouldnt just be America either, but all countries that wil be potential targets for these terrorists. From what i gather they dislike the very idea of our religions and money making societies. Which does not pardon even you spaniards or belgiums in this thread. It just puts you low on their 'hit' list.
I feel a great deal of sadness for this Korean man, most likely a person any one of us would have respect for, even before his beheading.
|
*sarcasm*
i thought you were serious~
|
Norway28691 Posts
nero, so what. usa has tried to assassinate fidel castro more than 10 times. would this entitle cuba to go to war against usa if they had the capabilities of doing so?
and not only fidel castro mind you..
|
the war was orig. started because of a fear of weapons of mass destruction which could under saddam's control could fall into the wrong hands and be used on us. . .
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
On June 22 2004 15:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
nero, so what. usa has tried to assassinate fidel castro more than 10 times. would this entitle cuba to go to war against usa if they had the capabilities of doing so?
and not only fidel castro mind you..
never said it was a reason 2 go 2 war its just another thing that would push bush to want to choose iraq 2 go 2 war with thats all i was saying
|
On June 22 2004 15:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:
nero, so what. usa has tried to assassinate fidel castro more than 10 times. would this entitle cuba to go to war against usa if they had the capabilities of doing so?
and not only fidel castro mind you..
Source? i was under the impression assassinations have been outlawed since the 70's.
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
On June 22 2004 10:11 [pG]RaGe wrote:
It's nice that South Korea is willing to help out in the effort but if their people are against it they shouldn't send the troops, regardless of how many people the USA currently has there. It's never good for a government to go against the people. This will also give South Koreans more bitter attitudes towards American since they will think their government is just a drone to the USA.
Really feel bad for that South Korean killed, this is starting to get rediculous:\
Even the south korean government is not really happy with sending the troops to Iraq. But they are being pressured to so that the US will not pull too many troops out of Korea. It's a sticky situation for them for sure
|
This old post is unavailable due to an encoding issue. Please contact an admin if you would like this post restored for historical reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
