They killed the korean hostage?

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:\

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:\

On June 22 2004 10:49 PheeRed.User wrote:
life is important but you just cant do that for one person i know that is awful to say but one life means very little for the lives of the rest of their country

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:\

On June 22 2004 11:05 pfff wrote:
yeah, its obvious that if south korea wouldnt have gone into iraq, the terrorists wouldve already conquered the world.
this man died for keeping us safe from this enormous threat
terrorists form.



umm
not

On June 22 2004 11:05 pfff wrote:

i dont really get where everyone gets the idea that terrorists are still capable of a major strike.
the war in afghanistan destroyed the whole structure of al-qaeda, all terrorists that still claim to work under alqaedas flag, just do this because one very large and powerful organisation has more effect then a lot very few cells, who have no centralised leadership.
hyping alqaeda this much also helps A LOT with recruiting terrorists.
but off course, the idea of one very big organized terrorist group, also helps to accomplish the ideas of warmongering neoconservatives.
just the thought of bin laden sitting in a cave in afghanistan planning out alqaedas next move is ridiculous.
really, terrorists have no where near the capabilities they had before 9/11, you really dont have to be afraid of them, and please, stop thinking the war in iraq is a war against terrorism, cuz iraq is NOT a terrorist state, if you can name a few terrorist strikes iraq did in the past few years?

On June 22 2004 11:25 Countdown wrote:
Stupid terrorists.. now everyone is going to be mad at us T_T


I hate these morons that start talking about Islam, and how it is this and that. Probably Catholics that have never opened a history book..

On June 22 2004 11:55 Dave307 wrote:
meh freeze is real -.- pfff is just retarded!

On June 22 2004 10:51 FreeZEternal wrote:
i just want iraq gone...just wipe out everything-_-;

On June 22 2004 12:42 Countdown wrote:
terrorism has little or nothing to do with religion

imo

On June 22 2004 12:40 (orky)oTTeR wrote:
I just love the way Americans instead of blaming the gvnt for such security failure actually went straight to it, just like a kid asking for protection.

On June 22 2004 13:30 NerO wrote:
i think that if the afghans and terrorists want 2 play hardasses "defending their land and people" and shit we should play rite back u wanna kill random innocent civilians blatantly we should take a fucking crew rite into all these areas we know cells opperate and fucking kill anyone in there. there is one thing for sure if this turns into a fucking blood war they will be completely obliviated. i still dont see how anyone can just try 2 discuss this shit politically with these pussies. maybe once they see that everyone is getting slaughtered all the people that they are doing this for they will stop cus they realize if they keep going then for 1 usa or s.korean or UK or who ever civilian we kill 100 of their terrorists that are in jail then post the mass killing on a site with a big middle finger and a picture of a lil guy wearing an american flag pissing on osama's face.

On June 22 2004 10:49 PheeRed.User wrote:
life is important but you just cant do that for one person i know that is awful to say but one life means very little for the lives of the rest of their country

On June 22 2004 10:55 LostDesire wrote:

Exactly
As soon as the terrorists get what they want, what will stop them from kidnapping even more people

On June 22 2004 13:34 pfff wrote:
umm, nero the gas prices have been rising because there is a lot less export from iraqi oil because most pumps were destroyed by saddam during the war.
also, because of americas budget problems they have trouble keeping their price low, youre oil is like two times cheaper then oil in the rest of the world.
also, america has problems with inflation.
also, oil use is rising constantly while oil production is nearing its maximum. in china, in the last decade, the demand for oil has risen almost exponentially.
really, if you dont have a clue, then dont say anything at all.

On June 22 2004 14:45 Chobohobo wrote:
You are right 0_0 instead we should have marched into Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and whipe them clean, they are more of a threat than Iraq.

On June 22 2004 14:40 0_0 wrote:
I'm really sorry to hear about this Korean guy getting beheaded . But it seems clearer than ever now that we should have NEVER gone into Iraq, I mean who really cares? Did we really make things better? No.

Under Saddam there were people getting killed everyday. Now there are lots of people from other countries getting killed too. Sure, the Iraqies are free, but they live in fear of being killed by bombs, friendly fire, and what not.

On the topic of the "War on Terror"/War in Iraq. Has this war dulled the threat of terrorism or escalated it? Have there been more civilian deaths due to terrorism after the war? The answer is this war has actually been counter productive, more people have died, and terrorism is still out there - and Iraq wasn't even an Al Qaeda strong-hold, although there are Al Qaeda there now... Also terrorists now have a place in the Middle East to strike at the United States.

On June 22 2004 11:24 HnR)Louder wrote:
SK will help the USA because the USA has been helping secure their borders against NK since the korean war --; even though NK could walk right over all our troops, and SK's too if they wanted =( It's always unfortunate when a government takes part in something that is against the will of the majority of it's population, but it happens.
People need to understand that terrorism will get worse no matter what we do - and that we can't ignore it or negotiate with it =\

On June 22 2004 14:59 StoneR wrote:
Just one last thing Countdown

would you admit this war was a mistake right from the beginning?

On June 22 2004 15:06 Chobohobo wrote:
Its a right war for a right cause for wrong reasons at a wrong time.

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 ^^.

actually all the muslim states are happy with a religious leader (dictator no matter how you put it)

On June 22 2004 15:40 Liquid`Drone wrote:


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.

=[

On June 22 2004 15:44 StoneR wrote:


shut up plz

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..

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..

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:\

On June 22 2004 15:57 VioLat0R wrote:
if the premise for this war had been to get saddam out and setup a democracy, Im pretty sure the international community would have supported it right from the start... so yes, you sort of can just go throwing governments... the error here was: the premise was WMD and they got little international support...

Im for kicking every dictator out... not assassination, though...

On June 22 2004 16:03 Liquid`Drone wrote:
rif

IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11

OKAY?

On June 22 2004 16:04 NerO wrote:
well we all here know 2wrongs make a right there for this should be 100% the right thing to do k?

On June 22 2004 16:19 hk[hanbyul] wrote:
like i said one man's terrorist is another one's freedom fighter.

On June 22 2004 16:21 SW)RIF wrote:
Heh, well online your position is more consistant with what i am in real life. Im a big wuss that feels sorry for moths and flies that i have to kill in my store since i serve open grill food and coffee. I also feel sadness everytime i see roadkill.

What im doing online though is trying to put a legitimate perspective on voilence. It takes a certain sense of give or take to realize that violence is unavoidable.

On June 22 2004 16:30 VioLat0R wrote:
just like 'we' did in brazil... I wasnt there and Im pretty sure you werent either... so? dont you think it would have been better if there was huge international support? I do...

On June 22 2004 16:00 StoneR wrote:


are you 12 years old? do you know many arab countries have and want a religious leader (dictator)?

On June 22 2004 16:34 VioLat0R wrote:
now they do yea... they want the troops out of there... but the great majority of them is thankful for overthrowing the dictatorship...

On June 22 2004 16:55 Countdown wrote:
61 percent of Iraqi's said Saddam's ouster was worth any hardships during the war

i don't think he cares what they want. it's more about the U.S. going against the U.N. and it being a "war for oil." Even if 100% of the Iraqis supported the war and 100% of AMericans supported the war, some country that isn't even involved in the war will still be complaining about America doing whatever it wants

On June 22 2004 16:55 StoneR wrote:



SAYS CNN??

He says Irakis want freedom and democracy, i say they might

On June 22 2004 16:59 [pG]RaGe wrote:
99.9% of all government statistics in this operation are made up=[

On June 22 2004 17:32 NotSorry wrote:
Guess our movie plans of Rek going over there and pulling a action star on us is out of the question now. Someone should make a poll "What country will the next victim be from"

I got my bet on Canada.

On June 22 2004 11:24 HnR)Louder wrote:
SK will help the USA because the USA has been helping secure their borders against NK since the korean war --; even though NK could walk right over all our troops, and SK's too if they wanted =( It's always unfortunate when a government takes part in something that is against the will of the majority of it's population, but it happens.
People need to understand that terrorism will get worse no matter what we do - and that we can't ignore it or negotiate with it =\

On June 22 2004 17:29 IndexFing wrote:
The people don't always know whats best for their country.


If Winston Churchill listened to popular opinion, he would have never declared war on the Nazis. Where would we be today.

On June 22 2004 18:10 Abyss_Bahamut wrote:


In all respect no, I watched a special on this at school and after much analyzation, the united states government deemed that it could destroy the whole nation of North Korea in 6 minutes, if war was declared. Of course this is without the use of nukes otherwise it's not 6 minutes, it's just one nuke. I'm not a communist or anything but I think North Korea is smart for having nukes.

Why?

Bush is a fucking moron and called North Korea and many other innocent COUNTRIES [ Countries not leaders ] part of the ' Axis of evil ' therefore proves he is hostile. If you were North Korea, wouldn't you want to have nukes? America is taking away nukes from everyone saying that it's unsafe, but think about it, if you're North Korea and America is obviously hostile to you, do you want to give up your nukes? Hell no. Having nukes doesn't mean you will use them, North Korea is just smart to have them.

On June 22 2004 17:00 NerO wrote:
USA is the big mother fucking bully in the playground everyone is either his friend/bitch or his enemy u have the choice to either suck up to them and join them in the "UN" or clan of buddies that makes all the other little bitches feel important or u can fight a fight u cant win against it and thats wut they are doing and fighting the only way they can fight someone so much more powerful then them thats by popping his mom's tires and stealing his wallot and cutting up posters in his room. this is just another act of the USA showing that the UN has absolutely no control over wut we do and we can do wutever the fuck we want when we want and however we want and when we do ur either in or ur out or ur the enemy.

wow i hope that makes sense cus i have no idea where the fuck that came from lolz.

On June 22 2004 18:38 StoneR wrote:
Bush is a jacked up leadership

On June 22 2004 18:42 StoneR wrote:
and English being the most influential language in the world... pff
The most influential was latin, as it was influential on Portuguese, French, Spanish, Andalusian, Catalonian etc even on english ^_^

On June 22 2004 18:44 hk[hanbyul] wrote:
oh my bad sorry dude.

On June 22 2004 18:29 Klogon wrote:
Gundam has a point, I mean Saddam didn't listen to popular opinion, did he? :o

On June 22 2004 18:42 StoneR wrote:

in the U.S. for example they teach Spanish to everyone in School.

On June 22 2004 18:43 Excalibur_Z wrote:


lolz wut a coincidence i have no idea where the fuck your brain went lolz

The UN is a joke. It was founded by communist spies and has done nothing to speak out against the leadership of rogue nations and oppressive regimes. In fact they put Libya, a country known for its crimes against humanity, on the Human Rights Council. But nobody hears about things like that. People are led to believe by the media that the UN is some godlike organization that is the beginning of a one-world government - little do they know.

On June 22 2004 11:05 pfff wrote:
yeah, its obvious that if south korea wouldnt have gone into iraq, the terrorists wouldve already conquered the world.
this man died for keeping us safe from this enormous threat
terrorists form.



umm
not

i dont really get where everyone gets the idea that terrorists are still capable of a major strike.
the war in afghanistan destroyed the whole structure of al-qaeda, all terrorists that still claim to work under alqaedas flag, just do this because one very large and powerful organisation has more effect then a lot very few cells, who have no centralised leadership.
hyping alqaeda this much also helps A LOT with recruiting terrorists.
but off course, the idea of one very big organized terrorist group, also helps to accomplish the ideas of warmongering neoconservatives.
just the thought of bin laden sitting in a cave in afghanistan planning out alqaedas next move is ridiculous.
really, terrorists have no where near the capabilities they had before 9/11, you really dont have to be afraid of them, and please, stop thinking the war in iraq is a war against terrorism, cuz iraq is NOT a terrorist state, if you can name a few terrorist strikes iraq did in the past few years?

On June 22 2004 19:34 Countdown wrote:


hmm.. not really

On June 23 2004 09:55 suffeli wrote:


AH-HA-HA!

Really!? You must be kidding me right? From what planet are you from? Do you take drugs?

"The UN is a joke. It was founded by communist spies and has done nothing to speak out against the leadership of rogue nations and oppressive regimes."

Actually, I don't know if I should laugh or cry..

On June 23 2004 10:10 choboPEon wrote:


What do you mean? In any public school you have to learn a foreign language. Spanish is the most popular one, as Spanish are the biggest minority here.

And French, Italian, etc etc etc

On June 23 2004 10:19 suffeli wrote:
Bush is doing a great job afterall, at least, now people in Asia ex. China, North Korea, have a common thing to hate. This anger will surely unite the people!

---

Poor man, he died for nothing.

On June 24 2004 02:16 Klogon wrote:
I remember Jay Leno doing his "Jay Walk" on his show where an 19 year old girl who lived in LA couldn't locate Mexico on the world map. -_- Sad...

On June 24 2004 02:44 NotSorry wrote:
Me and klogon were hoping Rekrul would take a small detour and stop by and pull a action hero move on the whole middle east before getting to korea.

On June 24 2004 01:31 baal wrote:
The second city with more mexicans in the WORLD is L.A. california!, the first is Mexico city ofcourse.

On June 24 2004 02:45 Zerius wrote:


Rekrul's micro wouldnt save him when facing the barrel of a gun.