The Internet's authoritative role-playing game forum.
https://gamebanshee.com/forums/
So invading a country against the UN's will because that country does not respect the UN's will is OK to you? Don't you see any contradiction?TEMPLAR67 wrote:4. they were invaded for breaking the ceasfire agreement and multiple UN resoulutions
I was just using the UN as another example even though they are completely irrelevent. Personally i think the US should leave the UN, all they do is take our money and the spit in our face, no one seems to like the US at all any more, I guess they have forgotten about WW2 when we came in and saved their butts. I agreed with the invasion because they broke OUR ceasefire agreement. The UN resolutions are a pointless waste of time, like w/ iran, they say dont build nukes ore we will get very angry then pass a resolution telling you how angry we are, its rediculous.So invading a country against the UN's will because that country does not respect the UN's will is OK to you? Don't you see any contradiction?
That raises another question in me. If people should judge the USA based on what they did 60 years ago in WW2 and not on what they are doing right now, then what is the USA doing in Afghanistan, since that country helped them during the Cold War?TEMPLAR67 wrote:no one seems to like the US at all any more, I guess they have forgotten about WW2 when we came in and saved their butts.
we were bringin' Democracy and got around to the Middle East last.Gilliatt wrote:That raises another question in me. If people should judge the USA based on what they did 60 years ago in WW2 and not on what they are doing right now, then what is the USA doing in Afghanistan, since that country helped them during the Cold War?
That's just it, you don't know that, not at all. I keep hearing people say that if Gore had won the 2000 elections or if Kerry won the 2004 elections that things would turn out for the better. And then other people say that bush is doing a better job than Gore or Kerry "could" have done, when in reality, nobody on this planet knows just how good a job Gore or Kerry would have done because no human can predict the future.I believe that bush is a good person and that he has faired much better than gore would have given the situation he was in.
The reason this war is still going on is because we are too concerned about being politically correct instead of fighting a war. the only thing these terrorist understand is violence and pain, the only way to win is to make them too terrifyed to fight us, and just start killing them off. And last time i checked our economy is doin pretty dam good.what's been happening since the good intention of "Elimenating the Terrorist Threat"? A huge war that now has a huge problem, we stay and cause relationship damage to quite a few nations as well as our own government, we leave, a Civil war is probable to break out that is essentially our own doing. What happened with his good intention of getting the economy back in order? We were in debt so harshly and his solution was to make a tax cut. Our economy is pretty gruesomly damaged and the solution?
That is exactly what the terrorists think of the Americans.TEMPLAR67 wrote:the only thing these terrorist understand is violence and pain, the only way to win is to make them too terrifyed to fight us, and just start killing them off.
your absolutely right, we need to fight like they do and use the greatest weapon in any army's arsenal, fearThat is exactly what the terrorists think of the Americans.
Maybe you have more in common than you think.
Then we become the terrorists that we so desperately want to destroy, thus solving nothing.TEMPLAR67 wrote:The reason this war is still going on is because we are too concerned about being politically correct instead of fighting a war. the only thing these terrorist understand is violence and pain, the only way to win is to make them too terrifyed to fight us, and just start killing them off. And last time i checked our economy is doin pretty dam good.
)?they obtain their domination and are so feared because they use pain and violence.Terrorism relies on fear and domination, not necessarily with the use of violence or pain.
but we have the moral ability to stop whenever we want , they dont b/c they're crazyThen we become the terrorists that we so desperately want to destroy, thus solving nothing.
Because they don't have oil.Claudius wrote:If its good to bring democracy at gunpoint then why didn't we invade south africa? European governments are different in form from ours. Perhaps we consider them imperfect. Why don't we invade Europe and establish our perfect US govt (before flames from europeans note my sarcasm
I did not know oil had the right to vote.Lady Dragonfly wrote:Because they don't have oil.
we have not been taking oil from iraq, if we were gas would be 75c per gallonBecause they don't have oil.
Why would Big Oil want gas to be sold for 75c per gallon, pray tell?TEMPLAR67 wrote:we have not been taking oil from iraq, if we were gas would be 75c per gallon
I'm sorry to say this but that's incredibly selfish, you're basically saying Americans are better than someone else with a poor defense that they must be crazy because of what they believe in. They may be suicide bombing the "enemy" in the name of their god, they may be carrying out missions for a spiritual and in their eyes, a just cause, but that doesn't make us crazy. If we're going to use that word, use it on Americans. We maimed and killed many Native Americans to gain their land, with no respect for them whatsoever, and WE started that one, we were the ones to suddenly attack them for a rather weak excuse. We were the ones to enslave thousands of african americans in the belief that they weren't people because the color of their skins, and then when we decided that this was wrong and some disagreed, we divided the entire nation in half and then started a huge war over this, and after that, even if the Africans were no longer enslaved, it took another hundred or two years to just gain the same rights and privelages that all americans, and still today we have racism and prejudice over a belief that a supposed monotheistic god deems black people not people at all for some reason, I couldn't even find this in any sort of biblical reference, but I've sure as hell heard it from quite a few Klan members who I no longer ascociate with.but we have the moral ability to stop whenever we want , they dont b/c they're crazy
March 8, 2007
By LAUREN FRAYER
ASSOCIATED PRESS
BAGHDAD, Iraq — Military force alone is not sufficient to end the violence in Iraq and political talks must eventually include some militant groups now opposing the U.S.-backed government, the new commander of U.S. forces in Iraq said Thursday.
“This is critical,” Gen. David Petraeus said in his first news conference since taking over command last month. He noted that such political negotiations “will determine in the long run the success of this effort.”
American troops have stepped up efforts to clear and secure major highways around the capital as part of the Baghdad security crackdown, which began last month. The Pentagon has pledged 17,500 combat troops for the capital.
Petraeus said “it was very likely” that additional U.S. forces will be sent to areas outside the capital where militant groups are regrouping, including the Diyala province northeast of Baghdad.
The region has become an increasingly important staging ground for groups including al Qaeda in Iraq. Meanwhile, many Sunni extremists apparently have shifted to Diyala to escape the Baghdad clampdown.
Petraeus declined to predict the size of the expected Diyala reinforcements.
He said that “any student of history recognizes there is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq, to the insurgency in Iraq.”
“Military action is necessary to help improve security ... but it is not sufficient,” Petraeus said. “A political resolution of various differences ... of various senses that people do not have a stake in the successes of Iraq and so forth — that is crucial. That is what will determine, in the long run, the success of this effort."
U.S. officials, including Petraeus’ predecessor Gen. George W. Casey Jr., have long expressed the opinion that no military solution to the Iraq crisis was possible without a political agreement among all the ethnic and religious factions — including some Sunni insurgents.
However, previous overtures to the insurgents all faltered, apparently because of political opposition within Baghdad or Washington to some of the conditions.
Last year, 11 Sunni insurgent groups working through mediators offered to immediately stop attacks on American-led forces in Iraq if the Shi'ite-led government and Washington set a two-year timetable for withdrawing all coalition forces from the country, according to insurgent and government officials.
The groups did not include several major groups, including the Islamic Army in Iraq, Muhammad’s Army and the Mujahedeen Shura Council, an umbrella for eight militant groups including al Qaeda in Iraq.
The Arabic newspaper Asharq al-Awsat reported last year that U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad met seven times with insurgent representatives in late 2005 and early 2006. But the extremists broke off the contacts in April 2006 after the U.S. side failed to respond to a series of demands.
The United States never confirmed details of the account ,but Khalilzad later said he believed his contacts with Sunni groups had contributed to a temporary decline in U.S. battle deaths, which fell in March 2006 to 31 — their lowest level in two years.
One of Iraq’s most expansive militias — the Mahdi Army of radical Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr — appears to have set aside its weapons under intense government pressure to lend support to the Baghdad security plan.
Mahdi militiamen also have allowed Iraqi authorities to try to protect at least a million pilgrims heading to Karbala, about 50 miles south of Baghdad.
Many are making the traditional trek on foot for rituals beginning Friday to mark the end of a 40-day mourning period for Imam Hussein, grandson of the Prophet Muhammad. Hussein’s death in a 7th-Century battle near Karbala cemented the schism between Sunnis and Shi'ites.
The processions have proved to be vulnerable targets, with attacks killing more than 170 people this week.
Copyright © 2007 Detroit Free Press Inc
Yes, first off i feel that at least i am superior to these animal-like terrorist, and second, if strapping a bomb to yourself in the belief that you will be given 72 virgins if you do it, if that dosent qualify you to be crazy, then i dont know what does.I'm sorry to say this but that's incredibly selfish, you're basically saying Americans are better than someone else with a poor defense that they must be crazy because of what they believe in. They may be suicide bombing the "enemy" in the name of their god, they may be carrying out missions for a spiritual and in their eyes, a just cause, but that doesn't make us crazy.
you may consider the "american god" stereotypical? well at least he isnt telling his ppl to go and blow themselves upNow, think about that. You believe a terrorist is crazy because he would suicide bomb himself in the name of his god, yet in the name of the stereotypical american god, Americans decided to enslave african americans, torture them, and eventually kill them off if they haven't yet worked themselves to death.
. on that second part, granted some slave owners were cruel to their slaves, but look at it from the prospective of the other owners, torturing and killing your "property" would cause you to lose money (since you did pay normally quite a bit of money for them) you would want them in the best condition possible so they could produce as much as possible, a weak, beaten slave could not make you as much money. And if every slave was tortured and beaten so badly how come most of them stayed even after they were freed I dont believe that these terrorist should be considered human beings, do normal humans saw off ppls heads with a knife? b/c it seems to be becoming common practice over there.We are human beings just as much as they are, and as much as I think you would hate to admit it, you have the same thought capacity, physiology, and psychological capabilities as any other person on this planet, whether it's your next door neighbor, or it's Osama Bin Laden himself
that general is somewhat right, for a military solution to work we will have to be far more aggressive and not think about what the rest of the world thinks about us, they will hate us no matter what we doDo you think there can be a military solution in Iraq? This US general does not.
Why are they animal-like? Because they have different beliefs and a different culture to yourself? Also, are the fighters in Iraq really terrorists when it was the US and UK armed forces that invaded THEIR country?TEMPLAR67 wrote:Yes, first off i feel that at least i am superior to these animal-like terrorist, and second, if strapping a bomb to yourself in the belief that you will be given 72 virgins if you do it, if that dosent qualify you to be crazy, then i dont know what does.
Look back over the last two millenia and you will see the following all carried out in the name of the Christian God (even if it wasn't what Christianity actually preaches):TEMPLAR67 wrote:you may consider the "american god" stereotypical? well at least he isnt telling his ppl to go and blow themselves up
So if I understand you well, it is the rest of the world against the USA.TEMPLAR67 wrote:for a military solution to work we will have to be far more aggressive and not think about what the rest of the world thinks about us, they will hate us no matter what we do