War on Terror..Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. (1 Viewer)

[ad infinitum]

The fight agianst Theocratic Fascists is one worth fighting for. For those masochists that think the 'West' is the problem; that think the problem is the Danish cartoons not the barbarians that wish to murder them, that think the submission and abuse of women is a 'cultural difference' that must be 'respected'. No, you may submit to these bronze age dessert theocratic fascists , but you mst leave the rest of us out of your warped masochism.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

Wow JohnathanN got owned.

 

[Empyrean444]

9/11 was an attack orchestrated by the highest levels of US government & intelligence agencies. The official conspiracy theory is so easy to pull apart that even a child could do it.

Al Qaeda is a CIA invention and people in Intelligence know this. Al Qaeda literally means 'the base' or 'the database' and was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.

So no, there is no multi-headed, sophisticated or co-ordinated network of sleeper cells and dangerous extremists around the world.. it's simply a lie.

This is slightly less reputable than the bullshit theory about the CIA inventing AIDS.

 

[Bigboyjames lol]

Thanks for the laugh.

Ha! Idiot, it was the Jews who created Al-Qaeda.

lol bro its ok. lol pownage happens in life.

 

[JonathanM]

I laugh when people attribute something to an entire mass of people. Exactly who were the 'jews'? The Zionists or...?

I'm telling you it was them. It's plainly there and I have as much proof as your theory.

They all used their horns to communicate with each other on 9/11. They also did it in 1912 to sink the Titanic and most recently to kill our beloved MJ.

Well, it was either them or reptilian shape-shifting extraterrestrial humanoids.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

I didn't realize Follz21 was a 9/11 truther. Still, JohnathanN is using that to dismiss everything he has said, which is quite pathetic. He still made some very valid points about the destruction of key infrastructure and the killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[JonathanM]

JohnathanN

lol

I didn't realize Follz21 was a 9/11 truther. Still, JohnathanN is using that to dismiss everything he has said, which is quite pathetic. He still made some very valid points about the destruction of key infrastructure and the killing of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They are not valid points at all you brainless twat, there is always collateral damage in war. I already conceded that the Iraq War was pointless, but any arguments that Afghanistan is are devoid of sense.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

lol



They are not valid points at all you brainless twat, there is always collateral damage in war. I already conceded that the Iraq War was pointless, but any arguments that Afghanistan is are devoid of sense.

Ah yes, the death of hundreds of thousands of people is just collateral damage. I wonder if you'd see it that way if someone did that to us in Australia.

 

[Sprangler]

Did he say it was "good" collateral damage? Did he say it was the kind of collateral damage he'd like to experience?

Collateral damage Definition | Definition of Collateral damage at Dictionary.com

collateral damage
n. Unintended damage, injuries, or deaths caused by an action, especially unintended civilian casualties caused by a military operation.

If a military operation was carried out in Australia and civilians were killed unintentionally, it would be called collateral damage.

 

[Follz21]

They are not valid points at all you brainless twat, there is always collateral damage in war. I already conceded that the Iraq War was pointless, but any arguments that Afghanistan is are devoid of sense.

You seem to have no problems with wars. But like all pro-war or war supporting imbeciles, you never get within a thousand miles of a bullet being fired or missile being dropped. It's all very good and well to say 'war is necessary' and 'wars always have collateral' when you don't live with the consequential reality of the situation. Like I say to all you devoid-of-neuron-activity nitwits: if you support the wars so much, go over and fight yourself.

A deafening silence always ensues...

 

[Planck]

I've got to say I think the Afghan war is a serious timewaster. We've just ended up in the situation where Australian troops are killing farmers and their families because of the crops they choose to grow.

 

[Follz21]

Did he say it was "good" collateral damage? Did he say it was the kind of collateral damage he'd like to experience?

If a military operation was carried out in Australia and civilians were killed unintentionally, it would be called collateral damage.

You remind me of those heartless, devoid-of-compassion military generals. When asked questions about civilian casualties, the term 'collateral damage' is never far away. It's one of the buzz phrases in which the media lap up. Instead of reporting the reality of the situation, such as: '300 innocent men, women & children were killed in the missile strike', instead you get bastardized rhetoric such as: 'The bombing was a success, suffering only some collateral damage'.

At the end of the day, no matter which way you wish to spin it, the term means the murder of innocent people as an unfortunate 'result'. If Australia was at war, and your family was 'accidentally' bombed and were considered nothing more than collateral damage, how would you feel about that?

Bear that in mind when you uses such phrases when referring to wars in which well over a million people have died. To call them 'collateral' is to devalue human life itself.

 

[JonathanM]

You seem to have no problems with wars. But like all pro-war or war supporting imbeciles, you never get within a thousand miles of a bullet being fired or missile being dropped. It's all very good and well to say 'war is necessary' and 'wars always have collateral' when you don't live with the consequences of the reality of the situation. Like I say to all you devoid-of-neuron-activity nitwits: if you support the wars so much, go over and fight yourself.

A deafening silence always ensues...

I’m always astounded by the distinction dickheads like you seem to make: you hate war (you imply) and thus imply that I, somehow, love it simply because I support it. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

The only difference between your hostility to war and mine is that I know that war can be a solution sometimes. Now please stop posting, I'm feeling embarrassed for you.

 

[Planck]

I disagree with JonathanM about this conflict but I agree that conflict is necessary in some circumstances.

 

[Sprangler]

You remind me of those heartless, devoid-of-compassion military generals. When asked questions about civilian casualties, the term 'collateral damage' is never far away. It's one of the buzz phrases in which the media lap up. Instead of reporting the reality of the situation, such as: '300 innocent men, women & children were killed in the missile strike', instead you get bastardized rhetoric such as: 'The bombing was a success, suffering only some collateral damage'.

Over the course of these two wars I don't think I've ever read or watched a news report that didn't attempt to give a semi-accurate number of civilian casualties in a battle/incident. In fact I can't recall ever seeing the term "collateral damage" in a media report.

Think of the hijacked fuel tanker bombing by the USAF that happened recently. Every news report I saw gave the number of civilian casualties as reported by the US military along with the Afghan authorities.

At the end of the day, no matter which way you wish to spin it, the term means the murder of innocent people as an unfortunate 'result'. If Australia was at war, and your family was 'accidentally' bombed and were considered nothing more than collateral damage, how would you feel about that?

How am I supposed to know how I would feel? I can't empathize with anyone in such a terrible situation. And that's not because of the media cleaning the stories up, it's because it's impossible for anyone to do that.

Bear that in mind when you uses such phrases when referring to wars in which well over a million people have died. To call them 'collateral' is to devalue human life itself.

Not really. Human life still has the same value it's always had. We use words to describe things.

 

[astupiddvdcase]

You remind me of those heartless, devoid-of-compassion military generals. When asked questions about civilian casualties, the term 'collateral damage' is never far away. It's one of the buzz phrases in which the media lap up. Instead of reporting the reality of the situation, such as: '300 innocent men, women & children were killed in the missile strike'

How do you know they're innocent?
Remember, not all afghans are taliban but not all talibans are good afghans.
They might actually support the taliban regime? providing them shelter?

The last good war was WW2... every other war after was pointless and went no where...

How long have the Palestinians and Israelis been fighting?

OOPs what i meant to say was not all afghans are taliban but not all afghans are good afghans.
Especially in a war like there is no real face to the enemy.
IT COULD BE THE FARMER!!!

 

[Optimus Prime]

With a surge in troops and the annexation of Pakistan we could win this war within a year. We brought freedom to Iraq, and Afghanistan shall eventually embrace civilization too.

 

[Jeee]

Terrorism is a reaction to the intervention in the middle east by the United States and her allies over the last half century. Imagine how the US would react if the Arabs had bases and troops in their country. Of course these people are going to be pissed. Hey maybe installing Saddam Hussein and giving him money and weapons wasn't such a great idea....

Fighting more wars in this region will only increase terrorism as more angry young men are driven towards these extremist groups. The solution is for the US to get the fuck out of the middle east.

If the US is so concerned about national security it should bring home its troops from its hundreds of military bases all over the world and use them to protect its own borders.

This.

One man's 'terrorist' is another man's freedom fighter.
The US should just fuck off instead of instigating wars and then blaming the other for retaliating and labelling THEM the terrorist.

 

[Jeee]

Remember, not all afghans are taliban but not all talibans are good afghans.

Shut up.

 

[lolrofllol]

With a surge in troops and the annexation of Pakistan we could win this war within a year. We brought freedom to Iraq, and Afghanistan shall eventually embrace civilization too.

shit troll is shit.