The War Is On!

[Davros]

When I first saw the title I thought it was the Irish joke :

Back in the cold war days, and Ireland have declared war on the Soviet Union. The parties have been bought together by the UN to try and negotiate a truce.

Soviet General : We will crush you like bug -
Ireland, how big?
Irish PM : a little over 90000 sqaure miles isn't it Patrick - mosly under potatoes, oh, and a few cows.
Soviet General : Soviet union is largest country on earth - over 6 million square miles.
Irish PM : Don't care - the war is still on
Soviet General : Irish Airforce, how many planes?
Irish PM : We have 8 planes - only two pilots mind, and they go home an the weekends to spend quality time with the families.
Soviet General : Soviet Union has 250 squadrons, over 6000 war planes, our pilots are ruthless.
Irish PM - Don't care - the war is still on.
Soviet General : Irish Navy - how many?
Irish PM - we have 3 naval frigates, one in dry dock, another on a good will visit to Canada, and the other is on exercises - where is it Murphy - oh yes, the Irish sea.
Soviet General : Soviet Union has 48 fleets, 37 aircraft carriers, nuclear armed submarines, highly trained - ruthless.
Irish PM : Don't care I tell you, THE WAR IS STILL ON.
Soviet General : Irish army - how big?
Irish PM : The Irish national guard nubers 500 stout hearted souls - absolutely esential for crowd control at the football on a Saturday
Soviet General : Army of Soviet Union is over 1.5 million men - highly trained killers.
Irish PM : OK OK, you've convinced me - the war is off.
Soviet General : Common sense it is prevailing?
Irish PM : Too right - how the hell do you expect us to feed 1.5 million prisoners of war!!!

[AzureWolf]

Nope.
[img]smile.gif[/img]

[fable]

The US isn't at war with anybody. This aggravating subject has already been covered repeatedly on this board; if you want more info on opinions, just do a SEARCH on the word "Ladan" or "Afghanistan," or better yet, "insane fanatical fundamentalistic zealot who has nothing to do with Islam and deserves to have his neck stretched from whatever haunt he is in to Oslo, Norway."

Originally posted by JR Jansen: quote: Originally posted by Nanaki3: I mean I am for the US. Do you think the US has the right reason to fight?

Hmmm, this is somewhat of a delicate matter for most people. At least that's my experience when dealing with this subject.
Does the US have the right to defend themselves ? Defenately yes.
Do i like Bush's militaristic manner. Certainly not.[/QUOTE]Okok when you see my name on a post I know the tendancy is to grit your teeth and hold on tight but...hehhe this is an honest question for you.

You say you don't like "Bush's Militiaristic manner" but seeing as how he is pulling in an 80+% aproval rating..is it HIS manner or is it the manner of the will of the people?

Originally posted by fable: The US isn't at war with anybody. This aggravating subject has already been covered repeatedly on this board; if you want more info on opinions, just do a SEARCH on the word "Ladan" or "Afghanistan," or better yet, "insane fanatical fundamentalistic zealot who has nothing to do with Islam and deserves to have his neck stretched from whatever haunt he is in to Oslo, Norway."

Ya didn't have to be so mean to the kid, he/she is reletively new ya know. hehe Im the one who is usually deemed the "mean nasty" or the "big bad" (a buffyism) Oh and I guess Im with Galadria and Nanaki on this one (big surprise I know)

[Sir Taliesin]

I'll answer that one Magik. It's the will of the people. We may not get all of the bastards, but we'll get most of the big dogs before its over and the rest will be hunted the rest of their lives. We don't ever forget.

Originally posted by Smeagol II: [QBWell, can't say I quite agree with the US led war on terror (and remember that it isn't just the US involved in this - us Brits have just sent some more troops in). I just generally don't quite understand why you have to kill mroe people in order to solve the problem. And the irony is that it is unlikely to solve the problem anyway - do you honestly think that we will catch all the members of Al-Quaeda just by bombing innocents in Afghanistan? Remember that quite a lot of the people involved aren't Afghanis or in any way connected to Afghanistan. What are you going to do? Bomb every country that harbours terrorists? Better start by looking at home then in my view, and over here in the UK. Any chance we can start bombing Derry for the Omagh bomb? If we send in enough troops then we are bound to kill the right people eventually. The terrorists are all over the world, and they don't think of themselves as doing wrong. These are people pushed into a corner fighting in any way they can for an ideal that they see the Western world as trying to destroy. I have the utmost sypmathy for their victims but that does not mean I want to see these people demonised and killed. It won't solve anything and will plunge the world into years of war. Bottom line - lets all stop talking about our right to kill people, or our right to have revenge, and start talking about how we can get out of the mess we have out ourselves in.[/QB]

Ill try and address your post top to bottom, (I still need to figure out the quoting thing)

You solve the problem by killing the bastards who indiscrimintaely take life...it removes any posibility for them to do it again.

We are NOT and never have indiscriminantly bombed innocent civilians...the USA more than just about any nation bends over backwards risking their own soldiers to do everything possible to limit what some call callously "Collateral Damage" The bombings that were conducted were targeted at combatents and with very few exceptions that is who was hit.

Can you get all of the Al-queda? probably not, but by being passive to their attacks you invite more attacks, if you smack the enemy down hard you force these kinds of people to find other less dangerous targets...by and large the majority of them would like tolive to see home and hearth again..even if it is a cave in some hill.

You argument about looking at home for the terrorist and bombing there is specious at best. In countries that work WITH the USA and others you don't need to bomb, the FBI and local law enforcement ARE being mobilized to root out the terrorists here so no bombing nesecary, In places like Iraq and Syria and Iran and others You bomb because the local governments are SPONSORING the terror not trying to eliminate it.

The people of Al-queda and other terror groups are not some poor innocent freedom fighters who have been pushed into a corner, these people are fighting for the freedom to enslave women and treat them as property, these people are fighting to avoid the influence of civilization where differences can be reasoned out, they don't want something good and noble..they want barbarism and terror...period...no lofty goals..oh unless you consider dying to go to allah where you can then deflower 70 virgins a noble and lofty ideal. If for no other reason than womens right to be treated as people these groups need to be destroyed...but that isnt the only reason.

Anyway....please don't read into this response any hostility toward your view, I just wanted to point out the other side of the coin.

pax!

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Smeagol II: [QBWell, can't say I quite agree with the US led war on terror (and remember that it isn't just the US involved in this - us Brits have just sent some more troops in). I just generally don't quite understand why you have to kill mroe people in order to solve the problem. And the irony is that it is unlikely to solve the problem anyway - do you honestly think that we will catch all the members of Al-Quaeda just by bombing innocents in Afghanistan? Remember that quite a lot of the people involved aren't Afghanis or in any way connected to Afghanistan. What are you going to do? Bomb every country that harbours terrorists? Better start by looking at home then in my view, and over here in the UK. Any chance we can start bombing Derry for the Omagh bomb? If we send in enough troops then we are bound to kill the right people eventually. The terrorists are all over the world, and they don't think of themselves as doing wrong. These are people pushed into a corner fighting in any way they can for an ideal that they see the Western world as trying to destroy. I have the utmost sypmathy for their victims but that does not mean I want to see these people demonised and killed. It won't solve anything and will plunge the world into years of war. Bottom line - lets all stop talking about our right to kill people, or our right to have revenge, and start talking about how we can get out of the mess we have out ourselves in.

Ill try and address your post top to bottom, (I still need to figure out the quoting thing)

You solve the problem by killing the bastards who indiscrimintaely take life...it removes any posibility for them to do it again.

We are NOT and never have indiscriminantly bombed innocent civilians...the USA more than just about any nation bends over backwards risking their own soldiers to do everything possible to limit what some call callously "Collateral Damage" The bombings that were conducted were targeted at combatents and with very few exceptions that is who was hit.

Can you get all of the Al-queda? probably not, but by being passive to their attacks you invite more attacks, if you smack the enemy down hard you force these kinds of people to find other less dangerous targets...by and large the majority of them would like tolive to see home and hearth again..even if it is a cave in some hill.

You argument about looking at home for the terrorist and bombing there is specious at best. In countries that work WITH the USA and others you don't need to bomb, the FBI and local law enforcement ARE being mobilized to root out the terrorists here so no bombing nesecary, In places like Iraq and Syria and Iran and others You bomb because the local governments are SPONSORING the terror not trying to eliminate it.

The people of Al-queda and other terror groups are not some poor innocent freedom fighters who have been pushed into a corner, these people are fighting for the freedom to enslave women and treat them as property, these people are fighting to avoid the influence of civilization where differences can be reasoned out, they don't want something good and noble..they want barbarism and terror...period...no lofty goals..oh unless you consider dying to go to allah where you can then deflower 70 virgins a noble and lofty ideal. If for no other reason than womens right to be treated as people these groups need to be destroyed...but that isnt the only reason.

Anyway....please don't read into this response any hostility toward your view, I just wanted to point out the other side of the coin.

pax![/QB][/QUOTE]Gotta Love It. Yankee and All

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Smeagol II: Bottom line - lets all stop talking about our right to kill people, or our right to have revenge, and start talking about how we can get out of the mess we have out ourselves in.[/QB]

That sounds fair enough. Let's hear your opening comments.

What solution do you propose to prevent future attacks?

[Galadria]

You gotta love it. MagiK and John D. on the sane thread. (hugs) Yeah, we're gonna get 'em. Spread the news.