Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
OK, you made the challenge. I said Reagan helped give birth to modern day terrorism. You said you could prove me wrong. I suggested you give an example of a terrorist attack targeting US citizens before the Reagan era. You have not done so. The key here is when did attacks by middle eastern terrorist groups targeting American citizens begin.That would be interesting. I do not think you can do it. You could perhaps start with giving the dates and incidents of middle eastern or Islamic terror groups specifically targeting US citizens before the Reagan era.The Embassy takeover was not really a terrorist group incident. It was a state-sponsored hybrid form of terrorism. What followed in the 80's was the birth of today's form of terrorism. That is, terror groups, often with covert sponsorship from sovereign nations, but independent terrorist organizations targeting western nations, and particularly the USA. That was started and allowed to grow in the 80's under Ronald Reagan.[/QUOT]
I am quite willing to show you how stupid this is.
There were terrorist attacks long before the embassy was taken in IRAN.
You've already been shown.
OK, you made the challenge. I said Reagan helped give birth to modern day terrorism. You said you could prove me wrong. I suggested you give an example of a terrorist attack targeting US citizens before the Reagan era. You have not done so. The key here is when did attacks by middle eastern terrorist groups targeting American citizens begin.That would be interesting. I do not think you can do it. You could perhaps start with giving the dates and incidents of middle eastern or Islamic terror groups specifically targeting US citizens before the Reagan era.
There were terrorist attacks long before the embassy was taken in IRAN.
You've already been shown.
Nope, won't give it up. You did not answer the challenge. What part of "attacks on US citizens" do you not comprehend?
Modern day terrorism refers to the era in which terrorist attacks became accepted tactics against western countries, and particularly the Untied States.OK, you made the challenge. I said Reagan helped give birth to modern day terrorism. You said you could prove me wrong. I suggested you give an example of a terrorist attack targeting US citizens before the Reagan era. You have not done so. The key here is when did attacks by middle eastern terrorist groups targeting American citizens begin.There were terrorist attacks long before the embassy was taken in IRAN.
You've already been shown.
Nope, won't give it up. You did not answer the challenge. What part of "attacks on US citizens" do you not comprehend?
Pride is a terrible thing. You lost kid.
That would be interesting. I do not think you can do it. You could perhaps start with giving the dates and incidents of middle eastern or Islamic terror groups specifically targeting US citizens before the Reagan era.The Embassy takeover was not really a terrorist group incident. It was a state-sponsored hybrid form of terrorism. What followed in the 80's was the birth of today's form of terrorism. That is, terror groups, often with covert sponsorship from sovereign nations, but independent terrorist organizations targeting western nations, and particularly the USA. That was started and allowed to grow in the 80's under Ronald Reagan.It was strictly emotional satisfaction. It would not have changed anything earlier or later.
had it been done in the 1980s-----it might have helped
Nope. Squashing Iran in 1979 might have, but Carter wasn't up to it.
I am quite willing to show you how stupid this is.
Sounds like a demonstration that got turned into a riot. Was it referred to as a riot at the time or a terrorist attack?That would be interesting. I do not think you can do it. You could perhaps start with giving the dates and incidents of middle eastern or Islamic terror groups specifically targeting US citizens before the Reagan era.The Embassy takeover was not really a terrorist group incident. It was a state-sponsored hybrid form of terrorism. What followed in the 80's was the birth of today's form of terrorism. That is, terror groups, often with covert sponsorship from sovereign nations, but independent terrorist organizations targeting western nations, and particularly the USA. That was started and allowed to grow in the 80's under Ronald Reagan.had it been done in the 1980s-----it might have helped
Nope. Squashing Iran in 1979 might have, but Carter wasn't up to it.
I am quite willing to show you how stupid this is.
Al-Fatah Turkey 1968, they demonstrated and threw Molotov cocktails at our military in the buildings we worked, overturned and burnt U.S. Military vehicles.
What I astonishing is that the Western mind is (for the most ) incapable of understanding the mindset of Islamic True Believers. It simply does not compute for them.
What I astonishing is that the Western mind is (for the most ) incapable of understanding the mindset of Islamic True Believers. It simply does not compute for them.
There is an inverse relationship between knowledge and the propensity to act as an apologist Those who know absolutely nothing think Islamists are just like anybody else in their motivations and desires. The more a person learns, the more they realize Islamists might as well be a different species.
Christianity and Judaism were as bad, historically, as Islamic extremist are today. King David was a butcher. The history of Christianity is full of persecutions and massacres.
The question is: Why have Christian, Jews and most Muslims evolved away from interpreting their religions as a license to commit atrocities, while some Muslims have not?
For us non-religious people, it's obvious that almost a organized religions are about brainwashing and using the brainwashed to dominate all other people.
They're a way of declaring anyone who does not conform to their socio-economic order to be EVIL.
The roots of Islamic terrorism lie in the primordial desire to dominate. But in a modern world these Muslims are unable to adapt, unable to compete, so they resort to mass murder in anger and frustration.
Bullshit you liberal educated people are so vastly uneducated in reality you are pathetic.
Christianity and Judaism were as bad, historically, as Islamic extremist are today. King David was a butcher. The history of Christianity is full of persecutions and massacres.
The question is: Why have Christian, Jews and most Muslims evolved away from interpreting their religions as a license to commit atrocities, while some Muslims have not?
For us non-religious people, it's obvious that almost a organized religions are about brainwashing and using the brainwashed to dominate all other people.
They're a way of declaring anyone who does not conform to their socio-economic order to be EVIL.
The roots of Islamic terrorism lie in the primordial desire to dominate. But in a modern world these Muslims are unable to adapt, unable to compete, so they resort to mass murder in anger and frustration.
Bullshit you liberal educated people are so vastly uneducated in reality you are pathetic.
Or perhaps your just plain stupid.
Christianity and Judaism were as bad, historically, as Islamic extremist are today. King David was a butcher. The history of Christianity is full of persecutions and massacres.
The question is: Why have Christian, Jews and most Muslims evolved away from interpreting their religions as a license to commit atrocities, while some Muslims have not?
For us non-religious people, it's obvious that almost a organized religions are about brainwashing and using the brainwashed to dominate all other people.
They're a way of declaring anyone who does not conform to their socio-economic order to be EVIL.
The roots of Islamic terrorism lie in the primordial desire to dominate. But in a modern world these Muslims are unable to adapt, unable to compete, so they resort to mass murder in anger and frustration.
Bullshit you liberal educated people are so vastly uneducated in reality you are pathetic.
Or perhaps your just plain stupid.
Priceless, "your" should have been "you're".
Normally I just let that shit go.....but if you are going to accuse someone of being "stupid" you shouldn't use incorrect grammar.
Christianity and Judaism were as bad, historically, as Islamic extremist are today. King David was a butcher. The history of Christianity is full of persecutions and massacres.
The question is: Why have Christian, Jews and most Muslims evolved away from interpreting their religions as a license to commit atrocities, while some Muslims have not?
For us non-religious people, it's obvious that almost a organized religions are about brainwashing and using the brainwashed to dominate all other people.
They're a way of declaring anyone who does not conform to their socio-economic order to be EVIL.
The roots of Islamic terrorism lie in the primordial desire to dominate. But in a modern world these Muslims are unable to adapt, unable to compete, so they resort to mass murder in anger and frustration.
Bullshit you liberal educated people are so vastly uneducated in reality you are pathetic.
Or perhaps your just plain stupid.
Priceless, "your" should have been "you're".
Normally I just let that shit go.....but if you are going to accuse someone of being "stupid" you shouldn't use incorrect grammar.
If you think it matters whether you 'let that shit go', your as stupid as I thought.
BTW- Neither grammar or typos indicate intelligence. E. E. Cummings and Mark Twain both proved that.
Bush didn't send troops to Pak. to kill Osama because Osama was already long dead.or deterred by any democratic political party or by what name anyone refers to them by?
Some muslims are insulted by tying "Islamic" to actions that are not consistent with Islam but that's hardly the largest problem with our international relations with muslim maj countries. but this bullshit about dems or gopers being "tougher" on terrorism is just silly.
It was silly when people said Obama was tougher than W because he sent troops into Pak to kill bin laden, when W did not do so. It's true W didn't send troops into Pak, but it wasn't because he was "soft" on terrorism.
