quote from nuremberg trials still highly relevant today

[RetiredGySgt]

Blu got EXACTLY what he wanted with this thread, his leftist retardo brothers and sisters attacking the US over Afghanistan and Iraq. That was the entire point of his post.

 

[georgephillip]

And who is Hasan Akbar? He was a US Army Soldier who decided he was with the terrorists. The insane-looking woman pictured seems to be with the terrorists, too.

What's your definition of "terrorist?"

Most standard descriptions involve taking innocent civilian lives for political, religious, or economic ends.

Hasan Akbar- Wiki

Or actively supporting them with money help or materials. She is helping a known terrorist by advocating he be freed.

None of Hasan Akbar's Kuwait victims were innocent or civilians.

That means he is a cold blooded murderer but not a terrorist as were those who planned an implemented the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.

 

[georgephillip]

Akbar sided with the terrorists, moron.

Are you even capable of considering the possibility that you are not one of the "good" guys?

What a good little Chomskybot you are. I'll ask again: If America sucks so bad, why are you here?

Because I'm not the one taking money to kill innocent human beings.

Why do you refuse to consider the possibility that the US Empire relies on deliberate violence against innocent civilians at least as much as past empires?

Because it's the blind loyalty of good "patriots" like you that enable their terror?

 

[daveman]

What's your definition of "terrorist?"

Most standard descriptions involve taking innocent civilian lives for political, religious, or economic ends.

Hasan Akbar- Wiki

Or actively supporting them with money help or materials. She is helping a known terrorist by advocating he be freed.

None of Hasan Akbar's Kuwait victims were innocent or civilians.

That means he is a cold blooded murderer but not a terrorist as were those who planned an implemented the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.

My goodness, but you're a stupid, stupid alleged man. Akbar was not a terrorist, but he was siding with his terrorist brothers.

 

[daveman]

Are you even capable of considering the possibility that you are not one of the "good" guys?

What a good little Chomskybot you are. I'll ask again: If America sucks so bad, why are you here?

Because I'm not the one taking money to kill innocent human beings.

Why do you refuse to consider the possibility that the US Empire relies on deliberate violence against innocent civilians at least as much as past empires?

Because it's the blind loyalty of good "patriots" like you that enable their terror?

No, because the facts simply don't support your America-hating braindead leftist talking point.

 

[georgephillip]

Blu got EXACTLY what he wanted with this thread, his leftist retardo brothers and sisters attacking the US over Afghanistan and Iraq. That was the entire point of his post.

Was Goering Right?

"...All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."

"It works the same in every country."

Did it work here after 911?

 

[georgephillip]

Or actively supporting them with money help or materials. She is helping a known terrorist by advocating he be freed.

None of Hasan Akbar's Kuwait victims were innocent or civilians.

That means he is a cold blooded murderer but not a terrorist as were those who planned an implemented the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.

My goodness, but you're a stupid, stupid alleged man. Akbar was not a terrorist, but he was siding with his terrorist brothers.

What if his terrorist brothers were sleeping in their tents?

"Akbar himself reportedly said, just moments after his arrest, 'You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'"

Is Akbar's blindness greater than yours?

 

[daveman]

None of Hasan Akbar's Kuwait victims were innocent or civilians.

That means he is a cold blooded murderer but not a terrorist as were those who planned an implemented the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.

My goodness, but you're a stupid, stupid alleged man. Akbar was not a terrorist, but he was siding with his terrorist brothers.

What if his terrorist brothers were sleeping in their tents?

"Akbar himself reportedly said, just moments after his arrest, 'You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'"

Is Akbar's blindness greater than yours?

Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you. The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs. You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.

 

[georgephillip]

What a good little Chomskybot you are. I'll ask again: If America sucks so bad, why are you here?

Because I'm not the one taking money to kill innocent human beings.

Why do you refuse to consider the possibility that the US Empire relies on deliberate violence against innocent civilians at least as much as past empires?

Because it's the blind loyalty of good "patriots" like you that enable their terror?

No, because the facts simply don't support your America-hating braindead leftist talking point.

Is this a fact?

"Estimates on civilian casualties are more variable than those for military personnel. According to Iraq Body Count, a group that relies on press reports, NGO-based reports and official figures to measure civilian casualties, approximately 7,500 civilians were killed during the invasion phase, while more than 60,000 civilians have been killed as of April 2007." (Wiki)

Do you accept this definition of terrorism?

"the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear."

 

[daveman]

Because I'm not the one taking money to kill innocent human beings.

Why do you refuse to consider the possibility that the US Empire relies on deliberate violence against innocent civilians at least as much as past empires?

Because it's the blind loyalty of good "patriots" like you that enable their terror?

No, because the facts simply don't support your America-hating braindead leftist talking point.

Is this a fact?

"Estimates on civilian casualties are more variable than those for military personnel. According to Iraq Body Count, a group that relies on press reports, NGO-based reports and official figures to measure civilian casualties, approximately 7,500 civilians were killed during the invasion phase, while more than 60,000 civilians have been killed as of April 2007." (Wiki)

Do you accept this definition of terrorism?

"the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear."

Now find where any of those civilians were deliberately targeted. You know, like your terrorist heroes do.

And then get the hell out of my country. You're stinking it up.

 

[georgephillip]

My goodness, but you're a stupid, stupid alleged man. Akbar was not a terrorist, but he was siding with his terrorist brothers.

What if his terrorist brothers were sleeping in their tents?

"Akbar himself reportedly said, just moments after his arrest, 'You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'"

Is Akbar's blindness greater than yours?

Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you. The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs. You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.

"All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."

"It works the same in every country."

You are living proof Goering was right.

 

[georgephillip]

No, because the facts simply don't support your America-hating braindead leftist talking point.

Is this a fact?

"Estimates on civilian casualties are more variable than those for military personnel. According to Iraq Body Count, a group that relies on press reports, NGO-based reports and official figures to measure civilian casualties, approximately 7,500 civilians were killed during the invasion phase, while more than 60,000 civilians have been killed as of April 2007." (Wiki)

Do you accept this definition of terrorism?

"the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear."

Now find where any of those civilians were deliberately targeted. You know, like your terrorist heroes do.

And then get the hell out of my country. You're stinking it up.

Howard Zinn, combat vet of WWII, believed there was a third option when considering war crimes.

"Along with accidental and deliberate targeting of civilians, there was also targeting practices which resulted in the inevitable loss of civilian life.

As far as Iraq's concerned, what light does WikiLeaks shed?

"The secret US army files made public Friday by the WikiLeaks web site provide massive documentation of the criminal character of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.

"WikiLeaks posted nearly 400,000 army field reports, filed by low-ranking soldiers after combat or reconnaissance operations, describing the death tolls due to US military action, attacks by anti-US insurgents, or the internecine civil conflict sparked by the US occupation.

"The reports cover the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009, and therefore provide no data on the mass killings that took place during the initial US invasion in March 2003..."

“The war logs, seen by the Guardian, contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq's roads and during raids on people's homes.

"The victims include dozens of women and children.

"The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly.”

Don't let the door smack your fat ass on your way out, Punk.

 

[daveman]

What if his terrorist brothers were sleeping in their tents?

"Akbar himself reportedly said, just moments after his arrest, 'You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'"

Is Akbar's blindness greater than yours?

Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you. The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs. You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.

"All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."

"It works the same in every country."

You are living proof Goering was right.

Not really. You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle. If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.

 

[daveman]

Is this a fact?

"Estimates on civilian casualties are more variable than those for military personnel. According to Iraq Body Count, a group that relies on press reports, NGO-based reports and official figures to measure civilian casualties, approximately 7,500 civilians were killed during the invasion phase, while more than 60,000 civilians have been killed as of April 2007." (Wiki)

Do you accept this definition of terrorism?

"the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear."

Now find where any of those civilians were deliberately targeted. You know, like your terrorist heroes do.

And then get the hell out of my country. You're stinking it up.

Howard Zinn, combat vet of WWII, believed there was a third option when considering war crimes.

"Along with accidental and deliberate targeting of civilians, there was also targeting practices which resulted in the inevitable loss of civilian life.

As far as Iraq's concerned, what light does WikiLeaks shed?

"The secret US army files made public Friday by the WikiLeaks web site provide massive documentation of the criminal character of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.

"WikiLeaks posted nearly 400,000 army field reports, filed by low-ranking soldiers after combat or reconnaissance operations, describing the death tolls due to US military action, attacks by anti-US insurgents, or the internecine civil conflict sparked by the US occupation.

"The reports cover the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009, and therefore provide no data on the mass killings that took place during the initial US invasion in March 2003..."

“The war logs, seen by the Guardian, contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq's roads and during raids on people's homes.

"The victims include dozens of women and children.

"The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly.”

Don't let the door smack your fat ass on your way out, Punk.

First Chomsky, now Zinn. You'l believe anything that validates your hatred of America, won't you?

You really are a mindless fool.

 

[kiwiman127]

Apparently not.

Really?

Yup. Apparently the point is that George Bush is a Nazi follower of Goehring because he lied us into war just Goehring predicted.
Frankly the old Bush is Hitler meme is geting kind of stale. So is Blu and the usual anti American crowd here.
I wonder if these same geniuses said the same thing about WW2.

Or Obama with Obamacare! LBJ with the Gulf of Tonkin Incident! The list could go on and on.

 

[georgephillip]

Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you. The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs. You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.

"All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."

"It works the same in every country."

You are living proof Goering was right.

Not really. You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle. If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.

If I were a pacifist, I wouldn't be planning attacks on anyone.

Only Slaves kill for money.

 

[daveman]

"All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."

"It works the same in every country."

You are living proof Goering was right.

Not really. You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle. If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.

If I were a pacifist, I wouldn't be planning attacks on anyone.

Only Slaves kill for money.

Pay attention, fool. Your pacifism stems not from a desire for peace but from your cowardice.

That you are a coward is a well-established fact.

 

[kiwiman127]

Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you. The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs. You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.

"All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."

"It works the same in every country."

You are living proof Goering was right.

Not really. You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle. If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.

What a crock of shit!
Per example, the invasion of Iraq. Many people were against the war based on their principles. I was all for invading Afghanistan but Iraq was a totally different story. During the Bush selling the concept using false information as his tool, one could find information that correctly contradicted the Bush selling points in the European press. I remember I read in the European press that the aluminum tubes designed to enrich uranium claim was bunk based on the opinion of Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA. Also the Yellow Cake myth was exposed long before Joseph Wilson even had gone to Nigeria by the European Press. The same with the Saddam/al Qeda tie in.
Many people who supported the invasion of Afghanistan were against invading Iraq because they knew the selling points were BS. So, they were pacifist on principle, where as the cowards were the ones who fell for the scare tactics of the Bush Administration.

 

[daveman]

"All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."

"It works the same in every country."

You are living proof Goering was right.

Not really. You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle. If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.

What a crock of shit!
Per example, the invasion of Iraq. Many people were against the war based on their principles. I was all for invading Afghanistan but Iraq was a totally different story. During the Bush selling the concept using false information as his tool, one could find information that correctly contradicted the Bush selling points in the European press. I remember I read in the European press that the aluminum tubes designed to enrich uranium claim was bunk based on the opinion of Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA. Also the Yellow Cake myth was exposed long before Joseph Wilson even had gone to Nigeria by the European Press. Then same with the Saddam/al Qeda tie in.
Many people who supported the invasion of Afghanistan were against invading Iraq because they knew the selling points were BS. So, they were pacifist on principle, where as the cowards were the ones who fell for the scare tactics of the Bush Administration.

Hey, dumbass, I'm speaking of Red George personally. Airman I Miss My Mommy So I'll Say My Back Hurts.

 

[georgephillip]

Now find where any of those civilians were deliberately targeted. You know, like your terrorist heroes do.

And then get the hell out of my country. You're stinking it up.

Howard Zinn, combat vet of WWII, believed there was a third option when considering war crimes.

"Along with accidental and deliberate targeting of civilians, there was also targeting practices which resulted in the inevitable loss of civilian life.

As far as Iraq's concerned, what light does WikiLeaks shed?

"The secret US army files made public Friday by the WikiLeaks web site provide massive documentation of the criminal character of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.

"WikiLeaks posted nearly 400,000 army field reports, filed by low-ranking soldiers after combat or reconnaissance operations, describing the death tolls due to US military action, attacks by anti-US insurgents, or the internecine civil conflict sparked by the US occupation.

"The reports cover the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009, and therefore provide no data on the mass killings that took place during the initial US invasion in March 2003..."

“The war logs, seen by the Guardian, contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq's roads and during raids on people's homes.

"The victims include dozens of women and children.

"The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly.”

Don't let the door smack your fat ass on your way out, Punk.

First Chomsky, now Zinn. You'l believe anything that validates your hatred of America, won't you?

You really are a mindless fool.

"The Guardian notes that the army reports, however grisly, significantly underestimate the death toll from US military action, even compared to the figures produced by Iraq Body Count (IBC), which are well below estimates, based on demographic studies, of a million or more Iraqis killed.

"The newspaper writes:

“'A key example of the failure by US forces to record civilian casualties they have inflicted comes in the two major urban battles against insurgents fought in 2004 in Falluja. Numerous buildings were reduced to rubble by air strikes, tank shells and howitzers, and there were well-attested deaths of hundreds of civilians. IBC has identified between 1,226 and 1,362 such deaths during April and November. But the leaked US internal field reports record no civilian casualties at all.'”

WikiLeaks...

Why are you running from this debate??