'Bout 37 hours left.. Time to see how many folks are brain-washed

[Redz]

The US is big and powerful for a reason. I can understand your envy. We have done more for the poorer countries of the world than anyone but we are NOT just sitting here waiting to be killed by people who don't like us. If you expect us to be THAT magnanamous you're mistaken. You have yet to hold the terrorists responsible for the murders they have committed. Would you rather a terrorist group live next door to you or an American family?? Place the object of your fear in its' proper place>

i'm not envious and i'm glad i was born and live where i do, you keep the poor of the world poor along with the EU and the IMf, mainly throught agricultural trade sanctions. i hold terrorists responsible for murders yes and i'd rather anybody but terrorists next door

 

[dilloduck]

Ok, is there a reason anyone is trying to educate this fool?

LOL nervous energy??

 

[Zhukov]

Ok, is there a reason anyone is trying to educate this fool?

I'm almost done.

 

[dilloduck]

i'm not envious and i'm glad i was born and live where i do, you keep the poor of the world poor along with the EU and the IMf, mainly throught agricultural trade sanctions. i hold terrorists responsible for murders yes and i'd rather anybody but terrorists next door

Bush is trying to keep it that way for you!

 

[dilloduck]

lol, Z your posts are to good to go to waste!

HEY--I'm readin' em ! nothing is wasted on me.

 

[Bonnie]

Ok, is there a reason anyone is trying to educate this fool?

We are all masochisitc???????????

 

[Redz]

Oh, I understand completely. And I don't care. Their opinion is irrelevant.
I got a gun, and no one is telling me what to do.
Do you think killing Nazi's encouraged Nazism?
Must I get out the bin Laden "strong horse" quote?
You're wrong now. Iraq commited acts of war years before we invaded. They attacked us. Pearl Harbor was just a naval base. Hawaii wasn't even a state at the time. They were just attacking ships. By your logic the Japanese attack didn't warrant a response.
So you're problem is primarily with the occupation? So instead of fighting the terrorists in Disney World, we should just give it to them? I'm afraid I don't understand that at all. The surest way to encourage terrorism is to give in to it. That is undeniable.

don't care you sir are a borg!!!. their opinion is as valid as yours
nazis and terrorists are different
strong horse-sure
radar lock is not really attacking is it?
i think by the loigic of this preemptive strike nonsense, the japanese attack was justified because america may have attacked them
primary problem is preemptive stike logic not occupation. but occupation is where this cases differs from the others you mentioned.
i don't think you can defeat terrorism, look at israel, it can't stop the attacks

 

[Redz]

You don't like it when we attack one country? You want us to attack another? Twelve years of resolutions is not only not negotiaions but in fact pre-emption? But you're upset, and you ridicule, when we negotiate with North Korea?

You've got more angles than a dodecahedron.

i'm not saying attack them, but it shows the flaw in the spreading freedom arguement, why not spread it there

 

[dilloduck]

i'm not saying attack them, but it shows the flaw in the spreading freedom arguement, why not spread it there

good luck Z---I'm outta here on that one !!

 

[Redz]

Ok, is there a reason anyone is trying to educate this fool?

ok folks thanks for the effort at education, but i do think its a fair point that your military is a little too streched to deal with anything else at the moment

 

[Redz]

I'm almost done.

zhukov thanks for the effort anyways!!!
good quality of post
better luck next time!!!

 

[Zhukov]

don't care you sir are a borg!!!.

Like, from Star Trek? Ok.....

their opinion is as valid as yours

Valid? That doesn't make it relevant. Since they will not act on their opinion it is irrelevant.

nazis and terrorists are different

Not so different as you might think.

radar lock is not really attacking is it?

Wow. Clearly you can read. So go back and read what they did after the part about radar locks.

i think by the loigic of this preemptive strike nonsense, the japanese attack was justified because america may have attacked them

They never thought that, and that isn't why they attacked us.

primary problem is preemptive stike logic not occupation. but occupation is where this cases differs from the others you mentioned.

So pre-emption is ok so long as there is no occupation afterwards? Really, you have great difficulty making points.

i don't think you can defeat terrorism, look at israel, it can't stop the attacks

Check the stats. See how many attacks followed the so-called Peace Accords, then compare that to how many attacks have followed the construction of the fence and their aggressive self-defense, which like our efforts in Iraq has also drawn quite a bit of international criticism.

 

[Said1]

Check the stats. See how many attacks followed the so-called Peace Accords, then compare that to how many attacks have followed the construction of the fence and their aggressive self-defense, which like our efforts in Iraq has also drawn quite a bit of international criticism.

Plus parts of the fence have been torn down, the path has been re-routed, they are complying with ISC rulings ect, ect.

 

[Said1]

i'm not envious and i'm glad i was born and live where i do, you keep the poor of the world poor along with the EU and the IMf, mainly throught agricultural trade sanctions. i hold terrorists responsible for murders yes and i'd rather anybody but terrorists next door

Wow, truely pathetic, and funny at the same time.

 

[Redz]

Like, from Star Trek? Ok.....

Valid? That doesn't make it relevant.
They never thought that, and that isn't why they attacked us.
So pre-emption is ok so long as there is no occupation afterwards? Really, you have great difficulty making points.
Check the stats. See how many attacks followed the so-called Peace Accords, then compare that to how many attacks have followed the construction of the fence and their aggressive self-defense, which like our efforts in Iraq has also drawn quite a bit of international criticism.

relevant or irrelevant, its as valid
might is clearly right for you, do you understand why other nations see this as a new imperialism.
so they fired missiles at your planes, but did they make an attack on american soil, regardless the U.N did not think that constituted an act of war, otherwise you would have had international law on your side when you invaded
preemption is not ok ever. the whole notion that one state can attack another based on percieved threats is madness and is open to all sorts of abuse
occupation is another issue and a messy bloody foolish ine at that
you know deep in your heart that violence causes violence. when has a violent response ever solve a terrorist problem?, ask the english
you will have to address the issues causing terrorism at some stage as this is the only way to solve terrorism in terms of the japanese thingthats not`what i heard, but regardless their sneak attack would be justified under the notion of a preemptive strike would it not?

 

[Redz]

Wow, truely pathetic, and funny at the same time.

your right said1 keeping the third world poor throught agricultural tarriffs and IMF policy is pathetic, dunno bout funny tho

 

[Said1]

your right said1 keeping the third world poor throught agricultural tarriffs and IMF policy is pathetic, dunno bout funny tho

Do you seriously think that's what's keeping the third world poor? Agricultural tarriffs and IMF policy, and it has nothing to do with who is running their governments? Please fill me in, obviously I'm missing something here.

 

[Redz]

Do you seriously think that's what's keeping the third world poor? Agricultural tarriffs and IMF policy, and it has nothing to do with who is running their governments? Please fill me in, obviously I'm missing something here.

thats a major component of it yes, who runs their goverment also plays a big role too of course. but i think agricultural tarriffs play a big role in damaging the agricultural sectors of their economies. we protect our agri sector at the expense of theirs. IMF opens these countries to free trade before they are sophisticated to deal with it, American european and chinse economies were developed behind protectionist barriers until recently, and still are in certain areas, like agriculture for example!!

 

[Bonnie]

relevant or irrelevant, its as valid
might is clearly right for you, do you understand why other nations see this as a new imperialism.
so they fired missiles at your planes, but did they make an attack on american soil, regardless the U.N did not think that constituted an act of war, otherwise you would have had international law on your side when you invaded
preemption is not ok ever. the whole notion that one state can attack another based on percieved threats is madness and is open to all sorts of abuse
occupation is another issue and a messy bloody foolish ine at that
you know deep in your heart that violence causes violence. when has a violent response ever solve a terrorist problem?, ask the english
you will have to address the issues causing terrorism at some stage as this is the only way to solve terrorism in terms of the japanese thingthats not`what i heard, but regardless their sneak attack would be justified under the notion of a preemptive strike would it not?

So now you imply that we are to blame for terrorists attacks? Do you understand that Radical Islamists hate us simply because we exist, just as they hate Israel becasue its exists??? We did nothing to facilitate the attacks that occured on 9/11 or anything before or after..........That fact that you are suggesting we sit down and have coffee with these lunatics is beyond absurd!! THEY WANT TO WIPE US OFF THE FACE OF THE EARTH...........Okay.... no amount of bargaining or capitulation is going to change that!!

 

[Said1]

but i think agricultural tarriffs play a big role in damaging the agricultural sectors of their economies.

How?

IMF opens these countries to free trade before they are sophisticated to deal with it

No, they have to meet certain requirements, and pay money of course. What happens after that is up to them.

American european and chinse economies were developed behind protectionist barriers until recently, and still are in certain areas, like agriculture for example!!

American and European markets are much different from Chinese. I don't see what you're getting at. The focus on developing agriculture never really helped China, might be why they want in on the free market game now.