I think I am starting to see a trend in this list of terrorist attacks.

[rightwinger]

Ah, "unlawful", and the US makes the laws......

It's like murder v. execution
Opium v. morphine

Words that have different meanings depending on which direction you're looking at it from.

no--the Geneva Convention/UN/etc make the laws
it is not US policy to attack innocent civilians
..there have been and always will be lone wolves/mistakes/etc
but it is not US policy
terrorist DIRECTLY target innocent civilians, as a policy--this is UNDENIABLE
the US does not as a policy

Ah, the UN, which the US will work to control.......

It's all how global politics works, China is working towards the aim of controlling enough countries that it can do whatever it likes and the UN will never condemn them.

Doesn't make it right. Doesn't make invading Iraq better than bombing some civilians in America.

please prove YOUR claim that it's the US policy to directly target innocent civilians
in fact, the US goes out of their way to not hit civilians

Huh? Why is targeting "innocent civilians" an issue here?

"the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians,"

It doesn't say "targeting innocent civilians" here, does it. Or correct me, did my eyes just give the fuck up. What I read is "unlawful use of violence and intimidation".

Are you saying that the invasion of Iraq did not involve "violence"? By invading Iraq the US managed to get upwards of 1 million people killed through blatant stupidity on the part of Bremer and Bush.

Disbanding the Iraqi Armed Forces and Police was one of the most criminal acts ever seen in that country. It led to so many problems.

So you'd say "they didn't target innocent civilians", well, they did. Just not necessarily in the traditional manner you're trying to make this.

No, let's try this. A voter is a person who gets to decide how the government works. Is a voter "innocent" of the crimes of the country? Are US citizens "innocent" of the crimes of invading the country? They elected Bush, they supported the war, they supported those whose policies against Middle Eastern oil rich countries has caused so much friction which led to 9/11.

The only way they're innocent is if you ignore everything.

The invasion of Iraq by the coalition of UN member states was not unlawful, jackass.

Otherwise the smoking gun would have been a mushroom cloud

 

[frigidweirdo]

You're clearly not reading what I'm writing.

you clearly do not understand basic English
you CLEARLY have not read/researched any history on the subject
you claim the US commits terrorism as policy --PROVE it!!!!

terrorists do not sentence their ''soldiers'' to prison for killing civilians
etc etc
William Calley - Wikipedia

Seriously? Are you fucking serious?

The point I'm making, as it seems to have completely gone over your head, is that what the US does is actually WORSE than what the terrorists are doing.

Labels are labels. Something doesn't become bad simply because it meets the requirements of a label, and the same for good. Or didn't you get that?

hahahah
you just fked up
what the terrorists do is illegal per the Geneva Convention/etc = murder is ILLEGAL--everywhere
what the US does is legal...killing in combat/war/etc is legal

And who wrote the Geneva Convention? Who decides what is legal and what isn't legal?

AND it is basic COMMON SENSE!! that's who!!
..you should not DIRECTLY target innocent civilians--which is UNDENIABLY what terrorists do
..the US does not

And again, what's a civilian when people get to vote?

Terrorists target civilians because they don't have a massive army behind them. Maybe if you funded their armies a little more, they wouldn't need to attack civilians.

But then again the US doesn't actively target civilians and 1 million die.
Terrorist target civilians in Europe and the US and in the past 15 years maybe 1,000 have died.

Hmmm...

 

[frigidweirdo]

You're clearly not reading what I'm writing.

you clearly do not understand basic English
you CLEARLY have not read/researched any history on the subject
you claim the US commits terrorism as policy --PROVE it!!!!

terrorists do not sentence their ''soldiers'' to prison for killing civilians
etc etc
William Calley - Wikipedia

Seriously? Are you fucking serious?

The point I'm making, as it seems to have completely gone over your head, is that what the US does is actually WORSE than what the terrorists are doing.

Labels are labels. Something doesn't become bad simply because it meets the requirements of a label, and the same for good. Or didn't you get that?

....lawfully defending yourself by attacking the attackers is worse than murdering innocent civilians??
???!!!!

The US INVADED a foreign country simply because it could and it wanted to reduce the impact of sovereign countries to come together and form a cartel to increase their profits.

In the process up to one million innocent people were killed.

Now, you're comparing this to terrorists who may go and kill like 100 people.

Innocent people? How innocent is a voter?

what country was that?

Iraq.

Casualties of the Iraq War - Wikipedia

 

[frigidweirdo]

Who decides they're terrorists? Oh, wait, the US does.

So, get this, this is your narrative.

The US says this group is a terrorist group. The terrorist group says the US is a terrorist group. The terrorist group attacks the US, oh, they're bad. The US attacks the said terrorist group, they're good.

How?

very stupid shit
plain and simple--the US does not target innocent civilians as policy
don't try the stupid double talk/twisting crap

Tell that to the people of Hiroshima

that was legal/lawful/etc as many cities were bombed
AND--they were not surrendering
they still didn't want to surrender AFTER the A--bombs destroyed their cities
AND in the end more people were saved by the Abombs
you're point is worthless
Operation Downfall: How America Would Have Invaded Japan (It Would Have Been Hell)

Hiroshima had little military value. It was an attack on civilians.

Justify it if you wish. But you can’t claim the US does not target innocent civilians

again--they killed less than if they had to invade
they did it to END the war!!!!!!
etc etc

So if the terrorists kill LESS by attacking civilians than by attacking military targets, it's justified?

 

[WillMunny]

Islam has been terrorizing the world for 1400 years, according to their own holy hate book in which Mohammed himself said something like, "You will be made victorious through terror" and hundreds of other bloodthirsty edicts. Here's something most people don't know: since 9/11 the muslim world has had 32,000 sectarian suicide bombings, culminating in hundreds of thousands of deaths. Meaning the biggest cause of muslim death (by far) is other muslims.

Islam has never done anything positive for any society in 14 centuries. That's why liberalfilth cannot give one logical, rational reason why we should import the most violent religion on the planet into America when we were always doing fine without any Pisslam influence of any kind. It's based on liberals' irrational, self-righteous, self-loathing of Western culture. Even though Western culture is demonstrably the most superior culture on the planet in terms of human accomplishments, human enlightenment and human rights.