DescentBB

Spidey wrote:911 was the final event for me�If I could kill them all��.I would do it in a microsecond!

Arol wrote:When the joyous mob of celebrating Fallujanâ??s started their victorious war dance around the wrecked APC they ceased to be innocent civilians

You both are facists. leave this place and never come back.

Ferno wrote:

Arol wrote:When the joyous mob of celebrating Fallujanâ??s started their victorious war dance around the wrecked APC they ceased to be innocent civilians

You both are facists. leave this place and never come back.

I do wish there was a Smiley with which to give someone the Finger!
But in want of better:

Beowulf wrote:Please tell me you're being sarcastic. Please tell me you're not so ignorant as to stereotype an entire race of people with a bumper-sticker blanket statement.

You want to kill you some A-rabs? Why don't you go over there and tell them that, and do us all a favor. Maybe we'll see a video of your decapitation floating around the Internet somewhere.

EDIT: and on a second note...

What about Chechyna? You see those terrorists blowing up buildings, raping, killing children in a school. What about the Basque seperatists? Blowing up a trainstation. What about Somalia, Kosovo, Northern Ireland...places that are just as volatile but don't get news coverage because we think that we're the only people who matter in the world and unless it affects us, its no good to us. The selfish attitude that you display is why the world hates us. And the completely blind indifference to everybody else in the world other than you makes you just as bad as a terrorist.

The problem here is the ones who are attacking and killing us are arabic muslums. Last time I checked, hating a ethnic/religious group for killing your fellow citizens is as natural as the sun rising in the east. Who should we be ticked off at? Mexicans?

I'd like to see what the bleeding hearts would have been saying back in WW2.

As to being ethno-centric, name me some countries that aren't.

woodchip wrote:As to being ethno-centric, name me some countries that aren't.

earth

you don't belong here.

(edit: yikes that was pretty harsh.
edit2: hmm, or was it?)

hating a ethnic/religious group for killing your fellow citizens is as natural as the sun rising in the east

Why not restrict your hate to the parts of that group doing the killing? Why hate the whole group for the actions of the few?

Is it OK for a black person to hate you because the KKK killed someone close to him? No -- he can hate the KKK all he wants, but unless you're a member, he has no right or reason to hate you.

Whether or not that hate is "natural"... it's not right.

Lothar wrote:

hating a ethnic/religious group for killing your fellow citizens is as natural as the sun rising in the east

Why not restrict your hate to the parts of that group doing the killing? Why hate the whole group for the actions of the few?

Is it OK for a black person to hate you because the KKK killed someone close to him? No -- he can hate the KKK all he wants, but unless you're a member, he has no right or reason to hate you.

Whether or not that hate is "natural"... it's not right.

It would be nice if we could just direct our feelings where it is most appropriate. Unfortunately with terrorists hiding behind the robes of their fellow muslums, identifying just who to hate is difficult. Human nature will take the easy path and vent their ire on a whole group and not just select factions. If, on the other hand, the innocent muslums in question were to march in protest of the terrorist then the ill will we feel would be mitigated. Alas they don't so we get the impression that the whole fabric of the Islamic religion is in accord with the extremists.
The KKK example is flawed in that the clan operated in a regional area and it was clearly evident that in other areas whites were not supportive of clan activities. Blacks had a option to move to other areas to escape the clan where their (blacks) opinion of whites were vastly different. Muslum terrorist do not give us the option of "moving" to escape their influence.

"Last time I checked, hating a ethnic/religious group for killing your fellow citizens is as natural as the sun rising in the east."

Natural in the instinctual sense, yes. The proper action, no.

And to think all this could have been avoided so easily if some stupid cowboy didn't decide to "liberate" a people who had no wish to be "liberated".
I'd be more sympathetic to some of these opinions if Iraq or the Iraqi people had asked for the U.S. to invade them. How much joy did you expect them to express, you have destroyed their government, destroyed the ability of the police to enforce law and order, destroyed their infrastructure leaving them living in the stone age and are setting them up to suffer years of civil war in the years to come. No big sloppy kisses for you Uncle Sam.

Ford, I don't suppose you read any of Bash's Iraqi blogger posts?

Ford Prefect wrote:And to think all this could have been avoided so easily if some stupid cowboy didn't decide to "liberate" a people who had no wish to be "liberated". :roll:

Iraq the Model. Those guys seem glad for it... and read over their comments about conversations with friends.

I'd be more sympathetic to some of these opinions if Iraq or the Iraqi people had asked for the U.S. to invade them.

Tell me, how do you go about collecting those opinions during Saddam's reign?

How much joy did you expect them to express, you have destroyed their government, destroyed the ability of the police to enforce law and order, destroyed their infrastructure leaving them living in the stone age and are setting them up to suffer years of civil war in the years to come. No big sloppy kisses for you Uncle Sam.

Iraqis are as divided as anybody else. Some of them are expressing tons of joy, and some of them are hella mad. Some of them see the s*** that got blown up and they get mad about that, and some of them see all the good stuff happening in Iraq and are pleased with the US presence.

It always impresses me how cynical some people can be when most of what they hear from Iraqis is what some news organization tells them. What's more impressive is how sure they are of their opinions. "OMG the Iraqis all hate us!" That's not what I hear from the Iraqis I read, and that's not what I hear from soldiers on the ground. I don't think they all love us, but I know a decent number of them are happy with what we've done so far. And don't even get me started on Afghanistan...

Oh, and I'm not sure what you think "all could have all been avoided" -- do you think if the US hadn't liberated Iraq, woodchip wouldn't be posting stupid racist crap? I think you'd have to go back to "if Al Qaeda didn't attack New York City..." to get that result. Maybe he'd be less annoying about posting such things if there was no Iraq war, but I'm pretty sure most of the anti-Arab/Muslim racism you see here is built on a foundation of 9/11, and whatever happens in Iraq is just the icing on the cake.

I'd be more sympathetic to some of these opinions if Iraq or the Iraqi people had asked for the U.S. to invade them. How much joy did you expect them to express, you have destroyed their government, destroyed the ability of the police to enforce law and order, destroyed their infrastructure leaving them living in the stone age and are setting them up to suffer years of civil war in the years to come. No big sloppy kisses for you Uncle Sam.

Well I told myself there would be some idiots that would attack me for having feelings about the people who are trying to annihilate every American on the planetâ?¦including you liberalsâ?¦. and I told myself to ignore themâ?¦

But like always, they prove who the true haters are once againâ?¦

Comparing me to Hitler is pretty low on the scaleâ?¦but I have come to expect that kind of attacks from people with pure hatred in their heartsâ?¦.

I only hate the people who have proven time and time again that they want to exterminate usâ?¦.Whatâ??s your excuse?

My hatred was forged in the fires of blatant terrorismâ?¦yours is a low brow off the cuff remark designed to hurt someoneâ?¦.oh yeaâ?¦your better then me.

Actually Afghanistan is a model of how to properly "liberate" a country. The U.S. seems to have gotten all puffed up about it's well deserved success there and then promptly forgotten the lessons they should have learned.
1)Get the backing of your friends.
2)Find a clear enemy to attack.
3)Find an ally inside that country that is willing to do the ground work. Nothing like having an invading army to rally the divided. In Afghanistan most of the ground fighting was done by Afghanis against Afghanis.
3)Support your ally with your technological superiority, cruise missles, air support, inteligence, etc. Supply them with the tools to do the job.
4)When the battle is won get the h**l out of there and let the locals sort it out. I know, there are still forgein troops there including Americans and Canadians but it is not a occupation force.

In Iraq there was no group of Iraqis willing to lead the charge against Saddam. That might have been a hint that this was a bad idea.

Ford Prefect wrote:In Iraq there was no group of Iraqis willing to lead the charge against Saddam.

Yeah -- because last time, we backed out our support and they got slaughtered. There's no way any viable opposition group was going to arise after that, even though most of the country hated Saddam, because they felt it was certain death to oppose him. Now that he's captured, it's a different story.

That might have been a hint that this was a bad idea.

No -- that was a hint that it was going to be MORE DIFFICULT. Being difficult doesn't make it a bad idea, it just makes it take longer and cost more. It was still something that needed to be done.

Lothar:"It was still something that needed to be done."

Ummm... Could you add IMHO after that please.

Ford Prefect wrote:Ummm... Could you add IMHO after that please. :wink:

I don't see an "IMHO" attached to your statements that the Iraqi people didn't wish to be liberated.

Point well taken Lothar and I guess I expect people to understand that they are just the way I see it.

It's okay now though the UN has declared the whole thing illegal. That should stop this nonsense.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3661134.stm

Pure hatred. Laf. You're a joke.

Yes Pure Hatredâ?¦.

I hate because someone wants to destroy me, and or my way of life.

You hate because of petty reasons like spite.

Oh and by the wayâ?¦you might want to take that pix down before I Hot link it to like 4 million websitesâ?¦

Heh...you really just don't get it. We hate you because you're no better than they are. You want to kill them and their way of life. We hate you because if everyone followed your theory, everyone would constantly be at war with everyone else. You are the typical ignorant white trash who thinks the only way to accomplish things is by throwing everyone else's considerations to the winds.

I don't understand. Do you people honestly want to be at war all the time?

Exactly what kind of 'pure hatred' are you referring to, Spidey?

BTW, I didn't see any references to 'Hitler' being made. References to 'nazi' on the other hand, were.

I thought there was a policy against flame baiting?

Kuffjob's substantive contributions to this topic:

You're a loser Woodchip.
Yay for Spidey. (nazis pic)
Pure hatred. Laf. You're a joke.

While Kuffy may have been a good descent player, it is now obvious that is all he was good at.

Spidey brings up a salient point. He has grown up hearing nothing good about Islamist and everything bad. So what does one think Spidey's view of Muslums should be?

woodchip wrote: So what does one think Spidey's view of Muslums should be?

Something like this, properly adjusted for windage of course....






PS: Spidey, don't forget some of them are supposedly not bent on killing us...supposedly.

that one is sitting in his chair not killing, saying he will not kill.
that one is sitting in his chair not killing, saying he is "resolute" and will fight to the bitter end.
that one is sitting in his chair not killing, saying "we" are winning this war.
i'm sitting in my chair not killing, and fondling my tiny pecker.

Yah, substantive discussion with two hicks that promote the indisriminate killing of Muslims. Is that supposed to be reasonable? Am I supposed to feel bad for telling your two to eat sh1t? Am I supposed to engage some kind of debate with you?

You two are just as extreme as these "terrosits" Woodchip. Why can't you see that? Is it really that hard? Lets explore the logic.

Dumbass Islamic terrorist says: "I hate Americans, I want to kill them all."

Dumbass white hick says: "I hate Islamists, lets kill them all."

Give me a break while you're fvcking off dickhead.

Hating the hater is still hate, regardless of how you try to justify it. It makes you no more moral or politically correct.

B-

Well, if you're responding to me, I have never said, nor indicated, that I hate anyone on this board, because I don't.

Ford Prefect wrote:It's okay now though the UN has declared the whole thing illegal. That should stop this nonsense.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3661134.stm

The comments attributed to Kofi Annan are his own personal viewpoints, and NOT those of the the entire UN.
There is a vast difference between one mans opinion and attributing these oppinions to the entire world body.

kufyit wrote:Dumbass Islamic terrorist says: "I hate Americans, I want to kill them all."
Dumbass white hick says: "I hate Islamists, lets kill them all."

Just to clarify a point Kufy. Since when is it wrong to want to kill/eliminate/waste etc., etc., Islamic terrorists whose openly stated purpose in life is to kill; or convert by force; you and everyone you hold dear?
Who's ruthless and singleminded intentions can be seen in living colour, courtesy of the international media, in the list of dead victims from the WTC stretching to Beslan.
So when - Dumbass Islamic terrorist says: "I hate Americans, I want to kill them all." and Dumbass white hick says: "I hate Islamists, lets kill them all." - my money is on the latter because he is simply using commons sense.
Better to get him before he gets me!

Good point, if you were born with a birth defect.

The only difference is: they aren't saying anything about Islamic terrorists. They are proposing we kill ALL ISLAMISTS. Get it? Or did you not read what they said?

There is a word for what they suggest: genocide.

kufyit wrote: There is a word for what they suggest: genocide.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=40470
Case in Point!

kufyit wrote:Yah, substantive discussion with two hicks that promote the indisriminate killing of Muslims. Is that supposed to be reasonable? Am I supposed to feel bad for telling your two to eat sh1t? Am I supposed to engage some kind of debate with you?

You two are just as extreme as these "terrosits" Woodchip. Why can't you see that? Is it really that hard? Lets explore the logic.

Care to point out where I said "Kill all Muslums", or does that part of your head that comes to a point contain your cognitive abilities?

Okay, so some nutbags call for genocide, that means that we should respond with genocide? Don't think so.

Was our reply to Germany genocide? No.

Rwanda? No.

No no no.

i'm speechless.

kufyit wrote:Okay, so some nutbags call for genocide, that means that we should respond with genocide? Don't think so.

Was our reply to Germany genocide? No.

Rwanda? No.

No no no.

I beg to differ on the reply to the genocide in Germany. We fought in the trenches. We used planes and carpet bombing on German cities. We killed Germans. If that isn't genocide, I don't know what is.

Genocide is the deliberate targeting and killing of a population of a particular nationality, race, or religion with the intent to exterminate the entire population of said group. The key concept here is the desire to exterminate the entire group.

Here is Websters definition:

The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group.

Stryker wrote:We killed Germans. If that isn't genocide, I don't know what is.

We finally agree on something. You don't know what Genocide is.

actually, when you think about it, carpet bombing IS kindof untargeted killing, where all you know is that the people you are killing are NATIVE to that city.

"quick Ned, thin their numbers!"

it's not Genocide, because it's not an attempt at COMPLETE eradication. but because of it's simplistic targeting of 'everyone native to the area', it's eerily close to genocide, in spirit, no?

No.

spookily close?

So you read a couple of Iraqi blogs and now the overall sentiment is happy we're there?