Jump to content

Home

El Presidente


Lieutenant_kettch

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 201
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yeah, gotta be him. But I wouldnt count any other terroist out of the picture. Another will come up if the leader dies, Then another and another. Bush sounds like were gonna stay in there until his time in office is done, and Kerry will pull out all of our men and watch as the government that we set up there is destroyed. I'm not gonna choose side but were gonna have some weird changes when it happens:( .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Shok_Tinoktin

How so?

 

I think the way that the government tried to keep us in a constant state of fear after 9/11 so that we were willing to do PRETTY much whatever they told us is using fear as a political weapon, which fits your definition of a terrorist to a T. Not only that, but Geedubya even told us that God was on our side, meaning religion was used as a cover.. :dozey:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by ET Warrior

I think the way that the government tried to keep us in a constant state of fear after 9/11 so that we were willing to do PRETTY much whatever they told us is using fear as a political weapon, which fits your definition of a terrorist to a T. Not only that, but Geedubya even told us that God was on our side, meaning religion was used as a cover.. :dozey:

 

umm, seriously, how would you consider what happened post 9-11 to be them trying and/or succeeding in keeping us in a constantstate of fear?

 

and, suppressing evil dictators and attempting to make the world a little bit better sounds like something God would support

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

attempting to make the world a little bit better sounds like something God would support

 

That's exactly what the people you're fighting against, the terrrorists think if you see things from their view when attacking you.

 

The point is that violence is used. Other humans are being killed because of the values of a group in some part of the world. It doesn't matter if this or that group thinks it's for the good or whatever, it's the way that they're going about to achieve that goal that's wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

umm, seriously, how would you consider what happened post 9-11 to be them trying and/or succeeding in keeping us in a constantstate of fear?

today is a red day.

 

I remember schools were forced to put the students into doing drills for if we were invaded by terrorists, we had to lock the doors, turn off the lights, and hide.

 

gee, how on earth did they keep us in a state of panic. :dozey:

 

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

suppressing evil dictators and attempting to make the world a little bit better sounds like something God would support

if god really gave a damn, he shouldn't/wouldn't have allowed it in the first place(:dozey:), but that's nother argument, for a different time and a different place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to play "devil's advocate" here for a second... In their eyes they are correct in their religion, in our eyes, we are correct in religion. so, we can't really use religion to justify what we did to the rest of the world, we can use it as a moral booster for us and our troops. However, i ask you this, if you had to pick one, would you have america doing what it is doing now, or would you allow the terrorists and dictators to continue as they were, if you could only pick one of the two, which would you pick

 

Edit: that was in response to lynk former, this is for insane sith:

i don't believe america was ever in what you should call panic, we may have been worried, but that is vastly different than panic, worry is when you are scared something may happen to you, i.e. you are worried you may get mugged because you are in a bad neighborhood, panic is evidenced in situations like a building fire, or when a bomb goes off nearby, and everyone panics and goes crazy, big difference

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't pick either because both options don't make much of a difference in either level. You're assuming the US is gonna be 100% successful if I choose the US side. The fact is that both options will lead to the deaths of many just that they both have different ways that people will die.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what i said had legitimacy, because, the first option is what is happening now, i never said 100% success,just what they are doing now, and the second option is what was going on before we stepped in... we can't go back to the past and add more options, i am just asking, if you were to decide between not doing anything(which is what was happening) or letting the u.s. step in (which is what is happening) which would you choose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

In their eyes they are correct in their religion.

actually no, Islam strictly forbids the actions these terrorists are doing. also Saddam was anything but a religious man.

 

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

However, i ask you this, if you had to pick one, would you have america doing what it is doing now, or would you allow the terrorists and dictators to continue as they were, if you could only pick one of the two, which would you pick(?)

can I pick neither? I really have no liking for either.

 

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

i don't believe america was ever in what you should call panic, we may have been worried, but that is vastly different than panic, worry is when you are scared something may happen to you, i.e. you are worried you may get mugged because you are in a bad neighborhood, panic is evidenced in situations like a building fire, or when a bomb goes off nearby, and everyone panics and goes crazy, big difference

 

pan·ic

n.

 

1. A sudden, overpowering terror, often affecting many people at once. See Synonyms at fear.

 

shazaam.

 

and no, I saw girls go into panic attacks, people were also making those terrorist attack kits, incase terrorists attacked agaiin, those things sold out within an hour(!).

On every news station there was an individual slidepanel showing "terror alerts"

at hospitals they had flags up for if it was a red alert day, yellow alert day.

the government was feeding people this fear. that's the exact opposite of what they're supposed to do. Hell I remember we had to do a weeks class of terror drills, should an attack happen again, we had to do these ridiculous procedures similiar to the ones done in the 50's incase a nuclear attack happend :dozey: I think the US was pretty much kept in a state of panic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whatever you want to believe, believe, however, just because a little girl freaks out, or the gov't decides to put out a terror level alert, and selling those terror kits does not constitute panic, nor does people buying them, it was simply a way to alleviate worry, etc.

 

in response to religious views, i was speaking of most terrorist, and they say themselves that their religion iis backing them as they see it, not as you see it...:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

whatever you want to believe, believe, however, just because a little girl freaks out, or the gov't decides to put out a terror level alert, and selling those terror kits does not constitute panic, nor does people buying them, it was simply a way to alleviate worry, etc.

well see, I have this thing called the dictionary to back up what I say. What do you have? petty arguments involving criticism of my views.

 

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

in response to religious views, i was speaking of most terrorist, and they say themselves that their religion iis backing them as they see it, not as you see it...:rolleyes:

just because someone says something, doesn't make it true, they have to present proof to their claim. Islam strictly forbids killing unarmed people, especially in a time of peace. Islam does not allow unconstituted murder, especially not for revenge. It only allows murder during a time of war in a state of self-defense, or when being attacked at any time (peace or war) if only in a state of self-defense. What these terrorists do is against Islam and by claiming a jihad they are desecrating all that the muslim world holds true.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no, im saying they justify it, it was a comment on a comment made earlier about bush saying God was on our side, etc. thus, it was a string of discussion about the validity of that statement, not saying i agree with what they do, or condone it, i'm just saying you can't get mad at bush for saying God is on our side

in the future, please read most of the posts, not just the most recent ones

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Hanna_solo

insane u do not bealive in God if so then why do we exist

I don't know, while I may be well learned, I do not have all the answer nor do I ever claim to. There are many questions that can't be answered, this is one that I cannot say with certainty. I believe in the possibility of god, but I do not devote myself to the unwavering thought of the entities existence.

 

Originally posted by Lieutenant_kettch

no no no, you can IS, because i have seen you attempt to support your claim

 

i was saying that in respoonse to R9s comment

oh I see.... my bad.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Hanna_solo

insane u do not bealive in God if so then why do we exist

 

You really don't want to open up that can of worms in here.....we're already on a hot enough topic now, I think throwing in a debate about God will just cause more problems.

 

If you REALLY want to debate it, you can start a thread for it, but I advise strongly against it because threads like that degenerate into flame fests pretty quickly.

 

 

And you cannot tell me the government wasn't trying to keep us in a state of panic. I mean honestly, how many times has news "leaked" about how there's an impending terrorist threat that never materialised? If there really WAS a terrorist threat wouldn't it be in the best interests of people to not be told, and just take precautions against it without us knowing?

 

Tom Ridge has certainly helped matters, what with the whole "Seal your windows with duct tape" measures. You think convincing people that they have to anthrax-proof their homes isn't an attempt to remind them that they could DIE at any moment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...