Do you feel that we have avenged 9/11? After all we've been through, when can we finally say that we "got revenge" on our attackers?

revenge is a dish best served cold my friend

Well, we've killed or caused the death of thousands of civilians, so I think we've fulfilled the "eye for an eye" portion of revenge, if that's what you mean.

But no, I don't think we "got revenge." We definitely haven't received justice.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

In my book - no. I am an advocate of the "If you attack me, we will hit you back 100 times harder" club.

If they had the new MOP back when they hit Tora Bora I would have dropped about 20 of them at that time, and then dropped our smallest nuke on top of that to seal the debris into glass.

All this crap with Iran supplying weapons and materials for IEDs - if we had actionable intelligence showing who the supplier was I would remove them (not Iran, but the military bases or suppliers they are coming from) as well. I think we need to revise our Geneva Convention books to allow for response geared to the level of our attackers. For countries that act honorably, you treat their POWs and other non-combatants with honor. For folks from hailing from terrorist groups that have renounced caring about other human beings, I would do like in the old days, and post them up on totem poles near their villages in the most humiliating ways possible until their families started to get the message and sued for peace.

I sure as hell don't believe in war for the sake of war, or for corporate interests - but if we get attacked by someone I say we move to the least common denominator in behavior they respect. Once they get the message, then we can start back in with negotiations.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/14/2009 01:31PM by Registered Voter.

Dig Deeper, It Won’t Help
Air Force’s Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb ready to drop from B2s
http://www.barking-moonbat.com/index.php/weblog/mil_porn/

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, we've killed or caused the death of
> thousands of civilians, so I think we've fulfilled
> the "eye for an eye" portion of revenge, if that's
> what you mean.
>
> But no, I don't think we "got revenge." We
> definitely haven't received justice.


+1. Additionally, if you really wanted to get true justice, we should have brought the war to Saudi Arabia since most of the hijackers came from there and Bin Laden is Saudi.

__________________________________
That's not a ladybug, that's a cannapiller.

YOU ARE ALL A BUNCH OF FOOLS.
YOUR GOVERNMENT LET 9/11 HAPPEN. DO THE RESEARCH!

We need to have Bin Laden and his number 2 guy killed or captured. The concept of overwhelming response against an attacker has been used by every dominating military power since the beginning of time...we have now joined the ranks of the Alexander the Great...the Roman Empire...and NazI Germany in utilizing what can only be described as terrorist tactics.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

FOOLS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> YOU ARE ALL A BUNCH OF FOOLS.
> YOUR GOVERNMENT LET 9/11 HAPPEN. DO THE RESEARCH!

... and Obama's not a US citizen, airplanes are spraying chemtrails, the moon landing was faked, and Elvis Presley is alive and well. Thanks.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We need to have Bin Laden and his number 2 guy
> killed or captured. The concept of overwhelming
> response against an attacker has been used by
> every dominating military power since the
> beginning of time...we have now joined the ranks
> of the Alexander the Great...the Roman
> Empire...and NazI Germany in utilizing what can
> only be described as terrorist tactics.

We joined those ranks a long time ago fucknut. Remember Hiroshima?

You are a such a fucking idiot.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Mr Mephisto, on another thread about 9/11 I asked about 100 questions that remain unanswered. You failed to give me an answer for even one of them, do you want me to repeat them so you can continue your straw man argument?

Wow, you sure told him, Registered Voter!

You are wise and all-knowing; I salute you!

A.B.D Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr Mephisto, on another thread about 9/11 I asked
> about 100 questions that remain unanswered. You
> failed to give me an answer for even one of them,
> do you want me to repeat them so you can continue
> your straw man argument?

Don't be silly. You know as well as I do that the Lizard People won't let me answer a single question. They use chemicals discovered during the fake moon landing to spray the mind-controlling chemtrails into our atmosphere.

If someone could find a way to put a tinfoil helmet on me, that might block out their influence and allow me to provide all the missing pieces of information that "Loose Change" didn't address.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

America shouldn't be out for "revenge." We should seek justice. And the only justice for 9/11 is the death of Osama bin Laden and Zawahiri. Everything else that has happened since has been a huge and costly distraction from that goal.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> America shouldn't be out for "revenge." We should
> seek justice. And the only justice for 9/11 is the
> death of Osama bin Laden and Zawahiri. Everything
> else that has happened since has been a huge and
> costly distraction from that goal.

+1

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

Hahahahahahahahha Loose Change??
You really have no idea what I am talking about, maybe if you did some research into ANYTHING instead of spending all day on here you would actually make sense.

They Live!

Registered Fucknut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wow, you sure told him, Registered Voter!
>
> You are wise and all-knowing; I salute you!

Vince is a certified idiot. When he comes on and makes stupid ass statements he will get the same response. Feel free to troll all you want.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

At least 753,399 people have
been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq
since the U.S. and coalition attacks, based on lowest credible estimates.

source: http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

About 251 times as many people have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq than in the ghastly attacks of September 11, 2001. More than 108 times as many people have been killed in these wars and occupations than in all terrorist attacks in the world from 1993-2004. The 2004 report showed terrorism at an all-time high, and after numerous experts suggested that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were fueling the increase, subsequent reports have remained classified.

Well, if revenge was the goal, I'd say we knocked it out of the park. We sure showed those Afghani/ Iraqi bastards!

Justice, not so much.

Looks like the "100 times" threshold was pretty easy, after all.

Still no justice, though.

Damn, I hate when that happens.

______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.

A.B.D Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They Live!
Attachments:

A.B.D Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hahahahahahahahha Loose Change??
> You really have no idea what I am talking about,
> maybe if you did some research into ANYTHING
> instead of spending all day on here you would
> actually make sense.

A.B.D you are another whackjob like Vince. We don't have to disprove anything you stated as "facts" earlier as you did not provide any citation other than unsubstantiated rumor and falsehoods repeated from other conspiracy sites.

Charlie Sheen has bought into this shit hook line and sinker - but as has been pointed out many times, and you fail to acknowledge, this would presume a conspiracy of a very large size. Hell, if we could pull shit off like this, we would have gotten rid of Putin, or the Iranians a long time ago. Thing is, we haven't, and we didn't. For the timing of this, you would have to presume it started under the Clinton administration - so now you are taking a conspiracy across two administrations of different political parties. How likely is it that all these folks would conspire together to pull off something of this magnitude, and yet there have been no leaks or revelations - nothing. Just a bunch of kooks to include some loony in France who posted the first web site where he claimed a plane could not have flown into the Pentagon because the hole was too small. Thing is, he wasn't there, he has never been to the site to do measurements, look at debris, or do any form of analysis other than superimposing the picture of an airplane over a picture of the Pentagon. Hardly the basis of a full accident (or intentional attack) reconstruction analysis.

If you did any research, you would have seen the information about the recent Pentagon renovation where they upgraded the walls and building structure to be able to withstand a nuclear blast wave presuming they were not the direct target. Those kind of structural reinforcements will do a lot to slow down and minimize the impact of something like say, a plane. In particular the wings of a plane which are much more flimsy then hardened, reinforced concrete. In the case of the WTC buildings, they were just steel girders, so the areas between the structural members would have done little to slow down the parts of the wings that sheared off. Contrary to Rosie O'Donnell (another mental giant) who gets her information from other whackjob sites, it has been shown now by multiple University engineering departments and studies how the collapse of ALL 3 WTC buildings occurred, and why.

Until there is some smoking gun of real documentary footage showing the conspirators meeting, or real memos of planning, your obsession with this is nothing more than the ravings of extreme paranoia. You probably should talk to VInce and see if you can get the name of the doctor he sees - although based on his results, maybe not.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

fairfaxdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At least 753,399 people have
> been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq
> since the U.S. and coalition attacks, based on
> lowest credible estimates.
>...
> Looks like the "100 times" threshold was pretty
> easy, after all.
>
> Still no justice, though.
>
> Damn, I hate when that happens.

This was what? An attempt to take my statement and somehow compare it to something that had nothing to do with it?

The deaths "attributed to violence" in the civilian populace probably had a lot more to do with religious violence then it did anything the US did - but of course the study didn't really go into the real causes of the violence, just that it happened during and after the US went into Iraq so somehow the US was inferred to be responsible for all of them. I have no doubt US forces have killed some civilians, but I am sure that the majority of the true civilians killed had little to do with the US targeting them. There is no telling whether the folks killed were in the military, or the para-military groups there, or if they were counted double, as both a war casualty and a civilian casualty. But hey FF, you keep buying into the "American are murderers" crowd. We all know how evil the American soldier is - just ask John Kerry or Jack Murtha.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Now now RV. Let's keep this amicable and on topic about politics. There is no need for you to make personal attacks. You sound really angry and unstable, maybe you should take a break from FFXU for a while.

Sure there is. When folks are posting absolutely harebrained shit, they should expect someone to tell them they are fucknuts.

No anger, just the truth. You can read all the tone you want into my comments - that doesn't mean you have a clue how or what I feel when I write them.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Unregistered Don't Vote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Now now RV. Let's keep this amicable and on topic
> about politics. There is no need for you to make
> personal attacks. You sound really angry and
> unstable, maybe you should take a break from FFXU
> for a while.


OMG, is that retard still over-posting? Man, I'm sure glad I finally figured out how to put his lame ass on ignore. Makes for a much nicer FU experience. You should try it.

______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.

fairfaxdude Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OMG, is that retard still over-posting? Man, I'm
> sure glad I finally figured out how to put his
> lame ass on ignore. Makes for a much nicer FU
> experience. You should try it.

Good for you. Perhaps then you would stop obsessing over my other comments or commenting about me.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

It's not so much over-posting as it is being a lonely man that can't share his political views with anyone in real life.

Whatever anony-trollie

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Oh, it's SO much about over-posting....Trust me on that.

______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.

Unregistered Don't Vote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's not so much that I'm gay, I just have this hunger
> for male companionship because I am such a lonely man
> that can't share my political views with anyone in real
> life.

Sorry to hear that - must be why you don't vote, huh? I am not interested though - you might want to start talking to fairfaxdude, I think there is a thread on here somewhere that points out how totally gay he is. He would probably even meet you in a men's bathroom somewhere.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Did your wife leave you because of your internet addiction?

Unregistered Don't Vote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did your wife leave you because of your internet
> addiction?

Actually she went off with Vince(1) somewhere. I seem to remember he had a thread about that too. You know, the one where he said something about screwing my wife and my daughter I believe.

Did yours? (EDIT: Sorry, your significant other. I presume that is why you are trolling this place so much looking for action)

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/14/2009 05:58PM by Registered Voter.

About 3,000 people died in 9/11. 4,345 soldiers (and counting) died to avenge them, and we're no closer to doing so than were were on 9/12/2001.

I cannot reconcile the idea that the life of a civilian is somehow more important than the life of a soldier, but that's the reality of the situation. Everybody got all weepy when 3,000 Americans died, and then gleefully tossed over 4,000 more into a big, sandy meat grinder.

For what? To catch the people responsible for the attacks? They were already dead.

To catch the people who planned the attacks? Bin Laden will die of old age before he ever sees the inside of a courtroom. If he's killed in combat, he's an martyr, and will gain even more popularity in death (also known as the Tupac Effect).

To stop the threat of terrorism? Hardly. Persecution strengthens the resolve of the oppressed. In this case, we're talking about people that think dying for their cause is the best thing they can do with their life. And we're fighting the wars on their terms.

There is never any justice in war, and any notion that there is is nothing more than justification for war. If it's revenge we're seeking, then we officially cut off our nose to spite our face when the 2,977th soldier died.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

I dont think the Pentagon was hit by a missle nor do I think the WTC was destroyed in a controlled demolition. I never said either Mr Strawman.
All I said was the government let it happen. That only requires NOT ACTING.
The evidence is widely documented, you havent done any research I can already tell based on the STRAWMAN ARGUMENT you have made.
Keep it up, you've been exposed.

No, the Taliban and Al Queda still operate and now are even growing. We should of focused soley on Al Queda and Bin Laden and completed that job.

A.B.D Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I dont think the Pentagon was hit by a missle nor
> do I think the WTC was destroyed in a controlled
> demolition. I never said either Mr Strawman.
> All I said was the government let it happen. That
> only requires NOT ACTING.
> The evidence is widely documented, you havent done
> any research I can already tell based on the
> STRAWMAN ARGUMENT you have made.
> Keep it up, you've been exposed.

What, you mean when Clinton let Bin Laden out of his grasp a number of times when he could have arrested him or insisted he be arrested? What, the highly documented claim (from your source) that somehow Cheney ordered the stand down of the interceptions? Or that the FBI and others just let these guys train at flight schools and never brought them in? I mean that started under Clinton didn't it?

There is no strawman argument. You are a whackjob, and yes, you are exposed.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Lopter25 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, the Taliban and Al Queda still operate and
> now are even growing. We should of focused soley
> on Al Queda and Bin Laden and completed that job.

So what do you suggest? Invade Pakistan and Saudi Arabia? Since that is the only way (other than firing missiles and dropping bombs - that conveniently kill lots of civilians) to get at these folks right now.

EDIT: Maybe if your boy Obama would do what he said and pull all the troops out we could be having a different discussion later when it all shakes out. So far though he seems to believe we need to stay over there.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/14/2009 06:13PM by Registered Voter.

A.B.D Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I dont think the Pentagon was hit by a missle nor
> do I think the WTC was destroyed in a controlled
> demolition. I never said either Mr Strawman.
> All I said was the government let it happen. That
> only requires NOT ACTING.

Well, using that standard, the government is also responsible for Hurricane Katrina, that bridge collapse in Minneapolis (?), the bombing of the USS Cole, etc.

What could the government have done other than increase security at the airports? The hijackers would have gotten through anyway, because box cutters were not prohibited items back then. Even post-9/11, a guy smuggled a bomb on-board in his shoe, for chrissakes.

You make it sound like they knew who exactly was going to do what, and just looked the other way.

> The evidence is widely documented, you havent done
> any research I can already tell based on the
> STRAWMAN ARGUMENT you have made.
> Keep it up, you've been exposed.

There's also evidence that Bigfoot exists if you really want it to be true.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

This is one of a few US government officials who have come forward with claims of government collusion with terrorists.

The former head of the consulate office in Saudi Arabia has come forward saying they where routinely forced to give Visas to suspected terrorists and unqualified applicants. Here is an article about it:

Michael Springmann, head US consular official in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, later claims that during this period he is “repeatedly ordered … to issue
[more than 100] visas to unqualified applicants.”

He turns them down, but is repeatedly overruled by superiors. [BBC, 11/6/2001; St. Petersburg Times, 11/25/2001] In one case, two Pakistanis apply for visas to attend a trade show in the US, but they are unable to name the trade show or city in which it will be held.

When Springmann denies them a visa, he gets “an almost immediate call from a CIA case officer, hidden in the commercial section [of the consulate], that I should reverse myself and grant these guys a visa.”

Springmann refuses, but the decision is reversed by the chief of the consular section. Springmann realizes that even the ambassador, Walter Cutler, is aware of the situation, which becomes “more brazen and blatant” as time goes on. On one occasion Springmann is even told, “If you want a job in the State Department in future, you will change your mind.” [CBC Radio One, 7/3/2002; Trento, 2005, pp. 344-6] Springmann loudly complains to numerous government offices, but no action is taken.

He is fired and his files on these applicants are destroyed. He later learns that recruits from many countries fighting for bin Laden against Russia in Afghanistan were funneled through the Jeddah office to get visas to come to the US, where the recruits would travel to train for the Afghan war. According to Springmann, the Jeddah consulate was run by the CIA and staffed almost entirely by intelligence agents. This visa system may have continued at least through 9/11, and 11 of the 19 9/11 hijackers received their visas through Jeddah (see November 2, 1997-June 20, 2001), possibly as part of this program (see October 9, 2002 and October 21, 2002). [BBC, 11/6/2001; St. Petersburg Times, 11/25/2001; CBC Radio One, 7/3/2002; Associated Press, 7/17/2002 pdf file; Fox News, 7/18/2002]

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A.B.D Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I dont think the Pentagon was hit by a missle
> nor
> > do I think the WTC was destroyed in a
> controlled
> > demolition. I never said either Mr Strawman.
> > All I said was the government let it happen.
> That
> > only requires NOT ACTING.
>
> Well, using that standard, the government is also
> responsible for Hurricane Katrina, that bridge
> collapse in Minneapolis (?), the bombing of the
> USS Cole, etc.
>
> What could the government have done other than
> increase security at the airports? The hijackers
> would have gotten through anyway, because box
> cutters were not prohibited items back then.
> Even post-9/11, a guy smuggled a bomb on-board in
> his shoe, for chrissakes.


I think what ABD is saying is that is it that hard to believe that the government got wind of this operation and said "you know, this would really help us achieve our nefarious goals a lot quicker".

One of the main supporting arguments is this - and I'm not saying I believe it:

1. The gov't was conducting a drill of planes crashing into the WTC so a lot of air defenses were on "it's a drill - stand down" if they got wind of something like this. What are the odds of the drill happening at the same time as an identical situation in real life, in real time, on the same day?

2. When Payne Stewart's private jet lost oxygen somewhere above Oklahoma (or something) and everyone on board died - the plane flew on autopilot by itself. Once things were realized to be out of the norm, it was intercepted within minutes. How come the biggest city on the East Coast and the nation's capitol weren't under the same standard? (See #1).

I'm not endorsing or condemning anything, but is it so hard to believe that there could be alternative agendas within our own government that would be more than happy to use certain events to serve themselves?

__________________________________
That's not a ladybug, that's a cannapiller.

You make it sound like all this happened in 2001, but it didn't. This guy Springman was issuing VISAs in 1987 when George Bush Sr was in the Whitehouse and they were sending folks to Afghanistan. He is not saying he issued VISAs in 2001 to these folks, just that back when we were fighting the Soviets there with the CIA and Bin Laden, he used to be told to issue them. There is nothing to tie those events together. His only reason to believe this was true is reading an article in the LA Times - which could have also been referring to their initial visa issuance, long before 9.11.

http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpWESSEX/Documents/springmaninterview.htm

Quote

...
CBC: But you're quite sure that Mohammed Atta and others had their visas issued in Jeddah?
Springman: This is what I was told by reading an article in the Los Angeles Times.
CBC: Well, an intriguing tale and we thank you for telling us.
Springman: You're quite welcome.

December 29-31, 2000: Atta and Alshehhi Train on Flight Simulator; Uncertainty over Whether They Gain Skills Needed for 9/11 Attacks
(This was before Bush was in office)
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a122900attasimulator#a122900attasimulator

Quote

...
Having finished their flight training at Huffman Aviation and passed their commercial pilot license tests (see August 14-December 19, 2000), Mohamed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi spend December 29 and 30 at the SimCenter flight school at Opa-Locka Airport, near Miami. Saying they want to join an Egyptian airline and need experience in a large plane, they each pay $1,500 in cash and spend six hours, split over the two days, training in the school’s Boeing 727 simulator. Henry George, the school’s owner who trains them, describes their training as a “mini, mini introduction,” and they spend most of their time practicing maneuvers and turns. George later describes Atta and Alshehhi as “average pilots,” and says they are “quite ordinary. They were respectful and quiet almost to the point of being shy.” [New York Times, 9/15/2001; St. Petersburg Times, 9/27/2001; Aviation International News, 11/2001; BBC, 12/12/2001]
...

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lopter25 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No, the Taliban and Al Queda still operate and
> > now are even growing. We should of focused
> soley
> > on Al Queda and Bin Laden and completed that
> job.
>
> So what do you suggest? Invade Pakistan and Saudi
> Arabia? Since that is the only way (other than
> firing missiles and dropping bombs - that
> conveniently kill lots of civilians) to get at
> these folks right now.
>
> EDIT: Maybe if your boy Obama would do what he
> said and pull all the troops out we could be
> having a different discussion later when it all
> shakes out. So far though he seems to believe we
> need to stay over there.

I suggest we do exactly what Obama has proposed. Focus more money on intelligence and go straight for Al Queda with specific target teams.

Lopter26 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suggest we do exactly what Obama has proposed.
> Focus more money on intelligence and go straight
> for Al Queda with specific target teams.

I remember a time when we could just call this what it is: assassination. Gussy it up however you want, but that's not fighting a war, it's selectively murdering people.

I'm not against it, but let's be honest about the fact that he's talking about assassination.

--------------------------------------------------------------
13 4826 0948 82695 25847. Yes.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lopter25 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No, the Taliban and Al Queda still operate and
> > now are even growing. We should of focused
> soley
> > on Al Queda and Bin Laden and completed that
> job.
>
> So what do you suggest? Invade Pakistan and Saudi
> Arabia? Since that is the only way (other than
> firing missiles and dropping bombs - that
> conveniently kill lots of civilians) to get at
> these folks right now.
>
> EDIT: Maybe if your boy Obama would do what he
> said and pull all the troops out we could be
> having a different discussion later when it all
> shakes out. So far though he seems to believe we
> need to stay over there.


"Boy"?

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > We need to have Bin Laden and his number 2 guy
> > killed or captured. The concept of
> overwhelming
> > response against an attacker has been used by
> > every dominating military power since the
> > beginning of time...we have now joined the
> ranks
> > of the Alexander the Great...the Roman
> > Empire...and NazI Germany in utilizing what can
> > only be described as terrorist tactics.
>
> We joined those ranks a long time ago fucknut.
> Remember Hiroshima?
>
> You are a such a fucking idiot.


Is it possible to have a conversation without an insult? Are you so intent on beating your chest like a guerilla in the jungle?

My statement made no reference to when or what event put us on the list..your opionion that it started with Hiroshima...fine...that fact neither adds nor negates my original point...that overwhelming responses to attacks is a terrorist act....of no lesser and perhaps greater then 9/11. So our acts of revenge are meaningless...its all about corporate money supporting the military industrial complex.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fairfaxdude Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > OMG, is that retard still over-posting? Man,
> I'm
> > sure glad I finally figured out how to put his
> > lame ass on ignore. Makes for a much nicer FU
> > experience. You should try it.
>
> Good for you. Perhaps then you would stop
> obsessing over my other comments or commenting
> about me.


It seems as if anyone that challenges your lies is accused of being obsessive...and you get away with this behavior because you kiss the ass of the few powerhouses on here. You are a kiss-ass...a loud, seld absorbed big-mouth.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Actually Vince I only hound you because you make these absolutely over the top delusional posts. If you actually decided to converse about shit and stop calling people racists every time they disagree with you there might have been a different outcome. But you seriously need to get a grip.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

A.B.D Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I dont think the Pentagon was hit by a missle nor
> do I think the WTC was destroyed in a controlled
> demolition. I never said either Mr Strawman.
> All I said was the government let it happen. That
> only requires NOT ACTING.
> The evidence is widely documented, you havent done
> any research I can already tell based on the
> STRAWMAN ARGUMENT you have made.
> Keep it up, you've been exposed.


I do believe the Bush Administration turned a blind eye to Bin Laden hoping Al Qaeda would do something like another Cole bombing or blowing up an embassy in the Third World. Anything along the lines of a "Pearl Harbor-type event" to justify an invasion of Iraq. Unfortunately for Bush, Al Qaeda was more capable than they anticipated.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, we've killed or caused the death of
> thousands of civilians, so I think we've fulfilled
> the "eye for an eye" portion of revenge, if that's
> what you mean.
>
> But no, I don't think we "got revenge." We
> definitely haven't received justice.


I hope you're not going on some "Civilian Killers" rant.

MrMephisto Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lopter26 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I suggest we do exactly what Obama has proposed.
>
> > Focus more money on intelligence and go
> straight
> > for Al Queda with specific target teams.
>
> I remember a time when we could just call this
> what it is: assassination. Gussy it up however
> you want, but that's not fighting a war, it's
> selectively murdering people.
>
> I'm not against it, but let's be honest about the
> fact that he's talking about assassination.


An Assassination typically involves only one or two targets, and they are usually high-level leaders. If you go after a Terror cell however, that's not an Assassination, it's an Operation. Regardless, both are perfectly fine when speaking of Al-Qaeda, because they are not representative of any specific Nation, and therefore there exists no precedent based ramifications which might result from "Assassinating" Al-Qaeda Leadership (It's one of the reasons why we never attempted to Assassinate Russian Leaders for example, as we were in an agreement with them that such actions were completely off limits for either side).

BTW, we already have active "Hit Squads" in OIF, and OEF, and they are amazingly successful. Whenever they go after a target, they don't arrest either, they obliterate.

I think we brought some to justice, but ultimately did more harm than good. Terrorists still despise us and our global image suffered. Yeah they deserve what they got, but who actually got fucked in the end?

So let me get this straight...you do not think we should avenge 9/11?

I don't know much about you, but i KNOW you are a peacenik obama supporter.

communist scum.

I'm sorry to be a party pooper, but I don't think we should be seeking "revenge".

Emotional reactions are not always very effective.

I agreed with our initial invasion of Afghanistan, where we routed the taliban, who were the hosts of Al-Qaeda. And I know we were doing a good job in 2002 in chasing down and killing the leadership who orchestrated 9/11.

But after that, we sort of dropped the ball.

We really should have been much more proactive, and not taken any prisoners.

I know that GW had friends in Saudi Arabia, and we were hostage to their oil, but we should have made an ultimatum and told the saudi sand fools. We should have told them it is our way, or the highway, we should have told them they could continue supporting extremist fundamentalist islamic radicals, and be victim to our military might, or they could jump on board the capatilist bandwagon.

Why we failed to chase down the al qaeda leadership, I can only assume all kinds of conspiracy theories.

We had them, and we could have defeated them. Yet, we decided to attack Iraq, and open up a new front.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The function of conservatives is not to meet every liberal program or scheme with a denunciation or a destructive counterscheme, but rather to weigh its advantages and defects, supporting the first and challenging the second. A declaration of ideological warfare against liberalism is by its nature profoundly unconservative. It meets perceived radicalism with a counterradicalism of its own.

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/2012 10:18PM by Alias.

Alias Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thurston wrote:
>
> "I'm sorry to be a party pooper, but I don't think
> we should be seeking "revenge".
> ________________
>
> Thurston, as kids, if you had knocked me off my
> bike, I would have not only knocked you off
> yours, but you would have had major injuries and
> your bike would have thrown off a bridge.
>
> I like revenge. I like it alot.


I would have thrown you and your bike over the bridge.

I also like revenge.

Let's not get nasty. We all know how we are going to act as natural people.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The function of conservatives is not to meet every liberal program or scheme with a denunciation or a destructive counterscheme, but rather to weigh its advantages and defects, supporting the first and challenging the second. A declaration of ideological warfare against liberalism is by its nature profoundly unconservative. It meets perceived radicalism with a counterradicalism of its own.

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/2012 10:17PM by Alias.