Think somone's a terrorist?

Post Reply New Topic

See what a mess we get in when we let the NTs run things?

Aspieness rules!

It's time Aspies ruled.

Mourn the reign of the dogs, long live the reign of the cats!

this is a news and current events forum... not just for AS...

this is very very narrowminded.. most of the soliders over there don't want to be there.. a family member of mine! its horrible that people say this.. and make these guys feel like crap.. 9/11 happened in my back yard! and if you don't like these governments then by all means go to North Korea or communist China... it irratates me that people knock the soliders, gov't or the US in general when if you lived in some place else lets see how well your view it tolerated! i think you can not agree with the choices of our leaders but that gives you no reason to be calling soliders horrible names like this.. feel free to take your arse over to the other side!

Yet to the people whos country your brother has invaded, he is every bit the terrorist. If he is lacking the courage of his convictions (you say he is not wanting to be there) then he should be brave and refuse to serve.

As to the government and they're willing stormtroopers, they are criminals and terrorists of the highest order.

I have no need to take "my arse over to the other side" as i see the Iraqi resistance is doing a thorough job of executing the willing slaves and criminals that your "government" has dispatched to that sovereign nation.

with all due respect, iraq was not involved in 911

That, of course, is at this point, irrelevant, as Bush has gotten troops over there.

I do not condemn the soldiers, unless they are the sort who kill/rape/torture Iraqi civilians for fun or retaliation. I condemn the politicians. I do agree that Saddam needed to be dealt with sometime, but this was just rushed. In the end, it is not really the foreign soldiers or the insurgents who are winning, but rather, the Iraqi people who are losing, thanks to both sides....

There is no winner in war. Yet to say that the Iraqi people are not better to fight for their freedom is wrong.

In fact the Iraqi people and the national resistance movement is one and the same.

By the Iraqi people winning and defeating racist and genocidal imperialism they securing themselves their culture, pride and economy.

Iraq will be liberated when all usa and IMF laws legitimizing the theft and rape of the Iraqi people are thrown into the rubbish bin alongside the soldiers and criminals whom invaded.


ps You say it is irrelevant that the criminal usa administration lied that Iraq was involved in 9/11. I strongly disagree, for when that lie is brought before an international war crimes trial I am sure the Iraqis will be using it as more evidence of the usa criminality in Iraqs suing for thousands of billions damages.

*Snort* like the US would pay out even if they got found guilty

I do not say that is irrelevant morally, but the horse has damned well bolted. Saying that Iraq was not involved with al-Qaeda now would be like saying to Edward Teller "Oh look, the atmosphere is being consumed by a nuclear blast." on his deathbed. In other words, it's nearly useless to say it now....

I hate to say this, but the US will wriggle out of those charges, if they are even brought against them. The Yanks seem to be able to walk all over everyone lately, which was pretty much what this thread was about in the first place. And this attitude isn't new. After WW2, and the beginning of the Cold War, I think someone said that now they should make the world safe not for democracy, but rather safe for the United States.

Regardless, the Iraqi resistance has delivered just days ago the surrender conditions to the american and other imperial forces. The gangsters baulked as the terms did not include the proviso that the yanks could steal at will of the Iraqi people. No matter! The IR will sink america to its knees and then offer again the same surrender terms.

Why? Most of what was said about him was lies to justify the invasion after it was clear we were lied to about WMD.

If you want to get rid of evil dictators, what about Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe?

I think there is a good chance Sadam will get off his charges in court. Sure he used brutal measures against sections of the Iraqi peoples, but that was necessary in order to hold the country together, as is now demonstrated by Iraq sinking into civil war now under the supervision of the "coalition of the willing".

Don't blame only Bush, Blair and Howard were right there lying to use about the need for invasion too.

BTW - would you think its a terrorist act to shoot out highway speed cameras

I would think it a criminal act, not a terrorist act. And more of a nuisance than anything else....

The US couldn't give a flying f*** about Mugabe, as he seems no threat to them. The UK and Australia do, but the Yanks don't, which is surprising given their attitude to many Africans within their country.

(Personally, I'd drag Mugabe off his chair and make him do farming. After all, he forced the English out, and failed to get anyone competent to actually make the farms productive for his people)

I'm a bit ambivalent as to whether Saddam will get off. On one, hand, he unified Iraq. But on the other, he is still reviled by many Iraqis in his dictatorship. And what about the massacre of the Kurds? A fine act for someone supposedly modelling himself after Saladin (who himself was a Kurd).

I do blame Blair and Howard. I reckon it was a case of Blair being shit-scared of being left behind, while little Johnnie Howard was merely sucking up Bush's arse.

I have to admit I was one of the people who thought that invading iraq to get rid of Saddam was a good idea. Subsequent events have obviously proven that I was wrong. I wish my government would just say the same thing and be done with it.

But I'm not sure I like the other side all that much better. Help me out some. Can somebody tell me a few cases where islamic militant freedom fighters have produced anything resembling a free society?