Dad... what is a terrorist?

[amadeus]

Originally posted by nonconformist
So Che is a terrorist in your eyes? BOO FRIGGIN HOO! He isn't a terrorist.

And someone wuith an avatar with such a stupid expression should not be making remarks about other's avatars, thank you very much.

again.

That's Ed O'Neill, (former) TV sitcom actor of Married With Children.

 

[nonconformist]

Maj, I seem to have misunderstood. I thought you meant that the rules of war and international law were useless, and should not exist.

rmsharpe, I apologise for my little outburst, and hope you did not take offence. I still have no idea who that person in your avatar is .

 

[Civvin]

Originally posted by nonconformist
Maj, I seem to have misunderstood. I thought you meant that the rules of war and international law were useless, and should not exist.

rmsharpe, I apologise for my little outburst, and hope you did not take offence. I still have no idea who that person in your avatar is .

Rmsharpe's avatar is a picture of Al Bundy who is the central figure on the American sitcom 'Married With Children' Al, who is an unhappily married shoe salesman, is often the central butt of the joke for many of the shows storylines. The show typically consists of 30 minutes of 'bathroom' jokes and sophmoric humor.

 

[Maj]

22 and a half minutes

 

[nonconformist]

Look, we are all together now, in our laughing a at noncon because he doesn't know who Al Bundy is. It brings a glow to my heart. All together now: aahhhhh........

 

[samildanach]

terrorist [n] - an unconventional weapon, particularly effective against women and children.

islamic terrorist [n] - rubbish variant of the common terrorist. Will often be deployed in strategically and tactically inept ways. For instance they are often deployed against heavy armour where they explode upon contact and form an aesthetically displeasing veneer on the vehicles.

 

[Civvin]

Originally posted by nonconformist
Look, we are all together now, in our laughing a at noncon because he doesn't know who Al Bundy is. It brings a glow to my heart. All together now: aahhhhh........

I'm not laughing at you, the show is lame, and the sad thing is, there's millions of Al Bundys in America.

 

[nonconformist]

The problem with CFC is it cannt convey sarcasm. If it could, then you would probablyy have realised I was being sarcastic .
In think we need the addition ofn some [sarcasm] tags [/sarcasm].

 

[Stefan Haertel]

That is an unfortunate result of war.

Right...

 

[andrewgprv]

Originally posted by MrPresident
A terrorist is a person who deliberately targets innocent civilians to inflict pain, death, or destruction of property, in order to foster a widespread feeling of terror within the population at large, for political purposes.

So the American Bombers in WW2 were terrorists?

 

[amadeus]

We didn't bomb their cities for political purposes. We bombed their cities for victory.

Besides, you're comparing the doctrines and rules of today to conflicts of the past.

 

[Civvin]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
We didn't bomb their cities for political purposes. We bombed their cities for victory.

Here comes the cliche...but so very true

War is a continuation of politics by other means.

 

[Smidlee]

Is terrorism always an evil act is another good question? We (USA) uses terrorism to end WWII with Japan with two nukes and a threat with one we didn't have. Did we save more lives in the long run by useing those nukes?
the main different now is terrorism is now used by small religious groups instead of world government which makes it more like guerrilla warfare than fighting a nation. So today terrorists are more like religious guerrillas uprisings againest a world government power. the worst part will be this may force the world's powers once again try to control and join a religion or church to counter these terrorists. while I didn't totally agree going into Iraq the start with ,I now believe democracy (USA) can't afford to lose this war since a defeat here would now come back to haunt us later.

 

[crystal]

Originally posted by nonconformist
The problem with CFC is it cannt convey sarcasm. If it could, then you would probablyy have realised I was being sarcastic .
In think we need the addition ofn some [sarcasm] tags [/sarcasm].

Maybe it's just the interpretation skills of the audience.

 

[covok48]

"Maybe it's just the interpretation skills of the audience."

Or a sad excuse to bail out when the argument doesn't go in one's favor...

 

[Knowze Gungk]

What's the difference between targeting & killing a large ammount of civillians, and not targeting them, but also, not taking enough care to avoid them & killing an equal or larger amount as a result?

The difference is they're them & we're us.

Because we're not them, we cannot comprehend their daily suffering, caused by living on a battle field.
And because they're not us, they just fail to understand that we only have the best of intentions, and it's their welfere we are killing them for, after all.

That's the funny thing about the middle east, they get real stroppy when it comes to a foreign invasion. They've always been stubbborn like that.

 

[amadeus]

Originally posted by Knowze Gungk
...we cannot comprehend their daily suffering, caused by living on a battle field.

What do you call the post-9/11 world then?

The entire planet is a battlefield. Israelis would tell you for sure.

 

[De Lorimier]

Originally posted by rmsharpe
What do you call the post-9/11 world then?

The entire planet is a battlefield. Israelis would tell you for sure.

The entire world is a battlefield? Maybe a potential one but not more.
Don't tell me you can understand, you can comprehend the daily suffering of people in Israel, Palestine, Iraq or Afghanistan because of 9/11. The day bombs start falling over Minnesota you'll be able to make that claim.

 

[amadeus]

Bombs won't be falling over Minnesota. It's too late to elect Carter/Mondale again.

 

[De Lorimier]

Typical rmsharpe.
How clever of you!