Iraq has made us less safe, end of story - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-28-2006, 01:59 PM   #76
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
and your single anecdote proves what?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar...strial_complex


Eisenhower:

[q]A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction...
[/q]
Boy did Eisenhower have a brain. He's dead on about how a world power has no choice but to have strong national defense in order to prevent attacks.

But to dismiss personal testimonials altogether dismisses any that you have used on this forum.
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:01 PM   #77
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Those questions seem to be different don't they?
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
They're harboring more terrorist than Iraq was, where have you been?

Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Who - the Saudi government? Do you have anything to back this up?

Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
ANSWER THE QUESTION!

Was 9/11 funded by the Saudi government?

If so, can you back it up?

JUST WHAT IS SO DIFFERENT ABOUT THESE QUESTIONS?
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:05 PM   #78
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:44 AM
The very title of this thread is hilarious.

"Iraq has made us less safe, end of story"

Last time I checked, we haven't had an attack on US soil since 9/11.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:16 PM   #79
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 04:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
The very title of this thread is hilarious.

"Iraq has made us less safe, end of story"

Last time I checked, we haven't had an attack on US soil since 9/11.


i'm sure the Australians in Bali, the citizens of London and Madrid, the Iraqis and the Turks, are all happy for us.

read. the. report.

Iraq has given angry young men a "cause celebre" that is drawing more and more and more of them to Jihadism.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:17 PM   #80
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 04:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Boy did Eisenhower have a brain. He's dead on about how a world power has no choice but to have strong national defense in order to prevent attacks.

But to dismiss personal testimonials altogether dismisses any that you have used on this forum.


1. did you read the whole thing?
2. care to flesh out your anecdote, or are you just going to hold it up there?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:19 PM   #81
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i'm sure the Australians in Bali, the citizens of London and Madrid, the Iraqis and the Turks, are all happy for us.

read. the. report.

Iraq has given angry young men a "cause celebre" that is drawing more and more and more of them to Jihadism.
Honestly, Irvine - you think all those attacks are America's fault?

Or do you think that they are in fact results of Islamic Jihad against infidels and Muslims who don't convert by the sword?
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:21 PM   #82
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 04:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Honestly, Irvine - you think all those attacks are America's fault?

Or do you think that there IS in fact a result of Islamic Jihad against infidels and Muslims who don't convert by the sword?


i think there are a variety of factors, but one undeniable factor is the American response since 9-11, the ceterpiece of which is Iraq, that has rallied thousands of angry young men to the Jihadist movement against the west and resulted in the bombings i've highlighted (and Morocco, i forgot about the Morocco bombings).

George Bush and his thugs are making things worse, not better.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:22 PM   #83
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:44 AM
Al-Qaida in Iraq: 4,000 foreign fighters killed
Attacks urged during Ramadan in new tape purportedly from group's leader

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The new leader of al-Qaida in Iraq purportedly said Thursday in an audio message posted on a Web site that more than 4,000 foreign militants have been killed in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003 — the first apparent acknowledgment from the insurgents about their losses.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15044435/
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:25 PM   #84
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 03:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
They're harboring more terrorist than Iraq was, where have you been?

Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Who - the Saudi government? Do you have anything to back this up?

Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
ANSWER THE QUESTION!

Was 9/11 funded by the Saudi government?

If so, can you back it up?

JUST WHAT IS SO DIFFERENT ABOUT THESE QUESTIONS?
You don't see a difference in harboring and funding?

Come on Mac!!! This is that stubborn thing I was talking earlier about...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:38 PM   #85
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i think there are a variety of factors, but one undeniable factor is the American response since 9-11, the ceterpiece of which is Iraq, that has rallied thousands of angry young men to the Jihadist movement against the west and resulted in the bombings i've highlighted (and Morocco, i forgot about the Morocco bombings).
The Islamic Militant movement is nothing new, it's been around for centuries.

However, when Al Qaida declared a Jihad - translated "struggle" in English (ahem, Mein Kampf, anyone?) against the United States, the warriors packed up from both sides. Americans joined the military with a boost of patriotism that motivated them to fight for their nation's survival. Jihadists spewed out anti-Western hatred in order to recruit more terrorists.

It appears that you refuse to take sides in this matter, only to throw punches at a president you and many others don't agree with on socio-economic policies. If the Republicans did the same thing under FDR, it would be very tough to imagine the end result.

Quote:
http://www.military.com/Resources/ResourceFileView?file=AlQaida-Organization.htm

There have been no attacks on U.S. soil since September 11, but al Qaeda appears to be persevering in its efforts. The New York Times quotes a U.S. intelligence official who says that six Arab men have been secretly arrested in the U.S. on suspicion that they were scouting new targets to hit. The chief worry remains that al Qaeda will somehow obtain weapons of mass destruction and strike a major blow within the U.S.
It is time to realize what we're up against.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:39 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


You don't see a difference in harboring and funding?
How about harboring by funding?

Do you believe that the Saudi government had anything to do with 9/11?
What can you prove?
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:43 PM   #87
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 03:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
How about harboring by funding?

Do you believe that the Saudi government had anything to do with 9/11?
What can you prove?
LOL now you are stretching. Harboring by definition does not require funding, it can, but by definition doesn't need any funding involved.

I never stated the Saudi government had any direct part in 9/11.

But this wasn't the original issue. The original issue was you said we went after those who harbored terrorist. That is indeed not the case.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:48 PM   #88
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 04:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
The Islamic Militant movement is nothing new, it's been around for centuries.


no one is saying it's new, we're saying it's getting worse because of American policies in the Middle East.

[q]However, when Al Qaida declared a Jihad - translated "struggle" in Arabic (ahem, Mein Kampf, anyone?) against the United States, the warriors packed up from both sides. Americans joined the military with a boost of patriotism that motivated them to fight for their nation's survival. Jihadists spewed out anti-Western hatred in order to recruit more terrorists.[/q]

is this a novel you're writing? i don't understand what you're talking about here at all.

[q]It appears that you refuse to take sides in this matter, only to throw punches at a president you and many others don't agree with on socio-economic policies. If the Republicans did the same thing under FDR, it would be very tough to imagine the end result.[/q]

okay, that's it. take your McCarthyism and shove it up your ass. i have been very clear on my opinions, and not once have i equivocated between nihilistic jihadism and american foreign policy. how dare you twist my words to render me into some sort of masturbatory fantasy liberal who sympathizes with terrorists. i know people who died on 9-11. i know people who ran out of the burning buildings. i live in a primary target for future terrorism. don't, FOR A SECOND, stand there and lecture to me about the threat we face and that you somehow have a greater, more visceral understanding of it than i do. we disagree on how to ADDRESS this threat, and one of the reasons i am getting so ticked off is that it's because of people like who who want to pretend they're in some sort of apocalyptic video game and want to play sheriff that i am LESS SAFE than i was on september 10, 2001. it is your jingoism, your cowboy dick swinging, your certitude, your righteousness, your zealotry, your absolutism, your cultural vanity, that has enabled a president to destroy this nation's integrity and put the liberty of individual americans in peril.



Quote:
It is time to realize what we're up against.
firstly, you are probably 40,000x more likely to die in a car accident than be killed by a terrorist, so let's not go around overestimating our own importance.

the REAL threat we face is not the jihadist, but WHAT THE JIHADIST CAN FORCE US TO DO UNTO OURSELVES THROUGH THE PERCEPTION OF THREAT AND THE FEAR IT CAUSES.

and the fact that the current torture bill is going to set our civilization back 900 years is evidence of ANOTHER major al-qaeda victory.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:49 PM   #89
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 05:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
I never stated the Saudi government had any direct part in 9/11.
Exactly - so why the bloody hell would you invade a country just because 19 Al Qaida hijackers were responsible for 9/11 - without government involvement?!

Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
But this wasn't the original issue. The original issue was you said we went after those who harbored terrorist. That is indeed not the case.
If you can't comprehend that Saddam did in fact fund Islamic Terrorism, then that explains just about everything.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 09-28-2006, 02:53 PM   #90
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 03:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Exactly - so why the bloody hell would you invade a country just because 19 Al Qaida hijackers were responsible for 9/11 - without government involvement?!

If you can't comprehend that Saddam did in fact fund Islamic Terrorism, then that explains just about everything.
I NEVER SAID WE SHOULD INVADE SA. I SAID GIVEN YOUR LOGIC WE SHOULD HAVE. YOUR ORIGINAL STATEMENT WAS FAULTY!!!

LOOK BACK AT WHAT YOU STATED!!!
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com