Read This.. Peacelovers.. Question Yourself Once More...

[Lemonite]

Read what the leaders of the Taliban and Al Queda are saying... If any american/canadian.. OH ExCUSE ME.. United STATIAN.. Hah.. such a horrible attempt to take away our songs/patriotism... But anyways, read this and then tell me if you don't want these people dead.... "Bin Laden?s chief strategist, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, interjected, ?If you go to BBC reports, you will find that 30 nuclear weapons are missing from Russia?s nuclear arsenal.? He added, ?We have links with Russian underworld channels.? Interviewed by the BBC last week, Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar made apocalyptic warnings about ?the destruction of America. The plan is going ahead and, God willing, it is being implemented,? he ranted. ?It is a huge task which is beyond the will and comprehension of human beings. If God?s help is with us this will happen in a short period of time. Keep in mind this prediction.?

Cheers to War and God Bless America.

 

[z edge]

nuke them before they nuke us

 

[Amna]

You refer to Peace lovers as something negative? Why so? If you are against peace, then why do u like U2....?
Peace On Earth
Amna

 

[Lemonite]

No, it's not a 'peacelovers' negativity sort of thing like i'm this big war monger.. I have stated before on this forum that peace is teh ultimate goal... yet there are just different ways of obtaining it, and in this particular instance, war and the regretful, but necessary destruction that comes with it is how peace .. and practically the only way peace can be obtained... As for the u2 referenec, I have not heard Bono yet lambast America for the war.. he has given out a part of a solution, but he has never said anyting about '''STOP THE WAR... ALL WE ARE SAYING'' sort of schtick... Peacelovers is just a sweeping arrogant generalization to those who write about 'let us sit around a table and talk with the taliban.. let us frisk ourselves, but let them walk in unfrisked, unchecked and let them say, or blow up their piece....'... Just an internet shortcut for saving typing.. though i end up explaining it in a long post.. hah.. gotta love the irony.. Zoo TV at it's best... though i do end up disagreeing (spelled right?) on many issues with bono, but that's for another post... because it'd be too difficult to explain the ones i do agree wit him on.. and now i'm rambling.. get me to amazon .. grinch dvd comes out tomorrow..

 

[Angela Harlem]

It doesn't require war to kill one man or many men. You say war equals peace. You know how ludicrous that can sound as it wont lead to peace. And why? Because after the Taliban, there will be another group. And if not America as the target, then some other country. It is a vicious cycle that will not see an end in our lifetimes. Human beings will never live in peace. I dont believe it anyway. With such a vast range of social, political and religious views, it doen't seem possible. Also with hate as rampant as it is in some groups, it leads to the insanity and lack of clarity by people such as the Taliban and Al Queda. Does this type of thinking ever fade away? Can it be fazed out in the next generation? I dont think so. I would like to see them killed, simply because of their actions. I want peace, even though I dont belive it possible. I just dont think dropping some bombs on Afghanistan is going to achieve your end. And with the statement posted above, I dont give credence to words said by a man who is so distorted with hate. I dont see a person such as himself having much sanity. By all means I dont mean brush him off, but I will not have faith in or respect the words of an individual I would under any circumstance call insane.

 

[Klodomir]

I agree with what Angela Harlem is saying - I wouldn't put too much trust in the ramblings of a bunch of terrorists. They know they are in big trouble and are grasping at straws, trying to scare America and its allies out of Afghanistan.

So I'm not going to take that very seriously - just as I don't take someone who says "cheers to war" seriously.

One positive point, though. I'm glad that you are willing to admit that "peacelovers" in this context is a sweeping arrogant generalization.

 

[Lemonite]

Oh.. Angel of harlema point completely agreed with.. But sadly, it's a vicious cycle that we will HavE to continue on with until there is a one world philosophy that hillary clinton wants to implement, as it peace is truly not possible... and yes, cheers... hyperbole for effect, as it gets the point across.. but how about this.. Cheers to the largest cease fire in history.. a worldwide one..! hah..i'm off to breakfast.

 

[Bathtime Fun Whortense]

hysterical

*yawn*

------------------
~whortense wiffin
walla walla, washington

 

[sv]

Scenario: So John Wayne Gacy (a serial child rapist/murderer from the late 1970s in Chicago - 33 killed) flees from the police and hides in a classroom of 50 schoolchildren. You are the chief of police and you arrive at the school in hot pursuit. You enter the classroom, and Gacy has surrounded himself with children. It doesn't seem possible to get him (alive or dead) without killing lots of children.
Do you get a machine gun and open fire, killing everyone in the room including Gacy and the children?

If you say yes, in my opinion you are a brutal human rights abuser and child-murderer - your basic goal was to punish Gacy and not to prevent innocent deaths. Your thirst for punishment far outweighed your stated aim of making the world safer for innocent people.

If you say no (and I certainly hope all of you said no), WHY IS IT ANY DIFFERENT IF THE CHILDREN ARE FROM AFGHANISTAN?????????

Do you think the women and children of Afghanistan voted to have Osama spend a few years in their country? Did they vote to have him murder 5000 Americans? Did these civilians have any choice whatsoever? If not, why is his murder/capture considered adequate justification to murder them? Since when does our thirst for vengeance outweigh the right of an Afghani child to live?

If you say this is about deterrance not vengeance, making the short-term deaths worth the long-term lives saved, let's first remember that these were suicide bombers - apparently fear of death is not a particularly strong deterrant. The U.S. has been bombing someone or other for years - doesn't seem to have scared these people. History shows that murder doesn't deter.

If you say we can take away their technical capabilities to commit such acts, that argument might hold water if the U.S. (and the other Security Council nations) wasn't selling every possible form of arms to the highest bidders all over the world. General Electric, Boeing, Lockheed, Honeywell . . . lots of money in murder. America's best companies, right? Murderers tend to find weapons if they are being offered for sale. Ask the veterans of the Gulf War, who were expecting fire from bows and arrows, not the sidewinder missiles they got. So as long as there are terrorists, they will find weapons.

So murdering innocent civilians to prevent terrorism has little chance of working, on pragmatic grounds. On moral grounds, this plan fails miserably.

 

[Amna]

This is such a tough subject.....

 

[Lilly]

NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS! i will repeat that again *NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS*!!! NO! yea, they are crazy as somebody sniffing paint, but nukes just kill everybody in the end. a part of me wants to pee my pants at their statements. but the overriding part of me (because i still haven't recovered from 9/11) says they're bs'ing us. i hope and pray to God that they have nothing planned. war is fine, but i cannot handle living with the fear that i could go to school one day and downtown minneapolis/st. paul were bombed. it's not even fathomable to me to understand it! the worse part is that other countries live with this fear ALL of the time. but i'm in AMERICA! we aren't supposed to be bombed here. and if we are, we are supposed to be able to go to war and win quickly...i'm confused as anybody else on this one...personal conflicts vs world conflicts...ug.

------------------
Go lightly down your darkened way.

 

[Patti Jones]

Originally posted by Lemonite:
Read what the leaders of the Taliban and Al Queda are saying... If any american/canadian.. OH ExCUSE ME.. United STATIAN.. Hah.. such a horrible attempt to take away our songs/patriotism...

OH MY GOD! Im starting to undestand why we treat each other that badly...you are not undestanding me, and Im not undestanding you. When I say United Statian is a way for myself to make you note that you are fron the US. I want to stress your nationality and patriotism. If I say Im american I can be Argentinian, United Statian, Cuban, Mexican or from whatever other country you wish, like if I say Im european, 'cos America and Europe are continents...I cant believe your lake of patriotism...arent you proud of your country? So, if you are, why do you make yourself call like the whole continent? Looks as if you dont want everybody to know of wich part of it you are.

Originally posted by Lemonite:
But anyways, read this and then tell me if you don't want these people dead.... "Bin Laden?s chief strategist, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, interjected, ?If you go to BBC reports, you will find that 30 nuclear weapons are missing from Russia?s nuclear arsenal.? He added, ?We have links with Russian underworld channels.? Interviewed by the BBC last week, Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar made apocalyptic warnings about ?the destruction of America. The plan is going ahead and, God willing, it is being implemented,? he ranted. ?It is a huge task which is beyond the will and comprehension of human beings. If God?s help is with us this will happen in a short period of time. Keep in mind this prediction.?

Cheers to War and God Bless America.

No, to be true I want this ppl in prison forever, but not dead. When they kill they think they have a good point to do it. So if you kill them 'cos you have a good point to do it you are just as lame as they are. And also, 'cos the God you trust in is the only one who can give or take life.
And BTW, making a parking lot out of Afganistan does not ensure you that terrorism will never attack you again, it is the exactly opossite. And to get a little peace you will have to bomb the whole world, includding your country, because you have terrorist bases there too...
Why don't you just try to find out why does "some countries hates the US" (In you ex-pres Clinton words). And please, tell me you didnt swallow that Bush's bullshit of "they hate this" as he pointed at the congress. I dont want to have a president that won in the way Bush has...I will be really ashamed...and believe me tons of countries too...
Peace!...I should stop it and quit once at all...but I just can't...


------------------
Patti
-Pride Girl-

[This message has been edited by Patti Jones (edited 11-21-2001).]

 

[U2Bama]

It is doubtful that nuclear weapons will come into play in this conflict, and I can ASSURE that the United States and our allied forces will not use nuclear weapons against Afghanistan or any of the other future targets in this conflict. If anyone uses them, it will be a terrorist group who obtained them via the black market or Sadam Hussien/Iraq, although even that is highly unlikely.

But actually, Patti, most of the terrorist probably DO hate the U.S. Congress.

~U2Alabama

 

[Patti Jones]

Originally posted by U2Bama:
But actually, Patti, most of the terrorist probably DO hate the U.S. Congress.

~U2Alabama

Yeah, but that's not why they attacked you.
Love,

------------------
Patti
-Pride Girl-

 

[U2Bama]

Right, it's because of our presence in the Middle East. Kind of like how redneck racists in America don't like it when African-Americans move into their neighborhoods.

Celebrate Diversity.

~U2Alabama

 

[pub crawler]

Originally posted by U2Bama:
It is doubtful that nuclear weapons will come into play in this conflict, and I can ASSURE that the United States and our allied forces will not use nuclear weapons against Afghanistan or any of the other future targets in this conflict.

Wow, I really do wish I could say I have that kind of confidence.

 

[U2Bama]

So you think we are going to "nuke" Afghanistan?

 

[pub crawler]

Not necessarily. I'm just thinking about the comments made by Congressman Steve Buyer of Indiana. He's the guy who supports the idea of possibly leveling a "tactical nuclear strike" against Afghanistan.

 

[J-Tree]

I don't believe anyone is gonna be nuking anybody. It wouldn't be in the interests of the United States or the Taliban. I know there will be some counter-arguements on the basis that the Taliban don't fear death and thus, disregard life. But how does self-destruction perpetuate one's cause?

I don't believe in vengence/revenge either. I understand the desire for it because, quite frankly, I'd like to see people held accountable but not in such a way as the innocent are punished as well. As sv pointed out, human rights violations for the sake of revenge is deplorable and shouldn't even be considered.

But what concerns me more than just the want for revenge is the obsession with it... if anything perpetuates this war, it'll be that reason... the need to "get back" at them.

------------------
Hey Nico, stay strong in this world.
My girl, ignore their cold words.
The song of your heart's so true, the sai is a way for you.
Hey Nico, stay strong in this world, my girl.

SlipStream Soul

 

[Lemonite]

Originally posted by Patti Jones:
No, to be true I want this ppl in prison forever, but not dead. When they kill they think they have a good point to do it. So if you kill them 'cos you have a good point to do it you are just as lame as they are. And also, 'cos the God you trust in is the only one who can give or take life.
And BTW, making a parking lot out of Afganistan does not ensure you that terrorism will never attack you again, it is the exactly opossite. And to get a little peace you will have to bomb the whole world, includding your country, because you have terrorist bases there too...
Why don't you just try to find out why does "some countries hates the US" (In you ex-pres Clinton words). And please, tell me you didnt swallow that Bush's bullshit of "they hate this" as he pointed at the congress. I dont want to have a president that won in the way Bush has...I will be really ashamed...and believe me tons of countries too...
Peace!...I should stop it and quit once at all...but I just can't...

The whole reason I am against having them put into prison is because.. Can you imagine what would happen in a trial.. It isn't such a far fetched idea that they'd get off on some sort of mistrial or aquittal.. I know it seems like a wacky idea, but you have to agree that it is not completely impossible... and also.. Say they are put in prison, first of all, they'd become some sort of mythical figure during the trials, but then it just came out that some other al queda member was actually coordinating terrorist acts from prison.. Is this waht we want?.. Hopefully it'll be like a Mussolini situation where the people will drag him through the streets and take care of the leaders.. bin laden omar and such.. And one more thing.. i guess while i'm at it.. What is this horrible horrible way that Bush won presidency..? Get over it.. He won .. that was the final outcome, the courts decided it... The large majority of tis country is ecstatic with how he's performing.. sadly he inherited clinton's piss poor economy, but no one will realize that he's rolling off of what clinton did to mess up the economy.. but anyways.. I'm out...

~Mullah Omar's Second Eye

 

[Lemonite]

Originally posted by pub crawler:
Not necessarily. I'm just thinking about the comments made by Congressman Steve Buyer of Indiana. He's the guy who supports the idea of possibly leveling a "tactical nuclear strike" against Afghanistan.

I also doubt that nuclear weapons will come into play.. they can take care of what they need to with the bombs and special ops.. Here's to knowing our special forces are as bad ass as they're touted...

 

[U2Bama]

Putting The Osama and his thugs in prison will only lead to them being used as ransom/bargaining chips in future hostage-based terrorist acts undertaken by their misguided followers.

~U2Alabama

[This message has been edited by U2Bama (edited 11-22-2001).]

 

[A|catura]

Originally posted by U2Bama:
Right, it's because of our presence in the Middle East. Kind of like how redneck racists in America don't like it when African-Americans move into their neighborhoods.

Celebrate Diversity.

~U2Alabama

Perfect! Couldn't have said it better myself!! It's funny that most people don't want to admit that the ENTIRE problem we are facing today is due to RACISM. Bin Laden, Al Queda and the Taliban are global BIGOTS!!!!

U2Bama, that's a perfect summary!!!

Celebrate Diversity. AMEN!!!




------------------
-------------------------------------------

"I have a brother, when I'm a brother in need. I spend my whole time running. He spends his running after me."

 

[sv]

Interesting how confident we are that the U.S. wouldn't use nukes first. In the face of very contradictory history.

Hmm - let's see. . . Who DID use nukes first? Gee it was the U.S. And not while the outcome of the 2nd world war was in doubt - this occurred well after we knew we had won, during the mopping-up phase.

Who used napalm extensively to not only kill about 3 million Vietnamese, Laotians, and Cambodians, but to convert some of the most arable land in the world into a virtual desert, ruining any future hope of recovery in that region? Gee it was the U.S.

Who makes and stocks weaponized anthrax? Gee we now learn that the U.S. is one of these countries. Are we doing this to hit military targets or for "deterrance"? Unlikely. The only reason to possess weaponized anthrax is to offensively destroy a civilian population. What the hell business does anyone have with that stuff?????

So while our bombs are enough to destroy a stone-age civilization in Afghanistan, I wouldn't be so sure about the U.S. being unwilling to use nuclear weapons. And not just to defend us from attack. I wish I could be that confident in our govenment, but a look at history just doesn't support that assessment.

 

[sv]

oh yeah, and let's not forget Agent Orange.