k thx

Ones without cocks? Ones without cockrings? Ones without sons? Sometimes, I don't think I wanna know.

Woohoo! Where shall I stick it?

Ooh, kinky. So, you gonna by me a ring?

Dammit, that means I'm gonna have to wear a dress. And it aint gonna be white...

Eddie sucks. Iron Maiden sucks. Heavy metal sucks. You suck. That is all.

Stabilise the region. OH! <smacks herself in the forehead> That's what we should be doing?! Well thank God we have you around to clue us in! Where's the President? I need to tell him that we should be stabilising the region!!! My God what a fucking revelation! I'M BLINDED BY THE LIGHT OF TRUTH Well, fuck me, but I thought that's exactly what we WERE doing by killing, capturing, and hunting them. But no! Obviously we should be doing something else entirely! Will you enlighten us, O great bodhisattva of wisdom? Shit! You're right! You're SO RIGHT! Not living under the lash of a sadistic tyrant doesn't improve anyone's quality of life! I mean who cares about the freedom to speak your mind without being tortured, raped, and shot in the head? The Iraqi people sure don't! We need to start handing out welfare cheques to them instead of hunting down the Ba'athists! That should improve their quality of life! Yay! And then we'll win a big fucking prize for being the Best Loved Country In The Whole Wide Wide World! YAAAAAYYYYY Yeah! Stop those embarrassing stories, who gives a shit about the First Amendment! And I'll bet they aren't bothering to plan anything of the sort on their own! They're waiting for college kids in the States to come up with ideas and write about them in the papers so they can figure out what to do! Damn those cunning Al-Qaeda bastards! Where's the President?!!! Yeah, it's all obvious, but it's also not happening. Iraqis are rebelling, and more and more are turning to Saddams side. Airport security is still shit, and poor enough for people around the world to notice it. Bin Ladin is still on the loose, and seemingly an afterthought to many people. America is not endearing itself to the rest of the world, and when something bites you, you don't keep teasing it. What would your solution be Marney. Do you think America's safe from terrorism, and if not, how would you change that?

Cool, let's get married. It can be the first TSM wedding!

You know you love me.

Excellent. Why?

That's way too general a statement. What if their relatives disagreed with them? Only a very small amount of people will become terrorists because of our actions, and it was likely that they would have become terrorists anyways. Another question: If killing terrorists only creates more terrorists, why fight them? Are you suggesting that we just stop fighting them? And I completely disagree with your statement on the War on Terror: They thought we were after them long before Bush declared the War on Terror. To simply think that they are coming in force now is because we are embroiled in a War on Terror is naive; it's more a result of our foreign policy and action being strictly centered around the Middle East, creating more openings for Terrorist attacks on our troops that is occuring. They may HAVE been normal people, but once one makes the jump to killing people to complete a political objective they have fallen outside the norm. A serial killer could be a normal person before, but once he starts summarily murdering people we don't call him normal again, now do we? ... But that contradicts what you said above saying that killing more terrorists will only create more. Should we only kill the ones without families or something? The reason behind invading Iraq has NO BEARING on these people attacking us. If we had gone in because we said "Saddam is evil", they would have dismissed that just as heartily. Terrorists don't look at our reasons; they choose to make those up for us to further their own causes. Going into Iraq certainly didn't hurt, either: it shows that we are now making an effort to root out the evil in the Middle East and attack those who have supported them in the past. A more aggressive stance puts the terrorist on the defensive rather than the offensive. Think of it this way: if the Al-Qaida All-Stars are filtering across the border into Iraq to attack armed Marines, that means they can't try to get into the US and attack our civilians. By doing so we protect our people while drawing them into the open where we can engage them on our terms (Even engaging them in a guerilla war is far more advantageous to us than trying to find them in our own country). Of course freeing the people of Iraq helped increase Pro-US sentiment in that country. Of course it polarized terrorists in the area, the good far outweighs the bad here. From your second post: We haven't done this yet? We've shown that we will come to your area, kill off your suppliers, take your supporters out of power, and find and kill you like the rats you are. How do you not make something like 9/11 not worth it without what we've done already? And finally, your first post: B.S. 9/11 was not just about publicity, it was trying to hurt us as much as possible. They don't care about pissing us off anymore: These people are doing open battle with tanks and Marines right now. Do you think they care about pissing the US off anymore? 9/11 is the epitomy of what a terrorist attack should be and they are, without doubt, going to try and stage another one. Killing 3,000 infidels with 19 men is DEFINITELY a tasty prospect to them. 1) History has shown numerous times that ordinary people are willing to die for a cause. If it's a worthy cause, they become heroes, if it's not that they, rightly, become villains. However, if you believe that you are fighting for what is right, then you will be willing to die. 2) Yes, you should kill (or at least punish) terrorists for their actions, but killing all terrorists wont rid the world or terrorism, not unless you take away their reason. 3) Invading Iraq (for seemingly different reasons to those given by Bush) at a time when terrorists think the US is plotting a wat against the Arab world is not gonna stop terrorsim. Hussein's link with the terrorists wasn't vital, and it's unlikely that all of Al-Qaida's followers are gonna go into Iraq to fight US troops, especially when they know it's a losing battle. They may try isolated attacks, but they aren't gonna be on the defensive. If anything, they are the attacking forces, and the US troops are the sitting ducks. 4) The people of Iraq haven't been freed. And their quality of life hasn't improved yet to the point where it justifies the means. Yes, going into Iraq and liberating the people there was the right thing to do, but that hasn't been done yet, and until it is done, the good wont outweigh the bad. 5) At the moment, the US hasn't made carrying out terrorism completely un-worthwhile. The people who the US are capturing at the moment are, by and large, the pawns. They are people who are willing to die for this cause and who are willing to risk capture. It will take the capture of Bin-Ladin, or someone like him, to show that the US will punish those in charge and not just the supporters. 6) 9/11 was a publicity exercise. They weren't trying to kill as many people as possible, they were trying to take out landmarks. I forget how many people were killed in 9/11, but if they had done that in smaller, isolated attacks over a period of time, people wouldn't have taken as much notice as 9/11. That's the point of terrorism, especially on a large scale.. There's no point in killing civilians unless it's going to draw publicity to your cause: if you do that too often, ypur people will end up empathising with the dead, and turn against your cause. 9/11 turned Al-Qaida from a group few American civillians knew or cared about to the worlds most famous terrorist group, all at the cost of a few dozen lives. That was the point of it. And that happened because they took out the WTC on international live television, not because they killed a few thousand civillians.

Stabilise the region. Let terrorists realise that their actions wont be worth the consequences. If you show the world that by going into Iraq you've improved the quality of life for people there (which they haven't done yet) then people in that part of the world will be less anti-USA. Also, it would help if they stopped all these embarrassing stories about people still being able to smuggle stuff onto planes. That just shows possible terrorists that it's possible to carry out annother 9/11. Also, capture Bin-Ladin.

Which one was that? Thats Jason Lee in his Blind (skateboarding) days. Damn, the dudes changed. A lot.

So, we should ignore their PRIOR terrorism (that we DID ignore, mind you) and not do ANYTHING to them? Screw that. The sub-human monkeys who perpetrate this crap wish to attack us? We should make their lives as miserable as humanly possible. You want a fight? We'll be MORE THAN HAPPY to give you one. We ignored terrorism in the past and, guess what --- we got MORE of it and it got WORSE. So, from now on, you attack --- we attack MUCH HARDER. Another 9/11 probably wouldn't cause outrage amongst the anti-U.S people. Our response, though, would cause even less outrage out of me. Let 'em rot. -=Mike So, your response to terrorism is to kill all terrorists? That doesn't work: it'll only make terrorists out of their relatives. Terrorists aren't sub-human: they're ordinary people driven to extra-ordinary measures. That doesn't excuse it, but it does mean that it can be avoided. Yes, you've gotta show that terrorism will not be tolerated and that you'll kill anyne who plots or carries out those deeds. However, going into Iraq for no justified reason (at least when compared to other nations which need our help more) when there is widespread anti-US feeling in the Middle Esast isn't gonna help. It's just gonna increase anti-US sentiment, and thus increase terrorism.

Sorry. I suppose they should have done full background checks on everyone, as well as reviewed their references, resumes, and personal interviews. And checked for TWO forms of identification. Well, what would you consider suitable qualifications to be put in such a delicate position? They can't just hand out jobs to anyone suitable, otherwise it jepordises the US intelligence. Hell, the US probably killed someone they knew, it's gonna be hard for them to "switch sides". And at no point there did I say that they shouldn;t hire Iraqis, just keep them in a position where they can't get delicate information.

You got rid of the "Confide In Me" avatar. That makes me a sad panda.

Why shouldn't we piss them off? Because they'll do something to us? Should we just live in fear? No thanks. Theres a difference between not doing anything and pissing off people in the Middle East. In many foreigners eyes, especialy those who were never pro-USA, America is hated more now than before 9/11. Mainly because thay went into Iraq withought a UN sanction, and without finding WMDs, and haven't stabilised the region. Because, God knows, the U.N's blessing is a HUGE deal to Islamo-facist regimes. I love this mindset. It's not like Arab terrorists never attacked U.S targets before. Well, unless you forget WTC in 1993... Or that ship in Africa... Take away those and, yup, our response to 9/11 led to all of this. What we need to do is simply make the price you pay for committing terrorism prohibitively painful. -=Mike Those past incidents are irrelevant, if only because Bush didn't declare a war on terrorism, and in many dissidents eyes a war on Arab nations, after them. The key to stopping terrorism is to make it not worth taking place. We haven't got to that stage yet, but likewise annother 9/11 wouldn't cause complete outrage among anti-US people.

So, in your eyes, there is nothing the military could do right here. They don't use Iraqis and they're running the country and dominating the peoples. They use Iraqis and they are too stupid to recognize the problem. I hope ALL of the infiltrators are summarily shot and their bodies left to rot in the desert. They cost plenty of lives thus far. Of course, this ALSO means that we CANNOT quickly turn over control to Iraqis. Sorry, buddies, but if you can't be trusted, you can't be trusted. -=Mike No, in my eyes the Iraqis need to be kept an eye on. Yes, it's a lose/lose situation, but you have to admit this news does not reflect well on the military. The Iraqis will spread propaganda regardless, so it doesn't really matter whether they are in a position of power, but the US needs to vet the Iraqis they are hiring much better. And this needs to be kept completely seperate from military operations. Team them up with US troops to keep an eye on them. You need to hand the country back over to the Iraqis, and sooner rather than later. Only a moron would suggest otherwise. And there have to be some Iraqis who have proved themselves to be pro-US. I don't think that these people are in the same group as those oin the running for controlling the country.

Bite me.

The only reason I can see that there would be no repeat of 9/11 is that there's no need to do it anymore. Anti-US terrorists have got to know that to do something like that again would only piss of the US and achieve nothing. It was a publicity exercise, and they don't need to repeat it again.

No, but it's an open secret. Mainly because mods have been telling people. It's just not to be discussed on this board. And Stardust: who can tell? I might register a new name in a couple of days if I get bored of this one.

They'll be mad no matter what we do. We've eliminated a lot of their money, killed a lot of them, have them concentrating on Iraq and have caught many of the masterminds behind the 9-11 attack. I'd say we're still at risk but we're a hell of a lot safer now than we were on 9-11. For every terrorist you kill, theres annother 10 willing to treat him like a martyr and die for what he believed in. You can't stop terrorism by killing terrorists, only by stopping them wanting to be terrorists.

This is the militaries fault. They need to have Iraqis helping to police the area, to help people get on their side, but to give them information, or the position to spread propeganda, that may be used by terrorists is just plain dumb.

Why shouldn't we piss them off? Because they'll do something to us? Should we just live in fear? No thanks. Theres a difference between not doing anything and pissing off people in the Middle East. In many foreigners eyes, especialy those who were never pro-USA, America is hated more now than before 9/11. Mainly because thay went into Iraq withought a UN sanction, and without finding WMDs, and haven't stabilised the region.

Seconded.

Heres a clue: he used it on annother board too. And I thought everyone knew who I was. Dammit, the moments passed Kotz. Leave it, and accept me for who I am.