Attacking Iraq...

[Guest Vagabond]

The disco bar wasn't like a USO bar. It was a civilian bar run by civilians. There may have been a few out of uniform soldiers there, but not 95%. And what about the gunman that burst into a barmitzvah and began shooting people? I guess they were all military personnel as well.

 

Not everyone is a "Combatant". You sir, have fallen to propaganda. To kill innocent people, people who in no way threaten the bombers, is obscene. Did you support Timothy McVeigh because the Federal Building in OC, Oklahoma, was a government target?

As I said which you missed everybody from 18-20 in Israel is in the army. Exactly what age group do you think is hanging out in a disco? Not to mention you have 240,000 of 3 million people who are active military so most of those older are military too and all of them are ex-military and most of those reservists.

 

This is two separate questions. I don't support what McVeigh did. A federal building is a legitimate military target. We targetted government buildings of all types in both the gulf war and in Afganistan. Instead of begging the question some more tell me what exactly would be a legitimate target?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

using adjectives which accurately describe somebodies statements are not insults. They might be taken as such by those who receive them but they aren't. It's not a name if it is true. It might be a bit harsh but it is meant to be. If somebody obviously doesn't know anything about a topic, saying they are uneducated is no different from telling somebody they aren't a carpenter when they are giving you advice on building your deck

My goodness, you're a pompous little shit aren't you? So anything subjective anyone says about you is a flame and an insult, but anything subjective you say about anyone else is merely an adjective that accurately embodies his uneducated statements about things he obviously doesn't know anything about. And, of course, your opinion is true. Well, I'm convinced.

 

Twit.

[Guest Powerplay]

Well, considering your usage of "mindless," "people like you," and "your education is obviously lacking severely," I thought what I said was more akin to fighting fire with fire. But looking at the rest of your posts, that blatantly and unnecessarily patronizing tone isn't there, so I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and forget about it.

I always do my best to stick to facts. However, using adjectives which accurately describe somebodies statements are not insults. They might be taken as such by those who receive them but they aren't. It's not a name if it is true. It might be a bit harsh but it is meant to be. If somebody obviously doesn't know anything about a topic, saying they are uneducated is no different from telling somebody they aren't a carpenter when they are giving you advice on building your deck. Neither of which they should be doing.

What facts? You have definitive proof that I am mindless? What educational credentials do you have to make that assumption? Seriously, tell us all.

 

And let me get this straight: if called you mindless, it is flaming. But if you call us mindless, it is a factual statement that should be believed as a truth. In essence, everything we say or do is wrong no matter what, but everything you do is right no matter what. You must understand, berating someone's intelligence is an insult, whether you think so or not. Just because you think it is right doesn't mean it really is. You are not above everyone else, although you certainly seem to think you are.

[Guest Vagabond]

I'm trying to follow your logic here:

 

1. Israel is attacked repeatedly by foreign armies and terrorists.

 

2. In response, Israel started forcing mandatory military service on all its citizens.

 

3. The same terrorists who attacked before keep attacking.

 

4. Ergo, everyone over the age of 18 is "fair game" for murder by violent extremists.

 

I think that's what you're implying, and if I'm right, then you're dead wrong, sir.

No, you aren't being in the slightest logical. You act like you are asking questions but you are just stating your own biased opinion which is severely lacking in facts. Israel attacked first in the 68 war and countless other times including several times recently. Israel basically walked up to somebodies house, punched them in the face when they answered the door and then claimed ownership of the house based on the outcome of the struggle. They have, had no right to any of that territory there in the first place. They are squatters who are imprisoning those who they stole the land from and blaming them for being pissed off. People have a right to defend themselves. They have a right to keep their property and not have it stolen arbitrarily. If these people do damage and kill in the process it happens, we and the Israelis do much more damage for much less cause all the time.

[Guest Powerplay]

The disco bar wasn't like a USO bar. It was a civilian bar run by civilians. There may have been a few out of uniform soldiers there, but not 95%. And what about the gunman that burst into a barmitzvah and began shooting people? I guess they were all military personnel as well.

 

Not everyone is a "Combatant". You sir, have fallen to propaganda. To kill innocent people, people who in no way threaten the bombers, is obscene. Did you support Timothy McVeigh because the Federal Building in OC, Oklahoma, was a government target?

As I said which you missed everybody from 18-20 in Israel is in the army. Exactly what age group do you think is hanging out in a disco? Not to mention you have 240,000 of 3 million people who are active military so most of those older are military too and all of them are ex-military and most of those reservists.

 

This is two separate questions. I don't support what McVeigh did. A federal building is a legitimate military target. We targetted government buildings of all types in both the gulf war and in Afganistan. Instead of begging the question some more tell me what exactly would be a legitimate target?

Were we at WAR with McVeigh? McVeigh is not his own country. If he was, and he had declared war on us, yes, it might be a military target. But at no point were we at war with McVeigh. This is one person acting, not a country. Just because one person, or fifty, or one hundred people feel they are at war with the US doesn't give them the right to kill people.

 

Not all the people at the Barmitzvah were 18-20. And none of them had weapons. These people had no way of defending themselves. Just because a couple may have served in the military doesn't mean they are now a military target. They were no longer affiliated with the military, they had no weapons, and they had no intent on attacking Palestine. Not everyone in Israel carries an M-16.

[Guest Vagabond]

You talk as if the group that attacked the USS Cole was the military force of a country, as if they had declared war on us and we actively knew that docking the Cole was inviting disaster. We hadn't declared war on Yemen. It was a group of civilians not affiliated with the government of Yemen attacking the USS Cole

Yeah, kinda like those minutemen that didn't have any uniforms. The British called them "terrorists" or the era equivelent because the would stand behind trees and ambush them instead of fighting in the open like any decent army would. Or the Boston tea party, that tea was certainly a combatant and that happened prior to war. The US never declared war on Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Grenada, Yugoslavia, or any of countless others they have attacked. So I guess all those people deserved fair warning and didn't get it? War is a bitch.

[Guest Vagabond]

My goodness, you're a pompous little shit aren't you?

Hilarious, feigning rightous indignation about something you claim I do while you yourself are doing it with crass overbearing fireworks, trying to show off. Lame.

[Guest Vagabond]

Not everyone in Israel carries an M-16.

Pointless talking to you any further, you do nothing but beg the question and now you use a gross generalization in place of a fact. You don't discuss you ramble. Which perhaps explains your childlike understanding of things.

[Guest Powerplay]

You talk as if the group that attacked the USS Cole was the military force of a country, as if they had declared war on us and we actively knew that docking the Cole was inviting disaster. We hadn't declared war on Yemen. It was a group of civilians not affiliated with the government of Yemen attacking the USS Cole

Yeah, kinda like those minutemen that didn't have any uniforms. The British called them "terrorists" or the era equivelent because the would stand behind trees and ambush them instead of fighting in the open like any decent army would. Or the Boston tea party, that tea was certainly a combatant and that happened prior to war. The US never declared war on Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Grenada, Yugoslavia, or any of countless others they have attacked. So I guess all those people deserved fair warning and didn't get it? War is a bitch.

The British were right. They were terrorists. They committed acts of violence and hatred against people because of their political beliefs. Not until 1776, after the Declaration of Independence, were they not terrorists.

 

North Korea invaded South Korea. We helped out our allies. North Vietnam invaded South Vietnam. We went over to help our allies. Iraq invaded Kuwait. We went over to help our allies. I don't agree with Grenada all that much, either. In Yugoslavia, Serbia attacked Bosnia, and then committed genocide against ethnic Albanians. Are you saying we shouldn't have interdicted in the extermination of a race? Bitch? Wow, I'm surprised you lowered yourself enough to use that.

 

Just to ask, are you a Palestinian? Not to say that Palestinians are bad, but you seem very biased toward them.

[Guest J*ingus]

Okay Vagabond, that's it, you're getting the full Jingus Dissection of Doom.

 

If somebody deliberately kills civilians who have no active part in supporting the government, military, war effort. I would consider that terrorism. 9/11 certainly counts.

 

Here we are in agreement.

 

I explained the US definition which is any attack of any kind aimed at us. Which diminishes the meaning and purpose.

 

What else would you call an attack by a group of violent multinational religious extremists who are loyal to no country, wear no uniform, repeatedly attack civilian targets, and flaunt the Geneva conventions at every opprotunity?

 

What motivation do those who wish to war against us have to limit their attacks on military targets if we still call them "terrorists" when they attack a purely military target like the Cole?

 

They attacked the Cole only after the first WTC attack, and after one of the embassy bombings as well if I remember correctly. A murderer who picks pockets after killing someone is still a murderer, not a pickpocket.

 

Also, it is a necessary evil in war to attack known civilian areas to keep them from being considered safe by the enemy.

 

Machiavelli would've just LOVED you. Evil is evil. There is no such thing as a "necessary evil". If something is wrong, DON'T DO IT.

 

If you did not they would just move their troops and supplies in school buses and taxis instead of army trucks.

 

Just to let you know, the Palestinians don't have a huge number of school buses, taxis, or army trucks for that matter. Their forces tend to be ordinary-looking people with weapons hidden under their clothing.

 

It's a fine sentiment to limit your attacks to only military but in practice it's impractical if you want to win. We don't do it ourselves either.

 

Well, if we pounded the entire Middle East flat with nuclear warheads, that would certainly allow us to win. It doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

 

I always do my best to stick to facts. However, using adjectives which accurately describe somebodies statements are not insults.

 

"accurately describe"? You said "mindless". As in, completely lacking in ANY intelligence, coherence, or design. Such a label only applies correctly to brain-dead coma patients. Also, applying such a label to the moderator of this forum, who can and will ban you for insulting, is especially dumb.

 

They might be taken as such by those who receive them but they aren't. It's not a name if it is true. It might be a bit harsh but it is meant to be.

 

Ooh, feel the TOUGH LOVE~!

 

If somebody obviously doesn't know anything about a topic, saying they are uneducated is no different from telling somebody they aren't a carpenter when they are giving you advice on building your deck. Neither of which they should be doing.

 

There is a whole world of difference between abstract political debates on a nonphysical message board and building a damn deck. One is an exact science; the other is not.

 

As I said which you missed everybody from 18-20 in Israel is in the army. Exactly what age group do you think is hanging out in a disco?

 

Why don't you go to a reliable source, do some research, and come back and tell us exactly how many military personnel were killed in that bombing, in comparison to the number of noncombatant civilians killed?

 

Not to mention you have 240,000 of 3 million people who are active military so most of those older are military too and all of them are ex-military and most of those reservists.

 

You know why there are so many soldiers? ISRAEL WAS ATTACKED FIRST. The social adaptations they have made to defend against those attacks does NOT make those attacks any more valid because of said adaptations.

 

This is two separate questions. I don't support what McVeigh did. A federal building is a legitimate military target.

 

If McVeigh bombed "a legitimate military target" (despite the fact that it was a simple office building filled with innocent pencil-pushers), then why don't you support what he did?

 

We targetted government buildings of all types in both the gulf war and in Afganistan. Instead of begging the question some more tell me what exactly would be a legitimate target?

 

A legitimate target: one in which the PRIMARY USE of said target is of direct military functions.

 

No, you aren't being in the slightest logical. You act like you are asking questions but you are just stating your own biased opinion which is severely lacking in facts.

 

Nothing can state what I feel more adequately than this simple phrase: I know you are, but what am I?

 

Israel attacked first in the 68 war and countless other times including several times recently.

 

Bullshit.

 

Israel basically walked up to somebodies house, punched them in the face when they answered the door and then claimed ownership of the house based on the outcome of the struggle. They have, had no right to any of that territory there in the first place. They are squatters who are imprisoning those who they stole the land from and blaming them for being pissed off.

 

1. The land comprising modern-day Israel was in fact stolen from the Hebrews by Muslims centuries ago.

 

2. The Palestinians did not own the land when Israel was created; Britain did, and it gave the land to the Jews of their own free will.

 

People have a right to defend themselves. They have a right to keep their property and not have it stolen arbitrarily. If these people do damage and kill in the process it happens, we and the Israelis do much more damage for much less cause all the time.

 

So what about every single Israeli under the age of 54? They were born in Israel. They've lived there for their entire lives. What right do the Palestinians have to steal away their homes?

 

Yeah, kinda like those minutemen that didn't have any uniforms. The British called them "terrorists" or the era equivelent because the would stand behind trees and ambush them instead of fighting in the open like any decent army would. Or the Boston tea party, that tea was certainly a combatant and that happened prior to war.

 

Difference: the U.S. colonials did NOT attack civilian emplacements. British troops were pretty much their only target. The bright red coats helped a lot with that, of course.

 

The US never declared war on Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Grenada, Yugoslavia, or any of countless others they have attacked. So I guess all those people deserved fair warning and didn't get it?

 

You do kinda sorta have a point here, but it's buried underneath the weight of your scornful delivery.

 

War is a bitch.

 

No shit. Although I somehow doubt that you know that from firsthand experience.

 

Hilarious, feigning rightous indignation about something you claim I do while you yourself are doing it with crass overbearing fireworks, trying to show off. Lame.

 

Don't kill, Marney, don't kill!!!

 

Pointless talking to you any further, you do nothing but beg the question and now you use a gross generalization in place of a fact. You don't discuss you ramble. Which perhaps explains your childlike understanding of things.

 

You are one of the most snobbish, arrogent, holier-than-though posters I have EVER seen here.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Israel attacked first in the 68 war and countless other times including several times recently. Israel basically walked up to somebodies house, punched them in the face when they answered the door

Uh, what the hell are you even talking about? Egypt had built up forces on the Sinai Peninsula, Jordan had just joined the Egypt-Syria military alliance, and Iraq, Algeria, and Kuwait had all deployed military contingents to the area! There were something like 500 thousand troops on her borders, 3000 tanks, and 800 aircraft! And you're claiming that Israel started the war just because she launched a pre-emptive strike before the Arabs could wipe her off the face of the earth?

 

Honestly, get a clue and quit while you're ahead. Your virulent anti-Semitism was actually more palatable than these bare-faced lies. I mean for someone who claims he's so interested in keeping strictly to the facts your grasp on reality sure seems to be shaky - or weren't you aware that the Six Day War lasted from June 5th to June 10th of 1967? '68 war? What '68 war?

 

Hilarious, feigning rightous indignation about something you claim I do while you yourself are doing it with crass overbearing fireworks, trying to show off. Lame.

No, kiddo, that wasn't "rightous indignation" or even righteous indignation. It was amusement at your blatant hypocrisy and completely unjustified assumption of superiority. You're a snooty, wordy little prick puffed up with hot air and an obscenely bloated ego. I assure you, someday, someone or something will come along with a pin.

[Guest Powerplay]

I'm trying to follow your logic here:

 

1. Israel is attacked repeatedly by foreign armies and terrorists.

 

2. In response, Israel started forcing mandatory military service on all its citizens.

 

3. The same terrorists who attacked before keep attacking.

 

4. Ergo, everyone over the age of 18 is "fair game" for murder by violent extremists.

 

I think that's what you're implying, and if I'm right, then you're dead wrong, sir.

No, you aren't being in the slightest logical. You act like you are asking questions but you are just stating your own biased opinion which is severely lacking in facts. Israel attacked first in the 68 war and countless other times including several times recently. Israel basically walked up to somebodies house, punched them in the face when they answered the door and then claimed ownership of the house based on the outcome of the struggle. They have, had no right to any of that territory there in the first place. They are squatters who are imprisoning those who they stole the land from and blaming them for being pissed off. People have a right to defend themselves. They have a right to keep their property and not have it stolen arbitrarily. If these people do damage and kill in the process it happens, we and the Israelis do much more damage for much less cause all the time.

And the Arabs attacked in 1948 and 1973, Marney. Don't forget that. The Arabs attack first in 1948, starting the whole conflict. They could have gotten a huge part of Israel and part of Jeruselum, but they instead attacked Israel. Recently Israel has only attacked AFTER terrorist attacks committed against them.

 

Why are they all ex-military? Because they have been attacked numerous times by their neighbors and now the safety of their nation requires it.

 

They aren't "Squatters". They are a nation, unlike Palestine. They have just as much right to be there as any Palestinian does.

 

You are just as guilty as Jingus, and in actuality far moreso. You are trying to pass your own severely biased opinions as fact. You have no right to decide what is fact and what is not, what is right and what is wrong. Childlike understanding? You don't seem to realize that killing unarmed people who are not threatening you is wrong yet.

 

Again, who are you to think you are smarter and better than us? You act like you are some sort of professor, like you have a doctorate in all of this. What are your credentials? What makes it so that you are allowed to judge us but we are not allowed to judge you. You say I'm mindless. You have no proof. Explain to me why I am mindless.

[Guest J*ingus]

Oh, and may God help you if the real heavyweights like TheMikeSC or FK Teale come on and see this anytime soon.

[Guest Powerplay]

Another question. My grandfather served in the Korean War. He got out of the military right after, went to college, became an accountant, and now plays golf at the age of 71. Since he was in the military at some time in his life, does that mean he is fair game for a North Korean sniper right now?

 

And Jingus, Marney, thanks for helping me out. I really needed the reinforcements, as I'm better at getting my point across speaking to someone rather than writing to someone. It's always comforting to know that at least I agree with you guys on something. Good job, guys.*Salutes*

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I know we don't always agree, in fact we rarely do, but that's just fine in my opinion because you're an honest debater. If we all agreed on everything there would be no point in talking. <returns salute> God bless you sir.

[Guest Vagabond]

It was amusement at your blatant hypocrisy and completely unjustified assumption of superiority. You're a snooty, wordy little prick puffed up with hot air and an obscenely bloated ego. I assure you, someday, someone or something will come along with a pin.

As usual with those of your vapid intellect, who use uneducated nonfactual opinion used in lieu of facts. Who don't really want to learn anything thus why they are idiots in the first place. But, just like to see their words in print and make the supreme effort to impress those who are impressed by nothing and whose opinion is of no value in the first place. You attempt to insult by saying falsely to others what you desperately need to be saying to yourself in the mirror and to a therapist while laying on a couch.

[Guest Vagabond]

And Jingus, Marney, thanks for helping me out. I really needed the reinforcements, as I'm better at getting my point across speaking to someone rather than writing to someone. It's always comforting to know that at least I agree with you guys on something. Good job, guys.*Salutes*

Oh, you need help allright but from someplace called a "school" something you obviously dropped out of far too soon. You won't get anything but mindless ego stroking from these people as they are just as uneducated and lacking in facts as you are.

[Guest Vagabond]

You are one of the most snobbish, arrogent, holier-than-though posters I have EVER seen here. <<<<<

Granting the 7th grade intellect level that seems to be prevelant around here not surprising. That is exactly how somebody uneducated would percieve somebody who knows far more about everything than they do. I am probably the only person around here that knows their ass from a hole in the ground. Nobody has said anything to make me consider otherwise. But only verified this belief.

[Guest Vagabond]

There is a whole world of difference between abstract political debates on a nonphysical message board and building a damn deck. One is an exact science; the other is not.

It's only not an exact science if you aren't knowledgeable enough about it. If you are it is quite exacting. You don't know what you don't know. You are totally ignorant of the vast expanses of knowledge you don't even know exist.

[Guest Vagabond]

1. The land comprising modern-day Israel was in fact stolen from the Hebrews by Muslims centuries ago.

 

2. The Palestinians did not own the land when Israel was created; Britain did, and it gave the land to the Jews of their own free will.

This is a myth. There is absolutely no historical evidence of this whatsoever. Also even if true, Israel allows anybody who is Jewish citizenship, regardess of their actual heritage. Including Arabs for that matter. Nearly everybody currently in Israel are not decended directly from the people that lived there 3000 years ago. They do not share that heritage.

 

Yeah, which the British also stole. They didn't own the land because the previous conquerer the British, didn't allow it. However, the British did not give this land to the Jews. In actuality, you might want to actually learn a little history. The British knowing what would happen if they settled there set up blockades to prevent it which the Jews RAN. The Jews of the time including Moshe Dyan bombed the British in the same was they are now being bombed by the Palestinians now in order to force their own state. Dyan was imprisoned by the British for acts of terrorism and insurrection.

[Guest Powerplay]

And Jingus, Marney, thanks for helping me out. I really needed the reinforcements, as I'm better at getting my point across speaking to someone rather than writing to someone. It's always comforting to know that at least I agree with you guys on something. Good job, guys.*Salutes*

Oh, you need help allright but from someplace called a "school" something you obviously dropped out of far too soon. You won't get anything but mindless ego stroking from these people as they are just as uneducated and lacking in facts as you are.

Ah, the egotist with a thesaurus is back. Just to ask, what are your educational credentials? I mean, you preach on us being incredibly uneducated, but you've never told us where your wealth of knowledge comes from. Please, enlighten me. Was it Harvard? Or Yale? Perhaps Cambridge?

[Guest Cancer Marney]

As usual with those of your vapid intellect, who use uneducated nonfactual opinion used in lieu of facts. Who don't really want to learn anything thus why they are idiots in the first place. But, just like to see their words in print and make the supreme effort to impress those who are impressed by nothing and whose opinion is of no value in the first place. You attempt to insult by saying falsely to others what you desperately need to be saying to yourself in the mirror and to a therapist while laying on a couch.

Is it just me or is the last phrase the only one which is actually a complete sentence?

[Guest Powerplay]

In the last phrase it almost describes himself perfectly. And he still hasn't told me where he became so intellectually inclined. I'm still wondering whether he went to college or not.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Good point there. It does come off a bit like a high school junior's "I am rubber, you are glue" spiel.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

Oh, and may God help you if the real heavyweights like TheMikeSC or FK Teale come on and see this anytime soon.

Whatever happened to MikeSC. He was one of the best posters on the Current Events folder. We also agreed on almost everything polticially and socially related.

[Guest J*ingus]

Granting the 7th grade intellect level that seems to be prevelant around here not surprising. That is exactly how somebody uneducated would percieve somebody who knows far more about everything than they do. I am probably the only person around here that knows their ass from a hole in the ground. Nobody has said anything to make me consider otherwise. But only verified this belief.

Ladies and gentlemen, here we have a good example of applying the theory of Occhiam's Razor to real life.

 

In front of us are two possibilities:

 

1. Each and every single individual in this Current Events forum (with the exception of the brilliant Vagabond) have no more than a 7th grade intellect. This includes everyone on this board who has been to college, as no doubt several of us such as myself have. Furthermore, everyone on this forum (once again, with the sole exception being the widely hailed genius Vagabond) is completely unable to tell the difference between their own rectum and an opening in the ground. Finally, the mind of our times Vagabond knows more about EVERYTHING than ANYBODY here.

 

Or:

 

2. You're a fucking pretentious arrogant idiot.

 

Mathematically speaking, what do the odds say? (You must forgive me if I'm off a little here, I only got a 690 on the math portion of my SAT, unlike the perfect 800 I received for the verbal half. Of course, both of those paltry scores are far, FAR below what a superintelligent being like Vagabond must've gotten.)

 

This is a myth. There is absolutely no historical evidence of this whatsoever. Also even if true, Israel allows anybody who is Jewish citizenship, regardess of their actual heritage. Including Arabs for that matter. Nearly everybody currently in Israel are not decended directly from the people that lived there 3000 years ago. They do not share that heritage.

 

Let's follow this logical train of thought:

 

1. Thousands of years ago, the Jewish faith was born and flourished in the Middle Eastern area known today as Israel.

 

2. Somewhere along the way, they were driven out of their homelands, and by the time of the Crusades were wholly evicted by the Muslims.

 

3. By definition, all Jews are descended at least somewhat from the original Hebrews, since unlike other monotheistic religions Judaism does not seek to convert outsiders and encourages intermarriage.

 

So just how do the Jews have no claim at all to Israel?