DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Mucho on December 17, 2006, 05:03:47 PM
-
http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1220 (http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1220)
-
I think you are confusing cliche's.
I haven't heard we were trying to get the arab world to like us. We are trying to get the islamic fanatics to quit blowing up buildings and otherwise waging a terror war.
-
I think you are confusing cliche's.
I haven't heard we were trying to get the arab world to like us. We are trying to get the islamic fanatics to quit blowing up buildings and otherwise waging a terror war.
I know you are . That is why it is all fucked up and we are losing. It would be virtually impossible to kill all the Arabs that the Bushidiot has caused to hate US.
-
It would be virtually impossible to kill all the Arabs that the Bushidiot has caused to hate US.
Again i believe you are mistaken.
I don't believe it is our mission to kill alll the Arabs that hate us. I believe it is our mission to kill all the arabs who are caught acting out on that hate.
-
It would be virtually impossible to kill all the Arabs that the Bushidiot has caused to hate US.
Again i believe you are mistaken.
I don't believe it is our mission to kill alll the Arabs that hate us. I believe it is our mission to kill all the arabs who are caught acting out on that hate.
Not much of a difference when killing the acting out ones creates even more acting out. You might get their attention with a few nukes , tho. Admit it . You would like that, wouldnt you?
-
I believe there should be boundaries on their acting out. Killing innocent civillians as targets of their wrath should be have negative consequences. What say you? Should they be rewarded?
-
I believe there should be boundaries on their acting out. Killing innocent civillians as targets of their wrath should be have negative consequences. What say you? Should they be rewarded?
No- but neither should we for going into an unjust and unwarranted war, but that was not the question and you know it. Should we attemprt to pull this lost war out of our ass buy nuking the people that are protecting their country against our invasion and occupation?
-
Should we attemprt to pull this lost war out of our ass buy nuking the people that are protecting their country against our invasion and occupation?
I don't believe nukes are necessary at this point. I do believe an aggressive disarming of militias would be an idea whose time has come.
-
Should we attemprt to pull this lost war out of our ass buy nuking the people that are protecting their country against our invasion and occupation?
I don't believe nukes are necessary at this point. I do believe an aggressive disarming of militias would be an idea whose time has come.
But wouldnt it be so much easier to disarm those nasty old militias by nuking them? I bet your idol Bushidiot has considered it and will do it before admitting defeat.
-
I don't agree with disarming the militia.
It is not really hard to find small arms in Iraq , we can only really disarm the co-operative .
Makeing the co-operative operate at a serious disadvantage .
It is better to arm or allow to remain armed all the co-operative and treat the unco-operative with enough pressure to give them a serious disadvantage.
The time for just leaveing them alone is really past , unless you are willing to see the majority of Iriquis submitted to the most violent minority.
-
It is better to arm or allow to remain armed all the co-operative and treat the unco-operative with enough pressure to give them a serious disadvantage.
How do you suggest we treat the un cooperative with enough pressure to give them a disadvantage?
-
But wouldnt it be so much easier to disarm those nasty old militias by nuking them? I bet your idol Bushidiot has considered it and will do it before admitting defeat.
Nukes don't distinquish between innocent civillians and the bad guys.
Kinda of like Clinton's airstrikes in Kosovo. So perhaps you have presidents confused.
-
It is better to arm or allow to remain armed all the co-operative and treat the unco-operative with enough pressure to give them a serious disadvantage.
How do you suggest we treat the un cooperative with enough pressure to give them a disadvantage?
Pretty much like we have been doing but with one minor diffrence.
Nobody ought to tell them that we are on the verge of giveing up.
Why would they ever quit if they always are presented with a light at the end of their tunnel?
-
But wouldnt it be so much easier to disarm those nasty old militias by nuking them? I bet your idol Bushidiot has considered it and will do it before admitting defeat.
Nukes don't distinquish between innocent civillians and the bad guys.
Kinda of like Clinton's airstrikes in Kosovo. So perhaps you have presidents confused.
The main difference is that Bill won & didnt need to use nukes to do it like the Bushidiot would.
-
The main difference is that Bill won & didnt need to use nukes to do it like the Bushidiot would.
Your reply makes no sense. How do you know Bush would use nukes? Has he?
Clinto did rain death from above. How is that different than using nukes except by scale? Bombs don't discriminate.
-
The main difference is that Bill won & didnt need to use nukes to do it like the Bushidiot would.
Your reply makes no sense. How do you know Bush would use nukes? Has he?
Clinto did rain death from above. How is that different than using nukes except by scale? Bombs don't discriminate.
I know because he is an evil idiot who thinks he is on a great crusade and has fucked it up at every turn. One more major fuck up means nothing to him. I dont think he has used them yet. We mighta heard about it from the liberal media, dontcha think?
Bombing genocidal maniacs with conventional weapons isnt even close to nuking an innocent country that we screwed up ourselves.
-
Clinton did rain death from above. How is that different than using nukes except by scale? Bombs don't discriminate.
==========================================================================
Yeah, sure. All the same thing.
NOT!
This would be part of our "watch us and use us for our role model" plan.
It would thrill the Japanese.
There might not be much difference in using nukes (other than the radioactivity, the gruesome death due to radiation, the next 20 generations of birth defects), but psychologically, there is no other single act that would make the rest of the world despise us more.
-
Pretty much like we have been doing but with one minor diffrence.
Nobody ought to tell them that we are on the verge of giveing up.
Why would they ever quit if they always are presented with a light at the end of their tunnel?
=======================================================================
The US is not going to stay in Iraq forever, just as they did not stay in Vietnam forever. Vietnam was only a 12 year stay from 1964 to 1976, roughly. There always has been light at the end of their tunnel.
But the Sunnis want to control the country before the US leaves, the Shiites also want to control the country, and the Kurds want independence, or at least autonomy.
When the US leaves, there won't be nearly as many arms available, and the money will dry up.