BOT,, the agents were killed by a Manchurian candidate.
Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums
Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
BOT,, the agents were killed by a Manchurian candidate.
Originally Posted by Stuart
Well the answer to your question is nothing, because I'm not an insane islamobot.
what's the point of the question?
I never suggested that we use the jihaidi tactics against them in a literal manner and send americans to blow themselves up in markets.
I also never suggested that we carpet bomb cities. I used that in an facetious manner to illustrate that my opinion, that we should punish (nay, MURDER!) the poor innocent families of the poor innocent suicide bombers, is actually a more humane yet delightfully brutal alternative to wreaking mass destruction on thousands.
It's funny how folks are arguing with me like they think they have a chance in hell of painting me into a corner and getting me to change my view.
Some feel that there are things we shouldn't do to our enemies because we'd be "stooping to their level" and that would make us "no better than they are"
That's fine.
Like I told conspiracy man. Beleeve what you like.
Your opinion can be like our nations soft, kind heart.
And mine can be like our nation's foot.
In a boot.
Pressing down on their neck.
chew on this amigos. front page of CNN.
It compares our current war to what happened in the Philippines one hundred years ago. (a long time before we bombed dresden)
Talks about why we won then, and why the idea of political correctness, playing nice, and "we can't stoop to their level" is gonna lose the current one
for us.
http://afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/201...s-not-vietnam/
juicy tidbits:
Filipino fighters deliberately sought to drag the war on with hit-and-run tactics that would turn the American public against the war, historians say. It was the classic guerilla strategy: Win by avoiding big, pitched battles and melt into the civilian population.
But the U.S. military responded to the guerilla strategy with a simple strategy of their own, some historians say: Kill them all.
Civilian casualties were not accidental, but intentional, says Lt. Col. Michael E. Silverman, an Iraq war veteran and a counterinsurgency training consultant for the U.S. Army.
and one comment by some guy named Sean:
The main differences between the current wars and those past ones we were able to win are the ROE. In the past the ROE were created with the pure intent to win. Todays ROE are designed to have as little collateral damage as possible and has nothing to do with the intent to win a war.
I asked the question because I correctly anticipated your answer. You can't even comprehend what it would take to become a suicide bomber, yet you are solidly convinced that if you use the method you think is harsh, based on your mindset and beliefs, and think that they will apply to a person who is so different from yourself that you can't even relate to them. That is like suggesting using reverse psychology on a dog to get it to stop chewing up your shoes.
Look, I thought the made up story in The Usual Suspects about the maffia war was cool too, but in this situation I don't think it is really an effective tactic to get the result that you want.
"There are no finger prints under water."
direction has nothing to do with it. that is unknown what they were going after...the whitehouse, who knows.
The pentagon never has and never will release footage because it would compromise the interior of the building. the only footage released was the parking lot security camera that had about a 1 frame per ten second rate on it which is damn near worthless.
Did you watch the attack live? I did and I can tell you airliners hit the building and they collapsed, not some weird conspiracy
I think there were 500,000,000 reasons for wtc 7 coming down and not some absurd .gov plot.
Pretty sure it was Bush's fault....
I think it is interesting that people see that there are things that don't immediately make sense (Tower 7 falling without being hit) and then jump straight to a conclusion that makes just as little, or even less sense (it was the US gov) than the original event.
Several terrorist sleeper cells infiltrate the country, remain dormant for years and years while they go through flight school to learn the basics of flying planes. They fly some planes straight into some buildings, some unexpected stuff happens (EVERYTHING is unexpected when something happens that has never happened before) and instead of reasoning that perhaps the terrorist sleeper cells ALSO infiltrated another common industry in America (demolition, building construction, etc) it is automatically assumed that the US gov is behind everything? That doesn't make sense.
Sorry if my interjections made that comment flow poorly.
"There are no finger prints under water."
Death is a great deterrent for any mindset.
Evidently not.
Posting Permissions
