Moderator: Community Team

Talapus wrote: I'm far more pissed that mandy and his thought process were right from the get go....damn you mandy.
I think it's the beginning of a pincer movement on Saudi.joeyjordison wrote:ok wat do people think of american involvement in somalia?

Talapus wrote: I'm far more pissed that mandy and his thought process were right from the get go....damn you mandy.
probably something more valuable, but the U.S government are keeping it secret until they claim somalia as the 51st state and take it allMirak wrote:Has someone discovered oil in Somalia?
darvlay wrote:Get over it, people. It's just a crazy lookin' bear ejaculating into the waiting maw of an eager fox. Nothing more.
Yeah, because we all saw how calpable Isreal is in their complete failure against Hezbollah.what,me worry? wrote: Isreal will sweep up the mess in palestine and all that will remain will be a few middle eastern fronts and stabilizing the phillipines.
Frigidus wrote:but now that it's become relatively popular it's suffered the usual downturn in coolness.
actually, Puerto Rico needs to be the 51st state. US citizens+no taxes= not cool....mr. incrediball wrote:probably something more valuable, but the U.S government are keeping it secret until they claim somalia as the 51st state and take it allMirak wrote:Has someone discovered oil in Somalia?

Talapus wrote: I'm far more pissed that mandy and his thought process were right from the get go....damn you mandy.
If that is "everyone around me" then world has become one fucked-up place real fast. So, please explain, when is it ok to kill kids? 'Cause I honestly can't think of a way in wich bombing a residential building and killing children is something good. If you know how it's good, tell me.I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.

Talapus wrote: I'm far more pissed that mandy and his thought process were right from the get go....damn you mandy.
1. ok you dispise....so sorry...mandalorian2298 wrote:1. I don't hate US. I don't hate at all. It's bad for karma.
2.If that is "everyone around me" then world has become one fucked-up place real fast. So, please explain, when is it ok to kill kids? 'Cause I honestly can't think of a way in wich bombing a residential building and killing children is something good. If you know how it's good, tell me.I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.
mandalorian2298 wrote:1. I don't hate US. I don't hate at all. It's bad for karma.
2.If that is "everyone around me" then world has become one fucked-up place real fast. So, please explain, when is it ok to kill kids? 'Cause I honestly can't think of a way in wich bombing a residential building and killing children is something good. If you know how it's good, tell me.I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.
Wouldn't you like to know you agent provocatourUtafar wrote:mandalorian2298 wrote:1. I don't hate US. I don't hate at all. It's bad for karma.
2.If that is "everyone around me" then world has become one fucked-up place real fast. So, please explain, when is it ok to kill kids? 'Cause I honestly can't think of a way in wich bombing a residential building and killing children is something good. If you know how it's good, tell me.I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.
hey you remind me of someone...what's your real name?
Well, perhaps every country in the world should start killing children. Then they would all become thriving. Or is it when country becomes thriving it thereby earns the right to kill children.P Gizzle wrote:2. can you tell me one thriving country who hasn't been in a war and killed a civilian child?? I can't....WWII, Britain, US, even Canada went into France and accidently killed kids......hey, it's not good, but it happend, and let me tell you that if we didnt kill those kids, we wouldnt have been there, and wouldnt have won that war, and the world would be run by a facist dictator......so, of course, that's a reason to kill kids...so, that other kids can have a free life, and not die......it ain't good, but it's a hard world out there

Talapus wrote: I'm far more pissed that mandy and his thought process were right from the get go....damn you mandy.
mandalorian2298 wrote: Look all I am saying is that, in the last few years, American troops killed MUCH more civilians then any "terrorist" organization. IMO ANY country that sends it's troops to attack civil population of another country is a menace to world-peace. Even if that country is USA.
Frigidus wrote:but now that it's become relatively popular it's suffered the usual downturn in coolness.
no, im saying that no matter where you go, in war civilians are being killed....it's sad but true.....mandalorian2298 wrote:Well, perhaps every country in the world should start killing children. Then they would all become thriving. Or is it when country becomes thriving it thereby earns the right to kill children.P Gizzle wrote:2. can you tell me one thriving country who hasn't been in a war and killed a civilian child?? I can't....WWII, Britain, US, even Canada went into France and accidently killed kids......hey, it's not good, but it happend, and let me tell you that if we didnt kill those kids, we wouldnt have been there, and wouldnt have won that war, and the world would be run by a facist dictator......so, of course, that's a reason to kill kids...so, that other kids can have a free life, and not die......it ain't good, but it's a hard world out there
New definition of terrorism: Killing civilians executed by a non-thriving country.
Killing civilians done by USA = COUNTERTERRORISM
Look all I am saying is that, in the last few years, American troops killed MUCH more civilians then any "terrorist" organization. IMO ANY country that sends it's troops to attack civil population of another country is a menace to world-peace. Even if that country is USA.
First off there's a difference between total war and counter-terrorism. The wisdom of carpet bombing still hasn't been proven to this day; in Germany and Japan their factories would start up days after massive air raids. The British didn't lose their will to fight and neither did the axis nations. Then factor in the defensive problems added like destroyed roads, fighting to take endless mounds of rubble doesn't work a la Stalingrad. MacNamara makes the case in his documentary The Fog of War that the US was just as guilty of war crimes for carrying out air raids on civilian areas when no strategic aims were met. These were punitive measures, more people in Japan died from fire bombing than the A-bombs. We didn't drop the bombs to make them surrender. We could've blown up Mt Fuji or a military station to do that but instead wanted to make a statement to the Soviet Union. War is different from terrorism and counter-terrorism so you can't compare a nation's war history to legitamize current actions.P Gizzle wrote:no, im saying that no matter where you go, in war civilians are being killed....it's sad but true.....
think of it this way, if you can.....
during hiroshima and nagasaki, a lot of people died right?
could you image how many people would've died if the US tried to take the homeland? all of the Japanese woulda killed themselves!!
and im not sayin that the US has a right to kill civilians, im saying that i can't think of a country today that hasn't. can you?
so, say what you will about the US being terrorists....what do you suggest to get these guys dead?
George dubya?MeDeFe wrote: The Japanese had tried to surrender several times even before the A-bombs fell, but a certain president wanted to make a point.