Isn't It About Time The US Stopped Killing Innocents?

Excellent point. But the thing that gets me the most is how everybody keeps saying there is no alternative but to fight back at these terrorists. How do you know that? America barely even tried any sort of diplomatic method. But Tony Blair, the British Priminister, was in the middle of laying a diplomatic trap by getting the countries surrounding Afghanistan on his side. Thereby if Bin Laden tried to leave he almost certainly would have got captured. Did America wait to see if it would work? Nope. It was all kill kill kill, vengeance vengeance vengeance, get in there and bomb the heck out of the place and leave questions for later.

 

What are you talking about? Did you do a Rip Van Winkle after 9/11 or something? People were questioning Bush why we didn't act for months while he built up an international coallition including the surrounding countries. That statement was completely unfactual, and show how biased you are that you don't even take the time to look for the facts before you post. I mean you could at least attempt to get something write in a post before you just crap out your mouth (South Park)

 

What are you talking about? Of course Bush tried to get as many countries as he could on his side. This is the ignorance that the left side has come to in regards to anything about Bush and the war on terror. Wait, what am I thinking? I forgot that Bush is stupid and he only wants to keep bombing to keep his approval rating up! (<--- 2nd half = sarcasm)


And, ::


-EDIT- Not you, tenor, I meant kaineDamo

 

Wow! Bush tried the diplomatic method for a few months! He should get the noble peace price! And why is everyone picking on the peace loving hippie?

 

If the peace-loving hippies took over, the world would be one giant pot-farm .


V-03

 

And whats so bad about that? I've only smoked pot a couple of times, by the way.

 

this is what I have to say from my uber Right perspective... the news came into my bombshelter, and this is my opinion, it may provoke flaming, but hey, im "right" and you dont have to read the rest of this thread.

dirty people in a foreign land who "claim" to be civilians were discharging firearms in the air at a United States aircraft. by any means anyone or thing attempting to harm "OUR" equipment or manpower should be eliminated, without thinking twice... it was stupid of the afghanis to fire into the air period. AK-47's were developed post WW2. 50 years is not a very legitimate time to consider something a "tradition"
we are in afghanistan to keep them from being dirty terrorists... If we have found a way to profit ($$$$) from this, GREAT. personally i couldnt care if on 9/12/01 we nuked afghanistan till it turned to glass...
the UN is an attempt at forming a 1 world government. Our country (USA) is better than most of the other countries in the UN, and because of this they try to exploit us. If the united states gov't wants to find a way to enter afghanistan into the universe of free trade, they have to give them bargaining chips (or something to barter) the only things I see that they have to offer is- oil, glass, cheap labor. their former cash crop (opium) should be wiped out, and replaced with food to sustain themselves...
but for the point of the "innocents" being killed, its their own stupid fault for firing at our aircraft, and you will never know the true story if you listen to (CNN, MSNBC) liberal controlled media.

 

KaineDamo:

Because the "peace-loving hippie" seems to be missing the points.

1. We were attacked first in this war.

2. The civilian deaths were unintentional. Again, it looks as if these deaths came from one of two causes: Either celebratory fire was misinterpreted as anti-aircraft fire OR anti-aircraft fire directed at American planes missed, and came back down.

3. Osama bin Laden and his ilk have to be stopped. Stopping them will require violence.

 

Yeah, nuke afghanistan, you crazy bleep. (excuse my language, but there was no need for anything that you just said, and i am becoming increasingly sick of the lack of basic human compassion and common sense here).


24 hours for flamming.

 

(excuse my language, but there was no need for anything that you just said, and i am becoming increasingly sick of the lack of basic human compassion and common sense here).

Strange how you blame others for their lack of common sense when in the last post, you used absolutley none.

I smell a ban.....

 

A ban because i told someone off for wanting to nuke Afghanistan??

 

Who's talking about nuking Afghanistan?

 

Because you call someone a "crazy nazi #$%^".

 

"i couldnt care if on 9/12/01 we nuked afghanistan till it turned to glass..."

He also said some stuff about "dirty foriegn people". All you have to do to realise tehre were innocent people killed is watch the clips of children wounded crying out, and the doctors that tell us these children are left without families.

 

Ahh, thanks.

 

When someone couldn't care less if an entire nation was wiped out, i tend to think of them as a nazi. This will be the last time i comment for awhile.

 

This will be the last time i comment for awhile.

You ain't kidding, buddy.


EDIT: And I saw in one of your previous posts, you compare the Death Star to the Twin Towers. Nice, real nice.

 

He did say that it was his opinion and warned you that you might not want to read any further.

 

But its flaming, he wasn't discussing anything, he was just name-calling.

The Senate is a place for discussion, not to flame others, no matter how ignorant they are.

 

All right, let's get back to the discussion, please.

 

When someone couldn't care less if an entire nation was wiped out, i tend to think of them as a nazi. This will be the last time i comment for awhile.

Please, go get your facts straight. "Peace" can't be accomplished unless both sides want it. A lot of your posts in this thread seem to be uniformed.

1) If "Civilians" are firing at you, you fire back if there is no way out other than running and such. They may be military, but they still have their lives to protect.

2) For a month after 9/11, all Bush did was try to get people on his side. What makes you think these people (Bin Laden, terrorist-supporting countries) with BAD past history, would suddenly get a change of heart if the US said, "hey, lets be buddies". Nation state interaction is different than two friends fighting. Diplomacy only works for so long.

So, please, read up on some things from at least two opposing sides, not just an "environmentalist, peace lover's guide" website.

 

a country that cant run itself because it is to busy self destructing has no future... until we step in...
now it is basically the responsibility of the USA to keep them alive.
they will drive themselves to distruction, we will end their despare.
we will educate, and enlighten them to the ways of capitolizm... now they are worthy of existence...

 

He actually compared 9/11 to the death star attack? Wow.....anyways I firmly believe this thread is entirely a one-sided thread and any other opposing viewpoint is either ridiculed or quashed into meaninglessness. I know this is a one-side opinion based thread, but an opposing viewpoint shouldn't be treated badly because it is not your own. Also this thread sounds as if it wants Americans feel ashamed for being Americans. I will make it known before I do not reply anymore, that I dislike this thread for that very reason. Is there a "Isn't it about time the terrorists stopped killing innocents?" No, you won't find one because apparently the author of this thread wishes to ignore the facts that terrorists attacked us and also ignored the facts of how we handled ourselves before we even attacked Afghanistan.

 

the US must intervene in the affairs in the middle-east in order to prevent themselves from obliterating eachother off the face of this planet. a diplomatic solution is always the initial resolve to situations such as 9/11. blair and bush did their best to use non-violent solutions and attempts at forming coalitions within the arab worlds. obviously, that didn't go too well. war against terrorism was the only reasonable solution to all the madness occuring in that region. innocent casualties that they suffered were unintentional/accidental. the innocent casualties that we suffered were intentional. they wanted our innocents dead. we suffered tremendous losses before the friggin war ever started and now we are belittled because we accidentally mowed down some of their innocents? it's a friggin war! expect people to die. hell, ours died before the war was even declared. we must intervene if we want to prevent themselves from wiping eachother out from the face of the earth.

cheers!

 

I personally have never smoked pot, it is illegal, and it is a cheap thrill for the ignorant and "unenlightened"

when I said that i didnt care if on 9/12/01 we nuked afghanistan i was being overdramatic. but If you think that I am a Nazi because I think diplomacy is weak, and instant military action is far more efficient, then so be it, if that were the definition, and not that it was a fascist government, also known as the national socialist (german worker's party) then i guess it would fit me... but I am in no way, an actual NAZI. allthough I do own some of their weapons.

afghanistan hosted terrorist groups, and we knew it. there is no need for a judge and jury here. We needed an executioner, and the taliban is being served its sentence. diplomacy wasted our time, we had known about the terrorist affiliations for too long, and Clinton knew too, he was just a huge stomachless coward, who also was a pot smoking hippie...