Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo

Hezbollah cowards caught on video


Recommended Posts

I think the point he is trying to make is to eliminate the refugee problem as well
You're still not getting it. If they are all DEAD, then you have no refugee problem

Oh, I get it all right. Your proposed solution to every problem is to kill everyone. If there are Islamic terrorists, you want to kill all the Muslims.

If Hezbollah is in Lebanon, you want to kill all the Lebanese. I imagine that if you are stuck in line at the grocery store, you want to kill everyone in front of you in the line.

Once again, the reason I addressed my questions to nelms is that, in the post I originally commented on, he actually advocated something besides killing everyone:

I say flatten the whole effin' country and turn it into a buffer zone. The Lebanese people can move to Syria or Iran.

However nonsensical it may be to try and send 4 million new refugees, 40% of them Christians, to Syria or Iran, at least that is an idea that goes beyond killing everyone. If nelms is going to propose it, I'd like to hear him back it up. Let's see if he took the time to think before he spoke or whether he just made a wanton comment that doesn't make any sense. If, as you insist, all he means to say is that we should kill everyone in Lebanon, then let him say that. I don't see why anyone else feels the need to speak in place of nelms unless they can offer some support or explanation for his "refugee plan."

Hardly. Most all of the comments in these threads advocate the eradication of a group of people that can't get along with the rest of 21st century humanity

I could really care less if the *******s were purple, I'd still advocate getting rid of them and their ideology.

All of them if it takes that

Who are the "group of people that can't get along with the rest of 21st century humanity," the so-called "*******s," and the "them" that you wish to get rid of? Is it Islamic radicals, or all Muslims? It's difficult to understand your meaning or intentions because you confuse the two and describe them interchangeably. Anyone who will "advocate getting rid of them" needs to be very clear and consistent about which "them" he is speaking about.

A lot of people, including me, would agree that Islamic radicals around the world (not just in the Middle East) are a "group of people that can't get along with the rest of 21st century humanity" and are a group of "*******s" that we need to get rid of.

Unfortunately, there are those who think that all Muslims are a "group of people that can't get along with the rest of 21st century humanity" and are a group of "*******s" that we need to get rid of. And thus, you get comments like the "yellow Muslim pig" comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever your President meets up with our Primeminister, we side with you over an issue. Iraq being the most notable one, because we send in our army. Whereas other countries have there pride, there principles, for example France, and choose not to join in the war.

If England had gotten as much Oil-for-Food money as France had received from Saddam, perhaps England might have had similar "principles."

What angers me is that After one George Bush visit to London, England and our government is now backing Israel.

Personally, I have heard stories that would justify both sides actions, but I wont make a decision on who to 'Side With', because It seems both sides are causing atrocities. I have no sympathy for Hezbollah, because of there cowardly tactics, and it angers me that yet again we side with the US on another middle east issue, so I have no love for Israel either.

So you don't want to choose sides because both sides are committing atrocities, but you're mad because England has chosen to support the U.S. because of Bush? Do you really see no difference in the two sides that are fighting, or do you just hate Bush that much?

As of three weeks ago, the two sides were living in relative peace. In short order, the Palestinians came across the border, killed some soldiers and kidnapped one, and then Hezbollah came across the Lebanese border, killed some soldiers and kidnapped a couple. Israeli soldiers wear uniforms, Hezbollah doesn't. Hezbollah conduct their attacks to maximize civilian casualties -- both Israeli civilian casualties, and Lebanese civilian casualties. Israel warns civilians to flee, Hezbollah keeps them there and does not allow them to leave. The fact that there are so many Lebanese civilian casualties is not Israel's fault, it's Hezbollah's.

Perhaps England sided with the U.S. on "yet another middle east issue" because there is so clearly a right side and wrong side, and we're on the right side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jumbo, thank you for pointing this out. All these threads have been disgustingly racist especially by a few posters who are basically advocating ethnic cleansing.

The "pigs" comment was over the top. But nothing else here has been "racist", per se. If you're suggesting that being anti-Islamic-terrorist is racist, I suggest you re-think your definition of racism.

If the Islamo-fascists did not make a habit of

- not wearing uniforms (as required by the Geneva Convention)

- conducting attacks from the middle of civilian populations,

- using mosques, schools and hospitals and neighborhoods to store weapons & ammo,

- using mosques, schools and hospitals as firing platforms

- kidnapping

- torturing, in the true sense of the word

- beheading

(all prohibited by the Geneva Convention)

...then I'm guessing you wouldn't hear as much "racist" criticism of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caught on tape, huh? Well, I see that even Israel changed its story.

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel on Tuesday urged Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to establish a state commission of inquiry into the killings at Qana.

As the Israel Air Force continues to investigate the air strike, questions have been raised over military accounts of the incident.

It now appears that the military had no information on rockets launched from the site of the building, or the presence of Hezbollah men at the time.

The Israel Defense Forces had said after the deadly air-strike that many rockets had been launched from Qana. However, it changed its version on Monday.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caught on tape, huh? Well, I see that even Israel changed its story.


The military had no info on rocket lauchers, and evidently the Hezzbos had a whole lot fewer bodies then they claim as well.

Digging up dead kids for publicity must be backbreaking work :rolleyes:


The Red Cross published that 28 corpses were evacuated from Qana, 19 of which were children. The report clashes with the Lebanese report that 57 people were killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...