OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 The solution is simple: Kill 'em All. Of course, I mean all of those involved in the killing and post-murder activites. Personally, if it was up to me, I would have called in an airstrike and instantly killed all of the hundreds that were involved in this act of terrorism. I'll bet it wouldn't happen again. Force is the only thing these animals understand; it is force that they should get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Originally posted by Ancalagon the Black Folks, stop and think for a moment. The liberation of the Iraqi people was one of the few good things that came out of this "war." Conservatives on this board have posted about how the good things that are happening in Iraq as a result of Saddam's downfall are being underreported. Now, there's an event in which some Iraqis attack the Americans in order to try to get us to leave, and people are saying "Screw them!" Well, we invaded their country on the pretext of helping them out. Some are grateful. Others are not. Whom do we want to help? Do we want all of them to turn against us, or do we want to cement the good feeling towards the USA that's developed among those who are better off without Saddam? ... or do we want to get kicked around by a small pack of ungrateful terrorists? Like I said in another post, if it was up to me, that whole mob of hundreds of people would have disappeared in an airstrike. Such action is justified because they are ant-coalition terrorists. We are there to win and not to win a UN popularity contest. Let's win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 If we resort to levelling towns, then we don't win. We lose. We become just as bad as the bad guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Originally posted by Ancalagon the Black If we resort to levelling towns, then we don't win. We lose. We become just as bad as the bad guys. Where did I say we were going to level an entire town? I expect better of you, AtB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 I'm just glad Dubya and company had a plan when they decided to invade Iraq. Otherwise, we would be bogged down there for God knows how many years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Personally, if it was up to me, I would have called in an airstrike and instantly killed all of the hundreds that were involved in this act of terrorism. Is an airstrike going to be able to target just exactly who in the crowd is a terrorist? What percent of a town's population needs to be destroyed before the town is, for all intents and purposes, destroyed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Guys, this was just utterly disgusting. I don't care where you are politically, I think we can all say this was a nauseating act commited by some horrible humans. It really brings up to question our morals when we protect those who are willing to die to attack our troops!!! Right now guys, we are in a quagmire, but the question is how to get out of it. Every option is bad and sends the wrong message, in other words, there isn't much good that will come out of being over there right now. 1.) We pull out in July after the transitional government takes over. If we do this, we will almost certainly cause a civil war and years of turmoil in Iraq. The one thing we don't need is more instability in the Middle East. We need to stay the course and make sure everything is O.K. and that is nowhere near happening now. 2.) We do in "fact stay the course". This is really the only option we have for any chance of good. Ideally, Iraq would police themselves and we could leave. Unfortunately, that's what Americans would do, we've had freedom for over 200 years and we're brought up to think civilized. Iraqis-not all of them but some of them-and other muslim groups, are trained to think of war first, it's the way they've been brought up. There will be an increasing number of attacks against our troops leading up until the election because of their mentality and hatred of the US. Can we attack back? no we can't. No matter who we go after, it will be the evil Americans persecuting the poor Iraqis again. The entire world would forget about the American soldiers and workers that were killed over there. There will be a picture of a dead Iraqi child posted on all their news services. This is what they'll see and this is what they'll believe. Our President is in the beginning of a campaign, do you actually think he'd put himself in a position to have dead Iraqi children shown on the evening news? This, unfortunately is what we're facing. We can't get UN help into Iraq becuase we gave them the finger, and other countries are backing out of support for the US. We are slowly becoming the isolated nation from the rest of the world. Look at what happened, this is the reason I'm against Bush. We're loosing young American soldiers everyday protecting people who don't want us there. We should not be in Iraq, but now we HAVE to stay in Iraq. There is no "good" solution. I for one do not think Saddam Hussen was worth the trouble. When did the "war on terror" turn into us occupying a country to free people who don't want to be freed!?!!?? There was something ironically horrible with a nightly news story I saw tonight. It was a story about a man who was killed in Iraq two months ago. He wasn't a soldier, but a worker. You see, this man had been unemployed for 2 years, his factory moved overseas, and his unemployment benifits ran out. He had a son and a wife, and he chose to move to Iraq for work. He could make $100K a year and set up his retirement for his wife and son. He was killed in an ambush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Originally posted by Ancalagon the Black Is an airstrike going to be able to target just exactly who in the crowd is a terrorist? What percent of a town's population needs to be destroyed before the town is, for all intents and purposes, destroyed? I invite you to visit a very nice website - http://www.janes.com There was a huge, concentrated mob of terrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 979guy Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 anyone going? ..... Rebuilding Iraq Expo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Originally posted by Sir Lucious Let's here what you would do Bizzaro... or are you only inclined to sit there a criticize like a typical lib.. Well unlike a typical conservative I would skip the jingoistic labeling followed by ironic demands for violence and simpley demand that we do what should have been automatic. Send in troops to get the bodies of our people and stop the sick ****s from desecrating them by any means deemed necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Now, I was opposed to this war. And, I'll admit, I haven't seen the pictures, just heard descriptions. But, I've got to admit, if I'm President, and somebody tells me that a bunch of camel lovers are dragging an american body through the street, my first reaction is "kill everybody, and level every building, within two blocks". I'll make a speech, later, to the american and Iraqi people, explaining that the US would really prefer a civilized war where the only fighting is done by people in uniform, and anybody not wearing a uniform is out-of-bounds, and we'll be happy to do so just as soon as the people, here, decide to become civilized. (I think I'd deliberatly phrase it that way). But, if they really want to "get mideval", then I guess we'll just have to do that. I'd tell them that, if it happens again, I'm using Napalm. I also think my message to the Iraqi people would reference Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven: The next time you see somebody dragging an american body through the street, my message is "Any man don't want to get killed, best clear on out the back way." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 Originally posted by Destino Well unlike a typical conservative I would skip the jingoistic labeling followed by ironic demands for violence and simpley demand that we do what should have been automatic. Send in troops to get the bodies of our people and stop the sick ****s from desecrating them by any means deemed necessary. It is more than that Destino. Contrary to your world-view that Iraq is separate to the war on terror, the terrorists know this is CENTRAL to the war on terror. What we are seeing may be the last battlefield of the war, thus the atrocities in an effort to demoralize us. When we win in Iraq, the war will be close to being over (we see this already in the recent capitulation of Lybia, Pakistan's stepped up action against Al Qaeda, et al). Syria and Iran and N Korea will soon be getting in-line, or the they become the next battlefield. Whether you like it or no, this war is NOT about what America does, or has done. It is about people committed to our destruction. We cannot unilaterally declare "Peace," just as we could not unilaterally disarm our Nukes, or pull out of Western Europe (you remember, all of the appeasers wanting these things, months before the Soviets collaspsed because they realized that America would not back up and that they could not keep up). There is no choice but to fight this war, wherever it leads, and that may be Iran/Syria/N. Korea. Our goal is not to stop them from mutilating our dead. Our goal is not to understand them. Our goal is not to be sensitive to their beliefs. Our goal is to defeat them utterly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickalino Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 Ultimate irony of the double-standard against the U.S - We were called "animals" for showing Saddam on worldwide TV getting medical treatment from a doctor, probably the best medical treatment he ever had, yet few in the international community care to react to our citizens being savagely, repulsively killed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chet06 Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 I can't understand why it is so hard to figure out that the terrorists and Al Qaida are not in Iraq but in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The despicable acts yesterday in Fallujah are a consequence of Sunni muslims pissed that they have been dethroned and occupied.. The whole notion that the Iraqis will welcome us with open arms is a load of propoganda by the administration. We made a mistake by focusing on Iraq...once the mistake has been made we need to put more boots on the ground and stay the course. Leaving on June 30 is a huge mistake. We need to crush the insurgency in order to have any credibility around the world and to show the terrorists we mean business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 Originally posted by chet06 I can't understand why it is so hard to figure out that the terrorists and Al Qaida are not in Iraq but in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The despicable acts yesterday in Fallujah are a consequence of Sunni muslims pissed that they have been dethroned and occupied.. The whole notion that the Iraqis will welcome us with open arms is a load of propoganda by the administration. We made a mistake by focusing on Iraq...once the mistake has been made we need to put more boots on the ground and stay the course. Leaving on June 30 is a huge mistake. We need to crush the insurgency in order to have any credibility around the world and to show the terrorists we mean business. Is that so? Have you ever heard of the Salmon Pak terrorist training center sounth of Baghdad where they had a 747 fuselage and they trained foreign Al Qaeda types to hijack planes with knives and boxcutters? Have you ever heard of the Al Qaeda camp in the north near the Iranian border? We know they were there and we know there were Al Qaeda types there. Do you know how we know? Because we killed them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 Originally posted by chet06 I can't understand why it is so hard to figure out that the terrorists and Al Qaida are not in Iraq but in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The despicable acts yesterday in Fallujah are a consequence of Sunni muslims pissed that they have been dethroned and occupied.. The whole notion that the Iraqis will welcome us with open arms is a load of propoganda by the administration. We made a mistake by focusing on Iraq...once the mistake has been made we need to put more boots on the ground and stay the course. Leaving on June 30 is a huge mistake. We need to crush the insurgency in order to have any credibility around the world and to show the terrorists we mean business. Is that so? Have you ever heard of the Salmon Pak terrorist training center south of Baghdad where they had a 747 fuselage and they trained foreign Al Qaeda types to hijack planes with knives and boxcutters? Have you ever heard of the Al Qaeda camp in the north near the Iranian border? We know they were there and we know there were Al Qaeda types there. Do you know how we know? Because we killed them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chet06 Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 Originally posted by JimmiJo Is that so? Have you ever heard of the Salmon Pak terrorist training center south of Baghdad where they had a 747 fuselage and they trained foreign Al Qaeda types to hijack planes with knives and boxcutters? Have you ever heard of the Al Qaeda camp in the north near the Iranian border? We know they were there and we know there were Al Qaeda types there. Do you know how we know? Because we killed them... It is a question of degree. The real terrorists who killed US civillians on 911 are in Pakistan not Iraq. We should be rooting them out and not wasting time, money and other resources on Iraq. The real enemy is Bin Laden in Pakistan who is being shielded by Musharraf and the ISI. I am sick of having nobody being able to rebut this reality. If you know these guys are in Iraq then let us know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 Originally posted by chet06 It is a question of degree. The real terrorists who killed US civillians on 911 are in Pakistan not Iraq. We should be rooting them out and not wasting time, money and other resources on Iraq. The real enemy is Bin Laden in Pakistan who is being shielded by Musharraf and the ISI. I am sick of having nobody being able to rebut this reality. If you know these guys are in Iraq then let us know. Yea, they're in Iraq. . . they're hiding under the WMDs. I hate to make a joke like that, espically when we have soldiers dieing oiver there, but WERE IN THE WRONG COUNTRY!! If we want to get Bil Laden, start at Bagdhad and move east about 1500 miles or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 Uh, jihadists are all over Iraq right now. Duh, our biggest firefight in Baghdad last year was with a gang of foreign fighters. They were not merely "mercenaries" but terrorists and Saddam was their benefactor. Only an utter boob would think that a country that celebrated 9/11, harbored a terrorist from the first WTC bombing and funded terrorist groups is not a target. BTW, AQ is in Iraq and has been. AQ is jihad--you have to look at that more than the direct org headed by Bin Laden. I mean how many Arabs are in Indonesia planning attacks? Not as many as there are radicalized Indonesians. This isn't about that organization but about Islamic jihad and atrocities throughout the world, from Sudan(genocide and slavery--where is the world community and the press?!??) to Mauritania(established system of slavery) to the Philippines to Kashmir to Israel to Chechnya to Saudi ARabia. Do you guys even remember the Malaysian PM's remarks about Jews controlling the world? This narrow-minded idea that if we got rid of some Uzbeks, Chechens, Pakistanis and Arabs in Quetta we'd win is, well, stupid. This is global, more global than even National Socialism, as it is not restricted to those of only one nationality but to a large minority of anyone embracing Islam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted April 2, 2004 Share Posted April 2, 2004 Raze Fallujah Raze Fallujah By Tammy Bruce FrontPageMagazine.com | April 2, 2004 The latest reminder of the type of brutality that has ruled Iraq under the thumb of Saddam Hussein is in the action of his supporters, and their al-Qaeda mentors, in Fallujah. The murder and desecration of the bodies of American contractors reminds us that, while the Iraqis everywhere appreciate and support their liberation, there are a few rats who would prefer a return to the hell of Saddam’s depraved tyranny. Fallujah has remained a hotbed of support for the brutal past regime, and for reasons that can only be explained by political correctness, we have not, up to this point, destroyed that base of murder, terrorism and bestial violence. I contend it is now time to raze Fallujah. I’ll remind you of what it took to quell the beasts of Germany and Japan in 1945: complete and total destruction. There was a reason why we bombed Dresden into oblivion. There was a reason why Berlin was not saved. There was a reason why two atomic bombs had to be dropped on Japan after Hiroshima: they still refused to surrender unconditionally. Beasts of violence and destruction understand one thing: destruction. The media, of course, are comparing the Fallujah horror with Mogadishu. Almost with gleeful hysteria, the Left and their water boys, the mainstream media, seem desperate to cast this as Mogadishu. Why? To make George W. Bush look bad, that’s why. Because they revel in horror. Because they need Americans to be just like them. We must see a pit like Fallujah as Saddam's last bunker. The time for political correctness, worry about inflaming the situation, and restraint, are over. This is war. The people of Fallujah have decided to continue the war, so it should indeed be visited upon them with no mercy. But consider this inane comment to the New York Times by Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, chief spokesman for the American military command in Iraq, as he tried to explain why American forces have yet to enter the city: "I think that there was a well-thought-out decision on the part of the Marines that let's not rush headlong into there, there may be ambushes set up a pre-emptive attack into the city could have taken a bad situation and made it even worse." Really? With this kind of response, if Kimmitt was making decisions in April 1945, perhaps we would have simply put a fence around Berlin in an effort not to inflame Hitler. Really, now, how can we make a situation where Americans have been murdered, set aflame and their bodies dragged through the streets and hung from a bridge worse? Let’s be honest here. The violent only understand violence. Gentility emboldens them. Kindness disgusts them. And it should. Even the barbaric have no respect for being handled with care. Even they know they should be destroyed. Kimmitt is now making noises that we will be teaching Fallujah a lesson. What that would be from the man who didn’t want to make the situation worse I can’t imagine. Kimmitt should be reminded of Dresden, Berlin, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The brutal respond to and understand brutal might, especially when it is delivered by the decent. This is a good time to remember, however, the difference between the Clinton and Bush administrations. Bill Clinton was afraid and retreated out of Somalia, which as we know, is what so empowered bin Laden and made him feel Americans would cower when confronted. We now know bin Laden was behind the Somali warlord in Mogadishu, and when we turned and ran like frightened rabbits, did that help the world situation? Was our cowardice then supposed to help save American lives? While it was supposed to, it did quite the opposite on September 11, 2001. Three thousand Americans died, mostly civilians, because the American military, neutered by a terrified Clinton government, told the beasts that we have no character, no conviction. Clinton, soft and afraid, told bin Laden that Americans were soft and afraid. For those of you conflicted, ask yourself, would World War II have ended more quickly if we threw up our hands and said, oh let Hitler have it! Yes, of course. And then what? The disease of Hitler would have metastasized to our homeland, replete, no doubt, with smiling German-speaking Frenchmen leading the charge. After all, so many Jews, so little time! Were we not supposed to know the consequences of showing the Radical Islamist animals our underside? Did we not understand, despite examples through thousands of years, that murderous despots and terrorists are never appeased, they are made more bold by the retreat of the decent? Of course, we knew, but we are apt to take our President’s lead when it comes to what is right. Even today, we have just learned that Clinton knew of the Hutus "final solution" in Rwanda, and the genocide of Tutsis that took place. For years Clinton denied knowing the scope of the slaughter. Now, intelligence reports obtained using the U.S. Freedom of Information Act show Clinton knew of the genocide with his senior officials privately using the word within 16 days of the start of the killings, but chose not to do so publicly. Why? Because the president had already decided not to intervene because he remained terrified of "another Mogadishu." With these reports, it appears the legacy of our first "black president" is that he chose to ignore the murderous slaughter of 800,000 black people. We must decide what we’re made of because how we handle the barbarians in Iraq will send a message to beasts everywhere. Are we to be like George W. Bush or Bill Clinton? It's an easy question. Just ask Rwanda's surviving Tutsis who they prefer we be like. I wonder, as Clinton sits around his office with his cigars, Hillary (or some other woman. It really doesn¹t matter, does it?) and John Kerry, does he ever wonder what it’s like to be hacked to death with a machete? Heck, why do I even ask this of a man whose only concern has been with women whose limbs can do him some good? Today’s Democrats, who are Clinton’s Democrats, still have no stomach to do what’s right. Why not? Because they cannot see beyond themselves and wanting to save their own skin. The malignant narcissists who run the Democratic Party and American leftists who control our culture, feel there is nothing worth fighting for except their own power. Facing down the depraved takes courage, perseverance and the resolve to put the bad guys where they belong. We did not leave the world to the Germans because we’re better than that. And we will not leave the world to the Islamists, because we are still better than that. No matter how much nihilistic American leftists and the media would prefer us to return to the days of fear and cowardice, we will still refuse to be like them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrangeSkin Posted April 3, 2004 Share Posted April 3, 2004 Kill every single one of them. Men, women, and children. :asta: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted April 3, 2004 Share Posted April 3, 2004 Originally posted by chet06 It is a question of degree. The real terrorists who killed US civillians on 911 are in Pakistan not Iraq. We should be rooting them out and not wasting time, money and other resources on Iraq. The real enemy is Bin Laden in Pakistan who is being shielded by Musharraf and the ISI. I am sick of having nobody being able to rebut this reality. If you know these guys are in Iraq then let us know. They are in Iraq! The terrorists know the importance of the battle of Iraq, even if the appeasers here in America do not. http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20040320-102255-9065r.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted April 3, 2004 Share Posted April 3, 2004 Almost with gleeful hysteria, the Left and their water boys, the mainstream media, seem desperate to cast this as Mogadishu. For someone who claims to be an independent thinker, Phat Hog, you sure posted one revolting article. Orangeskin, that comment was inhuman. I can only hope that that was a terrible, terrible joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted April 3, 2004 Share Posted April 3, 2004 Originally posted by Ancalagon the Black For someone who claims to be an independent thinker, Phat Hog, you sure posted one revolting article. No arguements there AtB... Consider the source - Tammy is clearly biased, but does make some good points. 'Eat the chicken and spit out the bones' I always say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.