Why is America afriad?

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

Let's see, wars that America has been in to defend the homeland, oh I don't know does this: http://www.chandlerswatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/9-11-1.bmp Ring a bell?

Cruise missiles are good, but you know what, lobbing a few cruise missiles isn't exactly scary, if I was them I'd be laughing at America lobbing a few cruise missiles at you. But then again, Clinton couldn't even get the target right.

America's problem is not because we love our country too much, I've never heard of such a thing, loving a country is not bad, loving a government is, Britain I'm sorry but lost most of my respect.

What do you mean you've never heard of loving a country too much? That's insane! That is the entire philosophy behind fascism!!! Nazism and Fascism are extreme, extreme, extreme nationalism.

Gracania is right by the way. You can't truly fight a "war on terror," it is like fighting a belief, which is impossible.

New Roosevelt wrote:

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

Let's see, wars that America has been in to defend the homeland, oh I don't know does this: http://www.chandlerswatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/9-11-1.bmp Ring a bell?

Cruise missiles are good, but you know what, lobbing a few cruise missiles isn't exactly scary, if I was them I'd be laughing at America lobbing a few cruise missiles at you. But then again, Clinton couldn't even get the target right.

America's problem is not because we love our country too much, I've never heard of such a thing, loving a country is not bad, loving a government is, Britain I'm sorry but lost most of my respect.

What do you mean you've never heard of loving a country too much? That's insane! That is the entire philosophy behind fascism!!! Nazism and Fascism are extreme, extreme, extreme nationalism.

Gracania is right by the way. You can't truly fight a "war on terror," it is like fighting a belief, which is impossible.

I love my country, It's the government I don't love, does that explain it? In fascism they define loving a country as loving the government as well, which I would never ever love my government unless it did serious reforms.

Also, Terrorism is not a belief, Islam is a belief, however Terrorism is an action, which can be fought.

Terrorism is the tactic of the movement. The only way you can deal with terrorism by force is to destroy the movement and as I said that can't be done. Conversation is the only way, look at Northern Ireland.

Gracania wrote:Terrorism is the tactic of the movement. The only way you can deal with terrorism by force is to destroy the movement and as I said that can't be done. Conversation is the only way, look at Northern Ireland.

Okay, I'll remember that the next time a terrorist shoots a soldier. "Oh you should have talked to them, they're nice people, they didn't want to kill you"

Exactly, you can't fight terrorism with force so putting soldiers against them wont work. You can't go to countries where a terrorist organization is based and then killing or capturing these people. It just makes more terrorists.

Gracania wrote:Exactly, you can't fight terrorism with force so putting soldiers against them wont work. You can't go to countries where a terrorist organization is based and then killing or capturing these people. It just makes more terrorists.

Yes because letting them blow up the Twin Towers and doing nothing is just so...... much better.

Proportional response which is not what Afghanistan was. Now the government of Afghanistan needed to be destroyed but the twin towers as a reason for war is not proportional.

Gracania wrote:Proportional response which is not what Afghanistan was. Now the government of Afghanistan needed to be destroyed but the twin towers as a reason for war is not proportional.

What?........... Wait wait wait, we were supposed to let them attack the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and head for the White House (even though they didn't get there) and we're supposed to negotiate?!?!?! WTF is next, someone nukes us and we invite them to dinner?

That's not what I meant by proportional response. A proportional response is where a revenge attack is made in proportion to what damage was done. e.g. They shoot down a helicopter over Gaza and you blow up a training camp. You don't go over board and tactics like that kept the Cold War cold, and thus kept the planet habitable with life still on it.

Gracania wrote:That's not what I meant by proportional response. A proportional response is where a revenge attack is made in proportion to what damage was done. e.g. They shoot down a helicopter over Gaza and you blow up a training camp. You don't go over board and tactics like that kept the Cold War cold, and thus kept the planet habitable with life still on it.

Oh, well that I do partially agree, from a tactical point of view, it's illogical, from a political point of view it's acceptable, and from my personal view point I'm torn.

Its getting a little intense in here so here we are:



Right back to the discussion...

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

Gracania wrote:Proportional response which is not what Afghanistan was. Now the government of Afghanistan needed to be destroyed but the twin towers as a reason for war is not proportional.

What?........... Wait wait wait, we were supposed to let them attack the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and head for the White House (even though they didn't get there) and we're supposed to negotiate?!?!?! WTF is next, someone nukes us and we invite them to dinner?

You know that there is actually NO evidence that they flew a plane into the pentagon right? There was no metal, no skeleton of the plane, nothing like that to indicate a plane flew in. In order for the type of metal in 747's to melt, the temperatures need to be ASTRONOMICALLY high. INCREDIBLY high. Like upwards of 5000 degrees. And there is no way it got that hot.

Please lets not get into 9/11 Conspiracy theories.

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:I agree, liberalism is what hurts a country, look at France (I'm not going into detail on that matter as it might offend people and I don't feel like getting banned). I strongly believe rather than making new gun laws or banning them all together, we should make intelligent gun laws and then enforce the ones we have. Now, I'm not saying that every half witted person should be allowed to go out and own a gun, but rather than taking away law biding American's rights, and turning the nation into a dictatorship (which taking away guns is the first step) we should be making competent actions to reduce the problem with guns.

Hey! Wtf do u think is wrong with France??

Nova Loherien wrote:

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:I agree, liberalism is what hurts a country, look at France (I'm not going into detail on that matter as it might offend people and I don't feel like getting banned). I strongly believe rather than making new gun laws or banning them all together, we should make intelligent gun laws and then enforce the ones we have. Now, I'm not saying that every half witted person should be allowed to go out and own a gun, but rather than taking away law biding American's rights, and turning the nation into a dictatorship (which taking away guns is the first step) we should be making competent actions to reduce the problem with guns.

Hey! Wtf do u think is wrong with France??

You really don't want me to go into that.

New Roosevelt wrote:

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

Gracania wrote:Proportional response which is not what Afghanistan was. Now the government of Afghanistan needed to be destroyed but the twin towers as a reason for war is not proportional.

What?........... Wait wait wait, we were supposed to let them attack the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and head for the White House (even though they didn't get there) and we're supposed to negotiate?!?!?! WTF is next, someone nukes us and we invite them to dinner?

You know that there is actually NO evidence that they flew a plane into the pentagon right? There was no metal, no skeleton of the plane, nothing like that to indicate a plane flew in. In order for the type of metal in 747's to melt, the temperatures need to be ASTRONOMICALLY high. INCREDIBLY high. Like upwards of 5000 degrees. And there is no way it got that hot.

Oh yeah, that's right, because those 2,000 people just went poof.

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

Nova Loherien wrote:

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:I agree, liberalism is what hurts a country, look at France (I'm not going into detail on that matter as it might offend people and I don't feel like getting banned). I strongly believe rather than making new gun laws or banning them all together, we should make intelligent gun laws and then enforce the ones we have. Now, I'm not saying that every half witted person should be allowed to go out and own a gun, but rather than taking away law biding American's rights, and turning the nation into a dictatorship (which taking away guns is the first step) we should be making competent actions to reduce the problem with guns.

Hey! Wtf do u think is wrong with France??

You really don't want me to go into that.

y? is it because you have no strong valid points on how France is? Do you not like France? Do you think that France is a failed state? WTF do you think is wrong with France?

i think its the stereo type. hey hey hey!!! i have a joke. why cant England use fireworks? cause every time they do frnce surrendors. lol rofl France used to be (and debatebly is) the weakling country.

the UNSC wrote:i think its the stereo type. hey hey hey!!! i have a joke. why cant England use fireworks? cause every time they do frnce surrendors. lol rofl France used to be (and debatebly is) the weakling country.

They're the weakling country on the UN Security Council. They are the only one of the victorious allied nations in ww2 that fell. The US, USSR, UK, and China all stood despite massive losses. While France fell, actually signed themselves over, to the Nazi's.

While in modern day they are completely fine, many still remember them surrendering to the Nazi's.

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

New Roosevelt wrote:

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

Gracania wrote:Proportional response which is not what Afghanistan was. Now the government of Afghanistan needed to be destroyed but the twin towers as a reason for war is not proportional.

What?........... Wait wait wait, we were supposed to let them attack the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and head for the White House (even though they didn't get there) and we're supposed to negotiate?!?!?! WTF is next, someone nukes us and we invite them to dinner?

You know that there is actually NO evidence that they flew a plane into the pentagon right? There was no metal, no skeleton of the plane, nothing like that to indicate a plane flew in. In order for the type of metal in 747's to melt, the temperatures need to be ASTRONOMICALLY high. INCREDIBLY high. Like upwards of 5000 degrees. And there is no way it got that hot.

Oh yeah, that's right, because those 2,000 people just went poof.

You realize that your comment has nothing to do with what I said, right?

Read it.

I think he was talking about the crazy French racists running the government who have banned the wearing of headscarves in schools for Muslims. Its ridiculous.

Oh and to the French in general: Crecy, Agincourt, the whole Peninsular war, Waterloo and we saved your arses in two world wars! The best you did was 1066, but they were Vikings who had taken over large parts of France then conquered us so not really a French victory when the Frankish King paid the Normans tribute.

As one man said going to war without the French is like going to war without an accordion, you just leave a load of noisy useless baggage behind.

My favorite French quote: 'When God made France he made the most beautiful country on Earth. To balance this out he made the French people.'

New Roosevelt wrote:

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

New Roosevelt wrote:

Wilhelm Tuscini wrote:

Gracania wrote:Proportional response which is not what Afghanistan was. Now the government of Afghanistan needed to be destroyed but the twin towers as a reason for war is not proportional.

What?........... Wait wait wait, we were supposed to let them attack the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and head for the White House (even though they didn't get there) and we're supposed to negotiate?!?!?! WTF is next, someone nukes us and we invite them to dinner?

You know that there is actually NO evidence that they flew a plane into the pentagon right? There was no metal, no skeleton of the plane, nothing like that to indicate a plane flew in. In order for the type of metal in 747's to melt, the temperatures need to be ASTRONOMICALLY high. INCREDIBLY high. Like upwards of 5000 degrees. And there is no way it got that hot.

Oh yeah, that's right, because those 2,000 people just went poof.

You realize that your comment has nothing to do with what I said, right?

Read it.

You're one of those conspiracy theorists that 'know the truth' and yet have no idea. Unless you were just pointing out one of those conspiracy theorists said.

i agree on that one. conspiracy is more often than not a fat assed load of BS.

Agreed except when it comes to Kennedy.

Rofl! epic dude. truly epic.