[quote]rainjack wrote:
Elkhntr1 wrote:
Ah, rain, I just get tired of hearing your “who de fuk are you” “You still living with mom and dad pussy” “Fuck em all let Allah sort em out” rhetoric. That gets ollllllld!
That’s fine if you have a problem with what I said. We are here to debate and counter. But when you make shit up - “Fuck em all let Allah sort em out” - then I have to wonder why you even post and use my name. I didn’t say that. But eveidently that’s not going to matter too much to you.
rainman, how many years passed between the first terrorist bombing in New York and 9/11? Do you realize that these guys work on a very slow timeline or are you on a slow timeline?
I don’t know the exact timeline, but we had The USS Cole attack, the U.S. Embassy attacked, and other terrorist attacks inside of an 8 year window. We are closing in on 4 years, now and no attacks on U.S. soil. What is your point?
You said they are killers of women and children. Do you realize many more women and children have been slaughtered in Iraq by U.S. munitions THEN from all of the terrorist acts combined.
Are you equating our involvement in Iraq with terrorism? It sounds like it to me. The difference is - and please try to pay attention here - the terrorists TARGET the innocent SPECIFICALLY. They hide amoung thew women and children. They hide in the Mosques. Then they blow them up if they don’t cooperate. Thw Coalition makes every effort to minimize the civilian casualties. Remember Fallujah? Remember our soldiers being killed by going door to door and trying to get the terrorist element out of Fallujah? Why did they go door to door when the safe play qould have been to turn Fallujah into a prking lot? Give up? To minimize civilian casualties.
When they blow up a building they are cowardly terrorists metioned in every GW speech. When we blow up a city with hundreds of non combatant casaluties including children it’s not reported.
Name a city that we have “blown up”. If you can’t find a report of a “blown up” city in the liberal anti-war rags that pass as journalism, you have a very weak position.
Rain, how can you justify the killing of any children? And, I’m tired of hearing the “Zap Brannigan” rationale of “It’s a shitty deal for them, but necessary crap”. Easy to say when your childrens or own life isn’t under fire!
If my children were “under fire” I would do what many fathers have done: take them to a safer place. That’s easy enough to do when the evil U.S. led band of murdering thugs take special precautions at the risk of their own life to try and ensure the safety of innocents. That’s something that the imported terrorists would never do.
You are just proving my point that the ABB crowd has transposed their hatred of Bush to the War on Terror. Defending the terrorists by painting us to look as evil as they are is truly a deplorable position to take.
[/quote]
It is the concept of sanctuary and it is something the US and other civilized military powers abide by.
Fallujah is an excellent example. The US designed the battle plan to minimize civilian casualties. They also warned the terrorists and the population and gave them a chance to surrender (psyops). The Red Army, the Nazi’s, take you pick would not have done that. Fallujah would not have stood for one day against a combined arms assault or even against an armored division attack. We chose not to do that.
When the enemy uses terror and fights using irregular tactics then they have given up their right to the concept of sanctuary. Sanctuary is the military concept of mercy on the battlefield and is granted to opponents who offer the same.
Our enemy in this war are not soldiers, they are murderers. The US didn’t cause the murder of commuters in London or office workers in NYC, the terrorists did.