Mumbai

[Kirkland Laing]

No you are incorrect. There has been no concerted effort on the part of the US or any significant part of the US to kill lots of Muslim civilians. Dude, do do you really honestly think that with all the bombing that the US has conducted, that it was really an attmpt to kill civilians, because by golly if that was the case then, as I have stated, there would be far far more dead muslims civilians. Why do you think the US is having so much trouble in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is due in large part to the lack of respect groups like ALQuaida have for civilian life, shit they have no problem killing Iraqis just to try and make us look bad. It's because the US is trying not to kill civilians. Although obviously they are not having 100% success.

Sorry about the bold, but you seem to be consistently ignoring the crux of my points. YOu speak of the evil US and their bombing and all, and a few white supremacists but you have consistently ignored the key issues about indiscriminate killing of civilians. As many as possible. No other group has taken this stated position. What do you think these guys mean when they walk down the street whacking themselves bloody with 2 by 4s, chanting "Death to the Great Satan"? Do you see White Supremacists obtaining nukes, and bioweapons? Are you prepared to say we are no better all the way to your grave?

Really?
We sent nerve gas to Sadaam,blew the snot out of Iraq twice,propped up the Shah in Iran,fed weapons to the Iranians and the Saudi's,trained the mujahadeen,propped up Israel no matter what atrocity they did,and trained the Lebanese Christian Militias(this is the short list by the way) in an effort of good will to our fellow man?
Heaven forbid we actually really disliked someone,I suppose that would involve nukes,or plagues of locusts or something

OK guy I will take this to indicate that you really do believe that you (The US) are no better than Al Quaida, and that you are getting what you deserve. I will also take this to mean that you really do believe that the USA wants to kill lots of civilians. I say that because you obviously disagree with me when I say that the US doesn't want to kill as many civilians as possible.

The US doesn't have to target civilians. They have the world's most advanced military. They can spot something on a satellite, press a button on an aircraft carrier somewhere in the world and fire a missile to take the thing they saw out. Nobody can compete with America militarily which is why nobody tries and uses terrorism instead. I'm sure if you gave AQ billions of dollars of F-16s and Stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, spy satellites and tanks and years of training then they'd fight us using those weapons. They'd be much more effective. But they don't have them so they use what they've got.

[CGM]

Really?
We sent nerve gas to Sadaam,blew the snot out of Iraq twice,propped up the Shah in Iran,fed weapons to the Iranians and the Saudi's,trained the mujahadeen,propped up Israel no matter what atrocity they did,and trained the Lebanese Christian Militias(this is the short list by the way) in an effort of good will to our fellow man?
Heaven forbid we actually really disliked someone,I suppose that would involve nukes,or plagues of locusts or something

OK guy I will take this to indicate that you really do believe that you (The US) are no better than Al Quaida, and that you are getting what you deserve. I will also take this to mean that you really do believe that the USA wants to kill lots of civilians. I say that because you obviously disagree with me when I say that the US doesn't want to kill as many civilians as possible.

The US doesn't have to target civilians. They have the world's most advanced military. They can spot something on a satellite, press a button on an aircraft carrier somewhere in the world and fire a missile to take the thing they saw out. Nobody can compete with America militarily which is why nobody tries and uses terrorism instead. I'm sure if you gave AQ billions of dollars of F-16s and Stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, spy satellites and tanks and years of training then they'd fight us using those weapons. They'd be much more effective. But they don't have them so they use what they've got.

Thank you.

Fight us? Hell, they'd pave us over.

Use what they got? yep, they'll continue to get more and use it too.

[Kirkland Laing]

OK guy I will take this to indicate that you really do believe that you (The US) are no better than Al Quaida, and that you are getting what you deserve. I will also take this to mean that you really do believe that the USA wants to kill lots of civilians. I say that because you obviously disagree with me when I say that the US doesn't want to kill as many civilians as possible.

The US doesn't have to target civilians. They have the world's most advanced military. They can spot something on a satellite, press a button on an aircraft carrier somewhere in the world and fire a missile to take the thing they saw out. Nobody can compete with America militarily which is why nobody tries and uses terrorism instead. I'm sure if you gave AQ billions of dollars of F-16s and Stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, spy satellites and tanks and years of training then they'd fight us using those weapons. They'd be much more effective. But they don't have them so they use what they've got.

Thank you.

Fight us? Hell, they'd pave us over.

Use what they got? yep, they'll continue to get more and use it too.

But it's really not worth wetting the bed over a bunch of terrorists, they're no real strategic threat at all. Certainly our governments don't think it's a serious problem or they'd stop causing terrorism worldwide.

[CGM]

The US doesn't have to target civilians. They have the world's most advanced military. They can spot something on a satellite, press a button on an aircraft carrier somewhere in the world and fire a missile to take the thing they saw out. Nobody can compete with America militarily which is why nobody tries and uses terrorism instead. I'm sure if you gave AQ billions of dollars of F-16s and Stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, spy satellites and tanks and years of training then they'd fight us using those weapons. They'd be much more effective. But they don't have them so they use what they've got.

Thank you.

Fight us? Hell, they'd pave us over.

Use what they got? yep, they'll continue to get more and use it too.

But it's really not worth wetting the bed over a bunch of terrorists, they're no real strategic threat at all. Certainly our governments don't think it's a serious problem or they'd stop causing terrorism worldwide.

OK, so you are saying our governments are actually causing terrorism to happen, and they obviously don't think it's a big problem, or else all they'd have to do is just stop causing it. Sure dude, whatever you say.

[Kirkland Laing]

Thank you.

Fight us? Hell, they'd pave us over.

Use what they got? yep, they'll continue to get more and use it too.

But it's really not worth wetting the bed over a bunch of terrorists, they're no real strategic threat at all. Certainly our governments don't think it's a serious problem or they'd stop causing terrorism worldwide.

OK, so you are saying our governments are actually causing terrorism to happen, and they obviously don't think it's a big problem, or else all they'd have to do is just stop causing it. Sure dude, whatever you say.

If you'd been living under occupation or a dictatorship for decades how would you react? Maybe you wouldn't feel courageous enough to fight back yourself but in any group of one thousand or one million human beings anywhere on the planet there will be people who will. And if you're going to deny them the right to fight back, something you would want for yourself should you ever live under repression, you're just a big fat hypocrite.

[CGM]

But it's really not worth wetting the bed over a bunch of terrorists, they're no real strategic threat at all. Certainly our governments don't think it's a serious problem or they'd stop causing terrorism worldwide.

OK, so you are saying our governments are actually causing terrorism to happen, and they obviously don't think it's a big problem, or else all they'd have to do is just stop causing it. Sure dude, whatever you say.

If you'd been living under occupation or a dictatorship for decades how would you react? Maybe you wouldn't feel courageous enough to fight back yourself but in any group of one thousand or one million human beings anywhere on the planet there will be people who will. And if you're going to deny them the right to fight back, something you would want for yourself should you ever live under repression, you're just a big fat hypocrite.

How the hell can you deny someone the right to fight you? The will fight you if they want. What the hell do you expect, maybe we should just sit back and let it happen? You know, you come accross as some kind of politicoeconomic guru, but your arguments while appearing logical on the surface, are really unsupportable. You seem to think that all of Western Society is one big repressive pile of shit. I think you just like to argue. Play the devil's advocate because it makes seem clever. You continue to ignore the key points I make. Sometimes I think you're just a big fat pompous ass. LOL. I think I'll let some else have these "discussions" with you. So long.

[Trainer Monkey]

OK, so you are saying our governments are actually causing terrorism to happen, and they obviously don't think it's a big problem, or else all they'd have to do is just stop causing it. Sure dude, whatever you say.

If you'd been living under occupation or a dictatorship for decades how would you react? Maybe you wouldn't feel courageous enough to fight back yourself but in any group of one thousand or one million human beings anywhere on the planet there will be people who will. And if you're going to deny them the right to fight back, something you would want for yourself should you ever live under repression, you're just a big fat hypocrite.

How the hell can you deny someone the right to fight you? The will fight you if they want. What the hell do you expect, maybe we should just sit back and let it happen? You know, you come accross as some kind of politicoeconomic guru, but your arguments while appearing logical on the surface, are really unsupportable. You seem to think that all of Western Society is one big repressive pile of shit. I think you just like to argue. Play the devil's advocate because it makes seem clever. You continue to ignore the key points I make. Sometimes I think you're just a big fat pompous ass. LOL. I think I'll let some else have these "discussions" with you. So long.

Not really,you have to look at cause and effect.
People just dont blow themselves up in a shopping mall, because theres nothing to do around here on a Friday night.
Maybe if we took the time to look at the causes of this level of rage,we wouldnt have to deal with so many effects of it.

[Kirkland Laing]

OK, so you are saying our governments are actually causing terrorism to happen, and they obviously don't think it's a big problem, or else all they'd have to do is just stop causing it. Sure dude, whatever you say.

If you'd been living under occupation or a dictatorship for decades how would you react? Maybe you wouldn't feel courageous enough to fight back yourself but in any group of one thousand or one million human beings anywhere on the planet there will be people who will. And if you're going to deny them the right to fight back, something you would want for yourself should you ever live under repression, you're just a big fat hypocrite.

How the hell can you deny someone the right to fight you? The will fight you if they want. What the hell do you expect, maybe we should just sit back and let it happen? You know, you come accross as some kind of politicoeconomic guru, but your arguments while appearing logical on the surface, are really unsupportable. You seem to think that all of Western Society is one big repressive pile of shit. I think you just like to argue. Play the devil's advocate because it makes seem clever. You continue to ignore the key points I make. Sometimes I think you're just a big fat pompous ass. LOL. I think I'll let some else have these "discussions" with you. So long.

You're saying that terrorists don't have any right to fight back in situations where if you'd been in the same position you'd do exactly the same.

And western society, as seen from, for instance, the Arab world, is one big repressive pile of shit. First britain then the States subverted and overthrew their systems of government and imposed our own handpicked pro-western dictators on their countries to further our economic and military power. And we've done this for over a century now in the region, since 1907 in fact when the Brits first discovered oil in Iran. And when the people living under these regimes finally get upset to the point where they fight back you dismiss them as crazed irrational savages who really have no reason to do what they're doing..

I'm not ignoring any of the points you've made, I've answered your questions specifically to the point where you're waving the white flag of surrender and running away. Like a Frenchman. It's obvious which part of Canada you come from, monsieur.

[Trainer Monkey]

Thank you.

Fight us? Hell, they'd pave us over.

Use what they got? yep, they'll continue to get more and use it too.

But it's really not worth wetting the bed over a bunch of terrorists, they're no real strategic threat at all. Certainly our governments don't think it's a serious problem or they'd stop causing terrorism worldwide.

OK, so you are saying our governments are actually causing terrorism to happen, and they obviously don't think it's a big problem, or else all they'd have to do is just stop causing it. Sure dude, whatever you say.

See this what your not seeing the big picture,we've allways taken a ham handed easy route in our dealing with the middle east,and now its biting us in the ass.
We've almost had only two goals in the middle east,fight off the Russian Bear,and maintain affordable oil. To do that we have gotten cosy in to bed with some real scum balls. And people notice things like that. And considering its our money and supplies propping said scumballs up,people REALLY notice that kind of thing.
Our foreign policy over the years can be best described as disjointed an incoherent.

[yvonne]

All i will mention about this crazy act is that one of the terrorist was from my local town of Hartlepool(north-east of england).I hope he is dead!!Fooking fruit cake!!

[Andre]

Really?
We sent nerve gas to Sadaam,blew the snot out of Iraq twice,propped up the Shah in Iran,fed weapons to the Iranians and the Saudi's,trained the mujahadeen,propped up Israel no matter what atrocity they did,and trained the Lebanese Christian Militias(this is the short list by the way) in an effort of good will to our fellow man?
Heaven forbid we actually really disliked someone,I suppose that would involve nukes,or plagues of locusts or something

OK guy I will take this to indicate that you really do believe that you (The US) are no better than Al Quaida, and that you are getting what you deserve. I will also take this to mean that you really do believe that the USA wants to kill lots of civilians. I say that because you obviously disagree with me when I say that the US doesn't want to kill as many civilians as possible.

The US doesn't have to target civilians. They have the world's most advanced military. They can spot something on a satellite, press a button on an aircraft carrier somewhere in the world and fire a missile to take the thing they saw out. Nobody can compete with America militarily which is why nobody tries and uses terrorism instead. I'm sure if you gave AQ billions of dollars of F-16s and Stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, spy satellites and tanks and years of training then they'd fight us using those weapons. They'd be much more effective. But they don't have them so they use what they've got.

I agree they dont target civillians and the American people generally dont want other civillians destroyed, but the goverment and the military cheifs sectretly dont a give a rats fried freckle if they get a few thousand while (DOING THEIR JOB). This is business as usual,
It isnt Christian.

Take out the enemy,Feed the public ,build them protective guarded hospitals and start doing Christian work via the armys work then we can talk about what banner we are flying while we do the job.

[Kirkland Laing]

OK guy I will take this to indicate that you really do believe that you (The US) are no better than Al Quaida, and that you are getting what you deserve. I will also take this to mean that you really do believe that the USA wants to kill lots of civilians. I say that because you obviously disagree with me when I say that the US doesn't want to kill as many civilians as possible.

The US doesn't have to target civilians. They have the world's most advanced military. They can spot something on a satellite, press a button on an aircraft carrier somewhere in the world and fire a missile to take the thing they saw out. Nobody can compete with America militarily which is why nobody tries and uses terrorism instead. I'm sure if you gave AQ billions of dollars of F-16s and Stealth bombers, aircraft carriers, spy satellites and tanks and years of training then they'd fight us using those weapons. They'd be much more effective. But they don't have them so they use what they've got.

I agree they dont target civillians and the American people generally dont want other civillians destroyed, but the goverment and the military cheifs sectretly dont a give a rats fried freckle if they get a few thousand while (DOING THEIR JOB). This is business as usual,
It isnt Christian.

Take out the enemy,Feed the public ,build them protective guarded hospitals and start doing Christian work via the armys work then we can talk about what banner we are flying while we do the job.

Yes, when we asccidentally kill civilians we call it collateral damage. I'm not sure that doing anything under the banner of Christianity in the Muslim world would be very succesful though.

[Kirkland Laing]

Sean Hannity on Fox News last night talking to radical cleric Rick Warren, who says it's legitimate for the American government to bomb Iran and take out their president.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=MQhwyydEGpQI'm sure if an Iranian news anchor ever discussed bombing America and taking the US president out with an Ayatollah it'd get quite a lot of coverage in the American media and people like Hannity shaking their heads in pious disapproval and wondering just why the Iranians are such violent extremists.