Terrorists, real or not?

[urogard]

If you have any questions on whether or not terrorists exist take a good long hard look at Al Qaeda and what they have done to Americans

What did they do to americans? Please explain.
I can't recall any specific incident except for the regions where they are fighting as insurgents against an invading force which is violating countless articles of International law.

Concerning terrorists, most definitely they exist, there are always groups somewhere in the world who attempt to gain power through means of spreading fear and hatred. Look at the bush administration, perfect example, if anyone wants to tell me that terrorists don't exist then they are outright blind.

Concerning the War on Terror, well anyone with half a brain sees that this is a hoax only meant for the armaments industry to be gaining more money and having poor people die for no reason and the rich getting richer.

[Kieltyka]

I can't recall any specific incident except for the regions where they are fighting as insurgents against an invading force which is violating countless articles of International law.

Check here.

Look at the bush administration, perfect example, if anyone wants to tell me that terrorists don't exist then they are outright blind.

And where is your proof? Last I heard of, the Bush Administration are not the ones going around strapping bombs to their chest and blowing themselves up in public.

Don't be ridiculous.

[urogard]

Check here.

"Chinese media have reported american agents tried to sabotage a train. Chinese intelligence confirmed this report"==> Report must be true.

"Council on foreign relations"
[sarcasm]Yes your source is very accurate.[/sarcasm]

Look at the bush administration, perfect example, if anyone wants to tell me that terrorists don't exist then they are outright blind.

And where is your proof? Last I heard of, the Bush Administration are not the ones going around strapping bombs to their chest and blowing themselves up in public.
Don't be ridiculous.

You're right, they are not the ones going around strapping bombs to their chest and blowing themselves up in public.
But they should be, instead of sending others to fight THEIR wars which only serve to spread and consolidate their hegemony Bush, Cundy, Cheney et al. should be the ones in the front line.

And my proof?
Open your eyes and read credible reports which actually make any sense at all.

Besides, terrorism isn't about blowing yourself up. There are tons of ways for a government to spread fear and panic, if you want a good example look up reports about what happened in New York on 11.09.2001

"The building is a symbol, as is the act of destroying it. Symbols are given power by people. Alone, a symbol is meaningless, but with enough people, blowing up a building can change the world."

I am confident that even one day you will understand.

[Iƒrit]

kinda like when bush spoke for his re-election...tons of fear speech to get backing his return to office.

And dont get me started on CFR, they are just as monsterous as terrorist.

[urogard]

kinda like when bush spoke for his re-election...tons of fear speech to get backing his return to office.

And dont get me started on CFR, they are just as monsterous as terrorist.

Fear and panic was the one and only thing he and his lackeys relied on.
What better way to lure people into WILLINGLY giving away their freedoms

[Iƒrit]

oh I agree mate, just look at bushes roots he is after all just fullfilling his ascentors dreams

[Kieltyka]

Show me some speeches that spread fear the hearts of American.

[urogard]

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsart ... x?id=46806

first link on google i got.

Seriously kieltyka you just basically asked "please point me to the direction of the sky" LULZ

[Angnoch]

If you have any questions on whether or not terrorists exist take a good long hard look at Al Qaeda and what they have done to Americans

What did they do to americans? Please explain.
I can't recall any specific incident except for the regions where they are fighting as insurgents against an invading force which is violating countless articles of International law.

Concerning terrorists, most definitely they exist, there are always groups somewhere in the world who attempt to gain power through means of spreading fear and hatred. Look at the bush administration, perfect example, if anyone wants to tell me that terrorists don't exist then they are outright blind.

Concerning the War on Terror, well anyone with half a brain sees that this is a hoax only meant for the armaments industry to be gaining more money and having poor people die for no reason and the rich getting richer.

9/11/2001...................terrorists hijacked planes and destroyed the WTC, crashed into the Pentagon, and were heading either towards the Capitol or the White House.

Show me where America is violating International Law because as it stands right now there is a UN resolution allowing a Coalition of Forces to be in Iraq hence the title Operation Enduring Iraqi Freedom as of this moment we are there to protect and preserve Iraq freedom until such time as Iraqi Military can defend themselves.


You also have your definitions mixed up an insurgent IS FROM THE LOCAL POPULACE a terrorist may be from that area but they do not have to be as well as the tactics they use differ greatly.


If you honestly think that America is in a War against Terror strictly to make money for "Arms Dealers" then why has this war consistently drained The American economy and caused a more unstable economy over the past 5 years.


Anything else you would like to know?

[Kieltyka]

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=46806

first link on google i got.

Seriously kieltyka you just basically asked "please point me to the direction of the sky" LULZ

Nice try at an insult, even though you failed, haha. Now, how is that article proof that the Bush Admin. is terrorizing the people?

[urogard]

Show me some speeches that spread fear the hearts of American.

Now, how is that article proof that the Bush Admin. is terrorizing the people?

Mate how about being consistent. If you ask for something don't reply later that you were asking for something else.

1) Half a page of text, the word threat is noted 6 times.
2) "The men who run al Qaeda are determined, capable, and ruthless"
3) "America faces ‘a persistent and evolving’ threat "
4) It states that al Qaeda will continue to … ‘focus ... (various) ...targets with the goal of producing mass casualties, ...... and/or fear among the U.S. population.

I could go on, and this is bush speech first result on google.

9/11/2001...................terrorists hijacked planes and destroyed the WTC, crashed into the Pentagon, and were heading either towards the Capitol or the White House.

Hmm well that still doesn't say anything about what Al Qaeda has ever done to americans on american soil.

Show me where America is violating International Law because as it stands right now there is a UN resolution allowing a Coalition of Forces to be in Iraq hence the title Operation Enduring Iraqi Freedom as of this moment we are there to protect and preserve Iraq freedom until such time as Iraqi Military can defend themselves.

The invasion to Iraq and afghanistan was illegal, therefore the whole war is illegal.
And obviously later the UN allowed the troops to stay. American forces destabilize a country, ruin their infrastructure, murder countless civilians destroy their economy and then just walk away and let the groups who were fighting for power but were on a leash thanks to Saddam create more chaos?
I'm still wondering why the american public doesn't send their congress representatives and the whole white house into iraq to fight for this "operation" until it's over.

You also have your definitions mixed up an insurgent IS FROM THE LOCAL POPULACE a terrorist may be from that area but they do not have to be as well as the tactics they use differ greatly.

Che guevara wasn't from the local populace when he was killed in bolivia. But he was still an insurgent. So fix your definition of insurgent please.
Good and evil are two sides of the same coin.

Minorly off topic, if you ever want to say that an insurgent is in any way "better" or "worse" than a terrorist then you are the role model of the countless brainless drones who are enlisted in a certain terrorist force occupying a souvereign country.

If you honestly think that America is in a War against Terror strictly to make money for "Arms Dealers" then why has this war consistently drained The American economy and caused a more unstable economy over the past 5 years.

Because the money went from the pockets of the taxpayers into the pockets of the bankers and the owners of certain major companies i.e. armaments/oil industry.
you really think they give a crap about american economy/people or about anything that they can live without?

Anything else you would like to know?

Are you a subscriber to bill o reily mentality?

[Kieltyka]

Mate how about being consistent. If you ask for something don't reply later that you were asking for something else.

Oh I first demanded for those speeches, you delivered with a link that you thought was terrorism. Instead its just you over exaggerating an article.

1) Half a page of text, the word threat is noted 6 times.
2) "The men who run al Qaeda are determined, capable, and ruthless"
3) "America faces ‘a persistent and evolving’ threat "
4) It states that al Qaeda will continue to … ‘focus ... (various) ...targets with the goal of producing mass casualties, ...... and/or fear among the U.S. population.

What you expect them to say about a hostile terrorist group? That they're nice guys and they just want to make friends? I mean, basically isn't al Qaeda a ruthless terrorist group who is always looking to produce mass casualties for their cause?

. . . murder countless civilians destroy their economy and then just walk away and let the groups who were fighting for power but were on a leash thanks to Saddam create more chaos?

Now you're just exaggerating again, and how about you show Angnoch where the US broke international law like he asked.

On a side note: There is going to be casualties, sometimes civilians get caught up in the middle of it.

[Iƒrit]

Im not sure if America did break international law or not, but I'm pretty sure going to war without the apporval of congress is breaking law, and not following the onstitution you swear an oath to when you go into office

[Demeisen]

of course the terrorists would say the iraq war is unlawful. but the majority of rest of the world sees it as a legal war. thats fact.

urogard your link only showed me an article written with some dramatic language. everything within said article was true though. hmmmm although someone who believes 9/11 was conducted by the usa may have a skewed concept of truth.

Are you a subscriber to bill o reily mentality?

man ive heard a lot of chatter about this man from the conspiracy club. is he your deity?


terrorists are proven to be real. stating that the do not exist reminds me of creationists who deny evloution. both are done despite the overwhelming evidence against them.

meh some people like to believe in things. . . like UFOs, bigfoot or God for example. atleast the concept God cant be disproved. whereas its all to easy to see through these theories. if i had a penny for every variation of conspiracy theory out there my butler would be typing this for me.

edit: actually my french maid would be typing for me

[Angnoch]

dd

9/11/2001...................terrorists hijacked planes and destroyed the WTC, crashed into the Pentagon, and were heading either towards the Capitol or the White House.

Hmm well that still doesn't say anything about what Al Qaeda has ever done to americans on american soil.

Show me where America is violating International Law because as it stands right now there is a UN resolution allowing a Coalition of Forces to be in Iraq hence the title Operation Enduring Iraqi Freedom as of this moment we are there to protect and preserve Iraq freedom until such time as Iraqi Military can defend themselves.

The invasion to Iraq and afghanistan was illegal, therefore the whole war is illegal.
And obviously later the UN allowed the troops to stay. American forces destabilize a country, ruin their infrastructure, murder countless civilians destroy their economy and then just walk away and let the groups who were fighting for power but were on a leash thanks to Saddam create more chaos?
I'm still wondering why the american public doesn't send their congress representatives and the whole white house into iraq to fight for this "operation" until it's over.

You also have your definitions mixed up an insurgent IS FROM THE LOCAL POPULACE a terrorist may be from that area but they do not have to be as well as the tactics they use differ greatly.

Che guevara wasn't from the local populace when he was killed in bolivia. But he was still an insurgent. So fix your definition of insurgent please.
Good and evil are two sides of the same coin.

Minorly off topic, if you ever want to say that an insurgent is in any way "better" or "worse" than a terrorist then you are the role model of the countless brainless drones who are enlisted in a certain terrorist force occupying a souvereign country.

If you honestly think that America is in a War against Terror strictly to make money for "Arms Dealers" then why has this war consistently drained The American economy and caused a more unstable economy over the past 5 years.

Because the money went from the pockets of the taxpayers into the pockets of the bankers and the owners of certain major companies i.e. armaments/oil industry.
you really think they give a crap about american economy/people or about anything that they can live without?

Anything else you would like to know?

Are you a subscriber to bill o reily mentality?[/quote]

I stated the accepted Military Definition ok that applies to the current Theatre of Operations. Al Qaeda planned and conducted the 9/11 attacks bin Laden took credit for them. I never said insurgents were good bad or otherwise it all depends on what they do.

The economy going downhill is a direct result of people having less money to spend hmmm corporations lose money when that happens its a very basic concept.

The war in Afghanistan was never illegal and neither was the war in Iraq. Technically the wars were circumvented around Congress by declaring them as joint military operations but it was still approved by Congress after the time limit.

We kill innocent civilians over there all of the time? I was totally unaware of this I must not have been paying attention in the "Kill all" class that we had hmmm I will ask my NCOIC if he had standing orders to kill the local populace when he was deployed. Is that something you would like to know?

If we were killing innocent civilians on a regular basis do you honestly think that Iraq would be more and more stable every year as the amount of support for Terrorist and Insurgent groups declines on a daily basis?


Last time I checked I saw that Iraqi forces are actually taking over control of more and more of the country and the CF (Coalition Forces) are taking a back seat and allowing them to run the Military Ops with CF as backup and advisors.


No I do not subscribe to Bill O'Reilly mentality, do I watch him occasionally if something is on that catches my eye but generally no. I watch both Fox and CNN in order to gain a "balanced" view of the news sometimes I just read other sources.


Any other questions?