Thread: War on Terrorism

^ duh!

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

As so goes the American economy, so goes the world's
Duh...

Considering that America is a net debtor nation and a consumer society versus an industrial society one would be more easily convinced that China would legitimately have such a position.

Originally Posted by Macha

^ duh!

You lefties are still sore about Pinochet taking over in Chile after Salvedor Allende met an untimely demise. What you don't seem to accept is we just have to step in to not only protect the business interest of America, but the world as well. How, in good conscious, could we have let those copper mines go commie?

Reconsider that mentality when China starts using the same logic to block shipments of oil.

Originally Posted by surasak

Reconsider that mentality when China starts using the same logic to block shipments of oil.

Block shipments?
They import the stuff - where you been...

They're closer to the oil than we are.

Are you not aware of various goings-on with regards to strategic locations where China is currently building dual-use port facilities? Indonesia, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia....

Jesus Christ on a stick just what the hell do you think the real reason for being in Iraq is?

Originally Posted by BoonMe

What you don't seem to accept is we just have to step in to not only protect the business interest of America, but the world as well.

Protect interest of the world with these people? Have a looksie

Lewis Libby who was indicted on five charges stemming from from the grand jury investigation of the outing of CIA Agent Valerie Plame. The charges against Libby include perjury, obstruction of justice, and making false statements.

Philip A. Cooney the former White House staff member who repeatedly revised government scientific reports on global warming. Mr. Cooney has no scientific training. Cooney will now sit on the other side of the table at the White House's energy meetings, his job will remain the same, i.e. to do the bidding of the oil industry.

..... and the list goes on.

So do you think these people can provide us security? I don't focking think so.

Originally Posted by surasak

They're closer to the oil than we are.

Are you not aware of various goings-on with regards to strategic locations where China is currently building dual-use port facilities? Indonesia, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia....

Jesus Christ on a stick just what the hell do you think the real reason for being in Iraq is?

Right...and just what are they going to be blocking those supertankers with? Recall the most powerful military in the world your taxes help support?

Try to read me post above yours and come up with some lame excuses.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by surasak

They're closer to the oil than we are.

Are you not aware of various goings-on with regards to strategic locations where China is currently building dual-use port facilities? Indonesia, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia....

Jesus Christ on a stick just what the hell do you think the real reason for being in Iraq is?

Right...and just what are they going to be blocking those supertankers with? Recall the most powerful military in the world your taxes help support?

You realize of course that military is stuck in Afghanistan and Iraq right now?

Yeah, OK, we can support a three front war. Hell, even Hitler did it!

No, it was Richard Armitage.

Richard Armitage's Role in Plame Case - Newsweek National News - MSNBC.com

Originally Posted by surasak

Jesus Christ on a stick just what the hell do you think the real reason for being in Iraq is?

It's a never ending cycle ... we steal there oil in life and steal their virgins in death

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by Milkman

Originally Posted by Milkman

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by Milkman

It specifically states that the U.S. should use the military to enforce its economic interests.

And what's wrong with that?

First,

you tell what's right with that.

Boon Mee response:

Hard to argue that Iraq bred these terrorists but the appeasment camp will find a way. More islamofascist bombings in Thailand.

Bombs hit 22 banks in southern Thailand

Nice answer. You didn't answer my question.

First you answer. Then I'll answer.

Question again: what is right about using the U.S. military for the sole purpose of enforcing American's economic interests, as outlined in the Proposal for the New American Century.

As so goes the American economy, so goes the world's
Duh...

So, you can't answer the question.

Check out this interview with the #2 mullah at the Iranian nucular program. Where he says drinking lots of heavy water cures cancer? And so their heavy water program is for ecological and medical purposes, you see, dog of an infidel!

Link

Originally Posted by Milkman

So, you can't answer the question.

Still at it, eh?
Well, try this on for size. We have four options:

1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons.

2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons - which may be as early as next year if Iran's progress is what it claims.

3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the ME, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America.

4. Or we can stand down now and pick up the fight later when the Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after these Islamos have dominated France and Germany which is well underway - perhaps most of Europe. It will be more dangereous and bloodier then.

These Islamofascists say that they look forward to an Islamic America and the world. If you are against defending your countries business interests, you best hope you like the idea that your kids, or grandchildren may live in a Islamo utopia under the Mullahs and the Sharia Law.

They may take over the u.k. but they will NEVER take over AMERICA.

ya know why???

coz OUR government has not disarmed the citizens

the day Mr. jihad walks down main street in America will be the day he gets his ass filled full of holes

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons.

oh yeah ? and how do you plan to do that ?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the ME, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America.

Its dominance in the ME is cultural, hardly a new phenomenon. So what are you going to do ?

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons.

oh yeah ? and how do you plan to do that ?

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the ME, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America.

Its dominance in the ME is cultural, hardly a new phenomenon. So what are you going to do ?

We got the B2 bombers with bunker-busters, MOABS - you name 'em. Just have to hit a few more targets this time than Israel did when they took out Saddam's nuke plant.

^ you can't even hit civilians areas right, I doubt you would be able to target Islamists with your smart bombs.

Face it, it's too late. You got OWNED on all fronts thanks to GW Bush incompetence.

It's ok SADDAM was killing that many civilians before the invasion, can't you remember ? You are killing more innocent civilians on a false pretense and claim some kind of victory.

You are so OWNED you can't even smell your own shit anymore. That's America today.