Because lord and allah knows you have to agree with your opinions to be 'intelligent'.
There are a lot of intelligent people for the war as well as against it.
Im not defining intelligent as academic or educated, im talking about people who dont succumb to propaganda and can see things for what they are, can recognise the hypocrisy. Anyone in favour of such a war is either stupid or evil
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
It's not a terrorist attack when you know it's going to happen.
So is that the look of love in their eyes as their whole world goes boom? I think the look of terror may be more appropriate! Funny that a few intel agencies warned about 911 but your government was too fucking stupid to believe or move on it. So where is the terror in that?
I think that the people are more worried about their little boys and girls who may one day get called up to go and fight for the noble cause weighs more on their teeny heads then the fact they may well be losing another war.
Secondly, I agree calling american soldiers murderers is completetly uncalled for..
how so? what would you call someone who takes human life? you can use any euphamism you want ,its murder.Thats not even an opinion its a fact , how can you possibly argue with it. I dont care if they were following orders they are still people with a conscience and should Know better
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
how so? what would you call someone who takes human life? you can use any euphamism you want ,its murder.Thats not even an opinion its a fact , how can you possibly argue with it. I dont care if they were following orders they are still people with a conscience and should Know better
And these rapes etc that you talk of were government sanctioned were they?
A restaurant with a smoking section is like a swimming pool with a pissing section
And these rapes etc that you talk of were government sanctioned were they?
No thats the whole point ,they did illegal things, they came into someone elses country where they were not wanted and terrorised the people. If they had never been sent then they never would have had the chance to commit these crimes. This is one of my main points, the troops shouldnt be pitied because regardless of whether they were sent there or not they still committed the evil acts themselves you cant blame it all on the government
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
how so? what would you call someone who takes human life? you can use any euphamism you want ,its murder.Thats not even an opinion its a fact , how can you possibly argue with it. I dont care if they were following orders they are still people with a conscience and should Know better
That's a fcking lame argument. By that rationale anyone who fought for the Allies during WW2 should be condemned as murderers then? Should they have known better? Do they deserve to be villified from the comfort of your living room, office or wherever it is you're being so callously judgemental from?
Just to clarify I was utterly against the invasion of Iraq and never wavered from that opinion throughout the whole sorry saga. But to vent all of your vitriol at the marines involved is just pathetic. It is the vile Republican administration (and Blair's cronies) who are to blame. The marines on the ground are victims of this war just as the Iraqi dead and wounded are. The majority of them victims of a government who deny education and job opportunites to the poor, and fill their heads with a nationalistic fervour that preconditions them to sign up for the armed forces out of a misguided sense of patriotism and the material reality that short of 12 hour shifts in a packing factory it is one of the only career options available to them.
The majority of America's armed forces are conditioned from birth to be pawns for the military and the neo-cons pursuit of global hegemony. In red states up and down the Bible belt the education system insidiously fills people's heads with the oath of alliegance, ubiquitous nationalistic iconography and mind numbing Christian fundamentalism.
People laugh at Bush like he's an idiot but in some sense he, his administration and the whole of the religious right are absolute genius's - they have the country sewn up in an endless cycle. Orwell wrtoe that the only two things required for the retention of power are poverty and ignorance. Throughout the majority of the red states they have got this down to a fine art. Even to the extent that as Eddie said on Storytellers when it comes to election time the people who vote for the Republican administration are the very same people who will be most harmed by it.
But to vent all of your vitriol at the marines involved is just pathetic. It is the vile Republican administration (and Blair's cronies) who are to blame. The marines on the ground are victims of this war just as the Iraqi dead and wounded are. The majority of them victims of a government who deny education and job opportunites to the poor, and fill their heads with a nationalistic fervour that preconditions them to sign up for the armed forces out of a misguided sense of patriotism and the material reality that short of 12 hour shifts in a packing factory it is one of the only career options available to them.
The majority of America's armed forces are conditioned from birth to be pawns for the military and the neo-cons pursuit of global hegemony. In red states up and down the Bible belt the education system insidiously fills people's heads with the oath of alliegance, ubiquitous nationalistic iconography and mind numbing Christian fundamentalism.
Hehe....be careful with this logic.
If those who pull the triggers are victims of their masters, the masters are just victims of their masters. You're creating an endless cycle wherein no one is responsible for their choices.
I will agree that those who villify anyone who participates in a war as a murderer oversimplifies a complex issue. But to pretend that people are not responsible for their choices precludes the villification of anyone.
If those who pull the triggers are victims of their masters, the masters are just victims of their masters. You're creating an endless cycle wherein no one is responsible for their choices.
I agree with you here. Everyone chooses for themselves and are accountable.
I will agree that those who villify anyone who participates in a war as a murderer oversimplifies a complex issue. But to pretend that people are not responsible for their choices precludes the villification of anyone.
Taking lives with premeditation is what it is. There are all kinds of justifications that just cannot effectively be made. Again, I agree, though, that any level of killing, from those who support killing from their armchairs to those who carry out the deeds themselves carries with it the precise and specific accountability for the exact output.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
That's a fcking lame argument. By that rationale anyone who fought for the Allies during WW2 should be condemned as murderers then? Should they have known better? Do they deserve to be villified from the comfort of your living room, office or wherever it is you're being so callously judgemental from?
.
I didnt invent the english language , the truth is you feel uncomfortable viewing these people as murderers because it would mean that anyone is capable of murder, just because you dont like the word and its connotations doesnt stop it from being true. If you kill somebody you are a murderer. Comparing the invasion of Iraq to the fight against the Nazis is just completely laughable, are you indirectly saying that the invasion of Iraq was justified? Is it that you disagree that they murdered people or do you just not like that i said it because it forced you to think about it. It ultimately is the fault of Bush and Blair but the people who implemented their will by invading and bombing Iraq cannot be free from blame, they arent idiots they are real humans with consciences and should have enough integrity to say no .whatever the price may be it can be nothing compared with having to live with the fact that you are a murderer for the rest of your life. If there was no army there could be no war no matter how many leaders declared it
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
In February of '03 I was a Bush supporter. In March of '03 I wasn't.. does that help explain my opinion of the situation? It has NOTHING to do with how bad the war is going.
If those who pull the triggers are victims of their masters, the masters are just victims of their masters. You're creating an endless cycle wherein no one is responsible for their choices.
I will agree that those who villify anyone who participates in a war as a murderer oversimplifies a complex issue. But to pretend that people are not responsible for their choices precludes the villification of anyone.
Their political masters are victims of nothing but their own twisted ideologies.
And I doubt they will ever be held to account for their crimes (much like a certain Mr pinochet and other dictators to whom they and their ilk were willing accomplises).
Soldiers who wantonly slaughter innocent civilians are of course responsible for doing so, but to label all marines 'murderers' is ridiculous.
There are all kinds of justifications that just cannot effectively be made. Again, I agree, though, that any level of killing, from those who support killing from their armchairs to those who carry out the deeds themselves carries with it the precise and specific accountability for the exact output.
I didnt invent the english language , the truth is you feel uncomfortable viewing these people as murderers because it would mean that anyone is capable of murder, just because you dont like the word and its connotations doesnt stop it from being true. If you kill somebody you are a murderer. Comparing the invasion of Iraq to the fight against the Nazis is just completely laughable, are you indirectly saying that the invasion of Iraq was justified? Is it that you disagree that they murdered people or do you just not like that i said it because it forced you to think about it. It ultimately is the fault of Bush and Blair but the people who implemented their will by invading and bombing Iraq cannot be free from blame, they arent idiots they are real humans with consciences and should have enough integrity to say no .whatever the price may be it can be nothing compared with having to live with the fact that you are a murderer for the rest of your life. If there was no army there could be no war no matter how many leaders declared it
I'm not comparing it or justifying the war on Iraq. I thought I side stepped that rather obvious accusation by explicity stating my opposition to it.
My point is would you call the American soldiers who took place in the D Day landings murderers? By your rationale you should. But the word dosn't really fit right does it?
Their political masters are victims of nothing but their own twisted ideologies.
Really? Cannot the same case be made for your other "victims"??? You refer to one as "conditioned" to absolve them of their responsibility. Are not these political masters also "conditioned"?
And I doubt they will ever be held to account for their crimes (much like a certain Mr pinochet and other dictators to whom they and their ilk were willing accomplises).
You're probably right there. Nor will the American public be held to account for making their crimes possible.
Soldiers who wantonly slaughter innocent civilians are of course responsible for doing so, but to label all marines 'murderers' is ridiculous.
With the loaded connotations fit for the serial killer, yes. Within the literal confines, not really.
If you kill a man, you are a murderer. Whether that death happened in brutal aggression or desperate defense, you have still taken a life. Taking a life, in some circumstances, is justifiable. However, the man who pulls a trigger cannot absolve himself of his responsibility to those justifications. In short, "someone told me to" cannot justify killing.
I didnt invent the english language , the truth is you feel uncomfortable viewing these people as murderers because it would mean that anyone is capable of murder, just because you dont like the word and its connotations doesnt stop it from being true. If you kill somebody you are a murderer. Comparing the invasion of Iraq to the fight against the Nazis is just completely laughable, are you indirectly saying that the invasion of Iraq was justified? Is it that you disagree that they murdered people or do you just not like that i said it because it forced you to think about it. It ultimately is the fault of Bush and Blair but the people who implemented their will by invading and bombing Iraq cannot be free from blame, they arent idiots they are real humans with consciences and should have enough integrity to say no .whatever the price may be it can be nothing compared with having to live with the fact that you are a murderer for the rest of your life. If there was no army there could be no war no matter how many leaders declared it
Killing someone does not necessarily make you a murderer. Murder is defined as unlawfully killing someone. If you kill in justifiable self-defense, you are not a murderer. If you are the executioner for a state where the death penalty is legal, you are not a murderer. If you are engaged in a war that is being fought in accordance with international law, you are not a murderer.
I agree with just about everything else you've posted on this thread, and I think the war in Iraq blatantly violates international law. I also think that the administration violated U.S. law in getting us into it. So I can't dispute that what's going on over there is indeed murder. I just wanted to clear up the definition.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
I didnt invent the english language , the truth is you feel uncomfortable viewing these people as murderers because it would mean that anyone is capable of murder, just because you dont like the word and its connotations doesnt stop it from being true. If you kill somebody you are a murderer. Comparing the invasion of Iraq to the fight against the Nazis is just completely laughable, are you indirectly saying that the invasion of Iraq was justified? Is it that you disagree that they murdered people or do you just not like that i said it because it forced you to think about it. It ultimately is the fault of Bush and Blair but the people who implemented their will by invading and bombing Iraq cannot be free from blame, they arent idiots they are real humans with consciences and should have enough integrity to say no .whatever the price may be it can be nothing compared with having to live with the fact that you are a murderer for the rest of your life. If there was no army there could be no war no matter how many leaders declared it
And by the way I'd happily agree that the American marines are murderers long before I'd agree that they are'nt idiots.
Seen a little theme in this thread....some trying to compare WW2 to Iraq....give me a break...not even closely related those that try to think this are trying there hardest to try to justify this Iraqi cause as noble IMHO...when I choose to define it as cowardly...not the soldiers being cowards....the people running the show being cowards.....
Seen a little theme in this thread....some trying to compare WW2 to Iraq....give me a break...not even closely related those that try to think this are trying there hardest to try to justify this Iraqi cause as noble IMHO...when I choose to define it as cowardly...not the soldiers being cowards....the people running the show being cowards.....
Did IQ's on this board just drop 50 points?
I invoke the Allies in WW2 analogy precisely because it was a completely justified war where as Iraq isn't.
And was thereby wondering whether the earlier posters definiton of a murderer as anyone who takes a human life would extend to those who participated in the entirely justifiable and necessary D Day landings.
And was thereby wondering whether the earlier posters definiton of a murderer as anyone who takes a human life would extend to those who participated in the entirely justifiable and necessary D Day landings.
Personally, I think those people are "murderers", just in the sense that they took life. It doesn't mean that what they did was unjustifiable though.
Look, the term "murder" is somewhat inappropriate for any state-sanctioned killing since "murder" is more a legal term than anything else.
Regarldess, both troops in Iraq and troops on D-Day took life. And they take life in situations that are sometimes warranted and sometimes unwarranted. The context of an entire war does not justify all the deaths and killings that happen in that war. Each individual killing is either right or wrong, judged by the circumstances in which it happens.
Their political masters are victims of nothing but their own twisted ideologies.
Really? Cannot the same case be made for your other "victims"??? You refer to one as "conditioned" to absolve them of their responsibility. Are not these political masters also "conditioned"?
And I doubt they will ever be held to account for their crimes (much like a certain Mr pinochet and other dictators to whom they and their ilk were willing accomplises).
You're probably right there. Nor will the American public be held to account for making their crimes possible.
Soldiers who wantonly slaughter innocent civilians are of course responsible for doing so, but to label all marines 'murderers' is ridiculous.
With the loaded connotations fit for the serial killer, yes. Within the literal confines, not really.
If you kill a man, you are a murderer. Whether that death happened in brutal aggression or desperate defense, you have still taken a life. Taking a life, in some circumstances, is justifiable. However, the man who pulls a trigger cannot absolve himself of his responsibility to those justifications. In short, "someone told me to" cannot justify killing.
Bravo, farfromglorified.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Saddam was no Hitler or Stalin to be sure, but he is easily one of the most vile and wicked heads of state of the last century.
American soldiers have already been convicted of murder, rape and torture and are serving their sentences as we speak...
On the international outcry, I realize that Saddam's government was condemed. My point was that in comparison to the protesting against the US, versus the protesting towards Saddam Hussien - America was condemend FAR worse than Saddam ever was. COrrect me if I'm wrong but I never saw half a million people walk through the streets of London or New York shouting "World's biggest terrorists" about Saddam... that was my only point there.
...
Do you know why you believe Saddam Hussein was such a brutal dictator and needed to be taken out? Because you were TOLD that he was a brutal dictator and needed to be taken out. You didn't come up with that on your own... I know it and you know it and here's why:
When these so-called heinous acts occurred... it was with the blessings of your country. These atrocities occurred in the 1980s... under the patron saint of your political beliefs watch... Ronald Reagan.
why are you so worked up about these murders 20 years down the road? Why weren't you protesting about these mass murders 20 years ago? I'll tell you why... you were probably a little kid and didn't give a shit about those Iraqis then... and you wouldn't give a shit about those same iraqis now... if we weren't so deeply intrenched in this mess. You are using the deaths of these people to justify your support for this war and the actions of our President. Don't use the deaths of those people as justification for your political arguement... that is about as disrepectful as using the deaths that occurred on September 11, 2001 to justify your arguement. It does not honor them... it spits on them.
So, come up with your own opinion and get back to me on this one. You cannot uphold your hatred for Saddam Hussein without including his partners in these crimes... the U.S. Administration of Ronald Reagan and his advisors... including Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. We supplied the weapons used and urged him to be the stop-gap between secular nations like Iraq and fundamentalist extremist nations like Iran. To enforce that policy by going after all enemies with extreme prejudice.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
In February of '03 I was a Bush supporter. In March of '03 I wasn't.. does that help explain my opinion of the situation? It has NOTHING to do with how bad the war is going.
i didnt write this thread about YOU, i never even heard of you
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
I'm not comparing it or justifying the war on Iraq. I thought I side stepped that rather obvious accusation by explicity stating my opposition to it.
My point is would you call the American soldiers who took place in the D Day landings murderers? By your rationale you should. But the word dosn't really fit right does it?
I dont care if it fits or not, people who kill people are murderers, its not debatable its just not, its a word for people who kill people whether they be justified or not(in this case they arent), you still murdered. i dont understand the confusion.
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
Im not defining intelligent as academic or educated, im talking about people who dont succumb to propaganda and can see things for what they are, can recognise the hypocrisy. Anyone in favour of such a war is either stupid or evil
Oh I know how you were defining it...you're defining it based on agree with your beliefs.
Killing someone does not necessarily make you a murderer. Murder is defined as unlawfully killing someone. If you kill in justifiable self-defense, you are not a murderer. If you are the executioner for a state where the death penalty is legal, you are not a murderer. If you are engaged in a war that is being fought in accordance with international law, you are not a murderer.
I.
i Know what you are saying but what you are pointing out is in fact a very dangerous definition. lawful killing? i mean apart from in an act of self defence what is lawful killing? what if tommorrow a law was passed which said that i dunno illegitimate children were to be killed. Thats obviously completely wrong but your saying that under law its not murder, we shouldnt confuse the law as the upholder of moral values because often times it isnt. We all know whats right and whats wrong we dont need a law to tell us. The invasion of Iraq wasnt in accordance with international law it was deemed illegal by the UN
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
Oh I know how you were defining it...you're defining it based on agree with your beliefs.
Exactly and in this scenario my beliefs are right, its not a matter of opinion its a fact that i am right, thats all there is to it
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
I dont care if it fits or not, people who kill people are murderers, its not debatable its just not, its a word for people who kill people whether they be justified or not(in this case they arent), you still murdered. i dont understand the confusion.
It is debateable. You are confusing murderer with killer. They dont have the same meaning. Murder is something specifically against the law. If you kill someone within the means of the law, you are not a murderer.
Exactly and in this scenario my beliefs are right, its not a matter of opinion its a fact that i am right, thats all there is to it
Jesus Christ. I think this thread is 8 pages long because you keep giving words non-standard meanings. So sure. Make up your own definitions for all of the words you use, and you'll always get to be right about everything.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Jesus Christ. I think this thread is 8 pages long because you keep giving words non-standard meanings. So sure. Make up your own definitions for all of the words you use, and you'll always get to be right about everything.
...
Well to me... Jesus Christ means body of Christ.... which means daily bread... which means sandwhich... which means Subway... therefore, Jesus Christ means an Italian BMT with the works... hold the Mayo.
See y'all after lunch.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
It is debateable. You are confusing murderer with killer. They dont have the same meaning. Murder is something specifically against the law. If you kill someone within the means of the law, you are not a murderer.
How is an unsanctioned invasion of another country within the law
"If you remove the English army tomorrow and hoist the green flag over Dublin castle, unless you set about the organisation of the socialist republic then all of your efforts would have been in vain. England will still rule you through her capitalists ,landlords and commercial institutions"
Comments
So is that the look of love in their eyes as their whole world goes boom? I think the look of terror may be more appropriate! Funny that a few intel agencies warned about 911 but your government was too fucking stupid to believe or move on it. So where is the terror in that?
I think that the people are more worried about their little boys and girls who may one day get called up to go and fight for the noble cause weighs more on their teeny heads then the fact they may well be losing another war.
That's a fcking lame argument. By that rationale anyone who fought for the Allies during WW2 should be condemned as murderers then? Should they have known better? Do they deserve to be villified from the comfort of your living room, office or wherever it is you're being so callously judgemental from?
Just to clarify I was utterly against the invasion of Iraq and never wavered from that opinion throughout the whole sorry saga. But to vent all of your vitriol at the marines involved is just pathetic. It is the vile Republican administration (and Blair's cronies) who are to blame. The marines on the ground are victims of this war just as the Iraqi dead and wounded are. The majority of them victims of a government who deny education and job opportunites to the poor, and fill their heads with a nationalistic fervour that preconditions them to sign up for the armed forces out of a misguided sense of patriotism and the material reality that short of 12 hour shifts in a packing factory it is one of the only career options available to them.
The majority of America's armed forces are conditioned from birth to be pawns for the military and the neo-cons pursuit of global hegemony. In red states up and down the Bible belt the education system insidiously fills people's heads with the oath of alliegance, ubiquitous nationalistic iconography and mind numbing Christian fundamentalism.
People laugh at Bush like he's an idiot but in some sense he, his administration and the whole of the religious right are absolute genius's - they have the country sewn up in an endless cycle. Orwell wrtoe that the only two things required for the retention of power are poverty and ignorance. Throughout the majority of the red states they have got this down to a fine art. Even to the extent that as Eddie said on Storytellers when it comes to election time the people who vote for the Republican administration are the very same people who will be most harmed by it.
Hehe....be careful with this logic.
If those who pull the triggers are victims of their masters, the masters are just victims of their masters. You're creating an endless cycle wherein no one is responsible for their choices.
I will agree that those who villify anyone who participates in a war as a murderer oversimplifies a complex issue. But to pretend that people are not responsible for their choices precludes the villification of anyone.
Taking lives with premeditation is what it is. There are all kinds of justifications that just cannot effectively be made. Again, I agree, though, that any level of killing, from those who support killing from their armchairs to those who carry out the deeds themselves carries with it the precise and specific accountability for the exact output.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Their political masters are victims of nothing but their own twisted ideologies.
And I doubt they will ever be held to account for their crimes (much like a certain Mr pinochet and other dictators to whom they and their ilk were willing accomplises).
Soldiers who wantonly slaughter innocent civilians are of course responsible for doing so, but to label all marines 'murderers' is ridiculous.
Very much so, yes.
Exactly.
I'm not comparing it or justifying the war on Iraq. I thought I side stepped that rather obvious accusation by explicity stating my opposition to it.
My point is would you call the American soldiers who took place in the D Day landings murderers? By your rationale you should. But the word dosn't really fit right does it?
Really? Cannot the same case be made for your other "victims"??? You refer to one as "conditioned" to absolve them of their responsibility. Are not these political masters also "conditioned"?
You're probably right there. Nor will the American public be held to account for making their crimes possible.
With the loaded connotations fit for the serial killer, yes. Within the literal confines, not really.
If you kill a man, you are a murderer. Whether that death happened in brutal aggression or desperate defense, you have still taken a life. Taking a life, in some circumstances, is justifiable. However, the man who pulls a trigger cannot absolve himself of his responsibility to those justifications. In short, "someone told me to" cannot justify killing.
I agree with just about everything else you've posted on this thread, and I think the war in Iraq blatantly violates international law. I also think that the administration violated U.S. law in getting us into it. So I can't dispute that what's going on over there is indeed murder. I just wanted to clear up the definition.
And by the way I'd happily agree that the American marines are murderers long before I'd agree that they are'nt idiots.
Did IQ's on this board just drop 50 points?
I invoke the Allies in WW2 analogy precisely because it was a completely justified war where as Iraq isn't.
And was thereby wondering whether the earlier posters definiton of a murderer as anyone who takes a human life would extend to those who participated in the entirely justifiable and necessary D Day landings.
Personally, I think those people are "murderers", just in the sense that they took life. It doesn't mean that what they did was unjustifiable though.
Look, the term "murder" is somewhat inappropriate for any state-sanctioned killing since "murder" is more a legal term than anything else.
Regarldess, both troops in Iraq and troops on D-Day took life. And they take life in situations that are sometimes warranted and sometimes unwarranted. The context of an entire war does not justify all the deaths and killings that happen in that war. Each individual killing is either right or wrong, judged by the circumstances in which it happens.
Bravo, farfromglorified.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Do you know why you believe Saddam Hussein was such a brutal dictator and needed to be taken out? Because you were TOLD that he was a brutal dictator and needed to be taken out. You didn't come up with that on your own... I know it and you know it and here's why:
When these so-called heinous acts occurred... it was with the blessings of your country. These atrocities occurred in the 1980s... under the patron saint of your political beliefs watch... Ronald Reagan.
why are you so worked up about these murders 20 years down the road? Why weren't you protesting about these mass murders 20 years ago? I'll tell you why... you were probably a little kid and didn't give a shit about those Iraqis then... and you wouldn't give a shit about those same iraqis now... if we weren't so deeply intrenched in this mess. You are using the deaths of these people to justify your support for this war and the actions of our President. Don't use the deaths of those people as justification for your political arguement... that is about as disrepectful as using the deaths that occurred on September 11, 2001 to justify your arguement. It does not honor them... it spits on them.
So, come up with your own opinion and get back to me on this one. You cannot uphold your hatred for Saddam Hussein without including his partners in these crimes... the U.S. Administration of Ronald Reagan and his advisors... including Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. We supplied the weapons used and urged him to be the stop-gap between secular nations like Iraq and fundamentalist extremist nations like Iran. To enforce that policy by going after all enemies with extreme prejudice.
Hail, Hail!!!
Oh I know how you were defining it...you're defining it based on agree with your beliefs.
It is debateable. You are confusing murderer with killer. They dont have the same meaning. Murder is something specifically against the law. If you kill someone within the means of the law, you are not a murderer.
Jesus Christ. I think this thread is 8 pages long because you keep giving words non-standard meanings. So sure. Make up your own definitions for all of the words you use, and you'll always get to be right about everything.
Well to me... Jesus Christ means body of Christ.... which means daily bread... which means sandwhich... which means Subway... therefore, Jesus Christ means an Italian BMT with the works... hold the Mayo.
See y'all after lunch.
Hail, Hail!!!