Wmd

[torque]

well i was listening to the radio last night and the host was doing the news update and he mentioned that there was a convoy of "WMD" trucks that went to Syria about 3 weeks before the invasion. We had pictures of it from our sattellites but no proof that it had WMD in them. I guess while they were interragating one of the scientists he admitted to them carrying WMD. he said the article was posted on a global news site. i dont rember the site, could u guys try and help me find it? it was like globalink or globalnet, something with global in it.

[Wrath]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38581

[oPiumologist]

This fits more of the details in your description - the mother site is Global Security dot Org.
Article:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/bw.htm



In an exclusive interview with The Sunday Telegraph published on January 25, 2004, Dr. David Kay, the former head of the Iraq Survey Group, said there was evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before the start of the war to overthrow Saddam. "We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

[kinggovernor]

i read that before, I think it means Syria is next

[oPiumologist]

i read that before, I think it means Syria is next
Imperialism strikes again!

[athenalux]

Imperialism?

[oPiumologist]

Imperialism?
:eek3:
---
\Im*pe"ri*al*ism\, n. The policy, practice, or advocacy of seeking, or acquiescing in, the extension of the control, dominion, or empire of a nation, as by the acquirement of new, esp. distant, territory or dependencies, or by the closer union of parts more or less independent of each other for operations of war, copyright, internal commerce, etc.
---

Intelligence Agencies have evidence that weapons of mass destruction were shipped by ground into Syria before the overthrow of Saddam. The whole point of our existence in Iraq was and still is to seize these weapons and get rid of people who may use them. Therefore, kinggovernor is correct in saying that the U.S. may in the future send troops to Syria and conduct searches for them. The U.S. is, in a way, spreading their "wings of democracy" throughout the Middle East, hence this Imperialistic attitude is common among those who don't fully agree with U.S. occupation.

[-silent-]

people have been saying Syria is next for 2 years already and nothing has happened... get over it!

[oPiumologist]

People started saying Iraq was next back in the eighties, look at us now.

[torque]

thnx guys

[kinggovernor]

Imperialism?

what have a right to defend ourselves. and if country A helps country B when we are at war with them, then we have to defend ourselves against country A

[oPiumologist]

what have a right to defend ourselves. and if country A helps country B when we are at war with them, then we have to defend ourselves against country A

What in God's name does that have to do with Imperialism? If Country WE is at war with country A, and country A is assisting country B, then we have a right to search and attack country B. Iraq was either supplying Syria with weapons or hiding them there, so in this case it makes no sense attacking or defending ourselves against country A if country B is helping them and we are infact at war with country B, unless of course they are posing a major thread to us, which is not the case with Syria.

<img src="http://www.IMGSpot.com/u/04/143/01/war.jpg" border="1">

[SandBox]

well i was listening to the radio last night and the host was doing the news update and he mentioned that there was a convoy of "WMD" trucks that went to Syria about 3 weeks before the invasion. We had pictures of it from our sattellites but no proof that it had WMD in them. I guess while they were interragating one of the scientists he admitted to them carrying WMD. he said the article was posted on a global news site. i dont rember the site, could u guys try and help me find it? it was like globalink or globalnet, something with global in it.


Ya, they said so many other things too, mostly bullshit, I believe.

Everything that comes out of Washington i take with a grain of salt.

[-silent-]

most is coming from fox news headquarters ^^

[Method]

The U.S. is, in a way, spreading their "wings of democracy" throughout the Middle East, hence this Imperialistic attitude is common among those who don't fully agree with U.S. occupation.

yes.... defending yourself against foreign enemies who wish to use chemical, biological and nuclear weapons against you is the the utmost example of "spreading wings of democracy"

I call it self-preservation myself, but if you choose to believe that we're "grabbing our guns, bibles, Roman history books, and headin' off to war" ... :ugh2: so be it.

[oPiumologist]

*sigh..* I don't think you fully understand what I meant by that. People have an attitude "like" that toward the U.S. in today's wars. I didn't mean the government is using ancient & Biblical tactics.

[kinggovernor]

What in God's name does that have to do with Imperialism? If Country WE is at war with country A, and country A is assisting country B, then we have a right to search and attack country B. Iraq was either supplying Syria with weapons or hiding them there, so in this case it makes no sense attacking or defending ourselves against country A if country B is helping them and we are infact at war with country B, unless of course they are posing a major thread to us, which is not the case with Syria.

<img src="http://www.IMGSpot.com/u/04/143/01/war.jpg" border="1">

yea Syria would just allow Iraqi WMDs into their country :rofl:

and how can you say Syria is not a threat to us, they are listed as sponsors of terrorism.

http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2000/2441.htm

[oPiumologist]

I know they're a threat - they don't support the Kurds, who let the British and Americans use bases to land warplanes even now. I'm saying that because relations are and have been shaky between Iraq and Syria, I don't think they will be our next major target in the war. However, with these weapons transports, the U.S. is likely to take action with search procedures along with the UN.

[Wildwilly]

look out Laura! Perfessor Grone is monitoring these boards!

[Osama Bin White Out]

I am so sick and fucking tired of people saying the Americans are defending themselves from Iraq; and now Syria is getting the same story.

[SandBox]

I am so sick and fucking tired of people saying the Americans are defending themselves from Iraq; and now Syria is getting the same story.


w3rd

[kinggovernor]

I am so sick and fucking tired of people saying the Americans are defending themselves from Iraq; and now Syria is getting the same story.

i would take at look at these:

http://fpc.state.gov/c7690.htm

there is a reason why Iraq was and Syria is on the list of states that sponsor terrorism

[Osama Bin White Out]

Iraq and Syria are of no direct threat to the States. Any threat they pose wont be solved by bombing the civilians of Iraq. Period.

[Method]

Iraq and Syria are of no direct threat to the States. Any threat they pose wont be solved by bombing the civilians of Iraq. Period.


Sounds like the same phrase I heard a couple years ago... oh except they instead of Iraq or Syria... they used the name.... what was it again??? oh yea....

Afghanistan

where ever we do so allow a safe haven for terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, we are allowing our enemies to threaten our freedom.

How do they not pose a threat? Since when are we going on civilian bombing raids?
I don't agree with everything we've done, and there will always be mistakes, and regrets, however I do not regret, nor think it a mistake, to defend ourselves against terrorists, sponsors of terrorism, or those who provide weapons or a safe haven for them.

Iraq was 100% involved in WMD, and the threat there today still exists.

Try having an attack on the soveriegn land of your country..watching 1000's of your fellow ciitizens die, then tell me I should just sit around and hope we can all just get along.... :moon:

You just take a fucking seat Sally, we'll keep the world safe.

[Osama Bin White Out]

You just take a fucking seat Sally, we'll keep the world safe.


Ya, and by the way terrorism is increasing and hatred for the west is fuelled, your doing a bang up job. Your such a pig Im not even gonna respond to your horsecrap.

[Method]

Ya, and by the way terrorism is increasing and hatred for the west is fuelled, your doing a bang up job. Your such a pig Im not even gonna respond to your horsecrap.


actually, I am doing a bang up job.

and you just did respond to my "horsecrap"

Please don't do so in the future if you really don't feel I have valid points.

oh ya, and I rejected your aim message cause well...I really don't care. no offense

[Dogg]

Iraq and Syria are of no direct threat to the States. Any threat they pose wont be solved by bombing the civilians of Iraq. Period.

Who ever in the history or the Untied States or anywhere said bombing Iraqi Civilians would help anything...back this statement up...

Who?

Post a quote from any source...real or fake...

[Osama Bin White Out]

Like I said on AIM (boo hoo you refused) I have no care at all to what you said, I dont give a shit. Method is the prime example of why the world hates America. It makes me so fuckin furious to hear some mindless drone like him insist that the America needs to send its millitary into a country to stop terrorism. Terrorism cant be fought with any millitary, only fueled. But rejects like these 2 and many others cant tell the difference between NOT carpet bombing countries and appeasement. To idiots like them there is no middle ground. It's mind numbing. oh by the way Dogg shouldnt you be hitting me up with more negative rep?

[Method]

It makes me so fuckin furious to hear some mindless drone like him insist that the America needs to send its millitary into a country to stop terrorism.

well I guess I do have valid points, because you're continually responding to me.

I'm a mindless drone huh? That's funny, because I get more insight into the war on terrorism nightly that you do in 6 months of watching CNN. I'm also a liberal, which doesn't match your "drone" theory either. What I am, is informed, unbiased, and responsible for the safety of my nation; instead of just an opinionated arm chair political analyst wanna-be like yourself.

[Dogg]

NOT carpet bombing countries and appeasement. To idiots like them there is no middle ground. It's mind numbing. oh by the way Dogg shouldnt you be hitting me up with more negative rep?


The mind numbing part is idiots like you refuse to back up the crap you let out...tell us who carpet bombed what country? You still refuse to say who said bombing Iraqi civilians would solve anything...

SO until idiots like you back up your statements in a debate, you will continue to waste our time reading...

I thought you had a life outside the internet? Shouldn't be out there instead of here?

[Osama Bin White Out]

1st off, you dont know the 1st god damn thing about me. Secondley, your one of these people who believes that the war on terror will be fought and won with conventional armies. Clearly that's the case seeing how you've support it in this very thread. I hate to be the one to tell you this, theres no army of terrorism waiting to face USA on the battlefield for all the marbles. And if said army existed, if the American forces won, terrorists around the world wont turn themselves in because of it. Endless war is what you support, a 1984'ish society with an invisible enemy that has no clear end. Great strategy.

[Dogg]

1st off, you dont know the 1st god damn thing about me. Secondley, your one of these people who believes that the war on terror will be fought and won with conventional armies. Clearly that's the case seeing how you've support it in this very thread. I hate to be the one to tell you this, theres no army of terrorism waiting to face USA on the battlefield for all the marbles. And if said army existed, if the American forces won, terrorists around the world wont turn themselves in because of it. Endless war is what you support, a 1984'ish society with an invisible enemy that has no clear end. Great strategy.

Let me clarify the US stance since you fail to understand it, it will dismantle those regimes that support it with money, weapons, and safe havens...

A jackal on the run cannot do anything but save itself...

Not a hard point to understand to civiliazed people...

[Osama Bin White Out]

balogne. you know how many sleeper cells exist in canada and the united states alone? if you honestley believe a convential army can defeat global terrorism your a scary individual

[oPiumologist]

balogne. you know how many sleeper cells exist in canada and the united states alone? if you honestley believe a convential army can defeat global terrorism your a scary individual
man, just finished reading your guys' flaming.. it's not all that relevant but I have to admit that whiteout is owning you, method. :whip:

[SandBox]

w3rd

[Dogg]

balogne. you know how many sleeper cells exist in canada and the united states alone? if you honestley believe a convential army can defeat global terrorism your a scary individual


I'll say it again, because you couldn't read it the first time...I'll even spell it out...we are not going in to Iraq or other future areas to capture all the terrorists...we are NOT...

We are dismantling and attacking the regimes (this means governements) that are openly hiding the terrorists and not trying to stop them themselves. IE Iraq or Afganistan who supplied a safe training haven, wepaons and protection from anti terrorist states...

Why can you not understand this?

A conventional army can, has, and does stop regimes every single time...so yes, a conventional army can stop a government from existing....the Taliban who? The Baath who?

The biggest problem was regimes (again this means governments) were allowing Al qeuda and others to hold training camps and crap...no more...if you can care less...move there...don't hide behind the Canadian flag and people who also, like the US, refuse to openly support terrorists in their border because this is the current mission in removing terrorist supporting regimes...this is not a man by man hunt using the Army in Iraq...you must me kniave to think every terrorist is in Afganistan and Iraq...the CIA, NSA, FBI and every other world wide police force is hunting them down on a global scale...son't hide behind blanket arguements saying a army in Iraq isn't gonna find em...because it's not trying...so get the facts straight and use sources to back your flaming posts...

[Osama Bin White Out]

you completley miss my point dogg, atta boy.

[SandBox]

man, just finished reading your guys' flaming.. it's not all that relevant but I have to admit that whiteout is owning you, method. :whip:

Except for this part...

I'm also a liberal, which doesn't match your "drone" theory either.

[SandBox]

Hi Dogg nice to see you :)

[Dogg]

you completley miss my point dogg, atta boy.

No you were first complaining about an army taking out terrorists which it isn't, but then in yoru last post you want to change topic to sleeper cells...I simply went after your second statement in that post relating to the others...sleeper cells has nothing to do with governments or armys or iraq...complety off base in what you originally complained about...

Which has gone from apparenlty the US is going to kill all the terrorists by carpet bombing the Iraq civilians, then the Army s engaged in searching in only two countries for every world terrorist, to now sleeper cells....stick to one area and debate it, not jump around when you lose control...

Do you know want to talk about sleeper cells and not your other isssues with Americas Army? (lol...play on words)

[Method]

well if Grone thinks someone is getting "owned" as he says...then ya it MUST be true...


anyway, conventional armies are winning...sorry to tell you.

[Dogg]

Hi Dogg nice to see you :)

As it always is...I am such a ray of sunshine :boink: :wtcd:

[Osama Bin White Out]

If conventional armies are winning why is there terrorism on a near daily basis in Iraq?

[oPiumologist]

If conventional armies are winning why is there terrorism on a near daily basis in Iraq?
:rofl: I agree :rofl:

[Dogg]

If conventional armies are winning why is there terrorism on a near daily basis in Iraq?

Baath party is gone...we won.

Now you want to argue that because there are still terrorists in Iraq that the US is losing?

Crap...even by your own admittance there are sleeper cells in the US and Canada...are Canadians failures too? Are they?

Answer is No - you have to use police forces and intel agencies to get man by man once you cut off these phsyco's main supporters....which the US Military did, and therefore has already won this particular battle...

[oPiumologist]

Hold still Dogg, you bear the mark of the Beast!

[torque]

usualy i dont post to white outs, incoherent rants about how bad the united states is, but i couldn't help myself this time. you say that a conventianal army is not going to win the fight agaisnt terrorism, that may be true. but after 3 planes attack buildings in your country you believe that we should just all just put up our white flags and say hey you cant do that!?

at least we are trying to change the world for the better. whats the point in trying if you cant win is the point your trying to get across. everyone gets on our case for things that happen and it is easy for you to sit back and be the monday morning quarterback and say that we are doing such a shitty job when your country refuses to help (besides the minor humanitarian aide), if your not part of the solution ur part of the problem, but lets look into the future and lets say the unthinkable happens, CANADA suffers an attack of terrorism.
wtf would you guys do? you lack a sufficent army to fight back or mount any kind of rebutle. What would be the first country to jump behind your back and offer any kind of support that was nessicary? in return you go piggybacking in which ever way the rest of the world is going.

i would just like to say i in no way hate canada or have anything against them, i just think that some of the assholes up north, that rant about things in the war, how we are "attacking" Iraq, when they did nothing against us in the first place. you have no right to be posting that bull shit, you in no way can process how big of an impact 9/11 was.

We all know the middle east has been a ticking time bomb waiting to blow. Who is the biggest supplier of trying to restore peace? who has been trying to make a peace treaty between iran and the palestians? the un? no. who was the first to touch down when the cubans needed help a few months ago? the un? no

[Osama Bin White Out]

usualy i dont post to white outs, incoherent rants about how bad the united states is, but i couldn't help myself this time. you say that a conventianal army is not going to win the fight agaisnt terrorism, that may be true. but after 3 planes attack buildings in your country you believe that we should just all just put up our white flags and say hey you cant do that!? at least we are trying to change the world for the better. whats the point in trying if you cant win is the point your trying to get across. everyone gets on our case for things that happen and it is easy for you to sit back and be the monday morning quarterback and say that we are doing such a shitty job when your country refuses to help (besides the minor humanitarian aide), but lets look into the future and lets say the unthinkable happens, CANADA suffers an attack of terrorism. wtf would you guys do? you lack a sufficent army to fight back or mount any kind of rebutle. What would be the first country to jump behind your back and offer any kind of support that was nessicary? in return you go piggybacking in which ever way the rest of the world is going. i would just like to say i in no way hate canada or have anything against them, i just think that some of the assholes up north, that rant about things in the war, how we are "attacking" Iraq, when they did nothing against us in the first place. you have no right to be posting that bull shit, you in no way can process how big of an impact 9/11 was. We all know the middle east has been a ticking time bomb waiting to blow. Who is the biggest supplier of trying to restore peace? who has been trying to make a peace treaty between iran and the palestians? the un? no. who was the first to touch down when the cubans needed help a few months ago? the un? no

paragraphing would be super

[TonyMontana]

First off...no terrorist in his right mind would ever attack Canada (unless he is pissed off at the Maple Leafs :ugh2: ). Seriously though torque...Canada is too perfect for anything like that ever too happen to them.

And if it ever did...they wouldn't piggyback on anybody because...well they are like I said...perfect. They first off would get White Out to draw up the peace plans (which include watching a digitally re-mastered copy of the Summit Series...and taking in a live hockey game at one of the remaining hockey teams left in Canada :rofl:) and White Out would execute them to perfection.

The terrorist would be so impressed with the Summit Series victory that they leave Canada with a big foam finger (from the live hockey game) and a smile. And look at that no blood shed!! Now that’s peace keeping!!! GJ WO!

[Osama Bin White Out]

First off...no terrorist in his right mind would ever attack Canada (unless he is pissed off at the Maple Leafs :ugh2: ). Seriously though torque...Canada is too perfect for anything like that ever too happen to them.

And if it ever did...they wouldn't piggyback on anybody because...well they are like I said...perfect. They first off would get White Out to draw up the peace plans (which include watching a digitally re-mastered copy of the Summit Series...and taking in a live hockey game at one of the remaining hockey teams left in Canada :rofl:) and White Out would execute them to perfection.

The terrorist would be so impressed with the Summit Series victory that they leave Canada with a big foam finger (from the live hockey game) and a smile. And look at that no blood shed!! Now that’s peace keeping!!! GJ WO!

I always figured you were intellectually bankrupt.

[torque]

lmfao nice job tony, i stand corrected

[CrazyIvan]

I'm also a liberal, which doesn't match your "drone" theory either. What I am, is informed, unbiased, and responsible for the safety of my nation; instead of just an opinionated arm chair political analyst wanna-be like yourself.

its not a drone theory its a grone theory

"You just take a fucking seat Sally, we'll keep the world safe"- best quote of this whole thread

[TonyMontana]

I always figured you were intellectually bankrupt.


Then please Mr. Thesaurus tell me what you would want your country to do if something like that ever happened. Better yet here is a little scenario for you.

Scenario...You're playing in a hockey game (something you can relate too) and you get sucker punched. You get some pretty good damage done to your face (broken nose jaw etc..). The guy who sucker punches you has ever intention of doing it again. The next time you guys meet up are you going to be on the offensive? Or are you going to let him punch you again?

[Dogg]

First off...no terrorist in his right mind would ever attack Canada (unless he is pissed off at the Maple Leafs :ugh2: ). Seriously though torque...Canada is too perfect for anything like that ever too happen to them.

And if it ever did...they wouldn't piggyback on anybody because...well they are like I said...perfect. They first off would get White Out to draw up the peace plans (which include watching a digitally re-mastered copy of the Summit Series...and taking in a live hockey game at one of the remaining hockey teams left in Canada :rofl:) and White Out would execute them to perfection.

The terrorist would be so impressed with the Summit Series victory that they leave Canada with a big foam finger (from the live hockey game) and a smile. And look at that no blood shed!! Now that’s peace keeping!!! GJ WO!

w3rd

[Method]

conventional armies are winning, aided by humint and sigint we do more in one night than your psycho babble bullshit could get done in a century.

[Method]

oh and Grone, giving me bad reputation for mispronouncing your name is kinda sad, but thats ok, I'm sure you get enough bad rep on your own :)

[SandBox]

Al Qaeda plans attacks in Canada-Ottawa spy chief
06 May 2004 21:41:48 GMT

(Adds quotes by Public Security Minister paras 6-7)

By David Ljunggren

OTTAWA, May 6 (Reuters) - It is inevitable that Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network will try to mount terror attacks in Canada and against Canadian targets abroad, Canada's spy chief said on Thursday.

Ward Elcock, head of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, also said CSIS had already prevented terror attacks in Canada and revealed his operatives were mounting an increasing number of spying missions abroad.

Elcock said directives believed to be from al Qaeda had singled out Canada and Canadians as targets twice over the last two years.

"The service's top priority Sunni Islamic terrorist target is al Qaeda...To date, Canadian victims have been as a result of being in the wrong place at the wrong time," he told Parliament's national security sub-committee.

"But as al Qaeda has directly threatened Canadians twice in as many years, the last time only a month ago, it is therefore safe to assume that it is no longer a question of if, but rather of when or where, we will be specifically targeted."

Public Security Minister Anne McLellan said later that while Elcock was "painting a fairly realistic picture" about the risks, it was by no means guaranteed that al Qaeda would launch an attack.

"I'm not sure that I would say it's inevitable...(but) we live in a very complex world and we must be prepared for the possibility that we will be the target of a direct threat or attack," she told reporters.

Elcock repeated a long-held CSIS assertion that "indigenous and foreign terrorists" had long been active in Canada, some using the country as a base for foreign missions.

"Canada's history is not free of terrorist violence. Nor is its future," he said, adding that CSIS was monitoring all groups considered dangerous.

"I believe in some cases we have prevented terrorist attacks or the preparation for terrorist attacks," said Elcock, declining to give further details.

Canadian police arrested a software developer in Ottawa in late March and charged him with planning explosions in both the Canadian and British capitals.

Police say the case of Mohammed Momin Khawaja is linked to that of five men arrested in Britain with half a tonne of ammonium nitrate fertilizer. Khawaja's bail hearing continues on Friday.

Canada opposed the war on Iraq but did send 2,000 troops to Afghanistan to take part in a NATO-led peacekeeping mission.

Elcock -- touching upon a topic normally kept firmly under wraps in Ottawa -- said that one way of combating terror attacks was the growing number of spying missions CSIS agents were now mounting abroad.

"Since the late 1990s...the service has increasingly engaged in covert foreign operations. This change was due in part to the changing nature of the threat. It was also a logical development of the service's growing expertise in carrying out such operations," he said.

"CSIS has expanded the range of foreign operations to include tasking human sources to travel abroad, recruiting foreign sources and meeting those sources in third countries."

Elcock said the number of liaison arrangements with foreign security and intelligence organizations had grown from around 50 in the late 1980s to nearly 250 today.


http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N06280544.htm

[Dogg]

Exactly what I said earlier...it's up to the Intel agencies to get man for man on terrorists...the military is simply to defeat the regimes that support them in masses...

this is not a man by man hunt using the Army in Iraq...you must be kniave to think every terrorist is in Afganistan and Iraq...the CIA, NSA, FBI and every other world wide police force is hunting them down on a global scale

But gg on the CSIS to start travelling abroad to get them...waiting for them to strike is stupid and kniave...hope they help the world out and bust some terrorist asses...

Of course isn't this just a smaller scale of say an Iraq or Afgan mission? Just using a scaple instead of a broad sword...but still taking the war to the terrorists in other countries...hmmmmmmmmm

[Method]

not neccesarily... the military works with the intelligence agencies in a zillion ways (as you know). I work with multiple agencies and i'm in the military, part of the "conventional army"

[Osama Bin White Out]

I said it before and I will say it again. If conventional armies were the ticket, terrorism in Iraq would have ceased. The reality is theres terrorism everywhere, and sleeper cells everywhere. It's no different that guerrilla warfare.

[Dogg]

I said it before and I will say it again. If conventional armies were the ticket, terrorism in Iraq would have ceased. The reality is theres terrorism everywhere, and sleeper cells everywhere. It's no different that guerrilla warfare.


Even though you are too dense to listen to us when we say the Military is there to remove regimes that support terrorists and keep on crying about the Military is only there to capture terrorists and is failing...

Then we will ignore that...lets all lie to ourselves and say the military is there just to hunt terrorists and nothing else. Since the CSIS is failing to capture sleeper cells in Canada by your own words, and the US military is failing to capture them (even though we have told you they aren't trying - its not their job - they are removing a hostile regime in the real world), then what in your world is the way to capture them?

Does every country just bend over and take it in the ass since police, federal, or military forces can't catch them? Do we ask Jesse Jackson to ask them all to surrender?

Whats your plan or ideas?

If you care to answer that...or even have the courage to acknowledge it, then ask youself if you have the courage to acknowledge that the US military is there to remove a terrorist supporting regime...it's not hard to admit, but it's easier to cry they think they are there to capture the worlds terrorists...

The truth is a bitch to face...I admit it...learn to face it...crying lies won't change it...it only hopes to fool idiots...and thats not working here... :slap:

[Dogg]

And let me save you some words...

Dogg, your a fucking idiot asshole sucking dick...


Now that I've beaten you to the punch...answer the questions....

p.s. Pardon my pre-emtive language, but you'd see it anways in his post...as the rest of his demonstrate... :drama:

[Osama Bin White Out]

Yes Dogg, I have all the answers. All the leaders in the world and US intelligence and presidents all couldnt solve terrorism in the last several decades, but, clearly, I have the answer. What it is Im saying is that you cant keep doing the same things and expect different results. Very simple.

[CrazyIvan]

"CSIS has expanded the range of foreign operations to include tasking human sources to travel abroad, recruiting foreign sources and meeting those sources in third countries."

well i hope so..i wouldnt want to see another 9-11 scale type attack on any of our allies or even our enemies...well maybe our enemies ...i happen to like canada....canadian women that is <3

[Dogg]

Yes Dogg, I have all the answers. All the leaders in the world and US intelligence and presidents all couldnt solve terrorism in the last several decades, but, clearly, I have the answer. What it is Im saying is that you cant keep doing the same things and expect different results. Very simple.


You said you cant keep doing the same thing...you are SO CORRECT MY BROTHER...insert the US Military into Afganistan and Iraq to remove the regimes that support these terrorists...instead of being a wuss country crying on it's own soil using big words like we have in the past, we are backing them up with the needed actions, we are taking the fight to those that support terrorism...so now wtf is the issue...we did a 180 degree turn on the worlds stance on terrorism and thats still not good enough for you? (Maybe you just wanted a 90 degree turn) Iraq is no different than Afganistan except they had a more modern culture, so since you all apparently believe in Afganistan, how you cannot believe in Iraq is uncomprehensible. Not sure what you see different in the Taliban who only opressed it's people and supported Al Qeuda from Saddam who slaughtered his people and started open war with Iran and Kuwait not to mention refused to comply with actual UN resolutions as well as bribing UN officials and stealing humanitarian money meant to help his people whom his regime also tortured if they weren't slaughtered...

Considering there was a helluva lot more reason to invade Iraq than Afganistan I can not fathom how one action is seen better than the other except that Canada went into Afganistan as well...

But o wait, we are back to my point, this is anti US thought, because if you were all so against Bush's Foriegn policy you would deplore Afganistan as well, yet you all support it...so now we are all confused...you hate Bush's Foreign Policy, you support Bush's foriegn policy to invade Afganistan, but you're back to opposing it again for Iraq...which is the same policy, but we used more force to remove a more well armed sitting army...sounds like you only support us beating up little kids like the Taliban but not formidable opponents like the Iraqi's...because again there is no difference in either situation except two, One, the Taliban NEVER attacked the world...NEVER...you support us attacking innocent people...they only harbored terrorists, but again they NEVER attacked us, but you support there onslaught. Two, Iraq never attacked us either. The merely waged open war in the region and also harbored terrorists...they even offered payments to suicide bombers...we'll ignore the genocide and torture of what human rights organizations call 500,000 but the US believes 300,000

O wait, your still pissed about the State of the Union speech going on 1 1/2 years ago...damn that man Bush...

Sorry...

:wtf:

[oPiumologist]

sounds like you only support us beating up little kids like the Taliban but not formidable opponents like the Iraqi's...because again there is no difference in either situation except two, One, the Taliban NEVER attacked the world...NEVER...you support us attacking innocent people...they only harbored terrorists, but again they NEVER attacked us, but you support there onslaught. Two, Iraq never attacked us either.

However, these countries who harbored terrorists are just as bad as the terrorists themselves. Countries like the U.S., Canada, the U.K., France, etc. who have very good homeland security and homeland intelligence and who can find out if there are infact any terrorists in their country is the type the United States as well as many others throughout the world want these "terrorists harborers" to become eventually. It's not like there's going to be a country called Terrorista where that's all there will be are terrorists and radical anarchists, and until the world has the ability to pinpoint these kind of people in specific locations and their motives, leaders like Bush will have to lead the war upon them.

[torque]

sure there will be haven't you ever heard of australia? thats where all the british (not sure if it was british or what country but ill run with them) ditched there prisioners we should just do the same let them bomb the shit out of eachother so they can feel they will go to heaven.

[oPiumologist]

sure there will be haven't you ever heard of australia? thats where all the british (not sure if it was british or what country but ill run with them) ditched there prisioners we should just do the same let them bomb the shit out of eachother so they can feel they will go to heaven.
http://www.IMGSpot.com/u/04/146/06/lol.gif

Yes...it was the British who controlled most of Australia. I bet if it were possible, we'd follow their technique with all the terrorists too.

[Method]

sure there will be haven't you ever heard of australia? thats where all the british (not sure if it was british or what country but ill run with them) ditched there prisioners we should just do the same let them bomb the shit out of eachother so they can feel they will go to heaven.

Well, that's what Castro did ... don't you remember when all the people started showing up on boats here from Cuba and our government thought the Cuban regime was falling? But instead Castro just emptied his insane asylums and prisons...gave them all boats, pointed them towards America and said "good luck!" :wavey:

so now their country is relatively free of crime and meanwhile here in the US we have every Cuban that even Castro didn't want, ya... we got :Owned:

[SandBox]

lol^

[torque]

well we should of gave them cars and told them to go even farther north :hsnono:

[CrazyIvan]

so now their country is relatively free of crime and meanwhile here in the US we have every Cuban that even Castro didn't want, ya... we got :Owned:

exactly ..good ol castro


and for that matter the good ol u.s. gov accepting them...thats what being Politically correct and Humane gets you :Puke: