Quote:

---

The fact is the actions of the current governemnt in Isreal has caused the growth of much hatred and anti-Americanism. Sharon was found to have acted in a terrible manner and was held directly responsible for the terrorist atrocity where maybe up to 3,000 innocent people were massacred in Sabra. We know how himself and his crew refered to them as 'two-legged animals'. The Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, is one of the world's most bloodstained terrorists like the evil Binladen. He is responsible for the cold-blooded slaughter of at least 1,500 men, women and children in the Beirut refugee camps of Chatila. Even a formal Israeli commission found Sharon personally responsible for the Lebanese massacres
Ariel Sharon is sought for trial by the Hague Tribunal, the same body that succeeded in extraditing former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic for charges of crimes against humanity in Kosovo. Sharon will not travel to Belgium for fear of arrest by the International Court for the massacre.
After the Israeli military devastation and occupation, Sharon forcibly removed Palestinian resistance fighters from Lebanon. Many Palestinian women, children and old people were left behind in refugee camps near Beirut. The United States publicly guaranteed their safety and promised that they would quickly be reunited with their loved ones. When Sharon plotted their murder, he not only planned a bloody act of terrorism against the refugees; he knew it was an act of treachery against the United States that would raise intense hatred against America.

Wasn't Sharon, after all, the one that said that Isreal controlled the U.S. ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JaynezTown:
Funny Flynn, so you think everyone should be pro-Bush and pro-militants in Isreal. Yes those suicide bombers are scum, and what they do is horrible. However that radical leader Sharon is often just as disgusting, laying waste to villages, killing women and children.

---

Quote:

---

Conas tá tú inniu, an dtig linn níos mó Gaeilge scríofa a fheiceáil san fhóram seo ?
Nice how you failed to mention any of the loyalist and English terrorist killings UVF, LVF, UDA or RHD actions in the North. Wouldn't happen to know a few of those who waved the Union Jack when the Queen tossed her pennies to the masses ?


Is it that your transparency is begining to show

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The fact is the actions of the current governemnt in Isreal has caused the growth of much hatred and anti-Americanism. Sharon was found to have acted in a terrible manner and was held directly responsible for the terrorist atrocity where maybe up to 3,000 innocent people were massacred in Sabra. We know how himself and his crew refered to them as 'two-legged animals'. The Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, is one of the world's most bloodstained terrorists like the evil Binladen. He is responsible for the cold-blooded slaughter of at least 1,500 men, women and children in the Beirut refugee camps of Chatila. Even a formal Israeli commission found Sharon personally responsible for the Lebanese massacres
Ariel Sharon is sought for trial by the Hague Tribunal, the same body that succeeded in extraditing former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic for charges of crimes against humanity in Kosovo. Sharon will not travel to Belgium for fear of arrest by the International Court for the massacre.
After the Israeli military devastation and occupation, Sharon forcibly removed Palestinian resistance fighters from Lebanon. Many Palestinian women, children and old people were left behind in refugee camps near Beirut. The United States publicly guaranteed their safety and promised that they would quickly be reunited with their loved ones. When Sharon plotted their murder, he not only planned a bloody act of terrorism against the refugees; he knew it was an act of treachery against the United States that would raise intense hatred against America.

Wasn't Sharon, after all, the one that said that Isreal controlled the U.S. ?

---

Flynn maybe we are starting to see where your loyalties lie ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
ConnerFlynn- Actually, I had a question that I didn't have time to type!

Was Saddam a terrorist? I'm not wondering if he SUPPORTED terrorists, my question is- was Saddam himself a terrorist? After all, he DID target civilians with plastic-chippers, ear-lops and chemical weapons. There is a reason why his regime was called a "reign of terror".

And if he is a terrorist, would that also include Pol Pot? Josef Stalin?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
ConnerFlynn- Actually, I had a question that I didn't have time to type!

Was Saddam a terrorist? I'm not wondering if he SUPPORTED terrorists, my question is- was Saddam himself a terrorist? After all, he DID target civilians with plastic-chippers, ear-lops and chemical weapons. There is a reason why his regime was called a "reign of terror".

And if he is a terrorist, would that also include Pol Pot? Josef Stalin?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Look out ConnerFlynn!! It's a trap!!!

You'll say "Sure, they were evil bastards and terrorists of the first stripe, and I hope they burn in Hell for eternity." Then SignyM will inform you that the USA supported all of them at one time, and hence we are terrorists too.



"Keep the Shiny side up"

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Huh. You're smarter than I am, Geezer!

I'm not sure I could say that we "supported" Stalin although I know we were nominal allies in WWII. (Actually, I don't think the term "allies" applies... there is a different word that is used for temporary military cooperation but it escapes me right now.) I'm pretty sure that we didn't "support" Pol Pot either. I know we secretly bombed Cambodia during the Vietnam War.. if you have any information on us funding, supplying arms to, or providing intellgence for Pol Pot let me know!

We DID actively support Saddam through many years in his fight against Iran, but he's kind of the odd man out in my set of examples.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Yes but "encouraging" another country - especially a country that we barely had relations with and one that has almost no goals in common with ours- to "support" a regime is not in the same league as supplying or selling arms, training military and security staff, providing intelligence, and running interference for in the UN.

I'm just trying to get a bead on where the definition of terrorism breaks down.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Yes, and also where culpability ends for "encouraging" and "funding" terrorism. Obviously, if I'm giving money to ObL, or supplying arms, or providing secret information then I could obviously be accused of supporting terrorism.

What about if I sell arms to ObL? For instance, the Swedes have a number of small-arms manufacturers (or so Ive been told) and make quite a bit of money that way. If they sell arms to ObL are they supporing terrorism or just being good businessmen? What abut if they sell explosives? Bandages? Food?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Juko:
So when the US supplied weapons and advisors to Bin Laden to aid in his efforts to overthrow the Soviets...

---

Quote:

---

As for the Israelis, how much of a difference is there really in attacking and killing a civilian outright or repeatedly killing civilians in accidental crossfire or collateral damage? At what point does it stop being accidental and simply becomes an uncaring attitude?

---

Quote:

---

Neither side of the Israel/Palestine conflict is guiltless. They both seem equally stupid and stubborn. The Palestinian terrorists might be blowing themselves up to kill civilians... but the Israelis respond back by levelling a block of Palestinian houses or conducting a rocket attack from helicopter gunships into a crowded street.

Does Blue Sun sponser the Blue Man Group?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
ConnerFlynn, I have to say you're wrong on this.

Those "militants" have large, extended families who live together, sometimes these families don't overtly know what the kids are doing. And in the case of Palestinians who are very short of housing, many unrelated people live there too. It isn't enough to fire missiles on a block of houses and then say "Oh well, it's too bad the rest of the people didn't find someplace else to live." The Israelis are CLEARLY targeting innocent civilians, they do this deliberately to put pressure on the militants, and they SAY they are doing it. It's part of their policy.

Also, Sharon isn't called "the butcher of Sabra" for no reason. He ordered Lebanese Christian Phalangists into the refugee camp where women and children were pulled out of their tents, raped, and slaughtered. According to witnesses, the Israeli Army prevented refugees from escaping while the Phalangists took vengeance on the refugees. There were indeed perhaps 200-300 armed men in the camp, but this doesn't account for the fact that women and children were killed specifically and individually, not as part of some "crossfire".

BTW- it's not real smart to simply dimiss erroneous alliances as simply a Cold War error in judgement. We might perhaps want to (ahem) LEARN from the past?

One of the lessons I've gleaned from these errors (and there are many) is that we had better make true alliances with nations that share our goals and means rather than temporary alliances with horribly corrupt, tyranical, or fanatical groups because a large percentage of them seem to get enough traction to come back and bite us in the *ss.

---

Quote:

---

It's a trap!!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JaynezTown:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Connorflynn:
World War III is on, most of the world just hasn't realized it yet. The only difference between the Islamafascists and the Nazis, is that the Islamafascists are willing to blow themselves up, rather then just run people into the gas chambers.

When will France and the rest of Europe wake up? Maybe after the severed heads of their journalists arrive, maybe after a few more hostage situations with inane demands.

I welcome Russia. I mourn for their loss. There can be no diplomacy with the Islamafascists. Only force.

Take a look at (Insert Islamafascist group here)..
"Crush the Infidels!!!" (gets ass handed to them)
"We give, we want to talk" (secretly builds up arms)
"Oh wait, We SHALL DIE for Allah!!!" (Gets ass handed to them)
" No wait, we give, we want to talk" (secretly begins to build up arms again).

http://www.kremlin.ru/eng/

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?flok=FF-RTO-roitz&idq=/
ff/story/0002%2F20040908%2F0627683863.htm&sc=roitz&photoid=20040906BES23D&floc=NW_1-T

---

Hot headed reactions like these are kind of understandable. I saw much worse ideas than this Flynn guy on the Yahoo-news and MSN-news board

It's true that these Islamic terrorists are scum, and if they take human life, bomb hospitals or kill children they deserve to die.

However not all Arabs, Muslims or Islamics are like these radical nuts. Many are just ordinary folk and some don't give a damn about religion. Terrorism will always exist in some form, it is hard to defeat but it can be largely prevented.
Terrorism flourishes where there is ethnic hatred, radical political leaders, religious nuts and oppression..these are the places where it grows and gets strong.
The probelm is that some try to strike back using overkill methods only to see terror groups spring back in other places and sometimes stronger.

Take the example of Clinton, he was a bullcrap president and spent much time with Monica and cigars. However he done ok for the USA and was smart when it came to global politics and events. In Kosovo, we had different ethnic groups and races killing ecah other. Clinton was forced to act and planes bombed. Afterwards there were big problems, yet Clinton set up the smart framework so that the area would be secure, safe and free from dictators or terrorists again. Clinton also done good in parts of Asia, Northern Ireland and the Middle East.

Now take our idiot Bush, all fight but no brains instead of finding the evil Binladen and his Taliban friends Bush is off causing trouble in the Iraq. Meanwhile N-Korea is building long range Nukes that reach the west coast and Iran has a real WMD program. Terrorism flourishes where there is ethnic hatred, radical political leaders, religious nuts and oppression..these are the places where it grows and gets strong and this might be why it's now growing in Iraq, a place where Al-Quaida could not have existed some months ago as Saddam used to hatethem and other religious radicals. It seems Bush has plenty of bravado and fight in him,
but no brains and tactics and no idea about peace, and security or winning the war.

There is no doubt these islamic extremists are evil and they should be killed for what they have done. However not respond by bombing a city
let's catch them , put them on trial and shoot them.
The worst thing Russia could do is play this like Bush has done, by pinning it on some other random city ( Baghdad-Iraq ) . When I speak of Clinton or Bush I don't just mean the presidents but the advisors and administartion which surrounds. Is Bush smart enough to win peace and security or are the terrorists coming back and more people going to die ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I appreciate this necropost. Before I even knew that Saudi Arabia was funding al Qaida (and ISIL) I knew it was a bad idea to cozy up to whichever tyrant was willing to forward out short-term aims.

It seems that being unethical has a price, and it may take 30 years but that price is now biting us in the ass.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Connorflynn:


Is that clear enough for you?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THGRRI:
I think this should be preserved for prosperity don't you. I wonder when JAYNZTOWN is going to respond to his own post, don't you?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
The Opening Post sounds like a prediction.

---