RAzOR

no apology needed, but accepted just the same. and i apologize for the misunderstanding.

but to continue the debate. never under estimate anyone. no body is above killing or being killed. 9/11 happened because we under estimated the terrorist's infiltration to our country. the US and all its allies are a force to be rekoned w/ but dosen't make us invincible. we're goliath they can easily be david. under estimate our enemies and provoking retaliation is surly a risk we need not be taking. its just like our cars...ppl under estimate the potential and powers of our volvos, but what happens? we blow out from under the radar and the other drivers never knew what hit them. we need to be prepared to take the defensive instead of striking w/ the offensive. cuz our focused attention is the task at hand, we completely miss the fact that they've penetrated what little guard we have up and we get KOed.

Agreed- the balance is civil liberties against security and that is no easy question.

To me the real threat to our countries and our civilzation comes from within, our own weaknesses, our own sense of guilt for our wealth, our faults in dispensing our wealth, and the like.

Sometimes I wonder if Imperialism, done right, is such a bad thing. I mean the Romans brought their way of life to societies that ranged from inferior to just downright savage (They didn't want to war with Egypt or Carthage I think, as they were powerful and succesfully goverened). After the bloodshed, in the long run, those societies, those provinces, flourished with trade and wealth. Again, I'm just pondering. Sometimes I feel like the US should just go where it will with overwhelming force, hold our own, annex the land and teach our way of life- our freedom, democracy, justice system and trade wealth for resources. And our systems are far from perfect, but about as good as it gets. Anyway, just thinking.

One of my favorite thinkers stated recently that a society should not be judged by its faults but more by what it does to remove its faults, to grow.

For me, that did wonders.

i don't see how you linked buddhist and hindu's into my question. random statements can easily fuel tempers consider what you're acutally posting. i told you, i probably misunderstood what u were saying, but i did say it b4 hand.

I was only making the point that it isn't that the Islamic radicals cannot take the west out in a violent manner (like your sparring analogy stated). I probably shouldn't have included those other religeons but I was only demonstrating that save from nuking themselves, the US, Britian, France, Russia- all judeo-christian rooted nations, could obliterate any country, any religeon external to themselves without even trying. That it is not the Islamic world that is keeping our power at bay, it is our own principles.

I couldn't include Chrisitian since those countries are largely Christian.

Yeah, adding Hinduism and Busshism confused things, sorry.

So I'll say it without those two and maybe it's more clear:

The west could wipe out nearly all of Islam thirty minutes which not coincidentally is the time it takes for an ICBM to reach its target. A fact that is lost on the vastly illiterate masses of Muslims who think Allah is keeping the infidels at bay. We are keeping ourselves at bay.

Our war, in my humble opinion is for the heart of the moderate Muslim, who is afraid of being killed by the radical Muslim which is why they are largely silent. The real civil war in Islam will erupt once (if at all) the moderates decide the radicals are their worst enemy. Unfortunately, I think that is the strategy the West must adopt- enabling the moderate Islamists to reclaim their religeon. The Christians went through this 500 years ago.

Again, bad form on my part, I think you are right, I should not have lumped Hinduism and Buddhism with Islam even for purposes of example. My apologies.

im buddhist, but im american first...buddhist tend to be more passive and let things go. i guess its my civil rights that put me on edge. i don't take kindly to ppl forcing their views on others or threatening anything im associated to. i don't outright threaten ppl, but i do leave open challenges. like i said, mayb i misunderstood what u wrote, but from what i read it was somewhat negative towards islamic, buddhist and hindu ppl. im calm as long as everyone else is calm n there is a civil discussion going on.

I know you are worked up but please read it again. I have not edited it and it makes no such threats.

For clarity, here is your particular line I was responding too with my "nuke" observation. If you put them in order, I think you will see my point:

Your post clip...

"If violence is truly the answer, i challange you to come down here n get in a sparring ring with me. I'll give you 2 rounds to knock me out n then ill descimate you. Thats whats going on over there, we're in round 2 n we haven't knocked them out yet, so we're just pissing em off. What do you think is gonna happen when its time for them to fight back?" -HtownTurboBrick

---

My reply:

The west could wipe out nearly all of Islam and Buddhism and Hinduism in thirty minutes which not coincidentally is the time it takes for an ICBM to reach its target. A fact that is lost on the vastly illiterate masses of Muslims who think Allah is keeping the infidels at bay. We are keeping ourselves at bay.

Our war, in my humble opinion is for the heart of the moderate Muslim, who is afraid of being killed by the radical Muslim which is why they are largely silent. The real civil war in Islam will erupt once (if at all) the moderates decide the radicals are their worst enemy. Unfortunately, I think that is the strategy the West must adopt- enabling the moderate Islamists to reclaim their religeon. The Christians went through this 500 years ago.

yeah, they have tons of stuff left over from when the US and the UK supplied them during the days of the shah. They also have a much more fanatical devotion to theor country and more of a will to fight than the iraqi army did. It would not be a fun time, especially if they have a couple nukes already.

Luckily they seem to be a bit more even-headed than the north koreans. There is a reason we aren't going after north korea, it would be an absolute bloodbath. North korea has a standing army of over 2 million, and they would love an excuse to invade south korea, which a war would give them. Nevermind if china got involved to back them up. It would be "game over" for the US if that happened, since portion of china's population that's eligible for military service outnumbers the total population of the US by the tens of millions.

The big reason NK is not as dangerous as Iran: Islamic fundamentalists have shown to an exhausting degree they are more than willing to die for their cause (infidels out of formerly Muslim land, destruction of Israel, etc). Now, put a nuke in the hand of a man prepared to die, and you have big problem. The only reason the concept of nuclear detente (MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction) worked with the US and the Soviets is that both sides did not want to die. It seems that is not the case with so many of the Islamic radicals. That is what makes Iran far more worriesome to me- is that if they get nukes, Iran's government leaders are not concerned about nuclear retaliation by the west so long as they fulfill their objective(s).

The hell is that supposed to mean? You'd support attacking people based upon relgious beliefs? I'm buddhist, so u gonna make something of that? I'm not nearly as fearful of a country talking about shooting a missle at me as i am of a man holding a gun to my head telling me i'm about to die. As easy as it is for a man to kill another man for no other reason then one gave the other a funny look...that man can easily be you. Y the hell are we worried about freeing a country that didn't ask to be free (revolution would of been just as plausible for them as it was for us) and we're not worrying about the rising crime rate ie. violent sex crimes, kidnappings, murders hell even the drug money being made to fund the terrorist on our own soil. I really hope that i'm misunderstanding you in your previous post, because if that means you'd rather attack people for not believing what you think they should believe in...your just another neo-nazi terrorist...and i'd b ashamed to be associated with you in this forum.

Calm down buddy and actually read what I write. And if you REALLY ARE Budhist, then you are definitely the only violent one I've ever encountered!

Whats your view of Islam in general? But it sounds like you're basing your perception of Muslims on what has been linked w/ terrorist. If you truly believe all of that is from Islamic belief...i must say you're dumber then i thought. I can accept the fact that you stand fast on your opinions, however poorly based, because thats an American right. But if you're gonna start lumping a group of people together and talk stuff, you're just another neo-nazi loon. And i don't take kindly to discrimination at all. What is your problem that you think everything can be solved w/ war? If violence is truly the answer, i challange you to come down here n get in a sparring ring with me. I'll give you 2 rounds to knock me out n then ill descimate you. Thats whats going on over there, we're in round 2 n we haven't knocked them out yet, so we're just pissing em off. What do you think is gonna happen when its time for them to fight back? 9/11 is gonna look like a drive by if they decide to run a full assualt on our soil. Our boys should be here guarding our boarders, not over there losing lives. You advocate something you're too chicken stuff to do yourself...don't tell people to do stuff you don't have the balls to do. And my challenge stands, if you truly believe violence is an answer...i'm more then willing to provide you with a live action example of what of "controled violence" is and mayb ull get the picture of what is going on over there. You're welcome to your opinions, but please keep them down to a minimal...your ignorance is dumbfounding.

The west could wipe out nearly all of Islam and Buddhism and Hinduism in thirty minutes which not coincidentally is the time it takes for an ICBM to reach its target. A fact that is lost on the vastly illiterate masses of Muslims who think Allah is keeping the infidels at bay. We are keeping ourselves at bay.

Our war, in my humble opinion is for the heart of the moderate Muslim, who is afraid of being killed by the radical Muslim which is why they are largely silent. The real civil war in Islam will erupt once (if at all) the moderates decide the radicals are their worst enemy. Unfortunately, I think that is the strategy the West must adopt- enabling the moderate Islamists to reclaim their religeon. The Christians went through this 500 years ago.

A lot of good that did? Your ignorance amazes me. Please, for the sake of argument look up the info relative to the treaty. As soon as bush came into office he threw out all of the negotiations with north korea and put them on the "axis of evil". And this means what. We are going to call them one of the most evil nations on earth and do nothing about it. I am beggining to tire of this argument. In the end there are other ways of getting peopple out of power and iraq wasent even a threat. The war in iraq is dumb as is a war for oil. It is an extemly easy target and that is why it was attacked by the most powerfull nation. Iran has more oil and is a much bigger threat to freedom yet US has not attacked them because of their military supremacy in the middle east.

Kuzia, my dear sir, you are just plain wrong. Your information is entirely wrong. Your facts are entirely wrong. This is not hard- check the facts, historical timelines, etc. You are just plain wrong and unless you want to utilize actual, real history in your decision making process, there is literally nothing I can say to you since you do not choose to exist in the real world.

Listen, in all sincerity, you have great energy to debate which is unfortunately rare these days- make the energy you spend worthwhile and base your arguments in fact. It takes a little work but soon you will know where you can get reliable information from you'll be surprised and pleased with what you can accomplish.

Hint to get you started, Go ahead , its easy! There was no term "Axis of Evil" until after 9-11. Bush came into office 11 months prioir and his focus was education reform. He was even at an elementary school when the 9-11 attack happened.

I very much doubt that Iran has F16s. They might have F14s from before the revolution, but they wouldn't be able to get any spare parts for them from that time on. I doubt they got anything from an American company after 1977.

Iran had some F-14's back when the Shah was in power, but since then there have been no parts to maintain them and they were salvaged.

I can tell you with complete certainty Iraq's military was far, far more formidable in the region than Iran's. No nation in the ME save for Turkey (NATO) would present any real challenge to coalition forces.

Iran wouldnt exactly be a walk over militarily, its a completely different ball game to Iraq, as in it actually has a decent air defence system something that Iraq was missing and made it very easy to get into, the Iranian army is also larger again.

Iran is also one of the U.K's defence suppliers biggest customers, admittedly the stuff isnt as technically advanced as the US stuff but in the right hands i.e the U.K's its more than a match for most the equipment out their, however im not sure on the state of training that the whole iranian defence system would be in. Also im sure they have a fair bit of kit lying around from Russia and China so could all be used to a nasty mix.

Iran would be milk-toast and I'm not boasting. Their military has not been significantly updated and is smaller than Iraq's was. Look what happened in Gulf War I, Iraq army was much more modern then comparatively and they were decimated.

The deal was "locked up" but the bush administration decied not to pursue it. come on now, North Korea is in the "Axis of Evil". Nothing is "locked up now". lol, Korea came after iraq???? lol, are u dumb, all of the intellegince was pointing to the fact that they had the bomb way before iraq. And please adress the fact that osama is not iraqi, u kinda seem to be ignoring that fact

I'm not ignoring any fact. You misunderstand me. Clinton brokered a deal with NK for food and humanitarian supplies in exchange for the end of their nuke program. Lotta good that did. That's what I meant. And Iraq never had the bomb.

Did you not read my post and in it addressing indirectly Osama not being Iraqi? There is a potential link I pointed out as rationale to go into Iraq. Read it again and don't call me dumb and I will continue to honor this exchange of ours by providing the informed dialogue. :)

our boys need to come home period. enough is enough we need to finish cleaning up that mess n get our boy's asses back here. sitting here talking about if we're gonna "bomb the livin shizzle" outta someone else should be the farthest thing from our minds. kuzia60 lets just lay off of razor, we made our point in the last thread. razor you're definite on your standpoint so lets agree to disagree. instead of mindless arguing amonst ourselves about the "necessity" or "foolishness" of war, how about we pray that no more families get the call that their sons/daughters aren't gonna make it home for their next birthday.

RIP Fallen heros...

Bless the heros that are still there...

And that's what's great about this country, it's why our way of life IS BETTER- we CAN agree to disagree. Not only is there Good and Evil but there is BETTER AND WORSE.

Just curious what the mood is in the US about the Iran situation?

What are peoples opinions on the situation and does anyone really think bush would be mad enough to start a war with the iranians?

While militarily they would not be an issue, it would another slog. I don't the majority of Americans, including me, want to see us go in- unless we keep it and trade them our way of life for their oil! DEAL!

Why didnt US attack iran or north Korea in the first place. WE KNOW they have the bomb or are extremly close to getting one. also, once again, The people that bombed the word trade center were not iraqi. Bin ladens family and most of the people that planned this attack are still living lavishly in saudi arabia.

Korea came after we went into Iraq also Clinton supopsedly locked up that deal.

reading the blatant ingnorance on this thread is making my eyes bleed...

Razor... thank you for clearing things up.

Finally some love.

And that's what great about this country, we CAN agree to disagree.

RAzOR was busy drinking heavily in the return of the Steelers to Superbowl Champions!

I'll start by saying that the US will not go into Iran. We have too much committed to trying to get out of Iraq with a victory. I would like to see the EU step up to handle this one. At present I have heard two differing sets of info that indicate different senses of urgency. 1. That Iran has one or two bombs already (something must be done ASAP,-military ground campaign, support internal revolution, etc) 2. That Iran is ten years away from a real bomb (heavy diplomacy and regime change should work). I don't know right this second which is correct but you can bet, I'll be paying attention.

As for the pesky Kuzia and his/her persistent inquisition in this thread as to why we are in Iraq here's what I think (but not to turn this into an Iraq thread).

1. US, British, French, Russian, Israeli intelligence, all in agreement, indicated high probability that Saddam still had WMD's

2. At the end of the Gulf War, Saddan had confirmed WMD's.

3. Saddam never accounted for their destruction.

4. The goofing off at the UN took 14 months even after 8 years and 15 resolutions (we ended up with 17?) and 14 months is plenty of time to slide those WMD's to, say, Syria or the neighborhood.

5. Saddam consistently obsturcted UN inspectors and hampered their efforts.

6. The finding of buried MIG-25 Foxbats in the desert demonstrates how hard it is find something over there.

7. The Bush Administration had to make a decision as to the RISK that Saddams WMD's could reach the hands of Al Qaida who had recently demonstrated the means to deliver them (9/11) in the US (something Iraq could not do). I believe the decision was made simply to act rather than not act (to be proactive and aggressive).

The US coulda pulled out after removing Saddam but are staying behind because of what happened after Gulf War I and the shot at a democratic ME, Islamic country (which may prove to be a valuable ally).

I don't buy the war for oil crapola. Venezuela is much closer and woulda been much easier! Plus, we'd be invading Japan now to stop production of the Prius!

I work in LA, so obviously these are my perceptions as are nearly all of our opinions here wrought from beer and pretzel rantings. Regardless, the soldiers of the coalition forces are my heros.

i swear to god i did not edit his post. i'm guessing it was kevin since he posted shortly after.

I agree. Who, but Kevin, at that hour, would go to a post called To: <insert someone else's name> right after it goes up and then posts on it?

KEVIN!!!!!

T-bone pwned joo!

pwned and boned :o

I ate a lot of cock today. Please forgive me

Not as far as I can remember but there was that time when I was herding cattle in the mountains with another wrangler...

This was obviously not my post.

My post was to the point (FOR ONCE) as opppsed to my addressee's whose were a bit abrasive but I felt we had a valid discusion going in the right place. Then the thread was killed and I thought Kuzia and I could go on.

Password Jack? Maybe, it wasn't tough.

Mod Jack? Probable!

I ate a lot of cock today. Please forgive me

if thats the case then attack the right country dimwit

Oh, and what country might that be Einstein?

Schools have every right to impose dress codes and in fact should require uniforms. You are there to be educated not express yourself. Do that after the bell rings. Fine with me.

Clinton and Gore are worried about the POSSIBLE fate of penguins in Antarctica 100 years from now which may OR MAY NOT even be the human race's fault.

Folks who have their prioirities staright are far more worried about finding themselves glowing in the dark and then dying of radiation poisoning.

O i kno our soilders support the war n won't leave till we're done what we went there to do. I was raised by a soilder i had the the lessons taught to me. Don't start what you can't finish, If your gonna do something do it all the way, and always back and support your troop, battalion and country. I don't deny any soilder regretting what they're doing. But what i'm saying is run a poll n see how many soilders think us rushing iraq was a good move. n ull see what kind of response you get. all my marine n army buddies support what we're doing there, and i support what they're doing too, but when i ask them was it right for us to do what we did, they'll gave me a drop dead no. They support the rebuilding of Iraq not the dismantiling of it.

I agree and at some point they have to leave it to the locals. But our soldiers are not the ones doing the dismantling. It a curious mix of foreign Syrian backed Arabs and Iraqis. We are helping not hurting I contend. And if we leave now, we leave them less prepared rather than if we left a little later. Thats what the brains are supposed to figure out is "when".

And I hope to God we don't have go first into Iran. I hope Europe steps up and takes car of that ballbuster.

The vast majority of our soldiers support the war and rebuilding effort and do not want to leave until their work is finished. No poll ever done shows otherwise. Do some homework.

I never said the soliders' opinions do not matter. They matter very much and their perspective is highly valued since they are on the ground and see it first hand. But their opinion cannot direct the course of the war. That's why we have generals and such who get the bigger picture, integrate national policy prioirities, and because of this their actions may not always make sense to the public or the man on the ground.

time to tick some people off...

where is the virtue in having a complete and total disregard for the life, welfare, interest, etc. of the mother, or of the father, or of the child once born? come on. this issue is so much more complicated then that. how can you say that every embryo deserves a chance when 50% of all fertilized eggs fail to implant? where is the virtue in demanding that every pregnancy go to term, when our teens and other woman are denied a proper sexual education and the means to prevent pregnancy? hell, where is the virtue in forcing your religious views onto another, especially in a country that's supposed to be about liberty?

as for "the war on terror..." please. it's a war on terrorISM. to be fair you can't fight either, one is an emotional state and the other is a tactic. and you know what? wake up to the truth and the harsh reality of history, the tactic works.

terrorism is why there is a free ireland, why israel exists, why afganistan isn't part of russia, why france is out of algeria, and on and on. it's a desperate tactic of last resort, but anyone with no other way to fight back would do the same. another thing of note is that terrorism is never spontaneous. people don't just sit around and one day decide to start a war and start blowing up buildings, buses, and people. terrorism is a weapon of the disadvantaged oppressed, to be used against their oppressors. if the IRA had a military capable of fighting a conventional war against the british, they would have. hell there's plenty of rebellions (like the easter rising of 1916) in which us irish tried in vain. terrorism, and political involvement to back it up (which is what hamas is starting to do) is what worked.

does that make it right? no, but it isn't right to oppress other people either, and it isn't right for citizens to be complacent in the oppression of others by their nation. it's a pretty fair thing to say that war or violence in general and of any form isn't right, but sometimes you're simply left without a better choice.

you can't be so ignorant and closed minded about the world. history matters, the truth matters, and reality really does matter.

YEAH! The IRA intentionally blew up schools and weddings and candy stores and beheaded people all the time!

What's wrong with you? They're FREEDOM FIGHTERS. No, this is something new and something different. These poeple are NOT defending a territory. And lest you forget, they attacked us on 9-11 and before. We weren't even in their neck of the woods as fits the list of examples you gave. This is different.

-You're a fool if you think otherwise bottlecap, nothing matches up to this in history.

both soldier and "terrorist" are looking for the same thing; happiness in life and or death.

and YOU fit the "lazy coward" charicature- taking the path of least resistance, least disruption of your life, the path of appeasment and complacency in the face of threat to Western Civilzation itself.

HTownTurboBrick: So what if only those who served could speak about it? Well then I guess the military would pretty much be ruling this country since they won WWII for us, held off the Soviets, etc. Where does your logic take you? Not very far. We all have a say in this becuase we have brains and we are allowed to use them.

Yeah you three pissed me off alright. Why don't you move to France and help them hoist the white flag? You seem all too eager to do that!

You don't beleive in this country and you won't stand up for it because there is no right and no wrong to you. Well let me tell that there is and its coming in the form of a dirty nuke maybe to a neighborhood near you. OOOH but they're freedom fighters! Tell me, WHAT WERE THEY FREEDOM FIGHTING FOR ON 9-11, HUH?!?! Just shake your head and go "Uhu Huhu Duhhh". You gotta think and don't let peace at any cost wackos throw you into a hippie frenzy. Peace is great, but unfortunately, war is need to obtain peace sometimes. It's kinda like "without the 2nd ammendment, we don't have the 1st." Think about it.

It isn't going to be OBL saving the world from Bird Flu, or sending up an attempt to divert an asteroid or explore the worlds oceans or give women and homosexuals rights, IT'S the US- IT'S EUROPE, IT'S THE WEST. GET IT THROUGH YOUR SLOGGY HEADS that there is right and wrong, GOOD AND EVIL.

Shyeet I'm wide awake now.

THIS WILL EXPLAIN EVERYTHING

and scare the sh!t out of you.

From the Wall Street Journal Opinion Page

i smell a move to poilitical...

DAGNABIT U R Right! You really are on all the time.

I think they are just going insane. I hope not at the expense of victory.

Actually, the old Russia/Soviet Union has a lot of Eastern Orthodox influence

Actually, as I understand it, the Soviets attempted to eliminate it but it was too entrenched. Regardless, the Soviet Union was officially atheist.