Re: My poor misguided/misinformed friends

On Dec 26, 7:20 pm, nmp <addr...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Dec 26, 5:28 pm, nmp <addr...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

My country (thank goodness) hasn't been waging war all around the world
prior to sept. 11, 2001. Or, like one of your countrymen said (and he
was 100% Wright): America's chicken are coming home to roost.

your country, as small as it is, had a key role in fucking up western
civilization's encounter with other countries in history.

Be specific. Do you mean our colonial period? Yes, that was very bad.

well, let's put it this way. i'm old enough to remember when moluccan
terrorists kidnapped a train of dutch children in the netherlands
about 20 years ago. seems they thought your country did something
wrong

and your statement about 9/11 is delusional bordering on insanity. only
someone who's too stupid to have actually read the works of islamists
would make such a statement :

Tell me where I am wrong then. This is just grandstanding on your part.

ROFLMAO!! really? you make a broad generalization that is is blow back
then fail to qualify your statement.

i suggest you read sayyd qutb's descriptions of his visits in the US
in the 50's. hell, he thought square dancing was immoral! THAT"S the
kind of religious fanaticism that led to 9/11, not some imagined
delusions that you conjure out of tea leaves.



No, of course not, because the US insists in doing the wrong thing.
Like so many blinded Americans always do. Like even your new President
Elect wants to do. Good luck with that. I only ask of the new American
government, please try not to kill too many innocent civilians while
you insist in this folly, will you?

it's apparent you are a nihilist, with no beliefs at all. adman is a
fanatic fascist with extreme beliefs. you deserve each other

as to killing civilians, perhaps if you could get your friends, the al
qaeda crew, to obey the geneva convention accords, innocents wouldnt be
killed. but you believe in a bizarre equivalance between AQ and western
civilization

*** you, wf3h.

gee. what a well reasoned argument! i can see that, when you have your
argument destroyed, you resort to the type of vocabulary that earns
the respect of every 11 year old across the world.


Whenever a military power resorts to killing civilians who have nothing
to do with the conflict at hand, in order to achieve some fuzzily
described "strategic" goal, only that military power is completely
responsible for those consequences.

if nobel prizes were awarded for stupidity, you'd be the winner
without competition.

if the US was killing civilians, with our firepower, there woudn't be
any civilians in afghanistan. and, again, i see you ignore the fact
that your friends, the taliban, are not obeying the geneva
conventions. you give those murderous fanatics a pass, while insisting
the US pull out because our enemies hide behind children

Not its enemy, not some critic in
some little European country. Only those who pull the triggers, drop the
bombs, fire the shells, or give the orders to do so. And this point of
view is the opposite of nihilism, and I stick by it.

you have nothing to stick by because you have no beliefs at all, save
nihilism.

About the Geneva Convention: it defines only a *minimum* standard to
adhere to. Anyone who can't even do that can't call themselves civilised
or humanitarian at all. They are criminals. There is nothing nihilist
about calling criminals criminals. Right now, those Western leaders who
advocate (or do not speak out against) inflicting more suffering on the
Afghan people are criminals. Plain and simple.

ever read the geneva convention accords? do you know what is required
of the signatories?

no...i don't suppose you have...

and you seem to think that condemning the afghans to slavery is better
than working with them and their leaders to expel religious fascists
from their midst.

who do you hate more? the girls you condemn to slavery, or the
westerners who adhere to moral values inherent in the DoHR?

Exactly the same thing that he NATO forces, including the Americans
will do in the end. Really, it's only a matter of time. It won't be the
soliders fault, but the politicians will have no choice. Mark my words:
NATO *will* retreat from Afghanistan and leave it a worse place than it
was before they went in. May be two, three or ten years, but it will
happen. And it will be a fucking disgrace.

what an ***. truly. when the taliban dictate terms from kabul you
let me know, OK? as bad as bush has made this situation by his
incompetence, the war is not 'lost'.

It was lost when it was abandoned. Not by me, but by the US leadership
that lost interest after Tora Bora and thought they had the world blinded
enough that they could finally go against Iraq, their #1 target from the
beginning. Sacrificing even more civilian and military lives - people.

who's sacrificing? do you think that, when the taliban kill
homosexuals by pushing walls over on them that that's not murder? or
blowing up schools and killing teachers?

why do you despise the afghans so much that you'd condemn them to a
life of slavery?


you think of it only in military terms but this is a cultural war.

If that is true, then why is it fought with military means? Why are
people killed on a daily basis? Some fine "cultural war" you have going
on there. You are sure that the Afghan war is not about some pipeline in
the North, are you?

you know, you should read. actually read history. try it some time.
you might actually learn something. for example:

leading contributor of economic aid to afghanistan before 9/11: the
united states
leading contributor AFTER 9/11: the united states

oh. you didn't know that. you're so caught up in your fundamentalist
cliche'd view of the US that any evidence to the contrary is simply
ignored.


and culture involves belief...that's what's got you confused: people
actually have beliefs.

Yes, let them have them. As long as they are no threat to the outside
world. Like the US government of the last 8 years.

and how long do you think it would be before we had to go back in and
re-destroy afghanistan?

No, we won't. We will manage. And so will the USA if its government
would wisely decide to stop the folly in Afghanistan and concentrate on
domestic matters. There are plenty of those to worry about, no?

peace in our time, eh? neville chamberlain's point of view?

Where did I say that? I just said we (the Western world) have better
things to spend time and talent on than killing people in some country
that is not a threat to any of us.

tell it to the people of mumbai. they just had a visit from the people
you think are no threat.



And meanwhile you rebuke friends of your nation who try to tell you the
truth.

unlike adman, i do not look at this as a religious war on the US side.

But you do. A cultural war, you called it. That doesnt differ too much
from a religious war, does it?

ROFLMAO!! really? the culture of beethoven, madison, de gasperi, is no
different than the fundamentalism of adman?

you don't think too much of democracy, culture, etc., do you?


dutch troops are, with canadian, british and american troops, bearing
the brunt of the war. your country is standing up for the values of
western civilization. and that is a war we can not lose.

It's already lost. Our military efforts there are futile and we have no
more realistic goals to achieve

yeah, and genesis is literally true.

.

Quantcast