Oh excuse me. What I mean is that there has been very few convictions. Yes there has been a lot of arrests but almost no one has been convicted of any actual crimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Printable View
Oh excuse me. What I mean is that there has been very few convictions. Yes there has been a lot of arrests but almost no one has been convicted of any actual crimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
False.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alric
http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache...lnk&cd=2&gl=us
http://nyjtimes.com/cover/06-27-06/T...sSince9-11.htm
Lets see, racketeering, money laundering, distributing heroin and hashish. Sure is a lot of supplying "material support", whatever that vague charge is supposed to mean. Sure wonder where that huge urgent threat you were talking about is.
Yea sure they have some convictions, I never said they didn't. Theres very few real threats on that page however. I mean you just said a while back all of america would have been destoryed if we didn't stop them. I am sure you could probably pick out half a dozen real threats from there, but considering its been nearly 7 years since 9/11, half a dozen or even a dozen of convictions its hardly anything at all.
Oh and theres no point in posting two links if they go to exactly the same thing copied and pasted on two different sites.
If you actually absorbed all these things I was posting you would've seen areas in your previous opinion's logic that are clearly flawed...
Reposted for effect...
ABC News: Secret FBI Report Questions Al Qaeda Capabilities
No 'True' Al Qaeda Sleeper Agents Have Been Found in U.S.
A secret FBI report issued this month and later leaked to the press states, “Al-Qaeda leadership’s intention to attack the United States is not in question. However, their capability to do so is unclear, particularly in regard to ‘spectacular’ operations. We believe al-Qaeda’s capability to launch attacks within the United States is dependent on its ability to infiltrate and maintain operatives in the United States. To date, we have not identified any true ‘sleeper’ agents in the US.… Limited reporting since March indicates al-Qaeda has sought to recruit and train individuals to conduct attacks in the United States, but is inconclusive as to whether they have succeeded in placing operatives in this country. US Government efforts to date also have not revealed evidence of concealed cells or networks acting in the homeland as sleepers” ABC News notes that this seemingly contradicts the sleeper cell depiction seven men arrested in Lackawanna, New York, in 2002. It also differs from warnings by FBI Director Robert Mueller and other US officials, who have warned that sleeper cells are probably in place. [ABC News, 3/9/2005] In 2002, it was also reported that no sleeper cells can be found in the US (see March 10, 2002).
How do you know whether my posts are flawed if you are admittedly too scared to read them? You were checkmated a while back. From this point on, I am just going to look at you as a barking chihuahua until you come at me with some actual counterarguments to my counterarguments. You lost. I can't give you an "E" for effort because you didn't show much of one, but I will give you a token point for making me laugh with your hollow condescension which got you nowhere in the debate. Good game. ;-)
Thought for the day: The United States never invaded Iraq.
You can arbitrarily decide who won in your eyes that makes absolutely no difference to me. As far as 'winners' go, without you having offered up any evidence to declare your opinion anything more than one, it's as they say,
"The proof is in the paper", or lack there of, in your case...good game then...I'll be waiting for that evidence. ;)
.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
keyword: THROUGH, not OVER :)
Now shut yo' mouf sucka...:cool:
Key word: SKIP :gator:Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
I suppose you've never heard the term, to skip through something...? (ie. skip through a book, newspaper article, e-mail, letter, etc...)
Here's it's usage: When the impatient girl received the new Harry Potter book she quickly skipped through it to find out which characters die, and which live, so she could ruin it for everyone else.
If not, you might need to go back to middle or elementary school when that word was introduced. Because, I think that's about the level of the english being used. I could be wrong, though, on when that phrase was actually introduced. Hmm... It was so long ago I just can't quite remember. Oh well...
Waaait a minute. I hope you aren't just trying to draw attention from the fact you're skirting real issues and valid points being presented here, right? Either way, both your attempts are based on misunderstanding the actual facts of the matter and are failing miserably so you can stop while you are behind...or show me some PROOF. :cool:
You my friend, talk complete bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
Solskye, lets pretend for a moment that Al Qaeda doesn't pose a threat to US soil. There will never be peace in the region until they are gone. Period. That should be enough for you.
What's the iraqi death toll up to now? 60,000-70,000?!?
I KNOW all them weren't Al Qaeda. They are probably just militia men that are sick and tired of having their children and wives killed by splash damage from ill-informed rednecks from america thinking they have a right to be in their backyard creating bases and check points and telling them what to do while pointing guns in their face.
Yeah, I'd probably do the same damn thing in their shoes...it's not al Qaeda, it's called, human nature when under the stress of being invaded by people who don't actually care to understand your way of thinking...just impose theirs.
It's like...
Soldier1: Hey sarg, I thought you said, after we blew up some buildings and killed a few people the locals would just start spontaneously building starbucks, wal-marts, and gaps everywhere...
Soldier2: How about that big building over there?
*boom*
Soldier1: Nope, Nothing. Not even a McDonalds.
Soldier2: Wait. I thought they don't eat cow over here?
Soldier1: START BUILDING SOMETHING GOD DAMNIT OR WE'LL START KILLING MORE OF YOU!!! BE FREE, GOD DAMNIT!!! BE FREEEEE!!!
Indiscriminantly blowing up buildings
(I don't know the validity of these but the point rings true just the same)
Message From Iraqi Resistance
Message From Iraqi Resistance 2
Your posts are simply clones of one another. All you do is point out injustices. There are more important things at stake than "injustices" and "sticking guns in peoples' faces".
That's because they are responding to your circular logic. Again, where's the proof of al Qaeda? That's all I've ever been asking...not your opinion.
60,000 people is quite an "injustice" if I do say so myself.
15,000 are contributed to US munitions. The rest are from insurgents and suicice bombers.Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
Get your facts straight. There have been about 660,000 Muslim deaths in Iraq. 600,000 Insurgents/Iraqi army and 15,000 civilians on our part.
link? I provided one. ;)
Either way, that number's obscene. You think people are going to want to start a democracy after seeing this kind of blowback? Uhh...HELL NO. It's no wonder insurgents arise. Try thinking outside your narrow perspective for a change.
Insurgents do not equal al Qaeda, nor 'evil'... just people trying to protect THEIR homeland from invaders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
You don't think car bombs in a market is evil?
Do you know what "insurgent" means? They are not protecting their homeland. And there is no obscene number of dead terrorists. I hope they all die before they can blow themselves up.
Solskye, which is more evil? Terrorism or the United States?
I am not going to post a death toll from the Internet, because there are numbers all over the place. I saw one site that SWORE there were 654,000 CIVILIAN deaths in Iraq. Propaganda my friend. Those same people write the articles you selectively read.
Do you believe the war in Iraq is ILLEGAL?
I continually asked you for a link... show it to me.
'Terrorism', like 'Freedom', or any other word aren't something that hold an objective meaning for all people to easily stand in agreeance on.
Insurgent, simply means, a rebel. Since a stable working regime has yet to be setup they are rebeling against AMERICA's presence there. So, from the eyes of an iraqi insurgent who's lived their entire lives there, and sees you coming to tell them how to live sees you as the terrorist that they must rise up against. Because from their perspective, YOU ARE. They aren't wrong for feeling this way, and you aren't right for pushing your views down their throats. Stop thinking in subjective absolutes.
After killing 60,000+... Don't you think that the 'terrorists' would've long since run out of people if there were any real 'terrorist' threat there to begin with?
Terrorists don't just multiply if you feed them after midnight. Obviously, if people aren't accepting america's presence one would have to start to rethink the reasons for being there in first place... It's only logical. We aren't allowing for the option of them not wanting our help to setup their new goverment. Forcibly setup goverments are far from free.
Did England come in and tell america how to write it's constitution or hold elections in 1776? Exactly.
There is no such thing as an Iraqi insurgent. Jesus, look up "insurgent" on dictionary.com. It does not mean "rebel".
Insurgent is the word the us government gave to the rebels to make it sound like they are terrorists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming
By the way straight from dictionary.com.
a person who rises in forcible opposition to lawful authority, esp. a person who engages in armed resistance to a government or to the execution of its laws; rebel.
Well, I think of people who come from places other than Iraq to fight the authority.
Still waiting for those links to your sources Half/Dreaming...:cool:
Thats what your supposed to think. Thats not what the word means though. Our government could of also called them freedom fighters, which means the exact same thing, but why would they do that? "We need to wipe out the iraqi freedom fighters." Sounds a hell of a lot worse than, "We need to wipe out the iraqi insurgance."Quote:
Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming
Politicains are very careful how they say things though. Even though they have the same meaning they used the one that makes them sound the worst off. Technincally they are not lying since they words are the same. Infact when the war first started a lot of news sources called them rebels but as the government decided on the offical term for them, people starting using only that.
Oh, so you read my posts carefully enough to know what they said? Well then, stop acting like you didn't. What are your counterarguments to my points?Quote:
Originally Posted by SolSkye
And I still want proof that the United States military invaded Iraq. Those guys are just fighters with a common hatred for Islamofascists. The United States military does not exist.
-- Elvis Presley