Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        New Message Board Archives >> 2006 General Board Posts >> al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
        
(Message started by: unsolved1 on Jun 8th, 2006, 3:58am)
Title: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by unsolved1 on Jun 8th, 2006, 3:58am
Did we get another one ??

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060608/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_al_zarqawi

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060608/wl_nm/iraq_dc_239;_ylt=AgvFNaljIK8gf6KKzKgIOOAUewgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA2ZGZwam4yBHNlYwNmYw--
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by sailpappy on Jun 8th, 2006, 4:37am
:) I sure hope it a good story!  I will rest a little easier waiting for my son to finish his time over there and get home knowing this guy is dead!
    I know Erics 3 sons and wife feel the same!  They want him out of there and back in Alaska with them!! Pappy
http://tk.files.storage.msn.com/x1pdroxzQ2qwWz-LTqWrJmoscnTy9PTMA9edZRI6_AoxOKPn1t6i_nHZGxBDaQmK_UTVz6yuIpeRMo_L5ph0n6h3SADPSSgJ3-7xjDEv1BIScAIjMq857gtYBCorIk7yg2ZwNxNYmJ9Ggc4_39O6XD89g
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by zwibbs/Scott on Jun 8th, 2006, 6:16am
It is true...confirmed by Iraq--no doubt the bastard is gone
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by maffumatt on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:13am
Fox news had Nick Bergs dad on this morning, Zarqawi personaly cut of his head on video. His dad was defending Zarqawi and saying that it was all a lie that he was killed, that its just another Bush lie, and if he was dead he was saddened by it.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Kevin_M on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:38am
Credit for some accurate intelligence and timely execution on that moving target.  

Anybody have a little grasp about Al-Qaeda presence in Sudan these days.  I heard the U.S. still had some financial involvement there until recently but that news seems elusive.  
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by floridian on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:54am
It's good if they got him, no doubt he is a ruthless killer and the world is better off with Zarqawi gone.  

Not sure what Nick's father said on the TV show, but what you said is different from what he has said recently:


Quote:
"First of all, I'm not even certain that al-Zarqawi even killed my son," said Berg, who doesn't believe the videotape of his son's execution or what he's been told by the FBI any more than he believes conspiracy theories suggesting that Nicholas Berg was killed by the FBI or a U.S. assassination squad.

http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash/national/index.ssf?/base/national-66/114976975463600.xml&storylist=ornational


And I don't think that this small victory is going to change the course of events - the large majority of the fighting in Iraq is from non Al Qaeda groups.


Quote:
U.S. Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told reporters there the development would not end the insurgency and an official in Washington, who requested anonymity while details of al-Zarqawi's death were still unfolding, said it should not cause anyone to have unrealistic expectations.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_8818.shtml
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Tom K on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:00am
1 dirtbag down, X number to go.  Even when some good news comes out of Iraq, there are people who are going to bash it.  Get over yourselves, people.  I wonder if there would have been this much back stabbing crap if the Internet was around during WWII.  WE WERE ATTACKED!  Germany didn't attack us, but we went in a blew the shit out of them, then dealt with Japan.  Iraq didn't directly attack us, but they gave some assisstance to Binladen.  Training grounds are assistance.  Do some research and find out how much of Sadam's weapons are in Syria...
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by unsolved1 on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:11am
I can't believe what Nick's father said ...


Quote:
"Berg said "restorative justice," — such as being forced to work in a hospital where maimed children are treated — could have made al-Zarqawi "a decent human being. "Now that he's dead, that's not a possibility," he said.


Sounds like my first writing teacher in college who wanted to make the whole class believe that there was never a reason to sentence someone to death (even if they killed your whole family). The class didn't go for it, neither did I. The teacher was pissed at the end of the semester !

The dude was a murderer. He got what he deserved. Live by the sword - Die by the sword. If we had more "eye for an eye" justice here, we wouldn't have half the crime (imo)

UNsolved

Flame away  8)

Edited to add: I got that quote from the first link Flo provided.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by chewy on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:13am

Quote:
confirmed by Iraq


Ohhhh! Iraq confirmed? Then it must be true.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by unsolved1 on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:18am

on 06/08/06 at 09:13:37, chewy wrote:
Ohhhh! Iraq confirmed? Then it must be true.


The new leader of Al-Qaida in Iraq has already came out and made a statement.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060608/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_zarqawi_qaida
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by floridian on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:19am

on 06/08/06 at 09:11:09, unsolved1 wrote:
I can't believe what Nick's father said ...

Sounds like my first writing teacher in college who wanted to make the whole class believe that there was never a reason to sentence someone to death (even if they killed your whole family). The class didn't go for it, neither did I. The teacher was pissed at the end of the semester !

The dude was a murderer. He got what he deserved. Live by the sword - Die by the sword. If we had more "eye for an eye" justice here, we wouldn't have half the crime (imo)

UNsolved

Flame away  8)

Edited to add: I got that quote from the first link Flo provided.


Yeah, Nick's father is a radical pacifist, along the lines of Jesus and Gandhi, and can sound rather naive at times.  
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by brewcrew on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:26am
Zarqawi would have cut off Nick Berg's father's head if he had been given the chance.

Nick Berg's father ought to think about that for awhile.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by BMoneeTheMoneeMan on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:34am
This dude wasnt even on the radar screen until we invaded Iraq and he led a group to fight against the invaders, right?  
I can guarantee you one thing, if my country were invaded and occupied, I would either lead or follow a group to fight against the invaders.  

If I was in a group to fight against the invaders, would you call me a murderer and a terrorist?

B$
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by floridian on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:37am

on 06/08/06 at 09:00:38, Tom K wrote:
Iraq didn't directly attack us, but they gave some assisstance to Binladen.  Training grounds are assistance.  Do some research and find out how much of Sadam's weapons are in Syria...


Stop repeating those old, disproven lies, Tom.  The training grounds were in northern Iraq, in the no-fly zone, in an area that Saddam did not control.  Saddam did not trust or like the fundamentalists, and there is no evidence that he supported them.  There is, however, evidence that Bush knew about Zarqawi's training camps, and refused to strike at them.




Quote:
Jim Miklaszewski of NBC News reported that a few months after 9/11 the Pentagon drafted multiple plans to hit the camp of Abu Musab Zarqawi, the al-Qaeda terrorist who had taken up residence in Iraq's northern no-fly zone, outside Saddam Hussein's control. George Bush, however, refused to authorize a military strike.

I've written about this multiple times (I used to jokingly call it my "monthly Zarqawi post"), but Miklaszewski's story always had a big problem: it was based on anonymous sources, which made it easy for the White House to ignore. Today, however, the Australian show Four Corners has gotten confirmation of the story from Michael Scheuer, former head of the CIA's Osama bin Laden unit:

   He told Four Corners that during 2002, the Bush Administration received detailed intelligence about Zarqawi's training camp in Iraqi Kurdistan.

   ...."Almost every day we sent a package to the White House that had overhead imagery of the house he was staying in. It was a terrorist training camp...experimenting with ricin and anthrax...any collateral damage there would have been terrorists."

So why wasn't Bush willing to hit Zarqawi, a known al-Qaeda terrorist in a known location? Scheuer says he was told it was because Bush was afraid of annoying the French — a theory that seems a bit of a stretch, non? Others believe it was because Zarqawi was politically convenient: having him alive allowed Bush to pretend that Saddam was "harboring terrorists," thus providing useful ammunition for the war.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_04/008718.php
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by brewcrew on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:38am

on 06/08/06 at 09:34:23, BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote:
If I was in a group to fight against the invaders, would you call me a murderer and a terrorist?

B$

Depends on whether you offed innocents or your own countrymen because you considered them to be infidels.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:45am

Quote:
Yeah, Nick's father is a radical pacifist, along the lines of Jesus and Gandhi, and can sound rather naive at times.  



Quote:
Romans 13:1-5 (RSV):
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
4 For he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.


God requires pacificism of the individual but He also condons governments to "bear the sword" against wrongdoers.

Abu was a non-pacifist individual.  The US Government Military is an instrument of God, led by a God fearing Commander In Chief.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by pattik on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:47am

on 06/08/06 at 09:34:23, BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote:
This dude wasnt even on the radar screen until we invaded Iraq and he led a group to fight against the invaders, right?  
I can guarantee you one thing, if my country were invaded and occupied, I would either lead or follow a group to fight against the invaders.  


I wasn't aware that he was from Iraq and fighting the invaders as an Iraqi.  I thought he was from Jordan
[smiley=huh.gif]. So you would move away from your homeland to fight invaders of another country then?
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by imnotbub on Jun 8th, 2006, 11:12am

on 06/08/06 at 09:45:59, Bob P wrote:
 The US Government Military is an instrument of God, led by a God fearing Commander In Chief.



Think about this, isn't this statement as religiously radical as the statements being made by the Muslims? The military is an instrument of God? Are you kidding? "You can't say we shouldn't be there, that's blasphemy!"

Not so radical Steve
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Tom K on Jun 8th, 2006, 11:23am

on 06/08/06 at 09:37:51, floridian wrote:
Stop repeating those old, disproven lies, Tom.  The training grounds were in northern Iraq, in the no-fly zone, in an area that Saddam did not control.  Saddam did not trust or like the fundamentalists, and there is no evidence that he supported them.  There is, however, evidence that Bush knew about Zarqawi's training camps, and refused to strike at them.


And there is no evidence that shows he DIDN'T support them.  Why are they lies?  Because you believe them or because the mass media spouts them as fact?   ::) At least Fox News, as right wing as they are, comes right out and says they are biased.  Maybe the mass media would do themselves a favor to admit the same.  You come in here and link to all this leftist Bravo Sierra, and preach it as fact.  Yet, they don't have a liberal bias?  I guess since it is a link that you provide, it must be true, right?   ::)  What happened to the story about a bunch of Russian truck tracks around KNOWN WMD sites, only to have those sites come up empty?  Oh, I guess that never happened because Ol' Flo doesn't believe it.   ::)
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 11:53am

Quote:
Think about this, isn't this statement as religiously radical as the statements being made by the Muslims? The military is an instrument of God? Are you kidding? "You can't say we shouldn't be there, that's blasphemy!"


Nope.  I am a Christian.  I believe the teachings of the Bible.  The Bible quote is in my post above.  Guess it really depends on if the government is trying to good or if it is doing bad by it's people.  The US Government is trying to protect it's people from terrorist attacks, like 9/11.  I think that's a good thing.

The radical muslims are saying that Alah approves of killing innocents.  I think that's a bad thing.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by karma on Jun 8th, 2006, 11:55am
Its all a convenient deflection from the atrocities that have been in the news.
Keep a wanted man in your crosshairs until the impact of his demise is really needed.
Republicans 1
Dems 0
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 12:07pm

Quote:
Its all a convenient deflection from the atrocities that have been in the news.  
Keep a wanted man in your crosshairs until the impact of his demise is really needed.
Republicans 1
Dems 0

and we're saving Bin Laden until just before the election!
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by karma on Jun 8th, 2006, 12:12pm

Quote:
!and we're saving Bin Laden until just before the election

stranger things have happened lately.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by zwibbs/Scott on Jun 8th, 2006, 12:44pm

on 06/08/06 at 12:07:43, Bob P wrote:
and we're saving Bin Laden until just before the election!

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                And on that same day Al Gore will fly into your town via a tornedo
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Kevin_M on Jun 8th, 2006, 1:27pm

on 06/08/06 at 09:00:38, Tom K wrote:
Do some research and find out how much of Sadam's weapons are in Syria...



Concerning any chemical weapons of mass destruction.

Iraq never mastered the process of distilling the nerve gas Sarin, the purity of the agent ranged between 60 and 70 percent, resulting in its rapid deterioration.  After three months in storage, the purity level dropped below 40 percent, the cutoff for filling munitions.  Iraqi Sarin therefore had to be consumed on the battlefield almost as fast as it was produced.
 Sarin dissapates rapidly in the intense heat of the Iraqi desert, less volatile is Soman but plans to manufacture it were foiled by the failure to find a supplier of pinacolyl alcohol.  Iraq chose to make Cyclosarin, an analogue of Sarin who's lower volatility makes it superior in hot climates by simply replacing isopropyl alcohol with cyclohexyl alcohol, which was readily available from the Iraqi petrochemical industry.  It could remain considerably stronger after a few months of storage.
 Another agent developed by Iraq was VX, but they attained purity of only 50% and less than 90% pure is unstable with a limited shelf life, deteriorating to the point of nonusability within weeks.  In April '88, Iraqi scientists developed a salt form of VX known as "dibis" that was able to remain stable for up to eight months and could be converted into active VX as needed.
 In 1990 Iraq worked on the delivery system, an R-400 aerial bomb and developing a warhead for the Al-Hussein ballistic missile.  Any long term storage of chemicals was still unavailable.
 Eight years of war with Iran ruined the Iraqi economy making them heavily dependent on oil exports.  A long standing border dispute with Kuwait over a valuable oil field straddled the border between them resulted in Saddam ordering an invasion August 2, 1990.  The Muthanna chemical site churned out Sarin and Cyclosarin for two months starting December 1990.  U.S. secretary of State Baker then warned Saddam about using chemical warfare.  The commencing of Desert Storm's air campaign January 17, 1991 led to very quick defeat for Iraq.

Summer and fall of 2003, investigations were compiled by members of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), a U.S. fact-finding mission reporting to the Pentagon and the CIA and numbering 1,200 personnel.  In an interim report issued in October 2003, ISG director David Kay wrote, "Multiple sources with varied access and reliability have told ISG that Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled chemical weapons (CW) program after 1991... Iraq's large-scale capability to develop, produce, and fill new munition was reduced,- if not entirely destroyed - during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, thirteen years of U.N. sanctions and U.N inspections."  
 On October 6, 2004, Charles A. Duelfer, who had replaced David Kay as head of the ISG, released a 918-page final report summarizing the results of the eighteen-month investigations  into Iraq's unconventional weapons programs prior to the March 2003 war.  Duelfer's report concluded that Iraq had destroyed its undeclared chemical stockpile in 1991, and had not resumed production thereafter.  Although a network of clandestine laboratories operating under the Iraqi intelligence Service had conducted research and testing on various toxic chemicals and poisons for assassination purposes, this effort did not meet the definition of a militarily significant capability.  
 UNMOVIC Executive Chairman Hans Blix likened Saddam's behavior to that of someone who does not own a dog but tries to discourage thieves by posting a BEWARE OF DOG sign on the door.  *



If the U.S. fact-finding report by the ISG and the U.N. inspectors both seem to find that no significant chemical weapons have been developed since 1991, with the know-how Iraq had at that time, any nerve agents then produced could by now be considered only a biohazard long ago.


*358.3 T
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by tanner on Jun 8th, 2006, 1:38pm


 Flo, why is it that every time a thread comes out regarding events in Iraq you feel the need to turn it into an anti-war (anti soldier) diatribe! whether you think so or not every piece of your kind of political bashing is readily available to our troops in the field.
 And when someone else comes up with a comment or thought regarding why we are there you call it dis proven ! Well yeah according to your yellow left wing biased sources. Have you ever heard of troop morale and how important it is to the health and safety of soldiers that are engaged in a conflict whether or not that conflict turns out to be good bad or ugly.
 I greatly admire both Jesus and Gandhi but neither one was tasked with trying to the best of their ability to maintaining some order in a world of chaos.
 You seem to want us to just pull out of all combat or peace keeping missions and leave everyone to fend for themselves.
 I wonder if that thinking applies to the next time your home state gets creamed by mother nature? Shall we just save our tax dollars and leave you to clean up your own mess?

 Save your Jane Fonda statements until after we have our kids home! Hopefully soon!!!

.......been there, been undermined by negative public sentiment, lived through the years of getting over what that did to my head, and don't like seeing it happen again...Tim
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by unsolved1 on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:04pm
With regards to the report of Iraq's chemical weapons abilities ... how come it doesn't mention that Saddam gassed his own people (killing thousands) or that he used chemicals in the Iraq vs Iran war ? Wouldn't the fact that he has used them (more than once) before be just as (if not more) significant than intelligence reports ?

UNsolved
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:11pm


Quote:
pure BS!


From the Bible:


Quote:
For there is no authority except from God, and those (government authorities) that exist have been instituted by God.


I doubt God is much of a BS'er!
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Kevin_M on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:12pm

on 06/08/06 at 14:04:27, unsolved1 wrote:
how come it doesn't mention that Saddam gassed his own people (killing thousands) or that he used chemicals in the Iraq vs Iran war ? Wouldn't the fact that he has used them (more than once) before be just as (if not more) significant than intelligence reports ?






Quote:
Iraqi Sarin therefore had to be consumed on the battlefield almost as fast as it was produced.


and it certainly was in the instances you mentioned.

I was addressing the issue of why none have been found and their viability as weapons of mass destruction in 2003.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Tom K on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:33pm

on 06/08/06 at 13:38:05, tanner wrote:
 Flo, why is it that every time a thread comes out regarding events in Iraq you feel the need to turn it into an anti-war (anti soldier) diatribe! whether you think so or not every piece of your kind of political bashing is readily available to our troops in the field.
 And when someone else comes up with a comment or thought regarding why we are there you call it dis proven ! Well yeah according to your yellow left wing biased sources. Have you ever heard of troop morale and how important it is to the health and safety of soldiers that are engaged in a conflict whether or not that conflict turns out to be good bad or ugly.
 I greatly admire both Jesus and Gandhi but neither one was tasked with trying to the best of their ability to maintaining some order in a world of chaos.
 You seem to want us to just pull out of all combat or peace keeping missions and leave everyone to fend for themselves.
 I wonder if that thinking applies to the next time your home state gets creamed by mother nature? Shall we just save our tax dollars and leave you to clean up your own mess?

 Save your Jane Fonda statements until after we have our kids home! Hopefully soon!!!

.......been there, been undermined by negative public sentiment, lived through the years of getting over what that did to my head, and don't like seeing it happen again...Tim


X2!!!  THanks Tim!!! [smiley=bow.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Mattrf on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:39pm
I think Tanner has it right, we need to support our troops, the fact that you believe or do not believe in the reasons we are there are of no consequence to our boys and girls in the field. They are in harms way and need there nation to show them that they are supported and respected for doing a job even if it is a job you or they do not agree with. I did my time in the Air Force and knew that if my country called me to fight that that was what I would have to do, if I liked it or not and if you like it or not there is a price to pay for the freedoms we have and the least you can do to pay for that freedom is to support the people that defend that freedom, all the bashing just disrespectful to those in harms way and any one doing it should be ashamed of themselves.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Ghost on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:40pm
Make that X3.

Mike

See I have stayed out of this one! ;;D
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by rickyshot on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:50pm
Yes Tim, Tom.

I just love posts from bleeding hearts who enjoy all the freedoms to bash and gripe without solution our soldiers taking advantage of the fact the reason they can do so is because we chose to get involved in wars to protect those freedoms. Maybe the tone will change when the next plane lands in their own back yards.

I for one will not forget.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by imnotbub on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:52pm

on 06/08/06 at 09:45:59, Bob P wrote:
God requires pacificism of the individual but He also condons governments to "bear the sword" against wrongdoers.

Abu was a non-pacifist individual.  The US Government Military is an instrument of God, led by a God fearing Commander In Chief.



What or who decides what constitutes a wrong doer? Saddam thought he was totaly in the rite when he gassed those he thought were plotting against him. Therefore, according to this logic, his 'government' was bearing the sword against a wrongdoer, making his regime 'An instrument of God.' Plenty of Muslim extremeists that would agree with this, don't you think?
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 2:57pm

Quote:
What or who decides what constitutes a wrong doer?

God via the Bible.

Not too hard to figure out if killing innocent people for no reason is right or wrong.

If a country via it's armed forces, is doing away with the bad guys, then they are doing God's work.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by deltadarlin on Jun 8th, 2006, 3:10pm

on 06/08/06 at 14:57:36, Bob P wrote:
Not too hard to figure out if killing innocent people for no reason is right or wrong.

If a country via it's armed forces, is doing away with the bad guys, then they are doing God's work.


And what about those women and children who are killed?  Surely, you can't count them among the bad guys?

NOW, before anyone flames me here, please understand that I am not anti-war, nor have I ever been.  Neighbors son is in Iraz now, daughter's friend is over there now.  I do and will continue to support the troops.  I'm sorry, but I don't see the God I know as judging women and children who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time as bad guys (and yes, I know shit happens when there are battles).
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by maffumatt on Jun 8th, 2006, 5:34pm
The guy targeted, killed, and maimed thousands, it blows my mind anyone, especialy a liberal, can defend the guy. It just goes to show you that their hatred of Bush overrules everything else regardless of their acts. Bleeding heart liberal my ass.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 8th, 2006, 5:39pm
http://www.newsmax.com/images/archive_250x250/Coulter_book_250x250.gif
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by BarbaraD on Jun 8th, 2006, 5:47pm
Damn! I have to run to the store and get more popcorn.....

Politics and religion all in the same breath.....

Hugs BD
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 8th, 2006, 5:50pm
LMAO....Mom ;;D
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 5:51pm

Quote:
And what about those women and children who are killed?  Surely, you can't count them among the bad guys?

Nope.  They are innocents and sure I hope we are all remorseful, and ask forgivness for killing them because that is wrong.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by floridian on Jun 8th, 2006, 5:51pm
So Tanner,

show me where I (or any one else in this thread) was criticizing the troops.  

What did I say that rubbed you the wrong way?

1) Good that they got Zarqawi
2) Nicholas Berg's Father is a pacifist, but might have been misquoted by maffumat
3) The top US commander in Iraq said its good they got Zarqawi but this won't end our problems
4) Radical pacifists can sound naive at times
5) There is no evidence that Saddam supported Al Qaeda

I wasn't really political at all until I responded to TomK's claim that we were in Iraq because Saddam had provided bases for Al Qaeda - a claim that is political and false.

While you may think that only the liberal yellow press would disagree with TomK's claims, I would refer you to the 9/11 Commision report, which concluded there was no evidence of a "collaborative operational relationship" between Saddam and Al Qaeda/Ansar. And a British intelligence report which found "that there is nothing but enmity between Iraq and Al Qaeda."  And the testimony of dozens of CIA agents  that have said their research was manipulated and distorted by the head of the CIA and the Bush White House - people like Michael Scheuer, the senior intelligence analyst who created, directed and advised a secret CIA unit for tracking and eliminating bin Laden from 1996 - 2004.

You tell me to " Save your Jane Fonda statements until after we have our kids home! Hopefully soon!!!" ... as if I were an Al Qaeda supporter.  Go ahead, misquote me, characterise me in a way that is innacurate.  I don't give a rats what you think about me. But not everyone who disagrees with the war is an Al Qaeda supporter - in fact, most Americans are pretty disillusioned with how the war has been handled by our elected officials (although some obviously cling to their illusions).  We wouldn't be doing anyone a favor by turning off our right to free speech and pretending that things are just swell.


--- edited to add:





Quote:
The guy targeted, killed, and maimed thousands, it blows my mind anyone, especialy a liberal, can defend the guy. It just goes to show you that their hatred of Bush overrules everything else regardless of their acts. Bleeding heart liberal my ass.


And who has said that Saddam doesn't have blood on his hands, or shouldn't stand trial for murder.  Your obviously bent out of shape and distorting what has been said. That Saddam is evil isn't the issue.  The question is whether he supported Al Qaeda, and whether the war against him was launched under false pretenses.  Would the American public have signed on for a war to liberate Iraq? Probably not. So the propaganda was catapulted that Saddam was supporting Al Qaeda and he was behind 9/11.  And we march into Iraq, where thousands of Americans are maimed and killed.  Classic bait and switch, but since we bought the war and they won't let us return it, they try to sooth our buyer's remorse with talk about how moral we are for removing Saddam.  Never mind that Iraq is plunged into chaos ...
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 8th, 2006, 6:03pm
Mom!.....pick me up some popcorn.....LOL ;;D
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by tanner on Jun 8th, 2006, 6:50pm

 I am extremely happy that you don't "give a rats ass what I think about you"

 You manage to miss the point every single time anyone brings it up.

 So one source at NBC news reports that Bush purposely did not take out Zarqawi for some obscure reason of his own so that he would have an excuse to go to war. God knows that the press is never wrong!

 You respond that the statement by Tom regarding weapons hidden in Syria has long ago been dis proven, which is patently absurd and again the opinion of ostriches with their heads in the sand. Yeah come back with your quotes and while your at it see if you can't find some evidence that the freaking tooth fairy exists, I am fairly sure it's out there somewhere.

 I did not misquote you! I never quoted you at all !

 I did not characterize you as an al Qaeda supporter !
if you want that rep your going to have to give it to yourself.

 I never said I was in favor of this or any other war !

 Every statement you or anyone else makes regarding the Commander in Chief's misguiding us into a conflict while we are still engaged in that conflict is a direct slap in the face to the entire Chain of Command right down to the Privates on the ground ! Hence the Jane Fonda reference.

 You are missing the f##king point. You and those like you are bad for morale !

 On behalf of our troops Thanks a Bunch and enjoy your freedom down there in the sun.

 While it is impossible for me to speak for all of our men and woman at arms I can speak for one Veteran that had folks just like you make me question whether or not my country was behind me while I had crosshairs aimed my way.  

 I will just let you imagine how I would like to end this little response.

 Your a smart guy, you can figure out what I would like to call you !  hint.... it's on the filter list......Tim
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 6:55pm

Quote:
I can speak for one Veteran

Make that 2 bro.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by kcopelin on Jun 8th, 2006, 7:18pm
I don't care what anyone thinks about any particular war, those folks over there are sons and daughters, moms and dads, husbands and wives and they're all heroes in my book.
Enjoy your freedom to voive dissenting opinions-it was won by such as these.
Three.
Kathy TSgt USAF (Ret)
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by kcopelin on Jun 8th, 2006, 7:21pm
And also a Christian who is absolutely not ashamed of that fact.
kathy
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 8th, 2006, 7:28pm

on 06/08/06 at 18:55:34, Bob P wrote:
Make that 3 bro.

Rodger ;;D
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by jimmers on Jun 8th, 2006, 7:37pm
TIM!

YOU ROCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jimmers

and make that 4
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by maffumatt on Jun 8th, 2006, 7:52pm

on 06/08/06 at 17:51:57, floridian wrote:
So Tanner,

show me where I (or any one else in this thread) was criticizing the troops.  

What did I say that rubbed you the wrong way?

1) Good that they got Zarqawi
2) Nicholas Berg's Father is a pacifist, but might have been misquoted by maffumat
3) The top US commander in Iraq said its good they got Zarqawi but this won't end our problems
4) Radical pacifists can sound naive at times
5) There is no evidence that Saddam supported Al Qaeda

I wasn't really political at all until I responded to TomK's claim that we were in Iraq because Saddam had provided bases for Al Qaeda - a claim that is political and false.

While you may think that only the liberal yellow press would disagree with TomK's claims, I would refer you to the 9/11 Commision report, which concluded there was no evidence of a "collaborative operational relationship" between Saddam and Al Qaeda/Ansar. And a British intelligence report which found "that there is nothing but enmity between Iraq and Al Qaeda."  And the testimony of dozens of CIA agents  that have said their research was manipulated and distorted by the head of the CIA and the Bush White House - people like Michael Scheuer, the senior intelligence analyst who created, directed and advised a secret CIA unit for tracking and eliminating bin Laden from 1996 - 2004.

You tell me to " Save your Jane Fonda statements until after we have our kids home! Hopefully soon!!!" ... as if I were an Al Qaeda supporter.  Go ahead, misquote me, characterise me in a way that is innacurate.  I don't give a rats what you think about me. But not everyone who disagrees with the war is an Al Qaeda supporter - in fact, most Americans are pretty disillusioned with how the war has been handled by our elected officials (although some obviously cling to their illusions).  We wouldn't be doing anyone a favor by turning off our right to free speech and pretending that things are just swell.


--- edited to add:





And who has said that Saddam doesn't have blood on his hands, or shouldn't stand trial for murder.  Your obviously bent out of shape and distorting what has been said. That Saddam is evil isn't the issue.  The question is whether he supported Al Qaeda, and whether the war against him was launched under false pretenses.  Would the American public have signed on for a war to liberate Iraq? Probably not. So the propaganda was catapulted that Saddam was supporting Al Qaeda and he was behind 9/11.  And we march into Iraq, where thousands of Americans are maimed and killed.  Classic bait and switch, but since we bought the war and they won't let us return it, they try to sooth our buyer's remorse with talk about how moral we are for removing Saddam.  Never mind that Iraq is plunged into chaos ...

your motives are as transparent as glass Flo-
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:05pm

on 06/08/06 at 17:51:57, floridian wrote:
there was no evidence of a "collaborative operational relationship" between Saddam and Al Qaeda/Ansar.


From: Aviation Week & Space Technology
Headline: Satellite Photos Believed To Show Airliner for Training Hijackers
Byline: Michael A. Dornheim
Dateline: Los Angeles, January 7, 2002


Satellite images of a facility near Baghdad show an airliner that Iraqi defectors say is used to train terrorists in the art of hijacking.Space Imaging, which operates the Ikonos civilian surveillance satellite, was prompted to look for the aircraft in existing photos after a ''Frontline'' television show interviewed two Iraqi defectors who described the hijacker training and the aircraft used for the mock attacks.

One of them drew a map of the Salman Pak training area, and Space Imaging was able to find the facility and the aircraft in photographs taken on Apr. 25, 2000, of an area about 15 mi. southeast of Baghdad on the Tigris River. The zoomed-in photograph is a close match to the hand-drawn map, lending credence to the defector's story. He is Sabah Khodada, and said he worked at the secret Salman Pak complex for about six months as an administrator. The facility is run by the Iraqi secret service, and is used to teach assassination, kidnapping, hijacking of airplanes, buses and trains and other terrorist operations, Khodada said. ''This camp is specialized in exporting terrorism to the whole world.''

Foreigners were trained separately from Iraqis, both Khodada and the other defector said.The aircraft is sitting by itself far from an airport. ''In this camp, I saw [people] getting trained [in] situations where security will not allow you to get weapons into the plane - then what you need to do is to use...very advanced terrorizing methods,'' Khodada said on the television show.''They are even trained how to use utensils for food, like forks and knives provided in the plane....

They are trained how to plant horror within the passengers by doing such actions. Even pens and pencils can be used for that purpose. They can do it, and they can overcome any plane because they are very well physically trained, and they are very strong. They can overtake a plane in a very efficient manner. ''Training will include the way they would sit in the plane, how they enter the plane.... They will, for example, sit in twos, and they will assign who will sit to the right of the other guy, and who will sit to the other side. Two will sit in the front, two will sit in the back and two will sit, for example, in the middle. They are trained to jump all at one time, and make a declaration that 'We are going to take over the plane. And nobody [move], don't move, don't make any moves.'''

They will probably use a pencil or a pen, or even sunglasses or prescription glasses. Somebody will hold the crew members of the plane from their chins upward tightly, and you will pull it on his neck. He will think you are going to slaughter him and kill him. Including in this training is terrorizing by making very, very loud noises and screaming all over the plane. That will [create] the planned horror, and will terrorize the plane, including the crew.'

"The aircraft was also used to practice fighting a hijacking, Khodada said. He called it a Boeing 707, but the position of the wing on the fuselage better fits an aft-engined aircraft.The camp was visited by United Nations inspectors on a holiday in January 1995. The inspectors ''went all the way inside the camp,'' Khodada said. ''They saw the plane, they saw the train, and they didn't care anything about it, because [the commanders] told the United Nations, 'This is a camp to train police, antiriot police.'''

Khodada said he was sure the Sept. 11 attacks involved Iraqi training because Osama bin Laden was not capable of such a high-level operation. ''These kind of attacks must be, and have to be, organized by a capable state, such as Iraq,'' he said. ''Even the grouping; those groups were divided into 5-6 people in the group. How about the training on planes? Some of these groups were taken and trained to drive airplanes at the School of Aviation, north of Baghdad.... Everything coincides with what's happening.''
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:11pm

on 06/08/06 at 20:05:54, Jonny wrote:
From: Aviation Week & Space Technology
Headline: Satellite Photos Believed To Show Airliner for Training Hijackers
Byline: Michael A. Dornheim
Dateline: Los Angeles, January 7, 2002


Satellite images of a facility near Baghdad show an airliner that Iraqi defectors say is used to train terrorists in the art of hijacking.Space Imaging, which operates the Ikonos civilian surveillance satellite, was prompted to look for the aircraft in existing photos after a ''Frontline'' television show interviewed two Iraqi defectors who described the hijacker training and the aircraft used for the mock attacks.

One of them drew a map of the Salman Pak training area, and Space Imaging was able to find the facility and the aircraft in photographs taken on Apr. 25, 2000, of an area about 15 mi. southeast of Baghdad on the Tigris River. The zoomed-in photograph is a close match to the hand-drawn map, lending credence to the defector's story. He is Sabah Khodada, and said he worked at the secret Salman Pak complex for about six months as an administrator. The facility is run by the Iraqi secret service, and is used to teach assassination, kidnapping, hijacking of airplanes, buses and trains and other terrorist operations, Khodada said. ''This camp is specialized in exporting terrorism to the whole world.''

Foreigners were trained separately from Iraqis, both Khodada and the other defector said.The aircraft is sitting by itself far from an airport. ''In this camp, I saw [people] getting trained [in] situations where security will not allow you to get weapons into the plane - then what you need to do is to use...very advanced terrorizing methods,'' Khodada said on the television show.''They are even trained how to use utensils for food, like forks and knives provided in the plane....

They are trained how to plant horror within the passengers by doing such actions.LIE! Even pens and pencils can be used for that purpose. They can do it, and they can overcome any plane because they are very well physically trained, and they are very strong. They can overtake a plane in a very efficient manner. ''Training will include the way they would sit in the plane, how they enter the plane.... They will, for example, sit in twos, and they will assign who will sit to the right of the other guy, and who will sit to the other side. Two will sit in the front, two will sit in the back and two will sit, for example, in the middle. They are trained to jump all at one time, and make a declaration that 'We are going to take over the plane. And nobody [move], don't move, don't make any moves.'''

They will probably use a pencil or a pen, or even sunglasses or prescription glasses. Somebody will hold the crew members of the plane from their chins upward tightly, and you will pull it on his neck. He will think you are going to slaughter him and kill him. Including in this training is terrorizing by making very, very loud noises and screaming all over the plane. That will [create] the planned horror, and will terrorize the plane, including the crew.'

"The aircraft was also used to practice fighting a hijacking, LIE! Khodada said. He called it a Boeing 707, but the position of the wing on the fuselage better fits an aft-engined aircraft.The camp was visited by United Nations inspectors on a holiday in January 1995. The inspectors ''went all the way inside the camp,'' Khodada said. ''They saw the plane, they saw the train, and they didn't care anything about it, because [the commanders] told the United Nations, 'This is a camp to train police, antiriot police.'''

Khodada said he was sure the Sept. 11 attacks involved Iraqi training because Osama bin Laden was not capable of such a high-level operation. ''These kind of attacks must be, and have to be, organized by a capable state, such as Iraq,'' he said. ''Even the grouping; those groups were divided into 5-6 people in the group. How about the training on planes? Some of these groups were taken and trained to drive airplanes at the School of Aviation, north of Baghdad.... Everything coincides with what's happening.''


All this above is nothing but republican lies! This was nothing more than a stewardess school! ::)
Name not disclosed due too extreme flaming! [smiley=laugh.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:23pm

on 06/08/06 at 20:11:25, medic1852 wrote:
All this above is nothing but republican lies!


Prove it  [smiley=smokin.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:26pm
It must be because CNN said and they did not find any WMD's and all the anti-war protestors could not be wrong.

Again name not disclosed due to severe flamming! ::)
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Paul98 on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:32pm
Salman Pak training area = Stewardess training school.

What airline?  Alkida Air?  I guess that explaines it being in the middle of fut buck nowhere and heavily guarded.

-P.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by floridian on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:34pm

on 06/08/06 at 18:50:59, tanner wrote:
  So one source at NBC news reports that Bush purposely did not take out Zarqawi for some obscure reason of his own so that he would have an excuse to go to war. God knows that the press is never wrong!


Ok, discount everything in the 'yellow' press. There is still no question that the US had the intel on Zarqawi's camps for a period of years. It's not a liberal fact that Powell showed pictures of them in a speech - it is simply a fact.  So you tell me: why the US didn't act on that information starting the day after 9/11.  We had planes in that no-fly zone every single day.



Quote:
 You respond that the statement by Tom regarding weapons hidden in Syria has long ago been dis proven, which is patently absurd and again the opinion of ostriches with their heads in the sand. Yeah come back with your quotes and while your at it see if you can't find some evidence that the freaking tooth fairy exists, I am fairly sure it's out there somewhere.


Your absolutely unable to read what I wrote.  Although TomK's passage that I quoted mentioned Syria, I replied only about his spurious Saddam-Al Qaeda allegations (as this is an Al Qaeda thread).  


Quote:
 I did not misquote you! I never quoted you at all !

 I did not characterize you as an al Qaeda supporter !
if you want that rep your going to have to give it to yourself.


Literally, that is true, but disingenous.  You merely mischaracterized my statements. By asking me to keep my Jane Fonda statements to myself, you accused me of lending comfort to the enemy.  Unless you were accusing me of promoting aerobics.  


Quote:
 Every statement you or anyone else makes regarding the Commander in Chief's misguiding us into a conflict while we are still engaged in that conflict is a direct slap in the face to the entire Chain of Command right down to the Privates on the ground !


You may feel that way, but as a civilian in a democracy, I am going to question the policies from my elected officials.  Even the president. Otherwise, "they are dying for my right to" ... be silenced.  That's the part that YOU don't get.  Yes, the president is the commander in chief.  Yes, the troops are obligated to follow orders in the chain of command. But the troops rely on a functioning democratic process to determine policies.

America learned some things from the Vietnam conflict.  The people opposed to the war learned that it was wrong and stupid to take their anger out on the troops, when the troops (our relatives and neighbors) were not the problem with the Vietnam war - it was the politicians.   But the politicians did not learn that it was wrong to lie about war - and now you are telling me that the troops would be better off if the sheeple just kept quiet.  


Quote:
 You are missing the f##king point. You and those like you are bad for morale !


Well, you can blame me and half the rest of the country for disagreeing with the policy, or you can blame the policy makers that took us into an uneccessary war based on lies.  You can be angry at me for being honest and a bearer of bad news, or you can be angry at the politicians for lying and wasting lives. Its your choice.  

There was never any doubt that Afghanistan was connected to the 9/11 bombings, and I support that war completely.  That sentiment is reflected in the general population; if the war is clearly in defense of the country, the people will support it.  If the war is fast and has a low human cost (like the invasion of Grenada), the people will support it.  But when we are lied into an unecessary war, and that war becomes an long term comittment to a bloody mess, then the people will be pissed. As they should be.


Quote:
 I will just let you imagine how I would like to end this little response.


I can't really imagine how your mind works, so I guess we'll never know.

Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by CHTom on Jun 8th, 2006, 8:38pm

on 06/08/06 at 14:11:37, Bob P wrote:
From the Bible:


I doubt God is much of a BS'er!


So I guess that Hitler was placed in power by god and that those Germans who worked against the Nazis during WWII-and many were caught and executed-deserved what they got because they were going against god's will, right?  I guess that those Germans, including the SS, were doing god's will, right (afterall, they were only killing Jews, gypsies and commies, so what's the problem with that?)  I don't know if this applies to Saddam because he is a Muslim, not a Christian, so maybe you can clear this up for me, Bob:  were  those Iraqis who resisted Saddam and were killed by him and his followers going against god's will or don't they count because they weren't christian and neither is he.  Please clarify this for me, religion confuses me [smiley=huh.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:08pm

on 06/08/06 at 20:38:45, CHTom wrote:
So I guess that Hitler was placed in power by god and that those Germans who worked against the Nazis during WWII-and many were caught and executed-deserved what they got because they were going against god's will, right?  I guess that those Germans, including the SS, were doing god's will, right (afterall, they were only killing Jews, gypsies and commies, so what's the problem with that?)  I don't know if this applies to Saddam because he is a Muslim, not a Christian, so maybe you can clear this up for me, Bob:  were  those Iraqis who resisted Saddam and were killed by him and his followers going against god's will or don't they count because they weren't christian and neither is he.  Please clarify this for me, religion confuses me [smiley=huh.gif]


STFU Scumbag.....nobody is talking to you.

You behave and you wont be deleted!!!
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by floridian on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:14pm
Actually, CHTom's argument had occurred to me, and it a logical question to ask someone who believes that obedience to the state is obedience to God.

Also, Jonny, the Senate Intelligence Committee on Pre-War Intelligence had this to say about Salman Pak:

The facility was used by the Iraqi Intelligence Service to "train its officers for counterterrorism operations against regime opponents." The committee further stated that it did not receive any evidence that Iraq trained "Arabs of various nationalities at the Salman Pak facility for potential surrogate terror operations" and that CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency analysts confirmed that Al Qaeda "sources" had not reported any knowledge of such training.  http://intelligence.senate.gov/iraqreport2.pdf

The informants provided by Chalabi turned out usually to be misinformants - all kinds of 'screwballs', which is what the Germans nicknamed one.  
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Tom K on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:32pm
First off, since I'm the one who was initially in the cross hairs, I feel that some of this should be answered by me.  Flo,  you have every right to question, no one is trying to silence you, but...you bring up "facts" from various liberal websites and quote it chapter and verse as if it is fact.  Any time anyone else brings up a quote, you pick it apart as part of the "Right Wing Conspericy".  How bout some give an take?  Personally, I did respect your opinion...did.  Calling me out was out of line and unnecessary.  If you have some problem with me, bring it to me, don't post it.  Jumping on my shit on the board isn't the way to settle anything.  Second, I think a lot of people, myself included, would appreciate the word President, capitalized.  The man has earned that much.  I don't care if you don't like him, but he has earned the title and deserves the respect that it is given.  Third, what would you like the President to do?  Should he call you anytime he needs to make a decision?  So what, he didn't blow the crap out of Zarqawi earlier.  Big Fawking Deal.  Had his camp been in the middle of a school yard and he blew the shit out of it, you would have jumped all over his case then.   As stated in an earlier thread...We Get It.  You don't like President Bush.  Guess what...He is still in office and is going to be for a few more years.  I didn't like President Clinton, but I dealt.  Oh wait, now I will be chastized for bringing up His Holiness, President Bill Clinton.  Seems to me that you are all about dishing it out, but when someone brings it...you can't handle it.  It's the Interweb for fawks sake...I would hate to see how you would react in person if someone disagreed with you...

I'm out...
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 8th, 2006, 9:52pm
Once more from the top:

Quote:
Romans 13:1-5 (RSV):
1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,
4 For he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.


What it says is that God is the authority.  He allows governments to be established to do and enforce good for the people.  If you do bad the government is there to punish you.

Obviously a bad government is not playing by God's rules of enforcing good.  It therefore becomes the wrongdoer and sometimes another, good government must punish the wrongdoing government.

This is really simple shit folks!
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by jimmers on Jun 8th, 2006, 10:01pm
Hey Chewy! How's the marathon going?

Super Size it yet? ;;D

Jimmers
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by tanner on Jun 8th, 2006, 11:30pm


 Flo, you didn't learn shit from the "Vietnam Conflict" and I definitely was not suggesting an aerobics class for you!!

 You know the real difference between you and I Is that we are both American civilians, but if and when the shit hits the fan I will be watching your back, but you won't be there for me!

 I'm done with your crap! Have a nice life and remember to thank no one for it because you did it and protected it all by yourself with the First Amendment !

 God Bless America !.........................Tim
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by floridian on Jun 8th, 2006, 11:43pm

on 06/08/06 at 21:32:08, Tom K wrote:
Flo,  you have every right to question, no one is trying to silence you,  


No, Tanner was pretty clear that he thought I was a traitor, and that I and everyone else should shut up and support the President, whether the war is right or wrong. And other people jumped on, agreeing with him, while pretending to not take part.  Don't apologize for him or pretend that he didn't mean it.


Quote:
but...you bring up "facts" from various liberal websites and quote it chapter and verse as if it is fact.  Any time anyone else brings up a quote, you pick it apart as part of the "Right Wing Conspericy".  How bout some give an take?  Personally, I did respect your opinion...did.  

If Fox and the other right wing sites refuse to publish information they find inconvienent, then I guess that only "liberal" sources (ie, non-conservative) will publish it.  And if the Senate Committe on Intelligence and the 9/11 Commission are liberal sources, so be it.  

This board is a haven for religious kooks and bigots, homophobes, racists, and right wing nuts. Sorry, but I am not going to give that crap equal consideration. And I am tired of the factual relativism - every month or two, somebody spouts off about how smoking hasn't really been proven to be harmful.  Sorry. It has.  That opinion is not equal to the factually backed opinion that smoking causes all kinds of health problems.  If somebody says they value freedom of a person to do what they want with their body, fine.  That is their value system - I can agree or disagree, take it or leave it.

That the government lied to us about Iraq is as proven as is the fact that they lied to us about Vietnam. It will take some people decades to deal with that truth, other will go to the grave as a 'true believer.'  


Quote:
Calling me out was out of line and unnecessary.  If you have some problem with me, bring it to me, don't post it.  Jumping on my shit on the board isn't the way to settle anything.

Perhaps I was snappish, but our government, with the exception of Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld have established that there was no connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda.  Analysis of source documents (declassified and leaked documents, testimony) indicates a clear pattern of deception to get us into war.  And guess who is paying for the lies, and will pay an even higher price if the lies are not confronted??


Quote:
Second, I think a lot of people, myself included, would appreciate the word President, capitalized.  The man has earned that much.  I don't care if you don't like him, but he has earned the title and deserves the respect that it is given.  

I was unaware of the rule, assuming that "President of the United States" was capitalized, but simply referring to the President was not.  I was wrong on that, and it had nothing to do with respect.  My capitalization has been messed up since I studied German as a youth, and was constantly berated by teachers for capitalizing all nouns. I shall refer to the President at all times from now on.


Quote:
 So what, he didn't blow the crap out of Zarqawi earlier.  Big Fawking Deal.

Excuse me? You don't care if (after 9/11), the President of the United States knew where Al Qaeda camps were, and did nothing?  The terrorists were ALLOWED to keep training,  and scattered across the globe ... That statement is Un-fucking-believable.      

And even if we refused to commit enough troops to Afghanistan so we would have enough to invade Iraq, so what?  When Bin Laden was pinned down, we sent in a bunch of locals to capture him, and he slipped away? That's ok.  Any one who would criticize that obviously must just be a mean spirited Bush-hater, you say?  


Quote:
Had his camp been in the middle of a school yard and he blew the shit out of it, you would have jumped all over his case then.   As stated in an earlier thread...We Get It.

No, you obviously do not know what I think and what I have stated on this board. There has been collateral damage in Afghanistan, and I have not been "all over his case."  I support the war in Afghanistan, I regret the loss of innocent life there, but I also believe we have a right to invade, as the former government of Afghanistan was hosting Bin Laden and his friends.  And was it in the middle of a school yard? No, that's some hypothetical you made up to excuse the dereliction of duty.  Action against the terrorists involved in 9/11 was not taken, and every American should be outraged.


Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by brewcrew on Jun 8th, 2006, 11:47pm
Lots and lots of mental masturbation going on here. Gets people all hot and bothered, but accomplishes nothing.

A very, very bad man is dead, the world is now a little bit better place, and I'm going to sleep just fine tonight, thank you very much.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by floridian on Jun 8th, 2006, 11:54pm

on 06/08/06 at 23:30:11, tanner wrote:
 Flo, you didn't learn shit from the "Vietnam Conflict" and I definitely was not suggesting an aerobics class for you!!


And what did we learn about the Vietnam conflict this month?  Super-patriot and player of pawns Henry Kissinger was negotiating the fall of Vietnam to the communists in 1972!  Too bad he wasn't tried as a war criminal.


Quote:
Former U.S. secretary of state Henry Kissinger quietly acknowledged to China in 1972 that Washington could accept a communist takeover of South Vietnam if that evolved after a withdrawal of U.S. troops - even as the war to drive back the Communists dragged on with mounting deaths.

The late U.S. president Richard Nixon's envoy told Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai: "If we can live with a communist government in China, we ought to be able to accept it in Indochina."

Kissinger's blunt remarks surfaced in a collection of papers from his years of diplomacy released Friday by George Washington University's National Security Archive. The collection was gathered from documents available at the U.S. government's National Archives and obtained through the research group's declassification requests.

WASHINGTON (AP) -
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by tanner on Jun 9th, 2006, 12:25am
Why Do We Ride?

PGR Member Laurel B. Dinsmore May 8, 2006


Why do we do this, you ask?
Why bother to stand out in wind and rain for someone unknown?

Why do we ride through torrents chilled to the bone?

The answer is simple: “Because, Never Again!”

Never again will they return home in shame,

Never again will wearing their uniform cause them pain.

Never again will we forget why they serve.

No, Never Again.

But still I hear you say “Why does it matter to you?”

“They aren’t your friends,

your brothers, your sisters,

your father, your mother.”

War is a sad time for many; it is sad but true.

So, why do you gather in the gap between their families and their foes?

The answer is simple: “Because, Never Again!”

Never again will grieving parents, families and friends alone bear mourning’s toil.

Never again will hard-won freedom of speech be used to debase and destroy.

Never again will their sacrifice be dishonored upon their home soil.

No, Never Again.

Why do we gather, why do we ride?

Why travel this country far and wide?

We remember our grandfathers, fathers, brothers and others yet to come.

We stand proud through tears reflecting their courage and pride.

Because, Never Again.

That’s why we ride.

Written in memory of:

Henry C. Barrows ~ Army, WWI (Great-Uncle)

Cecil A. Bray ~ Army paratrooper, WWII (Father)

In honor of:

Garrett C. Bray ~ Navy, Viet Nam (Brother)

Donald A. Dinsmore ~ Marines & Army (Husband)

and

All Patriot Guard Members

Laurel B. Dinsmore May 8, 2006



 Very Proud Member of "The Patriot Guard Riders"....Tim

Now if I can afford a bike and learn to ride it........... ;;D

I won't always be the tail-gunner drivng a "cage" 8)
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Charlie on Jun 9th, 2006, 12:34am
What a bunch of pricks we can be.

By finally eliminating this horror, we killed the man who put a face on the Iraqi insurgence. The question now is how large a blow his death is to the guerrilla movement that he helped so as to make Iraq safe for beheadings---but for now; how sweet it is to lose this waste of carbon. This guy probably was directly involved in some of the nastiest bombings and planning of others: One down. Too bad the Sunni Arab insurgency has such a broad base that it's doubtful that they will fold up their tents. Rats.

Nothing live having a god on your side. This mess certainly boils down to money and religion. Each and every God-fearing bunch has yours, mine or their god on its side. That God-fearing throwback in the White House loves thinking God is on his side. That must explain why he is as he is.

My very good friend and next door neighbor is a very serious preacher. He, of course, says that all other Gods are "false gods." Of course that's his job. This is the crux of the matter. Religious zealotry is a bloody mess.

Enough with saying liberals are pacifists and military bashers. Very few liberals are pacifists. I'm not and I'm about as liberal as it comes. It's like saying that that spoiled child, Ann Coulter, speaks for conservatives. We have our nuts, you have yours.

Screeching right wing pundits and Bubbas, use "Do you support the troops." to try to kill debate and slander those who have the audacity to think like Americans. Like it or not, it's one of the most patriotic things one can do. We are not unmindful that the military guards our freedom. Everybody supports the troops and some of us would like them to get a little more support from the cost-cutters in Washington. They deserve it, because with very few exceptions, they become better citizens. It’s not their fault when they are forced to defend people that don’t want to be defended. There’s this though: No matter what they say; while we don't speak softly and certainly carry a big stick they could do worse than having Americans getting in the thick of things.

We need to use our heads though and not genuflect every time Rummy or Dubya tells us we should.

Charlie
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Kirk on Jun 9th, 2006, 3:19am
Expensive way to do it, but damn I'm glad he's gone.

Smokem if ya see em.  [smiley=smokin.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by BobG on Jun 9th, 2006, 4:30am
Wow! This is cool!

A dead terrorist, God and religion, Vietnam, politics and even Hitler all in one thread.

Hey Barbara, while you're up for popcorn please get me an order of deep fried Twinkies and a root beer. Super sized. Please.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by CHTom on Jun 9th, 2006, 6:54am
[b]quote author=Bob P link=board=general;num=1149753515;start=50#60 date=06/08/06 at 21:52:35]Once more from the top:

What it says is that God is the authority.  He allows governments to be established to do and enforce good for the people.  If you do bad the government is there to punish you.

Obviously a bad government is not playing by God's rules of enforcing good.  It therefore becomes the wrongdoer and sometimes another, good government must punish the wrongdoing government.[/b]This is really simple shit folks![/quote]
Well, Bob, I agree that your answer is really simple and really shit.  Who determines if a government is "bad"?  I mean we, Americans, have always thought that Hitler was bad, but the vast majority of the Germans at the time did not think that he was bad.  Currently, according to most polls, the majority of Americans believe that we should never have gone into Iraq as the reasons given for that invasion have been proved to be deliberate lies by our government and the majority of Americans want us out of that mess; Bush's popularity is at an all time low-I believe he has the lowest popularity rating in our history and it has lasted for several months.  We invaded a country that, while a repressive dictatorship, had done nothing against us-not much different than Adolf invading Poland for alleged terrorist type attacks against Germany (the incident, staged by the Nazis, in which a German radio station on the Polish border was "attacked" by Polish soldiers who, in reality, were German SS dressed in Polish uniforms-they were later killed by Hitler & Co. to keep their mouths shut); this was not much different than the lies used by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld to justify the invasion of Iraq-fortunately, they weren't able to kill all of those who knew that the reasons were lies).  Saddam is not so different from the heads of state in the other Arab nations-not one is a democracy, all use terror to one degree or another to keep their people under control.

So tell me, Bob, where does god figure into all of this-that is your christian god.  Are the Americans who oppose the war and Bush and Co. committing a sin by doing so?  Are they condemning themselves to hell unless they change their ways and become good Republicans?  Are we supposed to blindly accept what our government does because god put it in place?  If the christian god is the only true god, then does that mean that muslims are all condemed to hell anyway?  Are we supposed to support whatever our troops do, even if it involves murder, torture, etc., because-using your reasoning-god put them in Iraq to, I guess, carry out a holy mission-whoa, this is another crusade, isn't it?  Maybe we should all see Monty Python's movie about the Holy Grail to gain better insight into what is going on now.  

Please answer as many of the questions raised as you wish, Bob, but with something more substantial than "the bible told me so".  Still very confused [smiley=huh.gif].
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 9th, 2006, 7:50am
Ahh, the word twisters.  Trouble is, you're not very good at it Tom.


Quote:
Please answer as many of the questions raised as you wish, Bob, but with something more substantial than "the bible told me so".  Still very confused .


The Bible told me so is as substantial as it can get.  If everyone lived by It, we would have the perfect world.  The main thrust of the Bible verses I posted is good  & bad.  Not obey the government whatever they say.

Beheading innocent people and purposely blowing up children = bad.
Putting him to bed with a 500 lb. bomb = good.  The good doers are doing the Lord's work!
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by CHTom on Jun 9th, 2006, 8:54am

on 06/09/06 at 07:50:08, Bob P wrote:
Ahh, the word twisters.  Trouble is, you're not very good at it Tom.


The Bible told me so is as substantial as it can get.  If everyone lived by It, we would have the perfect world.  The main thrust of the Bible verses I posted is good  & bad.  Not obey the government whatever they say.

Beheading innocent people and purposely blowing up children = bad.
Putting him to bed with a 500 lb. bomb = good.  The good doers are doing the Lord's work!


OK, so you didn't answer my questions but gave me an insight into your thinking-"purposely blowing up children=bad."  Now, as has happened many times in many wars and is happening in Iraq, if a "bad" man is known to be in a house in which their are innocent women and children and a 500 lb. bomb is dropped upon that house to get rid of the "bad" man-and "collateral damage" (love that phrase, sanitizes the reality of death) occurs and innocent women, children and even some men are killed, according to you, that is OK because it is "the Lord's work"?  That doesn't quite make it OK with me.  I suppose that if the women and children and innocent men are killed, and christian, then they probably go right to heaven, n'est pas?  But what happens if they are not christian?  You never answered that question-it appears to me that you don't have any problems with the killing of non-christians...perhaps it is because they are doomed to hell anyway?  I would appreciate an answer to that question.  It appears to me that, in your way of thinking, the killing on non-christians is OK.  Whatever happened to "Thou shalt not kill" and "Turn the other cheek"?  You also ignored the question I posed about the situation in Germany when Hitler was in charge.  I promise not to ask you any more questions, but I would like some answers other than the simplistic ones that you have been giving.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 9th, 2006, 9:15am

on 06/09/06 at 08:54:31, CHTom wrote:
OK, so you didn't answer my questions but gave me an insight into your thinking-"purposely blowing up children=bad."  Now, as has happened many times in many wars and is happening in Iraq, if a "bad" man is known to be in a house in which their are innocent women and children and a 500 lb. bomb is dropped upon that house to get rid of the "bad" man-and "collateral damage" (love that phrase, sanitizes the reality of death) occurs and innocent women, children and even some men are killed, according to you, that is OK because it is "the Lord's work"?  That doesn't quite make it OK with me.  I suppose that if the women and children and innocent men are killed, and christian, then they probably go right to heaven, n'est pas?  But what happens if they are not christian?  You never answered that question-it appears to me that you don't have any problems with the killing of non-christians...perhaps it is because they are doomed to hell anyway?  I would appreciate an answer to that question.  It appears to me that, in your way of thinking, the killing on non-christians is OK.  Whatever happened to "Thou shalt not kill" and "Turn the other cheek"?  You also ignored the question I posed about the situation in Germany when Hitler was in charge.  I promise not to ask you any more questions, but I would like some answers other than the simplistic ones that you have been giving.

HMMMM lets see CHTom, a few months ago you called me out and told me you wanted to discuss things in a PM format. Well I tried and you never replied to the questions posed to you. You dissapeared and never responded to the facts that I presented to you. I want you to know that I still have the conversation saved. Untill then.
Rodger
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by karma on Jun 9th, 2006, 9:36am
Hey Bob P,

I can't believe no one see's the sarcasm in quoting religious ethics to rationalize war.

;)
I tried to do the same thing with this but no one took the bait.

Quote:
Its all a convenient deflection from the atrocities that have been in the news.  
Keep a wanted man in your crosshairs until the impact of his demise is really needed.
Republicans 1
Dems 0


War Sucks!!!! >:(
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 9th, 2006, 9:38am

on 06/09/06 at 09:36:00, karma wrote:
Hey Bob P,

I can't believe no one see's the sarcasm in quoting religious ethics to rationalize war.

;)
I tried to do the same thing with this but no one took the bait.

War Sucks!!!! >:(


Robbie I see the sarcasm. If folks would look at history they would see more wars and deaths can be attributed to religion and in the name of God, or what ever you choose to call him.
Rodger
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by karma on Jun 9th, 2006, 9:43am

Quote:
If folks would look at history they would see more wars and deaths can be attributed to religion and in the name of God, or what ever you choose to call him.
[smiley=thumb.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Tom K on Jun 9th, 2006, 9:46am

on 06/09/06 at 07:50:08, Bob P wrote:
Ahh, the word twisters.  Trouble is, you're not very good at it Tom.



You're right, Bob.  I'm not good at it, I don't research everything I post, because I'm posting what is coming off the top of my head, that's why my posts are not set up in neat little paragraphs and such.  Am I going to sit down and read a post and then find "facts" to back up my thoughts?  No, don't have the time or the energy to waste.  I really don't give a flying fawk what other people think.  No one, Me, Flo, Charlie, Tanner, etc, is going to change anyone's opinoins on this or any other board.  It used to be fun to argue/discuss the differences in opinion, because it used to be done with respect.  Don't know where that went, but it seems to be waning on both sides.  Personally, I really blame the media, CNN, MSNBC, etc.  I have never seen such vitriol for a sitting President as I have with this one.  It has been since day 1 of this Presidency and only let up for a short time during 9/11.  FOX is in the same group as the media, but at least they are open with their support of the President, they don't hide behind the banner of Freedom of the Press.  My favorite is when all of the people who are against the President, say that he is bringing government into our private lives.  Then they turn around and ask for government paid health care.  Isn't that directly bringing the governement into your private life?  It's nice to be able to question which side is doing "God's Work", isn't it?  One side thinks their God is all that and the other thinks the same of theirs.  Personally, I don't follow any God, but I would say that any God that tells it's followers that the only way he is coming back is to wipe out all the non-believers, probably isn't the one to side with.  But, you know how people are...they will just talk to the attackers, let them know how they feel, that they understand their anger toward America, that they never agreed with the President, and then it will all be good.  They won't cut off your head or blow your house up because you agree with them that President Bush is evil.  Just try that one.  You cannot reason with the people who follow Allah, no matter how hard you try.  
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 9th, 2006, 9:55am

Quote:
But what happens if they are not christian?  You never answered that question


Not my question to answer, but God has answered it:

John 3:16

and about the Thou shalt not kill:
 The reason is that the Hebrew meaning of the word translated as "kill" actually means "murder" or "to slay someone in a violent manner unjustly." So, in the Ten Commandments God is saying, "Thou shalt not murder." Unjust premeditated killing with the wrong motives of hatred, vengeance, greed, jealousy, etc. is murder.  Killing in self defense to protect oneself is not murder nor is executing condemned killers.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 9th, 2006, 9:58am

on 06/09/06 at 09:46:54, Tom K wrote:
 You cannot reason with the people who follow Allah, no matter how hard you try.  


I was with you on everything except this Tom. Sorry but you can reason with them it is the extremist you cant reason with. All religions have extremist.
Rodger
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by zwibbs/Scott on Jun 9th, 2006, 10:30am

on 06/08/06 at 21:08:22, Jonny wrote:
STFU Scumbag.....nobody is talking to you.

You behave and you wont be deleted!!!

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ROTFLMAO !!!
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Mattrf on Jun 9th, 2006, 10:45am
I agree that there are some people you just can not reason with. Not all Muslims are extremists and those that are not can be reasoned with, the problem is that these people are raised in a way that they truly believe what they are doing is just and that strapping a bomb to them selves and blowing up innocent people is just in the eye’s of there god and that they will go straight to heaven for doing so. I know that for myself and probably most Americans we will never understand this kind of belief or how one can believe so blindly and except this as a good thing to do. Comparing this to Hitler I think is insane at least the part about most Germans liking Hitler, I think they were all scared of him and knew if they said anything against him they would be killed, I think the only comparison that you can do is Hitler to Saddam and the fear of the people that lived under these maniacs.
Now I don’t like everything that Bush has done but he is our president and I support him in that capacity and hope he will make better choices and do what’s best for the people.
As far as the war, we are there and we are not going to change that and I for one support our troops 100% and I am appalled at some of the antiwar demonstrators I see on the news, how do they think this makes our people risking there lives feel?
I also think the media for the most part should be ashamed for being so biased, the news should be unbiased and report the good and the bad but they seemed to want to report only things that make our government look bad and it is not just to our people they make it look bad to the world and it is an embarrassment to us all. I think that is one of the reasons Bush’s approval ratting is so low since all people have to go on is all the negative press he gets and all the negative press on the war, don’t get me wrong I do not feel that, that’s is the only reason not by far but I do think it is a major contributing factor.

I long for the day that I can vote for someone I want in office instead of voting for the guy I dislike the least.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Slammy on Jun 9th, 2006, 11:04am
Ahhh  My kind of thread!     :D

At least some things never change on here!

and I blame Bush for my cluster headaches!    [smiley=laugh.gif]


Slammy   8)
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Mattrf on Jun 9th, 2006, 11:09am
I sure would like to blame someone for my headaches then strangle them! [smiley=laugh.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by imnotbub on Jun 9th, 2006, 11:18am

on 06/09/06 at 09:58:34, medic1852 wrote:
I was with you on everything except this Tom. Sorry but you can reason with them it is the extremist you cant reason with. All religions have extremist.
Rodger



And the living proof of this is someone stating that the army is an instrument of God. Paleeeese.

Steve
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Mattrf on Jun 9th, 2006, 11:23am
I think the only thing that we will all agree on is that war is a bad thing and that our suns and daughters being in harms way is not something that any of us wants no matter if it is a just cause or not and we all wish that they will be home soon.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Bob P on Jun 9th, 2006, 12:18pm
God hates war, however, it is necessary to maintain order in the earth and overcome those who would like to destroy good. In fact, the first war ever recorded was the war in heaven where Satan and his evil angels fought against God and his angels.

I should qualify the statement to say, an army fighting for good and against evil is an instrument of God.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by tanner on Jun 9th, 2006, 12:33pm

on 06/09/06 at 10:45:25, Mattrf wrote:
I long for the day that I can vote for someone I want in office instead of voting for the guy I dislike the least.

  ..Huge AMEN......Tim
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by tanner on Jun 9th, 2006, 12:39pm
 

 Matt, I hate to hijack this thread ::) but at least here in SC. It looks like I will be able to vote in almost all of our elections with a clear choice based on the issues. I sure won't be voting any straight tickets!

 I am actually looking forward to election day.........Tim
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Mattrf on Jun 9th, 2006, 2:53pm
I am seriously jealous, you have people worthy of being in office!
How the hell did that happen?  [smiley=laugh.gif]
You sure there not like aliens or robots or something?
Maybe I should move east? [smiley=laugh.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 9th, 2006, 2:56pm

on 06/09/06 at 14:53:02, Mattrf wrote:
I am seriously jealous, you have people worthy of being in office!
How the hell did that happen?  [smiley=laugh.gif]
You sure there not like aliens or robots or something?
Maybe I should move east? [smiley=laugh.gif]

http://www.writingshop.ws/assets/images/Borg-Intro.jpg
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Mattrf on Jun 9th, 2006, 2:58pm
Oh so that’s why!
Resistance is futile!
[smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=laugh.gif]
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 9th, 2006, 3:50pm
Zarqawi is now in paradise and there are no virgins, there are 72 goats and they are fuckin billy goats.....LMAO

There is only one radio station and 24/7 they play only one song...here it is.....LOL ;;D

http://tinyurl.com/om466

Its played over and over and over and over and over and over....ROTFF!!!!
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 9th, 2006, 4:15pm
Wont let me post it so nevermind!
Rodger
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by tanner on Jun 9th, 2006, 4:46pm

on 06/09/06 at 14:53:02, Mattrf wrote:
I am seriously jealous, you have people worthy of being in office!
How the hell did that happen?  [smiley=laugh.gif]
[smiley=laugh.gif]


 Yeah this time it looks like I will be able to vote with some conviction ....oops that's the wrong word to use when talking about elections , but anyway in all likelihood no one I vote for will win ;;D

 and Jonny that song is already making me nuts and I only listened to it twice ::)

 Thank God the board wouldn't let Medic add whatever mindf##k he was going to [smiley=laugh.gif]


.....tim
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by medic1852 on Jun 9th, 2006, 7:58pm
This will be what he wakes up to in hell! (http://tinyurl.com/f4htt)

Rodger
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 9th, 2006, 8:30pm

on 06/09/06 at 08:54:31, CHTom wrote:
Now, as has happened many times in many wars and is happening in Iraq, if a "bad" man is known to be in a house in which their are innocent women and children and a 500 lb. bomb is dropped upon that house to get rid of the "bad" man-and "collateral damage" (love that phrase, sanitizes the reality of death) occurs and innocent women, children and even some men are killed, according to you, that is OK because it is "the Lord's work"?


What kind of idiotic m*th*rf**k**g statement is this?

How much of a fucking moron do you have to be to even make such a statement?

In WW2 we would blow a whole city block to get one guy, now, we sacrifice American soldiers not to kill  civilians.

Its called WAR.....Shit-head!...and we are the only country that goes out of our way (With the death of our soldiers) to fucking do this.

Man, I hope you make it to a convention sometime  ;)
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by chewy on Jun 9th, 2006, 8:33pm

Quote:
What kind of idiotic m*th*rf**k**g statement is this?


Consider the source.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by maffumatt on Jun 9th, 2006, 8:52pm

on 06/09/06 at 20:30:59, Jonny wrote:
What kind of idiotic m*th*rf**k**g statement is this?

How much of a fucking moron do you have to be to even make such a statement?

In WW2 we would blow a whole city block to get one guy, now, we sacrifice American soldiers not to kill  civilians.

Its called WAR.....Shit-head!...and we are the only country that goes out of our way (With the death of our soldiers) to fucking do this.

Man, I hope you make it to a convention sometime  ;)


Not only that Jonny.....but if you were living in a war zone would you welcome the most targeted man in the country into your home with your wife and children at home ? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that anyone and everything around the guy is targeted. The guy that invited him into his home is resposible for his their deaths.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Charlie on Jun 10th, 2006, 12:16am
War is indeed hell.

I didn't know Bob P. was such a Christian. Now I understand him better so I'll give him a little more leeway...a little anyway. 8)

I truly envy people who are sure of a hereafter. I've never been so.

Charlie
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by CHTom on Jun 10th, 2006, 12:47pm

on 06/09/06 at 20:30:59, Jonny wrote:
What kind of idiotic m*th*rf**k**g statement is this?

How much of a fucking moron do you have to be to even make such a statement?

In WW2 we would blow a whole city block to get one guy, now, we sacrifice American soldiers not to kill  civilians.

Its called WAR.....Shit-head!...and we are the only country that goes out of our way (With the death of our soldiers) to fucking do this.

Man, I hope you make it to a convention sometime  ;)


Gee, jonny boy, you seem to know a lot about war; I've asked you the following questions many times, but you've never answered it and I wonder why:  When exactly did you serve in the military and what was your job?  I pose the same question to your buddy chewey.  I volunteered to serve AFTER the draft was abolished, but somehow I get the impression that your only military experience has been reading "Sergeant Rock" comic books or watching movies and TV shows.  So, if you dare, please publically let us all know when you served in the miitary, what branch, how long, what job you did and any combat experience.  If you don't answer, for me that confirms that you are a paper patriot who is willing to let others do the fighting and getting wounded and dying but somehow never had the courage to take the step up and enlist.  [b][color=Red]The balls are in your court-or maybe you don't have any[/color][/b].
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by chewy on Jun 10th, 2006, 1:00pm

Quote:
When exactly did you serve in the military and what was your job?

Never.  


Quote:
I volunteered to serve AFTER the draft

Thanks.

Advice:

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v388/bgull2/th_668922739_l.jpg
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Mattrf on Jun 10th, 2006, 1:28pm
Guys not to make a joke about this but can’t we all just get along?
I think this thread needs to die you guys are just attacking each other now.
If you have never served in the armed forces, then you have no right in my opinion to slam those that have. You do have the right to go after those who have put us there but those who are just doing there job, need our support and I know no matter how much you are against the war that you truly do not blame those on the ground for it or question there patriotism for being there when they have no choice. Those of us who have served have a unique perspective and understand what it is like to be there and the feeling of pride you have knowing you are the front line in protecting our way of life even if that means protecting those that do not agree with your feelings. They are doing a job that you clearly do not want to do and that most do not want to do and they are being shot at, and just like the police they are vastly underpaid for laying there life on the line so that you may voice your opinion freely. I know that those of us who have served have this unique perspective because even though I have been out for years part of me wishes I was there helping just like I am sure most other veterans feel. Don’t take this as me saying I agree with us being there, I truly wish we where not but that does not stop the feeling of patriotism that I think you can only get by experiencing serving your county.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by chewy on Jun 10th, 2006, 1:35pm

Quote:
If you have never served in the armed forces, then you have no right in my opinion to slam those that have.


Even if they are an a*sshole?


Quote:
They are doing a job that you clearly do not want to do and that


And just what makes my intentions or choices so clear to You?
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Mattrf on Jun 10th, 2006, 1:59pm
It was a generalization, there have been many that have chimed in on this and some to me seem this way. If you are not one of them then it was not meant for you.

Unfortunately not all that have served are of the moral fiber that they should be and some give the rest of us a bad name so no not the few who are of that caliber Chewy.

I am just tired of this thread and yes I know I do not have to read it but it is like a train wreck, and I just can’t help it.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by tanner on Jun 10th, 2006, 2:27pm

 World Cup Soccer, now thats the way disputes should be decided! Man I hope Iran gets there asses handed to em [smiley=laugh.gif]


.........tim
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Richr8 on Jun 10th, 2006, 3:02pm
Here's a topic that will just go on and on due to a very wide range of life experience, religious and moral interpretation, backgrounds, opinions, etc.  I respect everyones right to believe as they do, I just wanted to be clear on my position.  

Wooohoo!  We got another one of the SOB's.

I am a Vietnam Vet ( 1 tour, 10 months 1973.  US Navy Diver)and currently work at the facility that built and delivered the precision strike weapon that nailed Zarqawi (Paveway Lazer guded bomb) and Sadaam's sons (TOW Missiles) well as all of the other precision stike weapons ( JSOW lazer guided bombs, Tomahawks,TOW, Stinger, AMRAAM' and Standard missiles, etc. that minimize collateral damage and the taking of innocent lives, and I am pleased and very proud to be part of the solution.  

Done!
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by chewy on Jun 10th, 2006, 3:08pm

Quote:
I am pleased and very proud to be part of the solution.  


AS YOU SHOULD BE!

Your initials are figuritively carved on the scums forehead.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Jonny on Jun 10th, 2006, 4:07pm
No Tom (or whetever name you are going by this month) I have never served.

But, that dont make you any less the scumbag you are ....LOL ;;D
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by maffumatt on Jun 10th, 2006, 5:31pm

on 06/10/06 at 15:02:56, Richr8 wrote:
Here's a topic that will just go on and on due to a very wide range of life experience, religious and moral interpretation, backgrounds, opinions, etc.  I respect everyones right to believe as they do, I just wanted to be clear on my position.  

Wooohoo!  We got another one of the SOB's.

I am a Vietnam Vet ( 1 tour, 10 months 1973.  US Navy Diver)and currently work at the facility that built and delivered the precision strike weapon that nailed Zarqawi (Paveway Lazer guded bomb) and Sadaam's sons (TOW Missiles) well as all of the other precision stike weapons ( JSOW lazer guided bombs, Tomahawks,TOW, Stinger, AMRAAM' and Standard missiles, etc. that minimize collateral damage and the taking of innocent lives, and I am pleased and very proud to be part of the solution.  

Done!



Hey Rich where do you work? I work at KAAP.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by Richr8 on Jun 10th, 2006, 5:42pm

on 06/10/06 at 17:31:00, maffumatt wrote:
Hey Rich where do you work? I work at KAAP.

Raytheon Missile Systems.  I'm the Logistics manager there.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by maffumatt on Jun 10th, 2006, 5:55pm
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/9351684/detail.html
Boy they sure taught me a lesson.
Title: Re: al-Zarqawi killed in Iraq
Post by chewy on Jun 10th, 2006, 7:01pm
yeah! That'll teach us not detain suspected terrorists.

Time for my nap now.


Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1!
YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved.