Conquer Club

ok wat do people think of american involvement in somalia?

I think people who bomb civilian population a cowards and I spit on their parent's grave.

Of course unless they are "fighting-terrorism". That makes it all right to do anything.

joeyjordison wrote:ok wat do people think of american involvement in somalia?

I think it's the beginning of a pincer movement on Saudi.

Good thing too. That corpse looked like one dangerous 10 years old girl to me. Good to know that USA is safe from her. I feel warm and fuzzy knowing that the peace in the world is in such capable and noble hands.

It's a stupid political move, which is why they claim that the leader behind the embassy bombing was killed just a few days after it started. Maybe the US doesn't want to do any serious actions and to divert attention like from the US sub that collided with a Japanese ship in the straits of Ormuz. A great idea really, sticking a sub in such a narrow high traffic area. We're lucky it was a Japanese ship.

Has someone discovered oil in Somalia?

the muslim control over the middle east and africa is falling apart (thanks to the U.S. and its support of terrorists who favor us - the enemy of my enemy is a friend). They are breaking into factions. It like a game of janga. You pull out the key elements from the muslim puzzle and sit back and watch it fall. We have iraq and afganastan in control (sort of) and right in the middle is good ole iran. Last time i checked, three in a row equals a jack pot. lol. Isreal will sweep up the mess in palestine and all that will remain will be a few middle eastern fronts and stabilizing the phillipines.

Mirak wrote:Has someone discovered oil in Somalia?

probably something more valuable, but the U.S government are keeping it secret until they claim somalia as the 51st state and take it all

what,me worry? wrote: Isreal will sweep up the mess in palestine and all that will remain will be a few middle eastern fronts and stabilizing the phillipines.

Yeah, because we all saw how calpable Isreal is in their complete failure against Hezbollah.

mr. incrediball wrote:

Mirak wrote:Has someone discovered oil in Somalia?

probably something more valuable, but the U.S government are keeping it secret until they claim somalia as the 51st state and take it all

actually, Puerto Rico needs to be the 51st state. US citizens+no taxes= not cool....


and, is this goin to turn into, a "Flame US thread". Cuz if so, im leaving

I ain't interesting in flaming US. I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.

so, what you're saying is, you hate the US, but you also equally hate everyone around you?

1. I don't hate US. I don't hate at all. It's bad for karma.

2.

I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.

If that is "everyone around me" then world has become one fucked-up place real fast. So, please explain, when is it ok to kill kids? 'Cause I honestly can't think of a way in wich bombing a residential building and killing children is something good. If you know how it's good, tell me.

mandalorian2298 wrote:1. I don't hate US. I don't hate at all. It's bad for karma.

2.

I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.

If that is "everyone around me" then world has become one fucked-up place real fast. So, please explain, when is it ok to kill kids? 'Cause I honestly can't think of a way in wich bombing a residential building and killing children is something good. If you know how it's good, tell me.

1. ok you dispise....so sorry...

2. can you tell me one thriving country who hasn't been in a war and killed a civilian child?? I can't....WWII, Britain, US, even Canada went into France and accidently killed kids......hey, it's not good, but it happend, and let me tell you that if we didnt kill those kids, we wouldnt have been there, and wouldnt have won that war, and the world would be run by a facist dictator......so, of course, that's a reason to kill kids...so, that other kids can have a free life, and not die......it ain't good, but it's a hard world out there

I believe Cervantes wrote a little story about what's going on between the US and the rest of the world....


I wonder if this administration even remembers what happened last time the US tried to get involved in Somalia.

i have no problem flaiming america

infact

youve just inspired me

mandalorian2298 wrote:1. I don't hate US. I don't hate at all. It's bad for karma.

2.

I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.

If that is "everyone around me" then world has become one fucked-up place real fast. So, please explain, when is it ok to kill kids? 'Cause I honestly can't think of a way in wich bombing a residential building and killing children is something good. If you know how it's good, tell me.

hey you remind me of someone...what's your real name?

Utafar wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:1. I don't hate US. I don't hate at all. It's bad for karma.

2.

I eaqualy despise people who consider that killing little children is "ok in certain conditions" no matter their country of origin.

If that is "everyone around me" then world has become one fucked-up place real fast. So, please explain, when is it ok to kill kids? 'Cause I honestly can't think of a way in wich bombing a residential building and killing children is something good. If you know how it's good, tell me.

hey you remind me of someone...what's your real name?

Wouldn't you like to know you agent provocatour .

P Gizzle wrote:2. can you tell me one thriving country who hasn't been in a war and killed a civilian child?? I can't....WWII, Britain, US, even Canada went into France and accidently killed kids......hey, it's not good, but it happend, and let me tell you that if we didnt kill those kids, we wouldnt have been there, and wouldnt have won that war, and the world would be run by a facist dictator......so, of course, that's a reason to kill kids...so, that other kids can have a free life, and not die......it ain't good, but it's a hard world out there

Well, perhaps every country in the world should start killing children. Then they would all become thriving. Or is it when country becomes thriving it thereby earns the right to kill children.

New definition of terrorism: Killing civilians executed by a non-thriving country.
Killing civilians done by USA = COUNTERTERRORISM

Look all I am saying is that, in the last few years, American troops killed MUCH more civilians then any "terrorist" organization. IMO ANY country that sends it's troops to attack civil population of another country is a menace to world-peace. Even if that country is USA.

mandalorian2298 wrote:Look all I am saying is that, in the last few years, American troops killed MUCH more civilians then any "terrorist" organization. IMO ANY country that sends it's troops to attack civil population of another country is a menace to world-peace. Even if that country is USA.

The fact that the qualification at the end is necessary is disturbing.

mandalorian2298 wrote:

P Gizzle wrote:2. can you tell me one thriving country who hasn't been in a war and killed a civilian child?? I can't....WWII, Britain, US, even Canada went into France and accidently killed kids......hey, it's not good, but it happend, and let me tell you that if we didnt kill those kids, we wouldnt have been there, and wouldnt have won that war, and the world would be run by a facist dictator......so, of course, that's a reason to kill kids...so, that other kids can have a free life, and not die......it ain't good, but it's a hard world out there

Well, perhaps every country in the world should start killing children. Then they would all become thriving. Or is it when country becomes thriving it thereby earns the right to kill children.

New definition of terrorism: Killing civilians executed by a non-thriving country.
Killing civilians done by USA = COUNTERTERRORISM

Look all I am saying is that, in the last few years, American troops killed MUCH more civilians then any "terrorist" organization. IMO ANY country that sends it's troops to attack civil population of another country is a menace to world-peace. Even if that country is USA.

no, im saying that no matter where you go, in war civilians are being killed....it's sad but true.....

think of it this way, if you can.....

during hiroshima and nagasaki, a lot of people died right?

could you image how many people would've died if the US tried to take the homeland? all of the Japanese woulda killed themselves!!


and im not sayin that the US has a right to kill civilians, im saying that i can't think of a country today that hasn't. can you?


so, say what you will about the US being terrorists....what do you suggest to get these guys dead?

As for Hiroshima and Nagasaki... why would the US army even have tried to take the Japanese homeland as you call it? The Japanese had tried to surrender several times even before the A-bombs fell, but a certain president wanted to make a point.

because "a certain president" wanted to make a point.....

P Gizzle wrote:no, im saying that no matter where you go, in war civilians are being killed....it's sad but true.....

think of it this way, if you can.....

during hiroshima and nagasaki, a lot of people died right?

could you image how many people would've died if the US tried to take the homeland? all of the Japanese woulda killed themselves!!


and im not sayin that the US has a right to kill civilians, im saying that i can't think of a country today that hasn't. can you?


so, say what you will about the US being terrorists....what do you suggest to get these guys dead?

First off there's a difference between total war and counter-terrorism. The wisdom of carpet bombing still hasn't been proven to this day; in Germany and Japan their factories would start up days after massive air raids. The British didn't lose their will to fight and neither did the axis nations. Then factor in the defensive problems added like destroyed roads, fighting to take endless mounds of rubble doesn't work a la Stalingrad. MacNamara makes the case in his documentary The Fog of War that the US was just as guilty of war crimes for carrying out air raids on civilian areas when no strategic aims were met. These were punitive measures, more people in Japan died from fire bombing than the A-bombs. We didn't drop the bombs to make them surrender. We could've blown up Mt Fuji or a military station to do that but instead wanted to make a statement to the Soviet Union. War is different from terrorism and counter-terrorism so you can't compare a nation's war history to legitamize current actions.

Do you know what the problem is today? This was shown recently when 1300 illegals in the US were rounded up, families separated, people sent to jail. It was all done to catch 65 people, 65 people! This is the same solution being used to capture terrorists. Target the group and you will be bound to catch some of the "evil doers."

that is very true....im not saying the method is fair. im asking the question, "do you have any better ideas?"

MeDeFe wrote: The Japanese had tried to surrender several times even before the A-bombs fell, but a certain president wanted to make a point.

George dubya?

So now everyone hates him because he went too far and dropped the bomb on Japan because Britan and the international governments would not allow them to surrender?

Mmmmmmok.