Why do they hate us?

[Hitman]

 

 

THE TEXAS DOUBLE WHOPPER IS NOW ON SALE FOR $.99!!

 

 

 

[Homer]Mmmmm....Texas Double Whopper......[/Homer]

[Retrograde assault]

They hate us cause we're better and tougher than they are, they know it and can't really do anything about it. Pisses em off good I tell ya! F...ck em!

[The Misfit]

It is this high-brow intellectual type of response that has been keeping me out of the Tailgate. I just can't respond to such solid argumentation.

 

On topic, clear and irrefutable!

 

 

McBoog, the fact that you find anything you've read in the tailgate to be a "high-brow intellectual type of response" probably says far more about you than you really want people to know.

 

Hey, is this a political thread yet?

[TheGrunt]

No, you are missing the point. Tank's argument is that cutting and running from Iraq has not main Spain less a target for terrorism. The terror alert level since our invasion and occupation of Iraq (the variable in our discussion) has never dropped below Yellow Elevated.

 

The Homeland Security Advisory System is designed to target our protective measures when specific information to a specific sector or geographic region is received. It combines threat information with vulnerability assessments and provides communications to public safety officials and the public.

 

You can translate and disect what exactly that is supposed to mean with wiegie, Az and the rest of the smart kids.

 

The fact that the war in Iraq has never lowered the level seems to indicate to this simpleton that taking the war to them is no more effective at protecting a nation from terrorism than cutting and running. At least according to tank and his data from Spain.

 

Pass.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Redfish]

I'm still not clear here... If Spain had attacked Iraq, what would be the benefit?

 

 

Nice job by everyone keeping the discussion civil thus far. H8's comments (and my rejoinder) were not intended to justify the military presence in Iraq, but to point out that there is no possibility for neutrality in today's world reality. We will all be targets on the IslamoFascist movement. I think being proactive improves our chances of avoiding another significant act on US soil. I also think Europe (outside the UK) faces serious problems for the next two decades, brought on by a "head-in-the-sand" response to increasing Islamic activism.

 

While I respect your opinions about the Bush government and the conflict in Iraq, I still think the administration's ultimate scorecard should include the obvious fact that we have not suffered another catastrophic event here at home. Someone (thousands of someones) are doing a lot of things right.

[Dr. Sacrebleu]

 

 

While I respect your opinions about the Bush government and the conflict in Iraq, I still think the administration's ultimate scorecard should include the obvious fact that we have not suffered another catastrophic event here at home. Someone (thousands of someones) are doing a lot of things right.

 

 

 

So is Chirac kicking ass then?

France's policies resulted in no 9/11, no casualties in Iraq, while being part of the NATO forces in Afghansitan. No catastrophic event on french soil despite greater proximity to the "islamofascists" and a great number of islamofascist sympathizers on their soil.

 

Looks like police action, and tough response to the Taliban terrorists might be the way to go after all.

 

Though this is tongue in cheek, I do agree with redfish that europe is going to face some major issues in the next 10 years....

[bushwacked]

While I respect your opinions about the Bush government and the conflict in Iraq, I still think the administration's ultimate scorecard should include the obvious fact that we have not suffered another catastrophic event here at home. Someone (thousands of someones) are doing a lot of things right.

 

 

I would think you wouldn't be suprised that a lot of us think this oversimplifies a complex situation and a reach of logic.

 

If we got attacked overnight would you think that the ultimate scorecard proved Iraq was a failure and a lot of someones were doing a lot of things wrong?

[PantherDave]

I still say it's because of our large American members-and I'm sticking to it.

[Kid Cid]

So what this boils down to is that "doing nothing" invites attack and "doing something" invites attack. Then it is clear that the only solution that will EVER remove the threat of islamic terrorism is erradication of the Muslim faith.

[Front Row]

Nice job by everyone keeping the discussion civil thus far. H8's comments (and my rejoinder) were not intended to justify the military presence in Iraq, but to point out that there is no possibility for neutrality in today's world reality. We will all be targets on the IslamoFascist movement. I think being proactive improves our chances of avoiding another significant act on US soil. I also think Europe (outside the UK) faces serious problems for the next two decades, brought on by a "head-in-the-sand" response to increasing Islamic activism.

 

While I respect your opinions about the Bush government and the conflict in Iraq, I still think the administration's ultimate scorecard should include the obvious fact that we have not suffered another catastrophic event here at home. Someone (thousands of someones) are doing a lot of things right.

 

+1

One point I ponder , is it possible that the enemy is laying back(concerning attacks here at home) because they know that another 911 type attack would bring about another unified US retaliation?

Do you think the enemy capable of this kind of calculating ?If we leave Iraq, does the enemy become stronger, more emboldened?

[alexgaddis]

+1

One point I ponder , is it possible that the enemy is laying back(concerning attacks here at home) because they know that another 911 type attack would bring about another unified US retaliation?

Do you think the enemy capable of this kind of calculating ?If we leave Iraq, does the enemy become stronger, more emboldened?

 

If we leave, it will embiggen the terrorists

[Front Row]

embiggen??

[H8tank]

If we got attacked overnight would you think that the ultimate scorecard proved Iraq was a failure and a lot of someones were doing a lot of things wrong?

 

They've been attacking us for 30 years, they finally succeeded in killing enough of us at once at a time when we had an administration who would do something about it.

 

Retreat and peace are not anything the mooslims have EVER done the past thousand years.

 

btw, how is kosovo doing? rwanda? darfur?

[thecerwin]

So is Chirac kicking ass then?

France's policies resulted in no 9/11, no casualties in Iraq, while being part of the NATO forces in Afghansitan. No catastrophic event on french soil despite greater proximity to the "islamofascists" and a great number of islamofascist sympathizers on their soil.

 

Looks like police action, and tough response to the Taliban terrorists might be the way to go after all.

 

Though this is tongue in cheek, I do agree with redfish that europe is going to face some major issues in the next 10 years....

 

I was surprised Chirac didn't surrender during the riots.

[Ill Nuts]

Maybe they just hate you

[AtomicCEO]

H8's comments (and my rejoinder) were not intended to justify the military presence in Iraq, but to point out that there is no possibility for neutrality in today's world reality. We will all be targets on the IslamoFascist movement. I think being proactive improves our chances of avoiding another significant act on US soil. I also think Europe (outside the UK) faces serious problems for the next two decades, brought on by a "head-in-the-sand" response to increasing Islamic activism.

 

 

I think this point is flawed because Iraq was not IslamoFascist before we invaded. Saddam was not a fan of Al Qaeda.

 

If anything, removing Saddam from power allowed the IslamoFascists to elect themselves a government. IslamoFascism has a home in Iraq now because we created a vacuum for them to fill.

[H8tank]

Saddam was not a fan of Al Qaeda.

 

If anything, removing Saddam from power allowed the IslamoFascists to elect themselves a government. IslamoFascism has a home in Iraq now because we created a vacuum for them to fill.

 

 

All PURE LIES, BOLD FACED UTTER LIES.

[untateve]

All PURE LIES, BOLD FACED UTTER LIES.

 

 

 

He didn't use "bold face." He used regular huddle font.

[SuperBalla]

So is Chirac kicking ass then?

France's policies resulted in no 9/11, no casualties in Iraq, while being part of the NATO forces in Afghansitan. No catastrophic event on french soil despite greater proximity to the "islamofascists" and a great number of islamofascist sympathizers on their soil.

 

Screw France.

 

Aren't the French the same people that graffitti'd our WWII soldiers tombs with "come get your dead" Here

 

 

 

So what this boils down to is that "doing nothing" invites attack and "doing something" invites attack. Then it is clear that the only solution that will EVER remove the threat of islamic terrorism is erradication of the Muslim faith.

 

 

Can you reason with Cancer? Can you reason with a bullet? Can you reason with a rabid pitbull? Can you reason with a terrorist?

 

They've been attacking us for 30 years, they finally succeeded in killing enough of us at once at a time when we had an administration who would do something about it.

 

Retreat and peace are not anything the mooslims have EVER done the past thousand years.

 

btw, how is kosovo doing? rwanda? darfur?

 

 

 

We are going to have a long four years after Bush goes...get yer hard hats on and head for the bunkers.

[Clubfoothead]

I think this point is flawed because Iraq was not IslamoFascist before we invaded. Saddam was not a fan of Al Qaeda.

 

If anything, removing Saddam from power allowed the IslamoFascists to elect themselves a government. IslamoFascism has a home in Iraq now because we created a vacuum for them to fill.

 

 

ALL PURE TRUTHINESS, BOLD FACED UTTER TRUTHINESS.

[AtomicCEO]

Quick questions:

 

- Which country was Iraq's biggest enemy before we invaded?

 

- Which country is now the most successful supporter of insurgent terrorist groups in Iraq killing American troops?

 

Hint: They are the same country.

 

Follow up question: This is an improvement?

[Ursa Majoris]

Aren't the French the same people that graffitti'd our WWII soldiers tombs with "come get your dead" Here

 

 

That's a British War Graves Cemetery.

[skins]

Bush?

 

Islamofascists? Fascists?

 

Balla?

 

Awesome comedy.

[bushwacked]

Quick questions:

 

- Which country was Iraq's biggest enemy before we invaded?

 

- Which country is now the most successful supporter of insurgent terrorist groups in Iraq killing American troops?

 

Hint: They are the same country.

 

Follow up question: This is an improvement?

 

 

 

Can you reason with Cancer? Can you reason with a bullet? Can you reason with a rabid pitbull? Can you reason with a terrorist?