Originally posted by slimjimSurprisingly, I agree. This whole rotten mess has gone on long enough.
I believe that is the point. Our soldiers don't have any rights when captured by terrorists. The ones they have locked up right now should be tried by a military tribunal and if found guilty quickly escorted out back and hung. If they are innocent then send them back to their country of origin. I'm sure the bastards can't give any more intel since they have been locked up for the past 3 years. Either shoot the SOB's or let them go.
Originally posted by slimjimIn what way did the Spaniards back down?
Well much money did your "benevolant" country donate to the Tsunami victims or the Katrina victims for that matter arsehole? The so-called macho Spaniards did back down. Macho yeah right. Ellos Son Maricons.
Their government was changed at an election, and the new government withdrew the Spanish troops, as they had promised the elctorate.
Sounds like the will of the people triumphing. You may recall the concept of democracy?
Originally posted by slimjimSome of them are English, Kuwaiti, Australian, etc who happened to be in Pakistan/Afghanistan at the wrong time. Some may have been at training camps, others may have been simply travelling.
I believe they were turned in by fellow Afghan's who claimed they were Al-Quaeda or Taliban. Thats why they were released later when found innocent.
I don't see how it took up to 4 years to determine the reason why a person was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
D
2 edits
Originally posted by sasquatch672You, SQ, an “American-hater”!!??!! You “siding with the terrorists”!!??!! You “living in your theoretical world”!!??!!
Newdad, what's this sound remind you of?
wong wong wong wong...
No?
Ok, I'll tell ya. That's the sound of that single brain cell rattling around that empty skull of yours. I know you now. You're the kindred spirits of a couple of people you may not be acquainted with - STANG and Blindfaith101. STANG repeats himself over and over ...[text shortened]... up a civics textbook, and maybe a copy of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Sure makes me wonder what we’re going to hear about that left-wing liberal, American-hating, terrorist-lover John McCain! (Who could be the first Republican I vote for for President since Gerald Ford.) And think—Teddy Roosevelt must’ve been a closet communist! You just can’t tell anymore…
You know, I never served in the military. I “came of age,” so to speak, in the Vietnam era. I was generally opposed to the war, but I was not a protester (I was too busy working in a cannery and elsewhere trying to support my family). I feel no shame or regret for not having been in the service—but I give those who did and do serve the respect that I think is their due. (Oh, yeah, I’ve known one or two jerks who came back from Nam and told stories that proved they were either (1) insane after the experience, (2) insane to begin with, or (3) just loved to make up stories about atrocities. They were, by far, far, far, the exceptions. And I don’t think that their brothers-in-arms thought much of them either.)
I have never been treated with disrespect or disregard by a service-person because I was not in the military—not once, not ever. I have never been told that I had no right to an opinion, or that I was somehow less of a person because of that—not once, not ever. In turn, I would never think to call a Marine, like SQ, someone who “sides with terrorists.” Not only would that be unbelievably dumb—more importantly, it would deny them the respect and regard for their service that I think they deserve.
SQ, I’m surprised that your response was as moderated as it was.
Originally posted by RedmikeWell what about the money? You didn't answer that part of the question.
In what way did the Spaniards back down?
Their government was changed at an election, and the new government withdrew the Spanish troops, as they had promised the elctorate.
Sounds like the will of the people triumphing. You may recall the concept of democracy?
Originally posted by slimjimAlways a competition with you Texans isn't it?
Well what about the money? You didn't answer that part of the question.
Anyway to answer your question:
British government donated: $146m or $2.43 per taxpayer
u.s. government donated: $350m or $1.17 per taxpayer
Ireland government donated: $7m or $2 per taxpayer
Non governmental donations are hard to calculate, but the u.s. lead that by a long way.
D
Originally posted by RagnorakI believe I was asking the Scottish lad the question but thanks anyways.
Always a competition with you Texans isn't it?
Anyway to answer your question:
British government donated: $146m or $2.43 per taxpayer
u.s. government donated: $350m or $1.17 per taxpayer
Ireland government donated: $7m or $2 per taxpayer
Non governmental donations are hard to calculate, but the u.s. lead that by a long way.
D
Originally posted by RagnorakI'm fairly sure the US government gave more to the Katrina appeal.
Always a competition with you Texans isn't it?
Anyway to answer your question:
British government donated: $146m or $2.43 per taxpayer
u.s. government donated: $350m or $1.17 per taxpayer
Ireland government donated: $7m or $2 per taxpayer
Non governmental donations are hard to calculate, but the u.s. lead that by a long way.
D
Whereas the UK government pledged more to Pakistan (earthquake).
I know that the response to both these recent disasters has been comparably apathetic by the British public. Whether this is due to disaster fatigue or reservations about those two countries government policy is harder to gauge.
Shouldn't the left be outraged that CNN and the Washington Post (similar article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/01/AR2005110101644.html) are outing all of these secret operations? I thought that National Security was first and foremost in the minds of our friends on the left. How many people have now been endangered by our enemies now knowing this information?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Unlike the famous Ms. Plame, none of the agents in these prisons have ever appeared in Vanity Fair Magazine ...they're just trying to do their jobs... And here we have CNN and Wash Post spilling the beans.
Originally posted by slimjimI think other people have answered that for me.
Well what about the money? You didn't answer that part of the question.
Can you answer the point about the Spanish elections?
Should Spain not be able to make a democratic choice to withdraw their troops?
Or does democracy only apply if you do what the US wants?
Originally posted by newdad27So, do you reckon you have the right to scream when US citizens are picked up and held in secret locations by other nations?
god you are an idiot. you must be 12 yrs old. Do you really think these Al Queada were picked up for there profile? Further debate with you is futile. It's obvious you are blinded by ideology. One day maybe you will start "thinking".
Do you think that these secret (well obviously "not so secret" is a more appropriate term) locations which are used to contain people continually without charge is doing your cause more good or more harm?
Originally posted by newdad27What's wrong with supporting the terrorists?
you seem to be an american hater, someone who thinks america is wrong, evil, is to blame, etc. You go ahead believing the propaganda you hear and read about innocent people being held, you keep siding with the terrorists. we have brave men and woman dieing in a noble cause, but you side with all of these propagandist shouting "america is to blame". Any ...[text shortened]... in your theoretical world, one day you will wake up and realize the actual threat we are facing.
The media has indoctrinated you into believing one side is good and one side is bad? Do you really think that "reality" is a star wars-like Good and Dark situation?
Come now...
The word terrorist is already negative in meaning. Why don't you try to understand them? Why not peek over the fence and see "Why" they do what they do? Sure, you may still not agree with them, but you might see other oppertunities and methods to solve the current situation you find so repulsive.
Call them "freedom fighters" for a day and see what they're trying to free themselves of...
Call them "rebels" for a day and see what they're rebelling against...
Call them "crusaders" for a day and see what they're crusading about...
Form an opinion which goes one step further than: "They're evil."
Because they're just as evil as you and your government...it all depends how you look at it.
Many "terrorists" were actually quite good:
- The French resistance during WWII were terrorists.
- George Washington was the first man ever labelled a terrorist
- Nelson Mandela was a terrorist
Most "terrorist" situations which have been won, have been won not by combat, but by negotiation. Talking.
- PLO
- IRA
- ANC
Terrorist situations which have been resolved through violence are far and few between, and quite generally, it's the "Organised armies" which have lost.
Hear me well now. If you want to beat terrorism you have to do two things:
1. Draw them into the system. Which means talking to them and getting them to be politically involved.
2. Win over the hearts of their core support.
And on both accounts the US's policies are doing exactly the opposite.
Why would that be then? Follow the money.
The US government doesn't want the terrorist situation resolved. It's the only logical explanation for their actions. And why not?
Follow the money.
Do that, open your eyes and I'm sure you'll be horrified enough to understand that your simplistic good/bad views on the situations are forced upon you to keep the circus going.