Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. Devastating.....:(

Devastating.....:(

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
comquestion
94 Posts 17 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • R Red Stateler

    Michel Prévost wrote:

    Hmmmm but it is the result of US war monging on Iraq.

    Yes, it's the result of it. But, disregarding the numerous devastating terrorist attacks, what's going on in Iraq is a wonderful thing. It scares Iran, so they want to destroy it. How could you advocate in their favor? That's just being on the side of evil.

    Michel Prévost wrote:

    If there is no justification for a country to use a WMD, there is no justification for any country for using one, whatever the reason.

    No? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall[^] Mortality estimates were as high as 800,000 on the American side and 10 million on the Japanese side. Compared that to the hundred and whatever thousand people killed by the nuclear. Granted that's the most pessimistic figure, the most optimistic placed the minimum number of deaths about 100,000 higher than the bombs produced. These figures don't include the fact that the entire country would have been pretty much destroyed. If you think that the fat man and little boy should not have been dropped, then I think that you might be a sociopath.

    Michel Prévost wrote:

    :rolleyes:

    WOOOOOOO!!! AMERICAAAAAAAA!!! YEEEAAAAHHHH!!!! YEEEHAAWWWWW!!!

    L Offline
    L Offline
    Le centriste
    wrote on last edited by
    #15

    espeir wrote:

    How could you advocate in their favor?

    You are completely misinterpreting me. I will stop arguing with you, as you last line of your last post tells me a lot about your mind set. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

    R 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • L Le centriste

      espeir wrote:

      How could you advocate in their favor?

      You are completely misinterpreting me. I will stop arguing with you, as you last line of your last post tells me a lot about your mind set. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

      R Offline
      R Offline
      Red Stateler
      wrote on last edited by
      #16

      YEEEEEEEEHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!! YIPEEEEEKYAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! LET'S KILL US SOME O' DEM CIVILIANSSSSSS!!!!!! YEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!

      J 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • E Eytukan

        Can't the US make a better armour?:doh:, can't imagine if these sharpnels strike our body.:omg:, why not bush consider a pull out now? otherwise it will be too late :(. but i wish somehow, the americans pay back Iran someway. WTF:(^


        VuNic

        L Offline
        L Offline
        Le centriste
        wrote on last edited by
        #17

        ... whatever the US criticizes about other doing evil things, you will always find something similar the US did in the past. That is it. I am not endorsing Iran's act, I despise terrorists. The problem with espeir that he is so blinded by propaganda that for a given action, if the US do it, good, the others, evil. That was the point I was trying to make. You have to be objective, to have a clear mind when looking at what is happening. That is it. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

        R 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • E Eytukan

          Can't the US make a better armour?:doh:, can't imagine if these sharpnels strike our body.:omg:, why not bush consider a pull out now? otherwise it will be too late :(. but i wish somehow, the americans pay back Iran someway. WTF:(^


          VuNic

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #18

          It sounds like they're using the core of a RPG9, it uses the same copper disc system. British tanks use a charged mesh so when the copper hits there is an arc which causes a massive dischage and disrupts the molten copper plug. The tigress is here :-D

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • L Le centriste

            ... whatever the US criticizes about other doing evil things, you will always find something similar the US did in the past. That is it. I am not endorsing Iran's act, I despise terrorists. The problem with espeir that he is so blinded by propaganda that for a given action, if the US do it, good, the others, evil. That was the point I was trying to make. You have to be objective, to have a clear mind when looking at what is happening. That is it. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

            R Offline
            R Offline
            Red Stateler
            wrote on last edited by
            #19

            I'm not stupid. I know America has done bad things. However, the motivations behind virtually all American actions are noble. We have fought numerous wars in the name of bringing justice and democracy to citizens around the world. I challenge you to name one war within the past 100 years that America engaged in for profit. We have never kept the countries we have invaded. We have always rebuilt them to conditions better than before. And we have always left them much better off. The only exception I can think of is Vietnam, where America just kind of bungled and withdrew without making a truly positive difference (but not because we didn't try). I just find it terribly hypocritical that much of the world (Europe, I'm looking your way) has the nerve to criticise America for its noble (albeit challenging) position in the middle east when many of them owe their very existence to similar causes taken up by America.

            L J 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • R Red Stateler

              I'm not stupid. I know America has done bad things. However, the motivations behind virtually all American actions are noble. We have fought numerous wars in the name of bringing justice and democracy to citizens around the world. I challenge you to name one war within the past 100 years that America engaged in for profit. We have never kept the countries we have invaded. We have always rebuilt them to conditions better than before. And we have always left them much better off. The only exception I can think of is Vietnam, where America just kind of bungled and withdrew without making a truly positive difference (but not because we didn't try). I just find it terribly hypocritical that much of the world (Europe, I'm looking your way) has the nerve to criticise America for its noble (albeit challenging) position in the middle east when many of them owe their very existence to similar causes taken up by America.

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Le centriste
              wrote on last edited by
              #20

              espeir wrote:

              I just find it terribly hypocritical that much of the world (Europe, I'm looking your way) has the nerve to criticise America for its noble (albeit challenging) position in the middle east when many of them owe their very existence to similar causes taken up by America.

              You are right, my excuses. Everyone know that the good America invaded Iraq becasue Saddam Hussein had WMDs had Al-Qaeda links oppressed the Iraqi people. I am sure God will punish eupropeans, because God blesses America. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson -- modified at 14:29 Tuesday 7th March, 2006

              R K B 3 Replies Last reply
              0
              • L Le centriste

                espeir wrote:

                I just find it terribly hypocritical that much of the world (Europe, I'm looking your way) has the nerve to criticise America for its noble (albeit challenging) position in the middle east when many of them owe their very existence to similar causes taken up by America.

                You are right, my excuses. Everyone know that the good America invaded Iraq becasue Saddam Hussein had WMDs had Al-Qaeda links oppressed the Iraqi people. I am sure God will punish eupropeans, because God blesses America. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson -- modified at 14:29 Tuesday 7th March, 2006

                R Offline
                R Offline
                Red Stateler
                wrote on last edited by
                #21

                America invaded Iraq because it posed a threat to the entire world (which turned out to be less than expected). So America decided to go against the popular and self-centered opinions of the rest of the world and commit itself to ousting Saddam Hussein and bringing liberty to Iraq (and Afghanistan). Where are America's ignoble deeds? We spent hundreds of billions of dollars to take over a couple of countried only so we can give them back better than before. What do we get out of it? Regional stability. That's it. Why do we do it? Because America is the best country in the entire world. It's that simple. We're better than Canada. Better than Europe. Better than everyone. We rule.

                L B V 3 Replies Last reply
                0
                • R Red Stateler

                  America invaded Iraq because it posed a threat to the entire world (which turned out to be less than expected). So America decided to go against the popular and self-centered opinions of the rest of the world and commit itself to ousting Saddam Hussein and bringing liberty to Iraq (and Afghanistan). Where are America's ignoble deeds? We spent hundreds of billions of dollars to take over a couple of countried only so we can give them back better than before. What do we get out of it? Regional stability. That's it. Why do we do it? Because America is the best country in the entire world. It's that simple. We're better than Canada. Better than Europe. Better than everyone. We rule.

                  L Offline
                  L Offline
                  Le centriste
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #22

                  Bravo. I am so proud of America, I wish I was american. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                  R D T 3 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • L Le centriste

                    Bravo. I am so proud of America, I wish I was american. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                    R Offline
                    R Offline
                    Red Stateler
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #23

                    You can't be. It's the home of the brave. YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!

                    J 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • R Red Stateler

                      I'm not stupid. I know America has done bad things. However, the motivations behind virtually all American actions are noble. We have fought numerous wars in the name of bringing justice and democracy to citizens around the world. I challenge you to name one war within the past 100 years that America engaged in for profit. We have never kept the countries we have invaded. We have always rebuilt them to conditions better than before. And we have always left them much better off. The only exception I can think of is Vietnam, where America just kind of bungled and withdrew without making a truly positive difference (but not because we didn't try). I just find it terribly hypocritical that much of the world (Europe, I'm looking your way) has the nerve to criticise America for its noble (albeit challenging) position in the middle east when many of them owe their very existence to similar causes taken up by America.

                      J Offline
                      J Offline
                      jasontg
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #24

                      espeir wrote:

                      motivations behind virtually all American actions are noble

                      The motivations behind the people who burned "witches" at the stake were noble as well. Noble != Smart -J


                      Think of a computer program. Somewhere, there is one key instruction, and everything else is just functions calling themselves, or brackets billowing out endlessly through an infinite address space. What happens when the brackets collapse? Where's the final 'end if'? Is any of this making sense? -Ford Prefect

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • R Red Stateler

                        America invaded Iraq because it posed a threat to the entire world (which turned out to be less than expected). So America decided to go against the popular and self-centered opinions of the rest of the world and commit itself to ousting Saddam Hussein and bringing liberty to Iraq (and Afghanistan). Where are America's ignoble deeds? We spent hundreds of billions of dollars to take over a couple of countried only so we can give them back better than before. What do we get out of it? Regional stability. That's it. Why do we do it? Because America is the best country in the entire world. It's that simple. We're better than Canada. Better than Europe. Better than everyone. We rule.

                        B Offline
                        B Offline
                        Bob Flynn
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #25

                        Give it a rest. This guy is just an idiot getting a kick out of getting a rise out of you. You can not argue with logic that says: The US deserves to be attacked by Iran (or any other disgruntle world citizens) because we attacked Iraq. I could write more, but it is just not worth it.

                        L 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • B Bob Flynn

                          Give it a rest. This guy is just an idiot getting a kick out of getting a rise out of you. You can not argue with logic that says: The US deserves to be attacked by Iran (or any other disgruntle world citizens) because we attacked Iraq. I could write more, but it is just not worth it.

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          Le centriste
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #26

                          Another idiot misinterpret what I say. Typical. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                          B 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • L Le centriste

                            espeir wrote:

                            I just find it terribly hypocritical that much of the world (Europe, I'm looking your way) has the nerve to criticise America for its noble (albeit challenging) position in the middle east when many of them owe their very existence to similar causes taken up by America.

                            You are right, my excuses. Everyone know that the good America invaded Iraq becasue Saddam Hussein had WMDs had Al-Qaeda links oppressed the Iraqi people. I am sure God will punish eupropeans, because God blesses America. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson -- modified at 14:29 Tuesday 7th March, 2006

                            K Offline
                            K Offline
                            kgaddy
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #27

                            Michel Prévost wrote:

                            had Al-Qaeda links

                            "The CIA has confirmed, in interviews with detainees and informants it finds highly credible, that al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, met with Iraqi intelligence in Baghdad in 1992 and 1998. More disturbing, according to an administration official familiar with briefings the CIA has given President Bush, the Agency has "irrefutable evidence" that the Iraqi regime paid Zawahiri $300,000 in 1998, around the time his Islamic Jihad was merging with al Qaeda. "It's a lock," says this source." Saddam's al Qaeda Connection

                            Michel Prévost wrote:

                            had WMDs

                            What were those things Saddam shelled the Kurds with? My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"

                            L V 2 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • L Le centriste

                              espeir wrote:

                              I just find it terribly hypocritical that much of the world (Europe, I'm looking your way) has the nerve to criticise America for its noble (albeit challenging) position in the middle east when many of them owe their very existence to similar causes taken up by America.

                              You are right, my excuses. Everyone know that the good America invaded Iraq becasue Saddam Hussein had WMDs had Al-Qaeda links oppressed the Iraqi people. I am sure God will punish eupropeans, because God blesses America. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson -- modified at 14:29 Tuesday 7th March, 2006

                              B Offline
                              B Offline
                              Bob Flynn
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #28

                              So you REALLY believe that Saddam never had WMD? You believe that he would not have provided them to terrorist to attack the US?

                              L 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • K kgaddy

                                Michel Prévost wrote:

                                had Al-Qaeda links

                                "The CIA has confirmed, in interviews with detainees and informants it finds highly credible, that al Qaeda's Number 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, met with Iraqi intelligence in Baghdad in 1992 and 1998. More disturbing, according to an administration official familiar with briefings the CIA has given President Bush, the Agency has "irrefutable evidence" that the Iraqi regime paid Zawahiri $300,000 in 1998, around the time his Islamic Jihad was merging with al Qaeda. "It's a lock," says this source." Saddam's al Qaeda Connection

                                Michel Prévost wrote:

                                had WMDs

                                What were those things Saddam shelled the Kurds with? My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"

                                L Offline
                                L Offline
                                Le centriste
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #29

                                I am not CIA specialist, nor I know whether Al-Qaeda had ties or not. But didn't Rumsfeld meet with Saddam Hussein not so long ago? Does this make rumsfeld have links with Al-Qaeda? Didn't Ossama Ben Laden used to work for the CIA? Anyway, this was not the point of my post. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                                K 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • B Bob Flynn

                                  So you REALLY believe that Saddam never had WMD? You believe that he would not have provided them to terrorist to attack the US?

                                  L Offline
                                  L Offline
                                  Le centriste
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #30

                                  I never said that. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                                  K 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • L Le centriste

                                    I am not CIA specialist, nor I know whether Al-Qaeda had ties or not. But didn't Rumsfeld meet with Saddam Hussein not so long ago? Does this make rumsfeld have links with Al-Qaeda? Didn't Ossama Ben Laden used to work for the CIA? Anyway, this was not the point of my post. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                                    K Offline
                                    K Offline
                                    kgaddy
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #31

                                    Michel Prévost wrote:

                                    I am not CIA specialist

                                    Well you sure acted like one when you were making the assumption in your other post.

                                    Michel Prévost wrote:

                                    But didn't Rumsfeld meet with Saddam Hussein not so long ago?

                                    No, it was long ago. Try December 20, 1983. 23 years ago. The world was a diffrent place then.

                                    Michel Prévost wrote:

                                    Does this make rumsfeld have links with Al-Qaeda?

                                    What??? Did you read the article? Saddam gave money to Al-Qaeda.

                                    Michel Prévost wrote:

                                    Didn't Ossama Ben Laden used to work for the CIA?

                                    No, he was given arms to defeat the Soviets. You are making big streaches with your assumptions. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"

                                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • L Le centriste

                                      I never said that. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                                      K Offline
                                      K Offline
                                      kgaddy
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #32

                                      What were you saying here? Saddam Hussein had WMDs My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • K kgaddy

                                        Michel Prévost wrote:

                                        I am not CIA specialist

                                        Well you sure acted like one when you were making the assumption in your other post.

                                        Michel Prévost wrote:

                                        But didn't Rumsfeld meet with Saddam Hussein not so long ago?

                                        No, it was long ago. Try December 20, 1983. 23 years ago. The world was a diffrent place then.

                                        Michel Prévost wrote:

                                        Does this make rumsfeld have links with Al-Qaeda?

                                        What??? Did you read the article? Saddam gave money to Al-Qaeda.

                                        Michel Prévost wrote:

                                        Didn't Ossama Ben Laden used to work for the CIA?

                                        No, he was given arms to defeat the Soviets. You are making big streaches with your assumptions. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"

                                        L Offline
                                        L Offline
                                        Le centriste
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #33

                                        kgaddy wrote:

                                        What??? Did you read the article? Saddam gave money to Al-Qaeda.

                                        I could probably found numerous articles stating the reverse. But I am tired of this pointless discussion, as it was not the subject of this thread. Read the post "My point is...". -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • L Le centriste

                                          Another idiot misinterpret what I say. Typical. -------- "I say no to drugs, but they don't listen." - Marilyn Manson

                                          B Offline
                                          B Offline
                                          Bob Flynn
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #34

                                          No, I read this entire thread. There has been no misinterpretation. Just you trying to get a rise out of anyone that will acknowledge you. So I will now go back to ignoring your lame comments.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups