My take on the mosque killing incident

hasan said:
eh? do you watch aljazeera? who told you such bs?
that's entirely not true.

actually, all the reports about hostages are taken form aljazeera. they are THE ONES who report it first. everyone else takes it from them.
Click to expand...

They're the ones inside the places watching the beheadings and murders. They're not recieving tapes, they're taping it. But, I guess its all good in journalism. Best to be the next big headline instead of stopping an evil act, right?
 
Farrowlesparrow, with all due to respect -- while he might acquire some change, he's acting just like the rest of us.
 
Farrowlesparrow said:
Eg. Your posts are basically just there to get people annoyed. Stop it.
Click to expand...

that lat one, yes, but what others?
 
Im somewhat confused. Is it me or there are Americans here that believe that your troops have never killed innocent civilians or children?
Are you closing your eyes to the news or is it that your tv never airs images or footage of inocents killed?
Im really confused cause Ive seen realy ****ed up shit in the news...
 
XBORGZORZ said:
Im somewhat confused. Is it me or there are Americans here that believe that your troops have never killed innocent civilians or children?
Are you closing your eyes to the news or is it that your tv never airs images or footage of inocents killed?
Im really confused cause Ive seen realy ****ed up shit in the news...
Click to expand...

I don't believe our troops purposefully kill innocent civilians and children. People die in war, its inevitable. If there is somebody out there wearing the uniform and purposefully killing innocent civilians and children, they don't deserve the uniform, and they don't deserve to have a life. Death sentence would be a good start.
 
And in your oppinion, is it worth it? This war, the deaths of many innocents, all for what?
Why do you think it is happening? For WMDs? The liberation of the people? What is your take on this?
 
well, lets see, how many more mass graves would have been du had saddam and his kids jad stayed in power?

add that on to their own personal prisons,

and nation wide corruption

now that the US is in there, yes one or two marines go nuts and shoot some people, and some people get caught in crossfire, in 10 years the amount that died will be less than that saddam would have made sure of.

btw the original reason for going into the war was because iraq was being a bitch about the weapon inspectors, and that fact that the UN is soo corupt these days, its easy to see why it did nothing. plus Iraq had awhole other bunch of stuff happening, but heres my conspiracy theory:

we invade iraq, then all the terrorists from Iran\Saudi Arabia come into one place, so we invade one, fight 2. so now that all the t's are fighting in iraq, we have a controlled setting where we could kill them all. notice there havent been any terrorost attacks on US soil since 911 or the war?
 
Eg. said:
well, lets see, how many more mass graves would have been du had saddam and his kids jad stayed in power?

add that on to their own personal prisons,

and nation wide corruption

now that the US is in there, yes one or two marines go nuts and shoot some people, and some people get caught in crossfire, in 10 years the amount that died will be less than that saddam would have made sure of.

btw the original reason for going into the war was because iraq was being a bitch about the weapon inspectors, and that fact that the UN is soo corupt these days, its easy to see why it did nothing. plus Iraq had awhole other bunch of stuff happening, but heres my conspiracy theory:

we invade iraq, then all the terrorists from Iran\Saudi Arabia come into one place, so we invade one, fight 2. so now that all the t's are fighting in iraq, we have a controlled setting where we could kill them all. notice there havent been any terrorost attacks on US soil since 911 or the war?
Click to expand...


So what you are saying is that you wanted to liberate the people of Iraq and were concerned about WMDs right?
 
All that and a whole list of things the Un was to wussy enough to do
 
Eg. said:
All that and a whole list of things the Un was to wussy enough to do
Click to expand...

the UN has no permanent army, it's army is made up of member states who choose whether or not to commit troops to a particular hotspot

so can I see you're list? I have a whole whack of things the US was too "wussy" to do like stop 8 million rwandans from being slaughtered ..oh I forgot, no oil in rwanda
 
CptStern said:
so can I see you're list? I have a whole whack of things the US was too "wussy" to do like stop 8 million rwandans from being slaughtered ..oh I forgot, no oil in rwanda
Click to expand...


Hey, stupid...it was 800,000 dead. NOT 8 million. Get your facts straight and read about the causes of the genocide or shut up.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/


BTW, almost 5,000 posts since May 2004 !? Man, you seriously need a girlfriend.

:D
 
Yeeee Hawwww.

I think his wife would have something to say if he went out and got a "lady freind".
 
XBORGZORZ said:
And in your oppinion, is it worth it? This war, the deaths of many innocents, all for what?
Why do you think it is happening? For WMDs? The liberation of the people? What is your take on this?
Click to expand...

No offense, but why don't you look to your own government? Seems like your government is fond of abusing immigrants - particulary the Albanians. Oh yeah, about how about those pesky Macedonians? Still "relocating" them?
 
CptStern said:
the UN has no permanent army, it's army is made up of member states who choose whether or not to commit troops to a particular hotspot

so can I see you're list? I have a whole whack of things the US was too "wussy" to do like stop 8 million rwandans from being slaughtered ..oh I forgot, no oil in rwanda
Click to expand...


and teh UN left because they couldnt hold their own against some tribesmen, and i believe u said it was canadians there?

clinton was being a bitch about that somali thing and didnt want to deal with anything anymore
 
HateCrime said:
Hey, stupid...it was 800,000 dead. NOT 8 million. Get your facts straight and read about the causes of the genocide or shut up.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/evil/


BTW, almost 5,000 posts since May 2004 !? Man, you seriously need a girlfriend.

:D
Click to expand...

hey newcomer, stfu and stop flaming a-hole ..it was a simple mistake

btw I'm married with a child so stfu
 
Eg. said:
and teh UN left because they couldnt hold their own against some tribesmen, and i believe u said it was canadians there?

clinton was being a bitch about that somali thing and didnt want to deal with anything anymore
Click to expand...

stated for emphisis
 
that's not a coherent post ..I wont even attempt to decipher the meaning behind what you said
 
ill state it again because u seem to stay away from the issues

what you claim as UN invovlement in Rwanda was in fact a retreat. shortly after arriving in africa, the Canadian-UN troops left, because they came under attck from the rivaling tribes, the Tutus and the something or other. Anyway, they were sent there on a "peacekeeping" mission, but soon left after bullets were being fired. it took 500,000 dead africans for the Un forces to leave, and the civil war continued, because the UN never looked back(aka Canadian forces)

you seem to have this unncany disease where you seem to lack a comprehension of english when there is a contrasting opinion to yours
 
wrong, Canadian Romeo Dallaire led a small UN force into rwanda (made up of mostly from Bangladesh and Ghana and a few belgians) to mediate a peace accord between the Hutus and the Tutsi which failed when the Hutu president was assisinated. All hell broke loose as each side called for the genocide of the other. Dallaire had 2600 men, far too small a number to stop the Hutus and the Tutsi from slaughtering each other.

here, educate yourself
 
Dallaire argued that with 5,000 well-equipped soldiers and a free hand to fight Hutu power, he could bring the genocide to a rapid halt.

The U.N. turned him down.

man.. what wankers. the UN... worthless organization.
 
gh0st said:
Dallaire argued that with 5,000 well-equipped soldiers and a free hand to fight Hutu power, he could bring the genocide to a rapid halt.

The U.N. turned him down.

man.. what wankers. the UN... worthless organization.
Click to expand...


did you forget this part?

"with 5,000 well-equipped soldiers and a free hand to fight Hutu power, he could bring the genocide to a rapid halt.
The U.N. turned him down. He asked the U.S. to block the Hutu radio transmissions. The Clinton administration refused to do even that. Gun-shy after a humiliating retreat from Somalia, Washington saw nothing to gain from another intervention in Africa, and the Defense Department, according to a memo, assessed the cost of jamming the Hutu hate broadcasts at $8,500 per flight-hour."
a little further down


"Even as the already desperate situation worsened, Washington called for a complete withdrawal of peacekeepers. On April 21, after international pressure, the U.S. agreed to a limited force and supported a Security Council resolution slashing the force to 270 peacekeepers. U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright accurately described the tiny force as enough "to show the will of the international community."
 
well stern my hypothesis was correct. even when the UN is overwhemlingly at fault (ordering withdrawl, UN resolution slashing the force to 270 peacekeeprs), you still take the time to blast US policies. after somalia, i doubt we were all that interested in helping another african country. if romeo wanted more troops why didnt he just ask canada to dedicate some more? oh thats right, he wouldent have gotten any. after all, didnt you say that it was the countries themselves that choose to donate troops to these causes? madline albright is a disgrace, no one is questioning that. somehow i doubt colin powell or condoleeza rice would say something that ignorant.
 
CptStern said:
Dallaire had 2600 men, far too small a number to stop the Hutus and the Tutsi from slaughtering each other.
Click to expand...

Funny, I find it hard to listen AND believe a Canadian "general" (no offense to any Canadians in here) ) can speak with authority about military issues, i.e, leading men in combat, tactics, planning a battle.

2,600 men and he couldn't stop a ONE SIDED slaughter? What about air-power? What about setting up a safe-zone? Puhleeze! The American Marines could've done it with 500 troops - if Clinton wasn't such a puzzy.

CptStern, you MUST a Canadian. :angel:
 
Oh, dear.

I don't even think hatecrime's post needs a dignigified answer to discredit his post. I think he just did that job good enough himself.
 
HateCrime said:
Funny, I find it hard to listen AND believe a Canadian "general" (no offense to any Canadians in here) ) can speak with authority about military issues, i.e, leading men in combat, tactics, planning a battle.

2,600 men and he couldn't stop a ONE SIDED slaughter? What about air-power? What about setting up a safe-zone? Puhleeze! The American Marines could've done it with 500 troops - if Clinton wasn't such a puzzy.

CptStern, you MUST a Canadian. :angel:
Click to expand...

and you must be an idiot ..what's an american doing in norway? drawing up invasion plans? :LOL:

edit: hehe Ben ..sorry too late :)
 
*passes high five over the intenernet #2"

OH SNAP!
 
CptStern said:
here read this it's from the NY times

Inquiry Faults U.S. Inaction in '94 Rwanda Genocide
Click to expand...
BBC seems to think it was the UN's failure
The shortcomings of the UN are numerous.

Two notable ones were its failure to stop the genocide in Rwanda, and its inability to stop brutal ethnic cleansing in Bosnia.
Click to expand...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1595625.stm ahh bosnia. who took care of that?

Its our fault right stern, not the fault of those doing the killing. We all know how the UN reacts when we go intervening in other countries. Oh wait, when we actually DO intervene somewhere its for oil or its a holy crusade. Youre full of shit stern. Maybe its just that damn imperial tendency we have. Since the UN couldent make a decision in this case, i bet the US wanted another unilateral intervention in africa. Great idea, i wonder what would have happened then, because i KNOW you love unilateral use of our military. UN authorities never once condemned the "tribal" actions of the country. no, they wouldent refer to them as "genocide" god forbid that would merit a response.
 
It was a shared blame in Rwanda, if the UN relies on an international army it needs cooperation from all member states.
 
CptStern said:
hey newcomer, stfu and stop flaming a-hole ..it was a simple mistake

btw I'm married with a child so stfu
Click to expand...

Married with a child? Almost 5,000 posts since May 2004!?

Question: Whose child is it? :thumbs:
 
^Ben said:
It was a shared blame in Rwanda, if the UN relies on an international army it needs cooperation from all member states.
Click to expand...
oh no, stern seems to think it relies on an "international" (read: US led) army. after all, we do give the least amount of peacekeepers per capita, right stern? i wonder why canada with all its peacekeepers didnt do anything. damn, and bangladesh could have saved the day too. oh and stern dont go calling people new comers, your not exactly an old timer yourself. you are, however, the most arrogant person on these forums.
 
Im not exaclty impressed with the British respone either.

Im not impressed with the whole affair but im not gonna point fingers at soley 1 member state.
 
^Ben said:
Im not exaclty impressed with the British respone either.

Im not impressed with the whole affair but im not gonna point fingers at soley 1 member state.
Click to expand...
a voice of wisdom from the left! i must be dreaming.
 
gh0st said:
a voice of wisdom from the left? i must be dreaming.
Click to expand...

Dont fall for the trap. He is just dawing you in so he can blame the US for cancer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
HL2.NET HORROR SLAP
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
To Those That Stand, Those That Fell
Replies
6
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Lizardizzle
2019: The year of Half-Life SFX videos
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ennui
Ennui
TechnoHippyChic
If you post it, they will come...
2
Replies
63
Views
6K
TechnoHippyChic
TechnoHippyChic
Back
Top