My horror trip to lebanon.

Sirelrohir said:
here to save the motherfuckin day!

that scene where the puppet puked... dude, i was crying i was laughin so hard.
Click to expand...
And when they say it all slow after the guy leaves, LOLOLOL
 
Kotsu said:
Dude, Hezbollah aren't even the government. They're an organization funded by Syria and Iran to fight. Funded, trained, and supplied by them. Two nations that are on the UN's Hit List for being terrorist pieces of shit that threaten the balance of the world. At this rate, World War Three will occur and it's strictly because of the middle east. People are fighting over land, oil, belief's, and stupid shit. Y'know what I think? America, Russia, and China levels the entire fricking land. From there, they divide it into three and share the oil. Gas prices down, little more land, and no war. Why? Sometimes it is necessary to commit and evil to create a better good. Evil: Killing the unhappy militants in Middle East who will do nothing but war over material and metaphysical possessions. Good: Prevents this war from escalating into what very well could turn into the apocolypse. Then again, my argument here is cold and heartless. But the shit you've spewed smells like stupidity and coming from an completely opinionative standpoint. Simple fact is, there is no war going on there. There was war there in the 80's and the 90's. There will always be war there. War in the middle east dates back over thousands (Notice, that's over 2000) of years. Good people live there, bad people live there. Unfortunately, with children posing as civilians and then attacking troops; it's hard to care who doesn't make the cut of who lives and dies. Simple fact is, we protect our own. Whether we're right or wrong, this is where our country has gone and if we can not support that then we can not be unified. The lack of unity show's displacement to other countries; where there is displacement there is weakness. So, flex the muscle and wipe out a few middle eastern countries. I'll be disgusted by it because I wish it wasn't necessary; but simple fact is that it is necessary. Though we can't sort the good from the bad; let god sort them out later.
You sir.. are an idiot. So you want to wipe out a 'few' countries to protect your own? Your own what? You are basically taking the stand of countries like Iran and Syria that want to wipe out Israel to protect their own. As for the lack of unity, well thank God people have a concious and know right from wrong. The root of all the problems in the middle east is the Palestinean-Israeli conflict. You want to fix things over there, start with that, b/c a military solution will never work.

Edit: how about instead of taking out a 'few' countries, you just move the Israelis? You talk about necassary evils, well, wouldnt you want those evils to impact the smallest amount of people possible?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Palestinian-Israeli conflict won't be a conflict if they're all dead. Iran has nuclear warfare and funds terrorism, as does Syria. Kill them too. Simple fact is, when the civilians become the enemies; why keep your troops there? Pull out and fire bomb the hell out of them. Turn the country into one big sheet of glass (As heat temperment upon sand turns sand to glass, hence the "joke"). Though, it's the truth. We have OUR citizens dying for the freedom of Iraqies. There's Iraqi women and children killing our troops because they're over there trying to take care of them? There's attempted genocide over there. There's people dying for religious beliefs. There's people dying for their personal views. There's people dying for being in the wrong place, wrong time. For living their lives. Simple fact is, the evil over in that country is beyond control. Keep your hippy-peace-loving fag bullshit outside of war, cuz it aint going to work.
 
Kotsu said:
Palestinian-Israeli conflict won't be a conflict if they're all dead. Iran has nuclear warfare and funds terrorism, as does Syria. Kill them too. Simple fact is, when the civilians become the enemies; why keep your troops there? Pull out and fire bomb the hell out of them. Turn the country into one big sheet of glass (As heat temperment upon sand turns sand to glass, hence the "joke"). Though, it's the truth. We have OUR citizens dying for the freedom of Iraqies. There's Iraqi women and children killing our troops because they're over there trying to take care of them? There's attempted genocide over there. There's people dying for religious beliefs. There's people dying for their personal views. There's people dying for being in the wrong place, wrong time. For living their lives. Simple fact is, the evil over in that country is beyond control. Keep your hippy-peace-loving fag bullshit outside of war, cuz it aint going to work.
Click to expand...

anyone notice when crazy ass right wing fudementalists lose an arguement they resort to 'hippy-peace-loving fag bullshit'. this guy apparently codones genocide. that right there loses all credibility. I think kotsu hates america.

As for the palestinran-israeli conflict, well, b4 we kill em all, why dont we enforce some UN resolutions, then see what happens? hmmm,or is adhering to international resolutions too 'hippy' for u?

I have an idea, how about we get the fuck out iraq? we invaded them FOR NO REASON. And all we have done is destabalize the region. Do u know for sure that iran has nukes? are u as sure about it as they were sure about iraq? everything i have read has stated that they have power plants, which is actually condoned in the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. How about u post a link (from a reliable source) about all of their nukes?

edit: our soldiers went to iraq for non-existant weapons of mass destruction. dont try to change the reason we went their. only after they found none (which is exactly what weapons inpectors said we would find) did ouir government say it was to 'liberate' iraqis. notice now, its to fight terrorists. This despite the fact that the old iraqi regiem was also fighting islamic fundamentalists.
 
Last edited:
give up sire ... they wont take anything till they lived here ..
 
Glad you're back safely, stryder.

Can we get a mod to move this to the burning circle please? It doesn't belong here.

And as far as I'm concerned, there is no excuse for attacking civillians. It is inappropriate to attack a civillian airport in a hunt for missing soldiers.
 
Sirelrohir said:
anyone notice when crazy ass right wing fudementalists lose an arguement they resort to 'hippy-peace-loving fag bullshit'. this guy apparently codones genocide. that right there loses all credibility. I think kotsu hates america.

As for the palestinran-israeli conflict, well, b4 we kill em all, why dont we enforce some UN resolutions, then see what happens? hmmm,or is adhering to international resolutions too 'hippy' for u?

I have an idea, how about we get the fuck out iraq? we invaded them FOR NO REASON. And all we have done is destabalize the region. Do u know for sure that iran has nukes? are u as sure about it as they were sure about iraq? everything i have read has stated that they have power plants, which is actually condoned in the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. How about u post a link (from a reliable source) about all of their nukes?

edit: our soldiers went to iraq for non-existant weapons of mass destruction. dont try to change the reason we went their. only after they found none (which is exactly what weapons inpectors said we would find) did ouir government say it was to 'liberate' iraqis. notice now, its to fight terrorists. This despite the fact that the old iraqi regiem was also fighting islamic fundamentalists.
Click to expand...

lol, really? I hate america? I love this country. Why do you think I support it's war efforts? I support the troops. "this guy apparently codones genocide." Definition of the word from dictionary.com: The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. Destroying the national group? I'm saying kill them all. I don't care about ethnicity, political stand point, race, anything like that. Indiscriminately kill them all. What defines a national group? Kill all Iraqi's? Iranians? As per country? Nah, they're who takes the cannon fodder for killing the real enemies. The ones who committ crimes against the masses of the world, the terrorists. That's a bad definition though, otherwise we had a genocide of Nazi's in WWII. We targetted their German / Nazi nationality. So personally I would rule that definition out. If you wouldn't, then yes. I would condone the evil of genocide to protect the sanctity that is our world.

See, democrat's like you don't seem to get it. Pull out the troops, make us look weak and insignificant. Make the other countries who went into Iraq with us feel as though they wasted their efforts by standing with us. Their efforts, lives or their troops, supplies, time, money, investments. See, democrats by nature are stupid. That's how it is. Well, stupid and poor. Let's not forget that one.

Iran has the capabilities of nukes. Shit, getting rid of the possibility of Iran nuking us just helps us focus on another should-be target: North Korea. But let's stick with the middle east. After all, since you're very anti-war now that we're in a position of no-turning back, it's important to help you realize that. Destabilize their nation you said. We would de-stabilize the entire UN credibility and the speculation of the USA being one of, if not the, strongest powers in the world. The people in the middle east by political, religional, and personal beliefs prey upon those who are weaker then them. Hence, we're just asking for more problems aren't we? Hell, let's do it your way. When they come over to the North American continent and start fighting us here, I'm going to shoot them with a gun. Are you going to cry to them about peace? Or are you going to fight for your land and freedom? We're in Iraq fighting for their freedom right now. Fighting to stabilize the country. What you're suggesting is to leave them to fight a civil war. Us pulling out now may be another catalyst to the escalation of another world war. So let's think this through, big guy. Do we really want to pull out now? It's more than just flexing muscle. It's showing that we WILL act against you if you can't treat your civilians as humans. Shit, even Fidel Castro has behaived himself. Korea, not so much so but until we fix things with China in that area we're leaving them alone. But the middle eastern people HAVE hit us on our own land. Disrupted our economy, which is war in a different fashion. You throw words like "idiot" at me, and I've respected your opinion thus far to an extent. Though, in complete honesty I have to say that you're opinions so far have given me a good chuckle. Can I prove Iran has nuke's? No. Can I do anything about it individually? No. As a world, can we act to protect the world for us now, and the children of the future? Yes. That's what we need to do. Nuclear explosions do great damage not just to the target area, but also to the atmosphere and ecological world overall. So why wouldn't we try to prevent that from happening again? That's what brings us to this debate. Kill the perpitrators of the future to ensure the world lasts that much longer; or let the timer of this worlds life-clock continue to count down. Which path would you take? One path leads to a bit of evil to a great good, and the other path leads to the next World War. If you turn your head, it doesn't just go away. Remember world war 2? Yeah, we turned our head for a while and the Nazi's just went further and further. Eventually, we had to unify the allied forces and fight back. Guess what? World was at peace again. Repeating that mistake again is just stupid. Then again, that's what democrats are here for.

And before you say we're just trying to take control of other countries and land, look back to the past. We took over Europe in WWII and straight gave all the land back to the rightful countries. So, with that argument shot... what do you have left? Not much, but hell give it a shot. I'm bored at work for another 5 hours.

----Editted out some things that I found to be more offensive than argumentive.----
 
Last edited:
Kotsu said:
And before you say we're just trying to take control of other countries and land, look back to the past. We took over Europe in WWII and straight gave all the land back to the rightful countries.
Click to expand...

When did that happen? O.o I must have slept through that part in every history lesson attended and documentary watched.
 
Kotsu said:
lol, really? I hate america? I love this country. Why do you think I support it's war efforts? I support the troops. "this guy apparently codones genocide." Definition of the word from dictionary.com: The systematic and planned extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. Destroying the national group? I'm saying kill them all. I don't care about ethnicity, political stand point, race, anything like that. Indiscriminately kill them all. What defines a national group? Kill all Iraqi's? Iranians? As per country? Nah, they're who takes the cannon fodder for killing the real enemies. The ones who committ crimes against the masses of the world, the terrorists. That's a bad definition though, otherwise we had a genocide of Nazi's in WWII. We targetted their German / Nazi nationality. So personally I would rule that definition out. If you wouldn't, then yes. I would condone the evil of genocide to protect the sanctity that is our world.

See, democrat's like you don't seem to get it. Pull out the troops, make us look weak and insignificant. Make the other countries who went into Iraq with us feel as though they wasted their efforts by standing with us. Their efforts, lives or their troops, supplies, time, money, investments. See, democrats by nature are stupid. That's how it is. Well, stupid and poor. Let's not forget that one.

Iran has the capabilities of nukes. Shit, getting rid of the possibility of Iran nuking us just helps us focus on another should-be target: North Korea. But let's stick with the middle east. After all, since you're very anti-war now that we're in a position of no-turning back, it's important to help you realize that. Destabilize their nation you said. We would de-stabilize the entire UN credibility and the speculation of the USA being one of, if not the, strongest powers in the world. The people in the middle east by political, religional, and personal beliefs prey upon those who are weaker then them. Hence, we're just asking for more problems aren't we? Hell, let's do it your way. When they come over to the North American continent and start fighting us here, I'm going to shoot them with a gun. Are you going to cry to them about peace? Or are you going to fight for your land and freedom? We're in Iraq fighting for their freedom right now. Fighting to stabilize the country. What you're suggesting is to leave them to fight a civil war. Us pulling out now may be another catalyst to the escalation of another world war. So let's think this through, big guy. Do we really want to pull out now? It's more than just flexing muscle. It's showing that we WILL act against you if you can't treat your civilians as humans. Shit, even Fidel Castro has behaived himself. Korea, not so much so but until we fix things with China in that area we're leaving them alone. But the middle eastern people HAVE hit us on our own land. Disrupted our economy, which is war in a different fashion. You throw words like "idiot" at me, and I've respected your opinion thus far to an extent. Though, in complete honesty I have to say that you're opinions so far have given me a good chuckle. Can I prove Iran has nuke's? No. Can I do anything about it individually? No. As a world, can we act to protect the world for us now, and the children of the future? Yes. That's what we need to do. Nuclear explosions do great damage not just to the target area, but also to the atmosphere and ecological world overall. So why wouldn't we try to prevent that from happening again? That's what brings us to this debate. Kill the perpitrators of the future to ensure the world lasts that much longer; or let the timer of this worlds life-clock continue to count down. Which path would you take? One path leads to a bit of evil to a great good, and the other path leads to the next World War. If you turn your head, it doesn't just go away. Remember world war 2? Yeah, we turned our head for a while and the Nazi's just went further and further. Eventually, we had to unify the allied forces and fight back. Guess what? World was at peace again. Repeating that mistake again is just stupid. Then again, that's what democrats are here for.

And before you say we're just trying to take control of other countries and land, look back to the past. We took over Europe in WWII and straight gave all the land back to the rightful countries. So, with that argument shot... what do you have left? Not much, but hell give it a shot. I'm bored at work for another 5 hours.

----Editted out some things that I found to be more offensive than argumentive.----
Click to expand...

dude... lol.. i really have nothing more to say to you, but if thats what you really believe then you just dont get it.
 
Athilorian said:
When did that happen? O.o I must have slept through that part in every history lesson attended and documentary watched.
Click to expand...

D-Day. We took over France and gave it back. We also expanded out into Germany and Italy as well as other countries in Europe; all of which the land was returned to the countries after the incident was put to rest and returned to peace. Not defined that way in class, but can basically be referenced that way.
 
Athilorian said:
When did that happen? O.o I must have slept through that part in every history lesson attended and documentary watched.
Click to expand...

I think he's trying to claim that America gave independance to all the countries that were already independant pre WWII. I think his statement would of held more ground if he had said WWI. Even then it's naive to think that most of Europe cared what America thought.
 
Kotsu said:
D-Day. We took over France and gave it back. We also expanded out into Germany and Italy as well as other countries in Europe; all of which the land was returned to the countries after the incident was put to rest and returned to peace. Not defined that way in class, but can basically be referenced that way.
Click to expand...

You fail at history. D-Day didn't give power back to France. It took a while to gain control of the whole country from the Germans. Effective power wasn't given back till after VE Day and even then they relied on the Allies a hell of a lot.
 
The US didn't "take over France" the allies liberated it from the German forces. The trouble with referencing it in such terms is that people grow up to believe history transpired differently to reality. The US was part of a greater whole that fought to restore peace on several continents, not to take over countries as done by sovereign powers in the past.
 
Athilorian said:
The US didn't "take over France" the allies liberated it from the German forces. The trouble with referencing it in such terms is that people grow up to believe history transpired differently to reality. The US was part of a greater whole that fought to restore peace on several continents, not to take over countries as done by sovereign powers in the past.
Click to expand...

Ath you're forgetting though, remember U-571 it was the Americans that cracked the enigma code. It certainly wasn't us at Bletchley (sp?) Park.:rtfm:
 
Dayner said:
that dont sound how it work

the woman who got rapes wont face death , only the the rapper well die if the ppl know what have he done

also the woman must bring 4 man support her claim , they can be family or friend or even the Doctor
Click to expand...


You need to read that law a little more carefully. If a woman who is married claims to be raped and can't supply the 4 male witnesses, she can be accused of adultery and it is punishable by death. I've read tons of material on women's rights regarding this law, and none of it from anything as shaky as wikipedia. I know how that law works, and I don't need to live there to know it.
 
Zyndara said:
You need to read that law a little more carefully. If a woman who is married claims to be raped and can't supply the 4 male witnesses, she can be accused of adultery and it is punishable by death. I've read tons of material on women's rights regarding this law, and none of it from anything as shaky as wikipedia. I know how that law works, and I don't need to live there to know it.
Click to expand...

You believe everything you read? I would trust someone who has had first hand experience over anything someone has read.
 
Sirelrohir said:
You believe everything you read? I would trust someone who has had first hand experience over anything someone has read.
Click to expand...

LOL No I don't believe everything I read. What I do believe are the published documents of respected legal experts over some joe average male who lives there. I would hope that would be the case for most people, but apparently not. Personally, I choose to be informed and not accept the word of one random person. And I highly doubt that any man living there has had first hand experience as acutely as the women there whom the law targets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top