bombs going off around london.

[Vertigo 0]

Like somone said earlier...Bush has WMD too. And as long as he has them, no countries are safe.

[alf13 0]

Like somone said earlier...Bush has WMD too. And as long as he has them, no countries are safe.

Really? God..... I hope he Nukes france then..... :roll:

[Smasharoo 0]

The do not have the powerOf course they do. They've gotten essentially everything they wabted since 9-11 completely unchecked.I imagine BinLaden is watching CNN and laughing his ass off.

[goldenteemaster 0]

Like somone said earlier...Bush has WMD too. And as long as he has them, no countries are safe.

:roll: Having WMD doesn't mean they'll actually use them so arguing that USA, China, UK, etc. have them and no one invaded them is pointless. At this point in time, any country seeking to actually use their WMD would need to get UN approval. I know that the US has ignored the UN's wishes before but this isn't a scenario that they could do so without global retribution. Without a UN mandate or a direct WMD attack on them, the US will never use them. The same could not be said for Saddam.Saddam actually used WMD on his own people. :shock: Saddam needed removal, US was stupid for using terrorism as an excuse to do so.

[Guest Anonymous]

Hopefully President Bush will see that this came from Iran and we will bomb the hell out of that nation. USA!!!! USA!!! USA!!!!

[Smasharoo 0]

Saddam actually used WMD on his own peopleYeah 10 years before we decided to invade.If you support the war in Iraq just say you think it's a good idea geopoliticaly to secure out financial intrests in the reigon and buffer Isreal against attack from it's Arab neighbors.Don't make up bullshit rationalizations for it. There was no compelling reason to invade Iraq in terms of a threat to the US or anyone else. This adminstration wanted to do it so they did. That's it. Maybe it'll serve out intrests, maybe not. We'll know in 50 years. Regardless there was no need to do it. At all.

[Smasharoo 0]

Hopefully President Bush will see that this came from Iran and we will bomb the hell out of that nation. USA!!!! USA!!! USA!!!!Nah, see, they're actualy working on nuclear weapons.We just give countrie slike that whatever they want, because it's hard to deal with them.Like North Korea or Pakistan.

[Royal_Tour 0]

The do not have the powerOf course they do. They've gotten essentially everything they wabted since 9-11 completely unchecked.I imagine BinLaden is watching CNN and laughing his ass off.

Your comment makes no sense.You cant just copy*paste a section of my sentence, and expect a proper debate, or rebuttle.I said they do not have the power to take over and run an entire country,they do however have the power to cause shit., and thats all your saying., is it not?

[Smasharoo 0]

I said they do not have the power to take over and run an entire country, Sudan, Yemen, Somolia...most of Equitorial Africa really.

[Royal_Tour 0]

I said they do not have the power to take over and run an entire country, Sudan, Yemen, Somolia...most of Equitorial Africa really.

no permanent national government; transitional, parliamentary national government Political parties and leaders: nonePolitical pressure groups and leaders: numerous clan and subclan factions are currently vying for powerLegislative branch: unicameral National Assembly note: fledgling parliament; a 275-member Transitional Federal Government replaced the Transitional National Government created in 2000; the new parliament consists of 61 seats assigned to each of four large clan groups (Darod, Digil-Mirifle, Dir, and Hawiye) with the remaining 31 seats divided between minority clansanswer is still a negative

[Ju And Da 0]

Ive just got home, i was at St Pancras Station (Which is a branch off station of Kings Cross which was hit) This morning at approximatley 9am Exactly when the bombs started and Boy did i know about it, im still in a fcuking mess about it all... i was late for a meeting and if i had been on time then i would have been on a tube From Kings cross to Leicster Square at the time.I feel like a very humble and lucky guy right now.

[KDawgCometh 2]

Ive just got home, i was at St Pancras Station (Which is a branch off station of Kings Cross which was hit) This morning at approximatley 9am Exactly when the bombs started and Boy did i know about it, im still in a fcuking mess about it all... i was late for a meeting and if i had been on time then i would have been on a tube From Kings cross to Leicster Square at the time.I feel like a very humble and lucky guy right now.

glad to hear it my man.

[rapperwilly 0]

It's somethin about human nature and revenge that I can't seem to comprehend. We hate being embarrassed, beat up, attacked, and now look wats happenin. It was inevitable. They tried to deliver a message like they did to Madrid. U supported the US and now we do this. I don't think it will work this time and I fear even worse things happenin. The Brits gonna back the US to the core, they owe em after WWII. Blair now has a reason to beef shit up. The timing was terribly well calculated. Its gonna be a vicious circle and I don't see the end soon. The world is a brutal place... too bad negotiations and the UN don't work anymore

[Ju And Da 0]

Ive just got home, i was at St Pancras Station (Which is a branch off station of Kings Cross which was hit) This morning at approximatley 9am Exactly when the bombs started and Boy did i know about it, im still in a fcuking mess about it all... i was late for a meeting and if i had been on time then i would have been on a tube From Kings cross to Leicster Square at the time.I feel like a very humble and lucky guy right now.

glad to hear it my man.

Thanks.

[KDawgCometh 2]

It's somethin about human nature and revenge that I can't seem to comprehend. We hate being embarrassed, beat up, attacked, and now look wats happenin. It was inevitable. They tried to deliver a message like they did to Madrid. U supported the US and now we do this. I don't think it will work this time and I fear even worse things happenin. The Brits gonna back the US to the core, they owe em after WWII. Blair now has a reason to beef censored up. The timing was terribly well calculated. Its gonna be a vicious circle and I don't see the end soon. The world is a brutal place... too bad negotiations and the UN don't work anymore

looks like someone is a little off on their history. GBR has been an ally since the war of 1812.

[Royal_Tour 0]

It's somethin about human nature and revenge that I can't seem to comprehend. We hate being embarrassed, beat up, attacked, and now look wats happenin. It was inevitable. They tried to deliver a message like they did to Madrid. U supported the US and now we do this. I don't think it will work this time and I fear even worse things happenin. The Brits gonna back the US to the core, they owe em after WWII. Blair now has a reason to beef censored up. The timing was terribly well calculated. Its gonna be a vicious circle and I don't see the end soon. The world is a brutal place... too bad negotiations and the UN don't work anymore

looks like someone is a little off on their history. GBR has been an ally since the war of 1812.

Ooo.. bet you guys didnt know Canada is the country to have had their troops in the longest out of any other country during the wars

[Landon_McFly 0]

Ooo.. bet you guys didnt know Canada is the country to have had their troops in the longest out of any other country during the warsI can believe that. If I was born in Canada I'd probably do anything to get the hell outta there... including joining the military :wink:

[NickTheKid 0]

What're you lookin at, butthead?

[Keeper 0]

Actually, the taliban wasn't a terrorist group. By definition a Terrorist group is a militant organization that lacks the means to fight a conventional war, and uses subversive hit-and-run attacks, instead. They lack the means to fight even a guerrilla type of war, so they choose their targets wisely (usually a political symbol I.E. the WTC, and the King David hotel in Jerusalem). By definition, a terrorist group can't take control of a country, and that's never really their goal. Terrorists are political actors, which lack any means other than violence to carry out their agendas (revolution and insurrection are slightly out of their grasp because of limitations)."lack the means to fight a guerilla type of war"... "uses hit-and-run attacks instead"Sounds like Guerilla warfare..."By definition, a terrorist group can't take control of a country, and that's never really their goal." Why, are you a member of one, does that give you "insight" to their real motives?

I really didn't think I'd need to clarify, but I will anyway. A terrorist group will never actually battle the standing army of another country. A guerrilla group will, but they'll choose their spots. And as for how I know about the goals of terrorists. No, I am not a terrorist. But I have read extensively on the subject. Now, I'm going to ask that you keep out of discussions on subjects that you know nothing about. If you want to know more about terrorism, go to the library and get a book, Inside Terrorism by Bruce Hoffman is a good place to start. Or you could just act like a fool on message boards on the internet.

No offense intended sir, so please keep your barbs hidden. My point is that the semantics in this situation are nominal. If a terrorist organization had enough members, for which they recruit and train, they WOULD be a guerilla group. Guerilla groups can also be politically motivated to overthrow certain governments. And there is no reasonable belief that a terrorist org. wouldn't start a "ground war" with those tactics if they had the resources, ie...money. This is a good discussion and most of the posters are very intelligent people with reasonable if arguable opinions. I'm stating mine. Call the groups what you will, but the fact remains, IMO, if the resources were available, they would be identical.I don't agree with the stated reasons as to why we went into Iraq, but, that doesn't change the hideousness of Saddam and his lackadaisical attitude towards terrorism or contempt of western civilization.Good day to you sir.

keeper,, remember the terrorists inside the opera house in russia a couple years ago??terrorists groups do things, and acts of violence to be heard and to prove themselves,The do not have the power, nor could they even attempt to take over a country.

I do. This discussion began by me stating that Saddam actually deterring terrorism was ludicrous, which Sum claimed. I gave the analogy that Al Qaeda had not attacked or overthrown Saddam, although clearly it has been shown he and Bin Laden did not share the same views. Which turned into Sum stating that a terrorist group does not overthrow govt's, Guerrillas do.My point was more of a theoretical one, and I will include the use of common sense. Your points of this "group of persons" being qualified as a 1) Terrorist organization or 2) Guerrilla group is finances. The point of "terrorists" is to harass and harang an enemy by acts of detruction and terror, but they use military tactics to accomplish this. No one, except military, terrorists, or guerrillas use explosives or weaponry for harm of another human being. The fact that you are qualifying a "description" of this group is purely semantic. If by your explanation, a terrorist group has enough loyal members willing to engage in warfare and has the finances to wage that war, they then "evolve" into a Guerilla group, thereby changing their "classification?" Do you not think that the group that took over The Russian opera house would overthrow the local govt. in order to instill their beliefs if given the opportunity??? That is my point, they are all one-in-the-same, if given the same opportunity.Definitions from Dictionary.com:guer·ril·la or gue·ril·la n. A member of an irregular, usually indigenous military or paramilitary unit operating in small bands in occupied territory to harass and undermine the enemy, as by surprise raids. ter·ror·ist n. One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.ter·ror·ism n. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.From those definitions and IMO, a little common sense, they are identical.Do not South American drug lords use terrorism of local governments and officials in order to operate their facilities in order to make money? The drug lords have a guerrilla army backing them, it's all about the money.Man, religion can be an ugly thing, doesn't have to be, but sure CAN be.btw, love Ontario, beautiful place...Peace and goodwill toward all the familys currently in need.

[rapperwilly 0]

I know that the americans have been allies of the brits for along time but WWII is definitely where without the US the British woulda been decimated. Canadians are allies with the States but we don't support some of the shit. Britain and United States are beyond allies there is definitely some historical bond and I'm guessing WWII has a big role in this, that has led to the Brits participating in Iraq and now being attacked because of that.

[KDawgCometh 2]

I know that the americans have been allies of the brits for along time but WWII is definitely where without the US the British woulda been decimated. Canadians are allies with the States but we don't support some of the censored. Britain and United States are beyond allies there is definitely some historical bond and I'm guessing WWII has a big role in this, that has led to the Brits participating in Iraq and now being attacked because of that.

britian would've held on without the help of the USA. There has been no successful invasion of england since 1066 ad. I can go into a bunch of stuff, but I won't. Trust me when I say that Hitler woulld've failed to invade england with the plan he had in place. England would've helped out america in this situation with or without our help in WWII

[alf13 0]

I know that the americans have been allies of the brits for along time but WWII is definitely where without the US the British woulda been decimated. Canadians are allies with the States but we don't support some of the censored. Britain and United States are beyond allies there is definitely some historical bond and I'm guessing WWII has a big role in this, that has led to the Brits participating in Iraq and now being attacked because of that.

britian would've held on without the help of the USA. There has been no successful invasion of england since 1066 ad. I can go into a bunch of stuff, but I won't. Trust me when I say that Hitler woulld've failed to invade england with the plan he had in place. England would've helped out america in this situation with or without our help in WWII

Brush up on Military History....Kdawg...The Nazi's had 15 panzer divisions set for an invasion......and not to mention what Hitler would have committed had the decision come down to jump the channel.If the Nazi's don't take the Island...they at least kill hundreds of thousands of Brits.....Yeah...England would have held on without the US..... :roll:I think it is safe to say that the American involvement saved MANY MANY british lives.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Ooo.. bet you guys didnt know Canada is the country to have had their troops in the longest out of any other country during the warsI can believe that. If I was born in Canada I'd probably do anything to get the hell outta there... including joining the military :wink:

Hey.. Nothing agianst you.. and your post was witty., this does not have anythng to do with your post.But your avatar is disgusting., I'm sorry, i'm not a animal rights activist, but comon man. , thats just revolting. i really dont think its funny.

[Royal_Tour 0]

(EDITED A LOT OF STUFF)btw' date=' love Ontario' date=' beautiful place...Peace and goodwill toward all the familys currently in need.[/quote'']Thank you. I love it here also.I agree with everything you posted, however, if guerilla groups came to North Amercia (Canada or US specifically) and decided to start bombing, they would be classified as terrorists.guerilla warfare occurs in the same country as an attempt to overthrow that government

[KDawgCometh 2]

I know that the americans have been allies of the brits for along time but WWII is definitely where without the US the British woulda been decimated. Canadians are allies with the States but we don't support some of the censored. Britain and United States are beyond allies there is definitely some historical bond and I'm guessing WWII has a big role in this, that has led to the Brits participating in Iraq and now being attacked because of that.

britian would've held on without the help of the USA. There has been no successful invasion of england since 1066 ad. I can go into a bunch of stuff, but I won't. Trust me when I say that Hitler woulld've failed to invade england with the plan he had in place. England would've helped out america in this situation with or without our help in WWII

Brush up on Military History....Kdawg...The censored's had 15 panzer divisions set for an invasion......and not to mention what Hitler would have committed had the decision come down to jump the channel.If the censored's don't take the Island...they at least kill hundreds of thousands of Brits.....Yeah...England would have held on without the US..... :roll:I think it is safe to say that the American involvement saved MANY MANY british lives.

I don't need to brush up on military history as I wrote one of my thesees on 20th century warfare, predominantly WWI and WWII and the failiures of those wars. I had shown how Hitler proved the Schlieffen Plan could work if obeyed to its exact word(maybe you've heard of that plan). Obviously you didn't read my post, I said that Britian would've held on, you didn't prove how they wouldn't have. Look to sucessfully invade britian if you are Nazi Germany you need to go about it in a systematic nature, which Hitler didn't do as he resoorted to the blitz(which btw happened before 12/7/41). FOr it to have worked he would've needed to take out the RAF first. He bombed many of teh fields but was not through enough in his attack. THe Luftwaffe needed to make sure to take out around 90% of the RAF if they were to then take on teh Royal Navy. THey did not do this. So when the battle of britian happened and Hitler attacked the Royal Navy, he still had to deal with a strong enough RAF along with dealing with the best navy in the world at the time. THen if, and this was a big if, he was able to take out the Royal Navy, he'd then still have to deal with picking a good spot for invasion of southern england. He couldn't go the route that William of Normandy did in 1066 as Portsmouth and Southampton had been built in that region since. THey at the time were industrial strongholds and had plenty of armed forces, to also deal with some of the hills that do not translate well for tank warfare on the way to get to London. Even if London would be taken, you'd still have to somehow get over to Birmingham and the other parts of the west counrty to really have control of england, since the midlands has and always will be, the industrial capitial of Britian.so what is your reply to that.