Proof that extremests hate anything who isn't them

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
France did fight in enduring freedom but they also felt that the fundamentalist in Iraq were no problem, the truth is a viper is a viper whether it is brown or green.

The "fundamentalist in Iraq" were not a problem since there were no fundamentalist in Iraq, the ones that today lauch terrorist attacks daily have come from the outside.

See below.

Quote:
Other countries fought in enduring freedom and are not at as much risk as France is at this moment. Wherever a fundamentalists finds a target he will attack it.

They recently found half a ton of Ammonium nitrate in the UK. Alerts in Belgium, Germany (who still holds Afghanistan, the country we attacked under the "Operation Enduring Freedom"-mandate) Scandinavia, etc. The Civil Defense is notched up all over Europe, Asia Pacific and America.

Quote:
If they were really attacking france for enduring freedom then why did they wait this long? Why did they wait almost 3 years.

They are waiting even longer, it seems, since there has not been any attack on France yet.

8 and a half years passed between the first attack on WTC and the second. Why? I dunno. You?

Quote:
The fact is the fundamentalists wanted to stir up trouble because one of their empires in Iraq fell

Iraq under Saddam Hussein was not fundamentalistic! Everybody knows that, it is, so to speak, common knowledge!

It was a secular and non-religious state. Tariq Aziz was a christian, for crying out loud! The chance for it to become fundamentalistic, however, has grown considerably lately.

Why · Joined: 06 Dec 2003 Posts: 51

"They are waiting even longer, it seems, since there has not been any attack on France yet.

8 and a half years passed between the first attack on WTC and the second. Why? I dunno. You?"

Galmin you do know and I already know that answer. All the major and wide spread terror operations have been happening since 2001 and are linked to Osama Bin Laden. That's clear. He is firing up all fundamentalist and even non-fundamentalist in their hatred against anything western.

The First attack that happened was by Shake Obdel Rocmon(not sure if its spelled right). Galmin you can not compare the terrorist dangers of 1993 to that of 2001-2004. That sonofabitch Bin Laden is stirring up everyone and he is doing his best to make this a major war against innocent civilians.

Simply put...why did they wait 8 years? because Shake Rocmon was put down and for that brief time we mellowed out the threat until 8 years when Bin Laden really made his danger known by one terror attack after the other.(although bin laden was known for murdering before that.)

The fact is, is that fundamentalist are pulling out the stops because of the war in Iraq. They feel that they must beef up their murdering. Just look what happened to the civilians in Spain. They were attacked mainly because they were westerners who helped us in Iraq and they were attacked by...guess who...the fundamentalist cells and not by Iraqi's.

If you don't consider Iraq one of their empires, they see us kicking ass and now they are worried about their own hides.

But I have a personal question, not to be rude, but why do you oppose US action so much. Do feel that the fundamentalists are not a threat to you or to your neighbors? Do you feel that as long as they try to get us and Israel that you are high and dry? If a terror attack happens where you live or your nation of origin will you continue to bash us or see the threat that is Bin Laden and that the rabbit hole goes even deeper than you can imagine?

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
Galmin you do know and I already know that answer. All the major and wide spread terror operations have been happening since 2001 and are linked to Osama Bin Laden.

And? I have never said anything remotely different.

Quote:
The First attack that happened was by Shake Obdel Rocmon(not sure if its spelled right). Galmin you can not compare the terrorist dangers of 1993 to that of 2001-2004. That sonofabitch Bin Laden is stirring up everyone and he is doing his best to make this a major war against innocent civilians.

I don't compare the dangers from 1993 with the ones from 2001. All I did was setting your question why they would wait almost three whole years with an attack on France in perspective with that the two attacks on the WTC had eight years in between.

Quote:
The fact is, is that fundamentalist are pulling out the stops because of the war in Iraq. They feel that they must beef up their murdering. Just look what happened to the civilians in Spain. They were attacked mainly because they were westerners who helped us in Iraq and they were attacked by...guess who...the fundamentalist cells and not by Iraqi's.

You know there are a lot of fundamentalist muslims around in the western world, should we invade the countries where they live? Bomb the crap out of them? Maybe topple their government, throw some soldiers and cabdrivers into camp X-ray? UK first?

Quote:
If you don't consider Iraq one of their empires, they see us kicking ass and now they are worried about their own hides

The "fundamentalist" that are perpetrating terror acts in Iraq have come over the border. They are not likely to be Iraqis.

Quote:
But I have a personal question, not to be rude, but why do you oppose US action so much. Do feel that the fundamentalists are not a threat to you or to your neighbors?

I do not oppose the US action as such, though I vehemently oppose the way the war on Iraq was being sold and executed. I oppose how, still after a YEAR, we effectively have an occupationforce sitting on the country it invaded.

I do support war as the very last means of diplomacy. This support of mine takes for granted that the UN had voted for a war and a had set deadline that had come and gone. It also takes for granted that the work the weaponinspectors had done would have been fruitless. It even takes for granted that the evidence presented by Mr Powell had not been, point by point, knocked down like the strawman it was. It takes for granted that no nation runs the UN over and take action on their own.

The Bush admin moans about how noone is helping with troops in Iraq and cannot understand that since the invasion (according to International Law, well they probably do not know the first thing about it); they are the occupationforce and responsible for order, security, water, electricity, etc. Anything that happens is the responsibility of the willing occupiers. It's in their hands and as long as they want to be at the helm and distribute contracts without having a write out /offer sequence that is fine by me. Through that they are, however, on their own.

---

You use the term fundamentalist rather freely, do you know that its origin comes from a denomination coined in 1920 that describes Christians that takes the Bible a tad too litterary?

It seems you type fundamentalism when you actually mean terrorism.

Quote:
Do you feel that as long as they try to get us and Israel that you are high and dry? If a terror attack happens where you live or your nation of origin will you continue to bash us or see the threat that is Bin Laden and that the rabbit hole goes even deeper than you can imagine?

I am supporting the War On Terror, aka Operation Enduring Freedom 100%. It wasn't I who told fairytales about Saddam Hussein and WMD before the job in Afghanistan was finished so we lost focus for a year (and counting) on the real threat we all set out to get.

Why · Joined: 06 Dec 2003 Posts: 51

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Galmin you do know and I already know that answer. All the major and wide spread terror operations have been happening since 2001 and are linked to Osama Bin Laden.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

your Quote:

"And? I have never said anything remotely different."

Galmin before you comment, read the whole thing.

Your original question was:

"They are waiting even longer, it seems, since there has not been any attack on France yet.

8 and a half years passed between the first attack on WTC and the second. Why? I dunno. You?"

The reason why 8 years passed is because they had different terrorist leaders. One leader was more murderous and sneakier than the other. That's why there was an 8 year delay, because we took one out and then the muslim terrorists took up another murderer as their guide.

Now my other statement is why did they wait 3 years to threaten France. The reason why is because they saw us defeat a Muslim power in the mideast and now they want to get back at us by trying to threaten anyone who is western. You see a terrorist sees any attack against a muslim nation as westerners trying to take them over, which is bullshit. In other words terrorist are will always be scum bags who want to kill western powers if they support the US or not. Like I said Enduring Freedom bloodied their noses at first and Iraqi freedom made them feel like they had to go all out and hit anything western.

But never mind that, you hit another nerve ending. Now this what I can't beleive Europeans buy and do all the time. You originally said:

"I oppose how, still after a YEAR, we effectively have an occupation force sitting on the country it invaded."

Galmin I know your not stupid. I know you saw what has been going on in Iraq. Its on the news everyday. Its on the net, in the paper. Everytime we try to make order, loyalists come in and destroy that order. We put up power lines, the loyalist sabotage it. We try to put in reconstruction, the loyalist kill our contractors. We send in troops to keep the peace on the street(rioting and looting are all over), the loyalist attack our troops. You oppose this occupation force so much yet you want freedom for the Iraqi's, how do you suppose that if we leave, the loyalist won't cause a problem. Basically tell me what you think will happen if we leave right now and go home? What do you think will happen? Will Iraq suddenly turn into the garden of Eden? Will the Loyalist and Saddam hating Iraqi's shake hands and rebuild without aid. If you believe that and tell me that you honestly do, I will finally only then begin to understand you.

Another thing I wonder what sort of news you get of Iraq. Is it the slant on the anti-american. I think it is. If the country you live in only gives you anti-american slanted news then i suggest you read an american version of it or if you don't like us that much then you can go to the BBC.com and find your stuff there.

Because just admit that all you hear on the news is that America is wrong for keeping the peace there. That we are doing a bad job. That we are an imperial occupation force. And that's mostly all you hear. But can you say that you truly hear the whole story?

European policy has gotten so naive to the point that when they see us go in and then when it gets tough, they say pull out and let them deal with it and it will all balance out. So what good happens? If it is because you care so much for our soldiers then I apologize to you, but judging from European opinion, I kind of doubt it.

Don't call me a chickenhawk or warmonger. Our troops are already there and why not support them and what they are doing instead of making them miserable and doubting what they are doing is good or right. They are already as miserable as it is, so why make it worse by calling them occupation forces who don't do the right thing? When we finally do pull out; fine say Bring our boys home all you want but until then what else can I do but say Godbless our troops or we love you?

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
The reason why 8 years passed is because they had different terrorist leaders. One leader was more murderous and sneakier than the other. That's why there was an 8 year delay, because we took one out and then the muslim terrorists took up another murderer as their guide.

Al-Qaida was established around 1988 by the Saudi militant Osama bin Laden.

I don't compare the dangers from 1993 with the ones from 2001. All I did was setting your question why they would wait almost three whole years with an attack on France in perspective with that the two attacks on the WTC had eight years in between.

OK? Can we move on now?

Quote:
You oppose this occupation force so much yet you want freedom for the Iraqi's, how do you suppose that if we leave, the loyalist won't cause a problem. Basically tell me what you think will happen if we leave right now and go home? What do you think will happen? Will Iraq suddenly turn into the garden of Eden? Will the Loyalist and Saddam hating Iraqi's shake hands and rebuild without aid. If you believe that and tell me that you honestly do, I will finally only then begin to understand you.

Getting out now would be the most stupid thing to do.

Getting much more troops in to resolve the matter swifter should be the top priority.

This could be done in two ways:

1, The occupationforce send more troops in and remain the occupiers. This is not going to happen.

2, An International Community, extremely experienced in nationbuilding at the helm, take the mission over. through this the mission is provided legitimacy for the first time and the International Community can charge every memberstate to provide everything needed. Including much more troops.

This is not going to happen, because one coalitionpartner will not have it.

See? It wouldn't just have to be the "coalition of the willing" on their own.

Quote:
Another thing I wonder what sort of news you get of Iraq. Is it the slant on the anti-american. I think it is. If the country you live in only gives you anti-american slanted news then i suggest you read an american version of it or if you don't like us that much then you can go to the BBC.com and find your stuff there.

I watch CNN every day. I got FOX (Fair and Balanced) BBC CNBC etc. As you see, all anti-american newsoutlets.

Quote:
European policy has gotten so naive to the point that when they see us go in and then when it gets tough, they say pull out and let them deal with it and it will all balance out.

Yup. That's why German troops still are in Afghanistan, in spite of the fact that Osama Bin Laden called out for Jihad on all western occupiers on Islamic ground. This he did in 1996.

Bloody Yellow Euros.

Quote:
Don't call me a chickenhawk or warmonger. Our troops are already there and why not support them and what they are doing instead of making them miserable and doubting what they are doing is good or right.

I support the troops. Thinking that support of the troops means supporting every idiotic political policy possible and shut up about it already, shows some serious logical flaws.

Quote:
They are already as miserable as it is, so why make it worse by calling them occupation forces who don't do the right thing?

1, Right now there is an occupation of Iraq. Effectively they are the occupationforce. That is the correct denomination. Why should I call them anything else?

2, The troops don't do the right thing? I never said that.

Quote:
When we finally do pull out; fine say Bring our boys home all you want but until then what else can I do but say Godbless our troops or we love you?

This is fine by me. You have to understand that critique against a policy that put the troops in the situation they are (on their own, without help from the international community) is not criticising the troops!

Occupiers are responsible for order, security, water, electricity, etc. That is a juridical fact. Stating that is not criticising the troops.

When I voice my opinion about how we lost focus on the hunt for Osama for a year, I am not criticising the troops.

Why · Joined: 06 Dec 2003 Posts: 51

Quote:
I don't compare the dangers from 1993 with the ones from 2001. All I did was setting your question why they would wait almost three whole years with an attack on France in perspective with that the two attacks on the WTC had eight years in between.

Yes but when did he start to attack America in full force. In the 2000s right. The beast was born in the 80s but did his damage recently in 2001.

Quote:
Getting out now would be the most stupid thing to do.

Ok see this is my complaint against all the American bashers here. Why do you have your troops there America? but please don't pull out. :dunno

What's wrong with that picture. Now you also said an International Community? International COMMUNITY?? wait a minute is this the same International Community of countries who left us out in the cold when Iraqi freedom first began? Does this include Turkey, Russia, France, Canada, Germany and the other Arab nations who gave the most friction? Or are do they include more civilian contractors? Remember what happened to our contractors that were there for rebuilding. Look what happened to those boys. They were mutilated. You think Iraqi's will accept them anymore than us?

Quote:
Yup. That's why German troops still are in Afghanistan, in spite of the fact that Osama Bin Laden called out for Jihad on all western occupiers on Islamic ground. This he did in 1996.

Yup that's why so many lovely Germans are still protesting US action in Iraq even to this day. Just recently I saw a particular German mock the pictures of the burned bodies of our civilian contractors.

Yeah, damn bloody yellow Euros indeed.

Quote:
2, The troops don't do the right thing? I never said that.

Galmin so far all your posts have been a direct attack against the Americans who are policing Iraq from insurgents and rioters. That's all anyone can decipher from your messages. I have yet to see one post of encouragement for our troops who you supposedly sympathize with.

Galmin · The King has spoken! Joined: 30 Dec 2001 Posts: 1711

Quote:
Galmin so far all your posts have been a direct attack against the Americans who are policing Iraq from insurgents and rioters.