America Under Attack thread, part deux.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Johnny Mac
What a traggidy(sp?). That was not only an attack on the U.S. it was also an attack on the rest of the world. I was and still am extremely outraged about the situation. I personally think we should bomb the <bleep>. The states should go in to afganastan, egypt and irak and carpet bomb the shameless mother <bleep> for oh I don't know how does 20 days straight all day all night sound. Wipe them all out. If you willingly harbor terrorists in your country and give them asylem then you are just as guilty as the terrorists themselves which makes those people <bleep> outa <bleep> luck in my book!
Oh yeah and the muslums have the awdasity(sp?) to dance in there streets and cheer and all that <bleep>. <Bleep>! killem all!!!!!!:grr:
P.S - sorry for the swearing but I couldn't help myself!

Edit by Unne: I dislike having to censor people.

---

I also dislike stereotyping people just because they belong to a particular group. I know many Muslims in my neighbourhood but they're all peaceful and not all war-hungry for blood, most of them were also saddenned by this event. If a Nazi came and killed your family, would you be justified in going after all Germans? Here in Britain there's many bombings by the IRA, but we don't wage a war on the whole of Ireland, but only go after those who are known to be involved.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Johnny Mac
Oh yeah and the muslums have the awdasity(sp?) to dance in there streets and cheer and all that <bleep>. <Bleep>! killem all!!!!!!:grr:
P.S - sorry for the swearing but I couldn't help myself!

Edit by Unne: I dislike having to censor people.

---

I think you're referring to the Palestinians. Why don't you try to look at the bombing from their point of view, what they've been through at the hands of Israel with the support of the American government over the past few years, then you'll understand their reaction. You need to look at events from an unbiased point of view before drawing conclusions such as killing a whole group of people off, not from the biased points of view of the media who mostly all happen to be western hence siding with the Americans on all possible issues.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by David
And...I fear for my family and friends if we don't make it a full scale war.

---

You guys do realize that waging full scale war on Afghanistan WILL cause Pakistan to break all ties with us and retaliate, right? Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Full scale war is MORE dangerous for America.

Actually, I take that back. Full scale war is more dangerous for all of humanity.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Linus
War is POINTLESS.

AND STOP USING THOSE DAMN METAPHORS! Nobody crashed a stupid car, nobody beat up your sibling, nobody did jack like that. You need to look at the current situation and NOT make metaphors that are like our situation. Anyways, let's just PRETEND Afghanistani government had something to do with this. We wipe them out. Then what? We have a big stinkin' hole, lots of very pissed off civilians, a country with no leaders, etc. How would we, the American people, feel good about killing off a government when we're CAUSING pain and suffering. We won't be dancing in the streets, that's for sure. In other words, once the perpetrators are gone, do we celebrate? In the end, it won't matter one bit and we'll have done more wrong than right.

---

Indeed. By starting a war and killing Bin Laden, He will be a Martyr to the terrorists, which will in the future will make the terrorists go on and do more damage to the US for killing their leader.

im worried about this whole war thing......i dont want my brother to get drafted:(



~Selphie

I think we need to try to be acting more positively. I'm not saying we can't grieve, I am doing that myself, and I'm not saying we can't remember, but they're showing the same slow, sad song on VH1 all day. MTV's been trying to lift our spirits, though, I saw Black & White by Michael Jackson twice. (This could be counted as depressing for some people, though.) :D They need to stop jawing off the same nuclear war stuff that they were spouting all this morning on ABC, do ya think that's gonna make anyone feel better? I don't think so. I'm trying to make a tiny effort to brighten up the place here, by putting, in my opinion, the funniest movie ever (Mallrats, NO, Clerks was not better, close, but not) as my "theme". So if we could try to not be so dark and depressing about everything as we have been, I think it will greatly lift our nation's spirits and help us to think clearer in time like this.

But that's just my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Britt


You guys do realize that waging full scale war on Afghanistan WILL cause Pakistan to break all ties with us and retaliate, right? Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Full scale war is MORE dangerous for America.

Actually, I take that back. Full scale war is more dangerous for all of humanity.

---

Hmph, too late. Afghanistan leaders have told their people to prepare for a holy war. If we go after bin Laden, they'll retaliate. Talk to us all you want about how stupid it is of us to go to war. Why don't some of you who are against it offer some suggestions of just HOW we'd get bin Laden out of Afghanistan without military action seeing as how Afghanistan isn't going to let us anywhere near him?


Pakistan is torn in half on the subject of whether or not to help the US. Half of the population there thinks that the US got what it deserved while the other half thinks it was an act of evil. The Pakistani government has absolutely no idea what they're going to do.

Through negociating with Pakistan, as we have been doing. If anyone can peaceably convince the Afghans to relinquish bin Laden, its Pakistan.

Won't work. Afghanistan has already said that if Pakistan gives in to any of America's demands, they'll consider them as an enemy as well. If Pakistan tries to get ahold of bin Laden through negotiations, Afghanistan will instantly put two and two together and realize that they're helping us.

Read this.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20...tan/index.html

That's exactly what I'm saying. One can't easily bomb Bin Laden to the moon when they haven't a clue where he is, and nobody wants to talk. The only methods I can think of are negociation and ground-troop raids. But even mass ground-troop raids on Taliban officials, as awful as that is, would be preferrable to bombing the country.

For those of you who are afraid of their nukes, I say don't be. Be afraid of their Bio and Chem weapons. Those will do far more damage than their nukes.

I can't believe the people who think we should go bomb the whole freakin' country. Jesus. Think of all the people that would die who didn't agree with what happened. All the children that have no idea of what's going on. I don't think I could ever forgive what the terrorists did, but I can't see the difference between what they did and what we would be doing by bombing that country. Just the idea of it makes me sick.

"It may sound harsh, but we may have to kill a few people who weren't directly related to the attack" --I heard someone on TV say this... I can't even think of the words to describe how sick it makes me feel. >_<

Ground troops are much better than air raids for many reasons. Ground troops can distinguish between the innocent and guilty much better than missiles lauched from thousands of feet in the air. Ground troops show that we're willing to send our own people in to get the job done and that we're not going to rely on sloppy, innacurate missiles in hopes that somewhere in the wreckage is bin Laden. Ground troops will know for sure when we've got the job done.

Unfortunately, most senators are afraid of sending in ground troops because they know that MUCH less American lives will be lost if we use air raids, regardless of how many innocent Afghani citizens get killed. I don't like that fact any more than anyone else, but it's how the officials feel.

I'd much rather see a ground war over there, but our logic will be that American troops will be safer with air strikes.

I guess that you odon't know very much about modern warfare and tactics then. Inaccurate carpet bombing went out with the vietnam police action. (It wasn't a war, it was a UN police action) Now we have cruise missles and bombs that can navigate through a city to hit one specific building. We can destroy anything they have with pinpoint accuracy. Despite all this, if push comes to shove, we will need ground troops, but if we can avoid it, we will use surgical strikes, as it will reduce the death count on _both_ sides. I myself hope that itr doesn't come down to war, but I think that you people assume _way_ too much about war.

Can you say that any innocent civilians that would be in the area won't get killed because of it? I don't care how smart a missile is, it can't tell the difference between right and wrong. As soon as you can show me a missile that stops when it knows it's going to kill someone who's innocent, I'll believe that air-to-ground combat is a cleaner and more just form of warfare. I know the capabilities of modern guided missiles, but I also know that they're still just machines without the ability to think for themselves.