2 men are beheaded and heads thrown in place of worship!

Sorry gunners I didn't get you what does it mean { but these sikhs were killed because they r not muslims big differnce }

 

beheadings are bad, do you think they are very painful? it is the worst disrepect, its like chopping animal head for ssacrifice

 

No I think they're usually just having fun when they do it. Y'know, after the head is off they go, "ohhhh you just got punked!"

It's always a good time except we usually don't hear from them after they get punked, I think they're just upset.

 

That's what Islam teaches. The Muslims who killed those Sikh's were following the words of Muhammad to the letter:

9:29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low. ​

 

was doing some research and spoke to a few pakistani friends and they said this is to make the kafir (non muslim) person halal or something like that

 

Kafir's are non muslims and not people of allah or the book. In many islamic nations, kafirs are persecuted and even killed if they dont believe in allah

 

Nazi's were atleast brave enough to fight on the war fronts rather than engage in Guirella warfare hiding in the mountains. Let the Taliban come and fight a real war and see how they get their ass kicked.

 

i dont think we will see that anytime soon

 

Especially not after that strategy worked so poorly for the Nazi's.

 

well the nazis didnt have the numbers as well as the sporadic placement around the world...they were all located in 1 area and didnth have foreign militants joining them to an endless supply

 

In the end, it was centralization which killed the Nazi's. During the Normandy invasions, the German commanders in the field just didn't have enough autonomy in their decision making to be able to effectively respond to the Allied advances in a timely manner.

On the other hand, Islam is not set up like the Roman Catholic church. There is no one central figure like the Pope. This makes Islam far more durable. It's less of an organization and more of a movement. Of course, it also makes them less effective. What made the Nazi's strong on the offense made them weak on the defense; what make the Islamists weak on the offense makes them strong on the defense. The Nazi's were able to attack entire nation states and overwhelm them in a matter of days. The Islamists are only able to murder women and unarmed men in a very sporadic fashion. Hitler murdered six million Jews; Osama bin Laden may have a lot of desire but his performance numbers are pitiful in comparison. It's not that Osama is incompetent, it's just the nature of the organization he has to work with.

After the European and American nations were able to almost abolish piracy, and until the advent of aircraft hijacking, the Islamists were almost completely without usable weapons. Osama bin Laden destroyed aircraft hijacking as a useful technique. As a result, we're seeing a lull in Islamist displays of power which will continue until they are able to obtain their next big weapon -- which will likely be nuclear or possibly biological. Then the next round of conflict will begin.

 

The day these terrorist get their hands on the nuclear weapon, its gonna be the end of Afghanistan,Pakistan and Iran if not the entire Muslim world. They won't be able to get away with it.

 

It is always funny to see someone with no knowledge or experience in military, try to pretend to be a general because he has played some war games on his x-box.

And some how the Hindus in India will hide under their holy cows and the use of nuclear bombs in Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan won't hurt them.

 

You need to know one thing, only one legitimate intelligence input is enough for us to bomb the crap out of those countries before they can even press the button.

And the non-muslim world (including India) has effective missile defense technology to counter any threat.

 

I think some people think that India is weak country and cannot do any thing against these Muslim countries but they are thinking wrong If India wishes than it can also destroy any big nation, Pakistan Afghanistan and other countries will be destroy while testing missiles so there is no need to touch even Pakistan.

 

No missile defense system is 100% and only one missile needs to arrive on target for your whole day to go wrong.

In addition, missiles may not even be the preferred delivery system of the future. Ships, trucks, and commercial aircraft can work just as well.

 

Ships? Trucks?

As far as I know Nuclear Bombs need to be detonated a few hundred feet above the ground to be effective. Ships and Submarines can o launch missiles from the sea.

 

LOL. I have been to India, is a shit hole. India can not even manage the traffic in it's streets, let alone an effective missile defense system. What will you do if a cow is standing in front of the missile that is going to be launched?

 

How about learning some English first?

Firstly, there's no traffic "in" the street, it travels "on" the streets. LMAO!

And I don't understand how a cow can come "in front of a missile", missiles are launched up in the air vertically, in case you didn't know. So cow coming in front is not a problem.....but I have heard that the holy pig smells and farts so bad that the methane in the fart is enough to burn down a building, so that might be a security threat. Fortunately enough they are slaughtered and I must agree, they do make a really good meal.

 

Air bursts are most effective at creating damage over larger areas, but they are definitely not required to achieve effect.

In fact, if you were focused on destroying a specific cultural or political target like a Taj Mahal or the Pentagon ... nothing really does that as effectively as a nuclear ground burst.

Imagine a ship sailing up to the island of Manhattan and detonating a "ground" burst just offshore? Would you call that ineffective?