5 Years Later -- Are we any safer (A soldiers thoughts)

OHH. I see your point. So it only matters if our stuff is blown up here? Out someplace else, its fair game? Gotcha.

 

Address the source from CONGRESS that I provided that states that the attack on the U.S.S. Cole was a terrorist attack.

 

I get my info from reputable sources, I dont need to accept any facts that you 'present'.

I bet you thought you were safe on the 9/10. Invading Iraq has created more of US enemies, time will tell.

I can see you think anyone who criticises your Governments policies wishes harm on the US - are you moving to russia or china?

 

Indeed! Yeah, it's hard to find all those policies all nice and neat to pick off. I'd agree wholeheartedly here. Drop foreign aid, especially to those countries who are, or have hostile people, towards us. No world welfare, no free lunches. That'd turn things around real quick.

 

I read it and there's not a single mention of Iraq being linked to 9/11. I also read the editor notes which you probably missed:

You do realize that current members of the Bush admin had contact with Saddam right? Does that mean they were involved in 9/11? How does an Iraqi official meeting Bin Laden 6 years before 9/11 make the entire nation of Iraq responsible?

 

How does Japan bombing Pearl Harbor make the whole nation of Japan the responsible?

 

There's a difference between need and want. You will not accept them, because the truth doesn't matter. Go ahead, admit it, we know it's true, right?

I was safe on 9/10 and I'm safe now. Unlike yourself, it's not about my own personal safety, it's about my country.

The "anyone who criticizes {insert something here}" doesn't have much value. People like yourself overuse it when you have nothing else to fall back on. Do you have anything new and improved?

 

I don't need to address any government propaganda when I've already shown the legal definition of terrorism and pointed to other credible sources http://fs.huntingdon.edu/jlewis/Outlines/TerrorismNotes.htm

On a funnier note...
What do you call 3000 navy boys setting off to sea?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1500 Couples .. have fun sd

 

Well, it's pretty simple. Japan's military launched the attack on Pearl Harbor.

An Iraqi official only met with Bin Laden 6 YEARS PRIOR TO 9/11.

 

always love it when the "open minded" types whip out a gay joke. Shows their moral superiority.

 

Ohhhh...so there is a difference between a single japanese dude (or a small group) ordering the attack on Pearl Harbor; and an Iraqi official meeting with Bin Laden prior to 9/11 ... I'm not sure how that japanese dude (or small group) made the entire country of Japan our enemy. Seems like a flawed policy to me. Doesn't it to you?

 

That's because you keep overlooking the fact saddam had ties to al qaida, which is the issue. You said you read it right? Still twisting words?

Who said the entire nation was responsible? Have we already forgotten the reasons we went to war:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html

saddam had a choice. he made his choice. If that upsets you, join his defense team in Iraq.

 

Or you could read all 23 reasons to invade:
http://www.yourcongress.com/ViewArticle.asp?article_id=2686

 

One liberal-biased professor against the LIBRARY OF CONGRESS.

Er, yeah. Ok.

Nice joke. I've never heard that before. What happens when 150 submariners go on patrol? 75 couples come back. Good stuff. Har har.

Fact is, I was never attached to a surface ship so your petty little gay Navy boy jokes don't stick too well. Read up a bit on E.O.D. sometime, fella.

Basically, I just "PWNED" you for another 5 pages.

 

Just because I think something should be legal doesn't mean I agree with it, and certainly doesn't mean I can't joke about it

 

So you think it should be legal so you can make fun of them? Got it. Thanks.

 

Geez Gtech, you must've been asleep when Bush was trying to get support for a war against Iraq because their primary case for waging war was that Saddam had WMD's and posed an immenent threat to the U.S.

Do I really need to post sources for this?

 

Curious.

http://www.yourcongress.com/ViewArti...rticle_id=2686

How many clauses deal with WMD and how many deal with Iraq not living up to the UN resolutions? Count for me? And let me know what you come up with

 

you might have seen me post this before too...

ahem...young or stupid, which is it?

 

The definition comes from Cornell Law buddy, 1 of 5 ivy league law schools. Possibly the best in the country. I'll take their word for it over yours.

The Adventure Is Real