Troops Killed 2 families and 3 year old girl today...

You have no proofs. Gtech is not a terrorist. What do you base that argumentation on? Is expressing an opinion terrorism to you?

 

No worries latehorn, he's covering up for his own inadequacies by projecting his values onto me.

I just hope he doesn't start talking about penises. I'd hate for him to start projecting his shortcomings in that area on me too.

 

Stay tuned for the next exciting Politics and Religion thread, where yet another astute, politically savvy DP member reveals that George Bush has troops kill children to satisfy his sick cannibalistic urges!! Also, he smells.

 

If you believe in and support conservative ideology then you are a conservative.
If you believe in and support socialist ideology then you are a socialist.
If you believe that massacring civilians is a justifiable action in order to achieve political goals like Gtech does, this makes you a terrorist. Based on your political goals, you can be left wing, right wing or Muslim terrorist. Gtech is right wing terrorist.
It is irrelevant from the point of classification of ideological belief system that he is too much of coward to openly admit it or do something about it.

I condemn all terrorists independent of if they are left wing, right wing or Muslim terrorists or if their name is Gtech or Bin Laden.

 

@GWorld: Would you please stop calling GTech a terrorist? It is misleading and it's a pretty serious charge. There's been enough of that around here lately.

@GTech: Would you please not talk any more about ANYBODY'S penis? It's not a mental image that brings forth good feelings. (And, that's putting it mildly!)

@Both Of You: Could you, maybe start a
"GTech Sucks" thread or a "GWorld Sucks" thread? The rest of us can check in from time to time and see how you guys are doing.

 

How do you classify someone who supports the massacre of civilians in order to achieve political goals?

 

You are saying that most of all people in the ME are terrorists? Trust me, I have spoken with some saudies and some UAEs. Many of them believe in that this is neccessary when it comes to Israel. Are they terrorists?

On the otherhand, I have to say that most Iranians I know are very moderate when it comes to political views, despite their terrorist government.

Anyway, there's a different between killing to defend and killing for offend. Killing for offend can sometimes be judgods(poor spelling, forgot how the word was spelled) as terrorism.

 

Never said I did or didn't. The problem is, you are ashamed of answering why you want the US to pull out of Iraq so terrorists can take over. A condition I set for you in order to answer your question. But you are ashamed of supporting terrorists (see signature).

If you were a real man, you'd realize you are in control! That I've given you control over me in that all you have to do is answer the question, and I'll gladly give you what you've been waiting for.

Is that a yellow streak on your back gworld? Or do you have naturally blonde hair growing down the center of your back?

Come on gworld, post it in big bolded fonts next time! Show me you're a real man!

 

ANYONE who believes killing civilians is a justifiable action in order to achieve political goals is a terrorist. As long as that person has not taken actions in support of this ideology, the person is a terrorist from ideological point of view but as soon as it goes to action, that person becomes a terrorist and criminal.

 

Gworld, is this your proof?

 

Some times silence speaks louder than words.

What will be the normal reaction and answer for any human being when you ask them if they support or condemn the killing of civilians?

 

And your silence on why you want the US to pull out of Iraq so terrorists can take over is duly noted. Especially since I've told you 2-3 dozen times I'd gladly answer your question if you would answer it.

You still have the power, gworld! Will you use it, or will your silence continue to be the voice of your words?

 

What we have here is a failure to communicate.

You see, GTech, GWorld, these two questions are what we would call a "loaded question".

Maybe a "GTech AND GWorld Suck" thread? No playing favourites here. I just want you boys to get this resolved.

 

I know what you mean, but you are living in a pink bubble unknowing of the fierce reality in this world.

Seriously, you would shoot if you thought that you was under threat. That is imaginary defense and since you are acting in a proffesional and legal situation, it is not terrorism.

You simply need to filter away evil leftist propaganda that will for weakening your country in the long run.

 

As usual you don't know what you are talking about, the question, I asked of Gtech, was about the massacre of Vietnamese civilians in My Lai. There was no threat and those soldiers already been convicted in an AMERICAN court.

 

I know what I am talking about. You simply don't understand the phsycological pressure that the soldiers have to go through.

 

He's never served anything other than his on self-interests. Men and women better than gworld have secured his freedoms for him. The very people he chooses to trash, while praising those they fight against.

 

How about the psychological pressure on people who see their mother, father, daughter, son, sister or brother massacred by some trigger happy soldiers?
Does this give them right to kill American civilians because they are under psychological pressure or this is a right only reserved for American soldiers?

Anyone who massacres civilians is a terrorist and criminal, independent if it is because of "psychological pressure", revenge or "to fight terrorism".

 

Well, the Iraqi citzens have a great opportunity in staying away from the terrorists.

Anyway, it's not the same thing. Turning into a terrorists takes time while short time decisions doesn't. The case in Vietnam that you mentioned was mayby not a very sucessfull operation, but the officiers thought it was the best thing to do after some short-time analysing.

 

What are you talking about? Your post got noting to do with situation that I described. Let's imagine that a father of the 3 year old girl that sees his child killed, goes to street and shoots the first American civilian that he sees, is he justified in your opinion?

My Lai massacre "maybe not a very successful operation", you must be joking? It was a massacre of civilians that made those soldiers to criminals, convicted by an American court and jury.