Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

What would be the worse thing to happen if the US lost the war on terrorism?

There is no ****ing war.

Originally posted by Bardock42
There is no ****ing war.

Ok, if there was...

We would all die????

there is no war on terrorism. that is just rhetoric for the "democratising" of middle eastern muslem nations. democratising is in quotes because how can anyone call whats in iraq 'democracy' and hold a straight face?

Originally posted by PVS
there is no war on terrorism. that is just rhetoric for the "democratising" of middle eastern muslem nations. democratising is in quotes because how can anyone call whats in iraq 'democracy' and hold a straight face?

But you are not answering the question. Please do not derail this thread.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But you are not answering the question. Please do not derail this thread.

It's a stupid question to be frank.
You can't wage a war on a CONCEPT fer petes sake. So you have to be more concrete in what it is you're asking.

Originally posted by The Omega
It's a stupid question to be frank.
You can't wage a war on a CONCEPT fer petes sake. So you have to be more concrete in what it is you're asking.

Then look at it theoretically. I just don't want PVS turning this thread into a Bush bashing thread.

If you believe that nothing would happen, then state that.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then look at it theoretically. I just don't want PVS turning this thread into a Bush bashing thread.

If you believe that nothing would happen, then state that.

Look, if there is no war on terrorism, and there isn't then obviously nothing would happen if it would stop since it doesn't exist....

Are you asking "What would happen if the US would not invade any more countries, withdraw from those it did already invade and stop the hunting, locking up and killing of "terrorists"?" ?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Look, if there is no war on terrorism, and there isn't then obviously nothing would happen if it would stop since it doesn't exist....

Are you asking "What would happen if the US would not invade any more countries, withdraw from those it did already invade and stop the hunting, locking up and killing of "terrorists"?" ?

Yes, maybe even a step or two more. Like, what if the US army were destroyed, or a US city destroyed. I don't know I'm asking you.

If we were under attack, then we would be like the other countries that have gotten terrorists attacks also??

Originally posted by PVS
how can anyone call whats in iraq 'democracy' and hold a straight face?

Whob, Sith, KidRock...you wanna feild that one?

Originally posted by debbiejo
If we were under attack, then we would be like the other countries that have gotten terrorists attacks also??

Would the worse thing that could happen be just a few trains bombed or a few airplane crashes?

Originally posted by debbiejo
If we were under attack, then we would be like the other countries that have gotten terrorists attacks also??

What? Where? What? What?

You know other terrorist attacks in other countries..........the ones in the news...

Originally posted by debbiejo
You know other terrorist attacks in other countries..........the ones in the news...

Well, you Deb that was just made up.

Originally posted by debbiejo
You know other terrorist attacks in other countries..........the ones in the news...

Like 9/11? Oh no wait, that was in the US, wasn't it?

The England Subway bombs Bardock?

Originally posted by NineCoronas
The England Subway bombs Bardock?

I'm not saying there weren't others, I am saying that the US wasn't left out, they had a very severe one themselves.

Originally posted by The Omega
It's a stupid question to be frank.
You can't wage a war on a CONCEPT fer petes sake. So you have to be more concrete in what it is you're asking.

thank you omega.


Originally posted by Shakyamunison
But you are not answering the question. Please do not derail this thread.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then look at it theoretically. I just don't want PVS turning this thread into a Bush bashing thread.

If you believe that nothing would happen, then state that.



...and shakey, my post was on topic, and i never mentioned bush, did i?
so **** off, k?

Hmm, I think no one ever reads my posts....weird.

Originally posted by PVS
thank you omega.

and shakey, my post was on topic, and i never mentioned bush, did i?
so **** off, k? I expected you to actually mention "GO DUBYA".

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why does that matter to you?

Just as much as your question to us matters to you, why don't you jsut answer? That would push this thread quite a bit forward.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Just as much as your question to us matters to you, why don't you jsut answer? That would push this thread quite a bit forward.

You define it, if you like. I don't think it can be defined




And PVS, I love you too.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You define it, if you like. I don't think it can be defined




And PVS, I love you too.

So you asked a question you can not answer, while using a term you can not define...so basically this thread is pointless since it is undefined?

Actually, I have to disagree with most of the sentiments posted.

I think we Are in a war, a war unlike any other that's been fought, at least in modern times. And it's gonna take a very, very, very long time (20-50 years, I would guess) to get through it. We will win, eventually, but I fear at great cost.

If we lose--just for arguments sake--then the world will likely reflect, more and more, the mindset of the victors. That happens anyway, right?

Is Bush doing the right thing in how he's handling it? Sure does Not seem that way. Is he exploiting the conflict for capitalist gain? Very likely. Regardless, I do believe this: whatever you wanna call it, the fact is, there are people out there--medieval, barbaric, obsolete in mindset--who are plotting--as we speak, er, type--how next to do us harm.

And make no mistake: those who say a WMD being used in a city is Not a matter of If but When--they're right.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why does that matter to you?

Because I don't understand what you mean by LOOSING THE WAR ON TERROR.
When would you say you could claim this war was LOST? What events should take place?

There's been a high-scale "war on terror" since 2001, and the number of terrorists attacks has risen.

You can really, really not have a War on a concept...that's not how the definition of war works....

Exactly! It's the same with that old "War on drugs"...

Can't ahve a war on some substance either. It's rhetorics... What is MEANT by "war on terror"?

Originally posted by Mindship
Actually, I have to disagree with most of the sentiments posted.

I think we Are in a war, a war unlike any other that's been fought, at least in modern times. And it's gonna take a very, very, very long time (20-50 years, I would guess) to get through it. We will win, eventually, but I fear at great cost.

If we lose--just for arguments sake--then the world will likely reflect, more and more, the mindset of the victors. That happens anyway, right?

Is Bush doing the right thing in how he's handling it? Sure does Not seem that way. Is he exploiting the conflict for capitalist gain? Very likely. Regardless, I do believe this: whatever you wanna call it, the fact is, there are people out there--medieval, barbaric, obsolete in mindset--who are plotting--as we speak, er, type--how next to do us harm.

And make no mistake: those who say a WMD being used in a city is Not a matter of If but When--they're right.

What war? Who started it and when? What makes you so certain "we" will win? What will it take to win a war on a concept?

Originally posted by The Omega
Exactly! It's the same with that old "War on drugs"...

Can't ahve a war on some substance either. It's rhetorics... What is MEANT by "war on terror"?

Was it that Stephen Colbert that PVS fancies so much, that declared the War on Wars? Since, the US seems to need a war to function.

Coooool! Yes, let's declare war on wars... CAn we declare war on idiocy as well?? What about War on Poverty??

Originally posted by The Omega
Coooool! Yes, let's declare war on wars... CAn we declare war on idiocy as well?? What about War on Poverty??

I'm too capitalist, have your war on poverty for yourself.

Yeah... you're right. If poverty won the war... No, I mean... if poverty was destroyed... who'd make our cheap goods...?

Originally posted by The Omega
Yeah... you're right. If poverty won the war... No, I mean... if poverty was destroyed... who'd make our cheap goods...?

Exactly, now you think like us capitalists.

Originally posted by The Omega
1. What war?
2. Who started it and when?
3. What makes you so certain "we" will win?
4. What will it take to win a war on a concept?

1. Maybe we disagree on the definition of "war."
Up until now, "wars" have been fought by, what: opposing armies/navies/whatever on a battlefield often removed from civilian populations? The largest of these traditional wars was WWII, pretty much spanning the globe, or likely would have, if the Axis powers started to win. Then came nuclear weapons and the realization that the world was no longer big enough to wage a traditional war, certainly nothing bigger/more explosive than WWII. WWIII--a nuclear conflict--would've been deadly beyond comprehension.
So we entered a new phase: the Cold War, a war of nerves, which we won and became the sole superpower. In the traditional sense, no one could challenge us.
Well, since no one could grow big enough to fight us, the enemy rebounded, so to speak: they got smaller and sneakier, evolving into a form our traditonal way of fighting couldn't well deal with. But the objective is the same: whether it's Nazi armies marching across the land, or a handful of terrorists seeking to plant WMDs, "They" want to force their way of life on "Us," by force if necessary. Not once, not twice, but as often as they can until they reach their objective. They will kill and destroy as much as possible to meet their objective. It is not a limited exchange...this is war.
Also for the first time in history, thanks to WMDs, a single individual has the power to destroy a city. Both persistence over time, and potential scale for destruction, make this a war.

2. Don't know; don't know. Someone once said that on 9/11, 3 things began: the 21st century, Bush's presidency and WWIII.
From what I understand, the impetus for Arab/Islamic discontent supposedly goes back centuries. A historian could answer this better than I. In any event, this is not a traditional war; it does not require a formal declaration. That's how civilized people fight wars. Islamic fascists are not civilized.

3. Because we are bigger, richer and stronger, plus we have to win. Would you wanna live under their rules? Do you consider their way of life a step forward? It's like the rabbit being chased by the fox: the fox runs for a meal; the rabbit runs for its life.

4. It's not a concept. Concepts don't fly planes into buildings and they don't plan to gas subways. And sooner or later, a "concept" is gonna make a mushroom cloud rise over someone's city. Even if there is a 0.1% chance of that happening, it's a 0.1% chance we can't afford. Do you want it happening in your city?

Please understand: I do Not consider the US of A and its leadership angels. The First World is hardly perfect. But a democracy is still the best game in town.

Originally posted by Mindship
Actually, I have to disagree with most of the sentiments posted.

I think we Are in a war, a war unlike any other that's been fought, at least in modern times. And it's gonna take a very, very, very long time (20-50 years, I would guess) to get through it. We will win, eventually, but I fear at great cost.

If we lose--just for arguments sake--then the world will likely reflect, more and more, the mindset of the victors. That happens anyway, right?

Is Bush doing the right thing in how he's handling it? Sure does Not seem that way. Is he exploiting the conflict for capitalist gain? Very likely. Regardless, I do believe this: whatever you wanna call it, the fact is, there are people out there--medieval, barbaric, obsolete in mindset--who are plotting--as we speak, er, type--how next to do us harm.

And make no mistake: those who say a WMD being used in a city is Not a matter of If but When--they're right.

Originally posted by Mindship
1. Maybe we disagree on the definition of "war."
Up until now, "wars" have been fought by, what: opposing armies/navies/whatever on a battlefield often removed from civilian populations? The largest of these traditional wars was WWII, pretty much spanning the globe, or likely would have, if the Axis powers started to win. Then came nuclear weapons and the realization that the world was no longer big enough to wage a traditional war, certainly nothing bigger/more explosive than WWII. WWIII--a nuclear conflict--would've been deadly beyond comprehension.

So we entered a new phase: the Cold War, a war of nerves, which we won and became the sole superpower. In the traditional sense, no one could challenge us.
Well, since no one could grow big enough to fight us, the enemy rebounded, so to speak: they got smaller and sneakier, evolving into a form our traditonal way of fighting couldn't well deal with. But the objective is the same: whether it's Nazi armies marching across the land, or a handful of terrorists seeking to plant WMDs, "They" want to force their way of life on "Us," by force if necessary. Not once, not twice, but as often as they can until they reach their objective. They will kill and destroy as much as possible to meet their objective. It is not a limited exchange...this is war.
Also for the first time in history, thanks to WMDs, a single individual has the power to destroy a city. Both persistence over time, and potential scale for destruction, make this a war.

2. Don't know; don't know. Someone once said that on 9/11, 3 things began: the 21st century, Bush's presidency and WWIII.
From what I understand, the impetus for Arab/Islamic discontent supposedly goes back centuries. A historian could answer this better than I. In any event, this is not a traditional war; it does not require a formal declaration. That's how civilized people fight wars. Islamic fascists are not civilized.

3. Because we are bigger, richer and stronger, plus we have to win. Would you wanna live under their rules? Do you consider their way of life a step forward? It's like the rabbit being chased by the fox: the fox runs for a meal; the rabbit runs for its life.

4. It's not a concept. Concepts don't fly planes into buildings and they don't plan to gas subways. And sooner or later, a "concept" is gonna make a mushroom cloud rise over someone's city. Even if there is a 0.1% chance of that happening, it's a 0.1% chance we can't afford. Do you want it happening in your city?

Please understand: I do Not consider the US of A and its leadership angels. The First World is hardly perfect. But a democracy is still the best game in town.

Both of these posts are right on the money.

For the bashing on the previous page...play nice, kiddos.

It would be a major blow to image - but beyond that there would be little in the way of tangible affects - as in victorious terrorist armies raising flags.

The whole cry of pro-war lobbies was "well, when terrorists are over running our nation, burning and raping etc." But lets face it - the "terrorists" didn't have the power or resources then to doing any such thing, and they don't now. In the entire history of the US it has sustained very little in the way of terrorist damage, certainly when compared to nations where it is a part of life. Likewise, statistically, in terms of probability the danger to the US and it's citizens (in the US) is not really greater or lesser then it was before 9/11.

In every sense terrorism in not new. It reached new heights with 9/11, but has not done so again, it is quite possible it could do so again however. As I said, little in the way of tangible effects, but it would be symbolic, and since terrorists aren't conventional forces symbolism becomes quite an important aspect of what they are doing.

Personally I don't think such a war can actually be won - it will all come down to when the US decides it has achieved a symbolic victory - killing Bin Laden maybe. Then they could claim a victory, even though there will be plenty of terrorists still out there, and plenty of reasons for terrorists to still exist.

Geez, I cannot believe the sheer pedanticism of the 'there is no war' brigade. Anyone with the meanest intelligence knows exactly what the thread starter means, and just because you dislike the semantics of the phrase 'war on terror', that is no defence to the charge of outright stupidity that can be levelled at those who say there is no war going on. There sure as hell is.

Ok, for those of you who are desperate to be that anal, what if we define things thusly:

What would happen if the action of those aggressive groups opposed to the US force an American withdrawl from the Middle East?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Geez, I cannot believe the sheer pedanticism of the 'there is no war' brigade. Anyone with the meanest intelligence knows exactly what the thread starter means, and just because you dislike the semantics of the phrase 'war on terror', that is no defence to the charge of outright stupidity that can be levelled at those who say there is no war going on. There sure as hell is.

Ok, for those of you who are desperate to be that anal, what if we define things thusly:

What would happen if the action of those aggressive groups opposed to the US force an American withdrawl from the Middle East?

Thing is, it wasn't as clear as you make it out to be, there are many possibilities to take this topic. That's why we asked.

.

-

,

\

Originally posted by Ushgarak
What would happen if the action of those aggressive groups opposed to the US force an American withdrawl from the Middle East?

The same thing that is going to happen anyway; civil war. This is a region in which 20% of the population is an ethnic minority that wants to be autonomous and the 70% of the population that was oppressed by the other 30% is the new ruling class.

If the US lost the war on terrorism, then there would be no war, so that would be nice. Thank you very much.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
If the US lost the war on terrorism, then there would be no war, so that would be nice. Thank you very much.

Let's jsut all admit for a second that there is no war to begin with....good.

OK, if there is no war on terrorism, and the US lost a war that didn't even exist, then there would still be no war, so that would be nice. Thank you very much.

Is that OK, Fart Face?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
OK, if there is no war on terrorism, and the US lost a war that didn't even exist, then there would still be no war, so that would be nice. Thank you very much.

Is that OK, Fart Face?

Yes sir, very nice ineed.

'ineed'? What the f*ck does that mean, Bardock? Hahahaha...'ineed'? It's not even a word! Real word, that is. Hahahaha. God, you look so silly! Hahahaha. 'Ineed', 'ineed', 'ineed'...It's like a moron word! Ahahahaha.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
'ineed'? What the f*ck does that mean, Bardock? Hahahaha...'ineed'? It's not even a word! Real word, that is. Hahahaha. God, you look so silly! Hahahaha. 'Ineed', 'ineed', 'ineed'...It's like a moron word! Ahahahaha.

It's a real word. Claimk.

I don't look like a moron. Claimk.

Maybe you don't look like a moron, but you smell like one! Ahahaha...'smell'...you know, with your nose! Ahahahahahaha.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Maybe you don't look like a moron, but you smell like one! Ahahaha...'smell'...you know, with your nose! Ahahahahahaha.

No, I don't know...I smell with my skin.....sometimes I rub pudding all over me...and then I sleepwalk through a tunnel.....and I tell you that....because?

Because, because, because, because...*crescendo*...because of all the wonderful things I does?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Because, because, because, because...*crescendo*...because of all the wonderful things I does?

That doesn't ****ing matter...it's just not a war...it isn't.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That doesn't ****ing matter...it's just not a war...it isn't.
Yeah, you're right. The war isn't real, only the world around it.

(write that one down, and quote me on it)

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Yeah, your right. The war isn't real, only the world around it.

(write that one down, and quote me on it)

My right? What are you talking about. Oh..you used the wrong word...could happen to anybody...I won't make fun of you, despite the severe stupidity such a mistake implies....

You edited that, you bastardo. I didn't mean to insult you then, by the way.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
You edited that, you bastardo. I didn't mean to insult you then, by the way.

I know man, I love you...I just like to take cheap shots (because everything else is beyond me)...I feel bad now.

I feel more badder seeing as it says "Last edited by Ya Krunk'd Floo on Today at 08:39 PM" next to my original post. You did that too, didn't you?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
I feel more badder seeing as it says "Last edited by Ya Krunk'd Floo on Today at 08:39 PM" next to my original post. You did that too, didn't you?

Yeah, I have some magical powers I like to use for my childish pranks....so, all in all, I guess I want to say I feel baddest.

You're definitely the mostest badder around here. How do I know? I know because I never loved him the way I love you. Damn it!

Originally posted by Ushgarak
What would happen if the action of those aggressive groups opposed to the US force an American withdrawl from the Middle East?

In that sense it would be bad for Iraq, and likely Afghanistan as despite the many problems on going in these regions US forces are pretty much the only thing stopping it really getting out of hand. If they pulled out I would expect to see terrible things happen in such a vacuum before the most powerful faction forcefully restored order, in which case they would probably resemble what they were before the invasions.

This is of course bad for these nations, good for nations that would benefit from such upheaval (Iran etc.) Still, I don't believe it would cause much more then some image and economic damage to the US. The War on Terror (in it's conventional theatres) is very much focused on Iraq and Afghanistan - two nations which due to a variety of factors haven't been contributing to the wider world for many years, now both with large scale terrorist activities that while dangerous, don't somehow transfer over to being able to invade the US and so forth.

For the terrorists it would be purely symbolic if the US said "we lost the war on terror", a symbol that might aid them in recruiting. But unlike a victorious nation in a war they do not have resources, numbers etc to attain some physical prize from such a victory. However the US doesn't need to ever say that. As above I don't think it is a war that can be won by conventional means, at best both sides can claim a symbolic victory, nothing more.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
If the US lost the war on terrorism, then there would be no war, so that would be nice. Thank you very much.
Exactly. I agree. Us IS the war.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What would be the worse thing to happen if the US lost the war on terrorism?

Gay Marriage would never have a chance of becoming legalized..

Originally posted by Ushgarak
What would happen if the action of those aggressive groups opposed to the US force an American withdrawl from the Middle East?

nobody said there was no war, just that the 'war on terror' is a horseshit term and by its very definition will never end so long as there is terrorism. its like having a war on murder or rape. it implies that the war will never end, so i dont see why anyone would use such a title, for or against the war...but anyway...

i think that if u.s. troops pull out we will have another dangerous, unstable theocratic state ala post-u.s.s.r. afghanistan. so...any responsible mind would realise that we are stuck their imho. but that doesnt make "stay the coarse" a solution, but rather simply the coarse of action which presents a greater, yet miniscule chance that this wont end in disaster...or more to the point would delay the disaster.

Originally posted by Gay Guy
Gay Marriage would never have a chance of becoming legalized..

I would venture to say that, in some countries, if you are anything but an adult, heterosexual, male, Arab-Islamic fanatic you will become second-class...if you're lucky.

That aside, if we pulled out prematurely from Iraq and Afghanistan, the impetus for the Barbarians to carry on would increase and, in the long-run, the chances of a city getting whacked by a WMD would also rise.

We haven't even touched on how the global economy would be affected, especially if a major financial center got nuked.

Thank you all, the thread is going just fine.

The worse that could happen is that you would loose your life, think about it.

Special thanks to
Mindship & Ushgarak : for telling it like it is
botankus : for those photos, I laughed my butt off
Ya Krunk'd Floo : for insulting Bardock42
Bardock42 : for insulting Ya Krunk'd Floo

I got special thanks w00t

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Thank you all, the thread is going just fine.

The worse that could happen is that you would loose your life, think about it.

Special thanks to
Mindship & Ushgarak : for telling it like it is
botankus : for those photos, I laughed my butt off
Ya Krunk'd Floo : for insulting Bardock42
Bardock42 : for insulting Ya Krunk'd Floo

and thank you for your previous back-seat moderating

Originally posted by PVS
and thank you for your previous back-seat moderating

That was weird!

well, im sure the globals are all just passed out on their keyboards from exhaustion,
hoping and praying that someone will step up and do their job for them. kudos 2 u

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That was weird!

Just as weird as your earlier post(s).

Originally posted by Bardock42
Just as weird as your earlier post(s).

Do you want to get ignored again? jk

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Do you want to get ignored again? jk

You are an annoying pseudo-intellectual ass. jk

Originally posted by Bardock42
You are an annoying pseudo-intellectual ass. jk

I'm an intellectual. w00t

Yes...yes, I guess that was the overall message of my previous statement.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What would be the worse thing to happen if the US lost the war on terrorism?

I think the U.S. will NEVER win the war on terror for the following reasons:

#1. There are more of Them than Us, and they are growing in numbers daily.

#2. The whole conflict will end up eventually in a large conflict against Jerusalem and Isreal as the bible predicts. It will then spead outward on a global scale.

#3. The U.S. does not have enough strong Allies in this fight and financially cannot be everywhere at the same time.

#4. Since Politicians look often at Pole numbers. We will always be lagging support by the American People which therefore will hinder our efforts.

Originally posted by Justbyfaith
#2. The whole conflict will end up eventually in a large conflict against Jerusalem and Isreal as the bible predicts. It will then spead outward on a global scale.

the bible, huh? lets see the passage you refer to.

It will constantly be a battle against Terrorism. Never will it end, for there will always be a group or a country that hates the U.S.

All we can honestly do is defend against attacks, and try to eliminate the threats as they found.

I just read yesterday that the FBI arrested 7 people with plans on attacking the Sears Tower in Chicago. They stated that these individuals were not connected to Al-Quida ( sp? ).

Bush pushed this country into a war, just like his Father did, and no matter how many protestors there are, the conflict will rage on until such time he leaves office.


It is very important for us to continue this battle, for once we are to let our guard down, the U.S. will become a easy target to hit. We will become like other countries that have to deal with daily bombings and constant terrorism.
It is a fact that we are the strongest nation there is, and of course you will have those that want to hit us where it hurts the most. What happened on 9/11 will happen again, maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow, but it will happen.

12/7 will live in Infamy, and 9/11 will never be forgotten.

Originally posted by A.D. Skinner
It will constantly be a battle against Terrorism. Never will it end, for there will always be a group or a country that hates the U.S.

All we can honestly do is defend against attacks, and try to eliminate the threats as they found.

I just read yesterday that the FBI arrested 7 people with plans on attacking the Sears Tower in Chicago. They stated that these individuals were not connected to Al-Quida ( sp? ).

Bush pushed this country into a war, just like his Father did, and no matter how many protestors there are, the conflict will rage on until such time he leaves office.


It is very important for us to continue this battle, for once we are to let our guard down, the U.S. will become a easy target to hit. We will become like other countries that have to deal with daily bombings and constant terrorism.
It is a fact that we are the strongest nation there is, and of course you will have those that want to hit us where it hurts the most. What happened on 9/11 will happen again, maybe not today, and maybe not tomorrow, but it will happen.

12/7 will live in Infamy, and 9/11 will never be forgotten.

I always knew there was a good reason for me to not like Bush.

Originally posted by Gay Guy
I always knew there was a good reason for me to not like Bush.

OMG THATS SO FUNNY WHOB!!!!
...because you meant 'bush' as in a woman's vagina! thats amazing!
who would have thought to make a play on that? you know...bush/vagina...
and then the fact that you're posing as a homosexual? gold...pure gold.
lolz @ bush loz @ vagina. did you think of that by yourself? and how come
you did not add that you happen to love the vice president? that would have
just polished it off. you know, dick cheney? dick as in penis? that would have
just sent me into a coma from laughing too hard.

Originally posted by PVS
OMG THATS SO FUNNY WHOB!!!!
...because you meant 'bush' as in a woman's vagina! thats amazing!
who would have thought to make a play on that? you know...bush/vagina...
and then the fact that you're posing as a homosexual? gold...pure gold.
lolz @ bush loz @ vagina. did you think of that by yourself? and how come
you did not add that you happen to love the vice president? that would have
just polished it off. you know, dick cheney? dick as in penis? that would have
just sent me into a coma from laughing too hard.


I'm tired of you and your hatefilled homophobia. Consider yourself reported.

Originally posted by PVS
OMG THATS SO FUNNY WHOB!!!!
...because you meant 'bush' as in a woman's vagina! thats amazing!
who would have thought to make a play on that? you know...bush/vagina...
and then the fact that you're posing as a homosexual? gold...pure gold.
lolz @ bush loz @ vagina. did you think of that by yourself? and how come
you did not add that you happen to love the vice president? that would have
just polished it off. you know, dick cheney? dick as in penis? that would have
just sent me into a coma from laughing too hard.

Originally posted by El_NINO


I actually found the Bush joke funny..

I think for all it's worth, that other countries have gotten hit................LOTS.............an we aren't used to it being that way.........cause we are a New Country...........not much history....and far away..........and we really don't want to succumb to black mail, ,........and I don't think we will....................I believe,in my mind, that we would fight dying..............We always have...........

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What would be the worse thing to happen if the US lost the war on terrorism?

Come again?

Originally posted by Da preacher
Come again?

No.

Read the thread and post, or don't, I don't care.

There is no war on terrorism.

There's just the senseless invasion of 2 countrys which is ****ing up worldpeace and destroying the fragile peace in the Middle-East and killing hundreds of Irakis.

Originally posted by Da preacher
There is no war on terrorism.

There's just the senseless invasion of 2 countrys which is ****ing up worldpeace and destroying the fragile peace in the Middle-East and killing hundreds of Irakis.

Now isn't that better? Just saying what you feel instead of being a ****.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Now isn't that better? Just saying what you feel instead of being a ****.

i tell you,you're living your latest peace time you never had in the u.s right now,if IRAN does pass to actions,the half of the united states will be blow away
from a nuclear warfare you'll never known from,
united stated should stay at home and pray god the help you out,cauze you'll need it soon,that goverment of tyranical perceptions must fall
away,remove your troops or you'll learn a savage lesson!

god doesn't like you and me either....

hail satan!

Originally posted by godkiller
i tell you,you're living your latest peace time you never had in the u.s right now,if IRAN does pass to actions,the half of the united states will be blow away
from a nuclear warfare you'll never known from,
united stated should stay at home and pray god the help you out,cauze you'll need it soon,that goverment of tyranical perceptions must fall
away,remove your troops or you'll learn a savage lesson!

god doesn't like you and me either....

hail satan!
I could swear this is Whob...

Everyone keeps accusing of all these new folks of being Whob.

Why?

Originally posted by DiamondBullets
Everyone keeps accusing of all these new folks of being Whob.

Why?

I agree, why the hell new people...I think you are whob.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think you are whob.

Originally posted by DiamondBullets
Everyone keeps accusing of all these new folks of being Whob.

Why?

Why? Because they are so absurd in some cases it is impossible they could actually be real. That, and they are almost carbon copies of previous banned posters that are known to have been Whob socks - socks created to cause trouble and mock serious posters and/or serious views that he couldn't actually defeat in serious debate.

That, and so he could actually be seen to be beating another poster in battle of oppinions.

The only way America would lose the 'war' on 'terrorism' is if terrorism won.

Will terrorism win? Who knows? Not know, anyway, but in a few years, perhaps. Terrorist organisations may grow stronger and more powerful, and they need to be stopped before they get out of control.

There are many terrorist attacks in Iran and Iraq today. This hasn't changed since the USA invaded Iraq, so is the war on terrorism actually having any effect? We wouldn't know for sure, as tabloids such as newspapers and reporters on television only feed us the bad news. They show us the carnage, people dying, bombs exploded. They show us the murder and mayhem, and they make us believe that we need to be in Iraq, to prevent this. But do we really need to be there?

America will not lose this war, the country is simply to powerful, and has many allies. But, I fear, if America continues to threaten other countries, such as North Korea, (who are said to be building a missile or nuclear weapons) they will begin to lose allies they may so desperately need in the future.

Originally posted by DiamondBullets
Everyone keeps accusing of all these new folks of being Whob.

Why?

but...he is whob. he's like clockwork and everyone can see besides those who swung from his nutsack. probably out of desperate wishing for others of simple mind to find their way to a computer and then here.

Whobs next username should be TROLL

Originally posted by Bardock42
There is no ****ing war.

hysterical






....wait, I'm almost done laughing


hysterical



.... okay now I'm done. Sorry fell of my seat laughing there.

Originally posted by autumn dreams
The only way America would lose the 'war' on 'terrorism' is if terrorism won.

Will terrorism win? Who knows? Not know, anyway, but in a few years, perhaps. Terrorist organisations may grow stronger and more powerful, and they need to be stopped before they get out of control.

That's one of the things though - terrorist organisations of one sort or another have existed for a long time, and have never reached the "critical mass" people fear where they will somehow act more like a conventional army capable of conquering nations. And I don't think it is possible - there inherent nature limits how powerful, in physical terms they become. In terms of influence they can grow, and influence and fear are their main weapons.



Actually one of the main reasons why terrorists are in Iraq is because the US invaded. Prior to this, during the previous dictatorship Saddam was apparently quite stringent in keeping groups like Al-Quaeda out as they draw negative attention (as expected) and act as a destabilising force.



That, to me, seems to be the problem - fighting terrorists in a conventional manner, in terms of national power and the like. The US has been fighting this "war" for some time now. Many terrorists have been killed - but it does not seem to have had to great an effect upon the organisations. Existing in fragmentary, liquid NGOs makes it hard to kill such an organisation, it seems, through conventional means without sustained and concentrated effort - which the US and its allies haven't shown, by diverting vital resources from Afghanistan to Iraq while serious portions of Al-Quaeda are still functional and capable of reforming.

Even Richard Armitage, in a recent interview with Australian media admits not stabilising and consolidating Afghanistan more was a serious mistake in when it came to the war on terror as a conceptual war, and an actual war.

But I agree, they can't lose the war in a "our nation has been defeated now we must surrender" kind of way, only in a symbolic one. And likewise I don't think they can win in any other then a symbolic, temporary way.

Two questions: What do you think would have happened if we didn't invade Iraq?

Do you think the war in Iraq is worthwhile? Should we get out while we can?


For me, I honestly don't think anything would have happened if we hadn't invaded Iraq. Saddam would still have control, but I highl;y doubt he would pose any serious threat to the United States.

I also believe the war is not worthwhile. Too many people are dying, and US soldiers seem to be making an awful lot of mistakes, by killing people they believed to be terrorists, only to discover they were innocents.

Hopefully, this can be avoided in the future.

The only active ingredient in this 'War on Terrorism' is the USA. There is no real terrorism for any other reason than the Middle East's defense against a dictating USA. The USA created this terrorism because it doesn't give other nations their own freedom. Terrorism against the USA exists only because the USA cast the first stone against the Middle east, and now they are just defending themselves, but the US brainwashes everyone into beleiving that the Middle East has the bad guys, while it's actually the other way round.

Originally posted by Wonderer
The only active ingredient in this 'War on Terrorism' is the USA. There is no real terrorism for any other reason than the Middle East's defense against a dictating USA. The USA created this terrorism because it doesn't give other nations their own freedom. Terrorism against the USA exists only because the USA cast the first stone against the Middle east, and now they are just defending themselves, but the US brainwashes everyone into beleiving that the Middle East has the bad guys, while it's actually the other way round.

I find myself agreeing, very strongly, in fact.

Originally posted by autumn dreams
I find myself agreeing, very strongly, in fact.

Thanks. I don't think there's any good in a super power other than God. People should learn to give peace, not to make or force peace.

Originally posted by Wonderer
Thanks. I don't think there's any good in a super power other than God. People should learn to give peace, not to make or force peace.

Agreed. President Bush claims to want peace in Iraq, but as long as troops are in Iraq, and as long as the US continues to threaten other countries to do it's bidding, there will never be peace.

Originally posted by DiamondBullets
Everyone keeps accusing of all these new folks of being Whob.

Why?

It all has to do with the meaning of the words parody and obvious. But, I can understand your hesitation, as you aren't obsessed with KMC. If you got banned, you'd likely go on loving cars and playing the b*tches. But Whob has no life. So he has to keep coming back like a weed in the drive way. Or Adam Corollas career. You can't wrap your mind around it, because you aren't obsessed with being right, or even cared about by anyone else. You just don't notice it because you both think alike, you're just not as pathetic as he is.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
It all has to do with the meaning of the words parody and obvious. But, I can understand your hesitation, as you aren't obsessed with KMC. If you got banned, you'd likely go on loving cars and playing the b*tches. But Whob has no life. So he has to keep coming back like a weed in the drive way. Or Adam Corollas career. You can't wrap your mind around it, because you aren't obsessed with being right, or even cared about by anyone else. You just don't notice it because you both think alike, you're just not as pathetic as he is. You have a point.

But seriously, this is a bit of a syndrome of paranoia. After Sorgo was banned, every new person in the OTF was being accused left and right of being him.

Originally posted by NineCoronas
You have a point.

But seriously, this is a bit of a syndrome of paranoia. After Sorgo was banned, every new person in the OTF was being accused left and right of being him.

I didn't accuse them of being that guy. But I know a Whob sock when I see it. Especially when they parody the point of view of someone he argued with, right off teh bat. Joining a forum and working towards expressing a view is one thing, but when your sole purpose is to mock other menbers, be they gay, hindu, black, non-christian, is one thing. But to join a forum with a purpose, it's fairly obvious who you are.

and the really sad part, is that Whob will read this and consider it validation for his stupidity...as a reason to go on being an annoying turd.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I didn't accuse them of being that guy. But I know a Whob sock when I see it. Especially when they parody the point of view of someone he argued with, right off teh bat. Joining a forum and working towards expressing a view is one thing, but when your sole purpose is to mock other menbers, be they gay, hindu, black, non-christian, is one thing. But to join a forum with a purpose, it's fairly obvious who you are.

and the really sad part, is that Whob will read this and consider it validation for his stupidity...as a reason to go on being an annoying turd. Can't KMC just call his ISP?

Originally posted by NineCoronas
Can't KMC just call his ISP?

not when he's admitted to buying a machine that scrambles his IP address. See, you didn't know that. And perhaps DB didn't either. But that shows how sad he is, and why he deserves teh riddicule of others. He's really that sad.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
not when he's admitted to buying a machine that scrambles his IP address. See, you didn't know that. And perhaps DB didn't either. But that shows how sad he is, and why he deserves teh riddicule of others. He's really that sad. I want one

Err, not for KMC. But yeah, that's pretty sad. He bought for use specifically to KMC?

But ok, if the US lost the 'War' on terrorism, it would be the best thing that could ever happen, because there would be no terrorism anymore.

Originally posted by Wonderer
But ok, if the US lost the 'War' on terrorism, it would be the best thing that could ever happen, because there would be no terrorism anymore.
You have an incredibly naive view of the world. As long as hate and inhumanity to your fellow man continue to exist there will always be terrorism, war and the things that make us what we are.

Having the US loose the "War on Terrorism" would change nothing.

Originally posted by Jonathan Mark
You have an incredibly naive view of the world. As long as hate and inhumanity to your fellow man continue to exist there will always be terrorism, war and the things that make us what we are.

Having the US loose the "War on Terrorism" would change nothing.

No, you see, the USA is the culprit overhere. It's the USA, or rather, it's leaders, that created this Terrorism in question because of it's 'big-head' attitude. If the USA really was the good and not-guilty it would've left other countries alone, but it doesn't because it tries to protect it's own interests and bully status. The USA's leaders are the inhumane aspect here, not the middle east.

Originally posted by Wonderer
No, you see, the USA is the culprit overhere. It's the USA, or rather, it's leaders, that created this Terrorism in question because of it's 'big-head' attitude. If the USA really was the good and not-guilty it would've left other countries alone, but it doesn't because it tries to protect it's own interests and bully status. The USA's leaders are the inhumane aspect here, not the middle east.
I'm not talking about my country's actions in the Middle East. I am referring to the sad but undeniable fact that there will always be terrorism. There will always be hate, violence and war.

Take a good long look at the history between Israel and the neighboring Arab countries. Then tell me the US is the cause of all terrorism.

Originally posted by Jonathan Mark
I'm not talking about my country's actions in the Middle East. I am referring to the sad but undeniable fact that there will always be terrorism. There will always be hate, violence and war.

Take a good long look at the history between Israel and the neighboring Arab countries. Then tell me the US is the cause of all terrorism.
Sorry, I'm not saying the USA is the cause of all terrorism, but it's definately the cause of the terrorism going on in it's own territory.

Also, the USA needs to set an example of peace, rather than attempting to stop violence by using violence. You can't fight hate with hate.

Originally posted by Mindship
1. If this has to be explained to you, no explanation will do. Plus, you have yet to convince me you are this naive in the first place.

2. For someone who doesn't like propaganda, you sure wave a lot of it around. Arab discontent existed long before there was a USA (consult a historian), and a big cause of it today are the sheiks who use anti-USA propaganda to keep their feudal/medieval hold on power (but I'm sure you don't buy that, either). Again, the USA's leaders are no angels, but clearly, another source of your position appears to be an anti-USA stance.
And this has nothing to do with an absolutist position: it has to do with Opening Your Eyes.

3. Again, your anti-USA sentiment is apparent.

4. You said terror is a concept; I said "concepts can't fly planes," meaning terror is more than a concept; it is a tactic being put into action by human beings. But this is moot. The fact remains, if terror as a weapon was useless, there wouldn't be terrorists.

5. Really, I just can't believe you're this naive--you are an extremely intelligent woman--but apparently you are more afraid than you care to admit or perhaps even realize yourself.

Omega, I do thank you for presenting a (somewhat) challenging POV, but again, I feel your position (which you have yet to clearly explain; all you've done is just point out what you disagree with about mine) is based in denial, anti-USA sentiment and/or surprising lack of awareness. Since it is obvious we will never reach agreement, as a show of respect, the last word is yours.
Wow, what we got here is an extremely civilised gentleman.

Originally posted by Mindship
1. If this has to be explained to you, no explanation will do. Plus, you have yet to convince me you are this naive in the first place.

2. For someone who doesn't like propaganda, you sure wave a lot of it around. Arab discontent existed long before there was a USA (consult a historian), and a big cause of it today are the sheiks who use anti-USA propaganda to keep their feudal/medieval hold on power (but I'm sure you don't buy that, either). Again, the USA's leaders are no angels, but clearly, another source of your position appears to be an anti-USA stance.
And this has nothing to do with an absolutist position: it has to do with Opening Your Eyes.

3. Again, your anti-USA sentiment is apparent.

4. You said terror is a concept; I said "concepts can't fly planes," meaning terror is more than a concept; it is a tactic being put into action by human beings. But this is moot. The fact remains, if terror as a weapon was useless, there wouldn't be terrorists.

5. Really, I just can't believe you're this naive--you are an extremely intelligent woman--but apparently you are more afraid than you care to admit or perhaps even realize yourself.

Omega, I do thank you for presenting a (somewhat) challenging POV, but again, I feel your position (which you have yet to clearly explain; all you've done is just point out what you disagree with about mine) is based in denial, anti-USA sentiment and/or surprising lack of awareness. Since it is obvious we will never reach agreement, as a show of respect, the last word is yours.

I don't think that this could have been said any better. You basically laid it on the line here.

I am beginning to realize, maybe I already knew, that there are some people in the world, including the US, that in their opinion the worst thing that could happen is if the US where to win the war on terrorism.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I am beginning to realize, maybe I already knew, that there are some people in the world, including the US, that in their opinion the worst thing that could happen is if the US where to win the war on terrorism.
The world is full of many different people with many different opinions and such this is only natural.

Boy there sure are a lot of blame America first people out there! Way I remember it, they attacked us first (meaning terrorists, not iraq). They were at war with us long before we as a nation even realized it.

How were we stopping them from living as they wished pre-9/11? Answer: We weren't. We didn't have much to do with the middle east aside from having a base in Saudi Arabia and buying their oil.

So tell me, How are we responsible for their decisions? Answer we aren't, they are. Al Qaeda brought the war on themselves. And for me what losing comes to is the US just giving up. You know what would happen then? More 9/11's thats what. Look at the terror plot that was foiled in Canada a little while ago. Canada isn't even in Iraq.

I hope the US doesn't stop until the current major terror groups are practically destroyed.

Of course the real war is a war of propaganda, and the terrorists do seem to be winning that one. All the blame America first idiots are proof of that.

Originally posted by docb77
Boy there sure are a lot of blame America first people out there! Way I remember it, they attacked us first (meaning terrorists, not iraq). They were at war with us long before we as a nation even realized it.

How were we stopping them from living as they wished pre-9/11? Answer: We weren't. We didn't have much to do with the middle east aside from having a base in Saudi Arabia and buying their oil.

So tell me, How are we responsible for their decisions? Answer we aren't, they are. Al Qaeda brought the war on themselves. And for me what losing comes to is the US just giving up. You know what would happen then? More 9/11's thats what. Look at the terror plot that was foiled in Canada a little while ago. Canada isn't even in Iraq.

I hope the US doesn't stop until the current major terror groups are practically destroyed.

Of course the real war is a war of propaganda, and the terrorists do seem to be winning that one. All the blame America first idiots are proof of that.

Both the Reagan administration and Osama bin Laden significantly armed, financed, and trained the Mujahideen to fight the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, and following the Soviet Retreat, the Reagan administration armed, financed, and trained the Taliban to fight the Mujahideen.

I do not see how that would turn an ally into enemy at all.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Both the Reagan administration and Osama bin Laden significantly armed, financed, and trained the Mujahideen to fight the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, and following the Soviet Retreat, the Reagan administration armed, financed, and trained the Taliban to fight the Mujahideen.

I do not see how that would turn an ally into enemy at all.






I do have to agree with you. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a complete twit...

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What would be the worse thing to happen if the US lost the war on terrorism?

The Jihad agaisn't the Infidel would be over. Which is good for them.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The Jihad agaisn't the Infidel would be over. Which is good for them.

So what you're saying is that anyone who didn't bow down to Islamic extremists would be dead.

The absolute worst possible would be if the terrorists got ahold of massive amounts of nuclear weapons and wiped out the human race, thus defeating the United States.

Originally posted by Gay Guy


I do have to agree with you. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a complete twit...

What is up with you moderators? He's a sock! Look at how he acts towards others that disprove his theory of stupidity? Just ban him and get it over with. That way, we can move on to the next sock.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
What is up with you moderators? He's a sock! Look at how he acts towards others that disprove his theory of stupidity? Just ban him and get it over with. That way, we can move on to the next sock.

Or and administrator can block people using proxy servers from accessing the site, and be done with sock accounts using false IP addresses altogether.

Originally posted by docb77
hysterical






....wait, I'm almost done laughing


hysterical



.... okay now I'm done. Sorry fell of my seat laughing there.

Yeah I know, you are being fooled by your own government...the people you voted in power lie to you 24/7...it's hilarious, I'm laughing all the time, that's how funny it is...

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Or and administrator can block people using proxy servers from accessing the site, and be done with sock accounts using false IP addresses altogether.

Are you ignorant or what, dude? If KMC banned all proxy servers, they will ban entire countries like mine - my entire country (South Africa), at least the public, uses the same proxy IP!

Originally posted by docb77
Canada isn't even in Iraq.Wow... your parents really hit the jackpot with you.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Wow... your parents really hit the jackpot with you.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah I know, you are being fooled by your own government...the people you voted in power lie to you 24/7...it's hilarious, I'm laughing all the time, that's how funny it is...

Just in case you didn't know, the govt. doesn't really have that much propaganda power here in the US (Freedom of the press and all that). More likely it's the media that's lying to you.

I hold murderers responsible for their own crimes, I don't care if they were beaten as kids or not. Same thing here. Those Islamist terrorists made their own bed. What came before is inconsequential and if they want the war to stop they can quit trying to blow innocent people up.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then look at it theoretically. I just don't want PVS turning this thread into a Bush bashing thread.
Judging from the title of this thread, that's probably something that will happen sooner or later, if not by PVS's hand.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What would be the worse thing to happen if the US lost the war on terrorism? terrorism would end

Originally posted by lord xyz
terrorism would end

I fail to see your logic. If the US gave up and went home, the islamist terrorists would be emboldened. We'd probably have even more 9/11 level events.

the only way to end terrorism without letting them kill everyone who doesn't agree with them is to kill them instead.

Originally posted by docb77
I fail to see your logic. If the US gave up and went home, the islamist terrorists would be emboldened. We'd probably have even more 9/11 level events.

the only way to end terrorism without letting them kill everyone who doesn't agree with them is to kill them instead.

Hahahahahaha, if you hadn't ****ed with them in the first place they wouldn't want to kill you now. And instead of stopping to **** them you continue, good job.