You don’t mean that… That’s simply too stupid to be your opinion.
Explain please why it's "stupid".
Terrorists hate us - free people, our way of life, and our beliefs - which is why they launch attacks on free nations.
Please don't call my opinion "stupid" without giving some sort of reasoning or explanation as to why.
Originally posted by DeRFmAnso that's truth what they say about american cars 😑
it would take me 7.8 gallons to go 100km which would be 29.53 litresI think I did the math right
Originally posted by Lananot so good then...
Okay, I recalculated it, and it'd be about 11.28 litres to go 100 km.
Originally posted by DeRFmAn😂
HA my mileage is more worser then your's is...hahahahaha.......sorry I turned 11 again.
BackFire> By saying “they simply hate us”, you risk turning your attention away from the “why are they doing this?” I recall, after 9/11, that it was quickly phrased as “evil-doers attacking freedom”. No one seemed to stop up and go “Well, okay, why DID these people commit this terrible act?” “What is their motivation?” “HOW can we prevent it?”
“Terrorists hate us - free people, our way of life, and our beliefs - which is why they launch attacks on free nations.”
This is way to simplistic, BF. First of all there are terrorists in North-Ireland and the Bask-area of Spain for example who don’t HATE “us”.
To say “they hate us” “they hate free people, they hate our way of life, they hate our beliefs” could be a clever politicians way of masking other motives. People could easily go “oh, my god, “they” hate ME. ME personally, even though I never did anything to them.”
I think this rhetoric is dangerous – and I call it rhetorics, because that is exactly what it is.
Let me ask you this: Do you think the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are lowering or raising the number of Al-Queda-members?
”Please don't call my opinion "stupid" without giving some sort of reasoning or explanation as to why.”
I apologize. My brain hotwired when I read the opening posts of the thread, and it should not have been directed at you.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It's simple; if you kill Bin Laden, he becomes more powerful. Best to let him die on his own.
So your theory is that the ingenious US military actually knows, or knew at one point, exactly where he was, and consciously chose not to kill him so he could "die on his own"...? What a brilliant reason to invade a country! 😱
So, whereabouts in Oregon you from? 😐
Originally posted by BackFire
Explain please why it's "stupid".Terrorists hate us - free people, our way of life, and our beliefs - which is why they launch attacks on free nations.
Please don't call my opinion "stupid" without giving some sort of reasoning or explanation as to why.
Are you actually claiming that there are people who ENJOY being oppressed?
They don't launch attacks on "free nations". You'll notice that there are a great many "free" nations that haven't been attacked by terrorists.
What I find interesting is how, before we attacked Iraq, there were very few terrorists there, like here. That was because, although it was very oppressed, everything was reasonably under control, most people had food and water, etc. Of course, as in virtually any country, including the US, there were people who were willing to commit terrorist acts, but either didn't try or weren't successful. And then as soon as it gets invaded and all hell breaks loose—ta da! Terrorists! And what's more, the American military, which is supposedly the best in the world, is totally unable to control such attacks.
Originally posted by DeRFmAn
oooooo good point I had not thought that. Though ours was by far worse then a lot of others. Although I don't think that they were expecting it to be as bad as it was either.
Far worse....well......It had a few more dead granted...but the idea that it was "far" worse I think comes from the notion that the US was attacked on their own ground....