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

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!

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 Mindship
1. You're going off on tangents asking for these definitions. Others in this thread know very clearly who/what I am referring to.

2. As I said, a) Arab discontent goes back centuries, very likely with religionistic reasons at the core; and b) again, as I said, America is no angel. Do YOU believe the Arab-Islamic world is the victim; that (eg) 9/11 was justified? Perhaps you do; that would explain your position.

3. Again, off on tangents, and an assumption about China, which, at best, would be true economically. And it is an unfortunate aspect of this kind of war, as Ush and others posted, that we may never know when we have won, or even if we can ever win in the traditional sense, at least not in our lifetimes.

4. I never said Terror could fly a plane... but THIS may well be the crux of your position: you, your city, your country have not been attacked (and I pray that will never happen). If you / your city / your country had been attacked, then you would understand that Terror CAN do shit. If it didn't, there wouldn't be terrorists.

5. The USA, as imperfect as it is, IS regarded (rightly or wrongly) as a world leader, economically, politically and militarily. And it is not--it never was--a question of me, personally. And no, you can't force democracy on anyone, it must be a choice. And why would someone choose it? Because as Churchill said, it is the worst system, except for all the other systems.

Again, I'm starting to realize that much of your position comes from not having been touched by the War on Terror, not having Your city attacked, not seeing the smoke from Your office window (I say the following with all due respect, but I'm also beginning to suspect there may be good ol' fashioned [B]denial on your part--"no, I am not afraid terror will bomb my city, no. I don’t listen to scare-rhetoric from state-leaders." That's another example of the 'shit' Terror can do).

In any event, I do value your perspective because, if nothing else, it reminds me that we are not all on the same page. [/B]

1. I don’t care what others know or do not know. If you do not know who the “us”, “we”, “they” are, then just admit it. Otherwise tell me EXACTLY who you are talking about. Fussy and vague definitions are dangerous these days.

2. WOAAAW… have you been having propaganda for breakfast, lunch and dinner lately? I ask you: 2. Why did 9/11 happen? Why are so many Arab nations angry at the US government and the West in general? Discontent? Yes… Maybe you should try to understand WHAT caused this discontent. Or do you believe in “EVIL ARABS”?
And am immidiately being accused of thinking 9/11 is justified?? Scary to know you’re one of those absolutists “you’re either WITH us or AGAINST us.” So… you know NOTHING of Arab history in recent times even. Scary as well… And you did not answer my questions.

3. I am not making assumptions and vague definitions here. You have any doubts about Chinas growing economy and power? Well… (shrugs)… Again. You did not answer my questions. “We”? Who are “we”? You have NO say, NO power and make NO decisions. The US status as a superpower will be challenged within the next decades by China. And no one will win because “they have to.” That sounds very much like propaganda in my ears. WHEN will “we” have won? What will it take to declare victory? And over WHO? THEIR rule? Who are you talking about?

4. No, you said TERROR is not a concept, and went on to say concepts cannot fly airplanes. Right, concepts can’t do that. SO SPECIFICY WHO you are talking about – if you even KNOW who it is. Oh, goodness… What has happened to me, my friends, my city is completely irrelevant. Can you only discuss murder if someone you know have been murdered??
Terror is a concept or a feeling. TERROR can’t do ANYTHING…

5.Well you keep saying we, us and them, as if you personally had any say in anything. So because some Brit once made a quote on democracy it MUST be true because HE said it??

Well, your realisation is based on what… ? Do you even KNOW what my position is, Mindship? Ohhh, the rhetoric… TOUCHED by TERROR, MY CITY ATTACKED BY TERROR…
No, I am really, truly not afraid that TERROR will bomb my city. Because TERROR is a concept that can’t do anything. Could ANGER bomb my city? No, can’t do that either…
And you a reminding me how easy it is to get some people to spout – without critique – what comes from leaders, without contemplating the wording, the definitions and the consequences of being vague and fuzzy.

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
[COLOR=tomato]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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.