IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Re: That's precisely what they depend on.
> It's time to put a little uncertainty into their lives. A little swift, unilateral action will screw up their calculations and make ROI far more uncertain.

Like the way the TERRORISTS did to the America?

Not quite.

If you didn't have your head stuck up somewhere, you'd see a vast difference.

United States forces (usually) (attempt to) bend over backwards to avoid hitting civilians. Witness the constant shelling of the airport in Sarevjo - where the US forces wouldn't fire back, since it might hit people nearby.

This was a deliberate attack *using civilians as cover*.

The United States response is not to take out civilians - which would be the analog you're discussing, but the planners, financeers, leaders, and grunts of the terrorist movements.

If they'd just started carpet bombing Afganistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the Phillipines, yes, then it would be exactly the same.

Addison
New Re: That's precisely what they depend on.
> If they'd just started carpet bombing Afganistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the Phillipines, yes, then it would be exactly the same.
>

Addison,

I do understand what you are saying. And to a certain degree, I do CHOOSE to believe that the US will try to avert civilian casaulties as much as possible.

But (you knew there is going to be one, don't you).

Read through the earlier posts and you'll see that there are indeed posts that suggested/supported NUKING the Arab region to kingdom come.

That kind of attitude is NO different from those that you, and I condemn, and THAT is the point that you seem to choose NOT to see.

     What proof do we need against bin Laden? - (brettj) - (18)
         Proof for what purpose? - (Another Scott) - (10)
             To show the world that a unilateral decision will not happen - (brettj) - (7)
                 That's precisely what they depend on. - (Andrew Grygus) - (5)
                     Re: That's precisely what they depend on. - (TTC) - (4)
                         Morals have nothing to do with it. - (boxley) - (1)
                             typo? - (tablizer)
                         Re: That's precisely what they depend on. - (addison) - (1)
                             Re: That's precisely what they depend on. - (TTC)
                 Re: To show the world that a unilateral decision will not ha - (wharris2)
             Powell has been running off at the mouth a lot - (wharris2) - (1)
                 Rather not, IMO - (kmself)
         Proof? Why don't we just take him at his word? - (Andrew Grygus)
         No proof will persuade the Arab/Muslim street - (bluke) - (5)
             Regarding this rumor - (brettj) - (2)
                 Um. Brett? - (addison) - (1)
                     I see your point. - (brettj)
             Re: No proof will persuade the Arab/Muslim street - (a6l6e6x) - (1)
                 Actually if anything Israel has come out much worse... - (bluke)

Gifts to acquaintances and coworkers should be delivered with as much warmth and sincerity as you can fake.
66 ms