It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by plumranch
If Bill or Hill had been in charge either would have claimed credit big time and the liberal media would have it all over the news. So I will claim credit for Bush 2!
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
and if you just knocked out 2 of the largest buildings in the world, you're not going to go for a smaller attack.
originally by Madness,
um... ok, you're acting as if there's a massive terrorist network.
before you label them shameless killers
If one of our troops participated in indiscriminate killing they would face endless lawyers. No moral equivalency here.
look at the allies of the USA
Originally posted by plumranch
originally by Madness,
um... ok, you're acting as if there's a massive terrorist network.
Didn't say that.
before you label them shameless killers
If one of our troops participated in indiscriminate killing they would face endless lawyers. No moral equivalency here.
look at the allies of the USA
I think that if they could, some group somewhere in the US would blow up something, even a car of bus. They would do it on Mohamed's birthday or other key date. Terrorist attacks occur in other western countries because they are easier prey than the US. The fact that they have not been able to stage another US attack is probably because they are too disorganized, on the run and we have an inside track on them, at least so far.
you equated all terrorist attacks on the allies of the USA to 9/11...
Our troups have rules of engagement. We have rules now we had them in Nam. Individual soldiers have to be very careful when they pull the trigger.
no, they wouldn't. the USA does it all the time, actually. we label the deaths of civilians as "collateral damage"
I remember Hamas purposely placing their own civilians in front of their military targets in the last war. They were asking for civilian casualties so they could go to the media and point to the nasty Israelies.
like israel, big one there. they kill more civilians than the accused "terrorists
Originally posted by plumranch
I think that if they could, some group somewhere in the US would blow up something, even a car of bus. They would do it on Mohamed's birthday or other key date.
Terrorist attacks occur in other western countries because they are easier prey than the US. The fact that they have not been able to stage another US attack is probably because they are too disorganized, on the run and we have an inside track on them, at least so far.
My guess is they will wait till there is a weaker administration in power before taking another shot.
Our troups have rules of engagement. We have rules now we had them in Nam. Individual soldiers have to be very careful when they pull the trigger.
Is there collateral damage when someone higher up the chain of command orders a bombing of a likely target, of course. But targets are not indiscriminately sellected. Again there is no moral equivalency between their indiscriminate bombing of civilians and the way we are conducting the war IMHO.
I remember Hamas purposely placing their own civilians in front of their military targets in the last war. They were asking for civilian casualties so they could go to the media and point to the nasty Israelies.
Yes, but 99% of terrorists are Muslim. An activity not condoned in their Koran and most of their victims are Muslims. Go figure!
By madness:
...are you aware that not all terrorists are muslims?
Our Senate and Congress are controled by the Dems. If what Bush (the Executive Branch) is doing is not constitutional the Dems would stop them pronto!
do you mean one that doesn't step outside it's constitutionally powers
We do not have the same rules of engagement as we did in Nam. I'm just saying that we had rules in both engagements. IMO those rules helped the enemy win that war.
yeah... exactly, the rules we had back in 'nam... those worked out so well
Try to explain that to the families of the victims of 9-11 and hundreds of other terrorist bombings around the world.
terrorists aren't just people that indiscriminately hate
Originally posted by plumranch
Yes, but 99% of terrorists are Muslim. An activity not condoned in their Koran and most of their victims are Muslims. Go figure!
Our Senate and Congress are controled by the Dems. If what Bush (the Executive Branch) is doing is not constitutional the Dems would stop them pronto!
We do not have the same rules of engagement as we did in Nam. I'm just saying that we had rules in both engagements. IMO those rules helped the enemy win that war.
Try to explain that to the families of the victims of 9-11 and hundreds of other terrorist bombings around the world.
Originally posted by dgtempe
I think i'm going to be sick.
Our president is protecting us and loves us dearly, so much so, that he's going to do a mercy killing on all of us one day soon.