100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: what's ur view about terrorist. I think they are not human a | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.
1 Samuel 15:3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! Reagan's terrorists...er...Freedom Fighters, the Contras targeted cilivian populations- that is how they support the movement. Reagan done you bad? 
I merely gave a definition,why go politicize it? But here goes! How about the present POTUS's support and arming of sundry Groups,the problems of which are coming to the US to roost now? BTW,so did the Sandinistas,even after they became the Government! I didn't; just showing the blur between freedom fighter and terrorist. Nice to know you will defend your hero Reagan though. Personally, I believe him an idiot and not for his deep documented relationship with the mafia while SAG president. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Conrad_73
on
Mon 07/14/14 08:47 AM
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! Reagan's terrorists...er...Freedom Fighters, the Contras targeted cilivian populations- that is how they support the movement. Reagan done you bad?
I merely gave a definition,why go politicize it? But here goes! How about the present POTUS's support and arming of sundry Groups,the problems of which are coming to the US to roost now? BTW,so did the Sandinistas,even after they became the Government! I didn't; just showing the blur between freedom fighter and terrorist. Nice to know you will defend your hero Reagan though. Personally, I believe him an idiot and not for his deep documented relationship with the mafia while SAG president. OMG,that's a new one! Blame Reagan! Used to be,Blame Bush! 
Regardless,the Definition still stands!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! Reagan's terrorists...er...Freedom Fighters, the Contras targeted cilivian populations- that is how they support the movement. Reagan done you bad?
I merely gave a definition,why go politicize it? But here goes! How about the present POTUS's support and arming of sundry Groups,the problems of which are coming to the US to roost now? BTW,so did the Sandinistas,even after they became the Government! I didn't; just showing the blur between freedom fighter and terrorist. Nice to know you will defend your hero Reagan though. Personally, I believe him an idiot and not for his deep documented relationship with the mafia while SAG president. OMG,that's a new one! Blame Reagan! Used to be,Blame Bush!
Regardless,the Definition still stands!
I do blame Reagan for what he should be blamed for and Bush for what he should be blamed for. Even though I liked Johnson and Nixon, they still need to be blamed for what they need to be blamed for; same as with Obama. However, in the case of Reagan/Bush II, I hold them as evil people, why? Due to their views based on their cult-like version of Xianity. ( See I brought it full circle, catch that? Tried to slip it by ya). History is written by the victor, so Michael Collins is a hero, while the later boyos are terrorists? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! Reagan's terrorists...er...Freedom Fighters, the Contras targeted cilivian populations- that is how they support the movement. Reagan done you bad?
I merely gave a definition,why go politicize it? But here goes! How about the present POTUS's support and arming of sundry Groups,the problems of which are coming to the US to roost now? BTW,so did the Sandinistas,even after they became the Government! I didn't; just showing the blur between freedom fighter and terrorist. Nice to know you will defend your hero Reagan though. Personally, I believe him an idiot and not for his deep documented relationship with the mafia while SAG president. OMG,that's a new one! Blame Reagan! Used to be,Blame Bush!
Regardless,the Definition still stands!
I do blame Reagan for what he should be blamed for and Bush for what he should be blamed for. Even though I liked Johnson and Nixon, they still need to be blamed for what they need to be blamed for; same as with Obama. However, in the case of Reagan/Bush II, I hold them as evil people, why? Due to their views based on their cult-like version of Xianity. ( See I brought it full circle, catch that? Tried to slip it by ya). History is written by the victor, so Michael Collins is a hero, while the later boyos are terrorists? We are simply discussing the definition of Terrorism here,nothing else! Heck knows how we got off on a Tangent of whom to blame for what!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! Reagan's terrorists...er...Freedom Fighters, the Contras targeted cilivian populations- that is how they support the movement. Reagan done you bad?
I merely gave a definition,why go politicize it? But here goes! How about the present POTUS's support and arming of sundry Groups,the problems of which are coming to the US to roost now? BTW,so did the Sandinistas,even after they became the Government! I didn't; just showing the blur between freedom fighter and terrorist. Nice to know you will defend your hero Reagan though. Personally, I believe him an idiot and not for his deep documented relationship with the mafia while SAG president. OMG,that's a new one! Blame Reagan! Used to be,Blame Bush!
Regardless,the Definition still stands!
I do blame Reagan for what he should be blamed for and Bush for what he should be blamed for. Even though I liked Johnson and Nixon, they still need to be blamed for what they need to be blamed for; same as with Obama. However, in the case of Reagan/Bush II, I hold them as evil people, why? Due to their views based on their cult-like version of Xianity. ( See I brought it full circle, catch that? Tried to slip it by ya). History is written by the victor, so Michael Collins is a hero, while the later boyos are terrorists? We are simply discussing the definition of Terrorism here,nothing else! Heck knows how we got off on a Tangent of whom to blame for what!
You started it! Mom! I started it! I think it was the operation definition of "terrorizing civilians" as a distinctive mark distingiushing terrorist from freedom fighter. I hold, for example, even in the American War for Independence (by definition it was not a revolution) the civilian population was very much put on by both sides. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While were playin the blame game. I blame Carter for letting Castro almost convert central America and the Carib to communist dictators.
Reagan had to clean up Carters mess. Did you notice how fast the terrorist released the hostages in Iran after Reagan took office? I think those terrorist were muslims too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While were playin the blame game. I blame Carter for letting Castro almost convert central America and the Carib to communist dictators. Reagan had to clean up Carters mess. Did you notice how fast the terrorist released the hostages in Iran after Reagan took office? I think those terrorist were muslims too. Was it not quid pro quo? Arms for hostages and the freeing up frozen assets. No one is playing the blame game, after all this isn't the FOX News channel. Forgive me for I have sinned, I am coveting my neighbors azz. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While were playin the blame game. I blame Carter for letting Castro almost convert central America and the Carib to communist dictators. Reagan had to clean up Carters mess. Did you notice how fast the terrorist released the hostages in Iran after Reagan took office? I think those terrorist were muslims too. Was it not quid pro quo? Arms for hostages and the freeing up frozen assets. No one is playing the blame game, after all this isn't the FOX News channel. Forgive me for I have sinned, I am coveting my neighbors azz. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
alleoops
on
Mon 07/14/14 12:36 PM
|
|
While were playin the blame game. I blame Carter for letting Castro almost convert central America and the Carib to communist dictators. Reagan had to clean up Carters mess. Did you notice how fast the terrorist released the hostages in Iran after Reagan took office? I think those terrorist were muslims too. Was it not quid pro quo? Arms for hostages and the freeing up frozen assets. No one is playing the blame game, after all this isn't the FOX News channel. Forgive me for I have sinned, I am coveting my neighbors azz. They could have done all that while Carter was in office. I think it was more of CYA on their part. 
Carter left us with the ayatollah khomeini, we forgot to thank him for that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More up to speed.
The current terrorists are muslims and their desire to convert and conquer. Their so-called MODERATE counterparts may not be chiming in but, sure as hell don't see any condemnation of the radical actions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! people dont lose loved ones gracefully there are many 'civilian' peole who die when freedom fighters 'target' non civilians,, there is no way to seperate them, and rarely a circumstance where they are seperate those who loose those 'civilian' relatives sometimes want an eye for an eye and 'target' civilians themselves they are still human,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Am a military personal and have seen a lot of deadly act . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! people dont lose loved ones gracefully there are many 'civilian' peole who die when freedom fighters 'target' non civilians,, there is no way to seperate them, and rarely a circumstance where they are seperate those who loose those 'civilian' relatives sometimes want an eye for an eye and 'target' civilians themselves they are still human,,, I believe the "terrorists" in question are deliberately attacking civilians to spread fear, or "terror" if you will. Civilians killed by these people are not collateral damage when attacking a target, they are the target. This tactic is highly immoral and cowardice at its very best. Although I do agree with there being a very blurred line between the being a freedom fighter and a terrorist. The terms are often confused, or misused for political reasons. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! people dont lose loved ones gracefully there are many 'civilian' peole who die when freedom fighters 'target' non civilians,, there is no way to seperate them, and rarely a circumstance where they are seperate those who loose those 'civilian' relatives sometimes want an eye for an eye and 'target' civilians themselves they are still human,,, I believe the "terrorists" in question are deliberately attacking civilians to spread fear, or "terror" if you will. Civilians killed by these people are not collateral damage when attacking a target, they are the target. This tactic is highly immoral and cowardice at its very best. Although I do agree with there being a very blurred line between the being a freedom fighter and a terrorist. The terms are often confused, or misused for political reasons. that's where the difference lies,regardless of the Hairsplitting and Obfuscation by some Liberals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lol one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter I think they are human, I think we all are,,the good bits and the bad but hopefully we strive to nurture and exhibit more of the good than than the bad There is a difference! Freedomfighters don't usually on purpose target Civilian Populations,Terrorists do! It's the purpose of terrorism! people dont lose loved ones gracefully there are many 'civilian' peole who die when freedom fighters 'target' non civilians,, there is no way to seperate them, and rarely a circumstance where they are seperate those who loose those 'civilian' relatives sometimes want an eye for an eye and 'target' civilians themselves they are still human,,, I believe the "terrorists" in question are deliberately attacking civilians to spread fear, or "terror" if you will. Civilians killed by these people are not collateral damage when attacking a target, they are the target. This tactic is highly immoral and cowardice at its very best. Although I do agree with there being a very blurred line between the being a freedom fighter and a terrorist. The terms are often confused, or misused for political reasons. the language is interesting,, the terrorist definition you provide here could easily describe our 'serial killers' and 'mass shooters',,,, but there has to be able to be a political spin for it to be 'terrorism', I guess |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
