Sept. 11th

[S-Gray]

Its so true Bush has to be the "Hero" in making the world "War free" but in doing so he wants to cause wars to stop them?

 

[Sar]

Blow up the Statue of Liberty, then bring Charlton Heston out of retirement so he can go nuts.








Again.








Then he could possibly shoot them.







If he could aim straight that is.

 

[Daffeh]

is he even still alive?

 

[PR.]

Personally I don't have a problem with us taking on Sadam or Blair supporting Bush.

We should have sorted the Iraq problem the first time round, and Blair is helping to keep support and I think he wants to help countrys unite instead of countries like Russia and the US still harbouring there cold war paranoia.

I was watching something on tele reguarding Iraq and they had an official from the UN saying that during the breaks the Weapons Inspectors 'lost' several thousand tons/tanks of some biological weapon and Iraq have never 'got round' to answering there questions regarding it.

I have the feeling that they are hiding weapons, maybe not Nuclear but more likely biological stuff

I feel there will be some 'token' gesture from some terrorist organisation nothing on the scale of last year but something to remind the public that they are still around

 

[Sar]

Originally posted by Daffeh
is he even still alive?

Yeah, unfortunately.

Fucking Gun nut.

 

[Sar]

Originally posted by PR.
I feel there will be some 'token' gesture from some terrorist organisation nothing on the scale of last year but something to remind the public that they are still around

Hopefully to assassinate Dubya.

That'd do us all a favour.

 

[Sar]

Aaaaanyways, as Summo said, I can't see them pulling off anything major like last year.

Because let's face it, the US aren't exactly sleeping on their arses like they were this time last year. They'll be anticipating something, as will, evidently, the rest of the world.

The irony would be if the US is on high alert for a massive attack and the Al-Qaeda pull off something equally tragic on Britain, because let's face it, which country is the US's biggest apologist?

 

[Daffeh]

i could see someone attacking the Statue actually....


but i think that would be too Hollywood-ish


PR, i disagree about Blair supporting Bush. Yes getting rid of Saddam may help, but Blair will support Bush on ANYTHING, which is what i have a problem with. Hell, i bet Blair would support an attack on England, if Bush suggested it

 

[Daffeh]

Originally posted by Sar
Aaaaanyways, as Summo said, I can't see them pulling off anything major like last year.

Because let's face it, the US aren't exactly sleeping on their arses like they were this time last year. They'll be anticipating something, as will, evidently, the rest of the world.

The irony would be if the US is on high alert for a massive attack and the Al-Qaeda pull off something equally tragic on Britain, because let's face it, which country is the US's biggest apologist?

as long as the attack just takes out Blair and his cronies, we're home and dry

 

[Dev^]

hmm

all about religion and oil(well okay most of todays troubles are anyway)...anybody that follows this shit to this extreme can fuck off and die a nasty death....cunts.

I would rather ride a bike and look forward rather than be dictated by the past. Sure we can look at the past and learn valuable lessons......suicide and kill others? Cause injury to innocent people?

Rather watch West Ham lose at home......twisted fuckers!

Be realistic not a sheep.

hmmm although, do we wait for the inevitable or are we going to be proactive?

Tough one.

good evening.

 

[S-Gray]

besides, if they kill / capture Hussain / bin Laden, one part of the problem would be sorted, but unfortunatly i dont think they go around alone.. they will have followers who will do their work in the name of "Allah"

Al Quieda may not do anything (but that is unlikely) instead we may see other Groups of Terrorist' making a name for themselves

 

[S-Gray]

Re: hmm

Originally posted by Dev^
I would rather ride a bike and look forward rather than be dictated by the past. Sure we can look at the past and learn valuable lessons......suicide and kill others? Cause injury to innocent people?

Isnt that what riding a Bike is all about? Looking forward? Unless your a Stunt Rider

 

[Dev^]

idd

my point

 

[Daffeh]

as stated before, attacking Iraq is likely to make these 'fanatics' despise the West even more, and might turn more people again the West, and thats exactly what we dont want.



hmmm a worldwide ban on religion on the other hand....

 

[Sar]

That's the thing that gets me about religious fanatics - they say they're doing all this because god told them, or it's "god's will" (deliberate lower case g there), but what these idiots fail to realise is this one simple pertinent fact:



Man is not the creation of God

God is the creation of Man.

 

[Sar]

And here's another one:

In the absence of human judgement, everything is fine.























So what does that tell you about religion?

 

[Daffeh]

some deep messages there

 

[Damini]

I think Saddam should have been taken out long ago, and I thought this way before sept 11th. When you read about the Jewish persecution during the second world war, and see the pictures of all those people, irregardless of broached borders or invaded countries, I feel that was justification itself for a war. You cannot simply stand back and let man systematically kill man, and reduce their life value to that of vermin. In wars, yes, lives are lost, but at least this is a transitional process, rather than establishing what is hoped to be the norm.

Saddam wiped out 5,000 people with nerve gas, not a military target, not an approaching army, but simply 5,000 kurds in their village, going about life. To put it comparatively, about 3,300 (ish) died in the twin towers.

So if you look at that image, and see what the man is capable of out of war, then I think it gives a fairly good spur on to deposing him. It should have been done the instant he started commiting genocide, and shouldn't need a terrorist crusade to spur people on, or the fear that he is stock piling nuclear/chemical/biological weapons. For fear, I think you can pretty much read fact. If the United States wants to play Parental Country, it should start intervening when trouble starts, not kick the bee's nest and then retreat to let it get angrier and rebuild.


And I think an attack on the eleventh is likely, but I think it will be small token acts rather than a large atrocity like before. I think it would be very unlikely to be a biological attack, due to incubation time which would mean that the significance of hitting on that date would be lost. Chemical attacks can be very haphazard, and as proved on the Tokyo subway, despite causing mass injury, I don't think they can really predict mortality too effectively. The obvious, in my opinion, would be synchronised bombs, or suicide bombings - huge visual effect, moral undermining and the fact they can be very tightly timed would add to the dramatic impact upon america. They'd want to do it just to prove they could, so they are likely to go for something easier to control.



This is all a little deep for a friday morning.

 

[legendario]

I hear a lot of you saying they won't try a large scale attack. Osama proved last year that terror has no boundaries and the large scale devastation of the US and its allies is his goal.

You have to rememeber that it wasn't just death and destruction he sought, he hit the WTC for a reason, to make a dent in a fragile economy.

With this in mind I wouldn't be as silly as to rule out anything.

Ph33r.

 

[Sir Frizz]

Sar, i'm going to marry you.

 

[Damini]

I'm not saying he won't ever try a large scale attack; infact, I'd be exceptionally surprised if he doesn't do something that will completely push the boundaries of atrocities at some stage. What I'm saying is that if he's hoping to strike on sept 11th in order to undermine American confidence, he'll aim for dramatic and easy, because if you try to do something huge and fuck it it makes you look shite. He's a showman, it's the grand spectacle he's interested in.

 

[stu]

Originally posted by Damini
I think Saddam should have been taken out long ago, and I thought this way before sept 11th. When you read about the Jewish persecution during the second world war, and see the pictures of all those people, irregardless of broached borders or invaded countries, I feel that was justification itself for a war. You cannot simply stand back and let man systematically kill man, and reduce their life value to that of vermin. In wars, yes, lives are lost, but at least this is a transitional process, rather than establishing what is hoped to be the norm.

Interesting. Where do you stand on Israel?

Incidentally, 5,000 is nothing compared to the 200,000 or so Iraqi civilians the US is responsible for killing.

edit: btw... Iraq 1 - 0 USA

 

[legendario]

Originally posted by Damini
if you try to do something huge and fuck it it makes you look shite

... I couldn't have put it better myself.

True.. he nearly fucked up the trade centre attacks and had to bring the date forward (or push it back ..can't remember)..in retrospect I probably should have thought before posting that comment :/

 

[Damini]

I don't know enough about the Israel affair to make a judgement, but the Iraqi issue is something I have read alot about.

Its all highly emotive to decree that the US is killing Iraqi children, and I'm assuming this is about embargos. Naturally, you can't help but empathise when thrown the propoganda of children dying because lack of anti biotics, etc... The sad truth is that Saddam's regime cannot be trusted with these antibiotics, the same way that much charity money sent to africa gets swallowed by the people in power and doesn't reach the people that appear sad eyed and dying on the advertisements. Antibiotics can be used as an inhibitor when growing cultures for biological warfare. Iraq could have negotiated, worked complicitly with the weapons inspectors, but I think you'll find that Saddam is far happier to make a martyr of his people in order to create interest in his cause then he is to compromise. Every war is about propoganda as much as it is about weapons and money these days, and I'd have some issue with believing every figure Iraq presents. I have every sympathy for the Iraqi people, and I wish that they could recieve all the help and aid they need, but as it stands I doubt very much they would recieve the full benefits of it anyway.

As I've said before, I'm not much of a politician, more of a humanitarian, so if there are holes in my argument I'd be glad to hear them, because I'm not set in stone. The way I see it is that Saddam is a threat to his own people (people missing in the middle of the night for expressing diverse political opinions), he's a threat to bordering countries and outlying tribes, and he's a threat globally, as he is blatantly willing to carry out the tasks most people use as only threats.

 

[GDW]

Originally posted by stu


Interesting. Where do you stand on Israel?

Incidentally, 5,000 is nothing compared to the 200,000 or so Iraqi civilians the US is responsible for killing.

edit: btw... Iraq 1 - 0 USA

...and how many more Kuwait citizens would Iraq have killed before 200k of their civs where killed? Probably many more

 

[Sar]

Originally posted by Damini
I don't know enough about the Israel affair to make a judgement, but the Iraqi issue is something I have read alot about...

Problem is though, that with those types of regimes, killing Saddam would be like chopping the head off a hydra - chop one off and two appear in its place.



I do agree though, he needs to be removed from power (in other words killed), and Dubya's good old pop fucked that one up when he had the chance. Now considering that Dubya himself is just like his daddy, except a million times more retarded, the chances of that happening, unless someone sits him down and explains why it's necessary with the help of a childrens nursery rhyme or something, are pretty slim.

 

[Mellow-]

All this theorising is all very well and good, but if America hadn't got involved with the rest of the world so much there wouldn't be so much dislike for the western world.

I really do dislike the American President.

Where's the British Empire when you need it.

 

[prime1]

Originally posted by stu


Interesting. Where do you stand on Israel?

Incidentally, 5,000 is nothing compared to the 200,000 or so Iraqi civilians the US is responsible for killing.

edit: btw... Iraq 1 - 0 USA

Bullshit, utter utter bullshit, the US etc are not responsible for that. The food and medical supplies were sent enough to supply the people, the Iraqi authorities held it up and denied their people access to it, cause it makes Saddams position stronger amongst his own people - so he can claim the chaos is caused by the US. I read on the CNN website today that Iraq threatened Australia in august -- they said they would halt ALL GRAIN imports from Oz if they continued to support the US. THATS the kind of bullshit that caused those people to die, not the Americans.

They also stopped the food and medical supplies for oil agreement for a while not too long ago. These are not the actions of a state that gives a damn about its people. All they had to do in order to get teh sanctions lifted, was allow the UN to COMPLETE its weapons inspections.

The original Gulf War ended on the premise that weapons inspections coudl continue and the UN resolutiosn would be followed. Iraq has been in flagrant violation of the PEACE treaty, as such the allies ahve every right to revoke that treaty and finish the job they started a decade ago.

And dont give me that crap about "this is about oil" cause oil prices will RISE if we go to war, the US wants prices to be as low as possible. The UK produces enough oil from the North Sea to supply its own needs, the US produces enough oil to supply itself as well, so if push comes to shove they can supply themselves regardless.

another point for thought ....

Pretty much the sole source of income for the Arabic states in that region is oil - a finite resource -- tell me this, what do you think will happen when that resource runs out?

 

[Mellow-]

Such a heated response there, you're not American by any chance are you?

 

[dysfunction]

From Sky News:

Lone bombers and gunmen unconnected to al Qaeda could strike in Britain on September 11, anti-terror chiefs have warned.

So There we have it...