| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| No Bin Laden, No "Truce with Europe" | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 15 2004, 03:17 AM (424 Views) | |
| Swidden | Apr 15 2004, 10:40 PM Post #16 |
|
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
|
So, how long before we hear a bootleg of Osama singing "All we are saying is give peace a chance..."? Y'know, some of those caves can have really great acoustics...
|
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| 24thcenstfan | Apr 15 2004, 11:14 PM Post #17 |
|
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
|
I am just glad the Europeans didn’t take OBL up on his offer of a truce. I believe Anon posted a link on this, but here is another LINK OBL is nothing but scum. I propose we just go ahead and carpet bomb the whole mountainous region between Afghanistan and Pakistan (where he is most likely living it up in some luxurious cave). Ok, maybe not carpet bombing, we definitely wouldn't want to decimate the local villages, etc...you get the idea though. At this point, making OBL a martyr isn’t going to alter the extremist thinking of his followers/would be followers who already harbor such hatred against us anyway. The sooner OBL and his asinine audio tapes are out of commission, the better IMO. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| somerled | Apr 16 2004, 12:16 AM Post #18 |
|
Admiral MacDonald RN
|
No - they voted that way because they wanted to send a clear message to their government who involved their military in a conflict they (the Spanish) weren't supportive off. There was no cowardous involved. The Spanish have been victims of internal terrorism for decades and are hardened to it. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| anon_persona | Apr 16 2004, 07:44 AM Post #19 |
|
Lieutenant Junior Grade
|
What's the source that the Spanish government tried to make the attack look like it was part of the Seperatist movement? I thought the terrorism info came out pretty darn fast - it must have given that it was out before the election and the attack had occurred only days before. So the Spanish are victims of terrorism and hardened because of it, but they want their troops out of the war on terror despite that? I can't follow that line of thought. I thought this was interesting in light of this discussion: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...dc&e=2&ncid=721 So bin Laden wants Bush to be president because Bush wouldn't be likely to capture bin Laden, while Kerry would "kill them in their sleep." Could they be more transparent? |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Cool Vulcan | Apr 16 2004, 12:51 PM Post #20 |
|
Captain
|
They are cowards, because they backed away from protecting themselves. What they did in Madrid they delcared a war on Spain if they hadn't been helping America. Once we are gone you should brush up on your Arabic because Bin Laden a comin! |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Hoss | Apr 16 2004, 01:01 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
|
Hmmmm..... Al Quaida negotiating for a truce with no promting..... An organization that was here to for dedicated to the ideals of radical islam and the destruction of the west, has now changed from this radical, hard-lined stance. Where is the dedication? Where is the devotion to the Allah who wants all the infidels killed? How is he going to be assured of his 120 virgins when he dies and is delivered to his promised reward if he doesn't kill the evil Satans of the western Christian cultures and their dogs in Israel? It seems to me that two things are crystal clear. 1. the war on Al Quaida is working. They have suffered heavy punishment and are scrambling to recover. They seek to divide their enemy by offering this plastic truce and abandoning their ideals. 2. the radical islamic terrorists smell weakness and fear in Europe, but not in Israel and America for some reason. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Intrepid2002 | Apr 16 2004, 01:01 PM Post #22 |
|
UNGH!
|
Minority? Where? On this message board maybe. :rolleyes: |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Adrian | Apr 17 2004, 02:24 AM Post #23 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Here's a BBC Link to one story, although it was pretty well covered in the press. It dosen't pay to lie to your people in a Democracy (especially right before an election). Most of the world dosen't accept the "War on Terror" brand I suppose. They probably see our efforts against Al Qieda and see that we invaded Iraq. One they support, the other they don't. Like a lot of us Americans are realizing (like President Bush for one), they don't buy that Iraq had anything to do with Al Quieda; so they have no problem pulling out their troops. Anon, your link didn't go through, could you repost? And I will say that in hindsight, Bush is the best president for Al Quieda. No one else I could think of would have gone into Iraq. Very few things could have brought more Muslums on the side of Al Quieda than invading Iraq (okay, nuking Mecca would have done it better). But invading Iraq screamed to the Moslem world "Look, the infidels just want our oil! They're embarking on a Crusade agianst our way of life! Al Qieda was right!". |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| anon_persona | Apr 17 2004, 03:17 AM Post #24 |
|
Lieutenant Junior Grade
|
That link died because Yahoo removed the story - it was just the story where Usama endorses Bush because he's supposedly incompetent. It's so obvious that they are afraid of Bush and want Kerry in there so they won't be truly threatened anymore. Adrian I have again and again proven a watertight case for Iraq in more than one thread. You sometimes feel the need to attack it, but you only like to attack little points you don't like, rather than even attempt to defeat the entire argument. This time you just made a blanket statement that it's a bad idea. If you think Iraq is a bad decision, instead of merely saying so all the time, why don't you come up with something to support it? And an argument, not soundbytes like "oil" or "Bush is evil" etc. If all these Muslim countries hate us, than why is Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Iran, Pakistan, and more helping us out? Yeah, lots of people risk their lives to support wars for countries they hate. And the US really cares about Iraqi oil - that's why te three countries most against the war had the biggest oil contracts there (France, Russia, and Germany), that's why we've been working hard to stabilize the country instead of concentrating much resources on the oil lines, that's why no one in the Bush administration mentions it, that's why we invaded Afghanistan, for oil. That's why. Right. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ds9074 | Apr 19 2004, 07:16 AM Post #25 |
|
Admiral
|
All western Government will, and have, condemed this offer. Interestingly however there were some European commentators on the BBC recently saying that while their Governments may have been forthright in their rejection, this was not the case amoung the people. It was given some consideration. I have to say there is not that sentiment here in Britain, everyone realises what a bad idea a truce would be. I hope it doesnt come to this, but it may do. There may be a point where the British have to make a clear choice - Europe or America. Almost everything we have done so far, along with our history and culture, says that we will choose the USA. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| Dandandat | Apr 19 2004, 07:24 AM Post #26 |
|
Time to put something here
|
Why should the choice be "Europe or America"? Should not the choice be doing what is best to protect the British? Isn't there something fundamentally wrong with America vs Europe? It reminds me of the old saying "divided and concur" |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
| ds9074 | Apr 19 2004, 09:52 AM Post #27 |
|
Admiral
|
I dont want Britain to have to choose between Europe and America, but it seems that on a lot of issues there are divisons of policy arising and we are going to have to decide which side of the fence to be on. We have tried to be a 'bridge' but it just hasnt worked out. On the one hand we struggle to influence the agenda in Washington and on the other we alienate the Europeans and struggle to influence the EU agenda. We end in the worst possible position - adrift mid-atlantic. The underlying problem is that the electorate want something that the politicians cannot deliver. They want Britain to be a super power again. Our answer to the problem has primarily been to cosy up to the US. The idea is that your power is our power. Your influence is our influence. The French have the same problem but their approach has been to cosy up with the Germans and try to create a European superpower. This is central to European relations, politics and policies. |
| Offline | Profile | | Quote | ^ |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." Learn More · Sign-up Now |
|
| « Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2




2:13 PM Jul 11