Al - Zarquai Killed in Iraq!!!
- 06-10-2006, 01:35 AM
Originally Posted by CDB
You say I should step forward for a second and view the details. Yet, ironically, the current administration used this same logic as they convinced the American public to focus on the one seemingly focal detail of the war in Iraq, that Osama Bin Laden had some connection with Sadaam Hussein. I personally think the time to fixate on details has long passed. If more Americans had a complete understanding of how their vulnerablitity and intense feelings of the need for retribution were taken advantage of to justify an unjust war, I believe they would focus far more on the bigger picture as well
I want to reiterate that I am not trying to dimish the sense of relief and satisfaction that the families of his victims may feel, nor imply in any sense that his death means nothing. I just feel that his death should be viewed as a small moral victory. Viewing it as any more, or focusing too much importance on it will do nothing but perpetuate the situation.
- 06-10-2006, 10:01 AM
Why isn't both sides happy about this terrorist being dead. Both Dems and Reps should be congratulating each other on this. Is this the end of terrorism and resurgent attacks in Iraq, NO. But that is like saying why arrest the Son of sam, only another serial killer will take his place.
I believe, both sides are being taken over by there fringe, but more so on the Dem side i sadly feel. The last few days, the talking point Dems and some Congressmen are saying the most ass nine things. One Dem pundit was saying this morning that Bush was parading the photos of this dead scumbag and holding press conferences like he was gloating. if anything, Bush has been very restrained in his rhetoric and said the violence will not stop by this guys death. Some have said that Bush did this to improve his numbers and make everyone forget all his failures.
I mean, come on. Whats next, if we find Bin Laden and kill him, will these same people call it a ploy, said we did the wrong thing because now he is a martyr, that violence begets violence, that it is a ploy to improve his numbers???
I usually am not happy by the death of another human being, but when a killer like Al Zarquai, Bin Laden, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, Hitler, Stalin die, whether at the govts hands, there own hands, natural causes, accidents etc I am happy to the thought that now that person will not be able to destroy someone elses right to live.
Dems should stop this non-sense of whenever something good like this happens to find the grey cloud in the silver lining. I dont agree with Jack Murtha, but at least the guy said it is a good thing this guy is gone now.
06-10-2006, 03:23 PM
Originally Posted by DinoTrainer
Not sure if you are referring to me or not, but I am not an American, and if I was would not align myself along political lines. To address the silver-lining concept, if you read my posts I never once said this is not a good thing. What I was trying to state however, is that though this small victory can and will be savoured by a select few, the masses SHOULD NOT be lulled into thinking this is a significant military victory. It simply is not. In such global matters I do not think it is pertinent to focus too much on the death of one individual. As I said before it was this same logic that led the United States into this war in the first place.
Also, to both CDB and Dinotrainer, I do not think the "why arrest the Son of sam, only another serial killer will take his place" argument has much precident here. Although there are, and have been many serial killers, as their cases standed they are isolated individuals. Arresting that one serial killer is effective as it eliminates the threat of that one individuals further course of action, there is a direct correlation between crime and personal accountability. Although another serial killer will arise, he will not continue on the same path, for the same victims, in the same city, etc., Seeing as Zarqawi was part of a vast network, that if left continually unchecked can/will threaten the safety of individuals everywhere, trying to create an analogy between his deeds and one individual serial killer has no merit beyond that of personal satisfaction and closure for his known victims families. Zarqawi is not a serial killer in one city, he is a small part in a now global socio-political, socio-economic and unfortunately religious struggle. Although his death is great for the families, it really does have no bearing on the entire stuggle.
06-10-2006, 03:40 PM
That is simpy dead wrong. Such statement simply contradicts reality.Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
06-10-2006, 03:45 PM
The Dems have never failed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.Originally Posted by DinoTrainer
They just can't stand that the good side is winning.
To them, partisan politics trump national interest and basic human decency.
Time was, the elder statesmen in political parties, put national interest above partisanship. These days, you can't find that in the opposition anymore. They have sold everything down the river, just to get back into power.
06-10-2006, 04:07 PM
Hmm..Contradicts reality, I do not see your logic there. I think you are failing to realize that this organization, the people behind it are not driven by petty resolve, it is not as if they are a street gang. They are driven by an extreme loyalty and frightening interpretation to a religion that I do not think you comprehend. This is not the same as taking out a crime boss, or a leader of the Hell's Angels. It will not simply 'fall apart' because a significant figure has been dismantled. These are people willing to kill themselves and anyone else that stand in their path because of their strict adherence to their ideology. Al-Qeada is not one man, or two men, or 100 men. It is a framework of frightening ideologies, that will continue to proliferate until something is done to cure the disease, not the symptom. I think it is you who needs to grasp reality, not my statement.Originally Posted by BioHazzard
06-10-2006, 04:16 PM
yeah right.. Holy ****! We had better go with you to bent over and drop our pants for Osama then.Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
Go check with the Egyptians, the Syrians, the Saudis, the Jordanians, about how and what they have been doing to 'cure the disease' RIGHT NOW. Hell, go check with the French about what they have been doing for years by now. That's right, the FRENCH.
Do some research and find out how Islamo (and other religious) Fanatism has been defeated in the past. That's right, it has been done in the past.
Then come and tell me which version of the reality you are in.
06-10-2006, 04:19 PM
BTW, you can come out from underneath the table now, Al Qaeda's ideology is a bust. I guess you have not heard the news yet.
Al Qaeda is the most hated group in Iraq, Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya etc.... (edited to add Afghanistan to the list , yeah imagine that!! The liar of the beast has turned against it.)
What a true tragedy for the bleeding hearts......
06-10-2006, 04:44 PM
Holy Cow! You should be ashamed of yourself, you warmongering GI JOE! Where is your compassion, dude??Originally Posted by Viperspit
We should indict those who outrageously murder this freedom fighter!! Damn them!
We should have read him his rights, provided him with legal counsel, made sure he was not physically nor emotionally distressed. We must tend to his religous needs, provide him with a Quran, a praying facility, and cater to his religious diet.
Afterall, we should never have sank to his level. We mush show him compassion!!
It wasn't even his fault. It is our fault that he has become this way. So, we are to blame!
06-10-2006, 04:46 PM
Originally Posted by BioHazzard
haha, I believe you and I are as far from Liberals as can be I'm one that believes that a good offense is the best defense. Don't wait for the $hit to land in your lap, get off your ass and bring it!
06-10-2006, 04:58 PM
06-10-2006, 05:00 PM
Here is for your reading pleasure, bro...Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
Death Could Shake Al-Qaeda In Iraq and Around the World
"Death Could Shake Al-Qaeda In Iraq and Around the World
By Craig Whitlock
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, June 10, 2006; A01
BERLIN, June 9 -- The death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi could mark a turning point for al-Qaeda and the global jihadist movement, according to terrorism analysts and intelligence officials.
Until he was killed Wednesday by U.S. forces, the Jordanian-born guerrilla served as Osama bin Laden's proxy in Iraq, attracting hundreds if not thousands of foreign fighters under the al-Qaeda banner. At the same time, Zarqawi had grown into a strategic headache for al-Qaeda's founders by demonstrating an independent streak often at odds with their goals.
Despite written pleas from bin Laden's deputy to change his tactics, Zarqawi alienated allies in the Iraqi insurgency as well as Arab public opinion by killing hundreds of Muslims with suicide bombings. Zarqawi, a Sunni Muslim, repeatedly attacked Shiite shrines and leaders in a bid to fuel an Iraqi civil war, instead of primarily fighting the U.S. military and its partners.
As a result, counterterrorism officials and analysts said, Zarqawi's al-Qaeda in Iraq had become increasingly isolated and marginalized in the past year.
"A number of al-Qaeda figures were uncomfortable with the tactics he was using in Iraq," said Paul Wilkinson, chairman of the Center for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. "It was quite clear with Zarqawi that as far as the al-Qaeda core leadership goes, they couldn't control the way in which their network affiliates operated."
Zarqawi gave a boost to the al-Qaeda network by giving it a highly visible presence in Iraq at a time when its original leaders went into hiding or were killed after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States. He established al-Qaeda's first military beachhead and training camps outside Afghanistan.
He was also a master media strategist, using the Internet to post videotaped beheadings of hostages and assert responsibility for some of Iraq's deadliest suicide attacks, usually in the name of al-Qaeda. Adding to Zarqawi's mystique was a $25 million bounty the U.S. government had offered for his capture.
It is unclear which of 39-year-old Zarqawi's lieutenants, or deputy emirs, will attempt to fill his role. But whoever succeeds him will be hard-pressed to achieve the same level of notoriety or to unite the foreign fighters in Iraq under a single command, analysts said.
Some European and Arab intelligence officials said they had seen signs before Zarqawi's death that the number of foreign fighters going to Iraq was already waning. For recruitment efforts, the importance of Zarqawi's death "cannot be overestimated," Germany's foreign intelligence chief, Ernst Uhrlau, told the Berlin newspaper Der Tagesspiegel.
Guido Steinberg, an expert on Islamic radicalism at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs in Berlin, said other groups of foreign fighters that kept a loose alliance with Zarqawi, such as Ansar al-Sunna, might turn away from al-Qaeda in Iraq now that he is gone.
"It's a great loss for the these jihadi networks," said Steinberg, who served as a counterterrorism adviser to Gerhard Schroeder when he was chancellor of Germany. "I don't think there is any person in Iraq able to control this network the way Zarqawi did. It's very decentralized. He was the only person in Iraq who could provide the glue.
"By losing Zarqawi, they run the danger of losing Iraq as a battlefield to the nationalist insurgents and others who aren't interested in bin Laden or the global jihad."
For many years, Zarqawi had an arm's-length relationship with al-Qaeda. He met bin Laden in the late 1990s in Afghanistan, but the two clashed personally, according to Arab intelligence officials and former Islamic radicals.
Zarqawi accepted al-Qaeda money to set up his own training camp in Afghanistan, they said, but he ran it independently. While bin Laden was preparing the Sept. 11 hijacking plot, Zarqawi was focused elsewhere, scheming to topple the Jordanian monarchy and attack Israel.
After Sept. 11, with al-Qaeda's leadership on the run from U.S. forces, Zarqawi and his fighters moved into Iran and later into Kurdish-controlled areas of northern Iraq. Zarqawi maintained his independence at first. But after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, he played up his affiliation with al-Qaeda's core leadership when it served his purposes, analysts said. He formally swore loyalty to bin Laden in October 2004 and changed the name of his Monotheism and Jihad network to al-Qaeda in Iraq.
Both sides benefited. By using the al-Qaeda name, Zarqawi bolstered his legitimacy and attracted media attention, as well as money and recruits. In turn, al-Qaeda leaders were able to brand a new franchise in Iraq and claim they were at the forefront of the fight to expel U.S. forces.
But the relationship was fragile, and Zarqawi provoked the ire of al-Qaeda's founders by focusing less on U.S. military targets and by killing or injuring thousands of Iraqi Shiites. In September 2005, U.S. intelligence officials said they had confiscated a long letter that al-Qaeda's deputy leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, had written to Zarqawi, bluntly warning that Muslim public opinion was turning against him.
With Zarqawi gone, some analysts said bin Laden's allies would try to re-exert strategic influence over the remains of the al-Qaeda network in Iraq. If al-Qaeda fails to maintain a high-profile stake in the conflict with U.S. forces in the region, the analysts said, its relevance in the jihadist movement will quickly diminish.
"I don't believe al-Qaeda in Iraq will die as a result of the death of Zarqawi," said Mustafa Alani, a terrorism analyst at the Gulf Research Center in Dubai. "Al-Qaeda headquarters will now have more influence on the Iraqi branch. At least, I think they'll be in a far better position than before."
Others said Zarqawi's death is likely to widen the factional splits that have been developing for years within the global movement. More and more, Islamic radical groups are becoming splintered and are only loosely affiliated. While they may be united in a broader struggle against the United States and the West, they often have different aims and tactics.
Nawaf Obaid, director of the Saudi National Security Assessment Project, said Zarqawi's network had already been eclipsed in size and strength by other groups of foreign fighters in Iraq. He said units led by Egyptian, Saudi and Algerian commanders posed a much more serious military threat than al-Qaeda in Iraq, although much less is known about how their operations are organized. The strongest, he said, are North African groups in Iraq composed largely of veterans of the civil war in Algeria.
"They're completely autonomous organizations," Obaid said in a telephone interview from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. "They're more powerful than Zarqawi was and have more weaponry and money at their disposal. They all have their own networks, their own fundraising abilities and their own way of bringing in fighters."
Considering how much Al Qaeda is hated in Iraq, I would love to see how those foreign groups do in Iraq, especially since those foreigners are basically being hunted down and killed mercilessly in their own countries.
06-10-2006, 07:36 PM
Yes, they are hated in Iraq and there is a very few number of Arab countries which harbour/support terrorists. Yet you very effectively proved my point, that he was only a small part of a vast network, and even furthered that same point that we has alienating his seniors. I am not sure why you would post that article in your defense, it actually work quite the opposite, and iin favour of mine.Originally Posted by BioHazzard
06-10-2006, 07:43 PM
Okay, arrogant slander aside, I have done my research. I do not wish to argue with you, but I will ask that you go back and take the time TO READ MY POSTS!. Never once did I include A SINGLE MENTION of any government working with Zarqawi, not once, so I am not sure why you felt the need to include references to those countries. I love, and encourage a healthy debate, but only if the other individual takes the time to read/listen to what I say before responding with assine comments. If you would have read my posts you would have seen that I mentioned the FRIGHTENING interpretation of the Moslem dogma used by these 'Jihadists'. In fact, there are five jihads, the greatest of which being called the 'Great Jihad' which is an internal struggle for religious servitude and loyalty. So, please do not tell me to 'go do research', I was obviously referring to the fanatical, conservative Moslem sects.Originally Posted by BioHazzard
Again bro, I would appreciate it if you read my posts before you blurt out arrogant and spiteful comments. My point is TO NOT FOCUS ON ONE INDIVIDUAL in order to treat the symptoms of this struggle aggressively. And not be drawn into thinking one death is going to irexorably change the course of this war, it will not.Originally Posted by Biohazzard
06-10-2006, 07:45 PM
Originally Posted by BioHazzard
Again man, I seriously doubt you understand what point I am trying to make. In no way, shape, or form to I feel in the least pitiful or remorseful he suffered a slow and most likely agonizing death. What my point was, is that it will not make a difference, and to stop looking at the micro perspective and take in the macro. This is a very healthy debate, but your last reponses were slightly immature, and I would appreciate it if you would read my responses like I do yours...
06-11-2006, 12:24 AM
Im glad this Zarqawi's mother****er got what was coming to him, after the atrocities he's commited. What you don't hear in the news is how some women and children also died in the bombing that took him out, and that's sad.
Honestly, to destroy this man I understand some civilian casualties were acceptable to our military commanders...but as the casualties keep mounting on both sides - with no end in sight - its just kind of heartbreaking.
I want these al-queda *****es dead as much as anyone, but like mentioned in previous posts, the cause of such violent religious fanaticism needs to be addressed as well, it has no place in modern culture. Hopefully, what the US is doing now will pan out in the long run and in a couple decades Iraq will be a central point of commerce and peaceful democracy in the middle east. A damn shame how much blood is going to be spilled before that happens though. But then again, I cant think of one great nation that hasent been founded on a multitude of senseless human carnage.
06-11-2006, 12:39 AM
I wasn't referring to you in my post. I was referring to all the Democrats who have been down playing this to ridicolous levels. I have herd what are suppose to be main street democrats say that Bush killed him now to bolster his numbers and the waining support for the war, that he is hyping this up because he held a press conference, and they God forbid, showed a pic of this piece of **** dead, that violence only begets violence, we made him a martyr, and on and on with the non-sense.Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
I rejoice in this pricks death the way i will when they finally kill Bin Laden and splatter his death photos all over the news. I can't wait for us to see the military footage of the strike aganist that piece of ****. Yeah it will make him a martyr to some, but thats a given. You also have crazy women sending scott petersen there soiled undies.
And democrats and republicans should stand and rejoice together that this prick is dead, that Hussains sons are dead, that hussian is rotting in jail, that Bin laden will hopefully be dead soon. Fight politics over the deficit, taxes, health care etc not our security.
And Mullet, your theory that why kill Zarquai, becuase only someone else will step in his place and threaten the same lives doesnt hold water. Then why go after Bin Laden? Why go after any terrorist, especially if they are a leader then? It is a big deal to kill these people. That just isnt true that no damage is done to them when the top level people get killed and are no more. It can send them into disarray, even for a small period of time, enough time to destroy them even more. This killing of Zarquai led to even more intelligence on there operations.
06-11-2006, 02:10 AM
Kay, I am actually starting to get aggrevated over this, I DID NOT ONCE SAY THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE KILLED HIM!! I am going to go back and quote my own posts so you can see what I said, and then I will say it again.Originally Posted by DinoTrainer
Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
Originally Posted by MulletsoldierLike I said. I love a healthy debate, but I take serious offense when someone engages in one, yet refuses to take in and truly disgest what the other person is saying. I have said countless times that I do not feel that they should not have killed him, or that killing him will yield absolutely nothing. What I said, and meant, was that when one views the entire socio-political event of this war his death is not a major military or functional victory. The point of my posts is to realize one man did not start a war, one man does not carry it out, and one man's death does not finish it. What got your country in this war in the first place is the attitude of personal accountablity and retribution, coupled with intense feelings of vulnerability and a breeding, if only temporary, distaste for the other (being the moslem community). I am trying to stress that in no way is this conflict going to be resolved, or come close to being resolved from one death. He was a waste of skin, and I am glad he is dead, I just will not be fooled into thinking this is a major victory. It would seem the only individual in this thread that took the time to read my posts and glean the point I was trying to establish is BV.Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
06-11-2006, 02:29 AM
I do agree. I just find the situation a bit odd. The guy deserved what he got, and now everyone who was using his at large status as some kind of evidence of ineffectiveness in Iraq is now playing down his death as nothing big. I find the double standard interesting. I don't think Iraq is a good situation, don't get me wrong. If we are successful there it may end up being a good thing, but I personally think we'll have to be there 20 years easily to be succesful, and I doubt that will happen. I think the place will fall apart shortly after the first major US troop withdrawals.Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
Good point.You say I should step forward for a second and view the details. Yet, ironically, the current administration used this same logic as they convinced the American public to focus on the one seemingly focal detail of the war in Iraq, that Osama Bin Laden had some connection with Sadaam Hussein. I personally think the time to fixate on details has long passed. If more Americans had a complete understanding of how their vulnerablitity and intense feelings of the need for retribution were taken advantage of to justify an unjust war, I believe they would focus far more on the bigger picture as well
I agree.I want to reiterate that I am not trying to dimish the sense of relief and satisfaction that the families of his victims may feel, nor imply in any sense that his death means nothing. I just feel that his death should be viewed as a small moral victory. Viewing it as any more, or focusing too much importance on it will do nothing but perpetuate the situation.
06-11-2006, 02:37 AM
I was only pointing out the lack of deterance that this one kill is likely to provide doesn't take away from the point that he deserved to die.Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
06-11-2006, 02:43 AM
Oh exactly, and I truly was never trying to dispute that. He deserved to die 100%. My point was always on the larger socio-political scale, never on the front of personal accountablity and retribution. Though seemingly all of my comments were taken that way.Originally Posted by CDB
06-11-2006, 03:48 AM
This is just one big waste of breathe. But that is what the internet is for. lol
It is very simple. The killing of Al Qaeda's poster boy is a stunning political, military and intelligence victory for the good guys.
But the Dems, the lefties and America haters cannot stand the fact that America under Bush, is winning.
So therefore, they put on the usual dog and pony show, to snatch defeat from the jaw of victory. Just because it is a tracherous and despicable thing to do, never stops them. So what else is new?
Who gives a sh1t about 1 jihad, 2 jihad, big jihad, little jihad, or great jihad? There are all mad dog howling. You can go hide under the desk, but like they said,"You can come out from under the desk now, Nancy. Gunny has your ass covered." No one who knows what is going on, is cowing in fear.
There can be no compromise with those Islamo Facists. The Russians know it. The French know it. The Arabs know it. These fanatics should be hunted down and killed off, just like what the Saudis, the Algerians, the Jordanians, the Egypians, the Russians have been doing to them.
This 'socio-politico' stuff is crap. Yeah sure, you can convert to Islam (be sure it is Sunni, else it does not count and you are still gonna die), institute Sharia, establish Global Caliphate, submit to the rule of Osama and his clergymen. That is the 'socio-politico' root cause that the Islamo Facists are having issues with. Yeah, good luck with that! Better hurry up and surrender. We don't want to stall on solving the root cause of this big 'socio-politico' problem.
You can go bellyaching about root cause, symptom, compassion, blah blahblah. It is all a total waste of breathe. "You can come out from the desk now, Nancy. Gunny has your ass covered." We know how to deal them and we are dealing with them.
Back to work. Have a nice weekend.:bb:
P.S. The Iraqi got it right when Prime Minister Malik said," Every time a Zarqawi appears, we will kill him. We will continue confronting whoever follows his path. It is an open war between us."
Take it from those who live it.
06-11-2006, 11:29 AM
Mullet, I said I wasnt talking about you, but of the debate that started to rise immediately after finding out he was killed. I was addressing what democrats are saying, not what you were saying.Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier
the only personal response I have to you is that you are right this is not THE military victory that finishes this war, but rather a good piece to helping end it. Just a piece, but an important piece. There are alot of fence sitters there, who arent sure if we are going to stick this out to full completion. Events like this help sway those fence sitters to our side and away from the insurgents. So therefore it is a functional victory. It is a functional victory because of that action, yeilded more intelligence info about there activities, it will help sway the fence sitters, it shows we are making progress because it was iraqis who ratted this guy out.
And what is this distate of muslim people you talk about, that we have in our country. What got us into Iraq was that for over a decade Saddam Hussain never abided to the UN terms. He played games with the inspectors, he was flying into the no fly zone areas AND shooting at our fighter planes patroling the no fly zone areas. Even though they didnt find nukes, they did say he had an active program for re-constituting those programs. We had plenty of justification for getting rid of Hussain.
After 9/11, I believe our President changed his views. Just like Japan and Germany were our eniemes in WW2 and Vietnam was an enemy in the 60's and 70's, now, in this time they are friends and allies. I believe the President is looking for long term goals here, that in 20-30 years this could change the whole land scape of the middle east and making the next generations more secure from Islamic radicalism. it wasnt retribution and distate of muslims that brought us into Iraq.
06-11-2006, 12:38 PM
You're right. Truly, how could I have been so foolish to not see how the US military has this entire situation under complete control? Well it is probably because, as CDB said, there is not a chance the US will pull out of Iraq successfully unless they are there for 20 years.Originally Posted by BioHazzard
Lefties? America haters? Is your argument and belief system that desperately one-sided that you result to labelling when you don't have perspective on another individual's view? There are many labels I could have immaturely placed on you given your previous responses, but I usually like to base my comments on the statements, not who I think the person is.Originally Posted by Biohazzard
If thinking logically and not wholey ingesting every word George W. Bush struggles to say is despicable then I may very well be the most horrible person on earth.Originally Posted by Biohazzard
This is the same type of ignorant attitude that will keep your country there for 10 years. The "1 jihad, 2 jihad, big jihad, little jihad, or great jihad" is an integral part of the culture that your president has aligned himself against. Effectively, his military is only fighting the extremists, but there is a growing contempt for the United States in the Middle East. It may benefit you to drop the inherent racism in your comments and learn something about the Moslem religion and culture.Originally Posted by Biohazzard
Never once said they should not be.There can be no compromise with those Islamo Facists. The Russians know it. The French know it. The Arabs know it. These fanatics should be hunted down and killed off, just like what the Saudis, the Algerians, the Jordanians, the Egypians, the Russians have been doing to them.
Yes, you are right, analyzing a situation under it's socio-political lines is complete crap. Taking into account the religious and social history of the region, in order to truly understand it's inherent connection with political happenings of the region is being a *****. We should follow your logic and just destroy every individual whose skin isn't the same shades as ours. I truly despise labelling people along political lines, because I believe it implies a certain extremism, and close-mindedness, not only on their part, but on mine as well. However, your comments unfortunately ooze with an arrogant, "good ol' boy" attitude that displays how much actual thought you invest in global issues. So, I will continue to think logically how an assertive approach fixating on destroying the network's means to transport, communitcate and function properly, effectively treating the disease. You can continue to shoot all the Iraqi's you want and have more of your soldiers killed in a conflict that will drag on longer than you will expect.Originally Posted by Biohazzard
Similar Forum Threads
- By Iron Warrior in forum General ChatReplies: 6Last Post: 04-24-2004, 01:40 AM
- By windwords7 in forum General ChatReplies: 32Last Post: 03-27-2003, 12:10 AM
- By windwords7 in forum General ChatReplies: 2Last Post: 03-24-2003, 12:39 AM