By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Little terrorist or big pedophile?

sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


 

What the fuck are you talking about?  Firstly, "we" are leaving the Middle East.  Secondly, how would minimizing the security make us less vulerable to terrorists?  "We" are not destroying ourselves within our borders; we are defending ourselves.   The more effort, the less casualties.

Let me just say one more thing:  It's important that we maintain a dignified society.  We fought a Revolution so we didn't have to bow before a King.  A President who can go to war without even consulting the Congress is a King in everything but name, and that is the greatest threat we face today.  It is not the trumped-up propaganda about terrorists wanting to kill Americans because we're "free and rich". 

We should never, ever sacrifice our freedoms or rights because someone or something claims they can keep us safe. 



 

Around the Network
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

What the fuck are you talking about?  Firstly, "we" are leaving the Middle East.  Secondly, how would minimizing the security make us less vulerable to terrorists?  "We" are not destroying ourselves within our borders; we are defending ourselves.   The more effort, the less casualties.

Absolutely wrong.  Have you read at all about the reasons for the attack on 9/11?  We had bases on the Muslim Holy Lands, and we kept interjecting into other nation's internal affairs.  Without being asked to.  We created the problem of them wanting to come here in the first place.  If you don't realize that, then you can't begin to understand how to resolve this.

And, no, we are not leaving the Middle East.  I have no idea where you're getting that from.  We have bases all over the place over there.  And when we pulled most of the combat brigades out of Iraq last year (for purely political reasons) we replaced them all with DoD contractors, who by the way, cost MORE than combat troops. 

I would argue that there is a big difference between defending ourselves and overreacting to something that our government's policies caused in the first place.  And private airport security NOT run by bureaucrats would do a much better job with safety, and they would do it without destroying the 4th amendment.


Bolded: Where did I ever say I didn't know that?

Rest: I really don't see your point. Just because USA did/do cause shit in the Middle East we shouldn't spent as much money as we can to protect ourselves from terrorists? I say we take the safe road and do what we can to prevent as many casualties as possible, how does that sound to you?



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said: 

Absolutely wrong.  Have you read at all about the reasons for the attack on 9/11?  We had bases on the Muslim Holy Lands, and we kept interjecting into other nation's internal affairs.  Without being asked to.  We created the problem of them wanting to come here in the first place.  If you don't realize that, then you can't begin to understand how to resolve this.

And, no, we are not leaving the Middle East.  I have no idea where you're getting that from.  We have bases all over the place over there.  And when we pulled most of the combat brigades out of Iraq last year (for purely political reasons) we replaced them all with DoD contractors, who by the way, cost MORE than combat troops. 

I would argue that there is a big difference between defending ourselves and overreacting to something that our government's policies caused in the first place.  And private airport security NOT run by bureaucrats would do a much better job with safety, and they would do it without destroying the 4th amendment.

Bolded: Where did I ever say I didn't know that?

Rest: I really don't see your point. Just because USA did/do cause shit in the Middle East we shouldn't spent as much money as we can to protect ourselves from terrorists? I say we take the safe road and do what we can to prevent as many casualties as possible, how does that sound to you?

Your solution is that because we're continuing to make mistakes in our foreign policy, that we should do anything necessary to protect ourselves since we're not changing our flawed policies? 

Why don't we correct our mistakes, learn from them, and then no one will want to come here to do us harm? Is that not a more logical solution?



 

sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

Bolded: Where did I ever say I didn't know that?

Rest: I really don't see your point. Just because USA did/do cause shit in the Middle East we shouldn't spent as much money as we can to protect ourselves from terrorists? I say we take the safe road and do what we can to prevent as many casualties as possible, how does that sound to you?

Your solution is that because we're continuing to make mistakes in our foreign policy, that we should do anything necessary to protect ourselves since we're not changing our flawed policies? 

Why don't we correct our mistakes, learn from them, and then no one will want to come here to do us harm? Is that not a more logical solution?


No, I say we stop "causing shit" as part of the investment. Looks like we agree on that part.



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

Your solution is that because we're continuing to make mistakes in our foreign policy, that we should do anything necessary to protect ourselves since we're not changing our flawed policies? 

Why don't we correct our mistakes, learn from them, and then no one will want to come here to do us harm? Is that not a more logical solution?

No, I say we stop "causing shit" as part of the investment. Looks like we agree on that part.

I would say, we should get rid of the TSA, the Dept of Homeland Security, and close all bases overseas on other nation's territory. if we need to have ships or submarines staged in certain "areas of importance" that is one thing, but occupation is quite another.  We can have airport security, but being run by bureaucrats in Washington is doing nothing but harm.  Privatize it, just like businesses do for transporting large amounts of money from safes to a bank. 

We should announce we are bringing home all troops stationed in other countries, and open friendly talks and free trade with any nation that wants to.  That would solve the problem.



 

Around the Network
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

No, I say we stop "causing shit" as part of the investment. Looks like we agree on that part.

I would say, we should get rid of the TSA, the Dept of Homeland Security, and close all bases overseas on other nation's territory. if we need to have ships or submarines staged in certain "areas of importance" that is one thing, but occupation is quite another.  We can have airport security, but being run by bureaucrats in Washington is doing nothing but harm.  Privatize it, just like businesses do for transporting large amounts of money from safes to a bank. 

We should announce we are bringing home all troops stationed in other countries, and open friendly talks and free trade with any nation that wants to.  Thaty would solve the problem,


Indeed, removing their reason to spread terror should be priority 1.

As for the bolded, I must say that I wouldn't know about that since I live outside of the US, and we don't have that kind of problems. But I trust your opinion.



sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

It's routines, after all. You never know how terrorists plan to hijack their next plane!


Sadly, integrity has to be sacrificed to maintain safety. There's no other way.


If this is true, then the terrorists have already won, and we might as well pack it in. Game over.

Their whole purpose for 9/11 was to scare people into voting for authoriatarians and turning America into a police state, destroying us from the inside.  They have us right where they want us, mired in the Middle East with no purpose, and they have us right where they want us here, destroying ourselves within our own borders from the inside out.

What the fuck are you talking about?  Firstly, "we" are leaving the Middle East.  Secondly, how would minimizing the security make us less vulerable to terrorists?  "We" are not destroying ourselves within our borders; we are defending ourselves.   The more effort, the less casualties.

Absolutely wrong.  Have you read at all about the reasons for the attack on 9/11?  We had bases on the Muslim Holy Lands, and we kept interjecting into other nation's internal affairs.  Without being asked to.  We created the problem of them wanting to come here in the first place.  If you don't realize that, then you can't begin to understand how to resolve this.

And, no, we are not leaving the Middle East.  I have no idea where you're getting that from.  We have bases all over the place over there.  And when we pulled most of the combat brigades out of Iraq last year (for purely political reasons) we replaced them all with DoD contractors, who by the way, cost MORE than combat troops. 

I would argue that there is a big difference between defending ourselves and overreacting to something that our government's policies caused in the first place.  And private airport security NOT run by bureaucrats would do a much better job with safety, and they would do it without destroying the 4th amendment.

actually you are wrong about the reason they attacked us. sure thats something they say when the talk to western media, but when they talk amongst themselves it much different. this i why they attacked us, i will paraphrase a quote of why Osama bin Laden said they attacked us.

"our talks with the infidel west, ultimately revolve around one thing, and that is to submit to islam either willingly or by the sword because non believers cannot live"

so yeah, they pretty much attacked us because we arent Muslim and dont live in  a Muslim society.

and with what the TSA are doing is bring us closer to that society.

 

on another note to those who think what the TSA did here is fine. answer this: By the TSA agent molesting/searching this kid, did it make that flight in anyway safer?



IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

No, I say we stop "causing shit" as part of the investment. Looks like we agree on that part.

I would say, we should get rid of the TSA, the Dept of Homeland Security, and close all bases overseas on other nation's territory. if we need to have ships or submarines staged in certain "areas of importance" that is one thing, but occupation is quite another.  We can have airport security, but being run by bureaucrats in Washington is doing nothing but harm.  Privatize it, just like businesses do for transporting large amounts of money from safes to a bank. 

We should announce we are bringing home all troops stationed in other countries, and open friendly talks and free trade with any nation that wants to.  Thaty would solve the problem,


Indeed, removing their reason to spread terror should be priority 1.

As for the bolded, I must say that I wouldn't know about that since I live outside of the US, and we don't have that kind of problems. But I trust your opinion.

Yeah, it would be handled better if it were done by private business.  They would take more pains to make sure people didn't feel violated, because they would be concerned with public image and maintaining a strong business.  The government could care less, which is the whole problem with them being involved, as if they have any authority to do so in the first place.

BTW, totally off topic, but I see you're playing Skyward Sword? What are your thoughts on it?



 

killerzX said:
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
sperrico87 said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:


 

What the fuck are you talking about?  Firstly, "we" are leaving the Middle East.  Secondly, how would minimizing the security make us less vulerable to terrorists?  "We" are not destroying ourselves within our borders; we are defending ourselves.   The more effort, the less casualties.

Absolutely wrong.  Have you read at all about the reasons for the attack on 9/11?  We had bases on the Muslim Holy Lands, and we kept interjecting into other nation's internal affairs.  Without being asked to.  We created the problem of them wanting to come here in the first place.  If you don't realize that, then you can't begin to understand how to resolve this.

And, no, we are not leaving the Middle East.  I have no idea where you're getting that from.  We have bases all over the place over there.  And when we pulled most of the combat brigades out of Iraq last year (for purely political reasons) we replaced them all with DoD contractors, who by the way, cost MORE than combat troops. 

I would argue that there is a big difference between defending ourselves and overreacting to something that our government's policies caused in the first place.  And private airport security NOT run by bureaucrats would do a much better job with safety, and they would do it without destroying the 4th amendment.

actually you are wrong about the reason they attacked us. sure thats something they say when the talk to western media, but when they talk amongst themselves it much different. this i why they attacked us, i will paraphrase a quote of why Osama bin Laden said they attacked us.

"our talks with the infidel west, ultimately revolve around one thing, and that is to submit to islam either willingly or by the sword because non believers cannot live"

so yeah, they pretty much attacked us because we arent Muslim and dont live in  a Muslim society.

and with what the TSA are doing is bring us closer to that society.

on another note to those who think what the TSA did here is fine. answer this: By the TSA agent molesting/searching this kid, did it make that flight in anyway safer?


Neither does Japan, Korea, China, Russia, South America, or much of Africa and Europe.  Seems like if your reason for them wanting to come here and attack us was true, all of those other non-Muslim regions would be regularly under threat, too.  Yet, they're not.

And prior to us invading the Middle East and trying to re-mold them into puppet democracies, there were very few terrorist attacks against Americans.  After we invaded and began this ridiculous "War on Terror", there have been more terrorist attacks against Americans than occurred during all the time before 9/11.



 

killerzX said:

on another note to those who think what the TSA did here is fine. answer this: By the TSA agent molesting/searching this kid, did it make that flight in anyway safer?

It feels safer in the heart. Like santorum said, he speaks what feels right in his heart, even if it's completely false. And that's what matter.