hoots7 Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 The Marines came out of the Navy, so I choose the Navy they are the most diverse branch of them all.They have battle ships, subs, carriers, air planes & fighting forces (but no tanks bummer). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiber Septim Posted April 25, 2009 Author Share Posted April 25, 2009 I'm getting rich!! Rich!! RICH!!!!, and the Major's getting bankrupt. <evil laugh> oh, and then i'll buy a new computer, then a Mansion, then a helicopter then...<keeps on goin'> @hootz7Yeah, but the Marines becomes a different, seperate branch. Marines have tanks of course. And they have they're own planes, supported by the Navy. So, yeah the Marines and the Navy are brothers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajKrAzAm Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 sure there are muslim who give a damn about their faith, nevertheless even those that eat pork and have orgies are still most of the time kinda pious, yes i use it, people... ive spent quite some time in arab countries, amongst arabs and not in a holiday inn so i think i can make that assumption...OK so these Arabs that you know, who eat pork, have orgies - are pious? What religion are they? From what you’ve implied they are certainly not pious Muslims. Unless of course they are being hypocritical - something that all faiths seem to share.i didnt suggest that youre indebted to islamic thought but to arab wisdom... sorry if that was misundertandableWestern thought, to the contrary, has some roots in the Islamic world. But to use this, as some do and you yourself certainly did in your previous post, is to suggest that the West would be nothing without Islam. This is nothing more than mere tribalism and intellectual blackmail that attempts to usurp the achievements of the West and claim them as Islam’s.sorry if i doubt the efficency of your institutions which should hold the US leaders accountable as the last one changed quite some laws of which some now contradict the constitution and basic rights given by it...I’m not going to dispute this, I also condemn the abuse of the law by the past administration. But to equate George W. to Islamist fascists as you did in your previous post is incredibly disingenuous. Although the tools of accountability have been rather feeble - GWB can be held to account by the American people via the judiciary/impeachment tools - unlike the various not state actors who do not have one iota of legitimacy to govern nor do they even have a state. They are totalitarian fascists without even a state or ummah to repress. as we've seen in iraq and afghanistan he (your leader) has the means to screw us all aslong as he can just bring up the slightest justification like for example WMDs in iraq whihch never existed (after that incident back in the late eighties) but were forged by the CIAThe invasion of Iraq was a noble pursuit. We now know that had Saddam Hussein not invaded Kuwait he would now be in possession of a nuclear weapon. It is unfortunate that many seem to conflate actual nuclear stockpiles with capacity. This was a man who committed genocide on his own citizens, financed and harboured terrorists including Abu Abbas, Abu Nadal and Al’Zaraqawi, violated the sovereignty of neighbouring countries, fooled around with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and abrogated the rights of his citizens. I’m not sure how you have been “screwed” by this war. I and many others in the West have not had to sacrifice anything to rid the world of this dangerous despotic dictator. I find the civilian and military casualties to be abhorrent but this should not lend credence to the view that this entire enterprise should have been avoided. In fact we merely postponed his time of reckoning. Leaving Saddam in power in 1991 and imposing sanctions on him was disastrous, he was merely contained which had disastrous consequences on the Iraqi populace. The United States acknowledged this took the stand that coexistence with Saddam Hussein is impossible. A bill was passed in in Congress in 1998 calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein and which provided support for various groups in Iraq.im not suggestig that the "jihad" is a 3rd world liberation movement as i clearly state my view quite often that they (the terrorists) are merely acting on behalf of the FED and their long arms including the CIA (from a commanding point of view)...If I understand you correctly you’re implying that the Federal Reserve somehow controls the various Islamist outfits around the world? If you’re going to make such a preposterous claim then you’re going to need a lot of evidence to support this view otherwise you should be out on the street shouting and screaming your views with cardboard sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajKrAzAm Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 im not suggestig that the "jihad" is a 3rd world liberation movement as i clearly state my view quite often that they (the terrorists) are merely acting on behalf of the FED and their long arms including the CIA (from a commanding point of view)...but i also state that i find it kinda understandable if someone stands up and fights back at what ever opressor he faces (from an individual point of view)... and if we take palestine for example, a suicide bomber is more or less the only possibility left for someone who lost his whole family and has no B2 bomber or a seat in the bilderberg association at hand... im not saying that a suicide attack has anything to do with islam and i even state that it is against the koran, wether a religious leader said so or not, but is an understandable action for those that have no other means...such action is also not done because of the religion as you suggest... they do it out of hopelessness and griefthe religion is used to make them more comfortable in their choice thoIf someone blows themselves up in Israel proper then somehow I do not believe that they are seeking a peaceful resolution or compromise. When a British civilian purports to be a ventriloquist for the grievances of the people of Palestinian and Iraqi people and then proceeds to blow themselves up on London underground , somehow I do not believe that they are suffering from angst or frustration. They are deluded psychopaths and must be dealt with as such. When British Muslims from London fly to Israel to blow themselves up and murder civilians then I highly doubt that the emancipation of Palestine is their ultimate goal. Likewise the perpetrators of 9/11 were not impoverished and oppressed people. These groups have repeatedly stated that they aim to restore the Islamic caliphate and make Israel judenfrei. Jihadism is not caused by “hopelessness” or “grief” or poverty - it itself is the cause of these things. The Israel-Palestine conflict is a simple border dispute that has been exacerbated by the various religious extremists on both sides - the messianic settlers in the West Bank and the Islamist Palestinian thugs. betrayal yes the ruskies were kicked out but then the whole country fell into anarchy... the taliban were the ones that emerged victorious and at least established some kind of ruleset (not to say that they are nice guys by no means) just to see you come in and bomb their legacy to piecesThe Taliban did not exist as distinct political clan/movement until after the Soviet war. And so were not victorious in any sense of the word, as you go on to state. They emerged as a fundamentalist tribe competing for power with the other warlords in Afghanistan and were successfully able to dominate large parts of the country through Pakistani support, who saw the Taliban as a useful proxy to control Afghanistan. What you call their “legacy” and ‘”rule set” was the most vile strand of Islamist sharia that repressed all secular forces, women’s groupsbut im also hinting at the other wars in which you used minorities to fight for you and then left em at the mercy of those they fought - there are still people in this world who suffer due to it like for example the hmong, where are you to save em now? if the us is such an honorable country you should at least try to broker a deal with the vietnamese or cambodians to stop them from slaughtering those people...What you’re doing is disgracefully conscripting the Vietnamese into your argument that aims to portray the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and various other Islamist thugs as some sort of third world liberation theology on par with the Vietcong and Hmong. The grievances of the Vietnamese are sincere and the Vietnam war was a quasi-colonial continuation of French Imperialism. It is disgraceful that you implicitly equate the Hmong and even the Vietcong to the repugnant Islamists. The Vietcong were justifiable in their aims, whatever one my say of them, they were a civilized foe acting reasonably in the context of their history. The comparisons between the Hmong and the Mujahedeen are unfounded. The Hmong have no plans for global dominance as some of the foreign fighters - including Al-Qaeda - that comprised the mujahedeen did. Support for them was reckless and short-sighted, not to mention foolish, but this does not justify their continued existence, they are a menace and must be dealt with. i welcome your points of view alot btw... at least there is some substance to them that makes it worth to argue about lolI don’t feel that I need anyone’s permission to hold someone to account to the b/s that they preach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaysus Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 @major - post2 911 and israel - FED shareholders actions led to both problems... were funded and supported by them... just read some of the manuscripts from between the late 19th cent. up to the midlle of the 20th between mr. barfour and lord rothshild... israel was planned and funded by the two, mr. rohshild also funded hitler whose holcaust system gave some justification to the creation of israel on a stretch of land that was promised to the palestinians in WW1 by the brits for their support against the ottomans and the reich wether you are living in exile or not doesnt stop you from feeling grief for those that get slaughtered everyday makin israel judenfrei: thats totally paradox... israel is by fact a jewish state or why is it that every jew on earth is automaticly an israeli? so calling for it becoming "judenfrei" is the same as calling for it to vanish which is from a palestinian point of view totally understandable in the face of all the atrocities commited by israel... but i agree that those that control and command the suicide bombers are probably not from palestine but are... well right wing israelis that need a justification for the next attack on a primary school comparing the culprits of 911 with the palestinians in the way you did is certainly wrong... you cant compare them the way you did... apart from that 911 is due to the missing investigation totally unsolvable... you cant even say that those 9 that were stated as being those that planned and executed the plan really were them... witnesses saw em shopping in arabia after they should actually have been blown to bits in the incident for example... well i still stand with the fact that the only organisation capable of pulling this off were FED shareholders, wether osamas family is one i dunno but they own quite alot in the us and the assumption that their own a bunch of shares of the FED is not totally off... @talibanyou dont contradict my statement by saying that the taliban didnt emerge till after the war... i said anarchy broke out and they emerged victorious, and i agreed yet that they are jerks but you cant deny the fact that they brought some form of peace to the place and gave it stability wether the women had to wear burkas or not... @hmong vs taliban i dunno where you take your assumption from that i compare islamistic fundies with the hmong, i compared the actions of the US military and government of both incidents... and it was similiar and in both cases with disastrous results for both of em which fought for you and maybe i shoud state it again, al quaida is not a group but is the name of a secret CIA operation to supply the mudjahedins and if you want to deal with it you should first bomb langley instead of kabul if you insist on bombing runs... @you needing accountabilitylol i give a damn... if you feel insulted by me saying that your points are worth discussing and have at least some slight credibility then i must LOL... but plz refrain from calling my points BS as that just undermines the lil credibility your FOX news intel gave you... ---post 1--- @hypocritical pious arabswhat does it have to do with being pious if someone doesnt follow every story in a religious book? being pious is a moralic descicion and i can only state it again that most of those i met had moral values high above any ive seen around the civilized westi dunno why i should be hypocritical in that context, and implying that i am a muslim is also a totally unjustified assumption and i dunno where you got that from... i tried a bunch of religions and realized its all nonsense... if you want to know about my spiritual believes you should 1st study physics and then put that knowledge down on religious believes and what they actually are... namely that the so called GOD is just another word for nature... no need for you to understand that tho as it has nothing to do with this discussion... @islam and our wisdomi must say it again... islam has nothing to do with that, its the arabs... where do you think we got our wisdom about surgery, math, engineering and so on from? before the crusades we were indeed living on trees... or somin like that - heck even the ideal of knighthood is a persian invention which happen to be muslims to and wasnt created by king lionheart(well some of that wisdom came from india, but we wouldnt even know about that if it werent for arabic merchants) @Gbush and accountability i must lol again at your naivity... do you really think GBush would ever be persecuted if they didnt even make an investigation into 911? nixon didnt end up in jail neither... same for the rest of western world, cancellour kohl is still at large too for example after being prooven to have accepted money for a bunch of descicions... but even if we dont persecute our own leaders for their crimes we have the right to hang saddam? thats hypocrite... @Saddam and the noble crusdae of iraq saddam invaded kuwait after he got word from the us that they wouldnt care if he did, and he had a certain justification for that assault, namely kuwait being controlled by the IMF (which he didnt know at the time) and selling oil in amount too large and much too cheap in accordance to the OPEC treaties... so if we want to spin that further: the us urged kuwait to sell oil cheaper, pushed saddam into an invasion (in which he didnt eat babies btw as us gov press suggested) just to invade him too... mmmh strange... well after that they had 2 countries which supplied cheap oil in rough and unhealthy quantities... saddam commited atrocities no question, but how does russia deal with the chechenians (however that spelled in english)? does the us step in? a lil afraid arent we... ah no you cant as you do the same poo...he fough seperatists youd call terrorists and did it in a way that suited him... i dunno but using white phosphor against civilians is not much better than nerve gas imo... saddam lost all capabilities to build a nuke after israel bombed his civilian reactorsthat reasoning is the same used in the now officially proven fact that the CIA forged the evidence for WMDs how i suffered from that endevaour? well my taxes are being used to rebuild the place you bombed to pieces and is not being put into schools, hospitals nor streetlights in my place...apart from the fact that i have a friend who is still enjailed, due to us foreign policies and dictatorship support like in this case mubarak, for doing nothing but pointing out in his blog where terrorists are being recruited and by whom (you might have read it on the BBC - free kareem i say) - a fine person he is, sadly he lives in a torture prison... thx america... apart from the fact that saddam did never bend a hair of a us citizen afaik... and terrorists live in every country... did you bomb france, spain, germany or britain for hosting and educating those like Atta? no... afraid again? probably not but we dont have oil... thx god... @FED supporting the teroristsya id need evidence if id like to vanish suddenly...but just take all the past wars and the FED shareholders involvment and it is not hard to imagine them being behind this poop too as they are once again the only people gaining anything from that whole dipshit situation...would they have at any point said: "no we wont print that money for you and raise inflation" there wouldnt have been a 911, no israel, no hitler, no lenin, no nothing in regards to the mass war waging in the last few centuries - and there wouldnt have been 3 financial crisises btw... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiber Septim Posted April 25, 2009 Author Share Posted April 25, 2009 This is a nice argument to watch. It's detailed too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajKrAzAm Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 makin israel judenfrei: thats totally paradox... israel is by fact a jewish state or why is it that every jew on earth is automaticly an israeli? so calling for it becoming "judenfrei" is the same as calling for it to vanish which is from a palestinian point of view totally understandable in the face of all the atrocities commited by israel...You’ve misinterpreted me - various groups have called for the destruction of Israel and the slaughter of Jews. Making it “vanish” is exactly what they would like. Furthermore, I disagree with your point on Israel as a Jewish state. I do not believe that ethnicity entails rights in land.comparing the culprits of 911 with the palestinians in the way you did is certainly wrong... you cant compare them the way you did...I did not compare the two. I suggested that the motivations of the perpetrators of 9/11 were not out of “hopelessness” and “grief” as you did. I maintain that they usurp the issue of Palestine and claim to be spokesmen for the grievances of all Muslims around the world. They represent a filthy and barbaric ideology that is fundamentally at odds with Civilisation and the values of liberal enlightenment. you dont contradict my statement by saying that the taliban didnt emerge till after the war... i said anarchy broke out and they emerged victorious, and i agreed yet that they are jerks but you cant deny the fact that they brought some form of peace to the place and gave it stability wether the women had to wear burkas or not...In that case I misinterpreted you - which is quite easy to do. Your second point is ridiculous - it is an apologetic attempt to justify Taliban rule. Stability does not confer legitimacy to run a region. In fact quite the opposite. By accepting stability as the status quo or asserting that it is a good thing - as you do - would entail non-resistance to criminal repressive but stable regimes . what does it have to do with being pious if someone doesnt follow every story in a religious book? being pious is a moralic descicion and i can only state it again that most of those i met had moral values high above any ive seen around the civilized westi dunno why i should be hypocritical in that context, and implying that i am a muslim is also a totally unjustified assumption and i dunno where you got that from... i tried a bunch of religions and realized its all nonsense... if you want to know about my spiritual believes you should 1st study physics and then put that knowledge down on religious believes and what they actually are... namely that the so called GOD is just another word for nature... no need for you to understand that tho as it has nothing to do with this discussion...Piety and morality do not follow each other. To claim such a thing would be to say that our morality comes from religion. And it most certainly does not. Being pious is strictly abiding by a set of religious dogma. Thus your friends cannot be considered pious in any sense of the word if they were to eat pork or drink alcohol.saddam invaded kuwait after he got word from the us that they wouldnt care if he did, and he had a certain justification for that assault, namely kuwait being controlled by the IMF (which he didnt know at the time) and selling oil in amount too large and much too cheap in accordance to the OPEC treaties... so if we want to spin that further: the us urged kuwait to sell oil cheaper, pushed saddam into an invasion (in which he didnt eat babies btw as us gov press suggested) just to invade him too... mmmh strange... well after that they had 2 countries which supplied cheap oil in rough and unhealthy quantitiesOil price meddling by Kuwait is not a legitimate casus belli for war. It is a frivolous justification for war that aims to portray the Kuwaitis as the aggressors in an attempt to annex their country. You have enounced various statements that I have not addressed and have no intention of, instead please reply to these following questions with a so that we can get a clear picture of what you are trying to say… Do you believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by the United States government ?Do you believe that the United States government is responsible indirectly for 9/11?Do you believe that the United States government controls Al-Qaeda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaysus Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 vanishing of israel - ya agreed, your point is what now? that they are not entitled to hate those that kill their children and take their land? israel as a jewish state - thats the whole point of israel, if you believe in "land for ethnicities" or not doesnt matter... it was founded (officially) as a homeland for jews and every jew on planet earth can send a pic of his cut in half dong to the authorities there and will get a passport stating that hes an israeli (same for women of course) 911 and the attackers reason -so what was their reason to perform the attacks then? fun? taliban -again... i dont like them...nevertheless you can not deny the pros of a stable region in contrast to a war torn one in which people die day by dayafterall that was one of the points why you said a withdrawal out of iraq is out of question... its not stable...the us is stable too and the former leader was a criminal, so should we bomb the us to pieces therefore? would it improve anything? is it better to have corrupt but stable regime or no rule at all? i dunno... but the common thought around the wrold is that stability and peace is of more value than a fake liberty which is in fact an enslavement of freedom through bloodshed which makes fear and not law the ultimate instance by which people act... -pietypiety is born out of moral... religion creates moral... but religion includes a look of stories which can be interpreted in any way and are most of the time dependant on the situation like for example muhammed saying one should take as many wives as one can... was said in a time where women starved cause most men did die in warthus piety is dependant ONLY on the moralic questions posed by a religion and not pointless rules like "eat no pork" or "dont have sex before the marriage"these rules might not be pointless under certain circumstances but are generally not applycable everywhere and anytime pork is for example prone to worms which grow rapidly in a hot climate which is no problem in lets say sweden...so basicly someone who acts according to the 10 amendments but doesnt belief that jews are the god chosen race can still be pious... -the oil price changes of kuwait were a break of a contract signed by them, sadly there is no international court for contract breaks between countries and since talks didnt help war was the only alternativebut it should be noted that not kuwait itself made that decision but the IMF who provoced that war... why the us did intervene is another question noone really understands... the lebanon wasnt defended when israel attacked neither nor was georgia or the iraq when israel attacked...so to take up your point, its not a casus belli to attack another country if he is at war with someone else... -------------------------------------- Do you believe that 9/11 was perpetrated by the United States government ? no... the government is an institution or a bunch of them and has no intention of any kind except to follow the constitution and serve the peopleyes... the government is filled with people who follow their own intentions, alot of variety there and noone can say for sure as long as no investigation has taken place so: the gov as a whole didnt, but certain individuals did - at least if we take in account that they sabotaged the defense (relocation of the air defense force on that day), intel (ignoring the intel tha tthe attacks would take place), followup actions (wars) and the investigation for which they must have had reasons also the fact that the CIA had a program to perform exactly that attack with the intent to justify an invasion is kinda strange dont you think (under Gbush sr. and bumsfeld)? Do you believe that the United States government is responsible indirectly for 9/11? same answer as above as it is the same question, gov in itself: No, certain individuals: yes Do you believe that the United States government controls Al-Qaeda? i dunno.... sadly i have no access to secret CIA, SS or NSA filesbut since it is a CIA program one could think so, but as we all know through a bunch of hollywood movies some programs can run out of control and act on their own... --------------------------------------------------now i have 3 questions: do you think killing civilians to get hold of one suspect is just if that suspect never harmed as many as got killed in the hunt? do you think killing someone or a group without a proper investigation about their guilt is just? do you think high ranking government officials can be put on trial without an invasion of that country? and a 4th one: do you think the United States have the right to intervene in all kinds of situations in other souverain nations? and why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddah Posted April 26, 2009 Share Posted April 26, 2009 Since the OP has no objection and is enjoying the debate I will let this go. Please do not get personal in your discussion. Buddah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiber Septim Posted April 26, 2009 Author Share Posted April 26, 2009 @ BuddahThis is kinda exciting, y'know. Well... It does make me sick sometimes because i don't like talkin' about the gov't but this is a good debates. Both two of these people are good debaters. They would be good if they're lawyers. Regards,Staff Sergeant Tiber Septim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now