1
   

Sanctions on Iran

 
 
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 08:14 am
@Brent cv,
Brent wrote:
We are not known as mass killers. Smile Can you please not over exaggerate your comments.



To BRENT, GOOD MORNING, GUTEN TAG, BONJOUR, SHALOM, SALAM !

Well, you're right, using "mass killers" are the wrong words to use.

Via the internet I read an article by ANTHONY GREGORY.
Anthony Gregory is a writer and musician who lives in Berkeley, California. He is also a research assistant at the "Independent Institute".

Reprinted from THE FUTURE OF FREEDOM FOUNDATION with permission are some excerpts that I feel is important enough to quote:

*** The U.S. government has killed civilians for well over a century.
During the Civil War, General Williams Tecumseh Sherman waged war on civilians.
During the Philippine Insurrection at the turn of the 20th century, U.S. forces killed about 200,000 civilians, and even had a policy to shoot anyone more than 10 years old who dared to resist the U.S. occupation of the Philipines.

TERRORISM (capitalizing by me), if it means anything, is a method by which civilians are the targets of violence for the purpose of achieving political goals. Having Imperial Japan surrender, even if a worthy goal, was nevertheless a political one, and the targetting of innocents to achieve that goal was an act of terrorism.

Indeed it was terrorism on an incredible large scale.

Hundreds of thousands (300,000 - my note) of innocent Japanese were instantaneously wiped off the earth on August 6 and August 9, 1945 (Hiroshima and Nagasaki - my note).
Many more died in the following years from the radioactive climate left behind by the bombing. ***

Do you think I should have used the words "Terrorist or terrorism" instead of 'mass killers' ?

I appologize for not using the "right" words.

BTW, researches at the Johns Hopskins University in Baltimore MD and Columbia University in the state of New York stated that the U.S., in the first 18 months of the Iraqi War has killed about 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians , mostly women and children. (and counting - my note)
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 08:32 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
By mass killers i would take it as being the baddest mofo's on the planet.



What are "mofo's" ?

I checked my 10th edition (1998) Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary but can't find that word.

I have a hard time following your 'Scientific' language, like you having a hard time following my highschool's french or german.
Lasombra
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 03:36 pm
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
I agree. Invade Iran just like Iraq.
Better still, use the Nuclear bomb then all oil and the people in that part of the world will be blown to pieces, not in a month, in a whimp, like Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

We are known in the world today for mass-killers, anyway


I've said no such thing.
0 Replies
 
Lasombra
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 03:38 pm
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
BTW, researches at the Johns Hopskins University in Baltimore MD and Columbia University in the state of New York stated that the U.S., in the first 18 months of the Iraqi War has killed about 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians , mostly women and children. (and counting - my note)



The Lancet study you are referring to has been proven false.

Nevermind that you're 18 months too late.


Putting aside the fact that there are problems with how Lancet calculated their figures, the Lancet study’s only statistically significant finding is that there were between 8,000 and 194,000 excess deaths. How did you specifically get that 100,000 civilians died? Why don't you go for the gusto and say that we killed 194k? Wouldn't that help your side better?
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 04:27 pm
@Lasombra,
Lasombra wrote:
The Lancet study you are referring to has been proven false.

Nevermind that you're 18 months too late.


Putting aside the fact that there are problems with how Lancet calculated their figures, the Lancet study’s only statistically significant finding is that there were between 8,000 and 194,000 excess deaths. How did you specifically get that 100,000 civilians died? Why don't you go for the gusto and say that we killed 194k? Wouldn't that help your side better?



That's your opinion, not mine....(Enjoy conflicting views, says Brent)
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 09:48 pm
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
To BRENT, GOOD MORNING, GUTEN TAG, BONJOUR, SHALOM, SALAM !

Well, you're right, using "mass killers" are the wrong words to use.

Via the internet I read an article by ANTHONY GREGORY.
Anthony Gregory is a writer and musician who lives in Berkeley, California. He is also a research assistant at the "Independent Institute".

Reprinted from THE FUTURE OF FREEDOM FOUNDATION with permission are some excerpts that I feel is important enough to quote:

*** The U.S. government has killed civilians for well over a century.
During the Civil War, General Williams Tecumseh Sherman waged war on civilians.
During the Philippine Insurrection at the turn of the 20th century, U.S. forces killed about 200,000 civilians, and even had a policy to shoot anyone more than 10 years old who dared to resist the U.S. occupation of the Philipines.

TERRORISM (capitalizing by me), if it means anything, is a method by which civilians are the targets of violence for the purpose of achieving political goals. Having Imperial Japan surrender, even if a worthy goal, was nevertheless a political one, and the targetting of innocents to achieve that goal was an act of terrorism.

Indeed it was terrorism on an incredible large scale.

Hundreds of thousands (300,000 - my note) of innocent Japanese were instantaneously wiped off the earth on August 6 and August 9, 1945 (Hiroshima and Nagasaki - my note).
Many more died in the following years from the radioactive climate left behind by the bombing. ***

Do you think I should have used the words "Terrorist or terrorism" instead of 'mass killers' ?

I appologize for not using the "right" words.

BTW, researches at the Johns Hopskins University in Baltimore MD and Columbia University in the state of New York stated that the U.S., in the first 18 months of the Iraqi War has killed about 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians , mostly women and children. (and counting - my note)
Quote:
is a method by which civilians are the targets of violence for the purpose of achieving political goals.

So what street address did the anola gay have for there target? If i remember history correct is was a jap gasolene or munitions factory.
Quote:
Having Imperial Japan surrender, even if a worthy goal, was nevertheless a political one, and the targetting of innocents to achieve that goal was an act of terrorism.

If that is all the proof you have i guess i'll be waiting a long time for this one as well?
Quote:
Indeed it was terrorism on an incredible large scale.

What flavor is the coolaid these days.
Quote:
Hundreds of thousands (300,000 - my note) of innocent Japanese were instantaneously wiped off the earth on August 6 and August 9, 1945 (Hiroshima and Nagasaki - my note).
Many more died in the following years from the radioactive climate left behind by the bombing. ***


By your count there won't be any thing left of Iran, right on. Back to the stoneage we all go.
Quote:
Do you think I should have used the words "Terrorist or terrorism" instead of 'mass killers' ?

I appologize for not using the "right" words.

Use what ever you like, you may get corrected every now and then.
Quote:
BTW, researches at the Johns Hopskins University in Baltimore MD and Columbia University in the state of New York stated that the U.S., in the first 18 months of the Iraqi War has killed about 100,000 innocent Iraqi civilians , mostly women and children. (and counting - my note)

Got a credible link for that?
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Apr, 2006 09:52 pm
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
What are "mofo's" ?

I checked my 10th edition (1998) Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary but can't find that word.

I have a hard time following your 'Scientific' language, like you having a hard time following my highschool's french or german.
Mofo is a short word for Mutha Fukka. search what you like, you won't find it in a dictionary.
Quote:
I have a hard time following your 'Scientific' language, like you having a hard time following my highschool's french or german

No hard time here, just falls on apptitude. Some get it some don't.
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 12:22 am
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
What are "mofo's" ?

I checked my 10th edition (1998) Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary but can't find that word.

I have a hard time following your 'Scientific' language, like you having a hard time following my highschool's french or german.

Try the Urban Dictionary.
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 11:39 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
So what street address did the anola gay have for there target? If i remember history correct is was a jap gasolene or munitions factory.

If that is all the proof you have i guess i'll be waiting a long time for this one as well?

What flavor is the coolaid these days.

By your count there won't be any thing left of Iran, right on. Back to the stoneage we all go.

Use what ever you like, you may get corrected every now and then.

Got a credible link for that?




First of all my message was addressed to our mutual friend, the administrator.

All links and sources are for everyone to read in that message.

It is not enough to be able to read the alphabet from A to Z.
It needs comprehension to be able to understand what is written.

Apparently you don't have the ability to do that.

Brent does. Verstehen sie herr Drnaline? (understand?)
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 11:45 am
@Drnaline,
Drnaline wrote:
Mofo is a short word for Mutha Fukka. search what you like, you won't find it in a dictionary.

No hard time here, just falls on apptitude. Some get it some don't.



>>Mofo is a short word for Mutha Fukka<<

Wow, mama mia...I suppose you've been doing that all the time? Wow!
tikala
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:02 pm
@ndjs,
ndjs wrote:



>>Urban Dictionary<<

Is it for "scientific" people like you and Drnaline?
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:11 pm
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
>>Urban Dictionary<<

Is it for "scientific" people like you and Drnaline?

That's odd, I don't really recall me ever saying that I was a scientist. However, you tend to act like you know more than we do, but all you do is dance around points, name call (esp in jest), and ignore responses except to take the original topic ever farther off topic.

You didn't know what he meant by something, and I explained it to you in no uncertain terms. You're welcome.

Now, GET BACK ON TOPIC. Or posts will be edited, leaving only the information which pertains to the topic.

And tikala, this post requires no response. So don't.
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 06:04 am
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
First of all my message was addressed to our mutual friend, the administrator.

All links and sources are for everyone to read in that message.

It is not enough to be able to read the alphabet from A to Z.
It needs comprehension to be able to understand what is written.

Apparently you don't have the ability to do that.

Brent does. Verstehen sie herr Drnaline? (understand?)
Quote:
First of all my message was addressed to our mutual friend, the administrator.

If it is only ment for a specific person and only want a reply from them, try a Private Message (PM).
Quote:
All links and sources are for everyone to read in that message.

Wow, modern technology is wonderful.
Quote:
It is not enough to be able to read the alphabet from A to Z.
It needs comprehension to be able to understand what is written.

To comprende what you write all you need is preschool, ever hear of it where your from?
Quote:
Apparently you don't have the ability to do that.

Brent does. Verstehen sie herr Drnaline? (understand?)

Apparently is just your opinion, if it's any thing like waiting for proof of your statement? What is to understand but how to interpret nothing?
0 Replies
 
Drnaline
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 06:06 am
@tikala,
tikala wrote:
>>Mofo is a short word for Mutha Fukka<<

Wow, mama mia...I suppose you've been doing that all the time? Wow!
Havent done here lately, so how is your mother?
0 Replies
 
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Apr, 2006 03:02 pm
@tumbleweed cv,
He can't respond. this is the last time i'm telling everybody to get back on topic.
0 Replies
 
ndjs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 11:36 am
@tumbleweed cv,
After Russia warned us not to mess with Iran, they are now telling Iran to stop uranium enrichment.

FOXNews.com - Russia to Iran: Stop Uranium Enrichment - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News
0 Replies
 
Brent cv
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Apr, 2006 02:20 pm
@tumbleweed cv,
Good stuff.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Sanctions on Iran
  3. » Page 2
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 08:18:56