THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

Amigo wrote:

...You advocate Terror on civilians under the guise of liberating of the civilians you terrorize.

No! I advocate doing that which will save more civilian lives than would otherwise be lost if I did something else.

Oh, I forget. Don't forget to commit suicide after you finish exterminating the malignancy of this administration, because you're an advocate of what they have done - killing thousands of innocent civilians.

cicerone imposter wrote:

Oh, I forget. Don't forget to commit suicide after you finish exterminating the malignancy of this administration, because you're an advocate of what they have done - killing thousands of innocent civilians.

I believe terrorist malignancy is killing thousands of innocent civilians.

You appear incapable of correctly stating the truth or even what I advocate.

The number of non-combatant civilians killed by violence since 01/01/2000, as of:
12/31/2002 (1096 days) -- total = 56,049 -- approximate average monthly rate / daily rate = 1,556.9 / 51.1;

The number of non-combatant civilians killed by violence since 01/01/2003, as of:
12/31/2005 (1095 days) -- total = 31,319 -- approximate average monthly rate / daily rate = 870.0 / 28.6;
01/31/2006 (1126 days) -- total = 31,928 -- approximate average monthly rate / daily rate = 862.9 / 28.4;
02/28/2006 (1154 days) -- total = 32,506 -- approximate average monthly rate / daily rate = 855.4 / 28.2;
03/31/2006 (1185 days) -- total = 38,161 -- approximate average monthly rate / daily rate = 978.5 / 32.2;
04/30/2006 (1215 days) -- total = 39,024 -- approximate average monthly rate / daily rate = 975.6 / 32.1.

I believe this must be stopped or drastically curtailed. I believe the only way to stop or drastically curtail it, is to exterminate terrorist malignancy.

Holly crap ican!!!! Did you see Cicerones list on page 158???? Where does that fit into our foreign policy of Liberty for all?????

...
When do we start?
...

I believe you believe that it does not. I believe that it does trump each and every one of our other concerns. I believe that a group of fanatics capable of enlisting youth to commit suicide while mass murdering civilians is a serious threat. I believe that a group declaring repeatedly that it intends to control the world is a serious threat.

Amigo wrote:

Holly crap ican!!!! Did you see Cicerones list on page 158???? Where does that fit into our foreign policy of Liberty for all?????

Holy moly Amigo!!!! What the USA did before 9/11 is not what the USA is doing after 9/11.

What the USA did prior to 9/11 cannot be corrected. What the USA is doing after 9/11 can be corrected.

1. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, destroy their own humanity.

2. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, are not civilians.

3. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, are inhuman malignancies.

4. Civilians can be protected from inhuman malignancies without loss of their individual liberty by demanding their government murder (i.e., intentionally kill) inhuman malignancies.

5. Civilians can be protected from inhuman malignancies by surrendering their liberty to enable their government to adequately detect and prevent inhuman malignancies from murdering them.

6. Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who give up liberty for security will have neither liberty or security."

7. Because Benjamin Franklin is correct, inhuman malignancies should be murdered to protect the security of both civilian life and civilian liberty.

ICAN BELIEVES:

Quote:

1. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, destroy their own humanity.

2. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, are not civilians.

3. People who mass murder civilians, or who abet such, or who advocate such, or who are silent witnesses to such, are inhuman malignancies.

4. Civilians can be protected from inhuman malignancies without loss of their individual liberty by demanding their government murder (i.e., intentionally kill) inhuman malignancies.

5. Civilians can be protected from inhuman malignancies by surrendering their liberty to enable their government to adequately detect and prevent inhuman malignancies from murdering them.

6. Benjamin Franklin said, "Those who give up liberty for security will have neither liberty or security."

7. Because Benjamin Franklin is correct, inhuman malignancies should be murdered to protect the security of both civilian life and civilian liberty.

...
There isn't much difference between what you advocate and what they advocate.
They advocate murdering civilians; we advocate murdering those who murder civilians. That's a big difference.
They have an arbitrary list of events that lead them to believe that we need exterminating.
They have stated that we need exterminating because their governments permit us bases in the middle east, and because we do not believe in the Muslim religion.
You have presented an arbitrary list of events which lead you to believe that they need exterminating.
They advocate murdering civilians, they declared war against civilians, they murdered civilians, and they are murdering civilians.


They believe we are responsible for the war.
We are because we went to war to defend ourselves.

We believe they are responsible for the war.
They are too because they created the need for us to defend ourselves.
---

Some of us believe a truce is possible. The extremist terrorists do not. The extremist ICan's also do not.
The term extremist terrorist is redundant, since all terrorists want to murder to get what they want -- for these people that is non-negotiable. The term extremist ICan's is an exaggeration in that I want only to stop terrorists from murdering those those I love without those I love losing their liberty as a consequence -- that is non-negotiable.

Truce with terrorists is no more probable than truce between the British led by Chamberlain and the Germans led by Hitler was possible. Churchill repeatedly warned of that improbability. Churchill was right. If you believe made Churchill an extremist, then I believe we need more such extremists today.

You agree with the enemy on pretty much every subject. You simply cannot agree who the enemy is. But most of us in the middle understand that both of you are the enemy. Extremism is the enemy, and those who advocate extremism to fight extremism, deserve to be treated the same as those whose attitudes they copy.
Your semantic distortions not withstanding, our enemy consists of those who advocate the murder of civilians, who declare war against civilians, who make war against civilians, and who murder civilians. Such people are themselves not civilians.

I have no doubt that there is a Muslim version of Ican, on a Muslim discussion board, who fevrently puts forward his theories that his state will never be safe while American interests are not fought. He will advocate the youth to fight in the manner that his culture determines appropriate.
I do not put forward any general theory that America will never be safe while the interests of others are not fought. I put forward only the theory that Americans will not be safe while Americans are repeatedly murdered. Seems to me that's a truism.

As I said, you didn't used to be this extreme. Why have you become more extreme?
Alas, "Why have you stopped beating your wife (or significant other)?"

I believe that, absent evidence to support your view, it is you who are extreme in believing one can successfully negotiate with murderers of civilians to stop them from murdering civilians; and in believing those who believe one cannot successfully negotiate with murderers of civilians to stop them from murdering civilians are extreme.

Cycloptichorn