donkey Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Respect Do you have any figures how many civilians have been killed? The "civilians" that i see die daily are armed with AK47`s.With estimates at 20000 including armed forces deaths it makes it look like a tea party compared to Iraq (110000 civilian deaths) and Afganistan (13000 civilian deaths not including armed forces). Of course when Assads army is getting bombed by suicide bombers left right and centre and IEDs placed everywhere they should then not resort to force and have a cup of tea with the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists who want to impose sharia law on the people.I hope he wipes them out. Do you even know who runs the FSA?.They don`t live in Syria anyway. Do you want to see what your beloved Free Syrian Army did today? Google "terrorists throwing post office workers from a building". Maybe the 3 million christians in Syria don`t want to end up like that. Stop, you're breaking my heart. Those poor Syrian security service personal. I'm sure there's a perfectly good reason why they've been terrorising and murdering their own poulation for the last thirty years, and sure, people in other countries supported by the west do it as well. What more justification could any right minded person need to lend moral support to a bunch of sadists and psychopaths let loose to terrorise the general population? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 So the IRA sympathizers in America and Canada who funded the IRA in North Ireland were only putting what they saw as being their compatriots interests first ? Difficult to blame them for that? The IRA weren't a country, nor were they a paramilitary organisation accepted as being a part of a country, so it was far easier to call them 'terrorists'- Which they were. That terrorist status didn't stop funding from American Organisations, Multi-National organisations (Ray Kroc, MacDonalds) and indeed, tacit approval by the US government for some time. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and attitudes do change. It's not so long ago that the West (primarily the US) was funding the Taleban, and supporting Saddam Hussein. Menachem Begin (the terrorist who headed Irgun and was responsible for many attacks against British forces in Palestine was the same Menachem Begin who was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. Martin McGuinness was a member of the IRA but is now the deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland. In politics (particularly in international politics) things move on and colours (including black and white) are not permanent. Yes, the Russians and the Chinese are acting in their own interest. They seem to make a habit of doing that and they're fairly open about it. The French too are renowned for putting the interests of their country first. - and second and third ... others can get to the end of the line. Other countries are not always so consistent. Perhaps in some cases, the politicians leading some other countries put their own personal and political ambitions ahead of the good of their countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XXTickerXX Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Stop, you're breaking my heart. Those poor Syrian security service personal. I'm sure there's a perfectly good reason why they've been terrorising and murdering their own poulation for the last thirty years, and sure, people in other countries supported by the west do it as well. What more justification could any right minded person need to lend moral support to a bunch of sadists and psychopaths let loose to terrorise the general population? You seem to be under the impression that democracy and Islam mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 The IRA weren't a country, nor were they a paramilitary organisation accepted as being a part of a country, so it was far easier to call them 'terrorists'- Which they were. That terrorist status didn't stop funding from American Organisations, Multi-National organisations (Ray Kroc, MacDonalds) and indeed, tacit approval by the US government for some time. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and attitudes do change. It's not so long ago that the West (primarily the US) was funding the Taleban, and supporting Saddam Hussein. Menachem Begin (the terrorist who headed Irgun and was responsible for many attacks against British forces in Palestine was the same Menachem Begin who was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. Martin McGuinness was a member of the IRA but is now the deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland. In politics (particularly in international politics) things move on and colours (including black and white) are not permanent. Yes, the Russians and the Chinese are acting in their own interest. They seem to make a habit of doing that and they're fairly open about it. The French too are renowned for putting the interests of their country first. - and second and third ... others can get to the end of the line. Other countries are not always so consistent. Perhaps in some cases, the politicians leading some other countries put their own personal and political ambitions ahead of the good of their countries. So it may just be that the Russians and the Chinese may suffer considerable fallout after all this is over. They are major powers in the world and both have proved that they have no foreign policy whatsoever. Only the desire to reap in the profits while Syria descends into a complete bloodbath. There is also another factor to consider. Revolutions have a habit of spreading, sometimes across boundaries between different cultures, Perhaps Putin doesnt feel all that secure on his own throne. He's far from universally popular in Russia and has set himself up as some modern day Tsar who if not actually in power for a period of time nevertheless pulls the strings of the puppet who supposedly is.... Medvedev is who comes to mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alteredgemed Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 In other words you're a complete lightweight who can't cope with a few questions from people who doubt your intellect and integrity. How sad. In other words he is disgusted with morons trying to twist his posts. I suppose he's sick of cowards trying to defend the indefensible. Useless repeater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 In other words he is disgusted with morons trying to twist his posts. I suppose he's sick of cowards trying to defend the indefensible. Useless repeater Appreciate that thank you.. My intention was to wake these people up so they know what's going on, America are using us again, for their own gain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Appreciate that thank you.. My intention was to wake these people up so they know what's going on, America are using us again, for their own gain ooh youve popped back, cos youve got a friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 ooh youve popped back, cos youve got a friend That's one more than you then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 If the insults and off-topic sniping do not cease, this thread will be closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 You seem to be under the impression that democracy and Islam mix. Ho Hum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man A straw man is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2] Still, I suppose SF is nothing, if not highly predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.