There once was this school bully that was the biggest baddest bully in the yard.
Nobody messed with this bully because they knew better. And when the bully
came around things got silent. Nobody wanted to make the bully mad. There
were nerds that would do the bully's work in return for protection from others.
Then one day the bully was turned on and a gutless attack on the bully from
some unknown place happened. The bully got hit with pies in the face, and
nobody could find the person that did it. Everyone had a good idea who did it,
but nobody was certain. The bully got really pissed and the longer the suspect
hid, the more mad the bully got. The bully got so mad that he had to vent his
frustration, and he decides to take it out on the people that are not under his
protection. These innocent people are getting nailed every night until the
bully has regained his bully status, because everybody knows that if a bully is
made to look funny, he no longer looks like a bully. And if the bully does
nothing about it then forever the bully is a push over and nobody looks at the
bully the same, nobody is scared of them, nobody wants protection from them.
The school becomes chaotic. Kids rioting, beating up other kids. The nerds
have no protection any more, and therefor are subject to constant wedgies, and
swirleys(sometimes even chocolate swirleys). While the bully is silenced, the
nerds are taken over and a new bully will be formed. But there has to be a
challenge between the bigest of the yard to see who will reach the bully
status.

On the other hand. If the bully stands up and starts to kick the crap out of
everyone that is in his way, until he gets the sasisfaction that he desires.
The others will still be under his shadows, fearful of what he will do to them,
scared when he looks at them differently, and order will remin as much as
always has. There might even be some that search and find the one responsible
just so they can pass their beating off to another.

Floppy_Monster
-thoughts on the world now that America has had pie thrown in their face.

*edit* this was copied as is, so don't blame me for any speeling or grammatical errors.

This message has been edited by Dysorderia on September 17, 2001 at 03:18 PM

------------------
You are what you drive
---
Cadillac: A Buick Park Avenue is too young and sporty for me.

Well, can't say I'd be very surprised.. this is just the kind of action I'd expect from you yanks.

btw that exact same analogy could be used to condone the nazi's.

quote:

---

Originally posted by keij0:
Couldn't agree more with your post, Dysorderia. Now evil yanks just want revenge, no matter who will be hurt in the process. How does killing of innocent civilians with airplanes differ from killing innocent civilians with weapons and missiles?

Well, can't say I'd be very surprised.. this is just the kind of action I'd expect from you yanks.

---

WTF? I don't recall us "yanks" going crazy and bombing out of hand here recently, do you? I don't know where you're from, and don't really care. Do you condone this act? Do you think America should simply shrug, say "Oh well" and go on? Was your nation and its soveriegnty attacked in an act of war? Did you lose family or friends because the happened to be at work when a someone decided to play God and take thousands of lives?

No?

Then shut the fuck up.

Dysorderia, a pie in the face? 5000+ innocent people dead is a pie in the face? Parents at work, children on the planes is A PIE IN THE FACE? What is wrong with you? Do you condone terrorism? What will it take to change your mind? A car bomb that kills your parents? Your child executed screaming for mercy? It may not be your politics, but it DOES affect you.

Open your eyes and join the world of reality.

I'm not advocating bombing every possible nation that might be responsible into a smoldering hole, that's just asinine. And I agree that this desire for revenge is dangerous. I don't want revenge, I want justice. And once we locate those responsible, we shall have it.

------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dark-Angel99:
How come {name removed} doesn't like you? I find you really funny :D

---

Never argue with and idiot...he may be doing the same thing

quote:

---

Originally posted by keij0:
Couldn't agree more with your post, Dysorderia. Now evil yanks just want revenge, no matter who will be hurt in the process. How does killing of innocent civilians with airplanes differ from killing innocent civilians with weapons and missiles?

Well, can't say I'd be very surprised.. this is just the kind of action I'd expect from you yanks.

---

the killings with the planes was planned. the killings with missles was an accident. stupid.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pengu1nn:
the killings with the planes was planned. the killings with missles was an accident. stupid.

---

And we all know that's how the American system of justice works, huh?

"I'm sorry your Honor! But I didn't mean to kill my neighbor! I just thought putting a concrete block on my gas pedal and letting my mower run loose would be funny!"

Pull your head out of your ass. What matters is the actual result of your actions. Intentions are inconsequential.

Also, anyone who wants to do a comparison with Iraq, there are two things I must point out: 1, Iraq was the aggressor, overrunning a small and relatively defensless neighbor which happened to be our ally. 2, The US did declare war on Iraq before the first attack on Iraq was made. It is understood that in war there will be casualties, and they aren't always military: Iraq's dictator ran that risk when he decided to invade Kuwait.

This situation cannot be compared in any way to Iraq. It can possibly be compared in principle to the missle attack on a suspected terrorist building in the Sudan made by Clinton in 97 in which a midnight watchman died, since our government made no warning to Sudan that it was going to attack. However the sheer scope of this attack and the fact that it was planned to maximize casualties rather than minimize them makes this attack completely different.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CatKnight:
hello, you are are comparing a grade school play ground to an international [b]war. not the best analogy.

btw that exact same analogy could be used to condone the nazi's.[/B]

---

hello your're pretending to be clever when ur just a twat.

------------------
simultaneity is not absolute. So just because you think i'm wrong, from my frame of reference i'm right!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
Iraq was the aggressor, overrunning a small and relatively defensless neighbor which happened to be our ally.

---

Not that I like Iraq or anything, and not that Iraq has already done enough stuff in the past to rationalize attacking them, but Iraq was actually (to some extent) justified when they invaded Kuwait. You see, Kuwait had been drilling diagonally into Iraqi oil fields for some time before the invasion, and had been warned by Iraq on several occasions, "Stop fucking stealing our fucking oil or we'll invade your ass."

quote:

---

Originally posted by keij0:
Couldn't agree more with your post, Dysorderia. Now evil yanks just want revenge, no matter who will be hurt in the process. How does killing of innocent civilians with airplanes differ from killing innocent civilians with weapons and missiles?

Well, can't say I'd be very surprised.. this is just the kind of action I'd expect from you yanks.

---

STOP PROFILING PEOPLE DUE TO THEIR COUNTRY OF ORIGIN, ASSHOLE! Its fuckheads like you that are in America doing the same thing to some poor mideastern looking guy. You're just as bad as them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Beldurin:
Dysorderia, a pie in the face? 5000+ innocent people dead is a pie in the face? Parents at work, children on the planes is A PIE IN THE FACE? What is wrong with you? Do you condone terrorism? What will it take to change your mind? A car bomb that kills your parents? Your child executed screaming for mercy? It may not be your politics, but it DOES affect you.

---

Quoted from the F.U.C.K mailing list

I.E. NOT written by me, Beldurin, you dumbass.

this is all that I wrote of that post:

*edit* this was copied as is, so don't blame me for any speeling or grammatical errors.

------------------
Windows 95 -n- (win-doze): a 32 bit Extension to a 16 bit Graphical Shell of
an 8 bit Operating System originally coded for a 4 bit Processor by a 2 bit
company that can't stand one bit of competition!!

This message has been edited by Dysorderia on September 18, 2001 at 10:48 PM

I referred "yanks" as in citizen of US, becouse to my knowlidge there isn't a better word for it. Americans means people that live in South-America as well as in North-America. Consider my "yanks" as "Unitedstatesians" or something :P

Beldurin:
Do you think America should simply shrug, say "Oh well" and go on?

So you think that attacking a country becouse one guy *may* have been involved in the terrorist act is reasonable? I still haven't seen any proof that bin Laden would be behind the attack, but isn't it just like US to quickly find a scapegoat?

Beldurin:
Was your nation and its soveriegnty attacked in an act of war?

No. And neither was yours. An act of terrorism is not same as war, even if your president decides to call it such.

Beldurin:
Did you lose family or friends because the happened to be at work when a someone decided to play God and take thousands of lives?

So you've lost someone? Well of course this gives you the right to go kill just about anyone you think is reasonable for the killing, doesn't it? Oh wait.. no it doesn't.

Didn't see much news coveridge when US bombs killed civilians as well as soldiers. In a far away country. That most of your citizens have never heard from and surely can't point out from a map.

--

Hellraiser:
Whiskey: there's a difference between intentional and accidental homicide.

Yes, there is. But the consequences are the same. You could say that the terrorists didn't mean to kill anyone, people just accidentally died when the places hit the buildings. This would be the same kind of denial as when innocent civilians die becouse of bombings.

Slate:
STOP PROFILING PEOPLE DUE TO THEIR COUNTRY OF ORIGIN, ASSHOLE!

Thank you for shouting. Also you referring to me as a fuckhead really proved your point, didn't it?

Being a "big bully" is easy, you don't have to rationalise your actions, just kick everyones ass that questions them. This has been the way I've seen US handle their foreign policy. Of course i acknowledge that there are smart and wise people in US. It's just, that they seem to be a very small minority.

I think I have made my comments clearly, given some reasons why my opinions are the way they are, and all in all made my points without attacking anyone directly. I hope you are capable of same.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CatKnight:
hello, you are are comparing a grade school play ground to an international [b]war. not the best analogy.

btw that exact same analogy could be used to condone the nazi's.[/B]

---

I think its a good analogy, personally.

And compared to the world population, the amount of lives lost in this tragedy, IS a pie in the face.

No offense intended to anyone that lost their lives, or loved ones, but to the terrorists these people were numbers. Same thing your Government is assigning to the troops he is about to send over to attack.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
Whiskey: there's a difference between intentional and accidental homicide. That is the basis behind our justice system here. I'm not saying that accidental killing of civilians in bombing military targets is justified or right, just that there is a difference.

---

Agreed, but the original quote I replied to seemed to imply that the US is somehow exonerated by virtue of its ‘accidents’. I was just trying to point out that it makes little difference whether accidental or intentional: in this country, negligence resulting in death is still punishable by heavy penalties. Furthermore, dead civilians are dead civilians, especially to a religious fundamentalist bent on believing the US is out to destroy his entire country and culture.

quote:

---

Originally posted by keij0:
Blah blah blah blah....

Yes, there is. But the consequences are the same. You could say that the terrorists didn't mean to kill anyone, people just accidentally died when the places hit the buildings. This would be the same kind of denial as when innocent civilians die becouse of bombings.

Some other mindless drivel.

---

It might help to pull your head out of your ass for a bit and consider what you say before you post.

First of all, not all of us "yanks" as you called us are out for blood, or even behind our government's policy all the time, which has *agreed* been wrong at times.

Second of all, read my post before you put words into my mouth that I never implied. Same goes for your replies to everyone else who posted.

You can't say that the terrorists accidentally killed people. Slamming a plane full of passengers into an office building during working hours is far different from slamming a missle into a target that has been identified as harboring terrorism, and planning the strike at night when there is theoretically no one working. Its allso different from bombing another country after explicitly declaring war on them for acting like the "bully" you seem to think we act like "all the time" (though I'd like to see your proof of that.

The US has made numerous efforts to be responsible with its power in dealing with other countries: granted it has not always worked out, but if you could have done a better job of handling US power in every situation given the information those in charge had at the times the power was handled or mishandled, then you might possibly have a leg to stand on. Hindsight is 20-20, but foresight is never that clear.

Regardless of bin Laden's responsibility in this case, he has commited acts of terrorism on US sovereign soil before, thus is a justifiable target no matter what. The US is not rushing into this: we have *not* as of yet taken any action military or not in retaliation for this attack WHICH IS AN ACT OF WAR, AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH. Bin Laden has stated several times that he favors killing American soldiers and civilians and making no distinction between the two, and has acted on this. He is at war with America, and so are his followers, and so is anyone who feels that they have to resort to violence against American citizens or the American government to make their point.

To call Americans evil and assume that all they want is revenge in the wake of this tragedy is naive and shows the same type of blind unreasoning feelings that were responsible for this attack, and would be behind any kind of kneejerk reaction. Most of us are willing to go to war over this, but do not want to strike without thinking it through, and do not want to target a country but rather terrorism as the enemy. There are many who feel that the US has been at fault in its dealings with the Middle East in the past, thus most want the US to be very careful in how it deals with this most recent attack.

If you have the impression that the American people are a bunch of redneck hillbilies with guns who are out for blood and to attack anyone and everyone who voices opinions other than that America is God, you're sadly mistaken.

In the future please use reason before you post. Not everything that you see and hear and is reported to you through your media, or anyone's media for that matter, is true, neither is it the whole story. I've made every effort to keep up with both US and foreign news and crosscheck my various sources throughout this crisis so that I can discuss it from a reasonable standpoint having taken into account more than just my country's side of the situation. Please do us the courtesy of doing that as well.

------------------
Old farts never die, they just get blown away.

Edit: misplaced modifier

This message has been edited by Hellraiser on September 19, 2001 at 09:45 AM

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
< previous post was here >

---

Well put. You've pretty much expressed everything I would have said, and you made it look a lot nicer then I would have.

quote:

---

Originally posted by whiskey@throttle:
And we all know that's how the American system of justice works, huh?

"I'm sorry your Honor! But I didn't mean to kill my neighbor! I just thought putting a concrete block on my gas pedal and letting my mower run loose would be funny!"

Pull your head out of your ass. What matters is the actual result of your actions. Intentions are inconsequential.

---

so when you step on someones foot they should beat the shit out of you? after all intentions are inconsequential.

maybe you should have read the post i was replying to.

--------------------------------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by whiskey@throttle:

Agreed, but the original quote I replied to seemed to imply that the US is somehow exonerated by virtue of its ‘accidents’. I was just trying to point out that it makes little difference whether accidental or intentional: in this country, negligence resulting in death is still punishable by heavy penalties. Furthermore, dead civilians are dead civilians, especially to a religious fundamentalist bent on believing the US is out to destroy his entire country and culture.

---

again you should have read the post i was replyig to. I'n fact i will add the part of that post "keij0 - How does killing of innocent civilians with airplanes differ from killing innocent civilians with weapons and missiles?" and agian the difference is we weren't trying to kill civilians, they were. we fucked up, THEY DIDN'T. you see how that works?

pengu1nn – yeah, I hear what you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that, in the minds of these people declaring holy war against the US, it doesn’t matter whether the deaths were intended or not. And give me a break: stepping on toes is a long ways away from homicide.

I think it’s pretty clear that keij0 is off his rocker. How a person can even attempt to argue that crashing multiple hijacked planes into populated buildings was accidental, I haven’t a clue. Spidey senses tell me we're in troll territory.

Anyhow, there's a big difference between what dinglebat is saying and what I’m saying. I think it’s acceptable to empathize* with people who lost loved ones due to US influence (e.g. - a Palestinian who hates the US because his parents were killed by an American made IDF tank, or something like that). I'm just trying to be objective and put myself in their shoes, without saying, "it was an accident," or, "shit happens in war."

To me, it matters not whether the deaths of any group of civilians were accidental or planned. The fact is, they died. And I have a hard time imagining that I, or any one of you, wouldn’t live in hatred if some regime tried to bomb a government installation and accidentally killed mom and dad in the process.

In this country, when it comes to homicide, intentions usually don’t influence guilt. I find it a bit hypocritical to ignore this when it comes to actions of foreign conflict. That's all I was trying to say.

* please note that empathize is not synonymous with support.

This message has been edited by whiskey@throttle on September 19, 2001 at 03:17 PM

There was a real good show on TV last week, it was Canadian ppl who talked about the US incident, and they pointed out many reasons why they attack was provoked. The audience was made up of a few different nationalities, and they were all university professors, and otherwise highly educated ppl. They had many excellent points and questions for the American guy on the other end of the videophone. They got him on many points. I wanted to tape that show sooo bad. Excellent article in my local newspaper today too. I don't have a scanner and I'm not typin it all out either, it's quite a bit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
First of all, not all of us "yanks" as you called us are out for blood, or even behind our government's policy all the time, which has *agreed* been wrong at times.

---

Of course not. Not all nazis were bad people either ;P

quote:

---

Second of all, read my post before you put words into my mouth that I never implied. Same goes for your replies to everyone else who posted.

---

I don't see where I would have done such a thing. I did read originals and my quotes and commentaries on them, and didn't notice twisting meanings nor "putting words into their mouths". Then again, English is not my native language (in case you didn't notice

quote:

---

You can't say that the terrorists accidentally killed people.

---

I have a way of making very edgy comparisons when trying to prove a point. Of course the terrorists expect people to die. But when bombing a "military target", people also expect civilians, as innocent as the ones in WTC building and the streets of NYC, to die.

quote:

---

Terrorist airplane-bombing against bombing boms during war:
Its allso different from bombing another country after explicitly declaring war on them for acting like the "bully" you seem to think we act like "all the time" (though I'd like to see your proof of that.

---

Declaring war is mostly an idle action. Just a declaration. Maybe an etiquette that "civilized countries" follow? Attacking is always the same. When US declares war and then attacks, isn't this just like a bully telling it's victim "I'll beat you up after school!" and then doing so? Do you think this is somehow much better or more approved way of action than just going ahead and beating them up without prior notice?

quote:

---

The US has made numerous efforts to be responsible with its power in dealing with other countries

---

Instead of helping, I see US making sure that the goods it needs are delivered. For instance Iraq-Kuwait, US was so actively involved becouse it wanted to protect the oil. It was never about helping the weak or doing the right thing; just going for it's own asset.

quote:

---

bin Laden, Afghanistan: The US is not rushing into this: we have *not* as of yet taken any action military or not in retaliation for this attack WHICH IS AN ACT OF WAR, AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH. Bin Laden has stated several times that he favors killing American soldiers and civilians and making no distinction between the two, and has acted on this. He is at war with America, and so are his followers, and so is anyone who feels that they have to resort to violence against American citizens or the American government to make their point.

---

I hardly think bin Laden is alone in hating US. So when "he is at war against US", does this mean that US declares war against every person that dislikes/hates it and acts on this hate? I don't think so :P

And yes, US is rushing into this. Soon there are (if not already) about 500 fighters (airplane) ready to attack in the Middle-East and I don't know how much missiles and troops. If you don't call this rushing and an action next to attacking and *STARTING* an all out war, then what?

Also, after US has attacked Afhganistan, it won't be just them against you. If things decide to get shitty, people (muslims) from all over the war will as it is in their religion to protect an islamic country that is attacked.

quote:

---

To call Americans evil and assume that all they want is revenge in the wake of this tragedy is naive and shows the same type of blind unreasoning feelings that were responsible for this attack, and would be behind any kind of kneejerk reaction.

---

Never all, but I think most. After reading messages on for instance this board, most of them spoke of occupying, nukeing (make glass, turn into a parkinglot) and so on actions against attackers and their country. Of course there are always reasonable and rational people that see that 'fight fire with fire' isn't the right way, but was it US or any other country, unfortunately these people are always a minority and "an eye for eye, but atleast double" is the way majorities feel about things. (Maybe more in the US that in most of Europe, since you still have death penalty in some states.)

quote:

---

Most of us are willing to go to war over this, but do not want to strike without thinking it through, and do not want to target a country but rather terrorism as the enemy.

---

I personally think that terrorism is just a crime, and can't be fought against in any other way except preventing it. Of course if someone murdered my mother or something like that, I'd be bloody pissed off and want revenge. But then again, it would be personal and I'd have lost my objectivity.

quote:

---

There are many who feel that the US has been at fault in its dealings with the Middle East in the past, thus most want the US to be very careful in how it deals with this most recent attack.

---

I hope so. However, your country's recent actions do not support this belief.

quote:

---

In the future please use reason before you post. Not everything that you see and hear and is reported to you through your media, or anyone's media for that matter, is true, neither is it the whole story. I've made every effort to keep up with both US and foreign news and crosscheck my various sources throughout this crisis so that I can discuss it from a reasonable standpoint having taken into account more than just my country's side of the situation. Please do us the courtesy of doing that as well.

---

In my book, CNN and especially BBC are respected news agencies, but I tend to try to verify most of the news from other sources. And I did think before I posted the last time, as I did now. I'd also like to make note, that I did not feel the need to call you names as most people seem to do on this board.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pengu1nn:
the killings with the planes was planned. the killings with missles was an accident. stupid.

---

Highway of Death, Gulf War. Look it up. Accidental my ass.

------------------
When 1337 hax0rs start impaling each other with swords and typing code with a hook on one hand, then they can modify the term "pirate."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellraiser:
keij0:
Calling us Americans "evil yanks" is more of an affront to our persons than any name we called you could possibly have been.

---

------------------
Windows 95 -n- (win-doze): a 32 bit Extension to a 16 bit Graphical Shell of
an 8 bit Operating System originally coded for a 4 bit Processor by a 2 bit
company that can't stand one bit of competition!!

"[Bin Laden] is at war with America, and so are his followers, and so is anyone who feels that they have to resort to violence against American citizens or the American government to make their point."

So did he or didn't he declare war? I thought it was pretty clear, from the US Embassy bombings...this wasn't exactly a "Pearl Harbor" like a lot of people are saying...

sHuoReNviOLiN:
Its not a Pearl Harbor because Pearl Harbor was a military installation, and the attackers threw their own military and its weapons against the Americans.

Words are so bloody treacherous I see they can be twisted to make contradictions out of just about everything I say, so I will say this: bin Laden is at war. These acts of Tuesday whether planned by him or not were acts of war. What makes them evil and different than any act of war America has ever made on another country is they were carried out against a known non-military target, in a fasion that was intended to maximize loss of civilian human life. Even their choice of weapons - flying planes full of passengers into their targets - shows a definite intent to kill as many as possible and make as bold a statement of hatred as could be achieved by doing so. This is premeditated murder of the worst kind.

War as in a struggle between two countries militaries over perceived or real threats is fundamentally different than (despite being a thing to be avoided under most circumstances) war as in terrorist attacks on civilian populations.

There is an underlying principle here that I am trying to get across: while results of actions are very important, the intent behind those actions is what makes the difference between good and evil. That people would be willing to kill thousands unarmed and defensless civilians just to make a statement is unconscionable. That people are willing to fight a war to defend the interests of their country against the military representation of a known enemey, and risk loss of life on both sides including possible civilian casualties is regrettable, but sometimes necessary.

That is my attempt to put into words a concept that I believe every civilized person in their right mind should know and understand.

------------------
Old farts never die, they just get blown away.

I know someone here is probably gonna try to justify this or something...
But this is just as much bullshit and hatred as anything. Man if i was from Iraq or near, i'd probably like to do the same thing Bin Laden's men did.

Now i expect to get quoted and flamed for somthing stupid like my spelling...or the fact that i hate the mentality behind this whole goddamn conflict.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShiNobi:
< http://www.deoxy.org/wc/wc-death.htm >

I know someone here is probably gonna try to justify this or something...
But this is just as much bullshit and hatred as anything. Man if i was from Iraq or near, i'd probably like to do the same thing Bin Laden's men did.

Now i expect to get quoted and flamed for somthing stupid like my spelling...or the fact that i hate the mentality behind this whole goddamn conflict.

---

Short COunter argument.

Suppose they did bomb/disable the first/last trucks to trap the others... come on now, you think they are going to SIT IN THEIR TRUCKS, TRAPPED? No, they got out. The counter argument I've read was that this event happened to some extent. MOST escaped alive.. yes, there were some casualties, but most got away. Plus, they were transporting STOLEN goods as well. (stolen tv's etc from kuwait) The "Highway of Death" should really be called the "Highway of Death for Trucks and Stolen Goods" cause reportedly very few people were killed.

Remember, this is just from what I read. Could be true, could be a lie.

quote:

---

Originally posted by SLATE:
Short COunter argument.

Suppose they did bomb/disable the first/last trucks to trap the others... come on now, you think they are going to SIT IN THEIR TRUCKS, TRAPPED? No, they got out...

---

Some of the weapons used include fuel air bombs, e.g. BLU-82, which incinerates everything within hundreds of yards...also napalm and other phosphorus bombs, in violation of international law. For that matter firing on fleeing troops is against the Geneva Conventions too.

Plus they had enough airplanes in the area that there was nearly an aerial traffic jam. By the time they knew to run it was probably too late. Video footage shows a VW Bug (very deadly) trying to run, with a missile streaking in on it.

This was hardly the only example, either...it's just the most publicized single incident.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sHuoReNviOLiN:
For that matter firing on fleeing troops is against the Geneva Conventions too.

---

Were gonna be fighting a totally differnt war this time...i higly doubt that a terrorist group that were fighing against is gonna play by the Geneva Convention rules.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DRUFER:
Were gonna be fighting a totally differnt war this time...i higly doubt that a terrorist group that were fighing against is gonna play by the Geneva Convention rules.

---

So we should sink down to their level? That seeds more hatred for the next generation of terrorists.

Plus, this is halfway an international police action...we want to catch them, bring them to trial, and then execute them. Kill bin Laden on the battlefield, and he becomes a martyr whose guilt everybody will always wonder about. Take him to court, try him, give him due process of law...and that makes it justice, not revenge.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sHuoReNviOLiN:
So we should sink down to their level? That seeds more hatred for the next generation of terrorists.

---

I said that THEY wouldn't play by the rules...i never said that we shouldn't.