namelesstavern.net

i will allow the brilliance of The Artist Taxi Driver to rephrase my original question, which we all seem to be dancing around:

Pants down my ass chief. You want to whitewash your little northern home and be the good guys and us to be the bad guys but that just isnt the case.Seriously you basicly just said yes yes we killed them too but you did it first so we arent the bad guys.. Come on man answer this for me home boy ....... Did yall niggas kill any iraqis while you were over there being peace keepers and cleaning up our mess?

The answer is yes yes you fuckin did and that my friend puts the blood on your hands as well and any thing you say other than that is pure bullshit. If you helped us kill niggas in iraq you are terrorists too. Im sure youll come back and tell me how im wrong but thats just you trying to white wash your part in this and nothing more.



P.S.

I still think your a total little bitch in case ya forgot.

Dub post my bad

Again, I don't care about this whole "American Army are terrorists" junk. I don't care about blood on your or my hands. We weren't involved in the second Iraq war, and were actually very vocally against it (fact). Kaemon made claims to the contrary to win an internet argument. I was correcting him.

Stop being a cry baby. I've seen your pictures. I understand why you'd have a little bitch complex.

Zanchief, if it makes you feel better to use such antics as shortbus and caught with my pants down, by all means go for it bud.

Either way it's all symantics, the fact is Canada was involved in ALL 3 wars, whether your citizens protested or not, it didn't stop your government by ASSISTING in ALL 3 skirmishes. I would also like to point out that while our government sent soldiers also, we citizens protested as well. What's done is done, but don't try to single out your government hardly had a hand in one and sweep the other 2 under the rug chief.

As Tikker put it, we're terrorists? Well so is your country bud.

Kaemon wrote:As Tikker put it, we're terrorists? Well so is your country bud.

Again with the rhetoric. I don't care about Tikkers point. I don't consider the American army to be terrorists, just corrected a factual error of yours, which remains entirely false. It wasn't the Canadian people who protested, but our government who deemed it an illegal war. There's a big difference. Our aid started when your your commander and chief declared things "mission accomplished", and UN got involved again.

Actually, Canada became involved because of the NATO alliance, not because of the UN. Canada wasn't going to jump into the war unless the UN gave Canada it's blessing. But, because of the NATO alliance, Canada lent a small contingent of troops to help secure parts of Iraq.


So let's clear the air on this, my original post mentioned Canada assisted in all 3 wars, skirmeshes, whatever you want to call it. You countered by telling me to open the paper blah blah blah...shortbus. Yet you were proven wrong, you're own Country HAS to be lieing to you because a well rounded and knowledeable person such as yourself should know everything it's Country does and tells it's citizens, oh and theres no way in hell Google/Bing got the best of you. Ok, did I get that right?

So many weasel words and double talk.

War starts. Canada involved? No

War ends. Mission Accomplished. Canada involved? Yes.

Keep hitting google bud. It hasn't done you any good yet. Again, time for you to walk away while you're atleast still very wrong. Maybe you should mention Tikker and all that terrorist nonesense again. That's sure to establish your internet victory.

Zanchief wrote:So many weasel words and double talk.

War starts. Canada involved? No

War ends. Mission Accomplished. Canada involved? Yes.

Keep hitting google bud. It hasn't done you any good yet. Again, time for you to walk away while you're atleast still very wrong. Maybe you should mention Tikker and all that terrorist nonesense again. That's sure to establish your internet victory.

There is some information for you to read Zanchief.

Regardless of this silly argument, the last terrorist act was the Oklahoma City bombing. Everything involving 9/11 and the conflicts in the middle east are acts of war. In a war there are no rules and there are no peaceful bystanders. Unfortunately our enemies learned to expose our weaknesses and skillfully use media and The Geneva Convention rules to their advantage. Under the current conditions we have no chance of winning this war without becoming a police state.

Ganzo wrote:There is some information for you to read Zanchief.

Interesting. I will read it. It seems your google is better then Kaemon's.

can't help but notice no one has defined terrorism yet

somehow OKC was a terrist act but 9/11 wasn't? LOL. what about (insert mass school/college shooting spree)?

brinstar wrote:can't help but notice no one has defined terrorism yet

somehow OKC was a terrist act but 9/11 wasn't? LOL. what about (insert mass school/college shooting spree)?

I thought I tried here earlier:

Ganzo wrote:Well Brin, that is at the core of this issue. Some time after WWII media renamed guerrilla warfare into terrorism. Traditionally terrorism was a term for a citizen of a country using violent actions against his own government and nothing else.

if that's the definition you want to uphold then the entire "war on terror" is all a big joke

i mean, it certainly is a ridiculous "war" on its own (lack of) merit, but you'd be assigning a technical fallacy with such a specific definition of terrorism

I agree with your statement that the "war on terror" is a joke, just like the "war on drugs". Otherwise if we classify enemy combatants as terrorists, than we must also use the same term for our own troops.

Terrorism is an act usually violence or threat of violence against one to many people but with the intent to scare the shit out of whatever group the original target/s belong too.

A few examples of terrorism would be 9/11, shock and awe, no knock police raids, lynching, burning a church, and the matt shepard case.



Bit of a derail but a thought I had while typing this....
The above definition is also why I am ok with hate crime laws. If you commit an act of violence but it wasnt just abut the person but the group they belong to that is totally worse and should be punished accordingly. If I beat a dude up who happens to be gay I should only be charged with assault .... if I lynch a man and leave them hanging in a very public place in like harlem or something I should be charged with some hatecrime/terrorist type charge. Is what im saying making sense ?

There is some information for you to read Zanchief.

Nothing but net.

Everyone hear that? That's the air being let out of Zanchief's superinflated ego.

Spazz wrote:Terrorism is an act usually violence or threat of violence against one to many people but with the intent to scare the shit out of whatever group the original target/s belong too.

A few examples of terrorism would be 9/11, shock and awe, no knock police raids, lynching, burning a church, and the matt shepard case.

If we use that definition, than everything US does overseas is also Terrorism

bingo, and we should fucking stop

shit's orwellian, imo - our department of defense is actually the department of offense lol

Kaemon wrote:

There is some information for you to read Zanchief.

Nothing but net.

Everyone hear that? That's the air being let out of Zanchief's superinflated ego.

You were still talking out your ass, provided zero evidence, and needed someone else do your homework for you. This is hardly common knowledge and a lot of it seems pretty circumstantial. I'm not prepared to change my opinion, but at least least Ganzo gave me pause.

.

Tikker wrote:

Ganzo wrote:

Spazz wrote:Terrorism is an act usually violence or threat of violence against one to many people but with the intent to scare the shit out of whatever group the original target/s belong too.

A few examples of terrorism would be 9/11, shock and awe, no knock police raids, lynching, burning a church, and the matt shepard case.

If we use that definition, than everything US does overseas is also Terrorism

pretty much, yup

That still does not make all Americans into terrorists as you've claimed Tikker

No it makes more of us victims

.

Tikker wrote:

Ganzo wrote:
That still does not make all Americans into terrorists as you've claimed Tikker

my point is that you're perceived as a country of terrorists



just as in the 80's we perceived all libyans as terrorists, when obviously not every individual citizen was

My point is that you are stating your personal opinion, which is backed by nothing. Stop trolling.

Zanchief wrote:Our aid started when your your commander and chief declared things "mission accomplished", and UN got involved again.

this just occurred to me while pissing

but doesn't this in a large way validate that retard's handling of the unnecessary and unfunded war? "oh if DUBYA says it's over, we can go help - nevermind that it'll be another 7 years"

obv not blaming you directly Z but i had to shake my head