Against a US navy ship, which was not currently at war. Terrorism, not a wartime attack. That's how it was prosecuted and saying otherwise is silly.
Don't blame me because you are completely fucking ignorant and forgot about it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
war for oil
- Thread starter triple
- Start date
More options
Who Replied?Against a US navy ship, which was not currently at war. Terrorism, not a wartime attack. That's how it was prosecuted and saying otherwise is silly.
Don't blame me because you are completely fucking ignorant and forgot about it.
Against a US navy ship, which was not currently at war. Terrorism, not a wartime attack. That's how it was prosecuted and saying otherwise is silly.
Don't blame me because you are completely fucking ignorant and forgot about it.
LMAO.
The question I asked was about US soil terrorist attacks, to which you answered "USS Cole."
In the sea off Yemen.
LMAO.
The question I asked was about US soil terrorist attacks, to which you answered "USS Cole."
In the sea off Yemen.
orly?
major terrorist attacks on the us
READ AGAIN FAGGOT.
"on the us" means on the us. A navy ship of ours that is attacked is ON THE US.
If the russians attack a navy ship, are we not going to care because its not us soil? An attack on a destroyer or something is still an attack on us, as a country.
My god you are retarded.
orly?
READ AGAIN FAGGOT.
"on the us" means on the us. A navy ship of ours that is attacked is ON THE US.
My god you are retarded.
No, you are, load-swallower. I am at least 3 times smarter than you are, guaranteed.
The attacks on the US military have been escalated since 9-11 in case you haven't noticed, whether we are "at war" or not. That's semantics, and it's really retarded that you brush it off in light of that.
"Oh, it's just war now. No big."
or:
"Oh, we say we're at war, now it's not terrorism, but we're still going to refer to the people fighting our military as the terrorists anyway."
FatesWarning
Veteran X
Here's an excellent documentary about oil for anyone that actually wants to take this seriously. There are six parts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gH4dSsTOIY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gH4dSsTOIY&feature=related
That's semantics
how fucking so? we weren't at war, and now we are.
if being "at war" makes no difference, why are all you faggots against it so much?
I am at least 3 times smarter than you are
And at least 3 times as modest. Fucking arrogant prick.
how fucking so? we weren't at war, and now we are.
if being "at war" makes no difference, why are all you faggots against it so much?
And at least 3 times as modest. Fucking arrogant prick.
Dude, okay, I'll be civil. Honestly, I hate this shit because I consider it all stupid and I am not overly politicized like your ilk, and I include many of my fellow "leftists" in that group.
Listen: If an attack on a US warship in Yemen that kills 17 is to be considered a major terrorist attack "on the US," but an attack on citizens in Jordan that kills 57 at a bunch of American hotels in 2005 isn't just because we're "at war" and G. Bush can't prevent terrorism all around the world, it seems to me there's some semantic game-playing there. We were already at war. It's just a matter of who declared it. They did first, a long time before the 2000 USS Cole attack. Is an attack on US citizens not an attack on the US now, just because it was in Jordan? By my reckoning, there has been at least one each year since 2001, major or not, and sometimes by our own citizens against our own citizens.
There have been terrorist attacks "on the US" since 9-11 if you're going to include worldwide terrorism on US people or military hardware, even if you're going to slice and dice the meaning of terrorism to suit your worldview.
And I'm against war because I fucking hate violence. All violence. By us or them.
To throw you a bone, I don't believe anyone is 100% wrong about this sort of thing. It's when people think they're 100% right that I have problems.
And with that, I'm outta here. I can't spend all night arguing this stuff and I'll let someone else take this over for me.
KnightMare
Veteran X
No, you are, load-swallower. I am at least 3 times smarter than you are, guaranteed.
The attacks on the US military have been escalated since 9-11 in case you haven't noticed, whether we are "at war" or not. That's semantics, and it's really retarded that you brush it off in light of that.
"Oh, it's just war now. No big."
or:
"Oh, we say we're at war, now it's not terrorism, but we're still going to refer to the people fighting our military as the terrorists anyway."
we're fighting the terrorist in iraq so we dont have to fight them here. Clearly that means all attacks on the US military in Iraq count as major terrorist attacks on the US.