+1

So Byron could type in big red letters is as good as any reason I've heard. Moses, "stupid"....not by a long shot...thank you Moses!

Off-topic.

My son has Down Syndrome. Recent studies show that people with Trisomy 21 are neither mentally retarded or mentally ill. They do, however, have a learning disability that the medical community is still struggling to understand. Their physical abnormalities have nothing to do with their mental capacity either. It's chromosonal.

No kids myself, but I'd bet he brings tremendous joy to your life :).

This begs the question, why didn't we overthrow Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Yemen, et al?

Answer: Because Bush had a hard on for Saddam Hussein. :)

You obviously never met someone with Down's Syndrome.




Imagine the most gentle, 8 year old child you have every met. Now imagine that they never changed as they got older, stayed as trusting and kind hearted as that child. That is what someone with this is like.



I guess you are right, innocent is innocent, but some people are bothered by children(or people who have a childish outlook) being used to murder other innocent people. I don't know what I am thinking when I get upset about bombs strapped to children:rolleyes:

The United Nations has no overriding legal or moral authority to compel any sovereign nation to comply with it's resolutions. EVER. That includes Iraq.

We should be careful about the powers we permit this unstable group we call the United Nations. Someday they could focus their Chapter 7 resolutions on us. The United States should NEVER surrender autonomy to any foreign power including the U.N.

+1

Probably so Froggy, but ya gotta start somewhere. What pisses me off is the limp wristed approach. If this was done correctly, we could have instilled fear in muslims everywhere.

By your own logic, how do we "instill fear" in combatants who are willing to die in an instant in order to take out some Americans? Show them some Rambo posters? :rolleyes:

Great question! This is a big secret so keep it to yourself OK? They are not ALL particularly willing to die. I know, nobody told you this before & it comes as a shock, it's true. Remember kadaffy duck? You don't see bin laden strapping any dynamite to his skinny ass, do ya? And if they are, then it's our job to facilitate the meeting with big al.

Why would we care about instilling fear in the peaceful ones? Let me in on that "big secret", you freaking genius.

So we start with the one secular country that had kept the radical Islamic fundamentalists "in check" in the region for years :(? Why not Saudi Arabia, which IS the source of the hatred, the 9/11 attackers, and OBL, and just for grins, we send them 20B in arms for being "our oil buddies" recently. I believe that Sadaam had already taken care of the second part, and we as a country simply should NOT go there, or we would be no better than he was imo.

Do tell us Mule...exactly...how you would attack "muslims...correctly" so they would have fear "instilled" in them to stop the radicals?

Take your time and type slowly.

Mule, you appear to be so damn stupid that you don't even realize when you defeat your own position!

Case in point: You correctly post that we have basically taken Kadaffi out of the terrorist equasion. And how has that worked out per stopping or slowing global terrorism you nitwit?

i hesitated opening this thread. are there actually going to be people trying to rationalize this atrocity? i'm waiting for someone to say...

"one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."


well, the other guy's freedom fighter is a poor retard. and the other guy is an evil retard.

You are entirely correct. Just as there are people who would say that causing over 2 million refugees and the maiming of over 100,000 innocent Iraqi's is not worth trying to instill democracy in their nation.

Works both ways doesn't it?

99% of the time the people causing the refugees and slaughter civilians are the ****ING muslim TERRORISTS. it is depressing having to explain something like this.

So you actually think that if we had not invaded and then occupied Iraq over the past 6 years there would still be over 2,200,000 Iraqi refugees and another 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed or maimed?

Yes, it is and always will be depressing to have to explain or defend an incorrect or lame position. It's know as "it comes with the territory" if you stop and think.

I get it, in WWII, we screwed up by bombing peaceful nazis?:confused: