If you ever had any doubt as to why we are fighting terrorists
 

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UHNN081&show_article=1

I nearly threw up when I read this. These scumbags used two women with Down's syndrome to carry out these heinous acts. Two people that likely had no clue what they were doing and they were sacrificed.

Anyone that had previously asked whether these people were "insurgents" or "freedom fighters" just got your answer.

Yeah, it's horrible. But how is it worse than any other innocent people getting blown-up? I'm not seeing the distinction.

Our government has also "enlisted" the help of mentally Ill people for experimentation. Although these acts didn't turn them into human bombs are we that much better?

http://tinyurl.com/2sc42r

http://tinyurl.com/39emut

It's worse because they used a person that was likely incapable of understanding what was happening to them to commit their heinous act. It was someone that was likely known to them and trusted them.

I agree, that mass murder alone was bad enough. So bad that I thought nothing could be worse. This is worse.

It should also serve as a warning that there is no way that these terrorists can be reasoned with.

Try and find something from this generation before you spew your moral relativism claptrap.

Link me something from the past year that shows that we used people like this as human bombs (or something similar) and I will shut up.

We're better because we've learned and corrected our behavior. Isn't that what you want from an enlightened society?

Take your inane argument elsewhere.

Tell us, oh wise one, why we are not in Sudan. violence against innocent civilians there is WAY WAY WAY worse than in Iraq.

Just because you and I hate terrorists.......does not necessarily make it a good idea to send thousands of troops over there to pick a fight. Besides your hatred, can you come up with another reason?

Joe, why haven't you turned your anger into action and shipped out for Iraq? You might be the answer to the Iraqi peoples' prayers.

We could have ended much of this in Sudan when that country offered to hand Bin Laden over to us, but Prez Clinton declined. This is what you were referring to about Sudan I am sure.

Pick a fight? Guess you forgot...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1201912456.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1201912542.jpg

Yes, this is an absolutely heinous act -- makes me sick to my stomach. It's surprising to see that it doesn't particularly bother the lefties here.

"how is it worse than any other innocent people getting blown-up?"
"Our government has also "enlisted" the help of mentally Ill people for experimentation."
"oh wise one, why we are not in Sudan. violence against innocent civilians there is WAY WAY WAY worse than in Iraq."

My hatred?

Using mentally retarded people as suicide bombers, likely without that person's knowledge. Making someone like that into a mass murderer? If you can't tell evil when you see it, then I can't help you.

I don't use the term evil loosely. It needs to be reserved for times when it applies. Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, etc.... This is one of those times.

Since you asked, we're not in the Sudan for a few reasons. Not all of them I agree with mind you. The world seems to have a double standard for the USA. They don't want the USA to unilaterally invade a country, but they also don't want us not to. Since we are spread thin in Iraq, the current administration has pushed back on the UN to deal with Sudan/Darfur. I think that's wrong. We can not allow genocide. While I also disagreed with Bill Clinton on things, he was right to get involved in Yugoslavia to help prevent ethnic cleansing. As a cynic, you could add oil to the list and I'd likely agree with you. Anything else?

Your "chickenhawk" argument is a red herring Frogger and I won't chase it.

I'm not angry, I am disgusted.

"It should also serve as a warning that there is no way that these terrorists can be reasoned with."

And what do you propose; do you think they all can be killed, disarmed, incarcerated or contained by force? There are a lot of them and they "swim among the innocent" as Mao would say.

I personally doubt armies and ordinance and saying "bring it on"will solve the problem. IMO some intelligent evaluation of the root causes and motivation and then efforts to eliminate the same will result in more peace.

Does this really suprise anyone? In alot of cultures, past and present, mentally handicap people are considered inferior and are treated as such. We're pretty darn good to our population of mentally handicap citizens. But not to long ago most of them were sent off to live in mental institutions and ignored by society. My grandmother, rest her soul, worked with the mentally handicap for a long long time, back when alot of people wouldn't admit that someone in the family was afflicted.

So honestly, this does not shock me one bit.

What would that be? Embrace sharia? Cut ties with Israel? Bring democracy and freedom of conscience to the Middle East?

typical neocon tripe. At the risk of namecalling.

Does it really make you guys feel better to have in your brains that "lefties" don't care about stuff like this? I suppose if it give you a warm fuzzy to ascribe heartless tendencies to "lefties" then by all means, knock yourself out. But realize that you're only deluding yourself.

No, you just described your "hatred" one post earlier. Sounds more like anger to me. And then you hatefully hurled insults at some others here. So, either put up or shut up. I'm personally disgusted by the chickenhawks and their bile. I say they should do something about the things that upset them. And I'm disgusted by the terrorists, too, and appreciate our soldiers for their efforts to stop the ba$tards that pull this crap.

Unfortunately, I think you are partially right. I doubt that the evaluation of the root causes will help. We do need to keep up armed pressure to continue to marginalize these movements before they get too large and prevent them from pulling off large scale assaults.

BTW: I agree that "Bring it on" was a dumb thing to say.

Quite the contrary. Seeing the lefties' reaction to this heinous event makes me sad.

I guess I'm an idealist. I figured that everybody here would agree that this was a horrific act, without qualifiers or moral equivalence gymnastics. My bad.

.

To answer your question: Yes, it shocks the ***** out of me. How any thinking human being can be anything but disgusted and angry over this is beyond comprehension. These perpetrators are ******* animals. Innocent people were sacrificed in an abhorrent act of murder. Suicide murderers that know and understand what they are doing get exactly what they deserve. Anyone that would strap an explosive device to an innocent/ignorant individual and detonate it deserves to be boiled in oil. You sympathizers disgust me.

Actually, I was responding to Superman. He said something about my hatred. Notice the question mark in my post. Please do try and keep up Frogger. ;)

Your chickenhawk argument is a bad one. It doesn't serve you well. We have a nation of over 300 million, and a military (all branches) made up of approx 2.8 million (active and reserves). Implying that only those that have served or are serving can have an opinion or get angry about something makes no sense. We have a civilian Commander in Chief. If Mrs. Clinton wins the Presidency, will she be unable to express outrage? Since she never served, can she order people to lay down their lives? Think about the ramifications of that argument.