CITIZEN_2015 Posted July 8, 2024 Report Posted July 8, 2024 1 hour ago, Nationalist said: Huh... Their murderous masters is the Ayatollahs in Iran. Quote
eyeball Posted July 9, 2024 Report Posted July 9, 2024 (edited) 4 hours ago, Nationalist said: Huh... I doubt you Putin lovers would ever get it. Countries that enable proxies never get it either. Because they don't have the courage or conviction to fight their own battles. That's why some 70% of humanity now find themselves living under autocratic conditions. Of course you people imagine we live in one too so go figure. Edited July 9, 2024 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
eyeball Posted July 9, 2024 Report Posted July 9, 2024 10 hours ago, WestCanMan said: Try to convince a guy like @eyeball of that. He thinks Hamas and Hezbollah are heroes. Nope. They're just another bunch of arseholes in a world filled to the rim with arseholes. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Moonlight Graham Posted July 9, 2024 Report Posted July 9, 2024 Times of India lol. OPDo you have a more legitimate source? Quote "All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain Partisanship is a disease of the intellect.
Five of swords Posted July 9, 2024 Report Posted July 9, 2024 On 7/5/2024 at 9:01 AM, blackbird said: Big Win For Hezbollah; Major Declaration By Saudi, 21 Arab Nations In Favour Of Lebanese Group | Watch (msn.com) "The Arab League has announced it no longer considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization, reflecting a shift in regional priorities amid ongoing tensions between Israel and Hezbollah. This decision comes as the threat of a potential war looms, with Hezbollah actively engaging in hostilities against Israel. The Arab League's move indicates a significant change in stance, given Hezbollah's influence in Lebanon and the broader geopolitical landscape. Big Win For Hezbollah; Major Declaration By Saudi, 21 Arab Nations In Favour Of Lebanese Group " Is this pushing the middle east closer to a regional war? This appears to be a major blow to Israel. Will this embolden Hezbollah? What is the difference between a terrorist organization and a non terrorist organization? Quote
WestCanMan Posted July 9, 2024 Report Posted July 9, 2024 17 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said: but in summary, Arabs are bunch of desert born camel riders with no history and no civilization, whereas Persians have 2500 years of history 🤣 Tell us how you really feel lol. 1 Quote If CNN gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. If you missed something on the Cultist Narrative Network, don't worry, the dolt horde here will make sure everyone hears it. Ex-Canadian since April 2025
CITIZEN_2015 Posted July 9, 2024 Report Posted July 9, 2024 3 hours ago, WestCanMan said: 🤣 Tell us how you really feel lol. I can't tell how I really feel in public lol. Quote
blackbird Posted July 9, 2024 Author Report Posted July 9, 2024 (edited) 15 hours ago, Five of swords said: What is the difference between a terrorist organization and a non terrorist organization? This is just a general reply which may be added to with additional information and/or fine-tuned. I would say a terrorist organization is a group that attacks civilians for political or religious reasons. A non-terrorist organization would be a peaceful organization which does not commit unlawful acts or attack civilians. Edited July 9, 2024 by blackbird 1 Quote
Five of swords Posted July 9, 2024 Report Posted July 9, 2024 1 minute ago, blackbird said: I would say a group that attacks civilians for political or religious reasons. A non-terrorist organization would be a peaceful organization which does not commit unlawful acts or attack civilians. I cannot think of a single institution with power that is not a terrorist organization, then. Can you think of an example? Quote
Venandi Posted July 10, 2024 Report Posted July 10, 2024 17 hours ago, Five of swords said: What is the difference between a terrorist organization and a non terrorist organization? One of those two entities doesn't support, condone, apologize for, or participate in terrorist activities. Were it multiple choice, the "non terrorist organization" would be my guess... Quote
QuebecOverCanada Posted July 12, 2024 Report Posted July 12, 2024 On 7/8/2024 at 1:31 PM, CITIZEN_2015 said: What people in the West especially their elected politicians don't realize is that the root of all these problems whether Hamas or Hezbollah is the Islamic Republic hated home and abroad. The West must get united and cut off the head of octopus and its legs in Gaza and Lebanon and Yemen will die too. Yeah, so let's die in another pointless war in the Middle East that's so important for people 10000km abroad. Let's spend another trillion on that stuff. It worked so well in Afghanistan. Quote
ironstone Posted July 12, 2024 Report Posted July 12, 2024 On 7/5/2024 at 9:18 AM, jatt47 said: Why's it our problem? Maybe because we bring in an awful lot of people from that part of the world(excluding Israelis) and they often bring their hate with them. Quote "Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it." Thomas Sowell
Army Guy Posted July 12, 2024 Report Posted July 12, 2024 On 7/9/2024 at 8:21 PM, Five of swords said: I cannot think of a single institution with power that is not a terrorist organization, then. Can you think of an example? Not that easy, there is a difference between an group or organization/ country that strictly attacks civilians soft targets to make a political statement...and one that kills civilians in the state of war unintentionally...so yes i can name hundreds of nations that are not terrorist organizations... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Five of swords Posted July 12, 2024 Report Posted July 12, 2024 1 minute ago, Army Guy said: Not that easy, there is a difference between an group or organization/ country that strictly attacks civilians soft targets to make a political statement...and one that kills civilians in the state of war unintentionally...so yes i can name hundreds of nations that are not terrorist organizations... Name one then. Quote
Army Guy Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 21 minutes ago, QuebecOverCanada said: Yeah, so let's die in another pointless war in the Middle East that's so important for people 10000km abroad. Let's spend another trillion on that stuff. It worked so well in Afghanistan. It worked so well becasue one side does not have to abide by the rules of war laid out by the Geneva convention, or have it's citizens screaming to treat them humanely...and then grow tired of the conflict and demand the return of our troops early before the job is done, and cut funding to a trickle......kind of like quitting in the 3 rd period and going home... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 3 minutes ago, Five of swords said: Name one then. Every country in NATO, most other countries in the free world...the argument of one man's terrorist is another mans freedom fighter is a retarded assumption...If this was the case why do we have Human rights, of Geneva conventions, inter national laws.... All of these rules and policies were implemented to make war more civilized, like that is possiable....to spare the innocent as much pain as was possible... It is consider not civilized to intentional attack civilians for the sole purpose to create terror....i think the only exception to this is total war...then all bets are off, civilians become legitimate targets, in order to force their government into surrender... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Five of swords Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 37 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Every country in NATO, most other countries in the free world...the argument of one man's terrorist is another mans freedom fighter is a retarded assumption...If this was the case why do we have Human rights, of Geneva conventions, inter national laws.... All of these rules and policies were implemented to make war more civilized, like that is possiable....to spare the innocent as much pain as was possible... It is consider not civilized to intentional attack civilians for the sole purpose to create terror....i think the only exception to this is total war...then all bets are off, civilians become legitimate targets, in order to force their government into surrender... So the usa has never deliberately killed civilians? Quote
Army Guy Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 33 minutes ago, Five of swords said: So the usa has never deliberately killed civilians? Do you have proof it did, i'm all ears... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Five of swords Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 9 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Do you have proof it did, i'm all ears... Um...everyone knows about nuking Hiroshima, for example Quote
Army Guy Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 46 minutes ago, Five of swords said: Um...everyone knows about nuking Hiroshima, for example Yes everyone knows , but that was total war, which change the rules a lot....in this case done to shorten the war, had this not been done what do you think the loss of allied lives would have been if this attack did not happen...and they had to attack the Japanese mainland... This example could be an argument for both sides and i see your point...they are purposeful attacks on civilian population,to force a political group into surrendering .However the rules have changed since WWII, one can not wantonly bomb civilian population areas, unless there is a military target present...then all the conventions state is every precaution is to be made before military action is taken to limit civilian casualties...certain building or areas are off limits like churches, mosques, hospitals, schools etc...however those restriction can be dismissed if there is enemy operating in or around these places... That being said Nuclear weapons are designed to attack civilian population centers...but if it gets that far nobody is going to care we will all be ash or dieing of radioactive poisoning... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Five of swords Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 1 hour ago, Army Guy said: Yes everyone knows , but that was total war, which change the rules a lot....in this case done to shorten the war, had this not been done what do you think the loss of allied lives would have been if this attack did not happen...and they had to attack the Japanese mainland... This example could be an argument for both sides and i see your point...they are purposeful attacks on civilian population,to force a political group into surrendering .However the rules have changed since WWII, one can not wantonly bomb civilian population areas, unless there is a military target present...then all the conventions state is every precaution is to be made before military action is taken to limit civilian casualties...certain building or areas are off limits like churches, mosques, hospitals, schools etc...however those restriction can be dismissed if there is enemy operating in or around these places... That being said Nuclear weapons are designed to attack civilian population centers...but if it gets that far nobody is going to care we will all be ash or dieing of radioactive poisoning... Well in essence you just seem to be moving the goalposts. Sure the usa kills civilians but sometimes that cannot be avoided in war. Okay. So. Exactly like I said. I guess killing civilians isn't the key part of defining a 'terrorist' organization. Quote
QuebecOverCanada Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 13 hours ago, Army Guy said: It worked so well becasue one side does not have to abide by the rules of war laid out by the Geneva convention, or have it's citizens screaming to treat them humanely...and then grow tired of the conflict and demand the return of our troops early before the job is done, and cut funding to a trickle......kind of like quitting in the 3 rd period and going home... We have been twenty years in Afghanistan. It's not like we quit at the 3rd period. It's like we were still there when the game was ended a generation ago when Mario Lemieux was still playing. There was no "job to be done". It was pointless; the Afghans truly supported the Talibans after all. It's their culture. Now name me one Middle East intervention that turned out well in the last 40 years. Quote
QuebecOverCanada Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 On 7/8/2024 at 7:18 PM, CITIZEN_2015 said: I have to write a book to answer this but in summary, Arabs are bunch of desert born camel riders with no history and no civilization, whereas Persians have 2500 years of history dominating half the world 2500 to 1500 years ago (the other half by Romans) for ten centuries. Cyrus brought in the very first charter of human rights 2500 years ago. Persians are originally Aryans (before being mixed with inferior invaders), whereas Arabs are Semitics. Persians have totally different culture and calendar and history and geography and celebrations like Noruz, Yalda and Tirdad. Persians speaking Farsi which is different with Arabic. The great culture of Iran, ladies and gentlemen. Totally unlike we see anywhere else in the Middle East and in Muslim countries in general. Truly the superior race of the Middle East. Such honorary Aryans, such a superior race, ladies and gentlemen. Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 16 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said: Yeah, so let's die in another pointless war in the Middle East that's so important for people 10000km abroad. Let's spend another trillion on that stuff. It worked so well in Afghanistan. If you have read my posts you would realize that I am not advocating military invasion but rather military blockage of Islamic Republic. True, if some stupid ships violate blockage and carry Iranian oil then they must be torpedoed and sank but in general not a single shot has to be fired. No one on either side will die unless Iranian navy and air force intervene in which case the nuclear submarines must sink the ships and shoot down the planes but that would be their choice and stupidity to test or confront the much superior western military. Quote
CdnFox Posted July 13, 2024 Report Posted July 13, 2024 On 7/8/2024 at 1:44 PM, eyeball said: Hamas and Hezbollah would go down a lot easier and possibly even surrender if Iran was dealt with first. Nope. In fact that's been tried before. The groups would continue just fine and would find other sources of funding and sponsors. They always have. And Iran has been "dealt with" in the past And unless you're going to occupy them forever they're going to rise back up again and be the same sort of problem. It is a joke that you think somehow somebody could flip a switch in Iran would go away and Hezbollah and Hamas would follow the next day. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.