Author Topic: USA=Isreal (Read 2948 times)

Gunslinger · « **Reply #30 on:** December 07, 2003, 04:13:39 AM »

Its not like I see a slant on this story....I can just imagine the reporter:

Reporter: "sir this is michale evens with yahoo news can you answer us some questions?"

Army Officer: "Yahoo has reporters.....since when?"

Reporter: "Seriously sir, could you answer some questions from me so our Yahoo listeners can hear what is goin on here?"

Army Officer: "do the storys begin with YAAAAHOOOOOO?"

Reporter: "I'm trying to get somone to take me seriously I want to know about this fence:

Army Officer: "I suppose your having a hard time being taken seriously working for a place like Yahoo."

I could go on but i"m tired and what the hell its a lame story anyways

StSanta · « **Reply #31 on:** December 07, 2003, 04:35:22 AM »

Hm, Americans are locking up the relatives of suspected resistance fighters?

This is very un-American I find. Imagine if your estranged brother was speeding and you got the ticket.

That's just not right.

Other than that; the situation in Iraq is better now than I feared it'd be a month ago. It is doable.

Oh, a pet peeve of mine: it's not supposed to be pronounced is'real or some derivative thereof. And it's spelled "Israel. The Untied Staets of Amreika and Knigdmo of Dnemark are in union with the zheinitik Iisrealialites.

mrblack · « **Reply #32 on:** December 07, 2003, 05:24:26 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hristo
For every wounded German, shoot 50 locals. For every killed German shoot 100 locals.

Dam I like the sound of this:aok

_Schadenfreude_ · « **Reply #33 on:** December 07, 2003, 07:00:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by mrblack
Dam I like the sound of this:aok

Oh great....we have an idiot who thinks emultating fascist war criminals is good foreign policy.

Martlet · « **Reply #34 on:** December 07, 2003, 08:42:04 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by ravells
We = Malaysians.

Ravs

Well, in that case, I do understand. "We" lived under the occupation of England for hundreds of years. Hence proving my point.

"We"=Scottish

Dowding · « **Reply #35 on:** December 07, 2003, 11:42:47 AM »

Quote

Well, in that case, I do understand. "We" lived under the occupation of England for hundreds of years. Hence proving my point.

"We"=Scottish

This just in, Braveheart. Scotland is so 'occupied' it became part of a new union centuries ago, a union that was way lopsided in terms of population. It hardly became 'unoccupied', unlike India for instance or Malaysia under the Japs.

Martlet · « **Reply #36 on:** December 07, 2003, 01:31:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
This just in, Braveheart. Scotland is so 'occupied' it became part of a new union centuries ago, a union that was way lopsided in terms of population. It hardly became 'unoccupied', unlike India for instance or Malaysia under the Japs.

Regardless, moron, you missed the point. Let me put it at a comprehension level you may understand.

He lived under another's occupation no more than I did, you did, or Bubba down the street did.

maslo · « **Reply #37 on:** December 07, 2003, 01:40:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hristo
How about German strategy against partisans in Slavic countries in WW2 ? For every wounded German, shoot 50 locals. For every killed German shoot 100 locals.

Nothing works better in alienating local population.

But barbed wire and ID cards are a good start.

yup thats more less true....

and we should not forget, that german went to Slavic countries to free them from 'evil' jewish and bring freedom to smaller that small population of german or german lovers.

and you can be pretty sure, that here was a lot of people whitch supported german (hitler) and zillion of people welcome them with nazi flags... ... yeah yeah ....

we should not comapre Bush to Hitler, coz Hitler were much more successful

maslo · « **Reply #38 on:** December 07, 2003, 01:44:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by StSanta

Other than that; the situation in Iraq is better now than I feared it'd be a month ago. It is doable.

im not sure if is it somehow better.
well 30 attacks +-10 a days is already normal,
5 dead occupation soldiers a week is also normal
so media just do not speak about same stuff

hard to say if is it better, go ask iraqm they will tel you

one of them will tell you that he is so glad, coz he can listen rock n`roll
and second gonna tell you that US sux, coz they bring chaos into life of normal people....

what made you think, that situation is already better ?

maslo · « **Reply #39 on:** December 07, 2003, 01:47:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
I want to kill all the people that want to kill us.... is that somehow wrong? Lol.

no its not wrong... and dont forget to eat them as well, coz they would like to eat your corps as well

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #40 on:** December 07, 2003, 01:55:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hristo
Funked, if the killing starts as you suggested, how could anyone consider this a liberation ? You won't have peace there in thousand years, until US troops leave. And it is my understanding there will be no peace now, until US troops leave the country.

If you have to use barbed wire, threats, ID cards and checkpoints to stay there, what does that make you in their eyes ?

US troops are already considered aggressors over there. No ? What do you think, what would happen to a single US soldier who decides to go take a walk unarmed in downtown (insert any Iraqi city here) ?

Hristo I think we have a language barrier. What I was trying to say is that armies should be used for killing, not as police.

maslo · « **Reply #41 on:** December 07, 2003, 01:59:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by StSanta
Hm, Americans are locking up the relatives of suspected resistance fighters?

This is very un-American I find. Imagine if your estranged brother was speeding and you got the ticket.

That's just not right.

well my friend and his wife got job in US 2 years ago.
They had signed contracts with company for 5 years and everything was quite fine

they never ever were arested or guildy of any crime in any country

but sister of his wife went to US as tourist and she did stay there for few years.
Ok so my friend and his wife did apply for working visa, they had contract, they had flat from company, they had everything all right, both of them speak fluent english and they didnt get working permision, because sister of his wife did stay there 2 years before.
They kicked them home, kept their 300 USD for applience.

So lawyer from US company had to came to here, he went with them to US embasy, he was whinning about 1 hour and then they got those Visa

so its not nothing new, that american do avenge on family members... its quite normal here...
if someone from my family will run there, they will no even give me tourist visa for 14 days nor working visa, even with invitation from company and signed contract.

so Santa im not surprised

ps.: nazi did same during the WW2.. but we shoulnt spaek about it pssst

Dowding · « **Reply #42 on:** December 07, 2003, 02:00:00 PM »

Thanks braveheart. It's a shame you miss MY point though. Not only is your Scottish example nothing like ravell's Japanese occupation in either duration or outcome, he still hasn't given you an exact answer either way as to whether he lived under the Japanese. Your smug 'QED' is hardly warranted.

maslo · « **Reply #43 on:** December 07, 2003, 02:02:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
Hristo I think we have a language barrier. What I was trying to say is that armies should be used for killing, not as police.

correct me but army should be use for defence country
defence is not same as killing

killing dosnt specify if you defend or occupy......

ohh dam i forget that there is nothing wrong about occupation...

dammm im so stupid

Martlet · « **Reply #44 on:** December 07, 2003, 02:05:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
Thanks braveheart. It's a shame you miss MY point though. Not only is your Scottish example nothing like ravell's Japanese occupation in either duration or outcome, he still hasn't given you an exact answer either way as to whether he lived under the Japanese. Your smug 'QED' is hardly warranted.

You didn't make a point, moron. The "smug QED" is spot on. You probably wouldn't understand that, though.