Zarqawi is dead

[The fish]

The US have killed the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, in and airstrike in Iraq.
Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5059494.stm

[conzer16]

Ill just quote what I said on another forum when I read this:


So an eye for eye is at America? Why not capture him and imprison him for life? He has been killed by the American Government - they are as much a terrorist regime as Al Qaeda.

[Jordan]

On numerous occassions Al Qaeda have said he's nothing to do with them. He's small time for sure.

Zarqawi dead, Tingle DS is alive again. Crazy day.

[The fish]

Lol Jordan: one good thing, one bad thing...

[Fields]

Nice one lads, now go and get the rest of these bastards. :yay:

[The fish]

*cocks SA-80*

[Tellyn]

Brilliant news, it's good to know he died painfully like what his organisation inflicts on innocents.

[Dan Dare]

So an eye for eye is at America? Why not capture him and imprison him for life? He has been killed by the American Government - they are as much a terrorist regime as Al Qaeda.

HAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAAHAHA AHAHAAHA!


HA!

[Jack]

I pretty much agree with Conzer - it would have been better to put him on trial and imprison him. In death, he becomes a martyr to al-Qaeda's cause.

[Kurtle Squad]

You poofters....It's a waste of space putting people in jail.

[Lammie]

Originally Posted by conzer16 on DigitalSpy earlier today
So an eye for eye is at America? Why not capture him and imprison him for life? He has been killed by the American Government - they are as much a terrorist regime as Al Qaeda.

You sir are a fool of the highest degree.

To anyone who doesnt have a grasp of reality can you please refrain from posting. Thank you.

If the US had the possiblity of capturing Al Zarqawi they would have. Second best thing was to bomb him to shit.

[The fish]

If the US had the possiblity of capturing Al Zarqawi they would have. Second best thing was to bomb him to shit.

Here-here!

[BlueStar]

If the US had the possiblity of capturing Al Zarqawi they would have.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/15/zarqawi.captured/ :woops:

[conzer16]

You sir are a fool of the highest degree.

To anyone who doesnt have a grasp of reality can you please refrain from posting. Thank you.

If the US had the possiblity of capturing Al Zarqawi they would have. Second best thing was to bomb him to shit.


Thats your opinion and I will respect it. Mine is different. That is after all how we debate about these things.

[mike-zim]

well i think that people as evil as this should die. capture him and put him in jail why what hardship is that? he should have been captured and tortured to death give him chinese water torture for a month then set him on fire. burn like those in the towers.

an eye for an eye. people would then think twice about killing inocent people.

[conzer16]

Well if America are championing the cause of democracy surely they should be demonstrating the way a democratic country deals with terrorists and criminals? I do believe that it is illegal under American Democratic Law to kill a man.

Then one could argue that they are acting undemocratically in their actions against this one man?

[mike-zim]

was it a democracy that sent those planes into those building? i think not. i for one am glad he is dead. they need to get osama now and start to put this behind us.

[Athriller]

an eye for an eye. people would then think twice about killing inocent people.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Didn't Ghandi teach you anything?

Jumping on the 'it makes him a martyr' bandwagon. If anything, this will fuel the 'yeah let's go out and blow shit up, bonus points if you take out yourself :cool:' attitude.

[conzer16]

Okay so he's dead then - but how many more extremists will only be too happy to take his place? How many more will be incensed by the fact that the "infedels" murdered their leader? How many more Zarqawis are waiting in the wings?

[Ramar]

Well we'll just have to bomb the shit out of those arseholes.

[Haver]

I'm the first to get my pants in a twist when we have unwarranted civilian casualties in Iraq but I have little problem with this. War is tricky, war is uncivilised, and war is something we can't comprehend sat in front of a keyboard back home.

[BGS]

I love a quote from Bush I saw on the news the other day. I can't remember it exactly but it was something like "now that we have killed him, never again will he murder"

Now get me wrong, but isn't that exactly what you did to him Bushy?

[conzer16]

Now get me wrong, but isn't that exactly what you did to him Bushy?

Quoted for fucking truth

[AshMat]

You jsut know this will spark something with Al-Qeada, but it's still good to know.

[Jack]

You poofters....It's a waste of space putting people in jail.
Pray tell, why?

[Twozzok]

Didn't the Al-Quaeda say they had nothing to do with him though :wtf:

[EEVILMURRAY]

Giant who cares.

Didn't the Al-Quaeda say they had nothing to do with him though :wtf:
Clinton said something about not having sexual relations with that woman too.

[Lammie]

Looking back Conzer, I was probably a bit over-critical. I'm gonna take back the fool thing.

Well if America are championing the cause of democracy surely they should be demonstrating the way a democratic country deals with terrorists and criminals? I do believe that it is illegal under American Democratic Law to kill a man.

Then one could argue that they are acting undemocratically in their actions against this one man?

I'm pretty sure the attitude from the US is that taking out Zarqawi isn't going to have any long lasting impact on things, it's more of a symbolic thing. Sort of 'we can continously kill your terrorist leaders while you can't lay a scratch on ours'. I'm not saying it's necessarily the best way to go about things as it's what Israel has been doing for the last few decades and look where it' got them.

And the whole acting undemocratically thing doesn't mean much in a war. Especially the war on terror which is all pretty fuzzy on what you can and can't do. It's a far cry form the old days of frontlines and trenches.

I find it hard to debate topics like this. There's so much to consider - it's unbeleivably complex and I don't think it's possible to state one side or opinion as 100% right. Of course the US is going to act in it's own interests, there's no such thing as altruism - you don't become the most powerful military and economic power by making sure everyone else is happy and healthy first. God, I'm straying from topic and turning this into a rant. Better stop now.

[Tellyn]

The rest of people remotely involved with the al Qaeda should be made to burn. I don't care if people say we live in a civilised society, if they want to kill thousands of people brutally like in the 9/11 attacks or the 7/7 bombings, they should be tortured thoroughly until they beg for death. It is inhumane, yes, but they do much more inhumane things than that.

[Athriller]

The rest of people remotely involved with the al Qaeda should be made to burn. I don't care if people say we live in a civilised society, if they want to kill thousands of people brutally like in the 9/11 attacks or the 7/7 bombings, they should be tortured thoroughly until they beg for death. It is inhumane, yes, but they do much more inhumane things than that.

Do you want the morale higher ground or not?

[Arragaun]

They should be tortured thoroughly until they beg for death.
You want them to go through that? Do it yourself.

[Haver]

As NBC News reported back in 2004, U.S. military planners drew up plans to take out Zarqawi three times in 2002 and 2003, but the Bush administration killed the plans each time. Why? Because, military officials told NBC, the Bush administration feared that destroying Zarqawi's terrorist camp in Iraq "could undercut its case for war against Saddam."

OK, now this makes me angry.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/06/08/zarqawi/index.html

[conzer16]

Looking back Conzer, I was probably a bit over-critical. I'm gonna take back the fool thing.



I'm pretty sure the attitude from the US is that taking out Zarqawi isn't going to have any long lasting impact on things, it's more of a symbolic thing. Sort of 'we can continously kill your terrorist leaders while you can't lay a scratch on ours'. I'm not saying it's necessarily the best way to go about things as it's what Israel has been doing for the last few decades and look where it' got them.

And the whole acting undemocratically thing doesn't mean much in a war. Especially the war on terror which is all pretty fuzzy on what you can and can't do. It's a far cry form the old days of frontlines and trenches.



Very good post.

And I agree with what you say about trying to debate on a topic like this. But the debate on the War on Terror will be THE debate of the early 21st century.

[BGS]

Okay, look at things this way.

Bush and co are saying it is OK to kill a murderer.
Killing a murderer makes YOU a murderer by definition of the word. There should be no questions about that.
Is it okay then for someone to kill you as you would then be a murderer? And then, for someone else to kill the person that murdered you? and so on?

Bush and co say killing a terrorist like this will send out a message to all the rest. This itself is insane because this is exactly what terrorism is!!

You could get to the point where you really should ask yourself who -really- started this thing? The word terrorism is bounded around everywhere but they're all at it.

Every time Bush and co attack and kill a handfuls of innocents to get at 'one terrorist' it'll make people there angry and you can probably +10 (or whatever) yourself on "terrorist" numbers. Have you ever noticed how outrageous it is that the numbers of innocents in Iraq (or wherever) that are killed "accidently" by our armies are pretty much brushed over by the majority of media outlets. And I bet we don't even get to hear about the majority of them..

Anyway.. Wanting to then react in an equally violent way to this, they (the "terrorists") then respond to this, and without their stealth jets and bombers and such to fly over to the white house and get bush direct, they do the only they can (remembering these are people like Bush, thugs who only know how to react violently) and attack american innocents. This then turns more numbers of americans into bunny boiling bush lovers.

I'm putting the word terrorist in commas not because I justify their actions, which I definitely do not but because I find it ironic the way Bush and co use the word terrorist so much. They themselves are terrorists in multiple ways, following the same 'stop this or die' mindset but by also installing a climate of fear upon their very own people.

Fighting terrorism with terrorism solves nothing. It creates an increasing problem that must eventually be brought to a head because everybody with any kind of power is too stubborn to back down once they've set out on one track. There's no doubt in my mind that what we're heading towards, whether it takes a few years or tens of years, is another war which will eventually be known as the third world war.

[Jack]

The rest of people remotely involved with the al Qaeda should be made to burn. I don't care if people say we live in a civilised society, if they want to kill thousands of people brutally like in the 9/11 attacks or the 7/7 bombings, they should be tortured thoroughly until they beg for death. It is inhumane, yes, but they do much more inhumane things than that.
I really disagree. It's precisely because it's inhumane that we don't do that. You can't justify torture by saying "He's done worse things". If you do that, you're on the same level as them. You've got to do things on a proper level, through a justice system. No torture, no execution, none of that shite. Otherwise, what makes you better than them?

[The Bard]

Er...Hurrah..?
Dear lord, when are people going to get over the fact that the bush administration is just a legalised terrorist organisation? It seems these days it's popular to hate Bush and Blair, and that people are jumping on that bandwagon, but it is entirely justified:

Terrorism: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing
societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Bush is just a little boy inexperienced in life, riding on the coattails of his father and just isn't used to being told that he can't get what he wants and as a result he resorts to enforcing his truth through a gun. The US government's lies are deluding ordinary people as to whats really going on.

Does any rational person believe that the hundreds of thousands of poor, innocent Iraqi civilians that went "missing" was the result of anything other than mass genocide?

Nothing matters to Bush, Iraqi's don't matter, even his own citizens don't matter, they're all just disposable heroes for him to use as he wants. This is just entirely the problem with having an old and senile man in power. He is going to die soon, which is why world issues such as global warming (the effects of which he can deny as much as he wants, but that's not going to avert it) don't matter to him, because the real consequences of these things won't onset until after he is gone.

And his cronie Blair is even worse, the man doesn't have any balls to stand up and say "we won't bend over for the Americans." When the bastard was asked in parliament what he thought about rigorously taxing aviation fuel so that the waste isn't emitted in the place where it is most harmful (and thus prevent people from embarking on pointless flights, and to think twice before they do decide to go), he said, laughing "I think we'll leave it to another country to suggest that one." He is a Jackass and I look forward to his death.

In fact...here is a nice little poem that describes the US' utterly fascist regime:

Bombs to set the people free, blood to feed the dollar tree,
Flags for coffins on the screen, oil for the machine.
Army of liberation, gunpoint indoctrination,
The fires of sedation,
Fulfill the prophecy.
Now you've got something to die for,

Send the children to the fire, sons and daughters stack the pyre,
Stoke the flame of the empire, live to lie another day,
Face of hypocrisy, raping democracy...

At the end of the day though, I'm just another random jackass who has his two cents to give on political matters that he doesn't really know anything about, but from what I have seen happen since September 11th, there is no way the world can afford a third term of Bush in office.

Edit: 　　　 　 　 good job!!　　 　 　 　 　 ∩　　 ∩
　　　 　　　　_ _∩　　　　　　 　 　 (⌒ ) 　 ( ⌒)　　 　 　 ∩_ _　good job!!
　　　 　 　 （ヨ,,. i　　 　 　 　 　 　 |　 |　　/　.ﾉ　 　 　 　 i　.,,E）
good job!!　＼ ＼　　　　　 　 　 |　 |　 /　/ 　 　 　 　 /　/
　　_n　　　　　　＼ ＼　　　_､ _　 .|　 |　/　/ _、_　 　 ／ ノ
　（　 l　 　 　_､ _　 ＼ ＼（ <_,`　）|　 | /　/　,_ﾉ` ）／ ／　　　 _、_　　　 good job!!
　　＼ ＼　（ <_,`　）　＼　　 　 　 　 ﾉ（　　　　　　　／＿___（　,_ﾉ` ）　　　　n
　　　 ヽ___￣￣　ノ　　　|　　　　　 / 　 ヽ　　　　　 | ＿＿　　　 　 ＼ 　 　 l .,E）
　　　　　 / 　 　/ 　 　 /　　　　　/　　　　＼　　 　 ヽ 　 / 　 　 /＼　ヽ_／ ／


Eh? You what?

[conzer16]

Fear not the Bard! An American President can only hold office for 2 terms. Unless of course Bush himself changes the law :p

[The Bard]

Fear not the Bard! An American President can only hold office for 2 terms. Unless of course Bush himself changes the law :p

Yeah, I know, but I think Bush, being the audacious bastard that he is, wouldn't hesitate to change the law.

And another point is that, when you come down to it, I think that if Bush or any of his cronies are found guilty of anything that is punishable by the death penalty, then they should die, simple as that. But the fact is that they'll never get their day in court. The stuff the Bush Administration has gotten away with is so much worse than anything that took place when Clinton was in office, yet they impeached his ass. To quote Macbeth, "All great Neptune's ocean cannot wash the blood clean from his hands."

[Shino]

Obviously Lammie is the only person with a common sense.
I don't get it Conzer, you're sad they killed him? I'm not an apologist of the "an eye for an eye" theory, but they probably did the only thing they could possibly do.

I don't get this "discussion", and everything else that has been talked about, like the purpose of this assassination and if it turns them into murderers, doesn't really have much to do with this.

[Blue_Ninja0]

Obviously Lammie is the only person with a common sense.
I don't get it Conzer, you're sad they killed him? I'm not an apologist of the "an eye for an eye" theory, but they probably did the only thing they could possibly do.

I don't get this "discussion", and everything else that has been talked about, like the purpose of this assassination and if it turns them into murderers, doesn't really have much to do with this.

I absolutely agree, I really don't mind if they kill or not this type of man.

They had to atack Al-Qaeda in it's weakpoint for MASSIVE damage.

[BGS]

They had to atack Al-Qaeda in it's weakpoint for MASSIVE damage.

Please, please tell me that this was an ironic, sarcastic type of comment...

[Blue_Ninja0]

Please, please tell me that this was an ironic, sarcastic type of comment...

Yes BGS, it was an ironic/sarcastic type of comment. I'm stupid (sometimes), but not that stupid.
Ok, before someone else misunderstands, that was a joke, using what was said at the E3 2006 sony press conf, about the giant crab.

[Lammie]

The US does what it does because there's this general consensus through western culture that even if though the US does do some shoddy things, in the end we're still right and the terrorists are wrong. It kinda softens the fact that they've killed a shitload more people getting rid of Saddam than the terrorists could hope to have done with Americans/British/Australians/Spanish etc.

[conzer16]

Obviously Lammie is the only person with a common sense.
I don't get it Conzer, you're sad they killed him? I'm not an apologist of the "an eye for an eye" theory, but they probably did the only thing they could possibly do.

I don't get this "discussion", and everything else that has been talked about, like the purpose of this assassination and if it turns them into murderers, doesn't really have much to do with this.


Im not sad at all. I counldt give 2 f*cks about the man - Im just disappointed that the US have to use violence to champion their cause.

[Dan Dare]

US' utterly fascist regime:





Jesus jumping christ on a bike! please, for the sake of my patience and faith in humanity, tell me you don't actually believe that?

If the US was run by facists, you'd fucking know about it. Hitler and Musolini were facists. Last time I checked the US wasn't a dictatorship, they werent attempting to wipe out an entire race from the face of the earth, nor were they closing down the press or indoctrinating the youth.


Having said that, I havent seen the news today so can anyone clarify this radical change in policy that I've clearly missed?

[AshMat]

Clinton said something about not having sexual relations with that woman too.
haHAHA, genious

[The Bard]

Jesus jumping christ on a bike! please, for the sake of my patience and faith in humanity, tell me you don't actually believe that?

If the US was run by facists, you'd fucking know about it. Hitler and Musolini were facists. Last time I checked the US wasn't a dictatorship, they werent attempting to wipe out an entire race from the face of the earth, nor were they closing down the press or indoctrinating the youth.


Having said that, I havent seen the news today so can anyone clarify this radical change in policy that I've clearly missed?

Hitler was a Nazi, Mussolini was a Fascist.

Fascism: A system of government marked by centralization of authority, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

Hmm...from that, the US's "policy" seems quasi fascist to me. There are diffenent degrees of Fascism. Admittedly Bush is not quite fascist on a Mussolini scale. And not wanting to wipe a race or culture from the face of the earth? what about this crusade on Islam? There is clearly an indoctrination of youth going on, pretty much everywhere, whether it's religious indoctrination, or patrial indoctrination. These things do go on, it's just that Bush has managed to put a friendly face on them.

Aanyway, there is about a 99% chance that I've got my facts completely wrong, so you shouldn't take anything I say on politics too seriously.

[Dan Dare]

I assumed so.

[mcj metroid]

You poofters....It's a waste of space putting people in jail.
what the hell is a poofter?:bouncy:



Hitler was a Nazi, Mussolini was a Fascist.

Fascism: A system of government marked by centralization of authority, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

Hmm...from that, the US's "policy" seems quasi fascist to me. There are diffenent degrees of Fascism. Admittedly Bush is not quite fascist on a Mussolini scale. And not wanting to wipe a race or culture from the face of the earth? what about this crusade on Islam? There is clearly an indoctrination of youth going on, pretty much everywhere, whether it's religious indoctrination, or patrial indoctrination. These things do go on, it's just that Bush has managed to put a friendly face on them.

Aanyway, there is about a 99% chance that I've got my facts completely wrong, so you shouldn't take anything I say on politics too seriously.

yes u have.Us is not cencesored!withever happened to freedom of speech?Nobody refers to george bush as IL DUCE or DER FUHER do they?I see no totalitarium state and any sort of dictatorship do u?
OH and a NAZi IS a facist

[The Bard]

Are you a complete jackass? The US is very censored. I didn't say that it was completely fascist, I said it has traits of fascism. Freedom of speech is admittedly there to some degree but anyone who thinks we are able to say whatever we want and get away with it is a complete fool. What about the recent Blasphemy Laws, where it almost became illegal to criticise religion or speak of it negatively? You aren't allowed to criticise Judaism at all because apparently they are a "race." Or how about the fact that we aren't allowed to use expletives in the vicinity of senior citizens? If that is your idea of free speech, then that sort was there in Hitler's Germany.

Nazism is not Fascism. They are closely related, but The term Fascism is often used in a very broad sense, to refer to a variety of authoritarian nationalist political movements that exist or existed in many countries. As such, Nazism is usually classified as a particular version of Fascism. Fascists had no strong opinion of the question of race, which is something that played a central role in Nazism. Do you think it really matters what people refer to George Bush as? You have to stop listening to other people's definitions or opinions on things and see the evidence for yourself. Also, it's Der Fuhrer, which in German just means, chief or head or leader. So, Tony Blair or Bush are in fact fuhrers.

Also, I think it's better not to reply to me when I'm talking crap, because that just makes me talk more crap, which if you reply to it, will just make me talk even more crap...and, are you starting to see a pattern here...?

[Shino]

Are you a complete jackass? The US is very censored. I didn't say that it was completely fascist, I said it has traits of fascism. Freedom of speech is admittedly there to some degree but anyone who thinks we are able to say whatever we want and get away with it is a complete fool. What about the recent Blasphemy Laws, where it almost became illegal to criticise religion or speak of it negatively? You aren't allowed to criticise Judaism at all because apparently they are a "race." Or how about the fact that we aren't allowed to use expletives in the vicinity of senior citizens? If that is your idea of free speech, then that sort was there in Hitler's Germany.

Nazism is not Fascism. They are closely related, but The term Fascism is often used in a very broad sense, to refer to a variety of authoritarian nationalist political movements that exist or existed in many countries. As such, Nazism is usually classified as a particular version of Fascism. Fascists had no strong opinion of the question of race, which is something that played a central role in Nazism. Do you think it really matters what people refer to George Bush as? You have to stop listening to other people's definitions or opinions on things and see the evidence for yourself. Also, it's Der Fuhrer, which in German just means, chief or head or leader. So, Tony Blair or Bush are in fact fuhrers.

Also, I think it's better not to reply to me when I'm talking crap, because that just makes me talk more crap, which if you reply to it, will just make me talk even more crap...and, are you starting to see a pattern here...?


Look dude, you can't go wikipedia and copy-paste something here without saying it. With that said, I agree that the self-proclaimed "World's Most Democratic Country" is the only one wich people can't even say they're communist.

But still, I fail to see what this has to do with the topic.

[The Bard]

Yeah...I don't know, how it got to this point. Also, I only copied the defination of Fascism from wikipedia, why do I need to say that I did that? Is there any point in going, "Oh and by the way, for those of you that give a crap, the following sentence was taken from wikipedia."

[mario114]

BGS, I disagree, killing someone is not allways murder, in a war, it's taking a life, and is for a reason, that guy deserved to die. Killing someone in cold blood is murder.

[demonmike04]

To put myself in any american soliders situation, i wouldnt chance arresting some dude who's willing to blow themselves up.

[BGS]

BGS, I disagree, killing someone is not allways murder, in a war, it's taking a life, and is for a reason, that guy deserved to die. Killing someone in cold blood is murder.

In war, why does anyone -deserve- to die? Most soldiers are simply (and no offense is meant to anyone or their friends or family here) mindlessly following orders. Maybe it's not fully their fault but that's how they're trained, brainwashed into that mindset.

Maybe this guy did "deserve to die" but who the hell can give themselves the power to decide who lives and dies? That's just playing God which noone has a right to do.

This missile that killed him, were there any innocents hurt by this? You can bet that if there were, we won't hear about it. Their deaths will be overshadowed by the news of US soldiers killing one of the 'terrorists'. Maybe there were no innocents killed this time but I know for sure that more innocents are killed in war than the actual perceived 'bad guys'

What about these innocent casualties of war? Have they been murdered or are they simply an unavoidable inevitability? Maybe to the soldiers and the US that's what they are, but to the families and friends of those people, their loved ones have been murdered, no arguments about that, and they're sure going to be pissed off.

I have no argument with bringing people to justice. I just find it atrocious how certain parties are slapping a 'World Police' badge on their chests whilest playing God with peoples lives.

[Lammie]

In war, why does anyone -deserve- to die? Most soldiers are simply (and no offense is meant to anyone or their friends or family here) mindlessly following orders. Maybe it's not fully their fault but that's how they're trained, brainwashed into that mindset.

I don't know if you've had any experience as a soldier, but although they are trained to be very disciplined it's not like they are like zombies that mercilessly kill on command. A soldier isn't allowed to carry out orders from a commanding officer that break the rules of engagement or any other conventions that have to be ahered to.


Maybe this guy did "deserve to die" but who the hell can give themselves the power to decide who lives and dies? That's just playing God which noone has a right to do.

This missile that killed him, were there any innocents hurt by this? You can bet that if there were, we won't hear about it. Their deaths will be overshadowed by the news of US soldiers killing one of the 'terrorists'. Maybe there were no innocents killed this time but I know for sure that more innocents are killed in war than the actual perceived 'bad guys'

Innocents were killed. It's no cover up. I think the last report I read said at least ten civilians were injured or killed, including one woman and child.

What about these innocent casualties of war? Have they been murdered or are they simply an unavoidable inevitability? Maybe to the soldiers and the US that's what they are, but to the families and friends of those people, their loved ones have been murdered, no arguments about that, and they're sure going to be pissed off.

I don't know if the term 'murdered' exists in war. I think they tend to go for 'casualties' or 'collateral damage'. It's the horrible reality. That's the worst thing about this war, and every other - the civilan deaths. And yes it's unavoidable - the argument isn't about waging war without harming civilians it's about not having any war full stop.



And on the topic of Fascism - I think it's kind of difficult to relate the US's current government to Hitler's or Mussolini's regime as there's alot of other factors influencing the US government. You've got lobby groups, big business and religion all with their fingers in the pie wanting the current administration to look after them. GWB isn't a psychopath like Hitler, he's just got alot of favours to repay while keeping the US economy afloat.

Oh, and can people be a little more open to other's opinions, I know I didn't set a very good example earlier on but try and keep away from blatant flaming.

[mcj metroid]

Are you a complete jackass? The US is very censored. I didn't say that it was completely fascist, I said it has traits of fascism. Freedom of speech is admittedly there to some degree but anyone who thinks we are able to say whatever we want and get away with it is a complete fool. What about the recent Blasphemy Laws, where it almost became illegal to criticise religion or speak of it negatively? You aren't allowed to criticise Judaism at all because apparently they are a "race." Or how about the fact that we aren't allowed to use expletives in the vicinity of senior citizens? If that is your idea of free speech, then that sort was there in Hitler's Germany.

Nazism is not Fascism. They are closely related, but The term Fascism is often used in a very broad sense, to refer to a variety of authoritarian nationalist political movements that exist or existed in many countries. As such, Nazism is usually classified as a particular version of Fascism. Fascists had no strong opinion of the question of race, which is something that played a central role in Nazism. Do you think it really matters what people refer to George Bush as? You have to stop listening to other people's definitions or opinions on things and see the evidence for yourself. Also, it's Der Fuhrer, which in German just means, chief or head or leader. So, Tony Blair or Bush are in fact fuhrers.

Also, I think it's better not to reply to me when I'm talking crap, because that just makes me talk more crap, which if you reply to it, will just make me talk even more crap...and, are you starting to see a pattern here...?

U ask if im a jackass and except no reply?Lucky for u im not going to reply cause i dont know sh1t about modern politics,only history:bouncy:
i knew it was der fuhrer just a typing error
thats it im finished!

[Haden]

I think that if they couldn't capture him again killing him was a good thing for Iraq and sent a strong message out to future terroists. Of course the problem is this won't stop the violence but it shows that the coalition is striking back. And this guy was important the fact that he caused stirs in Al Quedea shows this.

Oh and btw George Bush is is in no way a fascist. Fascists belive that the State should encompass everything and are totalitarion not authortition. This means they intervne in society and ban any other divergent social expressions like the scouts etc or modify elements of society like the Catholic Church. Fascism also has the idea that the leader of the state embodies the state and is in a sense infallible. George Bush doesn't think this and rule of law and liberalism are the underlying political thought in America. America also supports Captalism wheras Fascism is heavily based the the economic thought of corprotism. So guys please give the George Bush and America are fascists!!! comments a rest as they are boring and check out the acts methods and ideas of the terrorists to see who the real villans are.

[Arragaun]

I too think it is very silly to apply such out-dated terms as Fascist and Nazi to modern-day world powers.

Nazi stood for National Socialist anyway, it wasn't some doctrine of belief. They were just led by a bunch of very strange people.

[Dan Dare]

ah but you can define nazism by describing it as believing or following the doctrine of the national socialist party.

you know, like the Daily Mail.

[Jack]

We're talking about a government which calls the suicides of three inmates illegally imprisoned at a modern-day concentration camp "an act of warfare" and "a good PR move to draw attention" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5069230.stm). "Fascist" doesn't cover it. "Evil fucks" does.

[The Bard]

Aye, polititians can be a tad callous at times.

[conzer16]

Well, it looks like Al Qaeda have their next Zarqawi already.

Here (http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,70131-1224480,00.html?f=rss)

and

here (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199106,00.html)

[Lammie]

If you're interested in getting some solid unmediated reports about the current state of insurgents vs. the US led occupation check out anything by Michael Ware - an Australian journalist who's spent the last 3 years reporting for Time. Just saw a documentary based around his contact with Iraqi Resistance and al Qaida jihadi's. Very interesting. I could go on for a while about what he has to say, but you're better off tracking down the reports by him yourself.

This is what Ware had to say about Zarqawi back in 2004:

"Insurgents used to say to me, 'I'm fighting to get the U.S. out of Iraq - Iraq for Iraqis.' Now they say, 'I'm fighting for Islam.' We've created the next Bin Laden, Zarqawi. He was a marginal figure before the war, and now, he's actually competing with him for primacy."