Good News....

[TheKOB]

Whether you agree with the war or not, it's always good when another one of these guys gets captured...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6847225/

[OutBurst]

That's excellent. Now all that's left is to drop a bomb on the entire country of Iraq.

[Frndlefire]

Whether you agree with the war or not, it's always good when another one of these guys gets captured...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6847225/ agreed :nod:

Now all that's left is to drop a bomb on the entire country of Iraq. small bombs get less publicity.

[BuckWyld]

clearly it will be much easier to bring democracy to the region if we wipe out all the inhabitants.

[enjoi]

clearly it will be much easier to bring democracy to the region if we wipe out all the inhabitants.

Exactly. But i say we use the Neutron bomb, it will kill all the biological things in that area (Camels? More like ash am i right Lol//1/1/1???)

[fujilax10]

responsible for 75% of car bombs! thats insane. glad we got him. our troops are a little safer over there now

[Frndlefire]

"safe"? "middle east"? huh?

[wayzatalax2008]

that insurgent shold burn

[Frndlefire]

Im not commending these peoples actions or anything, but seriously, how do these guys just keep going on? Hell, if I was an insurgent and I was poorly armed and equipped going against the best army in the world I would be out of there in a second. Its a shame such a determined person is fighting on the wrong side. I don't find it so strange. This is their home and they believe in what they are fighting for. If someone attacked my house you know damn well that I would fight to the best of my ability.

[The Chariot]

yeah, that and they are religious fanatics. The craziest (crazy as in really really religious, nothing against Catholics) Catholic family you know has nothing on these guys. So if they are killing in the name of their God and religion, and they are so obsessive about their relgion...somethings bound to blow up.

[Frndlefire]

I really have no idea, but I wonder how accurate of a portrait we are given of these people. I mean, we have plenty of crazy people here, they just don't always justify themselves with a religion. Would you sacrifice your life if you believed it would protect your home and way of life? I don't mean to condone the things that these people do, I just wouldn't be at all surprised if we paint these people in an unfair, dehumanizing light (yes, even understanding that they are our enemy here.)

[senor_k]

yeah, that and they are religious fanatics. The craziest (crazy as in really really religious, nothing against Catholics) Catholic family you know has nothing on these guys. So if they are killing in the name of their God and religion, and they are so obsessive about their relgion...somethings bound to blow up.

Protestants are worse. All us Catholics do is drink and have kids.

[TheKOB]

I really have no idea, but I wonder how accurate of a portrait we are given of these people. I mean, we have plenty of crazy people here, they just don't always justify themselves with a religion. Would you sacrifice your life if you believed it would protect your home and way of life? I don't mean to condone the things that these people do, I just wouldn't be at all surprised if we paint these people in an unfair, dehumanizing light (yes, even understanding that they are our enemy here.)

Yes, there are plenty of crazy people here, and there are plenty of religious zealots here, and there are plenty of gun owners here, but not that many crazy religious zealots with guns. Those are usually called cults and are dealt with somehow (aka. David Koresh). In the Middle East these people seem to be an exception rather than a rule. Perhaps it's because we're a christian country, and there isn't that much room for violence based on relgion in christandom (anymore).

Our religious fanatics scream at you that you're going to hell if you're a girl wearing a tight fitting shirt (which, in my opinion, is awesome!). It would then go to the courts to see if he is just excercising his right to free speech.

Their religious fanatics will say you're an abomination of Allah and shoot you. Then they'd go drive a car bomb into a police station.

[BuckWyld]

no violence associated with christianity? what about the people shooting abortion doctors or bombing clinics. how about that church that supports thoes guys who killed matthew shepard and recently put out an ad saying that 9/11 and the tsunami were caused by god to punish gays. Not to mention Africa where there are always christians and muslims killing each other over religion. Christians have commited just as many attrocities in the name of god as any other religion. I mean even going back 60 years the Catholic Church refused to condem the Nazis and after the war the vatican issued a statement saying that Jewish children who were taken in by christian families during the war should not be returned to their parents. then of course you can go back to the Spanish Inquisition or the crusades.

[TheKOB]

the war the vatican issued a statement saying that Jewish children who were taken in by christian families during the war should not be returned to their parents.

Don't rush to conclusions....

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/159/story_15942_1.html

(for those of you who don't like to read, here's the last paragraph....
Had the American critics actually investigated this story (or even if they had waited just a few weeks while others did), they would not have embarrassed themselves. The critics’ rush to judgment probably got them headlines that are denied to true scholars. By drawing hasty conclusions, they have once again smeared a good man—Pope Pius XII—and the Catholic Church.)

Also, I read an article that the current Pope (JP2) forced a family to return a jewish child they had hidden during the holocaust (who's parents had died in concentration camps) to her extended family in America.

[TheKOB]

(should be deleted)

[TheKOB]

no violence associated with christianity? what about the people shooting abortion doctors or bombing clinics. .

Few and far between when compared with fudamentalist Islam.

how about that church that supports thoes guys who killed matthew shepard and recently put out an ad saying that 9/11 and the tsunami were caused by god to punish gays.

Which church? I doubt it was a mainstream one, but one of the crazies without guns I referred to earlier. Also, they didn't really kill anyone. You can believe anything you want to. There's a difference between thinking that a death is justified and actually committing it.

I'm interested...Source?


then of course you can go back to the Spanish Inquisition or the crusades.

I acknowledged that, and I'm referring to current day. Just because a thousand years ago the papacy and royalty in Europe was nuts is no excuse for any other religion to behead people based on their nationality, and kill their own countrymen for *religious* reasons.

[BuckWyld]

Oops I didnt realize that story about the vatican had been discredited, I also can not find the link about Matthew Sheppard, my point is that demonizing Muslims because of their religion is not right, there are many Muslims in the world, most of whom are not terrorists, and second Christianity has had just as many Religious Zealots using religion as an excuse for violence.

[Longest]

Yes, there are plenty of crazy people here, and there are plenty of religious zealots here, and there are plenty of gun owners here, but not that many crazy religious zealots with guns. Those are usually called cults and are dealt with somehow (aka. David Koresh).

It is widely suspected that the Branch Davidian situation was bungled horribly resulting in all their deaths.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_1999_Sept_27/ai_55820848
http://www.jeffhead.com/liberty/waco_mas.htm
http://www.waco-anewrevelation.com/news-events.html

The way we "dealt with" them was at best flawed and at worst, mass murder. Your overall point is somewhat valid in that the Branch Davidians never attacked infidels or bombed buildings.

Dan

[TheKOB]

I just meant, with regards to the Branch Davidians, that our authorities were 1) willing to respond and 2) able to respond, since they weren’t overwhelmed by other such groups.

It seems like the largest concentration of dangerous religious fanatics with guns are in the Middle East or from there, and are Islamic. I was only referring to those in the Middle East, I’m sure there are plenty of muslims the world over that live their lives much the way I do, except they call God Allah (or maybe I call Allah God…).

There is a larger proportion of people who are dangerous religious fanatics (religious terrorists) who are Muslim/Arabs than anyone else. This is pretty undeniable. Why?

Well, perhaps a few reasons.

a) Their religion allows for religious war and violence. Not to say Christianity doesn’t…it did, because that’s what let us to the Crusades, etc. It seems like Christianity has passed that phase, while Islam (in the middle east or mosques with middle eastern ties that have been found to be places of terrorist activities in Europe, etc) hasn’t yet.

2) Their region is extremely not diverse with religion or race. That leads to intolerance of other races and cultures. This is especially a problem when it’s enforced by the state, like in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and, until recently, Afghanistan. While there is of course intolerance in other places, not to the degree and reach (in terms of being worldwide terrorism) as the Middle East.

Someone mentioned Africa. Africa is kind of the same, in that it is majorly black, but the people aren’t united under a common religion the way the Middle East is. Also, Africa hasn’t had foreigners coming in to the country or been pushed to the focal point of worldwide attention, since they don’t have something that everyone in the world needs (oil) or anything resembling the creation of Israel after WWII (not that they (Africa) would’ve minded, since they’re not really united by a common religion).

Doing my best to seem brainy….

[TheKOB]

The way we "dealt with" them was at best flawed and at worst, mass murder.

I'd go for dealt, since they were the equivalent of a hostage situation. It was botched, meaning the hostages (kids) died. They (the adult members) broke the law. The authorities do their best to do their job, but it always doesn't work out well.

Some people seem to be trying to equate the Branch Davidians as victums. I see them as a drunk who pees on an electrified fence, dies, and who's family sues the owner of the electric fence for not posting enough signs. The only difference was that there were innocents (kids) involved. It was a tragedy, but was it avoidable? Also, how much responsibility did the authorities have to avoid what happened? Sometimes that kind of responsibility comes in conflict with their actual job, which was to apprehend those who are breaking the law.

Does a cop pursue a robbery suspect, even if it is rush hour and wreaks may result?

[Longest]

I'd go for dealt, since they were the equivalent of a hostage situation. It was botched, meaning the hostages (kids) died. They (the adult members) broke the law. The authorities do their best to do their job, but it always doesn't work out well.

Some people seem to be trying to equate the Branch Davidians as victums. I see them as a drunk who pees on an electrified fence, dies, and who's family sues the owner of the electric fence for not posting enough signs. The only difference was that there were innocents (kids) involved. It was a tragedy, but was it avoidable? Also, how much responsibility did the authorities have to avoid what happened? Sometimes that kind of responsibility comes in conflict with their actual job, which was to apprehend those who are breaking the law.

Does a cop pursue a robbery suspect, even if it is rush hour and wreaks may result?

What laws Kevin? They were authorized to produce and sell weapons until the government strong-armed the dealer to rescind their contract. So if that law was broken
Polygamy? Please don't tell me the government needed a 51 day siege to arrest people who chose to marry in ways they found offensive.
Your hostage argument is unconvincing. Parents are allowed to take their children where they wish and keep them where they wish. See below for abuse charges but the children were fed and provided for.
Child abuse allegations must be proven. Obviously that is moot now, they're dead. As are the children who were abused. Does none of that seem to at least approach excessive?

This is not an isolated incident. Ruby Ridge, for one. Same organzation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branch_Davidians

I'm not trying to start a long, drawn-out argument about these incidents. Obviously mistakes were made by the Davidians and the Weaver family that brought suspiscion on them in the first place. But the government is hardly the blameless, benevolent father figure which I infer from your messages. They DO make mistakes, and those mistakes have been grievous. I do not blame individuals for acting to save their lives while under orderse but the blame does lie at the top, those that make the decisions, for placing agents in jeopardy and forcing it into a life or death confrontation.

Dan

[TheKOB]

What laws Kevin? They were authorized to produce and sell weapons until the government strong-armed the dealer to rescind their contract. So if that law was broken
Polygamy? Please don't tell me the government needed a 51 day siege to arrest people who chose to marry in ways they found offensive.
Your hostage argument is unconvincing. Parents are allowed to take their children where they wish and keep them where they wish. See below for abuse charges but the children were fed and provided for.
Child abuse allegations must be proven. Obviously that is moot now, they're dead. As are the children who were abused. Does none of that seem to at least approach excessive?

This is not an isolated incident. Ruby Ridge, for one. Same organzation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branch_Davidians

I'm not trying to start a long, drawn-out argument about these incidents. Obviously mistakes were made by the Davidians and the Weaver family that brought suspiscion on them in the first place. But the government is hardly the blameless, benevolent father figure which I infer from your messages. They DO make mistakes, and those mistakes have been grievous. I do not blame individuals for acting to save their lives while under orderse but the blame does lie at the top, those that make the decisions, for placing agents in jeopardy and forcing it into a life or death confrontation.

Dan

I gotta admit, I'm not as well-versed about this as you. I was pretty young and not as aware/interested in news as I am now.

I figured they violated some sort of law. I'll have to look into this further.

My original point is that these things are few and far between in the US and most 1st world countries....

[Longest]

I'll certainly agree that your original point stands, these types of situations are rare which might explain why they have been bungled: you're more likely to make a mistake in something you've never seen before. Throwing the Branch Davidians out there in the original argument was, IMO, flawed, that was my only point; there was more to that situation then religious nuts "attacking" the government. You've done a fine job on the brainy front.

Dan

[lzlax09]

Anyone hear the Bush quote " We will not force democracy on any unwanting nations."