See, I’m a Democrat, so being the pussy that I am, I assumed it was referring to introspection. Typical effeminate Democrats I tell ya! 
Well, World Eater, having big balls is important, but not, perhaps in the way you or President Bush mean. I think that it would take enormous cojones to set up a Marshall Plan for the Middle East and press for social reforms from our Muslim allies, like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. I’d like the US to stand up for the rights of women and ethnic minorities even in coutries that don’t have oil.
(confused look) In what way were they NOT targeted? If somebody wants to fuck up the Balinese tourist trade will it be more effective to blow up one or two Balinese or 200-odd tourists? As the obvious answer is the tourists, who better than people from the largest source of tourists in Bali? OF COURSE they were targeted.
And how did this thread get so hijacked? I thought we blue-staters were supposed to be using it to gloat over our personal, financial, and educational superiority but now we’re talking about dead Australians?
You guys know how to suck the fun out of EVERYTHING. :mad:
I was joking around, I totally agree with you here.
I’m refuting Moto’s point that’s all. Tourists were attacked, not Australians.
We have two scenarios here.
- Australians were targeted because someone is pissed at Australia
- Australians were in the wrong place at the wrong time when someone with a beef against Indonesia blew some shit up.
As I said before, call me when a 757 flies into the opera house.
The Bali bombing was apparently ordered by Riduan bin Isamuddin, AKA Hambali, al-Qaeda’s military commander in Southeast Asia. Later in that article the CBC reporter quotes a captured accomplice, “It had to be Bali, because that is what was possible at the time. And why Westerners? Because there were lots of Westerners - Americans and Europeans. Because they are followers of Bush and his cronies.” So the targets were Americans, because the bombers were pissed at America, and America’s allies, because the bombers were pissed at them, too. As America’s largest ally in the region is Australia that means the bombers were pissed at Australia. (banging WorldEater’s head with a mallet in an attempt to drive my point home) Just because the attack did not take place on Australian soil does not mean it was not an attack specifically against Australians because they were Australians and because of the actions of the Australian government. DUH! :smack:
That’s quite a bit of extrapolation there. Look this dumb side argument is totally besides my point. I used Australia as an example and people want to get all technical on it. So fuck Australia and replace it with Norway, ok?
There are reasons Canada and Norway aren’t being attacked.
Too cold? I have it–too expensive! Have you seen the price of a seedy hotel room in Montreal or Oslo?
Never been to either. Might be nice places to live in this day and age.
(looking at other articles instead of working)
What the FUCK?!?!? Bali Micro Nuke - Lack of Radiation Confuses “Experts” Could that be because IT WASN’T A FUCKING MICRO NUKE?!?!?
Lord, there are some nuts out there.
Shifting the ol’ goalposts, huh?
Look, you’ve lost this argument badly, even if you can’t see it.
Shifting goalposts? How?
I used an example to express a point. People started nitpicking over one aspect of my example, so I replaced it with another example.
My argument has not changed one bit.
Moto, you’re being an ass and completely hijacking the thread. I don’t see where World Eater’s argument has changed at all, even though he has selected a different country. Your incessant nitpicking forced him to choose another country to clarify his argument-but the mechanics of the argument haven’t changed a bit.
Sam
Hijacking is probably the best he can do. Let’s corner the rat shall we?
Moto, do you feel that we (the US) may be partially responsible for the extreme hatred towards us?
If so, would you consider undergoing steps to fix said things capitulation?
Well sure. Actions taken by America have pissed off some radicals in the Muslim world, and they have targeted us for it.
Consider, though, that the number one action America has taken in this regard, sufficient all by itself in making us a target of terrorism, is continuing support of Israel.
Given that capitulation to the terrorists on this point is neither moral nor in America’s interests, it behooves us to fight the terrorists, rather than give in.
You’d rather give in, apparantly. Sorry, I find that cowardly and morally reprehensible.
Except that it’s not just the Muslim world, or even radicals that we have pissed off or pissed on. It’s a good deal of the world. The Radical Muslims are simply the first to strike.
I don’t think it’s apparent that either World Eater, nor myself, nor most Democrats think we should “give in”. Distorting the argument like that and levelling the charge of “coward”(unpatriotic and all that), is pretty fucked up behavior all on its own.
Sam
Well, what do you propose, then? I’m all ears.
The country was targeted by terrorism well before the Bush Administration took office. What during the Clinton administration brought these attacks upon us?
You seem to be calling yourself a Democrat, GaWd. Do you want to field this?
More then Muslim radicals. The anti-us sentiment is gaining ground everywhere.
True, although I can’t think of a course of action off the top of my head, we should re-examine our relationship with cooling tempers a goal front and center.
“Fight the terrorists”. What does this mean?
You can’t fight terrorists with a gun alone.
You know better then to attribute things to posters who didn’t say them.
Moto, I’ll field any question you fucking want.
Globally, Americans are not loved. We haven’t been loved as a group of people in a long time for our big stick and our big balls, and our economic situation(envy). It’s not a fucking surprise-at least to me-that people want to attack us and have and will continue to want to.
In the 70’s and 80’s we played both sides of every coin around the world. Are you therefore shocked that people(especially Muslim fanatics), want our fucking heads? And Bush’s policies over the last 4 years have been so hamfisted and brutish that anti-american sentiment has risen to levels never encountered before.
I don’t know that Clinton did anything to welcome attacks. Hell, today’s OBL communicades all mention Bush, I don’t know of any during Clinton’s presidency that specifically indicted him as the reason for the attack.
Sam
For that matter what did Carter do to deserve a hostage crisis in his term.
You seem to want someone to blame. Please tell me who that someone is?