andrewstewart

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    358

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by andrewstewart

  1. andrewstewart
    Are you saying that no one who has not been on the ground in Iraq is allowed to comment on the situation there? That's about as unamerican in sentiment as you can get.
  2. andrewstewart
    The only way to achieve that strategy would be to invade everyone and rule the entire world. Not entirely plausable, is it. You are basically saying that preemptive war is justifiable in all circumstances. That is exactly the attitude that makes people scared of the US, and it will drive people TOWARDS groups who would seek to harm us. By attacking, you only create more enemies. It's a viscious cycle that you can only break by talking a cold hard look at the reasons why people fear you and hate you. Your strategy is inherently self-defeating.
  3. andrewstewart
    I disagree. Getting rid of all of the cars would be just as complicated. It was an off the cuff response to what I think wasn't a very well thought out post. What's not thought out about it? Which is more likely to kill US citizens - cars or terrorism? You tell me. Pick one.
  4. andrewstewart
    That's completely wrong. Name a single reputable source that backs that up.
  5. andrewstewart
    Okay, how about if 1000 soldiers died, or 10,000? How about 100,000? You're telling me that at no point would you ever start to question exactly why you're there?
  6. andrewstewart
    You're going to have to do a better job of articulating your point than saying "you just don't get it".
  7. andrewstewart
    If Bush actually believed that SH had the weapons, it isn't fraudulent. A mistake for sure, but not fraudulent. Has it been proven that he didn't have them? What part of "We know where they are" don't you understand? You didn't answer the question, you asked another one. The burden of proof is not on me or anyone else to prove that they aren't there. The burdon of proof is on the administratin to prove that they ARE there. They said they knew specifically where they were (DR quote I'll dig out if you want). So where are they??
  8. andrewstewart
    Is that how you're rationalizing it? "Some people just don't get it"? Regardless of what you might think about your opponents views on this forum - do we seem inarticulate or unintelligent to you? How do you rationalize our objections other than we just don't "get it"? I'm interested to know if you understand the points that we're making - even if you don't agree with them.
  9. andrewstewart
    Not in the slightest. Todays "oppressed" are tomorrows "liberators", and you have no compunction with being told who's on our side today and who isn't. Ref: Afganistan. Don't tell me you joined the military so that you could do great humanitarian work.
  10. andrewstewart
    Oh you're definately the bigger man. You're the greatest. Thank you! About time you realized that! It was sarcasm based on the fact that your desire to turn the discussion into a "who's seen more people killed" competition shows just how little empathy you have for your fellow human beings.
  11. andrewstewart
    Freedom from what? They attacked us on our soil, not theirs. OBL's issue with the US was/is the american bases on "holy" soil.
  12. andrewstewart
    Oh you're definately the bigger man. You're the greatest.
  13. andrewstewart
    What, he didn't? Er... riiiiight.
  14. andrewstewart
    And you're not one of them.
  15. andrewstewart
    Every time we see family of a fireman, policeman, soldier, or 1000s of innocent wives, kids, brothers, sisters and parents of those who died on the 911 terror attack. What, you mean you saw them on TV? That's the extent of the interaction between the majority of the population of the US and the victims of 9/11. It's a rather different story in Iraq though. Didn't know Faber was from Iraq -- thought he said, Denmark. Now you're being deliberatly obtuse, although that's pretty typical from you. He said he was from Europe and very near to recent wars that have occured there. You should have read his post.
  16. andrewstewart
    I never think that killing other people is right.but i do understand why some one wants to kick ass in USA,just sad they didnt manneged to kill the right people instead of inocent people. So you hoped Al Qaeda would murder the President of the U.S.? I hope I'm not reading this correctly. He thinks that it's ok to kill Americans, but not ok to kill terrorists? How can anyone justify this? Well, you could easily make the comparison with the US for labelling people as "enemy combatants" in order to hold them indefinately without trial. You're talking symantics. Also his first language isn't English and you're really giving him a hard time or it.
  17. andrewstewart
    The same intel that the president got. Yes, but given that he is the president - is he not ultimately responsible? Responsibility flows up the hierarchy and he's right at the top. Why doesn't he do the mature thing and come out and admit that he was wrong? Instead we get references to "weapons of mass distruction-related activities". That's just pathetic.
  18. andrewstewart
    Every time we see family of a fireman, policeman, soldier, or 1000s of innocent wives, kids, brothers, sisters and parents of those who died on the 911 terror attack. What, you mean you saw them on TV? That's the extent of the interaction between the majority of the population of the US and the victims of 9/11. It's a rather different story in Iraq though.
  19. andrewstewart
    That's jaw dropping naivety if you really believe that, which I don't really think you do. Hardly ANYONE sits back and waits for the "official report". It is the nature of modernity to have instant, pundit-like response to news. That is why Bush worked so hard to create the media impression that there were WMD.
  20. andrewstewart
    What about the 8000 Iraq civilians killed to date? It's incredible that you can criticise him for being contradictory and yet be so contradictory yourself.
  21. andrewstewart
    Man, this hit the nail right on the head. Excellent post. It's very surprising to me that aren't more (any?) soldiers questioning the reasons why they are being sent to Iraq. Is it the military doctrine that you just don't question things? I can understand that to an extent, but when your fellow soldiers are dieing in the hundreds, does that not make you question the validity of why you are over there?
  22. andrewstewart
    How is it twisting what you said? It's right there for everyone to see. You said that when innocent people get killed that is terrorosm. Over 8000 innocent Iraqi people have been killed in Iraq due to the occupation to date (source previously quoted). How is that not terrorism, by your definition? My point is that one mans terrorist is another mans soldier and vice-versa. There is no clear delineation, no matter how black and white our leaders want to try to portray it.
  23. andrewstewart
    No, he accused you of being "bogus." Definition here. I say this whole post is about you being right. It's childish, you know? Take it to him in pms, work it out in private, and handle it with some class. Ciels- Michele Yes, he is right. But he was asking for advice, and that is the purpose of the forum (at least to some extent). He got his answer, so it's all cleared up. Move along..
  24. andrewstewart
    So by your definition, the US is currently engaged in terrorism in Iraq. Otherwise, how did over 8000 innocent Iraq people get killed to date? - http://www.iraqbodycount.net/bodycount.htm
  25. andrewstewart
    Jim Riley a.k.a freefallfreak called him a liar in this post: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=880313;#880313