• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

Kofi Annan claims destuction of U.N. Outpost by Israeli airstrike to be "delibrate"

anyone getting the supreme Irony of the terrorists not valuing human life like "we do" and getting responses like "who cares" in a thread about people dying??????? :up: :irony:


huh huh? *nudges*
 
Mr Sparkle said:
anyone getting the supreme Irony of the terrorists not valuing human life like "we do" and getting responses like "who cares" in a thread about people dying??????? :up: :irony:


huh huh? *nudges*

what is this word "irony" you speak of?
 
They just hate freedom, that's all. They're freedom haters. They might even be allergic to it, because every time we drop one of our bombs that's meant to spread freedom, they die. Freedom allergies. I think there's meds for that.
 
Mr Sparkle said:
I miss the gay fishing thread :(
Me too. I don't know what all the fuss was about. I think they should be allowed to fish as long as they don't tell me about it or do it in public.
 
Slipknot said:
Jonty, I guess you missed maxwell's post. Here it is... you can't miss it now. :up:

If you go into a war zone, expecting not to be targetted, whether accidentally or purposefully, than you deserve your fate.

If I run across the street of a busy intersection, for no real reason, and I get hit by a car, I can't hold the driver that hit me responsible, though I was the victim.

The UN observers did not belong there and should have declined to be there until some understanding was reached between Hezbollah and Israel.
 
Well they couldn't do their job if they stayed out, now could they?
 
bored said:
Well they couldn't do their job if they stayed out, now could they?

They had no job to do.

The UN knows better than to send anybody where help cannot be provided.

They didn't do it in Somalia and they didn't do it in Rwanda and many, many other places where conflict went on.
 
Two wrongs don't make a right. If the UN is willing to take the initiative to at least acknowledge a conflict, they should.
 
bored said:
Two wrongs don't make a right. If the UN is willing to take the initiative to at least acknowledge a conflict, they should.

You acknowledge it and stay away until the conflict is over.

Settle accounts later.
 
What good does it do to stay away? I'll look for your answer in the morning.
 
bored said:
What good does it do to stay away? I'll look for your answer in the morning.

What good does it do to be there? The UN has a non-existant record of holding terrorist groups accountable or their host countries.

All they end up doing is putting themselves in harm's way, unneccessarily or worse, causing the more decent foe to hold back and risk getting defeated.
 
maxwell's demon said:
you make it sound like the Olympics or something:(

It's actually the Mid-east version of the Spanish custom Running of the Bulls.

It's called Running of the bombs.
 
War Lord said:
What good does it do to be there? The UN has a non-existant record of holding terrorist groups accountable or their host countries.

All they end up doing is putting themselves in harm's way, unneccessarily or worse, causing the more decent foe to hold back and risk getting defeated.


Ever thought some organizations have more of a purpose than "bomb the **** out of people"?
 
bored said:
Ever thought some organizations have more of a purpose than "bomb the **** out of people"?

Sometimes those organizations actually protect people, like the Israeli army does.
 
War Lord said:
Sometimes those organizations actually protect people, like the Israeli army does.

hmmmm, so, Killing civillians to protect your interests is a good way of going about things?

edit: jonty, the above statement is a question.

thanks.
 
Mr Sparkle said:
hmmmm, so, Killing civillians to protect your interests is a good way of going about things?

edit: jonty, the above statement is a question.

thanks.

It's ultimately impossible to avoid killing civilians if your enemy hides among them. It'd be nice if we had Star Trek technology to beam just the terrorists into empty spaces and then blow them away, but that's not possible yet.

One day, maybe we can reach your godlike level of morality and stupidity to do just that.
 
War Lord said:
It's ultimately impossible to avoid killing civilians if your enemy hides among them. It'd be nice if we had Star Trek technology to beam just the terrorists into empty spaces and then blow them away, but that's not possible yet.

One day, maybe we can reach your godlike level of morality and stupidity to do just that.


:confused: I don't think that was my question, I didn't ask anything about technology.

it's a simple yes or no question, being the lover of absolutes you are I assume you'd be willing to apply that same view upon the presented question.

so, again.....yes or no?
 
hey jonty...pssst, question Jonty, yes or no answer Jonty.....pssst





jonty.......
 
uh...jonty????

you there sport?

yes or no?


jonty?......



*crickets*
 
Mr Sparkle said:
:confused: I don't think that was my question, I didn't ask anything about technology.

it's a simple yes or no question, being the lover of absolutes you are I assume you'd be willing to apply that same view upon the presented question.

so, again.....yes or no?

If it was a deliberate targetting of civilians, it would not be a good thing. However, since it's a deliberate targetting of terrorists, it's a good thing.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,262
Messages
22,074,095
Members
45,876
Latest member
kedenlewis
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"