Who'll be the better president?

[laszlo]

We can bomb like no tomorrow

Very Very easy.

I think you get what I'm looking at from where we could do that from.

We are more modern than they are BY FAR! We are the Bigger man by the thousands to what they could do to one of us!

Sending in a ton of troops would work also.
But did it take a ton of troops after they(enemy) knew it was over in WW2?


We did clean up after WW2.
We could do that anywhere.

you could start bombing the the ones responsible for all this chaos created...btw all your bombs are made from your money i don't know why are you so proud having so much money invested in destruction instead of creation;with a fraction of your military expense from decades the water running car will be created so no more oil & oil war was needed but a few greedy who pull the strings need this to control and manipulate all of you and also us;your medical care sucks ,people from us go in Cuba,Canada England... for free medical aid is this normal?
of course is normal let's make another 100 nuke instead of giving to our citizens the basic needs ;if in a small country the democratic elected president don't accept the big american investors offer(which always is about oil or other mineral on the smallest price for you) you invade or kill him see Guatemala,Ecuador,Panama,Venezuela,and the last Irak

i bet if you recall all your troops and cut all military spendings no more war will start and so called terrorists will never attack you because this is the 1st reason why they love you so much-invading and imposing someone agenda- only than you'll become a respected nation

 

[FudFighter]

jeeze i leave for a few hours and come back to a bunch of warmongering.

Sorry guys, but killing every terrorist you find will do 1 thing, creat more, their family and friends, people who lost somebody will become the new terrorists.

watch some gundam seed for the love of god......it shows this mantality quite well(ok u will go crazy wanting to slap the main char but hey.....)

way i see it, patroll the borders of terrorist states, kill anybody who trys to get out, let them kill eachother till they are sick of it, eventuly they would get tired of it and stop if they where cut off from the rest of the world.

world should build walls around the middle east(ok, keep some access to the oil so we can TAKE IT) just let them have at eachother till they get sick of the killing and death......or till they manage to kill eachother off, eather way problem solved

 

[btarunr]

^That just won't happen, although I agree with the part where when you kill one person who hates America, you spawn a few more.

 

[WarEagleAU]

Haha, good one BTA!!!

 

[pepsi71ocean]

you could start bombing the the ones responsible for all this chaos created...btw all your bombs are made from your money i don't know why are you so proud having so much money invested in destruction instead of creation;with a fraction of your military expense from decades the water running car will be created so no more oil & oil war was needed but a few greedy who pull the strings need this to control and manipulate all of you and also us;your medical care sucks ,people from us go in Cuba,Canada England... for free medical aid is this normal?
of course is normal let's make another 100 nuke instead of giving to our citizens the basic needs ;if in a small country the democratic elected president don't accept the big american investors offer(which always is about oil or other mineral on the smallest price for you) you invade or kill him see Guatemala,Ecuador,Panama,Venezuela,and the last Irak

i bet if you recall all your troops and cut all military spendings no more war will start and so called terrorists will never attack you because this is the 1st reason why they love you so much-invading and imposing someone agenda- only than you'll become a respected nation

Who is responsible for all of this? The terrorist? They came and bombed America, its just like Japan, when they Bombed us at Pearl Harbor. We didn't stand idle by while Japan attacked America, why should we do the same now? Trust me, Wars of Attrition works every time.

Second, our health care doesn't work that way, and besides we don't build 100 Nukes anymore, we haven't done nuclear weapons building for bout 8 years, since the Cold War has been Over. We can't trade off nuke building for health care, as our health care system is not socalised, all we have is Medicare and many hospitals and doctors are not accepting medicare anymore because medicare sucks and they screw the doctors and hospitals over.

We cannot cut military spending. If we did, then the world would attack us, or another piss ant country would, and then what do we do? kill them with sticks and stones because we have no military. And cutting military spending will not fix the view the world has of America. All you hippies think is that we invaded Iraq for oil. I ASK YOU, WHERE IS THE CHEAP OIL!? SHIT WE INVADED IRAQ WE SHOULD HAVE 40 DOLLAR A BARREL OIL RIGHT? Well, for the last 3 years where has it been? Oh that's right 4 dollar gas. WHERE Mr. War for oil, WHERE IS IT? LOL, That's right we never TOOK IT OUT OF THE GROUND.

Guatemala,Ecuador,Panama, all had more to do about fundamentalism, and drug trafficking then anything else. The Panama Incursion had more to do with capturing a drug lord, who had fled to the safety of Panama because the new Panamanian government took him in and said "we will harbor you"

Venezuela, Iran and Iraq, have nothing to do with oil. We didn't kill Chavez because he nationalized oil? We didn't kill whaach a macall it because he promoted Death to America. I believe the world is always threatening America. Hell, Iran chants "Death To America", yea you peace loving hippy, when we have no Army to defend our selves, what happens when Iran invades and attacks America or Israel of ally? Oh that's right we throw sticks and stones because we have no military to start wars, or end them, and that is where the problem lies, Ending wars required manpower, something that none of the western bloc nations except Israel can handle.

 

[Palit_Guy]

The key to all this is education not war. People have been fighting against each other for centuries and it continues to this day. I'd say that a few centuries of data is enough draw that conclusion.

Think of it this way, if someone whoops your ass one of two things will happen. You either avoid that person or you find some other way to retaliate against them. Avoid them pretty much cuts off all contact between you and the alternative will eventually lead to more conflict. Either way, no one wins.

The same sort of stuff happens in the business world. Personally I love the Mac vs. PC commercials; because they are funny. But they are a sign that Mac doesn't want to work with PC to benefit the whole of computer users. Mac is trying to increase their following not by producing and marketing a superior product but by showing that PC is bad and you have no choice but to use Mac unless you want to be bad like PC. Huh?

I that analogy is on topic here because there are more than a few people that want to vote for Obama because they dislike McCain. The lesser of two evils is still evil. I'll reiterate the shit sandwich story from earlier. No one would eat a sandwich made of doody. It is equally not ok to eat a sandwich that just has a little doody hidden under the bologna.

 

[Palit_Guy]

I'm not saying that it's impossible to end conflict via a military victory. But I think the end would be specifically limited the extermination of a specific people. Obviously that's no way to do things.

WWII and the bombing of Japan was brought up earlier. But the two of you ended your story too soon. It doesn't end with a couple bombs and a show of force. While hostilities ended in 1945 between Japan and everyone else, there was an American occupation force there until 1952.

Yup, that's right, from 1945 to 1952- 7 years, the US stayed on under the command of General MacArthur to accomplish the following:

• To establish a responsible and democratic self-government.
• To make sure that Japan will not be a new threat to the U.S and its allied.
• To develop a sense of individual liberty and respect for human rights.
• To develop a legal system which will protect individual and civil rights.
• Most importantly, it was not the responsibility of the Allies powers to impose upon Japan any form of Government not supported by the freely expressed will of the people.

Source: http://www.empereur.com/DOC/Japan_occup.html

Education was key to accomplishing all those goals. The fact that the military did should not be astounding. They worked with civilians and government officials and provided a strong arm when needed usually determined by the Japanese.

I'm not saying everything went smoothly but the goals were admirable and the military stuck to them as much as human beings can do so.

This is the same path we should be taking in Iraq. Get a military hold on things so people can move about the country without the imminent threat of death. then we can get to the business of educating everyone so they can stand up for themselves. Believe it or not, most of the people that live in these distraught regions are not fans of terrorism, war or death. They would love to govern themselves without living under tyranny OR US occupation.

Just another example of a special interest group run amuck.

The point of all this is to get those of you that think a military solution is possible to understand it isn't possible. Eventually the military has to leave the area and if you don't want them back there in a year or two the people that live there have to be able to manage their own affairs and prevent the people that created the situation in the first place from doing so again.

 

[WarEagleAU]

I Agree the lesser of two evils is still evil, but its a best case scenario way of thinking. I feel safer with McCain as CIC than with Obama. I am kind of excited to see if Obama can do any reaching across the isles and getting America;s image back at the same time. We will have to see how it plays out. To me Obama is too much forward with his flip flopping than McCain is.

 

[laszlo]

Who is responsible for all of this? The terrorist? They came and bombed America, its just like Japan, when they Bombed us at Pearl Harbor. We didn't stand idle by while Japan attacked America, why should we do the same now? Trust me, Wars of Attrition works every time.

Second, our health care doesn't work that way, and besides we don't build 100 Nukes anymore, we haven't done nuclear weapons building for bout 8 years, since the Cold War has been Over. We can't trade off nuke building for health care, as our health care system is not socalised, all we have is Medicare and many hospitals and doctors are not accepting medicare anymore because medicare sucks and they screw the doctors and hospitals over.

We cannot cut military spending. If we did, then the world would attack us, or another piss ant country would, and then what do we do? kill them with sticks and stones because we have no military. And cutting military spending will not fix the view the world has of America. All you hippies think is that we invaded Iraq for oil. I ASK YOU, WHERE IS THE CHEAP OIL!? SHIT WE INVADED IRAQ WE SHOULD HAVE 40 DOLLAR A BARREL OIL RIGHT? Well, for the last 3 years where has it been? Oh that's right 4 dollar gas. WHERE Mr. War for oil, WHERE IS IT? LOL, That's right we never TOOK IT OUT OF THE GROUND.

Guatemala,Ecuador,Panama, all had more to do about fundamentalism, and drug trafficking then anything else. The Panama Incursion had more to do with capturing a drug lord, who had fled to the safety of Panama because the new Panamanian government took him in and said "we will harbor you"

Venezuela, Iran and Iraq, have nothing to do with oil. We didn't kill Chavez because he nationalized oil? We didn't kill whaach a macall it because he promoted Death to America. I believe the world is always threatening America. Hell, Iran chants "Death To America", yea you peace loving hippy, when we have no Army to defend our selves, what happens when Iran invades and attacks America or Israel of ally? Oh that's right we throw sticks and stones because we have no military to start wars, or end them, and that is where the problem lies, Ending wars required manpower, something that none of the western bloc nations except Israel can handle.

responsible is your elite who owns you and have the power to rule ;bush is a fool puppet ;the next president will do what they tell if not they kill him like kennedy who has the guts to try doing more for you people...

maybe you're hippie because you don't understand what had become america; you send the army to support american interest of the big companies;is a good business to destroy a country than re-build it and how they pay you back ? what's your tip?

why don't you make a strike against high prices which are kept only to empty your pockets...where you think are going the 700 billions? in your pockets ..? keep dreaming they will go out from your pockets to your great banks who control your life because they must survive no matter what cost you;this was the 1st sign that this form of free-market capitalism is condemned ;a bankrupt company to saved by government from peoples money good joke and great business

 

[Bigjohn]

I Agree the lesser of two evils is still evil, but its a best case scenario way of thinking. I feel safer with McCain as CIC than with Obama. I am kind of excited to see if Obama can do any reaching across the isles and getting America;s image back at the same time. We will have to see how it plays out. To me Obama is too much forward with his flip flopping than McCain is.

That and the fact that he's supposedly a "constitutional scholar" who's wiping his ass with the constitution and calls it a "defective" document...

 

[DaMulta]

Who is responsible for all of this? The terrorist? They came and bombed America, its just like Japan, when they Bombed us at Pearl Harbor. We didn't stand idle by while Japan attacked America, why should we do the same now? Trust me, Wars of Attrition works every time.

Second, our health care doesn't work that way, and besides we don't build 100 Nukes anymore, we haven't done nuclear weapons building for bout 8 years, since the Cold War has been Over.

Why did Bush started building bunker busting nuclear bombs then....we still build them, and make new ones.

We are making tactical nukes as well. Small nukes.

We are also working on hand held nuclear bombs that solders could use.

We have not stopped making them.

 

[Palit_Guy]

As for people around the world not liking the US, it's hard not to blame them. The US is extremely militant. We play with toy guns before we can even walk and hold our service men and women in the highest possible regard.

We have covert operations that fund one group or another for a while, only to change the group we help when our internal political climate changes. Either one group or the other is "right" and it makes little sense to change our support of a group just because our President's political party changed.

When we travel abroad, far too many of us look down on the people of the country we visit because they don't speak English. Those same people then get upset when foreign people come here to visit and don't speak English. At what point are people not required to speak English?

We have the most lax gun laws of any major country I'm aware of. There is a general perception among non-US folks that US folks are all gun toting war mongers that prefer to shoot first and ask questions later.

Non-US folks read forums like this and see people like Pepsi and Damulta advocating the use of massive force to wipe out a problem. Most Americans don't see what the big deal is because we don't see the carnage produced by an active conflict the way Europeans and most other nations see it. Our news doesn't show burnt dead bodies, destroyed cities and villages and tanks driving down main street in the same way other countries do. Yes, we see it a little bit but there are millions of other people world wide that see it day in and day out for years on end.

Some of these things are true about Americans and some aren't. But unless you walk a mile in a US citizen's shoes, all of it is taken out of context and is impossible to truly understand. In the course of my job I get to talk to a lot of people that aren't US citizens and I am continually surprised by the look on their face when I tell them that most Americans would prefer to just leave the world alone and do our own thing. We don't want to take over everything and make everyone's government run like ours.

The japan issue is a great example of this. You couldn't get any more conservative than the Republicans of 1945 yet even they insisted that Japan be able to choose their own form of government even if that meant it wasn't like ours. Which it isn't.

 

[WhiteLotus]

Why did Bush started building bunker busting nuclear bombs then....we still build them, and make new ones.

We are making tactical nukes as well. Small nukes.

We are also working on hand held nuclear bombs that solders could use.

We have not stopped making them.

how is hand held nuke be developed? sounds like a really big grenade!

 

[btarunr]

how is hand held nuke be developed? sounds like a really big grenade!

I guess somewhat like the Redeemer in UT.

 

[WhiteLotus]

I guess somewhat like the Redeemer in UT.

i would only invest in such a thing if i can also remote control it to fly around first right before i send it up some poor smucks arse.

 

[Palit_Guy]

responsible is your elite who owns you and have the power to rule ;bush is a fool puppet ;the next president will do what they tell if not they kill him like kennedy who has the guts to try doing more for you people...

maybe you're hippie because you don't understand what had become america; you send the army to support american interest of the big companies;is a good business to destroy a country than re-build it and how they pay you back ? what's your tip?

why don't you make a strike against high prices which are kept only to empty your pockets...where you think are going the 700 billions? in your pockets ..? keep dreaming they will go out from your pockets to your great banks who control your life because they must survive no matter what cost you;this was the 1st sign that this form of free-market capitalism is condemned ;a bankrupt company to saved by government from peoples money good joke and great business

What you need to understand is that, when it comes to military and paramilitary operations, the American public is almost completely in the dark and don't know anything about what's going on.

I say again, it all comes back to education. more information about US driven paramilitary operations during the 70's is being disclosed every day. But it takes time for this information to get into the education system and for people to find out it's been going on. It then takes more time for those people who agree that it's wrong to then grow up, get elected into office and then refuse to approve the funds for such operations.

But that is difficult. People who get elected have to spend money to get people to elect them. When you owe someone a debt it needs to be repaid. It takes great courage to stand up to someone you owe and tell them you will not do something for them when they ask. Especially if they can leverage you with something you've done that isn't good or threaten you or your family in some way.

I think it's a good idea to have term limitations for the President. While he may not have much real power, he does have the ability to be "persuasive" in many ways. Term limitations prevent us, by law, from finding ourselves with effectively a dictator or king.

I also think we should have term limitations for Senate members. Originally members of the Senate just were wealthy folks who could afford to take a couple years off their normal jobs and spend a few in the service of the government. Lately it's turned into people being a lawyer for a few years and then moving into politics permanently and never having done an honest day's work in their lives.

That's the biggest reason I like Palin for VP. She doesn't have a lot of experience at the "political" game and i think she will just run around doing what she thinks is right. We need that kind of simple thinking without undue influence from small interest groups or large corporations.

We need to strike some kind of balance in all this.

 

[DaMulta]

how is hand held nuke be developed? sounds like a really big grenade!

Yea, a really big grenade.

Like a 100 ton bomb(guessing) that you can hold in your hand......



-------

I would like to say. War is not pretty. I know that I have never seen it, but I have had family that was on D-Day and other parts of the war that have told me the dark details.
It is horrible no way to say that it is not. Women and children die, everyone dies. To think other wise would be stupid. It's just a part of war.

War is something that should be the last resort, but I do believe if you do go to war don't hold back at all until it is over. That's what I was talking about.

Clearly we could not change into a bomb running campaign, because we have invested to much time into what we are doing now. I was just pointing out that we should of never backed down until there was peace and fear.

 

[WarEagleAU]

Wow Palit_guy, you have a nice graps on geopolitical climate and homemade politics.

I agree on the education in the early days (60s, 70s, and 80s). I myself was born in 79 and I remember the 80s, as far as prices and money being alot stronger than today. Of course, everything wasnt sugar coated, but my dad was a steelmaker and made hellacious money to support 11 of us (9 kids and he and my mom).

 

[DaedalusHelios]

That and the fact that he's supposedly a "constitutional scholar" who's wiping his ass with the constitution and calls it a "defective" document...

Got a source on that, One that is more than republican rumor?

 

[Palit_Guy]

@ WarEagle

I'm not sure how much of it I understand actually. Over the last couple years I've been reading the basics like the constitution. I've lived in Germany as a civilian with their equivalent of a green card, visited several European countries, lived in several states over the years and through the course of my job have met more people than I can even count.

I've had manual labor jobs (carpenter, hod carrier etc.) and I've had white collar jobs. Been married three times, been to war (kind of the same thing) and have sold just about everything under the sun at one time or another. Didn't go to college.

All in all I think I'm a pretty average guy. I hated history in any form in school but now I'm beginning to understand why it's important to know what happened.

Through all this, I just try to examine what I know, listen to what other people are saying and just see what I can put together. i always try to dumb things down because I actually believe that nothing is really that complicated.

As I look back at things I just try to examine them one step at a time and see where the hiccups are. they usually stand out if you take the emotion out of the conversation and just look at the facts.

 

[DaedalusHelios]

That's the biggest reason I like Palin for VP. She doesn't have a lot of experience at the "political" game and i think she will just run around doing what she thinks is right. We need that kind of simple thinking without undue influence from small interest groups or large corporations.

We need to strike some kind of balance in all this.

Well she is not any more a political outsider than Obama. Her husband's influence in the "secessionist" Alaska independence party helped her become mayor of that small town and then governor of Alaska. Her husband was an oil executive until she became a governor when he had to drop that position for "conflict of interest" and buy up a construction company that was involved with road construction. Was the construction company in Alaska involved with the "road to nowhere"? I am looking into it.


The Alaska independence party believes Alaska should break off from the US to become its own country. Thats what secessionist refers to and thats anti-American by definition. So its Alaska first, not "America First" in those people's eyes.

 

[Bigjohn]

Well she is not any more a political outsider than Obama. Her husband's influence in the "secessionist" Alaska independence party helped her become mayor of that small town and then governor of Alaska. Her husband was an oil executive until she became a governor when he had to drop that position for "conflict of interest" and buy up a construction company that was involved with road construction. Was the construction company in Alaska involved with the "road to nowhere"? I am looking into it.


The Alaska independence party believes Alaska should break off from the US to become its own country. Thats what secessionist refers to and thats anti-American by definition. So its Alaska first, not "America First" in those people's eyes.

Even if that stuff you're getting from the daily KOOK (er, KOS) were true in that context....
The fact that someone believes that a state has the right to secede when they feel the 'federal' is not doing it's duty, well, that person understands the constitution and what the framer's intended. These United States - are a membership federation, not a mandatory one.

 

[Palit_Guy]

I don't really know that much about Alaska or its history. I just read a couple short things about it and it's interesting. Basically the US bought property from someone who didn't own it but rather had "acquired" it. Sounds familiar.

Regardless, if some sort of majority (I would think at least two thirds) of the populace want to secede from the union, why not?

Before we get into the whole civil war thing, remember what the civil war was about. The right of states to govern themselves. Slavery was just the particular element that has always been focused on. The idea to secede started when Missouri became a state. That made northern states outnumber (in senate seats) southern states and would thus leave them powerless to oppose (in their minds) any laws the northern states wanted to impose upon them.

There was also an issue of the roll of Senate members of southern states not actually representing the interests of their constituency. Most people in the south were opposed to slavery including the slaves. The south considered slaves not to be citizens and therefore without rights whereas the constitution made no distinction between race. But even that is misleading, it wasn't the south that held that opinion. It was the politically powerful and the wealthy plantation owners that kept the politically powerful in their positions. The almost exclusive source of income in southern states, at the time, was cotton. Without any other significant sources of wealth and a remarkably few individuals controlling the cotton market the number of people in control of all things southern was very small indeed.

The only reason (in my opinion) the civil war happened is that the south seceded without securing the permission of the Senate first. that made the secession an illegal act although I can't find any law that says that. Surely there is one and I just didn't find it. If there is no such law and a simple declaration of intent is all that's needed then we should rename the Civil War to something more accurate since, after making their declaration, the southern states were no longer part of the USA.

So I have to think there is no reason Alaska shouldn't be able to secede IF they can present their case to the Senate AND the Senate approves it.

The situation in Alaska is not about human rights or not enough people having an impact on their Senate members. In my cursory investigation into it (http://www.akip.org/ ) I have to admit the independence party has some valid points. It definitely seems to me the federal government exercises some authority that no other state would tolerate. For example, subsurface rights are owned by the federal government. I haven't done any research to verify whether or not their claims are true. But assuming they are i find many aspects of the Alaska issue appalling.

I would encourage everyone to do substantial research into the problem before forming an actual opinion on whether or not Alaska has grounds to consider seceding. I limit my opinion at this time to the fact that they should have the right to make their case before the Senate.

 

[Tatty_Two]

In In Iraq, if they attacked us in some town. We just bomb the crap out of it.

If they do a IED on us, we turn around and do the same thing around where the IED went off.
.

Lol, I find that kind of amusing, thats exactly what the US did in iraq in the first few months after the country was taken, and you had to stop because within weeks you were losing more and more troops....why? because when you "bomb the crap" out of a town, you kill hundreds or thousands of innocent people INCLUDING women and children, overnight your enemies multiply because of that act (which by the way, is a form of genocide which is for the sake of this debate, one of the things WE used as an excuse to go in there in the first place to stop).

The US stopped doing that and their casulties over time became fewer, they began to follow the UK's "hearts and minds" philosphy, a philosphy which they scorned beforehand by the way, we (the UK), sent some of our troops north from basra to "train" some of your forces in those methods, at first the US forces didnt like it much, because you cannot win "hearts and minds" from a Tank or Personnel carrier, you have to patrol the streets on foot (something the UK has always done and is still the only force to do so consistently in Afghanistan.......bottom line here is, if you just Nuked or bombed the crap out of these places, you, as a country would have no friends, and over time, when all these "innocent" deaths were racking up, eventually most of the civilised world would turn against you (most brutal regimes throughout history have suffered similar), apart from a worldwide embargo against the US (so no oil!), whatever your thoughts on your own power, you would ultimately be defeated, then no longer would you be "the land of the free", just as most of the innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan still are not free today........but hopefully, between your great nation and a little help from your friends there will be soon.......and that really is something we can all be proud of......bombing "the crap" out of them will bring short term gain, but with that most certainly will come long term pain.

 

[DaMulta]

Lol, I find that kind of amusing, thats exactly what the US did in iraq in the first few months after the country was taken, and you had to stop because within weeks you were losing more and more troops....why? because when you "bomb the crap" out of a town, you kill hundreds or thousands of innocent people INCLUDING women and children, overnight your enemies multiply because of that act (which by the way, is a form of genocide which is for the sake of this debate, one of the things WE used as an excuse to go in there in the first place to stop).

The US stopped doing that and their casulties over time became fewer, they began to follow the UK's "hearts and minds" philosphy, a philosphy which they scorned beforehand by the way, we (the UK), sent some of our troops north from basra to "train" some of your forces in those methods, at first the US forces didnt like it much, because you cannot win "hearts and minds" from a Tank or Personnel carrier, you have to patrol the streets on foot (something the UK has always done and is still the only force to do so consistently in Afghanistan.......bottom line here is, if you just Nuked or bombed the crap out of these places, you, as a country would have no friends, and over time, when all these "innocent" deaths were racking up, eventually most of the civilised world would turn against you (most brutal regimes throughout history have suffered similar), apart from a worldwide embargo against the US (so no oil!), whatever your thoughts on your own power, you would ultimately be defeated, then no longer would you be "the land of the free", just as most of the innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan still are not free today........but hopefully, between your great nation and a little help from your friends there will be soon.......and that really is something we can all be proud of......bombing "the crap" out of them will bring short term gain, but with that most certainly will come long term pain.

If we never backed down, I think what we did in the first place would of stuck more in the end.

you kill hundreds or thousands of innocent people INCLUDING women and children

I have admitted this, it is very bad, but a part of war.


As said above with Japan we did not back down until the fear was there. Then we were able to do the things that we are trying to do with less problems.

IMO of course



You were there, you seen it, you certainly understand what was going on there more than I EVER WILL.

@Damulta

Please stop saying stupid things like blowing up towns because there was a bomb in the vicinity. Seriously. Are you drunk?

How about this? Some mailboxes in your area get M80s tossed in them and blown up. So the police react by coming along and arresting everyone in the area including you. They do this because there's a 90% probability that the culprits live in the area where the explosions took place.

How would you like to explain to your boss that you were arrested for something you didn't do and had nothing to do with whatsoever? You wouldn't because the police don't operate like that. It doesn't make any sense.

The only thing it would cause is people to go vigilante and take out whoever they thought did it. You can only hope the vigilantes get it right though.

My war talk is now over.

It is a very touchy subject, even more than politics because it deals with real people and real lifes.