Not all people who advocate war jack off to dead muslims. But people who jack off to dead muslims all advocate war. And they use "legitimate reasons", in a doomed attempt to mask this. What tells me you are of the latter group, Dayton, is your open admission back on TNZ of desiring America to have imperial dominion of the entire planet.
Yeah, those were good days at TNZ. But even though I advocated U.S. expansion and domination of the earth I didn't want it to be a bloodbath either side.
Power crazy without bloodthirst is a new kind of unparalleled nativity I'm not sure I know how to process.
Process it this way. I want the U.S. to have power over the rest of the world. But gaining that power just for the sake of power isn't worth it.
Peace. Pax Romana Pax Britannica A single very dominant nation controlling the heart of the known world has historically been the best way of promoting peace and prosperity.
Agreed. But I also don't like the idea of some coffee house anarchist with syphallus and a bolt-action rifle able to shut down the planet.
Dayton - If you imply that the situation couldn't possibly be worse, or that there couldn't possibly be a larger number of extremist Muslims in the world, you're gonna get called stupid for it. Tough shit. You also said that I was "self loathing", somewhere between your casual longing for thousands of deaths and chanting of your "war is peace" mantras. Care to justify that?
I lamented the immigration policy because of the situation they were in. But I don't care too much about the actual situation. This is hardly even worth replying to, because you didn't even bother reading my reply. I'm "gung-ho" about tracking down the people who attacked us on 9/11. I don't care about Iran. I don't care about Iraq. I don't want to waste American lives on either of those places.
Focusing on the "people who attacked us on 9/11" makes it sound too much like a criminal act rather than an act of war. In waging a war, just killing the people involved doesn't matter. Smashing their base of operations and support is much more vital.
I wouldn't call Al Queda "decentralized".(not prior to the U.S. smashing into Afghanistan). They had a clear leader and chain of command with a well organized command structure and a reliable funding mechanism. Plus they always used a nation as their base of operations. First Sudan then Afghanistan. Finally, their leader Osama Bin Laden himself declared war on the United States with a publicly aired statement.
Okay, fuck decentralized, how does a criminal organization declare war on someone? Substitute Cobra Commander for Osama. See? He's just a messianic loon. War is a state between,...well, states. Give war into the hands of self-styled supervillains, all bets are off.
The United States has lost much of the world's confidence that it is defeating Al Qaeda. Because much of the current war is based on perception, this is a serious issue.
They aren't soldiers. They are illegal combatants. Illegal combatants may in fact fight in a war but they are not entitled to any of the protections given uniformed regular soldiers. Unless you fight wearing a uniform or other means of clear identification, then you do not deserve the protections of international agreements and may be summarily executed.
And why, exactly, do you care if I show my "real" persona? Do you want to meet me? Did you like some aspect that I portrayed and want to have lunch with it?
Well, good for you, Nancy. Then you must think I'm the bee's knees, since you're spending such a great amount of time chit-chatting online with yours truly.