shropshire 0 #26 December 11, 2005 My death count is bigger and more important than your death count..... Great competition.... can we all play? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #27 December 11, 2005 QuoteQuote Calm Matey... America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice 3000 dead in one day. Did any IRA bombing ever come close to that? Did all the IRA bombings come close to that? The generally accepted death toll from terrorism in Northern Ireland is 3466. It is beyond any doubt that much of the financial backing for the IRA came from Irish-Americans. The USA is indeed a Johnny-come-Lately when it comes to outrage against terrorism.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #28 December 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuote Calm Matey... America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice 3000 dead in one day. Did any IRA bombing ever come close to that? Did all the IRA bombings come close to that? The generally accepted death toll from terrorism in Northern Ireland is 3466. It is beyond any doubt that much of the financial backing for the IRA came from Irish-Americans. The USA is indeed a Johnny-come-Lately when it comes to outrage against terrorism. That's a separate question and one that I wouldn't argue with. What I was objecting to most was the charge that the only reason the world should consider 9/11 important was because it was an American attack. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #29 December 11, 2005 <What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... But raised the issue that America only became involved in the so called war on terror after this incident. If you cannt see the distintion . that's not my problem. my bottle's empty and I'm off to my pit - good night (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #30 December 11, 2005 Quote<What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... Bullshit. When you say "America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice", that absolutely belittles it, no matter what context you put it in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #31 December 11, 2005 QuoteQuote<What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... Bullshit. When you say "America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice", that absolutely belittles it, no matter what context you put it in. "You are either with us or against us", G.W. Bush 11/6/2001, might reasonably be construed as a command for the rest of the world to sit up and take notice.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #32 December 11, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Calm Matey... America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice 3000 dead in one day. Did any IRA bombing ever come close to that? Did all the IRA bombings come close to that? The generally accepted death toll from terrorism in Northern Ireland is 3466. It is beyond any doubt that much of the financial backing for the IRA came from Irish-Americans. The USA is indeed a Johnny-come-Lately when it comes to outrage against terrorism. That's a separate question and one that I wouldn't argue with. What I was objecting to most was the charge that the only reason the world should consider 9/11 important was because it was an American attack. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. Well, 3466 deaths in N. Ireland with a population of 1.6 million would, if pro-rated to the size of the US population, be equivalent to well over half a million dead in the US. In terms of overall effect on the community the human and economic impact of terrorism in Ireland was way bigger than 9/11 in the US.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #33 December 12, 2005 Quote<What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... But raised the issue that America only became involved in the so called war on terror after this incident. I apologize for that. We had a President who was more interested in appeasement and satisfying his own childish urges than he was getting involved in fighting terrorism. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #34 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuote<What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... Bullshit. When you say "America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice", that absolutely belittles it, no matter what context you put it in. "You are either with us or against us", G.W. Bush 11/6/2001, might reasonably be construed as a command for the rest of the world to sit up and take notice. So what? Why should anything the President did have any effect on the basic respect paid for the thousands who died on that day, most of whom probably never even voted for him? To suggest that the world had to be somehow "coerced" into "sitting up and taking notice" to the events of 9/11 is reprehensible. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #35 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuote<What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... But raised the issue that America only became involved in the so called war on terror after this incident. I apologize for that. We had a President who was more interested in appeasement and satisfying his own childish urges than he was getting involved in fighting terrorism. Surely you are talking about Bill Clinton. Right?Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #36 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote<What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... Bullshit. When you say "America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice", that absolutely belittles it, no matter what context you put it in. "You are either with us or against us", G.W. Bush 11/6/2001, might reasonably be construed as a command for the rest of the world to sit up and take notice. So what? Why should anything the President did have any effect on the basic respect paid for the thousands who died on that day, most of whom probably never even voted for him? To suggest that the world had to be somehow "coerced" into "sitting up and taking notice" to the events of 9/11 is reprehensible. So why did he say it, then? Your reply is non-sequitur, the original comments had nothing to do with respecting the victims (or not). It is a FACT that until an attack took place against the US, the US wasn't all that interested in terrorism, as shown perfectly by the lack of action taken against those in the US who openly funded the IRA. This applies to both Republican and Democrat administrations.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #37 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote<What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... Bullshit. When you say "America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice", that absolutely belittles it, no matter what context you put it in. "You are either with us or against us", G.W. Bush 11/6/2001, might reasonably be construed as a command for the rest of the world to sit up and take notice. So what? Why should anything the President did have any effect on the basic respect paid for the thousands who died on that day, most of whom probably never even voted for him? To suggest that the world had to be somehow "coerced" into "sitting up and taking notice" to the events of 9/11 is reprehensible. So why did he say it, then? Your reply is non-sequitur, the original comments had nothing to do with respecting the victims (or not). It is a FACT that until an attack took place against the US, the US wasn't all that interested in terrorism, as shown perfectly by the lack of action taken against those in the US who openly funded the IRA. This applies to both Republican and Democrat administrations. To begin with, I don't support the IRA, but a lot of Irish-Americans were concerned about your 30? year occupation and alleged torture of civilians. Why you are still in Northern Ireland after all these years? Isn't it their country? Why not let them settle their own affairs like others believe we should do in Iraq? I understand that most of the troops will go home in 2006 minus about 6000 staying. Hope we aren't in Iraq for 30 years.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 2 #38 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote<What I was objecting to was the notion that the world should consider 9/11 important simply because it was an American strike. It was also the most deadly terrorist strike to date, by a wide margin. >> and if you re-read my post I didn't beittle it... Bullshit. When you say "America wasn't the first country to ever be hit by terrorist bombs.... but as soon as it does, the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice", that absolutely belittles it, no matter what context you put it in. "You are either with us or against us", G.W. Bush 11/6/2001, might reasonably be construed as a command for the rest of the world to sit up and take notice. So what? Why should anything the President did have any effect on the basic respect paid for the thousands who died on that day, most of whom probably never even voted for him? To suggest that the world had to be somehow "coerced" into "sitting up and taking notice" to the events of 9/11 is reprehensible. So why did he say it, then? You'll have to ask him. I didn't even vote for him. Quote Your reply is non-sequitur, the original comments had nothing to do with respecting the victims (or not). Maybe in your opinion. To me "the rest of the world has to sit up and take notice" sounds like a reluctant obligation. I just wish both sides would stop using 9/11 to further their political objectives (for example, in your diatribe below). Quote It is a FACT that until an attack took place against the US, the US wasn't all that interested in terrorism, as shown perfectly by the lack of action taken against those in the US who openly funded the IRA. This applies to both Republican and Democrat administrations. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #39 December 12, 2005 Quote To begin with, I don't support the IRA, but a lot of Irish-Americans were concerned about your 30? year occupation and alleged torture of civilians. Why you are still in Northern Ireland after all these years? Isn't it their country? Why not let them settle their own affairs like others believe we should do in Iraq? I understand that most of the troops will go home in 2006 minus about 6000 staying. Hope we aren't in Iraq for 30 years. Oh, lets not bring that up. Next thing you know people might start asking why the British flat out stole Ireland from the Irish. Heck, people might even start to sympathize with the Irish terrorists. Big can of worms. Want to go fishing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #40 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuote To begin with, I don't support the IRA, but a lot of Irish-Americans were concerned about your 30? year occupation and alleged torture of civilians. Why you are still in Northern Ireland after all these years? Isn't it their country? Why not let them settle their own affairs like others believe we should do in Iraq? I understand that most of the troops will go home in 2006 minus about 6000 staying. Hope we aren't in Iraq for 30 years. Oh, lets not bring that up. Next thing you know people might start asking why the British flat out stole Ireland from the Irish. Heck, people might even start to sympathize with the Irish terrorists. Big can of worms. Want to go fishing? Well, it is a rather current event, but I will cut no more bait. Don't want to hear about the occupation of Texas. edited for bad grammar.Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #41 December 12, 2005 what ever You clearly understand what I meant more than me so I could care less - Bye (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #42 December 12, 2005 QuoteOh, lets not bring that up. Next thing you know people might start asking why the British flat out stole Ireland from the Irish. Heck, people might even start to sympathize with the Irish terrorists. Big can of worms. Want to go fishing? you mean how Israel was stolen from the Palestines and how Iraq is being stolen right now? (just thought I would put some more worms on the hook) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #43 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuoteOh, lets not bring that up. Next thing you know people might start asking why the British flat out stole Ireland from the Irish. Heck, people might even start to sympathize with the Irish terrorists. Big can of worms. Want to go fishing? you mean how Israel was stolen from the Palestines and how Iraq is being stolen right now? How much of the USA is currently owned by "Native Americans" (as opposed to native Americans)? (just thought I would put some more worms on the hook)... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #44 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuoteOh, lets not bring that up. Next thing you know people might start asking why the British flat out stole Ireland from the Irish. Heck, people might even start to sympathize with the Irish terrorists. Big can of worms. Want to go fishing? you mean how Israel was stolen from the Palestines and how Iraq is being stolen right now? (just thought I would put some more worms on the hook) OK I'll bite. How is Iraq being stolen, and by whom? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #45 December 12, 2005 QuoteOK I'll bite. How is Iraq being stolen, and by whom? it has been stolen from the ruler that was in place.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #46 December 12, 2005 QuoteQuoteOK I'll bite. How is Iraq being stolen, and by whom? it has been stolen from the ruler that was in place.... And given to whom? What makes you think the dictator owned the country? Just because he murdered and bullied his way into power he owns Iraq? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
