What would you do?

they've proved that iraq has links to al queda, but not that they were involved with 9/11. though it wouldn't suprise me if they were
 
Originally posted by Ripper
It's not needless. The world needs to be shown that destroying two of our largest buildings and killing thousands of our civilians will be met with devastating response, no matter how small their connection to it. Just going down the list of countries that thought that was O.K. Don't have to get them in any particular order, as long as we get them.
Click to expand...
No. Would be terrorists need to be shown that no terrorist action is going to be tolerated in ANY country. NOT just the US.
 
Not a problem. Too bad there are so many who think that we can work things out peacefully with them.
 
Could someone please explain to me why the debate on terrorism has also polluted this forum? I was under the optimistic impression that we were keeping it contained in the Off-topic Zone.
 
Originally posted by Ripper
Not a problem. Too bad there are so many who think that we can work things out peacefully with them.
Click to expand...
A totally peaceful resolution is not going to happen but we don't need to go all gungho and just bomb everyone. Besides the problem runs much deeper than that. Blowing up the current terrorists isn't going to top future terrorism.
 
Well, OK. But we can minimise the influence of those wacky over zealous types so that terrorism is no longer a real threat. This does not involve blowing things up.
 
Originally posted by steampunk
Neither is getting blow up by some wacko or contracting anthrax from your own mailbox.
Click to expand...

Now, who said we want to get blown up by some wacko or contract anthrax?
 
Fun is subjective. They arrested a guy last year for hiding in the woods under planks covered in leaves, wanting to get run over by ATVs and such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top