Israeli-Palestinian conflict (82 Viewers)

Is Hamas a Terrorist Organization?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Should there be a Jewish nation SOMEWHERE in the world?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Should Israel be a country located in the region it is right now?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
what do you guys think about Egypt building the wall between itself and Gazza (that blocks all underground tunnels)?
Im just waiting for the day Mubarak is off the political stage once and for all.


And Bisco don't tell me this isn't the place to discuss him :D
 

Bisco

Senior Member
Nov 21, 2005
14,389
Im just waiting for the day Mubarak is off the political stage once and for all.


And Bisco don't tell me this isn't the place to discuss him :D
no i wont, the other time i told u so bec it was a footie thread :D besides there it was abit out of context too bec not supporting a footie team bec of one person is'nt quite right not to mention i was waaaaaaaaaaaay too pissed off :snoop: . here its all politics so every one is free to express his feelings. :beer:
 

Bisco

Senior Member
Nov 21, 2005
14,389
what do you guys think about Egypt building the wall between itself and Gazza (that blocks all underground tunnels)?
i dont know to be honest, i think if they r going to do this some one has to come out and explain the reasons as to why these tunnels are crucial for our national security, not to mention i have a feeling this has alot to do with the bombings that toke place in sharm a couple of years ago. the problem with here is they exclude us from the picture they dont tell people whats going on until a catastrophe occurs.
how a bout you snake midget?? what do u make out of all this??
 

Omair

Herticity
Sep 27, 2006
3,254
Im just waiting for the day Mubarak is off the political stage once and for all.


And Bisco don't tell me this isn't the place to discuss him :D
ارضى بقردك لا يجيك اقرد منو

lol .. who's gonna come instead? Jamal? seriously? any candidate is good enough anyway? I'm not much into Egyptian politics I only occasionally listen to Mubarak or Abo Alghait .. but they never said something I 100% agree with ..

I don't expect some radical change to happen. Do you, JBF and Bisco?
 

Bisco

Senior Member
Nov 21, 2005
14,389
ارضى بقردك لا يجيك اقرد منو

lol .. who's gonna come instead? Jamal? seriously? any candidate is good enough anyway? I'm not much into Egyptian politics I only occasionally listen to Mubarak or Abo Alghait .. but they never said something I 100% agree with ..

I don't expect some radical change to happen. Do you, JBF and Bisco?
not really, i think its going to be the same. i personally dont like abu alghait he does'nt convince u he is a diplomat instead he is more like those street sellers if u get the picture.
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
no i wont, the other time i told u so bec it was a footie thread :D besides there it was abit out of context too bec not supporting a footie team bec of one person is'nt quite right not to mention i was waaaaaaaaaaaay too pissed off :snoop: . here its all politics so every one is free to express his feelings. :beer:
You're right that was totally inapropriat from my side and that's why I kept my mouth shut :)
But believe me man I was on nobody's side that night, I was only happy when the Algerian fans waved that giant Palestinian flag :touched:


And just so as to stay on topic, Fuck Mubarak :turk:
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
ارضى بقردك لا يجيك اقرد منو

lol .. who's gonna come instead? Jamal? seriously? any candidate is good enough anyway? I'm not much into Egyptian politics I only occasionally listen to Mubarak or Abo Alghait .. but they never said something I 100% agree with ..

I don't expect some radical change to happen. Do you, JBF and Bisco?
I only expect a change if one of those "keefaya" guys came to the presidental sweet :D

But that will never happen, so I guess my answer is a big fat No.
Neither Korea nor Japan employed suicide bombing to kill US soldiers.
Now here's a History lesson for you bro :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
That's not a suicide bomber dipshit. Kamikaze was completely different. And it certainly didn't occur during the US occupation of Japan, after the war.
:lol:
This just shows how ignorant you are, a fucking pilot running his plane into a god damn ship while previously having a retual, aint a suicide attack how the hell did you get this conclusion?


And it did happen while the war was on, coz after the war Japan had already surrendered to the Allies or actually in was the US alone in this war.

Get your fact staight pall.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
111,701
The Kamikaze was used to destroy a battleship's capacity to do their job, as in conduct communications, bring down opposition aircraft, or sink opposing vessels. It was not intended to kill innocent people in your local cafe, nor was it the first option in battle. The Kamikaze was generally the last option.

Much, much different from suicide bombers who's only course of action is to blow themselves up along with civilians.
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
The Kamikaze was used to destroy a battleship's capacity to do their job, as in conduct communications, bring down opposition aircraft, or sink opposing vessels. It was not intended to kill innocent people in your local cafe, nor was it the first option in battle. The Kamikaze was generally the last option.

Much, much different from suicide bombers who's only course of action is to blow themselves up along with civilians.
Once again, Im talking about suicide attacks on US soldiers with regards to that attack on the CIA agents in Afghanistan. No civilians were there and they certainly weren't in a cafe.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
111,701
Once again, Im talking about suicide attacks on US soldiers with regards to that attack on the CIA agents in Afghanistan. No civilians was there and they certainly weren't in a cafe.
Still not the same thing. The Kamikaze was used for vessels or edifices, not to wipe out soldiers. The supposed "hero" who took his own life to take out some CIA folk used the idiocy as his first plan of attack.

And some people wonder why groups who use such methods will never win the war they're partaking in. Can't say enough about the intelligence of wiping out your own crew in attacks. :sergio:
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
Still not the same thing. The Kamikaze was used for vessels or edifices, not to wipe out soldiers. The supposed "hero" who took his own life to take out some CIA folk used the idiocy as his first plan of attack.

And some people wonder why groups who use such methods will never win the war they're partaking in. Can't say enough about the intelligence of wiping out your own crew in attacks. :sergio:
His idiocity as first plan huh, you tell that to the supposedly secuirity forces outside the base that consists of about 5 road blocks and two searching units for weapons and explosives.

Well the Kamikaze was effective as in total it caused the US to use weapons of mass destruction to defeat the Japanese, and according to US numbers those attacks caused:
80 destroyed war ships and killed 4,900 sailors, and wounded over 4,800.

So it was damn effective just like those so called idiotic bombings is gonna cause you yet another defeat in a foreign country.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
111,701
His idiocity as first plan huh, you tell that to the supposedly secuirity forces out of the base that consists of about 5 road blocks and two searching units for weapons a explosives.

Well the Kamikaze was effective as in total it caused the US to use weapons of mass destruction to defeat the Japanese, and according to US numbers those attacks caused:
80 destroyed war ships and killed 4,900 sailors, and wounded over 4,800.

So it was damn effective just like those so called idiotic bombings is gonna cause you yet another defeat in a foreign country.
If you knew anything about the situation in Afghanistan, you would not attribute a possible US loss of the war to suicide bombings.

But as such, you're most likely trying to defend the idiotic concept of "martyrdom" here, and I don't really have any care to discuss such moronic beliefs.
 

JBF

اختك يا زمن
Aug 5, 2006
18,451
If you knew anything about the situation in Afghanistan, you would not attribute a possible US loss of the war to suicide bombings.

But as such, you're most likely trying to defend the idiotic concept of "martyrdom" here, and I don't really have any care to discuss such moronic beliefs.
Im not saying that the war will be won by suicide bombing, Im just saying that its having a great effect in causing this defeat that IMO is more predictable than ever.

And whenever you don't feel like not discussing the Afghan way of confronting their enemy, you can just blow up Afghanistan as it must be the only way to make peace in that desturbed area of the world for over 60 years.
 

Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,253
:lol:
This just shows how ignorant you are, a fucking pilot running his plane into a god damn ship while previously having a retual, aint a suicide attack how the hell did you get this conclusion?


And it did happen while the war was on, coz after the war Japan had already surrendered to the Allies or actually in was the US alone in this war.

Get your fact staight pall.
Do some reading about Kamikazi pilots and you'll find the reasons behind them are completely different than what you are trying to parallel. I could explain it to you, but you won't get it. Here's a hint chief, it stems from the remains of Samari code that were still inveloped in the culture of WWII Japan. The suicide wasn't intended to kill American troops, but to sacrifice one's self for the Emperor, usually to redeem some sort of disgrace. This is a similar reason that thousands of Japanese killed themselves at Saipan and Iwo Jima. If you've been paying attention you should realize that this has nothing to do with your original post.

My fact is straight pall. You are simply a fucktard.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 72)