Forum    News    Downloads    Saved Games


New Outlook On The War In Iraq

<<

BKFraiders7

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 4248

Joined: January 23 2010

Location: On COD:BO2 iPhone User:5 Mac User: Macbook Pro Mtn Lion

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 31 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

crait wrote:No. That is a lie.
The only thing differentiating an "enemy" and a "civilian" is if they are holding a gun in their hand at the time. You still have not disproved this theory by saying "that is a lie"
crait wrote:Innocent people are like you and I, except in a different location.

I back the United States 100% and even though I dont hold a gun in my hand I am still considered an enemy because I do not support the views of the incoming attackers. So no, you and I would not be innocent if a foreign nation came and invaded our home country.

crait wrote:You're fine with innocent people dying as long as they aren't related to you.
What if your family was the family that died or even you????!!

If a relative of mine died in a war with an enemy country then Id know they went down with honor defending our homeland. But once again my idea still stands that there is no way to tell if 20 of them will enlist the next day and kill 20 of our citizens.
crait wrote:You would never, and should never, accept innocent people being murdered!

Murder and killing in a war are two totally different things. A declaration of war was passed and both nations were notified before one single militant was let loose. Both countries knew there would be casualties with both excepting them. Its the rules of war. Sad to say, but your logic is why many nations feel the United States as a whole is so weak. Too soft. Too insecure. That ideology of us is going to get us all killed someday.

crait wrote:If you're fine with them being murdered, then you're suggesting that you wouldn't mind taking their place.

No because I dont share in their beliefs, have their ideologies,support their governmental style, or would participate in their culture. That was a really stupid point to make actually..


Im guessing you dont support the bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well? Those saved an estimated 500,000+ American lives. This is doing the exact same thing

Lord, I pray the American people, American government, and the Nation as a whole regains the backbone that got us in the world to where we are today. That the American people as well as other nations know this is the land of the free, home of the braves, and, above all, your nation in part because of the sacrifices that had to be made along the way. Let us not forget.. amen
Watch me stream on MIXER or follow on Youtube at ChA0TiCxDR3AMS

Image Image
<<

crait

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 6488

Joined: August 11 2006

Location: Narnia!

Thanks given: 195 times

Thanks received: 50 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 3:47 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

OH BROTHER! There is so much fail in that post...
We are not at war against Iraq. We are having a war within Iraq.
Innocent people include children as young as a month old!!
They can't pick up a gun and defend themselves from either side.

BKFraiders7 wrote:
crait wrote:No. That is a lie.
The only thing differentiating an "enemy" and a "civilian" is if they are holding a gun in their hand at the time. You still have not disproved this theory by saying "that is a lie"

I don't even know why you keep saying this. I don't understand. If you are in a battle and you see someone with a gun, yes! Shoot them! Because, they're going to shoot you. Now, the yellow in this graph is not people with guns. They would be considered enemies, and make up the grey area.
If you're implying that we're killing enemies before they have a chance to grab a gun and we're counting them as civilians, then you're gravely mistaken.
Children are dying in this war and that is completely unacceptable by my standards. If retards want to go and kill other people in other countries because some baboon told them that we would all die if we didn't, then that's their problem, but don't get innocent people involved in it.
You cannot tell me that everyone deserved to die or it was for the greater good. Killing kids is never for the greater good. Killing anyone is bad.

BKFraiders7 wrote:
crait wrote:Innocent people are like you and I, except in a different location.

I back the United States 100% and even though I dont hold a gun in my hand I am still considered an enemy because I do not support the views of the incoming attackers. So no, you and I would not be innocent if a foreign nation came and invaded our home country.

If you or your son, if you had one, were invaded and killed for no reason, you'd be an innocent casualty. I don't understand why that's hard to understand. You're saying that everyone in Iraq is our enemy?! That's retarded!!
Alright, I know that was exaggerated, but if you're saying that we invade their country and everyone is an enemy, then you're wrong. There are so many women and children that die, weekly, because of this senseless war and it needs to stop. You cannot defend innocent people getting murdered.

BKFraiders7 wrote:
crait wrote:You're fine with innocent people dying as long as they aren't related to you.
What if your family was the family that died or even you????!!

If a relative of mine died in a war with an enemy country then Id know they went down with honor defending our homeland. But once again my idea still stands that there is no way to tell if 20 of them will enlist the next day and kill 20 of our citizens.

WHAT?! No, no, no. What if your son died who is 3 because of random troops' gunshots?! There is no way a 3-year-old's life if going to be an honorable death. You're talking about if your family was fighting. I'm saying if you or your family are just in your home, randomly, and people kill you. You wouldn't want that. There's no way you can convince me or anyone else that your 3-year-old son will be something you would give up, not for your country, but to the enemy.
That's not honor. That's stubbornness. Whenever you know something is wrong, and you act like everything will be okay. It won't. Hundreds of 3, 4, and 5-year-olds have died in this war, without being on a side or even understanding what people are fighting for.

BKFraiders7 wrote:
crait wrote:You would never, and should never, accept innocent people being murdered!

Murder and killing in a war are two totally different things.

No, they are the same if you're killing innocent people who want nothing to do with the war. What about infants? Are they murdered when they are gunned down by soldiers? Or are they killed by the hand of justice so that we can all sleep peacefully at night?
BKFraiders7 wrote:A declaration of war was passed and both nations were notified before one single militant was let loose. Both countries knew there would be casualties with both excepting them. Its the rules of war. Sad to say, but your logic is why many nations feel the United States as a whole is so weak. Too soft. Too insecure. That ideology of us is going to get us all killed someday.

WE ARE NOT AT WAR WITH IRAQ!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is seriously the most stupidest thing I've ever read in my life!!
This is the war on terrorism. We are supposed to be killing terrorists that are threats to America. Maybe if you knew Iraq wasn't our enemies, you wouldn't act like anyone in that country that dies is a death to support our freedom.
No one thinks America is too soft. The world does not think we are too soft. The world thinks, and knows, that we are retarded for listening to Bush. There was no evidence linking Iraq to 9/11. If anything, we should have invaded Saudi Arabia because that's were nearly all of the 'hi-jackers' come from.
Who is going to kill us? Your ideology is what is going to destroy us. We will destroy ourselves.

BKFraiders7 wrote:
crait wrote:If you're fine with them being murdered, then you're suggesting that you wouldn't mind taking their place.

No because I dont share in their beliefs, have their ideologies,support their governmental style, or would participate in their culture. That was a really stupid point to make actually..

Do you think that innocent children support or even understand their government?
You think 2-year-olds care about the government?!?!
We are not at war against their beliefs.
We are not at war against their ideologies.
We are not against their governing style.
We are not against their culture!
We are not at war against their religion!
We are not even at war against Iraq!!
We're trying to find and kill terrorists, no matter what country they're in.
We're trying to find and kill terrorists, no matter their political view, religious view, culture, ideology, or anything else. We're supposed to be killing bad people. Not children. Not innocent people.

BKFraiders7 wrote:Im guessing you dont support the bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well? Those saved an estimated 500,000+ American lives. This is doing the exact same thing

OF COURSE I DON'T!! Why did we have to kill entire cities?! WE DIDN'T!!!
We didn't save anyone by doing that. We killed many, many, many innocent people!
Those bombings were attacks specifically designed to kill innocent people!!

BKFraiders7 wrote:Lord, I pray the American people, American government, and the Nation as a whole regains the backbone that got us in the world to where we are today. That the American people as well as other nations know this is the land of the free, home of the braves, and, above all, your nation in part because of the sacrifices that had to be made along the way. Let us not forget.. amen

Do you even know why we are in Iraq? Or even still in Iraq?!
Weapons of mass destruction? Sure... They totally have them. That's why many, many soldiers have illegally quit the military and fled to Canada: Because the government lied to you and you still will defend that lie. I'm not saying being patriotic is bad- I'm saying that defending bad people in power is bad. America is supposed to be the best country in the world and whenever people like Bush have too much power, they destroy her name.




BKFraiders7 wrote:
que13x wrote:OH I forgot to mention, the foreign country that invaded us also disbanded our military, because that is what we did to them.

Then they won? Were just rebels then in their land. But beside that, which country could totally disable our military right now? Thank the Lord for our Army

Good thing our soldiers were lied to so that they would join! They were afraid and were told what to do. They were terrorized by the threats of what would happen if they didn't join. They were threatened into doing something that they didn't want to do. That sounds like terrorism to me.
Now, do you see who is the terrorist?
<<

BKFraiders7

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 4248

Joined: January 23 2010

Location: On COD:BO2 iPhone User:5 Mac User: Macbook Pro Mtn Lion

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 31 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

This is the reason I generally try to stay out of discussions. You cant have one stupid little debate on this forum without someone either A. flaming. B. Taking what people say wayyyy outa context. or (majority) C. Making insults to a persons intelligence rather then counter them.

No one on this forum said we were at a war with Iraq. I dont know how you got the assumption I was even talking about Iraq or even Afghanistan. I never said we were in a war with Iraq. Go back and check your facts.

-BKF Out-
Watch me stream on MIXER or follow on Youtube at ChA0TiCxDR3AMS

Image Image
<<

ace

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 5007

Joined: May 12 2007

Location: bat cave Firmware: iXtreme 1.7

Thanks given: 10 times

Thanks received: 29 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:42 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

crait wrote:
ace wrote:
crait wrote:Why would they kill people of their own country? It's 90% or more our faults. Yes, there have been some suicide bombings, but we are the main factor. We hit targets because we think the area may have so-and-so in it and they aren't there. We just blow up stuff and kill innocent people, like diehard said, because we're good at it.


I'd like to see some proof of that. Granted they do hide behind their citizens in order to stop us from attacking, which obviously doesn't work. But why would they not attack Iraqi civilians? Well particularly the ones that agree with what we are doing, and support a new government system and all that jazz. Or what about the "infidels" in their own country? Or even to strike fear in the people, after all that is a method of controlling the people.

Innocent people should never be murdered. Whenever we invaded an innocent country, we caused these people to be put into this situation. 100% is more than 90%.
Go to CNN. I bet 24/7, no matter when you go, one of the top articles are talking about innocent people dying in Iraq. Oh, sorry. Not all the time. Not when Tiger Woods or someone is cheating on his wife.
I do not support murder.


I'm not sure how that remotely answered my question, but whatever. I went and visited cnn's site real quick and the only thing I saw without looking very hard was this: http://insidethemiddleeast.blogs.cnn.co ... day-after/
AQ attacking their own civilians, thats why I'm asking what proof do you have that we killed all these civilians? Or are you just guessing because someone told you that? Of course I think civilians dying during a war sucks, but it's war what do you expect? You can't win a war by not supporting murder.

Btw when I said "they" everytime I meant "terrorists".
Image
It's not the religion that causes wars, it's the men who use religion as a means to control people that do.
They call me tater salad.
<<

crait

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 6488

Joined: August 11 2006

Location: Narnia!

Thanks given: 195 times

Thanks received: 50 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:01 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

ace wrote:
crait wrote:
ace wrote:I'd like to see some proof of that. Granted they do hide behind their citizens in order to stop us from attacking, which obviously doesn't work. But why would they not attack Iraqi civilians? Well particularly the ones that agree with what we are doing, and support a new government system and all that jazz. Or what about the "infidels" in their own country? Or even to strike fear in the people, after all that is a method of controlling the people.

Innocent people should never be murdered. Whenever we invaded an innocent country, we caused these people to be put into this situation. 100% is more than 90%.
Go to CNN. I bet 24/7, no matter when you go, one of the top articles are talking about innocent people dying in Iraq. Oh, sorry. Not all the time. Not when Tiger Woods or someone is cheating on his wife.
I do not support murder.


I'm not sure how that remotely answered my question, but whatever. I went and visited cnn's site real quick and the only thing I saw without looking very hard was this: http://insidethemiddleeast.blogs.cnn.co ... day-after/
AQ attacking their own civilians, thats why I'm asking what proof do you have that we killed all these civilians? Or are you just guessing because someone told you that? Of course I think civilians dying during a war sucks, but it's war what do you expect? You can't win a war by not supporting murder.

Btw when I said "they" everytime I meant "terrorists".

I understand that you're talking about terrorists and not Iraqis.
There are a lot of Iraqis that are killed by terrorists and the US, alike. So, when you state, "You can't win a war," I've got to say back that I don't think we should even have a war! Winning is not something that I care about. It's never a winning war whenever this many civilians lose their life.
I don't want to say, "Yes! We won the war in Iraq! Now, only a forth of their population remains!"
That's unrealistic and definitely not a win for us.

Now, the link that I'm going to send you may shock you. I'm glad that you understand that this is a war on terrorism, and not on Iraq.
"January 13, 2006: Damadola airstrike kills 18 civilians in Bajaur area but misses Ayman al-Zawahri."
"October 30, 2006 Chenagai airstrike allegedly aimed at Ayman al-Zawahridestroys a madrassa in Bajaur area and kills 70-80 civilians."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan
We've been attacking people in Pakistan, and killing a lot of people who do not deserve to die.
The latest one posted was November. It's sad that we kill so many people like this, and think how many of these people that we're targetting and not reporting because of the secrecy involved.

I'm surprised your brought up that link. I thought you would post this: http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/1 ... l?hpt=Sbin
Doesn't say who was killed but does say that civillians were involved and it also states that the Taliban leaders tell their troops to "avoid civilian casualties."




BKFraiders7 wrote:This is the reason I generally try to stay out of discussions. You cant have one stupid little debate on this forum without someone either A. flaming. B. Taking what people say wayyyy outa context. or (majority) C. Making insults to a persons intelligence rather then counter them.

Sorry if I seem like a troll or flaming or something, I'm just trying to stress that murder is wrong.

BKFraiders7 wrote:No one on this forum said we were at a war with Iraq. I dont know how you got the assumption I was even talking about Iraq or even Afghanistan. I never said we were in a war with Iraq. Go back and check your facts.

You actually did.
BKFraiders7 wrote:A declaration of war was passed and both nations..

I don't think that Al-Queda or the Taliban are nations and besides, look at this topic title.


This is why we cannot debate on this site... Because people just stop reading the posts. I cover every single point you bring up and show you why you are wrong and you just leave. Not fair to anyone.
<<

DarkPacMan77

User avatar

Brewology Moderator
Brewology Moderator

Posts: 6205

Joined: January 10 2007

Location: Pac Land

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 18 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:01 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

When people learn that the term "terrorists" of our current generation reflects the word "communists" from our parents' generation, we will be free. The answer to 1984 is 1776.

-DarkPacMan77-
Image
D3ViLsAdvocate wrote:Try shaking the salt harder onto your tongue.
<<

BKFraiders7

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 4248

Joined: January 23 2010

Location: On COD:BO2 iPhone User:5 Mac User: Macbook Pro Mtn Lion

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 31 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:24 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

crait wrote:
BKFraiders7 wrote:No one on this forum said we were at a war with Iraq. I dont know how you got the assumption I was even talking about Iraq or even Afghanistan. I never said we were in a war with Iraq. Go back and check your facts.

You actually did.
BKFraiders7 wrote:A declaration of war was passed and both nations..

I don't think that Al-Queda or the Taliban are nations and besides, look at this topic title.


Ah my apologies on that subject then. I know were at war on terror not Iraq in particular. But still, the Taliban and the US both knew we are at war with each other with a declaration war (albeit not on paper) was passed.
Watch me stream on MIXER or follow on Youtube at ChA0TiCxDR3AMS

Image Image
<<

DarkPacMan77

User avatar

Brewology Moderator
Brewology Moderator

Posts: 6205

Joined: January 10 2007

Location: Pac Land

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 18 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:38 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

When was a declaration of war signed?

-DarkPacMan77-
Image
D3ViLsAdvocate wrote:Try shaking the salt harder onto your tongue.
<<

BKFraiders7

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 4248

Joined: January 23 2010

Location: On COD:BO2 iPhone User:5 Mac User: Macbook Pro Mtn Lion

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 31 times

Post Mon Nov 15, 2010 6:21 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

DarkPacMan77 wrote:When was a declaration of war signed?

-DarkPacMan77-


Who said it was?
Watch me stream on MIXER or follow on Youtube at ChA0TiCxDR3AMS

Image Image
<<

ace

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 5007

Joined: May 12 2007

Location: bat cave Firmware: iXtreme 1.7

Thanks given: 10 times

Thanks received: 29 times

Post Tue Nov 16, 2010 6:23 am

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

crait wrote:
ace wrote:
crait wrote:Innocent people should never be murdered. Whenever we invaded an innocent country, we caused these people to be put into this situation. 100% is more than 90%.
Go to CNN. I bet 24/7, no matter when you go, one of the top articles are talking about innocent people dying in Iraq. Oh, sorry. Not all the time. Not when Tiger Woods or someone is cheating on his wife.
I do not support murder.


I'm not sure how that remotely answered my question, but whatever. I went and visited cnn's site real quick and the only thing I saw without looking very hard was this: http://insidethemiddleeast.blogs.cnn.co ... day-after/
AQ attacking their own civilians, thats why I'm asking what proof do you have that we killed all these civilians? Or are you just guessing because someone told you that? Of course I think civilians dying during a war sucks, but it's war what do you expect? You can't win a war by not supporting murder.

Btw when I said "they" everytime I meant "terrorists".

I understand that you're talking about terrorists and not Iraqis.
There are a lot of Iraqis that are killed by terrorists and the US, alike. So, when you state, "You can't win a war," I've got to say back that I don't think we should even have a war! Winning is not something that I care about. It's never a winning war whenever this many civilians lose their life.
I don't want to say, "Yes! We won the war in Iraq! Now, only a forth of their population remains!"
That's unrealistic and definitely not a win for us.

Now, the link that I'm going to send you may shock you. I'm glad that you understand that this is a war on terrorism, and not on Iraq.
"January 13, 2006: Damadola airstrike kills 18 civilians in Bajaur area but misses Ayman al-Zawahri."
"October 30, 2006 Chenagai airstrike allegedly aimed at Ayman al-Zawahridestroys a madrassa in Bajaur area and kills 70-80 civilians."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan
We've been attacking people in Pakistan, and killing a lot of people who do not deserve to die.
The latest one posted was November. It's sad that we kill so many people like this, and think how many of these people that we're targetting and not reporting because of the secrecy involved.

I'm surprised your brought up that link. I thought you would post this: http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/1 ... l?hpt=Sbin
Doesn't say who was killed but does say that civillians were involved and it also states that the Taliban leaders tell their troops to "avoid civilian casualties."


Yea I just picked a random link looking through the news articles. Although I'm sure you would care about "winning the war" if they bombed a church that all of your family members attended. But civilian causalities caused by both sides happens in every war, and there will always be war. I'd feel a little better about it though if we were actually defending ourselves instead of just going out and looking for high value targets. But at the same time you made it sound like all of those civilian deaths were caused by us, which I just don't feel to be true.

I'm curious though, do you not agree with the US's involvement in WWII?
Image
It's not the religion that causes wars, it's the men who use religion as a means to control people that do.
They call me tater salad.
<<

The Cookie Monster

User avatar

Brew Guru
Brew Guru

Posts: 2744

Joined: August 29 2009

Location: Narnia

Thanks given: 9 times

Thanks received: 54 times

Post Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:52 am

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

ace wrote:Yea I just picked a random link looking through the news articles. Although I'm sure you would care about "winning the war" if they bombed a church that all of your family members attended. But civilian causalities caused by both sides happens in every war, and there will always be war. I'd feel a little better about it though if we were actually defending ourselves instead of just going out and looking for high value targets. But at the same time you made it sound like all of those civilian deaths were caused by us, which I just don't feel to be true.

I'm curious though, do you not agree with the US's involvement in WWII?


most are, some aren't...

and ace, there won't always be war, we just have to wait for what happened in equilibrium to happen in real :P
-Formerly DCM
Image
Image
<<

irishdragon85

User avatar

Experienced Brewer
Experienced Brewer

Posts: 397

Joined: November 13 2010

Location: Alabama

Thanks given: 16 times

Thanks received: 7 times

Post Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:13 am

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

Da Cool Man wrote:
ace wrote:Yea I just picked a random link looking through the news articles. Although I'm sure you would care about "winning the war" if they bombed a church that all of your family members attended. But civilian causalities caused by both sides happens in every war, and there will always be war. I'd feel a little better about it though if we were actually defending ourselves instead of just going out and looking for high value targets. But at the same time you made it sound like all of those civilian deaths were caused by us, which I just don't feel to be true.

I'm curious though, do you not agree with the US's involvement in WWII?


most are, some aren't...

and ace, there won't always be war, we just have to wait for what happened in equilibrium to happen in real :P

i disagree there will always be war its human nature we are a vain species think about it like this lets say Brazil has a resource we want but they aint willing to share with a contract or anything then the United States will find some reason to invade for said resource its in our DNA
Image
<<

crait

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 6488

Joined: August 11 2006

Location: Narnia!

Thanks given: 195 times

Thanks received: 50 times

Post Tue Nov 16, 2010 1:10 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

ace wrote:Yea I just picked a random link looking through the news articles. Although I'm sure you would care about "winning the war" if they bombed a church that all of your family members attended. But civilian causalities caused by both sides happens in every war, and there will always be war. I'd feel a little better about it though if we were actually defending ourselves instead of just going out and looking for high value targets. But at the same time you made it sound like all of those civilian deaths were caused by us, which I just don't feel to be true.

I know they weren't all by us, but if we hadn't gone over there in the first place, almost all of those deaths could have been prevented. Why were we over there in the first place? WMD's? It was the home of our terrorist enemies? They attacked us on 9/11? None of those reasons.
That's why I see the deaths of people in Iraq as preventable.

ace wrote:I'm curious though, do you not agree with the US's involvement in WWII?

This is a trick question. I believe that the government wanted us to go to war, but they didn't stage the events at Pearl Harbor. I believe that because England was the only source of news from Europe and they wanted us to enter the war, they manipulated the news that we received. But, it wasn't a conspiracy.
It's hard to tell and make up my mind, but for the most part, yes, I do.
<<

BKFraiders7

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 4248

Joined: January 23 2010

Location: On COD:BO2 iPhone User:5 Mac User: Macbook Pro Mtn Lion

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 31 times

Post Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:16 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

I believe the Country started go "downhill" when we gained the Super Power title. Because of this, we are more involved in European affairs instead of our homeland. What got us to where we were in the 1900's was the sheer fact that we literally fed off European wars. When European powers went to war they needed a reliable resource manufacturer (away from the war hint hint) that could supply the resources promptly. Who better than another Power not close to the War a hemisphere away? The US gained its power, and in essence is losing its power, because of conflicts in Europe. World War I and World War II were horrible nightmarish things and some of the darkest times in Human History...but it literally projected us to the top of the totem pole with a LOT of room underneath.

This really has nothing to do with this topic :)
Watch me stream on MIXER or follow on Youtube at ChA0TiCxDR3AMS

Image Image
<<

DarkPacMan77

User avatar

Brewology Moderator
Brewology Moderator

Posts: 6205

Joined: January 10 2007

Location: Pac Land

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 18 times

Post Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:40 pm

Re: New Outlook On The War In Iraq

BKFraiders7 wrote:
DarkPacMan77 wrote:When was a declaration of war signed?

-DarkPacMan77-


Who said it was?


LOL you just did in the post above my last one... didn't you? I mean, you said not on paper but to my knowledge there's been no declaration other than to say "the war on terrorism".

-DarkPacMan77-
Image
D3ViLsAdvocate wrote:Try shaking the salt harder onto your tongue.
PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 319 guests

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by ST Software for blacklist.org.