Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sounds like the effects of crack, ice or anything cocaine driven.
I don't know how or why someone would want to stay awake for days.
Between the drug and sleep deprivation, no wonder they are so brutal.
Too bad they don't frigging OD with a bursting of their soulless hearts.
Along with these men being raped sense they were 9 yrs old.......and people want these people here! I'd say, even the Christians they are wanting here, may not be as Christian as many are pushing they are.
And no evidence of any weapons was ever found, and Bush and Cheyney insisted we have to go NOW, sorry to me going in before any reason to go in is established is rushing in. There were plenty of us against it and no one debated it, they just bullied over us calling us unpatriotic. There was never any real debate, Bush knew he wanted to invade even before 9/11 IMO, that just gave him the excuse and it scared the American people enough to stupidly believe rhetoric versus facts, and I see the same aimless fear here causing people to want to do anything, right now, even if it causes more harm than good.
If I believed invading any country would increase our safety that would be one thing, but I don't.
I would love to see forum posts from that period because I would gamble the rhetoric and arguments to invade is pretty identical to this thread.
You seem to be forgetting Pelosi and Feinstein where telling Bush "all was true" and we did need to invade. Wonder why this is never discussed?
Really ? I thought it had something to do with marrying their first cousins.
So much for their we don't drink and do drugs theory.......amazing how these people try to pretend they are "holy" and the rest of us are the "sinners"
Along with the sex they have before they go on a killing spree......these people are whacked. They can have drugs and sexual pleasure, while they rob their own women of basic life.
Sounds like America needs more young drugged up men with no work experience!
Let's see, you recruit from alienated and disaffected youth, promise them status, give them free reign to act out their most destructive impulses, wrap the whole macabre package with a cloak of religious authority and throw in a dose of meth on top of it all that and folks are surprised what results.
Let's see, you recruit from alienated and disaffected youth, promise them status, give them free reign to act out their most destructive impulses, wrap the whole macabre package with a cloak of religious authority and throw in a dose of meth on top of it all that and folks are surprised what results.
You said a mouthful, my friend. They're no different from the Nazis (who really were taking meth, not Captagon).
You seem to be forgetting Pelosi and Feinstein where telling Bush "all was true" and we did need to invade. Wonder why this is never discussed?
Cause they weren't the "deciders", as Bush himself liked to call himself. I am also resentful that Hilary voted yes, though, if that makes you feel better. But politically, the climate was much like now, and anyone going against the grain and the rush to war was considered a traitor. Politicians being politicians, they don't always adhere to their values in the face of public backlash, that goes for both parties.
The point is, let's not repeat the same mistake again based on fear and the desire for some simple and swift conclusion, which is not going to happen no matter what we do. Look at all the people here saying "let's just do ____ or____" like it's so simple, but it's not and neither will the solution be simple.
US soliders sometimes use amphetamines during missons. College students abuse them for long study sessions. Not conding them, but they don't fuel madness
The real problem isn't individual fanatics with conventional weapons; they might inflict a lot of damage in individual actions, but they can be identified and liquidated: the real problem is the possibility of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of the leader of a rogue state. Iran and North Korea obviously qualify, and the strengthening of terrorist organizations such as ISIS, Hamas and Hezbollah ought to give any forward-thinking Western leader reason for concern. The stuff that rolls downhill also sticks together.
Weapons of mass destructions refer to a wide range of weapons; most chemical and biological weapons aren't really more threatening than conventional weapons and often are liable to damage those releasing the weapons. Nuclear weapons are different; ISIS holding a nuclear weapon is a nightmare-ish situation. North Korea has had nuclear weapons for over a decade now. A state even a rogue state can be negotiated with and deterred. A terrorist organization like ISIS can't.
I'm looking forward to the new round of terrorist movies where the characters are constantly looking for their next round of kill drugs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
