Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2013, 01:05 PM
 
3,309 posts, read 5,741,975 times
Reputation: 5042

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat View Post
Terrorism: Systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective.

Look, I am all about your freedom to state your opinion, and your entitlement to whatever political beliefs you may have. The problem that I have is that you don't seem very willing to extend the same courtesy to others. Were you at Fort Hood when it happened? Did you know any of the people that were in the Soldier Readiness Processing Center that day? Did you know any of the Law Enforcement Officers that responded? You may have a slightly different opinion if you had.

MAJ Hasan used armed violence to make a political statement. He had ties to a known Al Qaeda operative, Anwar Al-Awlaki.

How Anwar Al-Awlaki Inspired Terror

MAJ Hasan gunned down 13 people in cold blood due to his political beliefs and his opposition to the War on Terror. Of course, I do agree that everyone is innocent until proven guilty by a jury of their peers. But trying to excuse the actions of a known Al Qaeda sympathizer by calling them workplace violence is ridiculous and intellectually dishonest.
I agree. Tried to rep you, but you know how that goes.

 
Old 03-22-2013, 01:05 PM
 
2,206 posts, read 4,726,293 times
Reputation: 2103
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
He's never given a statement as to why he did what he did, and the Army went all through his personal emails so you have no evidence if he had "political objectives". And you linking him to in some nefarious way to Al Awalki is right wing BS. The Army investigated and found NOTHING incriminating.
LOL.

Actually, the investigations of his emails and conversations with other Muslims have shown that Hasan was motivated by violent Jihad. He was in constant contact with Al-Awlaki who was a known Al-quada cleric and organizer.

And witnesses said he was shouting Allahu Akbar when he was doing it.

Fort Hood shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
According to eyewitnesses, Hasan had taken a seat at an empty table and bowed his head for several seconds when he suddenly stood up, shouted "Allahu Akbar!"[21][22] and opened fire.[23] Witnesses said Hasan initially "sprayed bullets at soldiers in a fanlike motion" before taking aim at individual soldiers.[24] Eyewitness Sgt. Michael Davis said: "The rate of fire was pretty much constant shooting. When I initially heard it it sounded like an M16."[25]
and

Quote:
Once, while presenting what was supposed to be a medical lecture to other psychiatrists, Hasan talked about Islam, and said that, according to the Koran, non-believers would be sent to hell, decapitated, set on fire, and have burning oil poured down their throats. A Muslim psychiatrist in the audience raised his hand, and challenged Hasan's claims.[73] According to the Associated Press, Hasan's lecture also "justified suicide bombings."
 
Old 03-22-2013, 01:07 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,933,248 times
Reputation: 4555
tx75007

Sorry, I got to your first assertion that claims Al Awlaki was the "controller" of Hasan and you are not to be taken seriously.

I don't deal with posters that spread clear falsehoods. Goodbye.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/us...uire.html?_r=0
 
Old 03-22-2013, 01:13 PM
 
3,309 posts, read 5,741,975 times
Reputation: 5042
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
He's never given a statement as to why he did what he did, and the Army went all through his personal emails so you have no evidence if he had "political objectives". And you linking him to in some nefarious way to Al Awalki is right wing BS. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/us...uire.html?_r=0 The Army investigated and found NOTHING incriminating.

Furthermore, most 7th graders can understand the difference between causation and justification. 133,000 civilians were killed in Iraq after the US needlessly and immorally invaded that country, so when you live by the sword, you die by the sword. So of course there are going to be Muslims deeply resentful of the US murdering innocents and they will take it out on US targets. Goes with the territory when you meddle in the affairs of other sovereign nations. Deal with it.

OMG Who ARE you?
 
Old 03-22-2013, 01:27 PM
 
2,295 posts, read 2,356,025 times
Reputation: 2668
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
He's never given a statement as to why he did what he did, and the Army went all through his personal emails so you have no evidence if he had "political objectives". And you linking him to in some nefarious way to Al Awlaki is right wing BS. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/us...uire.html?_r=0 The Army investigated and found NOTHING incriminating.

Furthermore, most 7th graders can understand the difference between causation and justification. 133,000 civilians were killed in Iraq after the US needlessly and immorally invaded that country, so when you live by the sword, you die by the sword. So of course there are going to be Muslims deeply resentful of the US murdering innocents and they will take it out on US targets. Goes with the territory when you meddle in the affairs of other sovereign nations. Deal with it.
If you read the link in my earlier post you would have seen that his plan was discussed with and approved by Al Awlaki. Now, if Awlaki was such a great guy, as you infer with your brushing aside of that key point, then why would Obama have approved the drone strike mission to kill him?!

On to your typically liberal distortion of the facts on the ground in Iraq. First, were you ever in Iraq? Do you have first hand knowledge of what happened on the ground there, or do you simply rely on liberal blogs for your "factual" data? Having been there, and knowing what actually happened, I find your comments offensive. You try to make the inference that 133,000 Iraqi civilians were killed by U.S troops. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The U.S. did not ever target innocents, and as a standing rule makes every conceivable effort to avoid any injury to non-combatants, and collateral damage to property and infrastructure. The vast majority of civilian deaths in Iraq were a direct result of sectarian violence. This was a direct result of years of oppression under the brutal Ba'athist regime. Sadam was a Sunni Muslim, and Sunnis comprise the minority in Iraq. He ruthlessly oppressed the Shi'a Muslims and the Kurds in northern Iraq. It doesn't take a career in geopolitical issues to determine there would be some desire for retribution. Add to the already incendiary environment the influence of external forces seeking to destabilize the situation in Iraq for personal gains, like Iran, AQI, Jaish al Mahdi, the Badr Brigades, Hezbollah, etc., and things go from bad to worse in short order. Did the U.S. leadership make mistakes? Sure they did, but U.S. forces never deliberately engaged innocent civilians as you try to infer.

Finally, I really don't need some arrogant, entitled person whose view of the world is crafted only through carefully worded talking points from a select number sources telling me to get over anything.
 
Old 03-22-2013, 01:52 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,933,248 times
Reputation: 4555
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat View Post
If you read the link in my earlier post you would have seen that his plan was discussed with and approved by Al Awlaki. Now, if Awlaki was such a great guy, as you infer with your brushing aside of that key point, then why would Obama have approved the drone strike mission to kill him?!

On to your typically liberal distortion of the facts on the ground in Iraq. First, were you ever in Iraq? Do you have first hand knowledge of what happened on the ground there, or do you simply rely on liberal blogs for your "factual" data? Having been there, and knowing what actually happened, I find your comments offensive. You try to make the inference that 133,000 Iraqi civilians were killed by U.S troops. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The U.S. did not ever target innocents, and as a standing rule makes every conceivable effort to avoid any injury to non-combatants, and collateral damage to property and infrastructure. The vast majority of civilian deaths in Iraq were a direct result of sectarian violence. This was a direct result of years of oppression under the brutal Ba'athist regime. Sadam was a Sunni Muslim, and Sunnis comprise the minority in Iraq. He ruthlessly oppressed the Shi'a Muslims and the Kurds in northern Iraq. It doesn't take a career in geopolitical issues to determine there would be some desire for retribution. Add to the already incendiary environment the influence of external forces seeking to destabilize the situation in Iraq for personal gains, like Iran, AQI, Jaish al Mahdi, the Badr Brigades, Hezbollah, etc., and things go from bad to worse in short order. Did the U.S. leadership make mistakes? Sure they did, but U.S. forces never deliberately engaged innocent civilians as you try to infer.

Finally, I really don't need some arrogant, entitled person whose view of the world is crafted only through carefully worded talking points from a select number sources telling me to get over anything.
I read your link. It does not say that. You are misrepresenting what is says. Here is the link you need to read http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/us...uire.html?_r=0. It offers a detailed explanation of what the Army investigators found and why Hasan was communicating with him. NOTHING incriminating.

I said nothing that would infer Alwaki is a great guy. I'm sorry if you can't handle the truth and must resort to petty insults. Post what I said
that makes you say this?

And why would I need to be in Iraq in order to have knowledge of Iraq? In 2006 Zogby polled the soldiers there and 85% of them thought we were there because Saddam was involved in 911? What a bunch of dumbasses!

Lastly, I never claimed US soldiers killed 133,000 civilians. 133,00 were killed as a result of the US unjustly invading the country.

Last edited by padcrasher; 03-22-2013 at 02:15 PM..
 
Old 03-22-2013, 02:03 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,933,248 times
Reputation: 4555
Here is the poll Zogby did in 2006.

John Zogby: On a New Poll Of U.S. Soldiers During Their Service in Iraq

Nearly nine of every 10 - 85% - said the U.S. mission is "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks,"

Wow! How ignorant can you get?

If you really want to know about the Iraq War, I'd advise NOT to ask a soldier that was there.
 
Old 03-22-2013, 03:02 PM
 
2,295 posts, read 2,356,025 times
Reputation: 2668
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
Here is the poll Zogby did in 2006.

John Zogby: On a New Poll Of U.S. Soldiers During Their Service in Iraq

Nearly nine of every 10 - 85% - said the U.S. mission is "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks,"

Wow! How ignorant can you get?

If you really want to know about the Iraq War, I'd advise NOT to ask a soldier that was there.
And here it is, the inevitable underlying reason for your argument. Bashing Soldiers. You obviously were making the inference that U.S. Soldiers were complicit in the statistic you quoted. Now you resort to calling them dumbasses based on a Zogby poll. I would contend that they have gotten off their collective backsides and done something for their country. What have you done? Anything aside from trying to win hearts and minds through the anonymity afforded by the internet?
 
Old 03-22-2013, 03:40 PM
 
13,186 posts, read 14,933,248 times
Reputation: 4555
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXStrat View Post
And here it is, the inevitable underlying reason for your argument. Bashing Soldiers. You obviously were making the inference that U.S. Soldiers were complicit in the statistic you quoted. Now you resort to calling them dumbasses based on a Zogby poll. I would contend that they have gotten off their collective backsides and done something for their country. What have you done? Anything aside from trying to win hearts and minds through the anonymity afforded by the internet?
It is what it is.

You are the one implying one must be in Iraq in order to be able to offer some informed comment on the war.

Your words:

First, were you ever in Iraq? Do you have first hand knowledge of what happened on the ground there, or do you simply rely on liberal blogs for your "factual" data? Having been there, and knowing what actually happened, I find your comments offensive.

I just posted a poll that shows how absurd that notion is.

And actually I am a veteran, and I sleep well at night knowing that I wasn't indirectly responsible for the needless deaths of US soldiers sent off on this immoral, senseless fiasco. And I'm pretty certain these posters calling for Hassan to be shot with bullets "dipped in pig's blood" are just the type that wrap themselves in the flag and support any war corrupt US politicians call for. You really all should be ashamed for indirectly helping to get our soldiers killed with your right wing, nationalistic nonsense. I tried to stop it from the get go, and I'm proudly liberal, and my conscience is clear!

The posters on this thread pro military? What a sick joke!

Last edited by padcrasher; 03-22-2013 at 03:59 PM..
 
Old 03-22-2013, 04:05 PM
 
2,295 posts, read 2,356,025 times
Reputation: 2668
The overt point of my quote is that someone with years on the ground in Iraq knows more of the situation than some person that read about it on a blog. Take it for what it is. Finally, I don't think that I said anything overtly conservative or nationalistic. I simply corrected some of your allegations. I am also a veteran and sleep just as soundly knowing I never did anything even remotely questionable. Again, you are more than welcome to your own opinions, but not your own facts or thinly veiled accusations.
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.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top