English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

this is for everyone, but especially for liberals, if by some weird freak accident the USA were to get attacked on our own soil (again) by Islamic extremist would you take up arms and fight to the death to save your family and friends or would you convert to Islam to save your own A**?

2006-12-29 08:52:36 · 9 answers · asked by hairpoor 2 in News & Events Current Events

9 answers

I do whatever I'd have to--even save a liberal maybe.

2006-12-29 08:55:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

non-violence, and your second question (would you convert to islam...is a major philosphical question The Brothers Karamazov is a good read about this question). Simply put, if non-violence and pacification could not be used, I would come in the defense of the nation. Bascially there needs to be a REASON to fight. All will fight for their defense of family, but once the war goes overseas "to protect freedom" these so called liberals cannot be convinced to take part in an ambiguous quest to "establish democracy" when the government posses an obvious agenda.

Fighting to defend the homeland (mainland) as a last resort is ok, and I would do it because it is JUSTIFIED.

2006-12-29 16:59:40 · answer #2 · answered by x overmyhead 2 · 0 0

You damn right I would fight to the very end. I would be in the military right now if I did not have the physical problems that I have. If they were to invade this soil, they would have one hell of a fight on thier hands. Not only would they have to deal witht the full wrath of our military but with ever gun weilding American that loves his/her country. If you do convert, I'll hunt you down and shoot you for the pussy that you are. If you are not willing to defend your country, by all means, leave and never return.

2006-12-29 17:07:45 · answer #3 · answered by subsystem2001 3 · 0 0

I think, philosophy aside, most people would try to fight off any enemy who threatened their family and friends. As far as "converting"-- if it were a simple choice of losing my head or giving lip service to "Allah" I would probably do the latter. I could never actually, in my heart, believe in any so-called religion that advocates forcing people to 'believe or die'. God gives us free will-- so by denying that freedom, these people clearly are not serving or worshiping God.
On the other hand, lip-service to their religion in order to live and fight another day seems a practical thing and I doubt it would be displeasing to God. Depends on whether I could do the most good by having my head cut off then and there, or attempting to combat this evil by staying alive.
There are evil people claiming to be doing God's work in every religion. Did not Jesus Himself make reference to this when He said:
21 "Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' 23And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'
Allah is simply another name for God--- and I am sure He is very displeased by His so-called followers.
Although I am a vegetarian and try not to cause unnecessary suffering for any living entity, I am not a pacifist. Those who kill innocent people deserve to be killed. Simple. I would fight to the end in whatever way I could...whether it was just "my" family and friends or not.

2006-12-29 17:12:55 · answer #4 · answered by Rani 4 · 0 0

I would fight, but I don`t think a true American liberal would. I think that all American leftists would be apologizing profusely to their murderers as they got their heads sawed off.

2006-12-29 17:01:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I'd be the first one to sign up.

2006-12-30 05:31:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Good questions I'd probably commit suecide........If that were an option anyway.

2006-12-29 16:58:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The U.S. has never been attacked at home by Islamic extremist. There is no terror (beyond the usual region-specific revolutionary type that's always existed). 9/11 was orchestrated by the U.S. and Israel (see scholarsfor911truth.org/), but for different reasons. The U.S. will begin building a NAFTA Superhighway next year that stretches from the S. Texas Mexican border through the Midwest up to Canada for the purpose of facilitating a North American Union parallel to the European Union (see Congressman Ron Paul's website). The Christian West recognizes through the revelations in Samual P. Huntington's book, "Clash of Civilizations" that they will never get the Muslim world to accept this one world globalization, so we need to create pretexts for wars against the Muslims. 9/11 was made possible by carrying out 15 different "war games" by the military simultaneously and at the same location of the "attacks". Same thing in london on 7/7 (again, see scholarsfor911truth.org/). The British authorities were carrying out "anti-terrorism" exercises at the exact same time and location as the bombings. The Indonesian authorities have investigated the Bali bombing and the trail leads to the U.S. military (Guardian October 27, 2002). Same thing with the Spain train bombing. The U.S. military pays "contracters" $30,000 per month (per Melissa Rossi, "What every American should know about who runs the World), to carry out "military operations". Have you heard any more about the anthrax letters since the Baltimore Sun reported that the very unique weapons grade used was traced to a U.S. military lab? (There's a Patriot Act to pass, we can't have dissenters in congress.) So the war on terror is a fabrication to minimize the muslim numbers and establish puppet presidents in Muslim countries. The masses mostly consist of simple people who are very easy to fool. The U.S. Intelligence agencies specialize in false flag attacks and influencing elections in foreign countries through clever propaganda. (Our intelligence agencies were not born yesterday and there is no organization better at deception-have you any idea how many false films they've produced, including Flight 93?).The press is the key. But the U.S. cannot control the foreign press, so stories like the following are written and linked to the internet: "Hijack 'suspects' alive and well" by BBC News on September 23, 2001; "Gore Vidal claims 'Bush junta' complicit in 9/11 by the Guardian Observer on October 27, 2002". There are hundreds more, including an interview with Osama soon after 9/11 where he explains that he had no involvement with 9/11 and why. (The December, 2001 "confession" video has been proven a fraud-more propaganda by CIA/Mossad). Everything was fabricated (cell phones did not work at 30,000 feet in 2001, and if Marc Bingham did call his mom, he wouldn't say, "hi mom, this is Marc Bingham". But the masses are very easy to fool. Show an explosion and TELL them what happened and they buy it hook, line and sinker. By the way, skyscrapers do not collapse by fire. During WWII a B-52 bomber flew into the Empire State Building. It burned for awhile but these building are built to withstand multiple airplane hits, as attested by the WTC construction mgr, Frank Demartini on the History Channel. And when you do a "review" of the call on the field by revisiting the "attack" you can see that instead of burning down, the towers were getting blown to kingdom come with explosives, the very thing that the witnesses attest to in the dvd's and the internet videos. Now you know why Bush resisted an investigation (which he later loaded with insiders who wrote the biggest lie since Santa Clause). Now you know why Bush refused to testify under oath. Now you know why Bush insisted that Cheney be at his side during his interview. Now you know why 9/11 is not among the crimes listed on the FBI website of Osama Bin Laden. Now you know why no one was reprimanded or fired for allowing 9/11 to happen. Now you know why the Patriot Act was on Ashcroft's desk on September 10, 2001. Now you know why most of the Bush gang with any sintilla of a concious has "resigned", such as General Tommy Franks, Karen Hughes, Colin Powell, and scores of others. Franks is quoted in Senator Bob Graham's book, "Intelligence Matters" as saying "This is not a war on terror". Indeed it isn't Mr. Franks. Now you know why Pat Tillman was killed by "friendly fire" after he became outspoken on how bogus the war was (as reported in Sports Ilustrated Magazine). Again, there is no war on terror. The U.S. needs a significant military presence in Eurasia to stifle any challenge to its global supremacy. Pat Tillman did not appreciate giving up his NFL career to be the oil police. But that is what our military is doing in Afghanistan. Do you really believe that a bunch of rag tag towel heads with no air force, no navy, no cruise missles, no helicopters, no uniforms, no canteens, no nothing can hold off and resurge against the world's sole global superpower???? Remember the Gulf War in 1991? How long did it take the U.S. to remove the fourth largest army in the world from Kuwait? TWO MONTHS!!!!!!!!!!!! And FIVE YEARS later, we're losing the "war" in Afghanistan? Yeah, right. Now you know why the U.S. government refuses to answer the dozens of questions of the families of the 9/11 victims as shown in the dvd, Press for Truth. Now you know why the 9/11 Truth Movement reps are yelled at and discredited with name calling in the mainstream media. You people need to decide if you are sheep or your own thinker. Your government is decieving you to your grave and you just keep sleeping. I know, I know, our government would not do such a thing. Google "Operation Northwoods" and your political naivete will lump up in your shorts. The 9/11 attack was actually drawn up in 1962 as a hit on Cuba, intentionally kiliing Americans. It was to be blamed on Castro so we could remove him militarily. Kennedy, the peacemaker, rejected it and the plan has been sitting on the shelf waiting for the Neoconservative establishment to revive it, only at a different location. As Zbig Brzezinski wrote in "The Global Chessboard", "...it is more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances OF A TRULY MASSIVE AND WIDELY PERCEIVED DIRECT EXTERNAL THREAT." Guess what 9/11 was folks? It was a TRULY MASSIVE AND WIDELY PERCEIVED DIRECT EXTERNAL THREAT! Yeah, create an explosion and TELL the people what they saw and...lets roll...

Stay informed. Get your news from the internet, dvd's, and the international press. And inform others. This is our country. So your questions should be, do you have the courage to exercise you duty as per the Declaration of Independence and remove the despot in the White House???

2006-12-29 17:33:31 · answer #8 · answered by protocols 2 · 0 0

fight!
no convert here!

2006-12-29 16:59:49 · answer #9 · answered by KRIS 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers