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

10 answers

It depends on the intentions. Communists can be deterred because they don't believe in some wonderful afterlife full of beatiful virgins on the other hand just a handfull of thugs with really bad intentions can cause a lot of damage.

http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/12min.htm

2007-01-23 14:42:00 · answer #1 · answered by scarlettt_ohara 6 · 1 0

One is just the tool of the other, anyone who has an eye on what the communist are doing with all that money we pump into their economy, and the other eye on limited world resources like food, water, arable land, and energy, knows what is coming. Al Q is just part of the 5th column, a little sideshow, and their every success against the US just happens to benefit China, what a coincidence?

2007-01-23 14:44:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Neither or? If they negotiate with China as we have been doing they will be satisfied for a while and they will build their economy in their own timing and then take territories with negotiating if we all agree. Al Qaeda would not be a problem once we terminate their supplies and put on an Embargo, close all their borders and starve them out.

2007-01-23 14:41:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

very properly, you asked for spin so here it extremely is. It appears like those generals (and different vets and vet communities) do unlike war and infantrymen being killed (opposite to what maximum individuals think of roughly militia workers). And it additionally appears like they do unlike distant places dependence on oil the two. distant places oil dependence skill each and every so often you're able to combat for oil, each and every so often oil money gets into the palms of terrorists and none of that's solid for militia workers (between others, i.e. nationwide risk-free practices). sure, they throw interior the term climate replace by way of fact they could because that's the universal reason at the back of reducing carbon utilization. yet like i've got mentioned one thousand situations, some people like the assumption of carbon help regardless if the international temperatures circulate up, down or sideways. those adult males like the assumption of no longer giving trillions of greenbacks to middle East international locations (and the detrimental repercussions that circulate alongside with that). truthfully, that's a exceedingly solid factor. If all people reads that article as help for the technological know-how of CO2 inflicting disasterous warming, then they are greater effective at spinning than I. sure, that's totally my attitude and totally hypothesis. I truthfully have my grandfather who replaced into killed in WWII to thank for permitting me to stay in a society the place i will brazenly speculate without worry of arrest or worse. Edit: i'm going to could carry out a little digging into the Trueman nationwide risk-free practices undertaking. My preliminary impact is they seem to be a Liberal front group. (sure, hypothesis back, provide me a while.)

2016-12-16 12:07:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Al Qeada or 150 million Americans
We have much more stuff "Made in China" and nothing "Made in Middle East"

2007-01-23 14:54:07 · answer #5 · answered by D.B. Cooper 2 · 0 0

WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://thereligionofpeace.com/

2007-01-23 14:46:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I agree, no diffeance, they are about the same

2007-01-23 14:41:14 · answer #7 · answered by xyz 6 · 1 1

i hear ya

2007-01-23 14:42:09 · answer #8 · answered by (_)iiiiD 4 · 0 0

I'd say -8,500,000,000,000 dollars.

2007-01-23 14:40:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

They are about equal.

2007-01-23 14:39:40 · answer #10 · answered by Shaddup Libs 5 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers