http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/17/nterror117.xml
Very yes...And our judges are such a stupid clowns...
2007-07-17 16:10:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Let's not forget the weddings bombed in outposts like Nangarhar in 2007. Now, I don't claim to be a military strategist, but even I can see that bombing a wedding (were the Taliban getting pissed up at the reception?) and killing 45 people including 39 women & children, is not going to endear you to neutral locals. It is an idisputable fact that the USA has an appalling record when it comes to civilian casualties, in Iraq & Afghanistan, and also throughout its past military campaigns-or were the 600,000 civilians killed in Cambodia between 1969-1973 as a result of the USAF's highly illegal bombing campaign deemed to be military targets too?
2016-05-18 23:38:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by gaye 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Agreed. It certainly is refreshing to see that there are (a few) people out there who understand that our problem won't be solved by this mindless arrogance and violence. Too many people have got it in their heads that "anyone I agree with kills for the right reasons, and anyone I disagree with kills for the wrong reasons". Not that any of the reasons we've been given by either side are "right", but the point is, we need to at least understand where our opponents are coming from, rather than labelling them as "evil", and deciding that anything we do after that point is justified. Both sides of the conflict are equally ignorant and arrogant, think the same thing about each other, and are taking the same course of action. And truly, nobody wins.
2007-07-15 19:46:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Master Maverick 6
·
4⤊
2⤋
The US is not at war with anyone, not in any legal sense of the word.
The US may be in conflict with lots of people, but we're certainly not in conflict with all 1.4 billion Muslims. That's 20% of the world's population and almost five times our total population.
So, two of your assumptions are invalid from the start.
The US has invaded other countries, bombed their civilians and destroyed their cultural monuments. We're doing it right now in Iraq. So is it really any wonder that the majority of Iraqis hate us?
Or any wonder that many of them decide to join terrorist groups that hate us?
What goes around comes around. Yes. The US has used force, and threats and intimidation to get what it wants for decades. Now other groups are doing the same thing right back at us.
2007-07-15 20:13:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
5⤊
2⤋
The only goal of the U.S. and every other freedom loving nation is to stop the world-wide terrorism created by radical Muslims. We are not at war "with just about everyone." Look at a world map and you will see that the U.S. is fighting only in Iraq and Afghanistan. We may have political disagreements with some countries but we are certainly not engaged in wars with them. The intentions of Osama bin Laden to destroy America are clear. In case you haven't noticed they have also killed a few hundred thousand of their fellow Muslims who happen to not share their radical views. Osama bin Laden has trained terrorist and has sponsored their evil acts. His dictate to Al Qaida to kill all Americans - men, women, or children - is quite clear. You clearly do not understand the impact that 9/11 has had upon all of the free world. And no I don't have to consider the Nazi's and the UK because the Nazi's were no different than the radical terrorist and zealots who want the world to bow to their desire for world-wide domination of a radical fundamentalist religion. I promise you that Americans will never stop fighting terrorists until we have found every single one of them and the holes in the ground where they hide!
2007-07-15 20:16:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by cwomo 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
The U.S. is at war with just about everyone? This statement automatically puts you in the category of someone that doesn't know what they are talking about. And in case you haven't heard, Al Queda has said it is OK for them to KILL men, women, and CHILDREN simply because they are citizens of the United States. Anyone that condones CHILD MURDER on this stupid of a reason does not deserve to live. You might also notice that the Nazi's did NOT conquer the UK - they didn't conquer anything in the long run. Get a clue, then come back and ask an INTELLIGENT question.
2007-07-15 19:43:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Paul Hxyz 7
·
1⤊
4⤋
Civilians should never be legal targets--not of terrorists, not of armies (except under exigent circumstances, and I'd like to see those investigated by rote), not of guerilla fighters.
As for how to get the US out of Iraq, it would really help if as many people as possible would ASK the US to get out of Iraq. 70% of the people in the USA are already in favor of doing that, but we often hear "But they want us there." Raise your voices, people! Give us more proof to bring to the blind among our leadership. The soldiers you'd be "bleeding" are not the ones who have the ability to make a policy change. They are patriotic men and women being misused by our government (just look up decisions like "stop loss"). I'd like to see as few of them "pay" as possible.
2007-07-15 19:54:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by Vaughn 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
TIslam, a religion of mercy, does not permit terrorism. In the Quran, God has said:
Allah does not forbid you to deal justly and kindly with those who fought not against you on account of religion nor drove you out of your homes. Verily, Allah loves those who deal with equity.
Surah (Chapter) Al-Mumtahanah (The Woman to be examined) Qur-an 60:8
The Prophet Muhammad ( may Allah exalt him and grant him peace ) used to prohibit soldiers from killing women and children,1 and he would advise them: {...Do not betray, do not be excessive, do not kill a newborn child.}2 And he also said: {Whoever has killed a person having a treaty with the Muslims shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise, though its fragrance is found for a span of forty years.}3
Also, the Prophet Muhammad ( may Allah exalt him and grant him peace ) has forbidden punishment with fire.4
He once listed murder as the second of the major sins,5 and he even warned that on the Day of Judgment, {The first cases to be adjudicated between people on the Day of Judgment will be those of bloodshed.6}7
Muslims are even encouraged to be kind to animals and are forbidden to hurt them. Once the Prophet Muhammad ( may Allah exalt him and grant him peace ) said: {A woman was punished because she imprisoned a cat until it died. On account of this, she was doomed to Hell. While she imprisoned it, she did not give the cat food or drink, nor did she free it to eat the insects of the earth.}8
He also said that a man gave a very thirsty dog a drink, so God forgave his sins for this action. The Prophet ( may Allah exalt him and grant him peace ) was asked, "Messenger of God, are we rewarded for kindness towards animals?" He said: {There is a reward for kindness to every living animal or human.}9
Additionally, while taking the life of an animal for food, Muslims are commanded to do so in a manner that causes the least amount of fright and suffering possible. The Prophet Muhammad ( may Allah exalt him and grant him peace ) said: {When you slaughter an animal, do so in the best way. One should sharpen his knife to reduce the suffering of the animal.}10
In light of these and other Islamic texts, the act of inciting terror in the hearts of defenseless civilians, the wholesale destruction of buildings and properties, the bombing and maiming of innocent men, women, and children are all forbidden and detestable acts according to Islam and the Muslims. Muslims follow a religion of peace, mercy, and forgiveness, and the vast majority have nothing to do with the violent events some have associated with Muslims. If an individual Muslim were to commit an act of terrorism, this person would be guilty of violating the laws of Islam.
_____________________________
(1) Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #1744, and Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #3015.
(2) Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #1731, and Al-Tirmizi, #1408.
(3) Narrated in Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #3166, and Ibn Majah, #2686.
(4) Narrated in Abu-Dawood, #2675.
(5) Narrated in Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #6871, and Saheeh Muslim, #88.
(6) This means killing and injuring.
(7) Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #1678, and Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #6533.
(8) Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #2422, and Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #2365.
(9) Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #2244, and Saheeh Al-Bukhari, #2466.
(10) Narrated in Saheeh Muslim, #1955, and Al-Tirmizi, #1409.
Note: From the book of "A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam" by I.A.Ibrahim
2007-07-16 01:34:53
·
answer #8
·
answered by haylie 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
you're still one of the last hold outs that says the war is about oil? really now, explain the high prices of gas. explain why we are not importing oil from iraq. and too civilians must be legal targets as we lost a lot on 9/11 because the terrorists thought so.
2007-07-15 19:41:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by ?! 6
·
3⤊
4⤋
Legal no but in the eyes of the terrorist we are legitimate targets,,subtle difference
2007-07-15 19:40:36
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
What are you rambling on about ? The whole point about terrorism is that it is illegal. How can you have legal targets of terrorism ?
And consider what about the Nazis ? What are you on ?
2007-07-15 19:43:41
·
answer #11
·
answered by Well, said Alberto 6
·
1⤊
1⤋