BF2S Forums Al Qaeda Unhappy With Democrat War Funding Bill.

I can make them happy.

ATG wrote:

http://a.abcnews.com/images/Internation … 505_ms.jpg
Of the war funding bill sent to be vetoed by George Bush:

Ayman al-Zawahiri wrote:

"This bill will deprive us of the opportunity to destroy the American forces which we have caught in a historic trap," Zawahiri says in answer to a question posed to him an interviewer.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3143623

Well duh thats the whole idea numbnuts

So if the Democrats are making them sad by wanting to reduce funding and pull the troops out, surely that means that the Republicans are in fact making terrorists happy? *insert a few comments about traitors etc*

Kmarion wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

So if the Democrats are making them sad by wanting to reduce funding and pull the troops out, surely that means that the Republicans are in fact making terrorists happy? *insert a few comments about traitors etc*

Too simplistic, shall I point to the obvious>(none of it involves the word traitor)?

I wasn't being serious, but that's just what people tend to say when it's the other way around.

Hahah, what a tool. Their all needing a shave bunch of sand turds.

Turquoise wrote:

I think it would be a lot more entertaining for the media to engage in mock interviews.  If they can get the chance to meet with these people, they should hook up with a group of military operatives, so that they can film what starts out as an interview and then catch the look of surprise on their faces as they get killed by the operatives on camera.

It would make one hell of a video, wouldn't it?...

Exactly, we'll get some SEALs, Delta Force, SAS etc and disguise them as cameramen, half way through the interview, bang bang, double taps for every terrorist in the room.

ALLAH IS A FUCKING LIE! God damn. The world is so fucking glued to religion. You can be a peaceful and caring and helpful person without being Chrisitian. I do nice things because I feel it's right not because I'll go to hell if I don't!

So this now makes the REPUBLICANS the party of Al-Qaeda. GG guys.

Harmor wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Let's face it - if the US do pull out of Iraq it'll be a darn sight tougher for them to get at Americans.

I don't think so.  Looks what they almost pulled last year when they wanted to down 10 airlines destended for the United States - killing upwards of 4,000 people.

Erm. What did that have to do with Iraq....?

Harmor wrote:

Assuming that we pull out will Al Quada get a foothold on the country?  Will they fester and use the money from oil revenues to fund new attacks against us and our allies?

Al Qaeda isn't native to Iraq. Iraqis will not have an Al Qaeda government. It'll more than likely be three countries with the Shi'a one led by Moqtada Al Sadr and the Sunni one led by a former Ba'athist.

Harmor wrote:

Will Iran annex 1/3rd of Iraq?  Will the price of oil goto $120/barrel and cause a world-wide recession?

The price of oil would actually decrease if Iran annexed 1/3 of Iraq (not that I think they have a right to do such a thing). They would stabilise output given that the Shi'a nature of the majority of both peoples would make them happy bedfellows. Iran means business when it stamps its authority too - there wouldn't be any namby-pamby 'hearts & minds' bullshit.

Harmor wrote:

Will Iran get the nuke and kill 90,000 Israelies before the world 'acts'?

Well Israel already have a sizeable nuclear arsenal, they're well capable of responding. They're not our responsibility.

Harmor wrote:

Will Iran give nuclear technology to Al-Quada to attack U.S. interests?

Iran aren't stupid. They're not going to do something that could lead to themselves been nuked by the west. The Iranian theocracy aren't overly fond of Al Qaeda anyway - they are competitors in the 'who's the proper muslim?' contest. We all know what happens when you arm some rogue bunch of nutters anyway (CIA arming Al Qaeda in the 80s).

Harmor wrote:

Will the 30,000 Hesbolla troops inside the United States attack our malls and schools en masse killing 100,000 Americans?

You need to press the mute button on Fox methinks.

Harmor wrote:

CameronPoe, you make it sound like we are better off pulling out of Iraq and letting the cards fall as they may.  You actually think its ok for Iran to annex part of Iraq because it would stabalize it - something we can't do now.

So with that logic, why did we help Kuwait in the 1991 Gulf War if someone like Saddam could 'keep the peace'?

What would be different now if Iran annexed 1/3 of Iraq, even if it is to ment to 'stablize' the region?

Should we allow Iran to control even more oil, basically putting a tigher squeese on the world's nuts?

You way want to read what he wrote

(not that I think they have a right to do such a thing)

Kuwait did not need the peace keeping. It got on perfectly happily till it got invaded.

Actually I thought the reason gas prices in the United States are so high are because of the following:

• There are so many different blends of gasoline that refineries can't make enough of the gas to meet the supply
• No refineries have been built in the last 20 years (no one wants them in their backyard and they are very expenseive to make - upwards of 1 billion each).
• Taxes on Gas by my account are about 45 cents of the price.
• Oil reserves off the coast of California and Oregon will not be drilled because of the environementalists concerns of another Exxon Valdez

At least that's my understanding.

Last edited by Harmor (2007-05-06 12:47:23)

Not to derail the argument too much, but what about Venezuela?  The supply interruptions that we will see in the future there were not sparked by Islamic extreamism we have in the Middle east.  19% of the oil the United States uses comes from Venezuela.



So if we let Iran, Al-Quada, and the rest of them to their own devices then the price of oil will go down and we'll all be better for that?

EDIT: Is this the 'If we can't see it or we ignore it its not a problem' attitude?

Last edited by Harmor (2007-05-06 12:51:56)