Why?? Are you offended by being called a liberal??TeamZephyr wrote:
Is it possible for once that you could make a post without the word "liberal" in it?lowing wrote:
much more prudent than the state of denial, in which you and all the other members of the liberal think tank reside.sergeriver wrote:
Lowing prefers to live in a state of paranoia.
No need to be ashamed of being a 'liberal':
Liberal - liberty - freedom of choice/movement/speech/etc.
Conservative - stand still - restrictions - aversion to change
Liberal - liberty - freedom of choice/movement/speech/etc.
Conservative - stand still - restrictions - aversion to change
I hope there is something in the middle of those extremes.lowing wrote:
much more prudent than the state of denial, in which you and all the other members of the liberal think tank reside.sergeriver wrote:
Lowing prefers to live in a state of paranoia.Bertster7 wrote:
Don't you think a better headline might be "US Embassy Attack Foilled 3 Terrorists Dead"?
Gives a better picture if you ask me.
Also inspires public confidence, which is what the war on terror should really be about, that's what terrorism is - scaring people. If you stop people being concerned about it you've beaten the terrorists.
Thanks for the compliment dude.lowing wrote:
Why?? Are you offended by being called a liberal??TeamZephyr wrote:
Is it possible for once that you could make a post without the word "liberal" in it?lowing wrote:
much more prudent than the state of denial, in which you and all the other members of the liberal think tank reside.
I like the BBC headline and the New York Times headline. They both promote confidence in the public by immediately placing emphasis on the fact the attack was foiled. They also mention that it was Syrian forces that prevented the attack, which promotes confidence in international cooperation. The Sapinish one's not bad, but the translation seems a bit vague and I don't have a good enough grasp of Spanish to understand it.CameronPoe wrote:
ACTUAL HEADLINES - Interesting...
Al Jazeera (Qatar):
- Deadly attack on US embassy in Syria -
Three armed men have been killed and one wounded after they attacked the US embassy in Damascus in what Syria has called a terrorist operation.
CNN (USA):
- U.S. Embassy attack foiled -
BBC (International/UK):
- Syria 'foils' US embassy attack -
El País (Spain):
- EE UU agradece a Siria que evitara el atentado contra su Embajada en Damasco -
(Roughly: America thank Syria for averting the attack against their embassy in Damascus)
Le Monde (France):
- Des hommes armés ont attaqué l'ambassade des Etats-Unis à Damas -
(Roughly: Armed men have attacked the embassy of USA in Damascus)
Ha'aretz (Israel):
- U.S. hopes Syria joins war on terror after embassy attack - LOL!
Jerusalem Post (Israel):
- Syria: Attack foiled at US embassy - LOL! By who? Typical jpost. They even have an entire section labelled 'IRANIAN THREAT'.
La Prensa (Panama):
- Frustran atentado contra embajada de EU en Siria -
(Roughly: Attack against US embassy in Syria thwarted)
Irish Independent (Republic of Ireland):
- Gunmen killed in attack on US Embassy in Damascus -
Irish Times (Republic of Ireland):
- Car bomb fails in attack on US embassy in Syria -
New York Times (USA):
- Syrian Forces Repel Attack on U.S. Embassy -
Al Quds (Palestine):
- جيش الاسلام ينفي تقريرا صحفيا عن مكان احتجاز الجندي الاسرائيلي المخطوف في غزة -
(Roughly: WTF?)
The Al Jazeera and La Monde headlines I really don't like. Neither give a clear picture of the incident.
Well the attack was stopped before anyone got hurt (except the attackers), I believe. So what's wrong with that? If only every terrorist attack was stopped as quickly and painlessly.lowing wrote:
yes of course, the problem is with the headline, NOT the terrorist attack itself.......liberals
then don't be a liberalrawls wrote:
I've had it. I am a die hard liberal. That doesn't mean I am willing to close my eyes when it comes to foriegn policy. If someone doesn't want to secure the US don't call them a liberal. Just call them what they are, pussies. I take offense to having pussies labeled liberals.
sure can.....................................See?? I didn't say liberal.TeamZephyr wrote:
Is it possible for once that you could make a post without the word "liberal" in it?lowing wrote:
much more prudent than the state of denial, in which you and all the other members of the liberal think tank reside.sergeriver wrote:
Lowing prefers to live in a state of paranoia.
I agree, but most on here care more about the fuckin' headline and the notion that the papers made the terrorist look bad. The attack, according to them, was no big deal and shed a negative light on the terrorists. Liberals can't have their allies looking bad in the papers apparently.aardfrith wrote:
Well the attack was stopped before anyone got hurt (except the attackers), I believe. So what's wrong with that? If only every terrorist attack was stopped as quickly and painlessly.lowing wrote:
yes of course, the problem is with the headline, NOT the terrorist attack itself.......liberals
I think it's ridiculous to classify a person as either "this " or "this" in the first place. I speak how I feel no matter what label I get. Some issues are different.CameronPoe wrote:
No need to be ashamed of being a 'liberal':
Liberal - liberty - freedom of choice/movement/speech/etc.
Conservative - stand still - restrictions - aversion to change
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I'm pretty sure they've learned their lesson after the cartoon incident last year/earlier this year... They were damned lucky that noone decided that to support an attack on several foreign embassies should be considered an act of war !ATG wrote:
Syria knows that a breach of U.S. diplomatic territory will result in Marines being dispatched to protect and/or evacuate our people.
Not in their best interests as they know they couldn't do much to stop us and that would make them look like sissies.
I'm just happy they finally owned up to he responsibility it is to actually HOST an embassy. Regardless of how you would feel about vicous maneating martians bent on destroying the world, if they wanted an embassy in YOUR city, they deserve all diplomatic rights and courteseys afforded any other diplomat....