Iran's President Seeks Permission to Visit Ground Zero

[Necromis]

Rashy, you are talking about two seperate things here. Terrorists and rebels are not the same. A terrorist is someone that uses terror and will kill innocent people to make their point and strike from the shadows like cowards. Rebels will normally only attack military or political targets, attempting to avoid the death of innocent people. I have no problems with a government, even Iran, supporting a rebelion of people that are like minded. This is also what the US has done. I do have a problem with any country supporting terrorists, as they have no true cause except to force their will through terror despite what the majority wants.

[blightyred]

[Necromis]

blightyred, the dictionary decides who is what. Not the US. Give me a break. TERRORist.....see that big word in there called TERROR. That means a person who uses TERROR to prompt their agenda. Typically they are not a majority and are not backed by the population as a whole. REBEL, someone rebeling against the current established government or authority. Normally backed by the majority of the population. Pretty easy picture there. If I was to use TERROR tactics to try to create change here in the US then I would be a TERRORist. If I was to launch a war against the government with other like minded people then I would be a rebel. Bombing schools, churches, is TERRORist. Bombing Military targets, is REBEL. Or maybe they didn't teach that to you in school.

[blightyred]

Bombing schools, churches, is TERRORist.

USAF and British Army, are they terrorists by your ridiculously naive definition?

Technically I imagine that waging an illegal war for absolutely no reason would make us terrorists, or are we rebels against the UN and the rest of the world?

Who knows ? Although you appear to. Damn my limited education, wish I was so certain of things?

Why the hysterical response, after all the guy just wants to pay his respects.

And incidentally although there is no way whatsoever of you realising this, there is NO proof at all of any wrongdoing by Iran, (well until you invent it.)

[Rashy]

U.S. bombs hit civilian buildings in Vietnam. Are we terrorists?

Blackwater employees (read: U.S. civilians) shot Iraqi civilians, does that make them terrorists?

Rebels generally don't attack out in the open. Usually a rebel force would be weaker than the State's army, meaning that if they want any hope to win they would have to (and this is quoting you) "strike from the shadows like cowards." They don't use guerilla tactics because they are cowards, but because they would get their *** kicked if they didn't.

And also by your definition the attacks in Iraq are caused by rebels and not terrorists. You say that rebels will "normally only attack military or political targets." That is what is happening in Iraq. Sure, a school or marketplace gets bombed here and there (but that would fall outside the normalcy), but the majority of the attacks are directed at U.S. and Iraqi soldiers, the Iraqi police, and government buildings.

One of the definitions for Rebel from dictionary.com:

[mouse]

[Necromis]

blightyred, let me correct something. First, bombing schools and churches intentionally. The military, regardless of country, sometimes does hit schools and churches by accident, when war is fought close to those structures. Secondly, nothing is illegal about the war in Iraq, it was signed off on by congress and a formal declaration was made. There for all nice and legal. Lastly, you must be a fool. This guy even confirmed after he was back home that his intentions were NOT to pay his respects but to try and keep us from using it like the Jewish use the Holocaust. So I guess common sense is not with in your mind set. I am not at all hysterical about this. I actualy am being very calm and rational about this. I do take the time to emphasize my points to hopefully educate you on the points you are mistaken.

mouse, you too are very misled. Bush, as pointed out above, did not enter into any illegal war. Secondly, get your facts correct, former President Clinton's intelligence also showed Iraq had WMDs. There is also proven fact that Iraq sent convoys with materials into Syria right be for the invasion. Thirdly, I personally feel fighting against people who would like to cause another 9/11 a reason. Fourthly, what good has happened for the US. I would say having Democratically elected governments in both Iraq and Afganestan(sp?) is something that is good for Americans. I would say keeping Al Qaida concentrated there to fight with military forces, rather than having them here flying more planes into buildings is a good thing. fifthly, see above about what Iran's President really wanted to do. Lastly, Saudi Arabia as a country does not promote terrorism. However, you are correct that a large number of terrorists come from the country. Your logic would be like saying at since some Muslims are terrorists, we should wage a war against all Muslims. If Saudi Arabia, was like Syria, Iran, and several other terrorist promoting and supporting countries, I would have no trouble agreeing with you. However, your comment is foolish and uninformed.

[blightyred]

I think we will have to agree to disagree, you are so utterly brainwashed with propaganda and half truths that any sensible debate is rendered futile.

I pity you.

[Necromis]

I can agree with you to disagree. However, I can not agree with your thoughts that I am brainwashed with half truths. You have to understand I am not a republican, or a conservative, I am a moderate. I have conservative leanings when it comes to national security, military, and defense of this country and war against terrorists and extremists. I am however more liberal in some of my social standings. In an example, I don't agree or support abortion, but do believe that it is not my right to choose for another and I don't want to make it a crime for someone to have the right of that choice. I am also agnostic, and lean towards athiest. I get my information from multiple sources, I just don't take the face value of mainstream media, because they like to only supply half the information, not the whole picture.

You see, some people paint the current President as a villian because of the course he took with the information he had, and paint the former President as this great man. However, both of these Presidents made the same statements regarding Saadam and WMDs and that military action was needed. It is just the current President that had the courage to actually follow through with that plan.

I have to say I think I lean toward conservative canidates more than liberal ones because they tend to actually stick to their beliefs or if the make an honest change in those beliefs put foward a reason that seems legitimate. I find that most liberal canidates change thier beliefs based on what ever is popular at the time. Take Rudy for an example of the first, and Hillary for the second.