Uday and Qusay likely captured or killed!

[Ben E Lou]

Breaking news from MSNBC

[Butter]

That "likely" just kills the importance of the story for me.

[Celeval]

FOX News: Report: Saddam's Sons Captured or Killed
'Likely' That Udai, Qusai in Mosul Shootout
Fox News learns heirs to dictatorship probably in Mosul house targeted by U.S. forces

CNN: BREAKING NEWS U.S. troops investigating whether Saddam Hussein's sons Uday and Qusay were killed during firefight in Mosul, Iraq, Pentagon officials tell CNN. Details to come.

MSNBC: Saddam sons taken?
NBC News: ‘Likely’ captured or killed
Saddam Hussein’s sons Udai and Qusai Hussein were “likely” captured or killed in a U.S. raid in northern Iraq Tuesday. More details to come...

[cuervo72]

They were also reasonably optimistic that they had killed Saddam in one of the two bombing attempts directly targeting him. I'm hoping it's true of course, but will wait for definite confirmation.

[ice4277]

The same thing has happened about a dozen times in this conflict already, be it for capturing people or finding chemical weapons. We'll see.

[JPhillips]

On CNN they keep talking about Mosul as a part of the supposed Saddam stronghold. I thought Mosul was much farther north and basically in Kurdish control. Does anyone know any more about this?

[NoMyths]

Not that the departure of Saddam's sons from this mortal coil wouldn't be a good thing...

...but is anyone else creeped out by such a vocally Christian member of this board putting a grinning smiley face next to a possible death announcement? Sorry, SkyDog, but as good of news as this would be for political reasons, I guess I'd expect a little less joy from you.

[Anrhydeddu]

NM: The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally posted by Butter_of_69
That "likely" just kills the importance of the story for me.

the "breaking news from MSNBC" part did it for me.

:)

[NoMyths]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
NM: The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few. And what, exactly, does that have to do with putting a smiley face next to a possible death announcement?

[Anrhydeddu]

Think of SkyDog being a proxy for many of the Iraqi Olympians, since they probably don't know about FOFC.

[NoMyths]

But he's not. I'm also assuming that most of those Iraqi Olympians weren't Christians, and while I'm not comfortable speaking about Islam's views on killing, I know that Christianity has tended to take a fairly somber view.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
NM: The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.

Hooray! We just executed ten unwitting hobos, and have shipped their body parts for immediate transplant into needy donors.

[Anrhydeddu]

Great, another ethical debate.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by NoMyths
Not that the departure of Saddam's sons from this mortal coil wouldn't be a good thing...

...but is anyone else creeped out by such a vocally Christian member of this board putting a grinning smiley face next to a possible death announcement? Sorry, SkyDog, but as good of news as this would be for political reasons, I guess I'd expect a little less joy from you. I believe that this is a just war, and that these men were targets. That's why the smiley. Let's not try to rehash all the reasons, but can you at least accept that if it is a just war, then such a response is appropriate?

[JPhillips]

Anrhsfgtzfdghj(or however the hell its spelled): Christianity is certainly not about the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few. In fact I would argue that that the many outweighing the few is just another form of moral relativism.

btw- Its also a pretty good argument for taxing the rich and redistributing wealth!

[Ksyrup]

Were the hobos dressed slutty?

[NoMyths]

"Just" a war? These are real people getting hurt and killed, SkyDog.

I'd say a smiley face isn't appropriate. If I heard that Saddam had been killed, I'd probably feel fairly positive about it, but I've also got enough respect for the enemy to not celebrate unduly. After all, his side is still taking some of our guys every day.

We'll have to agree to disagree on whether this was a just war or not. But I don't like the idea of Christians celebrating killing...it makes me suspicious of how firmly they walk the talk, and as committed as I believe you are to your cause, your smiley struck me as surprising and inappropriate. Just one man's opinon, though.

[Swaggs]

Originally posted by NoMyths
Not that the departure of Saddam's sons from this mortal coil wouldn't be a good thing...

...but is anyone else creeped out by such a vocally Christian member of this board putting a grinning smiley face next to a possible death announcement? Sorry, SkyDog, but as good of news as this would be for political reasons, I guess I'd expect a little less joy from you.

Actually, I do find it creepy to see anyone's death placed next to a smiley.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by NoMyths
"Just" a war? These are real people getting hurt and killed, SkyDog.You juxtaposed words and COMPLETELY changed the meaning there. I trust it was a mistake. I said, "a just war" not "just a war." That makes a HUGE difference in meaning.

[NoMyths]

Ack...yeah, a mistake. My bad. :)

[Dutch]

Shit, if killing Saddam's sons makes the fugitives stop killing Americans I'm all about the smileys.

But I'm with cuervo on this one, until I know for sure, I'm skeptical.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by NoMyths
Ack...yeah, a mistake. My bad. :) no prob...

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by JPhillips
Anrhsfgtzfdghj(or however the hell its spelled): Christianity is certainly not about the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few. In fact I would argue that that the many outweighing the few is just another form of moral relativism.

btw- Its also a pretty good argument for taxing the rich and redistributing wealth!

You did it right, just an "A" plus random letters.

War isn't about Christianity, it's what humans do. Christ, when He died and resurrected from the Cross, was certainly about the needs of the many (all humankind) outweighing the need of one that He was willing to sacrifice himself for all of us. It's something that we, as humans, cannot really comprehend so we just resolve it by knowing good vs evil and how it awkwardky plays out throughout history (esp. in the case of warfare).

Taxing the rich and redistributing wealth is about envy and covetness (think one of the 10 commandments). Volunteering to give up your wealth is what Christ talked about.

[NoMyths]

I'm sorry, A, but I disagree with that assessment of both war, its relationship to religion, and your understanding of Christianity.

We can comprehend it. Christ was meant to be the last sacrifice--the last one killed for the good of the many. Yet we continue to enact sacrificial rituals (e.g. going after Saddam Hussein because he represents terrorism). Does it "really" matter if we capture or kill Saddam? Only to a degree...the symbolic value is much more powerful than the "actual" value.

[JPhillips]

Ahselihsdlk:(I'm really getting the hang of your name!) I was only using Christianity because of NoMyths' post. Personally I don't really agree that the good of the many is appropriate in Christianity all of the time. Certainly one is supposed to sacrifice self for God and fellow man, but I don't thik that applies to killing if it makes others happy.

And I just tossed in the tax thing to torment you, I'm not trying to say taxation is Christian or vice versa. My point was a doctrine of the many over the few seems to justify income redistribution at least to some level.

[Bee]

There was a war?

[Anrhydeddu]

I agree, the symbolic value is much more powerful than the "actual" value. The actual value will come from the Iraqi government being able to govern on their own.

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by JPhillips
Ahselihsdlk:(I'm really getting the hang of your name!) I was only using Christianity because of NoMyths' post. Personally I don't really agree that the good of the many is appropriate in Christianity all of the time. Certainly one is supposed to sacrifice self for God and fellow man, but I don't thik that applies to killing if it makes others happy.

And I just tossed in the tax thing to torment you, I'm not trying to say taxation is Christian or vice versa. My point was a doctrine of the many over the few seems to justify income redistribution at least to some level.

I know, it's a fine and confusing line. From Isaiah, ""For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD . When humankind is veiled by sin, wars are an unfortunate result. I cannot take up arms as willingly as other believers but it seems we do what we can to affect our sphere of influence, how imperfect that might be.

[NoMyths]

If our ways aren't His ways, and our ways have traditionally been warfare, then why don't we try His ways for a change? ;)

Or to add to Isaiah: when Jesus said love your enemies, I don't think he meant kill them.

[Mustang]

If it was Uday and Qusay killed.. that leaves 2 others dead along with them. . .

Probably just a pair of South African pilots....

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by Mustang
If it was Uday and Qusay killed.. that leaves 2 others dead along with them. . .

Probably just a pair of South African pilots....

I am sure we killed them when they were reading the Koran to blind children.

[The Afoci]

Dola,

My point is they are evil people and death is what they deserve.

[Anrhydeddu]

NM: In both cases, He was commanding His believers. If the majority of individuals and certainly all nations do not follow Christ and His ways, why are we surprised at the consequences?

I don't know why I thought of this anecdote but it may fit. When the Constitutional Congress wanted limited the new nation's armed forces to 20,000, Genl. Washington replied, "I would readily accept that limit if you can guarantee me that our enemies would also have the same limit."

[tucker342]

That's good news. But the key word is "likely." So I'll believe it when they have actual proof

[NoMyths]

It's not a matter of being "surprised at the consequences" -- that's merely a matter of most people not behaving in 'good' ways (e.g. Christians who aren't actually following the teachings of Christ). It's a matter of being surprised by the reaction of a vocal Christian member of the community celebrating a possible killing in what I felt was a tasteless way.

I'm not sure why you thought of that anecdote either. :)

[Subby]

When I prayed to God this morning he told me he wanted them dead!

He's vengeful and jealous like that. Those bastards have false idols out the yin-yang!

[MylesKnight]

Sounds a lot like what happened to Pablo Escobar.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by Subby
Those bastards have false idols out the yin-yang! A friend of mine once had false idols coming out of his yin-yang. Very scary...

[Drake]

Originally posted by NoMyths
It's not a matter of being "surprised at the consequences" -- that's merely a matter of most people not behaving in 'good' ways (e.g. Christians who aren't actually following the teachings of Christ). It's a matter of being surprised by the reaction of a vocal Christian member of the community celebrating a possible killing in what I felt was a tasteless way.

I'm not sure why you thought of that anecdote either. :)

Christianity isn't really the issue here. You're worried more about SkyDog not practicing the version of Christianity you endorse instead of the one he endorses. Christianity is not monolithic, and pretending that it is just so you can point fingers is dishonest.

[Ryche]

Back to the news at hand...

Mosul is very far north in Iraq, which, according to CNN, is of great interest to the intelligence analysts. Were they about to cross the border?

We should know definitively if we actually got them this time. They have or will have the bodies and can do DNA testing if nothing else.

[NoMyths]

Originally posted by Drake
Christianity isn't really the issue here. You're worried more about SkyDog not practicing the version of Christianity you endorse instead of the one he endorses. Christianity is not monolithic, and pretending that it is just so you can point fingers is dishonest. Come again?

I don't endorse any particular brand of religion. I do believe in pointing out dissonance between a religion and the way it is practiced. I've already explained why I felt it was in poor taste for a purported Christian to celebrate the potential death of an enemy in the manner that SkyDog did. There's absolutely nothing dishonest about that.

[Kodos]

Being a non-religious fella, I can tell you that news of Saddam's or his sons' deaths would bring a smile to my face. They are some of the most evil, despicable humans in history.

[Drake]

Originally posted by NoMyths
Come again?

I don't endorse any particular brand of religion. I do believe in pointing out dissonance between a religion and the way it is practiced. I've already explained why I felt it was in poor taste for a purported Christian to celebrate the potential death of an enemy in the manner that SkyDog did. There's absolutely nothing dishonest about that.

You're perceiving a dissonance based on your particular definition of the tenets of Christianity. Ask 5 Christians what Christianity means and you'll get 10 different responses. You know this. You're allowed to view SkyDog's smilies as poor taste, but you can't say that he's somehow failing in his religious duty just because your taste was offended (I'm using offended here very mildly). The dissonance you detect is his action vis-a-vis your perception of Christianity...not his action and "true" Christianity (whatever the fuck that may be).

Yes? No?

(Oh, and I should have put a smiley in that post, so here it is now - :P )

[NoMyths]

I never said he was failing in his religious duty. I said that his use of a smiley face next to a possible death announcement was in poor taste considering his stated beliefs. Over and over. I'm not concerned with our differing perceptions of Christianity, but I'm familiar enough with the core tenets to know that Jesus probably wouldn't have done a touchdown dance if Pontius Pilate had been assassinated.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by NoMyths
Come again?

I don't endorse any particular brand of religion. I do believe in pointing out dissonance between a religion and the way it is practiced. I've already explained why I felt it was in poor taste for a purported Christian to celebrate the potential death of an enemy in the manner that SkyDog did. There's absolutely nothing dishonest about that. Well apparently "your brand" doesn't leave room for a just war. I said very clearly that I believe it is a just war, and therefore celebrate achieving an objective. If I didn't believe it was a just war, then I'd be saddened.

[Anrhydeddu]

NM: You are getting close to another theological argument and that is what does death mean? For those believers in Christ, death is something we can mourn for the passing but joyful in knowing that there is eternal life. The alternate is something to be truly saddened by, if we were to know.

"The greatest pain in Hell is the loss of Heaven."

[Drake]

Originally posted by NoMyths
...but I'm familiar enough with the core tenets to know that Jesus probably wouldn't have done a touchdown dance if Pontius Pilate had been assassinated.

Really? I guess you don't buy N.T. Wright's assessment that the famous "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's; render unto God that which is God's" shouldn't be paraphrased as "Pay your taxes and be a good citizen as long as it doesn't conflict with your religious principles", but as "Give Caesar exactly what he deserves - that is, a sharp stick in the eye - because everything really belongs to God and Caesar is trying to usurp it unjustly".

Jesus was more politically savvy and revolutionary than you give him credit for, I think. There are significant differences between the Disciples of Jesus (for lack of a better term) and Pauline Christianity.

What does this have to do with your statement above, you ask? Only a reminder that my point is that the only Christianity most people understand (myself included) is their own.

In necessariis unitas, in non-necessariis libertas, in utrisque caritas.

[Subby]

Drake -

I just talked to God again and he told me he can see your nipples through that shirt...

Just FYI.

[Fritz]

Originally posted by Drake
Jesus was more politically savvy and revolutionary than you give him credit for, I think. There are significant differences between the Disciples of Jesus (for lack of a better term) and Praline Christianity.[/i]

I love a cookie based faith

[Drake]

Originally posted by Subby
Drake -

I just talked to God again and he told me he can see your nipples through that shirt...

Just FYI.

Eh, what do I know anyway? I'm a pagan, a Freemason and a member of the FOBL - that's like being excommunicated in triplicate.

[Franklinnoble]

Mat 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

[cmp]

CENTCOM has confirmed that Qusay and Uday were killed.

[VPI97]

Originally posted by gold101
CENTCOM has confirmed that Qusay and Uday were killed.
:) :D :) :D :) :D :) :D :)

[The Afoci]

Can I get a "WHOO WHOO?" or something similiar that is cool.

[Ben E Lou]

<center>http://i.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.0/misc/bannerhead/ace.clubs.jpg TRUMPED http://i.cnn.net/cnn/.element/img/1.0/misc/bannerhead/ace.hearts.jpg</canter>

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by sabotai
"Well apparently "your brand" doesn't leave room for a just war. I said very clearly that I believe it is a just war, and therefore celebrate achieving an objective. If I didn't believe it was a just war, then I'd be saddened."

It's funny actually. When 9/11 happened, we were very harsh on the people in the arab countries that were celebrating. To them, the terroristic war on the US was "a just war". Yet, now here we are, celebrating death because it is our beleif that this is "a just war".

Kind of hypocritical in way...

(note: Yes, 9/11 had 3000+ civilian deaths. To me and you, it's different. To them, it's not. And that, my friends, is my point) I don't find it hypocritical at all, but I can see how you would.

[JonInMiddleGA]

sabotai -- but does the hypocrisy exist if the basis isn't the same?

I mean, I agree that there's a hypocrisy there if you felt both/neither occurence was just but the reaction was different.

But if you're comparing apples to oranges (regardless of which you prefer) then different reactions doesn't seem hypocritical AFAIC.

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by sabotai
It's funny actually. When 9/11 happened, we were very harsh on the people in the arab countries that were celebrating. To them, the terroristic war on the US was "a just war". Yet, now here we are, celebrating death because it is our beleif that this is "a just war".

Kind of hypocritical in way...


Well, let's see....

I'm looking outside my window, and no one is celebrating in the streets upon hearing of the death of these guys. Expressing relief - or even joy - that two central figures involved in the prior regime of Iraq are no longer obstacles to rebuilding the country, is hardly a celebration akin to those we witnessed on 9/11 and the days after.

And from what I've read, these two "gentlemen" were far from innocent victims of an attack, but rather were brutal killers and torturers of their own people, let alone enemies in a war (just or not).

So I'm not really sure I see anything close to a similarity between 9/11 and today.

[MylesKnight]

I wonder what part of Hell you'd be able to find these two in.. There's got to be a special little room for these guys with people like Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Pablo Escobar waiting with open arms.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally posted by MylesKnight
I wonder what part of Hell you'd be able to find these two in.. There's got to be a special little room for these guys with people like Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Pablo Escobar waiting with open arms.

What are you talking about? If a Muslim gets killed during the course of a jihad, he goes to heaven and is greeted by 40 doe-eyed virgins...

[MylesKnight]

Well they better not have been cheating on their Muslim-ticity then, that's all I've gotta say.

[Kodos]

Originally posted by gold101
CENTCOM has confirmed that Qusay and Uday were killed.

Now if we can just get Saddam himself...

[WSUCougar]

Originally posted by MylesKnight
I wonder what part of Hell you'd be able to find these two in.. There's got to be a special little room for these guys with people like Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Pablo Escobar waiting with open arms.
Geez, the guy's E.R.A. is a tad high pitching for the Blue Jays, but that's no reason to put him in that kind of company. Oh, wait, that's Kelvim Escobar...

[Ksyrup]

Wasn't Pablo the soccer player who was shot to death for giving up an own goal to the US?

[sabotai]

"What are you talking about? If a Muslim gets killed during the course of a jihad, he goes to heaven and is greeted by 40 doe-eyed virgins..."

72...but who's counting? :D

[ice4277]

Actually, will it really matter in the long run if we do catch Hussein? His base of power is gone now, and while he does have some supporters left in Iraq, it doesn't seem like he will be able to exert much influence over them. Not that I think we should stop looking for him, but I don't think the net effect of catching him will be that great past the PR value.

[Anrhydeddu]

Agree, the outlawed Baath party is already engagin in guerilla warfare, setting up the stage for violent internal conflicts regardless of the presence of Allies troops.

[sabotai]

"Actually, will it really matter in the long run if we do catch Hussein?"

It could. Do we have any idea what assests he has avaiable to him? For all we know, he could be in some far away country getting together an organization similar to Al-Quida to set up and execute terrorist attacks against us.

[3ric]

Originally posted by Ksyrup
Wasn't Pablo the soccer player who was shot to death for giving up an own goal to the US?

It's possible that player's name was Andres Escobar, but I could be mistaken.

[Anrhydeddu]

An Iraqi informant came to the U.S. military Monday night and gave information as to where Odai and Qusai may be, Sanchez said.


That should be one very rich hombre.


Fox News has learned that Abid Hamid Mahmud Al-Tikriti (search), Saddam's top aide who surrendered June 17 and was the "Ace of Diamonds" in the U.S. military's deck of cards representing Iraq's most wanted, provided some of the information leading U.S. officials to confirm that two of the bodies were Odai and Qusai.


I really hope they have a more objective mean of confirming.

It would have been interesting if they were taken alive and the subsequent game that would have been played.

Also, that villa had a tunnel (like most places in Iraq). Wonder if someone lost the key to it?

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by sabotai
I admit that I wasn't completely clear on what I said, but if you thought I was directly comparing the two, you need serious help.

You did compare the two. Maybe you didn't mean to, but you did. I was just responding to that comparison. I don't need help, except, I guess, in trying to understand your point.

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by 3ric
It's possible that player's name was Andres Escobar, but I could be mistaken.

I know it wasn't Pablo, but that's the first "mistaken identity" I thought of.

[Qwikshot]

So am I or am I not supposed to be happy that Hitler is dead?!?

[rexallllsc]

LOL @ Christians celebrating deaths...

[panerd]

I'll chime in here as a pretty unbiased outsider on this one. Skydog is often regarded as the morality leader of this board. He used a smiley face to celebrate two people's death. It was inappropriate and he probably should have just saved face and took it off. However, as in the case with most debates (cough, slutty clothing) nobody ever wants to admit an error in judgement.

However, all of the biblical crap that ensued is complete nonsense. I think that Skydog made a mistake, but I also sincerly believe in his morals and ideals and don't think he is a different person because of the smiley face. All that quoting a bunch of lines from the Bible is going to do is put people to sleep. Do you really need to quote the Bible to explain what is right and wrong?

[CAsterling]

Originally posted by MylesKnight
I wonder what part of Hell you'd be able to find these two in.. There's got to be a special little room for these guys with people like Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Pablo Escobar waiting with open arms.

Please you are comparing these two sons of a dictator to some strange people.

Adolf Hitler, a man that led his country out of poverty, gave them a sense of purpose, united europe (something that Europe has been trying to repeat ever since), oh and ordered mass genocide.

Benito Mussolini, a stupid fat idiot, who couldn't even make the trains run on time, and was dunb enough to ally himself with Adolf because he wanted to expand his countries empire further in Africa, but not really such a bad guy.

Pablo Escobar, a very street smart drug dealer who decided that as the richest man in his country he ought to have a say in running it, and got a little upset when he wasn't allowed to. All because although his morals and ethics were applauded by his own countryman's standards, he was considered unacceptable by US standards.

Whereas these two encompas one complete physcopath with the intelligence of a dead rat, and one of the cleverest and ruthless powers behind the throne in the middle east for whom the end justified the means.

Personally I don't care how many smiling icons were used, death is something that happens, nobody here cared about these people, so why should we care if we celebrate the death of these people - so there :) :) :) :) :) :eek:

[Anrhydeddu]

Originally posted by panerd
Do you really need to quote the Bible to explain what is right and wrong?

What are you going to quote from to explain what is right and wrong? Something you just made up this morning?

Sorry, but I got offended by such disrespectful and intolerant tone.

[neofied]

Christian: But you will all burn forever in eternal hellfire.
Marklar: Yes, that's nice. Thanks for stopping by.

Damn, that was a funny episode. Than again most South Park episodes are a riot. :D

As for the death of Hussein's sons, I'm happy to see them dead. Heard some reports that Saddam may not be that far behind.

Just because you're a Christian doesn't mean you can't support a war. From my understanding SkyDog is a pretty strong, mainline evangelical Christian (closer to Southern Baptist maybe).

Christianity was pretty divided on the whole war. Larry King had a debate with Christians during the war and it was pretty interesting to see the liberal, moderate and conservatism within Christianity itself.

[Subby]

I would prefer those guys be alive and in US custody than be dead.

They are no good to us dead...

[neofied]

They'd be no good to us alive either.

[Killebrew]

Originally posted by sabotai
[B]"Well apparently "your brand" doesn't leave room for a just war. I said very clearly that I believe it is a just war, and therefore celebrate achieving an objective. If I didn't believe it was a just war, then I'd be saddened."

It's funny actually. When 9/11 happened, we were very harsh on the people in the arab countries that were celebrating. To them, the terroristic war on the US was "a just war". Yet, now here we are, celebrating death because it is our beleif that this is "a just war".


The key difference my friend is that we are the just side, while their side is the unjust side, simple as that. Their celebration of blood lust was tactless and Neanderthal, while our celebration of blood lust is Jesus Christ© approved. Now if both armies would be wearing "In God We Trust" belt buckles this Jesus Christ© approval issue would be a little more sticky, but from what I can make out by the CNN reports, their society is God less.

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by Subby
I would prefer those guys be alive and in US custody than be dead.

They are no good to us dead...

Yeah, they could have brought Uday before the Olympic committee headed by his own country to dole out his punishment for torturing Iraqi Olympians. That would have been worse than a few bullets from our guns.

[rexallllsc]

Originally posted by Killebrew
The key difference my friend is that we are the just side, while their side is the unjust side, simple as that. Their celebration of blood lust was tactless and Neanderthal, while our celebration of blood lust is Jesus Christ© approved. Now if both armies would be wearing "In God We Trust" belt buckles this Jesus Christ© approval issue would be a little more sticky, but from what I can make out by the CNN reports, their society is God less.

Great post.

[Subby]

Originally posted by neofied
They'd be no good to us alive either. Why not?

Seems like you could eventually extract some type of information out of them...

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by Killebrew
The key difference my friend is that we are the just side, while their side is the unjust side, simple as that. Their celebration of blood lust was tactless and Neanderthal, while our celebration of blood lust is Jesus Christ© approved. Now if both armies would be wearing "In God We Trust" belt buckles this Jesus Christ© approval issue would be a little more sticky, but from what I can make out by the CNN reports, their society is God less.

Uh...this country doesn't define itself by religion, but their society does. This wasn't a Christian war, but there's is a Muslim war. Just or unjust, that's the simple fact. We don't fight as Christians, we fight as Americans. To you and them, that may be one and the same, but it's not. We don't hate simply because of another society's method of worship, but they hate Christians and Jews solely for that reason.

[Easy Mac]

A "just" war is appealing to a higher sense of morality. A just war implies that God is saying it is okay to embark on the war. To me those who use this phrase bring religion into the equation.

And what was the last Christian country we attacked? Who does the President bring up in every speech? I'd say religion is just as important here is it is in "their" country. So people haven't said "lets bomb Mecca", huh, I guess we have the moral high ground.

[rexallllsc]

Originally posted by Ksyrup
Uh...this country doesn't define itself by religion, but their society does. This wasn't a Christian war, but there's is a Muslim war. Just or unjust, that's the simple fact. We don't fight as Christians, we fight as Americans. To you and them, that may be one and the same, but it's not. We don't hate simply because of another society's method of worship, but they hate Christians and Jews solely for that reason.

Last I heard, they (Iraq) didn't declare war on the US. We declared war on them.

Thoughts on the war aside, it's funny how supposed "men of God" can be so excited about the deaths of others.

[Killebrew]

Originally posted by Ksyrup
Uh...this country doesn't define itself by religion, but their society does. This wasn't a Christian war, but there's is a Muslim war. Just or unjust, that's the simple fact. We don't fight as Christians, we fight as Americans. To you and them, that may be one and the same, but it's not. We don't hate simply because of another society's method of worship, but they hate Christians and Jews solely for that reason.
The Christ reference was about the hypocrisy of the boards biggest God lover delighting in the killing of fellow human beings. It is as unfair to say "they" hate us because of our religion as it is to say we hate them because of their religion, neither viewpoint is accurate. Anyway, religion has almost zero to do with this fight.

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by rexallllsc
Last I heard, they (Iraq) didn't declare war on the US. We declared war on them.

Thoughts on the war aside, it's funny how supposed "men of God" can be so excited about the deaths of others.

I wasn't referring to Iraq, I was referring to the terrorists. You know, the "them" everyone is referring to.

It's funny how we were so quickly chastised for referring to "them" as being all Muslims, when it was supposedly the fraction of 1% "fringe" Muslims who were really the only ones who deserved to incur our wrath. Now, people use "them" however it serves their purpose. "They" (the Iraqis) have the right to cheer our deaths, since "they" hate Americans. But wait, I thought "they" didn't support terrorism, only the radicals did? Which is it?

We aren't fighting the Iraqi people, we were (and still are) fighting the remnants of their regime, which supported terrorism. We're after the terrorists, not the people. I don't have a problem with expressing joy that terrorists have been killed, and I don't equate that with celebrating the death of innocent people.

[Ben E Lou]

I stand by my statement that I believe it was a just war, and therefore the smiley makes sense and is not hypocritical at all.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally posted by Killebrew Anyway, religion has almost zero to do with this fight.

And with that your credibility on this subject pretty much flies out the f'n window.

Thanks for playing.

[Easy Mac]

So, say I post an article about a rape victim.

Say I believe rape is wrong.

Say I read that this girl was a whore before, but in this instance she was raped. So I say this bitch deserved it, that she needs to learn a lesson. Its ok so long as I add a smiley?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally posted by Easy Mac A "just" war is appealing to a higher sense of morality. A just war implies that God is saying it is okay to embark on the war.

Y'think maybe that's just a bit of a leap in logic there EM?

The word "just" can't be used in a context of ...

a) justifiable in a national sense?
b) justifiable in a common-sense sense?
c) justifiable in a legal sense?
d) justifiable as a response to provocation?
d) justifiable in basically any sense other than religious?

Never mind whether we're discussing Iraq, Afghanistan or putting sugar in the gas tank of the class jerk. And never mind whether you agree with any of the possibilities I mentioned in any of those instances. What _you_ think of the justification wouldn't really be the issue here, it'd be what the person using the word "just" intended. And it seems to be one heckuva leap in reasoning to claim that a Higher Power is the only possible basis for someone to use the word.

[Easy Mac]

then say "justifiable". The crusades we just wars. The terrorists call their "war" a "just" war. "Just" and "justifiable" have 2 completely different meanings in todays society.

[JonInMiddleGA]

EM, we must live in different society's or something.

While one definition does indeed invoke morality, I hear usage of it that is more consistent with Properly due or merited at least equally as often.

[rexallllsc]

Originally posted by Easy Mac
then say "justifiable". The crusades we just wars. The terrorists call their "war" a "just" war. "Just" and "justifiable" have 2 completely different meanings in todays society.

Exactly. Here's guessing that if someone of similar stature was killed over here, they would be glad as well...and the same ones who are :) here would be pretty damn pissed about their happiness...

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by rexallllsc
Exactly. Here's guessing that if someone of similar stature was killed over here, they would be glad as well...and the same ones who are :) here would be pretty damn pissed about their happiness... Yup, and I'll re-state that it isn't hypocritical either, but I can certainly understand why many would disagree.

[Kodos]

Heartless bastards who purposefully killed and tortured many of their own people are dead. If that ain't reason for a big smile, I don't know what is.

:)

[JeffNights]

Originally posted by sabotai
"The key difference my friend is that we are the just side, while their side is the unjust side, simple as that."

This is EXACTLY my point. To you, the US is just and they are unjust. Do you think they think that way? Do you think they think they are unjust and we are just?

No, of course not, so it's not that simple, is it? Killbrew, it's very simple actually. THEY think that the attacks on US are just. They think our attacks on them are unjust.

So basically, if we examine what it is you just said, you're basically saying that we are right because we say we are. Can't you just sit back and see things from their point of view? Can't you at least try to understand their position? What they've been through?

It's this kind of arrogance that makes us a target.

So these two murders deserve sympathy? What they've been through? Thats just outta whack man.

Oh, and i did a HUGE happy dance when the news broke that these two were killed, and i drew happy faces all over the freakings walls.

and yes, I am a Christian, and thats MY point of view.

[Killebrew]

Originally posted by JonInMiddleGA
And with that your credibility on this subject pretty much flies out the f'n window.

Thanks for playing.
Please feel free to expand on that Jon, I am always eager to hear your enlightened opinion on complex world issues:).

[sabotai]

"So these two murders deserve sympathy? What they've been through? Thats just outta whack man."

:rolleyes: I never said that...

[Dutch]

This is EXACTLY my point. To you, the US is just and they are unjust. Do you think they think that way? Do you think they think they are unjust and we are just?

No, of course not, so it's not that simple, is it?

I guess you assume that Jeffrey Dahmer thought what he was doing was just as well?

Oh he was crazy? Well, so we're these folks.

[clintl]

As someone who is both religion-free and who thinks this was NOT a just war, I would just like to say that I understand SkyDog's view, and agree with him that the world is better off without the Hussein brothers than it was with them. I think the Bush Administration lied through its teeth throughout this whole affair, and continues to do so, and that it murdered thousands of innocent Iraqis in the pursuit of illegal political goals, but that doesn't mean I feel compelled to feel any regret over the deaths the guilty Iraqis.

[Dutch]

So what should the United States and the United Nations done to solve the broken agreements of the 1991 cease-fire agreement and the 16 UN resolutions?

Argue all you want, but unless you can tell me what should have been done, it just comes off as whiny.

And no, tripling the UN inspectors to 300 while 150,000 US Army, Marines, Air Force, and Navy personnel are "there to pressure" would not have worked. It would have been an absolute nightmare of a failure, wouldn't you agree?

So anyway, let's have the master plan, or better yet, tell me what the Democrats would have done, differently. I suspect that if Gore was in office, he would have had to do the same thing.

Good luck.

[Easy Mac]

And if Gore were in office, Republicans would have been bitching.

Welcome to the real world.

[EagleFan]

How can you compare a couple of smilies on a post to people celbrating in the streets after 9/11. There was no celebration in the streets here upon hearing the news of their death. In fact, there was celebrating in the streets in THEIR OWN COUNTRY.

Again, more liberals show up to defend two complete strangers. Strangers who have committed attrocities beyond what is imaginable by any sane human being. Yet they can't even give their own country the same consideration.

[Kodos]

Just for the record, I am an non-religious liberal, and I fully support smiling about these bastards dying. Aren't most super-religious freaks conservative, by the way (since this thread has a religious theme running through it)? So probably some of the people who are saying smiling was bad are probably ultra-conservatives, not liberals.

[SplitPersonality1]

Originally posted by Kodos
Just for the record, I am an non-religious liberal.

That's Ok Kodos. I won't hold it against you. You slimy-tentacled, alien, commie bastard. :D

[Kodos]

I'm no commie! :D

[Subby]

Originally posted by EagleFan
Again, more liberals show up to defend two complete strangers. Strangers who have committed attrocities beyond what is imaginable by any sane human being. Yet they can't even give their own country the same consideration. Please give it a rest. Your dumb-ass partisan ramblings are getting repetitive.

For the record -

Conservatives=Good
Liberals=Bad

Everything is black and white and uncomplicated. <i>We get it</i>.

[cmp]

Looks like Odai might have committed suicide.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/WorldNewsTonight/iraq030723_sons.html

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally posted by Subby
Please give it a rest. Your dumb-ass partisan ramblings are getting repetitive.


Gee Subby, that's damned close to how some of us feel about the members of the far-left around here.

Kinda balances out in the end I guess (although we'd probably be able to agree that most of it really doesn't get anybody anywhere).

[Subby]

Originally posted by JonInMiddleGA
Gee Subby, that's damned close to how some of us feel about the members of the far-left around here.

Kinda balances out in the end I guess (although we'd probably be able to agree that most of it really doesn't get anybody anywhere). No - I completely agree with your point. I just abhor partisan politics and generalizations about folks based on their political leanings. Over-generalizing is just too easy and usually wrong...

If we stopped painting folks with such broad strokes I think we would have more fruitful discussions.

[EagleFan]

Oooh, Subby is angered with me, get a life!!!

Since you can't understand, I'll paint it a little clearer for you you ignorant little prick. My statement was aimed at those whining about the smilies and comparing it to those celebrating in the streets after 9/11. In no manner did I mention anything about the religious debate in my post. Try reading something before you spout your vile crap.

[Kodos]

But much of the whining about smilies had a religious basis. In fact, the criticism made on SkyDog was that he must not be a "good" Christian (whatever that means) because he put up a smiley face in reaction to their deaths.

Edit: As for the comparing their celebration of 9/11 and SkyDog's smiley about the Uday and Qusay's deaths, there is no comparison. One involved thousands of innocent victims, and the other involved the deaths of 2 vicious dictators who have made their people suffer for years.

[sabotai]

"Try reading something before you spout your vile crap"

I love it when people give advise that they themselves do not follow...

[Subby]

Originally posted by EagleFan
Oooh, Subby is angered with me, get a life!!!

Since you can't understand, I'll paint it a little clearer for you you ignorant little prick. My statement was aimed at those whining about the smilies and comparing it to those celebrating in the streets after 9/11. In no manner did I mention anything about the religious debate in my post. Try reading something before you spout your vile crap. Good come back, Diceman.

I still want to know how being liberals has anything to do with what has been discussed in this thread. Or is that 45 degree forehead slope making it difficult for you to comprehend my post?

[Drake]

Originally posted by Subby
No - I completely agree with your point. I just abhor partisan politics and generalizations about folks based on their political leanings. Over-generalizing is just too easy and usually wrong...

If we stopped painting folks with such broad strokes I think we would have more fruitful discussions.

Actually, I thought that was the original complaint in this thread. NM was painting religious folks with an awfully broad stroke when he suggested that SkyDog was somehow not being faithful to his religious principles by posting smilies - when the truth was that SkyDog was only being unfaithful to NoMyths' religious principles.

I object to broad strokes of all sorts, be they political partisan or religious.

On the other hand, I love all guys named Subby, so you'll have to forgive me a bit of hypocrisy in that regard.

[Dutch]

And if Gore were in office, Republicans would have been bitching.

Welcome to the real world.

Intelligent response. So beyond the bitching, your head is drawing a blank, eh? :)

[Easy Mac]

And since you didn't refute it, it seems you concur.

[EagleFan]

Originally posted by Subby
Good come back, Diceman.

I still want to know how being liberals has anything to do with what has been discussed in this thread. Or is that 45 degree forehead slope making it difficult for you to comprehend my post?


Seems like I struck a nerve. I wasn't even referring to one of his damn posts and he goes all PMS on me. Oh well, I can put the little boy on ignore and not have to worry about missing one intelligent remark.

I was referring to the same thing that I see over and over again from many liberal posters on this board or in politics in general. They're always willing to believe something that anyone outside of this country says over what the President or someone from his cabinet says. This goes all the way to the extent of believing Saddam over him.


Hell, republicans are no saints in this either but right now it's the republicans in charge and the democrats are the current ones actiing like little children.

[HarringtonDynasty]

Mass graves, countless accounts of torture derived from literally hundreds of catalogued methods, marsh Arab genocide, Kurdish genocide, Olympic athlete torture, rape of foreign citizens....AND NOMYTHS delicate sensibilities are offended at SKYDOGS smiley? NOMYTHS...are you a French citizen? Would you say the same to cartoonists who lampooned Hitler after his death?

NOMYTHS remarks are indeed something short of insanity...but whats underneath this? One possible idea is the effect of Islamic propaganda and the more gullible element of our society. World media has received the news of Uday & Quasy's death as a point of celebration. Baghdad was one big party. The exception here however, was Islamic media. "Illegal murders" were the characterizations asserted by Muslim spinsters. Billions are invested by Islamic interests in disseminating the military religious state’s views.

NOMYTHS is one of the many hapless zombified creatures staggering forward, in step, with the Muslim pied piper, whose tune is simply a plagerized collage of every leftist cliché they pray will stick. America is a free country, whose free media is open to foreign manipulation. As inconceivable as it is that one could find any sympathy for terrorists or homicidal dictators, nevertheless, Islamic propaganda succeeds in playing upon the simple strings of America’s chip-on-the-shoulder leftists.

Why is it that despite the fact that 32 of 35 armed conflicts worldwide are Islamic; that almost all terror is Islamic; that almost all military states are Islamic; that almost all slavery is Islamic; that almost all separatist movements are Islamic; that NOMYTHS wants to bash Christians? Don’t tell me NOMYTHS...all religions are bad right? Have you investigated Islam in any depth? Let me assure you, some religions suck way worse than others. Really. No religious doctrine in the world has anywhere near the textual justification for war against unbelievers. This actually matters. Please don’t confuse this with straw men recaps like "youre saying all Muslims are bad!!" or "you wanna kill all Muslims!!!".

It amazes me that leftists find romance with Islam. I suppose Che isn’t as sexy anymore. Reality of course is the following: That, more than Jews, more than Hindus, more than Idol worshipers, Muslims hate the American Left most....by far. Ironically, Leftists apologize for Islam...when they haven’t a clue about it. Watch, I expect no less from NOMYTHS.

[Easy Mac]

congratulations, we've found our next contestant on "People most Likely to Commit Mass Genocide."

[Dutch]

And since you didn't refute it, it seems you concur.

Okay....everybody bitches. Agreed. My point is that a lot of folks (and you are one of them) tend to bitch without letting your brain form any opinion.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not calling you an idiot or stupid, just that you could make these topics more informative if you backed up your crying.

[ice4277]

Originally posted by HarringtonDynasty
more than Idol worshipers, Muslims hate the American Left most

Dude, I watched the whole season of American Idol, and there is no way you could say that I hate America, so I resent that...

[Easy Mac]

Originally posted by Dutch
Okay....everybody bitches. Agreed. My point is that a lot of folks (and you are one of them) tend to bitch without letting your brain form any opinion.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not calling you an idiot or stupid, just that you could make these topics more informative if you backed up your crying.

I'd think if you read through all my posts, you'd see I do back it up. Ask anyone here about whether I actually write out reasons why I question things, and I'm pretty sure they'd say I do.

If you even look at the first reply in the topic, I put why I answered as I did.

[Easy Mac]

dola, whoops, sorry wrong thread (I got the 2 Uday/Qusay threads mixed up). I don't have alitst of what I posted, but I attempted to debate this along religious lines.
The thing I wanted to find out was how one reconciles this with religious doctrine.

[CamEdwards]

Originally posted by Easy Mac
A "just" war is appealing to a higher sense of morality. A just war implies that God is saying it is okay to embark on the war. To me those who use this phrase bring religion into the equation.

And what was the last Christian country we attacked? Who does the President bring up in every speech? I'd say religion is just as important here is it is in "their" country. So people haven't said "lets bomb Mecca", huh, I guess we have the moral high ground.

Since nobody brought it up, I thought I'd go ahead and mention the last Christian country we attacked. It was Yugoslavia. And Iraq wasn't a "muslim" country, remember? They couldn't have been a muslim country because Osama bin Laden didn't want anything to do with Iraq, right?

[Dutch]

I'd think if you read through all my posts, you'd see I do back it up. Ask anyone here about whether I actually write out reasons why I question things, and I'm pretty sure they'd say I do.

If you even look at the first reply in the topic, I put why I answered as I did.

I have probably read enough of your posts to know that I have no clue what would have been a better way to handle the broken 1991 cease-fire agreement and the irrelevancy Saddam placed on the 16 UN resolutions according to Easy Mac.

I guess reminding me isn't an option since you haven't a clue either! :)

[sabotai]

So far, I'd have to say HarringtonDynasty's post is in the lead for the this years Best Trolling Post. Can he keep the lead through the rest of the year? Well, as long as HM doesn't show up...

"And Iraq wasn't a "muslim" country, remember? They couldn't have been a muslim country because Osama bin Laden didn't want anything to do with Iraq, right?"

I don't think I'd classify Iraq as a Muslim Nation. At least, not in the sense that the government was solely based on the muslim religion (ie, I would classify Afghanistan (Taliban) as a Muslim Nation). And this is the reason that Osmama hated Saddam and called for a jihad against him.

[Ryan S]

Originally posted by sabotai
So far, I'd have to say HarringtonDynasty's post is in the lead for the this years Best Trolling Post. Can he keep the lead through the rest of the year? Well, as long as HM doesn't show up...

HarringtonDynasty fits the profile of the classic troll, so I am not giving him a chance to claim HM's crown.

[cthomer5000]

Originally posted by JeffNights Oh, and i did a HUGE happy dance when the news broke that these two were killed, and i drew happy faces all over the freakings walls.


So are you in kindergarten... or a padded room?

[Schmidty]

Originally posted by Ryan S
HarringtonDynasty fits the profile of the classic troll, so I am not giving him a chance to claim HM's crown.

Because he gave his opinion (even though I disagree with it)?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by Schmidty
Because he gave his opinion (even though I disagree with it)? Schmidty:

You're on shaky ground here.

[sabotai]

Schmidty, because it's an insult filled post designed to draw NoMyths into a flame war.

[Schmidty]

Originally posted by SkyDog
Schmidty:

You're on shaky ground here.

Why?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Interesting.

Other than aiming his words too narrowly at NoMyths, I thought HarringtonDynasty's post was one of the best written and to the point posts I've read anywhere online in quite a while.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by Schmidty
Why?PM sent.

[Schmidty]

Originally posted by SkyDog
PM sent.

Got it.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Damn, I just KNEW that reading this thread was going to be a bad idea, and I was right.

You know how if someone complains about the content of a thread, people will say "Just don't read it"? I tend to follow that advice. For some reason, I didn't do it this time, and now I'm disappointed. Ugh.

I'm going back to my corner now.

[sabotai]

No Pumpy Tudors, that's a bad Pumpy Tudors!!

Kirby Puckett

[Subby]

Originally posted by EagleFan
I was referring to the same thing that I see over and over again from many liberal posters on this board or in politics in general. They're always willing to believe something that anyone outside of this country says over what the President or someone from his cabinet says. This goes all the way to the extent of believing Saddam over him.Fair enough. I just think BOTH sides tend to paint the other with too broad a brush...

Sorry for lashing out, Big Poppa.

I look forward to settling any further differences in the NFC East ;)