Do you believe it?

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
I know my shit, i've lived through it, i'v fought and died, lived again and this time i'm not really living but i am at home,

Holy shit, the Son of God posts among us. :shocked:

Some people know what it means to die in the field and return amongst the living when you are at home, you obviously do not...

You didn't even ask either, why would you, you are an egoistic bitch that assumes that everyone is like you but if they were, you'd cry all the time since you are such an egoistic bitch.

There is not man, woman or child in this world that would ever respect you, remember that.

The fact is anyone who has any personal experience with that part of the world knew right away who would most likely be blamed and who it most likely was. Many people made threats only a few has the resources to follow through, so your predictions were not surprising, nor even intuitive but only common sense. With that said when you look at the precautions that were disregarded as part of her movements the chance of a few inside sympathizers aiding them in there cause is not so far fecthed. Since you seem so well versed in this entire subject I won't waste my time labelling everything that was left out of her security detail. Military experience or knowledge does not mean you are a god at foreign affairs nor does it mean you understand international politics, if that was the case every military dictatorship would be the superior government that they are not. Yes, it was obvious from the start who did this for anyone with any real knowledge of that area, yes it was not surprising that it was done, yes the fact that certain key parts of a security detail that could have prevented something this amateurish from happening were not present does raise questions.

As much as you think you are gods gifts to the forums you are not, the fact that you served means nothing to most people, and even less to those of us who are near these areas most of the time, as much as you think your opinion is the only one, it is not. For a majority of the P&N forums this is a pissing match between people, but also a good number of us do in fact have experience with other parts of the world, parts that from time to time are hotspots and this is another spin to P&N we get a benefit from, you though posting the same crap you have been for a while is contributing nothing to any of the discussions at all.

You fail to understand, i am SAS, i knew the intel from the observers before you knew she was shot.

I seriously doubt that, if not for the fact your spelling and grammar is so atrocious than for the fact that if you are and typed that you broke the NDA agreement you need to sign when you enlist to SAS.

LOL, we do not sign an NDA agreement, where the feck did you get that from lad? And my spelling and grammar is English, not American English you twat.

But you can doubt it all you want, there are several here who know my status, so it does not matter.

Where are you from son, and what platoon?

 

[MadRat]

If you believe anyone but our own cia killed bhutto then you know something Musharraf does not. It was a wakeup call to him timed to coincide with a forceful offer of troops to clean up their tribal regions. Until government control is asserted in the far reaches of the north and western ends then the US cannot root out rebels in the mountains. The afghan counterinsurgency is too important to the US to lose.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Topic Title: Do you believe it?
Topic Summary: Pervez Musharraf government says "it was Al Qaeda"

You're all entitled to your opinions, but I believe no one, especially on this continent, has enough info to do anything more than speculate about who did it. It will be some time before we know who was behind it, if ever.

Then you do not mind me saying that the news i posted (before i should have) have been confirmed three times and one time by tape?

It was teh Taliban and no sane man would expect anything but them.

It's not opinion anymore.

We really need to eradicate them and i for one, for some reason, would like you to understand that.

They are few and they are evil.

So you have an inside source to inaccurate news. Hell I can get that from fox.

I do, i returned from Afghanistan in late November, i have not one but several sources that confirmed the Taliban involvement within five minutes of the news.

But you go ahead and believe whatever you like.

See, punkarses running around doesn't matter much to me until they get in my way.

Don't get in my way.

<Within 5 minutes eh? Hell I can make up a lie within seconds! Oh NOES! brit bad man on the prowl! Me is scared!

Thanks, asshole, I just blew pepsi on my monitor. :laugh:

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: MadRat
If you believe anyone but our own cia killed bhutto then you know something Musharraf does not. It was a wakeup call to him timed to coincide with a forceful offer of troops to clean up their tribal regions. Until government control is asserted in the far reaches of the north and western ends then the US cannot root out rebels in the mountains. The afghan counterinsurgency is too important to the US to lose.

Yah, and a horse and carriage brought forth by the mighty GW Bush tore down the WTC.

I really really dislike shit like this, i know people in the Afghan SOF and there is not even such a thing as a couterinsurgency unit since there is no fucking insurgency you wise and beautiful woman.

There is a region left, we all know it, and it's about to be dealt with, i would love to have been there and lead my people there but we are going to Tchad.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon

Topic Title: Do you believe it?
Topic Summary: Pervez Musharraf government says "it was Al Qaeda"

You're all entitled to your opinions, but I believe no one, especially on this continent, has enough info to do anything more than speculate about who did it. It will be some time before we know who was behind it, if ever.

Then you do not mind me saying that the news i posted (before i should have) have been confirmed three times and one time by tape?

It was teh Taliban and no sane man would expect anything but them.

It's not opinion anymore.

We really need to eradicate them and i for one, for some reason, would like you to understand that.

They are few and they are evil.

So you have an inside source to inaccurate news. Hell I can get that from fox.

I do, i returned from Afghanistan in late November, i have not one but several sources that confirmed the Taliban involvement within five minutes of the news.

But you go ahead and believe whatever you like.

See, punkarses running around doesn't matter much to me until they get in my way.

Don't get in my way.

<<Within 5 minutes eh? Hell I can make up a lie within seconds! Oh NOES! brit bad man on the prowl! Me is scared!

Thanks, asshole, I just blew pepsi on my monitor. :laugh:

Oh, if it isn't our new Hitler in person... seee seee, loook muslims do it, must kill all muslims, don't tell me it's not all muslims you bitches cus it is muslims now i read it is muslims and it is islam and i want muslims dead.

I know, i know, you're pissy about me pointing out your meaningless generalizations, but that don't matter too much son, i mean, just because you are kinda stupid it doesn't mean you have to portray yourself as a bad man who will laugh at horrible jokes just because it is at my expense.

I know your sort fairly well, you get drunk, write something stupid, shut up and don't dare entering the thread nor responding, then someone else writes something and you are all over it.

I mean, there are so many things that are pathetic, there has to be a word for this level of pathetic?

 

[Lemon law]

With all due respect to JOS, there is something pathetic and clueless about the British. Still pretending they are numero uno when the are decidedly second stringers as their former empire collapsed in one short century. The answer is two fold. (1) The world changed and they didn't. (2) The lack of smarts and inefficiency. But what they had and pissed away is truly amazing for a small island nation.

To give a short history, England proper was incredibly backward during Roman times, and when Rome cast their greedy eye on England they made short work of them. And the English learned from it. Rome fell, Christianity came, waves of Viking came and were assimilated as England acquired a new national identity separated by water from a larger Europe. Then came 1066 and the Normans from France invaded and easily rolled up the Anglo Saxons in what amounted to the last time the English were successfully invaded. But its became a wash as the Norman's became English and England continued to develop as fast as the larger Europe but water kept them safe from larger European nations.

In comparison, circa 1100 AD, the Islamic empire was far more extensive, more politically mature, and at a far higher level of science than that of Europe. And its was the crusades that brought them together. To Islam it was endless hoards of barbarian louts too numerous to resist. For the Europeans it was discovering how much better the Islamic
metallurgy was. And gasp they discovered all those silks and spices Islam had along their monopoly trade routes to the east. Of course the Christians "won on numbers" and were able to occupy Jerusalem for a century or so. But being more politically mature meant Islam realizing that steady resistance would win and soon the Europeans were gone and various Islamic nations were making a bundle off their trade routes from European countries.

And while Islam rested on its laurels the Europeans progressed on from largely feudal States into nation States. And soon made tremendous strides in military and naval technology and also in the sciences. Spurred on by the holy grail of making an end run around Islam to get at the wealth of the Orient. And by AD 1500 routes to the America's
and around Africa were found while England lagged Spain and Portugal. Then King Henry the 8'th decided to divorce, formed his own church to do the deed, which PO'd Spain which built a mighty armada which should have crushed England despite its feeble ship building counter response. But the Brits got lucky, the Spanish armada was wrecked in a storm,
and lesson learned kept building ships. Soon they were looting Spanish treasure ships for cash and went on to carve out a colonial empire with superior military technology and organization. Paying for their military with colonial profits. And the model works if you can retain the colonies and use a divide and conquer efficient military strategy. But the same model fails if one collides with other similar powers or end up exhausting one self holding the colonies militarily. But as a middle sized State, England was able to pursue a large state strategy because its navy kept it safe while other European powers had no such safety from internecine warfare. Now airplanes cross water and the channel is no longer a big barrier.

Meanwhile Islamists in the mid-east who lost their trade monopoly have been in a deep
denial snit ever since. As they still struggle to escape European domination. Ironically it was a failed British occupation of Iraq in the 1920's and 30's that exhausted England while Germany and Italy armed that is partly responsible for the demise of the British empire.

In contrast the time honored strategy of smaller football nations is more galling but more efficient. Hold on to your national identity as you are conquered. And Nations like the Vietnams, Koreas, Estonia, Finland, good parts of the mid- east, and should I say most of the world had gone through many cycles of being conquered, then breaking away, only to be gobbled up again. For them resistance movements lasting centuries are their expected norm. Finally the hated occupier is told to not go away mad, just go away.

So I somewhat laugh at JOS who is clueless to his own history as he thinks military force will rapidly win in places like Pakistan or Iraq. And cry as I see the US stupidly try the same. If we don't wise up and get smarter, we will exhaust ourselves in a futile military effort. And we in the US are well on our way already.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: yllus
*shakes head* Bhutto was Musharraf's ticket to holding onto power, albeit in a limited form. That ticket is now dead. He had nothing to gain from this.

Exactly. He is the next to die, and likely as a result of the chaos this situation creates.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: bamacre
"If you harbor terrorists, you are a terrorist." - GWB

And yet how many billions of dollars have we given Pakistan since OBL has been there?

This is some fucked up foreign policy we have.

You're assuming that our goal is to fight terrorism. I think that's obviously not the case, terrorism just provides a really convenient excuse for all the things various people wanted to do anyways. From rearranging our foreign policy to shredding the constitution, terrorism is a really good justification...but I don't think a lot of folks are really interested in fighting it.

You forgot to add oil to your tin foil rant.

 

[MadRat]

JohnOfSheffield-

You are so sure the Taliban did it. Unfortunately the Taliban is quite in bed with isi, Musharraf depends on a cafeful trade between the two. I'd argue the US sent a pretty clear message that his relationship with the Taliban will not affect his loyalty to the US. But then again the politics go far deeper than a simple, superficial War on Terror. This is about real power.

You can believe death is the military solution for battles between ideologies, but it is not. Isolation is the best solution. The enemy will consume themselves in due time. The US has quietly managed all of the terrorism strongholds and is reigning them in one by one. Its a slow process. But its not without precedence. Think barbary pirates.

 

[ProfJohn]

Why are all the Ron Paul fan boys so dead set against the idea of AQ killing Bhutto?

It seems simple to me:
If AQ has enough power to go around killing people like Bhutto then we and the rest of the world can?t sit back and ignore AQ.

And if we can?t ignore AQ then Ron Paul?s foreign policy beliefs fall apart around him.

Which brings me to an even bigger point:
Ron Paul has rapid base of young 20 something?s whose entire adult life experience has been filled with terrorism. And now all of a sudden someone comes along with a magic plan to make all that terrorism go away. ?If we just leave the rest of the world alone, the rest of the world will leave us alone!!!? Which is similar to thinking that if you just leave the local bully alone he will stop stealing your lunch money.

 

[MadRat]

Al Queda doesn't exist in the conventional sense. To believe AQ killed her is as absurd as to believe OBL is still alive.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Why are all the Ron Paul fan boys so dead set against the idea of AQ killing Bhutto?

It seems simple to me:
If AQ has enough power to go around killing people like Bhutto then we and the rest of the world can?t sit back and ignore AQ.

And if we can?t ignore AQ then Ron Paul?s foreign policy beliefs fall apart around him.

Which brings me to an even bigger point:
Ron Paul has rapid base of young 20 something?s whose entire adult life experience has been filled with terrorism. And now all of a sudden someone comes along with a magic plan to make all that terrorism go away. ?If we just leave the rest of the world alone, the rest of the world will leave us alone!!!? Which is similar to thinking that if you just leave the local bully alone he will stop stealing your lunch money.

Wow, now go back and read the last part of what you typed. And think about it.

Who is the bully? I think both sides have played that roll quite a bit. Probably us more so than them.

 

[ProfJohn]

You?re reading too much into my statement?

Ron Paul seems to think that if we just ignore the rest of the world that the rest of the world will ignore us. However, Osama and AQ are on a religious crusade and their goal isn?t to stop the US from meddling in their affairs, but to spread Islam to the entire world.

Following WW 1 we tried the non-intervention policy and ignored Hitler and the Japanese as they expanded their power one little country at a time. When we finally woke up to reality we ended up with WW 2 and 20+ million dead.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
However, Osama and AQ are on a religious crusade and their goal isn?t to stop the US from meddling in their affairs, but to spread Islam to the entire world.

They cannot do it alone. Cutting off their recruitment MUST be done to fight this "war on terror" effectively.

And AQ has a long history of failure. From Kutb and al-Zawahiri in Egypt, all the way to AQ in Iraq, they fail time and time again. Why? Because moderate Muslims don't want what they want, and they certainly don't care for the means (killing of civilians) either. Face it, AQ's recruitment depends greatly on us meddling in ME and Muslim affairs. Take that away, and AQ becomes smaller and weaker. And OBL and al-Zawahiri become just a couple of dumbasses living in caves making betamax tapes.

 

[Lemon law]

Non Prof John makes a bogus point when he says---Ron Paul has rapid base of young 20 something?s whose entire adult life experience has been filled with terrorism.

When in fact there has been one and only one real terrorist attacks on soil in their life.
And I am far older and have still experienced one and only one real terrorist attack on US soil in my life.

The only other filled with terrorists attacks on US assets are only after we go onto foreign soil and meddle around. And the lesson many are taking is that the GWB policy of aggressively combating terrorism is only creating more and not less terrorists attacks. They may be younger than you are but they seem to be a lot smarter. A lesson you might consider if you want to become less dumb Non prof John.

What part of a failed strategy don't you understand. Or do you think more international terrorism is a good thing? Or that all failed offense and no defense is a good thing?

 

[MadRat]

I've seen terrorism before. A month ago we had it here at Von Maur. So what if there are 1 million other ticking time bombs out there ready to kill innocent people for their own ideology.

Sure it is tragic that people die in these events. But life goes on.

And if one's message is snuffed by their own death then obviously it wasn't very important. Only time will tell how important Bhutto's assination was on the grand scale.

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Non Prof John makes a bogus point when he says---Ron Paul has rapid base of young 20 something?s whose entire adult life experience has been filled with terrorism.

When in fact there has been one and only one real terrorist attacks on soil in their life.
And I am far older and have still experienced one and only one real terrorist attack on US soil in my life.

The only other filled with terrorists attacks on US assets are only after we go onto foreign soil and meddle around. And the lesson many are taking is that the GWB policy of aggressively combating terrorism is only creating more and not less terrorists attacks. They may be younger than you are but they seem to be a lot smarter. A lesson you might consider if you want to become less dumb Non prof John.

What part of a failed strategy don't you understand. Or do you think more international terrorism is a good thing? Or that all failed offense and no defense is a good thing?

Here is one fact, Lemon Law.

I'm almost around 30 and have seen enough terrorist attacks in my nation (India) to sicken me for a lifetime.

Here is another fact, Lemon Law. Terrorist attacks do not happen because your country tried to some thing good for this fvcked up world. Terror attacks happen because they form a part of a fvcked ideology which promotes perpetual expansionism.

Here is still one more fact, Lemon Law. These attacks will happen irrelevant of the fact whether the U.S invaded Iraq or GWB didn't take a dump a particular morning. Why do you blame your country for this?

Understand this, Lemon Law.

The problems in the Middle East is happening because of a particular expansionist ideology, not because of GWB. Your boys are doing yeoman service to the world in trying to maintain stability there (especially Afghanistan.) I wish the world will stop being selfish and contribute to the situation, first of all, my very own nation : India.

It's time the world is forced to contribute.

 

[Braznor]

Regarding your original question, OP.

Yep, it was Islamist fanaticism which did Benazir in. I have no cause to love Musharaff (the bastard was about to nuke my nation!) But I have to admit he is the least worst mofo there for us at present.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: MadRat
JohnOfSheffield-

You are so sure the Taliban did it. Unfortunately the Taliban is quite in bed with isi, Musharraf depends on a cafeful trade between the two. I'd argue the US sent a pretty clear message that his relationship with the Taliban will not affect his loyalty to the US. But then again the politics go far deeper than a simple, superficial War on Terror. This is about real power.

You can believe death is the military solution for battles between ideologies, but it is not. Isolation is the best solution. The enemy will consume themselves in due time. The US has quietly managed all of the terrorism strongholds and is reigning them in one by one. Its a slow process. But its not without precedence. Think barbary pirates.

I just got back in November afer leading a SOF force and getting delayed.

When i say something i mean it.

You do not know shit, the Taliban and the ISI connection does not match since the ISI has been fucking them up as mush as we have and after our reports for years now.

I believe that the Talibans need to be eradicated and it soothes my soul that even if i am not going to be there the likes of me will.

If democracy previls in Pakistan, the troops will still be needed, i would go there voulantarily and so would anyone else who has been there and seen the changes we have made.

I believe that this is the very thing i have been arguing for since forever, it will be done now and i'll be in goddamn Tchad?

Life is NOT fair, neither is duty.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
With all due respect to JOS, there is something pathetic and clueless about the British. Still pretending they are numero uno when the are decidedly second stringers as their former empire collapsed in one short century. The answer is two fold. (1) The world changed and they didn't. (2) The lack of smarts and inefficiency. But what they had and pissed away is truly amazing for a small island nation.

To give a short history, England proper was incredibly backward during Roman times, and when Rome cast their greedy eye on England they made short work of them. And the English learned from it. Rome fell, Christianity came, waves of Viking came and were assimilated as England acquired a new national identity separated by water from a larger Europe. Then came 1066 and the Normans from France invaded and easily rolled up the Anglo Saxons in what amounted to the last time the English were successfully invaded. But its became a wash as the Norman's became English and England continued to develop as fast as the larger Europe but water kept them safe from larger European nations.

In comparison, circa 1100 AD, the Islamic empire was far more extensive, more politically mature, and at a far higher level of science than that of Europe. And its was the crusades that brought them together. To Islam it was endless hoards of barbarian louts too numerous to resist. For the Europeans it was discovering how much better the Islamic
metallurgy was. And gasp they discovered all those silks and spices Islam had along their monopoly trade routes to the east. Of course the Christians "won on numbers" and were able to occupy Jerusalem for a century or so. But being more politically mature meant Islam realizing that steady resistance would win and soon the Europeans were gone and various Islamic nations were making a bundle off their trade routes from European countries.

And while Islam rested on its laurels the Europeans progressed on from largely feudal States into nation States. And soon made tremendous strides in military and naval technology and also in the sciences. Spurred on by the holy grail of making an end run around Islam to get at the wealth of the Orient. And by AD 1500 routes to the America's
and around Africa were found while England lagged Spain and Portugal. Then King Henry the 8'th decided to divorce, formed his own church to do the deed, which PO'd Spain which built a mighty armada which should have crushed England despite its feeble ship building counter response. But the Brits got lucky, the Spanish armada was wrecked in a storm,
and lesson learned kept building ships. Soon they were looting Spanish treasure ships for cash and went on to carve out a colonial empire with superior military technology and organization. Paying for their military with colonial profits. And the model works if you can retain the colonies and use a divide and conquer efficient military strategy. But the same model fails if one collides with other similar powers or end up exhausting one self holding the colonies militarily. But as a middle sized State, England was able to pursue a large state strategy because its navy kept it safe while other European powers had no such safety from internecine warfare. Now airplanes cross water and the channel is no longer a big barrier.

Meanwhile Islamists in the mid-east who lost their trade monopoly have been in a deep
denial snit ever since. As they still struggle to escape European domination. Ironically it was a failed British occupation of Iraq in the 1920's and 30's that exhausted England while Germany and Italy armed that is partly responsible for the demise of the British empire.

In contrast the time honored strategy of smaller football nations is more galling but more efficient. Hold on to your national identity as you are conquered. And Nations like the Vietnams, Koreas, Estonia, Finland, good parts of the mid- east, and should I say most of the world had gone through many cycles of being conquered, then breaking away, only to be gobbled up again. For them resistance movements lasting centuries are their expected norm. Finally the hated occupier is told to not go away mad, just go away.

So I somewhat laugh at JOS who is clueless to his own history as he thinks military force will rapidly win in places like Pakistan or Iraq. And cry as I see the US stupidly try the same. If we don't wise up and get smarter, we will exhaust ourselves in a futile military effort. And we in the US are well on our way already.

You like to write fantasy stories, stick to doing that and let those who know do what we do best.

I do not expect any respect from you or your kind, you've never served.

I like your history bullshit, and crap, if anything i have made you pro Americana with all that that means, if your effort was made to make me despise you then you have done well, if it was to impress me then you have failed.

If it was so you could get to lick my balls, well, i'm sorry son, it's a no go.

Now go play in the corner with the other retards.

Sincerely, John

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Braznor
Regarding your original question, OP.

Yep, it was Islamist fanaticism which did Benazir in. I have no cause to love Musharaff (the bastard was about to nuke my nation!) But I have to admit he is the least worst mofo there for us at present.

Considering your own Hindu fanaticism expressed by yourself you should probably just shut the fuck up aright about now

You are arguing for your own against the other side and just so you are aware of it, Hindus or Muslims, i really could not care less.

For those with access to the intelligence reports (all two of us?) regarding the LTTE we all know that Hindu's were the worst source of terrorism before the US (no, the US admin) decided it was a great idea to invade Iraq with one fifth of the troops needed.

A an aside superior force does work, but you fucking need to use it to work, look at how Israel did it or England in Falklands for that matter.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Ronstang
JohnOfSheffield......most of these people probably don't even know what the SAS is....Special Air Service....and I bet they don't even understand what it is if they do know. You are wasting your time around this place unless you have posts full of speculation and conjecture.

Well, i'm at home now, and there are good people around here, Maluckey, and Palehorse, and those who have formerly served.

I don't mind the disrespect, they do not know me.

I'd rather not speculate and i have a hard time even posting what i do know since i have to find a news source before i can post it, which sometimes takes me weeks and most of the time i just forget it.

But when it comes to things like who we are and why we do what we do.

They are sending more in, i wish, man, you do not know how dearly i wish i could bring my men into this, this needs to be finished and we were amongst those who started it, chances are that if you ever been to Bagram or Kabul to stay for more than two days you have seen us leaving or coming back, we're the ones with all the yellow shit on.

If we don't fix this now, it's not going to ever be fixable.

Hey John, did you use to own a company that designed Motherboards?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Ronstang
JohnOfSheffield......most of these people probably don't even know what the SAS is....Special Air Service....and I bet they don't even understand what it is if they do know. You are wasting your time around this place unless you have posts full of speculation and conjecture.

Well, i'm at home now, and there are good people around here, Maluckey, and Palehorse, and those who have formerly served.

I don't mind the disrespect, they do not know me.

I'd rather not speculate and i have a hard time even posting what i do know since i have to find a news source before i can post it, which sometimes takes me weeks and most of the time i just forget it.

But when it comes to things like who we are and why we do what we do.

They are sending more in, i wish, man, you do not know how dearly i wish i could bring my men into this, this needs to be finished and we were amongst those who started it, chances are that if you ever been to Bagram or Kabul to stay for more than two days you have seen us leaving or coming back, we're the ones with all the yellow shit on.

If we don't fix this now, it's not going to ever be fixable.

Hey John, did you use to own a company that designed Motherboards?

No, i've been into programming a bit but never EE, why?

 

[Braznor]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Braznor
Regarding your original question, OP.

Yep, it was Islamist fanaticism which did Benazir in. I have no cause to love Musharaff (the bastard was about to nuke my nation!) But I have to admit he is the least worst mofo there for us at present.

Considering your own Hindu fanaticism expressed by yourself you should probably just shut the fuck up aright about now

You are arguing for your own against the other side and just so you are aware of it, Hindus or Muslims, i really could not care less.

For those with access to the intelligence reports (all two of us?) regarding the LTTE we all know that Hindu's were the worst source of terrorism before the US (no, the US admin) decided it was a great idea to invade Iraq with one fifth of the troops needed.

A an aside superior force does work, but you fucking need to use it to work, look at how Israel did it or England in Falklands for that matter.

Look soldier, call me what the fvck you want. I don't give a fvck again. I'm not here to be a damned choir boy. The point is the likes of me uphold the candle of civilization in this wretched part of the world.

I'm a writer and I like rhetoric and doesn't make a fanatic. I don't really care what anyone thinks of me or bother correcting their impression. One thing though, I'm more civilized or reasonable than most people here prone to cycles of retaliation. Here is another fact, the LTTE has nothing to do with Hinduism or anything I had to talk about here. Yes, superior force works, but it needs proper application. Exactly the fvcking point I argued.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Braznor

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Braznor
Regarding your original question, OP.

Yep, it was Islamist fanaticism which did Benazir in. I have no cause to love Musharaff (the bastard was about to nuke my nation!) But I have to admit he is the least worst mofo there for us at present.

Considering your own Hindu fanaticism expressed by yourself you should probably just shut the fuck up aright about now

You are arguing for your own against the other side and just so you are aware of it, Hindus or Muslims, i really could not care less.

For those with access to the intelligence reports (all two of us?) regarding the LTTE we all know that Hindu's were the worst source of terrorism before the US (no, the US admin) decided it was a great idea to invade Iraq with one fifth of the troops needed.

A an aside superior force does work, but you fucking need to use it to work, look at how Israel did it or England in Falklands for that matter.

Look soldier, call me what the fvck you want.

I'm a writer and I like rhetoric and yes, that doesn't make a fanatic though. But trust me, I would rather let you do what you believe of me than bother correcting your impression. Here is the fact, the LTTE has nothing to do with Hinduism or anything I had to talk here. Yes, superior force works, but it needs proper application. Exactly the fvck I'm arguing here.

I'm not a soldier, i'm an officer, a Captain more specifically, and what was dug up and posed about you that you wrote was fanaticism the size of Talibans.

Yet the LTTE consists of what? Hindus? You know it and i know it, we both know they are responsible for classic terrorist acts and plenty of them. You saying that they have nothing to do with Hindusim is akin to Magomago saying that islamic groups committing terrorist acts has nothing to do with Islam.

Then we have several thousands of cases of battery acid attacks in India (if i can't rape her anymore i'm going to make sure no one else wants to).

These are people, not religions, evil will exists with or without it but to make yourself up as some kind of superior compared to Pakistanis, well, that shit just won't fly with me.