• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Go FoxNews: Homicide Bomber vs. Suicide Bomber

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Morph

Banned
Oct 14, 1999
747
0
0
If a 250-pound muscle-bound extreme fighter attacks a 90-lb weakling and beats the hell out of him, do you call it a "fight" or a "beating"?

I don't know, when I think of a "war", I think of a more two-sided affair. This seems more like an out-of-control military action to me.

PS. I thought it was funny the way that the Bush administration was taking bids on the Iraq rebuilding projects while they were still supposedly pursuing diplomatic solutions.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
When the weakling gets in a good shot to the gonads, solar plexus, side of the knee, or an eye . . . it's a fight.
 

jahawkin

Golden Member
Aug 24, 2000
1,355
0
0
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
As far as liberating the Iraqi people, that is more of result of the war instead of the goal. The real goal is to disarm Iraq and remove Saddam from power. . .
Runner-up Operational Monikers:

Operation Don't Fudge with Us (Christian Bush would not tolerate foul language)
Even born-again George uses some foul language once in a while. For example, when describing his position on Iraq:
"F___ Saddam. We're taking him out." Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. It was March 2002, and Rice was meeting with three U.S. Senators, discussing how to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, or perhaps in a coalition with America's Middle East allies. Bush wasn't interested. He waved his hand dismissively, recalls a participant, and neatly summed up his Iraq policy in that short phrase. The Senators laughed uncomfortably; Rice flashed a knowing smile. The President left the room.
 

Morph

Banned
Oct 14, 1999
747
0
0
Originally posted by: jahawkin


Even born-again George uses some foul language once in a while. For example, when describing his position on Iraq:
"F___ Saddam. We're taking him out." Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. It was March 2002, and Rice was meeting with three U.S. Senators, discussing how to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, or perhaps in a coalition with America's Middle East allies. Bush wasn't interested. He waved his hand dismissively, recalls a participant, and neatly summed up his Iraq policy in that short phrase. The Senators laughed uncomfortably; Rice flashed a knowing smile. The President left the room.
This is very disturbing.. What is the source?
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Are you disturbed that he cursed or believes foreign policy is a function of personal feelings about other world leaders?

 

apoppin

Lifer
Mar 9, 2000
34,890
0
0
alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Morph
Originally posted by: jahawkin


Even born-again George uses some foul language once in a while. For example, when describing his position on Iraq:
"F___ Saddam. We're taking him out." Those were the words of President George W. Bush, who had poked his head into the office of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice. It was March 2002, and Rice was meeting with three U.S. Senators, discussing how to deal with Iraq through the United Nations, or perhaps in a coalition with America's Middle East allies. Bush wasn't interested. He waved his hand dismissively, recalls a participant, and neatly summed up his Iraq policy in that short phrase. The Senators laughed uncomfortably; Rice flashed a knowing smile. The President left the room.
This is very disturbing.. What is the source?
Bush's mouth. :p



Follow the LINK (in Blue - [Iraq]) to Time.com. (you included it in your quote)

:D
 

friedpie

Senior member
Oct 1, 2002
703
0
0
Originally posted by: Electrode
"Homicide Bomber" is one of the stupidest and most irritating examples of sensationalism that I have yet heard. Fox News decided that, since the term "Homicide" is more inflammatory and therefore more exciting, it is O.K. to misrepresent the facts to boost their ratings. Typical tabloid media.
I don't think the intention is to inflame. We all know what suicide bomber means so how can you inflame people's senses any more than that already does? I think the intent is not to focus on the suicide, who some might see as brave (the Arabs call them martyrs), but to focus instead of the act of murdering people.


 

ASK THE COMMUNITY