It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by macman
Originally posted by mossme89
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by mossme89
What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here.
The problem is that it leads to an endless cycle of bloodshed. We're all human and we all live on the same planet. We need to stop killing each other and learn to talk things out like sane people.
Part of the reason we have enemies is because we stick our noses where they don't belong.
While I agree with the fact that the US federal govt sticks its nose in the business of other countries and even the US citizen, I still have no problem with the statement of killing your enemy.
Talk only goes so far. Look at the UN. That is the biggest bloated group of wind bags that could ever have come together.
Lots of talk, no results or resolutions.
Originally posted by Diablos
Originally posted by ShiftTrioPlease do not feed the trolls =)
The many conservatives who agree with me must be "trolls" as well.
Originally posted by Ismail
I find it curious that when a certain type of americans see a group of muslims chanting "death to America", they equate them to fanatical barbarians, but when the same feelings of bloodlust and hatred are expressed in public by their own compatriots, it's "not an issue".
These warmongering conservatives should maybe pause at some point, and reflect on which country the world as a whole perceives as the greater threat. A third world muslim state, engaged in a fumbling effort to devellop nukes, or the worlds greatest military power, that has been engaged in constant state of war since the middle of last century, and that is slowly but surely producing generation after generation of dim-whitted fundamentalist christians who unfortunatly get to vote (and are, on occasion, elected president).
Think about it.
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Destinyone
Not watching the debate and watching the clips on this means what?
Did not know you hold the final say in who can and can't comment.
I like the thought of getting rid of your enemies.
So the crowds in these debates cheer at the thought of killing others, cheering on the death penalty and cheering on the idea that people should be left to die if they have no insurance.
Originally posted by Drew99GT
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by mossme89
What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here.
I agree; however the HUGE exception is this: it's obvious the US government under the NDAA, the DHS, and FEMA classifies many US citizens as "enemies" because they do not agree with certain policies of the government. Newt said what he said; does he think US citizens who are classified as enemies of the US government should be killed?
The way certain legislation has been written recently and the growing police and military state domestically, it could be a slippery slope and it's BLATANTLY unconstitutional. The US Constitution was written to give citizens the ability to disagree with the government. It's why the country was founded.
Originally posted by P12SOLD
Originally posted by macman
Originally posted by P12SOLD
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by P12SOLD
Kind of like a really big Suicide Bomber, huh?
Yeah, you go ahead and believe that Iran would not do it.
Thats a false analogy. And, what prove have you got to show Iran would fire first upon Israel, if it had a nuclear weapon? Israel, it seems is carrying out covert actions inside Iran. Has Iran been as belligerent, as Israel?edit on 17-1-2012 by P12SOLD because: (no reason given)
I am not going to do your research.
There are many quotes for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other groups stating they would strike if given the opportunity.
And yes, Iran has been on the covert, just like other countries.
My research undertaking would probably be lot different to your kind of research, mate. Tell me now do you speak Persian? If you do. Then you wouldn't be saying these are true quotes. He never said he strike first your telling lies here.
Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
The title of this thread is...............
Debate audience goes crazy cheering when Gingrich says "We'll kill our enemies.",
The first paragragh from the O.P. is..................
I saw this on the South Carolina debate last night and am utterly disgusted at how the audience went ballistic cheering. This clip isn't even half of it. A few seconds later, the camera showed people almost falling off their seats in utter joy. If this the attitude of our country, I have officially lost hope. We're doomed to continue the vicious cycle of bloodshed.
And your first response is......What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here
Am I wrong in assuming that your response is supporting Gingrich's words ?
Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
Am I wrong in assuming that you see no disgust in the audience response as the O.P. expresses in his post ?
Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
Your cavilier approch to killing is disheartining.
Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
No honest person wants to go to war and no honorable will walk away from it when theatened,
Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
but for one to fight there must be a cause and a purpose not just accusations and assumptions.
Originally posted by OLD HIPPY DUDE
That is where your moral compass is broken. ( your quote)......Don't see the issue here. (I guess you don't.)
Originally posted by colbyforce
Originally posted by macman
reply to post by mossme89
.k
What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here.
You also kill many innocent people, numbskull. What about them? Ares you going to go apologize to the parents whose kids were blown to bits? Hey, blame it on the "bad guys " right? Everything's so simple isn't it? Kill 'em dead. Problem solved.
Originally posted by 6Eyengineer
Originally posted by macman
Originally posted by ararisq
Originally posted by macman
What is the problem?
In warfare, you kill your enemy.
I want my dangerous enemies dead.
Don't see the issue here.
Who are our enemies again? Anyone labeled a "Terrorist" + Iranians? Chinese? Russians? Libyans? Egyptians? Syrians? Venezuelans? Cubans?
Anyone that threatens the US.
Very simple.
Nice. But instead of threaten, How about If you attack us or our allies, then its game on? Threatening is a bit to vague.