MUSLIMS BEHEAD SEVENTEEN PEOPLE FOR DANCING

FUCK...

Yes, we did those things. That by itself did not make it right.

England and France had your attitude in WWI: punish the Germans, make them know who is boss, humiliate them and leave a mark on their economy that will remind them for decades that they LOST.

The result: WWII

That was such a good deal at Versailles, wasn't it?

No, "every means at it's disposal" is NOT the right attitude. If you really believe what you said you should have photos of General Giap and Che up on your wall as heroes. Terrorism, gurilla warfare, etc., are what you are obviously lead to if you REALLY believe what you said. And let's not forget biological weapons. They are really quite effective.

But when we have done that, we have lost. We have become the people we say we are fighting against. Who do you retaliate against when it's a Detroit born fanatic who blows up a tunnel? How many civilians do you kill to shout out to the world that our principles are something to be admired? Originally Posted by Old-T

Sorry, OldT, Im calling Bull Shit on this.You do remember that after we thouroughly whipped both Japan and Germany, we then helped them rebuild into extremely productive Countrys.

But first we had to get rid of the Nazis and the Emperialist who's aim was to bring other people into subjegation.

I see NO corralation between WW-1 and WW-2 in this respect.

Let's see if you can understand this simple statement. Everyone in the Taliban is a Muslim, all of them. The heart of the problem in Afganistan is fundamentalist Islam. If the Afgans were Buddhists, or Hindus, or Methodists, there wouldn't be a problem.

You don't see Methodist zealots blowing up buses full of school children or chopping off people's heads because they forgot to go Sunday school. Originally Posted by joe bloe

You are a fucking idiot. Has anybody told you that today? (btw -- you are not alone, but far ahead of the peleton)

I've asked a number of times of you are employed. Care to answer that?

I see NO corralation between WW-1 and WW-2 in this respect. Originally Posted by Jackie S

I think you might have missed my point: at the end of WWI the victors--mostly France and to a lesser degree England--wanted to humiliate and "totally defeat" Germany.

That excessively draconian view was a significant piece of the political climate that lead to Hitler and WWII. That was my point, not that the ends to WWI and WWII were the same.