Dead Children

[SpidermanTUba]

What's the difference between children killed by terrorists and children killed by U.S. bombs?

[jimnyc]

What's the difference between children killed by terrorists and children killed by U.S. bombs?

The terrorists do it on purpose. The US takes many precautions to avoid civilian casualties.

[SpidermanTUba]

The terrorists do it on purpose. The US takes many precautions to avoid civilian casualties.

How is dropping bombs on populated urban areas taking 'precautions' to avoid civilian deaths? It would seem if you wanted to avoid killing civilians, you wouldn't drop bombs next to apartment complexes. You would also not intentionally drop bombs on civilians targets, such as TV stations, if you wanted to 'avoid' killing civilians.

[avatar4321]

whats the difference between children accidently killed in defending our lives and children purposely killed through abortion?

[SpidermanTUba]

whats the difference between children accidently killed in defending our lives and children purposely killed through abortion?

Its not possible to kill a child through abortion. Abortion only kills fetuses.

BTW, are you claiming that the US military's decision to bomb civilian areas was 'accidental'? Seems hard to believe that we accidentally dropped thousands of bombs on Baghdad. Who was responsible for that screw up, and were they fired?

[PostmodernProphet]

Seems hard to believe that we accidentally dropped thousands of bombs on Baghdad.

IIRC, the only time we dropped "thousands of bombs" on Baghdad was in the first week of the war.....those were dropped on government buildings in the middle of the night, not on civilian residential areas.....the casualty figures were quite low, intentionally......

[SpidermanTUba]

IIRC, the only time we dropped "thousands of bombs" on Baghdad was in the first week of the war.....those were dropped on government buildings in the middle of the night, not on civilian residential areas.....the casualty figures were quite low, intentionally......

What were the casualty figures?

[glockmail]

What were the casualty figures? Who cares?

[manu1959]

What's the difference between children killed by terrorists and children killed by U.S. bombs?

the terrorists should stop using them as human shields.....

[Yurt]

What's the difference between children killed by terrorists and children killed by U.S. bombs?

If you don't know the moral dissimilarity, then you are a terrorist lover. Throughout history war has been inevitable, sometimes in order to accomplish a greater good, some bad must occur. Your question also shows your incredible ignorance, for even our enemies over there take children being killed as a necessary in order to expunge the infidel. It is people like you that will hand victory to them. They know this well and their strategy is working. Hide in civilian clothes in civilian schools, mosques, houses and the inevitable will occur.

[avatar4321]

Its not possible to kill a child through abortion. Abortion only kills fetuses.

BTW, are you claiming that the US military's decision to bomb civilian areas was 'accidental'? Seems hard to believe that we accidentally dropped thousands of bombs on Baghdad. Who was responsible for that screw up, and were they fired?

Thanks for showing your utter hypocrisy.

[PostmodernProphet]

What were the casualty figures?

iraqbodycount had the early war estimates of casualties at around 5000 if I recall.....I have no idea what percentage of those came from the first week's bombing and what percentage from troops moving in.......

[Nukeman]

What's the difference between children killed by terrorists and children killed by U.S. bombs?

Whats the difference between YOU being shot by a lunatic or accidentaly being run over by a car....?????


I'll give you a little hint.... Ones on purpose the other is an accident...

Now if the terrorist were to actually fight and not hide behind women and children than we could completely eliminate the civilian casualties but since thats not going to happen this is a mute point....

[JohnDoe]

whats the difference between children accidently killed in defending our lives and children purposely killed through abortion?I would venture to say that our government does not walk in to the doctor's office for the abortion, individuals on their own without any government pressure make the decision to abort their future children, where as our government when giving the orders to drop bombs in areas near civilians, is basically ORDERING and making the choice to kill, and doing such in our names as our representatives.

That's where I see the difference.

jd

[Sir Evil]

I would venture to say that our government does not walk in to the doctor's office for the abortion, individuals on their own without any government pressure make the decision to abort their future children, where as our government when giving the orders to drop bombs in areas near civilians, is basically ORDERING and making the choice to kill, and doing such in our names as our representatives.

That's where I see the difference.

jd

Yep, and I'm certain it is in hopes that children are killed in the process. :rolleyes:

[darin]

This is perhaps the stupidest thread NOT in the 'conspiracies' forum. The US does NOT bomb children. We bomb terrorist assholes who launch, plan, and produce attacks from their homes...surrounded by their kids.

(shrug).

[glockmail]

This is perhaps the stupidest thread NOT in the 'conspiracies' forum. The US does NOT bomb children. We bomb terrorist assholes who launch, plan, and produce attacks from their homes...surrounded by their kids.

(shrug). You are dealing with idiots and haven't figgered that out yet, idiot!

[JohnDoe]

Yep, and I'm certain it is in hopes that children are killed in the process. :rolleyes:
i have never said it was ''in hopes that children are killed in the process''!!!

But I am not going to say that our gvt is not aware that ''collateral damage'' is not a calculated and considered part of the equation, when they choose, to drop bombs.

This is why going to War should always be a last resort, never preemptive, but only when a real danger is imminent, to our citizens imho....otherwise, unnecessary deaths of citizens is a ''choice'' that our government made....

and yes, i can see how others may differ with me and try to justify preemptive war as a Just measure, but I never will change my mind on this Sir Evil.

jd

[Sir Evil]

i have never said it was ''in hopes that children are killed in the process''!!!

But I am not going to say that our gvt is not aware that ''collateral damage'' is not a calculated and considered part of the equation, when they choose, to drop bombs.

This is why going to War should always be a last resort, never preemptive, but only when a real danger is imminent, to our citizens imho....otherwise, unnecessary deaths of citizens is a ''choice'' that our government made....

and yes, i can see how others may differ with me and try to justify preemptive war as a Just measure, but I never will change my mind on this Sir Evil.

jd

Never asked you to change. Write a letter, garner up some support, take it to congress, ask them to drop water baloons in futre wars.

[JohnDoe]

Never asked you to change. Write a letter, garner up some support, take it to congress, ask them to drop water baloons in futre wars.

Choosing NOT to START a war with someone that is NOT an imminent threat to us or has not attacked us in any manner, WOULD be a good start....

That's not too hard to do, but it takes Wisdom and a person with their eye on God imho.

jd

[Sir Evil]

Choosing NOT to START a war with someone that is NOT an imminent threat to us or has not attacked us in any manner, WOULD be a good start....

That's not too hard to do, but it takes Wisdom and a person with their eye on God imho.

jd

Yep, I have seen your wisdom, I have seen your version of god so could'nt agree more with that opinion.

[JohnDoe]

Yep, I have seen your wisdom, I have seen your version of god so could'nt agree more with that opinion.

:slap:


:laugh2:

[retiredman]

What's the difference between children killed by terrorists and children killed by U.S. bombs?


I would suggest that there is absolutely no difference between those two types of children. In either case, they are dead and their bodies mutilated.

I would suggest that differences begin to reveal themselves in the parents and siblings and family members left living... and that difference would be in who those survivors grow to hate for the death of the child.

I think it is a basic truism that, if the most creative way we can come up with to persuade muslims to stop killing us is by killing muslims, we really need to develop the stomach necessary to kill all of them.

And if that IS indeed the best method we can come up with, then perhaps we should start by just killing all of them living in America. The logistics of doing that are much simpler than lugging armies and munitions half way around the world. We could get a great head start here at home. [/sarcasm off]

[theHawk]

Choosing NOT to START a war with someone that is NOT an imminent threat to us or has not attacked us in any manner, WOULD be a good start....

Well we do that with every country every day. So we must be off to a great start!

[JohnDoe]

Well we do that with every country every day. So we must be off to a great start!We have done pretty well with it over the Centuries, but we have undeniably imo, failed at it also.

And yes, maybe this is in hindsight, but hindsight saves no innocent lives, thus Wisdom and advice from the truely wise must come in to play from the beginning and also in my opinion... an eye on God made man, Jesus Christ, who was our example to follow, the perfect man.

1 mistake out of every 10, could still leave millions of innocent, uninvolved people, dead, or ten's of thousands of innocent people dead. War should ALWAYS, be the last resort in protecting oneselves, because of its brutality and the devastation that it can bring to other children of God's.

It takes Wisdom and patience and insight to be a leader that can keep us out of unnecessary wars of choice and according to our Constitution it takes 2/3's member of the house and of the Senate, to declare war, just for the reasons I have mentioned above...the devastation that it causes to the innocent, including those of us left here to be enslaved to our govt via taxes to pay for it.

I think this step in declaring war that our constitution required was insightful of our founding fathers and morally based as well. We need to go back and follow the constitution regarding a Declaration of war and stop sidestepping it, the way presidents have done on BOTH sides of the aisle! :(

jd

[Gaffer]

We have done pretty well with it over the Centuries, but we have undeniably imo, failed at it also.

And yes, maybe this is in hindsight, but hindsight saves no innocent lives, thus Wisdom and advice from the truely wise must come in to play from the beginning and also in my opinion... an eye on God made man, Jesus Christ, who was our example to follow, the perfect man.

1 mistake out of every 10, could still leave millions of innocent, uninvolved people, dead, or ten's of thousands of innocent people dead. War should ALWAYS, be the last resort in protecting oneselves, because of its brutality and the devastation that it can bring to other children of God's.

It takes Wisdom and patience and insight to be a leader that can keep us out of unnecessary wars of choice and according to our Constitution it takes 2/3's member of the house and of the Senate, to declare war, just for the reasons I have mentioned above...the devastation that it causes to the innocent, including those of us left here to be enslaved to our govt via taxes to pay for it.

I think this step in declaring war that our constitution required was insightful of our founding fathers and morally based as well. We need to go back and follow the constitution regarding a Declaration of war and stop sidestepping it, the way presidents have done on BOTH sides of the aisle! :(

jd

It's not the presidents that are side stepping the declaration of war. It's congress. They will not declare war on anyone for any reason. It's been that way since Truman.

As for children being killed in war. That happens. Our military makes every effort to avoid innocents being killed or hurt. But when the enemy purposely sets up positions around civilians and in residential areas, there's little you can do about it. saddam was famous for using civilians as shields. hezbollah and hamas use them constantly. They make great propaganda when they get killed. Many times they are herded into areas at gun point and kept there as shields. It's all done to affect you. They want your compassion for the innocent to affect your support of the military and the war effort.

[JohnDoe]

It's not the presidents that are side stepping the declaration of war. It's congress. They will not declare war on anyone for any reason. It's been that way since Truman.

As for children being killed in war. That happens. Our military makes every effort to avoid innocents being killed or hurt. But when the enemy purposely sets up positions around civilians and in residential areas, there's little you can do about it. saddam was famous for using civilians as shields. hezbollah and hamas use them constantly. They make great propaganda when they get killed. Many times they are herded into areas at gun point and kept there as shields. It's all done to affect you. They want your compassion for the innocent to affect your support of the military and the war effort.

Hi Gaffer :)

Just another reason to make war as an absolute last resort, when being threatened even...because the innocent will be used by the enemy and killed by us, and propagandized to our detriment in my opinion.

And they use those civilians because they think we will be moral and ethical and not kill these innocent people just to get at them, the bad people. Similar to hiding in a hospital or a church filled with it's congregation and clergy.

So, I think we should hold back in those circumstances and find a way to remove these human shields before we bomb them.

They would be contained anyway.

I know, I know...my kind of thinking would make us lose wars.... :(

This is another reason why we shouldn't go in to any war without exhausting all of our other options...whether it be a coup from within that we managed to arrange, or having someone taking out the threat, -like saddam and his sons, but not going in to a full fledge war that will en bitter some of that country's citizens against us for centuries all because of the innocent that were killed who were their family members.

I don't think wars are all about military might, winning hearts and minds through moral integrity is an important part of the "win" also in my book.

Again, you can abandon your athiesm for a minute and "thank God" that Doves like me aren't running the Military or the War!!!! :D At least many of my own family members do!!!! Hahahahaha!!!

War is proposed too freely as a sollution to problems that could be handled by other means imo.
:dunno:

:salute:

jd

[Gaffer]

Hi Gaffer :)

Just another reason to make war as an absolute last resort, when being threatened even...because the innocent will be used by the enemy and killed by us, and propagandized to our detriment in my opinion.

And they use those civilians because they think we will be moral and ethical and not kill these innocent people just to get at them, the bad people. Similar to hiding in a hospital or a church filled with it's congregation and clergy.

So, I think we should hold back in those circumstances and find a way to remove these human shields before we bomb them.

They would be contained anyway.

I know, I know...my kind of thinking would make us lose wars.... :(

This is another reason why we shouldn't go in to any war without exhausting all of our other options...whether it be a coup from within that we managed to arrange, or having someone taking out the threat, -like saddam and his sons, but not going in to a full fledge war that will en bitter some of that country's citizens against us for centuries all because of the innocent that were killed who were their family members.

I don't think wars are all about military might, winning hearts and minds through moral integrity is an important part of the "win" also in my book.

Again, you can abandon your athiesm for a minute and "thank God" that Doves like me aren't running the Military or the War!!!! :D At least many of my own family members do!!!! Hahahahaha!!!

War is proposed too freely as a sollution to problems that could be handled by other means imo.
:dunno:

:salute:

jd

Good post JD. Yes I am greatful that doves are not in charge of the military. Though some sure are trying.

In a war situation you don't always have the option to wait out the enemy and avoid civilian deaths. Those people are basically hostages.

In a country like iraq under saddam. How easy do you think it would be to get an assassination team near him? Who is the successor? If any of the team is captured and talks guess who gets the blame. It would be considered an act of war. The US policy is also not to assassinate leaders of other nations. They can be targeted in war time but not in any other case. Sanctions only work if EVERYBODY takes part. Talking, as in irans case, only leads to iran getting closer to having the bombs it wants.

Carpet bombing was last used during the first gulf war. It is only used in areas that only contain military targets. Baghdad was only hit with precision weapons. Sometimes they miss or target the wrong spot. An example would be the cruise missile that hit the chinese embassy during clintons war over kosovo. A lot of civilians died during that action too. In fact thousands of civilians were killed. Somehow that is over looked by the Bush haters here. So is the fact we still have forces in kosovo and bosnia. clinton took out a despot, prevented millions of people from being killed. Freed people from oppression. He went to war for purely humanitarian reasons. Bush does the same with even more reasons and he's evil. Go figure.

[Sir Evil]

"thank God" that Doves like me

Did'nt I tell you to cut that shit out already?

You are not a dove at all, more like a buzzard circling a thread to post some rant of higher standards, hearts & minds, morally above crap to fit your argument instead of taking the subject at hand for what it is. Wars kill people, children unfortunately have been killed in the process, however to make it sound as if it were intentional which is what you are really attempting is bullshit.

The moment higher standards are applied when fighting those with no standards at all, it's over.

[JohnDoe]

Did'nt I tell you to cut that shit out already?

You are not a dove at all, more like a buzzard circling a thread to post some rant of higher standards, hearts & minds, morally above crap to fit your argument instead of taking the subject at hand for what it is. Wars kill people, children unfortunately have been killed in the process, however to make it sound as if it were intentional which is what you are really attempting is bullshit.

The moment higher standards are applied when fighting those with no standards at all, it's over.

:laugh2:

Do you think that I listen to you or need your advice on this SE? :poke:

No one tells me what to do SE, outside of my husband, occaisionally.

Does thinking about the consequences of war and the deaths that come from it make you uncomfortable SE? Thus your outburst?

Do you think it shouldn't be talked about or considered when we decide to go to war?

I think it should be considered and I believe we as a country on the whole, also consider and weigh these consequences before waging war....in fact making the lives of the people better than they were while under the control of the Despot right previous to attack is a critical part in Just War.

Thus the mission's name, "Operation Iraqi Freedom"....

Or was that just some Political Jingle that helped push what the Administration had already made up their minds to do?

I respect Gaffer's opinion, he makes good points, as usual, when he converses with me on this subject that I am very torn over. I am not looking for a fight on this, I am trying to understand it.



jd

[darin]

No one tells me what to do SE, outside of my husband, occasionally.


That's not exactly true. The Government tells you what to do, and don't do, all the time. GOD tells you what to do, if you'd listen. In fact, by accepting membership to this board, you've agreed to do what the Staff tells you to do.

:)

[Sir Evil]

:laugh2:

Do you think that I listen to you or need your advice on this SE? :poke:

No one tells me what to do SE, outside of my husband, occaisionally.

Does thinking about the consequences of war and the deaths that come from it make you uncomfortable SE? Thus your outburst?

Do you think it shouldn't be talked about or considered when we decide to go to war?

I think it should be considered and I believe we as a country on the whole, also consider and weigh these consequences before waging war....in fact making the lives of the people better than they were while under the control of the Despot right previous to attack is a critical part in Just War.

Thus the mission's name, "Operation Iraqi Freedom"....

Or was that just some Political Jingle that helped push what the Administration had already made up their minds to do?

I respect Gaffer's opinion, he makes good points, as usual, when he converses with me on this subject that I am very torn over. I am not looking for a fight on this, I am trying to understand it.



jd

It's of my opinion that you are not trying to understand it, that is what I am saying.

I have seen you do this countless times before where you try to justify topics with moral high ground, we are better than that type stuff. The topic is not waging war, it's about dead children. Now you are onto "Operation Freedom", and how the admin had already made their decisions anyway. It's see through, twist the original topic to suit the point you wanna make, and that point is that this administration is wrong at all possibilities.

Now quit using a higher power to hide your motives, you damn buzzard.

[JohnDoe]

That's not exactly true. The Government tells you what to do, and don't do, all the time. GOD tells you what to do, if you'd listen. In fact, by accepting membership to this board, you've agreed to do what the Staff tells you to do.
:)


Hahahahahahahaha!:laugh2:

YEAH, and that sucks wind, BIGTIME, for a person like me who likes to have control of her own self!!!!!

:eek:


jd

[darin]

Hahahahahahahaha!:laugh2:

YEAH, and that sucks wind, BIGTIME, for a person like me who likes to have control of her own self!!!!!

:eek:


jd

You're challenging me. Banned from Thread.

:)

[GW in Ohio]

What's the difference between children killed by terrorists and children killed by U.S. bombs?

The children killed by US bombs go straight to heaven, 'cause God is on our side.

George Bush told me so.

[JohnDoe]

It's of my opinion that you are not trying to understand it, that is what I am saying.

I have seen you do this countless times before where you try to justify topics with moral high ground, we are better than that type stuff. The topic is not waging war, it's about dead children. Now you are onto "Operation Freedom", and how the admin had already made their decisions anyway. It's see through, twist the original topic to suit the point you wanna make, and that point is that this administration is wrong at all possibilities.

Now quit using a higher power to hide your motives, you damn buzzard.


I will NEVER stop using a higher power in my reasoning or in my life SE. We happen to have Freedom of Religion in our country and protection from people like you that seem to want to squash it.... Are you sure you are not some far left wing radical in disguise?

And yes, this thread IS ABOUT DEAD CHILDREN as a consequence of WAR....I am not off topic, in the least.


:salute:
jd

[JohnDoe]

You're challenging me. Banned from Thread.

:)

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:


hahahahahaha!

smart ass!!!!!

:coffee:

jd

[darin]

I will NEVER stop using a higher power in my reasoning or in my life SE. We happen to have Freedom of Religion in our country and protection from people like you that seem to want to squash it.... Are you sure you are not some far left wing radical in disguise?

And yes, this thread IS ABOUT DEAD CHILDREN as a consequence of WAR....I am not off topic, in the least.


:salute:
jd



I think he means the false moral ground you place yourself upon with most threads. You take the topic, twist it into something HUGE, then stand perched atop your mountain of morality in a way which tries to paint those who disagree as immoral or evil.

:)

[Sir Evil]

I will NEVER stop using a higher power in my reasoning or in my life SE. We happen to have Freedom of Religion in our country and protection from people like you that seem to want to squash it.... Are you sure you are not some far left wing radical in disguise?

And yes, this thread IS ABOUT DEAD CHILDREN as a consequence of WAR....I am not off topic, in the least.


:salute:
jd

Freedom of religion? where did I mention anything about that? I mentioned how you use religion to hide behind while attempting to make a point without exposing the the true motive of what you are trying to say.


So while you are on topic, please explain this tidbit:


Thus the mission's name, "Operation Iraqi Freedom"....

Or was that just some Political Jingle that helped push what the Administration had already made up their minds to do?

So while the administration made up their minds already, they have also justified killing children when dropping bombs?


Walk the higher ground Doe, but understand that it puts you above nobody, in fact the way you use that higher power I would conclude that it puts you slightly below.

That upper echelon you put yourself on looks silly from my view, sorry.

[Abbey Marie]

I think he means the false moral ground you place yourself upon with most threads. You take the topic, twist it into something HUGE, then stand perched atop your mountain of morality in a way which tries to paint those who disagree as immoral or evil.

:)

'tis true, JD. :)

[Sir Evil]

I think he means the false moral ground you place yourself upon with most threads. You take the topic, twist it into something HUGE, then stand perched atop your mountain of morality in a way which tries to paint those who disagree as immoral or evil.

:)

Good vision.

[JohnDoe]

What's the difference between children killed by terrorists and children killed by U.S. bombs?

For the children and their surrounding surviving family members, NOTHING.

In the eyes of the "World" or the people within the Industrialized world, there is a HUGE DIFFERENCE, as many have said. A terrorist sets out to terrorize, he strikes at people that are innocent on PURPOSE to achieve his goal of terrorizing the masses of innocent people. This is not the case with strategic strikes made by USA bombs.

It doesn't mean that one life of a child taken before their time -verses another life of a child taken before their time, has any greater worth as a human being over the other....or any greater meaning to their unnecessary death.

jd

[Sir Evil]

For the children and their surrounding surviving family members, NOTHING.

In the eyes of the "World" or the people within the Industrialized world, there is a HUGE DIFFERENCE, as many have said. A terrorist sets out to terrorize, he strikes at people that are innocent on PURPOSE to achieve his goal of terrorizing the masses of innocent people. This is not the case with strategic strikes made by USA bombs.

It doesn't mean that one life of a child taken before their time -verses another life of a child taken before their time, has any greater worth as a human being over the other....or any greater meaning to their unnecessary death.

jd

How charming.

Lemme ask you something, is it the cross that you bare in vain that helps you lean a particular way?

[JohnDoe]

I think he means the false moral ground you place yourself upon with most threads. You take the topic, twist it into something HUGE, then stand perched atop your mountain of morality in a way which tries to paint those who disagree as immoral or evil.

:)


I honestly do not mean for it to come off that way. And I am sure when you end up standing your ground with your beliefs regarding Christianity and your views on sin and grace and mercy and Heaven and Hell, you don't mean to be atop a perch on the maountain of morality either....right? Just fuel for thought darin... ;)

It isn't a moral high ground of mine....I don't ever think of myself as being sinless, even with God's grace and gift.... I see myself as a sinner, falling short of who I can be, for the one I love, God.

And yes, I have taken special interest in you perhaps, and made comments that were unjustified...but I have mentioned before, you got a little under my skin because I think you remind me of my first husband... and the baggage from that was coming out in my posts to you.

That was NOT taking the high ground Darin, that was me, taking the low ground.... :( and I should not have allowed this mental war within, of mine, to be taken out on you.


NUFF SAID!!!

jd

[Abbey Marie]

Well, uh, since I've gotten the about the same judgmental treatment, it begs the question, of which ne'er-do-well in your past do I remind you?

[Sir Evil]

I honestly do not mean for it to come off that way. And I am sure when you end up standing your ground with your beliefs regarding Christianity and your views on sin and grace and mercy and Heaven and Hell, you don't mean to be atop a perch on the maountain of morality either....right? Just fuel for thought darin... ;)

It isn't a moral high ground of mine....I don't ever think of myself as being sinless, even with God's grace and gift.... I see myself as a sinner, falling short of who I can be, for the one I love, God.

And yes, I have taken special interest in you perhaps, and made comments that were unjustified...but I have mentioned before, you got a little under my skin because I think you remind me of my first husband... and the baggage from that was coming out in my posts to you.

That was NOT taking the high ground Darin, that was me, taking the low ground.... :( and I should not have allowed this mental war within, of mine, to be taken out on you.


NUFF SAID!!!

jd


Tisk tisk, the dove never flies free in painted skies darling.

[Sir Evil]

Uh oh Dove, are you feeling the heat from the bridge burning at both ends? Qucik, jump to higher ground. :laugh2:

[Gaffer]

A decision to go to war is not based on how many civilians might die. The decision is based on what the enemy country might or might not do. Targets are assessed for their military value. Not how many lives might be lost.

If an enemy anti-air radar is turned on it is picked up by our planes and a missile is launched against it. The location of that radar is the responsibility of the enemy, not the pilot taking it out.

[JohnDoe]

Well, uh, since I've gotten the about the same judgmental treatment, it begs the question, of which ne'er-do-well in your past do I remind you? My mother probably, who thought she knew all about me and, and wanted to control my thoughts and responses to the world in he perfect PC manner at all times, giving no room for any failure or forgiveness for it? :(

Or possibly the enabler, friends of the exhubby who encouraged him?

:dunno::dunno::dunno:

I honestly haven't figured the you and me out yet Abbey? I know I was also drawn to you, from the first day on this board, and something deeper inside than the fact that you have the same name as "My little kitty girl, Abbey"!

And Gaffer and Glock remind me of my hubby, and my dad, being hawks, more or less....

Oh hells bells, I got all kinds of things to work out on this board!!!!

Just knock me in the head if you see me out of line!!! I can take it....that is, once I get done sulking for a bit!

jd

[Abbey Marie]

My mother probably, who thought she knew all about me and, and wanted to control my thoughts and responses to the world in he perfect PC manner at all times, giving no room for any failure or forgiveness for it? :(

Or possibly the enabler, friends of the exhubby who encouraged him?

:dunno::dunno::dunno:

I honestly haven't figured the you and me out yet Abbey? I know I was also drawn to you, from the first day on this board, and something deeper inside than the fact that you have the same name as "My little kitty girl, Abbey"!

And Gaffer and Glock remind me of my hubby, and my dad, being hawks, more or less....

Oh hells bells, I got all kinds of things to work out on this board!!!!

Just knock me in the head if you see me out of line!!! I can take it....that is, once I get done sulking for a bit!

jd


Lordy, here you go hatin and lovin me all in one post. I think you are right- you need to figure lots of things out, JD! I do wish you well, though, my Christian sistuh. ;) :)

[darin]

I honestly do not mean for it to come off that way. And I am sure when you end up standing your ground with your beliefs regarding Christianity and your views on sin and grace and mercy and Heaven and Hell, you don't mean to be atop a perch on the mountain of morality either....right? Just fuel for thought darin... ;)


That's entirely different. I'm right. I speak biblical truths regarding Christianity. That's not a false-moral ground; it's a biblical ground. You create false moral ground by twisting a subject into a battle of good and evil.

That's the difference. That's what I'm talking about.


And maybe I AM your first husband. :D

FWIW I'm drawn to Abbey, too, and something deeper inside her. :D

[Abbey Marie]

That's entirely different. I'm right. I speak biblical truths regarding Christianity. That's not a false-moral ground; it's a biblical ground. You create false moral ground by twisting a subject into a battle of good and evil.

That's the difference. That's what I'm talking about.


And maybe I AM your first husband. :D

FWIW I'm drawn to Abbey, too, and something deeper inside her. :D

Shoot, you made me spit out my ginger ale. :cheers2:

[Sir Evil]

Just knock me in the head if you see me out of line!!! I can take it....that is, once I get done sulking for a bit!

jd

:laugh2:

You would be a good card player with those bluffs. Problem is you can't play the same cards all the time or your bluff will get called.

[JohnDoe]

A decision to go to war is not based on how many civilians might die. The decision is based on what the enemy country might or might not do. Targets are assessed for their military value. Not how many lives might be lost.

If an enemy anti-air radar is turned on it is picked up by our planes and a missile is launched against it. The location of that radar is the responsibility of the enemy, not the pilot taking it out.

Well, I think the consequences of action verses inaction are considered Gaffer, when it come to starting a war.

In the scenario you give regarding striking a target, that is a detriment, and putting our soldiers in harms way, thus taking it out, is acceptable to me and logical.

If it were a situation or scenario where our soldiers were NOT in harms way or an Imminent danger, I think taking the target out hastily, without consideration of the "collateral damage" would be wrong. And I believe that our Military does, consider this.....am I wrong?

I mean, there was a group of Taliban not long ago that gathered together at a huge funeral of one of their own....alqaeda leaders were there too, and the USA could have taken a strike on them to take out the bad guys, but the USA decided NOT to do this for some reason and it could be that they saw the benefits of taking the bad guys out verses the consequences of what would follow with the "collateral Damage'' assessment and weighed the outcome imo and chose not to take them out at that time, didn't they?

jd

[JohnDoe]

That's entirely different. I'm right. I speak biblical truths regarding Christianity. That's not a false-moral ground; it's a biblical ground. You create false moral ground by twisting a subject into a battle of good and evil.

That's the difference. That's what I'm talking about.


And maybe I AM your first husband. :D

FWIW I'm drawn to Abbey, too, and something deeper inside her. :D

lordy Lord!!!! Have mercy on us! Oh my God, that would really be something if you were!!!!!!!!!!!!! LMAO, that was a pretty good comeback there, Darin!!!!



jd

[darin]

lordy Lord!!!! Have mercy on us! Oh my God, that would really be something if you were!!!!!!!!!!!!! LMAO, that was a pretty good comeback there, Darin!!!!



jd

If you are a short pretty blonde chick from Germany, we might have been engaged to one-another at some point. Other than that, I'm still married to my first wife.

:)

[JohnDoe]

:laugh2:

You would be a good card player with those bluffs. Problem is you can't play the same cards all the time or your bluff will get called.


:slap:

shut up!!!


:D

jd

[JohnDoe]

If you are a short pretty blonde chick from Germany, we might have been engaged to one-another at some point. Other than that, I'm still married to my first wife.

:)I am petite, 5'3'' and was a Blonde for the 3 years with my ex....and I lived in Germany for a bit! hahahaha!

But I am not German, I am Italian decent...half of me, anyway. Plus I was definately married to the guy.... so, it ain't you and glad we got THAT settled! LMAO

jd

[darin]

5'3" = IDEAL height for a woman. :D

[Sir Evil]

:slap:

shut up!!!


:D

jd

:laugh2:

Sorry, I revealed those cards did'nt I?

[glockmail]

5'3" = IDEAL height for a woman. :D Wrong. There is no ideal height. I like 'em all sizes and flavors.

From petite:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z256/glockmail/woat_bio_roselyn.jpg

to giant:
http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z256/glockmail/sharapovaAP1207_468x908.jpg

[darin]

That amazon woman is NOT attractive. I mean, I suppose she's 'generally attractive' but not pretty or stunning or anything special.

[glockmail]

That amazon woman is NOT attractive. I mean, I suppose she's 'generally attractive' but not pretty or stunning or anything special. To you maybe. But I doubt most me would agree with you. She has no trouble getting a date or drawing crowds for that matter.

She's a major babe IMO.

[darin]

I think most men who have left their hometown for more than a year would find her fairly plain-looking.

[glockmail]

I find it hard to imagine anyone thinking a 6'4" athletic blonde with an angelic face as "plain". Perhaps you'd feel intimidated.

[darin]

It's her face. It's plain. And knowing she's 6'4" maks her LESS attractive because "Datsa Huge Bitch!", with apologies to Duece Bigalow. :)

[glockmail]

It's her face. It's plain. And knowing she's 6'4" maks her LESS attractive because "Datsa Huge Bitch!", with apologies to Duece Bigalow. :)

Her face is plain? Don't think that's quite the word.

Methinks you're intimidated by her height. Don't worry, she probably wouldn't hurt you. At least not permanently.

[darin]

Yeah - her face is very plain. Average. Not nasty. Not Pretty.

Her height? doesn't intimidate me, it's just makes her "not cozy." :)

Jessica Alba, for instance - she's cute! Very cute...but she's also 5'1"-5'3" or so...VERY cozy. :D

[Abbey Marie]

5'3" = IDEAL height for a woman. :D

Dear dmp:

Hmmph!

Sincerely,
5'8" Abbey

[glockmail]

Dear dmp:

Hmmph!

Sincerely,
5'8" Abbey
There's plenty of room on my side of the cabin. :salute:

[Abbey Marie]

There's plenty of room on my side of the cabin. :salute:

Not to mention your mad breakfast-making skills. :D

[darin]

Dear dmp:

Hmmph!

Sincerely,
5'8" Abbey

You've got a pass, Abbey...cuz I have tall shoes to offset your height. :)

[Gaffer]

Well, I think the consequences of action verses inaction are considered Gaffer, when it come to starting a war.

In the scenario you give regarding striking a target, that is a detriment, and putting our soldiers in harms way, thus taking it out, is acceptable to me and logical.

If it were a situation or scenario where our soldiers were NOT in harms way or an Imminent danger, I think taking the target out hastily, without consideration of the "collateral damage" would be wrong. And I believe that our Military does, consider this.....am I wrong?

I mean, there was a group of Taliban not long ago that gathered together at a huge funeral of one of their own....alqaeda leaders were there too, and the USA could have taken a strike on them to take out the bad guys, but the USA decided NOT to do this for some reason and it could be that they saw the benefits of taking the bad guys out verses the consequences of what would follow with the "collateral Damage'' assessment and weighed the outcome imo and chose not to take them out at that time, didn't they?

jd

True, the military will not act in haste. Collateral damage is always a factor in the military decision to strike. The funeral is a good example. Though they could have killed a lot of taliban and AQ there was a chance of hitting innocents and children. Children are taken to those things specifically for that reason. striking that site might have caused some innocents to die, but definitely would have killed a lot of high ranking AQ and taliban. How many murders and atrocities have been committed by those same guys since that incident? Inaction has consequences too.

[glockmail]

You've got a pass, Abbey...cuz I have tall shoes to offset your height. :) So you are intimidated by a woman's height. Wuss! :laugh2:

[manu1959]

Dear dmp:

Hmmph!

Sincerely,
5'8" Abbey

6'-2"..........COME UP AND SEE ME SOME TIME.................

[gabosaurus]

Short men = short minds = short *other things*

[glockmail]

Short men = short minds = short *other things* You got something against short people? Typical "tolerant" lib.

[PostmodernProphet]

IDEAL height for a woman

I'm content if they are tall enough to reach all the way to the ground......

[glockmail]

I'm content if they are tall enough to reach all the way to the ground...... They must have really long legs then when I'm holding them up by their butt cheeks. :banana:

[Abbey Marie]

6'-2"..........COME UP AND SEE ME SOME TIME.................

Nice!

[waterrescuedude2000]

That civilians have died in every war in the history of man kind?? Its an unfortunate thing but it happens... There is no way of avoiding it 100 percent.
And have you thought that an 11 year old girl could pull a trigger of a gun?? What would you do let her sit and shoot at you??

[Monkeybone]

wow, should we maybe start another thread about height?

i think that there is and isn't a dif between the kids. there isn't because they are bopth dead and that is a sad thing when a child dies. it touches even some of the most callous ppl. but at the same time, those that are killed by terrorist are done so willingly and on purpose. like the guys who had kids in the cars and then left them when they blew it up. it is sick and horrible that these 'righteous and holy' ppl use kids as sheilds. where as in when we kill, we atleast show remorse and try to do better the next time around.

and the nice/right imo, height for a woman is is 5'5''-5'9''. that way it doesn't feel like she is looking up my nose too much.