# Taliban bunch of pussies



## 6ft4Dan (Feb 6, 2006)

So they think killing 126 defenceless school kids is going to further their 'cause'

Bunch of pussy barbarian backward **** wits.

How the **** can they think their God approves of being a pussy that kills children???

Congrats, made yourselves look real hard and real clever...... ****ing tools.

#rantover


----------



## mymumbeatsme (Sep 12, 2014)

flamingo-dan said:


> So they think killing 126 defenceless school kids is going to further their 'cause'
> 
> Bunch of pussy barbarian backward **** wits.
> 
> ...


Sorry mate. We weighed up our other options and this seemed like the best course of action.


----------



## megatron (Apr 21, 2004)

At least it's their own people on this occasion, disgusting and monstrous as it is... Rather them then some British school...

Probably an easier target for the pussies


----------



## 6ft4Dan (Feb 6, 2006)

mymumbeatsme said:


> Sorry mate. We weighed up our other options and this seemed like the best course of action.


**** lol


----------



## 6ft4Dan (Feb 6, 2006)

megatron said:


> At least it's their own people on this occasion, disgusting and monstrous as it is... Rather them then some British school...
> 
> Probably an easier target for the pussies


I guess, but kids are kids mate. What a waste of lives


----------



## GCMAX (Dec 31, 2013)

Pretty obvious why they don't like education because it frees the mind and their minds are a prison.


----------



## Andy Dee (Jun 1, 2008)

When are they banning handguns over there then now this has happened? next election?


----------



## monkeybiker (Jul 21, 2010)

megatron said:


> At least it's their own people on this occasion, disgusting and monstrous as it is... Rather them then some British school...
> 
> Probably an easier target for the pussies


Don't see how that's any better really?


----------



## BettySwallocks (Aug 1, 2012)

Good old Islamists strikes again...

'Wait wut?! ya damn racist, can't say things like that'

Zero fvcks given anymore. Time to ban religion, every single one of them.


----------



## Jammy Dodger (Nov 2, 2014)

Most of the violence and killing is inflicted on fellow muslims. When people talk about the Islamic faith they need to realise most people living in the countries they are talking about are terrified and peaceful.

I'm not sure how anyone could blow up or kill school kids. But I'm not sure how anyone could do the same to adults... Banning religion isn't the answer, there are no world police and what we need to do is let people live in piece.

This is horrific and sticks in my throat to say this - but we have gone out of our way to overthrow "dictators" who however evil and horrible, did do a good job at controlling the locals. What is left is a huge power vacuum whereby the harshest and most evil again take power, or atleast fight for it. I'm not sure it's acceptable to say people should live under tyranny so us in the west can have an easier life - but I do think that our previous war on terror has done nothing but fan the flames of hate.

If an islamic country were to invade the UK, kill the queen and then try and impose their way off life on us - I'm sure many on here including myself would rise up and fight it. If there was a section of our society who decided to support and work with the invading country - I am pretty sure we would want to have a go at them as well. I'm not saying for one second this justifies the brutality, but I do think it gives an insight into the mindset of some of the young men acting like this. Most of them grew up around occupation, they came out of the womb armed. When we went into these countries it was only going to end one way...

Waiting for some abuse to come my way now.


----------



## zasker (Jun 21, 2014)

BettySwallocks said:


> Good old Islam strikes again...
> 
> 'Wait wut?! ya damn racist, can't say things like that'
> 
> Zero fvcks given anymore. Time to ban religion, every single one of them.


yup... ban religion.


----------



## mymumbeatsme (Sep 12, 2014)

zasker said:


> yup... ban religion.


Haha, good that no ones being too drastic.


----------



## mymumbeatsme (Sep 12, 2014)

sammym said:


> Most of the violence and killing is inflicted on fellow muslims. When people talk about the Islamic faith they need to realise most people living in the countries they are talking about are terrified and peaceful.
> 
> I'm not sure how anyone could blow up or kill school kids. But I'm not sure how anyone could do the same to adults... Banning religion isn't the answer, there are no world police and what we need to do is let people live in piece.
> 
> ...


Nah, I'd thank 'em for killing the queen, and probably convert.

Allahu Akbar!


----------



## 2004mark (Oct 26, 2013)

I don't mean to sound cold here... but the idea of terrorism is to cause terror.

On a different note though; to think people moan about the country we live it. Imagine having to decide whether an education for your children is worth rising their lives for.


----------



## Deasy (May 5, 2014)

megatron said:


> At least it's their own people on this occasion, disgusting and monstrous as it is... Rather them then some British school...
> 
> Probably an easier target for the pussies


You're a ****ing moron..


----------



## megatron (Apr 21, 2004)

Sorry if you don't like it but I am relieved it was a school in their own country, not just for the fact that it's none of our people getting killed but ALSO because if they are attacking their own people - their sympathy in Pakistan (where they hide) will be waning badly.

Never said I was happy they did this awful thing


----------



## Andy Dee (Jun 1, 2008)

What kind of evil evil people would be so full of hatred that they could do that to those poor children. I just hope they're judged and there is a terrible afterlife for all of them. what a horrific waste of young lives.

and ftr. Taliban are not Pakistan origin or Afghan origin, they originate and come from neither of those countries. They're neither race.


----------



## weissewut (Dec 16, 2014)

Yea good old Islam, why i cannot say it, ist true?


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

flamingo-dan said:


> So they think killing 126 defenceless school kids is going to further their 'cause'
> 
> Bunch of pussy barbarian backward **** wits.
> 
> ...


That told them. I bet they are looking at their feet and feeling ashamed of them selves. "BAD TALIBAN, GO IN THE NAUGHTY CORNER"


----------



## FelonE1 (Dec 23, 2013)

flamingo-dan said:


> So they think killing 126 defenceless school kids is going to further their 'cause'
> 
> Bunch of pussy barbarian backward **** wits.
> 
> ...


They're 'God' was a peado. They don't give a fvck about the kids.


----------



## jim2509 (Dec 30, 2010)

This has nothing to do with the religion of peace, move along here.


----------



## 6ft4Dan (Feb 6, 2006)

simonthepieman said:


> That told them. I bet they are looking at their feet and feeling ashamed of them selves. "BAD TALIBAN, GO IN THE NAUGHTY CORNER"


That told me to never rant again...... Bad Danny, will go in the naughty corner now.... Sorry Simon


----------



## IronJohnDoe (Oct 17, 2013)

In my ideal world we kill the family and friends of terrorists (yes we become like that as you need a monster to kill a monster) so to make them feel that desperation and impotence of losing the people who they love and then only then we kill them all.

Maybe drastic but I cannot stand a bunch of cowards who blow themselves up in a place full of innocent people...

And no, I am not saying kill the muslims or kill the jewish or whatever, all I am saying is kill the terrorist families and friends to hurt them where it feels more and then kill all terrorists


----------



## SickCurrent (Sep 19, 2005)

More hate just fuels the fire. Look upon them as criminals and not any religion. They murdered innocent kids and karma is a b1tch...

peace out

SickC


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

Just think if any survive they can come to Birmingham to be fixed up then all get the Nobel prize for doing fvck all.

As I have said before when the taliban or IS etc start to take marines or sas soldiers hostage then they should be a force to worry about. Why they are still taking kids and other soft people that they no will give in to them and be terrorised by them then the world shouldn't give them the media coverage.


----------



## FlunkyTurtle (Aug 5, 2013)

IronJohnDoe said:


> In my ideal world we kill the family and friends of terrorists (yes we become like that as you need a monster to kill a monster) so to make them feel that desperation and impotence of losing the people who they love and then only then we kill them all.
> 
> Maybe drastic but I cannot stand a bunch of cowards who blow themselves up in a place full of innocent people...
> 
> And no, I am not saying kill the muslims or kill the jewish or whatever, all I am saying is kill the terrorist families and friends to hurt them where it feels more and then kill all terrorists


 take away what little they have just gives them more reason to fight. They have nothing to lose. Wouldn't so much but create more martrs


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

jim2509 said:


> This has nothing to do with the religion of peace, move along here.


Nah I think they are talking about islam so no peace there mate


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

IronJohnDoe said:


> In my ideal world we kill the family and friends of terrorists (yes we become like that as you need a monster to kill a monster) so to make them feel that desperation and impotence of losing the people who they love and then only then we kill them all.
> 
> Maybe drastic but I cannot stand a bunch of cowards who blow themselves up in a place full of innocent people...
> 
> And no, I am not saying kill the muslims or kill the jewish or whatever, all I am saying is kill the terrorist families and friends to hurt them where it feels more and then kill all terrorists


See id take this stand and go to the extreme. The cancer has to be cut out and it don't stop at the actual terrorist. That man will teach his son his ways and his son and so on. Destroy the line. Gas every terrorist and his family until it ends.


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

FelonE said:


> They're 'God' was a peado. They don't give a fvck about the kids.


It was actually their "prophet" Muhammad that is regarded as a paedophile for marrying a 6-7 year old and then consummating the marriage when she was 9-10, not their God. Bear in mind though that this was about 620AD and many Christians have done worse as far as pedophilia is concerned. It's extremist terrorists that don't give a fvck about kids, not all Muslims.


----------



## FelonE1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Alanricksnape said:


> It was actually their "prophet" Muhammad that is regarded as a paedophile for marrying a 6-7 year old and then consummating the marriage when she was 9-10, not their God. Bear in mind though that this was about 620AD and many Christians have done worse as far as pedophilia is concerned. It's extremist terrorists that don't give a fvck about kids, not all Muslims.


Where did I say all Muslims? The thread is about terrorists.


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

FelonE said:


> Where did I say all Muslims? The thread is about terrorists.


You said "They're 'God' was a peado. They don't give a fvck about the kids."

Their God is Allah, the same as any other Muslim's. That doesn't mean all Muslims are terrorists or pedophiles.


----------



## TommyBananas (Nov 23, 2014)

This whole thing makes me sad


----------



## IronJohnDoe (Oct 17, 2013)

crouchmagic said:


> Okay, let's look at some of the current UK lads who have gone over to fight for ISIS.
> 
> Their families had no indication that they were going to leave, they had nothing to do with it, they don't support it, and they have disowned them.
> 
> ...


You made your point but I will still kill them all just for make sure


----------



## FelonE1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Alanricksnape said:


> You said "They're 'God' was a peado. They don't give a fvck about the kids."
> 
> Their God is Allah, the same as any other Muslim's. That doesn't mean all Muslims are terrorists or pedophiles.


Didn't say it does.


----------



## IronJohnDoe (Oct 17, 2013)

crouchmagic said:


> Which would then render you a terrorist:


No it would make me an avenger


----------



## FelonE1 (Dec 23, 2013)

IronJohnDoe said:


> No it would make me an avenger


The Equaliser


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

crouchmagic said:


> Okay, let's look at some of the current UK lads who have gone over to fight for ISIS.
> 
> Their families had no indication that they were going to leave, they had nothing to do with it, they don't support it, and they have disowned them.
> 
> ...


Only there lot over there. The "british" terrorists wannabees over here are a joke, they should just be hanged. If their whole family are terrorists then gas the lot of them. This country is not an Islamic country and most of them wether u like them or not follow our laws etc it's only the stupid kids that go off to play terrorists. Over there where it's a way of life and not just a fad like here the dad will teach the son to live how he has because he thinks it's right. I'm not saying gas them to prove a hurtful point mate. I'd gas every man woman and child in Syria or Iraq that is apart of IS or the taliban to end the way they think.

Also it's the type of thinking such as "oh what if it was your family" is why Britain and America take so fvcking long to win a war.


----------



## Hulksome (Jun 21, 2013)

This thread just proves what is wrong with the world and the intellect of the majority of this forum.

You have pretty much confirmed everyone's assumptions of you being a typical meathead.

Dumb $hits lmao


----------



## IronJohnDoe (Oct 17, 2013)

Hulksome said:


> This thread just proves what it wrong with the world and the intellect of the majority of this forum.
> 
> You have pretty much confirmed everyone's assumptions of you being a typical meathead.
> 
> Dumb $hits lmao


Thank you for being better than us


----------



## FelonE1 (Dec 23, 2013)

Hulksome said:


> This thread just proves what is wrong with the world and the intellect of the majority of this forum.
> 
> You have pretty much confirmed everyone's assumptions of you being a typical meathead.
> 
> *Dumb $hits* lmao


How very rude.


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

harrison180 said:


> Only there lot over there. The "british" terrorists wannabees over here are a joke, they should just be hanged. If their whole family are terrorists then gas the lot of them. This country is not an Islamic country and most of them wether u like them or not follow our laws etc it's only the stupid kids that go off to play terrorists. Over there where it's a way of life and not just a fad like here the dad will teach the son to live how he has because he thinks it's right. I'm not saying gas them to prove a hurtful point mate. I'd gas every man woman and child in Syria or Iraq that is apart of IS or the taliban to end the way they think.
> 
> *Also it's the type of thinking such as "oh what if it was your family" is why Britain and America take so fvcking long to win a war.*


It was our illegal war that caused this in the first place. I'm not suggesting that this justifies their actions, but we need to learn to stop stoking the fire and keep our noses out of it. Unfortunately when money/oil is up for grabs, we can't seem to resist.


----------



## mymumbeatsme (Sep 12, 2014)

Hulksome said:


> This thread just proves what is wrong with the world and the intellect of the majority of this forum.
> 
> You have pretty much confirmed everyone's assumptions of you being a typical meathead.
> 
> Dumb $hits lmao


OI WANNA TAKE THIS OUTSIDE BRAH?!!!?!


----------



## PLauGE (Oct 17, 2010)

agreed, kill um all


----------



## 6ft4Dan (Feb 6, 2006)

Hulksome said:


> This thread just proves what is wrong with the world and the intellect of the majority of this forum.
> 
> You have pretty much confirmed everyone's assumptions of you being a typical meathead.
> 
> Dumb $hits lmao


Never mind the fact 140 kids were slaughtered.....

****


----------



## IronJohnDoe (Oct 17, 2013)




----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

Alanricksnape said:


> It was our illegal war that caused this in the first place. I'm not suggesting that this justifies their actions, but we need to learn to stop stoking the fire and keep our noses out of it. Unfortunately when money/oil is up for grabs, we can't seem to resist.


You can go back to the 10 and 1100s mate where Britain would go over and give the muslims a good hiding. Terrorism is just a branch off from all types of religion mate. Just seems to be more popular with islam than any other religion. Once upon a time a Britain would of invaded and put them under our rule so we could of had all their oil and bollox to the lot of them. Appears that's abit heavy handed in this soft day of age.


----------



## Alanricksnape (Apr 5, 2013)

I agree completely with your point about terrorism coming from all types of religion. Do you not agree however, that attempting to invade the Middle East and putting them under our rule would be insane? The US pretty much attempted to do that in Iraq. They overthrew Saddam, had him silenced via execution and then picked a replacement. Look how that turned out! Besides, I don't see a feasible way in which we could with our limited resources, we no longer have a gigantic empire. Not to mention that fact that we no longer live under a Monarchy where supreme power is bestowed on a single individual. We live in a democracy where I think the majority want peace not war. War makes life harder for us all (apart from the extremely wealthy).


----------



## banjodeano (Jan 9, 2011)

IronJohnDoe said:


> In my ideal world we kill the family and friends of terrorists (yes we become like that as you need a monster to kill a monster) so to make them feel that desperation and impotence of losing the people who they love and then only then we kill them all.
> 
> Maybe drastic but I cannot stand a bunch of cowards who blow themselves up in a place full of innocent people...
> 
> And no, I am not saying kill the muslims or kill the jewish or whatever, all I am saying is kill the terrorist families and friends to hurt them where it feels more and then kill all terrorists


A bit like the Germans in the war, if any subversives attacked German soldiers, whole towns were destroyed in revenge...not saying i agree, but i think it must have put people off


----------



## zasker (Jun 21, 2014)

harrison180 said:


> You can go back to the 10 and 1100s mate where Britain would go over and give the muslims a good hiding. Terrorism is just a branch off from all types of religion mate. *Just seems to be more popular with islam than any other religion*. Once upon a time a Britain would of invaded and put them under our rule so we could of had all their oil and bollox to the lot of them. Appears that's abit heavy handed in this soft day of age.


probably because they imagine their a bunch if tusken raiders.


----------



## UkWardy (Mar 30, 2014)

megatron said:


> At least it's their own people on this occasion, disgusting and monstrous as it is... Rather them then some British school...
> 
> Probably an easier target for the pussies


I nomimate this for worst post 2014..


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

The taliban are scum, archaic, morally indefensible murderers, but to imply they are cowards is simply nonsense.

I just re-watched one of my favorite programs, ross kemp in afghanistan and all the guys who Ross talks to say how the Taliban have massive balls, opening up on Apaches they know are likely to obliterate them, ambushing soldiers despite overwhelming ISAF air dominance of the area.

Again are they cnuts? Of course, are they cowards? **** no!


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

banjodeano said:


> A bit like the Germans in the war, if any subversives attacked German soldiers, whole towns were destroyed in revenge...not saying i agree, but i think it must have put people off


Nope, in fact it lead to entire populations supporting partisan groups with food, places to hide. On top of that it made the people executing non combatants scum and the end certainly never justify those means.

Executing non combatants is never ok, not on 9/11, not during Nazi occupied territory in 1943, not when the British put Boer children in concentration camps.


----------



## Huntingground (Jan 10, 2010)

The Taliban, just like the IRA and all terrorist groups, are cowards and absolute sh1tbags, they won't stand and fight but hide in the shadows, planting bombs and killing innocent women and children.


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

zasker said:


> probably because they imagine their a bunch if tusken raiders.


But in reality they are more like the little ****ers from return of the jedi haha


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

Normsky said:


> The taliban are scum, archaic, morally indefensible murderers, but to imply they are cowards is simply nonsense.
> 
> I just re-watched one of my favorite programs, ross kemp in afghanistan and all the guys who Ross talks to say how the Taliban have massive balls, opening up on Apaches they know are likely to obliterate them, ambushing soldiers despite overwhelming ISAF air dominance of the area.
> 
> Again are they cnuts? Of course, are they cowards? **** no!


I belive that unless your one action is going to make a difference then there's no point. So trying to attack an apache helicopter is just plain stupid but risking your life to get into a base and fvcking them up now that would be brave.


----------



## 2004mark (Oct 26, 2013)

Outrage on UKM at the killing of 132 children and 9 adults.

Proposed solution; kill everyone else in the region (inc millions of other children) :confused1:

I'm lost for words


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

The US military should send over a crack team of 100 prostitutes to give the taliban a serious [email protected] off, morning, noon, and night. After all that [email protected] they won't have the energy to stand up, never mind kill people.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

harrison180 said:


> I belive that unless your one action is going to make a difference then there's no point. So trying to attack an apache helicopter is just plain stupid but risking your life to get into a base and fvcking them up now that would be brave.


But it does sometimes work, and when it does it does more damage as far as publicity against the ISAF coalition, economically as they are expensive as hell and it usually takes out quite a few people.

Bravery is not about the success of something, it is about, well, bravery.

For example flying planes into buildings is evil, but holy **** is it brave as ****. Or for example when the Taliban basically kicked the British forces out of Musa Qala, they did that by overwhelming British forces with crazy brave, brazen attacks. Many of those attacks achieved nothing, but all of them over time resulted in a situation where their individual bravery forced the enemy out.


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

Normsky said:


> But it does sometimes work, and when it does it does more damage as far as publicity against the ISAF coalition, economically as they are expensive as hell and it usually takes out quite a few people.
> 
> Bravery is not about the success of something, it is about, well, bravery.
> 
> For example flying planes into buildings is evil, but holy **** is it brave as ****. Or for example when the Taliban basically kicked the British forces out of Musa Qala, they did that by overwhelming British forces with crazy brave, brazen attacks. Many of those attacks achieved nothing, but all of them over time resulted in a situation where their individual bravery forced the enemy out.


I do agree with you mate but we could both pick at each other's views in what's brave and what's stupid until we drop dead of old age but in the end we will be still on the same page.

I have always followed the rules of the samurai cuz I find they were an interesting bunch of people and lived by a code that everyone should follow. They would fight to the death no matter what it was about and if they were going to lose would commit suicide. That to me is bravery. If I was kidnapped by these islamic tosspots I would rather die by my own hand then give them cvnts the satisfaction of it. I don't think flying a plane into a building is brave because they are only doing because they are that brainwashed into the lie that is religion that they can do it. Someone who plants a bomb to kill people, live to see it and then accept whatever comes to them after is braver. Imo


----------



## killamanjaro (Dec 30, 2013)

2004mark said:


> Outrage on UKM at the killing of 132 children and 9 adults.
> 
> Proposed solution; kill everyone else in the region (inc millions of other children) :confused1:
> 
> I'm lost for words


Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.


----------



## mymumbeatsme (Sep 12, 2014)

2004mark said:


> Outrage on UKM at the killing of 132 children and 9 adults.
> 
> Proposed solution; kill everyone else in the region (inc millions of other children) :confused1:
> 
> I'm lost for words


Hahahahaha!

I love this place.


----------



## mymumbeatsme (Sep 12, 2014)

EpicSquats said:


> The US military should send over a crack team of 100 prostitutes to give the taliban a serious [email protected] off, morning, noon, and night. After all that [email protected] they won't have the energy to stand up, never mind kill people.


F%CK OFF DO NOT BRING MY GIRLS INTO THIS.


----------



## 6ft4Dan (Feb 6, 2006)

mymumbeatsme said:


> F%CK OFF DO NOT BRING MY GIRLS INTO THIS.


Looooooooool


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

EpicSquats said:


> The US military should send over a crack team of 100 prostitutes to give the taliban a serious [email protected] off, morning, noon, and night. After all that [email protected] they won't have the energy to stand up, never mind kill people.


thats all they need mate. a good fvck and some different books to read. how can a race of people do anything reading one bollox book?


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Huntingground said:


> The Taliban, just like the IRA and all terrorist groups, are cowards and absolute sh1tbags, they won't stand and fight but hide in the shadows, planting bombs and killing innocent women and children.


Thats stupid, guerrilla tactics require you to hit and run and fight in the shadows. You don't beat a conventional military occupation force with regular military forces, you wage a war of attrition. Why would you stand and fight against an enemy with staggeringly overwhelming unfair technological and numerical advantage?

If you hold that as cowardly then the resistance against the Nazi's were cowards, Britisht revolt against Roman occupiers was cowardly, NV/VC resistance against the U.S was cowardly.

I hate this stupid way of nonthinking, branding people who use military tactics as cowards because they don't musket bayonet charge a force armed with fighter jets, professional soldiers with high tech weapons and body armour.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

harrison180 said:


> thats all they need mate. a good fvck and some different books to read. how can a race of people do anything reading one bollox book?


It is so ironic because at one time in history Islam was the leading light of enlightenment, unlike the christians who burnt all non christian books such as those in the great library, the muslims protected greek literature and chinese literature and were comparatively enlightened.

Now you look at Baghdad and its the exact opposite


----------



## jamiew691 (Mar 23, 2014)

The religion isn't the problem, I have nothing against religion as long as they don't disturb anyone.

These people have made fellow muslims look bad but they are not all as bad!!

The people who are cvnt like this need to be shot dead, If the army goes and does anything about it I'll be over there straight away


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

Normsky said:


> Thats stupid, guerrilla tactics require you to hit and run and fight in the shadows. You don't beat a conventional military occupation force with regular military forces, you wage a war of attrition. Why would you stand and fight against an enemy with staggeringly overwhelming unfair technological and numerical advantage?
> 
> If you hold that as cowardly then the resistance against the Nazi's were cowards, Britisht revolt against Roman occupiers was cowardly, NV/VC resistance against the U.S was cowardly.
> 
> I hate this stupid way of nonthinking, branding people who use military tactics as cowards because they don't musket bayonet charge a force armed with fighter jets, professional soldiers with high tech weapons and body armour.


Is walking into a school and murdering 130 odd children 'Guerilla Tactics' though? These people aren't brave at all. They are brainwashed fools who for all their cowardly acts will achieve nothing.


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

Normsky said:


> It is so ironic because at one time in history Islam was the leading light of enlightenment, unlike the christians who burnt all non christian books such as those in the great library, the muslims protected greek literature and chinese literature and were comparatively enlightened.
> 
> Now you look at Baghdad and its the exact opposite


As I have said mate we were the same until we dropped religion. Look how much advances the west has made since about 1850 because people started looking more towards science and working things out instead of blaming some thin air.

When them lot decide to play catch up they might learn a few things.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

MR RIGSBY said:


> Is walking into a school and murdering 130 odd children 'Guerilla Tactics' though? These people aren't brave at all. They are brainwashed fools who for all their cowardly acts will achieve nothing.


No but I never said killing 130 kids was that, i said that the guy claiming the IRA were cowards for not fighting toe to toe with a conventional military force were cowards, or the taliban using guerrilla tactics are not cowardly, I am not lending support to those groups, just pointing out basic military strategy.

And yeah they are brave, they are just also lunatics who follow a crazy fundamentalist islamic movement, that has no bearing on their bravery. Many SS troopers were brave determined soldiers, they also shot jewish children into mass graves, their evilness and horrendous crimes don't remove the fact they were brave.

Also if we are being honest killing cvilians is a very effective insurgency strategy.

A national Hero, queen Boudica waited until the Roman legion stationed in Britain marched out and they then locked the women and children stationed at the Roman barracks into wooden structures and set them on fire alive in the thousands. We celebrate her as a hero.


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

To be honest can't remember the Pakistani Taliban having done anything other than kill innocents. They're getting hammered by the army, losing support so have come up with this evil plot to grab some attention. I don't think it will have the desired affect, as it will force the Pakistani government to act, something they have refused to do in the past.

The world has moved on from the time of Boudica mate, something the Taliban, Isil and Al-Qaeda haven't yet grasped.


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

sammym said:


> Most of the violence and killing is inflicted on fellow muslims. When people talk about the Islamic faith they need to realise most people living in the countries they are talking about are terrified and peaceful.


yawn lol. You sure are you? don't see many british guys blowing anything up do you?


----------



## Jammy Dodger (Nov 2, 2014)

dann19900 said:


> yawn lol. You sure are you? don't see many british guys blowing anything up do you?


I went to afghan twice and come home once a bollock short in a coma. Care to share your experience of Islam and terrorism?


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

sammym said:


> I went to afghan twice and come home once a bollock short in a coma. Care to share your experience of Islam and terrorism?


sorry about that, not sure how it makes you the authority on the muslim faith though


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

sammym said:


> I went to afghan twice and come home once a bollock short in a coma. Care to share your experience of Islam and terrorism?


I agree with your previous most, the majority of moderate Muslims are living in fear and are terrified of the Taliban. To scared to speak out knowing the consequences and not wiling want to go give evedience or tip offs to the west as they know they west will be leaving their country soon and they will be left in the hands of the taliban


----------



## Ian_Montrose (Nov 13, 2007)

dann19900 said:


> yawn lol. You sure are you? don't see many british guys blowing anything up do you?


7 July 2005 London bombings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Carbon-12 (Feb 26, 2013)

Hiroshima and Nagasaki... It happened once, I don't see a reason why it should not happen again.


----------



## Jammy Dodger (Nov 2, 2014)

dann19900 said:


> sorry about that, not sure how it makes you the authority on the muslim faith though


I worked with interpreters who risked their lives and their families lives because they hoped the kids wouldn't grow up in the country they did. I met the locals and looked in the kids eyes. I saw the old men who just wanted an easy life but instead had to worry about sorts of rubbish we couldn't dream off. I met and worked with ana/anp who were not great but truly did want to stop the crazies from tearing the country up.

I also went on patrols where locals would let us full up our camelbaks risking their lives again if the tali found out. The place is a dive but most of the people are not evil or bad. They are just scared and sick of living in fear.

So I'm not an authority on it. But I have more real life experience than many posting rubbish on here. I've had to step back and not respond to most of it. If people want to be ignorant then fine. But it's ignorance that caused this mess. It won't change until people stop trying to hate each other.

I have more reason than most on here to be resentful or hate, and I can't find it in myself to. You need to stop believing everything the media and politicians tell you. Most of the killing is Muslim on Muslim and a lot of it was caused directly and indirectly by what we did.


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

sammym said:


> I worked with interpreters who risked their lives and their families lives because they hoped the kids wouldn't grow up in the country they did. I met the locals and looked in the kids eyes. I saw the old men who just wanted an easy life but instead had to worry about sorts of rubbish we couldn't dream off. I met and worked with ana/anp who were not great but truly did want to stop the crazies from tearing the country up.
> 
> I also went on patrols where locals would let us full up our camelbaks risking their lives again if the tali found out. The place is a dive but most of the people are not evil or bad. They are just scared and sick of living in fear.
> 
> So I'm not an authority on it. But I have more real life experience than many posting rubbish on here. I've had to step back and not respond to most of it. If people want to be ignorant then fine. But it's ignorance that caused this mess. It won't change until people stop trying to hate each other.


yeah I've read a lot about it and I'm sure 'most' are nice but theres a bit of a issue with a far larger % than normal wanting to kill us all lol


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

Ian_Montrose said:


> 7 July 2005 London bombings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I'm sure you know I wasn't including those in 'British' lol


----------



## AncientOldBloke (Dec 11, 2014)

jamiew691 said:


> The religion isn't the problem, I have nothing against religion as long as they don't disturb anyone.


Yeah but all religions ever do is divide brothers and encourage hatred. It's used as an excuse to kill and maim anyone different.

I can't be wasting time fighting somebody else's agenda.

It's all different shades of the same ****.

*Taoism *

**** happens

*Buddhism *

If **** happens, it's not really ****

*Islam *

If **** happens, it's the will of Allah

*Protestantism *

**** happens because you don't work hard enough or buy enough stuff

*Judaism *

Why does this **** always happen to us?

*Hinduism *

This **** happened before

*Catholicism *

**** happens because you're born bad

*Hare Krishna *

**** happens rama dama ding dong

*T.V. Evangelism *

Send more ****

*Atheism *

No ****

*Jehova's Witness *

Knock knock, **** happens

*Hedonism *

There's nothing like a good **** happening

*Christian Science *

**** happens mysteriously and cannot be explained using logic

*Agnosticism *

Maybe **** happens, maybe it doesn't

*Rastafarianism *

Let's smoke this ****

*Existentialism *

What is **** anyway?

*Stoicism*

This **** doesn't bother me


----------



## Ian_Montrose (Nov 13, 2007)

dann19900 said:


> I'm sure you know I wasn't including those in 'British' lol


I suspected not. Unfortunately, it is not the terrorists that pose the greatest risk to our society. It is the fvcknuggets such as yourself who promote bigotry and racism as a valid response to the terrorist threat.


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

Ian_Montrose said:


> I suspected not. Unfortunately, it is not the terrorists that pose the greatest risk to our society. It is the fvcknuggets such as yourself who promote bigotry and racism as a valid response to the terrorist threat.


lol please show me where I've promoted racism


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

dann19900 said:


> lol please show me where I've promoted racism


The fact you said you didn't include the London bombers as british shows you think they are not what it says on their passport, they are as rightful british as me and you they jus have different religious beliefs


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

UlsterRugby said:


> The fact you said you didn't include the London bombers as british shows you think they are not what it says on their passport, they are as rightful british as me and you they jus have different religious beliefs


I admit British was the wrong word, I meant non psychotic normal British people who don't believe in a bunch of fairytales from 1000s of years ago. Find it ****ing hilarious guys like the 1 above from montrose where theres probably no immigrants whatsoever thinking everyones nice and the terrorists are a tiny minority.

And you 'they are as rightful British' despite blowing up a bus of British people, we'll have to disagree mate, getting bored of talking to labour/snp voters now anyway. I'm sure you're all right and the Muslim faith is a great addition to the world


----------



## Ian_Montrose (Nov 13, 2007)

dann19900 said:


> I admit British was the wrong word, I meant non psychotic normal British people who don't believe in a bunch of fairytales from 1000s of years ago. Find it ****ing hilarious guys like the 1 above from montrose where theres probably no immigrants whatsoever thinking everyones nice and the terrorists are a tiny minority.
> 
> And you 'they are as rightful British' despite blowing up a bus of British people, we'll have to disagree mate, getting bored of talking to labour/snp voters now anyway. I'm sure you're all right and the Muslim faith is a great addition to the world


Your ignorance is beyond staggering.


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

dann19900 said:


> I admit British was the wrong word, I meant non psychotic normal British people who don't believe in a bunch of fairytales from 1000s of years ago. Find it ****ing hilarious guys like the 1 above from montrose where theres probably no immigrants whatsoever thinking everyones nice and the terrorists are a tiny minority.
> 
> And you 'they are as rightful British' despite blowing up a bus of British people, we'll have to disagree mate, getting bored of talking to labour/snp voters now anyway. I'm sure you're all right and the Muslim faith is a great addition to the world


Yea they chose to blow that bus up, if you were a sexual predator your still unfortunately british that's the point I'm making, they are british I'm not saying in any way what the did was right, that can't be farther from the truth but the views those young men share are not all shared alike by the majority of Muslims that's what I'm saying. I doubt you interact with many Muslims from your posts but I've came across many nice Muslims who have gave me hospitality and food whilst putting themselves out


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

UlsterRugby said:



> Yea they chose to blow that bus up, if you were a sexual predator your still unfortunately british that's the point I'm making, they are british I'm not saying in any way what the did was right, that can't be farther from the truth but the views those young men share are not all shared alike by the majority of Muslims that's what I'm saying. I doubt you interact with many Muslims from your posts but I've came across many nice Muslims who have gave me hospitality and food whilst putting themselves out


have 3 muslims working for me. No worries wouldn't want to push my 'racist' views anymore 

edit: just to clarify 1 last time. I'm well aware most muslims are nice people but whether 1% or 10% secretly have thoughts of killing loads of us for not being muslims its a far too big of a number in my opinion. And I'm fairly certain its atleast 10%


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

dann19900 said:


> have 3 muslims working for me. No worries wouldn't want to push my 'racist' views anymore


I don't think your a racist at all, sorry if I've hinted i thought you were a rascist


----------



## BettySwallocks (Aug 1, 2012)

Oh woe is me leave the poor terrorists to do there thing and heaven forbid if any body reacts with anger when they pull a despicable stunt like this, I mean it's all our doing anyway isn't it?

What a crock of sh1te.


----------



## Tonk007 (Jan 1, 2012)

dann19900 said:


> yawn lol. You sure are you? don't see many british guys blowing anything up do you?


Thats because the british government & their cronies are blowing thing up instead


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

Tonk007 said:


> Thats because the british government & their cronies are blowing thing up instead


lol you're definitely 1 of the closet terrorists, why don't you move somewhere else if you don't like it that much. You're free to go anywhere you like in the EU


----------



## PLauGE (Oct 17, 2010)

Tonk007 for next taliban leader gets my vote to, you got a lotta hate for the white people of this country don't you


----------



## Tonk007 (Jan 1, 2012)

dann19900 said:


> lol you're definitely 1 of the closet terrorists, why don't you move somewhere else if you don't like it that much. You're free to go anywhere you like in the EU


you mean your a closet racist lol, little pr**k, always posting the same **** lol


----------



## Tonk007 (Jan 1, 2012)

PLauGE said:


> Tonk007 for next taliban leader gets my vote to, you got a lotta hate for the white people of this country don't you


your the one with hate towards muslims, you get my vote for the next bnp leader lol


----------



## PLauGE (Oct 17, 2010)

Lulz good one


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

Tonk007 said:


> you mean your a closet racist lol, little pr**k, always posting the same **** lol


wouldn't have non english working for me if that was the case u plank. I've given my views on racism. If your religion stops blowing things up/murdering innocent people I'll stop posting the same **** lol


----------



## Tonk007 (Jan 1, 2012)

dann19900 said:


> wouldn't have non english working for me if that was the case u plank. I've given my views on racism. If your religion stops blowing things up/murdering innocent people I'll stop posting the same **** lol


well tell your greedy government to get the **** out of muslim countries then

must add the op is right talibans are ****s for attacking/killing innocent kids, hope they all get nuked ****ing ****s


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

Tonk007 said:


> well tell your greedy government to get the **** out of muslim countries then
> 
> must add the op is right talibans are ****s for attacking/killing innocent kids, hope they all get nuked ****ing ****s


get our my greedy governments country then u fuking idiot. What you living here for if you don't like it? dick head


----------



## Tonk007 (Jan 1, 2012)

dann19900 said:


> get our my greedy governments country then u fuking idiot. What you living here for if you don't like it? dick head


i was born here you pr**k, why should i move ? just because i have a different opinion then yours

you racist ****, its people like you with your bigoted views that need to **** off


----------



## dann19900 (Dec 29, 2012)

Tonk007 said:


> i was born here you pr**k, why should i move ? just because i have a different opinion then yours
> 
> you racist ****, its people like you with your bigoted views that need to **** off


don't sound like you see yourself as very british 'your greedy government'


----------



## Tonk007 (Jan 1, 2012)

dann19900 said:


> don't sound like you see yourself as very british 'your greedy government'


well i am very british got mate called dave & my gf is white lol, anyways im off to the gym


----------



## robsam23 (May 15, 2006)

megatron said:


> At least it's their own people on this occasion, disgusting and monstrous as it is... Rather them then some British school...
> 
> Probably an easier target for the pussies


It's not their own people! That's like saying it would be fair game for a group of neo nazis to try and kill you because you're white (assuming you are). These people are Taliban terrorist extremists, I don't know if they're from Pakisan or not, but that's not the point.

For the record I'm white.


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

The majority of the tailban are from Pakistan, the tribal regions in particular where it has been a safe heaven for them for years. The ISI are in bed with the Taliban then sit at the table pretending to be an ally of the west. Bunch of backward cowards that need a few more drone strikes their way, of course just my opnion


----------



## Huntingground (Jan 10, 2010)

Normsky said:


> Thats stupid, guerrilla tactics require you to hit and run and fight in the shadows. You don't beat a conventional military occupation force with regular military forces, you wage a war of attrition. Why would you stand and fight against an enemy with staggeringly overwhelming unfair technological and numerical advantage?
> 
> If you hold that as cowardly then the resistance against the Nazi's were cowards, Britisht revolt against Roman occupiers was cowardly, NV/VC resistance against the U.S was cowardly.
> 
> I hate this stupid way of nonthinking, branding people who use military tactics as cowards because they don't musket bayonet charge a force armed with fighter jets, professional soldiers with high tech weapons and body armour.


A retarded viewpoint indeed.

I will stand by my assertions that anybody who "hide in the shadows, planting bombs and killing innocent women and children" are cowards. I fail to see how this does not compute with everybody.


----------



## Fortunatus (Apr 12, 2013)

edit ; prob get banned for being against all of that sh1t.


----------



## josephbloggs (Sep 29, 2013)

this was a barbaric and evil attack by any standards, but i think it would be a disservice to our own military to label the taliban pussies or cowards as they have fended off our troops along with the US and rest of the coalition for more than a decade with much less sophisticated hardware than we have, and talking about hiding in the shadows is nonsense really. every successful military unit fights to it's strengths. our preferred strategy isn't really to "stand and fight" we much prefer to bomb the crap out of our enemies from the sky even using unmanned drones at times. troops on the ground are only deployed where it is seen as absolutely necessary and even then that is accompanied by very comprehensive air support as well.

whatever you think of taliban don't think anyone can deny they are a determined and formidable fighting force.


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

I don't think anyone is under any illusion that the Taliban are seasoned, hardcore fighters who are not afraid to stand and fight in flip flops and a tea towel on them when the time comes however of course they are going to deploy the tatics they have done in the past 10 years as they don't care about the general moderate Muslims and local population. They like them living in fear and they using cowardly tatics which have been on their part very successful in defeating the west. They do know a lot about military warfare and deploying ambush tatics, the use of fire, diversion and distractions and so on and so fourth so they are not as Brain dead as many people in the west think


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

thread has worried me with the amount of hate spread hope all those that need the education to make them see clear get it

but for now my heart goes out to the children and parents that has suffered


----------



## AlexB18 (Dec 10, 2013)

Absolutely horrible atrocity whichever way you dress it up, cant imagine how the parents of those children must be feeling, the thought of seeing my kids off to school one day and never seeing them alive again just doesn't bare thinking about.


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

AlexB18 said:


> Absolutely horrible atrocity whichever way you dress it up, cant imagine how the parents of those children must be feeling, the thought of seeing my kids off to school one day and never seeing them alive again just doesn't bare thinking about.


There is no way one can dress it up like you say its a horrible atrocity and I think all involved, their chain of command and their training grounds should be wiped out by a drive strike but that won't happen anytime soon as the ISI are in bed with the Taliban


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Normsky said:


> Thats stupid, guerrilla tactics require you to hit and run and fight in the shadows. You don't beat a conventional military occupation force with regular military forces, you wage a war of attrition. Why would you stand and fight against an enemy with staggeringly overwhelming unfair technological and numerical advantage?
> 
> If you hold that as cowardly then the resistance against the Nazi's were cowards, Britisht revolt against Roman occupiers was cowardly, NV/VC resistance against the U.S was cowardly.
> 
> I hate this stupid way of nonthinking, branding people who use military tactics as cowards because they don't musket bayonet charge a force armed with fighter jets, professional soldiers with high tech weapons and body armour.


good post.....when at war, you use the right taictics...otherwise your sending your force out for slaughter with no means of winning...this applies in other places...In Boxing, Bernard Hopkins didn't have the power to stand toe to toe with a lot of younger stronger fighters, so he wwould set traps and pick them off


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

barsnack said:


> good post.....when at war, you use the right taictics...otherwise your sending your force out for slaughter with no means of winning...this applies in other places...In Boxing, Bernard Hopkins didn't have the power to stand toe to toe with a lot of younger stronger fighters, so he wwould set traps and pick them off


I agree, obviously you have to expect the lesser force to deploy such tatics to try win or achieve their end game whatever that may be, it's just unfortunate this always comes at a heavy loss of innocent civilians like we have saw yest and in the past say the IRA bombing and killing women and children/unborn babies to try achieve their goal.


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

I don't see why people are linking the taliban with the IRA yes they both do horrible things to innocent people but the IRA were fighting against being owned by the British government ment. These were normal men who wernt being heard so they had to get their points across violently. That is not the same as fighting a people (us) who want to drag a race out of the stone age with its prehistoric laws. As soon as the neanderthal leftovers are destroyed or bred out and one day the countries stop relying on religion they may be able to function and there will be no taliban or IS or any of that sh1t. The taliban are fighting so they can lice in a world of rape, stoning women and just plain dark ages sh1t.


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

andyebs said:


> thread has worried me with the amount of hate spread hope all those that need the education to make them see clear get it
> 
> but for now my heart goes out to the children and parents that has suffered


What do u mean see clear mate? What would your solution be?


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

UlsterRugby said:


> I agree, obviously you have to expect the lesser force to deploy such tatics to try win or achieve their end game whatever that may be, it's just unfortunate this always comes at a heavy loss of innocent civilians like we have saw yest and in the past say the IRA bombing and killing women and children/unborn babies to try achieve their goal.


I wont go into it, but there was involvement from British Spook and the Americans, who knew about Omagh, but allowed it to happen......Loyalists and Britiish Soldiers where also guilty, as the IRA, of murdering woman and children....point is, in War, no one is morally just


----------



## zasker (Jun 21, 2014)

harrison180 said:


> I don't see why people are linking the taliban with the IRA yes they both do horrible things to innocent people but the IRA were fighting against being owned by the British government ment. These were normal men who wernt being heard so they had to get their points across violently. That is not the same as fighting a people (us) who want to drag a race out of the stone age with its prehistoric laws. As soon as the neanderthal leftovers are destroyed or bred out and one day the countries stop relying on religion they may be able to function and there will be no taliban or IS or any of that sh1t. The taliban are fighting so they can lice in a world of rape, stoning women and just plain dark ages sh1t.


Insert general argumentative comment here.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Some people in this thread struggling with consistent logical analysis.

The people who murdered those kids are scum, RIP kids who were killed, we should just nuke the entire place, killing millions of children. Is this real life?


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

I agree comparing the IRA with the Taliban is somewhat disingenuous.

One is a nationalist anti colonialist force which enjoyed widespread support both economically from the Nationalist community in the North of Ireland. They only emerged as a renewed force after a split with the CIRA after catholic workers and students were beaten off the streets and shot by loyalist thugs and burnt out of their homes.

The other is a fundamentalist ex government power who believe in a literal interpretation of Islam

My politics are completely different from those of SF and the republican movement and I don't think their goal of a united Ireland was worth 3000 deaths, that is due to me being an internationalist and if Ireland occupied half my country I would not consider reunification worth dying for or killing for .

However most of the English people who call them terrorist scum, if the roles were reversed and Ireland still owned half of Enlgand, would be blowing up Irish security forces and Irish pubs in a second.


----------



## andyebs (Aug 14, 2013)

harrison180 said:


> What do u mean see clear mate? What would your solution be?


i dont have a solution mate wish i did but i know more hate and war will not solve the problem


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

Its nothing to do with race its religion, the root of all wars


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

harrison180 said:


> I don't see why people are linking the taliban with the IRA yes they both do horrible things to innocent people but the IRA were fighting against being owned by the British government ment. These were normal men who wernt being heard so they had to get their points across violently. That is not the same as fighting a people (us) who want to drag a race out of the stone age with its prehistoric laws. As soon as the neanderthal leftovers are destroyed or bred out and one day the countries stop relying on religion they may be able to function and there will be no taliban or IS or any of that sh1t. The taliban are fighting so they can lice in a world of rape, stoning women and just plain dark ages sh1t.


Don't think hunting ground was comparing their motives. Rather the cowardly tactics of killing innocent civilians they both used.

The Taliban are ****s the IRA were/are ****s. End of story really.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

MR RIGSBY said:


> Don't think hunting ground was comparing their motives. Rather the cowardly tactics of killing innocent civilians they both used.
> 
> The Taliban are ****s the IRA were/are ****s. End of story really.


The IRA never target civillians, however cvillians did die from their actions. However hundreds of thousands died in Iraq fron US and British missiles, why is a car bomb under a RUC van that explodes and kills RUC officers plus 2 innocent kids proof the IRA are cowardly ****s, but Us and GB forces dropping bombs that kill thousands in packed civillian areas not proof of the same?

Every single military force, in every conflict has killed children.


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

Normsky said:


> The IRA never target civillians, however cvillians did die from their actions. However hundreds of thousands died in Iraq fron UK and British missiles, why is a car bomb under a RUC van that explodes and kills RUC officers plus 2 innocent kids proof the IRA are cowardly ****s, but UK forces dropping bombs that kill thousands in packed civillian areas not proof of the same?
> 
> Every single military force, in every conflict has killed children.


The IRA were pretty indiscriminate in their attacks, many targeted security forces, many did not. Your belief that civilians were never targeted is absurd.

Why do you always come back to the old 'well they did this or that , so it must be ok' . Boudica killed innocents centuries ago, so why shouldn't the Taliban, the British Government kill innocents when they drop bombs in Iraq, so it's ok for the IRA to plant bombs in shopping centres. Your logic is twisted.

Noticed numerous times you almost try to defend, excuse terrorist acts by blaming the British government or harping on about something in the distant past.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Normsky said:


> The IRA never target civillians, however cvillians did die from their actions. However hundreds of thousands died in Iraq fron US and British missiles, why is a car bomb under a RUC van that explodes and kills RUC officers plus 2 innocent kids proof the IRA are cowardly ****s, but Us and GB forces dropping bombs that kill thousands in packed civillian areas not proof of the same?
> 
> Every single military force, in every conflict has killed children.


We have argued about this before. You are an IRA lover... It's clear to see. But don't come on here saying crap like they never targeted civilians. That comment is a fcuking INSULT to the many civilians who died at thier cowardly strategy. Tell me was shankhill a legitimate target? What about the bombs in shopping centres? Fcuk off with your crap


----------



## Pinky (Sep 3, 2014)

crouchmagic said:


> Okay, let's look at some of the current UK lads who have gone over to fight for ISIS.
> 
> Their families had no indication that they were going to leave, they had nothing to do with it, they don't support it, and they have disowned them.
> 
> ...


True 

Its a hard one to prove tho IMO, if the families knew about their relatives intentions? If they had no idea what so ever, then punishing them for their relatives behaviour is obserd, however if they did know and they support them in what they do, then IMO they are bas as the person who has gone to fight for them!


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

The ONE thing I am grateful of the Islamist terrorists is it exposed you lot (IRA) for what you are to the world. After 9/11 your financial support was over. You could no longer lie to the yanks that what you were doing was justified. You were exposed and finished.

I had to re read your comment about not targeting civilians lol. You still try to justify it. Your mob killed innocent women, children, unborn babies and normal people going about thier day. Of course in your deluded mind a chip shop, a barber shop, a busy city centre shopping mall and town centres were all legitimate military targets. Fud


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> We have argued about this before. You are an IRA lover... It's clear to see. But don't come on here saying crap like they never targeted civilians. That comment is a fcuking INSULT to the many civilians who died at thier cowardly strategy. Tell me was shankhill a legitimate target? What about the bombs in shopping centres? Fcuk off with your crap


 Again your talking with emotion, disregarding the facts. The civillians who died from IRA bombs were not the targets, property damage was, it was to economically smash the British Government to the table, which by the way worked.

The Shankhill bomb was as un-justifiable as when British bombs kill tens of Iraqi children at a time, why do you condemn one group as terrorists and the other as brave soldiers?

The British Government ordered the firebombombing of dresden, thousands of women and children burned alive. How was the shankhill bombing any worse than what we do?

In war you can't never get an operation wrong, the difference is the British RAF purposefully killed civillians as official policy, the IRA were trying to cost the British money from property damage, they also issued declerations of apology for the loss of innocent life, like the shankhill and Eneskillen. The RAF never apologized for firebombing toddlers.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Normsky said:


> Again your talking with emotion, disregarding the facts. The civillians who died from IRA bombs were not the targets, property damage was, it was to economically smash the British Government to the table, which by the way worked.
> 
> The Shankhill bomb was as un-justifiable as when British bombs kill tens of Iraqi children at a time, why do you condemn one group as terrorists and the other as brave soldiers?
> 
> ...


ha ha ha ha ha what total crap you speak of. So a chip shop being bombed crippled the UK economy. You were really targeting buildings huh? Why not bomb landmarks then? You are sooooo deluded it laughable. Your tactics didn't witk. What brought you to the table was no support from America after 9/11. Oh and by the way that meant the UK won. We NEVER surrendered to your terrorism, we always said the ONLY way progress could be made was through the table NOT the bomb. So how did your tactics work? Your friends are disarmed, no money, no support and are losing democratically now also. The North is STILL British and will be for the remainder of my life and your life. YOU will never see a United Eire, only Northern Ireland. And until the people living there DECIDE different it will always be. Lol even the Catholics living in NI want it to remain British. God save the queen


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

Normsky said:


> Again your talking with emotion, disregarding the facts. The civillians who died from IRA bombs were not the targets, property damage was, it was to economically smash the British Government to the table, which by the way worked.
> 
> The Shankhill bomb was as un-justifiable as when British bombs kill tens of Iraqi children at a time, why do you condemn one group as terrorists and the other as brave soldiers?
> 
> ...


This is a serious question, you obv support the IRA. Do you think it was right them killing a 50 odd year old prison gaurd on his way to work last year?


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> The ONE thing I am grateful of the Islamist terrorists is it exposed you lot (IRA) for what you are to the world. After 9/11 your financial support was over. You could no longer lie to the yanks that what you were doing was justified. You were exposed and finished.
> 
> I had to re read your comment about not targeting civilians lol. You still try to justify it. Your mob killed innocent women, children, unborn babies and normal people going about thier day. Of course in your deluded mind a chip shop, a barber shop, a busy city centre shopping mall and town centres were all legitimate military targets. Fud


Can you show when the IRA sanctioned the purposeful killing of civillians? As far as I know there was one such incident and it was not sanctioned and the volunteers who organised it were chased out of Ireland or killed by the IRA command.

IRA bombs accidentally killed civillians, this number is 723, which is far less than the thousands and thousands killed by our military in Iraq! But you never adress that.

And by the way here are the statistics for deaths in the troubles:

Index of Deaths from the Conflict in Ireland:[173]

Of those killed by British security forces:

187 (~51.5%) were civilians

145 (~39.9%) were members of republican paramilitaries

18 (~4.9%) were members of loyalist paramilitaries

13 (~3.5%) were fellow members of the British security forces

Of those killed by republican paramilitaries:

1080 (~52%) were members/former members of the British security forces

723 (~35%) were civilians

187 (~9%) were members of republican paramilitaries

57 (~2.7%) were members of loyalist paramilitaries

11 (~0.5%) were members of the Irish security forces

Of those killed by loyalist paramilitaries:

877 (~85.4%) were civilians

94 (~9%) were members of loyalist paramilitaries

41 (~4%) were members of republican paramilitaries

14 (~1%) were members of the British security forces

Noticed who has the smallest percentage of victims who were civillians ??


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

Delhi said:


> ha ha ha ha ha what total crap you speak of. So a chip shop being bombed crippled the UK economy. You were really targeting buildings huh? Why not bomb landmarks then? You are sooooo deluded it laughable. Your tactics didn't witk. What brought you to the table was no support from America after 9/11. Oh and by the way that meant the UK won. We NEVER surrendered to your terrorism, we always said the ONLY way progress could be made was through the table NOT the bomb. So how did your tactics work? Your friends are disarmed, no money, no support and are losing democratically now also. The North is STILL British and will be for the remainder of my life and your life. YOU will never see a United Eire, only Northern Ireland. And until the people living there DECIDE different it will always be. Lol even the Catholics living in NI want it to remain British. God save the queen


Of course the Catholics in Northern Ireland want to be part of the union, why on earth would they want a united Ireland.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

We only target buildings lol what a fcuking joke. Incidental that innocent people were in it sound xmas shopping. Honest we only wanted to smash a few windows.... Ha ha ha


----------



## Gary29 (Aug 21, 2011)

I want to colonise Mars and give the human race a second go, because we've totally fcuked this one up.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

UlsterRugby said:


> This is a serious question, you obv support the IRA. Do you think it was right them killing a 50 odd year old prison gaurd on his way to work last year?


1. I don't support the IRA, I deem them morally no worse than the British security forces

2. They have killed far less civillians than the British security forces

3. The vast majority of the globe deemed the armed struggle as legitimate, over 40 nations named streets after IRA volunteers, had days of mourning for IRA members (including france, sweden, Italy, Norway)

4. The IRA did not actively target civillians, I have read both pro IRA and pro British books on both ancient Irish history, civil war period and the troubles, neither side claims they did

5. Most British people who bomb Irish pubs and kill Irish troops if they occupied half our country

6. I don't support the IRA as my politics are not in line with theirs, as I said if Ireland occupied England I would not care, I am not nationalist, my politics are labour movement based (not the labour party)

7. killing prison officers was done by British backed Greek and French resistance groups, was it legitimate then? If so why is it not in this instance?

8. The IRA groups around now have nothing to do with the IRA that actually had mass support from the republican community in Northern Ireland, the situation if completely different.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Look you simply don't get it do you. NO ONE cares a flying fcuk what you think. You come on a UK board and insult innocent people who died at the hands of IRA. Innocents who you say we're not targeted. Yes loyalists also killed civilians but YOUR point was about the IRA not targeting individuals. They cleat and most definitely did. Undeniable fact.

Insulting the British armed forces for actions in Dresden etc is a separate topic (though no one was ever convicted of anything in court). You will be on board soon enough apologising for your pro IRA stance. You try and bring educated discussion to justify terrorist actions. I had family and friends involved in the troubled. Many were VERY innocent, your pals gave not two fcuks though...and as such I give not two fcuks what you think or say. I know who they were and what they stood for. They were cowards like you. Stand up and name yourself publicly. Who you are and where you stay


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

Very political answer to a simple question, I'm just curious that's all not having a day in anyway. This is an open forum everyone has different views which makes the world the way it is. One mans freedom fighter another mans terrorist and all that.

Are you from Northern Ireland or Ireland?


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> We only target buildings lol what a fcuking joke. Incidental that innocent people were in it sound xmas shopping. Honest we only wanted to smash a few windows.... Ha ha ha


So are you claiming they meant to kill civillians? If so what would be the strategy behind that, they lost revenue and support everytime they accidentally killed civillians, not even the British government agree with you, all British government documents pertaining to the mainland bombing of the UK by the IRA name the reaosn behind it as "targeted economic damage", the strategy was to bomb billions and billions of pounds worth of property, which the government were liable for.

The bombings had warnings, meaning the places were evacuated, it cost us billions, it was a major reason we started the secret talks with the IRA.

Did it ever go wrong? Of course, but claiming it was on purpose is just not supported by either side.

How is that different than when the British army kills thousands in Iraq? You keep avoidiong it, how are the British troops not cowards for killing way, way, way more children in Iraq than the IRA ever did?


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

UlsterRugby said:


> Very political answer to a simple question, I'm just curious that's all not having a day in anyway. This is an open forum everyone has different views which makes the world the way it is. One mans freedom fighter another mans terrorist and all that.
> 
> Are you from Northern Ireland or Ireland?


Here is my view. I support Ireland staying part of the UK as long as the people there wish it. However I also deem the republican movement justified in fighting a centuries old, foreign power. The question is do you say bah the Irish have no right to vote on reunification, only those in the north do, many of whom are loyalist English and Scottish descended settlers or do you acknowledge the historical evil of English imperialism, massacres and continued occupation and say people have a right to fight against it.

I generally don't support war, any war, as it always kills civillians. I don't support the IRA campaign then and now, but I also don't support the British occupation of Ireland.

I ust hate it when English people who would bomb and shoot an Irish occupational force in England call out Irish people for doing the same thing, only nreversed.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Look you simply don't get it do you. NO ONE cares a flying fcuk what you think. You come on a UK board and insult innocent people who died at the hands of IRA. Innocents who you say we're not targeted. Yes loyalists also killed civilians but YOUR point was about the IRA not targeting individuals. They cleat and most definitely did. Undeniable fact.
> 
> Insulting the British armed forces for actions in Dresden etc is a separate topic (though no one was ever convicted of anything in court). You will be on board soon enough apologising for your pro IRA stance. You try and bring educated discussion to justify terrorist actions. I had family and friends involved in the troubled. Many were VERY innocent, your pals gave not two fcuks though...and as such I give not two fcuks what you think or say. I know who they were and what they stood for. They were cowards like you. Stand up and name yourself publicly. Who you are and where you stay


Ha, what ignorance  , we dont care about the facts, we are blindly nationalistic, herp derp.

RAF pilots purposefully firebombed thousands of women and children, but because the side which won did it, no one waqs prosecuted for war crimes, yet the the IRA are cowards for accidentally killing civillians with bombs that the British government itself acknowledges were aimed at economic t argets.

You are simply an immoral person and are making yourself look like an incredibly biased, ill informed person.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Politically the republicans had a case. The means they used were entirely wrong. End of discussion for me.


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> We have argued about this before. You are an IRA lover... It's clear to see. But don't come on here saying crap like they never targeted civilians. That comment is a fcuking INSULT to the many civilians who died at thier cowardly strategy. Tell me was shankhill a legitimate target? What about the bombs in shopping centres? Fcuk off with your crap


the UFF Leadrship used the upstairs of the chippie which was bombed....did they know it would kill innocents, yes, was it planted to target Loyalists, then yes....its same logic as the amount of bombs allied forces have used when targeting the enemy knowing they'll kill innocents....like ive said, ALL sides, have killed innocents....were its the IRA, UFF, British Army, Americans etc...all have...so by you calling the IRA Scum and ****s...which would be expected from your background, with mine, the British Army were the enemy to us and loyalists


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> Politically the republicans had a case. The means they used were entirely wrong. End of discussion for me.


read up in the history of Ireland....little thing called 'Gerrymandering'....unfair representation of Nationalist population, menat they had no voice


----------



## WilsonR6 (Feb 14, 2012)

Seems to be a disease of the mind this whole muslim business


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

My final bit of advise for you is this mate:

Be careful with your view and opinion in public. I have family members lost and friends lost. I suggest if certain people heard you speak like you are on this board they would rip you apart mate. When you insult dead people as you did you would deserve it 100%


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

barsnack said:


> read up in the history of Ireland....little thing called 'Gerrymandering'....unfair representation of Nationalist population, menat they had no voice


Ahh I was waiting on you chirping in. Again a well know IRA sympathiser...your opinion matters Bill to me(as mine does to you). I know my history mate. I suggest you read up also.


----------



## UlsterRugby (Nov 16, 2014)

Normsky said:


> Here is my view. I support Ireland staying part of the UK as long as the people there wish it. However I also deem the republican movement justified in fighting a centuries old, foreign power. The question is do you say bah the Irish have no right to vote on reunification, only those in the north do, many of whom are loyalist English and Scottish descended settlers or do you acknowledge the historical evil of English imperialism, massacres and continued occupation and say people have a right to fight against it.
> 
> I generally don't support war, any war, as it always kills civillians. I don't support the IRA campaign then and now, but I also don't support the British occupation of Ireland.
> 
> I ust hate it when English people who would bomb and shoot an Irish occupational force in England call out Irish people for doing the same thing, only nreversed.


Ireland isn't part of the UK. The country Northern Ireland it. The majority of people from both sides of the divide which it to remain that way. There is some who through peaceful means would like a united Ireland then a minority who want people to live in fear and are trying to achieve their 32 county state through viloence. The so called modern day Ira who set bombs in busy streets in Belfast last Christmas, shot a prison officer driving to work ect these people have very little support.

I agree with you in the sense that as long as the people of Northern Ireland want to remain part of the UK then it should remain as it is


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Actually you are right, all they did was target buildings for economic reasons. So tell me does that make the bombing of the twin towers legitimate and acceptable?

*Do you both agree (normsky and bar snack) that flying a plane into trade centre was justified?*

Sounds like you ARE afterall just the same as the Islamists


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> Ahh I was waiting on you chirping in. Again a well know IRA sympathiser...your opinion matters Bill to me(as mine does to you). I know my history mate. I suggest you read up also.


haha you clearly haven't if you didn't comment on Gerrymandering, heres an example of one Area 'Derry' and the effects of Gerrymandering to control the Catholic majority....when a people don't have a voice politically, then they use arms






suggest you watch it, and learn something before you start dimissing other people opinions


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> My final bit of advise for you is this mate:
> 
> Be careful with your view and opinion in public. I have family members lost and friends lost. I suggest if certain people heard you speak like you are on this board they would rip you apart mate. When you insult dead people as you did you would deserve it 100%


Oh shut up trying to threaten people you moron. Guess what, I have a number or relatives in the forces, they know my views, none of them feel like punching people for disagreeing with them.

My old MMA instructor was Irish and supported the republican cause, he could knock you senseless and rape you, guess that means you shouldn't be pro british in public.

Also where did insult any dead person you logically inept moron, stop thorwing lies out because you are an ill educated ass who has done zero research or studying on the subject.


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> Actually you are right, all they did was target buildings for economic reasons. So tell me does that make the bombing of the twin towers legitimate and acceptable?
> 
> Do you both agree (normally bar snack) that flying a plane into trade centre was justified?
> 
> Sounds like you ARE afterall just the same as the Islamists


eh? economic reasons, already mentioned they targeted the CHippie in Shankill bomb as Loyalist leaders had meetings above it....find people who haven't much sense of argument, using cases which aren't link, and go off track i.e. the twin woers, to gather support for your views....and no, I don't think the twin towers was justified


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

andyebs said:


> i dont have a solution mate wish i did but i know more hate and war will not solve the problem


If there was a peaceful mate then they should go for it but I'm afraid the human race just isn't ment to get on. It's inevitable that we will wipe ourselves out. It's what we are good at.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Actually you are right, all they did was target buildings for economic reasons. So tell me does that make the bombing of the twin towers legitimate and acceptable?
> 
> *Do you both agree (normsky and bar snack) that flying a plane into trade centre was justified?*
> 
> Sounds like you ARE afterall just the same as the Islamists


Did the IRA give a warning in advance so the building could be evacuated?

Was AQ's stated aims to cause economic damage and not kill people?

Are you this stupid?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

barsnack said:


> eh? economic reasons, already mentioned they targeted the CHippie in Shankill bomb as Loyalist leaders had meetings above it....find people who haven't much sense of argument, using cases which aren't link, and go off track i.e. the twin woers, to gather support for your views....and no, I don't think the twin towers was justified


so was Manchester shopping centre justified?


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

If you don't think RAF s should of been prosecuted for Dresden which killed far more than 9/11, do you think AQ should of been punished for 9/11? If not why?


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> so was Manchester shopping centre justified?


Was it more or less ustified than dresden, if so why? if not why not?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Oh and again will remind you of conversation. Your pal normsky was saying IRA and Islamists were different. Islamists targeted trade centre for economic impact just like your pals attacked buildings for economic impact. So why is IRA justified and Islamists not?

Also, how is your British passport? Looks great don't ut. Esp the part that talks about the queen


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> so was Manchester shopping centre justified?


Was bloody sunday more morally defensible than the manchester bombing which killed no one?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Answer the question and stop dodging it. Do you think attacking twin towers was justified. Yes or no


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

MR RIGSBY said:


> Don't think hunting ground was comparing their motives. Rather the cowardly tactics of killing innocent civilians they both used.
> 
> The Taliban are ****s the IRA were/are ****s. End of story really.


I wasn't really commenting on any one persons post mate I just saw the IRA being brought into it and even tho I agree that they did some Sh1tty stuff and they were sh1t heads their cause for it was completely different imo.

I'm all for fighting for what you belive in etc no matter how stupid but those who want no part of the physical stuff shouldn't be brought into it but on the other hand if we hadn't bombed the fvck out German cities in ww2 and America hadn't bombed Japan into surrender then us or America wouldn't of won the war.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Normsky said:


> Did the IRA give a warning in advance so the building could be evacuated?
> 
> Was AQ's stated aims to cause economic damage and not kill people?
> 
> Are you this stupid?


No I am not stupid mate, the only stupid ones are you and bar snack who are trying to justify in ANY way the killing of innocent people. Think it's clear who the stupid ones are.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Oh and again will remind you of conversation. Your pal normsky was saying IRA and Islamists were different. Islamists targeted trade centre for economic impact just like your pals attacked buildings for economic impact. So why is IRA justified and Islamists not?
> 
> Also, how is your British passport? Looks great don't ut. Esp the part that talks about the queen


 They killed 3000 people, on purpose, actively targetted civillians, you are being incredibly stupid comparing economic bombing campaigns to 9/11. Also the stated goals of Osama was to pull the west into wars in the middle east and economically weaken us while whipping up support against the west. Their goal was to kill non believers and eventual goal is the genocide of non believers and the establishment of sharia.

The IRA targeted soldiers and RUC, bombed buildings gave warnings, aiming for a united Ireland.

Use logic.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> No I am not stupid mate, the only stupid ones are you and bar snack who are trying to justify in ANY way the killing of innocent people. Think it's clear who the stupid ones are.


Says the guy who condemns IRA bombings yet defends RAF pilots who firebombed babies and women in the thousands. Why are those more ustifiable than the British civillians killed?


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> so was Manchester shopping centre justified?


they did give warning 1hr before the explosion...but no, I personally don't agree with bombs in any densly populated areas of civilians


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Since you won't commit an answer here is mine.

Was twin towers justified...no

Was Manchester justified...no

Was Dresden justified...possibly

Was loyalist killings justified...no

Is Isis justified in beheadings ...no

That's the difference between me and you. Now answer the questions. Let the world see you for what you really are


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> No I am not stupid mate, the only stupid ones are you and bar snack who are trying to justify in ANY way the killing of innocent people. Think it's clear who the stupid ones are.


can you justify Iraq? or Bloody Sunday?...and that's only two im mentioning, not going into the treatment handed out in your colonies years ago


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

barsnack said:


> they did give warning 1hr before the explosion...but no, I personally don't agree with bombs in any densly populated areas of civilians


Sensible post, but don't try to justify it in any way


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Answer the question and stop dodging it. Do you think attacking twin towers was justified. Yes or no


No you moron, because they intentionally killed civillians, how are you comparing that with IRA bombings where warnings were given?

Jesus you ust revert to this nonsense rather than adress the facts that your soldiers killed far more civillians that the IRA. Yet you define one as cowardly and the other as heroes.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Was Bloody Sunday justified...no

Was Iraq justified...no but was for oil


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> Oh and again will remind you of conversation. Your pal normsky was saying IRA and Islamists were different. Islamists targeted trade centre for economic impact just like your pals attacked buildings for economic impact. So why is IRA justified and Islamists not?
> 
> Also, how is your British passport? Looks great don't ut. Esp the part that talks about the queen


ive an Irish passport...when Islamic stremists targeted the twin towers, they did so knowing they would be killing innocents....the IRA gave 1hr warning where exactly the bomb was...and in their statement, said they regreted people got injured


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Normsky said:


> No you moron, because they intentionally killed civillians, how are you comparing that with IRA bombings where warnings were given?
> 
> Jesus you ust revert to this nonsense rather than adress the facts that your soldiers killed far more civillians that the IRA. Yet you define one as cowardly and the other as heroes.


No they attacked the twin towers primarily for the economic and symbolic advantage. Just like your pals the IRA did in Manchester etc they knew there would be civilian casualties, just like your pals the IRA did.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Sensible post, but don't try to justify it in any way


You justify British soldiers and RAF both killing intentionally and unintentionally, lots of civillians. Why is it wrong to support the IRA who have killed 730 civillians over 30 years, but ok to support the RAF who killed 25,000 civillians in dresden in two days?

Please adress the point.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> No they attacked the twin towers primarily for the economic and symbolic advantage. Just like your pals the IRA did in Manchester etc


The IRA gave warnings in manchester, no one died, because the IRA warned them. AQ murdered 3000 people on purpose and claimed it was legitimate. God you are embarassing.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

barsnack said:


> ive an Irish passport...when Islamic stremists targeted the twin towers, they did so knowing they would be killing innocents....the IRA gave 1hr warning where exactly the bomb was...and in their statement, said they regreted people got injured


Regretted lol. Just like the British and any army "regrets" the loss of life. They sure did pick the best times though didn't they. I mean rush hour, xmas shopping etc. anyone would think they intentionally blew these places up at those times because the wanted to cause as much TERROR as possible. But nah, you guys are right they chose those times because it was coincidence.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Normsky said:


> The IRA gave warnings in manchester, no one died, because the IRA warned them. AQ murdered 3000 people on purpose and claimed it was legitimate. God you are embarassing.


Back to square one with you. Sooooo...what about shankhill etc. people DID die you tool. You CANT justify that. You try to but are failing badly. Under no circumstance can you justify the killing of innocent, but here you are doing just that. Saying it's ok for IRA but not AQ lol listen to yourself


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> Regretted lol. Just like the British and any army "regrets" the loss of life. They sure did pick the best times though didn't they. I mean rush hour, xmas shopping etc. anyone would think they intentionally blew these places up at those times because the wanted to cause as much TERROR as possible. But nah, you guys are right they chose those times because it was coincidence.


yes, they gave warning as already said...unlike others....were ****ing against the wind here...you've one opinion, ive another, completely opposide...pointless arguing the same points...and yeah, of course there goin to pick peak times, so when shopping etc is disrupted, then more damage is caused without loss of life...this thread is best locked


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Hey everyone, it's ok to kill someone with a bomb. So long as you give them warning. What a complete bell end you are normsky


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

barsnack said:


> yes, they gave warning as already said...unlike others....were ****ing against the wind here...you've one opinion, ive another, completely opposide...pointless arguing the same points...and yeah, of course there goin to pick peak times, so when shopping etc is disrupted, then more damage is caused without loss of life...this thread is best locked


Agree, funny thing is a agree with many of your posts but we will never see eye to eye on this. No love lost though


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

Delhi said:


> Back to square one with you. Sooooo...what about shankhill etc. people DID die you tool. You CANT justify that. You try to but are failing badly. *Under no circumstance can you justify the killing of innocent*, but here you are doing just that. Saying it's ok for IRA but not AQ lol listen to yourself


you just said in a previous post that Dresden was 'possibly justified', and IRAQ was 'for oil' meaning it was justified in a way...your contradicting yourself


----------



## Boshlop (Apr 1, 2012)

people get blown up and terrorism ****s up countries, instead of people coming together not wanting more death they use it as reason to argue, not the terror they intended but it seems to be tearing people apart years on... quite sad


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Back to square one with you. Sooooo...what about shankhill etc. people DID die you tool. You CANT justify that. You try to but are failing badly. Under no circumstance can you justify the killing of innocent, but here you are doing just that. Saying it's ok for IRA but not AQ lol listen to yourself


Civillians die in every war! Was there a war where the British army diudn't accidentally kill any civillians?

The diufference between the IRA/British army and AQ is that AQ aim to kill civillians, the IRA/British army kill civillians during military operations, its not the sole aim. (well British forces have such as dresden, but don't these days)


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

Why can't men just meet on fields again and shoot the sh1t out of each other? Very cheap and whoever is the best side wins.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

barsnack said:


> you just said in a previous post that Dresden was 'possibly justified', and IRAQ was 'for oil' meaning it was justified in a way...your contradicting yourself


Didn't say killing innocents was justified. I said attacking DRESDEN was possibly justified. They were the manufacturing centre for the German army. America dropped just as much (more I think) than we did in Dresden. So justified as a legitimate military target

And Iraq I said no it wasn't justified, but it was about oil.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Didn't say killing innocents was justified. I said attacking DRESDEN was possibly justified. They were the manufacturing centre for the German army. America dropped just as much (more I think) than we did in Dresden. So justified as a legitimate military target


Ok, so then the shankhill bombing is the exact moral equivalent then if it was used by loyalist paramilitaries, right?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Normsky said:


> Ok, so then the shankhill bombing is the exact moral equivalent then if it was used by loyalist paramilitaries, right?


Lol keep moving the target. First answer the questions. Do you think it is justified to kill innocents (with a warning)


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Evelyn Baird. The mother-of-three

Michelle Baird. Schoolgirl Michelle (7)

Wilma McKee. ...

John Frizzell. ...

Michael Morrison

Sharon McBride (13)

George /Gillian Williamson

Leanne Murray.

Ok so here are the victims of shankhill. Which of those was a legitimate military target normsky. God bless their souls. You disgust me, and I feel ashamed to have to post this. But tell me...who amongst them was legitimate. You fud


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Lol keep moving the target. First answer the questions. Do you think it is justified to kill innocents (with a warning)


See here is the problem, all wars kill innocents, so if its not justified to ever do anything that could kill innocents, then we couldn't go to war against the Nazi's. we couldn't of fought in any war ever.

The question is is purposefully killking civillians acceptable, which of course is a no, it is not. However the IRA did not target civillians, in fact tony blair mentioned this in the famous interview when he talked about his role in the NI peace process.

He said the reason he could sit down and do a deal with the republican movement and why he saw it as impossible to ever deal with jihadists was because of the moral and political distinction. The IRA were a group who did not actively target civillians and had, whether you agree or not, a rational goal, a united Ireland.

**** even mi5 figures talked about how they had a begrudging respect for the IRA, despite wanting their destruction, yet they openly despised loyalist groups who opened up on civillians with AK47,S in pubs.

In the early stages of the troubles British Army soldiers sometimes saluted IRA funeral processions.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Evelyn Baird. The mother-of-three
> 
> Michelle Baird. Schoolgirl Michelle (7)
> 
> ...


 Who amongst the 25000 murdered civillians at dresden were legitimate?

You are being puposefully ignorant here. You claimed Dresden might be legitimate because of MANUFACTURING, the chipsop bombed on the Shankhill was used by loyalist paramilitaries who organised operations in the flat above, how is that not a legitimate target? Thats who they were trying to kill, not the civillians they killed by accident!


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

And British troops saluted dead nazi soldiers that's cause they had morals and respect for thier enemy. Did the IRA ever salute British army?


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> And British troops saluted maxi soldiers that's cause they had morals. Did the IRA ever salute British army?


Yes, they did, they also often laid flowers where soldiers had been killed.

Could you please address post 191 as .its the crucial point


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Did the attack on Dresden succeed in its military objective? Yes innocents were killed (regrettably) the shankhill bomb achieved nothing if military importance.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

I am about to jump on plane, so discussion ends here for me. We have polar views and nothing you say will change

My view. At least I have respect for bar snack for agreeing that with. Discussion is good. No love lost, have a nice evening x


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> Did the attack on Dresden succeed in its military objective? Yes innocents were killed (regrettably) the shankhill bomb achieved nothing if military importance.


Ha so now its about wether the misison was succesful, jesus you just completely changed your argument 

I am done, this is hysterical.

What makes this change of arguement so funny is that you are staggeringly wrong, manufacturing sites were not hit, infact dresden was not even a main manufacturing centre, it achieved nothing, in fact Churchill regarded it as an act simplky to commit more terror

*Almost immediately, those responsible started to have second thoughts. Churchill himself penned a minute which read: "It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror though under other pretexts should be reviewed. Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land. The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of allied bombing. I feel the need for more precise concentration upon military objectives rather than the mere acts of terror and mass destruction, however impressive."*

So if its about the success of the operation, neither were succesful. But one killed a dozen people, the other killed 25000.

You just sunk in the water.


----------



## jamiew691 (Mar 23, 2014)

AncientOldBloke said:


> Yeah but all religions ever do is divide brothers and encourage hatred. It's used as an excuse to kill and maim anyone different.
> 
> I can't be wasting time fighting somebody else's agenda.
> 
> ...


I didn't even know of most of these religions!! You got some brains bro


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

Find it hard to believe that people are defending terrorists.

It is UKM though, so people will argue that black is white till they're blue in the face.


----------



## Benchbum (Apr 20, 2011)

Jerks. I bet they don't even lift


----------



## harrison180 (Aug 6, 2013)

So when is the UKM super army starting? Why don't we get together go over buy weapons and do some useful stuff?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Normsky said:


> Ha so now its about wether the misison was succesful, jesus you just completely changed your argument
> 
> I am done, this is hysterical.
> 
> ...


No mate I didn't sink, again I am not the one defending terrorists who killed British people. Your morals were shown to all long ago. Dresden was a critical city to the nazi operation that is FACT. You quote Churchill AFTER the initial bombing raids. As I said Dresden was POSSIBLY legitimate.

Listen to yourself condoning the murder of innocent people then trying to a cross as the moral high ground. You are a tool and I suspect a young boy. You can't see the offence you cause people with your posts. Yet you will come on the board soon enough crying like a baby appogiskng for any offence you cause. Why not p1ss off and go live in Eire. I would stand alone and argue with you and all men like you. I will never agree with your view that ANY form of terrorism is justified.

You support and sympathise with terrorists, FACT. I don't and never will. And if that means the troops in the British army need to do whatever it takes to remove men like you fro. Society then they have my backing.

That's the difference between the British army and the IRA. The British army fight on instruction only the government and head of state. Elected officials of the people. The IRA never represented the MAJORITY in Eire. They were never elected, never agreed to Geneva convention or any other human rights act. You say they didn't target civilians I say they did. History and a whole lot of graves tell me so. At no point did they change tactics after civilians were killed. They simply did not care.

You have supported Terrorism, IRA and Syrian Rebels (Isis) on this board. We all can see who you are...now why do t you fcuk off with your stupid views and go back to the cave where you came.

I said it earlier in the thread, I would love you to say these things publicly. It's easy to support terrorists from behind your keyboard.

I suppose you can find justification for the children Killed in Pakistan also? After all they were not targeting children (education was target) and they have given plenty of warnings... So they are justified in your book army they?

Afterall so long as warning is given and civilians are not the primary target it's all good in your book isn't it?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

New question for you.

Do you think it is acceptable and or justifiable to kill civilians if warning is given and no intent to kill was present?

Yes or no


----------



## NO-IDEA (Jun 28, 2012)

crouchmagic said:


> Okay, let's look at some of the current UK lads who have gone over to fight for ISIS.
> 
> Their families had no indication that they were going to leave, they had nothing to do with it, they don't support it, and they have disowned them.
> 
> ...


You are really naive if you honesty believe relatives don't know whats going on. They have chose NOT to fight or convert as they are already content in life.

They are not going to turn round and admit to knowing etc as face a backlash from press etc I bet you won't find 1 family that will admit to being in the know. People are always going to choose to protect there kids etc and even once they have killed will want to and try to believe it wasn't them. Most muslim family's will know full well that mohammed akbar khan will be off to join Isis.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> No mate I didn't sink, again I am not the one defending terrorists who killed British people. Your morals were shown to all long ago. Dresden was a critical city to the nazi operation that is FACT. You quote Churchill AFTER the initial bombing raids. As I said Dresden was POSSIBLY legitimate.
> 
> Listen to yourself condoning the murder of innocent people then trying to a cross as the moral high ground. You are a tool and I suspect a young boy. You can't see the offence you cause people with your posts. Yet you will come on the board soon enough crying like a baby appogiskng for any offence you cause. Why not p1ss off and go live in Eire. I would stand alone and argue with you and all men like you. I will never agree with your view that ANY form of terrorism is justified.
> 
> ...


For the last time, I do not support the IRA, I don't support Syrian Rebels (however our government did with millions of pounds).

I just think the IRA and the British army are morally equal. Neither purposefully killed civillians, they both had mass support from their community and represent that community.

My whole point is the IRA and the British Army are both morally equal, as oppose to say these monsters in pakistan who killed civillians, not by accident, but that was the purpose of their operation.

I neither support the IRA and their killing of both military combatants and civillians, or support the British Army and their killing of combatants or civillians.

How does that equal support for either side?

My point is you can't say the IRA killing civvies by accident makes them scum, but then say the British Army are not scum when they do the same. War is ****, civillians die in every war. Nationalism is making you say hypocritical things.


----------



## Normsky (Aug 29, 2014)

Delhi said:


> New question for you.
> 
> Do you think it is acceptable and or justifiable to kill civilians if warning is given and no intent to kill was present?
> 
> Yes or no


I think it is acceptable for the Britsh army to conduct military operations against the Nazi's that, while not meaning to, took innocent German civillian lives.

Now if that is the case, why is it whenever anyone else accidentally kills civillians, by accident, they are terrorists, but when, we do it, by accident, it was just a mistake?

Again this applies to groups like the PIRA, British Army, IDF, American patriotic rebels in the US revolution against the crown.

Not groups who are ambivelent or pro killing civillians, like the Taliban, AQ, ISL, BHG.


----------



## Sambuca (Jul 25, 2012)

didnt they kill the kids as the parents were in military/police for the oposition


----------



## vlb (Oct 20, 2008)

The problem is that if you go around killing other peoples familes (deliberate or not) then they will eventually attack back.

try telling a father who has lost his son or his son's that he should not seek revenge for his loss.

The UK has noone other than itself to blame.

It ****ed about in Ireland and the IRA came calling

It ****ed around in the middle east and the Islamists came calling.

The UK needs to lose its bullyboy attitude to other countries or it should not expect to stay safe.


----------



## MincedMuscle (Aug 6, 2012)

flamingo-dan said:


> So they think killing 126 defenceless school kids is going to further their 'cause'
> 
> Bunch of pussy barbarian backward **** wits.
> 
> ...


They aren't religious. That's a big lie fed to us. Its state funded terrorism.


----------



## josephbloggs (Sep 29, 2013)

vlb said:


> The problem is that if you go around killing other peoples familes (deliberate or not) then they will eventually attack back.
> 
> try telling a father who has lost his son or his son's that he should not seek revenge for his loss.
> 
> ...


QFT

this is what most people are either too 'conditioned' to recognise or just in plain denial but of a lot of the problems with 'terrorism' have been a result of "bullyboy" UK foreign policy


----------



## EpicSquats (Mar 29, 2014)

The worst thing you can do is go over to someone else's country where you weren't invited, push people around, p1ss them off, then let loads of them come to live in your country. This is what the UK has been doing for a couple of decades now.


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

vlb said:


> The problem is that if you go around killing other peoples familes (deliberate or not) then they will eventually attack back.
> 
> try telling a father who has lost his son or his son's that he should not seek revenge for his loss.
> 
> ...


Sure the 130 school kids were Pakistani mate. How you going to try and blame the UK for that. Whether the west interfered or not, these groups would still exist. Look at Somalia and Kenya.

They're a bunch of animals and ain't got **** all to do with us


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

josephbloggs said:


> QFT
> 
> this is what most people are either too 'conditioned' to recognise or just in plain denial but of a lot of the problems with 'terrorism' have been a result of "bullyboy" UK foreign policy


No they haven't. 99% of terrorism, whether it be Al-Qaeda, Isis, Al shabab or Boko haram is committed in the terrorists own country against its own people. These organisations would exist no matter what our foreign policy is. I mean realistically how badly affected are we by these groups? I know I don't lose any sleep over them.


----------



## WilsonR6 (Feb 14, 2012)

My muslim friend (I say friend, he's a friend on Facebook after we used to work together) is very extreme when it comes to Islam. He tells me he wants to die in the name of Islam and be a 'martyr' so he can have eternal whatever in the afterlife

All day every day he posts pictures, videos and statuses on Facebook about the american army/**** that's going on in these scumbag third world *s*hithole countries

I asked him what he thought about the taliban attack he said it was the US government?

I don't follow this nonsense to be fair, all I know is islam is a disease and the world would be a better place without it


----------



## latblaster (Oct 26, 2013)

WilsonR6 said:


> scumbag third world *s*hithole countries


----------



## WilsonR6 (Feb 14, 2012)




----------



## josephbloggs (Sep 29, 2013)

MR RIGSBY said:


> No they haven't. 99% of terrorism, whether it be Al-Qaeda, Isis, Al shabab or Boko haram is committed in the terrorists own country against its own people. These organisations would exist no matter what our foreign policy is. I mean realistically how badly affected are we by these groups? I know I don't lose any sleep over them.


i was more talking about "our" problem with terrorism tbh, i agree most of us will never be affected personally but if you listen to the media you would think we were under a terrorist seige in the UK at the moment. but anyway our actions in the middle east have hugely contributed to the rise of some of these groups there. ISIS for one would definitely have had great trouble gaining the foothold they have now if we hadn't overthrown the Iraqi regime for no reason.

this is the thing that irks me. it's all ridiculous double standards and hyprocrisy . we go and wrongly accuse a country of having weapons of mass destruction , invade their country, an invasion that led to hundreds of thousands iraqi civilian deaths with millions more displaced... we find out there were no WMDs, and it's just a case of oh well...honest mistake never mind onwards and upwards. the country is currently in a state of anarchy mainly due to our(coalition) actions. how was that not an act of terror?

yet everyone else are terrorists and we're still the good guys. how did america, the only nation on earth to ever unleash nuclear weaponry get to decide who we can be trusted to possess them. talk about lunatics running the asylum. the one thing our governments and the groups you mention have in common, they all want control and power, our governments with their propaganda machines are just better at dressing it up to make out we are on the good side.


----------



## MR RIGSBY (Jun 12, 2007)

josephbloggs said:


> i was more talking about "our" problem with terrorism tbh, i agree most of us will never be affected personally but if you listen to the media you would think we were under a terrorist seige in the UK at the moment. but anyway our actions in the middle east have hugely contributed to the rise of some of these groups there. ISIS for one would definitely have had great trouble gaining the foothold they have now if we hadn't overthrown the Iraqi regime for no reason.
> 
> this is the thing that irks me. it's all ridiculous double standards and hyprocrisy . we go and wrongly accuse a country of having weapons of mass destruction , invade their country, an invasion that led to hundreds of thousands iraqi civilian deaths with millions more displaced... we find out there were no WMDs, and it's just a case of oh well...honest mistake never mind onwards and upwards. the country is currently in a state of anarchy mainly due to our(coalition) actions. how was that not an act of terror?
> 
> yet everyone else are terrorists and we're still the good guys. how did america, the only nation on earth to ever unleash nuclear weaponry get to decide who we can be trusted to possess them. talk about lunatics running the asylum. the one thing our governments and the groups you mention have in common, they all want control and power, our governments with their propaganda machines are just better at dressing it up to make out we are on the good side.


I do agree with some of what your saying. Certainly think the government have made some questionable decisions, but I think the world is so ****ed up now, you have to make what are sometimes morally wrong decisions to protect your own. Sounds selfish, but the fact is we have it very good in the west, and despite what some people think there will never be this utopia, where we have world peace and everyone lives happily together.

Also think at times the government are damned if they do and damned if they don't. When The Arab spring kicked off all the left wing do gooders were saying 'oh this is great, get rid of Mubarrak, Ghadaffi, Al Assad.' Now look at these countries. They're ****ed and everyone's saying 'oh we should mind our own business' .

I agree there is a lot of hypocrisy but I don't think that will ever change.


----------



## latblaster (Oct 26, 2013)

If indeed the "Arab Spring" was real & not facilitated or funded by the US to destablise.....then, hey presto...Regime Change! Then a change of Leadership...

Wait a minute....how did Saddam get in???? :lol:

CIA ofc....allegedly.

There's alot of "muslim disturbance" (note the quote marks) in Southern Thailand atm....because apparently there's Oil to be had in that region.

And it is very strongly rumoured that the US has an Interrogation "Centre" in the North.

Personally, I believe not a word.

*clears throat*

BANGKOK, 13 December 2014 (NNT) - The Prime Minister of Thailand has commented on the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence's report on a rumored CIA detention complex in Thailand, saying its an internal matter for the US and is unrelated to the Thai government.


----------



## vlb (Oct 20, 2008)

MR RIGSBY said:


> Sure the 130 school kids were Pakistani mate. How you going to try and blame the UK for that. Whether the west interfered or not, these groups would still exist. Look at Somalia and Kenya.
> 
> They're a bunch of animals and ain't got **** all to do with us


i was talking more around our problems with terrorism not referring to the Pakistani School kids situ.

I dont know alot about the taliban v pakistan situation other than they have been at war for quite some time.


----------



## MrBrown786 (Apr 17, 2014)

H



flamingo-dan said:


> So they think killing 126 defenceless school kids is going to further their 'cause'
> 
> Bunch of pussy barbarian backward **** wits.
> 
> ...


They are not of any religion , no God watches over them they are nothing but evil they are feared by all, they kill their own people . Panchods


----------



## Huntingground (Jan 10, 2010)

@Delhi, well done in exposing Normsky for the absolute tool and fool that he is, didn't answer a question and just threw Dresden into the conv when outsmarted (which was very often).

I have disagreed with Barsnack in the past and understand he is Republican but is reasonably intelligent, articulate and moderate in his thinking.


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

WilsonR6 said:


> My muslim friend (I say friend, he's a friend on Facebook after we used to work together) is very extreme when it comes to Islam. He tells me he wants to die in the name of Islam and be a 'martyr' so he can have eternal whatever in the afterlife
> 
> All day every day he posts pictures, videos and statuses on Facebook about the american army/**** that's going on in these scumbag third world *s*hithole countries
> 
> ...


Why don't you just delete the pr**k?


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Huntingground said:


> @Delhi, well done in exposing Normsky for the absolute tool and fool that he is, didn't answer a question and just threw Dresden into the conv when outsmarted (which was very often).
> 
> I have disagreed with Barsnack in the past and understand he is Republican but is reasonably intelligent, articulate and moderate in his thinking.


I agree mate, and thanks. Normsky tried to justify terrorism and killing innocents. He tried to then distance IRA from Isis, AQ, FSA etc by saying they (IRA) regretted civilian casualties. What he didn't explain though is how after multiple innocent casulties they didn't change course or tactic. They continued to "regret" the civilian casualties. Lol the Taliban recently apologised for killing younger children in thier recent attack. Saying they did not intend to kill the younger children. So with that evidence normsky believes thier actions were justified. Killing innocent children is ok in his book. Because the tally an never set out to kill them, only target education.

Bars snack I also respect, he clearly was raised during the troubles and has a personal story to justify things (as I do). Funny thing is that we (bars and I) could at least agree that peace was best for all. Normsky wants to continue to ram his drivel down people's throats and pour petrol on burning embers.

I would like to know his age as I am beggining to think he wasn't even around when the troubles were. A young KID who thinks answering politically or by diversion makes him look cool on a forum.

Thanks for the mention mate, I would have stood up to him in any case.


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

Delhi said:


> I agree mate, and thanks. Normsky tried to justify terrorism and killing innocents. He tried to then distance IRA from Isis, AQ, FSA etc by saying they (IRA) regretted civilian casualties. What he didn't explain though is how after multiple innocent casulties they didn't change course or tactic. They continued to "regret" the civilian casualties. Lol the Taliban recently apologised for killing younger children in thier recent attack. Saying they did not intend to kill the younger children. So with that evidence normsky believes thier actions were justified. Killing innocent children is ok in his book. Because the tally an never set out to kill them, only target education.
> 
> Bars snack I also respect, he clearly was raised during the troubles and has a personal story to justify things (as I do). Funny thing is that we (bars and I) could at least agree that peace was best for all. Normsky wants to continue to ram his drivel down people's throats and pour petrol on burning embers.
> 
> ...


I remember going out clubbing in London in the early 90's and driving through road blocks in the square mile and getting pulled over and searched thanks to the IRA and their bomb in Bishopsgate.

My home town of Guildford also got bombed by them, the film In The Name of The Father was about the Guildford four who reportedly carried them out.

People have got short memories.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

My father (dead) always used to tell me this about the troubles. And as I grow older the more it rings true. He would say:

The problem in Ireland is that both sides are right, both are wrong and both will never listen to each other.


----------



## Delhi (Dec 8, 2005)

Smitch said:


> I remember going out clubbing in London in the early 90's and driving through road blocks in the square mile and getting pulled over and searched thanks to the IRA and their bomb in Bishopsgate.
> 
> My home town of Guildford also got bombed by them, the film In The Name of The Father was about the Guildford four who reportedly carried them out.
> 
> People have got short memories.


Exactly my sentiment. I don't think he was around though, so he don't realise the situation and what really happened. Instead reads articles on the Internet and thinks that makes him an expert with his opinion.


----------

