Re: The death penalty legitimizes murder

"Grendel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Critter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > She is certainly a legless gerbil.
> >
> > Very gullible too apparently if she is swallowing all of those old lies
> > about the glory of war and yada yada.
>
> Ever been in war?  Ever even been in the military?  Or did the lack of
> balls and that yellow streak down your back keep you from service?  Or
> are you one of the 'enlightened' few who thinks that everyone can
> 'just get alone'?
>
> Believe me, when your shivering your nuts off in the ass end of a
> Stratopig you have plenty of time to think about why you're doing it.
> I sure as hell wasn't there for the financial oportunities.
>
> > > Do you really have intentions to bring to senses this Gerbil with his
> > > gibberish about "necessity" of mass murder?
> > > Only a complete idiot like Gerbil would compare a fight between two
> > > prehistoric Neanderthals over a piece of meat to the modern time
policies
> >  of mass annihilation.
>
> I didn't say a thing about the 'necessity' of war or even about the
> policies of this administration or any other administration involved
> in a war.  Although I do agree with the policies of America during
> this particular conflict, I never mentioned that in my posting.
>
> My point is that there has ALWAY been conflict, there always WILL be
> conflict.  You can't change this as long as there is ONE individual
> who want's that which is not his.  "Peace" is just an agreement
> between multiple entities (be it individuals, cities, states or
> nations) and is enforced by the winner of the last conflict.  Anytime
> anyone of these entities decides it doesn't want to play by the rules
> any longer and inflict it's will upon the rest you get conflict(riots,
> mobs or war).  This is a fact of life, you can't change it in any way.
>  Deal with it.
>
> As far as my opinions on the current conflict:  I think this is a war
> that should have started long ago.  Under Klinton our citizens and
> service men were attacked numerous times and nothing was done.  How
> many Americans have to die before you feel we are 'justified' in
> taking action?  We went after Al-Quida and they ain't given us much
> problem since.  And there is a provable link of ol' Sadam harboring
> terrorist of that organization.  Sure, most of the terrorist are now
> striking back at our soldiers in Iraq, but at least they seem to be to
> busy over there to worry about over here.  That may change, but I'd
> rather keep them on the run than give them free riegn as you would
> have.
>
> "Never underestimate the power of Stupid People in large numbers."

Gerbil, I have to agree with your quotation about danger of stupid people in
large numbers, considering the fact that you belong to them, too...

But the rest of your crap is gotta go.  Because regardless of "importance of
keeping terrorists occupied", this mission is being terminated in June, if
you heard the junior.

Being firm is extremely important in preservation of respect for the
standards of human rights anywhere in the world.  But adherence to the same
internationally excepted rules is not a bit less important.

And when some weaklings are joining the mob of assassins in the capacity of
the mercenaries for despotic rulers, it does not in any way speak of their
"courage" and "heroism", as you think...  Because if they had been true
heroes, they'd made sure first and foremost that americunts themselves had a
fair and free system, before going half way around the world to "liberate
Arabs" by dropping bombs on them indiscriminately, before deciding to step
on devastated soil of long impoverished Iraqi deserts.