Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Do People living under Military Occupation


Bob26003

Do people under military occupation have the right to fight back?  

34 members have voted

  1. 1. Do people living under military occupation have the right to fight back

    • Yes
      21
    • No
      2
    • Depends, please explain choice.
      11


Recommended Posts

your using neocon and zionist propoganda sites as references..

Please, demonstrate how these articles are propaganda. And no, "because they are!" isn't an answer.

I know people who fight terrorism

King Triad, right?

look around my fearful friend terrorisms dead...and it's defeated

So you admit the Bush Administration has made us safe from terrorism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Unlimited

    35

  • BrucePrime

    24

  • AROCES

    14

  • Ins0mniac

    9

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Please, demonstrate how these articles are propaganda. And no, "because they are!" isn't an answer.

King Triad, right?

So you admit the Bush Administration has made us safe from terrorism?

fox news is owned by rupert murdoch and has ties to the white house...they pepper the news with fear propoganda regularly...bush attacks your psyche and builds on the fear and works it....no not king triad...his commanders fight terrorism...not bush ...he's made us less safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fox news is owned by rupert murdoch and has ties to the white house...they pepper the news with fear propoganda regularly...bush attacks your psyche and builds on the fear and works it....no not king triad...his commanders fight terrorism...not bush ...he's made us less safe.

You still have no answered the question.

How were those articles propaganda? Can you point to one falsehood or lie in those stories?

no not king triad...his commanders fight terrorism...not bush ...

So, it's the UFO overlord's commanders who fight terrorism. Interesting.

Edited by BrucePrime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You still have no answered the question.

How were those articles propaganda? Can you point to one falsehood or lie in those stories?

.

can i point to any truth in the fox article?....where are all the attacks bush promises?....everytime he speaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hahah! :D like I said, making what you think is a reality.

Ya it's just Rosie, Matin Sheen , bob26003 and Unlimited that want bush impeached :rolleyes:

http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/11789-former...ys-impeach-bush

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/MNSBC_on...t_say_1110.html

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/10/26/b...r-impeach-bush/

http://newsbusters.org/node/11266

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8...h&plindex=3

Edited by The Silver Thong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

can i point to any truth in the fox article?....where are all the attacks bush promises?....everytime he speaks.

And if an attack do happen, then you will say it's Bush fault and he didn't protect us. Get real here. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if an attack do happen, then you will say it's Bush fault and he didn't protect us. Get real here. :blink:

theirs not gonna be any attacks ...as long as the govt doesnt help them they can be stopped...without help the atta gang could have been stopped.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

theirs not gonna be any attacks ...as long as the govt doesnt help them they can be stopped...without help the atta gang could have been stopped.....

What??? Can't follow you now :huh: Who is they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

, it still not flying and because what you folks think is not reality.

criminals dont usually expose themselves...who do you believe the FBI and the whitehouse?...maybe the 9/11 commision...lol...this is like 1938 germany and you think the criminals are gonna implicate themselves.....war crimes are being commited maybe they will just turn themselves in lol...i cant contain the laughter today...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure that blowing up buses of women and children and crowded diners would not end any sort of occupation

Lets say for example and I know way condon this by any means I'm just trying to get into there heads.

For example if Iran :rolleyes: invaded the U.S. and was ocupying the u.s. What would you do if the Iranians were convincing people to side with them learn from them and start accepting there way of goverment as there own. What if you saw thousands of Americans fighting for the occupiers. Would you blow up a training facilty filled with fellow american's that are now fighting for the Iranians? As far as women and children, i don't know how many women and children died when the bombs started falling from the sky. Many women and children were killed in Iraq due to coalition forces. So if you saw a market place filled with supposed traiters would it be justified to blow the hell out of them.

This is just one way to look at it, damn I'm so glad I will never have to go through something like this. It's an awful thing but the insurgants just might feel that their fellow Iraqi's have betrayed them. Only time will calm the region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What??? Can't follow you now :huh: Who is they?

they is the terrorists...c'mon the fbi had mossauis computer and special agt rowley looked in it...they knew everything..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can i point to any truth in the fox article?....where are all the attacks bush promises?....everytime he speaks.

You're evading, Unlimited. If there are falsehoods or lies in that story, please demonstrate them. Once again, "because it is!" is not an answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm taking vegas odds that it's bruce...

Yup, that proves it, you are illiterate.

Go back and actually try reading anything I posted, then come back and tell us if you still think it was me. Prove to us you have at least the tiniest sliver of reading comprehension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're evading, Unlimited. If there are falsehoods or lies in that story, please demonstrate them. Once again, "because it is!" is not an answer.

*sigh* were on elevated terror alert, and the terrorists cant blow up a newspaper machine...hmmmm..anyone scared yet..hitler worked the fear like bush but the jews,and gypsys were the enemy in his idealogical struggle..for bush it's the muslims..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the Indians are huge land owners...I'm not justifying the raw deal they got.. but they were compensated with reservations..

Ask a Native American how they feel about their "compensation." If someone came in and took your home and your land and then gave you a piece of desolate land with barely any resources to live off of, would you feel compensated? That is what happened in most all of those cases. And, I'm not trying to attack you and I do see that you aren't "justifying the raw deal they got", but they were hardly compensated. (Sorry to go off topic.)

This is just a mild case of what happens when you fight back....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Land_Lottery

In October 1831, Georgia voters went to the polls to vote between Governor George Gilmer (who wished to reserve the gold mines for the State of Georgia, to pay for government projects and to reduce taxes), and Wilson Lumpkin, who strongly supported the lottery system of giving away the Cherokee land (in what would become the State's last land lottery).

In an effort to keep their lands, certain Cherokee Indians (and other interested parties)--including John Ross, Samuel Worcester, and Major Ridge--took their fight against the State of Georgia to the United States Supreme Court. There were two major cases heard by the Court, during the years 1831 through 1832: Cherokee Nation v. Georgia and Worcester v. Georgia. Though the Cherokees actually won the court battles, U.S. President Andrew Jackson and the State of Georgia chose instead to ignore the Supreme Court ruling--Georgia, by continuing its division of the Cherokee lands surveyed, through the final "1832 Land and Gold Lotteries", and--with the help of President Jackson--by requesting the U.S. Army's "removal" of the Cherokees.

The Native Americans/First Nation's did fight the invasion and continued to do so during the occupation for many years. Many lives were lost, it only ended when there was absalutly no chance but to surrender. If the Natives would have kept fighting they would have all been killed hence Genocide. Did they have the right to fight back and burn down settlements and houses and kill for there land? YES they did.

:tu:

I voted YES. I think someone else all ready stated this, but yes, any citizen living in a country that is INVADED should have the right to fight back, they just have to deal with the consequences.

Edited by Pandora2173
Link to comment
Share on other sites

*sigh* were on elevated terror alert, and the terrorists cant blow up a newspaper machine...hmmmm..anyone scared yet..hitler worked the fear like bush but the jews,and gypsys were the enemy in his idealogical struggle..for bush it's the muslims..

You're still evading.

Look, you've pretty muched proved that you have nothing to back up your assertions. Run along now...King Triad is calling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're still evading.

Look, you've pretty muched proved that you have nothing to back up your assertions.

what assertions my flamebaiting friend?........

Edited by Unlimited
Link to comment
Share on other sites

one person voted NO????

where from?

Haiti

not Haiti.

From BrucePrime's and Aroce's Hannity, Oreilly and Rush Fun Park. :lol:

linked-image

Its just a joke people....... or is it? :lol:

Edited by Bob26003
Link to comment
Share on other sites

not Haiti.

From BrucePrime's and Aroce's Hannity, Oreilly and Rush Fun Park.

linked-image

I'd rather listen to Hannity or O'Rielly than be a brainwashed fascist like you, Bob.

Why is it the conservatives, or those who are accused of being conservatives, seem to be the only ones who know how to spell or use proper grammar around here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course they have the right to fight back. They also have to right to a fair trial and a quick execution if the people do not support their actions.

What is kind of in the grey area to me is when an insurgent force interjects itself into a conflict just to be doing so, much like what we are seeing in Iraq today.

As a side note, does anyone think that one of the possibles reasons for the drop in attacks on U.S. forces and Iraqi civilians in Iraq have anything to do with the threat of an attack on Iran for its involvement? What I mean is, could they be trying to re-group their manpower for a potential invasion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.