Forums / Miscellaneous Discussions / Religious Extremist terror

Get some real arguments, i dont have anything personal against you, I just dont want to see that kind of bull*beep*.

okay , i forgot , it's suits you , but okay ,

well i suggest this thread is locked or deleted

atleast i'm not telling you to get out ...

"Take it easy, most of the technical inventions Rome got ideas for or directly from the Etruscans. "

Invent?  No.  Spread?  Yes.

"Again, why even take up stuff like they had a "fair warning" you take up alot of that kinda *beep*, your attitude is very apologetic."

Try to imagine a family coming to your house and forcing you to move out because "they were there first and thus the rightful owners before your great-grandfather took it from us."  You're going to say sorry about your luck, but no.

"Im not really into good / bad discussions, but since Americans always lable their past as a shining beacon of glourious light im all up for it."

This is not true.  America has its proud and ignorant, just like every other country, but that does not mean Americans all believe in some shining beacon.

'WHen romans take a city they always sack it and kill wahtever they find thats a fact.."

WTF?  No, they did not kill everything and everyone.  In actuality, many of the Roman provinces were allowed to self-govern (with Roman oversight, of course) and continue on their normal lives, while paying taxes and recieving benefits for trade.

Prince and Alex, the few good points you make are few compared to the nonesense you spew.  Conquest and colonization are just words made to make things sound nicer or harsher.  Unless you settled in a perfectly empty land, then it is conquest because you took from your neighbor.

I might mention that a good portion of Americans have native blood.  Does that mean its settlers "colonized"?  Not necessarily.

And PoD, discussing Islam is one of the most relevant arguements in this thread, titled religious extremist terror, all three of which can be, in certain situations, applied to Islam.

but islam isn't the

Religious Extremist terror

and soooooooooo what , palestine is owned by god , and god gave it us , it was meant that cannans take it .........

dreadii , mohamad told us that the shahed before going paradise he saw it before 1 second , and then baaaa

and lol then people say about that man a terorist hehe

wow , so do you want a medal , haha i just said bad words about god inusalting the master of humans ha ha ha ha , thank you and good bye

well my answer is in points

1) *beep* you .

2) fuke the man who tought you that .

3) i have the right to insualt you cuz you insult me .

4) did i say fuke you , well then this is anther fuke you , enjoy

actualy, I think stealth bombing is better. Stealth bombings are more efficient, you recieve money for them, and you don't go to hell as a result. So...I'd say stealth wins :)

Man you Arab's are beginning to look a bit pathetic, throwing insults around and assuming that your religion is the right one? I'm a Christian, proud of it but I still think Muslim is just as good a religion as any other, everyone has a right to believe what they like. But the way you guys treat everyone else in this thread like 5H1T is really shocking, people come here to have a good discussion and all you guys do is insult them and tell them their gonna burn in hell! Also suicide bombing is a shocking thing, especially when used against innocent civilians, at least Stealth bombers (try to) get military installations and attack the people they are really fighting.

poor poor muslims ... always the oppressed ones ... they have no faults of their own ... declared themselves to be the chosen ones ...

iraq and afganistan, etc, were not attacked because you believe in 'allah', the were attacked for other reasons.      but , it seems easier to you boys to just forget that, to just believe the propaganda.

really?

well i can say that not all muslims are like prince and alex.

but mushashi you keep saying theyare blind to the truth and act like you know it better then them wich i find arrogant and stupid actualy. (look at yourself first)

The matter is people are trying to have an intelligent debate here, and "you're going to hell" with "fuk you, did I say fuk you?" is harming your image.  I know you didn't say that, Prince, but by affiliation it unfortunately applies to anyone taking your stance.

"dakarius the man who do the bombs and die can see paradise in earth before he gone to it

but the stealth won't hide him from god radars , lol he will face hell"

So the suicide bomber who walks into a crowded mall of innocent men, women, and children, looks into their fearful eyes, and flips the switch to slay anyone nearby without mercy, do you believe that is paradise on earth?

That does not speak well either for your stance or your intelligence.

last time i sended my frind in zeta , this time i am in mantrax , so septim , low the temppo

Hephaetus quetes:

To :  'WHen romans take a city they always sack it and kill wahtever they find thats a fact.."

He says:   WTF?  No, they did not kill everything and everyone.  In actuality, many of the Roman provinces were allowed to self-govern (with Roman oversight, of course) and continue on their normal lives, while paying taxes and recieving benefits for trade.

if you respect our belifs , don't say that kind of jokes , you trapped yourself

"You say these two thing according to you two very diffrent subject. where one killing is brutal and inhuman the other isnt even killing its self govrning
WTF?"

What?  I did not say it was not killing but rather self-governing at all.  This may be your own interpretation, because you are not familiar how to make an objective debate.

You need to stop here and realize that you are merely trying to sensationalize what I'm saying and begin thinking rationally.  Never once did I say the Romans were not brual, nor justified in their conquests.  I did not claim the Romans made a better world because they spread technology through their warfare and occupation of the Meditteranean regions.   I claimed nothing of humanity of the action of the Romans.

And similarly, I am not promoting suicide bombers either.

"Your calling religeos people blind and stupid becouse they belive in something you dont want to belive in.
While Here in the west you are treated like a bunch of stupid animals not convinsed bye reason but sound implications and explicit images.."

Who says Westerners are treated like a bunch of stupid animals not convinced by reason?  Reason usually works on the athiest's side, and it is the religious who more often choose to ignore it.

  Not sure what you mean by images and sound implications... everyone uses their eyes and ears (provided they aren't blind or deaf), or perhaps you are making a false and unbacked claim that Westerners live by nothing else but lusty animal-like senses.

"If you think thats better or you cant even exept that then you deserve nothing less."

No, Westerners don't think it's better.  They don't even feel or act that way either... go back and make a valid arguement, Dreadii.

coming from a dude that hasn't made any decent points yet ...

Prince, I have been in this thread since the beginning.  I have changed names since the thead began, however.

what i wanted to say with those quotes is show your diffrent perspectives of killings.
and are you even goning to deny those two quotes are diffrent?(NO on this is still denying).

 i can understand you not agreeing with some opinions but why do you deny you own obvious quotes . when the subject is romans killing the things you talk about u say : WTF NO they dont kille everything Actualy tehy govrn bla bla and when it comes to middle east issues it is detailed Buchering.

even if you use valid arguments to support your opinion those arguments are only one sided and narrow
your right we cant talk objectively when you use select argument only as a tool to get you narrowminded opinion across.

Understand this, Dreadlii.

1) In any debate either side holds a "narrow" view, because it doesn't help much for your arguement when you contradict yourself. 

For example, if I were debating against the Romans, I would mention that the armies typically plundered and burned many of the cities they conquer before leaving it to the local governors, or that in the later years of the empire the only reason certain provinces were granted citizenship was so they could be taxed.

Or perhaps I would mention that another way to spread technology is through mere trade, no bloodshed involved.  As in the various renaissance italian states, thriving in technology and art while shattered into many principalities.

Or take the idea behind the stealth or suicide bomber.  The stealth bomber could just as easily drop a bomb that kills a crowd of civilians, and the pilot is probably just thinking "pretty flash!" while the suicide bomber knows he has risked everything for a certain belief.

For this realize that I understand more than I say, for the sake of debate.  If I weren't doing then I'd just be writing a report or something, which is far less interesting.  If there's something you disagree with me about, it's your job to argue, not mine.

It's just when people make false statements like "Romans kill everything and everyone" or say things like "the suicide see paradise on earth" I don't really feel like supporting them.

Ofcoure i understand and i agree with all your reasoning.
Just reconsider some of the thing than make you feel a certain way.

For instance if someone says we want/bring 'freedom' or something the first thing that comes in you head taht its a lie or impossible or nobody wants it or alot of violance is need to get it..( becouse of the situation in middle east(or more the the media covrage around it).
while saying this 'they' actualy take away alot more freeedom from you in the 'Homeland'.
in the shade of this supposed freedom people cant see real freedom anymore.

I dont exacly know who or what i mean by 'they'.

I know what you mean, Dreadlii.  For example, in the American revolution many of the people who fought did it for "freedom" from taxes and tyranny from Britain from unfair taxes they did not want, except the British people already paid such taxes, and many more.

What the revolutionaries thought was fair game the British called guerilla tactics, or terrorism... now what Iraqi insurgents call fair game Americans now call the same the British did when fighting for their own independance.

Everything is interpretable, and of course that is the essence of debate.

I only wish there were stronger people to argue the Islamic side besides Prince and Alexander, who, try as they might, really don't understand how to approach a debate and thus their "side" remaines unargued.

summery
goldsie says: terrorist kill innocent bombers and missiles kill guilty.

thats stupid and irrational but at first sight by a westerner it feel correct...
the reason behind needs to be seen.. (its evil :p)