On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 02:04:42AM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote: > On Tue, 6 Mar 2007 22:03:45 -0500, Roberto wrote in message > <[🔎] 20070307030345.GD27399@santiago.connexer.com>: > > > Really? Sweden is a member of NATO > > ..errr, no. they are Neutral. ;o) > They are members in all but name [0]: "While the government parties in Sweden have opposed membership, they have participated in NATO-led missions in Bosnia (IFOR and SFOR), Kosovo (KFOR) and Afghanistan (ISAF)." > > and the UN. Sweden also sent > > troops to Afghanistan. Under your definition, that constitutes > > interference. I mean, heck, why would Sweden send troops to > > Afghanistan if they weren't even attacked? > > ..as EU members? The EU has its own (token) military force, > but I am not aware of any Swedish troops in Afghanistan. > Here [1]: "Soldiers from Sweden's Sarskilda Skyddsgruppen (Special Protection Group) have served in Afghanistan and two SSG troopers were killed by a roadside bomb in late 2005." Not sure if they are still there, though. > > War is a bloody business. It is unfortunate. What alternate > > solutions would you propose? > > ..peace. First we need to hang all our war criminals, then they have > to hang theirs, all under the strictest combination of Sharia, the full > 4 Geneva Conventions, the US War Crimes Act, the Norw. Military > penal code etc. Sorry. Geneva conventions applies to lawful combatants. Now, if any coalition troops have committed crimes in violation of the Geneva conventions, then yes they need to prosecuted. Now, the terrorists are afforded no such protection under the Geneva Conventions. In fact, they don't even have to be taken prisoner. They can simply be shot on sight. It is the grace of the US government that efforts are made to capture and detain rather than just kill outright. As far as Sharia, why should the US subject its military forces to the laws of Islam, when it doesn't even subject them to the laws of Christianity? As far as foreign laws, they should have no bearing. The same way that US laws should have no bearing on the actions of other countries' soldiers. > Or, you will have to _forgive_ Osama for felling the WTC. ;o) I have, personally, forgiven OBL. However, that does not absolve the government of protecting its people. > Thenafter we can make peace last by moving the Jews out of the > Middle East to whereever they please to go, or watch Hezbollah 'n > Hamas mow 'em. > I see, so you are an anti-Semite. The fact is that the Jews were there long before the Muslims. > ..the root cause of this war is not that "the Jews got a home land", > but that we (the UN) stole it from the Filistinians and renamed it > to "Palestine" and let Hitler gas the Jews to scare them "home", to > piiage Arab oil and stall Muslim Capitalism. > Wooh! I don't think I could have fit so many conspiracy theories into such a small space, even if I tried. > ..we need to fix that, _if_ we want peace. If we don't, there is > absolutely _no_ way you can convince me, "the Muslims does > not need nukes." > Clearly, you are naive, so I will explain something to you. The Muslims will not be satisfied until the Jews have been *exterminated*. Not relocated, but exterminated. The same with Christians. Remember that the Muslims have three options when dealing with infidels: 1. enslave them 2. convert them 3. kill them Regards, -Roberto [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO#Sweden [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_War_order_of_battle#United_States -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature