UK EXECUTES INNOCENT BRAZILIAN FOR WEARING A COAT

Serry... wrote:

Actually I'm a former officer of Russian army, I'm Lietunant...

Well, anyway - yes, we did mistakes, yes, we're still doing mistakes - does it mean that everyone should repeat them? No.

About Chechnya - I think we need to give them freedom and forget about them, without wars, without anything like that.

That's where you're wrong, because they won't forget about you.

So we need to kill them all?

Did it help in Northern Ireland? Did it help in Spain? Did it help in Israel? Did it help in Russia? No.

Our war with Chechnya is about 10 years and nothing changes!

It would be much better if the policemen were armed with tranquilizer guns, instead of the traditional guns. If they were not sure wrether a suspect had really commited the crime, they could shoot the person, and investigate if he/she were actually guilty. This way, tragedies like that wouldn´t happen. :´(

Aren't the metropoliton police testing out new 'zap' guns?

That's what i read in my local paper not so long ago.

They knock out the victim for a while, preventing the loss of life.

<b><font color = "crimson">ThomasQuinn wrote:

Errr...Al Qa'ida has NOTHING to do with the Taliban, my friend.

They did indeed. They were hiding Bin Laden and allowed Al-Qaeda to do as they please in Afghanistan.

Now Iraq (or Saddam Hussein for that matter) and Al-Qaeda have NOTHING to be with each other.

<b><font color = "crimson">ThomasQuinn wrote:

Errr...Al Qa'ida has NOTHING to do with the Taliban, my friend.

Well, my friend i gess they have everything to do with Al-Qaeda.

Take care

Mr.Jingles wrote:
Now Iraq (or Saddam Hussein for that matter) and Al-Qaeda have NOTHING to be with each other.[/QUOTE]

That`s my point.. They don`t have nothing to do with him or Iraq, but they justify their acts with the Iraq invasion. And before the Iraq invasion they would justify their acts with something else. The thing is, it was proven in the Taliban regime that this guys don`t guive a shit for human life. They just want the occident to leave because they want to put their people in power and do whathever they want.
I mean, put yourselves in those people shoes and think what it would be like to live in a Taliban regime (or with one with the same characteristics).

This has got to a point where we can`t let that happen again because it would made those deads (soldiers and citizens) even more pointless than that their are now!!

Let me remind you that in 1985 Saddam Hussein was considered by the UN the most dangerous country Lider in the World. By now, everyone of you has already got access to his Curriculum Vitae.
All over the years Saddam enjoyed his success as "BAD". Every now and then he would threat USA saying that someday he would put bombers in subways and cause terror. Then he invaded Koweit, killed his daughters husbands beacuse they run from Iraq and spoke what they knew about him. You all saw how his two sons lived. He put venom in water and killed thousands of people. In the Iran/Iraq war he tested Quemical bombs and was acused of having comited one of the biggest atrocities in a war untill today.
I mean, do we need a good reason to not want this guy in power? NO.

Do we need a good reason to start a war and kill inocent people? Yes.

How can we conciliate this two things? I don`t know, but doing nothing wouldn`t help too.



Of course USA suported him in the past, but that is no reason for let it be in the present. All of a sudden he has becaneme a saint??- C´mon...

By the way, if want my opinion i don`t believe that Saddam wasn`t supporting Bin Laden. I`m totally shure that they`ve must met each other even if it`s not proven. Just my opinion!

Take care

Serry... wrote:

So we need to kill them all?

Did it help in Northern Ireland? Did it help in Spain? Did it help in Israel? Did it help in Russia? No.

Our war with Chechnya is about 10 years and nothing changes!

If when you say 'them' you mean terrorists, then the answer is yes.

Good defence will always keep a country quiet. I'm not afraid of riding the bus anymore, because we have good defence. Our war with the Palestinians is more than a 100 years old and nothing in our relationship has changed, but our security has.

I sincerely recommend you read the following article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Defensive_Shield) and especially this paragraph, in order to understand the significance of killing terrorists:

Since the conclusion of Operation Defensive Shield, the follow-on Operation Determined Path and the continued construction of the Israeli West Bank Barrier the level of terrorism in general, and suicide bombings in particular, has, according to some sources, dropped by more than 95% to less then five suicide bombings during the period from August 2003 to July 2004.

They lived under threat of Saddam, you live under threat of terrorists... Good exchange for Iraq? I don't know...

Serry... wrote:

They lived under threat of Saddam, you live under threat of terrorists... Good exchange for Iraq? I don't know...

Emphasis on 'lived'. They don't live under his threat anymore, they live under the threat of terrorists.

ChinesedogTorture wrote:

It would be much better if the policemen were armed with tranquilizer guns, instead of the traditional guns.

The reason why they dont use tranquilizer guns is that, to the best of my knowledge, they dont work straight away as the drug still has to enter the bloodstream which takes maybe more than a few seconds - thus still giving any potential suicide bomber time to trigger any bombs

Mr Mercury wrote:

ChinesedogTorture wrote:

It would be much better if the policemen were armed with tranquilizer guns, instead of the traditional guns.

The reason why they dont use tranquilizer guns is that, to the best of my knowledge, they dont work straight away as the drug still has to enter the bloodstream which takes maybe more than a few seconds - thus still giving any potential suicide bomber time to trigger any bombs

You're indeed correct.

Guy, you certainly know your stuff.. well done :)

Guy wrote:

Mr Mercury wrote:

ChinesedogTorture wrote:

It would be much better if the policemen were armed with tranquilizer guns, instead of the traditional guns.

The reason why they dont use tranquilizer guns is that, to the best of my knowledge, they dont work straight away as the drug still has to enter the bloodstream which takes maybe more than a few seconds - thus still giving any potential suicide bomber time to trigger any bombs

You're indeed correct.

True indeed. So let's kill them all, so there wouldn't be any threat...

Well these new 'zap' guns arent tranquilizer guns, It does exactly what the name says, it 'zaps' the victim with an electronic charge. It will be interesting to see if the tests are successful.