Author Topic: war on the middle east  (Read 6457 times)

we should just remove Jerusalem from existence so we can at least solve one problem with those ADHD extremists.

we should just remove Jerusalem from existence so we can at least solve one problem with those ADHD extremists.
i dunno i think nuking jerusalem would piss off christians, jews, muslims, historians, and people who don't want the world's shared culture destroyed

while yeah that was pretty dumb it's important not to focus on negative history; it's likely the middle east would be just as stuffty otherwise
yeah its important not to look at our past flaws that's why the nam and korean borders after both wars are a few miles apart yet billions of dollars and caustlies are off the charts

I mean jesus loving christ bush manged to make the people think 9\11 was sadams revenge over the loving gulf war

Saddam was an starfish, Assad is an starfish and a coward. Even if he does "win" very people are going to like him. He is pretty much killed off or turned his supporters against no.

He also screwed up the infrastructure of his country. The land is so infertile because he keeps using chemical weapons on his own land. Don't be surprised if another conflict arises after Russia packs it's bags.

Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq are the countries that are completely forgeted. Syria especially. My guess is Syria will cease to exist soon, the country is pretty much shattered beyond repair.

Other countries like Algeria, Mali, and Egypt have relatively small insurgencies happening in certain parts.

Then the rest just have stuffty governments.
hey tunisia is p good right now, they even got a medal for democracy


Weren't you just correcting me for conflating the two? no...? the terms are not interchangeable always.
Evidence? their beliefs forbid it. common sense and behavior patterns.

their beliefs forbid it. common sense and behavior patterns.
That's a strange way of saying "I don't have any evidence"

alexander is gonna forget up those persians i loving know it



Evidence specifically means something that proves what you're saying besides you confirming it's true

no...? the terms are not interchangeable anyway

You did definitely correct me for conflating progressives and liberals (even though I wasn't).

You can be liberal without being a progressive. The two are independent titles.



That's a strange way of saying "I don't have any evidence"
Of course there's no way of knowing that there are absolutely zero conservatives that think this way. I understand that there isn't any concrete evidence. But in my eyes, it is more likely that there isn't a conservative than there is, given behavior patterns.
Evidence specifically means something that proves what you're saying besides you confirming it's true
I understand this. There is no way to prove this. I understand that. Maybe there are. Perhaps if you have evidence that there are? I understand the burden of proof is on me, but for the purpose of learning...
You did definitely correct me for conflating progressives and liberals (even though I wasn't).

Well, it's just you seemed to say liberal when you meant to say progressive, given context clues in your argument. It really did and still does seem like you were.