Act of Terrorism in Boston

Iran was an allie of the U.S. during the cold war. We helped train thier airforce, we also helped them train the secret police SAWAK who were not good guys in white hats. I actualy saw Iranian oficers in germany watching one of our manuvers. The they over threw the shah, kicked us out, stormed our embassy and held our diplomats hostage.Then using the enemy of my enemy is my friend, we helped iraq in the war with Iran. Both were corrupt governments.Cuba,Batista was a puppet of american interests some of the stuff in "the godfather" is fact. the people of cuba wanted batista out,we ignored them, we got Castro instead.We seemed to pick losers as our friends,We fought a war to be free of colonial rule, and sided with colonial powers when others wanted independance. We just have trouble keeping our noses out of other peoples business.And it costs us BIGTIME.

[QUOTE=Moveon;512990]Let's get this thread back on track. I sure hope that someone can ID these two and the FBI can get ahold of them to see if they are the culprits or not. The sooner we catch these SOB the better IMHO.

Short of killing all the potential terrorists how should we stop these terrorists acts.

If we catch the people that did this bombing and make an example of them some how do you think that will stop others from carrying out more terrorist bombing? I doubt that it will. We could crusify those responsble and let them die a slow death on the cross and that still would not deter others from doing more bombings in retailation. Nothing short of killing them all will stop the bombings from happening.

There is no way we would even think about crusifying anyone and there is no way we could or would think about killing them all. So what's left to do? We could put them to death which is what I think will happen. Lethal Injections given to those that did this still won't stop the others but it will get revenge for those that died from the bombings. But it won't bring anyone back to live or fix what has been broken.

Looking at the pictures of the guys that the FBI released today Thursday April 18th 2013 I can't really tell who or what they are. I mean their nationality. Can you tell their nationality from those pictures? Are they foreign or domestic terrorists?[/QUOTE]
They'll get the death penalty, and they richly deserve it, but don't fool yourself into thinking that will serve as a deterrent. It will not.

Bonjour :) French Model for sure. I know because I read it on the internet. If it's on the internet it's got to be true. :p

[QUOTE=HURRICANEBOB;512994][URL="http://www.ispot.tv/ad/7VOE/state-farm-the-internet-and-french-model"]State Farm TV Commercial, 'The Internet and French Model' - iSpot.tv[/URL]

Wow, extensive research.[/QUOTE]

Suspect #1 is already dead. He was shot and had bomb fragments in his body. They are searching for his 19 year old little bother now. They will find him and end up shooting him too. IMHO the quicker the better.

But I fear that their MO is to hijack cars and get away quicker than the police can catch them right now.

Last night all hell broke loose while I slept. The suspects shot a two police officer and hijacked a guy from his car and got away after robbing a store last night.

The police chased them in the car and the suspects were throwing explosives out the window of the hijacked car at the police while the police and the suspects exchanged gun fire at each other. I'm thinking of the Bonnie and Clyde Movie right now! eeek! How did the kid get away from the police? I'm thinking of overweight policeme trying to run down a 19 year old kid who likes to watch the Boston Marathon. Could it be that the kid is a marathon runnner? Kids do a lot more running that older adults for the most part. And the kids not afraid to pull out a gun and overpower people. He could be hiding in a home near the sceen of the shooting last night or already hijacked another car and is out of town by now. Either way he will eventually be caught and possibly killed in the next few hours or days. The sooner he's gone the better for America, Mass, and the Boston Area.

[QUOTE=RoadToad;513011]They'll get the death penalty, and they richly deserve it, but don't fool yourself into thinking that will serve as a deterrent. It will not.[/QUOTE]

Riddle me this though.........don't you find it convenient to blame Reagan for this 3 decades later......while Syria KILLS with chemicals that came from IRAQ, which according to APB didn't exist..........even though the ENTIRE world thought they did, and the United Nations voted on it......
--------------------
And this is why I usually don't bother trying to discuss things with you any more. Real hard to have an honest discussion with you. Please show me where I claimed Iraq did not have WMD. I believe you will find in past posts that I have stated that at one time Iraq did have them. We knew this cause Reagan/Bush I sold it to them. UN (I seem to recall you not liking them so much) certainly had a number of resolutions concerning Iraq prior to the war. At no time did the UN authorize an invation. That invation was a pre-emptive strike lead by the US and Britian. A number of other countries were also involved, but that certainly did not include the ENTIRE world or even anywhere close to that. My concerns with attacking Iraq at the time had to do with the fact that we needed to concentrate on Afganistan and make sure we did that one right. As you might remember, Afgans were harboring the terrorists who had actually attacked us. Bush II, to me, never made a good case for why we needed to be in Iraq.
Concerning the man of the year, see JCB's comments on that.

Andrew

[QUOTE=Moveon;513015]Suspect #1 is already dead. He was shot and had bomb fragments in his body. They are searching for his 19 year old little bother now. They will find him and end up shooting him too. IMHO the quicker the better....[/QUOTE]
Agree, he will most likely not be taken alive. If for no other reason than the safety of the police. Having him alive would be of use though. News reports indicate grenades and other weapons. Sounds like they had help. Would be of interest to determine who else might be out there and the motives for the attack. Andrew

I've heard that there is one or two others that they are looking at who might be associated with the two brothers.

I doubt he will be taken alive as his brother died fighting with a bomb strapped to his body. Suicide bomb vests will make the police shoot them to prevent them from blowing up the police officers.

It's hard to imagine that one of the largest cities in America is on lock down and over a million people are stuck in their homes now. Let's get this ended pretty soon.


[QUOTE=apb;513027]Agree, he will most likely not be taken alive. If for no other reason than the safety of the police. Having him alive would be of use though. News reports indicate grenades and other weapons. Sounds like they had help. Would be of interest to determine who else might be out there and the motives for the attack. Andrew[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=apb;513025]Riddle me this though.........don't you find it convenient to blame Reagan for this 3 decades later......while Syria KILLS with chemicals that came from IRAQ, which according to APB didn't exist..........even though the ENTIRE world thought they did, and the United Nations voted on it......
--------------------
And this is why I usually don't bother trying to discuss things with you any more. Real hard to have an honest discussion with you. Please show me where I claimed Iraq did not have WMD. I believe you will find in past posts that I have stated that at one time Iraq did have them. We knew this cause Reagan/Bush I sold it to them. UN (I seem to recall you not liking them so much) certainly had a number of resolutions concerning Iraq prior to the war. At no time did the UN authorize an invation. That invation was a pre-emptive strike lead by the US and Britian. A number of other countries were also involved, but that certainly did not include the ENTIRE world or even anywhere close to that. My concerns with attacking Iraq at the time had to do with the fact that we needed to concentrate on Afganistan and make sure we did that one right. As you might remember, Afgans were harboring the terrorists who had actually attacked us. Bush II, to me, never made a good case for why we needed to be in Iraq.
Concerning the man of the year, see JCB's comments on that.

Andrew[/QUOTE]

* UN Resolution 1441 and 678 authorized action in IRAQ.......debate it all you want.
* We sold a crap ton of weapons......I don't think we sold chemical and biological weapons. I stated that.
* IRAQ was pre emptive.....I never said it was not, but It WAS authorized by the UN....which in turn means world.

My comments about Hitler and Stalin were a stretch maybe......but putting them on TIME magazine sure looks bad.......don't ya think?

[QUOTE=GeoFisher;513038]* UN Resolution 1441 and 678 authorized action in IRAQ.......debate it all you want.
* We sold a crap ton of weapons......I don't think we sold chemical and biological weapons. I stated that.
* IRAQ was pre emptive.....I never said it was not, but It WAS authorized by the UN....which in turn means world.

My comments about Hitler and Stalin were a stretch maybe......but putting them on TIME magazine sure looks bad.......don't ya think?[/QUOTE]
It wasn't just your comments about Hitler and Stalin that were a stretch. Those two resolutions were passed by the UN Security Council, not the UN as a whole, and to say that passage of those two resolutions by 15 countries, many of which were offered economic rewards in return for their "yes" vote, constitutes approval by "the world," is also quite a stretch. The fact is, opposition to the war was widespread in Europe and elsewhere, and the absence of UN approval was one of the main reasons. Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the UN, went so far as to say that the war violated the UN Charter, and as a result, was illegal: [URL="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/16/iraq.iraq"]Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan | World news | The Guardian[/URL]

I don't want to get into an argument over whether or not the war was justified. But to say that the "entire world" thought the invasion was necessary is revisionism. It was extremely unpopular overseas, as well as here in America.

[QUOTE=DJD;512995].I'm not that big of a fan of horse racing so I didn't have plans on going but if I was going I would rethink it.[/QUOTE]

DJ, I agree, that's prudent. And its just what the terroirist seeks to do, disrupt our lives. I'm serious when I tell you I agree with you. Risk vs reward, threat vs benefit. In my mind, if I want to go, then I accept the risk, and try to be mentally be prepared to deal with it if the worst happens. And if the risk, added to the long lines at the porta potti that is overflowing and has not T-paper is above my threshold of pain, then I add up what the costs would be if I went, and use that money to stay at home, buy darn good steaks for the grill, and darn good bourbon to enjoy while I watch it on TV. There is no waiting line at my home toilet, the beer line is always one deep, and the food is excellent, and I can't get a DUI going from my back deck to my living room or bedroom :-)

PS: I've never gotten an STD when I stayed home......Korea is a an exception.

Above and beyond all the debate about how or when we went to war. I ask only this.

Since 9-11-01, what foregin county has mounted a successful attack inside the US?

My time as a warfighter taught me well that the way you keep your home safe, is to take the fight to the enemy [B]in his backyard. [/B]

[QUOTE=HURRICANEBOB;513059]Above and beyond all the debate about how or when we went to war. I ask only this.

Since 9-11-01, what foregin county has mounted a successful attack inside the US?

My time as a warfighter taught me well that the way you keep your home safe, is to take the fight to the enemy [B]in his backyard. [/B][/QUOTE]

We disagree on a CRAP TON of stuff.............this my friend we agree on.