Posted on 12/02/2008 3:22:06 AM PST by Alia
Too true. Some would still have died BUT not nearly so many.
A well armed populace helps prevent this kind of carnage.
Many more uses, as a flower holder.
As a companion.
As protection.
As a fun time.
And yes, to sometimes kill some who need killing.
If a lot of middle-aged white grandmothers went on a killing spree, I would have no problem if they "profiled" me in order to catch the killers. But golly gee, we don't want to step on anybody's delicate little feelings.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
God, I miss Reagan.
"Islam does not sanction violence Extremist leaders and heads of state do. It's not the religion nor the masses. It's the leaders."
This idiot must have laid awake for days on end to come up with this.................
"We should listen to terrorism experts, psychologists, etc. and handle religion-based terrorism differently to the extent necessary if there really is a practical difference between how we have to respond to religious terrorism and other types of terrorism. But, at a political level, I don't think we should give creeps who target and kill innocent civilians because of some kind of ism the courtesy of taking their isms seriously. If a bunch of guys go out and torture a rabbi, the rabbi's wife and their house guests to death because they're Jewish, that's despicable. If they commit the same crime because the victims are communists, or capitalists, or citizens of Denmark, that's also despicable. If the creeps say they're killing in the name of Islam, Capitalism or some other belief -- well, that's a bunch of hooey. The reality is that they're killing because of glitches in their forebrains that we're too primitive to diagnose. From our primitive point of view, they're just a bunch of murderous lunatics. If they weren't murdering people in the name of Cause A, they'd probably be murdering people in the name of Cause B, or Q, or Z"
This guy speaks for most Democrats.............
"Treat terrorism as a crime to be policed and punished, not through "war' that breeds more terrorists by destroying civilian life."
All in all looks to me like most Democrats are cowards and niave fools.
Yes, that is what it is in my estimate. However, the devils advocate would say they were planning this maybe way back in the Democrat primaries, so it was not a given who the next president would even be when they started the planning. One thing is sure, there will be an INCREASE in attacks on American soft targets after he takes office, as they know he will be weaker than his predecessor and weaker than his 2008 opponent...that can be guaranteed. Think of all those saps thinking his election would bring World Peace and Love/Respect again for America worldwide. Our allies might like us more, but our enemies will disdain us even more, and what really counts is not how our allies relate to us, but how our ENEMIES do.
I remember reading that thread at the time and thought your assessment was pretty much correct. I didn't comment since I hadn't yet signed-up for posting privileges to FR. Another aspect I remember was being surprised that that thread generated so little attention and commentary.
#1 - situational awareness.
#2 - concealed, or open, carry
#3 - don't let your government convince you that open borders are a good thing
But the #1 answer is situational awareness.
As an example, when I was in the military, stationed overseas, I got into the habit of taking a step to the side of the door when entering a business I had not been in before. I use several moments to determine the layout of the business, where the exits are, what types of cover are available, etc. I still do it today.
One time my daughter saw me do this and asked me what I was doing. I told her,
Several years later we were talking and she said that she knew she had taken my advice to heart when she was standing in a supermarket aisle, looking at potato chips, and the thought ran through her head, "Those chips aren't going to stop a bullet."
When America sits back and watches other people around the world slaughter each other, we are attacked because we didn’t step in and stop it. Even when there is no way way we could have stopped it as is the case with India and Islamic terrorists. When we do step in, we are criticized for stepping in. We can’t win. Sometimes I feel like erecting a one-hundred foot wall around the country and telling the rest of the world to go screw itself.
You talkin' about conditions? We don't need no steenkin' conditions! Thus sayeth BHO.
That was Killeen.
How many terrorist attacks in the world per day? 10, 100? Who would still be ignoring this?
Thanks,
I’m old and my memory is not as good as my wife’s . Ask her
she’ll tell ya.
“An olive branch extended in the left hand is worthless without a sword in the right.”
So true, so true.
There is the whole thing. Some really disturbing stuff by the so called moral superior ones
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.