rjdohnert wrote:
Did I say all Iraqi's?  Nope, I said terrorists and members of Saddams Army.  Not saying all terrorists are Iraqi, thats why I said I would have invaded, conquered and taken over the whole region.  Not everyone that lives in that region is a terrorist.  How simple is the world I come from?  Well where I come from, someone spits in your face, you cut their throat.  So yeah, its pretty straight forward.


Back during the American revolution, I believe the American "freedom fighters" could have been considered, by outsiders, as terrorists of the day: an armed uprising against a government.

Now a days, armed fighers are called "freedom fighters" if they're on "our" side, and terrorists if they're not. The US currently supports (in our war on terrorism) the government of Indonesia, despite the tens of thousands killed, starved, and/or tortured.. After Iraq, under Sadam, used chemical weapons (Reagan or Bush I Presidency), the US publically condemned they're actions, yet sent a special envoy, lead by none other than Donald Rumsfeld, to Iraq to basically say ("we had to say that. We really support you!"). All of this was uncovered by the Freedom of Information act.

Kind of interesting how we change our definitions of friends and foes, isn't it?