[Zipperfish]

I'm not suggesting rounding up the Muslims. Just maybe enacting a law whereby they have to wear some kind of mark, like a crescent, on their clothing so others can identify them. Same with the businesses they own--a little crescent on the window. That's not prejudice, is it?

[BartSimpson]

desertdude desertdude:

And if you want to get historical like bart more Muslims have been killed by Christians than vice versa

That's because, as you have so kindly illustrated, your team comes to the battle looking like this:



And our team comes to the battle looking like this:



Given that the kill ratio of around 50:1 favors NATO you'd think your team would grow some smarts and stop fighting so our guys could come home. But no.

Really, the underfunded, undersupplied, but highly professional Canadians whomped the sh*t out of the tallywhackers in Operation Medusa back in 2008 killing what's now estimated at around 450 jerkoffs at a loss of four Canadian troops. That's an over 100:1 kill ratio and the charming believers of Mohammed aren't smart enough to figure out when to fold.

So you complain that your guys are getting slaughtered and I say isn't it about time you stopped fighting with us?

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

I'm not suggesting rounding up the Muslims. Just maybe enacting a law whereby they have to wear some kind of mark, like a crescent, on their clothing so others can identify them. Same with the businesses they own--a little crescent on the window. That's not prejudice, is it?

Better yet, how about if they were indistinguishable from everyone else?

[desertdude]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The passage in bold, are you going to back that up with something resembling an actual fact or is this just anthoer made-up bit of nonsense of yours?

LOOOL Seriously Bart, now your going to deny the Ethinic cleansing and war crimes carried out in Bosnia !

I'll just leave you to enjoy yourself in your loon fantasy.

Have fun, cheers

[BartSimpson]

desertdude desertdude:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The passage in bold, are you going to back that up with something resembling an actual fact or is this just anthoer made-up bit of nonsense of yours?

LOOOL Seriously Bart, now your going to deny the Ethinic cleansing and war crimes carried out in Bosnia !

I'll just leave you to enjoy yourself in your loon fantasy.

Have fun, cheers

According to an Islamic site there's 18,000 dead as a high estimate. Where'd you come up with 50,000?

http://www.islamawareness.net/Persecuti ... nsing.html

[desertdude]

A proper question deserves to be answered, only fair I say.

$1:

The women, identified only by codes, were among the 16 survivors who testified for the prosecution in the Foca rape trial, named after the southeast Bosnian city overrun by Serb forces at the outset of the ethnic war that lasted from 1992 to 1995. An estimated 50,000 girls and women were raped during the conflict.

http://www.womensenews.org/story/rape/0 ... -the-hague

But figures vary from diffrent sources but majority put it anywhere from 20,000 to 50,000. So if you read my prginal post it says anything upto 50,000, not atleast 50,000.

[ShepherdsDog]

Former Yugoslavians ...six to one half a dozen to the other. There you had Orthodox Serbs, Catholic Croatians and Moslem Bosnians all committing atrocities against each others civilian populations. No faction there was blame free.

[mentalfloss]

My favourite line is.."Given that the kill ratio of around 50:1 favors NATO" as some sort of justification.

[EyeBrock]

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

My favourite line is.."Given that the kill ratio of around 50:1 favors NATO" as some sort of justification.

Would you rather our guys on a mission sanctioned by Parliament died in higher numbers?

[CanadianJeff]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

It's become tiresome that resistance to Islamisation is considered 'prejudice'. What's especially empty in this accusation is the fact that the people who are starting to resist Islamisation the most are not Americans, but European liberals who are finally coming around to the idea that their ideas have no place in the Islamic Europe so many Islamic colonists dream of. The US has no laws restricting Islamic practices. Europe does. The US, so far, has no neighborhoods where non-muslims dare not enter. Europe does. So while the GZ mosque is getting a lot of media coverage, the battleground of "prejudice" is really Europe.

My wife's family in Heidelberg/Mannheim are noting that it is the left-liberals who are starting to become militant in their opposition to Islamisation for the precise reason that the actions and words of the muslims ring a familiar tone for the Germans.

So that leave me curious, when the left-liberals in Europe are the ones taking the most actions against Islamisation are they also prejudiced?

It's a religion Bart. You can criticize any other belief that a person holds but the moment you start to do any analysis of religious belief people just stick their fingers in their ears call you a biggot and go la la la.

It doesn't mean these are evil or bad people it just means that we have a problem were we choose to be closed minded to one aspect of our lives that many people choose to BE their life.

Islam is really just a representation of what most religions were like in the dark ages.

what I think people get confused with is that they want to have their pie and eat it too. They want to be able to say they live peacefully alongside Muslims but they don't want people to partake in what the Quran says about non believers and jihad. What people don't understand is that this refers more to what society does to people of faith rather then looking at what society these people of faith live in.

A theocracy of any kind is always dangerous without equal.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

desertdude desertdude:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The passage in bold, are you going to back that up with something resembling an actual fact or is this just anthoer made-up bit of nonsense of yours?

LOOOL Seriously Bart, now your going to deny the Ethinic cleansing and war crimes carried out in Bosnia !

Nope, of course no one could, the evidence is well documented. But you also know damn well who came to the aid of the muslims don'tcha I'll give you a hint. 2 of them are involved in active operations in A-stan right now.
It's not the best example to illustrate yer point.

[EyeBrock]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

desertdude desertdude:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The passage in bold, are you going to back that up with something resembling an actual fact or is this just anthoer made-up bit of nonsense of yours?

LOOOL Seriously Bart, now your going to deny the Ethinic cleansing and war crimes carried out in Bosnia !

Nope, of course no one could, the evidence is well documented. But you also know damn well who came to the aid of the muslims don'tcha I'll give you a hint. 2 of them are involved in active operations in A-stan right now.
It's not the best example to illustrate yer point.

Pakistan and the Chechens?

[BartSimpson]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

My favourite line is.."Given that the kill ratio of around 50:1 favors NATO" as some sort of justification.

Would you rather our guys on a mission sanctioned by Parliament died in higher numbers?

Seems to be the case.

[EyeBrock]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

My favourite line is.."Given that the kill ratio of around 50:1 favors NATO" as some sort of justification.

Would you rather our guys on a mission sanctioned by Parliament died in higher numbers?

Seems to be the case.

He hasn't replied so I'm thinking he's reflecting on his lack of logic.

He obviously didn't think through his little ditty.

If NATO/US kill ratio is less than 100 or 50 to 1, as in we kill 50 bad guys for everyone of our own killed by them, it means more Canadians die to kill 50 bad guys.

That's not the idea in war. The idea is to kill more of the enemy for the least amount of losses on your own side.

It would appear some people miss the obvious.

[Dayseed]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

mentalfloss mentalfloss:

My favourite line is.."Given that the kill ratio of around 50:1 favors NATO" as some sort of justification.

Would you rather our guys on a mission sanctioned by Parliament died in higher numbers?

I don't think he was suggesting that more Canadians need die; rather that saying sure Christians killed more Muslims because we've got a kick-ass army and the Taliban has a team of missile donkeys isn't a good argument for the recent lopsided death toll.

I'd be happy had the Taliban been wiped out diplomatically and nobody killed at all. That said, I don't think the Taliban is ever going to give up in Afghanistan, no matter how many we leave blown to bits. The reason they're in the Taliban in the first place is that they're dedicated hard-liners.

Put it this way, especially Bart for wondering why they just don't surrender, if the Taliban actually had something that was a real army and they invaded the United States, how many Americans would they have to blow up before you quit resisting and became a dutiful Muslim? Wouldn't more dead Americans just harden your resolve to outlast, resist and kill?

If you personally would never lay down arms against the invading Taliban, why would you believe that any amount of losses on their side would prompt them to do the same?

It's a shame Karzai is such a corrupt pig and his government isn't able to quell the Taliban themselves. It's the best solution short of a diplomatic/social one where the Taliban realize they're absolutely wrong. Not comparatively wrong; completely and wholly wrong the way they do shit.

I don't have a solution, but suspecting all of Islam of some great conspiratorial conquest isn't it.