Aight, boy, I got your proof right here. First off: I gave several reasons why capitalsim sucks. It drives men to their ulitmate evils, as seen when we look at Christopher Columbus. He supposedly "discovered" america, but in fact all he did was enslave and butcher innocent natives to get him gold and spices. That is all he did, and all in the name of Capitalism. A great modern-day example is such favored shops like The Gap, Abercombie and Fitch, American Eagle, and Aeropastale, all major shoe companies who sport shoes not made in the US or in Great Britan, i.e. Nike, Adidas, Airwalk, to name a few. Just look at the tag on the tounge of your shoe. I'm not making much sense, though. What do all these have in common? Slave/Sweatshop labor. Nike has a 10-year-old boy in Siam pumping out shoes that are sold for up to and including $300 dollars here in the states. This boy has little to no saftey precautions inplimented on the machines he's working on, and hardly earns enough to support his family. You're telling me this is good? When some men are given an incentive, they will put all else aside to get it. That is what's wrong with capitalism...profit over people. I'll address the others later. gtg for now.
 
-----------------------
TRP/1PFC GM_Sniper/4SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/Tadath/VEA {LoR}

I haven't commented on this topic for a while, but I will now.. Its really quite easy to say why innocent people are being killed. When you bomb something, people tend to get in the way. You can't deny the facts; Its been shown on camera. A British journalist was in Kabul when it was being bombed, and in the middle of his live TV report (he had just finished speaking, but the camera was still running), the building RIGHT next to him was obliterated by a bomb fired from a millitary jet. US Intelligence showed that the only millitary jets flying over Kabul at that time were American, so it was either an American bomb or US Intelligence doesn't have a clue. If that journalist had been just a few inches closer to the house, a flying piece of rock could have gone straight through his face and killed him. Was a missile/bomb aimed at him? No. But it doesn't ELIMINATE THE RISK. Fiction: The Pentagon can assure as that innocent civilians will not be killed. Fact: Civilians are going to get in the way, when there are weapons being used. Oh, and about your "emigration to America" ideal. Christopher Colombus was far more patriotic than any American can be. He was a Spaniard, willing to risk his life for his country and his king and queen. He set off on a journey to find China; He found a new land. He DID exploit the locals, by buying their land for meagre sums of money. However, JMac is right - He did not find gold or spices. What he did do was find a new land, for new conquistadors (Hernan Cortes, another Spaniard, for example) and explorers to exploit and ravage for their own good. Did they succeed? Take a look in any history book. You should see that after the discovery of the New World, the Spanish Empire became the largest the world had ever seen - so yes, Columbus died penniless - But the country he had done it for became the richest, largest and most powerful in the world.
 
-----------------------
AAMB/LCM Bear/VEHC/VE
------------
RET/LCM Bear/mSSD Atrus/VEN/VE (=A=) (=SA=) (=FOCE=) (=JCPA=) [BRC] [BRC] [NDM] [LSM]
------------
TRP/1PFC Grizzly/3SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/1REG/Lorn IV/VEA 

Uhm...JMac, exactly what have you established? All I've read is some Conservative overcompensation up until now. Christopher Columbus cut the hands off of all natives who didn't bring him gold dust. If you think that's a good thing, you need help. Why do you think that Elizabeth brought him back to Spain in shackles? Was it because he stole a loaf of bread? No, because he stole the livelyhood from the natives. I thought everyone past the third grade knew that. This is what I love about all the super patriots: they blame EVERYTHING on Terrorism, Minorities and Communism. I don't give a rat's ass if we're "doing our best" to save civilian lives. We obviously must NOT be if 500,000 innocents have died because of our attempt to kill a concept. Spilling more innocent blood is not the solution, not by a long shot. I agree with you that the Taliban and terrorism is bad. I loathe hate. It's the worst thing in this universe. I'm afraid though, much opposed to Bush's ignorance, you will never EVER see an end to Terrorism. EVER. This "War" is only a short-term solution for a long-term problem. I don't know yet what we should be doing in lieu of killing. Something other than killing would be good. Riel will field the Communist bit. He and I share views on that.
 
-----------------------
TRP/1PFC GM_Sniper/4SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/Tadath/VEA {LoR}

Exactly, Raziel. JMac, you appear to have some very strange thoughts on economic types. Let me make it simple. Imagine you own two cows. In a capitalist country, like the USA, you would fence the two cows in a field, leave them to over-graze the grass, milk them twenty five times a day and act surprised when they both die a week later. In a fundementalist-facist country, such as Middle Eastern countries (take Iran, for example), the government would take your cows, and sell you the milk, regularly. In a communist country, such as China, they would BUY one of your cows, and sell you the milk. You would be free to keep the other cow and do as you like with it. Ten years after this.. In the USA, you'd be on the streets as your cows are dead and you have no income. In Iran, you'd be under-nourished because you drank nothing but milk, but you would be alive (albeit just). In China, you'd have a steady supply of milk, and would have been able to sell the excess on the free market, and bought a bull. You would breed the bull and cow, to produce a new cow. You would then have two cows, a bull, and a steady supply of milk. You would slaughter a cow for meat, and breed the other, and then it would start over.. When its put in terms of cows and milk, Communism suddenly seems like a VERY good idea..
 
-----------------------
AAMB/LCM Bear/VEHC/VE
------------
RET/LCM Bear/mSSD Atrus/VEN/VE (=A=) (=SA=) (=FOCE=) (=JCPA=) [BRC] [BRC] [NDM] [LSM]
------------
TRP/1PFC Grizzly/3SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/1REG/Lorn IV/VEA 

the ideals of communism are perfect, however human nature makes it impossible
 
-----------------------
SL/1SGTRaziel/4SQD/1COMP/1BAT/1RGT/Tadath/VEA/ {EW1}
Squad Leader - Squad4 Wraiths

[ . . . ]

/me clears his throat: JMac: The lives lost in our strikes will be far less then the lives that would be lost to the    terrorists had we not stepped in. It seems that everything is being taken "In light of recent events." I still can't believe that there are non-victims still reeling over this. JMac: We were attacking the Taliban, a regime of men (not capitalists mind you) that were dedicated to opressing the people and forcing their fanatacism upon them. JMac: Let's take a look at Communism, shall we.  It is the Antithesis of capitalism. Just made a little logic chain, there...blaming Terrorism on Communists? Just a little question: After September 11th, did you go out an buy American flags? Christopher Columbus: Columbus was THE original capitalist. He did NOTHING good for ANYONE. If you're such a happy capitalist, you should scorn him for being penniless. The actions of men may not make the whole thing wrong, but it can defeat some of its worth. GODDAMNIT, JMac, it doesn't matter weather third world countries are succeptable to bribes, it's the fact that it's WRONG. That forcing 10-year-old kids in Indonesia to work for chump change so that their family can live just below the poverty line and the kid will be forced to work long hours and could die any moment making your Nike shoes.
 
-----------------------
TRP/1PFC GM_Sniper/4SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/Tadath/VEA {LoR}

JMac.. You say in your response to my cow metaphor that if a farmer learns to cope under capitalism, his farm/ranch will thrive, and he will have plenty to eat, drink, and plenty of money. If a farmer does not learn to cope under capitalism, they starve and are poor. If you are so sure that someone can LEARN to survive under capitalism, whats stopping people LEARNING to live under communism? You seem to be saying that people in a capitalist society learn to live better than those in a communist. My point is this. It is not up to people like you to decide which form of society is better. It is up to unbiased and neutral people. Unfortuently, there are none. Think of it like this: If you lived in a capitalist country, and your cow lived in a tiny field, hardly getting fed, because of the stupidity of yourself (the farmer) what woud it say (if it could talk)? I don't think it would be very happy.. If you lived in a communist country, and were a successful farmer, with a happy cow in a big field, getting regularly fed, what would your cow say? It would be pretty happy, for a cow, I expect. There are good sides and bad sides to everything. Capitalism- Some people thrive and prosper, while some are oppressed by the government (and don't even think about giving me your "America doesn't oppress anyone!" rubbish, because the facts are there. Look at the statistics for people executed in the USA from a lower class of family, for example. And there are thousands more.), and do the opposite. Communism- Some people learn to live with the system, and to get along with it, by farming/manufactuing to their best potential (a "Commune Brigade" in China during Mao's time was so successful it received special benefits in the form of more medical/education supplies, more equipment, etc. They did their best, and rose out of the "communist slump".) while some are oppressed, and do the opposite.. Fundamentalism (i.e. Afghanistan)- Some people learn to get the best deal out of it, such as joining the Army, or becoming a cash-crop (eg. opium) farmer, while some are oppressed and do the opposite.. Anyway, now that we've all completely demolished JMacs arguement for capitalism, lets go back to something else. What are we fighting for in Afghanistan? An end to world terrorism? Democracy? Justice? I'll address them one at a time.. An End To World Terrorism In Tianemen Square (I noticed a reference to that somewhere), in China, hundreds of people were murdered. Why? They were campaigning for more political freedom. They were trying to BRING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT. To the Chinese, they were terrorists. So they killed them. To the US, they weren't. Osama Bin Laden masterminds a plot to kill thousands of people in America. He carried it out; It worked. The US wants to kill him as a terrorist. He was a spiritual leader for many people in the Arab World, and they do not treat him as a terrorist. No matter how you look at it, somebody is always a terrorist to somebody else. Terrorism is not going to end. Period. Violence is a last resort. Many other methods have been taken by right-wing extremists, without results. September the 11th was their last resort. I sure hope it worked. If it did, we might see the US getting off their butts and trying to help the rest of the world. (Before you say anything about Europe doing nothing, I'll make a counter-argument. The EU (European Union) was formed after ww2 to rebuild the countries affected by war. It now consists of 15 countries, and, united together (which they are not, but theoretically can be for military, economic and political purposes) forms the strongest alliance in the world (in terms of millitary strength, economic power and political power). It has rebuilt Europe VERY successfully (3 of the top 5 largest economy in the world places are now held by Germany, the UK and France, in that order, after the USA and Japan), and has been a major influence in helping third world countries. It has even *shock* WIPED SMALL AMOUNTS OF DEBTS! Not enough to make a major differance, but still far more than the USA has done. Needless to say, the EU is doing far more than the US, we've rebuilt our continent after our "heroic rescue from the brave Americans", and we don't need you any more, so goodbye. Oh, and by the way, please get your nuclear weapons out of our country..) Democracy I am 15 years old. I am my countrys future. I could become the leader, one day. I could even become the President of the EU (see above). In two and a half years time, I will have the chance to vote for a corrupt politician who will try to make the country a tiny bit better just so he can be elected in the next election, in which he will promise to do a better job. Do I care? No, not really. I intend to go to University when I am 18, and the next election will not be until I am 19, and I intend to study abroad. I will have the chance to vote by post. Will I? Erm.. no thanks. I do not want to be oppressed by my government (or even foreigners ie. the USA) for my views and feelings. If I am, then I will do everything in my power to halt the oppression. If that includes terrorism.. then its something I may consider. Basically, I am my countrys future. And I really couldn't care less about democracy. I feel that the old feudal-parliament system was a far better way (in which the King held 50% power and an elected government held 50%), but thats just my opinion. Get rid of democracy? No, thanks.. keep the option to vote, but don't make such a big deal out of it. I don't intend to take a part in the political process of the UK (being a first-past-the-post system, it is ridiculous already), so I don't care about democracy. You tell me to go and fight in a distant country in the name of democracy, and I'll laugh at you Justice This is the one I agree with. Once this criteria has been met: 1) Giving full human rights to the POW's (or whatever you want to say they are) in Cuba, as dictated by the Geneva Convention. 2) Giving everyone in the country (i.e. USA) the right to have the same lawyer, no matter what their colour, religion, gender etc is. That means a millionaire gets the same as a shoe-cleaner. 3) Bringing to justice people who have evaded the system because of their own power. Such as? Margaret Thatcher, for her arms deals with Iraq; George Bush (the first one) for the same; Nixon for his paperwork fixing (or whatever it was); etc; etc; etc. Thats my rant.
 
-----------------------
AAMB/LCM Bear/VEHC/VE
------------
RET/LCM Bear/mSSD Atrus/VEN/VE (=A=) (=SA=) (=FOCE=) (=JCPA=) [BRC] [BRC] [NDM] [LSM]
------------
TRP/1PFC Grizzly/3SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/1REG/Lorn IV/VEA 

Jmac your government puts down other countries by putting them in 3rd world debt...all of the things good about your country stated above seem very selfish indeed. we could quite easily cure world hunger...but the american government doesn't seem to interested so they'll just give out loans and make money out of the LEDC's instead...yeah great
 
-----------------------
SL/1SGTRaziel/4SQD/1COMP/1BAT/1RGT/Tadath/VEA/ {EW1}
Squad Leader - Squad4 Wraiths

Okay, I just came back to this after a while away and caught up on all the arguments.  To JMac, I'd like to say that you argued hard against massive odds, but I can't say that you won.  To everyone else(who seemed to be all lined up against JMac), I'd like to say that I agreed with nearly every statement you made.  Now, I'd like to make a couple of my own, drawn from my experiences since my last post. First off, this "War on Terror" cr@p is getting out of hand.  Bush has cut taxes enough to send us into a deficit, and now he wants us to beef up the military?  Do the words "we-are-in-a-f*cking-recession" mean anything to him?  He's also talking about going after Iraq, North Korea, and Iran.  Who does he think he's kidding?  There's no way in hell the US public is going to support troops going anywhere(they might get killed(What are we paying them for again?)) that has as much armament as those nations.  Let me just say that the "War on Terror" will eventually join the "War on Drugs". Second, all this over-patriotism.  I'd like to relate a story first. A week or two ago, in my English class, the teacher handed out an article about militarization in America(and how it's gone too far) as an example of a pursuasive essay.  I started up a debate with some class members, intending to have a free flow of ideas, see what they thought.  I found that they were divided into two camps: those who agreed with it, and therefore had nothing more to offer, and those who disagreed.  When I tried to debate with those who disagreed, I found their arguments to be weak at best and shot them down repeatedly.  I know that this isn't just my opinion because they ran out of arguments and just settled for calling me "Anti-American". The fact that I disagree with a militant version of the US makes me Anti-American?  When did that happen?  Is this a nation anyone wants to live in? Third, I saw the economic system debate.  Let me get back to where it started at.  The US has been raping and pillaging the Middle East since WW2 ended.  Heck, their royal families are standing by and praising us as we do!!  Unlike what JMac says about us paying handsomely for the oil we get, most of that money ends up in the back pocket of some royal cousin(gee, I wonder how that could happen...  ).  The people don't see any of that money.  Then, we let the royal families set up state news things blasting us for causing all these outrages.  What would any self-respecting human being do!?!?!  They can't decalare war, because we'd refuse to recognize them as a nation and they can't get over here in military force besides.  Peaceful protests have been tried, and failed.  Nothing else works.  Think about it, are you stupid enough to take on the most advanced military in the world with a ragtag army that you can't even move to the right battlefield? Fourth, back to pacifism.  Yes, I know, I've been blasting all this stuff for the last three topics, so I'll explain myself.  The "War on Terrorism".  Think about the first word there and you'll realize why I blast it.  Second, I blasted militarism.  Third, some may think I'm condoning the violence of the terrorists.  I'm not.  Nothing in the world makes violence right, but there are reasons people do it.  What I am doing is laying the pure, crystal clear reasons in front of you.  Also, I can say this.  If my country needs me to fight for it, I will refuse, even if it means jail time, there can be no end to violence except more violence.  Or, as Ghandi said, "An eye for an eye and we're all blind".  I hope that puts my opinions there in perspective. Fifth, religion.  Most of you have ignored this as a cause of world conflict.  Needless to say, over the past two mellinea, religion has been the largest source of conflict.  Let me name a few of those.  Pakistan vs India.  The Crusades.  The Holocaust.  All of these were caused by religion, and there are millions more that I neglected to mention.  The saddest part is that all of these were caused by religions that say they are peaceful!  There is no peaceful religion on the planet, this is just another way to divide yourself from others.  Division causes conflict, it's just human nature(no, I'm not saying we should be clones, I'm saying we should get along despite differences.).  This argument can(and has, at least at my school) be used toward patriotism as well.  Is it any wonder I'm and anti-patriotic Athiest? Sixth(and last for tonight), Osama bin Laden.  I restate my point that he is the product of an intensely anti-American system(that we support for cryin' out loud!!).  I use this point again becuase it still hasn't been disproven.  Also, another story. In the Chemistry class I'm Teacher's Aide for, they had to do a "Mole project" where they sow together a mole(the animal), put 602 beans in it(avagadro's number) and dress it up to look like something.  Imagine my surprise when one girl brings in a mole with a target, a beard, and a turban calling it "Osamole bin Laden".  This is someone who is an ultra-Christian(still trying to convert me after three years...), and claims to be pro-life!! Now, needless to say, I was pretty disgusted by this and let her know my feelings on the matter quite clearly(not that she cares, I'm just "the Athiest").  This is the type of person Bush is trying to create, someone who believes what he says without questioning it, without analyzing it, without thinking on it.  Once again, is this a nation you want to live in? Anyways, I'm out of time for tonight(school tomorrow  ), so I'll leave you with this.  Enjoy 
 
-----------------------
Argon Viper
"History is on the move, those who cannot keep up will watch from a distance, and those who get in our way will not watch at all" - Grand Admiral Thrawn
"He who knows his enemy, needs not fear confrontation" - Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"
"Insanity is not a mental condition, it's a way of life" - Argon Viper
"Those who run from death, win little.  Those who simply live their lives, win much" - Argon Viper

*cough* *splutter* *cough* I am so deeply insulted, I can hardly breathe.. ON THE VERGE OF MAKING NUKES?! www.angelfire.com/fl/UselessFacts/atombomb.html I advise you go there.. once you've read that, YOU are on the verge of making nukes. Quick, better have you arrested and shot as a suspected terrorist.. Also, the USA has about 6000 nuclear warheads (well, they did at about the time of the cold war, and it has gone down since then), which could kill every person on this planet.. about 250 times. Just think what would happen if the USA had a President who likes to declare war on other nuclear power groups (i.e. terrorists) and drop bombs on things.. oh! wait! They already do! 250 times. That fact alone shows that we must bring down the nuclear powers in the world. If terrorism will do that.. I support it.   Thats pretty much my feelings in a nutshell. I disagree with killing innocent people, but I disagree even more with weapons which can kill innocent people 250 times. Ask yourself this.. What is the 2nd most cowardly thing in the world? Flying a plane full of people into a building full of people. What is the most cowardly thing in the world? Dropping a massivly powerful bomb on a city without warning, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people.. ----------------------- AAMB/LCM Bear/VEHC/VE ------------ RET/LCM Bear/mSSD Atrus/VEN/VE (=A=) (=SA=) (=FOCE=) (=JCPA=) [BRC] [BRC] [NDM] [LSM] ------------ TRP/1PFC Grizzly/3SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/1REG/Lorn IV/VEA 

LOLOLOL!!!!!!!  Great site!!!  Laughed my @$$ off!!!  Also, JMac, if you'd like to give me $200,000 I'll get you a fully working nuclear device with a two year warranty.  The Russians say that they can miss about 11 lb of their weapons grade plutonium a month and not know it due to crappy measurement systems.  At that point, the rest of the stuff is stuff you can get at a hardware store(just replace the TNT with the fertilizer McVeigh used...).  Enjoy the snow  As to nukes and terrorism, the US is the largest terrorist nation in the world, the entire Cold War was terrorist, with each nation terrorizing the other into compliance with nukes.  So, if you don't like terrorism, I suggest you move to...  Uhhh...  lesse...  I think Switzerland could be considered the least terroristic of all nations.  The United States of America is the most terroristic nation in the world, we attack everyone who disagrees with us, we assassinate leaders who disagree with us(or at least, we try.  Ask Castro).  Our point of view is the same as bin Ladens, either you agree with us or you're evil.  Can anyone honestly refute that last statement?  And, I feel safer with a nut like bin Laden around than a sociopathic nation around with its finger on the trigger to enough nukes to fry the world 250 times over(about 500 times if all other nuke nations launch too). Lesse, more rants... Oh yeah, US foreign policy.  If you think the US is the world's greatest promoter of democracy(the real term is Republic because we elect people to vote for us, but we'll ignore that fact for now)?  Think again.  Nearly every nation in the middle east is ruled by some form of monarchy or military dictatorship, and we support over 75% of them!!!  Now, say you live in one of those nations.  You're horribly opressed and dirt poor(the fact that you don't pay taxes means nothing because you don't have anything to pay taxes with).  Every day you watch the state-run media telling you how wonderful the monarch is and how evil the US is for taking all the oil and money.  Now, this won't work crap on the first generation, but what about the second?  Or the third?  We're seeing the culmination of over 50 years of US foreign policy here!  Here's a generalized meeting between an Arab leader and a US ambassador.  They start calmly, discussing 'matters of great import' to both nations.  The US ambassador suggests the Arab guy ease up a bit on the human rights issue.  The Arab subtly 'reminds' the US guy that easing up would allow fundamentalists to take power, and they wouldn't be so 'cooperative'.  The US guy appologizes and backs off.  Now, the problem with that argument is that the reason the fundamentalists would be less cooperative(and the reason they would gain power in the first place) is that the state run media has been demonizing the US for 50 years!!!  We need to get them to stop that, wait a generation, and then get the fundamentalists to start up a democracy!!!  Screw the oil, Russia and the US together could cover that for the amount of time it would take a military force to go into the Arab world and replace the d*mn monarchies with democracies.  Considering the example of Afghanistan, that would take about 10 seconds, so why don't we do it?  The reason is simple, we don't give a f*ck.  That's right, forget all the BS the gov is throwing at us about this fight being about human rights, womens rights, helping the innocent, and all that stuff they're telling us.  This fight is going on for one simple reason, people want to see things blow up and people die.  Heck, I can prove that too.  When the Taliban took control in...  '94 was it?...  did we do anything?  Did we do anything when they shot up the Buddhas?  Did we do anything when they started taking away women's rights?  How about human rights?  No.  Think it over. I hope you enjoyed listening to yet another rant   
 
-----------------------
Argon Viper
"History is on the move, those who cannot keep up will watch from a distance, and those who get in our way will not watch at all" - Grand Admiral Thrawn
"He who knows his enemy, needs not fear confrontation" - Sun Tzu, "The Art of War"
"Insanity is not a mental condition, it's a way of life" - Argon Viper
"Those who run from death, win little.  Those who simply live their lives, win much" - Argon Viper

That whole Russia France etc. thing was related to WWII, in case you didn't pick it up from my obscure refrences and lack of justification. sorry!
 
-----------------------
TRP/1PFC GM_Sniper/4SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/Tadath/VEA {LoR}

The UK and the US spend their defence money differantly. The UK puts more emphasis on SHORT-RANGE nuclear weapons (in particular the Trident project), and practically none into long range nuclear weapons. The UK also spends more on a professional, small force of regular troops. Virtually every British Army Regiment has a history and something it is famous for. They are also highly trained (the British infantry is far better trained than the US infantry). However, the US spends a lot of its money on long-range nuclear weapons (i.e. missiles) and specialist units, such as Marines, Rangers, Airborne, etc.. They also spend a ridiculous amount of money on the Navy (I believe there are about 20 US Aircraft Carriers in service? Compared to 2 (and one out of service) in the British Navy) and Air Force. If World War 3 came about, then yes, the USA would be able to cope admirably. I would be surprised if they would lose, because of their nuclear weapons and MASSIVE amounts of conventional forces. However, in a "War against terrorism", you don't need dozens of aircraft carriers, hundreds of missiles and thousands upon thousands of troops. I heard that Bush just added $46 billion to the US Defence budget? How much of that do you expect will go on Intelligence, Reconaissance etc (which would help in a war against terrorism), and how much would go into building another fleet of US Warships? Explain to me how a dozen battleships can hunt down ONE man.. The UK, on the other hand, has infantry which can move in quickly, and stay there, to keep peace. Some of the Paratroopers (they're British) were in Kabul months ago. If the Taleban (or Al Quada) make a surprise attack/uprising against Kabul, what good will hundreds of B-52 bombers do? Sure, they could flatten the city in a couple of minutes, but would kill hundreds of US and other Allied troops in the process. And imagine the fiasco.. The UK does have far more peacekeeping missions than the US, yes.. In Northern Ireland (I would just like to point out that Northern Ireland is a PART of the UK, and is NOT a "colony") for example; Bosnia as well; Kosovo; Falklands (although that is a colony, but a force has to remain because there was a war there); etc. George Bush's ethic on war is "We shall do the fighting; Let our allies do the peacekeeping." Thats just the kind of thing that inspires and breeds terrorism.
 
-----------------------
AAMB/LCM Bear/VEHC/VE
------------
RET/LCM Bear/mSSD Atrus/VEN/VE (=A=) (=SA=) (=FOCE=) (=JCPA=) [BRC] [BRC] [NDM] [LSM]
------------
TRP/LCPL Grizzly/3SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/1REG/Lorn IV/VEA 

Good point, but.. The Geneva Convention says nothing about uniforms relating to "real" soldiers. A real soldier does not have to wear a uniform to be protected under the Geneva Convention. What they DO have to wear are identification tags somewhere on their body. This can be in the form of a uniform (anyone seen The Great Escape? At the end, when the American Captain is captured on the border, and he holds up his rank badge to show he's a "real" soldier?) or in the form of ID disks round your neck. However, back to Argon.. in the poorest country in the world, which has faced years of drought, would YOU keep your ID Disk, or would you sell it (a piece of steel is probably very valuable in Afghanistan) to feed your family? The problem with the Geneva Convention is that it was made during the time of the "gentleman" wars (i.e. World War 1, the Boer War, etc), and only really applied when a handful of countries ruled the world (Britain, Russia, Germany and France, among a couple of others). It doesn't really apply now, when we're having "Wars against terrorism".. which is why people like Rumsfeld and Bush can avoid it. Also, to back Argon up again on his last point.. in the American constitution, it states that all Americans should have the right to own a gun, to protect themselves? Well, when us British people invade (which we shall do in 2005, because we still hold a grudge after you forced us out of our greatest colony ever.. at least, thats what YOU think, so you own guns. To be honest, we really couldn't care less.), unless all the American civilians shooting at us are wearing ID tags, full millitary uniform, a rank, and are nicely organised into Regiments, Divisions and Brigades, then we shall take no prisoners. And if we can't see our faces in your shiny shoes.. well, we shall take no prisoners. You savvy?
 
-----------------------
AAMB/LCM Bear/VEHC/VE
------------
RET/LCM Bear/mSSD Atrus/VEN/VE (=A=) (=SA=) (=FOCE=) (=JCPA=) [BRC] [BRC] [NDM] [LSM]
------------
TRP/LCPL Grizzly/3SQD/1PLT/1COMP/1BAT/1REG/Lorn IV/VEA