Also on this thread any good soldier American, Iranian, or Alquada is willing to risk and lose his life if necessary to protect those he defends. That Isaeli soldier hopes that he finds the bomb before it can kill him. He more importantly wants to find it before it blows up innocent civilians. It is your rules of engagement that determine if you are a soldier or terrorist.
So if military snipers are killing children and the military looks the other way unless someone makes a big stink about it, and has small fines or temporary "break" in duty as the maximum punishment, if at all, would you consider that a ROE? Is this soldier a soldier or a terrorist?
sam isn't someone waiting for your answers in this thread? http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=65158
Do you know _anything_ about Sudan? Anything at all? If you did I think you would realize how silly your response was.
Sam's been talking out of school, I see. Kiss either side of my arse as you like; you're a bigot and I offer you no mercy.
I see no reason to prove my knowledge to you; I merely suggest ways to improve yours. Your lack of any knowledge is painfully obvious.
your lack of knowledge is obvious. in all of our discussion about israel you showed it including linking me to the same article 3 different times on 3 occasions from 3 different sites. using google and pretending you know what you are talking about isnt a sign of knowledge.
What does linking from different sites have to do with it? I use the keywords and I don't save my history, so I couldn't really care where its from as long as its the one I'm looking for.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
samcdkey Yes it is hard to prove something that you do not have, and Knowledge is hard won, and you have made it painfully obvious that you don't have the knowledge, you just post from any site that you find, as far as I can tell the only places that you have been is, the U.S. and India, and your imagination.
So? I always link what I'm referring to, unless I'm doing it in between other stuff and get distracted.
I'm glad your [ENC]dyslexia[/ENC] has cleared up. Its obviously been replaced by flights of fancy.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
yeah thats explain why you linked to the same article 3 times , after i linked it myself before you did, where all you needed is to go back and find it again instead of linking it again and again. it was very funny.
Its a bad habit from writing too many science papers. Every time you use an article, you cite it.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I prefer linking it where I use it, you assume everyone reads the whole thread, I don't.
from 3 different locations? excuse me if i dont buy it. if you wanted to cite it you would have used the same link. besides, why cite something i already cited myself. then why there are cases when you dont cite at all?
