Bombs over Baghdad...erm Mosul - Page 2

gtboys34 · 01-09-2005, 02:44 AM

possibly... but If the targets were 'low level', why not just use ground troops?

[DAS REICH] Blitz · 01-09-2005, 06:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyMontana

MODS DELETE THE BULLSHIT PLZ

Swill · 01-09-2005, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyMontana

MODS DELETE THE BULLSHIT PLZ

Yeah and this gets me more into trouble...

CoMaToSe · **Re: Bombs over Baghdad...erm Mosul -** 01-09-2005, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyMontana

a 500 pound cock to take penetrate me? oOo:

Im right here, baby

Quze · 01-09-2005, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtboys34

possibly... but If the targets were 'low level', why not just use ground troops?

less risky?

Mr.Buttocks · 01-09-2005, 12:50 PM

WAR CRIME

rdeyes · 01-09-2005, 03:18 PM

BOO F*ucking HOO !! maybe if the terrorists werent killing innocent people we wouldnt have to use a 500 lb bomb to take out a single house .

[DAS REICH] Blitz · 01-09-2005, 03:43 PM

[quote="Mr.Buttocks":d6fac]RAW CREIM[/quote:d6fac] ed: PS: Remove the santa hat from mugabe

Madmartagen · 01-09-2005, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quzemoto

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtboys34

possibly... but If the targets were 'low level', why not just use ground troops?

less risky?

yep. low level targets dont get arrested, they get shot or blown up. you send in troops, you risk getting shot or tricked into a booby trapped house like last week. if you know theyre there, bomb em. but you should make sure you drop it on the right house too.