Terrorists........Kind ?

Ive heard from people that Terrorists are actually nice people, its just they need or want something. They dont want all these terrorist attacks, they just feel like they were mis treated. We had a long convo on this in R.S. They said they were just treated bad from Other states. I dont agree.
Take the Kenneth Bigley incident for example, as you all know, him Eugene Armstrong, and Jack sumin ( dont know his last name ). Were taken hostage, and were later beheaded, Kenneth was held longer, with them asking for UK to release there Women Prisinors ( sumin like that ). Tonys lack or reaction, resulted in Kenneth Bigley to as well be beheaded. Now, taking someone hostage isnt kind in the first place. And killing them , now thats just wrong. And I believe Kenneth was on a rebuilding project ( as again, now sure, but he wasnt a soldier ). And I believe Blair actually said he had no Prisinors.
I think terrorists are horrible, just mean people. They have no kindness in them, they just want to stick out like a sore thumb. And just tell everyone that they are just people asking for sumin in return, while they are actually just nasty pieces of work.

Thoughts ?

They're just people. Calling terrorists good or evil would just be a stupid generalization, assuming there are such attributes.

They believe their enemies are doing evil things (for the most part), and they fight the only way they know how. You can draw a LOT of conclusions about the nature of the terrorist in that, but you can't determine if they're good people.

Bin Laden, for example, is a great leader in most respects. Intelligent, a brilliant tactician and planner, strong charismatic ability. Despite being quite wealthy, he chose to fight *on the front lines* alongside his soldiers. Ate the same food, slept in the same dirt, risked death by the same bullets and bombs. Can you say that of about our leaders?

And on the other spectrum, we have our former ruler of Iraq. Sadam was a snivelling, pathetic little coward who came into power, not of his own skills, but of the privilege of birth and having the right contacts. Now, HE reminds me of the typical politicians.

I wouldn't call anybody who actively seeks to murder innocent people kind.

I don't know about you, but I wouldn't consider someone who intentionally targets and kills innocent civillians as anything remotely close to "kind."

EDIT: Quit reading my mind, Manus.

Great minds think alike.

True dat.

I can't believe anyone could ever say terrorists were kind. I would like to take this small moment to point a small thing out to everyone

THEY KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE WITHOUT REGARD

I don't care if they 'think their enemies are evil.' That's no reason to kill innocent women and children. Or even innocent businessmen. And Bin Laden is not a great leader. He's just a fanatic with a lot of fanatic followers. As a military leader, he is a coward and a hypocrite. He tells other people to go kill themselves for the 'glory of Allah' and yet I don't think he's ever even left his little cave or even seen the devastation he has wrought. And as for our leaders, you can go up to any Marine Corps officer and see someone who will starve before letting his troops go without food, go days without sleep so his troops can sleep, and will take an RPG in the chest to save his Platoon. I know one in particular who did exactly that. His name was 2nd Lt. Blecksmith. He was a good leader, not some coward who sits in some cave and tells young men to strap bombs to their chests.

And why do they do it? For Allah? Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Islam an inherently peaceful religion? Does it say somewhere in their religion 'strap a bomb to your chest and blow up innocent people?' I don't think so, so don't even pull the whole religion card. I've never been one to say that someone deserves to die, I value life, but if anyone does deserve to die, it's terrorists.

Dr. Frederick J. Hacker once characterized terrorists into three groups: Crusaders, Criminals, and Crazies. Crusaders fight (and kill innocent people) because they believe that they are doing it for a cause - freedom, liberation, acknowledgement, etc. Some might even call Al Qaeda a group of Crusaders. Criminals do it to make money - drug dealers, mafia members, that kind of thing. Crazies do it for a simple reason - they're mentally deranged people.

There are many types of terrorists, many different people. Their personalities obviously differ, and there could be many kind terrorists - they would almost all go under the 'Crusader' category. However, they still use violence to solve their problems and to cause havoc.

Quote:

---

Calling terrorists good or evil would just be a stupid generalization, assuming there are such attributes.

---

Oh yeah, I used to talk to some really nice baby-eaters, serial killers and rapists. Lovely people, really.

Seriously - what on the surface may resemble 'normal' or even 'nice' may be the exact opposite. I mean, Hitler was a vegeterian, never smoked, and was a gentleman, most of the time. A real 'nice guy', in all aspects, except those that actually count. You know, that whole world domination scheme and plotter of genocide sort of got in the middle.

So, yeah, Ossama bin Laden may be a great host and very polite (as many of his people are), but that still doesn't change the fact he's an innocent slayer.

So, yeah, in closing - evil. They're all freaking evil.

Quote:

---

Sadam was a snivelling, pathetic little coward who came into power, not of his own skills, but of the privilege of birth and having the right contacts.

---

Not relevant, but still - Sadam was an extremely forceful and capable man, despite not being very intelligent. He rose to power using sheer power, and little more. He wasn't a man of words nor schemes. He wasn't of noble birth (quite the opposite), and certainly had no connections where it counts. He was a self-made man. :)

think about it this way. terrorists are engaged in total war. it may be a one sided total war but that is what they are engaged in.

we did it happily against the japanese and nazis. dresden in particular.

killing people kills tax payers, farmers, nurses, doctors, money makers. you wear down a country in that sense. everybody is supporting the country and so can be considered an enemy.

also we did it cos we believed that if you show them just how ty life can get and how bad things will be for them you can force them to surrender.

we forget we employed the same tactics back then. it is a legitimate tactic. but i don't agree with it.

mandella was a terrorist and won the nobel peace prize.

You cannot engage in total war one-sidedly. You need two to tango. But you know what? If it's total war on their behalf, I wouldn't think too much of using a few atomic bombs on Muslim population. But wait, that's not very nice, now is it?

Quote:

---

mandella was a terrorist and won the nobel peace prize.

---

And so did Yasser Arafat. The Nobel Award for Peace is a load of crock.

but we aren't at war with the muslim population. unless you want to commit religious genocide and fight a people based on their religion.

you can fight total-war one-sidededly. there's no real law against it. the rules of war are gone. it's not a fair fight but war never is.

i like the nobel peace prize. at the time ararfat deserved it.

Yes, I'm sure. Osama is a really loving individual.

Give me a smurfing break.

This is people taking some "nice" ideas and slanting them. It's a generally good thing to take a step back and not judge people without reason. I mean, for example, the person walking across the street who is to himself could be a really nice guy, so it'd be irrational for me to judge him as egotistical and narcissitic.

Sometimes, people make mistakes, and that's one thing. But it is a very good thing to judge people on their actions and words, when they are clear. If a person murders for fun or their God and then attempt to justify it, it's pretty ok to "judge" them as "wrong".

Sorry, kids, "right" and "wrong" are real, breathing concretes, regardless what your philosophy and sociology professors tried to teach you.

And SOME PEOPLE are just nuts, if they think a terrorist deserves an award. You have to question the soul who has no value of human life and would attempt to jusify that.

One man's terrorist is the next man's freedom fighter.

Really.

I disagree.

Oh, it's total war, and it's NO WHERE NEAR one-sided. America has, one way or another, been crushing islam since the end of WW2. Or haven't you heard about Israel, and how their entire military ordinance is American weaponry? Israel was using our guns, flying our planes, and dropping our bombs when they fought against the arab nations and claimed the territory now known as Palistine. Hell, they were even paying their soldiers using OUR money.

And don't think for a second that Israel wasn't killing plenty of civilians during THAT engagement. If anything, after 9/11, they finally caught up the death toll. Perhaps surpassed us, perhaps not, but brought it as close to even as it's ever been. Of course, when we were doing our part to destroy them, we weren't pissed off.

They may have blood on their hands, but no more than we. And ours, it's been there FAR longer.

Of course a damn government has "blood on its hands". It's been around a hell of a lot longer than Islamo-Fascist extremism. Sorry. I'm all for the Muslim family down the street, but I drop the peaceful co-existence idea when a group starts throwing bombs our way.

Yeah, well, to continue the analogy, stop helping the family that stole their old home!!! We started this war, the USA and the UN, when we helped Israel's creation.

They're fighting it in a very bloody, deadly, and horrifying way. (Not to mention futile). But they're fighting the only way they can.

The Israeli thing is a huge mess, admittedly. The problem is that the farther back we go, the more that land changes hands. It's ultimately a matter of religion, and it's ridiculous for any of us to get involved.

I don't care how justified they (the Islamo-Fascist groups) might feel - nothing can justify their actions or the opression of their people.

And, as you probably know, the only reason Israel can stand is due to assistance from the USA. We stop supplying them, their military will colapse. And when that happens, they will be destroyed, and the holy land retaken by the islamic peoples.

Israel knows this, which is why they didn't simply massacre the rest of the middle east. And with our military tech, and their total disregard for the arabic peoples, they could do it with little difficulty.

And the terrorists know this. Hence the target on us. And since our people choose our government(s)... the USA is most despised, but they're not great fans of Europe, either. You can see that civilians aren't entirely free from blame, and thus, are not free from that target zone.

You'd think they'd send us a hallmark card considering we've helped open new bases for them all over the world :eep:

And while some may think it's bad that they had or have oppressive governments, some of these governments are stable for the time being (Iraq was secular and stable albeit oppressive, but we've gone and turned it into a fractioned clustersmurf of 3 different countries run by a theocratic government). If we didn't waste our time going after oppressive governments to "install freedom", we wouldn't be wasting lives and money that could actually be put to a use. You fight terrorists and such with police and the spies, not with the military.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hachifusa

Sorry, kids, "right" and "wrong" are real, breathing concretes, regardless what your philosophy and sociology professors tried to teach you.

---

Then how would you define them and who would have the power to define them? Every action you'll ever make will cause positive change for someone/something, no matter how immoral it seems to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old Manus

I wouldn't call anybody who actively seeks to murder innocent people kind.

---

yes

we started this war. forcing the arabs out of israel, supporting oppressive regimes, switching sides when it suited us. it is our fault this war is at this stage.

these people are just fighting a total war. a dead nurse is one person who can't help the injured, a dead policeman is one less person to catch them, a dead anyone is less tax money to fight the war.

But we don't aim to fight a war against civilians. They do. You say we gave as good as we got, but what the hell else could we do.

We COULD have left them alone in the first place. Asking that, now, is like asking how to make a swarm of angry hornets stop stinging after you just broke their nest off the tree. In other words "we done ****ed up". But, we're pretty much committed to an all-or-nothing at this point.

If somebody I had never seen before walked up to me and punched me in the face, I wouldn't say "Ow, you just hurt me badly." and walk off.

The vikings were ruthless raiders whenever they landed a shore. I have read describtions of them being devils.

At home the vikings were slightly uncoth but much more civilized and kind then thier raiding would leave you to believe.

Same with terrorists. It is very possibly for them to be kind. Though it doesn't neccesarily need to be so. You can't just look at an enemy and go "they aren't on our side so they are evil". Crap hits the fan during wars. And that is exactly what terrorists are doing. True they should be hitting military instalations instead of civilian areas; however, I am sure we all recall the US and its Atom Bomb.

They could be kind, but aren't neccisarily kind. I just wish they would start hitting military targets. Striking civilians is only going to continue this circle of pain and bloodshed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old Manus

If somebody I had never seen before walked up to me and punched me in the face, I wouldn't say "Ow, you just hurt me badly." and walk off.

---

Exactly. Too bad we westerners are the strangers who punched them, first. Gotta admire their tenacity, though. How many people do you know that won't stop the fight, even though they're getting their ass handed to them? Of course, doesn't say a lot about their judgement, but it's still damned impressive tenacity.

Quote:

---

Or haven't you heard about Israel, and how their entire military ordinance is American weaponry? Israel was using our guns, flying our planes, and dropping our bombs when they fought against the arab nations and claimed the territory now known as Palistine. Hell, they were even paying their soldiers using OUR money.

---

First, the 4th largest armoured corp in the world is composed of 100% Israeli made Merkava tanks. The 3rd largest air force in the world is composed of 100% American (custom-made to Israeli demands and needs) aircraft. Also, more importantly - American military aid only started to flow into Israel from 1973, and before it Israeli relied on France and Britian. French Mirage fighter planes served us well for decades against Russian Migs. Further more, there's this thing called 'taxes', and we have them here. People pay taxes. Yes, there's a very handsome 4 billion dollar aid from the US, which we use to buy military equipment from them, but it's only about one quarter of our security budget.

Quote:

---

now known as Palistine

---

Who in the what, now? Israel, love, Israel. Always was, and always will be. Please disregard any Roman insults to our nation, as they're not very funny anyway. :)

Quote:

---

when we helped Israel's creation.

---

You did wot? Sorry, laddie, but neither you, nor your country were around when Israel first came to be. The Asyrians were, the Mesopotamians, the Babylonians, and the ancient Egyptians... but they're all gone now. And in-case you're reffering to the renewed State of Israel - we lost 6+ million lives, not including the 5 subsequent wars that followed, and we are still fighting for our very right to live on this piece of land, upon which we have been sitting since the dawn of humanity. No freaking foreigner helped through the entire thousands-year-old facade. We appreciate America's help greatly, and we stand by them, but let's not make a bigger deal out of it than it really is. Our right for existence is not dependant on aid, help, or even moral support. We were here long before any bugger out there, and we fought long and hard, and seems we will keep on doing so. What is rightly ours, will always be ours, and we will always claim it as so, support or no support.

Quote:

---

forcing the arabs out of israel,

---

You say it like it's a bad thing. There's a reason it's called Israel, and not 'welcome-we-take-everyone-in-please-shove-sharp-objects-up-our-bum' land. Would you like to be run-over by an enemy that wants nothing more than your death? Sorry, but if anyone tries to mess with Israel, they'd meet with the wrong kind of Jewish humour - and it's not nearly as funny as Seinfeld.

Quote:

---

is like asking how to make a swarm of angry hornets stop stinging after you just broke their nest off the tree.

---

Asking? You don't freaking ask hornets to stop stinging you - you exterminate them. Get the analogy?

Quote:

---

Sorry, kids, "right" and "wrong" are real, breathing concretes, regardless what your philosophy and sociology professors tried to teach you.

---

I disagree. I don't think moral values are absolute. However, I don't think it matters, really. A man can believe whatever he wants... it's when he tries to impose it upon others, that it gets nasty. If terrorists think it's alright to kill for an idea - that's fine by me. But that's also the exact same moment they've signed their own death warrant. They are already dead.

Quote:

---

it is our fault this war is at this stage.

---

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the source of the problem. 'I am the one to blame', said the rape victime. Some victims turn soft, thinking it's their fault they got attacked, finding justifications for the attacker's motivation... it's all sick, very sick. Psychiatrists sit down with people, and help them realise they're not to be blamed, that it's not their fault. The European standpoint is still that of 'what did we do wrong?'. Well, it doesn't f*king matter! There are people out there that want to kill you! Stand on your God-damned feet and fight, or freaking die like cowardly dogs!

Why should anyone care why someone wants to kill them?! Would it even matter if their motives are somehow justified? Would you roll over and die, if that were the case? I should hope not! So stop taking the punishment and humiliation, and act up! Your enemy sure is.

Quote:

---

but it's still damned impressive tenacity.

---

Yes. And that means our own tenacity, the will to live and protect what is dear to us, has to be stronger. The enemy's persistence, viciousness, cruelty and tenacity are to be respected and despised at the same time, but not feared. We must fight back, or we're dead. It doesn't get much simpler, in the laws of survival.

Sorry, but your ordinance in "renewing" israel was european and american ordinance. Mostly left-overs from the world war. Including american soldiers who voluntarily aided them. How do you think you POPULATED Jerusalum after taking it from its millenium-old existence in Muslim hands? Something that not even the Crusades managed to do. It's because you had families, and troops, from all of the Allied powers.

And you don't get to claim Israel's old heritage. That only works for unbroken lines. Besides, to claim that, you give the same de facto privilage to the peoples of Islam. Or aren't you aware of Abraham, and his sons? Even your own bible names you two peoples as brothers in heritage. Explains the family resemblance. I know I can't tell an Israeli from a Muslim (arabic muslim, of course) by looking at them, without going by what they wear or how they style themselves.

As for the argument about Palestine, and that it doesn't exist. It exists, it's a very real chunk of land. Now, it may have almost no legal independence. In fact, I'm very certain that the states and provinces within most other countries have more autonomy. But it DOES exist, and your own leaders refer to it as "Palestine". And it belonged to Muslim nations at one time. You guys took it as part of the ceasefire.

Speaking of which, aren't they currently moving Jewish settlements out of the occupied territories? So much for "always will".

I'm not saying your current war of self-defence is wrong. But you were, and are, the aggressors of this thing. But I do think the quote in your signature makes the point better than I ever could.

udsuna - you speak ignorant, vile words. I'll counter them some other time, as service starts tommorow, once more, after a relaxing, enjoyable weekend, and I need my beauty sleep. Stick around. :)

Hmm... insults. My words may be vile, to you at least, but they're by no means "ignorant". I'm pretty well educated, thanks. And who's education should you trust more? Ours (by which I mean America specifically, and european/western in general) who were watching and recording these events real-time since they began. Or yours, which I can only GUESS how much propoganda has been mixed in. I know I don't trust American history records in our wars (especially against the natives). No more than I'd trust Napoleon's account of the French Revolution, or Nazi Germany's account of WW2. Well, in the first two, I do trust the timeline (to some degree) and the "we kicked their asses" statements.

But I DO look forward to hearing your responce. "Ignorant and vile", indeed. I wonder if your government takes the same attitude you do. Because if this is how you treat people who simply disagree with you, no wonder your enemies are running a terrorist campaign. Because it's not like diplomacy would work. But that's a lot of "if"s, and while my look at the over-all is about as accurate as anyone's, my knowlege of the specifics is a little blurry.

EVERYBODY has a good and bad side.

Sympathising with the enemy is the first step to defeat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Old Manus

Sympathising with the enemy is the first step to defeat.

---

Also the first and second steps to peace.

But also the first step to defeat.

And we have now entered the feedback-loop. Is there any wonder why, in all of human history, there has been a war somewhere in the world at all times?

This thread has 21 chromosomes.

They aren't aliens. Terrorists are people. What's the difference between a terrorist and a soldier? One kills people because he's told and the other kills people because he wants to scare people? That means our attack on Hiroshima was TERRORISM. Note that we killed innocent civilians in Hiroshima. Are soldiers nice people?

"Gee, uhh well I guess they can are be boths!"

Calling all 'terrorists' evil is idiotic to the extreme. They are human like you and I. As such should be judged on their actions not their label. A lot of what 'terrorists' do is warped ideology to the extreme, a lot is fighting for freedom. Then again, a lot of regular soldiers are warped to the extreme. No one group or human is the same & labeling them as 'evil' only serves to soothe your own needs.

'Terrorism' is a reaction to something or some group, stronger in men & resources than the 'terrorist'. Therefore it's war 'by other means'. These 'other means' are usually done by few & with little funding, therefore precision of attack is harder & 'mistakes' are frequent, with collateral lives lost. A lot deliberately attack innocents for the same reasons as above.

It's a dirty nasty war by both the 'terrorist' and the government fighting it, I know this first hand. The word 'evil' is a sanctimonious cop out.

Ah, whatever happened to one of those good, clean wars, where we didn't shoot civillians (or even officers), both sides wore bright colors, and stood in neat little lines while they blew each other away.
But seriously, everything all depends on a person's point of view.

Quote:

---

Calling all 'terrorists' evil is idiotic to the extreme. They are human like you and I. As such should be judged on their actions not their label. A lot of what 'terrorists' do is warped ideology to the extreme, a lot is fighting for freedom. Then again, a lot of regular soldiers are warped to the extreme. No one group or human is the same & labeling them as 'evil' only serves to soothe your own needs.

---

I guess calling Satan a misunderstood flower child is ok then... Terrorists are evil. Lets look at this: Little johny has a problem with a neiboring country's (bob) actions. Bob is a body builder with facial hair, so little johny decided that brutally killing Bob's younger sister is the best way to get even, and get heard.

Little johny shall then rot in hell. He is EVIL and will never seek vindiction. I am appauled that we can say that terrorists are misunderstood people. That is like saying they were just bad pilots!
What do terrorists want? Why do they cause terror to get things done? Because what they want is not worth others time to listen to them. They need to kick and scream and blow up likea 5 year old drama child. With that analogy I am afraid I must through everything I said in the child dicipline thread out the window, and break some paddles over thier worthless keisters.

How can you sympathise with a terrorist whom aims at innocent people? I am not talking you supposed 'labeled terrorists' but real terrorists. Yes, some may be marked as terrorists in the short run, but the obvious standing is that real terrorists need their trip to hell hastened.
Bipper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bipper

That is like saying they were just bad pilots!

---

You have no idea how much I laughed when I read that...

Meh, I don’t think it matters if the are decent people or not. They kill us, we kill them. They continue to convince people to blow themselves up. We scare the s@#$ out of people to make more money out of them.

It’s all good…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wiegrahf42

Ah, whatever happened to one of those good, clean wars, where we didn't shoot civillians (or even officers), both sides wore bright colors, and stood in neat little lines while they blew each other away.

---

They ended when the civilians began building weapons, thus becoming assets to that government's army.

I dont think America is as bad as the terrorists. We dont go around killing inoccent people.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

I dont think America is as bad as the terrorists. We dont go around killing inoccent people.......

---

hear hear

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

I dont think America is as bad as the terrorists. We dont go around killing inoccent people.......

---

My ass. Or did you miss the prior reference to Hiroshima? We who supposedly don't go around killing innocents are responsible for single-handedly eliminating entire religions and languages (because we killed all the practicers) in our conflict with our own natives. Or is that too far in the past? How about Vietnam? Too long ago? How about the support we gave that allowed Bin Laden and crew to rise to power in afghanistan in the first place? Same can be said, to some degree or another, of every nation that currently exists in the middle-east, most of africa, and portions of asia and south america. Fine, so we don't get *our* hands dirty, we have our underlings do that for us. I do believe a Mr. Charles Manson is on death row for similar actions.

And trust me, the worst of the middle east is almost naively innocent in comparison to what we let go on in africa. If we disapprove, we still haven't stopped funding the governments whose own troops commit those attrocities on their own people. America has more blood on it's hands than almost anyone else in history. We're second only to the Nazis and the Catholics.

Anyway, it doesn't matter to me how nice they are. So what. I hope they are nice and have proper British tea parties for whatever guests happen by the ol' cave.

The problem is that this is a person that wants to severely injure us. That makes the equation fairly simple. Do whatever it takes to stop the attack. If negotiation would work, I'd suggest negotiation. Not because it's my fault, but because I don't want to cut my hand on his teeth. But if it won't work, there's no point in wasting my breath. And from what I know, the only negotiation point is "Accept Sharia and surrender", in other words no more America.

Now I'll admit we have done quite a few things wrong, and most of them are still ongoing. We should stop doing those things. Yesterday. But that doesn't mean that because we are doing something stupid, it's ok to attack us. It would be the same as saying "Yeah you deserved to get raped. Just look at that short skirt". [/COLOR][/SIZE]

Quote:

---

My ass. Or did you miss the prior reference to Hiroshima?

---

This is almsot a good point. Save for the fact that we were at war. It was done to debatibly save many lives (both Japanese and american). Anyways, in this case I would agree that it was a terroristic act. It was an act done to inflict a state of terror on Japan (and possibly the rest of the world). I will never condone the use of the bomb. It was a mistake. We have all apologized for it, because we knew it was wrong. We stooped down to the level of terrorists enemies whom decided to sneak attack (also debatable if your in for a conspiracy theory) pearl harbor.

As for the Natives, I do not even wish to walk down that road. I agree with you that the slaughter and mistreatment of the Native Americans is comparable to the Halocaust. That is an inexcusable act, nothing good about it.

Vietnam, what is the problem here? We went to war for the reasons of few, many protested, and we retreated. Less your talking about our support to our 'allies' there (very loosely used :) )

Our at home security starts out with securing what is beyond our borders. We are a powerhouse nation, and we are expected to use this pwoer for what everyone else sees fit, while we keep an eye on our own investments as well. Now, I agree that a few (ok most) greedy-self-serving-lower-than-the-dog-crap-I-found-on-my-car-tire polititians abuse the rights they have for the sake of greed. I do disagree with some of our foriegn policies; but most of them are there to offensicly protect us from our enemies. I would like (not really but) to see you bitch when Iran, or North Korea Nuke the hell outta California. There is a lot more going on than we know. I still do belive that we take very man librities too far.

This is a small rock though, our enemies are not as far away as you might think. (Rhetorical metephore - score!!)

[edit] On that note, I should say that though I agree that African trade (along with other 3rd wolrd trade) should be brought up, to encourage global trust, insted of conquoring the globe and making an allied empire. imho of course
bipper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by udsuna

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

I dont think America is as bad as the terrorists. We dont go around killing inoccent people.......

---

My ass. Or did you miss the prior reference to Hiroshima? We who supposedly don't go around killing innocents are responsible for single-handedly eliminating entire religions and languages (because we killed all the practicers) in our conflict with our own natives. Or is that too far in the past? How about Vietnam? Too long ago? How about the support we gave that allowed Bin Laden and crew to rise to power in afghanistan in the first place? Same can be said, to some degree or another, of every nation that currently exists in the middle-east, most of africa, and portions of asia and south america. Fine, so we don't get *our* hands dirty, we have our underlings do that for us. I do believe a Mr. Charles Manson is on death row for similar actions.

And trust me, the worst of the middle east is almost naively innocent in comparison to what we let go on in africa. If we disapprove, we still haven't stopped funding the governments whose own troops commit those attrocities on their own people. America has more blood on it's hands than almost anyone else in history. We're second only to the Nazis and the Catholics.

---

We dont mean to kill inoccent people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bipper

Quote:

---

My ass. Or did you miss the prior reference to Hiroshima?

---

This is almsot a good point. Save for the fact that we were at war. It was done to debatibly save many lives (both Japanese and american). Anyways, in this case I would agree that it was a terroristic act. It was an act done to inflict a state of terror on Japan (and possibly the rest of the world). I will never condone the use of the bomb. It was a mistake. We have all apologized for it, because we knew it was wrong. We stooped down to the level of terrorists enemies whom decided to sneak attack (also debatable if your in for a conspiracy theory) pearl harbor.

As for the Natives, I do not even wish to walk down that road. I agree with you that the slaughter and mistreatment of the Native Americans is comparable to the Halocaust. That is an inexcusable act, nothing good about it.

Vietnam, what is the problem here? We went to war for the reasons of few, many protested, and we retreated. Less your talking about our support to our 'allies' there (very loosely used :) )

Our at home security starts out with securing what is beyond our borders. We are a powerhouse nation, and we are expected to use this pwoer for what everyone else sees fit, while we keep an eye on our own investments as well. Now, I agree that a few (ok most) greedy-self-serving-lower-than-the-dog-crap-I-found-on-my-car-tire polititians abuse the rights they have for the sake of greed. I do disagree with some of our foriegn policies; but most of them are there to offensicly protect us from our enemies. I would like (not really but) to see you bitch when Iran, or North Korea Nuke the hell outta California. There is a lot more going on than we know. I still do belive that we take very man librities too far.

This is a small rock though, our enemies are not as far away as you might think. (Rhetorical metephore - score!!)

[edit] On that note, I should say that though I agree that African trade (along with other 3rd wolrd trade) should be brought up, to encourage global trust, insted of conquoring the globe and making an allied empire. imho of course
bipper

---

Well that's quite the steaming pile of hypocrisy. The only reason North Korea and Iran started building nukes is because they knew our hands are still occupied with Iraq and Afghanistan.

Wow, that was kinda rude; but

Quote:

---

The only reason North Korea and Iran started building nukes is because they knew our hands are still occupied with Iraq and Afghanistan.

---

Is a major assumption in itself. I don't really see what is so false about what I say. No more intellectually sound than what I quoted. It is belived by some that the Iraq war is a ploy to set our sights on Iran next. /shrug. I don't claim to know what is going on through other peoples heads, all I have is my observations and beliefs. I don't wish to see them being called "hypocrisy" in any case. If i am wrong, and you can search yourself for a better way to show me your interpitations of things. :mad:

N. Korea and Iran have been working on nuclear programs for years. While Iran says that they have been refining for power usage, N. Korea has been openly admitting thier intent to make missles. This has been going on for a long time now, not just since we got out "hands tied with Iraq". Its a fact, you can look it up.


Bipper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

I dont think America is as bad as the terrorists. We dont go around killing inoccent people.......

---

Well, not personally. But if you recall, you funded Saddam's massacre of the Kurds, the Nicarguan death-squads, Batista's fascist dictatorship, the Iranian Shah, the South Vietnamese dictatorship, the Argentinian Juntah, the various South Korean dictatorships, the opressive Brazillian government, al-Queda, the Taliban... the list goes on and on... And that doesn't include your own people that you've sent to die in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq...

But I don't like terrorists at all. America isn't great, but terrorists are worse. If they really want to fight, then they should become guerrilas, like Che Guevara, Castro or Ho Chi Mihn, and fight their enemies militaries, not just target innocents, who would often otherwise support them.

While I am not saying that any of that is wrong, I would like to know exactly how you know we were funding a genocide in Iraq? we have paid out of pocket to keep the bullies aside, we also do not have the resources that everyone seems to think we do.

The world > America, and I hope it will always be that way. The offencive defence that I spoke of earlier is bad for the simple reason that we do begin terroizing other countries by funding thier enemies. I hate this approach, its like funding the lesser of two evils.

You can go around all day (we pay people to do this :D) and different opinions on the matter of foreign policy will never meet eye to eye.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cuchulainn

Calling all 'terrorists' evil is idiotic to the extreme. They are human like you and I. As such should be judged on their actions not their label. A lot of what 'terrorists' do is warped ideology to the extreme, a lot is fighting for freedom. Then again, a lot of regular soldiers are warped to the extreme. No one group or human is the same & labeling them as 'evil' only serves to soothe your own needs.

'Terrorism' is a reaction to something or some group, stronger in men & resources than the 'terrorist'. Therefore it's war 'by other means'. These 'other means' are usually done by few & with little funding, therefore precision of attack is harder & 'mistakes' are frequent, with collateral lives lost. A lot deliberately attack innocents for the same reasons as above.

It's a dirty nasty war by both the 'terrorist' and the government fighting it, I know this first hand. The word 'evil' is a sanctimonious cop out.

---

Yes they are humans like you and me. They are simply brainwashed. They aren't evill. Just brainwashed to be evilll.

Seriously they are brainwashed and they do think their cause is right. You have to look into the history of terrorism.

People have different reasons why they do terrorism.

America arent bad people at all, they mean no harm to others, so arent bad people in any respect. They have made bad judgement and decisions, but never meant to kill innocent people. Terrorists are idiotic and think America is agaisnt them.So go out of there way to kill 1000 + people in the twin towers incident. Not even caring of all the familys that have been wrecked by them.
I think Blair is making a bad choice though. Him being Bushes lap dog almost got my Mum killed from the Tavistock Bomb ( oposite My mums work ). Were safer being allys with no one IMO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

America arent bad people at all, they mean no harm to others, so arent bad people in any respect. They have made bad judgement and decisions, but never meant to kill innocent people.

---

Yes. The USA is all about peace, love and fluffy little bunnies, dancing on a field of pink flowers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrgen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

America arent bad people at all, they mean no harm to others, so arent bad people in any respect. They have made bad judgement and decisions, but never meant to kill innocent people.

---

Yes. The USA is all about peace, love and fluffy little bunnies, dancing on a field of pink flowers.

---

that is what America wants, Bush dosent want a war.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bipper

While I am not saying that any of that is wrong, I would like to know exactly how you know we were funding a genocide in Iraq? we have paid out of pocket to keep the bullies aside, we also do not have the resources that everyone seems to think we do.

---

Everyone knows the US funded the genocide in Iraq. US funds Saddam, Saddam commits genocide, therefore US funds genocide. The only reason that they decided to 'keep the bullies' aside is because he started going against there orders. It's happened before. IN South Vietnam, the US had President Diem assassinated because he was failing to fight off the Vietmihn. They replaced his already corrupt administration with a military dictatorship.

Terrorists are bad, and a I agree that they are all pretty much evil, but the Bush administration uses them as a weapon against the American people, to keep them scared and under control. SO, bye gaining from their actions, he's just as bad. Which is very bad.

we happily gave sadamme lots of planes, bombs, gas, chemicals. he then used them against the kurds. it was american made planes, bombs and chemicals which committed the gassing and genocide.

terrorism is the new red scare. we will now use it at every turn. and 9-11 was the new reichstag fire.

and until we begin to start understanding out enemy will we know how to combat them.

to negotiate is not a sign of weakness or defeat it is a sign of knowing what is best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreddz

America arent bad people at all, they mean no harm to others, so arent bad people in any respect. They have made bad judgement and decisions, but never meant to kill innocent people. Terrorists are idiotic and think America is agaisnt them.So go out of there way to kill 1000 + people in the twin towers incident. Not even caring of all the familys that have been wrecked by them.
I think Blair is making a bad choice though. Him being Bushes lap dog almost got my Mum killed from the Tavistock Bomb ( oposite My mums work ). Were safer being allys with no one IMO

---

I know its not hte american people that isnt bad. But the CEO's and hte government and the peresident they hate. If so. Why kill the innocent instead of the ones they hate?

Because they ARE NOT NICE.

CHRIST GIVE ME A BREAK THEY ARE GOD DAMNED TERRORISTS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Traitorfish

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bipper

While I am not saying that any of that is wrong, I would like to know exactly how you know we were funding a genocide in Iraq? we have paid out of pocket to keep the bullies aside, we also do not have the resources that everyone seems to think we do.

---

Everyone knows the US funded the genocide in Iraq. US funds Saddam, Saddam commits genocide, therefore US funds genocide. The only reason that they decided to 'keep the bullies' aside is because he started going against there orders. It's happened before. IN South Vietnam, the US had President Diem assassinated because he was failing to fight off the Vietmihn. They replaced his already corrupt administration with a military dictatorship.

---

Would it make anyone feel better to know I'm an American, and almost pointed this out in my last post? If not in specific detail.

Quote:

---

Terrorists are bad, and a I agree that they are all pretty much evil, but the Bush administration uses them as a weapon against the American people, to keep them scared and under control. SO, bye gaining from their actions, he's just as bad. Which is very bad.

---

This one, I'm on the fence about. It holds together, from the outside, but the truth is that you don't see a lot of specific references in country. It's not focused heavily enough to be propoganda. And that's too subtle for Bush.

you've got to look at the iraq war to see the heavy level of propaganda.

"iraq has terrorists" "well then we need to invade" "he had links to 9-11 too" "that bastard we need to kick his ass"

noone questioned that al-qaeda had infact called for a jihad on iraq. that they hated the idea of a secular state. that they offered to fight for saudi against them.

the fact the bin laden hated sadamme and wanted him dead and an islamic state in place was ignored. and happily replace with the idea "sadamme aided 9-11". these guys were not on the best of terms and anyone with any idea about the middle east knew that. al-qaeda prefered iran to iraq. that much was clear.

but by saying they were supporting terrorists and aided 9-11 the nation got up and said it was okay to invade. it was the government. they wouldn't lie. and this was terrorism. it needed to be stopped. and so we went to war and the public sort of approved. it was for the good of the nation after all.

and that is how terrorism has blinded the american people. link a country to terrorism. no matter how stupid and they will want to destroy it.

iraq having links to terrorism was an outright lie. it was not mistaken intelligence. everyone knew it. it was well documented. why would jihadist, fundamental and fanatical muslim group want to to deals with the man who ran a secular state that had fought a war with the jewel of islamic states?

your enemy's enemy is your friend does not apply. bin laden is far too caught up in his ideas for that.

SUPPOSED WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cloud No.9

you've got to look at the iraq war to see the heavy level of propaganda.

iraq having links to terrorism was an outright lie.

your enemy's enemy is your friend does not apply. bin laden is far too caught up in his ideas for that.

---

You've got a point there.

Wrong, Iraq was up to it's neck in terrorist activity, just not the same terrorists as we were supposed to be hunting for.

And, you're right on that one. Fanatics, the real ones, are easy to predict: they do EXACTLY what they believe is right. It makes them dangerous, but not terribly surprising. Of course, Americans don't know what to do with "True Believers", because it's so rare for us to find them in these borders, anymore. And impossible for them to get into power, because they can't play nice with the jackasses. In democracy, the majority rules, and the majority are losers.

I blame that on the 50's and (moreso) the 60's.

I fully agree with the precept that 'My enemy's enemy is my friend' is a very bad idea. However almost every single regime which has been supported by the West in the latter half of the 20th century was done so because we were fighting against Soviet Russia. And I don't know how many people know about Soviet Russia, but believe me; I'll take Saddam and Al'Quada over Stalin any day of the week.

At any rate, I don't care what they're like on a personal level. All I know is they're trying to kill me and my loved ones and enforce their ideals onto anyone who survives. That equates to kicking the out of them.

Well put Milf and welcome back.

What I don't get, being the uninformed individual that I am, is if we were funding Iraq, did we know that Soviet Russia was funding thier military as well? There is, and always will be something that just doesn't add up in my feeble little mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF

At any rate, I don't care what they're like on a personal level. All I know is they're trying to kill me and my loved ones and enforce their ideals onto anyone who survives. That equates to kicking the out of them.

---

On this, you have my complete agreement. I know why they hate us, and it's because we're assholes to them, and they're also assholes back. But I'd rather be the living asshole than the dead one.

Wow, I was actually going to comment here, about the hateful things udsuna said... but, man, now I have, like, 50 times more stupid crap to address, and I truly cannot be arsed. This is futile.

Like the Linkin Park song, in the end, it doesn't really matter. America is strong, Israel is strong, both are standing on their feet and ready to fight the good fight. If some idiots want to symapthise or join the opposing side - let 'em, as long as they only do so verbally, like in this site. I know they're wrong, and that's really enough for me, and I also know they are powerless to affect the course of things with their baseless hate, ignorance and sometimes sheer stupidity (don't get all pissy, udsuna, you're not stupid. :p ). I would advise, however, not to sound these opinions outside the Internet, as you may never know who is listening and might get offended by you supporting the enemy's cause, for whatever reason you might have.

udsuna the terrorists in iraq were mostly kurds fighting against sadamme. the same kurds we supplied iraq with the planes and bombs to gas them in halabja, the same kurds we incited to rebel then refused to help when they were slaughtered in their thousands.

israel and america are not fighting the good fight. they are both following their own reichstag fire's. america lies then invades who it wants, holds men (and children) for 4 years without charge and tortures them. israel has a habit of shooting unarmed civillians and shelling refugee camps. that is not the good fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

I would advise, however, not to sound these opinions outside the Internet, as you may never know who is listening and might get offended by you supporting the enemy's cause, for whatever reason you might have.

---

Ah, but that's the great thing about America. I can say to whomever I want that these stupid little conflicts are complete bull****. The worst I get is the occasional threat, and even that was only once. Freedom of speach kicks all forms of ass. And I have no hate or ignorance involved in this scenario. For me, it's little more than an intellectual exercise. You, on the other hand, if you can't spot your own hate, then you truly are ignorant.

You see, I thought I had to explain certain things, like why Jews have a right to live, why they have a right to live where they did for eons, why they have a right to protect themselves, etc... but then I thought - why? Why isn't all that obvious? It should be. And if for some reason, to someone, it isn't... well, then there's nothing I can do about it, because as I've said, they are either too hateful, too ignorant or too dumb to want to change their minds. And, as I've said, it shouldn't really matter. Yes, it pisses me off to see that kind of $hit spoken about my home, nation and people... but there's really nothing I can do. If those words were slung to my face in real life, real time, the consequences would be much more severe. But this is the net, and I'm not about to explain the obvious, to those who do not wish to understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by War Angel

You see, I thought I had to explain certain things, like why Jews have a right to live, why they have a right to live where they did for eons, why they have a right to protect themselves, etc...

---

All completely true, but the Israelis can't force the Palestinians to leave. They've been there for 1500 years, so it's their home too. Not that I support the PLO or any other terrorists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF

At any rate, I don't care what they're like on a personal level. All I know is they're trying to kill me and my loved ones and enforce their ideals onto anyone who survives. That equates to kicking the out of them.

---

This is down right pathetic. NO WHERE IN THE DEFINITION OF TERRORIST IS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MENTIONED. This is seriously LUDICROUS. What the hell goes through you peoples minds? "Terrahist why he must be talkins bout 9-11!!!"? WTH? You people act like terrorists haven't protected you. IT's pretty damn ignorant to claim that all terrorists are out to kill you. I honestly hope you aren't always that introverted.

Soldiers also kill innocent people. Why's the connotation for soldier so much more positive than terrorists?

Quote:

---

They've been there for 1500 years, so it's their home too.

---

The first time the word 'Palestinians' has been sounded was in 1965. Also, please note that there weren't any Arabs at all, 1500 years ago, in Israel. They were tribes in the Saudi peninsula.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZeZipster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF

At any rate, I don't care what they're like on a personal level. All I know is they're trying to kill me and my loved ones and enforce their ideals onto anyone who survives. That equates to kicking the out of them.

---

This is down right pathetic. NO WHERE IN THE DEFINITION OF TERRORIST IS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MENTIONED. This is seriously LUDICROUS. What the hell goes through you peoples minds? "Terrahist why he must be talkins bout 9-11!!!"? WTH? You people act like terrorists haven't protected you. IT's pretty damn ignorant to claim that all terrorists are out to kill you. I honestly hope you aren't always that introverted.

Soldiers also kill innocent people. Why's the connotation for soldier so much more positive than terrorists?

---

What are you talking about? I can barely decipher your post. Please calm down and type with a little more consideration of your words next time. Nevertheless: I know what terrorists are like. I've lived in Northern Ireland on and off through much of the more recent times of the Troubles. I lost family in the Shankill Bombing.

But no, I don't consider terrorists as a blanket evil. Terrorist being a person who induces or causes terror. It is simply how the world works. Everyone has their own objectives and agendas. Armies use terror to win battles and wars. This isn't something I like, but I accept and support those who induce terror to protect things like liberty and freedom and life and not being forced to be religion 'X' or 'Y'.

But that quickly becomes a case of might making right. So, you know, the entire flaw is governments being more powerful than individuals. We need to reduce governmental powers to law enforcement (And the laws are: No force, no coercion, other than the extraction of taxes which is required to ensure these very laws are held.), and let individuals and groups thereof handle everything else.

Alright I know I'm coming in late but there were a couple things that needed replying to:

Quote:

---

that is what America wants, Bush dosent want a war.....

---

this word has been thrown around a lot but that is ignorant, not only my opinion but factually. the "downing street memos" which were memos of the british head of intelligence to the blair cabinet saying (23rd of July Prime Minister meeting 2002 happening at the same time that Bush was saying he wanted a peaceful solution and had not sided on war) "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD (weapons of mass destrustion). But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC (national security council) had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action." pretty obviously Bush did want more; if you feel like that's not enough (I don't know how it wouldn't be but if) I'll post more evidence. Needless to say the press in America took weeks to cover it and it was only covered when blogs forced them to. When they did cover it they tried to explain it away by saying everybody already knew so it's not news or that it really wasn't a report on Bush because it said "Washington said" both are clearly nonsense. President Bush and Rumsfeld asked for plans for invasion of Iraq within weeks of the 9/11 attacks. Other info can be found in Farenheit 9/11. During Clinton's administration Cheney and Wolfkowitz pushed for an invasion of Iraq, so they came into office wanting that.

Oh yeah BTW I agree with udsuna more than anyone else here.

Quote:

---

You see, I thought I had to explain certain things, like why Jews have a right to live, why they have a right to live where they did for eons, why they have a right to protect themselves, etc... but then I thought - why? Why isn't all that obvious? It should be. And if for some reason, to someone, it isn't... well, then there's nothing I can do about it, because as I've said, they are either too hateful, too ignorant or too dumb to want to change their minds.

---

hmmm... I just read the whole post and stunningly I never noticed anyone saying Jews do not have the right to live; please post an example as I utterly missed that. And if it's not there don't stick horrible words in other people's mouths and then call people stupid in some of your other posts if they didn't say what you stick on their mouths. Sorry if I read innacurately. I personally thought he was saying other people had a right to live, but I see how these things could be confused. :p

Quote:

---

We dont mean to kill inoccent people.

---

OK we're not out to kill innocent people, on that point though we (US) are very clearly willing to kill innocent people.

Quote:

---

ike the Linkin Park song, in the end, it doesn't really matter. America is strong, Israel is strong, both are standing on their feet and ready to fight the good fight. If some idiots want to symapthise or join the opposing side - let 'em, as long as they only do so verbally, like in this site. I know they're wrong, and that's really enough for me, and I also know they are powerless to affect the course of things with their baseless hate, ignorance and sometimes sheer stupidity (don't get all pissy, udsuna, you're not stupid. ). I would advise, however, not to sound these opinions outside the Internet, as you may never know who is listening and might get offended by you supporting the enemy's cause, for whatever reason you might have.

---

specifically could you tell me what you knoow is wrong? I didn't see that in your post and as your other posts didn't seem to talk about what other people said I have no idea what you're taling about,please clarify for slower people like me.

Finally (I make come back to pick out more things I disagree with) on the initial subject could you find terrorist more specifically. I know that could be considered simple but with all the other views of it it should be defined or at least considered opinion instead of fact which is how it's usually stated. I consider it a primitive term something undefined that can be understood, as opinions on it's meaning are different. One might define it 'one who causes terror' which would give us no sense of to what scale it's considered or anything. 'One who kills innocent people' already feels biased towards calling them evil without any discussion. Another word that comes up is 'freedom fighters'. Is Bush considered a terrorist- it's all so subjective. The problem is not that we have different opinions it's that to each of us it has different meaning. We disagree but in a way it's about different subjects.

edit: just so you know I was writing this as MILF put up what he said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Traitorfish

All completely true, but the Israelis can't force the Palestinians to leave. They've been there for 1500 years, so it's their home too. Not that I support the PLO or any other terrorists.

---

You did screw that one up. You're confused about "Palistine"- a small section of land, the occupied territories that Israel took in during a defensive war with the other Arabic nations in the area. Anyways, you seem to think Palestine matters.

However, aside from your lack of understanding of location/seperation, you're right. The people who NOW call themselves palestinians have been there for thousands of years. They've been muslims (of one nature or another) for the last 1500, but they've been native to that land for many hundreds of years earlier than that.

But, aside from saying "palistinian", you were correct. Nothing has changed but the names.

You can be nice and still be a smurfing dick at the same time.

This whole thread looks like a dog chasing its tail. Honestly it is simple. Terroism is not nice. Neither is killing for any reason, aside from putting a murder down.

I belive that you can make an excuse for every attack, and find a reason it was wrong. This could go on forever, and would prolly never end.

"aside from putting a murder down." sorry is that meant to say murderer? and in what way is that right? and that is why terorism exists. because every tax paying citizen pays the government for it's tanks and soldiers that kill people. at the end of the day the people are supporting the killing and so are part of the murder.

Yup murderer was the word I meant to use. What I say is right by outting a murderer dwon, is simply killing a person, whom is sick and beyond help. This is part of my opinion.

Obviosuly terrorists should rethink thier strategy if they are trying to attack the taxpayers. That would take a lot of work, and would prolly piss us off even more. I am sure you know there true motives as well as I do - so lts not stand in the dark and try to pick out thier targets. I would not go as far as to say I am a killer or a target. These terrorists, (if we are even talking of the same group) do more killing than talking, and that is not cool in my book.

I have faith in my government, and I know they have killed innosent; but to pass judgement based on the bad facts that you have, is wrong. The right thing to do is bring them up, and instead of condemning the US - bring your points up with proof, an sell others on the idea.

The world is not all that bad, no matter how much we complain, it could be worse. Latley I have seen some great positive steps in the right direction; it just seems to be that moving on is a slow and hard process, while pointing the finger and screaming comes a bit easier.

Bipper

Quote:

---

However, aside from your lack of understanding of location/seperation, you're right. The people who NOW call themselves palestinians have been there for thousands of years. They've been muslims (of one nature or another) for the last 1500, but they've been native to that land for many hundreds of years earlier than that.

---

Prior to 1881, there were anywhere between 25,000 and 30,000 Arabs in the land of Israel. They lived as good neighbours with their Jewish friends, who were about 4,000 (roughly a quarter, or so), a group of Jews which is reffered to as 'the old settlement', as they never moved from Israel, inspite of all the exiles and all the empires, 3,000 years-worth of them, that tried to capture Israel. As the Jewish immigration began to rise in the late 1800s (due to the rising of the Zionist movement, which called for the establishment of a Jewish state), so did the Arab nations around Israel (which was then called Palestine, due to a practical joke of a Roman emperor) got nervous - namely Jordan, which was, and is still today, a proud monarchy, and a very cautious nation. So, they did what seemed right - and as they couldn't risk open war, as the Ottomans controlled the area, they flooded it with civilians instead. Masses of poor Jordanian Arabs that lived near the border came to (or rather, were pushed into) Israel, to counter the Jewish settlements. They weren't too happy about it, mind you, as there was practically nothing for them here, other than the up-coming strife with the Jewish population.

So, the angry Arabs that now call themselves Palestinians, are those Arabs that came a little over a hundred years ago into Israel. They are misreable, bitter, and have very little hope, and no-where else to go. So, they fight, not yet realising a lasting peace with the strongest nation and also the only democracy in the area could actually benefit them...