Terrorism

[Endless]

Or better yet, find out what exactly it is that influences them to attack us in the first place. The whole "they hate our democracy, our freedom blah blah blah" is not viable considering Saddam, the Taliban and al Qaeda were all once allies to the United States. And I'm not talking a hundred years ago... this has been in the last 20 years.

America is the very definition of decadence (don't believe me? Go to Las Vegas, the decadence capital of the world), a characteristic considered violently taboo by middle-east religion. Guess what... we were a decadent, capitalist nation while all three of the enemies mentioned above were allies, why didn't they "hate our freedom" then?

All conpiracy theories about ghosts, aliens, hell boy, and elvis living on the moon aside. It doesn't take much logic from even the most partisan individual to figure out these current events revolve around money in one form or another when said individual takes a step back from the propaganda for 5 seconds. Heck, corporate America & U.K. are making bank like Microsoft circa 1995 from these wars.

Here's and interesting read related to former allies and oil: http://www.mediamonitors.net/josephclifford2.html

The problem is that you think that terrorists/fundamentalists are rational, which they aren't. A lot most likely hate the Western civilisation as a whole, no matter what country, because it's starting to take root in the Middle East, which means people are going to start thinking for themselves and maybe reconsider the social order they lived in for the past decades/centuries. And if you're a fundamentalist religious group, that's a very bad thing, on two levels: first, your own values will be replaced by those of the West, second, your influence and power will become smaller and smaller. Wehn Europe went through these changes 200-300 years ago, the elite and the Church didn't exactly enjoy losing their place, and didn't let go without dragging their foot, big time.

About Las Vegas: did you actually go there, or are you just basing your judgement on assumptions, hearsay or media?

And last, there is financiary motivation along with humnitary, religious or whatelese motivation. France didn't oopose the USA because we're so cool and morally right, but because a lot of money was at stake, and the USA setting foot in Iraq meant that we wouldn't have the oil contracts anymore. That and it's a longtime tradition for Gaullists to piss off the USA, just 'cause.

when you ahve two antions...fighting eachother..they call eahcother terrorists..and they both some how kill innoccent people, and they both do the same crap?..who is more terrorist?...

What's the second nation?


Repeated for emphasis:

It's not very cool hating a whole nation beause you don't like what thier government is doing. We don't have any control over it. Besides that, all governments do exactly the same thing. We're just the ones getting picked on right now. If your going to hate us, you might as well hate everybody, even your own country and government. Bringing up watergate doesn't prove anything seeing as how it happened so long ago. That's like saying I hate England because a couple hundred years ago they wanted to treat Americans unfairly and overly tax them so they can make lots of money.

[Dr Unne]

We don't have a moral obligation to please everyone in the world. If you have a problem and you start exploding buses full of bombs in the middle of cities, you lose your right to be heard, in my opinion. I agree with Endless that if the willingness to resort to terrorism shows lack of rationality.

[qq]when you ahve two antions...fighting eachother..they call eahcother terrorists..and they both some how kill innoccent people, and they both do the same crap?..who is more terrorist?...[/qq]

Self-defense against physical threat is a justification for the use of force.

[Glendon]

The problem is that you think that terrorists/fundamentalists are rational

I don't know how rational (its not a black or white issue) terrorists are anymore than you do. If they were rational as early as 1998 when they were negotiating with American oil companies for a pipeline through Afganistan, then they are capable of being rational now. Perhaps it is the US that was not being rational, we do not know. Western ideals have not had any significant changes in influence in the past 10 years when some of these "terrorist" organizations were allies to the US. The Western world has been spreading its ideals for decades. Therefore, the argument that their motivation for attacking us is based on their violent hatred of western influence, freedom, democracy, capitalism, or decadence is complete hog wash.

About Las Vegas: did you actually go there, or are you just basing your judgement on assumptions, hearsay or media?

I'm basing it on facts. Las Vegas is pure opulence, offering the most extravagant services for those with enough cash to request it. Where else can you chase naked women around with a paint ball gun for $300, order a prostitute via yellow pages while staying at a 5 star hotel, walk down the strip drinking out of a bottle of beer in clear view of smiling law enforcement, and then get married under the authority of a preacher wearing Elvis garb... all in the same day?

Las Vegas is one of the (if not the) fastest growing cities in America because you can do damn near anything you desire without consequences. Not because they have kiddie rides at the amusement park. Las Vegas represents American capitalism, and everything that spawns from it (excess). I challenge anyone to try and paint it as moral community.

p.s. I have two friends who live there, and will be there in two weeks given we are willing to side track the road trip to San Diego for a few days.

[[c]]

Dr. Unne: Self-defense against physical threat is a justification for the use of force.

exactly my point, you wanna call arab terrorist beacsue they are defending themselves...you have to call ameircan terrorist also..because they are defendign themselves also...

no matter what kinda of insult someone throws on a group of people...it will be the same for you...call them terrorists all you want, when your own people are doing the same thing,,

that's liek your friend bob breaks your FF7 game..and you get mad.....and call him eivll.....then you break your friend bill's game...don't get amd at someone for somehting you do also

the two antions was a metaphor for americans vs 'anyone that don't agree with oppressive democracy'

american government think they have soemthign good (freedom, democary) and they are trying to force this 'democracy' on everyone else....

that woudl be like me haveing something good (weed, pot, marajuana)..and me forceing soemoone else to smoek it becasue i think it is good and i think i am doign the 'right thing' by forceing it...

please people..commons sense

(and a typeing program for me )

[Endless]

I don't know how rational (its not a black or white issue) terrorists are anymore than you do. If they were rational as early as 1998 when they were negotiating with American oil companies for a pipeline through Afganistan, then they are capable of being rational now. Perhaps it is the US that was not being rational, we do not know. Western ideals have not had any significant changes in influence in the past 10 years when some of these "terrorist" organizations were allies to the US. The Western world has been spreading its ideals for decades. Therefore, the argument that their motivation for attacking us is based on their violent hatred of western influence, freedom, democracy, capitalism, or decadence is complete hog wash.



I'm basing it on facts. Las Vegas is pure opulence, offering the most extravagant services for those with enough cash to request it. Where else can you chase naked women around with a paint ball gun for $300, order a prostitute via yellow pages while staying at a 5 star hotel, walk down the strip drinking out of a bottle of beer in clear view of smiling law enforcement, and then get married under the authority of a preacher wearing Elvis garb... all in the same day?

Las Vegas is one of the (if not the) fastest growing cities in America because you can do damn near anything you desire without consequences. Not because they have kiddie rides at the amusement park. Las Vegas represents American capitalism, and everything that spawns from it (excess). I challenge anyone to try and paint it as moral community.

p.s. I have two friends who live there, and will be there in two weeks given we are willing to side track the road trip to San Diego for a few days.

On Las Vegas: Time did it, in fact. I'll try to find what issue it was, I have it somewhere in the pile of journals/books in my appartment.

On fundamentalism:
You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Law of Allah, choose to implement your own inferior rules and regulations, thus following your own vain whims and desires. You run a society contrary to the nature of mankind by separating religion from your policies. So much so that people believe that even if they commit adultery, theft, and other wicked acts, as long as they go and confess, everything will be okay. ... Osama Bin Laden, 2002
We -- with Allah's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson. - Osama Bin Laden, 1998
"Hostility toward America is a religious duty, and we hope to be rewarded for it by God . . . . I am confident that Muslims will be able to end the legend of the so-called superpower that is America. OBL to Time Magazine

"Every American man is an enemy to us." -- OBL.


'course, I only took one specific example, but it applies to pretty much any fundamentalist. Just switch who the incarnation of evil is. Also, the fact that they accepted help from the US/Europe/wherever before doesn't mean that they liked us at that time. If was the less negative situation, and motivated by their own objectives/agenda, which may very well have included fscking the helper over once the situation allowed it. Hell, France did it diplomatically and militarily in 1966 by pulling out of NATO.

[War Angel]

you wanna call arab terrorist beacsue they are defending themselves

You don't defend yourself by attacking innocent people, out of the blue. Innocents getting killed is part of war, but when your entire compaign is based on and spins around killing innocents, you have something seriously wrong in your mindset.

America retaliated. Maybe a bit too harshly to some (and too lighlty for other), but it did not start this conflict.

that's liek your friend bob breaks your FF7 game..and you get mad.....and call him eivll.....then you break your friend bill's game...don't get amd at someone for somehting you do also

If someone punches me, and I punch him back, it doesn't mean we're both at the wrong. He started the fight, he's the agressor, not I.

[theundeadhero]

It's amazing how much things changed in the past 60 years. Japan bombs pearl harbor and it's all like, let's go kick the crap outta those guys. Now, terrorist bomb us and were really mean because we fight back. It's the same situation. The only difference is that England isn't fighting this war aside from sending some support troops. Heck, S. Korea sent more troops to help than England if I remember right.

[Loony BoB]

It's amazing how much things changed in the past 60 years. Japan bombs pearl harbor and it's all like, let's go kick the crap outta those guys. Now, terrorist bomb us and were really mean because we fight back. It's the same situation. The only difference is that England isn't fighting this war aside from sending some support troops. Heck, S. Korea sent more troops to help than England if I remember right.

So what? We haven't yet been touched by the terrorists. If you want to target nations, go target every single other nation in the world. The UK never had to send troops in the first place. The British troops are also sharing armour because the MOD had a server bugger up at some point. A lot of British soldiers have died because they didn't have adequate armour. If they sent more troops over, it'd be suicide.

How the hell you can say that England isn't fighting the war because "they're only sending troops" is beyond me. I don't like that the UK is getting involved but they are. They're sending the Black Watch, a group which is possibly going to be dispanded, right into the "triangle of death" (or something like that) to cover for US troops. Imagine that scenario - you've lived in the army for years and have been told that your regiment (or whatever) is likely to be dispanded soon. But first they're going to send you to an area where it's highly likely that some of you are going to end up losing your life. Have fun!

The UK has been in co-op with the US for all areas of the war, including intelligence, troop supply and vehicle supply, amongst other things. What made you think they aren't fighting the war? Oh, and sending troops is fighting the war, by the way. "Besides sending troops" - oh, gee. Because, you know, troops are nothing. Who needs troops? We'll do it with... uh... foxes. Yes, we haven't supplied the US with foxes yet (well, not to my knowledge). Maybe if we supply foxes instead of troops and intelligence then we'll be considered as fighting a war. Troops are the last thing that you'd expect to see in a war, after all.

The thing that has changed over the past 60 years is the media and how people react to genocide. Do you think that the US would get away with using a nuke against Iraq even if it did start the war? Or any other nation for that matter. Using nukes is genocide. 60 years ago, the US got away with genocide, as did every other country at that point and earlier. Now the media capture everything and if you use a nuke then people know the consequences and they'll show them to the world in the most gruesome way possible. That's war. That's the media. That's the difference. If Jimmy Bob Jenkins kills a seven year old kid while aiming for a 30 year old person that he thought was a terrorist but was actually one of his own men - could happen - then 60 years ago the world wouldn't give a crap. Today they do. Every corpse counts. Injuries even count.

[Polaris]

My English Teacher call me 'Terrorist'....

[[c]]

point 1) to the gtovernment..troops are troops...jsut fodder to feed the flame for a while....the big stuff is what they use to acutlaly win the war..bomb, bombs, and more bombs, and even if america did drop the bomb...how many americans would give a anyways...to them it would be "kill all the people you want, but doin';t kill me"...stop acting liek they actually care for people..please, that's what makes them who they are...

point 2) media-- 99% lie - 1% propaganda...

point 3) don't complaine about a war that you arn't fighting in..and that really has no effect on you at all

(i was already mad ight now...so it seems harsh, but the basic point is clear)

[theundeadhero]

Looney Bob the point of me mentioning Europe in my thread was that if the terrorist would have attacked England along with the US then English people wouldn't hate us for fighting this war. They would be able to justify it the same way we do. I didn't mean they don't support the US troops, I meant they aren't a major country in the war. Sorry you misunderstood. I consider S Korea a major country in this war by comparing the amount of troops they sent vs. the total size of thier military.

point 3) don't complaine about a war that you arn't fighting in..and that really has no effect on you at all

I've already spent a year overseas and will be leaving again for another year in January.