- Joined
- 28 Dec 2001
- Messages
- 1,087
A good post there mbunny, plenty to talk about.
I'll go through backwards if I may.
Hopefully I can lay the 9/11 analogy to rest as still I feel I'm being mis-interpreted. I made this analogy to pose the question what does it take to stir a pacifist to action? When do losses become unacceptable and action necessary? I believe this question has been answered. If I posed the question in a confusing way then I apologise.
Moving on. The thrust of your post is how do we deal with Islamic terrorism?
You may be right. We may be untactful and selfish in our dealings with the world. Armed conflict certainly will enrage them.
However I again point out that 9/11 occurred before the US took to arms. So I don't think doing nothing is the right thing to do.
Is this a justification for terrorist activity? No it's rubbish, not from you, coz I've heard this countless times before. My opinion of it is this:
Sanctions - Incurred if you're in breach of UN resolutions. Stop breaching the resolutions.
Assistance - The US & Western countries provide massive amounts of aid to the 3rd-world including Muslim countries.
OPEC countries are fabulously wealthy. Why do they not support their Arab friends more? Take out the poverty with their huge oil wealth. If the west is ignoring the East then they most definitely have the resources internally to sort this out.
Lack of Tact - Christians are persecuted around the world in Muslim countries. In Burma Chrisitianity is forbidden and Christians are frequently imprisioned, tortured and executed because of their religion. In Zimbabwe a racist dictator persecutes white farmers and is ruining his country. However we do not see Global Christian Terrorism despite many provocations.
Yes they are but unlike any other terrorist groups(s) they have chosen to wage their war on the world. Most other terrorism to date has been internal. Global problem, global solution.
The bombs dropped caused massive casualties and massive harm to future generations. This was definitely not a good thing. However a pacific war dragging itself from island to island through into 1946 and the eventual invasion of Japan by American forces would have cost even more life. The Americans had experienced the Japanese 'Samurai' culture and knew that the Japanese would literally fight to the last man, especially in their homeland. Would they have surrendered before this? No one will ever know for sure.
You are right. The circle of violence has clearly been demonstrated in Israel. Viscious and unending.
However doing nothing won't stop them. Look at your average ceasfire in Israel. Unless we are being serially misled it always ends with another bus being blown up. Then there are Israeli reprisals etc... The point here is that surely if they stopped blowing the buses and cafe's up then the circle would be broken and dialogue could start.
This seems to be the general nature of Islamic terrorsim. That there is no solution. They just hate us and that is that.
As I believe this I also believe that the only solution therefore is to meet them head on, find them and destroy them.
I would dearly like to be proven wrong.
Well I haven't , not for the Iraqi war - again that's back to the 9/11 analogy which rather confused the issue
Well we do don't we! We also vote in Tony Blair and John Prescott and all the other bunch of corrupt and self serving numpties that go long with them. It sucks. I have no answer for this.
Well actually I do... :blink:
Unfortunately this doesn't detract from the fact that other countries do the same and this includes idiots like Saddam Hussein. We still have to deal with them.
Here here!
Thanks for a good answer to my earlier post
Mubbers
I'll go through backwards if I may.
Hopefully I can lay the 9/11 analogy to rest as still I feel I'm being mis-interpreted. I made this analogy to pose the question what does it take to stir a pacifist to action? When do losses become unacceptable and action necessary? I believe this question has been answered. If I posed the question in a confusing way then I apologise.
Moving on. The thrust of your post is how do we deal with Islamic terrorism?
You may be right. We may be untactful and selfish in our dealings with the world. Armed conflict certainly will enrage them.
However I again point out that 9/11 occurred before the US took to arms. So I don't think doing nothing is the right thing to do.
The reason Islamic terrorists are pissed are because of the sanctions on most Islamic countries or lack of assistance and the lack of tact when dealing with their religion.
Is this a justification for terrorist activity? No it's rubbish, not from you, coz I've heard this countless times before. My opinion of it is this:
Sanctions - Incurred if you're in breach of UN resolutions. Stop breaching the resolutions.
Assistance - The US & Western countries provide massive amounts of aid to the 3rd-world including Muslim countries.
OPEC countries are fabulously wealthy. Why do they not support their Arab friends more? Take out the poverty with their huge oil wealth. If the west is ignoring the East then they most definitely have the resources internally to sort this out.
Lack of Tact - Christians are persecuted around the world in Muslim countries. In Burma Chrisitianity is forbidden and Christians are frequently imprisioned, tortured and executed because of their religion. In Zimbabwe a racist dictator persecutes white farmers and is ruining his country. However we do not see Global Christian Terrorism despite many provocations.
The Islamic Terrorists are a bunch of rowdy ****ers who have twisted the teachings of Islam to their own desires.
Yes they are but unlike any other terrorist groups(s) they have chosen to wage their war on the world. Most other terrorism to date has been internal. Global problem, global solution.
1945. Wait long enough and the Japanese would have surrendered. It just so happened the US were impatient. Japan was on the verge of defeat. The nukes were premature and not necessary.
The bombs dropped caused massive casualties and massive harm to future generations. This was definitely not a good thing. However a pacific war dragging itself from island to island through into 1946 and the eventual invasion of Japan by American forces would have cost even more life. The Americans had experienced the Japanese 'Samurai' culture and knew that the Japanese would literally fight to the last man, especially in their homeland. Would they have surrendered before this? No one will ever know for sure.
Again you bring up islamic terrorists. So by blowing up another Islamic state (despite what the US say, civilians WILL die) that will stop Islamic Terrorists?
Hey look... US just killed some of our brethren. Lets stop all our terrorist activities. A US led War will just merely strengthen their resolve. Violence begets Violence.
You are right. The circle of violence has clearly been demonstrated in Israel. Viscious and unending.
However doing nothing won't stop them. Look at your average ceasfire in Israel. Unless we are being serially misled it always ends with another bus being blown up. Then there are Israeli reprisals etc... The point here is that surely if they stopped blowing the buses and cafe's up then the circle would be broken and dialogue could start.
This seems to be the general nature of Islamic terrorsim. That there is no solution. They just hate us and that is that.
As I believe this I also believe that the only solution therefore is to meet them head on, find them and destroy them.
I would dearly like to be proven wrong.
Do not use terrorists links for a War. The first reason for this is. Unless a link is ACTUALLY evident then there is no smart reason for using that as a reason.
Well I haven't , not for the Iraqi war - again that's back to the 9/11 analogy which rather confused the issue
Lets start by not electing evangelistic presidents. Bill Clinton was a great president with a few blemishes (oh whoopti dooo... so he cheated on his wife... big WHOOP). Did we concentrate on his PEACE efforts? Yeah for like 3 days.
Well we do don't we! We also vote in Tony Blair and John Prescott and all the other bunch of corrupt and self serving numpties that go long with them. It sucks. I have no answer for this.
Well actually I do... :blink:
Unfortunately this doesn't detract from the fact that other countries do the same and this includes idiots like Saddam Hussein. We still have to deal with them.
Shame we couldn't have an intelligence test on our would be leaders. Could be a whole new generation of benchmarks. LeaderMark 2003.
Here here!
Thanks for a good answer to my earlier post
Mubbers