Can someone please tell me what 'Terrorism' is?

[MrMarbles]

So if Al-Queda had a B-52 and bomd NY with it, that would be ok. They were at war with the US, they attacked a major economic centre, trying to collapse the system, all fair targets it seems. This is what your are saying. I'm trying to show you guys how much you have in commoon with your enemies. What is the point of all this killing, retaliate? Fine. Retaliate till your blue in the face. We will see where that will get you..... You will kill off those responsible instead of to justice, and in the process kill thousands of innocents. It is in these innocents that new terrorists are born out of your acts. It is an endless cycle.

How about some source for your numbers? From all we can tell, there have been few outside of Falluja hit with missiles since the war began its holding pattern.

Look it up, or read books, or documentaries, it is everywhere.

Japan had NOT been contained. Even after the war there were elements of the army that continued to fight. After Hiroshima, the Japanese refused to capitulate, which is why there was a Nagasaki.

Isolated incidents of soldiers not told, or believe the war was over. If an Al-Queda member told you they won, would you stop fighting. It still doesn't justify killing civilians. US dropped the bombs to test, and to show off the the USSR. Japan was beat, again try looking it up yourself, but stay away from American history texts, try international ones, a little less bias.

Do you mean Iraq or Saddam?

'Stop Irag from using its WMD against us'. Irag had none, no wa.r

I assume you mean by the Nazis?

Zionist terrorists bombing british installations.

I'll assume your last question was meant, "How's is that or this right?" Most of the Palestinians killed were either terrorists or suicide bombers. At the same time, Israel continues to target the centers of bomb making activity and hidy holes of the leadership of Hamas/Hizbohollah. In the crowded conditions of the territories these 'strikes' may result in innocent civilian casualties. However, it's always difficult to say about 'innocent' since the Palestinians persist in putting children in harm's way.

No one is right. None of them. Things will only stop when they both realize the human cost to all this fighting. Fighting that has been going on forever.

We don't care all that much about the buildings. It's the 3,000 plus that died in them that makes us furious. It's the people murdered on board those airplanes that gets us stirred up. Why won't you talk about our PEOPLE that were murdered? I'll answer that - it's because you can't sanitize the blood of thousands of innocents with a few equivocating phrases. The airplanes and the buildings are ultimately inconsequential, but the people deserve to be avenged....

Ok Merlin. You got your vengance when the US toppled the Taliban. Hey, Canada help, and I supported it. Iraq has massive questions marks all around it. And when you are not totally sure of something, the last thing you should do, is go to war and start killing people. Saddam, bad guy. All out war, not right though. No WMD's, the people want you out, and death toll for US soldiers reaching 1000, why stay? They have there own gov't now. Why stay? Their future is in their hands now, why stay?

 

[dilloduck]

So if Al-Queda had a B-52 and bomd NY with it, that would be ok. They were at war with the US, they attacked a major economic centre, trying to collapse the system, all fair targets it seems. This is what your are saying. I'm trying to show you guys how much you have in commoon with your enemies. What is the point of all this killing, retaliate? Fine. Retaliate till your blue in the face. We will see where that will get you..... You will kill off those responsible instead of to justice, and in the process kill thousands of innocents. It is in these innocents that new terrorists are born out of your acts. It is an endless cycle.



Look it up, or read books, or documentaries, it is everywhere.



Isolated incidents of soldiers not told, or believe the war was over. If an Al-Queda member told you they won, would you stop fighting. It still doesn't justify killing civilians. US dropped the bombs to test, and to show off the the USSR. Japan was beat, again try looking it up yourself, but stay away from American history texts, try international ones, a little less bias.




'Stop Irag from using its WMD against us'. Irag had none, no wa.r



Zionist terrorists bombing british installations.



No one is right. None of them. Things will only stop when they both realize the human cost to all this fighting. Fighting that has been going on forever.



Ok Merlin. You got your vengance when the US toppled the Taliban. Hey, Canada help, and I supported it. Iraq has massive questions marks all around it. And when you are not totally sure of something, the last thing you should do, is go to war and start killing people. Saddam, bad guy. All out war, not right though. No WMD's, the people want you out, and death toll for US soldiers reaching 1000, why stay? They have there own gov't now. Why stay? Their future is in their hands now, why stay?

from what I understand we have to stay to protect the oil supplies and crush Islamo-facism.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

MonsieurMarbells, Islamist tyrants will always see free societies as a threat, because free societies grow and prosper and an amazing rate, and that's a good thing. They have repressed their own people back into the stone ages, and will always seek to do the same to freedom. Freedom is a threat to tyranny. The truth is an antidote to poisonous lies. My foot in your ass is may be just the solution to your intellectual dishonesty and general intractibility.

So again. You rely on your stubborn refusal to actually evaluate the general pros and cons of freedom versus tyranny to justify your idiocy.

 

[MrMarbles]

MonsieurMarbells, Islamist tyrants will always see free societies as a threat, because free societies grow and prosper and an amazing rate, and that's a good thing. They have repressed their own people back into the stone ages, and will always seek to do the same to freedom. Freedom is a threat to tyranny. The truth is an antidote to poisonous lies. My foot in your ass is may be just the solution to your intellectual dishonesty and general intractibility.

So again. You rely on your stubborn refusal to actually evaluate the general pros and cons of freedom versus tyranny to justify your idiocy.

The amazing rate of growth, tends to be on the backs of poorer peoples. America expliots and uses machiavellian tactics in the mid-east. These people are oppressed, by its by leaders who where placed and controlled by the US. Now they fight back the only way they can. America has created this problem, and the cure it is trying to shove down the worlds throat is worse then the disease. I know the pros and cons of democracy, Unfortunatley the last dinosuar of the cold war has lost it's way. Keep this up and the American Empirer is going to start to fade away, like all those before it.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The amazing rate of growth, tends to be on the backs of poorer peoples. America expliots and uses machiavellian tactics in the mid-east. These people are oppressed, by its by leaders who where placed and controlled by the US. Now they fight back the only way they can. America has created this problem, and the cure it is trying to shove down the worlds throat is worse then the disease. I know the pros and cons of democracy, Unfortunatley the last dinosuar of the cold war has lost it's way. Keep this up and the American Empirer is going to start to fade away, like all those before it.

We've supported tyrants. Yes. But we didn't insist they oppress their people. That was their mode of ruling. Who are we to say it's wrong? Right?

You need to develop a criteria along which to judge different forms of governance and start applying it to all situations. You focus on the bullets and blood. Violence is just a tool, like any other, employed by all sides. Who do you want to rule the world, a consortium of socialists, appeasing terrorists as a tool against america, apparently ignorant of the fact that all they're guaranteeing is that the islamofascists will come for them last? Or A consortium of free countries, who understand the importance of economic growth?

When did economic ignorance become a worldview? When did econ 101 become hate speech?

 

[MrMarbles]

We've supported tyrants. Yes. But we didn't insist they oppress their people. That was their mode of ruling. Who are we to say it's wrong? Right?

You need to develop a criteria along which to judge different forms of governance and start applying it to all situations. You focus on the bullets and blood. Violence is just a tool, like any other, employed by all sides. Who do you want to rule the world, a consortium of socialists, appeasing terrorists as a tool against america, apparently ignorant of the fact that all they're guaranteeing is that the islamofascists will come for them last? Or A consortium of free countries, who understand the importance of economic growth?

When did economic ignorance become a worldview? When did econ 101 become hate speech?

America is constantly telling other people what is wrong with them. Thats why it is so hypocritical. You say what is right and wrong, then proceed to do whatever the hell you want. As long as you see greenbacks, once they stop flowing, you live the place to self-implode.

Everyone should focus on the bullets and blood, only then will we beable to stop repeating history.

Violence a tool! Thats disgusting! A shovel is a tool, your hands, not violence! A statement used often by dictators when discribing how to control the masses.

A consortium of socialist would be nice. If we thought of people first, their would be no reason to exact vengenace. A support the fight against terrorism. So lets fight them, bring them to justice. Saudi Arabians made up the vast majority of those on the plane, yet you invade Iraq. Whats with that?

Economic ignorance? I'm not ignorant. I know how wealthy nations grow, and prosper. But the human price is to rich for my blood. But appearently not for the 1000 US soldiers who aren't coming home.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

America is constantly telling other people what is wrong with them. Thats why it is so hypocritical. You say what is right and wrong, then proceed to do whatever the hell you want. As long as you see greenbacks, once they stop flowing, you live the place to self-implode.

Everyone should focus on the bullets and blood, only then will we beable to stop repeating history.

Violence a tool! Thats disgusting! A shovel is a tool, your hands, not violence! A statement used often by dictators when discribing how to control the masses.

A consortium of socialist would be nice. If we thought of people first, their would be no reason to exact vengenace. A support the fight against terrorism. So lets fight them, bring them to justice. Saudi Arabians made up the vast majority of those on the plane, yet you invade Iraq. Whats with that?

Economic ignorance? I'm not ignorant. I know how wealthy nations grow, and prosper. But the human price is to rich for my blood. But appearently not for the 1000 US soldiers who aren't coming home.

Economies must grow. Because life grows. Your decision that human life should simply cease to grow is what's disgusting.

Look at france and germany; their economies are failing. In socialism, when things start to go bad, the country mobilizes against the most convenient "outgroup" because in socialism members of the "ingroup" aren't allowed to fail. Hence villification of some arbitrary group begins, jews, americans, whoever inspires the most envy. You're condemning the world to repeat past atrocities with your economic ignorance.

 

[8236]

People are being killed all around us and liberals stand there and want a definition

Yeah, and the killing occurs in numbers that reveal the war on terror to be nothing more than the red herring that it is.

 

[8236]

Amazig that anyone at all bothers to take the time to answer these
questions of yours! trying looking up what a board troll is, that may give you a good look into your own reality!

Deja vu. So, then, please do tell me what the point of the 'war on terror' thread is if nearly all the posts it contains are from a bunch of right wingers congratulating each other on what a fine job their president/government is doing fighting said war.

The whole point of my origional post was to start a debate. And I think I succeeded in doing that. You can call me a troll if you like. Then I'll call you small minded and blinkered.

Enjoy 'patrolling'

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Yeah, and the killing occurs in numbers that reveal the war on terror to be nothing more than the red herring that it is.

Could you please explain this to me. This seems to make no sense. How do the casualty numbers prove the war was a red herring?

 

[8236]

Could you please explain this to me. This seems to make no sense. How do the casualty numbers prove the war was a red herring?

OK then. How many people died (unnecessarily) of Aids on the day 9/11, and the day before, and the day after , and the day after that etc etc (the figure is of the same order of magnetude as 9/11, but, EVERY DAY). How many people die on the streets of America every year due to morons with guns or morons driving cars whilst high/over the limit. How many people die every year in the US due to small particle emissions (power stations/ engine emissions/ smoking). How many bla bla... obesity. Need I go on? All these early deaths could have been prevented.

The probability of being 'unnaturally' killed in America due to terror as opposed to any other form of 'unnatural' death approaches zero. The probability of Bush talking about an issue other than terror/homeland security also approaches: zero.

Jeez! Are you telling me you really didn't have a clue about what I was getting at? (did you read ScreamingEagle's origional post?)

 

[rtwngAvngr]

OK then. How many people died (unnecessarily) of Aids on the day 9/11, and the day before, and the day after , and the day after that etc etc (the figure is of the same order of magnetude(EVERY DAY)). How many people die on the streets of America every year due to morons with guns or morons driving cars whilst high/over the limit. How many people die every year in the US due to small particle emissions (power stations/ engine emissions/ smoking). How many bla bla... obesity. Need I go on? All these early deaths could have been prevented.

The probability of being 'unnaturally' killed in America due to terror as opposed to any other form of 'unnatural' death approaches zero. The probability of Bush talking about an issue other than terror/homeland security also approaches: zero.

Jeez! Are you telling me you really didn't have a clue about what I was getting at? (did you read ScreamingEagle's origional post?)

Your explanation is pure idiocy. So you're willing to say the probability of a terrorist attack is nearly zero because there haven't been more attacks since 9/11, so therefore the war is a red herring? That's totally retarded.

 

[8236]

Your explanation is pure idiocy. So you're willing to say the probability of a terrorist attack is nearly zero because there haven't been more attacks since 9/11, so therefore the war is a red herring? That's totally retarded.

No, your lack of understanding is pure idiocy. Bush woffles on about terror continually and has managed to get you all completely paranoid and obsessed about it, even though you are literally thousands of times more likely to fall victim to other causes of death also of mankind's making than terror. If you can't square that with the phrase 'red herring' then I give up. Go read up about Risk Assessment.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

No, your lack of understanding is pure idiocy. Bush woffles on about terror continually and has managed to get you all completely paranoid and obsessed about it, even though you are literally thousands of times more likely to fall victim to other causes of death also of mankind's making than terror. If you can't square that with the phrase 'red herring' then I give up. Go read up about Risk Assessment.

Where has bush waffled about terror? You must be thinking of Kerry.

The war on terror is real, you rube. Have you heard about 9/11? Did you think that was the main topic of a funny movie by michael moore? Now THAT was a work of fiction.

 

[Avatar4321]

Would the definition apply to the Contras, the Bay of Pigs invaders, the Mujahedeen and the IRA, the ANC, the maquis, the chechens, the russians in chechenia, the serb paramilitaries, blablabla?

Who is a terrorist? Who is a freedom fighter? I honestly don't know. I think all of them must be both.

A terrorism is one who uses terror to achieve their political purpose, which involves subjugation of a people to their whims.

A freedom fighter is one who fights against a tyranical or totalitarian regime

There are huge difference. for one Terrorists fight against free nations to bring them into bondage. Freedom fights fight against opressive regimes to bring them freedom.You cant fight against a free nation and be a freedom fighter.

Also Freedom fighters will limit their attacks on military targets to achieve their victory over the government. They care about the people, hence why they are trying to liberate them.

Terrorists dont care about the people. They will kill anyone and in fact prefer to kill innocent victims, particularly children to accomplish their goals. They are fighting for their own power.

This is why ive never understood liberals in their attempt to somehow make freedom fighters and terrorists the same. There are obvious differences. Why try to equivocate the two? Maybe im giving them too much benefit of the doubt but there is no way they can honestly say they cant see the difference.

But then if you think about the history of liberalism and terrorism, they share similar history. The beginning of both was in the French Revolution. Most muslim terrorist activities began because the Soviets taught them out to fight against Western Representative governments. They funded them etc. So i guess its not terribly surprising.

 

[8236]

Where has bush waffled about terror? You must be thinking of Kerry.

The war on terror is real, you rube. Have you heard about 9/11? Did you think that was the main topic of a funny movie by michael moore? Now THAT was a work of fiction.

Eh? I don't even live in America, yet even I know that American public opinion considers Bush far stronger on terror/homel. sec. than Kerry, which is why Bush talks about that, and is why Kerry talks about the other (real) issues facing Americans (domestic, health care, unemployment, deficit).

Another thing baffling about America at the moment is:
How can there be any issue as to which candidate is more patriotic than the other when both were born with silver spoons in their mouths, yet one volunteered (patriotically at the time, because I can't imagine Kerry had any presidential ambitions when he went to Vietnam), and the other did exactly the opposite and used his silver spoon to pull the strings to get out of doing his patriotic duty - and pulled them so hard, that he managed to get a cushy air national guard posting?
I simply do not understand this. Please explain how you can square - even, cube - this?
Could it be a case of 'he who b.s.eth loudest'? I don't believe that, because Americans are not stupid.

 

[8236]

We've supported tyrants. Yes. But we didn't insist they oppress their people. That was their mode of ruling. Who are we to say it's wrong? Right?

LLLLOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLL.

Hmmmmmm......... Isn't that how Dubya justified the Iraqvasion - get rid of the oppressive tyrant? WMDs was not an issue for Bush - that was purely cowtowing to British/UN political needs.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

LLLLOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLL.

Hmmmmmm......... Isn't that how Dubya justified the Iraqvasion - get rid of the oppressive tyrant? WMDs was not an issue for Bush - that was purely cowtowing to British/UN political needs.

It's called sarcasm. I know it doesn't work in print sometimes. My bad. You lefties criticize us when we support tyrants; you criticize when we depose tyrants. You have no core selves. You're just against whatever we do as a nation. You're intellectually bankrupt.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Eh? I don't even live in America, yet even I know that American public opinion considers Bush far stronger on terror/homel. sec. than Kerry, which is why Bush talks about that, and is why Kerry talks about the other (real) issues facing Americans (domestic, health care, unemployment, deficit).

Another thing baffling about America at the moment is:
How can there be any issue as to which candidate is more patriotic than the other when both were born with silver spoons in their mouths, yet one volunteered (patriotically at the time, because I can't imagine Kerry had any presidential ambitions when he went to Vietnam), and the other did exactly the opposite and used his silver spoon to pull the strings to get out of doing his patriotic duty - and pulled them so hard, that he managed to get a cushy air national guard posting?
I simply do not understand this. Please explain how you can square - even, cube - this?
Could it be a case of 'he who b.s.eth loudest'? I don't believe that, because Americans are not stupid.

The explanation is simple. Kerry has consistently taken positions regarding defense issues which would weaken our nation. That's unpatriotic. He's so insecure that he needs europeans to approve of him politically and culturally, so he has internalized their antiamericanism to win their praise. He's a dangerous fool. Bush will do what is good for america, and the world for that matter.

 

[MrMarbles]

But then if you think about the history of liberalism and terrorism, they share similar history. The beginning of both was in the French Revolution. Most muslim terrorist activities began because the Soviets taught them out to fight against Western Representative governments. They funded them etc. So i guess its not terribly surprising.

Osama Bin Laden was trained by America to it's bidding against the USSR. Saddam was put in place by America to it's bidding. Or Noriega. Or Pinoche. Lots of tyrannical dictator put in place to oppresse people to do America's bidding. And you wonder why people or soar at you guys.