War On Terrorism Must And Can Be Won

[Psychoblues]

Every red blooded American I know agrees with this concept. In fact, every red blooded human I know agrees as well.

So? What is the definition of "TERRORISM?" Is it some abstract that is poorly defined and vaguely communicated by a leader of a powerful nation? Is it solely confined to describe actions that tend to target opposing religious beliefs? Is it actions that are interpreted as being in support of opposing commercial interests? Is it invading foriegn countries that support or not the interests of other nations? Is it attacking peoples of differing political interests? Is it attacking congregations that have differing religious beliefs? What and most importantly, WHY is there a concept that has led us to a worldwide WAR ON TERROR? And what in God's name is your definition of "TERROR?"

A genuine coalition of worldwide leaders will be necessary to put the concept of "WAR ON TERROR" to rest. The Russians certainly have their problems in Chechnya. But, they obviously do not have and have not had a problem with Iraqis. The Chinese certainly have their problems with Tibet and Tiawan. But, they aren't into the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. Come to think of it, the Russians left Afghanistan years ago and haven't been back since. The Chinese are not at war in Afghanistan or Iraq either. Then there are the German, the French, the Brazilian and the other multitudes that are not in agreement that the WAR ON TERROR should have ever been declared in the rather small and insignificant country of Iraq. Hellfire, even the Israeli's didn't fear Iraq anymore and are not volunteering support for OUR war there.

I would submit that the true perpetrators of TERROR are the unregulated and irresponsible so-called CAPITALISTS. I'm as much a CAPITALIST as anyone here, but I don't always agree with the abuses and destruction caused by industrial and commercial short sightedness but being excused as being simply "Capitalism." Jesus threw the money changers out of the Temple of God. It's time we separated the truly religious from the money changers, don't you think?

I don't mind fighting; I've earned my stripes in other wars. But what in hell are we fighting for now? Or against? I mean in Iraq and as advertised by the present administration as "worldwide?" Organized confusion? I think so.


Psychoblues

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Every red blooded American I know agrees with this concept. In fact, every red blooded human I know agrees as well.

So? What is the definition of "TERRORISM?" Is it some abstract that is poorly defined and vaguely communicated by a leader of a powerful nation? Is it solely confined to describe actions that tend to target opposing religious beliefs? Is it actions that are interpreted as being in support of opposing commercial interests? Is it invading foriegn countries that support or not the interests of other nations? Is it attacking peoples of differing political interests? Is it attacking congregations that have differing religious beliefs? What and most importantly, WHY is there a concept that has led us to a worldwide WAR ON TERROR? And what in God's name is your definition of "TERROR?"

A genuine coalition of worldwide leaders will be necessary to put the concept of "WAR ON TERROR" to rest. The Russians certainly have their problems in Chechnya. But, they obviously do not have and have not had a problem with Iraqis. The Chinese certainly have their problems with Tibet and Tiawan. But, they aren't into the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. Come to think of it, the Russians left Afghanistan years ago and haven't been back since. The Chinese are not at war in Afghanistan or Iraq either. Then there are the German, the French, the Brazilian and the other multitudes that are not in agreement that the WAR ON TERROR should have ever been declared in the rather small and insignificant country of Iraq. Hellfire, even the Israeli's didn't fear Iraq anymore and are not volunteering support for OUR war there.

I would submit that the true perpetrators of TERROR are the unregulated and irresponsible so-called CAPITALISTS. I'm as much a CAPITALIST as anyone here, but I don't always agree with the abuses and destruction caused by industrial and commercial short sightedness but being excused as being simply "Capitalism." Jesus threw the money changers out of the Temple of God. It's time we separated the truly religious from the money changers, don't you think?

I don't mind fighting; I've earned my stripes in other wars. But what in hell are we fighting for now? Or against? I mean in Iraq and as advertised by the present administration as "worldwide?" Organized confusion? I think so.


Psychoblues

China isn't into the war on terror? Yeah. That's because we're dealing with it. Europe's not into it either, because they know we'll do it. It's so easy to stand to the side and criticize the people who actually do things for the safety of the globe.

 

[dilloduck]

I think terrorism is action that results from a minority groups' inability to use the rules of law and civil comminication combined with their inabilty to realize that they aren't the only people in the world with a belief system.

Desperation and refusal to use the tools that society has developed to resolve these conflicts leads terrorists to resort to violence and fear to achieve the results they seek. They prey on the misfortunes of others and spread propaganda to recuit these people to thier cause. Their goal is to inflict their ideology on others by using death, torture and fear and are driven by selfish visions of how everyone should act. They care nothing about the individual and everything about an idea which they are unable sell to the rest of the world in a civilized manner

 

[LuvRPgrl]

TERRORISM is when ever a person makes posts full of agenda driven diatribes.

To compare what capitalism does to terrorists is like comparing cutting down trees for Christmas trees to Katrina.

One does do some destruction, but also provides many benefits. It can always use improvement, but the method to use it is peaceful means.

Katrina on the other hand does nothing useful, is destructive, indiscriminate in that it attacks defenseless women and children along with men, and virtually everyone, save the truly evil and sick and demented, are opposed to it. TERRORISM, as Hurricane Katrina will have its opponents in disagreement on how to end it, survive it, attack it, subdue it. It will also have its leeches and opportunists that will try to derive as much power, money and influence from its activities as possible.

You sir, would qualify as a terrorist by your own definition.

 

[Avatar4321]

So capitalists are terrorists now? What kind of communist propaganda are you trying to feed us?

A terrorist is any person or group of person who tries to use violence to intimidate a free people into cowering in fear.

They often are created or funded by rogue governments. In order to successfully win a war on terror you need to take out the funding. Hence why we took out the Taliban and Saddam. Its also why we are eventually going to have to do something about the Syrian and Iranian government.

If you remember the terrorists struck the Twin towers on 911. Why did they do that? Because they are a symbol of American economic strength. They are a symbol of capitalism at its finest.

A capitalist wouldn't start attacking capitalist symbols.

 

[Annie]

My definition of terrorism involves people willing to hurt, maim, kill civilians in their quest to further their political, religious, or ideological goals. This includes acts perpetrated by al Queda on 9/11 and ELF for ecoterrorism acts. It encompasses those in Iraq or Afghanistan that hit civilian targets, rather than the hardened troop locales. It includes the Palestinian hate groups that target buses, restaurants, malls, and dance clubs.

Take on the IDF or US Marines, even the Iraqi police, but NOT the civilian population.

 

[Avatar4321]

Oh, and Christ didnt kick out the money changers because they were making money. He did so because they were desecreting the Temple.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

China isn't into the war on terror? Yeah. That's because we're dealing with it. Europe's not into it either, because they know we'll do it. It's so easy to stand to the side and criticize the people who actually do things for the safety of the globe.

Its interesting how the left likes to attack President Bush's policies. They like to simplify complicated issues, such as the world wide scope of terror, then they like to complicate simply things, like, "what is a terrorist".

China has enough problems in its own backyard right now, namely N Korea.

Europe did support fully the invasion and overthrow of the Taliban. The reason SOME, actually, a small part of Europe didnt support the overthrowing of Iraq was because of some conflicting interests they had, namely, being exposed for ILLEGAL dealings with Saddam. Poland, Spain, Britian, Italy, Greece, Ireland, Denmark and others, these arent European?

Like Kathiane says, terrorism is defined by your target mostly. IF your target is non military, then you are a terrorist. Enviormentalists, jihadists, al quiada, Abu Sayff,

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Oh, and Christ didnt kick out the money changers because they were making money. He did so because they were desecreting the Temple.

oh damn avatar! Dont let a few facts get in the way here!

and good point on capitalist symbols being the target of the 9/11 TERRORISTS attacks.

 

[Psychoblues]

Excellent discussion, so far, barring a few personal digs and diatribes. I always enjoy and respect the opinions of those that call themselves part of the Republican base. You've certainly laid your understanding of complex and very dangerous political and military operations to bare in your responses to this and other threads here in USMB.

Psychoblues

 

[pegwinn]

The term "terrorism" means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant (1) targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.

The term "international terrorism" means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than one country.

The term "terrorist group" means any group practicing, or that has significant subgroups that practice, international terrorism.

The U.S. Government has employed this definition of terrorism for statistical and analytical purposes since 1983. -- Source

The assertion that capitalism is at fault, is pretty naive. Capitalism is a convienient scapegoat that amazingly enough has created more peace and prosperity than any other form of government. Terrorists are political and don't care who they kill. Most common is religious in nature as we are seeing in the middle east. There are two cures. First is to kill and continue to kill terrorists whenever possible. Second is to fix the local political system so that the terrorists decendants are incorporated into it. We are attempting to do that in Iraq. Democratization along with acknowlegement of the local religious belief is the tool of choice for now. Sometimes that solution isn't possible and we simply will continue to kill them. An example was the creation of Israel and the continuing attacks on her. Back to square one. Bait the trap, and kill them all.

 

[Psychoblues]

I don't think you intended to do so, dilloduck, but I think you have described here the general attitude of the Republicans, bar only a few of them.

I've certainly met Republicans that I admire and even wish to emulate. These days it's hard to find that kind of Republican.

Thanks for providing your expose'.


Psychoblues

I think terrorism is action that results from a minority groups' inability to use the rules of law and civil comminication combined with their inabilty to realize that they aren't the only people in the world with a belief system.

Desperation and refusal to use the tools that society has developed to resolve these conflicts leads terrorists to resort to violence and fear to achieve the results they seek. They prey on the misfortunes of others and spread propaganda to recuit these people to thier cause. Their goal is to inflict their ideology on others by using death, torture and fear and are driven by selfish visions of how everyone should act. They care nothing about the individual and everything about an idea which they are unable sell to the rest of the world in a civilized manner

 

[Hobbit]

I don't think you intended to do so, dilloduck, but I think you have described here the general attitude of the Republicans, bar only a few of them.

I've certainly met Republicans that I admire and even wish to emulate. These days it's hard to find that kind of Republican.

Thanks for providing your expose'.


Psychoblues

And I think you're nuts. You think Republicans repress minorities? It's the Republicans that show them that they can make it, too. It's the Republicans that now have the most racially diverse cabinet in the history of the country, not to mention a black woman secretary of state. It's the Democrats who have convinced the minorities that they can't possibly succeed without government help. It's the Democrats who keep the poor holed up in slums so they'll keep voting Democrat. It's the Democrats who promote cultures that are ultimately destructive to all who embrace them. So who is it that oppresses minorities? And I don't want to hear any more of that crap about how Condi and Powell aren't really black enough to count. According to the gangsta culture, anyone who so much as gets a college education isn't black enough to count.

 

[pegwinn]

I don't think you intended to do so, dilloduck, but I think you have described here the general attitude of the Republicans, bar only a few of them.

I've certainly met Republicans that I admire and even wish to emulate. These days it's hard to find that kind of Republican.

Thanks for providing your expose'.


Psychoblues

With all due respect PB you need to stop smokin something and stare at reality. Minorities are now the majority. Minorities have better access and more freedom than ever before. Personally I think that the bipartizan effort over the years to sweet talk all ethnic groups has led to an unhealthy dependence on .gov.

Just my two cents.

 

[Psychoblues]

With all due respect PB you need to stop smokin something and stare at reality. Minorities are now the majority. Minorities have better access and more freedom than ever before. Personally I think that the bipartizan effort over the years to sweet talk all ethnic groups has led to an unhealthy dependence on .gov.

Just my two cents.

I'm glad you only have two cents, pegwinn. You have only to look at the current administration and to listen to their words and to pay attention to their programs to realize that they are not comprised of typical Americans, much less minorities. I, personally, do not let token sacrifices tender my opinions.

With all due respect, pegwinn, I don't smoke anything other than cigarettes bought at my local grocery store and I stare at reality daily, weekly, monthly, yearly and on and on.

So, minorities are now the majority? How so and how are they represented in your minds eye?

Psychoblues