RE: Support (international) terrorism

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:09:26 PM

Rule

Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Antikapitalista
So, why is there so much moral panic and fear-mongering about terrorism?!

More specifically: why is war celebrated and terrorism is condemned?

I hate litter terrorists and noise terrorists. So I am opposed to terrorists. I do hope that some psychopath murders five per cent of my neighbors. (I will applaud such a benevolent act softly.)

(in reply to Antikapitalista)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:09:51 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

Try come back when you have a clue about celebrating war and celebrating terrorism.

pathetic, both of you...try looking outside your little comfort zone, before 9/11 before iraq, before libya, before your balls dropped
EOS

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Antikapitalista)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:12:41 PM

Antikapitalista

Posts: 15
Joined: 9/22/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

You are a loathsome and repellent excuse for a human being. Terrorism does not save lives and does not prevent war. It is a cowards way of waging war against an enemy he cannot defeat with ideas or arms.

Haha... you see, my idea of a hero is much closer to the pilot of an airliner who crashes it into the WTC than to operator of an unmanned drone hiding in the safety of a bunker on the other side of the Earth and pulling the trigger and bombing from there, really.

_____________________________

Thucydides: "There will be justice in Athens when those who are not injured are as outraged as those who are."

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon: "Property is robbery!"

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:13:54 PM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

Another day another sockpuppet.

(in reply to Antikapitalista)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:13:56 PM

Slavehandsome

Posts: 382
Joined: 9/19/2004
Status: offline

What about financial terrorists? We should give them a bailout right?

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:14:27 PM

Rule

Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

No planes have crashed into the WTC.

(in reply to Antikapitalista)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:16:43 PM

Rule

Posts: 10479
Joined: 12/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
Another day another sockpuppet.

Perhaps they are both sock-puppets? But whose?

(in reply to Politesub53)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:16:45 PM

isoLadyOwner

Posts: 221
Joined: 4/22/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

The Democrats got us into Libya.

Nato got you into libya

Obama got the USA into Libya.

Obama twisted a UN resolution "authorizing" the "protection of civilians" into "kinetic action" aggressively seeking regime change in Libya on behalf of islamists.

Authorizing something is not mandating it.

Obama chose to put the USA on the path of war in Libya and used the UN and NATO for cover. France and the UK didn't have the power to force Obama into the Libyan debacle either.

Here's a link to what was approved by the UN:

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm

...Demanding an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute “crimes against humanity”, the Security Council this evening imposed a ban on all flights in the country’s airspace — a no-fly zone — and tightened sanctions on the Qadhafi regime and its supporters.

Adopting resolution 1973 (2011) by a vote of 10 in favour to none against, with 5 abstentions (Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation), the Council authorized Member States, acting nationally or through regional organizations or arrangements, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory — requesting them to immediately inform the Secretary-General of such measures...

The UN's language does not require Obama to enable Libyan "ex rebels" to impose sharia law and slaughter sub Saharan African day laborers.

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:17:34 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Another day another sockpuppet.

where is random stupidity when you need it

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Politesub53)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:20:29 PM

Slavehandsome

Posts: 382
Joined: 9/19/2004
Status: offline

When I need random stupidity, I find it in Lucy's posts.

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:21:24 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

I didnt realise obama had any power over anyone imposing sharia law...its strange all these things are able to be done by the messiah...did he make you constipated today?
blame him for everything go ahead, it might give you back your verbal diarrhea

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 31

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:22:54 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

When I need random stupidity, I find it in Lucy's posts.

aww so cute, there there, you nearly made a funny.
but massive fail because you dont have the abilities needed to insult me sweetcheeks

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Slavehandsome)

Profile

Post #: 32

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:25:45 PM

Slavehandsome

Posts: 382
Joined: 9/19/2004
Status: offline

So how is it different losing someone to war versus losing someone to terrorism versus an accident?

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 33

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:26:22 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

five year olds cant join an army

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Slavehandsome)

Profile

Post #: 34

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:33:20 PM

Slavehandsome

Posts: 382
Joined: 9/19/2004
Status: offline

Just curious, would you call Hitler's organized army 'a terrorist organization'? What about the Soviets, the British?

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 35

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 4:52:08 PM

Antikapitalista

Posts: 15
Joined: 9/22/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: isoLadyOwner
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2011/sc10200.doc.htm

...Demanding an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians, which it said might constitute “crimes against humanity”, the Security Council this evening imposed a ban on all flights in the country’s airspace — a no-fly zone — and tightened sanctions on the Qadhafi regime and its supporters.

Exactly!
They have been violating the provisions of the U.N.S.C. resolution 1973 since Day 1, and with sky-high arrogance at that.
It is actually a huge shame for the United Nations, the supreme international crime (aggression) still cannot be prosecuted, and this case shows the savage state of things into which the international law(lessness) has devolved.
As one columnist in the Russian Pravda aptly put it: "International law is just something to throw in the other guy's face when you aren't wiping your feet on it."

Resolutions of the U. N. Security Council worth are worth less than used toilet paper and completely irrelevant, this has been the situation ever since the end of the Cold War.
Note that the number of resolutions passed during the last 15 years is roughly the same as during all those 50 years of its previous existence.

(BTW, it wasn't so much Obama as Hillary Klingon who actually pushed for it the strongest, it seems.)

_____________________________

Thucydides: "There will be justice in Athens when those who are not injured are as outraged as those who are."

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon: "Property is robbery!"

(in reply to isoLadyOwner)

Profile

Post #: 36

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 5:46:09 PM

servantforuse

Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline

Terrorists are cowards. They have no problem targeting innocent people, children included.

(in reply to Antikapitalista)

Profile

Post #: 37

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 5:51:12 PM

tweakabelle

Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline

I don't see much difference between a terrorist planting a bomb and an air force pilot dropping bombs on civilian areas from a height, or, say, the IDF firing artillery into Gaza. Just because someone wears a uniform doesn't mean they're not a terrorist.

But that doesn't make terrorism right. In my book they're ALL wrong. About as wrong as a person can be.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 9/26/2011 5:58:05 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Antikapitalista)

Profile

Post #: 38

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 6:05:09 PM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

I wonder why there is so much moral panic about terrorism...
I do support terrorism, especially international terrorism (while somehow condemning domestic terrorism), purely on humanitarian grounds.
The logic is simple: terrorism greatly saves human lives and property, while still being able to achieve the same political goals as war.

So, why is there so much moral panic and fear-mongering about terrorism?!

More specifically: why is war celebrated and terrorism is condemned?

Aren't you special.. Congrats as to your first and failed attempt at socialization.

_____________________________

Looking forward to The Dead Singing The National Anthem At The World Series.

Tinfoilers Swallow

(in reply to Antikapitalista)

Profile

Post #: 39

RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 6:17:30 PM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

I think ISO had a sock day, hes the only one to have responded to what it wanted, it kinda fell flat really... bit embarrassed for them to be honest

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to SternSkipper)

Profile

Post #: 40