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 >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:09:14 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

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


Hint: Its not random.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Slavehandsome)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:09:54 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline 		har de har, I put money on you being a twat
thanks you just got me forty bucks:)
MUWAH

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:16:40 PM   
SternSkipper


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome
The Democrats got us into Libya.

Nato got you into libya

Obviously not, Slavehandsome is right. They had started bombing Libya almost 2 weeks before they shielded themselves behind NATO.


Hey Antipasto... we should fix you up with the guy with the shoe stuck in his neck, I mean since non of the women here will wipe their asses with you... Tell me Do you still have to defect to leave your country?



_____________________________

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




Tinfoilers Swallow


(in reply to Antikapitalista)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:20:04 PM   
SternSkipper


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


Now Aggressive Terrorist Organization?


It actually stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organization ... and for decades, it existed almost entirely for the purpose of turning your country and all those around it to ash... back when you guys were 'the bad guys'


_____________________________

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




Tinfoilers Swallow


(in reply to Antikapitalista)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:22:21 PM   
SternSkipper


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

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


"hard to understand" doesn't translate to stupidity, random or otherwise


_____________________________

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




Tinfoilers Swallow


(in reply to Slavehandsome)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:24:16 PM   
SternSkipper


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

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

Hint: Its not random.


Shit... by page three I would think you two would be strolling down memory lane chatting about your days as birthers


_____________________________

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




Tinfoilers Swallow


(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:29:02 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

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.


This.

There really isn't much difference between a terrorist organization and a "standing army".  Think of it this way, if the colonists had lost the Revolutionary War, every one of them who had fought the British army would have been considered not only a terrorist but treasonous as well.  I read somewhere once that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.  We saw that in Afghanistan--they were first freedom fighters backed by the US against the Soviets and now they are terrorists, largely because of US foreign policy.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:44:20 PM   
StrangerThan


Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

So how is losing someone to war different from losing someone to terrorism?


If for nothing else, the victims. People who go to war for the most part, choose, or at least chose at some point, to enter the military. Even if you enlist during peace time, you're trained and exist to conduct war. You may do other things, but you either go to war or support those who do.

Terrorism victims have no such choice. They range in age from the youngest to the oldest. Some have lived full lives. Some haven't even started. Families are rent apart. 

There is no comparison.


_____________________________


--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain

(in reply to Slavehandsome)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 7:55:33 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

So how is losing someone to war different from losing someone to terrorism?


If for nothing else, the victims. People who go to war for the most part, choose, or at least chose at some point, to enter the military. Even if you enlist during peace time, you're trained and exist to conduct war. You may do other things, but you either go to war or support those who do.

Terrorism victims have no such choice. They range in age from the youngest to the oldest. Some have lived full lives. Some haven't even started. Families are rent apart. 

There is no comparison.



Except that bombs launched by droid aircraft into heavily (or even not-so-heavily) populated civilian areas don't distinguish between military and civilian victims.  If your comparison were anywhere near true, there wouldn't be "collateral damage" in war--which is exactly what the USA military has been calling all the civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 8:18:44 PM   
StrangerThan


Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

So how is losing someone to war different from losing someone to terrorism?


If for nothing else, the victims. People who go to war for the most part, choose, or at least chose at some point, to enter the military. Even if you enlist during peace time, you're trained and exist to conduct war. You may do other things, but you either go to war or support those who do.

Terrorism victims have no such choice. They range in age from the youngest to the oldest. Some have lived full lives. Some haven't even started. Families are rent apart. 

There is no comparison.



Except that bombs launched by droid aircraft into heavily (or even not-so-heavily) populated civilian areas don't distinguish between military and civilian victims.  If your comparison were anywhere near true, there wouldn't be "collateral damage" in war--which is exactly what the USA military has been calling all the civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.



There's always collateral damage, especially when those conduct war hide among civilians. To my knowledge, no war has ever been fought that didn't induce innocent deaths. Then again, if you're a fighter, who is putting your family more at risk? The drone you worry about, or you for going home after the fighting?

What you're implying is that the military intentionally targets innocent civilians, and while I'm sure someone can dig up a case where it happened, that is by far not the case. Terrorists do.


_____________________________


--'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform' - Mark Twain

(in reply to erieangel)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 8:22:45 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome

So how is losing someone to war different from losing someone to terrorism?


If for nothing else, the victims. People who go to war for the most part, choose, or at least chose at some point, to enter the military. Even if you enlist during peace time, you're trained and exist to conduct war. You may do other things, but you either go to war or support those who do.

Terrorism victims have no such choice. They range in age from the youngest to the oldest. Some have lived full lives. Some haven't even started. Families are rent apart. 

There is no comparison.



Except that bombs launched by droid aircraft into heavily (or even not-so-heavily) populated civilian areas don't distinguish between military and civilian victims.  If your comparison were anywhere near true, there wouldn't be "collateral damage" in war--which is exactly what the USA military has been calling all the civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.



There's always collateral damage, especially when those conduct war hide among civilians. To my knowledge, no war has ever been fought that didn't induce innocent deaths. Then again, if you're a fighter, who is putting your family more at risk? The drone you worry about, or you for going home after the fighting?

What you're implying is that the military intentionally targets innocent civilians, and while I'm sure someone can dig up a case where it happened, that is by far not the case. Terrorists do.



It goes further than that. A declared war by a government has the tacit approval of at least a good portion of its citizens.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 8:47:42 PM   
SternSkipper


Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline 		Since this is such a leaker of a thread I have no issues with a brief distraction there are significant updates being added to the wall street occupation 

_____________________________

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




Tinfoilers Swallow


(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 9:32:38 PM   
Fightdirecto


Posts: 1101
Joined: 8/3/2004
Status: offline 		What actually constitutes "terrorism"?

When I was a little kid, I was watching an old World War II movies with my parents. In the film "So Proudly We Hail" an American Army nurse (played by actress Veronica Lake) pretends to be surrendering to a group of Japanese soldiers and, when she gets close to them, she pulls the pins on two hand grenades hidden under her shirt and blows both herself and the soldiers up. In the film, she is hailed for her heroic act. (Clip of Veronica Lake's character being "Heroic") I remember asking my Dad wethere she really was a "hero" - and he had trouble answering me.

A few years ago, when Iraqi and Afghani "suicide bombers" were blowing American and NATO soldiers and themselves up in Iraq and Afghanistan, that old film was re-played on cable TV and it started to make me wonder all over again about what is "terrorism" and what is a "heroic act against an invader".

And I can't come up with a clear answer.

_____________________________

"I swore never to be silent whenever and wherever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.””
- Ellie Wiesel

(in reply to Antikapitalista)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 9:43:45 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline 		It all depends upon your POV, FD.  To those carrying the suicide bombs, it is an heroic act; to those targeted by such, it is an act of terrorism.  As I said above, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

(in reply to Fightdirecto)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 9:47:28 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
quote:

What you're implying is that the military intentionally targets innocent civilians, and while I'm sure someone can dig up a case where it happened, that is by far not the case. Terrorists do.



I'm not implying that.  I am saying it out right.  When the war in Iraq started, the US bombed Baghdad, a heavily populated city of civilians.  Face it, the USofA is responsible for far more civilian deaths than those men who flew the planes into the WTC, the Pentagon and into a field south of me in PA.

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 9:54:14 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline 		A lot of people seem to confuse the issue, perhaps for political reasons. For myself, I see terrorism as distinct from paramilitary activity. Terrorism focuses almost exclusively on soft targets, typically civilians or civilian infrastructure to further political goals. There is a strong psychological dimension by hitting the more vulnerable targets in a given society.

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 10:23:50 PM   
tweakabelle


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

What you're implying is that the military intentionally targets innocent civilians, and while I'm sure someone can dig up a case where it happened, that is by far not the case. Terrorists do.


There are numerous well known examples of Govt forces deliberately targetting civilians. The bombings of Tokyo and Dresden are two. Nixon/Kissinger's carpet bombings in Vietnam and Cambodia clearly qualify. The ruthless tactics employed by the Sri Lankan Govt in its (conventional) war with the Tamils is a more recent example. There are many many more.

There are also many instances where armies fail to differentiate between civilians and military forces/objectives. There are also many occasions where armies deliberately choose tactics that will inevitably result in civilian fatalities when other (less lethal to civilians) options are available to them. Firing artillery into a civilian area as part of a counter-insurgency/terrorist campaign is one example of this.

So, any suggestion that conventional military forces are innocent in this area is questionable. On some occasions they are, on others they aren't. The distinctions here may not be as clear cut as your post suggests.

In the law I live under, intent vs effect in homicides is the difference between murder and manslaughter. They are clearly different matters. But both are crimes.




< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 9/26/2011 10:28:37 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 10:46:13 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

To those carrying the suicide bombs, it is an heroic act; to those targeted by such, it is an act of terrorism.  As I said above, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.



Only in the fallacious world of moral equivalency.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to erieangel)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 11:09:09 PM   
tweakabelle


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

ORIGINAL: erieangel

It all depends upon your POV, FD.  To those carrying the suicide bombs, it is an heroic act; to those targeted by such, it is an act of terrorism.  As I said above, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.


It also depends on whether a 'terrorist'/freedom fighter is successful or not.

Mandela is one example of a successful 'terrorist'/freedom fighter who received a Nobel Peace Prize. Begin and Arafat both had 'terrorist'/freedom fighter histories. Sean MacBride (founder of Amnesty) was ex-IRA. That's just off the top of my head, there's probably quite a few more on the Nobel Peace Prize-winner list too ......

And then there's Osama bin Laden and his ilk who've been both too, (from the same POV) ......... Not to mention the numerous 'terrorist'/freedom fighter movements that now comprise Governments (eg South Africa's ANC, Sinn Fein/IRA, most Israeli Govts since 1949 ......)

There's an interesting discussion in wiki on the definition of 'terrorist'. About the only thing that everyone in that discussion agrees on is that it's a pejorative term. Beyond that it seems to many to be pretty meaningless.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 9/26/2011 11:14:40 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to erieangel)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? - 9/26/2011 11:16:18 PM   
lovmuffin


Posts: 3759
Joined: 9/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

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.




That's just about as fucked up as the OP


_____________________________

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Unknown

"Long hair, short hair—what's the difference once the head's blowed off." - Farmer Yassir

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Support (international) terrorism – why not? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094