Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: I defy you to disagree with this


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: I defy you to disagree with this Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 12:54:59 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

You have no idea how much I want to disagree with this post ... but I can't.

Find any great power, and examine their history in minute detail, and you will find that they had their own "war on terror."

It's the price of being a powerful nation. The only way to win it, is to not be so powerful. I honestly believe that our current leadership is using this issue to line their own pockets and those of their cohorts.

Then again, a s a history dork, one thing I have learned from all my reading, is that as bad as something may look on the surface, in the end it will turn out to actaully be ten times worse.


The problem with studying history as some sort of baseline for today, as I see it, is the dawn of the Nuclear Age --- which has largely made huge scale, world wars obsolete. I don't think anyone could rationally argue that the dollars the USA spends on defense is rationally proportionate to the threats we face.

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 1:09:33 PM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
Mercnbeth:

You gonna let those fanatics top us from the bottom like that? Sorry, but you are not only reacting, but overreacting!



I say let's just not play by their rules at all. We shall mystify them by becoming their best friends instead. Give them Palestine and withdraw support from Israel beyond what is necessary to maintain peace.

Oh, that can't happen? Why not? Oh right - the religious fanatics on our side!

Well shut my mouth...

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 1:21:27 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Give them Palestine and withdraw support from Israel beyond what is necessary to maintain peace.


Chain,
The "Great Wallenda" died trying to walk a line not as fine as the one you describe!

Thanks for the debate my friend.  

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 2:18:17 PM   
Reflectivesoul


Posts: 1777
Joined: 4/25/2006
Status: offline
Ok I have the perfect thing for all the debatee's here...
 
http://www.piratesandemperors.com/

its kinda long and a little slow at first but you have to watch the whole thing! It kinda sums up my feelings

_____________________________

ooooo..I bet THATS gonna leave a mark!!!!

Equal opportunity pisser on-er ... heh..

Gimme some crayons, I want color and I want it now DAMNIT!


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 8:08:48 PM   
DelightMachine


Posts: 652
Joined: 1/21/2006
Status: offline
I defy you to disagree with this

I know I'm not alone when I say I'm an American and I'm not afraid. I know I'm going to die. I accept that I'm going to die, no problem. I also accept the deaths of my family members, friends, innocent schoolchildren, women, old men, old women, orphans -- in fact, everyone I know and love and can imagine knowing and loving. Every damn one of them. Death is to be accepted.

Besides, chances are that even if the terrorists kill a lot of people, if there are terrorists, then the chances of them hitting me personally are pretty damn small. So let those other bastards fend for themselves. I've got a Bush-is-heartless post to write anyway.

What I do not accept and will not accept is the notion that I must live as a slave to fear for the purposes of craven, cowardly men who, in their time, pissed the bed instead of fighting an actual war, later to become powerful, using that power to line their pockets with my tax dollars. Give me liberty or give me death. Or if not death, give me a break. Take your "terror" and shove it."

Cower in fear. Believe that the world changed on 9-11-2001. Squander your life on empty rhetoric. For that matter, squander your life without cigarettes. I will continue to smoke like a demon because I refuse to live as a slave for the purposes of craven, cowardly men who think my smoking is bad for my health or for the health of people around me breathing in that second-hand smoke. Take your anti-smoking legislation and shove it.

For that matter, take your law against gravity and shove that too. I'm an American, dammit, and I'm not afraid of driving on mountain roads without guardrails. I refuse to be the slave of guardrail companies lining their pockets with my tax dollars.

For that matter, take your damn baby seats, CT scans, air bags, fire alarms and police forces.

I refuse to cower in fear. I will not let my life be ruined by mere reality.I defy you to disagree with this!!!


_____________________________

I'd rather be in
Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 8:14:06 PM   
snappykappy


Posts: 616
Joined: 3/5/2005
Status: offline
amen to that and if u don't like it i have a plane ticket to iraq for u one way

(in reply to DelightMachine)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 8:36:11 PM   
champagnewishes


Posts: 1310
Joined: 10/31/2005
From: Orange County
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: snappykappy

amen to that and if u don't like it i have a plane ticket to iraq for u one way


and welcome to the boards snappy! 

_____________________________

Nirvana cannot be described, it is only understood truly by a person who has experienced it.


(in reply to snappykappy)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:16:38 PM   
AhuraMazda


Posts: 7
Joined: 5/4/2006
Status: offline
Reply to the Topic in General:
Oh my, far too many directions to go.  War on Terror?  no, Terror is an emotion that must be fought internally,  War on those who would attempt to invoke terror and those who would support them?  GET AFTER IT!!! 
Muslims are not bad people on the general,  but there are a side to some that is just far to out there...Has anyone forgotten when we went into Bagdad and they Iraqi's tore down the statue and cheered us on?  How many have talked with soldiers returning from Iraq?  I have 6 in family two of them are my kids.  Their take? The people in general are great people, they are glad to be free of president who might Gas the entire village if he thought it suited his needs.  There are 2 types of fighting going on there now, some is the old-school that under Sadam would do whatever to rule, some are true patriots who just want to be Iraqi.  That statement doesn't make sense?  Ok a soldier told me of an Iraqi who asked "Ok, now how do I get to U.S.? "  When asked Why?  The reply was "Now we are conquered, we are American, and desire to go"   I understand the anger and fustration over both the attacks on our country and having so many soldiers over there, and the wounds, they bring home. But don't do anything like was done to the valient men who fought in 'Nam and were shamed for it.  Everyone wants to blame the current Politcal state for the condition we are in,  well you are about 65 years late, we gave up most of our control when we funded the second world war.  The IRS is the largest anti american force there is and got the power that far back.  Even the Attorney General of our country is afraid of them and that office is the one supposed to be looking out for us.  But that would be another direction.  I know we have the guns in the hands of the people at this time, and it needs to stay that way, but I much prefer our troops to keep them on the run, and dis-organized as much as possible so we don't NEED to fight outsiders on our turf.   All though we would at least fight them instead of letting them run over us.
IMHO



_____________________________

Ahura Mazda
----------------
Name is from Mythos

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:48:31 PM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
 This just a quick post before I read the rest of the responses. I absolutely agree with you and this article, Chaingang. And have felt this way since shortly after 9-11.

If it were up to me...... I’d dismantle everyone's television sets so they couldn't fall prey to such ridiculous propaganda / mind control. For those who are constantly running scared of these mythical terrorists -- Who's the culprit who keeps opening up the barn door for them to come in?



 - R

_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 10:26:30 PM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline




 
quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

I've got to agree. There is no war on terror and never has been. It is all a matter of perception. The parnoia built up in the US has only one logical explanation, it is the government wanting to keep its citizens in a state of fear so they won't question their government. It's all familiar Strausian philosophy of keeping people in their place and focused on the "American way" which means the way that supports the interests of the powerful and wealthy.



OMG!!  I'm impressed as all all hell!  Someone here -- instead posting links fron the Matt Drudge page to support their position on this phony war on terror -- has actually taken the time to read, understand/comprehend Bloom / Straussin philosophy. Almost all the important foreign policy cabinet positions were held by Staruss/ Bloom protégé’s - Bolton, Perle, Wolfowitz , Libby, Furukawa, Ledine, Rumsfeld. Hell... even Condi's mentor { Madelline Albright's father is a Strauss protégé'}

Heck.... anyone who is interested in understanding the inner-workings of the neocon thought-process, message me on the other side and I'll actually BUY the book for you. Trust me… after you read it, you’ll have a vast understanding as to why they want to project such control.



 - R






_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to meatcleaver)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 10:38:50 PM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AhuraMazda
...Has anyone forgotten when we went into Bagdad and they Iraqi's tore down the statue and cheered us on? 


Yeah, I remember that it was a staged event - just like the bullshit Jessica Lynch story.

Statue Story Links:
-------------------
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2838.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2842.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/SQ1.gif
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/SQ2.gif
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/SQ3.gif
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/images/SQ4.gif

...

The Army's internal study of the war in Iraq criticizes some efforts by its own psychological operations units, but one spur-of-the-moment effort last year produced the most memorable image of the invasion.

As the Iraqi regime was collapsing on April 9, 2003, Marines converged on Firdos Square in central Baghdad, site of an enormous statue of Saddam Hussein. It was a Marine colonel - not joyous Iraqi civilians, as was widely assumed from the TV images - who decided to topple the statue, the Army report said. And it was a quick-thinking Army psychological operations team that made it appear to be a spontaneous Iraqi undertaking.

After the colonel - who was not named in the report - selected the statue as a "target of opportunity," the psychological team used loudspeakers to encourage Iraqi civilians to assist, according to an account by a unit member.

But Marines had draped an American flag over the statue's face.

"God bless them, but we were thinking ... that this was just bad news," the member of the psychological unit said. "We didn't want to look like an occupation force, and some of the Iraqis were saying, 'No, we want an Iraqi flag!' "

Someone produced an Iraqi flag, and a sergeant in the psychological operations unit quickly replaced the American flag.

http://www.latimes.com/la-na-statue3jul03,1,7327035.story?coll=la-home-headlines
or for those without subscription:
http://atrios.blogspot.com/2004_06_27_atrios_archive.html#108885751390412719
...


Jessica Lynch Story Links:
--------------------------

"The truth about Jessica"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,956255,00.html

"Saving Private Lynch story 'flawed'"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/correspondent/3028585.stm

"Jessica Lynch Criticizes U.S. Accounts Of Her Ordeal"
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20815FA3E5D0C748CDDA80994DB404482


Gee, that was sort of easy...


_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to AhuraMazda)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 2:03:30 AM   
Kedikat


Posts: 680
Joined: 4/20/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

Since about 1090, the west has treated these people with contempt, and exploited them to their own ends.
 
I'm a patriotic American ... but to even suggest that we are lily white in this ongoing struggle, is just a position of emotion, not historical fact.

Too true. You noted earlier that you are a history nerd. I wish more people would look back further than yesterdays 24 hour news blast. I tire of trying to even discuss so many things with people who know nothing of the roots of the issue.
Why do they hate us? Religious aspects are just a convenient focal point to gather disgruntled people. The reasons go much deeper than religious differences, persecution or zealotry. Countries and peoples that have been taken apart and put back together randomly over centuries by outside powers have little else but ancient religious beliefs to rally round.
The greater powers never wanted them to have a sense of nationality, or enough calm time to grow prosperous from within.
I liken it to the spouse who is abused for years, then finally snaps. The violence of that moment was created by someone else.

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 9:01:55 AM   
Chaingang


Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline
Hey Mercnbeth:

If I understand your position correctly, you think it's better to pursue possibly unrelated wars in order to create fear of retaliation in would-be terrorists. This is in opposition to my own view that prosecuting such wars does more harm than good because it causes the numbers of those supporting radical Islam to grow. And while it seems that these might be the only two available options I think they are not - in fact, and I want to amplify on an earlier hinted at point.

Something that has been glossed over in this thread is the role and importance of Osama Bin Laden and his role in the 9-11 attacks. Without getting too deeply into the whole guilt or innocence thing let's just assume one or two things about OBL: he either did it and deserves whatever we might do to him; or he didn't do it but he might serve us as a satisfactory scapegoat. It might surprise you that I support the idea of scapegoating because I do agree its worth sending a message of warning to terrorists at large. That message needs to be: attack us and we will annihilate everything you once were.

To that end I am disappointed in Bush's seeming nonchalance on the OBL question. I think it sends the absolutely wrong message to make the guy public enemy number one and then just let him slip away. The head of OBL should be on a pike at ground zero, or something very like that. OBL should have been caught and some kind of symbolic act of desecrating his body should have been performed - something that says that we destroyed not only his body but also his soul. OBL should be our scarecrow against other terrorists - instead he seems to have walked away unharmed.

Now that's not smart. And if the failure to capture OBL fuels or incites the expensive and pointless wars that are being prosecuted for reasons of greed rather than security, then I am doubly interested in the OBL angle. We get far more bang for our buck by rounding up OBL and his gang than for anything else. But since we failed at that, it appears we are using expensive wars to "shake the trees" to see what falls out.

Just don't be too surprised if wars create a mood of retaliation in the "enemy." I mean, how could it be otherwise? This is now the Hatfields v the McCoys writ large. And again, in the game of blood feud among nations its simply better not to play.

The world of Islam would gladly have sacrificed OBL to us knowing that we wouldn't do anything else unless provoked. But now they aren't sure what we might do since we are acting the thug through these twin wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

And this while the U.S. supports an Israel with nukes and turns a blind eye to Israel's expansionist ways. Now why does this make me think of someone poking a stick at a nest of hornets? C'mon! Of course we do this because we have crazed religious people on our side that think there is some kind of bizarro Israeli manifest destiny at work in scripture.

So what makes me crazy is that we could have gone after OBL with clean hands and the whole world would have let it happen. Instead we are doing all kinds of weird things that send very mixed and garbled messages to the world at large.

To me that's just idiocy.



_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to Kedikat)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 11:30:58 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
Chain,
I'll apologize before starting that I'm a bit distracted today. Today's my last day in the office before a 10 day trip to the east coast for my son's graduation and to visit family. Therefore I may ramble even more than usual.

quote:

If I understand your position correctly, you think it's better to pursue possibly unrelated wars in order to create fear of retaliation in would-be terrorists. This is in opposition to my own view that prosecuting such wars does more harm than good because it causes the numbers of those supporting radical Islam to grow. And while it seems that these might be the only two available options I think they are not - in fact, and I want to amplify on an earlier hinted at point.


No. I actually think that President Bush #1's program of hit and run after Kuwait, was in the long term a better program. I didn't think so at the time, and didn't think so when we had to go back under President Bush #2; but having 20/20 hindsight I'd have let Saddam continue to maim, torture, and kill his people. Even if he was stockpiling and or acquiring WMD's. From a 2006 perspective most likely those WMD's would have been used first on Iran. Iran is only able to saber rattle because they no longer have their next door neighbor as a blood enemy.

Of course the gap of attention to the region under President Clinton didn't help matters. But who can be bothered with international politics and Muslim terrorists while getting a blow job? Ironically a man who so worshiped JFK wasted his opportunity by living up to the JFK's private life persona. His problem was in 1990's the media no longer turned a blind eye as it did in 1960. Also, Marilyn Monroe versus Monica Lewinsky???? That's the most embarrassing part of his legacy! JFK would have bypassed Bobby and passed that one on directly to drunken brother Teddy! 

Told you I would ramble...

No, the context of pursuing ongoing hostilities in Iraq, or any other 'war' was only because I think that, on some level, the Muslim terrorists must allocate some of their resources to disrupt our attempt at instilling democracy to a people who don't know what democracy is or see it's value. Any resource used there can not be used against the US. A VERY weak argument and not one I'd use as a cornerstone to staying in Iraq. Your point of nurturing a more hostile attitude toward the US is something I'd agree. But the reason is, anything bad the US does is on the front pages; any good a US solder is never deemed worthy of an ounce of newsprint, or an inch of video tape.

OBL has become a caricature. People's image of him is more like the one portrayed on South Park than any CIA profile. He's the 'poster child' of 9/11. He provides a great distraction for the reality that it's not OBL, but the Muslim leaders and clerics NOT hiding in a cave that are responsible for the hatred of the US and the West. Both sides have an agenda for keeping him, if not his legend, alive. You want to see the Muslim's for what they are, look up what is happening in the Sudan. The world conference of Muslim States, and the Arab league support the ongoing genocide. Very little ink and or video is spent on that subject.

Frankly, my concern with the US is more focused on the invasion that President Bush seems to be soliciting. Lately I've been educating myself regarding a plan to create a Western equivalent of the European Union, encompassing Mexico, Canada, and the US. There have been a few political balloons floated about it and there were some 'leaks' regarding one currency. The illegal immigration issue is the first step - stay tuned. I don't know yet if my research will lead to or require an aluminum hat; but there is some interesting information out there.

(in reply to Chaingang)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 12:59:24 PM   
Kedikat


Posts: 680
Joined: 4/20/2006
Status: offline
I remember back in the 70's I think it was. Waves of highjackings, kidnappings, some bombings here and there ( mostly Europe ). Bader Meinhoff, Red Brigade and others.....
The effective methods to control those groups and quiet things down was undercover work, international cooperation and info exchange by various police and security agencies.
Few politicians ran on fear platforms about it. Lots of key nutjobs were nabbed or eliminated. Things calmed down for a while.
While those groups were different in scope and membership. The tactics worked.
Stealth and brains to find and target the terrorists. Not aerial bombing raids on suspected areas. Giant army bases. And pissing off millions of people by taking over their country.
It makes for poor campaign slogans and news clips. But works well.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 2:05:25 PM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
A lot of the money that funded the IRA's terrorist campaign in Britain was US money and much of that money bought arms from Libya. The US gave sanctuary to IRA terrorist suspects because they were deemed political activists.

According to your logic in fighting terrorism, Britain (if it was at all possible) had the right to blitz the USA, Libya and Ireland. Even if it was possible, it would have proved dumb and counter productive and would have more likely to have made the terrorism worse by recruiting new members of the IRA. It still took thirty years until IRA members couldn't go to the toilet without the security services knowing but it didn't cost all the innocent lives indiscriminate bombing would have cost.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 6/7/2006 2:36:24 PM >

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 3:07:11 PM   
NastyDaddy


Posts: 957
Joined: 9/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kedikat
I remember back in the 70's I think it was. Waves of highjackings, kidnappings, some bombings here and there ( mostly Europe ). Bader Meinhoff, Red Brigade and others.....
The effective methods to control those groups and quiet things down was undercover work, international cooperation and info exchange by various police and security agencies.

In the 80's the former West German Polizei had a very simple and direct method of dealing with terrorists. They published a Top 25 list with pictures to each Polizei office. Upon visual recognition, anyone on that list was shot and killed, no questions asked. As the terrorists were killed their picture had a red X drawn over it. The Top 25 terrorist list was updated regularly.  This same philosophy may be in use still today, I do not know... but it was pretty damned effective, despite the occaisional screw up.

I was driving a car in Germany, a red Opal Record with friends headed for a concert in Ludwigshafen. As we drove down the autobahn passing bota bags and Jagermeister, a green and white Polizei BMW pulled alongside my Opal... pacing me. I looked over and saw an Uzzi pointed at me by the right seat cop... then he waved to the driver to go on and they hauled ass. We stopped at a rastplatz to take a leak and after getting back on the autobahn we passed a red Opal Record laying on it's side and Polizei cars/motorcycles everywhere about 15km up the autobahn. The red Opal had bullet holes all over it, and was driven by a Top 25 list Bader-Meinhoff terrorist, who was shot and killed, along with his 19 year old female passenger.

I can honestly say I am glad those Polizei in the Beamer with Uzzi's didn't shoot first and think later. Apparently they were advised the terrorist was in the area and had been seen driving a red Opal Record.


(in reply to Kedikat)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 7:17:52 PM   
Sheikh


Posts: 32
Joined: 6/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PhoenixLM
Secondly the terrosist will keep coming this is not Bushes fault, it is not the fault of Former President Carter (remeber Iran?) or any president in between. It is the fault of the Jhiad, and tyrants such as Sadom.


What nonsense thou doth prattle! The invasion of the American embassy in Tehran was assisted by the CIA, who were trying to regain the influence they had lost with the overthrow of Reza Shah. Have you forgotten so soon that Colonel North sold or supplied them wirh arms and that, almost as soon as President Hopalong was elected, the hostages were freed under a secret deal the Republicans had cooked up?

The Taliban and Al Queda were also partly the creation of America, as they supplied the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan with weapons to fight and defeat the Soviet Union. Once the "Evil Empire" was toppled, the foreign fighters in Afghanistan started to look for other targets and, as the aid from America had ceased and as their crackpot version of "radical Islam" was gaining favour due to the repressive tactics of Israel to the Palestinian people, they had little difficulty in declaring a jihad against American Imperialism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhoenixLM

From that article I feel the author wants us to stop fighting and stop defending ourselves and become the sheep the terrorist wish we were.



Phooey. You cannot stop terrorism by armed conflict any more than you could stop a forest fire with a feather duster.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhoenixLM

My Opinion But I will not lay my life down by doing nothing to prevent terrorist.


But that is exactly what the Bush administration is doing; they are doing nothing to reduce recruitment by the terrorist organisations or to prevent the incursion of insurgents into Iraq from neighbouring countries. Nor are they doing much - if anything - to prevent the supply of weapons and bomb-making supplies from Iran. All Bush cares about is that Iran does not develop nuclear weapons which, if that was even planned by Iran, would still be years in the future. Bush seems not to perceive the present threat posed by the Iranian theocracy and generally gives the impression he has his head up his ass.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhoenixLM
The brave man and women who risk thier lives to protect your freedoms and your freedom to disrespect them and thier choices, do not disrespect you they protect you the same as they do me and I thank them.


Whilst paying due respect and homage to the bravery of the coalitiion forces in Iraq, it must nevertheless be stated that they are doing precisely nothing to keep America safe from terrorism. Indeed, until the overthrow of Saddam's murderous regime, there were no terrorists or Al Queda people operating from within Iraq, but now there are. Exactly how is that progress and exactly how is America made safer by becoming despised by more people?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhoenixLM

The American people are strong and will continue to be strong as long as we pull together to accomplish goals, wiping out attackers of things such as 911, the British Rail and bus bombings as well as other countries who have been terrorized BUT WE MUST STAND TOGETHER, we can not continue this political war on our own soil...

Nuff Said


Do you also write the piffle spoken by Bush?

The terror attacks of 7/7 in London were not carried by Afghanis, Iraqis, Iranians or, indeed, any other foreign nationals. All the bombers were born in the UK. They may have been indoctrinated abroad or by people from other countries, but it is more than slightly impossible to prevent the free flow of information in a democracy.

It is also impossible to "wipe out the attackers", as the threat comes as much (or more) from naturalised or second (or third) generation immigrants who have been angered by the actions of America or Britain and who have been persuaded by propaganda claiming that the west has embarked on a war against Islam. What would you do: round them all up, make America into a police state, ask anyone you think might be a suspect whether they are now, or have ever been, a Moslem?

And if you do that, what has happened to the concept of religious freedom on which America was founded?

Ben Franklin stated that he who would surrender some of his personal liberty in exchange for some temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety. I would say that he had a much better understanding of the issues involved than the dry drunkard in the Whitehouse.

(in reply to PhoenixLM)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 7:34:51 PM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: NastyDaddy

In the 80's the former West German Polizei had a very simple and direct method of dealing with terrorists. They published a Top 25 list with pictures to each Polizei office. Upon visual recognition, anyone on that list was shot and killed, no questions asked. As the terrorists were killed their picture had a red X drawn over it. The Top 25 terrorist list was updated regularly.  This same philosophy may be in use still today, I do not know... but it was pretty damned effective, despite the occaisional screw up.

I was driving a car in Germany, a red Opal Record with friends headed for a concert in Ludwigshafen. As we drove down the autobahn passing bota bags and Jagermeister, a green and white Polizei BMW pulled alongside my Opal... pacing me. I looked over and saw an Uzzi pointed at me by the right seat cop... then he waved to the driver to go on and they hauled ass. We stopped at a rastplatz to take a leak and after getting back on the autobahn we passed a red Opal Record laying on it's side and Polizei cars/motorcycles everywhere about 15km up the autobahn. The red Opal had bullet holes all over it, and was driven by a Top 25 list Bader-Meinhoff terrorist, who was shot and killed, along with his 19 year old female passenger.

I can honestly say I am glad those Polizei in the Beamer with Uzzi's didn't shoot first and think later. Apparently they were advised the terrorist was in the area and had been seen driving a red Opal Record.




Wow, now that's a hell of a story.

(in reply to NastyDaddy)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/7/2006 7:39:18 PM   
Sheikh


Posts: 32
Joined: 6/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel

Also, I happen to agree in the sense that every major civilization has had its "barbarians at the gate."  I think, however, it's essential to keep their numbers down, or to keep them otherwise occupied.  Blowing them up when the chance presents itself seems to be a good option to me. 



When America last (genuinely) faced its "barbarians at the gate", those hostile forces took the form of Senator McCarthy and his evil witch-hunt against anyone he or his committee deemed to be a communist or a 'fellow traveller'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel

Ahem, meatcleaver?  The difference between Washington's Army, and terrorists, is their choice of weapons.  Washington's forces in the field fought, and took land, fighting in a a then unconventional (sometimes!) manner.  A terrorist, by its nature, uses violence to inflict terror, to in turn, use that terror to gain influence and control.

Basically Washington's approach was "haha, we broke your Army.  You can go home now."  If he'd sent agents to blow up targets in England, with the implicit threat of doing it until the English left the colonies, then you'd have a much better case.  (You might be able to make a successful argument that some of the state militias used some terrorist like tactics at time, or that American privateers used terror as a weapon at times, but that still falls short of making Washington into a terrorist).



I tend to agree: it was a bad choice.

How about the support and succour that was, until quite recently, given by America to the IRA? There is some evidence that money raised by NorAid was used (or diverted) to buy guns or ammunition, whilst it is a matter of recorded fact that some IRA fugitives from justice were not extradited from America to Britain because they claimed they would be 'political prisoners'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pavel
And on a few parting shots.  I for one, am sick of us declareing war on things that aren't nation-states.  Wars on drugs, poverty, terrorism, sock monkeys, whatever.  It's just a cliche to make it seem like "somthing" is being done about an issue.


I wonder if Bush will soon declare war on hurricanes? They cause more damage to mainland America than terrorism ever did.


(in reply to Pavel)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: I defy you to disagree with this Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
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

0.125