I defy you to disagree with this

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

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 >> I defy you to disagree with this

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 6:42:27 AM

Chaingang

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

There Is No War on Terror
http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/36934

"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. 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. Take your "terror" and shove it."

_____________________________

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

Post #: 1

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 6:59:14 AM

PhoenixLM

Posts: 79
Joined: 5/12/2005
From: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Status: offline

I for one disagree with this, for starters I do not reconize the christian god "But where says some is the king of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal of Britain" holds no truth for me.

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.

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

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

This is a war on terror but the second war we are fighting is one within our own borders with people who have truly forgotten how this country became and has stayed free for over 200 years.

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

_____________________________

Phoenix
House Ds Haven
http://dshaven.com

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 2

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 6:59:58 AM

caitlyn

Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 3

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 7:00:31 AM

SirCumsSlut

Posts: 433
Joined: 4/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

There Is No War on Terror
http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/36934

"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. 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. Take your "terror" and shove it."

Cannot disagree...........slowly but surely our Constitution is being thrown to the bon fire............and Captain Danger and his puppet master's are right there with the gasoline to ignite the fire.

_____________________________

Peace
His slut

"Your firm hand and compassionate heart are what guide me in my journey....I am Yours, Sir" His slut

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 4

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 7:03:55 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

I disagree.

Living "as a slave to fear for the purposes of crave, cowardly men..." is a decision you make. Denying that there are a percentage of people using their radical interpretation of the Muslim religion to kill you isn't smart. The only society our adversary will accept is one where you wouldn't have the freedom to make a contrary statement, where woman wouldn't be permitted basic rights.

Reconcile you're position with this current story: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060605/D8I2B1TO0.html

And for those in CA and any other (?) place having primary elections today - Did you vote, or will you be staying at home and complain about the results?

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 5

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 7:05:07 AM

caitlyn

Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to PhoenixLM)

Post #: 6

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 7:22:23 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

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.

We've had terrorism for years and never had such paranoia though Blair is doing his level best to make people feel paranoid so they will accept ID cards. It's the fashion of governments at the moment.

Terrorism can be understood and fought against. Terrorism is not irrational, although individual actions make it appear irrational. Terrorists can't exist without a host population so one has to analyse why certain populations are willing to host terrorists and it is usually to do with oppression and exploitation. One man's freedom fighters are another man's terrorist. Washington to Americans was a freedom fighter, to the British he was a terrorist. There is nothing different going on in the world today that has not gone on before.

The war on terrorism if it exists at all, is a convenience for politicians and stops people asking politicians questions that should be asked.

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 7

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 7:50:04 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
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.

Until/unless a practical time machine is invented where all those who were treated with contempt can be apologized to in person, there is little that can be done in current times for them. History is important to learn. but perspective skewers the telling.

It's amazing that their are people who would site a 1090 reference as a rationalization of current behavior but take the opposite view of those who would site 9/11/01. Neither is incorrect in their historical reference, but neither is correct as a reason to justify a "war". Instead both are slogans and buzz-words to polarize. The focus should be on today.

Pragmatically their is no place for compromise on the Muslim side. I see this as a reason why eventually the west will lose. The west is too civilized and ingrained with democratic principles to consider that there is no possibility of a compromise position for a peaceful solution. On the west side there is open debate. On the Muslim side there is Dogma, religious Dogma at that. Would any of you who are devote about any religion be willing to compromise your believe just to have peace with a people? Would you allow them to go their way and practice their belief? Would you permit a society where believing at all is an option? Maybe you would - but the Muslims don't. At least not those representing themselves as the religions leaders.

It's a very basic position, uncompromising belief. Complete intolerance in any alternative view. Stoic absolute driven resolve. The west hasn't had that type of consensus since WWII. I doubt we have the ability to win in a conflict against such a foe. We live in a 'civilized' society where a person pointing out these facts by using the words and positions of the Muslim world as a prejudicial. Refer to the article I sited in the other post. Note how use of the word Muslim is avoided to consider PC rhetoric. Name calling and finger pointing is now an acceptable counter argument, but only if it originates from the left.

As long as the apologists can site 1000 year old reasons for current behavior there will be no common unified front from the civilized west. I wonder if Tibet used the same terror tactics against China, or the Christians living in Arab countries where carrying a bible is grounds for imprisonment used the same terrorist tactics in that regions we would take the same historical reference of 'understanding'.

(in reply to caitlyn)

Post #: 8

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 8:07:44 AM

Chaingang

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

Jeez Mercnbeth, give it up...

The principles you are discussing are perhaps okay in small units like your home but will simply never win over any significantly large segment of the U.S. population. I also deny that Muslims have that kind of fixed unifying vision either - they don't, they disagree among themselves also.

I mean really, what are you proposing? Fascism? Led by whom?

That's absurd!

Cower in fear. Believe that the world changed on 9-11-2001. Squander your life on empty rhetoric.

The America you are trying to envision is simply not an America worth living in or dying for.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 9

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 8:17:51 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

The west has conveniently supported dictatorships in muslim states to have access to oil supplies. Those people who have exerperienced oppression by their hated governments have identified western countries as aiding and abetting in thier oppression and drifted to extreme Islam as a way of fighting their oppression. The west is only reaping what is sowed and if we don't learn form that lesson we might as well nuke each other today.

We in the west glibly talk of democracy and liberty and pat ourselves on our backs for having civilised societies but we conveniently ignore the oppression and exploitation carried out in our name (even this day) so we can have a cheap and convenient materialist culture.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 10

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 8:37:44 AM

popeye1250

Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline

I'm not afraid at all.
There are more than 300 Million Firearms in the hands of American Citizens!
I'd be more concerned about the "un" THAN TERRORISTS.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Post #: 11

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 8:46:14 AM

MistressLorelei

Posts: 997
Joined: 11/7/2005
Status: offline

The "War on Terror" is a ridiculous concept. How can one win a war against the emotions of many... and how can one rid the world of potential terrorists.... anyone, anywhere could become a potential terrorist, and relationships with international governments change with time and policy. It's something which can never be won. Our government employs the same tactics of 'terrorism' on its own country. How many are living in fear of a war with Iran, on what damage Bush has done to our international relationships, and how many of these potential terrorists he has pushed into taking action against us, and with that, Bush has cut homeland security by 40% to D.C. and New York (our prime targets)... we found the greatest terrorist ever, and we put him in the White House.

Terrorism has and will always exist. Our present administration decided to use a terrorist act as an excuse to fight a war it wanted to fight before 9/11 ever happened. The US has been attacked prior to our ' War on Terror'... and we are in as much danger as ever of being attacked again. War often solves nothing... but hey we got Suddam... war must be over?

Besides, it's much more important to focus on what gender marries another, than to figure out how to get our soldiers out of harm's way.

edited for typo

< Message edited by MistressLorelei -- 6/6/2006 9:08:11 AM >

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 12

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:02:55 AM

Chaingang

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

MistressLorelei:

[N.B. I am not disagreeing with you at all =)]

Where is OBL? Isn't he supposed to be the mastermind behind all of this 9/11 stuff?

---

By contrast, Bush downplayed concern on the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, saying the accused terrorist mastermind is on the run and "I truly am not that concerned about him."
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/03/13/Bush.news.conference/

---

OBL must be sipping umbrella drinks somewhere today thanks to the efforts of BushCo.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to MistressLorelei)

Post #: 13

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:13:52 AM

caitlyn

Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline

The point was not what happened in 1090, but rather what has happened since 1090 ... but of course you know this, as it was clearly articulated.

The list of instanced where the west has acted less than honorably to the people of this region, is nearly endless. That just is, what it is. Saying that we can't apologize for the past, while correct, is just not on point ... because it ignores the truth that the conduct of the west towards these people has not changed. An apology at this point, would be almost laughable.

Lets cut the the chase. Do you think educated people in a society that had mathematics at a time when western nations thought baths caused illnesses, would wake up one day and decide, "I think I hate Americans today and will throw my life away to fly into buildings?"

Is that what you are selling, that our adversaries are somehow endowed by satan to do dreadful acts for capricious reason? No offense intended, but I agree with Chaingang ... just give it up already. They hate us for a reason, and if we don't openly and objectively discuss that reason, they will hate us forever.

If there is one thing history has taught us, is that when someone can't engage you in a straight up war, they will resort to alternate methods. We can call them terrorists if we wish, but they just are, what they are. They don't have an airforce, so they will use airliners. They can't kill our tanks, so they will kill our civilians.

That isn't a justification for what they do ... not at all ... but it's a realistic understanding of why it is happening, and is a hell of a lot more logical then just throwing up your hands, calling them evil terrorists, and dropping bombs on them for fun an profit.

< Message edited by caitlyn -- 6/6/2006 9:16:06 AM >

(in reply to Mercnbeth)

Post #: 14

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:18:02 AM

MistressLorelei

Posts: 997
Joined: 11/7/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

MistressLorelei:

[N.B. I am not disagreeing with you at all =)]

Where is OBL? Isn't he supposed to be the mastermind behind all of this 9/11 stuff?

---

By contrast, Bush downplayed concern on the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, saying the accused terrorist mastermind is on the run and "I truly am not that concerned about him."
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/03/13/Bush.news.conference/

---

OBL must be sipping umbrella drinks somewhere today thanks to the efforts of BushCo.

OBL... the excuse for the War on Iraq. Americans were far more likely to accept a War on stopping OBL and his gang (after the 9/11 attacks) than they would be to accept a war on Iraq. And yes, the proof lies in that our "reason" (OBL) to go to war still exists, and Bush doesn't care. But, I smell oil....

< Message edited by MistressLorelei -- 6/6/2006 9:26:48 AM >

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 15

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:24:29 AM

lisa1978

Posts: 224
Joined: 5/19/2006
From: Kansas City
Status: offline

There is a war on terror. Unfortunately, terror is not a specific geographical state, one leader, or something specifically tangible that you can go after and kill then declare victory.

Terrorism is being used in the Middle East and making America the "bad guy" and focus is the price we pay for being the biggest and baddest country currently. It is about people feeling hopelessness and angry to the point all they have is their faith. Then the devil leaders of terrorism use this to mold them into zealots for the cause that in the end is futile and never ending.

The problem is the current government fights this war like a conventional land war which does no good. Then usues the term war to stomp on freedoms and push agendas that have nothing to do with the war while most Americans just smile and let it happen. Terrorsit attacks will happen again and again. There is no way to prevent them all. I for one choose not to live in fear and hold the freedoms that we preach about that makes America great and not see them get squashed a little here and a little there until we look up one day and wonder if this really is the land of the free.

_____________________________

It hurts sometimes more than we can bear. If we could live without passion, maybe we'd know some kind of peace. But we would be hollow. Empty rooms, shuttered and dank. Without passion, we'd be truly dead.

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 16

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:39:46 AM

OedipusRexIt

Posts: 634
Joined: 11/15/2005
Status: offline

Just because you defy me to disagree with it, I do.

Now whaddaya gonna do?

_____________________________

"My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my father, prepare to die..."

(in reply to lisa1978)

Post #: 17

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:41:52 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

perhaps defy you not to disagree with it. Now you are in a pickle.

I thought the very same thing on first read.

Ron

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to OedipusRexIt)

Post #: 18

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:48:33 AM

Mercnbeth

Posts: 11766
Status: offline

Chain,
Are you saying that the prevailing pubic policy of Iran has 100% approval of the Iranians? Are you saying that ALL the woman in Saudi Arabian don't want to drive a car? You either have to take the position that ALL Muslims are evil and ALL Muslims wish to see the "death of America" or you have to believe that the majority of "good Muslims" in the Arab countries where the those statements originate can't do anything about it. Which is it?

In reality I agree with your position. The fallacy of it is, using the existing Muslim countries as an example, it does NOT require a majority to implement radical fascist Muslim policies.

quote:

The America you are trying to envision is simply not an America worth living in or dying for.

I read my posts again, and in neither did I represent my "vision" of America. In fact I represented that the current status of American politics doesn't provide for a 'winning' solution because it doesn't recognize or even have the guts, to call our enemy by name.

You comment "they disagree among themselves" is the solution. Let them kill each other in the name of Allah, instead of people from the west. The problem is, whether it's Jimmy Carter wanting to "free" Iran from the Shaw, or George Bush version I or II "freeing" the people of Kuwait and Iraq; we can't seem to allow them to "disagree among themselves". Bill Clinton simply ignored the issue short of lobbing a cruise missile or two when Muslim terror was distracting him away from the 'Oral' Office.

You'll get no argument from me that the reason is money. Businesses, whether they be oil companies or the company who supplies the paper napkin in the GI field meal are making a fortune on the war.

What I am proposing is a re-focus on the USA. No 'ism' is necessary, only pragmatic resolve. It won't happen because the leader necessary for such a dynamic change would never get elected. The 'masses' don't want to hear the truth or it's consequences. There would be time to make the change, but people don't want to compromise their peripheral positions. For example, most can not support a candidate that will eliminate our dependence on foreign oil if as a solution he/she opens up both continental shelves for oil exploration and authorizes the construction of 100 new nuclear power plants in the next 5 years. Pick any problem, from taxes to the border and the solution that will work, or at least hasn't be tried, will get shouted down to address some special interest group. And if that position is too radical it's adversaries pull out the old, "you're a fascist!", "you're a bigot!", "you're not considering the environment our children have to live in!".

What do I believe will happen? There will be a huge terrorist attack somewhere in the USA. Then we'll generate our US version of "Hitler". As Germany did once destroyed after WWI the people will clamor for such a pragmatic, charismatic, 'leader'; who will at all cost restore the USA to it's rightful place in the world.

Where do you see the USA going as a logical consequence of your position? Don't address what is wrong now or slogans about an America "worth living in or dying for". Where and with who will you negotiate the 1000 years peace and under what terms? It would help me if you can site any Muslim country enjoying any of the rights you hold so dear and are currently in fear of losing.

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 19

RE: I defy you to disagree with this - 6/6/2006 9:51:57 AM

Pavel

Posts: 308
Joined: 1/10/2005
From: Washington
Status: offline

Somehow, I'm sure by the end of this post, I'm going to be banging my head against the desk, yelling "make it stop."

Firstly, caitlyn, rock on for history dorks. However, while often times history is written about errors compounding, and very bad stuff, very rarely does it ever focus on near misses, or times everyone got excited about what turned out to be nothing. Not that I think we're living in happy-happy joy times, I'm just unconvinced doom is incoming.

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.

As far as the west's contempt for the Middle East, and Islam, it's a two way street. Lepanto, Tours, and Islamic expansion into the Balklands don't exactly bode well for the idea of the big mean infidels beating up on the poor defenseless Islamic Empires.

That all said, the concept of any nation-state, nation, or hell, individual person being lily white is insane. I just happen to side with the more pragmatic side (hmm, status quo, vs restoration of the Caliphate. I'll take the status quo please.)

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).

In any event, we must address the base root causes of terrorism, while still cheerfully killing people stupid enough to take the step from unhappy with the situation, to blowing themselves up in crowds that really have little to no connection with their struggles. While whatever you care to call the current situation won't be won purely by military force, we very well can't just sit back and soak up whatever attacks come our way while we wait for progressive reforms to take hold.

That said, a pan-Islamic front is pretty unlikely. For now, it's handy for the apperence of a unified struggle. However, I'm sure given time the Arabs would turn on the non-Arabs, Shiites already kill Sunnis happily (and visa versa), and really they're just as screwed up as any other group of people waiting for salvation from above. Still, the idea of the Caliphate is common in very nearly all Islamic fringe (and some not-so-fringe groups). Again, not that it'd happen, but it still provides some semblance of a common goal to be exploited.

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 for one, am perfectly okay with homeland security funding being cut anywhere. Really, I dare some of you to look into where that money goes. For a while, it was if you could make up a vaugely security like reasons, you could pretty much get whatever you wanted. More money does not equal better results.

I really could also care less for Osama or his location. He if anything has been a mediorce terrorist, with most of the planning and the like carried out by more practical people (two of Osama's orginal picks for the 9-11 mission couldn't speak English, and had zero experince in a western society, but OBL figured their piety would protect them. Sadly, he was overruled by others in the organization). Would his head on a plate be nice? Sure. Is it essential? Not really.

Sweet, no head banging. Go me.

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> I defy you to disagree with this

Page: [1] 2 3 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

0.113