I'm so sick of people making excuses for terrorists

[Beco]

bomb them all back to the stone age...........................

 

[Sean]

How do I define terrorism? Let's see.... there is absolutely no excuses made for the damn lowlifes that kill women, men, and children who have done nothing wrong.

So the USAF, USMC and the US army are terrorists? Or are you about to deny that they have killed innocents? (We won't get into the US funding of various terror groups around the world for the last 50 years or so.)

 

[Beco]

So the USAF, USMC and the US army are terrorists? Or are you about to deny that they have killed innocents? (We won't get into the US funding of various terror groups around the world for the last 50 years or so.)

we are trying to spread democracy and freedom, dude..........if it means killing a few million to get it done, by god we aim to do it!!!

 

[Sean]

we are trying to spread democracy and freedom, dude..........if it means killing a few million to get it done, by god we aim to do it!!!

You are POL POT aren't you? Go on you can admit it here, no-ones watching.

 

[lauren73]

Terrorists..

just aren't all there upstairs...."lots of screws missing and parts just floating around".....there will always be crazy people no matter how hard we try and get rid of them...

 

[Ham Murabi]

First off, you need to be very clear on how you define terrorism because the US is clearly identified offshore in the same league with their activities in many countries around the world.

Do unto others I say and if you suggest all guilty terrorists should be dealt with , I agree.
I gag a bit on self righteous selection methods though.

Wow. Frank Durbin posts on Lit.

 

[miles]

Wow. Frank Durbin posts on Lit.

It didn't take woody long to show his ass, did it?

 

[Adrenaline]

It didn't take woody long to show his ass, did it?

What's the point of this thread, exactly? One shouldn't bother to enquire as to the reasons behind violent terrorism because it would look like one is making excuses and that's bad? I see bg making sensible points and you throwing out nonsensical "see what I was saying?"-type posts without really saying _anything_ worthwile or constructive; and showing a preference for woody--you certainly take the time to quote his points--when everyone knows he's practically a bot when it comes to this sort of topic.

I'm guessing you weren't particularly interested in any productive discussion.

 

[miles]

What's the point of this thread, exactly? One shouldn't bother to enquire as to the reasons behind violent terrorism because it would look like one is making excuses and that's bad? I see bg making sensible points and you throwing out nonsensical "see what I was saying?"-type posts without really saying _anything_ worthwile or constructive; and showing a preference for woody--you certainly take the time to quote his points--when everyone knows he's practically a bot when it comes to this sort of topic.

I'm guessing you weren't particularly interested in any productive discussion.

And your contribution to this thread is what?

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Productive discussion; can't you read man?

 

[Ishmael]

And your contribution to this thread is what?

Looked one of those 'passive-aggresive', "We brought it on ourselves" type of posts to me miles.

Ishmael

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Chicken Little's coming home to roost...

 

[fxphilby]

let's have some specifics

While these animals are murdering innocent men, women, and children, some of you act as though these sub-humans are "acting out" because of Iraq, oil, Jews, Israel, capitalism, and so on ad nauseum.

Shove it up your ass.

O.K., Miles, please quote chapter and verse of what those you refer to as "some of you" said in justification of acts of terror.

Then we can have a discussion.

As it is, you're just making noise.

If you in fact believe that we should not analyze and understand the motivations of our enemies, then say so, clearly and unambiguously. If you believe that important political policy decisions -- and the discussion of important political issues -- should be based on slogans, not rational analysis, please say that too -- clearly and unambiguously.

 

[Beco]

O.K., Miles, please quote chapter and verse of what those you refer to as "some of you" said in justification of acts of terror.

Then we can have a discussion.

As it is, you're just making noise.

If you in fact believe that we should not analyze and understand the motivations of our enemies, then say so, clearly and unambiguously. If you believe that important political policy decisions -- and the discussion of important political issues -- should be based on slogans, not rational analysis, please say that too -- clearly and unambiguously.

Im pretty sure you are missing his point!

 

[landslider]

The methods used by terrorists (sneaking bombs onto subways) are so disgusting that they lose support for any real grievances they might have.

When a person is trying to kill you, who cares what his motive is?

 

[Adrenaline]

And your contribution to this thread is what?

Why don't you just answer the question? I figured that be page 3 there would be some kind of argument going on but with bg posts being ignored, woody producing his usual pap and you the thread-starter quoting him and throwing out vague insults there's not much to draw on. Anything I'd say would just be repeating bg's points.

I remember the days when you used to like converse sensibily and stuff. I guess you're all tuckered out now.

 

[Adrenaline]

The methods used by terrorists (sneaking bombs onto subways) are so disgusting that they lose support for any real grievances they might have.

When a person is trying to kill you, who cares what his motive is?

The people who would try to understand their opponent and so be more effective in eliminating them? This seems obvious.

 

[cuninglinguist61]

The people who would try to understand their opponent and so be more effective in eliminating them? This seems obvious.

"One must know their enemy to defeat them"-Sun Tzu "The Art Of War"
"Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book !" -Gen. George S. Patton

 

[Cathleen]

I don't think anyone wants to make excuses for terrorists. However, doesn't understanding historical foreign policy make sense? At least people can understand why things unfold as they do.

Why did the US CIA fund the coup in Iran in 1953 that eventually led to the fundamentalist revolution in 1979?

Why did Rumsfeld meet with Saddam Hussein in Dec 1983 and back Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war?

Why did the West help arm the Mujahideen in Afghanistan and then allow one of their groups that we now know as the Taliban to emerge as the dominant force after the internal fighting between the warlords subsided?

Why does the West back a regime in Saudi Arabia knowing that it infuriates Osama bin Laden?

There are many questions like this that are clearly answered in history but it seems many don't even think about them when spouting rhetoric on both sides of the political spectrum.

The reasons for historical actions are pretty clear when you read about them retrospectively but the one thing that all these instances have in common is the lack of foresight or 'what if' planning.

Most nations try to act in what they believe to be their own self interest. After all, that is the definition of a nation state. However, they rarely seem to consider the longer term implications of their actions. What is good for today isn't necessarily good for tomorrow. And finally, nation states are historically too insular for their own wellbeing which is a very dangerous position to take if that nation state has global ambitions.

This is an excellent post and I agree history will look at these times a bit differently then how our eyes see things now.

The nation and world change far more quickly now then twenty and fifty years ago. The 21st century has made our world vastly smaller with regard to many issues, political and social. The way we live in the US wouldn't have been a concern to Iran, Iraq et al some fifty years back. Our advancements in technology, transportation and communication have put a spot light on our life style.

There are millions of people that do not like us, they hate us for how we live and what we have. Some can hate us passively while others can't. To way over simplify this, I remember as a kid saying to my folks 'well, Suzie's parents don't make her do X' to which my parents would say 'I don't care what goes on in Suzie's house.'

We do need to defend ourselves from those that want to kill us. I honestly don't think the average twenty year old AQ terrorists knows much about Iran Contra, Vietnam, the Sheik of Iran in the seventies etc. I think that person is more programmed, for lack of the right word, their culture told him/her to hate those who do not believe as they do.

I remembering reading an excellent article a few years back about the psychology of being raised with war. It focused on Northern Ireland but the principles seem to be universal - hate is a living thing and passes through generations. How sad.

 

[Ishmael]

What do I need to know about Islamic terrorists I don't already know?

I know they're religious motivation. If you think the mouth foaming Christians who are praying for the "End of Times" are bad, you haven't seen anything yet. It is a fundamental cornerstone of the radicals belief system.

Other than that all I need to know is their methods and means so as to facilitate their death in the most expeditious manner possible.

You cannot engage in political or economic negotiations with an enemy whose core motivations are niether political nor economic. It's folly to assume you can and a waste of time to try to do so.

Ishmael

 

[miles]

Can you imagine if the "seek to understand why they hate us" crowd was around right after Pearl Harbor?

 

[miles]

Why don't you just answer the question? I figured that be page 3 there would be some kind of argument going on but with bg posts being ignored, woody producing his usual pap and you the thread-starter quoting him and throwing out vague insults there's not much to draw on. Anything I'd say would just be repeating bg's points.

I remember the days when you used to like converse sensibily and stuff. I guess you're all tuckered out now.

My deepest apologies for not responding sooner to your question. Unlike some posters I have this J - O - B thing that keeps me pretty busy. Next time I'll take a day off so I can answer your question.

The point of this thread was expressing my opinion. Are you happy now?

 

[Ishmael]

Can you imagine if the "seek to understand why they hate us" crowd was around right after Pearl Harbor?

No, and we'd all be speaking Japanese now (or German).

Fucking idiots.

Ishmael

 

[LotusDreamer]

My 2 cents

Contrary to the Bush Admins. press releases the Iraqi insurgents and this latest wave of terrorism has very little, if anything to do with a threat or dislike for our values or bin Laden. These people could've cared less about us. Of course they thought we were a nation of greedy hypocrites, but they were not blowing our people up. What is happening today is because of the total voilation of treaties that ban infringing on sovereign nations.

Let me put it this way: The so called 'blue states' detest the Bush Admins., however if some foreign nation invaded our country under the guise of liberating us from his despotic rule (or any other guise, for that matter) we would all rise up as a nation to defeat this usurper.

That sort of thing just isn't done and America has a reputation for doing just that, when the mood suits us.

Besides, what is wrong with identifying the problems or underlying cause, I've always believed it is the only way to come up with an equitable solution for all involved. ??Es verdad???

 

[FinePhilly]

Can you imagine if the "seek to understand why they hate us" crowd was around right after Pearl Harbor?

Where was Hanoi Jane and her beat up bus then?