|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/10/2006 05:25:16 PM · #101 |
Well if this becomes permanent...perhaps they can find some way to use the space normally taken by the overhead luggage racks and foot cubbies to add more comfortable and spacier seating?
Not likely though... |
|
|
|
08/10/2006 05:39:00 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Originally posted by "riponlady":
As I said I was referring to the point about revenge not playground bullies and the innocents killed by either side |
I know...but I see a little differently than you. I don't view both parties as quite the same.
Party 1 (includes USA, Europe, Israel, Western World) endeavors to minimilize civilian casualties. Drops leaflets warning before hand. Endeavors focus to be on hostiles.
Party 2 (islamifascists) deliberately attack civilian populations and hide in and amongst civilians in order to ensure any attacks on them put civilians at risk.
THOSE ARE TWO VERY DIFFERENT IDEOLOGIES AND PEOPLE
Originally posted by "riponlady":
As you are again inferring....refrain from personal attacks. |
Hey Riponlady. WHAT IN THE WORLD ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???
The above quote was a quote of Ergo's that I was pointing to as an example of politicism & insult (which was being ignored). It had nothing to bloody do with you.
Originally posted by "riponlady":
I was responding to the point about political/news comments and saying that once political blame was apportioned then this thread should move to rant! |
Yes, I forgot we must tie anything negative about segments of islam to christians...the real danger. Let me outline again for you numerous differences.
a) the identity of any one operating incognito is hard to determine
b) there is a far greater number of active islamic terrorists than there are christian terrorists.
c) the christian community as a whole pretty much condemns said extremists and declares their actions as wrong. And usually without condition. Even in the case of the abortion clinic killings most christians condemn the actions completely. They may feel abortion is wrong but they do not believe it is justification for murder.
So they are very very different.
If there was a great number of rascist NAZI freaks like Timothy McVeigh in Maine and they were launching attacks throughout the world. And Canada decided after suffering several attacks they needed to eliminate said threat. Then we'd be talking more similar ballgames. In which case, I would completely condemn the christian-fascist terrorists.
As for the "islamifascists"...most of the Muslim countries of the world are in war with them as well. Hence, i don't see this as an all Islam issue and really dislike assinuations that people on the left make towards us for our statements. |
Jason, obviously I am not making myself clear and I am having some difficulty in understanding your responses.
1. The point I was making about revenge and not not allowing ourselves to be as evil as "them" came in response to the following comment by astropilot-
The only way that we will ever rid ouselves of this problem is to make the price of acts of terrorisim so high that "they" are no longer willing to pay the price. Talking and understanding is not the answer. These people have made it very clear that inocent life means nothing to them, and I think it's high time raise the stakes. If that means killing a hundred of them for every single inocent they kill, then so be it. We didn't start this war on terroisim, but we sure as hell could end it, if the world had the guts to do it.
It had nothing to do with bullies.
2. If you think that "Party 1" is not guilty of causing severe innocent casaulties throughout the history of war then I am afraid you have been the victim of successful propaganda. Terrorists of all groups (Irish,Tamil,Basque, BaderMeinhof(sp?), are also as guilty and target civilian areas, not just your "Islamfanatics"
3.If I misread your response to Ergo's post I apologise. It appeared to me that you were calling my comments those of a "right-wing, fascistic and delusional ignoramuses trying to justify something that any reasonable person would know to be wrong." as you wrote
Or comments like the above underneath.
Which comments were you referring to if not mine?
4. I was not linking Islam with Christianity merely pointing out that identifying the fanatics in either group is nigh on impossible. You agree there are such people as Christian fanatics so why are you jumping on me for mentioning them? I was using it only as an example.
5. You say that one of the differences is that the christian group denounce their fanatics (implying the Islamic faith do not) and a few sentences further on say that most of the Muslim world is at war with their terrorists. You can't have it both ways!
6. Could you tell me where you obtained the statistics about the number of fanatics in both religious groups? I am sure MI5 and US Intelligence would be pleased to know the numbers they are fighting against!
6. I am very glad to hear you do not see this as an Islam issue but sad to see you have put a "you" and "us" slant on the discussion. You also seem to have decided my politics and placed yourself directly against them - ironic that this is exactly how many wars start!
7 I am bloody annoyed because answering you last time made me burn dinner!!!!!:)
P
|
|
|
|
08/10/2006 06:23:33 PM · #103 |
"The only way that we will ever rid ouselves of this problem is to make the price of acts of terrorisim so high that "they" are no longer willing to pay the price. Talking and understanding is not the answer. These people have made it very clear that inocent life means nothing to them, and I think it's high time raise the stakes. If that means killing a hundred of them for every single inocent they kill, then so be it. We didn't start this war on terroisim, but we sure as hell could end it, if the world had the guts to do it. "
2. If you think that "Party 1" is not guilty of causing severe innocent casaulties throughout the history of war then I am afraid you have been the victim of successful propaganda. Terrorists of all groups (Irish,Tamil,Basque, BaderMeinhof(sp?), are also as guilty and target civilian areas, not just your "Islamfanatics"
I never said that. But there is a difference. It's not about targeting civilian areas but the focus of the attacks being civilian or strategic. If one bombs a strategic target such as an oil refinery, or even a nuclear bomb research center...hundreds of civilians may be killed in the collateral damage. However, there is a difference between that and specifically trying to kill civilians. Where civilians are the target.
A lot of times I feel like I am dealing with some weird quantum mechanics when trying to discuss with you. It's like there is x and there is y with you but no decimals in between.
Yes, there are other groups of terrorism (Irish, Basque, etc.) most of which tend to be local in their attacks. All of which I do believe to be wrong. Now mind you, if the Basque seperatists viewed Spain as occupiers and they bombed a military installation and killed the caterer and cashier at the military officer's club. I would see those as collateral civilian deaths that occurred on an attack upon a military target. I wouldn't even quite call it terrorism, so long as a declaration was made.
This is the difference in how I feel regarding the attacks on the Cole and the U.S. Marine base. Those were military targets and I believe them to be legitimate war targets.
"Or comments like the above underneath. Which comments were you referring to if not mine? "
That was in reference to Ergo's comment. Which greatly bothered me for two reasons. a) One, it was an extremely rude and insulting comment upon a group. b) It got not a single response against. I am sure had I come out and made a similar comment toward the left I'd have received several flaming responses. It's one of my big gripes. I feel the left is very unfair in most of it's handlings of people with two standards. Than again. I also feel the right tends to be filled with a lot of hot-heads who can be rude as can be. Hey, I've even been such.
4. "I was not linking Islam with Christianity merely pointing out that identifying the fanatics in either group is nigh on impossible. You agree there are such people as Christian fanatics so why are you jumping on me for mentioning them? I was using it only as an example."
Okay, in that case I agree. The issue is identification. And this is the same issue with any cancer. Right now much of cancer research is focused on identifying and isolating the cancer cells from the healthy ones and targeting them. Sadly, we've not gotten there. And most treatments of cancer tend to harm both the good and the bad cells. The hope being that one can kill enough of the cancerous cells without killing the person. Sometimes it works sometimes it fails. It's never a nice option.
And I truly agree with you, that identification of extemists is the problem.
5. "You say that one of the differences is that the christian group denounce their fanatics (implying the Islamic faith do not) and a few sentences further on say that most of the Muslim world is at war with their terrorists. You can't have it both ways!"
Some elements of the Islamic faith does. But overall, I have found it extremely difficult to find muslims who will state without attachments that these actions are wrong. There is almost always a justification of the perpetrators. There are exceptions but I've found them to be rare. And this opinion derives from several I've spoke with in person, dozens I've heard speak on radio/TV/etc.
That said, there are a large number who will flat out say "it's wrong...it's evil" but I can't say I've seen evidence to say that I see this as a greator whole on the part of Islam. Not even in the just the U.S. muslims. And that to me is a significant problem.
6. "Could you tell me where you obtained the statistics about the number of fanatics in both religious groups? I am sure MI5 and US Intelligence would be pleased to know the numbers they are fighting again"
There have been polls conducted. Sorry, I do not have them off hand. But many in the middle-east in which any where from 5%-50% responded with opinions that would be considered extreme (as in supported terrorism or believed their were valid reasons for such killing, or elected groups who supported such positions openly, etc.). There were also polls regarding the killing of abortion doctors and the vast majority of those claiming to be christian opposed and disagreed with such actions.
Furthermore, there is the obvious. It can be represented by the number of terrorist attacks against civilians. Of course, there are exceptions. Ireland is a great example of christian terrorists.
6. I am very glad to hear you do not see this as an Islam issue but sad to see you have put a "you" and "us" slant on the discussion. You also seem to have decided my politics and placed yourself directly against them - ironic that this is exactly how many wars start!
I disagree, most wars start by inaction and/or a failure to respond. Europe tried very very hard to understand Germany and it's views in hopes of peace. Had Churchill's points and views been acted on when he said so several years earlier Germany would have been nipped in the bud and WWII might never have happened.
That said, my apologies for boxing you in. I shouldn't have.
7 'I am bloody annoyed because answering you last time made me burn dinner!!!!!:) "
To that, my sincerest apologies. To me, eating is a blessing of life. It is also a great way to understand another culture. I think it was the Frugal Gourmet who used to say you could find out a lot about a culture and it's history from their food. In truth, my solution to the world's problems is one big massive "potluck". We'd cease fighting and enjoy a good meal and some fine drink and solve world hunger in the process.
So, can we at least agree to the "Potluck". I do hope your dinner wasn't burned too badly. :(
PS - I accidentally hit the report post instead of the reply. I tried to close the pop-up window quickly. But if RiponLady's post got flagged as reported. Please disregard. I found no offense in it and felt it was civil and even warm. :) |
|
|
|
08/10/2006 06:32:02 PM · #104 |
I knew something would happen before I fly next month. Luckily it's not internationally. I hope things settle down by then. I'm not keen on putting my equipment in checked luggage either. I'll ship it UPS before I do that, I think.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2006 06:36:11 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by bod:
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by bod:
One thing I don't understand ...
The current delays at airports are to prevent any kind of backup or secondary plan kicking in and taking out airplanes full of people.
So, to stop them doing that, we've created huge holding areas, full of airplane loads of people, which anybody can walk into the middle of.
It's a good job these highly organised terrorist groups aren't very organised. |
Not sure which airports you have been to recently, but last week I was through three of them. In none of them could you access anything but the ticket desk without walking through some form of security measure. There is probably a way to get to the "huge holding areas" but to do so is going to raise the suspicion of someone somewhere. |
Manchester, UK.
There's a huge waiting area before you even reach any ticket desks. That appeared to be where the crowds of people were being given clear bags and being told to repack. |
Ah, I see what you are saying. I guess that I was fortunate to not meet a bunch of lines anywhere. |
|
|
|
08/10/2006 06:42:31 PM · #106 |
I don't want to get too involved in this non-Rant thread, but there are some ironies in the figures
//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5257128.stm
Targetting might be indiscriminate v targetted, but it is ironic that Hezbollah have killed majority soldiers while Israel has killed a majority of civilians.
I would also note that the PR war is fought on many sides, not just by Hezbollah and the "war" is a little more complicated than:
"Party 1 (includes USA, Europe, Israel, Western World)
v
Party 2 (islamifascists)"
Keeping a war alive in Iraq to concentrate a dispute and keep people dying is not a very progressive policy.
Message edited by author 2006-08-10 18:42:41.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2006 07:39:47 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
I don't want to get too involved in this non-Rant thread, but there are some ironies in the figures
//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5257128.stm
Targetting might be indiscriminate v targetted, but it is ironic that Hezbollah have killed majority soldiers while Israel has killed a majority of civilians.
|
That is an easy statistic to interpret. Hezbollah does not reach into the infrastructure of internal Israel. They recently have focused on the border. Where soldiers primarily are...
Isreal has countered (note: countered) into Beirut and national Lebanon. So naturally, when dealing with a poor country, where civilians are, you have a few explanations --- 1. ill-equipped to move ---2. refuse to move due to entrenchment mentality--- 3. stupid ---there will unfortunately be casualties not intended. I guarantee you, the stance of Israel is to not harm a single innocent civilian. I also guarantee you, that is NOT Hezbollah's stance.
These are fundamentals that everyone must get straight. Also, if we are gonna have a discussion of right and wrong, or good v. evil, then you first admit there has to be at least one. And if there is simply good, then naturally there must be evil. And you cannot have both in a battle like this. Unless of course both sides are publicly admitting hatred and destruction of all. But last time I checked, there is only one side doing this. And for me, that is the side doing wrong.
Question: When is the last terrorist act a Western National entity performed against another sovereign state? Use America, Britain, France, Canada, or whoever you like from "Party 1"
Answer: None. They all publicly, politically and morally abhor this concept.
The bad guys are obvious people.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2006 08:01:28 PM · #108 |
Four weeks of figures hardly tells the story. How long would you take having your citizens blown up by suicide bombers? And ignore foreign leaders who publicly state your people will be eliminated, before you did something about it?
Unfortunately Israel is dealing with a group that cannot be negotiated with.
The elimination of all non-believers is taught to (most all) Moslems from birth and to die for their cause is an honor. They believe God instructed them to kill all heathens. There is but one way to exist with these people and that is to join with them. Those of their heritage who wish to practice another religion are slain.
I prefer freedom. I do not believe in political correctness. Rules of engagement is a death sentence to our military men and women. We, and Israel, should use every weapon at our disposal. If the Iraq people want freedom they must fight and earn it themselves. Having our soldiers troll for bullets is insane.
How in hell did we ever allow the enemy to infiltrate our country so deeply? And, for fear of hurting someone's feelings, let them stay. No other country, to my knowledge, allows foreigners so much freedom as the US does. We even allow them to own land and businesses, sometimes purchased with low interest government loans, and, if the liberals have their way, they will be able to vote, right along with our criminals.
If America, and the rest of the world continues not to acknowledge who the enemy is, the enemy will win, and likely within my lifetime.
Sorry for the long rant. This has not been a good day for me.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2006 08:11:58 PM · #109 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
.
If America, and the rest of the world continues not to acknowledge who the enemy is, the enemy will win, and likely within my lifetime.
|
Sorry, being stupid tonight, who do you think "the enemy" is?
Are you suggesting that the US get rid of all foreigners on their soil?
It appears the UK is breeding its own British terrorists - what do you think we should do about them?
We should try to keep on track here else this thread will be moved to rant. Let's keep to discussion on the current terrorist alert.
P
Edit - David just found out about your bad day. Don't want to draw you into an argument tonight. Chill and have a stiff drink.
Message edited by author 2006-08-10 20:15:58.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2006 09:53:20 PM · #110 |
Thanks Pauline. We can disagree and still be friends I hope.
I see the enemy as those who wish death to me and my family and death to Christians, Jews, etc. and even the non-believers. ie. those who are not Moslem.
No, I do not believe the US should expell all foreigners. I have no solution to our problem but I am certainly not afraid to acknowlage there is one and it will have to be delt with at some point.
Message edited by author 2006-08-10 21:54:31.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2006 10:00:10 PM · #111 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
I see the enemy as those who wish death to me and my family and death to Christians, Jews, etc. and even the non-believers. ie. those who are not Moslem. |
But militants (I hate the word terrorist...seems any enemy now is classed as a terrorist) kill Muslims too so I don't think you could put it in catagories like that.
Back to the subject, if we have to have tighter security through our airports for our own safety then I'm happy with that. I guess though I see it as even though a lot of the people that were involved were caught they still had a win because of the fear instilled in us.
|
|
|
|
08/10/2006 10:34:15 PM · #112 |
Originally posted by Makka:
I guess though I see it as even though a lot of the people that were involved were caught they still had a win because of the fear instilled in us. |
You are right. Fear is a powerful weapon.
And terrorists still apply to a select group. Militants are something altogether different.
Terrorists are those who do not fight in the name of honor, duty, are not governed by a national government, and use unconventional, fear-based tactics and killing to display there hatred upon a certain peoples.
Words are powerful and we must never relegate them to something milder than what they truly are. We have a word "terrorism" for a reason.
|
|
|
|
08/11/2006 12:22:38 AM · #113 |
Originally posted by Cutter:
Originally posted by Makka:
I guess though I see it as even though a lot of the people that were involved were caught they still had a win because of the fear instilled in us. |
You are right. Fear is a powerful weapon.
And terrorists still apply to a select group. Militants are something altogether different.
Terrorists are those who do not fight in the name of honor, duty, are not governed by a national government, and use unconventional, fear-based tactics and killing to display there hatred upon a certain peoples.
Words are powerful and we must never relegate them to something milder than what they truly are. We have a word "terrorism" for a reason. |
Fear is indeed a powerful weapon, and its use is not limited to the "bad guys." I often think our own governments have the capacity to manipulate or exaggerate or even CREATE a sense of fear to further exercise control over their public. This, I believe, is a process that should always be watched over and not allowed to dominate OUR public life. Anyone who has ever lived in a police state would know how this works. If you've seen it before, see it again -- Wag the dog.
On the word "terrorism," until we accept that the people whom have been labelled as terrorists by America and its allies in reality feel that the West are the true terrorists, we will never reach the resolution of this entire problem. As long as the West dismisses them as terrorists, and dismiss their grievances and actions as those of madmen, the divide not only remains, but continues to deepen.
If Israel is interested in breeding more fodder for Hezbollah, it should continue to do what it is doing now. And yes, from the Lebanese perspective, what Israel is doing is in fact terrorizing, killing, impoverishing and creating refugees out of Lebanon's civilian population. And that's just perfect from Hezbollah's viewpoint.
*this should really be a rant, shouldn't it?* |
|
|
|
08/11/2006 12:55:49 AM · #114 |
love more, care more, give more,
fear less
it is really our only hope |
|
|
|
08/11/2006 12:59:13 AM · #115 |
lets simplify - there are good people, and there are bad people.
Hmm, there, much simpler now. |
|
|
|
08/11/2006 01:16:29 AM · #116 |
| I guess no more airplane window shots anymore. |
|
|
|
08/11/2006 04:56:55 AM · #117 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Four weeks of figures hardly tells the story. How long would you take having your citizens blown up by suicide bombers? And ignore foreign leaders who publicly state your people will be eliminated, before you did something about it? |
To put the other side to the story, how long would you put up with the occupation of your land, the detention of thousands of your compatriots as prisoners without trial, the denial of your families work, the shooting of unarmed civilians and children by an occupying military? And would you ignore foreign leaders who declare you all terrorists who cannot be negotiated with?
It is all a matter of perspective. I am not asking anyone to support Hezbollah. I do not support them, and terrorism is to be abhored. But (to use theSaj's test for determining bias) I see a lot of blame being poured on Hezbollah, but I don't see much criticism of Israel's actions here.
Originally posted by David Ey:
The elimination of all non-believers is taught to (most all) Moslems from birth and to die for their cause is an honor. They believe God instructed them to kill all heathens. There is but one way to exist with these people and that is to join with them. Those of their heritage who wish to practice another religion are slain. |
I am guessing that you have not encountered very many Muslims. You appear to have absorbed some scaremongering propaganda. If you have met a number of Muslims and your personal experiences bear this out, I would be interested to hear your story.
Originally posted by David Ey:
No other country, to my knowledge, allows foreigners so much freedom as the US does. We even allow them to own land and businesses, sometimes purchased with low interest government loans, and, if the liberals have their way, they will be able to vote, right along with our criminals. |
I am guessing that you have not travelled to much of the rest of the Western world, either. Again, if your personal experiences bear this out, I would be interested to know how.
|
|
|
|
08/11/2006 05:02:11 AM · #118 |
.
Message edited by author 2006-08-11 05:16:40. |
|
|
|
08/11/2006 05:18:37 AM · #119 |
Originally posted by Cutter:
That is an easy statistic to interpret. Hezbollah does not reach into the infrastructure of internal Israel. They recently have focused on the border. Where soldiers primarily are... |
I said it was ironic - not more. I agree that Hezbollah has neither the capacity nor the desire to limit its strikes to military targets.
Originally posted by Cutter:
Isreal has countered (note: countered) into Beirut and national Lebanon. |
"Countered" into Beirut and civilian infrastructure in the north of the country - where Hezbollah does not operate militarily.
Originally posted by Cutter:
So naturally, when dealing with a poor country, where civilians are, you have a few explanations --- 1. ill-equipped to move ---2. refuse to move due to entrenchment mentality--- 3. stupid --- |
You missed out "too poor".
Originally posted by cutter:
if we are gonna have a discussion of right and wrong, or good v. evil, then you first admit there has to be at least one. |
This is the one aspect of the US conservative/GWB attitude that I constantly come up against. Good guys (Christians, Jews, the West) v bad guys (Muslims, the Middle East). You are "for us or against us". By reducing an entire region (with some of the most complicated politics in the world) down to a single word "bad", you make it okay to bomb, rape and pillage them, because they are all deemed "bad" and "evil". You also create a barrier in international cooperation that exacerbates the very tension that you are trying to eliminate. It is poor politics. I would usually not worry too much about it on the basis that we are led by professional politicians and experts who have a far deeper understanding of the politics and sensitivities of the region, but with GWB and TB I get pretty worried.
Originally posted by cutter:
Question: When is the last terrorist act a Western National entity performed against another sovereign state? Use America, Britain, France, Canada, or whoever you like from "Party 1"
Answer: None. They all publicly, politically and morally abhor this concept. |
Depending on your point of view, the illegal US/UK invasion of Iraq, the Israeli occupation and suppression of Palestine and the Israeli invasion of Lebanon were all acts of state terrorism.
When was the last terrorist act performed by a Middle Eastern National entity performed against another sovereign state? It could be answered that (if we are excluding, as you appear to do, the acts of international terrorist agencies, such as the IRA and ETA in the West and the militant wings of Hezbollah and Hamas in the M East) that you have to look back a number of years to Libyan acts in the 1980s.
Originally posted by cutter:
The bad guys are obvious people. |
I think that the same arguments are used by Hezbollah with some success.
I do not propose peace at all costs, but is an escalation of the warmongering going to make it easier or harder to achieve the long term goal of international tolerance (from both sides)? If our war is against terrorism, then are there more, or fewer terrorists as a consequence of our actions? Are we winning, or losing?
|
|
|
|
08/11/2006 05:23:51 AM · #120 |
Originally posted by ergo:
*this should really be a rant, shouldn't it?* |
Yep - I suggested it a while ago, because I don't like breaking forum rules to respond to some of the more offensive posts.
|
|
|
|
08/11/2006 10:37:31 AM · #121 |
Originally posted by "legalbeagle":
Targetting might be indiscriminate v targetted, but it is ironic that Hezbollah have killed majority soldiers while Israel has killed a majority of civilians. |
Sorry, I don't believe it. Why? Because they always over-inflate their numbers.
ie #1: building destroyed and we're told there were 40+ casualties. After it got investigated more closely there was one death. This sort of thing is extremely common.)
ie #2: Hezbolleh members are killed. Their friends take the guns with them. As Hezbolleh wear civilian clothes with no markings all their casualties are counted as civilian.
ie #3: Photos and counts are staged, re-counted, etc. to inflate the figures.
I'm not saying a couple hundred civilians have not been killed and many more left homeless. I'm just saying that based on the history of that region I don't buy the provided figure. I'd say it's 1/2, maybe a quarter.
Let's also take into account that Israeli and Western forces tend not to hide in civilian centers. Hezbolleh makes a policy of hiding in civilian centers, hospitals, schools, and U.N. observation posts. So I put much of said blame on Hezbolleh. To me, firing missiles from schools and hospitals and civilian centers constitutes war crimes.
Originally posted by "David Ey":
Rules of engagement is a death sentence to our military men and women. |
Rules of engagement require both sides to follow them. I am sure most people would not play a football/basketball/baseball/soccer game where your opponents were allowed to play by different rules than you were.
Originally posted by "riponlady":
It appears the UK is breeding its own British terrorists - what do you think we should do about them? |
I believe that any mosque (or any organization be it church or girl scouts for that matter) which is teaching the need to kill or the acceptibility of suicide attacks, etc. Needs to be closed and expelled. That said, such requires a lot of work and on careful grounds. It's not like said groups will just tell anyone their views.
Originally posted by "makka":
But militants (I hate the word terrorist...seems any enemy now is classed as a terrorist) kill Muslims too so I don't think you could put it in catagories like that.
|
Militants is actually incorrect. Militants may be brutal, be they mercenaries, rebels, warlord armies, but these usually have markers denoting their association. Terrorists do not have marking to provide their association. They are equivalent to spies.
That's why I use "Islamifascists" now. Those who want a specific world and are endeavoring to bring it out by force and chaos. These being those willing to kill jews, christians, non-muslims, and even muslims to achieve their goals.
Originally posted by "ergo":
America and its allies in reality feel that the West are the true terrorists, |
Greed.... not to say we don't manipulate policies for our benefit. But so do they. Ever heard of OPEC? Price-fixing monopoly.
No, the issue is indoctrination. They are taught a great number of things much of which is absolutely false. But they learn and grow up hating.
Do you know what Iran gave it's people as an explanation for the WTC. They said that the attacks were carried out by disgruntled Vietnam Veterans who hate America for the Vietname war and the U.S. just used it as an excuse to attack Iraq for oil.
That is what a Persian (Iranian) I chatted with online told me they had heard on Iranian news/TV.
Originally posted by "ergo":
If Israel is interested in breeding more fodder for Hezbollah, it should continue to do what it is doing now. |
Well, since giving up tons of land, dismantling settlements, giving Palestinians a semi-independent government did nothing to stop the breeding of more fodder. What difference does it make. Israel has no solution to stop the fodder. So, yes, they've decided to eliminate the infrastructure as much as possible. And perhaps trigger Iran to reveal it's true colors.
Originally posted by "legalbeagle":
To put the other side to the story, how long would you put up with the occupation of your land, the detention of thousands of your compatriots as prisoners without trial, the denial of your families work, the shooting of unarmed civilians and children by an occupying military? And would you ignore foreign leaders who declare you all terrorists who cannot be negotiated with? |
- why, when both you and them are immigrants who've come in the last 200+ yrs would you not share?
- why, when your people control 98% of the region you would not allow another people with a heritage in the region going back 3,000 yrs no access?
- why would you refuse said people onto the mount of their temple?
- why would you get all the rest of your people to attack said group and try to push them into the sea three times
- why would you make no political complain about the fact that Jordan, Syria & Egypt took much more land than Israel?
- why would you complain about said group killing your families and then strap a bomb onto your child and send them out into the market to kill other children?
- how long would you put up with being persecuted and killed basically everywhere you've gone?
- how would you deal with 1/3 of your people being killed? and every country from Britain to the USA refusing your refugees?
- how would you deal with 500,000+ of your people forced out of the surrounding region by force and threat?
That said, I do think that Israel is going to far and being more careless with Lebanese lives than they should be. And I think that is wrong. So I am willing to condemn the actions by both sides.
That said, I hold Hezbolleh and the other "islamifascists" more to blame because if they ceased their actions I believe the situation in the middle east would cease and peace would ensue. Where as if Israel ceased it's actions it would merely result in a massacre and no peace.
Originally posted by "legalbeagle":
"Countered" into Beirut and civilian infrastructure in the north of the country - where Hezbollah does not operate militarily. |
They do not operate there, because there is no reason for them too. They operate only along Israel's border. However, Hezbolleh is supplied via the north from Iran via Syria.
Originally posted by "legalbeagle":
When was the last terrorist act performed by a Middle Eastern National entity performed against another sovereign state? |
Can we say this year....by Iran! Whether they are simply shouting their rhetoric while pulling Hezbolleh's strings. They're the ones financing, arming, & training Hezbolleh and also providing "green berets". Look, a group like Hezbolleh does not get drones by itself.
Originally posted by "legalbeagle":
I do not propose peace at all costs, but is an escalation of the warmongering going to make it easier or harder to achieve the long term goal of international tolerance (from both sides)? |
I think the problem LegalBeagle is that most do not have faith that the "islamofascists" will ever accept tolerance. So if you have one entity that will not tolerate, then the goal of tolerance is impossible.
As for whether we are winning or losing. I am not sure. I will say this. "If we try to tolerate an intolerable enemy - we will lose!"
BTW LegalBeagle, I do actually consider Israel to have started this war. I do not believe they had to respond this way to the kidknapping of the two soldiers. And I do think their actions were likely wrong in this case.
I do believe the global community's actions to also be wrong. Iran should have received much more censor, rebuke and response for it's nuclear development, threat of annihilation of Israel, and use of Hezbolleh & other terrorist groups.
If Israel had come out and said they were going to Nuke Iran. I am sure France and Russia would have spear-headed a condemnation and sanctions against Israel by this time already. |
|
|
|
08/11/2006 10:46:40 AM · #122 |
| hi ho hi ho it's off to rant we go. |
|
|
|
08/11/2006 10:53:54 AM · #123 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
hi ho hi ho it's off to rant we go. |
Boy, that took long enough!!!!
|
|
|
|
08/11/2006 10:56:32 AM · #124 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
As Hezbolleh wear civilian clothes with no markings all their casualties are counted as civilian. |
Yeah this is utter bullshit on the part of the media for not putting two and two together and reporting on the fact that something is seriously flawed with these counts. I have yet to see a headline saying that some Hezbollah guys were killed - it is always 'civilians'. Hezbollah managing to make it through this war without a single death? What a crock. |
|
|
|
08/11/2006 11:19:32 AM · #125 |
Originally posted by routerguy666:
Originally posted by theSaj:
As Hezbolleh wear civilian clothes with no markings all their casualties are counted as civilian. |
Yeah this is utter bullshit on the part of the media for not putting two and two together and reporting on the fact that something is seriously flawed with these counts. I have yet to see a headline saying that some Hezbollah guys were killed - it is always 'civilians'. Hezbollah managing to make it through this war without a single death? What a crock. |
Erm look at this page again under civilian, military, you find
Originally posted by bbc:
Hezbollah - there are no reliable figures
Israeli military estimate 250-450
Hezbollah and fellow Shia militant group Amal say 55 fighters have been killed
(Agence France Presse, 5 August) |
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/11/2025 09:38:48 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/11/2025 09:38:48 PM EDT.
|
