To think that your preferred methods would lead to anything but more bloodshed is naive. People willing to die for their cause are unlikely to "fear the night", and your contempt of the rules puts you exactly on their level -- no different than a common thug or bully. I don't want my government playing at that level, and I'm sure doing so would just create more enemies.
Not my rules, pal. Just my observations from being a participant on the playing field.
And it doesn't matter what you want your government to do; it will do whatever is necessary. Even with Obama as its president.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
My two cents:
We tend to label large-scale acts of violence as terrorism. Murder and assault tend to be categorized as non-terrorism because it's essentially either one on one or more personal (e.g. jealous husband kills wife, her boyfriend, her mother and perhaps himself). With larger scale violence whose victims are random (e.g. bombing at a shopping mall, shooting up a police station, etc.), there's a tendency to immediately label that as terrorism. The exception appears to be when it involves some lone gunman who shoots up a school, church or fast-food restaurant. For some reason, we don't count that as terrorism.
I see a big difference between the real cause of terrorism and the stated purpose of terrorist acts. It comes down to this: the masterminds behind these acts have decided that violence is the way to get something done. They really don't give a damn about the social, political, religious, economic situation of a particular hamlet, village, town, city, county, province, country or region. It could be a simple matter of gaining power, notoriety, fame, prestige, political leverage, popular favor; the reasons are endless. It comes down to being able to convince a group of people that committing these large-scale acts is the right thing to do. The typical buttons they push are religious, political, nationalist, economic, social, ethnic, etc. But that's all they are: buttons that can be pushed to sway a group of people into following along.
If you truly believe that Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are committing these acts because of their religious beliefs, then you've missed the boat. It turns out that religion is the easy button. Otherwise, it may be ethnicity or some other motivation.
In the end, the terrorist is no different than a common thug or bully.
And they can be taught to fear the night.
We believe that the way to deal with these thugs is to play by some rules we impose on ourselves. How naive.
You mean like the United States involvement in Korea and Vietnam in order to impose its vision on that region, or the invasion of Iraq!
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
We tend to label large-scale acts of violence as terrorism. Murder and assault tend to be categorized as non-terrorism because it's essentially either one on one or more personal (e.g. jealous husband kills wife, her boyfriend, her mother and perhaps himself). With larger scale violence whose victims are random (e.g. bombing at a shopping mall, shooting up a police station, etc.), there's a tendency to immediately label that as terrorism. The exception appears to be when it involves some lone gunman who shoots up a school, church or fast-food restaurant. For some reason, we don't count that as terrorism.
I see a big difference between the real cause of terrorism and the stated purpose of terrorist acts. It comes down to this: the masterminds behind these acts have decided that violence is the way to get something done. They really don't give a damn about the social, political, religious, economic situation of a particular hamlet, village, town, city, county, province, country or region. It could be a simple matter of gaining power, notoriety, fame, prestige, political leverage, popular favor; the reasons are endless. It comes down to being able to convince a group of people that committing these large-scale acts is the right thing to do. The typical buttons they push are religious, political, nationalist, economic, social, ethnic, etc. But that's all they are: buttons that can be pushed to sway a group of people into following along.
If you truly believe that Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are committing these acts because of their religious beliefs, then you've missed the boat. It turns out that religion is the easy button. Otherwise, it may be ethnicity or some other motivation.
In the end, the terrorist is no different than a common thug or bully.
And they can be taught to fear the night.
We believe that the way to deal with these thugs is to play by some rules we impose on ourselves. How naive.
If you're suggesting that the masterminds behind these acts might be manipulating men and women, who already have some pretty serious control issues themselves, into carrying out these acts, you might just be onto something.
Cheap shots and insults are the last refuge of those who have nothing else to fall back on. Thank you for making it obvious that you have no substantive argument.
So what's this then?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandhi90s
For the record, the number of people killed in all the atrocities that you list is dwarfed by the number of deaths caused by Bush's illegal war.
[Edited to add:] Let's try something different, let's *think* for a change.
Bolding mine.
Missed the point, didn't you? (Or perhaps you have signatures turned off.) That's Occupationalhazard's own signature that I was playing back to him. It was a joke. If you look very carefully you can see my smiley at the end.
Mrs. PTravel is really shaken by the thought that we would have been in the Oberoi (she was the one who really wanted to go to Mumbai -- I wanted to go further south).
I'm glad you weren't there. You'd have been a lovely target. Looks like they've killed the Chabad rabbi and the rebbitzin.
Yes, but . . . Mohammad Atta was educated Muslim. The Australian doctors were educated Muslims. What they had in common was not simply Islam, but attendance at specific mosques that most certainly did, indeed, preach hatred and violence. Again, it's not all Islam, or even most Islam, but the philosophy of hate and violence is being preached by extremist imams in the name of Islam, perverted though their views may be.
I would respectfully challenge you to provide an example of unhyphenated, non-religious terrorism from the past 50 years.
Which 'Australian doctors' are you referring to? The Indian doctor (or a second cousin from India, working in Australia as a doctor, held then released on suspicion) who was a resident or citizen of the UK, on a drive-in mission into the airport terminal? I think you have your facts and memory mixed, but I'd appreciate more info.
Many, many Australians have died on been seriously injured by terrorist attacks in the past in Bali, London and now Mumbai.
I don't know how you've made an Australian a convicted terrorist in your rhetoric, above.
Programs: AA EXP & SPG PLT. Long-suffering Mets fan.
Posts: 3,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by swei0009
I'm glad you weren't there. You'd have been a lovely target. Looks like they've killed the Chabad rabbi and the rebbitzin.
They clearly were only killed because they were American, as representatives of a US-based missionary organization. After all, this was only domestic Indian terrorism.
See, one of my fellow OMNI-ites has finally taught me not to see anti-semitism everywhere I look. So now, I'm like Stephen Colbert: I don't see anti-semitism at all.
They clearly were only killed because they were American, as representatives of a US-based missionary organization. After all, this was only domestic Indian terrorism.
See, one of my fellow OMNI-ites has finally taught me not to see anti-semitism everywhere I look. So now, I'm like Stephen Colbert: I don't see anti-semitism at all.
Before anyone flames me, YES, THIS WAS SARCASM.
I know I'm going to take flak for this, but it's not always all about the Jews. Really. There are hundreds of non-Jewish Indians lying dead, yet you choose to imply that this attack had something to do with anti-Semitism. The Chabad House was not the primary target. Can we wait on the rhetoric until more facts are known?
Also, I have not read anywhere that the rabbi and his wife have been killed, and I hope swei0009 is wrong and that they are safe.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by CO FF
They clearly were only killed because they were American, as representatives of a US-based missionary organization. After all, this was only domestic Indian terrorism.
See, one of my fellow OMNI-ites has finally taught me not to see anti-semitism everywhere I look. So now, I'm like Stephen Colbert: I don't see anti-semitism at all.
Before anyone flames me, YES, THIS WAS SARCASM.
Just because it happened in India and the perpetrators might be Muslims, does not mean it's entirely domestic. Even Sikh terrorism was not entirely domestic. Right everything is about Jews. No one who was not Jewish was killed.
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
Just because it happened in India and the perpetrators might be Muslims, does not mean it's entirely domestic. Even Sikh terrorism was not domestic. Right everything is about Jews. No one who was not Jewish was killed.
So what then, to you, is domestic terrorism?
__________________
FlyerTalk supports hate speech.
Location: Somewhere near DCA. NW Platinum. AA Platinum.
Posts: 11,263
Anyone with half a brain would know what domestic terrorism is not If you are not aware of the situation in that part of the world, your should educate yourself on the issue.
Only one who is completely unaware of politics in that part of the world would call it domestic terrorism and rule out "foreign" hands.
__________________
Those who sacrifice liberty of some to purchase a little temporary safety, will have neither liberty nor safety.
I think you have your facts and memory mixed, but I'd appreciate more info.
