It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

OP/ED: The War On Terror: Is It Really A War?

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
To Astronomer68

We must all have a little more belief in the people we elected to lead us.


How can we when they lie to us. The trials farce is a good example of that lying. Why should we have a belief and trust when we see it being abused. Why must we have a belief and trust and faith. Why can't we have truth and facts, not lies and falshoods.


The people in our respective countries have spoken. If things seem to stray to far off the track of our expectations you can bet the people will speak again and again and again until things are put more or less right.


The people are brainwashed. No One will speak out for fear of losing "easy street" no one has to struggle to live and survive and why would they speak out to lose their jobs and positions in cushy society. Everyday we are subject to "the threat of terror" and the fact is terrorism is named that because of the "threat of terror and of terror itself" we are conditioned to be terrified of terror and 9/11 bought that right into our loungerooms. We could sit back watch television in comfort of our homes, eating our hot cooked meals and, well one only has to look at the comforts of our society to understand where I am getting at there.

The only threat to our cushy lives, is an act of the unknown. or terror. To think that one can go about their day to day life and catch a train to work or catch an elevator to the 87th floor office and in the safety comfort zone be blown up in an act of terror.

No-one is going to speak out when its the less of two evils, even after past experience of those concentration camps and ethnic cleansing historically.

History has shown that people will not speak out except the minority of forward thinking people who will get scoffed at, shot down and thought of as a little loony to be supporting being kind and just to naughty terrorists interred in US led camps.


You simply must trust the good intentions and judgement of the people.


How so, wheres the good intentions, how can the people pass that judgement without full possession of the facts. How can they judge with bias in their hearts. What are those good intentions and how do they actually benefit me and my family now and in the long run.


Your only logical course of action is to attempt to convince the people that what you think is the proper course of action, should,in fact, be the one adopted. You can write letters, send E-mails, speak out, or do whatever to persuade the majority of the people of the rightness of what you think, but if you are unable to persuade the majority of them then you must accept their judgement and get on with things.


Never, how can one accept judgments which go against one's moral core, how can I accept this war where the US and my own country has no business. Given a choice I would rather those same troops to be sent to African countries to teach and build resources for those nations so they can eventually stand on their own feet and continue proudly without drought and fminie and disease. There are starving nations out there and starving people here at home, wherever your home may be. How many from your country is living in poverty, how much is being done within your country for the sick, the elderly, the poor. How much is done to fight crime and drugs. There are people dying that do not need to die. People dying of AIDS in Africa, I know we can't help everyone of them but there can be lots done to minimize this.

How can I accept that a countryman has done wrong until he gets a fair trial. Was I asked whether I wanted to expose my children to a war on terrorism?
I would much rather declare war on religion, all religion, religion with doctrines and beliefs that separate humanity and cause conflict of beliefs and cause war and fanaticism in the name of that religion, whatever that religion maybe.

Over time, most if not all wars can be attrributed to religion of some sort. It serves it's purpose to separate, to confuse and until the truth is exposed, whatever that maybe it will continue to separate, to divide humanity and cause dissent in the race to prove that one is better than the other, that their way is the only way, that they hold the golden keys, That there is an us and them.




[edit on 3-8-2005 by Mayet]




posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Mayet the people speak through elections and the people they elect to represent them--They have done so. If the representatives we elected stop representing us they will be replaced through democratic processes.

[edit on 4-8-2005 by Astronomer68]



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Last I heard since the WMD gig didnt work out, we are at war cause Saddam involved with 9/11.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 11:44 AM
link   
The "War on Terror" as is it being referred to can only fall under the second defenition.

An actual war requires conflict between two states, of which the War on Terror is not. The War on Terror, like the War on Drugs, is a war against an all-encompasing entity, like the Al-Qaeda. The Al-Qaeda is not a specific country, nor does it represent a specific country, so the first defenition of War would not be a valid defenition for the "War on Terror".

Now, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are actual wars under the first defenition because there's a conflict between these two countries and the United States, albiet that conflict is part of what we are dubbing as the "War on Terror".

So, technically, the "War on Terror" can go on from either "side" (those for and those against) until the end of man, but actual wars can only last til one side or the other gives in.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   
perceived illegalities, hype, and proaganda aside, i don't believe this is a "war". I don't believe America has been involved in a "true" war since WWII.

War means doing whatever it takes, going all out, holding nothing back. There's no room for international opinions, press corps sedition, physical and political sabotage, or opinion polls. Or endless rantings about tolerance and treating your enemy better than your own people, giving your prisoners more protections and rights than the enemy shows your people captured.

It's about killing your enemy and destroying his support until he is demoralized and unwilling (not just unable) to fight any more. Even if his weapons are destroyed but he still attacks bare handed, the war is not over until the hostiles are killed and the *enemy* requests the fight to end.

No real war is fought if victory can be declared by the more powerful side and the enemy does not admit defeat.

It needs to become a real war, or not at all. "police actions" have proven to fail in Vietnam, the "war on (foreign) drugs", and against terrorism. Prosecute a real war violently and viciously and efficiently, and the fear will silence the enemy. Play the politics game and set limits on yourself, and the enemy will exploit those weaknesses. Show your lack of resolve and unity on hundreds of media channels and the enemy will gain spirit and morale.

Morale, is the most dangerous weapon of all. The enemy knows this. We fail to remember this. The American press fails to remember-or does it?

As my grandfather would quote:"war is hell". If it's not a seething nasty hell, it's not war. If people can sit back and be comfortable, it's not war. Real war involves everyone, and becomes so disgusting that it is only used when absolutely necessary. It's frightening and uncivilized to the winner and the loser.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astronomer68
Mayet the people speak through elections and the people they elect to represent them--They have done so. If the representatives we elected stop representing us they will be replaced through democratic processes.

[edit on 4-8-2005 by Astronomer68]


You are kidding right? You really think that the democratic process will do all that? You still have trust in a two party preferred system? Hey yeah we can elect someone else as equally corrupt.



posted on Aug, 4 2005 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Yes Mayet I think the democratic process will do all that. I, like you, don't have much faith in the two party system, but I do have faith in the American people. When enough people think the two party system is not doing the job then it will be changed. It is certainly your perrogative to try to hasten that day through any legal means you choose.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Erm, no, you were not labelled a gluton for punishment, what you are seemingly advocating is. There is a distinct difference between me labelling you and then attaching a view or cliche to what you are saying or seemingly advocating, is there not? Apparently not.....?

If, in your eyes, some one advocates something stupid wouldnt it go with out saying that you consider them to be stupid? Regardless, not a major issue. Moving on.


Originally posted by Seekerof
Again, subz, that would be exactly what?
According to what I commented to previously, you were seemingly insinuating that the West, the West's foreign policies, the support of Israel were the root causes? Correct me if I am wrong, but I have yet to see you address or recognize that the fundamental teachings of Islam may be the/a problem?

Im not insinuating anything. I am actually saying that the West's foreign policy IS the root cause of Islamic terrorism.

How many Icelanders have you seen killed by Islamic terrorist? They are infidels as much as British and Americans are yet they have not once been targeted. Why not? If the sole reason Islamic terrorists target Westerners is because they are infidels and not muslims then wouldnt logic state that all Western countries would be targeted?

The only Western countries that have been targeted by Islamic terrorists are those involved in meddling with the Middle East and support of Israel. Britain and the United States are major players with the creation of Israel. Is it a coincidence that we are the only countries targetted and Canada, Scandinavia and Ireland have all been left alone?

You be the judge.

Fundamentals might be a cause of terrorism but Islam definately is not a problem. Is Catholicism to blame for the IRA terrorists and all the British dead? Or was it the fact that the British involvement in Northern Ireland was to blame?


Originally posted by Seekerof
Yeah, stereotypical and all....
Here's one for you: Enough is enough?
How about this one: An eye for an eye?

An eye for an eye will see the World go blind. Have you not heard that proverb?

You might have had enough but we usually do not allow that kind of finalistic attitude to base our laws. Objectivity trumps passion in legislature every time.


Originally posted by Seekerof
If sitting back and taking these acts of terrorism for a couple decades or so do not or have not thwarted terrorism, and those acts increase in magnitude, such as 911, etc., apparently, the time has come when the problem, the plague of terrorism must be actively dealt with, just as it is being dealt with more and more?

Again you are deliberately misleading the reader here. I have never once said we should sit back and take this terrorism. Ive readily stated that its the methods we are employing to rid the World of terrorism are wrong. Not the fact that we should be ridding the World of terrorism. Right?


Originally posted by Seekerof
I can careless, per se', if these actions taken against terrorists groups and organizations solves anything. What I do know is that those who are acting against terrorism are basicially saying is that enough is enough, and we will not stand around while further acts of terrorism go unanswered and unabated.

So you're saying your just glad we are lashing out blind because we're suffering? Fantastic attitude there



Originally posted by Seekerof
As mentioned above, again, no recognition by you that fundamentalist teachings of Islam may be part of the problem or the problem.

No you're wrong, I have said that fundamentalism is a contributing factor. I also said that the Israel-Palestine problem is what fundamentalists make their arguments with. If we deny them justified reasons for being angry we can work to remove the fundamentalists as well as deny them recruits based on existing problems.


Originally posted by Seekerof
Interesting, all the while Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia support, aid, and finacially back terrorist organizations. No, fair treatment is not going to eliminate terrorism. Sovling the Israel-Palestine problem is not going to eliminate it. Hate of the West is simply hate of the West, despite how you wish to rationalize it.

Saudi Arabia is a close American ally. Your President holds hands with the Saudi Arabian King. Interesting indeed!

I agree that solving the Israel-Palestine problem will not eliminate terrorism. I also think there is not a silver bullet solution for terrorism. And lashing out indescriminately and taking on the whole Muslim World wont eliminate terrorism.

But solving the Israel-Palestine problem will drive a wedge between fundamentalists and moderate muslims. That should be a prime objective as it will reduce the radicalisation of moderates. Isnt that the goal here?


Originally posted by Seekerof
I find that you make some rational and valid points, but my impression, maybe in mistake, is that I am sensing that you think that the West is the problem.

Your impression is correct. I do think the West is PART of the problem.


Originally posted by Seekerof
Each of the things you have mentioned are valid and have merit in that they do factor in to the overall equation, but again, I am putting forth that the very heart of the problem may be the fundamental teachings of Islam.

Key word "fundamental".

My argument, though, is that we are adding fuel to the fire when we could actually throw water on it.


Originally posted by Seekerof
To me, despite what we do to appease those Middle East sovereignties, despite how we fix the Israel-Palestine situation, the problem will still persist in the Middle East.

It will, I said before that there is no single silver bullet solution to Islamic terrorism. But at this point in time we're on a leaky ship with sieve to bail ourselves out. We are not being clever and multi-faceted in our combating of terrorism and we are actually contributing to the radicalisation of muslims.


Originally posted by Seekerof
When will Islam and the Middle East countries be held accountable for terrorism, instead of the finger continually being pointed at the West and its foreign policies?

Just what press have you been reading Seekerof? Which newspaper, TV news station or Western government have you seen pointing the finger at the West? Not bloody many thats for sure. All those loud voices are constantly blaming Islam and the Middle Eastern countries. Your last paragraph is completely topsy-turvy.

[edit on 6/8/05 by subz]



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by subz

Originally posted by Seekerof
Again, subz, that would be exactly what?
According to what I commented to previously, you were seemingly insinuating that the West, the West's foreign policies, the support of Israel were the root causes? Correct me if I am wrong, but I have yet to see you address or recognize that the fundamental teachings of Islam may be the/a problem?

Im not insinuating anything. I am actually saying that the West's foreign policy IS the root cause of Islamic terrorism.

How many Icelanders have you seen killed by Islamic terrorist? They are infidels as much as British and Americans are yet they have not once been targeted. Why not? If the sole reason Islamic terrorists target Westerners is because they are infidels and not muslims then wouldnt logic state that all Western countries would be targeted?

The only Western countries that have been targeted by Islamic terrorists are those involved in meddling with the Middle East and support of Israel. Britain and the United States are major players with the creation of Israel. Is it a coincidence that we are the only countries targetted and Canada, Scandinavia and Ireland have all been left alone?

You be the judge.



I hate to tell you this subz but you are mis-informed. Major terrorist cells have been broken up in France, Italy, Spain, Denmark, The Netherlands, Australia, the Phillipines, Indonesia, Russia, India, Romania, Germany, Greece, basically everywhere and yes, even Canada. Actually Canada has had several terroist cells knwn to be operating there, and guess what? They are not all planning attacks on the US. Some have a beef with Canada.

And what about those "non-medalling" scandinavian countries? Apperantly you missed some of the news coming out of those countries like the muder of Dutch filmmaker Van Gogh. How about the Dutch police hit with a handgrenade and then put into a standoff with a group of terroists? Or what about the churches burned in Holland by Muslim radicals? The threatened beheading of police officers there? Any of that sound familiar? Can you tell me how any of those nations have anything to do with the Isreal/Palestine debacle?

militantislammonitor.org
According to witnesses, the gravely wounded Theo Van Gogh begged for mercy on his knees.The shooter, who was described as "a dark skinned man" wearing a knitted cap and a jabailaya, reloaded and shot him again. He then pulled out a knife which he held with both hands and proceeded to stab Van Gogh in a frenzy - "as if he was trying to cut a tire to shreds" - according to witnesses. It later became apparent that the killer had slashed Van Gogh's throat in an attempt to behead him.

Soon after the murder it was revealed that the killer was connected to the group of Islamists in Holland who were under surveillance by the police and linked to Ayman Al Zawahir and Al Zarqawi , and a Jihad network which was linked to attacks in Madrid and Casablanca. Investigators said that the letter found on Van Gogh's body indicated ties to Takfir al Hira, a radical group which has declared war on westerners.

Witnesses recounted that after stabbing and slashing Van Gogh, the killer then calmly pulled a second knife out of his bag, wrote a short note and then plunged the note and knife into Van Gogh's chest near his heart. He then kicked Van Gogh several time hard in the side, wiped his gun on a rag, and walked away - "As if it was the most normal thing in the world."


The note was later found contain verses from the Koran and a call for holy war.



abcnews
THE HAGUE, Netherlands Nov 10, 2004 — Dutch special forces were locked in a standoff with an unknown number of suspected terrorists holed up in a house in The Hague after three officers were wounded by a hand grenade during an attempted raid Wednesday, authorities said.

Authorities closed the airspace over the city to small planes during the predawn operation. Neighbors said police snipers were posted on nearby rooftops and anti-terror forces were at the scene.

Hague Chief Prosecutor Han Moraal said the raid was part of a "continuing investigation into terrorism," but would not confirm if it was related to the Nov. 2 killing of filmmaker Theo van Gogh by an alleged Islamic radical.


What about the Philippines subz? The bombing onboard a ferry boat that killed 116 people in 2004, what did that have to do with the west's support of Isreal?

cnsnews.com
Seven months after insisting that a deadly fire onboard a passenger ferry was not related to terrorism, Philippines President Gloria Arroyo has acknowledged that terrorists detonated a bomb which sparked the devastating blaze.

Her government has filed criminal charges against six members of the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG), a terrorist gang with historic links to al Qaeda, in connection with the attack last February.

Sixty-three bodies were recovered although police say 116 people perished, making it the worst terror attack in the country's history.




Your assumption that the Jihad is all about the west's policies is wrong. What do Indonesia and the Phillipines have to do with the creation of Isreal? Nothing. All the black christians killed in Darfur, Sudan - What about their foriegn policies caused Arab gangs to wipe them out in a genocide? Nothing, they don't have foriegn policies. The Dutch don't have any forces in Iraq or the middle east, so why are they being targeted, if you assumption is correct subz? Everywhere that the radicals go they have an excuse for Jihad and terrorism, murder and torture. Don't buy into the "policy" excuse. Look closer at the activities of these groups and where they attack, then look at the custom tailored excuse promptly delivered by terrorist spokespeople on Al Jazeera. The groups that are committing these acts have a very real agenda and it has very little to do with any nation's foriegn policy

The root cause of modern Islamic terrorism is the radicalization of Islam and a political ideaology that urges the spread of Theocratic Rule.

Anyway, in case you would like to learn more about the non-existant terrorists in Canada and other "non-medelling" countries, here ya go.


frontpagemag.com
A US Senate committee hearing recently revealed that one of the world's most wanted terrorists, Imad Mugniyah, is in charge of Hezbollah's Vancouver cell. Mugniyah has planned terrorist attacks worldwide the past two decades and currently has a $25 million dollar reward on his head for the 1985 hijacking of an airliner that left one American dead. He is also suspected of having a hand in the Marine barracks attack as well as in the 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Argentina.

Another indication of how highly Hezbollah's leaders value their Canadian operation is that money raised from a Hezbollah cigarette-smuggling ring in North Carolina was sent to Canada. Moreover, an important Hezbollah agent, Mohammad Dbouk, was sent from Lebanon to run the Vancouver cell. According to the Senate committee, Dbouk was so highly regarded by Hezbollah that his
application to become a "martyr" was rejected five times.



www.cbc.ca
"It was simply a case of watching every move, following these individuals and keeping a close tab on their activities. They ultimately closed down shop and moved out of Ontario," Security Minister Bob Runciman said.

He disclosed the situation to shake Canadians out of their complacency about the possibility of terrorist attacks in Canada. But in Ottawa, federal Solicitor General Lawrence MacAuley dismissed the threat, saying the chances of an attack are low.

The "sleeper" cell – on call but not currently involved in criminal activity – was shut down in the past two months by provincial police and other law enforcement officials.



www.smh.com.au
Federal police say authorities have smashed an Australian terrorist cell linked to the French national Willie Virgile Brigitte, who they have confirmed has direct al-Qaeda connections.

The Australian Federal Police Commissioner, Mick Keelty, said last night that the actions of ASIO, AFP officers and NSW police over the past few days and weeks had "broken up and disrupted a [terrorist] group".

Asked whether the 35-year-old Brigitte, who has been deported, was the most serious al-Qaeda link arrested in Australia, Mr Keelty said "well, from what we know so far that is true".

Reports coming out of France "clearly indicate he wasn't here for a holiday, and he was here for an untoward purpose", he told the Nine Network.

French authorities are investigating Brigitte's role in the murder of Ahmad Shah Massoud, the Northern Alliance leader in Afghanistan.

The Caribbean-born Brigitte is also suspected of operating survival training camps for al-Qaeda sympathisers in the Fontainebleau forest, near Paris, according to French media reports.


And it goes on and on. Where you find the lax immigration laws you find terrorists. It's a global struggle for Theocratic Islamic Rule, anywhere these radicals go they start setting up cells.



Since the late 1990s, massive amounts of evidence has surfaced indicating that almost every country in Western Europe has at least one terrorist cell linked to al-Qaida. The cells all correspond with one another and send members to different countries to help with recruitment and logistic support. The investigation is wide in scope and has included the efforts of Italian, British, Belgian, German, French and Spanish police, as well as Europol, the European Union's intelligence-gathering agency focussed on international cross-border criminal networks. In each of these countries, investigators found a solid network of militant Islamists with connections not only to top leaders in the Middle East, but also to heads of cells in each European country. Police intelligence described the Tanzania attack on the American Embassy in 1998 as a four-pronged attack. There were four cells involved in the attack, each with separate and well-defined tasks. One cell supplied the arms, a second forged the necessary documents, a third helped transport people, and the last carried out the actual attack.

A Palestinian on trial for terrorism-related offenses in Germany told a Dusseldorf court in early July 2003 that al-Qaida terrorists are living in Germany. Shadi Mohammed Mustafa Abdalla, 26, said he knew of terrorists living in Duisburg, Cologne, Krefeld and Haan near Dusseldorf. The defendant told the court a the terrorist cell planned on attacking the Jewish Museum in Berlin, a disco frequented by Jews in Dusseldorf and a Jewish-run restaurant in a Dusseldorf suburb. Prosecutors say the defendant has become one of the state's principal witnesses in German trials of alleged Islamist terrorists. At his trial, Shadi recounted his training in Afghanistan and his days working as a bodyguard for bin Laden himself.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by looking4truth
I hate to tell you this subz but you are mis-informed. Major terrorist cells have been broken up in France, Italy, Spain, Denmark, The Netherlands, Australia, the Phillipines, Indonesia, Russia, India, Romania, Germany, Greece, basically everywhere and yes, even Canada. Actually Canada has had several terroist cells knwn to be operating there, and guess what? They are not all planning attacks on the US. Some have a beef with Canada.

Before I start can I say I dont appreciate your combative tone. You may assume you know everything but dont pretend to lord it over me thanks.

For starters i've underlined the Coalition of the Willing members in your list above. That is a major policy garnering terrorist attention. I also bolded non-Western countries with which you tried to say I am mis-informed.

That leaves Germany, France, Canada and Greece in your list. These countries have terrorists operating within their borders, not attacking them. There is a difference. When the bombs start going off in their land then your point might have merit and without that happening my statement is correct.

There is also a very varied and wide history of international interference in the Middle East. France interfered in Morroco for years. That some muslim extremist group would use that as an excuse would not surprise me. Do I think it would be justified? No! But the fact remains these groups see the past injustices as cause for their "revenge". Its not Islam that is doing this, its the policies, both past and present, that they are using to base their revenge on.

They use these injustices, backed up with Islam, as recruitment devices to radicalize muslim youth. When we all wake up and accept this and take steps not to make things worse we can effectively combat terrorism.


Originally posted by looking4truth
And what about those "non-medalling" scandinavian countries? Apperantly you missed some of the news coming out of those countries like the muder of Dutch filmmaker Van Gogh. How about the Dutch police hit with a handgrenade and then put into a standoff with a group of terroists? Or what about the churches burned in Holland by Muslim radicals? The threatened beheading of police officers there? Any of that sound familiar? Can you tell me how any of those nations have anything to do with the Isreal/Palestine debacle?

I never said that Scandinavian countries didnt get involved with Israel so they are immune from terrorism. The Netherlands is part of the coalition of the willing that invaded Iraq. I would class that as a reason for the above. Also the killing of Teo Van Gogh was a hate crime, not a terrorist incident. But as well, if you wanted to dig for excuses that Islamic terrorists might base their hate on, not me - them, then the Netherlands was blamed for selling Israel the hard water they required to produce nuclear weapons. Im not saying their logic is sound, merely showing the reasons they use. Which is not just Islam.


Originally posted by looking4truth
What about the Philippines subz? The bombing onboard a ferry boat that killed 116 people in 2004, what did that have to do with the west's support of Isreal?

The Philippines is part of the West now? I could of sworn they were an Eastern country. Care to disabuse me of that belief?

Also to show you that the reasons for the Islamic terrorism in the Phillippines is not based purely on Islam, there has been a civil war for an independant state. Is that based on Islam? Maybe, but I assume it to be a land grab much like many other nations have done. Religion may be an excuse but human greed usually is the primary motive.


Originally posted by looking4truth
Your assumption that the Jihad is all about the west's policies is wrong. What do Indonesia and the Phillipines have to do with the creation of Isreal?

Again I was refering to Western countries but also Indonesia has Islamic rebels in Acheh wanting independance from an authoratarian regime. They may use Islam for their rallying cry but again is human greed motivating them to make grabs for land and power. Much like Europe did in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries.


Originally posted by looking4truth
[Nothing. All the black christians killed in Darfur, Sudan - What about their foriegn policies caused Arab gangs to wipe them out in a genocide? Nothing, they don't have foriegn policies.

Again your talking about non-Western countries. All the non-Western countries that you are using to try and discredit my post have ancient ethnic and religious problems. The cycle of religious violence is as old as the hills and is not caused by Islam in isolation. So stop trying to paint a picture that Islam is the be all and end all of World conflict.


Originally posted by looking4truth
The Dutch don't have any forces in Iraq or the middle east, so why are they being targeted, if you assumption is correct subz?

Again they are part of the coalition of the willing. That is tantamount to support for the invasion of Iraq. Also your reference to the Teo Van Gough murder is not a terrorist act. It is a hate crime.


Originally posted by looking4truth
Everywhere that the radicals go they have an excuse for Jihad and terrorism, murder and torture. Don't buy into the "policy" excuse. Look closer at the activities of these groups and where they attack, then look at the custom tailored excuse promptly delivered by terrorist spokespeople on Al Jazeera. The groups that are committing these acts have a very real agenda and it has very little to do with any nation's foriegn policy

Give me a break. If you believe that you are severely blinkered. Whats the greatest attraciton that swells the ranks of Islamic terrorist groups? Because Islam says so? Or the injusticies (real or percieved) that muslim's are experiencing?


Originally posted by looking4truth
The root cause of modern Islamic terrorism is the radicalization of Islam and a political ideaology that urges the spread of Theocratic Rule.

And how do they get support for the radicalisation? Why is it only coming to existance now? Why didnt they do all this back in the late 40's when Israel was flouting international law? The muslim countries tried to go through the proper channels. We have many outstanding UN resolutions critical of Israel and yet they do not obey them. Why didnt the Islamic terrorists arrise back then? Why now? Are Islamic radicals something created in the last 20 years? Look at why they are exploding onto the scene now. Its our policies that have swelled their ranks.


Originally posted by looking4truth
Anyway, in case you would like to learn more about the non-existant terrorists in Canada and other "non-medelling" countries, here ya go.

And here you go.


Coalition of the Willing
# Afghanistan
# Albania
# Australia
# Azerbaijan
# Colombia
# Czech Republic
# Denmark
# El Salvador
# Eritrea
# Estonia
# Ethiopia
# Georgia
# Hungary
# Iceland
# Italy
# Japan
# Latvia
# Lithuania
# Macedonia
# Netherlands
# Nicaragua
# Philippines
# Poland
# Romania
# Slovakia
# South Korea
# Spain
# Turkey
# United Kingdom
# Uzbekistan

Sorry but I still believe our policies are fueling the fire.

[edit on 6/8/05 by subz]



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by looking4truth
The root cause of modern Islamic terrorism is the radicalization of Islam and a political ideaology that urges the spread of Theocratic Rule.


Wrong.

The Islamic angle is merely a hotpoint. Religion is used by the cells to indoctrinate the terrorists. Religion is a major reference point in the Western medias, whose audience happens to be majority Christian. Religion is not the point, however. It's a tool. Just like its always been. Your assertion that the theocratic angle is proven by the varied attacks is flawed as well. Reasons abound, such as initiation, practice, and the undermining of Western Policy by association.

Btw....I still find it very interesting that the Laden family has ties to the Bush family......there are a few minor points and details that prevent me from arguing that the entire charade is Western Policy.......but I digress...


[edit on 6-8-2005 by MemoryShock]



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock

Originally posted by looking4truth
The root cause of modern Islamic terrorism is the radicalization of Islam and a political ideaology that urges the spread of Theocratic Rule.


Wrong.

The Islamic angle is merely a hotpoint. Religion is used by the cells to indoctrinate the terrorists. Religion is a major reference point in the Western medias, whose audience happens to be majority Christian. Religion is not the point, however. It's a tool. Just like its always been. Your assertion that the theocratic angle is proven by the varied attacks is flawed as well. Reasons abound, such as initiation, practice, and the undermining of Western Policy by association.

Btw....I still find it very interesting that the Laden family has ties to the Bush family......there are a few minor points and details that prevent me from arguing that the entire charade is Western Policy.......but I digress...


[edit on 6-8-2005 by MemoryShock]


MemoryShock, I don't think you do the people in the terrorist groups any justice by describing their struggle in such Machiavellian terms. Religion is NOT just a tool, it is a belief system, and one that is so central to what the terrorists are fighting for that if you took it away then there would be no reason to take up arms. All of the members of Al-Qeada whom come from nations outside of palistine have no vested interest in the Isreal/Palistine conflict other than the religious aspects.

I stand by my conclusion. Modern Islamic terrorism stems from the radicalization of Islam and a political ideaology that supports theocratic rule on a nearly global scale. It is a mixture of politics and dangerous religious interpretation. The politics are simple, theocratic Islamic rule is the only true rule of law.

The terrorists are not just fighting against "western" policies, they are fighting anything that is standing between them and Allah's will as they see it. Be that in the U.S., or in Russia, in India, in the middle east, or be it in Asia.

Any "policy" that the terrorists sight as a reason for attack is always backed up by the fact that it conflicts with the teachings of the Koran. For example, Bin Laden's demand that the west leave Saudi Arabia is based on what? The belief that it is a "holyland" and that the Koran instructs muslims to drive infidels from the holyland.

MemoryShock, what western policy are the Islamic terrorists in the Philippines fighting? How about Indonesia? According to them they are fighting for the rise of Islamic states in those countries. Don't downplay their aspirations by minimizing their struggle as just attacking an "association" with the west. That is a dangerous underestimation of what drives people to take up arms and risk their lives. How about in Chechyna? The Islamic rebels there are fighting for an automynous Islamic state in Chechyna, Russia. Al-Qaeda describes itself as a coalition of groups fighting for the values of Islam around the world.



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Subz, I don't feel your post needs any dis-crediting. It was Op/Ed right, opinion? I disagree that's all. Your Op/Ed was about the WOT not really being a war, I simply feel that that is niave and dangerous not to mention exclusive of any role radical, racist, biggoted, extremism from the other side plays and just how big a problem it is. I don't think you realize the size and numbers of the worldwide Islamic extremist movements. It is simply just too much for law enforcement alone to tackle.

As for western "policies" being a cause for the terrorism, I think that's B.S.! Any policy that is at odds with the will of the extremists is going to cause tension. To say that the policies are the cause is to say that the terrorism is justified.

And as for the Van Gogh murder, if it was just a hate crime then why did the investigation lead to the breakup of a terrorist cell? Remember that the cops got handgrenades lobbed at them by terrorists when they were investigating the murder. I have no doubt that the murder was inspired by hate, it's the group the murderer was associated with that should give you pause in labeling it a regular hate crime. A member of a terrorist group commits a hate crime, but it's not terrorism why? Again you are trying to make the terrorists into just a law enforcement issue when they are clearly a worldwide force. There are countless numbers who are or support Islamic extremists, it is just to big a problem for law enforcement agencies alone to deal with.



posted on Aug, 11 2005 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by looking4truth
Subz, I don't feel your post needs any dis-crediting. It was Op/Ed right, opinion? I disagree that's all. Your Op/Ed was about the WOT not really being a war, I simply feel that that is niave and dangerous not to mention exclusive of any role radical, racist, biggoted, extremism from the other side plays and just how big a problem it is. I don't think you realize the size and numbers of the worldwide Islamic extremist movements. It is simply just too much for law enforcement alone to tackle.

My reason for emphasising why its not a War is because that during times of War our civil liberties traditionally take a back seat. We are not at War now so our civil liberties should not be curtailed. We could very well combat terrorist just as effectively as we do now without pretending we are engaged in a real War. We are not, it does not apply. Yet because the majority of us believe we truly are engaged in a traditional War the stage is set for the curtailment of our civil liberties and no complaint will be made. This scares me and I see no end in sight for this 'War time setting'.


Originally posted by looking4truth
As for western "policies" being a cause for the terrorism, I think that's B.S.! Any policy that is at odds with the will of the extremists is going to cause tension. To say that the policies are the cause is to say that the terrorism is justified.

How is American support for Israel in direct defiance of the United Nations not a cause of Islamic terrorism? How is the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq not a cause of terrorism? If you can honestly sit there and tell me that these policies have not added terrorists to the ranks of Al-Qaeda I will be shocked. You cannot possibly think that Western policies has no bearing on fueling Islamic terrorism.

Your supposition that saying our policies are a cause (not the sole cause) of Islamic terrorism is to say they are justified is insane. How do you work that one out? Just because you agree with those Western policies doesnt change the fact that terrorists are justifying their actions because of it. It doesnt change the fact that due to these policies muslims are being drawn to terrorist groups. You can agree with these policies all you like and it wont change the reality of how muslims interpret them.


Originally posted by looking4truth
And as for the Van Gogh murder, if it was just a hate crime then why did the investigation lead to the breakup of a terrorist cell?

This was the murder of a single man. It doesnt scare the population of the Netherlands any more than any other murder. If it was a terrorist attack the target would be the population of the Netherlands. I have never seen the killing of one civilian being refered to as terrorism before.


Originally posted by looking4truth
Again you are trying to make the terrorists into just a law enforcement issue when they are clearly a worldwide force.

So are drug dealers and people smugglers. This is my point. The only criteria a War can be waged through is one country attacking another country. You cannot declare War on disparate group of criminals. It IS a law enforcement issue. They are criminals and the fact that the London bombers are being charged with "attempted murder" is testament to that. We can use the military to combat terrorists without the war-time setting. We are not incapable of rooting out terrorists if we fail to declare War on them.


Originally posted by looking4truth
There are countless numbers who are or support Islamic extremists, it is just to big a problem for law enforcement agencies alone to deal with.

I can guarantee you there are more people involved with drug smuggling than there are with terrorism. More people are killed through drugs than there are through terrorism. The crime generated through drugs and the fueling of the users habits is a massive danger to our societies. Why the military focus on terrorism and none for drugs?

The answer lies in the fear that can be manipulated in us because we have no choice in where terrorism strikes. Our governments are playing on this fact to pass laws that make their jobs easier to control us. We will not have these measures released because they have declared a perpetual War. It will be too late to change this by the time society at a whole realises this. This is what I fear, not terrorists.



posted on Aug, 23 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   
I came across this quote today and it fitted the spirit of this Op/Ed to a tee. I was compelled to include it here.


Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes...known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. ... No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. - James Madison, Political Observations, 1795


Spoken 210 years ago and it says it all really


[edit on 23/8/05 by subz]




top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join