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.

 

Understanding "Terrorists" (just hear me out) Poster's Confession/Explanation

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 01:15 AM
link   
Recently I have been speaking about the Mujahideen and how they deserve success and all that. I do it to provide a little balance here, but more importantly I should explain why, so that we can achieve greater understanding. After all, deny ignorance, right?

Alright.

Imagine this. (Now I know some may not want to, but just do it, for the sake of being fair)

It's 2015, and our new President Jeb Bush (or Hillary Clinton) has decided that democracy had a nice run, but that's enough, and now it's time to save the country with a dictatorship. The President has declared themself ruler of America, and no one is to challenge them, or speak against them.

Now, the newly democratic Muslim nations see the America that saved them (thanks W) falling to the evils that had befell them not so long ago. So out of respect, and a sense of responsibility, they form a large invasion force, which they have built up, thanks to their new economic freedoms, and decide to invade America, depose our current dictator and their henchmen, and install a new democracy.

Now the dictator is using the American armed forces to defend against the invaders, but since the dictatorship has taken over, the army has weakened because of the bad leadership, and they drop their weapons and mix amongst the civilians.

Now, who's side would you be on, when on a daily basis you see occupying armies killing American women and children, while attacking the "resistance?" And then referring to them as collateral damage?

Think about that for a while, before you just think of them all as terrorists. They are people, too.

The sad thing is that many of you consider them the enemy as well, and many refer to Islam as evil. With that attitude, the killing will never, ever, ever end.

I'll leave you with a paragraph from a pro-resistance author, in hopes that you may understand how they feel (you are encouraged to read the full article):




So, their soldiers wearing the cross, full of hate, shoot into unarmed civilians, singing "Burn, you mother-f.. Burn". In contrast when the Mujahideen retaliate they praise their creator (Allah Akbar). Only occasionally they exhibit anger due to the loss of their loved ones but rarely show hatred. Hateful words like rag head, sand 'n-word', towel heads have no equivalence within the tolerant Muslim societies.
The New Badr, 9-11 And Layla Tul-Qadr





[edit on 10-11-2004 by cstyle226]




posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 01:37 AM
link   
To be fair, I for one do distinguish between "militants", "insurgents" and "terrorists", and am actually pretty picky about that.

If you fight, you're a militant. If you fight the government, you're an insurgent. If you deliberately kill innocent people in brutal ways to try to achieve political objectives, you're a terrorist.

What title a person earns depends upon his deeds.

The "mujahideen" illegally occupying Fallujah are, by my definition, "insurgents", and not necessarily terrorists.

However, like terrorists, their fate will be the same: "martyrdom".



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 01:41 AM
link   
It wasn't so much the titles I'm talking about, even though that is a problem, it's the reasoning.

Do you expect them to watch it, and enjoy? Their history tells them that countless empires have invaded their land for control of their riches, so pardon them if they are skeptical when Bush II leads an invasion right back into their lands.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by cstyle226
Do you expect them to watch it, and enjoy? Their history tells them that countless empires have invaded their land for control of their riches, so pardon them if they are skeptical when Bush II leads an invasion right back into their lands.

Sorry, I got a little off track with the whole semantic angle.

No, I'm totally on board with your point. I can absolutely understand why both Iraqi insurgents and foreign "friends" would want to drive the U.S. out of Iraq. I can't blame them the slightest bit for feeling the way they do about the situation.

Certainly, I know we Americans would not be at all hospitable toward troops of a nation that invaded the U.S. -- no matter what reason they may give for doing so (WMDs? Um, sure.
), and can understand that nothing other than U.S. withdrawal from Iraq will be satisfactory to the insurgents.

It is a sad and unfortunate consequence of U.S. policy in Iraq that they have to die, and while I can salute their courage and commitment, it must necessarily be a farewell salute.

May God have mercy on their souls, because we will not.


[edit on 11/10/2004 by Majic]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic


It is a sad and unfortunate consequence of U.S. policy in Iraq that they have to die, and while I can salute their courage and commitment, it must necessarily be a farewell salute.

May God have mercy on their souls, because we will not.



And while you were cordial at the beginning, it is at this point where you inflame the sentiment of us vs. them.

Like I said before, Al-Qaeda is their version of the KKK.

They are behind the times in comparison to America, so their racist movement is just coming to full power.

And despite the KKK no longer being significant, their sentiment resounds throughout the south, and dare I say it, where I live right now temporarily. (Central Indiana, but I am originally from Chicago).


So when you say:

It is a sad and unfortunate consequence of U.S. policy in Iraq that they have to die, and while I can salute their courage and commitment, it must necessarily be a farewell salute.

I say, you will not kill all of them, and tons of Americans will die as well. So maybe we can give the marines an equal farewell salute.

And when you say:

May God have mercy on their souls, because we will not.


I say, you are begging for it, and may the marine's souls be shown no mercy by "god".


P.S. I don't believe in any religion, but all this anti-muslim speak is driving me towards supporting their position.




[edit on 10-11-2004 by cstyle226]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by cstyle226
I say, you will not kill all of them, and tons of Americans will die as well. So maybe we can give the marines an equal farewell salute.

I'm not saying I'm happy about it, simply that it's going to happen.

It really is sad to see people die this way. My statements are observations, and though they may seem jingoistic, the truth is that history bears out my prediction in this case pretty well.

Of course, I could be wrong. We'll know soon enough, I imagine.

Fallujah isn't the only or last battleground in this war, and there are many problems besides insurgents plaguing Iraq right now, so I don't want to seem too smug about that.

But as far as the outcome of this battle, that is one of the few certainties there is in Iraq. I'm sorry it has to be this way, but we're going to kill them, and we're not going to be nice about it at all.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
I'm sorry it has to be this way, but we're going to kill them, and we're not going to be nice about it at all.



I'll be saying the same thing when that car bomb goes off in the middle of a bunch of the "we" you are talking about.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by cstyle226
I'll be saying the same thing when that car bomb goes off in the middle of a bunch of the "we" you are talking about.

Well, I guess someone has to cheer for the losing side. I'm not sure I would feel very comfortable posting pro-terrorist sympathies on the Internet these days, but I guess that's up to you.

It would be very unwise to assume that the War on Terrorism is only being fought in Fallujah right now. It would also be unwise to assume that some chest-beating and saber-rattling will deter us.

So your side is going to lose, and disastrously so. The best you can hope for is to kill as many of us as you can before you go down, but that's all you will have accomplished: nothing more than leaving a blacker mark on history, and more contempt for your memory.

On the bright side, if your support for terrorism does not go beyond opinion, you need not worry about being beheaded when we win.

Since I cannot expect the same luxury should my side lose, I have no choice but to support victory for the U.S.

And I support it very strongly.




[edit on 11/10/2004 by Majic]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 02:57 AM
link   
I suppose. But the US has not every war it has fought, and arrogance is usually the reason.

So I welcome any arrogance on yours and others behalf.

As for you saying I support terrorism, you are incorrect.

I support the liberation of people's from oppressors, whether they be Islamic oppressors, Christian oppressors, Athiest, or ANYONE.

So when the US says they are coming to Iraq to give democracy, but will actively make sure that the government that is chosen is friendly, then they are only supporting their version of "freedom."

So even if you are successful, you will ultimately fail.

[edit on 10-11-2004 by cstyle226]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 03:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by cstyle226
As for you saying I support terrorism, you are incorrect.

Setting off car bombs in crowds of people qualifies as terrorism to me, but maybe we'll just have to disagree on that.


Originally posted by cstyle226
I support the liberation of people's from oppressors, whether they be Islamic oppressors, Christian oppressors, Athiest, or ANYONE.

Perhaps it is none of my business, but would you be so kind as to tell me what "oppressors", other than the U.S., you are opposed to?

Is there anyone else, or just us Americans on your "bad guy" list?



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic

Setting off car bombs in crowds of people qualifies as terrorism to me, but maybe we'll just have to disagree on that.


When you are severely outmatched in weaponry, as you have happily boasted about, you do what you can, and if you notice, the majority of those bombs are directed at the Occupiers, with, what the American army refers to as "collateral damage" when they do it, but "mass murder" when the Resistance does it.



Perhaps it is none of my business, but would you be so kind as to tell me what "oppressors", other than the U.S., you are opposed to?

Is there anyone else, or just us Americans on your "bad guy" list?



I am not biased against certain oppressors, they are ALL bad

For instance:
Saudi Arabia
Saddam Hussein was one...the Taliban was, too.

Bush is one, too.

NOW NOW NOW...I know this may outrage some, but I will explain.

First question you may be asking:

"If Saddam and the Taliban were oppressive, why wouldn't you be happy that the US has gotten rid of them?"

Excellent question. Because replacing one oppressive government, with another installed one, doesn't fix anything, just changes the "kind" of oppression.

Another question you may be asking is:

"How is Bush oppressive?"

"Free-speech zones" which are in reality "Freedom cages"
Plus, anyone who speaks against the US policy in the US is considered to be an enemy, and dissent is not welcomed, almost punished and shunned.

And while "clean" elections may make people feel proud of their leaders and their excellent victory, I do not believe that this election was clean, and democracy in the US is more of a feeling, than a reality. Now had the Skull and Bones boys decided to let Kerry win, I would have said the same thing.

So whether you're oppressiving in the Eastern or Western Hemisphere, you're still oppressing, and you deserve everything that comes in response to such oppression.

That's what I mean, when I say Justice.

By the way, I am an American.

[edit on 10-11-2004 by cstyle226]

[edit on 10-11-2004 by cstyle226]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 03:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by cstyle226
By the way, I am an American.

Now what could have possibly led me to believe otherwise?



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic

Originally posted by cstyle226
By the way, I am an American.

Now what could have possibly led me to believe otherwise?




You assuming that anyone who didn't support the invasion, and is against the oppression maybe?

Or perhaps the fact that I dissent, makes me un-American?

Maybe it's arrogance?



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 03:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by cstyle226
Maybe it's arrogance?

Naw, we can't possibly be arrogant. We're Americans.


U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 03:35 AM
link   
cstyle226 very nice open minded view. you are for sure capable of seeing things truely from the other prespective. We should just get out of Iraq and Afganistan and Saudi arabia and those terrorsits wont find a reason to hit us.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 03:35 AM
link   
We are arrogent and it is one of the seven sins. We will suffer.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 03:48 AM
link   
Unfortunately, most Americans (while some may pretend it's not true) believe they are untouchable.

Within 10 years, we'll see how untouchable America really is.

If we keep pursuing this type of foriegn policy, while pretending to want to stop terror, when in reality the goal is to secure oil, and encourage terror to provide a never-ending enemy to feed the Military-Industrial Complex, and the coffers of the greedy elite.

[edit on 10-11-2004 by cstyle226]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by cstyle226
Within 10 years, we'll see how untouchable America really is.

Actually, we have already seen this demonstrated again and again. America did not go to war over a single incident.

We were called out for war the first time the WTC was bombed. That was in 1993.

We didn't fight back. So we kept getting attacked. We were attacked several times throughout the '90s. And we didn't offer any meaningful resistance.

Finally, after 3,000 American civilians and the heart of a major U.S. city were brutally, catastrophically and maliciously destroyed, with the Pentagon in flames, and with the passengers and crew of four jet airliners dead, we figured out that a strategy of not responding to terrorism wasn't working.

We are painfully aware that we are not untouchable. We finally got the message, loud and clear.

That's what this whole thing is all about.



[edit on 11/10/2004 by Majic]



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 04:10 AM
link   
That's not what I meant.

Sure, anyone can blow something up...9/11 was just a carefully thought-out and planned attack, but in essence, it was blowing something up.

So was the first WTC attack.

That's not what I mean by "untouchable."

I'm talking about how everyone believes that the US will be the world's superpower forever, and that there is no possible way our democracy could ever fail.

While it started out as an excellent system, over the past 200 years, and especially as of late, the constitution has been incorrectly interpreted, or just bypassed altogether in some cases. And the ideals this country was based on, which I love, are no longer as strongly evident as they once were, and should be.

The reason we will not be able to stop it, is because the majority of the population doesn't believe it.

How can you fix a problem you can't even see?

Hubris.



posted on Nov, 10 2004 @ 04:18 AM
link   
The truth will come and the liar's will be exposted then you will know the lord.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join