Should We Try To Rid The World Of Terrorism?

[Always Free]

If the answer is yes, then how do we do it?

Is attacking Iraq one way to do it?

Should we leave it to America and Britain to do the dirty work or should we all stick together and fight this most evil and cowardly acts of murder?

Why can't those who find any excuse under the sun for this war (Iraq) see it as one way of helping rid ALL of us of terrorism?

:mad:

[to.by]

If the answer is yes, then how do we do it?

By obliteration of the cause of terrorism, which usually is despair which again is caused by powerty.

Is attacking Iraq one way to do it?

No way! Violence produces only more violence.

Should we leave it to America and Britain to do the dirty work or should we all stick together and fight this most evil and cowardly acts of murder?

Which acts are you talking about? The twin towers or perhaps or furnishing indians with blankets inoculated with smallpox or perhaps the invation of Grenada? Or is it perhaps rtoning women because they have been raped? (I'm sorry, that last act is legal, at least in the us ally Saudi Arabia.)

Why can't those who find any excuse under the sun for this war (Iraq) see it as one way of helping rid ALL of us of terrorism?

I would suppose that those who find an excuse for war see it as such.

Originally posted by Always Free
Should We Try To Rid The World Of Terrorism?


According to what or who's definition of terrorism?

Thanks,
S&S

You CANNOT fight terrorism by attacking Iraq, Iran and North Korea. All that will do is provoke more terrorism, not less.

The ONLY way to stop terrorism is to stop the things which cause it.

Shall I tell you how the US could remove the threat of terrorism against it?

It should take all the countless billions it is going to spend on waging war all around the globe and spend it on schemes to alleviate poverty in the third world. In doing so it would make a MASSIVE difference to vast numbers of people and turn itself from being the #1 target of terrorism to an international symbol of justice and progress.

[Always Free]

Originally posted by to.by


By obliteration of the cause of terrorism, which usually is despair which again is caused by powerty.

Oh rubbish. Sept 11 is justified because of poverty? The bombings of Embassies justified somehow? Bali bombings justified because of----what?

And to quote you "No way! Violence produces only more violence". It's unjustified if U.S. uses it against Hussein but okay for terrorists claiming to be fighting the downtroddens plight?

And any form of terrorism should be eliminated whether perpetrated by U.S. or any country or organization.



"No way! Violence produces only more violence."

Okay, lets just sit back and allow Iraq, Nth Korea and anyone else have their WMD. Good idea.

Which acts are you talking about? The twin towers or perhaps or furnishing indians with blankets inoculated with smallpox or perhaps the invation of Grenada? Or is it perhaps rtoning women because they have been raped? (I'm sorry, that last act is legal, at least in the us ally Saudi Arabia.)[/B]

Gee, you left out Hussein murdering his own people with poisonous gas experiments.
Any form of terrorism should be eliminated whether perpetrated by U.S. or ANY country or organization.

Don't you defend any terrorist or act of terrorism to me. It can't be defended for any reason so don't even try. Everyone says there are other ways to resolve this coming war, so why not yell out loud the same thing to terrorists who want to tell U.S. what to do and where to go??? And tell the suicide terrorists the same thing.



I would suppose that those who find an excuse for war see it as such.

You think war is the worse thing that can happen?

[Always Free]

Originally posted by S&S


According to what or who's definition of terrorism?

Thanks,
S&S

Somebody help me out here. What is terrorism? I'm not sure, gee let me think about that and I'll get back to ya.

[Drooper]

I think the causality mentioned here (poverty =>terrorism) needs proving.

Some stylised facts:

OBL - extremely wealthy.
other sources terrorism in recent history: Greece, Germany, Italy, Ireland. Not exactly poor.
There is little anti-Western terrorism coming fro the world's poorest countries, namely sub Saharan Africa. Where it occurs, it is associated with local political struggles.

[richardm]

Still, there might be some sort of connection.

Ostensibly, OBL wants the infidels out of Saudi Arabia.

The IRA wanted the British out of Ireland.

ETA want the Spanish out of Basque.

Each of these are based in wealthy countries (OBL is personally wealthy).

However, in each case the foot-soldiers of the terrorism movement tend to come from the poorer regions; in Ireland, it was the poor South that was the real hotspot for the IRA; The Basque region is very impoverished.

OBL's mob is a bit more tricksy, since while a large number of his supporters live in very poor conditions, many of them also appear to be quite well-off people who give everything up to follow him.

Otherwise, in most cases where terrorist organisations arise, In each case the motivation is perhaps less ideological and more a hope that life will be better if only they remove the perceived oppressor de jour.

[Always Free]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant
You CANNOT fight terrorism by attacking Iraq, Iran and North Korea. All that will do is provoke more terrorism, not less.

The ONLY way to stop terrorism is to stop the things which cause it.

Shall I tell you how the US could remove the threat of terrorism against it?

It should take all the countless billions it is going to spend on waging war all around the globe and spend it on schemes to alleviate poverty in the third world. In doing so it would make a MASSIVE difference to vast numbers of people and turn itself from being the #1 target of terrorism to an international symbol of justice and progress.

Why should U.S. spend billions on alleviating poverty in the third world? Seems to me that over population and no birth control could be the reason for poverty over there. If you haven't the food, why are you having babies? The govts of these countries could do heaps more for their people but even they don't want to help the poor. I almost want to laugh at your 'international symbol of justice and progress' comment. Not laughing at you but it wouldn't matter what US did, certain countries and religions will never see US in that way. The US is not a bottomless well of money and resources to give away to anyone who wants a hand out.

[Graham]

Originally posted by Always Free


Why should U.S. spend billions on alleviating poverty in the third world? Seems to me that over population and no birth control could be the reason for poverty over there. If you haven't the food, why are you having babies? The govts of these countries could do heaps more for their people but even they don't want to help the poor. I almost want to laugh at your 'international symbol of justice and progress' comment. Not laughing at you but it wouldn't matter what US did, certain countries and religions will never see US in that way. The US is not a bottomless well of money and resources to give away to anyone who wants a hand out.

Geez, chill out, you're getting mouth-froth all over the keyboard :D

Seriously though, I think it's not so much a matter of "country poverty" as "personal poverty" at least for the foot soldiers, as RichardM was saying.

However, I think ignorance/lack of education and/or a very introverted world-view are more to blame than pure poverty.

If a population grows up only hearing one thing ("US is the great Satan", for instance or "Jesus is Lord") then 90% of that population* will continue to believe that without question.

Maybe the solution to terrorism is mass exchange programs! Ship 'em over here while they're young, let 'em see that we're not ALL bad and after a few generations - no more terrorism.

Graham

*Indicates completely made up statistic

Terrorism isn't caused by poverty. Terrorism is the result of people feeling they have no other means of acheiving whatever they see as justice. Terrorism is a decision that an injustice exists which cannot be resolved diplomatically and therefore must be resolved by violence. That is why no amount of control and pressue from Margaret Thatcher or the Spanish government had any serious effect on IRA or ETA. Clamp down on the terrorists and it just spawns more of them, like a hydra. Just look at Israel. There is your example of an attempt to control terrorism with violence and fear! Has it worked?



Why should U.S. spend billions on alleviating poverty in the third world? Seems to me that over population and no birth control could be the reason for poverty over there. If you haven't the food, why are you having babies? The govts of these countries could do heaps more for their people but even they don't want to help the poor.


Most of them are so burdened by debt that they spend more money in interest, going straight into western pockets, than they do on building an infrastucture to do something about the quality of life for their populations.


I almost want to laugh at your 'international symbol of justice and progress' comment. Not laughing at you but it wouldn't matter what US did, certain countries and religions will never see US in that way. The US is not a bottomless well of money and resources to give away to anyone who wants a hand out.


No, but the well sure seems bottomless when its bombs they want to buy.

[Always Free]

Geez, chill out, you're getting mouth-froth all over the keyboard

Watch what you say to me buddy or I'll rip your bloody arms off!!!

And I believe I am justified in saying that to you because you hurt my wittle feelings. And who do you think you are coming in to my thread and insulting me? I want you out of here NOW!!! If you don't you will regret it. I will find a volunteer poster to get rid of ya! Of course I wouldn't have the courage to do it myself but I'm sure I would have plenty of dumb friends on this board to do my bidding for me.
:p;)

[K-W]

Originally posted by Always Free


Why should U.S. spend billions on alleviating poverty in the third world? Seems to me that over population and no birth control could be the reason for poverty over there. If you haven't the food, why are you having babies? The govts of these countries could do heaps more for their people but even they don't want to help the poor. I almost want to laugh at your 'international symbol of justice and progress' comment. Not laughing at you but it wouldn't matter what US did, certain countries and religions will never see US in that way. The US is not a bottomless well of money and resources to give away to anyone who wants a hand out.

Perhaps we should give them condoms and family planning information.

The US is a nearly bottomless well of money when it comes to military spending. If we spent our military money on actual aid(not tied to corporate globalization) that would certainly improve our PR. The fact that nations and religions have thier own points of view doesnt mean we shouldnt try and reconcile with them.



As far as the war on terrorism. You cant end terrorism anymore than you can end murder. You can try to prevent it, you can reduce its occurance, but you cant make a word go away.

[Graham]

Originally posted by Always Free


Watch what you say to me buddy or I'll rip your bloody arms off!!!

And I believe I am justified in saying that to you because you hurt my wittle feelings. And who do you think you are coming in to my thread and insulting me? I want you out of here NOW!!! If you don't you will regret it. I will find a volunteer poster to get rid of ya! Of course I wouldn't have the courage to do it myself but I'm sure I would have plenty of dumb friends on this board to do my bidding for me.
:p;)

I'm glad there were smilies at the end of that ;)

Just put yourself in the position of the Palestinians (incidentally the highest birth rate on the planet).

Your country has been invaded as part of a global war, and then the best half of it is given to an ethnic group that has no claim to the land apart froma promise from their God in the old testament. You have then been subject to 50 years of oppression, which continues to get worse. The regime in Israel is additionally massively supported by a US adminstration that cares nothing for the plight of the Palestinians. What are they supposed to do? What would YOU do? Quietly sit in your slum knowing nothing was ever going to improve for your people? Would you submit to Israeli-US terror and repressions? OF COURSE YOU WOULDN'T! You would do anything - ANYTHING - to end the curse. If your life isn't worth living then why not at least inflict some pain on the Israelis by dying as a suicide bomber? One thing is for sure - if they just accept their lot then nothing will ever change. Submitting to oppression simply isn't an option. They MUST fight back. No amount of Israel demolishing their houses and summarily executing Palestinians is going to change this. And yet America is responding in the same way! 9/11 was a response to American foreign policy. It was Bin Ladens reply to an American belief that it can acheive what it wants by throwing its military weight around the world, looking after its own interests with no regard for the rights of others - just like the Israelis. Why anyone seriously thinks the 'war on terror' is going to do anything but create more terrorism is beyond me. Do you really think a couple more US-led wars is going to reduce anti-American terrorism? You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you do.

(oh I forgot....America is still fighting it's 'war on drugs' isn't it.....? :rolleyes: )

[Always Free]

Most of them are so burdened by debt that they spend more money in interest, going straight into western pockets, than they do on building an infrastucture to do something about the quality of life for their populations.

Why did they borrow in the first place? And come on, take a look at the politicians of some of these countries and the royals of these countries. They are not exactly swimming in mud themselves, but their people are.

Terrorism is the result of people feeling they have no other means of acheiving whatever they see as justice. Terrorism is a decision that an injustice exists which cannot be resolved diplomatically and therefore must be resolved by violence. That is why no amount of control and pressue from Margaret Thatcher or the Spanish government had any serious effect on IRA or ETA. Clamp down on the terrorists and it just spawns more of them, like a hydra. Just look at Israel. There is your example of an attempt to control terrorism with violence and fear! Has it worked?
People power, if used in the right circumstances is a very powerful thing. If the people of Israel or Pallistine were to say to their respective leaders---enough of this fighting, resolve this matter NOW or we will find someone who will, their leaders just may find a resolution. But they are sheep who follow the one in front of them. What was the name of that country a few years ago where it's people revolted and rid themselves of their madman leader? No, terrorists don't go about resolving their grievances in the right way. Put a gun in their hand and they will use it. Don't try and justify terrorism.

[Always Free]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant
Just put yourself in the position of the Palestinians (incidentally the highest birth rate on the planet).

Your country has been invaded as part of a global war, and then the best half of it is given to an ethnic group that has no claim to the land apart froma promise from their God in the old testament. You have then been subject to 50 years of oppression, which continues to get worse. The regime in Israel is additionally massively supported by a US adminstration that cares nothing for the plight of the Palestinians. What are they supposed to do? What would YOU do? Quietly sit in your slum knowing nothing was ever going to improve for your people? Would you submit to Israeli-US terror and repressions? OF COURSE YOU WOULDN'T! You would do anything - ANYTHING - to end the curse. If your life isn't worth living then why not at least inflict some pain on the Israelis by dying as a suicide bomber? One thing is for sure - if they just accept their lot then nothing will ever change. Submitting to oppression simply isn't an option. They MUST fight back. No amount of Israel demolishing their houses and summarily executing Palestinians is going to change this. And yet America is responding in the same way! 9/11 was a response to American foreign policy. It was Bin Ladens reply to an American belief that it can acheive what it wants by throwing its military weight around the world, looking after its own interests with no regard for the rights of others - just like the Israelis. Why anyone seriously thinks the 'war on terror' is going to do anything but create more terrorism is beyond me. Do you really think a couple more US-led wars is going to reduce anti-American terrorism? You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you do.

(oh I forgot....America is still fighting it's 'war on drugs' isn't it.....? :rolleyes: )

Well I'm not surprised they have the highest birth rate. What with all those suicide bombers---if they don't replace them, Palistinians will become extinct very soon. Big deal.

If you know so much about Israel/Palestine situation, tell me something---what is the gain for US in it all? I don't know what any of it is about. I have never studied this situation. But obviously what the Palestinians are doing to resolve things isn't working---so try something else. If every avenue has been taken to find an answer, then try something else, find some other way than sending your children to die. For gods sake. No one has to do that. They have killed Israelis, but guess what, this hasn't worked either, so what should they do??? Try something else, anything.:(

[Graham]

Having reattached my arms ;)

Originally posted by Always Free

Why did they borrow in the first place? And come on, take a look at the politicians of some of these countries and the royals of these countries. They are not exactly swimming in mud themselves, but their people are.


True in some cases but the same leaders are making very sure that the people don't blame their poverty on them.

And what's the easiest way to divert attention from your crappy domestic policies? Yes, you there at the back, George W, stop picking your nose and answer the question. Yes, that's right George - blame all your problems on a far away country.

Look how many Americans are absolutely convinced that Saddam Hussein is an imminent threat to US security.

People power, if used in the right circumstances is a very powerful thing. If the people of Israel or Pallistine were to say to their respective leaders---enough of this fighting, resolve this matter NOW or we will find someone who will, their leaders just may find a resolution. But they are sheep who follow the one in front of them. What was the name of that country a few years ago where it's people revolted and rid themselves of their madman leader? No, terrorists don't go about resolving their grievances in the right way. Put a gun in their hand and they will use it. Don't try and justify terrorism. [/B]

You're assuming that the people in question have enough intelligence and/or education to be able to see through their leaders lies and know that he's the one opressing them and not the big, bad United States. It's easy for us to see that but can they?

[Graham]

Originally posted by Always Free


Well I'm not surprised they have the highest birth rate. What with all those suicide bombers---if they don't replace them, Palistinians will become extinct very soon. Big deal.

If you know so much about Israel/Palestine situation, tell me something---what is the gain for US in it all? I don't know what any of it is about. I have never studied this situation. But obviously what the Palestinians are doing to resolve things isn't working---so try something else. If every avenue has been taken to find an answer, then try something else, find some other way than sending your children to die. For gods sake. No one has to do that. They have killed Israelis, but guess what, this hasn't worked either, so what should they do??? Try something else, anything.:(

In case you haven't noticed, this is your sig: "Stand Up For Your Freedom, Stand Up For Yourself"

I think you should start including a disclaimer to say:

"Stand Up For Your Freedom, Stand Up For Yourself, unless, after a while, it doesn't seem to be working, then stop."

The Palestinians aren't trying to resolve things - they're trying to kill the Israelis and take back what they consider, rightly or wrongly, as their land.

"The gain from the US" in their involvement in the situation is that all the Israeli, who for the most part are just normal bods like the rest of us, don't end up dead.

Seems like a laudable enough goal to me.

Graham

[Always Free]

You're assuming that the people in question have enough intelligence and/or education to be able to see through their leaders lies and know that he's the one opressing them and not the big, bad United States. It's easy for us to see that but can they?

Graham, I would think that all of these poor countries have individuals who have travelled to great far of lands and actually gotten themselves educated and very well educated at that. These countries need a saviour to come and rescue them and maybe start a revolution of sorts. People have to learn to stand up for their rights. Anyway most countries these days have electricity, tv, papers, telephones etc. I bet most of them know what the outside world is like. And they only have to visit their capitals to see the oppulent palaces and buildings and homes for politicians to smell a rat.
:(

[Always Free]

My sig has no connotation of terrorism or murder or oppression etc etc.

Strapping explosives to your body and stepping on a bus in the name of resolving your unfortunate/dire situation is a disgusting thing to do. "Oh lets blow up a few babies on that bus today, that will show em." Are you another who is trying to justify terrorism?

[Plutarck]

And if we destroyed all the causes of terrorism and thus caused it to no longer exist...what would we be left with, exactly?

In general, the same things that can bring good things are the same things that can bring about bad things.

Though more succinctly, you can get illiminate terrorism about as well as you can get rid of murder and thievery. Reduce them, sure, but even if you could illiminate them the measures required would make it a very undesirable trade.

As far as I am concerned, it is "their land". Israel was created as a place to put Europes persecuted Jews. It had nothing to do with the Palestinians. They just had their country stolen from them.


Well I'm not surprised they have the highest birth rate. What with all those suicide bombers---if they don't replace them, Palistinians will become extinct very soon. Big deal.


You seem to have completely ignored my point. The Palestinians are not going to become extinct. The problem is not going to go away.


If you know so much about Israel/Palestine situation, tell me something---what is the gain for US in it all?


The votes of the massive Jewish lobby in America.


I don't know what any of it is about.


You and 80% of the rest of America.


But obviously what the Palestinians are doing to resolve things isn't working---so try something else.


Yeah, right. Apply the same to American foreign policy.


If every avenue has been taken to find an answer, then try something else, find some other way than sending your children to die.


You don't get it. There are at least TEN outstanding UN resolutions against Israel. The UN has decided that Israel is wrong and the Palestinians have a case. The most powerful country in the world, rather than 'enforcing the will of the UN' has COMPLETELY IGNORED the plight of the Palestinians. They have nobody to turn to. You wonder why Palestinian children were dancing in the street on 9/11?

What the hell do you suggest they try? :rolleyes:

They have NO OTHER OPTION. They must attack Israel or accept that their country has been stolen from them and that they must live in poverty and misery forevermore. If the US actually forced Israel to comply with the wishes of the UN then they may have some hope of non-violent change. But the US doesn't care about the UN, it sees it a bit like Saddam sees his 'Parliament'. It's there to rubber-stamp whatever he decides to do.


For gods sake. No one has to do that.


Open your eyes AlwaysFree. FluffyBunnyLand has gone bye-byes. We stand on the edge of international Anarchy. Americans have been cocooned for far too long. Welcome to the real world. :(

[Graham]

Originally posted by Always Free


Graham, I would think that all of these poor countries have individuals who have travelled to great far of lands and actually gotten themselves educated and very well educated at that. These countries need a saviour to come and rescue them and maybe start a revolution of sorts. People have to learn to stand up for their rights. Anyway most countries these days have electricity, tv, papers, telephones etc. I bet most of them know what the outside world is like. And they only have to visit their capitals to see the oppulent palaces and buildings and homes for politicians to smell a rat.
:(

Individuals yes but revolution requires mass support (Successful revolution anyway!) It has been my experience that the more travelled a person is the more broad-mined and free-thinking they are (two weeks in Torremolinos every summer doesn't count, btw).

I don't think the vast proportion of Palestinians have travelled very far beyond their own borders (and probably even fewer beyond Libya, Iran and such places where they wouldn't get much exposure to the "outside world" anyway.

As to television and papers, etc, again for the most part they probably only speak Arabic. How balanced a world view do you think they would get from Al-Jazeera (sp?)

Finally, with regard to opulent palaces, etc, millions of tourists go to see Buckingham Palace and The White House every day.The vast proportion of them will never in their lives be able to afford anything like that level of comfort - when do you expect to see armed rebellion on the streets of London and Washington? People in power are better off than the average - it's so constant practically a law of physics. That doesn't make it right but in and of itself it's rarely a cause for revlution.

This is an an interesting coversation, btw. It's nice to meet you :)

Graham

Originally posted by Plutarck

And if we destroyed all the causes of terrorism and thus caused it to no longer exist...what would we be left with, exactly?


Star Trek.

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant


Star Trek.

Yea, but only Captain Kirk apparently got to have sex with all the blue alien chicks.

Vìva Revolutìon!

Originally posted by Always Free


Strapping explosives to your body and stepping on a bus in the name of resolving your unfortunate/dire situation is a disgusting thing to do. "Oh lets blow up a few babies on that bus today, that will show em." Are you another who is trying to justify terrorism?



You seem like a nice person. But you also seem very naive. Nobody wants death and desruction and misery. You really have got to imagine what it is like to be born Palestinian and grow up in a situation where there is no hope. The suicide bombers have got nothing to lose.

[Graham]

Originally posted by Always Free
My sig has no connotation of terrorism or murder or oppression etc etc.

Strapping explosives to your body and stepping on a bus in the name of resolving your unfortunate/dire situation is a disgusting thing to do. "Oh lets blow up a few babies on that bus today, that will show em." Are you another who is trying to justify terrorism?

I come from a country that's seen its share of terrorism. I live in Dublin but my family are Northern Protestants. I've spent nights waiting to find out if friends and family are dead or alive. I have no truck with terrorism whatsoever, let me emphasise that - [b]whatsoever[/i]

However (and in life there is always a however) there is no black and white in the world and there is no good and evil. There's just people and people are stupid and believe stupid things and do stupid things because of it.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter - it's trite but true. IIRC the tactics used by some of the "freedom fighters" in the War of Independence could be described as "Terrorism" do you condemn them?

The Palestinians see themselves as fighting against injustice and fighting for freedom. They think they are doing the right thing. You and I think may think that they are wrong, very, very wrong and maybe we're right but without at least attempting to understand their motives how can we possibly hope to tell them why?

[Always Free]

Okay, You have made me see the light. Terrorism is a good thing!! Lets all give three cheers to terrorism!!! It will solve all problems world wide. YAY!!!

Come on, I don't hear you!!! Hip Hip ------!!!

Oh if you think I'm American, nope. I'm Australian and that has nothing to do with anything.

Don't tell me to open my eyes and don't talk to me like I'm six yrs old.
I don't give a damn about Palestine while they are doing their suicide bombing murders thing. Oh yes that makes them dance in the street seeing the body pieces everywhere. Good for them. Well, tell me, when is the situation going to be resolved? It must be soon now? They have blown up enough civilians for their plan to have worked haven't they??


:mad:

[Graham]

Originally posted by Plutarck


Yea, but only Captain Kirk apparently got to have sex with all the blue alien chicks.

Vìva Revolutìon!

The guys in the red shirts would be in the front line! Those poor sods never had a chance!

:D

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by richardm
However, in each case the foot-soldiers of the terrorism movement tend to come from the poorer regions; in Ireland, it was the poor South that was the real hotspot for the IRA; The Basque region is very impoverished.

As is so often pointed out... Soldiers (terrorists or not) are generally from a poorer demographic.

Stop US militarism! Send relief funds to the Tennessee Valley!

If only the US didn't have so many desperately poor, we wouldn't have so many volunteers for our military.

aerocontrols

[aerocontrols]

Why George Wants Saddam's Head (http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_197994,00120002.htm)

The newly-elected George W. Bush ignored Hussein. He wanted a second term and a risky overseas mess was a no-no. The CIA and State Department argued Iraq was a nuisance, not a crisis. The oil industry went further: they wanted sanctions against Hussein lifted. His national security advisor, Condoleezza Rice, wrote it didn’t matter whether Hussein got nukes or not. In other words, Bush’s Iraq policy was initially softer than Clinton’s.

Then 9/11 happened. Rumsfeld and Co. argued that Iraq needed to go down along with Afghanis-tan. Powell, the CIA and Bush gave them a thumbs down. But by the time the Taliban were history, Washington had sketched out a blueprint for a multi-front war on terrorism. Once the battle plan was laid out, it was realised that Rumsfeld’s thinking was right. Many of the warpaths against terrorism ended with an X on Hussein’s face — but for wildly different reasons.

It goes on to discuss the reasons...

MattJ

[Graham]

Originally posted by Always Free
Okay, You have made me see the light. Terrorism is a good thing!! Lets all give three cheers to terrorism!!! It will solve all problems world wide. YAY!!!

Come on, I don't hear you!!! Hip Hip ------!!!

Oh if you think I'm American, nope. I'm Australian and that has nothing to do with anything.

Don't tell me to open my eyes and don't talk to me like I'm six yrs old.
I don't give a damn about Palestine while they are doing their suicide bombing murders thing. Oh yes that makes them dance in the street seeing the body pieces everywhere. Good for them. Well, tell me, when is the situation going to be resolved? It must be soon now? They have blown up enough civilians for their plan to have worked haven't they??


:mad:

You see that tiny dot waaaaaaaaaaaay over there on the horizon? Yes, that's the point and you've missed it :rolleyes:

Terrorism is bad but people are ignorant and foolish and you won't change their minds by razing their country to the ground.

For a terrorist, blowing up civilians doesn't make the plan work - blowing up cvilians is the plan. It's about hatred and it's about vengeance for perceived wrongs. There is no reason in hatred.

Look, I'd be the last person in the world to support terrorism, really I would, but the history tends to suggest, IMO, that war doesn't stop terrorism it only produces more things for people to get mad about.

BTW, I didn't havve an opinion as to where you were from but thanks for sharing :)

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant


You seem like a nice person. But you also seem very naive. Nobody wants death and desruction and misery. You really have got to imagine what it is like to be born Palestinian and grow up in a situation where there is no hope. The suicide bombers have got nothing to lose.

They have nothing to lose merely because they are listening to the siren call of their own perverted culture. They are immersed in it from the first day their little eyes blink open. You could say the same thing about people in other lands who are born to poverty and misery...and yet they do not go around blowing up babies at bus stops...no. Sometimes they even pull themselves out of poverty by their own bootstraps and have a productive life.

Their culture is to blame. Go look at Haifa where Jews and Arabs live together in peace. The culture there has been modified by mutual respect...there are still Arabs there who don't care much for Jews but they are moderate in their attitudes. They see progress in working together with Jewish Israelis and making a better life together. The Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza see progress in numbers of Israelis killed...which is no progress at all. They are terrorists...products of their enviroment. Now you may say the Jews are the reason for this enviroment of terrorism...but if so, why are things different in Haifa?

The short answer is that the Arabs there see "progress" in a completely different light. They have become moderates. This means that the Palestinians Are Responsible for their own actions!! (What a novel concept) Their dire circumstances are of their own making. The lesson in this is: Life is hard, get over it There are no free passes...not for you...not for me. We are all responsible for our own actions. You don't get rights for free...they come with responsibility.

-zilla

AlwaysFree


Well, tell me, when is the situation going to be resolved? It must be soon now?


The situation in Israel?

At the moment the actions of both the Israeli and US governments is making the problem worse. It is not going to be resolved any time soon. The situation is likely to deteriorate further.

Personally I think the only way to resolve this problem is a complete turnaround in US policy toward Israel. Without US support Israel would be forced to compromise.

I am sorry I patronised you. You seem very idealistic. Identifying with the misery of the Palestinians is not 'supporting terrorism'. The only way to resolve any sort of conflict is for both sides to understand the way it looks to the other. You started this thread to talk about whether it is possible to rid the world of terrorism by force. All I have been doing is trying to explain why I believe this is impossible, regardless of whether or not it may be a desirable aim. I hate terrorism as much as you do. But I cannot condemn the Palestinians for trying to rectify the injustice that continues to be perpetrated against them. Their terrorism is self-defence.

Rik


They have nothing to lose merely because they are listening to the siren call of their own perverted culture. They are immersed in it from the first day their little eyes blink open. You could say the same thing about people in other lands who are born to poverty and misery...and yet they do not go around blowing up babies at bus stops...no. Sometimes they even pull themselves out of poverty by their own bootstraps and have a productive life.


Rik, their country has been stolen from them. What would you do if somebody invaded half of America, and gave it to a completely different ethnic/cultural group?


The short answer is that the Arabs there see "progress" in a completely different light. They have become moderates. This means that the Palestinians Are Responsible for their own actions!! (What a novel concept) Their dire circumstances are of their own making.


Rik. THEIR COUNTRY WAS STOLEN FROM THEM.



The lesson in this is: Life is hard, get over it


Get over it!!!??? :mad:

THEIR COUNTRY WAS STOLEN FROM THEM!

[fishbob]

If the answer is yes, then how do we do it?then how do we do it is the hard part of the question. This is the nuts and bolts part, the part where a lot of wrong decisions will be made, a lot of death and injury will occur, a ton of money will be spent. The devil is in the details.

A ways back somebody said that stopping the causes of terrorism is the way to go instead of attacking Iraq. Again the hard part of the question was glossed over. What are the causes of terrorism? Was the end result of the shootings at Columbine really any different than the result of the latest suicide bomber in Israel?

[Tmy]

Why would we want to rid ALL terrorism. I say we just hit the terrorism that effects us.

[Graham]

Originally posted by rikzilla


They have nothing to lose merely because they are listening to the siren call of their own perverted culture. They are immersed in it from the first day their little eyes blink open. You could say the same thing about people in other lands who are born to poverty and misery...and yet they do not go around blowing up babies at bus stops...no. Sometimes they even pull themselves out of poverty by their own bootstraps and have a productive life.

Their culture is to blame. Go look at Haifa where Jews and Arabs live together in peace. The culture there has been modified by mutual respect...there are still Arabs there who don't care much for Jews but they are moderate in their attitudes. They see progress in working together with Jewish Israelis and making a better life together. The Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza see progress in numbers of Israelis killed...which is no progress at all. They are terrorists...products of their enviroment. Now you may say the Jews are the reason for this enviroment of terrorism...but if so, why are things different in Haifa?

The short answer is that the Arabs there see "progress" in a completely different light. They have become moderates. This means that the Palestinians Are Responsible for their own actions!! (What a novel concept) Their dire circumstances are of their own making. The lesson in this is: Life is hard, get over it There are no free passes...not for you...not for me. We are all responsible for our own actions. You don't get rights for free...they come with responsibility.

-zilla

I'd just like to say that I agree with most of this post, I don't think it's contradictory to anything I've said but, re-reading, maybe it seems like it is.

I'm not sure I agree with either of these statement though:


Their dire circumstances are of their own making.The lesson in this is: Life is hard, get over it

First of all, no one human being in all of history can really be said to be totally responsible for his circumstances and I think the same applies to nations/communities. We are affected, sometimes against our will be the actions of our forebearers and our contemporaries. The current crop Palestinians are, to an extent, caught up in events way bigger and older than they are. Maybe they have the power to escape but it won't be easy.

As to "Life is hard, get over it" - what is this supposed to mean? At face value it seems like a ridiculous statement to me. Get over it? Would you suggest the America just "Get over" the WTC Attacks? What about British occupation and oppression of the Irish for hundreds of years? SHould we have just "gotten over" that?

It probably doesn't matter to you but unless you can justify that statement somehow my opinion of you will drop dramatically.

Graham

AlwaysFree,

Since you do not seem to understand the origins of the Palestinian problem I will give you an off-the-cuff recap.

For hundreds of years before WWII the area now known as Israel was occupied by the Palestinians. There were a few Jews living there, relatively peacefully, but it was Arab-administrated and predominantly Palestinian. Then WWII happened and Hitler decided to rid Europe of Jews. Many Jews either escaped or survived, and at the end of WWII but they had nowhere to go. They ended up sailing round the ocean on a great big boat which nobody would allow to dock. British troops were occupying the Palestian land. So Britain and various other western nations decided that the Jews should be given a land of their own, like God always promised them. Nobody asked the Palestinians if it was alright to give half their country to the Jews. So Israel was 'created', by Britain, to solve a European-Jewish problem. Thus the seeds were sown for what is now the biggest political problem in the world. The Palestinians live if terror, fear and misery.

And here we are with you telling us that no injustice is so great that it warrants terrorism, and Rik telling us that 'life is hard, get on with it'. I am sorry - but if I was a Palestinian I'd know exactly what I would say to both of you.

[Always Free]

I think that most people here have completely missed my point in my original post. Which is the way it usually happens on this board. People get off the beaten track so easily. Oh well.

I asked a couple of questions about terrorism and got very little support for my feelings towards it. And got lectured about everything. Sheesh. I would have thought everyone here would have said, "yes we agree with you---but". I get called naive, get told to open my eyes. "Fluffy bunny land has gone bye byes" was told to me.
Well stuff you! There, how's that for a response?

You can tell me all about politics and people being displaced and poverty etc, but don't talk to me like that. None of you know anything about me. Why don't you respect my opinion. I'm wrong I hear you say. Well please forgive me!!! Sheesh!!

Graham, it's nice to meet you to.

I was replying to Undercover Elephant when I mentioned where I was from.


:)

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant
Rik



Rik, their country has been stolen from them. What would you do if somebody invaded half of America, and gave it to a completely different ethnic/cultural group?



Rik. THEIR COUNTRY WAS STOLEN FROM THEM.




Get over it!!!??? :mad:

THEIR COUNTRY WAS STOLEN FROM THEM!

If my country was a backward little patch of sand ruled by religious fanatics and someone came in and turned it into a democracy where I could have a higher standard of living then I'd do what the residents of Haifa have done and get my piece of the economic pie. When the alternative is: Raise your kids on hate and turn them into human bombs... is the alternative it makes and easy choice ever easier.

Remember Geoff... THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS!

So what about Haifa Geoff? Why are Arab citizens there quite happily getting along? What is different about their way of life? What sets them apart from the terrorists of Gaza and West Bank??

I'll 'splain it to ya.... THEY HAVE STOPPED BLAMING EVERY BAD THING ON THE "JEWS" AND HAVE ACTUALLY GOTTEN ON WITH THEIR LIVES!

Come on man...what is wrong with personal responsibility. Why is this concept so hard for most liberals to get???

-zilla

[Graham]

I think you're being over-sensitive. Most of the people who post do so because they have opinions, just like you. YOu can't complain if they share them. They're also, for the most bpart, very good writers which I think sometimes comes across as condescending.

If I've offended you or talked down to you I apologise.

Now, back to your original post then:

Originally posted by Always Free
If the answer is yes, then how do we do it?

Is attacking Iraq one way to do it?

Should we leave it to America and Britain to do the dirty work or should we all stick together and fight this most evil and cowardly acts of murder?

Why can't those who find any excuse under the sun for this war (Iraq) see it as one way of helping rid ALL of us of terrorism?

:mad:

In my opinion, yes we should try to rid the world of terrorism, no question about that.

Attacking Iraq is one way to do it, I don't believe it is a very good way to do it and I don't think it will be effective. I've given some reasons above, I think. In short, war promotes terrorism rather than impeding it.

No, personally, I think that, whatever we do, we need to do it together. We may have our differences as countries but the civilised world needs to stick together.

As to the last question, I think I've already answered that.

If you would care to respond to my points, we can now begin this discussion all over again ;)

Graham

[Always Free]

Originally posted by Graham
I think you're being over-sensitive. Most of the people who post do so because they have opinions, just like you. YOu can't complain if they share them. They're also, for the most bpart, very good writers which I think sometimes comes across as condescending.

If I've offended you or talked down to you I apologise.

Now, back to your original post then:



In my opinion, yes we should try to rid the world of terrorism, no question about that.

Attacking Iraq is one way to do it, I don't believe it is a very good way to do it and I don't think it will be effective. I've given some reasons above, I think. In short, war promotes terrorism rather than impeding it.

No, personally, I think that, whatever we do, we need to do it together. We may have our differences as countries but the civilised world needs to stick together.

As to the last question, I think I've already answered that.

If you would care to respond to my points, we can now begin this discussion all over again ;)

Graham

OVERSENSITIVE!!!OVERSENSITIVE!!! DID YOU CALL ME OVERSENSITIVE?????:mad:

Just kidding Graham!!! :) ;) ;) :D :D

I didn't complain about them sharing their opinions, that's what we post for isn't it. I really dislike the insults from perfect strangers who are so much better than me.;)

No you haven't offended me either.

Maybe these days, war could promote terrorism as you say but when US attacked Japan, granted is was with atomic power, it put a stop to any future plans of them trying it again. A great show of force by US did the trick in that situation.

And you said something I had hoped I would hear and that was "the civilised world needs to stick together". Truer words were never spoken. Well, at least on this thread.;)

[alancarre]

Originally posted by Always Free
If the answer is yes, then how do we do it?

Is attacking Iraq one way to do it?

Should we leave it to America and Britain to do the dirty work or should we all stick together and fight this most evil and cowardly acts of murder?

Why can't those who find any excuse under the sun for this war (Iraq) see it as one way of helping rid ALL of us of terrorism?

:mad:

1. Eh... nah. There is very little non-state terrorism in the world. It is not a major problem or concern. You are far more likely to die in a traffic accident for instance. If you're worried about state terrorism, then you can do it by urging your government so stop participating in it.

2. No

3. Why do you bring Britain into this? Are you British? And no, we should not leave it to known terrorists and mass-murderers to "fight terrorism".

4. I don't understand the question. Those who "find any excuse under the sun" for this war, are also including "helping rid ALL of use of terrorism" as one of their excuses. Perhaps you meant to say those who "disagree with the idea of attacking Iraq"?

- Alan

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Graham



It probably doesn't matter to you but unless you can justify that statement somehow my opinion of you will drop dramatically.

Graham

Ok Graham,

It does matter to me. You seem to be a reasonable thoughtful person...of course your opinion matters to me. I'm glad you brought this up instead of just fuming in private.

I could have chosen a better way of saying that...but what I meant by it is that bad stuff happens to everyone. Somalian people have lived thru famine and war...but they do not blow themselves up at bus stops. They don't seem to be overtly looking around for someone to blame either. So why is it acceptable to some that, because of this state of plight the PA's live in that, terrorism is a "natural" outgrowth...and these people are not to be blamed?

Every living person has their daily troubles to live through. Money buys the rich out of some of it...but even they find ways to have pressure and misery in their lives. My statement that "Life is hard, get over it"...is just an acknowledgement of the nature of the daily struggle on this planet. For some it's easy...for others it's unbearable. It's just a fact. No escaping it.

If tomorrow I lose my job, my wife leaves me, and I'm tossed out in the street in misery would it be more acceptable for me to try and pick up the pieces of my life and move on, or get a gun and go kill my boss? If I kill my boss I get REVENGE (instant satisfaction of my baser urges) and a slick liberal defense attourney who will shift all the blame to the evil corporation which "quite obviously" created the entire situation! Barring that perhaps I'll go the "temporary insanity" route. We see these kind of cases every day, and they all seek to defer responsibility away from the guilty party. To me this is wrong. If we take this kind of attitude with terrorists we are merely encouraging more terrorism.

Do we need to "get over it"? Can we just get over 9/11? Yeah, actually I think not only that we can, but that we must. Getting over it however, does not mean forgetting it's lessons. 9/11 taught us that terrorism is something that will get bigger and bigger until it destroys us unless we do something about it. 9/11 taught us to be vigilant...and to start a likely never-ending war against terrorism itself. IMHO we're going to have to learn to live with this threat forever more. 9/11 is history now...but again, the past is prologue. We must learn history's lessons. We must stop trying to rehabilitate terrorists who are "just vicitms of their environment". Sooner or later the very existence of our civilization will depend it. "Just get over it" was too flippant, I hope this post has helped you to understand what I was really going on about.

-zilla

[Graham]

Well, it's after five an time for Graham to go home. I'll try to get back to this later but my wife is addicted to playing backgammon on MSN Gamezone and taking over the computer might well cost me some :D

That said, you're right it did work in the case of Japan. That's interesting, something I hadn't considered before. My off-the-cuff reaction is to say that:

(a) social conditions in Japan were unlike those in practically any other country before or since

and

(b) to their credit, the Americans followed up on their use (twice) of the most horrendous weapon mankind has ever invented with a comprehensive program of reconstruction, re-education and economic aid. Which prevented terrorism - the bombs, what came next or both? You've stated, quite vehemently, that you are broadly opposed to aiding other countries with US funds and expertise. Are you opposed to a MacArthur (is that right? excuse my ignorance please) type program for Iraq after the war?

Those are my initial thoughts but I'll have to think on it some more.

Bye for now,

Graham

PS - the civilised world does have to stick together but, IMO, a major part of "civilisation" is freedom of dissent and taking into account the opinions of others, even if you don't agree with them. True consensus requires give and take from all sides.

Rapidly edited to add that that last comment was not directed at you Mr Sensitive :p but at the governments of the US and France and Palestine and - well you get the idea.

So if your listening governments of the world - do as I say and stop farting around!!!!

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by Graham

IIRC the tactics used by some of the "freedom fighters" in the War of Independence could be described as "Terrorism" do you condemn them?


That is an interesting point that I had not heard before. Also during the Civil War, I believe Grant's actions in Atlanta can easily be considered terrorism.

But a point I've yet to see fully addressed and not rushed-past, skirted-around, or fallaciously dismissed, is America's use of the Atomic Bomb. It was dropped solely for the reason of terrorism - to terrorize the japanese into giving up.

To accept it requires that one accept that terrorism is not so much absolutely evil, but that whether or not it is acceptable (or 'good') is a question of a trade-off. While killing civilians may have an inherantly massive negative-utility penalty, it is not a finite sum, and thus it is possible to be 'ok'.

Rejecting it has it's own problems, but I've run out of time...

[Graham]

Originally posted by rikzilla


Ok Graham,

It does matter to me. You seem to be a reasonable thoughtful person...of course your opinion matters to me. I'm glad you brought this up instead of just fuming in private.

I could have chosen a better way of saying that...but what I meant by it is that bad stuff happens to everyone. Somalian people have lived thru famine and war...but they do not blow themselves up at bus stops. They don't seem to be overtly looking around for someone to blame either. So why is it acceptable to some that, because of this state of plight the PA's live in that, terrorism is a "natural" outgrowth...and these people are not to be blamed?

Every living person has their daily troubles to live through. Money buys the rich out of some of it...but even they find ways to have pressure and misery in their lives. My statement that "Life is hard, get over it"...is just an acknowledgement of the nature of the daily struggle on this planet. For some it's easy...for others it's unbearable. It's just a fact. No escaping it.

If tomorrow I lose my job, my wife leaves me, and I'm tossed out in the street in misery would it be more acceptable for me to try and pick up the pieces of my life and move on, or get a gun and go kill my boss? If I kill my boss I get REVENGE (instant satisfaction of my baser urges) and a slick liberal defense attourney who will shift all the blame to the evil corporation which "quite obviously" created the entire situation! Barring that perhaps I'll go the "temporary insanity" route. We see these kind of cases every day, and they all seek to defer responsibility away from the guilty party. To me this is wrong. If we take this kind of attitude with terrorists we are merely encouraging more terrorism.

Do we need to "get over it"? Can we just get over 9/11? Yeah, actually I think not only that we can, but that we must. Getting over it however, does not mean forgetting it's lessons. 9/11 taught us that terrorism is something that will get bigger and bigger until it destroys us unless we do something about it. 9/11 taught us to be vigilant...and to start a likely never-ending war against terrorism itself. IMHO we're going to have to learn to live with this threat forever more. 9/11 is history now...but again, the past is prologue. We must learn history's lessons. We must stop trying to rehabilitate terrorists who are "just vicitms of their environment". Sooner or later the very existence of our civilization will depend it. "Just get over it" was too flippant, I hope this post has helped you to understand what I was really going on about.

-zilla

It appears we are in agreement then and, for the record, my opinion remains intact :)

Do you think that the war in Iraq will help to quell terrorism? If so, why do you think the many, many previous wars in history have not done so? (the example of Japan excepted for now - I'm still thinking about that!)

I really do have to go though! Damn this board, I wanna go home!!!

Graham

[Always Free]

Alan, people on message boards everywhere give their opinions as to why the US is going to war in Iraq. Some say oil, some say disarmament, some say WMD, some say politics etc. Lots of different opinions. I meant, can't anyone see it as a fight against terrorism and a war with Iraq will give any country or any terrorist organisation a cold hard message that if you intend to possess WMD, then we will assume that you will use them therefore we will come and destroy them.

No one wants innocent civilians to be caught up in a war. Hussein has been quite the terrorist to his own people. But the countries who potentially are the target of his WMD will breath easily knowing the bombs are destroyed. Also these WMD and missiles etc won't fall into the hands of others who are willing to use them.

No I'm not British but I mentioned Britain because of the pending war in Iraq. They are the only large country willing to go into this war with US.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by rikzilla


If my country was a backward little patch of sand ruled by religious fanatics and someone came in and turned it into a democracy where I could have a higher standard of living then I'd do what the residents of Haifa have done and get my piece of the economic pie. When the alternative is: Raise your kids on hate and turn them into human bombs... is the alternative it makes and easy choice ever easier.

Remember Geoff... THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS!

So what about Haifa Geoff? Why are Arab citizens there quite happily getting along? What is different about their way of life? What sets them apart from the terrorists of Gaza and West Bank??

I'll 'splain it to ya.... THEY HAVE STOPPED BLAMING EVERY BAD THING ON THE "JEWS" AND HAVE ACTUALLY GOTTEN ON WITH THEIR LIVES!

Come on man...what is wrong with personal responsibility. Why is this concept so hard for most liberals to get???

-zilla

I was wathing MTV last night and tehy had a show "True Life: I live in the terror zone". Its a documentry show. They followed the day to day life of young Arabs and Jews. I thought it was well done becuase it didnt harp on the polictics but intsead it focused on daily lives. watjing it made me sympathise with both sides.

[alancarre]

Originally posted by Always Free
Alan, people on message boards everywhere give their opinions as to why the US is going to war in Iraq. Some say oil, some say disarmament, some say WMD, some say politics etc. Lots of different opinions. I meant, can't anyone see it as a fight against terrorism and a war with Iraq will give any country or any terrorist organisation a cold hard message that if you intend to possess WMD, then we will assume that you will use them therefore we will come and destroy them.

Whatever the reasons are, they aren't the officially stated ones. We can prove that by logic. The stated intention of the Bush administration (and whoever follows along) is clearly false. There are simply too many contraditions and even flat-out lies for anyone to take them seriously.

Originally posted by Always Free
No one wants innocent civilians to be caught up in a war. Hussein has been quite the terrorist to his own people. But the countries who potentially are the target of his WMD will breath easily knowing the bombs are destroyed. Also these WMD and missiles etc won't fall into the hands of others who are willing to use them.

Nobody is denying that Hussein is a tyrant. Most heads of state are. That's because they are the ones that have to make what we call tough decisions or as Colin Powel puts it "hard choices". For instance, Hussein had to put down a Kurdish rebellion to maintain stability. The US and other allies were very pleased with his creative use of chemical weapons, and so continued to provide him with military aid, including dual-use technology, more Weapons of Mass Destruction technology and so on... Why? so that he would continue maintaining stability for our interests. Remember, it wasn't just Hussein that gassed the Kurds. It was Hussein + USA + Great Britain + many many others with crucial interests in the region. Those are oil interests BTW.

But anyway, don't kid yourself about these people being concerned about civilian casualties. Nothing could be further removed from their minds than the concept of a civilian life having any value. Just look at the conduct of the first Gulf War (er. let's call it the Gulf Slaughter more accurately). What did they do? Did they target the military? Well, sort of. They targeted only the conscript part of the army (a conscript is just a civilian dressed up in a uniform) and avoided the "republican guard" (the ones that maintain stability for us). What else did they do? Well they also went ahead with their plan of destroying the extensive water treatment facilities of the country. That was a military aim by the way. One of those tough choices; to take actions that they knew would destroy a good portion of the civilian population of the country. Why is that desirable? It's easy: the fewer people around, the more stability you get. Simple logic.

[i]No I'm not British but I mentioned Britain because of the pending war in Iraq. They are the only large country willing to go into this war with US. [/B]

Well there are a few others, also too scared to not get involved. "Willing" is not really the right word. For instance in Britain apparently they stand at about 70% opposed currently.

- Alan

[JAR]

It seems very unlikely that we can bring terrorism to an end, but we should do something to make it happen on a rare basis at least. I can't think of any ways to prevent terrorism.

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by JAR
It seems very unlikely that we can bring terrorism to an end, but we should do something to make it happen on a rare basis at least. I can't think of any ways to prevent terrorism.

To rephrase:

We should seek to minimize the rates of occurance and effects of terrorism, as it is likely impossible - or undesirable - to fully illiminate.

[rikzilla]

I had posted this earlier to the "Blair" thread...and if Bidlack will forgive me I'd like to repost it here as well. This post seems to me to be more at home in a "what can we do about terrorism" thread.

-zilla

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The real problem Geoff, is that terrorism works. The reason that it works is that the exact "solution" you have come up with rewards terrorism. By addressing the "root causes" of terrorism you are rewarding the terrorist's cause. You may actually succeed in reducing specific terrorist acts by your method Geoff...but there are many, many other groups...all with "root causes" of their own. You encourage widespread terrorism when you give in to the demands, or advance the cause of any terrorist.

Listen to the words of Zehdi Labib Terzi, the PLO's chief observer at the United Nations:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The first several hijackings aroused the consciousness of the world and awakened the media and the world opinion much more--and more effectively--than 20 years of pleading at the UN."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The Palestinians were rewarded for their terrorism by increased awareness of their "root causes". Attention that resulted in their leader being welcomed by the UN General Assembly, their organisation being granted observer status at the UN...and many nations recognising their so called "government". That was back in 1968 I believe. The modern era of political terrorism was born at that time. Guess what? Terrorism did not decrease....it has increased over the years....mostly because it has been proved to work. It has been continually rewarded by our "friends" in the international community. Why wouldn't it grow and thrive?

Things are different now. 9/11 made them different. We're going to try the new aggressive approach to terrorism reduction. GWB's approach is a good common sense tactic of deterrence, an approach that doesn't seem to have been thought of seriously before!

Of course root causes should be addressed, but not at the point of a gun. Actually the root causes of groups which resort to terrorism Should Never be addressed at all until such groups repudiate the tactic. Just MHO.

-zilla

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant
Just put yourself in the position of the Palestinians (incidentally the highest birth rate on the planet).Where do you all get this information from? Palestinians do not have the highest birth rate on the planet. Source, please? :confused:

[Graham]

Originally posted by rikzilla
[B]I had posted this earlier to the "Blair" thread...and if Bidlack will forgive me I'd like to repost it here as well. This post seems to me to be more at home in a "what can we do about terrorism" thread.

-zilla


Things are different now. 9/11 made them different. We're going to try the new aggressive approach to terrorism reduction. GWB's approach is a good common sense tactic of deterrence, an approach that doesn't seem to have been thought of seriously before!

Of course root causes should be addressed, but not at the point of a gun. Actually the root causes of groups which resort to terrorism Should Never be addressed at all until such groups repudiate the tactic. Just MHO.

-zilla


As an example of "The new agressive approach to terorism reduction", I invite you to study the following:

Cromwell's Supression of the Irish beginning 1649 (http://homepage.tinet.ie/~tipperaryfame/cromwell.htm)

THis site glosses over many of the more gory details, I think (or they just told it differently when I was young) but I think this is a good demonstration that the tactic of detterence and overwhelming force has not only been tried before but has been tried and tried and tried:

Cromwell, a Puritan, ‘believed he was an instrument of divine retribution for (alleged) atrocities committed by Catholics against Protestants in 1641 and he accordingly gave orders to deny mercy to Catholics.’ His campaign was savage and is remembered for the slaughter of women and children as well as unarmed captives. He captured Drogheda and slaughtered the garrison. At Wexford the townspeople as well as the garrison were put to death. Cork, Kinsale, Bandon, Youghal and Clonmel had surrendered before he returned to England in May 1650.

This is another version of the story (http://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/cromwell_settlement.htm)

"Believed he was an instrument of divine retribution" - say, who does that remind you of?

By luck or design, I think we're finally seeing the end of the Irish Troubles but it wasn't overwhelming force that succeeded in the end, or the deterent of force.

It makes me physically ill to think of some of the people we now "do business with" - I think if I ever met any of them personally I'd have a very, very hard time being civil but I can't deny that things have been better since we started talking to them.

Graham

PS - I'm still thinking about Japan and all that but I think I'lll start a seperate thread tomorrow maybe.

Originally posted by Bjorn
Where do you all get this information from? Palestinians do not have the highest birth rate on the planet. Source, please? :confused:

The source was a TV program.

But :

http://www.globalpolicy.org/wtc/fundamentalism/2001/1209radicalism.htm


In some cases, politics affects demography as much as demography affects politics. In 2015, Israel's population is expected to increase by only 20 percent, compared to 56 percent in the West Bank and 72 percent in the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian birth rate is so high that if it continues at current levels, in a decade Jews will be a minority in the combined population of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza.

[max]

UCE



geoff you and me usually agree on subjects but I have to disagree with your opinion on Israel.
Jews have lived there for at least 2000 years. Muslims own two thirds of the planet when you look at the atlas. Israel is about as big as Wales with a 4 million population. Jews live on half the land Palistinians the other half. When I was in Israel in 1978 jews and Arabs lived happily alongside one another. The jews had made the land green and fertile, built kibbutz, farms built cities whilst the arabs sat in their tents drinking coffee (sat on their arses in other words) There were vastly rich arabs then living in their mansions, these were identifiable by blue markings on the roof. I went on the Golan Heights and it was quite clear why Israel needed to occupy this territory. All it is, is moorland, one couldn't build on it if one tried but it was a buffer land of some six miles or so, to stop the Syrians from firing down on jews' homes. Rather like cheshire/Lancashire occupying the Peak hills to stop Sheffield shooting down on Glossop.....get it? Of course propaganda teaches the world that the Israelies occupy the Golan Heights, land they say belonging to Syria, viewers watching such propaganda on news bulletins etc are never told that the land is uncultivateable or un inhabitable.......and in fact only useful for sneaking up on jews!!!
I travelled to every corner of Israel (which didn't take long, it is so small) and the arab quarters everywhere were filthy, their markets where they sold meat was heaving with blue bottles crawling all over the meat. Of course you could blame the USA for that eh? The arab women I met just sat around all day talking with other arab women whilst jewish women went to work......there was no restriction on arabs who wanted to work. When after decades the sweat from the jews made a wonderful land and a prosperous one, well the arabs wanted it back eh? yes, sit on your arse for decades while every stupid buggar around you tills the land , then claim it back , and if you can't get it back first time round then bomb the buggars with suicide kids who have been brainwashed into dying for the older cowardly arabs telling them it's good to die for your land. The Palistinians wouldn't be so poverty stricken if
1...they'd work
2 Arafat ploughed money into his people instead of into arms and paying such as Hamas.
The arabs farmers, initially, were only too pleased to sell their land to the jews at massive profits, such land as the west bank.
The world seems to have forgotten such facts.
The arabs and jews would live peacefully together, it's the politicians that won't let them.
Sometimes I really do appreciate that I am nearer to the end of my life than the beginning. The world is horrendous.
P.S. if anyone is wondering.......i was baptised into the christian faith, without my consent of course, so I have no connection to the jewish faith or arabs

[Shane Costello]

Originally posted by RichardM:
However, in each case the foot-soldiers of the terrorism movement tend to come from the poorer regions; in Ireland, it was the poor South that was the real hotspot for the IRA; The Basque region is very impoverished.

This is innacurate in terms of the IRA. In the south the IRA hotspots were in border regions adjoining the North. Relative poverty had little do to with it, considering Northern Catholics probably had a standard of living comparable to those in the South. And it was the poor South that took the IRA on and almost wiped them out.

[B]Terrorism is a decision that an injustice exists which cannot be resolved diplomatically and therefore must be resolved by violence. That is why no amount of control and pressue from Margaret Thatcher or the Spanish government had any serious effect on IRA or ETA. Clamp down on the terrorists and it just spawns more of them, like a hydra. Just look at Israel. There is your example of an attempt to control terrorism with violence and fear! Has it worked?

Actually force did work very well against the IRA. The Irish armny defeated then IRA in 1921-1923 when they embarked on a campaign of terror against the new Irish state when their political representatives were rejected at the polls. Likewise successive Irish governments (including ones made up of politicians who had backed the IRA during the civil war) used internment and capital punishment to great effect against the IRA, so much so that on the eve of the troubles in Northern Ireland the IRA was almost extinct, only for Unionist and British stupidity to give them life again.

There's also evidence to suggest that the SAS operations against the IRA were an important factor in bringing Sinn Fein/IRA to the negotiating table.

[Kevin_Lowe]

Originally posted by max
UCE
geoff you and me usually agree on subjects but I have to disagree with your opinion on Israel.
Jews have lived there for at least 2000 years.

As I understand it, -some- Jews have lived their for 2000 years. That doesn't make it okay to take the land, though.

Originally posted by max
UCE
Muslims own two thirds of the planet when you look at the atlas.

I'm normally a polite guy. But I have to say that comment is unworthy of thinking human being.
:mad:

Are you going to come around to my place, kill me and steal my computer because white guys have two thirds of the world's computers? That would make it all right, I take it?

Originally posted by max
UCE
The jews had made the land green and fertile, built kibbutz, farms built cities whilst the arabs sat in their tents drinking coffee (sat on their arses in other words) There were vastly rich arabs then living in their mansions, these were identifiable by blue markings on the roof.

(snippage)

I travelled to every corner of Israel (which didn't take long, it is so small) and the arab quarters everywhere were filthy, their markets where they sold meat was heaving with blue bottles crawling all over the meat. Of course you could blame the USA for that eh? The arab women I met just sat around all day talking with other arab women whilst jewish women went to work......there was no restriction on arabs who wanted to work. When after decades the sweat from the jews made a wonderful land and a prosperous one, well the arabs wanted it back eh? yes, sit on your arse for decades while every stupid buggar around you tills the land , then claim it back , and if you can't get it back first time round then bomb the buggars with suicide kids who have been brainwashed into dying for the older cowardly arabs telling them it's good to die for your land. The Palistinians wouldn't be so poverty stricken if
1...they'd work
2 Arafat ploughed money into his people instead of into arms and paying such as Hamas.
The arabs farmers, initially, were only too pleased to sell their land to the jews at massive profits, such land as the west bank.
The world seems to have forgotten such facts.
The arabs and jews would live peacefully together, it's the politicians that won't let them.
Sometimes I really do appreciate that I am nearer to the end of my life than the beginning. The world is horrendous.
P.S. if anyone is wondering.......i was baptised into the christian faith, without my consent of course, so I have no connection to the jewish faith or arabs

By the same logic, if the black americans in the US and the aborigines here in Australia would only pick the flies out of their noses and get honest jobs they wouldn't be living in poverty. They've had hundreds of years to put on suits and get jobs in well-paid professions, compared to only decades for the Palestinians. How dare they act like they have any claim on us after all we've done for them? :rolleyes:

This is the age-old "blame the victim" argument, and it's sad that it's being perpetuated by educated, intelligent people.

[max]

so with your way of thinking it'd be ok if the aboriginies start suicide bombing white australians then?.......now that you've worked your arses off to make something of the land.
well, if you don't mind, who am I to argue with that

[DialecticMaterialist]

Claim: "terrorism is caused by poverty."

Counter-point: There are wealthy terrorists and poor nations with little terrorism....


Then:" Well gee, its a matter of national poverty....sometimes. "

Well nothing a bit spurrious and questionable about that kind of reasoning. Using that method I suppose one can prove that just about anything is THE "cause" of terrorism. (nevermind that there is probably more then one.)

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant
You CANNOT fight terrorism by attacking Iraq, Iran and North Korea. All that will do is provoke more terrorism, not less.

The ONLY way to stop terrorism is to stop the things which cause it.

Shall I tell you how the US could remove the threat of terrorism against it?

It should take all the countless billions it is going to spend on waging war all around the globe and spend it on schemes to alleviate poverty in the third world. In doing so it would make a MASSIVE difference to vast numbers of people and turn itself from being the #1 target of terrorism to an international symbol of justice and progress.

Problem with that is that along with our money and aid often comes U.S. culture and political strings which cause even more resentment. Also, despot states are known to have taken aid intended for the poor and used it to maintain power, eventually requiring military solutions.

[Plutarck]

Originally posted by pyrrho2000


Problem with that is that along with our money and aid often comes U.S. culture and political strings which cause even more resentment. Also, despot states are known to have taken aid intended for the poor and used it to maintain power, eventually requiring military solutions.

I can't recall the country - maybe it was Algeria - but I believe that, with the help of the US and other countries, they built an oil-pipeline and related infrastructure that resulting in millions of dollars of revenues for them; a truly vast amount of money to them.

The problem is that they used the first 100-some million directly to purchase weapons which they used in the continuing civil war and fight against "rebels". I don't believe the standard of living has increased whatsoever.

The thing that one must remember about money is that it has absolutely no power of its own. Whoever controls it will decide how it is used, and in most truly impoverished countries all money flows almost instantly into government or underground coffers - out of the hands of the people, and into the hands of corrupt governments and criminals.

There is just so much infrastructure required that it would basically require a country actually take over sections of them and extend their existing infrastructure and systems to permit efficient expansion.

But of course, that would be annexation, imperialism, and that would just piss people off even more, even if if saved millions of lives.

If all it takes would be more money, there wouldn't be such a problem - plenty of opportunity there. But it is a cluster-**** of bad situations, from Bring Your Own Infrastucture, to corrupt governments, excessive and extensive regulation, and a lack of the good governance of fair and clear legal systems, private property ownership with clear title, etc. Not to even mention often highly conflicting cultures - there is no way to get around the fact that they would effectively be illiminated and replaced, or super-mutated leaving only a minor resemblence. Some people have a problem with that, too.

An appropriate saying would be, "There are no simple problems left to solve."

[Bjorn]

UCE,
You quote this:

The Palestinian birth rate is so high that if it continues at current levels, in a decade Jews will be a minority in the combined population of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. However, it is not saying that 'Palestinians have the highest birth rate on the Planet'.

The birth rate in Palestine is high, 32/1000, but still lower than many African countries and even lower than Saudi Arabia (34/1000).

[DrBenway]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant
The regime in Israel is additionally massively supported by a US adminstration that cares nothing for the plight of the Palestinians. What are they supposed to do? What would YOU do? Quietly sit in your slum knowing nothing was ever going to improve for your people?


I would apply for Israeli citizenship. Like many Israeli Arabs, I'd obey the laws of the land, keep my nose clean, get a good education, and run for a seat in the Knesset.

[Drooper]

Originally posted by UndercoverElephant


The source was a TV program.

But :

http://www.globalpolicy.org/wtc/fundamentalism/2001/1209radicalism.htm




Typical, lies and statistics.

The birth rate in the West Bank is 34.94 per 1,000.

That birth rate would get it into the top 50. Note that the 50th highest birthrate is around 36 per 1,000 (Iraq amusingly enough), while the highest is Anfghanistan at over 50.

Source (The Economist, CIA World Factbook.)