Is this Terrorism

[a_unique_person]

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1053196622398_2003/05/21/2105toon,0.jpg

[Jesse]

I'm speechless.

[LeFevre]

That guy with a bow over there is a terrorist, he wont come over here and fight me spear to spear.

[Mike B.]

:confused:

[HarryKeogh]

we carpet bombed iraq? hmmm, that's news to me.

[Mike B.]

shhhhhhhhhhh

Don't confuse AUP's biases with facts. :p

[hisham]

http://www.goma.demon.co.uk/al%20qaida/dove.gif

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by HarryKeogh
we carpet bombed iraq? hmmm, that's news to me.

Who mentioned Iraq before you did?

[aerocontrols]

Hisham:

Do you agree with your cartoon's apparent contention that the US and UK claimed that 'We come in peace'?

[hisham]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Hisham:

Do you agree with your cartoon's apparent contention that the US and UK claimed that 'We come in peace'?
aerocontrols :
The cartoon contention is very clear .

[Frostbite]

Depends what side of the fence you're on I guess. The US calls it "collateral damage", but for an Iraqi civilian it's terrorism.

[Tony]

No, its not terrorism, its an act of war.

[hisham]

Originally posted by Tony
No, its not terrorism, its an act of war.
What is the difference, both are used to kill humans, with different names.

[richardm]

Originally posted by hisham

What is the difference, both are used to kill humans, with different names.

The difference is that in war, you're not (according to the Geneva Convention) supposed to deliberately target civilians.

If you're a terrorist, the whole point is that you deliberately target civilians.

[HarryKeogh]

Originally posted by Ian Osborne


Who mentioned Iraq before you did?

ok, we didnt carpet bomb afghanistan either.

[Skeptical Greg]

I have never really had a problem with the suggestion that " a terrorist, is just someone who can't afford an aircraft to deliver their bomb.. "

When you set out to kick some butt, it only makes sense to put on your biggest and best boots.. Preferably the steel toed kind.

[c0rbin]

Hisham, I think what Aerocontrols was trying to say was that the coalition made nothing unclear about their intentions of bringing war to the Iraqii regime.

Ergo, we did not "come in peace."

Whether this was the right decision is moot as it has happened.

Whether this is fair seems to be a choice made long ago by people who have the capacity to commit violent acts, be they in the name of some god, policy, or agenda.

Is that fair to armless Ali? No. What did he or the 3,000 people in the WTC ever do to cause torture and death?

By the way, the last sentence had a little sarcasm.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by hisham

aerocontrols :
The cartoon contention is very clear .

I didn't ask you to clarify the cartoon, thanks.

I asked you if you agreed that we claimed to be bringing peace while we actually brought war.

If you believe the cartoon is making another contention, please tell me what it is, because any other interpretation is not that clear to me.

MattJ

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Tony
No, its not terrorism, its an act of war.

Can't be war there has been no declaration of war.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by richardm

If you're a terrorist, the whole point is that you deliberately target civilians.

Would you then go on to say that the Bombing of the USS Cole was not an act of terrorism?

Would you say that the IRA blowing up a British squaddie is not an act of terrorism?

Would you also say that any Isreali soldier killed by palestinian paramilitaries are not acts of terrorism?

Would you say that the Allied bombing offensive aginst Germany during WWII was an act of terrorism.

Would you say that US troops shotting a bus-load of Iraqi civillians IS terrorism? after all they did deliberately target the civillians......

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by Dancing David


Can't be war there has been no declaration of war.

If a tree falls in the forest, and no one hears it, it doesn't make a sound.

MattJ

[hisham]

Originally posted by aerocontrols


I didn't ask you to clarify the cartoon, thanks.

I asked you if you agreed that we claimed to be bringing peace while we actually brought war.

If you believe the cartoon is making another contention, please tell me what it is, because any other interpretation is not that clear to me.

MattJ
Matt,
But what you mean when you said "we claimed" is the world "we" referred to the US administration?
It is a war, and it never will bring peace, of course am happy to see Iraq is free from Saddam Regime, but this war destroyed this country and what happen now is like this:
http://www.goma.demon.co.uk/al%20qaida/portraits.jpg

[Tony]

Originally posted by hisham


It is a war, and it never will bring peace,


Another ignorant quote by our resident muslim.

http://www.goma.demon.co.uk/al%20qaida/portraits.jpg


Propaganda. :rolleyes:

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by hisham

Matt,
But what you mean when you said "we claimed" is the world "we" referred to the US administration?

I was perfectly clear:

cartoon's apparent contention that the US and UK claimed that 'We come in peace'?

I am (as I was before) talking about what the cartoon claims. The dove is carrying the flags of the US and UK with the caption "We come in Peace". Who is 'we' in the cartoon, Hisham? That's the 'we' I'm talking about. I'm asking if you think 'we' ever said "We come in peace". Will you answer that question or not?

Originally posted by hisham
It is a war, and it never will bring peace, of course am happy to see Iraq is free from Saddam Regime, but this war destroyed this country and what happen now is like this:

None of this addresses my question, I'm afraid.

MattJ

[hisham]

Originally posted by Tony



Another ignorant quote by our resident muslim.

http://www.goma.demon.co.uk/al%20qaida/portraits.jpg


Propaganda. :rolleyes:
Your resident:confused:

[hisham]

Originally posted by aerocontrols

None of this addresses my question, I'm afraid.

MattJ
i agree with the cartoon's apparent contention. Is this addresses your question now :rolleyes:

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by hisham

i agree with the cartoon's apparent contention. Is this addresses your question now :rolleyes:

Yes it does. Thank you.

Now, when did the US and UK claim that "We come in peace".

Can you quote someone?

MattJ

[peptoabysmal]

No, posting cartoons that distort the truth is not an act of terrorism.

You will have to try harder than that if you want to get into al Qa'ida.

[Jon_in_london]

Originally posted by Jon_in_london


Would you then go on to say that the Bombing of the USS Cole was not an act of terrorism?

Would you say that the IRA blowing up a British squaddie is not an act of terrorism?

Would you also say that any Isreali soldier killed by palestinian paramilitaries are not acts of terrorism?

Would you say that the Allied bombing offensive aginst Germany during WWII was an act of terrorism.

Would you say that US troops shotting a bus-load of Iraqi civillians IS terrorism? after all they did deliberately target the civillians......

*bump*

-----sounds of crickets chirping-------

[c0rbin]

Another ignorant quote by our resident muslim.

Tony, you make it sound as if you have some knowledge of this forum's religious demographics. Is this fellow really the only Muslim to post here?

I get the feeling you are a little bigotted in this regard. Please ease my concerns that I am sharing this board with a bigot.

Moving on to Jon_in_London.

Would you then go on to say that the Bombing of the USS Cole was not an act of terrorism?

I would say not an act of terrorism.

Would you say that the IRA blowing up a British squaddie is not an act of terrorism?

I would say not an act of terrorism.

Would you also say that any Isreali soldier killed by palestinian paramilitaries are not acts of terrorism?

I would say not an act of terrorism.

Would you say that the Allied bombing offensive aginst Germany during WWII was an act of terrorism.

I would say not an act of terrorism.

Would you say that US troops shotting a bus-load of Iraqi civillians IS terrorism? after all they did deliberately target the civillians......

I would say not an act of terrorism, given the precedent set by the tactics used in the past (car bombs targeting check-points).

Jon_in_london, you left out a few.

Germans in WWI executing or decimating townsfolk in response to resistance.

Colonial militia sniping British Redcoats (Lobster Backs) during our push for independence.

Tour busses being bombed in Egypt.

Olympic athletes held and hand-grenaded.

I could go on, but I will get to the point. No one is clean. Violence is pervasive in all societies and cultures.

Peace on Earth is something one must fight for because there is always going to be some ******* willing to mug you on your way home.

[max]

Tony
I think you mean token muslim not resident.

I don't consider the Iraq situation was war, in my humble opinion it was an invasion and something Bush had in mind from the beginning of his 'reign' Thatcher was the same.i.e. a warmonger. (the Falklands) They want to go down in history as an Eisenhower or a Churchill but great leaders such as them only come once in a century.
It also keeps the arms companies happy. I wonder how many members of congress have shares in such companies. The above also goes for Blair and the UK
I think both countries are bullies, after all we are not in a hurry to bully Korea, we may get nuked

[Tony]

Originally posted by c0rbin




I get the feeling you are a little bigotted in this regard.




If you look up the definition of a bigot you will see I am not. I made this judgement based on this guy's previous posts. And I think max is right, I did mean token instead of resident.


Please ease my concerns that I am sharing this board with a bigot.

I cant do that, i have come to see that most people on this board are anti-christian bigots. "Xian" seems to be the only acceptable cultural slur.

[jj]

Originally posted by peptoabysmal
No, posting cartoons that distort the truth is not an act of terrorism.

You will have to try harder than than if you want to get into al Qa'ida.

Ohhh, good, hey, Joe McCarthy Tom Ridge, political speech isn't an act of terrorism.

Yet.

And what about Tom DeLay using the "Homeland Security" people to track down democrats?

The man needs a fast impeachment.

[jj]

Originally posted by Tony

I cant do that, i have come to see that most people on this board are anti-christian bigots. "Xian" seems to be the only acceptable cultural slur.

So, then, when is the word "Christian" a description of an individual's espoused belief system, and when is it a "cultural slur"?

Is "Christian" a slur in the following:

"
The sexton did not set me down
Back by the door,
He was a Christian man.
"

(from 'Model Church' by The Bluegrass Album Band, also J. D. Crowe and the New South)

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by aerocontrols


If a tree falls in the forest, and no one hears it, it doesn't make a sound.

MattJ

Actualy it can't make a sound it makes a noise, wink.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Tony




I cant do that, i have come to see that most people on this board are anti-christian bigots. "Xian" seems to be the only acceptable cultural slur.

Come now sir, some of us are quite tolerant of christians, dump on all beliefs equally with little regard for the race,class,religion or feelings of those concerned.

When I type Xian, it is because I am lazy, it is not menat as a slu. When I say 'thumper' or 'fumblementalist' then it is a slur.

Hey Tony, are you okay?

Peace

[Dancing David]

Hisham, I find the cartoons entertaining! I feel the same way about Bush.

Peace

[Skeptic]

It is a war, and it never will bring peace,

Let's just ask Hitler about that one. War (or the threat of war), when used against evil, agressive, violent regimes like those of Saddam Hussein, Hitler, or the Taliban, often DOES bring peace.

Europe had fifty years of peace now, solely due to the fact that a). the US fought a war against Nazi Germany (and Italy) there, and b). it threathened a world war if communist Russia (the USSR, more accurately) would invade Europe after WWII.

of course am happy to see Iraq is free from Saddam Regime, but this war destroyed this country

Are you KIDDING? There were FAR less casualties in Iraq in the entire war than in one night of bombing of Berlin during WWII, for example. As for the infrastructure, including the all-important oil wells, it is mostly intact. Do you see ANYTHING in Baghdad, for example, that resembles how Berlin looked at the end of WWII?

and what happen now is like this:
http://www.goma.demon.co.uk/al%20qaida/portraits.jpg

Even if that WAS the case, it would have been a great improvement. I doubt, for instance, that an Iraqi who says he would have voted for the Democratic candide if he were an American is going to be arrested, tortured, and then killed by the American soldiers.

Besides, the point is to establish a democratic government in Iraq, not to remain there. The US obviously has no intention--and no need, for that matter--to establish its own rulership there.

[Troll]

Originally posted by hisham

What is the difference, both are used to kill humans, with different names.

So is self-defense and plain old fashioned murder. The result is a dead body. But surely you can see the difference amongst those, can't you?;)

[c0rbin]

I think killing a human being is murder. Motives are motives. One could speculate on the merits of those motives all day, but murder is still murder.

Defining terrorism seems to be a little more politically slippery.

Like the Benjamin Franklin quote:

"Treason is a word invented by winners as an excuse to hang the losers."

BTW, it is the truth that "war" is not a term defined by the congress.

Edited to add: I was a little taken aback when I went to dictionary.com, typed in "war" and got back "warrant"--which seemed to blast my argument out of the water, until I realized I was reading the definition for "warrant" and not "war"). Link to hilarity (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=war)