Printable View
Where did you get that definition? The definition of terrorism is the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. Nothing about "innocents", which again, is an ambiguous term. The non-combatants of Iraq and Afghanistan could be describe as innocent, but I digress.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tor Larson
Repetition in progress... standby for redundancy to occur:Quote:
Originally Posted by DeusExMachina
Intended target, key word here, stay with me, I'm about to use "big words." Terrorists spout "Death to all infidels regardless of if they are actually picking up arms to fight us." The Pentagon passes down "Kill every last one of those terrorist scum, but do your damnedest to not let any civilian casualties occur." 'Course I'm paraphrasing here, but they don't care if they're killing US troops or just plain old John Q. American Public, 9/11 proved that pretty obvious. We're not carpet bombing all of Baghdad, launching raids into neighborhoods killing anything that isn't in US uniform. ROE, our mission, and goals for the wars we fight differ greatly from what terrorists believe, and if it really takes for me to sit here and spell it out for you then please cease and desist now, because it's honestly just making me think you're really dumb, or really uneducated in current affairs. Ok, so I didn't use "big words" I decided to speak in layman's terms.
This actually isn't meant to deviate from the original topic, but friends of mine who are close to Israeli/Palestinian types laugh their butts off at how accurate (albeit overblown) the dynamics in You Don't Mess With The Zohan are in regards to cultural interactions amongst these people groups.
that was a great movie! [ROFL1]Quote:
Originally Posted by mevshooter
Quote:
Originally Posted by sniper7
Disco Disco....
Ronin you have a very narrow understanding of terrorism. Do you think the FARC or the IRA sits around saying death to the infidels?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Terrorism is a tactic usually used by a group when they don't feel they have the political means or military might to achieve their goals. If you don't believe that from their perspective their goals are just then perhaps you're the one who should cease and desist now.
I said earlier I was looking for a little intellectual honesty. Let's try to at least be consistent here. You still haven't answered my post on pg 8. I'm looking forward to your thoughts.
OK so here's a question. Let's play to the assumption that it is black and white.
What should Israel do? How do they ensure their own peace and prosperity?
Ronin, have you read Unintended Consequences?
If you believe that someday you will stand before a power who will judge you according to your actions, then there is absolute right and wrong that will be dictated by whoever judges you. If you don't believe that then do whatever you want. Use whatever philosophy or intellectual reasoning that will justify yourself. I would say the latter view is prevalent in humans based upon their actions.
I personally believe I will stand in judgement. And it has been a safe guide to me, making my life better. My personal belief is that it doesn't matter what perspective you have, or what is written in the history books. It doesn't matter what popular opinion says happened. Right and wrong are absolutes. Nobody rapes, kills without cause, or steals and remains innocent. Regardless of perspective. They may escape punishment in this life, may have books written in their honor, and enjoy honor from like minded people but they will be judged according to their deeds.
How's that for an extremely narrow and naive view. Works for me. If you violate the natural laws set before us and don't find a way to reconcile with the power that will judge you, you deserve to burn in hell. And I'd hate to find out what it would take for people like Hitler, Manson, Stalin ect. to find forgiveness.
(puts soapbox away)
No, can't say I have... I'm currently reading that criticism of the drug war book by the former Sheriff of San Miguel County (Telluride)... Should I add it to the next book in line?Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Before you call the IRA terrorists, i suggest you read The History Of The IRA. I personally don't consider the IRA terrorists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick-Boy
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMP_5.56
And again we come back to perspective. Ask a member of the RUC and I'm certain they'll describe the IRA as terrorists. Ask someone from Dublin and you'll likely get a different answer. The British Government has them listed as a proscribed organization in their anti-terror acts (2000?). They call themselves freedom fighters. Perspective.
Edited to add- Are you talking about Coogan's "The IRA: A History"? Because I've read it.
The United States should have ceased all contact when the Palestinians elected Hamas as their leadership.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick-Boy
I like black and white, that's why. The Palestinians don't deserve recognition because they elected Hamas, a known terrorist organization to lead their government.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoosier
The United States is being played for suckers by the rest of the Arab world.
Thank you for the linktv link.
I love how the Palestinians want their countrymen who murdered Israelis released. It is OK to murder Israelis but if Israel lifts a finger to try and convict murderers or to defend itself, well we just can't have that.
d*mn i wish i could type better but ill give it a shotQuote:
Originally Posted by Mick-Boy
if not give back some of the land that was taken at least have an open agriculture program using those lands in question
try some real peace talks without the preconceived notion of failure
i bet if they just started there things would start progressing .
the real problem with that part of the world is it considered holy land by d*mn near everyone so they all feel as if they are chosen and have the right to inflict not only political but religious views . you can never have peace when everyone feels that they are right and has god on there side.
Mick- after spending 7 months at the US Army Intelligence School, and continuous counter-terror training throughout my tenure as an S2 ANCOIC I think my knowledge of all kinds of terrorists is pretty wide. It's not focused simply on ME terrorists, but also extreme right and left wing domestic terrorists (like PETA!) and many many others from around the globe. I personally, as an American of Irish heritage (and Scottish too) do not believe that the PIRA/IRA/RIRIA/etc. ARE NOT (typo- my bad) terrorists organizations. They responded to a threat and do not specifically target civilians. Granted the law of unintended consequences comes to play in their bombings in London, Belfast and other areas of the region. Need I mention the Scottish revolution, Bloody Sunday, and the peak of the Troubles? Personally, and this is simply my educated opinion on the matter, the IRA and different factions therein, are not in the wrong in opposing the last of the British empire's outstretched dominance.
I can see my request for a little intellectual honesty didn't didn't take.
You rock on in your black and white world. Continue making judgements of millions of people based on your opinions and issuing blanket statements on America's foreign policy when you clearly have very little understanding of the issues involved. Whoever trained you has failed on an epic level.
while simplistic i was being honest , although id never call my self an intellectual[Tooth]Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick-Boy
Sorry Alex, that wasn't directed at you. I think you're off to a good start. I hit on the big three issues at the bottom of page 7. Until some progress is made on those issues they're going nowhere. That can't happen until both sides are willing to give a little. "God gave it to us" just isn't going to cut it with 7.8 million believers on one side and 6 million believers on the other side.Quote:
Originally Posted by alxone
In the words of Jack Ryan (from Clear and Present Danger): "Not black and white, right and wrong!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick-Boy
Israel, for the most part, =Good!
Palestine, while mostly not bad people, still those support bombing innocent people= BAD...
I'd think whoever trained me probably knew more about what they were talking about than most- considering one of whom used to be the 5th highest ranking civilian from the DoD to brief the president (which probably fell on deaf ears because it was during Clinton's reign of stupidity on foreign policy).
You don't need to add it, I just wonder how you'd feel about the events in the book is all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
I'm not sure playing up 35F AIT (amounting to a wide knowledge of terrorism) is a display of intellectual honesty. That is, unless we call Bradley Manning an intellectual because of his training.
Rereading this post, I apologize if this was snarky. I just think Mick brought up some very interesting questions that have been sidestepped with a bait and switch on ambiguous qualifications.
I'm still thinking about the Balfour Declaration, all the associated agreements and whether or not is was the right thing to do.
I'm trying to figure out the motivating factors for the British and French, why would they want to do this.
If Jews are gods chosen people are we non-Jews second class people in his eyes?Quote:
Originally Posted by bameverden
I don't get the "chosen people" thing.
The 'chosen people' thing is from the Old Testament and I don't really know what it means, only where it originates. The 'chosen people' thing is no longer relevant after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ in the New Testament, all the Gentiles (all men) become 'the chosen' after that event.Quote:
Originally Posted by 86k10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zundfolge
that video is well worth the time it takes to watch.
they don't want to live in peace. they don't want their own country.
they want to exterminate the jews.
But in Revelation, John goes on to talk about that Israel's enemies will attack from the north and God will protect them with fire/brimstone from the sky.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberth
It doesn't become irrelevant, but I agree with you on the point that it is no longer an "exclusive" club. Jesus said in the New Testament that He did not come to UNDO the Old Covenant, but to fulfill it. So it is a matter of both yes and no.
And THAT'S the deciding factor for me when considered without my Christian bias towards Israel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elhuero
When I remove that aspect of my perspective, I still can't get behind Palestine.
i could go into detail but the short answer is guilt . promises made after ww1 were not held and then after ww2 everyone felt real sh*ty . france then went to war with indochina (vietnam) to help rebuild and the brits tried not to starve as they rebuilt .Quote:
Originally Posted by roberth
the problem is that its not cut and dry or black and white , at this point both sides have committed some many wrongs that making some rights are gonna take a lot of pride swallowing on both sides .
Quote:
Originally Posted by alxone
did you watch the video?
israel has offered peace several times now.
Historically speaking the sequence of events in the video is pretty accurate but the depiction of the parties involved is extremely one sided (look who made the video and tell me it's not biased...).
If you read what I wrote on pg 7 it'll give you an idea of what the big roadblocks to peace are. BOTH sides have offered peace but not on terms the other side can accept.
Nothing is simple when there are millions of people, religion and extremely emotionally charged issues on both sides.
You're correct, irrelevant is the wrong. The club becomes inclusive vs exclusive.Quote:
Originally Posted by mevshooter
This is a list of rocket attacks by the Palestinians on Israel for 2011. The source is Wikipedia, go figure. I wonder why the US new media failed to report these with all the bluster that an Israeli counterattack gets. Hmmmmm.Quote:
Originally Posted by mevshooter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...n_Israel,_2011
I agree, guilt isn't a reason to do anything. This was also one of the last, arrogant acts of a fading superpower.Quote:
Originally Posted by alxone
When qassam rockets do damage it makes international news. They are home made unguided rockets, their lethality is low.Quote:
Originally Posted by roberth
You could ask, "Why does the US news media fail to report..." things like this, as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli...s_1948-present
I'm opposed to the concept of a Jewish state, just as I'm opposed to the concept of a Muslim state (Iran, Saudi Arabia et al), and just as I'm opposed to the concept of a Christian state. Any place like that will invariably disenfranchise citizens who do not belong to the same cult.
H.
If we follow that line of thinking, then we should ignore every single one of those same type of unguided, low lethality attacks that happens at all of our bases and outposts in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoosier
Every time I talked to my dad on the phone during his tour of duty, he would say something along the lines of "yeah, 3 rocket attacks yesterday, 2 this morning, about 9 last week..." and so on and so on.
The intent to kill is there. Just because they suck at it, doesn't make it more acceptable. Much the same as just because Israel are awesome at it, doesn't make them any more despicable.
Erm, I was just stating what happens, not justifying it or explaining it. However, I would say if a rocket attack doesn't kill anyone, it should be lower on the news totem poll than say, flooding that has displaced ten million people in Thailand.Quote:
Originally Posted by mevshooter
I re-read what I posted, and still can't find where I said it's acceptable. Stop putting words in my mouth, please.Quote:
The intent to kill is there. Just because they suck at it, doesn't make it more acceptable. Much the same as just because Israel are awesome at it, doesn't make them any more despicable.
H.
And when ten million people are displaced by flooding in Thailand, that news story typically takes the top spot of the news hour. However, when it is an issue of OUR people being attacked vs. people in other countries going through hard times, OUR people will tend to take the top spot of the news hour, because they are OUR people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoosier
Much like the UK are far more concerned with the people rioting in their streets, than the OWS people over here. As it should be.
I never stated that YOU said it was acceptable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoosier
Its a free exchange of ideas here on the board. I was simply stating MY thoughts on this.
If I would have said "I can't believe you think its acceptable" then yes, by all means, you would have been correct in your statement. However, I did not say that. At all.
This is an old axiom that may or may not have already been repeated here- but for me it says it all- If the "Palestinians" threw all of their weapons into the Mediterranean -there would be immediate peace-. If the Israelis threw all of their weapons into the Mediterranean- the surrounding Arab countries would immediately advance, invade and kill the Jews. To me this is not really arguable, it is obvious.
You realize that Israelis are not OUR people don't you? They are citizens of a foreign government.Quote:
Originally Posted by mevshooter
We weren't talking about Israel at that point in the exchange Hoosier and I were having.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick-Boy
Of course I know Israel aren't our people. However, they are one of our greatest allies, so they do hold a place of significance greater than other countries.
[quote=Sharpienads;447137]Sounds like you got it pretty much covered to me.[/quote
Upsetting but true.