[quote]kristopherts wrote:
fire and anger is how fighting is done, watching your people murdered while trying to Dr. Phil them to death is called rolling over and taking it like a bitch.
I suppose you would offer this same line of peacenic dovehugging hippie talk to a man breaking in your house and going after your child?
[/quote]
I would like to point out that India’s independence was not won through fire and war - it was done peacefully. I would ALSO like to point out that the civil rights movement in the United States happened the same way. …would you lessen the importance of their struggles by saying it wasn’t something they had to fight for?
If someone was breaking into my house to get my child, I would kill them or die trying. …however, while I may be willing to sacrifice my own life to save my family, I doubt many others would be willing to sacrifice their lives to KILL my family, which A, means this is an extremely unlikely scenario, and B, puts me at a distinct advantage, were that situation to arise.
There is certainly a time and a place for everything - war included. …that being said however, war is reserved for an absolute last resort - when you have nothing LEFT to lose - when you would gladly give your life for something greater than yourself.
…THAT is the awful point in time when you strap a bomb to your body to make a point.
[quote]PantyPeePunch wrote:
So I have “little understanding of the terrorists” and your understanding of them leads you to wish for some fantasy terrorist who will blow himself up with a regard for innocent human life? What about a possible soulution?
A terrorists thinking is, “I’m going to destory as many infidels/Jews as possible while blowing myself up so I can go to heaven and rest easy in the satisfaction that I am thought of as a martyr and my family is revered in the community and collecting a weekly payment thanks to my good deed.” What do you propose we do? How do we defend ourselves when we offer no punishement to fit the crime?
I dont think any of the terrorists fear a quick and painless death that they themselves choose under their own terms. The key is getting them to understand that the moment they consider commiting the act they have also considered the innevitable, violent destruction of their friends and loved ones.
[/quote]
PPP it was specifically what India did that worked, non-violent and self sacrificial protest to get the worlds’ attention.
I don’t expect the current terrorists to understand or do that. They are after vengeance. So are you, in the same way they are, specifically because you said you want to kill their innocent families for their actions.
You want to terrify them so much they are too scared to terrify you.
You want them too scared (for their loved ones’) to do anything harmful to you.
THEY want YOU too scared to do anything to them. You are after the same thing, and in the same way. It ain’t working. It can’t work until someone (prefer both) say enough is enough.
The only real solution is to advance their economy and stop bombing them / other conflicts and allow them time to live a prosperous life without threats and no need to blame or retaliate for anything. I severely doubt this is going to happen for a loooong time.
But what you are suggesting is guaranteed to just make matters worse.
Here’s the deal: no, all muslims are not fanatics, nor are all christians fundamentalists. However, if you’ve been watching the news of hundreds of thousands of people in the streets rioting and fighting each other (people of the same religion, mind you) because they cannnot tolerate satire of their religion. They want the entire western world to pass laws infringing freedom of speech, a basic liberty in democratic societies.
They believe that their beliefs should dictate what a newspaper in Denmark, Malaysia or anywhere else can print. I am afraid that is a load of bullshit. The Prophet himself probably would have gotten a laugh out of it. However, it seems his modern day followers would rather see the entire world as corrupt, oppressive and impoverished as their own world is.
Bombing mosques and innocents is out of bounds, but we shouldn’t let desire for a fantasy world blind to the world as it truly is. We face a dire enemy to liberty in all religious fanaticism.
Here’s the deal: no, all muslims are not fanatics, nor are all christians fundamentalists. However, if you’ve been watching the news of hundreds of thousands of people in the streets rioting and fighting each other (people of the same religion, mind you) because they cannnot tolerate satire of their religion. They want the entire western world to pass laws infringing freedom of speech, a basic liberty in democratic societies.
They believe that their beliefs should dictate what a newspaper in Denmark, Malaysia or anywhere else can print. I am afraid that is a load of bullshit. The Prophet himself probably would have gotten a laugh out of it. However, it seems his modern day followers would rather see the entire world as corrupt, oppressive and impoverished as their own world is.
Bombing mosques and innocents is out of bounds, but we shouldn’t let desire for a fantasy world blind to the world as it truly is. We face a dire enemy to liberty in all religious fanaticism.[/quote]
Also, don’t forget the fact that 4 months ago when the cartoons were published, nothing happened. It was only when a few muslims from Denmark were unhappy with how it was handled in Denmark (ie peacefully allowed as freedom of speech) that they took copies of the cartoons to various middle eastern countries, and went on a campaign of making people angry as heck about it. WHO KNOWS WHAT THEY SAID.
“This is what they show in Denmark, they are all laughing at you!”
Whatever they did and said, it worked to start a protest of chaos.
It took much less in Australia, all the neo-nazis needed was a few hours of sun and beer to start an anti-muslim riot.
““I would like to point out that India’s independence was not won through fire and war - it was done peacefully. I would ALSO like to point out that the civil rights movement in the United States happened the same way. …would you lessen the importance of their struggles by saying it wasn’t something they had to fight for?””
India was lucky enough to be dealing with the English, and the civil rights movement was lucky enough not to be fought for in a place like China or the former Soviet Union; their struggles were/are quite important, but both examples are completely different than the current terrorist threat that many nations face.
[quote]PantyPeePunch wrote:
““I would like to point out that India’s independence was not won through fire and war - it was done peacefully. I would ALSO like to point out that the civil rights movement in the United States happened the same way. …would you lessen the importance of their struggles by saying it wasn’t something they had to fight for?””
India was lucky enough to be dealing with the English, and the civil rights movement was lucky enough not to be fought for in a place like China or the former Soviet Union; their struggles were/are quite important, but both examples are completely different than the current terrorist threat that many nations face.
[/quote]
In addition to this, I would like to say I would love to be able to reach my hand out to the moslem world in a gesture of friendship and a sincere desire for peace and understanding. However, I think that I’d pull back a bloody stump. While the rage on the part of some folks in the moslem world is quite legitimate (whether it is directed at the appropriate targets is another matter), it seems unreasoning and indiscriminate.
I really don’t know how one reasons with unreasonable people.
[quote]WMD wrote:
In addition to this, I would like to say I would love to be able to reach my hand out to the moslem world in a gesture of friendship and a sincere desire for peace and understanding. However, I think that I’d pull back a bloody stump. While the rage on the part of some folks in the moslem world is quite legitimate (whether it is directed at the appropriate targets is another matter), it seems unreasoning and indiscriminate.
I really don’t know how one reasons with unreasonable people. [/quote]
WMD I am not saying the idea is perfect, and I don’t think you can reason with unreasonable people. I just don’t think this plan of kill everyone around them will work. You need to get the other 95% non-violent (or, not actively violent) muslims to condemn the other 5% and hopefully, weed them out and rat on them or something.
But the action of killing the families would turn half the remaining, currently peaceful people into terrorists.
I would like to point out that India’s independence was not won through fire and war - it was done peacefully. I would ALSO like to point out that the civil rights movement in the United States happened the same way.
…[/quote]
The only smart thing you have ever posted in the political forum.
Until the terrorists forsake violence and use peaceful protests they will never get what they want.
They don’t care about people and families… they are not important to them at all.
They care about their religion.
I tell you, equate one death to one destroyed mosque or holy shrine and there will be a debate of biblical propertions of whether or not encouraging the destruction of mosques and shrines via suicide, because you know the consequences of such acts, represents an unforgivable sin.
Heh, or not… perhaps there would just be a huge war![/quote]
On the other hand, it would be a war of attrition. Every time we were to kill the family, there’d be one less potential terrorist bomber down the road. It’s a long shot but, given the number of fanatics, we’d get there eventually.
Hopefully it would only take a few years to thin the population down to those who are peaceful.
[quote]knewsom wrote:
The only way we can defeat them is with compassion and non-violence. If they kill one of us, we must say, “are you really going to kill ALL of us? Us, who are doing you no harm? Us who only aim to help you?” If they kill a THOUSAND of us, we must continue to repeate these honest words until their hearts (their only weapon) break, and realize what foolishness this has all been.
[/quote]
Knewsom, there are only three possible outcomes to that scenario:
They kill all of us.
They don’t kill any more of us.
They stop killing us once we as a nation convert to Islam.
Given what we’ve seen so far, do you REALLY believe option two has much of a chance of happening?
[quote]PantyPeePunch wrote:
What if the terrorist is Irish? Should we blow up a pub?[/quote]
As can be seen from N.Ireland irish terrorists get released from prison without serving full sentences and get put in government. Hey maybe that would work in the US!! Let all those detainees out and into the police service then offer Bin Laden a position in the senate - i’ve solved all the problems.
Don’t they breed terrorist? Wouldn’t geneside solve that particular terrorist problem. Wait a minute. Hitler tried that with people he didn’t like. Nevermind, maybe we should just like the people that don’t like us. A little reverse psychology. Maybe we can tell them we’re all terrorist too & the next time a suicide bombing occurs, we’re signing up to this program too and we’re going to nuke the whole planet. (especially if we can’t get everyone to agree that God is goat in Sicily)
If you can’t beat em’, join em’.
or
Kill or be killed.
There is no grey area with terrorists. You have to have no conscience first to be a terrorists.
After thinking about it for awhile, I came up with this.
You can’t kill a terrorist, hell they like that. They’re going to la la land, you’re just helping them get there. Your also pissing all the softies off because they don’t believe in payback and now your hated by them.
So, whats left?
Humiliation & Frustration.
Ain’t no better way to frustrate and humiliate a man, then top chop of his arms so he can’t whack off no more. Then chop of the shaft of his pecker and soe the head back on and leave him with a 1.5 inch penis fully erect. Ain’t no terrorist honeys’ gonna give him any. And he can’t even get at the little head to give himself a jerk without any arms.
Problem solved. Write a bill up. Ship it. Pass it. Then let the terrorists know whats in store for them if the get caught doing any of the following.
No suspected terrorist shall do any of the following:
1- no bitch slappin’ your wife
2- no joining a camp other then “summer camp”
3- no activities other then “extra curricular”
4- no talkin’ smack from caves
5- no chuckin’ rocks at civilians
6- no shooting targets with AK-47’s
7- last but not least, no breeding other little terrorist bastards!
I think alot of people would stop signing up for this profram if there was some consequences to it.
I know this much… If there was a penis chopping off law for speeding, I’d turn in my liscense today and be walking til my dying day.
I would like to point out that India’s independence was not won through fire and war - it was done peacefully. I would ALSO like to point out that the civil rights movement in the United States happened the same way.
…
The only smart thing you have ever posted in the political forum.
Until the terrorists forsake violence and use peaceful protests they will never get what they want.
Until then we have no choice but to kill them.
[/quote]
Do you even LISTEN to yourself? That has got to be the most blatant double standard I have EVER seen.
Sure, if they used non-violence they’d be far more effective… so why is it so hard to imagine US using non-violence? Too fucking typical.
I would like to point out that India’s independence was not won through fire and war - it was done peacefully. I would ALSO like to point out that the civil rights movement in the United States happened the same way.
…
The only smart thing you have ever posted in the political forum.
Until the terrorists forsake violence and use peaceful protests they will never get what they want.
Until then we have no choice but to kill them.
Do you even LISTEN to yourself? That has got to be the most blatant double standard I have EVER seen.
Sure, if they used non-violence they’d be far more effective… so why is it so hard to imagine US using non-violence? Too fucking typical. [/quote]
The US was using nonviolence up until 9/11.
I am stunned that you can look at the history of India as part of the British Empire and equate the Indians position to Americas and the British position to the Islamic Fundamentalists.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
The US was using nonviolence up until 9/11.
I am stunned that you can look at the history of India as part of the British Empire and equate the Indians position to Americas and the British position to the Islamic Fundamentalists.
[/quote]
riiiiiight, because the US was non-violent until 9/11… ook dude, sure. What I think you meant was, The US only HALF ASSED invasions and funded/aided other nations in violent endeavours until 9-11, then we decided to go full-blown imperialist.
I’m not trying to draw any such correlation - I’m merely trying to point out that the only functional response to violence that history has shown is non-violence. Responding to violence with MORE violence simply perpetuates the problem.
[quote]knewsom wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The US was using nonviolence up until 9/11.
I am stunned that you can look at the history of India as part of the British Empire and equate the Indians position to Americas and the British position to the Islamic Fundamentalists.
riiiiiight, because the US was non-violent until 9/11… ook dude, sure. What I think you meant was, The US only HALF ASSED invasions and funded/aided other nations in violent endeavours until 9-11, then we decided to go full-blown imperialist.
I’m not trying to draw any such correlation - I’m merely trying to point out that the only functional response to violence that history has shown is non-violence. Responding to violence with MORE violence simply perpetuates the problem.
[/quote]
I understand now. When police use violent force to subdue and restrain felons and prevent crime, it’s just as ineffective when the allies used violent force to destroy the third reich. History clearly shows that passive-aggression is the ONLY true answer to violence. If only our war against the Soviets could’ve been fought in a bloodless, non-violent and diplomatic manner, so many American lives could’ve been saved. Clearly, We have a lot to learn from India about peacefully earning our independence from England.
Wow, I didn’t think so much sarcasm could fit in one post.
[quote]knewsom wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
The US was using nonviolence up until 9/11.
I am stunned that you can look at the history of India as part of the British Empire and equate the Indians position to Americas and the British position to the Islamic Fundamentalists.
riiiiiight, because the US was non-violent until 9/11… ook dude, sure. What I think you meant was, The US only HALF ASSED invasions and funded/aided other nations in violent endeavours until 9-11, then we decided to go full-blown imperialist.
I’m not trying to draw any such correlation - I’m merely trying to point out that the only functional response to violence that history has shown is non-violence. Responding to violence with MORE violence simply perpetuates the problem.
[/quote]
Sir, I mean no disrespect to you but for the love of God, do us all a favor and STFU. Sometimes violence is the only permanent way to solve any fuckin’ thing. Take this arguement for instance. If I couln’t shut you up thru persuasive internet peace messages, then I would be resorted to to opening up a can of violence on your ass and drop kicking your ass all the way back to reality.
Terrorist deserve no mercy. Kill em’ all. Mercy is for the weak. I feel no pity, for anything that happens to a terrorist. The only pity I feel is we didn’t seek them out quick enough and burn them at the stake. Would have been a nice tribute to the 911 victims who died & for every servicemen or women that has given thier life to protect this country for you and me to live in.
Have some respect for those that died before you. And those that are dying for you right now. Fuck the terrorist. Either join em’ or kill em’. Whats it gonna be.