How To Make a Terrorist

[quote]Professor X wrote:

What again? I have pretty much stayed OUT of the gay marriage debate as my only point is that the bible shouldn’t the basis of enacting laws for this society.[/quote]

I wasn’t necessarily referring to just that.

Nope. Go read your quote - you said gay marriage was an easy issue so long as basic, pure ‘logic’ was applied. I simply attacked your idea and explained what end result your logic would lead to.

You always start moving the goal posts when someone gets after you, Pro X. All I did was go after your argument, which I thought ludicrous.

Actually, it did - see above. You made a point, I decided to go after it. You don’t have the sack to play tackle, go stand on the sidelines, Doctor.

Affirmative action anyone? Abortion? god I love the left you bring humor to my life.

thunderbolt23 preach on brother

RJ nice to see you join in this debacle.

Lorisco, who needs responsibility when you have excuses.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Nope. Go read your quote - you said gay marriage was an easy issue so long as basic, pure ‘logic’ was applied. I simply attacked your idea and explained what end result your logic would lead to.[/quote]

I’ll stick with this and hopefully this thread can get back on topic. The point was, many beliefs held in religion cloud logic if taken past the originally implied lesson or moral. The majority of the people against gay marriages aren’t against them because they object logically. They are against it because of personal biases (illogical) or religious beliefs (also illogical even though I hold the same).

I would make the assumption that very few people on this planet are against gay marriages because they find the act logically faulty. I also doubt that many of our actions in this country are strictly the result of logic.

If that were the case, marijuana would have been legal long ago because the cost to uphold a war on drugs that is failing is not equally balanced with the windfall of income that could be gained by taxing the shit out of it and making it legal.

That was the point being made and thusly why the actions of terrorists are “illogical”. For whatever they base their actions, be it religion or their political stance, the victims of the terror acts not being the perpetrators of their frustration makes the act illogical unless it sufficiently robs their “enemy” of their aggressions. Since they don’t and America has not backed down, that was the point being made that you couldn’t grasp. Maybe next time, right?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The majority of the people against gay marriages aren’t against them because they object logically. They are against it because of personal biases (illogical) or religious beliefs (also illogical even though I hold the same).

[/quote]

Shouldn’t the law represent the spirituality and beliefs (note I don’t use the term religion) of the people?

[quote]Elder Troll wrote:
Professor X wrote:
The majority of the people against gay marriages aren’t against them because they object logically. They are against it because of personal biases (illogical) or religious beliefs (also illogical even though I hold the same).

Shouldn’t the law represent the spirituality and beliefs (note I don’t use the term religion) of the people?[/quote]

The law should reflect the opinion of the people. That is why we have a democratic society. It isn’t because of spirituality directly because that implies everyone in America is religious. That is false. What does that have to do with what I wrote?

many institutions in this country were held illogically because of the beliefs of the people…like women not being able to vote. There is a logical reason for that? No, it was simply what the majority believed.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

And only a Conservative - drunk with American propaganda, denial, nothing short of idiotic, irrational idealism - can find a way to think that our foreign policy had nothing to do with 9/11.

It ain’t just a river in Egypt.

Yikes. My God, how cheesy. An English major, right? Consider switching.

My point about foreign policy as an excuse is that it doesn’t add up. How can the terrorists be legitimately mad at the oppression we apparently cause when what they want is, in reality, more oppressive? They aren’t fighting to liberate the poor, the oppressed, and the unfortunate, per the romance of the Left. They fight because they want Muslims to be poorer, more oppressed, and essentially enslaved under Sharia rule.

I don’t like our support for, say, the Saudi regime. But we technically support a more liberal regime than the terrorists would - that is a bad foreign policy? Since we don’t support Sharia law, when are we not a target for purposes of our foreign policy?

But instead of an argument or a thought, you keep squeezing the trigger on a gun that isn’t loaded - and you sound like a fool.

Question the government? Nice bumper sticker, but you ever gonna sit at the big kids’ table?

Open your damn eyes. Question the government (even though you may not like what you find).

Ignorance is never bliss. It’s just ignorance.

Cheap and unoriginal quips aren’t going to get you anywhere. You parrot my language and then you back it up with nothing. Will you make an argument? Or, perhaps the better question - can you?[/quote]

Make fun of the phrases all you want. They are words that convey meaning, and not much else.

First of all, when did I ever say that I thought they were fighting for freedom? When did I say that they are fighting against oppression? You need to read what I write. I didn’t think it would be so much of a problem being as that was relatively short…

You’ve read my other posts. you know where I am in politics. As a leftist, I would say to fight against any and all theocracies, to fight against any society that oppresses people in the ways that they are oppressed. But I am not for the US doing it because I do not believe that we get a rat’s ass about spreading democracy. Democracy itself is a work in progress, a work that is not complete in this country. How can we spread to others what we haven’t done ourselves?

Muslims have been around for quite a while…far longer than this country. But miraculously, we never had a problem with them for the first two hundred years after our inception. Why is that? If they had a jihad against us for the last three hundred years based on “American values”, then it would be a different case.

When was it that America began having problems with Muslims? When did Muslims get the idea that we were against them? 9/11 was the result of American support for Israel. As long as the Israelis have been fighting the Arabs, it has been American guns with American bullets killing there people. Bin Laden said it himself; he got the idea for using planes after watching the war in Lebanon (I think in 1982).

They are seperated from us by thousands of miles. They certainly don’t have the capability to interject themselves into our affairs. So where was the run in that led to 9/11? Was it them who provoked us? Or did we provoke them into planning such an intricate attack, and then carrying it out?

I only parrot your quote because it is the propaganda that is used against the left forever, and its run is getting tired.

I hold no illusions about why they are fighting us over there. I do not believe they are right, as I said before, I am against theocracies all over the world. But it was not our job to go there and start this war. It is not our job to make sure that they are safe. It is not our job to fight their revolutions for them.

When people want change, they will take care of it. These governments fall only when their people tire of the ridiculous rhetoric about 72 virgins and how it is noble and good to murder the infidels. But when we do it, as the most powerful country in the world, and overturn governments in order to install those that are favorable to us, it is called Imperialism. Let them fight their own battles, and let them win their own freedom from religion. You want English major shit?

“But when to their feminine rage the indignation of the people is added, when the ignorant and the poor are aroused, when the unintelligent brute force that lies at the bottom of society is made to growl and mow, it needs the habit of magnanimity and religion to treat it godlike as a trifle of no concernment.”

That is Emerson. Happy now? No “unoriginal quips” here.

Wow, I think thunder actually struck a huge nerve with all you liberals. Why don’t you all just regroup and admit you just had your ass kicked intelectually. Very well thought out replies thunder, it couldn’t have been put better.

There’s a difference between understanding the motives of a terrorist, and sympathising with a terrorist. This is not subtle, it 's obvious. But way to subtle for quite a few people on this list.

Sun Tzu taught us that it’s important to know your ennemy. He was a wise man. That’s why his teachings are still read to this day.

Other generals were convinced he got it wrong and thought it would be wiser to storm in, kill them all and let god sort them out… But these generals remain nameless, forgotten in history, their teachings are not studied.

They seem to have a hell of a lot of followers though.

Extremist Muslims (the brainwashed) want all Christians and Jews dead. In fact anyone who is NOT a Muslim Extremist, they want dead. Doesn’t matter to them whether innocent babies, elderly, children, families, white, black, Asian, American, European, African… WHATEVER… even other Muslims that do not support their extemist views of the world… ALL DEAD!

And we, as non-Muslims for the most part, (99.9999999%) wish to, and can easily, and DO, live side-by-side with Muslims.

They want us dead and we have a live-and-let-live (melting pot) attitude toward them.

[quote]snipeout wrote:
Wow, I think thunder actually struck a huge nerve with all you liberals. Why don’t you all just regroup and admit you just had your ass kicked intelectually. Very well thought out replies thunder, it couldn’t have been put better.[/quote]

No, what strikes a nerve is when people ingest the President’s garbage propaganda about how innocent this country is, and then spew it back out without proof other than, “George I says so”.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
First of all, when did I ever say that I thought they were fighting for freedom? When did I say that they are fighting against oppression? You need to read what I write. I didn’t think it would be so much of a problem being as that was relatively short…[/quote]

So - are the terrorists fighting against oppression in your view or not?

What is this nonsense? Because we haven’t ‘perfected’ democracy, we cannot champion it? By the way, there is no perfection.

We topple a government, nowadays we have an obligation to put something in its place other than scorched earth. Democracy - the best viable government we have come up with - is the best option. As a practical matter, this makes the most sense.

[quote]Muslims have been around for quite a while…far longer than this country. But miraculously, we never had a problem with them for the first two hundred years after our inception. Why is that? If they had a jihad against us for the last three hundred years based on “American values”, then it would be a different case.

When was it that America began having problems with Muslims?[/quote]

Specifically 25 years ago when Islamist radicals raised their head in Iran.

And, later, you answer your own question - the existence of Israel has pitched Arab nations into sustained conflict with Western countries ever since Arab pride was humiliated by the internationally recognized presence of Jews in the Holy Land.

That has magnified what has essentially become a ‘values’ war.

Ok, I have no objection to this - so what? Why not support Israel, the only democratic, pro-Western nation in all of the Middle East?

Yes, but your great failure is that you won’t assign rightness or wrongness to the behavior. If American bulltets are killing Arab soldiers, ask yourself: is the shooting justified? I know why OBL and the other Islamists do the things they do, but I think they are dead wrong. Arab nations have been trying to bully Israel for years and most of their anguish stems from getting repeatedly humiliated by such a small country (ask Egypt).

I don’t doubt Islamists are pissed because of our support for Israel - but are they wrong for doing so? I say yes - but then, I am no relativist.

A better question - is the provocation you suggest justified? If not - then talk of provocation is meaningless.

Most Leftists think the ‘provocation’ is justified, because they adhere to ideas that Western influence or power is bad and capitalism is bad. Striking back at all these ‘bad’ things is good, so they are sympathetic to the Islamists.

My point has always been “how can Leftists be sympathetic to the cause of Islamists when they aren’t fighting for freedom from oppression?” Leftists have spilled an awful lot of ink claiming that they stand against oppression of any kind. Why then the sympathy? Why all the equivocating?

And perhaps you aren’t sympathetic - but let’s face it, many Leftists are. Many would rather see Islamism succeed just so it means that Bush can fail.

My other point is simple - the Islamism we see now is not the result of a ‘reaction’ to Western imperialism. It is the result of self-inflicted cultural wounds, religious humiliation, and the type of pathology groups get when constantly confronted with their own inferiority in the face of modernity.

They hate Israel - a country perhaps not with a perfect track record but with every conceivable international right to exist where it does in the world. Arab aggression against Israel is unjustified and the presence of Israel is a mere scapegoat for other problems. The Palestinian problem is only of recent vintage - only recently did Arab countries worry about their ‘brothers’ being oppressed in Palestine - only when it became useful leverage against mean ole Israel.

Propaganda? Then refute it, rather than wimping out with name-calling.

Propaganda? Another lazy escape-hatch.

We ended a war that was already being waged over a 13 years period. The recent war in Iraq was not an original move.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

No, what strikes a nerve is when people ingest the President’s garbage propaganda about how innocent this country is, and then spew it back out without proof other than, “George I says so”. [/quote]

Pathetic.

Who here offered no proof other than “George Bush says so”?

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
First of all, when did I ever say that I thought they were fighting for freedom? When did I say that they are fighting against oppression? You need to read what I write. I didn’t think it would be so much of a problem being as that was relatively short…

So - are the terrorists fighting against oppression in your view or not?

But I am not for the US doing it because I do not believe that we get a rat’s ass about spreading democracy. Democracy itself is a work in progress, a work that is not complete in this country. How can we spread to others what we haven’t done ourselves?

What is this nonsense? Because we haven’t ‘perfected’ democracy, we cannot champion it? By the way, there is no perfection.

We topple a government, nowadays we have an obligation to put something in its place other than scorched earth. Democracy - the best viable government we have come up with - is the best option. As a practical matter, this makes the most sense.

Muslims have been around for quite a while…far longer than this country. But miraculously, we never had a problem with them for the first two hundred years after our inception. Why is that? If they had a jihad against us for the last three hundred years based on “American values”, then it would be a different case.

When was it that America began having problems with Muslims?

Specifically 25 years ago when Islamist radicals raised their head in Iran.

And, later, you answer your own question - the existence of Israel has pitched Arab nations into sustained conflict with Western countries ever since Arab pride was humiliated by the internationally recognized presence of Jews in the Holy Land.

That has magnified what has essentially become a ‘values’ war.

When did Muslims get the idea that we were against them? 9/11 was the result of American support for Israel.

Ok, I have no objection to this - so what? Why not support Israel, the only democratic, pro-Western nation in all of the Middle East?

As long as the Israelis have been fighting the Arabs, it has been American guns with American bullets killing there people. Bin Laden said it himself; he got the idea for using planes after watching the war in Lebanon (I think in 1982).

Yes, but your great failure is that you won’t assign rightness or wrongness to the behavior. If American bulltets are killing Arab soldiers, ask yourself: is the shooting justified? I know why OBL and the other Islamists do the things they do, but I think they are dead wrong. Arab nations have been trying to bully Israel for years and most of their anguish stems from getting repeatedly humiliated by such a small country (ask Egypt).

I don’t doubt Islamists are pissed because of our support for Israel - but are they wrong for doing so? I say yes - but then, I am no relativist.

They are seperated from us by thousands of miles. They certainly don’t have the capability to interject themselves into our affairs. So where was the run in that led to 9/11? Was it them who provoked us? Or did we provoke them into planning such an intricate attack, and then carrying it out?

A better question - is the provocation you suggest justified? If not - then talk of provocation is meaningless.

Most Leftists think the ‘provocation’ is justified, because they adhere to ideas that Western influence or power is bad and capitalism is bad. Striking back at all these ‘bad’ things is good, so they are sympathetic to the Islamists.

My point has always been “how can Leftists be sympathetic to the cause of Islamists when they aren’t fighting for freedom from oppression?” Leftists have spilled an awful lot of ink claiming that they stand against oppression of any kind. Why then the sympathy? Why all the equivocating?

And perhaps you aren’t sympathetic - but let’s face it, many Leftists are. Many would rather see Islamism succeed just so it means that Bush can fail.

My other point is simple - the Islamism we see now is not the result of a ‘reaction’ to Western imperialism. It is the result of self-inflicted cultural wounds, religious humiliation, and the type of pathology groups get when constantly confronted with their own inferiority in the face of modernity.

They hate Israel - a country perhaps not with a perfect track record but with every conceivable international right to exist where it does in the world. Arab aggression against Israel is unjustified and the presence of Israel is a mere scapegoat for other problems. The Palestinian problem is only of recent vintage - only recently did Arab countries worry about their ‘brothers’ being oppressed in Palestine - only when it became useful leverage against mean ole Israel.

I only parrot your quote because it is the propaganda that is used against the left forever, and its run is getting tired.

Propaganda? Then refute it, rather than wimping out with name-calling.

Propaganda? Another lazy escape-hatch.

I hold no illusions about why they are fighting us over there. I do not believe they are right, as I said before, I am against theocracies all over the world. But it was not our job to go there and start this war. It is not our job to make sure that they are safe. It is not our job to fight their revolutions for them.

We ended a war that was already being waged over a 13 years period. The recent war in Iraq was not an original move.

[/quote]

I don’t believe in support for Israel. I don’t think the nation should have been created, I don’t agree that we should support them at our own tremendous expense, and I think they are a belligerent nation that would rather start another world war than work with the people they are fighting.

I don’t have a high opinion of the Arabs either. I understand why they are fighting, but I don’t think we should support them either. I see no reason for America to arm and support Israel like we do when it leads to transgressions like 9/11.

I don’t support militant Islam at all. I think that anyone who is so enamored with any religion should not have power over the masses whatsoever, as religion mixed with power is a dangerous mix.

You are thinking far too linear by saying that since American imperialism is bad, than Islamic radicals who strike at it are good. No leftist was happy when 9/11 happened. There were far too many people who were just trying to make a life for themselves and their families for any attack on them to be warranted. In fact, all anarchists and socialists immediately condemned it. So don’t let this garbage about how we “sympathize with Islam” influence your thoughts. Because I don’t think any do.

However, the fact remains that now there are people who otherwise would not have been “terrorists” or “jihadists” who are now joining that cause because they think that the Iraq war is all about imperialism, and would rather see Muslims run the country than us. Which to me is understandable, as they should have the right to sort out their own affairs. It doesn’t matter to me how many of each other they kill trying to figure that out.

And that spiel about how this has been a 13 year war is pure bullshit. That war was over. George II started another seperate endeavor. This is your opinion, that is fine. But don’t even argue that with me because that will go nowhere.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

You are thinking far too linear by saying that since American imperialism is bad, than Islamic radicals who strike at it are good. No leftist was happy when 9/11 happened. There were far too many people who were just trying to make a life for themselves and their families for any attack on them to be warranted. In fact, all anarchists and socialists immediately condemned it. So don’t let this garbage about how we “sympathize with Islam” influence your thoughts. Because I don’t think any do.[/quote]

We couldn’t possibly go any further until we address what is either a blatant lie from you or an example of very limited knowledge.

Plenty of leftists were happy when 9/11 - certainly not all - but plenty. I could drum up some specific quotes, but how about the quote that the NY skyline was actually improved? How about the one that finally was relieved that someone took out the ‘two big buck teeth’ that represented our arrogance?

No, your statement is completely unmoored from reality. I am not suggestng that everyone left of center cheered the attacks, but your statements are more than wrong; they are recklessly irresponsible.

I suspect you are right - such a discussion would go nowhere - but I think that would be a function of your limitations rather than a stalemate of opinions.

[quote]Wreckless wrote:
There’s a difference between understanding the motives of a terrorist, and sympathising with a terrorist. This is not subtle, it 's obvious. But way to subtle for quite a few people on this list.

Sun Tzu taught us that it’s important to know your ennemy. He was a wise man. That’s why his teachings are still read to this day.

Other generals were convinced he got it wrong and thought it would be wiser to storm in, kill them all and let god sort them out… But these generals remain nameless, forgotten in history, their teachings are not studied.

They seem to have a hell of a lot of followers though.[/quote]

Grant
Pershing
Patton
MacArthur
Montgomery
Zukov
Abrams
Schwartzkopf
Franks

Tzu had it right for his times. The folks listed above have been studied and hardly forgotten. They got it right for their times.

The US hasn’t “killed them all and let God sort them out since MacArthur”. The current strategy, simplisticly put, is to get inside the command and control structures of our enemy, eliminate the C&C, and then attack them with overwhelming force at their weakest points. In other words tip the balance in your favor.

What strategy were you referring to? Perhaps you could list a Field Manual reference?

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
No leftist was happy when 9/11 happened. There were far too many people who were just trying to make a life for themselves and their families for any attack on them to be warranted. In fact, all anarchists and socialists immediately condemned it.[/quote]

One of these two options must be true about this statement.

A. You are being dishonest.

B. You are simply ignorant about that which you speak.

I think it’s probably B, but either way, not good.

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

We couldn’t possibly go any further until we address what is either a blatant lie from you or an example of very limited knowledge.

Plenty of leftists were happy when 9/11 - certainly not all - but plenty. I could drum up some specific quotes, but how about the quote that the NY skyline was actually improved? How about the one that finally was relieved that someone took out the ‘two big buck teeth’ that represented our arrogance?

No, your statement is completely unmoored from reality. I am not suggestng that everyone left of center cheered the attacks, but your statements are more than wrong; they are recklessly irresponsible.

[/quote]

You do have a gift for rhetoric.

You insinuate that plenty is nearly all.
If a hundred or even a thousand, let alone the two you cited, were happy when 9/11 happened that still only constitutes a fraction of one percent of the “leftist” population.
I seriously doubt the number is even that high. So, a handful of idiots were happy when the attack happened, they’re just idiots.
What’s recklessly irresponsible is judging an entire group based it’s most fringe elements.

[quote]optprime wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
No leftist was happy when 9/11 happened. There were far too many people who were just trying to make a life for themselves and their families for any attack on them to be warranted. In fact, all anarchists and socialists immediately condemned it.

One of these two options must be true about this statement.

A. You are being dishonest.

B. You are simply ignorant about that which you speak.

I think it’s probably B, but either way, not good. [/quote]

Actually your post is the most dishonest and ignortant one. Instead of trying to be a smartass by cracking out a lame joke, try to refute his actual argument, prove to us if anyone on the left actually celebrated the attacks.

Tell us why you disagree,

Fahd

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

You are thinking far too linear by saying that since American imperialism is bad, than Islamic radicals who strike at it are good. No leftist was happy when 9/11 happened. There were far too many people who were just trying to make a life for themselves and their families for any attack on them to be warranted. In fact, all anarchists and socialists immediately condemned it. So don’t let this garbage about how we “sympathize with Islam” influence your thoughts. Because I don’t think any do.

We couldn’t possibly go any further until we address what is either a blatant lie from you or an example of very limited knowledge.

Plenty of leftists were happy when 9/11 - certainly not all - but plenty. I could drum up some specific quotes, but how about the quote that the NY skyline was actually improved? How about the one that finally was relieved that someone took out the ‘two big buck teeth’ that represented our arrogance?

No, your statement is completely unmoored from reality. I am not suggestng that everyone left of center cheered the attacks, but your statements are more than wrong; they are recklessly irresponsible.

And that spiel about how this has been a 13 year war is pure bullshit. That war was over. George II started another seperate endeavor. This is your opinion, that is fine. But don’t even argue that with me because that will go nowhere.

I suspect you are right - such a discussion would go nowhere - but I think that would be a function of your limitations rather than a stalemate of opinions.

[/quote]

Now you are showing complete ignorance. I spend alot of time on this kind of thing, on leftist philosophies and who is out there now. I recall both websites and people I knew who are far from center condemning 9/11. It is neither a lie nor my apparent “lack of intelligence” that leads me to this. For you to make any judgement on this is naivety on your part. There were far more common people in that tower than anybody else. Therefore, no leftist would consider ever doing this. It would be a betrayal to working folks everywhere.

However, pull your quotes out. Have fun. Democrats are all left of center, and I don’t recall Ted Kennedy, or for that matter Ralph Nader (who has positions similar to where I stand) talking about “buck teeth being blown out”.

I am a leftist. An American leftist. I live in NJ. Believe me, this shit affected me far more than it likely affected you.

I present my opinion and you say I am lying. Great argument.

Looking at the 9/11 bombers and the higher-ups in al Queda, apparently you make a terrorist by starting with people with at least some money and at least middle-class backgrounds, give them access to western educations, and then have the West do everything in its power to avoid criticizing radical Muslim rhetoric because you don’t wish to offend anyone.

The latest such example: