Crazy stuff.
jayhawk,
why not? American forces kill civilians. Not intentionally, but they do.
And why are civilians not legitimate targets? After all they finance the war and they elect the goverments that decide that there is going to be a war.
I doubt that the U.S army could lead a war without some serious help from civilian companies.
Americans seem to believe that an american life or even a british life is somehow worth more than let?s say an iraquis and that it is somehow unfair to bring the war to the US or it?s allies because we all know that this is against the rules, right? Wars are things that happen in other, strange backward countries most americans can?t find on a map, and if an enemy doesn?t agree to that he?s obviously playing unfair.
My point is, wars do not work like that. If the US army is too strong to be beat in battle, they will go for them any other way they can. If they can?t hurt the army anymore, they will start to go for civilians and they won?t stop until they are caught or dead. Don?t take it personal they are just doing their jobs - exactly like an US pilot releasing his bombs.
[quote]orion wrote:
a bunch of stupid shit [/quote]
You do understand that the U.S. could just wipe most countries from the face of the Earth tomorrow, right? We could have done it yesterday, and we could do it next week. In the end, we won’t be defeated by Islam.
A few bombs in subways every now and then is not going to win anything in the end.
Where are the moderators?
It’s disgusting to see how this thread changed from trying to share views and immediate experience with the bombings here in London, has turned out to a pissing contest on who can be the bigger troll.
Debate over reasons, disagree over policies, no problem, that’s what the forums are for. But for the “It was all the CIA” and “Fuck Islam” fractions alike: Shame on you. If you can’t offer arguments, at least try and offer respect when talking to others.
Makkun
Good to see all the tired old arguments drudged up. I too got really angry yesterday, seeing a bunch of morons blowing up a bunch of random people in London.
Angry, mainly because, what was it intended to achieve? So far about 37 people have been recorded dead and so we are forced to watch every dumbass news network offer their own half-baked theories on what happened and what will be done.
The sad reality is that not very much will be done. These people will very probably not get caught and ‘brought to justice’. There will be a lot of nice speeches and everyone will reaffirm ‘their resolve to fight terrorism’. But in a country where the immigration controls are a joke, where we have no idea who lives here anymore, the chances of bringing anyone to justice are decidedly slim.
In the UK since sep 11 the muslim community has done nothing to combat the radicalisation within it’s own community, instead the leadership within the UK has blamed the UK people for islamophobia. Yesterday the speech by the british islamic leaders was not to help catch these terrorists or put an end to this radicalism but instead about how the muslim community is scared. Well it should be, payback is a bitch, if instead of sitting on it’s ass for the last four years it had done something then maybe we would not be here today. You reap what you sow and there will be some serious payback.
The two countries responsible for this pakistan and saudi arabia must be attacked. Saudi arabia would be releatively easy as it’s armed forces are a joke and the people would overthrow the royal family once they see our support. Pakistan could be done as our troops are already next door in afghanistan and india is on the other side itching to attack (did anyone notice the pakistan based terrorist group LeT attacking a hindu holy site in india on july 6th).
No more excused if the UK islamic community will do nothing about the terrorists within it’s community then the british government must. 59 million british people cannot suffer because 1 million muslim idiots do nothing.
Its a shame to see this topic regressed so backwardly, Im a Londoner but none of this debate (which I stupidly got caught in) helps my fellow Londoners, shame on all of you who on this board who show hate and contempt for others,what makes you any different from those that because of hate and contempt bombed my city?
Well, I just read the whole thread in one sitting. Part way through I was thinking ‘Hey, interesting stuff, maybe this point is valid, etc’ until the thread degenerated.
I too was angry when I heard about the bombings yesterday. Two years ago I was holidaying with a friend who lives opposite Aldgate East station. Luckily he is okay.
My initial reaction was ‘It must be the muslims, I want some blood. That’s how they operate- we should too.’ But after some reflection, I calmed down. And who do we attack? Afghanistan, I believe, provided the correct template. Those directly responsible, and those who harbour them, are the criminals, and they should be brought down. But to strike out at muslims indiscriminately, as some are advocating, is plain wrong, it’s sinking to the level of the terrorists. That’s why I am against the Iraq war- wrong target, not directly involved, not justifiable.
Some people are calling for the US to attack Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. I agree that inside these countries there are many who support terrorism and we should put pressure on these governments. But invade? Are you serious? Unless that nation state directly attacks your nation state, this is not justifiable.
Escalating the war in the Middle East cannot lead to anything else but an all-out war between the West and Islam. Kill 10 000 muslims and you alienate another million. There’s over a billion of them, remember. The more you kill, the more moderates you turn into fundamentalists, so you have to kill more, and the end result would be, unless you kill the whole billion, the terror will continue on an increased scale.
That’s why any reprisals must only be targeted at those directly responsible. But as for winning the war, not just the battle, this can only be done on a level of ideas, not through violence. When people are happy, and free, are not brainwashed,and have decent lives, they will have no interest in terrorism. And if they still do, they are truly evil.
I have no love for Islam. I hear about a kind-hearted, peaceful Islam. It isn’t what I see on the news. I see a barbaric, backward religion oppressing women, beheading people, etc. But I have no hate for it either. I hate the terrorists, and fundamentalism, in fact extremism of any kind. I would like to know more about how good peaceful muslims live. I would like to see more muslims speak out against the terror. Then I would respect it more. It needs to change, evolve. I don’t think that will be achieved by indiscriminate military actions. This will only exacerbate the divides that exist already and drive more people into the extremist camp.
Apologies for the length.
[quote]doogie wrote:
orion wrote:
a bunch of stupid shit
You do understand that the U.S. could just wipe most countries from the face of the Earth tomorrow, right? We could have done it yesterday, and we could do it next week. In the end, we won’t be defeated by Islam.
A few bombs in subways every now and then is not going to win anything in the end. [/quote]
Cool,
I could beat up all the kids in my local kindergarden. Wouldn?t solve one of my problems but I?d feel HUGE.
And I know that they won?t achieve anything you would call winning, but if you turn on CNN and they are running loops of the bombings, in their minds they allready have won .
It is like the war on Iraq that was officially “won”, when exactly, one year ago? Either noone has told them or “winning” is not everything.
[quote]orion wrote:
jayhawk,
why not? American forces kill civilians. Not intentionally, but they do.
And why are civilians not legitimate targets? After all they finance the war and they elect the goverments that decide that there is going to be a war.
I doubt that the U.S army could lead a war without some serious help from civilian companies.
Americans seem to believe that an american life or even a british life is somehow worth more than let?s say an iraquis and that it is somehow unfair to bring the war to the US or it?s allies because we all know that this is against the rules, right? Wars are things that happen in other, strange backward countries most americans can?t find on a map, and if an enemy doesn?t agree to that he?s obviously playing unfair.
My point is, wars do not work like that. If the US army is too strong to be beat in battle, they will go for them any other way they can. If they can?t hurt the army anymore, they will start to go for civilians and they won?t stop until they are caught or dead. Don?t take it personal they are just doing their jobs - exactly like an US pilot releasing his bombs. [/quote]
You answer your own question right after you ask it. You say the American forces are not INTENDING to kill civilians, whereas terrorists are INTENDING to kill civilians. But even if American forces were intending to kill civilians, it would still be wrong for an opponent to do the same. Just like it would have been wrong for America to nuke Afghanistan after 9-11. There are certain rules of conduct that we as human beings should follow, even when we are engaged in war.
I have a question for you orion, do you agree that the American bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima were legitimate? If you do, explain why America should not be free to do the same against targets today. If you don’t agree, please explain why?
[quote]nabz wrote:
Its a shame to see this topic regressed so backwardly, Im a Londoner but none of this debate (which I stupidly got caught in) helps my fellow Londoners, shame on all of you who on this board who show hate and contempt for others,what makes you any different from those that because of hate and contempt bombed my city?[/quote]
nabz, this thread has regressed terribly.
I am not sorry for what I said because I believe it is a valid viewpoint. Your viewpoint is also valid. I wish we would hear more from others like you.
My hope is that people are just venting anger and do not truly hate a huge group of people just for their shared religion with these murderous thugs.
Save your hate for those that commit these atrocities.
[quote]deanosumo wrote:
some good stuff[/quote]
deano, you and I often disagree, but I am with you here.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
All I’m doing is posting news articles and some of you guys can’t handle it, so my freedom of speech is only respected if I have the same point of view as you, and then a couple of lightweights start calling names, sorry children I don’t go down to your level…
You post pictures of sheeep watching the president. And you think you are some how superior to those that support this country’s war on terror?
You live at home and have never paid a single day of rent in your life - am I even close?
Quit attempting to wrap yourself in the First Amendment. You are exercising your right to free speech. No one has taken anything from you. You don’t, however, have the right to be listened to. Especially if you are name calling and basically slandering the nation that guarantees you the right to be a total fucking moron.
Now go buy some new foil for your hat. Get the heavy duty stuff this time - that cheap shit just won’t cut it.
[/quote]
So I have to sit by while i’m being called troll and stuff. I don’t know where you get that I said I was superior, and since when not supporting “The War On Terror” makes me a target. By the way, I haven’t lived at home for the past 19 years. I don’t slander this beautiful nation that I love, I’m speaking about the real morons that have almost made it the police state that it is. You republicans just can’t handle anyone talking about your Leader. And I wrap myself on the 1st amendment since anyone who doesn’t agree with you is demonized…
[quote]samsmarts wrote:
FCFighter wrote:
Religion has something to do with everything, but your sorry ass take on the issue is only feuling the religious friction.
[/quote]
Here’s a religious quote for you from Norman Schwarzkopf:“As I see it, it’s God’s function to forgive. We’ll just arrange the meeting.”
Iran is the mother of modern terrorism. They need to be set straight too. I suggest we take care of it while we’re next door.
Bin Laden is their leader. He’s not going to lower himself to being a rank-and-file suicide bomber.
What? Are you saying that our soldiers are raping and murdering?
Trade restrictions? You are delusional. What do you suggest when they bomb us for imposing trade restrictions? Ask “pretty please”?
This is going to be a long war. Terrorism will not end overnight and it will not end with compassion and understanding.
[quote]
So whats next attack Iran? Move into Syria? Pakistan anyone? Beat up the muslims living in our neighbourhoods? Wipe every damn muslim off the face of this planet? [/quote]
Like Bush said after 9/11:“If you’re not with us, you’re against us.”
Maybe we should follow the advice of a famous Muslim:“BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.”
[quote]hedo wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
hedo & vegetable,
sheep…
I am sure you are much more familiar with the ass end of a sheep then I am.
Perhaps you would be better suited trolling this website:
Much more like minded people there for you.
[/quote]
Whatever…I think you’ve been hannitized…
[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
…
By the way, I haven’t lived at home for the past 19 years. [/quote]
Are you homeless?
[quote]FCFighter wrote:
This is going to be a long war. Terrorism will not end overnight and it will not end with compassion and understanding.
[/quote]
Correction, it simply will not end, especially if there is no understanding of what creates a terrorists. I am not sure why any of you believe that a war on a concept would ever have the result of being “won”. As long as there are people with strong opinions that affect what they believe in, there will always be those willing to hurt others to achieve a goal. The real question is, how far do you extend yourself in the effort to battle a concept? Until all resources are gone? A nuke dropped on the Middle East today would not end terrorism.
[quote]FCFighter wrote:
So whats next attack Iran? Move into Syria? Pakistan anyone? Beat up the muslims living in our neighbourhoods? Wipe every damn muslim off the face of this planet?
Like Bush said after 9/11:“If you’re not with us, you’re against us.”
Maybe we should follow the advice of a famous Muslim:“BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.”
[/quote]
Right wing retard of the day: you.
There have been some left wing tards on this thread too
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
…
By the way, I haven’t lived at home for the past 19 years.
Are you homeless?[/quote]
I won’t continue with the stupid high school crap, you go ahead…
[quote]jayhawk1 wrote:
orion wrote:
jayhawk,
why not? American forces kill civilians. Not intentionally, but they do.
And why are civilians not legitimate targets? After all they finance the war and they elect the goverments that decide that there is going to be a war.
I doubt that the U.S army could lead a war without some serious help from civilian companies.
Americans seem to believe that an american life or even a british life is somehow worth more than let?s say an iraquis and that it is somehow unfair to bring the war to the US or it?s allies because we all know that this is against the rules, right? Wars are things that happen in other, strange backward countries most americans can?t find on a map, and if an enemy doesn?t agree to that he?s obviously playing unfair.
My point is, wars do not work like that. If the US army is too strong to be beat in battle, they will go for them any other way they can. If they can?t hurt the army anymore, they will start to go for civilians and they won?t stop until they are caught or dead. Don?t take it personal they are just doing their jobs - exactly like an US pilot releasing his bombs.
You answer your own question right after you ask it. You say the American forces are not INTENDING to kill civilians, whereas terrorists are INTENDING to kill civilians. But even if American forces were intending to kill civilians, it would still be wrong for an opponent to do the same. Just like it would have been wrong for America to nuke Afghanistan after 9-11. There are certain rules of conduct that we as human beings should follow, even when we are engaged in war.
I have a question for you orion, do you agree that the American bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima were legitimate? If you do, explain why America should not be free to do the same against targets today. If you don’t agree, please explain why?[/quote]
Jayhawk,
I do agree that Hiroshima was necessary. Or to be more to the point, I do not know but I would have ordered to drop it. As for why America shouldn?t use nukes now? Because in 2005 a lot of countries have them, not just one, and after the US used them even more countries would want them. I think NorthKorea would be more than willing to sell them all the know-how they need. Not in the best interest of the US. Besides, who would you use them against? Saudi-Arabia or Pakistan? Please…
That american forces don?t intend to kill civilians is of no use to the victims and it doesn?t change the hatred it causes. There is also called a degree of intent (I do not know if it exists in anglo-saxon law) called dolus eventualis. It means you do not intend something to happen but you know it very likely will happen because of your actions and that you couldn?t care less. So how many civilians is the american army allowed to kill unintentionally? Is any number ok, because they meant well? And is it ok, if some people start to hate America because of it?
I?m not even close to accusing the US for every problem there is, I think that the Iraq war will be a good thing in the long run, though I also believe Blair/Bush lied their asses off to get you into it. Hey, the only remaining superpower a democracy? Great!
But there is a kind of american doublespeak that makes me nervous:
Kills for America and its values: soldier, hero, thank you for serving
Kills for Allah and their way of life:
insurgent, terrorist, barbarian
Bombs that fall out of american airplanes: Good
Bombs that are delivered by suicide bombers in person: Oh, so bad
60 londoners die in a subway, 3000 americans die in collapsing towers: a tragedy
A few hundred thousand iraquis die in two wars and 10 years of sanctions: Noone in the US gives a shit.
This is a point of view you cannot expect to fly with the rest of the world. Arab terrorists do not exist to be the villains of an american movie, they are the heroes of their own, and they are supported by a lot of people who see it their way.