So Not All Terrorists Are Bad?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]orion wrote:
JD430 wrote:
lixy wrote:
JD430 wrote:
Ah, forget it…

Go back to your relativist world…

When did relativizing become a bad thing?

Uh, when you become so obsessed with seeing the viewpoint of cutthroat, murderous bastards that you lose all sense of right and wrong…

How do you define a cutthroat, murderous bastard?

Do ends justify means?[/quote]

What do you want, something from Webster’s? If you would like, I’ll post a link of the jihadi scum sawing off Daniel Pearl’s head.

Are you guys really that confused?

Dont give me the its not all “black and white” crap either. Ill agree its all about shades of grey. However, the policy and behavior of the United States as a whole puts us in a fairly light shade of grey, despite mistakes and alliances with the wrong people and so forth.

Radical Islamic terrorists are the deepest, darkest black I can imagine.

However, if you want to sympathize with them for some reason, I can’t see any reasonable man putting them much above a very dark shade of grey.

22

[quote]JD430 wrote:
However, the policy and behavior of the United States as a whole puts us in a fairly light shade of grey, despite mistakes and alliances with the wrong people and so forth.

Radical Islamic terrorists are the deepest, darkest black I can imagine.

Glad to hear you say that.

Now here’s where we might differ. You assume good faith in the US government, and attribute the “bad decisions” to honest mistakes. Carefully studying US history shows it’s pretty much a rule rather than an exception when it comes to foreign policy to use and abuse American military might to terrorize populations, topple democtratically elected regimes and disregard international law. Granted, the US did a lot of good things as well by forwarding technology and crushing the Nazis for example. But, if you think it did so for the sake of humanity or because it saw it as a noble cause, you’re mistaken. It defends its best interests, or at least what at the time, seems to be for the best interest of the American elite.

I don’t think anyone ever supported directly or indirectly “radical Islamic terrorists” or condoned their actions. What you might have confused it with is providing contexts for the emergence of such bloody and violent movements. It’s more convenient to buy into the Fox news line that such behavior is inherent to Islami culture, than to actually question it and look at the mirror.

However, if you want to sympathize with them for some reason, I can’t see any reasonable man putting them much above a very dark shade of grey.[/quote]

No. They’re not even close to a dark shade of grey. They’re simply “black”.

The roots for getting pissed do exist and it’s too bad that the cause was exploited by the radical extremists. They’re horrible people who can only drag humanity down with their barbarious methods and outdated mentality. But, it doesn’t change the fact that there was a reason for people to rally around them in the first place. Fix that and you get rid of most of the terror. There will always be a bunch of nuts who gets angry at nothing but those are negligible;

Hope you better understand my position now.

23

[quote]JD430 wrote:

Dont give me the its not all “black and white” crap either. Ill agree its all about shades of grey. However, the policy and behavior of the United States as a whole puts us in a fairly light shade of grey, despite mistakes and alliances with the wrong people and so forth.

Radical Islamic terrorists are the deepest, darkest black I can imagine.

[/quote]

Blah blah… Europeans moving here and annihilating the Indians was just as bad as terrorism.

Give me a break. The US is no different than any other country in that we do what benefits us at the time. To pretend any differently is ignorance.

History depends on who is writing it. We have noble ideas as a country… but they are very rarely carried out, and we operate in the same fashion as anyone else.

24

[quote]lixy wrote:

No. They’re not even close to a dark shade of grey. They’re simply “black”.[/quote]

Yup. “Black” “nuts” who are trying to get themselves removed from the black list in a court of law. How barbarous;

In the conclusion of its judgment in the case of the “PMOI -v- the Council of the European Union”, the European Court of First Instance wrote unequivocally in Item 2 that it “Annuls, in so far as it concerns the applicant, Council Decision 2005/930/EC of 21 December 2005 implementing Article 2(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 on specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities with a view to combating terrorism.” The Court also stated in paragraph 35 that when a court annuls an act “the act is eliminated retroactively from the legal order and is deemed never to have existed.” The Court decision effectively un-froze the assets of the PMOI and 4/5ths of the legal costs were awarded against the Council.

http://www.ncr-iran.org/content/view/2832/70/

Although I can see why people like lixy would want to keep their message from being heard;

[i]The PMOI is a legitimate resistance movement and its inclusion on the terrorist list was, from day one, the blatant product of a deal with the clerical regime in Iran. But the decision by the Council of Ministers has stepped over recognised red lines in Europe. While the mullahs’ President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is calling for the annihilation of Israel and rapidly threatening with the nuclear capability, it ill befalls the European Council to continue its failed policy of appeasement. While Iranian revolutionary guards roam freely in Iraq, inflaming the insurgency, killing allied troops and murdering countless innocent civilians, the Council of Ministers should be offering support to those who oppose the mullahs, rather than seeking to tarnish them with lies and distortions. While the Iranian regime engineered and financed the recent war between Israel and Hezbollah and continues to cultivate civil war in Palestine and Lebanon, the European Council should be confronting Tehran from a position of strength, rather than displaying craven weakness.

The Friends of a Free Iran parliamentary inter-group demands that the Council immediately implement the ruling of the Court of First Instance and removes the PMOI from the EU terrorist list once and for all. The Council’s defiance of the Court’s ruling benefits no-one except the extremists who rule Iran and who are the enemies of peace and democracy. All members of the European Parliament, especially those on the Committees on Foreign Affairs and Civil Liberties, should condemn this unlawful decision by the Council of Ministers and insist that the rule of law should be respected and upheld at all times and never forfeited to satisfy base political interests.[/i]

25

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
JD430 wrote:

Dont give me the its not all “black and white” crap either. Ill agree its all about shades of grey. However, the policy and behavior of the United States as a whole puts us in a fairly light shade of grey, despite mistakes and alliances with the wrong people and so forth.

Radical Islamic terrorists are the deepest, darkest black I can imagine.

Give me a break. The US is no different than any other country in that we do what benefits us at the time. To pretend any differently is ignorance.

[/quote]

The US is very different than most other countries. Go back to the history books young man.

26

[quote]JD430 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
JD430 wrote:

Dont give me the its not all “black and white” crap either. Ill agree its all about shades of grey. However, the policy and behavior of the United States as a whole puts us in a fairly light shade of grey, despite mistakes and alliances with the wrong people and so forth.

Radical Islamic terrorists are the deepest, darkest black I can imagine.

Give me a break. The US is no different than any other country in that we do what benefits us at the time. To pretend any differently is ignorance.

The US is very different than most other countries. Go back to the history books young man.

[/quote]

I have read plenty of history books. Don’t tell me to “go back to them” if you give no proof otherwise…which you didn’t.

Cute, but it doesn’t work.

27

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
In 2004, the US gave Indonesia 760.6 Million dollars in Tsunami aid.

(the government there said Christians weren’t welcome)

In 2005, the US gave Pakistan 50 Million dollars for earthquake aid.

(the earthquake hit the tribal area where al-qaeda hides)

what was the amount of aid given to America by Muslim nations to help when Katrina hit?

(I recall radicals praising the hurricane)[/quote]

A) WTF does this have to do with anything? The US isn’t pure evil, we get it, Just stop trying to make it look like the super-good guy of the world. the Muslim extremists are worse, but we still do bad shit sometimes.

28

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
A) WTF does this have to do with anything? The US isn’t pure evil, we get it, Just stop trying to make it look like the super-good guy of the world. the Muslim extremists are worse, but we still do bad shit sometimes.[/quote]

Here’s the only argument they have: “If you’re not with us, you’re with the enemy”.

So, if you don’t totally support Bush’s actions their conclusion is that you’re supporting the radical Islamist freaks. Kinda like anyone who criticizes Israel actions is tagged anti-Semitic.

29

I am not trying to make it like we are the super good guy in the world, but (you said it) we are not pure evil.

That was the point I was trying to make following a post detailing what we did to the Vietnamese and others.

Right or wrong we had reasons for doing what we were doing and I defend the decisions my country made.

If people constantly put my country down, and degrade everything it has done since it’s inception, I believe I have a right to defend it.

30

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Right or wrong we had reasons for doing what we were doing and I defend the decisions my country made. [/quote]

Right or wrong? How insightful!

I better understand your mindset now.

Here’s a question though: Would you defend the genocide perpetrated against native Americans? Would you defend the slavery black people were subjected to? Obviously you had reasons for doing that but would you defend the decisions made by your “country”?

Smile.

31

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I am not trying to make it like we are the super good guy in the world, but (you said it) we are not pure evil.

That was the point I was trying to make following a post detailing what we did to the Vietnamese and others.

Right or wrong we had reasons for doing what we were doing and I defend the decisions my country made.

If people constantly put my country down, and degrade everything it has done since it’s inception, I believe I have a right to defend it.[/quote]

The problem is no ones criticizing EVERYTHING.

Most people will agree our involvement in WWI and WWII was a good thing. They’ll agree we’ve set up a pretty good government, based off an amazing constitution. They’ll agree we still ahve more rights and freedoms than most of the world. They’ll argue we treat our people pretty damn well.

It’s only our most recent, post-cold war era foreign policy thats been shit.

And the phrase “My country, right or wrong” is one of the most Un-American pieces of bullshit ever spoken. Criticism is the basis for everything American. Our government, our constitution, and our nation is based on the people being allowed to criticize and change the government. A social contract between the people and the government. The Government in America only exists because the people support it. That’s why our nation is special, that is what makes us incredible.

When our government fucks up, it SHOULD be criticized. Fully and thoroughly. It’s the American thing to do. And if you believe it didn’t fuck up, then you should voice that opinion as well. But don’t defend the US just because you were born here.

32

Did some of you even read the article? They have to be protected until the Iraqis expel them. Which by the way, the article also mentions that the Iraqis have given them a time line in which they must leave Iraq. If they try to stay, or come back in, the Geneva Conventions will no longer protect them. Even the International Red cross protects them for God’s sake. Read the damn article and stop misrepresenting this.

33

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Did some of you even read the article?[/quote]

No, few of them did and the facts are being (deliberately) oversimplified and misrepresented. The same people that blame Bush, the United States, and the CIA for supporting terrorism and oppression around the world are glossing over the fact that the Mujahedeen were originally and still are loyal to the nation of Iran.

They ignore the fact that the Mujahedeen and related groups target politicians and military figures rather than just people in buildings or on the subway. They ignore the fact that the Mujahedeen are uniformed, separate themselves from civilian populations, and are organized with political representation. They ignore the fact that they claim to stand for equal rights, peace in the Middle East, Free-market capitalism, and separation of Church and state.

They ignore the fact that the Mujahedeen were placed on the list at by Clinton as an appeasement of Iran in exchange for their withdrawal of support for Hezbollah and Hamas as well as opening the door for nuclear inspections. They ignore things like the fact that the Ayatollahs summarily executed people for even demonstrating in the presence of suspected Mujahedeen, that prisoners were executed en masse (like 30,000), without trial, by order of the Ayatollah, for suspicion of being Mujahedeen.

They ignore the fact that the Vice President of EU Parlaiment describes ‘an elaborate and complex misinformation campaign by Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) against the Mujahedeen.’ They label the Mujahedeen as terrorists and then deny that Saddam had any involvement in terrorist activities.

Probably most importantly, they claim to be pacifists and that brutal ‘oppression’ of the people of the Middle East by force won’t work and wholly support that exact same policy that Iran has taken to these groups for decades.

As usual, not to say that the US is an angel of the most merciful god incarnate, more to say that slamming planes into buildings indiscriminately is completely different than a uniformed militia acting against their own oppressive government. Given the choice of siding with Iran or siding with the Mujahedeen, I would have to say that the Mujahedeen haven’t threatened to develop into industrial-scale nuclear power or wipe any nation from the pages of history. I would also say that if someone as crazy as Senator McCarthy had suddenly wound up as Supreme Leader of the United States and started killing people by the tens of thousands, I would also pick up a rifle and don the uniform of a local militia.

34

[quote]lucasa wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Did some of you even read the article?

No, few of them did and the facts are being (deliberately) oversimplified and misrepresented. The same people that blame Bush, the United States, and the CIA for supporting terrorism and oppression around the world are glossing over the fact that the Mujahedeen were originally and still are loyal to the nation of Iran.

They ignore the fact that the Mujahedeen and related groups target politicians and military figures rather than just people in buildings or on the subway. They ignore the fact that the Mujahedeen are uniformed, separate themselves from civilian populations, and are organized with political representation. They ignore the fact that they claim to stand for equal rights, peace in the Middle East, Free-market capitalism, and separation of Church and state.

They ignore the fact that the Mujahedeen were placed on the list at by Clinton as an appeasement of Iran in exchange for their withdrawal of support for Hezbollah and Hamas as well as opening the door for nuclear inspections. They ignore things like the fact that the Ayatollahs summarily executed people for even demonstrating in the presence of suspected Mujahedeen, that prisoners were executed en masse (like 30,000), without trial, by order of the Ayatollah, for suspicion of being Mujahedeen.

They ignore the fact that the Vice President of EU Parlaiment describes ‘an elaborate and complex misinformation campaign by Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) against the Mujahedeen.’ They label the Mujahedeen as terrorists and then deny that Saddam had any involvement in terrorist activities.

Probably most importantly, they claim to be pacifists and that brutal ‘oppression’ of the people of the Middle East by force won’t work and wholly support that exact same policy that Iran has taken to these groups for decades.

As usual, not to say that the US is an angel of the most merciful god incarnate, more to say that slamming planes into buildings indiscriminately is completely different than a uniformed militia acting against their own oppressive government. Given the choice of siding with Iran or siding with the Mujahedeen, I would have to say that the Mujahedeen haven’t threatened to develop into industrial-scale nuclear power or wipe any nation from the pages of history. I would also say that if someone as crazy as Senator McCarthy had suddenly wound up as Supreme Leader of the United States and started killing people by the tens of thousands, I would also pick up a rifle and don the uniform of a local militia.

[/quote]

Superb post!!!

JeffR

35

[quote]beowolf wrote:
The problem is no ones criticizing EVERYTHING.[/quote]

Hey, beowolf.

You do know that there is a portion of people in the world that are doing EXACTLY that. Actually, you can look no further than this board to find people who are hostile to our very way of life.

They try nice little catch phrases such as “I just object to your government, not your people.”

No one should buy that.

Agreed. However, some people find those rights dangerous. Some people deny others freedom to further their tyranny.

Not true. We’ve just moved into an era that has far more grey.

We can’t force bin laden to have a ceremony on the USS Missouri and call an end to the conflict.

We are fighting a bad idea with a better one.

Spoken like a true liberal. I’ll tell you what, if you don’t give your own country the benefit of the doubt, innocent until proven guilty, and so forth, then you need to spend some time in somalia.

An American Patriot will identify an error in government and work to rectify it.

Money, blood, votes, etc. He/she wouldn’t jump to overreaching conclusions. For example, “All politicians are scum” or “The U.S. Government is only concerned with oil.”

As is love of country. Criticism without action, is the lowest form of public discourse.

True. However, there are people like jlesk who rebel just to get attention.

I’m not a fan.

Well put.

That is the start. The MORE important part is demanding and participating in the remedy.

Again, that is a LARGE difference between you and I.

I give the American people the benefit of the doubt from the get go. While I may not agree with every policy or decision, love of country has to include an inherent loyalty.

I encourage you to travel overseas.

I’ll bet you change your tune if you spent some time in Cuba.

Or, if you don’t have the finances, go to the coast of Florida.

You’ll see people dying to reach our shores.

I’d be willing to bet that this will change your tune. I’ll bet you become more loyal. Finally, I’d wager that your new found loyalty would make it more likely to participate in actions that improve your community and your country.

JeffR

36

[quote]lucasa wrote:
They ignore the fact that they claim to stand for equal rights, peace in the Middle East, Free-market capitalism, and separation of Church and state. [/quote]

Church and state? And there I was under the impression we’re talking about Muslims.

Seriously though, I believe peace, free-market and that load of crap was also what Ben-Laden promised the CIA.

For God’s sake, what part of Mujaheedin Al-Khalk did you miss? What did Osama&co call themselves back in the 80’s?

How strange then that they’re still listed as such. The group lost three appeals (1999, 2001 and 2003) to the US government to be removed from the terrorist list.

How is that relevant?

The response of the VP you quoted was to a HRW’s report describing the abuses at the Mujahideen’s camps. How he came to the conclusion that HRW was somehow tricked by the “elaborate” Iranian propaganda is beyond me. Matter of fact, the only evidence he provided was seriously biased.

Now, you turned your rage against the EU? Focus please.

I’m sure someone has given the same argument in the late 70’s about siding with Ben-Laden or the USSR. Also, when siding with Saddam against Iran. Look at the monstrous consequences…

Why the hell doesn’t your government mind his own business instead of constantly sticking his nose everywhere? I hear there are a handful of issues which should be taken care of within the mainland…

37

I was talking strictly about our war against Communism during the cold war,

(you had brought up bombing in Viet nam, backing of dictators, islamic extremists, Israel, ect)

I think we were right doing that.

I did not bring slavery into it, nor American Indians, but since you did, Lix, that just fortifies my arguement that certain people will criticize everything America has ever done.

Likewise, I can criticize a lot of things Muslims have done also. But what is the point of that?

If you think that Muslim extremists are the blackest of black, why do you constantly preach their propaganda day in and day out?

38

Beowuf,

“When our government fucks up, it SHOULD be criticized. Fully and thoroughly. It’s the American thing to do. And if you believe it didn’t fuck up, then you should voice that opinion as well. But don’t defend the US just because you were born here.”

I agree.

I never said that EVERYTHING the US has done is a good thing. I believe we fucked up royally in Iraq.

39

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I did not bring slavery into it, nor American Indians, but since you did, Lix, that just fortifies my arguement that certain people will criticize everything America has ever done. [/quote]

Gkhan, you said that you would defend your government’s decisions, right or wrong; that entitles me to bring forth the unequivocal aberrations of said government.

None. I never said I’ll defend whatever Muslims have done. People who call themselves Muslims have done some very bad things and are still doing them. You on the other hand claimed that you had reasons for doing the things you do, and “right or wrong”, you reserved the right to defend them. This is utter BS.

Nothing wrong with admitting a mistake, Gkhan. You may have misformulated your thoughts, or backed up after being cornered; either way, persisting on that track makes you look…bad.

40

You have taken my thoughts out of context. But I never said I support EVERYTHING my country does, or did, I said I support what the did to defeat the communists. If we supported radical muslims or bombed Vietnamese at least we defeated the communists. After all, the Vietnamese are our allies now.

You may not agree with everything muslims have done in the past, but you have a habit of blaming the United States for everything that is wrong in the muslim world, which is not only wrong but is the muslim extremist point of view, so I ask you again, if you think the extremists are the blackest of black, why do you preach their propaganda?