When Will Bin Laden Not Hate Us?

by TR 34 Replies latest jw friends

  • Abaddon
    Abaddon

    Yeru;

    Make the terrorists afraid, while giving the common man hope, THAT is how terror will be defeated, and it's gonna take at LEAST two generations. It's the cold war all over again, except with a lot more violence.

    Would you like amputated body parts in your bath of blood?

    So, rather than address the reasons for terrorism, you want to go on a killing spree? When, typically, this will result in 1.1 or more martyrs appearing for every one you make?

    Smart. Not.

    I was in a training session in the Northrn Ireland Office once, and got to ask a top wallah; "look, if the membership is more or less known, why not just round them up overnight?" He smiled at me as at a simple child and explained that when they'd tried that (internment, early '70's), it had only made the situation worse, as for every one they locked up, several more jumped up BECAUSE of the 'injustice' of internment.

    Doesn't make any difference if you kill them instead of locking them up. Look at how the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis actually acts as a recruiting process. Look at how the Tamil Tigers resisted for years against a massively powerful country AND WON. This is not Greneda or Panama. This is a geographically diffuse enemy, which just makes it harder.

    If you can prove to me, from history, that suppression and violenece will more effectively end the problems caused by fundamentalist terrorists than working to remove the reasons why people become terrorists, go ahead.

    But I don't think you have ONE historical incident which supports what you suggest as a solution.

    If this is the case (please give me examples if it isn't), then what are the reasons to proceed long-term with a useless action, when there are far more effective, albeit long term (but you're talking two generations, so split hairs) solutions? Long term domination of the millitary-industrial combine, unfettered spending on arms, rich people getting richer, lots of people dying.

    Don't get me wrong. Direct action must be taken in the short term against those threatening violence. But you're pretending it's a long term solution, when it isn't.

    cornish; please ask what black people have to do to please KKK memners in a KKK chat room. I think you are confusing Isalm (billions of adherants, mostly peacefull people) with fundamentalism (millions of people, willing to use violence, drawing their shock troops from the disaffected).

  • og
    og

    If you want to get rid of mosquitoes, you start drying up the marsh. If you want to reduce terrorism as a problem, you start to ease the conditions that lead to large numbers of people willing to support terrorism. That is, you acknowledge their right to secure national borders, to self-governance, to their own religion. You strive to reduce dependence on resources they control (you stop making the world safe for housewives driving SUVs). When support dries up, the Osamas (and Pat Robertsons) of the world are pests, not monsters.

    TR's points are inane, he's being an unthinking dumbass. OF COURSE Osama is never going to be happy with the Western world; he's a fanatic. But sensible policies - not appeasement, not knee-jerk jingoism, not poorly conceived wars - can reduce his support, and thus his ability to harm.

  • TR
    TR

    I appreciate the thoughts and ideas on this thread. Simple, isn't it?

    Yeru is on to something here that I agree with. Giving people hope. Many of these extremists are tought to hate and kill from childhood. Look at these youth suicide bombers. They need something else to look forward to. Terrorism and suicide bombings is not the answer. The Fanatical teachers that produce these youth have to be replaced with those that can give hope for economic development and a better lifestyle. If we free these people from those that teach to hate and kill, give them a better education, much more positive results could follow.

    Not a popular ideawith many, but these extremist nations need to be conquered and occupied for a time to help the population. We did it in Japan, Germany, etc. These nations grew to be economic powerhouses. But, it's hard to know which leaders to support. it's come back to bite in the ass on many occasions.

    TR

  • sunstarr
    sunstarr
    If you can prove to me, from history, that suppression and violenece will more effectively end the problems caused by fundamentalist terrorists than working to remove the reasons why people become terrorists, go ahead.

    The problem is that these "fundamentalists" believe their crusade to destroy the infidel - all who don't comply with the beliefs and lifestyle of Islam - is backed by God. How do you nicely reason with that type of person? They are clearly not interested in diplomacy. They are interested in fulfilling their self-imposed mission from God to wipe the earth of those not worthy. These are their "fundamental" beliefs. To put it succinctly, they are terrorists because they believe it to be their God-given right. Thus, there can be no rational discourse to lead all to peace when their beliefs center around war. Now, if you wish to argue the issue that they supposedly don't represent Islam in their patterns of behavior, then ultimately, they are not "fundamentalists." They are merely acting on a personal conviction, much the same as Adolf Hitler acted on a personal conviction. And, as history would note, the Nazi's weren't stopped by a tea party on the White House lawn.

    It boils down to this: Blood will inevitably be spilled. Will it be the blood of the extremists, or that of our own?

  • Realist
    Realist

    a few years ago i had a similar opinion as the majority here...the damn arabs are hating all of the west and are a constant threat to us.

    but if you step back for a minute and look at the actual situation...who is interfering in whose hemisphere all the time? whose culture is threatened by whose? who is sucking out money from whom?

    the answer is the west is the one who causes this conflict not the muslims.

    sure the muslims have no respect for our western lifestyle but the same is true for us too...do we respect their lifestyle and believes?

    they would not hate us and they would not attack us (which by the way they really don't do on a regular basis) if our nations wouldn't be messing with them.

    think about that!

  • borgfree
    borgfree
    the answer is the west is the one who causes this conflict not the muslims

    Yep, they stay in their own countries and mind their own business alright.

  • Silverleaf
    Silverleaf

    While it's possible that there might have been some legitimacy to the grievances of the muslims and the terrorists - all that legitimacy went out the window on September 11th. Violence is not the answer to their problems - it wasn't the answer then and it won't be the answer now. Instead of standing up like the human beings they are SUPPOSED to be and asking for help, demanding change, etc, they killed innocent people. Their causes don't matter any more, their suffering [real or imagined] in the past has been for naught because they damned themselves, their people and their religion with the senseless acts of that day. Their future suffering is meaningless now because they stooped to the level of animals to make their point. It's a damn shame, but any problems they have from this point on, are their own fault.

    Silverleaf

  • Crazy151drinker
    Crazy151drinker

    When we drop a cluster bomb on his ass.

  • TR
    TR

    Realist,

    but if you step back for a minute and look at the actual situation...who is interfering in whose hemisphere all the time? whose culture is threatened by whose? who is sucking out money from whom?

    I guess we should also stop sending the billions of dollars worth of humanitarian aid over there.

    TR

  • TR
    TR

    How the U.S. helps other countries:

    http://www.usaid.gov/

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit