Crazed people of Isam vs Peaceful US?

[straffo]

Originally posted by SWulfe:


Then again, Muslims have been in a never-ending war since then beginning of time with Jewish people.

Sorry but it's completly wrong (except for the last 50 year) often they were strong jewish comunauty in arabian country and they were living without trouble.
The Intolerance of some muslims is something new (about 40 year) muslims didn't start crusade like the christians.

In fact concerning religion muslims were more tolerant than us during a long time it's just since the 60's that the extremist got a big audience.

[easymo]

OK. Let me try to spell this out.

  When we left Vietnam.  We probably left behind more weapons then we have intentionally given to any country since WW2.  So what!  There is a huge Ocean between us and them. What are they going to do? Drive a tank across the ocean.  Do you think we will let some guy with an M-16 shoved down his pants on a plane? (look what the N.Y. terrorist were armed with).  Belive it or not.  We are carful about what we pass out. The point is, buy the time a country develops the technology to deliver troops to use these type of weapons.  Their technology will be advanced enough that they don't need our old junk.  The world saw what happened the one time someone tried to put a real weapon near us (Cuba).

  On the other hand.  If, for some reason the North Koreans, get mad at the PRC.  Well, hell.  They are just across the river.  How many guys does it take to carry a nuke.

  We could give the Northern Alliance train loads of small arms.  It would not threaten us.  We just want ben laden and his boys.  Then we are out of there.

[ 09-27-2001: Message edited by: easymo ]

[LtHans]

Ok.....EVERYONE LISTEN UP!

Seems this has changed into a debate about who's country is the best.  That answer is easy.  Don't bother poping up your opinion....it isn't the deciding vote, and here is why.

The answer to that question is whatever country people are tyring to emigrate to, so much that the country has to erect baricades and boarder patrols to keep them out.  The masses have spoken.

Now, what the hell is all this roadkill talk about the evil United States?  That same United States that has just nuked Afganistan or that other United States that hasn't killed a single person in retaliation for 6,000+ of our own people dead?

You all are asking us Americans to show restraint.  WHAT THE diddly DO YOU THINK WE ARE DOING?  Nobody has died by our hands yet, and by all rights nobody will in the forseeable future.  Large numbers of civilian casualties are not on the United States agenda.  Even the Gulf War was very light on civilian casualties acording to the Iraqis themselves.

Should the USA go after the Taliban?  Hell, yes!  They knew about what was going on and didn't think it was a bad idea at all.  They are enemies of the United States and are guilty of gross negligence.

Should the United States get involved with the Northern Aliance?  Tough call.  I'm not really happy that we helped Afganistan once before and this is the thanks we get.  I don't want to help any Arab nation anymore.  The only thing I want from them is oil, and I want that to change as soon as possible.

[-dead-]

Good point Lt Hans.
And I hope the US continues to show restraint - because if they don't, I fear we're all screwed. The world is too small these days for this sort of scary bellybutton conflict.

I don't think a "War" on terrorism with military strikes, arming other terrorists, or anything to do with weaponry will help the cause of peace in any way. Kill one, and 30 new ones convert to the terrorist cause - look at the pictures at the top of this thread - Pakistanis and Indonesians going all out on the terrorist side - and that's just with a threat of a war. Are they all just going to calm down and go home if you kill bin Laden and bomb the Taliban? I don't think so: I reckon they'll join the cause, learn to fly and then ...? The whole cycle repeats all over again, and again, and again.

If terrorism were as easily dealt with as many on this BBS reckon (a nuke, EMP, a Barrett, the Special Forces, smart weaponry, poison wetsuit - whatever), it wouldn't happen at all, it would have been dealt with already. The problem is you can not fight it with a military solution (look at Israel & N.Ireland - 50+ years of fighting), it has to be dealt with politically, you have to make the terrorist cause unpopular, even foolish. You don't do that by executing and bombing people, that only excites other people into a rage - think how angry the US is now. Why are they calling for Bin Laden's head and the overthrow of the Taliban?
 
I don't reckon the US is any more evil than any other country. I'm an equal opportunites lad: I think all countries suck - although actually I think my own country has got the most despicable track record over the last couple of centuries, what with invention of concentration camps, several genocides (including the only successful one), state-sponsored and enforced drug dealing etc.

If the US sides with the Northern Alliance, they side with a group that is almost identical to the group they want to fight, and looking at past history, odds on they'll have a pop at the US once they're finished with the Taliban, just like the Taliban did when they finished with the Russians. Furthermore, the US invalidates any serious claim of a "war on terrorism", by using a group that basically seem to be the same as the terrorists.

Finally, the US still doesn't have proof positive that the Taliban knew about it or that Bin Laden was responsible, so any act of aggression thataways would also be daft until there is proof [and if the US is going to use military might it had better be damn near irrefutable proof].
Sadly, I fear that this lack of proof is the only thing holding the retaliation fireworks show up, not any real restraint.

"Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons." - Betrand Russell

[Toad]

The problem is that the terrorist attacks are NOT going to stop.

The attacks are not based in "reason"; there IS no even remotely justifiable reason to crash an airliner into the WTC.

No matter what we do, these attacks will continue.

Respond militarily? The attacks continue.

Respond diplomatically? The attacks continue.

Don't respond? The attacks continue.

Beg forgiveness for all our Evil on the world stage? The attacks continue.

Nothing we can do will satisfy the Islamic extremists. The Great Satan has to wiped off the face of the earth so their perfect religion can flourish in peace. (Just look at how much the Taliban has accomplished! Think of how great a whole world like that would be!)

There is no "WIN" here; get used to it. For the next hundred years you're going to be engaged in what amounts to damage control.

It isn't patriotism at all... get this and get it good: It's survival.

...and if and when the US fails and falls, the other infidel nations will be next in line. These guys have to have something against which they can struggle.

[JV44]

Hello all....

Before WTC was attacked I was believe that terrorists are only terrorists because they are poor, not edjucated and have nothing to loose....

But now I see that the terrorists of WTC was not poor, well edjucated and sure have some things to loose...

Is there a way to stop such intellegent elements....???

After WWII one idea of allied was to sterilisate all germans so that only a matter of time we disappear of this planet...

But Germany have learned the lesson and today nobody in europe is afraid of us (exept poeple who play aceshigh
  )

So, maybe they only need the same hard lesson that germany was teached in WWII and maybe than they will wake up and learn their lesson???  


Andreas (JV44)

[mrfish]

i agree with toad but am left with this question...

is a nation built on consensus capable of carrying out what needs to be done?

the enemy knows how simplistic and easily puppeted the american public is and all they will have to do to break our will is send a video tape to cnn showing some burnt children and women pleading for an end to the u.s. actions kneeling over their dead sons and daughters.

or some little big eyed 3 year old with a bandage asking "mommy why do they want to kill me" translated from the arabic...

at least 1/2 of americans' resolve will crumble into memory when they see that inevitable scene.

i'm glad we didn't have 24hr news coverage during wwii - can you imagine the soccer mom protest outside of the capital if there had been?:

 "no more burning babies in dresden and tokyo you warmongers - they looked really, really sorry and sad so let's stop <crowd: YEAH!!!!NO MORE WAR NO MORE WAR...>!!!"

if bush tells the people 'tough titty, this is war, grow a spine...' then they will just compare him to some fascist like hitler and he won't have any power - the future sucks the way i see it.

sometime after the 1st actions the dissent will start in earnest. then we'll really see what we're made of. this unity fairytale is a patriotic wet dream that people are gonna wake up from when they realize how fragmented we really are. too bad too - i was starting to like it.

[Toad]

Fish, I share your concerns.

Frankly, no, I don't believe the US at this time has the necessary understanding of just what type of conflict they are involved in.

Therefore, I think there's a large chance we're going to lose and lose big.

Only a fool would doubt that the terrs have considered more deadly operations than diving an airliner into downtown USA. Bio, chemical, conventional explosives and undoubtedly nuke options have been considered and pursued to the best of their ability.

At some point, after such an attack, with far greater casualties than WTC, the populace may wake up to the actual magnitude of the threat.

However, I believe that will be too late; it may be too late now.

Then thoughts will turn to vengeance, pure and simple. The old, "if I'm going down, I'm taking them down with me" mode.

That's what has been keeping me awake at nights lately.

[Udie]

I think that if people around the world really understood the magnatude of this we'd already be bombing the afgans, iraq, iran and any state on "the list".  We'd probobly already have troops on the ground, if we don't already  


 I'm scared, but I'm not going to let it rule my life. That's what "they" want.  Screw "them"...


U

[Hangtime]

Sooner or later.. probably sooner, they (the terrs) will use a weapon of mass destruction against the US.. gas or bio... maybe a suitcase nuke.

Then, it will get truly ugly.

There will be glass craters at Baghdad, Kabul, Tehran, etc... maybe a few here too.

Yha know, this could have all been avoided in 1979 by simply turning the 52 American Hostages in Tehran into 52 American Martyrs by the simple act of turning Tehran into a Crater.

Simple formula... one dead american by terrorist action equals one Islamic city vaporized.

Kill two americns; lose two cities. Kill three americans, a peaceful islamic nation is gone.

DON'T diddly WITH US.

Thank you. You are now free to travel the world without worry.

 

*sigh*

Then I woke up.

 

[koala]

Thrawn said:
After all the US gov't seems to feel it has a right to try and dictate what the laws of Canada should be. (Search for info on the North American Defense Perimeter)

Nah, I think we should just close down our border with Canada so we don't have to worry about the huge security leak from the North.  After all, we do have the right to do that, don't we?

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by koala:


Nah, I think we should just close down our border with Canada so we don't have to worry about the huge security leak from the North.  After all, we do have the right to do that, don't we?

You're right Hang.

ehm, Fine by me.

[ 09-27-2001: Message edited by: Thrawn ]

[Hangtime]

I liked your original "Fine by me" answer, the one you had up there before you changed it to "Hypocracy".

[Toad]

Yeah, Thrawn. It's the bad ole USA that has tried to oppress the entire rest of the world.

...thanks for the smiles.. this has been a pretty down day otherwise.

[-dead-]

I have to agree with you on one point toad - the attacks probably won't stop if you do nothing or if you do diplomatic stuff, but I reckon they'll only get worse if you respond militarily. I don't know what the other way out is - I suspect it may involve ceasing to support Israel, no matter what they do, and withdrawing all US troops from the Middle East - but I do know that blowing places up never works very well (did it cow the US into submission? Or did it just unite them and piss them off?), especially when you're dealing with something that isn't bound to any geographical location, or any particular state (Yeah, bomb the Taliban - as if Bin Laden and his loons really cared - they are probably praying for the US to do it).
And charging around the whole of the Islamic world threatening people and governments with dire retributions is definitely not top of the "how to win friends and influence people" list, the "how to promote world peace" list or indeed the "how not to destabilize the whole of the Middle East  and quickly escalate the conflict up to nuclear war" list.

What sort of war will it be? I fear it's a total unwinnable war - like software/mp3  protection - you can't react fast enough - you can't tell who's a threat until it's too late, and by the time you deal with them, there's another group waiting in the wings, that you don't know about. A guess that it will drag on for over 50 years at least seems pretty fair (based on Israel and N. Ireland). Everyone home by 2051 - that prospect doesn't appeal to me. Mind that's if we're lucky - if not, then Hangtime can throw away his faded copy of "Trinity and Beyond"   and watch nuclear explosions live on CNN. And then we're all stuffed, and on our species' death certificate they'll have to put "stupidity" as the cause of death.