Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: muckmaw on March 24, 2004, 11:13:04 AM
-
I read an article in TIME magazine recently, and it corresponds to this situation:
Explosive Found in French Railway Bed
24 minutes ago Add Top Stories - AP to My Yahoo!
PARIS - A French railroad worker found an explosive device buried in the bed of a railway line heading from France to Switzerland on Wednesday, the Interior Ministry said.
Bomb disposal experts neutralized the device, which was half-buried under a track in the village of Montieramey, on a train line heading from Paris to Basel, Switzerland, the ministry said in a statement. It was discovered shortly after noon.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility.
The Interior Ministry said the device did not resemble bombs described in threats by a mysterious and previously unknown group calling itself AZF.
The group claimed to have planted nine bombs along the country's rail network and has threatened to explode them unless it is paid millions of dollars.
The group's threats, first disclosed in early March, appeared in at least three letters sent to the offices of President Jacques Chirac and Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy on Dec. 10, Feb. 13 and 17.
The letters, demanding $5.2 million threatened railway targets.
Information from the group led to the recovery Feb. 21 of a sophisticated explosive device buried in tracks near Limoges in central France.
According to the time piece, France tried to pay a group calling itself AZF $5.2 million on 3/7/04. This was the amount AZF demanded to give the location of a bomb it supposedly planted.
Now, it's easy for me to say, the US would NEVER pay a ransom to a terrorist group, but then I stopped and thought about it. Imagine if we could go back in time. How much would the US have paid, if anything, if it could have prevented 9/11?
Personally, I think paying terrorist demands only encourages more terrorism, but it's a tough decision to make.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
Now, it's easy for me to say, the US would NEVER pay a ransom to a terrorist group, but then I stopped and thought about it.
I thought Regan sold Iranian terrorists weapons in exchange for hostages. :confused:
-
I thought he sold weapons to the Contra's and then took the money to buy the hostages' freedom.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
I thought he sold weapons to the Contra's and then took the money to buy the hostages' freedom.
Agreed to sell the weapons to the Iranians to have the hostages released. Took the money earned from the sale and gave that to the Contras.
-
I'm surprised North Korea has not taken hostages yet.
-
If you think terrorist want money you're IMO confused they generaly don't have money in their objectives.
But criminal have.
-
So the difference in your opinion between in criminal and a terrorist is their motive?
Does it really matter?
Both hold a people hostage under threat of violence for their own gains.
-
Criminal are in general more dumb than terrorists and so easier to catch plus they don't have any sort of "esprit de corps" like the terrorists.
For this example (AZF) they are so dumb they were unable to give a proper rendez-vous place for the ransom.
-
Soon, everyone "dissagreeing" with Sarcosi will be a terrorist Muck, why wait... lets be visionaries. France is in the middle of an election too, no decision will be made before that is done.
-
Straffo-
I'm not trying to insult your govenment, but if the AZF is so dumb, why is the French Government so willing to fork over $5 million dollars to them?
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
Straffo-
I'm not trying to insult your govenment, but if the AZF is so dumb, why is the French Government so willing to fork over $5 million dollars to them?
good bait !!
no one showed up to pick up the ransom: it was a perfect ambush, snipers, helicopters and special forces !
-
sorry muckmaw, frog is right only criminals demanding money.
Talking about suicide terrorists, there is no demanding or
warning here, its a complete different story.
Sometimes paying millions of dollars is one way to get the criminals at the end, the daily police work/investigation you know.
Calling this "bowing to terrorist" is, with all respect BS.
regards
Gh0stFT
-
I disagree, Ghost.
A terrorist is merely a criminal with a political demand. Would there have been a 9/11 if the US paid the reparations Al Quaeda said we owed for all the oil we stole? I remember that being part of what they wanted. Does this mean Al Qaida is not a terrorist organization?
You guys are simply mincing words here.
This time they demand money. Will France invade Costa Rica if I threaten them with violence?
Giving in to the threat of violence is the heart of the matter. That's whats happening here.
You can call it whatever you want. Your just playing with semantics.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
I'm surprised North Korea has not taken hostages yet.
USS Pueblo...
-
jehh muckmaw read your stuff:
terrorist is a guy that in 99% of the cases have a political motive.
criminal is a guy that in 99% of the cases have a economic motive.
oboy, I promised myselve never posting here again but doh :)
edit: and terroists dont need money they are pretty well founded anyway.
-
Airguard-
Whats the difference?
Both make demands under threat of violence.
Anything else is just window dressing.
-
ok i can agree terrorist are criminal in their act but they have diffrent motives for acting criminal.
and ofcourse I dont like either of them, they both are scum.
But the reason for their behaviour is not the same.
criminal do they stuff just for money and the other ****eheads it for political reasons (that suck big time)
there can never be a escuse for killing people like they do. :(
-
So if I get a divorce and lost custody of my daughter, and then abduct her, does that make me a terrorist?
Its a crime and the motive is not money.
You see how silly this can get?
-
I don't see anything political in this exemple.
-
isn't this more of a rectangle versus square argument?
by definition all terrorists are criminals: those who break the law
but not all criminals are terrorists.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
USS Pueblo...
A swing and a miss.
-
Originally posted by muckmaw
So if I get a divorce and lost custody of my daughter, and then abduct her, does that make me a terrorist?
wow good one ? :confused:
-
Originally posted by GScholz
If you plant a bomb and demand money not to set it off you're an extortionist. If you plant a bomb and have political demands you're a terrorist. Both acts are crimes.
and if i plant a tree and make the economic/political demand of having it never cut down then what am i?
-
Originally posted by hawker238
A swing and a miss.
So you are saying that the crew of the Pueblo were not held hostage by NK?
Could have sworn they were. Damn umpires need new glasses.
-
Originally posted by vorticon
and if i plant a tree and make the economic/political demand of having it never cut down then what am i?
you are worst than a terrorist or a criminal you are an ecologist !