Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Ancalagon]
    #4379875 -

Ancalagon said:
Quote:
Quite well, really. Do you honestly think that we've "failed" in Iraq?


Never said that. Not yet at least. Do YOU honestly think that we've "succeeded" in Iraq?
I think that we are winning, yes

Quote:
Compare our casuality count there with some other wars that we have definatly won (say, the big dub-dubs), and with wars that we've lost. Which does it look like more?


Don't even know what to make of this. The nature of the wars is so different that using one as some measure of the other is laughable. Is any war to be gauged a success if it keeps its' casualty figures under WWII numbers? How convenient.
People die in wars. Compare how much we've gained with our ~1500 US dead and other wars. We've destroyed their regular army, we've ousted and captured their leader, we've destroyed terrorist strong points, we've got power going, we are buildnig hospitals, we are putting food on their tables. We lost a hundred times this in Vietnam and didn't really do shit.

Quote:
trained troops


Just a few more trained Iraqi troops and the tide will be turned, eh? We shall see.
Thats what I'm thinking will happen, yes. The tide doesn't need to be "turned", it's going the right way. If you classify people dying in war as us losing, then we've lost every war we've ever taken part in, of course, so have the 'other guys'
Quote:
installed a new government.


Installed, ouch. Poor choice of words? Freudian slip?
No, we used force to kill the last guys family, and we supported the new guy. Thats installing. Libertarianism doesn't work with heathen animals, we'll force freedom on them until they like it
Quote:
If people in the military die while this is happening, well, thats why they call it war instead of "massive slaughter". It's just how shit goes down.


People in the military are dying, Iraqi citizens are dying (to a much larger extent) -- I'm just not so sure that each pint of blood that's spilt brings us that much closer to the end game.


Would you say that we are winning or losing?


--------------------


Jackie Treehorn treats objects like women, man

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: looner2]
    #4379899 -

I don't know where I said anything about
Quote:
caring about their feelings and the struggles of being a poor muslim


You said "understanding".

I just posted a quote about needing to understand in oreder to defeat your enemy. Nothing cute about it. Though your reply was quite titillating.

And something not being up for debate is nonsense. Whether we already have a fixed idea of an answer, what are you worried about discussion?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Ped]
    #4380384 -

put quite simply..the "war on terrorism" is a class war being waged by the rich against the poor...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Edited by Annapurna1 (07/07/05 05:28 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Ancalagon]
    #4380784 -

Ancalagon said:
Quote:
Quite well, really. Do you honestly think that we've "failed" in Iraq?


Never said that. Not yet at least. Do YOU honestly think that we've "succeeded" in Iraq?



uhh, you guys, the war is officially over and declared as a great success (or so says Bush).
Now its an occupation. I'd say an occupation is successful when order rules. But that's not the case, so the occupation is a failure so far.

So bush finished his little war with a big proud smile on his face, he wiped away all the immediate existing opposing forces, he got saddam, he got his oil, but one thing he never took the time to think about: post-war measures. "ehh, we'll think about that later, its not really important right now", so he thought.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: exclusive58]
    #4381688 -

If anyone got oil, then why am I paying $2.30 a gallon?

Oh yeah, it's b/c we didn't get their oil.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Redstorm]
    #4381751 -

Redstorm said:
If anyone got oil, then why am I paying $2.30 a gallon?

Oh yeah, it's b/c we didn't get their oil.


True, "we" didn't get their oil. Halliburton did. It doesn't benefit us. It benefits the oil companies.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Silversoul]
    #4381761 -

I just find it ridiculous to tie links between Bush and Haiilburton. Even the link between Cheney and Halliburton is getting looser and looser the more it is looked at. A multinational corporation was going to get the contracts there anyways. It just happens that Halliburton won the bids. It's a damn shame that we're not getting the benefits of this oil, but to blame Bush is silly.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Ped]
    #4381794 -

Ped writes:
Quote:
A more balanced, objective perspective sees that the war on terrorism is a legitimate campaign with a legitimate cause which is used to veil the illegitimate and definitely unethical intrusion into other nation's affairs for the purpose of furthering the dominating agenda of America and it's closest allies. That is clear.


Just because you characterize your speculation as "balanced" and "objective" doesn't make it accurate. And no, it is far from clear.

Quote:
Even if the war on terrorism was not being used to distract the common person from the real objective behind actions taken in it's name...


Assumes facts not in evidence -- i.e. that it is just a "distraction" and that there are ulterior motives.

Quote:
... the war on terrorism would still be an entirely ridiculous campaign. Attacking and removing the leaders of terrorist organizations does not address the root cause of terrorism. So long as the root cause of terrorism is left unaddressed, other leaders will appear to replace those who are removed by American efforts. Without addressing it's root cause, terrorism will always exist.


While this is of course correct, the same can be said of sexual predators and bank robbers and shoplifters and jaywalkers.

Quote:
The root cause of terrorism is the illegitamate and definitely unethical intrusion into other nation's affairs for the purpose of futhering the dominating agenda of America and it's closest allies.


Incorrect. The root cause of 95% of the terrorism going on in the world today is the desire of radical Islamists to establish a worldwide Islamic state.

Quote:
The war on terrorism has been, since it's first successful campaigns, contributive to terrorism's root cause.


Incorrect. See above.

Quote:
Regardless of whether or not it's true that the intent of America's coalition is compassionate, to install democracy in the middle east and loosen the grip of totalitarianism in the region, the war on terrorism only contributes to this and other related problems.


Well gee, Ped. It sure would be nice if there were always an option between a course of action that is "good" and a course of action that is "bad". Unfortunately in the real world sometimes one is presented with a situation where the only options are "bad" and "worse".

Quote:
Terrorism itself has been a foolish endeavour. In attempting to dissuade impinging nations from continuing their interference in the political and cultural affairs of sovreign nations, these terrorist leaders have only succeeded in granting those impinging nations an easy excuse to ramp up their efforts. They have only invited more intrusion.


No, terrorism has been a smart endeavor. It has (at the very least):

1) Cowed the moderate Muslims from taking any action (even to the point of just verbally condemning the 'splodeydopes) for fear they'll be beheaded

2) Changed the outcome of the election of at least one previously staunch ally in the fight (Spain)

Quote:
And so it will ping-pong back and forth like this until one group or the other finally decides to walk away from the table.


The mad mullahs will never walk away from the table. Ever. So we can only hope our side doesn't or we'll all be living under a medieval theocratic government.

Quote:
Civilian casualties in Iraq will invite bus-bombs in London, which may invite more aggressive behaviour toward Iran or another Middle Eastern country, which may invite subway sabotage in New Jersey, on and on like this for an indeterminable period of time, all of it tangled up in an indecipherable myriad of lies and half truths designed to harness public opinion and use it like a sail, and all of it hinging on the pride, the selfishness, and the anger of a very small group of people on either side of the conflict.


So your solution is for the good guys (that's the non-'splodeydopes, in case you're wondering) to roll over and take it up the ass? No offense, to you, Ped -- I'm sure you're a nice guy and all -- but I'm relieved you'll never be president.


Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Silversoul]
    #4381798 -

Quote:
True, "we" didn't get their oil. Halliburton did.


Halliburton didn't get the oil either. Halliburton got the contract to rebuild stuff. They didn't get the rights to any oilfields.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Phred]
    #4381810 -

Did the Iraqi's keep the oil rights?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Redstorm]
    #4381812 -

Yes.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Phred]
    #4381904 -

Incorrect. The root cause of 95% of the terrorism going on in the world today is the desire of radical Islamists to establish a worldwide Islamic state.

Evidence please. I have read statements by select muslims that believe that is a noble goal, but I don't know where you got your numbers from. Al Qaeda itself states that its motivations are due to american troops in Saudi Arabia, and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. While they evidently believe that terrorism would have some effect on these issues, I have yet to see any evidence that most terrorists believe terrorism will help create an entirely muslim world, or that they feel they should use terrorism for this goal.

It seems to me that this is speculation on your part, and not fact. (Unless, of course, you have the results of some sort of terrorist census.)


So your solution is for the good guys (that's the non-'splodeydopes, in case you're wondering) to roll over and take it up the ass? No offense, to you, Ped -- I'm sure you're a nice guy and all -- but I'm relieved you'll never be president.

I'm not sure that's what he was proposing.


--------------------
"I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson
http://phluck.is-after.us

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Phluck]
    #4381959 -

Phluck writes:

Quote:
I have read statements by select muslims that believe that is a noble goal, but I don't know where you got your numbers from.


The select Islamists to whom you refer are the "Founding Fathers" of the jihadist movement. I've covered this before, with plenty of links, back when Zahid was doing his Muslim martyr schtick. Unfortunately, the threads in question have now been archived hence cannot be bumped. Search the PA&L archives for "al Qutb" if you feel like it. I'm not going to bother at this hour of the night.

As Hussein Massawi, former leader of Hezbollah, neatly put it, "We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you." The first choice of Islamists is to kill Americans and Jews, or best of all an American Jew?like Daniel Pearl, the late Wall Street Journal?reporter. Failing that, they're happy to kill Australians, Britons, Canadians, Swedes, Germans, as they did in Bali. We are all infidels.

Quote:
Al Qaeda itself states that its motivations are due to american troops in Saudi Arabia, and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.


Almost correct. It was Osama bin Laden who said that, and his first statement taking credit for the 9/11 attacks made no mention of Israel at all. He said it was because the Infidel had defiled the holy soil of the Arabian Peninsula by putting their feet on it. It wasn't till later statements months down the road that he decided to drag Israel into it.

Quote:
It seems to me that this is speculation on your part, and not fact.


When the "spiritual leaders" of the Religion of Peace say the same thing over and over and over again and preach to their followers that it is their sacred duty to kill the infidel wherever they may be found, it's no longer speculation to take them at their word.

Don't forget these nutbars kill other Muslims as well -- for not being devout enough. That has nothing to do with Joooos or the Great Satan.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Phred]
    #4381964 -

Incorrect. The root cause of 95% of the terrorism going on in the world today is the desire of radical Islamists to establish a worldwide Islamic state.

The Crusades were started by which religious group?

Would you care to wager against me that there will be no Al Queda attacks on more neutral countries like Canada or Switzerland?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Swami]
    #4381996 -

Swami writes:

Quote:
The Crusades were started by which religious group?


What part of

"The root cause of 95% of the terrorism going on in the world today is the desire of radical Islamists to establish a worldwide Islamic state."

are you having difficulty grasping? You do know the Crusades ended around seven centuries ago.


Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Swami]
    #4382012 -

Swami writes:

Quote:
Would you care to wager against me that there will be no Al Queda attacks on more neutral countries like Canada or Switzerland?


Seeing as how Osama and his henchmen have issued public threats to attack Canada and Denmark and Japan and a bunch of others, I wouldn't rule out such an attack, no. But wishing to attack a place and actually managing to carry it out are two different things. Look how many plots in England were foiled before this one succeeded.

Besides, in the case of some countries, threats are enough to cow them into caving. Osama may be crazy but he ain't stupid.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Swami]
    #4382018 -

Canada Called a Terror Target ['Genuine Threat' from al-Qaeda]
CanWest News Service ^ | STEWART BELL


A new Canadian intelligence report says terrorists might attack Canada in retaliation for the arrests of suspected Al-Qa'ida associates who are being deported for reasons of national security.

In the report, titled Al-Qa'ida: Potential Threats to North American Targets, the federal government's threat analysis unit said Canada's efforts to deport Al-Qa'ida suspects could trigger a violent response.

"Canadian agencies have aggressively pursued removal proceedings against inadmissible classes of foreign nationals associated with Al-Qa'ida constituents, which may also provide extremists with an impetus to attack Canadian interests."

The report by the Integrated National Security Assessment Centre (INSAC) was labelled Restricted Distribution because of its "sensitive nature," but a copy was disclosed to the National Post under the Access to Information Act.

It is the latest signal to emerge from Ottawa that there might be a genuine Al-Qa'ida threat to Canada, even if many Canadians do not consider their country to be in the sights of the global jihadist terror network.

Canadian authorities have captured several alleged Al-Qa'ida associates in Ontario and Quebec, notably Egyptians Mahmoud Jaballah and Mohamed Mahjoub, Adil Charkaoui of Morocco and Algerian Mohammed Harkat.

Several others, such as Algerians Samir Air Mohamed of Vancouver and Abdellah Ouzghar of Hamilton, were arrested for extradition to stand trial in the United States and France respectively.

Last March, Canadian police arrested an Ottawa computer expert on charges he was part of a radical cell that was plotting a bombing in Britain. He is alleged to have used his computer skills to help build a bomb using ammonium nitrate.

The report notes that Al-Qa'ida ranked Canada as "the fifth most important Christian country to be targeted, following the U.S., the U.K., Spain and Australia." Of those, Canada is the only one to not have suffered an attack.

Canadian security agencies say they have found indicators terrorists might be in the planning stages of an attack, including incidents involving the videotaping of possible targets in Toronto. Last year, Pakistani authorities found a list of Canadian targets in the pocket of a captured Al-Qa'ida operative.

Although the Liberals opposed the invasion of Iraq, Al-Qa'ida considers Canada a legitimate target because of the Canadian troop presence in Afghanistan and Ottawa's participation in the U.S.-led war on terror.

One of Canada's main counterterrorism tools is a section of the immigration law that allows the government to deport non-Canadians suspected of involvement in terrorist groups.

INSAC is based at the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and is composed of federal security agencies including CSIS, RCMP, national defence, foreign affairs and immigration.


would you care to wager if they blame bush.





And after a terrorist attack, how long would victims have to wait to get medical care????????????????


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Phred]
    #4382029 -

What part of X are you having difficulty grasping?

So attacking my intellect is a mod's perogative and adds to the discussion?

How far back is it OK to go for grievances? 1 year? 10 years? 100 years? 1000 years? Please show me the statute of limitations on cultural hatred?

We should have no anger over 9/11 because that is NOT TODAY and is old news.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Swami]
    #4382041 -

They whooped us anyways in the Crusades. They don't really have much to cry about.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: On Terrorism and the War Against it [Re: Phred]
    #4382045 -

Phred said:
While this is of course correct, the same can be said of sexual predators and bank robbers and shoplifters and jaywalkers.


Terrorist acts are political in nature. They are acts of the politically impotent against the powerful. It is not the same thing.

Quote:
Incorrect. The root cause of 95% of the terrorism going on in the world today is the desire of radical Islamists to establish a worldwide Islamic state.


Why do you ignore the published statements of Bin Laden, Ramzi Yousef and others as to why they have a beef with the U.S.? This is willful ignorance on your part. Muslim terrorist acts against the U.S. ARE directly related to U.S. foreign policy. The radical Islamists gain sympathy and converts BECAUSE OF U.S. foreign policy. The radical Islamic movement is nurtured and grows in response to U.S. actions. There will always be religious crackpots and extremists from many faiths, some are possessed of violent tendencies and creeds. It is foolish to provide impetus to such movements by a short-sighted, ham-handed and interventionist foreign policy. As long as people refuse to admit this, they will fail to address the problem in a constructive manner and will continue the cycle which makes the innocent targets of the politically desperate. The only other viable alternative is to commit genocide against Muslims, take all their oil and give all their remaining land to the Jews or whomever may curry the favor of the conquerors. Perhaps this is your preferred method?


--------------------
Money doesn't grow on trees, but deficits do grow under Bushes.

You can accept, reject, or examine and test any new idea that comes to you. The wise man chooses the third way.
- Tom Willhite

Disclaimer: I reserve the right to change my opinions should I become aware of additional facts, the falsification of information or different perspectives. Articles written by others which I post may not necessarily reflect my opinions in part or in whole, my opinions may be in direct opposition, the topic may be one on which I have yet to formulate an opinion or have doubts about, an article may be posted solely with the intent to stimulate discussion or contemplation.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* terrorism/war on drugs weezer 798 2 10/18/01 02:56 PM
by PGF
* War on Drugs, War on terrorism = War on liberties Anonymous 882 18 07/16/03 01:27 PM
by DoctorJ
* War people, why do you support the war?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )		 rhizo 11,211 145 07/05/06 11:56 AM
by Phred
* The Case Against War EchoVortex 1,256 3 10/31/02 08:24 PM
by Anonymous
* Say No Way To Drugs and Terrorism Law silversoul7 583 5 09/17/03 01:12 AM
by domite
* terrorists, beheadings and righteous anger
( 1 2 3 all )		 Moonshoe 4,522 44 06/25/04 05:13 PM
by Moonshoe
* France and Canada help Islamic terrorists Ed1 1,017 12 09/11/04 10:03 PM
by monoamine
* Porous Mexican Border as a Terrorist Entry Point
( 1 2 all )		 Autonomous 4,303 36 01/05/04 01:19 PM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,987 topic views. 2 members, 13 guests and 19 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.032 seconds spending 0.013 seconds on 16 queries.