Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

What alternative is there to terrorism?

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Although is was terrible what whappened in New york on september the 11th and the actions taken by the terrorists can not be condoned - they are still human beings. and a life is a life. - but it seems that everyone values american lives more than they do any oter. Hundresds of thousands of people have been killed all over the world - directly and indirectly by The american government BUT because america is a suoerpower other countries have no way of fighting back - they have little choice but to fight dirty.So guys, What else can they do to fight back? null
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I challenge you to find a single instance of America deliberately targeting civilian targets with the sole intention of causing maximum civlian casualties.

    Other countries have no way of fighting back? Can you tell me why it would be so hard for these terrorists to shoot a soldier out on the town rather than shooting his wife in her bed?

    There are a million legitimate US targets that terrorists could attack but they choose to attack innocents. That is why they are so bad and that is why they are so much worse than the US.

    PS, there is also a ton of international organisations and courts that can be used to influence the US. If a country is being so screwed by America then they can take their case to the UN.

    You also seem to forget that it wasnt a country that carried out these attacks. It is a small minority of a countries inhabitants that lean toward terrorism(or so we are constantly told).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    1- the us hardly signs up to any UN resolution - eg- it's the biggest polluter in the world and it hasnt signed up to the kyoto protocol. No 3rd world country can oppose htem otherwise they will put economic sanctions on them - and they may not deliberately bomb people but as a result of their foreign policies (eg- giving the isralies arms & stopping drugs in Iraq) INNOCENT people die but, there is never a war started because of that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LondonGurl:
    <STRONG>Although is was terrible what whappened in New york on september the 11th and the actions taken by the terrorists can not be condoned - they are still human beings. and a life is a life. null</STRONG>

    Yes a life is a life, that must annoy 5,000 innocent people seems as they don't have one, whilst they may have a legitamate case for hating the us, but nothing can excuse what they did that day, there lives are lives worth ending, human beings or not
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yeah exactly - but no one says that when it's thousands of innocent non-american lives do they?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LondonGurl:
    <STRONG>Although is was terrible what whappened in New york on september the 11th and the actions taken by the terrorists can not be condoned - they are still human beings. and a life is a life. - but it seems that everyone values american lives more than they do any oter. Hundresds of thousands of people have been killed all over the world - directly and indirectly by The american government BUT because america is a suoerpower other countries have no way of fighting back - they have little choice but to fight dirty.So guys, What else can they do to fight back? null</STRONG>

    For one - please lets not forget there were 180 killed at the Pentagon - the tragedy didnt just affect NYC.

    A life is a life? No arguing that - but when one life decides to devalue another by smashing planes into buildings, the other life is more than justified in seeking justice and even vengance for that action.


    Hundreds and thousands killed? care to make sense of that? - Iraq is dying because their leader refuses to cooperate with accords geared towards keeping the world safe from nukes and bio weapons. Additionally, his people are undoubtedly starving, yet hes spent billions on rebuilding his military and govt infrastructure (ie palaces). Theres the source of the Iraq problem - kill him, don't blame US.

    Little choice but to fight dirty? Hmm seeing as how we didnt nuke the Middle East into a lake, Id say we showed tremendous restraint these last few months. More Mercy than revenge seems to be our mission by targeting specific installations and groups.

    Beleive me chicky, it could be a lot worse - whatever we're doing now pales in comparison to what they'd like to see happen to us.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    LondonGurl,

    UN resolutions have nothing to do with it. Its the UN courts that have to be used to take up grievances with America.

    What has Kyoto got to do with anything? Japan isnt even signed up to Kyoto now and they started the bloody thing. It seems you just want to bash the US.
    If the US were oppressing a country to such a degree that they were forced to use terrorism in their defence then I think economic sanctions are the least of their worries.

    I dont agree with the sanctions on Iraq either but its incomparable to the WTC attack. I think will also find that its not just the US who is imposing sanctions.
    Your Israel point is irrelevent. If the US didnt supply weapons then someone else would. That argument is like saying knife argos are responsible when someone kills someone with an argos kitchin knife.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LondonGurl:
    <STRONG> Hundresds of thousands of people have been killed all over the world - directly and indirectly by The american government BUT because america is a suoerpower other countries have no way of fighting back - they have little choice but to fight dirty.So guys, What else can they do to fight back? null</STRONG>

    Another volunteer to the "jihad"? <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
    Follow the dictum that ALL Americans should be murdered, WHEREVER they might be found? What's your perspective to be when it becomes ALL BRIT's, next? <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    QUOTE]Another volunteer to the "jihad"?
    Follow the dictum that ALL Americans should be murdered, WHEREVER they might be found? What's your perspective to be when it becomes ALL BRIT's, next? [/QUOTE]

    THE american PEOPLE and the american GOVERNMENT are entirely diferent things! they have no controll over that chimpanzee that runs their country.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LondonGurl:
    <STRONG>QUOTE]Another volunteer to the "jihad"?
    Follow the dictum that ALL Americans should be murdered, WHEREVER they might be found? What's your perspective to be when it becomes ALL BRIT's, next?

    THE american PEOPLE and the american GOVERNMENT are entirely diferent things! they have no controll over that chimpanzee that runs their country.</STRONG>[/QUOTE]

    good job or a nuke would of landed sept 12th <IMG alt="image" SRC="wink.gif" border="0">
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A life is a life? No arguing that - but when one life decides to devalue another by smashing planes into buildings, the other life is more than justified in seeking justice and even vengance for that action.


    Hundreds and thousands killed? care to make sense of that? - Iraq is dying because their leader refuses to cooperate with accords geared towards keeping the world safe from nukes and bio weapons. Additionally, his people are undoubtedly starving, yet hes spent billions on rebuilding his military and govt infrastructure (ie palaces). Theres the source of the Iraq problem - kill him, don't blame US.

    Little choice but to fight dirty? Hmm seeing as how we didnt nuke the Middle East into a lake, Id say we showed tremendous restraint these last few months. More Mercy than revenge seems to be our mission by targeting specific installations and groups.

    Beleive me chicky, it could be a lot worse - whatever we're doing now pales in comparison to what they'd like to see happen to us.

    Ok, babe. so your saying we should have a life for a life? so you agree with the death peanalty for murderers? - all murderers? - so you dont agree with our current LAW system here in the UK?

    yeah, sadam is a nutter but the US should realise he doesnt give a S*it about the people so why make them dies to get to him - they're stopping drugs goin in - not money!

    & we didnt not nuke the middle east coz we're so damn nice it's because if we did we'd get nuked back! & there wouldnt be an alliance & because it'd be a stupid thing to do!

    anyway how do you know what they wanna do to us? - and surely rather than killing them if they dont like us we could just fine out what the problem is & negotiate!!??
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    & we didnt not nuke the middle east coz we're so damn nice it's because if we did we'd get nuked back! & there wouldnt be an alliance & because it'd be a stupid thing to do!

    America could quite easily have nuked Afghanistan. Nobody would have nuked them back. Only nukes in the middle east belong to Israel. India/Pakistan can only shoot nukes at each other. China is in no position to threaten the US yet. Russia has no will to intervene on the behalf of the Afghans. Whos gonna nuke them back?
    anyway how do you know what they wanna do to us? - and surely rather than killing them if they dont like us we could just fine out what the problem is & negotiate!!??

    Theyve said what they want to do to the US many, many times. Find out the problem and negotiate? Well why didnt they think of that <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> . Funnily enough, things have been going on for years, not just since you woke up to world affairs since Sept11th. How exactly do you negotiate with a man with explosives strapped to his chest?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by LondonGurl:
    <STRONG>

    Ok, babe. so your saying we should have a life for a life? so you agree with the death peanalty for murderers? - all murderers? - so you dont agree with our current LAW system here in the UK?

    yeah, sadam is a nutter but the US should realise he doesnt give a S*it about the people so why make them dies to get to him - they're stopping drugs goin in - not money!

    & we didnt not nuke the middle east coz we're so damn nice it's because if we did we'd get nuked back! & there wouldnt be an alliance & because it'd be a stupid thing to do!

    anyway how do you know what they wanna do to us? - and surely rather than killing them if they dont like us we could just fine out what the problem is & negotiate!!??</STRONG>


    For one thing - Im from Boston, MA - the US - I wholeheartedly agree with the execution of ALL murderers and disagree with any country who would pay to keep a hopeless peice of shit incarcerated via taxes.


    Actually - the embargos on Iraq are meant to stop everything - all imports and exports from happening on Iraqi shores. Hussein can either cooperate with the global community and allow inspections or endure furthter restrictions - his fault, not ours.


    Who is going to nuke back? Aside from some crude bombs they have, the Islamic terror organizations don't yet have that capacity.

    I say yet because it segues beautifully into your next question "how do I know what they want to do to us?" Hmm the Khobar towers, the Embassy attacks, the USS Cole, the Pentagon and WTC attacks and the shoebomber scumbag - that should all be proof of what they wish to do to us - beleive me chicky baby, if they could launch an ICBM at us, they would - screw negotiations, screw the world courts - these people are sick dogs and like all sick dogs, they have to be put down - theres NO way around it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    America could quite easily have nuked Afghanistan. Nobody would have nuked them back. Only nukes in the middle east belong to Israel. India/Pakistan can only shoot nukes at each other. China is in no position to threaten the US yet. Russia has no will to intervene on the behalf of the Afghans. Whos gonna nuke them back?

    ok, maybe not straight away & maybe not nuclear weapons but there must've been some sort of threat or why would they need to build such an alliance?

    Theyve said what they want to do to the US many, many times. Find out the problem and negotiate? Well why didnt they think of that . Funnily enough, things have been going on for years, not just since you woke up to world affairs since Sept11th. How exactly do you negotiate with a man with explosives strapped to his chest?

    Erm, yeah. I think I know things have been goin on for ages, and I've been awake to world affairs since i was old enough to understand. negotiation isnt meant to start at the last minute when they're about to blow up the plane. THEY ARE NOT JUST RANDOM EVIL PEOPLE THAT ARE KILLING FOR NO REASON. THEY HAVE EXTREMELY SERIOUS GREVIANCES - KILLING THEM OR PUTTING THEM IN PRISON OR BOMBING THEM WONT MAKE THEM GO AWAY - THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE HTE SAME GREVIANCES AND AMERICA CANT INPRISON ALL OF THEM - THIS IS JUST A SHORT TERM SOLUTION.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    there must've been some sort of threat or why would they need to build such an alliance?

    There was no war threat whatsoever. They got international support because thats how todays world works. America could very easily have done everything themselves, they didnt need any of us. Like it or not, we live in a global community and if your friends can help then its nice to have their support whether its needed or not.
    THEY ARE NOT JUST RANDOM EVIL PEOPLE THAT ARE KILLING FOR NO REASON. THEY HAVE EXTREMELY SERIOUS GREVIANCES - KILLING THEM OR PUTTING THEM IN PRISON OR BOMBING THEM WONT MAKE THEM GO AWAY - THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE HTE SAME GREVIANCES AND AMERICA CANT INPRISON ALL OF THEM - THIS IS JUST A SHORT TERM SOLUTION.

    What exactly is wrong with a short term solution? Bombing them or imprisoning them will make that particular terrorist go away. Its not an either/or situation here. The short term solution is to stop more terrorist attacks. The US will look at long term solutions to terrorism once the immediate threat is over. How can they even begin to re-evaluate policy with a knife to their throat?

    Short term solution will stop the immediate threat which gives the US room to think about a long term solution.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    LondonGurl is right.
    THEY ARE NOT JUST RANDOM EVIL PEOPLE THAT ARE KILLING FOR NO REASON. THEY HAVE EXTREMELY SERIOUS GREVIANCES - KILLING THEM OR PUTTING THEM IN PRISON OR BOMBING THEM WONT MAKE THEM GO AWAY - THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE HTE SAME GREVIANCES AND AMERICA CANT INPRISON ALL OF THEM - THIS IS JUST A SHORT TERM SOLUTION.

    Maybe someone should have thought about how many Muslims feel about US support for Israel when the US government was training and supplying these guys with weapons 15 years ago to fight the Russians.

    It pisses me off that no one wants to bring this up.

    However, what else are you going to do? Attacking them will at least serve as a deterrant, as well as making them less able to do it again.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by USC Alex:
    <STRONG>LondonGurl is right.



    Maybe someone should have thought about how many Muslims feel about US support for Israel when the US government was training and supplying these guys with weapons 15 years ago to fight the Russians.

    It pisses me off that no one wants to bring this up.

    However, what else are you going to do? Attacking them will at least serve as a deterrant, as well as making them less able to do it again.</STRONG>


    Plenty of people have suggested dropping aid to Israel but few politicians will do anything about it in the US for fear of losing the Jewish vote - personally I agree - cut all ties to Israel and let them kill each other off - just not with our weapons.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Plenty of people have suggested dropping aid to Israel but few politicians will do anything about it in the US for fear of losing the Jewish vote - personally I agree - cut all ties to Israel and let them kill each other off - just not with our weapons.


    Thank God someone else feels the same way.
    We (the American taxpayer) give 3 billion dollars a year (I'm pretty sure that's the number, could be wrong) to support this government that doesn't need our aid. If a all out war broke out in the Middle East, who doesn't think that the UN and the US would be there to stop in a second? Not to mention the fact these people have a legitimate gripe with the Israeli government. There was a chance for peace when Peres (a smart man) was PM of Israel, this fucking idiot Sharon is just making things worse.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by USC Alex:
    <STRONG>

    Thank God someone else feels the same way.
    We (the American taxpayer) give 3 billion dollars a year (I'm pretty sure that's the number, could be wrong) to support this government that doesn't need our aid. If a all out war broke out in the Middle East, who doesn't think that the UN and the US would be there to stop in a second? Not to mention the fact these people have a legitimate gripe with the Israeli government. There was a chance for peace when Peres (a smart man) was PM of Israel, this fucking idiot Sharon is just making things worse.</STRONG>

    But the Governments in the UK and US wont admit that, cos theyre too busy butt-licking the Jewish vote. The Jews have noone to blame but themselves for the Palestinian revolt...take someones land off of them with no reason, and the people youve attacked will be mighty pissed. They only got away with it cos of the Holocaust and cos the US Government is riddled with Jewsih cronies. Israel did exactly the same thing as Milosevic in Yugoslavia did, but the Yugos got blown up whilst the Jews get given guns.

    Finally Ive found someone who isnt a Jewish apologist. yeah, how the Palestinians have retaliated is pure evil, but its no worse than how the Israelis reacted. Just Israel has gunships, whilst the Palestinians have suicide bombers.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Kermit:
    <STRONG>

    Just Israel has gunships, whilst the Palestinians have suicide bombers.</STRONG>

    The difference: the Israelis do not target innocent civilians but the Palestinians do.

    Edited by Squinty

    [ 31-01-2002: Message edited by: Karla ]
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by WillyPete:
    <STRONG>

    The difference: the Israelis do not target innocent civilians but the Palestinians do.

    Edited comments of poor taste <IMG alt="image" SRC="mad.gif" border="0">

    [ 30-01-2002: Message edited by: Squinty ]</STRONG>

    Israelis arent targeting civilians? Hmm so out of nearly 700 killed, the 250 or so children dead weren't civilians? Oh right - to an Israeli, who is right beyond any doubt, is justified in killing any arab because of all of their suffering? Bullshit.

    The US should suspend any and all aid to Israel and her reign of terror on Palestine. I read a story earlier that said nearly 50 Israeli troops, most officers and all combat vets are refusing to fight anymore in Palestine - yeah thats right, they recognize that the army occupation of Gaza and other arab territories is no different than the terrorism Jews experience in Tel Aviv! It appears also this movement is growing -to hell with it - Sharon is NO better than Arafat.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Devilman, can't you read; I said innocent civilians, tough shit if children that riot get killed, don't want to get shot don't riot.

    If arafat would stop his people from killing innocent israeli civilians then there wouldn't have to be retaliation.

    each time things start to become peaceful the palestinian murdering scum let off more bombs.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    DevilMan,

    Can I ask how you feel about George Bush? Is he as bad as Arafat and Sharon? He has just spent the past few months killing several thousand totally innocent Afghan civilians.

    If you refuse to differentiate between deliberately targetting civilians(the Pales/Al-Queda) and killing them mistakenly(Israel/US/UK) while trying to get at the terrorists then you must class Bush, Blair and all the alliance leaders as terrorists.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well lets see, if you take a look at real history (long before WW1, some of you don't seem to think that exists but it does) you would see that the Jewish people were taken from there homes in Cannan (or modern Israel for you non history types) by many empires (most notably the Romans) and so after the holocaust the Western powers set up a small portion of land in palistine (same place as cannan) and formed a country of Israel (there were already many Jewish people there)So on the dawn of the first day of the nation of Israel, Arab forces attacked and tried to finish what Hitler couldn't. If it wasn't for our support the Jewish population would be gone forever. In the midst of this war the Jewish people gained more land. Every time the nation of Israel has grown in size it has been because the Arabs have attacked it. I'm not saying everything they do is good but stop sounding like anti-semites please.

    Oh and the whole US support of 3 billion dollars. That comes from private donations from wealthy Jewish people in the US. And if it wasn't for Israel our new F-22 Raptor wouldn't be in exitstance. And niether would the F-117 or the B-2. That's write most of the technology in our most advanced birds comes from the Jews. Speaking of that I have to give a shout out to the British, thanks for the Harrier, it's a great plane and the Marine Corps wouldn't be the same without it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by WillyPete:
    <STRONG>Devilman, can't you read; I said innocent civilians, tough shit if children that riot get killed, don't want to get shot don't riot.

    If arafat would stop his people from killing innocent israeli civilians then there wouldn't have to be retaliation.

    each time things start to become peaceful the palestinian murdering scum let off more bombs.</STRONG>

    Dont riot? im not talking about the riots man! Im talking the helicopter attacks when someone gets killed in Israel - they just fire off a bunch of rockets at the target not mindful of innocent civilians - this includes children.
    Did you not read what I wrote - theyre also bulldozing homes in Palestine! Oftentimes people are still in them - resulting in more deaths. Even the Jews are tired of this having nearly 50 + officers refuse to engage the Arabs.

    Hey Im not saying Palestine and certainly not Arafat are innocent - but come on people - the Jews would prefer they didnt exist at all. This isnt anti semitism, just common sense.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Balddog:
    <STRONG>DevilMan,

    Can I ask how you feel about George Bush? Is he as bad as Arafat and Sharon? He has just spent the past few months killing several thousand totally innocent Afghan civilians.

    If you refuse to differentiate between deliberately targetting civilians(the Pales/Al-Queda) and killing them mistakenly(Israel/US/UK) while trying to get at the terrorists then you must class Bush, Blair and all the alliance leaders as terrorists.</STRONG>

    I think theres a huge difference between a planned deliberate attack than what Sharon does. He inflames the Palestinitans to attack them - not saying I approve of what they do, but Sharon certainly doesnt help matters.
    If he were to try and work with them - respect their differences instead of restricting every movement they make and bulldozing their homes, we'd see less and less news reports of attacks at Pizza shops and night clubs.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I challenge you to find a single instance of America deliberately targeting civilian targets with the sole intention of causing maximum civlian casualties.
    Erm, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, Vietnam. Different circumstances I know but part of the American ethos of how to conduct modern warfare that arose from WW2
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Toadborg:
    <STRONG>
    Erm, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, Vietnam. Different circumstances I know but part of the American ethos of how to conduct modern warfare that arose from WW2</STRONG>

    Dresden was us, leave the Yanks out of it and stop stealing our own glory.

    (can anyone smell the irony??)

    The second world war was a long time ago, and much of it was fought using tactics and battle plans dating back thousdands of years. The key to victory is to subdue the civilian population and to halt industrial output.
    In the 40's, RAF high command's main concern was to destroy the German will. 50 years on we have discovered that the mass slaughter of civilians can't do much to stop a mobilised army, especially if the troops in that army find out that they have nothing left to live for. Imagine during the cold war, there are a couple of battallions of British troops in Germany. They find out that every major city in Britain has been destroyed. They have no way of getting home, and just over the horizon they will come across soviet territory. What would you do??

    However now, we have sophisticated weaponry, that can be targetted on specific targets. granted they go wrong once in a while, but 10 civilians is nothing compared to the numbers that would be killed by couple of b-52's flying overhead.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Erm, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden, Vietnam. Different circumstances I know but part of the American ethos of how to conduct modern warfare that arose from WW2

    Sorry I should probably have refined the search parameters for certain people. <IMG alt="image" SRC="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

    WW2 and Vietnam, examples of modern warfare? LOL. Can you see any western nation firebombing a city today? I dont think so.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Depends how you define 'modern', I was thinking of modern in the sense of civilians being bombed from the air. Despite the level of technology the recent wars in Afghanistan and Yugoslavia have shown that large numbers of civilians will be killed because mistakes are still made.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toad,

    Warfare has changed massively since even the 80s. Large numbers of civilian casualties are just not acceptable in todays western world.
    Despite the level of technology the recent wars in Afghanistan and Yugoslavia have shown that large numbers of civilians will be killed because mistakes are still made.

    Again, that is a very different thing from deliberately going after those civilians.
Sign In or Register to comment.