Terrorism

[MK]

.

I think that Bush honestly believed that Saddam was a nacient threat to US interests, despite evidence that Iraq was a pipsqueak nation.

Actually, all the intelligence agencies of our allies were all singing the same song about how Iraq was hidding arms and had a nuclear program. All of which was breaking the UN treaty Saddam signed.

That seems to have been forgoten along the way.

 

[jamespowers]

Another thing is that we waited and telegraphed the blow for so long that the WMDs could have been hidden in Syria, Iran or a number of other countries before we got there. After a year of saber rattling I think it might have given them time to take the stuff to the North Pole!
The other thing that has not been widely discussed is the meetings Saddam had with the lieutenants of Bin Laden. He allowed them to train on Iraqi soil and even gave them money. The money that came from the European Oil for Food programs that greatly benefitted Germany, France and Russia. Is it any wonder that they wouldn't help us and were in fact contrary to their own safety interests? That cheap oil being cut off might have had a bit of a strangle hold on their self preservation reflex. War for Oil indeed.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

The RAF was the good guys. And drastic times call for drastic measures. This is an imperfect world. I guess that you could also argue that the US was a terrorist by sending the Enola Gay to Bomb bomb Japan. We have to consider the greater good too. Then we have to ask, "What is the greater good?" well, it's not despotism and enslavery. It's not genocide. And I'll agree with some, we should have done more in Africa and Yugoslavia than we did. But,oh yeah, that was when we had a different President.

My point wasn't that the RAF wasn't the "good guys," just that your definition of terrorism seemed to fit them perfectly, just as it also fit our B-29 raids on Japan as you say.

Saying it isn't terrorism because we were the "good guys" makes the whole definition of terrorism sort of useless doesn't it? It would make the word terrorism akin to the word enemy. Nobody thinks of themselves as the "enemy," the enemy is always the other guy. Just as the terrorist is always the one trying to harm them, not the person themself harming others.

 

[Phil_in_CS]

a couple of points....

But with the Y2K-BS there wasn't anything at all to be prepared for-
it was purely BS hype for a mass moneymaker-
-unfortunately people believed it... others made a killing.
:cheers1:
B
T

As a programmer who was working on this at the time, it wasn't total BS; there was a real problem with most programs, that in some cases would have a catastrophic result. But it was a known problem, with a known solution, and a known deadline. That kind of problem just takes money to fix, so money was spent and it was fixed.

That said, I grew up in a Texas coastal refinery town, so between the plants and the hurricanes my family always kept supplies around in case we needed to split suddenly. Being prepared, without being crazy about it, makes total sense.

on the Main Topic of this thread, I saw on the TV last weekend the Queen visiting some guy in the hospital. He was pretty cut up in the face, but sitting up and talking. He said something to the effect of "I'm very pleased to meet you, Your Majesty, I wish it were under nicer circumstances." She laughed, and replied something like "When I was a little girl, I would go around and visit people in the hospital injured when the enemy came and bombed our city. Now I am an old lady, and I'm going around visiting people in the hospital after the enemy has come and bombed our city."

I think she left unsaid "if the nazi's couldn't take us, these kooks don't have a chance."

 

[Matt Deckard]

Phil, that is great point you made about what the Queen said.

By the by, great avatar.

 

[Biltmore Bob]

Vlad, terror is, I guess, a part of war. However, the Good Guys are morally superior to the Bad Guys. I know that that may be a new concept for some to understand. I talked earlier of the Greater Good. Sometimes we must weigh the greater good against casualties during wartime. I believe that is what the Allies were faced with during WWII.

Oh, and Vlad, The only people that hated the RAF were the bad guys. Not the people they were defending and protecting, as is the case of the terrorists from the Middle East. Most of the people in Iran and Afganistan hate and fear the Taliban, etc...

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

That is just my point. Terror is an essential component of warfare. I just think your definition of "terrorism" needs a slight modification. "Terrorism" as we know it, is the use of force as a coercive tool for change on the part of sub-national or independant groups. The RAF and USAAF killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, but I would not say those organizations are terrorist organizations simply because they are military forces of national governments.

Thus you can have two acts which share the same moral weight (killing innocent women and children with bombs) but which are not both acts of terrorism, because one was committed by a sub-national group and the other committed by a nation-state.

The rather dubious moral distinction as seen above is why I believe a "War on Terror" is such an absurd idea.

 

[Biltmore Bob]

I sort of agree...

War on terror, I reckon, is the easiest way to say it. I guess we could say "The Current War Against Despotism, Enslavement, Genocide, Rape, Unecessary Imprisonment, Etc... and You Hit Us First."

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

I am not a particular fan of GWB, but I take exception to the statement that he was not the justly elected president of the United States.

He won the election legally under United States law, which does necessarily award the presidency to the winner of the popular vote. Many people may disagree with that system, but the fact is that then and now it is the legal system of the United States.

 

[BellyTank]

I'm sorry to hear that Vlad- nothing personal.
The constitution seems to be under constant 'modification' to suit the will of the Government- under the disguise of protecting the nation, etc- tough times call for tough measures- like re-writing constitutions. Ever seen the bit about voting rights?

OK, is it fair to say at least that the Florida vote was a complete fiasco and voting joke?
Many projected non-Bush voters being disallowed from the electoral roles under the 'felon' umbrella- also ex-felons and 'suspected felons' and associates and even individuals with similar social security numbers, last names and addresses- just to boost the number of disallowed...? that's just the beginning.
Of course, this demographic included and summarily excluded from voting, many African Americans (trad. non-Bush) - some 'clever' electoral engineering and demo-tweaking.
Just like you can cut unemployment figures by putting them all in the Army, Navy and USMC- it's great for the statistics!
And of course the fiasco of the false win being breaking voting-night news, before the votes were even counted...
The whole Florida thing is just too fishy- how much of the vote was 'fishy'?

True, the majority of American voters voted against him anyway...
I was talking about in his 1st term as Supreme Court case winner, or 'honorary President' (hold the honour)of course-
Once he'd gone to war, of course he'd get the 2nd vote- he had to go to war- obviously to gain more time for the henchment to do their evil.

Read what divers sources have said about the suspicious voting and dodgy election result- even if you disbelieve or forget 3/4s of what you discover it's still criminal.

B
T

 

[MK]

.

BT you are getting so over the top that most people are going to dismiss you as being reasonable or logical.

 

[farnham54]

BT-

There is a big difference between viewing things with a reasonable degree of skepticism or doubt and looking for evidence that proves a point.

If you REALLY want truth; or near as possible to truth, you must look at ALL verifiable sources of fact, not just ones that support a pre-disposed idea. You cannot assume that anything and everything that proves you wrong is, in fact, false information. Just as you cannot assume that everything that proves you correct is completley accurate and verified information.

Now, I'm not saying 'You' as in you specifically BT, but I did get the impression from your previous post that you have discounted all 'pro' war information and reasons for the war that don't make GWB look like he is "evil".

Not trying to start Conflict BT, and no offence is intended. Just healthy debate.

Cheers

Craig

 

[jamespowers]

Whoa! This is so over the top that it doesn't make sense. We have someone who is not even a citizen of the US telling us not only what we should think but how our system runs even if they have not voted in it once? Really is this true?
I don't invent things about the leaders of Europe or manufacture stories about them nor would I believe anything that did not come from a source that I cannot verify myself. The president was elected just as happened 100 years before through the electorial college when a Democrat president was chosen. Whee!
The Florida vote was a Fiasco because of the Democrat counties trying to corrupt the system and win the election by doing what they always do---take it to court and question the constitutionality when you lose. You never hear about all the military votes (traditional Republican voters) that were not allowed to be counted but they were not. Felons are restricted from voting in the US. I do not know how it is in Europe but here they do not vote. If they wanted to vote then they could have refrained from a life of crime. The problems with dupilcate social security numbers and the like goes back to another fact that we do not allow illegal aliens or non-citizens to vote. It is just the way it is. Either become a citizen legally or don't vote. Simple. Criminal acts seem to be coming from the other side from where I stand---in the US.
The liberals rewrite the Constitution here not the conservatives. They try to find things in the Constitution that is not in it. Ever hear of the American Civil Liberties Union? Do you think they have ever supported a Republican? The constitution is a strict dead document. Strict adherence to what it says literally is what is needed. Reliance on international law to make court decisions in the US is wrong but has been done.
Statisitics of unemployment? Seriously? This is coming from Europe where they have nearly 25% unemployment and you say the difference is because of the military? So the 20% difference is due to the military? Gee, I should be an even bigger military support than I already am.
Gee, I guess I have to agree with you. Saddam is not an evil creature. All of those Kurds gased themselves to make him look bad. Disidents cut out their own tongues, arms, legs and other apendages just to make him look evil as well. No, the Sainted Saddam was just merely misunderstood. We should just bring him right over him and let him fill the Supreme Court opening for chief justice.
Sure I also agree that we should not believe what our leaders tell us. It is impossible that Kofi Annon and his son used their positions to funnel money into their own bank accounts and business into his son's firm. No we shouldn't look at such evidence. I am sure France, Russia and Germany we just sending care packages through the UN for the Iraquis. They got the money for sure and Saddam wasn't building palaces. Those were actually hospitals for the sick and needy. His sons didn't have million dollar cars and homes. Those were ambulances and rest homes for the elderly where they got free health care and lodging. I am sure France, Germany and Russia were purely angelic in their motives and expected that their money was being used for humanitarian purposes. The 24% of France's population that is Muslim is also completely innocent and never raised a single dime for the terrorists either. They were sending that money to Al Queda for humanitarian reasons too. Those weren't for bombs.
The British also faked that subway bombing we just can't trust them. They did that just to increase public sentiment for the war. Tony Blair is a public relations genius. He is a leader that just can't be trusted.
This is all that you have to believe in order to discount everything that has happened. Now really is this what you want to believe? Ridiculous!

Regards to all,

J

 

[MK]

.

This thread has gotten pretty far from the subject of terrorist.

That is exactly what those who wish to kill us want.....to lose focus on them and bicker amoungst ourselves.

 

[Biltmore Bob]

Tony Blair is the only leader over there that I can name off the top of my head. I don't even know who the president, prime minister, or supreme potentate of Finland or Lapland or wherever Belly Tank's living. It seems that everybody everywhere knows the US President though. What I can't understand is the level of contempt that people foriegn to the US have for G Dubya. I don't agree with some of my Presidents policies, especially imigration and securing the borders. I support the war though. I truly believe that we would have had more incidents of violence had we not gone to war. And, by the way, Sadaam is evil and evil needs to be stopped. There is other evil and it needs to be stopped too. Look at N. Korea, I predict they will knuckle under any day now. When Kim dies I predict communism to fall over there. When Castro dies Cuba will once again be free also.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Major General Smedley D Butler, of the US Marines said in the early 1940s:

"I spent 33 years in the Marines. Most of my time being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenue in. I helped in the rape of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street."

This is a very well known quote and represents a very well known viewpoint.

While one could disagree with this viewpoint, for him artibtrarily to assert that a United States President could not order a military operation for financial gain and that this viewpoint is "illogical" proves only that he has to go back and review his Euclid.

 

[jamespowers]

That is exactly what those who wish to kill us want.....to lose focus on them and bicker amoungst ourselves.

That is exactly what they want and intend just as communists had their "useful idiots."
I have nothing more to add to the vicious cycle anyway.

Regards to all,

J

 

[Wild Root]

Over there, it's about 50/50. Not all over there hate us. We have done some good.

I have talked to a friend who is now married who served over there for a few years. He said it's not what most people thing it's like.

God Bless us all.

Root.

 

[swinggal]

I believe in keeping your mind open to all things. I rarely believe anything I see on the news and have been taught by my parents to question everything, which I think is a fine attribute to have. It's not hard to do a bit of digging yourself and you'll find that many of the things protrayed in history are not what they seem. But we only find out after the fact.

BT you are getting so over the top that most people are going to dismiss you as being reasonable or logical.

But BT also has the right to say whatever he wants. That is what freedom of speech is all about in a democracy. If you think he sounds crazy well that's fine but he has a right to his opinion. One thing that scares the sweet bejeesus out of me is when I hear Bush and his allies say, "If you disagree with us fighting the war on terror, then you side with the terrorists." What scare-mongering load of crap that is and it's certainly not a democratic thing to say by any means. I don't agree with war but it doesn't make me a terrorist.

 

[BellyTank]

James Powers and Bob, I said "Sadam IS an evil creature", so I don't know what you're on about...
So is it just the voting scandal that you're disagreeing with?

Terrorists attacked the US and GWB 'responded' by attacking somebody unrelated, somebody in the middle east, perhaps to satisfy public/political revenge and perhaps to secure other interests.

You don't seem to realise that the whole world cares and takes an interest in what the US is doing and why. Why shoudn't we, it's our world GWB is toying with and America is apparently a 'superpower', so is pretty dangerous.
He's your President, so of course it's instinctive to support him I guess...
Perhaps people in Europe are maybe more interested in World news than on your side of the globe and definitely in touch with what's going on in Europe anyway.

But to believe all that 'they' tell you is to fool yourself and everyone else.

As long as your ego's in charge, you'll have no interest in what's really going on.

And Bob, yes, many Americans are totally ignorant of Europe and the rest of the world- I guess America IS the World for many- america against the World it seems.

By the way Bob, I live in Denmark, but I'm in Stockholm right now.

It also seems like less and less of you are supporting the war against Iraquis too. When is enough enough?

B
T