Subject:
|
Re: Vote against/for...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 02:46:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
743 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> > Q: Whose reasoning for use of nuclear weapons do you trust more-- Iraq or
> > the US?
> Well, since I've publically stated I think their reasoning in WWII was nothing
> short of terrorism anyway (lets not go there again), I'd have to say "neither",
> especially with dubya at the helm.
I tell you, the word "terrorism" gets so over/misused. The purpose of
terrorism is to evoke fear in a GP for the purpose of swaying opinion. We
dropped the bombs on Japan to bring about a quick end to the war (that *they*
started BTW), not to frighten the Japanese people. There are distinctions here.
> Here's another question: Do you think that neutralizing all regimes that
> harbour terrorists (even if it were possible) would do anything to quell the
> anger and hatred which fuels terrorism? And if not, why is disarming /
> attacking Iraq considered a valid "battle" in the "war on terrorism"?
What you and the Left are failing to realize (and it is a fatal flaw) is the
reason for the violence perpetrated by muslim extremists. You assume that it
is in retaliation for something we did to them and that their reaction is, to
some degree, justified or explainable. That is your mistake.
Muslims extremists want non-Muslims either converted or dead. Period. End of
story. Any other attempt to explain their behavior is your rational mind
trying to make sense of their actions when in fact there is none. Sure Muslim
extremists hate Americans, but they hate Australians, too, and would just as
soon slit *your* throat if they felt it furthered their cause. But I know what
you are thinking: "He's looney, because *we* never did anything to *them* to
warrant their wrath!" Sorry, but unless you are willing to convert to their
brand of Islamic extremism, you are part of the problem, not part of the
solution, and therefore you must die (as ordered by Allah himself).
Their anger and hatred is about you and me differing from them, not about
anything we ever did to them. This is what rational-minded people are finding
so hard to fathom, but the sooner we get past looking at ourselves for
explanations as fuel for their behavior, the sooner we can effectively deal
with leaders who teach/promote/exploit this hatred.
-John
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Vote against/for...
|
| (...) Actually, the bomb was dropped to scare the Japanese, thus ending the war. I don't see that as terrorism, though - terrorism implies a much more prolonged chain of events than a couple weeks in August '45. Terrorism is ETA in Spain, IRA in (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
| (...) Well, since I've publically stated I think their reasoning in WWII was nothing short of terrorism anyway (lets not go there again), I'd have to say "neither", especially with dubya at the helm. Here's another question: Do you think that (...) (22 years ago, 11-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
161 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
