Subject:
|
Re: Vote against/for...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 09:49:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
894 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> 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.
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 Britain, Armata Corsa in France, Red Army
Faction in Italy/Germany... and both parties in the ME (where the discussion
on "who started it all" is as prolific as knowing what came first, the egg
or the chicken).
> > 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.
Proselythism is a constant of practically all religions. And BTW, there is
no ground in the Khoran to actively pursue murder of non-muslims - the only
statement regards those who fight the Muslim faith "per se" (ie, crusaders
in the 12th century). Please do not misread that Book, like some do for
their own purposes - that would be playing their game.
> 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).
Please quote Allah, in his exact terms. Otherwise, withdraw the statement.
> 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.
Aren't those two sentences contradictory? (ie, they hate us for being
different, but it is not within us that we'll find explanation for it)
I'm not saying islamic extremists are good guys. NO! All I'm saying is that
they use *the cover* of Islam to achieve their political purposes (the
leaders), at the expense of the average pawn (the brainwashed terrorist). It
is *unspecific* of Islam as a technique - it is only far more obvious in
that case, given that one sixth of the World population follows that Religion...
Pedro
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Vote against/for...
|
| (...) The two atomic bomb raids were not the only US bomb raids on Japan during the second world war. US low level incendiary bomb raids started much earlier. The aim of the night time bomb raids were the civillian population, which largely lived in (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Vote against/for...
|
| (...) Not the believe like us or die variety. That may be been en vogue 100s of years ago for Christianity, but Christianity grew out of those dark times, and continues to change with time (although the basic message is the same). Islam has no (...) (22 years ago, 12-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Vote against/for...
|
| (...) 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 (...) (22 years ago, 12-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
|
|
|
|
