How does the West win the 'War on Terror'?

[hedgehog]

In reading some of what I wrote last night, I feel I need to clairify a few points. First, in no way do I condone violence perpetrated by terrorists. As to the number of times the word 'jihad' appears, I imagine that it appears as often as tales of violence, and war appear in the Old Testament. Religions worldwide all claim to be of peace, but one only needs to flip a book on world history to see how religion and war have been entangled for years.
Should events which transpired almost 1000 years ago excuse violence today, no of course not. The reason I wrote so much historical background is that from my experience with people of Middle Eastern origin, this history is ingrained in them from an early age. Their view of the West is not the freedoms provided by West, but only the worst aspects of our culture. Education, alieviating economic pressures and cultural exchange, IMO are the only long-term solution which can hope to end terrorism.

 

[McRocket]

In addition to executing the Terrorist (as in London), round up his whole family and execute them. I know that sound barbaric, but the message is simple, Every time a Suicide bomber straps on a pack of Explosives, An Iraqi Terrorist kidnaps a Civilian or a soldier and publicly executes them, They risk the lives of their mothers, Fathers, Brothers, sisters, wives & Children etc.... If he hits you with a stone, hit him and his, with a fucking big rock!!!

You are going to kill the entire families of the terrorists. Alright.

-WHat constitues a terrorist? Someone that actually committed an act? Or just someone that tried to commit an act? What about someone that was convicted of trying to commit an act but denies they ever did it? What about someone that swears up and down that they will one day commit an act of terror, but has done nothing yet?
You are saying that all of their families should be killed?
Well, let's just take the families of those that actually committed an act. How are you going to kill their families? What if their families live in other countries? Are you going to send hit squads into these countries to assassinate these family members? What if their governments expressly refuse to let them in? You are going to violate their borders on an ongoing basis to do this?
And what if a close relative of one of these terrorists is a high ranking political or financial or spiritual figure? You are going to assasinate some vice president because his brother committed a terrorist act?
And let's say the whole family lives in your country. What do you do? DO you round them up and arrest them and execute them? Or do you kill them in their homes and places of work?
Are you going to kill the sick and elderly? Are you going to kill children? 2 year old's? Babies?
You are going to assasinate a baby?

Something tells me all of this will do nothing to stop terrorism and in fact make the terrorists job of recruitment MUCH easier. Plus you would probably piss off ALOT of the Western world as well.

I think more responsibility MAYBE should be put on to the families - but your idea is, imo, going WAY, way too far.

 

[McRocket]

4. To prevent future attacks, I recall the words of one of America's Founding Fathers, Benjamin Franklin, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." It is the amazing freedom of self-determination which truly seperates the West from the rest of the world. In each of our countries we face a decision, how do we keep our citizenry safe? I would say that without doubt the most important change we can persue is a clear and consistant policy in the Middle East. Acknowledge the fact that the Israeli government is not faultless, and that they are equally responsible for the deaths of innocent palestinians, as the suicide bombers are for the deaths of innocent israelis. Challenge the House of Saud, and all other regimes to make further democratic changes. On the homefront, and abroad, an active intelligence community capable of working with law-enforcement not in competition is needed. We must retain the moral high-ground, our we are surely lost. We should be above torture. I recognize that these people we have captured are not "good-guys," but what do we gain by debasing our own values. A nation of laws does not hold criminals in communicato, rather we charge, convict and sentence.

What he said...lol.

Another stellar post from Hedgehog ('Dinnsdale?!'). All of your points. Who needs college when we have Hedgehog.

QBall would be proud (I feel).

 

[McRocket]

My suggestions would be:

basically do what Hedgehog wrote. That is the best, most practical way - imo.

But I tend to be a man of extremes, so...(and I did not think all this until today)

1) Iraq is finished as a country. Split it up. The Kurds get their own country and the other two (or three) factions get theirs. Split it up along traditional ethnic borders.
The only reason (imo) the Kurds don't leave is because Turkey would go ballistic (and maybe Russia too). Turkey has a large Kurdish population that wants independence. IF the Kurds get their own country then Turkey is worried that their own Kurds would want one too.
But Turkey wants to join the EU. ANd they can't expect to get in if they go around invading countries. So the US should keep troops along the Turkish/Kurd border (the Kurds LOVE the Americans apparently) to guard it and give the Kurds their own country. Plus it gives America a base of operations in the middle east - which apparently they REALLY want.
ANd then, if the other factions agree by a vote (and why would they not?), they will get their own countries as well. After the countires have been established (as fast as possible) then they can ask the U.S. to leave anytime they want. And the U.S. MUST go.
That would help end the civil war. But it might start a regional one. SO be it. If they want to kill each other - let them. IF the World gets pissed off enough they can send a Muslim UN force in (but ONLY Muslims).
Iraq (like Yugoslavia before it) is an ethnic mess. IT canot survive peacefully right now. Let it die. It's just a name. Why does Iraq have to stay together?

2) Israel. The American assistance to Israel has made the U.S. more enemies (imo) then anything else they ever did in the Middle East. ANd it has to stop. THe Palestinians are being treated unfairly and they MUST have their own country.
So, America should stop all aid to Israel (to the tune of 3 billion U.S. a year - most of it military, I believe) until Israel agrees to let the Palestinians go and have their own state. Keep the wall up if you like. But let the Palestinians go. They are treated like natives were treated by AMericans long ago - very badly. And AMerica is supporting it (like it or not) and it has made ALOT of people mad - as it should.

3) Put a tax (a very small one) on all imported finished goods from countries that are not democratically run. Yes, that will include China. Not such a big tax that it kills all imports from them. But large enough to send a message to all such countires. Enough to piss them off, but not enough to REALLY get them mad. And enough to tell the repressed people of the world that their voices ARE being heard. It could also help domestic manufacturers in North America and Europe.
Also, a total ban or a big tax would just make those suffering people suffer further. ANd poverty is probably their number one problem, not the U.S.. If they weren't so poor - I doubt they would be SO pissed off.
No, the US won't do it. And yes, it would not include oil - yet. But it would send a clear warning to all monarchies/dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, etc..
In addition, cut all military aid or arms sales to these countries.

And in terms of dealing with the terrorists themselves? I am still pondering.

 

[georges]

2) Israel. The American assistance to Israel has made the U.S. more enemies (imo) then anything else they ever did in the Middle East. ANd it has to stop. THe Palestinians are being treated unfairly and they MUST have their own country.
So, America should stop all aid to Israel (to the tune of 3 billion U.S. a year - most of it military, I believe) until Israel agrees to let the Palestinians go and have their own state. Keep the wall up if you like. But let the Palestinians go. They are treated like natives were treated by AMericans long ago - very badly. And AMerica is supporting it (like it or not) and it has made ALOT of people mad - as it should.

I will react to that point. Can you trust a government that has no authority and no force to face to terrorism and is corrupted? I am clearly talking about the actual Palestinian government which two years ago was lead by a pig called Yasser Arafat who had more blood on his hands than something else. America had always ennemies in Middle East. Libya with Kadhafi, his hq was bombed in 1986, Iran in 1979, Irak in 1989 and from 2003 till now. Probably Palestinians are lacking a trustworthy government, this is why U.S.A trusts more Israel than Palestine and it is easily understandable.

 

[McRocket]

I will react to that point. Can you trust a government that has no authority and no force to face to terrorism and is corrupted? I am clearly talking about the actual Palestinian government which two years ago was lead by a pig called Yasser Arafat who had more blood on his hands than something else. America had always ennemies in Middle East. Libya with Kadhafi, his hq was bombed in 1986, Iran in 1979, Irak in 1989 and from 2003 till now. Probably Palestinians are lacking a trustworthy government, this is why U.S.A trusts more Israel than Palestine and it is easily understandable.

Let's say that you give the Palestinians their own country. Surely there reason for bombing Israel would go down. Less of them would be angry. Would some still bomb Israel? maybe. But surely it would be far better then now. They bomb Israel to gain independence. They get support from the Arab world to gain independence. SUrely if they get it they would have less hatred of Israel. And less reason to bomb them.
And if they kept bombing them - they would surely get far less support form the Arab world. And any worldwide sympathy would evaporate.

And besides. How would giving them their own country possible make things any worse?
And it would make Israel look better to get more support. ANd if the bombings continues then Israel would be right in saying they were being attacked by another country and would be much more acceptable if they went in to stop them then what they are doing now.

 

[Anonymous2]

You give the Palestinians their own country? In order to reward them for decades of terror without any limits? For bombing school buses and nurseries? By doing that you not only honor the past atrocities committed by the Palestinians, you also create an incentive for every fuckwad out there who thinks you can achieve something by killing civilians. Remember what happened in Beslan, where Islamic fanatics took hundreds of children hostage in that school? They allegedly fight for independence, too.

Truth is, this hasn't got all that much to do with the original quest for independence any more. I've already said that in another thread. It is well possible that some of today's terrorists originally wanted to fight for their peoples' independence. But they were infiltrated and their groups were invaded by religious fanatics, pretty much what happened in Iraq too, by the way.

I like your idea about putting an extra tax on these countries' goods though. Interestingly enough, the Egyptians didn't really care about the worldwide terrorist attacks but cried bloody hell when that bomb exploded in Sharm-el-Shejk the other day, because it's the high season and they expect hundreds of thousands of Europeans to come and spend their vacations in their country. So money seems to be a good means to achieve lasting effect, though it's not going to solve the problem.

 

[McRocket]

You give the Palestinians their own country? In order to reward them for decades of terror without any limits? For bombing school buses and nurseries? By doing that you not only honor the past atrocities committed by the Palestinians, you also create an incentive for every fuckwad out there who thinks you can achieve something by killing civilians. Remember what happened in Beslan, where Islamic fanatics took hundreds of children hostage in that school? They allegedly fight for independence, too.

Truth is, this hasn't got all that much to do with the original quest for independence any more. I've already said that in another thread. It is well possible that some of today's terrorists originally wanted to fight for their peoples' independence. But they were infiltrated and their groups were invaded by religious fanatics, pretty much what happened in Iraq too, by the way.

I like your idea about putting an extra tax on these countries' goods though. Interestingly enough, the Egyptians didn't really care about the worldwide terrorist attacks but cried bloody hell when that bomb exploded in Sharm-el-Shejk the other day, because it's the high season and they expect hundreds of thousands of Europeans to come and spend their vacations in their country. So money seems to be a good means to achieve lasting effect, though it's not going to solve the problem.

All I can say about the Palestinians is that these have been at most, what 1,000 suicide bombers. And that total is way too high I suspect. So the entire Palestinian population (over 5,000,000 I think) should be punished for the acts of a messed up few?
And I will say it again. How could giving them their own country make things worse?

 

[epic]

1. The holy war has been started and it was not from the Western countries. As a matter of fact Western countries have always tried to accomodate the Muslims and their views and tried to bring them into the center of their societies. Have you ever been to Germany and have you seen how your fellow countrymen live there? How they enjoy every right and priviledge and freedom the Western countries stand for? And how they don't care about it? How they live in their "areas" which sometimes the Germans don't dare setting foot in, because the Arabs brought all their sets of rules with them and are free to live their life the way they know it from back home, including abusive behavior towards women, killings for the sake of "honor" and so on? They don't give a rat's ass about integration into these societies, although the West does all for them it does for their own citizens - and a little extra, so that the 9/11 murderers could find their place in Hamburg to plot their attacks. Now you differentiate between normal and radical muslims and I see a difference there alright. Still, if I as a Westerner would go to some place Arab and without any regard to the existing social rules tried to pursue my way of living as I know nit from back home, would I be welcome to do it? So what side always tried to prevent disharmonies between the religions/cultures? What side decided to kill members of the other without reason?

2. The majority of board members responding here have not been Americans.

3. Excuse me? Is this your "non-radical" Muslim view? If it is, you have given me all the more reason to advocate a strict, powerful way of action as described above.

At first, i'm NOT arabian.. i'm turkish.. i don't know about what arabian people do.. i don't care either..
western countries never "tried to accomodate the Muslims and their views and tried to bring them into the center of their societies".. they see them as "manpower", nothing more..
in history, minorities are always seen as "filthy population".. just like in the usa, to the blacks (past time) and in my own country, to the kurds.. 80% of my citizens hate kurds.. but i don't think this way.. because i'm aware of that these are all consequences of under-education and poorness (which both related to each other).. our country never supported kurds seeing them as a thread.. because of this half of the kurds are poor criminals, and the other half is terrorists who are active in the northern iraqian/south eastern turkish district.. i never judge any single of them because of their actions..
do you know how they become terrorists? at first they are simply poor (i mean very very poor; they live in caves, no kidding).. the main instinct of a living thing is to survive you know.. one day a man comes and says: "here is food, here is home, be on my side".. do i need to tell more.. ok, this was a rare example for the radical muslim terrorists..
have you ever heard of "hashishies" (that was where the word "assasin" comes from).. the old religious order based on assasin soldiers taking their will from hashish.. when they smoke it, they are soldiers ready to die for what the leader says.. just same as these terrorists.. the common thing is "brainwashing".. you can't believe how it's easy to wash brains of masses in today's modern world..

i don't think there will be any "winner" in this damn war.. the both side have already lost..

 

[Anonymous2]

All I can say about the Palestinians is that these have been at most, what 1,000 suicide bombers. And that total is way too high I suspect. So the entire Palestinian population (over 5,000,000 I think) should be punished for the acts of a messed up few?

Actually, yes. Because I don't see the other 4,999,000 take a united stand against the terrorist acts committed in their name.

 

[Anonymous2]

At first, i'm NOT arabian.. i'm turkish.. i don't know about what arabian people do.. i don't care either..
western countries never "tried to accomodate the Muslims and their views and tried to bring them into the center of their societies".. they see them as "manpower", nothing more..

Right. That's why there are about ten mosques in every French, British, German, Italian,... city. That's why they have their own Islam religion lessons in public paid schools. That's why they are free to get together and breed out ideas to destroy the very society that has always tried to find a way to live alongside the Muslims which were originally (this is about 50, 60 years and therefore at least two generations back) invited to these countries as workmen.

in history, minorities are always seen as "filthy population".. just like in the usa, to the blacks (past time) and in my own country, to the kurds.. 80% of my citizens hate kurds.. but i don't think this way.. because i'm aware of that these are all consequences of under-education and poorness (which both related to each other).. our country never supported kurds seeing them as a thread.. because of this half of the kurds are poor criminals, and the other half is terrorists who are active in the northern iraqian/south eastern turkish district.. i never judge any single of them because of their actions..

I believe you'll see your contradiction without me having to point it out. But both of these points, the one above and this one aren't what the thread is about. I simply tried to talk about how the West has accepted and even to a certain degree invited the Muslim radicalism and that was to show who it was who started this whole holy war crap.

do you know how they become terrorists? at first they are simply poor (i mean very very poor; they live in caves, no kidding).. the main instinct of a living thing is to survive you know.. one day a man comes and says: "here is food, here is home, be on my side".. do i need to tell more.. ok, this was a rare example for the radical muslim terrorists..
have you ever heard of "hashishies" (that was where the word "assasin" comes from).. the old religious order based on assasin soldiers taking their will from hashish.. when they smoke it, they are soldiers ready to die for what the leader says.. just same as these terrorists.. the common thing is "brainwashing".. you can't believe how it's easy to wash brains of masses in today's modern world..

i don't think there will be any "winner" in this damn war.. the both side have already lost..

I'm with you on all of that. I know most of the acting persons in these attacks don't have an idea what they're getting into. This doesn't hold true for all of them though, if you remember the pilots of 9/11.

 

[Peter South]

Kill em' all

I agree with this post of Bimbo ! Once and for all let the US drop it's MORE advanced Nuclar/Atomic Bomb that it has in it's possession in Iraq and Afghanistan . . . reminiscing the dropping of the A-Bomb in Japan during the 2nd World War. The US is always in the fad of starting a war and never ending it, just like in Vietnam . . . apparently, what the US have experienced there is just like happening again in Iraq !

 

[epic]

Right. That's why there are about ten mosques in every French, British, German, Italian,... city. That's why they have their own Islam religion lessons in public paid schools. That's why they are free to get together and breed out ideas to destroy the very society that has always tried to find a way to live alongside the Muslims which were originally (this is about 50, 60 years and therefore at least two generations back) invited to these countries as workmen.

these mosques and lessons are all must in a usual society.. i didn't say anything like "west limits the religious freedom of muslims", i appreciate that.. it is same for jews and christians in our country, too.. but those muslims have no relation with the terrorism.. they're just usual citizens.. how do you blame a mass for the fault of one?

I'm with you on all of that. I know most of the acting persons in these attacks don't have an idea what they're getting into. This doesn't hold true for all of them though, if you remember the pilots of 9/11.

i'm happy to see that we are both agree on the most important point..

 

[McRocket]

Actually, yes. Because I don't see the other 4,999,000 take a united stand against the terrorist acts committed in their name.

SO what exactly would the Palestinians have to do in your eyes before you would grant them what all humans deserve - freedom?

So you would deny millions of innocent civilians their freedom just because they have not condemned these attacks more strongly?
If so, I fear you do not understand what it is like to be in their shoes.

They are a poor, homeless and unhappy people. ANd they have been so for over 50 years. Tell me why granting them a country would make the situation worse?

 

[hedgehog]

Wow I've got to say I'm really saddened by the direction this thread has taken. For Mr. Peter South, and you alone I have some pictures I think that you should look at available at http://www.nvccom.co.jp/abomb/giseie.html. Once again, I am in no way trying to hide the fact that the Japanese Army was responsible for numerous atrocities in the Pacific theatre of WWII, but I ask, are you willing to allow the deaths of women and children to rest on your conscious? I am not.

The accusation that all practitioners of a certain religion must be held responsible for the actions of a few extemists is simply repugnant. We do not blame all Christians for the murders committed by Eric Rudolph. Because the BTK killer Dennis Rader [see this link http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/28/victims.son/] was a deacon in his church, does that mean all Lutherens are serial killers.

As to the nationality of the posters for this thread, I would assert that nationality is irrelevent. Terrorists use America as the focus of their hatred, but that is simply because of our visibility. The question posed, rightly, was "How does the West win the 'War on Terror'?" The British, the French, the Spanish, the Canadians, the Italians, the Germans, the Dutch, the Flemish, the Aussies, we all have a stake in this.

 

[McRocket]

I agree with this post of Bimbo ! Once and for all let the US drop it's MORE advanced Nuclar/Atomic Bomb that it has in it's possession in Iraq and Afghanistan . . . reminiscing the dropping of the A-Bomb in Japan during the 2nd World War. The US is always in the fad of starting a war and never ending it, just like in Vietnam . . . apparently, what the US have experienced there is just like happening again in Iraq !

Kill 'em all? Nuke Mecca? Kill all of their families? In all honesty, some of you people just ever so slightly disgust me. And I am assuming that most of you are only half serious.
Was I this incredibly ignorant and/or naive and/or angry when I was your ages? I am not sure.

Clearly I have picked the wrong place to expect a rational discussion of this.

Any that would seriously suggest these things are either too ignorant, too unhappy or both.

But, what should one expect from a porn chat room? My mistake.

I think it is time I moved on.

I wish you all well. It's been fun.

Goodbye.

 

[hedgehog]

Sadly, Mcrocket, the nuke Mecca idea is something some right-wing radical Congressman in the US has proposed http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/18/congressman.muslims.ap/. I'd like to pretend that this short sighted policy of pre-emption put for by President Bush is an anomoly, but I no longer can. You know any policy based upon the argument that, "he was going to hit me first," does not pass the test in my book.

 

[guy]

ok, I just came here to surf porn...but since we're on the topic...gotta say...I truly believe its the Liberal point of view that will be the killer of this countrys freedom. Its that damn wishy washy "cant hurt they're feelings" crap that is going to get us all killed if we keep it up. Those of you that say "Killem all"...your probably right..thats just about the only way your truly going to rid the world of terror...drop a nuke on mecca...scare the shit out of them....the people we are fighting have got to have an IQ of a fence post! They're trying to "win" but at the same time..every one of they're "suicide bombers" goes out and blows himself up...now they're short another man! Seriously though....this country needs to get its shit in a pile and go out there...drop a nuke, and give the land to people that care about life, and want to live in peace.....ever since BC times, before america was even around...those fuckers have been at war over something...I say...fuckem...we dont need anything to do with people like that...These "Liberals" arent liberating a damn thing...they take away all our damn right like freedom of speech (wathc out...you might offend someone), and there so many issues like that in this country that Democrats cant seem to have any logic on...like gun control....they say" we need more laws"...well, what the fuck is another law going to do if ya can even enforce the ones you already have? and how is taking guns away from law abiding people going to lower crime rate? Criminals will still have guns( thats whay they're call OUTLAWS..ya dumb shit...they dont follow the law!!!) we need to start tightening the nuse on criminals here and over seas. You watch the news tonight...they'll be on there bitchin and moaning about how many innocent lives have been lost because of U.S. forces...well why dont we hear about Sadam INSANE???That fucker killed his own people on a daily basis....never see that on the news. I say fuck liberalism...its time to stop feeling sorry for ever fuckin thing that walks, and face reality...if we keep sitting here on our asses debating if we should be over there or not..more of those "suicide" fuckers are going to attack us. I say....THANK YOU MR. BUSH!!! Granted,, maybe not the best president we've had...but what the hell would kerry have done??huhh?? more of those damn Negotiations??? Try to talk them into giving up???WTF??? That fucker would have got us all killed.

 

[guy]

"he was going to hit me first,"




he already did...rememebr USS COLE??? FIRST TRADE CTR BOMBING? does 9/11 ring a bell???

 

[hedgehog]

No Guy you totally misunderstand me, I am totally in favor of going after Osama Bin Laden. The resolution giving the President the authority to use the force to do so is still in effect. In fact it pisses me off when the CIA director states that we know where he is, but because of politics we can't get him http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/20/goss.bin.laden/. Why are we protecting the Pakistan's Mushaaraf, who gained power in a military coup? I reject that assumption that we cannot take action.

But Iraq had nothing to do with the USS Cole, nor the US Embassy in Kenya, the first WTC bombing nor 9/11. Those were Al Qaeda operations, and believe me the full force of American power should come to bear on those responsible. This is something that many people in the United States refuse to accept so allow me to state it boldly,

There was no Al Qaeda/Iraq connection
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5223932/

There were no WMDs in Iraq
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7634313/

Please for your own sake, investigate the Downing Street Memo http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html, which show definitevly, that the American public was misled during the build-up to the war,

"C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

Ask yourself which is better, a crazy man isolated in his own country, or a quagmire in which provides the perfect breeding grounds for more terrorists. The claim is often made that we are fighting the terrorists "over there" so we don't have to fight them "over here." I doubt many British citizens would by that argument now.