Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My impression from reading your posts, is that you believe that there are people "out there" who "want to get you." I'm sorry you feel that way.
Huh? Out to get ME? I am not sure how you got that from my posts. While it is undoubtedly true that Islamic extremists are interested in attacking western targets, I do not feel personally targeted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahigherway
As for me, no one is "out to get me." I've done nothing to offend anyone, and I don't feel the need to "defend" myself or others.
Now here is your niavete on display. Islamic extremists believe the fact that you do not follow Islam is offensive. No need to be defensive, simply be aware there are people who want you dead because you do not believe as they do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahigherway
In reality, it is we who are the ones invading them, and we are killing mostly civilians. Now, in a civilized country, people who are accused of a crime are brought to trial, and the evidence is evaluated. But that is not what is happening now. We are invading countries who do not want us there, and we're making more enemies than friends.
Invading who? Afgahanistan had no functioning government, thus the rise of the Taliban. I do not think those that hate us could hate us any more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahigherway
So that is why the "war on terrorism" won't work. Invading other countries is not the solution. That is precisely why we need to learn to negotiate.
- Maybe some people can't get along in the world without an enemy to attack..
Peace,
brian
You keep insisting on something that isn't so. We are clearly winning the war on terror. Their leadership is decimated, their money has dried up and their safe havens are shrinking and there hasn't been another attack on the US. If this is losing, I hope we continue to lose for a long time.
Brian- Thank you for a thoughtful and sane proposal.
Not that I consider some other ways acceptable. IMHO Sharia Law is an abomination and completely unacceptable. I also realize that without killing ALL its adherents it will be around for quite a long time.
The way we will overcome this culture is not through force but through example. We must maintain an actual, and not just nominal, society with real freedom for all. They can see through our “Freedom for those that can afford it” farce better than we are able to do.
Shorebaby - Thank you for post as well. Indeed the extremist Muslims do not live or fight by our rules. The fact that the "Leadership" of al-Qaida has been killed will not reduce their effectiveness. IMHO they are just waiting for us to destroy ourselves in our anti terrorism which hunts. We are actually hurting ourselves by sending our military, not to fight terrorism, but to protect the international oil cartels from having their access to oil reserves restricted by nationalist governments.
If terrorism stopped existing our warmongers would have to create something to replace it. They are making far too much money to let the gravy train dry up.
Hi Greg,
Based on history, I also agree that America isn't in these foreign countries to "help the people have a better life." After all, America doesn't even give its people health care, why would it care about the well-being of Afghans?? (sadly..)
I like your idea of leading by example. I don't deny that there is violence in the world. And I certainly don't deny that there are many people who do not like the US, plain and simple.
So leading by example (if a morally good one) would be a good start.
International Law should serve as a "neutral basis" for groups to abide by. Unfortunately, some countries blatently disrespect this Law, and often get away with it.
So apparently more needs to be done.
We are fighting in five countries at this time. What do these countries have in common aside from religion? They are all places where the private ownership of or access to petroleum resources have been threatened by some form of nationalization or tribal extortion. I disagree with the idea that military force is justified in protecting private business investment in a foreign country. We should not be spending our money protecting the future profits of British Petroleum or the Arabian American Oil Company.
We are at war with Libya because they threatened to nationalize the oil within their borders. IMHO that is their right. The stuff is within their sovereign territory. To use force to prevent them from doing what they decide in their country is to simply change the definition of sovereign. Libya also threatened to sell their oil in a new currency. This was an economic but not physical threat to the existing world economic order. Economic threats do NOT JUSTIFY FORCE in response. Only Physical attack justifies force.
We desperately need to stop this waste of our resources and reputation. We cannot afford and do not need to be the Petroleum MOBs enforcers. That is too expensive and degrading.
Huh? Out to get ME? I am not sure how you got that from my posts. While it is undoubtedly true that Islamic extremists are interested in attacking western targets, I do not feel personally targeted.
As you write here, if you are in the west, you are a target. Do you not live in the west?
Now here is your niavete on display. Islamic extremists believe the fact that you do not follow Islam is offensive. No need to be defensive, simply be aware there are people who want you dead because you do not believe as they do.
Personally, I'm not worried about Islamic extremists wanting to convert me to Islam. I've had interesting discussions with Muslims who have no desire to convert me nor kill me.
Invading who? Afgahanistan had no functioning government, thus the rise of the Taliban. I do not think those that hate us could hate us any more.
I've read some articles recently which report that the US is an unwanted presence in Afghanistan..particularly on the part of civilians.
You keep insisting on something that isn't so. We are clearly winning the war on terror. Their leadership is decimated, their money has dried up and their safe havens are shrinking and there hasn't been another attack on the US. If this is losing, I hope we continue to lose for a long time.
I'm happy that you think you are "winning." Let me just remind you, as you continue to pay taxes to fund the weapons, that it will never end. There will always be an "enemy," as long as peaceful negotiations are not used.
Very interesting post!
It almost sounds as though you're saying:
"If you keep everyone poor, they can't harm you!"
Brilliant!!
Why are you ok with everyone hating you? Doesn't that tell you something? In the real world, we need to learn to get along. Otherwise we may as well live in a cave with a bat.
But since we aren't cavemen, we need to learn why people hate us, and work to make amends.
Just like back on the playground.
Peace,
brian
No. There is no way to construe what I have said as what you wrote in the first sentence above. Kindly leave your agenda out of my comments.
I have traveled and worked quite a bit in the Third World and note many grievences are based on fiction.
Hyperpole does your argument no good. Kindly phrase your arguments without them if you wish to have an intelligent discussion.
This is no playground, there is no cave and no bat. We are dealing with peoples who have a hatred for the U.S. and have clearly shown means to injure us. Making amends imply guilt or error. There is neither in the case of Al Queda.That is the area of concern. I admit the U.S. does have a history of poor foreign policy decisions. That is the other area of concern.
Shorebaby and Felix C - I am using the extreme as an end point argument.
As you consider these cultures to be unchangeably threatening to us and are willing to use force to keep them relatively powerless what do you propose when they actually obtain the ability to project major force such as nuclear weapons on our territory? Assuming this theoretical attack is not sponsored by a sovereign government but by a privately operated and funded terrorist organization what would be your response?
LOL, you are reinforcing the perception that you are a child. I can only tell you I do not feel personally targeted, despite your attempts to insinuate that I do.
Because your friends in the campus quad aren't trying to convert you doesn't mean there are not extremists who are willing to kill themselves to kill infidels. Try being a jew entering Saudi Arabia and you will experience the tolerance of Islam first hand.
Wow, are you telling me there are some Afghans who don't want us there? Iam shocked. shocked!
More niavete, as you grow up you will realize there are folks you can't negotiate with for a variety of resons, they are crazy (Kim Il Jong), they are true believers (Islamic extremists) etc.
Costa rica doesn't even have an Army. they always seek the bargaining table when they have a conflict with another country. Sounds like a good model Why we think we are going to get anywhere with might is beyond me. I suspect the reason we take this approach is because those in charge get rich when Lockheed makes money or the other defense contractors.
Shorebaby and Felix C - I am using the extreme as an end point argument.
As you consider these cultures to be unchangeably threatening to us and are willing to use force to keep them relatively powerless what do you propose when they actually obtain the ability to project major force such as nuclear weapons on our territory? Assuming this theoretical attack is not sponsored by a sovereign government but by a privately operated and funded terrorist organization what would be your response?
Of course I do not view these cultures as an existential threat. There are elements within this culture that clearly is an existential threat. It is the nuclear threat that really motivates the war on terror. The best solution is what we are doing. Preventing these elements from aquiring nuclear weapons by cutting funding, killing leaders, removing safe havens, etc.
We are fighting in five countries at this time. What do these countries have in common aside from religion? They are all places where the private ownership of or access to petroleum resources have been threatened by some form of nationalization or tribal extortion. I disagree with the idea that military force is justified in protecting private business investment in a foreign country. We should not be spending our money protecting the future profits of British Petroleum or the Arabian American Oil Company.
We are at war with Libya because they threatened to nationalize the oil within their borders. IMHO that is their right. The stuff is within their sovereign territory. To use force to prevent them from doing what they decide in their country is to simply change the definition of sovereign. Libya also threatened to sell their oil in a new currency. This was an economic but not physical threat to the existing world economic order. Economic threats do NOT JUSTIFY FORCE in response. Only Physical attack justifies force.
We desperately need to stop this waste of our resources and reputation. We cannot afford and do not need to be the Petroleum MOBs enforcers. That is too expensive and degrading.
The oil question is a serious one.
The thought of people dying in other countries so that America can have more oil, is horrific. How many human lives is a barrel of oil worth??
Besides, tith all of our advanced technology, you'd think we'd be able to live without oil by now!!
Peace,
brian
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
