Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Appleton
Well said Simon , I think we are on the same page.
The question is how to combat terrorism without creating more terrorists.
ichi :bow:
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Appleton
Well said Simon , I think we are on the same page.
The question is how to combat terrorism without creating more terrorists.
ichi :bow:
How invade then all?Quote:
But AQ does seem to have significant support in places like Algeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc. End this and we win the war on terror.
This blatant hand wringing is neutrality in the face of pure evil.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Thanks for the information Barroca. I never counted the Winter War as a victory. :bow:
So would you take Bush's aproach and claim that it's either one or the other, with us or against us? Even though most of the neutral countries are decent, while a bunch of our allies have very very bad people in charge?Quote:
This blatant hand wringing is neutrality in the face of pure evil.
I think this is the best way to create more terrorists. It also reminds me what nazis were doing during occupation. Killing every male over 16 in whole blocks to avenge the death of one german by partizans. Did it worked? hell no. The only thing they had was more people with nothing to lose. The most dangerous kind of warrior.Quote:
Originally Posted by barocca
IMO more important than the puppets are the puppeteer. We have a situation with fanatics ready to kill and get killed without doubting about what their doing. I try not to look the pick of the iceberg. I mean those murderous individuals. There can be millions of reasons that make them so. Some of them are pure evil, some of them religious fanatic, some of them have dreams of power, some of them might lost everything in a NATO-US attack and paying back. I think the most important is to see who is directing this whole thing and what he-they try to achieve. I mean who wins something out? Is it only a comic book style madman living in a cave that doing all this? and if yes what he wants? world domination? nobody can be that stupid even thinking that after all that he is gonna sit in a table with G8 and put conditions. Is Ladin the big bad guy? or the head puppet? And if he yes who pulls the strings?
Those are some of my thoughts. Over the years reading history i ve learned one thing.. its never black and white. Its always more complicated.
I dont know who is doing all that things but his greatest asset is this..
The world we live is unfair. And those unjustices provide the puppets for the puppeteers. Before we skin them fry them shoot and hang them we must first understand who they are. Who is setting this mechanism.
Quote:
But AQ does seem to have significant support in places like Algeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc. End this and we win the war on terror.
I don't know. I suspect invading them all would be wholly counterproductive. However, my gut feeling is that the other part of the US neocon agenda may be right - democraticisation may be part of the answer. Having a military or other repressive regime - however mild - seems to like to create the conditions for violent dissent to fester. They typically don't allow either the political or the economic freedoms that may provide outlets for the energies of educated young men.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Plus some of the non-democratic regimes seem to sponsor some of the dangerous Islamic fundamentalist ideas that motivate AQ, perhaps in an effort to distract attention - hate the Jews/America not us etc - and/or get legitimacy. Saudi Arabia is the obvious example, but Pakistan has a pretty shaddy past with the Taliban and Egypt tolerates a lot of anti-semitic propaganda that sits odd with its peace with Israel.
Now there's the real risk that introducing democracy into the Middle East will lead to radical Islamic governments, as apparently was going to happen in Algeria before the military annulled the election. If so, I'm inclined to say, so be it. My suspicion is that democracies don't want to start wars or sponsor terrorism. Given the chance, people want to get on and live their lives, not cause trouble. Any fledgling democracies would need some constitutional guarantees to try to stop new governments kicking away the ladder and becoming undemocratic. Even then, there's a risk. But democraticisation seems the most promising route I've come across so far.
One way is the "Sword of Gideon" approach.
I think what we need is to field teams, such as the Mossad did in the operation spawned by the Munich massacre. Target the terrorists directly wherever they are, and use military assets to conduct strikes with aircraft, cruise missiles, special forces, where possible when the target is identified by human intelligence (not electronic).
This would be possible with the cooperation of 'Old Europe', Russia, and a few allies from around the world. It would require the nations involved to target any terrorist targets or it would degenerate into a partisan debate over which group of murderers should be excluded. This means the IRA, Chechens, PLO, Al Qaeda, Albanian groups, and others who target civilians rather than military targets. The attack on the U.S.S. COLE for example was not an act of terrorism (though carried out by terrorists) due to the nature of the target.
This IMO would work, and could garner the support of many of the nations we would need to get the job done. We would need to avoid exempting targets simply because we think they have a legitimate grievance. Any attack on civilians, regardless of the cause should be subject to retaliation.
This is the best plan Ive seen yet and includes all the things Ive been talking about like Europe putting away its petty political differences and doing whats right for it and the rest of the free world. United theres nothing that can stand against us. We are our own biggest enemy.Quote:
One way is the "Sword of Gideon" approach.
I think what we need is to field teams, such as the Mossad did in the operation spawned by the Munich massacre. Target the terrorists directly wherever they are, and use military assets to conduct strikes with aircraft, cruise missiles, special forces, where possible when the target is identified by human intelligence (not electronic).
This would be possible with the cooperation of 'Old Europe', Russia, and a few allies from around the world. It would require the nations involved to target any terrorist targets or it would degenerate into a partisan debate over which group of murderers should be excluded. This means the IRA, Chechens, PLO, Al Qaeda, Albanian groups, and others who target civilians rather than military targets. The attack on the U.S.S. COLE for example was not an act of terrorism (though carried out by terrorists) due to the nature of the target.
This IMO would work, and could garner the support of many of the nations we would need to get the job done. We would need to avoid exempting targets simply because we think they have a legitimate grievance. Any attack on civilians, regardless of the cause should be subject to retaliation.
the IRA was not willing to use WMD's, eventually they realised that the UK was not going to back down to terror bombings and that killing innocents was counterproductive,
the IRA began to try to legitimise themselves by issuing warnings with only just sufficient time to evacuate all civilians,
the UK people responded by accepting Sein Fein as a valid political entity seeing the IRA had made their campaign more humane,
eventually the IRA came to the conclusion getting people into parliment was more important that blowing things up.
The radical islamists have no such qualms about WMD,
their belief system allows any force required to bring the infidel (thats you and me peoples) to their knees and beg for permission to submit.
We will see a WMD attack on the US, we will see thousands if not millions of casualties in a single stroke.
At that time the US will be enraged and the people demanding retribution,
We will see smoking glowing craters wherever terrorists are.
Naturally the UN will condemn such action, and the US response will be quite blunt (along the lines of "go and self procreate yourselves")
On that day I will be sending donations to the US emabssy to assist in the purchase of more missiles.
Terrorists have no morals and no qualms, these ones believe that if they kill enough Infidels they go straight to heaven where there will be a large number of willing virgins just for them. what a crock of excrement.
Their belief system regarding Jihad and the rewards thereof is totally whacked.
How do we counter a religous belief that what they are doing is good and holy?
We cannot.
Can we stop them by deploying assassination squads?
No, they want to die. Assassinate them and they become martyrs for the faith and a beacon for others to follow.
So i suggest something that will scare them,
the total loss of their families
do you think they will be so readily willing to sacrifce their own wives, mothers and daughters?
...if he brings a knife, you bring a gun,
if he sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morge...
Offer another solution that will work and I will listen.
Tell us how we are going to stop those who believe it is their religous duty to slaughter women and children
The Nazi's were taking revenge for attacks on military targets - that was not good.
We are talking about revenge and deterrent for the murder of our women and children, an entirely different objective.
The Cold War was because of Mutually Assured Destruction - but for it to work both sides had to believe it would occur.
We are facing something that appears to have a similar solution as the only alternative,
Mutually Assured Destruction - you bomb us and we will bomb you.
They HAVE bombed us, it IS payback time.
B.
So then you think the Israelis have the right idea and are justified in not only what they do but in going much further? Certainly theirs is just a microism of the whole war on terror.
You catch or identify (from remains) a terrorist? Kill him kill his wife his children his parents his brothers his sisters his grandparents his aunts his uncles his cousins his nephews his nieces,
his wifes parents, brothers, sisters, grandparents, uncles aunts cousins nephews and neices,
Yes a radical solution Baroca , its called Genocide . :dizzy2:
Since you mention the bombings from the '70s , could you just explain something to me .
When after you have killed the suspects , all their families , all their families families , all the people they met or may have met , all their neighbours and those that may have been neighbours .......How do you feel 20 years later when you find out that you managed to kill all the wrong people ?
As Ive said over and over until you make these people and any other enemy in history for that matter believe you will never give up and that they can never win the battle will continue. Victory can only be achieved by strength.
An address from the Bunker , 1945 ~D ~D ~D
Ichi and Idomeneas have spotted the little flaw in the plan .
Just as an example . Look at the Irish publics reaction to the terrorists in the Easter rising , then look at their reaction once they had been executed .
Consider this statement from a Briton who led a fairly successful campain against terrorists in the '50s
"There is a very strong temptation in dealing ... with terrorism ... to act outside the law, the excuses being that the processes of law are too cumbersome, that the normal safeguards in law for the individual are not designed for an insurgency and that a terrorist deserves to be treated as an outlaw anyway. Not only is this morally wrong but, over a period, it will create more practical difficulties for a government than it solves."
So instead of an iron fist wielding a sledgehammer perhaps surgical gloves and a small scalpel would be the more effective approach .
Oh and for the conservatives out there , it would be a lot cheaper as well . ~;)
On AQ recruiting in UK link
Quote:
The Iraq war was one of the key causes of young British Muslims turning to terrorism, the report added.
CBR
On AQ recruiting in UK link
"It seems that a particularly strong cause of disillusionment among Muslims is a perceived 'double standard' in the foreign policy of western governments, in particular Britain and the U.S," the report was quoted as saying.
No , no , no , the disilllusionment is caused by them wanting to make the world convert to Wahhabism , it has nothing whatsoever to do with foriegn policies~D ~D ~D
Terrorism is like hydra. Cutting the heads leads nowhere. You have to kill the body. Its like drugs. Catching the small time dealers that sells few doses it keeps you busy but ineffective cause there always be more to do the bidding of the big boss. Its the big boss you have to target. The one with the tones.
But offcourse.. what if you cant touch the boss for x reasons..
Its odd to me, with all this technology that can trace a mouse in its hole, with all those international spy networks existing for years, that the result is total failure. So what US invaded Irac. the only benefits was the oil exploitation by friendly companies. In terror target(the initial one) they drilled a hole in water. No WMD, more agry muslims, a destroyed infrastructure wich they pay (tax payers offcourse), dead people in spain, dead people in UK, US seen as evil empire.
On the other hand we ve got systems examing our phone calls, zeppelins hovering over us, cameras on streets, economical disorder, laws that take measures for our safety (or not?), fear of an unseen enemy lurking us, a label ''war on terror'' that justifies every act done in the name of democracy, just as Inquisition was justifying everything in the name of the god. The red threat of post WWII was replaced by another since USSR collapsed and no buggy man was here anymore. People always must be afraid of something. God, the communists, the terrorists etc.
Im trying to think the big picture, till now i cant say i have an answer, but the positive thing is that im thinking and many other people do so to.
I really don't think mass murders will help anything at all. Quite the opposite: more terrorists will be created, and even more hatred will occur. Besides, how many of our allies will stand by and still support us when we murder innocents like that? Numerous people in the countries that are killing the innocents would (hopefully) object. It would cause far more problems, in addition to being totally evil (the idea, not the people advocating it).
“You catch or identify (from remains) a terrorist? Kill him kill his wife his children his parents his brothers his sisters his grandparents his aunts his uncles his cousins his nephews his nieces, his wives parents, brothers, sisters, grandparents, uncles aunts cousins nephews and nieces,”: Why to stop here? Kill the friends also, because they can search for revenge… And you know what? We can start now. Let’s see: Osama Bin Laden, known terrorist has a family in Saudi Arabia. Let’s exterminate his family. His family is friend with the King; let’s exterminate the King’s family. After that, I am sure the US soldiers and Citizens will walk safer in the world… ~D
“Victory can only be achieved by strength". These are the last words of the French King before Agincourt… and Westmorland in Vietnam…
So the solution is to terrorise to bring democracy (to terrorise the terrorists, as said a French Interior Minister, the same accused by US to have received brides from Saddam):
So, I have ideas:
Gas them in Halabja. S***, Saddam did it before.
Let’s go with assault helicopters and armoured divisions, and Special Forces, surrounding a city (Basra) and kill them all… S*** again, Saddam did it.
OK, let’s take a leader, an Imam, and let’s go to rape his wife and daughters, and after that, we burn his beard, then we kill him, that will teach them… S*** again, Saddam did it.
OK, ok, so let’s take hostages, and when we arrest people, we put them in jail and we torture them and their family too… S***, Saddam was a dammed good democrat… He did it all. ~D
So, now, I know why the US keeps Saddam alive. He will be the next President of a Free and Democratic Iraq.
I prefer the OLD US democracy, if you don’t mind. ~:cheers:
Just to let you know, Barroca's from Australia...