What course of action would you favor?

[Bobby Hogg]

I don't think that. However, I do think that the mindset of the people who get involved with Al-Qaeda is that they have a complete justification of their actions no matter the consequences: which is why they can kill ordinary Muslims in Jordan or Iraq the same as they can Western citizens in London, New York, Madrid or Bali.

Any punitive, indiscriminate murder of ordinary Muslims on a wholesale basis would simply play into their hands: offer them further moral justification in their minds to carry out their acts and convince more angry people to join their struggle.

Scorched earth policies do not work in this case. It only strengthens the resolve.

Then again, there is no real solution to the problem that does not involve a seismic shift in the values and aims of the major nations of the world and how they deal with the rest (USA, UK, France, China, Russia).

 

[Gato_Solo]

I don't think that. However, I do think that the mindset of the people who get involved with Al-Qaeda is that they have a complete justification of their actions no matter the consequences: which is why they can kill ordinary Muslims in Jordan or Iraq the same as they can Western citizens in London, New York, Madrid or Bali.

Any punitive, indiscriminate murder of ordinary Muslims on a wholesale basis would simply play into their hands: offer them further moral justification in their minds to carry out their acts and convince more angry people to join their struggle.

You're still missing the point. Yes...it's punitive, but it's definitely not indiscriminate.

Scorched earth policies do not work in this case. It only strengthens the resolve.

Hard to have resolve when your hiding places have been flattened, poisoned, or booby-trapped...You're totally disregarding the 'fear' factor...which is supposed to be what military action is all about...and was until after WWII.

Then again, there is no real solution to the problem that does not involve a seismic shift in the values and aims of the major nations of the world and how they deal with the rest (USA, UK, France, China, Russia).

I'll agree with one caveat...how do you deal with someone who wants no dealings with you, and threatens your friends and your livlihood?

 

[Bobby Hogg]

You're still missing the point. Yes...it's punitive, but it's definitely not indiscriminate.

It appears I am certainly missing something. I thought we were talking about using nuclear weapons on another nation here in response to a terrorist attack. How can nuclear weapons not be indiscriminate?

If you're talking blowing up a known terrorist training camp, then I'm all for it. I'm in favour of this idea of wiping out an entire nation or major cities with an over-whelming response.

Hard to have resolve when your hiding places have been flattened, poisoned, or booby-trapped...You're totally disregarding the 'fear' factor...which is supposed to be what military action is all about...and was until after WWII.

But if your hiding place is a major city anywhere on the planet, friendly or otherwise?

That said, how well do you think Al-Qaeda's fear tactics will work in defeating anyone?

I'll agree with one caveat...how do you deal with someone who wants no dealings with you, and threatens your friends and your livlihood?

I'm not really talking about dealing with unfriendly governments or terrorists. I'm referring to being true to your expressed principles.

Then again, China and Russia are run by out and out crooks.

 

[Gato_Solo]

It appears I am certainly missing something. I thought we were talking about using nuclear weapons on another nation here in response to a terrorist attack. How can nuclear weapons not be indiscriminate?

You seem to have this idea in your head that a nuke is only for wiping out large tracts of cities. This is a common mistake. There are nuclear weapons that wouldn't damage more than one city block...including fallout.

If you're talking blowing up a known terrorist training camp, then I'm all for it. I'm in favour of this idea of wiping out an entire nation or major cities with an over-whelming response.

Since you've been staunchly against such ideas, I'm going to keep thinking about this in those lines. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Overwhelming response is what war is supposed to be about. Somebody blows up a building in your town, you level a block. A dirty bomb get's you a levelled city. You make it bloody, ugly, and very nasty. You make it so that nobody wants to fight you. That's what war is about. Since the last unconditional surrender, we've had nothing but police actions. That's why we have this continual attack and retreat going on.

But if your hiding place is a major city anywhere on the planet, friendly or otherwise?

If it's a friendly city, you give them time to root out the cause of the problem, and eliminate it. If they cannot, you give them a chance to ask for help. If they will not, you fix it yourself. It's not about friendship, nor is it about being nice.

That said, how well do you think Al-Qaeda's fear tactics will work in defeating anyone?

Al-Qaeda is nothing more than an annoyance...unless they get a nuclear weapon. More people die each year in car accidents than Al Qaeda attacks.

I'm not really talking about dealing with unfriendly governments or terrorists. I'm referring to being true to your expressed principles.

That being said, I'll respond this way. If you don't do what you say you will, then how effective are you?

Then again, China and Russia are run by out and out crooks.

At least they do what they say they will...whether it's liked, or not.

 

[The Other One]

I'll go ask a Muslim when I'm in work tomorrow. How about that?

You will be impressed when you meet a moderate Muslim personally. As your next-door neighbor, coworker, student, teacher, engineer, professionals you may even like us. You will find us well mannered, polite, humble that will make you say, “wow, Muslims are good and peaceful people”, But, we will stab you in your back when you are sleeping as we did on 9/11....

I get the impression you feel the Muslims have a moral if not a legal justification for Jihad. You've already said a terrorist bomb attack is not a reason for retribution.




"No Hiroshima class atomic wimp-weapon will do..."

http://www.islamundressed.com/Consequences of Nuking Mecca.htm

 

[Bobby Hogg]

I get the impression you feel the Muslims have a moral if not a legal justification for Jihad. You've already said a terrorist bomb attack is not a reason for retribution.




"No Hiroshima class atomic wimp-weapon will do..."

http://www.islamundressed.com/Consequences%20of%20Nuking%20Mecca.htm

AUP 5.7 Repetitive shit stirring, use of the AUP as a general defense tactic, making unprovoked personal attacks, or behaving in an unacceptable or unreasonable manner may result in restriction of your posting or viewing privileges, including but not limited to, the offending member being sent to the Kiddie Korner until he/she can behave, a trip to the coventry, or an instant ban. OTCentral.com will be the sole arbiter as to what constitutes acceptable and reasonable manner

Please refrain in future from posting in this manner. - Leslie

 

[Bobby Hogg]

You seem to have this idea in your head that a nuke is only for wiping out large tracts of cities. This is a common mistake. There are nuclear weapons that wouldn't damage more than one city block...including fallout.

I understand that, but I'm assuming that when people talk about nuking somewhere, they mean heavy duty. Like "The Other One" there talking about not using Hiroshima bombs.

Since you've been staunchly against such ideas, I'm going to keep thinking about this in those lines. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Overwhelming response is what war is supposed to be about. Somebody blows up a building in your town, you level a block. A dirty bomb get's you a levelled city. You make it bloody, ugly, and very nasty. You make it so that nobody wants to fight you. That's what war is about. Since the last unconditional surrender, we've had nothing but police actions. That's why we have this continual attack and retreat going on.

Yes, typo.

The scorched earth policy hasn't worked for Israel, so I don't see why it would work in this instance.

If it's a friendly city, you give them time to root out the cause of the problem, and eliminate it. If they cannot, you give them a chance to ask for help. If they will not, you fix it yourself. It's not about friendship, nor is it about being nice.

But I don't see how this works. The terrorists who carry out these attacks are often dead. What good is trying to intimidate them then?

I don't see why I should be blown up in my street for something I have no control over: terrorists committing atrocities, saying they do it in my name. Just as your average American citizen has no control over what his government does (in a real sense), blowing him up is fruitless.

All I see when you try to employ a policy of violent reprisal is an escalating cycle of violence with no end in sight.

This is not to say that I don't think terrorists or their leaders should be dealt with, if the opportunity arises. They must be.

At least they do what they say they will...whether it's liked, or not.

They're also corrupt, brutal and undemocratic.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

AUP 5.7 Repetitive shit stirring, use of the AUP as a general defense tactic, making unprovoked personal attacks, or behaving in an unacceptable or unreasonable manner may result in restriction of your posting or viewing privileges, including but not limited to, the offending member being sent to the Kiddie Korner until he/she can behave, a trip to the coventry, or an instant ban. OTCentral.com will be the sole arbiter as to what constitutes acceptable and reasonable manner

Please refrain in future from posting in this manner. - Leslie

It wasn't unprovoked.

 

[Leslie]

You're grownup enough and way intelligent enough to handle a debate without cussing someone out. We include that in the realm of personal attack.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

He's not debating, he's posting inane racist rhetoric and accusing me of condoning murder. I consider my original response the most valid one possible.

 

[Gonz]

He's not debating, he's posting inane racist rhetoric.

His perogative. It wasn't a blatant personal attack on you. Argue ideas. Point to failings in logic. Use rhetoric. Just stop calling people names.

 

[Bobby Hogg]

I didn't call him anything, I just told him to fuck off.

 

[Leslie]

That counts.

 

[chcr]

He's not debating, he's posting inane racist rhetoric and accusing me of condoning murder.

Welcome to OTC, enjoy your stay.

 

[The Other One]

It wasn't unprovoked.

Hey--no provocation here: I was just wondering if you are one of those people who feels that the United States deserved what we got on 9-11. It's an easy yes or no answer--doesn't need to have a bunch of swearing involved.

Inane and racist? Islam is Anti-semite and anti-Christian and sexist to boot; promotes violence against Israelis and violence against Americans, even violence against their own women; their own Koran tells them to do it. How can I be considered racist when I only mean to defend what the Koran says? It's those that refer to Islam as the "Religion of Peace" that are truly trying to twist it into something it's not.

How can we exist on a planet if there are hundreds of millions of people who believe that if one does not believe in their God, if one does not accept their principles of religious ideology, that they do not deserve to exist and that they are, in fact, some sort of threat to them?

http://www.house.gov/tancredo/newsroom/2004_09_13.html

The desire to be blind to the truth outweighs the need to face reality...

 

[chcr]

The desire to be blind to the truth outweighs the need to face reality...

That's really well put. I tell bible-thumpers things like that all the time (consider yourself duly plagiarized) but they just shake their heads and say I'm going to a non-existent place when I die.

 

[The Other One]

Oh Hell No

 

[The Other One]

The desire to be blind to the truth outweighs the need to face reality...


http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina50802.htm

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/JenniferKing50804.htm

 

[freako104]

The desire to be blind to the truth outweighs the need to face reality...


http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina50802.htm

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/JenniferKing50804.htm

Your "truth" is full of bullshit. Why not get the information from an unbiased site or from a site done by moderate Muslims?

 

[chcr]

Your "truth" is full of bullshit. Why not get the information from an unbiased site or from a site done by moderate Muslims?

Don't screw with the way he wants the world to be, freako.