No one worries why cockroaches do what they do, we just exterminate them. so it should be with terrorists.

Ouch, my post sounds a little harsh. I guess for the terrorist on the front line, the ones willing to give their own lives, aside from their own twisted perception of reality, they are extremely noble human beings.

Its one thing when a terroristic organization does it, its completly another when an acutal government does the same thing.

Terrorism has existed for as long as governments have, its just, now with all the access to information and fast travel we have it makes it a lot easier. We will never get rid of terrorism, there will always be those sociopaths who deems others' lives worthless. We cant stop it, but we can try and prevent it. I mean the only reason we are reacting so harshly to it is because we havent been affected by terrorism as much as other countries have. Europe has had security measure in their airports for decades that we are only starting to think of implementing.

ok emperor

it is ok for terrerists to attack civilians but not for countries defending themselves from civilians that are attacking them

it is ok for terrerists to attack civilians but not for countries defending themselves from civilians that are attacking them

In a sense yes... you wouldn't burn your house to kill the termites would you? that is kinda what the Israelis did in lebanon... except it wasnt their houses they were burning!

it is a complicated issue

i am about to make you two mad

but i am getting tired of people saying it is ok for evil people to do evil things just becouse that is what they are

isreal did everything they could not to attack civilian targets but when hezbollah is hiding field guns inside of houses

and soldiers inside of houses behind civilians what is isreal or the usa supposed to do ask nicely for them to come out and get killed

they wouldn't do that they will still hide behind their civilians and shoot the isreally and usa troops

and yes hezbollah was hiding field guns inside of houses

and they threatened to kill the civilians if they tried to run away after isreal announced where they were going to attack

They did everything they could.. really now.

Hm... lets review the facts shall we.
Half the bombings occured in the night, when everyone is sleeping in their houses.
Sure they warned people ahead of time, but they never said where they were going to strike.

Put those too together and you not only have killings but wide spread panic.

Now, i never stated that terrorists shoud get away with things they do. No, they should be punished, but was Israel punished for its actions. NO!! It got away with it by stating that it was fighting a valiant war on terror. While i am sure they killed quite a few terrorist, i think that the property damage and death they caused could have been easily done away with, if the just followed a more diplomatic solution.

I just though that a government should have better morals and comprhension of the world than just a group of people.

I guess i was wrong...

i am about to make you two mad

actually your post reminds me of another analagy... cancer! Terrorists are like cancer hiding inside your body. Targeting cancer with radiation damages your body, and it is very hard to get rid of.

you mean the diplomatic solution were the palis attack while isreal begs and begs them to stop

you mean where isreal promises to give up land to the palis if they will stop attacking while the palis continue to attack them

you mean where isreal gives them land as the palis continue to attack isreally civilians including 4 to 10 years olds

i used to drive taxi in salt lake city

one of my passenger was a palis. he told me that the palis. consider all isreally citizens to be in the army from 2 year old to the grave

where as if you asked the palis. whom they consider to be civilians in of the palis they would probable say all of them

that last part is just my opionion

evil people are just that evil people and you have to stop the evil people however you can


in world war 2 Pattan said "when you are fighting a war do whatever you have to get it over with and then go back to the civilians and appoligize.

and isreal did tell the civilians where they were going to attack and told them it would be in 3 or 4 days

and hezbollah did threaten to kill lebaneeze civilians if they tried to run away before the attack that was reported on cnn which is an anti isreal news network

also the lebaneeze government wanted to get rid of hezbollah but were scarried that if they helped isreal hezbollah would turn against them

remind me what is going on in lebanion now

if the just followed a more diplomatic solution.

Unfortunately 'diplomacy' and 'fanatics' are two words that just don't mix.
However the words 'destruction' and 'fanatics' is a perfect marriage.

So considering that, i think israel was justified in its actions.

However the words 'destruction' and 'fanatics' is a perfect marriage. So considering that, i think israel was justified in its actions.

Yes, I guess they were considering they are definitely 'fanatics' and only really know how to get things done via destruction.
Furthermore, all of this talk regarding Iraq is senseless considering the 'passion' that both sides demonstrate when it comes to slinging around the blame for the problems in that country right now.
Those of you who throw around the term 'fanatic'... when was the last time an Arab knocked at your front door and stuck an AK-47 in your face with the demand that you worship Allah or else? I can't ever recall that happening around here, but then maybe I just live in a bubble huh? Doubtful.
And as a final point, long before I read anything that related our country (the US) to the Roman empire of old I felt that our country was nothing more than the 'New Roman Empire' for our actions emulate them to a tee, only with less emphasis on building culture and intelligent thought. We have over 400,000 troops abroad, stationed in areas deemed 'crucial' to our interests. Now I am not a statistics guru but I think it would be safe to say that only 30% of those 'interests' are truly 'our' interests. The rest would be Corporations and the ignorant millionaire/billionaire crowd. Their interests are the only ones that are protected.
We should focus on ourselves and what is happening in this country. Stop the Mexicans from crossing the border and for the love of God send the ones that are already here back... we don't need them. Fix healthcare and the homeless. And for heaven's sake, DO SOMETHING ABOUT OUR FAILED AND MORONIC EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM.
How are those things for a start? That doesn't even touch on the environment, retirement, our nuclear weapons 'problem' (even though it is more of a global problem), and the myriad of other things that could use addressed, not to mention spending our 'tax dollars' on something besides military might.

the arabs

One of the biggest problems with this so-called war on terror is the fact that so few people use precise terms to define actors in the conflicts. To say "the Arabs" is no more precise than saying "the Americans" or "the Muslims."

All of these categories are far too large and complicated to have practical value in a discussion. Those of you using such words in this way are either deliberately or unthinkingly perpetuating rhetoric in a discussion that sorely lacks reason.

If our species is to survive our steadily growing powers of destruction, we *must* learn to work around our tendency to think in us-them terms. Right-wing Christian activists worry me a great deal, but I often rebuke my left-wing friends for using "Christian" in the way danielost appears to use the words "Arab" and "Muslim."

If our species is to survive our steadily growing powers of destruction, we *must* learn to work around our tendency to think in us-them terms.[/quote] I agree with this statement but it is very unrealistic to think (hope maybe, but not think) that 'we' could ever look at each other in this way, as one big family, despite color, creed, or gender. There will always be this division, period. [quote]All of these categories are far too large and complicated to have practical value in a discussion. Those of you using such words in this way are either deliberately or unthinkingly perpetuating rhetoric in a discussion that sorely lacks reason.

If I offended you with the use of 'Arab', I apologize, but that is the word I would choose to describe them, or would Middle Eastern be more appropriate? Political correctness is something that I abhor, so I do not play into it.
To try and argue against this war and the purposely created genocide that it has wrought... I will always chime in, for I do not believe in it. It is pointless in my eyes, and is doing nothing for me or anyone else in this world, except those few who have money vested in this endeavor.
So yes G.W., this conversation is kind of pointless because nothing will come of it, but if one person reading actually stops and thinks about what is going on, regardless of which side of the fence they wish to choose, then this conversation did at least do some good, even if it wasn't changing the world.

Why did this forum lump my first pulled quote with my response? Hmmm...

Political correctness is something that I abhor, so I do not play into it.[/quote] No worries, Evil. I've thought of you as a voice of moderation in the last few days' posts in this megasprawl of a thread. Besides, one year when I was a dorm student in Sarasota, one of my best friends and his roommate declared their room to be a PCDMZ. One of the men in that room was then freshly returned from serving in the Marines in Desert Storm and the other was a long, tall drink of a queen who was raised "white trash" in South Florida and had worked as an honest-to-god Manhattan hairdresser. Both men are far smarter than I can hope to be and did a lot to liberate me from the clutches of "political correctness." The one who's still a very close friend is the ex-Marine who's since become a diplomatic historian with strong grounding in "African American Studies," become a wilderness firefighter, and now works as an associate producer for a remarkably cheesy cable television show. [quote]this conversation is kind of pointless because nothing will come of it, but if one person reading actually stops and thinks

I didn't mean I thought the thread had become pointless. I'm just doing my best to respond constructively when I am also fighting back powerful instincts to "flame on." I'm a committed democrat (philosophy before party), so I work as hard as I can to support civil discourse in public settings. Put that together with my typing speed, love of ornate words, and well, I don't always communicate as well as I'd like

all of the muslims in direct conflict with isreal are arabs the only group indirectly invovled with isreal is the iranians and your correct they are not arabs

so when i said the arabs attack isreal i was correct and there may be one or two non arab involved directly

danielost, I still don't seem to be communicating well with you. I'm asking for *specifics*, e.g. "Lebanese members of Hezbollah" or "Iranian-funded Palestinians."

When you use the small-but-large words you seem to prefer, you bury many peace-loving subgroups in your larger category of "enemies."

Put that together with my typing speed, love of ornate words, and well, I don't always communicate as well as I'd like

I understand completely. To speak eloquently whilst typing is very difficult. Couple this with being at work (as I am when I'm on here) and the occasional outbreak of excitement over a topic or reply...

PS: And yes, the constant 'in-fighting' with my own urges to flame the hell out of someone, ahem, which I have somehow managed to suppress.

all of the muslims in direct conflict with isreal are arabs

Danielost, I think you need to brush up a little bit on your history. When Israel was 'created' even though it angered many 'muslims/arabs' the Palestinians did in fact accept the Jews alongside themselves, in THEIR OWN country. The established borders were not good enough for the Zionist leadership so they set in motion actions which would make them out to be the 'good guys' in the world's eyes, giving them the excuse and opportunity to carry out genocide for their own expansion of Israel. Now I may not be conveying this all too well, as G.W. pointed out this can be difficult, but I think if you research a little bit, you will see what I am saying.
Remember one thing... if you ever have the chance to talk to a true Zionist Jew, of which there are many residing here in Pittsburgh, you will learn that the person you are speaking to thinks that you are a lesser creature than he/she is. If you are not one of them, you are worthless, you are an animal, and you are only here for the Zionist's use for you. This is how they see all of us. This is why if you know your New Testament (and even some of the Old Testament) you will see that not only God disliked the Jews and what they had become, but so did Jesus. Why do you think the Pharisees had Jesus executed? Because he spoke the truth about them, period.

Those of you who throw around the term 'fanatic'... when was the last time an Arab knocked at your front door and stuck an AK-47 in your face with the demand that you worship Allah or else? I can't ever recall that happening around here, but then maybe I just live in a bubble huh? Doubtful.

I used the term fanatic, but i did not use the term 'arab'. My point was that when i think of a religious fanatic full of hatred and be willing to die for their cause.... Ah yea i could not imagine diplomacy having much effect. I mean how can you deal with this kind of person aside from a bullet or a serious amount of drugs??

I mean how can you deal with this kind of person aside from a bullet or a serious amount of drugs??

All I can say is LOL. That was a good one Mystikmind. Believe me, I also understand what you mean about fanaticism. Yes it is truly impossible to sway these 'people' once they have totally closed their mind to anything else but what they believe. My point was, if they're not bothering me, why bother them? Is it fair or honorable to preemptively attack them because of this fanaticism? I don't know the answer to that one.
Besides all of that, I believe the Iraq war was more to do with Saddam and his CIA dealings more than any other factor. That's why Daddy Bush stopped the push to finish off Saddam the first time... because Saddam probably 'caved in' and promised to shut up and comply. Remember Noriega? Same thing. The Panama invasion was nothing more than a snatch and grab perpetrated by the CIA to shut Noriega up because he wasn't playing ball anymore. You don't think so? Try crossing the CIA then... for you will only do it once.

That's why Daddy Bush stopped the push to finish off Saddam the first time

Here's one where I'm inclined to give Bush 41 a small hat-tip. IMO, they chose not to take the fight into Iraq b/c they understood what it means to kick over an anthill with bare feet and then stand in it. Plus they also apparently understood the value and complexity of maintaining a strong international coalition--just compare the bills (banker's and butcher's) for the '91 war and our current long, hard slog.

The Hussein regime got a solid spanking that kept the world's oil flow safe. The sanctions and inspection regimes had their problems (killing children not least among them), but the no-fly zones were working to keep Iraqi military power contained. Bush 43's choice to invade might well end up being the textbook example used in discussions of "cowboy diplomacy."

IMO, they chose not to take the fight into Iraq b/c they understood what it means to kick over an anthill with bare feet and then stand in it.

That was a good example there G.W. but I will still stick to my belief that there was a lot more to it, almost all of which we will never know. Espionage is of course the business of deceit... so how could any of us truly know for sure? I just try to follow the trail, be it money, oil, guns or drugs. They almost always lead back to our politicians/intelligence community and those two groups are securely cemented into the military/industrial complex which truly runs the world. Remember, killing is a business and business is very, very, very good... especially right now.

That's why Daddy Bush stopped the push to finish off Saddam the first time

Here's one where I'm inclined to give Bush 41 a small hat-tip. IMO, they chose not to take the fight into Iraq b/c they understood what it means to kick over an anthill with bare feet and then stand in it. Plus they also apparently understood the value and complexity of maintaining a strong international coalition--just compare the bills (banker's and butcher's) for the '91 war and our current long, hard slog.

The Hussein regime got a solid spanking that kept the world's oil flow safe. The sanctions and inspection regimes had their problems (killing children not least among them), but the no-fly zones were working to keep Iraqi military power contained. Bush 43's choice to invade might well end up being the textbook example used in discussions of "cowboy diplomacy."

When Israel was 'created' even though it angered many 'muslims/arabs' the Palestinians did in fact accept the Jews alongside themselves, in THEIR OWN country

How did the Jews end up not in israel in the first place? All i know is that israel ceased to exist at some point after the roman empire colapsed. I don't know if they completely abandoned israel or were slaughtered/driven out? Somehow the palestinians ended up owning israel, i don't know how? then after a few crusades etc etc palestine eventually became part of the ottoman empire. So then palestine was 'liberated' or perhaps a better term would be 'conquored' from the turks by the british. Then the british did a similar trick to what they did in India and divided the country upon granting independance. Now you don't see Indians blowing themselves up and carrying on like lunatics and swearing to iliminate pakistan do you? So i don't know why palestine carnt accept israel the same way india accepts pakistan (even if they do quarrel)?

i remember now... palestine attacked israel and got conquored. So began the big independance struggle... yea makes sense now.