New explosions in Istanbul!

[atawa]

Edit: CT beat me to it.

[MikeH]

What's pacifism got to do with it? Who should we start a war with to stop terrorism? There have been plenty of British and US terrorists in the last 5 years do we have to invade ourselves?

I'm not a pacifist anyway, I just don't think that tanks in the desert helps stop the four guys in a flat in Istanbul from driving a van into a consulate.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Because war is probably why these attacks happend in the first place.
Violence promotes violence. Continue the cycle and it never ends, obviously.

But what if I never started a war, never hurt anyone, never provoked anyone, and some terrorist groups comes around and starts the violence? Should I still not even defend myself and let the terrorist continue to kill over and over again?

[MikeH]

I didn't realise not starting a war meant you couldn't defend yourself from terrorism.

[atawa]

Originally posted by The diplomat


But what if I never started a war, never hurt anyone, never provoked anyone, and some terrorist groups comes around and starts the violence? Should I still not even defend myself and let the terrorist continue to kill over and over again?

The number of terrorists would decline as most terrorism is the direct result of wars, but the only way to defend yourself actively against terrorism is getting your name of the targetlist, something you wont achieve by invading country's.

[DanS]

This really bites.

As for the roots of terrorism, I don't think you can classify it so clearly. Most wars do not result in terrorism after the fact, for instance. Some might.

[Ancyrean]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Because war is probably why these attacks happend in the first place.
Violence promotes violence. Continue the cycle and it never ends, obviously.

Well, although I agree with the principle here, I believe even if Israel withdrew from the West Bank or US from Iraq tomorrow, these AQ people or all the likeminded scum would still go on operating, making attacks and so on...

What I mean is, they really are not interested in any sort of compromise or accomodation...They want to impose their version of religion on the Muslim world first, and then take on the rest of the world, period...If it sounds incredulous, that's unfortunately still what they are up to, in 10, 100 or 1000 years...This is their awful mindset...

The injustices the Muslims are suffering in the world in their perception is their starting point, but their "rightful" solutions wouldn't be their endpoint...

Acknowledging this nature of the state of events would still not necessarily force anybody to agree with the tactics of the "war on terror". Still, the fact remains that although we can discuss in depth whether the invasion of Iraq was right or wrong, reality now on the ground would require an understanding that withdrawing now in the wrong way and in the wrong time would make many things go wrong, like encouraging these people about the inevitability of their "vision of the world"...

[Solver]

Saw that on Pro Sieben three hours ago, I think. I first thought "Is it September 11th they're showing for some reason?" Then the image of bank building appeared, and I realised it wasn't New York...

My condolences to all the victims and their families .

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by atawa
but the only way to defend yourself actively against terrorism is getting your name of the targetlist, something you wont achieve by invading country's.

I wasn't aware that Turkey was on the target list. Remember that they refused to help the US during the Iraq war. Yet they still got blown up today. So, your theory does not hold!

[Bereta_Eder]

I don't think that was his theory.

[Lord Merciless]

The message should be: Muslimes won't get their due respect through the use of terrorism. Actually, nobody should achieve their goals through terrorism. Those who try should get thouroughly thrashed, by force.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by The diplomat


I wasn't aware that Turkey was on the target list. Remember that they refused to help the US during the Iraq war. Yet they still got blown up today. So, your theory does not hold!

Well, remember that Turkey just did vote to commit troops to Iraq; the Iraqi's turned them down, but Turkey's in. Turkey's on the list, I suspect, because
1) They're the only Muslim country that's fully secular -- indeed, aggressively anti-Islamicist
2) They're the only Muslim ally of Israel
3) They're the only Muslim country in NATO
4) They're the only Muslim candidate for the EU

In short, they're the only Muslim country that has cast its lot with the West instead of the Muslim world. That makes them a particular thorn in the side of Muslim fundy nutjobs.

[Bereta_Eder]

Correction:
I think there are a lot of other muslim countries which are secular.
The people of Turkey were not very friendly towards Israel's policies and I think they feel uncomfortable with the alliance with Israel as was demonstrated when the Sharon government issued the (unfulfilled) plan to exhile or kill Arafat. Actually both the Turkish and Greek Foreign ministers together in joined action acted as mediators on that instant.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by MikeH
I didn't realise not starting a war meant you couldn't defend yourself from terrorism.

So you'd rather we used large numbers of clandestine forces to kill anything that looked like a terrorist rather than use the military?

Great

I always agreed with unleashing the SAS to do 'as they will' during the bad days of 'the troubles'

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by The diplomat
I wasn't aware that Turkey was on the target list. Remember that they refused to help the US during the Iraq war. Yet they still got blown up today. So, your theory does not hold!

Turkey is a secular state with muslim population and American ally. That's enough to be well up there on the target list. Plus there are small domestic extremist groups there, who are even more pissed since Prime Minister Erdogan finally acts consitent with the secular doctrine and not pushing an islamistic agenda. Domestic groups make it way easier to perform attacks.
Remember, it was Al-Qaeda and not Iraqi terror. Though Al-Q has declared all nations who participated in the war enemies, they never forgot those they already had (=the Saud, secular mulsim nations, also Saddam before, though Bush &Co. always tapped their ears singing lalalalala when someone mentioned that.)

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Correction:
I think there are a lot of other muslim countries which are secular.

But they're the only really laicist state.

[General Ludd]

Let's declare war on bombs. That should make both sides happy.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Correction:
I think there are a lot of other muslim countries which are secular.
The people of Turkey were not very friendly towards Israel's policies and I think they feel uncomfortable with the alliance with Israel as was demonstrated when the Sharon government issued the (unfulfilled) plan to exhile or kill Arafat. Actually both the Turkish and Greek Foreign ministers together in joined action acted as mediators on that instant.

I probably should have said "secular and nominally democratic," but I think the point holds; the rest of the Muslim world is overtly Islamicist, actively anti-democratic, or both.

And I think the Turks hate Sharon, but until he took charge they were okay with the Israel alliance -- if only because Turks really, really hate Arabs. The enemy of my enemy...

But the larger issue is that Turkey cast its lot with the West in 1923 and never looked back; this is the price they're paying.

[Buck Birdseed]

My parents are in Istanbul at the moment, flying home tonight. Hope they're okay.

[Bereta_Eder]

My sympathies Buck

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


I probably should have said "secular and nominally democratic," but I think the point holds; the rest of the Muslim world is overtly Islamicist, actively anti-democratic, or both.

Is Egypt or many of the northern African muslims states anti-democratic and not secular?

And I think the Turks hate Sharon, but until he took charge they were okay with the Israel alliance -- if only because Turks really, really hate Arabs. The enemy of my enemy...

I see.

But the larger issue is that Turkey cast its lot with the West in 1923 and never looked back; this is the price they're paying.

They also had enormous benefits.

[Sandman]

I expect most of the victims were Muslim, as has been the case for many of the recent attacks. When Al-Qaeda finally dies off, it will probably have taken the lives of many more Muslims. Their death throes, almost.

[Shi Huangdi]

Originally posted by atawa


The number of terrorists would decline as most terrorism is the direct result of wars, but the only way to defend yourself actively against terrorism is getting your name of the targetlist, something you wont achieve by invading country's.

The only way to get your name off the target list is to give into their demands. That's not acceptable.

[Solly]

Gosh, this hit them hard.

I hope your parents get home ok BB. And good luck to Rufus tomorrow.

I'm at the moment considering my position on the "War on Terrorism". It certainly seems terrorism has increased in the last year; is this because of US- and-UK led action to defeat it, or despite it? Hmmm.

[Pekka]

Buck, I hope they are ok. The odds for them not being ok except maybe shock is very very extremely low..I'm almost sure they're just fine... You'll hear from them soon. Is there any number you can reach them from? Hotel number, cell phone?

ANyway, I just saw the news images, aerial ones. Oh gosh that was a BIG one. I hope everyone can recover from that.

[Ramo]

I probably should have said "secular and nominally democratic," but I think the point holds; the rest of the Muslim world is overtly Islamicist, actively anti-democratic, or both.

Not really. For instance, Bangladesh and Indonesia (which actually are both much larger than Turkey) are both secular and nominally democratic.

'Course, I wouldn't really say they're democratic, but then again I wouldn't call Turkey democratic either.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by The diplomat
I don't understand pacifism. How can anyone still be a pacifist after these kind of terrorist attacks?

Aren't you a Christian or something?

[GePap]

Only The Diplomat could go fromt his thread to a denounciation of Pacificsm...take it up with Ben.

While it seems clear why turkey is an obvious target for Al Qaeda, I don;t see this gaining a zip of sympathy. The fact is that while they are trying to paint these as strikes vs. Westerners and Jews in Turkey, most dead are Turks, and the Turkish public in general will back the government against Al Qaeda, and in most Arab lands, or non-Arab Muslim lands these attacks don;t have the "appeal" of attacks against the uS, specially in the US.

So while these attacks show we are far from victory in the war vs Al Qaeda (planning 2 double attacks in just a few days takes real planning), the targets being hit don't build much public support foir thier cause anywhere. Just in terms of PR for Al Qaeda, they would be more successful going after the Iraq occupation.

[Lord Merciless]

They do go after the occupation in Iraq, through the bombings of UN, Red Cross(Crescent), and Shia clerics.

[GePap]

They could spend more there.

These attacks undermine whatever suppor they get from those, at least in large portions of the muslim word.