The War on Terrorism is a Farce!

[TCO]

Imran, I can't beleive you compare yourself to MLK. He risked his life and eventually gave it for his cause.

You don't have the guts to tell your parents about your non-Muslim g/f.

Posting threads on Apolyton is not an act of courage, big guy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ugh.... asking poor college students to spend time looking up things.

Ramo... can you do it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Imran, I can't beleive you compare yourself to MLK.

Hey... look, some words by GP in my mouth... how did they get in there

I used him as an example of patriots being those that critique injustice in the US.

Of course, you've never met an ad hominem attack you didn't make.

[TCO]

Oh spare me the hish school debate terms. Just grow some b...juevos.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
You mean when we bombed Sudan, because they were involved in terrorism and ended up hitting a medical plant?

That was a mistaken indentity, not an error of judgement.

You thought you were hitting a chemical plant, no?

A lot of times we aren't doing things for the right thing, but for the political thing.

This is unrelated to your previous example.
Hitting a chemical plant is the right thing.

I sincerely doubt that Clinton bombed Sudan just to get political score, and randomly picked a medical plant of all things.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
He has in the past... the media just doesn't like to put it on Page 1.

I guess palestinians don't like putting it on page 1 either....

Maybe that suggests that he isn't doing it.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Siro... are terrorists to be locked up for life? Maybe their term was up. The fact is that Arafat CANNOT stop Hamas or Islamic Jihad. The US can easily withdraw support of a dictator... like Saddam when he took Kuwait.

Sure, every terrorist on the god damned planet suddenly finished their term in October 2000. following that, they immediately started attacking Israel again, as they promised to do.

Releasing them had one goal in mind - fueling a huge wave of terror.

Arafat can stop Hamas and IJ. He did a great job shooting them when they were in conflict, when they threatened his authority several months ago.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I sincerely doubt that Clinton bombed Sudan just to get political score

You don't know Clinton very well.

Arafat can stop Hamas and IJ. He did a great job shooting them when they were in conflict, when they threatened his authority several months ago.

Oh sure... and when he attempts to put them down, he is blamed for being a tyrant. And, of course, Hamas and IJ will always come back and in full force.

[Gatekeeper]

You don't know Clinton very well.

And *you* do, Imran? Sorry, but there was more to Clinton's foreign policy than "Wag the Dog."

Regarding U.S. actions taken in the Cold War, I always find it absolutley *fascinating* how so many people demonize Americans 100 percent w/o ever considering the "why" of a situation or the circumstances — namely, the Cold War and the Soviet Union. It's as if their heads are in a vaccuum of some sort. I know time can make memories fuzzy and whatnot, but the Soviet Union was a very real threat in the years and decades after World War II. It doesn't always excuse us for what we did in response to the Soviet Union, but it does put some things in context.

Who knows? If the Cold War had never developed, a whole 'nother timeline might have developed. One w/o the crises of the Cold War, of course.

Gatekeeper

[Imran Siddiqui]

And *you* do, Imran? Sorry, but there was more to Clinton's foreign policy than "Wag the Dog."

Name it. Clinton HAD no foriegn policy and most of what he did in the world was 'Wag the Dog'. Diversionary Tactics were his speciality.

[Sprayber]

I can't belive I wasted my precious internet time reading this thread.

If you support Araffat, you have defined the word hyprocrite. Of course that goes for those that support some of the intensly stupid things that Sharon has done. As for other "terrorist". We should eliminate those who pose a threat and leave the others unless we have evidence that says they pose a threat to us or out allies. If that means killing those that call themselves muslims or any other religion, then so be it.

Stop playing favorites Imran, its beneath you.

I don't think the argument "because we did bad things in the past means we can't try and make the world a better place" doesn't work.

Yeah, we have our own problems in the US. And we've created some problems. But that doesn't excuse thousands of "Osama's" and "Mohammed's" running around killing innocent people.

I don't feel any sympathy for a sub-culture that rewards people for killing innocents.

PS. If these terrorists are only a minority, as many Arab-Americans tell me, why don't the peace loving people in the region give them up?

I love rhetorical questions.

Answer: Most Palestinians want Israel to be annihilated.

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Kyle



Neither has asked for our help.

Actually, I think that India asked.
The United States then told them to "sit tight"

etc.

[Kyle]

Originally posted by DarkCloud


Actually, I think that India asked.
The United States then told them to "sit tight"

etc.

India has never asked for US military involvment in Kashmir. They have close to 1 million troops there already.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
Actually, I think that India asked.
The United States then told them to "sit tight"

We'll never help them. They aren't a part of the rhetoric. After all, which American cares about terrorists in India? Proof that this is a political crusade, and not a moral one.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

And *you* do, Imran? Sorry, but there was more to Clinton's foreign policy than "Wag the Dog."

Name it. Clinton HAD no foriegn policy and most of what he did in the world was 'Wag the Dog'. Diversionary Tactics were his speciality.

I am *not* going to do *your* homework for you, Imran. All you have to do is perform a general Internet search (probably "Clinton + Foreign + Policy" will turn something up) or, even better, go to other news sources'* archives and do some digging. You're a student, Imran. Digging for information should be something of an art form for you. It sure was for me when I was at university and having to do homework, term papers, research papers and whatnot.

Gatekeeper

*I recommend The Associated Press, Knight-Ridder Tribune and then major newspapers/television stations' *non-editorial* news parts. Or you can specialize even more by digging into scholarly works.

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
This war on terrorism is nuts. I can see retaliation for the destruction of the World Trade Center, but a worldwide War on Terror? What hypocrisy.

I mean, look at the history of the US, we haven't been shy about using terror in the past. Our revolutionary past is filled with acts of terrorism (what, you thought tar and feathering feels nice?). Mobs gathered up tax collectors and tortured them before killing them (what do you think tar and feathering is), they massacred loyalists. And we claim moral superiority?

We decry killing of civilians in Israel... do we forget our own history? There were civilians we killed in Sherman's march towards the sea, the firebombing of Dresden, the massacres in Vietnam and Korea, and, most spectacularly, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But you say, this is war. What do you think Palestinians feel? They feel they've been in war with the Israelis since 1948. Why is their killing of civilians worse than our own?

We are being hypocrites on the world stage, by denouncing terrorism so strongly, yet sponsering it whenever we needed to defeat Communism. We've used terrorism to great results, so to declare war on it is patently absurd.

PS. This isn't a David-Floyd-My-Password-Has-Been-Stolen post. I actually believe this, and it has been building up.

PPS. You Euros aren't off the hook either. The terrorism that was done during the religious wars of the 16th and 17th Centuries and the terrorism during the Colonial Era was no better than what the United States has done since its founding.

It never ceases to amaze me, why does it take you so long to notice the obvious?!

Of course it's better late than never

there's still hope for you republican

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Gatekeeper
I am *not* going to do *your* homework for you, Imran. All you have to do is perform a general Internet search (probably "Clinton + Foreign + Policy" will turn something up) or, even better, go to other news sources'* archives and do some digging. You're a student, Imran. Digging for information should be something of an art form for you. It sure was for me when I was at university and having to do homework, term papers, research papers and whatnot.

For what? To find out something which I know doesn't exist? Hell, I'm a Political Science major, with a concentration in International Relations. I KNOW he didn't have a coherant foriegn policy, and so do a vast majority of IR specialists.

And paiktis... nice to join the club, comrade .

[Saint Marcus]

Imran

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
This war on terrorism is nuts. I can see retaliation for the destruction of the World Trade Center, but a worldwide War on Terror? What hypocrisy.

I mean, look at the history of the US, we haven't been shy about using terror in the past. Our revolutionary past is filled with acts of terrorism (what, you thought tar and feathering feels nice?). Mobs gathered up tax collectors and tortured them before killing them (what do you think tar and feathering is), they massacred loyalists. And we claim moral superiority?

We decry killing of civilians in Israel... do we forget our own history? There were civilians we killed in Sherman's march towards the sea, the firebombing of Dresden, the massacres in Vietnam and Korea, and, most spectacularly, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But you say, this is war. What do you think Palestinians feel? They feel they've been in war with the Israelis since 1948. Why is their killing of civilians worse than our own?

We are being hypocrites on the world stage, by denouncing terrorism so strongly, yet sponsering it whenever we needed to defeat Communism. We've used terrorism to great results, so to declare war on it is patently absurd.

PS. This isn't a David-Floyd-My-Password-Has-Been-Stolen post. I actually believe this, and it has been building up.

PPS. You Euros aren't off the hook either. The terrorism that was done during the religious wars of the 16th and 17th Centuries and the terrorism during the Colonial Era was no better than what the United States has done since its founding.

Imran

the key point is that the Palestines act like a state of war exists with Isael, but they (and the world) say that Israel cannot act in a like matter.

That is thew issue.

Jon Miller

[Arrian]

Personally, the self-righteous rhetoric of my government pisses me off somethin' fierce. Saying that does not mean I support terrorism - it's merely an extreme dislike of hypocrisy.

I'd rather we were a bit more straightforward about things - no one believes the rhetoric anyway, except some of us.

How about: "We have suffered terror attacks. We will now hunt down and capture or kill those who we believe were involved in these attacks. We will do our best to target the guilty, but some innocents will be killed."

That's it. No fancy crap about "Enduring Freedom" or "Axis of Evil." Say it like it is.

-Arrian

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Arrian
Personally, the self-righteous rhetoric of my government pisses me off somethin' fierce. Saying that does not mean I support terrorism - it's merely an extreme dislike of hypocrisy.

I'd rather we were a bit more straightforward about things - no one believes the rhetoric anyway, except some of us.

How about: "We have suffered terror attacks. We will now hunt down and capture or kill those who we believe were involved in these attacks. We will do our best to target the guilty, but some innocents will be killed."

That's it. No fancy crap about "Enduring Freedom" or "Axis of Evil." Say it like it is.

-Arrian

What are you, nuts? Come on, get with the program here. You gotta get your priorities straight. These people have elections to win!

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Guynemer

What are you, nuts? Come on, get with the program here. You gotta get your priorities straight. These people have elections to win!

So long as it appeals to the average American voter, who cares what the rest of the world thinks, right?

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

Isreal already acts like a state of war exists. See how many more Palestinians have died that Israelis.

[Imran Siddiqui]

There is actually a theory in IR called the Election Year Hypothesis (or something like that) saying that chances for war increase as the presidential election year in the US approaches .

[Lincoln]

Remember what happened to George W's father... I think that the son needs to keep the "war"going at least until the 2004 election.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Heh, maybe that is what he is counting on.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Heh, maybe that is what he is counting on.

I thought he counted on his fingers.

No, wait, he does this with his fingers.

[KrazyHorse]

Sweet.

[Peacemaker]

Congrats Imran you do get it.

The "war" is just a way to impose the wants of the govt on the rest of the world and keep the mind numbed masses happy.