/agreed. It's already been proven that an effective way to cripple the terrorists is to go after the money but apart from the initial seizures shortly after 9/11 theres seem to have been little progress shown on this front. I think the problem is again in part due to the media and the "requirement" to have glorious scenes of death & destruction plastered across the evening news. Maybe if they concentrated equal time on the positive sides of what has been done it would not only help to re-assure the general public but help improve the perception of the West by those not part of it. Mal
Islam & Islamic terrorism While religion has become the flag of Al-Qaeda, the origins are not there. I doubt the majority of future fanatics sign-up exactly because they want to sacrifice for God. There are also other ways for this. I`m much more suspicious that it is a cultural/"national" thing. Religious propaganda only complements it. It is about the invasion of West in arabic societies. Certainly that was in the start - some 20 years ago. About all those things we in the other parts also experience and detest. 1. The feeling your ways will disappear and be like a bird with broken wings, maybe cared for by some good nurse in a cage. 2. The constant propaganda of american "self-righteousness" and european "wisdom" while in fact you see them doing horrible things to further more their power and exploitation of weaker countries, including your own. 3. In many countries of Middle East - also direct military presence and/or very fresh Western-sponsored/induced wars or coups. See Lektek`s post for a really eloquent irritation of an exemplary arab. No doubt he will have much more to add. Cheers, man. However, for certain pecularities of history and resulting contemporary live in the resion, which i will note below - arabs (or a small part of them) react to this in much more violent and decisive way than other parts of the World at present.
i think its because they need enemies. Look what is happening in the USA - individual freedom is step by step removed, without the protest of the electorate, because they are afraid of "the worse". PS: in fact i find many parallels between USA and Russia
So why arabs are so eager to die? Islam, although it has a role, is not so significant. You could have catholicism on its place as well. Here is my suggestion: They are used to death. First - you are living shitty life. Second - you can be shot anytime. Third - you see people being killed around you all the time. (doesnt work for the sons of Saudi Princes though) So life and death isnt so a big deal as in, say, Europe. I could even imagine the suicider thinking "ha-ha, you will see know how it looks at home. you have your lives so dear, little drivellers... see how real people die!" This is a cultural thing. In my country we had the miserable + easy-death lifestyle up until the end of XIX cent. So we made great soldiers in the following wars of early XX cent and good a portion of the population worked (and died) in an organization, that today would be labelled outrighly terroristic, but is now one of our cherrished national symbols. The literature, songs and poems are promoting that self-sacrifice as highest ideal and still make the heart tremble. However we have lived that out by the 1950s. Today we are the same "drivellers" as any dutch or brit. (well, not AS much, as I had the chance to see in the UK ) So I extend the analogy to Near East. There war and oppression by foreign powers didnt end in early XX cent. Ottoman empire was sliced by the WWI winners and each took his fair share of abuse. Later decolonisation left the arabs in society that tolerated low life-price that would have eventually evolved in a kinder one, but it didnt get a chance. The countries got held in the border zone of Cold War, so each side abused them to further its geostrategical interests. Low-cost life hasnt stopped until now.
Now, tell you what? I didn't read a damn shit in this thread, cause I know what this fucking forum is all about. But I'll just ask you ONE question: Would ANY of you consider blowing himself apart in the middle of a fully visited cafee, taking as many innocents with you as you could? I believe NO ONE who's writing in this forum would consider that as means for achieving a goal. So, if you really are people who believe in that this world should move on, man ought to be better than he is, that we should finally achieve a status where no war is neccessary any more, we gota GO TO WAR to get rid of those regimes who fuck their peoples' brains full of shit that make them considering walking up into a coffee and blow the innocent up, or blow trains apart by remote controll. NO ONE in this fucking forum, ableit all its fucking hatred, would seriously consider to do something like that, WOULD YOU? Now, Iraq was sure enough NO such regime. Instead, it was a somewhat realistic-thinking regime (that's why they found support in the West during the cold war, against the State of Iran, that was EXACTLY that kind of regime which I described above), albeit cruel - while considered the LESS evil in the West during THE COLD WAR, in the WHOLE WEST, this includes GERMANY AND FRANCE, who had contracts with the evil Dictator well until the RECENT war, other than the United States of America. But now it had to get rid of, since it had the common enemy with all the islamofascist states and organizations in the world: The United States of America, who, together with the great German Chancellor Helmut Kohl (who btw said that about the current Chancellor Gerhard Schrцder:"He has been on the wrong side of history on almost all occasions" - Schrцder was against the German Re-Unification, for example) have brought more freedom into the World since the Second World War and the German Re-Unification than EURO WEASELS who like to make many worthless meetings, could EVER DREAM OFF. You MORONS tell me the US police the world? Hell, sure enough! We called JUST THAT POILICE to get rid of an evil dictator in the middle of Europe just 5 damn years ago!!! Because we could not cope with that one alone by any means! And tell you what? There was NO FUCKING "UN" MANDATE for the war in Kosovo, because we KNEW that Russia would by NO MEANS agree to a war on their long-time allied and big customer. So, OTHER THAN THE US concerning the recent Iraq war, we DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER to get an UN mandate!! We just got rid of that sucker, AND IT WAS GOOD! Sure enough, the Serbs were and are slaughtered just as well as their Muslim brothers in Kosovo before the war, HOWEVER SOMETIMES you got to get rid of fascist ASSHATS like Milosovic who are not aiming at a peacefull way WHATSOEVER, to get at least A CHANCE for peace. Like the GREAT STATESMAN Tony Blair, who does not consider his political career more important than the fate of his country and the Western World, put it so well: "Sometimes a *chance* for peace, is *reason* for war." We got the UN mandate LATER AFTER the war, when the UN debates were no longer broadcasted by ANY media, so that the Russians wouldn't lose their face, and they agreed - I don't blame the Russians - they are my dearest "enemies", for they are decent people you can argue with, and after all the Cold War was just a war where both sides just wanted to survive - it was not a war where one side aimed at the anihilation of the other one - or we WOULD have seen a "cold war - hot". BTW, I think I'm in agreement with them on their war in Chechnia, for that is just made up by the same Islamofascists like anywhere else in this world. It's not a war about freedom of Chechnia, it's a war about robbing a part of the free world, which Russia now belongs to (albeit not perfectly), to the hands of Islamofascists who would like to return to the Middle-Age and jepardize any "collaboration" and economical ties which ARE CRUCIAL FOR YOUR WEALTH, for the sake of opening-up a "God State" which can "defend" its values and goals by means like Weapons of Mass Destruction and terror. WHAT THE FUCK? And some more on the UN: The UN are a joke! It is highly critized here in "Old Europe" (which Spain has now became part of, for they think they'll be safe from the will of terrorists in the future by appeasing them after just those sick-minded people have killed many of her fellow citizens) that the evil Bush administration questions the so-called "International Law". Now tell you what: They question it because they know VERY WELL, and as has been proven MANY TIMES now, that only free western societies care about that "International Law", while evil Dictators and fascists around the world don't GIVE A FUCK about it, instead are PROTECTED by JUST THAT "International LAW". What the hell? Tell you some else: Of course, from the point of view of Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, and how they might all be called - they are fighting a "just war" for their course. I say "FINE!" I see why they would think that. They believe in another world than us. However, unfortunately, there IS ONLY ONE WORLD for all of us. ONLY ONE. So it comes down to the point WHICH SIDE YOU ARE ON. If you, dear forum members, believe in the values your country has put up, which is freedom of speech, freedom of religious believe, freedom of trade, freedom of the individual, privacy, freedom of sexual orientation, right of women, freedom of access to information, freedom of believes and freedom to elect that kind of government you deem to be the one to do best to your country, YOU SHOULD NOT oppose those who are fighting there on YOUR SIDE and shoot them in the back! For the alternative IS FAR WORSE than what you might be able to imagine. I seriously believe that many "home-made" intellectuals are far off from reality. They havn't experienced anything else than freedom since their birth, so they don't know what is worth to fight and die for, they just take it for granted. IT IS NOT FOR FREE. There is that quote that goes: "Sometimes the tree of liberty has to be refreshed with the blood of tyrants and the brave". And it holds its truth well into our days, and will always into the infinite future. I feel very sadened about my country's positioning. For most of the people that went to all those damn "peace marches" (where from a lot of people are collecting money for the "resistance" in Iraq now), and the SPD/Greens longed into to get re-elected, are not older than 50 years and DO KNOW NOTHING about what it means to have freedom not for granted. Those who were older than that went there because "they know what getting bombed means (Hamburg, Dresden, etc.) SHIT! SURE you know that getting bombed means! BUT I WONDER do you not know what it means do see YOUR FELLOW NEIGHBOURS getting dragged out of their homes, get on the train to Ausschwitz? Have you forgotten THAT PART? Have you forgotten what you answered when Goebbels "asked" you:"Wollt Ihr den totalen Krieg?" ("Do you want total war?") What is wrong with you people? The war against the Jewish-Bolsevic-American World conspiracy is over, IS IT? My GERMAN great grandfather was lucky, he only lost his job as an engineer for Frankfurt Tiefbau when he opposed joining the FUCKING NSDAP and ended up selling watches and other shit going from door to door, in order to keep his family alive. He could have well ended up in a Concentration Camp like many others did. And I remember that "Jew" (A FELLOW GERMAN GOD DAMNIT, whose grandfather might have fought in the First World War for Germany as well as many other "Jews" did!) who told me (on TV) that once during a bombing night, his mother went out into the streets and shouted "MORE, MORE, MORE!" If you do not agree with these very simple observations, I wish you farewell into doom. Be sure: The only alternative you will achieve by opposing those who take arms to defend the free, "capitalist" world, is a world far less responsible to justice and man's rights than the one you know now. heartc
no, don't! but since you already did... i did read the d*** s*** in your post, and i know what i would be glad about: if there is no other place than this f*** forum, where an angry person like you will have the slightest chance to be read or even noticed!
BTW, anyone heard of the whereabouts of old Saddam? I betcha he's got a 40 amp battery lead hangin' off his dick right now... Lem
Maty, unlucky there is no way to "fight" terrorists, there are not war laws, you can't recognize the bad guys between the mass of peaple. You can fight any "terrorist country" killing only poor peaple and the thousand of terrorist groups who lives in all the world will be free to strike back. You can't talk to foundementalists as you can't negociate with them. Terrorists announced that Madrid attack is nothing compared to what will happend in future in USA ans Europe, maybe with some thousand of victims peaple will stop to react like idiots and European powers as USA will reason on real solutions instead to use the violence first. "Begin to learn how to survive or fuck political civilty" wich civilty? the killer one? the stealer one? or just the population who prefer wach the footbal on the TV maybe for forget how the modern politic civilty sux?
So how to stop the terrorists? Obviously fighting them is not a solution. this will evolve exactly in the total war heartc mentions. The more people you turn into martyrs, the more ordinary people you irritate - the more will sign-up for martyrdom. Extremely tight security measures and extended intelligence agencies may help - but about 90% of the time. While they drain the country`s resources in a similar manner war would. Besides they practically bereave the common citizen of his freedoms - the very basic things they are supposed to protect. Cutting the big financial sources of terrorists will decrease their abilities for hi-tech and complex assaults but wouldnt stop them entirely. Terrorism is cheap war. I see the best solution to removing from terrorism its potential human resources. Make the people like their lives, feel more secure, have things they wouldnt want to loose, and they will not volunteer for death. Remove the things that make them so angry, and they wont be so motivated for war. The ones that have already become terrorists will continue for sure, but they will be a decreasing nuumber.
(Off Topic) Come on guys, try to keep things friendly here, ok? Please refrain from mindless USA- (or Iraq) bashing. I kind of understand Heartc's posts, too often "discussion" is replaced with plain venting of polarised opinions... Keep it contructive! @ Heartc, if you do not read the posts others typed, it's just plain senseless to post . If you had read my posts for instance, you probably would've noticed this isn't another "USA-bashing"-topic. And yes, I hate those topics too, even though my opinions differ from yours. I even felt a bit insulted by your replies, mate... I am trying to do my goddamned best to explain my viewpoints, and the last thing I expect in return is a reply like: "Why would I bother? There is nothing to gain here which would change the slightest". Yes Heartc, you CAN change a lot! But you'll have to come up with valid arguments, posted in a way whcih clearly states that you respect people who think differently. And the moment someone posts something like: "Those US bastards think they can police the world" or something: ignore it. Those posts are not constructive. @ Lemmy: You are now saying SH should be tortured. Do you know what Saddam being tortured would imply? That the USA has become just as bad, sick and twisted. All the things the USA went to war for would be null and void the moment the current was "dailed up", so to speak. THAT would be highly questionable, to say the least... I mean, the USA invaded Iraq to END the torture and now they'd be torturing people themselves? You know what would happen if that became public knowledge???? Let's make a few things clear here: 1. At all: We're here to discuss and learn, NOT to cause more anger and hatred. We are all part of an international community and as such are "role-models" in a way. So pretty please with sugar on top: SHOW SOME RESPECT FOR EACHOTHER! 2. To the USA-bashers here: Just shouting "The usa invaded Iraq because of their oil" is bullshit. We've ALL heard this "argument" before, and I've never seen it proven. 3. To the Iraq-bashers here: I think we can accurately state that Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussain were NOT "on one team". 4. To all USA-bashers: Another favored argument is: "The USA are trying to police the world". Hmmmm, this is factually correct but sounds rather negative. Why not state it as "The USA are trying to get rid of non-democratic governments"? I mean, it's the same thing. For instance: the US involvement in WWII could be called "policing" as well, but in 1941 we were pretty damned happy when the US came to our help. Therefor THIS "policing"-stuff cannot be a valid argument against US-involvement. It's just stating an objective fact, albeit with a turn-of-words specifically used to give off a negative signal. That is VERY bad form in a discussion, people! To use this argument, one must say: "The USA are intervening in a country that doesn't want intervention" or use another phrase in which these negatives are avoided and your position is more obvious.
I already mentioned you'll make martyrs out of them, in fact, you might wanna read my first post in this thread again. I don't think you understand how muslem fundamentalists think... It's true that some of them (the suicidal bombers) are recruited from the lowest regions of society, if you would give them money it wouldn't solve much, nobody's life is perfect, the 'terrorist brains' will still find ways to persuade people into fighting for 'the cause'. People always believe things could go better. Besides, you'll never remove poverty. How are you going to remove things that make them angry if you are exactly what makes them angry? Lastly: terrorists fight for their religion, giving them money, giving them something to hold on to won't help at all, that's the western idea, that's exactly what they hate by all their heart, they don't want money, they want nothing, even if they had a perfect life their society is very very dependant on religion and in that way they will always have a 'cause' to fight for. <Z>
My dear Sebbo, I am not saying SH should be tortured, I'm betting that he is being tortured. But I'm actually not betting, I am alluding with a little bit of humor in a Mel Brooks sort of way (see avatar in upper left corner of post). But my question is serious as the whearabouts/current affairs of SH have been not noted in US press in quite a while now and am curious if anyone knows? You see I'm having a tea party this weekend and I'd love to call old Saddy himself and invite him over.... Lem
@ Zem: I have to say, I agree with Grobar. People in the Middle East are, on the whole, no different from us. They want educated, they want to be able to work, they want to be able to live in peace. Just the same as everyone else. Food on the table, water to drink. Currently these people have nothing, some even less than that. I reckon if you took 100 affluent people from Europe/USA and stuck them in those living conditions, most of them would be candidates for suicide bombers after a year. When you have nothing else to live for, you might as well at least die for something 'worthy'. @ Grobar: Our society was invaded from people with Arabic backgrounds 50 years ago, an steady stream of people that has now turned in to a tidal wave. They have affected the fabric of our society to the extent that languages like Urdu are the main language teaching in some mainstream UK schools. It goes right down to the downright stupidity of things like having to remove the 'golliwog' from jars of jam. I could give a hundred more serious examples of how our lives have had to change to accomodate the wishes and feelings of people from Pakistan, India etc. IMO their impact on the West has been greater, as the ordinary man on the street sees it, than our impact on their cultures. So why havent we developed such a hatred, such a desire to remove this influence, as they have? Life is valued much more in the developed world and, like you said earlier, giving people a reason to value their lives is imo the only way to stop people from wanting to do things like blowing themselves or other people up. If what you said is true, then it surely means that people in the developed world are capable of much more civilised behaviour than those from, say, the Middle East. I dont believe that is true. -glas-
Well, no, those people are physically no different from us, true, but for example they live in another climate, we all know the clichй of hotheaded italians, we call it southern temperament, but it's not only a clichй it's also a characteristic, additionally their geographical situation is completely different as well, etc etc, there are multiple factors that make them differ from us. And then there's the element of peer pressure, then there's the element of religion, then there's the element of secularisation. Over here people don't really mind other religions etc, we see religion as some sort of a hobby, they don't, their law systems are even interconnected with religion, don't think that because over here people tollerate different cultures they do that to the same extent over there. Fundamentalists fight exactly against the secularisation, I'll tell you again and again, they don't want money, increasing their life standard might lower the ammount of terrorists but it's not going to solve the issue, besides it's not really profitable in the long run anyway. They don't mean to fight you, they fight what you represent, they feel endangered, increasing their life standard won't mean that the terrorist networks can't recruit. It sounds kind of utopic IMHO. <Z>
