The terrorists want to kill me.

[Tacet_Blue]

maybe the nazi's called the resistance during the second world war also 'terrorists', who knows? in my view it's just a change in weapons and tactics nowadays...

Are you comparing the UN to the Nazi party...incredible, and those glorious suicide bombers to the resistance

You do realise that terroists attack civilian targets. The IRA, ETA, Al-Qada etc all like to plant nail bombs in crowded public places, like trains, or shopping precincts...I don't recall the resistance movement in WWII reducing themselves to such worm like behaviour.

Keep eating that space cake senna

 

[gt3 drifter]

now I don't know what this thread is about so maybe this will do. www.newgrounds.com/collection/osama.html and www.newgrounds.com/collection/iraq.html the osama one is the best. let me which one you think is the best.

 

[Danoff]

Well, you're welcome to convince me that American citizens are anything more than a small minority of the victims of bombs, assasinations, etc. that happen all over the world everyday.

I didn't claim that we were a huge part of the casualties. I just commented that the word "tiny" is a bit extreme and misleading.

don't care whether or not they understand the concecpt of a democratic government. I'm just pointing out that the naive idea of "terrorists" as people who are motivated by simple ideas like killing Americans or killing people who disagree with them is a stupid idea which doesn't reflect the broad ideas held by all sorts of terrorist or insurgent groups all over the world.

Yea you did say that - and I didn't argue with that. I was arguing that the following:

I don't think [the Iraqis are] at all prepared to share power in a government.

is irrelevant.

Feel free to pick a sentence or phrase of mine in one of my posts where I actually defended or condoned a terrorist atrocity or terrorist organistaion and I'll gladly defend my remarks.

As I said...

I’m not saying that you support terrorism or agree with their causes or methods. I’m just saying that the way you said it makes it sound like that’s the case.

 

[Tacet_Blue]

now I don't know what this thread is about

Try reading it...

so maybe this will do. www.newgrounds.com/collection/osama.html and www.newgrounds.com/collection/iraq.html the osama one is the best. let me which one you think is the best.

Your links are 404 errors, but after looking at the site index, I don't think it would be worth your while fixing the links.

 

[///M-Spec]

Yet another warning to watch the language and refrain from personal attacks. There are some good posts here, but this thread will be locked and official warnings handed out if I see another violation.


M

 

[sennafreak]

in the heat of politics men can say strange things....

 

[sennafreak]

watch out with that spacecake fellas, me mate once passed out by a slice.

 

[KieranMurphy]

Has the level of debate in the USA when it comes to international terrorism been reduced to the level that someone who tries to explain or understand the motives behind a terrorist or insurgent group has been reduced to the level of a "supporter" or "defender" or "condoner" of terrorism?

Is the situation really so bad that people like me are afraid to defend our positions because there's people out there willing to defend themselves and all too willing to pigeon hole innocent people like me as defenders and condoners of terrorism?

I weep for the future of the USA if that's what you have been reduced to.

The things I've said in this thread I can say to friends to family and have a spirited discussion about terrorism or international mayhem. But voice the same opinion on an American hosted website and it's "condoning" or "supporting" terrorism. I weep for the future of the United States of America if that's the typical or normal opinion of the voting public.


KM.

 

[Solid Fro]

What are the motives behind terrorism?

To wipe out the Jewish infidels?

To wipe out the American infidels who support the Jewish infidels?

To wipe out the whole western democracy?

 

[ledhed]

KM read some of the other post on the subject. I know I have expressed much the same thoughts on the subject as you have and I do not think any sane person would think I condone terrorist. I think you are taking Danoffs comments for more than they are worth. Its worth repeating though , that its important to know your enemy and what motivates him if only because it makes it easier to defend against them or kill them. Terrorist and terrorism may be subjective...the British called the colonial militia " terrorist " and guirillas because they liked to hide behind trees and snipe at them. But its all relative. They have declared war on us whatever you want to call them.

 

[sennafreak]

the jews take land that is not theirs and repress the people who lived there with military superiority and greedful ethics.

america takes land that isn't theirs (how was it founded), or uses dirty political tactics to spread havoc in it's own interests.

give those two their well deserved punishment by the hand off those who suffered and the western world will stay alive...
if someone is responsible for the killing of your familie or the raping of your land, you will want to give him back the same pain and rightly so. america is the biggest factor in this world for the dissapearing of morals and values, it's the spreader of a kapitalistic virus that has no sence for justice or brotherhood...only $$$

 

[///M-Spec]

Has the level of debate in the USA when it comes to international terrorism been reduced to the level that someone who tries to explain or understand the motives behind a terrorist or insurgent group has been reduced to the level of a "supporter" or "defender" or "condoner" of terrorism?

Is the situation really so bad that people like me are afraid to defend our positions because there's people out there willing to defend themselves and all too willing to pigeon hole innocent people like me as defenders and condoners of terrorism?

I weep for the future of the USA if that's what you have been reduced to.

The things I've said in this thread I can say to friends to family and have a spirited discussion about terrorism or international mayhem. But voice the same opinion on an American hosted website and it's "condoning" or "supporting" terrorism. I weep for the future of the United States of America if that's the typical or normal opinion of the voting public.

So the way for you to respond is by doing some 'pigeon hole-ing' of your own? I see one poster who to took exception to your remark, and your artful response was to cuss him out and assume he speaks for all Americans?

Perhaps you can direct some of your uncanny ability to understand the minds and hearts of people (like terrorists, for instance), to understand the hearts and minds of other people, (like some Americans, for instance)... who perhaps are still a little touchy on the subject of buildings exploding.. and maybe rightfully so?

Or if that's too much trouble for you, maybe you should just let it go?


M

 

[Danoff]

Perhaps I should also take ///M's advice and let it go. But I feel the need to further explain my position. I will not continue to respond after this post, so anything KM responds with will be the last word on the subject.

Has the level of debate in the USA when it comes to international terrorism been reduced to the level that someone who tries to explain or understand the motives behind a terrorist or insurgent group has been reduced to the level of a "supporter" or "defender" or "condoner" of terrorism?

Let’s take a closer look.

Another tactic seen in Northern Ireland was for Loyalist extremists to deliberately try to match the IRA atrocity for atrocity so that every time the IRA performed one of their "actions", they'd respond by doing something equally atrocious to Catholic civilians in order to try to get them to stop supporting the IRA because it was backfiring on them.

Let’s break this down. The IRA was committing atrocities (ie: the terrorists didn’t start it). The terrorists were responding to those atrocities with “equal” acts (ie: they aren’t any worse than the IRA). The motive for this was to get people to stop supporting the IRA (a good thing as you’ve laid out the case).

It’s obvious that in your paragraph you put the IRA in a bad light, since you indicate that effectively “they started it”. On the other hand, you paint the terrorists as doing something no worse than the IRA if not making it seem more reasonable.

I know almost nothing about the Northern Ireland – IRA conflict, but I know enough to know that you’re in a tough spot with the paragraph I quoted. Either the Ireland terrorists are truly justified somehow and you’ve compared them to the terrorists in Iraq (which would indicate that you support the Iraqi terrorists), or the Ireland terrorists were not justified and yet you’ve taken a sympathetic stand with them. Or neither side is correct and yet you have painted the terrorists in a better light.

Granted, I’m reading waaaaaaay to much into what you said – and you probably meant none of what I read into it – which is why I said that I didn’t think that you condone or support terrorism. I’m just pointing out why I think you could be more careful with how you put things.

Let’s continue…

I think they just want everyone to get out and leave them to what lots of people see as an inevitable Iraqi civil war. A lot of opinion suggests that a stable Iraqi democracy is a non-starter.

The use of the word “just” is fairly incriminating here. It indicates that perhaps it’s not too much for the terrorists to ask that people get out and leave them to a possibly inevitable civil war. Your description of it as potentially inevitable supports the terrorist position, and you continue by saying that lots of opinion indicates that it is inevitable.

If you’re not against the US being in Iraq, I’d be surprised considering this paragraph. It’s fine to be against the US being there (though it misunderstands the situation), but you could be do more to not support the methods that the terrorists are using.

Once you’re sympathetic to the causes of either the Iraqi or Nothern Ireland terrorist groups (which I’m not certain that you are), your language is going to naturally show it as you underplay the actions that the terrorists take and appeal to their sense of reason.


Once again, to restate – I’m not saying that you support terrorism or terrorist methods. It’s just the way you said what you did. I’m quite shocked that you think you don’t need to be careful when explaining the motives of barbarous groups who recently killed and are currently killing the countrymen of the people on this message board.

 

[ledhed]

Danoff I think you are reading WAY too much into what he has written ...and even looking at it after reading your post I do not see the same thing you do. Have we gotten to the point , that if a fact or opinion can even remotely be seen to justify a terrorist act we shouldnt post it ? What are we afraid of ? Who is a terrorist is in the eyes of the beholder. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter or hero martyr , thats been true throughout history and will not change no matter who cant bear to hear it. Do you really think you will care what the person who is killing you is called anyway ? You will be just as dead no matter if by bomb or rifle bullet or germ or nerve gas....unless of course you either surrender to thier demands and put yourself at thier mercy...or kill the bastards first before they kill you...no matter what they are called. Thats the only decision that has to be made...give up or fight.

 

[Famine]

the jews take land that is not theirs and repress the people who lived there with military superiority and greedful ethics.

america takes land that isn't theirs (how was it founded), or uses dirty political tactics to spread havoc in it's own interests.

give those two their well deserved punishment by the hand off those who suffered and the western world will stay alive...
if someone is responsible for the killing of your familie or the raping of your land, you will want to give him back the same pain and rightly so. america is the biggest factor in this world for the dissapearing of morals and values, it's the spreader of a kapitalistic virus that has no sence for justice or brotherhood...only $$$

Just for reference, there has never been a country called "Palestine".

The IRA was committing atrocities (ie: the terrorists didn’t start it).

The IRA ARE terrorists.

There are separatist (or Nationalist) terrorists, who blow stuff up, kill people and, apparently, rob banks because they hate the idea of England ruling them (they believe Northern Ireland is Irish, not British). These are the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and its various offshoots - including the "Real IRA" and the "Continuity IRA". Sinn Fein represents the IRA's political front - but its elected members permanently refuse to take up their seats in the UK Parliament (since they believe they're Irish, not British). The two main faces of Sinn Fein, Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams, are both acknowledged as "former members" of the IRA. Imagine Osama bin Laden running in the Afghanistan elections - that's how crazy the UK can be.

There are also Loyalist (or Unionist) terrorists, who blow stuff up and kill people because the IRA did it. They believe that Northern Ireland is British, not Irish. These are the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), the Ulster Defence Assocation (UDA), the Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF), the Red Hand Defenders and the Orange Volunteers. I'm not aware of any affiliation to political parties, although a Unionist party - the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) - holds the majority in the Northern Ireland assembly.


Both sets of terrorists are terrorists - intent on harming normal people in their daily duties in order to further their single-track political mindset. They call themselves "paramilitaries".


Some claim that Loyalist groups aren't as bad as the IRA, because they only respond to Nationalsit violence - in the same way the the Israeli Army only kills Palestinians after suicide bombings... Some claim that the Nationalist groups aren't as bad as the Loyalists, because they target army personnel predominantly (like that makes it any better). Loyalists have killed around 700 people, mostly Catholic and civilian. Nationalists have killed around 600 civilians, mostly Protestant, but a further 1200 British army personnel.

 

[gt3 drifter]

Try reading it...

Your links are 404 errors, but after looking at the site index, I don't think it would be worth your while fixing the links.

I tried them and your right only one site works (the top one) so i apoligise.

 

[gt3 drifter]

watch out with that spacecake fellas, me mate once passed out by a slice.

wats spacecake can somebody pm me saying what it is.

 

[Danoff]

The IRA ARE terrorists.

There are separatist (or Nationalist) terrorists, who blow stuff up, kill people and, apparently, rob banks because they hate the idea of England ruling them (they believe Northern Ireland is Irish, not British). These are the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and its various offshoots - including the "Real IRA" and the "Continuity IRA". Sinn Fein represents the IRA's political front - but its elected members permanently refuse to take up their seats in the UK Parliament (since they believe they're Irish, not British). The two main faces of Sinn Fein, Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams, are both acknowledged as "former members" of the IRA. Imagine Osama bin Laden running in the Afghanistan elections - that's how crazy the UK can be.

There are also Loyalist (or Unionist) terrorists, who blow stuff up and kill people because the IRA did it. They believe that Northern Ireland is British, not Irish. These are the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), the Ulster Defence Assocation (UDA), the Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF), the Red Hand Defenders and the Orange Volunteers. I'm not aware of any affiliation to political parties, although a Unionist party - the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) - holds the majority in the Northern Ireland assembly.

Thanks Famine.

So the UDA is the um UUP with... wait...

Dumb question (which I probably shouldn't ask because it's mostly in jest). If you're from Ireland, how are you not Irish?

 

[Famine]

The UK ruled Ireland as a whole until 1916. It then divided it up into the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. The Republic of Ireland is a country in its own right, with its own currency, government, armed forces and is under no control from the UK. Northern Ireland - like Gibraltar - is part of the UK and is ruled by the UK, with UK currency and UK military forces (the Royal Navy, the Royal Air Force and the Royal Army).

If you are born in Northern Ireland, you are a British citizen, not Irish because you aren't from Ireland. If you are born in Gibraltar, you are a British citizen, not Spanish. If you are born in the Republic of Ireland, you are Irish.

 

[Danoff]

If you are born in Northern Ireland, you are a British citizen, not Irish because you aren't from Ireland. If you are born in Gibraltar, you are a British citizen, not Spanish. If you are born in the Republic of Ireland, you are Irish.

Kinda like canadians being born in North America but not being American.

 

[Famine]

Yeah. That whole thing...

 

[Flerbizky]

It's probably personal... Sorry mate....

 

[KieranMurphy]

What are the motives behind terrorism?

To wipe out the Jewish infidels?

To wipe out the American infidels who support the Jewish infidels?

To wipe out the whole western democracy?

The goal of some terrorist organisations may well be to wipe out Jewish "infidels" or to wipeout American "infidels" or to target Western democracy in general, but this is another example of the simplistic thinking behind some people who discuss terrorism. You simply can't lump all organisations who use terrorist tactics into one lump and ask what are their motivations.

Are the IRA and UVF in Northern Ireland not terrorists? They don't give a hoot about Jewish or American "infidels" and they've no beef against Western democracy in general.

Are the Tamil Tigers not terrorists? As far as I understand their situation is a local situation to do with Sri Lankan politicans and religion and nothing to do with the worldwide Islamist umbrella groups like Al Qa'eda.

There are groups in South America like FARC and the Shining Path who are undoubtedly terrorist in their methods but have no Islamic motivations. Their motives spring from local politics and may be strongly related to the horrible economic and political mismanagement that's been the sad history of many countries in Latin America.

There's nothing wrong with a bit of spirited discussion of terrorism and it's roots and cause and possible solutions, but when you dump all terrorist groups into a single group and try to understand them thus, you're not going to solve anything.


KM.

 

[KieranMurphy]

Its worth repeating though , that its important to know your enemy and what motivates him if only because it makes it easier to defend against them or kill them.

This is absolutely true. Which is why it's very important to avoid simple generalisations about "terrorists" and to realise that you have to appreciate the economic/religious/social/political/etc reasons that people and groups resort to terrorist tactics in the first place and to not try to understand terrorism as some sort of conglomerate than can be understand as a single entity.


KM.

 

[KieranMurphy]

So the way for you to respond is by doing some 'pigeon hole-ing' of your own? I see one poster who to took exception to your remark, and your artful response was to cuss him out and assume he speaks for all Americans?

Perhaps you can direct some of your uncanny ability to understand the minds and hearts of people (like terrorists, for instance), to understand the hearts and minds of other people, (like some Americans, for instance)... who perhaps are still a little touchy on the subject of buildings exploding.. and maybe rightfully so?

Or if that's too much trouble for you, maybe you should just let it go?


M

The reason I took offence is that I resent being targetted out as a sympathiser or condoner of terrorism simply because I took the trouble to try to explain that it's not as simple as some people think or wish it to be.

The reason I went into detail about Northern Ireland groups like the IRA and the UVF is because I'm Irish and I've grown up listening to it everyday on the radio and watching the troubles everyday on the news.

I was merely trying to give examples that debunked the simplistic post I quoted which suggested that terrorists are people who kill people they don't like or disagree with. I was giving you examples of how that's a very untrue and very unuseful idea of how terrorist groups work.

I'm very sorry that I snapped down people's throats and used foul or abusive language in my posts. I just didn't like the idea that I was condoning any sort of violence because I was just trying to explain my understanding of how terrorism worked in certain parts of the world.


KM.

 

[KieranMurphy]

It’s obvious that in your paragraph you put the IRA in a bad light, since you indicate that effectively “they started it”. On the other hand, you paint the terrorists as doing something no worse than the IRA if not making it seem more reasonable.

Perhaps you misunderstood me. As far as I'm concerned the IRA are terrorists. The whole point behind my post was to clarify that there's all sorts of different groups the world over with different political, economic or religious reasons behind their terrorist tactics. I just took the example of Northern Ireland because I happen to be Irish so I understand that situation better than any other. I was explaining both Republican and Loyalist motivations to help you understand that terrorism has many different complex causes, not just the simple motives some have posted here like to kill people they agree with or to wipe out Jewish or American infidels.

I know almost nothing about the Northern Ireland – IRA conflict, but I know enough to know that you’re in a tough spot with the paragraph I quoted. Either the Ireland terrorists are truly justified somehow and you’ve compared them to the terrorists in Iraq (which would indicate that you support the Iraqi terrorists), or the Ireland terrorists were not justified and yet you’ve taken a sympathetic stand with them. Or neither side is correct and yet you have painted the terrorists in a better light.

I wasn't trying to compare different terrorist groups or to suggest that any one group is justified in their atrocities more than any other group. I just picked some random terrorist organistions and explained what I think their motivations to be to explain that they're different. That the situation is extremely complicated and that different groups from different places have very different reasons behind their actions. I'm not sure how I've actually sympathised with any of the groups I've named.

Granted, I’m reading waaaaaaay to much into what you said – and you probably meant none of what I read into it – which is why I said that I didn’t think that you condone or support terrorism. I’m just pointing out why I think you could be more careful with how you put things.

Yes, I think there has been a misunderstanding. I'm sorry if I wasn't clearer. Hopefully my last few posts will have made my situation more understandable.

KM.

 

[KieranMurphy]

The IRA ARE terrorists.

Just to clarify things, I agree with Famine. I've not sympathy for the IRA or their tactics. They are terrorists.

Sinn Fein represents the IRA's political front - but its elected members permanently refuse to take up their seats in the UK Parliament (since they believe they're Irish, not British). The two main faces of Sinn Fein, Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams, are both acknowledged as "former members" of the IRA. Imagine Osama bin Laden running in the Afghanistan elections - that's how crazy the UK can be.

It's even crazier than that. Everyone in Ireland (north and south) knows that Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams were both leading IRA commanders in their day, but Gerry Adams still denies it to this day. Sinn Fein supporters and their opponents both know it, but Gerry Adams being the politicain he is, insists on denying it. Martin McGuinness has admitted to being the leader of the Derry Brigade of the IRA.

There are also Loyalist (or Unionist) terrorists, who blow stuff up and kill people because the IRA did it. They believe that Northern Ireland is British, not Irish. These are the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF), the Ulster Defence Assocation (UDA), the Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF), the Red Hand Defenders and the Orange Volunteers. I'm not aware of any affiliation to political parties, although a Unionist party - the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) - holds the majority in the Northern Ireland assembly.

The UUP are a totally legitimate political party with no ties to terrorist groups. As are nuthatch Ian Paisley's party, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). The two main Loyalist paramilitary groups are both linked to their own political parties. The Progressive Unionist Party (PUP) are the political front to the UVF and the Ulster Democratic Party (UDP) are the political front to the UDA.


KM.

 

[ledhed]

To the Catholics in Northern Ireland the British are the terrorist . To the Jews in Palestine the men who blew up the British are heros and worthy of being made Prime Minister of the new country that was founded after the terrorism worked. To the people of Palestine , who have no country and no army , the men who fight back , and for them by killing themselves , along with the people they percieve as thier enemy. I'd say they are seen as heros at least to the Palestinians and thier supporters..WE on the other hand see a bunch of old Jewish ladies and some kids in a bus being blow to smithereens and see NOTHING what so ever heroic about it. You are deluding yourselves if you do not think that to some in the world Osama bin Laden is not a HERO . As long as he has support he stays alive. It says alot that with all we throw against him he still has not been caught. We destroyed a government to get him and occupied a country..he still has fanatical support. Remember what you saw on TV ? The people dancing and celebrating when the planes hit the towers ? Try to imagine what it would take for you to react the same way to such a disaster . Thats what the US is fighting , not so much Osama but what makes people want to dance in the streets and cheer when naked US soldiers are dragged through the streets. We can kill the world 10 times over we have the power. but unless we really want to do that we need to get to the people who are the breeding ground for the terrorist and either change thier minds about them or kill them all because when someone feels so strongly that they have been wronged ESPECIALLY in that corner of the world , they will be comming for you. And they do not have the quaint idea that only soldiers are targets. If you are an enemy ALL of your people are enemys , your dogs , your buildings ...the air you breath is an enemy. do not make the mistake of thinking that everyone has the same value system you do.
Thats the enemy we are fighting and we need to adjust our attitudes and our tactics to deal with it...unless of course we think its all too much trouble and not worth the bloodshed..then we just have to give up .

 

[Tacet_Blue]

To the Catholics in Northern Ireland the British are the terrorist .

I can't agree with that one ledhed.
The British occupation in NI is a military one, they might see us as oppressors but not terrorists, surely. Terrorists are covert, they disguise themselves as civilians, and use violence to achieve political objectives. The military presence in NI is meant to keep the peace.

However..there are SAS operatives in NI under deep cover. Their method of operation could be seen to be similar to that of a terrorist. Not wearing a military uniform exempts them from protection under the Geneva convention, and their covert tactics and infiltration could be said to be the same as terrorist activity.

 

[ledhed]

Thats my whole point. Of course you do not see them as terrorist. The people who want a United Ireland and the removal of the British as an occuping power do. And the SAS is doing counter insurgency work...

However..there are SAS operatives in NI under deep cover. Their method of operation could be seen to be similar to that of a terrorist. Not wearing a military uniform exempts them from protection under the Geneva convention, and their covert tactics and infiltration could be said to be the same as terrorist activity.

Thats whats know as changing your tactics to defeat the enemy...
Of course OTHERS ...most likely the ones you are beating to get information or whos door is being broken down in the middle of the night etc. etc. will most likely call it terrorism.
The best way to defeat an insurgancy is to use the Insurgents tactics to your advantage...BUT we wont do that we are too civilised..so we will kill them the old fashioned way and take losses.
At any rate I had a girlfriend from Gallway (sp) county cork ? she liked U2 and politics along with a spiff and a good shagging..so thats how I got my irish education on the " troubles" along with my Irish friends in south Philly who support " the Cause "...although the only cause I could see involved beer whiskey and singing until we fell down.