For all the hippies

[gdalton]

I know that it doesn’t matter how much I say or how much proof you put in someone’s face, if they believe something they will stick with that belief, but I can’t take this “America is bad for killing terrorist” crap. Terrorist kill innocent people, men, women, children they do not care, they only care about spreading fear through violence. If we sit back and just leave them alone, like some people are suggesting we do, what do think is going to happen, all these people who have no problem killing themselves and taking as many people with them as possible are going to wake up the morning after we “leave them alone” and just start singing on the mountain side about how great it is to finally have peace in the world. Listen, go out and do a little research for your self, don’t take my word as truth or automatically believe everything you see and read that is labeled news. What we are trying to do is rid the world of people who only want to destroy, they may label their cause as religious but somehow I don’t think these maniacs are going to be welcomed by any god that I can think of. If we sit around doing nothing about the situation then we are only waiting for another 9/11.
And by the way for all those who keep arguing the same crap about Iraq here is a few facts for you. Iraq was connected with terrorism, read the 9/11 report for this little tid bit, this is taken directly from www.gpoaccess.gov/911, in the report they describe a terrorist cell in Iraq that was taking a beating from the Kurds, the report says “In 2001, with Bin Laden’s help they re-formed into an organization called Ansar al Islam. There are indications that by then the Iraqi regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common Kurdish enemy.” And it goes on to describe a longer history of connections saying that in 1997 Saddam was staying clear of Bin Laden because Saddam was trying to re-build relationships with some of his Middle Eastern neighbors but by 1998 Saddam had changed his mind and “it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative. In March 1998, after Bin Laden’s public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Laden. Sources reported that one, or perhaps both, of these meetings were apparently arranged through Bin Laden’s Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis.” The report goes on to say that in 1999 Al Qaeda’s relationship with the Taliban in Afghanistan was beginning to become strained so more meetings were set up and “Iraqi officials offered Bin Laden a safe haven in Iraq” which Bin Laden declined because he felt his position in Afghanistan was more favorable. Then to top it all off after the 9/11 attacks Bush received “A Defense Department paper for the Camp David briefing book on the strategic concept for the war on terrorism specified three priority targets for initial action: al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Iraq.”
Every time I hear another “where are the WMD’s” argument I know to cut the conversation short because these people refuse to find the truth and instead just listen to all the crap that feeds their point of view. But for arguments sake how’s this, there have been several reports, often over looked, of small amounts of WMD materials found all around Iraq but I believe the biggest find was reported in a 2004 article written in the New York Times which said that 500 tons of uranium was found in Iraq after the 2003 invasion. Now if that isn’t massively destructive I guess my definition of WMD’s is misconstrued.
If people could be trusted to not bother anyone anarchy would be the perfect society, but instead a lot of people are crazy and will use any excuse they can put their crazy hands on to hurt others. I know war sucks and America isn’t perfect but at least we are trying, I just don’t think the military would be very effective if they just held up cardboard signs that read “please don’t hurt us”.

[AlmostStock]

So you think if we can somehow kill enough of them the rest will just give up? I don't. The more we kill the more we make. The least we can do is not make things worse, which is what many who aren't even hippie's believe we have done.

BTW- If everyone was a hippie there would be no war. Maybe an occasional argument over boggarting a dobbie but that's about it.

[gdalton]

Originally Posted by AlmostStock

So you think if we can somehow kill enough of them the rest will just give up? I don't. The more we kill the more we make. The least we can do is not make things worse, which is what many who aren't even hippie's believe we have done.

Hey I'm open for suggestions, any plan that would keep people from getting killed would be great just let me know how we can do that.

[AlmostStock]

Originally Posted by gdalton

Hey I'm open for suggestions, any plan that would keep people from getting killed would be great just let me know how we can do that.

Sounds like hippie talk if you ask me.

Wouldn't you be surprised to read the plan to end all terrorist activity on AF? Obviously there are no easy answers but it is still one of the most interesting and worthy topics.

It seems to me we need to get to the root cause of the problem. Terrorism is only a tactic and not the root cause. Maybe if we figure out why they think and act this way we can work on that. Some will consider this as sort of "giving in". But considering ALL of the costs of our present strategy and the results, this could very well prove more effective and less expensive.

[gdalton]

At least you are giving it some thought, a lot of people just say "no war" and never actualy put forth any arguments as to what the alternative should be.
I just added the hippie stuff to ruffle feathers, no one likes to be called a dirty tree hugging hippie exept for dirty tree hugging hippies.

[AlmostStock]

Originally Posted by gdalton

I just added the hippie stuff to ruffle feathers, no one likes to be called a dirty tree hugging hippie exept for dirty tree hugging hippies.

It wouldn't bother me. I can think of plenty of worse things to be called.

I'd rather be a dirty tree hugging hippie than a dirty money grubbing politician!

[YogsVR4]

Its all about power. As long as people crave it, they'll go to various lengths to get it and then keep it. Be it political or religous, people want to cast their will on others. Left or right. Liberal or conservative - name your opposites; they all go to some lenghts to gain power.

[T4 Primera]

I agree that there will always be some who are willing to F!@#K it all up.

Although they are dangerous in small numbers, when they gain popular support they become immensely more dangerous.

My suggestion as a first step would be to stop giving people a reason to support them. IOW, destroying civilian infrastructure, accepting civilian deaths as "collateral damage" while not even bothering to keep count of them and razing cities to the ground is not the way to win hearts and minds. It merely serves to make more enemies.

Without popular support, it becomes almost impossible for them to hide.

Contrary to what many say (not necessarily think), this situation did not begin with 9/11 - it goes much further back than that.

The situation that the US finds itself in now is one where some of their enemies have literally nothing left to lose (and they hold the US responsible for their situation) while the US has everything to lose.

People can only be pushed so far...even hippies

Here's a word - BLOWBACK - if you are unfamiliar with this term and what it means in reference to the US foreign policy, then you need to do more research.

[codycool]

In a perfect society Hippies would rule, and communism would be our way of life. However we do not, so people want power and others want to live off the rich. The strong will survive, this is how humans have lived, and will continue to live. "Only the dead have seen the end of war." Plato

[lazysmurff]

Originally Posted by gdalton

Hey I'm open for suggestions, any plan that would keep people from getting killed would be great just let me know how we can do that.

we can start by withdrawing our unilateral support of israel. they've been a country long enough, its time for them to stand on their own feet, without relying on american handouts and strong armed policy initiatives.

then, we can actually start to look like we give a damn about the innocent Iraqis and Afgans we've killed/are killing. if its possible to tally exactly how many civilians terrorists kill, then its possible to tally exactly how many civilians our armies kill. lets get on it.

after that, it would be a good idea to finally accept, as a nation, that perhaps not everyone on earth WANTS to live in a democratic country ruled by american standards of government. perhaps some people would like to choose for themselve what kind of country theylive in. spreading democracy and freedom is a nice ideal and all, but some people dont want it, and some of those that do want it might want to get it without american help and all the strings that come attached....imagine that.

forcing our values on other cultures (as cool as our values may be) will only breed resentment.

and theres my plan for reducing the terrorist threat to americans. ill be running in 2020, i would appreciate your support.

[gdalton]

Originally Posted by lazysmurff

after that, it would be a good idea to finally accept, as a nation, that perhaps not everyone on earth WANTS to live in a democratic country ruled by american standards of government. perhaps some people would like to choose for themselve what kind of country theylive in. spreading democracy and freedom is a nice ideal and all, but some people dont want it, and some of those that do want it might want to get it without american help and all the strings that come attached....imagine that.

People who live under the rule of dictatorship did not choose for themselves what kind of country they live in. I think you're kind of missing the point as to why we are over there, it's not just about freeing millions of people from the homicidal maniacs that rule their country, although that is a pretty nice side effect, it's about removing known threats to our country and fostering the types of government that do not promote violence as a means of control.

[gdalton]

Oh yah, on the idea about making a count of all the inocent civilians we have killed during the war, maybe we should take a look back and find out how many inocent civilians Saddam killed on average per year then use that as a means of determining a ratio of the numbers of people killed by our forces as compared to the number of people that would have been killed by Saddam.

[T4 Primera]

SInce you brought Saddam into it, he is going to be tried for the murder of 150 odd people as a result of an assasination/overthrow plot against him.

Many think that once convicted, he will be duly executed without facing all the other charges against him. Essentially this will deny him the opportunity to present testimony for all the other crimes he is accused of and thus prevent him from revealing the complicity of the US in those crimes.

[YogsVR4]

The compliance of the US in those crimes? Good grief.

[lazysmurff]

Originally Posted by gdalton

People who live under the rule of dictatorship did not choose for themselves what kind of country they live in.

actually, you are wrong. you DO choose what kind of government you want to live under, even if it is a dictatorship. though...albeit in a round about way. ill put it like this:

if you are not actively attempting to change the government under which you live, or remove yourself from the country, you are, by me, considered to be in a state of passive acceptance of your situation, and thereby are voicing your "ok" with the current state of affairs.

Originally Posted by gdalton

it's not just about freeing millions of people from the homicidal maniacs that rule their country, although that is a pretty nice side effect, it's about removing known threats to our country

still holding on to that lie are we? sorry to hear that. even the administration is taking a difference stance these days, claiming we're there to "spread democracy".

its hard to continue claiming a country poses a serious threat when it turns out that they dont have any WMD and that their military couldnt have repelled an invasion by the girl scouts.

Originally Posted by gdalton

and fostering the types of government that do not promote violence as a means of control.

this statement is so laughable, i almost want to ignore it, but im obviously not going to.

rather than sit here and point out all the obvious regimes that also use violence as a means of control, im going to ask you the age old question of why it is okay for us and our allies to use violence to achieve our ends and control populations of people if its not ok for anyone else to do so?

funny how our countries history is rife with examples of violence dominating our foriegn and domestic policies, yet we sweep it under a rug, while we sanction and invade other countries for doing the same thing. whats wrong for them is wrong for us, and if we are incapable of living up toour own standards, its high time we stopped judging other countries.

america is not some infallible idiom of righteousness and global moral superiority. its time we stopped treating it like it is.

Originally Posted by gdalton

maybe we should take a look back and find out how many inocent civilians Saddam killed on average per year then use that as a means of determining a ratio of the numbers of people killed by our forces as compared to the number of people that would have been killed by Saddam.

well, while i dont have a "year by year" break of saddam hussiens killings, i can tell you this. everything ive read puts Kurdish death tolls around 40-50 thousand. 10 thousand of which were gassed, though evidence is actually undertermined on whether this was even Iraqi gas, or if it was, instead, iranian gas. these numbers are hear-say from the kurdish representatives, and are, as such, likely to be embelished. though that does not lessen the severity of the act.

we, on the other hand, have killed about 25 thousand Iraqi civilians, and something like 3200 afghan civilians. so a little over half the highest claims by the Kurdish people.

Saddam Hussien was in power for, i think, 22 years. we've been there 3ish years. if we continue at the rate we're going now, in 22 years, we'll have killed about 150,000 iraqi civilians. a number which pales Mr hussiens.