Religious answer to terrorist problem

[Mr_Lee_ 0]

Hybrid, do us all a favour, stop being a troll or get lost. If you have nothing interesting/helpful to say, don't say anything at all.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

speaking of definitions

 

Conspiracy theory: A theory seeking to explain a disputed case or matter as a plot by a secret group or alliance rather than an individual or isolated act.

 

yet we proved that the 9/11 bombings were done by a group known as Al Queda. hmm....ltos fo conspiracy there. yup. I mean of course the US bombed its own buildingsd, killed several thousand of its own people, and partially riuned the economy, just so we couold go to war in a country that we alreayd had the plans and power to do so in anyway. oh yeah, lots os sense there.

 

:roll: :roll:

 

come off it. If they wanted us all dead, we would be. Wake up and get yur head outa the clouds.

 

Yes we should have jsut said Saddam is bad, instead of goin on the whole WMD thing, but you know what ? Scuds + bio weapons = WMD, and he had tghe potential for both. so shut it you. we are saving lives.

[F15pilotX 4]

Murder is to kill, simple enough. Soldiers are killing, that is murder, however its for survival so its considered lawful. Either way the murderers are in the government. These soldiers simply are doing their job, which they think is protecting their country.

You are getting close to insane you moron!!! Someone just gave you a CLEAR dictionary definition of what murder is, and you still insist on condemning our soldiers as MURDERERS :bang:

 

<1> The USA legally declared war on Saddam's regime, so our soldiers are not murdering fanatical militants (Yes, that is who they fight :wink:).

<2> Our soldiers are shooting them, not beating and/or burning them, unlike what those fanaticals have done to CIVILIANS and soldiers alike.

 

Now, why did you call them murderers again, you malicious fool? :roll:

[General Leang 0]

Because the Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win.

 

I really wish this was just me making stupid comments to mock the crazies who believe in their hearts and minds that we are the World Empire and terrorists, insurgents, those who wish death on the West and to bring death to Americans and to Western people are the rebel alliance, but as most of us know this is not the case. These were the words of Michael Moore, who I believe Hybrid is a fan of, a man who in all fairness everyone who does support him should know better, as there is every reason his desire to become a suicide bomber and kill Americans as portrayed in Team America is an accurate portrayal.

 

I do have some insight to the original question. One of the most dangerous things about the Devil is he is a great deciever. All the agents of influence, those who make you think you work for one cause when in fact you are working for another, have nothing on him. It is not out of the question for the Devil to have convinced people to commit terrorist acts.

 

As for Muslim terrorists wanting to destroy the West because it promotes itself too much, I can see the logic of this. But how do you explain the car bombings of Indonesia, or the attacks on Egypt, Spain, or even Saudi Arabia, a terrorist supporting country? By that logic it would be America that would continue to be the target, or American interests. At the risk of giving terrorists the idea, were they to concentrate their efforts on just the one target, America, they would probably have a lot more support given the hatred the world has to America. By killing as many people as they can, any support they might have gained is lost.

[Waraddict 0]

As for Muslim terrorists wanting to destroy the West because it promotes itself too much, I can see the logic of this. But how do you explain the car bombings of Indonesia, or the attacks on Egypt, Spain, or even Saudi Arabia, a terrorist supporting country? By that logic it would be America that would continue to be the target, or American interests. At the risk of giving terrorists the idea, were they to concentrate their efforts on just the one target, America, they would probably have a lot more support given the hatred the world has to America. By killing as many people as they can, any support they might have gained is lost.

 

Arabian terrorist groups usually stick to terrorising their own or neighbouring countries as they view the leaders of such countries not complying enough to their belief in their own countries, its the more likely and traditional target such groups take, there is no advantage in attacking the West unless it is interrupting in their society.

 

Basically what I am saying is, the best we can do is prevent them from terrorising the West.

 

Also, you have to realise terrorists are not a unified group, it is a strategy, there are hundreds, maybe even thousands of terrorist groups, and they tend more to splinter then to unite. Terrorism will always exist, just as war will, we have to watch out giving reasons to people to use it, just as we have to watch out giving reasons for war.

 

Which also brings me to the concern that Bush is obviously supporting the fear of the War on Terrorism, in what scenario would the war on terrorism ever be won? You might aswell have a war on war.

[General Leang 0]

Yes...but Al Qaeda, not allies of them or splinter groups, have not solely targeted America and attempted to drum up support for attacks against America. Jimaar Islamiah for example, you can excuse that because they are an ally of Al Qaeda, not Al Qaeda itself. And it cannot be said that terrorist attacks are because of Iraq, Afghanistan or actions the West have taken against terrorists Muslim and otherwise. America only retalliated after September 11. They did nothing over the USS Cole, or the Khober Towers, or the Beirut barrecks. Criminal prosecutions were carried out for Oklaholma and the original WTC bombing, but no military intervention. Only the terrorists themselves would have not wanted retalliation after 9/11.

[F15pilotX 4]

They did nothing over the USS Cole, or the Khober Towers, or the Beirut barrecks. Criminal prosecutions were carried out for Oklaholma and the original WTC bombing, but no military intervention. Only the terrorists themselves would have not wanted retalliation after 9/11.

Good point, but as for the Beirut and USS Cole bombings, those were very delicate situations, since they were in predominately Muslim (and mabye terror supporting countries :wink: As for 9/11, 5,000 lives lost is not a small deal; that was like a slap in the face to America, and what self-respecting country would not respond to that kind of insult/attack?

[Cygnus X-1 12]

and respond we did, by going in an outsting the Taliban, by wiping out a large part of terrorists in Afganistan, and then removing a fascist dictator fro mthe middle east, a region that needs all the help it can get.

 

Now where does a conspiracy fit into that, hmm lets see here.....OH WAIT< IT DOESNT !

 

Micheal Moore is an ass. So are people who make a bigass fuss about it all being a "trick, jsut to steal oil" or "to take over the world" or as American being "communist dogs"

 

If I recall correctly, it was America (and European Allies, but predominantly the US) the help back the worlds communist juggernaught, the Soviet Union. Now how can people find so much fault in all of that ? Next hting you know they will have a conspircay of Bush and Blair trying to steal wine from France because the wine is alcoholic and therefroe "bomb paterial" or sumthin st00pid like that :roll: :roll:

[General Leang 0]

A country with Michael Moore in power, maybe.

 

 

Seriously, a valid point, and not to have a go at Clinton, but he was not one to use force.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Clinton ? Oh no, he wasnt one ot use force, he was one to give Nuclear warheads and ICBMs to China for "research" purposes

[General Leang 0]

And we are very happy with them.

[BWare 0]

And we aren't sleeping too well at night because of them! But... you're welcome! :lol:

 

Plus, I'm pretty sure that Clinton did, in fact, attack Iraq from a distance with volleys of Tomohawk cruise missiles... you know, to take the pressure off him for his disgusting and horribly, horribly offensive conduct in the oval office... that and LYING about it to the American people while under oath. :roll:

Yeah... he was a great guy :wink:

[General Leang 0]

Okay, enough joking about China and nukes. Clinton did have air strikes against Iraq because they had scud missile launchers, as I recall.

[Azrael 0]

My answer: ONLY A FEW MUSLIMS ARE TRYING TO MAKE PEOPLE ISLAMIC MILITANTS. THEY WON'T DISAPPEAR. GET ON WITH IT. They'll never suceed. But I, in my opinion, religion is something that causes problems sometimes... My parent's recently had a fight against my mom's parents because of my sister's baptism as Roman Catholic, and my dad's parents got all offended cause they're Iglesia ni Kristo... Martin Luther King's question was: "Why can't we all just get along?" My reply: "Because of interests and RELIGION."

[Acerz492 1]

Okay, enough joking about China and nukes.

 

Heh, sorry to kinda drag it back into context here, but why the hell -would- China nuke the US? The Chinese, although they have the largest military in the world, won't risk starting World War III.

 

I don't really see what all the worrying is for. :?

[BWare 0]

Also from people taking things, religion-wise, -way- to seriously. :roll:

I know man! I mean, it's only the fate of your immortal soul for all of eternity! Why get so worked up about it?? :wink:

 

Okay, enough joking about China and nukes.

Hehe... nukes are funny.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

you know, to take the pressure off him for his disgusting and horribly, horribly offensive conduct in the oval office... that and LYING about it to the American people while under oath. :roll:

Yeah, cause getting a blowjob and lying about it is so the worst thing anyone can do. :roll: You know something, I get tired of hearing this tired bull**** about Clinton.

[General Leang 0]

Oh, so maybe this is not funny.

 

 

A very valid point, one that we often lose focus of, is how it is only a small minority of Muslims that are the problem. Of course it is, those killed by Al Qaeda would probably total more than those who are members of Al Qaeda, but we still blame Muslims for the problem. We need to assure the Muslim people that it is onlt the terrorists we are concerned with, and for the most part we do a decent job. However, I was listening about the terror attacks in Indonesia and because they allow terrorist group Jimaar Islamiah, they said in the strongest terms for the clerics to go after those they know are a problem. Stop pussyfooting around, stop asking, start telling, and they further went on to say that what should be done is if Muslims are not going to help then they will close down the mosques and even start deporting Muslims. There is no doubt in my mind there are good Muslims, that the majority of Islamists are good people. Those who follow the way of Jihad, however, we should find out what terrifies them the most (life, I would guess, since they are willing, even bragging as we saw with that Amrozi, to become myrters) and sock it to them.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Hmmm

 

Muslims in general are just people like US (ok a few differences, but what can you do eh?) I kno a muslim and a few jews, as well as a Lutheran, about am illion catholics, and a Russian orthodox dude. We all get along fine.

 

BUt having hte Muslims help bring down the extremists iwthin their religion....could work, might now though. Too many problems I think.

 

For once this is where sepperation of CHurch and State is a very good thing. This allows the State (federal government of whatever nation) to go in and take down people who are suspected of illicit acts, regardless of race or religion.

[BWare 0]

Yeah, cause getting a blowjob and lying about it is so the worst thing anyone can do. :roll: You know something, I get tired of hearing this tired bull**** about Clinton.

That man defiled the highest office of the United States. Ronald Reagan wouldn't take off his jacket while in the oval office... Clinton took off his pants and went beyond just getting a "blow job," as you so elegantly put it. As if that wasn't bad enough, he then proceeded to commit perjury and lie through his teeth to the American people. It would be incredibly foolish to diminish what he did.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

hey when Im wearing a good jacket I never take it off.

 

Ya kno, the hebrews of old, "be prepared to leave, for you never know when he will come"

 

but Clinton was an ________ <--- insert inappropriate term there

 

he was not cut out to be the president of the United States. Sure he had charm, but stuff like that...makes me very annoyed.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

That man defiled the highest office of the United States. Ronald Reagan wouldn't take off his jacket while in the oval office... Clinton took off his pants and went beyond just getting a "blow job," as you so elegantly put it. As if that wasn't bad enough, he then proceeded to commit perjury and lie through his teeth to the American people. It would be incredibly foolish to diminish what he did.

I don't condone the lying and the perjury. I don't but it was a ****ing blowjob. Hardly the worst thing that's come out of the Oval Office. Besides, it's not like he was the only to get one in the Office. If you're that naive, I pity you... Wait, no I don't...

 

Defiled... you make it sound like he raped the girl and then murdered her. Oh please, get over it. No, Nixon defiled the Office. Clinton got a bit too happy in it. Big difference.

[General Leang 0]

Agreed. If the world cannot go on because of his inventive ways of smoking cigars and how Monica Lewinski played 'swallow the leader', I have to ask if the obsession for scandal has really gone that much out of control. Personnally I really could not give a stuff one way ot the other.

[Azrael 0]

I think China has enough nukes to roast the American seaboard... And their military is friggin' HUGE. But still, they get alot of stuff from U.S., e.g. the advantage of easily getting iPods cause' it's manufactured in China, etc.

[GeneralZ 0]

they're catching up to us pretty fast. but right now we're still supreme