When did America become a nation of cowardice?

[Athlete{UK}]

I don't think it's so much that the imposing of new security measures means the terrorists win.

But when you go to an airport and feel afraid. Or even walk down the street and worry about who might blow you up. Then the terrorists are afraid. That's their job. To instill terror into your lives.

Not saying we're at that point yet but we're not far away.

[firedfns13]

i think if someone *cough* spain *cough* gives into their demands terrorists win. After the terrible Madrid bombings, spain withdrew all support for the US's war on terror.

Those attacks were just as bad, but i think America is awesome because instead of going "you killed us, alright fine...." we were like "f#$% NO, GTFO MY PLANET NOOB" and bombed them to the stone age. (Afganistan and the Taliban, pre 2004)

I greatly dislike how our military handles things now though, I emphasize the feeling of 'War' rather than selective .... um.... what would i call it... selective engagement?
The US is at war, i think, since we are at WAR, our military should respond by minimizing civilian fatalities, but not overly doing so. I value human life, but its retarded we can't attack 50% of targets because of human shields.

that said, I think a lot of laws are bullcrap. Drug sniffing dogs are ok, i mean unless you have drugs, why would you care? Dont you like dogs? I personally think we should have drug sniffing grizzly bears...
Then people would want the dogs back.
haha bears in kevlar!

[Sathor]

Yeah, as the bombing of Afghanistan back into the Stone Age clearly solved anything in the fight against terror. Great job, America

[Mr. Happy]

I think that we should give into, or rather, discuss with terrorists groups, their demands. Right now our policy is "they take a hostage, etc., we don't talk to them, we don't give in," and I AGREE with that. Makes sense. BUT we should talk with the leaders of these groups, get the complaints and issues hear on the world stage.

I see most terrorist groups as simply political groups who have gone to far. They have legitimate concerns and opinions, etc., and should be heard out. An attempt should be made to involve them in the political process.

I guess what I'm saying is that if we talk to the them, maybe even give in (or compromise) on certain issues with a terrorist group it isn't that we have failed, or they have won, unless it is done under the threat of force.

We need a process to legitimize these groups, perhaps even make some sort of conditional pardon for certain individuals. We need to help move them from the world stage right to the world stage left.

[dragonfliet]

I think that we should give into, or rather, discuss with terrorists groups, their demands. Right now our policy is "they take a hostage, etc., we don't talk to them, we don't give in," and I AGREE with that. Makes sense. BUT we should talk with the leaders of these groups, get the complaints and issues hear on the world stage.

I see most terrorist groups as simply political groups who have gone to far. They have legitimate concerns and opinions, etc., and should be heard out. An attempt should be made to involve them in the political process.

I guess what I'm saying is that if we talk to the them, maybe even give in (or compromise) on certain issues with a terrorist group it isn't that we have failed, or they have won, unless it is done under the threat of force.

We need a process to legitimize these groups, perhaps even make some sort of conditional pardon for certain individuals. We need to help move them from the world stage right to the world stage left.

I'm really curious what compromises you see for: Kill all infidels (infidels being all that not only don't believe in Islam, but a particular branch of it), destroy Israel, destroy all western cultures and implement a strong theocracy. Perhaps you suggest giving them free koolaid? Oh YEAH!



~Jason

[YokaI]

Listen, even if he quoted incorrectly and even if you may disagree with some of his political views, don't you feel it silly that you can't put a laptop in a scanner without them having to check your luggage? Don't you find it odd that you can't do things because people are afraid of bad things occuring? If we limit our freedom to stay safe, then we are technically losing the war we claim to be having. (The war on terror)

You can't fight a war on a force, terrorism is an action, not something that can be killed off like a bug.

[Mr. Happy]

I think that we should give into, or rather, discuss with terrorists groups, their demands. Right now our policy is "they take a hostage, etc., we don't talk to them, we don't give in," and I AGREE with that. Makes sense. BUT we should talk with the leaders of these groups, get the complaints and issues hear on the world stage.

I see most terrorist groups as simply political groups who have gone to far. They have legitimate concerns and opinions, etc., and should be heard out. An attempt should be made to involve them in the political process.

I guess what I'm saying is that if we talk to the them, maybe even give in (or compromise) on certain issues with a terrorist group it isn't that we have failed, or they have won, unless it is done under the threat of force.

We need a process to legitimize these groups, perhaps even make some sort of conditional pardon for certain individuals. We need to help move them from the world stage right to the world stage left.

I'm really curious what compromises you see for: Kill all infidels (infidels being all that not only don't believe in Islam, but a particular branch of it), destroy Israel, destroy all western cultures and implement a strong theocracy. Perhaps you suggest giving them free koolaid? Oh YEAH!



~Jason

Well, first off, most terrorist groups aren't muslim.

That said, I suppose most people think al-Kah'eida when you say "terrorist" so I'll address that: what's wrong with the establishment of a caliphate in the middle east if the people support it? That is al-Qaeda's primary goal, to garner the suppost of Islam as a whole and do establsh a caliphate. Without the support of the people they are nothing.

So what I'm saying is that instead of installing governments we should let the people in that country work it out themselves. They think that they have some ideas worth checking out, let em. That's how we started our government ya know? I mean shit, all I'm saying is let everyone have a voice. Maybe they will stop the killing if they are involved in a proper political process.


I was going to say something else but I forgot what

[Meotwister]

Well, first off, most terrorist groups aren't muslim.

Well the ones we're dealing with mostly now are.

That said, I suppose most people think al-Kah'eida when you say "terrorist" so I'll address that: what's wrong with the establishment of a caliphate in the middle east if the people support it? That is al-Qaeda's primary goal, to garner the suppost of Islam as a whole and do establsh a caliphate. Without the support of the people they are nothing.

Of course most people will think that since they're the ones dancin on the world stage gettin the most attention.

You can't honestly think that the only thing terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda or Hezbo-allah want is just the return of the caliphate to the region and then everything would be fine. I'm sorry but dragonfliet was dead on with it. There's no talking to these people, no compromising with them. Not because we're America and we're too good to do it, it's because we're nothing but filthy infidels to them that need to be killed with the same going for Israel except they're right in the thick of things. This is of course referring to the current terrorist crisis thats been escalating for 20 years or so. [/quote]

So what I'm saying is that instead of installing governments we should let the people in that country work it out themselves. They think that they have some ideas worth checking out, let em. That's how we started our government ya know? I mean shit, all I'm saying is let everyone have a voice. Maybe they will stop the killing if they are involved in a proper political process.

This isn't about the terrorist groups not having a voice in their politics and you know that. We set up a base government that they went ahead and made a constitution for. People risked their lives to go out and vote and many lost their lives doing so. Their ideas they want to 'voice' concerning the make up of the goverment usually include an anarchist environment so they can continue what they do unhindered or a puppet government controlled by them as well.

We're not as unwanted over there as many think. Sure there's bad areas but many areas where we're welcomed.

[Sorrow]

We're not as unwanted over there as many think. Sure there's bad areas but many areas where we're welcomed.

I agree on this and actually wrote an essay on why we should stay in Iraq despite the losses thusfar...
Well it's mostly because we now owe it to the people to rebuild their country after we bombed it but ok.

[daap]

i still find it 'amusing' to know that
american getting shot by there own weapons
in afganhistan (gave them to the taliban to fight
against the russians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan)

OT:
ter·ror·ism [ter-uh-riz-uhm]
–noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Well, first off, most terrorist groups aren't muslim.

Well the ones we're dealing with mostly now are.

no they are not.. There just well-known groups.. there are 100s off small terrorstgroups..As you can see in the dictionary. A terrorsit can also be an animal-activist who's using force/violence to get his
ideas around

[Sathor]

The fight in Iraq is certainly not against terrorist. I mean, ok, there are suicide bombings, and such. But the once we consider as terrorists just have the idea that the western nations should stay out of their country. So, for other people, they are resistance fighters/freedom fighters.

And I think most of the Islamic world does not want any fighting with us, why should they? I mean, they are like, normal people, just like you and me. Maybe they are a bit more convinced that Allah really exist then most of us that God really exist, but hell, I think a good father over there just wants peace for his children like we do. We would have problems if ALL of them would be possible terrorist right? Are a few million, would be the largest (and most motivated) army of the world. Nah, I think they are only "a few" radicals. Yes, and they are enough ... but when we continue to bomb the countries we deem them to hide in back into the Stone Age, I don't think that is likely to stop desperate people those groups ... I mean, would YOU believe anyone who just bombed away your house that he wants to HELP??

[DocRock]

What cracks me up is the fact that we claim to be doing so much to stop the war on terror, but the borders of Mexico and Canada are wide open.

Does that even make any sense?

And our Homeland Security loses files and can't remember when things happen - as quoted by Alberto Gonzoles.

[Mr. Happy]

I think I'll post my paper on al-Qaeda when I finish tonight...

C-If our intended goal in this age is the establishment of a caliphate in the manner of the Prophet and if we expect to establish its state predominantly-according to how it appears to us-in the heart of the Islamic world, then your efforts and sacrifices-God permitting-are a large step directly towards that goal.
So we must think for a long time about our next steps and how we want to attain it, and it is my humble opinion that the Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals:
The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq.
The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority or amirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate- over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq, i.e., in Sunni areas, is in order to fill the void stemming from the departure of the Americans, immediately upon their exit and before un-Islamic forces attempt to fill this void, whether those whom the Americans will leave behind them, or those among the un-Islamic forces who will try to jump at taking power.
There is no doubt that this amirate will enter into a fierce struggle with the foreign infidel forces, and those supporting them among the local forces, to put it in a state of constant preoccupation with defending itself, to make it impossible for it to establish a stable state which could proclaim a caliphate, and to keep the Jihadist groups in a constant state of war, until these forces find a chance to annihilate them.
The third stage: Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq.
The fourth stage: It may coincide with what came before: the clash with Israel, because Israel was established only to challenge any new Islamic entity.
My raising this idea-I don't claim that it's infallible-is only to stress something extremely important. And it is that the mujahedeen must not have their mission end with the expulsion of the Americans from Iraq, and then lay down their weapons, and silence the fighting zeal. We will return to having the secularists and traitors holding sway over us. Instead, their ongoing mission is to establish an Islamic state, and defend it, and for every generation to hand over the banner to the one after it until the Hour of Resurrection.

[A]

Compromise on the first two. We leave, and they get to take part in the political process. If that happens I believe most of their support will fall away. In another portion of the letter (don't want to find it) al-Zawahiri says that they cannot continue without the support of the Muslim people.

This isn't about the terrorist groups not having a voice in their politics and you know that. We set up a base government that they went ahead and made a constitution for. People risked their lives to go out and vote and many lost their lives doing so. Their ideas they want to 'voice' concerning the make up of the goverment usually include an anarchist environment so they can continue what they do unhindered or a puppet government controlled by them as well.

It's not quite that simple. If you really look into it we installed a government there (just like in every South American country), except that this time the people were given a choice between Douchebag#1 or Douchebag#2. The government was not, in any way whatsoever, formed "By the people, for the people" which is what they want (not suprisingly, but ironicly).

The fight in Iraq is certainly not against terrorist. I mean, ok, there are suicide bombings, and such. But the once we consider as terrorists just have the idea that the western nations should stay out of their country. So, for other people, they are resistance fighters/freedom fighters.

I 100% agree with that, I think that's something everyone should try and understand! What would the British have called the American Rebels? Terrorists! What would the Nazi's have called the French Resistance? Terrorists! What did the Cylons call Tigh and Tyrol? Terrorists!

[A] Letter form al-Awahiri to al-Zarqawi

[Meotwister]

Compromise on the first two. We leave, and they get to take part in the political process. If that happens I believe most of their support will fall away. In another portion of the letter (don't want to find it) al-Zawahiri says that they cannot continue without the support of the Muslim people.

Compromise on the first two... sure.. then they'll go ahead with stage three and four explained in the letter where they extend the jihad to neighboring countries and finally having a showdown with Israel just because they've always hated Israel and Zawahiri like many others has this warped view of the country. These aren't people you can 'compromise' with. Hate to bring this up but what comes to mind to me is Neville Chamberlain and 'peace in our time'.

And of course they can't continue without support.. the problem being they have the support.

It's not quite that simple. If you really look into it we installed a government there (just like in every South American country), except that this time the people were given a choice between Douchebag#1 or Douchebag#2. The government was not, in any way whatsoever, formed "By the people, for the people" which is what they want (not suprisingly, but ironicly).

Hey well if you don't like who they had goin thats one thing. We let them decide how they wanted to make their government and they did.

The fight in Iraq is certainly not against terrorist. I mean, ok, there are suicide bombings, and such. But the once we consider as terrorists just have the idea that the western nations should stay out of their country. So, for other people, they are resistance fighters/freedom fighters.

I 100% agree with that, I think that's something everyone should try and understand! What would the British have called the American Rebels? Terrorists! What would the Nazi's have called the French Resistance? Terrorists! What did the Cylons call Tigh and Tyrol? Terrorists!

Of course they're terrorists. You guys seem to have the idea these people just wanna have a voice in the government or that they're only fighting cause we're there. They hate the US and all western countries. Constantly it's being shouted 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel' by thousands of people all over that region with no better sentiment to other countries. They may think they're freedom fighters themselves but does that make them such? When they carry out IED explosions, supermarket suicide bombings, and plenty of other cowardly acts that don't help anyones cause but the terrorist leaders. Certainly doesn't help Islam. All their acts do is manage to kill innocent people. And now we have people over here comparing them to the French Resistance and the American militia. *sigh*

What cracks me up is the fact that we claim to be doing so much to stop the war on terror, but the borders of Mexico and Canada are wide open.

This is another matter altogether... I agree that this is a huge problem but the problem with fixing this problem is that illegal workers are almost essential to thousands of businesses down there. There's a lot of money and interests tied up in the whole affair unfortunately as well.

[Sathor]

And now we have people over here comparing them to the French Resistance and the American militia. *sigh*

Yes, because you have to see it from another perspective than ours.

You guys seem to have the idea these people just wanna have a voice in the government or that they're only fighting cause we're there.

I can't remember any suicide bombings in such scale before you came there (Iraq)

They hate the US and all western countries.

Yeah, because they feel mistreated by us. Invading their countries and bombing them back into Stone Age and forcing them to use our idea of government certainly does not make them feel a lot better.

Certainly doesn't help Islam.

It does not, of course. But the invasion of Iraq did not really help either.