Can someone please tell me what 'Terrorism' is?

[rtwngAvngr]

Osama Bin Laden was trained by America to it's bidding against the USSR. Saddam was put in place by America to it's bidding. Or Noriega. Or Pinoche. Lots of tyrannical dictator put in place to oppresse people to do America's bidding. And you wonder why people or soar at you guys.

But what have we ever done to Canada? Or are you just too addicted to that eurolib cock?
:bj2:

 

[Comrade]

Osama Bin Laden was trained by America to it's bidding against the USSR.

As opposed to leaving the whole region to the USSR's bidding.

Saddam was put in place by America to it's bidding.

Not true.

Or Noriega. Or Pinoche. Lots of tyrannical dictator put in place to oppresse people to do America's bidding. And you wonder why people or soar at you guys.

So the bitter leftists say.

 

[8236]

A terrorism is one who uses terror to achieve their political purpose, which involves subjugation of a people to their whims.

A freedom fighter is one who fights against a tyranical or totalitarian regime

There are huge difference. for one Terrorists fight against free nations to bring them into bondage. Freedom fights fight against opressive regimes to bring them freedom.You cant fight against a free nation and be a freedom fighter.

Also Freedom fighters will limit their attacks on military targets to achieve their victory over the government. They care about the people, hence why they are trying to liberate them.

Terrorists dont care about the people. They will kill anyone and in fact prefer to kill innocent victims, particularly children to accomplish their goals. They are fighting for their own power.

This is why ive never understood liberals in their attempt to somehow make freedom fighters and terrorists the same. There are obvious differences. Why try to equivocate the two? Maybe im giving them too much benefit of the doubt but there is no way they can honestly say they cant see the difference.

But then if you think about the history of liberalism and terrorism, they share similar history. The beginning of both was in the French Revolution. Most muslim terrorist activities began because the Soviets taught them out to fight against Western Representative governments. They funded them etc. So i guess its not terribly surprising.

Fine. Now tell me which side of the fence Haganah, Irgun and the Stern Gang were.

 

[8236]

It's called sarcasm. I know it doesn't work in print sometimes. My bad. You lefties criticize us when we support tyrants; you criticize when we depose tyrants. You have no core selves. You're just against whatever we do as a nation. You're intellectually bankrupt.

Sorry, I agree, sarcasm is a tricky one in print. And yes, I don't have a core self, I don't know what that means. What I'm against, though, and am going on about is double standards and hypocrisy - particularly from people/nations that claim to hold some kind of moral high ground.
As for being against America, whatever it does, you are wrong. After 9/11 the whole world (nearly) was on America's side and pro action against Afghanistan. But thanks to Bush, and Iraq all that goodwil has been squandered, and now (nearly) the whole world is against what America is doing. Do you really feel the world is a safer place wrt terror now than on 9/12? Do you really think there are less people hell bent on killing westerners now than on 9/12? I don't.
Latest poll: In only 3 countries in the world do more people want to see Bush win than Kerry. (Phillipines and Poland are 2 of them), and, although it doesn't matter cos they are not voting, it surely does say something?

 

[8236]

But what have we ever done to Canada? Or are you just too addicted to that eurolib cock?
:bj2:

Is that a compliment? I thank you for your kind words.

I have nothing to do with MrMarbles, heck, his spelling is even worse than mine.

 

[8236]

The explanation is simple. Kerry has consistently taken positions regarding defense issues which would weaken our nation. That's unpatriotic. He's so insecure that he needs europeans to approve of him politically and culturally, so he has internalized their antiamericanism to win their praise. He's a dangerous fool. Bush will do what is good for america, and the world for that matter.

Lol. Very interesting interpretation of reality.

Lol. Weaken the nation that spends as much on defense as the next 20 biggest spenders put together. 43% of world total. I do think you are in danger - at least, you are until you hit a minimum of half the worlds total defence expenditure. Lol. I wonder in which country all those WMDs are. Syria? Oh yeah! It was the USA.

You are being sarcastic again, yeah?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Lol. Very interesting interpretation of reality.

Interesting and correct. Where do you disagree?

Lol. Weaken the nation that spends as much on defense as the next 20 biggest spenders put together. 43% of world total.

And we're in a position of responsiblity commensurate with this expenditure, for global stability.

I do think you are in danger - at least, you are until you hit a minimum of half the worlds total defence expenditure. Lol. I wonder in which country all those WMDs are. Syria? Oh yeah! It was the USA.

You are being sarcastic again, yeah?

No. But you've stopped making sense.

 

[Annie]

Osama Bin Laden was trained by America to it's bidding against the USSR. Saddam was put in place by America to it's bidding. Or Noriega. Or Pinoche. Lots of tyrannical dictator put in place to oppresse people to do America's bidding. And you wonder why people or soar at you guys.

Mr. Marbles, for a guy that obviously has more than one brain cell active, you display an obvious lack of curiosity. Who/What states were behind al 'Quida? US did during Soviet/Afghanistan faze, but left abruptly with the end of that conflict. This should have peaked your curiosity, but obviously didn't:

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/terror-qaeda.html

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Sorry, I agree, sarcasm is a tricky one in print. And yes, I don't have a core self, I don't know what that means.

It means you form positions not on thought but just on doing the opposite of what american policy is, or what american conservatives desire.

What I'm against, though, and am going on about is double standards and hypocrisy -

Like the double standared you have for america?

particularly from people/nations that claim to hold some kind of moral high ground.

We saved the world from naziism, and communism and are a symbol of freedom to people all around the globe.

As for being against America, whatever it does, you are wrong. After 9/11 the whole world (nearly) was on America's side and pro action against Afghanistan. But thanks to Bush, and Iraq all that goodwil has been squandered, and now (nearly) the whole world is against what America is doing. Do you really feel the world is a safer place wrt terror now than on 9/12? Do you really think there are less people hell bent on killing westerners now than on 9/12? I don't.

No thinking person should have been against this invasion. the violated u.n. resolutions alone justified it. The euroweenies are just mad we ended their corrupt deals with Saddam.

Latest poll: In only 3 countries in the world do more people want to see Bush win than Kerry. (Phillipines and Poland are 2 of them), and, although it doesn't matter cos they are not voting, it surely does say something?

Yes. It says envy is a strong emotion and that the states of most countries disseminate anti american propaganda out of jealousy, even though they all depend on our military and market. It's textbook hypocrisy and envy.

 

[pegwinn]

To answer the question:

"Terrorism is the application of psychological pressure (fear) resulting from the threat of or actual employment of indiscriminate violence in the attempt to achieve political gain by a group of individuals whose organization by its' lack of sufficient size cannot effect change in an accepted manner."

Many spoke of this. But this is the accepted definition by the FBI and the Marines. The important thing is to locate, close with, and destroy the terrorists by whatever means gets it done.

Definition is here about halfway down

 

[Annie]

Sorry, I agree, sarcasm is a tricky one in print. And yes, I don't have a core self, I don't know what that means.

It means that you firmly believe what you are saying. You have a philosophical reason for your thinking.

What I'm against, though, and am going on about is double standards and hypocrisy - particularly from people/nations that claim to hold some kind of moral high ground.

Anyone who believes in something passionately, whether communism, democracy, libertarianism, or enviornmentalism, believes they are holding the 'high ground.' There are reasons they have for taking their position.

As for being against America, whatever it does, you are wrong.

LOL America IS America, whatever it does, for better or worse. You probably mean that what was done, YOU disagree with, maybe I do or don't, but America is still America.

After 9/11 the whole world (nearly) was on America's side and pro action against Afghanistan. But thanks to Bush, and Iraq all that goodwil has been squandered, and now (nearly) the whole world is against what America is doing.

That is not actually true. Immediately after 9/11, meaning 9/11 or 9/12, with the exception of certain Arab areas, most spoke or demonstrated 'sympathy' with the victims of 9/11. What they seemed to have meant is that they hoped that 'America had learned its lesson, to bow down to 'the powers that were meant to be.' Unfortunately for them, it wasn't in the cards.

Do you really feel the world is a safer place wrt terror now than on 9/12? Do you really think there are less people hell bent on killing westerners now than on 9/12? I don't.

Yeah, alot of people that were 'hell bent' on killing westerners are now dead or running. How long ago was Bali? Not to say they can't get 'lucky' again, but they are going to have to work awfully hard...'

Latest poll: In only 3 countries in the world do more people want to see Bush win than Kerry. (Phillipines and Poland are 2 of them), and, although it doesn't matter cos they are not voting, it surely does say something?

This is the biggest laugh of all, do YOU really think that most Americans give a flying F whether or not the 'world' agrees with our vote? OMG, the 'world' is ready for serious therapy!

 

[MrMarbles]

With all my arguments, i'm just pointing out how America uses terror tactics to it's aid. So why is it so different when someone else utilizes them? Whether America participates directly in the acts, or gets someone else to do it, the US is a big user of this 'tool'.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

With all my arguments, i'm just pointing out how America uses terror tactics to it's aid. So why is it so different when someone else utilizes them? Whether America participates directly in the acts, or gets someone else to do it, the US is a big user of this 'tool'.

No. We don't. you're wrong. Do you like being a broken record?

 

[MrMarbles]

No. We don't. you're wrong. Do you like being a broken record?

Just as much as you.

 

[wade]

I have to laugh - RWA calling someone else a broken record. Now that is a side splitter!

Wade.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I have to laugh - RWA calling someone else a broken record. Now that is a side splitter!

Wade.

The repetitiveness you sense is the constancy of your own idiocy.

 

[MrMarbles]

The repetitiveness you sense is the constancy of your own idiocy.

The repetitiveness you sense is the constancy of your own idiocy...*skip*...The repetitiveness you sense is the constancy of your own idiocy...*skip*...The repetitiveness you sense is the constancy of your own idiocy...*skip*...The repetitiveness you sense is the constancy of your own idiocy, etc, etc.....

 

[Avatar4321]

Osama Bin Laden was trained by America to it's bidding against the USSR. Saddam was put in place by America to it's bidding. Or Noriega. Or Pinoche. Lots of tyrannical dictator put in place to oppresse people to do America's bidding. And you wonder why people or soar at you guys.

You seemed to have totally missed my point and arguing things im not talking about. Terror and the left both have their roots in the french revolution. Obviously you arent familar with the reign of terror. or how the French revolutionists were in a way the proto communists. The first totalitarian regime in history.

You are obviously uninformed about how it was the Soviets during the cold war that began encouraging terrorism against the west in Muslim Extremists. The have strong ties with Yassar Arafat and his start as a terrorist. Israel was seen as an American prescense in the middle east. Soviets didnt want any American influences in the region.

The training of Osama and support of Saddam are therefore irrelevant because that doesnt change the fact that terror techniques and the idea of terrorism among muslims was promoted by the Soviets. They are using these communist techniques.

Thus why it may seem sometimes that the left and terrorism are linked. Because in reality they are.

I think there is alot of irony in you being a leftist and being upset at American interference in other nations. Its ironic because most of that interference has been from the left. It was the left who went to Aghanistan during the sixties for their hippie orgies and drug supplies which gave rise to the Taliban movements there. Its the left with their promotion of sin, debachery, and loose morals that give the terrorist their reasons to believe we are "the great satan" It is the left you refused to support our allies in Iran and South Vietnam whow ere eventually responsible for the slaughter of millions and extreme tyrannical and totalitarian governments to be installed. Its was the lefts abandonment of Iran that triggered Saddams coup(sp?) and rise to power. It was the lefts abandonment of Iran to the Soviet ally that made it necessary to temporarily support Iraq to try to restabilize the region.

A majority of the problems we face come from the left. So like i said its Ironic.

 

[MrMarbles]

You seemed to have totally missed my point and arguing things im not talking about. Terror and the left both have their roots in the french revolution. Obviously you arent familar with the reign of terror. or how the French revolutionists were in a way the proto communists. The first totalitarian regime in history.

You are obviously uninformed about how it was the Soviets during the cold war that began encouraging terrorism against the west in Muslim Extremists. The have strong ties with Yassar Arafat and his start as a terrorist. Israel was seen as an American prescense in the middle east. Soviets didnt want any American influences in the region.

The training of Osama and support of Saddam are therefore irrelevant because that doesnt change the fact that terror techniques and the idea of terrorism among muslims was promoted by the Soviets. They are using these communist techniques.

Thus why it may seem sometimes that the left and terrorism are linked. Because in reality they are.

I think there is alot of irony in you being a leftist and being upset at American interference in other nations. Its ironic because most of that interference has been from the left. It was the left who went to Aghanistan during the sixties for their hippie orgies and drug supplies which gave rise to the Taliban movements there. Its the left with their promotion of sin, debachery, and loose morals that give the terrorist their reasons to believe we are "the great satan" It is the left you refused to support our allies in Iran and South Vietnam whow ere eventually responsible for the slaughter of millions and extreme tyrannical and totalitarian governments to be installed. Its was the lefts abandonment of Iran that triggered Saddams coup(sp?) and rise to power. It was the lefts abandonment of Iran to the Soviet ally that made it necessary to temporarily support Iraq to try to restabilize the region.

A majority of the problems we face come from the left. So like i said its Ironic.

American left is still pretty darn right.

I am uninformed about Soviet actions, it's funny that i've never came across anything like that, not in texts, or news stories, or even conversations with other people. Well until now. Thats pretty ironic. The taliban came to power with the using the support (weapons, tactics, training) that was provided to it from America, not hippies. Hippie are usual to high, or perma-fried to do much anyway.

Loose morals? It's called civil liberties, equal oppourtunity, and free speech.

Support South Vietnam. A corrupt dictatorship, well that was after Americas assasination of their democratically elected leader.

Terror and 'the left' have nothing in common. Nor do these concepts have roots in the french revolution. Left and liberal ideals of self-determination and equality have been around since ancient greece. America was built on thse ideals. Whats the point in having a revolution, and then proceed to move backwards?

And I don't know why these things aren't relevant. The US used these people and their tactics to her advantage, they helped create these monsters. By trying to take the moral high ground, America has shown her hypocracy.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

American left is still pretty darn right.

I am uninformed about Soviet actions, it's funny that i've never came across anything like that, not in texts, or news stories, or even conversations with other people. Well until now. Thats pretty ironic. The taliban came to power with the using the support (weapons, tactics, training) that was provided to it from America, not hippies. Hippie are usual to high, or perma-fried to do much anyway.

Loose morals? It's called civil liberties, equal oppourtunity, and free speech.

Support South Vietnam. A corrupt dictatorship, well that was after Americas assasination of their democratically elected leader.

Terror and 'the left' have nothing in common. Nor do these concepts have roots in the french revolution. Left and liberal ideals of self-determination and equality have been around since ancient greece. America was built on thse ideals. Whats the point in having a revolution, and then proceed to move backwards?

And I don't know why these things aren't relevant. The US used these people and their tactics to her advantage, they helped create these monsters. By trying to take the moral high ground, America has shown her hypocracy.

Liberals todays are not liberals in classic sense of the word. Now what we call liberals are actually socialists like yourself.