Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > How does bush expect to stop terroism?      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 2
How does bush expect to stop terroism?Page 1 of 4    (1, 2, 3, 4)
Out of curiousity, how do you reconcile "faceless cowards," and "someone who 90 percent of the time take their own lifes in the act of terrorism." One or the other dude, but anyone who sacrifices himself ain't a coward.

But the first step would be to STOP MAKING MORE OF THEM. When he condones torture, invades Islamic nations for no reason, and runs secret prisons he's radicalizing moderates. That latest stupid plot was a bunch of doctors! Clearly that would indicate that modern, moderate, Westernized Muslims are now seeing terrorism as a legitimate expression of defiance in what is increasingly being seen as the USA vs Islam.
 Wolfie65
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 3
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 8:00:12 AM
OP - The answer to your question is he doesn't.
Like all politicians everywhere, he is saying stuff that his speechwriters think the public wants to hear.
 namegame2
Joined: 4/17/2007
Msg: 4
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 8:01:33 AM

Anyone who drives into a ship, building, or crowded area where there are men, women, and children, for the sake of bombing for the cause and jihad, without staying to incur the repercussion of his actions, but rather to kill many senselessly, and then kill himself in the process, is a coward in my book.


And somebody who who has other people do the fighting for him is brave.
 redhorserainbow
Joined: 10/13/2006
Msg: 5
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 8:39:55 AM
He doesn't want to stop terrorism nor can he stop it. It's a perpetual war, just like the war on drugs, both wars can never be won. The nice (for the government) thing about the war on terror is the harder you fight it the more it escalates, every time the US accidentally blows up the wrong building and kills some kids parents that kid is going to grow up hating the US and wanting revenge, so voila, a whole new generation of "terrorists" are created.

The reason why he doesn't want to stop it is because the whole US economy is based on the Industrial Military Complex, so having a war that you can keep fighting without ever winning is a perfect scenario for the US government. They had the cold war for a while but that eventually ended, then the war on drugs but you can't really fight that with tanks and bombers, and now the war on terror which is self perpetuating. If the US stopped fighting wars the whole economy would colapse.
 backwarduck
Joined: 3/22/2007
Msg: 7
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 10:27:26 AM
as we see his goal is not to stop terrorism but to increase it.
 CharlesEdm
Joined: 9/16/2006
Msg: 8
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 11:16:16 AM

Anyone who drives into a ship, building, or crowded area where there are men, women, and children, for the sake of bombing for the cause and jihad, without staying to incur the repercussion of his actions, but rather to kill many senselessly, and then kill himself in the process, is a coward in my book.


Yah because essentially riding a cruise missle into the building as it's guidance device is so much more cowardly than just bombing the place.
 passionteman
Joined: 3/7/2005
Msg: 9
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 11:18:18 AM

Can someone give me a good answer to that? How do you stop faceless cowards?


- Let's see who the real faceless coward is.

A. The US government has been funding radical Mujahideen in Afghanistan where Usama was part of that gang. Who is the supporter of terrorist and faceless coward? US government.

B. The US government killing thousands of civilians through carpet bombs and "Precision bombs" and call it "Spreading of democracy". Who are the cowards now, US government?

C. The US government sends military who make sex videos with Iraqis and abuses them? Who is the faceless coward? US government.

D. Did Afghanistan attack US? No. Why kill Afghans? Because US government is coward.

E. Did Iraqis kill any Americans or attack America? No. Why kill civilian young kids and destroy house and famillies? Because US governemtn is coward.

- Do you get the gist of it now who the real coward is? There were no terrorist before? How come all of a sudden their number keeps increasing? I will tell you why. Because we go over there and bombard families and killing little young children and call it "Oops it was mistake" and then when the survivor of that family takes arms against you and wants to revenge, we call it "Islamic terrorist".

- How would you react if Iraqi army was invading and occuping US, rolling its tanks all over, dictating you what to do and what not to do, stop you in the middle of the street and strip search you and your car, come to your house in the middle of night, throw your grand father, father, mother on the floor with no respect and search your house for weapons?

- How would you react if they bombarded your entire family and you were the only survivor? What you need to do is put yourself in their shoes and think for a minute first!!!

- Does that answer your questions? I hope so.
 Always Smiling36
Joined: 1/3/2007
Msg: 10
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 12:14:41 PM
passionteman;
I agree with your entire post, except for this;


D. Did Afghanistan attack US? No. Why kill Afghans?


Afghanistan did not attack the USA, you are correct. However, the Taliban did, and they were running Afghanistan at the time. They also had their main base(s) of operation there. So even though the Afghan population did not declare war on the west, their leadership did.
I am aware that 9/11 happened because of American foreign policy. But it doesn't matter. Once those planes hit those buildings, a response was required. Further, there were Canadians killed on 9/11. I think going there and taking down the Taliban is the right thing to do, in response to those attacks.
Now Iraq, thats a whole different can of worms. I still cannot fathom that Bush and Chenny have not been impeached yet. They should be.
The military complex in the USA does not want to stop terrorism. On the contrary, their greed is fueling it.
 passionteman
Joined: 3/7/2005
Msg: 11
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 12:42:39 PM

passionteman;
I agree with your entire post, except for this;


Thank god. At least someone agrees. lol.




Afghanistan did not attack the USA, you are correct. However, the Taliban did, and they were running Afghanistan at the time. They also had their main base(s) of operation there. So even though the Afghan population did not declare war on the west, their leadership did.


- A couple of points I would like to make.

A. Imagine this. Afghanistan has 7 leaders who enter Afghanistan and fight for power. These 7 leaders are funded by all the powerful countries including US, France as well as Saudi Arabia. These 7 leaders were creation of US government and hand of Pakistan and the whole reason they were 7 of them and not just ONE resistance power is because Pakistan knows that once these leaders get inside Afghanistan, they will start another civil war amongst themselves and Pakistan is in favor of it for the following reason:

1. A portion of land of Pakistan belongs to Afghanistan and was supposed to be handed over some years back in 1990s and the more there is civil war, the more there is chance that they won't be asking for the land back.


B. Once US governement notices the civil war and the mistake it has made of creating 7 of them, Taliban is formed to disarm all these seven armies and have one powerful resistance force so the civil war will stop. BIG MISTAKE Again.

C. How could you possible fathom that ONE resistance army stands up all brand new and disarms and takes over 95% of Afghanistan in a flash? That kind of army needs a very very very very strong support and back up, including $$$$, weapons etc.

D. I don't believe the Taliban were simply formed by those people. The Taliban were created just like the Mujhideen and they were funded and supported.

E. This new resistance army was forced upon Afghans. That doesn't mean that people approved them and they were the leadership. They were a creation, so saying that the Taliban represented Afghans wouldn't be accurate since they didn't vote for the Taliban and it was created and forced upon them.


I am aware that 9/11 happened because of American foreign policy. But it doesn't matter. Once those planes hit those buildings, a response was required. Further, there were Canadians killed on 9/11. I think going there and taking down the Taliban is the right thing to do, in response to those attacks.


A. There wasn't even one single Talib involved in the 9/11 assuming that it was Usama's plan and hit those buildings.

B. All the hijackers are from Saudi Arabia and there is not even a single proof that any of them travelled from Afghanistan to the US to take part.

C. We also shouldn't forget the fact that the Taliban did say that they will put Usama bin laudin through trial IF THE US GOVERNMENT PROVIDED THE PROOF AND EVIDENCE that he was involved.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,563965,00.html
Taliban 'will try Bin Laden if US provides evidence'


Staff and agencies
Friday October 5, 2001
Guardian Unlimited


Afghanistan's ruling Taliban are prepared to put Osama bin Laden on trial in an Afghan court, but only if the US provides hard evidence against him, the party announced today.
Although the Taliban's cooperation in the trial of Bin Laden hinges largely on the definition of "evidence", the statement is the clearest signal yet that they could cooperate with Nato's mission to track down the suspect for September's terror attacks on New York and Washington.






http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/11/world/main310852.shtml

(CBS) Without evidence, Afghanistan's Taliban rulers will not hand over Osama bin Laden, Afghanistan's ambassador to Pakistan said Friday.

The rejection came in a statement by Abdul Salam Zaeef, the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan. Asked whether the Taliban would hand over bin Laden, Zaeef said, "No." But his translator said, "No, not without evidence."

He also said he had no information on bin Laden's current whereabouts.

At a news conference in Islamabad, the Taliban ambassador said he was sorry that people had died in the suicide attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon last week, but appealed to the United States not to endanger innocent people in a military retaliation.

"Our position on this is that if America has proof, we are ready for the trial of Osama bin Laden in light of the evidence."

Asked if he was ready to hand bin Laden over, he snapped, "No."

He also called for an investigation by the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic Conference into the attacks, and criticized President Bush's remarks made in a speech late Thursday.
 Duckman_2
Joined: 5/15/2007
Msg: 12
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 12:47:45 PM

So even though the Afghan population did not declare war on the west, their leadership did.


Bin Laden was never the leader of Afganistan, he was just living there in the mountains when he financed the attacks that were carried out by citizens of Saudia Arabia...
 Always Smiling36
Joined: 1/3/2007
Msg: 13
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 1:10:54 PM

E. This new resistance army was forced upon Afghans. That doesn't mean that people approved them and they were the leadership. They were a creation, so saying that the Taliban represented Afghans wouldn't be accurate since they didn't vote for the Taliban and it was created and forced upon them.


Thats a good point. Actually it is all good points.

One thing though, didn't Osma admit to ordering 9/11?
 namegame2
Joined: 4/17/2007
Msg: 14
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 2:03:26 PM
The Taliban did not attack the US, and had nothing to do with it per se.

They enter into it because they were willingly harboring AQ training camps and UBL, and maintained very close ties. After 9-11 they refused to move against AQ or inhibit the camps. Not argue that they can't, mind you, but rather they consciously aligned themselves with AQ and offered their protection.
 birknhead
Joined: 7/22/2006
Msg: 16
view profile
History
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/14/2007 3:46:21 PM

Stop supplying aid/arms to Israel


That's right support America giving aid & support to the rest of the world but ignore Israel ! .. You Nazi
 leanlife
Joined: 5/15/2007
Msg: 18
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/15/2007 3:37:36 PM
ReInVenTeD

Can someone give me a good answer to that? How do you stop faceless cowards? I mean if all terrorist went around wearing uniforms it would be easy to kill their whole group. But a terroist can be anyone. How do you punish someone who 90 percent of the time take their own lifes in the act of terrorism?



Terrorists are a military arm of a movement which desires to control people through religion they have fallen into adherence to. The movement is not as popular as democracy but, tends to have core followings in places where there is no democracy where it acts as an alternative to oppressive regimes and, where the people have no voice or hope for individual futures. Sadly, it is quite fluid and fills voids where it sees them and, morphs itself according to opportunities to rally and whip people up into frezies such as Iraq, the Danish cartoons and US presence in the Mid East. All of which are simple rallying points for their cause which is to establishing a conservative and fundamentalist Islamic state with their version of Islam being the one and only version with the above mentioned points providing the vehicle they need to unite people.

Here, Jihadists or more specifically radical Islamists use this method to create social upheaval and instability to cause tension which they hope to exploit using their political and religious arm in order to overthrow whatever regime is in place and replace it with their version of an Islamic state with them or their clerics running the show.

I agree with the poster above where he stated that terrorists are not cowards. That is true as they themselves give up all sense of self when entering into this world. Neither are they insane but rather totally devoted to the logic of their root cause which, given the combination of political, religious, social and, sense of personal value and admiration from much of the oppressed world makes it a very appealing task to undertake. In the world of Jihadists, there is no such thing as innocents. All targets are considered military as they are part of the state which they deem corrupt and in need of overthrow. Once this logic is accepted, the mission and cell becomes their life with no crazies or non dedicated individuals allowed or permitted entry or access to it.

Other than the obvious which is in the here an now such as cutting off financing, putting a bullet in the head of a terrorist or capturing them, the movement has to be replaced with viable alternatives which provide an obvious attraction to people, potential recruits and, is sustainable. Hence, the push for democracy where people have a voice and an investment in their country and, rewarding and punishing states that out of fear of civil unrest allow these groups to operate.

Another way which is along the same venue is to push regimes that are oppressive to take action against these groups and movements and, provide aid for them to do so. Once again, the appeal of the movement, which is great, has to be tarnished by giving people a viable alternative.

So, in essence, in order to stop it, an entire region with all it’s backward problems has to be satisfied and brought into a world where they have a invested life and opportunity for themselves and children. One where they are not told what to do but asked if this is what they wish to do and, provides an alternative of self other than being a servant of Jihad. It’s going to take a lot of time.
 Mr. Ivan
Joined: 3/13/2006
Msg: 19
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/16/2007 5:36:50 PM
The truth is that BUSH is the terrorist and the people he calls "terrorist" are the actual victims of terrorism. BUSH is pretty much provoking people into joining the anti-American groups, whether it be a violent group or a pacifist group. He then lumps all these bitter and angry people as "terrorist". But since when was being angry about your country getting invaded and shelled an act of terrorism? The biggest terrorist act has been the illegal attack on IRAQ and the collective punishment of the Iraqi people who were said to have WMD.
 passionteman
Joined: 3/7/2005
Msg: 20
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/16/2007 8:59:07 PM

One thing though, didn't Osma admit to ordering 9/11?

- I don't believe he admitted to ordering the 9/11. The only thing shown as proof was a video of Osama moving his hand in a video, whose audio is not understandable and it's assumed that he has ordered since he made his hand like a plane. That doesn't prove anything.
 Catnip59
Joined: 6/29/2007
Msg: 21
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/17/2007 5:15:33 PM
Reinvented. To my knowledge Bush and the Repubs need another "act" of terrorism to get their ratings out of the toilet. From what I've seen his plan is fighting terror With Terror. This can be witnessed by the carnage and death of innocents we see in Iraq and Afghanistan today. Do you know that the Bush Admin CIA is currently funding terrorists such as al-CIA-da? The KEY to successful terrorism is FEAR. And who has spoken of and hyped "terrorism threats" to Americans more than the Bush admin. and the media? Remeber the "Intelligence" and threats by Condi Rice of mushroom clouds? Who has struck more FEAR into the hearts of Americans? That FEAR got us into Iraq. Technically they are terrorists also. The "war on terror" that Americans see is really just a diversion created by the masters of deception. Meanwhile the War raging against the middle class goes merrily on...


How do you stop faceless cowards? I mean if all terrorist went around wearing uniforms it would be easy to kill their whole group. But a terroist can be anyone.


You are absolutely right, a terrorist can be anyone! Have you ever seen the men in black with black masks doing raids in the U.S.? Perhaps you've heard of, BATF, IRS, FDA, FTC raids and such? Faceless cowards... terrorizing Americans, and it's just business as usual. This concerns me more than anything! They're already here.
 leanlife
Joined: 5/15/2007
Msg: 22
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/17/2007 9:44:43 PM
you need me

If you define terrorists as people who kill unarmed women and children and non agressive male members of the population, then th good ole US of A is the largest terrorist organization in the world.


http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html



Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50)49-78,000,000
Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1934-39)13,000,000 (the purges)
Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945)12,000,000 (concentration camps and civilians WWII)
Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44)5,000,000 (civilians in WWII)
Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79)1,700,000
Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94)1.6 million (purges and concentration camps) Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78)1,500,000
Ismail Enver (Turkey, 1915)1,200,000
Armenians Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970)1,000,000
Leonid Brezhnev (Afghanistan, 1979-1982)900,000
Jean Kambanda (Rwanda, 1994)800,000
Suharto (East Timor, West Papua, Communists, 1966-98)800,000
Saddam Hussein (Iran 1980-1990 and Kurdistan 1987-88)600,000
Yahya Khan (Pakistan, 1971) vs Bangladesh 500,000
Fumimaro Konoe (Japan, 1937-39)500,000? (Chinese civilians)
Savimbi (Angola, 1975-2002)400,000
Mullah Omar - Taliban (Afghanistan, 1986-2001)400,000
Idi Amin (Uganda, 1969-1979)300,000
Yahya Khan (Bangladesh, 1970-1971)300,000
Benito Mussolini (Ethiopia, 1936; Yugoslavia, WWII)300,000 Mobutu
Sese Seko (Zaire, 1965-97)?
Charles Taylor (Liberia, 1989-1996)220,000
Foday Sankoh (Sierra Leone, 1991-2000) 200,000
Slobodan Milosevic (Yugoslavia, 1992-96)180,000
Michel Micombero (Burundi, 1972) 150,000
Hassan Turabi (Sudan, 1989-1999)100,000
Jean-Bedel Bokassa (Centrafrica, 1966-79) ?
Richard Nixon (Vietnam, 1969-1974)70,000 (vietnamese civilians)
Efrain Rios Montt (Guatemala, 1982-83)70,000
Papa Doc Duvalier (Haiti, 1957-71)60,000
Hissene Habre (Chad, 1982-1990)40,000
Chiang Kai-shek (Taiwan, 1947)30,000 (popular uprising)
Vladimir Ilich Lenin (USSR, 1917-20)30,000 (dissidents executed)
Francisco Franco (Spain)30,000 (dissidents executed after the civil war)
Fidel Castro (Cuba, 1959-1999)30,000 Lyndon Johnson (Vietnam, 1963-1968)30,000 Hafez Al-Assad (Syria, 1980-2000)25,000
Khomeini (Iran, 1979-89)20,000
Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe, 1982-87, Ndebele minority)20,000
Rafael Videla (Argentina, 1976-83)13,000
Guy Mollet (France, 1956-1957)10,000 (war in Algeria)
Paul Koroma (Sierra Leone, 1997) 6,000
Osama Bin Laden (worldwide, 1993-2001)3,500
Augusto Pinochet (Chile, 1973)3,000
Al Zarqawi (Iraq, 2004-06)2,000
 leanlife
Joined: 5/15/2007
Msg: 23
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/17/2007 10:28:11 PM
violetskye
And GW so far? How many?


Iraqi body count http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ placed the invasion of Iraq casualties at about thirty thousand so I suppose that is the figure you are looking for.

Insurgents and terrorists are supposedly responsible for another forty thousand. Saddam Husein was responsible for the deaths of over a million Iraqis and then, during the sanctions while he butted heads with the UN, another half million or so. If you count his unnecessary war with Iran, another eight hundred thousand.
 bob0colo
Joined: 4/9/2006
Msg: 24
view profile
History
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/17/2007 10:43:07 PM





And GW so far? How many?
_______________

4 Million out of country.....HOMELESS

Why don't we have them here working in meat packing or lawn care........

my grass would be GREEN with a PHD.....................

really smart people doing crap jobs........MORE than the Mexie suff........Cheaper

Every bathtub would become a shiny goal ....America

We then can kill the rest of them..........Just like we did the Commie Ba$tards....

=======================================

Iraqi body count http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ placed the invasion of Iraq casualties at about thirty thousand so I suppose that is the figure you are looking for.

Insurgents and terrorists are supposedly responsible for another forty thousand. Saddam Husein was responsible for the deaths of over a million Iraqis and then, during the sanctions while he butted heads with the UN, another half million or so. If you count his unnecessary war with Iran, another eight hundred thousand.

============================================

Are we safer????????? NO.........
We have made the middle east a NIGHTMARE>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 leanlife
Joined: 5/15/2007
Msg: 25
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/17/2007 10:53:32 PM
bob0colo
4 Million out of country.....HOMELESS


Least they can move away from insurgents and terrorists now. In Saddam's time they simply waited for their wives or daughters to be hauled away to be raped. Interesting how the threat of terrorism and Saddam's regime was downplayed so much and now, it is they who are Iraq's biggest enemy.

bob0colo
We then can kill the rest of them..........Just like we did the Commie Ba$tards....


Explain this sentence please as it makes absolutely no sense.
 passionteman
Joined: 3/7/2005
Msg: 27
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/19/2007 8:31:40 AM

Here's a wild thought...Pull our troops and aid from every country and tell the world that we are not gonna do shit until the terrorist groups that are a threat to us are brought to justice. Then we might see some results.


- I don't belive any of those countries need your help at all. They have got enough resources. The problem is that your government loots their resources, interferes with their affairs.
 leanlife
Joined: 5/15/2007
Msg: 30
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/19/2007 10:00:13 PM
luckych4rm
The Bush regime and their neo-con puppet masters could probably stop terrorism by not engaging in it as a means to create more, but if you actually think stopping it is the goal, there is much for you to learn about U.S. foreign policy.


Yes, you could always just shut down those nations who support terrorism after you stop supporting unconventional methods yourself right?
 Christopher0914
Joined: 1/3/2006
Msg: 34
ONE way to stop it---there are many others.
Posted: 7/22/2007 10:29:33 AM
Bush doesn't expect to stop terrorism.

He expects sheeple to vote GOP because they fear the terrorists.
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 35
How does bush expect to stop terroism?
Posted: 7/22/2007 1:46:49 PM
You know, I'd hate to start this topic of conversation, but leanlife posted a nice list of dictators and their genocides, I think it was to show they have killed more people than the leaders of America. But, if you look at how many dictators on that list got training, funding, and a blind eye from America while they did their killing (Pinochet,Duvalier,Taylor,Amin,Savimbi,Suharto,Pol Pot, Saddam H right off the top of my tired brain), you wonder do they get included in America's so called "death toll", or are they just kills-by-proxy?

I'll admit, declaring America the biggest killer when its only existed for two centuries is a big claim....how does it get decided?
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > How does bush expect to stop terroism?