OT: Counter-Terrorism is a Farce

[dogscoff]

Normally we see pretty well eye to eye AT, I'm really disappointed that I have to come down on you like this, but you are out of line.

To the people who seemingly hate Israel and enjoy blaming them, please answer my questions if you would be so kind. Tell me where I am going wrong here. To me it seems that your picking on Israel just for the sake of doing so. I fail to see why some, mostly anti-jewish racists blame Israel for all the problems in that region.

There's a big gap between "I disagree with the way Israel handles its foreign policy" and "I hate all jews". Don't call people racists without cause, it only pisses them off and makes you look stupid.

I don't see the Israel blowing up bus loads of kids, or markets full of people.

Then you're not looking. The Israelis have been known to destroy entire towns in response for terrorist bombings. And no, before you start, this doesn't mean I am a supporter of terrorism or a Nazi or anything like that. I abhor terrorists, but I also abhor Israel's brutality. They have done as much to escalate the conflict as anyone else. Both sides are guilty.

{loads of offensive, reactionary flamebait snipped}...say what you really think, that Hitler should have killed them all...

I hereby invoke Godwin's law. You lose.

Just be honest, your a racist

No, you be honest. You are an idiot who finds it easier to call anyone who disagrees with you 'Hitler' than to look at the shades of grey in-between the two extremes of the debate. It's that kind of polarised, extremist, de-humanising thinking in the west, in Israel and in the islamic extremists that has caused all this [censored] in the first place.

And honestly, who the hell are you, who the hell are we, to judge Israel? Do you live there? Have you lived there? ... have no right too pass judgement on those who live there

OK, fair enough so far, but then you go on to say...

Hezbollah attacked and drew first blood. If I am not mistaken, that is an act of war is it not? And I promis you, since they got away with what they did, they will rearm and do it all over again.

Aren't you doing here to Hezbollah exactly what you just criticised others for doing to Israel? Hypocrisy much?

EDIT: Fixed formatting, that's all.

[Renegade 13]

Atrocities said:
Sorry Ren, I was speaking in general terms and not directing the comment at you personally.

No problem Atrocities, misunderstandings happen all too frequently over the internet.

[Atrocities]

I am very dissapointed in you dogscoff. I feel that I am entitled to my opinion, and my comment were a generalized statement designed to promote honest discussion, based in part on ligitimate opinions, points of view, and a logical conclusions relating to racism. Since my statements were generalized and not directed at any one personally, I must surrender to the fact that in any debate people get angry and regrettably sometimes resort to flaming. I believe that you could have made your counter points without personal insults. I would have preferred that you would had offer proof to support your statements rather than flaming me, however you didn't, and I feel that the personal attack toward me was unwarrented. You make several good points to which I would like to respond.

There's a big gap between "I disagree with the way Israel handles its foreign policy" and "I hate all jews". Don't call people racists without cause, it only pisses them off and makes you look stupid.

While I agree with your statement about "big gaps" I have to point out that I was specifically refering to people who do hate all jews in general and that their position is one of racism. If that pisses them off, then they are the ones who look stupid because racism in general is indeed stupid.

Then you're not looking. The Israelis have been known to destroy entire towns in response for terrorist bombings. And no, before you start, this doesn't mean I am a supporter of terrorism or a Nazi or anything like that. I abhor terrorists, but I also abhor Israel's brutality. They have done as much to escalate the conflict as anyone else. Both sides are guilty

Can I ask you if there is any proof that Israel dilibrately used terrorist bombs to blow up school buses and markets filled with women, children, and inocent people? Bulldozing a building that has been repeatedly used by terrorists is not an act of terroism, it is an act of defense. I would like to point out that bulldozing a building or leveling several buildings, is not brutality when it is in response to terrorist attacks that have injured and killed inocent civilans. While both sides are pretty much fed up with each other, this does not give them each a moral high ground. I agree, they are both to blame for the escalation in violence and are both to blame for not working together to resolve their differance. Israel could have recognized the new Palistenian (sp) government and continued to give them the money owed, something that might have averted these most recent acts of anger on both sides. While the new government of Palistine and Lebenon could have maintained better control over their terrorist militias and prevented the kidnappings.

No, you be honest. You are an idiot who finds it easier to call anyone who disagrees with you 'Hitler' than to look at the shades of grey in-between the two extremes of the debate. It's that kind of polarised, extremist, de-humanising thinking in the west, in Israel and in the islamic extremists that has caused all this [censored] in the first place.

I did not call any one Hitler. Please get your facts strait before flaming me.

One of those shades of grey that you spoke of is the shade that is racist. There is no denying that racism is playing a part here. The Arabs absolutely hate the jews and as stated by the Iranian president, should be wiped out.

Israel did not start terrorism, nor have they resorted to it. So blaming them for terrorism is again something that I feel only a person who lacks the facts would do. Or to be brutally honest, who knows they lack the facts but does it anyways because they hate israel.

While some that hate israel are racists who do wish all jews would die, many people just dislike them and are not racists. They dislike them for whatever reason and often, more than not, blame them for all the woes in the middle east. Often without proof to back up said claims. But hey, that is their right, and they are entitled to their opinions, however, if they are racist against the jews, then they should be honest enough to come out and say so. All because I believe that this is what they should do if they are indeed racist, doesn't make me an "idiot" or "stupid."

Aren't you doing here to Hezbollah exactly what you just criticised others for doing to Israel? Hypocrisy much?

What did I accuse others of doing to Israel?

In general I believe that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization and given their statements and radicalized points of view, it is only logical, and I might add widely agreed upon, that they will attack again because they feel that they got away with it this time. Now I pray that they see the light and don't, but I honestly believe that that they will attack again.

Edit: spelling correction or two.

[Renegade 13]

Atrocities said:
So blaming them for terrorism is again something that I feel only a person who lacks the facts would do.

I guess this depends on your definition of terrorism. With reference to Israel's latest conflict with Hezbollah, Israel did commit terrorist acts, in my opinion. Blowing up hospitals is, under my definition, a terrorist act. I don't care if it was being used by Hezbollah, blowing up a hospital full of sick, injured people, innocent people, just to get at Hezbollah is not tolerable. You can not defeat terrorist groups by becoming like them; for if you do, how are you any better than what you have attacked?

With reference to your statement about all this happening again AT, I agree. It is inevitable that conflict will continue in that region of the world. I think that the only way it will ever stop is for one group or the other to completely and utterly annihilate the other. Israelis and Arabs have a history of violence towards each other going back 5000 years. That many generations of senseless violence simply won't be overcome, not until one or the other are gone for good.

[Atrocities]

You make a good point about distinction between terrorism and terror. While I do not know for certain that Israel bombed a hospital, I will speculate that if they did do so, that they did so for a reason and that for the most part the people in that hospital were given advanced notice. I do not believe that Hezbollah gave any advanced notice to any Israeli before their rockets struck.

Hezbollah uses people as human shields and they are the ones that should be blamed for the colateral damage, not Israel. Israel may have dropped the bomb, but it was Hezbollah that made it a target, and did so knowing that inocent people would die as a result. If Israel did not attack these human shielded bases of Hezbollah operations, then this tactic of using inocent people as human shields would become standard operating proceedure in Hezbollahs play book.

I would like to point out that in many instances following a terrorist attack in many countries over the years, many inocent people have died as a result of that countries efforts to end the terrorist siege. Russa, Germany, England, spain, and even France have all been forced to do things for the greater good that in the short term killed inocent people. This is most unfortunate and most regrettable and should never be taken or accepted as affordable losses. In that regard Israel did go to great lengths by dropping fliers to warn people to leave and or evacuate prior to any bombings.

As to whether or not they should have dropped those bombs I can only say that I wish that they had found other ways to achieve their objective other than destroying the homes and infastructure of inocent people being used by the terrorist group Hezbollah during their unprovoked assualt on Israel.

EDIT:
I would also like to point out that if Hezbollah is saying that Israel bombed a hospitol full of injured people that it could be a set up. Hell for all we know, and according to at least one news organization and blogger, Hezbollah has doctored up photo's, used many people several times, a women crying infront of a bombed out building, and then the same women as a victim of a bombing. A man as a rescue worker then was shown as a dead victim following a bombing, then seen again as a supporter of Hezbollah. I choose not to believe anything that comes from Hezbollah and question any news report that indicates that Israel intentionally bombed a hospital full of injuried people. Chance are that the source for that news came directly from Hezbollah and therefore is questionable even if reported by a lagitimate news organization. Look at all the things they have gotten wrong in recent days to know that even the best news organizations can be dupped. All I am saying is keep an open mind and take nothing on face value. There is more to be gained by propoganda than by truth. And truth is often harder to come by in the face of a well organized campaign of propoganda. In war the truth is often the first casualty.

Israel had nothing to gain by alledgely bombing a hospitol full of injured people so I don't buy that they did so. If they did bomb it, I do not believe that it was a benevolant act.

[Will]

I thought I would walk into a hornets nest when I read the title, and I was right... A few comments:

1) It is entirely misleading to say "Hezbollah started it!" or "Israel started it!". If you say the first, try standing in the shoes of the Hezbollah fighters, think what they were thinking; why did they kidnap Israeli soldiers? To think that it is only because all Arabs (or even these particular Arabs) are racist pricks that hate Jews and Israel is both naïve and racist. Far more likely is anger at Lebannese prisoners still being held in Israel from the occupation of Lebannon circa 1982 during the Israeli invasion of southern Lebannon, up to the withdrawl in 2000. In fact, that's the reason that Hezbollah stated was the reason for kidnapping what they considered to be enemy combatants. You can follow such tit-for-tat events all the way back to the end of the first World War, when the West cut up the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, and began meddling in politics in the region ever since. There really isn't anything resembing a Western democracy in the Middle East precisely because we never let it happen. It is much easier to get what you want out of a dictator than a slow deliberation in a Parliment or Congress.

2) Yes, the "War on Terror" is a farce. It's the only reason Bush Jr. got re-elected in 2004, and it creates lots of cushy jobs for people throughout the defense sector. I worked for a defense company this summer in fact, and I can tell you it is a cabal. Once you're "in", you will always be in. If there isn't enough jobs to go around, the higher up leadership will take every opportunity they can to create more. After the Cold War ended, there was pressure to cut down on massive military spending, since we didn't have the big boogeyman of Communist Russia to fear anymore. Terrorism was the perfect replacement, since there isn't really any chance that it can be erradicated. So, it keeps the leadership of the country in power because all you need to do is cause people to fear becoming overrun by terrorists if the way things are done changes to what The Other Guy wants. And it keeps the money coming into the military-industrial complex. Ike must be rolling in his grave right now, because it seems no one listened to his warnings.

3) How to really stop terrorism: another Marshall Plan, this time for Africa and the Middle East. Instead of destroying infrastructure, rebuild it. Get reliable transportation, power, and communication to the urban centers, and then expand it out into the rural areas. Fund education in the urban centers, for both boys and girls; there it will be more likely to be accepted. Elsewhere, education will be opposed by extremists, and will be impossible to undertake. Curriculum should consist of basic knowledge of science and mathematics in the Western tradition, as well as local art and literature, regional and world history, and the culture's religious texts (will be helpful to start out with a peaceful religious message, to make it harder for a violent message to take over religious discourse). Young children will be taught in the local language, and as they progress, the "language of business" (i.e. English) and other languages will be taught. Make it known in the countryside that there is education for all available, and set up temporary shelters for the people that will migrate toward the urban centers, until they can settle somewhere around the cities. Allow the population to arm themselves, and train locals to handle their own security. After about five years of relying on Western support for security logistics, there should be enough experience for locals to handle logistical security ops. As the cities are being rebuilt, leave the countryside to the warlords and extremists, it is too difficult do defend such a dispersed area, and as the cities are built up, all those that migrated to the urban areas for a chance at a better life will begin moving outward to reclaim their countries.

If these things are done with full faith, I see no reason why we cannot have peaceful thriving societies in the Middle East within a decade of the program's start. As the cities thrive, I see no reason why there cannot be peace in the Middle East within 30 years. And if there is a flaw in my thinking, please point it out to me, so I can fix it before I take over the world

[Atrocities]

I do believe that our special forces knows right where Bin Laden is, but are prohibitted from going in and getting him because to do so would effectively casterate the "war on terror."

[StarShadow]

Well said, Will.

Hate does not exist in a vacuum, and hate doesn't just spring out of nothing. Hate has to have a cause. I think that maybe people should start looking for that cause for themselves, rather than relying on the soundbites that pass as news these days. I reccomend watching Peace, Propoganda and the Promised Land, as a start.

[Renegade 13]

Will, as someone not familiar with American culture or history like I should be...who was "Ike"??? I've heard the name before, but in reference to what, I can't remember.

Also, I think your plan could work, but I think it would take longer than 30 years. Maybe 50. There's bound to be some massive snags along the way.

[Will]

Renegade 13 said:
Will, as someone not familiar with American culture or history like I should be...who was "Ike"??? I've heard the name before, but in reference to what, I can't remember.

Whoops. Probably most people in the world over about the age of 40 would recognize the nickname "Ike"... but that still leaves out the majority of the world

Ike was the nickname for Dwight D. Eisenhower. Supreme Commander of American forces in Europe during WWII, 34th President of the United States, among other notable positions. He famously warned in his farewell address to the nation that the growing military-industrial complex in the United States posed a major threat to our way of life.

Also, while the year count is fungible, I think that 30 years of ... all that stuff, would be a conservative estimate. I'm not looking for utopia here, I'm just saying after that amount of time, it would be reasonable to expect that there will be no national conflicts and no discernable threat of national conflicts in the area. There won't be an ending to attacks and bombings by militant fringe groups, but those still exist in the US and Europe, as well. As I see it, 30 years is enough time for two generations to go through a minor cultural shift where it becomes difficult to convince young men to kill people and blow themselves up. A span of 50 years would basically flush out most of the population that had their formative years during the time before the plan's implementation. I do not have much personal experience with Arab, Turkish, or Persian cultures to know how much of an influence the elder population has, but I would guess it is not sufficient to continue wars when the younger population fighting those wars are finding it harder to believe the reasons for fighting said wars.