foiled terrorist plot?

[snazzlefrag]

What or who is that? LOL @ my lack of knowledge on that statement/subject.

High Wycombe is the town in England where the recently caught terrorists live.

[X #911]

No, I said if they bomb a building we bomb a city. If they destroy a city, we destroy a country. We make terrorism so unthinkable that the terrorist will not kill our civilians because they will realize the price they pay for doing it. They are simply exploiting us because of the liberal media.....As for the action to be just, of course it is not. But it would be for the greater good of our innocent people. I do not like seeing innocent people die either. But people are driven by incentives, the only reason terrorists continue to hide with innocent people and the innocent people allowing it is because they know we would never blow them up because of the civilian causalities. But if we were to show them that we do not care and we are willing to blow up an entire city for the greater good, then they would obviously get rid of the terrorists themselves. It would be either that or get blown up every other week. This would also give the terrorists less incentive to actually commit terrorist acts.

So let me make sure I have this straight....
...I'm totally with you on the 'let's kill the terrorists' idea. On the "let's blow up a city" thing.....errrr.....not so much!
hilarious

I do not like see "innocent" or "guilty" people, for that matter, die at the hands of violence (that includes terrorism).

But having that said, my view is that if people of specific countries (or areas) allow these men/people to in flick harm on others, they are just accountable for condoning their violence (terror).

Kind of example: If a person willing knows that their friend/sibling/Uncle/Brother/whomever is being a ________ (fill in the blank with something like this: thug/bully/etc) and you do not report them (or get them to stop) you are just as responsible for their continued actions of terror as they are for continuing to commit them.

Hope you understand my view......basically if you have them hide with you (or allow them to bully/beat up the neighbor kid everyday) then you are allowing for them to continue their reign of terror, just as if you were doing it yourself.

[snazzlefrag]

You know the answer to that, why even bring it up? I am not sure; you should be able to answer this one? What percent of the population in High Wycombe are fundamentalist Islamic? Now you are just throwing stupid ideas out that are irrational to the entire point of what I was saying. Striking similarities of what the liberal media would do?

Alright, so you are losing me a bit here....

When I said you would pick a random city, you corrected me and said that "The city would not be random, the city would be where the terrorists who destroyed our building would live obviously."

The natural conclusion then, would be that you would destroy High Wycombe since, had these idiots been successful, this is the city "where the terrorists who destroyed our building would live obviously." But when I made that conclusion, you accused me of "liberal bullshit".

So, exactly which city would you destroy? And who would get to play God and decide which 300,000 people must die for the actions of this handful of British citizens?

Also, please stop accusing me of "liberal bullshit" when we are merely trying to have a reasonable discussion of opposing viewpoints. When you disagree with a point I raise, debunk it and counter it without resorting to personal name-calling and foul language. We've been down this street before Spazz. Keep it civil and argue your points intelligently. Debate me on the issues I raise, not on some assumed and cliche label you want to attach to me (and/or anyone else who just happens to disagree with you). That's the way it works.

I might be inclined to call you a radical, qausi-religious fundamentalist, right wing extremist, racist, Bush-loving, neo-conservative. But see? That gets us nowhere. It doesn't accomplish anything. It's likely to be an inaccurate caricature of who you really are. It doesn't further my argument, or make my argument any better. It merely makes me seem like someone who can't see past a label, or my own pre-conceived stereotypes. It simply attacks YOU personally. It makes it seem as if I don't have any legitimate means, other than juvenile and inane name-calling, by which to counter your equally legitimate arguments. Keep the name-calling and the foul language in the schoolyard, and let's debate the issues instead. Deal?

[spazz]

Alright, so you are losing me a bit here....

When I said you would pick a random city, you corrected me and said that "The city would not be random, the city would be where the terrorists who destroyed our building would live obviously."

The natural conclusion then, would be that you would destroy High Wycombe since, had these idiots been successful, this is the city "where the terrorists who destroyed our building would live obviously." But when I made that conclusion, you accused me of "liberal bullshit".

So, exactly which city would you destroy? And who would get to play God and decide which 300,000 people must die for the actions of this handful of British citizens?

Also, please stop accusing me of "liberal bullshit" when we are merely trying to have a reasonable discussion of opposing viewpoints. When you disagree with a point I raise, debunk it and counter it without resorting to personal name-calling and foul language. We've been down this street before Spazz. Keep it civil and argue your points intelligently. Debate me on the issues I raise, not on some assumed and cliche label you want to attach to me (and/or anyone else who just happens to disagree with you). That's the way it works.

I might be inclined to call you a radical, qausi-religious fundamentalist, right wing extremist, racist, Bush-loving, neo-conservative. But see? That gets us nowhere. It doesn't accomplish anything. It's likely to be an inaccurate caricature of who you really are. It doesn't further my argument, or make my argument any better. It merely makes me seem like someone who can't see past a label, or my own pre-conceived stereotypes. It simply attacks YOU personally. It makes it seem as if I don't have any legitimate means, other than juvenile and inane name-calling, by which to counter your equally legitimate arguments. Keep the name-calling and the foul language in the schoolyard, and let's debate the issues instead. Deal?

Thats fine, I am not attacking you though. I do not remember calling you liberal or your statements bullshit. I was simply saying how the media would affect the situation, which is why we will never have the balls to solve the problem in the first place. If anything the liberal media is good in a sense it restricts our government from harming us, but on the other hand we cannot defend ourselves from terrorists because of the media.

I am by no means republican, if I had a chance to vote I would have gone with kerry this election. Simply because I care about our economy more then this whole terrorism issue. I was just posing a potential solution to a problem which I know bush would be opt to accept it then say kerry.

Well the city would obviously be chosen intelligently, we would not pick it out of a hat. If I had to do it, I would choose a city where the majority of terrorists and islamic fundamentalist live. But really any city where you could get the point across. It would have two effects: It would make the citizens more opt to fight against these terrorists and it would make these terrorists less responsive because now we have put a price to pay on the table. The price is more then any of them could afford.

Again: I challenge you to come up with a better solution, would love to hear it. Might even give me something to think about.

Sorry if you got offended when I made an example out of your statements about genocide etc.

[snazzlefrag]

Well the city would obviously be chosen intelligently, we would not pick it out of a hat. If I had to do it, I would choose a city where the majority of terrorists and islamic fundamentalist live. But really any city where you could get the point across. It would have two effects: It would make the citizens more opt to fight against these terrorists and it would make these terrorists less responsive because now we have put a price to pay on the table. The price is more then any of them could afford.

One problem I see is that these terrorists don't seem to have ANY real concern for their own people. They have an extremist agenda, and nothing will come between them and their agenda: Not even the death of their own people. If they weren't fighting against us, they would be fighting each other (and already are in many cases).

These are not rational people at all. I think they are unlikely to repond to the death of thousands of their countrymen by saying, "Yikes! Our own people are dying. We'd better call this whole jihad thing off." I think the events in Iraq have shown that military intervention only radicalizes these crazy people even more. Every bomb we drop only serves to strengthen their resolve, and increase their numbers. Every death is a "martyrdom". Every time we capture or kill one of their leaders, they are simply replaced. Every time we capture or kill one of their rank and file, they are instantly replaced by two more.

I think we all agree that this is NOT a conventional war, and that our enemies are NOT conventional foes. So why would we think that conventional military responses, such as bombing them, would work?

Were we to bomb an entire city, we would instantly convert many millions of average, minding-my-own-business, doing-an-honest-days-work, just-trying-to-provide-for-my-family Arab citizens into angry, armed, I-will-defend-my-people-at-all-costs, I-will-die-to-protect-my-country, militant anti-americans. I would be pissed off too if America bombed my city just because some nutjob whacko terrorists happened to live a few miles down the road. I'm not a terrorist, but you are going to wipe out me and my entire family because somebody who just happens to live in my city blew up a building. Geez! That sucks!

But of course, we are not talking about blowing up MY city, or killing MY family. We are talking about a far off place that I can't relate to and don't much care about. A family I don't know, a family who looks different than me, a family that has a different religion, and wears a different style of clothing, and speaks a different language. We are talking about THEM....OVER THERE! So it's easier to consider wiping them off the face of the earth, than it is to think about blowing up MY city, or killing MY family.

I don't know what the answer is Spazz. I honestly don't. I just know that there HAS to be a better way than to meet terrorism against our innocent people, with terrorism against their innocent people. There HAS to be a better way than to avenge the murder of 3,000 of our innocent people, with the murder of 300,000 of their innocent people. There HAS to be a better way to beat these guys, than to merely BECOME LIKE THEM.

If I met a terrorist (domestic or foreign), I would gladly rip off his nuts with my bare hands, beat the living crap out of him, and then execute him.

If I met Mr Sahid, the guy who owns the grocery store at the end of Wallahah Street in downtown [Insert Arab city here], the guy who starts work at 4am and doesn't go home to his loving family until 9pm at night, the guy who only desires to live peacefully, and to provide a safe home and a fulfilling life for his wife; his 3 year old son; and his 6 yr old daughter....I would gladly shake his hand, invite him in, and ask him if he would like a cup of tea.

We HAVE to be able to distinguish between a terrorist, and peaceful citizen of a foreign nation.

We HAVE to be able to distinguish between what is morally just, and what is morally unjust.

We HAVE to be able to distinguish between who legitimately deserves to die, and who deserves to live his life without the Americans dropping a 2000 pound nuclear bunker buster on his family.

This ability to distinguish between right and wrong; innocent and guilty, is what makes us the great nation we are. Unfortunately, FEAR is causing us to lose sight of our morality and our humanity. The more frightened we become, the more we are in danger of becoming no different than the terrorists we fear.

KILL the terrorists who are responsible for deaths of thousands of our innocent people? Yes, absolutely! BECOME terrorists who are responsible for the deaths of thousands of their innocent people? No, absolutely not.

We ARE better than that! We are better than THE TERRORISTS!

[Urbannaja]

Terorism is a methodology. It's not a nation, not a thing, not even an idea...it's just the method used for a desired end. I'm not so sure that we can EVER erradicate the AQ-type terrorism, because their desired end is a unified pan-Muslim world....akin to the old califates (which would include America as well). But we CAN combat it and try to mitigate it.

The only real way to mitigate it is through social reform, and positively encouraging the people AWAY from that desire. It's actually similar to how the terrorists operate...fullfilling social needs, like jobs, education, living standards (why do you think the palestinians voted in HAMAS?). The other part of what terrorists do is exploiting hatred. What we can do on that front, is minimize their hatred toward us lol BTW, this is also how hitler won over the german people: he gave them massive social reforms (through insane debt spending), told them how they could be even better, and focused their hatred. Lots of examples of it...hell it's even happening in america...radical mosques take in felons/gang memnbers and help them out, then focus their hatred on the government that didn't help them.

It's hard to say "help your enemies" but it's probably the best way to mitigate them.

[X #911]

So...you mean...like...High Wycombe? :eek:

::GULP::

What or who is that? LOL @ my lack of knowledge on that statement/subject.

High Wycombe is the town in England where the recently caught terrorists live.

Thank you for the reply. My husband told me about the events that happened that day. But I did not remember the name of the town.
YIKE!!! Is my memory that bad. LOL Going to have a tough time when it comes to taking an exam....I'll be lucky enough to remember where the testing center is - let alone my name!!! hilarious hilarious