Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
foiled terrorist plot?
#11
spazz Wrote:I would like to see you walking the streets of Iraq with potential terrorist passing you by with ak47's in their hands and not being able to do a thing until they fire at you. Then you can only fire back at the guy who shoots at you, no one else. Because god knows, if you end up killing a terrorist that has not opened fire yet, then you killed an innocent person.

Hopefully, none of us here will ever be in such a horrific situation. Of course, you must realize that you are comparing apples with oranges.

In your earlier scenario, you are condoning the indescriminate annihilation of an entire city and all its inhabitants in vengeful retaliation for the actions of an evil few.

In your latest scenario, you are talking about a soldier mistakenly killing an 'innocent' because he had to make a split-second, life or death decision in an active combat zone while under direct fire from the enemy.

Your latest scenario involves a tragic but nevertheless understandable and often unavoidable error of judgment.

Your earlier scenario, on the other hand, involves malicious and intentional genocide, with forethought.
My name is Rob
_____________________________________
Exams/Courses Passed (43):
- Courses (4): 1 Excelsior, 1 CSU-Pueblo, 2 Penn Foster.
- Exams (39): 24 DSST, 15 CLEP.

Total Credits: 142 (12 not used).
[SIZE=1]GPA: 4.0
[/SIZE]
Reply
#12
snazzlefrag Wrote:Hopefully, none of us here will ever be in such a horrific situation. .
Yes I would not like to be put in that situation.

YIKES!!!! ALL good comments listed above.
But makes me think of a movie that I watch yesterday = Pearl Harbor (the one with "dreamy" stars Ben A. and Josh Harnett in it).
There was a line in the movie that the scriptwriter had the President Roosevelt say- (something to the fact)
(In regards to dropping the bomb on a selected citys..you know the ones)
"It would only be a pin prick. But it would be one straight through the heart." (not exact wording)
But you know that if we "hit" them where we DO know where there are. It would be a good strike against them.

But the media definitely has 'raised' the level for us. These foiled plots happen ALL the time...the media chooses which one to fill up the air waves with today.
[[[[ An example of this: shark attacks...in a city had that 2 shark attacks in 2 month period. All of a "sudden" there was a massive media attention on shark attacks. But they (the media) failed to report the 15 attacks that happened the 6-12 months earlier!!!]]]

My brother-in-law was in the Marine Corps for 22 years. He served in Beirut, Lebanon, Afghan, Kuwait, you name it, he was there. Told my sister once when he was serving in an operation, that I look for his unit/squad (what ever you call it) on the TV for reporting info. She told me that you will NEVER see him on TV because where he is the media is not. The media gives up the 'imagine" (or knowledge) that THEY want us to think/know. But they truly report bias information.
Everything is peaches & roses - when they want us to think that everything is A-ok. (When in reality there are not.)
Then on the flip side, want us to be in fear of flying (or whatever is the "topic" of the day----swimming off the Eastern seaboard) when it gets them to have huge ratings.
So these "new" foiled plots are nothing new just same story different election year. We (Americans & other troops) foil these plans all the time. This foil happens to be the one (timing) that they wish to talk about it!!

The eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth is stated alot. But the good Book states it like this: (which is same times hard to remember to do...especially when someone cuts you off traffic!!!)

Matthew 5:38-48
38 "You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' "
39 "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
40 "If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also.
41-42 "Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. "Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you.
43 "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.' "
44-45 "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
46-48 "For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? "If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.



Sorry my post is so long.........awaiting the + and - feedback from this post!!! LOL
We all have the right to think and believe what we wish, this country's founding Fathers gave us that right. And the men and women today fight hard to continue to allow us that keep that right! Pro or Con about the war on terror. Please think of that.
I remember clearly the "letter" that my brother-in-law wrote to us (his family) because he might not have made it home defending what some of us believe to protect the rights of all mankind.
~ X ~
Reply
#13
snazzlefrag Wrote:Hopefully, none of us here will ever be in such a horrific situation. Of course, you must realize that you are comparing apples with oranges.

In your earlier scenario, you are condoning the indescriminate annihilation of an entire city and all its inhabitants in vengeful retaliation for the actions of an evil few.

In your latest scenario, you are talking about a soldier mistakenly killing an 'innocent' because he had to make a split-second, life or death decision in an active combat zone while under direct fire from the enemy.

Your latest scenario involves a tragic but nevertheless understandable and often unavoidable error of judgment.

Your earlier scenario, on the other hand, involves malicious and intentional genocide, with forethought.


If that is what it takes to save innocent lives then so be it. Terrorism will become so unthinkable and unimaginable that these terrorist will think about the cost they are to pay when they kill american lives. I am not talking about geneocide, that refers to the annihilation of a race. Obviously there is not a city in the world where the entire race precides.

My latest "scenerio" is a CE to your liberal media dispute.

As for X 911 quotes, I agree with them. But on an individual level.
Reply
#14
spazz Wrote:If that is what it takes to save innocent lives then so be it. Terrorism will become so unthinkable and unimaginable that these terrorist will think about the cost they are to pay when they kill american lives. I am not talking about geneocide, that refers to the annihilation of a race. Obviously there is not a city in the world where the entire race precides.

My latest "scenerio" is a CE to your liberal media dispute.

As for X 911 quotes, I agree with them. But on an individual level.

Genocide is a process, not a single action. Although all genocide begins with a single action. If, every time there is a terrorist attack, you destroy an entire city of several hundred thousand people simply because they have the same color skin as the terrorists, you are undoubtedly committing mass murder based on race. Do it often enough, and you will eventually wipe out the entire race.

I don't see the logic in bombing a city full of innocent people because somebody else bombed a city full of our innocent people. Why is one action just and the other unjust?

If we bomb innocent people to try to force the terrorists to meet OUR demands (ie, stop bombing us), then how are we any different from the terrorists themselves. After all, they bomb innocent people to try to force us to meet THEIR demands.

Take out the terrorists for sure. I'm absolutely for that. If we know where they are, drop a missile on their evil asses. But all this talk of wiping out entire cities full of innocent Arab men, women, and children in retaliation for the death of innocent American men, women, and children is outrageous. It is simply meeting terrorism with terrorism. As I said before, we are better than that.

At least, I'd like to think that we are,
Snazzlefrag
My name is Rob
_____________________________________
Exams/Courses Passed (43):
- Courses (4): 1 Excelsior, 1 CSU-Pueblo, 2 Penn Foster.
- Exams (39): 24 DSST, 15 CLEP.

Total Credits: 142 (12 not used).
[SIZE=1]GPA: 4.0
[/SIZE]
Reply
#15
snazzlefrag Wrote:Genocide is a process, not a single action. Although all genocide begins with a single action. If, every time there is a terrorist attack, you destroy an entire city of several hundred thousand people simply because they have the same color skin as the terrorists, you are undoubtedly committing mass murder based on race. Do it often enough, and you will eventually wipe out the entire race.

I don't see the logic in bombing a city full of innocent people because somebody else bombed a city full of our innocent people. Why is one action just and the other unjust?

If we bomb innocent people to try to force the terrorists to meet OUR demands (ie, stop bombing us), then how are we any different from the terrorists themselves. After all, they bomb innocent people to try to force us to meet THEIR demands.

Take out the terrorists for sure. I'm absolutely for that. If we know where they are, drop a missile on their evil asses. But all this talk of wiping out entire cities full of innocent Arab men, women, and children in retaliation for the death of innocent American men, women, and children is outrageous. It is simply meeting terrorism with terrorism. As I said before, we are better than that.

At least, I'd like to think that we are,
Snazzlefrag


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. They know we could never catch them because we would be crucified by the media for the civilians we kill. Genocide is a process, which could never happen because we would have to kill every Arab in the world, even our own trusted citizens. That is the kind of radical bullshit that the media plays off of.

The only difference between terrorist and countries is countries actually have the balls to define themselves. But most of the Middle Eastern countries are ran by terrorists or fundamentalist religious zealots.

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.
Reply
#16
spazz Wrote:That is the kind of radical bullshit that the media plays off of.

So let me make sure I have this straight....

If evil men murder 3,000 innocent Americans, that's terrorism. But if America murders 300,000 innocent foreigners, that's NOT terrorism?

If you blow up a random city and kill 300,000 innocent people, that's NOT radicalism. But if the media reports that you blew up a random city and killed 300,000 innocent people, that IS radicalism?

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
My name is Rob
_____________________________________
Exams/Courses Passed (43):
- Courses (4): 1 Excelsior, 1 CSU-Pueblo, 2 Penn Foster.
- Exams (39): 24 DSST, 15 CLEP.

Total Credits: 142 (12 not used).
[SIZE=1]GPA: 4.0
[/SIZE]
Reply
#17
snazzlefrag Wrote:So let me make sure I have this straight....

If evil men murder 3,000 innocent Americans, that's terrorism. But if America murders 300,000 innocent foreigners, that's NOT terrorism?

If you blow up a random city and kill 300,000 innocent people, that's NOT radicalism. But if the media reports that you blew up a random city and killed 300,000 innocent people, that IS radicalism?

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

LOL, No I was saying what you're doing now by saying it is genocide is the liberal bs the media plays off of. First off, it would not be 300,000 innocent foreigners, since most of the people are brainwashed to think that we are the son of the devil and we need to be exterminated. The innocent people would really only be a small fraction, depending upon what your definition of innocent would be. The city would not be random, the city would be where the terrorists who destroyed our building would live obviously.
Reply
#18
spazz Wrote:The city would not be random, the city would be where the terrorists who destroyed our building would live obviously.

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

::GULP::
My name is Rob
_____________________________________
Exams/Courses Passed (43):
- Courses (4): 1 Excelsior, 1 CSU-Pueblo, 2 Penn Foster.
- Exams (39): 24 DSST, 15 CLEP.

Total Credits: 142 (12 not used).
[SIZE=1]GPA: 4.0
[/SIZE]
Reply
#19
snazzlefrag Wrote:So...you mean...like...High Wycombe? :eek:

::GULP::
What or who is that? LOL @ my lack of knowledge on that statement/subject. Smile
~ X ~
Reply
#20
snazzlefrag Wrote:So...you mean...like...High Wycombe? :eek:

::GULP::

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?

My whole point was to destroy a city with terrorist or at least people that where brought up that we are the sons of the devil and want us exterminated. They have connected those people to Al-Qaeda and they know where the money came from, good place to start.

If you have a better or more effective solution, then by all means share it with us. But I doubt there is a nonviolence solution to people who look at us like the devil. I believe my solution would save the most innocent lives of any solution. Simply because we just want to get the point across and give them some incentive to stop. I know how the liberal media would spin this, NOW WE ARE TERRORISTS! Nope, we are not. You know why? Because we are a well defined country that just wants them to stop killing our innocent people. If you were to call this terrorism, then you could certainly call it a terrorist act when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor or any military action for that matter. It is stupid and radical to compare a countries action to terrorism, when the only true difference is we are not hiding behind rocks and we take responsibility for our actions.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)