Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Appeasment or Elimination

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Appeasment or Elimination

    I think how one feels about the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan comes down to what a person believes to be the truth about the nature of a terrorist. Basically, there are two views. One view holds that appeasement or reasoning with the terrorist will result in peace and the other view holds that the violent elimination of the terrorist will result in peace.

    The appeasement crowd believes that if we'd stop giving reasons to the terrorist groups for doing ugly things (settlements in Gaza, for example) that eventually they'd dry up and blow away because they'd have no reason to express discontent via bombings.

    The elimination crowd believes that terrorists use conflicts such as the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as a ruse to hide designs to bend all of mankind to their will and that terrorist groups like the Taliban won't be happy until everyone believes as they do.

    I think one group is entirely too cynical and the other incredibly naive.

    Consider this: (see if you think this is true)
    1) If a terrorist can be 'satisfied' or 'appeased' by the application of fair distribution of rights, provision of reasonable territories, and provision of adequate food and water then the 'appeasement' crowd would be correct in their claim that war is the wrong answer. The war in Iraq and Afgahnistan would be, IMHO, morally wrong because a peaceful solution was evident.

    2) If a terrorist can NOT be 'satisfied' or 'appeased' because they wish to continually subjugate more and more of the world to their will and the expression of that will is the enslavement or destruction of all idealogical foes, then war becomes the only answer and a moral obligation.

    Taking the Israeli, Palistinian conflict for example, a strong case can be made for each viewpoint:

    For the 'elimination' crowd (kill all terrorists) there is the over whelming proof offered by the history of the region. Time and time again the Arab world has expressed verbally and in deed their desire to drive the Jews into the sea, despite many attempts by the Jewish people to live at peace. The goal of much of the Arab world is GENOCIDE and to deny that is, IMHO, extremely naive. If you care to make the claim that the Palistinian cause is about peace, then you do so in denial of history up until the present.

    For the 'appeasement' crowd there is the over whelming proof of circumstances. When a 15 year old Palestinian boy watches his neighbors house get bulldozed by Jewish soldiers he would be exibiting an exceptional amount of maturity and independent thinking to see the cause and effect relationship evident in such an act. What is MORE likely is that he'll believe the adult who tells him that he doesn't stand a chance of building a real life anywhere unless the Jewish pigs are eliminated. That boy is going to look around at his surroundings and become ripe pickings for terrorists groups.

    Here are a couple of summary statements:
    1) It is just as unreasonable for Bin Laden to expect the Jews to dry up and blow away as it is for the Jews to expect the Palestinians to dry up and blow away.
    2) Is is just as unreasonable to think 'elimination' can work independent of 'appeasement' as it is for 'appeasement' to work independent of 'elimination'.
    3) It is as unreasonable for the Palestinians to trust the Jews while another house is being bulldozed as it is for the Jews to trust the Arabs in light of the last 30 years of history.
    4) Sure would be nice if political posturing wasn't getting in the way of real answers.

    SUMMARY:
    The solution is to get down and dirty mean-ole-Texan all over the arses of men like Saddam Hussien and Bin Laden while at the same time getting Mother Teresa all over the faces of those who desperately need aid in a world where terrorism seems to be the only effective answer.

    In short, appeasement for those who can be readily appeased and death for those who've sworn themselves as enemies of liberty.

    If you wanna squash terrorism, the double blow of killing it's hard core adherents while at the same time destroying the reasons people join these groups is the only way to get the job done.
    "A gerbil is a rodent, wretched creature and quite possibly represents yourself there unclean vile obsolete weak and live happily in there and others filth, they have caused plague and death to humans and nearly wiped us out" - industrialism

  • #2
    umm first of all, we did get down and dirty with saddam hussein as he is in
    custody, his country a shambles etc and I don't see any evidense that slowed
    the terrorists down any( see: Madrid bombing). Besides the fact that noone
    has ever had any proof saddam was a terrorist, a brutal dictator yes, terrorist?
    I doubt it. even if we get Osama bin Laden, I doubt that will have much effect
    either as the next in line will just take over from him, with the added bonus that
    if we do kill him we made him a martyr for the cause.

    Terrorists look like the people in the countries in which they hide and they're
    mobile(not like attacking an Army) So it seems to me there is no way to eliminate
    terrorists. The only way we can keep them from attacking us that I can see
    is to stop allowing immigration from the countries which they come from.
    (note: like that will ever happen) So to summerize: There is no way to stop them
    all we can do is strengthen our defenses and hope we keep most of them out.

    Oh, and appeasement is a joke. no way that will work. if we do what they say
    they want then what have they spent all these years preparing for a suicide
    bombing for?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Ghostly apparition
      umm first of all, we did get down and dirty with saddam hussein as he is in
      custody, his country a shambles etc and I don't see any evidense that slowed
      the terrorists down any( see: Madrid bombing). Besides the fact that noone
      has ever had any proof saddam was a terrorist, a brutal dictator yes, terrorist?
      I doubt it. even if we get Osama bin Laden, I doubt that will have much effect
      either as the next in line will just take over from him, with the added bonus that
      if we do kill him we made him a martyr for the cause.

      Terrorists look like the people in the countries in which they hide and they're
      mobile(not like attacking an Army) So it seems to me there is no way to eliminate
      terrorists. The only way we can keep them from attacking us that I can see
      is to stop allowing immigration from the countries which they come from.
      (note: like that will ever happen) So to summerize: There is no way to stop them
      all we can do is strengthen our defenses and hope we keep most of them out.

      Oh, and appeasement is a joke. no way that will work. if we do what they say
      they want then what have they spent all these years preparing for a suicide
      bombing for?
      I guess I left out the 'Hopeless' catagory.
      "A gerbil is a rodent, wretched creature and quite possibly represents yourself there unclean vile obsolete weak and live happily in there and others filth, they have caused plague and death to humans and nearly wiped us out" - industrialism

      Comment


      • #4
        This is a repost of my reply to Gerb's exact same post at Crackaz:
        • While "appeasement" is probably an incredibly naive position, the "elimination" method won't work, either. There is simply no way one can root out all of every single terrorist cell in the world, or even most of them. It's like trying to break water by hitting it with a hammer. Sure, you may splash some out of the bin, and there won't be any water in the space occupied by the hammer, but as soon as you withdraw the hammer to hit again, the water flows back into the space it used to occupy.

          Furthermore, the very act of trying to eliminate terrorists is largely what creates the resentment that allows them to recruit so many people so quickly. Any time a military action is carried out in a region to eliminate a group of terrorists, some of the non-terrorists in the region resent the action, and some of those will be pushed out of their state of non-action, and join terrorists against us.

          In the meantime, government back home is driven to new heights of paranoia trying to stop terrorism, taking more and more drastic measures to curb it, resulting ultimately (most likely) in a police state.

        As you can see, I seem to be in Ghostly's camp, or "hopeless", as Gerb puts it, with the difference that I don't really think it's hopeless, I just think we haven't found a good answer yet.

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm drunk! I'm right! FU! Peace!
          Ah, to be a hero. Keeping such company...

          Comment


          • #6
            ASIO chief Dennis Richardson said (quoted from 'The Australian, 18/03/04):

            "Too often, I believe, some people look for answers to al Qa'ida in the external environment and in the imperfect world in which we live."


            Quote The Australian,

            "Neither the Palestinian issue nor issues such as world poverty and perceptions of injustice in the Islamic world should be seen to be at the centre of al-Qa'ida's belief system, ASIO chief Dennis Richardson said yesterday.
            ...
            The ASIO boss said it was essential to understand that al-Qa'ida's core ideology contained a world view and was not simply a reaction to the sins of others."


            Now my point is that they believe they are doing (their) "God's" will and bringing his justice. Also you need to understand that they want to convert the world to Islam (although their holy sites are a hot spot). Some European cities will be majority muslim by 2020 (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...?from=storyrhs. I was speaking to a Muslim female medical student from Sudan and she said that if a city (country?) was majority muslim then muslim law should be imposed (ie that's their democratic right). Also remember (as the ASIO chief says) that their world view is different to what you are used to.
            Night of the Werewolves II
            HarryPotterwars
            A Thief's Guide to Thievery for UT (video not complete yet)

            Comment


            • #7
              I blame rap music. SO much hatred.
              ~TuF~

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Convict
                Now my point is that they believe they are doing (their) "God's" will and bringing his justice. Also you need to understand that they want to convert the world to Islam (although their holy sites are a hot spot). Some European cities will be majority muslim by 2020 (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...?from=storyrhs. I was speaking to a Muslim female medical student from Sudan and she said that if a city (country?) was majority muslim then muslim law should be imposed (ie that's their democratic right). Also remember (as the ASIO chief says) that their world view is different to what you are used to.

                Great. Let the end times begin....
                Never let LaughingRat shave your testicles with a rusty serrated knife.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by TheMachine
                  I blame rap music. SO much hatred.
                  T'aint the style, tis the message.
                  "A gerbil is a rodent, wretched creature and quite possibly represents yourself there unclean vile obsolete weak and live happily in there and others filth, they have caused plague and death to humans and nearly wiped us out" - industrialism

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X