Pages: 1 2 3 4

 

2007-02-22 15:36:52
m3thod
All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz
+2,197|7093|UK

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

At this point it really doesn't matter what we do. Whether or not we quell the insurgency, Iraq will become the same radical Middle Eastern shithole it has always been
No shit?!! You might wanna tell that to your esteemed leader.

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

We are doing too much for a country that will inevitably regress back to what it once was. This is the Middle East we're talking about here
See above

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

They don't want peace, and they don't deserve it
Now, this is why you are referred to as Bollox....you might want urban dictionary it.

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

If they want to live in the year 1000 for another 1000 years, let them. What we should do is quarantine the region--create a "zoo", so to speak
Even better why don't we do this to the people that try to open up a suppressed shitfest and really get to the root of the problem?

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

They can stay in their designated area and kill each other all they want, but they won't affect the outside world. As history has shown us, they have a tendency to bring their shenanigans all around the globe.
So long as the US provide unequivocal support to Israel and demonstrates hypocrisy that borders on the obscene the terrorists have all the ammo they need to go about their "shenanigans".

Times must be hard huh?  You've started to plagiarise yourself.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
2007-02-22 15:46:04
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6827|North Carolina
Actually, Fancy does make some valid points above.

I would prefer his approach over that of Bush's at least.

The problem, though, is that you really can't quarantine a nation as large as Iraq.  I have a feeling Iran will sort things out in their own special way -- it's going to be quite bloody.
2007-02-22 16:03:12
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|7190

Turquoise wrote:

BN, we normally agree on things, but I don't understand why you're getting personal with Kmarion.
He pushes me, I push back.

Lets keep the thread on track.
2007-02-22 16:11:19
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7023|132 and Bush

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

Fancy_Pollux wrote:

At this point it really doesn't matter what we do. Whether or not we quell the insurgency, Iraq will become the same radical Middle Eastern shithole it has always been. We are doing too much for a country that will inevitably regress back to what it once was. This is the Middle East we're talking about here. They don't want peace, and they don't deserve it. If they want to live in the year 1000 for another 1000 years, let them. What we should do is quarantine the region--create a "zoo", so to speak. They can stay in their designated area and kill each other all they want, but they won't affect the outside world. As history has shown us, they have a tendency to bring their shenanigans all around the globe.
No it does not matter what we do at this point. But people fail to comprehend where the root causes of terrorism comes from.

From my interview:
To effectively stop the "idea" of terrorism you must  look at what causes it. Terrorism will breed in despair and hopelessness. A person who does not have much to live for is more likely to board a bus strapped with explosives. A more effective way in my opinion would be to give possible terrorist a chance to be successful. I know to some this may sound "weak". But when someone has a chance to become something greater the misinterpretations of a radical cleric will not sound so appealing. We must support the moderates in the Muslim religion, they are our greatest ally. Unfortunately now the majority of our efforts seemed to be allocated to surges and blame.

So logically if you take away hope it would increase the probability of terrorism.

Edit: I took out the personal crap.

Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-22 16:24:15)

Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-02-22 16:17:06
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6827|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

From my interview:
To effectively stop the "idea" of terrorism you must  look at what causes it. Terrorism will breed in despair and hopelessness. A person who does not have much to live for is more likely to board a bus strapped with explosives. A more effective way in my opinion would be to give possible terrorist a chance to be successful. I know to some this may sound "weak". But when someone has a chance to become something greater the misinterpretations of a radical cleric will not sound so appealing. We must support the moderates in the Muslim religion, they are our greatest ally. Unfortunately now the majority of our efforts seemed to be allocated to surges and blame.
I agree totally.  Economics are about the only way we can win this war.

It's not the weak method, it's the common sense method.

But yeah, I'm starting to think the damage done is permanent.
2007-02-22 16:22:00
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7023|132 and Bush

By weak I mean there are some people who feel you can crush an abstract idea with force. I do believe you have to use it in some circumstances but when that is the only thing you have placed on the table I feel it is a huge mistake.

Last edited by Kmarion (2007-02-22 16:22:12)

Xbone Stormsurgezz
2007-02-22 16:24:12
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6827|North Carolina

Kmarion wrote:

By weak I mean there are some people who feel you can crush an abstract idea with force. I do believe you have to use it in some circumstances but when that is the only thing you have placed on the table I feel it is a huge mistake.
Definitely...  you've basically summed up my central problem with this administration.
2007-02-22 16:24:35
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6816|The Gem Saloon
this is ASYMETRICAL WARFARE........we are almost fucked no matter what we do.
we pull out-we lose
we stay-we lose
we try to make peace with extremists-we lose
we say fuck it and start bombing the shit out of everywhere-we lose
no matter what we do the media will be there to undermine the decision and try to make the country look bad.
ive thought many times what WWII would be like if there were cable news channels?
would ernie pyle have gotten on the air and proclaimed to the world what the evil american machine was doing to the nice little facists?
war is a dirty, nasty business, not fitting for people that want to video tape it and scrutinize someone elses actions while they sit in a nice comfortable chair safe and sound.
im so tired of all this, it really is getting old.
2007-02-22 16:27:10
m3thod
All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz
+2,197|7093|UK
Relax BN, apart from the fact Kman TK's for jets he's alright...

First rule of D&ST is to check if the source is credible, unfortunately for you Kmarion did just that!

personally if i see wikipedia of fox i don't bother to get involved.

Last edited by m3thod (2007-02-22 16:50:56)

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
2007-02-22 16:27:26
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6827|North Carolina

Parker wrote:

no matter what we do the media will be there to undermine the decision and try to make the country look bad.
ive thought many times what WWII would be like if there were cable news channels?
would ernie pyle have gotten on the air and proclaimed to the world what the evil american machine was doing to the nice little facists?
war is a dirty, nasty business, not fitting for people that want to video tape it and scrutinize someone elses actions while they sit in a nice comfortable chair safe and sound.
im so tired of all this, it really is getting old.
In a way, you are right.  I'm against censoring the media, but I do agree that many people don't understand the full context of what we are doing.

A lot of people defend Bush by saying that he does what he feels is right regardless of what people in the media think.  In principle, I agree with that mindset, but the problem I have with him is that his ideas aren't very practical -- nor are most of his approaches.
2007-02-22 16:28:37
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7003|SE London

Kmarion wrote:

To effectively stop the "idea" of terrorism you must  look at what causes it. Terrorism will breed in despair and hopelessness. A person who does not have much to live for is more likely to board a bus strapped with explosives. A more effective way in my opinion would be to give possible terrorist a chance to be successful. I know to some this may sound "weak". But when someone has a chance to become something greater the misinterpretations of a radical cleric will not sound so appealing. We must support the moderates in the Muslim religion, they are our greatest ally. Unfortunately now the majority of our efforts seemed to be allocated to surges and blame.

So logically if you take away hope it would increase the probability of terrorism.
So you're saying if people are happy they won't blow themselves up. Makes sense to me, good stuff.

You terrorist appeaser you. 

I totally agree with you.

Demonising Muslims creates radicalism within moderate Muslim communities, but you have to remember that a lot of these suicide bombers are impressionable teenagers with a lot of pent up angst, many of whom come from moderate Muslim families. Stopping these sorts of suicide attacks in the west would be more difficult, but lowering the media profile of the war on terror is likely to help.

Leaving the middle east well alone would be a great idea. Let them sort their own shit out, that way they've only themselves to blame. Although now the US (a to an extent the UK) have become obvious scapegoats for radical clerics to blame all the problems of the middle east on.
2007-02-22 16:29:09
chittydog
less busy
+586|7257|Kubra, Damn it!

This is old news, man. The National Intelligence Estimate report declared this back in September '06.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/09/ … index.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12913317/
2007-02-22 16:31:33
m3thod
All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz
+2,197|7093|UK

Parker wrote:

this is ASYMETRICAL WARFARE........we are almost fucked no matter what we do.
we pull out-we lose
we stay-we lose
we try to make peace with extremists-we lose
we say fuck it and start bombing the shit out of everywhere-we lose
no matter what we do the media will be there to undermine the decision and try to make the country look bad.
ive thought many times what WWII would be like if there were cable news channels?
would ernie pyle have gotten on the air and proclaimed to the world what the evil american machine was doing to the nice little facists?
war is a dirty, nasty business, not fitting for people that want to video tape it and scrutinize someone elses actions while they sit in a nice comfortable chair safe and sound.
im so tired of all this, it really is getting old.
It's today and tomorrows news.  It's fresh every day and it will get debated every day.

Someone posted that military analysts planned the invasion and occupation for 13 years only for Rummy to flush it down the pan and install his rash, beleaguered shock and awe bollocks.

Poor planning at its finest.

Last edited by m3thod (2007-02-22 16:51:31)

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
2007-02-22 16:38:49
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6816|The Gem Saloon

m3thod wrote:

Parker wrote:

this is ASYMETRICAL WARFARE........we are almost fucked no matter what we do.
we pull out-we lose
we stay-we lose
we try to make peace with extremists-we lose
we say fuck it and start bombing the shit out of everywhere-we lose
no matter what we do the media will be there to undermine the decision and try to make the country look bad.
ive thought many times what WWII would be like if there were cable news channels?
would ernie pyle have gotten on the air and proclaimed to the world what the evil american machine was doing to the nice little facists?
war is a dirty, nasty business, not fitting for people that want to video tape it and scrutinize someone elses actions while they sit in a nice comfortable chair safe and sound.
im so tired of all this, it really is getting old.
It's today and tomorrows news.  It's fresh every day and it will get debated every day.

Someone posted that military analyst planned and invasion and occupation for 13 years only for Rummy to flush it down the plan and install his rash, beleaguered shock and awe bollocks.

Poor planning at its finest.
indeed it is todays and tomorrows news.
i wasnt alive so i cant say from firsthand accounts, but i am aware of the body count the media posted DAILY during the vietnam conflict. whether or not you agree with the reason we are there, i dont think that count should be posted.....how do those families feel when they see those numbers? and the media does it to attempt a passive "Fuck You" at the administration. so basically the media can show whatever they want to try and sway people.....even if it is showing the body counts...which half the time they seem excited to tell.
this whole situation is fucked up......im actually angry now, which really doesnt happen that much....but my thoughts are getting muddled, so im going to stop and go smoke with my wife, be grateful for my safety and the fact that i dont live in a warzone.
2007-02-22 16:40:00
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7003|SE London

Parker wrote:

this is ASYMETRICAL WARFARE........we are almost fucked no matter what we do.
we pull out-we lose
we stay-we lose
we try to make peace with extremists-we lose
we say fuck it and start bombing the shit out of everywhere-we lose
Yup. We lose. It's all about damage limitation.

Potential scenarios:

We pull out - The region descends in chaos and civil war - Oh dear, what a shame, never mind.
We stay - Insurgency continues and probably gets worse whilst the US spends a fortune - How does this help anyone?
We try to make peace with the extremists... - ...and fail - Doesn't look good.
Bomb everything - Probable war crimes tribunals, though since the US does not follow international law nothing would come of them - This would lead to disasterous international relations for the US and create loads more terrorism and probably be the worst possible course of action, not to mention the least moral (and the current reason for the war being on moral grounds would be proven even more farcical than it is now), genocide is never nice.
2007-02-22 17:07:58
HunterOfSkulls
Rated EC-10
+246|6702

Kmarion wrote:

From my interview:
To effectively stop the "idea" of terrorism you must  look at what causes it. Terrorism will breed in despair and hopelessness. A person who does not have much to live for is more likely to board a bus strapped with explosives. A more effective way in my opinion would be to give possible terrorist a chance to be successful. I know to some this may sound "weak". But when someone has a chance to become something greater the misinterpretations of a radical cleric will not sound so appealing. We must support the moderates in the Muslim religion, they are our greatest ally. Unfortunately now the majority of our efforts seemed to be allocated to surges and blame.
Well said, Kmarion. All the "they're just animals", "they only respond to force" and "they don't want peace" shite is empty-headed blanket judgement crap that borders on outright racism. The average Iraqi/Afghani/Muslim living anywhere doesn't want to blow themselves up or cut off heads; it takes either a lot of abuse and hardship piling up on them or a lot of screwing with their heads by fanatics. Desperate, broken people are vulnerable to the Wahabbist clerics who essentially preach the ideas of payback and eternal rewards, very appealing to someone who's got nothing to live for, someone who lost friends or family members as "collateral damage" in Coalition attacks or someone just desperate to belong to something greater than themselves. The only way you beat the fanatics is by denying them new adherents. Invading and dropping bombs and occupying countries will only exacerbate the problem by creating more and more of the people they recruit from, creating more piles of bodies for the fundamentalists to point at as "proof" of the evil of the West, and unfortunately, more encounters between Muslims/Arabs and Western soldiers who view them as subhuman animals only worthy of being abused, tortured, raped or killed.

I don't really know a whole lot of Chomsky's work, but I do recall what he said about "draining the swamp". Force is not going to fix this. As much as some people might like to, you can't kill an idea or an ideology, the only thing you can fight that with is better ideas and ideologies. Fight the violent when they attack, yes, but realize that their leaders are not on the battlefield but within the body of society as a whole like a malignancy. You don't treat a tumor with a shotgun blast and you don't excise a malignancy and then turn the patient out on the street without another thought. Careful surgery and aftercare is what's called for here, not casual brutality and abandonment.
2007-02-22 17:10:20
usmarine2007
Banned
+374|6789|Columbus, Ohio

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

I don't really know a whole lot of Chomsky's work, but I do recall what he said about "draining the swamp". Force is not going to fix this. As much as some people might like to, you can't kill an idea or an ideology, the only thing you can fight that with is better ideas and ideologies. Fight the violent when they attack, yes, but realize that their leaders are not on the battlefield but within the body of society as a whole like a malignancy. You don't treat a tumor with a shotgun blast and you don't excise a malignancy and then turn the patient out on the street without another thought. Careful surgery and aftercare is what's called for here, not casual brutality and abandonment.
Is that how they should have stopped Hitler in 1939-40?
2007-02-22 17:20:18
m3thod
All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz
+2,197|7093|UK

usmarine2007 wrote:

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

I don't really know a whole lot of Chomsky's work, but I do recall what he said about "draining the swamp". Force is not going to fix this. As much as some people might like to, you can't kill an idea or an ideology, the only thing you can fight that with is better ideas and ideologies. Fight the violent when they attack, yes, but realize that their leaders are not on the battlefield but within the body of society as a whole like a malignancy. You don't treat a tumor with a shotgun blast and you don't excise a malignancy and then turn the patient out on the street without another thought. Careful surgery and aftercare is what's called for here, not casual brutality and abandonment.
Is that how they should have stopped Hitler in 1939-40?
Ah Bless! The ever reliable copyrighted by USM07 Hitler reference post.

Can you say B-B-B-Broken R-R-R-Record?

Last edited by m3thod (2007-02-22 17:20:29)

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
2007-02-22 17:22:41
usmarine2007
Banned
+374|6789|Columbus, Ohio

m3thod wrote:

Ah Bless! The ever reliable copyrighted by USM07 Hitler reference post.

Can you say B-B-B-Broken R-R-R-Record?
I think it fits there.
2007-02-22 17:26:04
m3thod
All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz
+2,197|7093|UK

usmarine2007 wrote:

m3thod wrote:

Ah Bless! The ever reliable copyrighted by USM07 Hitler reference post.

Can you say B-B-B-Broken R-R-R-Record?
I think it fits there.
Different time.  Different era.  Different mindset.  Different people.  Different weapons.  Different strategy.  Different food.  Different chicks.

Not applicable.

Y-Y-Y-Ya D-D-D-Dig?
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
2007-02-22 17:26:57
HunterOfSkulls
Rated EC-10
+246|6702

usmarine2007 wrote:

Is that how they should have stopped Hitler in 1939-40?
Is that anything remotely like what I was talking about? We're talking about terrorism, not conventional warfare between nation-states and not your silly false dilemna "yew libz would've tried to appease Hitler" crap. There's no standing army on the other side, no major military engagements. Where's their air power? Their armored divisions? Where are the factories that produce their war materiel? Where are the troop movements to target, the supply lines to cut? They don't even have recognizable frickin' uniforms and you want to bring WWII into this? Face it, the force angle is not working. It's not going to start working when you apply more force either. We're not losing ground because we're not being brutal enough, we're losing ground because this is like having a boxing champ perform eye surgery. Finesse is not appeasement. Realizing that sheer brute force isn't going to fix the problem isn't cowardice. Thinking that you can just stomp people into shape is not strength, it's the ideology of the tyrant and the dictator.
2007-02-22 17:27:12
usmarine2007
Banned
+374|6789|Columbus, Ohio

m3thod wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

m3thod wrote:

Ah Bless! The ever reliable copyrighted by USM07 Hitler reference post.

Can you say B-B-B-Broken R-R-R-Record?
I think it fits there.
Different time.  Different era.  Different mindset.  Different people.  Different weapons.  Different strategy.  Different food.  Different chicks.

Not applicable.

Y-Y-Y-Ya D-D-D-Dig?
He is talking about ideology which does not really have a time stamp.



Stop being an asshole about it.
2007-02-22 17:27:44
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6827|North Carolina

usmarine2007 wrote:

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

I don't really know a whole lot of Chomsky's work, but I do recall what he said about "draining the swamp". Force is not going to fix this. As much as some people might like to, you can't kill an idea or an ideology, the only thing you can fight that with is better ideas and ideologies. Fight the violent when they attack, yes, but realize that their leaders are not on the battlefield but within the body of society as a whole like a malignancy. You don't treat a tumor with a shotgun blast and you don't excise a malignancy and then turn the patient out on the street without another thought. Careful surgery and aftercare is what's called for here, not casual brutality and abandonment.
Is that how they should have stopped Hitler in 1939-40?
There is a major difference between Hitler and our enemies in Iraq.

Hitler was a conventional force.

Insurgencies must be dealt with in very different ways.
2007-02-22 17:29:45
usmarine2007
Banned
+374|6789|Columbus, Ohio

HunterOfSkulls wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

Is that how they should have stopped Hitler in 1939-40?
Is that anything remotely like what I was talking about? We're talking about terrorism, not conventional warfare between nation-states and not your silly false dilemna "yew libz would've tried to appease Hitler" crap. There's no standing army on the other side, no major military engagements. Where's their air power? Their armored divisions? Where are the factories that produce their war materiel? Where are the troop movements to target, the supply lines to cut? They don't even have recognizable frickin' uniforms and you want to bring WWII into this? Face it, the force angle is not working. It's not going to start working when you apply more force either. We're not losing ground because we're not being brutal enough, we're losing ground because this is like having a boxing champ perform eye surgery. Finesse is not appeasement. Realizing that sheer brute force isn't going to fix the problem isn't cowardice. Thinking that you can just stomp people into shape is not strength, it's the ideology of the tyrant and the dictator.
Well excuse me.  But I thought you were talking about ideology in the second paragraph.
2007-02-22 17:29:47
m3thod
All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz
+2,197|7093|UK

usmarine2007 wrote:

m3thod wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:


I think it fits there.
Different time.  Different era.  Different mindset.  Different people.  Different weapons.  Different strategy.  Different food.  Different chicks.

Not applicable.

Y-Y-Y-Ya D-D-D-Dig?
He is talking about ideology which does not really have a time stamp.



Stop being an asshole about it.
Your rational is IMO wrong.  I'm not being asshole about it.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard