True. It is Israels legacy of terrorism that has brought a whole lot of chaos and terrorism into the region. But I doubt everything would be perfect even without the existence of Israel.sergeriver wrote:
Mostly they are the cause of hate because of their crimes against humanity.Miller wrote:
I can only say that, because Isreal is the cause of most of the hate in the middle east that, they sometimes will have to commit terrorist acts just to survive.sergeriver wrote:
Please don't compare Lebanon to Israel. Lebanon is a poor country without any support and they do what they can, and Israel has the entire West support and counts with the best weapons available. What Israel did to Lebanon in July is pure terrorism.
Or when everone else has the sense not to do it.Stingray24 wrote:
God bless the men and women of the US military, they get the job done when no one else has the balls to do it.Miller wrote:
Sure, go ahead and call the US a terrorist state anyway then. I won't care. I would brush that aside and kick the ass of anyone who needs to be dealt with.Bertster7 wrote:
Kind of true, I suppose. But states like Lebanon where organisations recognised by some countries as terrorists are in government I think are a different case entirely to the US.
Sure, but Israel is not making things much easier.Bertster7 wrote:
True. It is Israels legacy of terrorism that has brought a whole lot of chaos and terrorism into the region. But I doubt everything would be perfect even without the existence of Israel.sergeriver wrote:
Mostly they are the cause of hate because of their crimes against humanity.Miller wrote:
I can only say that, because Isreal is the cause of most of the hate in the middle east that, they sometimes will have to commit terrorist acts just to survive.
No. They're not. If you ask me they've been a proper bunch of cunts about it all. Consistently exacerbating the situation and defying any sort of international resolutions against them. That added to the fact that their very state is built on the actions of a terrorist force composed of (mostly) illegal immigrants taking control of the country they migrated to and oppressing the people who lived there.sergeriver wrote:
Sure, but Israel is not making things much easier.Bertster7 wrote:
True. It is Israels legacy of terrorism that has brought a whole lot of chaos and terrorism into the region. But I doubt everything would be perfect even without the existence of Israel.sergeriver wrote:
Mostly they are the cause of hate because of their crimes against humanity.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2006-11-18 11:18:32)
Even with that definition, we must still include America, because Israel, while recognized by some countries as a terrorist group, is recognized as a legitimate government by the US.Bertster7 wrote:
Kind of true, I suppose. But states like Lebanon where organisations recognised by some countries as terrorists are in government I think are a different case entirely to the US.jonsimon wrote:
But if we loosen our definition, we will be including America in the category of terrorist states, defeating serge's original point.Bertster7 wrote:
You could claim that several other middle eastern countries are terrorist states because of their backing of terrorism. Iran for one.
To avoid including the US as a terrorist state, it seems we must constrain our definition of terrorist state to that of any state who explicitly engages in regular terrorist activity. Even then, however, it is easily arguable that states like the US, Lebannon, or Iran are guilty of forms of terrorist actions, and thus, terrorist states.
Maybe they shouldn't say it, but they have.sergeriver wrote:
I don't think anybody here could say that US is a terrorist state or Bush is Hitler. Those things aren't true. But you must concede that Bush is a bad politician, which doesn't mean there's something wrong with America, in fact most politicians in all the world suck big time. And Dubya isn't the exception to this. I often criticize Bush, not America. Bush is a person and America is a country. Why would anyone say America is a terrorist state only for Bush being a bad president? The only terrorist state (as a country who commits terrorist acts all the time) is Israel. The other terrorism comes from terrorist organizations, not exactly countries.Fancy_Pollux wrote:
Yeah, I didn't quite get that one either. Just be more up front next time and say the US is a terrorist state and Bush is Hitler.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
So your saying that if the USA sits back and hangs it can still be a threat to global security?
I don't think so. If the US had members of a terrorist organisation in government, then yes. But they don't. Hezbollah have seats in Lebanese parliament. The US government don't have that problem, despite their many other faults and backing of terrorism in some cases.jonsimon wrote:
Even with that definition, we must still include America, because Israel, while recognized by some countries as a terrorist group, is recognized as a legitimate government by the US.Bertster7 wrote:
Kind of true, I suppose. But states like Lebanon where organisations recognised by some countries as terrorists are in government I think are a different case entirely to the US.jonsimon wrote:
But if we loosen our definition, we will be including America in the category of terrorist states, defeating serge's original point.
To avoid including the US as a terrorist state, it seems we must constrain our definition of terrorist state to that of any state who explicitly engages in regular terrorist activity. Even then, however, it is easily arguable that states like the US, Lebannon, or Iran are guilty of forms of terrorist actions, and thus, terrorist states.
Definitely. Our country would work much better if our leaders were as consistent as you, whatever their political leanings.lowing wrote:
I do have my opinions, and I defend them, I did not just DECIDE to think this way, deep inside I believe what I say ( most of the time). If I didn't, why would I waste time arguing them, when I could get on the band wagon, agree with everyone else and collect karma.
You can say a lot about me, good or bad, but I really hope consistent is one adjective you can use.
Consistency and adherence to one's own true values and principles - that's the foundation on which wisdom is built. +1.
There's not enough mentioning of what an eloquent speaker I am in this thread....
Get on with it!
Get on with it!
oooh ooh!! xietsu!!
Lowing president of the US? Mmmm. Interesting perspective. He would invade Pluto looking for terrorists.The_Shipbuilder wrote:
Definitely. Our country would work much better if our leaders were as consistent as you, whatever their political leanings.lowing wrote:
I do have my opinions, and I defend them, I did not just DECIDE to think this way, deep inside I believe what I say ( most of the time). If I didn't, why would I waste time arguing them, when I could get on the band wagon, agree with everyone else and collect karma.
You can say a lot about me, good or bad, but I really hope consistent is one adjective you can use.
Consistency and adherence to one's own true values and principles - that's the foundation on which wisdom is built. +1.
I mentioned you.ghettoperson wrote:
There's not enough mentioning of what an eloquent speaker I am in this thread....
Get on with it!
Thanks! Finally some sense there. I find these things important too, and english isn't even my native tounge!ghettoperson wrote:
Yeah, at least for the most part, people in here understand the need for coherent spelling and grammar. Capitals in correct places are always nice as well.
I agree but it's "tongue." I can't complain though... I don't know Swedish. It would be cool to learn it though....klassekock wrote:
Thanks! Finally some sense there. I find these things important too, and english isn't even my native tounge!ghettoperson wrote:
Yeah, at least for the most part, people in here understand the need for coherent spelling and grammar. Capitals in correct places are always nice as well.
Last edited by Turquoise (2006-11-18 15:47:10)