That's not appeasement, that's people changing their mind out of fear. It's not the same thing.usmarine2005 wrote:
Are you kidding?adam1503 wrote:
When were Spanish elections influenced by terrorist demands? Can you quote a source for me?
lol...roger that.sergeriver wrote:
That's not appeasement, that's people changing their mind out of fear. It's not the same thing.usmarine2005 wrote:
Are you kidding?adam1503 wrote:
When were Spanish elections influenced by terrorist demands? Can you quote a source for me?
I remember Chamberlain trying to appease Hitler went tits up as well.
Terrorism Works!
lolGunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Terrorism Works!
How can millions of people appease all at the same time the extremists? Appeasement like the one the OP is talking about comes from a government not from individuals voting. Cmon.usmarine2005 wrote:
lol...roger that.sergeriver wrote:
That's not appeasement, that's people changing their mind out of fear. It's not the same thing.usmarine2005 wrote:
Are you kidding?
Well some influence by money and commercials, others blow shit up with the sole intention of killing innocent people.sergeriver wrote:
How can millions of people appease all at the same time the extremists?
Serge, I love ya buddy, but you have lost your mind. That anti-islamic activity ( lol, i'm sorry that cracks me up every time I say it) scared those people into giving into the terrorists wishs. Not even you or Cam, can deny that this is appeasement given your bull headed definitions in the other thread. This most certainly meets your criteria.sergeriver wrote:
That's not appeasement, that's people changing their mind out of fear. It's not the same thing.usmarine2005 wrote:
Are you kidding?adam1503 wrote:
When were Spanish elections influenced by terrorist demands? Can you quote a source for me?
Last edited by lowing (2008-01-26 13:37:13)
OR it could prove that terrorism works better, because they got Spain out of Iraq, and they still get to come back with more demands (or else).Varegg wrote:
The global uncertainty with radical islam as a main contributor must have had something to do with it, atleast that is my firm opinion - what this really shows is how the people have the power to change things through voting, what happend in the Spanish election is proof that democracy works ...lowing wrote:
add to it, the fact that the popular party had a strong lead in the polls before the bombing and yet lost the election. If this does not point to an outside influence, ( anti-islamic activity) I have no idea what does.Varegg wrote:
That is the point lowing and one never knows what will work or not - i also think Spain was cowardice for pulling out alone when they had comitted themselves but i understand why they did it, partially for election reasons witch i think was utterly dispicable and partially from the pressure of the Spanish population that really doesn't wan't to be bullied by both local and global terror in the degree you can call bask separatists local terror.
Pulling out was wrong and appeaselike, they should not have comitted themself to such a venture in the first place imho ...
This is my point, no appeasement do not negotiate, do not budge one inch. In doing so, at the end of the day, all that you have achieved is giving the anti-islamic activists ( hehehehe) an inch and you lose an inch.
No Serge, I know words like equality, contribute, achieve, strive,and ambition. Or are you going to go out on a limb and say that these things I have never spoken ofsergeriver wrote:
Lowing knows four words only, liberal, appeasement, responsibility and Muslim.
Let me beg ya not to wonder out on that limb too far, or you surly will fall.
Last edited by lowing (2008-01-26 12:30:07)
I think certain members have homo erotic tendencies for Arabs of the muslim faith.
Pick another country and try again tomorrow.
Pick another country and try again tomorrow.
I am sorry did someone talk about a Muslims? I thought we were talking about Spain and ANTI-MUSLIMS.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
I think certain members have homo erotic tendencies for Arabs of the muslim faith.
Pick another country and try again tomorrow.
Last edited by lowing (2008-01-26 12:29:19)
Yeah....I didn't think you'd get it. moving on...lowing wrote:
I am sorry did someone talk about a Muslims? I thought we were talking about Spain and ANTI-MUSLIMS.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
I think certain members have homo erotic tendencies for Arabs of the muslim faith.
Pick another country and try again tomorrow.
I say fuck political correctness once and for all, let's go over to (Iraq, Afghanistan etc.) and kill every taliban / hamas / hezbollah / extremist bastard occupying the lands. I mean hell the way we're going they'll be blowing themselves up even after we left. Either clean it properly or get out and let them kill eachother untill they're all dead.lowing wrote:
OR it could prove that terrorism works better, because they got Spain out of Iraq, and they still get to come back with more demands (or else).Varegg wrote:
The global uncertainty with radical islam as a main contributor must have had something to do with it, atleast that is my firm opinion - what this really shows is how the people have the power to change things through voting, what happend in the Spanish election is proof that democracy works ...lowing wrote:
add to it, the fact that the popular party had a strong lead in the polls before the bombing and yet lost the election. If this does not point to an outside influence, ( anti-islamic activity) I have no idea what does.
This is my point, no appeasement do not negotiate, do not budge one inch. In doing so, at the end of the day, all that you have achieved is giving the anti-islamic activists ( hehehehe) an inch and you lose an inch.
Last edited by dayarath (2008-01-26 12:38:23)
inane little opines
..........kinda hard to back up what ya just said I see..no worries I will let ya off the hook.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
Yeah....I didn't think you'd get it. moving on...lowing wrote:
I am sorry did someone talk about a Muslims? I thought we were talking about Spain and ANTI-MUSLIMS.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
I think certain members have homo erotic tendencies for Arabs of the muslim faith.
Pick another country and try again tomorrow.
yeah... Mason wins for dumbest response in a thread this week... lol
Love is the answer
I love you too, but how can you say that millions of people agreed to appease the extremists. I don't get that. I mean that's not appeasement, coz it doesn't come from people, it comes from governments.lowing wrote:
Serge, I love buddy, but you have lost your mind. That anti-islamic activity ( lol, i'm sorry that cracks me up every time I say it) scared those people into giving into the terrorists wishs. Not even you or Cam, can deny that this is appeasement given your bull headed definitions in the other thread. This most certainly meets your criteria.sergeriver wrote:
That's not appeasement, that's people changing their mind out of fear. It's not the same thing.usmarine2005 wrote:
Are you kidding?
It was a joke. You know all those too. Lol.lowing wrote:
No Serge, I know words like equality, contribute, achieve, strive,and ambition. Or are you going to go out on a limb and say that these things I have never spoken ofsergeriver wrote:
Lowing knows four words only, liberal, appeasement, responsibility and Muslim.
Let me beg ya not to wonder out on that limb too far, or you surly will fall.
The problem lowing is having is that he believes there are only two choices, appeasement or violent resistance.lowing wrote:
You are correct, military responses are not doing much to curb terrorism either. I simply would rather die in defiance of it, than kneel to it and make it easier for them to kill me anyway. Spain proves this, peace at any price, even succumbing to it, to no avail.
If there is a third choice to react to "anti-islamic activity', I am all ears.san4 wrote:
The problem lowing is having is that he believes there are only two choices, appeasement or violent resistance.lowing wrote:
You are correct, military responses are not doing much to curb terrorism either. I simply would rather die in defiance of it, than kneel to it and make it easier for them to kill me anyway. Spain proves this, peace at any price, even succumbing to it, to no avail.
This "enemy" has been blown out of proportion. Soon enough the Islamic balloon will explode as there's simply not enough things happening to keep the myth going. China and Russia will take its place. Building a case against them will surely be less of a problem.
ƒ³
well I guess no one is willing to tell us........lowing wrote:
If there is a third choice to react to "anti-islamic activity', I am all ears.san4 wrote:
The problem lowing is having is that he believes there are only two choices, appeasement or violent resistance.lowing wrote:
You are correct, military responses are not doing much to curb terrorism either. I simply would rather die in defiance of it, than kneel to it and make it easier for them to kill me anyway. Spain proves this, peace at any price, even succumbing to it, to no avail.
3. Work with the wider Muslim community to help combat radical Islam.lowing wrote:
well I guess no one is willing to tell us........
There are a million third choices. They all have a common goal: figure out why millions of muslims hate the US and do something about it that does not compromise US values or interests.lowing wrote:
If there is a third choice to react to "anti-islamic activity', I am all ears.san4 wrote:
The problem lowing is having is that he believes there are only two choices, appeasement or violent resistance.lowing wrote:
You are correct, military responses are not doing much to curb terrorism either. I simply would rather die in defiance of it, than kneel to it and make it easier for them to kill me anyway. Spain proves this, peace at any price, even succumbing to it, to no avail.
For example, one theory is that millions of muslims hate the US because they see it as propping up their corrupt leaders. The US could do something about this by working with dictatorships we support--in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan--to provide basic services to their people. Poor Egyptians would have different feelings about the US if their televisions were getting electricity from a grid the US gave them. Instead, muslims with dysfunctional governments turn to Hezbollah, Hamas and the Islamic Brotherhood because they provide them with basic services.
Maybe you consider that appeasement, but it doesn't compromise US interests or values at all. In fact, it's a highly aggressive move because it would transform societies and drag people from the dark ages into the 21st century.
This is just one idea (developed by me, a person who doesn't know much about muslim societies). Joe Biden has talked about his own ideas like this, such as building roads, schools and clinics in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The fundamental idea is to address the causes of anti-US attitudes among muslims and to modernize muslim societies. The Bush administration has totally ignored this "third" type of choice.
HUH?? I'm sorry, I have been "proven wrong" remember. We do not have problems with Islam, only a few that are not even practicing Islam. In fact we can't even call it Islamic Terror anymore, It is now called ANTI-Islamic activity". So tell me again what you mean when you say millions of Muslims hate us, because according to Cam and his groupies, this is not the case. We only have a problem with a select few and that problem is insignificant. So on the whole expalin to me again why the US needs to improve relations with the Muslims, if everything is already fantastic. ( except for a few of course, and they are not Muslims)san4 wrote:
There are a million third choices. They all have a common goal: figure out why millions of muslims hate the US and do something about it that does not compromise US values or interests.lowing wrote:
If there is a third choice to react to "anti-islamic activity', I am all ears.san4 wrote:
The problem lowing is having is that he believes there are only two choices, appeasement or violent resistance.
For example, one theory is that millions of muslims hate the US because they see it as propping up their corrupt leaders. The US could do something about this by working with dictatorships we support--in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan--to provide basic services to their people. Poor Egyptians would have different feelings about the US if their televisions were getting electricity from a grid the US gave them. Instead, muslims with dysfunctional governments turn to Hezbollah, Hamas and the Islamic Brotherhood because they provide them with basic services.
Maybe you consider that appeasement, but it doesn't compromise US interests or values at all. In fact, it's a highly aggressive move because it would transform societies and drag people from the dark ages into the 21st century.
This is just one idea (developed by me, a person who doesn't know much about muslim societies). Joe Biden has talked about his own ideas like this, such as building roads, schools and clinics in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The fundamental idea is to address the causes of anti-US attitudes among muslims and to modernize muslim societies. The Bush administration has totally ignored this "third" type of choice.
I am looking for a third choice after the terrorist act, like the Madrid bombing, you can appease, or like the US you can fight.....Which isa third choice to deal with a terror act aftewr it is committed?