Afghan pres wishes to shoot down US planes - Page 5

On December 23 2008 10:35 HeadBangaa wrote:

They aren't "hiding weapons of mass destruction". Everyone knows Israel is nuclear, along with USA, Russia, etc. I understand that you're trying to mock the American-Iraq war, but you're just regurgitating buzz phrases that aren't applicable to Israel's situation. I'm not even going to read the rest of your post since it started so wrongly.

On December 23 2008 11:01 IdrA wrote:

they are 'pests'. people who choose to blow themselves up in public places give up their humanity. they are scum who should be exterminated.
its questionable to call those who harbor and support them innocent in the first place.

On December 23 2008 11:12 KissBlade wrote:



Pardon? Israel's nuclear program is actually one of the main controversial points in the Middle East. How is that not applicable?

On December 23 2008 11:16 HeadBangaa wrote:

He said they are hiding. They are not hiding. Learn to fucking read.

On December 23 2008 11:16 KissBlade wrote:


You were good until you got up to here.

On December 23 2008 11:22 IdrA wrote:

how can you consider them anything else?
they fully believe theyre going to live in paradise with 70 virgins for blowing themselves up and taking out as many infidels as they can win them and nothing can shake that belief.

pest and scum is a flattering term for something like that, its downright scary. you cant deal with an enemy like that, whos indoctrinated into such blind unshakeable hatred that theyre happy to kill themselves to do damage to you.

On December 23 2008 11:35 Jibba wrote:
Here's the problem, IdrA. First, it's easy to abuse anything "for the greater good" (see: PATRIOT Act.) Second, our intelligence is and will always be extremely imperfect. The cost/benefit analysis for "possibly killing terrorists in caves" fails, because we are terrible at predicting the cost (see: Afghanistan 1979/Somalia 2005) and the benefits are unpredictable as well.

Our weapons are extremely accurate, but the decision making is not. The collateral damage we've caused is enormous and hasn't been effective and it may not even be particularly beneficial. The Taliban is essentially a greater threat to Afghanis than it is to the US. Like Saddam, their major intent is to avoid rocking the boat in international waters and retain control of the country. If they, or anyone for that matter, wanted to attack the United States, it could be done fairly easily. Two rednecks in Oklahoma did a pretty good job, and they chose a terrible target. Numerous independent studies have shown that we're not safer from any type of attack than we were 10 years ago. Remember, who trained the 9/11 pilots- a Florida flight school.

If you want to make the case that we should do it for humanitarian reasons, then fine. Afghanis don't deserve the miserable treatment the Taliban will inflict, just like Iraqis didn't deserve what Saddam gave them. Still, this is an even more difficult battle to win than Iraq is, because we have too few troops (Soviets failed with 600,000), little internal support (this is an anarchic/tribal territory), ridiculously mountainous borders to control and there's nothing to cover the costs. Afghanistan has deserts, mountains, rocks and a few opium/rose fields- it's a shitty place to live. Not only will the conflict hemorrhage us financially, but it's also taken our attention away from the nearly failed state next door, that actually has nuclear weapons.

It'd be great if we could punish the groups that attacked us, and one could even argue the government has an obligation to attempt to, but eventually you have to realize that it was a failed state that drained an empire, and it's currently a failed state that's draining an empire.

On December 23 2008 11:22 IdrA wrote:

how can you consider them anything else?
they fully believe theyre going to live in paradise with 70 virgins for blowing themselves up and taking out as many infidels as they can win them and nothing can shake that belief.

pest and scum is a flattering term for something like that, its downright scary. you cant deal with an enemy like that, whos indoctrinated into such blind unshakeable hatred that theyre happy to kill themselves to do damage to you.

Ch. 6: Occupation and Religious Difference

“[T]he taproot of suicide terrorism is nationalism” not religion (79). It is “an extreme strategy for national liberation” (80). This explains how the local community can be persuaded to re-define acts of suicide and murder as acts of martyrdom on behalf of the community (81-83). Pape proposes a nationalist theory of suicide terrorism, seen from the point of view of terrorists. He analyzes the notions of occupation (83-84), homeland (84-85), identity (85-87), religious difference as a contributor to a sense of “alien” occupation (87-88), foreign occupation reverses the relative importance of religion and language (88-92), and the widespread perception of the method as a “last resort” (92-94). A statistical demonstration leads to the conclusion that a “linear” rather than “self-reinforcing spiral” explanation of suicide terrorism is best (94-100). However, different future developments of the phenomenon of suicide terrorism are very possible, and more study of the role of religion is needed (101).

On December 23 2008 11:01 IdrA wrote:
we're telling them that if they cant control the terrorists in their midst theyre going to die because those terrorists will otherwise kill us. i agree with you that its not right to force democracy on them if they dont want it, but we're not pushing democracy in favor of the tribal governments, but in favor of the totalitarian regimes that ruled the countries before we invaded.
they are already an enemy because of their ideology, in some cases the motive may be revenge ideology, that doesnt mean the action that results from it is necessarily wrong. look at iraq, blair and bush use scare tactics with the wmd's to support taking down saddam. it was wrong of them to do that, but still right to attack.

ya
sounds plausible
when exactly did we drop bombs on the homes of the 9/11 hijackers?

once again
the only will we're imposing is that they arent allowed to impose theirs on us. theyre not going to change. they have no desire to change. unfortunately they do have the desire to either subjugate or destroy the rest of the world. i dont really see how that attitude can be allowed.

so its ok when innocents are killed by the terrorist attacks, but not in attempts to kill the terrorists?
they are 'pests'. people who choose to blow themselves up in public places give up their humanity. they are scum who should be exterminated.
its questionable to call those who harbor and support them innocent in the first place.

It is never ok to kill anyone under any circumstances, ever. Once you understand this, you too will be considered a rational and moralistic being.

On December 23 2008 11:21 KissBlade wrote:


Reading comprehension generally involves knowing what a person is talking about in context. You nitpick one sentence and expect to tangent a point from there so perhaps it's you who needs to take up that advice?

On December 23 2008 12:24 HeadBangaa wrote:

As threads often go, we were focusing on a brief tangent. "Israel is not hiding nuclear weapons." Your point of contention questioning the validity of their possession of nukes was completely non-sequiter. And yeah, that's worth nit-picking because it had nothing to do with what we were discussing, and it's a shifty tactic to change subjects like that on an internet forum discussion, rather than concede a point; you couldn't get away with it IRL, so why should you here?

On December 23 2008 11:22 IdrA wrote:

how can you consider them anything else?
they fully believe theyre going to live in paradise with 70 virgins for blowing themselves up and taking out as many infidels as they can win them and nothing can shake that belief.

pest and scum is a flattering term for something like that, its downright scary. you cant deal with an enemy like that, whos indoctrinated into such blind unshakeable hatred that theyre happy to kill themselves to do damage to you.

On December 23 2008 12:23 Jibba wrote:
Uh... don't go all hippie on our asses.

On December 23 2008 13:08 kazokun wrote:


I find it disturbing that people assume there's something wrong with what I said.