[QUOTE=MrDibble]
Jundallah
[/quote]
Man our terrorists suck…Hamas does better in a day.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
The problem with that argument is that outside our own borders we have never showed any interest in promoting values superior to the Iranians ( or the Communists before them ). We’ve cheerfully supported terrorism, dictators, torturers ( when not torturing ourselves ), economic exploitation, and so on.
It doesn’t matter if our ‘good’ is better than Iranian ‘good’, because we have no desire to push our version of ‘good’ or anyone else’s.
[/QUOTE]
Well…we got Germany and Japan and Italy back on track post WWII.
I think the US wants to get other countries going the same way too. Why we fail at it in many cases is complex (partly our fault, partly their fault, partly circumstances).
[QUOTE=Whack-a-Mole]
Man our terrorists suck…Hamas does better in a day.
[/QUOTE]
Try RENAMO. Definitely one of the CIA’s most reprehensible clients - I always considered the U.S. support of them real politik at its utter worst. While there are some as bad, it’s hard to come up with many groups that were worse.
What is curious about several of these groups ( as with the MEK group noted in the article above ), is the factionation that often breaks out over them in the U.S. government, very frequently in terms of State Department vs. CIA/military.
[QUOTE=Tamerlane]
Try RENAMO. Definitely one of the CIA’s most reprehensible clients - I always considered the U.S. support of them real politik at its utter worst. While there are some as bad, it’s hard to come up with many groups that were worse.
[/QUOTE]
I only perused a quick Google on them and they seem pale in comparison to Hamas.
Perhaps they are brutal in their activities (and I agree if they are the US should have nothing to do with them if they cannot rein them in) but for overall impact they are a shadow of Hamas in their dreams.
[QUOTE=Whack-a-Mole]
I only perused a quick Google on them and they seem pale in comparison to Hamas.
You could always read the report PDF. It doesn’t make for pleasant bedside reading, I can tell you.
Hamas has killed an estimated total of 482 in suicide attacks. Would you care to guess how many civilians were killed by RENAMO? never mind the mutilations, torture and rapes.
[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil]
I’m not sure this bears out valid comparison to the “modern idea” of what a terrorist constitutes.
We were at war with Japan (which they started with us) and were pulling out the stops to defeat them, as they were a particularly non-surrendering type of culture.
Heck, why use that example when you could arguably make a better case for us dropping the A-bomb on them?
[/QUOTE]
Am I right in believing that the US considered atom bombing Nikko National Park, but decided against it, reasoning the Jap’s may never surrender after carrying out such an act?
[QUOTE=MrDibble]
You could always read the report PDF. It doesn’t make for pleasant bedside reading, I can tell you.
Hamas has killed an estimated total of 482 in suicide attacks. Would you care to guess how many civilians were killed by RENAMO? never mind the mutilations, torture and rapes.
[/QUOTE]
I stand corrected (I was looking for a kill count for Hamas…how I missed the wiki is anyone’s guess)
[QUOTE=ivan astikov]
Am I right in believing that the US considered atom bombing Nikko National Park, but decided against it, reasoning the Jap’s may never surrender after carrying out such an act?
[/QUOTE]
Doesn’t look like it:
[QUOTE=Enfant Terrible]
All states are terrorist. It is simply a matter of degree.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, the term originated as a self-designation of the French Jacobins when they were in power. Rebels using terror tactics were known at the time as “incendiaries.”
[QUOTE=Whack-a-Mole]
I stand corrected (I was looking for a kill count for Hamas…how I missed the wiki is anyone’s guess)
[/QUOTE]
Note that that’s only the suicide bombing bodycount. There’s also rockets attacks and, I suppose, proper gunfights? But still, man, 100 000 worth? I don’t think so.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Actually, the term originated as a self-designation of the French Jacobins when they were in power. Rebels using terror tactics were known at the time as “incendiaries.”
[/QUOTE]
Yes, but the term is so fraught with subjectivity that I try to stay as general as possible.
In Charlie Wilson’s War, one way the CIA “aided” the Afghan resistance was to instruct them on how to make make bike and car bombs and use them to blow up shops and clubs that Russian soldiers frequented. I’m pretty sure that qualifies as terrorism when the situation is reversed. Not that it’s an authoritative source, but I don’t know that anyone’s pushed back on it.
[QUOTE=FoieGrasIsEvil]
Sadly, I don’t think this is going to be the case, in spite of insurgent “success” in fighting our military.
Open battles between countries with the military sizes of Iran and the USA are still going to occur.
Whether or not that translates into surrender anymore is a very good question.
BTW, what the fuck is Russia doing, being all silent and all? Aside from their recent bomber runs over someone else’s territory, what are they doing? They sell weapons to countries we either have fought, are fighting or will fight.
They have a lot of nukes, too. Whom are their alliances with? They sell a ton of oil and natural gas to many customers, weapons sales notwithstanding. Whom are their key allies now?
[/QUOTE]
They’ve done a lot of things, but “staying quiet” isn’t among them.
Medvedev and Putin are trying to rebuild the patriotic, strong Russian self-image. New tanks are allegedly being produced (T-95s) and military reharsals are allegedly being carried out continuously. Being in Norway, we get exposed to a lot of things we’d rather have had not happen. (Such as Russian aircraft carriers two good stone throws off our oil platforms. In international waters, sure, but still a very blatant poke)
It’s been a non-starter so far, though, with the only capable tank factory left in Ural choking and dissembling over production failures and reports of casualties from troops badly prepared for the cold in the north of Russia. Their military spending is up at a record level since 1990 - but it’s still only 1/25th of the US budget.
While the jingoistic patriotism booming over the speakers worry a lot of us, as neighbours, they’ve a long way to go both before selling their population on direct aggression. Putin is brutal, of course, but he’s also well respected. Some Norwegians liken him to Caesar - a brutal strongman in the right place at the right time. Nobody in Europe would benefit from Russia imploding, and Russia has been making indications that they want to “come into the warmth” of the EU and NATO. That’s years coming, of course, but we’re optimistic.
As for their “loose” nuclear arsenal, we haven’t heard anything, but indications are that significant parts of them are outside of central Russian government control. Whether that means the oligarchs Putin were deadlocked with, destruction or dissemly, or outlying groups have aqquired them, nobody knows.
[QUOTE=Gukumatz ]
They’ve done a lot of things, but “staying quiet” isn’t among them.
Medvedev and Putin are trying to rebuild the patriotic, strong Russian self-image. New tanks are allegedly being produced (T-95s) and military reharsals are allegedly being carried out continuously. Being in Norway, we get exposed to a lot of things we’d rather have had not happen. (Such as Russian aircraft carriers two good stone throws off our oil platforms. In international waters, sure, but still a very blatant poke)
It’s been a non-starter so far, though, with the only capable tank factory left in Ural choking and dissembling over production failures and reports of casualties from troops badly prepared for the cold in the north of Russia. Their military spending is up at a record level since 1990 - but it’s still only 1/25th of the US budget.
While the jingoistic patriotism booming over the speakers worry a lot of us, as neighbours, they’ve a long way to go both before selling their population on direct aggression. Putin is brutal, of course, but he’s also well respected. Some Norwegians liken him to Caesar - a brutal strongman in the right place at the right time. Nobody in Europe would benefit from Russia imploding, and Russia has been making indications that they want to “come into the warmth” of the EU and NATO. That’s years coming, of course, but we’re optimistic.
As for their “loose” nuclear arsenal, we haven’t heard anything, but indications are that significant parts of them are outside of central Russian government control. Whether that means the oligarchs Putin were deadlocked with, destruction or dissemly, or outlying groups have aqquired them, nobody knows.
[/QUOTE]
Thanks Gukumatz. It’s good to read a little about what the USA’s former “mortal enemies” are up to. After years and years of the Cold War and non-stop references to the USSR in the media, they sure seem to have faded into relative media obscurity these days, with the exception of the report of Bear bombers flying over someone else’s airspace, or the cutoff of a gas pipeline to a neighbor, etc.
Yes.
Next question!
[QUOTE=elucidator
When we fire bombed Tokyo, at a cost of more than a hundred thousand civilian lives, was that not terrorism? [/QUOTE]
Nope, there was a war going on, declared and everything. Toyko was a perfectly legit target, war factories, bases etc.
Not that simple. In the firebombing attack in question, there wasn’t even an attempt to localize specific military targets, the attack was intended to destroy the homes and lives of civilians. A declaration of war does not nullify any and all obligations for humane conduct. YMMV, of course.
Watched an interesting PBS show last night called “The War of the World”, which touched on this very subject. Not sure what night it was aired, as I had recorded it earlier in the week, but it appears to be an ongoing series. At any rate, last night’s show was a devastating indictment of the Allies and the tactics used in WWII plus a secondary indictment of the fact that we chummed up with Stalin-- someone arguable worse than Hitler. The guy covered lots of the usual stuff-- firebombing of Dresden and the like-- but also included archival footage of US soldiers blatantly committing atrocities that would make Bush blush. Desperate times call for desperate measures, I guess. Or something like that.
I highly recommend this series to anyone interested int he subject.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QOmAIWJ_t8o Heres a short list. Yes we do terrorism very well.