Semantics, Monty. Given the level of destruction in Hiroshima, one could effectively argue that dropping another bomb on Nagasaki was ruthless and unnecessary violence on a mostly civil target. Whether you are willing to call it terror probably depends on your passport, and it’s not even all that important - as long as we agree that Nagasaki should never have been targeted.
Sigh. Monty. You say potato, I say potato (that doesn’t work on a message board, does it?). Let’s discuss that at another time (I shouldn’t have chosen an example that was open to interpretation). The point was to illustrate the piece of this that is the propaganda posted by Heimdall.
Anyway, back to more important matters: come on the Irish!
Monty, the definition of the word terror does not include an automatic wartime suspension of the meaning and weight the word carries. You’ll be hardpressed to find me and for instance DSeid agreeing on the issues at hand here, but his definition in this thread is IMHO, as good as it gets:
I might disagree with him in the rest of that thread and even on interpretation of that definition in a given situation, but as for the definition itself we are in solemn agreement, and given the subjective nature of the word terrorism I can’t see how anyone remotely objective in mind can claim ownership to the namecalling in question.
And just for the sake of solidarity, clarity and the opposition to idiotic demagogy: gobear and milroyj get fucking real will ya! I sided with efrem in a couple of the debates here examined, so I’ll side with him here as well. He never even came close to saying that Suicide bombing or for that matter terror of any other nature and by any other entities is acceptable. We (him, I and others) were all trying to advocate understanding of the moral and ethical perpsective that gives rise to the terrible phenomena in question. Understanding evil is not forgiving evil, but it is the first step in trying to cure it.
Sparc
Ah - the wit of the Irish - sure an 'tis a small thing indeed.
I have a distinct feeling that you misunderstood my original posting in the first place and reacted out of (understandable) embarasment.
As regards my understanding of what drove the ira/sin fein scum to negotiation - well, it was pretty well understood even on the Falls Road, and very well understood in Larne. It was just what the Loyal Ulster defenders predicted would happen once the gloves came off.
(Actually, I suspect that I have a very much deeper understanding of events in Ulster than you might think. You assume far too much.)
That is of little consequence here. My original post was sarcasim. Lowest form of wit granted, but it makes a good point.
By the way - I’ve noticed that if someone uses the ‘f’ word three times or more in the one scentence - as you did in the quote above - then that person is emotionally involved in the subject!
(I often fight below my weight, I can’t help it.)
Notwithstanding any minor ‘spat’ here’s somthing that may be of real interest.
The URL shown below takes you to the charter for Hamas. This Palestinian terrorist group is typical in aims, methods, beliefs, and values to most all of the others. I believe it also encapsulates much about Moslem culture, a very diffeent culture frrom the West an to my view, incompatable.
But then, I’m biased.
I found it especially interesting to remember when I hear or read statement from islamic groups about how forgiving and tolerent that they are.
Heimdall… you don’t want to this.
Trust me.
If you were more familiar with the workings of this message board you would know that you are currently in the BBQ Pit. On an otherwise very levelheaded and informed venue for debate and discussion, this is the only place we would be permitted by the rules of the board to tear you apart with harsh rebuke and scathing invective for the bigoted idiocy that you so far have displayed. And tear you apart we will. You might get some support from the extreme corners of the membership, but generally you’ll be on your own. The SDMB holds a pretty high level and you might enjoy it, but your beginnings don’t look too promising.
OK Ladies and Gentlemen; do your best - tear it apart, it has been warned.
Sparc
:rolleyes: Read my ‘Location’: I’m not even Irish.
Not in that subject in particular, just reacting strongly to bigotry and lies.
[quoteI found it especially interesting to remember when I hear or read statement from islamic groups about how forgiving and tolerent that they are.[/quote]
You choose Hamas to illustrate how ‘forgiving tolerant’ ‘islamic [sic] groups’ are? That’s like choosing the UFF to illustrate what the vast majority of Northern Irish Unionists are like, fucknut.
As I’ve already posted, we understand the causes of terrprism: the terrorists want to exterminate Jews from Israel. We’re not talking about sensible people who can be reasoned with; we’re talking about people who think killing schoolchildren and littkle old ladies is doing God’s will. How the heck can you reason with that? Hell, you might as well try to explain the virtues of Adam Smith to the Khmer Rouge!
The point that you and Eferem are trying to make, albeit clumsily, is that there is much the Isreali government and military can do to persuade the Palestinian people that they wish to end the state of war and live in peaceful coexistence, like ending settlement of the West Bank, ending collective punishment, restoring Palestinian civil rights, and creating a viable, independent Palestinian state…
…and I agree.
But I still maintain that this “we must understand” business is utter crap. Sorry, but no amount of understanding would have stopped the WTC destruction, and it won’t stop terror in the future. All youare doing is baring your throat to knife wielded by sociopaths. Your POV is, at best, heartbreakingly naive, and at worst is active cooperation with evil.
And Heimdall can go make love to himself–sans lube. Putz
Sparc: I have to ask: Did you read your own posting there? It specifically said “targeting of non-military targets.” Nagasaki and Hiroshima, as a whole, contained non-miltiary targets, but they also contained and thus were military targets. Please try to remember that in 1945 neither side in that war had the control over weapons we now have today. I’d really appreciate a coherent argument about those bombings that didn’t equate 1945 with 2002.
I’m sorry, Monty, but that’s bullshit.
Even if the powers that be had no fucking clue what the bomb on Hiroshima would accomplish (and it’s likely they DID know a lot of civilian lives would be lost), they STILL could have called off the bombing of Nagasaki after having seen what #1 did.
Military targets, they were not.
Blanket statement and completely beside the point. The point being that albeit you and I view the suicide bombers as terrorists, there is evidence that they view themselves as desperate warriors. Yes I think they are terrorists, I even happen to think they fit into the objective definition of terrorists. However the name-calling serves no purpose as long as both sides do not agree on the semantics. Taking the hard-line and saying “No talks, no discussion as long you guys support terrorism,” is not constructive from any side in this conflict, since you might remind yourself that both sides are playing that game, independent of if they are right or wrong.
I can obviously only speak for myself; and although we agree that is not at all the point I am trying to make.
Wowa there mistah gobear did I say that because you understand you should go; “Oh well, so you want to blow us all up! That’s just fine and dandy, 'cause we know why now so just go ahead… bombs away on us!”.
Ex-fucking-scuse me??? Are you even on the same planet as I think I am?
Where did you read that I was saying that the solution was passive resistance? Where did you read that I think that understanding should stop you from taking counter measures? Where did you read that I said that terrorism just because it was understood was acceptable? Come ooooon! Understanding will enable you to take the correct counter measures and that is all and the only thing I meant. And don’t be silly enough to propose that there is only one counter measure you can take. They range from peaceful dialogue to outright crushing preventive air strikes and your smart enough to know that choosing the wrong one will have exactly the reverse effect of the desired.
Get some blistering nuance into your argument for chrissake.
Monty… ::sigh:: Must I really give you cites for the fact that most of the carpet bombing of German cities, the Blitz over London and both bombs in August 45 were purposefully directed at civilian targets with the purpose of demoralizing and breaking the common will to resistance of the nations targeted, thereby harming the war effort of the administration in the same. That’s schoolbook stuff. The strategy wasn’t even kept secret from the public at the time of the very events we’re talking about.
Sparc
And Heimdall while inserting your choice of yourself into yourself ‘au séche’… pay attention here you might learn something.
Wow. Patronising straight off the bat. well done.
taking a leaf out of the DUP linguistics course?
Loyal Ulster defenders? Like those paragons of virtue, Johnny Adair and Michael Stone?
Well, no, I don’t think there is only one counter measure that can be taken–please! You mention peaceful dialogue as one option–with whom will you have this dialogue?
Arafat? He’s a liar–he’s broken every agreement he ever made. No peace can be made with him.
Terrorists? They’re too busy blowing up restaurants to listen.
The Palestinian people? What faction will they listen to? Who, besides Arafat, commands enough general support to make peace that the populace will support?
More important, what about the right of return for the families of Palestinians who left in 1948 and the status of East Jerusalem? Is there any resolution of these issues that both sides can agree to?
Then again, blowing the crap out of the West Bank isn’t helping matters. Sharon needs to chill because he is the suicide bombers’ best recruiter right now. I agree with you there.
There are different meanings of the word “to understand.” It seems your approach is that of the FBI profiler: get into the mind of the perp, find his motivations to make it easier to catch him. OK, I’ll buy that. But your buddy Efrem seems to be more of a fellow traveler: He seems to think that suicide bombings aren’t good, but you have to understand the terrorists have been provoked to do it. That’s the kind of understanding I can do without.
I mised your first post, went back to read it, and saw this gem
You are either a troll, or seriously deluded.
True Ulstermen? Do you mean the Loyalist death squads, like Lenny Murphy and the Shankhill Butchers?
gwan to fuck, you idiot.
For starters I’m glad you confirm my understanding you as being somewhat more nuanced than the average. In continuation I can only say that although I don’t want to believe in the harsh analysis you make, I am note hopeful for any solution through dialogue either. I’ll quote myself from another thread:
But I can’t say that I see how that would work at this moment and quite frankly I am glad that I am not one of the poor foreign ministers or diplomats that have to try to help these guys through their differences.
Sparc
[A quick intervention.
With one’s opponents. That’s the stickler with conflict, you’re not negotiating with your friends, nor are you ever negotiating with virgins nor shrinking violets. Whether it is IRA, Corse, Georgians or whatever, you’re going to be negotiating with motherfuckers. The French didn’t much like chatting with the FLN but trying to set up ideal “partners” always ends up in the same thing, you get spineless collabos who can’t deliver jack.
One can piss and moan about that or one can suck it up.
Rubbish. He may or may not be a long-term viable partner, but he played ball for quite a while. So long as he thought he was going to get his little state. Things went to hell as the impression solidified that no acceptable settlement was going to come round.
This has been covered in the GD in ample detial. Arafat certainly bears a large responsibility for failure with his unimaginative, narrow-minded and corrupt goals. But the double-crossing on Oslo and Madrid goals on the Israeli side, esp in re settlements did not help matters in any way, esp given the Palestinians near psychosis over land.
Arafat is a nasty little git but he desperately wants his state, so long as it won’t mean a bullet in the back of his head.
Hamas, Jihad: they’re listening. They don’t want to play the game.
More than one type of terror going on there. Those who want to leverage the game, those who want to blow up the game. It is helpful to understand the difference. Hamas and Jihad, they’re impossible (and yet oddly virtually untouched by the security sweeps) and have to be taken down.
The utility in understanding the different terrorists is to know which ones one can influence to stop or change, which ones one can not (and in analytical manner, not just whinging on about how evil they are).
Nobody. And putting guys who might like Baghouti on ice is not helping to develop a real alternative, unless Sharon thinks that his Uncle Tom promotion strategy will work this time around. Failed miserably in the past, but he seems to have a thick head.
Return can be finessed. Jerusalem is a harder nut. A long-term transitional plan with an internationalized zone might be the best option.
Bingo, and it is highly peculiar, his smashing the PA while Hamas and Jihad seem not to have been whacked.
I’m not going to bother with the fight over quislings, fellow travellers and the like.
It’s about time.
**
Good for you. :rolleyes:
**
That’s okay, I find your self-righteous, arrogant and willful ignorance to be not only unpleasant, but really sickening to me. However, I guess it is your right to be stupid.
**
That good, now I only have to worry about gobear and his slander.
Efrem, attend:
Collounsbury has made your exact point clearly, concisely, and with zero whining.
Cry me a fucking river.
It doesn’t serve “as an apologia for terror”, it can aid in everything from in stopping terrorists, to easing tensions throughout Israel and Palestine. Your logic of doesn’t serve anyone but your own inflated sense of self righteousness.
**
It’s just hyperbole, if you find it that wrong then jeez, don’t you have high moral standards? I bet you are not innocent of such exaggerations either.
**
Thank you, and I don’t want you to forgive my grammar. I just want the xenophobic cracks gone.
**
Yes, Palestinians have been “provoked”, but on the other hand the Israeli government have also been “provoked”, their has been plenty of provoking from both sides by the actions of both sides. To understand this fact does not serve as a apology for the acts of either groups, it just helps to understand the actions of both sides (again not to justify the actions, but to aid in stopping the cycle). Also, gobear for the record I have made Sparc’s exact point on day one in the Arafat chip’s thread, that understanding them will help in stopping them, if you had read my posts you might have picked that up.
Just because you were blinded by an orgy of arrogance, and stupidity to see my point doesn’t mean my posts weren’t clear enough. istara (in the Arafat chip’s thread) understood me and had also summed up my point very nicely on the first day. As for the “whining”, two weeks of pointless arguing with someone who is constantly misrepresenting your opinions because of their ignorance tends to get you bitter.
Well, that’s certainly a way to encourage understanding.