It does.
I don’t think America deserved or deserves to be attacked. It is the best country around right now. We arenot committing human rights abuses like say, China, are we? As for paranoid lemmings, I know people with many diverse viewpoints; none of them paranoid.
If you live in New York, Washington, Los Angeles and maybe Chicago…
I dunno; does China rape women and sodomize young children after invading another country?
You can’t say “China” or “America” or any other whole entire country “sodomizes young boys.”
What you mean, if this incident is true, is that a soldier or other military personell from America sodomized young boys. America as a whole is not responsible for that one man’s crime.
And I’m not agreeing with the idea that America is the “best country” right now. We have plenty of problems just like all other nations. No country is all good or all bad.
Ask the Tibetans.
:dubious:
…or work for the United States government in some foreign countries, or are an American citizen at some resorts, or… that’s all I can think of right now. In other words, terrorism doesn’t balance this out. It only represents a threat to specific people.
This point of view would also seem to legitimize terrorism as a tactic of reprisal.
I’m not sure if anyone’s touched on this yet, but, I don’t think it is for a bunch of religeous fanatics living in caves halfway around the world to pass judgement on all of America.
Are there elements to American foreign policy that are inciting anger in some people? Sure. Does that give people the right to inflict violence against civilians. I don’t think so.
And this statement:
just makes me think the only undereducated paranoid snob around here is you. As you can plainly see this message board carries a variety of oppinions and in spite of what the people here might like to think, it is not some hand-picked elite think tank(sorry guys). It is a cross section of random people of various backgrounds from all over the country.
The problem as I see it is that there will always be an angry disenfranchised segment of the population. I remember seeing people on the news who felt that 9/11 (while tragic of course) was basically a bunch of rich white Manhattan I-banker’s problem.
It’s the same old “people with more money/wealth/power/looks deserve misfortune” attitude.
I don’t even know where to start, given the OP. Instinct tells me to launch an all out attack, full of abuse and obscenity. But I’ll behave. As someone who grew up in New York, and had relatives who worked in and around the WTC (luckily they were old enough to retire before 9/11), I have to say nobody deserved to be “terrorized”, if that is the new code word for mass murder. The OP brought up Iraq. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan did not happen until after 9/11. So let’s turn it around. Even though I am known on this board as being generally anti-war, if anyone deserved to be smashed, it was the people who did these terrorist acts. We should have stayed in Afghanistan, instead of sidetracking to Iraq. We should have never outsourced the hunt to the local warlords. We should have brought back Osama’s head on a spike, and turned the entire country inside out if necessary. The terrorists caused whatever happens next by triggering a very angry and vengeful bunch of people (us). So, don’t come here saying a bunch of people minding their own business and trying to earn a living deserved to die. I have several objections to the current war. Some are based on the official reasons that were used to justify it, some are for the way it is being conducted, some are because we let Osama get away (we aren’t killing the right people).
Some people say Bush wanted to attack Iraq anyway. If so, the terrorists gave him the excuse he was waiting for. Some say he attacked because of the 9/11 killings. Either way, look what happend. Thank the terrorists for triggering it.
A “Think Tank” is kinda like a “Love Boat,” right?
I think that’s the most profound thing to come out of one of these discussions in a long, long time.
And that’s really at the heart of it. You have America as this massive conglomerate doing what ever it wants, where ever it wants, and the American people get fat suckling at her tit–and completely blind to what’s going on around them. As a Canadian I have to sit back and watch the US screw Canadians with softwood lumber tarriffs, and a ban on live cattle from Alberta and potatoes from PEI. The result is that Canadians lose their jobs and livelyhood while their US counterparts get rich. What angers me about it is how blissfully ignorant those Americans will be. Just head down, on his way to work, completely unware of the fact that a lot of people north of the border lost the very job he’s walking to.
The point I’m trying to make is that Americans benifit from their foreign policy, the way Wal-mart employees benifit from their company screwing local business. Just closing your eyes and ignoring it doesn’t make you innocent. Imagine the boom to the American economy if suddenly oil prices fell to $0.10/gallon. US citizens would be benifitting from the Iraq war, at the cost of Iraqi citizens.
With all that said, nothing justifies targetting civilians. But as msmith537 said, its makes it a whole lot harder to feel bad.
It does?
If Americans can feel sympathy for Al Qaeda terrorists and WWII-era Japanese, how can it be tough to feel bad for Americans targeted in terrorist attacks?
What’s even scarier is that it doesn’t legitimize terrorism, it causes people to equate terrorism with guerrila warfare. As someone in my thread pointed out, those angry at the US have no other option. There isn’t a military in the world that can go toe-to-toe. Even terrorist attacks against military targets is a struggle, which is again a credit to the most powerful military machine ever known. What recourse is left? And if the answer makes you a little queasy, consider life in 1775 as a young American trying to fight against the British—what was then the most powerful military in the world…
My apologies for how that comes across, and it sounds a lot harsher as I re-read it. A fear a lot of it just comes down to basic human nature. I have to admit I was a little happy when I saw that a cow in the US had BSE, and that the cow wasn’t from Canada. A small part of my wants the Canadian government to shut down beef imports from the US for an irrationally long time. Its hard to get screwed by a country, and then feel bad when that country gets screwed in return. And so much of this boils down to the fact that most of the world is insanely jealous of the US, whether they want to admit it or not.
This is my logic:
The United States is in an unjust war
Unjust wars are terrorist acts
The United States supports this war
Therefore, The United States supports terrorism
Terrorists are prepared to die
Therefore, US citizens should be prepared to die
What your “logic” is missing is a connection between point [4] and point [6]. Not every US citizen supports the war, should those opposed also be prepared to die? Perhaps a more appropriate [6] would be that US Republicans should be prepared to die, since they support the current administration. And that’s mostly a joke, lest I get in trouble for whooshing…
Just out of curiousity masheene, did Afgan citizens deserve to die?
Who is “The United States” and who needs to be killed to stop them from being terrorists?
Terrorists are prepared to kill, and sometimes kill themselves for a goal. On the other hand, you’re suggesting US citizens should be prepared to be victims. In what way is this “deserved?”
That ain’t logic, friend. It’s self-serving blindness of reality.
But, what the hey, let’s examine your “logic.”
Some folks don’t consider that war to be unjust. Certainly a number of those who’ve been reprieved from the terror known as Saddam’s government consider it a good thing[sup]tm[/sup].
Actually, they’re not. They’re merely unjust wars. Wars, as opposed to terrorism, have a set of rules to which the governments concerned are required to adhere.
Actually, you got that 100% wrong (well, I suppose I could say 200% wrong since you’re wrong in two ways). For one thing, it’s the government of the United States that is waging this conflict. For another, it’s not all of the citizens of the country who support the government’s action in so waging.
As shown above, your givens do not support your conclusion.
So what? Plenty of people are prepared to die for their beliefs.
You mean those citizens who don’t support the government’s actions should be prepared to die because you think they are guilty by association, don’t you?
A simple request from me to you, which you are free to ignore: Please avail yourself of any basic course in logic before uttering the expression “here’s my logic” again.
What do you mean “we,” kemosabe?
Also, Please remember that 9/11 occured ** before** “we” invaded Iraq. And no, I don’t believe that the former in any way justified the latter.
Short answer no. Terrorists kill indiscriminately. We’re much more discriminating.