Top marks. You cannot stop terrorism with a bomb. You have to death with why they are doing it. Fight fire with fire and the world will burnMarconius wrote:
I wish more people would realize that going to war against a political concept is absolutely futile. To rid the world of terrorism, you'd first have to rid the world of everything that creates terrorism, i.e., politics, religion, differing social values, borders, etc...
Not illegitimate just immoralM1-Lightning wrote:
That was a brilliant idea. Too bad Iraq somehow got inside word on it. That still doesn't make the war "illegitimate".Marconius wrote:
You do know that because Bush and Blair were lacking so much support at one point (due to my reasons), that they were considering painting planes with the UN Blue and flying them over the NFZ in order to spark Iraq into make the first move?M1-Lightning wrote:
The UN is not our government. We did not invade Iraq with smurf hats. Had we worn smurf hats into Iraq flying the smurf flag, then it would have been "illegitimate". Bush and Blair tried to get the UN to "sponsor" the war, but since China, France, and Germany didn't want to attack one of their customers, Bush and Blair gathered several other nations to help.
Good ol' Downing Street memos
I'm not going to get too involved in this thread, but bringing up age is also no way to conduct a "proper debate."CameronPoe wrote:
You obviously aren't capable of proper debate. What kind of childish response is that? WHat age are you?
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-06-13 01:43:03)
The response was exasperation after numerous childish responses from Erkut. He was not adding anything to the discussion but intransigent mantras and jibes.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I'm not going to get too involved in this thread, but bringing up age is also no way to conduct a "proper debate."CameronPoe wrote:
You obviously aren't capable of proper debate. What kind of childish response is that? WHat age are you?
Questions for you both. How do you stop terrorism? How do you stop crime? We've had police in this country for hundreds of years and yet there's still criminals. Maybe we should abandon the police force because they aren't ending crime.BN wrote:
Top marks. You cannot stop terrorism with a bomb. You have to death with why they are doing it. Fight fire with fire and the world will burnMarconius wrote:
I wish more people would realize that going to war against a political concept is absolutely futile. To rid the world of terrorism, you'd first have to rid the world of everything that creates terrorism, i.e., politics, religion, differing social values, borders, etc...
Cue Liberal slurs from conservatives...
I think the argument is that the military isn't the best option for dealing with terrorism. Just take northern ireland for example. The brits never defeated the IRA. THe conflict would still be raging today if it wasn't for the fact that the brits realised they had to deal with the cause of the problem, not the effect. Comparing policing criminality to using the military against terrorists is not a good analogy. The military approach is currently producing more terrorists than it is eliminating. As in Northern Ireland there will be an inexhaustible supply of people ready to take up arms, even more so when a particular segment of the global community appears to be the subject of demonisation by the US (and the west in general). For every terrorist the US kills ten terrorists will be produced.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Questions for you both. How do you stop terrorism? How do you stop crime? We've had police in this country for hundreds of years and yet there's still criminals. Maybe we should abandon the police force because they aren't ending crime.BN wrote:
Top marks. You cannot stop terrorism with a bomb. You have to death with why they are doing it. Fight fire with fire and the world will burnMarconius wrote:
I wish more people would realize that going to war against a political concept is absolutely futile. To rid the world of terrorism, you'd first have to rid the world of everything that creates terrorism, i.e., politics, religion, differing social values, borders, etc...
Cue Liberal slurs from conservatives...
I'm sorry but the point is this. The military and the police are needed to keep bad people in check. You don't abandon something because it's hard. Leaving the terrorists alone militarily is no solution. You must always keep them in check lest they get away with more 9/11's and train bombings. At the same time this needs to be combined with solutions and attempts at rooting out the cause of terrorism from beginning. There may never be an end to terrorism, but doing nothing about it is not a logical option.
Wait a minute, wasn't this about Canada? I don't have much of a problem with our peaceful neighbors to the north.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-13 02:10:44)
Incorrect. There are vast differences. The most important is that local police are associated with law and order, but foreign militaries are often view as invaders (rightly or wrongly is irrelevant).Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Well, I think we can agree, whether by military action or by government intelligence, you need to assertive when dealing with these groups.
And I'm sorry but the military is essenstially the same thing as the local police. At least in a democratic, nonimperalistic nation they are
Half-true. It is each nation's right to do whatever it sees fit to protect it's national security from foreign agression without violating their basic human rights.B.Schuss wrote:
well, it is each nation's basic right to chose whatever means it considers necessary to preserve its national security and that of its people.
Basic principle of the police - to uphold the the peace of domestic affairsBubbalo wrote:
Incorrect. There are vast differences. The most important is that local police are associated with law and order, but foreign militaries are often view as invaders (rightly or wrongly is irrelevant).Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Well, I think we can agree, whether by military action or by government intelligence, you need to assertive when dealing with these groups.
And I'm sorry but the military is essenstially the same thing as the local police. At least in a democratic, nonimperalistic nation they are
well, the concept of self defense ( which is also reckognized by the UN, btw ) is based on a military aggression by another nation. When that concept was established, NGO terrorist organizations as we know them today didn't exist.Bubbalo wrote:
Half-true. It is each nation's right to do whatever it sees fit to protect it's national security from foreign agression without violating their basic human rights.B.Schuss wrote:
well, it is each nation's basic right to chose whatever means it considers necessary to preserve its national security and that of its people.
In some situations, there are similarities, in most there are not. Basic principle of the police is to ensure civil obedience, preferably through non-violent means. Basic principle of the army is to kill stuff, preferably outside the country.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Basic principle of the police - to uphold the the peace of domestic affairs
Basic principle of the military - to protect and uphold a nations values
If you can't see the similarities you are dumber than I thought.
Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-06-13 03:54:05)
Common goal of both = keeping the people safe.Bubbalo wrote:
In some situations, there are similarities, in most there are not. Basic principle of the police is to ensure civil obedience, preferably through non-violent means. Basic principle of the army is to kill stuff, preferably outside the country.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Basic principle of the police - to uphold the the peace of domestic affairs
Basic principle of the military - to protect and uphold a nations values
If you can't see the similarities you are dumber than I thought.
now, that's an interesting point of view. Isn't it rather:Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Basic principle of the police - to uphold the the peace of domestic affairsBubbalo wrote:
Incorrect. There are vast differences. The most important is that local police are associated with law and order, but foreign militaries are often view as invaders (rightly or wrongly is irrelevant).Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Well, I think we can agree, whether by military action or by government intelligence, you need to assertive when dealing with these groups.
And I'm sorry but the military is essenstially the same thing as the local police. At least in a democratic, nonimperalistic nation they are
Basic principle of the military - to protect and uphold a nations values
If you can't see the similarities you are dumber than I thought.
Incorrect. The police job is to uphold laws, even if the benefit the government more than the people. The army's job is to kill what they're told to kill, sometimes to keep the people safe, sometimes to keep the government safe, sometimes to keep the economy safe.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Common goal of both = keeping the people safe.
Although that doesn't explain why the ADF has been used in DISASTER RELIEF missions recently. A lot.Bubbalo wrote:
Incorrect. The police job is to uphold laws, even if the benefit the government more than the people. The army's job is to kill what they're told to kill, sometimes to keep the people safe, sometimes to keep the government safe, sometimes to keep the economy safe.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Common goal of both = keeping the people safe.
I agree, but some nations obviously don't bother to make that distinction...^^Bubbalo wrote:
In some situations, there are similarities, in most there are not. Basic principle of the police is to ensure civil obedience, preferably through non-violent means. Basic principle of the army is to kill stuff, preferably outside the country.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Basic principle of the police - to uphold the the peace of domestic affairs
Basic principle of the military - to protect and uphold a nations values
If you can't see the similarities you are dumber than I thought.
B. Schuss: Actually, there were NGO terrorists around at the starting of the UN, they were just Jewish, so no-one cared. Regardless, defending yourself is different to defending your interests.
Because they are also trained for other eventualities. At it's core, though, an army is a weapon, that is what makes it an army. Often, they are used in other situations as manual labour (e.g. disaster relief) and peace keeping (e.g. East Timor......though that recently flared..........)Spark wrote:
Although that doesn't explain why the ADF has been used in DISASTER RELIEF missions recently. A lot.
I can once I access my resources tomorrow.B.Schuss wrote:
And maybe you'd care to elaborate what jewish terrorist organization existed after WWII.
Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-06-13 04:04:23)
Read up a bit. I said something about imperialism and democracy. It gets annoying repeating yourself over and over again even when you made your point in your first damn post. I don't like to go into large detail everytime but for some reason people can't figure things out when I put it simply.B.Schuss wrote:
now, that's an interesting point of view. Isn't it rather:Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Basic principle of the police - to uphold the the peace of domestic affairsBubbalo wrote:
Incorrect. There are vast differences. The most important is that local police are associated with law and order, but foreign militaries are often view as invaders (rightly or wrongly is irrelevant).
Basic principle of the military - to protect and uphold a nations values
If you can't see the similarities you are dumber than I thought.
Police - upholds and enforces national laws inside the nation's borders
Military - protects the nation's against foreign enemies and military aggression from outside
"to protect and uphold a nation's values" - what's that supposed to mean ? Sounds like a justification for nearly unlimited use of a nation's military forces....
All countries, democratic or not, value prosperity.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Read up a bit. I said something about imperialism and democracy. It gets annoying repeating yourself over and over again even when you made your point in your first damn post. I don't like to go into large detail everytime but for some reason people can't figure things out when I put it simply.