Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Winning the War on Terror
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

thepeel

Joined: 08 Aug 2004

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:47 am Post subject:

I just love that shirt. Ahhh. When I move to America I'm going to buy a shirt just like that and 'go native' while walking around North Florida. I wonder if I could get "these colors don't run" written on the back? Those liberals better watch out! Anyways. About the topic. I hate to simplify things, but terrorism is a domestic policing issue. Invading other nations is not going to decrease the likelihood that crazy muslim types will want to kill Westerners.

gang ah jee

Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: city of paper

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:48 am Post subject:

BJWD wrote:

We support your war Of terror!

"May your warlord George Bush kill the terrorist men, women and children, and drink their blood!"

And Joo, stop reposting that four-year old Thomas Friedman article and read this: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200609/fallows_victory

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 3:50 am Post subject:

BJWD wrote:

I just love that shirt. Ahhh.

When I move to America I'm going to buy a shirt just like that and 'go native' while walking around North Florida. I wonder if I could get "these colors don't run" written on the back? Those liberals better watch out!

Anyways. About the topic.

I hate to simplify things, but terrorism is a domestic policing issue. Invading other nations is not going to decrease the likelihood that crazy muslim types will want to kill Westerners.

IF mideast nations and elties stop teaching hate and inciting violence there will be much less terror.

The US is far too target rich to be protected. The US can't even keep out illegal aliens.

However mideast regimes have very effective security services. They can put an end to anyone they want to within their borders.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:09 am Post subject:

gang ah jee wrote:

BJWD wrote:

We support your war Of terror!

it is a very good article.

However one of the major reason for terror is that mideast regmes and eltes incite violence and teach hate

However it is ineviatabe that the US will get hit again. Then what?

I have already said the US ought to redeploy to the Kurdish areas.

And the US can stll invest in new weapons systems while doing much of what the article suggested.

However Saddam might not have been an a threat right away his regime still was a long term threat to the US.

He would have taken advantage of the US war with Al Qeada to rearm and make trouble. It s not like Saddam ever gave up his war.

And the Patriot act can stay in place too.

Cause the US justice system as it was , was not up to handling AQ.

That is why Bill Clinton allowed Bin Laden to go the the Sudan cause the US didn't have evidence to convict him in a US court. Althogh Sandy Burger has latter said that "something could have been worked out" _ another admission that the US justice system isn't up to dealing with AQ.

Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:42 am; edited 1 time in total

thepeel

Joined: 08 Aug 2004

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:17 am Post subject:

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

That is why Bill Clinton allowed Bin Laden to go the the Sudan cause the US didn't have evidence to convict him in a US court.

Just kill the guy already. That is the biggest absurdity of all!! Bin Laden is still relaxing in a cave in Afganistian/Pakistan. He should be dead.

AQ will become a European problem, provided the Americans let it. Let the Italians fret over civil liberties and executions.

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:29 am Post subject: Re: Winning the War on Terror

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

Not against Al Qaeda supporters. It is nothing that mideast regimes don't alread do.

For now, we'll ignore your claims that certain people don't have rights.

You're living in a dream world if you think these regimes will accede to demands that they turn their fury to AQ. Only when the terrorists start to directly threaten their own livelihood will they turn their attention to them.

So the discussion of just how odious and repugnant supporting these regimes' terror is, is moot. But yes, giving them carte blanch to go after suspected "terrorists" is repugnant in any realistic analysis of what would actually happen.

Quote:

Well Al Qaeda has a similar plan for the US as imperail Japan did for the US or worse.

No, no, no. Japan was an empirialistic nation bent on destroying its opponents. AQ is trying to stir up the Muslim masses by provoking the US into war. Two different objectives, two different solutions.

Quote:

Statistically, the "empirical evidence" is meaningless.

How do you know that , How do you know that the Patriot act has done nothing , I am saying it might based on the fact ther have been no attacks since is was inacted.

I am not saying that the PA has done nothing. I'm saying you can't evaluate its effectiveness based upon the number of major terrorist attacks that have occurred since it passed. The awareness and response to government threats has been completely changed since 9/11. That is a much more significant factor than the PA.

Quote:

What I mean by "they" is Bathists , Khomeni supporters and Al Qaedists.

Yes, I know. We didn't convict and execute every member of the Nazi party based upon the crimes of Hitler and Goebbels. Stalin probably would have liked to, but we were smart enough not to let him.

Quote:

To be a Bathists , Khomeni supporters Al Qaedists is to be a member of a hate group and a war criminal.

It's not an war crime to belong to a hate group. Being involved in a terrorist attack is a crime, yes. "Supporter" is an arbitrary term that leaves a lot to be desired in terms of defining their criminal responsibility.

Quote:

How may liberal reformers do you see in the mideast alive and free in nations hostile to the US?

You don't see them because they are smart enough to keep their mouths shut. I'm sure there are quite a few Middle Easterners who hate their regimes.

Here's a start: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2992240.stm

Quote:

As for Vietnam the US won the cold war. Keep that in mind.

Just for the sake of argument, in what respect did the US win the Cold War? Did we bring freedom and democracy to the Soviet Union? Did we eliminate the threat of war? Did we eliminate Communism from the face of the Earth?

Quote:

Tell you what if the US has a virtual gun pointed at Iran's head Iran will think twice about supporting terror. That is a better situation than the US has today.

Or they'll get defensive and be even more aggressive in their support. Which is worse. The US has proven that you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. They might as well do it and gain some brownie points with future muckmakers.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:07 am Post subject: Re: Winning the War on Terror

Quote:

For now, we'll ignore your claims that certain people don't have rights.

If they are Al Qaeda who cares?

Quote:

You're living in a dream world if you think these regimes will accede to demands that they turn their fury to AQ. Only when the terrorists start to directly threaten their own livelihood will they turn their attention to them.

Well at some point the US will have to get in a position either you go after those that support them or the US will kill them or even the leaders of the regimes.

anyway maybe it is not such a dream -

See below what pressure can do. Saddam killed Abu Nidal when Saddam began to get scared.

[quote]

Quote:

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER

Abu Nidal, September 11 and Saddam
The terrorist network may be closer knit than we think.

BY ASLA AYDINTASBAS
Wednesday, August 21, 2002 12:01 a.m. EDT

Numerous groups had reason to wish the death of the Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal, reported to have committed "suicide" in his Baghdad home--albeit with multiple gunshot wounds. The likely conspirators include the Israelis, the PLO leadership, Gulf states he successfully blackmailed, or former friends--like Moammar Gadhafi and Syria--that he might have crossed in one deal or another.

But just as plausible is the scenario that Abu Nidal was finished off by his on-again-off-again host, Saddam Hussein, in an effort to thwart U.S. military action.

Once a legend, Nidal--sick and operationally crippled--had long since become a liability for Baghdad. A Reuters report yesterday cited a high-level Palestinian source claiming Nidal was killed after a visit by Iraqi government agents. Perhaps he knew too much. After all, his group had served the interests of the Iraqi regime by terrorizing Saddam's foes through much of the 1970s. Or perhaps more importantly, Nidal was a hazard because his presence suggested a link between Saddam and Sept. 11.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002160

.

Quote:

So the discussion of just how odious and repugnant supporting these regimes' terror is, is moot. But yes, giving them carte blanch to go after suspected "terrorists" is repugnant in any realistic analysis of what would actually happen.

Not if they are Al Qaeda is it not.

Quote:

No AQ wants to build a fascistic Caliphate where those of other religions are enslaved or killed.

Quote:

We can't know how effective it is , but of course it would be very difficult to.

Quote:

What I mean by "they" is Bathists , Khomeni supporters and Al Qaedists.

Quote:

Yes, I know. We didn't convict and execute every member of the Nazi party based upon the crimes of Hitler and Goebbels. Stalin probably would have liked to, but we were smart enough not to let him.

Well the US needs to kill them to the point where they give up their war.

Quote:

.

It is if one if is Al Qaeda because AQ is always planing to kill as many civilians as possible.

Quote:

"Supporter" is an arbitrary term that leaves a lot to be desired in terms of defining their criminal responsibility

Sure but in this war where they are no nations involved . Still if some creepy cleric in the middle east calls for a holy war against America then the US has a good idea who to go after.

Quote:

You don't see them because they are smart enough to keep their mouths shut. I'm sure there are quite a few Middle Easterners who hate their regimes.

Not many of them are liberal and tolerant. Many in the mideast who hate the regimes are with groups like the Muslim brotherhood.

Here's a start: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2992240.stm

Quote:

The Soviet Union is more free and democratic than it was . Not great now but better than it was.
The US did not eliminate the threat of war but it did improve the situation between the US and Russia. It is not great now but better than it was.

The US for the most part discredited communism from the face of the earth. Only two communist nations (China is just a dicatorship) N Korea and Cuba.

Quote:

Then Iran must be suicidal . At any rate the US will be in a lot better position via Iran than the US is now.

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 4:01 pm Post subject: Re: Winning the War on Terror

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

Quote:

For now, we'll ignore your claims that certain people don't have rights.

If they are Al Qaeda who cares?

We are unable to hold the moral high ground if we stoop to their level. So anyone interested in preserving West ideals should care. And without our ideals, we are no different than them.

I'm all for prosecuting responsible AQ members, but to go from Step A to Step Z without considering the steps in between leaves more to the imagination than I care to. You don't hire the Crips to prosecute the Bloods and expect a positive outcome.

See Nuremberg as an example of how it should be done.

Quote:

Well at some point the US will have to get in a position either you go after those that support them or the US will kill them or even the leaders of the regimes.

That's WWIII. Are you seriously going to start WWIII because of 19 brainwashed nut jobs we could have stopped?

Quote:

See below what pressure can do. Saddam killed Abu Nidal when Saddam began to get scared.

Pure speculation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/08/25/wnidal25.xml

Quote:

Abu Nidal, the Palestinian terrorist, was murdered on the orders of Saddam Hussein after refusing to train al-Qa'eda fighters based in Iraq, The Telegraph can reveal.

Despite claims by Iraqi officials that Abu Nidal committed suicide after being implicated in a plot to overthrow Saddam, Western diplomats now believe that he was killed for refusing to reactivate his international terrorist network.

Which is the exactly opposite of your assertion.

Quote:

No AQ wants to build a fascistic Caliphate where those of other religions are enslaved or killed.

AQ can't even rule one country. They are no threat to Western hegemony. Unless the West lets AQ control the agenda, which is what you propose.

Quote:

So the claims of "victory" in the Cold War are a little superficial, don't you think?

Quote:

The US for the most part discredited communism from the face of the earth. Only two communist nations (China is just a dicatorship) N Korea and Cuba.

Vietnam and Laos both claim to be Communist as well. Maoist rebels have also been causing problems in several countries. The difference between many of the post-USSR dictatorships and communism is rather tenuous. They've eliminated their ideals of economic equality, but retained their oppressive regimes. Unless you were more worried about the economic consequences of Communism, it can hardly be considered a victory. But yeah, for the most part countries have found that it's easier to have the dictatorship without all of the trappings of communism.

Quote:

Then Iran must be suicidal . At any rate the US will be in a lot better position via Iran than the US is now.

Or maybe they realize that the US isn't particularly up to the task of fulling their threats.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 5:15 pm Post subject: Re: Winning the War on Terror

Quote:

We are unable to hold the moral high ground if we stoop to their level. So anyone interested in preserving West ideals should care. And without our ideals, we are no different than them.

No there is still a difference cause they fight for a sinister cause. That is a huge difference and that is why the US won't be like them.

Quote:

I'm all for prosecuting responsible AQ members, but to go from Step A to Step Z without considering the steps in between leaves more to the imagination than I care to. You don't hire the Crips to prosecute the Bloods and expect a positive outcome.

People who fund them and people who incite violence by calling for holy wars are also part of the problem.

What the US had been doing wasn't working. The only way is to go after everyone who is involved.

Quote:

See Nuremberg as an example of how it should be done.

that was when the US was so far ahead of the rest of the world is was also have Germany was defeated.

Quote:

Well at some point the US will have to get in a position either you go after those that support them or the US will kill them or even the leaders of the regimes.

Quote:

That's WWIII. Are you seriously going to start WWIII because of 19 brainwashed nut jobs we could have stopped?

If there is a war being waged against the US then they use has to do everything and anything.

They started the war. The US would just be facing them with everything it can do.
It is not just 19 crazys. It is 70,000 who trained in AQ camps and it is the regimes and the elites that support them.

Quote:

Pure speculation.

seems reasonable enough

Which is the exactly opposite of your assertion.

well that would mean that Saddam was in with AQ.

Quote:

AQ can't even rule one country. They are no threat to Western hegemony. Unless the West lets AQ control the agenda, which is what you propose.

They had Afghanistan, they tried in AQ. They were enough of the threat to shut down the US for a few days. At anyrate that is what AQ fights for.
They are looking at a long war.

Right now they are not much of a threat but they still can and are trying to kill a lot of people . And they can cause major problems and they fight for an evil cause.

Quote:

So the claims of "victory" in the Cold War are a little superficial, don't you think?

somewhat nevertheless the US came out w/ a reasonably good result.

Quote:

Well the US main rival is no longer commited to spreading its ideology, and communism is no longer a popular idea. I guess the US won a victory though perhaps not a complete victory. At any rate the USSR ended up a lot weaker and is somewhat less aggressive. Not a complete victory but a reasonably good outcome.

Quote:

Or maybe they realize that the US isn't particularly up to the task of fulling their threats.

Lets see how far Iran is willing to push their luck. At any rate US will have far improved Strategic options via Iran. and the US will be in a better strategic position via Iran which would be a very good thing.

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:44 pm Post subject: Re: Winning the War on Terror

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:

No there is still a difference cause they fight for a sinister cause. That is a huge difference and that is why the US won't be like them.

It's not just our ends that define us, it's our means. Resorting to their sinister means makes us no better then them.

Quote:

People who fund them and people who incite violence by calling for holy wars are also part of the problem.

How do you determine the sources of funding? A lot goes through humanitarian fronts. How do you determine the intent of the donor? It's a slippery slope of grays that could easily go from reasonable response to draconian. That's what I'm concerned about. Putting such a decision in the hands of known human rights violators is not the way to control that.

Quote:

What the US had been doing wasn't working. The only way is to go after everyone who is involved.

The US had been ignoring the problem. Since then, they busted up the major den of training (Afghanistan) and put bin Laden into hiding. For the most part, AQ is shattered. Terrorism will never be completely eliminated, and trying to track down and eliminate every last possible source of terror is a waste of time and money. I agree with BJWD that it's mainly a domestic problem. Protect the borders and stay vigilant. Declaring war on every last AQ member and sympathizer will only result in negative reactions.

Quote:

See Nuremberg as an example of how it should be done.

that was when the US was so far ahead of the rest of the world is was also have Germany was defeated.

It is still how we should deal with war criminals.

Quote:

They started the war. The US would just be facing them with everything it can do.
It is not just 19 crazys. It is 70,000 who trained in AQ camps and it is the regimes and the elites that support them.

Again with "they." Was everyone trained by the German military held personally responsible for Aushwitz? Was every member of Japan's military personally held responsible for their atrocities?

WWII is a bad analogy to terrorism, but if you're going to use it, understand all facets of it. Not just the buzzwords you want to make points with.

Quote:

AQ can't even rule one country. They are no threat to Western hegemony. Unless the West lets AQ control the agenda, which is what you propose.

They had Afghanistan, they tried in AQ. They were enough of the threat to shut down the US for a few days. At anyrate that is what AQ fights for.
They are looking at a long war.

AQ occupied Afghanistan, but they didn't rule it. It was merely a ragtag collection of warlords doing whatever they wanted. We rightly ended that situation.

Quote:

Right now they are not much of a threat but they still can and are trying to kill a lot of people . And they can cause major problems and they fight for an evil cause.

It'll always be that way. There's nothing we can do about it. AQ is less of a threat to America than either organized crime or Russia. So I suppose that qualifies it as a victory.

Quote:

So neither the war on organized crime nor the Cold War ended in unmitigated victory. Both were victories much more in perception than in reality. Which is how the war on terror will end. Not with an elimination of the threat, but rather with an elimination of the perception of threat. In time, we will adjust and "victory" will be declared. If that's the victory you're refering to, than yes, I agree it will occur eventually. If by victory, you mean eliminating the thread, than I continue to disagree.

Quote:

Or maybe they realize that the US isn't particularly up to the task of fulling their threats.

Possibly. There would still be great risk to the US, especially if they were unwilling to fulfill their end of the threats.

igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:40 am Post subject:

BJWD wrote:

We support your war Of terror!

That's right. Borat is a KHAZAR "JEW" Laughing

Funny, eh?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:33 pm Post subject: Re: Winning the War on Terror

Quote:

It's not just our ends that define us, it's our means. Resorting to their sinister means makes us no better then them.

the US has done bad stuff in several war sometimes against very evil enemies. the US was never what they were and not even close. We were not cause we fought for different things.

Quote:

Mid East regimes far better than the US know who supports AQ. While the US often doesn't know who is who mideast regimes know who they are. and can put a stop to it.
]

Quote:

How do you protect the borders? The US can't even keep out illegal workers . How can the US protect the borders and also protect US targets at the same time. The US is so target rich.

How is that going to be done? This is real important. How many mass transportation facilities are there in the US? How many sports Stadiums?

Quote:

It is still how we should deal with war criminals.

70,000 trained in AQ camps. That doens't include their supporters and it doesnt' include Khomeni followers or Bathists either.

Quote:

Again with "they." Was everyone trained by the German military held personally responsible for Aushwitz? Was every member of Japan's military personally held responsible for their atrocities?

Those who support AQ do it not because the state tells them to do it.

Quote:

WWII is a bad analogy to terrorism, but if you're going to use it, understand all facets of it. Not just the buzzwords you want to make points with.

The US like that was was also fighting fascists, and it took an all out effort

Quote:

AQ can't even rule one country. They are no threat to Western hegemony. Unless the West lets AQ control the agenda, which is what you propose.

They had Afghanistan, they tried in AQ. They were enough of the threat to shut down the US for a few days. At anyrate that is what AQ fights for.
They are looking at a long war.

AQ occupied Afghanistan, but they didn't rule it. It was merely a ragtag collection of warlords doing whatever they wanted. We rightly ended that situation.

Quote:

Right now they are not much of a threat but they still can and are trying to kill a lot of people . And they can cause major problems and they fight for an evil cause.

Quote:

It'll always be that way. There's nothing we can do about it. AQ is less of a threat to America than either organized crime or Russia. So I suppose that qualifies it as a victory.

And they are still being funed not only AQ but also the Bathists and the Khomeni followers. AQ and other terror groups are a bigger threat to the US than Russia , they are out to destroy the US.

IF you want to say that Russia is a bigger threat than AQ then you could say that England is a bigger threat than AQ.

So neither the war on organized crime nor the Cold War ende

Quote:

d in unmitigated victory. Both were victories much more in perception than in reality. Which is how the war on terror will end. Not with an elimination of the threat, but rather with an elimination of the perception of threat. In time, we will adjust and "victory" will be declared. If that's the victory you're refering to, than yes, I agree it will occur eventually. If by victory, you mean eliminating the thread, than I continue to disagree.

It will be more than how we see it. What I mean by a victory is a major change in the geopolitical realities against not only the terrorists but also those and those who sponsor them and the US in a far better position than it is today.

Quote:

Possibly. There would still be great risk to the US, especially if they were unwilling to fulfill their end of the threats.

At any rate the US program at a minimum would more or less reverse the strategic gains of Iran's nuclear program.

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 6:22 pm Post subject:

We're going in circles.

To briefly summarize:

1. I believe you overestimate the domestic threat AQ poses. They do pose a danger, but it's a security risk that shouldn't be exclusively focused on AQ. Domestic ecoterrorists have been a lot more active than AQ over the last 5 years. But somehow they don't warrant their own color code.

2. Because of 1, you everestimate the response needed. The response you suggest will not completely eliminate the risk, may in fact increase the risk, and will compromise the moral compass of the US.

3. You believe that 2 will eliminate 1. If protecting the US borders and domestic assets is impossible, how do you expect us to succeed in a worldwide manhunt? It's just not possible.

You're asking for a lot more things like this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070419/ap_on_re_as/china_canadian_detainee_1

Quote:

BEIJING - A Chinese court on Thursday sentenced a Canadian activist to life in prison for alleged terrorist links, delivering a ruling that could ratchet up political tensions between China and Canada.

Huseyin Celil was sentenced for the two crimes of "separating China" and "organizing, leading and participating in terrorist groups, organizations," Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said without elaborating.

Liu said the first carried a penalty of life in prison and the deprivation of all political rights, which include free speech and the ability to meet with others or protest. The second carried a sentence of 10 years.

Is that something you want more of?

The_Conservative

Joined: 15 Mar 2007

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:52 pm Post subject: Re: Winning the War on Terror

huffdaddy wrote:

[
Just for the sake of argument, in what respect did the US win the Cold War? Did we bring freedom and democracy to the Soviet Union? Did we eliminate the threat of war? Did we eliminate Communism from the face of the Earth?

[.

We bought about the dismantling of the Soviet Union and freed Eastern Europe. Several of those countries have freedom and democracy and a few are even E.U. members. As for Communism, yes. Russia is not Communist, and China is Communist in name only. Cuba is about the only true Communist nation and it's about ready to come down once the Castros die..which shouldn't take long.

jinju

Joined: 22 Jan 2006

Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:31 pm Post subject: Re: Winning the War on Terror

The_Conservative wrote:

We bought about the dismantling of the Soviet Union and freed Eastern Europe.

Don't you see, thats the problem. When dealing with these people, keep in mind that they would rather the USSR still existed, that a dozen countries were still shackled and enslaved if only that meant the US was opposed by somebody.

Quote:

Several of those countries have freedom and democracy and a few are even E.U. members.

Look at my sig for how these guys think.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 4 of 5

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe