 |
|
OliverFA
|
|
Leeds, UK
Sep 2002 time: 06:35
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph
1441 threatened with consequences, but did not legitimate the United States (with cronies or without) to march in unilaterally. It does not make the nation in question free for aggressive acts at will. If China had marched in and had left the United States out, would that have been ok too? |
Letīs assume for a moment that you are right. I completely disagree with your statement, but letīs say that I agree. In that case, why do one side need a legitimation to attack and the other can do anything it wants without any need of legitimation?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
NeOmega
|
 |
Play Pentagenesis Beta!
Feb 2002 time: 21:35
|
|
quote: Originally posted by OliverFA

Sure. Attacking the civil population is a form of self defence. Specially in the French case. Which French "attack" are the terrorists defending against? |
There are no rules of war.
The Iraqis who thought otherwise by now are just bloodcakes and burnt bits stranded in the desert.
The current rules make Western Domination a given. Western rules are just as sick and depraved as any terrorist rules. This whole war, and the first one, were nothing more than one group of people slaughtering another group.
Does it really matter to any civilian, whether their killer followed the rules or not? I think not.
Those who make the rules, do so, to ensure victory.
I have a good rule, you aren't allowed to drop 500 lb bombs on houses unless you are sure Saddam Hussein is inside..... or else you will just be needlessly killing civilians.
So the jihadists have picked a different set of rules to play by. Is it really a surprise to anyone that there is a resistance in Iraq? If so, is it because you actually expected them to play by Western rules?
If I were a resistor in Iraq, and I happened to stumble upon a white man.... he'd be dead. Better him than me.
1) I release him, and the CIA will talk to him. And I become a member of Abu Gharib.
2) The CIA doesn't play by any rules...especially if caught. So a CIA agent could be like, "Je suis une reporter a France". Oh, better let him go. Any foreigner in Iraq, not helping the jihad, would be there for other reasons.... and I would not particularly care why.
3) Especially white guys. Chances are, you catch a white guy, he is more symapthetic to the American cause than the Iraqi cause.
The jihadists cannot achieve any kind of resistance, much less victory, by attempting pitched batttles against American gunships and Abrams. It would be suicide.
As I said before, I know very little about the Chechen situation, so I am not going to pass judgement. But I have seen enough of the Middle East situation, and Iraq in particular, to say, this is war, and the rules were gone the minute Americans began to mercilessly drop bombs.
I posted this at the otehr site, it applies here as well.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
OliverFA
|
|
Leeds, UK
Sep 2002 time: 06:35
|
|
quote: Originally posted by optimus2861
You missed the part in the middle where the Spanish government lied about who was responsible for the attack. Why is it that everyone who parrots out this "Spanish gave in to the terrorists!" line never takes this into account? Do you really think a government that so brazenly lies to its people over something as serious as a terrorist attack deserves to be reelected? |
The disclassified information from the Spanish "intelligence" services (letīs be good with them and call them intelligence services) has demonstrated that the government said what the police was telling them at that moment.
But what is much more amazing is what the journalists investigations have shown. People inside the police lied on purpose. The same people that had been promoted under the new government...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
NeOmega
|
 |
Play Pentagenesis Beta!
Feb 2002 time: 21:35
|
|
More than likely ETA sympathizers were to blame, in league with "al Queada" (whatever that is)
Fighting Al Queada is like fighting a phantom.... it exists, but it doesn't. And many times when it seems like it opened a door, it was just the wind.
However, it CANNOT BE FORGOTTEN, regardless of what state media said, or tired to make the discussion of the election, that THE SPANISH PEOPLE OPPOSED THE SENDING OF THEIR TROOPS TO IRAQ.
I am sure, just like in America, the media tried to put the attention on the economy etc... the train bombings put the attention back to THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE IN SPANISH FOREIGN POLICY.
So the train attacks were a wake up call. A shame that it was required, but the attention span of the populace of any country these days is a shame.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
OliverFA
|
|
Leeds, UK
Sep 2002 time: 06:35
|
|
quote: Originally posted by NeOmega
There are no rules of war. |
However, people in favour terrorists continue insisting that western civilization must follow them.
Donīt get me wrong. I donīt think that western civilization has to act in the same way. We need to respect the principles that at the core of our civilzation and that makes us different from them. But there is a very big different between being a fair player and accepting to play with your both hands tied to the your back...
quote: Originally posted by NeOmega
The current rules make Western Domination a given. Western rules are just as sick and depraved as any terrorist rules.
|
I refuse to continue talking with someone that says that the rules that guarantee the freedom of the individuals, their security, and their rights, can be compared to any terrorist rule. There is no point talking with someone that believes that. If you vision of the world is so distortionated there is nothing I can say that will convince you. Thatīs the last message that I answer from you.
quote: This whole war, and the first one, were nothing more than one group of people slaughtering another group. |
When Western civilization does it (which is not truth but lets suppose it is) it is called slaughtering. When terrorists do it it is called self defence. I call it doble moral.
quote: Those who make the rules, do so, to ensure victory. |
I will tell you some news. There are some people (not so many as we would like but many more than it seems) which really worry about their citizens, and do to rules not to take profit from them, but to guaranteee they have a better life.
quote: So the jihadists have picked a different set of rules to play by. |
However they insist that they people they are attacking must follow a different, much more restrictive, set of rules.
quote: As I said before, I know very little about the Chechen situation |
You donīt need to know anything about that situation to understand that destroying tupolevs, placing bombs in the Moscow underground and helding children hostages make them lose any arguments they could have to justify their position.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
NeOmega
|
 |
Play Pentagenesis Beta!
Feb 2002 time: 21:35
|
|
quote: Originally posted by OliverFA
[quote]
I refuse to continue talking with someone that says that the rules that guarantee the freedom of the individuals, their security, and their rights, can be compared to any terrorist rule. There is no point talking with someone that believes that. If you vision of the world is so distortionated there is nothing I can say that will convince you. Thatīs the last message that I answer from you. |
Did I say anything about freedom etc? I am talking about the "rules of war". Man that strawman got a pounding, but I am over here.
quote:
When Western civilization does it (which is not truth but lets suppose it is) it is called slaughtering. When terrorists do it it is called self defence. I call it doble moral.
|
If it is an aggressive war a la Iraq, it is a slaughter. If it is people fighting an aggressive war, it is self-defense.
quote:
I will tell you some news. There are some people (not so many as we would like but many more than it seems) which really worry about their citizens, and do to rules not to take profit from them, but to guaranteee they have a better life.
|
The United States cares about it's citizens indeed... However, from what I've seen, teh US constituion does not apply in Iraq.... not one bit. Care to even waste your time trying to prove otherwise?
quote:
However they insist that they people they are attacking must follow a different, much more restrictive, set of rules.
|
That is because America brought the war to Iraq. This is not a difficult concept. And I will not anbide by it, nor will I accept any murder of any one in that country, from Saddam down to the smallest child, and any soldier in betweem as justifiable. The war was immoral, therfore, every person killed because of it is blood on American hands.
quote:
You donīt need to know anything about that situation to understand that destroying tupolevs, placing bombs in the Moscow underground and helding children hostages make them lose any arguments they could have to justify their position. |
I need to know about a situation before I pass judgement. Otherwise I would be a fool. Perhaps they are striking back against the remanants of a soviet police state. Perhaps they are just being ruthless zealots, and only want money and power. I don't know, but I will neither condemn, nor praise them. As far as I understand it, it is an old conflict, and in that sense, the only judgemnt I would pass is this.
I am an American, and I don't see any reason to involve America in this particular situation.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35. Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|