| Author |
Message |
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
 Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:05 pm |
|
| Founder wrote: | | Im sorry Hitch. I think you're talking about the Iraq war. Am I wrong in making that assumption? Thats fine if you disagree with that war. Im saying that we shouldn't just lay down and forgive an attack. As you said, Terrorist do not listen to diplomacy. That doesn't matter to them. Death to America is what matters. I feel that we have the right to destroy terrorist cells. Because of their attack on America. Forgiveness is a great thing, but when it comes to mass murder, justice is what prevails. I don't believe the people who died would be honored properly by not retaliating against the terrorists. Forgiveness almost seems like we are saying "Sorry that you were killed senselessly, but we must forgive them. They didn't know what they were doing." The terrorist did know what they were doing. I don't know where this will end, but I know how it began. Terrorist attacked America and the World is not safe with people like them running around unchecked. We got a rude awakening that day. We have to do everything we can to stop them. You know whats funny Hitch? Bush said the SAME thing as you. He said the War on Terror can NEVER be won. Of course the Democrats jumped down his throat because of it. What Bush meant was that Terrorism is a word, an idea. Ideas can't be killed. You are right in that sense, but there is no other option. We had to strike back. Now if we had to strike against Iraq is another question. Im not talking about Iraq as a whole. Its a part of all this, but not the sole reason. We are going to find Bin Laden and destroy Al Queda. After that? Who knows what will happen. Perhaps others will take their place but I know doing nothing would be wrong. |
Okay. 
EDIT: Gah . . . stupid posting button . . .
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Sat Mar 05, 2005 10:11 pm |
|
| Founder wrote: | | Unbelievable. There are people who are actually defending the terrorists. Wow. Who knew that the people here would fall so low. |
I know 
| Exalya wrote: | Forgiving...someone for killing 3,000 people, just because they hate them? Um...no. It's not revenge. It's trying to keep something like 9/11 from happening again. So, we should let them go? Oh, yes...come kill us, we'll forgive you. Nuclear bomb in San Francisco? Oh, sure! Take New York and Washington, too!
/rampant sarcasm\ |
EXACTLY.
| webtaz99 wrote: | The "War on Terrror" can be won, by making it impossible for terrorist activities to be carried out. Any war is won either by ending one side's ability to fight, or removing one side's will to fight.
Developing technologies will make it difficult for terrorist groups to secretly communicate, possess or carry weapons, or create bio- and chemical weapons without being detected. By making it harder (even impossible) to carry out attacks, their will to try will be undermined. |
Good point.
| Founder wrote: | | Hitchhiker wrote: | Ach, I hate that type of question because honestly I cannot think of an effective alternative to military action, simply because most terrorist leaders cannot be reconciled with diplomatic overtures.
In some cases, I must admit that I could approve of Canada engaging in military action, I wouldn't like it though. Simply put, I don't think the ends justify the means.
I dislike the connotation 'War on Terror,' it's a misnomer because wars can be won. Wars are short affairs fought amongst nations. The 'War on Terror' can never be one. Al-Qaeda can be dispersed, bin Laden caught, but there will always be more terrorists to take their places. Now, this does not mean that we should all go home and watch Bugs Bunny cartoons, as much as Warner Bros. would prefer. It simply means that if the 'War on Terror' continues on at its present rate, people are going to start getting dissatisfied. People don't like long wars, they like short ones with overwhelming victories for their country.
I disapprove of the Coalition's unilateral invasion of Iraq. The fact they overthrew an autocracy and are working to establish a democracy is beside the point, that is not the original reason the U.S. went there. And even though evidence may have been found that Iraq once had weapons of mass destruction prior to the invasion, I have not seen enough evidence to justify the invasion in my eyes.
I certainly don't see a "United Empire of America" in the future at any time, no. As much as I disagree with the decision to invade Iraq, I don't think the U.S. is about to go in and start annexing more countries. For one thing, the people would not be happy. Military operations in Iraq are taking significant resources--the U.S. is running a trillion dollar deficit--and further invasions of countries might not be good for the domestic economy.
I can see why people agree with the invasion of Iraq, and I'm glad that Iraq is trying to set up a democracy, however the reasons they put forth for their beliefs are not enough to convince me, as arguments usually go. |
Im sorry Hitch. I think you're talking about the Iraq war. Am I wrong in making that assumption? Thats fine if you disagree with that war. Im saying that we shouldn't just lay down and forgive an attack. As you said, Terrorist do not listen to diplomacy. That doesn't matter to them. Death to America is what matters. I feel that we have the right to destroy terrorist cells. Because of their attack on America. Forgiveness is a great thing, but when it comes to mass murder, justice is what prevails. I don't believe the people who died would be honored properly by not retaliating against the terrorists. Forgiveness almost seems like we are saying "Sorry that you were killed senselessly, but we must forgive them. They didn't know what they were doing." The terrorist did know what they were doing. I don't know where this will end, but I know how it began. Terrorist attacked America and the World is not safe with people like them running around unchecked. We got a rude awakening that day. We have to do everything we can to stop them. You know whats funny Hitch? Bush said the SAME thing as you. He said the War on Terror can NEVER be won. Of course the Democrats jumped down his throat because of it. What Bush meant was that Terrorism is a word, an idea. Ideas can't be killed. You are right in that sense, but there is no other option. We had to strike back. Now if we had to strike against Iraq is another question. Im not talking about Iraq as a whole. Its a part of all this, but not the sole reason. We are going to find Bin Laden and destroy Al Queda. After that? Who knows what will happen. Perhaps others will take their place but I know doing nothing would be wrong. |
Founder. Well spoken.
You know, let's just hand over America. We might as well! Don't just go after Washington! Go after San Francisco, New York City, Denver, Sacramento, Chicago, and anywhere else you want! Let's not defend ourselves! Let the bullets hit us!
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Jemah
Lieutenant
Joined: 04 Mar 2005
Posts: 209
|
| Sat Mar 05, 2005 11:55 pm |
|
bullets? i didn't know there were bullets being fired on us soil by all of those terrorists who want to take over. can you say paranoia? and i want to know how attacking iraq defends the us. there were no threats made, the un sent officials who turned up no weapons of mass destruction then the united states attacked against all advice and still turned up nothing. but it was to protect the us? how?
|
|
|
Jeremy
J's Guy
Joined: 03 Oct 2002
Posts: 7823
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
|
| Sun Mar 06, 2005 4:30 pm |
|
I agree with HH, the war on terror can never be won. There will always be people who will rise up and fight. It may become more difficult to actually commit the acts like they did on 9/11, but there will always be a chance.
I also agree with forgiving the terrorists. This doesn't mean not going after them and getting justice, but forgiving the acts. Far harder said than done. I'm not sure if I can do it myself. I'm just saying that I believe that for peole who can, don't condemn them for it.
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
