Did N. Korea set off a nuke?

[BlackArcher101]

Well, seismic activity supports that they didn't set one off. If they did set off an atomic bomb, the seismic activity from it would be registered throughout the world... there has been nothing in the past 30 days in korea

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Okay Tranny, since you're going to be an idiot about this, how about if China unilaterally decided that George Bush and the United States were the greatest threat to the world as we know it and decided to launch an offensive against an unguarded nation right now? Would you be p*ssed off? Or would you thank your luck stars that we were rescued from our oppressive leaders? Would China's actions be justified? The US does lead the world in incarceration of its own citizens (hard to believe when the country is only 300 million in size compared to the billion in China and India). Would this not give them the excuse of human rights violations as a reason to rescue the American people?

What you REFUSE to acknowledge, let alone accept, is the fact that the people in these countries know no other way of life and they have survived with in the confines of that system. How is it right for us to say that they are wrong? Why are we the ones who call them down for their form of government?

An aside here... Is ours so much better when qualified candidates are afraid to run for office and have their whole life scrutinized and potentially ruined? Yeah, we have a choice as to who we get to vote for, but a lot of the times the guys running for office are both scum bags and you have to vote for the lesser of two evils. I'm not sure which is worse as the political structure in this country prevents more things getting done that it promotes. Back to our regularly scheduled post...

Just because we don't agree with the political system, or what their eader stands for, does not mean we should not respect the country and deal with them in an objective nature. We can't go in and think everyone is evil because of one man. We have to try and open up their land to democracy through diologue, not through war. War should always be the last resort, and not spoken of lightly. With the Bush administration military action is the first natural response to any problem. Whether you want to admit it or not, the United States and its leadership is the greatest threat to world peace at the moment. They are the only country capable of launching an offensive anywhere in the world in short order. WE are the threat that concerns everyone, and that should be a concern for us.

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald@Sep 12 2004, 04:09 PM
Tranny, Ask youself this very simple question. Why is the United States always the one under scrutiny? Why does everyone hate them so much? Why are the Chinese not in the watch list? How about the Russians? How about the French? How about the Germans? How about the British? Why is it always the Americans? The Canadians do more UN peacekeeping than any other country, why is Canada not a target? Why is the US the country that everyone hates?

BTW... the US did the right thing in 1991, and got the UN's blessing for an action in Kuwait. What is so wrong with doing it again?

Aside from four specific instances I can think of - Korea in 1950, South African sanctions, Gulf War of 1991 and Afghanistan in 2001 - the UN is largely an ineffective forum jumbled by conflicted interests.

The only reason the UN authorized action in Korea in 1950 was because the Soviet Union wanted to antagonize China.

The confused state of the world in 1991 from the fall of communism led to a rare alignment of interests for Gulf War I.

South Africa was another rare alignment of interests.

Sympathy over 9/11 led to world to concede the USA was owed a free one in Afghanistan.

Most of the time, as we saw in the Iraq dispute, decisive action at the UN is frequently left by the wayside as problems are debated interminably with solutions frozen as nations guard their self-interests.

The UN is largely useless.

You can debate whether that should have led the USA to do what it did in Iraq, but admit the obvious as to whether the UN is a place to get something done.

Lastly, the lesson of history is the League of Nations collapsed when it failed to recognize and deal with the interests of the great powers of the day.

Cowperson

[transplant99]

Okay Tranny, since you're going to be an idiot about this, how about if China unilaterally decided that George Bush and the United States were the greatest threat to the world as we know it and decided to launch an offensive against an unguarded nation right now? Would you be p*ssed off?

Ahhh...here comes the name calling. Now i know im right.

Would i be p*ssed off? Of course i would...duh.

Or would you thank your luck stars that we were rescued from our oppressive leaders?

Ummm...what oppressive leaders? I am more than able to do as i please in this country. Unlike others in other countries....follow the bouncing ball Lanny.

Would China's actions be justified?

No...because they arent doing it to remove an oppresive dictator. What the hell are you arguing exactly?

The US does lead the world in incarceration of its own citizens (hard to believe when the country is only 300 million in size compared to the billion in China and India).

Correct....they put them in prison for crimes committed...they dont KILL them because they disgree with government policy or religious beliefs. Geezuz man...you are a trip.

Would this not give them the excuse of human rights violations as a reason to rescue the American people?

WHAT?? Are you suggesting countries, including the US, cant imprison people that break the law, without being accused of himan rights violations? Yep...let aanarchy rule Lanny...watch how much "fun" that would be.

Wow.

What you REFUSE to acknowledge, let alone accept, is the fact that the people in these countries know no other way of life and they have survived with in the confines of that system. How is it right for us to say that they are wrong? Why are we the ones who call them down for their form of government?


Holy crap!!!

Because they "know no other way of life" is reason enough to just ignore them and allow it to happen? Hey here sia question for you...since many children in this very country live in an abusive household and in fear daily, should we just ignore them and allow it to happen...because they "are used to it"?

There is an inherent right for ALL people to live free and without fear from oppresion. But hey, you want to support dictitors and disagree...go right ahead. The human spirit is a strong one and will fight through to freedom eventually. Thank god for this, or you would just as soon have women in Afghanistan stoned to death for not wearing a flippin scarf around their face or actually having the gall to learn how to read. Yeah Lanny...THATS what you are suggesting.


We can't go in and think everyone is evil because of one man.

Who suggested EVERYONE is evil? In fact, I am suggesting the people getting violated of basic human rights are NOT evil, but one guy doing it is. So I THINK< it would a really good idea to remove him..you dont. Good for you.

We have to try and open up their land to democracy through diologue, not through war. War should always be the last resort, and not spoken of lightly. With the Bush administration military action is the first natural response to any problem.

Let me see here. Bush takes office in January 2000, but the first bomb doesnt drop until October 2001....after his country has open war declared on them. Yup..he is a warmonger allright. Wonder what he did for those 21 months preceding 9/11?

Whether you want to admit it or not, the United States and its leadership is the greatest threat to world peace at the moment.

Yeah right...HAHAHAHA.

I guess the Madrid train bombings, the Russian school incident, the bombings in Bali and Yemen are all Bush fault which of course makes HIM the biggest threat to "world peace". I ask one question...what world peace would that be? The one that existed before 9/11? Holy smokes you just outdid yourself.

They are the only country capable of launching an offensive anywhere in the world in short order. WE are the threat that concerns everyone, and that should be a concern for us.

So what? Should they NOT be able to launch an offensive? Should they NOT have a military capable of helping ANYONE who asks for it?

Way to skirt what i said in the earlier post though....tough to argue facts i guess.

Im the idiot though...gotcha.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Sep 12 2004, 05:05 PM

The UN is largely useless.

And I wonder why? When the countries that everyone looks for leadership continully ignore the wishes of the UN does it not take the teeth out of the organization? When the US presents its case, and the world votes against action, and America says %$@# it, and invades any ways, who fault is it that the system is broken? America has become just a little big for its britches and is looking for someone to bloody their nose a helluva lot worse than 9/11 did. The US is pushing all the wrong buttons and someone is going to hurt the country deeply if they don't wake the hell up, and damn fast. Take that one to the bank.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Sep 12 2004, 05:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Sep 12 2004, 05:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Sep 12 2004, 05:05 PM

The UN is largely useless.

And I wonder why? When the countries that everyone looks for leadership continully ignore the wishes of the UN does it not take the teeth out of the organization? When the US presents its case, and the world votes against action, and America says %$@# it, and invades any ways, who fault is it that the system is broken? America has become just a little big for its britches and is looking for someone to bloody their nose a helluva lot worse than 9/11 did. The US is pushing all the wrong buttons and someone is going to hurt the country deeply if they don't wake the hell up, and damn fast. Take that one to the bank. [/b][/quote]
When members of the UN security council use programs designed to help impoverished people for financial gain while propping up a dictator in the process does that take the teeth out of the organization?

[Cowperson]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Sep 12 2004, 05:24 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Sep 12 2004, 05:24 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Sep 12 2004, 05:05 PM

The UN is largely useless.

And I wonder why? When the countries that everyone looks for leadership continully ignore the wishes of the UN does it not take the teeth out of the organization? When the US presents its case, and the world votes against action, and America says %$@# it, and invades any ways, who fault is it that the system is broken? America has become just a little big for its britches and is looking for someone to bloody their nose a helluva lot worse than 9/11 did. The US is pushing all the wrong buttons and someone is going to hurt the country deeply if they don't wake the hell up, and damn fast. Take that one to the bank. [/b][/quote]
That is one lame answer considering the voting history of ALL security council members in ALL resolutions since this organization was founded.

They're all guilty. Every one of them. That's the point.

This is an organization that put Libya in the chairmanship of the UN Human Rights Council, so we kind of know where its politics lie.

Cowperson

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 12 2004, 04:36 PM
Why is the US the country that everyone hates?

Huh?

Lets see....

terrorist bomings in Spain, Malaysia, Bali, Russia, Israel, Iraq, Kenya, N Ireland, Argentina, India, England, Phillipines, Japan, France, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Egypt, Singapore, Tunisia, Pakistan, Yemen, Turkey,

all have been victims of "terrorist" attacks...and thats just inthe last 15 years.

As for Canada...is your memory really that short?

Aremenian terrorists made several attacks in Canada.

Flight 182 that left from Toronto was blown up by Sihk militants.

Mujahideen al-Khalq ( an al-queda cell) attacked the Iranian embassy in Canada.

To think that ONLY the US is "hated" world wide is foolish and narrow minded at the least, but it does explain your position on many things.

I believe in prevention rather than reaction...you dont, thats fine.

I would much rather see something stopped before it happens however and use THAT as reason to go elsewhere in the world to make sure I never see another 9/11 in my lifetime...or even scarier...something worse.

You know..like a nuclear strike from N Korea to some unsuspecting country (Likely S Korea) that is just going about its existance.

As you can see Tranny, terrorism is an international problem that transends borders. You can't chase it around the world with a tank or a plane. You have to deal with it through other means. Diplomacy for instance. Education for another. Invading the countries that house the ideology you are fighting against only exacerbates the problem.

BTW... your Canada has been attacked by terrorists angle is joke, but I wouldn't expect anything less from you. An act taken by one foreign agency against another on Canadian turf is hardly an attack on Canada. The only terrorist attack that has ever been undertaken against Canada, that I can recall, is the FLQ attack in 1970. That was directed at Canada, not the others you list.

I am with you 100% on prevention being more effective than reaction. That is why I say that diplomacy is so important, as is having an effective foreign policy. America's foreign policy is the primary axe to grind with the terrorists behind the War on Terror. Should this not be the first weapon used, and adjust the foreign policy to be more effective and less of an issue with other nations? Or is that too simple a solution for the greatest country on earth (just ask them) to handle?

[CaptainCrunch]

I didn't want to get involved in this string

Told myself it would be better if I stayed out of it

But I have to ask,

When you talk about the use of diplomacy to deal with the terrorist problem, were you talking about using diplomacy with the companies that house them, or the terrorists themselves.

If its the terrorists itself, and you open up pandora's box and give in on thier demands, you will never see a agreement reached. Israel tried to trade land for peace and all they got was an increase in terrorist activity.

Spain changed thier government and withdrew thier troops from Iraq due to the terrible bombings in that country, and all it did was embolden the terrorists/

You can't negotiate with these people, they aren't about that. Hell Yassir Arafat was given a nobel peace prize and a key position in the peace process in Palestine, and all that he's done in between stuffing his starving peoples money into Swiss Back Accounts, is to become involved in terrorist activities again

Or are you looking at the countries involved in funding, and housing terrorists? Because that dosen't work until you provide an example of why they should comply.

After 9/11 the American's tried to work with the Taliban, asking for Bin Laden to be handed over, all the Taliban did was refuse, the American's gave them time to comply and they still did nothing but stonewall. So the American's invaded.

The American's didn't get any kind of movement out of Iran, and Syria until after they dropped the hammer on Iraq.

In short form the more backwards religiously driven middleeast countries don't understand diplomacy without a prior show of force to show your intentions.

And you can't really bring the UN into that, because thier policies and work in the middle east have been fairly poorly conceived and poorly executed, and the UN is no longer a descive and strong figure anymore.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 12 2004, 05:18 PM
Okay Tranny, since you're going to be an idiot about this, how about if China unilaterally decided that George Bush and the United States were the greatest threat to the world as we know it and decided to launch an offensive against an unguarded nation right now? Would you be p*ssed off?

Ahhh...here comes the name calling. Now i know im right.

Would i be p*ssed off? Of course i would...duh.

Or would you thank your luck stars that we were rescued from our oppressive leaders?

Ummm...what oppressive leaders? I am more than able to do as i please in this country. Unlike others in other countries....follow the bouncing ball Lanny.

Would China's actions be justified?

No...because they arent doing it to remove an oppresive dictator. What the hell are you arguing exactly?

The US does lead the world in incarceration of its own citizens (hard to believe when the country is only 300 million in size compared to the billion in China and India).

Correct....they put them in prison for crimes committed...they dont KILL them because they disgree with government policy or religious beliefs. Geezuz man...you are a trip.

Would this not give them the excuse of human rights violations as a reason to rescue the American people?

WHAT?? Are you suggesting countries, including the US, cant imprison people that break the law, without being accused of himan rights violations? Yep...let aanarchy rule Lanny...watch how much "fun" that would be.

Wow.

What you REFUSE to acknowledge, let alone accept, is the fact that the people in these countries know no other way of life and they have survived with in the confines of that system. How is it right for us to say that they are wrong? Why are we the ones who call them down for their form of government?


Holy crap!!!

Because they "know no other way of life" is reason enough to just ignore them and allow it to happen? Hey here sia question for you...since many children in this very country live in an abusive household and in fear daily, should we just ignore them and allow it to happen...because they "are used to it"?

There is an inherent right for ALL people to live free and without fear from oppresion. But hey, you want to support dictitors and disagree...go right ahead. The human spirit is a strong one and will fight through to freedom eventually. Thank god for this, or you would just as soon have women in Afghanistan stoned to death for not wearing a flippin scarf around their face or actually having the gall to learn how to read. Yeah Lanny...THATS what you are suggesting.


We can't go in and think everyone is evil because of one man.

Who suggested EVERYONE is evil? In fact, I am suggesting the people getting violated of basic human rights are NOT evil, but one guy doing it is. So I THINK< it would a really good idea to remove him..you dont. Good for you.

We have to try and open up their land to democracy through diologue, not through war. War should always be the last resort, and not spoken of lightly. With the Bush administration military action is the first natural response to any problem.

Let me see here. Bush takes office in January 2000, but the first bomb doesnt drop until October 2001....after his country has open war declared on them. Yup..he is a warmonger allright. Wonder what he did for those 21 months preceding 9/11?

Whether you want to admit it or not, the United States and its leadership is the greatest threat to world peace at the moment.

Yeah right...HAHAHAHA.

I guess the Madrid train bombings, the Russian school incident, the bombings in Bali and Yemen are all Bush fault which of course makes HIM the biggest threat to "world peace". I ask one question...what world peace would that be? The one that existed before 9/11? Holy smokes you just outdid yourself.

They are the only country capable of launching an offensive anywhere in the world in short order. WE are the threat that concerns everyone, and that should be a concern for us.

So what? Should they NOT be able to launch an offensive? Should they NOT have a military capable of helping ANYONE who asks for it?

Way to skirt what i said in the earlier post though....tough to argue facts i guess.

Im the idiot though...gotcha.

Ummm...what oppressive leaders? I am more than able to do as i please in this country. Unlike others in other countries....follow the bouncing ball Lanny.

No thanks, don't like the tune you're singing.

I'm curious, just how do you know what freedoms other countries have? Travel much? Been to the far east? Been in a communist country before? I really haven't seen much of a difference myself, and my wife, who has been all through Europe, Russia and the Far East, didn't see much difference herself. They military take a more active role in policing ofd the state, but you know that if you follow the laws of the land then you are safe from anything and are free to do as you please. You know, kind of like in America. The biggest restriction that she saw in China and the Koreas were restrictions on travel. You had to have the appropriate papers to go places. Big whoop. For countries where bicycles are still the primary form of transportation its not a stretch to never have a need to travel beyond your own city or province.

No...because they arent doing it to remove an oppresive dictator. What the hell are you arguing exactly?

Depends on who you talk to or what their frame of reference was. That's the whole point, who is right to say what is oppression? You have no idea what their core values are and they know nothing of ours. What right do we have to tell them that our way of life is any better or worse than theirs? Have you ever lived under their form of government? You have no right, nor does some flunky from Washington, to tell someone in another country how they should live their life.

Correct....they put them in prison for crimes committed...they dont KILL them because they disgree with government policy or religious beliefs. Geezuz man...you are a trip.

And you know that people in prison in other countries are there because they have not committed crimes against the laws of that country and are just political priosners? You have a futur with Amnesty International. But then again, they continually hammer the US for their incarceration issues, so maybe not.

Again, what right do you have to judge the laws of another country and another culture? What right do you, or said flunky in Washington, have the right to tell anyone whose set of laws are right and whose are wrong?

Because they "know no other way of life" is reason enough to just ignore them and allow it to happen? Hey here sia question for you...since many children in this very country live in an abusive household and in fear daily, should we just ignore them and allow it to happen...because they "are used to it"?

There is an inherent right for ALL people to live free and without fear from oppresion. But hey, you want to support dictitors and disagree...go right ahead. The human spirit is a strong one and will fight through to freedom eventually. Thank god for this, or you would just as soon have women in Afghanistan stoned to death for not wearing a flippin scarf around their face or actually having the gall to learn how to read. Yeah Lanny...THATS what you are suggesting.

Well, since you brought it up, why is the government NOT doing something about the problems of family violence that take place in this country? Why are they not doing anything to deal with the poverty in this country? Why are they not doing something to deal with organizated crime, the drug trade, the smuggling and trade of illegal immigrants, etc. Why Tranny? Oh yeah, I forgot, they're too busy telling other countries how great it is in America and how everyone should emulate their form of government (nee democracy).

Like I said earlier Tranny, WHO is to say who is a dictator? You believe every single thing that the government here tells you, so how are you any differnet from a person living in North Korea who believes every single thing that their government tells them? As sickening as it is for women in Afghanistan, that was the cultural norm and it transends borders and is not only prevalent in Afghanistan. All across the Arab world women are not allowed to show flesh to varying degrees. Does that mean they are all open to invasion? And what about those cultures that allow the use of drugs. Don't you think for a second that they view the US' laws on drug use oppressive and archaic? Again, who is to judge?

Let me see here. Bush takes office in January 2000, but the first bomb doesnt drop until October 2001....after his country has open war declared on them. Yup..he is a warmonger allright. Wonder what he did for those 21 months preceding 9/11?

War was declared on the US? As you like to say, WOW! Did I miss the declaration of war delivered from a particular country? Did I miss where Afghanistan declared war? I must have slept through the declaration of war from Iraq. Care to point out this declaration? And don't point to 9/11 as a decalation of war. A terrorist attack is just that.

So what? Should they NOT be able to launch an offensive? Should they NOT have a military capable of helping ANYONE who asks for it?

If everyone had a defensive military, then what would the world be? Oh yeah, at peace.

[CaptainCrunch]

Defensive Militaries don't work, we saw that in the Second World War when the German's pounded on Armies that were built around defending national borders. The French army fell into this trap when they built the Maignot line (sp? I suck)

If your Military dosen't have an offensive capability all that will happen is over time it will be ground into dust.

If you keep hitting a rock with a hammer no matter how big the rock is it will eventually break.

On the UN thing. The only way to give the UN any kind of power is to assign military units to it on a permanent basis, and allow to use it unitarily without the appoval of the bodies within it. Allow the UN to be more proactive and give it the backbone to do it, and it might actually work.

A long time ago, when I was out in the field on a excercise, after I came back from a UN mission in Cyprus we joked that each of the nuclear nations should give the UN one atomic tipped missile to use as a nuclear threat to keep some of the more dangerous nations in line.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by CaptainCrunch@Sep 12 2004, 06:06 PM
I didn't want to get involved in this string

Told myself it would be better if I stayed out of it

But I have to ask,

When you talk about the use of diplomacy to deal with the terrorist problem, were you talking about using diplomacy with the companies that house them, or the terrorists themselves.

If its the terrorists itself, and you open up pandora's box and give in on thier demands, you will never see a agreement reached. Israel tried to trade land for peace and all they got was an increase in terrorist activity.

Spain changed thier government and withdrew thier troops from Iraq due to the terrible bombings in that country, and all it did was embolden the terrorists/

You can't negotiate with these people, they aren't about that. Hell Yassir Arafat was given a nobel peace prize and a key position in the peace process in Palestine, and all that he's done in between stuffing his starving peoples money into Swiss Back Accounts, is to become involved in terrorist activities again

Or are you looking at the countries involved in funding, and housing terrorists? Because that dosen't work until you provide an example of why they should comply.

After 9/11 the American's tried to work with the Taliban, asking for Bin Laden to be handed over, all the Taliban did was refuse, the American's gave them time to comply and they still did nothing but stonewall. So the American's invaded.

The American's didn't get any kind of movement out of Iran, and Syria until after they dropped the hammer on Iraq.

In short form the more backwards religiously driven middleeast countries don't understand diplomacy without a prior show of force to show your intentions.

And you can't really bring the UN into that, because thier policies and work in the middle east have been fairly poorly conceived and poorly executed, and the UN is no longer a descive and strong figure anymore.

Good points Captain, but let me ask you, how do you defeat terrorism then? Its a battle of ideologies. To me the only way you defeat that is through education and the only way you establish educational institutions is through diplomacy. Any other ideas?

[Gugstanley]

Wow Lanny, everything that looks good on paper always works.
If you don't like the United States then Why do you live there?
I hope the US pulls back and stops helping (interfering) around the world. Then we will see how well your ideas work.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Sep 12 2004, 06:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Sep 12 2004, 06:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-CaptainCrunch@Sep 12 2004, 06:06 PM
I didn't want to get involved in this string

Told myself it would be better if I stayed out of it

But I have to ask,

When you talk about the use of diplomacy to deal with the terrorist problem, were you talking about using diplomacy with the companies that house them, or the terrorists themselves.

If its the terrorists itself, and you open up pandora's box and give in on thier demands, you will never see a agreement reached. Israel tried to trade land for peace and all they got was an increase in terrorist activity.

Spain changed thier government and withdrew thier troops from Iraq due to the terrible bombings in that country, and all it did was embolden the terrorists/

You can't negotiate with these people, they aren't about that. Hell Yassir Arafat was given a nobel peace prize and a key position in the peace process in Palestine, and all that he's done in between stuffing his starving peoples money into Swiss Back Accounts, is to become involved in terrorist activities again

Or are you looking at the countries involved in funding, and housing terrorists? Because that dosen't work until you provide an example of why they should comply.

After 9/11 the American's tried to work with the Taliban, asking for Bin Laden to be handed over, all the Taliban did was refuse, the American's gave them time to comply and they still did nothing but stonewall. So the American's invaded.

The American's didn't get any kind of movement out of Iran, and Syria until after they dropped the hammer on Iraq.

In short form the more backwards religiously driven middleeast countries don't understand diplomacy without a prior show of force to show your intentions.

And you can't really bring the UN into that, because thier policies and work in the middle east have been fairly poorly conceived and poorly executed, and the UN is no longer a descive and strong figure anymore.

Good points Captain, but let me ask you, how do you defeat terrorism then? Its a battle of ideologies. To me the only way you defeat that is through education and the only way you establish educational institutions is through diplomacy. Any other ideas? [/b][/quote]
I'm on two sides of the fence on defeating terrorism.

The first side is that you have to force Terrorrists away from taking the initiative. You have to find them and kill them or vanish them before they can act. That takes huge intelligence assets, and a very mobile and light force. you have to find a way to make it unprofitable for thier leaders, some and not all terrorist leaders are motivated by the payoff, so we need to find thier finances and freeze them, and let these organizations will wither and die.

People might understand and respect diplomacy but terrorists don't they don't negotiate, they take. The Spain example is a great one.

On the education thing I do agree with you, however it won't fly because a lot of the thocratic (sp?) don't want thier people to become educated in numbers because it will erode thier powerbase, so it becomes a waiting game, as you hope that the current leaders die out and more moderate forces come into place. Iran, and Syria, and Palestine don't want the majority of thier people to be able to read and formulate thier own opinions because it might lead them to question thier leadership. Something that we see in Educated Countries.

In Afganistan the Russians created a forced education program where they would take children from smoking villages and send them to Moscow to educate them in a modern workers paradise, it was thier hopes that given time it would moderate Afganistan. It failed because it created an older generation of terrorists

It might be a matter of two tiers. First you grab the radical states by the nose and scare the hell out of them, then after you do that, you can for the most part work towards moderating them.

I'm sorry I don't have a good solution that dosen't include shock and awe, there are two issues that you have to deal with.

the fact that terrorists don't care about the people that they're fighting for. The slant of religious destruction and lack of education. Makes it an impossible problem to solve. But I do know that you can't wait for these people to come to you, you have to go to them and find a way to unbalance them and make mistakes that will expose them and allow you to kill them

[Cowperson]

Just to throw wood on the fire:

Russia reserves the right to carry out pre-emptive strikes on militant bases abroad in the wake of the school hostage seizure, Russia's defence minister said Sunday, adding that Moscow and the United States see eye to eye on fighting terrorism.

“The Americans and the U.S. military have a better understanding of the seriousness of this threat since we and the United States have both been targeted in powerful terror attacks,” Mr. Ivanov said in the television interview.

“In that sense, it has been easier for us to find a basis for mutual understanding with the United States than with some of the European nations.”



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto.../BNStory/Front/

Cowperson

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I agree with you Captain. You have to take the action to them (I refuse to say war, because you can not pose an effective war against an ideology). You must use special forces hunting teams and give them free reign to kill as they see fit. That will help eliminate the rabelrousers. From that point forward you must use diplomacy and education to win the hearts and minds of the general public. Only through education can you truely do that. That means you must work with the moderates through a diplomatic effort to establish local schools and univerities under the auspices of these leaders. Allow them to be the drivers and reward them greatly for their participation. Is a billion dollars a day in Iraq as a police operation a good thing, or spending that billion dollars over a decade to establish an educational system that will win out in the long run? I pick education over a decade.

[transplant99]

Lanny... i am done going around in circles with you. You change the subject repeatedly and write things that just leave me shaking my head.

One thing though, you truly ARE defending the oppression of people, whether you want to admit it or not.

N Korea is starving to death...but i guess they are used to it, so its OK.

I'm curious, just how do you know what freedoms other countries have?

Wow. Well let's see if i can use your own words to answer this.

I read..lots. Books and stuff...ya know? Its always your answer, so i assume it works both ways.

Good grief.

And you know that people in prison in other countries are there because they have not committed crimes against the laws of that country and are just political priosners?

Did I say that? Where?

I said that in N Korea and in fact, in Iraq, there are mass graves turned up with thousands and thousands of bodies in them. Were all these just car thieves? Or perhaps, and using some common sense which you seem to lack in droves, maybe they were dissidents against the regime in power?

300,000 bodies have been recovered in unmarked graves in Iraq. (UN numbers BTW, or does this not count now because it doesnt fit your arument) Hell, no problem for those that were spared....after all they are used to being ruled with bullets, so i guess we should leave well enough alone.

Again, what right do you have to judge the laws of another country and another culture?

I have EVERY right to stand up and fight for the freedom of all people, if not just for basic human rights. In fact its my duty...as well as anyone else in the world. Or do I not have that right...and the REAL right lies with oppresive rulers who should be allowed to rape, torture, and kill at thier whim?


You believe every single thing that the government here tells you, so how are you any differnet from a person living in North Korea who believes every single thing that their government tells them?

Well thanks for putting words in my mouth Lanny.

Let me ask you this. Again with the UN (your bastion of fairness...right?)...why were their 17 resolutions against Iraq in 12 years? Were they doing nothing wrong?
Was it all what "my government" was telling me that this happened?

Who said that N Koreans believed everything their government tells them Lanny? In fact i am positive they dont...as i...wait for it....read a book from a N Korean defector that explains what happens there!!

The differance is...they have NO AVENUE to dispute it...without getting thrown in jail or blown to bits with bullets. But yeah...its the same thing.


War was declared on the US? As you like to say, WOW! Did I miss the declaration of war delivered from a particular country? Did I miss where Afghanistan declared war? I must have slept through the declaration of war from Iraq. Care to point out this declaration? And don't point to 9/11 as a decalation of war. A terrorist attack is just that.

LOL!!
Yes ya twit....war WAS declared on the USA by Al-Queda/bin laden...at least 2 seperate times BEFORE 9/11!! What the hell do think jihad means exactly? And it has to be a country declaring war...or those countries harboring those people who declare it before its acceptable by you? Just curious.

Just for your amusement, here is the full transcript from the 1996 declaration by Osama himself..signed and sealed.

Declaration of war on the USA

What ya have to say about that? Even better...what do your "books" say about that??

I must have slept through the declaration of war from Iraq. Care to point out this declaration?

Where did i say that exactly? I was talking about the acts of 9/11 and Al-Queda. On top of that, Hussein never decalred war...he just sent the tanks and missiles flying without warning...ask the Iranians and Kuwaitis. He didnt play by the US rules Lanny...which you should be happy about since they are different than us...right?


And don't point to 9/11 as a decalation of war. A terrorist attack is just that.

WHAT??

So its not an act of war to fly missiles into building? What the hell do YOU call it?

OK then...using that logic, the US never invaded Iraq then...right? Or at least they didnt go to war, they just used terrorist attacks.
Unfreakingbelievable.

[transplant99]

Good points Captain, but let me ask you, how do you defeat terrorism then?

You dont defeat terrorism..its impossible. That doesnt mean you dont fight it however, which you are suggesting.

Its a war that cant be won, but its one that must be fought, and sorry to offend you, but, i would rather the fight happens over there than over here. I guess since "they are used to it" it wont bother them anyhow.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Sep 12 2004, 07:24 PM
Just to throw wood on the fire:

Russia reserves the right to carry out pre-emptive strikes on militant bases abroad in the wake of the school hostage seizure, Russia's defence minister said Sunday, adding that Moscow and the United States see eye to eye on fighting terrorism.

Would that include a pre-emptive strike on American soil? It was President Putin that stated the US had developed a relationship with the Chechyn rebels and he felt there some shenanigans there. Would this be the type of first strike you feel would be fair? You are right Cow, that is wood on a fire that we need to control, not let burn free. Whether you think the UN is a useless tool or not, there must be some control to prevent frontier justice and a new age of high tech cowboy gunslinging between nations. The UN is the best solution at this point. Countries must just learn to cooperate on the issues.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally posted by transplant99@Sep 12 2004, 07:37 PM
You dont defeat terrorism..its impossible. That doesnt mean you dont fight it however, which you are suggesting.

Its a war that cant be won, but its one that must be fought, and sorry to offend you, but, i would rather the fight happens over there than over here. I guess since "they are used to it" it wont bother them anyhow.

Who said you don't fight it? There are more ways to fight something than roll the military into action. You can do so with special forces and better use of intelligence. You do so through education. Rolling a tank into the streets doesn't do a damn thing but p*ss people off and create more disenchantment and push more people toward the terrorist camp. Didn't we learn anything from the Soviet's failure in Afghanistan? The people must still have a say in the way things are done with in their own country, other wise they don't own the solution and will let it go.

And wasn't you that accused me of fear mongering? And then you come up with "but, i would rather the fight happens over there than over here." Wow. And if our Homeland Secuirty department does its job and properly screens people coming into the country, how do they take the battle to us here? And a very close minded statement in saying "I guess since "they are used to it" it wont bother them anyhow". No one anywhere enjoys indescriminent violence around them. And you accuse me of going off the deep end? Sheesh.