War on Terror? Not anymore.

[Qikdraw]

Its the "struggle against violent extremism".

Linky (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/27/wterr27.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/07/27/ixnewstop.html)

Very interesting article with some very interesting quotes.

Qikdraw

[Qikdraw]

Its the "struggle against violent extremism".

Linky (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/27/wterr27.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/07/27/ixnewstop.html)

Very interesting article with some very interesting quotes.

Qikdraw

[KirkOntario]

the war on terror should have been called what is is: the war against violent Islamic fundamentalism. The image of the terrorist has been used by the Left to confuse it with freedom fighters or liberators which they are definitely not. there is no freedom for which they are fighting.

[Captain Zen]

REd Army, Basque Seperatist, IRA, Brigade Rosso, are those not terrorists? Greenpeace maybe and the tree spikers, all of them onto the same heap, Islamic Extremists, no more terror...

[Boreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
the war on terror should have been called what is is: the war against violent Islamic fundamentalism. The image of the terrorist has been used by the Left to confuse it with freedom fighters or liberators which they are definitely not. there is no freedom for which they are fighting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Huh? The image of the terrorist has been used by the "left"???? Seems to me that is the biggest "tool" of the right these days. Get people scared of the terrorists so we can wage a big fight and make money for companies like Halliburton and the like.

Instead of thinking "left" and "right" perhaps we should be finding more productive ways to solve a major problem. Being extremist to fight extremists will not work.

[KirkOntario]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Still_Boreas:
Instead of thinking "left" and "right" perhaps we should be finding more productive ways to solve a major problem. Being extremist to fight extremists will not work. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But Americans are not extremists at all. They are conducting a very humane occupation, dropping teddy bears to kids while fighting insurgents who hide behind crowds, fire out of ambulances and mosques. Great restrain has been shown. America is allowing Iraqis to hash out their own constitution and establish their own path. That's pretty moderate.

[hm0504]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
the war on terror should have been called what is is: the war against violent Islamic fundamentalism. The image of the terrorist has been used by the Left to confuse it with freedom fighters or liberators which they are definitely not. there is no freedom for which they are fighting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately, the right uses the term "terrorist" to include almost anyone who opposes President Bush. I cannot agree that "the Left to confuse (the term terrorist) with freedom fighters or liberators". Geez, it is matter of historical record that the right considered the Taleban to be freedom fighters when they were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.

We need to develop a good definition of terrorism. Here's the one used by the U.S. State Department:

"Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience."

[Boreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
But Americans are not extremists at all. They are conducting a very humane occupation, dropping teddy bears to kids while fighting insurgents who hide behind crowds, fire out of ambulances and mosques. Great restrain has been shown. America is allowing Iraqis to hash out their own constitution and establish their own path. That's pretty moderate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is a pretty funny statement to me. Of course Americans do a lot of great things for other countries. I do not for a second dispute that. I want to get that one on record first! http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The funny part is that Bush started this war without much support from other countries and had a very suspicious motive for it. The US has also done a lot of damage in Iraq and has lost a lot of young people to the war. How on earth is that considered moderate? Doing good does not make the bad go away.

I would love it if the US could use its power and wealth to find non-violent ways to solve problems in the world. I think the resources are there for that to happen.

[Boreas]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
the war on terror should have been called what is is: the war against violent Islamic fundamentalism. The image of the terrorist has been used by the Left to confuse it with freedom fighters or liberators which they are definitely not. there is no freedom for which they are fighting. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately, the right uses the term "terrorist" to include almost anyone who opposes President Bush. I cannot agree that "the Left to confuse (the term terrorist) with freedom fighters or liberators". Geez, it is matter of historical record that the right considered the Taleban to be freedom fighters when they were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan.

We need to develop a good definition of terrorism. Here's the one used by the U.S. State Department:

"Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting.

[KirkOntario]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Still_Boreas:The funny part is that Bush started this war without much support from other countries and had a very suspicious motive for it. The US has also done a lot of damage in Iraq and has lost a lot of young people to the war. How on earth is that considered moderate? Doing good does not make the bad go away.

I would love it if the US could use its power and wealth to find non-violent ways to solve problems in the world. I think the resources are there for that to happen. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Americans defended Europe during the Cold war with countries like the Netherlands objecting to the cruise missile and every other necessary military program developed to win that Cold War.

Suspicious motive? It was not at the time. British, Russian, French, Jordanian and US intelligence all concurred on the existence of WMD.

Lost a lot of young people to the war? Not by comparative standards to Vietnam, WWII or shudder WWI. In 1968 the Us lost 15,000 men in Vietnam for example. Over 500 deaths in one week in March of that year. This war has the lowest rate of death in U.S. miitary history.
A lot of damage to Iraq? Not with precision bombing and smart bombs. There is no comparison to other conflicts the US has been involved in the last 75 years.

[hm0504]

1968 was the year of peak losses for the U.S. in Vietnam. The major U.S. buildup in Vietnam happened in 1964-1965 at the end of which there were 200,000 troops with 500 deaths. At the end of 1966, the death toll was 3,910.

One has to remember though that the Vietnam war started well before the Americans arrived whereas the Iraq war, the real Iraq war, is in its beginning phases.

This web site provides stats for American forces killed in Iraq (not including other Coalition members):
http://icasualties.org/oif/USchart.aspx

[Captain Zen]

Happiness cannot come from hatred or anger. Nobody can say, "Today I am happy because this morning I was very angry." On the contrary, people feel uneasy and sad and say, "Today I am not happy because I lost my temper this morning." Through kindness, whether at our own level or at the national and international level, through mutual understanding and through mutual respect, we will get peace, we will get happiness, and we will get genuine satisfaction.

-His Holiness the Dalai Lama

[Captain Zen]

oops, wrong thread, where to put happyness information?

[Bob S.]

Qikdraw, that link is almost 2 moths old. That is old news. The thing is that War on Terror is so much easier to say.

"Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience."

And that is what we are trying to fight, those who espouse those ideas. Unfortunately, this is a war that will never end as long as terrorism does what it is intended to do. And they have only to point at Spain and Israel to show how well it is working.

"The funny part is that Bush started this war without much support from other countries"

Meaning that France, Germany, and Russia all opposed it, Boreas.

"Through kindness, whether at our own level or at the national and international level, through mutual understanding and through mutual respect, we will get peace, we will get happiness, and we will get genuine satisfaction."

We will never have peace until we can all agree on what peace means. As I like to say, everyone wants world peace. We are merely fighting over who gets to make the rules.

And happiness cannot be attained through actions, Zen. I am surprised that someone so enlightened as you doesn't understand that. Happiness comes from within, not without. Kindness can only come through happiness. Peace can only come through kindness. And genuine satisfaction can only come through peace.

Bob S.

[Captain Zen]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Through kindness, whether at our own level or at the national and international level, through mutual understanding and through mutual respect, we will get peace, we will get happiness, and we will get genuine satisfaction.

-His Holiness the Dalai Lama </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You said that happiness cam only come from within and I agree, and so said the Dalai Lama, as I understand: said he; kindness, understanding, and respect all must come from within, and cannot be enforced from without.
The peace you mention I hope you agree can not be imposed with war, as try so many warlords. Peace through war is no peace, it is defeat by one and victory of the other, peace has nothing to do with it...

[Qikdraw]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:
Qikdraw, that link is almost 2 moths old. That is old news. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know, that is why I posted it close to 2 months ago. August 1st to be exact. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Qikdraw

[Bob S.]

Qikdraw, as Gilda Radner used to say..."Nevermind."

"The peace you mention I hope you agree can not be imposed with war... Peace through war is no peace, it is defeat by one and victory of the other, peace has nothing to do with it..."

I agree with you on that, too. Did you not read what I wrote? So how would you propose to create world peace, Zen? Since only kindness, in my quote, can create peace, how do you turn the world off of evil and into kindness?

That is a tall order. One that has never been accomplished over the history of the civilization of mankind.

Bob S.

[Captain Zen]

Peace is an idividual thing, not a global thing. Only individuals can create/find peace, for one self alone, and if it is a world citizen individual, like me, he finds [world] peace where ever he goes.
How strange that I travelled through 50+ countries during my life time and never ever had any violence or evil come my way. Where people coming from for instance Pakistan or the Philipines or Cumana in Venezuela warned me for bandits, street robbers and such, I walked the city streets with the locals just as any where else.
Every individual makes his own world, but that is not thaught in schools or churches; the trouble that keeps the world in thrall is from the capitalist system that promotes greed instead of sharing. It promotes fear instead of love, it promotes dependence in stead of freedom.
The first one to publicly thaught people how to stop suffering that keeps them all in misery was Gautame the Enlightened One. By observing the self and taking control of the self.
I must add, that I think i was born with it, and therefore believe in reincarnation, that this love power and freedom may have carried over from a former life, because I never had to learn it, I had it from day one... And I will take it with me when I shed this body and go into my next form, most possibly not on this very stupid planet...
Global peace [and the happiness it brings] can only come about when enormous alien space ships will hover over every major city and impose the end of hostility. When world leaders see a power greater than their own, they will comply because they must. Only then.

[namedun]

I somewhat agree. Global Peace, that's a myth. As long as our society fails to reconcile it's rules with simple human instincts and tendancies, there will be no "peace".

[jon71]

I think of the words "...wars and rumors of wars...". Brownie points to anyone who knows the reference.

[Captain Zen]

http://www.hermes-press.com/nazification_step4.htm

Congrats passive citizens, see none, hear none, say noone...

[hm0504]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jon71:
I think of the words "...wars and rumors of wars...". Brownie points to anyone who knows the reference. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yo bro, see Matthew 24:6 in the Bible.