Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What makes a terrorist a terrorist?
ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 12 of 300 (333903)
07-21-2006 4:19 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
07-20-2006 5:45 PM


a group ,that attempt to subvert and or coerce the existing ruling power , by means of acts targeted to cause terror with in the civilian population .
the agender of the group can be political , racial , religiious , criminal what ever ..
The problem is many groups use "terror" tactics but can make , to some degree , claims to be freedom fighters , and to be at war with the other side
those below all fall into that area , at time they act as terrorists , other times the fight a war style campagin
American Revolutionaries.... were they terrorists against legitimate british rule?
Confederate forces... terrorists?
How about the current iraqi resistance... terrorists?
French partisans during WW2... terrorists?
Scottish fighters against England... terrorists?
IRA.... terrorists?
Contras.... terrorists?
Sandinistas..... terrorists?
Viet Cong..... terrorists?
there are free pure terrorist's over time , as the nature of the fight may change ...
animal rights extremeists who conduct letterbomb campagains are a good model for a terrorist group .
Barder Minehoff was a classic terrorist group

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 07-20-2006 5:45 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by nwr, posted 07-21-2006 9:24 AM ikabod has replied
 Message 39 by Phat, posted 07-21-2006 5:16 PM ikabod has not replied

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 18 of 300 (333934)
07-21-2006 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by nwr
07-21-2006 9:24 AM


well the buzz bombs ie the V-1 unmanned plane was a continuation the attacks on london , given their clear inaccuracy as a missle they would fall under indisriminate bombing .. a terror based tactic .. but in this case we are looking at a nation waging war by any means , and taking the V-1 weapon as part of the whole effort is not a terrorist action its war with terror tactics
cruise missle have the problem that it is claimed they are very accurate , and are thus used to target very specific points , thus a claim can be made that they are a war weapon aimed to kill combatents , any civilians are hit by mistake ..
given that any form of conflict is terrifying i do not think that crusie missle use is terrorisum style combat .
If you used cruise missle to target say markets ,hotels ,theater ,ect then you would have a clear case of terrorist style attacks
PLEASE note i offer here no opinion on bush/ blairs actions .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by nwr, posted 07-21-2006 9:24 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 19 of 300 (333937)
07-21-2006 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by nwr
07-21-2006 9:43 AM


Re: relative
what TB really thinks only he knows ,
but the uk has had a long terrorist involded history , from its days of empire ...it has vast numbers of overseas industrial and economic links to protect , .. the UK has been firmly in the US camp for a long time and is viewed as such , and so is as much a target ... the UK also used its US links to balance its european links , never really totally joining one or other ..

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by nwr, posted 07-21-2006 9:43 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 116 of 300 (335420)
07-26-2006 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by Faith
07-24-2006 12:56 PM


Re: Again, it's about the root cause
They might, but this overlooks the fact that they are defensively responding to an ideologically-driven enemy that wants Israel not to exist. If that enemy just minded its own business, negotiated for a state that sought peace with its neighbor Israel, none of this violence would be happening at all.
the problem is that to the palastinians israel is not a neighbor it is occuping what was the palastine ...both claim the same land ...so how do you resovle such a matter ???
the modern israel state is based on a land grab and then defeating the arab armies ...
technically israel is an invader who is , to the palastinian nation ,a ideologically-driven enemy that wants them not to exist.
much of the population of lebanon is this displaced peoples who cant go home because israel is there ..hence the wish israel did not exsit ...
both sides are locked in to a no escape conflict ...all we seem to be able to do is count the number of inocents killed .. and israel is clearly killing more ,destroying more home, roads ,bridges, power stations ,airports , causing mass evacuations ....at what point do you judge a defensive responce has become a vengefull agression ???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Faith, posted 07-24-2006 12:56 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Faith, posted 07-26-2006 4:17 PM ikabod has not replied

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 122 of 300 (335634)
07-27-2006 4:24 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by Faith
07-27-2006 1:32 AM


Re: Again, it's about the root cause
this is in reply to a number of Faith's post , rather that doing multi replies..
"The Palestinians have no right to it. It legitimately belongs to Israel, who bought much of it. The Palestinian cause is completely trumped up. There was no Palestinian people until quite recently either."
before the state of modern israel was decleared by the the "so called jewish terrorist"groups the region know as palastine was a british protectorate .. this came about at the end of WW1 after british AND arab tribes defeated the turkish army .. infact the arabs where offical allies of the bristish with full diplomatic stautus... typically after the war britain hung on to the area , for hmm reasons (yes british imperial type reasons)
between the wars and during ww2 and after the british garrisoned palastine ...
during this time the number of jews in the area in creased due to the situation in europe and the nazis holocasust ...
post war the bristish tried and failed to keep jews from entering the region as they belive it would lead to conflict with the local;s ie the arabs ... how the dispalcement of the jewish peoples by the war lead to a flood of people into palastine ..... mostly educated europeans .. with conections to pro jewish state groups across the world .. . then followed a peroid of terrorist warfare .. re king david hotel ... the british gave up and left the jewish faction was locally stronger and took control ..... war follows , irronocally the first foe the israelies fight is the arab legion a army set up by the british to "protect palastine" from its arab neigbours .
so israel copmes about due to a incoming group of people held together by the "ideologically driven" dream of a nation of there own ... at the expecnce of others ...
Could be, Jazz. But most of those NOW called Palestinians aren't. They are a variety of Arabs from all over the Middle East
why do you thing the jews picked palastine ??? there was a much greater jewish population in the USA why not go there ..??
Post ww2 after the horrors that befell the jewish peoples of europe , they made a choice to "rebuild" the israel of the bible as a jewish homeland ... but it was at the expence of the then resident population , who where not asked , who frought against it and who lost ...the incoming jewish peoples took mover the land and set up a goverment based on their views and tradistions .. not the locals , the jewish people did nopt seek to live along side the locals they sort and by means of armed conflict took control .
now is that fair ?? would you allow a large group of ex russian communists to move into ,say, Idaho and take over the land , declear a independant nation of the Russian soviet people .. claiming that as they lack a home land they can take soime one elses , and any way there is no real Idahoians , 5they are just a collection of small tribes from across europe ??
1.so if no palastinian people who where the britsih ruling for 30 odd years ...?
2.by what from of legitimatcy is the land israels ?
3. in fact the israelies have created the "palastine people " as a single whole group by uniting them in comman situation , of being dispalced and having to live under the rule of a invader .
4. as to israel buying palastine land hmm like manhattern was brought from the native american tribes ?
Could be, Jazz. But most of those NOW called Palestinians aren't. They are a variety of Arabs from all over the Middle East
1. not really true .. no one can move into palastine , its not here its called israel , the rest is the refugeee camps
2.and how does that make the have no rights ?? what are the birth lands of most of the israelies born from say 1920 onwards ??
3.would you also apply the same reasoning to the USA as most of its population are " a variety of germanic / gallic / celtic / anglosaxon / italic / slavic tribes peoples from all over the europe " see example above
Now to make one thing very clear .. all peoples , in all lands have a right to exsist ...
what we are talking about here is a situation where groups are in conflict over living on the same bit of land .. we have the great luxury of debating this with out bombs falling on our heads ...we caqn get up from this debate and walk the street of our home town with out risk of shells killing us ...
do we not have a responcability to look at the conflict with open eyes , and see the reasons , both historic and current , and to condem the action of ALL who bring death and destruction , and not to allow one side the "right to defencive responce" that is clearly going to kill inoccents , that is destroying the ability of a civilisan population to find food water and medical services .
even when "laser guided" a 500kg bomb is not a pin ponit weapon when you are trying to kill one man in a apparment block

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Faith, posted 07-27-2006 1:32 AM Faith has not replied

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 154 of 300 (335913)
07-28-2006 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 138 by Faith
07-27-2006 6:49 PM


Re: Not all THAT complicated to define it
but they were provoked to a fury by the typical Arab cowardice, dressing like women
hmm so arabs are cowards , carefull you dont let any racial bias taint your point ....
oh and these are cowards who refused to surrender " and thus be safe"
may be they had a reason to avoid being caught ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Faith, posted 07-27-2006 6:49 PM Faith has not replied

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 155 of 300 (335916)
07-28-2006 4:06 AM


news flash we know now what defines a terrorist ..
reported on the BBC radio four news this morning
statement from israel ... everyone in the boarder area of south lebanaon will be considered a terrorist and dealt with as such ...
Can we now take this as a justifiable action and statement ...???
so if we hear of a terrorist cell hiding and opperating in say hmm New York city or London or Mardrid we can demand all non terrorist to evacuate the area .. or to be counted as terrorist , the we can use laser guided missles and 155mm howitzer shells to "make the area safe " , we will of course have to bomb any airports , docks and road and rail links to stop the terrorist being resupplied
the israely statement goes on to say greater firepwoer is to be use to remove the terrorist
the BBC report goes on to say c 600,000 people are now refuges as a result of israels actions ....
in Sidon 50,000 have arrived , with difficultly .. the BBC reporter said a 20 mile drive to reach Sidon took 4 hours due to bombed roads and bomb damage on the route
Edited by ikabod, : No reason given.

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 175 of 300 (337607)
08-03-2006 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by Faith
08-02-2006 9:18 PM


Re: Terrorism is the problem; history is the excuse
No terrorism is a symptom of the conflict not the cause , remember when modern Israel was founded it was the extremist zionist terrorist that started a armed conflict , and not solely vs the arabs .
The current wave of conflict is mearly part of the cycle started then .
Try to picture the roles revesed the Jewish population scattered around a Palastinian state , which has all the power of a modern westernised nation . The Jewish population seeks to over throw the palastinain state by armed struggle .
Who then are the "evil terrorists " that use cunning , deception , lies , bobby traps , and all the other toolos of irregular warfare .
Just because israel won its war of birth does not mean it is in the right , nor does it mean the palastinians are in the wrong .
The fundermental is that neither side wants PEACE , they want "peace on their own terms " and thos e terms are unbearable by the other side ...
As can be seen from the Northern Ireland conflict , real peace talks come BEFORE the end to armed conflict , both peoples need to find a mutual soloution .
This is why Israels inforced peace solution fails on all counts ... it simply does not engage with the palastinian people ... and it is clearly unpopular with a faction of the Israely population .
If , as Israel claims the current armed action will diarm Hezbula , then the Israel goverment and military have learn nothing over the years . All they are doing is feeding the fires that breed the terrorists ..
It is peace with the palastinian population .. the people .. that is needed ..convince them Israel can be trusted to be fair , to give social rights , access to to mutually holy places , and that Israel is willing to return such trust and then the terrorist will have no home , no support and then they will have to stop .
How any one can achive this is beyond me ..it needs a visionary person to bridge that gap .....
in Northern Ireland it took the brave women from both side s to unite for peace , it took the members of both religous creeds to join to call for peace , it took public revultion to the deaths .. and it took political leaders to risk their lives and future caraers to meet the need .....
none of this , currently seem to be in the Israel / Palastinian conflict ...... maybe we need to be speakiing to the people not the political / religious factions ......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Faith, posted 08-02-2006 9:18 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Faith, posted 08-03-2006 10:18 AM ikabod has replied

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 197 of 300 (337856)
08-04-2006 3:47 AM
Reply to: Message 176 by Faith
08-03-2006 10:18 AM


Re: Terrorism is the problem; history is the excuse
when Israel became a state in 1948, it certainly was NOT the Zionists who started the war. Israel was attacked by the Arab nations.
isarael became a SELF declaired state on the back of a terrorist conflict with the controlling britsih and local arab s , yes neigbours joined the fight after 1948 , but many combatents only had to open THEIR frountdoors to be inside the new israel and to join the fighting ...what was their land , some one had desided to call israel .
What are you talking about please? You give no dates, you refer to no historical incidents, I have no idea what you think you are saying. Your language is very odd. The Jewish "population" seeks... WHAT? And there IS no Palestinian state.
.. if you keep reading its clear reverse the situation ... who then is right or wrong .....its called trying to see the whole picture , taking an objective view.
Nobody said rightness and wrongness have anything to do with these things. The Palestinians are in the wrong because they are not negotiating with a full deck and their motives are not peace but the obliteration of israel, all fueled by Islamic dogma.
thank you for a brilliant example of your logic and view , where you start a paragraph saying its not about right or wrong , and then say who is wrong ...
ok who is wrong ..
any one who by action or inaction causes the death of a human being ....
who is guilty .... both sides leaders and their backers , both side combat troops , the world powers for not acting to force both side to stop ....
I guess you could put it that way. Peace to Israel means that the Palestinians have their own state next door and stop trying to kill Israelis, and you are right, these terms are unbearable to the Palestinians, because they want to kill Israelis and don't want Israel to exist and will never accept any agreement for a state that allows Israel to exist.
you are so close , but you still fail to see past the propogander of both sides ..
joe public in israel and palastine want peace and security and freedom ....ok they dont really want each other as neigbours but lets face it that family 2 doors down with the son playing loud music all hours is worst that having a jew/arab living in the same street , they can live with it ....
it is the entreched goverments / leaders on both side that use hatred and religion to drive their view as the "real" situation ..
yes the arab side calles for the removal of the state of israel BECAUSE israel will not return the land it now controls , and israel can because it will then not exsist , Israel calles for a end to armed conflict ..but states it can never met the political demands of the arabs .. they are locked in a circle ..,
What do you mean by "Israel's enforced peace solution?" I haven't a clue what you are referring to.
err try watching the news .. the wall israel is building , the withdrawl of israel from cetian areas , the statements that other areas will remain indside israel , israel drwawing up iots own boarders , and then walling them off ... claiming then the palastinians have land and can form a state ... all with out negosation or reference to the veiws of the palastinians ..
It's world opinion against Israel that is really feeding the fires, and if they supported Israel instead, that's how the fires would die down. The terrorists are self-breeding. If you don't fight them they will continue to attack because this isn't about anything that Israel does or doesn't do. It's about their Islam-based hatred of Israel because it's Jewish. Sure they get mad when Israel tries to stop the terrorism, but trying to appease the terrorist mentality is just playing into their hands.
so if the un the usa and europe russia china et al say ok israel go do what ever you think all would be well !!!! what do you base this on ?? how many times has israel gone into lebanon , how many safety zones has it set up over the years .. how many have worked ???
how many terrorist/fredom fighter groups have been defeated by indirect artillry fire and airial bombardment ???
Sorry but no you cant play the jewish card , if the population of israel was anglo saxon , slavic , germanic , irish , natvie america , inca , or what ever the comnflict would be the same .... how hard did the arab s fight the european xian crusader states when they controled basicly the same land .....its not that the people of israel are jewish , its that they are sitting on the land ..
and no one said appease the terrorist .. what i said was destroy the terrorist by undermining their base support .. the people , the causes , make the terrorist redundant ...
otherwise you remain trapped in the circle of conflict .. with both side killing each other because it is the easiest responce .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Faith, posted 08-03-2006 10:18 AM Faith has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024