The rule of law, human rights, and the War On Terror

[Boss Spearman]

[QUOTE
The so called "isolationists" were merely advocates of a foreign policy which placed the interests of the United States and its citizens above those of the so called "world community." [/QUOTE]

Well, that qualifies me as an isolationist then. The "world community" wants to disarm us and criticize us and hate us while at the same time accepting our money and offerings to help them out. I'm sick of the UN in particular and wish we'd kick them out of the US and withdraw.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

The fact is I know you are wrong. Even if you look at some Islamic dream state, like Instanbul, the only difficulty in being non-Islam was that you had to pay a fee. Yea, that's it. Not quite the genocidal tendencies you've been told, is it? A couple dollars and you are cool. Religious tolerance, in strict Islam society.

Bad example. Istanbul isn't a state, it's a city in Turkey, and while Turkey is overwhelmingly Muslim the government is seculkar, not Islamic. And that doesn't sit well with the radical Islamicist fundamentalists, who don't care much for Turkey at all.

 

[xd9fan]

armed neutrality is not isolationism. Very very different concepts.

 

[Strings]

>I think it's entirely possible that all the carpet bombing in World War II actually made the fighting last longer because it created bitterness, hatred, and resolve in people who would otherwise have no personal reasons to hate the Allies.<

Well... kinda. Won't argue that the carpet bombing added a certain level of hatred twords the Allies. However, you REALLY can't argue that nuking Japan didn't shorten the war there: I've seen the projections, and it wouldn't have been pretty. Instead, we demonstrated that we could SERIOUSLY destroy them without working up a sweat, and they capitulated...


The same trick wouldn't work against Islamofascist terrorism for a couple reasons.

First off... they're taught that dying "for the cause" puts you on the fast-track to Paradise. So they're eager: all that nuking them would do is give them more martyrs...

The there's the international angle, in two parts:
1)WHO do we nuke? Yes, there are "terrorist states", countries that give aid and comfort to the terrorists. But we'd kinda need proof...

2)How do we convince other nuclear capable countries that we aren't striking them? How do we get such to agree that turning say SYria into a sheet of glass is the proper way to fight Islamofascist terrorism? Remember: once a nuke is launched, all "lighter" options are gone...

Comparing the fight against Islamofascist terrorism with the fight against Japan is kinda an apples/oranges proposition. Unless we want to nuke the entirety of the Middle East, from Morrocco to Pakistan, into one giant sheet of glass. Which is about the ONLY way true "peace in the Middle East" will ever be achieved...

 

[TOADMAN]

Yes I can. Look at what happened on September 11th: People's resolve to fight back hardened. Look at what happened to the Russians in Afghanistan...the more they laid waste to whole villages, the more the intense hatred and will to fight grew on the Afghan side.


I think you meant to say: People's resolve to fight back hardened a little bit! Alot of those hardened folks are ready to quit now...I guess they weren't tough at all. Russians: That is because we supported the Afgans against the Russians.



(Quote = shootinstudent)I think it's entirely possible that all the carpet bombing in World War II actually made the fighting last longer because it created bitterness, hatred, and resolve in people who would otherwise have no personal reasons to hate the Allies.



I think it is entirely possible that if frogs had pockets - they could carry pistols so the snakes wouldn't eat them!!




(Quote = shootinstudent) Why is that so hard to imagine? If someone nuked los angeles, I know I wouldn't just want to give up and let that person do whatever he wanted...would you?



Why is that so hard to imagine? If someone nuked los angeles we might be better off?

(Quote shootinstudent) Now, in reverse: Why do you think that the rest of the world is any different from you in this respect.


I don't care!!

 

[Boss Spearman]

[QUOTE
Why is that so hard to imagine? If someone nuked los angeles we might be better off[/QUOTE]

Only if Jessica Alba's not in LA when it happens!

 

[TOADMAN]

Only if Jessica Alba's not in LA when it happens!

I forgot to say that!! I totally agree.

 

[gc70]

The big problem with the "War on Terrorism" is how to find and deal with the few thousand violent Islamofascists among a billion other Muslims. And the problem is compounded when the adherents to Islam choose, by the millions, to actively support, passively support, or willingly tolerate the Islamofascists.

 

[TOADMAN]

The big problem with the "War on Terrorism" is how to find and deal with the few thousand violent Islamofascists among a billion other Muslims. And the problem is compounded when the adherents to Islam choose, by the millions, to actively support, passively support, or willingly tolerate the Islamofascists.

I think your question hit a home run!!! Hopefully, soon the billion other Muslims will get tired of these few thousand Islamofascists folks and their supporters and willingly not tolerate them. Many of the billion other Muslims are currently on our side in the terrorism war.

 

[Sam]

The big problem with the "War on Terrorism" is how to find and deal with the few thousand violent Islamofascists among a billion other Muslims. And the problem is compounded when the adherents to Islam choose, by the millions, to actively support, passively support, or willingly tolerate the Islamofascists

Actually it's quite easy. You bait them into a a remote area and kill them as soon as they stick their pointy little heads up.

The Bait, US Military
Locations, Iraq

Sam

 

[Joejojoba111]

Bad example. Istanbul isn't a state, it's a city in Turkey, and while Turkey is overwhelmingly Muslim the government is seculkar, not Islamic. And that doesn't sit well with the radical Islamicist fundamentalists, who don't care much for Turkey at all.

I should have elaborated, I was thinking about when Instanbul was fresh, as Constantinople had undergone some, changes.


As for Japan surrendering - they had been putting out peace feelers for some time, but their sticking point was to do with treatment of the Emporer. In the end the Russians forced Truman's hand, and Japan was induced to peace with both the carrot and the stick.


As for terrorism... Oklamhoma gov't building was Christian terrorism. Unibomber was Christian terrorism. Those Norweigian guys, those Basque guys, those Italian guys, and most importantly, those Irish guys, all Christian terrorists. ALLL those terrorists in South America, Christian Terrorists.

OBVIOUSLY with that evidence it is now proven that Christianity is waging a war on democracy. All western nations should gather together to wipe out Christianity, as it will not stop until all vestiges of Democracy are extinguished.

 

[Strings]

could somebody PLEASE dig up some information on Budhist terrorism? We hear about Christian terrorism, Jewish terrorism, Islamic terrorism, once in a great while Hindu terrorism. I think the Budhists need to be "brought into the fold"...

 

[shootinstudent]

Sri Lanka...buddhist fundamentalist violence is a big problem there.

 

[Boss Spearman]

Toadman, we'll just have to go and save Jessica when the time comes.

 

[Byron Quick]

shootinstudent,

I think you need to go back and look at the historical timeline. Having two nuclear devices dropped on their cities absolutely did NOT strengthen the will of the Japanese people, the Japanese government, or the Japanese military to resist. They capitulated immediately thereafter for a reason-they believed that more were coming if they didn't.

You've read a good deal about Islam. Tell you what: talk with some Iraqi Christian, Egyptian Coptic Christians, Lebanese Marionite Christians, and Arab Jews about how enlightened they found (or find) living under Islamic rule is.

For some reason, ALL of the ones I've talked to (and I've talked to representatives of all the ones I mentioned) have no intention of subjecting themselves to Islamic rule ever again.

All of them tell of assaults up to murder and rape committed against their people by Muslims that are totally ignored by the authorities. That doesn't sound too enlightened to me.

Hunter Rose,

I don't know of any instances of Buddhist terrorism. However, Buddhists have a pretty violent history and a histoy of war. The Empire of Japan was predominantly Buddhist during the time of the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.

 

[Joejojoba111]

"I don't know of any instances of Buddhist terrorism. However, Buddhists have a pretty violent history and a histoy of war. The Empire of Japan was predominantly Buddhist during the time of the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere."

I think that's a negative, there was a resurgance of Shintoism, iirc, ancestor worship and whatnot, along with pronouncement of warrior-like stuff in general.

"I think you need to go back and look at the historical timeline. Having two nuclear devices dropped on their cities absolutely did NOT strengthen the will of the Japanese people, the Japanese government, or the Japanese military to resist. They capitulated immediately thereafter for a reason-they believed that more were coming if they didn't."

I suppose technically they might not have strengthened their will, but that depends on issues like propaganda. The local media could easily have presented the situation as one which the Japanese people must try EXTRA hard to defeat the enemy because their emporer was threatened by these new weapons.

Otherwise, you will notice that when their islands were conquered, often Japanese entire families would jump off cliffs together, rather than fall into the hands of the Americans. There is not a heck of a lot more resolve you can add to that. Thus, you see, fear of death was NOT a motivator. And truthfully they had little to fear, because there was honestly not much left to be bombed. LeMay, in reality, was running low on targets.


"You've read a good deal about Islam. Tell you what: talk with some Iraqi Christian, Egyptian Coptic Christians, Lebanese Marionite Christians, and Arab Jews about how enlightened they found (or find) living under Islamic rule is."

I think you'll find that people treat different people negatively, everywhere. Even places where there are laws against treating different people differently. The point was simply that there was at least some mechanism for co-existence, which is more than can be said for most.



"All of them tell of assaults up to murder and rape committed against their people by Muslims that are totally ignored by the authorities. That doesn't sound too enlightened to me."

My personal code tells me not to decide which cultures are enlightened, or not.

 

[p35]

See my sig line.

I also think we need to keep this in proportion. While 9/11 was a tragedy and a disaster, it was hardly a long term victory for Al Quaeda. The continued existence and stability of the US was never threatened, and those Al Quaeda leaders that aren't dead or in US custody are sneaking around the mountains on the Afghan/Pakistan border hiding from US Special Forces. They still pull something off once in a while, but they were a lot stronger before 9/11.

Compare that to some of the other crises this nation has survived. The Civil War was probably the worst, both in numbers killed and the threat to national survival. WWII was a far bigger struggle, and Pearl Harbor was a bigger disaster. If we react to this situation by giving up who we are and what we stand for, we're letting the tail wag the dog.

 

[RealGun]

See my sig line.

I also think we need to keep this in proportion. While 9/11 was a tragedy and a disaster, it was hardly a long term victory for Al Quaeda. The continued existence and stability of the US was never threatened, and those Al Quaeda leaders that aren't dead or in US custody are sneaking around the mountains on the Afghan/Pakistan border hiding from US Special Forces. They still pull something off once in a while, but they were a lot stronger before 9/11.

Compare that to some of the other crises this nation has survived. The Civil War was probably the worst, both in numbers killed and the threat to national survival. WWII was a far bigger struggle, and Pearl Harbor was a bigger disaster. If we react to this situation by giving up who we are and what we stand for, we're letting the tail wag the dog.

I read this and thought your version of the facts needed to be refined a bit.

If 9/11 was not a victory for OBL, we are making it into one.

Special forces are not in Pakistan, a country that smiles nicely but won't allow an American, especially military, to set foot in the country. They wouldn't even allow us in to assist with the recent earthquake aftermath.

They harbor al Quaida and everyone should know that. They claim to be looking for OBL and friends, but there is never any news about how they are doing that, who they have caught, where they are looking, etc.

Pakistan has nukes and is governed by a military dictatorship, so everyone is kissing up and walking around on tip toes, pretending like they are friends.

 

[The Real Hawkeye]

Well, that qualifies me as an isolationist then. The "world community" wants to disarm us and criticize us and hate us while at the same time accepting our money and offerings to help them out. I'm sick of the UN in particular and wish we'd kick them out of the US and withdraw.

Nope. There you go again. Using the language of your ideological enemies. What your position makes you is an advocate of armed neutrality, not isolation. Isolationist is an intentional insult directed at the Old Right in America, who favored armed neutrality, i.e., no foreign entanglements, while being prepared at the same time to kick butt if our nation is attacked. Bush's action against Afghanistan, for example, is perfectly consistent with armed neutrality, while the invasion of Iraq was not.

By the way, you were great in Open Range. I loved the line, "It's a pretty day for making things right."

 

[longeyes]

I think it's entirely possible that all the carpet bombing in World War II actually made the fighting last longer because it created bitterness, hatred, and resolve in people who would otherwise have no personal reasons to hate the Allies.

Yeah, it was all sweetness and light in Nanking, wasn't it?

Hey, let's all go back to that golden age when Islam ruled the earth and everything was harmonious. Now that was...when exactly?

Message to all you L.A.-haters: Envy is a terrible, and pathetic, thing.

 

[shootinstudent]

Byron,

They capitulated immediately thereafter for a reason-they believed that more were coming if they didn't.

That is true, the surrender followed quickly the bombings. That doesn't mean that the nuke bombings on two cities or a full scale ground invasion were the only ways to get surrender, but I have to admit it came more quickly after the two bombings. Did that justify it? I'm not sure....but I want to make clear that I don't bash the WWII generation for it. In my mind, the important part is after the war. Rebuilding is what made WWII a moral war, not destruction. If all we had done was carpet bomb and nuke, and then leave the rubble behind, I don't think people here would speak of WWII the same way they do now.

Tell you what: talk with some Iraqi Christian, Egyptian Coptic Christians, Lebanese Marionite Christians, and Arab Jews about how enlightened they found (or find) living under Islamic rule is.

I've talked with all four, and some Iranian jews. I think it's just as important to ask a non "Salafist" or "Wahhabist" Muslim how Islamic he thinks the rule in those countries is. I don't think you'll find too many Muslims out there who like living under those regimes either. I never have defended the dictator states, and I won't...but they're dictators for a reason. It's not because they have lots of grassroots support in the Muslim world.

And if you look at similar economic and political conditions in other religions/regions, you will find all the same problems. To me, that is good evidence that we should refrain from blaming the religion and focus on the political and social problems first.

Until recently, Lebanon wasn't under Muslim rule...I don't think anyone but a few tiny cults and the Alawhites themselves pretend that the Alawhites who run Syria are in fact Muslim. The terrorists do not really care about religion, what they care about is control, which is why they cooperate readily with people they believe are heretics (Iranians included if you mean Wahhabi terrorists), and they go around killing Muslims even more than they do christians.