NationStates Jolt Archive

Short answer: duh!

Long answer: Well no friggin shit Sherlock! A blind three legged dog burying shit on a frozen pond could've told you that.

Edit - I am teh uber thwead usurper!

and borderline trolling* (from the left?), but I feel that the topic would bring up a healthy discussion. Well, maybe.

By having a 'War on Terror', and pretending terrorists are a huge threat to our/your national security, are we letting the terrorists win? If so, then what the hell is the United States thinking?

BTW, right wing trolls, the definition of a terrorist is 'a person who terrorizes or frightens others'. Just thought I'd let you in on that little secret.

*although not on purpose, I promise you. More just a controversial topic than anything.

Well, then you're not trolling.

Repeating your arguments with little statement of evidence, fact, or reason, and then managing to argue those points with a "I'm right, you're wrong" sort of ego is trolling.

Don't worry.

Yes. Terrorists, by definition, wish to inspire terror. And America certainly seems like a terrified country.

If 'the terrorists' want to hate our freedoms and essential liberties (I, and they, disagree with that premise, but just for arguments sake) then curbing those essential liberties and freedoms in the name of fighting terror in essence surrenders to that goal.

So yes.

Again, I don't agree with the premise that they 'hate our freedoms...(don't tell Canada [/David Cross from It's Not Even Funny...makes sense when you hear it).'

It's interesting and just occurring to me now that we've flipped. Our revolution, or so we're taught, was largely successful by being an unconventional enemy against a nation that insisted on dealing with us in a conventional way. Now, two hundred plus years on we're facing an unconventional enemy (yes, there are people that want to do harm to western nations, I just disagree on the remaining details) with a conventional force. It didn't work in 1776, it didn't work in east Asia, and it won't work here. It's not an army 'we're facing,' we're going about this the wrong way. The over all increase in terrorism since the invasions are proof of that.

Yes. Terrorists, by definition, wish to inspire terror. And America certainly seems like a terrified country.

When it's not terrorizing others in turn, sure.

Was that a subtle anti-american jab? :D

No.

It wasn't subtle.


But then again, what else is 'shock and awe' supposed to have been?

When it's not terrorizing others in turn, sure.

Was that a subtle anti-american jab? :D

It's almost ironic the degree to which 'terrorists-freedom fighters' have influenced US foreign policy in a way they never could have through conventional means. The US has again reared it's ugly aggressivist military intervention head and everyone hates it.

No.

It wasn't subtle.


But then again, what else is 'shock and awe' supposed to have been?

Covert attempts to remove enemies of the state peacefully and without harm to civilians?

The thing is about the "war on terror" is that it's not truly a war on terror, but instead a war on Islamic extremists.

We could honestly care less about bosnian, czech, or armenian terrorists (of which there are an overwhelming amount). Sure, we pat Russia on the head and say "poor you" but we don't really do anything about it.

Now, that said, I find the war on Islamic extremists very imparative. The liberal media has portrayed the war as a bunch of war mongering heartless generals going around killing innocent civilians and senseless american casualties.

However, the truth is, we don't kill civilians intentionally, terrorists by their very nature hide (literally and figuratively) behind innocent civilians to make us look bad and them look like freedom fighters.

Also, there are quite a few reports, media wise and government reports that suggest that saddam hussein did have WMD's and was funding terrorist organizations, in fact there is a general of the Iraqui army who was Saddam's right hand man who disclosed that his WMD's were transported into Libya, however, Libya is unwilling to open up it's borders to a UN inspection.

So, in short, the war is very neccesary, and in fighting it we might be somewhat accomplishing their goals, but think about the past 5 years, or rather the last 6 months, and how many terrorist operations were busted (ie the big bust in England).

Also, there are quite a few reports, media wise and government reports that suggest that saddam hussein did have WMD's


So? I can just as easily say that there are quite a few reports that George Bush is hung like a baby carrot. I wouldn't expect anyone to believe me though - not unless I had something like, oh I don't know - some evidence to back it up.

*ahem*

So? I can just as easily say that there are quite a few reports that George Bush is hung like a baby carrot. I wouldn't expect anyone to believe me though - not unless I had something like, oh I don't know - some evidence to back it up.

*ahem*

I believe it.

I believe it.

If it was, would explain why he overcompensates with big military blastfests that turn into quagmires.

If it was, would explain why he overcompensates with big military blastfests that turn into quagmires.

Indeed.

So? I can just as easily say that there are quite a few reports that George Bush is hung like a baby carrot. I wouldn't expect anyone to believe me though - not unless I had something like, oh I don't know - some evidence to back it up.

*ahem*
Not a carrot, but i don't have to take you to task on your claim.
http://www.madcowprod.com/bush_pretzel.jpg

So, the OP is saying we should just not fight it and let it happen to show we aren't afraid?

So, the OP is saying we should just not fight it and let it happen to show we aren't afraid?

http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/I-Am-a-Rock-lyrics-Simon-and-Garfunkel/0B30FE760E5158E548256896000E708E

Yeah! Same reason why the current pope stopped riding around in a bulletproof mobile!

BTW, right wing trolls, the definition of a terrorist is 'a person who terrorizes or frightens others'. Just thought I'd let you in on that little secret.


So the guys and gals who make Doctor Who with the express intention of frightening children are terrorists?

So the guys and gals who make Doctor Who with the express intention of frightening children are terrorists?

Ah, so that was the point of Doctor Who!

So the guys and gals who make Doctor Who with the express intention of frightening children are terrorists?

Actually Daleks were orignally supposed to be adorable, uplifting and very gregarious children's show mascots.

"CE-LE-BRATE!! CE-LE-BRATE!! CE-LE-BRATE!!"

the definition of a terrorist is 'a person who terrorizes or frightens others'.
I disagree. I looked up the definition in the Oxford American Dictionary and found "a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims." Terrorism is defined as "the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims." So, I suppose you could say that the "War on Terror" creates terror itself, and it probably is not hurting the political careers of the people behind it. But simply terrifying people (however wrong) is not terrorism, and we would only let them be winning if in addition to terrifying people, the War on Terror aided the political aims of the terrorists, which it doesn't. It's not always safe defining a word based on its roots or origin, otherwise anyone that was hysterical would have an uterus.

So? I can just as easily say that there are quite a few reports that George Bush is hung like a baby carrot. I wouldn't expect anyone to believe me though - not unless I had something like, oh I don't know - some evidence to back it up.

*ahem*


There is evidence. Did you read the whole post? Hussein's five star general right hand man said he signed off on the papers shipping the WMD's to Libya. It's a public domain interview, go search for it if you want.

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:Go4uUgF6KKcJ:willinghamcomm.presskit247.com/EDocs/Site194/Poll%2520Says%2520Iraq%2520Top%2520Problem%2520to%2520Americans.doc+Iraqi+general+discloses+WMD+loca tion&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us



There's your precious evidence. However, after reading this a second time, he moved them into Syria not Libya, this doesn't change the principle though.

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:Go4uUgF6KKcJ:willinghamcomm.presskit247.com/EDocs/Site194/Poll%2520Says%2520Iraq%2520Top%2520Problem%2520to%2520Americans.doc+Iraqi+general+discloses+WMD+loca tion&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

There's your precious evidence. However, after reading this a second time, he moved them into Syria not Libya, this doesn't change the principle though.

Yeah, not proof. His claims are quite illogical as well. I believe he's just playing the US for a fool, and trying to sell his book. There is little or no evidence to back up his statement...

Yeah, not proof. His claims are quite illogical as well. I believe he's just playing the US for a fool, and trying to sell his book. There is little or no evidence to back up his statement...

See how that works, kids? Robonic - back of the class.