Terrorism - Threats and Realities

[thanuk]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/07/threat ... index.html

We have raised our terrorism threat level to its second highest point, because we believe that the Al Queda terrorist network is planning to launch an attack as a pre-emptive strike, now that war in Iraq is a foregone conclusion. I am confident in this country's ability to protect itself from terrorism, even in this heightened time of risk. But i believe the reality of the situation is that terrorist attacks won't be coming to the U.S., although i do believe there will be an attempt made somewhere.

If you look at the way this group has been operating post 9/11, you will see why its just not very likely. Terrorists in general, and in particular these terrorists(al queda) have a tendency to strike at the weakest possible target. 9/11, aside from the fact that it was on U.S. soil, is a perfect example. They hijacked planes from the airports with the worst security in our country, at a time when the threat of terrorism seemed surrealistic; it was happening in other parts of the world, but it couldn't really happen here. Well, now we realize our mistake; we know that it can happen here, and we are looking for it.

This is why i believe that terrorists will not strike on U.S. soil. Not because they don't want to, but because of the risk involved. A failed attack gets them nothing; in fact it would weaken their cause severely if we thwarted a major terrorist strike at this stage of the game. So they will be looking for something weaker; some place easier to strike, but someplace where a successful attack would still get the desired effect of both instilling fear, and in this case, making America look defenseless against them. So where do we look? UK? Possibly, but unlikely for the same reason. The more i think about it, the more i tend to look southward. Mexico? Any number of countries in central/south America? This is where i think a severe terrorist threat is being overlooked.

America has stood the protector of our neighbors to the south for a very long time now; since the monroe doctorine was written, there has been no question that America is 100% behind any of our southern neighbors. But that is only in the event of military action with countries outside our region. We do not govern these countries, nor do we run their military or law enforcement(for the most part). Many of these countries do not have the wealth or security anywhere near what we enjoy in the U.S., and so are not capable of successfully defending themselves from terrorism the way that we are. But in international eyes, we still stand their protectors, and a strike against them is as good as a strike against us. The opportunity is there, the chance for a successful mission is a great deal higher than if they were on U.S. soil, and the same desired effect will result. If anything, i worry about a terrorist pre-emptive strike in Mexico.

This is just a theory of mine, and it has pretty much 0 information to back it up other than the information included above. I'd love to hear other people's thoughts, because the more i read about the heightened threat of terrorism, and how Al Queda preys on weak nations like Kenya, i wonder how there is no serious consideration of these kinds of terrorist attacks. Thoughts?

[Ashiwi]

Actually Mexico has been weighing heavily in my mind recently, but not because of the potential for terrorist acts to be struck against it. In comparison to Mexico the US is one large, sprawling metroplex, and our borders are not 100% policed at any time. Powell mentioned vehicles which are small enough to be incredibly difficult to detect, have a 500 KM travel distance on auto-pilot and are capable of carrying and disseminating bio-toxins, if I heard him correctly. The odds of them successfully pulling something like that off are pretty slim, heck, the odds of them getting equipment like that 500 KM from our southernmost most populated cities seems a little on the fantastic side, but I can't say the thought hasn't occurred to me more than once.

[Chandigar2]

Another thing to consider, is that all this airport security you see when you go through, is far FAR from 100% reliable. I wouldn't even say 50% reliable. Most of it is to give people the illusion of safety so as that they'll feel better when flying IMHO.

Our company does a lot of airport work (airside and terminal side) and if someone was really determined to get something onto an airplane or to sneak onto the runway, they can. Its just not possible to provide airtight security.

My opinion (purely my opinon here): for the terrorists, life is cheap, and a tiny canister of biotoxins aren't much more expensive. If they want to set 50 off in the US, they'll send 100 and still get what they want if 1/2 are caught.

I'd be really interested to see the opinions of people with more intimate (personal ie working there) knowledge/experience in airport security though.

[Salen]

All you need is a small turboprop (easy enough to get, good amount of cash or better thief) a good mix of chemical agents (VX etc.) and a secluded stretch of paved road (Northern Mexico). Keep low to the ground till you reach ... San Diego/ El Paso/Houston/San Antonio/Pheonix (you get the idea) release the payload/crash it into a populated area (Rush hour). Go during the day(so lack of navigation eq doesn't matter) and the likelihood anyone will get to you in time is not good (40 min flight that looks like a private plane/cropduster).

I told friends years ago I expected a cargo plane with explosives to be flown into a major population, something like a big college football game, Florida/Florida State, Michigan Game, Aztec Stadium etc(large population stadiums). I was off a little on the execution of the plan was all. I got Plane, huge population, and emense telvision coverage. I missed type of plane (though 747 and C130 are similar) and type of population(though close to same number).

Unfortunately, I know that someday my next guess will come true too. :(

[Gurns]

A failed attack gets them nothing; in fact it would weaken their cause severely if we thwarted a major terrorist strike at this stage of the game.

A failed attack loses them little but that team or teams. Perception: "The mighty U.S. has spent gazillions of dollars hunting for terrorists and, no surprise, has found some." Some loss of face for failed attack. Not total loss, because you've got the rallying cry "The Great Satan has captured our heros, but we will never give up! Their sacrifice is not in vain!"

A successful attack gets them a huge bonanza: "The mighty U.S. has spent gazillions of dollars and couldn't stop us!"

Therefore, target = U.S. They may lose a few teams, but ultimately one will be successful.

The only reason not to attack the U.S. is if they have (a) very few teams in the country, so the loss of even one is significant, or (b) they've got something even more major and more likely to be successful in the works.

Non-U.S. targets are attacked to give the minor league terrorists practice, to serve as a distraction, and to spread thin the counter-terrorism resources. (As soon as we stop protecting those, they launch a major attack there, and boast how the U.S. couldn't protect whatever.) Note that, when the war starts, targets inside countries participating in the invasion become almost as good as U.S. targets.

[Abue]

Will today be the day? The feds think so. I guess we will see.

[Yarash]

Hmm, I agree with you, Thanuk. But I don't think an attack in Mexico would have the same results as an attack in the U.S. I'd say the farther an attack is from the U.S., the less nervous it makes Americans.

Example: Our soldiers are shot at all the time in Afghanistan (sp) but I don't think Americans are too nervous as a result (except perhaps soldiers positioned there). Yet when the serial sniper was shooting at, and killing people, Americans were scared; they altered their routines, wore helmets at gas stations, etc...

- Mike

[Guest]

quote: America has stood the protector of our neighbors to the south for a very long time now; since the monroe doctorine was written, there has been no question that America is 100% behind any of our southern neighbors.

You mean like when we demolished the democratically elected Guatamalan government back in the 50's and replaced it with a fascist military regime which murdered the common people for decades?
(The guatamalan gov't was socialist and stood for free public health care which we STILL dont have, along with the reclaiming of over 90% of Guatamala's farmable land from the United Fruit Corp. (now known as Chiquita) who take away billions of dollars of profits thru the banana exports, depriving guatamalan citizens of the right to farm their own land for their own food, and all without giving them a cent of the billions in annual profits. yes bananas are a billion dollar industry.

Or..you mean like when we demolished the democratically elected government in Nicaragua, using the CIA to train paramilitary troups for terrorist actions against the people of Nicaragua? This case was made famous by the Iran/Contra scandal, where we illegally sold weapons to Iran to fund the Contras down there. The USA, btw, was convicted by the WORLD COURT for international terrorism in regards to these 'friendly' times, when we authorized, funded, planned, and directed an attack on Nicaraguas most important port, blowing up several oil depots and sinking several cargo ships, from lands such as venezuala and france.

Or perhaps you mean when our favorite down-south man, Noriega, in Panama, stopped following orders and we had to have a little war down there to clean up this big bad drug dealer (he had been running narco for YEARS while on US payroll). The barriors (spanish for ghetto) where incidentally attacked by US aircraft. At least 1000 civilians dead in Panama City.

Or how about, when we forced Equador onto a worldbank economic program designed to foster American/British interests, under the guise of economic redevelopment and introduction to a new world economy. One stipend required for hefty worldbank loans: privatize the national water utility. Result: water prises to the impoverished 3rd world citizens jumped over a thousand percent, to almost a third of their daily wages, with all profits going to a foreign company now in control of the utility. Thats 1/3rd of their very little money just going to water. Equador ultimately backs out of this 'deal' and reclaims the water utility, setting prices back down. Result: Loss of millions of dollars in aid, public international condemnation of their unwillingness to 'modernize'

OR....How about the fact that Columbia, simply the nastiest, most violent, most corrupt, longest list of HORRID human rights violations, least democratic country in ALL of south america, for some reason receives more than 90% of all American foreign aid to the south and middle american countries.

Or still...how about when we ASSASSINATED the democratically elected president in Chile (gasp, he was also socialistic) and replaced him with Pinochet, the fascist military dictator who murdered THOUSANDS and is certaintly guilty of gross humanitarian violations and warcrimes.

Yeah. we help our 'friends.' Very democratically, peacefully, and legally. Sure. This stuff is true, and we do it all around the world. None of you should be surprised about the terrorist attacks, but if anything gets attacked in south america, it WILL be american corporations who own it.

[Abue]

Hey Grorrakk, try sending that Denmark army to attack Mexico and see what happens? There may be a lot of problems through out history on the American continants but no country from over seas will ever survive an invasion of any part of America, North or South, any time soon.

[kolasi]

Yeah the States kicks some butt in South America!

Grrorrak brought up up some great examples how. SOuth America with a "protector" like that has not really progressed. So, I can see the idea of the States proecting it own interests in south america, but the notion that the states is actually protecting the interests of those countries is ridiculous.

The big fish eats the little one, its been like that since the beginning of time, just now the big fish is trying to convince us that it is 'helping' the little fish

[thanuk]

The USA, btw, was convicted by the WORLD COURT for international terrorism in regards to these 'friendly' times...

Ok i dont really wanna go point by point concerning the GLARING BIAS in all of those statements, but i do have just one question...

Is this the same court that is already trying Tony Blair for war crimes in a war with Iraq, when the war hasn't started yet? Or is it the court that functions on the U.N. legislation on human rights that is headed by Libya?

Your conspiracy theories are great and all, but you should get a bit more grounded in reality. I have convicted everyone except myself of war crimes in my own Super duper imperial court of the universe, but nobody seems to care about that either.

[Guest]

The court is part of the United Nations, which is an attempt at world democracy by the majority of the worlds nations. Unfortunately, the U.N. is repeatedly thwarted in its efforts to govern the world democratically by the U.S.A, which will have nothing to do whatsoever with any cause that undermines US power, no matter how democratic it is. Strange, considering that the UN is basically an american conception (Roosevelt, League of Nations) intended to spread our wonderful views and values to the whole world. Read: American dream for all.

The business about Blair and Iraq is not nearly so ironic as you might hold in your CNN head. The war in Iraq has NOT stopped. There have been constant air strikes in that country for the last 12 years. Constant. The nofly zones, purely an american invention, were NOT conceived by the UN and are in fact against international law, as are the sanctions, which violate basic human rights laws, as agreed upon by the USA.
Therefor we have this case against Blair, which should be actually extended to other criminals, but which is unfortunately more of a political ploy, in that the UN is almost completely under the USA's economic thumb. (nice of us to impinge a single power over a democratic government. VERY democratic of us.)

As far as my base in reality, none of what I said in my last post is a conspiracy theory (but damn straight it was planned), ALL of it is documented, quite thoroughly. Try lookin some of it up, in the library, or through the Associated Press. Better yet, go to your local university, and ask the professors in hispanic culture about american foreign policy in those countries. You will probably just call them crazy liers too. But at some point you are going to have to ask yourself, just why do so many people hate the US so much. Really. Why september 11th? There are real reasons, for real hatred, spread throughout most of this very real and frightening world. If you really want to protect yourself, better open up your mind and start educating yourself.

[thanuk]

Move to France. You will find your views more widely accepted if you live in a place that beleives diplomacy is important, even if it does not have the force to back up such diplomacy.

The U.N. is most definately not under the thumb of the United States. If it were, we would already be in a formal war with Iraq, instead of standing around and waiting for the approval of countries who will have no impact upon the war. But you seem to lose grasp of a fundamental concept of the U.N. and the way the world in general works : The things you say only matter if you have the force to back them up. The United States does, other countries do not. Therefore when the United States speaks, people listen. When Somalia speaks, no one cares. That is also why the U.N. is under our economic thumb. Every other country has had opportunity to contribute money and supplies to all the undertakings of the U.N. They choose not to. We choose to pay for these things, so obviously we will have more say as to what is done with them. If that doesn't make sense to you, then you better go back to kindergarden.

You want to know why the U.S. could give a flying fuck what the U.N. has to say? Because their words have nothing behind them. The U.N. speaks, and nothing happens. NATO speaks, and nothing happens. There is no reason to respect the words of any judicial body if they are not willing to back up those words. Iraq is doing the exact same thing right now. Unfortunately for them, the only countries that EVER back up ANYTHING the U.N. says are the United States, England, and Australia, and these three countries stand ready to oppose Iraq. When the french start contributing money and supplies and troops to the undertakings of the U.N., is when the opinion of the french will matter to the countries who DO supply that money and those troops. Until that happens, the U.S. will continue to thwart any U.N. action that would directly undermine U.S. power. When we do, every other country is free to supply the money and manpower to support these actions without the U.S. involved, and every time they choose not to. As for our humanitarian violations, who is the head of the committee who rules on those violations? Oh, is it Libya? Thats like being told to practice abstinence by a porn star. What gives the U.N. the right to decide where nofly zones will and will not be? Was it their troops who fought the gulf war? Was it their troops who protected Kuwait? Sure, a few hundred of them, supplemented by 10's of thousands of American and British soldiers. Very democratic the way its always our soldiers, our supplies and our money that the U.N. would like to decide the fate of.

So you can site any instance of U.S. maltreatment of the world, but it doesn't matter. The average citizen of a third world country has no idea that these events ever occured, nor do they care. Yet they continue to hate the United States, because their political and religious leaders tell them that we are evil.

Eventually you come to the root of the problem, is that the U.S. is rich, and other countries are poor. We have, and they do not, and that is why they hate us. I can't say i wouldn't see it the same way in their position, but i am not about to give up that which i have to appease the will of a militant islamic fundamentalist. So we can either give up our riches and live in poverty so that the world will accept us, or we can defend that which we have against those who would see it destroyed. I, and every other American who has served or supported war since the revolution, have chosen the latter. If you would choose the former, then feel free to emigrate to the middle east. Its a free country, nobody is stopping you.

[kolasi]

Move to France. You will find your views more widely accepted if you live in a place that beleives diplomacy is important, even if it does not have the force to back up such diplomacy..

Ok, diplomacy is not defined as having force to back up your views. It is a means of arguing and looking after your interests through negotiations. If im carrying a gun and you are not, and we are discussing a topic, and i win the argument, well, that isnt diplomacy.

So you can site any instance of U.S. maltreatment of the world, but it doesn't matter. The average citizen of a third world country has no idea that these events ever occured, nor do they care. Yet they continue to hate the United States, because their political and religious leaders tell them that we are evil.
..

Oh, im sure people in Kenya who didnt have medicine after the states bombed their main pharmeceutical factory (and later apolozised for the mistake) have an idea.

Eventually you come to the root of the problem, is that the U.S. is rich, and other countries are poor. We have, and they do not, and that is why they hate us. I can't say i wouldn't see it the same way in their position, but i am not about to give up that which i have to appease the will of a militant islamic fundamentalist. So we can either give up our riches and live in poverty so that the world will accept us, or we can defend that which we have against those who would see it destroyed. I, and every other American who has served or supported war since the revolution, have chosen the latter. If you would choose the former, then feel free to emigrate to the middle east. Its a free country, nobody is stopping you.

Btw the Swiss are rich too, I dont see anyone hating them. Its not the riches that bother people, thats the main reason they immigrate to the US. Its the meddleing in thier affairs is what they dont like. Im sure 80% of the chinese believe occupying tibet is a good thing too. But tibetans dont hate china cause the standard of living is higher..[/quote]

[thanuk]

Ok, diplomacy is not defined as having force to back up your views. It is a means of arguing and looking after your interests through negotiations. If im carrying a gun and you are not, and we are discussing a topic, and i win the argument, well, that isnt diplomacy.

Diplomacy is negotiating. Negotiating only works if you have something to offer, be it reward or punishment. Take your own example, you have a gun, and i do not. Therefore you win. I have nothing to offer to make you see things my way, you have the threat of death to offer as an ultimatum to see things your way. This is exactly how diplomacy works, although the bargaining chips dont always involve use of force, they often do.

Oh, im sure people in Kenya who didnt have medicine after the states bombed their main pharmeceutical factory (and later apolozised for the mistake) have an idea.

Must've been those same kenyans who we gave monetary and medical relief to, after the terrorist attack on their hotel and plane! But of course, none of the good things we do ever count, because they are merely expected of us.

Btw the Swiss are rich too, I dont see anyone hating them. Its not the riches that bother people, thats the main reason they immigrate to the US. Its the meddleing in thier affairs is what they dont like. Im sure 80% of the chinese believe occupying tibet is a good thing too. But tibetans dont hate china cause the standard of living is higher..

Meddling, not meddling, does it matter? N. Korea and Iraq hate us for meddling in their affairs. Ireland hates us for not meddling in their affairs and giving northern ireland back. Its either something we do or something we dont do that people find a justification for hating the U.S., but that hatred existed before the justification was present. Ever heard the old expression, "Just give me a reason...", well thats what they want. They already hate the U.S., they just need a reason to justify that hatred.

Your example of China and Tibet do not apply here. That situation existed long before the United States was even a country. It is the equivalent of claiming that Arabs and Jews only began hating each other when Israel was established as a country. That battle has been fought for thousands of years, and will continue for thousands more, regardless of economic conditions, and regardless of the U.S.'s "meddling".

[Snurgt]

I have convicted everyone except myself of war crimes in my own Super duper imperial court of the universe, but nobody seems to care about that either.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Now thats comedy!

[Chandigar2]

Ok, diplomacy is not defined as having force to back up your views. It is a means of arguing and looking after your interests through negotiations. If im carrying a gun and you are not, and we are discussing a topic, and i win the argument, well, that isnt diplomacy.

Diplomacy is negotiating. Negotiating only works if you have something to offer, be it reward or punishment. Take your own example, you have a gun, and i do not. Therefore you win. I have nothing to offer to make you see things my way, you have the threat of death to offer as an ultimatum to see things your way. This is exactly how diplomacy works, although the bargaining chips dont always involve use of force, they often do.

di·plo·ma·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-plm-s)
n.
The art or practice of conducting international relations, as in negotiating alliances, treaties, and agreements.
Tact and skill in dealing with people. See Synonyms at tact.

coercion

n 1: the act of compelling by force of authority 2: using force to cause something: "though pressed into rugby under compulsion I began to enjoy the game"; "they didn`t have to use coercion" [syn: compulsion]



In reality, you're right tho Thanuk, thats how "diplomacy" works... but thats not what diplomacy should be.

According to your definition of diplomacy, the dude that held up the 7-11 is a diplomat too :D

He just negotiated with the guy at the counter to give him all of the store's money. :wink:

[Daz]

..

[thanuk]

According to your definition of diplomacy, the dude that held up the 7-11 is a diplomat too :D

He just negotiated with the guy at the counter to give him all of the store's money. :wink:

Indeed he did! Luckily for the store owner, our country has laws that prevent that type of negotiating. And in theory, the U.N. is supposed to prevent that type of negotiating as well. The difference? In the U.S., the police will come to your house with guns, arrest you, try you, and if found guilty, will lock you in a little metal box for a long time to think about what you have done.

In the U.N., they will give you money and supplies to stop(North Korea), and send the bill to good old uncle sam.
Great deal if your North Korea, not so sweet when you're Uncle Sam.

[Guest]

Quote from Thanuk:Every other country has had opportunity to contribute money and supplies to all the undertakings of the U.N. They choose not to. We choose to pay for these things, so obviously we will have more say as to what is done with them. If that doesn't make sense to you, then you better go back to kindergarden.

Actually, every country ON THIS PLANET who is in the UN and who can afford, pays their dues. The ONLY nation which does not do so, is the United States of America. The US owes BILLIONS of dollars to UN, which is only one of the ways in which we (CUZ YEAH IM A GOD-BLESSED AMERICAN TOO) get them under financial pressure. Other ways include blatant trade wars and other economic warfare measures, usually designed to cause voting countries to change their votes.

But you seem to argue that might makes right. Hitler said the EXACT same words. Also a popular phrase with Stalin. But hey, its the USof mutha fuggin goodness A. The world can trust us. We stand for Truth, Life, and Liberty for ALL! BZZZZZZ! WRONG! The record already shows FAR too often, that we stand for american interests. You even state the plain fact, thanuk, in among your arguments based mostly on childish ridicule of the opposing ideas.

You state, "Eventually you come to the root of the problem, is that the U.S. is rich, and other countries are poor. We have, and they do not, and that is why they hate us. I can't say i wouldn't see it the same way in their position, but i am not about to give up that which i have to appease the will of a militant islamic fundamentalist. "

Yes. We ARE rich. We got rich by exploiting other people throughout our history (yes, just as they may have done to us if given the chance), and we remain rich by using our wealth and power to CONTINUE exploiting the world. Only NOW, we are so damn rich/powerful, that the scale of exploitation is quite sickening. And NO THANUK, those people DO NOT hate us because we drive nice cars, which they would like to own, or because our houses are modern and sanitary which they would like to have, or even because we get cheap, abundant food, which they are starving to have. They hate us because we get those things by murdering their families and by starving their children, all by surporting repressive regimes and economic systems DESIGNED to tax the poor to feed the rich.
A pity you havent starved, or fed the starving. Perhaps you would understand what hurts them, and give up your so called 'riches', even IF they happened to be a fundamental extremist. Despite what Bush would have you believe, by far and large, most of them are women and children.

But back to your bashing of the U.N. Maybe you like might makes right. Maybe you even believe (quite foolishly) that the US is truly a supreme, immortal power now. But millenia of human civilization have taught us that neither are true. All power corrupts, and all power eventually fails. The UN is an attempt to create a true AMERICAN style democracy for the whole world. What government could POSSIBLY have ANY right to govern the affairs of the world, unless that government was composed of all the people of the world, INCLUDING LYBIANS, for all you really know about them. Would you accept an american governement that was only elected from citizens of california? i doubt it. SO how can you propose that the rest of the world shut its pie hole about things, just because the states has the most power to bomb them to hell and back? what kind of sick, fascist perversion of democracy do you have in your head?

It is clear to me, that you would rather ridicule your 'enemies', and should that fail, kill them (or relocate them to france), rather than actually think things through in a logical, open minded manner. I dont even know why I bother to post on this board, except that maybe, JUST maybe, some people might just crawl out of their patriotic-pridefilled-piehole and open there eyes to the plight of the WORLD, to which they still belong.

If you really had balls, you would read one book. Even if you didnt believe a single word it had to say, you would read it, just to know what the "anti-americans" are talking about. (i hate that phrase...so often labelled it, when i feel SO patriotic about what im trying to do)
Just read the first three chapters, if you cant handle the whole thing.
My bet is, you'll make fun of it and never even look once.
Understanding Power, Noam Chomsky.
Documentation of EVERYTHING in this book on the web site:
www.understandingpower.com
which is quite disturbing to read also.

[thanuk]

we stand for american interests.


Yes. We ARE rich.

...by surporting repressive regimes and economic systems DESIGNED to tax the poor to feed the rich.

What government could POSSIBLY have ANY right to govern the affairs of the world, unless that government was composed of all the people of the world, INCLUDING LYBIANS, for all you really know about them.

what kind of sick, fascist perversion of democracy do you have in your head?

open there eyes to the plight of the WORLD, to which they still belong.

Wow. You have de-railed.

So America is the great evil, but the U.N. is the way of the future! All countries should have a say in what goes on, including those oppressive dictators that we so often put into power, right? Because then everyone would hold hands and hug and all the violence would end! Then we could open our eyes to the plight of the world!

HELLO?! MCFLY!?! We are going to war to liberate a country that is being led by an oppressive dictator. That wonderful U.N. of yours is vetoing the war. Why? Because Iraq owes russia money, and France has good oil contracts! What kind of america bashing bullshit do you have to explain that?

Seriously bro, go get a "Make tea not war" sign and go hang outside the U.N. with your wannabe flower child friends. This is reality. We are america, and we stand for american interests. It is not our job or our concern to protect people of other countries, only our own citizens. But we often go out of our way to police the world, to try and stop at least a little bit of all the terrible things that are going on out there. And every time it doesnt work out for the best people like you scream and blame the oppressive american government. And every time we stand idly by like EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE U.N., people like you scream about how we are a superpower and we should have done something to prevent this terrible tragedy!

[Daz]

*wipes the tears away*

that is so touching :(

[rylan]

The fact that Lybia now chairs the Human Rights board, and that Iraq is slotted to become chair of the Disarmament Comittee pretty much sums up what the UN has become.

[Eilorn]

di·plo·ma·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-plm-s)
n.
The art of saying 'Nice doggie!' while hunting around for a big stick.

Eilorn.

[Sayannah21]

... We all have opinions, and they all suck. I live in a country that afford me the freedom to go out swimming on a hot day, or go out into 14" of snow just to get a pack of cigarettes and maybe a hot dog. Personally, if anyone has problems with the way that things are run, how about you try it and see how easy it is? :-D


Mama Sayannah

[Xisiqomelir]

Grorrak, there is no need for this overexuberant capitalization.

And the UN is an ineffectual and powerless organization with a vastly overinflated sense of self-importance (excepting the WHO and UNHCR).

[Xisiqomelir]

If you really had balls, you would read one book. Even if you didnt believe a single word it had to say, you would read it, just to know what the "anti-americans" are talking about. (i hate that phrase...so often labelled it, when i feel SO patriotic about what im trying to do)
Just read the first three chapters, if you cant handle the whole thing.
My bet is, you'll make fun of it and never even look once.
Understanding Power, Noam Chomsky.
Documentation of EVERYTHING in this book on the web site:
www.understandingpower.com
which is quite disturbing to read also.

That site only had footnotes. Where do I find the chapters of the book itself? (Not that I have a great desire to read any more Noam Chomsky than I have to)

[Guest]

Never said the USA was the 'great evil'

Certainly will point out that the US historically uses its force around the world not to protect people, but to protect its own economic/military interests, most often at the cost of democracy, human lives, human rights, and our environment.

Will agree that all countries are disposed to following their own interests.
Will even agree that the UN has become very stunted (tho will argue this is primarily the USA's fault)

Will finally argue that the US, with its great power and resources, should be fighting to set up a true UN, a true world democracy...because the whole point about democracy was never that everybody would love eachother and hold hands, but that you would get a balance of selfish interests that in the end would pan out to serve the needs of the the people as a whole. MUCH as our own federal government does for us, home in the USA. On top of providing the only legitimate kind of government for the world, according to american values, a world democracy would also take the US out of the precarious position of being the worlds only remaining superpower, at least on the surface (i doubt we will EVER get rid of our 50,000 thermonuclear war heads.) If the UN was backed, not just financially, but governmentally, and gained a truly, functioning status, it would have more than enough respect to spearhead missions around the world, reducing risk to UN troops, and completely removing the necessity of having a national army acting as a world policeman (ie USA). Coincidentally, national armies in foreign countries most often end up fighting and killing the very people they were sent to protect, and they always increase hostilities against their home country. So the US could effectively step out of the quite innappropriate position of world cop (a position we have no legitamacy for other than might makes right) and one that we often abuse. Why do the terrorists hate us? Because in their countries, we are most usually crooked cops breaking arms and stealing money.

Seriously, Im talking about truly spreading american ideals to the world. Most of you are ridiculing the only democratic global governement (rather than pointing out problems and giving possible solutions) and touting Might makes Right across the globe. Lets see how much war mongering, for whatever reasons, will bring peace to this planet. Lets see if dropping bombs on foreign cities will stop people from dropping bombs on us. Or we could just look at the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and realize that violence always leads to escalating violence, unless some sort of Final Victory is achieved (usually the death or total subjugation of an entire people).

Im not stupid, or totally in the clouds, or even an idealist. Practicallity goes a long way. But I don't believe everything bush tells me, and when it comes to having the biggest stick in the world, I dont agree with starving/plundering 3rd world countries in order to develop a bomb that can melt the skin off every man, woman, child, and animal within a fifty mile radius. To me, its an easy ethical call. Its pure evil, hiding behind good intentions.

Btw, the website i gave gives only footnotes...documentation of things in the book. If you want to read the book, buy it or find it at the library.

[Xisiqomelir]

Btw, the website i gave gives only footnotes...documentation of things in the book. If you want to read the book, buy it or find it at the library.

Well, forgive me for not bothering then. I doubt reading another anti-Israeli tirade from a Khmer Rouge apologist would really alter my basically pro-American worldview ;)

[Guest]

My point exactly, that most wouldnt even bother, and choose instead to sit in comfortable pre-disposed judgements that have very little to do with the authors actual view point, tho a lot to do with the worlds problems.
Even if its as easy as going down to the library to check it out.

The book handles mainly on the american power elite, focusing on how the power structure is defined, how it evolved, and how it remains in power. Takes a close look at the media, the US economic structure both at home and abroad, and on american foreign policy over the last fifty years. Also looks at other foreign countries, including world powers, upcoming powers, and 3rd world countries. Has a lot to do with democratic movements around the world, their successes and defeats, and why.

Might give you a good perspective on what exactly the average american citizen has gained, and lost, through the present system.

[Xisiqomelir]

Well, when you debate your references are meant to be more specific than "read this book". Maybe you could quote a paragraph or so to show how this book is so insightful and where exactly it supports your position?

[Guest]

Then read my first message in this thread, where i respond to 'the US has always protected its neighbors to the south.'

Those several examples are all detailed in the book (tho not the first place I read about it) and the coinciding documentation can then be found on the website. I will go thru and find actual footnotes and post them here so you can check his sources yourself, but later, after when im not so tired. I will even find a juicy quote or two, if it makes you feel better, but it will probably be something ive paraphrased already. I will edit this message and put it here.

Quite a lot of what I have said about American foreign policy happens to be in this book btw. Not because its my only source, far from it, but because this book happens to be one of the most extensive sources of concise information covering our history for the past 60 years, or more when you consider Cuba. So if you are interested about exactly what we have been up to out there, it is quite a good read. Especially if one checks the footnotes. Plenty of new material to be found that way.

Two other good reads are:
The new rules of the world, by John Pilger, an Australian journalist who happens to be in the new and quite excellent documentary film, Bowling for Columbine. This book is similiar, but you wont feel that it is so anti-american, as it also describes atrocities commited in South Africa under and after apartheid, and in Australia, as well as US foreign policy in Indonesia (see the East Timor massacres) and Central America. Has a LOT to do with global economics/world bank system.

That movie is awesom btw, and really goes into the question about violent crime and gun control in the US. It NEVER even implies that americans shouldnt have guns btw, it actually says it shouldnt make a difference, using other countries like canada for examples, and goes further to point out possible other reasons for our skyrocketing murder rates. Another highlight; interview with south park guys (who went to columbine highschool) and a small cartoon by them about americas history with firearms. Check www.bowlingforcolumbine.com to see pieces. Very funny. Also check the links inside for serious info on the net, lots of stuff under the operation oily residue link, such as this link about US support of Iraq's biological war machine.
http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html

A final book, very short, very fast read:
Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace; Why they hate us so much. Gore Vidal.
Very short, like 100 pages, covering basics of american foreign policy especially in the middle east. This will ruffle your feathers, but in my opinion tends to be a bit off track/personal sometimes.

[Arilin Nydelahar]

I've entered late in the game here, but here is a rather good article I read. Thought i'd share.
http://www.sierratimes.com/03/02/16/arpubrt021603.htm

[thanuk]

Never said the USA was the 'great evil'

Certainly will point out that the US historically uses its force around the world not to protect people, but to protect its own economic/military interests

Show me one country in the history of mankind that did not. Just one.

Will finally argue that the US, with its great power and resources, should be fighting to set up a true UN, a true world democracy...

Why should the U.S. do this? Any form of world government we have attempted has just become a tool of foreign governments to gain influence over our actions as a nation. It is the weaker countries of the world who should be actively seeking a united international government, because they have the most to gain by forming one. The U.S., as the last remaining superpower, has nothing to gain and everything to lose from an international government.

Why do the terrorists hate us? Because in their countries, we are most usually crooked cops breaking arms and stealing money.

Who cares why they hate us? All that matters is that they do. If you went around changing the way you live your life because someone else disliked it, well you would have to change every day. Our job is not to appease the islamic fundamentalists. Our job is to make life better for other americans. Terrorists, and Iraq have both posed a threat to the security and safety of the american people. Our government is actively eliminating that threat, as well it should.

Seriously, Im talking about truly spreading american ideals to the world. Most of you are ridiculing the only democratic global governement (rather than pointing out problems and giving possible solutions) and touting Might makes Right across the globe. Lets see how much war mongering, for whatever reasons, will bring peace to this planet. Lets see if dropping bombs on foreign cities will stop people from dropping bombs on us. Or we could just look at the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and realize that violence always leads to escalating violence, unless some sort of Final Victory is achieved (usually the death or total subjugation of an entire people).

Views like this completely ignore the american jacksonian tradition. This site corth showed me has a great explanation of the jacksonian tradition and how it shapes the United States policies on foreign affairs:
http://www.nationalinterest.org/issues/58/Mead.html

As for our war mongering and its relation to peace...has there been war in europe since ww2? How is South Korea fairing in comparison to north korea? How are they doing post ww2 in japan? Your sentiments are often reflected in literature, but rarely proven in the real world.

I dont agree with starving/plundering 3rd world countries in order to develop a bomb that can melt the skin off every man, woman, child, and animal within a fifty mile radius. To me, its an easy ethical call. Its pure evil, hiding behind good intentions.

Uhm in case you were confused, we aren't trying to develop any weapons in Iraq. We are trying to prevent them from developing a bomb that can melt the skin off everything in a 50 mile radius. Maybe thats the part you dont understand? We are trying to STOP people from building bombs, not trying to help them build more.

[Guest]

Ummm....maybe try actually reading my post, before you respond, thanuk? Make sure you understand it, too.
For instance youre first quote of me, the very next sentence i go on to say that, yes, everybody does this.
The last quote, if you understand english, goes to say that the USA is developing nasty bombs (doesnt even mention where) and that we extort 3rd world countries to support our economy, which supports our massive weapons program, which supports our economy... Sorry, I said nothing about Iraq or that they are building a bomb.
As far as not helping others...BS, we sell more weapons (including biologicals) than any other nation. Its big business. We sell them even to Iraq. We told the Israelis how to build nuclear weapons. Thats not proliferating them?
As far as the rest of your quote, you are right. There is no reason whatsoever that the USA should help anybody. There is every reason that we should use our power to crush the weaklings of this planet to our own gains. UNLESS you happen to be a human being with a conscience, or at least half a brain when it comes to planning for the long term future.
I feel inclined not to debate with you anymore until you develop either (but preferably both) a brain, so that you can respond logically and not waste people's time, or a heart, because your responses are sickening as far as any moral conscience goes.

[Abue]

Last night CSpan replayed President Nixons resignation speech. It was quite ironic when he talked about how the people in the middle east were our friends and there could actually be an ever lasting peace with the people of the area. There will never be peace in the middle east. Even if the US left the entire region and the Arabs drove Isreal into the sea like they want to, there would be major unrest in the region. Arabs need to hate someone and have this innate need to blow things up. If left to there own devices they would just go into a circular cycle of Hardline oppressive Muslim military government, pissed off little people who blow shit up, unstabilized government fails, New Hardline oppressive Muslim military government steps in.

[Ensis]

Just out of curiosity Grorrak, what do you do for a living?

If you honestly believe there will be a world government someday and everyone will be happy, have the same opportunities, and have food/water/shelter someday you're wrong.

Even in the criminal United States not everyone has food/water/shelter, there are plenty of homeless/jobless to go around. Considering we actually have resources, I would say those countries that do NOT have resources will have a harder time getting this.

Your solution would be to send them money and food. So then we become the crutch. Their existence in a small sandpit with no water and no viable means of economic stability is perpetuated because we send them food and water..why should they get out?

Fine, lets stop meddling in foreign affairs. No more troops in foreign countries, ethnic cleansing?..go for it, none of our business. Invading a neighboring country because they have more oil?..more power to you, trying to take over the world again?..nice!.. give us a call before you get to our continent, because we really don't care about the rest of them.

Beyond that, lets be consistent..no military aid, no food or monetary aid either. If you don't need soldiers, I'm sure you don't need food. We'll just hang onto what we've got just in case the population increases.

Don't be naive Grorrak, so long as humans walk on this earth there will never be peace and equality. Examine the situation now and compare it to 50 or 100 years ago, be happy with where we are at. If you expect perfection, you will die disappointed.

Is war the sign of failed diplomacy?..do you honestly believe that Saddam has done his part these last 11 years in complying with what was put in place when we let him and his army limp back to baghdad?

You, Grorrak, would like Thanuk to look like the bad guy for supporting the barbarism and capitalism that the US is made up of, because he supports a war that you don't believe in. Thanuk has only expressed his views and support of the soldiers that stand up in defense of our nation. You sit on a soapbox trying to make us all feel guilty for having a government that has people killed. Sit there all day quoting obscure de-classified reports about whatever misanthropic deeds we've committed to further our economy. Yes, of course you are patriotic, you must just be misunderstood :P

[thanuk]

we sell more weapons (including biologicals) than any other nation. Its big business. We sell them even to Iraq.

Can you document an instance of the U.S. selling biological weapons to Iraq? Or are you just making things up.

UNLESS you happen to be a human being with a conscience, or at least half a brain when it comes to planning for the long term future.
I feel inclined not to debate with you anymore until you develop either (but preferably both) a brain, so that you can respond logically and not waste people's time, or a heart, because your responses are sickening as far as any moral conscience goes.

I would say preventing a dictator from developing weapons of mass destruction is most definately planning for the future. Im sorry if my morality doesn't live up to your standards, but if you were the realist you claim to be you would realize that morality doesn't go a very long way in the world in which we live. International dealings with countries like Iraq are far from high society charity events. There is no need for our country to have any more morals than any other country, it would put us at a disadvantage.

Do you really expect the U.S. government to sacrifice its own interests for the benefit of foreign countries? Do you really expect us to stop developing weapons because its wrong to do so, while every other country in the world continues to develop their own weapons? Do you really think it would benefit third world countries if U.S. businesses stopped setting up factories there? I guess we would if we were as moral as you wanted us to be, but it would make us pretty god damn stupid as well.

[Guest]

Abue: That is the most racist thing I have ever heard. Do you base your condemnation of all arabs on the arabs you personally know, or the blanket of fear being layed down by CNN. People who are arabs do not have an underlying need to hate, just as all Americans do not have an underlying need to bomb poor people to make money.

Ensis: What could my job possibly have to do with my world view? Perhaps a little bit, but not much...to appease your interests, I study nanotechnology and travel the world in my vacation time, of which I have lots, because this socialistic/democratic country of Denmark insures that enough profits go to the people, and not a super elite, so that the people can enjoy their lives. I get 5-6 weeks payed vacation depending on where i work (EVERYONE gets that), and minimum wage is like 15 dollars an hour. School, hospitals, and many other things are free. No, society is not on the verge of collapse here, it works nice, and most people are happy. Btw, I never said anything about giving 3rd world countries more food and money, tho some of them do desperately need it. America btw has a pathetically low foreign aid bill, if you cut out military aid. Not just in percent of GNP, but as a naked number. Denmark, with only 5million people, gives substantially more.

Thanuk: It is now clearer than ever that you did not bother to read my last post before you tried, pathetically, to respond. The second web link is an article on americans selling bugs to iraq. with documentation. I repost it here so that you wont have trouble finding it. Its hard, I know.
http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html

Im done with this thread. I will just end to say that if you think the US military will free anybody by dropping bombs on their heads... Or if you think the US power elite has suddenly switched its priorities from oil and military strategy over to human rights (check out our foreign policy history).....well, then you are bought and payed for already.

[Abue]

Abue: That is the most racist thing I have ever heard. Do you base your condemnation of all arabs on the arabs you personally know, or the blanket of fear being layed down by CNN. People who are arabs do not have an underlying need to hate, just as all Americans do not have an underlying need to bomb poor people to make money.

It might sound a little racist, but it comes down to a couple of things. I have a hard time liking people who hate me just because I am a Christian and an American. I have met many Arabs and a good majority of them have scorned me just because of those two things. Also look at there history. Look around the world. All they do is blow shit up in the name of Allah.

On the other hand, I have my experiences with a certain people from the local mission field. I have had the experience of making a decision on taking in some Sudanese people to use our church. We have helped them with things like English as a Second language, how to cope in the American culture, and religious doctrine. These people fled Sudan because of the unrest caused by the Arab/Muslim factions. The persecution they suffered by the hands of these same factions. The stories I hear from them just reinforce my growing uncomfort for the Arab curture in general. Say what you want, but the hatrid and the lack of tolerance Arabs have has caused themselves and others a lot of problems.

[thanuk]

Thanuk: It is now clearer than ever that you did not bother to read my last post before you tried, pathetically, to respond. The second web link is an article on americans selling bugs to iraq. with documentation. I repost it here so that you wont have trouble finding it. Its hard, I know.
http://www.progressive.org/0901/anth0498.html

Im done with this thread. I will just end to say that if you think the US military will free anybody by dropping bombs on their heads... Or if you think the US power elite has suddenly switched its priorities from oil and military strategy over to human rights (check out our foreign policy history).....well, then you are bought and payed for already.

Grorrak, it is now clear to me that you are a complete idiot. I asked you if you had any instances of the United States GOVERNMENT selling weapons of mass destruction to Iraq, and you give me a list of PRIVATE COMPANIES who sold components to Iraq that could be used to make chemical weapons over a decade ago. But i guess when your a socialist, you can't handle distinguishing a nation's government from the private sector. There are also a great deal of other things you can't seem to handle, like the fact that we could be protecting our oil interests AND helping people at the same time. You mean accomplishing 2 goals with a single action? That could never happen! Moron.

As for your foreign aide claims, i will come outright and say that you are full of shit. Its amazing how when private companies sell biological weapons components, they are acting on behalf of the U.S. government in your mind. Yet all the money from private U.S. charities that are partially funded by our goverment(red cross, 10 million religious organizations, peace core, etc etc etc) do not seem to count toward our foreign aid bill. Well i guess its easy to twist the numbers to help your argument, since you can't seem to handle the separation of government and industry, it all makes sense to you. So stay in your bubble, ignore the atrocities going on in Arabic dictatorships, and continue to travel the world. In fact, go over to the middle east some time, and walk down the street waving an American flag. Surely the arabic peoples will respect your culture as much as you respect theirs! After all, they aren't so bad compared to the white devils of America, with their power elite and their democratic elections, always trying to crush those kind hearted, peace loving dictators and warlords who only wish to protect their people with biological and nuclear weapons! How dare we deny them the right to use nerve gas on their own citizens! Just who do we think we are? Unbelievable ignorance, but i guess that should be expected from a close-minded socialist.

Go back to sea world.

[Mikayla]

hey nukie lets try this policy, leave us the fuck alone, we will leave you alone you leave us alone, you how ever attack us i dont care if it is a terrorist attack like 9/11 or whatever, if you attack us, we remove your entire country from the face of the planet :)

see i am not a bleeding heart liberal. i am the kind that says, you kill people you die, you commit terrorism and it kills people your whole bloodline gets removed from the gene pool, hard ass yes i am, you dont like it? tough i dont care, in this country i am allowed my opinion, where as in other coutries you get shot for speaking like this. god it is great living in a country that allows me to speak my mind :)


would you like an order of fries with that order
thank you please drive forward.

[Guest]

private charities dont make donations in the governments name.
Big fat companies that donate to these charities get big fat tax breaks, the main reason they do it. Bottom line, they dont actually pay any money, cuz they get it back from YOU the tax payer. Which outta make you wonder, how come the richest people in the country get all the tax breaks. And why arent you, the supporter of the whole system, the one in charge of which charities get support and when. Thats how it works over here. People get to vote on it, and not have to depend on the whims of the fat cats, who dont get like 95% of the tax breaks. Cuz they dont need them. You probably do, tho, after paying for everything, and not getting much back other than a precious safety offered by a government which can not/does not protect you, and rather puts you in danger by systematically enraging pretty much the whole planet. BUt oh yeah, you prolly dont care about the OTHER people on this planet. They are probably evil, and not really people.

[Salen]

Keep in mind, the biggest voice against invading is France. You know 'saved by Britain in WW I' France. Or is it the 'Appease Hitler/Saved by US in WWII' France. Or hrmm, maybe, 'Drag the US into SE Asia to save our colony' France. Hrmmm, I see a patern. Maybe someone should remind France they wouldn't have made it out of the 20th century without the US/UK facing off against warmongers.

Second biggest voice, Germany.
You know, Ass Kicked WWI for trying to control central Europe.
Ass Kicked WWII for trying to take over Europe.

Seems they don't want war unless it's them gaining land out of it.

[thanuk]

private charities dont make donations in the governments name.
Big fat companies that donate to these charities get big fat tax breaks, the main reason they do it. Bottom line, they dont actually pay any money, cuz they get it back from YOU the tax payer.

So then since the money eventually comes from me, the tax payer, then all that money really does count as foreign aid from the government. which would boost us way higher than Denmark and pretty much every country in the world in the amount of money we ship out to foreign countries. Good try though.

Which outta make you wonder, how come the richest people in the country get all the tax breaks. And why arent you, the supporter of the whole system, the one in charge of which charities get support and when.

Because we have elected officials who make those decisions for us. I get to decide who the person making the decision is by voting, and i will vote for the one who says he will do things the way i would like them to be done. Thats called "Democracy".

Thats how it works over here. People get to vote on it, and not have to depend on the whims of the fat cats, who dont get like 95% of the tax breaks. Cuz they dont need them.

And thats how Denmark became the richest country in the world! Oh wait, it isn't.

You probably do, tho, after paying for everything, and not getting much back other than a precious safety offered by a government which can not/does not protect you

You have once again de-railed. Do i have to list the things I get? The intangible freedoms? The opportunity to become a fat cat myself? Or maybe its just something as simple as free speech, where i can call people like you a moron to your face, and not have to care what your status is, or what politician you know.

and rather puts you in danger by systematically enraging pretty much the whole planet. BUt oh yeah, you prolly dont care about the OTHER people on this planet. They are probably evil, and not really people.

I care as much about other people on this planet as they care about me, which is about jack shit. They are people, and they probably aren't evil, but they don't like me. But that doesn't make me really want to change who i am or the way i act to appease a bunch of people that i dont know. So instead, i will stop them from doing things that would be detrimental to me, or the people i do actually care about. That includes, but is not limited to, keeping WMD's out of the hands of militant islamic fundamentalists, dictators, and communists, protecting the oil which fuels my car and powers my home, and, since we're such nice guys, we'll free a bunch of oppressed people from a ruthless dictator...you know, since we're already in the area. How did Denmark do in WWII again? Oh yeah, and where do they stand on the Iraq issue? Oh thats right, even your own country pwnz j00.

Now go back to sea world.

[Daz]

without cherz, corth and thanuk are lacking in intelligent competition. help :*(

[Mikayla]

you know nukie you really do scare me sometimes, you think things through, almost sounds like you think about things before you write them down, damn sound like you grew up nukie :P run flee in terror nukie is acting with maturity ;) LOL LOL

but on a serious side, nice to read post from people who are thinking things through :)

[thanuk]

without cherz, corth and thanuk are lacking in intelligent competition. help :*(

As long as i never have to argue against corth, everything will be fine. :wink:

[Daz]

thanuk + corth vs cherzra + xisiqomelir in a ppv threadwar match of death and mayhem!


special guest commentators moritheil + daz.

surprise referee will be?

[Xisiqomelir]

thanuk + corth vs cherzra + xisiqomelir in a ppv threadwar match of death and mayhem!

But....I agree with American foreign policy. :\

Unless the threadwar is going to be about G1 Transformers. Or possibly Invokers.

Better still, Invokers AND Transformers! :!: