If someone came into your home and slaughtered your children

[Horse with no Name]

Would you passively wait while the "authorities" dealt with it, or would you find the bastards yourself and deliver your own justice?
Now imagine you are an Iraqi--do you let them kill your families and wait for someone to help (we know how helpful the UN was in Rwanda), or do you take to the streets and mete out your own justice.
I know what I would do.

[OnionPatch]

1. It's tragic

that so many cannot see the simple truth you are talking about.

[ohio_liberal]

2. Ask a Republican that

I did, and the answer I got was "well Saddam was no better". This piece of wisdom comes from my mother and my uncle, both life-long Republicans. They just can't admit that they would probably pick up guns as people in Iraq are doing.

[FreedomAngel82]

52. At least they had safety and security

Tell them the first group of people who left the country when we took out Saddam were the Christians. All the religions got a long pretty well when Saddam was there and now they're in an all out civil war in the country. And I'm sure their Constiution isn't going to be any better. *sigh* From what I've heard/read so far it isn't.

[tx_dem41]

55. All the religions got along?!?....

wow....I guess no one told that to the Shiites in the South after the First Gulf War or the Kurds that were living in a UN-protected area.

[bryant69]

3. Well what I would do is go to a bus station

Set off a bomb killing 43 and wounding 70 or more.

Right?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[The Stranger]

4. Well . . . right.

Again, the context and situation is that your family has just been murdered for no reason by the most powerful nation on Earth.

Things don't seem so nice and rational (like an internet message board) when your family get murdered for no reason out in a Third World desert.

[bryant69]

5. I totally agree

There's nothing wrong with setting off a bomb and killing 43 of your country men in that situation. I mean the pain that has been inflicted more than justifies depriving other families of their loved ones and wounding others.

[Modem Butterfly]

6. Sometimes you have to use a broad brush to hit the fine details

Excellent point.

[The Stranger]

11. Whether you agree or not is not the question.

What is key is trying understand what could motivate actions such as this; that is the only way to prevent it in the future.

Not everyone in that part of the world is "crazy" or "terrorist." Some have apparently become so desperate that your sense of "pain" probably has little meaning to them, as it has become their way of life.

[bryant69]

13. Yeah but the moment you blow up a bus station

Is the moment you are a terrorist.

There are plenty of Iraqis who aren't blowing up bus stations.

I don't mind trying to understand Iraqis; i'm all in favor of that. But I'm not likely to get behind justifying terrorism, and it seemed like your initial post went that direction. I'm sorry if I misread you.

[Horse with no Name]

22. You can't justify terrorism

But can you understand retaliatory justice in the instances where that is ALL it is (aside from the professional mercs and jihadists)?
After all, we have justifiable homicide in this country. What is the difference?

[bryant69]

26. Well yeah but how do you get from retalitory justice

indiscriminate violence?

And even then you'd have to look at on a case by case basis; as you would in our country as well.

[Horse with no Name]

29. As I said in another post

Once you kill once..I could imagine it would get easier.
Especially when you are chasing an unknown enemy(very difficult for that person to find the particular soldier who killed their family).

[bryant69]

31. And of course

Easy to shift targets from "those Bastard Americans who killed my family" to "those bastard Iraqis who support the Americans."

Yeah, but this attempt to understand them implies that the damage has been done doesn't it? Other than pulling out of Iraq (which we should probably do anyway), so as to not create any more of these insurgents, it would seem that there is little we can do to pacify them other than killing them.

If they have no rational goal, and are only out for revenge, what can we do?

[Bluerthanblue]

33. i understand

the 'instinctive' need to retaliate.-
But i cannot condone it. If my family is dead, killing others won't bring them back- it will only add to the pile of dead bodies and cheapen life.

i would find it very hard to see those who came into my home as 'liberators' though. No matter how well intentioned they (as individuals) may have been.

i would want to warn my neighbors- and seek ways to stop the violence, if only to make the 'bad guys' think they had won.

My family is more than those who live in my house. Even more than those who live in my country. My family includes the children, parents, and loved ones of those who came into my house and killed my children. i may not 'like' them, but they ARE a 'part of me' and i a part of them.


and i'm not just blowing smoke.... i've lost beloved ones... and i HATE the pain of grief and sorrow too much to willfully inflict it on others.

[pitohui]

43. you can't tell the difference, seriously

then i hope to god you don't have a firearm because you'll end up in prison one day

justifiable homocide is an immediate response to immediate danger, example, while i was being shot at, my friend took out his gun to shoot back, if he had killed our attackers, it would be justifiable homocide

if we had instead gone to their hang-out several days later & set off a bomb to be sure we killed all 5 of them & maybe took out their kids or women as well, we would be murderers

pure and simple

yeah, my friend talked of getting some c-4 & eliminating the menace, that's all it was, TALK, he knew such action was wrong

immediacy of the threat and appropriate response is key to justified versus criminal killing

i think you are pulling our leg & perfectly well know the difference

[The Stranger]

25. Interesting.

You seem to agree that understanding the Iraqis is important, and even that if you never bother to understand the reasons behind why someone is doing something extreme and murderous, you cannot really address it and are virtually guaranteeing that it will continue. Almost by definition, you simply cannot deal with what you do not understand.

Yet when someone follows this very sensible line of reasoning with Iraqis blowing up police stations, which is the example that you inserted into this thread and continue to post about, you accuse them of "justifying terrorism."

Yet, in actuality, by making accusations against and attempting to stigmatize those who seek to understand and prevent this extreme and murderous behavior, you are the one preventing the understanding and prevention of this extreme behavior. In effect, it is you who are preventing the prevention of terrorism.

[bryant69]

30. Who knew that I had that kind of power.

By simply questioning the initial poster, I am preventing the Prevention of terrorism? That's pretty amazing; I would never have suspected myself capable of such a thing.

The Iraqis are motivated by any number of emotions - to claim that the initial posters suggestions of a motivation are all there is to it is as simplistic as saying "They Hate us for our freedom." And I still read that initial post as more of a justification than an attempt to understand.

If it helps any, we probably agree on the punchline, which is that the United States has failed in it's attempt to improve Iraq and we should pull the troops home now.

[Sparkman]

58. justification is innaccurate. Playing with fire & getting burned maybe?

[tx_dem41]

70. So the innocent Iraqis that have been killed were playing with fire?

Is that what you meant? Not sure, so I'm asking.

[Sparkman]

81. neocon's doing acquisitor imperialsm, and feigning social engineering are,

playing with fire. And we are both getting BURNED, in both senses of the word.

[tx_dem41]

89. No doubt....

....as well as all the other people killing innocents.

[Horse with no Name]

12. I'm speaking of what it was, not what it's become

I'm speaking of one probably law-abiding Iraqi citizen who loved his family, if not his country.
Then for no other reason than the fact that he was Iraqi, his home was invaded and his children killed.
What you have done is start of cycle of killing.
Once you find the ability within your heart to kill one person, I can imagine it would just get easier with each additional person.
We have created the insurgency. What has come now is an organized jihad.
But that's not how it started.

[tx_dem41]

27. I reject your premise.

To answer the question in the OP....I wouldn't go out killing the perps as you suggest. And I most certainly would not start killing people indiscriminately! I would help in every way I could to find the perps, and I would let the judicial system resolve it.

Its what makes a civilized society. Apparently, you don't have enough knowledge or respect for the people of the Middle East to realize that they are a civilized society as well (have been longer than "us" in fact).

[pitohui]

44. tx-dem41 has the right answer

thanks, you expressed what i was trying to say concisely & correctly

[0rganism]

127. What if there was NO judicial system?

Or, worse yet, the people who killed your children for No Good Reason were the nominal judicial system?

And they were members of or allied with the military of a foreign occupying power?

"the people of the Middle East" are much more than one people, in a wide variety of circumstances, covering a broad spectrum of what most of us would call "civilized", ranging from technocrats of the UAE to refugees in the West Bank to opium farmers in Afghanistan to Kibbutzim in Israel. To speak of them as one "civilized society" would be to seriously misrepresent the whole situation -- there are myriad societies operating in parallel, sometimes with common interest and sometimes at cross-purposes, upholding numerous different legal codes and cultural value systems. And "have been longer than 'us'" is just another quicksand of vaguery, since we don't know who "us" is in this context or who specifically is thus compared or what your standard of qualification for "civilized" is.

Furthermore, to proclaim that the choices and actions of bereaved individuals are what makes or breaks a civilized society is to mischaracterize civilization itself! "Rule of law", you say? Well, in some societies, including some Middle Eastern societies, revenge killings (and even "honor killings") ARE the law, and "proportionality" as you or I see it may or may not be a factor in the meting of justice.

[tx_dem41]

133. I did not mean to imply "one" society covering all of the Middle

East..so thanks for letting me clarify it. Regardless of the situation re: a judicial system....I would NOT kill innocents as is being done in Iraq by all involved. I do not condone it. I do not try to justify it. I do not equivocate on the matter. I condemn it.

[0rganism]

137. So where's the clarification?

Look, here's what you typed earlier:
"Apparently, you don't have enough knowledge or respect for the people of the Middle East to realize that they are a civilized society as well (have been longer than "us" in fact)."

And in the same post, you asserted that "letting the justice system handle it" is "what makes a civilized society".

As you might say, I reject your premise. However, if you do still adhere to it, then your earlier statement is inconsistent with having knowledge or respect for peoples who do engage in non-systemic justice -- for whatever reason.

And a vengeful insurgent might point out to you that his definition of "innocent" is different from yours, or that the deaths of "innocents" are deemed to be necessary collateral damage in the process of making his country inhospitable to occupation forces. Or he might condemn you for your inaction under the rule of brutal tyrants like President Bush. Where is our domestic insurgency? Have we forgotten how to fight for our own freedoms, or do we secretly delight in inflicting our empire on the rest of the world to the extent that we tacitly approve of such actions, all words aside? How can he forget that every year we willingly donate our money to the very government that ruined his country, bombed his family, and stole his livelihood?

Would you go so far as to call him "uncivilized" for fighting an asymmetric war? What justice system will "handle it" if an occupying army kills your family? What nonviolent recourse will you have?

[tx_dem41]

140. Does "fighting for our freedoms" include killing children?

No matter who defines that, I believe it does not. And, whoever is doing that is not fighting for freedom. Why is this a hard concept to grasp?

And, for better or worse, there is a judicial system in place in Iraq right now. There is a new one coming down the pike. It might be based on Sharia...it might be based on something else, but there is a system in place.

[Horse with no Name]

128. Yes I do have respect for the people of the middeast

very much so.
But when those who were supposed to uphold the law of the land become the murderers, how do you expect--if you are an Iraqi citizen--justice?
When our country illegally invaded their country and started murdering their citizens, all civility went out the window. What do you do next?

[tx_dem41]

134. You don't return wrong with wrong by killing innocents such as ...

children. I don't understand why it is so hard to grasp that concept.

[Horse with no Name]

136. I never advocated killing children

:shrug: In fact, I never advocated killing anyone.

[Sparkman]

60. Feuds like this feed on each killing, one after another. Only the biggest

or most powerful party can stop it. The neocons need perpetual "war" for suppressing us and maintaining control? They hand out jobs & death sentences alike.

[tx_dem41]

8. Great answer.

Thanks. That made my morning. Haven't had any coffee yet, either.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Libby2]

10. There is no proof we would have

had another attack either way.

You're right though, I do despise the coward of crawford.
I wouldn't call him a man.

[Theres-a]

14. Where'd you hear that,Fox?

I suppose the terrorists in question are from Iran,and we'd better attack them before we have to fight them over here,right?Nice talking,point,by the way."No new attacks since we attacked Iraq."

[bryant69]

15. Good response

I see you are irony challenged, but that's OK.

[tx_dem41]

19. Reading comprehension is your friend.

Or it can be, if you would let it.

[Horse with no Name]

20. We wouldn't have had the "First" terror attack

if he had been doing his job. Next point?

[tnlefty]

21. And 9/11 happened on whose watch?

Welcome to DU, btw. :hi:

[rasputin1952]

32. You should qualify you statement about an attack w/"yet"...

As much as I hate to say this, these terrorists are not stupid; they will attack when they feel it is the right time, and in a place of their choosing.

No one thought London would be a target, nor Madrid or any other place for that matter. The very basis of terrorism is the "unknown" aspect of it.

I do not want to see anyone harmed, except for the capture of the cowards that do these acts. Innocent people, by ant standard, are being killed and maimed and this must stop. How to stop it is a different matter. Force does not appear to work by itself; understanding why these people are doing this and correcting an approach does not seem to work...so what are we left with? We cannot cover every port/city/waterworks/energy facility etc in the country, it is physically impossible. The real question is when/where will they strike.

While I do not propose we fall short and cave in to terrorist threats, I do think we should realistically look at why we have bases in Saudi Arabia, the reason why the WTC was struck in the first place. I also believe we should be investing in our petroleum free energy needs in the future. Every dollar spent on gasoline, puts money into the pockets of these terrorists, and that is a fact. We are actually financing these people through our own gluttonous appetites.

[Bluerthanblue]

40. just a question... when and where

have we honestly attempted to "understand why these people are doing this and correcting" our approach?

i may be completely ignorant- i'd love to be, but i don't see us ever truly looking at our own 'role' in the world. Odd, isn't it, how we all seem driven to look at what motivates individuals to commit crimes, (ostensibly so we can adress the motives, and improve the future) but when it comes to our collective consiousness- aka. America- 'we' somehow resent any implication that our own actions and in-actions have concequences.

oh shit, i'm one of those people Rove spoke about who wanted to understand why people would want to hurt us. It sure as hell couldn't be because we've raped them (clandestinely) for decades.- i LOVE my country, but i love ALL humanity too- and i was born by sheer luck into this nation, rather than Iraq, or Somalia or Croatia or Rwanda or Haiti or Guatemala ...... or so many other victims of world greed.

[rasputin1952]

48. One of the great tragedies is that we have not tried in earnest to

understand people of other cultures. We have tried to look over other cultures, but as soon as we find something we consider abhorrent, we tend to think the entire culture is abhorrent.

I am no great philosopher, but I do try to understand cultures that are different from my own, and I too fall into the trap of "abhorrence
retention". I think it is horrendous that some people think it is just fine to practice 'female circumcision', and literally rip the clitoris from a woman. When i read of something like that, i stop dead in my tracks and feel that the whole society must be insane. It takes a great deal of perspective for me to get over fact that this does happen. To me, once is once to often, but I found that the practice is limited to some subcultures and is not 'prevalent' so to speak. I still find it horrid and will do what I can to stop such practices....but reality asks me, 'what can you do if you are not there'?....:(

For several centuries, great thinkers and teachers came from Islam. While they tended to be ruthless in their conversion tactics, the Arabic peoples gave us much in the ways of science and mathematics. While the Europeans were immersed in the Dark Ages, and literacy was virtually unknown....90% of the Moslem population was literate.

I can understand why some Saudi's would be ticked at the US for building military bases on "holy ground". We would be ticked if Saudi's built hotels on Gettysburg Battlefield. The powers that be did not think this to be a problem, through their own ignorance of the situation. Now, a price is being paid, and while I think the price in blood is far too high, I would reconsider staying on Saudi Arabia.

Just my buck and a half...:)

[Bluerthanblue]

54. thanks- for

your reply, and sharing your thoughts. i've been feeling like i must be either invisible, or so far 'out-there' i'm not worth noticing.

What bothers me most about this whole situation, is the way humanity 'demonizes' each other. When people say "they are animals" it is in all honesty, not only a lie, but a sneaky way of letting ourselves off the 'hook' for the evil thoughts AND deeds that live within each one of us.

The men who flew those airliners into the towers could NOT see the common 'humanity' in the faces of the passengers, men, women and children who they were CHOOSING to destroy along with themselves. If they had, if that little girl on her mom's lap touched the common chord that we are ALL more 'alike' than not, that she could have been HIS child, he would never have been able to do what he did.

And when bush calls 'them' evil-doers, people who have no 'respect for life', 'monsters' he's indoctrinating US- our own people with the same kind of ignorance, and blind 'killing machine' thinking that will keep this world in constant everlasting hell until we finally blow it all up.

i have 2 very beloved sons. i want nothing more than to see them grow, mature, and live lives of value, promise, contentment and leave this planet no worse, and hopfully better for their having lived here.- i believe that desire is no different for the average Afgani, Israeli, Iraqi, Saudi, Palestinian, Somali, Nigerian or ANY country's parent.

Blind support of ones country is not loving it. Loving it is being courageous and humble enough to face reality- the 'good' and 'bad' we do. Abu Garhib is shamful without question.- to sweep that under the rug, while bush babbles on about how Saddam 'murdered his own people' and his 'rape rooms' and 'gassed the Kurds' is hyprocricy at it's finest- and were i less patient, i'd HATE America too- but he isn't america- he's a sorry, misguided and guilt riddled little man. Who has my pity, and hopefully someday, my forgiveness.

Thanks for your buck and a half it was well spent.

[rasputin1952]

76. You are not alone by any means....Many of us feel the same

frustration at not being able to "change the world". I have found some solace in the fact that I can change a small corner of it wherever I pass. A lot of it has to do with the sense of 'action', one must feel that action is necessary at a point, then take the action that is appropriate. I have found that standing in line at the store, listening to bush supporters, that one action is to just laugh at them...:)When confronted, I ask if they can come up with ONE thing that bush has done that has benefited the nation as a whole. I have yet to receive an answer.

But all of this is for naught if we cannot come to a line in the sand where we must all come together and cross if we expect to have a world for a our children to inherit. Every generation from every culture, has dreamed of passing on a better world to their prodigy. Some of these have been extremely misguided, such as the Nazi vision in the mid twentieth century. To the minds of the corrupt, the vision they had was as true as the one where most people would rather see a world where people got along and helped each other. This brings me to the point you made about differences in cultures.

In order to have an 'enemy', you must first dehumanize that culture. The Nazi's could not have killed millions w/o the advent of a public that allowed such things to happen. By putting it posters and constantly haranguing the people with visions of 'untermenschen': Jews, Gypsy's and Slav's, etc as less than human...more like vermin, they would never have had the opportunity to destroy so many. Looking at posters from that era, I can see where Jews are drawn to look like rats and dolts. They became 'inhuman' in the eyes of the population. the Japanese did the same thing with the Chinese and Europeans/Americans....and we did the same to them. The buck-toothed bottle lens glasses icon is still seen today on occasion, as is the dark shifty "Asian" mercenary look.

No normal human can go out and just kill other humans unless there are circumstances that move one to do such things. In the military, we would often bring the proposed 'enemy' down a few notches in the humanity scale. It was necessary to do so that you would not feel much remorse in shooting at them and killing them. Stories of atrocities, both real and fabricated, helped many to fight to the death, or pretty close to it, rather than become a POW for the pleasure of a sadistic jailer.

Fear moves people in strange ways. What we fear, we simply refuse to comprehend. It is almost 'normal' to fear something new and unknown. This is how it is when we come across cultures we know little of. It would be wise for us to take the best from each culture and meld it in with our own....but the current administration believes that Divine Will is pressed through the WH, and the chance for enlightenment is nil.

Thanks for letting me rant on....:D

[Sparkman]

62. nobody visits the slaughter-houses either, but we all eat the beef. thanks

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tx_dem41]

37. Wow...one whole post.

Ties a record held by many, I assume.

[Bluerthanblue]

36. we may not

honestly realize how much we have indeed lost 'since we went in over there' for a LONG time.

To sacrifice the lives of 'thousands' (yes, Iraqi people DO have lives too) for what????? 'because that man tried to kill my daddy?' because WE (the only people who matter on earth) want their oil??? Because Saddam was a mad man? (uh, don't look too closely at the us leader) BECAUSE WE CAN?????? - as Bill Clinton said, that is the worst possible reason ever-

Because WE were afraid???- then many will turn on this very administration, because quite honestly- 'we' scare me more than 'them'-

How many terror attacks did we have from Iraq before 'going in there'???

none.- ever.

THINK- you have a brain. USE IT.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[barb162]

126. I think it is sheer luck there has not been another attack on

this country. Bush has done NOTHING, ZERO to guard the borders and very little to guard the seaports.

[helderheid]

138. it wouldn't suit his poll numbers

[zbdent]

7. Funny thing is, Repukes used a similar "story" to justify the war

implying "Saddam".

Basic premise: Guy walks down the street, breaks into a neighbor's house (your neighbor). Kills the husband and children, then rapes the wife.

Next thing you see is the guy eyeing you up.

Their reasoning was that you would kill that guy as soon as you got near enough.

My point was that, in the above scenario, to be technically correct in the Iraq theme, the guy was a drinking buddy you tended to like, so you waited about 10-15 years before reporting to the police what your drinking buddy had done.

Unfortunately, the evidence is now showing that we are the guy who broke into the neighbor's house (Iraq) and is now eyeing up the viewer (Iran/everybody else).

[Horse with no Name]

16. With said difference is that they are chasing the "right" enemy

while we chased the wrong one. On purpose.

[DakotaDemocrat]

24. Basic premise (enhanced)...

The real truth about that premise is that you (the U.S.) helped that person a while back. In addition, no one else saw the same look this person "supposedly" gave you, and you did nothing about a different person who slipped through your back door and destroyed your own family four years ago.

I'm slowly believing that we live in a f*^%#d up country where the people responsible for the destruction are not held accountable, but the media that brings these things up, and the citizens that speak out against the destruction, are the ones subject to scorn and retribution.

It's truly becoming bizzaro world. It's not Bush's fault: its the left wing media's, Cindy Sheehan's, Dan Rather's, moveon.org's, Michael Moore's, Clenis', and Air America's fault.

[anarch]

17. well, gosh, were they "spreading democracy" when they killed my kids?

'Cause I guess if they were, I'd be obliged to thank them for letting me take part in the democratic process. Besides, my kids must have been terrorists, if they were killed in the process of spreading democracy. Freedom is on the march, after all!

[FloridaPat]

18. Don't foget - some of the bombings might be done by US forces.

Remember the stories of truck, taxi, and car drivers that found bombs in their vehicles after being stopped by US forces and detained for an hour or so? If we're leaving, why are we still building 14 permanent bases? If things settled down in that country and everyone got together and decided to unit, what would happen to the fake Iraqi government they have now and the export of oil to the US? We need confusion to keep everyone not united. Because once they unit, they will be against us.

[no_to_war_economy]

23. i would greet them with sweets and flowers

:sarcasm:

[NNN0LHI]

28. Just watching someone pumping my oil out the ground for export...

...while I was eating dirt might be enough to get me riled up a bit.

Don

[geek tragedy]

34. Do you feel solidarity with these Iraqis?

If so, why aren't you over there killing Americans and those Iraqis who 'collaborate' with them?

[tx_dem41]

38. Maybe someone could start passing leaflets around

with enlistment forms. ;)

[geek tragedy]

39. Operation Yellow Insurgency-Supporter! eom

[The Stranger]

142. I guess if one supports the subjugation of Iraq, they should be over

there participating, the logic would follow.

[Bluerthanblue]

45. what the f-K?

this sounds like the black/white mentality of the right wing idiots?

America love it or leave it.

Looking at how our own actions have REPERCUSSIONS, and trying to figure out why a group of kids are beating the shit out of each other is wrong?

Just tell them to stop- or punish the ones who aren't from "your neighborhood" and let it be there????

Violence is not usually the 'first' option people use to achieve what they want or need. It is most often the last. And suicidal violence is the action of the desperate.

President Lincoln said:
"I don't like that man. I must get to know him better."

America HAS done 'wrong' many times- ignoring it doesn't absolve it. Admitting it doesn't denegrate us- it shows we ARE a MATURE, RESPONSIBLE and HONEST nation. Lying and denying our own role in this world, is despotism. And will lead to our eventual destruction. Pride DOES go before a fall.

i was SO apatheticlly ignorant about some of the wrongs committed under the banner of 'freedom'- Because i LOVE this country, i am willing to look honestly at our flaws, and work to correct them.

[geek tragedy]

50. The person said they'd be shooting at Americans if they were

an Iraqi in that situation.

It's perfectly fair to question why they'd support the killing of Americans for their own dead family but not for someone else's.

[Bluerthanblue]

56. is that not

what Afganistan was all about?

is that not what the death penalty is?

Are you going to say, if i don't support the death penalty i should leave america? Or that if someone does, they should be prepared to be killed, because killing someone to prove that killing is wrong will eventually end all human life.

not being snotty, or argumentative, just trying desperately to understand you. and i'm failing miserably

[geek tragedy]

57. Afghanistan was not about going to find some Muslims to kill

because of 911.

This person said that if Americans killed his family, he'd go out and kill some Americans, and even conceded later in his post that he'd probably be unable to find the people who actually did it.

[Bluerthanblue]

59. in all honesty

it WAS about revenge.

The 'right' to avenge the killing. "No negotiations"- "Wanted Dead or Alive"- "You are either with us, or with the enemy".

PLEASE!!! i beg you- prove me wrong.

i don't want to know what i do. i don't want to see 'real people' who i have loved and respected following such a hate filled path.

What was the point of Afganistan?????? Why are so many dead? We used Afganistan like a whore during the cold war, then tossed her aside- As did Russia-...... can you not understand why people in the middle east might see 'us' as evil??? selfish??? Who makes the weapons? who taught the Afghans to kill??? why is their soil filled with cluster bombs and land mines??? What right do either WE, or the UK or USSR have doing this kind of thing, and then screamins 'foul' ????

[Sparkman]

61. thanks. I appreciate principled clear thinking. too bad more advisors

didn't have the neocon's ears (or some other appendage) at the critical moment they implemented Iraqi Freedom.

[Bluerthanblue]

74. most people

call me crazy- thanks for saying otherwise.

i wish with all that i am, we would stop killing as a way to end killing. How can we even begin to claim 'intelligent' design- or 'intelligent' anything, when we as a species live like Sisyphus.

[geek tragedy]

63. Uh, AQ was in Afghanistan and was being protected by the Taliban.

It's not revenge to attack those who are attacking you.

The Taliban had refused to turn bin Laden over for a period of years after the Embassy bombings, and had been punished by the UN as a result.

Taking the Taliban out was the smart and the right thing to do.

[Bluerthanblue]

73. many nations, OURS included

have been 'sanctioned' by the UN-

The 'Taliban' was NOT 'our target' - (as much as i deplore their fundementalist religiousity)

The Taliban NEVER 'attacked' us- And we honestly don't RULE THE WORLD.

Would you ok sending Pat Robinson to members of Al Queida to be 'dealt with' for his words and encouragement of revenge against Muslims?

Would you say, when Al Queida then bombed 'america' for harboring him, "well they refused to turn him over" and excuse the damage, and carnage of thousands of civillians as 'colleratoral damage'?

PLEASE- read this link-
we made promises to a starving country, and not only reneged, but plotted a war with Afghanistan shortly before 9/11-
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n1410/a10.html?1729

i harbor no 'love' for OBL- NOR do i approve of the violence done by Al Queida or any other 'group' as a means of 'change' or 'revenge'.

But believe me, America, the UK, all of Europe's major countries, AND the USSR have some of the blood not only the embasy bombings, 9/11, but every victim of this war on "terror" on it's hands, right along with the actual perpetrators. Most 'average' americans are ignorant about our covert actions, and doing wrong, to 'get our way'- i was. i still am i'm sure. But denial doesn't work- it destroys. Pretending that 'lump' is nothing, lets it grow.

We 'reap' what we sow. And we have 'sown' some terrible oats, in out quest for world dominance.- i don't EXCUSE the violence- but i'm begining to 'understand' it. In hopes that we can find a way to lessen and remove ourselves from encouraging it.

[Bluerthanblue]

77. just in case you..

didn't want to open the link, here are the key passages written on AUGUST 2 2001!!!!-


"After meeting with two Taliban representatives for slightly more than an hour, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Christina B. Rocca said Washington wants bin Laden extradited on terrorism charges, but that "Osama is not the be all and the end all. He is only one problem and he continues to be a threat."

Rocca said the Taliban "continue to harbor terrorists" and that there can be no "serious progress unless their support for terrorists stopped."

The Taliban's ambassador to Pakistan, Abdul Salam Zaeef, who attended the meeting, said the Taliban want to settle the issue of bin Laden, but "we support a solution that can respect religion, dignity and the traditions of Afghanistan."

"We gave Rocca our complete assurance that our soil will not be used against America and that Afghan soil will not be used for any terrorist activity," Zaeef told The Associated Press. He called the meeting "very successful. The atmosphere was very cordial."

U.N. resolutions, cosponsored by the United States and Russia, have sanctioned the Taliban to press Washington's demand that bin Laden be handed over for trial either in the United States or a third country on charges he masterminded the 1998 bombings of two U.S. Embassies in East Africa.

The Taliban have offered to try bin Laden in Afghanistan, to let him be tried by a panel of three Islamic clerics from Afghanistan and two other Muslim nations, or to allow his movements to be tracked by international Muslim monitors.

Rocca told reporters the Bush administration is in the midst of reviewing U.S. policy on Afghanistan as well as Pakistan, which was sanctioned following the 1998 detonation of an underground nuclear device. "

.... The Taliban wasn't unwilling to co-operate. They WERE unwilling to turn over someone to a group of people they had come to dis-trust.

i ask again, would you turn Pat Robinson over to Iran? or Lebanon or any radical Isslamic nation for 'trial' and punishment???

Look outside the 'comfort zone'- See the 'other side' and then ask what is 'reasonable'.

[geek tragedy]

82. You're regurgitating pro-Taliban talking points and bullcrap.

Unbelievable.

They had their chance to sever ties with bin Laden and surrender him. For whatever reason, they chose to shelter him.

That made them not only a legitimate, but necessary target of military action. I'm GLAD we killed a bunch of Taliban. My only regret is that some Taliban survived.

People who sympathize with the Taliban make me physically ill--especially when they call themselves liberals.

[tx_dem41]

91. Unbelievable to see pro-Taliban talking points on a liberal website....

Many things to refute....they played this stall game for years. Clinton did more than pre-9/11 Bush to stop it, but neither was successful.

As for respecting their religion and Afghani culture...you do remember when they blew up the Buddhist statues don't you? Mighty respectful of religion and culture, those Talibanis were! :eyes:

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluerthanblue]

112. as long as you are human

you can justify hating certian people of any nation, color, sex, etc.

what is DPRK?

[Bluerthanblue]

111. to both YOU and Geek- HOW can you make the jump

from my not wanting to see a nation invaded by the most powerfull country on earth under the 'excuse' of wanting to bring 'justice' to the enemy- to being PRO-TALIBAN.

You are WAY off the mark- given your logic, i guess you'd like to go into every single nation with oppressive governments, and blow them the hell up in the name of ..... WHAT?????

i HATE the way the Taliban treat AND continue to treat women. but i HATE the way america uses women and sex to sell their shit to people too. All in the name of 'freedom'- and 'capitolism' and saying hey, it's up to them.

WHY can't i as a woman wear anything i want, and NOT have to fear being 'judged' a sexual object, in THIS, the most progressive, free nation in the world???-

You try and justify killing people because you don't like the way they treat their citizens, and yet you criticize bush for going into Iraq???????- and you say you are liberal????

is that no HYPOCRITICAL???? let's be honest fellas- you can hate the Talibans beliefs, actions, and culture, but does that justify your trying to destroy them????? can we spell GENOCIDE???????? -

so who's your favorite 'war-lord' in Afgansitan now?????

[tx_dem41]

117. Of course I don't have a blanket policy of wanting to invade any..

country that is oppressive to its people. Not sure where you get that I did.

I will invade a country that's Government is actively harboring an entity that attacks me.

If you can't tell the difference between an invasion of Afghanistan (as it would have been done by Gore...ie. successfully) and Iraq, I can't help.

[Bluerthanblue]

122. that is EXACTLY the point..

Gore didn't do it- and we didn't really 'try' to 'get our man'-

Who paid the real price here. Not bush, not OBL not even the Taliban-
the already victimized Afghan people. And the soldiers who died.

We fucked up- we solved nothing. War lords are rampant, poppy fields are flourishing, and our soldiers are STILL dying there.

How many of the 'terrarists' were from Afganistan again????- and when did Pakistan become our allies????

[tx_dem41]

123. You're preaching to the choir on Pakistan....

and I agree we executed the incorrect military plan in Afghanistan. It should have been lighter and surgical.

[geek tragedy]

79. The Taliban were SHELTERING and PROTECTING

bin Laden and his terrorist organization.

They had been SHELTERING and PROTECTING bin Laden for several years before 911.

The time for talking with those cavemen was over. They could have saved their own hides by surrendering the terrorist bin Laden, and they didn't. They got exactly what they had coming to them.

[Bluerthanblue]

99. did you read the post???

sheltering and protecting???- They were WILLING and READY to allow him to be tried by Muslim nations.

Who are WE allowing to 'judge' those from GITMO?
Who are WE allowing to even CHARGE many 'suspected' terrorists some of whom are our OWN citizens, people whose only crime is to 'look' of be of Arabian descent???

Who 'judged' that poor fellow from South America, who was gunned down by the UK 'UNCLOTHED- policemen"????

Please, don't just take the words, or even hold that glass of kool-ade, without making DARN sure, you know what you are consuming is 'life-giving' and 'true'.

You slipped when you call them 'cavemen'- they aren't rag-heads, nor are any group of people i personally choose not to emulate, follow, or support open to being destroyed simply because i 'disagree' with them, of thier way of life. HITLER is your 'role model' there-
i was told by what i thought was a very sweet elderly German woman who was caring for my oldest child, (an infant at the time) in the nursery of a church i had visited, that he was a 'perfect arian'.

i nearly threw-up. "he has the perfect head shape, and coloring-" she said, stroking his head. (actually we are scots/irish)
My youngest son is like a horsechessnut, rich beautiful brown with curls like i can only dream of ever having.

And they BOTH are loved, worthy, and deserving of life regardless of their nationality, looks, age, belief, sex, ANYTHING.

Please don't hate based on 'grouping'- if you need to 'judge' judge the individual, on their OWN merits and actions.

[Name removed]

105. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tx_dem41]

107. "Willing and ready"?!?

You weren't a Clinton fan either I presume. They were saying they were "willing and ready" for 8 years. Do you believe everything you read?

[Bluerthanblue]

116. i was indeed a Clinton fan- even after

he lied about sex- and i was a vocal supporter of his even when people villified him for his is comment.

NO, i DON'T believe everything i read- and YES i DO believe they were willing and ready, NOT under Clinton, but when bush took over, they knew he was going to act regardless of what ANYONE thought-

Again, i ask you, would you surrender someone from what you see as your 'culture' to those of a culture that contradicts ours for trial???
The same way we export our captives to nations that torture overtly????

lets be honest here- if it is 'right' for them, why is it not 'right' for us as well??? Why are we above the law???? Cause we are the ones with the BIG GUNS???? the big balls????

fuck- i thought better of you. my mistake.

[tx_dem41]

119. Please read more.....why would they think Bush was going to "act"...

I assume you mean "attack". Bush gave the Taliban $43 million in May 01 for heroin eradication. Heck, Clinton actually did attack inside the country once. If anything, they thought Bush was going to be easier to play.

Do you actually have respect for Clinton? Its strange you think early Bush was going to be tougher than Clinton was.

[geek tragedy]

124. Slight correction: Bush didn't give that $43 Million to the Taliban

It was administered through the UN and NGO's. The Taliban didn't get a dime.

[Bluerthanblue]

125. as soon as 9/11 happened, actually before it did

i was activly reading EVERYTHING i could get my fingers on about the bush administration, feeling as i still do that the election was not only stolen, it was pre-meditativly stolen.
Rumsfeld was be-leagured, almost kicked out of his position- we refused to join in MANY treaties, we wouldn't attend the council on human rights, we were isolating oursleves from any alliances Clinton had forged- there were documents on the net, GOVERNMENT documents that indicated we intended to go into Afganistan regardless of no 'provication' and talk about getting it into action before the 'winter' set in-

i think Clinton was SMART- i think no i KNOW he was a diplomat, and a brilliant politician- who continued to run this country while a smear campaign like no other in history was being waged against him.- i believed bush was crazy enough, and arrogant enough to take us into hell if he chose. What i DIDN'T know, was how .... naieve the people of america were. 9/11 didn't horrify me- as it did most people- Anger me? sadden me? infuriate me? depress me? Mobilize me? YES to all of those- but, having lived a life where nothing a human being does to another is 'surprising'- it didn't take away my 'innocence'- i've been jaded towards my fellow humans since the begining. with reason.
And when i watched America 'unify' in fear,disgust,sorrow,grief, and love for our interconnectedness, i was almost suckered in, but that nagging voice of experience in me whispered warnings about the other shoe to dropping. And it did....- with the sole exception of Barbara Lee- we played right into the devils hand.

and we are still there.

and as long as i can cling to the foolish hope that we will 'wake up' i can continue to 'wake' up- each morning. When i lose that ability- i'll quit this world, on my own terms. by myself. harming only those who will miss me.

[Horse with no Name]

129. LOL I was waiting for someone to fall into this trap

I NEVER "said" what I would do.
I ONLY said that "I know what I would do". Yet you judged me as choosing violence. Interesting.

We judge others by how we are ourselves! I was hoping someone would take that bait.:)

[geek tragedy]

130. Yes, you implied something instead of coming out and saying it.

How very clever of you.

[Bluerthanblue]

131. what i believe our

friend who has "been through the desert" did was point out how we humans
ass u me too easily, and too often, much to our inevitable regret.

myself very much still a party to this flaw.

[Horse with no Name]

132. Nope. I didn't.

I gave you two scenarios and I asked what you would do.
Then I said--I knew what I would do.
You assumed you KNEW I would choose violence. Which I find interesting.
I never implied anything.
However, in this country as it is now, if someone broke in my house and murdered my children...I would let the justice system handle it. Our justice system is intact in this country.
However...if justice wasn't served and the murderer got out on a technicality or something, I'm not sure what I would do.
I would suppose it would depend on what level of grief I was at.
I can only speak of a situation I know. If you take away our justice system and add another country illegally occupying ours, I am sure I would pick up a sidearm (am I am a grandma)and I would seek justice another way--if nothing else but to prevent the senseless murders of my friend's and family's children. However, I would never blindly attack or set off bombs.

[pitohui]

42. in reality most people do turn the matter over to the police

i don't hear of too many americans standing up & delivering vigilante justice, this is not our culture

a 7 yr old was killed by drug dealers the other day in louisiana, do you think the mother is hunting down the killers or do you think she is leaving it to law enforcement to do it

other than charles bronson very few people take to the streets & mete out their own justice

those who do are usually the worst elements of society, the crack dealers shooting each other for example

you don't know what you would do if you think you would take to the streets & hunt down your child's killer

you just know what TV & the movies sez you would do

like everybody else you would demand the professionals step in & take care of the matter

yeah, i've been shot at, i called the police, i didn't hunt the men down & shoot them back tho i know who they were

yeah, i've had a family member brutalized by a gang, again, i didn't get my gun, i left it for the police

i understand yr argument but it is a false argument not going to convince anyone who isn't already convinced that we're a problem in iraq

i see this argument a lot & it's just not convincing

if iraq does have a vigilante culture, all the more reason we cannot withdraw until the situation changes

if you want to argue for withdrawal, find a convincing argument for how it will change for the better when we leave

i'm angry abt dead soldiers too but we're there now, if we leave, we're condemning the women, children, gays, christians, drinkers, and more people of iraq to a life (or death) under religious dictatorship

an argument drawn from charles bronson doesn't fix this horrible situation

[anarch]

47. I think the more accurate domestic analogy here...

would be to look at this from the perspective of, say, a middle child in an abusive household: you have grown up being beaten by your step-dad, who also beats your mom and your sister and brother and is just generally a total asshole tyrant.

Then, a rich family from the other side of the neighborhood sends several of their sons to break into your house. They kick the hell out of your step-dad and lock him in the garage (for which you are happy and relieved), but then they also burn half your house down, shut off your water, rape your sister, kill one of your little brothers, and lock your mom up in the basement. And, they move into the master bedroom (the only room in the house with air conditioning) and seem to have no intention of ever leaving. Would you not be inclined to want them gone?

[tx_dem41]

49. The real question to your analogy is: Would I kill my other little...

brother and my sister and burn down the rest of the house to get rid of them? I would hope not. That would be senseless at the very least.

[anarch]

53. good point

domestic analogies do tend to break down when the situation gets as complex as this...

And don't get me wrong...I do not advocate terror attacks of any kind, in any way. I just meant to point out that it's the continuing occupation (with its attendant mass incarcerations of civilians and lack of any real attempts at reparations and rebuilding) more than anything else that gives rise to insurgency.

I believe, in the end, the responsibility for this whole mess lies with the current bastards in charge.

[seabeyond]

46. step further, you cant trust the cops to help you........

they are part of the problem

[pitohui]

65. yeah cops often part of the problem -- so?

i lived in an area where i had certain knowledge of police involvement in the drug trade

nonetheless i did not pick up my gun & hunt down my attackers myself

what you fantasize you'll do & what you really do are two different things

i am civilized, in the end, not willing to throw away the rest of my life & my surviving friends & family's lives for revenge

i will not presume that the average iraqi is less civilized than i

[seabeyond]

69. hm, are you hearing how the sunni are being arrested and imprisoned

by the majority of the shiite. and there family is not being told about the young sons and brothers and fathers that are taken to prison and tortured

so as i can talk about my own civility, living in htis country where i am pretty confident if i call a policeman they will come and help me, or i run out into the street the majority, if not all, my neigbors will help me.... i can understand that the world i live in is different from the one being created in iraq

so i could sit on my high horse and say, nah, i am a pacifist, i dont fight at all....... for any reason

nothing of mine is being threatened and i have tons of help if anything is

is it a matter of being civilized or surviving

[FreedomAngel82]

51. If I knew that nobody was going to come and help us

I would do it myself. It's survival and your anger and emotions. I don't fault any of them for going after revenge for killing their loved ones. :(

[pitohui]

64. that's television, you'd do no much thing

no you wouldn't "do it myself," that's just what we tell ourselves after watching too many movies

in the end no one did anything abt the ppl who shot at me, nor did i return & hunt them down, nor did my friend, who was shot at by these people more than once

if you're civilized, you don't make yourself into an animal & start hunting other people down

easy to sit here & say yeah, man, i'm charles bronson, i'm dirty harry

reality is otherwise

if nobody helps you, you pick up & move on, it's all you can do

keeping the shooting match going is a good way to get the rest of yr family & friends shot up

there are arguments to be made against our presence in iraq

but the argument that iraqis are all dirty harry who are going to settle matters via vigilante justice is not one of them

[The Straight Story]

66. So you go off and kill other innocent people, and then they get mad and do

the same. Killing people that look like the people that killed someone you love (ie, same race, same country, whatever) does nothing to help.

I can understand the rage as you see one group as the enemy (or one race/nationality) and you want them to feel the pain you do so that they will hopefully change their ways. The downside to that is now that group sees your group as killers and it goes on and on.

I prefer peace. and it won't happen when people are off killing one another for whatever reason. I can see hunting down the individuals responsible for a crime, but not just going out and killing at random.

[DerekG]

67. I get a kick out of posters who disparage the violent abolitionists

Droning on about how it was wrong, wrong, wrong what Nat Turner, William Parker and (the white) John Brown did. 4 million human beings bound in chains--castrated, lynched, raped--and we have the temerity to suggest that freedom fighters should only be pacifistic.

You'd better believe I'd strap on that sidearm.

[tx_dem41]

71. Yet, when those "freedom fighters" kill innocent people including..

children, its really hard to keep calling them "freedom fighters"?

Or, do you just as easily, dismiss the children killed by our bombs as well?

[DerekG]

78. The line certainly gets blurred with the Islamic reactionaries

I have precious little sympathy for the migrating terrorists; yet many of the insurgents are, in fact, patriots, who seek to defend Iraq from imperialists. They have endured many horrors over the decades: Hussein (whom we installed); Gulf War I; 10+ years of sanctions; and, of course, this. Suffice to say, they're just a tad bit desperate. I doubt a good number of them seek to kill children, but unfortunately, this is what happens in these kinds of conflicts. Outside of Lucas's "Star Wars," you'll find rebellion gets a little dirty.

If, and when, children are injured or killed in an insurgent counter-strike, I am more prone to blame the United States for creating the situation, just as I blame the slave-holding society for the innocents who were killed by Nat Turner and co.

And no, I don't dismiss the children who fall victim to our bombs. Since I fancy America to be the leading terrorist state since 1945, it would be unfathomable for me to have such a perception.

[tx_dem41]

83. Lots of equivocation in that post....

I'll blame anybody involved, homegrown, or migrating that kills an innocent person, or contributes to it. Wrong is wrong.

[geek tragedy]

85. The fact that a person won't blame insurgents for killing children

says everything you need to know about that person.

[DerekG]

92. "I am more prone to blame"

Meaning, I place far more blame on America than I do on the majority of insurgents. I never said I transposed blame entirely.

[geek tragedy]

94. It's still apologism for murder. If an insurgent intentionally kills

children, that insurgent is primarily to blame. Period. End of discussion.

[tx_dem41]

96. "majority"...."entirely"

More equivocation.

[DerekG]

90. Like me, you've never been put to the test

And you never will, unless Bushco really does have an itch for martial law.

Oh, and unless you're a war-tax resister, I assume you consider yourself complicit in this horror. Both of us help fund the bombs that are used to scorch the children, and we are, by definition, contributors.

[tx_dem41]

93. Thanks....you sound just like a fundamentalist preacher.....

and that's why I'm an atheist.

[geek tragedy]

97. Do you think Paul Wellstone would offer up apologia for insurgents

who kill childen?

I certainly don't.

[tx_dem41]

101. Dang...GeekT....I'm almost pissed at you for bringing up that scenario...

Perish the damned thought!

[geek tragedy]

102. Almost pissed?

I'm losing my touch. ;)

[tx_dem41]

104. Nahhh....I just haven't gotten pissed in a while...

Kinda rusty. ;)

[DerekG]

110. Paul Wellstone? Certainly not.

But then, he was struck down while trying to prevent a conflagration that would inevitably claim many children. I'm sure he was cognizant of this "fog of war," which is far more complicated than you and TX are willing to admit.

[DerekG]

100. I ask again: Do you consider yourself complicit?

Or did I strike a nerve?

[tx_dem41]

103. No....you're the one showing nerve today.

Unable to say flat-out that killing innocents by anyone is wrong period.

BTW...cut the Philosophy 101 exercise.

[DerekG]

113. PHI 101? I've responded to your posts; be accomodating, and answer mine

You were damning anyone who contributes to the death of innocents (and perhaps you are right to do so). Do you, a tax-payer (I assume), consider yourself complicit?

[tx_dem41]

114. No....

Theoretically, Government commits acts in our name, because theoretically we are the Government. Realistically, this is BS.

[DerekG]

118. But you are cognizant of what the government does, regardless of consent

Yeah, we didn't vote for these guys and gals, but we do fund their ventures. Is this not indicative of our (tacit) participation?

[tx_dem41]

121. No.

[geek tragedy]

88. What are you doing to combat the evil terrorist US state?

Why haven't you picked up that sidearm?

[DerekG]

98. Besides pursuing war-tax resistance and writing polemics, not much

I'm a coward--this I readily admit.

[tx_dem41]

108. Lol...now that's honest....and self-deprecating....

honestly, I appreciate that. Thanks for being human. :)

[pitohui]

84. well i don't believe it because you haven't

i see a nation of millions being terrorized as we speak by an invading force

are you strapping on a side-arm

you are not

nor am i

talk is cheap

no one here is gonna strap on a side-arm & take the law into their own hands, who are you kidding

you mention john brown, but you aren't willing to get what john brown got, most of us aren't

let's keep it real, please

fantasies of vigilante revenge are fine for hollywood, they're masturbation in real life

[geek tragedy]

86. Why aren't you in Iraq killing American imperiailsts? eom

[Imagevision]

68. I would kill anyone who harmed my family or die trying!!

[tx_dem41]

72. Would you kill innocent people in your quest to avenge your

family's killers? That's the key point of this thread.

[Terran1212]

109. Most likely

The combined threat of the mukhabarat, cia, m16, and the various mercenaries and armies makes fighting soley military targets unlikeley

[bpilgrim]

115. no, but we - our military - do it all the time

all nations do it in todays wars. i believe we call it, 'collateral damage' and apparently is perfectly acceptable.

peace

[pitohui]

87. oh sure you would

:eyes:

everybody sez that until their family is actually harmed

[I concur]

75. I'm new here, but allow me...

...to courteously disagree that American servicemen are "murdering" Iraqi families in wanton rage as your posting suggests (making them similiar to what Waffen SS shock troops or Soviet retalitory squads did during WWII). I say so out of experience in Vietnam (when I was stationed (Da Nang) there in 1967). I found the typical Vietnamese to be really fond and appreciative of Americans...what they did not like was our support of their corrupt government and the fact that most of the ruling class was Roman Catholic while the peasantry was Buddist. I found out this fact by an elderly man we all called "Pappa San" (term of endearment) who, despite his demonstrative affection for me, told me "Ho Chi Minh, he number one (good); LBJ, number ten!"
I believe the same kind type of affection (especially among the majority (Shiite) populace of Iraq) is there for the troops...but I also believe them to be frustrated by the constant terror from the sizable minority of former Bathists, disgruntled Sunnis and foreign Islamic extremists who oppose the occupation: Making (Every Ayatollah No. 1 and Bush No. 10)...but, IN NO WAY does it make our troops murderers!

[whatever4]

80. I'd be in jail or dead

And that's just all there is to it. No telling where they'd be.

I just can't speak to Iraq. This nation seems to have an attitude that sees them as less than human, somehow, as if they're meant to suffer, just for where they were born. It's beyond me.

[Terran1212]

106. I cannot say

Because I am not in that situation. I'd hope to have the moral courage to resist vengeance, but I can't say until I'm there.

[B Calm]

120. I would tell the invader to get the hell out of my home! Then after

he tells me he can't leave yet because he has to fix what he broke, I would shoot him right between the eyes!

[evilqueen]

135. We helped to create the "terrorists". We funded it. Here is proof...

=======================================
THE ABC'S OF JIHAD IN AFGHANISTAN * Courtesy, USA
By Joe Stephens and David B. Ottaway
Washington Post, 23 March 2002

=======================================


*As Afghan schools reopen today, the United States has delivered 4 million radical Islamist texbooks. More are on the way.* (See text below).

In the twilight of the Cold War, the United States spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings, part of covert attempts to spur resistance to the Soviet occupation.

The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system's core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books, though the radical movement scratched out human faces in keeping with its strict fundamentalist code.

As Afghan schools reopen today, the United States is back in the business of providing schoolbooks. But now it is wrestling with the unintended consequences of its successful strategy of stirring Islamic fervor to fight communism. What seemed like a good idea in the context of the Cold War is being criticized by humanitarian workers as a crude tool that steeped a generation in violence.

More...

*edited for length

[tx_dem41]

141. We all know that....and we condemn the people that did that...

Question: Does that excuse the terrorists? Of course it doesn't.

[William Bloode]

139. Thats how i see it.

I have often used that as an example in discussion. Just ask what they would do if someone invaded their space and began killing their loved ones and friends.

[tx_dem41]

143. Well, if you asked me that......

I wouldn't answer: "Kill innocent children by planting a bomb in a public place". Would you answer that way?

[Moderator]

144. Locking....

This thread has run its course.