SOCNET

Go Back   SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network > General Topics > Terrorism and Asymmetric Warfare

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #221  
Old 4 January 2009, 13:49
Greenhat
Visitor
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReconValhalla View Post
Ok, I understand your point, but consider that the Jews did not ram two airplanes into the Reichstag nor did they try to sink a German warship.
There have been Jewish terrorists. There have been Catholic terrorists. Shall we blame every Jew or every Catholic for the actions of those few?

Quote:
We could never kill EVERY Muslim on the planet, but we can certainly send them back to the Stone Age, as we did to Japan and Germany. The only way we could get there is through the proper mindset, and it is said mindset that we lack. We won WWII by going all out, and that is the only way we will win this war.
I'd suggest you don't have a fucking clue how we won WWII. We went "all out"?

Did we? So why did we capture so many Germans, Italians, Japanese, etc.? After all, if we were going "all out", shouldn't we have just killed them all? Why did we bypass Rabaul? If we were going "all out", shouldn't we have obliterated it? Geneva Convention or Law of Land Warfare mean anything to you?

Quote:
But we need to bring a war without rules to the Muslims if we expect to keep our way of life.
Nonsense. Complete and utter bullshit. The great majority of Muslims don't give a damn about our way of life. However, doing what you suggest would clearly lose us our way of life, since you are willing to give up the very principles that make us the nation we are.

Quote:
However, keep in mind that if Muslims had their way in America, they would not be so fair and just as to fall in step with our beloved Constitution.
Nonsense again. You are using the words of a very small minority of Muslims to make claims against all Muslims.
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 4 January 2009, 13:57
Greenhat
Visitor
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOTB View Post
We are in a Global War on Islam -- whether we want to admit it or not. Certainly Muslims don't doubt this. Whether they will tell you that they are suspicious of the West's dealings with Islam in regards to recent wars, the support of Israel, issues surrounding oil, religious equality (including even when we capitulate and allow for the masking of windows at private swimming hours at public pools), whatever -- Muslims look at the West through jaundiced eyes at a minimum, many look at the West as an enemy (in advance, there are many examples of enemies conducting trade and other relations).

We should openly acknowledge that we are in a war against Islam, and wage it as such.
I disagree. First, there are a lot of Muslims who more than doubt it, they would disagree entirely with you. One of them is the elected leader of the most populous Islamic nation on Earth... who is fighting the same war, on our side.

What you are claiming may be primarily true in the Middle-East. I suspect it is may even be true in a significant portion of South-West Asia. It is not true throughout Islam.

I've pointed out already how WWII was not a war on National Socialism. The survival of Franco's Spain demonstrates that. In a similar way, the war we are in now is not a war with Islam. It may be a war with certain fundamental or radical sects of Islam, but it is not a war with Islam as a whole.
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 4 January 2009, 14:01
Jong Jong is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Fantasy Land
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenhat View Post
I disagree. First, there are a lot of Muslims who more than doubt it, they would disagree entirely with you. One of them is the elected leader of the most populous Islamic nation on Earth... who is fighting the same war, on our side.

What you are claiming may be primarily true in the Middle-East. I suspect it is may even be true in a significant portion of South-West Asia. It is not true throughout Islam.

I've pointed out already how WWII was not a war on National Socialism. The survival of Franco's Spain demonstrates that. In a similar way, the war we are in now is not a war with Islam. It may be a war with certain fundamental or radical sects of Islam, but it is not a war with Islam as a whole.
Hey man, you forget you are responding to Marines. All they like to do is kill things!!
__________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."

Winston Churchill

Put a small child in a playpen with an apple and a bunny. If s/he eats the apple and plays with the bunny, s/he's normal;but if s/he eats the bunny and plays with the apple, I'll buy you a new car. Somewhere along the line we must have been TAUGHT to do the wrong thing.

Maynard James Keenan
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 4 January 2009, 14:05
Greenhat
Visitor
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jong View Post
Hey man, you forget you are responding to Marines. All they like to do is kill things!!

Hmmmm...considering the Island-hopping campaign is one of the few places in WWII where you could claim that the approach was "Kill them all, let God sort them out"... you may have a point.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 4 January 2009, 14:12
ReconValhalla ReconValhalla is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenhat View Post
Hmmmm...considering the Island-hopping campaign is one of the few places in WWII where you could claim that the approach was "Kill them all, let God sort them out"... you may have a point.
LOL

touche!
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 4 January 2009, 14:22
Jimbo's Avatar
Jimbo Jimbo is offline
Scoundrel
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: inside your OODA loop
Posts: 6,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReconValhalla View Post
... but we can certainly send them back to the Stone Age, as we did to Japan and Germany.
We don't need to send them back to the stone age. What we need is for all of the quiet supporters and minor sympathizers to understand that their future does not lie in the next detonation of a suicide bomber or IED, or in the next spent casing in a Mumbai style attack. So that all the people who voted for HAMAS understand that doing so was the wrong move; that you don't elect groups who can't wrap their head around the roles and responsibilities of a Westphalian state.
__________________

“It's not a good idea to allow an unknown enemy force to attack your compound. Ever, really.” -MixedLoad

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." -HST

Secrets don't sleep til they're took to the grave. -BMTH
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 4 January 2009, 14:29
Greenhat
Visitor
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
We don't need to send them back to the stone age. What we need is for all of the quiet supporters and minor sympathizers to understand that their future does not lie in the next detonation of a suicide bomber or IED, or in the next spent casing in a Mumbai style attack. So that all the people who voted for HAMAS understand that doing so was the wrong move; that you don't elect groups who can't wrap their head around the roles and responsibilities of a Westphalian state.

Well said.
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 4 January 2009, 15:34
DirtyDog0311 DirtyDog0311 is offline
On the Extract Bird
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South
Posts: 7,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenhat View Post
If you aren't willing to give up your right to free speech, don't ask others to give up theirs.
I think that what they are doing is transcending the spirit of the first amendment. Much like the law that says you can't yell "fire!" in a crowded movie theater.

But on that note, I would be more than willing to give up my right to yell "Death to America" while pissing on the stars and stripes on National TV in order to get rid of these damn Muslim fanatics. I mean, the most controversial thing I do (morally, I guess) is to smoke and drink in bars and screw unsuspecting college girls through clever manipulation.

But seriously, I really do think that George Washington and Benny Franklin would be having second thoughts about the ambiguous language that they used in the constitution if they knew how lawyers would pick apart and bend it in such a manner that would allow certain things to continue (such as this) because "the constitution says this".

The bottom line is that if anyone I care about gets hurt by these people finally taking the next step and start strapping on plastic explosive vests (which, in my opinion, is only a matter of time) simply because no one gave a shit enough to say 'enough is enough'.....then I am checking out a SAW from the armory and all bets are off according to who has "human rights". Constitution be damned.
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 4 January 2009, 15:42
redhawk redhawk is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 2,880
Did someone genocide agx's account?
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 4 January 2009, 16:06
okami1 okami1 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: roadmarching in a bathrobe
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyDog0311 View Post
I really do think that George Washington and Benny Franklin would be having second thoughts about the ambiguous language that they used in the constitution if they knew how lawyers would pick apart and bend it in such a manner that would allow certain things to continue (such as this) because "the constitution says this".
The quote by Benjamin Franklin that Jimbo posted doesn't sound like ambiguous language at all, and the sentiment that it expresses is most certainly not anachronistic. The Constitution is a dynamic and evolving document that will be continually interpreted as our society evolves. I would argue that the language of the Constitution is kept purposefully vague in some places to allow us the latitude we feel appropriate in interpreting it. Think of the 2nd Amendment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyDog0311 View Post
The bottom line is that if anyone I care about gets hurt by these people finally taking the next step and start strapping on plastic explosive vests (which, in my opinion, is only a matter of time) simply because no one gave a shit enough to say 'enough is enough'.....then I am checking out a SAW from the armory and all bets are off according to who has "human rights". Constitution be damned.
What happened to Fish78?
__________________
Less talking
More PT
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 4 January 2009, 16:06
Sharky's Avatar
Sharky Sharky is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: SOCNET
Posts: 20,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by redhawk View Post
Did someone genocide agx's account?



Not me. I'm not feeling genocidal today.
__________________
I was born my papa's son
When I hit the ground I was on the run
I had one glad hand and the other behind
You can have yours, just give me mine
When the hound dog barkin' in the black of the night
Stick my hand in my pocket, everything's all right

-ZZ Top
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 4 January 2009, 16:09
okami1 okami1 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: roadmarching in a bathrobe
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenhat View Post
One of them is the elected leader of the most populous Islamic nation on Earth... who is fighting the same war, on our side.
GH, did you read that article I posted a couple pages back? I know it was cursory, but what did you think about the author's assertion that the ideology is spreading even while the people who put it into practice are being jailed or killed? Since you're in that part of the world and spend time in Indonesia, I would like to hear your opinion.
__________________
Less talking
More PT
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 4 January 2009, 16:10
ReconValhalla ReconValhalla is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
We don't need to send them back to the stone age. What we need is for all of the quiet supporters and minor sympathizers to understand that their future does not lie in the next detonation of a suicide bomber or IED, or in the next spent casing in a Mumbai style attack. So that all the people who voted for HAMAS understand that doing so was the wrong move; that you don't elect groups who can't wrap their head around the roles and responsibilities of a Westphalian state.
I agree with ya there, but I still think the solution to making them understand this is by giving them no quarter when they do the wrong thing.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 4 January 2009, 16:16
Chaplain's Avatar
Chaplain Chaplain is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Michigan
Posts: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo View Post
We don't need to send them back to the stone age. What we need is for all of the quiet supporters and minor sympathizers to understand that their future does not lie in the next detonation of a suicide bomber or IED, or in the next spent casing in a Mumbai style attack. So that all the people who voted for HAMAS understand that doing so was the wrong move; that you don't elect groups who can't wrap their head around the roles and responsibilities of a Westphalian state.
Amen! And threatening genocide does not win friends and influence people, or cause people to vote out the HAMAS idiots. It causes people to run towards any one who promises protection or freedom, even if they are totalitarian idiots. See Hitler for how that turns out! Unfortunately, "Give me liberty or give me death" works in the Gaza strip today (and Iraq and Afghanistan) as well as it did in Thermopylae or in Boston in 1776. And no, I am not saying that the Palestinians (or the Taliban) are great "liberators of the oppressed" or people to be admired. They just have a good propaganda angle, and use it to motivate their people to continue to endure the poverty and destruction caused by their stupid political decisions. The human desire for freedom is a powerful tool used by both honorable and dishonorable men. Using dishonorable means (genocide) to accomplish supposedly honorable ends (peace) does not work. (Again, see Hitler.) Muslims are escaping from totalitarian regimes and finding real peace in America. Welcome, friends of liberty! Yes, even if it means we also let in some more terrorists. When more Muslims experience true liberty, the less Muslims will want to give it up to terrorists, or have to turn to terrorists for safety and protection. Our constitution, as messy and ambiguous as it is, mistreated and twisted by lawyers as it is, is still a beacon of hope for all peoples of the world, regardless of race or religion.
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 4 January 2009, 16:43
mags123 mags123 is offline
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 70
I think one needs to come to terms with the fact that there will always be a certain "anti-Western" attitude present in some communities in the Middle East.

Realistically, there is little we can do about it and it might be more beneficial to practice some realpolitik instead of using grand ideological statements and policies.

I'm afraid that "sending them back to the stone age" will be very counter-productive. Instead, work with the elements of society that are amenable.
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 4 January 2009, 18:28
Greenhat
Visitor
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtyDog0311 View Post
I think that what they are doing is transcending the spirit of the first amendment. Much like the law that says you can't yell "fire!" in a crowded movie theater.
I think the British authorities probably claimed exactly the same about Sam Adams and the Sons of Liberty.
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 4 January 2009, 18:29
Greenhat
Visitor
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by okami1 View Post
GH, did you read that article I posted a couple pages back? I know it was cursory, but what did you think about the author's assertion that the ideology is spreading even while the people who put it into practice are being jailed or killed? Since you're in that part of the world and spend time in Indonesia, I would like to hear your opinion.
Yeah, I read it. And I think the guy is full of shit.
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 4 January 2009, 18:38
okami1 okami1 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: roadmarching in a bathrobe
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenhat View Post
Yeah, I read it. And I think the guy is full of shit.

Interesting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by article
A report by the International Crisis Group earlier this year suggests that the rise of radical publishers could indicate that Jemaah Islamiyah is beginning to wage jihad through the printed page rather than violent acts.

"Some publishers may be playing a more positive than negative role, directing members into above-ground activities and enabling them to promote a jihadi message without engaging in violence," the report says.
This stood out to me as being one of the more stupid things said in the article. Jihadi message without engaging in violence?
__________________
Less talking
More PT
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 4 January 2009, 18:42
Jimbo's Avatar
Jimbo Jimbo is offline
Scoundrel
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: inside your OODA loop
Posts: 6,378
Quote:
Originally Posted by okami1 View Post
This stood out to me as being one of the more stupid things said in the article. Jihadi message without engaging in violence?
What is stupid about that?

A number of groups essentially provide 'sensitization' to populations that might be suitable jihadists. Do you not understand the role of propaganda and information operations carried out by terrorist and insurget groups?
__________________

“It's not a good idea to allow an unknown enemy force to attack your compound. Ever, really.” -MixedLoad

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." -HST

Secrets don't sleep til they're took to the grave. -BMTH
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 4 January 2009, 18:48
okami1 okami1 is offline
Confirmed User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: roadmarching in a bathrobe
Posts: 1,181
"Aha!" moment.

I understand better now, thanks. I think what I thought sounded off about that quote was that it made it sound like the recipients of the jihadi message would be satisfied with the "above-ground" activities and not follow the path to violence. That doesn't seem likely. Am I wrong?
__________________
Less talking
More PT
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Our new posting rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:01.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved
© SOCNET 1996-2020