How would YOU stop Terrorism?

[Berzerker]

Do you know who started the Al-Sadr movement in Iraq?

Saddam did. By executing a senior al-Sadr clan member. In 1997, if I recall.

And we let Saddam keep his throne. And not by accident, either. Schwarzkopf himself said there was nothing between us and Baghdad in 1991. He said we could have taken Saddam out any time we wanted.


The U.S. specifically leaves Saddam on the throne, and then Saddam kills your grandfather. You know exactly how you would feel about that.

You're giving a rational for being mad, not becoming a terrorist. Was Al-Sadr sending his guys over to attack us after the first gulf war or after this clan member got killed? Nooope... We know his name only because we're intervening. We intervened in '91 and we kept intervening right on up to 9/11 and beyond. Do you realize this when telling me we're being attacked for not intervening?

 

[BasketCase]

And you dont appease them all much less at once, you meet the rational and do-able demands that have widespread support

That pisses off their opponents. Thereby breeding terrorists.

It's happened with things as innocuous as food donations. The U.S. donated food to Somalia, and warlords from one faction attacked our aid suppliers because we were allowing food to go to the OTHER faction.

 

[BasketCase]

Was Al-Sadr sending his guys over to attack us after the first gulf war or after this clan member got killed?

Al-Sadr started attacking us after the family took a personal loss and once U.S. troops were within easy reach.

Maybe Al-Sadr tried to attack us sooner. CNN says there have been approximately a hundred foiled terrorist attacks against U.S. soil (yes, I mean over here on this side of the Atlantic) since 9/11. The news never said who. It's very likely there were some Al-Sadr folks in there.

No, I'm not statistically certain. I'm theorizing. I took the general rules for how humans behave, and applied those rules to what has happened around the world. Hence my conclusions.

 

[Berzerker]

Not for something like fifteen years. If we'd intervened five years sooner, the Al-Sadr movement in Iraq would not exist right now.

We did intervene 5 years sooner, we've been intervening for decades.

China is not a superpower. Nobody gives a crap about them, and nobody goes to them when they need anything except tanks.We're the strongest. Everybody comes to us when they want someone dead. When you need money, you don't ask a homeless guy on a street corner for a handout. You ask Bill Gates.

So are the Chinese being attacked by Iraqi terrorists for not sending tanks? Comparing China to a homeless guy is rich Who do you think was sending the weapons in Vietnam and Korea?

 

[Berzerker]

That pisses off their opponents. Thereby breeding terrorists.

No, it makes the terrorists fall out of favor with the mainstream and they lose support, not gain it...

It's happened with things as innocuous as food donations. The U.S. donated food to Somalia, and warlords from one faction attacked our aid suppliers because we were allowing food to go to the OTHER faction.

Yeah? Thats called intervening... You support intervening, not me. Somalians weren't over here attacking us because they needed food or because warlords run the country.

 

[BasketCase]

We did intervene 5 years sooner, we've been intervening for decades.

No, we did not kick Saddam out of office until 2003.

So are the Chinese being attacked by Iraqi terrorists for not sending tanks?

I already covered that. Nobody goes to China for help. They come to U.S.

 

[Berzerker]

Al-Sadr started attacking us after the family took a personal loss and once U.S. troops were within easy reach.

You mean after we intervened and he wasn't our boy to run part of the country?

Maybe Al-Sadr tried to attack us sooner. CNN says there have been approximately a hundred foiled terrorist attacks against U.S. soil (yes, I mean over here on this side of the Atlantic) since 9/11. The news never said who. It's very likely there were some Al-Sadr folks in there.

No, I'm not statistically certain. I'm theorizing. I took the general rules for how humans behave, and applied those rules to what has happened around the world. Hence my conclusions.

Ya, well, maybe he did maybe he didn't maybe this and maybe that (Bush forget to tell us?). You are not dealing with how humans behave. If some bastard murders my family, I dont commit terrorist attacks against peoples and countries who were not involved. To suggest that terrorists are attacking us because we didn't remove Saddam in '91 requires actual proof, and that doesn't even begin to prove that terrorist attacks are committed against nations that dont intervene.

 

[Berzerker]

No, we did not kick Saddam out of office until 2003.

We kicked him out of Kuwait and told Iraqis to rebel in '91

I already covered that. Nobody goes to China for help. They come to U.S.

Who do you think was arming the people fighting us in Asia?

 

[BasketCase]

You mean after we intervened and he wasn't our boy to run part of the country?

How about you stop digging for hidden meanings? What did I say?

If some bastard murders my family, I dont commit terrorist attacks against peoples and countries who were not involved.

How do I know? I've never met you. You could be Timothy McVeigh's stepfather for all I know.

But I do know that when relatives, children--or entire families--get murdered, some people do in fact fly off the handle and search desperately about them for anything or anybody upon which they can vent their rage. No, they should not attack people who were not involved.

But some people do anyway.

 

[bloh]

Terrorism will exist as long as man exists.

Wrong. Terrorism will exist as long as countries like USA and UK exists.

 

[Rossiya]

Wrong. Terrorism will exist as long as countries like USA and UK exists.

Wrong. If the UK were to stop following the USA around, the UK could still exist.