When do you have the right to..?

[250]

it doesnt matter what YOU think

it is the difference between what YOU think and what THEY think create conflicts here

there, any standard we set for killing (especially self-defense) will create problem

[Ryanamur]

Originally posted by Sazerac: Link, I think a lot of the "violent thoughts" that have been expressed on the forum in the past week, although disturbing, are necessary, because they are just that, "expressions." Therapists have long understood the necessity for angry and hurt people to unburden themselves of their feelings, including feelings of rage, violence, and revenge. Venting a feeling is not the same as acting on a thought, and if that feeling goes unexpressed, quite often it festers deep within and then explodes in a violent action that is far worse that the original feeling of anger, frustration, or despair. I do agree with you on not acting out on terrorism. One mustn't return evil with evil. The perpetrators of this crime must be brought to justice, of course, but let it be from a sense of honor and justice, and not a petty revenge.

I see your point Saz, but I do not think that it will do anything helpful to the situation. You see, justice is a pretty vague term. We see justice as an expression of law. They see justice in destroying the WTC. As far as they are concerned, a small amount of justice as been dealt to America on Tuesday morning. Plus, who are we, to say that our Justice system is here more appropriate then their's. Who are we to say that American (or Occidental) Justice does have bearing in other part of the World.

The sad part of this is that bringing them to justice will do just as much damage as killing them. They will again be taken martyr. They will rally more to the cause and there's nothing that we can do to prevent it. Plus, a live martyr is far more dangerous then a dead one. Imagine South Africa today if Nelson Mandela (a great man) would have been killed instead of put in jail. Do you really think that he could have rallied the world against the white regime as he did. No, I don't think he could of. Is sysbolisim would have come and gone and be forgotten.

I'm sorry to say, that unfortunately, killing them (not bringing them to justice) is the right thing to do in this very situation we are facing.


------------------
If I am because I think, then, if I talk without thinking, I'm not really talking! Am I?

[This message has been edited by Ryanamur (edited 09-16-2001).]

[Tobbin]

Originally posted by Rikard: and at home??? anyway i'm bored so i made this About terrorism (to stay on topic) What use does it have if you attack countries that harbor terrorist when it does not affect the terrorists?? It's sure that Afganistan isn;'t gonna give Bin Laden to the US and bombing Khabul will not change it [/B]

Nope, at work. Boy, I WISH I could work at home.

I agree with you about bombing Afghanistan, but even should it come down to an assault, I believe they are going to go after strategic targets. Similar to what happened with IRAQ, but hopefully with better precision. If we were going to just bomb Afghanistan, I believe that would have already happened. Besides, that type of aggression doesn't help anyone. That would make us the monster.

EDIT: Oh yeah, didn't mention about your creative effort, did I? That looks pretty cool. Uh Oh, watch out world, I have a LOGO now.
------------------


Protectorate of the OHF
Death Waits 4 U ALL

[This message has been edited by Tobbin (edited 09-16-2001).]

[250]

Originally posted by Ryanamur: I see your point Saz, but I do not think that it will do anything helpful to the situation. You see, justice is a pretty vague term. We see justice as an expression of law. They see justice in destroying the WTC. As far as they are concerned, a small amount of justice as been dealt to America on Tuesday morning. Plus, who are we, to say that our Justice system is here more appropriate then their's. Who are we to say that American (or Occidental) Justice does have bearing in other part of the World. The sad part of this is that bringing them to justice will do just as much damage as killing them. They will again be taken martyr. They will rally more to the cause and there's nothing that we can do to prevent it. Plus, a live martyr is far more dangerous then a dead one. Imagine South Africa today if Nelson Mandela (a great man) would have been killed instead of put in jail. Do you really think that he could have rallied the world against the white regime as he did. No, I don't think he could of. Is sysbolisim would have come and gone and be forgotten. I'm sorry to say, that unfortunately, killing them (not bringing them to justice) is the right thing to do in this very situation we are facing.

how do you kill them without "bring them to justice"? clearify please

[Nostron]

An eye for an eye that's what i say... I mean has anyone seen the movie "Swordfish"(w/ Halle berry, and John Travolta)... Well if not i dont' want to ruin it but the anti-terrorist there had a plan. They said that if any terrorist act is done on the US then they will do the same thing only 3 times worst.
If the terrorist blows up a plan they would blow up and airport. they blow up a building we take out entire cities.

Their point is that they would make terrorism such a bad crime that no one would be stupid enough to commit such acts.

------------------
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[250]

Originally posted by Nostron: An eye for an eye that's what i say... I mean has anyone seen the movie "Swordfish"(w/ Halle berry, and John Travolta)... Well if not i dont' want to ruin it but the anti-terrorist there had a plan. They said that if any terrorist act is done on the US then they will do the same thing only 3 times worst. If the terrorist blows up a plan they would blow up and airport. they blow up a building we take out entire cities. Their point is that they would make terrorism such a bad crime that no one would be stupid enough to commit such acts.

you are killing INNOCENTS here! damn it

you see, the fathers you killed, will be vengenced by their sons 20 years later, and then your sons and daughters will pay the price, got it?

so stop thinking like a terroist

[Ryanamur]

Originally posted by 250: how do you kill them without "bring them to justice"? clearify please

You kill them not to bring them to justice but to prevent them from killing more people (hence the self-defense).

------------------
If I am because I think, then, if I talk without thinking, I'm not really talking! Am I?

[Ryanamur]

Originally posted by 250: you are killing INNOCENTS here! damn it you see, the fathers you killed, will be vengenced by their sons 20 years later, and then your sons and daughters will pay the price, got it? so stop thinking like a terroist

250 is totally right. You CANNOT aim a response to the general population. That's against our own believes. You take out the terrorist and the government that harbor them. Not the bakery shop owner that happens to live in a country where terrorist live.

Don't forget, not all Islam people are bad. Only the extremists that are ready to perform terrorism... and even then, they're only bad by our own standards.

------------------
If I am because I think, then, if I talk without thinking, I'm not really talking! Am I?

[This message has been edited by Ryanamur (edited 09-16-2001).]

[250]

Originally posted by Ryanamur: You kill them not to bring them to justice but to prevent them from killing more people (hence the self-defense).

isnt that part of the justice? or you mean, like assasination?

then you are making heros out of them, I am afraid that is going to create more and more terroists

I say condamn them, use belief system, disrupt their public imagines

or manipulate them

whatever you do, don't make heros out of them

[DragonMage]

Originally posted by Nostron: An eye for an eye that's what i say... I mean has anyone seen the movie "Swordfish"(w/ Halle berry, and John Travolta)... Well if not i dont' want to ruin it but the anti-terrorist there had a plan. They said that if any terrorist act is done on the US then they will do the same thing only 3 times worst. If the terrorist blows up a plan they would blow up and airport. they blow up a building we take out entire cities. Their point is that they would make terrorism such a bad crime that no one would be stupid enough to commit such acts.

ONE major flaw that I can see in this is that all you do is become a terrorist yourself. You make others "obey" out of fear. Not come together in understanding for the greater good of all people. I know that the terrorists have to be stopped and, while retribution greater than the damage inflicted sounds doable, you hurt more innocent people. You cannot possibly punish ONLY the terrorists by bombing them because they don't set up their own camps in their own little areas that can easily be bombed. They infiltrate and go about as "normal" citizens in 'innocent' cities. Just think about it for a minute. They have infiltrated American cities/states. People didn't know that they were terrorists. Should we bomb Florida or California because these terrorists lived (and some may still) live there? I'm not flaming at you and I'm not entirely a pacifist, but I believe if there will be bombings and fighting, we've got to be VERY careful in doing it. I don't believe in a military view of "acceptable losses" or "expendables".

------------------
"Allright! We'll call it a draw."

The day we stop learning is the day we start dying!(c)

*Newly abducted - er, inducted - member of the HADB clan. Mage extraordinair. Occasional subjugate to Gwhanos the Fluffy *