When do you have the right to..?

[Link]

I'm getting the feeling only Saz here gets the point..

------------------
I am committed to restore your faith in extreme violence...

Link
Overlord Executioner, Slayer of Fluffed Beings
Member of Clan HADB
Supreme Warrior of Myst

hiya tobster
is msn working????


------------------

[Link]

Originally posted by Rikard: hiya tobster is msn working????

It's working here Rikard..

------------------
I am committed to restore your faith in extreme violence...

Link
Overlord Executioner, Slayer of Fluffed Beings
Member of Clan HADB
Supreme Warrior of Myst

[Ryanamur]

You are right, no one as the right to take someone elses life. The only problem is that given this leaves to anarchy. You see, what you're arguing ultimately can be interprete as "if someone commits a crime against me, I have (or society has) no rights to impose justice".

I what we are facing today, they're no absolute right solution: on one hand, if we retaliate, we will face more terrorists acts; on the other, if we don't retaliate, we will face more terrorists acts then if we do retaliate. What we are facing is an ideology problem: those terrorists believe that they are following the Islam religion 'cause they kill us to protect Islam. They are not cowards, they are, in there own rightfull mind, protectors of religion - I do not include all people of Islam belief in this group, only the extremists. We, as all Occidentals, have values that are completely incompatible with their believes. If I'm not mistaking, the Coran (which I've not read) allows them to fight if to defend themselves.

On the other side of the coin, our own believes allow us also seek justice. But, what is justice. To kill a few millions in Afghanistan. No, to kill Bin Laden and all his followers and future terrorists... yes. People that believe that the US (and other countries) will solve this problem can fight terrorism by diplomacy and discussion with terrorists are gravely mistaking and putting in the minds of others ideas that can lead to their death. You cannot negociate with them.

-Warning, very graphic illustration in the following paragraph-

Think of it this way: We are sitting at a table having tea, you, your wife and I. I pull out a gun on you and I tell you that if you move, I'll kill you. You open your mouth in surprise and I pull the trigger. Your wife jolts back, I pull the trigger on her. Guess what, as far as I'm concerned, it's your own fault if you died. You didn't listen, you both moved: you opened your mouth (movement) and your wife jolted (movement). As far as I'm concerned, you had it coming. I gave you the option of life or death and, by moving, you chose death. That's the kind of extremist we are talking about.

You cannot in your right mind even consider discussion with them. As far as they are concerned, that's an action. My opinion on this all thing, identify the bad apples as they keep popping up and eliminate them. Don't go after the civilian population, you'll only create more bad apples. Saddly enough you will never be able to remove them all. But you might be able to remove the one that was planning to kill your daughter at a movie theater tomorow night.

This is not going to be a small war. We will not go into Afghanistan, bomb the hell of them, take over the county and all is going to be fine after that. We are talking about decades (note the "s") of covert, police and military operations against potential threats. Once we remove those threats, more will pop up. That's the way it is. But you know what, if we don't remove them, more will pop-up anyway. As far as I'm concerned, we (as a Society) are better to kill them on sight now and as they pop-up then to let them live and deal with a number far greater than what we can handle. Even if killing them will not solve entirely the problem, it's the best, moral solution that our society can make.

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

[skywalker]

Originally posted by Link: I'm getting the feeling only Saz here gets the point..

I think I got your point, didn't I?

Mark

[Tobbin]

Originally posted by Rikard: hiya tobster is msn working????

Sorry, I'm at work. Don't have MSN. Not really supposed to be on here.


------------------


Protectorate of the OHF
Death Waits 4 U ALL

[Ryanamur]

Originally posted by 250: you can kill for all kinda reasons self-defense justice revenge whatever you choose, if you choose, you gonna end up fighting a bloddy war because your justice and honor are dictatorship and tyranny in the eyes of muslin world yourself defense will be seen as vegence and your vengence... lets not get into the ugliest one

I do not agree with you here 250. I think that only killing for self-defense is acceptable in your list. Taking out terrorist threats would follow exactly under that category. They will strike and kill somewhat innocent people (by our standards anyway). You do not strike out of revenge, you strike to protect.

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

[Link]

Originally posted by skywalker: I think I got your point, didn't I? Mark

You did get it Mark.. I was referring to Rikard and 250 actually...

------------------
I am committed to restore your faith in extreme violence...

Link
Overlord Executioner, Slayer of Fluffed Beings
Member of Clan HADB
Supreme Warrior of Myst

[Tobbin]

Originally posted by Link: I've been reading the topics about the (horrible) attacks in Washington and NY, and of course, i feel sad too. Not as sad as most of the Americans here, but that I can understand. The thing what really bothers me, is the enormous amount of agressive thoughts on this forum. I mean, everyone knows that someone can't walk away with such a crime, but (and don't get me wrong here, I'm speaking in general here) what gives a human the right to take someone else's life? Why is it always necessary to take revenge in a way, which will only affect more and more? In my opinion, no one has such a right, and therefore no one should kill one another. Easily said, but what can be done about it? Of course, something can be done, but agression and violence won't help solving terrorism in this world. Acting like a terrorist, will only help terrorism, not fight it, and fighting terrorism is (judging from the fact that the "World Against Terrorism-icon" is placed on top of each page of this forum) what we all wish to do...

There is a difference from terrorism and justice. Terrorism affects those that are innocent. Justice is aggression at those who have acted out against those that are innocent. Perhaps the level of justice may not fit the crime, and in that aspect, I totally agree with you, but to think purple dinosaur responses when you see such atrocities is almost unbelievable. I'll have to say that I am in the group that believes that aggression is necessary, but I would like to add that I want surgical aggression. I want justice on those that deserve it. Not any innocents. If we harm those who are innocent, then your definition of terrorist matches my own. It would be a dark day indeed should we become that which we strive so hard to eradicate. In that case, terrorism will truly win.


------------------


Protectorate of the OHF
Death Waits 4 U ALL

Originally posted by Tobbin: Sorry, I'm at work. Don't have MSN. Not really supposed to be on here.

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



------------------