combating terrorism

Trippy discussions of moral issues, conspiracy theories, the paranormal and other otherworldly phenomenon.

Moderator: Dracofrost

combating terrorism

Postby TerraFrost » Sat Jun 05, 2004 3:51 am

what do you thinkt he best way to combat terrorism is?

i think one of the best ways is to put a face on the would-be victims of terrorism - in essence, humanize them (as opposed to what is often done to terrorists - dehumanizing). that way, terrorism doesn't just target random NPC's (which is probably equiv. to what terrorists probably see their targets as), but real flesh and blood people, with families, all doing what they can to achieve some small level of happyness.

although, then again, considering that the 9/11 terrorists were able to live in the US for almost a year without gaining some appreciation of the people they would be killing, that might not work all that well, either...
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby ChatOmbre » Sat Jun 05, 2004 6:43 am

I'm not sure how to combat terrorism, and not to awake, but I think a war on terrorism (or any other idea) is stupid. a war on an idea isn't like a war on a place (like Iraq or the USA), because it can't end. there isn't a 'okay, we've done our duty and kicked their butts, let's go home.' but I guess me saying that doesn't mean much because I don't have a better idea atm. >.>; heh...
Queen of the PointyShiney

"Too much ink is drawn to describe and define love. Why describe it and define it? Take my hand and let's just take a ride through it. Love is... Love is... Let's just go for awhile, leaving ourselves for each other." --Mike Smith
User avatar
ChatOmbre
Heroic Guard
 
Posts: 3519
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2003 7:41 pm
Location: somewhere over the rainbow

Postby shahmask » Thu Jun 10, 2004 7:46 am

chat, that was beautifully said.

as much as i hate this idea, databases of federal agencies (fbi, cia, nsa, dea, faa, ins, etc), state agencies(state police, state justice systems, state colleges and universities), local agencies(sheriff & police, and other justice systems), international intelligence agencies, and other licensing organizations need to be standardized and interlinked. this is the only way to make sure ppl don't stay past thier greencard times and aren't engaged in doing something bad.

however, in the hand of tom delay, john ashcroft, david dewhurst, and other such ppl, such a system is a horrible thing. imagine them helping the riaa and mpaa. imagine these vigilanties tracking down anyone saying anything bad about them. it could become very dictatorial, very iran in that sense. so, if some such system were put into place, very strict rules would need to be put in place and followed. such as if info is found that is incriminating in a sense not directly (and i truly do mean directly, not crap like mp3 sharing encourages terrorism) related to terrorism, then that info can not be used interdepartmentally(the founding dept could still use it as it does now) for any other reason.

btw, attacking soveriegn nations that aren't directly involved on a national scale in immenant terrorism activity is wrong. attacking a country whose gov't wasn't responsible for terroristic activity doesn't work either.
User avatar
shahmask
Castle Guard
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 4:07 am
Location: in the valley of silicon hills

Postby TerraFrost » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:11 am

I'm not sure how to combat terrorism, and not to awake, but I think a war on terrorism (or any other idea) is stupid. a war on an idea isn't like a war on a place (like Iraq or the USA), because it can't end.


i think bush's war on terrorism is actually a war on organized terrorism, which is a tad more managable.
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Roadkill » Thu Jun 10, 2004 1:54 pm

This is shit. He should never have called it a war. You can tell bush is a conservative, he's fighting as if this was the past. In today's world you cannot just declare war on something like this, especially terrorism. Pretty much every war in the last 50 years has not been direct, it was always fought with guerilla tactics. Evern more so, he didn't even declare war on a nation, he declare war on an organization. hey don't own tanks, or fighter planes, or bombers, or any other of the direct warfare equipment a nation may use to fight a war. SO obviously they can't fight open battles. So how are they going to fight? Ask yourself how are they going to fight to win? hrm?

Guerilla tactics. So all he has done, really, in declaring war is perhaps satisfied the public, but also made america more of a target, as war implies an exchange of fire.

Bleh, there's alot of other things wrong with this setup.

But the best way to fight terrorism is not to fight it. Ask for a representative, invite him to a podium in front of lots of people, to make a political speech or statement of some sort. Be nice to them, and help them get their message across, but tell them to do it at home.

Something i just learned in world history is that Africa and the Middle East don't have natural borders right now, they were all created by the Imperialistic nations that occupied them -- and those borders were designed to divide the people, so they could get the most out of imperialism.

Let them fight it out themselves, and us quit interfering. Then they won't get so damn mad at us, and do shit like this. I doubt any of the nations in existance now will come to any high level without realigning itself to "natural" nations.
Image
<center>The secret's in the wings...
User avatar
Roadkill
Heroic Guard
 
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 5:18 am
Location: somewhere

Postby Gigafrost » Thu Jun 10, 2004 4:59 pm

but also made america more of a target, as war implies an exchange of fire

I can't help but notice that we were under fire before the "war" started.

But the best way to fight terrorism is not to fight it. Ask for a representative, invite him to a podium in front of lots of people, to make a political speech or statement of some sort. Be nice to them, and help them get their message across, but tell them to do it at home.
Getting messages out doesn't work. That's not what they're trying to do. They're trying to actually change something, and when getting messages out doesn't work they resort to trying to terrorize others into their worldview. Getting their representative onto a podium, having them say their message, and having the message fall on deaf ears or what they say unaffected, will only resort in the same thing happening.

I do say that I agree with Terrafrost's statement, though. Bush isn't fighting terrorism, but organized terrorism. I think that the crappy choice of words is merely for convenience and sound-byte-ness.
User avatar
Gigafrost
Frost Weapon
Frost Weapon
 
Posts: 4900
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 5:09 pm
Location: Here

Postby Roadkill » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:40 pm

i dunno, but i'd have to go with the policy of containment here. The impression is that terrorism (against america) is primarily in the middle east. So, isolate it, let them fight it out. Rather than just give one of the nations a new government, help redivide the nations. or some shit. Stable countries with happy citizens won't produce terrorists (they don't do that on their own, but their citizens inevitably do)
Image
<center>The secret's in the wings...
User avatar
Roadkill
Heroic Guard
 
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2002 5:18 am
Location: somewhere

Postby tsian » Fri Jun 11, 2004 2:30 am

The very problem with the middle east is partly that America can't leave it. Westerners like Oil.
Vive le titre de deux.
In an ironic twist, the only trait I find completely appaling is intolerance.
User avatar
tsian
Castle Guard
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:19 am
Location: BC, Canada

Postby TerraFrost » Fri Jun 11, 2004 3:02 am

hey don't own tanks, or fighter planes, or bombers, or any other of the direct warfare equipment a nation may use to fight a war.


so i take it the civil war wasn't actually a war, either, then? :lila:

Something i just learned in world history is that Africa and the Middle East don't have natural borders right now, they were all created by the Imperialistic nations that occupied them -- and those borders were designed to divide the people, so they could get the most out of imperialism.


that doesn't surprise me. incidently, south america is in the same boat. one negative consequence of this is that governments tend to be militaristic dictatorships. as such, if you seek to change the governments policies, you can *only* start a military coup, which, if successful, will only replace one militaristic dictatorship with another.

this is clearly bad for those who seek stable trade relationships, etc.

The very problem with the middle east is partly that America can't leave it. Westerners like Oil.


yup
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby shahmask » Fri Jun 11, 2004 5:14 am

also, u can't just get a representative. they aren't a country at odds with us.

even if we left the middle east completely abandoning oil and everything, they'd still go after us. they have been brainwashed into believing the united states is evil. even if they us wasn't existing, they'd still go after england and other western countires then after jewish countries. reactionistic muslims use islam for hate. and don't take this negatively. reactionistic christians use christianity for hate as well.
User avatar
shahmask
Castle Guard
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 4:07 am
Location: in the valley of silicon hills


Return to Twilight Zone

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron