Gotcha
-
Paul Watson wrote: I say Hmmmm because the US has not come out with a solution. Come on Paul, Go back and look at history. The US has always (since 1918) supported world forums and has been the principle backer for them. Paul Watson wrote: Just imagine for a minute that Al-Qaeda had attacked South Africa and killed thousands. Just imagine for a minute that SA had the military resources to know go and invade Afghanistan. Do you for one moment think the US would allow that? I will bet not. Yes I can see that and firmly believe you would have been supported by the US. At this point I think we will just have to disagree. I am simply taking your agruments as "Big Bad US is automatically at fault no matter what facts exist." I have to leave to go vote. Take care. "We are what we repeatedly do. excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." Aristotle
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: The US has always (since 1918) supported world forums and has been the principle backer for them. And yet it felt the League of Nations wasn't worth its time? I understand that one of the reasons behind them not backing the LoN was because there were in an isolationist phase and the country felt the problems in Europe were just that: Europe's problems, not the US's problems. But, I always wonder who much stronger the LoN would have been if the US had been involved. Would the appeasement of Germany happened? As a Canadian, we often see it as the "Big Bad US". (They mentioned in the news recently about how people from the Middle East, but living permanently in Canada, would be treated more harshly at the Canada-US border, than those who aren't). Used to be that all Canadians were treated equally when crossing the border. Anyways, sometimes it's just not worth it to argue about someone's country, because they won't change their mind, and I doubt they'd say anything to get me to change mine. That's why I ramble so much. If you're short and quotable, there's a much greater danger of ending up in a sig. [Christopher Duncan on how to prevent yourself from ending up in a sig]
-
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: The US has always (since 1918) supported world forums and has been the principle backer for them. And yet it felt the League of Nations wasn't worth its time? I understand that one of the reasons behind them not backing the LoN was because there were in an isolationist phase and the country felt the problems in Europe were just that: Europe's problems, not the US's problems. But, I always wonder who much stronger the LoN would have been if the US had been involved. Would the appeasement of Germany happened? As a Canadian, we often see it as the "Big Bad US". (They mentioned in the news recently about how people from the Middle East, but living permanently in Canada, would be treated more harshly at the Canada-US border, than those who aren't). Used to be that all Canadians were treated equally when crossing the border. Anyways, sometimes it's just not worth it to argue about someone's country, because they won't change their mind, and I doubt they'd say anything to get me to change mine. That's why I ramble so much. If you're short and quotable, there's a much greater danger of ending up in a sig. [Christopher Duncan on how to prevent yourself from ending up in a sig]
Atlantys wrote: And yet it felt the League of Nations wasn't worth its time? I understand that one of the reasons behind them not backing the LoN was because there were in an isolationist phase and the country felt the problems in Europe were just that: Europe's problems, not the US's problems. But, I always wonder who much stronger the LoN would have been if the US had been involved. Would the appeasement of Germany happened? You're kidding, right? US President Woodrow Wilson was the driving force behind the creation of the LON. However, once the Europeans got done corruptingdefining it our congress didn't want any part of it. Too bad we didn't do the same with the UN.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2402479.stm[^] A new tactic for the Americans? Play the terrorists at their own game? Sort of like something from a Tom Clancy Novel. The first time the bad guys will realise they've been found, is as their car explodes. Michael Life’s not a song. Life isn’t bliss. Life is just this. It’s living. -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Once more, with feeling
OK, everyone sit down and remove any sharp objects from your immediate vicinity I'm about to shock you: I, Mike Mullikin, agree that the US/CIA should not have targeted and killed these individuals. They should have been captured alive, tried and convicted of their crimes under due process. This is a serious mistake in world relations and should not be repeated. We cannot continue to be arbitrary judge, jury and executioner. That said, once convicted these individuals should have been publicly tortured to death in an attempt to gain knowledge of their organization and for general entertainment purposes.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
OK, everyone sit down and remove any sharp objects from your immediate vicinity I'm about to shock you: I, Mike Mullikin, agree that the US/CIA should not have targeted and killed these individuals. They should have been captured alive, tried and convicted of their crimes under due process. This is a serious mistake in world relations and should not be repeated. We cannot continue to be arbitrary judge, jury and executioner. That said, once convicted these individuals should have been publicly tortured to death in an attempt to gain knowledge of their organization and for general entertainment purposes.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
It's easy to say 'good for them', but what international court does the US answer to as it kills people on foreign soil ? Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
Normally, I don't think an event like this would even have been publicized. It was news to me that 4 similar attacks had been made prior to this in Afghanistan. And personally, I don't think it's right to throw out the concept of "due process" simply because these are really bad guys. On the other hand, I guess we're at war with Al Queda, although, again, there hasn't been any formal declaration of war that I'm aware of (except for Bush's speeches "war on terror"). I guess the CIA is back in business. But I think they also needed some political coup's, as they really f*cked up with the information they had on the 9/11 attacks. This whole business makes me sick, especially how politics costs people their lives. Hey, but when has it been different??? Marc Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
-
OK, everyone sit down and remove any sharp objects from your immediate vicinity I'm about to shock you: I, Mike Mullikin, agree that the US/CIA should not have targeted and killed these individuals. They should have been captured alive, tried and convicted of their crimes under due process. This is a serious mistake in world relations and should not be repeated. We cannot continue to be arbitrary judge, jury and executioner. That said, once convicted these individuals should have been publicly tortured to death in an attempt to gain knowledge of their organization and for general entertainment purposes.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
Mike Mullikin wrote: They should have been captured alive, tried and convicted of their crimes under due process. We cannot continue to be arbitrary judge, jury and executioner. Well said Mike. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
OK, everyone sit down and remove any sharp objects from your immediate vicinity I'm about to shock you: I, Mike Mullikin, agree that the US/CIA should not have targeted and killed these individuals. They should have been captured alive, tried and convicted of their crimes under due process. This is a serious mistake in world relations and should not be repeated. We cannot continue to be arbitrary judge, jury and executioner. That said, once convicted these individuals should have been publicly tortured to death in an attempt to gain knowledge of their organization and for general entertainment purposes.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
Mike Mullikin wrote: We cannot continue to be arbitrary judge, jury and executioner. An eye for an eye. Besides the fact that you can never 'win' against a terrorist that is willing to die for thier cause, you HAVE to look deeply into what motivates them. They kill us and we do nothing, they win because we look scared. They kill us and re retalliate, they win because we look like the stong armed opressors. To paraphrase a quote from someone here form a while back "I would rather coem to bail you out then come to identify the body". Moral? These situations are loose / loose no matter how you look at it. The winder in this case is the person who looses the least. Mike Mullikin wrote: They should have been captured alive, tried and convicted of their crimes under due process. The problem with this is that they have no due-process. They are not citizens, they are not ruled by our constitution, why should we treat them as such? You don't honestly think that if we just pulled back and just decided to ignore every country, and stay out of world politics, that things would get better do you? We are doing what we are doing becasue these countries have clearly shown a complete inability to regulate thier own peoples activities.
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: We cannot continue to be arbitrary judge, jury and executioner. An eye for an eye. Besides the fact that you can never 'win' against a terrorist that is willing to die for thier cause, you HAVE to look deeply into what motivates them. They kill us and we do nothing, they win because we look scared. They kill us and re retalliate, they win because we look like the stong armed opressors. To paraphrase a quote from someone here form a while back "I would rather coem to bail you out then come to identify the body". Moral? These situations are loose / loose no matter how you look at it. The winder in this case is the person who looses the least. Mike Mullikin wrote: They should have been captured alive, tried and convicted of their crimes under due process. The problem with this is that they have no due-process. They are not citizens, they are not ruled by our constitution, why should we treat them as such? You don't honestly think that if we just pulled back and just decided to ignore every country, and stay out of world politics, that things would get better do you? We are doing what we are doing becasue these countries have clearly shown a complete inability to regulate thier own peoples activities.
Ray Cassick wrote: Besides the fact that you can never 'win' against a terrorist that is willing to die for thier cause, you HAVE to look deeply into what motivates them. Stooping to their level is not the answer. If we continue down that road we become them. Ray Cassick wrote: The problem with this is that they have no due-process. They are not citizens, they are not ruled by our constitution, why should we treat them as such? The US constitution is more than a set of rules for American citizens, it also is a set of ideals that we mean to live up to. Due process is one of these ideals. Ray Cassick wrote: You don't honestly think that if we just pulled back and just decided to ignore every country, and stay out of world politics, that things would get better do you? No. I didn't say these individuals should be ignored. I said they should be captured, tried, convicted. If you read the fine print I also mentioned something about their punishment.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
KaЯl wrote: I could agree on this one, but what about Justice ? What about the people perhaps standing near the bombed car ? I agree with your concern, but I feel that all are responsible for what they allow their country (region) to support to at least some extent. They support harboring these criminals so have taken on that risk. KaЯl wrote: What about a mistake ?? Also agree with your concern here. However other options for my country do not exist other than doing nothing (because we may make a mistake) and just sit back for more of our citizens to be randomly murdered. "We are what we repeatedly do. excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." Aristotle
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: I agree with your concern, but I feel that all are responsible for what they allow their country (region) to support to at least some extent. They support harboring these criminals so have taken on that risk. The citizens of those regions being bombed probably have no idea what is going on and why they're under fire. They work and struggle daily to make barely enough to support themselves and perhaps their families. You think ordinary people would put in the time and effort to harbor terrorists? Terrorists exploit weaknesses in infrastructure, and infrastructure is the responsibility of the government. Go after the governments! Bilal
-
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: This would not be the case if all others would support bringing terrorist to justice, but that is does not happen, so to defend ones country you are forced into action like this. Amen. Islamic society could end terrorism tomorrow if it really wanted to. Either it does not want to, or its political/social structure is simply too incompetent to deal with the problem. In either case, the U.S. is not answerable to any external political authority to do what we must to avoid being attacked. The rest of the world can help us, get out of our way, or fight with the bad guys, makes me no never mind either way. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: Islamic society could end terrorism tomorrow if it really wanted to. I see. What Islamic society is this? You seem to think that terrorists are pouring out of some wormhole called the "Islamic society". So you blame all Muslims collectively? We must all be doing our little devilish bit to support terrorism, musn't we? Didn't Bush say this wasn't a war against Islam? But if this is the state of American public opinion then who is he kidding? Bilal
-
Stan Shannon wrote: Islamic society could end terrorism tomorrow if it really wanted to. I see. What Islamic society is this? You seem to think that terrorists are pouring out of some wormhole called the "Islamic society". So you blame all Muslims collectively? We must all be doing our little devilish bit to support terrorism, musn't we? Didn't Bush say this wasn't a war against Islam? But if this is the state of American public opinion then who is he kidding? Bilal
Bilal wrote: You seem to think that terrorists are pouring out of some wormhole called the "Islamic society". Aren't they? Bilal wrote: Didn't Bush say this wasn't a war against Islam? But if this is the state of American public opinion then who is he kidding? Being an American, I generally think for myself, and derive my own conclusions from my own observations. I don't really care what Bush or any other American thinks about anything. And yes, I think Islamic society, in general, has some serious problems which it badly needs to deal with. I think the terrorism we are seeing now is a natural out growth of core Islamic principles and beliefs (I'm not necessarily refering to the religion. The problems go far beyond that). You guys need to deal with these issues yourselves - openly and honestly. Blaming everything on the west and the U.S. will not help you. If you don't get it under control and fast, this is going to become a clash of cultures. If it comes to that, Islam will lose and lose big. BTW, I am not impressed by the word "Moderate". A moderate is just a coward waiting to see which side wins. Pick a side. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
-
Ray Cassick wrote: Besides the fact that you can never 'win' against a terrorist that is willing to die for thier cause, you HAVE to look deeply into what motivates them. Stooping to their level is not the answer. If we continue down that road we become them. Ray Cassick wrote: The problem with this is that they have no due-process. They are not citizens, they are not ruled by our constitution, why should we treat them as such? The US constitution is more than a set of rules for American citizens, it also is a set of ideals that we mean to live up to. Due process is one of these ideals. Ray Cassick wrote: You don't honestly think that if we just pulled back and just decided to ignore every country, and stay out of world politics, that things would get better do you? No. I didn't say these individuals should be ignored. I said they should be captured, tried, convicted. If you read the fine print I also mentioned something about their punishment.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
Mike Mullikin wrote: The US constitution is more than a set of rules for American citizens, it also is a set of ideals that we mean to live up to. Due process is one of these ideals. Again, I agree here. BUT, realizam needs to be brought into the mix. In a prefect world, wheer everyone is govourned buy the same set of rules, ti makes sense to follow the rules. They don't live, nor want to live, by our rules, no matter how good they are. Why should they have the bennifit of them. Yes, yes, I know.... We don't want to become THEM. Mike Mullikin wrote: No. I didn't say these individuals should be ignored. I said they should be captured, tried, convicted. If you read the fine print I also mentioned something about their punishment. The problem with this is that, unless there is an real chance that they could be found not guilty, the entire process of trial would only be looked upon as a sham, and carry no weight with it.
-
Ray Cassick wrote: Besides the fact that you can never 'win' against a terrorist that is willing to die for thier cause, you HAVE to look deeply into what motivates them. Stooping to their level is not the answer. If we continue down that road we become them. Ray Cassick wrote: The problem with this is that they have no due-process. They are not citizens, they are not ruled by our constitution, why should we treat them as such? The US constitution is more than a set of rules for American citizens, it also is a set of ideals that we mean to live up to. Due process is one of these ideals. Ray Cassick wrote: You don't honestly think that if we just pulled back and just decided to ignore every country, and stay out of world politics, that things would get better do you? No. I didn't say these individuals should be ignored. I said they should be captured, tried, convicted. If you read the fine print I also mentioned something about their punishment.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
Mike Mullikin wrote: No. I didn't say these individuals should be ignored. I said they should be captured, tried, convicted. For what? To prove what we already knew? To risk American lives trying to capture them? To waste our tax dollars in the courts? To make some lawyers more wealthy? To give these goons a chance to get off on some technicality? No thanks. Mike Mullikin wrote: If you read the fine print I also mentioned something about their punishment. Well, with punishment like you suggest (where we're stooping to their level or below), I say just blast them and go home. Regards, Alvaro
Well done is better than well said. -- Benjamin Franklin
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: No. I didn't say these individuals should be ignored. I said they should be captured, tried, convicted. For what? To prove what we already knew? To risk American lives trying to capture them? To waste our tax dollars in the courts? To make some lawyers more wealthy? To give these goons a chance to get off on some technicality? No thanks. Mike Mullikin wrote: If you read the fine print I also mentioned something about their punishment. Well, with punishment like you suggest (where we're stooping to their level or below), I say just blast them and go home. Regards, Alvaro
Well done is better than well said. -- Benjamin Franklin
Alvaro Mendez wrote: For what? To prove what we already knew? To risk American lives trying to capture them? To waste our tax dollars in the courts? To make some lawyers more wealthy? To give these goons a chance to get off on some technicality? No thanks. Slow down and really read what you just wrote and apply it to domestic criminal activity. Do you really want to live in a society that arbitrarily kills people they suspect of crimes without due process? The US is supposed to be above that kind of thing. Our constitution demands it. Don't forget - in this situation, our CIA (an agency that is chartered to gather and deseminate information) is covertly operating in a cooperative country (Yemen) where they targeted and killed suspected terrorists using explosive weaponry. If this would have been our military working in Afghanistan or Iraq then it's a whole other story and I'd be their biggest cheerleader. Alvaro Mendez wrote: Well, with punishment like you suggest (where we're stooping to their level or below)... Our laws and collective morals as a country demand due process - not mercy once convicted.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: The US constitution is more than a set of rules for American citizens, it also is a set of ideals that we mean to live up to. Due process is one of these ideals. Again, I agree here. BUT, realizam needs to be brought into the mix. In a prefect world, wheer everyone is govourned buy the same set of rules, ti makes sense to follow the rules. They don't live, nor want to live, by our rules, no matter how good they are. Why should they have the bennifit of them. Yes, yes, I know.... We don't want to become THEM. Mike Mullikin wrote: No. I didn't say these individuals should be ignored. I said they should be captured, tried, convicted. If you read the fine print I also mentioned something about their punishment. The problem with this is that, unless there is an real chance that they could be found not guilty, the entire process of trial would only be looked upon as a sham, and carry no weight with it.
Ray Cassick wrote: They don't live, nor want to live, by our rules, no matter how good they are. No, but in this case we are not living by our own rules. Ray Cassick wrote: The problem with this is that, unless there is an real chance that they could be found not guilty, the entire process of trial would only be looked upon as a sham, and carry no weight with it. If they committed crimes against Americans they should be tried by our courts with our rules. Once convicted they get punished by our methods. If the rest of the world doesn't like it or thinks it's a sham they can pound sand. I'm not really too concerned about what the rest of the world thinks of us, but at the end of the day we have to look in the mirror and know we did the right thing. Killing people (outside the scope of a war) without giving them a chance to prove their innocence is wrong no matter how you slice it.
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
Christian Graus wrote: I am saying that errors DO happen OK, Question: Do you allow your police or military to handle weapons? They may make an error and kill someone. Why do you allow this? "We are what we repeatedly do. excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." Aristotle
1. Our police operate within the bounds of our country, and are accountable to authorities within our country 2. When our military is active, they are active in a war zone. This is totally different to the US killing people in other countries, accountable to no-one. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
-
Christian Graus wrote: Basically the USA is a law unto itself in the world arena. A right we've earned. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: Christian Graus wrote: Basically the USA is a law unto itself in the world arena. A right we've earned. I like you Stan, but the only way I can respond to this is, what a pile of crap. Why is it that Osama Bin Laden is not allowed to rule the world, but George Bush is ? Why is his view of who should die in another country not acceptable, but George Bushes view is ? I'm not saying that your country is killing innocent people, just saying that it seems to me that if they are, there is no way for me to know, and no-one else is getting a say. Imagine if Russia killed an American, on American soil, because they were found guilty by the Russian military of an act against Russia. Would you applaud ? Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
-
Stan Shannon wrote: Christian Graus wrote: Basically the USA is a law unto itself in the world arena. A right we've earned. I like you Stan, but the only way I can respond to this is, what a pile of crap. Why is it that Osama Bin Laden is not allowed to rule the world, but George Bush is ? Why is his view of who should die in another country not acceptable, but George Bushes view is ? I'm not saying that your country is killing innocent people, just saying that it seems to me that if they are, there is no way for me to know, and no-one else is getting a say. Imagine if Russia killed an American, on American soil, because they were found guilty by the Russian military of an act against Russia. Would you applaud ? Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
of course there is no excuse. GWB is a dangerous fool and more than half the people in the US who voted on election day 2000 knew this. -c
“losinger is a colorizing text edit control” -- googlism
-
Bilal wrote: You seem to think that terrorists are pouring out of some wormhole called the "Islamic society". Aren't they? Bilal wrote: Didn't Bush say this wasn't a war against Islam? But if this is the state of American public opinion then who is he kidding? Being an American, I generally think for myself, and derive my own conclusions from my own observations. I don't really care what Bush or any other American thinks about anything. And yes, I think Islamic society, in general, has some serious problems which it badly needs to deal with. I think the terrorism we are seeing now is a natural out growth of core Islamic principles and beliefs (I'm not necessarily refering to the religion. The problems go far beyond that). You guys need to deal with these issues yourselves - openly and honestly. Blaming everything on the west and the U.S. will not help you. If you don't get it under control and fast, this is going to become a clash of cultures. If it comes to that, Islam will lose and lose big. BTW, I am not impressed by the word "Moderate". A moderate is just a coward waiting to see which side wins. Pick a side. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: Pick a side. and what are these "sides" ?
“losinger is a colorizing text edit control” -- googlism
-
of course there is no excuse. GWB is a dangerous fool and more than half the people in the US who voted on election day 2000 knew this. -c
“losinger is a colorizing text edit control” -- googlism
Does that mean that GWB has two years to bring about the end of the world before he gets voted out ? Or do you think the climate of fear surrounding these terrorist events will mean he will stay in power ? Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002