Galen
Emperor of Atlantis
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Atlantis
Posts: 24 |
quote:
Originally posted by Venus
OK, in response....
Are you serious? I'm not entirely sure whether you're talking about the 11th or the attacks on Afghanistan, but if you're talking about the latter, then I'm very surprised. Are you trying to tell me that for the past few weeks that the US (and co, just can't be bothered write that out every time) have been bombing Afghanistan, there have been hardly any casualties?! Not that I think I need proof, but did you not hear about that hospital that was hit? Which I remember hearing US confirmation of?
What I am claiming is that there are hardly any civilian casualties in Afghanistan. Something like 10 civilians have been killed. This is terrible, but there deaths will have meaning when the Taliban is destroyed and many more people are saved. The rest have been Taliban soldiers which is the way it should be that soldiers should be killed and not civilians.
quote:
I didn't say not to do anything about it, I think something should be done, but not what is being done, if you get what I mean. I agree that the plane hijacks shouldn't have been... hijacked, etc, and on that same ground, I don't think that any human should take another's life, and I see very little difference between what happened on the 11th in NY, and what has happened in Afghanistan in response.
The difference is that they murdered civilians. We are killing soldiers.
My point is that capitulating to terrorists just leads to more acts of terror since the message is sent that if you want something all you need to do is murder enough people.
quote:
I don't see the similarity. There had been no actual attacks on Tollana, the goa'uld are not terrorists, they are not even human, which mght bring in the possibility of different cognition, views, etc. The US would not have been destroyed by terrorists, even if they hadn't declared war. I doubt the terrorists would have continued to an extreme, (i.e. hitting 10 more targates at least), and in any case, that would not have detroyed the nation; there was worse damage done to nations in the world wars, which still survive.
Actually, there had been at least three attacks, first by Heur'ur, second by Zipcana, and third by Tanith and the mystery Gou'ald.
After repeated attacks by terrorists Tollana was eventually destroyed like the US would be. (The Gou'ald are terrorists. They are only as legitimate as the Taliban.) For a real world example look at Lebanon. Lebanon was destroyed by negotiating with terrorists (specifically the PLO).
quote:
And you don't think there's an propaganda in this war, on both sides? Those people were still human, however strong their faith was, and people seem to forget that. I imagine that the people bombing Afghanistan, and those that hijacked the plane probably have similar views; justified killing, perhaps even that they'll be forgiven for it spiritually.
Seriously, I don't. Anybody who tries to show that Israeli/Zionist/Jewish propaganda exists end up falling back on some version of either Zionist conspiracy, International Zionist conspiracy, the book The Secret Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, International Zionist bankers, etc.
I took a look at that zmag link of yours and they were guilty of this although they seemed to avoid the exact words of Zionist conspiracy. As a side point they also reference indymedia.org which was known for making stuff up during the anti-globalization protests so I am not inclined to believe them.
quote:
What is the cause? It seems to me the US is firing at the country in general; like they even have any idea of Laden's whereabouts. If they're doing it to overthrow the Taliban, why didn;t they take the capital before NA troops arrived?
We're firing at Taliban soldiers. The Taliban refused to extradite a known criminal.
As for why we didn't take Kabul, in theory (and those two words are important) the US is not an imperialist power. This war is not the conquest of Afghanistan.
quote:
I agree theres a difference, but the end aim is the same; to save human lives. Other problems, such as aids, or whatever, have been around longer, and kill far more people.
There are important differences. Governments exist to deal with external forces threatening their citizens. They don't exist to airlift drugs that can't even cure a disease yet to people are aren't citizens of the country it governs. Any action that would seriously curtail of stop the spread of aids would be correctly declared imperialist. The difference being that governments have the authority to deal with terrorists, but not run countries where they are not accepted by the people there.
Report this post to a moderator | ? + *
|
11-18-2001 03:35 AM
Why should the US be allowed to do it? Who made them God?! And hello, look at who's leading the nation!! 
