Falstaff

I would like to know, based on your knowlege and opinion, what you all think terrorist groups are fighting for?

__________________

Vikingod

religious ideals, and out of ignorance mainly. They have been fighting for so long, they don't know what it is not to fight. I think there is also that side that is fighting for sovereignty (sp). That area (middle east) has had so many hands in it (not just american, dont go that direction) over the past 60 years or so, that it doesnt know what to do. I certainly dont agree with their methods, but I really dont think they can understand a different way. The truth is, there are a few very powerful, very crazy leaders, and everyone follows them, because they don't know what else to do. They are promised something, and they don't see any other way of getting it. That is the problem with dispare coupled with ignorance, it is easy to control.

There are of course many reasons, this is just my rant.

Falstaff

thats a very good point(s)
I agree, sometimes it is human nature to fight no matter what, for control if you will.

__________________

TJ-

freedom

__________________
new sig comming soon

studbagel9

I agree with both Vikingod and Fallang_Jeff, ideology and political doctrine go a long way toward getting people rallied toward a cause. Acceptance is something I think the human race might never achieve completely, and yet for people of religion, these things shouldn't be happening at all! The Koran teaches that all Muslims should be kind to people of the book, aka religious folks, and yet we see bloodshed all around. Also, in our prodominately Christian America, there is teaching of love for your common man, no matter what their religious beliefs. Judaism also has a great history of acceptance and welcoming to people. The hospitality laws in Biblical times are written about in great detail in the Hebrew Bible; one story in particular that comes to mind is when a man harbored some other guys who were robbers or some sort of vagrants in his house, and when the local law officials came knocking, the host said he'd rather give his virgin daughter for punishment than break the laws of hospitality. So like, where have we gone wrong as a people when arguably the greatest motivational force in history (religion), which is littered with concepts of acceptance, have no say or bearing on how we're treating one another?

__________________

revolutionary

"Terrorists" is such a broad term. The question should be, "what do people really fight for?"

Early Americans were terrorists, we wouldn't have this 'great land' without them. So were they 'good' terrorists? Are terrorists always bad? I'd say no. Early Americans were also terrorists to Native Americans, but we wouldn't have so much land without this so-called 'terrorism'.

There were terrorists in WWII too, and they fought againsts the Nazi regime. So they were really freedom fighters, resistance fighters.

Overall, I think the term 'terrorist' is over used, and is used to demonize certain people, to push an agenda. People unite in times of war, to fight an enemy, but you have to have a reason to fight, someone to fight against. We fight terrorism, but what is terrorism?

An interesting question is; what are Americans really fighting for? Or should I say, what do they believe they're fighting for?

To answer the original question, if it is an answerable question. Some fight for freedom, others for control, or an agenda, and still others fight to belong to something. I'm sure some fight just to fight, to kill.

Vikingod

I think the question applies to the modern interpretation of the word "terrorist" not necessarily the text book definition of it. People fight for all reasons, or no reasons. I think Jeffs questions pertains the situation in the middle east.

The_Neon_Cowboy

What are they figing for? hard to tell....

drawing from a "warped" spin of a vaild religion. Where they belive they will be given paradise and 99 vergains... if they kill them selfs.. while takeing as many men wemon and children with them in the name of thier "cause"... wich is apreatly only to bring death, distruction, and choas... As to give thier goup power and for thier own personal gains.. lust, greed, power... the useall curruptors... but under the silk of a religion that by thier own actions they do not belive in. Becouse they do not fallow the techings at all...

So you can't really say religion, thier not opressed so not freedom,
the only viable explantion is "madness"

elaborate

Oh come on... calling people terrists... that aren't.... you see the term as verry broad becouse hat what you want to see...

Early americans, mostly people from europe who didn't like it there (can't say I blame them). somthing totally differant...As for resitance fighters of WWII is again something tottaly diffrent. They are as an organised groups figting againt a force invadeing , occupying thier country, and slougetering jews and anyone in thier way...

__________________

Asmoday

I see terrorism as when innocent civilians is getting delibrantly(sp?) attacked, by an aggressor that by that way is trying to persuade(once again sp? ) the regime to comply with their demands.
Simply put, you're a terrorist when you attack innocent people.

At least this is how i define the word terrorist...

__________________

pr0digal jenius

Acceptance?

Terrorism, in my mind, is a last ditch effort for acceptance and credibility as a "power"...albeit a inhumaine one.

LeanWolf

what's the difference between a nutjob that tries to kill as many people as possible while blowing himself up and a nutjob that collects guns and tries to kill as many people as possible before turning the gun on himself? one's called a terrorist

__________________

revolutionary

And what do you see? A pristine vision of truth? Give me a break.

What do you call the 'terrorists' from Iraq? They're Iraqi (not all), and they don't like it there and want to change it.

By definition they were terrorists, which is exactly my point.

And the 'terrorists' fighting against the US in Iraq are what?

Be a bit more of a hypocrite.

The_Neon_Cowboy

Apreantly I just live with my eyes open not shut....


Yes, They want to kill others becouse of thier religious belifs, they want to insight civil war, to strike fear into other to gain power over them. they want to take over control and become the new bloody dictatorship... they kill amerians, iraqies, and forgeners alike.
what matters is body count... like I said before the goal is to kill as many as they can.
to insight terror as a mean to reach what ever insane goal they have... that are not the wants or needs of the other 98% of the people... they fight againt freedom... for opression

I don't think that and other words mean what you think they do...

the short version for "terrorist" as found in the dictionary is:

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

as for the other word that is a personal attack is not allowed in this area.. I won't dignifiy it with a responce.. other then provide you with the defintion. I suggest you infest in a dictionary....

"hypocrite"
a person who professes beliefs and opinions that they do not hold,

__________________

Falstaff

it seems that in our times, a terrorist is someone that attacks innocent civilians for the purpose of spreading terror and mayhem and disrupt lives or destroy lives. Someone pointed out that early American colonials were considered terrorists in terms of their methods, but actually I believe they were considered guerillas and they fought from behind trees and hiding places, but they were considered dishonorable by the British.
I believe that terrorists in our times come in two distinct types:
One who utilizes the systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve political objectives, while disguised as a civilian non-combatant. The use of a civilian disguise while on operations exempts the perpetrator from protection under the Geneva Conventions, and consequently if captured they are liable for prosecution as common criminals.
One who is paid to employ the threat of violence to achieve political or idealogical goals.
either way, very very difficult to couter or eliminate.

even after 9/11 and Spain, we still believe that we are safe from the terrorist threat.

__________________

revolutionary

Watching Fox News Channel doen't mean your eyes are open, buddy. I mean really, who are you trying to kid?

If your eyes are so open, take a look down at the keyboard every once in awhile... Yes, and America does the same, how many friendly fire incidents have there been? didn't an Italian recently get killed?

And don't talk to me about how they were accidents, I know they were, but good intentions have nothing to do with actions.Body counts, huh? There have been about 1,500 US soldiers killed in Iraq (not all by enemies). As compared to how many thousands if enemy combatants killed by US soldiers, and how many Iraqi civilians killed?

I haven't seen any official numbers. The US doesn't count the people they kill in Iraq, only their own.

Don't talk about numbers, because the fact is that the US has killed more civilians in its so-called war on terror than terrorists have ever killed in America.Wants and needs? how many Americans wanted a war in Iraq, half? How many still want it?And America fights for freedom, by restricting its own people's rights with special bills to 'protect' them right? That's why a cop can walk up to me and demand that I show ID, even if I've done nothing, and if I don't comply I goto jail. I especially like the idea of a cop being able to come into my home and point a gun at me for no reason."'Terrorist': somebody using violence for political purposes: somebody who uses violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, to intimidate, often for political purposes"

Now, just because it says 'often' does not mean 'always'. Don't get confused.

Why don't you look up "domestic terrorist" in the Patriot Act and tell me what it says. Because according to it, driving under the influence is domestic terrorism.There's nothing about calling you a hypocrite that makes it an insult, and there are no rules saying I can't call you a hypocrite on this site.

As for "infest"ing in a dictionary, did you mean 'invest'? You should take your own advice."'Hypocrite': somebody feigning high principles: somebody who gives a false appearance of having admirable principles, beliefs, or feelings"

The reason why I called you a hypocrite is because you condemn one group of persons for doing something and yet defend another group for doing the samething. I guess a word more fitting for you would be 'biased'.

revolutionary

Guerillas use terrorist tactics, look at the guerillas in S. America. This is just an example of how people try to justify their own people's actions and condemn other's, yet both people did the samething."Non-combatant" is another silly term, it can apply to security officers, and (military) contractors, AKA mercenaries. Yet they both have guns in a warzone. This does not exempt them from being fired upon, or make them innocent, like the media makes it appear.Just like spies...and every country has their spies.And mercenaries can be mis-used for this purpose. If you pay them enough.And yet the US has funded terrorism, just like they funded Sadam. America gave the mujahedin money to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, and one of the mujahedin fighters was bin Laden. Now the American people have paid for it, and will continue to.

It's disgusting. And anyone who defends these actions is too. So obsessed with conquering their enemies, and wanting to be dominate, they blindly make new enemies. And it's the innocent people who pay, in more than one way, yet the same government powers remain to do it again.

stamvas

(3mb SWF) Check this link http://www.neiu.edu/~ayjamess/hmmm.htm#main

I submit this here because this is a thread about terrorism...(edit:though it could be an issue for a new thread) It is about 3mb but it is worth! What really happened 9/11 at the Pentagon. I am confused after this.
Any comments?

__________________
P4 @3.2Ghz, 2Gb RAM(@ dual channel), 2 WD HDD/320 Gb, 2*external Maxtor 120Gb, Gigabyte GA8IPE1000-G MoBo, Club-3d Radeon9550-256Mb, 2 Philips 190V7 19" LCD displays, SB0090 w Live Drive, DVD-RAM NEC ND4550A, DVD-RW Lite-onSOHW1633S, M-Audio MIDI keyboard MK225C.
Laptop-Fujitsu-Siemens AMILO Pro.

Sandok

They are fighting for freedom. It will shock you maybe but there is more than one sort of freedom, and more than just american freedom. They want their rights, thier ideals and thier ways of living to be respected so they fight for it. The us does the same. Big deal.

[)arkNova

Terrorist kill for hatred. Nothing else.Other countries who fight wars, i.e. most of Europian history (but not Nazi Germany) and America,fight for freedom. Granted, some wars in history were bad decisions but not terrorism.Don't mistaken terrorism with frightening an enemy to give up.They are not the same,but many people confuse the two because they are against almost all war.Bunch of tree hugger hippies.

__________________
[color=blue]Barton 2500 @ 202 X 11 [/color]
[color=red]@ 1.675V[/color]
[color=deepskyblue]1Gb of 3200 cosair @ 404 [/color]
[color=red]@ 2.7V[/color]
[color=blue]AN35N Ultra[/color]

[color=deepskyblue]9600xt 550/660[/color]

[color=blue]Thermaltake pipe 101 @ 42C/31C[/color]

[color=red]Fortron 530W[/color]

pr0digal jenius

Terrorism is what people call a cause they don't (want to) understand.

Ferdinand_L

That sounds familiar doesn't it? I guess if they aren't jews and they are just indiginous peoples than it really doesn't matter? This may not be reality but some people in Iraq seem to perceive it that way. Given that premise, are the insurgents terrorists?

Ferd-

raid517

A terrorist is only a terrorist if he looses. If he wins he can very quickly become a hero.

GJ

revolutionary

Go ask an historian, and I'll bet you he'll say they were terrorists.

studbagel9

Go ask a a sociologist and he'll tell you there are no terrorists, just two groups engaging in destructive conflict. It's all based on ideology, I'll beat this dead horse with a bigger stick: there are only terrorists based on your social values. People need to learn to deal with their problems through dialogue and compromise; at least we've got the dialogue part here at DH right? ;p. Anyway, it all boils down to acceptance and compromise. We'll never achieve those things so we'll always have this destructive conflict and it's all a moot point about what "terrorists" want because in the end it doesn't matter if we're just going to kill eachother anyway.


That was the bagel's tree-hugging non-sensical rant.

__________________

[)arkNova

I took ur advice revolutionary. The historian said you were wrong.No wander most socialist are almost always wrong,their teachers/professors are a bunch of idiot nutts.

__________________
[color=blue]Barton 2500 @ 202 X 11 [/color]
[color=red]@ 1.675V[/color]
[color=deepskyblue]1Gb of 3200 cosair @ 404 [/color]
[color=red]@ 2.7V[/color]
[color=blue]AN35N Ultra[/color]

[color=deepskyblue]9600xt 550/660[/color]

[color=blue]Thermaltake pipe 101 @ 42C/31C[/color]

[color=red]Fortron 530W[/color]

raid517

Like the idiot nut professors who helped design and build the computer you feel so free to use to abuse the English language on - and spread your own patently uniformed view of histoiry with?

Oh well, I guess accdemics must be useful for something after all then.

GJ

[)arkNova

If they help with technology,fine. But politics,they just put their biased noses in somewhere they don't belong.They need to teach.Not preach their bias left leaning propaganda.If they will fail you because you don't see it their way,then they are bunch of biased thugs.

__________________
[color=blue]Barton 2500 @ 202 X 11 [/color]
[color=red]@ 1.675V[/color]
[color=deepskyblue]1Gb of 3200 cosair @ 404 [/color]
[color=red]@ 2.7V[/color]
[color=blue]AN35N Ultra[/color]

[color=deepskyblue]9600xt 550/660[/color]

[color=blue]Thermaltake pipe 101 @ 42C/31C[/color]

[color=red]Fortron 530W[/color]

raid517

You know sometimes I think it's just about the smart people versus the dumb and selfish people. It's just a pity that too often there seems to be more of the later than the former kind of people in this world. The problem with most dumb people is that they are just too dumb to know how dumb they really are. The worst of it is they tend to elect people who are even dumber than they are just so that for once in their lives they can experience what it's like to feel smart.

I'm not referring to anyone specifically here - but that is the impression I often get of this whole damn deal.

GJ

[)arkNova

Raid ,please bless us with more of your superior intellect. It seems to give us many goose bumps. With all that former, later stuff.Please tell us how much greater liberalism and socialism is over all that stinks.Liberals,the educated.Liberalism,the religion.

__________________
[color=blue]Barton 2500 @ 202 X 11 [/color]
[color=red]@ 1.675V[/color]
[color=deepskyblue]1Gb of 3200 cosair @ 404 [/color]
[color=red]@ 2.7V[/color]
[color=blue]AN35N Ultra[/color]

[color=deepskyblue]9600xt 550/660[/color]

[color=blue]Thermaltake pipe 101 @ 42C/31C[/color]

[color=red]Fortron 530W[/color]

raid517

No no dear boy, I will leave you to show the world just what a lack of education can do for you - since you are obviously so proud of it. It is the idea that a decent education - that the educated themselves are somehow misguided - that particularly sticks in my throat. Indeed I think it is fair to say that I think it is the dumbest idea I have ever heard.

It's a bit like the question 'what did the Romans ever do for us'? The Romans were engineers, architects, builders, scientists, academics and historians too. And history shows that with their help, the Roman Empire pretty much ruled the world. Just like the Romans, when you ask what have the educated, or the academics of this world ever done for you - I can very easily show you that they are pretty much responsible for giving you everything decent and good that you have.

Anyway what exactly does being an academic have to do with being socialist? I don't get the connection. And what does socialism have to do with this topic - and who the hell here is a socialist anyway?

GJ