Jump to content
Accelerated Evolution

Terrorism


Recommended Posts

And most people who use the term don't understand it.

A terrorist is someone who commits terroristic, which are terror-filled, acts.

But try calling a soldier a terrorist and legions of people go crazy on you!

"A soldier a terrorist? Preposterous! You're just unpatriotic! It doesn't count because uh... They are under orders from a government! It somehow doesn't count as fear!"

Or that a government completely trying to stop terrorism either becomes terrorist itself or creates even more terrorism to direct at itself, because one cannot stop it completely.

Also, note because it is such a powerful word, a group that favors the terror-inducing group will almost always refer to them as "freedom fighters" which is usually synonomous with "terrorists." Watch the United States media for more examples.

Chech group holds a school hostage to violently protest Russian control? Freedom fighters. American soldiers get killed in Iraq? Terrorists at large!

EDIT: Also note that America does NOT negotiate with terrorists, they negotiate with freedom fighters. Look up just about every one of America's wars since Vietnam and then see who was funding and giving weapons to people who would become future enemies.

Link to comment

The US, France, the UK, Germany, the USSR and a few others. If my memory serves me right.

And the approximate percentages of where the weapons came from would be 90%, 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.5%, and 2.5% respectively.

Terrorism is what happens when you take away people's rights and leave them no way to do anything about it. For example, there's no way anyone will ever hear about the human rights violations in my country, but if I blow up a building it will get on the International News and hopefully someone will do something about it.

It's not right by any means, but here's the thing -- Empires create terrorism. The United States is currently an empire. We are creating terrorism. We are indirectly responsible.

EDIT: Not to mention, as Venom said, the terrorism the U.S. causes by bombing Iraq and getting rid of the water and electricity and then sending Marines in to shoot anything that moves.

Link to comment

What I love about the whole thing is that we've currently got the idea that we can kill off every single terrorist, without actually addressing the root cause of their anger. We kill, burn, and steal from a people and expect them to thank us for it. We just can't understand that every time we kill off someone's brother/son/cousin/nephew/husband/etc... many new warriors spring up to fill his place. Its like trying to put out fires with gasoline, and its now only a matter of time before it all blows up in our face.

Link to comment

Terrorism is what happens when you take away people's rights and leave them no way to do anything about it. For example, there's no way anyone will ever hear about the human rights violations in my country, but if I blow up a building it will get on the International News and hopefully someone will do something about it.

Wow, the list of "reasons" for terrorism that you people seem to pull out of your ass, really never does end, does it? :rolleyes: x 100

It's not right by any means, but here's the thing -- Empires create terrorism. The United States is currently an empire. We are creating terrorism. We are indirectly responsible.

Oh yes, I think we all knew this debate would end up here.. Just as every other debate about the causes of world problems ends when debating with post-mods/the left. :laugh:

"OZMG TA EV!L US/WEST!!1!!!"

EDIT: Not to mention, as Venom said, the terrorism the U.S. causes by bombing Iraq and getting rid of the water and electricity and then sending Marines in to shoot anything that moves.

Well at least we can learn one thing from this. You people don't know what terrorism, as it's being used for this debate, really means... :mellow:

Link to comment

"OZMG TA EV!L US/WEST!!1!!!"

A country that cannot look inward is dangerous. We need to do so.

I mean, frankly, I believe we need uprising to bring America back to its foundation.

If anything, Thomas Paine’s writings are more relevant now than his day.

It just ticks me off: I love my country, but not much is justified for nowadays.

Link to comment

A country that cannot look inward is dangerous. We need to do so.

I mean, frankly, I believe we need uprising to bring America back to its foundation.

If anything, Thomas Paine’s writings are more relevant now than his day.

It just ticks me off: I love my country, but not much is justified for nowadays.

No I agree, just not with the way the left and post-mods do it.

Too much, even in a good way, is bad. You have to look out sometimes as well.

Link to comment

I don't see our current scheme as a Democracy at all, mostly because of the lazy "party" system.

No, I imagine that the true liberal would believe in the now “conservative” ideals of the past.

If anything, a true liberal would spit upon the Democratic Party too, for they censor as bad as the Republicans.

(Now, I use liberal a lot, but I don’t apply to the liberal philosophy of today. I believe our American founders were rebels, imperfect rebels though. I believe in laissez-faire and I also believe in getting rid of Affirmative Action. Yet, I see these beliefs as very “liberal” because to me they are so open-minded and revolutionary.)

Link to comment

(Now, I use liberal a lot, but I don’t apply to the liberal philosophy of today. I believe our American founders were rebels, imperfect rebels though. I believe in laissez-faire and I also believe in getting rid of Affirmative Action. Yet, I see these beliefs as very “liberal” because to me they are so open-minded and revolutionary.)

We should actually outlaw use of the political spectrum labels around here and see how people debate. We'll all be smarter for it, as political labels are so horribly misused and so black and white and them vs. us these days it is pathetic.

Link to comment

We should actually outlaw use of the political spectrum labels around here and see how people debate. We'll all be smarter for it, as political labels are so horribly misused and so black and white and them vs. us these days it is pathetic.

I actually don't believe in outlawing words simply because idiots don't bother looking at the definition.

However, I absolutely agree with your assessment that some use the words without knowing the definitions and they do so too much.

The problem comes from this: The definitions are VERY open to interpretation seeing as they’re already broadly defined.

It probably is lazy not to look for better words though. In fact, I know it is.

Such as a girl in my grade who could not get over the teacher saying this:

Teacher: Be conservative with the glue, please.

Girl: How can I be conservative with glue?

Teacher: You don't use as much...

Girl: But... that's not what that mea...

Teacher: Yeah, look it up.

Then again, political "leanings and categories" are the least of America's worries.

Oh, and terrorism is simply a bad word choice for attack and or violence.

Then again, I’m taking liberties with words there.

.

Link to comment

And most people who use the term don't understand it.

A terrorist is someone who commits terroristic, which are terror-filled, acts.

But try calling a soldier a terrorist and legions of people go crazy on you!

"A soldier a terrorist? Preposterous! You're just unpatriotic! It doesn't count because uh... They are under orders from a government! It somehow doesn't count as fear!"

It's unfair to call a soldier a terrorist (some are, however). What makes a person a terrorist is completely based on motive. A terrorist wants to create a sense of a fear, often to push a political or ideological agenda. A soldier simply follows orders, his motive is to get paid or maybe to experience the world and shoot at stuff. A psycho serial killer isn't a terrorist, even though his actions may cause feelings of fear, but in most cases his motive is just to fulfill his unhealthy urges.

Terroristic and terror-filled acts are two different things. Terroristic acts relate to terrorism, the word it is derived from. Terror-filled acts are just that, terror-filled, but not necessarily relating to terrorism. Terror and terrorism are not one in the same.

Link to comment

Terroristic and terror-filled acts are two different things. Terroristic acts relate to terrorism, the word it is derived from. Terror-filled acts are just that, terror-filled, but not necessarily relating to terrorism. Terror and terrorism are not one in the same.

If you ask me, it all starts to sound alike when you describe it like that.

I think it's just a politically correct job description: "soldier"

Like a school that changes the janitor’s job title to:

"Chief Appointee of Cleaning Services"

.

Link to comment

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...