My rambling thoughts on Isreal/Palestinians/etc

[Riggswolfe]

Really if the Israelis want to make the Palestinians pause they need to take a page from Keyzer Soze. Next time they kill a Hamas leader, kill his family, his pets, his friends, his business associates, people he talked to the day before, people who owe him money, and anyone else they can think of that had contact with the guy.

The more this terrorism crap goes on the more I think that perhaps the script writer of Swordfish had at least one thing right. The only way to make a dent is to make the cost to terrorism so high, so horrific, that there is no way a country or group will support it.

Gabriel: Anyone who impinges on America's freedom. Terrorist states, Stanley. Someone must bring their war to them. They bomb a church, we bomb 10. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport. They execute American tourist, we tactically nuke an entire city. Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that is becomes unthinkable to attack Americans.

You know, it'd be a terrible price for all of us to actually enact this, but if our children and grandchildren can live in a world free of terrorism I'd pay that price. I know it's weird to use movies as ideas on how to deal with terrorism but really, does anything we're currently trying work? Why not escalate? Why not make it so that if a Palestinian even hints he's gonna blow up some jews he suddenly finds himself lynched by his own family?

I say the US needs to just tell Sharon to do what he has to do and we'll look the other way. Make examples of them. It'd be horrible, and history would describe it all as a black mark, but you know what? They'd be judging us from a safe world.

[daveNYC]

Given your location, what would you do about domestic terrorists?

[Tebonas]

Its nice that you defend the position of a movie psycho (well two actually) but it doesn't work that way in real life.

Terrorism isn't about cost efficiency, its very often about fanatism. Instead of sacrificing themself to the "worthy cause", they sacrifice themself, their family, their pets, their friends, their business associated and everybody the had contact with. This only guarantees them a better place in the afterlife, so why should they care.

Plus, you make new terrorists out of people that were relatives of the people that you kill because they had contact with him. So you can't stop there, in effect you have to kill everyone worldwide. Because even Americans are relatives of people who know people who know people who know people...

[Hanzii]

Nice idea. The Nazis tried it out in occupied territories during WWII with no real luck.

And the question on domestic terrorism is a good one. Afairc Timothy McVeigh was from Buffalo, NY. Should the answer to the Oklahoma City bombing be the destruction of 10 buildings (and daycare centers) in downtown Buffalo?

[Riggswolfe]

Didn't say the "plan" was without flaw. I'm one of those that's against our current trial of Terry Nichols. I consider it nothing more than an ego trip on the part of our DA. He's caught and convicted by the feds. Let it go. Actually, there is a book out there by a woman whose name I forget that is about Timothy McVeigh's and Nichol's ties to foreign terrorists. It names names, has eyewitness accounts, and all kinds of other evidence. Her whole question boils down to "why did the government not follow up on this?"

[Riggswolfe]

Its nice that you defend the position of a movie psycho (well two actually) but it doesn't work that way in real life.

Gabriel was a fascinating villain. He was a psycho, but he also was a patriot in his own warped way. He meant what he said. I mostly started this topic to get discussion started. My thoughts were prompted by Isreal's recent strikes against Hamas leadership.

It's all a moot point, noone would do what the topic suggested, the price would be way to high.

[Hanzii]

Didn't say the "plan" was without flaw. I'm one of those that's against our current trial of Terry Nichols. I consider it nothing more than an ego trip on the part of our DA. He's caught and convicted by the feds. Let it go. Actually, there is a book out there by a woman whose name I forget that is about Timothy McVeigh's and Nichol's ties to foreign terrorists. It names names, has eyewitness accounts, and all kinds of other evidence. Her whole question boils down to "why did the government not follow up on this?"

There's also a book out there claiming that Bush is really an E.T. lizard - "Why didn't the government follow up on that?"

It's all a moot point, noone would do what the topic suggested, the price would be way to high.

... and it wouldn't work. try arguing your points instead of just giving up.

[Riggswolfe]

There's also a book out there claiming that Bush is really an E.T. lizard - "Why didn't the government follow up on that?"

This book I'm referring to has hard, credible evidence. We're talking signed affidavits from somewhere around 20-30 witnesses. We're talking names, times, places. Photo IDs of suspected terrorists. Places they met. Times they met. Witnesses picking these guys out of one of those suspect books. Witnesses placing them at the scene when McVeigh parked and exited the truck. A positive ID on a vehicle that the FBI put out an APB on moments after the bombing. I could go on, or you could read the book. It's called I believe the 3rd terrorist. Basically this guy is the John Doe #2 that was briefly talked about then sort of dropped.


Found it on Amazon.com:

 The Third Terrorist : The Middle East Connection to the Oklahoma City Bombing
by Jayna Davis (Author)  

This book has been said to be creditable by such people as former CIA head James Woolsey.

As for the rest of it about not defending my original post, the reply about what to do about domestic terrorists poked a neat little hole in it, as my plan only would work on foreign terrorists.

Though I do say my plan would work. We wouldn't do it because noone wants to pay that price. Noone wants to go down in history with that kind of blood on their hands. IF someone did it. If someone escalated things that far I think it just might work. It would work because their own societies would turn on them for self preservation.

[HaemishM]

You know, it'd be a terrible price for all of us to actually enact this, but if our children and grandchildren can live in a world free of terrorism I'd pay that price.

"Those who would willingly exchange freedom for security deserve neither."

Or something to that effect.

[Riggswolfe]

You're referencing the Ben Franklin quote. That applies to the Patriot Act and the curtailment of civil liberties it implies. I also happen to agree with it in that context.

However, the price I'm speaking of is the blood that would be on our hands if we went balls to the wall and did whatever it took to stop these terorrist mother fuckers.

Though I guess I could see where it would affect liberties at home potentially. I am the type of person that would rather die than lose my liberties so that is a valid argument against it.

[HaemishM]

If you give some people the power to take away the lives of those they deem to be actively working against the state, expect that those same powers can be used against you by the very same state.

Do you really want to give our intelligence agencies the capabilities to nuke a foreign terrorist? Do you really want to give them legal carte blanche to do that? Keep in mind that any act they are given the legal power to carry out can then be turned inward in cases of extreme emergency.

[Riggswolfe]

Very thought provoking response Haemish. Considering how much the Patriot Act worries me I'd have to say. No.

[Hanzii]

Not to mention (again) that the Nazis didn't have the qualms you talk about, and actively used that "tactic" to fight resistance (or terrorists as the Germans called them) in occupied countries.
It didn't work for them, and it won't work for anybody else... not even if their cause was right.

[HaemishM]

Not to mention (again) that the Nazis didn't have the qualms you talk about, and actively used that "tactic" to fight resistance (or terrorists as the Germans called them)

I thought the Germans just called them "stinking Jews."

[Riggswolfe]

Not to mention (again) that the Nazis didn't have the qualms you talk about, and actively used that "tactic" to fight resistance (or terrorists as the Germans called them) in occupied countries.
It didn't work for them, and it won't work for anybody else... not even if their cause was right.

Well comparing say, French Resistance to Al-queda is kind of misleading. In any case, isn't there some kind of net rule that says if Hitler and/or the Nazis begin to be used in a thread then the thread is officially over?

[HaemishM]

Godwin's Law. Though I think it's in the process of being modified if George Bush (either one), Israelis or Palestinians is brought up in the thread as well.

[Ezdaar]

Nazi Germany isn't a good example in this case. They were fighting a losing military battle on three fronts. They didn't have the resources to deal with uprisings in occupied territories.

[Foix]

I say the US needs to just tell Sharon to do what he has to do and we'll look the other way.

Why? Palestinian terrorists have never attacked American citizens or property, or even threatened to do so, even though some groups have made it clear that they hate our guts for our continued support of Israel. Though I do believe that the continued existence of Palestinian terrorist groups is ultimately to the detriment of the Palestinians themselves, Israel seems to be in no hurry to resolve the situation one way or another. I say the two groups deserve one another and can blow one another up for as long as they like; it doesn't affect the United States one iota. Pity about the Israelis, though: something in the Middle East apparently causes people to revert to barbarism once they settle there for an extended period of time. The water, maybe.

As for your suggestion, I have no doubt that the Israelis could wipe out the Palestinians in short order if they wanted to. I also have no doubt that if such a move didn't lead to the imminent destruction of the state of Israel, it would become nothing more than an economic satellite of the United States a la Cuba before the fall of the Soviet Union, as the governments of the world declare it a rogue state and worked for its total isolation.

What the Israelis have to do is keep groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad disorganized by killing their leadership on the one hand, which is something that they've had some success at, while extending the olive branch to every Palestinian who isn't explicitly a terrorist. In the short term, it might be taken as a demonstration of weakness, but the terrorists will not lose their base of support so long as Israel keeps proving everything that is said about them true. Wanton killing on the part of the Israelis will radicalize more Palestinians, not less.

[DarkDryad]

Not to mention (again) that the Nazis didn't have the qualms you talk about, and actively used that "tactic" to fight resistance (or terrorists as the Germans called them) in occupied countries.
It didn't work for them, and it won't work for anybody else... not even if their cause was right.

Worked on Japan last time i checked.

[daveNYC]

Not to mention (again) that the Nazis didn't have the qualms you talk about, and actively used that "tactic" to fight resistance (or terrorists as the Germans called them) in occupied countries.
It didn't work for them, and it won't work for anybody else... not even if their cause was right.

Worked on Japan last time i checked.

I'm not sure nuking a country we were at war is very similar to fighting a local resistance movement.

[Tebonas]

What exactly did work on Japan?

Did you mean their fight against terrorists or them not being terrorists? And what time period we are talking?

Just checking if I plainly have to disagree with you or have to check the facts first.

[Hanzii]

Nazi Germany isn't a good example in this case. They were fighting a losing military battle on three fronts. They didn't have the resources to deal with uprisings in occupied territories.

I think you'll find, that the war seemed to go very well for them in the beginning - and if you aske some old survivors from the French or Polish resistance you'll also find, that they didn't seem to lack resources when it came to wiping out villages or villagers in response to what they saw as terrorist attacks.
Didn't stop the attacks, though.

And I am not comparing Al-queda to the French Resistance, because we're talking palestina and perhaps Iraq here, and only ill-informed Americans think the fight in those countries have anything to do with Osamas boys.
And it's a moot point, because whether you think the resistance/terrorists are fighting a just cause or not - there's absolutely no sane reason to believe that going after their friends and families will make them stop attacking you.
It. Will. Not. Work.
History allready tells us this.
Just like the death penalty doesn't deter cracheads from committing murder. We know this allready.

And I was wondering whether I was invoking Godwin's law... but as Haemish said, any thread starting with the words Israel and Palestina is allready on its way to the crapper.

[Romp]

Vioence has never worked against fanatics who dont even care for their own lives.

They are happy to blow themselves up and to see their friends blow themselves up, what makes people think they care so much for their own lives that the risk of losing them would be a deterrent?

[DarkDryad]

The point is the bombs were dropped on Japan to give an overwhelming show of force. No one was spared the whirlwind and no quarter given. The Japanese used very similar execution methods to the Islamist and held remarkedly similar stratagies.
Yes it would have undertones that ripple for years but a small tactical nuke in Falluja and one other fairly major Iraqi town would send a very strong message to the world . Do not fuck with these motherfuckers. Up untill very recenly there was no dirtbag terroist that would even think of attacking the US.
IMHO our weak presidential choices in the past 40-50 years have eroded the strength seen in our country. Take JFK for instance. He was a strong president who got in the USSR's face and toled them you get those missles out of Cuba or suffer the consequenses. They did mainly because they knew he ment what he said and that the millions of American people would back his play. That soon after WWII and Korea there was no doubt.

Now through weak leadership we are seen as a spineless giant and militant radical groups feel free to attack us with impunity. What needs to happen, again IMHO, is we need to have a definative show of force that these groups cannot hope to match  that says one and for all we will help you to the best of our abilities untill you screw with us then prepare for destruction. I just cant get with this sit around the campfire and sing kumbaya mentality of the sixties generation thats in power now. There was a reason the hippe movement died out. In the 40s and 50s it was peace though superior firepower and it worked. Maybe it could again.
/warmonger

[Romp]

Yes it would have undertones that ripple for years but a small tactical nuke in Falluja and one other fairly major Iraqi town would send a very strong message to the world

Heh yes you are right there it would certainly send a strong message to the rest of the world.  Do you realise that falluja is a city with a population of 500k and 99% of them are just normal innocent people.

[Riggswolfe]

Look, we know the terrorists are prepared to die for their cause. But is everyone around them? Are their families? Their neighbors? The idea is, if just once you show you're willing to take things to the next level, the Palestinians themselves might keep their nutcases in check.

Sorry, we've tried being civilized and nice. The Israelis get attacked everyday but the neo-nazis in Europe insist that the Israelis are the badguys. Maybe its time the US and Israel stood up for themselves and made the communities surrounding these mother fuckers stop the terrorists on their own. Call it incentive.

[DarkDryad]

DING DING DING!!!!! Theres a though for ya. Make places police thier own countries for fear of being associated with these nutjobs.. Wow whodda thunk it.

[daveNYC]

Nuke a city in a country we occupy just to show them that we mean business?  The only plus side is that it would get people's minds off of the prison abuse.

Can you think of a reason that OPEC wouldn't respond with an embargo?

[Riggswolfe]

OPEC is one reason I agreed with Bush's plan to drill Oil in Alaska.

Look, there are two ways to deal with terrorists.

1) The topic of this thread, make it so horrific to be a terrorists that your fellow Palestinians/Arabs/etc will lynch you before you get to your target

2) Do what all these nutjobs say they want. Total and complete withdrawl. All the European Fascists don't like us, the Nutjob terrorists don't like us, fine. Bring home ALL of our troops, even the ones in bases in peaceful countries. Close our borders to all immigration. Trade only what is absolutely vital. Stop all foreign aid. Basically totally isolate ourselves. Tell the rest of the world "Good luck, you all didn't like us, so fine, go fuck yourselves". I think once our money stopped going out to all these other countries, once we stopped buying OPEC oil we'd see foreign ambassadors with their hats in their hands going "Um...we didn't mean it. Please come back?"

I think alot of you are missing the point of this thread. I know killing terorrists isn't going to stop them. However, killing everybody around them just might. In the short term it'd breed more terrorists. But if it was consistent it'd end in genocide or halting of terrorism. At this point I'm on the verge of accepting either outcome. Let's face it. Terorrists aren't human. They're animals in human disquise. They should be treated as such. Those who allow them to live among them should as well.

You know, in general I'm a pretty humanitarian guy. I think we should do our best to stop atrocities around the world, whether or not it is in our "national interest". But, humanitarianism only applies to humans.

[daveNYC]

2) Do what all these nutjobs say they want. Total and complete withdrawl. All the European Fascists don't like us, the Nutjob terrorists don't like us, fine. Bring home ALL of our troops, even the ones in bases in peaceful countries. Close our borders to all immigration. Trade only what is absolutely vital. Stop all foreign aid. Basically totally isolate ourselves. Tell the rest of the world "Good luck, you all didn't like us, so fine, go fuck yourselves". I think once our money stopped going out to all these other countries, once we stopped buying OPEC oil we'd see foreign ambassadors with their hats in their hands going "Um...we didn't mean it. Please come back?"

More likely, we'd stick our heads out of the cave in five years and discover China is running the world.

[DarkDryad]

I wouldnt be so sure about that one. If China were to become the worlds supermarket they would be the evil capitolistic pigs then. Cant see them letting that happen.

[daveNYC]

They already are evil capitalistic pigs.  They are just corrupt, totalitarian ones.

[DarkDryad]

That has to be one of the funniest things I've ever read Dave . Thanx

[Foix]

He's right, you know. The Chinese economy is a lot closer to state capitalism than it is to state socialism these days. Even our old friends in Vietnam are proceeding in that direction, though they are not so far along the path as China. In fact, the only countries that truly have communist economies (i.e. a nonexistent to minimal private sector) in the world any longer are those that have been effectively isolated by the international community: Cuba and North Korea.

Those communist governments that didn't fall in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union came to discover that capitalism was simply more profitable, once the United States and others got over their Cold War fears of interacting with communist-oriented dictatorships. Mind you, the former communists nations that lacked democratic traditions are still as authoritarian (Russia) or totalitarian (China) as ever, but they also have their fair share of billionaires and booming consumer goods sectors--heck, some of those Everquest platinum mills like IGE are run out of China! Both are likely to realize that political liberalization naturally follows from economic liberalization: when people don't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from, they have the time to question why the government ignores their opinions. I'll be interested to see if they'll abandon the prospect of prosperity for the sake of cracking down on 'dissidents.'