Bin Laden is Dead - Page 11
Old 05-05-2011, 09:15 AM   #201 (permalink)
contemplating

The Killing Joke

 
Claudius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Burkina Faso, Disputed Zone
Posts: 9,968
Representing:
Send a message via MSN to Claudius
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDPlease View Post
I see what you mean but the 911 attacks were committed before any war was formally declared by either side (although the attack was the declaration, there was no formal warning). Therefore, all the attacks were were the killing of innocent civilians for political reasons, with no warning, and that's what I consider an act of terrorism.

Then when both sides had declared and acknowledged war, anything that happens after is, as you've said, collateral damage.
Unless, you consider the attacks PRIOR to 9/11 as a declaration of war by one side and ignored by the other.
Claudius is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 09:17 AM   #202 (permalink)
contemplating

The Killing Joke

 
Claudius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Burkina Faso, Disputed Zone
Posts: 9,968
Representing:
Send a message via MSN to Claudius
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffb View Post
How many bombings, muders has he orchastrated around the world. Not just the US, in the name of religion and politics. He was the head of a terrorist organization, period.
How well do you know your history? Because I can play this game all day long.

By this definition the State Department and CIA can both be considered terrorist organizations as well.

It's not black and white as many of us tend to view everything.
Claudius is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 09:20 AM   #203 (permalink)
is praying Ross makes us forget Drummomd so people stop whining

Senior Member
 
jeffb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: YO MAMMA
Posts: 69,985
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claudius View Post
How well do you know your history? Because I can play this game all day long.

By this definition the State Department and CIA can both be considered terrorist organizations as well.

It's not black and white as many of us tend to view everything.
You're right, we could do this all day. But I will always view Bin Laden as a terrorist. That won't change.
jeffb is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 09:25 AM   #204 (permalink)
far away

Senior Member
 
archie63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Panama City
Posts: 981
Representing:
Default

@ Claudius
I see that you don't like the word "terrorist" for some (good) reasons, but you can't ignore the "common use" of that word. So for the widest part of western people this word perfectly describes Bin laden and his action (terrorism). For sure there're some people that consider him an hero and for sure they never call him a "terrorist".
Whatever you think about him I think is lame and rethorical discussing a word instead of an action.
archie63 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 09:59 AM   #205 (permalink)
contemplating

The Killing Joke

 
Claudius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Burkina Faso, Disputed Zone
Posts: 9,968
Representing:
Send a message via MSN to Claudius
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by archie63 View Post
@ Claudius
I see that you don't like the word "terrorist" for some (good) reasons, but you can't ignore the "common use" of that word. So for the widest part of western people this word perfectly describes Bin laden and his action (terrorism). For sure there're some people that consider him an hero and for sure they never call him a "terrorist".
Whatever you think about him I think is lame and rethorical discussing a word instead of an action.
While you may think it is lame, I think it's important when we label anything.

And the reason I criticize the word terrorist to death is because of how strong that label has become in western society. Inevitably it seems, one thinks of a male Arab, between 30-45, with a beard and in 'traditional' garb. This is why it's important, because OF the perspective and the image it produces and why it's important to think critically of any term.

If I say mass murderer, the image likely changes (which is a good way to classify him). So why is that term not allowed? Is it because it's too vague of a term?

I think it's kinda lame to not critically analyze common (and misused) labels which become tropes in Western culture.
Claudius is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 10:20 AM   #206 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Captain Ding Dong
 
Aar_Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St.Catharines
Posts: 4,924
Representing:
Default

From Wikipedia: Terror comes from the latin verb terrere meaning "to frighten".

Bin Laden stated numerous times that his intent was not just the killing of innocent civilians, but the desire to frighten - by those actions and others - the west and, in turn, attempt to destroy financial markets, etc.

Now, you can say that the US terrorizes and others might view Osama as a hero but it doesn't change the fact that Bin Laden was a terrorist and, through much of his rhetoric, labeled himself as such.
Aar_Canada is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 10:58 AM   #207 (permalink)
far away

Senior Member
 
archie63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Panama City
Posts: 981
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claudius View Post
While you may think it is lame, I think it's important when we label anything.

And the reason I criticize the word terrorist to death is because of how strong that label has become in western society. Inevitably it seems, one thinks of a male Arab, between 30-45, with a beard and in 'traditional' garb. This is why it's important, because OF the perspective and the image it produces and why it's important to think critically of any term.

If I say mass murderer, the image likely changes (which is a good way to classify him). So why is that term not allowed? Is it because it's too vague of a term?

I think it's kinda lame to not critically analyze common (and misused) labels which become tropes in Western culture.
I see your point but it's not completely true, IRA affiliates were named "terrorists" as well as ETA affiliates and turkish PKK, and before RAF in Gemany and Red Brigades in Italy.
archie63 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 11:37 AM   #208 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Captain Ding Dong
 
Aar_Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St.Catharines
Posts: 4,924
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Whereas, terrorizing oppressors and criminals and thieves and robbers is necessary for the safety of people and for the protection of their property. There is no doubt in this. Every state and every civilization and culture has to resort to terrorism under certain circumstances for the purpose of abolishing tyranny and corruption. Every country in the world has its own security system and its own security forces, its own police and its own army. They are all designed to terrorize whoever even contemplates to attack that country or its citizens. The terrorism we practice is of the commendable kind for it is directed at the tyrants and the aggressors and the enemies of Allah, the tyrants, the traitors who commit acts of treason against their own countries and their own faith and their own prophet and their own nation. Terrorizing those and punishing them are necessary measures to straighten things and to make them right. Tyrants and oppressors who subject the Arab nation to aggression ought to be punished. The wrongs and the crimes committed against the Muslim nation are far greater than can be covered by this interview. America heads the list of aggressors against Muslims. The recurrence of aggression against Muslims everywhere is proof enough. For over half a century, Muslims in Palestine have been slaughtered and assaulted and robbed of their honor and of their property. Their houses have been blasted, their crops destroyed. And the strange thing is that any act on their part to avenge themselves or to lift the injustice befalling them causes great agitation in the United Nations which hastens to call for an emergency meeting only to convict the victim and to censure the wronged and the tyrannized whose children have been killed and whose crops have been destroyed and whose farms have been pulverized. ...

They rip us of our wealth and of our resources and of our oil. Our religion is under attack. They kill and murder our brothers. They compromise our honor and our dignity and dare we utter a single word of protest against the injustice, we are called terrorists. This is compounded injustice. And the United Nations insistence to convict the victims and support the aggressors constitutes a serious precedence which shows the extent of injustice that has been allowed to take root in this land.
Osama Bin Laden 1998

So, in one stretch of ramble, he declares himself a terrorist and then plays the, "They label us terrorists, we're just protesting..." card.
Aar_Canada is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 11:38 AM   #209 (permalink)
streets ahead.

Senior Member
 
SomeDPlease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,780
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claudius View Post
Unless, you consider the attacks PRIOR to 9/11 as a declaration of war by one side and ignored by the other.
I don't understand what you're saying here, can you elaborate a bit?
SomeDPlease is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 12:09 PM   #210 (permalink)
streets ahead.

Senior Member
 
SomeDPlease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,780
Representing:
Default

Nevermind, I see what you're saying but no, I don't think of the embassy attacks prior to 911 as a declaration of war. I guess we have different views there.
SomeDPlease is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 12:12 PM   #211 (permalink)
is praying Ross makes us forget Drummomd so people stop whining

Senior Member
 
jeffb's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: YO MAMMA
Posts: 69,985
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDPlease View Post
Nevermind, I see what you're saying but no, I don't think of the embassy attacks prior to 911 as a declaration of war. I guess we have different views there.
And there was also an earlier attempt to blow up one of the WTC buildings in the early 90's
jeffb is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 01:08 PM   #212 (permalink)
on the outside, looking in.

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,331
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by archie63 View Post
@ Claudius
I see that you don't like the word "terrorist" for some (good) reasons, but you can't ignore the "common use" of that word. So for the widest part of western people this word perfectly describes Bin laden and his action (terrorism). For sure there're some people that consider him an hero and for sure they never call him a "terrorist".
Whatever you think about him I think is lame and rethorical discussing a word instead of an action.
if foreign policy is going to be couched in such phrases as 'you're either with us or you're with the terrorists', and we are going to enact law regarding 'terrorism' or if we are going to engage in an overall 'war on terror' which is to guide military intervention and security policy within states, we mose certainly need to accurately and completely define the word. leaving it ambiguous leaves those laws an initiatives ambiguous, and it leaves privacy and personal security ambiguous as well.
'trane is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 01:14 PM   #213 (permalink)
LX
Less is more. More or less. But mostly less. Or should that be more?

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 26,635
Representing:
Default

they can keep the word vague, even neglect to admit to the terrorism committed by particular states without criticism, just end the war on terror - there's no way to make that one sensible or anything much more than an endless assertion of power with the usual side-effects.
LX is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 01:24 PM   #214 (permalink)
far away

Senior Member
 
archie63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Panama City
Posts: 981
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'trane View Post
if foreign policy is going to be couched in such phrases as 'you're either with us or you're with the terrorists', and we are going to enact law regarding 'terrorism' or if we are going to engage in an overall 'war on terror' which is to guide military intervention and security policy within states, we mose certainly need to accurately and completely define the word. leaving it ambiguous leaves those laws an initiatives ambiguous, and it leaves privacy and personal security ambiguous as well.
I could agree with you but your reasoning (as well as Claudius's) seem to me more pointed toward a "definition" than toward the "meaning". I don't want to appear too rude but what's wrong with the word terrorist? Given that no "terrorist" would call himself so, for those who call them with that word they are, and this goes both way. I mean British government called IRA a terrorist organisation while IRA member called themself soldiers for the freedom of Ireland and British soldiers (or the government) were terrorist.
Besides I completely agree about the law, sometimes (often) they're used to justify (make them legal) action against privacy and personal security that normally aren't allowed and considered unacceptable
archie63 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 01:28 PM   #215 (permalink)
on the outside, looking in.

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,331
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by archie63 View Post
I could agree with you but your reasoning (as well as Claudius's) seem to me more pointed toward a "definition" than toward the "meaning". I don't want to appear too rude but what's wrong with the word terrorist? Given that no "terrorist" would call himself so, for those who call them with that word they are, and this goes both way. I mean British government called IRA a terrorist organisation while IRA member called themself soldiers for the freedom of Ireland and British soldiers (or the government) were terrorist.
Besides I completely agree about the law, sometimes (often) they're used to justify (make them legal) action against privacy and personal security that normally aren't allowed and considered unacceptable
my point is only that you cannot enact law based on poorly defined words. what you said about ireland is precisely what's wrong with enacting legislation around loose terminology. and the correlative problem is who gets to decide on that meaning?
'trane is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 01:37 PM   #216 (permalink)
far away

Senior Member
 
archie63's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Panama City
Posts: 981
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'trane View Post
my point is only that you cannot enact law based on poorly defined words. what you said about ireland is precisely what's wrong with enacting legislation around loose terminology. and the correlative problem is who gets to decide on that meaning?
Yah but what's the difference in call someone a terrorist or freedom soldier, one can allways make laws against freedom soldiers. My bottom line is a law is wrong not because is against the terror as or whatever else is wrong because it could diminish personal freedom of people in the name of general security in a generic way
archie63 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2011, 03:25 PM   #217 (permalink)
Canada b-ball, 2020 Olympic Gold Medalists

The Mara sisters are hot!
 
Bill Haverchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,649
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claudius View Post
Unless, you consider the attacks PRIOR to 9/11 as a declaration of war by one side and ignored by the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeDPlease View Post
Nevermind, I see what you're saying but no, I don't think of the embassy attacks prior to 911 as a declaration of war. I guess we have different views there.
In 1997, during an interview with CNN, he declared his Jihad. Bin Laden said he was at war, and the first overseas attacks soon followed. So, in Bin Laden's mind, he was definitely fighting a war much earlier on. If you're going to say there was no war, then I guess you have to dispute who has the ability to declare a legitimate war, which leads us back to defining terms.
Bill Haverchuck is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 12:02 AM   #218 (permalink)
hibernating

Retired Administrator
 
Benzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,287
Representing:
Default

The difference for me and this is really just my opinion.

A "terrorist" fights his battles (war) with no consideration of civilian casualties, in some cases pick their targets to maximize them 9/11, UK, Spain. Causing "terror" among the masses.

Say what you want about the USA, and there wherefores and whys, they attempt to minimize as many civilian casualties as possible. It becomes a military action with strategic military targets, right or wrong, which is why the group we are discussing has been hiding amongst them.

It is not an Arab thing for sure, IRA, T.Macveigh etc... terrorists, no consideration for civilian life.
Benzo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 12:17 AM   #219 (permalink)
streets ahead.

Senior Member
 
SomeDPlease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,780
Representing:
Default

Just watched the interview, he definitely thought he was at war. Then it comes down to if you think a war is legit if only one side has declared it, or if both sides have declared it.
SomeDPlease is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2011, 01:26 AM   #220 (permalink)
is all bout dat life

Can't knock the Hustle
 
Nites's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 13,644
Representing:
Default

Nites is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright RaptorsForum.com 2005-2011

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24