I am thinking the groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad are not going to cooperate

Maybe 2-3 weeks

I'd give it a week before they start killing each other again.

My vote goes for a week.

I think a 17 year old palestinian boy is going to get drunk and throw a rock at a tank late one night. Then Israel will drive in a dozen tanks and blow up some houses, and everything will be back to normal.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg98976#msg98976 date=1107965024]
I think a 17 year old palestinian boy is going to get drunk and throw a rock at a tank late one night. Then Israel will drive in a dozen tanks and blow up some houses, and everything will be back to normal.
[/quote]Serves the kids right to have his house blown up.  I personally like the Singapore beating of the kid that spray painted the cars...YAY!

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg98976#msg98976 date=1107965024]
I think a 17 year old palestinian boy is going to get drunk and throw a rock at a tank late one night. Then Israel will drive in a dozen tanks and blow up some houses, and everything will be back to normal.
[/quote]

Yeah :(

Oh crap... I feel the inevitable Israel is / is not a terrorist state debate coming on.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg98976#msg98976 date=1107965024]
I think a 17 year old palestinian boy is going to get drunk and throw a rock at a tank late one night. Then Israel will drive in a dozen tanks and blow up some houses, and everything will be back to normal.
[/quote]

I love how stupid this is. Its like you think that the Palestinians do nothing to warrant the Israeli response.

It depends on what happens with the leaders on how long it will last. Hamas has already said that they will not follow the order of the new Palestinian leader.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99019#msg99019 date=1107976488]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg98976#msg98976 date=1107965024]
I think a 17 year old palestinian boy is going to get drunk and throw a rock at a tank late one night. Then Israel will drive in a dozen tanks and blow up some houses, and everything will be back to normal.
[/quote]

I love how stupid this is. Its like you think that the Palestinians do nothing to warrant the Israeli response.

It depends on what happens with the leaders on how long it will last. Hamas has already said that they will not follow the order of the new Palestinian leader.
[/quote]

Get past his trolling and you will see he is acknowledging that the Palestinians are provoking the Israeli's to respond with disproportionate force.

So its Israel's fault that they're crushing the Palestinians? Like maybe the Palestinians aren't asking for it, in fact begging for it by targeting strictly non-combatants?

[quote author=Grok link=topic=10478.msg99032#msg99032 date=1107980998]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99019#msg99019 date=1107976488]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg98976#msg98976 date=1107965024]
I think a 17 year old palestinian boy is going to get drunk and throw a rock at a tank late one night. Then Israel will drive in a dozen tanks and blow up some houses, and everything will be back to normal.
[/quote]

I love how stupid this is. Its like you think that the Palestinians do nothing to warrant the Israeli response.

It depends on what happens with the leaders on how long it will last. Hamas has already said that they will not follow the order of the new Palestinian leader.
[/quote]

Get past his trolling and you will see he is acknowledging that the Palestinians are provoking the Israeli's to respond with disproportionate force.
[/quote] I like that word disproportionate. How is is disproportionate? Honestly, using an armored vehicles is the sane thing to do to protect your own men from the enemy.

Disproportionate is bulldozing houses in the process of 'searching' for tunnels and weapons. Disproportionate is shooting unarmed children for running in the wrong direction. Disproportionate is shooting journalists with white flags in the midst of their attempt to leave a patrolled area.

Quite comprably, disproportionate is conducting suicide attacks on Isreali civilians, and blowing up busses full of schoolchildren. The difference is that Isreal is an industrialised, westernised democracy with a military and a chain of command, instead of a bunch of terrorists with some other people vaguely in charge, perhaps excerising some control, but not nearly as much as a government has over its military.

Put it this way: When terrorists kill civilians, it's awful. Nonetheless, that's what terrorists do, so it's not entirely unexpected. When the military of a country kill civilians without cause, as has uncontrivertably happened on more than one occasion, that's worse.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99157#msg99157 date=1108034617]
Disproportionate is bulldozing houses in the process of 'searching' for tunnels and weapons.[/quote] I also like how you put quotes around searching ::). The tunnels were a major problem, think of a better way to do it. Keep in mine searching every house would put the troops in danger and be less effective. Also the houses that were bulldosed were not houses like you and I live in... they were more like tents / temporary settlements.
[quote] Disproportionate is shooting unarmed children for running in the wrong direction. [/quote] The palestinians encourage children to run into the line of fire, and in front of tanks. They have a whole propoganda campaign to encourage them to do it. That way they can make Israel look bad.
[quote]Disproportionate is shooting journalists with white flags in the midst of their attempt to leave a patrolled area.[/quote] I have read nothing about this.

[quote]
Put it this way: When terrorists kill civilians, it's awful. Nonetheless, that's what terrorists do, so it's not entirely unexpected. When the military of a country kill civilians without cause, as has uncontrivertably happened on more than one occasion, that's worse.
[/quote] You act like Israel's military just goes after civilians. I am not going to say none die, but Israel does not go around shooting civilians. Half the time people are running into the line of fire and sacrificing themselves so the finger can be pointed at Israel so I would hardly call those people just innocent civilians.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99159#msg99159 date=1108035160]
I have read nothing about this.
[/quote]

James Miller. He was shot by troops in gaza who claimed that he was in the direction of gunfire. This is lies. On the website created to campaign for an enquiry into his death, there was a video shot by one of his colleagues that showed the entire thing. James miller was murdered - pure and simple - and the IDF has done nothing about it. Unfortunately that website seems to have gone down now. The BBC page mentions some other similar incidents. HBO made a documentary about it called Death in Gaza, which I've not seen, but would be interested in watching.

BBC story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2997525.stm

Google cache of the website, showing a timeline of events: http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:2UzGbE1hiGYJ:www.justice4jamesmiller.com/timelines.htm+%22James+Miller%22+justice&hl=en

I tried to find another copy of the video but no luck.

I don't really want to discuss this because the entire topic just makes me angry. The behaviour of both sides is equally bad, but Isreal is a modern country. It should know better than to allow its military to murder civilians and shoot children. When these things happen, as they inevitably will occasionally, it should hold people accountable, and yet it never seems to. Half the time, the IDF are just as bad as the terrorists they claim to be hunting.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99157#msg99157 date=1108034617]

Put it this way: When terrorists kill civilians, it's awful. Nonetheless, that's what terrorists do, so it's not entirely unexpected. When the military of a country kill civilians without cause, as has uncontrivertably happened on more than one occasion, that's worse.
[/quote]

But the Israeli government shouldn't be able to do anything, because thats what they should expect from the terrorists? Its worse for one person to kill civilians then another person to kill civillians. Is it worse for a white person to kill a black person than it is for a black person to kill another black person?

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99169#msg99169 date=1108050271]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99159#msg99159 date=1108035160]
I have read nothing about this.
[/quote]

James Miller. He was shot by troops in gaza who claimed that he was in the direction of gunfire. This is lies. On the website created to campaign for an enquiry into his death, there was a video shot by one of his colleagues that showed the entire thing. James miller was murdered - pure and simple - and the IDF has done nothing about it. Unfortunately that website seems to have gone down now. The BBC page mentions some other similar incidents. HBO made a documentary about it called Death in Gaza, which I've not seen, but would be interested in watching.

BBC story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2997525.stm

Google cache of the website, showing a timeline of events: http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:2UzGbE1hiGYJ:www.justice4jamesmiller.com/timelines.htm+%22James+Miller%22+justice&hl=en

I tried to find another copy of the video but no luck.

I don't really want to discuss this because the entire topic just makes me angry. The behaviour of both sides is equally bad, but Isreal is a modern country. It should know better than to allow its military to murder civilians and shoot children. When these things happen, as they inevitably will occasionally, it should hold people accountable, and yet it never seems to. Half the time, the IDF are just as bad as the terrorists they claim to be hunting.
[/quote] You act like the Israely military just goes out and kills people for the hell of it. I read the story and it sounds more like a screw up then a government's hidden agenda.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99230#msg99230 date=1108094134]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99157#msg99157 date=1108034617]

Put it this way: When terrorists kill civilians, it's awful. Nonetheless, that's what terrorists do, so it's not entirely unexpected. When the military of a country kill civilians without cause, as has uncontrivertably happened on more than one occasion, that's worse.
[/quote]

But the Israeli government shouldn't be able to do anything, because thats what they should expect from the terrorists? Its worse for one person to kill civilians then another person to kill civillians. Is it worse for a white person to kill a black person than it is for a black person to kill another black person?
[/quote]

No, but if a people/person is going to act more civilized (i.e. Israel, Whites) then there are certain expections as compared to the ones they label "inferior" (i.e.  Terrorists/Blacks).

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99232#msg99232 date=1108095106]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99169#msg99169 date=1108050271]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99159#msg99159 date=1108035160]
I have read nothing about this.
[/quote]

James Miller. He was shot by troops in gaza who claimed that he was in the direction of gunfire. This is lies. On the website created to campaign for an enquiry into his death, there was a video shot by one of his colleagues that showed the entire thing. James miller was murdered - pure and simple - and the IDF has done nothing about it. Unfortunately that website seems to have gone down now. The BBC page mentions some other similar incidents. HBO made a documentary about it called Death in Gaza, which I've not seen, but would be interested in watching.

BBC story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2997525.stm

Google cache of the website, showing a timeline of events: http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:2UzGbE1hiGYJ:www.justice4jamesmiller.com/timelines.htm+%22James+Miller%22+justice&hl=en

I tried to find another copy of the video but no luck.

I don't really want to discuss this because the entire topic just makes me angry. The behaviour of both sides is equally bad, but Isreal is a modern country. It should know better than to allow its military to murder civilians and shoot children. When these things happen, as they inevitably will occasionally, it should hold people accountable, and yet it never seems to. Half the time, the IDF are just as bad as the terrorists they claim to be hunting.
[/quote] You act like the Israely military just goes out and kills people for the hell of it. I read the story and it sounds more like a screw up then a government's hidden agenda.
[/quote]

The military doesn't kill people for the hell of it, but some of their soldiers have, and the military doesn't seem to care.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99247#msg99247 date=1108098995]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99230#msg99230 date=1108094134]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99157#msg99157 date=1108034617]

Put it this way: When terrorists kill civilians, it's awful. Nonetheless, that's what terrorists do, so it's not entirely unexpected. When the military of a country kill civilians without cause, as has uncontrivertably happened on more than one occasion, that's worse.
[/quote]

But the Israeli government shouldn't be able to do anything, because thats what they should expect from the terrorists? Its worse for one person to kill civilians then another person to kill civillians. Is it worse for a white person to kill a black person than it is for a black person to kill another black person?
[/quote]

No, but if a people/person is going to act more civilized (i.e. Israel, Whites) then there are certain expections as compared to the ones they label "inferior" (i.e. Terrorists/Blacks).
[/quote]

bigot

Adron and dxoigmn are arguing different rights and responsibilities for different people.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99270#msg99270 date=1108132446]
Adron and dxoigmn are arguing different rights and responsibilities for different people.
[/quote]

At one level yes, at another level no. Most importantly though, if you want people to support your fight against some groups because of the evil methods they use against you, you should not stoop to using similar evil methods yourself.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99260#msg99260 date=1108124127]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99232#msg99232 date=1108095106]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99169#msg99169 date=1108050271]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99159#msg99159 date=1108035160]
I have read nothing about this.
[/quote]

James Miller. He was shot by troops in gaza who claimed that he was in the direction of gunfire. This is lies. On the website created to campaign for an enquiry into his death, there was a video shot by one of his colleagues that showed the entire thing. James miller was murdered - pure and simple - and the IDF has done nothing about it. Unfortunately that website seems to have gone down now. The BBC page mentions some other similar incidents. HBO made a documentary about it called Death in Gaza, which I've not seen, but would be interested in watching.

BBC story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2997525.stm

Google cache of the website, showing a timeline of events: http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:2UzGbE1hiGYJ:www.justice4jamesmiller.com/timelines.htm+%22James+Miller%22+justice&hl=en

I tried to find another copy of the video but no luck.

I don't really want to discuss this because the entire topic just makes me angry. The behaviour of both sides is equally bad, but Isreal is a modern country. It should know better than to allow its military to murder civilians and shoot children. When these things happen, as they inevitably will occasionally, it should hold people accountable, and yet it never seems to. Half the time, the IDF are just as bad as the terrorists they claim to be hunting.
[/quote] You act like the Israely military just goes out and kills people for the hell of it. I read the story and it sounds more like a screw up then a government's hidden agenda.
[/quote]

The military doesn't kill people for the hell of it, but some of their soldiers have, and the military doesn't seem to care.
[/quote]
I would not say that at all. When a soldier gets out of line it really hurts Israel's image. Bad for PR. I am sure soldiers that get out of line are put back in their places. However, from the article in the OP, I would say it sounds more like a mistake then something that is deliberate.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg99281#msg99281 date=1108139758]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99270#msg99270 date=1108132446]
Adron and dxoigmn are arguing different rights and responsibilities for different people.
[/quote]

At one level yes, at another level no. Most importantly though, if you want people to support your fight against some groups because of the evil methods they use against you, you should not stoop to using similar evil methods yourself.
[/quote] Israel is not using similar methods. Israel does not target civilians, they target militants. Yes militants often pose as civilians and the palestinian officials are going to spin it their way, but you do not see busses of palestinians getting blown up. The attacks by Israel are not random, they are well thought out for the most part and their is a definate target. Claims that they are just fireing at random at palestinians that I have heard in the past are very flase. Take the missile attacks they use, they are often against the leaders of terrorist groups and are very well planned and are often successful. There is a lot of spin thaat says because Israel has superior firepower they are just bullying the palestinians around.

Adron, are you trying to say that we should not seek justice against people that have killed the innocent and pose a continuing threat? You're basically negating punishments. Israel doesn't have the right to kill terrorists because thats what the terrorists do, kill people? Is that seriously what you're getting across? You're saying that its okay for terrorists to kill innocent people because thats what terrorists do, but its not okay for the military to do it because the military's sole purpose is to kill terrorists and other threats?

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99270#msg99270 date=1108132446]
Adron and dxoigmn are arguing different rights and responsibilities for different people.
[/quote]

You just pulled a Hazard...oh wait you are Hazard.  Stop putting words in people's mouths.  I am not arguing for different rights, if anything I think everyone is equal.  BUT if a people are going to act more civlized than another (for example White people saying they're superior to Black people) then they'd had better act superior not not stoop to the level of the "inferior" (notice the quotes, they're very important) Blacks by committing those same acts Black commit becauase they are "inferior."

@Banana fanna fo fanna
Very insightful commentary on your half.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99329#msg99329 date=1108159575]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99270#msg99270 date=1108132446]
Adron and dxoigmn are arguing different rights and responsibilities for different people.
[/quote]

You just pulled a Hazard...oh wait you are Hazard. Stop putting words in people's mouths. I am not arguing for different rights, if anything I think everyone is equal. BUT if a people are going to act more civlized than another (for example White people saying they're superior to Black people) then they'd had better act superior not not stoop to the level of the "inferior" (notice the quotes, they're very important) Blacks by committing those same acts Black commit becauase they are "inferior."

@Banana fanna fo fanna
Very insightful commentary on your half.
[/quote]

dxoigmn: you are a bad person. Whoops, personal attack, sorry moderators.

Double standards perpetrated by the left wing european loving american hating scumbags will refuse to ever, EVER justify any action by anyone who is:

- white
- christian
- jewish
- pro-american

dxoigmn, people like you got Bush elected. thanks.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99329#msg99329 date=1108159575]
You just pulled a Hazard...oh wait you are Hazard. [/quote]
Damn straight. Bring it son.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99329#msg99329 date=1108159575]I am not arguing for different rights, if anything I think everyone is equal.  BUT if a people are going to act more civlized than another (for example White people saying they're superior to Black people) then they'd had better act superior not not stoop to the level of the "inferior" (notice the quotes, they're very important) Blacks by committing those same acts Black commit becauase they are "inferior."[/quote]
I'm trying to make sense of the senseless here, so bear with me. I'm going to assume that you stand against the death penalty too, since it is in your eyes "stooping to their level" to kill somebody because they brutally took another person's life. I don't think that many right-minded people argue for that Black's are inferior to Whites. In fact, many of these right-minded people stand to abolish affirmative action because it permits a lower standard from the black community. The Israelis don't argue that the Palestinians are inferior to them either. They are merely stepping up to the plate to defend themselves from terrorists. But apparently going after people just because they killed your own innocent people isn't okay, because somehow you got the idea that they find themselves superior. You're just too stupid to even talk to at this point.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99295#msg99295 date=1108144408]
Adron, are you trying to say that we should not seek justice against people that have killed the innocent and pose a continuing threat? You're basically negating punishments. Israel doesn't have the right to kill terrorists because thats what the terrorists do, kill people? Is that seriously what you're getting across? You're saying that its okay for terrorists to kill innocent people because thats what terrorists do, but its not okay for the military to do it because the military's sole purpose is to kill terrorists and other threats?
[/quote]

Seeking justice is fine. Israel isn't seeking justice, they're just seeking revenge.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg99339#msg99339 date=1108163000]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99295#msg99295 date=1108144408]
Adron, are you trying to say that we should not seek justice against people that have killed the innocent and pose a continuing threat? You're basically negating punishments. Israel doesn't have the right to kill terrorists because thats what the terrorists do, kill people? Is that seriously what you're getting across? You're saying that its okay for terrorists to kill innocent people because thats what terrorists do, but its not okay for the military to do it because the military's sole purpose is to kill terrorists and other threats?
[/quote]

Seeking justice is fine. Israel isn't seeking justice, they're just seeking revenge.
[/quote] Not really. Israel targets terrorist groups. They are not going for justice against the bombers because they are already dead. They are not going for revenge either. What they are going for is prevention. They are trying to take out the terrorists and their leaders before they can strike.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99335#msg99335 date=1108161969]
I'm trying to make sense of the senseless here, so bear with me. I'm going to assume that you stand against the death penalty too, since it is in your eyes "stooping to their level" to kill somebody because they brutally took another person's life. I don't think that many right-minded people argue for that Black's are inferior to Whites. In fact, many of these right-minded people stand to abolish affirmative action because it permits a lower standard from the black community. The Israelis don't argue that the Palestinians are inferior to them either. They are merely stepping up to the plate to defend themselves from terrorists. But apparently going after people just because they killed your own innocent people isn't okay, because somehow you got the idea that they find themselves superior. You're just too stupid to even talk to at this point.
[/quote]

Certainly you have others have painted the picture of Palestinians being these blood-thirsty savages who encourage their children to run into gun fire and other horrible acts as does Israel and their supporters (and if you don't believe this then the asshole, Daniel Pipes, that was at our school a we days ago must have been a ghost).  That implies inferiority.  Therefore, my argument stands.

I was toying with the example of Blacks and Whites (in the 1950s) because you brought up the issue of race and I find it fun to argue you with your own points in some ridiculous way.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99351#msg99351 date=1108165253]
Not really. Israel targets terrorist groups. They are not going for justice against the bombers because they are already dead. They are not going for revenge either. What they are going for is prevention. They are trying to take out the terrorists and their leaders before they can strike.
[/quote]

"Israel Responds to Suicide Bomb with (American-made) F-16s", "ISRAEL RESPONDS TO SUICIDE BUS BOMBING", "
Bombers' families targeted as Israel responds to new violence" and many other oh-so-familiar headlines.  Doesn't sound like Israel is being proactive but rather reactive.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99363#msg99363 date=1108172219]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99351#msg99351 date=1108165253]
Not really. Israel targets terrorist groups. They are not going for justice against the bombers because they are already dead. They are not going for revenge either. What they are going for is prevention. They are trying to take out the terrorists and their leaders before they can strike.
[/quote]

"Israel Responds to Suicide Bomb with (American-made) F-16s", "ISRAEL RESPONDS TO SUICIDE BUS BOMBING", "
Bombers' families targeted as Israel responds to new violence" and many other oh-so-familiar headlines. Doesn't sound like Israel is being proactive but rather reactive.
[/quote]

I love how you inject American-made into it to villify our nation once again.

[quote author=Banana fanna fo fanna link=topic=10478.msg99375#msg99375 date=1108181235]
[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99363#msg99363 date=1108172219]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99351#msg99351 date=1108165253]
Not really. Israel targets terrorist groups. They are not going for justice against the bombers because they are already dead. They are not going for revenge either. What they are going for is prevention. They are trying to take out the terrorists and their leaders before they can strike.
[/quote]

"Israel Responds to Suicide Bomb with (American-made) F-16s", "ISRAEL RESPONDS TO SUICIDE BUS BOMBING", "
Bombers' families targeted as Israel responds to new violence" and many other oh-so-familiar headlines. Doesn't sound like Israel is being proactive but rather reactive.
[/quote]

I love how you inject American-made into it to villify our nation once again.
[/quote]

I didn't inject anything into those headlines.  I just copied and pasted some examples, that was already there.  Don't assume, you only make an ass out of you and me.

According to dxo, the United States is the root of all evil. He should try living under a dictatorship or in one of these communist nations he seems to be constantly defending, but he wont because quite honestly he's a coward.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99383#msg99383 date=1108186328]
According to dxo, the United States is the root of all evil. He should try living under a dictatorship or in one of these communist nations he seems to be constantly defending, but he wont because quite honestly he's a coward.
[/quote]

You need to stop making personal assaults or you'll be banned from the forum again.

Jesus its a politics forum, everybody has done it, nobody takes it personally just get over it.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99407#msg99407 date=1108220050]
Jesus its a politics forum, everybody has done it, nobody takes it personally just get over it.
[/quote]

Maybe no one takes it personally, but it certainly destroys your credibility and whether or not people actually want to listen to you.

Everybody who matters considers what I have to say. Everybody who doesn't believes that what they think they know or believe is an indisputable fact. Cases in point, yourself, Arta, and Adron. Thats not a personal attack, thats a conjecture from months of observation.

Roughly translated: Everyone who agrees with you is important, and the rest of us are morons.

Get a grip. The fact that we disagree with you doesn't mean that we don't consider what you say.

You never have and you never will. Must I point to the old gun control debate as a prime example?

No. That debate was exemplified by us stating our views, and then you stating yours. Then we disagreed. Then we started again. Repeat x6 pages.

The fact that you are incapable of changing our minds, and vice versa, does not mean you haven't successfully conveyed your point of view.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99363#msg99363 date=1108172219]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99351#msg99351 date=1108165253]
Not really. Israel targets terrorist groups. They are not going for justice against the bombers because they are already dead. They are not going for revenge either. What they are going for is prevention. They are trying to take out the terrorists and their leaders before they can strike.
[/quote]

"Israel Responds to Suicide Bomb with (American-made) F-16s", "ISRAEL RESPONDS TO SUICIDE BUS BOMBING", "
Bombers' families targeted as Israel responds to new violence" and many other oh-so-familiar headlines.  Doesn't sound like Israel is being proactive but rather reactive.
[/quote] You expect them to roll over and say hard harder screw me harder? Of course they are going to respond somehow. Generally it is against the group. That family thing is badly out of context, I have seen examples of Israelies trying to isolate the money that saddam was giving to them and such, which is incentive for people to blow themselves up. Consider arthur miller's death of a salesman and the insurance money. I have never seen Israel's forces going into the home of a 'former' bomber with machine gun's blazing though.

Keep in mind the UN hates Israel and they just look for ammo to use against Israel. Israel is pissed on by the world and unrightfully so.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99652#msg99652 date=1108347797]
[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99363#msg99363 date=1108172219]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99351#msg99351 date=1108165253]
Not really. Israel targets terrorist groups. They are not going for justice against the bombers because they are already dead. They are not going for revenge either. What they are going for is prevention. They are trying to take out the terrorists and their leaders before they can strike.
[/quote]

"Israel Responds to Suicide Bomb with (American-made) F-16s", "ISRAEL RESPONDS TO SUICIDE BUS BOMBING", "
Bombers' families targeted as Israel responds to new violence" and many other oh-so-familiar headlines.  Doesn't sound like Israel is being proactive but rather reactive.
[/quote] You expect them to roll over and say hard harder screw me harder? Of course they are going to respond somehow. Generally it is against the group. That family thing is badly out of context, I have seen examples of Israelies trying to isolate the money that saddam was giving to them and such, which is incentive for people to blow themselves up. Consider arthur miller's death of a salesman and the insurance money. I have never seen Israel's forces going into the home of a 'former' bomber with machine gun's blazing though.

Keep in mind the UN hates Israel and they just look for ammo to use against Israel. Israel is pissed on by the world and unrightfully so.
[/quote]

So what is it?  You keep changing your stance on the issue.  Is Israel being proactive or reactive?

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99673#msg99673 date=1108355589]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99652#msg99652 date=1108347797]
[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99363#msg99363 date=1108172219]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99351#msg99351 date=1108165253]
Not really. Israel targets terrorist groups. They are not going for justice against the bombers because they are already dead. They are not going for revenge either. What they are going for is prevention. They are trying to take out the terrorists and their leaders before they can strike.
[/quote]

"Israel Responds to Suicide Bomb with (American-made) F-16s", "ISRAEL RESPONDS TO SUICIDE BUS BOMBING", "
Bombers' families targeted as Israel responds to new violence" and many other oh-so-familiar headlines.  Doesn't sound like Israel is being proactive but rather reactive.
[/quote] You expect them to roll over and say hard harder screw me harder? Of course they are going to respond somehow. Generally it is against the group. That family thing is badly out of context, I have seen examples of Israelies trying to isolate the money that saddam was giving to them and such, which is incentive for people to blow themselves up. Consider arthur miller's death of a salesman and the insurance money. I have never seen Israel's forces going into the home of a 'former' bomber with machine gun's blazing though.

Keep in mind the UN hates Israel and they just look for ammo to use against Israel. Israel is pissed on by the world and unrightfully so.
[/quote]

So what is it?  You keep changing your stance on the issue.  Is Israel being proactive or reactive?
[/quote] They are being more proactive I would say. Like I said, I have not heard of Israel going in and killing the suicide bomber's family, I would expect them to try to stop Saddam's money from getting to the family though. That way it will take away incentive for other people to blow themselves up.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99693#msg99693 date=1108381108]
They are being more proactive I would say. Like I said, I have not heard of Israel going in and killing the suicide bomber's family, I would expect them to try to stop Saddam's money from getting to the family though. That way it will take away incentive for other people to blow themselves up.
[/quote]

Okay, I understand now.  You have no evidence but because you think that Israel is proactive, then they must be.  Of course, my misunderstanding.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99708#msg99708 date=1108398295]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99693#msg99693 date=1108381108]
They are being more proactive I would say. Like I said, I have not heard of Israel going in and killing the suicide bomber's family, I would expect them to try to stop Saddam's money from getting to the family though. That way it will take away incentive for other people to blow themselves up.
[/quote]

Okay, I understand now.  You have no evidence but because you think that Israel is proactive, then they must be.  Of course, my misunderstanding.
[/quote] I have no evidence? I see this stuff on the news, but I guess I have to hold your hand and point it out to you.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/17/mideast.violence/index.html
They target the leader's of groups. That link I posted above was the first one that came up in a google search. I do not have time to post every article ever written about something like this.

quasi don't you realize that evidence supporting your argument is inadmissable?

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99750#msg99750 date=1108420141]
I have no evidence? I see this stuff on the news, but I guess I have to hold your hand and point it out to you.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/17/mideast.violence/index.html
They target the leader's of groups. That link I posted above was the first one that came up in a google search. I do not have time to post every article ever written about something like this.
[/quote]

So "Targeted killing follows deadly suicide bombing in Erez" right beheath the title doesn't mean anything?  That whole article reeks of seeking revenge.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99775#msg99775 date=1108433880]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg99750#msg99750 date=1108420141]
I have no evidence? I see this stuff on the news, but I guess I have to hold your hand and point it out to you.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/17/mideast.violence/index.html
They target the leader's of groups. That link I posted above was the first one that came up in a google search. I do not have time to post every article ever written about something like this.
[/quote]

So "Targeted killing follows deadly suicide bombing in Erez" right beheath the title doesn't mean anything?  That whole article reeks of seeking revenge.
[/quote] But do you see the fact that it is a Hamas leader?

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99752#msg99752 date=1108425438]
quasi don't you realize that evidence supporting your argument is inadmissable?
[/quote] It is just the first thing that came up in google. I do not feel like sifting through stuff. There is tons of stuff all over the place that shows that Israel goes after the groups and terrorists themselves and not innocent people. It is just people like dxo need it pointed out to them because they evidently watch their news through a sort of right-wing/anti-israeli filter.

They're still doing it for revenge, not justice or prevention. Justice would mean capturing leaders and give them a fair trial. Prevention would mean working on it continously instead of doing a counter-attack whenever there has been a bombing.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg99837#msg99837 date=1108485232]
They're still doing it for revenge, not justice or prevention. Justice would mean capturing leaders and give them a fair trial. Prevention would mean working on it continously instead of doing a counter-attack whenever there has been a bombing.
[/quote] It is prevention because it is taking out the leaders and terrorists before they can carry out attacks. Israel is working on it continuously. They have great intelligence they are constantly seaking these people out. Also the reason they are not getting a trial and terrorists are getting struck down is because this is a war... this is combat.

That's just beyond the pail.

1: This is not a war. War are armies fighting eachother. You yourself realise that half the combatants are terrorists. Hamas is not a military organisation. It is a terrorist group. Thus, this is not a war.

2: Killing terrorists just makes more terrorists. THIS IS TOTALLY, TOTALLY OBVIOUS. Thus, to defeat terrorism, we must address the causes of terrorism. There is no violent solution to this problem.

3: It is not prevention. See previous point.

I once read that the answer to all of humnanity's problems is to observe what is true, and do what works. Obviously, that's a fairly glib simplification, but the general principle is sound. Name a single example of a terrorist movement that has been overcome and eliminated by violent means. I dare you.

Given that:

Terrorists exist
Governments have universally failed to solve the problem militarily
Governments have sometimes succeeded in solving the problem diplomatically

It can be deduced that:

Military solutions don't work
Diplomatic solutions can work

It can be concluded that:

The strategy of Isreal, the US, and any other country that seeks a military solution to the problem of terrorism, is flawed.

QED

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99875#msg99875 date=1108497327]
That's just beyond the pail.

1: This is not a war. War are armies fighting eachother. You yourself realise that half the combatants are terrorists. Hamas is not a military organisation. It is a terrorist group. Thus, this is not a war. [/quote]

-Vietnam was not a "war" as there was no actual declaration of war. Do you not consider Vietnam a war?

-Hamas characterizes themselves as soldiers of Allah and an actual military organization to defend the will of God. Even though they classify themselves as soldiers and a military organization, they aren't really one because they don't meet your own personal requirements?

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99875#msg99875 date=1108497327]
2: Killing terrorists just makes more terrorists. THIS IS TOTALLY, TOTALLY OBVIOUS. Thus, to defeat terrorism, we must address the causes of terrorism. There is no violent solution to this problem.[/quote]

Thats your own misguided opinion, and nothing more. We have to address the causes? Should we just, surrender anything to terrorists that they want to make them go away? Pacifism? Does the name Neville Chamberlain mean anything to you? We should all hold hands and get along?

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99875#msg99875 date=1108497327]Given that:

Terrorists exist
Governments have universally failed to solve the problem militarily
Governments have sometimes succeeded in solving the problem diplomatically

It can be deduced that:

Military solutions don't work
Diplomatic solutions can work[/quote]

Lets use some British logic here::

Given that: John F. Kennedy was killed with a high powered and long range rifle.
Dr. M. L. King was killed with a high powered and long range rifle.
The students and other civillians killed during the shootings in Austin, Texas at the University of Texas were killed with a high powered and long range rifle.

It can be deduced that:
Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible for all the shootings.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99916#msg99916 date=1108516694]
Given that: John F. Kennedy was killed with a high powered and long range rifle.
Dr. M. L. King was killed with a high powered and long range rifle.
The students and other civillians killed during the shootings in Austin, Texas at the University of Texas were killed with a high powered and long range rifle.

It can be deduced that:
Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible for all the shootings.
[/quote]

That's Hazard logic. It's obvious to everyone (except Hazard) that Hazard logic is incorrect. What you may deduce is that high powered and long range rifles are bad, and that if those had all been properly destroyed, then those shootings would not have been done with those high powered and long range rifles.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99916#msg99916 date=1108516694]
-Vietnam was not a "war" as there was no actual declaration of war. Do you not consider Vietnam a war?

-Hamas characterizes themselves as soldiers of Allah and an actual military organization to defend the will of God. Even though they classify themselves as soldiers and a military organization, they aren't really one because they don't meet your own personal requirements?
[/quote]

Vietnam is a country, not a war nor was it ever a war.  I like how we can suddenly change when or when not our classifications matter.  That is so American to use and appropriate things to their liking (i.e. We say Hamas is a terrorist organization, but for sake of argument let's throw a curve ball and say they're a military organization by their own definition just because I want point in this debate.)  Also, I fail to see how your logic works out.  I came to the same conclusion Adron did.

I think Hazard was trying to rubbish my viable logic by posting some nonsensical pseudo-logica and calling them the same thing. I don't see how that was ever going to work, but nevermind.

I don't see what my nationality has to do with anything, either. You were either implying that Britons are less logical than everyone else, which is absurd, or you were just trying to insult me, which is pointless. Either way, it weakens your argument. Unfortunately, I don't think you have has grasped the finer points of civilised debate, so this observation will no doubt fall on deaf ears. Or blind eyes? Who knows, and quite frankly, who cares? I stopped taking Hazard seriously months ago.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg99965#msg99965 date=1108544420]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99916#msg99916 date=1108516694]
Given that: John F. Kennedy was killed with a high powered and long range rifle.
Dr. M. L. King was killed with a high powered and long range rifle.
The students and other civillians killed during the shootings in Austin, Texas at the University of Texas were killed with a high powered and long range rifle.

It can be deduced that:
Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible for all the shootings.
[/quote]

That's Hazard logic. It's obvious to everyone (except Hazard) that Hazard logic is incorrect. What you may deduce is that high powered and long range rifles are bad, and that if those had all been properly destroyed, then those shootings would not have been done with those high powered and long range rifles.
[/quote]

Its pointing out how sneseless the logic that he, and you, use. He drew an absolute conclusion based on bad information which is simply not true. He thinks that the war on terror is not effective. Even though this isn't true, its probably just based on the fact that he is misinformed, but you or him will never admit to it.

You know, a simliar argument was used against others who had interesting arguments that people did not want to agree with. Two names in particular come to mind, Albert Einstein and Galileo. Just because you don't agree and are trying to force people to see it all your way doesn't mean your right Adron, get the fuck over yourself.

You're right, we should get rid of all high powered and long range rifles. Those are the only ones that ever do harm in the hands of bad people. Except of course the young man who murdered the Archduke Franz Ferdinand... guess we should get rid of pistols too. Yep, and there was that movie where that guy gutted that dirty Kraut with the knife so lets get rid of those. You know I saw this movie called "Walking Tall" where The Rock hit some guy with a baseball bat, so we should get rid of those. While we're at it, I read in the paper that a guy lit his house on fire and killed his ex-wife and two children, so lets ban gasoline and matches. The list goes on and on Adron.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99975#msg99975 date=1108563755]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99916#msg99916 date=1108516694]
-Vietnam was not a "war" as there was no actual declaration of war. Do you not consider Vietnam a war?

-Hamas characterizes themselves as soldiers of Allah and an actual military organization to defend the will of God. Even though they classify themselves as soldiers and a military organization, they aren't really one because they don't meet your own personal requirements?
[/quote]

Vietnam is a country, not a war nor was it ever a war.  I like how we can suddenly change when or when not our classifications matter.  That is so American to use and appropriate things to their liking (i.e. We say Hamas is a terrorist organization, but for sake of argument let's throw a curve ball and say they're a military organization by their own definition just because I want point in this debate.)  Also, I fail to see how your logic works out.  I came to the same conclusion Adron did.
[/quote]

You know it is possible for more than one person to buy into a disillusion. Millions once believed that the Earth was a) flat and b) the center of the universe.

Dxo, the point was to get at the heart of Arta's argument. He said that Hamas is not a military group, even though they themselves constantly claim to be a military unit. I never said that they weren't. It is entirely possible to be a military group and commit terrorist acts.

Military actions and tighter security might help prevent terrorist attacks in the homeland but in doing so we expose our troops to the danger. Their tactics are much different from ours since they don't value their lives at all and consider it an honor to sacrifice themselves and take a few soldiers with them. Terrorist groups existed for a long time but the US only started hunting them down after 9/11.

As mentioned, a war on terrorism is futile.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99875#msg99875 date=1108497327]
Name a single example of a terrorist movement that has been overcome and eliminated by violent means. I dare you.
[/quote]

Arta:
What do you mean by eliminated? Whiped out completely? None.
Name for me a diplomatic action that has completely whiped out ANYTHING. You won't be able to find one.

Well, Arta it has been over 3 years since an al-Qaeda attack on American soil... I'd say that movement has been overcome by overwhelming force and straight violence. What would you have us do, talk to the animals? Reason with the unreasonable? We should all just bow to Allah and give terrorists whatever they want for the sake of peace?

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg99975#msg99975 date=1108563755]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99916#msg99916 date=1108516694]
-Vietnam was not a "war" as there was no actual declaration of war. Do you not consider Vietnam a war?

-Hamas characterizes themselves as soldiers of Allah and an actual military organization to defend the will of God. Even though they classify themselves as soldiers and a military organization, they aren't really one because they don't meet your own personal requirements?
[/quote]

Vietnam is a country, not a war nor was it ever a war.  I like how we can suddenly change when or when not our classifications matter.  That is so American to use and appropriate things to their liking (i.e. We say Hamas is a terrorist organization, but for sake of argument let's throw a curve ball and say they're a military organization by their own definition just because I want point in this debate.)  Also, I fail to see how your logic works out.  I came to the same conclusion Adron did.
[/quote] That logic would dictate that there is no war going on in Iraq right now even though our troops fight insurgents every day.
"war on terror", it is a war but not against a country, but against groups.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100063#msg100063 date=1108599207]
As mentioned, a war on terrorism is futile.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99875#msg99875 date=1108497327]
Name a single example of a terrorist movement that has been overcome and eliminated by violent means. I dare you.
[/quote]
[/quote] Arta, they hate us, they hate our culture. Until we are dead or convirt to Islam this is not going to stop. Being nice to them is not going to solve the problem.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100111#msg100111 date=1108607759]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg99916#msg99916 date=1108516694]
Vietnam is a country, not a war nor was it ever a war.  I like how we can suddenly change when or when not our classifications matter.  That is so American to use and appropriate things to their liking (i.e. We say Hamas is a terrorist organization, but for sake of argument let's throw a curve ball and say they're a military organization by their own definition just because I want point in this debate.)  Also, I fail to see how your logic works out.  I came to the same conclusion Adron did.
[/quote] That logic would dictate that there is no war going on in Iraq right now even though our troops fight insurgents every day.
"war on terror", it is a war but not against a country, but against groups.
[/quote]

What logic are you talking about?  Vietnam is a country.  I can find you a map online and show where it is if that is necessary.  There is no war in Iraq going on now.  A war is between states not some random guerillas running around with RPGs.  And if you want to extend this further, one could say there never was a war because congress never declared one.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100113#msg100113 date=1108607843]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg99875#msg99875 date=1108497327]
Name a single example of a terrorist movement that has been overcome and eliminated by violent means. I dare you.
[/quote]
Arta, they hate us, they hate our culture. Until we are dead or convirt to Islam this is not going to stop. Being nice to them is not going to solve the problem.
[/quote]

You don't know that being nice to them won't solve anything and you have no proof to say otherwise.  Beside that, you're sidestepping the question.

How do you know that there would have been an attack without the war on terrorism? Islamic extremists were around for a long time before 9/11. In fact, I think 9/11 was a freak occurence.

The IRA were regularly blowing up parts of London before Blair opened up the possibility of diplomacy - something that the previous government had steadfastly refused to do on the grounds that you can't give in to terrorist demands - and now the IRA is practically dead. It's still there, don't get me wrong, but they haven't attacked London or Northern Ireland in a long time, and I doubt they will any time soon. Thus, they are irrelevant.

Also, as I have mentioned in previous conversations, I don't think violence is always inappropriate. I supported the war in Afghanistan. It's just this ongoing, neverending, ill-defined war on terrorism that I don't agree with. In Isreal's case, I think their actions are flawed because they're not working. Isreal needs to observe what is so, and do what works. They're doing an excellent job of observing what is so, but they're not doing what works by any stretch of the imagination...

-Dxo, are you saying that guerrilas can't be an organized fighting force? The Viet Cong were a guerilla force "running around with RPG's" and they were still considered a military unit.

-A carefully planned and plotted attack nearly a decade in the works was a freak occurance? Explain that one to me.

It was not one of a series of attacks. It was not a member of a set of attacks. It was a single event, unconnected to other potential terrorist attacks on American soil. The fact that 9/11 occured does not automatically increase the probability of another terrorist attack. America is not more at risk following 9/11 than it was before 9/11.

I argue that it is less. Terrorist factions have seen the imminent destruction that follows an attack on Americans.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100265#msg100265 date=1108684184]
-Dxo, are you saying that guerrilas can't be an organized fighting force? The Viet Cong were a guerilla force "running around with RPG's" and they were still considered a military unit.
[/quote]

No, I am speaking specifically to what is going on in Iraq.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100299#msg100299 date=1108692177]
I argue that it is less. Terrorist factions have seen the imminent destruction that follows an attack on Americans.
[/quote]

Yeah, I'm sure they're quaking in their boots, considering that the sum total of America's response has been the failure to capture the only guy that really mattered (Bin Laden) and to attack an irrelevant country.

The only good thing was the removal of the Taliban, a government that really did sponsor terrorism and was horribly oppressive.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100299#msg100299 date=1108692177]
I argue that it is less. Terrorist factions have seen the imminent destruction that follows an attack on Americans.
[/quote]

I argue that it is somewhat less with Americas recent moves towards a police state. Terrorism was rare in the soviet union, when the secret police had everyone in their clutches.

There are no secret police. Everything is being done in the public eye and everybody has to answer to somebody. Your conspiracy theory is wrong. The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]

You're a 17 year old high schooler.  I don't think you've studied American foreign policy in depth other than what has been offered at your high school and maybe read a few books here and there.

Point is, I don't think you have any basis for trying to call people out.

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg100429#msg100429 date=1108760979]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]
You're a 17 year old high schooler.  I don't think you've studied American foreign policy in depth other than what has been offered at your high school and maybe read a few books here and there.
[/quote] Except he is in ib classes. I have taken ap amgovt, ap econ, ap econ comp, and ap ush. I think I have a pretty decent idea. I suspect hazard has taken some of the aps and some equiv ib classes.

You don't need an advanced understanding of American foreign policy to tell that killing terrorists just makes more terrorists.

FYI, I don't think America is turning into a police state, nor have I ever said that I do. Thanks for reading what I post so carefully. On the other hand, I do think that America is making some bad legislative decisions that won't stand the test of time.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]

And the fact is that Hazard is unqualified to speak on any of this because his views of international events are heavily colored by the American propaganda machine. He doesn't get to read the plain, politically incorrect, unpatriotic, truth.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100430#msg100430 date=1108761376]
[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg100429#msg100429 date=1108760979]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]
You're a 17 year old high schooler.  I don't think you've studied American foreign policy in depth other than what has been offered at your high school and maybe read a few books here and there.
[/quote] Except he is in ib classes. I have taken ap amgovt, ap econ, ap econ comp, and ap ush. I think I have a pretty decent idea. I suspect hazard has taken some of the aps and some equiv ib classes.
[/quote]

What's your point?  AP/IB classes are generally below-introductory college courses and you rarely study any issue in depth as you would in a college course.

Edit: What did you get on those AP tests?

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100431#msg100431 date=1108761881]
You don't need an advanced understanding of American foreign policy to tell that killing terrorists just makes more terrorists.
[/quote] I think you will still have less terrorists then you started with because a) you killed a bunch and b) you pissed some off, but you scared some other would be terrorists.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg100440#msg100440 date=1108766555]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]

And the fact is that Hazard is unqualified to speak on any of this because his views of international events are heavily colored by the American propaganda machine. He doesn't get to read the plain, politically incorrect, unpatriotic, truth.
[/quote] By that you mean the blatantly liberal american media which turned the election into a bush bash fest?

[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg100448#msg100448 date=1108768447]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100430#msg100430 date=1108761376]
[quote author=dxoigmn link=topic=10478.msg100429#msg100429 date=1108760979]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]
You're a 17 year old high schooler.  I don't think you've studied American foreign policy in depth other than what has been offered at your high school and maybe read a few books here and there.
[/quote] Except he is in ib classes. I have taken ap amgovt, ap econ, ap econ comp, and ap ush. I think I have a pretty decent idea. I suspect hazard has taken some of the aps and some equiv ib classes.
[/quote]

What's your point?  AP/IB classes are generally below-introductory college courses and you rarely study any issue in depth as you would in a college course.

Edit: What did you get on those AP tests?
[/quote]
I made a 4 on govt and the two econ tests. I made a 3 on apush. I made a 3 on ap comp sci too... but I am actually disappointed about that, I think I coulda done better.

My point is I think Hazard knows a thing or two about what he is talking about, much more than Joe Shmo on the street.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100458#msg100458 date=1108769767]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100431#msg100431 date=1108761881]
You don't need an advanced understanding of American foreign policy to tell that killing terrorists just makes more terrorists.
[/quote] I think you will still have less terrorists then you started with because a) you killed a bunch and b) you pissed some off, but you scared some other would be terrorists.
[/quote]

It's totally and utterly naive to think that you can scare people who are willing to blow themselves up for their cause.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100462#msg100462 date=1108772160]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100458#msg100458 date=1108769767]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100431#msg100431 date=1108761881]
You don't need an advanced understanding of American foreign policy to tell that killing terrorists just makes more terrorists.
[/quote] I think you will still have less terrorists then you started with because a) you killed a bunch and b) you pissed some off, but you scared some other would be terrorists.
[/quote]

It's totally and utterly naive to think that you can scare people who are willing to blow themselves up for their cause.
[/quote] They are not afraid to die, but afraid to get caught. Either way if you kill all of the terrorists I think the second batch is going to be smaller than the first.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg100440#msg100440 date=1108766555]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]

And the fact is that Hazard is unqualified to speak on any of this because his views of international events are heavily colored by the American propaganda machine. He doesn't get to read the plain, politically incorrect, unpatriotic, truth.
[/quote]

If you listen to any American propaganda at all, you'd see that it is, in fact, anti-American and anti-Bush.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100464#msg100464 date=1108772967]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100462#msg100462 date=1108772160]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100458#msg100458 date=1108769767]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100431#msg100431 date=1108761881]
You don't need an advanced understanding of American foreign policy to tell that killing terrorists just makes more terrorists.
[/quote] I think you will still have less terrorists then you started with because a) you killed a bunch and b) you pissed some off, but you scared some other would be terrorists.
[/quote]

It's totally and utterly naive to think that you can scare people who are willing to blow themselves up for their cause.
[/quote] They are not afraid to die, but afraid to get caught. Either way if you kill all of the terrorists I think the second batch is going to be smaller than the first.
[/quote]

I don't think that's true at all. Terrorists represent a very small percentage of the population of the world. Given that the potential exists for anyone to become radicalised, and that perceived acts of injustice are a very effective at radicalising people, it stands to reason that violence will be very effective at radicalising the people who are left behind.  Every time someone is killed, their friends and relatives are robbed of that person. A proportion of those people will become radicalised.

I spoke at length in a previous thread about this question of perceived injustice in the context of right and wrong, and this is another example of it. In many parts of the world, the terrorists are percieved as being the good guys, fighting the evil, corrupt west. It's a struggle - which is what the word 'jihad' means - against a perceived oppressor. I think it has been fairly well bourne out by history that a concerted group of resistance fighters - which his how many people see radical islamic groups - are generally successful in their attempts to overthrow their oppressors.

Now, in this case, I don't think that will be the result. I don't think the west is oppressing the middle east, and I don't think these people are resistance fighters. I think they are terrorists with an unrealisitc, radical agenda. Nonetheless, the point is not what I think - it's what they think - because it's their beliefs and their attitude that will define their behaviour. Thus, although the circumstances are not the same, I think that the result will be similar.

By killing terrorists, we further brutalise an already radical population, and inevitably, in the process, create more people who are willing to take up violence.

Yes, but a good number of muslims do not like these terrorists and they know that these terrorists are the reason we are over there to begin with. Some of them speak out against the 'fighters'. I think when you kill a batch, you will get another batch, but I think it will be smaller.

Why smaller? Please explain your reasoning. Even the moderates of which you speak have limits.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100508#msg100508 date=1108810821]
Why smaller? Please explain your reasoning. Even the moderates of which you speak have limits.
[/quote] Okay, you have plenty of people in the muslim world who are pissed off about all the fighting. They realize that this militant extremist group is really a problem. Some speak out against it. They are going to encourage people not to become terrorists. When a country goes in to fight the terrorists those non-terrorists are going to be all pissed off at the terrorists for bringing us in. I have heard interviews on the news of some Iraqi people who were really pissed off that we were there, but they were not pissed at us, but they were pissed at the insurgent fighters.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg100440#msg100440 date=1108766555]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]

And the fact is that Hazard is unqualified to speak on any of this because his views of international events are heavily colored by the American propaganda machine. He doesn't get to read the plain, politically incorrect, unpatriotic, truth.
[/quote]

You're blinded by the anti-American propoganda machine that is most of Europe. You don't get to read what happens here after it has been washed through the insulent minds of your nation's media. You have no idea what goes on here. You think you know, but the fact is you don't

God that's just so.. arrogant. You tell us not to speak about US problems because of not understanding them, while in the same breath claiming to have the same knowedge about Europe that we supposedly lack about America.

You don't know what you are talking about if you claim that Europe is an anti-american propaganda machine, and as for 'insulent'.. I assume you mean 'insular'. If so, that's just so obviously wrong that I'm not evern going to justify it with a response.

[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100524#msg100524 date=1108833080]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100508#msg100508 date=1108810821]
Why smaller? Please explain your reasoning. Even the moderates of which you speak have limits.
[/quote] Okay, you have plenty of people in the muslim world who are pissed off about all the fighting. They realize that this militant extremist group is really a problem. Some speak out against it. They are going to encourage people not to become terrorists. When a country goes in to fight the terrorists those non-terrorists are going to be all pissed off at the terrorists for bringing us in. I have heard interviews on the news of some Iraqi people who were really pissed off that we were there, but they were not pissed at us, but they were pissed at the insurgent fighters.
[/quote]

I think that if that were true, there wouldn't be any more Iraqi insurgents to fight. There's no doubt that our (mostly your) militaries have killed a lot of them, and yet the fight rages on, over a year later.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100542#msg100542 date=1108840127]
You're blinded by the anti-American propoganda machine that is most of Europe. You don't get to read what happens here after it has been washed through the insulent minds of your nation's media. You have no idea what goes on here. You think you know, but the fact is you don't
[/quote]

You're probably right that you know more about what happens in America than I do. At the same time you know less about what happens outside America. Which is actually the topic of this thread.

[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100546#msg100546 date=1108841247]
[quote author=quasi-modo link=topic=10478.msg100524#msg100524 date=1108833080]
[quote author=Arta[vL] link=topic=10478.msg100508#msg100508 date=1108810821]
Why smaller? Please explain your reasoning. Even the moderates of which you speak have limits.
[/quote] Okay, you have plenty of people in the muslim world who are pissed off about all the fighting. They realize that this militant extremist group is really a problem. Some speak out against it. They are going to encourage people not to become terrorists. When a country goes in to fight the terrorists those non-terrorists are going to be all pissed off at the terrorists for bringing us in. I have heard interviews on the news of some Iraqi people who were really pissed off that we were there, but they were not pissed at us, but they were pissed at the insurgent fighters.
[/quote]

I think that if that were true, there wouldn't be any more Iraqi insurgents to fight. There's no doubt that our (mostly your) militaries have killed a lot of them, and yet the fight rages on, over a year later.
[/quote] That can be explained because a lot of the former Iraqi military joined the insurgency. Also a whole lot of rebel fighters entered Iraq as the invasion ended to aid the insurgents.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg100574#msg100574 date=1108852777]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100542#msg100542 date=1108840127]
You're blinded by the anti-American propoganda machine that is most of Europe. You don't get to read what happens here after it has been washed through the insulent minds of your nation's media. You have no idea what goes on here. You think you know, but the fact is you don't
[/quote]

You're probably right that you know more about what happens in America than I do. At the same time you know less about what happens outside America. Which is actually the topic of this thread.
[/quote]

You're saying that a non-American would know more about a non-related 3rd party? Thats just stupid.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100622#msg100622 date=1108915623]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg100574#msg100574 date=1108852777]
You're probably right that you know more about what happens in America than I do. At the same time you know less about what happens outside America. Which is actually the topic of this thread.
[/quote]

You're saying that a non-American would know more about a non-related 3rd party? Thats just stupid.
[/quote]

No, it's true. Among other things, Sweden had the greatest share of voting Iraqis compared to population outside Iraq itself. The USA is far far away from the center of things.

So all 6 Iraqis living in Sweden voted in the election? Whoop de doo? Yea, the economic and military center of the entire world is certainly way far away from whats going on in the world.

Has anybody noticed the way all of these threads seem to go? Its the young Americans arguing with the misinformed liberal, the Swede, and the Brit. The Lib, Swede, and Brit all being convinced of their own superiority and infoulability with all sorts of slanted and misinterpreted "logic" as they call it to support their arguments, but with very little else to back up what they believe? Case in the point, the Swedes argument that a Sweedish person would know more about, say, a Cambodian person because Americans don't know what happens outside their borders. Thats the stupidest thing that I've ever heard, and to anyone not anti-American biased on the outisde, it would seem equally as retarded.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101052#msg101052 date=1109105485]
So all 6 Iraqis living in Sweden voted in the election? Whoop de doo? Yea, the economic and military center of the entire world is certainly way far away from whats going on in the world.
[/quote]

Yes, it is very far away from what goes on in the world for that exact reason. People living there think they're the center of the world and that nothing happens outside. For that reason, people living outside the USA have a much better view of the world.

I'm having trouble finding an online url for the numbers of voters. Found one reference saying USA had 12,079 registered voters and Sweden had 14,008. But that was before they extended the registration period.

Anyway, putting those in relation to the populations of the countries, 8,986,400 for Sweden, and 293,027,571 for the United States, you find the registered voter share at that time being 1.5 per mille in Sweden and 0.04 per mille in the United States. Rather big difference, eh?

More than 6 voters in Sweden....

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101055#msg101055 date=1109106130]
slanted and misinterpreted "logic"
[/quote]

If you think it's slanted and misinterpreted, you can show how. That's the wonderful thing about logic. Logic is, well, logical. That's the whole point.

Yes, being the center puts you outside the loop. Explain that logic to me? Everybody in the United States understands what happens on the outside. The fact of the matter it is YOU ADRON who is the ignorant one. Why you ask? Because you have no idea what happens inside the United States. Have you ever been here? How much time have you spent in our society? What first hand experience do you have? What second hand experience do you have? Or is everything you know based off of what you see on TV and read in the Sweedish Newspapers? Admit it.

Could it be, Adron, that Iraqi leadership matters very little to Iraqi-Americans? Perhaps they are totally content here where they are, and weren't willing to go to the "polls" and make an educated decision? They aren't in the thick of whats going on and guess what? Neither are the Iraqis in Sweden. I sincerely hope the votes of Iraqis who have made permenant homes in Sweden with no current ties to Iraq were not the difference in any of the elections.

Arta, I cannot teach the blind. A number of you are completely blind to any sort of logic that is not your own. Your little terrorism exists therefore counter-terrorism doesnt work therefore counter-terrorism is a waste of time "logical" deduction is a prime example. You refuse to see how ridiculous things that you say are. You can say all you want about how you think Americans, and even myself, are uneducated or unqualified to speak as long as you recognize that you are no more educated, and no more qualified. If you feel you are, you're not fooling anybody but yourself with the possible addition of the before mentioned people.

I love it when people put words in my mouth. No, really.

1. You seem to have difficulty accepting that other people have other points of view. I understand your point of view, and I accept it, I just don't agree with it. You, however, seem to think that I am 'blind' because I disagree with you. Sorry to say it again, but: get over yourself. You're not that important. You don't hold the answers to all the problems in the world. To imply that you are in a position to 'teach' anyone is thoroughly arrogant. Similarly, to imply that the US or any nation has all the answers is equally as arrogant.

2. I believe my logic to be sound. If you find fault with that, explain why. Don't just say "it's wrong", claim it to be ridiculous, put words in my mouth in an attempt to make me look bad, and claim that anyone that agrees with me is "foolish". Those things are tactics used by stupid people who are incapable of making a coherant argument, and you are not one of those people. Don't act like it.

3. As mentioned, don't put words in my mouth, thanks. I have never claimed that Americans (as a group) are unqualified or uneducated to speak about anything (whatsoever). To claim as much would be patently absurd.

I love it when you put words in my mouth. No, really I love it.

1. You seem to have trouble accepting that you are foulable. You also do not hold any of the answers to these world problems, so you can get over your own *tiny* little ego. I view teaching as the bringing of enlightinment, something that you make impossible.

2. It is impossible for me to prove to you that your logic is wrong. Your attempts to prove to me that my logic doesn't make sense should prove that fact to you. You do the same thing, you tell me my logic doesn't make sense or that "its not the same thing" but don't offer any intelligent feedback.

3.[quote]3. As mentioned, don't put words in my mouth, thanks. I have never claimed that Americans (as a group) are unqualified or uneducated to speak about anything (whatsoever). To claim as much would be patently absurd. [/quote]

Ditto to yourself. In that very passage you put words in MY mouth, thanks. So you agree with me that Adron's accusation, which can be read here, that Americans are less qualified to speak on the topic of a third party simply because they are Americans? Also, do you condem Adron's accusation that can be read here which accuses myself of being "colored by American propaganda"?

1. Those are unfounded assumptions. I have never claimed to have all the answers, nor that I am infallible. It's amusing that you talk about my 'tiny little ego' and then credit me with sufficient importance to prevent the attainment of enlightmentment.

2. Actually, I think its quite easy to show that your logic might be wrong. We've been killing terrorists for some time now, it doesn't appear to be working. In cases where we have stopped killing terrorists, they seem to have stopped killing us, too, after a necessary period of adjustment. Of course, there can be no formal, logical proof in any of these debates, because the variables involved are too numerous. That said, opinions can still be stated in a logical manner, which allows them to be criticised in a logical manner too. I'm hoping that such an approach will avoid tedium. No specific objection to my argument has yet been offered.

3.  I am not putting words into your mouth. You claimed that I have said, or implied:

[quote]
You can say all you want about how you think Americans, and even myself, are uneducated or unqualified to speak as long as you recognize that you are no more educated, and no more qualified.
[/quote]

I have never said or implied that, because I don't think that's true.

4. I'm not going to 'condemn' anyone. Adron is entitled to his opinion. We're not joined at the hip. On this occasion, we appear to disagree.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101122#msg101122 date=1109123277]
Ditto to yourself. In that very passage you put words in MY mouth, thanks. So you agree with me that Adron's accusation, which can be read here, that Americans are less qualified to speak on the topic of a third party simply because they are Americans? Also, do you condem Adron's accusation that can be read here which accuses myself of being "colored by American propaganda"?
[/quote]

The post you claim to be accusing yourself of being "colored by American propaganda" is:
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg100407#msg100407 date=1108753550]
There are no secret police. Everything is being done in the public eye and everybody has to answer to somebody. Your conspiracy theory is wrong. The fact is, Adron and Arta aren't even qualified to speak on any of this because they don't know anything about American policy. I doubt either of you have any sort of experience in the field and have never studied American foreign policy with any sort of depth.
[/quote]

I don't see that accusing you of being colored by anything. I do see it accusing Adron and Arta of knowing nothing about American policy.

Further, I claimed that you knew less about some Iraqi events than I do. You claimed not, but then helped support my claim here:
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101052#msg101052 date=1109105485]
So all 6 Iraqis living in Sweden voted in the election? Whoop de doo? Yea, the economic and military center of the entire world is certainly way far away from whats going on in the world.
[/quote]

The correct numbers for the Iraqi election were posted in the local newspaper that I picked up on the train. I can only assume that either they were not posted in your local newspaper, or you didn't read them, which does support my point about Swedes getting to be more well-informed about affairs outside the USA than Americans.

Also, given that Sweden's population is made up of about 1% exile Iraqis and the share of exile Iraqis in the USA is ten times less, it makes perfect sense that there will be more information about it floating around here.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101077#msg101077 date=1109111619]
Americans, and even myself, are uneducated or unqualified to speak
[/quote]

I think that your using the words "even myself" alone shows a great deal about why these discussions turn out so long-winded. You know you aren't a 50-year-old expert who has worked with foreign relations his entire life, right? How about showing some humility? Noone is flawless ;)


[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101077#msg101077 date=1109111619]
as long as you recognize that you are no more educated, and no more qualified. If you feel you are, you're not fooling anybody but yourself with the possible addition of the before mentioned people.
[/quote]

But back to what you were saying...

I think I'm more educated than you are (just considering total education level, school years etc). I think I'm more mature than you are, and that I have more accumulated years of life experience to give me more perspective on different things. I think that you are lacking in knowledge of things outside America just as I'm lacking in knowledge of things inside America. I think that our different backgrounds have given us very different perspectives and that we should've been able to complement each other much better.

I think that I'm way better at logic deduction than you are. I think you're a bit irrational in your reasoning, and that you need to start focusing on what's wrong about our assumptions / facts and not on proving that logic is incorrect (for example the comments on Arta's "british logic").

We weren't in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan, etc. pre-9/11 and they attacked us. Explain?

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg101182#msg101182 date=1109170488]
Further, I claimed that you knew less about some Iraqi events than I do. You claimed not, but then helped support my claim here:
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101052#msg101052 date=1109105485]
So all 6 Iraqis living in Sweden voted in the election? Whoop de doo? Yea, the economic and military center of the entire world is certainly way far away from whats going on in the world.[/quote]

The correct numbers for the Iraqi election were posted in the local newspaper that I picked up on the train. I can only assume that either they were not posted in your local newspaper, or you didn't read them, which does support my point about Swedes getting to be more well-informed about affairs outside the USA than Americans.[/quote]

Since you are so much better informed than myself, can you tell me how many Iraqi citizens voted in the following countires: Spain, France, Germany, Russia, Canada off of the top of your head? Since, after all we Americans are so uninformed and you are, can you give me that information? No. You know about what happens in your country, thats all your information says. Your own quotation proved it.

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg101183#msg101183 date=1109172541]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101077#msg101077 date=1109111619]
Americans, and even myself, are uneducated or unqualified to speak
[/quote]

I think that your using the words "even myself" alone shows a great deal about why these discussions turn out so long-winded. You know you aren't a 50-year-old expert who has worked with foreign relations his entire life, right? How about showing some humility? Noone is flawless ;)[/quote]

It was a point of emphasis. Bone up on your English and critical reading. You want to talk about humility? Wouldn't you find it wise to follow your own advice?

[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg101183#msg101183 date=1109172541]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101077#msg101077 date=1109111619]
as long as you recognize that you are no more educated, and no more qualified. If you feel you are, you're not fooling anybody but yourself with the possible addition of the before mentioned people.
[/quote]

But back to what you were saying...

I think I'm more educated than you are (just considering total education level, school years etc). I think I'm more mature than you are, and that I have more accumulated years of life experience to give me more perspective on different things. I think that you are lacking in knowledge of things outside America just as I'm lacking in knowledge of things inside America. I think that our different backgrounds have given us very different perspectives and that we should've been able to complement each other much better.[/quote]

You think, you don't know. Thats all that needs to be said. However, you did claim that a non-American would have a much better idea about things that would happen in a 3rd-party situation than an American, and I'd love for you to qualify that. Why would a German know more about Cambodians than an American? Why would a Swede know more about Brazilians? Why would a Korean know more about a Chilean? The fact is everything you think you know is based off of what appears to be nothing more than anti-American sentiment.


[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg101183#msg101183 date=1109172541]
I think that I'm way better at logic deduction than you are. I think you're a bit irrational in your reasoning, and that you need to start focusing on what's wrong about our assumptions / facts and not on proving that logic is incorrect (for example the comments on Arta's "british logic").
[/quote]

Once again, you think you don't know. At your form of "logic" you might be "better" but it doesn't your logic correct. In your mind thats how things work. I can prove to you logically that God exists, but in your logic it is impossible based on your own interpretation of facts and opinions. Thats like trying to say that there is only one logic, and yours is superior to mine. To be honest, I think that you're completely arrogant in your reasoning, and believe me it is not a feeling only I have. You need to realize that your logic is completely foulable and that you really don't understand anything completely, just as I don't. You need to stop refusing that your assumptions or facts could be discolored or, God forbid, even incorrect! God forbid that the young American could be right and the high and mighty, educated and logically superior Swede could ever be wrong.

Do you disagree that different nationalities have different forms of logic?

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101220#msg101220 date=1109186661]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg101183#msg101183 date=1109172541]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101077#msg101077 date=1109111619]
Americans, and even myself, are uneducated or unqualified to speak
[/quote]

I think that your using the words "even myself" alone shows a great deal about why these discussions turn out so long-winded. You know you aren't a 50-year-old expert who has worked with foreign relations his entire life, right? How about showing some humility? Noone is flawless ;)[/quote]

It was a point of emphasis. Bone up on your English and critical reading. You want to talk about humility? Wouldn't you find it wise to follow your own advice?
[/quote]

I am. And I definitely think there are Americans with more experience of politics than you.


[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101220#msg101220 date=1109186661]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg101183#msg101183 date=1109172541]
[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101077#msg101077 date=1109111619]
as long as you recognize that you are no more educated, and no more qualified. If you feel you are, you're not fooling anybody but yourself with the possible addition of the before mentioned people.
[/quote]

But back to what you were saying...

I think I'm more educated than you are (just considering total education level, school years etc). I think I'm more mature than you are, and that I have more accumulated years of life experience to give me more perspective on different things. I think that you are lacking in knowledge of things outside America just as I'm lacking in knowledge of things inside America. I think that our different backgrounds have given us very different perspectives and that we should've been able to complement each other much better.[/quote]

You think, you don't know. Thats all that needs to be said.
[/quote]

Noone knows anything outside logic. It's all just think.

So, what is your education level? How many years of schooling do you have? Clearing up that "think" is easy. How old are you? Clears up the next think. Third think, well, I picked one example of something from outside America that you were unaware of. Fourth think I'm pretty sure is correct. We have different perspectives. Fifth.... Well, maybe you're unable to complement anyone well?


[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101220#msg101220 date=1109186661]
However, you did claim that a non-American would have a much better idea about things that would happen in a 3rd-party situation than an American, and I'd love for you to qualify that. Why would a German know more about Cambodians than an American? Why would a Swede know more about Brazilians? Why would a Korean know more about a Chilean? The fact is everything you think you know is based off of what appears to be nothing more than anti-American sentiment.
[/quote]

A German wouldn't know more about a Cambodian than an American, but he'd know more about Poland, Switzerland and many places that are closer to him. What I think I know is based on proximity, news coverage, browsing American news sites and comparing them to local ones, seeing what news they cover, reading American news papers, etc.


[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101220#msg101220 date=1109186661]
[quote author=Adron link=topic=10478.msg101183#msg101183 date=1109172541]
I think that I'm way better at logic deduction than you are. I think you're a bit irrational in your reasoning, and that you need to start focusing on what's wrong about our assumptions / facts and not on proving that logic is incorrect (for example the comments on Arta's "british logic").
[/quote]

Once again, you think you don't know. At your form of "logic" you might be "better" but it doesn't your logic correct. In your mind thats how things work.
[/quote]

Have you ever studied logic?


[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101220#msg101220 date=1109186661]
I can prove to you logically that God exists, but in your logic it is impossible based on your own interpretation of facts and opinions. Thats like trying to say that there is only one logic, and yours is superior to mine.
[/quote]

There is only one logic :)

Mine is superior to yours - as far as I can tell, you just don't grasp the concept of logic.

You're free to try to prove that God exists with logic, but even if your logic is correct, you'll most likely fail on some assumption you made.


[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101220#msg101220 date=1109186661]
To be honest, I think that you're completely arrogant in your reasoning, and believe me it is not a feeling only I have. You need to realize that your logic is completely foulable and that you really don't understand anything completely, just as I don't. You need to stop refusing that your assumptions or facts could be discolored or, God forbid, even incorrect! God forbid that the young American could be right and the high and mighty, educated and logically superior Swede could ever be wrong.
[/quote]

I can be wrong, but you'll have a pretty hard time finding a case where I'm wrong in logic. If I'm wrong, it's because of bad premises. I'm not refusing that some assumptions I make, or facts I rely on could be incorrect, I keep inviting you to point them out and discuss them. You just hardly ever do.


[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101220#msg101220 date=1109186661]
Do you disagree that different nationalities have different forms of logic?
[/quote]

You'd definitely have to quantify that. Unless you have a very different interpretation of the word logic than me, logic is an absolute thing. There's no arguing against logic because logic is absolute. Logic is like math - it's correct.

[quote]I am. And I definitely think there are Americans with more experience of politics than you.[/quote]

There are. And I further know that there are millions of Americans better versed in logic, politics, and foreign affairs than you.

[quote]How old are you?[/quote]

Age has very little to do with intelligence, widom, and experience. If you were a more social creature, you would know that.

[quote]Have you ever studied logic?[/quote]

2 years thus far.

[quote]Noone knows anything outside logic.[/quote]

You sound like a Vulcan out of Star Trek. Logic is not the end all be all of human thinking, and even logic is foulable.

[quote]A German wouldn't know more about a Cambodian than an American, but he'd know more about Poland, Switzerland and many places that are closer to him. What I think I know is based on proximity, news coverage, browsing American news sites and comparing them to local ones, seeing what news they cover, reading American news papers, etc.[/quote]

Okay, so you're know arguing that location will dictate who knows more about what? Would a 17 year old Saudi boy know more about what is happening in Syria than a Professor of Middle Eastern Relations at Cambridge? Would a 22 year old computer technician in Spain know more about the Bosnian conflict than, say, a Professor of Bosnian Studies at Princeton? You know more than me about the conflict in Iraq because you are geographically closer than me? Is that really your "logic" because if it is, you're sunk.

[quote]There is only one logic [/quote]

Wrong. Even the scholars Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates had differing logics. Have ever studied logic?

[quote]Mine is superior to yours - as far as I can tell, you just don't grasp the concept of logic.[/quote]

You think your logic is superior to mine. Prove it. I don't grasp your twisted view of what logic is.

[quote]You're free to try to prove that God exists with logic, but even if your logic is correct, you'll most likely fail on some assumption you made.[/quote]

In the logic of all of those who believe, the existence of God is proven. I can't prove it to you because of the failures in your assumptions. Oh yea, Adron you've made a big mistake in your logic and you can't even see it. You've read a book on logic and taken a few credit  hours of courses, but that doesn't mean you get it. Its not my fault you don't recognize your foulability. Its humerous you think that you're above all the rest of us. One day, you're going to be humbled by something you wont have some smart ass response to, and I hope that you realize your own stupidity.

[quote]I can be wrong, but you'll have a pretty hard time finding a case where I'm wrong in logic. If I'm wrong, it's because of bad premises. I'm not refusing that some assumptions I make, or facts I rely on could be incorrect, I keep inviting you to point them out and discuss them. You just hardly ever do.[/quote]

Point out a time that you have accepted the foulability of your logic. Show me one time that you have changed your logic based on a fact I have corrected you on. You haven't because you dismiss my facts as "irrelevant" or some such.

[quote]You'd definitely have to quantify that. Unless you have a very different interpretation of the word logic than me, logic is an absolute thing. There's no arguing against logic because logic is absolute. Logic is like math - it's correct. [/quote]

Hundreds of years ago it was concluded that the Earth was, logically, the center of the universe. Was that absolute? It was absolutely correct?

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101220#msg101220 date=1109186661]
Once again, you think you don't know. At your form of "logic" you might be "better" but it doesn't your logic correct. In your mind thats how things work. I can prove to you logically that God exists, but in your logic it is impossible based on your own interpretation of facts and opinions. Thats like trying to say that there is only one logic, and yours is superior to mine. To be honest, I think that you're completely arrogant in your reasoning, and believe me it is not a feeling only I have. You need to realize that your logic is completely foulable and that you really don't understand anything completely, just as I don't. You need to stop refusing that your assumptions or facts could be discolored or, God forbid, even incorrect! God forbid that the young American could be right and the high and mighty, educated and logically superior Swede could ever be wrong.
[/quote]

I think this right here pretty much sums up why we shouldn't even bother arguing with Hazard.  This is quite possibly the most asinine thing I have ever read for reasons Adron has already pointed out.  Personally, the only reason I ever argue with Hazard or his friends is to dispel common understood "facts" because it is this kind of ignorance that hurts progress.

dxo, you didn't have to even talk before we knew who you would side with your brown nose. Unless you want to enter the debate, don't bring it here.

Logic is not subjective. Your comments show a lack of understanding of logic. To conclude that the earth was the center of the universe was logical, given the knowledge of the time. The only reason we know different now is that we know more, and thus, can reason more accurately.

Wisdom and experience are largely a function of age, but I agree not totally. However, making that statement with no qualification is not reasonable. The definition of experience that is relevant here is:

[quote]
  1. An event or a series of events participated in or lived through.
  2. The totality of such events in the past of an individual or group.
[/quote]

More age or more 'concentrated events' == more experience. However, your arrogance and self-assuredness are not indicators of wisdom and experience, in my opinion. In fact, I think they indicate the exact opposite. You seem incapable of accepting 'shades of gray' rather than 'black and white'. You deal in absolutes. You say we are wrong, and you are right. You are inflexible. These are indicators of inexperience, and lack of wisdom. I am not much older than you (22), but even I can tell that your dogged perseverence is a manifestation of misplaced confidence, and displays fundamental naiveté.

Here you are, claiming that logic is subjective, 'British', and that different countries have different logic. These things are all completely absurd, but I doubt you will accept even that.

For the record, I have never claimed that my facts and assumptions are invariably correct. In fact, Adron and I have frequently challenged you to produce evidence that contradicts us, and you rarely do, if ever. Instead, you resort to these tirades about how we malign you incessently and never listen to what you say.

I'm given to wonder if you're even capable of conducting a reasoned, dispassionate, interesting, civil and logical conversation.

So you both recognize that your logic is insufficent to explain life, as you clearly don't know even close to enough to make judgments. In your own statment that logically counter-terrorism doesn't work, you are required to realize that your conclusions aren't accurate because you are not privy to all of the information available.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101231#msg101231 date=1109191773]
dxo, you didn't have to even talk before we knew who you would side with your brown nose. Unless you want to enter the debate, don't bring it here.
[/quote]

You figured me out  :'(.  I am sucking up to Adron and Arta because they are in vL and I want to be in vL and they are so cool!!!  ...despite the fact that I have been offered and don't go on Battle.net nor talk to any of them except on this forum.  I entered the debate and feel quite content about my argument as you both conveniently ignored parts of my posts.

[quote author=Hazard link=topic=10478.msg101287#msg101287 date=1109205492]
So you both recognize that your logic is insufficent to explain life, as you clearly don't know even close to enough to make judgments. In your own statment that logically counter-terrorism doesn't work, you are required to realize that your conclusions aren't accurate because you are not privy to all of the information available.
[/quote]

Yes, you got it!  Arta and Adron don't say their solution is the solution to end all, where you frequently do.  They propose a solution to a problem, recognize that it may have flaws and encourage people to find them.  You don't do this.  Instead you spew out some solution that has no supporting evidence and you go ever further to call any criticism of it wrong as if to claim your solution correct.  Generally you do this by sidestepping the criticism and resorting to ad hominem attacks which are unacceptable in any other forum of discussion - especially in the academic world from which Arta, Adron and I come from.

Of course. A logical argument is built using the available information. The discovery of new information may require an argument to change. Logic itself, however, is never insufficient. There may be insufficient information to draw a meaningful conclusion, but I don't think we've run into such a situation here.

On the subject of information to which we are not privy, you make a fair point. In a specific situation, lack of information may make a reasonable opinion impossible. In such a situation, one must rely on one's impression of those in charge - basically, on trust. What other criteria are there? With the exception of the space program & the war in Afghanistan, I cannot think of a single thing the current US administration has done that I have agreed with. In other words, I do not trust Bush. You clearly do. Thus, we will disagree, and we will do so in a manner that assures that no debate will be meaningful: one cannot empirically debate about a situation where the only predicate is trust in the person making the decisions. An impasse is inevitable.

That said, one certainly can reason about a set of specific situations, especially where one does posses information about the outcome of and leadup to those situations.

On the subject of counter-terrorism, I think you may have misconstrued my position.  If, given a set of people planning to attack imminently, I would of course not object to apprehending those people, which would necessarily require people to be armed and would probably result in violence and bloodshed. The specific, small, and precise application of force in situations where there is little or no alternative is a necessary reality of life.

What I object to is the constant, relatively indiscriminate application of force. The occupation of another country. The unfounded and frankly simplistic belief that violent subjugation of the cultures that generate terrorists will mitigate terrorism. The belief, in short, that the world is a set of problems with military solutions.

With respect to the problem of terrorism, much of the reasoning and information given to the public by the governments involved  - most notably, the US government - is utterly blatent FUD, and I wish people would stop being taken in by it.

dxoigmn, you remind me of Ward Churchill, the man who writes shit like:

[quote]
As for those in the World Trade Center, well, really, let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire – the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved – and they did so both willingly and knowingly.

...

If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it.
[/quote]

That kind of extremism doesn't remind me of anyone here, and I'd be pretty offended if that comment had been aimed at me.

[quote author=Banana fanna fo fanna link=topic=10478.msg102395#msg102395 date=1109907777]
dxoigmn, you remind me of Ward Churchill, the man who writes shit like:
[/quote]

I consider this an insult and blatant mud slinging in an attempt to discredit my opinion based on sheer ignorance.  It’s this kind of crap that is deserving of a ban and is counter-productive to intellectual debate.

But moving on.  You, Banana fanna fo fanna (aka $t0rm), purport to be a staunch advocate against the “liberal media.”  Yet you yourself blindly follow what they have told you.  I am willing to wager you have never read any of Churchill’s books or essays and yet you seem so confident in making comparisons to that of which you have no knowledge.  This is hypocritical of the utmost level and speaks directly to why many of us have trouble debating you and others in a manner that is sophisticated.

Just as a little history lesson, I do not like Churchill nor do I agree with most of what he says.  He is the epitome of everything I’m not.  Not to mention my grandmother and great grandmother were one of the few people who called into question is status within the academic world back in the early ‘90s.