Huh?!?! You call what I used simply false logic then build up a great big straw man argument to knock down? Nice my man, nice. Nowhere, I repeat, NOWHERE did I state there were rational reasons for todays actions. Nor did I state that even if there were rational reasons that those reasons must be agreed to. And you are even correct - Hitler did have reasons for what he did, as did Pol Pot etc. But they were not justified as you keem seeming to think are the same thing. For instance your Unabomber argument. I obviously do not think we should not use technology. But I still want to know WHY he thinks what he does so can watch for signs like that in the future. With the actions today, I want to know why. If they were performed because of the US's support of Isreal I want to know. I want to know if we keep supporting Isreal whether or not we are putting our nation in jeapardy. Don't you want to know this? Don't you think this is basic knowledge that we need to have?
Yeah I sure do knock down straw men well, don't I. There are REASONS for every action. If you find that the REASON is US policy toward Israel what do you do with that conclusion? You say "well, does that make sense?" If it makes sense then you say "Should we change our policy." I'm saying we can't GET TO THE SECOND QUESTION. This isn't an action that makes sense. Therefore you don't get to the question of 'should we change our policy.' It is an irrational action. When you say 'hey there are REASONS that the terrorists did this,' you are legitimizing the action with an unsaid "this makes sense when you look at it from their perspective." So its not really a straw man, you just don't realize the implications of what you're saying.
You can get to the second question without legitimizing the actions. You first ask why it happened. Let's assume the answer is US support of Isreal. You now ask, is it likely that other attacks will occur because of the same reason? Whether the reason is rational or not it is important to asses the likelyhood of occurence. Now let's pretend that we have reason to believe that OTHER groups will have the same irrational reasons to perform terrorist acts on US citizens. Given that knowledge we can evaluate whether or not continued support for Isreal is desirable. The key is not changing behaviour based on result of one set of actions but based on predictable results of several actions. Do you understand these implications?
'Now let's pretend that we have reason to believe that OTHER groups will have the same irrational reasons to perform terrorist acts on US citizens. Given that knowledge we can evaluate whether or not continued support for Isreal is desirable. The key is not changing behaviour based on result of one set of actions but based on predictable results of several actions. Do you understand these implications?' How about this, toughguy. If we change our policy because of these terrorist attacks, or because more terrorist attacks may happen, then you legitimize these types of actions for aggreived parties. I do not want to do that. Do you?
There's nothing you can do to stop this. Maniacs will keep on doing this. There's no true rhyme or reason to this. Just pray for them, because when the military finds them, their @ss is grass.
BOTTOM LINE: These attacks will NOT "help" the "cause" of any group be they Afganistinian, Palestinian, or whoever. These attacks will only further the involvement of the U.S. in the Middle East, and more than likely we will see an increased and more aggressive presence of American troops and military. Stupid move, if you ask me.
You do not legitimize them. You just give up. You have to decide whether or not the fight is worth the expense. In this case I do not think it is. You have to make a reasoned decision. You have to decide whether the ending the near certainty of terrorist action about this issue is worth the possible result of more terrorism on other issues. I think it is and I have made this rational decision based on irrational acts. Let's say a bully approaches me in school and demands 50 cents or he kicks my butt. I don't give in and he beats me. This goes on for a week but I don't give in. Eventually I might come to the conclusion that the 50 cents isn't worth the beating. I have not legitimized the act of bullying, I just don't find it worth the cost to my body. I'm not trying to get personal HayesStreet, no need to get into name calling. I just resent you first accusing me of bad logic while setting up a straw man argument, then later accusing me of not knowing the implications of my own thoughts when that is not true.
About name calling...no problem. My bad. But originally I was talking about Khan, not you. As per your bullying example: you should know that a bully once you freely give your 50 cents up, instead of resisting, the bully won't stop beating you up. Next time it will be for your hat, or shoes or just the way you look. Bullies are cowards who pick on people that can't/won't defend themselves. What kind of message do you think it'll send to the world if we now withdraw our support for Israel? I guarantee you will see an INCREASE in terrorism not a DECREASE. Once you legitimize this type of action by giving it creedence you'll have ALL KINDS of radicals using the same approach. Not that you would say 'I think this is a moral action' but that you would send the message 'this will work. It will cause them to rethink their policy.' Its deeply ingrained in the American ethos that of all the countries in the world we are the one that won't be bullied. There is no reason to change that now. In fact, this is the time to give notice to the cowards of the world. We will find you. You will not stay hidden for long. THIS IS NOT THE WAY YOU GET US TO CHANGE OUR POLICY.
The worst possible thing we could do to prevent further terrorism is to give in to what the terrorists are after. Even if that group never attacks us again, a precedent is set. Every group that wants a change in US policy will decide that terrorism is the best method. We need to make a decisive retaliatory strike and even give more support to Israel. We must show that terrorism is not a good idea.
WAIT A MINUTE...WAIT A MINUTE !!! For all those advocating taking away aid to both Palestine and Israel, remember these 2 things. Twice in the last century we took an isolationist approach like this, and BOTH times it led to a HUGE World War. NEVER again, should we sit on the sidelines and just let things work themselves out. Nope, it does not work that way, you have to be PROACTIVE in the process, and it may get bloody, but for god sakes, don't let it escalate to another World War, this time, there may not be any world left to war over. I still sanction taking out any government that harbors terrorists. You need to educate the people and that will NOT happen as long as free thought and free information is supressed. Most of those people think that Americans Hate the Palestinian people, they are wrong, I get choked up any time I read about innocent people dying for any STUPID cause. Peace will only come through force. DaDakota
That sounds kinda funny. I think the ol' Al Haig moniker was 'peace through strength.' That sounds better, and I'm not even a Republican.
