Other - Politics & Government - October 2006

Gambling with the planet.

2006-10-06 12:09:40 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-06 12:04:01 · 9 answers · asked by aaa 1

A friend was telling me that her professor said with teenage pregnancy and kids dropping out of school as a result; in combination with our government not wanting to give immigrants (legal or otherwise) a public education, that we are headed for the "dumbing down" of America. In 20 years, some of these people will be the leading our country.

What are your thoughts on this?

2006-10-06 11:57:54 · 32 answers · asked by J.Z. 3

Everyone in Congress seems to be bought and paid for by Lobbyists controlled by corporations. What can be done?

2006-10-06 11:57:03 · 7 answers · asked by Zen 4

and when its said and done they haven't told you a thing:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Agy0icU7DkoImE4n8T_ighTsy6IX?qid=20061001151810AA3EnDI

We all know that crap is King..............who sang that?

2006-10-06 11:55:44 · 5 answers · asked by Cherie 6

What they have had to go thru. here religions. there ways.should they have a part of the country returned to them.so they may have a country of there own. it was ALL theres after all.

2006-10-06 11:46:04 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

Just the 3 major "planks" please.

2006-10-06 11:32:08 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

have just become another talk shop for muslims. I am completely sick of all the muslim ....muslim news shite all the time... do i live in some shityey islamic country? or is it all the stuff about muslims on radio and tv another way of brainwashing the people into islam?

2006-10-06 11:31:32 · 24 answers · asked by sanjlon 1

According to this NY Times article, which is partly based on a Wall Streed Journal article, the answer is yes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/05/opinion/05thu2.html?em&ex=1160280000&en=c49cd9a766ca7dc5&ei=5070

2006-10-06 11:30:15 · 13 answers · asked by Derek D 2

2006-10-06 11:24:20 · 8 answers · asked by guyote 3

ORIGINS OF MODERN TERRORISM





September 11, 2001 forced Americans to come face to face with terrorism and its devastating consequences. Although 9/11 was not the first terror attack on the United States, it was the most destructive and distressing. Before these tragic events, many of us never took a moments notice to understand terrorism. It just was not a word in the American vocabulary at that point in time. We knew it existed in the far reaches of the world but certainly not on our shores. We were proven wrong. Now in this post 9/11 world, we have come to understand the devastating nature of terrorism, the players involved, its impact on society and to some degree, how to handle it. However, many do not take the time to understand where this form of guerilla warfare originated. This is something that must be remedied in order to better understand the terrorists that threaten us everyday.
Terrorism was a word first by Edmund Burke to describe the exceptionally bloody conflict between the uprising French middle class and the ruling French Nobles. The slaughter of the French nobles and their families by the new, self appointed government became known as the Reign of Terror. In this sense, terrorism is referring to the government’s violent actions against its people. This is a much different definition than the one we know today. From the Reign of Terror we move to a group known as Radical Democrats.
Most European Democrats were interested in creating constitutional monarchies. Some were bent on eliminating the power of the upper class. These individuals were known as Radical Democrats. Known for their violent actions, they were considered by many to be terrorists. Some of these radical democrats came to be known as socialists. Socialism was born from the belief that property was to be commonly held and that “all institutions, as well as ownership and control of industrial production should be democratic”(White, 19). They lacked the ability to combat the police or military in an actual battle so they resorted to car bombs and arson. This type of violence is what terrorism came to be considered.
Radical Democrats evolved into militant socialists, and more peaceful socialists in the 1850’s. They both referred to their respective movements as anarchism. Considered to be the father of modern anarchism, Pierre Joseph Proudhon was known as a man of peace. Unlike Karl Marx, who believed that government was a necessary entity, set in place to protect individual rights of citizens, Proudhon attested that all of government needed to be eliminated. Though Proudhon preached peaceful resistance as a means of political change, many of his followers disagreed. They believed that the only way to accomplish its goals was to destroy the upper class. Assassinations and the use of explosives, such as dynamite, were the usual methods employed. These factions of anarchists became known as terrorists.
Perhaps the most noteworthy anarchist group was Narodnaya Volya, (People’s Will), a group of Russian Revolutionaries whose main tactic was to assassinate Russian Government officials. They were most famous for the assassination of Tsar Alexander ll. According to the last statement, the People’s Will fits the definition of a terrorist group but according to Grob-Fitzgibbon this is not so. Grob-Fitzgibbon states that these anarchists were not terrorists but were merely assassins. This is just another example of how the definition of terrorism was constantly evolving during this time period. Instead, Grob-Fitzgibbon attributes the origin of modern terrorism to two specific philosophies. “Propaganda by the deed” and the “Philosophy of the bomb” were the catalysts for modern terrorism according to Grob-Fitzgibbon. These two concepts were created by Johann Most. “Propaganda by the deed was an anarchist doctrine that promoted the decisive action of individuals to inspire further action by others.” It was thought that a spectacular action, such as a political assassination, would ignite revolutionary fervor among the working classes”(White, 21). As a doctrine-in-practise, its heyday was the period between 1881 and 1901, starting with the assassinations of Russian Tzar Alexander II and ending with that of United States President William McKinley. The philosophy of the bomb was simply the means of spreading this form of propaganda. Shortly after the death of Alexandar II, Alexandar III set out to destroy the People’s Will. He was successful in his attempt.
With Russia entering WWI, the scene had been set for Russian Revolutionaries to rise once again after years of brutal repression. Vexed with Tsar Nicholos II and the economic state of the country, the Russian Army joined the Russian people and ousted the Russian government. The new government made promises to her allies to stay in the war, creating turmoil within the country. At this time Germany was interested in seeing Russia get out of the war. They accomplished this task by putting the wheels in motion to get Vladimir Ilich Lenin in power of the Bolsheviks. Once in power Lenin and the Bolsheviks started another revolution and successfully removed Russia from WWI.
It was believed by Leon Trotsky that terrorism was a progressive way to achieve political goals. He used terrorism to overthrow the government and then, once the new government was in place, used it to keep their enemies at bay. The Red Terror was thus created to carry out such objectives. The goal of the Red Terror was quite simply to find and destroy all potential adversaries, external and internal.
We will now examine the link between anarchism and Nationalist Terrorism. Nationalist Terrorists are generally associated with anarchists because they use the same tactics and justifications for their causes. The main goal of nationalistic forces was to use terrorism to wrestle control of the government from other nationalities or ethnic groups. “If anarchists fought to impose an ideology on government, nationalists fought to govern”(White, 22). The goals of the two groups are obviously different but the outcomes of their actions are identical. Modern nationalistic terrorism has its roots in anarchism.
Modern terrorism also has roots in Ireland. During the latter part of the 12th century English nobles began moving into Catholic Ireland, establishing holds on the area and increasing their prominence in the territory. Roughly 300 years later Protestanism began sweeping through England and ultimatly spilt into Ireland. English nobles wanted Ireland to be like England in that they would both be Protestant. For centuries Protestants moved into Ireland, slowly displacing the Catholic majority one generation at a time. Tensions between the two groups escalated “when the English established a large Protestant colony in the north called the Plantation of Ulster in 1590”(White,23). Violence pretty much became a way of life after that. Constant fighting between the religious groups ravaged the country. “Modern terrorism came to Ireland in 1919 when Michael Collins took command of the IRA and waged a fierce campaign against the British(White,24). They used bombs and other Russain Revolutionary tactics to accomplish their goals. The methods proved effective as the British conceeded Ireland its independence in 1922. However, the British wanted to hold on to the north to protect the Irish loyalists. This enraged Collins who sent his army into the north to wage an unsuccessful terrorism campaign. After Collins was killed in late 1922, the Republic of Ireland outlawed the IRA causing them to have to move underground. About 50 years later violence erupted in Northern Ireland again. Rioting in the north caused the British to send in troops which created a climate for the IRA to rise once again.Once the IRA had its power again it commenced murders and bombings of police and military. Assasinations and kidnapping of government officials became the IRA’s primary tactics. It is noteworthy to say that “many of the bombing tactics terrorists use today have been copied from the IRA”(White,26).
There is no question that terrorism as we know it has its roots in the western world. Though the tactics have slightly changed over time many have stayed the same. One thing that the terrorists all have in common is that they have all learned tactics and styles from eachother. The actions of one group would usually be studied and employed by its successor. Much as we study history, so that we don’t repeat the mistakes of the past, so do terrorists. It is important to understand that we are not dealing with a stupid buch of people. They are dedicated to their cause and have proven the strength of their resolve through brutal killings and suicide bombings.

2006-10-06 11:14:59 · 5 answers · asked by quarterback 2

have difinitive proof of his claim that rumsfeld authorized rape of iraqi children?????? please show us difinitive proof.

2006-10-06 11:07:37 · 5 answers · asked by bushfan88 5

Why are most Jewish people Democrats ("liberals") when the Republican Party is the one that does most for your cause - Israel for the Jews?

2006-10-06 11:03:49 · 8 answers · asked by blu moon 2

thaddeus stevens was the leader of radical repubilcans

2006-10-06 11:00:56 · 2 answers · asked by candypopbaby 1

2006-10-06 10:57:59 · 3 answers · asked by S 1

I'm 16, and I feel like my citizenship in this country does not matter. I'm mature, and care about the world, and so do so many other teens. I understand that there are iresponsible teens, but there are irresponsible adults to! I'd like to know why 16 and 17 year olds cannot vote.

2006-10-06 10:55:10 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

I'm 16, and I feel like my citizenship in this country does not matter. I'm mature, and care about the world, and so do so many other teens. I understand that there are iresponsible teens, but there are irresponsible adults to! I'd like to know why 16 and 17 year olds cannot vote.

2006-10-06 10:54:37 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous

if Foley was a Democrat, (a) this would not have even made the news, (b) if it did, they would be portraying him as a normal homosexual man who just simply has a younger man (18). I see all these Dem-spin-meisters on this site demonizing Foley because he has an active gay fantasy life with 18 legal gay men, this is such a complete double standard and it is rediculous. I guess the real question is, if Foley was a Democrat, now really pretend, would all you Dems be trying to destroy him the way you are now??

2006-10-06 10:41:09 · 15 answers · asked by jasonzbtzl 4

Have they been caught in their lies again? They keep hammering about the deficit and the economy, the Bush tax cuts being irresponsible, etc. But the fact is, the economy is doing well, better than projected, the deficit is being cut at a faster pace than projected.

Read it and weep!

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/06/D8KJ8R2G1.html

2006-10-06 10:22:29 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous

A Navy corpsman testified at his court-martial today that he watched as Marines shot an Iraqi civilian in the head after taking him from his home in the town of Hamdaniya. Petty Officer 3rd Class Melson Bacos said he saw two Marines fire at least 10 rounds into Hashim Ibrahim Awad. Seven Marines are charged in Awad's death.

What has become of us? Why are our people doing this? How do you think our founding fathers would feel if they saw the sorry state our country now?

2006-10-06 10:19:15 · 8 answers · asked by The infamous bongblaster 4

If yes, is it because admitting a mistake will make people realize that you are not perfect, that you may even be human?

2006-10-06 09:48:37 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

..and why do people use "communists" as a derogatory term?

I've tried looking it up, so in your own words could be more helpful

2006-10-06 09:48:24 · 14 answers · asked by veganfreak 2

2006-10-06 09:44:35 · 12 answers · asked by The Show Must Go On 3

I thought this was a free world with free speach but you still can 't say what you want or ask Questions becuse it mite offend someone.

2006-10-06 09:41:56 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-06 09:39:37 · 1 answers · asked by Anonymous

Al Gore eats more food than a normal human needs, is he adding to global starvation, stealing food from the poor, and causing the deaths of innocent children?

2006-10-06 09:27:57 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

I just wanna know who u would listen to if you had to choose one or the other...

2006-10-06 09:23:19 · 13 answers · asked by cricketwinner@sbcglobal.net 4

no kidding he is retired army and went to the VA and told them he hates civilians and would shoot all of them because he spent 30 years in the army so they gave hime a mental disability rating of 100 percent then he went out and got a concealed weapons permit from the state of florida,, what does every body think about that??? so much for homeland security

2006-10-06 09:14:25 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-06 09:12:19 · 31 answers · asked by LUIS C 2

If the only choices were;
1) re-elect all incumbents
2) toss all incumbents
3) toss them all

nothing partisan please, just limit your answers to the three choices.

2006-10-06 09:11:28 · 6 answers · asked by rmagedon 6