English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I see on one side people who is trying desperate to protect their family, home, friends... their life. On the other side i see people who has no personal experience with the people they judge and kill, except the propaganda, they have been fed since their childhood.
If you aloud your self to judge about millions of people, you can not be anything else then wrong and ignorant.

It is ok to suppress the others in their freedom, even to kill... but when it comes to you, you start screaming about human rights... about innocence... about equality...

2006-08-11 18:31:22 · 6 answers · asked by zaraza 4 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

For me the terrorist is the western society, who always took the right to kill, and rob other countries, to rape their culture and to condemn their religion. Since centuries... and i hope it will have an end soon.

2006-08-11 18:36:42 · update #1

rhsaunders, you say;
If a person sets out to bomb women and children, he is a terrorist...
How many innocent WOMAN AND CHILDREN AND INNOCENT MEN! died due to american bombs? How many are dying right now in this moment?
That's why i sayed you are pretending on human rights only for your self... not for the others!
Also the terrorist attacks like those of 9\11, even if not faked!, where attaks of single persons, belonging to a group... not to a nation or to religion... So why didn't YOU fight their Majors, who was !hell yes! set and trained by the US Intelligence &Government... why did you fight the innocent people?

2006-08-11 20:35:27 · update #2

6 answers

A war against terrorism is a war against everyone and everything. Its the most retarted idea ever imo. Pretty soon people will be calling there nabors terrorists and vice versa. And thats just what the terrorist wants AKA G.W.Bush.

2006-08-11 18:37:54 · answer #1 · answered by magpiesmn 6 · 0 1

I think the confusion is with the word terrorism. I mean, there are legitimate reasons for "armed insurrection" or "war" or "armed rebellion" or any number of other names you want to give it.

My problem with terrorist tactics has always been that it focuses on terrorizing the citizenry of another nation -- not with attacking the actual power structure of the nation/state that you feel is attacking you or yours.

You want to protect your "family, home, friends", yet a terrorist attacks the very family, home, and friends of those that you're against. Armed insurrection or formal war is based upon attacking the infrastructure (government, military, etc.) of the opposing nation, not with attacking the "citizenry" of the opposing nation. In a war, you fight to get the other side to stop. With terrorism, you fight because you want to hurt the innocents of the other side.

If you target the government that has wronged you, that's not terrorism. If you attack the malls or schools of the nation that has wronged you, that is.

I also have issues with the whole concept of suicide bombers, but as others have pointed out in other questions posted here, the "kamikaze" pilot has a long tradition in insurrections that we term wars, so while I question it's effectiveness, in my mind, it's still the target that determines if an attack is the legitimate use of force or terrorist.

Basically, if your goal is to get some other nation to leave you alone, fight it's government or military until they stop. If your goal is to annihilate the other side completely, then you're committing the same crime that you're accusing them of. A soldier fights to end the war and secure rights for his/her people. A terrorist fights to hurt people... and the more the better.

2006-08-11 18:52:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

If a person sets out to bomb women and children, he is a terrorist. If a person sets out to destroy a nation, he is a terrorist. Both of these descriptions apply to Hamas and Hizbollah. Defense against such actions is not only morally justified, it is morally required.

2006-08-11 18:56:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

the people that blow up buildings and airplanes full of people and babies are sick or idiots.so if some ****** up race wants to kill people that dont even know anything about what you are talkin about.then that ****** up race should quit crying about anything.
if you blow up my sister with a little car bomb; does this not allow me to kill your whole family? the rules are set. right?
i dont know why we are so passive to people that should be extinguished.thats what you want to do to us. right?would you cry if we got serious and flattend all your people?we can step up the pace if you like?even mickey mouse is ready to kick your ****** up ***.your leaders have you brainwashed.if you were here; you could walk down the street and noone would want to cut your head off.you could ask for anything.but, if you hit someone ; you better get prepared for a fight.almost everyone in america has gunS.even attitude.
people want peace.psychos dont. this is only my opinion

2006-08-11 18:51:55 · answer #4 · answered by NONAME 3 · 0 1

terrorists are those who go out with the intention to hurt innocents without provocation. why can't they just live their lives and allow others the same? why do they have to feel driven towards violence and mayhem? whay can't we all just get along...

2006-08-11 18:39:36 · answer #5 · answered by Rider of Spirit 2 · 0 0

you can't really say that about every person living in the west, but you're mostly right

2006-08-11 18:39:12 · answer #6 · answered by blarg 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers