Why do so many people want to appease the terrorist?

Question

Israel takes on Hezballah, and it is Israel's fault. England arrest 21 terrorest and we are told they exist because we don't respect Islam. I don't see Islam being overly respectful to anyone else. One guy is put under a death sentence for sonverting to Christianity. The whole mess with ben-lauden is becasue we have bases in Saudi Arabia. They have killed unarmed civilinas on so damn many occasions that it cannot be counted. If the US played by the Arab rules, there would be about 1/3 less arabs in six months. And the propaganda machine that is fired up in defense of these pinheads is unbelevable. I can see the day coming when the west finally say the hell with it and does wage full scale war on all of Islam because of the criminal few.

Answer 1

Dealing with a terrorist force, unlike a traditional army, entails suffering very high civilian casualties. The Hezbollah "victory" when compared with the losses of regional armies in '67, etc. must be viewed in light of the vastly different rules of engagement.

The arab armies *tended* to avoid areas of high population density because of the moral decision to do so. Hezbollah terrorists, not hindered by morality, were more than willing to use their fellow citizens as shields, scapegoats, and canon fodder for the press.

So I believe that when people begin thinking about the prospect of dealing with a terrorist on their own terms, the result offends their sensiblities and they once again find themselves trying to consider "conventional" alternatives. Appeasement is an obvious choice because it means minimal human conflict. The fact that appeasement has never worked is conveniently forgotten with a "can't we try this way" path of thinking.

Answer 2

There are two possible solutions/outcomes to the problem of islamic fundamentalism if we're to win:

1. Economic conversion of the whole world to secular (separation of church and state) democracies (equality for all humans and capitalist markets), and then let supply, demand, and individual quest for weath do its thing. Israel would be the first one to change if we're to do this. This will take several decades or possibly a century to eliminate terrorism (time for the younger generation to grow up in a secular state, as opposed to an ethnocracy or theocracy)..

OR

2. Total war. Mobilize the entire economy for war, institute a draft, and decimate entire portions of the world, razing entire cities and killing hundreds of millions, making no distinction between civilian and military. Then build them back up in our image, like we did to Japan and Germany (and then make them secular democracies, like we did with japan and germany). This requires a devastating attack, much worse than 9/11, if it is to happen. I'm thinking nothing short of a nuclear attack in a major US city would suffice. This option would take at least 20 years. At worst, we might enter a new dark ages where the advance of civilization stops for 1000 years or so, due to nuclear holocaust and collapse of the global economy.

So yeah, I really would prefer option 1, but honestly, we're following neither of these strategies right now... which means we're not on the road to winning.

Answer 3

Politicians take a short-term view. People, when frightened, panic and think that "just this once" they can appease and the mugger (etc.) will go off and mug someone else. Remember the "Peace in Our Time" speech.

But politicians rarely refer to history from before they were born.

Answer 4

Well said. The people in the west don't really care to appease
the terrorists, as much as they just want to express their displeasure of Bush and those that think like him.
I Corinthians 13;8a, Love never fails!!!!!

Answer 5

You sure are mixing up quite a few stories here. Where would you like the first shot to be fired in your 'all out war on the few'?

Answer 6

Scapegoat the jews. It was always the answer, and it always will be. There can be no other way of explaining the double standards applied to attacks on jews (or Israel) and attacks on others.

Answer 7

because the terrorists are just savage fanatics who don't see anything else except Mohamed's rules. and they think that the rest of us are Mohamed's enemies. you can't force someone to be democratic if he doesn't want to, for them democracy is lost. they don't know the term tolerance.
it's sad, i wasn't a prejudiced, but now i feel that I'm starting to have some bad feelings against Muslims. and i hate it, but i can't do anything about it when i see / hear about all the attacks they plan.

Answer 8

Ah. A Lieberman Democrat. THIRD PARTY!

Answer 9

Fear is a big part of it. Sometimes when people feel threatened, they go on the offensive. Like starting a war.

Answer 10

Islam has oil money to buy people without morals to defend them