3 ms·

I think it's safe to assume that a 15 year old kid in Palestine is much more terrorised at the sight of Benjamin Netanyahu than Bin Laden. It's also safe to as

by atmosx 12y ago

I think it's safe to assume that a 15 year old kid in Palestine is much more terrorised at the sight of Benjamin Netanyahu than Bin Laden. It's also safe to assume that a kid in Ukraine is terrorised by Russians or by US/EU depending on which side of the country was he lives. So, to you Al Qaeda is a terrorist group and I totally get that (to me too). But you have to understand that to Afghans (and a huge load of populations worldwide) the USA/NATO is the terrorist group. That's why what @lectrick said is right I'm afraid. So either we can assume that all of these parties are terrorists since they indulge in actions of terrorism ?

bkmartin 12y ago
Is it? Which part of Palestine? Gaza or the West Bank? I guess that maybe it is true, since Bin Laden is dead and Netanyahu is alive...you got me there... Ukrainian kids terrorized by US/EU? Really? What are you talking about? Even in the rebel held areas, how has the US/EU EVER terrorized them? To some Afghans, we could be seen that way, but most of the population in Afghanistan would rather not take their chances with the Taliban (A terrorist group). Actions of Terrorism. What exactly are they? Admittedly, we have caused more collateral casualties than I'm comfortable with at times in our fight against terror. But innocent civilians are NEVER OUR TARGET. And that is the differentiating factor here. Terrorists aim to take down societies, not governments. Everyone in that society is considered the enemy. Look at Afghanistan... Taliban goes around beheading people of a different sect of their own faith, they behead non-believers as well as government officials. If you aren't for us, then you are against us mentality. Bin Laden finds a way to fly 2 planes into the twin towers in NYC, killing thousands of innocent people. Not to mention all the previous attempts to blow up those buildings in years prior, lest you forget that. So yes, there is a difference in what we are doing in the war on terror. Have we executed perfectly? No way. Have we overreached and done things that I disagree with? Yep. But one thing is damn certain, the motivations of our actions are not the same as the terrorists.
- celticninja 12y ago
  The motivation behind the attacks don't matter, the effect on the population being attacked does. The US is/was terrorised by Al-Qaeda and afghans and Pakistanis are being terrorised by the US (e.g drone warfare). This is a site with predominantly US and Western users so Al-Qaeda will always be the terrorists and America the freedom fighters but change the geographic location of the people you are asking and you change the labels being applied.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- atmosx 12y ago
  > But innocent civilians are NEVER OUR TARGET. I'm getting for granted that you are the USA. So in order to avoid never-ending discussions here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 They look pretty much civilians to me. ps. You know, the guy who released this video... Is hiding in an Embassy in the UK because he is terrorised by someone who call him a terrorist, food for thought!
  - bkmartin 12y ago
    I see you've been downvoted.. thankfully. If you would watch that video, which I reluctantly did... because I want to make sure that I'm speaking from the right position, then you would see that in the beginning of that there were 2 men with AK-47s in the open plus one with an RPG. Notice throughout they were verifying that weapons were present. Its a terrible tragedy that any innocent people died in that sequence of events as there appears to be 2 journalists that had. But they were not TARGETED EVEN WHEN KNOWN OR THOUGHT TO BE INNOCENT. Notice that they wouldn't even take a kill shot on the injured journalist (which they had no idea he was) until they could verify that he was going to pick up a weapon! So while it is tragic, I don't see how that video proves that was are purposely targeting innocent people.
    - atmosx 12y ago
      Your view is completely distorted, that's just my personal opinion and since I really don't wanna argue about it anymore (I don't see any point)... Let's agree to disagree. As for being up/down-voted. I don't really care, I just state my views, some people like them others do not. It's what makes this community great. Have a nice evening (it's 22:02 here! GMT+2)
kasey_junk 12y ago
I think it is pretty obvious to most people that there is a difference between actions that terrorize someone and big 'T' Terrorism. If there wasn't, any act of violence can be seen as an act of Terrorism. So while the US/NATO armed forces (who display uniforms, have a strict command structure, are bound by international law, etc.) might be seen as an occupation/invasion force, they cannot reasonably called a Terrorist organization. Terrorist organizations systematically target non-combatants in order to achieve their goals, do not display uniforms or have a command structure that can be entreated with. You cannot make a peace treaty with Al Qaeda for instance, you can with NATO. To act as if both groups are equivalent makes it impossible to have useful discussions about the morality of violence. There are many people that feel like there is no moral difference between the violence perpetrated by these groups, but that doesn't mean that they can be lumped together into the same sorts of violent activities.
danielweber 12y ago
Whatever redeeming qualities this comment may have had, it was absolutely certain to lead to a political flame war.

by atmosx 12y ago

bkmartin 12y ago

Is it? Which part of Palestine? Gaza or the West Bank? I guess that maybe it is true, since Bin Laden is dead and Netanyahu is alive...you got me there... Ukrainian kids terrorized by US/EU? Really? What are you talking about? Even in the rebel held areas, how has the US/EU EVER terrorized them? To some Afghans, we could be seen that way, but most of the population in Afghanistan would rather not take their chances with the Taliban (A terrorist group). Actions of Terrorism. What exactly are they? Admittedly, we have caused more collateral casualties than I'm comfortable with at times in our fight against terror. But innocent civilians are NEVER OUR TARGET. And that is the differentiating factor here. Terrorists aim to take down societies, not governments. Everyone in that society is considered the enemy. Look at Afghanistan... Taliban goes around beheading people of a different sect of their own faith, they behead non-believers as well as government officials. If you aren't for us, then you are against us mentality. Bin Laden finds a way to fly 2 planes into the twin towers in NYC, killing thousands of innocent people. Not to mention all the previous attempts to blow up those buildings in years prior, lest you forget that. So yes, there is a difference in what we are doing in the war on terror. Have we executed perfectly? No way. Have we overreached and done things that I disagree with? Yep. But one thing is damn certain, the motivations of our actions are not the same as the terrorists.

celticninja 12y ago
The motivation behind the attacks don't matter, the effect on the population being attacked does. The US is/was terrorised by Al-Qaeda and afghans and Pakistanis are being terrorised by the US (e.g drone warfare). This is a site with predominantly US and Western users so Al-Qaeda will always be the terrorists and America the freedom fighters but change the geographic location of the people you are asking and you change the labels being applied.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
atmosx 12y ago
> But innocent civilians are NEVER OUR TARGET. I'm getting for granted that you are the USA. So in order to avoid never-ending discussions here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0 They look pretty much civilians to me. ps. You know, the guy who released this video... Is hiding in an Embassy in the UK because he is terrorised by someone who call him a terrorist, food for thought!
- bkmartin 12y ago
  I see you've been downvoted.. thankfully. If you would watch that video, which I reluctantly did... because I want to make sure that I'm speaking from the right position, then you would see that in the beginning of that there were 2 men with AK-47s in the open plus one with an RPG. Notice throughout they were verifying that weapons were present. Its a terrible tragedy that any innocent people died in that sequence of events as there appears to be 2 journalists that had. But they were not TARGETED EVEN WHEN KNOWN OR THOUGHT TO BE INNOCENT. Notice that they wouldn't even take a kill shot on the injured journalist (which they had no idea he was) until they could verify that he was going to pick up a weapon! So while it is tragic, I don't see how that video proves that was are purposely targeting innocent people.
  - atmosx 12y ago
    Your view is completely distorted, that's just my personal opinion and since I really don't wanna argue about it anymore (I don't see any point)... Let's agree to disagree. As for being up/down-voted. I don't really care, I just state my views, some people like them others do not. It's what makes this community great. Have a nice evening (it's 22:02 here! GMT+2)

kasey_junk 12y ago

I think it is pretty obvious to most people that there is a difference between actions that terrorize someone and big 'T' Terrorism. If there wasn't, any act of violence can be seen as an act of Terrorism. So while the US/NATO armed forces (who display uniforms, have a strict command structure, are bound by international law, etc.) might be seen as an occupation/invasion force, they cannot reasonably called a Terrorist organization. Terrorist organizations systematically target non-combatants in order to achieve their goals, do not display uniforms or have a command structure that can be entreated with. You cannot make a peace treaty with Al Qaeda for instance, you can with NATO. To act as if both groups are equivalent makes it impossible to have useful discussions about the morality of violence. There are many people that feel like there is no moral difference between the violence perpetrated by these groups, but that doesn't mean that they can be lumped together into the same sorts of violent activities.

danielweber 12y ago

Whatever redeeming qualities this comment may have had, it was absolutely certain to lead to a political flame war.