Skip Navigation

London Blasts

Travel Forums Off Topic London Blasts

Page 1 ...

Last Post

101. Posted by Peter (Admin 5789 posts) 11y

But it is quite different to stop a national army from killing people than it is to stop a scattered organisation. About the only thing they have in common is that they need to be stopped. The methods should differ entirely.

It would be just as easy to compare highschool shooters to Hitler, yet I don't see the US waging a war against its teenagers. Nor do I see them bombing the UK any time soon for harboring terrorists or the UK bombing the US for manufacturing "Weapons of Mass Destruction". The entire current situation quite simply makes no sense.

102. Posted by Sam I Am (Admin 5588 posts) 11y

Quoting Travel100

Quoting Peter

And nor can there be a comparison between what happened then and what is going on now.

Definitely no comparison between what is happening now and with WW2. However, there could be a comparison between stopping these terrorists now (before they kill a million at one time and not 52+ at one time), and stopping the Nazis in the 1930's (before ww2, and possibly thus avoiding millions from being killed).

What if the nazi's in the 30's was the start of the terrorist organizations 10 or 20 years ago, when they were partly being financed by the USA I agree, the earlier the better, however when does that moment occur!?!

103. Posted by Travel100 (Travel Guru 1556 posts) 11y

Quoting Sam I Am

...when does that moment occur!?!

I have no idea, that's basically the question I was asking in some previous posts. When do you know that you actually are in a War? It's a little more complicated when the enemy is spread out in several countries and basically spend most of their time in hiding.

And are suggesting that we should not arm & train our enemies .

104. Posted by tway (Travel Guru 7273 posts) 11y

Quoting Peter

It would be just as easy to compare highschool shooters to Hitler, yet I don't see the US waging a war against its teenagers. Nor do I see them bombing the UK any time soon for harboring terrorists or the UK bombing the US for manufacturing "Weapons of Mass Destruction". The entire current situation quite simply makes no sense.

That's the crux of it. There are various groups waging terror across the world - from the above-mentioned teenagers, to suicide bombers in the middle east, to people who go "postal" and shoot their neighbours in the street (a growing trend), to serial killers, to wife beaters, to god-knows-what-else. Add the numbers up and they'll bypass the number of people killed by terrorist attacks by a mile. Yet the catch-all "terrorist" label is slapped on just the one group, which then acts as a kind of smokescreen for what's really going on. War can be necessary, yes - but it can also be extremely convenient for the one who wages it.

Peter has a point - if the US et al go into Iraq to hunt and kill in the name of "WOMD", then what's to say other countries don't have the right to invade the US et al to capture and destroy THEIR "WOMD"? Logic dictates tit for tat, in this case.

These groups are extreme and determined and dangerous. And I agree with Jeff that they have to be stopped. But unlike WWII, soldiers and countries are going into this new "war" not fully understanding who or what they're fighting against and fighting for. Terrorists? Freedom? Democracy? World peace? The Nazis wore their swastikas on their sleeves. But when the people we call terrorists hide behind religion, it's not so easy to figure out who you should be pointing your gun at.

105. Posted by Travel100 (Travel Guru 1556 posts) 11y

Quoting Peter

But it is quite different to stop a national army from killing people than it is to stop a scattered organisation. About the only thing they have in common is that they need to be stopped. The methods should differ entirely.

Definitely agree with your point above.

106. Posted by Travel100 (Travel Guru 1556 posts) 11y

Quoting Peter

It would be just as easy to compare highschool shooters to Hitler, yet I don't see the US waging a war against its teenagers.

The difference I see here, is that it's doubtful that highschoolers will ever develope the capability to aquire weapons and carry out an attack of the scale of 9/11 or the real threat of carrying out an attack of a much larger scale (like wiping out an entire city, etc.).

My point in making the comparison is that sometimes stopping a group earier rather than later will ultimately save lives.

107. Posted by Travel100 (Travel Guru 1556 posts) 11y

Quoting tway

[quote=Peter] The Nazis wore their swastikas on their sleeves. But when the people we call terrorists hide behind religion, it's not so easy to figure out who you should be pointing your gun at.

Exactly! Major problem, these people are all spread out, spend all their time hiding, and could even be living next door. So will require new & unique approaches to elinimate. No answers here.

108. Posted by Travel100 (Travel Guru 1556 posts) 11y

Quoting tway

Peter has a point - if the US et al go into Iraq to hunt and kill in the name of "WOMD", then what's to say other countries don't have the right to invade the US et al to capture and destroy THEIR "WOMD"? Logic dictates tit for tat, in this case.

Invading Iraq was stupid and created far more problems before. Now the danger is that Iraq will become the place for terrorists to be trained, live, and if something is not done to clean up the mess that's been created then it will be a "terrorist base & haven."

109. Posted by Brendan (Respected Member 1824 posts) 11y

I read a couple days ago that Iraq has signed a "Military Pact" with Iran. Notorious enemies for centuries coming to terms.. in a way. In the same news there was talk of a majority of Iraqi officials are calling for the United States to withdraw right now.

Anyone else hear that or am I out on a limb?

110. Posted by Travel100 (Travel Guru 1556 posts) 11y

Quoting Brendan

I read a couple days ago that Iraq has signed a "Military Pact" with Iran. Notorious enemies for centuries coming to terms.. in a way. In the same news there was talk of a majority of Iraqi officials are calling for the United States to withdraw right now.

Anyone else hear that or am I out on a limb?

I didn't hear any of this. Do you have link to article?

Page 1 ...

Last Post