quote:

Or are you trying to imply with your denial that Al Qaeda is negotiable?

What on Earth are you talking about? Denial about what exactly?

And I have no idea whether al-Qaida is negotiable or not, as far as I am aware, nobody has ever tried to negotiate with them to find out. My guess however, is that they would not be negotiable, but then, thats not the point is it? The only way I can be seen for al-Qaida to be defeated is to diminish their support, and continuing to attack or threaten Muslims (which many on here have called for) is gonna have exactly the opposite effect...

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley continuing to attack or threaten Muslims (which many on here have called for) is gonna have exactly the opposite effect...

That's your point of view of course.

My point is this: We haven't attacked or threatned Muslims before 9-11 yet they still attacked the USA and killed 3000 of its citizens.

So since your approach, "not threatening" Muslims has been tried for the past 50+ years and has no results to show for it, I am thinking it might be about time to change that reason of thinking.

The West has not threatened the Muslim world with the use of force since WWII and look what good it has done the west.

Maybe we should start threatening. I just like you, can't promise this will work. But what I can tell you is that not threatening them has clearly demonstrated to us through history to not be effective. Threatening muslims, we don't know, we haven't tried it really. So far Libya is the only example of its obvious success, but time is still too short to tell.

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

My point is this: We haven't attacked or threatned Muslims before 9-11 yet they still attacked the USA and killed 3000 of its citizens.

Your are confusing al-Qaida's motivations with the means to carry their objectives out.

When you quoted me, I was talking about the means in which al-Qaida can carry out objectives.

Al-Qaida will be more powerful and more effective the more members it has fighting for its cause, and the main way it does this is by convincing Muslims that the West is a threat. Al-Qaida needs the West to retaliate and people like you play right into their hands.

My arguments over 'threats' have nothing to do with al-Qaida's motivations. They concern al-Qaida's effectivness.

Makes no difference whether they were threatened before 11/9 (altho they would argue that they were under threat from US support for Israel, the 10 year bombing of Iraq, US military in Saudi Arabia etc etc), if they (Muslims) are threatened now, al-Qaida's membership will inevitabally increase, and so too the threat of terrorism...

quote:

The West has not threatened the Muslim world with the use of force since WWII and look what good it has done the west.

Ah so the West should threaten every nation no matter what? Ya know, just incase?



Anyway, just to clear up the original point...

The more members al-Qaida gets, the more powerful it will become (making it easier to carry out attacks and will make it impossible, due to the nature of al-Qaida, to fight, let alone erradicate)

The more the West retaliates, the more al-Qaida's membership will grow...notice a problem with that?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley The more the West retaliates, the more al-Qaida's membership will grow...notice a problem with that?

And the more the West backs down, the more Al-Quaeda will step up their efforts as they'd be viewed as being more effective. So what exactly are you advocating? Are you just saying that no matter what happens, that Al-Quaeda is destined to take over the world by use of scare tactics and overcoming people's will to resist them?

If anything, this is the reason that Al-Quaeda must be destroyed at its roots. There doesn't seem to be any other alternative, for as you've pointed out, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. The only solution is to eliminate the group from existence, which is obviously more than an overnight operation. As much as you hate the Dubya policy of "'smokin' 'em out of their caves and huntin' 'em down, bringin' 'em to justice one by one", I have yet to see another alternative that really deals with the problem as opposed to sweeping it under the rug for someone else to worry about.

quote:

So what exactly are you advocating? Are you just saying that no matter what happens, that Al-Quaeda is destined to take over the world

Do you know what al-Qaida's aims actually are?

quote:

As much as you hate the Dubya policy of "'smokin' 'em out of their caves and huntin' 'em down, bringin' 'em to justice one by one"

Shame they dont all live in caves in crappy countries isnt it or that might actually work! They live here, in my country, your country and every other country they plan to attack. I would fully support increased intelligence operations, but how exactly is massive use of force going to be in these situations?

And if you are going to pick on some crappy country...which one?

Afghanistan I can agree, in fact I supported it as I believed it was necessary in order to disrupt bin Ladens plans.

Iraq? No link with al-Qaida whatsoever (see bin Laden's ideology and you will realise Saddam is as much an enemy to him as the US)

Iran? Memeber of the mighty axis of evil!!! Nah, you think bin Laden is gonna get support from Iran?!

Saudi Arabia? Yes! But wait a minute, is this the same Saudi Arabia that is not only bin Laden's number one supporter, but also America's number one Arab ally? Summat strange there dont ya think???

So, if we are gonna get revenge and invade a soveriegn state (how else can we propose using military power to eliminate al-Qaida?)...

Which one?

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Places like Checneya, Niger, and Kosovo have swifted dramatically to be muslim dominated in the last 20 years. The chief reason for this is the islam-facist attacks on non-muslim to scare them away (see violence works) or force them to convert. You can look at the Christian populations of these regions for the past 30 years and see their sudden and dramatic decline. I chiefly attribute this to the increasing ferocity and determinism of the islamo-facists to expand their borders to places they weren't as traditionally islamo-facist as they have become. Even Afghanistan is a good example of this, despite being a predominatly muslim country, it was not radically such till the invasion of the Islamo-facist. After their invasion all non-mulsim minorities almost completely disappeared. I don't know though why you would think the Islamo-facist are content in containing themselves or why their philosophy has no expansionist tendencies, but hey whatever gets it up for you

Heh, as far as Kosovo goes, the only reason why it became predominantly muslim is because of the population growth differences. While average serbian families had about 2 children, the average albanian ones had about 10. This changed the ratio from 200000:200000 in 1950's to about 2000000:200000 now. Only after the muslim population grew to vastly outnumber the serbs did they start to feel scared and some of them left.

May I just say that this is a good example of what is likely to happen to Israel soon unless you guys either get rid of palestinians somehow or start screwing each others senselessly.

___________________
1+1=10

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Anyway, just to clear up the original point... The more members al-Qaida gets, the more powerful it will become (making it easier to carry out attacks and will make it impossible, due to the nature of al-Qaida, to fight, let alone erradicate) The more the West retaliates, the more al-Qaida's membership will grow...notice a problem with that?

And to clear up my point:

I agree with you, the more members al Qaeda gets the more powerful it will beocome.

I just differ in you how it will get members.

If I was a fanatical Arab, and I saw Al Qaeda strikes blow fear into the hearts of the enemy to such an extend they would be scared to retaliate, I would say by Allah, this organization has got something to it. It's got the right policy, and it will grow, I better join up and help the cause.

Now if I was a fanatical Arab and I saw Al Qaeda members blown to smitherens around me, perhaps with my mom and pop blow away with them too, I'd be terrified and say wow they sure woke up a sleeping giant.
I'd most likely be mad as hell, but I would realize if I join that organizaiton only doom and death will come to me and all those around me. Plus, why would join a place where the life expectancy is a month.. I might just go try that alternative liberal democracy thing.. this fanatacisim an't all its cranked up to be.

And thats where my view point and your view point differ.

Its like that slapping analogy.
(1)If someone comes up to you and slaps you, you slap them back, right? I would.

(2)Now if someone comes up to you with a gun and slaps you, you wouldn't say shit right?
I wouldn't.

(3)Now if you see some stranger come up to another guy and slap him (without a gun) and the guy does nothing and then you see another stranger approach the guy and slap him and he still does nothing, and you see three other strabgers than go and slap the guy, still without being slapped back, you'd probably be like.. dude I gotta try this, and you go up the guy and slap him.
I sure would.

(4)Now if you see some stranger come up to another guy and slap him, and the guy shots and kills the stranger, would you then go up to the guy and slap him?
I sure wouldn't. I'd be like, dud do not mess with that guy he's psycho.

I mean from my perspective this is very basic human psychology.
As I understand it, you are implying approach #3. As Spain has just been slapped real hard, yet they are not going to slap back.

What your hoping is the pity will kick in for Al Qaeda and they will feel sorry for the guy that is always getting slapped around but not standing up for himself.

I think, just like in this analogy if he doesn't slap back, people are going to wonder, why didn't he slap back, and continue to prod and slap him till they are content they can do with im what they wish.

and I as you have guessed I advocate approach #4.

See we both essentially agree on the same premise: The more members al Qaeda gets the more powerful it will become.

We just differe in how we think that will happen. You think more people will join Al Q if Spain guns them down. I think more people will join Al Q if they do nothing.

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Now if I was a fanatical Arab and I saw Al Qaeda members blown to smitherens around me, perhaps with my mom and pop blow away with them too, I'd be terrified and say wow they sure woke up a sleeping giant. I'd most likely be mad as hell, but I would realize if I join that organizaiton only doom and death will come to me and all those around me.

so this mean, if the palestinians attack Israel enough, you would refuse to go with the israeli military or in any way support the israeli occupation?

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew so this mean, if the palestinians attack Israel enough, you would refuse to go with the israeli military or in any way support the israeli occupation?

If they had overwhelming force and presented an alternative to genoicde then yes.

I'd rather live then die, how about you?

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

Why does every thread here end with a palestinian/isreali arguement?

you guys are out of control

___________________
GIGANTIC CUNT

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow Why does every thread here end with a palestinian/isreali arguement? you guys are out of control

That's usually the signal to run for cover.

the odd part is this time a non-palestinian/israeli changed the thread

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.