Terrorism, should it be ignored? (1 Viewer)

[stsburns]

Terrorist Attacks on Americans
A survey of pre-September 11, 2001, attacks

by David Johnson

International Terrorist Organizations
In the shadowy underworld of international terror, things are not always what they seem. Groups with diverse, even opposing, ideologies and differing goals often help each other when they share a common enemy. And while a terrorist act may be over in a matter of minutes, the planning and the coordination of such an event may take years.

For instance, despite their ideological differences, Middle Eastern terrorist organizations have participated in two international summits—in Beirut, Lebanon, and Teheran, Iran—in the year before the September 11, 2001, attacks, intelligence experts say. Two Palestinians, Musa Abu Marzouq, of Hamas, and Ramadham Abdullah Shallah of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, organized the conferences, which were called "The Jerusalem Project."

Participants at bin Laden's camps were taught about blowing up a nation's infrastructure, rocket-launching, urban warfare, assassination, and sabotage.


The 400 participants pledged to support the Palestinians and seek Arab control over Jerusalem. They also reportedly agreed that the U.S. has become "a second Israel." Attendees included several Iranian diplomats and intelligence officials; representatives of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda; the Lebanese Hezbollah; and individuals from Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Pakistan, Sudan, and Yemen, and at least one person living in the United States.

Highjacking of TWA Flight 847

On June 14, 1985, TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome was forced to fly to Beirut by gunmen apparently connected to Hezbollah, the Shiite Muslim terrorist group in Lebanon. The group demanded the release of 700 prisoners in Lebanon and Israel.

During the standoff, U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem was executed and his body tossed from the plane onto the runway. The 17-day crisis ended when the hijackers flew to Algiers and released the hostages. The perpetrators escaped without arrest, yet Imad Fayez Mugniyah, Hassan Izz-Al-Din, and Ali Atwa were indicted for the crime in the U.S. They were placed on the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorists list on Oct. 10, 2001.

Planned Explosion of Pacific Airliners

When a bomb exploded accidentally in a Manila apartment in January 1995, police uncovered a major terrorist plot. Associates of Osama bin Laden had planned to blow up 12 planes as they flew from Southeast Asia to the U.S., crash another aircraft into CIA headquarters, and kill the pope.

Ramzi Yousef, who was later arrested in Pakistan, received a life sentence plus 240 years for his role in the plot and for his complicity in the 1993 bombing at the World Trade Center. Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, of Kuwait, was indicted for this plot and was placed on the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorists list on Oct. 10, 2001.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/terrorism6.html#twa

Despite terrorism breeds in the middle east, some people still ignore its existance. Much like WWII, in which people still today say their was not a Holocost? Its one thing to be stubborn, its another to be given information, and still deny truth. But if your a conspiracy theorist you "create" the truth, in the minds of your believers. :spin:

 

[pidrow]

Spanish judge requests to interrogate American soldiers responsible for death of journalist
Judge Santiago Pedraz will file a request for interrogation to the United States in accordance with the request established by “Journalists Without Borders.” Pedraz intends to interrogate three American soldiers, Sergeant Thomas Gibson, Captain Philip Wolford and Lt. Colonel Philip de Camp in regards to the death of Spanish reporter José Couso. Couso was killed at the Hotel Palestine when the M-1 Abrahms tank controlled by Gibson fired upon the hotel. Wolford was the officer who authorized the shot after Gibson had notified him that there was someone watching them with binoculars from the hotel; de Camp was the officer who ordered to open fire on Hotel Palestine. Pedraz accuses the three soldiers of a crime against the international community stated in article 611.1 of the Penal Code, incurred in by whomever "with occasion of armed conflict carries out or orders the carrying out of indiscriminate or excessive attacks or subjects the civilian population to attacks, reprisals or menacing acts of violence with the intention of scaring it." Pedraz will offer American authorities to have the American soldiers travel to Spain for the interrogation, or to have himself travel to the United States to interrogate them. Spanish Minster of Justice, Juan Fernando López Aguilar, stated Wednesday that the current administration will help the judge to the extent of its capabilities. Aguilar went on to lament the United State’s “resistance” to putting its soldiers under the disposition of “a third country,” though he stated that this is a “constant element in their foreign policy.”

 

[stsburns]

(off topic) :yt Point Being?

 

[ANAV]

We tried ignoring terrorist for eight years during the Clinton administration. Thus, al-Queda thought we were spineless and underestimated our response to 9/11. But Bush unleashed the mighty US military on their asses and wiped out the Taliban and put al-Queda on the defensive rather than the offensive like they had been for many years.

It's amazing when you have a sitting President who cares more about national security than getting a knobber from an intern under the oval office desk.

 

[GarzaUK]

We tried ignoring terrorist for eight years during the Clinton administration. Thus, al-Queda thought we were spineless and underestimated our response to 9/11. But Bush unleashed the mighty US military on their asses and wiped out the Taliban and put al-Queda on the defensive rather than the offensive like they had been for many years.

It's amazing when you have a sitting President who cares more about national security than getting a knobber from an intern under the oval office desk.

What? Al-Queida hoped you would respond by force. You seem to forget that these people WANT a war between the west and the east, between christain/judaism and muslim. Bush has given them everything they ever dreamed of - war. That's probably why Bin Laden was hoping Bush would get re-elected. Oh and Al-Queida is still on the offensive - more deaths in Iraq today.

 

[teacher]

Aguilar went on to lament the United State’s “resistance” to putting its soldiers under the disposition of “a third country,” though he stated that this is a “constant element in their foreign policy.”

Pidrow? Do you in any capacity support putting US troops under the disposition of a third country? Dare you to say yes.

 

[teacher]

[

QUOTE=GarzaUK] You seem to forget that these people WANT a war between the west and the east, between christain/judaism and muslim.

They thought they wanted a war. Kinda like Elmer Fudd wanted a war with Buggs. And you know what he said.

 

[pidrow]

Pidrow? Do you in any capacity support putting US troops under the disposition of a third country? Dare you to say yes.

Yes...if they are criminals. But I think this one was not the case.

 

[Squawker]

What? Al-Queida hoped you would respond by force. You seem to forget that these people WANT a war between the west and the east, between christain/judaism and muslim. Bush has given them everything they ever dreamed of - war. That's probably why Bin Laden was hoping Bush would get re-elected. Oh and Al-Queida is still on the offensive - more deaths in Iraq today.

I have never seen any evidence to support that Gar -- do you have a link? The statement released by Bin Laden just before the election sounded like it came right out of Kerry's campaign headquarters.

 

[Connecticutter]

"There is no terrorist threat."
- Michael Moore

There are people who can't see the terrorist threat when its happening right in front of them. Some people are so disinclined to accept it that they enev make up stories about how we did 9/11 to ourselves. Yeah, right.

As far as Bin Laden wanting a war, he wants to restore the Islamic Caliphate and create an Empire. So this will take a war, but he wants a war he can win. Hopefully, we won't let him do that.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I have never seen any evidence to support that Gar -- do you have a link? The statement released by Bin Laden just before the election sounded like it came right out of Kerry's campaign headquarters.

[font=&quot]Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication[/font]

• Therefore, the dramatic narrative since 9/11 has essentially borne out the entire radical Islamist bill of particulars. American actions and the flow of events have elevated the authority of the Jihadi insurgents and tended to ratify their legitimacy among Muslims. Fighting groups portray themselves as the true defenders of an Ummah ... to broad public support.​

 

[Simon W. Moon]

The statement released by Bin Laden just before the election sounded like it came right out of Kerry's campaign headquarters.

That's pretty hateful thing to say about someone that roughly half of American voters chose.
Why do you hate America?
[Sorry couldn't resist]

[font=verdana,geneva,lucida,'lucida grande',arial,helvetica,sans-serif] [/font]So this will take a war, but he wants a war he can win. Hopefully, we won't let him do that.

We all hope that. Things are not going well for us though. Team Bush has helped terrorists recruit and get top notch training. At least that's what the liberal bastion the Pentagon is saying.

As much of a boon as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was to Islamist terrorists, the Us invasion of Iraq is an even bigger boon.

[font=&quot]Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication[/font]

[font=&quot] [/font]Worldwide anger and discontent are directed at America’s tarnished credibility[!] and ways the U.S. pursues its goals[!].
"The information campaign — or as some still would have it, “the war of ideas,” or the struggle for “hearts and minds” — is important to every war effort. In this war it is an essential objective ... But American efforts have not only failed in this respect: they may also have achieved the opposite of what they intended.


American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists ...
Furthermore, in the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering.
• What was a marginal network is now an Ummah-wide movement of fighting groups. Not only has there been a proliferation of “terrorist” groups: the unifying context of a shared cause creates a sense of affiliation across the many cultural and sectarian boundaries that divide Islam.
​

Team Bush's rhetoric and actions have kept UbL et al with wood for years now.

 

[Connecticutter]

Alright - I think that we agree on the major theme of this thread: Terrorism cannot be ignored.

While the War on Terror hasn't always gone smoothly, I just don't think that we're losing. Call me a neo-con, but if we create a stable, somewhat free Iraq (which we are determined to do), it will undermine the terrorist base. I believe that the terrorist organizations rely on Tyranny to control their members, and cannot withstand free interaction with the outside world.

As to the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan - the terrorists were emboldened because of our (foolish) support for them at the time against the spead of communism.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Call me a neo-con...

Did you used to be a liberal or something?

but if we create a stable, somewhat free Iraq (which we are determined to do), it will undermine the terrorist base.

Since anti-Americanism is the result of opposition to American foreign policies rather than the lack of a free & stable Iraq how is this going to work?

From the above mentioned DoD Report:

• Muslims do not “hate our freedom,” but rather, they hate our policies.
​

As to the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan - the terrorists were emboldened...

You mean the Afghani Freedom Fighters?

 

[Connecticutter]

It's not so much our foreign policy as it is our cultural influence is disrupting the status quo in the Middle East, thereby threatening those in power. Their days are numbered and they know it, so they are trying hold on for as long as possible. In order to do this, many of these tyrants are tightening their control and turing to terrorism.

Once these tyrants are out of power, terrorists will still exists (as they always will), but without government support they won't be able to have much of an organization.

With Saddam Hussein's regime out of power, the rest of Middle Eastern depots are going to have trouble miantaining their rule.

How often do you see two democratic republics go to war against each other?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

It's not so much our foreign policy as it is our cultural influence is disrupting the status quo in the Middle East, thereby threatening those in power.

Apparently, when asked, attitudes about our culture are "mostly favorable." While the hardcore religious nuts over there may just as upset with our culture as the hardcore religious nuts here are, apparently for the bulk of the population, our policies are the issue, not oput culture and values.

IMPRESSIONS OF AMERICA(pdf)
​

HOW ARABS VIEW AMERICA
HOW ARABS LEARN ABOUT AMERICA
A Six-Nation Survey​

Attitudes toward American values, people, and products remain mostly favorable, but have also declined in the past two years.
US policy is the major factor that accounts for the low US favorable ratings and the decline in these ratings.
These factors[values, people and products] have no impact on Arab attitudes toward US policy, which remains low and drives overall favorables down.
​

&
​

[size=+1]Poll Shows Growing Arab Rancor at U.S. [/size]
Those polled said their opinions were shaped by U.S. policies, rather than by values or culture. When asked: "What is the first thought when you hear 'America'?" respondents overwhelmingly said: "Unfair foreign policy."
And when asked what the United States could do to improve its image in the Arab world, the most frequently provided answers were "Stop supporting Israel" and "Change your Middle East policy."
​

How often do you see two democratic republics go to war against each other?

Is it true there has never been a war between two democracies?
​

...throughout most of history the number of such democracies has been small. According to political scientist Michael Doyle, there were only 13 liberal democracies prior to 1900, and just 29 between 1900 and 1945--and many of those did not endure.
...proponents of this idea argue that a war between democracies has never occurred. One arrives at this comforting conclusion chiefly by setting up the rules to exclude all the non-conforming cases. The most egregious omission is civil wars, which account for a high percentage of the world's violent conflicts--159 of 575 wars between 1816 and 1980, by one count.
The U.S. and Britain fought in the War of 1812; Britain at the time had a parliament and a prime minister. So did imperial Germany prior to World War I.
​

 

[Connecticutter]

That's just a poll of random Arabs. This doesn't give us any information about the terrorists, their leaders, and the dictatorships that support them.

In terms of my comments about democratic republics: sure its true that there have been wars between democracies, but its rare. Civil wars are far more common under a dictatorship. While democracies go to war with dictatorships, they tend to ally with each other.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

That's just a poll of random Arabs. This doesn't give us any information about the terrorists, their leaders, and the dictatorships that support them.

It gives us information about the pool of potential recruits.

In terms of my comments about democratic republics: sure its true that there have been wars between democracies, but its rare.

Liberal democracies have been rare. There's not much a pool of data to draw your conclusions from.

 

[Connecticutter]

It gives us information about the pool of potential recruits.

The pool of potential recruits gets a lot smaller in a free and open society. It would be harder to recruit someone who has had a taste of freedom, even if they diagree with US policy.

Liberal democracies have been rare. There's not much a pool of data to draw your conclusions from.

The great liberal democracies of our day don't go to war with each other. The American people would never support a war with another democratic republic. Transparency, free speech, and trade lessen the likelyhood of such a thing. But if you think the pool of data is too small, I guess there's no way to convince you. This is a little off topic anyway, so I'm just going to drop it. Could be an entire discussion on its own.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

The pool of potential recruits gets a lot smaller in a free and open society. It would be harder to recruit someone who has had a taste of freedom, even if they diagree with US policy.

Since you're advocating staking lives on this proposition, what evidence do you have to back it up?

 

[Connecticutter]

Since you're advocating staking lives on this proposition, what evidence do you have to back it up?

Look at our previous discussion. All that I'm trying to argue is that we're not losing to Bin Laden and his terrorist network. Sure, Bin Laden himself is probably hiding in some country where it would be politically difficult for us to get him, but his day will come. Meanwhile, his network is being decimated and the Arab world is being opened up to democratic ideals which includes social mobility and the free flow of information.

Despite this, you say that Bin Laden is winning because it is becoming easier for him to recruit terrorists. You base this on a hypothesis in a pentagon document. Before 9/11, Bin Laden was able to recruit all of the terrorists he needed. Today there are still people willing to turn to terrorism, but its harder for them to communicate with each other. More people in the region have access to a vareity of viewpoints. Etc.

Your argument, based on the pentagon conjecture alone, doesn't convine me.

 

[akyron]

• Muslims do not “hate our freedom,” but rather, they hate our policies.
​

I agree .
The policy of not letting them slaughter Israel is really getting their collective dead goats.


Darn those pesky interfering infidels err Westerners.

 

[stsburns]

The reason I posted this thread it to make one point. Have we not learned from our past mistakes.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

No, we haven't.

 

[stsburns]

No, we haven't.

So we should follow the Clinton strategy?