FinnMacCool
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2005
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 153
- Location
- South Shore of Long Island.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
FinnMacCool said:Ok so as we are constantly being reminded of by our dear President Bush, we are at war with terrorism but is calling them terrorists the right word? True Osama Bin Laden and his buddies are radical islamics but what is terrorism anyway? Terrorism is defined as such
ter·ror·ism Pronunciation Key (tr-rzm)
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
but if this is true, couldn't you call our founding fathers terrorists? And before you say that our founding fathers didn't commit any crimes such as this, its not true. In fact, one founding father (whose name escapes me) actually led a mob to a representative of the English King's home, "let himself in", destroyed all his furniture. then brought him down to this area where they beat up a replica of him, and then told him the same thing would happen to him and his family if he didn't do what he was told. He did this on two seperate occasions.
Wouldn't the French resistance during WWII be considered terrorist groups? Or William Wallace (of Braveheart fame) be considered a terrorist because he opposed England? I admit that terrorism sounds a lot more "evil" but is this the correct term to use?
FinnMacCool said:But then what are we fighting for? If you looked at it deeply enough, couldn't we consider ourselves terrorists? I mean even if you think that what we are doing during this administration is absolutely unconditionally justified, then what about times before that? You can't deny that the U.S. has a bad history of killings of innocents.
FinnMacCool said:All though I disagree with you about most everything you said about Iraq, I believe you are correct for the most part. Not because of your points but I think I answered the question myself. The U.S. is the authority so therefore, can't be considered terrorists haha. Kinda funny, isn't it? It's only terrorism if its against you right? If we blow up something of theirs we call it 'heroic' but if they blow up something of ours, they are terrorists.
I think someone must have made up the word "terrorists" for use as propaganda sometime. Does anyone know the origins of that term?
cnredd said:I don't trust definition terms...They don't show how words can evolve to mean other things....
cnredd said:I don't trust definition terms...They don't show how words can evolve to mean other things....
Mancunian said:cnredd, I've got to take exception to this comment. What are you saying? That we should redefine words already explicitly described in a dictionary to fit our own ideals?
cnredd said:ThesaurusLegend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
Verb 1. take exception - raise a formal objection in a court of law
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/take+exception
The fact that you used the phrase "take exception" proves my point...
This is not a court of law where you have raised a formal objection.
Now, of COURSE, I know what you meant...I'm not that dumb(no comments from the peanut gallery):2razz:
But see how the phrase EVOLVED into an everyday saying?...It's original intent, while still acceptable, has blossomed into more different ways of use.
I'm not saying we SHOULD change the words...I'm saying, through time, words do change. I thought I made my point when I mentioned "MTV Houses".
That's all I was saying...I didn't think it a big issue...:2wave:
Anyhow, BinLaden is fighting not for freedom, not for independance...he had a regime protecting him, and billions of dollars to play with. He is orchestrating these bombings/murders 1) because he's a megalomaniac nut-job, and 2) because he thinks it's what Allah or mohammad or whoever's in charge is telling him to do it. I guess what I'm saying is that there are different forms of "terrorism" , and maybe they should come up with a new word to distinguish the just from the un-just.
Surenderer said:Then you havent heard him speak....thats all O.B.L. thinks he is doing is fighting for oppressed Muslims....
That's what he says. He fights (hmmm. Nope. Correction: the coward lets others fight) for power and conquest, NOT for liberation, against oppression, or anything else.Surenderer said:Then you havent heard him speak....thats all O.B.L. thinks he is doing is fighting for oppressed Muslims....
ILikeDubyah said:That was my point #2. He's doing it because Allah, or Mohammad, or the Q'uran is telling him to, for all Muslims I suppose. I didn't think he was doing it for "oppressed" muslims though. Every time I've read or heard what he's saying, he's talking about how the west is too "decadent" (which i believe we are too, but would never kill anyone over it), and how it doesn't conform to the Muslim way of life, so we're all "infidels" and must die.
epr64 said:That's what he says. He fights (hmmm. Nope. Correction: the coward lets others fight) for power and conquest, NOT for liberation, against oppression, or anything else.
If he fought to suppress oppressed muslims (and there are quite a few), he would have waged Jihad in the ME (against the Saudis, for example). Instead of that, he did what he needed to recruit an army, through 911 and knowing how the BA would respond. Now, he has an army, as Bush did EXACTLY what was expected from him by AQ. How he will use it afterwards is still to see. But it will be for power and conquest... and not for Islam, be sure of that. Islam is merely a tool in the hands of a power-hungry assassin.
Y
Terrorist acts attributed to AQ in Saudi Arabia are from AFTER 911.Surenderer said:But he did Wage War against those Goverments 1st.......Thats why the House of Saud hates him and thats why he hated Saddam isnt it?...9-11 (according to him) was for U.S. interaction against the Goverments he allready hated
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?