Page 3 of 3
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2001 8:45 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Aegis:
<STRONG>@Quark: If Bin Laden is a Taliban hero, than why would they annouce his whereabouts? It seems to make more sense that they would protect him by feeding the states false information.</STRONG>
I haven't heard anything about them announcing his whereabouts. If they did, are you sure they aren't giving us false information?
Originally posted by Aegis:
<STRONG>Also, this will the LAST I should have to say this, but I am not denying that Bin LAden has done this. Get that fact thorugh your minds. I have merely said that it is plausible that others could be behind, even your beloved United States. It's reality. Not always is the country just the victim, as it is in Games. Sometimes, the country is both the victim and the assailant. The whole point of my argument is Theory and Speculation. Until all the facts are known, anything is possible.</STRONG>
I never said that you deny Bin Laden's involvement. You are "playing devil's advocate" so to speak by stating other "posibilities." I am doing similar thing by stating arguements against those ideas. What I said earlier about narrowmindedness had to do with how you were viewing what facts there are to get these "possibility" ideas.
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2001 9:34 pm
by Maharlika
@SS: The problem with bullies (in this case, the terrorists) is that you have to make them understand your position and what they are doing is wrong only through the language that they know of - violence.
Bullies have the tendency to be just all brawn but no brains (hence the need to show off muscle to compensate for being intellectually-challenged), but guys like Bin Laden are very dangerous bullies: they got the brawn, the money AND the brains to have their nefarious needs consummated.
In my country, there were instances when these muslim fundamentalists would kidnap people and threaten them with harm if their demands are not met - and the local community would answer that by kidnapping the kidnappers' families and threatening them with bodily harm.
What happened?
The victims were set free.
Such is the language these b@$t@r_$ know.
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2001 9:50 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Maharlika:
<STRONG>@SS: The problem with bullies (in this case, the terrorists) is that you have to make them understand your position and what they are doing is wrong only through the language that they know of - violence.
Bullies have the tendency to be just all brawn but no brains (hence the need to show off muscle to compensate for being intellectually-challenged), but guys like Bin Laden are very dangerous bullies: they got the brawn, the money AND the brains to have their nefarious needs consummated.
In my country, there were instances when these muslim fundamentalists would kidnap people and threaten them with harm if their demands are not met - and the local community would answer that by kidnapping the kidnappers' families and threatening them with bodily harm.
What happened?
The victims were set free.
Such is the language these b@$t@r_$ know.
</STRONG>
That is often the case with bullies, though sometimes, merely showing that you won't willingly be pushed around is all that is necessary. By this, I mean standing up and saying "I'll not be pushed around by you anymore" and showing you will fight if necessary. Fighting should be avoided if possible, but sadly it is not always possible.
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2001 5:07 am
by Quark
@Aegis: by taking on the stance that Americans could have done this to themselves, you by default aren't supporting the idea that is was bin Laden. You said that sometimes the answer is the simplest one:
The idea of a terrorist who hates America committing this act is pretty simple to me. Seeing Iraq's involvement as possible is simple. Keeping a secret of a conspiracy this big in America: not simple. This is the most vocal country in the world. Experts are estimating that at least 50 people were involved - could you imagine 50 people (many would have to be American themselves) keeping quiet about a story like this? This is a time to follow real leads - of which there are plenty.
As SS said, the Taliban have not said where bin Laden is, they have confirmed they are protecting him. That's a huge difference. Especially when you're talking about the mountain terrain of Afghanistan.
Just a quick note: the planning of this act would have taken alot of time. Would it really have been possible for Bush to pull this off? The only time he hasn't been busy was way too soon ago to plan this.
[ 09-17-2001: Message edited by: Quark ]
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2001 3:05 pm
by Aegis
Originally posted by Quark:
<STRONG>As SS said, the Taliban have not said where bin Laden is, they have confirmed they are protecting him. That's a huge difference. Especially when you're talking about the mountain terrain of Afghanistan.
[ 09-17-2001: Message edited by: Quark ]</STRONG>
@Quark: by the Taliban protecting Bin LAden, the pretty much tells the States that he is withen the sphere of Taliban influence. In other words, they have given a general location for Americans to search.
@SS: Let's go to your "bully" variant. How can we be sure that the Americans are the ones to be blamed? You look back on the States history, and you can see a long list of bullying, extortion, and real cloak and dagger movements. In the Middle East, the States and Britain basically went in, divided up the Middle East, taking land away from the Palenstinens, and spreading it around to other countries whom they could control. The States has been bullying the Middle East for years. Did you know that they were the one to put Saddam Huessan into power? Well, once he statrs thinking as an indepenadant leader, they want him, so they attack him. In South America, America (And Canada for this fact) has gone into to places like Mexico, and bullied people out of land, ownership, and a life, so that NA would be able to make things cheap.
What I'm getting at here, is that Terrorist attacks on the States made by other ethnic origins, those are people fighing back for whatever reason. Those people usually come from Countries the States, Canada, or Britain has brutilized in some way. Just keep that in mind when you think of the motives of these Terrorists.
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2001 3:11 pm
by Darkpoet
Originally posted by Aegis:
<STRONG>@Quark: by the Taliban protecting Bin LAden, the pretty much tells the States that he is withen the sphere of Taliban influence. In other words, they have given a general location for Americans to search.
@SS: Let's go to your "bully" variant. How can we be sure that the Americans are the ones to be blamed? You look back on the States history, and you can see a long list of bullying, extortion, and real cloak and dagger movements. In the Middle East, the States and Britain basically went in, divided up the Middle East, taking land away from the Palenstinens, and spreading it around to other countries whom they could control. The States has been bullying the Middle East for years. Did you know that they were the one to put Saddam Huessan into power? Well, once he statrs thinking as an indepenadant leader, they want him, so they attack him. In South America, America (And Canada for this fact) has gone into to places like Mexico, and bullied people out of land, ownership, and a life, so that NA would be able to make things cheap.
What I'm getting at here, is that Terrorist attacks on the States made by other ethnic origins, those are people fighing back for whatever reason. Those people usually come from Countries the States, Canada, or Britain has brutilized in some way. Just keep that in mind when you think of the motives of these Terrorists.</STRONG>
Their motives are to terrorize people, any way they can. Duh!!!! That's why they are called Terrorists.
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2001 3:14 pm
by Aegis
@DP: (Damn, twenty seconds...) Understood, but what causes them to become Terrorists? I undertsand what your saying though. Anyway, back to my silience.
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2001 3:57 pm
by Word
I'm sorry but the united states is not the most powerful country in the world. this is an arrogant attitude and this attack should have taught us that ingoring the rest of the world as we sit around is not a good policy. Arrogance is the downfall of every major country or Empire. Until we regain our hard working attitude and stop acting like spoiled little brats (exactly like we did in the revoluntionary war) we will not be the strongest nation in the world until we prove it by leading the world against whoever was responsible.
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2001 4:31 pm
by Happy Evil
Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield:
<STRONG>I agree with you Aegis.
Like i said in another topic,
A woman in one of the hijacked planes called on her cell phoen some governemnt or somebody.
The person asked her what race are these terrorists? But the woman couldn't tell. Muslims from the Middle East can't be that hard to tell apart.</STRONG>
Umm...she called her husband.
I dont think race ever came up.
You do see a lot of Swedish Nationals hijacking planes though dont you. I can see how it could be confusing.
Historically, radical arabs have NEVER hijacked planes. Right?
@Aegis...you said something about "...worse has happend in other countries..." and no-one noticed or said anything.
So what was worse?
..Also, as far as your conspiracy theories, I think O.J. did it right after he killed JFK and ELVIS.
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2001 6:02 pm
by nael
Originally posted by Happy Evil:
<STRONG>
..Also, as far as your conspiracy theories, I think O.J. did it right after he killed JFK and ELVIS.</STRONG>
too funny man...there is a reason why people laugh at conspiracy theorists...
about other posts - there have definitely been worse things in other countries. genocide in quite a few different african countries, "the killing fields" of cambodia, stalin slaughterign millions of christians, the whole holocaust thing; however, this is by far the worst act of terrorism.
Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2001 7:31 am
by Happy Evil
Originally posted by nael:
<STRONG>
...about other posts - there have definitely been worse things in other countries. genocide in quite a few different african countries, "the killing fields" of cambodia, stalin slaughterign millions of christians, the whole holocaust thing; however, this is by far the worst act of terrorism.</STRONG>
I agree totally that this is by no means the worst crime against humanity or human tragedy to a occur.
Please remember, this is not the first terrorist attack against Americans.
Certainly not the first by wassaba-been-llama
Posted: Tue Sep 18, 2001 4:22 pm
by Nightmare
I am going to stand at Aegis's side on this.
Bin Laden might not have done this. Historicly, he has always claimed reasonsiblility for the terrorist acts he commited (proclaiming the destruction of America, the first WTC bombing, the attack on American embassies in Africa, and the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen). IIRC, the media said he claimed not to be responsible for this act of terrorism.
Speaking of the media, how do you know what the media says is true. On the day of the attacks, CNN ended an interview with Tom Clancy because he said that the media is not neutral and unbiased, and that it influences many peoples opinions. The media only reports what they want, true or false. Plus, the US gouvernment will not tell the media if they know for certain who it is.
On the fact of Aegis's conspiricy theory, I'm saying I can't see any reason for a gouvernment official to organize this. BUT, remember Oaklahoma City? The perpitraitor turned out to be an ex-US military soldar. We shouldn't point any fingers for the moment.