LoginRegister
Nintendo Wii / Wii U Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11
    Senior Member Skippy's Avatar
    Member #
    10574
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,191
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    Terrorism targets civilians as opposed to rebellion or regular war which is against military targets.


    Quote Originally Posted by RPGMasterTurk91 View Post
    What I'd also like to point out is the fact that when the media portrays certain people as being "terrorists", it only applies to certain people. Timothy McVae was not once ever called a terrorist.

    I heard McVeigh referred to as a "domestic terrorist" in almost every news report. And that was just regular mainstream network news.

  2. #12
    WiiChat Member sanman's Avatar
    Member #
    64501
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    18
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    I think that terrorism involves attacks deliberately aimed against civilians, because civilians are helpless and can't fight back.

    So if you're a terrorist, you typically don't want to fight opposing soldiers, since they can shoot back. Instead, you want to go after the softer vulnerable parts of society, to terrorize them.

    Regarding the original poster's comments about different religions and terrorism, I assume that because he is a Muslim, he feels that other religions need to be blamed more. Well, the Tamil Tigers are not a religious terrorist group - Tamil is a linguistic group (people who speak the Tamil language), and there are Tamil speakers who are Hindus, Christians and Muslims who actually belong to the Tamil Tiger terrorist group. Likewise, the IRA (Irish Republican Army) is a terrorist group composed of Irish Catholics, but not all Catholics, nor all Irish. The FLQ (Front de Liberation du Quebec) committed terrorist acts during the 1970s, and was composed of French-Canadians in Quebec who were fighting to create an independent country. They were not composed of all Quebecers, nor all French-Canadians, nor were they fighting for the Catholic religion even though many French-Canadians are Catholics.

    The degree of correlation between a terrorist group and a wider religion would probably be proportional to the level of feelings in the wider religion towards the cause that the terrorists are fighting for. For instance, not everybody in the West supports Israel against the Palestinians - there are many people in the West who support the Palestinians over Israel. But how many in the Muslim world support a different ethnic/religious group over their own? That to me is an important question, which affects credibility and objectivity. If you only support your own group all the time, regardless of the circumstances or the situation, and cannot provide any examples to the contrary, then you're pretty much advertising what your biases are and what your credibility is.
    Last edited by sanman; 11-22-2009 at 01:42 PM.

  3. #13
    Turkish RPG Master RPGMasterTurk91's Avatar
    Member #
    1322
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere in New Jersey
    Posts
    737
    Friends
    13
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    Quote Originally Posted by sanman View Post
    I think that terrorism involves attacks deliberately aimed against civilians, because civilians are helpless and can't fight back.

    So if you're a terrorist, you typically don't want to fight opposing soldiers, since they can shoot back. Instead, you want to go after the softer vulnerable parts of society, to terrorize them.

    Regarding the original poster's comments about different religions and terrorism, I assume that because he is a Muslim, he feels that other religions need to be blamed more. Well, the Tamil Tigers are not a religious terrorist group - Tamil is a linguistic group (people who speak the Tamil language), and there are Tamil speakers who are Hindus, Christians and Muslims who actually belong to the Tamil Tiger terrorist group. Likewise, the IRA (Irish Republican Army) is a terrorist group composed of Irish Catholics, but not all Catholics, nor all Irish. The FLQ (Front de Liberation du Quebec) committed terrorist acts during the 1970s, and was composed of French-Canadians in Quebec who were fighting to create an independent country. They were not composed of all Quebecers, nor all French-Canadians, nor were they fighting for the Catholic religion even though many French-Canadians are Catholics.

    The degree of correlation between a terrorist group and a wider religion would probably be proportional to the level of feelings in the wider religion towards the cause that the terrorists are fighting for. For instance, not everybody in the West supports Israel against the Palestinians - there are many people in the West who support the Palestinians over Israel. But how many in the Muslim world support a different ethnic/religious group over their own? That to me is an important question, which affects credibility and objectivity. If you only support your own group all the time, regardless of the circumstances or the situation, and cannot provide any examples to the contrary, then you're pretty much advertising what your biases are and what your credibility is.
    Hey thanks a lot for your well-written comment.

    I think you have misunderstood what I was trying to portray, because I almost completely agree with your post

    My goal in no way is to emphasize that "other people are terrorists too, so stop thinking that all Muslims are terrorists".<--That is not my point at all. I was asking people what their interpretation of terrorism is--you gave yours as one deliberately attacking innocent civilians and causing fear in the peoples' hearts.

    It's true that many people associate today's terrorists with Islam (even though the acts that they are doing that we see as "terrorism" are actually against Islam), so I wanted to broaden the perspective on to what constitutes to "terrorism", but also what leads to it (more specifically the kind we are witnessing these days). Analyzing what makes a terrorist a terrorist, and what separates him or her from those things which are associated with positive things, like a freedom fighter.
    "Many religions within a nation causes little conflict, but two religions within a nation is nothing less than conflict."
    "If you can speak three languages, you are trinomial. If you can speak two languages, you are binomial. If you can speak one language, you are American."
    "Speak softly and carry a big stick"--Theodore Roosevelt. Haha describes me nicely.

    SSBB: 0602-5954-4722 CURRENTLY RETIRED FROM ONLINE PLAY AND VIDEO GAMES IN GENERAL

  4. #14
    WiiChat Member sanman's Avatar
    Member #
    64501
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    18
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    It's a well-known saying that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"

    However, not all militant groups go out of their way to target vulnerable civilians - that's what's specific to acts of terrorism. Nextly, when it comes to the various schools of thought or values that militants claim to be fighting for, not all competing schools of thought are equal. Some militants are fighting for values that are unworkable - for instance, socialist systems which have been proven to be unviable basketcases. Some militants have values that require a permanent state of "revolution" - meaning that even after they have achieved "liberation" they will have to continue to be militant and under rule of the gun.

    There are others who are genuinely fighting for freedom because they are themselves suffering oppression under the rule of non-viable systems which are the reason for their oppression.

    Anyhow, the fact is that terrorists go out of their way to attack vulnerable innocent civilians, while real freedom fighters try to fight ethically, and only attack the institutions which are oppressing them.

  5. #15
    Turkish RPG Master RPGMasterTurk91's Avatar
    Member #
    1322
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere in New Jersey
    Posts
    737
    Friends
    13
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    Terrorist acts themselves--that is, attacking and killing innocents by your definition--are wrong. But, the problem lies somewhere else where an even bigger wrong is going on. What is at least partially responsible for this horrible action is one that is even more horrible done to these specific groups of people, or their society and nation. Most of the time we aren't told by our biased media what we are actually doing in countries we are "helping". We are almost always there for strategic, economic, military purposes, oppressing its peoples unjustly (as is implied in the word "oppress"), causing them to do things they would have otherwise never thought of. While their reactions may be extreme and indeed wrong, it is true that an even bigger wrong that has negatively affected people in the MASSES--that is, anywhere from in the thousands to the MILLIONS, has been committed.

    So while the terrorists themselves are responsible and GUILTY for their actions, they are the last in the list of people/groups who have instigated terror and provoked war, and we are hidden the full and true stories virtually every time.
    "Many religions within a nation causes little conflict, but two religions within a nation is nothing less than conflict."
    "If you can speak three languages, you are trinomial. If you can speak two languages, you are binomial. If you can speak one language, you are American."
    "Speak softly and carry a big stick"--Theodore Roosevelt. Haha describes me nicely.

    SSBB: 0602-5954-4722 CURRENTLY RETIRED FROM ONLINE PLAY AND VIDEO GAMES IN GENERAL

  6. #16
    WiiChat Member sanman's Avatar
    Member #
    64501
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    18
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    No, the decision to attack vulnerable civilians has nothing to do with any prior provocation. By that reasoning, the man who beats his wife can blame it on the economy, his employer, his job, etc. The man who rapes can then blame it on all the sexual advertising around him, or pornography. Etc, etc.

    Terrorism is not an act that is provoked. It is a decision to go after civilians who have not provoked anybody. To use any cause as a justification for terrorism says more about the one making such statements, than about the subject being commented upon.

  7. #17
    Turkish RPG Master RPGMasterTurk91's Avatar
    Member #
    1322
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere in New Jersey
    Posts
    737
    Friends
    13
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    Quote Originally Posted by sanman View Post
    No, the decision to attack vulnerable civilians has nothing to do with any prior provocation. By that reasoning, the man who beats his wife can blame it on the economy, his employer, his job, etc. The man who rapes can then blame it on all the sexual advertising around him, or pornography. Etc, etc.

    Terrorism is not an act that is provoked. It is a decision to go after civilians who have not provoked anybody. To use any cause as a justification for terrorism says more about the one making such statements, than about the subject being commented upon.
    I said that they are guilty for their actions. Just like the man who is guilty for "beating his wife because of the economy", even though he was "provoked", he is still guilty. Human beings often make rash decisions because they are provoked in one way or another to act a certain way. Peer pressure is generally tempting. If you go along with the temp, let's say you drink--you get drunk, and get into an accident--you are responsible and guilty, even though you didn't intend on hurting anyone or yourself. So yes, the killing of innocent civilians is completely wrong, but in most cases, it needs to be realized that there is a greater wrong going on that we don't know about and that if it hadn't occurred, neither would have the terrorist attacks. So if you want to stop the so-called terrorism, you need to go to the root cause.
    "Many religions within a nation causes little conflict, but two religions within a nation is nothing less than conflict."
    "If you can speak three languages, you are trinomial. If you can speak two languages, you are binomial. If you can speak one language, you are American."
    "Speak softly and carry a big stick"--Theodore Roosevelt. Haha describes me nicely.

    SSBB: 0602-5954-4722 CURRENTLY RETIRED FROM ONLINE PLAY AND VIDEO GAMES IN GENERAL

  8. #18
    WiiChat Member sanman's Avatar
    Member #
    64501
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    18
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    To claim that terrorism has a "root cause" is to legitimize it. I said that the man who beats his wife doesn't have a basis for claiming provocation. If he can't get along, he should get divorced and leave her. There is no right to beat a wife.

    Terrorism is not legitimate, and therefore does not have a root cause. The root cause of terrorism can only be seen as the inhumanity of those who practice terrorism.

  9. #19
    Turkish RPG Master RPGMasterTurk91's Avatar
    Member #
    1322
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere in New Jersey
    Posts
    737
    Friends
    13
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    Quote Originally Posted by sanman View Post
    To claim that terrorism has a "root cause" is to legitimize it. I said that the man who beats his wife doesn't have a basis for claiming provocation. If he can't get along, he should get divorced and leave her. There is no right to beat a wife.

    Terrorism is not legitimate, and therefore does not have a root cause. The root cause of terrorism can only be seen as the inhumanity of those who practice terrorism.
    Something being illegitimate does not by any means mean the reason behind doing such an act is completely guilty, though it is. It is guilty: In court, we use Guilty or Not guilty when it comes to verdict, not guilty or innocent. I have clearly stated that terrorism in itself is a wrong act, and I'm not saying that there are ways to justify it. However, I am tracking back to what the original oppression was that eventually led to the wrongful act. Two wrongs don't make a right. Terrorists don't just terrorize for fun--they want to get a message across or are REACTING to something. This is a simple fact, not a confession. I said before that the actual act of terrorism is a horrible act, I am not legitimizing it in any way. You are missing the point--these people have a reason to terrorize (I'm not saying its a good reason, I'm just saying that a reason IS evident). The people partaking in such acts perceive themselves as victims (thus why they are referred to as freedom fighters by many).
    "Many religions within a nation causes little conflict, but two religions within a nation is nothing less than conflict."
    "If you can speak three languages, you are trinomial. If you can speak two languages, you are binomial. If you can speak one language, you are American."
    "Speak softly and carry a big stick"--Theodore Roosevelt. Haha describes me nicely.

    SSBB: 0602-5954-4722 CURRENTLY RETIRED FROM ONLINE PLAY AND VIDEO GAMES IN GENERAL

  10. #20
    WiiChat Member ARav989's Avatar
    Member #
    8001
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New Joisey 0_o
    Posts
    1,204
    Friends
    3
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    6597-7058-7157-6973
    Lmao Navarre, teaching terrorists a lesson since blah blah blah? You did one hell of a job with the Americans then [sarcasm/]

    I don't get it. Why can't some people just understand that the American Revolution happened? Was it justified? Hell no. Am I glad it happened? hahah yes. It was like a major league baseball team getting their asses kicked by a highschool team, it's amazing.

    and terrorism to me is anything that goes against national security.


    "We've all been down this path before
    You're trapped in this town
    And it wears you down
    When we leave today maybe you'll understand
    That this constant struggle isn't always in the palm of our hands."

Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Search tags for this page

exactly what is terrorism
,
rpgturk wii
,
were the colonists terrorists?
,
what is linguistic terrism
,
what is linguistic terrorism
,

what is terrorism

,
what terrorists
,
what?s called when someone knows three languages? trinomial. what?s called when someone knows two languages? binomia
Click on a term to search for related topics.