Missed the boat.

[Al Norris]

They hate us because we are rich and powerful and CHRISTIAN. They hate us because our social behavior will bring an end to their way of life. They hate us because of our wealth and their poverty. They hate us because we aren't Muslims.

Nice try, but almost entirely wrong. The part you did get correct?

...because our [civilization] will bring an end to their way of life.

The people that we are fighting against, use their Holy Writings, and hence their version of Islam, in the same way that radical fundamentalist Christians use their version of the Bible to say that everyone must follow them or be damned.

Both groups will use whatever force they perceive they must use, to obtain their own idealogy and enforce it upon the entire world. These kind of minds are the ultimate in classical conservative thought. No Change Allowed!

So let's get it straight. We are not fighting Muslims. We are not fighting Arabs. We are fighting radical religious extremists. Full Stop.

Whatever reasons the extremists espouse as the cause of their animosity towards western civilization, are nothing more than a pretext. Take away the reasons, as GoSlash27 suggests that we do, and the extremists will simply find another set of excuses. Ad infinitum.

Modern civilization is diametricly opposed to this kind of fanaticism. It (western civilization) must be taken down at all costs, in order to preserve the fundamental beliefs of these extremists.

I reject your premise, GS. It is based upon faulty reasoning and faulty knowledge of the extremists themselves.

 

[GoSlash27]

Mike,
Fer cryin' out loud!
There's a difference between "empathy" and "sympathy". We look at their POV *not* to justify their actions, but to discover their weaknesses so that we may exploit them and discover our weaknesses so that we may minimize them. They are our enemy and we wish to defeat them.
Let's quit being obtuse; I was abundantly clear on this point. Furthermore, it's people like you who attack people who wisely suggest studying our enemy as somehow unpatriotic that are directly aiding and abetting the enemy. What earthly argument could you have against "know thy enemy"?

Threegun,

I would ask you to back your statement above with some facts.

The statement you're referring to is this one:

The enemy is attacking us because he seeks to establish himself as the representative of the Muslim and Arab populace.

I'm surprised this isn't abundantly clear by their words and deeds already. How else would they seek to establish their Caliphate if not under their own hand?

The terrorist hasn't markedly changed over all these centuries, and this is a fundamental hallmark of them. They rebel against the existing power structure, fight on behalf of their adopted identity group, and hope to convince that group of their authority.
If you need this proven to you, I'd suggest you crack a history book and prove it to yourself.

Or, you could simply take his words for it. Or if the direct source doesn't suit you (which'd mean you've picked up nothing from this discussion) You could always check with our own DoD, which defines them as

A radical Sunni Muslim umbrella organization established to recruit young Muslims into the Afghani mujahideen and is aimed to establish Islamist states throughout the world, overthrow ‘un-Islamic regimes’, expel US soldiers and Western influence from the Gulf, and capture Jerusalem as a Muslim city.

 

[GoSlash27]

Antipitas,
If I may be so bold, you're the one suffering from logical fallacy, not me.

Yes, the terrorist always seeks to attack their target group and they will always believe in their own rhetoric. But their *ability* to wage their campaign is directly influenced by their popularity. Undermine that popularity and you destroy the organization. Add to that popularity by ham-fisted tactics and you make the enemy stronger.

Contrast the KKK a hundred years ago with the same organization today if you doubt me.
We once followed the current policy and it almost cost us our own nation! Where is the KKK today? A tiny marginalized group who's headquarters now belong to a black woman.

You don't have to follow my reasoning if you don't want. Just look at history and judge for yourself what worked and what didn't.

And I will confidently put my knowledge about the extremists up against yours any day of the week.


Tell ya what:
You're obviously not going to take my word for it, me being some random Joe Schmoe on the internet. Who could you accept this from? Not our government, since both parties have a vested interest in muddying the waters, and not the enemy themselves since you don't trust their word.

How about this: The word of a former FBI agent who's life depended on his ability to understand the terrorist mindset...say somebody who repeatedly went undercover to infiltrate terrorist organizations?
How about This guy?

I'll make it even easier for you: I will loan you a copy of this book free of charge on the condition that you pass it on to other interested board members. We'll call it a "reading assignment", such as Ron gave Rudy

If you're interested, drop me a PM.

 

[threegun]

I would ask you to back your statement above with some facts.

The statement you're referring to is this one:

Quote:
The enemy is attacking us because he seeks to establish himself as the representative of the Muslim and Arab populace.

It was your quote. If I may use a part of revjens post to explain why I believe they are at odds with us.

If you want to see what the Islamo-fascists have in mind there is an excellent blog called "Prophet of Doom" (google it) which explains the Muslim Weltanschauung quite accurately and in detail. Democratic government is anathema to Islam because they believe that Sharia Law is Divinely Ordained Truth and not subject to popular vote. For non-believers the choices are: convert to Islam (and once done the penalty for apostasy is death- there is no changing your mind); keep your religion and submit to second class citizenship as a Dhimmi, paying the jizyah (a ruinous tax on the infidels), not bearing or posessing arms, and maintaining a suservient attitude to the Faithful; or be killed. As a Dhimmi you may be accused of defaming the Prophet or Islam itself, and since you have no standing in Sharia Courts you may not tetify, have no defense, and may be beheaded. The War on Terror has been going on for over 1000 years and is finally coming to a head.

The link you posted as Bin Laden's excuse for jihad against the U.S. was aiding Israel which we will never stop doing and for aiding Kuwait and subsequently keeping Saddam in check which we couldn't stop doing until the war started. What is posted above is the real reason. We have been aiding Israel for decades including the time when Bin Laden considered the US a friend. I find it strangely odd that he would accept the great Satan's help then and want us dead now..........that why I feel its an excuse. When Iraq invaded Kuwait our help wasn't to kill Muslims was it? It was to rescue an Allie from an enemy. BTW Kuwait is 65% Sunni 35% Shiite MUSLIMS. We were rescuing Muslims from muslims..........Bin Laden has you fooled. It really is funny.

 

[threegun]

OMG GoSlash, You want to use the book written by a "non bias" LOL author. Lets see who does Mike German work for. Which politically neutral agency is he employed by?

The American Civil Liberties Union Washington Legislative Office appointed Michael German as Policy Counsel on National Security, Immigration and Privacy. A former FBI agent, German brings extensive national security and intelligence experience as well as a lifelong dedication to civil liberties.

The ACLU HA HA HA HA what a joke. Thanks for the laugh buddy.

 

[GoSlash27]

As opposed to your source, Craig Winn?
No thanks. I'll go with the guy who's life actually depended on getting this right

I see it didn't take you long to give up on the straw-men and move on to the well-poisoning.

Sadly predictable.

 

[threegun]

I'm done arguing anyway. We aren't going to change each others mind. You won't answer anyway. You might answer my question by asking another and I just can't handle that. Have a nice day.

 

[DasBoot]

-

Stop supporting Israel in instances where we know they're wrong

every Jordanian hotel bombing

No friend of Isreal I gather.

No more referring to the enemy combatants as...well..."enemy combatants". They are to be referred to as "criminals".
-We will treat them and refer to them no differently than we handle any other organized crime syndicate; completely above-board with full due process.
-We will scrap all laws differentiating between "terrorist" acts and other criminal activity.

When captured, they are to be imprisoned as criminals, not interred as enemy combatants.
-Seek every opportunity to deal and negotiate with legitemate representatives for the same goals that the terrorists wish to bring about.

 

[gc70]

Contrast the KKK a hundred years ago with the same organization today if you doubt me.
We once followed the current policy and it almost cost us our own nation! Where is the KKK today? A tiny marginalized group who's headquarters now belong to a black woman.

You don't have to follow my reasoning if you don't want. Just look at history and judge for yourself what worked and what didn't.

Yep, we took care of the KKK; the tipping point was in the 1930's. 1924 KKK membership = 6,000,000. 1930 KKK membership = 30,000. The "representative population" lost interest after: the Grand Dragon of Indiana was convicted of raping and murdering a young woman, and; the onset of the Great Depression presented more important things for people to deal with.

Do you count on extraordinary luck for Al Queada to self-destruct, a world-wide economic meltdown, or both?

 

[theinvisibleheart]

valid point

Missed the boat.
In this closed thread, I stated a simple point. It seems to have been missed by...well...everybody. So to repost without the "blatant sensationalism"..

Quote:
let's cut the crap about how the terrorists are "insane" or that we "can't understand their thought process".

Every one of us is capable of looking at the GWoT from the bad guys' point of view and seeing the glaring failure in our policy.
It's no wonder we're losing.

You know, for an entire week after 9/11 we as a nation were wandering around going "why do they hate us?"...we never bothered to find out. We just said "Bah, who cares. They're evil. They're crazy. They hate us because of our freedoms."

But each and every one of us holds the capability to understanding our enemy's motivations, goals, weaknesses, and fears...we just like to *pretend* that we don't. I'm sure that if Sun Tzu existed, he'd be spinning in his grave right now.

This is a valid point. It allows one to solve the problem more effectively via addressing the root problem.

--John

 

[FirstFreedom]

Goslash is exactly right. Of course. Again. You guys should listen to him.

 

[cloudcroft]

"GoSlash, when someone is attacking me, I don't need to recognize their point of view. I don't need to know "why" they are doing what they are doing... All I really need is to recognize the attack as an attack and deal with it." -- Antipas


I agree completely. I couldn't care less what their motivation is, either.

-- John D.

 

[obxned]

If a large mama bear wants to go up-side my head, I can be very sympathetic to her desire to protect her cubs, but I'll still shoot her dead if that is what is required to make her leave me alone.

 

[Dust Monkey]

"Every one of us is capable of looking at the GWoT from the bad guys' point of view and seeing the glaring failure in our policy."

AH! I get it!

IF I can see things from the bad guy's point of view, that means that I can then empathasize with him.

If I can see the glaring failure in our policy, then I can empathasize with him even more.

That, of course, will lead to the realization that we're nothing but a bunch of bastards who DESERVE to be attacked.

And, since we're such bastards who deserve to be attacked, we should immediately surrender to them.

Right?


Is everyone suddenly feeling very French?

Glad I was able to spit my Dr. Pepper over my monitor.

-We will treat them and refer to them no differently than we handle any other organized crime syndicate; completely above-board with full due process.
-We will scrap all laws differentiating between "terrorist" acts and other criminal activity.

The above shows how little you understand the ME mind set.

Take advantage of the intelligence gathered to directly target and disrupt their criminal activity. This is where the "judicial application of force" comes into play. These efforts must be seen as legitemate in the world community, and more importantly the Muslim community.

So Sorry, I dont think we should be asking the world or the muslim community for permission to defend our nation and/or national interests.


I dont want to see things from our enemies point of view, I could not care less. People who advocate leaving the ME are living in a world with flag depicting Rose colored glassed fluttering in the wind.

-Refuse to involve ourselves in the internal affairs of other countries

The only way I would support leaving the ME, would be sort of a Prime Directive (no Star Trek Jokes). If you claim we are interfering, the stop interfering. That means NO AID, none, not one red cent. No disaster relief, no medical packages, to bad if a plague is rampant in your Country, your passport will be flagged and you will be denied entry.

 

[defjon]

I agree with Go Slash, and the blue print plan he posted as a foreign/domestic policy of dealing with terrorism is HEADS and TAILS beyond what our country is doing now.

I think most of you are missing the point, he isn't saying we aren't gonna kill the bastards, but you don't do brain surgery with a fire axe, especially while your occupation is in the food service of janitorial industries. This is basically the equivalent of our present situation. The criminal activity that is the subject of this thread is a mutli-pronged and multi-dimensional problem that requires a solution that also faces and attacks as well as diffuses it on all fronts.

I do hope more people can remove such emotion from the issue and deal with it in a cold and clinical manner. This is ultimately a very easily defeatable enemy, and hardly as dangerous as the soviets this country has already successfully faced down.

The solutions go slash posted make sense, I suggest reading them. GS, where did you find that? Also, permission to use in my own discussions?

Regards,
Jon

Again....very well played.

I can see Anti's point, however, I cannot personally agree that the issue is an unsolvable one that simply continues to 'morph' shapes and continue aggressions. Every foe is defeatable.

 

[threegun]

The middle east mindset sees negotiation as weakness. Making as many of them assume room temperature as possible is all they understand. Finding the most efficient way to achieve this goal is the key. They can stop the killing by giving up.

 

[GoSlash27]

Defjon,
Use it in good health. The basic outline of the concepts can be found here.
http://www.gurus.com/dougdeb/politics/TS101.html

gc70,
The sensationalism of that trial was a by-product of the technique. Research Grover C. Hall. All of this was made possible because of their excesses in 1927, which allowed them to be wedged from their identity population as "violent and un-American".
The KKK example is a great springboard to hypothesize the effectiveness of certain techniques.
Would it have helped or hindered the KKK if the government waterboarded suspected klan members? Interred them as "enemy combatants"? Indiscriminately killed innocent southern whites in the crossfire? Invaded the southern states with military forces? Brokered agreements with David Stephenson?
What did work is the same thing that always works: Treat 'em like criminals and wedge them from their identity group.


Defjon,
"Brain surgery with a fire-axe"...fitting.

 

[threegun]

They don't care about being treated like criminals dude. They will lie, cheat, and steal to kill you. Comparing hatred of blacks by the KKK to hatred of Americans by Muslim extremists is BS. I haven't seen any KKK members willing to commit suicide to kill blacks. Muslims are driven by religion they aren't even close to the same.

 

[Al Norris]

threegun, when you say things like, "Muslims are driven by..." it negates your previous statement, "by Muslim extremists..." As you have equated all Muslims with the fanatics by inference.

That is simply using the Broad Brush to paint all of Islam as the same. They aren't. Anymore than all Christians are the same.

GoSlash, despite your attempts to minimize my stance, we aren't going to agree. When you start equating terrorists to ordinary criminal behavior, you lose perspective on what the terrorist is doing. You also lose sight of their mindset. That, in and of itself, will be your downfall.

An ordinary criminal knows he is breaking the law. These fanatical Terrorists do not even recognize that our laws are valid, let alone something he has to constrain himself to. Entirely different mindset.

Your approach is really no different than that of the Government, when it tries to use the Patriot Act against ordinary criminals. It waters down the definition. It blurs the line of demarcation.

There are fundamental differences between the mindset of a criminal and that of a fanatical terrorist.

 

[Joliet Jake]

There are fundamental differences between the mindset of a criminal and that of a fanatical terrorist.

Yes maybe the common criminal but not the international mafioso types. The difference is the organization. We didn't call out the Army to fight the Mafia or invade a country to fight the drug cartels. The military is being abused by being issued missions they cannot possibly win and they were never intended for. They are not police and can never function in that capacity and still expect to fullfill their primary mission of national security.