Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Discuss all the events of the day

Moderator: GH Moderators

User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

Shadow Boxer wrote:
Whatever your politics, clearly most terrorists are Muslim
That's demonstrably wrong.

I would say that those underneath the US bombing in the Middle East - bombing committed for a political aim - would say that the US military is the most well-resourced terrorist organisation in the world.

I'd suggest that the same people would say the Israel is the second largest.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42000
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Botman »

I can't tell if Shadow Boxer is xenophobic, or just ignorant.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

Cause and effect gentleman, fairly easy for the terrorists to stop the drone strikes tomorrow.
Image
User avatar
Schifty
Laurie Daley
Posts: 16467
Joined: March 14, 2010, 4:00 pm
Favourite Player: Josh Hodgson

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Schifty »

T_R wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:
Whatever your politics, clearly most terrorists are Muslim
That's demonstrably wrong.

I would say that those underneath the US bombing in the Middle East - bombing committed for a political aim - would say that the US military is the most well-resourced terrorist organisation in the world.

I'd suggest that the same people would say the Israel is the second largest.
One of those is just a franchise of the other.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42000
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Botman »

Shadow Boxer wrote:Cause and effect gentleman, fairly easy for the terrorists to stop the drone strikes tomorrow.
You..

You aren't serious, are you?
Genuine question.
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

Shadow Boxer wrote:Cause and effect gentleman, fairly easy for the terrorists to stop the drone strikes tomorrow.
Hang on champ.

How many thousands Iraqis were killed in Bush Jnr's little adventure there? It was a massive military action committed entirely for flimsy political purposes.

How exactly were they going to stop that death and destruction so 'easily'?
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

T_R wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:
Whatever your politics, clearly most terrorists are Muslim
That's demonstrably wrong.

I would say that those underneath the US bombing in the Middle East - bombing committed for a political aim - would say that the US military is the most well-resourced terrorist organisation in the world.

I'd suggest that the same people would say the Israel is the second largest.
Well if the political aim is to stop terrorism it's hardly terrorism. Anti terrorism or a response to terrorism maybe.
Image
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

If the Middle East is all a bit too fresh and close, how about the 1500 Panamanians killed in Bush Snr's little vanity exercise? How were they anything other than the innocent victims of terrorism?
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

T_R wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:Cause and effect gentleman, fairly easy for the terrorists to stop the drone strikes tomorrow.
Hang on champ.

How many thousands Iraqis were killed in Bush Jnr's little adventure there? It was a massive military action committed entirely for flimsy political purposes.

How exactly were they going to stop that death and destruction so 'easily'?[/

Stop being terrorists,
Image
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

Shadow Boxer wrote:
T_R wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:
Whatever your politics, clearly most terrorists are Muslim
That's demonstrably wrong.

I would say that those underneath the US bombing in the Middle East - bombing committed for a political aim - would say that the US military is the most well-resourced terrorist organisation in the world.

I'd suggest that the same people would say the Israel is the second largest.
Well if the political aim is to stop terrorism it's hardly terrorism. Anti terrorism or a response to terrorism maybe.
And the invasion of Iraq? The invasion that led to almost uncountable civilian deaths? How precisely was that a response to terrorism?
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

T_R wrote:If the Middle East is all a bit too fresh and close, how about the 1500 Panamanians killed in Bush Snr's little vanity exercise? How were they anything other than the innocent victims of terrorism?
The fat chick defence is out of control here. Sorry I do t know enough about it, I'll have a read and get back to you.
Image
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

Shadow Boxer wrote:
T_R wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:Cause and effect gentleman, fairly easy for the terrorists to stop the drone strikes tomorrow.
Hang on champ.

How many thousands Iraqis were killed in Bush Jnr's little adventure there? It was a massive military action committed entirely for flimsy political purposes.

How exactly were they going to stop that death and destruction so 'easily'?
Shadow Boxer wrote:Stop being terrorists,

Huh? Which terrorist were in Iraq?
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

Shadow Boxer wrote:
T_R wrote:If the Middle East is all a bit too fresh and close, how about the 1500 Panamanians killed in Bush Snr's little vanity exercise? How were they anything other than the innocent victims of terrorism?
The fat chick defence is out of control here. Sorry I do t know enough about it, I'll have a read and get back to you.
Stick to the Middle East then.

How was the invasion of Iraq anything other than a terrorist exercise dressed up as statecraft?
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42000
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Botman »

Shadow Boxer wrote: Stop being terrorists,
Wow.

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

Well it was a nation state actively sponsoring terrorism and that was believed to possess wmd's.

I dont really care what your politics are but to say most terrorists are not Muslim is clearly wrong unless you are going to take the definition of terrorism outside the norm.
Image
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

Shadow Boxer wrote:Well it was a nation state actively sponsoring terrorism and that was believed to possess wmd's.
Name a single terrorist act committed against any Western nation that was 'actively sponsored' by Iraq. Name one.

As for the WMD's....did you sleep through the entire 'sexing up' enquiry in the UK? No one really believed that they were going in after WMDs.

And if the bar you are setting for war is the posession of WMDs, I assume you'll support the invasion of the world's largest hoarder of them...the United States?
Shadow Boxer wrote:I dont really care what your politics are but to say most terrorists are not Muslim is clearly wrong unless you are going to take the definition of terrorism outside the norm.
No, it simply means that I'm looking at it from a slightly different point of view. Here's a scoop for you - to the guy sitting in his house with bombs going off, whoever it is that is causing those explosions is the terrorist. That's not taking a definition outside the norm, it's just being open minded enough to realise that there is an absolutely legitimate alternative viewpoint.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

Iraq was added to the list on December 29, 1979 and removed in 1982 to allow US companies to sell arms to it while it was fighting Iran in the Iran–Iraq War; it was put back on in 1990 following its invasion of Kuwait. The State Department's reason for including Iraq was that it provided bases to the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), and the Abu Nidal organization (ANO). It was again removed following the 2003 invasion and the overthrow of the government of Saddam Hussein. Following the invasion, US sanctions applicable to state sponsors of terrorism against Iraq were suspended on 7 May 2003 and President Bush announced the removal of Iraq from the list on 25 September 2004.

There's a difference between war and terrorism. Was the bombing of Dresden terrorism ?
Image
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

So, to be clear, you can't find any suggestion anywhere of any terrorist act in any way supported by Iraq and committed against any Western power?

But on that premise you approve the deaths of HALF A MILLION absolutely innocent people?

Seems to me that you're perfectly happy to see the most horrific terror acts committed so long as you approve of the aims, no matter how flimsy.

So how exactly are you morally superior to these Islamic terrorists?

Let me turn your words around. Want to stop terror acts in the West? Perhaps America should stop napalming so many innocent Middle Eastern babies.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
User avatar
Schifty
Laurie Daley
Posts: 16467
Joined: March 14, 2010, 4:00 pm
Favourite Player: Josh Hodgson

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Schifty »

Shadow Boxer wrote:Well it was a nation state actively sponsoring terrorism and that was believed to possess wmd's.
Sounds a lot like a centrain country supporting Isreal.. But yeah those bombings of UN schools and gunning down of kids playing on beach is definitely not terrorism!


I dont really care what your politics are but to say most terrorists are not Muslim is clearly wrong unless you are going to take the definition of terrorism outside the norm.
Oh I get it! 'norm' for definition of terrorism= Not white people

Makes sense now!

Carry on.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42000
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Botman »

Schifty wrote:

I dont really care what your politics are but to say most terrorists are not Muslim is clearly wrong unless you are going to take the definition of terrorism outside the norm.
Oh I get it! 'norm' for definition of terrorism= Not white people

Makes sense now!

Carry on.
'
:lol: :lol:
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

Or we could cancel the Jihad.

Religion is stupid.
Image
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

So you oppose religious terrorism, but half a million innocent deaths for political ends are OK?

SB, you seem utterly morally bankrupt.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

Schifty wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:Well it was a nation state actively sponsoring terrorism and that was believed to possess wmd's.
Sounds a lot like a centrain country supporting Isreal.. But yeah those bombings of UN schools and gunning down of kids playing on beach is definitely not terrorism!


I dont really care what your politics are but to say most terrorists are not Muslim is clearly wrong unless you are going to take the definition of terrorism outside the norm.
Oh I get it! 'norm' for definition of terrorism= Not white people

Makes sense now!

Carry on.
What is your definition ?
Image
User avatar
gangrenous
Laurie Daley
Posts: 16586
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by gangrenous »

T_R wrote: No, it simply means that I'm looking at it from a slightly different point of view. Here's a scoop for you - to the guy sitting in his house with bombs going off, whoever it is that is causing those explosions is the terrorist. That's not taking a definition outside the norm, it's just being open minded enough to realise that there is an absolutely legitimate alternative viewpoint.
Was the US's intention to provoke terror in the Iraqi civilian population?

I don't think it really fits most definitions of terrorism. It's by no means right, but I'm not convinced it's terrorism.
User avatar
Botman
Mal Meninga
Posts: 42000
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm
Favourite Player: Elliott Whitehead

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Botman »

Google tells me:

ter·ror·ism
ˈterəˌrizəm/Submit
noun
the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

Sounds like a fair definition to me.
User avatar
Schifty
Laurie Daley
Posts: 16467
Joined: March 14, 2010, 4:00 pm
Favourite Player: Josh Hodgson

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Schifty »

Shadow Boxer wrote:
Schifty wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:Well it was a nation state actively sponsoring terrorism and that was believed to possess wmd's.
Sounds a lot like a centrain country supporting Isreal.. But yeah those bombings of UN schools and gunning down of kids playing on beach is definitely not terrorism!


I dont really care what your politics are but to say most terrorists are not Muslim is clearly wrong unless you are going to take the definition of terrorism outside the norm.
Oh I get it! 'norm' for definition of terrorism= Not white people

Makes sense now!

Carry on.
What is your definition ?
Using violence against people and intimidating them to live in a state of fear.
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

SB, you didn't answer me. You condone the death of half a million innocent people for the flimsiest of political ends.

How are you morally superior to those supporting Islamic terrorists?
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

T_R wrote:So you oppose religious terrorism, but half a million innocent deaths for political ends are OK?

SB, you seem utterly morally bankrupt.
Mate I sense your passion, all I said was under the traditional definition of terrorism most terrorists are Muslim.

There are lots of definitions, you can pick another one if you want.
Image
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

gangrenous wrote:
T_R wrote: No, it simply means that I'm looking at it from a slightly different point of view. Here's a scoop for you - to the guy sitting in his house with bombs going off, whoever it is that is causing those explosions is the terrorist. That's not taking a definition outside the norm, it's just being open minded enough to realise that there is an absolutely legitimate alternative viewpoint.
Was the US's intention to provoke terror in the Iraqi civilian population?

I don't think it really fits most definitions of terrorism. It's by no means right, but I'm not convinced it's terrorism.
Terrorism is an act of asymmetrical warfare to achieve political ends.

The US action is simply the other side of the asymmetry.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

Schifty wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:
Schifty wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:Well it was a nation state actively sponsoring terrorism and that was believed to possess wmd's.
Sounds a lot like a centrain country supporting Isreal.. But yeah those bombings of UN schools and gunning down of kids playing on beach is definitely not terrorism!


I dont really care what your politics are but to say most terrorists are not Muslim is clearly wrong unless you are going to take the definition of terrorism outside the norm.
Oh I get it! 'norm' for definition of terrorism= Not white people

Makes sense now!

Carry on.
What is your definition ?
Using violence against people and intimidating them to live in a state of fear.
Schifty wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:
Schifty wrote:
Shadow Boxer wrote:Well it was a nation state actively sponsoring terrorism and that was believed to possess wmd's.
Sounds a lot like a centrain country supporting Isreal.. But yeah those bombings of UN schools and gunning down of kids playing on beach is definitely not terrorism!


I dont really care what your politics are but to say most terrorists are not Muslim is clearly wrong unless you are going to take the definition of terrorism outside the norm.
Oh I get it! 'norm' for definition of terrorism= Not white people

Makes sense now!

Carry on.
What is your definition ?
Using violence against people and intimidating them to live in a state of fear.
Yeh fair enough, that is a very broad definition that would include all conflicts including WWII I guess.
Image
User avatar
gangrenous
Laurie Daley
Posts: 16586
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by gangrenous »

Which is also called terrorism?
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

Shadow Boxer wrote: Yeh fair enough, that is a very broad definition that would include all conflicts including WWII I guess.
Tell it to Dresden.

Or London.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

Apparently,
Image
User avatar
T_R
Don Furner
Posts: 17276
Joined: August 4, 2006, 9:41 am
Location: Noosa

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by T_R »

Shadow Boxer wrote:
Mate I sense your passion, all I said was under the traditional definition of terrorism most terrorists are Muslim.

There are lots of definitions, you can pick another one if you want.
Seems to me that you've best picked the definition to support the aims of 'your' side.
Image

Son, we live in a world that has forums, and those forums have to be guarded by Mods. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Nickman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lucy, and you curse GE. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know -- that GE’s moderation, while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, keeps threads on track and under the appropriately sized, highlighted green headings.
You want moderation because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that forum -- you need me on that forum. We use words like "stay on topic," "use the appropriate forum," "please delete." We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very moderation that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather that you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you get a green handle and edit a post. Either way, I don't give a DAMN what you think about moderation.
Shadow Boxer
Ricky Stuart
Posts: 9174
Joined: May 20, 2008, 2:50 pm

Re: Latest terrorist threat to Australia

Post by Shadow Boxer »

T_R wrote:
gangrenous wrote:
T_R wrote: No, it simply means that I'm looking at it from a slightly different point of view. Here's a scoop for you - to the guy sitting in his house with bombs going off, whoever it is that is causing those explosions is the terrorist. That's not taking a definition outside the norm, it's just being open minded enough to realise that there is an absolutely legitimate alternative viewpoint.
Was the US's intention to provoke terror in the Iraqi civilian population?

I don't think it really fits most definitions of terrorism. It's by no means right, but I'm not convinced it's terrorism.
Terrorism is an act of asymmetrical warfare to achieve political ends.

The US action is simply the other side of the asymmetry.
That would imply terrorism needs two sides to function. I'm not sure that's correct, a response could be asymmetrical ie out of proportion but terrorism doesn't need another side to exist.

Then again that may be the red wine talking
Image
Post Reply