This, I understand, has become a popular pastime. Personally, it sickens me. I can’t understand why on earth why anyonem would give terrorists the publicity/attention they crave.
Moreover, imagine being the wife/son/daughter of someone brutally beheaded. How would you feel if the image of yoruo loved one’s death was being viewed again and again the world over. I can’t imagine a more depressing reality than this. If anyone DOES watch these, I urge you to stop.
Maybe God is watching this, urge him to stop.
Now that would be a start. Although I’m sure you’re aware that God doesn’t tend to interfere here on earth too often, does he?
for every one civilian they murder, we need to repay them in kind 1000 fold… they televise one beheading, we televise 1000 of them meeting similar fate… five hooded terrorist killers doing a decapitation=5000 dead terrorists… they’ll get the message quick, or there’ll many less terrorists quick… but unfortunately the pacifist democrat left in this country (the us) would raise such a stink, it’ll not happen (until the next 9-11 that is…)
an eye for an eye? hardly… it’ll be an eye for 1000 eyes…
(do you really think the only nation to have used nuclear weapons against an enemy would be afraid to do it again? let them keep pushing…)
-Imp
I see some people are still nostalgic of the old SS ways of dealing with rebels… 
Ahhh yes, tradition!
I kind of agree gav
Impenitent,
So what your saying is yoou are willing to kill even those of their ‘kind’ who just want a simple life without outrageous outbursts of terrorism?
Fascinating! Where you would not mind beheading 1000 human beings, sure they are terrorists, but still they are human beings and must do what they do for a reason, but you mind one human being being beheaded? I wonder what logic that is? Why not try and find the reason why that one person got beheaded and resolve the whole god damned thing?
Iroel… old ss way? well if the ss used it good for them… atilla the hun used it as well… as well as president truman… kill your enemy before they kill you… works for me…
AOW… sure… war is a bitch… there are always civilian casualties in any war… but that’s why you have to do it 1000 fold… so they immediately understand that an attack on you is futile and only insures their destruction… that’s why the MAD theory worked for the cold war with russia… but these terrorists aren’t worried about their own deaths… speaking softly and carrying a big stick only works if you aren’t afraid to use the stick and it is time to use the stick.
Been… “but still they are human beings and must do what they do for a reason” and if it was your wife (or husband) being tortured by the terrorists would you care what the terrorists’ reasons were? I don’t think so… and what is to be done to prevent these terrorists from taking more hostages? saying pretty please? giving them land? and when they demand more? and when they demand you follow their sharia laws? and you don’t think they will be satisified with iraq and israel do you? do you know what jihad means? resolve the jihad by sending the jihadists to allah… it was the only way to defeat the japanese kamakazes in '45 and it is the only way to defeat the jihadists today… they don’t reason…
-Imp
Take the example of Capital Punishment. There are some countries where it is still practiced. What that means is, that the law in these countries doesn’t really mind seeing a killing because if it did, then there is no way it would carry out the death penalty from its own side. That’s the reason why they say that, “Tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye” is bad philosophy because it shows that the person who takes revenge like that did not really mind the offense in the first place or he would have found a more peaceful alternative. Now I’m not saying that it’s wrong to go for, “Eye for an eye…” because we are all bound by emotions. I’m saying that it’s so much more wiser to find another better and peaceful alternative, that’s all!
it may be much wiser to play at making peace and singing happy song and using reason to resolve problems, yada yada yada… these terrorists are having none of it and they need to be dealt with in the most efficient way… an eye for an eye? that cannot work… they are already willing to lose their “eye” for allah… but if you take them, and everything they hold dear out with them, the thousand-fold solution, they stop. end of jihad. peace never comes by playing nice and making treaties and b.s. like that… peace is won at the end of a gun… this is a world which is held together through the aggressive use of force… would it be nice if it didn’t work like that? sure, sing your happy peace songs… just be sure to watch your back…
-Imp
You say, “Peace is won at the end of a gun.” What kind of peace would that be? That would be like saying that the teacher who ensures peace inside a classroom by intimidating the students is doing a good job rather than commanding peace. If the teacher intimidates then even though there is no commotion but the hearts of the students are not at peace. And you’re saying this kind of peace is fine?
Imp
It isnt true that terrorists arent willing to listen to reason/stop because of treaties. Not so long ago, the IRA were carrying out indiscriminate acts of terrorism here in the UK. They stopped after a long political bargaining process and there have been no deaths since.
Obviously the situation here is different, but this should serve as a warning that branding everyone with the terrorist iron and killing en masse is not a necessary strategy.
Forethought and careful consideration is. And sadly, this seems lacking from your line of thinking.
one that is kept with more assurance than one that isn’t…
false dichotomy… without rules in a classroom, no one learns anything…
yes, the students know that if they break the rules there are consequences… that is more than fine, that is how “civilized” life functions…
-Imp
obviously… bad comparison… the “civilized” irish and the “civilized” english were not followers of jihadist religion…
careful consideration? how did we win WWII? (and every war actually) by using such overwhelming force that the enemy found it impossible to continue… how will this war be won? the same way…
and if you are such a proponent of treaties, ask the Cherokee about theirs…
-Imp
Impenitent,
Intimidating the students is showing you have power over them which the teacher can use and hence abuse the students by exercising it, it has nothing to do with rules. Rules are good, but the teacher in this case is not ensuring that the students follow rules but is rather creating fear in their minds to ensure peace in the classroom. That is wrong, the intimidation.
And this war cannot be won by, “Overwhelming force.” It needs to be won by negotiation and understanding. Never underestimate the opposition. In fact, I believe any war should be won by negotiation and understanding together with compromise.
Let’s say there will be no more terrorism in the US, but besides that, the hearts and minds of the people need to be at peace too. Ensuring peace, “At the end of a gun” can end the physical violence on the side of one who holds the gun but physical violence on the other side still exists and there is no peace of mind anywhere on both sides. That’s why I don’t believe in using force to bring about peace.
This obviously is the clear indicator of the motivations for your earlier statements. You do not view terrorists/muslims/arabs/non-westerners (delete with respect to your own personal view) as humans, but as some lesser creature. This is the same logic used in the second world war to justify the nuclear attacks against the Japanese - the Japanese are sub-humans whilst the Germans are humans who have strayed.
this is one reason why your analogy is flawed, the teacher does not intimidate the students but does enforce the rules… the terrorists have no intention of ever playing by the rules…
yes, the jihadist’s compromise is that you surrender to follow their sharia law or you die. no negoiation, no compromise, no understanding. you overestimate the opposition.
which people? the jihadists who will never have peace until the infidel is killed and every land is subject to sharia law? or maybe the spanish who thought they would be exempt? or maybe the french?
you don’t understand the psychology and singlemindedness of the jihadist… you are trying to rationalize with people who are not rational…
-Imp
of course I view them as humans… all humans are greedy, selfish egocentric animals… the “enemy” is doing what they feel is in their best interest at the expense of what the other feels is their best interest… that is the story of humanity ever since humans have existed. period.
and don’t think the terrorists wouldn’t do the same to us if they could…
-Imp
Please impenitent, stop with the goofy Ann-Coulterish anti liberal paranoia. You guys act like the country is really run by idiots like Michael Moore when in fact it is run by technocrats who could care less.
but Beena, that’s exactly how EVERY teacher I’ve ever known keeps peace in the classroom (and as both of my parents were teachers for 30 years, I’ve known quite a few) - intimidation, by either physical punishment or by the threat of “consequences”. In fact Beena that’s how everyone every where controls or leads people, by letting them know that the consequences of crossing them are worse than the consequences of following them.