Some one msg'd me this on ICQ..

http://www.veloct.net/weatherkabul.jpg



Craig

And your opinion is a nuklear explosion above a city with thousands and thousands dying is funny?
:angry:

It's funny because it looks like that's what The National Weather Service is reporting. I doubt that will ever happen though...

Walter i did not mention it was funny, i was rather disturbed at the matter myself.
Its hardly like i would want nuclear war.. that would affect us all, in the short and of course, long term.

Its just strange what people think how nuke'n the country would solve the problems, terrosim is going to be here with us all the time. People should be re-educated not wiped out.

Craig

Oh, I am sorry Craig. For me it really looked like this...

Its ok, you cannot really tell ones tone via a text message :)

no hard feelings boss

Craig

Someone sent me a similar (yet better) image, not sure if I want to post it heh, but I do find the anti-images (for lack of a better word) interesting. I think they just speak of the fustration of the times, not really a strong, true political statement.

Originally posted by Chicken
Someone sent me a similar (yet better) image, not sure if I want to post it heh, but I do find the anti-images (for lack of a better word) interesting. I think they just speak of the fustration of the times, not really a strong, true political statement.

Well, Chicken, an interesting and true point. You asked in another thread, I think, about what people's possible solutions were and since someone ín this thread has already gone part of the way down the road...

Its just strange what people think how nuke'n the country would solve the problems, terrosim is going to be here with us all the time. People should be re-educated not wiped out.

Craig

...I'll carry on here.

I think part of the frustration that is felt is because most people know that the stated aim of the alliance "to root out terrorism" is an impossible goal, despite what their hearts tell them. Does anyone really think that anyone knows where all terrorist live? Or even that, if they did, they could liquidate them all? Or if they did, that others would not arise from the ashes? Or that all countries agree on the definition of "terrorist" (a sizeable minority of Americans have been quite happy to support the IRA, for example)?

In fact, Bush and other leaders are, IMO, going down a very dangerous road because, in the absence of a clear target, the will to fight an unclear "war" with no definable "victory" in sight will deteriorate over time (cf Vietnam). (Interestingly one of the papers in Europe was quoting a poll showing 54% of Americans for a war with the country of Afghanistan (as opposed to attacking "terrorist bases") but only 25 - 8% from allied countries.)

Other people have been posting about bombs that make you deaf and the military superiority of the allies. While this war may again thrill the military-industrial powerbase, it really has little relevance to a war against terrorism.

In fact, were the allied forces to win a convincing victory against the Afghan army or population, then it is highly likely that the incidence of terrorism would increase as a result. Terrorism results from powerlessness and the feeling that there is nothing to gain by traditional means and there is nothing left to lose. Terrorism results from political extremes. It is not the sole province of any religion or political group.

The only way it can be combatted is to address the issues that lead to its rise in the first place and have forced those extremes to occur. And even then, we will always have terrorism as there will always be individuals who feel dispossessed (i.e. Oklahoma bombing). The only thing we can hope to do is to try to reduce the extremes in the conflicts which give rise to it.

One of the most interesting interviews on CNN was with a former National Security Advisor (?) who was pointing out that Bush and allies now had an unparalleled opportunity to try and bring about settlements in the Middle East and other terrorism-producing hotspots by forcing all sides to sit down and talk with one another in great earnestness.

But that, I'm afraid, is an answer very few people want to think about at the moment...

I agree with most of what you said. Seems the best way to decrease terrorism is preventative (higher security at airports for example), but you cannot stop it completely.

On a smaller scale, there is little anyone can do to prevent terrorism altogether. Kids make pipebombs in their rooms, and how exactly would one stop a kid from using one in a school. Yes, this is smaller scale but the point is the same. Many deadly agents can be made with commonly found materials, and less common materials and technologies can be found from those willing to support the effort.

Some of this relies on the simple fact that people have enough common sense and morals *not* to do things. Sure everyone could go out and buy baseball bats and club grandmothers in the street and steal their purse. Easy money.

I don't know, as I said, I surely don't have the solution, but then again, I don't have the solution to a lot of problems (crime, etc.). Some of it can be handled on the preventative side, and I suppose 'some' is better than none, but apparently there are those who think it is ok to hijack planes and kill everyone on board and fly them into major metropolitan office buildings.

It is just really an extreme example of what we'll do to eachother for the sake of <insert misguided cause here>, unfortunately and sadly not the last nor worst example we'll ever have.

I'll admit it. I find these pictures "interesting" and somewhat funny. But that doesn't mean I want all those innocent people killed. If you take it as a joke, you don't consider all the people. These pictures symbolize the US getting revenge on the terrorists.

Then again, we could all be wrong and this could actually stop the majority of terroism.
After the USA said that any terroism is going to be punnished and such like the IRA seemed to be in the mood for handing over their arms and such.

At least i could stop many of new ones starting up.. hopefully it will do more good than harm.

Craig

Originally posted by Get-Hosted.com
I'll admit it. I find these pictures "interesting" and somewhat funny. But that doesn't mean I want all those innocent people killed. If you take it as a joke, you don't consider all the people. These pictures symbolize the US getting revenge on the terrorists.

Well if we start bombing countrys and such to stop terroism and killing innocent people then really we are no better than the terroists who kill innocnet people in the first place.
I do belive however that bombing of their training facilitys and such is ok.
Just no point killing people who have no control over it, its not really there fault that they live there.
Im sure, giving the chance most will want to get out and many do not back the actions of the groups.

Just hope it does not end in more waste of life.

Craig

I agree bombing innocent people won't do much good. Most of them don't even have a radio, and don't even know what happened in America.

Originally posted by Craig
Then again, we could all be wrong and this could actually stop the majority of terroism.
After the USA said that any terroism is going to be punnished and such like the IRA seemed to be in the mood for handing over their arms and such. I believe it was Colin Powell who, a couple of days ago, I heard asked in an interview whether the statement that the US is targetting all terrorist groups meant that the IRA would be a target. He responded something like "We're primarily interested in groups that threaten the security of the United States."

I suspect the IRA's recent stated change of stance is more directly related to the general mood of the world right now than to a fear of American reprisals.

I think they've got a pretty good idea of what's going on... Check out http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1554000/1554583.stm