Who are the real terrorists?

[marharth]

You're including war-time actions into this.

 

Congress declared war? When?

 

I'm not quite sure how old you are, but I vividly recall the phrase 'war on terror'. The word war implies war. Call me crazy. Korea: We never declared war, we spent a few years over there (exact number I forget), but it wasn't war! Yeah... I don't know about you, but I call it the Korean War, not the Korean Police Action.

 

I've got nothing to hide.

 

Good for you. I for one am sick of the "if you've got nothing to hide..." apologetics. It really is sickening. If our founding fathers had held such an attitude we'd still be singing "God Save the Queen."

 

There are lines to draw, in every fight. My line hasn't been crossed yet, but I assure you, it lies there and will bite someone in the butt if they ever have the misfortune to cross it. It is a line for every person to draw for themselves and decide when to say they've had enough.

 

"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation..." I think most know how this ends.

I don't know of congress has formally declared war or not on certain terrorist groups.

 

It doesn't really change what I am saying if they did, I am just wondering if they did or not.

 

Its not really legal if its just a media thing, congress needs to formally declare war on the organizations.

[ginnyfizz]

Ooops, typing earlier when I was in a rush to get to work meant that I typed;-

 

"Marharth, why you seem so determined to equate governments with these terrorists I do not know. I speak not of the jihadist organizations whose stated aim is to overthrow the kuffar and to destroy the way of life that your Founding Fathers (and mine) fought for."

 

when it should have been

 

"Marharth, why you seem so determined to equate governments with these terrorists I do not know. I speak of the jihadist organizations whose stated aim is to overthrow the kuffar and to destroy the way of life that your Founding Fathers (and mine) fought for."

 

This therefore totally throws your quoting of my words out of context, Stardusk. You know this because in another thread whose subject overlaps with this one, namely the one about the situation in Egypt, I have said that we need to be careful what we wish for. They are overthrowing dictators in the Middle East, but what they get may well be no better and could even be worse - a series of theocracies, a Caliphate even, that takes women back to the Dark Ages (despite the fact that originally Islamic law allowed women advanced property rights, this is not how it happens in practice)and discriminates against other religions. Not to mention ones that are not well disposed to the West and are committed to the annihilation of Israel. The fact that the Moslem Brotherhood, demonstrably NOT innocent and definitely jihadist, are up to their eyeballs in all of this is alarming.

[SpellAndShield]

Ooops, typing earlier when I was in a rush to get to work meant that I typed;-

 

"Marharth, why you seem so determined to equate governments with these terrorists I do not know. I speak not of the jihadist organizations whose stated aim is to overthrow the kuffar and to destroy the way of life that your Founding Fathers (and mine) fought for."

 

when it should have been

 

"Marharth, why you seem so determined to equate governments with these terrorists I do not know. I speak of the jihadist organizations whose stated aim is to overthrow the kuffar and to destroy the way of life that your Founding Fathers (and mine) fought for."

 

This therefore totally throws your quoting of my words out of context, Stardusk. You know this because in another thread whose subject overlaps with this one, namely the one about the situation in Egypt, I have said that we need to be careful what we wish for. They are overthrowing dictators in the Middle East, but what they get may well be no better and could even be worse - a series of theocracies, a Caliphate even, that takes women back to the Dark Ages (despite the fact that originally Islamic law allowed women advanced property rights, this is not how it happens in practice)and discriminates against other religions. Not to mention ones that are not well disposed to the West and are committed to the annihilation of Israel. The fact that the Moslem Brotherhood, demonstrably NOT innocent and definitely jihadist, are up to their eyeballs in all of this is alarming.

 

Maybe, but it is very unlikely. Whatever happens, it is not our business; our business is our own countries and dealing with them, the UK and USA respectivley. I think Caliphate is REALLY an exaggeration. A Caliphate? Do you really think that people who are rebelling against tyranny are going to say: well, now we have our secular dictators gone, I can't wait for the Caliphate to take over since I much prefer theocratic autocracy to secular. Not likely.

[ginnyfizz]

The point is, if that is who steps into the vacuum, then that is what they get whether they wanted it or not. And yes, it IS our business because the agenda of organisations such as the Moslem Brotherhood and their political associates is terrorist and jihadist, and seeks to overthrow the kuffar in their own backyard. The more power they get in the Middle East, the more it will further that aim.

[Aurielius]

 

Maybe, but it is very unlikely. Whatever happens, it is not our business; our business is our own countries and dealing with them, the UK and USA respectivley. I think Caliphate is REALLY an exaggeration. A Caliphate? Do you really think that people who are rebelling against tyranny are going to say: well, now we have our secular dictators gone, I can't wait for the Caliphate to take over since I much prefer theocratic autocracy to secular. Not likely.

OK then theocracy instead of caliphate will that definition suit you better? Look no farther than Tehran for an example of how a secular dictatorship was supplanted by that.You may be ready to surrender the southern half of the Mediterranean but I am not so sanguine.

[grannywils]

Stardusk, although my politics are generally more in line with yours than with those of Ginnyfizz and Aurielius, I must agree with both of them at least partially on this issue.

 

Although I sympathize somewhat with what I believe you are getting at with what you say about it being "none of our business". I cannot agree in toto. What Ginnyfizz says is true with respect to organizational and governmental treatment of women and with the general populice by theocracies. I agree that we do not need to go rushing in everywhere around the world to rescue everyone from everything; but we do need to be mindful of what is going on. What is happening right now is not a good thing for the people over there or for the world at large, including the USA, the UK or anyone else.

 

We have unfortunately reached a point where we cannot be isolationist. Our own behavior both good and bad has resulted in a need for us to "have a presence", whether physical or diplomatic remains to be seen, in almost any hotspot that exists. Unfortunately those choosing the hotspots have often been guilty, in my opinion, of wrong thinking in their choices. However, that is neither here nor there at this point. This particular hotspot is coming to a rapid boil.

 

I say what I say more from a humanistic rather than a militeristic or economic viewpoint. However, the other viewpoints must be considered as well, and I am no neophyte, and I do recognize this. I believe that both Ginny and A, are taking stances that at least need to be considered.

 

Trust me when I say that as a diehard Liberal thinking person, it hurts me to the heart to even say that, but I am nothing if not honest, and could say lots of other things about why I belive we are at this point, but it is not necessary here and now. Anyway, those of you who know me already know what I am thinking. Some of you have already claimed you can read my mind. LOL.

 

Anyway, that's all I have for now.

 

 

 

[marharth]

The US government has allied with terrorists before...

 

The muslim brotherhood has not committed any acts of violence, if a part of the group wants to be violent then that group will split off into another group separate from the muslim brotherhood.

 

The muslim brotherhood spreads Islam peacefully, I have never seen them commit acts of violence without disbanding into another group due to violence.

[grannywils]

Marharth, just typed whole response and it disappeared. Cannot do it all over again.

 

Let me just say I absolutely agree with your first line. Many times,I might add.

 

Was not intending to comment on any groups in particular. Have no agenda with any groups. Was merely attemping to address US current "need" for a presence in the Middle East.

 

Make no mistake about it, I am a Patriotic Liberal American through and through. However in my vernacular a patriot is meant to see his country honestly, warts and all. As a Liberal, many people have accused me of being unpatriotic. Nothing could be further from the truth. However, I have a tendency to speak out about our flaws, and for some reason, many think a "true American" should not do that. I am also willing to speak out about the good in America, but no one ever hears me when I do that.

 

Frankly, there are times when I wish there was no such thing as Nationalism, because then maybe we could all just stop finding ways to hate one another because "our country is better than yours". But I don't see that happening in my lifetime; so I guess I will remain a patriotic American. But that means I will continue to try to make it the best America it can be, and I will try to be the best American I can be, which means I will continue to speak out about those things, both good and bad that I see us doing. I try to speak out softly and gently most of the time. That is so that people will listen. However, no one should ever, ever mistake that for namby pambyism in me. It would be a very big mistake.

 

In any event, just wanted you to know that your point was well taken, and that I agreed with it, but was not attempting to say otherwise in my original post.

 

 

[ginnyfizz]

The US government has allied with terrorists before...

 

The muslim brotherhood has not committed any acts of violence, if a part of the group wants to be violent then that group will split off into another group separate from the muslim brotherhood.

 

The muslim brotherhood spreads Islam peacefully, I have never seen them commit acts of violence without disbanding into another group due to violence.

 

:wallbash: Oh for goodness sake, don't tell me you have already forgotten;-

 

General Strategic Goal of The Muslim Brotherhood (see page 21)

 

They support overthrowing the kuffar by any means possible and they like to kid the naive into believing that certain terrorist groups are nothing to do with them. It is a rather familiar tale where I come from.

[Aurielius]

The US government has allied with terrorists before...

 

The muslim brotherhood has not committed any acts of violence, if a part of the group wants to be violent then that group will split off into another group separate from the muslim brotherhood.

 

The muslim brotherhood spreads Islam peacefully, I have never seen them commit acts of violence without disbanding into another group due to violence.

 

:wallbash: Oh for goodness sake, don't tell me you have already forgotten;-

 

General Strategic Goal of The Muslim Brotherhood (see page 21)

 

They support overthrowing the kuffar by any means possible and they like to kid the naive into believing that certain terrorist groups are nothing to do with them. It is a rather familiar tale where I come from.

Pulls out bottle of aspirin and passes it over to Ginny :wallbash: