• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boston Marathon bombing suspect caught after day-long manhunt

Josie said:
Yes, exactly.
Click to expand...

Like I said. Their goal isn't destroying thw western world. It's establishing the caliphate. Attacking us is the means to an end.

Then you're either deaf or don't want to hear it.



They need to establish worldwide Islam so that the Mahdi CAN rule over them. They believe he won't return until Islam dominates the world. Then he'll return and rule over them for however many years.
Click to expand...

Nope. Your own link shows that they won't achieve worldwide domination until *after* the Madhi returns, not before.

In Islamic eschatology, the Mahdi (Arabic: مهدي‎ / ISO 233: mahdī / English: Guided One) is the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will rule for seven, nine or nineteen years- (according to various interpretations)[1] before the Day of Judgment (yawm al-qiyamah / literally, the Day of Resurrection)[2] and will rid the world of evil.[3]
Click to expand...

Your link says that is the Mahdi who will rid the world of evil.
 
ecofarm said:
I believe the terrorists win anytime we overreact and thus play into their game of terror. As mentioned above, see also: TSA, FISA, Patriot Act, Gitmo, etc.
Click to expand...

Originally, you argued they won because they shut the city down. Now, it's anytime we "over react" even though there was no over reaction this time.
 
Josie said:
Yeah, there's no point in debating with you - someone who refuses to hear and see what is right in front of him. Ciao.
Click to expand...

Your own link says that it's the Mahdi who will rid the world of evil. Clearly that means that the muslims will not do it *before* he returns.

It's not my fault that you won't read the link that you posted

In Islamic eschatology, the Mahdi (Arabic: مهدي‎ / ISO 233: mahdī / English: Guided One) is the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will rule for seven, nine or nineteen years- (according to various interpretations)[1] before the Day of Judgment (yawm al-qiyamah / literally, the Day of Resurrection)[2] and will rid the world of evil.[3]
Click to expand...
 
sangha said:
Originally, you argued they won because they shut the city down. Now, it's anytime we "over react" even though there was no over reaction this time.
Click to expand...

Wow, it doesn't take a genius to put that one together. haha
 
ecofarm said:
I believe the terrorists win anytime we overreact and thus play into their game of terror. As mentioned above, see also: TSA, FISA, Patriot Act, Gitmo, etc.
Click to expand...

Then we will agree to disagree, because I think the safety of the citizens of Boston in this instance, should have come first and I'm glad it did.
 
ecofarm said:
I'd not seen anything about them having training. I've only seen the two articles presented in this thread, and that after I noted they had no training.
Click to expand...

So because you haven't seen any evidence that somehow translates into no evidence, is that it? What was it Carl Sagen said, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"?

Evidence: On Tamerlan's youtube page he posted several jiihadist and terrorist videos. Thats a mighty big clue that the older brother was getting pretty ideologically radicalized.

Evidence: Tamerlan went back to Chechnea Russia for six months. Chechnea is well known for it's radicalization and Islamic jiihadist rebels. Until the FBI has a chance to trace his footsteps and talk to who he knew over there it's extremely premature to say there is no evidence.

A week before the bombing the older brother Tamerlan went to the boxing studio he used to frequent and started acting very strange. Normally, he was very respectful and polite, but that time he started trying to tear the place up and was kicked out and told never to return. The owner couldn't believe or understand why he was acting that way.
 
Moot said:
So because you haven't seen any evidence that somehow translates into no evidence, is that it?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anything on the news that claims they were crossdressers. Can I claim that they are not? Yes, I can. Your logic is screwed. You're demanding proof to claim a negative.
 
The point is two people stopped ALL economic activity in Boston with less than $500. Sure it cost them their lives but as we've seen in the past radical Islam groups encourage martyrdom. This is what might embolden other terrorists. This is what Eco is talking about
 
CDelapena2 said:
The point is two people stopped ALL economic activity in Boston with less than $500. Sure it cost them their lives but as we've seen in the past radical Islam groups encourage martyrdom. This is what might embolden other terrorists. This is what Eco is talking about
Click to expand...

No, this is what eco said

ecofarm said:
Locking down a city because of 2 people is ludicrous. It's letting the terrorists win.
Click to expand...

He clearly stated that these terrorists "won"
 
CDelapena2 said:
The point is two people stopped ALL economic activity in Boston with less than $500. Sure it cost them their lives but as we've seen in the past radical Islam groups encourage martyrdom. This is what might embolden other terrorists. This is what Eco is talking about
Click to expand...

Thanks (you are correct except for the $500), but don't bother further. Let's just leave it at that. I'm not bothering further with misunderstandings, intentional or not, and putting words in people's mouth. There are much better things to do and conversations and debates to have at this website. We must learn to limit our responses to those that are likely fruitful.
 
ecofarm said:
I haven't seen anything on the news that claims they were crossdressers. Can I claim that they are not? Yes, I can. Your logic is screwed. You're demanding proof to claim a negative.
Click to expand...
No, you're the one demanding proof and having this all wrapped like it was a CSI episode. You're claiming the lock down was over reacting because they didn't have any evidence. And yet, they knew they had at least two bombers on the loose and no idea for a motive. It's what they didn't know that demanded caution. Who were they, were they connected to a larger terror cell, did they have accomplices, were there more bombs planted throughout the city, how heavily armed were they, etc? You're trying to say that being cautious before the facts come in and protecting the public translates into the bad guys winning. You couldn't be more wrong, eco.

If the cops weren't doing everything they could to catch those two and they killed more people, who do you think the public would blame? On another thread, the OP is already trying to blame the FBI and HS for not catching them "before" they commited the crime.
 
ecofarm said:
Thanks (you are correct except for the $500), but don't bother further. Let's just leave it at that. I'm not bothering further with misunderstandings, intentional or not, and putting words in people's mouth. There are much better things to do and conversations and debates to have at this website. We must learn to limit our responses to those that are likely fruitful.
Click to expand...

So now we're dropping the whole "over reaction" thingie and going for "embolden other terrorists". :roll:
 
CDelapena2 said:
The point is two people stopped ALL economic activity in Boston with less than $500. Sure it cost them their lives but as we've seen in the past radical Islam groups encourage martyrdom. This is what might embolden other terrorists. This is what Eco is talking about
Click to expand...

But they were stopped with great speed when you compare to the time it took to capture the DC Sniper and the Unabomber. It is unfortunate they got to kill one more being the MIT policeman.

You are correct that you don't need to invest a lot of money into causing damage to a country. You can have the most sophisticated missile defense system and someone with a $3 box cutter can run circles around you.

But I disagree this might embolden other terrorists when they realize we will do everything possible to catch you ass even if it means shutting down a town.
 
sangha said:
So now we're dropping the whole "over reaction" thingie and going for "embolden other terrorists". :roll:
Click to expand...

I think it was both, among other things.
 
Crosscheck said:
But I disagree this might embolden other terrorists when they realize we will do everything possible to catch you ass even if it means shutting down a town.
Click to expand...

What about terrorists that don't care about getting caught and that just want to cause chaos and terror towards their political goals? It says to them: "come to America with a friend, make a pipe bomb, and shut down a major city for a day".
 
Moot said:
No, you're the one demanding proof and having this all wrapped like it was a CSI episode. You're claiming the lock down was over reacting because they didn't have any evidence. And yet, they knew they had at least two bombers on the loose and no idea for a motive. It's what they didn't know that demanded caution. Who were they, were they connected to a larger terror cell, did they have accomplices, were there more bombs planted throughout the city, how heavily armed were they, etc? You're trying to say that being cautious before the facts come in and protecting the public translates into the bad guys winning. You couldn't be more wrong, eco.

If the cops weren't doing everything they could to catch those two and they killed more people, who do you think the public would blame? On another thread, the OP is already trying to blame the FBI and HS for not catching them "before" they commited the crime.
Click to expand...

You're confused. I do not need evidence to make a negative claim. Lacking evidence otherwise, it is entirely reasonable to claim they were untrained. That's basic logic.

I don't know what the FBI knew then and I cannot speculate to such. I'm merely stating the facts as they stand or (perhaps, we'll see) stood.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
What about terrorists that don't care about getting caught and that just want to cause chaos and terror towards their political goals? It says to them: "come to America with a friend, make a pipe bomb, and shut down a major city for a day".
Click to expand...

The words I bolded show that even you realize that "creating terror" is not their goal, but just a means to an end.
 
ecofarm said:
You're confused. I do not need evidence to make a negative claim. That's basic logic. Lacking evidence otherwise, it is entirely reasonable to claim they were untrained. You can't refute logic.
Click to expand...

You didn't make a negative claim. You claimed that the authorities over-reacted. That's a positive claim

The facts show that they didn't over-react.
 
sangha said:
The words I bolded show that even you realize that "creating terror" is not their goal, but just a means to an end.
Click to expand...

It's a goal.

For example: Someone's goal can be to build a house. And their goal this week could be to get the walls up. Just because the walls do not complete the house does not mean that completeing the walls is not a goal. Your attempt at semantic BS is weak sauce.

One thing we know about terrorists is that one of their goals, if not the end goal, is to create terror.
 
sangha said:
You didn't make a negative claim. You claimed that the authorities over-reacted. That's a positive claim

The facts show that they didn't over-react.
Click to expand...

You've confused two different claims. My negative claim was that the guy and his kid brother were not trained. As I had not seen any evidence to the contrary, it was a perfectly logical and reasonable claim to make.
 
ecofarm said:
You've confused two different claims. My negative claim was that the guy and his kid brother were not trained. As I had not seen any evidence to the contrary, it was a perfectly logical and reasonable claim to make.
Click to expand...
There is more evidence to suggest the older brother, Tamerlan may have had some kind of training than there is that he didn't....

"...In early 2011, a foreign government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The request stated that it was based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.....
FBI — Updates on Investigation Into Multiple Explosions in Boston


"...Police said last night (FRI) they were carrying out at least one controlled explosion on Norfolk Street, in Cambridge, not far from where the bombers reportedly share a home.

As well as the two bombs that killed three people at the Marathon, authorities will carefully analyse the latest explosives to figure out how they were built and whether the brothers received help from outside.

The analysis is likely to take place at the government's specialist lab at Quantico, Virginia...."
Boston bombs: the 'small arsenal' of weapons suspects 'used against police' - Telegraph


"...A source close to the investigation said: “We have no doubt the brothers were not acting alone. The devices used to detonate the two bombs were highly sophisticated and not the kind of thing people learn from Google.

“They were too advanced. Someone gave the brothers the skills and it is now our job to find out just who they were. Agents think the sleeper cell has up to a dozen members and has been waiting several years for their day to come.”...
Boston bombers: FBI hunting 12-strong terrorist


Where would he have tested his bomb making skills?
 
Moot said:
There is more evidence to suggest the older brother, Tamerlan may have had some kind of training than there is that he didn't....

"...In early 2011, a foreign government asked the FBI for information about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The request stated that it was based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups.....
FBI — Updates on Investigation Into Multiple Explosions in Boston


"...Police said last night (FRI) they were carrying out at least one controlled explosion on Norfolk Street, in Cambridge, not far from where the bombers reportedly share a home.

As well as the two bombs that killed three people at the Marathon, authorities will carefully analyse the latest explosives to figure out how they were built and whether the brothers received help from outside.

The analysis is likely to take place at the government's specialist lab at Quantico, Virginia...."
Boston bombs: the 'small arsenal' of weapons suspects 'used against police' - Telegraph


"...A source close to the investigation said: “We have no doubt the brothers were not acting alone. The devices used to detonate the two bombs were highly sophisticated and not the kind of thing people learn from Google.

“They were too advanced. Someone gave the brothers the skills and it is now our job to find out just who they were. Agents think the sleeper cell has up to a dozen members and has been waiting several years for their day to come.”...
Boston bombers: FBI hunting 12-strong terrorist


Where would he have tested his bomb making skills?
Click to expand...

The first citation I had not seen or heard of in terms of "unspecified underground groups"; I had only seen that the older brother (or both?) had been to Chechnya recently. The second I had not seen and it does not really claim there was training (it speculates so, based on the home-made bombs). The last citation I did not see prior to making the claim that they were untrained (and it's from a UK tabloid).

Obviously, we are still waiting for what, if any, training they received. While we cannot be sure they had significant training, I would not make the claim that they were completely untrained in light of those citations (though the last hardly counts as a source in general and is only considerable due to the other citations).

At any rate, I was speaking of training in combat operations (and they may have had some of that as well, we'll see).
 
Last edited:
Crosscheck said:
Does it really look like these two brothers won?

Locking down the city prevented an escape of the criminal by blending in with "the crowd".
Click to expand...



it cost an estimated 333 million to close Boston down for the day not to mention the disruption it would of caused businesses, commuters etc all to capture a 19 year old kid who had no where to go, of course the terrorists won they caused maximum political and economic damage with 2 small bombs.
 
Higgins86 said:
it cost an estimated 333 million to close Boston down for the day not to mention the disruption it would of caused businesses, commuters etc all to capture a 19 year old kid who had no where to go, of course the terrorists won they caused maximum political and economic damage with 2 small bombs.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the cost of 3 dead and over 160 people maimed and injured....and two dead police officers.

I note that the Boston police didn't call in the state police and national guard until one of their own was killed.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom