• 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!

12 dead, as many as 31 injured in Fort Hood shootings

Getting back on topic I think now that there can be no question that he is a terrorist and committed and act of terrorism against this country...........Anyone that does not believe that is just kidding themselves
 
Oh, really? Is he part of a larger political movement who committed this crime to shift public policy? Or did he just go postal on his co-workers because he's nuts (*and his religion played a role in his insanity)?
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Oh, really? Is he part of a larger political movement who committed this crime to shift public policy? Or did he just go postal on his co-workers because he's nuts (*and his religion played a role in his insanity)?
Click to expand...


Did he partake in Jihad. no matter how perverted he took his fundamentalism?
 
Navy Pride said:
Getting back on topic I think now that there can be no question that he is a terrorist and committed and act of terrorism against this country...........Anyone that does not believe that is just kidding themselves
Click to expand...

Correction: He is a failed Terrorist, because I only see people getting pissed off at him. No terror here. He's just a bitch ass ametuer and I'm surprised his little Jihad buddies want to associate with him.
 
Seems I was wrong, this man certainly seems to be a sleeper agent, after all, if all this new information is correct.:doh
 
Jonah Goldberg (another bleeding heart liberal):

Again, I am very uncomfortable with the idea that I might sound like I'm trying to diminish the guy's crimes. He committed treason and murder. It was a cowardly act. If we are at war, then it was a war crime.

But I think the reader's definition of terrorism might move us into dangerous territory. In Pakistan, we launch missiles at people's homes with civilians in or around them to take out al-Qaeda leadership. The attacks are — hopefully — always intended to be something of a surprise. But I wouldn't call that terrorism. I'm just uncomfortable with the word terrorism metastasizing into "anything the bad guys do to us." Why not call what Hasan did a war crime? Terrorism is a war crime but not all war crimes are terrorism.

Of course, the fact that Jihadis reject all of the rules of war makes it very difficult to figure out how to even talk about the rules. (Just out of curiosity, what would the legal definition be of, say, a Japanese officer turning on fellow Japanese troops during World War Two in the apparent hope of aiding the Allies?)

As I said before, if terrorism is now the catchall for dastardly acts committed by Jihadis, then calling this attack terrorism works fine for me. But if this is really a war — and I think it is — then I think we could spend some more time thinking a bit more rigorously about our vocabulary. For those interested, this is a longstanding interest of mine.
Click to expand...

Re: Was It Terrorism? - Jonah Goldberg - The Corner on National Review Online

More questions:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/11/09/terrorism/index.html

If attacks on soldiers now qualify, how is it possible to exclude many American actions?

p.s. These articles highlight the perils of indiscriminate usage of the term, and require nuanced thinking skills, I'm sure many of you will self-disqualify from reading them.
 
Last edited:
EpicDude86 said:
If he was a sleeper agent, he was a pretty loud sleeper. Didn't maintain that "below the radar" M.O. at all.
Click to expand...

I also have seen no evidence that, if he contacted AQ, they responded and coordinated his activities. A sleeper agent implies that he was working for an organization larger than himself, and I'm not sure he was.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I also have seen no evidence that, if he contacted AQ, they responded and coordinated his activities. A sleeper agent implies that he was working for an organization larger than himself, and I'm not sure he was.
Click to expand...

Jihad is not limited to one group, this man committed jihad, period.
 
Last edited:
Jackboot said:
Jihad is not limited to one group, this man committed jihad, period.
Click to expand...

Jihad cat should start with himself.

In all seriousness, the term "sleeper agent" has a specific meaning. If you need help with definitions, just ask us. But, that term does not appear to be accurate in this instance, unless you have further information. So, please stop using it in this context.
 
Last edited:
Pretty soon, 9/11 will have been carried out by a local New York cricket team who were playing truth or dare.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Jihad cat should start with himself.

In all seriousness, the term "sleeper agent" has a specific meaning. If you need help with definitions, just ask us. But, NO, that term is NOT accurate in this instance, unless you have further information.
Click to expand...

I don't need any help....but thank you for asking.

This man was waiting in the wings for the perfect attack, this cannot be disputed. I was out of the country, so I didn't know all the facts, but as I have read more, this has become painfully obvious to me. I actually blame the Army, the CIA, the FBI, it seems everyone knew this guy was a potential threat, but the poor people at fort hood.:(
 
Jackboot said:
I don't need any help....but thank you for asking.

This man was waiting in the wings for the perfect attack, this cannot be disputed. I was out of the country, so I didn't know all the facts, but as I have read more, this has become painfully obvious to me. I actually blame the Army, the CIA, the FBI, it seems everyone knew this guy was a potential threat, but the poor people at fort hood.:(
Click to expand...

You seem to getting a little emotional with this. Just take a step back, put on your objectivity hat, and when you're ready, take your time, you just come on back.





:lol:
 
EpicDude86 said:
You seem to getting a little emotional with this. Just take a step back, put on your objectivity hat, and when you're ready, take your time, you just come on back.





:lol:
Click to expand...

I do get emotional when our brave men and women die, but my mind is made up, someone dropped the ball with regards to this threat, now 13 men and women are dead.

You take all the time you need though......
 
Jackboot said:
I do get emotional when our brave men and women die, but my mind is made up, someone dropped the ball with regards to this threat, now 13 men and women are dead.

You take all the time you need though......
Click to expand...



Where does the buck stop do you think....My money is on Holder. But that crap General Casey should go, along with the base commander.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Where does the buck stop do you think....My money is on Holder. But that crap General Casey should go, along with the base commander.


j-mac
Click to expand...

I do not yet know, we really have more questions, then we do answers at this point. I am all for free speech, and if this man was against the war, I think he should be allowed that freedom, even while serving. Now, if he made certain threats, or did not do his job(I do worry what someone like this was telling our young men coming home), then he should have been suspended, removed, etc. I also do not know if this information was passed along to army brass, or if the intelligence agencies kept this to themselves?

There is much to learn, but I know this, this was jihad.
 
Jackboot said:
I do get emotional when our brave men and women die, but my mind is made up, someone dropped the ball with regards to this threat, now 13 men and women are dead.

You take all the time you need though......
Click to expand...

Our brave Men and Women die all the time. The ball is dropped all the time. We can't let each and every incident get to us or we will go insane. I'm guilty of getting emotional sometimes too, it's what we do as humans, but we can't let ourselves go or else we become ravenous beasties bent on destruction. Which actually isn't that bad...Just go for it actually.
 
EpicDude86 said:
Our brave Men and Women die all the time. The ball is dropped all the time. We can't let each and every incident get to us or we will go insane. I'm guilty of getting emotional sometimes too, it's what we do as humans, but we can't let ourselves go or else we become ravenous beasties bent on destruction. Which actually isn't that bad...Just go for it actually.
Click to expand...

I am fine, I thank you for your sincere concern.;)
 
texmaster said:
Now remember, according to many liberals this guy was just "nuts"

So what does that make these guys?

Seem pretty sane to me.

Its called Islamic Fundamentalism. Not radicalism, not extremism. Fundamentalism.

YouTube - NYC AMERICAN Muslims JUSTIFY Fort Hood Shooting. ISLAM: "The Religion of Peace and Tolerance"??
Click to expand...

No it's not called Islamic Fundamentalism because that's exactly like saying "A Christian who believes in Christ". There is no Arabic translation for Fundamentalism. All Muslims take the Qu'ran verbatim.
 
Arch Enemy said:
No it's not called Islamic Fundamentalism because that's exactly like saying "A Christian who believes in Christ". There is no Arabic translation for Fundamentalism. All Muslims take the Qu'ran verbatim.
Click to expand...

If they did there would be world war right now not isolated to some countries.

The reason Islamic terrorism is so widespread is specifically because its so easy to justify violence using not only the Qur'an but the life of Mohammad.

And please save the Crusades or Spanish Inquisition arguments for someone else unless you want to relive the Islamic history of violence as well.
 
texmaster said:
If they did there would be world war right now not isolated to some countries.

The reason Islamic terrorism is so widespread is specifically because its so easy to justify violence using not only the Qur'an but the life of Mohammad.

And please save the Crusades or Spanish Inquisition arguments for someone else unless you want to relive the Islamic history of violence as well.
Click to expand...

It's easy to justify violence in all religions (except Buddhism, I am not too sure how that one actually works out).

It's not the fault of the religion. It's the fault of the person whose doing the killing. Killers only have one religion and it's disgusting and intolerable.
 
Arch Enemy said:
No it's not called Islamic Fundamentalism because that's exactly like saying "A Christian who believes in Christ". There is no Arabic translation for Fundamentalism. All Muslims take the Qu'ran verbatim.
Click to expand...

I guess that the difference between Islamic Fundamentalism and Radical Islamic Jihad is all in the interpretation of the Koran... you know... especially that part about subjugation of all infidels. It looks like the only religions that have subjugation clauses in them are Islam, Communism, and CO2ism (aka Gorism).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom