• 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!

Naming the Terrorists

Tigerace117 said:
Even if you try to give them a pass on their violation of the Geneva Convention, the war crimes they commit also violated Japanese military law--- which the fascist scumbags running the country failed to enforce.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_Japanese_war_crimes#International_law

They also violated sections of the Treaty of Versailles and other international agreements signed by Japan.

So in actuality your argument doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Are you really going to use the Treaty of Versailles for your case? The treaty that was part of the reason for the rise of the Nazi party and a cause for WWII. A treaty that is the model for why treating losers of war like dirt and causing hardships for the people of the country is a dangerous and undesirable action for the winners of war to take. I honestly can't fault anyone for violating that filth of a treaty. I would have attacked because of it too. :shrug:
 
legalimmigrant said:
A desire to kill an enemy is not hate. It's an expression of love for your friends.

Islam is an enemy of everything we cherish.
Click to expand...

so all muslims must be nuked ???? that is what you want in your posts!!!!!!!!!
 
Henrin said:
Are you really going to use the Treaty of Versailles for your case? The treaty that was part of the reason for the rise of the Nazi party and a cause for WWII. A treaty that is the model for why treating losers of war like dirt and causing hardships for the people of the country is a dangerous and undesirable action for the winners of war to take. I honestly can't fault anyone for violating that filth of a treaty. I would have attacked because of it too. :shrug:
Click to expand...

The Japanese weren't on the losing side. They made out well in the Treaty of Versailles.

Obviously you haven't studied history outside of primitive "fascists=good, US should have stayed out"
 
YourAverageJoe said:
At the recent town hall, President Obama was asked why he refuses to use the words, “Islamic terrorism.” His response, not wanting to conflate murderers with a religion, is certainly reasonable. However, the other side of this semantic argument is also understandable. Therefore, rather than accepting that it’s a binary decision – like with the vote for President – perhaps we should simply come up with a phrase that would be more widely acceptable. Something like: “Islam-distorted terrorism.” Let’s illuminate that this is a perverted embrace of religion to justify violence. Maybe that will even make recruitment more difficult for ISIS and the other Islam-disfiguring jihadist organizations.
Click to expand...

Maybe we should come up with some working definitions? For example, maybe we should define 'terror', and then 'terrorism' and then 'terrorist' as a person or persons employing terror to advance political agendae.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom