• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What's a War on Terror?

K

khajmer

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
61
Reaction score
9
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Honestly, I see these threads about the WoT being a joke, and I go into them hoping to see something about the fact that you can't actually wage war on terror. We all know about Gitmo, we all know it's a bad place, and people have been sent there for far less than being Osama's driver. Now, onto my point.

What is a war on terror? How can you wage war against an idea? What, are we going to go to the terrorist nation, fight their armies in a campaign across their territories, and then capture their leader and force a surrender so that we can all sign a treaty and go back to a peaceful world where Terroristan can slowly rebuild it's economy and go back to being a major and respected world power, maybe even join NATO? Yeah, I don't think so.

Terrorism isn't something you can wage war on. You can most certainly circumvent it, or hunt down terrorists themselves, but there will always be terrorists in the world blowing crap up to make a point. September 11th certainly wasn't the first time we've been attacked by terrorists, and it definitely won't be the last. So why do people continue to call it a War on Terror when in reality there's no such thing (bear in mind, I feel the same way about the War on Drugs. the difference is we're actually using the military on this one).
 
Its just a name everyone points this out like they are the smartest person in the world "A war on terror is like having a war on jealousy blah blah blah"

Its just a term that was coined because the term war on Islamic extremism triggers the wiring in liberals brains to explode because despite them being against everything liberals are supposed to believe in.They feel unable to criticize any movement that they could possibly see as having a racial component.
 
Apparently the War on Terror is just a war against rednecks that run their mouth.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...ds-keep-nigger-out-office.html#post1057761730

After this and after those protesters at the Republican Convention, I do not see how any American can ever take our Government seriously again when it talks about terrorists.
God only knows... what the "terrorists" did to earn such a classification.
They might of blown up people, or they might of just opened their mouth or been peacefully protesting an event.
 
The War on Terror is just another name pinned onto a terribly planned and executed idea to put it on a pedistal. It's just like the "Patriot Act" or the "Protect America Act" or "Operation Iraqi Freedom." You give it a nice name to make it seem above reproach. The Ministry of Peace would be proud
 
Kernel Sanders said:
The War on Terror is just another name pinned onto a terribly planned and executed idea to put it on a pedistal. It's just like the "Patriot Act" or the "Protect America Act" or "Operation Iraqi Freedom." You give it a nice name to make it seem above reproach. The Ministry of Peace would be proud
Click to expand...

I am sensing a Thought Crime in progress! ;)
 
Bodhisattva said:
I am sensing a Thought Crime in progress! ;)
Click to expand...

Sometimes when I get stoned and paranoid I think the Bushies do Orwellian stuff on purpose. That way, when they're called out on it it's easy to marginalize the detractors by calling them paranoid. It's the same thing they do with Area 51 (or, at least, what I would do). Put up a bunch of scary guards, put up a mysterious black mailbox, flash a bunch of lights every time you catch some hippies tripping shrooms in the area - and suddenly you have a nice torchlight that all the paranoid little moths flock to. Since everybody in a tin foil hat is desperately trying to break into Area 51, you're now free to safely hide things anywhere but there. But enough paranoid ranting, that's probably giving them way too much credit.
 
Doc Howl said:
DOUBLEPLUS UNGOOD!
Click to expand...

:rofl :rofl :rofl

Thanks Doc, you put perfect touch on a nice flow of intellectualism! :lol:

Pay no attention to this khajmer fellow...
He is simply jealous that he is not part of the game.
 
Of course there is no war on terror; 9-11 was a figment of our imagination as were the hundreds of other fake attacks on our embassies, ships and airliners.

I prefer the Liberal solution of hugging people whom we failed by not understanding them and sharing my empathy with their causes throughout the ME and world at large.

These poor misunderstood people need to know we really do care and would rather talk with them than hunt them down and kill them.

We can further this dialogue by agreeing with them that Bush and Cheney are the epitome of evil in the world and convincing them that we were ALWAYS against their war for oil. :roll:

I have always found that it is better to pretend there is no war on terror than to actually confront it. I look forward to going back to the failed policies of the last 50 years in the ME than to try something that might be construed as “CHANGE”.

:rofl
 
John1234 said:
Apparently the War on Terror is just a war against rednecks that run their mouth.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...ds-keep-nigger-out-office.html#post1057761730

After this and after those protesters at the Republican Convention, I do not see how any American can ever take our Government seriously again when it talks about terrorists.
God only knows... what the "terrorists" did to earn such a classification.
They might of blown up people, or they might of just opened their mouth or been peacefully protesting an event.
Click to expand...


It might have been the "empty his shotgun" part of keeping "the nigger out of office" that fit the definition of terrorism. The idea that the election can be decided legally/morally with a shotgun, to keep the nigger out of office, is an enemy idea.

Should a "liberal" hypocrite take more seriously the words "Bin Laden determined to attack inside the U.S." than they would the words of a redneck with a shotgun? It cannot hurt for a detective to ask the guy, "what did you mean by 'I am going to gut you like a fish?'" Could be talking about a lawsuit, could be talking about spilling blood. If the guy chants "Death to America," and reaches for a nuke, I would like to say, "kill it before it breaths another breath," but I cannot get enough guys to mindlessly chant "Death to Iran." I am being so unjustly treated with those threats of "Death to America."

"Again we say that when someone feels that he is unjustly treated, and no one is repulsing or stopping the injustice inflicted on him, he personally seeks ways and means for lifting that justice. Of course, not everyone is capable of finding the best way for lifting the injustice inflicted on him. People resort to what they think is the best way according to their own ideas, and they are not all capable of reaching out for what is beyond what is available to arrive to the best idea or means.

To find the best way, after having found their way to God and His rights, those who are inflicted by injustice need not to be isolated from their natural milieu, or be ignored deliberately, or as a result of mis-appreciation, by the officials in this milieu. They should, rather, be reassured and helped to save themselves, and their surroundings.” (Saddam Hussein Shabban 13, 1422 H. October 29, 2001""

I know khajmer would not answer that question, "who are the magical 'they' that Saddam said, 'should, rather, be reassured and helped to save themselves, and their surroundings?' so that spam is just here to let khajmer know, I know.

Think about the idea, I am unjustly treated by Iran, "people resort to what they think is the best way according to their own ideas," is the idea that I have rights to take the law into my own hands according to my "own ideas" of justice, is that unworthy of being fought? Maybe I should quote some Al Quacka:

"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the black stone idolaters wherever ye find them, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)"

Khajmer's question was:

"So why do people continue to call it a War on Terror when in reality there's no such thing?"

We must continue to call it a War on Terror, and be at war against an idea, because if we stop, Mecca becomes a glass pit.
 
Truth Detector said:
Of course there is no war on terror; 9-11 was a figment of our imagination as were the hundreds of other fake attacks on our embassies, ships and airliners.

I prefer the Liberal solution of hugging people whom we failed by not understanding them and sharing my empathy with their causes throughout the ME and world at large.

These poor misunderstood people need to know we really do care and would rather talk with them than hunt them down and kill them.

We can further this dialogue by agreeing with them that Bush and Cheney are the epitome of evil in the world and convincing them that we were ALWAYS against their war for oil. :roll:

I have always found that it is better to pretend there is no war on terror than to actually confront it. I look forward to going back to the failed policies of the last 50 years in the ME than to try something that might be construed as “CHANGE”.

:rofl
Click to expand...

How do we have a War on Something Abstract... like Terror????

ter·ror /ˈtɛrər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ter-er] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. intense, sharp, overmastering fear: to be frantic with terror.
2. an instance or cause of intense fear or anxiety; quality of causing terror: to be a terror to evildoers.
3. any period of frightful violence or bloodshed likened to the Reign of Terror in France.
4. violence or threats of violence used for intimidation or coercion; terrorism.

Wouldn't a War Against Terrorists be better? Something tangible at least? Something achievable?

I mean, we are not fighting a War against horror movies that strike terror into us, are we?
We are fighting actual people, we need to acknowledge this and face them, not some abstract notion that can never be achieved. Right? :2razz:
 
A war on terror is just another slow merging of societies catagorization for the purpose of domination. It's been used throughout history many times. And those in control will just have certian words merge like terrorist and insurgent and in the end history will remember them as a hero.
 
Bodhisattva said:
How do we have a War on Something Abstract... like Terror????

ter·ror /ˈtɛrər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ter-er] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. intense, sharp, overmastering fear: to be frantic with terror.
2. an instance or cause of intense fear or anxiety; quality of causing terror: to be a terror to evildoers.
3. any period of frightful violence or bloodshed likened to the Reign of Terror in France.
4. violence or threats of violence used for intimidation or coercion; terrorism.

Wouldn't a War Against Terrorists be better? Something tangible at least? Something achievable?

I mean, we are not fighting a War against horror movies that strike terror into us, are we?
We are fighting actual people, we need to acknowledge this and face them, not some abstract notion that can never be achieved. Right? :2razz:
Click to expand...

I have to laugh at people who in denial argue the semantics of a word. Would you feel better if we just said it is a "War on Terrorists?" Would it make any difference in your uninformed leftists rants filled with lies and distortions about what got us into Iraq?

I think not. Run along now and tell us how people who become President, who graduated from Yale and Harvard, who flew fighter jets and ran huge corporations are mere idiots; yet were genius enough to fool all of those brilliant Democrats, 35 other nations and the American people into voting FOR a war.

I just love watching Liberal pacifists who constantly contradict their weak arguments by taking BOTH sides of every issue.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
A war on terror is just another slow merging of societies catagorization for the purpose of domination. It's been used throughout history many times. And those in control will just have certian words merge like terrorist and insurgent and in the end history will remember them as a hero.
Click to expand...

Yes, heroes as defined by the lunatic left as being terrorists who blow up innocent women and children destroy places of worship and represent those who would enjoy seeing the destruction of freedom in the world.

And in that same warped illogical fog in their brains, claim that Bush and Cheney are the real terrorists.

When I read people like you, it gives me great comfort knowing that you are on the OTHER side of any argument.
 
Truth Detector said:
I have to laugh at people who in denial argue the semantics of a word. Would you feel better if we just said it is a "War on Terrorists?" Would it make any difference in your uninformed leftists rants filled with lies and distortions about what got us into Iraq?

I think not. Run along now and tell us how people who become President, who graduated from Yale and Harvard, who flew fighter jets and ran huge corporations are mere idiots; yet were genius enough to fool all of those brilliant Democrats, 35 other nations and the American people into voting FOR a war.

I just love watching Liberal pacifists who constantly contradict their weak arguments by taking BOTH sides of every issue.
Click to expand...


Right, I am a Conservative Republican... again.

Besides, you are talking to me and not those others that are making those statements... correct? ;)

It is not a "word", it is a "term" - "War on Terror"

You did not answer the question.
How do we have a War on Something Abstract... like Terror????

I think that you need to address the issue and not the person, you will have a better chance at making a coherent point that way. :2razz:
 
What was the Cold War, but a war of ideological differences?
A war isn't simply mindless bodies flailing at each other, it's people spurned on by an ideology, with tactics as political weaponry. Terrorism is a political weapon, to do what? Undermine a society's ideology and strengthen ones own.

Arguing the semantics of what words people use to identify a conflict doesn't make it any less real.
 
VTA said:
What was the Cold War, but a war of ideological differences?
A war isn't simply mindless bodies flailing at each other, it's people spurned on by an ideology, with tactics as political weaponry. Terrorism is a political weapon, to do what? Undermine a society's ideology and strengthen ones own.

Arguing the semantics of what words people use to identify a conflict doesn't make it any less real.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you will answer the question that I that TD ignored, for some reason:

How do we have a War on Something Abstract... like Terror????
 
khajmer said:
Honestly, I see these threads about the WoT being a joke, and I go into them hoping to see something about the fact that you can't actually wage war on terror. We all know about Gitmo, we all know it's a bad place, and people have been sent there for far less than being Osama's driver. Now, onto my point.

What is a war on terror? How can you wage war against an idea? What, are we going to go to the terrorist nation, fight their armies in a campaign across their territories, and then capture their leader and force a surrender so that we can all sign a treaty and go back to a peaceful world where Terroristan can slowly rebuild it's economy and go back to being a major and respected world power, maybe even join NATO? Yeah, I don't think so.

Terrorism isn't something you can wage war on. You can most certainly circumvent it, or hunt down terrorists themselves, but there will always be terrorists in the world blowing crap up to make a point. September 11th certainly wasn't the first time we've been attacked by terrorists, and it definitely won't be the last. So why do people continue to call it a War on Terror when in reality there's no such thing (bear in mind, I feel the same way about the War on Drugs. the difference is we're actually using the military on this one).
Click to expand...

pointless "wars," real and imagined, are what America is all about. The war on poverty. The war on Christmas. War on Science, War on Christians, Guns, Freedom, Etc. don't take it away from us, now.
 
niftydrifty said:
pointless "wars," real and imagined, are what America is all about. The war on poverty. The war on Christmas. War on Science, War on Christians, Guns, Freedom, Etc. don't take it away from us, now.
Click to expand...

My favorite was always the War on Drugs... :rofl

I hate to sound Orwellian, but we have this thing about constant and endless wars in this country, and it sucks.
Fight fight fight... everything is made out ot be a battle. :(



:2wave:
 
Bodhisattva said:
My favorite was always the War on Drugs... :rofl

I hate to sound Orwellian, but we have this thing about constant and endless wars in this country, and it sucks.
Fight fight fight... everything is made out ot be a battle. :(



:2wave:
Click to expand...

Time for the new endgame. The War on Wars.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Perhaps you will answer the question that I that TD ignored, for some reason:

How do we have a War on Something Abstract... like Terror????
Click to expand...

Do you think the survivors of the Bali bombings would define what they went through as an abstraction?

The word 'terror' is merely an identifier for a tactic, used as a political goal.
The tactic is palpable, and has tangible effects on people.

Democracy for some has, likewise, taken on substance beyond words, for both friends and enemies alike. While democracy is really just an ideology, hasn't it spurred palpable action that has physically affected many people?

For the most part, in every facet of life, we are fighting the ideologies of each other, be it in love, business or war. Our physical selves give substance to our beliefs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom