-
TDR Magazine subscribers receive more than the magazine! You also gain additional forum privileges!
Details here: TDR Privileges
Subscribe to TDR Magazine here: https://www.tdr-online.com/
Violence Never Solves Anything ........
- Thread starter Jumbo Jet
- Start Date
Attention: TDR Forum Junkies To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.
Thanks, TDR Staff
Max, Max, Max....tsk tsk tsk
Rich, it is sad that you don't see the full effort that must be made to bring those individuals to room temperature. That full effort is NOT simply violence.
No one single individual is going to see the "full effort that must be made to bring those individuals to room temperature"
The point is, as you stated, violence is a tool. In this case, there will, indeed, be many tools used on these buggers. Most will be to slow them down, annoy them, maybe cause some cells to turn upon each other, etc. The end result that must occur is that these unteachables who want YOU, yes, Max, YOU! dead at all possible cost, along with me, CF, JJ, and the rest of the TDR crowd, and our families, and our friends, and anyone who ever knew us, saw us, heard us, "lurked on our website", and any other American whose classification I missed DEAD. That includes any Muslim who lives here as a law-abiding citizen. The radicals also view them as infidels. Sure it's distasteful. Sure it's unpleasant. Unfortunately they need to die. They are bound and determined that we cannot win their hearts and minds, therefore, we must burn their huts down, preferably with them inside.
Now, I think, (I,too, do that sometimes) that should be simple enough to analyze. Them or you. Somebody's gonna die. Them or you, Max, and Jane, and Phil Donohue, and the un-named repetitive chanters. Them or you. You want to talk about violated rights? If you choose, "none of the above", then, for all intents and purposes, you chose "you". Unfortunately that means me, too, and I'm gonna take that a little personal.
Rich, it is sad that you don't see the full effort that must be made to bring those individuals to room temperature. That full effort is NOT simply violence.
No one single individual is going to see the "full effort that must be made to bring those individuals to room temperature"
The point is, as you stated, violence is a tool. In this case, there will, indeed, be many tools used on these buggers. Most will be to slow them down, annoy them, maybe cause some cells to turn upon each other, etc. The end result that must occur is that these unteachables who want YOU, yes, Max, YOU! dead at all possible cost, along with me, CF, JJ, and the rest of the TDR crowd, and our families, and our friends, and anyone who ever knew us, saw us, heard us, "lurked on our website", and any other American whose classification I missed DEAD. That includes any Muslim who lives here as a law-abiding citizen. The radicals also view them as infidels. Sure it's distasteful. Sure it's unpleasant. Unfortunately they need to die. They are bound and determined that we cannot win their hearts and minds, therefore, we must burn their huts down, preferably with them inside.
Now, I think, (I,too, do that sometimes) that should be simple enough to analyze. Them or you. Somebody's gonna die. Them or you, Max, and Jane, and Phil Donohue, and the un-named repetitive chanters. Them or you. You want to talk about violated rights? If you choose, "none of the above", then, for all intents and purposes, you chose "you". Unfortunately that means me, too, and I'm gonna take that a little personal.
Last edited:
Jumbo, you say you have used violence on your truck, then apologized. Interesting, do we plan on apologizing when we have killed thousands of innocents in our quest for justice? Or will we transcend the situation and prove that we are in fact better than the terrorists?
And as to your oil filter, did the violence solve the problem, a tight oil filter? No, because once the filter is removed, the next one could be put on just as tight. Violence was not the solution, but merely a tool in arriving at a solution. The solution used no violence at all, but a bit of common sense in tightening the replacement filter.
NPS, your debate seems to be concerned with the degree to which the military is allowed to act. As with any tool, the military can be misused, or abused. Clearly the examples you give the mission objectives were not clear, nor was the military allowed the unrestricted ability to achieve the objectives that were put forth, however unclear they were. I am NOT suggesting that the military be placed in harms way and then shackled. I am suggesting that the military (violence) be used properly, decisively, and accurately. We HAVE the ability to use our military in a way that minimizes civilian casualties, and we should do so. But as I have said, violence will not solve this problem. Following through on our proclaimed beliefs as written in the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution will put us much closer to a solution than simply annihilating the Afganistani people with force.
My examples were to show how violence would not solve the problem. You missed the point.
BK, your example of the use of violence to send a message is exactly what I am talking about. However, while it curtailed the problem in certain places, it clearly did not eliminate those using terror to send a message, they simply changed targets.
JAK, I hope perhaps they understand your words better than mine. Excellently stated.
Kitchell, I DARE you to find ANYTHING in my words that says freedom is not worth fighting for. To be quite honest, I am insulted that at a time like this, you would not only call for the U. S. to fight terrorism and use the military in full force, but THEN ask for a tax cut!!! Would I like a tax cut? YES!!! Do I think its a good thing to do when we are about to expend BILLIONS on a military operation? NO. While I recognize that you are simply being patriotic and looking at the big picture, using this occasion to further ones own wealth and well being is sitting on the edge of being insulting to those who died needlessly.
And while you rest on your laurels as a veteran, it would be wise to note that if not for the rest of the population who make up the nation, you would not only have nothing to defend, but nothing to defend it with. It is also insulting, even as I respect our servicemen and former servicemen, that any of you would demand recognition for that service after 6000 have died for simply earning a living to feed their families. None of the guys I know in, or previously in, the military feel they made even HALF the sacrifice those families have.
Rich, its obvious that you did not read my post very well. I never once said that allowing the terrorist community to stay alive was a good idea. I have said it will take more than simply killing these extremists to solve the problem.
Its fairly clear a bunch of you have narrow views of reality. Again, its a good thing GWB does not have the same blinders you prefer.
And as to your oil filter, did the violence solve the problem, a tight oil filter? No, because once the filter is removed, the next one could be put on just as tight. Violence was not the solution, but merely a tool in arriving at a solution. The solution used no violence at all, but a bit of common sense in tightening the replacement filter.
NPS, your debate seems to be concerned with the degree to which the military is allowed to act. As with any tool, the military can be misused, or abused. Clearly the examples you give the mission objectives were not clear, nor was the military allowed the unrestricted ability to achieve the objectives that were put forth, however unclear they were. I am NOT suggesting that the military be placed in harms way and then shackled. I am suggesting that the military (violence) be used properly, decisively, and accurately. We HAVE the ability to use our military in a way that minimizes civilian casualties, and we should do so. But as I have said, violence will not solve this problem. Following through on our proclaimed beliefs as written in the Declaration of Independance and the Constitution will put us much closer to a solution than simply annihilating the Afganistani people with force.
My examples were to show how violence would not solve the problem. You missed the point.
BK, your example of the use of violence to send a message is exactly what I am talking about. However, while it curtailed the problem in certain places, it clearly did not eliminate those using terror to send a message, they simply changed targets.
JAK, I hope perhaps they understand your words better than mine. Excellently stated.
Kitchell, I DARE you to find ANYTHING in my words that says freedom is not worth fighting for. To be quite honest, I am insulted that at a time like this, you would not only call for the U. S. to fight terrorism and use the military in full force, but THEN ask for a tax cut!!! Would I like a tax cut? YES!!! Do I think its a good thing to do when we are about to expend BILLIONS on a military operation? NO. While I recognize that you are simply being patriotic and looking at the big picture, using this occasion to further ones own wealth and well being is sitting on the edge of being insulting to those who died needlessly.
And while you rest on your laurels as a veteran, it would be wise to note that if not for the rest of the population who make up the nation, you would not only have nothing to defend, but nothing to defend it with. It is also insulting, even as I respect our servicemen and former servicemen, that any of you would demand recognition for that service after 6000 have died for simply earning a living to feed their families. None of the guys I know in, or previously in, the military feel they made even HALF the sacrifice those families have.
Rich, its obvious that you did not read my post very well. I never once said that allowing the terrorist community to stay alive was a good idea. I have said it will take more than simply killing these extremists to solve the problem.
Its fairly clear a bunch of you have narrow views of reality. Again, its a good thing GWB does not have the same blinders you prefer.
What is the total up to almost 7,00 lives lost now? How many lives are lost every year to drunk drivers... try over 40,000... each year... that's nearly half a million innocent Americans dead in a decade That's 40,000 dead earning a living or just going home.
The military thing is different. You go aboard knowing your *** could get smoked before the enlistment is up. You intentionally put yourself in harms way if it ever comes knocking. The dead people from Tuesday, and all the dead people from drunk drivers and other bad accidents in America were victims.
The guy working the gas station who gets shot gets his name on the evening news. The cop who dies catching the scumbag gets a citywide funeral, national news coverage most times and a letter of thanks from the Governor and sometimes President to be awarded to his/her family. That's the difference between being in the wrong place at the wrong time and volunteering your life to protect and defend others, and the difference between getting getting recognition and deserving recognition. There is a difference in how you got there, but the end result is always the same. Your dead. When my time comes, I want it to be for a reason, something worthwile. Not because I was in the wrong place at the wrong time when some drunk decided to smash me or when some fruit cake decides to kill everyone in the place I am at. There is a difference.
The military thing is different. You go aboard knowing your *** could get smoked before the enlistment is up. You intentionally put yourself in harms way if it ever comes knocking. The dead people from Tuesday, and all the dead people from drunk drivers and other bad accidents in America were victims.
The guy working the gas station who gets shot gets his name on the evening news. The cop who dies catching the scumbag gets a citywide funeral, national news coverage most times and a letter of thanks from the Governor and sometimes President to be awarded to his/her family. That's the difference between being in the wrong place at the wrong time and volunteering your life to protect and defend others, and the difference between getting getting recognition and deserving recognition. There is a difference in how you got there, but the end result is always the same. Your dead. When my time comes, I want it to be for a reason, something worthwile. Not because I was in the wrong place at the wrong time when some drunk decided to smash me or when some fruit cake decides to kill everyone in the place I am at. There is a difference.
Dont assume Powell is the greatest General around. If perception is reality, I would say he isnt being welcomed with smiles when he enters a room in Washington anymore. To tell the truth he never was cared for much in the military ring during Desert Storm either. Luckily for him Bush Sr. saved his name by not pulling a Truman vs McArthur only this time with the tables turned.
Hawks gang up against Powell
By Toby Harnden in Washington
(Filed: 26/09/2001)
THE political consensus over the September 11 attacks has begun to fracture in Washington with mounting criticism of Colin Powell by prominent conservative hawks.
William Kristol, a leading figure on the Right, accused the Secretary of State of undermining President Bush's war aims.
Mr Kristol, chief of staff to the former vice president Dan Quayle, wrote in the Washington Post: "Virtually every major political figure has gone out of his way to support the president. Except for his secretary of state . . . Colin Powell has revised or modified many of his boss's remarks. "
The article, the first public attack on Gen Powell by a prominent Republican since the devastating assault on America, also warned Mr Bush that he could face trouble from his own party if he steers too moderate a course.
"Eleven years ago, then-President Bush [Snr] overrode Powell's resistance to fighting Saddam. Bush was vindicated in doing so. Will the current President Bush follow Powell's lead? Or will Bush lead and demand that Powell follow?"
Many Republicans are uneasy about Gen Powell's approach, which appears to be based on limiting the war against terrorism to narrowly focused action against Osama bin Laden and his al-Qa'eda network.
Gen Powell has argued against taking action against "rogue states" such as Iraq and Libya and advocated bringing another, Iran, into the coalition against bin Laden.
There was widespread dismay among Republicans on Sunday when Gen Powell seemed to brush aside Mr Bush's implication that removing the Taliban from power was an American goal.
"With respect to the nature of the regime in Afghanistan, that is not uppermost in our minds right now," he said in an interview with NBC.
"I'm not going to say that it has become one of the objectives of the US government to either remove or put in place a different regime. "
He added that he didn't know whether "we should even consider a large-scale war of the conventional sort".
Gen Powell also said that "in the near future, we will be able to put out a paper, a document, that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking him [bin Laden] to this attack".
In an apparent sign that Mr Bush was not impressed with Gen Powell's performance in the interview, he came close to rebuking him as he explained next day that there would be no such paper.
"For those of you looking for a legal peg, we've already indicted Osama bin Laden . . . Now, Mr Secretary, if you'd like to make a comment on that. "
Gen Powell retreated, saying: "As we look through it and we can find areas that are unclassified and it will allow us to share this information with the public, we will do so. That would be our intent. But most of it is classified. "
In a letter to Mr Bush last week, 41 members of the Project for the New American Century, a conservative foreign policy group, wrote that following Gen Powell's advice not to act against Iraq "will constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on American terrorism".
Gary Schmitt, one of the signatories, said: "The fundamental issue is that Powell and the State Department are very anxious to confine the terms of the war to the most limited target possible.
"But the lesson learned on September 11 was that if you play defence the whole time you're going to get burned. "
Gen Powell, he said, was trying to make the "first step" in the war - the tackling of bin Laden and the al-Qa'eda network - the last.
"The Gulf war showed that if you act decisively and you're clear about your goals the American people will rally behind you. "
The battle between the Powellites and hawks - such as Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, and his deputy Paul Wolfowitz - promises to intensify once initial action against bin Laden has been taken and the debate begins in earnest about what phase two should be.
for all (and MAX) there is a time for peace and a time to strap on the iron and call out the bad guy. Its high noon and its time to start killin the bad guys.
Seriously... . I am a active duty officer (LDO Mustang) who put his retierment in in april to retire in the spring well looks like I might have to stay in the Gun club another war.
We have for to long let these things go unanswered... . its time to let the world know we will not take this anymore.
Sorry but 5000+ americans and 1000 others is enough for me to say killing is justified if not demanded.
If you still opose violence after this then I pray you are not the head of your household... . your family might someday need a defender/protector and you'll be behind your wife's skirt.
Not me I'd die defending my wife and kid. But I would not go alone!
My family enjoys our way of life in the USA and thats why I love being a Marine. I am a part of a unit that defends all americans from the bad guys. I will do my part! God bless america.
Seriously... . I am a active duty officer (LDO Mustang) who put his retierment in in april to retire in the spring well looks like I might have to stay in the Gun club another war.
We have for to long let these things go unanswered... . its time to let the world know we will not take this anymore.
Sorry but 5000+ americans and 1000 others is enough for me to say killing is justified if not demanded.
If you still opose violence after this then I pray you are not the head of your household... . your family might someday need a defender/protector and you'll be behind your wife's skirt.
Not me I'd die defending my wife and kid. But I would not go alone!
My family enjoys our way of life in the USA and thats why I love being a Marine. I am a part of a unit that defends all americans from the bad guys. I will do my part! God bless america.
Here it is.
We as a people must take a time in history to admit that we have fear. Some don't recognize it,because we mask it with bravado and saber ratteling. I know I am scared for our men and women in harms way. I am scared for my granddaughter who is in the military. And my grandson who is going in. This is going to be a free for all after its gets started. I have serious doubts that we will see any end to this in the next 4-5 years or more. Once it starts every radical faction in the world will take it upon itself to attack our assets all over the world. And yes,it will most likely happen here again.
However we all must stick together stateside and try to put all our focus on supporting our troops and president. We also must keep a close eye on our own goverment so our freedoms are not infringed upon. This is an important task,it was given to us long ago by our forefathers.
We as a people must take a time in history to admit that we have fear. Some don't recognize it,because we mask it with bravado and saber ratteling. I know I am scared for our men and women in harms way. I am scared for my granddaughter who is in the military. And my grandson who is going in. This is going to be a free for all after its gets started. I have serious doubts that we will see any end to this in the next 4-5 years or more. Once it starts every radical faction in the world will take it upon itself to attack our assets all over the world. And yes,it will most likely happen here again.
However we all must stick together stateside and try to put all our focus on supporting our troops and president. We also must keep a close eye on our own goverment so our freedoms are not infringed upon. This is an important task,it was given to us long ago by our forefathers.
BK
TDR MEMBER
max 340... .
"BK, your example of the use of violence to send a message is exactly what I am talking about. However, while it curtailed the problem in certain places, it clearly did not eliminate those using terror to send a message, they simply changed targets. "
Yes the target became us, since our meathodes of dealing with them were not strong enough to scare them away.
If all in this new anti-terrorist group were to practice the same eye for an eye that as worked for the Russians, these terrorist wouldnt have anything to work for.
Again, we treated it like a boxing match when the terrorists were fighting a street fight. Doesnt work. We can say that now with the most terrible kind of 20/20 hindsite.
Not only do we need a damn good reason for these terrorists not to try something again. We also need to eliminate them. But I doubt we will find them all.
What age do you think these guys started their mindset?
You've seen the videos of those 12 year olds celebrating the attack. . they are the next 20'something bombers.
Get it? Are we supposed to interview all pre-teens and teens in the Middle East and those that are stupid enough to say they want to become the next marter, we round em up and burn them at the stake. . as much as I"m for some drastic measures, that wont happen. So we need an effect deterent that gets them AT THEIR LEVEL! when they decide it's their turn. It's a new war that we havent fought before, and new defenses are needed. The Star Wars missle shield isnt going todo diddly for this. But thats were our thinking has been... all of this has been way below our radar.
It's like crab grass, you need to do something to keep it in check, if not it always gets back into your lawn and gets your good grass.
These terrorists operate on a level that has been driven by brain washing. They believe that they go to heaven and have 72 virgins to marry. They believe their family will be blessed. They are told their family will be rewarded and will be taken care of since they will be a "hero"...
Sending in cuize missles and 500K troops can't combat that.
But threating to kill their family will!! It's either theirs or yours? Which is it? I know my answer.
Max it seems why your taking heat is that anything that differs from a straight line of moral, PC'ism or direct order type command thinking you dismiss as not a viable solution. I'll say all these items are not a single solution on it's own, since this war needs to be fought on many fronts, fronts that we cant touch of feel.
But a combination of them to add defensive mechanicsims of self survivel that are at their level and new ways of getting intellagence are needed. If we just say no to every type of "mission" that it in someway isnt PC or completely moral... we might as well sit on our hands, open the gates and let them just have their way with use till they get it out of their system.
You better check that line you drew in the sand with your sword. . you may have drawn it much closer to your toes than you think. . I bet some of your toes are bleading. Your PC'ism has blinded you to how far things are and have to go. You want to see a typical war fought on a front. But the typical military response is no where near deep enough of a reaction to eliminate and stop future terrorists. This is not the Comi's Vs free world here. This is not the Gulf War.
Champane Flight, your totally correct and we need a NEW way of dealing with it, it will not be a war like any other we fought before.
Chad Sheets , How timely..... I have noticed some negative things about Powell in the paper this week. Seems he's been running his mouth with out approval from the President. Seems what Powell said was very much against the policies the President had spoken about to the press and outlined. Such as what they will and wont say.
I admit that from Persian Gulf war, I had a very positive notion about him. Now one does have to wonder...
I'll close my trap again...
Bob
"BK, your example of the use of violence to send a message is exactly what I am talking about. However, while it curtailed the problem in certain places, it clearly did not eliminate those using terror to send a message, they simply changed targets. "
Yes the target became us, since our meathodes of dealing with them were not strong enough to scare them away.
If all in this new anti-terrorist group were to practice the same eye for an eye that as worked for the Russians, these terrorist wouldnt have anything to work for.
Again, we treated it like a boxing match when the terrorists were fighting a street fight. Doesnt work. We can say that now with the most terrible kind of 20/20 hindsite.
Not only do we need a damn good reason for these terrorists not to try something again. We also need to eliminate them. But I doubt we will find them all.
What age do you think these guys started their mindset?
You've seen the videos of those 12 year olds celebrating the attack. . they are the next 20'something bombers.
Get it? Are we supposed to interview all pre-teens and teens in the Middle East and those that are stupid enough to say they want to become the next marter, we round em up and burn them at the stake. . as much as I"m for some drastic measures, that wont happen. So we need an effect deterent that gets them AT THEIR LEVEL! when they decide it's their turn. It's a new war that we havent fought before, and new defenses are needed. The Star Wars missle shield isnt going todo diddly for this. But thats were our thinking has been... all of this has been way below our radar.
It's like crab grass, you need to do something to keep it in check, if not it always gets back into your lawn and gets your good grass.
These terrorists operate on a level that has been driven by brain washing. They believe that they go to heaven and have 72 virgins to marry. They believe their family will be blessed. They are told their family will be rewarded and will be taken care of since they will be a "hero"...
Sending in cuize missles and 500K troops can't combat that.
But threating to kill their family will!! It's either theirs or yours? Which is it? I know my answer.
Max it seems why your taking heat is that anything that differs from a straight line of moral, PC'ism or direct order type command thinking you dismiss as not a viable solution. I'll say all these items are not a single solution on it's own, since this war needs to be fought on many fronts, fronts that we cant touch of feel.
But a combination of them to add defensive mechanicsims of self survivel that are at their level and new ways of getting intellagence are needed. If we just say no to every type of "mission" that it in someway isnt PC or completely moral... we might as well sit on our hands, open the gates and let them just have their way with use till they get it out of their system.
You better check that line you drew in the sand with your sword. . you may have drawn it much closer to your toes than you think. . I bet some of your toes are bleading. Your PC'ism has blinded you to how far things are and have to go. You want to see a typical war fought on a front. But the typical military response is no where near deep enough of a reaction to eliminate and stop future terrorists. This is not the Comi's Vs free world here. This is not the Gulf War.
Champane Flight, your totally correct and we need a NEW way of dealing with it, it will not be a war like any other we fought before.
Chad Sheets , How timely..... I have noticed some negative things about Powell in the paper this week. Seems he's been running his mouth with out approval from the President. Seems what Powell said was very much against the policies the President had spoken about to the press and outlined. Such as what they will and wont say.
I admit that from Persian Gulf war, I had a very positive notion about him. Now one does have to wonder...
I'll close my trap again...
Bob
OK. One more try to make this so clear even the simplest among us can understand it:
1. NOBODY in this thread has opposed the use of violence to wipe out those who have attacked us or anyone who would threaten our security. If you don't believe this go back and reread the whole thread. If you still don't believe it, have someone else read it and explain it to you.
2. NOBODY has suggested we employ the military as a political pawn as has happened way too many times since WWII. The military is very capable of wreaking havoc precisely where it is needed (I know, I've got my share of service time. ) and should be allowed to do so by tactics determined by military personnel, not politicians. Nobody thus far has suggested otherwise.
3. Here's the part that has caused most of the confusion so read it very carefully. If you think something here is pacifist then you have misunderstood it and need to read it again:
This is a different kind of war than we have waged before. It's going to take MORE than raw firepower to achieve desired results. There is no one country to invade and occupy. These terrorist groups have cells all over the world. For those of us who aren't presently associated with the military or law enforcement, our use of force is limited to defending ourselves. (Legal in every state in this great country) If you're fortunate enough to live in a state that recognizes your right to carry concealed weapons, EXERCISE THAT RIGHT! And defend yourself within the limits of the law. But our responsibilities to the success of this war DO NOT stop there. Here are some of the things we must all do to help the cause. All of them are non violent but none of them are unimportant: 1. Exercise patience and cooperation when flying the airlines. There are many bugs to work out of the security at airports and it's going to be a while before air travel will work smoothly. 2. Exercise the same patience and cooperation with increased security measures where ever they are encountered. 3. Educate those who would try to substitute non violent methods where violence is appropriate. This works better without many of the insults that have flown around this thread. I admit, some will refuse to be educated but that doesn't stop me from trying. Don't let those who may be sitting on the fence in this issue slip over to the wrong side. Certainly don't push them over there. Many of them are just ignorant of their history and the facts. Don't hate them for their ignorance until some attempt at educating them fails. The success of this war will depend heavily on the will of the people to stay focused on winning. 4. Continue to do those things that make this country function. Run your buisinesses, volunteer with your local fire company, VFW, Red Cross or whatever organization you choose. 5. Join the armed forces if you feel that is appropriate or answer the call if the government makes that choice for you. Then you will have the opportunity to wield the force of violence against our enemies. 6. Understand that the government will have to employ some diplomatic measures in addition to the use of brute force. Not in lieu of.
The title of this topic "Violence Never Solves Anything" is certainly a lie. Those who live by it are doomed to pay for that mistake with their blood. Nobody so far has defended that lie in this thread. (I have read every post carefully and repeatedly in case I missed something and found no defense of that lie anywhere. ) It has only been pointed out that the opposite "Violence Solves Everything" isn't much closer to the truth. "Violence Solves A Lot of Things with help from every resource we have" is the truth as I see it and exactly how it has been debated here. If I have missed something you can call me a dumb*** illiterate but don't question my resolve to see this fight through to victory.
1. NOBODY in this thread has opposed the use of violence to wipe out those who have attacked us or anyone who would threaten our security. If you don't believe this go back and reread the whole thread. If you still don't believe it, have someone else read it and explain it to you.
2. NOBODY has suggested we employ the military as a political pawn as has happened way too many times since WWII. The military is very capable of wreaking havoc precisely where it is needed (I know, I've got my share of service time. ) and should be allowed to do so by tactics determined by military personnel, not politicians. Nobody thus far has suggested otherwise.
3. Here's the part that has caused most of the confusion so read it very carefully. If you think something here is pacifist then you have misunderstood it and need to read it again:
This is a different kind of war than we have waged before. It's going to take MORE than raw firepower to achieve desired results. There is no one country to invade and occupy. These terrorist groups have cells all over the world. For those of us who aren't presently associated with the military or law enforcement, our use of force is limited to defending ourselves. (Legal in every state in this great country) If you're fortunate enough to live in a state that recognizes your right to carry concealed weapons, EXERCISE THAT RIGHT! And defend yourself within the limits of the law. But our responsibilities to the success of this war DO NOT stop there. Here are some of the things we must all do to help the cause. All of them are non violent but none of them are unimportant: 1. Exercise patience and cooperation when flying the airlines. There are many bugs to work out of the security at airports and it's going to be a while before air travel will work smoothly. 2. Exercise the same patience and cooperation with increased security measures where ever they are encountered. 3. Educate those who would try to substitute non violent methods where violence is appropriate. This works better without many of the insults that have flown around this thread. I admit, some will refuse to be educated but that doesn't stop me from trying. Don't let those who may be sitting on the fence in this issue slip over to the wrong side. Certainly don't push them over there. Many of them are just ignorant of their history and the facts. Don't hate them for their ignorance until some attempt at educating them fails. The success of this war will depend heavily on the will of the people to stay focused on winning. 4. Continue to do those things that make this country function. Run your buisinesses, volunteer with your local fire company, VFW, Red Cross or whatever organization you choose. 5. Join the armed forces if you feel that is appropriate or answer the call if the government makes that choice for you. Then you will have the opportunity to wield the force of violence against our enemies. 6. Understand that the government will have to employ some diplomatic measures in addition to the use of brute force. Not in lieu of.
The title of this topic "Violence Never Solves Anything" is certainly a lie. Those who live by it are doomed to pay for that mistake with their blood. Nobody so far has defended that lie in this thread. (I have read every post carefully and repeatedly in case I missed something and found no defense of that lie anywhere. ) It has only been pointed out that the opposite "Violence Solves Everything" isn't much closer to the truth. "Violence Solves A Lot of Things with help from every resource we have" is the truth as I see it and exactly how it has been debated here. If I have missed something you can call me a dumb*** illiterate but don't question my resolve to see this fight through to victory.
So its not honorable to be a victim while working for ones family, but it is honorable to be killed when working for ones country? Which set of values is better? I put them on the same level. Mentioning drunk driving victims cheapens either of the other circumstances. Your reply comes across as belittleing anyone who is a victim compared to a person you gambles on the odds of being killed in combat when there is also a possibility that no combat will occur. Seems to me both are trying to lead their lives on a set of values espoused by this country as a whole, and that both are worth something as human beings.
And while you would prefer to die for a cause or a purpose, if you do not, will you consider your life a waste? I think not, and I don't believe thats true, even if I think your attitude sucks. Seems to me most of us in here are just average guys making a living from many different backgrounds. So if you die while working for CAT, is your life in vain? Thats what you appear to be saying, and I disagree.
Chad, you REALLY need to read more closely. I did not say Powell was the best, I said he was ONE of the best, and that the point could be argued. Fact is, the man has a good handle on any situation he enters and is good at what he does. The fact that Powell "revises or modifies" what has been said by GWB may be a reflection of the required diplomacy in his position. I find it interesting how critics come out of the woodwork (chief of staff to Quayle????) and assume they could do a better job. Seems to me that Powell has the toughest of all the jobs, assembling a coalition. As to his comments on the Taliban, Bush said exactly the same thing on CNN last night, so just how different IS Powell's stance than Bush's? Again, Powell has an idea how to go about the military end of things, just how much do the politicians know? Both Bush and Powell appear to be doing an exceptional job under difficult circumstances. Its too bad some feel that political criticism is a good idea right now.
CGoyette, I think you have missed my point if you think I am advocating allowing these terrorists to continue sucking oxygen. But I also think that simply killing them is NOT the solution and that much more needs to be done. I have not and will not oppose violence. I simply stated that it was a tool that had a time and place for use and that it was not a solution. You can kill a terroist, but you cannot kill a religion or an attitude that pervades a society that opposes ours.
CF, I admit I have differed from your opinion in the past, but once again, you have made an excellent point.
BK, I agree, but how does a set of covert assasignations fit in with what we know as our founding set of values? I'm not sure, but I agree, it is effective. However, does it solve the problem? No. The attitude of hatred towards the U. S. remains. Threatening to kill their family will only continue that attitude. Do you expect anything less from them? If someone threatened your family, would you laugh it off? Or would you make sure it did not happen by trying to kill the guy that made the threat? Obviously its time to find and exterminate the bin Laden group (and others), but proving them righteous in their attitude towards us will accomplish nothing.
I haven't dismissed anything as a viable action, But there is only one viable solution, and that is changing the attitude towards the U. S. The use of violence will eliminate the present terrorists, but it will not eliminate the attitude and generations of beliefs that follow them. I never said any mode of warfare should be eliminated, I merely stated that violence is not the solution, it is a tool. I am expecting that a war will NOT be fought on a front. In fact, I believe that it will be fought in small skirmishes, that we may never hear more about than that Dover has a new set of flags to fold and hand to families. I expect it will take years of this sort of action, and that many Americans will die in the process. All of this is reality. But also part of that reality is the fact that violence will not change the hatred of the U. S.
And while you would prefer to die for a cause or a purpose, if you do not, will you consider your life a waste? I think not, and I don't believe thats true, even if I think your attitude sucks. Seems to me most of us in here are just average guys making a living from many different backgrounds. So if you die while working for CAT, is your life in vain? Thats what you appear to be saying, and I disagree.
Chad, you REALLY need to read more closely. I did not say Powell was the best, I said he was ONE of the best, and that the point could be argued. Fact is, the man has a good handle on any situation he enters and is good at what he does. The fact that Powell "revises or modifies" what has been said by GWB may be a reflection of the required diplomacy in his position. I find it interesting how critics come out of the woodwork (chief of staff to Quayle????) and assume they could do a better job. Seems to me that Powell has the toughest of all the jobs, assembling a coalition. As to his comments on the Taliban, Bush said exactly the same thing on CNN last night, so just how different IS Powell's stance than Bush's? Again, Powell has an idea how to go about the military end of things, just how much do the politicians know? Both Bush and Powell appear to be doing an exceptional job under difficult circumstances. Its too bad some feel that political criticism is a good idea right now.
CGoyette, I think you have missed my point if you think I am advocating allowing these terrorists to continue sucking oxygen. But I also think that simply killing them is NOT the solution and that much more needs to be done. I have not and will not oppose violence. I simply stated that it was a tool that had a time and place for use and that it was not a solution. You can kill a terroist, but you cannot kill a religion or an attitude that pervades a society that opposes ours.
CF, I admit I have differed from your opinion in the past, but once again, you have made an excellent point.
BK, I agree, but how does a set of covert assasignations fit in with what we know as our founding set of values? I'm not sure, but I agree, it is effective. However, does it solve the problem? No. The attitude of hatred towards the U. S. remains. Threatening to kill their family will only continue that attitude. Do you expect anything less from them? If someone threatened your family, would you laugh it off? Or would you make sure it did not happen by trying to kill the guy that made the threat? Obviously its time to find and exterminate the bin Laden group (and others), but proving them righteous in their attitude towards us will accomplish nothing.
I haven't dismissed anything as a viable action, But there is only one viable solution, and that is changing the attitude towards the U. S. The use of violence will eliminate the present terrorists, but it will not eliminate the attitude and generations of beliefs that follow them. I never said any mode of warfare should be eliminated, I merely stated that violence is not the solution, it is a tool. I am expecting that a war will NOT be fought on a front. In fact, I believe that it will be fought in small skirmishes, that we may never hear more about than that Dover has a new set of flags to fold and hand to families. I expect it will take years of this sort of action, and that many Americans will die in the process. All of this is reality. But also part of that reality is the fact that violence will not change the hatred of the U. S.
BK
TDR MEMBER
Max340. .
"BK, I agree, but how does a set of covert assasignations fit in with what we know as our founding set of values? I'm not sure, but I agree, it is effective. However, does it solve the problem? No. The attitude of hatred towards the U. S. remains. Threatening to kill their family will only continue that attitude. Do you expect anything less from them? If someone threatened your family, would you laugh it off? Or would you make sure it did not happen by trying to kill the guy that made the threat? Obviously its time to find and exterminate the bin Laden group (and others), but proving them righteous in their attitude towards us will accomplish nothing. "...
Killing Bin is only going to, for a very short time hurt their flow of money. I agree we need to kill him, but that won't stop the nut cakes that follow him.
You are not going to re-educate his nut cakes, you are not going to buy them off, they are brain washed.
You need to take those values brain washed into them and find a way to negate them... . the Russians found the way.
Once they realize they are fighting a futile battle you have 1/2 a chance to say they have two choices, talk or your family dies...
right now THEY only see one... they die to become a hero while taking out as many of "us western devils" as they can..... you cant fight that battle with cruise missles... it's already been proven. . understand? we can't change their present attitudes, and by them I mean the ones with bombs strapped to their chest...
Others, the masses that haven't committed to tieing on the bomb yet and really practice their religion and realize that theirs and all religions do not allow suicide of any kind..... those are the attitudes that may be could change through diplomacy. . but the ones that threaten us today... there's only a small windows of solutions for... and they arent sterile ones...
"BK, I agree, but how does a set of covert assasignations fit in with what we know as our founding set of values? I'm not sure, but I agree, it is effective. However, does it solve the problem? No. The attitude of hatred towards the U. S. remains. Threatening to kill their family will only continue that attitude. Do you expect anything less from them? If someone threatened your family, would you laugh it off? Or would you make sure it did not happen by trying to kill the guy that made the threat? Obviously its time to find and exterminate the bin Laden group (and others), but proving them righteous in their attitude towards us will accomplish nothing. "...
Killing Bin is only going to, for a very short time hurt their flow of money. I agree we need to kill him, but that won't stop the nut cakes that follow him.
You are not going to re-educate his nut cakes, you are not going to buy them off, they are brain washed.
You need to take those values brain washed into them and find a way to negate them... . the Russians found the way.
Once they realize they are fighting a futile battle you have 1/2 a chance to say they have two choices, talk or your family dies...
right now THEY only see one... they die to become a hero while taking out as many of "us western devils" as they can..... you cant fight that battle with cruise missles... it's already been proven. . understand? we can't change their present attitudes, and by them I mean the ones with bombs strapped to their chest...
Others, the masses that haven't committed to tieing on the bomb yet and really practice their religion and realize that theirs and all religions do not allow suicide of any kind..... those are the attitudes that may be could change through diplomacy. . but the ones that threaten us today... there's only a small windows of solutions for... and they arent sterile ones...
Maybe?
Maybe we ahve been trying to kill the men responsible when we should be going after the idea. There are thousands of starving people in Afganastan and other middle eastern countrys right now. Maybe we should start a precise bombing campaign. With FOOD and CLOTHING. On all the food stuffs we put the good ole USA markings and a short message. "This food and clothing is brought to you by the good ole USA we are your freinds,we are feeding you,unlike your own goverment. Medical care and a roof over your heads are to follow".
This will also show the world what we are really about.
Maybe we ahve been trying to kill the men responsible when we should be going after the idea. There are thousands of starving people in Afganastan and other middle eastern countrys right now. Maybe we should start a precise bombing campaign. With FOOD and CLOTHING. On all the food stuffs we put the good ole USA markings and a short message. "This food and clothing is brought to you by the good ole USA we are your freinds,we are feeding you,unlike your own goverment. Medical care and a roof over your heads are to follow".
This will also show the world what we are really about.
I think the Pope said it correctly a couple of days ago. We have the right to defend ourselves.
In other words... . For evil to rule, good men need do nothing.
It would be great if we could just all live peacefully, but that is not our current reality.
If I were to go to hell because I killed a bad guy, then so be it. That is a sacrifice I am willing to make so that my children have a better chance than I of living in a peaceful world..... and don't tell me I'd be making it worse, because that's bologna! bin Laden wants to kill "... as many Americans, wherever and whenever possible. "
He is a cold blooded murderer that should be thrown in jail for ever. If he refuses to go quietly, deadly force is just fine.
I cannot say enough about www.washingtonpost.com
I have been using this as my info source, and anything else I see or read pales in comparrison to its depth, accuracy, and lack of political favor.
READ IT. You won't regret it.
ray
In other words... . For evil to rule, good men need do nothing.
It would be great if we could just all live peacefully, but that is not our current reality.
If I were to go to hell because I killed a bad guy, then so be it. That is a sacrifice I am willing to make so that my children have a better chance than I of living in a peaceful world..... and don't tell me I'd be making it worse, because that's bologna! bin Laden wants to kill "... as many Americans, wherever and whenever possible. "
He is a cold blooded murderer that should be thrown in jail for ever. If he refuses to go quietly, deadly force is just fine.
I cannot say enough about www.washingtonpost.com
I have been using this as my info source, and anything else I see or read pales in comparrison to its depth, accuracy, and lack of political favor.
READ IT. You won't regret it.
ray
CF,
WE HAVE BEEN DOING THAT FOR AT LEAST 100 YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They eat the food, then burn the flag! Then ask for more
!!
I love the word- vaporize.
These people have been a pimple on the *** of the world long enough. Take 'em out. All of them.
WE HAVE BEEN DOING THAT FOR AT LEAST 100 YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They eat the food, then burn the flag! Then ask for more
!!
I love the word- vaporize.
These people have been a pimple on the *** of the world long enough. Take 'em out. All of them.
The world
I have no time to sit and read the paper. I do listen to "The world" on NPR. It gives an interesting veiw from the rest of the worlds eyes.
I have no time to sit and read the paper. I do listen to "The world" on NPR. It gives an interesting veiw from the rest of the worlds eyes.
max 340
I think you have missed one point. Yes, we as americans do have the right to disagree with anything and anyone. But Hanoi Jane and people like her hurt the American cause by parading their disagreement on national television. And, most of the media are liberals and try hard to emphysize their disagreement, and attempt to show Hanoi Jane and her followers as the majority. This in efficet harms the efforts of our military as it did in viet nam.
I did my time in the military and my daughter is a navy nurse and I look dimly on people I consider to be traitors.
I think the government should quickly pass a law making it a crime to parade around in public with signs which may undermine the work of our military.
We don't need jane fonda or anyone like her on TV.
God Bless the men and women in the military.
One more thing.
If clinton had acted forcefully after the WTC had been bombed the last time, and had wiped out the terrorists then. About 7,000 people would be alive today.
I think you have missed one point. Yes, we as americans do have the right to disagree with anything and anyone. But Hanoi Jane and people like her hurt the American cause by parading their disagreement on national television. And, most of the media are liberals and try hard to emphysize their disagreement, and attempt to show Hanoi Jane and her followers as the majority. This in efficet harms the efforts of our military as it did in viet nam.
I did my time in the military and my daughter is a navy nurse and I look dimly on people I consider to be traitors.
I think the government should quickly pass a law making it a crime to parade around in public with signs which may undermine the work of our military.
We don't need jane fonda or anyone like her on TV.
God Bless the men and women in the military.
One more thing.
If clinton had acted forcefully after the WTC had been bombed the last time, and had wiped out the terrorists then. About 7,000 people would be alive today.
A very good friend of mine worked for public radio for 19 years. Won many awards.
NPR uses british news because #1) It's in English and #2) It's much cheaper than buying American news (or creating it themsleves). It does tend to lean to the liberal side. I think they are near the top of the heap for quality & depth.
Sorry you don't have time to read. The Washington Post is much more objective than npr (bbc).
NPR uses british news because #1) It's in English and #2) It's much cheaper than buying American news (or creating it themsleves). It does tend to lean to the liberal side. I think they are near the top of the heap for quality & depth.
Sorry you don't have time to read. The Washington Post is much more objective than npr (bbc).
BK, As long as you use only killing and violence, the attitude remains, and perhaps is fostered. A Special Forces General on CNN tonight mentioned that in order to win fully, we need to win their hearts and minds. This is not the first time I have heard this statement, nor do I feel it will be the last.
Let me make something very clear. I am very much in support of suffocating bin Laden and his supporters in all ways that are effective, including large doses of firepower. I am very much torn between annihilating he and his band of terrorists and capturing them and allowing them to rot in jail, which to them would be more of a punishment than death. I want them to suffer as much as possible for what they have done.
But I am also very aware that the attitude bin Laden carries is much more far reaching than simply bin Laden and associates. To root out the attitude by individuals and kill each one, one by one, would be impossible. We MUST make an effort to "win the hearts and minds" of these people to rid the world of such an attitude. To do anything else alone will, I am sure, allow this same thing to happen again in the future.
CF, I am not sure that wholesale support of the Afgan nation is the best idea, but it sure goes further in changing our reputation than bullets will. Again, I am torn, do I feel like supporting another nation? Not particularly. But if that support helps keep this country safe, maybe its worth it. It is not an easy problem to solve, but certainly violence is not the solution, only a tool to move toward the solution.
Cobra, what point would that be? Violence not being the solution and Jane Fonda and her ilk calling for NO violent actions are far apart in my view. To the point, anyone saying we should not snuff out terror with all the force necessary is due for a reality check.
OTOH, thinking that violence will solve the problem, and it won't happen again after a few well placed bombs is missing the blatant proof in the bombing of Libya. We bombed Libya as a message that we won't tolerate terrorism, and guess what? They did it again. Big surprise. Obviously its going to take more than killing the vines of this mutant plant. Killing the root is essential. Doing that will take more than armed force.
Passing a law against freedom of speech is not only unConstitutional, but goes against the principles on which this country was founded. If we were to do as you suggest it would be duplicating one of the steps Nazis in Germany took to make sure they stayed in power. I do not believe thats a good idea, and it certainly solves nothing. It also is a liberal method of attacking the problem, "legislate against it, and it'll go away. "
Your conclusion that Clintons actions allowed this to happen are rather shakey at best. I do not agree with his methods, but the fact is, you and I have no proof either way to blame or exonerate Clinton in this event.
Let me make something very clear. I am very much in support of suffocating bin Laden and his supporters in all ways that are effective, including large doses of firepower. I am very much torn between annihilating he and his band of terrorists and capturing them and allowing them to rot in jail, which to them would be more of a punishment than death. I want them to suffer as much as possible for what they have done.
But I am also very aware that the attitude bin Laden carries is much more far reaching than simply bin Laden and associates. To root out the attitude by individuals and kill each one, one by one, would be impossible. We MUST make an effort to "win the hearts and minds" of these people to rid the world of such an attitude. To do anything else alone will, I am sure, allow this same thing to happen again in the future.
CF, I am not sure that wholesale support of the Afgan nation is the best idea, but it sure goes further in changing our reputation than bullets will. Again, I am torn, do I feel like supporting another nation? Not particularly. But if that support helps keep this country safe, maybe its worth it. It is not an easy problem to solve, but certainly violence is not the solution, only a tool to move toward the solution.
Cobra, what point would that be? Violence not being the solution and Jane Fonda and her ilk calling for NO violent actions are far apart in my view. To the point, anyone saying we should not snuff out terror with all the force necessary is due for a reality check.
OTOH, thinking that violence will solve the problem, and it won't happen again after a few well placed bombs is missing the blatant proof in the bombing of Libya. We bombed Libya as a message that we won't tolerate terrorism, and guess what? They did it again. Big surprise. Obviously its going to take more than killing the vines of this mutant plant. Killing the root is essential. Doing that will take more than armed force.
Passing a law against freedom of speech is not only unConstitutional, but goes against the principles on which this country was founded. If we were to do as you suggest it would be duplicating one of the steps Nazis in Germany took to make sure they stayed in power. I do not believe thats a good idea, and it certainly solves nothing. It also is a liberal method of attacking the problem, "legislate against it, and it'll go away. "
Your conclusion that Clintons actions allowed this to happen are rather shakey at best. I do not agree with his methods, but the fact is, you and I have no proof either way to blame or exonerate Clinton in this event.
Gentlemen, think about this for a moment. What is/should be our ultimate goal? Is it to kill bin Laden or "bring him to justice"? I think not. I believe it should be to ensure that nobody EVER considers attacking us again.
How to accomplish this? We will never be able to kill every terrorist in the world, nor can we "win their hearts and minds".
The only way groups such as bin Laden's can effectively operate against us is by being harbored, supported, given cover, and encouraged by the governments in the areas the terrorists inhabit.
The only way I can see to accomplish our objective is to make the price of sponsoring terrorism so high that no government is willing to pay it. If we make an proper example of Afghanistan, then other governments sympathetic to the terrorists will not risk allowing them into their countries. If they cannot secure a base of operation, they cannot effectively operate.
How to accomplish this? We will never be able to kill every terrorist in the world, nor can we "win their hearts and minds".
The only way groups such as bin Laden's can effectively operate against us is by being harbored, supported, given cover, and encouraged by the governments in the areas the terrorists inhabit.
The only way I can see to accomplish our objective is to make the price of sponsoring terrorism so high that no government is willing to pay it. If we make an proper example of Afghanistan, then other governments sympathetic to the terrorists will not risk allowing them into their countries. If they cannot secure a base of operation, they cannot effectively operate.
You just put it all in a nut shell. You are dead on with the ultimate goal. Everything else related is secondary.
I like the idea of winning hearts and minds, but it only works with people who have the ability to reason. That is a military tactic when fighting other military organizations that have our own cultural thinking. We tried it and made it work to a point in Germany during W. W. II. However, it did not work with the more Eastern culture of Japan. They were throwing kids up in suicide bombers by the hundreds towards the end because everyone wanted to die in battle against America. There was no winning of hearts and minds to it at the time, and we had to do something big to stop it all for good, which was the atomic bomb as we all know. The only way for them to change their minds, is to make them listen.
Make the price of sponsoring terrorism so high that no government is willing to pay it. I for one would love to see it happen.
"The only way groups such as bin Laden's can effectively operate against us is by being harbored, supported, given cover, and encouraged by the governments in the areas the terrorists inhabit. "
That is the best thing I have heard that makes sense yet. Outstanding observations considering the distractions.
I like the idea of winning hearts and minds, but it only works with people who have the ability to reason. That is a military tactic when fighting other military organizations that have our own cultural thinking. We tried it and made it work to a point in Germany during W. W. II. However, it did not work with the more Eastern culture of Japan. They were throwing kids up in suicide bombers by the hundreds towards the end because everyone wanted to die in battle against America. There was no winning of hearts and minds to it at the time, and we had to do something big to stop it all for good, which was the atomic bomb as we all know. The only way for them to change their minds, is to make them listen.
Make the price of sponsoring terrorism so high that no government is willing to pay it. I for one would love to see it happen.
"The only way groups such as bin Laden's can effectively operate against us is by being harbored, supported, given cover, and encouraged by the governments in the areas the terrorists inhabit. "
That is the best thing I have heard that makes sense yet. Outstanding observations considering the distractions.
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
Turbo Diesel Register
Issue 128 – Digital Version
Digital Magazines
FREE!
TDR Test Drive - Digital Edition
Renew
Subscribe
Gift Subscriptions
Back Issues
Subscription Status
Address Change Form
Buyer's Guides
Ram Diagnostic Trouble Codes
The Perfect Collection
The Perfect Collection Vol. II
TSB Updates
Dodge/Cummins Historical Overview
Cameron Collection
What Makes Us Tick?
Product Showcase
Advertising
