Can we kick some real terrorist ass please?

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
It means that all of you liberal pu**ies need to stop paying heed to totalitarian dictatorships which support, fund and breed terrorism.

Like Pakistan. Oh wait, they just kill people in Kashmir, so why bother.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Spiffor
If you can name the terrorists individually and their exact locations, go ahead. I don't think anybody here is against beating up terrorist's ass. But the thing is, it is not quite as easy to target as some national army.

1. said al adel, AQ's most recent operations chief, Saad bin Laden, Usama's son and assistant, and Sulaman Abu Goath (SP?) AQ spokesman and finance chief are apparently all in Iran. I dont know where in Iran, but presumably the Ayatollahs who run Iranian security do.
In addition Iran funds Islamic Jihad.


2. There have been movements of terrorists identified from Syria to Iraq.


3. Hamas is a terrorist organization. The European Union has refused to put its political wing on the list of banned terrorist organizations, apparently due to French opposition.

4. Saudi Arabia has funded Hamas. Israel reports such funding continues

5. Osama bin Laden and in all probability his right hand, zawahiri, are in the Northwest frontier province of Pakistan. Pervez musharaff is unable to take control of that province, fearing the disintegration of the Pakistani state at the hands of islamists. At some point the US will have to address that problem. One hopes that those who now are so eager to go after terrorists will join the US when that happens

6. Saudi Arabia has finally begun to address its domestic al qaeeda cells, in the wake of the Riyadh bombing. They have not yet addressed the problem of anti-western incitement from state appointed Imams. Hopefully those here will support us in pressuring them on that.

7. The US now holds several hundred terrorists in guantanamo, and is bringing them before military tribunals as appropriate. Hopefully everyone here will support that process.

[Dom Pedro II]

Who did we have on our payroll, the Saudis?

No, actually I was referring to two other guys... what were their names again??....

Oh yeah! Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein!

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
3. Hamas is a terrorist organization. The European Union has refused to put its political wing on the list of banned terrorist organizations, apparently due to French opposition.

Which is indeed a completely wrong move. You cannot discuss with the Hamas, since this organisation cannot and will not make any concession. Today terract shows it again

[rev]

7. The US now holds several hundred terrorists in guantanamo, and is bringing them before military tribunals as appropriate. Hopefully everyone here will support that process.

It would be a lot better for our international image to try these terrorists under our own justice system. It's part of the democracy we're trying to export, so why not prove that it works?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by rev


It would be a lot better for our international image to try these terrorists under our own justice system. It's part of the democracy we're trying to export, so why not prove that it works?

because we dont want AQ to know who we hold. We dont want the accused to go into open court, where they might signal what theyve told, or even what theyve been asked (allowing their friends to take "back-bearings") because we dont want them to be able to call their pals in gitmo as witnesses, enabling said pals to find out whats going on, and thus reducing effectiveness of interrogations.

By the way, military tribunals ARE part of our justice system, and will follow rules that give defendents rights to counsel, to present evidence, etc.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Sava
nice... it's the liberals fault...

quit listening to Rush, it's making you stupid...

Thoughtfully put.
What's your reason, a natural aptitude?

Knocking them down, one at a time. All that can be done.

[HershOstropoler]

"will follow rules that give defendents rights to counsel, to present evidence, etc."

No free choice of Counsel, at least that was the last thing I've heard. Calling of witnesses very restricted. Rules of evidence unclear. Rules of disclosure unclear. In short, a cangoroo court.

As for the reasons you give, so the next step is military cangoroo courts for organized crime?

[Dom Pedro II]

because we dont want AQ to know who we hold.

As if they don't know already...

[GePap]

Originally posted by The diplomat


terrorist are not ghosts. They are have real training camps, real infrastructure, money, personel, etc...

We cut off the funds, we obliterate the training camps, the kill the terrorist leaders.

You mean, like we are trying now, at least in Afghanistan?

sigh:

Terrorism, like war, is a reality of modernity. islamist terrorism won;t end until a positive and efefctive alternative is given. Or you could try genocide, but that in the end only utterly destroys ones credibility, their soul, and any claim they ever had to being "right".

How many people killed today? 20-30? Perhaps it is a good sign that people get so worked up about political violcene that leads to that many (which is not that many) deaths.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
By the way, military tribunals ARE part of our justice system, and will follow rules that give defendents rights to counsel, to present evidence, etc.

No, they are a brand new invention of this admin. As for how fair they are, The Ecnomist has already done a good job at showing how paltry and poor an example of democratic justice those things are.

[HershOstropoler]

Not to forget that those aren't ordinary military tribunals but will run under some "modified" rules.

[Dom Pedro II]

You can't ever make terrorism go away... and even if you can make the Muslims stop committing terrorist acts, it will STILL go on by some OTHER group.

Like those wackos in Japan, or another Tim McVeigh.

The War on Terror is like a War on Murder, its a noble idea, but you're kidding yourself if you ever think it'll be "over".

I remember seeing a great political cartoon, which I saved. It says "Think Overwhelming Military Force Can Stop Terrorism? Look at Israel:" And it a drawing of bodies being carried away from the charred skeleton of a bus. Based on a real photo.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
"will follow rules that give defendents rights to counsel, to present evidence, etc."

No free choice of Counsel, at least that was the last thing I've heard. Calling of witnesses very restricted. Rules of evidence unclear. Rules of disclosure unclear. In short, a cangoroo court.

As for the reasons you give, so the next step is military cangoroo courts for organized crime?

any counsel they want as long as the counsel has security clearance, IIUC. Is that asking too much, for trials at which top secret intelligence is likely to be presented? That someone could quibble over that leads precisely to the original point of this thread - that some people arent taking this seriously.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


You mean, like we are trying now, at least in Afghanistan?

sigh:

Terrorism, like war, is a reality of modernity. islamist terrorism won;t end until a positive and efefctive alternative is given. Or you could try genocide, but that in the end only utterly destroys ones credibility, their soul, and any claim they ever had to being "right".

How many people killed today? 20-30? Perhaps it is a good sign that people get so worked up about political violcene that leads to that many (which is not that many) deaths.

well terrorism pretty much ended in Egypt, without a positive and effective alternative. So im not sure your premise is right. I would also note that we have islamic terrorism in Indonesia, where there is democracy and freedom for islamist parties, more so than jordan or egypt where there is not. But even if it is, the acts of terror tend to undermine any positve and effective alternatives, as seen from Palestine to Iraq, and from Pakistan to Indonesia. So it is necessary to fight it at the same time as we build an alternative.