Br. Max said:
It worked with Jericho didn't it?
...
Br. Max said:
far greater criminal? NOT necessarily.
Oh. Mass murder is ok under what circumstances?
Br. Max said:
After killing just a FEW people the attacks were negligable.
The unrest in the Phillipines continued in one form or another untill they were granted the independance they were fighting for. The Terrorists killed 'a few people', the US killed 'a few people' the killing of 'a few people' continues untill someone realises that you either have to kill ALL 'the people' or you have to negotiate terms.
Br. Max said:
but we did not leave because of terrorism. In fact - we didn't leave at all.
You did leave because of the war - the war finished because the US agreed to grant independance - ie did what the terrorists wanted.
Br. Max said:
Yup - but not at the behest of the terrorists.
No of course - the war had NOTHING to do with it! You decided all by yourselves!
Root causes are addressed!
Br. Max said:
The muslims are still making trouble in there just like they do just about every where else in the world. It's apparently part of their religion.
??!! But I thought you said the US actions brought a complete end to these Muslim terrorists? I thought that was the whole point of you using it as an example??! So now we see that force doesn't work in this or any other example?!
Br. Max said:
There was a LOT more to it than that . . . .
Yep I'm sure there is a lot more detail to go into - but basically peace was reached without slaughtering the entire population, and that was done in the manner of all peace treaties - through a process of negotiation.
Br. Max said:
Can you point to any substantial level of Jewish terrorist action from the fall of Masada through to the 20th century . . . .?
If violence against a group of people was an effective way of getting them to relinquish their claims on power or a piece of land, then the constant violence visited on the Jewish people from well before Masada to the present day would have surely fixed the problem and they would have given up claims to Israel? The length of gap between Masada and the current unrest proves nothing. Violence failed to provide a solution to this problem. The Jews wanted their independance at Masada, and they now have it.
Br. Max said:
Which country can you point to in the Middle East where they have not rioted over those silly comics? How about . . . Iraq? I have not seen nor can I find a single story about riots over comics in Iraq. I think
Betty Dawisha summed things in Iraq up pretty well.
lol if you can find an embassy which is not already fortified then I'm sure you could have a similar protest about the comics, the chances of it being noticed over the exploding mosques which have brought the country even closer to the verge of civil war, the constant suicide attacks and car bombs, are slim to say the least! Bigger fish to fry!
There is no article on your link - however the site it links to looks like it may have a problem with partisanship.
Br. Max said:
And? Should we consider the intrests of tinpot petty dictators or maybe repressive communist regimes?
This is often what gets you into trouble in the first place - some of your allies in the middle east are tinpot petty dictators - Saddam was pretty useful to the US once apon a time, as was Osama Bin Laden. I think if the real interests of the majority of people of the middle east, not just the ones you have decided you can do business with, figured higher up the US priority list you might have more friends in the region.
Br. Max said:
The IRA laid down their arms when the lost their taste for bloodshed and realized they could get more from talk than they could from blood.
Terrorists pick up their arms when they realise that they are being ignored through peaceful means. Hamas started off running schools and social programmes. It is much easier to prevent them picking up their weapons in the first place than to persuade them to put them down - and in the case of the IRA - it took a long time, and some real concessions to the political wing Sinn Fein - which existed and was in politics and negotiations for a long time before the IRA decommissioned (frequent guests at the White House before 911!) - to persuade the majority that they could in fact make their voices heard through dialogue. Negotiation works.
Br. Max said:
But lets put all other terrorists aside and focus in on why it is that Osama has made us a target for terrorism. He's stated publically why - it's not because of any meddeling but for one simple act - Our stationing troops in Suadi Arabia during the Gulf War. Infidels tainting the "holyland" of Islam.
That is not what he has stated at all - far from being the only reason, that is one of many reasons that he is against the US.
Lebanon for instance:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/bin.laden.transcript/
Meddling!
Peace comes from negotiation - even after defeating your enemy, negotiation will still make or break the peace - there is no avoiding it. After WWI the negotiation was poor, so we ended up with WWII despite having soundly defeated Germany once - we had to go back and try again, because we did not negotiate peace. In the end it is inevitable - it just depends how many lives and how much time you want to waste before you take those steps.