Page 3 of 4
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:28 am
by Dottie
The important thing imo isn’t to stop the terrorists, the important thing is to stop creating new ones.
The idea that .05% of the population is carrying the "terrorist gene" is incorrect, and also very dangerous. Terrorist organizations come to life as a result of violent long-term oppression, poverty and hopeless political situations. They aren’t a result of random unpreventable events. Therefore the strategy of violent elimination is counter-productive, instead we should aim to remove the factors that create terrorism. This will not instantly stop all attacks, but given time it will prevent terrorist organizations from recruiting more members.
It’s ironical and tragic that the mindset “Hurt them until they understand that we wont allow ourselves to be treated this way” Is now dominant both among terrorists and among many western governments and general population..
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:33 am
by fable
Complete agreement, @Dottie. The symptomatic approach to dealing with terrorism yields headlines and votes, but affecting the factors that cause terrorism requires quiet, longterm commitment, and yields nothing so sensational. I honestly can't see Bush arguing for the latter when he thinks he can stay in office by looking tough.
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:48 am
by Moonbiter
Amen!
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 9:19 am
by Morlock
You can't stop the conditions if terrorists take advantage of the restrictions being lifted and use it to continue murdering people. That much has been proven here.
You have to plan for the future, but you can't throw away the present, which is where people are being slaughtered.
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 11:26 am
by Aegis
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 11:35 am
by Weasel
Originally posted by Gilgalen
Who is Waverly? Do you think she has my peaches?
The 2nd circle is lust... it's nowhere near the 9th.
(1)Waverly is......
(2)He just might have them. 
(3) Have you been to the 9th circle?
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 11:52 am
by Gilgalen
Originally posted by Weasel
(1)Waverly is......
(2)He just might have them.
(3) Have you been to the 9th circle?
Weasel, the ninth circle is in the lower hells reserved for the violent and murderous. I think circle nine is for the treacherous. Why would I be there? Looking for company?
Oh, Waverly is a he? You know I used to lurk a bit and remember the name. I think I’ve seen it on another board too. Didn’t he get banned or something?
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:03 pm
by Morlock
There was just a huge bomb blown up in Bahgdad. Destroyed a hotel and several adjoining buildings were severly damaged. Dozens are feared dead and wounded.
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:05 pm
by Weasel
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:26 pm
by fable
Originally posted by Weasel
Just a test. I believe he has came back with a new user name (nothing to stop him from doing this, since he hasn't used the account Waverly) and is trying to overthrow me from a different angle!!!
Obtuse angle, probably.
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:37 pm
by Aegis
Originally posted by fable
Obtuse angle, probably.
Yeah, but that's just because he don't know what an Acute angle is
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:45 pm
by Gilgalen
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:58 pm
by Aegis
Originally posted by Gilgalen
careful everyone, paranoia and delusions of grandeur are a dangerous mix
So what are you doing, accusing random people until you find him?! This is the 2nd time I’ve been accused of being someone else. *sigh* Do I actually act like this Waverly guy, who had a reputation for being pretty disagreeable if I remember right?
Anyway, good luck with your battle.
You just need to get used to Weasel... He's paranoid of everyone, since the Mrs. Sleep fiasco
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:44 pm
by Gilgalen
And yes I am accusing random people. As to the other time, was that me as well? Waverly disagreeable.....not that I can recall. He did have this habit of trying to ruin the rep of the Holy one, but some do have their faults.
Oh, I get it now. You are the Pratchet character. I don’t recall if he was paranoid, but I suppose you get to use artistic license. I think someone accused me of being a troll on my first post, but it wasn’t you. I think only Aegis has been nice to me since I started posting – maybe I’ll have to send him a little something after all.
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:48 pm
by RandomThug
Hey hey hey whats with the Canadian love here miss Peaches. I know I didn't respond to your post earlier and I apologize but really think about it. Can you trust the Canadian? I mean he claims to be a god yet a commie at the same time. err I mean a... Canukistan?
Im getting some new pics of me up here soon as I get them scanned.. recent ones.
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 1:51 pm
by Aegis
Originally posted by RandomThug
Hey hey hey whats with the Canadian love here miss Peaches. I know I didn't respond to your post earlier and I apologize but really think about it. Can you trust the Canadian? I mean he claims to be a god yet a commie at the same time. err I mean a... Canukistan?
Im getting some new pics of me up here soon as I get them scanned.. recent ones.
Hey, it was your Rumsfield who coined the term 'Soviet Canuckistan'
@Gilgalen: Weasel is a tad paranoid, but he's a good soul
And any other accusations (Troll, for instance) were probably made in jest. You're definatly a welcome addition though, so don't think some are out to get you, thats just those people...
Oh, one last thing. Here at SYM, the men in white coats are infact out to get you... Them and they're purple pills (copyright of Waverly, ironically enough
)
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 2:05 pm
by Aegis
Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2004 2:15 pm
by Gilgalen