Monday, May 09, 2005

Gott weiss Ich will kein Engel sein.

After kicking the hornets' nets a little with the Priceless entry, I figure I should take this time to explain a little more. I did comment on that blog entry but there is more.

“Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” Link

First, posting this picture, in my opinion, does not make me a horrible person nor should it change the opinion you had of me prior. I am a man that is passionate about everything I do, I have never been accused of not having an opinion. But my opinions are well thought and I welcome any debate. Some have been surprised at my apparent inconsistencies, how could I post my earlier comments and then post something horrific and disgusting as that. Easy. It is reality. This is what we soldiers do in war. This is what we are trained for. The joke part of it was my addition to maybe wake some people up. Why? Well, we all like to turn our faces away from the ugly parts of life. The victim in the photo was not posed, nor was the picture taken with the intent of me making a joke of it. It is an authentic photo, all else is my addition.

The proliferation of 'reality' TV shows are a reflection of how the media does a wonderful job of helping us live in denial and focusing on the most ridiculous topics. But how many times have you asked yourself how the media has shaped your own opinions? For instance, the battle that priceless picture came from produced 4 American fatalities, 4 men I shared a dining facility with. I saw nothing on any news channel or web page. I did see death tolls for Iraqis killed by insurgents, though. What is the message there? Are they trying to blur the lines of our opinions? The bastards, like the crispy one in the picture, are baby killers. They bring the fight to us and fully deserve the results. In their circles, they find honor in their actions. There is no honor in their lives nor in their cause. I was partially motivated to do this picture to publicly *dishonor* them further, for they are my enemy and I see them clearly.

Be thankful there are soldiers that continue to see them, our self-proclaimed enemy, the way I do. I was disgusted after 9/11 when some of my fellow Americans promptly felt the need to embrace those that attacked us, with some bleeding heart idealogy they want to understand and help them. Then those same Americans started to build a case that somehow we Americans asked for it because of our insensitivities, or the fact we are successful and happy. Our American-guilt caused it. How sick is that? Does a battered wife "ask for it"? How about a rape victim? Then do not allow yourselves to become the mindless drones that the corporate media wants you to be. Don't believe that the story you are told is the whole story. Don't believe that the face of war has changed into a kinder, gentler war. The face of war has never and will never change. Our purpose here is the same as in other wars, this situation is nothing new. The only difference is availability and manipulation of information. In WWII there was no doubt in any American's mind that the Nazi movement was wrong. We are attacked in the name of Islam and muslims somehow gain more rights and compassion than they had before. They are winning the battle for hearts and minds when fellow Americans stand up to argue that Islam 'is a peaceful religion' and muslims gain additional civil rights based on their religion.

There is as much evidence to point toward the fact that Nazis were a peaceful nationalistic movement. Sure there are many muslims that haven't strapped a bomb to their chest, but not every German killed a Jew either. (That ought to get people stirred up). If anyone argues that the philosophy behind Islam is peaceful that it is just the people that take it to extremes, I will thank you for continuing to prove my analogy. I also agree, not every muslim is responsible for the insurgents actions, but every muslim is responsible for not cleaning house and eliminating these negative influences from their culture.

No, I am not here to fight a war against Islam, nor do I undeservedly hate. I do not propose anyone become a vigilante against muslims either; as a matter of fact I have several friends that are muslim. My suggestion is that everyone become more suspect of the information they accept as true, to investigate the motives of their opinions. To not allow the issues to become too complicated, because they aren't.

And finally, as a sign of the subtle yet profound effect of American compacency, am I the only one that has found it dusturbing that Peter Jennings states in a recent ABC commercial that, "you are more free to express yourself here (in America) than almost anywhere else in the world." Almost? When did we loose ground? and to whom?

34 Comments:

Blogger SnotSucker said...

The bone has been fetched ;)
The opinions that I express here are not necessarily my beliefs. Like Dean, I enjoy being a "devil's advocate". I have no intention of making someone angry. I enjoy a healthy, deep debate and like to kick it up a notch so that others can see the other side of an issue.
I work in a Level I trauma center as a Respiratory Therapist and deal with death on a daily basis. Yes, I did find the humor in the photo and my initial response was probably not appropriate to those who do not know me. Humor in death is a coping mechanism. This is our way of dealing with extremely emotionally draining work. The same goes for our soldiers that perform their work on the battlefield.
Put yourself in our/their shoes. How would you cope if you had to deal with this photo in real life each day? I perform CPR on people several times a week. I do not enjoy the feeling of breaking ribs under my hands. I also am occasionally asked to withdrawal care under a doctor's orders. A coworker of mine last week withdrew care (under a physician's order) on a 5yo while the mother was holding him and sobbing.
How do you think he felt? And how do we handle it? With humor. Were it not for humor, most medical personnel and soldiers would be on medication and regularly attending psych wards.

I am no better than the next person. I save lives and I take lives, just like Dean and others. Do we get paid 6 figures to do the job we do? Of course not. I do not in any way agree with the way the radicals respond to Americans. But, some of the reasons for their twisted hate can actually be beneficial to us. Our society and morals are being degraded by greed. A CEO, professional sports player, actor etc can make millions. Do their jobs justify the compensation when there are people working in the "trenches" each day to make someone else's life better? Have they saved or taken a life lately? Since when has the value of life become less than $$$$?

I have much more to say on some of the issues Dean has presented, so stay tuned.

09:55  
Blogger Crystal said...

read my blog for a response. its too much to write here.

14:12  
Blogger Dorman said...

Crys, viewed your profile but was unable to find your blog. Can you please post the URL.


D

02:32  
Blogger Crystal said...

http://cryslynn5.blogspot.com/

"You are no angel, солдать" is the title, (just means soldier in russian)

07:35  
Blogger Dorman said...

Just another unbelieveable point of interest that does not really deserve a whole new entry.....

This is the exit plan as spelled out by Rumsfeld. Remember I must not give my opinion of him because of UCMJ. Decide for yourself:

"At some point the Iraqis will get tired of getting killed......."

Full quote and transcript:
http://www.dod.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040914-secdef1302.html

08:35  
Blogger Dorman said...

Opps, an ultr-long url. here it is again:

www.dod.mil
/transcripts/2004
/tr20040914-secdef1302.html

copy and paste each segment together to make one long line again.

08:38  
Blogger SnotSucker said...

Hmmm, unable to express your opinion. And they wonder why recruitment here in the states is not meeting quotas.

13:17  
Blogger Dorman said...

Well, yes. I can fight for the 1st Amendment but not fully excercise it due to stipulations within the Uniform Code of Military Justice preventing anyone in the military from publicly criticizing or dishonoring elected officials and officers. American civilians have full rights to the 1st Amendment but chose to reduce its breadth seemingly everyday. Irony.

15:10  
Blogger Crystal said...

what is a civilian copter attack?

07:03  
Blogger Crystal said...

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

maybe you hear less about soldiers dying in the line of duty because we actually count those numbers. (i hear a lot about soldiers on the news, but i know you probably see more) although we strategically bomb(ed) to minimize the number of civ casualties, we do not tally the actual numbers, because we don't want that to be a measurement of our success...anybody else see the problem with this???

the numbers on this are gathered from news and media coverage, so there is some amount of inaccuracy in it. other sites have it as low as 10,000. it is still interesting to think about.

07:41  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Society,... has to solve a difficult problem: How to break a person's will without his being aware of it. Yet by a complicated process of indocrination, rewards, punishments and fitting ideology, it solves this task by and large so well that most people believe they are following their own will and are unaware that their will itself is conditioned and manipulated." -- Erich Fromm

18:01  
Blogger SnotSucker said...

'Milbloggers' are typing their place in history

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-05-11-milblogs-main_x.htm

12:55  
Blogger Dorman said...

There is no difference between a civilian Iraqi and an 'insurgent'. It is too subjective of title since they become 'insurgents' only *after* they attack coalition forces (as per our Rules of Engagement). Each family is also allowed to own and carry one weapon, usually and AK-47. Insurgents don't wear big bright hats with their intentions written on them. That is why I refer to Islam as a 'mind-virus' - once converted you are more apt to follow the same patterns. As for the civilian copter attack, here is the link
Notice they call themselves the 'Islamic' Army, not the Insurgent Army or Bob's Fried Chicken and Gas Army.

Does anyone else realize a similarity between the direction of world politics (namely ours) since the end of the Cold War? Subtle colonialism? Not so subtle anymore IMHO, and look how good the previous experience with colonialism and Imperialism turned out. Every colony had either revolted, been in utter ruins once the ruling country withdrew, or in the singular case of Hong Kong, turned in to a major trade center. Forget culture though in Hong Kong, the original is long dead and gone. So what are we instilling into Iraq? A new government is not a functioning society.

04:33  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's interesting that Hitler used these same arguments to convince the Germans that all Jews were bad. ("Look how they're successful and we're not. We don't know who is and who isn't cheating us, therefore they must all have the capability. Because of this, we must 'label them all' and get rid of them all..." etc.)

Right now, I don't view all ex-soldiers as potential Timothy McVeighs. Soldiers/ex-soldiers aren't labled as dangerous or psychotic until they're convicted of beating/killing their families (http://www.southernstudies.org/reports/Hidden%20Casualties-new.htm) or blowing up federal buildings. Maybe I SHOULD fear all US soldiers and ex-soldiers, given their history.

Since the government DOES "condition and manipulate" the soldiers' wills, then I have to wonder who really is part of a "mind-virus". Fanaticism doesn't always involve a god...

07:00  
Blogger Dorman said...

touche. The difference is that we are trained to kill, they are trained to kill everyone. I would have liked to say that they are trained to kill everyone that's not a muslim, but they kill plenty of their own for the very same reason - they don't believe exactly the same thing. Conform or die, infidel. That's the jist of the Koran. And the Bible for that matter but Christians, as a whole, learned not to take it so seriously after the Inquisition and Crusades.

BTW, just got back from a convoy to central Iraq, some interesting stuff. So I will be posting a new entry soon.

07:29  
Blogger Crystal said...

umm, yeah. totally disagree. there is a difference between the civilian and the insurgent, even if you cannot tell the difference until after they attack. if there wasnt a difference, a large chunk of the political reasoning behind why you are there would be missing. why are we promoting democracy there. why did they have elections, why why why, if there wasnt a significant difference. Numbers are an important indication of how well you are achieving your goal. why do you think you are there, besides waging your own holy war against Muslims, as it is beginning to sound? I agree with anonymity (btw, come out from your cloak mr/ms. anonymous, we wont bite, atleast, i wont) that your arguments are beginning to sounds a little hitlerish. This isnt your own personal Crusade against the Muslims, although there are striking similarities for the argument that this is a Crusade not only for Muslims, but for us as well. And if you are going to say you cannot break military rules and not talk about higher officials, i think you should stick to the military points of your task. im not saying that you should agree with everything, but atleast realize that in the eyes of the political leaders whom you get your mandate to fight from, the reasons you are stating are not theirs.

17:59  
Blogger SnotSucker said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

21:18  
Blogger SnotSucker said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

22:51  
Blogger SnotSucker said...

http://news.yahoo.com/photos
/ss/1756/im:/050512/481
/vah10305121843
I found this to be interesting...

23:40  
Blogger Dorman said...

I do have a personal crusade against Islam. Since its inception 1500 years ago, it has done nothing but fuel bloody, genocidal holy wars against everyone else. Oh, sorry, forgot that time that they were the poor unfortunate victims of the crusades. Poor them. They apparently haven't forgotten about it either. Now, I am open minded, very much so believe it or not. So please educate me on the difference between a civilian and an insurgent. I am sure my Sergeant Major would be glad to have you here for a training of the troops, cause dammit, we just can't seem to tell them apart. (Sarcasm intentional). Really, though, what is the difference and how can I tell?

I also find it an American phenomenon that we can be so compassionate and understanding of everyone else to the point of denying the obvious ( as in snotsuckers pic) so we can lay some guilt and blame upon ourselves. What fuels *their* need for insurgency? That is the question that not even I, as part of the war, have ever had answered. These numbskulls apparently don't want anything except an end to American occupation. I agree with that but not the methods obviously. The question is, if these folks are so noble and righteous then what would they do if we pulled out? What would they put in place for their culture, government, society? The reason no one knows is that there is nothing. Being a mrtyr means not having to make too many plans. Being a martyr means there is a religious reason for your self destruction. That religious reason is Islam. What else do they, and almost every other non-domestic terrorist since 1972, have in common? Just Islam.

Oh, and Hitler killed people based on their genetics, I wish for the elimination of a religion.

Allah Akhbar!!!! BOOOOOOOOM!!!!!

00:15  
Blogger SnotSucker said...

Crys, I agree with you. To you & I there IS a difference between an insurgent and a civilian. However, a soldier in the field must treat everyone as a potential threat. This has been going on as long as there have been wars. Unfortunately throughout history, we've always stereotyped based on a person's religion. Dean is not out to persecute the Muslims. He is threatened 24/7 by those that misinterprate the Kuran or simply do not agree with our presence in their country. If we read carefully, he mentions that he has a few friends that practice the Muslim religion. If he truly felt the way Anonymous and yourself say he does, they would not be his friends.
Soldiers are taught to survive and that is what he is trying to do..do the job he is given to do, watch his back, his commrades back & come home safe to family & friends.

I think most Americans continue to be complacent and take for granted their freedom and safety. Only when it is threatened, do people take more notice. When was the last time we worried about the car parked at the corner blowing up? Maybe if we did, we as civilians would stop existing and start surviving.

As for the comments posted here being "Hitlerish", I do not agree. I have studied Hitler in depth and there is so much more to this than "all jews are bad"//"all muslims are bad". There is a world of difference between opression and surviving. There must be a better analogy that could be used. Now using Hitlerish and Saddam Hussein in the same sentence is more appropriate.

Congratulations for falling into the trap. He is trying to explain the actions of those that are threatening him on a daily basis, not the religion as a whole.

00:49  
Blogger Crystal said...

Snotsucker, and Dorman. That is exactly what I want to be made more emphatically clear. Who he is really fighting, and who he is not. Otherwise, he might end the life of one who is completely innocent. He needs to show that it is not the religion he is after, but the "insurgent," whoever that maybe. There is no trap, if he himself cannot see (not physically) the difference. Im sorry you cannot tell a physical difference between who is your foe and who is your friend. It makes your task that much more difficult, but still not religious-based, atleast on YOUR side. I dont have any suggestions for figuring out who your enemies are, but know that restraint until you know for sure, is one of the most admirable and highly regarded characteristics of our soldiers. That is what makes us the best.

Yes, I read, that he has friends that are Muslim, but if he truly believes they are his friends he will differentiate between those he is fighting and the people he is trying to protect over there.

Lastly, lets not forget that even Christianity began as a religion of martyrdom in Ancient Rome. That many Christians fought against one another throughout the Reformation, and martyred one another for holding new and different beliefs. Islam is not unique to this kind of mentality.

PS-Yeah, Hitler is better compared to Saddam, that comment was a little tasteless on my part. Sorry

09:08  
Blogger Crystal said...

forgot to add, I dont think it is American of me to try to understand, and feel compassion for other human beings. I think it is just human nature. I think we will figure out why the insurgent does what he does eventually, if we can keep ourselves on the high ground, and convince enough people that we are the good guys. I don't know. Maybe I dont know anything.

09:18  
Blogger Dorman said...

I was just on a convoy to and from Central Iraq. We drove through several of the towns where attacks regularly occur. We drove through 'RPG Alley' and by many fresh IED holes. Our front gunner even had to fire some shots at a car to get it to stop speeding toward our convoy. Very interesting ride. I video taped much of it.
We soldiers are put into a nearly impossible situation; only engage the enemy but operate in uncontrolled areas full of people and anarchy. I am sure we passed many insurgents those days, but because they are cowards, they do not wear a uniform or honorably designate themselves. In our ROE, Rules of Engagement, we are only allowed to engage the enemy once fired upon. Our definition of 'enemy' is someone firing upon us or intending to do damage or bodily harm. Not much different from Metro Police in the States, just the insurgents are better armed.
I focus on Islam because in every war there are insurgents. American history is repleat with them, but we call them 'revolutionaries'. Remember the Boston Tea Party? What is the basic difference though? In every other warthe insurgence were fighting for their lives, their country, or the political philosophy that was to control their government (eg Communism). The insurgents have none of those fundamentals. Their basis is simply 'because Allah wills it'. I am so frustrated over the American refusal to accept the fact that THEY have made it an Islam vs American war. It is their use of Islam (like Hitler's use of Aryan and Nazi philosophy) to convert or kill the infidel. Why do Americans refuse to accept this blatant fact? There is/was no other fueling motive than Islam or any perversion of it for the 9/11 attacks or the continued insurgency. If someone knows of one, please tell.
The immediate argument I hear from many is that many muslims are peaceful people. I reply with the statement that not all Nazis were bad either. After all, was it because Hitler was a Nazi that he was bad or was it because he killed all those people? Did being a Nazi push him, and many of his constituents, to kill millions? And what was the name under which they did such attrocities? Nazism. Did every nazi kill people? Do all nazis share in the blame for the attrocities? That is the key question.

I would like to edit a clip from the convoy tape and post it on the blog. No gore, no humor, it will be just a few moments of what we face when travelling through a typical Sunni town. Help me point out the enemies in the crowds.

**Crys** Are we the good guys? I have necessarily removed myself from the moral judgment of this war. Compassion is one thing but blindness is suicide. You are not blind, I enjoy your debate, but there are hard facts that are unpleasant for the typical well-fed, TV-watching, head-in-the-sand American to accept. We have Haji working on base, they clean our latrines, build our sidewalks, run bazaars. We know some of them give out vital information for no more noble a reason than money. What we think now as an innocent civilian placidly toiling away on our base can and sometimes does turn into a source of info for insurgents. Maybe planting IEDs around the base, we're never quite sure. We have tight security but you can't scan what is in someone's intentions at the gate. Our ROE is inadequate and that inadequacy perpetuates the conflict and allows the continued regeneration of insurgents.

10:04  
Blogger Dorman said...

A refresher on Nazism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi

10:06  
Blogger Crystal said...

"God is too great for just one religion" -unknown


At the end is a blog I wrote a few days ago...sort of summs up what I think about your centering your anger upon Islamic belief. I personally am really good friends with Muslims. My friend Favad is Muslim and I have known personally for 3 years now. He is one of the most peaceful persons that I know. I would even go so far as to say that he is more peaceful than I am. Therefore categorically proving your fight against Islamic belief in general to be ridiculously false. And I hate that I have to religiously profile him in order to show my point, atleast to myself. I would also think that you would not hate Allah, since you have Muslim friends.

Im a little confused as to what you actually believe concerning the American side of this fight though. Please clarify. Correct me if I am wrong in saying this, but you think that a fight against Islam is a more justifiable fight than our current reasons for being there?? Aside from what you are fighting, do you think that we should be there at all, that we are not the "good guys" in all of this (which I totally am not saying we are, just thought those words might give me some ethos in appealing to my audience)? If you think that we are not the good guys, then your job must be really difficult for you to handle. It also would explain your constant reiteration of how ignorant of the situation the American public is. I dont disagree that most of us (us meaning Americans in general, I dont believe I am ignorant, but I am definitely not an expert) know very little, but I think that is how the administration and politicians wants us to be. Which is partially but not entirely our fault.

I still think it is important for you to differentiate in the very least between the extremists-the religious fanatical insurgents you are fighting, and the other people just trying to survive, even if they have to do so by selling information.

Im not saying that it is any less wrong, that it doesnt make your job more difficult to accomplish, or that they then should not become your enemy, but they aren't the ones supplying the money, nor openly fighting you. They are just receiving a financial benefit from their very small actions, in a country that i am guessing has very little money for its people right now. They will stop doing this as soon as they are convinced of a side to support, the side that is winning and also which side will not racially or religiously profile them.

And yes, it sounds like your ROE does limit your actions, thank GOD. Or else everyone would already have been obliterated by the kind of action you would love to take. You dont have to post a clip of your point, you didnt have to post that picture that you still have up!!! I personally am not blinded by the situation, and I sort of resent it if you believe I am. I just choose to not look at some parts because they really are too graphic for most people. For one, I dont want to become hardened and lose my feelings of compassion for either side, nor do I honestly believe I should have to look or be a soldier in order to validate my opinion. I believe it already is. And if you had unselecitvely fired or chose to fire unprovoked into that crowd, what would it have solved, but only to create new barriers in the problem, instill new hatred where there was none (or very little) causing some to then become your enemy, springing up new hate and a large amount of evidence to support their hate.


Anyways, here is my blog. Again, wrote it like a week ago now, so it is not structured into the context of the debate now, though it is still prevalent to what I think on the subject. I hope this debate doesn't get out of hand, though. I believe it is on the verge of doing so.

Hate is non-essential. Hate is ridiculous.

I believe hate is the second most eggregious problem that our world faces today. The first being apathy, or complacency as you might agree.

But if you still believe hate is necessary and result-producing in your current situation, you are blinded by this hate. You are not hating the right problem.

Even if you believe Islam is not a peaceful religion (which I do believe it is and is practiced peacefully by many many people across the globe, and by some people you like to call friends), that is not the "justified" or "political" reason you are there. This has always been about removing a tyrant, and installing a democratic regime committed to plurality, peace, good Western relations, and the equality of women and of the many peoples in Iraq. (I do not wish to talk about terrorism or WMD's, frankly, its too easy, and really not prevalent to this discussion)

When you say that you hate Muslims because you are fighting a group of extremists, you do not cite the real, atleast the known reasons of why we are there. Or maybe the armed forces have reasons that the American public is not aware of. That is the problem I have with all of this. Even if they are fighting you for a religious cause, you cannot counter with hate for their religion, that leads to intolerance. You are not there to hate Islam, your duty is to create a peaceful environment so Iraqis can create a new Iraq, leading to a better, more stable situation in the Middle East and for the world in general.


peace out
crys

18:13  
Blogger Dorman said...

I think you've missed the core of my argument, so here it is in a nutshell. Not all Nazis were bad, most were peaceful German citizens just wanting to live with some pride and a job. Not all the kids that slept in Michael Jackson's bed were molested. It is rationally inverted to justify something by the absence of another. Because you and I, and many many other people happen to know some muslims that haven't blown themselves up yet does not mean that Islam is not a catalyst or motivation for many many others to do so. My preference is to eliminate Islam, not muslims per se, much like I would like to see NAMBLA eliminated. Here, they are all muslims by varying degrees. They show their dedication tio Allah through murder and explosions; hence the 'extreme view'. But how extreme is it when it is the majority of the population that feels and behaves that way? (eg Palestine and Iran where tens of thousands regularly turn out for violent protest and volunteering for suicide squads). I have never understood America's reluctance to point the finger appropriately and be honest with ourselves and the world. The result of WWII was that nazism became illegal; this is far beyond just arresting and trying the guilty of 'extremism'. It is a banishment of a philosophy, a religion, a politic. I know some peaceful nazis also. I really do. Living in Germany for nearly 2 years before coming here afforded me that privelege. But they gave up their nazi affiliations a long time ago.

As for the real reason we're here, well I have no conplete answer but I do know it had nothing to do with terrorism nor WMDs, not even humanitarian abuses by Saddam. Those ended after the Gulf War. How about considering how the world oil trade functions. What is its common monetary denomination? The U.S. dollar. Keep in mind I am definitely not into the whole conspiracy theory mentality but when stuff makes sense it is hard to not consider. A little in depth but a complete read, please just consider this article.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 nor Osama bin laden, no WMDs, not even a sour look was given to us about 9/11 by Iraq. Why did we overthrow the Taliban, who did nothing more than say they did not know where bin Laden was nor would they turn him over if they did? What was the first document signed by the new leader of Afghanistan upon his appointment? Why start kicking the hornet's nest that is Iran when they have yet to say a word to us since the hostage release in 1981? Since many of these insurgents come from Syria, why not focus on them? 18 of 20 9/11 terrorists were Egyptian, yet not an aggressive move militarily nor politically toward Egypt.

Look for some of those answers. Those are the questions the American public should be asking themselves and their politicians instead of unlocking their jaws to guzzle down the daily pablum pushed on them by corporate funded media.

Oh and finally, on hatred. Hatred removes doubt, a doubtful soldier is an indecisive soldier is a dead soldier.

I think this debate has been healthy and enlightening. I have enjoyed your replies and hope you stick around for more.

D

03:40  
Blogger Dorman said...

and how does one explain away the predominance of "Islamic terrorists" constantly making news worldwide?
Since Arafat introduced the world terrorism at the 1972 Olympics, 99.99% of non-domestic terrorism has been Islam vs whomever. Help me ignore that correlation. Anyone?

04:17  
Blogger SnotSucker said...

You got me by the knickers, I just can't seem to tell the two apart.

1. "I personally am really good friends with Muslims. My friend Favad is Muslim and I have known personally for 3 years now. He is one of the most peaceful persons that I know. I would even go so far as to say that he is more peaceful than I am. Therefore categorically proving your fight against Islamic belief in general to be ridiculously false."

2. "No, I am not here to fight a war against Islam, nor do I undeservedly hate. I do not propose anyone become a vigilante against muslims either; as a matter of fact I have several friends that are muslim."

21:00  
Blogger Crystal said...

I whole heartedly agree with some of your points. If the US has chosen a course of action against Iraq, why are we not pursuing a stronger role against others who are comparably to the same caliber as Iraq? Why then, Why there? Why not continue in Iran, North Korea, and such...Bob Woodward's Plan of Attack is a good read for chronologically following the buildup for war against Iraq, including war plans that were formulated way before any kind of clear linkage was, and will ever be provided for atleast politically justifying the intervention. But I guess my take on all of this is that we can only deal with so many problems at one time...

And don't forget about the other conspiracy theories that say we need to keep the insurgents centered on a clear target (meaning you guys are the bait) in order to prevent attacks at home. But it sounds like you are well aware of most of these arguments, acknowledging that a government in Iraq has not secured peace for their society, not being completely on target of US objectives to this point...though, it is a step in the right direction for the eventual stability we would like to promote. I think I read somewhere that the average number of years of US presence in occupied countries was around 6-7 years, so we still have a little time to prove ourselves.

Where I continue to disagree with you is probably based upon differences of life experiences and current situations. I clearly dont understand hate because I have never had a reason to hate. So far, during my 21 years here on earth, I have never needed to utilize feelings of hatred for anyone or anything, nor do I think I will ever really. I guess I feel blessed in this way. My "fear" of hatred, is that more people will have to think like you, more people will have to get embroiled into the mess of war, and more time and lives will be lost unnecessarily for unjustified hate. My reasoning not to hate is definitely not ignorant. My hating would be unjustifiable at this point in my life, as is your blanket of hate for Islam. I guess you have given me a better understanding of when and where hate is suitable, but its still a very dangerous and destructive tool to unleash.

Once more, I believe it is totally wrong to try and blame and want to eliminate an entire religion based upon your current perceptions. What is the difference between insurgents and the Christian fanatics who blow up abortion clinics because the bible tells them to? All violent acts based upon religious reasoning are disgusting and should not be tolerated. This doesnt make the practice of an entire world religion wrong, nor should these beliefs be obliterated because a select group interprets peaceful words in a violent way.

peace out
Crys

21:26  
Blogger Dorman said...

Crys, there is no difference except scale and that the Bible doesn't instruct on martyrdom in that way. Any religion that can psyche a person up to forfeit their good minds in wrong.

23:59  
Blogger Crystal said...

but you have to agree, that some in this world justify their violent actions based upon biblical reference and ideology. this is in essence what some are doing with the kuran.

the many interpretations that people use to justify their actions can be gathered from the bible are just as dangerous. what really, is not subjective to interpretation.

07:53  
Blogger Gavin said...

Interesting blog, discovered using the "next blog" button at the top of the page. My question(s) may sound facetious, but they're not meant to be.

I certainly agree with you, that international terrorism is typically associated with Islamic fundamentalism. However, if these same people had the resources available to them as the American public (i.e state of the art military hardware and the people to use it), and used those weapons against you (the coalition forces), would they still be terrorists?

I'm sure you can see what I'm asking. If there is minimal difference between terrorists/insurgents/Iraqi civilians, what is it that sets you apart from them?

I'm anticipating that you will invoke the "foreign insurgent" argument, but again that doesn't separate you from the group.

13:06  
Blogger Dorman said...

Thanks for joining our discussion, Gavin. Nice to have some new views in these debates.

Now to answer your question, you have a very good point, there are differences in the philosophy of design and organization, methodology, and purpose.

An army is government backed. Terrorists are organizationally or privately backed, insurgents are backed by individuals and small groups. This is the typical breakdown, arguable at least.

Terrorists are a problem for governments because they perform militaristic actions on behalf of a cause or country which can really mungleup foreign affairs, obviously. Insurgents really lack a positive goal, their aim is just to disrupt. Senseless really because something has to be put in place. The insurgents are getting backed by Al Zaqarwi and bin Laden types using mostly old Russian arms and old US arms.
Insurgents and terrorists do not wear a uniform nor identify themselves for a proper fight. terrorism is more of a career, if I may say so, and insurgency is more a state of mind...they are influenced usually one time by money, a trip to Allah, or whatever. But what we generally see are poorly trained kamikazee types. They are getting better organized and are more vocal in proclaiming their Islamic cause. I have some intercepted insurgency propaganda videos that I promise to post soon.

Thanks for the question,hope I answered it sufficiently.

13:33  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home