" No Terrorism in Islam "

Originally posted by Alfheim
I stated in the post that I still think that there are cases where America kills civilains unpurpose which is what we disagree on.....isnt it?

no, it isn't. For instance, in the siege on Fallujah, the Americas knew and purposely killed many people. Many of them were civilians. I am not saying that America goes out of its way to minimize civilian casualties. I think that is an insane argument.

My point is, and has been (and maybe I didn't go to enough pains to explain it) that American warfare differs categorically (not morally) from terrorism in that the needless death of civilians (which is by no means less or more discriminate than terrorism) is a secondary consequence of their actions. In almost exactly the same words that you use in your last paragraph, they don't care if they kill civilians.

Now, if you look at the expressed motivations of members of Islamic terror organizations, the mass murder of civilians is the INTENT of their attacks. Let me elaborate. In Iraq, suicide bombers attack civilians who are going to work or are trying to live a normal life, in Afghanistan, suicide bombers target military personnel. The former is terrorism, the latter is asymmetrical warfare. In both cases civilians are killed "on purpose" (I don't see how a death in a war can be considered accidental...), in one it is the goal, in the other, a secondary consequence.

See my point now???

So, unless your painting of America as morally gray (which I am not arguing with, see how I have gone out of my way to actually condemn the American actions as I have been arguing this) also contains some, i don't know, evidence of deliberate targeting of civilians with the intended purpose of murdering those civilians, I think my point stands.

There is something to be said for being open to the possibility that America may do evil things while at war (seems almost tautological) but in this case, you are arguing that they could as if it is evidence that they have. And no, torture of civilians is not evidence of the intentional and meaningful mass murder of civilians.

Originally posted by Alfheim
The bombing of the aspirin factory may have been an accident but I wouldnt be suprised if they did in unpurpose they're pissed about the twin towers, there America they can do what they like "lets teach these Ayrabs a lesson and make it look like an accident".

What's your basis for making such a claim?

Originally posted by inimalist
no, it isn't. For instance, in the siege on Fallujah, the Americas knew and purposely killed many people. Many of them were civilians. I am not saying that America goes out of its way to minimize civilian casualties. I think that is an insane argument.

I know your not but obvoulsy you thought thats what I thought you said.

Originally posted by inimalist

My point is, and has been (and maybe I didn't go to enough pains to explain it) that American warfare differs categorically (not morally) from terrorism in that the needless death of civilians (which is by no means less or more discriminate than terrorism) is a secondary consequence of their actions. In almost exactly the same words that you use in your last paragraph, they don't care if they kill civilians.

Got that point a hundred years ago, obvoulsy you assumed I dindt get it.

Originally posted by inimalist

Now, if you look at the expressed motivations of members of Islamic terror organizations, the mass murder of civilians is the INTENT of their attacks. Let me elaborate. In Iraq, suicide bombers attack civilians who are going to work or are trying to live a normal life, in Afghanistan, suicide bombers target military personnel. The former is terrorism, the latter is asymmetrical warfare. In both cases civilians are killed "on purpose" (I don't see how a death in a war can be considered accidental...), in one it is the goal, in the other, a secondary consequence.

See my point now???

I got that point hundred years ago but obvoulsy you assumed I didnt get it.

Originally posted by inimalist

So, unless your painting of America as morally gray (which I am not arguing with, see how I have gone out of my way to actually condemn the American actions as I have been arguing this) also contains some, i don't know, evidence of deliberate targeting of civilians with the intended purpose of murdering those civilians, I think my point stands.

..and again you obvoulsy assumed that I thought were an American fanboy and you were not condemning America eventhough you've stated that several times in this thread that you dont agree with their actions....nevermind you obvoulsy think im a dick.

Originally posted by inimalist

There is something to be said for being open to the possibility that America may do evil things while at war (seems almost tautological) but in this case, you are arguing that they could as if it is evidence that they have. And no, torture of civilians is not evidence of the intentional and meaningful mass murder of civilians.

Right so you thought that I said that America was intentionally mass murdering civilains with the sole intenion of murder and evidence of it is torture?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What's your basis for making such a claim?

My basis is that from what I can see American troops seem to see Arabs as sub-human so I would not be suprised if they cross the line and kill people unpurpose because they can get away with it.

Originally posted by Alfheim
..and again you obvoulsy assumed that I thought were an American fanboy and you were not condemning America eventhough you've stated that several times in this thread that you dont agree with their actions....nevermind you obvoulsy think im a dick.

ok, my take is that your position is "There is a chance that America might be willing to target civilians. This is shown by the willingness to torture people."

provided this is accurate, the argument is over. There is a chance that anyone might be willing to do anything. There is a chance space monkeys from the third moon of Neptune might come to earth and kill off all the animals with hooves.

The part about the torture is also, if I may be so bold, a little bit misguided. I personally do not believe that "torture" is American government policy. It clearly happened, but with the exception of Gitmo, I think there are better explanations than "Americans hate Arabs". I would direct you to Zimbardo's prison experiment to see how out of control situations like that can get without an authority figure directing the abuse.

I don't think you are a dick, but I just have little patience for arguing against pet theories or potential hypotheticals. Sure, I am open to the idea that the Americans directly targeted the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan in order to punish the Sudanese people for harboring Bin Laden for years, but all of the evidence I have seen indicates that this is not the case.

For instance, the reason the plant was targeted was based on soil samples taken near the factory (and not on "curve ball's" reports). These samples contained a chemical which was though to only have industrial use in the making of, iirc, anthrax (if i don't remember correctly, it is something similar, like sarin gas or whatever). However, after reports came out that the plant had not been making chemical weapons, more tests were done, and it was concluded that as some chemicals used in whatever drugs were being manufactured broke down, they converted into the chemical that the CIA mistook for chemical weapons. This is information widely available, the last place I saw it was in "The Looming Towers" by Lawrence Wright, however, I know Richard Clarke talks about it (he STILL believes it was a weapons plant) and other former intelligence people mention it as well, seeing as it is one of the most important events in the history of the (modern) Jihadi movement.

Can you provide one shred of evidence to support your suppositions?

Originally posted by Alfheim

My basis is that from what I can see American troops seem to see Arabs as sub-human so I would not be suprised if they cross the line and kill people unpurpose because they can get away with it.

Unless you interview American soldiers regularly, you have no basis for holding that arbitrary belief.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, suicide bombers are a normal Iraqi activity? You getting to much propaganda.

most bombings you hear as suicide bombings are not suicide bombings. certain not done by alqaeda inside iraq. a few are and the people who are the suicided have very little to do with islam and a lot to do with a very bad life and killing themselves for any1 who will give their families etc significant amounts of money to live/leave a god forsaken country. a lot of it is instigated{suicide or otherwise} by internal intelligence/security/political prganisation/beureaus. this is done to continue the cycle of tribulation and blame it on ethnic/sect divides{and actually add fuel to them} when in reality the phenomenon hardly exists.

seems unbeleiveable, but its true. the world is set up more on conspiracy{as an american citizen wud define it. not the wrest of the world though. n im not trying to offend u either} than you realise.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
most bombings you hear as suicide bombings are not suicide bombings. certain not done by alqaeda inside iraq. a few are and the people who are the suicided have very little to do with islam and a lot to do with a very bad life and killing themselves for any1 who will give their families etc significant amounts of money to live/leave a god forsaken country. a lot of it is instigated{suicide or otherwise} by internal intelligence/security/political prganisation/beureaus. this is done to continue the cycle of tribulation and blame it on ethnic/sect divides{and actually add fuel to them} when in reality the phenomenon hardly exists.

seems unbeleiveable, but its true. the world is set up more on conspiracy{as an american citizen wud define it. not the wrest of the world though. n im not trying to offend u either} than you realise.

"certain not done by alqaeda inside iraq. a few are"

You can't have it both ways.

u misunderstand. the significant majority of explosions are not SUICIDE bombings. the few which ARE are not done{very veyr little chance that they are} by alqaeda but the people/organisations i mentioned.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
u misunderstand. the significant majority of explosions are not SUICIDE bombings. the few which ARE are not done{very veyr little chance that they are} by alqaeda but the people/organisations i mentioned.

I don't believe you.

^ which is a pity.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It's a good thing America does everything it can to not kill innocent people.

yeah no wonder they "try not to kill Innocent people" America and Britain put together have killed more innocent people then any "Islamic terrorist group" ever will and you know it!

Originally posted by muslimscholar
yeah no wonder they [B]"try not to kill Innocent people" America and Britain put together have killed more innocent people then any "Islamic terrorist group" ever will and you know it! [/B]

That is only because Islamic terrorist groups have not yet gotten an atomic weapon.

You missed my point; My point is simple, if America wanted to kill "innocent people" millions upon millions would be dead. that is not the case, therefore, they must be trying to not kill innocent people.

Also, what is the meaning of "innocent people"? Osama Ben Laden would have said that I was not an innocent person because I am an American and pay taxes.

Originally posted by muslimscholar
yeah no wonder they [B]"try not to kill Innocent people" America and Britain put together have killed more innocent people then any "Islamic terrorist group" ever will and you know it! [/B]

It can be true that America has killed more civilians than terror groups and that they do not go out of their way to kill civilians.

^they do go out of their way to killl civilians. entire masses actually, as long as it gives them even a bit of advantage in a situation. to the american military forces and politicians and those who control it, human lives are extremely cheap, and be it anything from attaining oil at even a slightly lesser price, or making sum1 like israel happy or simply controlling the development of culture/power to challenge america, america gets rid of em as if it were nuthin.

it is true however that they do not SPECIFICALLY target civilians for no reason. ofcourse even that doesnt hold as american soldiers will and have taken out their frustrations of petty/not so petty things by gunning down civilians or torturing them. as well as the fact that many private security firms working on contracts with the US military in iraq etc have reported lots of incidences of randomly gunning down tens of people and cars without any intimidation and just for personal amusement{i.e. red neck cowboy types i suppose. but hey, americans and americans if you look at it from the point of view of the world. }

fact is there are good and bad people everywhere. that topped with the fact that power corrupts = america being a very bad if not the worse single economic/political/partly relegious force on the planet.

although its very true that if the muslim population had that power, in its current form, it may be far worse. but two wrongs dont make a right, and you can not justify america's influence on the world with that.

Originally posted by leonheartmm

it is true however that they do not SPECIFICALLY target civilians for no reason. ofcourse even that doesnt hold as american soldiers will and have taken out their frustrations of petty/not so petty things by gunning down civilians or torturing them. as well as the fact that many private security firms working on contracts with the US military in iraq etc have reported lots of incidences of randomly gunning down tens of people and cars without any intimidation and just for personal amusement{i.e. red neck cowboy types i suppose. but hey, americans and americans if you look at it from the point of view of the world. }

Thank you! Bleeding bloody obvious when you have people fighting a war for the wrong reason and not minimzing civilian activites **** like this will happen.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
it is true however that they do not SPECIFICALLY target civilians for no reason.

if you take the time to read what has been said, that is exactly the point I have been making

lol, and quit it with the america the evil BS. You are on an internet forum, anti-Americanism is almost a pre-requisite to joining.

Nobody is supporting any wars. If that is all you guys want to argue about, go start a new thread.

Originally posted by leonheartmm
^they do go out of their way to killl civilians. entire masses actually, as long as it gives them even a bit of advantage in a situation. to the american military forces and politicians and those who control it, human lives are extremely cheap, and be it anything from attaining oil at even a slightly lesser price, or making sum1 like israel happy or simply controlling the development of culture/power to challenge america, america gets rid of em as if it were nuthin.

it is true however that they do not SPECIFICALLY target civilians for no reason. ofcourse even that doesnt hold as american soldiers will and have taken out their frustrations of petty/not so petty things by gunning down civilians or torturing them. as well as the fact that many private security firms working on contracts with the US military in iraq etc have reported lots of incidences of randomly gunning down tens of people and cars without any intimidation and just for personal amusement{i.e. red neck cowboy types i suppose. but hey, americans and americans if you look at it from the point of view of the world. }

shitshitshit
shitshitshit
shitshitshit

The most shit I have seen in a long time. Osama Ben Laden would love people to believe the quote above.

Originally posted by inimalist

Nobody is supporting any wars.

You keep blooody saying that I ****ing know. God!!!!! Im assuming since you said "you guys" that includes me.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You keep blooody saying that I ****ing know. God!!!!!

ok, stop making points about going to war for wrong reasons

motivation for war would only be relevant if: America went to war specifically to kill civilians, or if someone were saying "America only goes to war for good reasons".