Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

American Terrorism

  1. Jul 18, 2005 #1
    Russ,

    Rather than Hijack your thread re:the 'Poll', I am creating a related link here:

    Just another little observation about 'suicidal behaviour' and 'military mentality'.

    Russ, you equate what these people do in the name of their cause as 'immoral'.

    How do you explain the USA and their attitude to the Tuskeegee Airmen and the venerial disease scandle, the deliberate collaberation of McArthur in not prosecuting Iishi over his activities in China so that he could gain information for the bio-weapons later used in Korea, and activities such as this gained by other 'civil' western states?

    You mentioned 'morality' of military technique in many of your posts.

    You are aware that bioweapons were banned in 1925 under the Geneva Protocols and that the USA and their new ally Japan (currently seeking a SC veto) have been the world's largest producers of these weapons since that time?

    (Well, where do you think the 'terrorists' got their cannister of sarin gas that was used in the Tokyo subway!? :biggrin:)

    You DO keep on mentioning 'morality' in reference to war/terrorism.

    We are after all discussing the people who supplied the technology and the know how to Saddam to produce the gasses he used on the Kurds and the Iranians notto mention the satellite intel on the best times, weather conditions and troop movements... Yes ... the fruits of illegal research don't seem to fall far from the tree and what is this illegal substance but an act of terrorism?

    Was Saddam field testing your bio-tech for you?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 19, 2005 #2
    TSM, to pre-empt the inevitable demands you're going to get to provide evidence for something that is so well-known, I found this information (from a US news source: Washington Post, Monday, December 30, 2002 - perhaps acceptably credible? Sorry, I did search for a Fox News source, but Fox just doesn't seem to report on these things, for some odd reason :rolleyes: ):
     
  4. Jul 19, 2005 #3
    ohhh i am tied of posting this information in the forum, i even post fragments of the desclasified documents, but it looks like if they don't want to see this... they close theyr eyes... or get answers like: "You understand nothing, in that time iran was more evil", haha, anyway i think we can start posting all terrrorist suported now and before by america.
    We can start with luis posadas carriles, agent of the cia who blown an airplaine full of civilians... or Islam Karimov (New rumsfeld buddy) who boils people alive...
     
  5. Jul 19, 2005 #4

    Art

    User Avatar

    Here's another example of the 'civilised' western countries total disregard for foreign lives;
    http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050708/sc_afp/environmentrainbow_050708171848
     
  6. Jul 19, 2005 #5
    I know the feeling, Burnsys. These discussions seem to have nothing to do with a search for 'truth' based on 'evidence' - people continue to believe what they want to believe despite whatever evidence they are presented with. This is tiresome - it is obvious that the 'discussions' boil down to ideological beliefs for some people: whatever X does is 'good', whatever Y does is 'bad' - how very simplistic to 'analyse' along these lines; how childish!
     
  7. Jul 19, 2005 #6
    More Bombs testing in foreing soil:

     
  8. Jul 19, 2005 #7
    isn't this the pot calling the kettle black vis a vi your discussions on communism vs. capitalism?
     
  9. Jul 19, 2005 #8
    An extract from Wikipedia:

     
  10. Jul 19, 2005 #9
    The history of South America for the last 100 years (and even longer) has largely been the history of U.S. intereference (many would call it terrorism).

    In fact, the U.S. run academy for installing illigitimate Latin American dictators is still around (The School of the Americas).
     
  11. Jul 19, 2005 #10

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    You know, Smoking Man, you really give the impression that you think one terrorist is justified because of another. Every civilization that has ever existed on this planet has a long history of propogating warfare, and of course this includes western civilization and even the United States. It's hard to see how that excuses the actions of modern-day middle-eastern terrorist organizations, especially given that there have only been three attacks that I can ever think of that were directly against the United States (Britain in the War of 1812, Japan at Pearl Harbor, and Al Qaeda on 9/11) and only one of them was carried out by one of these terrorist organizations.
     
  12. Jul 19, 2005 #11
    I don't think he was trying to condone terrorism at all, rather he was trying to point out that Russ's claims were rather one sided thats all.

    Also there are more than just three attacks, much more, but if you're talking about attacks specifically on U.S. soil (excluding embassy bombings, plane bombings and the like) I would bring your attention to the first WTC attack, as well as the Oklahoma City bombing (the work of an American, but still a terrorist), then theres the Unabomber, not to mention the bombings of black churches by American terrorist organizations such as the KKK (and the many other evil things they and organizations of their ilk did). More recently, what about the envelopes with anthrax sent to senators and news organizations? That was also domestic work. What about the DC snipers?

    There are many many other examples but these are just the ones that sprang immediately to mind.
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2005
  13. Jul 19, 2005 #12
    It doesn't excuses the actions of modern-day middle-eastern terrorist organizations, we are saying it's the motive why they exist today...

    What would happened if America didn't trained osama bin laden and the mujadin?? or if american didn't helped saddam husein???
    And now i ask you.. what do you think will happen in 10 years in saudi arabia or uzbekistan??
     
  14. Jul 19, 2005 #13
    Capitalism is the basis of US foreign policy, and it is about profit, not morals.

    The topic of terrorism, and of course the definition of terrorism--one of which is state terrorism, has been discussed in depth but immediately dismissed from thought by those who are in denial.

    The problem with those who espouse 'morals' is the inevitable hypocrisy, including domestic trends that we are experiencing at this time. These people who make election decisions based on so-called 'values' do not live any more a virtuous life than their secular counterparts. In fact, I have found them to be very confused in their thinking that because they go to church it makes them good people, while secular/liberal people are far more charitable and concerned about social issues including education, the environment, etc.

    The mentality seems to hold true at the global level too. It has been said many times that we need better education in the US, specifically of a global nature, beginning in grade school with current event assignments. Americans are oblivious to their own history outside their borders, which is apparent as they seem to struggle with simple things like the causes of terrorism.
     
  15. Jul 19, 2005 #14

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    I was thinking of attacks by outsiders, as the impression I got was that Smoking Man was justifying (not necessarily condoning) actions by these outside groups as responses to US aggression. Americans killing Americans wasn't on my mind. I almost forgot about that first WTC attack, though, it was so small comparatively.

    My point is simply that you walk a fine line here. When Russ cries out about, say, Chechens killing Russian schoolchildren, do you really think the appropriate response is "but the Russians kill Chechens every day?" How is killing innocent civilians that are in no way linked to any military target ever justified? Regardless of who does it, it's wrong. When you respond by screaming that the other side does the same thing, I respond by asking "So what?" Does that make it right?

    Honestly, can't we just condemn evil actions? Would not the first step to clearing our world of these things be an unqualified non-acceptance of them?
     
  16. Jul 19, 2005 #15

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    The reason they exist is the human desire for vengeance. 'You got us, now we'll get you.' That is exactly the attitude I'm trying to abet. It seems to be the attitude that threads like this condone.
     
  17. Jul 19, 2005 #16
    Yes everyone including Muslims should condemn evil actions, in particular targeting innocent civilians, which is most heinous. However, nothing is one sided and everyone needs to accept responsibility for contribution to the problems in the world today. Until all parties are willing to do so, how can the problem be resolved?
     
  18. Jul 19, 2005 #17
    This thread doesn't condone that attitude at all and either you are delibirately missing that point and trolling or, well, you are missing the point.

    This thread is not about saying, "Well, the other side does it too, that makes it ok!"

    It is about saying we have no right to say muslims are terrorists etc etc when we do the same thing. That doesn't mean it is OK one way or the other, obviously it is not.
     
  19. Jul 19, 2005 #18

    Art

    User Avatar

    First off I would like to reiterate what I have said on previous threads. I abhore all terrorist acts no matter who the perpetrators are. However I believe your criticism in this case is in error. The title of the thread is American terrorism so by bringing in M.E, terrorism you are going off topic and in fact (unintentionally I am sure) doing the very thing you are accusing TSM of doing which is using the argument of 'we may be bad but what about them'.
     
  20. Jul 19, 2005 #19
    Sorry for that impression then.

    I believe that the tiime for ALL to be held accountable is upon us and that terrorism should be stopped at all levels.

    Now that can't take place when you are prepared to 'forgive' acts of terrorism by states you are sympathetic to.

    Besides pointing out what is wrong with 'Moslem' states, we must therefore also acknowledge what goes on in western countries and admit it is equally heinous.

    Call it the 'arms race' of terrorism if you will and you are not going to get rid of it until something is done by all parties involved.
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2005
  21. Jul 20, 2005 #20

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    Who are 'we?' I've never committed a terrorist act, and presumably neither has anyone else that has posted a thread in this forum. So why do we not have the right to call Islamic terrorists 'terrorists?" Russ simply called an immoral act 'immoral.' If what he says is correct, and everyone seems to agree that it is, why the objection?

    How so? I've made no evaluation of either group. If you want me to, however, personally I think neither is particularly well justified. I never have and I'm not going to sit here from my pedestal and lecture you guys about calling US actions 'immoral.' I'm especially not going to do so by pointing out that other nations and civilizations have performed similar actions. If what the US does is immoral, then you have every right to call the actions by the name they deserve. Same goes with any other group performing immoral actions.

    Good. Thank you for not jumping on me. You seem to have gotten the message of what I was posting. I agree with you, although I don't think that simply acknowledging that the US has done and continues to do bad things is going to solve anything by itself. It is a little more complicated than that; then again, I'm sure you agree.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?