News Understanding the Impact and Perception of Terrorism in the United States

[Smurf]

I don't thing either side made more than a token effort to 'negotiations'. All I've seen here is that the Taliban offered to extradite bin Laden, if given extrensive proof. Yet they had in fact tried to evict bin Laden from Afghanistan (see my previous link) before September 23rd, which would have made extradition impossible even if the US had taken up their offer. So it was kind of worthless.

And the states thought they could do it better than the native governing body... WHY? A moot point, not going to war would've saved so many people's lives and accomplished the same, possibly more, but we'll never know now.

Did they make any other attempts at cooperation, and do you have links for those?

Does it really matter? As far as I'm concerned it was up to the USA to try negotiating before going to war, not up to afghanistan to convince America not to attack them.

 

[Smurf]

This kind of logic from the current leaders doesn't surprise me though. They were all too ready to attack. And they probably got drunk one night and decided to declare war and told a few people that they would do it... then they couldn't turn back on their word... now it's just a matter of pride.

Well. I suppose that's one explanation. I tend to subscribe to the theory that they had other motives.

 

[rachmaninoff]

Does it really matter? As far as I'm concerned it was up to the USA to try negotiating before going to war, not up to afghanistan to convince America not to attack them.

True; but you claimed that

The fact of the matter is the Taliban still went a lot farther than the US did as far as negotiation is concerned.

I'd like to know if this is still true, partially true, or just a moot point.

 

[Smurf]

What I meant by that was that the Taliban offered to try to extradite Bin Laden. What did the US do?

 

[Hurkyl]

1) The side of "good" is a matter of perspective. Everyone fights for something which they believe is good.

Acting in the name of a noble cause does not make the action noble.

When people speak the attitudes that allow the current form terrorism to exist and thrive, they mean precisely this: people who are willing to tolerate (even praise!) their actions, simply because they are done in the name of a good cause.

In other words, you are part of the problem.

And like most, I don't think you intend to be: you do seem to genuinely prefer that there would not be any terrorism. So, the thing I'm hoping that you will see is that your attitude towards the terrorists softens their image, which makes it easier for people to be recruited into terrorism.

 

[gurkhawarhorse]

soldiers from my country were sent to iraq. they are known as gurkhas by english pronountation and gorkhali by ours. my country opposed that but there is a treaty between england and mine so we had to remain quite. then 12 people from my country ie. nepalese were killed. one was behaded. he was slowly cut and it took more than 1/4 hour to be dead by loss of blood suffering. others were shot dead. a clip was shot it can be found in internet but i don't want anyone to see it. from then my country has its muslim citizens being killed dailay by hindus and muslims killing hindus. i by no means mean offence to any community but this is terrorising my country.
gurkha-war-horse

 

[klusener]

And the Maoist rebels are killing both the Hindus and Muslims.

 

[motai]

soldiers from my country were sent to iraq. they are known as gurkhas by english pronountation and gorkhali by ours. my country opposed that but there is a treaty between england and mine so we had to remain quite. then 12 people from my country ie. nepalese were killed. one was behaded. he was slowly cut and it took more than 1/4 hour to be dead by loss of blood suffering. others were shot dead. a clip was shot it can be found in internet but i don't want anyone to see it. from then my country has its muslim citizens being killed dailay by hindus and muslims killing hindus. i by no means mean offence to any community but this is terrorising my country.
gurkha-war-horse

Providing some links from google for reference:
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2076
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/08/31/iraq.main/

gurkhawarhorse, is there still violence and conflicts between those groups? If so, it sounds like more serious a threat to daily life than acts of terrorism in western countries (exception to the recent violence in the UK), as the probability for collateral damage is much higher.

 

[gurkhawarhorse]

gurkhawarhorse, is there still violence and conflicts between those groups? If so, it sounds like more serious a threat to daily life than acts of terrorism in western countries (exception to the recent violence in the UK), as the probability for collateral damage is much higher.

to the killing of nepalese in iraq:

Nepalese responded to this atrocity by venting their anger by assaulting the Muslim minority in Nepal. Hundreds of infuriated young men surrounded Katmandu's one mosque on Aug. 31 and heaved rocks at it. Violence escalated the next day, with five thousand demonstrators taking to the street, yelling slogans like "We want revenge," "Punish the Muslims," and "Down with Islam." Some attacked the mosque, broke into it, ransacked it, and set fire to it. Hundreds of Korans were thrown onto the street, and some were burned.

Rioters also looted other identifiably Muslim targets in the capital city, including embassies and airline bureaus belonging to Muslim-majority countries. A Muslim-owned television station and the homes of individual Muslims came under attack. Mobs even sacked the agencies that recruit Nepalese to work in the Middle East.

The violence ended when armored cars and army trucks enforced a shoot-on-sight curfew, leaving two protesters dead and 50 injured, plus 33 police, and doing an estimated US$20 million in property damage.

this is not the way it should be.
gurkha-war-horse

 

[outsider]

Acting in the name of a noble cause does not make the action noble.

When people speak the attitudes that allow the current form terrorism to exist and thrive, they mean precisely this: people who are willing to tolerate (even praise!) their actions, simply because they are done in the name of a good cause.

In other words, you are part of the problem.

And like most, I don't think you intend to be: you do seem to genuinely prefer that there would not be any terrorism. So, the thing I'm hoping that you will see is that your attitude towards the terrorists softens their image, which makes it easier for people to be recruited into terrorism.

No, my attitude is non-violence, which would educate people enough to not join in the chaos... have you ever been in a mosh pit?

 

[The Smoking Man]

Acting in the name of a noble cause does not make the action noble.

When people speak the attitudes that allow the current form terrorism to exist and thrive, they mean precisely this: people who are willing to tolerate (even praise!) their actions, simply because they are done in the name of a good cause.

In other words, you are part of the problem.

And like most, I don't think you intend to be: you do seem to genuinely prefer that there would not be any terrorism. So, the thing I'm hoping that you will see is that your attitude towards the terrorists softens their image, which makes it easier for people to be recruited into terrorism.

You know Hurkyl, there are a lot of Moslems who say EXACTLY the same thing when talking about the USA.

Except for the fact that people are still signing up for their cause.