OT: Ideas - Can't stop, Won't stop! :)

[mike holiday]

i think it's pretty obvious that our "war on terrorism" has bread more terrorists then stopped.

[Machinesworking]

hey rob, instead of doing the quote thing.... just a reply to you points.
Saudi Arabia, we could if we wanted to change that country. From what I understand the king there is so hated locally and in neighboring countries that the common belief in the middle east is that the only reason he's in power at all, is that it's considered a fact that we would come to his rescue if a coup was to happen.
Suadi Arabia are heavily invested in the US and also heavily in debt to the US. This is where Michael Moore is spinning completely in Fahrenheit 911, his assertion that Saudi Arabia is actually in control of the relationship because of huge investments in US business. The fact is they are in billions to trillions of dollars in debt to the US, and we have them by the short hairs. We could force the king to step down from power there, move them towards the situation you see with England, where the queen is a powerful figurehead rather than a political despot. It wouldn't be easy, but it would establish the US as a country that means what it says.
China is moving, very very slowly, towards democracy and a free market. It's why I believe they will succeed. I don;t blame them for that, russia proved that jumping in just gives power to the mob, and can splinter your country.


Doing these sort of things does in fact stop fundamentalists from having power. If people are happy they don't fall for it. As an example here in the states Pat Robertson declares that we should execute Hugo Chavez on public television. He's our version of the Taliban, but because we are prosperous and mostly well fed, we laugh and react in astonishment when he says things that are sickeningly fascistic.
Sure his supporters are all about him being right etc. but they aren't boarding planes and heading to Venezuela to carry out his plans. Mainly because they don't feel that threatened by Chavez. they are comfortable.

You cannot install democracy by force, and sadly, in heavily ethnically divided countries like Iraq, it will not work. Do you think that the Sunnis are going to be treated nicely by the Shiites once we leave? Saddamn believes we will not execute him because he has dealt with the ethnic strife in his country for years. It's insanity on his part to a degree, but the reasoning is solid.

Japan and Germany were different in the simple fact that they had a national identity, the middle eastern people have many ethnic loyalties. Also, the events were distinct, we were attacked by countries then, not rebel terrorist cells.

Terrorist cells feed on people believing that their way of life is threatened to the point that they have to do something about it. You can't decide that fascists or fundamentalists don't have a right to exist and try to force that, it just makes them stronger. There is very little terrorist activity in the USA, only the racists, and while they are a problem, they don;t have a huge following.

Point is we can in fact win a war on terrorism by giving them nothing to complain about. they don't hate us because of our "freedom", they hate us because we don't care about their freedom, yet claim to. We get rid of the king of Suadi Arabia, let them establish a government, and defend their right to exist with as much zeal as we do Israel, and you would see a change in terrorist activity.
We hand over Iraq to the UN and NATO, back down from taking control of their oil reserves. We commit to working with democratically elected leaders despite our dislike of them personally, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran, or Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, we show the middle east we are willing, then we will see change. Until then, I doubt anything will change, except that simple fact, in fifty years nuclear power will be available to any despot, and our actions now can make us a target.

I have to get back to music, so I might not get back to you today or tomorrow, but it's definitely an interesting conversation. You really aren't as much of an apologist as some have made you out to be? Can't figure that one out? and I'm pretty much a person who believes in a democratic system with a socialist government, and gently restrained free market economy. (Microsoft should have lost that government lawsuit, and Enron shouldn't have been allowed near anything as important to the people as electricity!)

[ethios4]

yes that is all well and good rob but your words hold no weight because it is crystal clear you are won of those dangerous people who feel he is informed and intelligent enough to from a serious opinion about the reasons for a war on terror when in reality you are as thick a pig shite.
Dangerous and very similiar to old GW bush. You clown !

This is the sort of thing that makes me seriously question the anti-Bush policy stance. Clearly emotion has taken over logic here.

[dj superflat]

machines, i like your analysis. the only point i don't buy is that islamic terrorism goes away if life is more prosperous in verious countries. don't get me wrong, i think that would go a long way towards removing willing recruits. but i also think that there are just some crazy ideologies (nazis, klan, etc.) that some people will follow to the bitter end. perhaps i'm just saying that, now that we've created this problem, we can't fix it by making things better now (once you have nazi, resolving the grievances following the treaty of versailles that created nazis no longer does you much good, cause you have wackjobs in power who think it's fun to kill). i'm also not sure i buy the "root cause" argument -- that it's really just the lack of jobs, etc., rather than a culture of histroric grievance and hate for the infidel. put in another context, i'm not so sure the yugoslavs were at each other's throats for any reason we could fix without force (other than going back and changing the outcome of whatever battle in the 14th century).

[djadonis206]

Hey, I started a number while reading this thread - just to prove to the nay sayers you can actually work on music and talk poilitics (world issues etc)

I took an hour off to watch the final episode of the WIRE and played lots of HALO 2 throughout the day

and this is far from finished but this thread inspired me -

FYI I'm running on the ICE CREAM PLATFORM OF PEACE

tracks called Sunday Sampler - you can be on the forum, talk shit and work on music - fyi

gentlemen

www.soundclick.com/djadonis206 <-- sunday sampler (oh and you have to click the music tab)

peace


ADONIS!

[robtronik]

hey rob, instead of doing the quote thing.... just a reply to you points.
Saudi Arabia, we could if we wanted to change that country. From what I understand the king there is so hated locally and in neighboring countries that the common belief in the middle east is that the only reason he's in power at all, is that it's considered a fact that we would come to his rescue if a coup was to happen.
Suadi Arabia are heavily invested in the US and also heavily in debt to the US. This is where Michael Moore is spinning completely in Fahrenheit 911, his assertion that Saudi Arabia is actually in control of the relationship because of huge investments in US business. The fact is they are in billions to trillions of dollars in debt to the US, and we have them by the short hairs. We could force the king to step down from power there, move them towards the situation you see with England, where the queen is a powerful figurehead rather than a political despot. It wouldn't be easy, but it would establish the US as a country that means what it says.

the only real problem with this, besides us doing even more of what we are currently being accused of with military/forceable action to another country, is that the current rulers of Saudi Arabia are actually more moderate towards us than the people are. Which means that if you free the people to go towards what they will, they will immediately be swallowed up by wahabists who are clearly part of the problem (i.e. the very radical strain that breeds hatred towards jews and america in general).

So, until they begin to change their internal standards over a period of time, it does us no good by removing the very thing that is keeping their society in check and not spiraling into an active jihadist state with direct and active sponsorhip.

i could be wrong about saudi arabia, but this is what I understand. If anyone knows that country's situation more clearly than I, please pop in and let us know.

China is moving, very very slowly, towards democracy and a free market. It's why I believe they will succeed. I don;t blame them for that, russia proved that jumping in just gives power to the mob, and can splinter your country.

yes, this is more ideal. China, I hope, will be a friend and ally at some point in the future. But they tend to think in terms of generations, so it will be a long time before (if ever) they become like the U.K. or Australia is to us. A case in point: Taiwan.

This will be forever a point of consternation between us and them as it immediately reveals the differences between us and them (w/ regard to what we consider important). This will take time and hopefully, if all goes well, it will be a model of how a society transforms itself without a bloody revolution.

Doing these sort of things does in fact stop fundamentalists from having power. If people are happy they don't fall for it. As an example here in the states Pat Robertson declares that we should execute Hugo Chavez on public television. He's our version of the Taliban, but because we are prosperous and mostly well fed, we laugh and react in astonishment when he says things that are sickeningly fascistic.
Sure his supporters are all about him being right etc. but they aren't boarding planes and heading to Venezuela to carry out his plans. Mainly because they don't feel that threatened by Chavez. they are comfortable.

I don't agree with the happy part and how that will stop terrorism. Being happy is immaterial to whether you think things are running the way you think they should. This is where ideology comes into play and why relatively well to do people succumb to radical ideologies - they are attached to ideas, not wealth. And when religion is put into the mix (and being saved, sent to virginal heaven or whatnot) it is even more potent.

This is evidenced in the U.K. and Germany and even places like Japan (subway terrorist attacks). Its about political aims and ideology, not if you have food on your plate and have a nice TV. Those things are secondary to an Islamist radical (who is easily swayed, under the rhertoric and belief system, to die for their cause).

Increasingly, the excuse of radicalized islamists for U.S. Non-intervention in the middle east, the removal of Isreal, and our subsequent reaction to 9/11 by invasion is nothing more than additional fuel to their argument that democracy, liberalism, western culture is wrong and should be eradicated.

this is the true goal of radicalized islamists (who are sometimes correctly discribed as fascists): they wish the elimination of democracy and in its place, sharia law and all the totalitarianism that goes along with that.

these are ideas, not ways to get wealth or be happy with materialism, this is about principles of what one thinks about how people should rule and under what mandate (a people powered constitution vs. law handed down by prophet on behalf of god).

You cannot install democracy by force, and sadly, in heavily ethnically divided countries like Iraq, it will not work. Do you think that the Sunnis are going to be treated nicely by the Shiites once we leave? Saddamn believes we will not execute him because he has dealt with the ethnic strife in his country for years. It's insanity on his part to a degree, but the reasoning is solid.

Japan and Germany were different in the simple fact that they had a national identity, the middle eastern people have many ethnic loyalties. Also, the events were distinct, we were attacked by countries then, not rebel terrorist cells.

You are absolutely right. I don't disagree with the idea that civil war could erupt in Iraq based on the ideas you wrote above. A national identity is important.

BUT, and this is a big ol' butt, we don't have a choice at this point. The first priority was to remove Saddam with the second priority (after removing him) was putting in place a representative government. The reasoning behind that, of course, was that it was more of a risk to leave him in power rather than the risk of a destablized Iraq.

But we haven't left yet, we are still trying, and more importantly, large masses of Iraqi's are trying and do see the benefits of a putting in a modern, representative government. Right now, it is a test of wills and I am glad to hear Bush say we aren't leaving. We have a moral obligation to see this through on their behalf.

Bigger problems would be on the horizon for them if we left prematurely. I suspect the next president of the U.S. will do exactly as Bush is doing in this area despite their political party affiliation.

Terrorist cells feed on people believing that their way of life is threatened to the point that they have to do something about it. You can't decide that fascists or fundamentalists don't have a right to exist and try to force that, it just makes them stronger. There is very little terrorist activity in the USA, only the racists, and while they are a problem, they don;t have a huge following.

Point is we can in fact win a war on terrorism by giving them nothing to complain about. they don't hate us because of our "freedom", they hate us because we don't care about their freedom, yet claim to.

I disagree with this. Go watch and read the interviews with their leadership (hamas, al q., hezb, president of iran, etc. read the teachings of thier imams and mullahs and you will see a much more deviant picture of how they view the west and what the goals are with islamism. This isn't about getting us to care about their freedom, this is about them having the freedom to spread their version of sharia, caliphate, and radicalized islam throughout the world. We are far beyond the claims of reperation - and in fact, we are not the cause of their lacking freedom per se. If anything they could as easily point the finger towards their own fascist governments, but this has not occured because the rulers of these countries not only sold out their own people but were savvy enough to lay the blame (partly correctly) back on the west and the U.S. and Isreal. Demonization of the west is the best way to blame your issues on an outide "devil" like the U.S. without taking responsibility.

hence my point on the region being world class poor and yet so much money is generated by the world's number one resource. Not strange how that happened...

We get rid of the king of Suadi Arabia, let them establish a government, and defend their right to exist with as much zeal as we do Israel, and you would see a change in terrorist activity.

We hand over Iraq to the UN and NATO, back down from taking control of their oil reserves. We commit to working with democratically elected leaders despite our dislike of them personally, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran, or Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, we show the middle east we are willing, then we will see change. Until then, I doubt anything will change, except that simple fact, in fifty years nuclear power will be available to any despot, and our actions now can make us a target.

totally disagree with this based on my points above. I wish it were so easy. For instance, take this example:

isreal pulls out of lebannon. Hezb. was formed as a reaction to the occupation. More than a decade later, Hebollah has no right to claim fighting an occupation, but still insists that its mission is to push Isreal into the ocean. Why?

Because it isn't about land or identity, its about the ideology of what Isreal represents and its relationship to the west (in particular, the U.S.). Why can't they leave it alone? Not in the agenda according to Nasrallah and his overlord, President of Iran...

I have to get back to music, so I might not get back to you today or tomorrow, but it's definitely an interesting conversation. You really aren't as much of an apologist as some have made you out to be? Can't figure that one out? and I'm pretty much a person who believes in a democratic system with a socialist government, and gently restrained free market economy. (Microsoft should have lost that government lawsuit, and Enron shouldn't have been allowed near anything as important to the people as electricity!)

word. Good discussion. If it could only have gone half as well with koo koo and the like. Mutual respect is good, even if we disagree. Its wrong to push a brotha into the corner with unrelated personal attacks, IMO.

rob.

[Machinesworking]

machines, i like your analysis. the only point i don't buy is that islamic terrorism goes away if life is more prosperous in verious countries. don't get me wrong, i think that would go a long way towards removing willing recruits. but i also think that there are just some crazy ideologies (nazis, klan, etc.) that some people will follow to the bitter end. perhaps i'm just saying that, now that we've created this problem, we can't fix it by making things better now (once you have nazi, resolving the grievances following the treaty of versailles that created nazis no longer does you much good, cause you have wackjobs in power who think it's fun to kill). i'm also not sure i buy the "root cause" argument -- that it's really just the lack of jobs, etc., rather than a culture of histroric grievance and hate for the infidel. put in another context, i'm not so sure the yugoslavs were at each other's throats for any reason we could fix without force (other than going back and changing the outcome of whatever battle in the 14th century).

Extremist groups don't go away, they just lose power, and it's not as much about being prosperous and free as it is about feeling that you are free to choose anything you want to. Iran really seriously hasn't been that much of a threat even though they have a religious element in their government simply because they are doing well, and in control of their own destiny.
Saudi Arabia's population is a threat,because they do not feel they are in control of their government, they feel we are in control!

That, is the grease that turns the wheels of fundamentalist terrorist organizations.
Also, this isn't necessarily about religion, any more than the IRA and Ulster terrorist cells in Ireland were about catholic VS protestant. Sure it helps to divide the people, but in the case of anti US sentiment it's more about the feeling that we are not allowing them self rule.

anyway I SAID I was going to get on this recording thing I have to do....

[Rod Underleaf]

Rob said ". The other half of that coin is the leadership of middle eastern nations that allowed themselves to be manipulated to their benefit over the concerns of the people they were responsible for ruling.

It is no accident that one of the wealthiest regions in the world (due to oil) is also the most poor, un-educated, and socially backward areas in the entire world even despite them having control of one of the most important natural resources on the planet. Why is this? Would this be because their leadership was at fault? ………..


If we don't win the battle of ideas, then we will eventually lose and this grand experiment in freedom and liberalism will be wiped off the face of the planet for a very, very, long time if left up to those who spread the ideas of the caliphate, sharia law, and unitary religious stances have their way. " So Rob reveals his ugly racist screed. This is about as bigoted as it gets. So these arab semites deserve to fry because we dont like their governments. We here at Live will not tolerate a few swear words but racist garbage is just fine. Ethios4 said "This is the sort of thing that makes me seriously question the anti-Bush policy stance. Clearly emotion has taken over logic here."
________________"Fuck" no: Bigot yes! Is this what its come to around here. I cry for my country, I cry for my software forum.

[djadonis206]

anyway I SAID I was going to get on this recording thing I have to do....

See my post two (or three now) post before yours

been doing that all day - actually I don't even know what recording is but I've been reading up on you guys, playing video games, eating chicken wings and practicing Ableton - www.soundclick.com/djadonis206 <--- the more I listen to it it's super sloppy and like 95% NOT DONE but it's a start

I'm glad you guys agree to disagree

[Machinesworking]

One last thing, Adonis, I just watched that episode of South Park where Cartman goes back in time and adds free ice cream day to the constitution! All south park dot com rules!

[deva]

How do stop terrorism?

I figure it will take a few million people, surround the White House, and arrest the terrorists.


and until we have an agreed upon definition of terrorism that is as much of an answer as I can gve.

[Machinesworking]

Because it isn't about land or identity, its about the ideology of what Isreal represents and its relationship to the west (in particular, the U.S.). Why can't they leave it alone? Not in the agenda according to Nasrallah and his overlord, President of Iran...

The arab world is holding on to the notion that Israel does not have a right to exist, that they were created by the west. The whole thing would shift if there was some way to appease both sides physically, not just religiously. It sucks, but it has little to do with fundamentalist ideology, and a lot to do with what the arab world considers unfair political maneuvering in the birth of Israel.
It's a lot like the Irish guys I would talk to that said all scotts protestants should just go back to england/Scotland, not really feasible, and based on emotions rather than reality.
Sure the radical leaders will advocate all kinds of shit to stir the population, you definitely would see the same thing her in the states if the situation in Mexico and Canada was being manipulated by outside interests.
Pat robertson would turn into a real son of a bitch if we had any cause for concern that Canada was going towards total communism, even if it was a utopian communism. It would still go against a large portion of the extreme rights ideological stance.

[glu]

The war on terror:

[Rod Underleaf]

"It is no accident that one of the wealthiest regions in the world (due to oil) is also the most poor, un-educated, and socially backward areas in the entire world even despite them having control of one of the most important natural resources on the planet. Why is this? Would this be because their leadership was at fault? ………..


If we don't win the battle of ideas, then we will eventually lose and this grand experiment in freedom and liberalism will be wiped off the face of the planet for a very, very, long time if left up to those who spread the ideas of the caliphate, sharia law, and unitary religious stances have their way. "

If you look at this you can clearly see the racist subtext. The clear message contained within crass hatred of Islam and the Arab world. Why do the forum members tolerate hatred but object to a few sharp words. Only a few voices have objected. What about it Ableton! This is hate speech.

[djadonis206]

One last thing, Adonis, I just watched that episode of South Park where Cartman goes back in time and adds free ice cream day to the constitution! All south park dot com rules!

No one said I was being original

"I don't want to wait, for our lives to be over..." <--- theme from Dawson's creek our man Cartman was humming as he beat the messanger boy to death -

"I don't want to wait, for our lives to be over..."