• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The next time someone complains about how we are treating the POW's....

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<< Are we, as american or as the western culture, forcing them to adopt or conform to our culture? If so, can you give examples as to how we are forcing them? >>


no, that is their business, interferring can be so many things, but mostly politicaly and financialy.
 


<< no, that is their business, interferring can be so many things, but mostly politicaly and financialy. >>



Can you be more specificas to how we are interfering with them both politicaly and financialy?

just wondering 🙂
 


<< Can you be more specificas to how we are interfering with them both politicaly and financialy? >>


First thing that comes to mind is Israel.
 


<<

<< Can you be more specificas to how we are interfering with them both politicaly and financialy? >>


First thing that comes to mind is Israel. >>



last post before class,

Since when has it become wrong for a country to support another country with similar interests and ideologies?
How is the US supporting Israel any different than the US supporting Taiwan, Japan, the Russian Supporting the Chinese, or the European Nations supporting each other?



 


<<
First thing that comes to mind is Israel.
>>



[ Below is something I wrote for another thread but sums up quite nicely what I feel about this position of yours. Czar, are you saying that it was always wrong for us to support Israel? Have you ever thought what would have happened if we did not support Israel? You claim to try to take the moral high ground -- but is it moral to just sit back and watch the Arabs slaughter all the Jews? ]

I don't believe the validity of this point of view. If we were to stop supporting Israel, I still think we would be the target of Islamic terrorists. Maybe not to the same extent now, but we would still be their target.

Why do I feel this? Well, take a look at the world. What does China, the Philipines, India, and Russia have to do with supporting Israel? And yet they have all suffered from Islamic terrorists.

Some people say that our support of Israel is the main cause for us being the target of Islamic terrorists. In the latest poll of Arab and Muslim people, they claim they dislike us because of our unfair bias towards Israel. Does anyone else think it is extremely hypocritical for them to feel this way? Most Arab and Muslim countries don't even acknowledge the right for Israel to exist -- and they sit on their high throne and call us bias?

At least we've been trying to broker some sort of peace between Israel and the Palestinian people -- one which gives the right to the Palestinian people to have their own homeland. But these same people who criticize us are the same ones who send suicide bombers to disrute the peace process. Hamas has stated that they are against any negiotiated peace.

For those advocating that we should stop all support of Israel, you are basically saying, [/b]"Just let the Arabs kill all the Jews -- it's not our problem"[/b]. The reason we support Israel is because their belief and way of life is more similar to ours (I would feel much more comfortable living in Israel than in a Muslim country), and if we didn't, they would be surrounded by armed enemies who want to kill them all. I think it would have been immoral not to have supported them. We could not just sit back and let the Arabs kill them all -- especially considering how long we waited until we helped them from the Holocaust.

Now, having said this, I think Sharon is doing everything wrong. I almost believe that his hatred of Arafat is making him do things that are not in the best interest of Israel. I don't understand why he is targeting the Palestian police and bulldosing houses when it is Hamas that is doing the killing. He's just escalating everything. I believe it is wrong for Israel to have settlements in the West Bank. They should take advantage of Saudi Arabia's offer and give all that land back in return for peace.

In summary, I believe that our support of Israel is a factor but it is not the root underlying cause.

I believe the root underlying cause is that Muslims don't seem to get along with others unless they are the top dog -- and then all non-Muslims would have to be subserviant and pay tax to them. The fact that they are not the top dog bothers them. All religionist extremists feel this way. Muslims are probably the most religious people I have seen. They have to be the top dog because God/Allah is on their side. If God is with me, shouldn't I be number one? If they aren't top dog, it chips away at their beliefs. Why aren't we number one? It must be because the others are evil.

Why do they hate Israel and not Jordan? They were both partitioned from the same land. Answer: Jordan is a Muslim country and Israel is non-Muslim (Jews).

Why did bin Laden become so enraged when Saudi Arabia asked us for help against Iraq? Answer: Because we are not Muslim and we are in the land of Saudi Arabia. If we were Muslim then there would be no such problems.

Muslims seem to have a tendency to want to be ruled by the law of Islam. They want to live under an Islamic nation. They want politics and religion to mix. They go to other countries to spread their religion. Once it gets a foothold they start building Mosques. Then after becoming a sizable minority they want to separate and form their own country -- because they truly believe that the only correct way is to be ruled by Islamic law. And this causes problems with the other people living with them.
 


<< last post before class,

Since when has it become wrong for a country to support another country with similar interests and ideologies?
How is the US supporting Israel any different than the US supporting Taiwan, Japan, the Russian Supporting the Chinese, or the European Nations supporting each other? >>


There is nothing wrong with supporting a country but when at the same time you are trying to bring peace between that country you support and another country and trying to come of as being neutral things start to look bad in the eyes of the other country.

Also what I find strange is that of all the countries in the world the US supports Israel the most regardless of everything that has happened.

anyway, I think this will be my last post in this thread to, getting tired and I realy should go and studdy😛
thanks everyone for this discussion.
 


<< anyway, I think this will be my last post in this thread to, getting tired and I realy should go and studdy
thanks everyone for this discussion.

>>



Please reply one last time to my post above. 😉
 
Czar,

1) There is an inconsistency in your worldview. You claim that morality is relative. Yet at the same time your insist that all killing is wrong. So which is it?

2) Our country was invaded by terrorists who's goal in death was to kill as many Americans as they could and cripple our way of life. Those terrorists were incubated by an extemist, totalitarian government in Afghanistan. Their goals were probably inspired by the USA's relationship with their enemy, Israel. Their leader is a megolomaniac who wants everyone to die for his cause except himself. His goal is to fracture the world into a Muslim vs. The West dichotomy. If you say that you cannot find any right or wrong positions within these conditions, then you are lying.

3) If a terrorist attacks us for some reason, and we diligently discover the reason for the attack and "correct" our behaviour, then we can expect to have a terrorist attack every day until our last citizen exposes his neck for the terrorist to slice.

4) You claim that killing serves no purpose, but that is absolutely false. It serves many purposes. You may not like those purposes, but that is a lot different than claiming there is no purpose. You may claim that killing is morally wrong (assuming you recant your claim that morality is relative) but you cannot say that killing serves no purpose.

 
Some of you may understand, some might not, but my first reaction to reading the article was a small, grim chuckle. Al-Qaeda has a couple of advantages over the US armed forces in Afganistan. One of them is that to them, the fighting is very personal, whereas to the average US serviceman, its not as personal (their other advantages are the fact that they are in their backyard, the look like the natives, etc). They just ceded one of their advantages. There were the attacks against us on September 11th, and that makes it personal to the average US service man to a degree not found in, say, Vietnam or Korea, but except for those who knew people in the buildings taken out on 9/11 or people on the planes hijacked, its not as personal as it is for the typical Al-Qaeda member, who is out looking for his 72 virgins. Now, for every SEAL team member, it just got really personal. If you are a SEAL, other SEALs around the world are like family. Killing one of them is like someone killing your brother (I've heard some SEALs talk about it just like that). Special forces have a very high will to combat ("will to combat" being the current US military term for morale/spirit/whatever else you wish to call it that gets a man to charge a machine gun nest, jump on a grenade, face overwhelming odds and carry on, etc). For every member of the US special forces, that will to combat just went up a whole lot. It also went up for every US serviceman. The next time the SEALs hit Al-Qaeda, I would expect their standard tactic of reconnasance by fire will get a whole lot more vicious in its implementation.

I feel sorry for the SEAL that died, and my condolences go out to his family. What happened might as well have been the equivalent of Al-Qaeda jamming a RPG up their @ss, and asking us to pull the trigger. There will be payback.
 


<< Some of you may understand, some might not, but my first reaction to reading the article was a small, grim chuckle. Al-Qaeda has a couple of advantages over the US armed forces in Afganistan. One of them is that to them, the fighting is very personal, whereas to the average US serviceman, its not as personal (their other advantages are the fact that they are in their backyard, the look like the natives, etc). They just ceded one of their advantages. There were the attacks against us on September 11th, and that makes it personal to the average US service man to a degree not found in, say, Vietnam or Korea, but except for those who knew people in the buildings taken out on 9/11 or people on the planes hijacked, its not as personal as it is for the typical Al-Qaeda member, who is out looking for his 72 virgins. Now, for every SEAL team member, it just got really personal. If you are a SEAL, other SEALs around the world are like family. Killing one of them is like someone killing your brother (I've heard some SEALs talk about it just like that). Special forces have a very high will to combat ("will to combat" being the current US military term for morale/spirit/whatever else you wish to call it that gets a man to charge a machine gun nest, jump on a grenade, face overwhelming odds and carry on, etc). For every member of the US special forces, that will to combat just went up a whole lot. It also went up for every US serviceman. The next time the SEALs hit Al-Qaeda, I would expect their standard tactic of reconnasance by fire will get a whole lot more vicious in its implementation >>



That's why the last word in my post was---- idiots.

Chief
 
I guess you're right, if its special forces doing the fighting. Regular troops get demoralized at special forces casualties.
 
<<Also what I find strange is that of all the countries in the world the US supports Israel the most regardless of everything that has happened>>

Like what? Israel responding every time some idiot blows himself and a bunch of Israelis up or shoots up a school?
Name one time Israel has done something that wasn't in response to another incident....nevermind, you can't.


<<OK Czar here's the question I asked Elledan a few months ago. You have a gun, an "evildoer" has a gun pointed at your childs head and say he's going to kill him. Do you kill the "evildoer" or do you let your child be killed? >>


<<Ofcorse not, but regarding self-defense, do you think its possible that this "evildoer" is acting also in self-defense because he belives you are threatening him?>>

I wouldn't care, and if you loved your child, you wouldn't either. You shoot the "evildoer" first, ask why he did it later.
If I come running at you with a gun saying I'm going to kill you, and you have a gun also, would you stop and ask me why I'm doing it, or shoot me?
You're an idiot if you say you wouldn't shoot me.
That's exactly what we are doing in Afghanistan. They started it, and now it doesn't matter why, we're going to end it. All of the people that are behind this are barbaric, sub-human, and plain wrong, particularly by today's standards.
All that didn't matter as much to us until they decided to bring their crap over here. Now it matters. The time for understanding is past.
 


<< Also what I find strange is that of all the countries in the world the US supports Israel the most regardless of everything that has happened. >>



If we ever stop supporting Israel we are doomed.
 


<< Name one time Israel has done something that wasn't in response to another incident.... nevermind, you can't. >>


How can we say that it is just the Palestinians responding to something that Israel does? Nevermind, you can't. 😉



<< I wouldn't care, and if you loved your child, you wouldn't either. You shoot the "evildoer" first, ask why he did it later.
If I come running at you with a gun saying I'm going to kill you, and you have a gun also, would you stop and ask me why I'm doing it, or shoot me?
You're an idiot if you say you wouldn't shoot me.
That's exactly what we are doing in Afghanistan. They started it, and now it doesn't matter why, we're going to end it. All of the people that are behind this are barbaric, sub-human, and plain wrong, particularly by today's standards.
All that didn't matter as much to us until they decided to bring their crap over here. Now it matters. The time for understanding is past. >>


1) It isn't that black and white.
2) Didn't we start it in 91' when we went over into Saudi Arabia to protect are own selfish oil interests? (I am not saying that what they did on 9/11 is anyway right, but we cannot ay that ?they started it all? and go along with, ?just because they did it we can do it.?)
 


<< Ofcorse not, but regarding self-defense, do you think its possible that this "evildoer" is acting also in self-defense because he belives you are threatening him? >>




But that's not the question I'd be asking myself. Thing is, if you actually thought about the above statement and were in the mentioned situation...would you really give a DAMN what he thought?

Not me...
 
A truley great president would find a way to deal with situations without resorting to war and creating an "us against them" propoganda.

We need more presidents like Kennedy, but unfortunetly we have another hot-headed Bush.
 


<< A truley great president would find a way to deal with situations without resorting to war and creating an "us against them" propoganda. >>


So what would you have done? Held it in your mouth until it went limp.



<< We need more presidents like Kennedy, but unfortunetly we have another hot-headed Bush >>


1. Bay of Pigs
2. Viet Nam
3. Cuban Missile Crisis
Ol' Jack wasn't quite the pacifist you make him out to be. Thank god he had more balls than you've got. He realized that there was a time and a place for diplomatic efforts, a time for a showing of tremendous strength and a time for violence. He was also not afraid of making a mistake if he thought the cause was a just one.
 


<< StormRider,
First of all, that quote was written by novon, not me.

The definition of good and evil depends on each and everyone one of us, what I belive is good can be evil to you and visa versa. To the Taliban and many other people the US is the bacteria and therefor in this issue there is no right and no wrong in this case.

Its true, I try to take the high moral ground, but you only see one side of this. There is motive to every action and everyone belives they are doing good. >>



Your ideals then would really reinforce every diabolical madman or country to ever grace the earth. Following along with what you said, you could place Hitler out of blame for killing millions of civilians during the war. He thought it was right and acceptable to do so, therefore there is no right or wrong in that case. You see the flawed logic in that argument? There may be different definitions of good or bad according to individuals, but there is a universal definition of what's right and what's wrong, and your missing that fact. Rape universally is wrong, murder universally is wrong, incest universally is wrong, etc. But to your definiton, if a rapist deems rape to be a good thing, he should be relieved of all guilt for his actions because he thought rape is just and proper.

I'm sorry Czar, I know you have your viewpoints and opinions, but this type of argument is not acceptable. What the Taliban and Al Qaeda are/were doing is unacceptable to any standard of humanity. They hate civilized society, they hate human rights, they enjoy a warring, barbaric, twisted religious state devoid of any civilization or decency. They may think they are right, but the rest of the western civilized world KNOWS they are wrong.
 


<< We need more presidents like Kennedy, but unfortunetly we have another hot-headed Bush. >>


Have you ever read a history book? Kennedy had us closer to annihilation than at any other time in history. That being said....he did the right thing.
 


<<
2) Didn't we start it in 91' when we went over into Saudi Arabia to protect are own selfish oil interests? (I am not saying that what they did on 9/11 is anyway right, but we cannot ay that ?they started it all? and go along with, ?just because they did it we can do it.?) >>



Okay, that is the stupidest statement. We DID NOT go into Saudi Arabia and slaughter civilians. We went into Saudi Arabia at the request of the Saudi Arabian government, and the a$$hole Bin Laden thought he was king of the world and told us to leave Saudi Arabia because 1) We weren't a muslim military and 2) We had women serving in the service. When we rightfully didn't, he flipped his lid and scoffed at the fact that the US didn't bend over to his will. That's when the crap with him started.

BTW, protecting our national security is not a rudely selfish act, it's insuring our survival as a nation. Besides, we did it at the request of the Saudi Arabians.
 


<< Amen to Czar >>



I'm having difficulty understanding this praise for Czar considering I F-ING DESTROYED HIS POSITION with my 4 points above. :| That's the problem with these types of discussions. No one will concede that their position is inherently flawed no matter what proof you provide of that very condition.
 


<< Thank god we had Roosevelt as our President during World War II, not some dudes like Czar or novon. >>




<< I'm having difficulty understanding this praise for Czar considering I F-ING DESTROYED HIS POSITION with my 4 points above. >>



If we didn't have people like you guys that get their jollies off destruction, we wouldn't have wars in the first place. Wether you are the aggressor or the "defender" you are still participating in close-minded slaughter. Why do I have a feeling I'm trying to discuss this with some 16 year old in his mom's basement who plays too much counter-strike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top