Shopping & Style4 mins ago
Ridding The World Of Terrorism - Can Cameron Handle It?
http://
The world would be a safer place without terrorism no doubt. But a report recently says there are over 1,000,000 militant Muslims and their offshoots spread throughout the world. We have seen what terror they can cause in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and now a major slice of North Africa. Now that Obama is taking a back seat this void is led by Cameron. Does he deserve our encouragement?
The world would be a safer place without terrorism no doubt. But a report recently says there are over 1,000,000 militant Muslims and their offshoots spread throughout the world. We have seen what terror they can cause in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and now a major slice of North Africa. Now that Obama is taking a back seat this void is led by Cameron. Does he deserve our encouragement?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by pdq1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
jake..one doesn't need to invade a country to be "at war" with them....there are different types of war..."Cold War"..."Religious War" and the most difficult and evil of them all..."the Terrorist War".
Some you win...some you lose....but the have to be fought for many reasons.
Innocent people (collateral damage) being killed is an unfortunate price we pay for the state of ...War.
Some you win...some you lose....but the have to be fought for many reasons.
Innocent people (collateral damage) being killed is an unfortunate price we pay for the state of ...War.
jake-the-peg
/// We invaded Iraq and killed 100,000 civillians ///
What purposely?
And how many did Saddam Hussein kill deliberately?
http://
/// We invaded Iraq and killed 100,000 civillians ///
What purposely?
And how many did Saddam Hussein kill deliberately?
http://
does it matter if it was deliberately or just through carelessness or accident, aog? The victims are just as dead and their families just as angry.
And does it matter how many Saddam killed? Are you suggesting that because he killed innocent people that gave us some right to do the same? Do you think we should have gone into Iraq at all?
And does it matter how many Saddam killed? Are you suggesting that because he killed innocent people that gave us some right to do the same? Do you think we should have gone into Iraq at all?
I think that the mindset that Islam wants to take over the world is simply media scaremongering.
The vast majority of Muslims are peace loving, as are the vast majority of Christians, but you get extremists who gain media attention and give the impression that their impact on the order of things is far higher than it is in reality.
Moslem extemists may continue to bomb, but that is because they are extremists, not because they believe it is a path to world domination. invasion of Muslim nations simply adds fuel to the argument that it is the West who wishes to rule the world, rather than the other way around - and on the basis or recent history, that argument does seem to have some weight.
By definition, it is not possible to rid the world of terrorism, but trying to assure other nations that we do not wish to force democracy on them might be a good start - and then backing that stance up by stopping the invasions of nations who do mebrace democracy as we do.
in the 60's and 70's it was the Communists who were set for world domination. Millions of lost lives later, did it move any closer to reality? No, and now it is forgotten - as are all history lessons, which is why we are doomed always to repeat them.
The vast majority of Muslims are peace loving, as are the vast majority of Christians, but you get extremists who gain media attention and give the impression that their impact on the order of things is far higher than it is in reality.
Moslem extemists may continue to bomb, but that is because they are extremists, not because they believe it is a path to world domination. invasion of Muslim nations simply adds fuel to the argument that it is the West who wishes to rule the world, rather than the other way around - and on the basis or recent history, that argument does seem to have some weight.
By definition, it is not possible to rid the world of terrorism, but trying to assure other nations that we do not wish to force democracy on them might be a good start - and then backing that stance up by stopping the invasions of nations who do mebrace democracy as we do.
in the 60's and 70's it was the Communists who were set for world domination. Millions of lost lives later, did it move any closer to reality? No, and now it is forgotten - as are all history lessons, which is why we are doomed always to repeat them.
whiskeryron
/// There should be a world military force with combined troops & equipment from ALL countries to quell the rise of terrorist
activities. ///
There is, it's called the United Nations Peacekeeping Force.
http://
/// There should be a world military force with combined troops & equipment from ALL countries to quell the rise of terrorist
activities. ///
There is, it's called the United Nations Peacekeeping Force.
http://
/And how many did Saddam Hussein kill deliberately? /
Saddam Hussein mostly targeted those he judged to be political enemies or enemies of Iraq eg the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs
and he suppressed religious extremists
That is (if not admirable) at least understandable
We and our allies killed 100,000 civilians as part of the process of 'liberating' them
In the process we turned a population happy to see us into one that turned on us until the yanks bought them off
That seems careless, wasteful and negligent in the extreme.
Saddam Hussein mostly targeted those he judged to be political enemies or enemies of Iraq eg the Kurds and the Marsh Arabs
and he suppressed religious extremists
That is (if not admirable) at least understandable
We and our allies killed 100,000 civilians as part of the process of 'liberating' them
In the process we turned a population happy to see us into one that turned on us until the yanks bought them off
That seems careless, wasteful and negligent in the extreme.
I'm sure my input will be taken offensively by some (this is not my intention i assure you) but i'm posting it anyway regardless because i feel so strongly about this issue.
I personally do not like the way our government/other governments loosely use the word "Terrorism" ..what is a terrorist?
is it someone who wishes to harm others out of a selfish act....is it someone who has an opposed opinion and uses violence as a way of justifying a point...or is it someone who has been denied the right of voicing their opinion (then dictated to..do as we say or else!) so they are left with little choice but to use violence as a way of demonstrating their right to be heard,freedom of speech but denial of the right!
What ever your own personal beliefs "we are all" entitled to the right to believe what we want,however what some "most" seem to conveniently forget is that which ever way you look at it NONE OF US ARE INNOCENT and whether we like it or not we have to remember that our world will "Never" see "peace" because of dictators (Big players,who made us the target!) around the world who are too familiar with pushing others (small countries) around which in itself causes massive tensions and anger/frustration/discrimination/violation violence and ultimately WAR.
If you were stopped in the street by some scumbag demanding you hand over you wallet,what would you do..would you hand it over and just leave it at that or would you stand your ground and tell him to jog on before he gets hurt?
The thing is, this is exactly how we separate the weak from the strong,what we have to remember here is that "Great" Britain (as its so aptly named) is in no way innocent..at one point or another through history we have taken/stolen many things/countries/property/people/slavery/rape/multitudes of unspeakable crimes and its all been committed through acts of violence..does that make us any less the "terrorist" we speak of?
Our government white washes us with ideas of peace and freedom but how free are we really?
We spend billions of tax payers money on war and "terror" in the middle east (and that's just recently..) does this make us innocent?
we have to remember to think about how many women/children/men and families we have killed and murdered in foreign lands which are just as unjustified as the "terrorists" who plot against us...why do they plot?
Because they will not just lie down (like the guy in the street with the wallet may) they also have a right to have a fair share.. just like us,,and of course they will not relent or just walk away with their tail's twitching between their legs so also have a fair right to an argument in this respect,remember the Blair/Bush war in Iraq...did we ever find those chemical weapons we were promised?
Has anybody watched the news in the last couple of days?
If you have you will be aware that there are currently almost 1000 outstanding cases of unspeakable "terror" tactics/brutality/murder/intimidation..(need i go on) against "Great" Britain..and the innocent taxpayer has already paid out more than £15 MILLION in damages..starting to see a pattern?
The point is we are Far from innocent and this is a "dog eat dog" world,the East and many other countries have their own rights/religions and beliefs as we do,and no doubt see countries like "Great" Britain or the mighty America as the real terrorists and with good cause..are we really any less the "Terrorists" because we hide behind a smart suit and white lies that are long buried or haven't yet been brought to light?
Are we any more entitled to a bigger arsenal than anyone else?
Why should we always have the upper hand?
Can we really be trusted to keep world peace..or are we just as violent greedy/selfish and intimidating as the rest of the terrorists around the world.
Food for thought if nothing else.
I personally do not like the way our government/other governments loosely use the word "Terrorism" ..what is a terrorist?
is it someone who wishes to harm others out of a selfish act....is it someone who has an opposed opinion and uses violence as a way of justifying a point...or is it someone who has been denied the right of voicing their opinion (then dictated to..do as we say or else!) so they are left with little choice but to use violence as a way of demonstrating their right to be heard,freedom of speech but denial of the right!
What ever your own personal beliefs "we are all" entitled to the right to believe what we want,however what some "most" seem to conveniently forget is that which ever way you look at it NONE OF US ARE INNOCENT and whether we like it or not we have to remember that our world will "Never" see "peace" because of dictators (Big players,who made us the target!) around the world who are too familiar with pushing others (small countries) around which in itself causes massive tensions and anger/frustration/discrimination/violation violence and ultimately WAR.
If you were stopped in the street by some scumbag demanding you hand over you wallet,what would you do..would you hand it over and just leave it at that or would you stand your ground and tell him to jog on before he gets hurt?
The thing is, this is exactly how we separate the weak from the strong,what we have to remember here is that "Great" Britain (as its so aptly named) is in no way innocent..at one point or another through history we have taken/stolen many things/countries/property/people/slavery/rape/multitudes of unspeakable crimes and its all been committed through acts of violence..does that make us any less the "terrorist" we speak of?
Our government white washes us with ideas of peace and freedom but how free are we really?
We spend billions of tax payers money on war and "terror" in the middle east (and that's just recently..) does this make us innocent?
we have to remember to think about how many women/children/men and families we have killed and murdered in foreign lands which are just as unjustified as the "terrorists" who plot against us...why do they plot?
Because they will not just lie down (like the guy in the street with the wallet may) they also have a right to have a fair share.. just like us,,and of course they will not relent or just walk away with their tail's twitching between their legs so also have a fair right to an argument in this respect,remember the Blair/Bush war in Iraq...did we ever find those chemical weapons we were promised?
Has anybody watched the news in the last couple of days?
If you have you will be aware that there are currently almost 1000 outstanding cases of unspeakable "terror" tactics/brutality/murder/intimidation..(need i go on) against "Great" Britain..and the innocent taxpayer has already paid out more than £15 MILLION in damages..starting to see a pattern?
The point is we are Far from innocent and this is a "dog eat dog" world,the East and many other countries have their own rights/religions and beliefs as we do,and no doubt see countries like "Great" Britain or the mighty America as the real terrorists and with good cause..are we really any less the "Terrorists" because we hide behind a smart suit and white lies that are long buried or haven't yet been brought to light?
Are we any more entitled to a bigger arsenal than anyone else?
Why should we always have the upper hand?
Can we really be trusted to keep world peace..or are we just as violent greedy/selfish and intimidating as the rest of the terrorists around the world.
Food for thought if nothing else.
jno
/// does it matter if it was deliberately or just through carelessness or accident, aog? The victims are just as dead and their families just as angry. ///
All victims of war I'm afraid, how many civilians died during WW2?
/// And does it matter how many Saddam killed? ///
Well you might not be bothered, but a caring world would.
/// Are you suggesting that because he killed innocent people that gave us some right to do the same? ///
As I have already said, he killed them deliberately, whereas we did not.
Are you suggesting that we should have let the most vile sadist monster of the 20th century carry on slaughtering people unheeded?
/// Do you think we should have gone into Iraq at all? ///
Not us or the U.S. personally, but carrying out our obligations as part of a United Nations Force, yes.
/// does it matter if it was deliberately or just through carelessness or accident, aog? The victims are just as dead and their families just as angry. ///
All victims of war I'm afraid, how many civilians died during WW2?
/// And does it matter how many Saddam killed? ///
Well you might not be bothered, but a caring world would.
/// Are you suggesting that because he killed innocent people that gave us some right to do the same? ///
As I have already said, he killed them deliberately, whereas we did not.
Are you suggesting that we should have let the most vile sadist monster of the 20th century carry on slaughtering people unheeded?
/// Do you think we should have gone into Iraq at all? ///
Not us or the U.S. personally, but carrying out our obligations as part of a United Nations Force, yes.
/the most vile sadist monster of the 20th century/
???
err, Pol Pot? Stalin? Hitler?
Well under his rule, Iraq was a well ordered society, most Iraqis weren't in constant fear of murder, rape and kidnap that the anarchy we created led to; and of course, for most of his career, Saddam Hussein was a friend of the West, supplied with weapons to attack America's #1 enemy, Iran.
???
err, Pol Pot? Stalin? Hitler?
Well under his rule, Iraq was a well ordered society, most Iraqis weren't in constant fear of murder, rape and kidnap that the anarchy we created led to; and of course, for most of his career, Saddam Hussein was a friend of the West, supplied with weapons to attack America's #1 enemy, Iran.
andy-hughes
/// The vast majority of Muslims are peace loving, //
They well may be, in small isolated groups such as the ones in this country, but are you unaware of what is happening throughout the Middle East and now North Africa?
Just look at the news reels coming out of these places these are not a minority they are a vicious mob, there is no law and order in any one of these places.
/// in the 60's and 70's it was the Communists who were set for world domination. Millions of lost lives later, did it move any closer to reality? No, and now it is forgotten ///
And in the 30s and 40s it was the Nazis, the Italians and the Japanese, who were set on world domination, are you saying that we should have just sat back and let it happen also, after all it's now all forgotten isn't it?
/// The vast majority of Muslims are peace loving, //
They well may be, in small isolated groups such as the ones in this country, but are you unaware of what is happening throughout the Middle East and now North Africa?
Just look at the news reels coming out of these places these are not a minority they are a vicious mob, there is no law and order in any one of these places.
/// in the 60's and 70's it was the Communists who were set for world domination. Millions of lost lives later, did it move any closer to reality? No, and now it is forgotten ///
And in the 30s and 40s it was the Nazis, the Italians and the Japanese, who were set on world domination, are you saying that we should have just sat back and let it happen also, after all it's now all forgotten isn't it?
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Crosswords8 mins ago
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.