user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
"They do not and (IMO) never will be in a position to challenge any true Soveriegn State or Nation."
Yeah, like the Taliban? They may not overthrow a government in the west but they can certain wreak havoc financially and otherwise destabilize a country. That is exactly what they attempted to on 9/11 by toppling the world trade centers.
Troublemakers? I don't think so. More like mass murderers and vermin.
The rest is wishful thinking. It might work if countries like Iran didn't sponsor terrorist groups like Hezbollah, various groups in Iraq and others. Or "allies" like Saudi Arabia that send out hate-filled "religious" literature around the world as well as subsidizing mosques, etc in which some are used as places for terrorists to meet.
BTW, the first part of your ballot description appears to contradict the last part. You speak of it "justifying wars on individuals instead of countries", etc, but then later you say we should stop riding roughshod over innocent people caught in the middle (which would be war on countries or those trying to take over one). Police work, etc is obviously of some very important use as the arrests in Germany show but terrorism won't stop until those countries and groups sponsoring it are taken down.
If they try to kill people, they're terrorists.
Voted : totally disagree
it's time to dispense with this word altogether and call these people what they really are - troublemakers. They do not and (IMO) never will be in a position to challenge any true Soveriegn State or Nation.
^ you're joking, right? so yeah, some pesty troublemakers killed 3,500 people on 9/11. darn-tootin troublemakers!
and "troublemakers" killed those people on the london subway and bus?
and not in a position to challenge any soverign state? like you mean how they could never carry off a coup or cause a rebellion? tell that to the saudi's. so let me ask you this -- they get their hands on a suitcase nuke and detonate it in a major city and you don't think that would be a major challenge to a soverign nation? like you know, if they detonated it in washington d.c, killing 100,000 people and making the city uninhabitable for 100 years. yeah, just troublemakers.
So what your suggesting is that by using the word ‘terrorist’ the media/politicians are glamorising the offenders of these heinous crimes and that , by doing so, are creating a climate of fear greater than that which the ‘terrorists’ could achieve on their own. I believe that you have a point but by belittling the offenders by means of calling them troublemakers you are demeaning the crimes which they have committed. I also think you are underestimating the power that the ‘troublemakers’ actually have. As other users have already pointed out, these ‘troublemakers’ have the power, or at least the potential to seriously harm our society.
Fiddle,
If a Country is "controlled" by "terrorists", they should be dealt with accordingly, (which I attempted to differentiate as to not confuse some people) if a Country, such as North Korea, can be contained and sanctioned to the point they are not able to function, they will come to the table, they have no choice...Countries such as Saudi Arabia which, seems to sponsor or condone these acts should not be coddled just because of oil, they are not democratic nor do they allow religious freedom. How many of these Countries do you think are capable of manufacturing precision weaponry ? I'm talking about guns, ammunition, bombs other than crude improvised explosives ? who is supplying this stuff to them ? why is there no sanctions against ANY Country that would support them ? In any war, you've got to cut off supplies in order to nullify any offensive or defensive capabilities...In the case of Countries such as Syria and Iran, which are capable of Manufacturing weaponry, Just as the "cold war" that is rapidly heating up, you've got to have dialogue and try to reach a mutual understanding, and also use sanctions to coerce them to comply on an acceptable level, there's power in words, and to glamorize fighting the "evil Superpower" by giving these people more credit than they deserve, is not smart...who would aspire to grow up to be a troublemaker ???
***how many of these "terrorists" do you think are capable of manufacturing precision weaponry ?***
so sayer, are you saying that when the united states supports sepratist groups in countries like latin america, we're actually supporting terrorism? and what about when the united states props up a corrupt regime that carries out atrocities against it's own people -- isn't that just like state sponsored terrorism?
your plan sounds nice in theory, but its in the practical enforcement that you run into big trouble.
Voted : The war on "terrorism" is infinite
There have been violent, crazy people on theis planet ever since we evolved to the point where we don't throw our own shit.
My appoach is that of an isolationist where all I can do is just try not to be around them when they go off. 
I'm beginning to wonder if both sides aren't funded by the same crime families.
Voted : Yes, stop legitimizing disgruntled troublemakers
Brilliant ballot. 5+4 when I've got it to give. Same for the comment above by Beelz.
|
|
