Thursday, July 28, 2005

Look and learn George .How to stop terrorism

The IRA today has made a historic statement renouncing terrorism and giving their full support to the democractic process

To watch this statement in full at the BBC click Here

Can we say we have won ? .. .well no you can't win against terrorists . by trying you just end up creating more of them

So what happened ? ....we found a way through talking and listening to live together in peace

We allowed the political wing of the IRA (Sinn Fein) into the democratic process .

As the world has been telling you George , try using your ears instead of your mouth

Look at why people are so angry
Look at what you have done to iraq
Look at the israel/palestine issue
Look at letting the middle east run its own affairs
Look at the INJUSTICE in the world and being the 'leader' of the free world .

Address it !

Of course you can never stop all terrorists , we know that , they have existed since time began

that is no excuse not to listen

Do you really think the british government wanted to listen to the IRA ! .. of course they didnt , but they did want peace , and going in with all guns blazing just seemed to make more terrorists then we killed

Terrorists are not born that way .. ask yourself what happens to make a small innocent child grow into someone so angry that they want to blow themselves up taking so many innocents with them

for those few who still do not get it ... i am not and never will justify terrorism , it is horrific , barbaric , inhumane and evil

if you read my words and think that i do , i would advice you to go back to watching Fox


Blogger G_in_AL said...

You forgot two drastically important things on this one.

A.) It took 30 years to get to this point.... we've been doing it for, ahh 4?

B.) Guess how many times the British appeased the IRA? None, zip, zilch, nada. That is why the IRA never took back Ireland...

July 28, 2005 10:37 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...

G .. with respect do your history . it didnt take 30 years to get to this point it took 700 !!!

how many times did the British appease the IRA .. answer hundreds .. just check out the BBC yesterday .. to get to this point we had to release another murderer (to us .. to them freedom fighter)
only yesterday

so alas your point is welcome but without historical accuracy

as for your final point "this is why the IRA never took back ireland"

answer -- it wss never theres .. ireland has it's own government and its own parliment .. the ira never got elected to run the country .. it was never theres

July 28, 2005 10:43 pm  
Blogger G_in_AL said...

The IRA was fighting against British Occupation. The SAS was brutally beating back the IRA for many many years. And it was around 1970 that the IRA announced it's presence, and said "there is a time to fight".

But, if you really want to go with 700, well, then ok... your boy Bush is WAY ahead of the curve.

Again, we've been in it for about 5 years (it was going on before Bush, but Clinton didnt realize it)... But already you have lost your stomache for it, and need concessions from us to them.

July 28, 2005 11:37 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...

I never did support this

terrorism is a noun ..

were the french freedom fighters against NAZI germany terrorists ?

was your battle of independance from us a battle we fought with terrorists ?

who do you think you are with war with ?

al-qaeda maybe ???

the same people the CIA supplied with stinger weapons to fight the russians

the same people george bush and his family have had buisness dealings with for years ?

it was not the wonderfull work by our SAS that defeated the IRA

it was the wonderfull work of our MI5 who opened back chanel talks with them

sorry G you dont get it .. YOU CANT WIN A WAR AGAINST TERRORISTS

it never happens , never will

the equation is simple .. kill one = inspire 2

i wish we could , but it isnt possible

July 28, 2005 11:45 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...

oh and just to clarify .. 1969 was the formation of the provisional IRA . 700 years of history is what it took to make them so angry

read up on the potato famine the british(me) brought to them and how many people died

any irish history expert of which (like any country that has suffered from imperalism) there are plenty could probably give you a much more detailed list of the abuses . but if you want i could recount what i know ?

July 29, 2005 1:18 am  
Blogger G_in_AL said...

I understand why the Irish were mad (mom is Irish). But here is the difference between freedom fighters and terrorists:

Freedom fighters attack military targets to end oppression/occupation from forces that are attempting to conquer/absorb them against their will.

Terrorists attack non-military targets with the intent of influencing government policy to reflect their political ideals that by and large are not shared by the majority of the populace.

Our Independence was over political differences that could not be resolved, resulting in the formation of armed forces that fought to gain the right of our own governance.

France was pushing back invaders with intent to conquer their land.

Modern day terrorists are bombing people in London to try and get them out of Iraq (mind you the bombers were from Pakistan).

They bomb each other because the government won’t enforce Islam as much as they would like.

July 29, 2005 2:55 am  
Blogger _H_ said...

so the "freedom fighters" in iraq and palastine are fighing due to political reasons that they can not resolve ?

come on .. you have to admit the insurgents in iraq would love to use a line like

"Our Independence was over political differences that could not be resolved, resulting in the formation of armed forces that fought to gain the right of our own governance"

alas my friend i see no diference

one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter

July 29, 2005 3:06 am  
Blogger G_in_AL said...

You cant be a freedom fighter when you are doing it in a different country. Was the US acting as "Freedom Fighers" in Afghanistan when they helpt he Mujadhen (spelling) against the Soviets?

Terrorism uses the "terror" effect caused by delivering violence non-military targets. Object of war/revolution is to acheive supremacy/self-governance.

Object of terroism to scare people into doing what you want. Big difference.

July 29, 2005 3:52 am  
Blogger _H_ said...

'Object of terroism to scare people into doing what you want'

that is exactly what the muslims feel the US id doing to them .. maybe you can see why they call george a terrorist

you see words are many things to many people you say Terrorism uses the "terror" effect caused by delivering violence

but you could have said "shock and awe"

July 29, 2005 4:28 am  
Blogger G_in_AL said...

Shock and Awe was against military targets. We immobilized their military in one night. Terror strikes subways, school buses, shopping malls.... there is a difference.

July 29, 2005 1:09 pm  
Blogger _H_ said...

it is very difficult to draw the line at what is and is not a military target

are the normal civilians who are trying to just feed their famillies who just happen to work in

A tv station
A electric power station
The political head quarters of a country

to me a MILITARY target is directed simply at the MILATARY of the other side .. where do you draw the line ?

when you are using Cluster bombs (banned by most countries on earth as an inhumane and nasty (evil?) weapon and depleted uranium

you see the difference may be that i have seen many of the video shot that could not and would not be shown on main stream TV . i have seen the aftermath of the coalition the bodies the death , the women , children who have been blown to bits and were without doubt NOT terrorists and NOT insurgents

there is no such thing as a clean war and terms like shock and awe and colateral damage are designed to make it all sound lovely

it isnt , you have been there , you know i am right

we have good old Nuclear detterent , they have weapons of mass destruction

they have terrorists .. we do collatoral damage

we have "a coalition of the willing"

they have "an AXIS OF EVIL"

come one G .. dont you think that is straight from the style of orwell

you look at a body destroyed by a suicide bomber . then look at a body destroyed by a cluster bomb

what difference ?

i recently came accross a video of the accident that happened when a missle struck an underground shelter (which nobody doubts now)

the floor was pure liquid as the heat had melted the body fat from the victims into a river

some of the bodies hade been fused together from the heat

the sort of scene that until the last 100 years could never have been seen by any human

you tell those families that it is different

July 29, 2005 6:32 pm  
Blogger thepoetryman said...

G, are you saying that the 10's of thousands of Iraqi civilians that died from the very same bombs taht targeted Iraq's military etc were just CD? While I respect your military service I question your rationale...

August 05, 2005 8:53 am  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home