if they can why can't we?
- Demosthenez
-
Demosthenez
- Member since: Jul. 15, 2004
- Offline.
-
- Forum Stats
- Member
- Level 13
- Blank Slate
At 4/9/07 08:20 PM, Boltrig wrote: What would be much better would be for them to calm the hell down and argue with words, not bombs.
I dont think there are nay extremist groups that want to talk. None of them. All they want is death and destruction. So I feel the only way to handle them is to not negotiate with them (unless they got like a nuclear weapon in London or New York or something) and marginalize them as best as possible. Because I adamantly believe they really do not want to talk about anything.
The underlying problems of a poor ass countries that are led around by the nose by the West may in fact be the among underlying problems that the talking heads in the West love to bring up when stating their greviences. But I believe once they have become fanatics, they do not talk or want to talk. It may not matter that they could gain tremendously by becoming rational for a time but I just dont ever see it happening.
So having seen that terror attacks do not do any favours for the credibility of their arguments, can you explain why on July 7th, more extremeists carried out further attacks on soft targets in London?
Because I frankly dont think any of them are rational in the Western sense. The lives of the extremists are ruled by secrecy, death, and religion. Its pretty hard to live a sane and rational life when your priorities are those three.
Previous experience should have told them that terror attacks only strengthen a countries resolve, yet they attack more civilians.
I kinda wonder what would happen if we were hit by another terrorist attack in the USA. Would it lead to more calls for troop withdrawal or would it make us want to extend the timetable for our occupation? Really dont know.
