Spainish Terriost Attack

**Condex** · 13/03/2004, 7:26 PM

Totally disagree with most of the posters in this thread

You've got to go and bring the fight to this lot wherever they hide. Islamic fundamentalism is biggest threat to world peace today.

**brendy_éire** · 13/03/2004, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by Condex
You've got to go and bring the fight to this lot wherever they hide. Islamic fundamentalism is biggest threat to world peace today.

Aye, you culchies all share a common ignorance.

Islamic fundementalism is a far inferior threat to world peace compared to the yanks. The yanks have killed over 10,000 civilians in Iraq so far. That's in less than a year. Islamic fundementalists have killed, what, a few thousand in the past 10 years?
You can't defeat a guerilla army. The only way to stop them is to tackle the causes of their anger.

**patsh** · 14/03/2004, 10:55 AM

Originally posted by Condex
Totally disagree with most of the posters in this thread

You've got to go and bring the fight to this lot wherever they hide. Islamic fundamentalism is biggest threat to world peace today.

Would you consider extreme Protestant fundamentalism in the US is a threat?
How about Jewish fundamentalists?
Russian Orthodox fundamentalists?
How about massive stockpiles of all sorts of deadly weapons?
Oil pipelines in authoritarian states in the former USSR?

What is world peace?
I suspect you mean the 1st world, because there is no peace in the 2nd or 3rd worlds.

Are you "bringing the fight to this lot" ?
Or are you happy to let the poor black thrash from the ghettos of America and Britain continue to be cannon fodder for their leaders campaign to put even more millions of dollars in their buddies pockets?

Small groups of determined unelected, even some elected, extremists can indeed wreak havoc as they seek to impose their views on the rest of us. We need to beware of all of these groups, no matter what religion, country or philosophy they claim to espouse.

**Condex** · 14/03/2004, 4:20 PM

How many of his own people did Saddam Hussein regime kill or in wars that he started, millions.

What happens when you don't intervene Ruanda, Zimbabwe.
What happens when you do intervene East Timor, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Iraq (we'll see)

Its just a matter of time till terrorist organisations get there hands
on nuclear weapons, then its not going to be much fun living in London or working in the Docklands.

**Éanna** · 14/03/2004, 5:07 PM

Condex, you're spouting the kind of rubbish I'd expect to hear from the US administration.

In reply to your questions-
Why did Saddam get in a position to do what he did- because America helped him.
And as for Rwanda, Zimbabwe, East Timor, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Iraq. Why are all these countries (And many others) in the mess they're in? Because of colonial powers like Britain, Portugal (in East Timor at least), and in the modern era, the USA interfering in other countries and it is they who are responsible for the terrorism we're facing. If the USA had not interfered in the middle east, particularly Israel, they wouldn't be the hate figure they are; if the UK had not decide to try and run Africa as their won personal treasure chest, that continent would not be in the mess its in. We can't change the past, we can't accept terroists killing people, but we MUST try and understand WHY this is happening. There's no point locking up or arresting people for these things and doing nothing more- people have to look at the causes of this problem, and they are a lot closer to home than Bush, Aznar or Balir want us to believe. The biggest danger to world peace is that psychopath Bush and his attempts to run the world

**liam88** · 14/03/2004, 7:01 PM

I've got to say I see both sides of the story here. I am against the colonisation Britain and the lieks practiced in the past but I also see the Islamic terrorists as a big attack on world peace.
I'm not saying the terrorists are a threat to world peace because they are fighting Capitalism, I'm saying it's the WAY they are doing it.
On Thursday they didn't target any political targets-they targeted trains packed full of commuters, school children and that 7 month old baby (probably a lot of lucky babies to who survived). If the trains hadn't been late and all the bombs went off the death toll would have been even worse.
They set up bombs to go off when the emergancy services arrived.
OK-so, if you guys are right in saying that Bush, Blair etc. started all this then ok-but Bush and Blair wern't among the victims.
Whatever reasons behind the attacks-the people who died had nothing to do with it.
We're fighting a bunch of w**kers.

**Condex** · 14/03/2004, 7:56 PM

Its blame the Yanks for everything.

Western democarcies give you a right to have an opinion, in London free speech allows some lunatic to preech hate outside mosque, try to be a practicing Christian in any Muslim country.

I know which country I'd rather live in.

**brendy_éire** · 14/03/2004, 8:37 PM

Originally posted by liam88
We're fighting a bunch of w**kers.

They believe the same thing. And on that, I don't believe that 'we' are fighting anyone. The whole 'war on terror' (an expression I despise), is being blown out of all proportion. The problem is nowhere near as big as it is made out to be by the leaders of western nations, it's merely an attempt to win votes from a scared electorate. (for example those colour-coded US 'Terror Alert' warnings and Blair sending tanks into airports (what, are the tanks going to shoot at anyone looking to hijack a plane?)) You can't fight these people, you can only solve the problems that cause them to what they do. By calling them 'terrorists' and 'evil' they are only incited further. For the same token, by describing the west as 'good' or as 'the free world' makes it out as if we are somehow better than these people. IMO, if anyone is 'evil' here, it's the US and its allies. I don't see any Muslim countries invading North America or Europe. I don't see firms from Muslim countries forcing westerners to work for them for peanuts or forcing countries to sign totally unfair trade agreements.

Islamic fundementalists aren't fighting capitalism, per say. They are fighting against the colonisation of their countries. The US is the primary colonial power of the world at the present time (both through military and economic means), and by attacking the US they are attackings its capitalist 'values'. But to say that they are attacking the US because it's capitalist would be wrong. These people are by no means seeking a socialist revolution.

Originally posted by Condex
Western democarcies give you a right to have an opinion, in London free speech allows some lunatic to preech hate outside mosque

Do they? Incitement to hatred laws take care of that.

BTW, I think it's disgraceful (though expected) how the Spanish government insisted that ETA was responsible for the Madrid attacks. They've done nothing but lie in order to win votes for their (idioitic) hard-line stance with ETA. Let's hope the Spanish people see through the lies of their government.

**liam88** · 14/03/2004, 9:19 PM

Originally posted by brendy_éire
IMO, if anyone is 'evil' here, it's the US and its allies. I don't see any Muslim countries invading North America or Europe. I don't see firms from Muslim countries forcing westerners to work for them for peanuts or forcing countries to sign totally unfair trade agreements.

I know that you are complied to disagree with my every opinion Brendy (Derry City rock!

) but they are killing innocent people.
I never said the USA and Britain and whoever else wern't killing the innocent-they are, but anybody who dilabratley targets civilian packed trains with the intention to kill and maim Innocent men women and children (including babies) they are scum.
Sorry no two ways about it.
Anyone who tries to dilibratley murder the innocent are scum

**brendy_éire** · 14/03/2004, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by liam88
Anyone who tries to dilibratley murder the innocent are scum

Those responsible for the attacks in Madrid are wrong. But realise that they are only reacting to what the US and others have done to over the years. I don't see the need to call them derogatory terms like 'scum'. Yes, they are wrong, but can you not understand how and why they are driven to do what they do? It could happen to any of us if we experienced what they have. If any is 'scum', it's the agressors, the US and its allies. The fundementalists (I refuse to call them terrorists) are only attempting to give as good as they get. Yes, that's wrong, but it's part of human nature.

Originally posted by Conor74
On the other hand, I don't see American dictators ruthlessly suppressing students marching for basic human rights on a yearly basis.

No, they do it in more covert, subtle ways.

Originally posted by Conor74
It was hardly fair that the wealth generated by Iraq funded the private lives of Hussein and his family.

And it's hardly fair that the wealth generated by Iraq now funds the private lives Bush and his corporate cronies (Rice, Cheney, et al).

Originally posted by Conor74
to pretend that all Muslim countries live in some fantastic utopia of free trade and fairness for all is wide of the mark too.

I never said that. They're crap countries to live in, ruled by many immoral people.

Originally posted by Conor74
As for 'working for peanuts', did you ever compare the wages in the US, the UK, Ireland and other countries, with say North Korea?

It's partly to do with relative prices for goods and services over there. €1 to them might be a month's wages, but it also will buy them more than it would buy us. BTW, where do you think half your stuff was made? Check your trainers, probably a south-east Asian country. Check your mouse, the same. Where was your petrol imported from? It's western firms paying these low wages in the majority of cases.

I don't think that Muslim countries, or indeed those of south-east Asia, are all brilliant. But neither are the countries of the west. While we might have a higher standard of living that doesn't mean we have the right to dictate how other states should be run. We shouldn't invade them for economic reasons. And we shouldn't complain when they fight back.

**brendy_éire** · 14/03/2004, 10:24 PM

Originally posted by Conor74
While I wouldn't put the IRA or other terrorists on pedestals

Slow down here mucker. The IRA are not terrorists. If the Brits still controlled Kerry and were attacking your home you'd be thinking a lot differently.
Agree totally that grievances must be addressed though. They aren't there for no reason.

**Beavis** · 15/03/2004, 1:02 AM

Current shock tactics applied by the fundamentalists will only serve to increase support for radical action against Isalm,widen distrust between Islam and the west and enevitably make policy changes less likely.These methods will not strengthen the voice of Islam but weaken it.

**liamon** · 15/03/2004, 9:35 AM

Originally posted by Conor74

Think Slick Willy would have handled it better than Bush, and think half the world will breath a sigh of relief if Kerry beats Bush in the elections.

Can't agree with that. I'm not a fan of Shrub, but I wouldn't absolve Clinton either. Al-Q prospered under the presidency of Clinton and committed several attacks while he was in power. The 9/11 attacks would have been planned and developed while he was president. He did nothing to reduce the threat. He actively supported Israeli governments while they abused Palestinians and this is the sort of thing that allows groups like Al-Q to recruit impressionable young men under the banner of fighting the injustice of the West.

Having said that, Bush has made some critical errors. The attack by the US lead coalition on Iraq are completely without justification and will only serve to further enhance anti-US hatred and promote further Al-Q recruitment. There was no link between terrorism and Iraq. Invading a country will not reduce terrorism, it will only encourage the Islamic world to engage in bombing campaigns and such.

War will not solve this problem. Dialogue and education are needed to overcome the hatred and fear built up by decades of anti-Western publicity in the Arab world.

PS IMO, the guys who planted the bombs in Madrid are scum. Misguided idealists perhaps, but still scum. As are the IRA and anyone else that carries out bombing campaigns.

**Éanna** · 15/03/2004, 9:50 AM

Originally posted by Condex
Its blame the Yanks for everything.

Its blame the Yanks for everything that they are responsible for. They are hypocritical interfereing murderers. I nearly p!ssed myself laughing last night when I heard that the US had "expressed concern about the legitimacy of the Russian presidential elections" How dare they! They have let an unelected maniac go around bombing anyone he doesn't like for the last 4 years, and they want to lecture others on legitimate elections.

The problem with the USA is- yes it is a better place to live than many Muslim countries, but they are quite happy to keep those countires the way they are, because it means cheap oil and someone to blame if things go wrong. Saddam Hussein has not attacked anyone for over 10 years, but he was a brutal dictator. Contrast that with Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan who is also a dictator, who's country has admitted selling nuclear technology to so-called rogue states, but hasn't even had sanctions imposed because it suits Dubya and his gang of cowboys in Washington.

Originally posted by Condex
try to be a practicing Christian in any Muslim country.

I know which country I'd rather live in.

Thats because you are an ignorant bigot.

**Macy** · 15/03/2004, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by brendy_éire
The IRA are not terrorists.

Eh?

**sadloserkid** · 15/03/2004, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by liam88
Anyone who tries to dilibratley murder the innocent are scum

Have you ever heard of a town called Omagh Liam?

**John83** · 15/03/2004, 2:14 PM

Originally posted by brendy_éire
Slow down here mucker. The IRA are not terrorists. If the Brits still controlled Kerry and were attacking your home you'd be thinking a lot differently.
Agree totally that grievances must be addressed though. They aren't there for no reason.

Woudl anyone outside Kerry mind if they took it back off our hands.

It's easy to go on about the grievances of the {insert name of terrorist group}, justifying their actions, buy you might feel a bit differently if the bus you went to work on was blown up because of the actions of a government you may or may not condone/have voted for.

**SÓC** · 15/03/2004, 2:36 PM

The Provos are terrorists. There is no other way to describe them. Explain how they are not terrorists?

They opperate (note I use the present tense) contracy to laws, conventions and rules of warfare.

**brendy_éire** · 15/03/2004, 4:34 PM

Originally posted by SÓC
The Provos are terrorists. There is no other way to describe them. Explain how they are not terrorists?

They opperate (note I use the present tense) contracy to laws, conventions and rules of warfare.

You're making the accusations, so justify how the IRA are terrorists. And contrary to the laws? So lemme ask ye, are the RUC/PSNI terrorists? Are the British army terrorists? What about MI5? Where the IRA terrorists during the War of Independence? Was it wrong for the IRA to defend Nationalists from the British army and the RUC?

The IRA had made mistakes. They have targetted civilians. That is wrong and they have apologised for it. Which is a lot more than the Brits have ever done.