[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Donna13 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I don't think that the Democrats are against finding and killing terrorists. Clinton's latest angry response during an interview was meant to set the record straight on that. We will now see what the Democrats will do differently, now that they control Congress. The whole country is hoping for the best solutions, especially with the situation in Iraq.
The roots of terrorism go back thousands of years. And although the world has dealt with it for many years, only recently has it impacted Americans directly on our soil. I do not believe it is a simple problem that can be solved by partisan politics. This assumption that the Democrats or liberal thinkers somehow have the answers is really kind of silly. Terrorism has confused all the experts for years. If there was a way to get to the root, it would have been well-documented by now.[/QUOTE]
Only recently has terrorism hit America? Oh, now that's news to me!
Let's see...we have religious terrorism from the puritans, killing who wouldn't convert...
Then we have the original KKK shorly after the civil war, taking out people...
Oh, and let's not forget the Jim Crow-era southern legislation, not to mention the syphilis-research ("what are the effects of syphilis on a black male who does not get meditation?") of the 20th century
Let's not forget the KKK-reïncarnation, which knocked off a fair few civil rights activists and innocent black people.
And that's only naming the most well-known cases![/QUOTE]
Still, most of that terrorism was directed at a particular minority of people, not all Americans in general. Therefore, the two types have completely different effects.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
The difference is one of national scale vs. international scale.
When the world grows from nation-oriented to internationalized, it is only to be expected that the problems grow and adapt along.
When the world grows from nation-oriented to internationalized, it is only to be expected that the problems grow and adapt along.
ThomasQuinn, you forgot the DC sniper. I actually was in Manassas during the sniper attacks and was outside an office supply store walking to my car when I dropped my keys. I had this really horrible feeling come over me as I stopped to pick them up. I was not too far away from where the sniper killed his next victim at a gas station the very next day.
So, this was terrorism to everyone in the DC metropolitan area and I'll never forget it. I'll never forget how I felt on 9/11 either.
So, this was terrorism to everyone in the DC metropolitan area and I'll never forget it. I'll never forget how I felt on 9/11 either.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Donna13 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]ThomasQuinn, you forgot the DC sniper. I actually was in Manassas during the sniper attacks and was outside an office supply store walking to my car when I dropped my keys. I had this really horrible feeling come over me as I stopped to pick them up. I was not too far away from where the sniper killed his next victim at a gas station the very next day.
So, this was terrorism to everyone in the DC metropolitan area and I'll never forget it. I'll never forget how I felt on 9/11 either.[/QUOTE]
I didn't 'forget'. As I said, I only gave a few examples.
So, this was terrorism to everyone in the DC metropolitan area and I'll never forget it. I'll never forget how I felt on 9/11 either.[/QUOTE]
I didn't 'forget'. As I said, I only gave a few examples.
Exactly the point I've already proven without the need for an exhaustive list of all cases of domestic terrorism ever committed. The point I was making was simple that 9/11 was in no way a 'first'.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME] The point I was making was simple that 9/11 was in no way a 'first'. [/QUOTE]
Actually, the level of destruction and deaths in one instant makes it a first. Add to that (much of) the world's outpouring of concern, support and sympathy, and you have a first on several levels.
Your point is taken, however, TQ, and I have to say it sickens me that much of what you mentioned is only breezed over in our primary schools, if covered at all. The attacks of 9/11, however, will no doubt be detailed in the history books and so become mandatory in-depth curriculum. (not that they shouldn't, but that's not my point...)
Actually, the level of destruction and deaths in one instant makes it a first. Add to that (much of) the world's outpouring of concern, support and sympathy, and you have a first on several levels.
Your point is taken, however, TQ, and I have to say it sickens me that much of what you mentioned is only breezed over in our primary schools, if covered at all. The attacks of 9/11, however, will no doubt be detailed in the history books and so become mandatory in-depth curriculum. (not that they shouldn't, but that's not my point...)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color = "crimson"> ThomasQuinn wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Donna13 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I don't think that the Democrats are against finding and killing terrorists. Clinton's latest angry response during an interview was meant to set the record straight on that. We will now see what the Democrats will do differently, now that they control Congress. The whole country is hoping for the best solutions, especially with the situation in Iraq.
The roots of terrorism go back thousands of years. And although the world has dealt with it for many years, only recently has it impacted Americans directly on our soil. I do not believe it is a simple problem that can be solved by partisan politics. This assumption that the Democrats or liberal thinkers somehow have the answers is really kind of silly. Terrorism has confused all the experts for years. If there was a way to get to the root, it would have been well-documented by now.[/QUOTE]
Only recently has terrorism hit America? Oh, now that's news to me!
Let's see...we have religious terrorism from the puritans, killing who wouldn't convert...
Then we have the original KKK shorly after the civil war, taking out people...
Oh, and let's not forget the Jim Crow-era southern legislation, not to mention the syphilis-research ("what are the effects of syphilis on a black male who does not get meditation?") of the 20th century
Let's not forget the KKK-reïncarnation, which knocked off a fair few civil rights activists and innocent black people.
And that's only naming the most well-known cases![/QUOTE]
Still, most of that terrorism was directed at a particular minority of people, not all Americans in general. Therefore, the two types have completely different effects.[/QUOTE]
I'm going to for once agree with Caspar on that one. The threat of the KKK, the puritans, and the southern legislation was even worse than the threat of Islamic terrorism, for the basic reason that these terrorists not only operated within U.S. borders, but because the majority of them got away with murder.
Don't forget also the Black Panthers, the FBI under Edger Hoover, urban street gangs, and of course who could forget the CIA.
The roots of terrorism go back thousands of years. And although the world has dealt with it for many years, only recently has it impacted Americans directly on our soil. I do not believe it is a simple problem that can be solved by partisan politics. This assumption that the Democrats or liberal thinkers somehow have the answers is really kind of silly. Terrorism has confused all the experts for years. If there was a way to get to the root, it would have been well-documented by now.[/QUOTE]
Only recently has terrorism hit America? Oh, now that's news to me!
Let's see...we have religious terrorism from the puritans, killing who wouldn't convert...
Then we have the original KKK shorly after the civil war, taking out people...
Oh, and let's not forget the Jim Crow-era southern legislation, not to mention the syphilis-research ("what are the effects of syphilis on a black male who does not get meditation?") of the 20th century
Let's not forget the KKK-reïncarnation, which knocked off a fair few civil rights activists and innocent black people.
And that's only naming the most well-known cases![/QUOTE]
Still, most of that terrorism was directed at a particular minority of people, not all Americans in general. Therefore, the two types have completely different effects.[/QUOTE]
I'm going to for once agree with Caspar on that one. The threat of the KKK, the puritans, and the southern legislation was even worse than the threat of Islamic terrorism, for the basic reason that these terrorists not only operated within U.S. borders, but because the majority of them got away with murder.
Don't forget also the Black Panthers, the FBI under Edger Hoover, urban street gangs, and of course who could forget the CIA.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I'm going to for once agree with Caspar on that one.[/QUOTE]
You said that the last 2 or 3 times you agreed with him, too... ha ha!
You said that the last 2 or 3 times you agreed with him, too... ha ha!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I'm going to for once agree with Caspar on that one.[/QUOTE]
You said that the last 2 or 3 times you agreed with him, too... ha ha![/QUOTE]
We all like to pretend we never agree with Caspar, even though many times we do. Nothing against him, though. It just happens to end up that way.
You said that the last 2 or 3 times you agreed with him, too... ha ha![/QUOTE]
We all like to pretend we never agree with Caspar, even though many times we do. Nothing against him, though. It just happens to end up that way.
That's what life is like; the radical says something, and the politically correct response is to disagree, of course. Sadly, that radical is not always wrong.
For those of us in the center there's always some sort of partial agreement with the radical, but never completely.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Donna13 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I don't think that the Democrats are against finding and killing terrorists. Clinton's latest angry response during an interview was meant to set the record straight on that. We will now see what the Democrats will do differently, now that they control Congress. The whole country is hoping for the best solutions, especially with the situation in Iraq.
The roots of terrorism go back thousands of years. And although the world has dealt with it for many years, only recently has it impacted Americans directly on our soil. I do not believe it is a simple problem that can be solved by partisan politics. This assumption that the Democrats or liberal thinkers somehow have the answers is really kind of silly. Terrorism has confused all the experts for years. If there was a way to get to the root, it would have been well-documented by now.[/QUOTE]
solution: find something that can replace the world's need for oil and the US ( no offence, it's the government I'm revering to) won't have anything to have a war about. Oil reserves have peaked ages ago and the US knows it, it'll be a dark day for the world's economie, especially the US's when the last drop of oil is drilled up
The roots of terrorism go back thousands of years. And although the world has dealt with it for many years, only recently has it impacted Americans directly on our soil. I do not believe it is a simple problem that can be solved by partisan politics. This assumption that the Democrats or liberal thinkers somehow have the answers is really kind of silly. Terrorism has confused all the experts for years. If there was a way to get to the root, it would have been well-documented by now.[/QUOTE]
solution: find something that can replace the world's need for oil and the US ( no offence, it's the government I'm revering to) won't have anything to have a war about. Oil reserves have peaked ages ago and the US knows it, it'll be a dark day for the world's economie, especially the US's when the last drop of oil is drilled up
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]vallie wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
solution: find something that can replace the world's need for oil and the US ( no offence, it's the government I'm revering to) won't have anything to have a war about. [/QUOTE]
except what we end up replacing oil with.
solution: find something that can replace the world's need for oil and the US ( no offence, it's the government I'm revering to) won't have anything to have a war about. [/QUOTE]
except what we end up replacing oil with.