PDA

View Full Version : Are we too civilised?


B747wideboy
14th Sep 2001, 01:11
Bin Laden and his cronies count our decency and civilisation as a weakness. They rely on us not to respond in kind to their acts of aggression. Letīs not miss the fact that Tuesdayīs attacks represent not just an act of war on civilised society but an unrestricted war. The people who died on Tuesday were civilians of every nationality.

The sort of people who commit these atrocities are insane and deeply evil. They have little care for their own lives and would regard their own death as a martyrdom but if they want unrestricted war then letīs give them exactly that.

I would suggest that waiting until the guilt of Mr. Bin Laden has been proven beyond reasonable doubt is folly. We need to fight his on his own level. On that note I would suggest that the Taliban government be as far as possible destroyed through a cruise missile attack on their homes and offices. This is itself could be construed as a humanitarian act on behalf of the Afghan people subject to their tyranical and fanatical rule. An air force transport aircraft should then be dispatched to Kabul with an ultimatum stating that the aircraft would remain on the ground for twelve hours, after which one of two things will happen. Either the aircraft will leave with Osama Bin Laden alive and on board or the aircraft will leave without him and Kabul will be wiped off the map.

We in the West have been too willing to turn the other cheek in the past and this attitude has not earned us respect as a just and civilised society but contempt as a weak one. Letīs show these people that if they arenīt willing to respect us, then they will learn to fear us.

gaterbait
16th Sep 2001, 09:51
Believe me,that's going to happen.

Paterbrat
16th Sep 2001, 11:23
It would simply be applying their own logic to the situation. The Taliban have repeatadly demonstrated their approach to a problem. If it opposes you destroy it. If it offends your sensibilities destroy it. If it does not conform to your narrow idea of right and wrong, imprison or flog or sentence to death.
They have destroyed antiquities, monuments villages and towns. They have continued to demonstrate their hatred and contempt of the West and Western ways in countless ways. They have harbored, sheltered, and given active support to BinLadin and his band for years. They have violently imposed their will on their countries population.
Since this is obviously the only language they understand and are fluent in, perhaps they might understand that the rest of the world grows tired and impatient with this behaviour, if this logic now be applied to them, as those who have been attacked seek to bring to justice the one they suspect of carrying out and being involved with the attack. Extreme dangers involve extreme measures. If the body is invaded by cancer we cut it out.
Those who live by hate, whose only dialog is terrorism and indiscriminate killing , who only seek to break down and destroy should be isolated from society, they have proved that they are unable to function normaly, shun dialog or peaceful methods. What remains to society to deal with them. Tolerance to anything has a limit and tolerance I think has just run out.

Cyclic Hotline
16th Sep 2001, 11:55
Paterbrat et al;

Are we civilised - yes, unquestionably.

I absolutely agree with you. I do not want a World War. I do not want the death of anyone.

I simply want the same peace and freedom that I have known in my lifetime, that was created by the efforts of my forefathers. I wholly sympathise with the individuals and their families who will be in the first line of defence of the world for this is what has occurred.

I may not be in the first phase of this battle, but I will surely be in the latter, if it is not resolved. I will be in the unreserved support and drive for all efforts to destroy this scourge of humanity.

OzExpat
16th Sep 2001, 18:02
You cut out a cancer, if you're that lucky, after proving its' existance and then proving it to be malignant. There really are plenty of parallels here for us because FIRST we need the proof of guilt, SECOND we need to be real lucky to get it all.

Even when people win their battle with cancer, it's invariably a long-term fight.

I understand the rationale being used here and, in fact, last Tuesday, I really wanted to see America nuke Afghanistan back to the stone age. But to do so without proof turns us into the very thing we want to destroy. I don't want that on my conscience.

I feel very deeply for all those people who lost family and friends last Tuesday. I have no way of feeling as close to it as any of my American friends - known or unknown - but I came pretty close to it.

You see, I did an e-mail roll-call of all my American friends with whom I hadn't been in regular contact. One of them didn't reply and I began to fear that she'd been at the wrong place at the wrong time. I felt really ill about that.

Then, yesterday, she replied. Seems that she'd been the victim of nothing more serious than a phone line foul up. I near cried because of that but also because I'd begun to think that she had died and I wanted someone, anyone, to pay for that.

But the fact is that, even before she replied, I came to the realisation that an arbitrary attack on someone, without evidence, turns good guys into bad guys. I came to one other conclusion too and this one will be a tad inconsistent with my beliefs, but here it is anyway.

Once the world has proof, attack the hell out of the guilty party/parties. After that, go after all the other rotten apples before they can take their own revenge. As you can see, it's a bit inconsistent, but better to go after the guilty group first.

Well, that's how I see it anyway.

JudyTTexas
16th Sep 2001, 21:54
Is it any different than shooting a mad dog?

HugMonster
16th Sep 2001, 22:11
Yes, Judy, it is significantly different from shooting a mad dog.

[list=a] A mad dog is easy to find and kill without losing large numbers of troops A mad dog doesn't have lots of friends willing to step into his shoes if he gets shot A mad dog is self-evidently mad. Bin Laden is not self-evidently guilty until proven so. Killing a mad dog doesn't run the risk of severely alienating your neighbours and allies[/list=a]
I could go on. But to think of going after Bin Laden in those terms demeans you, and demeans us.

I'm not saying don't do it. It should be done. But don't degrade yourself like that. Stand up to him because you are a human being, with a soul and spirit. Don't throw those away and lower yourself to his terms, thinking of his enemies merely as animals, as expendable pawns to be thrown away in the greater scheme of things.

Judy, I'm surprised at you. I had expected better things. :(

[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: HugMonster ]

flapsforty
16th Sep 2001, 23:28
Judy is an American citizen, and however much the rest of us feel for her and her countrymen, we as non-americans can not equate the depth of their emotions.

We all know Judy to be a kind woman with deeplu felt christian beliefs, alwyas seeing the good in other people.

If she under these circumstances posts a one liner that perhaps does not conform to the high standards that she always sets for herself, she merits our understanding and "letting go".

Huggie please show some compassion and understanding here my friend.

JudyTTexas
17th Sep 2001, 00:47
Hug, I can appreciate your response and respect your opinion. I'm not above disappointing others. I am human. I would be less than honest if I didn't say I "am" very angry.

I support George W. Bush in his role and know it will take time and "patience" to bring those to justice. Patience I have and Goodness will prevail. However, I have a difficult time in comprehending the mindset of these perpetrators. It is an act of "inhumanity" not "humanity"...hince the parallel of a mad dog. It is evil in it's pure form lead by the great deceiver.

I will not gloss over my feelings with "political rightness" statements. I reflect what many are voicing here in the USA.

Flaps, I just read your post before submitting this one. Thanks for your endearing response. You have risen above what I was yet unable to do. Yes, I do believe in God and have accepted my "failures" as a human on this earth. Anger is still a part of our God designed emotions. I will not deny myself those feelings at this time. I have never promised I won't disappoint others.

[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: JudyTTexas ]

HugMonster
17th Sep 2001, 01:23
Judy, nobody denies you your right to be angry, nor that of many others of all sorts of nationalities, religions and backgrounds.

I am angry. I feel that one of the things that defines part of me - my profession - has been violated. I always felt that part of my job and that of the FAs I work with was keeping our passengers safe, and doing our best for them. Instead, we are left in the position of wondering how to protect ourselves from THEM. Indeed, pilots are in future going to be even more powerless, in that, if one of the girls in the back of the cabin is being held at gunpoint, or if she has her throat slashed by some passenger, I will have to force myself even more to refrain from going back to assist, and instead let her die. I work with a really great bunch of Cabin Crew, and I'm very fond of them. Having to allow them to be butchered by people such as that would just tear me apart.

I spent a lot of time last Tuesday evening trying to contact an ex of mine. We parted very amicably, and are good friends, so I was extremely worried for her safety, since her law firm has offices in NY.

I am not suggesting anyone should not react naturally to what has happened, nor that they should deny their own feelings. We should react, and should respond, and strongly. However, I am not going to allow those who perpetrated this obscenity to drag me down to their level.

So, be angry, and be human. Don't react as anything less than that.

Velvet
17th Sep 2001, 01:50
Flaps and Judy, yes we know that anger and yes we know how it feels be on the receiving end of terrorism, Huggy as much as any. He is right, for the Americans have to realise they cannot use traditional military reprisals to solve this.

We, the British, have been for decades facing terrorism, we have dealt with buildings destroyed with people in them by mindless, evil - perpetrated by those who claim to be 'freedom fighters'. We have suffered from bombings which murdered innocents, just because the IRA thought us legitimate targets. We could not just invade Ireland to bring them to justice, we could not bomb them into submission.

We also know that the answer is not to use massive military might against an enemy you can't easily identify. Nor is thinking of that enemy as less than human - it may make it easier to deal with, but it runs the risk of creating a mindset that enables you to destroy others easily and without thought for the suffering of those who will be caught up in the retribution.

Flaps this is not just an American tragedy, we lost hundreds of British nationals - we feel just as deeply and equally want those who were responsible to be brought to justice.

Judy, I know you to be a good woman, but don't let your anger and grief lead you to support actions which are neither just nor right, just because they are against those who are portrayed as the 'enemies' of America. It doesn't ultimately bring peace of mind, nor assuage that anger and grief.

flapsforty
17th Sep 2001, 02:13
Vel, Huggie, Judy, having gotten to know eachother, however inclompletely, through these pages, chat and those wonderful parties, all 3 of you have become dear to me in different ways.

We all deal with the pain, the anger and the despair that this crime has brought in our own different ways as well.

In the first days after the attack, I found great comfort in the togetherness on chat, the warmth, the sheer feeling of belonging to a group of people who cared deeply about this industtry and about eachother.

Sometimes that feeling of togetherness is all we have, is what I am fumblingly trying to say..........

Velvet
17th Sep 2001, 02:37
Flaps, as always a bastion of good sense - you are right as ever my dear.

Judy, I may not always agree with you, but that is one of the precious freedoms you and I both subscribe to. Yes, we share your anger and yes, we share your grieving and yes, we will fight this menace shoulder to shoulder.

HugMonster
17th Sep 2001, 02:41
Flaps and Vel, I agree with you both.

Judy - breathe in ... breathe out ... breathe in ... breathe out ... :)

JudyTTexas
17th Sep 2001, 04:16
Hugs...I'm not giving birth here. If I am, it's a miracle. :D

Jackonicko
17th Sep 2001, 05:10
Hugs, Velvet and Judy.

You are clearly good people. I can understand the anger and loathing for those who did this (I share both feelings). I can understand why thinking about how to make the Islamic and Arab worlds feel better about us may seem irrelevant or even offensive after some of the displays of rejoicing. But let's urge our governments to be tough on the terrorists (killing them doesn't seem tough enough, I know) but also to be tough on the causes of terrorism, and try to solve some of the problems that underly it. Making any further support for Israel conditional on that nation's acceptance of UN resolutions, withdrawal from the West bank (including settlements) and giving East Jerusalem to the Palestinians would make the USA a hero in the eyes of ordinary Arabs, who might then greet even extreme action against Bin Laden and his Taliban cronies with equanimity. Without such actions, it will just be another issue to divide us, and to be used as specious justification for further outrages.

HugMonster
17th Sep 2001, 05:26
Jacko, I rather think I agree with you. Israel can be made to see sense - they behaved pretty well during the Gulf War, when having Iraqi Scuds rained down on them. It would be disarming, to say the least, if they were to withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza now.

I wouldn't, however, like to be the person who tells Shimon Ben Hecklerandkoch that he has to pull out of his settlement...

Velvet
17th Sep 2001, 15:49
You are right Jackonicko - we should be addressing the causes of terrorism, not just reacting to it. The trouble is that terrorism is not confined to the Middle East, and it is not solely the province of Islamic Fundamentalists.

How are we going to deal with the enemy within, or those Western Governments and Organisations who support, with funding, weapons or training, terrorism because it is against a Government or policy they disapprove of, but can't openly fight (outside the Middle East). The Islamic Governments who may not approve of us going to war with countries and nations in their region.

What of our Prime Minister's fine words, undermined by his lack of resolve in Ireland. What of the British and American muslims who may not be quite so happy to see bombs raining down on their homelands and their families.

Do we really want to see the Middle East enflamed and engulfed in war (will it really stop there), this is a very delicate situation and tough talk of hunting down and killing the terrorists and also the countries in which they shelter - does this also include those in Europe, South America and Africa.

Of course, we can't ignore this act and should make every effort to bring the people responsible to justice, but what happens if or when they cannot. There are people, children even, who cheered when they heard the news that America had been attacked - do we also destroy these - are they terrorists?

Pakistan is being split by this, from the support for America to the support for Afghan and the many in the middle who wish only that they were not located next door to Afghanistan. What happens to them if diplomacy fails, will we turn our backs and allow them to be invaded or war-torn by fighting factions.

How long would our resolve last in the face of an oil embargo by the Arab nations against the west until we backed down. How long would our support last if soldiers came home in hundreds - dead or wounded. How long would our support last in the face of mounting civilian casualties. These are questions we have to ask before we commit ourselves. We cannot just plunge into a conflict because we think we have a just cause.

In a Democracy and a free society, we should not be silenced because it is seen as uncomfortable, or because we are accused of being disloyal to those who died. It doesn't mean we feel less, just that we have a right to demand of our leaders that they answer to us.


Edited: having seen the pictures from around the globe - there is hope, if former enemies of America can join in the sympathy and grieving.

[ 17 September 2001: Message edited by: Velvet ]

Paterbrat
20th Sep 2001, 01:47
Ladies and Gentlemen you are dealing with some pretty cold people here who have already declared their willingness to kill anyone regardless of age or sex simply because they are American and therefore the Great Saten. Read Bin Ladin's declaration of war then decide for yourselves what is appropriate action. If you have not allready comprehended they will kill 'anyone' 'anywhere' that they percice to be and enemy. If you are not 'their kind of muslim' you are an enemy. The fact that the majority of Muslims do not agree with their interpretation of the Koran holds no ice with them. If they are not 'mad dogs' I regret that I cannot think of any other title that more closely matches the danger we face. By mad dog I mean a rabid animal that cares not who it bites and has no regard for it's own life. By all means be civilised but do realise when you are in mortal danger. With these people countless people are in mortal danger, just as thousands, lost their lives on the 11th. These people have promised to kill more. Wake up to the deadly danger they represent.

HugMonster
20th Sep 2001, 03:09
Paterbrat, unfortunately the willingness to kill someone simply because of who they are rather than what they are does not end there.

I was very saddened to hear on Radio 4 news earlier today that, among the people shot and killed in recent days in the USA were a Sikh and an Egyptian christian.

Seems like there is not a lot of either restraint or discrimination going on...

Bally Heck
20th Sep 2001, 04:11
Wouldn't it be nice if Adolph Bin Laden could be captured and dealt with under Muslim law. Whilst I am not generally a proponent of capital punishment, in this particular case a public execution in Jeddah seems appropriate.

Paterbrat
20th Sep 2001, 12:47
It is a matter of record that in the Mecca incident in the 70's where extremists took and held the Holy Mosque, a younger but no less extreme Ousama was forcibly restrained by his family from taking his guns and joining them. The few extremists captured at the end of that episode were beheaded after a Sharia trial. What a shame he did not manage to join them, how much misery would the world have been saved.
Hugmonster when someone is going to kill you I wonder if you will make any effort to save yourself or will you meekly allow yourself to be slaughtered

Wiley
20th Sep 2001, 15:12
gaiterbait, if your plan was to be put into action, (a bit unlikely, I’m afraid to say, but time will tell), I’d like to see an amendment to your demands. Demand of the Taliban that, along with Mr Bin Liner, six other passengers be put aboard the aircraft – the six Western aid workers who are under possible sentence of death in Kabul for the heinous crime of (allegedly) preaching Christianity to the people they were helping.

Whatever happens, let’s hope someone reminds the Americans to include this hapless half dozen people in their game plan.

Quickly changing the subject, if I may delve DEEPLY into the realms of Political Incorrectness, has anyone ever paused for a moment to think whether these terrible wars would linger on for as long as they do, resulting the deaths of so many people over such a long period of time, if the Western Aid Organisations weren’t always there in the wings making things barely bearable for so many of those affected? Would, for instance, literally millions of Afghans have headed for the Pakistani border over the years if they had not known that someone was going to be there to feed and ‘house’ them?

I’ve heard it said that if the Battle of Stalingrad was to be fought as these equally terrible ‘Third World’ wars are fought today, with NGOs and Christian aid groups feeding the civilians (and frequently, let’s face it, the combatants) of both sides, Stalingrad would still be a battleground ten years on – and ten times as many people would have died as did before one side won an outright victory, at an admittedly terrible cost to the losers.

HugMonster
20th Sep 2001, 18:06
Paterbrat, your posts on this subject have been until now well-thought out and well-argued. So what on earth prompted you to write something quite as stupid as:-
Hugmonster when someone is going to kill you I wonder if you will make any effort to save yourself or will you meekly allow yourself to be slaughtered :confused:

tony draper
20th Sep 2001, 18:31
The smart move for OBL would be to offer to give himself up for trial to the European court in the Haig, this would give him a platform to spew his hatred out for months in the full glare of publicity.
Even if he was sentenced to a lifetime imprisonment, he is wealthy man, and he would hardy do hard time in a European jail.
Even if he was tried in New York, I do not think that state has the option of the death penelty, how long he would live in a American prison is debatable.
Money can buy a awful lot of protection even for him.

B747wideboy
20th Sep 2001, 18:56
Iīm pretty positive that OBL would be extradited to the US without anyone objecting too much.

As for the question of State law and the death penalty, Iīm no legal expert but Iīm sure heīd be tried under federal law (as was Timothy McVeigh) and qould therefore be subject to the death penalty.

Interesting point here though, even OBL in the US would be subject to the same laws as everyone else. I.e. he is innocent until proven guilty AND theyīd have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Personally I have little doubt that the man was involved and deserves to be put down like the mad dog he is, but can it be proven beyond REASONABLE doubt?

Velvet
21st Sep 2001, 02:32
but where will they find an unbiased jury in NYK?

Rollingthunder
21st Sep 2001, 05:43
I understand that murdering a police officer or conspiracy to murder a police officer is a capital crime in the State of New York punishable by the death penalty. :(

[ 21 September 2001: Message edited by: Rollingthunder ]

HugMonster
21st Sep 2001, 05:48
Death penalty by what method in NY? I hope it's nothing painless and quick like lethal injection...

Please say it's the electric chair or the gas chamber... :mad:

OzExpat
21st Sep 2001, 19:34
Making the bahstard face Islamic Law would send an even more powerful message. But probably not a good idea to use a country like Iraq for it...

B747wideboy
21st Sep 2001, 19:46
Anyone remember the way that Osamaīs pal Saddam treated POWs in the Gulf War?

Iīd like to see Osama locked in a room with a couple of Mossad trained "interviewers" until heīs willing to appear on CNN. Then put him in front of the camera and have him say something along the lines of:

"I did it. I am guilty and a bad person. My captors have been treating me very well causing me to see the folly of my distrust and hatred of the west and now I fully, wholeheartedly and of my own accord renounce Islam".

Once thatīs done boil him alive in pig blood and bury him under a distillery.

Paterbrat
22nd Sep 2001, 02:41
I suppose HMnstr, because I thought you were amongst the ranks of those who advocate dialog, rather than the more robust arguments about to be put to the host country. Forgive me if I had that wrong. I have been hearing some truly amazing people who simply cannot advocate any' violence' towards these poor misguided people. There has even been talk of the hardships and food shortages that will be experienced by them due to their having been threatened by those brutal Americans.
My opinion has been, if the Taliban insist on locking up those who do try to go and help them then they deserve to go hungry. Secondly the people who kindly provide them with aid and food fail to appreciate that if the Afghans had to spend a bit more time farming for food they would have less time to be fighting with every other guy they can pick a quarrel with.
Since their credo has been from time immemorial, screw everybody else, perhaps it's time that a little screwing went in the other direction. I do admit that most people who have tried to screw them generaly come off wishing they hadn't but then hey that's what these guys seem to thrive on,so why deny them the pleasure.
They keep such nice houseguests too. May the screwing begin and yes I'm mad as hell at them for the utter chaos their houseguest has caused worldwide, for the thousands of innocent bystanders that were slaughtered, for the thousands who have ,or are about to lose their jobs, for the money that has been lost from everybodies pension plans, for the far ranging negative impact he has had on nearly everybody you can think of, because they have harbored him nurtured him supported him and generaly encouraged him. Do they deserve it HELL YES!
My reasoning gets less reasonable as time goes on and I probably get a bit more stupid with the anger. I feel that the world had better get real with these extremists and send them a message in language that they understand, that it's their asses that are in mortal danger now

HugMonster
22nd Sep 2001, 05:28
Paterbrat, do me (and yourself) a favour, and next time please argue with what I have said, not with what you think I might say. You don't have any idea who I am, as far as I'm aware you've never met me. If you want to know my stance on any particular issue, it's easy enough to ask me. Your post was unintelligent, presumptive, rude and ignorant.

PS If this post seems angry, it's because I am angry. I heard today that a cousin is missing in NYC. I heard yesterday that I no longer have a job thanks to last week's events. So do me a favour and go stuff your assumptions where you apply the supersoft quilted double-ply.

[ 22 September 2001: Message edited by: HugMonster ]

Paterbrat
24th Sep 2001, 03:25
Hugmonster, firstly my comiserations on your sad news.
Your first comment to me was a little puzzling the second condescendingly offensive the third descending alas, to the place where the sun don't shine.
I certainly don't know you, probably wouldn't want to. Apart from your self confessed cruelty to children( I am jesting now), I have simply read your posts and those of everyone elses, agreed with some disagreed with others.
I too have had my moments of anger and directed them at others on the forum, that is what JB is all about. If it is a simple sparring match have at it, I see that you have with others on the forum, but your present blunt offensiveness seemed a bit beneath your usual reasoned and subtle standard.
You should at least learn to separate what was directed at you, what was a general comment, and indeed what was in fact an appology.
If you didn't deduce that, read them a bit closer. If you still retain your previous opinions, which you are quite entitled to do, do so, just keep them above the quilted ( bit classy) paper line, and it will all be much more hygenic.
We are all opinionated, otherwise we wouldn't be here. All like putting forward our points of view, I guess i's a social thing. Not averse to a bit of gentle, or not so gentle, slanging, but when we descend into the gutter, or toilet, we are to paraphrase your own argument descending to their level and I gather you thought that a poor show.

OzExpat
24th Sep 2001, 17:26
Huggie... sorry about your double dose of bad news, especially as both are related to the same event. I suspect that the only people who can truly empathise are those who've had to deal with similar news to yours.

Thus, I can't empathise, but just want you to know how sad I felt at reading your news. It quickly gets to the stage where its easy to feel that there's no justice in the world.

brat ... I think you've overstepped the mark rather badly this time. And, before you jump down my throat about that, I'd ask you to consider just how much of a trying time we've all experienced in the last 2 weeks. We're all dealing with some sort of disaster as a result of the events of 11 September and I suspect we're still only seeing the tip of that particular iceberg.

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that everyone is likely to post something a bit out of character atm. Maybe you're as much a victim of that as the rest of us, being as how you're obviously a bit closer to current events than the rest of us.

But we all have a right to our grief, we all have a right to blow off steam. Jet Blast is a place for both those things. We all need to recognise that many people, all over the world are affected in one way or another and, therefore, can - and should - be given a little more consideration in the current stressful times.

Paterbrat
25th Sep 2001, 05:51
Oz your point is well taken. I had in fact appologised to HM, and most certainly did commiserate.
I lost both parents in a DC7C which flew into a hanger, which made the events of the 11th rather chilling, and have been in two airlines and one Av Dept which folded so certainly empathise.
It's finished from my side.