Is america a terrorist state and are americans terrorists

[Slevin57]

You must have misunderstood our position.

We are against terrorists that want to blow us up.

If you don't want to blow us up, we don't consider you a terrorist.

The key factor here is, US. If it doesn't affect US, then we don't really care.

In fact, we will probably give you money and say you are fighting terrorism.

[tinybear]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Read about WACO, and then read about RUBY RIDGE, and tell me that isn't federal and state sponsored terror. Read about the truth Tiny, not what the media highlights. The list of terror that is linked to this nation goes back 100+ years, but mainly in foreign policy and actions.

The Government attacks those who it perceives as our enemies. OK, sometimes they inadvertently or even negligently get it wrong. But the fact remains that it does not deliberately target and kill innocent people (save for one or two rare occasions like the 1945 bombing of Hiroshima, for example). By and large, I'd say USA is NOT a terrorist state. :)

[grandpa]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I would agree, except that I would say "to see why governments who are given a blank check to use force, in their peoples names are bad...." People have a right to defend their nations, but all governments are not all bad, nor are properly limited governments easily made bad.

I'm not saying some governments aren't better than others. However, a cursory glimpse into history makes the prospect of peace through power appear dim.

Powerful states also can "educate" their populations into
simply ignoring their governments attacks, as possibly evidenced by TinyBear.
The fact is, nearly all terrorism can be linked to hierarchies--either coming from or against them.

I think it's inaccurate to say governments aren't easily made bad. Authorities are prone to corruption and power-grabbing.

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

Quote by: tinybear The Government attacks those who it perceives as our enemies. OK, sometimes they inadvertently or even negligently get it wrong.

I was wrong.
I take it all back. :rolleyes:

Seriously, I have to wonder if you've studied history at all.

Grandpa h.

[Osborn F Enready]

Gramps said: I'm not saying some governments aren't better than others. However, a cursory glimpse into history makes the prospect of peace through power appear dim.

Peace through power, possibly very dim. Peace through defense and mutual respect, highly likely.

As long as humans understand force, force will be all some people will understand.

There are times when force is legitimate, and necessary, but only in protection and defense, not in offense or attack. This means that force must remain as accessible by the innocent, as the criminals make them accessible to themselves.

Gramps said: Powerful states also can "educate" their populations into simply ignoring their governments attacks, as possibly evidenced by TinyBear. The fact is, nearly all terrorism can be linked to hierarchies--either coming from or against them.

No doubt, but the fact is people DO form collectives, outside the family, of free-will, so collectives in some form must be accepted, or revolted against at every forming, correct?

That is why it only seems most logical to assume that since we form collectives naturally, and respect collectives that are in our own best intrest and voluntary, there is a benefit, correct?

The issue of force is ALWAYS the hangman, when given the power of the collective, or used against the collectives people by the collective heads.

Force of taxation, force of laws, force of police vs citizen, military vs citizen, government vs citizen, nation vs nation. It all revolves around force, because force is all humans lowest common denominator.

Force and its authorization and justification are the hangman in every collective, and in every individual.

Gramps said: I think it's inaccurate to say governments aren't easily made bad. Authorities are prone to corruption and power-grabbing.

I said not ALL governments are easily made bad. The secret is clear limitations, and an active, armed populace not afraid or timid to invoke and enforce those limitations once stepped over, REGARDLESS of majority support.

[grandpa]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Peace through power, possibly very dim. Peace through defense and mutual respect, highly likely.

I think peace efforts are crucial for avoiding a catastrophe, and the most effective way to guarantee peace is to simply avoid positions of hierarchy which create and exaggerate conflict.

Obviously, in a system where such positions are prominent it becomes difficult to avoid them, which is why it's important for free spirited people to speak out against them and, when possible, refrain from being subordinate and from subordinating others.

I don't think any of this is as hard as it's made out to be, which is why the coercion and violent expansionism is crucial. If we are afraid of both local and foreign institutions, we'll obviously have limited options.

Grandpa h.

[gw120]

Now I don't know about America, but the people in charge of it are for sure.

[smithvickey]

no, they are not terrorists

[Nono]

'Course, we're all clear on what we mean by "terrorism" here, aren't we?

If we mean the practice of terrifying the general populace (non-combatants) to achieve one's own political ends, then the US has qualified many times over, most recently in Iraq.

If all we mean is blowing up innocent people, the US qualifies even more.

Anyone who disputes this had better check his facts.

[BionicArmofDeth]

How i hate the word terrorist. Couldnt we use a different word? The word itself is misleading. Its like thinking way too much in black and white.

[Spoken Word]

Politcs are a very delicate subject.
The U.S helps many factions of many countries.
The opposing faction is suffering because of the U.S help.
Who decides what is right and what is wrong?
YOU?
ME?
No. Nobody.

If you agree/disagree with the reasons and idealogies(sp) of the faction, its right/wrong. Simply put.
Now, the opposing faction considers America terrorists(or w/e they refer to people that attack them lol). But we consider them terroists.
There's no grey area in this debate.

[Matt W]

And what happens when the US supports factions that are against its' allies?

[Athena]

Quote by: tinybear When we supported them, they were freedom fighters, not terrorists. Hey, if they turned into terrorists, we weren't told. We're not terrorists. Nor do we support terrorism. We're the good guys. Always remember that!

Tiny Bear, I soooo wish I could agree with you, but the truth is the United States has escalated terrorism about the world. Democracy is not spread with weapons of war, and the School of America is about terrorism not democracy.

School of the Americas WatchThe US Army School of Americas (SOA), based in Fort Benning, Georgia, trains Latin American security personnel in combat, counter-insurgency, ... SOA Watch - 44k - Cached - Similar pages What is the SOA/ WHINSEC? - SOA Watch SOA Training Manuals - SOA Watch SOA/ WHINSEC Background - SOA Watch Frequently Asked Questions - SOA Watch More results from SOA Watch »

The CIA comes out of WWII and has been used for acts of violence in countries around the world.

The US put its relationships with the mid east in jeapordy, by arming Israel and otherwise supporting it, to establish a foot hold in this area of the world, and prevent the communist from gaining this area.

Carter backing a very brutal Iranian leader is why we are now bad terms with Iran. He violated his own efforts to promote human rights, when he backed this brutal leader. I think very highly of Carter, but he made a huge error when he put the power of US politics above human values in Iran.

The USSR was fighting the terrorist we are fighting today, and the US supplied and trained these terrorist, because the US didn't want the USSR to gain in this region and jeapordize US interest.

The US has been in a power struggle to have control of oil rich nations since Israel first "bloomed in the desert", and the dirty work it does in South America is intolerable. Yes, the leaders you mentioned should go on trail, and the citizens of the US need to become aware of what is going on in their name.

I have gone on hurger strikes with a woman who went to prison because of her part in a School of America protest. This elderly woman is a peaceful Quaker. This use of power against peaceful protesters, is terrorism. Firing someone for saying the wrong thing is, a part of terrorism, and we are cheering when this happens.

We have been producing products for the military/industrail complex and New World Order since 1958. We are no longer the democracy we defended in two world wars. We are a military/industrial complex, the New World Order Bush used to speak of, and what we defeated in a world war.

[Nono]

Quote by: Word We consider them terroists. There's no grey area in this debate.

Or, as Boy George pronounces it, "terrists".

The Nazis called the French Resistance "terrorists" as well. Well well.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

[Osborn F Enready]

Nono said: One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Exactly, and I agree.

[LtMisha]

I don't like America much. Thay helped Osama Bin Laden fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. The fact that they would support suicide bombers sickns me to my heart. I see America got it's come uppance. 9/11. God rest the souls of the victims.