when they became a state sponcer of terror. pretty sure the USS Cole made the msm ; )
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
This is how you combat lunatic murders
- Thread starter dogtowner
- Start date
when they became a state sponcer of terror. pretty sure the USS Cole made the msm ; )
Werbung:
Cruella
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2012
- Messages
- 4,311
What are you talking about? Drones or terrorists? I replied to your post about Somalia.
Yemen, not Somalia, but it's really the same thing.
If we're "at war" with Al Qaeda, then we're "at war" with drug dealers as well, so why not shoot them from drones the way we do terrorists?
We could clean up East LA pretty quickly, it seems to me.
Openmind
Well-Known Member
It seems that too many gun owners have neither foresight nor hindsight!
This story should set a new example of the extend of stupidity that some gun owners (too many, obviously!) harbor. . . . with their love affair with guns!
steveox
Well-Known Member
Yeah,,, The Reason why Obama will never allow drones attacked on Mexican Cartels is because Mexico sides with Obama admin on anti illegal immingration. So Obama wants the courts make Arizona drop their illegal immingration laws. If Mexico wants illegals here why cant we become illegal in Mexico. Look what they did to our soldier who crossed the border illegaly.They put him in prison on chains. And were not even allowed to treat illegals so harshly here.
Who said anything about illegals?
there is a difference between terror and strong arm commerce.
pretty sure the crips have not joined al q
Strong arm commerce? Is that what we call killing off the competition, literally? It seems to me that the difference is that Al Qaeda is in it for political power, while the gangs are in it for the money, along with power over the other gangs. It is not a great difference.
huge difference. gangs have no ideology.
So, the difference between a gang and a terrorist organization is that the latter has an ideology? Does that mean that any entity that uses violence to achieve an ideological end is a terrorist organization, but one that uses violence simply to be the baddest on the block isn't?
Just how should we define "terrorist organization"? That seems pretty important if we're going to have a "war on terror."
you seem to have left the comercial aspect out which is central.
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
I disagree about gangs not having an ideology. Though their ideology might not be obvious - not even to the gang members - it exists. Gangs have a collectivist ideology, they believe in forcing some individuals to "sacrifice" for the "greater good" of the collective. Gangs, like terrorists or immoral governments, impose their will on others by force. Morally, all are equally evil. It's only when we ignore morality and look at it strictly in terms of physical violence on a sliding scale that distinctions are drawn. Laws may accomplish a goal with less violence than physically putting a gun to someone's head but both actions are equally immoral.
Is it, or is it a means to an end? Al Qaeda has to raise money for their activities, and so does the F14. The latter does so mainly through drug sales.
steveox
Well-Known Member
Im Making a point. When we go to mexico illegaly we get harsh treatment. When illegals come to America theyre treated with dignity and respect.
Werbung:
to be sure he Taliban leaned on the poppy trade in Afghanistan and money was the means to heir end. But gangs want the cash and violence is the means to that end.
