thebackpacker.com - backpacking, hiking and camping Welcome to thebackpacker.com
create account   login  
     home : trailtalk
    articles  beginners  gear  links  pictures            

Non-action and passiveness!

View Messages

Viewing posts 101 to 150 of 207 messages posted.
Jump to Page   << prev   |  1   |  2   |  3  |  4   |  5   |  next >>

To add this thread as a favorites, you need to first login.
 

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Jeeze Gear Slut, I've been in jail and nobody tried anything on me. Why is it that you are obsessed with jail house buggery?

Were you somebody's b!tch on the inside? Maybe you should change your name to Jail House Slut or Prison Ho.
BaSO4
9:01:02 PM
10/01/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
What a slut. Your concept of reality is so skewed it is beyond belief. You watch too much TV.
bacpac
9:04:23 PM
10/01/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Some people have no interest in Justice (whatever that may be) but rather in retaliation or retribution. Then if you happen to disagree with their "solution", they advocate smashing you in the mouth.
Not agreeing with the "solution du jour" is not treasonous. I tire of hearing the "either you're with us or your with the Taliban" line. Many of you would argue the reason it is critical for the population retain the right to arms is so they can rise up in the event of the government no longer represents the will of the people. You concede that there may be a time when the "government line" is not the way to go. But because the "line" now agrees with your idea of the solution, you wish to quash any dissention.
Tough guys, all.
flyguy6x
9:12:02 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Really if we think about it, isn?t this what our armed services are based on? The strong and willing fighters fighting on behalf of those not able to (the ones that are too old, the ones who are too young and those not able to stomach it)? If the Berkley kids are too weak and don?t have constitution for the fight before us, do we REALLY want them in the fight anyhow? Personally I am much more comfortable knowing the protesters are staying on campus and the bacpac Jr.s are in the trenches as it should be?the strong fighting for the weak.

Is it just me or is this post sounding like a left-handed compliment?
Nigal
9:26:27 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
just don't say its the stupid fighting for the smart or i'm gunna get mad
militiaboy
9:32:21 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Dear detractors,
Have you not had your collective ear to the ground? Are you not aware that the approach our government has elected to use is one of patience and calculation?

Has our military waded in "willy-nilly" and blasted away?
No.

Has one single innocent life been taken?
No.

Will the perpurtrators of the awful events on 9/11 be brought to justice, nonetheless?
You bet your candy a$$!
gojo
9:42:48 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I think you need to look at why there is so much Anti-American sentiment in so many Islamic Countries. Fixing this will help most of your War on Terrorism.
Bunyip
10:17:50 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
where do you live, bunyip?
radagast
10:31:38 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
If some fool sucker punches you, is that what you'd do? Ask why you got punched, stop doing that and hope the fool leaves you alone?? Ask any gradeschooler on the playground how that works.

I'd be willing to bet the peaceniks in this scenario are a calculated component of this attack. To be more blunt: you're a tool.
Le Subtil
10:38:14 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
A galaxy far, far away.
Bunyip
10:59:45 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Did any of you "ham-fisters" stop to think that "the peaceniks" are just citizens expressing their opposition to war in general and NOT opposition to America?

It looks as though "La Fascista" has dusted off her portrait of that #1 Stud-Muffin Musolini!

Big Smile!
Big Smile!

Tom Terrific
11:18:28 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I agree gojo. It seems that the administration is handling things well. No stupid and ineffective knee-jerk reactions this time. Sounds like the people in charge know that a conventional war is out. Now if only the blow hards on TT would realize it.
Gear Slut
11:27:20 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
i should punch you in the face midsentance
militiaboy
11:33:10 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
How's your nose, Gear Slut?
Did that motorcycle-ridin' minx rough ya up?

Those blow hards sure do talk a mean game.
They sound like a buncha chicken hawks to me!

We had a peaceful protest on our campus last week.
Some jack-ass was screamin' at one of the women involved, ..."you deserve to be raped!#%&*#@!"
There was the usual moronic crap about the protesters being"traitors".
There was heated "discussion"....a good thing in a free society.

Some of the Fascists were ripping down the signs erected by the protesters.
A young man tried to prevent this trashing of free speech by attempting to protect the signs and was assaulted by one or more of the Fascist thugs.

Tom Terrific
11:38:00 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
To use your schoolyard anologies, if you've been smacked in the teeth, you dont turn around and smack all the kids in another class where you think the guy that hit you is.
Bunyip
11:39:26 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
That'd be "midsentence".........

Hmmmmm,.......militia...BOY???

I'll buy that!

Tom Terrific
11:41:23 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
null
Bunyip
11:42:20 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I think the BLOWHARDS need something to blow!
Tom Terrific
11:43:05 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I don't disagree bunyip.
This isn't a black/ white, good vs bad, problem.
I think we should, and we have to, re-examine our mideast policies.
Carpet bombing ain't gonna help anything. Neither will doing nothing and hoping the problem solves itself.

I like what gojo said. I'm very proud of the patience our gov't has demonstrated so far.
Le Subtil
11:55:42 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Stop blowing. There is already an abundance of hot air in here. After reading more and more about the Taliban I have come to the conclusion they should be removed from power. Forunately, Powell is smart enough to know that a conventional ground war is out because it would result in numerous casualties and deaths with little results. Special ops are on the ground already. They'll take out as many of the brains as they can and start feeding the northern alliance insurgency with armaments while making food drops to the Afghani locals to try and sway their support to the US side of things. From the descriptions I've read of the popular sentiment there, I think it will work and the Taliban will fall in a short period of time after the civil war there climaxes. But what's next on the horizon is another story altogether.
roseymonster
11:56:09 AM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
How to beat the Taliban???

Send their women to college!

Tom Terrific
12:02:13 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
And when the Taliban retreat back to the colleges of Northern Pakistan (from where they came), do you then turn on Pakistan?
Bunyip
12:06:08 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
When do these "Special Ops" go after "ETA", "The Real IRA", Mugabe's Secret Police and etc. I thought this was a war on Terrorism.
Bunyip
12:12:43 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
The IRA have no quarrel with the USA.
Their fight is with the UK.
United Kingdom is a contradiction in terms!

Their are MORE IRISH in the USA than the whole on the world!

The British have it within their power to end the violence in Northern Ireland.

The IRA did not and would not assault the USA!

Tom Terrific
12:55:28 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
wow!

tom and i agree!

it feels snuggly!
radagast
1:21:36 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I know a way to fix the anti-American sentiment in Islamic countries, it's called bombing the dissenters.
Buddha Bear
1:23:49 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I guess taking the "protesters signs, and destroying them is the same thing that people who burn the flag do. I see no problem with destroying the signs, it is their right to do that.
Buddha Bear
1:28:26 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Sorry, but the IRA is composed of thugs. I hear this from Catholics in Northern Ireland. They are also really big on this 'you're either with us or against us' idiocy. When they aren't attacking the RUC, they're shaking down their own people. It's a protection racket.
Tilt
1:43:47 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
So Budweiser Bear, you are in favor of burning the U.S. flag, then?
flyguy6x
1:49:37 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
If someone wants to burn the flag, that is fine, I have the right to punch him in the face (the would be under "pursuit of happiness"), just like the peacenik has a right to face off against whomever breaks his little sign.
Buddha Bear
2:02:32 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I don't like the methods of the IRA.
They have gone 'round the bend in my book.
I DO believe that its time for the British to get the hell out of Ireland and let those people decide democratically wether to join the Republic of Ireland or not.

Bubba Bear-
It is NOT a right to disrupt a peaceful protest and destroy said protest signs.
That is fascist intimidation.
But from what I've read from YOU, that sort of Nazi Goonery is A-OK!!!

When are YOU going to join the Special Forces and go git 'em, ya stud-muffin?

Tom Terrific
2:16:31 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Yeah, not to mention destruction of personal property.
roseymonster
2:18:33 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I'm gettin' them in my own way right now, don't you worry there nik nak.
Buddha Bear
2:21:14 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Good Bear!
You must be scaring the sh!t out of those loonies!
Tom Terrific
2:25:26 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
BB = Chicken Sh!t er I meant Chicken Hawk er both.
Gear Slut
5:42:24 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Anyone else want to join LH and BB's Quilting B for WAR? You can talk as big and as dumb as you want. No thimble required for tough guys.
Gear Slut
6:14:12 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
The longer the response takes, the more appropriate it will be, I hope. Its obvious that a massive invasion is out, and is not necessary to fight the Bin Laden boys. Sounds like a little push,and the Afgans will take out the Taliban. If we did invade, we would lose our Moslem allies, not because their governments disagreed with us, but because their people disagreed with us.

I was relieved to see our efforts increased to feed the refugees. The place to built the future is in the refugee camps. If we are there training people, educating people, and being friends, we invest in stability. If we are absent, and Bin Laden is there training people, educating them (to his views), then we get screwed.

This movement started when we ignored the displaced people of the world. I don't like big government any more than the next guy, but a little money spent well might have made a big difference. I'd rather be spending money on feeding and educating refugees than on supporting some right wing dictator. One is a good investment, the other a bad investment.
Idaho Bob
7:05:11 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I think you're right Idaho Bob. These camps have to be prime recruiting grounds for terrorists. If we are active there and in other places where people feel they have nothing to live for, we might short-circuit some of this cycle of despair.

It would harder work for sure, but would help to build a more stable and secure world (aside from being the right thing to do).
Violin
7:24:01 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Agreed, treating symptoms rarely ever cures the disease. Time for a Marshall Plan for some of these have not people who have been effected by our poor foreign policy. Prosperity and Peace usually go hand in hand.
Gear Slut
7:51:51 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Fly... I am enjoying yer posts.
pedxing
8:49:06 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I am gaining optimism that the US is formulating a careful and well organized plan. That was part of what my long winded post on the "could this be the plan" was about. I trust that they have thought it through a lot better than I have.
pedxing
8:53:08 PM
10/02/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
The peaceniks should go to Afganistan and try waving those signs in front of the Taliban. We'll see how well they fare.
stanlee
3:28:40 AM
10/03/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!

stanlee-
You could drive the bus.


How about sending Jerry Falwell and Jesse Jackson over there?

......with a sh!t-load of bibles!

Tom Terrific
8:12:15 AM
10/03/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
OK, lets set up a food post for the refugees in Pakistan. I certainly won't voulenteer because those people will be dead in about two minutes.

Educate the people? Yeah, lets send in some of our teachers, so they can be imprisoned immediately, or shot, or worse.

Step 1 - Conquer the nation through force.
Step 2 - Rebuild and educate.
Step 3 - Poke pinko's like Gear Slut in the eye.
Buddha Bear
8:13:22 AM
10/03/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Would that be his "brown eye"?

Do away with teachers?
That's what the Taliban or most any dictatorial fascist regime likes to do.

Tom Terrific
8:18:24 AM
10/03/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
LOL Tom.

Either way, whatever he had in mind for poking is likely to be limp.
Gear Slut
8:36:12 AM
10/03/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
Tell my friend Don's wife, that war isn't needed. She has three children and a no job. Her husband was on top of Tower #1 when in fell. Tell his 8 yr old daughter that it was because of politics that he had to die and the people who did this are unaccountable for their crime. Osama Bin Laden didn't care that he would be taking him away from his friends and his family.

When I was younger I got beat up everyday by a bully. He would beat me up and take my lunch money and I went a whole month without lunch. One day I had enough, and I slugged him. We duked it out for a bit and I got a broken tooth and a few bruises for my trouble. It is safe to say he got the better of me that day, but he NEVER EVER again beat me up or took my lunch money. Bin Laden is just another bully. He needs to be put in his place. Non-action is just that. Doing nothing means getting nowhere. Will it take a nuke for American's to wake up. I would gladly give my life to stop this from happening again. We all need to realize that war may be evil, but doing nothing is no better. It's war or attrition of the American people.
Ravenseer
8:58:47 AM
10/03/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I 've tried to avoid this thread. Maybe some of ya have covered these points, but I gotta add.

Hmmm...so if I'm an economically struggling country, all I need to do is blame America, and spend $500K to get a dozen and a 1/2 guys to bomb some key buildings. Then America will come in and feed, educate and invest heavily in my country, even lift sanctions across the region for my allies past wrong doing - all I gotta do is promise to cooperate from now on.

Sounds like if some of ya have your way the Taliban will prove to be the most effective government to ever exist in the thousands of years history in the middle east - singlehandedly ending the poverty and food supply problems Afghanistan has always faced due to terrain, climate, and regional differences.

I do agree in rebuilding and forging a new relationship - but only after you demonstrate to them that fighting is absolutely futile and doing so has brought only pain & hardship. You have to break the peoples' will to fight - they need to want peace, and no longer find glory in war. Only then you help & re-build.

Unfortunately micro-targeting only the "bad ones" and soldiers, in the world's history of warfare, has never been successful in winning. And if this is the tactic we choose, face it now, we're going to "f" this thing up trying to be too careful, trying to avoid collateral damage, and we're going to lose this "new kind" of war.

Civilians become the next wave of soldiers - and unfortunately in order to break their will to fight, they must feel the sting of warfare. Most recent examples of this would be America's Civil War, when the South seemed steadfast in trying to wear out the North by fighting a defensive war. But that ended with Techumsa's "march to sea" - where his toops laid waste to everything - every building, crop, farm animal, horse, & railroad across a 60 mile wide path for 300 miles, culminating with the burning of Atlanta, thus dividing the south and demonstrating how horrible continued war will be. The atrocities commited by his soldiers upon the people of the South were terrible, but that essentially ended the war. Afterwards, we went in to re-build, unfortunatley with greedy carpet-baggers instead of with strong governmental polices. In WW1 no one helped rebuild Germany, and thus breeded a more terrible force. After WW2, where continued bombing of Germany's cities killed over 300,000 civilians, and of course the horrible A-bombs on Japan vaporized over 100,000 persons immediately, we went in and rebuilt both coutries the right way. Perhaps dropping the A-bomb should be considered a war crime in itself...it certainly has to be the saddest day in human history...but I think if we dropped food and money instead we would have lost many, many more Americans. This event ended the glory of the kamikaze pilots - from being heroes to being lives wasted whose actions will bring on further onslaught.

That's war...it is hell...innocent people suffer and die, and every occupied country that has ever lost a war has come to understand that. If we had had todays media in the 1/2 decade of WW2, and had become divided by the atrocities and suffering of our opponents civilians, we would have lost that war. And I'm sorry to say this stuff, I truly am. But anyone who argues differently I truly believe doesn't understand the full nature of warfare.
Wall-Man
10:32:07 AM
10/03/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
I must have missed something. When did we declare war on Afghanistan?
Violin
10:40:28 AM
10/03/01

RE: Non-action and passiveness!
What if bin Laden had used an atomic bomb, and leveled New York. Would we retaliate with an A bomb? Who would we bomb, Kabul? What's the point in that? He's not in Kabul, and just a bunch of beaten down Afgans are there. BL's "army" is spread all over the world in small groups. The only response that makes sense is to go after his organization, one group at a time. The response to those groups should be extreme, but there is no need to obliterate an entire country to target 50 people. It would be counterproductive. Sounds like the Afgans are sick of the Taliban, and they can take them out themselves, with a little well placed help from US.

If Tecumseh had been a Serbian general, he would be on trial for war crimes.
Idaho Bob
11:05:24 AM
10/03/01

Jump to Page   << prev   |  1   |  2   |  3  |  4   |  5   |  next >>
<< back to Trail Talk main page

 

Post a Message

In order to post a response to this thread you must first be logged in. If you do not already have an account, you must first create a new account.

 

Login Form

Username:
Password:

 

 

Post a New Thread
Search Threads
Browse Archive

Create a New Account

Trail Talk Main Page