Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I'm 22, My time on this earth is small in comparison to some others on this forum, but in those 22 years I have been able to do one thing VERY WELL, and that is CALL IT LIKE I SEE IT.

When I approach a situation I try to place my personal feelings aside, and view it from a 3rd party perspective. That way I see the "BIGGER PICTURE".

I'm not a democrat, or republican, I'm not a liberal or a conservative. Terms like that have been used to keep people on both sides of the fence from coming together. What am I? Just human!

I value ALL life, be it a 2year old American girl, or a 45 year old Islamic Fanatic. When broke down to 1's & 2's all are just Humans.

Americans have been conditioned to perceive their enemy's as less then human. "Example: Commies,Gooks"
I guess in a sense making it more easy to kill them with out remorse, but also blinding us from their point of view.

To better deal with a adversary, you must understand them, and what makes them do what they do. These people have families, ideas, visions, but unlike us in the U.S. They are living WAY WAY WAY below the poverty line. A bum in New York got it a million times better then a bum in say Afghanistan.

It is not a secret that America runs this world like a corporation. We impose sanctions on countries that dont bend to our will. Take Iraq, after the 1st gulf war. We imposed sanctions on them but, who did we hurt? Saddam? NOT AT ALL. He ate well, he had is medical issues taken care of, he slept in is fancy houses, and smoked is $100 cigars. Who hurt? Your average Iraqi citizen. Thats just one case of MANY!

Any one who takes the time to research American history, and dont eat up the candy coated version we are fed, would quickly learn that we are the biggest problem. We are the worlds worst Terrorist! Look no further then our on back yard South America.

We have Backed dictators, we have trained, and supplied weapons to KNOWN terrorist groups. We have staged coo's in country's that democratically elected their leaders. We have propped up puppet governments, we have let genocide take place in country's like Sudan. We torture prisoners, and kill civilians.

But what makes a terrorist a terrorist?

Websters defines Terrorism as: A systematic use of terror especially as a means of gaining some political end.

The U.S. is a terrorist, in every sense of the word, and our history shows it. Remember the people we call terrorist were once are good buddies, and guess who helped them get to the point they are at? Thats right, We did. From Osama to Saddam all got to where they are with OUR HELP.

We tend to only shun those that are not subordinate to our demands.

The war on terror will never be successful until we quit being terrorist.

The world is not a safer place no matter how Bush tries to twist it, and will not be a safer place as long as he is at the controls. He has proven him self to be a arrogant megalomaniac serving only the interest of corporate America.

Its time to wake up people! We are on a runaway train headed toward a big pile of $HIT. Jump off now, and run the risk of breaking a arm or leg. Or stay on board and open wide here comes your FECAL SANDWICH!

~SoBeK~

I respect your passion sobek. The USA has not had a pretty picture when it comes to how we treat different cultures. our own near extermination of the American Indian, our record with slavery, our Questionable wars (like the 1848 war with Mexico and the Spanish American war)point out that we are not saints.

We do often medle where we don't belong. But here's the rub...SO DOES EVERYONE ELSE!

Sometimes what looks like a situation where we are medling is actually our aiding an ally. But don't get me wrong. It is not as clear as we wear the white hat and fight the bad guys. A large piece of it goes under the muddy head line of Survival or national interests.

I think it unfair to call the USA Terrorists. Imperialistic at times, it's true.

A terrorist is a different breed of animal. They will willingly murder innocents (even their own people) to further their aims....Wait, let me rethink that. Using our own troops as guienia pigs to test radiation effects from A bombs does smudge the line.

As to your respect for all life...A two year old girl can grow up and be a benifit to man. A terrorist has allready shown his colors...I say, blast the bastard before he kills the two year old!

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Thanks for your reply Frank,

>>We do often meddle where we don't belong. But here's the rub...SO DOES EVERYONE ELSE!

I concur, but If we observer just who meddles MORE, that would be us, the US. Do you agree?

>>I think it unfair to call the USA Terrorists.

On the contrary Frank, By definition we are.

If we use that term "Terrorist" to define our current enemy's, it is basically "The pot calling the kettle Black".

I just dont understand how Osama was not considered a Terrorist when he was on the CIA payroll, but the second he quit working for us, the term became apply-able.

Sounds like that good ol "Double Standard"

~SoBeK~

By your definition, England, France Spain and Portugal (amongst others) were all terrorist nations for over three hundred years! What they used to do was create protectorates...namely put a puppet in charge of the country that they took over and run it through him. Sound familiar? That's imperialism.

As for Osama..Hypocrasy is the bedfellow of politics.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

>>By your definition, England, France Spain and Portugal (amongst others) were all terrorist nations for over three hundred years!

Not my definition Frank, it is THE DEFINITION!

So is "Terrorist" the term that should define our current enemy's, or this war?

And if so why does it not apply to us the U.S.?

>>As for Osama..Hypocrasy is the bedfellow of politics.

VERY VERY WELL PUT!

~SoBeK~

Went into the dictionary and checked up on this. If you use the first definition I found literaly, every country that ever threatened or declared war on another country was Terrorist.

Terrorism: The political use of violence or intimidation.
(The American Heritige Dictionary)

However, another dictionary says:

"The action of terror; a policy of intimidation or terror. terrorist"
(Webster's Dictionary)

By that second definition a company or any organization that uses intimidation is terrorist. A school yard bully could be called a terrorist if he uses intimidation or force to steal your lunch money. A parent who threatens their child with punishment can be said to be using terrorism to achieve their ends.

I think you might see by this that the use of the term can be badly over used to the point of ridiculousness. If you want to go to the literal definition,the term loses all meaning.

Imperialism: The policy of territorial expansion and developement as a world power.
(Webster's)

I think this more accuratly describe's the USA's actions (by definition). That is not to say that we have never used terrorism (by the strictest definition) but our policies cannot be called exclusevly terrorist-unlike Osama who does use it exclusevly.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

>>That is not to say that we have never used terrorism (by the strictest definition)

So does that not make us "The US" Terrorist?

If you deal drugs, your a drug dealer.
If you murder people, your a murderer.
If you use terrorism, your a terrorist!

In the eyes of the US, Osama is the Terrorist, but in the eyes of Osama, We are the terrorist.

What makes a terrorist a terrorist?

>>but our policies cannot be called exclusevly terrorist-unlike Osama who does use it exclusevly.

One of my hobbies other then herps, is the study of warfare. Osama does not have the billion $ stealth bombers that we the US have. The million $ laser guided missiles, that we have. What he is doing is using "guerrilla warfare"

Guerrilla Warfare has been used by people who can not AFFORD to engage in conventional warfare, and if you notice the US does not attack foes that can match our military power since the end of the coldwar.

Thats why we attacked Iraq, and not N. Korea.

Actually, the nations that match the US in power have enough sense to realize the impact that a war between two nations of such power can have....it ain't pretty. No major nation would go into war with a nation that also has nueclear capacity. Even these fools aren't that crazy...

Again...Overuse of a dramatic term. I see you ignored the definitions I placed there for you. One thing you should have learned by now is that the world is not so simple that you can drop the same label on everything.

We aren't saints...nor is the rest of the world. Our government has probs....but you can vote here, own property, we don't advocate stoning women to death because they don't wear a veil, or mutilate their sex organs because orgasms are wrong...There are much worse nations out there. Or would you like to live in a nation where you could be legally killed for what you have been writing here? I have lived in places like that.

Get a sense of perspective before you condemn a nation that is more open minded in it's freedoms than any in the world.

I do get discouraged by young idealist who have no real experience with how the world really works condemning our country.

As to Guerrilla war, Might I suggest that you pick up a copy of MAO TSE-TUNG on GUERRILLA WARFARE. translated by Sam B. Griffith ISBN: 877853-10-0. I too am a history buff. I'm certain you would enjoy this book.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

>>No major nation would go into war with a nation that also has nueclear capacity. Even these fools aren't that crazy...

Ummm Russia, and the US? So yes they are that crazy. Does your comment suggest that a nation not wanting to be attacked by the US should obtain Nuclear weapons?

>>I see you ignored the definitions I placed there for you.

No, you ignored my question, What makes a terrorist, a terrorist?

>>There are much worse nations out there. Or would you like to live in a nation where you could be legally killed for what you have been writing here?

Where not discussing what nation is a better place to live in, we are discussing, What makes a terrorist, a terrorist. And why the term applies to only those that we engage, and not ourselves!

>>Get a sense of perspective before you condemn a nation that is more open minded in it's freedoms than any in the world.

Any? Open minded? You tell me why Alcohol is legal, but pot is not. I have a very good sense of perspective, thanks Frank

>>I do get discouraged by young idealist who have no real experience with how the world really works condemning our country.

I know enough about how the system works to justify such claims. Age alone does not make one smarter.

>>Might I suggest that you pick up a copy of MAO TSE-TUNG on GUERRILLA WARFARE. translated by Sam B. Griffith ISBN: 877853-10-0. I too am a history buff. I'm certain you would enjoy this book.

I do own this book, and also Guerrilla Warfare By Che Guevara ISBN: 0-8032-7075-5

Might I suggest a book to pick up Frank, one of the best books I've read all year. Please PLEASE get this book!

Hegemony or Survival "America's quest for global dominance" By Noam Chomsky ISBN:0-8050-7400-7

I would enjoy discussing this book with you Frank.

~SoBeK~

No insult intended but while age alone does not make one wiser, Experience does.

It also tells me that you have the sharp and unforgiving eye of youth. I remember what that was like.

Like I have repeadly tried to tell you, the world is not a land of Black and white values. There are plenty of grays that shade every meaning. It's not as easy as point a finger and label one side or the other terrorists. It never is. Until you understand that simple principle you do not understand how the system works.

You should realise that the truely dangerous countries and political groups are those that have nothing to lose. The USSR held too much territory and power to risk the mutual destruction of nuclear war. That is why they would never have risked real nuclear war. both sides knew it was no win. A country like N. Korea on the otherhand (with nothing to lose but people) would be crazy enough.

As to identifying a terrorist: I would have to say that a true terrorist uses terror almost exclusevly in lieu of diplomacy. They are indifferent to the casualties in their own civilan population to the point of causing them themselves. A terrorist acts independantly of any government, and so ignores international law. Their only law is their cause...which justifies any attrocity.

While the US in it's history has commited some of the acts described above it is not the focus of our government to use them as policy and we have prosecuted people in our own ranks for violations, where true terrorists call their most sadistic members Heros.

As to open mindedness: When I was young and a Hippie I said That about booze and pot. I am older now and see no wisdom in the consumption of either. Eventually you realize that making one thing of questionable value legal because of the legality of something else of questionable value is not all that smart. I do not advocate the probition of alcohol because the "Noble experiment" was a total failure. As to Pot, I think eventually this will become legal too. But I will point out that the POT of today is much stronger (and hence; more dangerous) than that we smoked in the sixties)so I don't think it's wise to add to the trouble.

When you have lived for a few years in a dictatorship like I have, you gain a much better perspective to judge this country we live in. Yes I am older but yes-I am more experienced...and I hope a bit of a wiser man than I was at 22.

I'm glad you own those books. very good reads. I shall look into the title you offer. Thank you.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

>>No insult intended but while age alone does not make one wiser, Experience does.

Agreed.

>>It also tells me that you have the sharp and unforgiving eye of youth. I remember what that was like.

Was that B.C. or A.D.? lol J/k Franky boy

>>the world is not a land of Black and white values. There are plenty of grays that shade every meaning.

I know that...

>>It's not as easy as point a finger and label one side or the other terrorists.

Bush does it all the time.. He seems to have little trouble doing it. I still believe "Terrorist" is the wrong term to use for this war, if it does not apply to us also.. MY opinion..

>>You should realize that the truly dangerous countries and political groups are those that have nothing to lose.

I am well aware of this Frank, having nothing is why they are forced to engage in Guerrilla warfare.

>>The USSR held too much territory and power to risk the mutual destruction of nuclear war. That is why they would never have risked real nuclear war.

But they did. Placing WMD in Cuba "among other reasons" Showed they were ready, if not willing to risk it all.

>>A country like N. Korea on the other hand (with nothing to lose but people) would be crazy enough.

Its not just their people Frank, its their whole lifestyle. They have seen how the US "Bullies" nations into a submissive role, and I doubt they wish to be apart of that. So they did the only thing they could do, obtain WMD/programs to protect their selves/lifestyle.

>>As to identifying a terrorist: I would have to say that a true terrorist uses terror almost exclusevly in lieu of diplomacy.

Latin America 70's-80's, Iraq, We supply Israel with US military weapons to use Terrorism, against Arabic Terrorist, just to name a few. The book I suggested will shine more light on this subject.

>>A terrorist acts independantly of any government

That is not true Frank, again the book I suggested will shine more light on this subject.

>>Their only law is their cause...which justifies any attrocity.

Sounds like the Good ol US to me...

>>But I will point out that the POT of today is much stronger (and hence; more dangerous)

Dangerous? Sounds like you bought into the propaganda Frank. Pot has MANY MANY medicinal uses! Hell the Junk they call medication is 100% more dangerous then pot. It amuses me when commercials for medication tell the side effects, and they are usually worse then what they are treating The pot in the 60's and the pot today is not all that different. With the exception of Hydro. I talk to old heads, and while it its a bit more "potent" its not that much more. Why is it illegal? F.D.A. has to much at stake, but this discussion is not about Pot so.......... We can start one if you like..lol

>> I'm glad you own those books. very good reads. I shall look into the title you offer. Thank you.

Yes they are! Please do pick it up, it sheds so much light! Are you not Familiar with Chomskys work?

One another note, Your in Fl. right? I hope that weather has not caused you any problems.

~SoBeK~

Wrote a detailed response to you and got timed out ^%&^$$*&$*!!!!

The quick version:

Having lived thru it (the Cuban missle crisis) it was not as grim that historians paint it. the USSR wanted to se how far they could push JFK. They backed off when they found out. There was never a danger of NUKE war (except in the newspapers). Just a chess game.

Bush....(no comment necessary)

North Korea's lifestyle is total dictatorship. When they wanted to force this lifestyle on South Korea, the US stepped in. hardly sounds like bullying on our part.

Creating the Leauge of Nations...then the UN. No other country ever tried to create a world peace forum like those. hardly the act of a terrorist. Seems to me we use diplomacy quite frequently and not allways to our advantage (unless you think the UN is our puppet-I DON'T THINK SO...

As to POT (unlike Clinton I inhailed). I can assure you it is much more potent today than it was in the sixties (by experience...man....). I call it dangerous because too many people toke and drive......

I don't read a lot of Political books because usually they reflect the bias of the author. I watch and learn and make up my own mind. Since you seem to relate to this one I shall read it.

BC is the correct response...(at least that is what my bones are saying this morning)(lol)

Have you read Sun-tsu: THE ART OF WAR ISBN 1-56619-297-8.

As to the weather....we lost power for a few days and a fridge full of food.....Thanks for the thought.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

>> There was never a danger of NUKE war (except in the newspapers).

I disagree. I'm going to put it like this. You don't buy a gun to protect your family, if your not willing to use it.

>>Bush....(no comment necessary)

none needed..lol

>>North Korea's lifestyle is total dictatorship. When they wanted to force this lifestyle on South Korea, the US stepped in. hardly sounds like bullying on our part.

So when we go into say Afghanistan, and use reasons "among other things" like the treatment of Muslim woman. We are trying to force "our" lifestyle on them.. Does that mean another country like China, has the right to "step in"? *note I'm not suggesting the treatment of Muslim woman is right*

>>unless you think the UN is our puppet-I DON'T THINK SO...

lol The war in Iraq proved we only listen to the UN when they do what we want them to.

>>As to POT (unlike Clinton I inhailed). I can assure you it is much more potent today than it was in the sixties (by experience...man....)

When was the last time you smoked one Frank? If you dont mind my asking..

>>I call it dangerous because too many people toke and drive......

lol o Frank come on now, by that statement its not the pot thats dangerous, its the cars. More people have wrecks on cell phones, then pot smokers. Should we out law cell phones, or cars even?

>>I don't read a lot of Political books because usually they reflect the bias of the author.

Agreed, but you will not find that in Chomsky's work. He only states facts, and even allows you to check for your self.

>> Since you seem to relate to this one I shall read it.

Please do, if you have any trouble finding the book, let me know, I'm willing to send you a copy

>>BC is the correct response...(at least that is what my bones are saying this morning)(lol)

lol I dig ya sense of humor

>>Have you read Sun-tsu: THE ART OF WAR ISBN 1-56619-297-8.

O Yea! I have two versions of the book. A pocket one ISBN:0-87773-537-9, and a much more in depth version ISBN:0-670-03156-9

>>As to the weather....we lost power for a few days and a fridge full of food.....Thanks for the thought.

Better some food, then a home or loved one. Good to hear all is well.

~SoBeK~

By your first statement I know you are not a diplomat. (lol)

The trick is to step as close to the fire as you can and not get burned. The USSR did exactly that. They wanted to see how far they could go with exstablishing missles in Cuba. But when Kennedy sent the fleet, they wisely backed off (actual violentconfrontation was not the point of this and both sides knew it). The cold war was about posturing and advantages....a chess game.

Now if Bush had been in charge he likely would have over reacted and we would have been in a nuk...(wait he can't pronounce that)...Big bomb war.

I will stick with my memmorys rather than trust history's rewrite.

I kind of went through the same thing when I was stationed on a ship off Spain. We had a Russian spy vessel that was always trying to get a little too close (so they could photograph our hardware and give us a hard time). My captain tollerated it for a while and then he announced to the crew that everyone go up on the starboard rail and wave to the Russians. He did it on the ship's loud speaker so the Russians heard what he said. They did not like being recognised, so they backed off temporarily. A little later they came back and my captain called for a gunnery drill. One shot across their bow and they were gone. A day later they followed us too closely into Spanish waters and half the Spanish ships there tried to get out and sink them before they made it into international waters. They did but not by much.

We went to Afghanistan because they refused to give up Osama (who after 911 I think was fair game). As long as they did not attack us or harbor those that did, the US had no business there, Unlike S. Korea that asked the UN for help, so we were one of several countrys represented by that UN obligation.

Now that UN thing is a sidestep.....The point being we created them (so for that matter if we ignore them we are ignoring ourselves (strange logic?))

POT? Now that would be telling (is there a narc in the room (lol))

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

Hey DUMMIE; the U.S is the world's biggest terrorist ? If you don't like the policies of the U.S. governmnet why don't you pack up your little bag and leave. Go to a MUSLIM country see what freedom is all about. you Jerk !

Hey MArk, when you grow up, your welcome to join the conversation. Till then, childeren should not talk.