Fear of Communism/Fear of Terrorism?

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
Communism isn't a practice at all,

[/ QUOTE ]
I used the word practice as a synonym for the word "thing" so that sentence made sense gramatically with a reference to both Communism and Terrorism. Apart from anything else, it's not significant anyway.

[ QUOTE ]
much less an "evil" one that "kills people."

[/ QUOTE ]
This is such rubbish.

Communism is what Communism does.

If you have something, and in every substantial implementation, people get killed, it is reasonable to say that thing kills people.

This is not dissimilar to guns - You can argue the semantics of whether people kill people, or guns kill people, but the end result is the same. Being shot tends to kill, and at the very least, severley wounds.

The same thing applies to communism. Communist states end up with lots of people dead - whether in the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, or elsewhere.

[ QUOTE ]
You're doing a great job of proving that fear supports unreason and ignorance.

[/ QUOTE ]
There's no need to include baseless little jibes like this.

[Bedreviter]

[ QUOTE ]
And terrorism isn't a religious agenda, it's a method of achieving goals, not a goal itself. Anyone who makes use of that method is a "terrorist," so that "War Against Terror" has even less basis than the Cold War. Even if we destroyed every Islamic terrorist group in existence, terrorism would still be "out there" and unconstitutional policy would still be defended on that basis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its pretty well understood that the current "War on Terrorism" is basically against Islamic terrorists that is fighting the US. The fight against the Irish IRA or the Spanish ETA is not a priority for the US government even though they are seen as terrorist groups, and everyone knows that.

But it wouldnt help the cause to say "we are at war with radical muslims/terorists" too often, because that can be used by the radicals to fuel more hate among more moderate/peaceful muslims. The mention of the religion of the terrorists that the US is at war with can preferably be kept to a minimum because its no point in making any more muslims believe that the US is at war with their religion.

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
Communism is what Communism does.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, your position is that if something is done in the name of a certain philosophy, the philosophy itself can be indicted on that basis?

[ QUOTE ]
If you have something, and in every substantial implementation, people get killed, it is reasonable to say that thing kills people.

[/ QUOTE ]

By that standard, organized religion kills people.

[ QUOTE ]
This is not dissimilar to guns - You can argue the semantics of whether people kill people, or guns kill people, but the end result is the same. Being shot tends to kill, and at the very least, severley wounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough, but I wouldn't call guns "evil killers." That seems disingenuous at best, and casts responsible gun owners in a negative light.

[ QUOTE ]
There's no need to include baseless little jibes like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bad, I apologize. I leapt to the conclusion that you were a troll, and this post proves me wrong. No hard feelings on my end - I just get carried away sometimes in politics.

(Edit - typo)

[madnak]

[ QUOTE ]
Its pretty well understood that the current "War on Terrorism" is basically against Islamic terrorists that is fighting the US. The fight against the Irish IRA or the Spanish ETA is not a priority for the US government even though they are seen as terrorist groups, and everyone knows that.

But it wouldnt help the cause to say "we are at war with radical muslims/terorists" too often, because that can be used by the radicals to fuel more hate among more moderate/peaceful muslims. The mention of the religion of the terrorists that the US is at war with can preferably be kept to a minimum because its no point in making any more muslims believe that the US is at war with their religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm more worried about the cause of protecting American freedoms than that of stopping Islamic terrorists. Using a vague and largely meaningless term like "War on Terror" allows the government to shift its position without appearing inconsistent. Do you believe we would just drop the whole thing if Islamic terror ceased to be a threat? And do you deny that the term "terrorist" is being applied loosely in many cases?

"The War on Muslims" would be worse, but that doesn't mean "the War on Terror" is justified. I think there are calculated reasons for the rhetoric officials use, and if you look at the pattern of their PR it's consistent with an agenda to control the citizens of the USA and enact legislation that would never be tolerated during peacetime.

[Bedreviter]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you believe we would just drop the whole thing if Islamic terror ceased to be a threat? And do you deny that the term "terrorist" is being applied loosely in many cases?

"The War on Muslims" would be worse, but that doesn't mean "the War on Terror" is justified. I think there are calculated reasons for the rhetoric officials use, and if you look at the pattern of their PR it's consistent with an agenda to control the citizens of the USA and enact legislation that would never be tolerated during peacetime.

[/ QUOTE ]

What rights do you feel are taken away from you after the war on terror started? What level of control have been implemented on you and other Americans not affiliated with suspected terrorist groups, and how is that hurting the citizens of the US today?

What do you feel would have been the approiate response to 9-11 in regards of preventing another attack from happening again? Does innocent political active or inactive Americans have anything to fear due to the new legislation, and in that case, what can they fear?

And for the term "terrorist", can you give examples of who has been called and treated like a terrorist by the US government that did not deserve it? Would be easier to discuss your point if you point me to the the instances where you feel the term has been applied too loosely.

[dazraf69]

Whats funny is I could see an identical conversation taking place during the time of "fear of communism" when US citizens were being arrested out of fear of "communism".

[Bedreviter]

[ QUOTE ]
Whats funny is I could see an identical conversation taking place during the time of "fear of communism" when US citizens were being arrested out of fear of "communism".

[/ QUOTE ]

So because the government went too far with some arrests due to fear of communism in the 50s means that they can no longer warn people about the treath of another enemy?

Are people being arrested in this country today for being muslims? What American citizens are in prison today solely because of their political or religious affiliations?

[Josem]

[ QUOTE ]
So, your position is that if something is done in the name of a certain philosophy, the philosophy itself can be indicted on that basis?

[/ QUOTE ]

My position is that if every significant implementation of a particular philosophy does the thing in practice, yes, the philosophy can be indicted on that basis.

[ QUOTE ]
By that standard, organized religion kills people.

[/ QUOTE ]
No - because not every organised religion 'implementation' (for lack of a better word) does this.

By contrast, there are certain organised religions that seem to kill people - fundamentalist "Ladenist" (I don't know if that's the right word) Islam seems to kill a bunch of people. By my standard - every significant implementation of a particular philosophy - it would be reasonable to criticise Bin Laden's religious followers and the underpinning philosophy.

[ QUOTE ]
Fair enough, but I wouldn't call guns "evil killers." That seems disingenuous at best, and casts responsible gun owners in a negative light.

[/ QUOTE ]
Guns was only meant as a rough metaphor. I'm sure it is not perfect, as there are obviously gun owners who are great people.

[ QUOTE ]
No hard feelings on my end - I just get carried away sometimes in politics.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're not Robinson Crusoe here.

[Chips Ahoy]

[ QUOTE ]
What American citizens are in prison today solely because of their political or religious affiliations?

[/ QUOTE ]

This guy is.

(American citizen sentenced to 24 years in prison. He did nothing and planned to do nothing, despite the urging of the undercover agent leading him on. The jury considered credible evidence unnecessary.)

[Bedreviter]

Hes in prison for alleged ties to terrorism. How do you know he did not do anything of what he was found guilty of? You seem 100% sure that he was innocent, what do you build that belief on?