|
|
#31
09-29-2007, 05:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Falsehoods
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I also see it as an attempt to turn legitimate soldiers into "terrorists". [/ QUOTE ] Kind of like when we declare Iran's soldiers terrorists? [/ QUOTE ] link? 
|
|
#32
09-29-2007, 05:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falsehoods
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I also see it as an attempt to turn legitimate soldiers into "terrorists". [/ QUOTE ] perhaps you don't understand, but when newt says "covertly", he means no soldiers will be used, no military, nothing like that. he means secret sabatage CIA squads or whatever. [/ QUOTE ] That would still be a sanctioned, government attack. CIA agents are government agents, regardless of what Matt Damon's movies suggest. Not all warfare is fought in the open. By using the same logic that says CIA agents destroying the oil refinery are terrorists, Navy SEAL teams and Army Rangers are terrorists, because they don't always wear standard issue fatigues and attack in the daylight. I'm still undecided as to whether I believe attacking Iran's oil refinery would be a good idea, however, if we do it, it's still not terrorism imo.
|
|
#33
09-29-2007, 06:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falsehoods
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I also see it as an attempt to turn legitimate soldiers into "terrorists". [/ QUOTE ] Kind of like when we declare Iran's soldiers terrorists? [/ QUOTE ] link? [/ QUOTE ] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...081401662.html The United States has decided to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, the country's 125,000-strong elite military branch, as a "specially designated global terrorist," according to U.S. officials, a move that allows Washington to target the group's business operations and finances. ------------------- Which of course led to this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21047176/ TEHRAN, Iran - Iran’s parliament on Saturday approved a nonbinding resolution to label the CIA and the U.S. Army “terrorist organizations.” The move is seen as a diplomatic tit-for-tat after the U.S. Senate voted in favor of a resolution urging the State Department to designate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization.
|
|
#34
09-29-2007, 06:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falsehoods
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I also see it as an attempt to turn legitimate soldiers into "terrorists". [/ QUOTE ] Kind of like when we declare Iran's soldiers terrorists? [/ QUOTE ] link? [/ QUOTE ] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...081401662.html The United States has decided to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, the country's 125,000-strong elite military branch, as a "specially designated global terrorist," according to U.S. officials, a move that allows Washington to target the group's business operations and finances. ------------------- Which of course led to this: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21047176/ TEHRAN, Iran - Iran’s parliament on Saturday approved a nonbinding resolution to label the CIA and the U.S. Army “terrorist organizations.” The move is seen as a diplomatic tit-for-tat after the U.S. Senate voted in favor of a resolution urging the State Department to designate Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization. [/ QUOTE ] did you even bother to read your first link? Obviously when a group supports or commits terrorist acts, they are terrorists, whether or not they happen to also be part of an organized army. Hint: second paragraph
|
|
#36
09-29-2007, 06:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falsehoods
[ QUOTE ]
So the CIA should be labeled terrorist? I fail to see your point. Both sides are saying "THEY are the terrorists", but in the end it's not about terrorism at all. [/ QUOTE ] Certainly the motivation for labeling the Iran guard as terrorist is pragmatic in that allows for certain actions to be taken. However the JUSTIFICATION for labeling them terrorist is their support or commission of terrorist acts. So in the end that IS about terrorism. The Iranian resolution is exactly what the article says as well..tit for tat. Should the CIA be labeled as terrorists? If they commit terrorist acts, absolutely. got any examples that meet the criteria of terrorism, namely that it intentionally targets civilians?
|
|
#37
09-29-2007, 06:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falsehoods
[ QUOTE ]
Should the CIA be labeled as terrorists? If they commit terrorist acts, absolutely. got any examples that meet the criteria of terrorism, namely that it intentionally targets civilians? [/ QUOTE ] Do we have any examples of this happening with Iran? Or are we just labeling anybody we don't like Terrorist? Blackwater gunned down some civilians. Terrorists? We're paying them. If Hamas is terrorist and Iran is terrorist because they support Hamas.......... The original point of this was in response to the comment: [ QUOTE ] I also see it as an attempt to turn legitimate soldiers into "terrorists". [/ QUOTE ] Which is exactly what we're doing. Because if we say "Iranian terrorism", maybe we can fool the country into thinking that, you know, they ARE straping bombs to themselves and blowing up civilians along with our troops. And we BOTH know that the war with Iran has nothing to do with terrorism.
|
|
#38
09-29-2007, 06:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falsehoods
TomVeil,
"Do we have any examples of this happening with Iran?" An example of Iranian state terrorism that people may not know about is the 1994 bombing of a Jewish center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, which left 85 people dead. wiki page "On 25 October 2006, prosecutors in Buenos Aires formally charged Iran and Shi'a militia Hezbollah with the bombing, accusing the Iranian authorities of directing Hezbollah to carry out the attack and calling for the arrest of former President of Iran Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and seven others, including some who still hold official positions in Iran."
|
|
#39
09-29-2007, 06:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falsehoods
[ QUOTE ]
I'm still undecided as to whether I believe attacking Iran's oil refinery would be a good idea, however, if we do it, it's still not terrorism imo. [/ QUOTE ] so by the same logic, if iran decides to covertly and deniably blow up oil refineries in texas, that would be ok with you?
|
|
#40
09-29-2007, 06:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Falsehoods
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Should the CIA be labeled as terrorists? If they commit terrorist acts, absolutely. got any examples that meet the criteria of terrorism, namely that it intentionally targets civilians? [/ QUOTE ] Do we have any examples of this happening with Iran? <font color="red">Yes, we do </font> Or are we just labeling anybody we don't like Terrorist? Blackwater gunned down some civilians. Terrorists? We're paying them. <font color="red">are we paying them to commit those acts or did they act outside of their assignment. If we paid them to, yes we should be considered terrorists </font> If Hamas is terrorist and Iran is terrorist because they support Hamas.......... <font color="red"> by George, hes got it</font> The original point of this was in response to the comment: [ QUOTE ] I also see it as an attempt to turn legitimate soldiers into "terrorists". [/ QUOTE ] Which is exactly what we're doing. <font color="red"> show me some evidence of that</font> Because if we say "Iranian terrorism", maybe we can fool the country into thinking that, you know, they ARE straping bombs to themselves and blowing up civilians along with our troops. And we BOTH know that the war with Iran has nothing to do with terrorism. [/ QUOTE ] <font color="red"> If there is war with Iran it will have EVERYTHING to do with terrorism </font>
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
