Fighting Terror with Terror?
-
Is it possible for pple to fight terror with terror from a theory point of view?
Just asking whether would you go to the extend of tit-for tat operations?
Like for example killing the terrorist's families of the terrorist whom killed you.
or lets say kidnap terrorist's families and threaten to do what unless so ever.
or would it lost it's purpose? -
"An eye for an eye" ?
The answer is quite obvious as to where this principle will lead us to, simply by looking at the cycle of violence that is being perpetuated in the dispute between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
The intensity of violence has escalated with each reply from either side to each perceived counter-attack.
Where does it end, when neither side will succumb to the violence that continue to be perpetuated by hardliners that refused to negotiate, and willing to accept the cost of such violence ?
Will rationality return, when one walk down this path of vengeance ? -
An eye for an eye, and the world goes blind. Yi der Fu Ren. If noone did no wrong to the terrorist or the masterminds, why would they have a reason to terrorise in the first place?Originally posted by SibeiSuayKia:Is it possible for pple to fight terror with terror from a theory point of view?
Just asking whether would you go to the extend of tit-for tat operations?
Like for example killing the terrorist's families of the terrorist whom killed you.
or lets say kidnap terrorist's families and threaten to do what unless so ever.
or would it lost it's purpose? -
Just imagine yourself as the terrorist. How would you respond? In their frame of thoughts, they will probably be more convince that what they have done previously is correct.
Also, you should think about by-stander opinions. Those fence-sitter might just be convice that you are indeed evil and join the rank of the terrorist.
Look at cause and effect, and not be blind by emotions. -
Fight dumb with dumber
-
My stand on this question is 'Why not'?
Clearly there can be no moderate position to take when you are dealing with EXTREMISTS.
The rules of engagement is very simple.
I want you dead. You want me dead. Let's see who's better and faster at this Race for Eradication. -
But don't get the innocent involved. Why kill their family member? You want to kill the terrorist, go ahead.
Don't touch the innocent.
-
Then whats the difference between the terrorist and us ?Originally posted by [ Neo ]:My stand on this question is 'Why not'?
Clearly there can be no moderate position to take when you are dealing with EXTREMISTS.
The rules of engagement is very simple.
I want you dead. You want me dead. Let's see who's better and faster at this Race for Eradication. -
Originally posted by Qitai:But don't get the innocent involved. Why kill their family member? You want to kill the terrorist, go ahead.
Don't touch the innocent.
I didn't say we should kill their families - though I remain skeptic over the degree of similar fanatical influence that these individual might have been tainted and corrupted with along with an affirmed terrorist.Originally posted by paperchicken:Then whats the difference between the terrorist and us ?
What I was referring to earlier was more on the freedom and flexibility in the use of counterterrorism tactics and methodologies. -
Our World Has Already Been Stained With Chaos...
There Is No Turning Back Now.. muahahaha
-
Read first post.Originally posted by [ Neo ]:I didn't say we should kill their families - though I remain skeptic over the degree of similar fanatical influence that these individual might have been tainted and corrupted with along with an affirmed terrorist.
What I was referring to earlier was more on the freedom and flexibility in the use of counterterrorism tactics and methodologies. -
+ 1Originally posted by Qitai:Read first post.
-
Isn't it whatever that USA is doing to Iraq and Afghanistan now? Isn't it whatever that Israel has been doing to the Palestinians for all these years? Isn't it whatever that the Russians have been doing to the Chechens?Originally posted by SibeiSuayKia:Is it possible for pple to fight terror with terror from a theory point of view?
Just asking whether would you go to the extend of tit-for tat operations?
Like for example killing the terrorist's families of the terrorist whom killed you.
or lets say kidnap terrorist's families and threaten to do what unless so ever.
or would it lost it's purpose?
They're all the same. -
I know, the 'example' thing. And I also saw ur post the first time already. But the Human psychological perspective has neither Right nor Wrong, nor can it be totally devoid of emotions.Originally posted by Qitai:Read first post.
In loyalty to their fanatical Faith, they cannot and will not tolerate our Kind.
Likewise, in loyalty to our kind, neither can we tolerate on the presence and way of their disruptive existence. -
Different. Its collateral damage. US did not deliberately target civilians like the terrorist.Originally posted by NEWater:Isn't it whatever that USA is doing to Iraq and Afghanistan now? Isn't it whatever that Israel has been doing to the Palestinians for all these years? Isn't it whatever that the Russians have been doing to the Chechens?
They're all the same. -
Sorry. Press 'edit' to 'quote' wrongly just now.
-
I mean the very first post of this thread, not my post.Originally posted by [ Neo ]:I know. I saw ur post the first time already. But the Human psychological perspective has neither Right nor Wrong, nor can it be totally devoid of emotions.
In loyalty to their fanatical Faith, they cannot and will not tolerate our Kind.
Likewise, in loyalty to our kind, neither can we tolerate on the presence and way of their disruptive existence.
The Question: "Just asking whether would you go to the extend of tit-for tat operations? Like for example killing the terrorist's families of the terrorist whom killed you. "
Having emotion = right to kill?
-
Under the general laws, any citizens can be fined or jailed for wrong doing that promoting racial or religious discriminations or hatred, or implanting in classrooms of values like violence under the name of jihad that may result in violence against non-believer.
Somehow, our general laws while the rest of populations are controlled to behave, religious hatreds may still be generated daily within a segment of population or within a certain religion by certain extremist elements.
As long as this undercurrent practice of extremist behaviours can take place under the cover of religion from which government generally stays at arm length, there will be problems.
How can anyone propose to equal terror with terror as he or she will be locked up in jail in no time. However where such terror is insidiously conducted within religious classes, how can the rest of citizens ever be protected? Is government capable of stopping such activities since they take place probably as a sensitive part of religious teaching.
General laws may have to be amended to make them more effective to uncover such covert harmful activities in our multi-racial and multi-religious community. -
my answer to this question would be a NO.
Terrorists are aggressive and antagonistic people who are fighting for land, rights etc...But above all, they are fighting for their political convictions and beliefs. These people do not understand the language of fear, nor do they respond to threats. By using terror tactics as a counter attack against them, we will never be able to effectively stamp out terrorism simply cos these people have fought for and will continue to fight for what they so strongly believe in. They will only cease fighting when these deep-seated convictions they so strongly hold on to have been eroded, which will never be the case since these terrorists are subjected to a mighty lot of brainwashing.
Perhaps, we will never be able to totally eradicate terrorism from e face of the earth. Some conflicts are simply unsolvable, given the deep-rooted nature of conflicts today. As such, i feel that the best way to deal with these terrorists is through the various diplomatic initiatives of our political leaders. Although we may not be able to eliminate those terrorists, at least these will prevent conflicts from escalating and so undermine the works of these terrorists. -
I consider random raiding of civilian residences, arresting random civilians and putting them to detention without trial in some faraway island called Guantanamo terrorism as well. Running into a city/state with guns blazing and killing people is terrorism as well.Originally posted by paperchicken:Different. Its collateral damage. US did not deliberately target civilians like the terrorist. -
They big what. What can people do? Last time missile hit Chinese Embassy also just opps... sorry... intelligence screw up... then no answer liao....Originally posted by NEWater:I consider random raiding of civilian residences, arresting random civilians and putting them to detention without trial in some faraway island called Guantanamo terrorism as well. Running into a city/state with guns blazing and killing people is terrorism as well. -
They dun shoot unless they were fired upon. They dun take school children hostage or blow up ppl on buses. Dun expect them to treat terrorists with kiddy gloves. Force is necessary.Originally posted by NEWater:I consider random raiding of civilian residences, arresting random civilians and putting them to detention without trial in some faraway island called Guantanamo terrorism as well. Running into a city/state with guns blazing and killing people is terrorism as well. -
There is neither sanity nor humanity in our common enemy.
Not a trace of sanity or humanity in them at all.
Russian School Terrorist Attack Aftermath -
The history of conflicts between Islam and Jews is too deep for our understanding.
If we are to read the bible, we will find that the two religions were in conflicts from the beginning of human history.
We cannot readily find any solutions for them without going back to historical root causes.
What were the original causes? I believe they were embedded in religion itself.
Suppose there is a unifying religion that can bring the two together. I believe Islam believed that anything else other than their own religion is heresy.
Similarly, I believe that any Jew will believe that any other belief than their own is unacceptable.
So for centuries they were involved in conflicts that never will end. So, to find deeper root causes and have them discussed openly with a more tolerable attitudes towards each other's belief without agenda to control one another is the first stage of reconciliation.
Can someone be appointed to propose this phase of reconciliation to begin soon?
-
Buddhism dun force. Its subtle, gentle, fascinating and most of all non aggressive. It encourages us to think for others and ourselves. You can ask all sorts of questions but you feel ressuring.It doenst say once you are in buddhism you cannot convert to other religion. Nows thats a real 'religion. In fact most buddhists will tell you buddhism is not a religion, its life, science and most of all its practical. They practise it daily.
Peaceful, love, kindness and scientific.