Terrorists 'plan attack on Britain with bombs INSIDE their bodies&

[Guest American Woman]

Its called Vengeance. Its irrational but emotionaly appealing to those who have suffered great loss due to anothers actions. Vengeance rarely recognizes 'innocent civilians'. Blood needs be drawn - any blood will do. See WWII or I or the Boxer rebellion or the Boer war or ...

It what keeps us going when the going gets rough!

I know what it is. I'm just curious who "understands" their acting on it.

[Peter F]

I know what it is. I'm just curious who "understands" their acting on it.

People who would do the same in their circumstance 'understand'. Anyone who would not surrender to vengeance would act differently. Could we say we understand them too? I understand folks seeking vengeance. I also understand people not seeking vengeance. Both are understandable.

I suspect that our meanings of "understanding" is different. Thus my not understanding what you are asking.

[Bonam]

People who would do the same in their circumstance 'understand'. Anyone who would not surrender to vengeance would act differently. Could we say we understand them too? I understand folks seeking vengeance. I also understand people not seeking vengeance. Both are understandable.

I suspect that our meanings of "understanding" is different. Thus my not understanding what you are asking.

I agree... vengeance is definitely something one can "understand".

[dre]

I know what it is. I'm just curious who "understands" their acting on it.

Pretty much anybody with that has basic cognitive function should be able to understand it. Are you really meaning to ask who is "sympathetic" towards it?

[Guest American Woman]

Pretty much anybody with that has basic cognitive function should be able to understand it. Are you really meaning to ask who is "sympathetic" towards it?

I was meaning to ask who "understands" it, which is pretty much why I asked who "understands it." Perhaps if I help you out with the definition of "understand," it will help clarify it for you:

un·der·stand (ndr-stnd)

v. un·der·stood (-std), un·der·stand·ing, un·der·stands

v.tr.

1. To perceive and comprehend the nature and significance of; grasp. See Synonyms at apprehend.

2. To know thoroughly by close contact or long experience with: That teacher understands children.

3.

a. To grasp or comprehend the meaning intended or expressed by (another): They have trouble with English, but I can understand them.

b. To comprehend the language, sounds, form, or symbols of.

4. To know and be tolerant or sympathetic toward: I can understand your point of view even though I disagree with it.

5. To learn indirectly, as by hearsay: I understand his departure was unexpected.

6. To infer: Am I to understand you are staying the night?

7. To accept (something) as an agreed fact: It is understood that the fee will be 50 dollars.

8. To supply or add (words or a meaning, for example) mentally.

[dre]

I was meaning to ask who "understands" it, which is pretty much why I asked who "understands it." Perhaps if I help you out with the definition of "understand," it will help clarify it for you:

un·der·stand (ndr-stnd)

v. un·der·stood (-std), un·der·stand·ing, un·der·stands

v.tr.

1. To perceive and comprehend the nature and significance of; grasp. See Synonyms at apprehend.

2. To know thoroughly by close contact or long experience with: That teacher understands children.

3.

a. To grasp or comprehend the meaning intended or expressed by (another): They have trouble with English, but I can understand them.

b. To comprehend the language, sounds, form, or symbols of.

4. To know and be tolerant or sympathetic toward: I can understand your point of view even though I disagree with it.

5. To learn indirectly, as by hearsay: I understand his departure was unexpected.

6. To infer: Am I to understand you are staying the night?

7. To accept (something) as an agreed fact: It is understood that the fee will be 50 dollars.

8. To supply or add (words or a meaning, for example) mentally.

Like I said... its a very simple concept that anyone with basic cognitive function would understand. Probably any human beyond about age 2.

I was just trying to be generous and assume that you werent asking an incredibly stupid question.

Edited August 7, 2010 by dre

[Peter F]

I was meaning to ask who "understands" it, which is pretty much why I asked who "understands it." Perhaps if I help you out with the definition of "understand," it will help clarify it for you:

un·der·stand (ndr-stnd)

v. un·der·stood (-std), un·der·stand·ing, un·der·stands

v.tr.

etc...

Well, I can understand some guy whose loved ones have been killed by misplaced bombs, or being shot for driving too close to a military convoy, and being told by visiting generals "sorry bout that. Horrible mistake. But know that we are acting for the good of mankind - freedom for all and the education of little girls. Will $3000 US dollars satisfy your loss?". I can understand that guy taking up an axe and putting it in the generals head. Or telling the general where to shove his 3 grand his freedom and his education for girls. or taking the 3 grand and shaking the generals hand then aiding and abetting insugents/terrorists as much possible.

I can understand those reactions.

[DogOnPorch]

The Taliban could pop a cap into this guy's ass and he'd thank 'em.

[Peter F]

Kumbaya Brother!

[jbg]

Kumbaya Brother!

Certainly Kumbaya time (article link, excerpts below):

Gunmen Kill Medical Aid Workers in Afghanistan

By ROD NORDLAND

KABUL, Afghanistan — Their last meal was a picnic in the forest in the Sharrun Valley, high in the Hindu Kush mountains of northern Afghanistan.

Returning home from a three-week trek on foot to deliver free medical care to the remotest regions of the country, the aid workers — six Americans, a Briton, a German and four Afghans — had just finished eating when they were accosted by gunmen with long dyed-red beards, the police said.

The gunmen marched them into the forest, stood them in a line and shot 10 of them one by one.

***********

The Taliban claimed responsibility for the killings, accusing the group of being spies and Christian missionaries. Pressured in their traditional strongholds in the south and east by NATO’s growing concentration of forces there, the insurgents have become more active in areas once relatively quiet, like Badakhshan Province.

(snip)

Edited August 9, 2010 by jbg

[bloodyminded]

So I'm curious. Are you saying you understand that? That you understand why they would get involved in terrorist insurgency operations, purposely targeting innocent civilians?

I don't really understand what motivates people to kill innocent folks, no. Not on any sort of empathetic level. But when we kill innocent people, it doesn't sound like a stretch to believe that a few of them (and it certainly is a minority) might strike back in some way. But I think you're asking me if I condone it, which I don't.

[Wild Bill]

I don't really understand what motivates people to kill innocent folks, no. Not on any sort of empathetic level. But when we kill innocent people, it doesn't sound like a stretch to believe that a few of them (and it certainly is a minority) might strike back in some way. But I think you're asking me if I condone it, which I don't.

I think it's important to make some distinctions here. When the allies kill innocents it's virtually always as a result of collateral damage or mistaken intel.

When the Taliban or some Islamic fundamentalist group kills innocents it is virtually always because they DELIBERATELY TARGETED THEM!

There is NO moral equivalency here!

[bloodyminded]

I think it's important to make some distinctions here. When the allies kill innocents it's virtually always as a result of collateral damage or mistaken intel.

When the Taliban or some Islamic fundamentalist group kills innocents it is virtually always because they DELIBERATELY TARGETED THEM!

There is NO moral equivalency here!

I don't even know with whom you're debating. I do know that it isn't me.

[Guest American Woman]

I don't really understand what motivates people to kill innocent folks, no. Not on any sort of empathetic level. But when we kill innocent people, it doesn't sound like a stretch to believe that a few of them (and it certainly is a minority) might strike back in some way. But I think you're asking me if I condone it, which I don't.

No, I wasn't asking if you condone it; I was specifically asking if you understand it. I thought it sounded as if you do, but didn't want to assume, so I asked for clarification.

I really don't understand what motivates people to kill innocent people, either. While it's not a stretch to believe that a few of them will strike back, I still don't understand their striking back at innocent people; people who had nothing to do with it. To me, that would be like me being angry if a drunk driver killed a family member, so I go and murder my five year old neighbor.

I wanted clarification, too, because I think anyone who understands why people join terrorist organizations or blow civilians up via suicide bombs better understand it when westerners are angry and react to our loved ones being killed/threatened, too.

I was reading some horrific, ignorant, downright ugly, nasty comments on yahoo in response to their flood crisis, and just shook my head in disbelief. I couldn't understand it at all and couldn't help but cringe at how anyone from Pakistan reading that would feel. And of course I couldn't understand Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9-11. It just gets to be too much some times.

[bloodyminded]

No, I wasn't asking if you condone it; I was specifically asking if you understand it. I thought it sounded as if you do, but didn't want to assume, so I asked for clarification.

I really don't understand what motivates people to kill innocent people, either. While it's not a stretch to believe that a few of them will strike back, I still don't understand their striking back at innocent people; people who had nothing to do with it. To me, that would be like me being angry if a drunk driver killed a family member, so I go and murder my five year old neighbor.

I wanted clarification, too, because I think anyone who understands why people join terrorist organizations or blow civilians up via suicide bombs better understand it when westerners are angry and react to our loved ones being killed/threatened, too.

Yes, well, at bottom, human beings are not terrifically different.

I was reading some horrific, ignorant, downright ugly, nasty comments on yahoo in response to their flood crisis, and just shook my head in disbelief. I couldn't understand it at all and couldn't help but cringe at how anyone from Pakistan reading that would feel. And of course I couldn't understand Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9-11. It just gets to be too much some times.

I agree, it can be awful to contemplate.

[Bonam]

No, I wasn't asking if you condone it; I was specifically asking if you understand it. I thought it sounded as if you do, but didn't want to assume, so I asked for clarification.

I really don't understand what motivates people to kill innocent people, either. While it's not a stretch to believe that a few of them will strike back, I still don't understand their striking back at innocent people; people who had nothing to do with it. To me, that would be like me being angry if a drunk driver killed a family member, so I go and murder my five year old neighbor.

I wanted clarification, too, because I think anyone who understands why people join terrorist organizations or blow civilians up via suicide bombs better understand it when westerners are angry and react to our loved ones being killed/threatened, too.

I was reading some horrific, ignorant, downright ugly, nasty comments on yahoo in response to their flood crisis, and just shook my head in disbelief. I couldn't understand it at all and couldn't help but cringe at how anyone from Pakistan reading that would feel. And of course I couldn't understand Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9-11. It just gets to be too much some times.

It's really not so terribly complicated to understand. A member of a certain group does something you find deeply harmful, so you seek vengeance against other members of the group, especially if the original perpetrator is not available for retribution. You can see many examples of this in almost all cultures throughout history.

Edited August 10, 2010 by Bonam

[Guest American Woman]

It's really not so terribly complicated to understand. A member of a certain group does something you find deeply harmful, so you seek vengeance against other members of the group, especially if the original perpetrator is not available for retribution. You can see many examples of this in almost all cultures throughout history.

There's a lot throughout history that I don't understand. I honestly don't understand killing a four year old girl on a plane to Disney World because of anger at the U.S. government. How is she even "a member of the group" that the terrorists were angry at?

By the same token, I cannot understand the horrible comments directed at people in Pakistan who lost their homes, their livelihoods, even loved ones in the recent flood. How are they "members of the group" they are angry at over 9-11 et al?

I just don't understand it at all.

[naomiglover]

I was reading some horrific, ignorant, downright ugly, nasty comments on yahoo in response to their flood crisis, and just shook my head in disbelief. I couldn't understand it at all and couldn't help but cringe at how anyone from Pakistan reading that would feel. And of course I couldn't understand Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9-11. It just gets to be too much some times.

Do you understand these Jews dancing and celebrating Israel's attack on Gaza and the killing of 1000 civilians which include 300 children?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZNypPQdU70

[jbg]

Do you understand these Jews dancing and celebrating Israel's attack on Gaza and the killing of 1000 civilians which include 300 children?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZNypPQdU70

I also understand that the Gazans are allowing themselves to be used as human shields. Further, they voted Hamas in as their government. They face the consequences.

[Guest American Woman]

I also understand that the Gazans are allowing themselves to be used as human shields. Further, they voted Hamas in as their government. They face the consequences.

By the same token, they say we voted our government in so we face the consequences. Our governments, however, aren't purposely targeting civilians/children while Hamas does.

Having said that, I don't see the clip of the Jews celebrating as a celebration of the deaths of civilians. That wasn't the purpose of the attacks on Gaza, to kill civilians. It was the goal of 9-11. I did notice in the interviews that people were referring to "Hamas," "radical Muslims," and the effort to "try to minimize death" of civilians. No one, when asked about bombing schools/hospitals where terrorists hide was cheering it on; most struggled with the question, some even had no answer, while some said we have to do what is necessary and pointed out that Israel called and warned on occasion, saying 'you need to get out.' Hamas uses civilians to minimize their deaths. They also incite anger and rile up the civilians to riot, and then 'head for the hills' to save their own butts while the civilians face the consequences. They are not blameless in the deaths of Palestinian civilians and for the most part, I see their reaction as purely political; they don't mourn their deaths, they use them as a political gain.

So I don't see the clip presented as "Jews celebrating the deaths of civilians," because that's not what it was. I didn't see one person happy that civilians were killed, so it's not what I was talking about in regards to Palestinians dancing in the streets. Also, I didn't see one person sneering and saying "Where was Allah to protect them?" in mockery of their deaths, like I saw in the comments in regards to Pakistan's floods.

So those are my observations in that regard.

I'd also like to point out that 'celebrating in the streets' was not by any means the response of "Palestine." That isn't what I was saying in my previous post. I'm pointing out the hateful, difficult to understand actions on everyone's part; the things people say and do that are so difficult to understand. I pointed out the horrible comments in regards to Pakistan's floods which was no better than the dancing in the streets. It was not a one-sided observation by any means.