Justin Trudeau: terror and terrorists

[WWWTT]

Here's a link about Harper's comments.

He sounds off as well.

http://montreal.mediacoop.ca/blog/bernans/17289

WWWTT

Edited April 26, 2013 by WWWTT

[Guest American Woman]

OK then,so using your logic/reasoning,when the US invaded Iraq,they invaded because of the US military.

Or when NATO conducted sorties over/on Libya,they did it because of NATO.

If you say so American Woman.

What I say is - the root cause of targeting innocent people, wanting to kill innocent people, actually purposely killing innocent people is the mindset of the terrorists. That little five year old on the plane to Disney World wasn't the "root cause" of the terrorists' actions. The mindset of the terrorists, that they would partake in such activity, is the root cause of such acts.

If the terrorists have a beef with the west and want to take it up with the governments, that's one thing. But terrorism and military actions are two very different things; therefore no one is to 'blame' for terrorism except those doing the acts of terrorism. THAT is what I am saying. The terrorists are responsible for their actions. There is no reason for making them target and kill innocent people; for that being their goal. The only "root cause" of that is their mindset.

Now you might say otherwise, but I say that's making excuses for people who purposely target and deliberately kill innocent people - and take joy in it.

Edited April 26, 2013 by American Woman

[silver72]

What I say is - the root cause of targeting innocent people, wanting to kill innocent people, actually purposely killing innocent people is the mindset of the terrorists. That little five year old on the plane to Disney World wasn't the "root cause" of the terrorists' actions. The mindset of the terrorists, that they would partake in such activity, is the root cause of such acts.

If the terrorists have a beef with the west and want to take it up with the governments, that's one thing. But terrorism and military actions are two very different things; therefore no one is to 'blame' for terrorism except those doing the acts of terrorism. THAT is what I am saying. The terrorists are responsible for their actions. There is no reason for making them target and kill innocent people; for that being their goal. The only "root cause" of that is their mindset.

Now you might say otherwise, but I say that's making excuses for people who purposely target and deliberately kill innocent people - and take joy in it.

What I say is - the root cause of targeting innocent people, wanting to kill innocent people, actually purposely killing innocent people is the mindset of the terrorists. That little five year old on the plane to Disney World wasn't the "root cause" of the terrorists' actions. The mindset of the terrorists, that they would partake in such activity, is the root cause of such acts.

If the terrorists have a beef with the west and want to take it up with the governments, that's one thing. But terrorism and military actions are two very different things; therefore no one is to 'blame' for terrorism except those doing the acts of terrorism. THAT is what I am saying. The terrorists are responsible for their actions. There is no reason for making them target and kill innocent people; for that being their goal. The only "root cause" of that is their mindset.

Now you might say otherwise, but I say that's making excuses for people who purposely target and deliberately kill innocent people - and take joy in it.

So would you also agree, that when innocent people in Iraq or Afghanstan were killed by NATO or the US it was also an act of terrorism? You probably say no, but to those people it was. It all depend which side of the fence one is on.

[Moonlight Graham]

Makes sense to me. So many say we have to find the 'root cause.' It's the fault of the west. It's blow back. They are tired of this, that, or the other thing - all our doing, of course. He's saying that these things aren't the root cause of terrorism - that the terrorists themselves are. Sounds as if he's saying that the problem lies with the people committing acts of terror, not with anything we've done. So you agree?

When people say "root cause", it doesn't necessarily imply "it's the west's fault" or this or that, or that the attackers are the victims. There are or may be many motives and psychological/social/economic/political etc. reasons why anyone does any conscious act. Saying terrorists are the root cause of terrorism is like saying guns are the root cause of gun violence. It's a bit more complicated than that.

[Guest American Woman]

Saying terrorists are the root cause of terrorism is like saying guns are the root cause of gun violence. It's a bit more complicated than that.

No, it's not like that at all. It would be like saying the mindset of the criminals are the root cause of gun violence.

[Guest American Woman]

So would you also agree, that when innocent people in Iraq or Afghanstan were killed by NATO or the US it was also an act of terrorism? You probably say no, but to those people it was. It all depend which side of the fence one is on.

If NATO or the US or Canada were purposely trying to kill innocent people in Afghanistan, if that were the goal, to target innocent civilians, and NATO the US or Canada wanted to kill as many innocent Afghans as possible, then I would agree that that was terrorism; however, that's far from the reality - which is, in fact, the opposite.

Edited April 27, 2013 by American Woman

[Keepitsimple]

I'll say it again - it's not that Trudeau used the term "root cause". It's that he definitively said the root cause was because the terrorists felt excluded.....apparently, he's got all the answers. Does he really think that if we went out and hugged every one of them, invited them over for dinner, and went to ballgames with them that these terrorists would happily embrace us? A mindset like Trudeau's is naive and dangerous.

"But there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded, completely at war with innocents, at war with a society. And our approach has to be, okay, where do those tensions come from?"

[silver72]

If NATO or the US or Canada were purposely trying to kill innocent people in Afghanistan, if that were the goal, to target innocent civilians, and NATO the US or Canada wanted to kill as many innocent Afghans as possible, then I would agree that that was terrorism; however, that's far from the reality - which is, in fact, the opposite.

No, its not because there was no reason to go into Iraq. All the reasons bush gave were proven false which he knew and it was also said on US TV that by Bush going into Iraq he created more terrorism against the US and therefore you have the root cause of terrorism against the US and Canada.

[Guest]

No, its not because there was no reason to go into Iraq. All the reasons bush gave were proven false which he knew and it was also said on US TV that by Bush going into Iraq he created more terrorism against the US and therefore you have the root cause of terrorism against the US and Canada.

Yes, because the biggest terrorist attack ever against the US happened after the Iraq invasion.

Stands to reason, really. Not much cause, root or otherwise, to do anything before that. Right?

[cybercoma]

That's nice. Now - do you have anything of relevance to say?

that was relevant. Sorry you missed it.

[kimmy]

The root cause of terrorism? Personally, I think we should give more consideration to the words of Uncle Ruslan:

"What to I think was behind it? Being LOSERS. Not being able to settle themselves, and hating everyone who did."

Let's consider the strange case of the 4 mooks from London, Ontario who somehow ended up involved in terrorism. Two of them recently showed up dead in Algeria after taking part in a terror attack; a third is in prison in Mauritania for terrorism offenses, and the fourth is being sought by police in connection with the Algeria attack.

Two of these four were Albert Yoon (a Catholic-raised son of Korean immigrants) and Kristos Katsiroubas (raised Greek Orthodox, and of Greek heritage.) These guys didn't even join Islam until they were in high school, just a few years ago.

I can't help feeling skeptical that "blowback" is to blame when a couple of non-Muslim, non-Arab kids decide to pick up Qurans and join terror groups. It seems almost as if they joined Islam so they would have some excuse to go fight somebody.

-k

[WWWTT]

If NATO or the US or Canada were purposely trying to kill innocent people in Afghanistan, if that were the goal, to target innocent civilians, and NATO the US or Canada wanted to kill as many innocent Afghans as possible, then I would agree that that was terrorism; however, that's far from the reality - which is, in fact, the opposite.

Actually,the intent of NATO is to disrupt life there and kill the people that they feel are the enemy and anyone who sympathizes with whom they feel is the enemy.

Keep in mind that NATO has tools and resources that smaller groups do not.

And the smaller groups are acting within their capacity.NATO is acting within their capacity as well.

It can be successfully argued that the mindset and goals are both the same!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

I'll say it again - it's not that Trudeau used the term "root cause". It's that he definitively said the root cause was because the terrorists felt excluded.....apparently, he's got all the answers. Does he really think that if we went out and hugged every one of them, invited them over for dinner, and went to ballgames with them that these terrorists would happily embrace us? A mindset like Trudeau's is naive and dangerous.

"But there is no question that this happened because there is someone who feels completely excluded, completely at war with innocents, at war with a society. And our approach has to be, okay, where do those tensions come from?"

Agreed!

Terrorists from my understanding are only using simple means to achieve goals.

Justin is not on the ball and this guy in my opinion is freekin dangerous!

WWWTT

[Guest American Woman]

Agreed!

Terrorists from my understanding are only using simple means to achieve goals.

Justin is not on the ball and this guy in my opinion is freekin dangerous!

So now targeting and killing innocent civilians, purposely killing children, making all of that the goal, and cheering over it - is "only using simple means to achieve goals."

Un-freakin-believable. Methinks "[your] understanding" is off the charts.

Edited April 27, 2013 by American Woman

[GostHacked]

So now targeting and killing innocent civilians, purposely killing children, making all of that the goal, and cheering over it - is "only using simple means to achieve goals."

Un-freakin-believable. Methinks "[your] understanding" is off the charts.

Do you think it's justified to kill 10 other innocents as 'collateral damage' in order to get one suspected terrorist?

[eyeball]

It's bloody unfortunate that terrorists and imperialists can't be distinguished from people who are neutral. Collateral damage seems inevitable from both sides.

Edited April 27, 2013 by eyeball

[eyeball]

I'm reminded of that episode of Star Trek when the Enterprise visits a planet where the weapons being used in a war were virtual so that no real damage occurred. If you were targeted and hit you simply showed up at a disintegration chamber later.

Maybe we could do something like that and have people wear transponders that identified willing combatants from the unwilling so the people who hate each other could just take themselves out and leave the rest of us alone.

[jacee]

Here's a link about Harper's comments.

He sounds off as well.

http://montreal.mediacoop.ca/blog/bernans/17289

WWWTT

This needs quoting. It's priceless!

Breaking: RCMP Close to Arrests of Known Sociologists

The RCMP has confirmed that it is aware of several sociologist networks operating in a number of Canadian universities. Sources say arrests are imminent.

While most sociologists currently operating in Canada are thought to be of the home-grown variety, there appears to be a great deal of international coordination through various websites, social media and academic journals.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews is expected to introduce emergency minimum sentences legislation for anyone who commits sociology or provides material support to a known sociologist network. The legislation could be introduced as early as tomorrow.

On a more serious note ... what of the mysterious man, Misha, who radicalized and activated the Boston bombers, then disappeared? Who's tracking him? How many more are there like him? What are their motives? Is it really an attack on 'the west', or is it designed to foment suspicion and hatred of Arabs/Muslims?

Edited April 27, 2013 by jacee

[Army Guy]

Do you think it's justified to kill 10 other innocents as 'collateral damage' in order to get one suspected terrorist?

Thats a loaded question, either way you answer it it is going to be wrong, and yet it happens everyday, including in our country, a police officer in a high speed pursuit, endangers the lives of everyone on the roads, and in some cases ends badly for someone else....

It is a judgement call, and if it meant taking out a person who has or can take out many more lifes in the future, then yes....

[Michael Hardner]

It is a judgement call, and if it meant taking out a person who has or can take out many more lifes in the future, then yes....

Judgement call by whom ? There are criteria given to armed civil servants that limit their jurisdictions for these things.

John Candy played a cop on the SCTV show once who said "I'd kill a dozen innocent civilians to get a punk like him off the streets"

[eyeball]

It is a judgement call, and if it meant taking out a person who has or can take out many more lifes in the future, then yes....

If people in a democracy who support the actions of their countries and governments abroad are ultimately responsible for those actions, what about those of us who don't support them? How are terrorists supposed to tell us apart when we're all mixed together too?

Terrorists seem just as willing to kill innocent people but chances are they take out more of the people they're actually fighting against. Their kill ratio is probably a lot closer to even than 10:1.

[Guest American Woman]

How are terrorists supposed to tell us apart when we're all mixed together too?

You think they CARE?? Seriously. It's "the west" they don't like. You are a westerner. They don't like you. Doesn't matter how much you love them. They don't love you. Have you not noticed how willing they are to kill 'their own' if they don't succumb to their ideals??

[eyeball]

You think they CARE??

No, they don't seem to care any more than you do and I don't think the people benefiting from your side's raping and pillaging of Muslim lands love us or care how many of us die either.

[Guest American Woman]

No, they don't seem to care any more than you do and I don't think the people benefiting from your side's raping and pillaging of Muslim lands love us or care how many of us die either.

Any more than I do?? Am *I* killing anyone?? Calling for innocent deaths? Cheering it on?? You might want to watch your ludicrous accusations. If you want to play that game, I'll say that I think you would support their killing of innocents as long as you were safe; that I think you would support the terrorist cause. Not so cool when the ugly accusations are directed at you, are they? :angry:

[eyeball]

Any more than I do?? Am *I* killing anyone?? Calling for innocent deaths? Cheering it on??

Yes, apparently.

You might want to watch your ludicrous accusations. If you want to play that game, I'll say that I think you would support their killing of innocents as long as you were safe; that I think you would support the terrorist cause. Not so cool when the ugly accusations are directed at you, are they? :angry:

No it kinda sucks, but I guess that just goes with neutrality and holding on to your principles, something that seems to be an even worse threat in some eye's.