240 years of precedent down the tubes

[robkelk]

Giving the Tangoes what they want just tells them that we can be intimidated into doing it again. And they -will- do it again.
The only proper response to terrorism is to kill the terrorists.

Which turns them into martyrs.

Better to arrest, try, convict, and incarcerate them, IMHO.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Rajvik]

Thank you ECS ajd Rob, I just couldn't seem to come up with any responses that didn't seem to have spittle flying.
 

[Dartz]

The thing with 'terrorist' is that it's become a catch-all term for 'people we don't like'. I think David Cameron's definition of 'terrorist' was 'someone who tried to influence the government' - without regards to whatever method they're using. In the UK, you can be a 'terrorist' by standing outside a building carrying a sign and 'inconveniencing' someone - especially if that someone is sufficiently wealthy.

The terrorists we don't negotiate with are the ones who hijack a plane full of women and children and threaten to blow it up in 24 hours if their demands aren't met NOW.

Everyone else is just a different kind of enemy.

Anyway, 240 years of tradition? I suggest you look up the Barbary Wars.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[ECSNorway]

Dartz wrote:

---

The thing with 'terrorist' is that it's become a catch-all term for 'people we don't like'. I think David Cameron's definition of 'terrorist' was 'someone who tried to influence the government' - without regards to whatever method they're using. In the UK, you can be a 'terrorist' by standing outside a building carrying a sign and 'inconveniencing' someone - especially if that someone is sufficiently wealthy.

The terrorists we don't negotiate with are the ones who hijack a plane full of women and children and threaten to blow it up in 24 hours if their demands aren't met NOW.

Everyone else is just a different kind of enemy.

Gotta agree on this one.It's a big step to label someone a "terrorist". Using it for trivial things like you describe is in and of itself terrorism.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Rajvik]

The difference between a terrorist and a guerrilla is in what they target. If you're attacking civilians and using those tactics to force governmental change then you are by modern military definition a terrorist. As long as you only hit military targets then you are a guerrilla.

And I did not forget the Barbary Pirate Wars. If anything they are the first demonstrations of this doctrine. We went in and kicked their asses in 1802 and when we turned our back for the war of 1812 we found we had to go back and do it again. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
 

[ECSNorway]

Rajvik wrote:

---

And I did not forget the Barbary Pirate Wars. If anything they are the first demonstrations of this doctrine. We went in and kicked their asses in 1802 and when we turned our back for the war of 1812 we found we had to go back and do it again. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

I think what he's pointing out is that for several years before the wars, we did pay them off as they demanded. It was only later that we went 'fuck this, they're never gonna STOP unless we show them they ain't supposed to mess with us!'.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Dartz]

Not entirely.

What the US finally did IIRC was to just capture a few ships and their crews - and trade the crews for other prisoners and an agreement not to attack American shipping - which isn't that different from this really. The ultimate solution to Barbary piracy came from the French who sort of Borged Algiers and the local vicinity into a colony for the next 60 years.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[Rajvik]

Yes on the second part because we weren't a world power for almost another century. It wasn't until we semi-negotiated semi-fought the Spanish out of Cuba and the Philippines that we were considered a world power and then we were having to do the same with the banana republic wars as we did with the barbary pirates and the Moro tribes in the Philippines. Boot them don't piss on them, they'll remember both but be more contemptuous of the latter than the former.