View Single Post
Old 01-10-2007, 10:06 PM   #5
Nancy Allen``
@Nancy Allen``
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Here's another reason why a real life Rainbow Six wouldn't work. Most of the time they are called in to deal with hostage rescue where terrorists are making demands or bomb defusal. Sometimes they do recon and wet works jobs, ala Sam Fisher. Occasionally they do assaults on terrorists. Never, in reading the novel or going through the series of games, have they ever been involved in terrorism as we have seen it in the 21st century, and with all fairness they wouldn't be able to combat this type of terrorism. They would have done well in the Russian siege but preventing September 11, the Bali bombings, ect are more the work of intelligence agencies.

Now to reply to specific points...

Originally Posted by TK-8252
Not going to happen. Why? Because other countries, unlike us, realize that you can't "fight terrorism" any more than you can "fight drugs" or "fight poverty." Because terrorism is any time that some crazy **** stands up and says "hey, I'm gonna kill some people until they adopt my personal religious/political/social/economic/etc. ideology."
Which is exactly the reason why terrorism should be fought in the first place. Just on what you said, to an extent we are fighting drugs when we fight terrorism, the drug trade is part of how people such as Al Qaeda fund themselves. As for poverty, that's easy, the rich countries help the poor get on their feet. It'll never happen but the answer is easy enough.

Originally Posted by TK-8252
You see... al-Qaeda is OUR problem. WE helped create al-Qaeda and WE pissed them off. Other countries really have no reason why they should even get involved. It has been shown that when they get involved, they are then attacked (Britain, Spain). Is this appeasing?
It is very logical to draw the conclusion that because of their involvement in fighting against terrorism they are targets. That is why, as you pointed out, America is a large terrorist target, because they have taken measures against terrorism. Would Spain and Britain have been terrorist targets had they not been involved in Iraq, had they actively supported terrorism? I would venture to say yes, but there is no way I can state that as a fact. On the topic, France and Germany have been very much opposed to America and no threats had been made against them.

Originally Posted by TK-8252
That's what the U.S. has been doing. Walking around in places we don't belong ****ing with crazy people. Commies, fundies, fascists, you name them.
If you have the capacity to stop someone who intends to do you harm, do you? How about if it would mean it would prevent them from harming others. Should people, such as America, be allowed to stop people from harming others? Part of the difficulty I see here is that America, for example, would see one thing, and someone else, someone who is entitled to voice their opposition to America's actions (by this I mean Osama Bin Laden has no right to scream about laws against terrorism) might see things completely diffirently.

With communism, specifically with the former Soviet Union, a large part of the blame can be layed on McCarthism. If you don't know what McCarthism is Joe McCarthy whipped America up into a Soviet fearing frenzy and undoubtably the fears America imagined (I remember hearing old radio broadcasts when Russian spies were caught, there were fears the Soviets joined the Martians and they were going to eat our brains) only served to add heat to the Cold War. Is it fair to say we are seeing the same thing today? Perhaps, but we have seen evidence of terrorism on September 11, with the Bali bombings, when Al Qaeda attacked Egypt and Saudi Arabia, with Spain and Britain.

Originally Posted by TK-8252
If we didn't get involved in **** that's not our business to begin with, we wouldn't have problems. Since WWII, a lot of European countries have learned that lesson.
I might need to reread my history but didn't the Nazis just take over with no resistence to European countries? My understanding is it was only when Britain was threatened that the push against Hitler began.

Originally Posted by MasterRoss08
A question to TK is there any reason why USA aided al-Qaeda back in the cold war? My first thought would be that al-Qaeda was on the right side
so to speak and have thus changed positions to do there own ideals.
I think I can answer this. It is my understanding that when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan the CIA trained and armed Al Qaeda and the Taliban to fight them. So why have they turned now? There are a few reasons, all BS in my view but they include American bases on their land (one has to ask if their complain about this is because a military presence prevents them from committing acts of terrorism), they see the West as currupt and evil, their interpretation of their belief demands Jihad (their view if Islam is, most charitbly, extreme) or they are sick and tired of being ignored. All these reasons and more have been here at one time or another, plus more. I think it's just hatred and jealousy, but maybe they have legitimate complaints. Not legitimate enough, however, to target civillians.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: