Comments on: The New Rules of Engagement http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/ Nutz Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:28:46 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Rick Blaine http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-995 Rick Blaine Mon, 01 Mar 2004 23:09:19 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-995 "There is good and there is evil. It's a shame your side can completely not tell the difference." Remarkable. “There is good and there is evil. It’s a shame your side can completely not tell the difference.”

Remarkable.

]]> By: Rick Blaine http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-2994 Rick Blaine Mon, 01 Mar 2004 23:09:19 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-2994 "There is good and there is evil. It's a shame your side can completely not tell the difference." Remarkable. “There is good and there is evil. It’s a shame your side can completely not tell the difference.”

Remarkable.

]]> By: Rick Blaine http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-4993 Rick Blaine Mon, 01 Mar 2004 23:09:19 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-4993 "There is good and there is evil. It's a shame your side can completely not tell the difference." Remarkable. “There is good and there is evil. It’s a shame your side can completely not tell the difference.”

Remarkable.

]]> By: Karol http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-7844 Karol Sat, 28 Feb 2004 23:39:56 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-7844 Well, that too. Well, that too.

]]> By: Dawn Summers http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-7842 Dawn Summers Sat, 28 Feb 2004 01:50:50 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-7842 Really, I thought he would prefer 'roadkill.' Really, I thought he would prefer ‘roadkill.’

]]> By: Karol http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-999 Karol Sat, 28 Feb 2004 01:03:31 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-999 James Taranto calls Corrie a 'terror advocate' in today's BOTW. That sounds about right. James Taranto calls Corrie a ‘terror advocate’ in today’s BOTW. That sounds about right.

]]> By: Karol http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-2998 Karol Sat, 28 Feb 2004 01:03:31 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-2998 James Taranto calls Corrie a 'terror advocate' in today's BOTW. That sounds about right. James Taranto calls Corrie a ‘terror advocate’ in today’s BOTW. That sounds about right.

]]> By: Karol http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-4997 Karol Sat, 28 Feb 2004 01:03:31 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-4997 James Taranto calls Corrie a 'terror advocate' in today's BOTW. That sounds about right. James Taranto calls Corrie a ‘terror advocate’ in today’s BOTW. That sounds about right.

]]> By: beastofsound http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-7843 beastofsound Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:34:27 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-7843 Sorry about the cut/paste typos in the last paragraph. Sorry about the cut/paste typos in the last paragraph.

]]> By: beastofsound http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-996 beastofsound Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:32:26 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-996 (cont.) Although I agree with the comments that using the term "terrorist" to describe your uncle's actions, at least as far as you've done here, is stretching the word's meaning. But in doing so, you've bravely touched on a larger point which bears repeating. What the government calls "terrorists", are the other side's "freedom fighters", or "jihadists". While both sides have committed what they believe is justifiable violence, neither cannot or will not admit responsibility for the perpetuate of terrorism. Thus the struggle continues, and the innocent are their victims. (cont.)

Although I agree with the comments that using the term “terrorist” to describe your uncle’s actions, at least as far as you’ve done here, is stretching the word’s meaning. But in doing so, you’ve bravely touched on a larger point which bears repeating. What the government calls “terrorists”, are the other side’s “freedom fighters”, or “jihadists”. While both sides have committed what they believe is justifiable violence, neither cannot or will not admit responsibility for the perpetuate of terrorism. Thus the struggle continues, and the innocent are their victims.

]]> By: beastofsound http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-2995 beastofsound Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:32:26 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-2995 (cont.) Although I agree with the comments that using the term "terrorist" to describe your uncle's actions, at least as far as you've done here, is stretching the word's meaning. But in doing so, you've bravely touched on a larger point which bears repeating. What the government calls "terrorists", are the other side's "freedom fighters", or "jihadists". While both sides have committed what they believe is justifiable violence, neither cannot or will not admit responsibility for the perpetuate of terrorism. Thus the struggle continues, and the innocent are their victims. (cont.)

Although I agree with the comments that using the term “terrorist” to describe your uncle’s actions, at least as far as you’ve done here, is stretching the word’s meaning. But in doing so, you’ve bravely touched on a larger point which bears repeating. What the government calls “terrorists”, are the other side’s “freedom fighters”, or “jihadists”. While both sides have committed what they believe is justifiable violence, neither cannot or will not admit responsibility for the perpetuate of terrorism. Thus the struggle continues, and the innocent are their victims.

]]> By: beastofsound http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-4994 beastofsound Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:32:26 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-4994 (cont.) Although I agree with the comments that using the term "terrorist" to describe your uncle's actions, at least as far as you've done here, is stretching the word's meaning. But in doing so, you've bravely touched on a larger point which bears repeating. What the government calls "terrorists", are the other side's "freedom fighters", or "jihadists". While both sides have committed what they believe is justifiable violence, neither cannot or will not admit responsibility for the perpetuate of terrorism. Thus the struggle continues, and the innocent are their victims. (cont.)

Although I agree with the comments that using the term “terrorist” to describe your uncle’s actions, at least as far as you’ve done here, is stretching the word’s meaning. But in doing so, you’ve bravely touched on a larger point which bears repeating. What the government calls “terrorists”, are the other side’s “freedom fighters”, or “jihadists”. While both sides have committed what they believe is justifiable violence, neither cannot or will not admit responsibility for the perpetuate of terrorism. Thus the struggle continues, and the innocent are their victims.

]]> By: beastofsound http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-7845 beastofsound Sat, 28 Feb 2004 00:31:46 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-7845 What the word "terrorist" connotes has been completely transformed since it became widely used in the 1960's. Generally speaking, the terrorists of that era were more interested in television exposure than body counts. And they were motivated by a political agenda, not a religious one. Nowadays the reverse of each is more true. The great failing in the US policy towards terrorists was the Iran-Contra scandal. When would-be terrorists learned that the US would in fact negotiate, albeit secretly, their scale of their efforts mulitplied. Now this country must resort to counter-terrorism adventures abroad to combat them. (cont.) What the word “terrorist” connotes has been completely transformed since it became widely used in the 1960’s. Generally speaking, the terrorists of that era were more interested in television exposure than body counts. And they were motivated by a political agenda, not a religious one. Nowadays the reverse of each is more true.

The great failing in the US policy towards terrorists was the Iran-Contra scandal. When would-be terrorists learned that the US would in fact negotiate, albeit secretly, their scale of their efforts mulitplied. Now this country must resort to counter-terrorism adventures abroad to combat them.

(cont.)

]]> By: Dawn Summers http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-998 Dawn Summers Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:48:57 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-998 Interesting that you would think that the goals of the Chechen rebels are less laudable than those of the Tienamen Square kids... is Russia good or evil? Plus, if I recall correctly, the terrorists in the theater didn't kill anyone -- though hostage taking is reprehensible and I condemn it forcefully. Interesting that you would think that the goals of the Chechen rebels are less laudable than those of the Tienamen Square kids… is Russia good or evil?
Plus, if I recall correctly, the terrorists in the theater didn’t kill anyone — though hostage taking is reprehensible and I condemn it forcefully.

]]> By: Dawn Summers http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-2997 Dawn Summers Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:48:57 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-2997 Interesting that you would think that the goals of the Chechen rebels are less laudable than those of the Tienamen Square kids... is Russia good or evil? Plus, if I recall correctly, the terrorists in the theater didn't kill anyone -- though hostage taking is reprehensible and I condemn it forcefully. Interesting that you would think that the goals of the Chechen rebels are less laudable than those of the Tienamen Square kids… is Russia good or evil?
Plus, if I recall correctly, the terrorists in the theater didn’t kill anyone — though hostage taking is reprehensible and I condemn it forcefully.

]]> By: Dawn Summers http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-4996 Dawn Summers Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:48:57 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-4996 Interesting that you would think that the goals of the Chechen rebels are less laudable than those of the Tienamen Square kids... is Russia good or evil? Plus, if I recall correctly, the terrorists in the theater didn't kill anyone -- though hostage taking is reprehensible and I condemn it forcefully. Interesting that you would think that the goals of the Chechen rebels are less laudable than those of the Tienamen Square kids… is Russia good or evil?
Plus, if I recall correctly, the terrorists in the theater didn’t kill anyone — though hostage taking is reprehensible and I condemn it forcefully.

]]> By: Karol http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-7846 Karol Fri, 27 Feb 2004 23:17:40 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-7846 WOW, I clicked the comment section with the definite purpose of writing 'Dawn has lost the plot' and would you look at that- it's already been said! Did your uncle kill anybody or help other killers (ala Rachel Corrie- don't know if she's a 'terrorist' but she was definitely on one particular side in a war)? And for you to tie the kids at Tienamen Square to the terrorists in the Moscow Theatre is really ridiculous. There is good and there is evil. It's a shame your side can completely not tell the difference. WOW, I clicked the comment section with the definite purpose of writing ‘Dawn has lost the plot’ and would you look at that- it’s already been said!

Did your uncle kill anybody or help other killers (ala Rachel Corrie- don’t know if she’s a ‘terrorist’ but she was definitely on one particular side in a war)? And for you to tie the kids at Tienamen Square to the terrorists in the Moscow Theatre is really ridiculous. There is good and there is evil. It’s a shame your side can completely not tell the difference.

]]> By: Dawn Summers http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-7841 Dawn Summers Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:22:15 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-7841 P.S. one of my favorite right-wing blogging types says "lost the plot" all the time... it always reminds me of her. P.S. one of my favorite right-wing blogging types says “lost the plot” all the time… it always reminds me of her.

]]> By: Dawn Summers http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-997 Dawn Summers Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:20:17 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-997 Actually, I agree with you, but I do think that the label terrorist is being stretched to fit an increasing number of people who used be known as "terrorists." remember Rachel Corrie? Actually, I agree with you, but I do think that the label terrorist is being stretched to fit an increasing number of people who used be known as “terrorists.” remember Rachel Corrie?

]]> By: Dawn Summers http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-2996 Dawn Summers Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:20:17 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-2996 Actually, I agree with you, but I do think that the label terrorist is being stretched to fit an increasing number of people who used be known as "terrorists." remember Rachel Corrie? Actually, I agree with you, but I do think that the label terrorist is being stretched to fit an increasing number of people who used be known as “terrorists.” remember Rachel Corrie?

]]> By: Dawn Summers http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-4995 Dawn Summers Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:20:17 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-4995 Actually, I agree with you, but I do think that the label terrorist is being stretched to fit an increasing number of people who used be known as "terrorists." remember Rachel Corrie? Actually, I agree with you, but I do think that the label terrorist is being stretched to fit an increasing number of people who used be known as “terrorists.” remember Rachel Corrie?

]]> By: Alceste http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-1000 Alceste Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:01:18 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-1000 not to sound too much like those right-wing blogging types, but i do believe you have temporarily lost the plot ms summers - nothing you described about your uncle sounds like a terrorist - he protested against a foreign government by confronting the military forces of that government - nothing you've said suggested that he attacked (even with mere stones) any U.S. civilians in order to force the U.S. government to capitulate, he went after the government itself - to suggest that this is terrorism denigrates what he did and gives far too much sympathy to the actual terrorists who choose to target the citizens of a government rather than the government itself - yes, many terrorist groups have ends (much like your uncle's) that are just, but unlike your uncle, they've chosen means to achieve those ends that are anything but just - to imply otherwise gives too much credence to those folks on the right who think all of us liberal types are just plain whacky - my .02 at least... not to sound too much like those right-wing blogging types, but i do believe you have temporarily lost the plot ms summers - nothing you described about your uncle sounds like a terrorist - he protested against a foreign government by confronting the military forces of that government - nothing you’ve said suggested that he attacked (even with mere stones) any U.S. civilians in order to force the U.S. government to capitulate, he went after the government itself - to suggest that this is terrorism denigrates what he did and gives far too much sympathy to the actual terrorists who choose to target the citizens of a government rather than the government itself - yes, many terrorist groups have ends (much like your uncle’s) that are just, but unlike your uncle, they’ve chosen means to achieve those ends that are anything but just - to imply otherwise gives too much credence to those folks on the right who think all of us liberal types are just plain whacky - my .02 at least…

]]> By: Alceste http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-2999 Alceste Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:01:18 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-2999 not to sound too much like those right-wing blogging types, but i do believe you have temporarily lost the plot ms summers - nothing you described about your uncle sounds like a terrorist - he protested against a foreign government by confronting the military forces of that government - nothing you've said suggested that he attacked (even with mere stones) any U.S. civilians in order to force the U.S. government to capitulate, he went after the government itself - to suggest that this is terrorism denigrates what he did and gives far too much sympathy to the actual terrorists who choose to target the citizens of a government rather than the government itself - yes, many terrorist groups have ends (much like your uncle's) that are just, but unlike your uncle, they've chosen means to achieve those ends that are anything but just - to imply otherwise gives too much credence to those folks on the right who think all of us liberal types are just plain whacky - my .02 at least... not to sound too much like those right-wing blogging types, but i do believe you have temporarily lost the plot ms summers - nothing you described about your uncle sounds like a terrorist - he protested against a foreign government by confronting the military forces of that government - nothing you’ve said suggested that he attacked (even with mere stones) any U.S. civilians in order to force the U.S. government to capitulate, he went after the government itself - to suggest that this is terrorism denigrates what he did and gives far too much sympathy to the actual terrorists who choose to target the citizens of a government rather than the government itself - yes, many terrorist groups have ends (much like your uncle’s) that are just, but unlike your uncle, they’ve chosen means to achieve those ends that are anything but just - to imply otherwise gives too much credence to those folks on the right who think all of us liberal types are just plain whacky - my .02 at least…

]]> By: Alceste http://www.clareified.com/2004/02/27/the-new-rules-of-engagement/#comment-4998 Alceste Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:01:18 +0000 http://www.clareified.com/wp/?p=376#comment-4998 not to sound too much like those right-wing blogging types, but i do believe you have temporarily lost the plot ms summers - nothing you described about your uncle sounds like a terrorist - he protested against a foreign government by confronting the military forces of that government - nothing you've said suggested that he attacked (even with mere stones) any U.S. civilians in order to force the U.S. government to capitulate, he went after the government itself - to suggest that this is terrorism denigrates what he did and gives far too much sympathy to the actual terrorists who choose to target the citizens of a government rather than the government itself - yes, many terrorist groups have ends (much like your uncle's) that are just, but unlike your uncle, they've chosen means to achieve those ends that are anything but just - to imply otherwise gives too much credence to those folks on the right who think all of us liberal types are just plain whacky - my .02 at least... not to sound too much like those right-wing blogging types, but i do believe you have temporarily lost the plot ms summers - nothing you described about your uncle sounds like a terrorist - he protested against a foreign government by confronting the military forces of that government - nothing you’ve said suggested that he attacked (even with mere stones) any U.S. civilians in order to force the U.S. government to capitulate, he went after the government itself - to suggest that this is terrorism denigrates what he did and gives far too much sympathy to the actual terrorists who choose to target the citizens of a government rather than the government itself - yes, many terrorist groups have ends (much like your uncle’s) that are just, but unlike your uncle, they’ve chosen means to achieve those ends that are anything but just - to imply otherwise gives too much credence to those folks on the right who think all of us liberal types are just plain whacky - my .02 at least…

]]>