Keith Devens .com

Oh man, if you want to get in on the blame game about who finances the terrorists why not go back in history, we all do it, Ireland, England, France, Germany, USA, etc, etc.
FFS.
Oh, and have a good weekend

Donncha, don't equivocate on "financing terrorists". I assume you're referring to things like arming Iraq against Iran back in the 80s. That's way different than paying a 6 million dollar ransom straight to terrorists.

I mean, only if the Phillipines wanted to wage a proxy war against us would there actions make "sense" (that's what we were doing against Iran).

You know, for all the criticism conservatives and religious folks like myself get for seeing the world in "black and white", I think you're way more subject to that criticism than I am.

No, I wasn't refering to Iraq vs Iran - that's two sovereign states fighting a war, Americans giving money to the IRA, Irish Government and people turning a blind eye to the fact that we supplied beef for many years to the Iraqis and Egyptians (who have sponsored terrorism themselves), American Governments have long sponsored guerrilla attacks against sometimes democratically elected governments, I could go on.

You know, for all the criticism conservatives and religious
folks like myself get for seeing the world in "black and white",
I think you're way more subject to that criticism than I am.

Guess what, I'm religious too, I have a very strong faith in the same God you believe in. They world's not made up of simple zeros and ones, it's made up of everything between 00000000 and 11111111 and beyond.
If it is black and white, what am I for disagreeing with you? You're obviously good, am I evil? 0|1?

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I thought you were un-religious.

If it is black and white, what am I for disagreeing with you? You're obviously good, am I evil?

No no. Don't bring it there. You know that Christianity says we're all evil. It's better to talk about ideas. Speaking of ideas though, I'm glad I have your attention because I've been wanting to talk about one of your ideas for a while. Back a while ago when Yassin was killed (other times too, I think) you made a big deal about the "cycle of violence" and how the killing would only lead to more violence. I think it should be perfectly clear by now that it has done exactly the opposite, and attacks against Israel have gone sharply down due to both the wall and their assassination of terrorist leaders. What do you think about your claim about the "cycle of violence"?

Also, I'm about to update the main post with some quotes from Zayed in Iraq on the same subject -- make sure to check it out.

That's interesting what Zayed said. I believe that neither of us can really get a taste of what's happening out there as we're safely tucked up in our homes and communities, not "in the firing line" so to speak.
But that distance also brings perspective, of which we differ
There's no doubt that the money paid will feed further terrorist acts, that the Philipines "cooperated" with them and that more people are going to die. It's happened countless times before and will happen again.
If, God forbid, a member of your family or mine was captured by terrorists, by bank robbers, by some crazy guy at the local store, wouldn't you want the authorities to do anything to get them back? The wife of the Philipino driver/hostage was quoted on Irish news broadcasts thanking them for returning her husband.
There's also a chance that some/many of those terrorists are in it for the money. Certinaly there are mercenaries on the US side too.

Cycle of violence.. it does exist. I think I left a comment before about Northern Ireland - for about 2-3 months a few years ago a Catholic taxi driver would be killed one night by the Unionists, then a Protestant driver would be killed the next night by Republicans.
The killing in the North went on for over 30 years, and this is Western Europe, not some troubled 3rd world country. There were plenty of walls there too. Communities were segregated from each other by barbed wire fences and the British army patrolled constantly. Still the trouble continued.
The wall may have stopped the bombing for the moment but it'll only serve to intensify and concentrate the bad feelings felt by the Palestinians. It's no "solution" to the problem.
Kill a terrorist leader, elect a new one, the killing continues.

Sorry about that, got the name wrong. That post was by Mohammed. I've changed it in the post. I'm not sure how that blog works... they have a few people who post there I suppose.

Anyway... I'm not sure you can compare the situation in Northern Ireland to the one in Israel. Does one of those sides want the utter destruction of the other while the other wants to live in peace?

only serve to intensify and concentrate the bad feelings felt by the Palestinians. It's no "solution" to the problem.

Oh, no, you wouldn't want to hurt their feelings! One of the things that frustrates me the most about people who argue like you and Mike do is that you offer no alternatives or plans, just criticism based on some ideology (for you, maybe the committment to the idea of a "cycle of violence". Mike seems to be a pacifist with a worldview based on anti-Americanism). Fighting back won't work, and negotiating won't work, and not doing anything won't work, and surrender won't work, so what do you want to do about it? I think it's clear that killing the terrorist leaders and building the wall has helped tremendously. That, and deposing Saddam, from whom came much funding of Palestinian terror.

Backing up a bit:

There's also a chance that some/many of those terrorists are in it for the money. Certinaly there are mercenaries on the US side too.

Don't you dare compare mercenaries on our side who usually do things like guard transports of supplies to terrorists who take hostages and behead innocent people.

If, God forbid, a member of your family or mine was captured by terrorists, by bank robbers, by some crazy guy at the local store, wouldn't you want the authorities to do anything to get them back?

First of all, don't compare this to bank robbers. If bank robbers get away with the money they'll probably move to Mexico. They're not terrorists who want to destroy us and who will use the money to kill other people. You seem to be trying to diminish the severity of all this.

And actually, I put myself in that Filipino hostage's place earlier. If I were him, I'd be ashamed of my country. I'd be happy to be alive, of course, but I'd know, like Mohammed said, that the millions of dollars they paid in ransom would lead to possibly hundreds of other deaths. Not to mention that the Philippines broke their committment to the coalition. Personally, I think I'd rather have been beheaded than have that kind of dishonor on my country and guilt on my head. To know that my life was traded for the deaths of dozens of others? I couldn't live with that.

Let me say one more thing about the "cycle of violence". Of course there is such a thing, where attacks are met with reprisals and vice versa, but the cycle can end when one side wins. Also keep in mind that these aren't two "equal" sides fighting. The Palestinians want to exterminate all Jews and want the destruction of Israel. They can't be negotiated with and they can't be appeased. Would you agree with that? What would you suggest Israel do?

Heh, now I know why I was confused about the name. Zeyad is the author of this Iraqi blog. Just wanted to finish correcting my mistake. I also originally spelled the name wrong.