Sorry if I offend anyone.

[Jesus Chicken]

Does anyone here consider the Afgans who died attacking America, martyrs?
I am not sure if people will be able to look past the fact that they killed so many innocents, but still. If they died for what they belive in, for their faith, are they martyrs? I hope you can look past the fact that people in America died for something they had no idea about, but I want some interesting discussion. All this talk about remembering 9\11 has got me thinkin. I was just wondering what everyone else thinks about this.

[Guest cloricus]

*Stares@the jack hat*

Um yes I guess they would be considered martyrs. Tho they only just fit in to the category. (In my opinion.)

Hehe, you all do know that they can NEVER catch osama bin lan(sp?)?
Reason = If they catch him and lock him up the amount of highjacking and hostage taking (for his release) would be massive.
The second option would be to kill him, be it in battle or by the will of an American court. This IS the single most stupidest thing possible in the situation. You are talking the biggest martyr in the last century and all factions allied with him would strike back.
Even if they didn't like him it would be the best excuse and would give them a reason to fight.

-Eps

[Guest SunRiZe]

According to the definition of a martyr, is a person who dies for what they believe in. so yes the hijackers were martyrs as they died for what they believed in, despite that cause being wrong. They really thought they were fighting a religious Holy War or Jihad. however. Osama Bin Laden is not a matyr, he's a coward, you won't see him hijack a plane and die for the cause, like he expects his men to do. he just hides in caves, quite hypocritical really.

[Sandy]

Of course they're martyrs: that's why they did it! In islam religion, dying for your god is one of the most "heroic" things you can do.

The problem is, that in this era, those beliefs are quite barbaric, and with all the technology invented it might (and has done) some serious destruction.

If we would still fight with swords in battlefields, the "holy war" could still work as an ideal, but in this situation it's only manic.

On the other hand, one of the main reason the taleban attack the west IS the increase of technology: they fear that their culture will be destroyed by it, like every conservatist is(I'm not talking about the political party, but the idealism).

My opinion is that people must go on, follow their time or be tumbled by masses. It's truly an impossible task to survive as an individual in this world...:rolleyes:

[Guest cloricus]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Nuchlear [/i]
[B]According to the definition of a martyr, is a person who dies for what they believe in. so yes the hijackers were martyrs as they died for what they believed in, despite that cause being wrong. They really thought they were fighting a religious Holy War or Jihad. however. Osama Bin Laden is not a matyr, he's a coward, you won't see him hijack a plane and die for the cause, like he expects his men to do. he just hides in caves, quite hypocritical really. [/B][/QUOTE]

This posts seems very bias and does not display the facts correctly. Osama bin lan does not ?hide in caves? he actively fights along side his troops, just as any one leader would to keep the moral of his army up. He may be the top of that cell of terrorists, but he was not the one that directly ordered the ?attacks.? (My conclusion from facts that have been released.)
There are many more things you have said that I disagree with, for example ?The wrong cause? this is crap, how do you know that wiping out America is the wrong cause?
How do you know that wiping out Afghanistan is the right one?

Now the order to kill civilians on mass scale is not just isolated to these countries. The good old us of a and England have all done it to and so has Australia, just not on as big scale.
One example. Korea, America HQ ordered it?s troops to open fire on ANY one that entered to field of war. (The was a city in this case, civilian.)
On the ordered specified that civilians (including children) where in included.
And this is what happened, it was a massacre.
So don?t get all self rightcheas(sp?), every country has done bad things in the past.

-Eps

[James]

[color=royalblue]Cloricus...you really have a very distorted view of reality. lol

Since when is murdering thousands of people for your religion a righteous cause?

And yes, Osama bin Laden DOES hide in caves...he's a pathetic coward. Did he fight against the troops in Afghanistan? Hell no. He ordered others to go out and do it for him.

I have no respect for Osama bin Laden. He's not a man...he's just a coward.[/color]

[Lady Asphyxia]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i]
[B] How do you know that wiping out America is the wrong cause?
How do you know that wiping out Afghanistan is the right one?

Now the order to kill civilians on mass scale is not just isolated to these countries. The good old us of a and England have all done it to and so has Australia, just not on as big scale.
One example. Korea, America HQ ordered it?s troops to open fire on ANY one that entered to field of war. (The was a city in this case, civilian.)
On the ordered specified that civilians (including children) where in included.
And this is what happened, it was a massacre.
So don?t get all self rightcheas(sp?), every country has done bad things in the past.

-Eps [/B][/QUOTE]


I agree. I see them as matyrs. They died for something they passionately believe in. So did Joan of Arc...of course, to compare Joan of Arc to them these days is inane, simply because, to most people, religion isn't a big factor anymore.

Okay, looking back at this post, I have no idea what I'm saying. Its hard to put into words. Erm *flexes her fingers, not sure what shes about to write* I'd say they were matyrs, but I don't like the way the ratio went. It was like, 4:4000 or whatever. I don't like that. People died because of where they lived, and because of thier religion. And now, well, everyone else is paying for it.

America bombed a wedding in Afganhistan by accident...those people payed for what they didn't do...but so did those who were in the world trade center...

:drunk: okay, totallyconfusing myself, so I'll stop here.

By the way, Its righteous. lol

[Rain]

You say that these people died for their faith and their religion. What religion teaches and supports the killing of innocent people? They're making Islam look worse by using it as an excuse for their cowardly attacks. Isn't that what groups like the Ku Klux Klan do? They're prejudice to anyone not like them and then they back up their actions with quotes from the bible (just check their website if you want proof)...oh, sorry, I trailed off.
I agree with Nuhclear and James, Osama bin Laden is a coward, he wouldn't have the guts to fly a plane into a building, so he tells someone else to do it for him.

[Lady Asphyxia]

Yeah, I know what your saying... I'm doing an assignment on Arabs and Jews, mainly Jews, and there's lots of quotes there on how the arabs who oppose their right to their country must die...so I looked up quote by arabs...same thing. Extremists

I'm going to say this. They shouldn't have done it. But the retaliation attacks were also harsh...so basically, everyone is in the wrong.

[The Harlequin]

[font=gothic][color=crimson]James, Cloricus hasn't even realised there is a reality yet...

I don't personally believe this, but I'll off the viewpoint anyway. Bin Laden may very well wish to be a martyr, but, as we've seen, he is damn good at masterminding these kinds of attacks. Wouldn't it be better for his cause if he kept all the intelligent people alive, and used the idealistic, otherwise not particularly useful, stupid people for this? To do otherwise is like using a specialist troop unit for cannon fodder. America would never send their Specialist Marines in to a certain death situation, and it's the same idea here. Personally, I think Bin Laden is a damn good strategist, and I think there is some justice behind what he's saying. We don't really have the right to intercede in what really isn't our business. If those right wing, consumerist, capitalist, gutless, lapdogs who called themselves politicians had been more interested in doing their job, rather maintaining it, they would have kept out of what was essentially an internal conflict (I refer to the Middle East crisis as a whole here, not just Afghanistan). The only reason they interceded at all was for oil. And they did that because of public opinion. If they had done the right thing and stayed out of it, they would have lost their jobs. Their decision was pathetic self serving justification for their own existence. Politicians, and bureaucracy as a whole, make me sick.

I'm aware that most people would prefer to lynch me for my opinions, I don't need to hear it again.

27th time...[/font][/color]

[Lady Asphyxia]

lol, dont worry, I won't lynch you.

I agree with you. If the Western countries hadn't interfered in the Middle East conflict, a lot of the...erm...fighting wouldnt be happening now.

America wants to enlist the Australian SAS if they go to war with Iraq. Its basically because our troops are better, more patience, more discipline, less trigger happy, less of a bull****er. Basically everything that the Americans aren't. Yes, we all know I am commiting the horrible crime of generalisation. Don't pull me up on it.

[The Harlequin]

[font=gothic][color=crimson]It would take me severa hours to convince my entire SHK class of that...

Australian troops aren't neccssarily better, most people just feel better when it's foreigners dying . Again, politicians justifying their suvival.

28th time...[/font][/color]

[Lady Asphyxia]

28th time of what?

Yeah, true. I'd probably be jerked out of my usual apathetic state if someone rudely threw a plane into MY country's buildings.

Johhny Howard. I see him as a prime example of what your talking about. Course, thats totally excluding Bush. But Johhny-boy was actually cementing our relationship wiht America...and I wish he hadn't...

[The Unholy Newt]

What I am wondering is if the American populus has figured this out. In Australia we write our date 11/9. But in U.S.A they write 9/11, 911 the number Americans call when they are in an emergency. Coincidence? I think not.

[The Harlequin]

[font=gothic][color=crimson]I wouldn't be particularly concerned if it happened to Australia.... My views on humanity don't run to sympathy. Unholy Newt, you know better than to listen to Cloricus's conspiracy theories... listen to mine instead!

It's because of politicans like John Howard that these kinds of things happen. John Howard is a boot-licking, gutless, manipulative, over-cautious, arch-conservative bastard with no respect for the free will of any group around. He's the lapdog of any group who puts any pressure on him what so ever. In trying to keep from offending anyone, he present a weak, basically useless front to the world. And when he does stand up to something, it's something like Reconciliation, where he justs screws himself over even more. In fact, the only time he ever opens his mouth at all is to change which foot is inside it.


Has anyone notices I don't like governments....

29th time.... (How many times I've broken my vow not to post in this forum, Asphysxia)[/font][/color]

[Lady Asphyxia]

:eek: *does a double take* you're here? I thought you'd left.
The entire thing was planned...maybe it was a lesson in irony to the Americans (IS it irony...I think it is...)

...I did get the vauge impression you didn't like governments (Sarcasm is just one more service we offer)

[Ravenstorture]

[color=darkgreen][font=gothic]Ahh, it's good to be back.

Another topic of America Vs. Afghanistan/Iraq/Iran/Turkmenistan/anyone else who has nothing to lose and holds a slight grudge against the World SuperLeech?
Yes, we all know I do not like America.

Wouldn't it be nice if the queen turned around and said, "I do say, Australia, do stop licking America's anal passage for just a tic and do something with those scared, starcing children you seemed to ahve locked away somewhere. Don't go to war with Iraq, or I will get Rather Annoyed With you." (I'm not paying out the british, I am british.)

And wouldn't it be great if America said, "Australia is great, but they should focus on their own problems. So sort yourselves out before you start on our business. Oh, and your prime minister is an idiot."

And wouldn't it be ****ing wonderful if public schools had all the money they needed and the air force had to hold a cake stall to by a bomber?

Meh, not gonna happen. So I'm just going to sit back and focus on my business, which, I am sad to say, is packing for a week-long military exercise in Greenbank. Last year we had one, we hooked all the ANPRC77 sets up and listened to George Bush wage war on Afghanistan on the ABC... small world, wouldn't want to paint it. [/color][/font]

[The Harlequin]

[font=gothic][color=crimson]Regardless of whatever the title of this thread is, several of us aren't really sorry for offending anyone...

Raven is right. We live in a cynical age. And we're all too enamoured of it to do anything about it. Believing idealists will always be around, but those in power will always stifle them. On the other hand, the public are taking a harder stance, because of the sheer amount of corruption in the world today. If someone starts an Aid Agency, people believe they are in it for the money. If a politician takes a humanitarian stance, it's for the publicity. Nothing is ever right anymore, and I'm enjoying every moment of it...

29th time [/font][/color]

[James]

[color=royalblue]I think cynicism is a self defeating exercise.

It's not realistic. I mean, being excessively idealistic isn't very realistic either...but both are self defeating.

If we sit here and go on and on about what's wrong with the world and why nothing is right, what's the point? I always think that when people complain about these things, they should actually resolve to do something about it.

I mean, obviously there is corruption in the world. And obviously being cynical is the easy way out. It's easy to be dismissive about everything and to assume the worst about people.

It's much more difficult to be both a realist and an optimist. One thing I [i]do[/i] admire about President Bush (and it's not like I'm a huge fan of his, as anyone who knows me will attest to), is that he often talks in a very optimistic, ideological way...but he is also a realist. He understands what realistic steps must be taken in order to achieve a real change.

That's what I like to see, especially in world leaders.

That's kind of getting off the track of this discussion a little...but it's one reason why the public's often cynical nature annoys me. As I said, it's easy to sit there and point out what's wrong with everything. It's quite different to be constructive and optimistic about the world.[/color]

[Mist]

[color=crimson][size=1] First, I don't see why anyone would be offended by a thread such as this.

No, I do not believe that Bin Laden and the terrorists should be considered martyrs. In the Kuran, it specifically states "Do not kill yourself," in arabic text. If they say they were doing it in the name of thier religion, them maybe they ought to go back and read that little passage.

As for Bin Laden being a brilliant stratigist, well, we figured that out, didn't we? That was just a given; a fact that was already obvious.

I think that the America's intervention(s) in the Middle East conflicts might have been a minor [i]cause[/i], but Alqueda struck America in the heart of our finnacial econmy, and our military stronghold. They wanted to show America that their econmy and military wasn't as strong as we thought it was. Obviously, it wasn't just to get back at us from taking oil, and, ultimitly, sides.[/color][/size]

[The Harlequin]

[font=gothic][color=crimson]Doing something about the problems in the world would require a something entirely different than what most people expect it to. You could feed all the starving, protect all the homeless, fix the ozone layer, reconcile all factions on earth, it wouldn't change a thing. They'd keep cropping up. If you want to fix the world, you have to work on people. Making them think positive isn't what I'm talking about, you have to change their whole view of life. Most people aren't ready to fix the world, or for the world to be fixed. They simply couldn't deal with it. That is the main reason I choose to let people deal with their own problems. I have no patience for those with no wish to help themselves, and I believe it is their responsibility.


And Mist, I was referred to the Middle East crisis as a whole when I made that remark.

30th time...[/font][/color]

[James]

[color=royalblue]That's right. A lot of the problems in the world are not even physical problems; they are issues of perception, culture and history.

And of course, every nation in the world could be doing more to help those who are disadvantaged. The world is far from perfect. But still, I'm unwilling to get too cynical about these things...I don't think it helps me or anyone else.[/color]

[Genkai]

"martyr".... yes, in theory, they were martyr.

but say " the people who hijacked planes and ran them into two buildings symbolic of what america stands for are MARTRYS, GODDAMMIT!" Well, you could cut out the caps and "godammit", but still, the word "martyr" demands a respect, and i don't have respect for those men. now, er, im not the most, er, how do you say, patriotic among us, cause in my opinion, the american government is corrupt, but still, we the people are not.

[Mist]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by genkai_yyh [/i]
[B]the word "martyr" demands a respect, and i don't have respect for those men. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=crimson][size=1] Who is to say that being a martyr demands respect? Half the people that were martyred through history were [b]not[/b] respected during their time: Joan of Arc, the Romanov's, and many others.

I don't blame you for not having respect for these men, and personally, I don't respect them either. I think they use the excuse of religion as a sort of facade to hide behind. To put it just plain, straight fact, a bunch of extremist hijacked a few commercial airplanes, and crashed them into important structures, where they knew many people lived and worked, bascially killing thousands of people. So, I say, religion my foot.[/color][/size]

[Mitch]

[color=red]Yes, they were Martyrs, by the definiton. But to us Americans, of course that isn't what we think. I'm right there along with those people, to. But it goes by me why someone can believe in something so very, very, much that they destroy themselves for it. Well, actually it doesn't go beside me, but I just can't see taking your life away when you had a [i]choice [/i] not to. In my English class we just finished reading Farenheit 451, a great book which kind of relates to this subject (in a way). In the book, firemen burn books because in the society it is wrong to have books, and the people are thoughtless and self-centered. I'm not going to explain the whole book, but in it people die because they believe in the knowledge of books, and so on. That is something I would maybe die for, knowledge, maybe. The reason why I said this is so you can kind of see the other side of killing for what you believe in. Although it may mean nothing to you, it means something to me. If you haven't read Farenheit 451, it's a great book. Well, that didn't make any sense but yeh...[/color]