War

[Trend Monkey]

Hello all,
I find myself speculating about the war George W***** Bush and the club of dim wits, who havnt even touched the real terrorism. I know I should have no opinions, but its just too dominating to ignore.

Any war is a terrible thing (especially for the innocents) but I suspect its going to throw up some interesting trades. Half of me wishes they would get on with it.

What do others think?

 

[Helenqu]

Terrorism is caused by injustice, misunderstanding and inequalities. War can't ever address that.

 

[JonnyT]

Terrorism is caused by one thing and one thing only.

RELIGION

The sooner we ban it the better the world will be.

JonnyT

 

[Trader333]

If you research the core aspects of religion, as I have in detail, you will find that it is not religion that ever causes the problem. The problem is caused by those who choose to inflict harm under the banner of religion or whatever belief system they have. If religion was banned then some other belief systems would replace it and in the event that views differed strongly enough violence would ultimately result. This is seen in history time and again as much in non religious cultures as any other. I can still remember quite clearly when I was 11 years old being in Leeds train station on a Saturday when Man Utd arrived on the trains. The whole station was a mass of violence which the police were unable to control and it spilled onto the streets for the whole day. No religion there just the decision to align one self with a particular colour and team. Humans will always do this and we are taught to do so. The groups we align ourselves to vary from the small such as family, friends and football teams to much larger such as home town or city, county, North / South, Country, Continent etc. We naturally do this and, in my view, nothing will ever change it and therefore there will always be conflict.


Paul

 

[ivorm]

>>Terrorism is caused by injustice, misunderstanding and inequalities. War can't ever address that.<<

I think it's more correct to say that terrorism is caused by perceived or alleged injustice, misunderstanding and inequalities.

Often theses perceptions and allegations are untrue and are used as the excuse to commit acts of terrorism.

 

[Helenqu]

Well it doesn't really matter for practical purposes whether they are "real" or imagined. If people feel the hurt passionately enough to resort to terrorism then it is those feelings that need addressing. Perpetrating violence or refusing to hear the voices of those that feel aggrieved only increases those desperate feelings.

 

[DaveJB]

Terrorism is caused by having an unusually low respect for the rights of others to live - a resistance movement operating against the forces of perceived oppression I can accept, but terrorism is a disgustingly common example of (at best) two wrongs not making a right. Whatever the 'trigger' for the rebellion, I'd take a pop at the organ grinder, not the monkey, and certainly not the 'civilians' whose only crime was to walk past while the music was playing.
Dave

 

[Skimbleshanks]

Trend Monkey:

It's amazing that your first post here is to discuss war. Have you been sent from another bulletin board perchance?

 

[ivorm]

Well it doesn't really matter for practical purposes whether they are "real" or imagined. If people feel the hurt passionately enough to resort to terrorism then it is those feelings that need addressing. /B]

I disagree. It think there is an enormous difference between the way 'real' or 'imagined' injustices are (and should be) dealt with.

Imagine Person A who kills another person in self-defence and with a well-founded conviction that his own life was in danger.

Now imagine Person B who kills a person with blue eyes simply because he had a false belief that he had been treated unjustly by blue-eyed people.

Are you saying that we should be sympathetic to Person B because he must have felt 'the hurt passionate enough' to resort to murder ?. And thar Person A and Person B should be dealt with in the same manner ?

 

[ChartMan]

And what of those civilians in Iraq that may be released from opression by a successful campaign? Is Afganistan a better place now for the majority of it's citizens? War is a terrible thing, but cast your mind back to WW2.... what would the world be like if Hitler had succeeded? Bit different, I know, but it smells the same. At least we are not likely to see millions die as we did in the two WW's. What price freedom? Sadam passing on his nasty weapons to terrorists doesn't bear thinking about , does it? I hear both sides of the argument but prefer a solution that (potentially) provides a safer world for every one.

 

[zambuck]

...well you can discuss the terrorism till cows come home...but the main point of current situation is that Saddam is now a bad man because he is not playing tune to west...west prefers good terrorists it seems...pakistan's dictator is more dangerous than saddam...because musharraf is licking 'american's' backside so he is good..!!!he has apparently said publicly that in case of a war with India he will 'happily' use nuclear weapons against India...although we know the Indians will erase Pakistan if that ever happens....

IRA were also terrorists but I do not remember any western powers sending any military arsenl or using UN to to resolve that issue...perhaps christian terrorists are tolerated but islamic ones are not...????

americans and british made saddam, they made taliban and they made mujjahedein....so create not in the first place if you cannot handle then after....it's american's mess and i don't see why UN should clean it up...

Terrorism is caused by injustice....and indifference of global powers to their suffering...

 

[JonnyT]

The Americans are going to clean up the mess...

JonnyT

 

[zambuck]

...that's what you think...it will create even bigger mess than before...

 

[Uncle]

TERRORISM!!!

This is not the place to be discussing the rights or wrongs........

I give no opinion, except to say I have fought the b******** - and they dont fight fair, so lets leave it from this BB. Surely there are plenty of other forums to express morality!!!

John

 

[Skimbleshanks]

I agree wholeheartedly Uncle.

This site has always avoided talking about politics and religion, and that includes war. If anyone wants to carry on the war talk, perhaps they will do so on another of the trading websites.

Let's get back to the business of stock and futures trading using TA.

 

[ChartMan]

Ok.But the lounge was set up to discuss non trading topics. So far it has been a useful place, but perhaps you are right abut this particular topic, even though I contributed.It could easily get out of hand.....

 

[Trader333]

The Louge A Place to Discuss "Non Trading Related Subjects"

Hi Skim,

If you think that this subject should not be discussed on this site then why on earth did you allow a section called "The Lounge" that states the following:

"The Lounge A meeting place for talking about anything not trading related, such as sport, politics, entertainment etc."

I dont have a problem with not posting on this subject but when you have a thread specifically titled with this type of subject it is not really acceptable to then have a go at people who then decide to do so.

If you dont want posts on this then I suggest you remove the entire option to do so.


Paul

 

[Skimbleshanks]

Errr ... well, I didn't put it there!

You just have to look at other trading websites to see what happens when these inflamatory subjects are discussed; the result is that the quality trading talk gets lost in amongst the heated debates, insults and rants, etc. T2W has always been above this, and it would be a shame to revert now.

But perhaps this was the objective of the initial poster, whose sole post was, and still is, on this emotive subject. Interesting, eh?

 

[Trader333]

Hi Skim,

Fair point, I obviously dont understand what the full function of moderators are. Maybe it should be removed anyway, I wasnt being emotive just questionning the logic behind allowing potentially emotive postings if they are not really wanted.


Paul

 

[ChartMan]

I would like to think that this BB is way above the apalling level and depths of most other BB;s to the point where such emotive subjects would not get out of hand. I vote in favour of just about all contributors sense of delivering a balanced opinion on a subject, without feeling the need to "have a pop" at someone. So far, in this BB's history, that has proven to be the case 99.99 % of the time. I'm sure it will stay that way.

Trader333, the moderators are here to ensure this BB lives up to it's enviable reputation. On the odd occaision, we have to delete a post ( Blatant advertising) or , as on one occaision, banning someone that was hell bent on personal abuse against other contributors. You probably have never even noticed.......