Terror plot foiled by Brits

[Airliner]

Well, I would have to partially disagree on that. Process IS neccessary to determine guilt. If guilty, then yes. The problem is, before they
attack, they may well have done nothing but plan, which is not a death sentence crime. After they attack, they are already dead so then it's
too late to do anything about it. It's ugly all around. You can't kill people on suspicion of what they might do someday. But if you wait till
they do it... That's why this is a different kind of war - -it's going to be fought more on the level of intelligence gathering than on any
battlefield, with the exception of areas like Iraq and Afghanistan where WE set the terms and draw them out and engage them - take the
battle to them rather than wait for them to come to our borders.

Back to the FSX demo review.

[Drew]

the_nick wrote:
( this can sounds cruel , but for MY opinion they have to give those terrorist the electric chair without a procces , they also wouldn't give
their
victims the right to defend them selfs.)

People need to do more research before such comments, i already removed one on the previous page.

[walterp]

LIBERATING 50 million people in Iraq from a
dictator who himself was a major violator of human rights?

I thought it was to rid the country of Weapons Of Mass Destruction?
Silly me, I must have mis-understood. I thought that was the reason Bliar and Touche Tourtle invaded and continues to occupy a country
that has not threatened the UK or US in any way.
Well, I feel a lot safer now that Iraq does not have the capability to launch a nuke.....mmmmm.

The "war on terror" (why didnt the UK think of that phrase when the IRA was blowing London to bits every week?) is a "war" that no
Government can win.
To think otherwise is stupid.
The terrorists are already here - so is the UK now going to invade .erm Birmingham or North London?
MI5 and the UK police need to be lucky every time. The terrorist only need to be lucky once.

The only thing I can say is they wont stop me from getting on a plane to go on my holidays or from travelling on the tube.
Live life as normal. That is the only way to beat them.

[Airliner]

To think otherwise is stupid.

While I doubt that many would appreciate that comment, I do agree with the previous statement. It's a war of ideologies, not of nations
and armies.

MI5 and the UK police need to be lucky every time. The terrorist only need to be lucky once.

For someone who obviously doesn't like Bush, do you realize you just paraphrased him? "We need to be right 100% of the time. The
terrorists only need to be right once." Luck has nothing to do with it. You think MI5 just got lucky? They busted their butts on this for
months.

The only thing I can say is they wont stop me from getting on a plane to go on my holidays or from travelling on the tube.
Live life as normal. That is the only way to beat them.

TOTAL agreement on that! As for the nonsensical rhetoric at the top, I would expect that from someone who doesn't understand. When
they have nothing to hold up their side, they resort to sarcasm, character assassination, etc. All too familiar.

Well, here we go again!

[walterp]

I reckon the US should liberate China.
Anyway. Enough politics for one night - I did say I wasn't going to get started. Ho Hum.

[pegase]

was meant to cover my a$$ because I personally dont know the specific reason each and
every person was brought there and it would be presumptuous of me to make the claim that I did.

Sorry, Airliner if you felt it like this, accept my appology because it was no way in my goal to cover your a$$. I am not in any fight mode. I
am just trying to understand better what is going on by discussing with all of you. Thus, I simply have to tell honestly how i trhink so far.

What I wanted to point with most part of them is that global collective treatment of people is only acceptable in the urgence situation
of current battle. but not in long term on captured and then helpless people. I am not telling that they should be liberated as indeed they
would go back harder on the fight. I just think they are ennemy war prisonner and thus must be held in conditions matching the Geneva
conventions. Guantanamo is just scewing these conventions.

Wrong. They don't need anymore justification - they hate us, period.

This is true. and you are also right when you tell they will keep on hating us whatever we do. But there is a problem: people who did not
hate us yesterday hate us now. And even more people who still don't hate us today will hate us tomorrow. and this is TOTALLY
dependant on what we do.
Other question: Haw can we keep respect and faith in ourselves if we go doing things we do not accept from others? and no, this
question is not as theoric and futile as it looks because if we must face and win a war, we need to trust our mental position as much or
more than military strength.

And they are not poor guards

Sorry for that too. I did not mean "poor" as "bad". I respect these guys who do their job and assume (or hope) they (or most of them)
don't "play" with this situation. by poor I meant rather "having hard time". I undestand they have but it is nothing, NOTHING common with
the hard time the guys on the other side of the fence have.
Anyway, should I anyday get prisonner. I would do anything including the worse against my guards to get free. And if there is no hope to
get free, anything, including the worse to make the life of my guards as nasty as possible as much as I have the guts to do so and face
the result.

we are not YET at war

That kind of naive thinking WILL lead to another 9/11 or 7/7.

I muqt insist Airliner, you are way too optimist. The question is not if there WILL be others 9/11 or 7/7. There has been already plenty of
others like the 11/9 in Madrid, blasts in Turkey, Morocco, Moscow, Bombay or the tube blasts in Paris in 1995. and I don't speak about the
kamilase bombs or rocket blast Isralis gets since ages. As well the Iraqui people who is under terrorist attacks day after day since they
have been "liberated". (sorry for the bad irony but I still think this Iraq invasion as the havyest mistake it was possible to do).
So the question is rather what worse we are going to get for us and our kids.

Terrorist attacks are nasty criminal murders but in comparison to war it is what a wind gust is to an hurricane who would stay raging
several weeks, monthes or years.

Until now, in our western world we have been very lucky and keep the battlre fields far from our sweet homes. We can leave today people
like Israelians doing alone the "dirty job" fighting against what threat all of us. And we can even roleplay the righteous shocked people
lecturing them

But how long can we expect such a fake situation will still last?

[Airliner]

I reckon the US should liberate China.

Not a bad idea! But logistically, facing an army quoted as being near 100 million strong, eh... that could get ugly.

I am just trying to understand better what is going on by discussing with all of you.

That's cool. We're all trying to make sense out of this mess. Some of it doesn't make sense. Some of it makes perfect sense, to those
who are familiar with certain things. I could get into the whole Abraham and Isaac/Ishmael deal but, that will become a sermon.

But there is a problem: people who did not hate us yesterday hate us now.

I'll grant that. The problem I have is with those people who imply (or state outright) that WE (meaning, the US, western world, etc.) are the
cause of terrorism. Anytime you take a stand, you are going to generate opposition. But to take no stand at all guarantees failure. What's
that phrase? If you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything. It's the same thing with Israel and it's neighbors - you always here the
blame placed back and forth - kinda sounds like a schoolyard fight: "Well, they started it by firing into Lebanon." :No, they started it by
attacking and kidnapping our soldiers." "Well, you occupied Lebanon several years ago." "Well you..." And around and around we go.
Discernment is needed. ANYONE who commits acts of terrorism, should be condemned. The problem a lot of folks have is interpretting
what constitutes terrorism. Some would actually submit that Israel's response in the current conflict is worse than Hezbollah's. I
continue to point out that there is a gulf of difference in their actions. The IDF is like a pitcher, aiming at specific spots. Hezbollah is like
the batter, just swinging away with little regard for where the ball will land - just put it in play. But when an Israeli strike results in civilian
casualties, the world screens bloody murder - and when Hezbollah INTENTIONALLY targets civillians, you don't hear the same. Curious,
isn't it?

Terrorist attacks are nasty criminal murders but in comparison to war...

And again, I must insist that it is naive to not recognize that we are in a war. AGAIN, I point to Pres. Bush's comments after 9/11 - "This is
a different kind of war." Just because you don't have a tank in your driveway, doesn't mean there is no war. How long did the Cold War
last? How many military strikes were there? Hmm... We don't see all that is happening in this war because a lot of it is behind the
scenes. Right now, in America, there are Al Qaeda and Hezbollah cells operating (that's a comforting thought!). Our intelligence network
is working to track and infiltrate and dismantle them. Afghanistan, Iraq and now, the Israeli / Lebanese border are the military fronts in
this war. It's is truly a global conflict because it's not like, "the old days" when two powers squared off like to boxers in a ring, pummelling
each other other one cannot stand up. Terrorists have no national allegiance, no home base to speak of and they wear no uniforms,
which speaks to your point about Geneva conventions. Under the Geneva conventions, Illegal enemy combatants are not afforded the
same rights as prisoners of war. In fact, they themselves do not honor any rules of engagement. That's what the whole issue was about
in our courts for so much time - whether or not the President has the authority to designate people as such. Look, many of those at
Gitmo likely never committed a single, specific terrorist attack but, they were on the side of those who did. The reasons they were "picked
up," and again, I don't have profiles on each one so this is a generalization, was because of their associtations or their direct involvement
in a particular military operation against the US and it's allies in the field. It's the same as the NSA program - they were tracking calls
made by or directed to known terrorist elements. Again, the Pres. said if you are talking to a member of Al Qaeda, we want to know why!
Anyway, these people are being held because they have information that can help in this war to prevent future terrorist attacks. We don't
want these people to have the right to remain silent as that defeats the whole purpose of obtaining the infromation we are looking for.

Anyway, it's a very complex situation, all of it. Unfortunately, we no longer have th luxury of hoping it will all go away. Islamic terrorism is a
very real threat which must be confronted and defeated. Compromise doesn't work - negotiatiing doesn't work. I like the quote by (uh oh,
here I go!), Captain Picard in Star Trek First Contact (). Speaking of the Borg invasion he said, "We've made to many scarifices already,
too many retreats. They invade our space and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds and we fall back. Not again. The line must be
drawn here - this far NO farther!" Well, we've drawn that line and yes, it has angered some but, the alternative is to turn a blind eye and a
deaf ear yet again. 9/11 taught us that that is no longer an option. My main concern about discussing this is that too many people are
simply "drinking the KoolAid," as the expression goes. They are so quick to quote the latest poll without looking at the skewed way it was
presented. They regurgitate the talking points of their particular position without considering whether the information is even true and
factual. We are not stupid - people CAN think for themselves. We need to be more aware of the sources of our information and the
credibility of those sources before we run off at the mouth.

Here's a quick example of a mis-interpretted poll - then I'll go back to testing FSX and programming FSA.

A poll done about a year ago asked the question (and I'm paraphrasing as I don't recall the precise wording): "Would you prefer that
abortions take place in a clean, sterile environment like a clinic or that women perform them on themselves with coat hangars?" To that
effect. Well, the majority responded by affirming the first option. When the poll numbers came out, they were reported as X% of
Americans (note, NOT people polled! They select them carefully as well!) support legalized abortion! Hello? No spin there, right? Give
me a break! In fact, I've had to refrain from responding to a number of O'Reilly's polls, as much as I respect him as a journalist / news
analyst, because the questions were, at times, too vague. Bob Cohn wrote a great book on the subject of bias in the media. It is vital that
we understand that those with an agenda, on EITHER side, may or will spin the facts to support their own position. We need to cut
through all that to get to the truth and sometimes, it means wading waste deep in, well... junk! The alternative is to be ignorant and just
repeat what everyone else is saying. If you're going to quote someone, at least be able to back up why you believe what they said and not
simply with empty rhetoric but with facts.

Okay, deep breath.

[the_nick]

I'm not going to post anymore on this thread , everybody has a different opinion and statement. I will just wait and see what the britisch
police will do.