Darth Wong wrote: So, even if they had none of these "oppression of Muslims" incidents to put in their recruiting videos, these videos would be just as successful? I don't really see how that follows. Or were you unaware that Al-Quaeda recruiting videos largely consist of images of Muslims being killed by American and/or Israeli forces? How do you justify your claim that these groups would be just as influential without their main raison d'etre?
And other terrorists with other agendas don't manage to stir up support? It's only possible to have support if they show Muslims being killed by Americans? It's not possible to get support by showing something else? My point is that their group (and all terrorist groups, for that matter) have an agenda. And they can come up with anything they want to get people to agree with them so they can fulfill their agenda. If they don't have one option, they'll have another, and another, and another.
Darth Wong wrote: Why not? If you start a war with the stated purpose of making the world safe and you end up only fuelling the enemy's strength because he thrives on misery and hate, why does that not count as a reason against the war? Let's compare this to the American Prohibition era back in the early 20th century. Did Al Capone have the "right" to commit criminal acts in pursuit of contraband alcohol sales? Of course not. But that doesn't mean his criminal enterprise was not immensely enriched by Prohibition, or that Prohibition was not a bad idea as a result.
Let's see. If you start a war with the stated purpose of making a safe world (or country or whatever) and it causes deaths before it's done, but the end result after it is all over is that the world/country/etc is safer, you are saying that the war was wrong because of those deaths? All wars will have deaths. Whether you have deaths from another military, or from terrorists, the outcome is the same... death. You can't just say that the deaths are meaningless and that the war is meaningless just because some die. You have to wait and see what the final outcome is. Did it work to make the world better in the way you wanted, or did it not work?
Personally, I don't like war and usually won't support it. However, I do believe that sometimes it is the only way to accomplish what needs done. In 12? years, Saddam constantly went against UN requests and continued to harm Iraqis no matter what diplomatic or "coercive" methods were used. Do you just give up on peace just because you don't want to take it to the next step of war? As I said, I am not saying this war was right or the reasons behind it were right. I'm saying only that saying it is wrong JUST BECAUSE terrorist groups get stronger off from it. In the end, it could allow us to make a real impact in destroying these groups. We'll never be rid of them, but by bringing them out in the open, we have more chance of killing them than just sitting around waiting for them to attack us.
Darth Wong wrote:CTCNetwork wrote:BTW: I remember reading that the aircraft use in the 11/9 attacks were not able to manoeuver and bank as steeply as they did.. At least not when being controlled from the *beep*?? They could only have carried out the pre-crash manoeuvres if remotely flown... ?
I would love to know what physics principles are used in order to determine that an aircraft would be more maneuverable when piloted remotely. Do its control surfaces become bigger when the cockpit is empty?
It is possible to manually bypass the safety precautions put into aircraft computers if you know what you are doing. And, considering the comment about linux user and root accounts, think of it like this... who will have the most control of a computer? The user at the computer, or the user accessing remotely? And, I'd like to see the communications port that gives ground control access to flight controls on the plane... as far as I know, there isn't one. Otherwise, ground control would have the ability given to them (at least those with some sort of management level) and no planes could be hijacked and flown off course and those 9/11 planes could have been diverted.