Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Yogizuna who wrote (38477)	11/23/2001 7:29:37 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

We all know the typical character displayed by a coward. One who can be seen cowering in fear instead of standing to fight for justice. It can be described of course in a variety of ways and circumstances. Osama can be described accurately as an evil, corrupt, fanatical, maniac etc. I do not understand the intensity of the push by some to label him as a coward. He did not cower and cry when the full force of the most powerful superpower in the history of the world was flung at him. He has remained bold in his challenge (albeit twisted). You can stretch the term to make it apply in a sideways kind of atypical manner; and then make it a huge banner to support the cause of social action against Osama....That, BTW, is exactly what propagandists do when they are afraid that the simple truth wont carry them. It is also how Osama has corrupted the Islamic religion to justify his mania. The simple truth in this case is enough. Knowledge is power. Playing with sensationalized terms only serves to detract from the real issues. It confuses people to attempt to reduce the persona of Osama to "coward." It gives the perception that we are covering up for somehting. Terrorists are sick, brainwashed, fanatical maniacs. Their threat is terrible and they were not afraid to mix it up with us. They should be afraid and God willing they will be in the future. Our education, awareness, and intelligence efforts as important as are our military efforts. The biggest percentage of the Al-Quaida are so brainwashed that they honestly don't know how horrible and evil the network is, or any thing about their enemies. The simple truth is enough and always has been. Have Peace

To: Yogizuna who wrote (38477)	11/23/2001 7:40:02 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

the fact that so many became angered at you for your interpretation... Yogi, I followed the discussion on whether or not "coward" is a label that applies to Osama. I did not participate, but I read it all. My sense was that the sides were pretty evenly divided and that there were some good points made on each side. I thought it was an interesting and multi-faceted discussion although a bit rough, at times. The discussion covered both personal characteristics and the legitimacy of various forms of warfare in terms of international law and accepted practices. It seemed to me that the best points for the applicability of "coward" were based on his chosen style of warfare rather than his personal characteristics. Obviously, one who participates in the murder of unarmed civilians is not courageous in any way I would use the words, shameful, cruel, immoral, fanatical, cold-hearted, murderous, outrageous, evil, ghastly, and uncivilized, to describe the attack. I could probably come up with some other disgusting aspects of that act if I thought about it some more. But I don't think the word, cowardly, particularly applies. The application of that label is a complicated question involving both Osama's individual spirit and the military legitimacy of his targets. I don't see any lack of spirit in the man, himself. In prosecuting his uphill battle, he's shown himself to committed and tenacious, which meets the standard for courage. While don't think that office buildings can remotely be consider legitimate military targets, I don't see anything in the definitions of courage and cowardice that speaks to style of warfare. Modern warfare does not require combatants to stand in a line with a bunch of redcoats and be shot at to demonstrate courage. Arguing that cowardice is not among Osama's considerable shortcomings is at least a legitimate POV, if not the most valid POV. It should not subject one to ridicule or charges of sympathy to the enemy. Americans hate Osama, with good reason. Hatred sometimes make us overgeneralize--an evil person must have universally negative characteristics. Therefore Osama must be ugly, cold, dishonest, dirty, violent, disloyal, stupid, unmanly, and cowardly. And short,fat, and can't dance, too boot. Well, we know that some but not all of those negatives apply. To argue that he is neither cowardly or short, for example, is not un-American. Karen