Fighting & Winning The Global War on Terror (WW IV)

[a_majoor]

Heck, by that definition the Liberal Party of Canada also fits the bill...

 

[dutchie]

Combat Medic: Where did you get that definition of Sociopathy? It seems to me (with my limited education) that this definition is a combination of Sociopathy, Psychopathy, and Borderline Personality Disorder.

In short and in 'layman's' terms, Sociopaths are not bound by social norms/rules, and enjoy causing pain and suffering to others. Most people the media calls 'Psychos' are actually Sociopaths (serial killers/rapists). Psychopaths are ambitious, and will cause pain to others if it gives them some gain, but don't do it solely for pleasure, as they take no pleasure in it. There is a theory that the most successful tycoons in the world are Psychopaths, as in order to achieve that level of success, you have to have no regard for others. BPD is characterized by unstable relationships, impulsivity, unstable self-image, fear of being alone, and manipulative behavior. Violence towards loved ones in men, and promiscuity to gain acceptance in women is common.

I think perhaps you have defined 'Anti-social Personality Disorder', which can be sociopathy or psychopathy.


I would say that there is a really good chance that suicide bombers, islamic executioners (like that Jordanian fellow), etc are sociopaths. Those Columbine kids may have had anti-social personality disorder, but primarily acted within the 'Mob Mentality' - separated, they may not have done anything, but together, their instability and hatred fed each other.

Regardless, we can't diagnose people posthumously, from 1000's of miles away, and without PhDs, so my ideas (and yours) mean squat in the real world.

Needless to say, suicide bombers are nutbars, and pose a new threat to the US forces. It changes the rules when your enemy has no problem dying, as long as he takes one or two of the 'enemy' with him. Similar to Japanese Kamikazes in WW2 I suppose.

How do you feel the US has handled this new kind of threat? Could they do more to protect themselves? Have they gone too far already?

 

[combat_medic]

I can't find the exact link, but it was from a graduate thesis on sociopathy and personality disorders.

 

[mdh]

Perhaps this observation has already been made, but isn't the example of Imperial Japan the closest historical analogy we have to modern Islamo-fascism? There are a few parallels: the bushido death cult, ritual suicide, the obession with Emperor worship (a deistic entity), uncompromising xenophobia, I'm not sure that we'll get too far categorizing today's suicide bombers as a sociopathic phenomenon.    

 

[dutchie]

An interesting comparison, and I don't think it has been mentioned so far. Some differences, however:

Japan had imperialistic goals, the Islamo-Fascists do not.
Imperial Japan was united and very well organized. The Islamo-fascists are organized, but not overly so, and are definitely not united.
Imperial Japan had a conventional army/military, although they fought in sometimes unconventional ways. The Islamo-fascists definitely do not have a conventional army, and fight in almost exclusively unconventional ways.

Re:"I'm not sure that we'll get too far categorizing today's suicide bombers as a sociopathic phenomenon." - I'm not sure I characterized them as a Sociopathic Phenomenon. The discussion on sociopathy came about as a response to comparisons to suicidal north american teens and suicide bombers.

 

[M16]

Mr. Martin won't send troops to Iraq.

We do have troops in Iraq.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

We do do we? Try doing some research before making such ridiculous statements. Granted we had troops in there as part of the Foreign Exchange Program but there are no Canadian units there.

 

[jmackenzie_15]

Re: Canadian Troops To Iraq?
« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2004, 20:11:13 » 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If they send troops to Iraq, which I hope they do, I just hope they wait a couple of years so that I'm old enough to deploy with that force.
A nice, light LAV based force would be one heck of a contribution.

obviously you're too young to know what you're talking about.Canada stands nothing to gain or benefit from going to that hellhole.Untill the US really reaches out and begs for help, which I might add, that day will never come, i highly HIGHLY doubt you will see Canadian combat troops in iraq.I would sooner quit the CF than join in on an american crusade through the middle east for no particular reason , other than the fake one we've been told to oust, and I quote, "evil doers". Right on Batman.

Now if Iran is proven to have nuclear weapons, we could go there.If north korea makes good on its threats, we could go there.If Sudan gets totally out of control, hell we MIGHT even go there.Iraq is probobly the last place we'd end up.Our troops are too valuable to us to be wasted in a place like Iraq.Thats Bush's ugly closet monster, not ours.Untill some part of that mess threatens us, or requires a peacekeeping mission which likely wont happen anytime soon, dont even count on it.

 

[McG]

I would sooner quit the CF than join in on an american crusade through the middle east for no particular reason ,

Put some thought into why you are in now.  If the order comes to deploy, you won't be given the option to quit at that time; you will go.

an american crusade through the middle east for no particular reason , other than the fake one we've been told to oust, and I quote, "evil doers". Right on Batman.

Shake your head.  The war is over but the fighting is not, and unfortunately the struggle in Iraq has been allowed to become symbolic, for both sides, in the war on terror (even though it may be a stretch to link the initial invasion to fighting terror).  You may not agree with the reasons for the initial invasion, but it happened and if the west does not win in the aftermath, then Islamic extremism will have won.

 

[jmackenzie_15]

theres no doubt in my mind that the americans will inevitably crush the insurgents.Its a matter of time.Then again, it is costing them a crapload of money.

"but it happened and if the west does not win in the aftermath, then Islamic extremism will have won."

thats the thing, fanatacism never dies.You could kill every last man in that country and the last living one would still fight you.It will go on forever, regardless.

 

[McG]

That is why the Iraq effort requires more than just combat troops hunting down insurgents.  It must include reconstruction of the infrastructure and institutions of a democratic state.

 

[jmackenzie_15]

If thats the case, lets just tell every other country in the world that doesnt have the same culture as north america and 'install democratic states'. If the way the iraqis were living was wrong and needed to be corrected so badly that required war, then well we have alot of work to do in other places dont we.

 

[1feral1]

I believe Canadian troops should NOT go to Iraq currently for the US war against terror.

Do you even know what this war is all about?? Although the US and UK may be leading it, its a war between radical Islam vs the west, which includes Canada. Even positions agaisnt the war has not stopped problems in France. So if you think being neutral is going to save ya, think again!

I don't know where you are getting your information. A lot of them   'poor local people' (as you put it) are carrying RPGs and AKs, and would KILL you because not who you are, but who you represent. The west.

There is more good things going on in Iraq than you think, but the one sided media are too keen for stories on body counts and collateral deaths, than to report the good overall majority of people who are thankful Saddam has been crushed.

Take the fight to the EN before its on your shores, and don't get me wrong, the EN is already within the Canadian populus right now, and you don't believe that, somethings wrong.

Wes

 

[jmackenzie_15]

I still stand by attacking saudi arabia over anybody else first.If this 'war on terror' is really about fighting terrorism, shouldnt you start with the place most of the terrorist hijackers came from in the first place? isnt that country still full of them and al qaeda links that the US wont admit because it would hurt business? what about egypt? syria?

 

[McG]

If thats the case, lets just tell every other country in the world that doesnt have the same culture as north america and 'install democratic states'.

No.  However, we cannot turn a blind eye to state sanctioned torture and represion of its civilian population.  I don't imagine you think it is okay to allow states to employ WMD against their ethnic minoreties.  However, this is irrelevant as you are trying to drag the conversation back to the causes of the invasion.  Why the US invaded is now irrelevant.

The reason that reconstruction is required in Iraq is to enable the Iraqi people to look after thier own affairs and move forward under a system that respects individual rights.

 

[McG]

I still stand by attacking saudi arabia over anybody else first.If this 'war on terror' is really about fighting terrorism, shouldnt you start with the place most of the terrorist hijackers came from in the first place?

Again, this is no longer relevant.  You cannot change the past and current realities have moved the struggle to Iraq.

 

[1feral1]

Re: Canadian Troops To Iraq?
« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2004, 20:11:13 »    

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Canada stands nothing to gain or benefit from going to that hellhole..... I would sooner quit the CF than join in on an american crusade through the middle east for no particular reason

Benifit? Bloody heck Mackenzie! Sheesh, what about letting the world know we too will not be held ransom by a bunch of terrorists. In for a penny, in for a pound. Sorry, I disagree with that comment, and the next one really has me wondering about your own integrity.

I suggest quit sooner than later (tomorrow?), as I would not want anyone with an attitude like that in my section, as you'd get someone of value killed.

Wake up!

Shakes head in TRUE disgust.


Wes

 

[jmackenzie_15]

okay, for the last time, correct me if Im wrong, how many terrorists are there in iraq? i dont see any... oh wait, thats because those are , from their persepctive, freedom fighters.Quite frankly id do the same thing if a foreign power came into my town and started telling me how to live. But i forgot that anyone that opposes the US military is a 'terrorist'. At least in afghanistan there was a legitimit reason to be there, and a tactical reason, being al qaeda operated there quite heavily. Going there to remove them, would make sense.There ARE no enemies in iraq that are worth sending our military over there, compared to the countries I listed earlier, and if you had taken the time to pay attention to what I was saying, being , we should be prioritizing countries with the highest level of terrorist activity first (saudi arabia, egypt, syria,).Wouldnt that make sense? or are we just saving the best for last, and everybody wants to practice in iraq first? the new military sandbox?

 

[jmackenzie_15]

and Wes, you do realize by benefit canada , I meant benefit us by destroying threats to our people.Thats a benefit.You assumed i was talking about money.We will help NOTHING by going to iraq, and thats the point ive been trying to make all along.Thats the americans problem, theyll deal with it.IMO, it has very little to do with actual terrorism.Its a symbolic battle of west vs east.Id rather spend our time attempting to locate the actual threats than 'stickin it to the brown guys'.

 

[1feral1]

Tell me something Mack, if the US had sat back and did nothing, and Iraq ended up being held responsible for a 'big event' in the west, which killed thousands, say maybe even in Toronto or another city in Erope, than what would you be saying? Answer the question, and don't waffle.

The invasion of Iraq has truly saved us all from something sinister in the future, along with the fact that a terrible dictator has been taken out, and countless thousands are now free, and are experiencing freedom for the first time in a generation.




Wes