Metal Reviews

War is a catalyst of capitalism. It's inherent in our society.

Oh sure, because attacking terrorists is the easiest thing in the world. Or did you think Israel's last campaign in Lebanon was a complete success, that didn't make Olmert look like a cak-handed wanker?

It's different. We're not invading an entire country. We're just entering the northern area of Iraq which the terrorist camps are based, not a place for civilians to live in. It's mostly hills there. When there's no civilians to worry about I think chances of success is higher.

1. Israel invaded Southern Lebanon, bombed it to fuck, and still did fuck-all good.
2. Civilians live fucking everywhere. You think Americans in Iraq are targeting them on purpose? No.
3. Hills? Hills?! Goddamn, man, if the Commies couldn't take out the Taliban with attack choppers and shit, the Turks will have even less chance. Fucking terrorists love hilly terrain, gives them the advantage.

1.Israel invaded the DAMN COUNTRY, Turkey is supposed to enter a few kilometres into northern Iraq, just enough to reach the camps.
2. There are no civilians there, look it up. We're not entering cities.
3. Commies were idiots, our military knows the terrain very well, they've been fighting there for 20 years now. We have all those choppers,tanks and whatnot they use on wars, but it's likely that only commando squads and regular infantry will enter and there won't be a lot of bombing and shit. We don't need to bomb it, our soldiers know exactly where to go and take em out. They've been there before.

In a guerilla war, it'll be damn hard for your lot, is all I'm saying.

How typically Jewish of you, always thinking of the cost

I think what supporters of the so-called "war on terror" sometimes fail to understand is that if you declare war on someone, they're going to fight back. We now have more terrorism than ever before. I think the battle against terrorism should be fought within our own borders, rather than turning citizens of other countries against us.

Or that the idea of a war on an idea was a bad back when it was a war on communism.

America's war on terror is not something I support, but our case is slightly different. We have people, civilians, dying on a daily basis sometimes. Would you rather have civilians die or soldiers die fighting, which is what they're ultimately trained to do? Terrorists always find a way to enter and there is no certain way securing your borders completely, other than putting an end to the threat once and for all by taking it to their territory. Terrorist will fight back, but when unopposed they're just murdering, not fighting.

I agree with you. I don't think the two are the same because Turkey is right beside Iraq while US is on the other side of the world.

Obviously I don't really know about the situation in Turkey, but I was unaware of the problem with terrorism there. It's a very tricky problem to deal with, as you obviously can't sit back and let it happen, but fighting back may well breed more terror.

But terrorism is by its very definition a stateless entity, which if you attack it in one place will simply disperse to another. In my view a "war on terror" must be purely defensive, ie the tightening of security etc. The only offensive action you can take is on the causes of it. Probably a slightly less "realpolitik" influenced foreign policy would be of some use here, as pointed out in hilarious circumstances by Ron Paul. Trying to attack terrorists with military power is like waving a massive axe at a poisonous gas.

Stateless entity? Funny you should say that, this terrorist organization I'm talking about is trying to become a state, namely Kurdish state, in northern Iraq. It's like a parent watching his kid build a house out of legos which shouldn't be built, the parent might very well stop it but if he doesn't that house is going to be built sooner or later and he's going to have to deal with it when it's a bigger problem. Defending would be ignoring it. They're more organized than you think. You guys are looking at terror in a narrow 9/11 scheme. I've lived with it all my life.

Reading about people living by the bible and stuff i could only think of this Ned Flanders quote:

"I did everything the bible said. Even the stuff that contradicted the other stuff."

(thats not 100% correct just what i remember lol)

The proposed Kurdish state is a terrorist entity? How do you figure that? Problems of a "nation without a state" are almost always rooted in past imperialism. It's imperialism that they don't already have their own country, and it's imperialism that makes Turkey want to fuck with their chances of having one now, terrorists or not.

You'll also find British people are more familiar with this situation than you think. Before Irish independence there was a tendency here to regard the formative Irish Catholic state as a terrorist entity because in popular perception it was made up of IRA members. The British didn't want a terrorist state on their doorstep, in the same way that the Turks don't. Of course, after Irish independence that perception turned out to be utter bollocks, as it would with Kurdistan, if that ever exists.

I didn't know much about that but it does look comparable indeed.


I have a more nationalistic approach to this, because of the terrible things that happened in the past and are happening now, even though I wouldn't call myself a nationalist at all. Kurdish people are more than welcome to do whatever they will, I have Kurdish friends and relatives FYI, but this Kurdish state, it's proposed leaders and it's military arm, the PKK, have proven their hostility towards us a thousand times. I just can't have it, an enemy growing under my nose. Besides the Kurdish state is supposed to have a part of Turkey claimed as their land, which is utter bullshit and totally unacceptable. I wouldn't give my land away like that, just because the Kurds happen to be a majority there.

But is it really your land? if the majority is Kurdish and want to be part of a Kurdistan, (if it becomes a reality) then what could you really do to keep it from happening. You say " no your Turkey" and they say " fuck off you! were part of Kurdistan" then you just have a big cluster of Kurdish separtists bombing and attacking anything related to the TUrkish Government. The only thing that would succesfuly keep the region as being under Turkish control would be a strong Garrison and treat it like an occupation. Then can that realy be a succes? Look at the whole Palestine thing.


Tough situation in Turkey though. It does put perspective on how much here in the states we can grumble about the war but in reality doesn't effect us at all. Excluding those of course with loved ones in the Service.

Nobody owns anywhere and everyone has the right to live as they want but seriously would you be ok with it if say, all the Muslims in America gathered in a certain part of the land, claimed independence and called it, Free Islamic-Arabic state, and started murdering civilians as if it was a way of getting what's supposed to be their right? And the other ethnicities, groups followed this path? Let's give every single ethnicity in the world their own countries. If the Kurds have the right, why not the Hispanics in America, Turks in Germany...

Separating the world with a ruler in your hand and a gun in the other isn't really the answer to freedom, in my opinion.

Haven't the Kurds been collectively shat upon for the past however many years by both Turkey and Iraq? Not that they're right to use violence, but, like, they have a point.

And have people heard about this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/6257388.stm

We has been attacked! We're all Scottish now, etc.