Slashdot Mirror


The Pentagon, MMORPGs, and Catching Osama

MarkRH writes "I know, it looked like a troll to me too. But apparently a Pentagon-funded group, the Highlands Forum, is investigating the possibility of fighting terrorism by postulating that terrorist networks are similar to the online communities found in MMORPGs. By studying interaction within a community like Everquest, the military hopes to find hints on how to crack Al Qaeda." See also the "Uncloaking Terrorist Networks" post of several months back.

198 comments

  1. CRACK KILLS by sat985 · · Score: 0

    simply assinine is what comes to mind. Well they got money to burn so wha the hell, wonder how many $9.95 a month subscriptions their budget can buy?

  2. Slashdot truism: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Post anti-MS: Funny, Insightful.
    Post anti-Linux: Offtopic, Troll.

    1. Re:Slashdot truism: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Post anti-slashdot: Flamebait

  3. The Army by Exiler · · Score: 1

    Could make a MMPORPG about catching Osama, they've already got a propaganda FPS game...

    --
    Banaaaana!
    1. Re:The Army by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 2
      Could make a MMPORPG about catching Osama, they've already got a propaganda FPS game...

      You mean like "America's Army: Soldiers"?

    2. Re:The Army by tibman · · Score: 1

      I love most FPS games but i'd have to say "America's Army" sucks. Though it is one of the best games graphically i've seen in a while. It was NOT designed with soldiers in mind.

      For example, Level 1: BRM (Basic Rifle Marksmanship) What soldier has the patients to shoot at digital popup targets when his head is full of shit like BRAS (Breath, Relax, Aim, and Squeeze) and SPORTS (Slap the Magazine, Pull charging handle, Observe round eject, Release charging handle, Tap forward assist, Squeeze trigger). I personally had a hard time putting forth the effort to shoot when the bobbing cursor was just right.

      Imagine they had a Virtual High School game and you could do High School all over again. Wouldn't that be the crappiest game ever? Unless you've never been to high school before.

      "America's Army" makes for a good recruiting tool, but definately not a good SIM or game. Have you ever fired a 40mm Automatic Grenade Launcher (MK19) off the top of a HMMWV? That will make just about anyone join and I can guarantee ammo for that is cheaper than whatever the development costs for that "game" was.

      Though i cannot endorse, criticize, or make statements for the Army, this is my personal opinion.

      -PFC Carnes, Delta Troop 1/16th Cavalry Regiment, Fort Knox

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    3. Re:The Army by Dark+Lord+Seth · · Score: 2

      Good points, but remember the game was and still is largely a recruiting tool used to get people interested into the army. You used to see army leaflets and ads in magazines, then online and FPSers are a hit, so why not make one huge Army FPS advertisement?

      The game itself though is fun IMHO, because it's so much focussed on realism then any other FPS game, except maybe the Delta Force series, but I got no experience with those and it is highly unlikely that breathing in incorporated into DF. I would HATE to play a game with such emphasis on reality online though, because I'm more of the simple "blast em to kingdom come, with style" type. Combined warfare that is featured in BF1942 is far more interesting to me, at least.

      Have you ever fired a 40mm Automatic Grenade Launcher (MK19) off the top of a HMMWV?

      No, and screw the grenade launcher, I want the hummer :) Those babies are rarer then diamonds overe here in the Netherlands and I want one!

    4. Re:The Army by frp001 · · Score: 1
      Right... so... we had:

      Counterstrike in Russia

      Quake in Afghanistan
      And now Everquest if the Far East...
      I hope we never have nuclear winter nights!!!

      --
      May I use your sig please?
    5. Re:The Army by Exiler · · Score: 1

      "America's Army" makes for a good recruiting tool,

      Look up Propaganda, I never said it was supposed to be a sim.

      --
      Banaaaana!
    6. Re:The Army by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · · Score: 2
      A High School simulation... You mean like Tokimeki Memorial?


      I can certain enjoy a high school simulation... The appeal is you can go back and do things differently. You could try being someone else, joined a different club, met a different girl, etc....


      Maybe there are FPS's that would appeal to people in the military because they would let them do things differently as well...


      I have a friend who drove an M1 in the army, but he still plays WWIII tank simulations... Why? Because he never got a chance to take on the Russkies. :-)

  4. MMORPGs by intermodal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Personally, with the comments traded between gamers, i'm a little uncomfortable with anti-terrorist types studying gamers. Something that is commonly said in jest could easily be taken out of context by these government personnel and blown way out of proportion...

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    1. Re:MMORPGs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On EverQuest? No. Shouting insults about the lineage of Halflings, and threatening to burn Rivervale or whatnot to ground just wouldn't tip anyone off.

      Now Counter-strike.. Well, aside from people sucking anymore, that's the other reason I stopped playing.

      What?

      I liked the AK. It was so much more sexier than the Colt. :P Although, the TMP owned. ;)

      Actually, we're probably all just paranoid about this. If none of us have gotten arrested or stared at for talking about shooting people with high calibre weaponry, in public, well..

      (C'mon, you know you've talked about those bastard campers when you were at a store at 3 in the morning for a food run. ;))

    2. Re:MMORPGs by CaffeineAddict2001 · · Score: 1

      They would be studying how funds\weapons are traded through tightly woven heirarchies where members of the heirarchy may or may not always be available at a given time.

      They don't care about what stupid comment Joe Sixpack might say about fearless leader GWB.

    3. Re:MMORPGs by helix400 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Something that is commonly said in jest could easily be taken out of context by these government personnel and blown way out of proportion...

      Perhaps by studying jesting remarks in games, anti-terrorism investigators will better understanding real vs. joking threats in real life.

      Besides, this is a study of social behavior, not an Everquest anti-terror crackdown. They're not looking for Osama bin Laden's online character.

      Personally, I think it would be a blast if the feds EXPANDED their Everquest study, such as practicing their infiltrartion method by putting moles inside Everquest groups for intelligence, or secretly picking off key characters. It would add a whole new dimension to the game. =)

    4. Re:MMORPGs by EpsilonFour · · Score: 1
      Personally, I think it would be a blast if the feds EXPANDED their Everquest study, such as practicing their infiltrartion method by putting moles inside Everquest groups for intelligence, or secretly picking off key characters. It would add a whole new dimension to the game.

      Yeah, or perhaps purging Battle.net of dupers and hackers. I can imagine sitting in some Hell Cows game and all of a sudden 2 Barbs, 1 Sorc, and one Curse B*tch Necro come in and nab some lamer. You'd TP (Or PT depending on your stresses) back to town and find their items on the ground and them unable to pick them up. *Watches level 9 powergamer grab all his items and quickly quit the game.*

    5. Re:MMORPGs by aeronaut · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, this is real stuff. One of the hot research topics in dynamical systems is network structures.
      I think it was Stanley Milgram that did the famous "Six Degrees of Separation" experiment. People like Steve Strogatz and Duncan Watts have followed up on that with small world networks, scale free networks, etc. These network structures appear in places like the electrical power grid for southern California, the neural network of the flatworm C. Elegans, and the network of movie actors (the Kevin Bacon game.) See Duncan Watts's web site for more (and more accurate) information.

      So I think studying the networks in games like Everquest is a great idea. I don't think that they think they will actually start to pick up coded messages from real terrorist cells, but rather they want to see how these people interact and connect in the network. And this is not the pentagon themselves, but a funded think tank doing the work. Big difference.

      Anyway, if the Feds start busting Everquest players, I'll be laughing my ass off. But I don't expect it to happen. However, the rich structure of the networks formed in these MMORPGs has to be worth at least a look.

      Regards,
      Martin Melhus
      (aeronaut)

      --
      Never generalize
    6. Re:MMORPGs by pcidevel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They don't care about what stupid comment Joe Sixpack might say about fearless leader GWB.

      Sure they don't, keep telling yourself that. They also don't care if you make a joke about "Burning Bushes".

      Freedom of speech? What's that?

      --

      I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!

    7. Re:MMORPGs by zaibutsu · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This warning is about 40 years too late.

      UK SF fans used to be quite involved in postal Diplomacy. One of them was late orgsanising his moves once and sent a telegram to a potential ally reading "suggest we join forces for an attack on Liverpool".

      He spent the following day deep in conversation with gentlemen wearing black raincoats.

    8. Re:MMORPGs by arkanes · · Score: 2

      I'm not really sure the concept of mule characters and bots translates well into real life. But I'm not the pentagon, and I don't have a million dollar budget, so what do I know.

    9. Re:MMORPGs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Sounds like you know what you are talking about.

      Must be why your are scored at 1, while ranting, reactionary dumbasses are modded up as 4: Insightful.

      Sheesh.

    10. Re:MMORPGs by Kintanon · · Score: 2

      Mules do translate well. Third party pickups. If 2 people are never able to meet face to face, but both have the opportunity at different times to meet the Mule, then transfers of money and items can take place. Also, there may be people in the network that aren't involved in the actual terrorism, they just hold caches of supplies/weapons/money and that's all.

      Kintanon

      --
      Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
    11. Re:MMORPGs by Draigon · · Score: 1

      Further proof that the government is managed by either aliens or humans serverely out of touch with reality crouching under a desk somewhere.

      "Think men! Think! What can we do to get inside the minds of these... these... people? What's that you got there son?"

      "Uh... this is a MMORPG sir."

      "MMORPG eh? Sounds good to me. Pay a scientist to endorse it so as to not make us look crazy."

      "Sir, I found a weakness in their caves. All we have to do is cast level 5 earthquake!"

      ok, I got carried away... but so did they.
      I hate the world.

      --
      -Rabbit
    12. Re:MMORPGs by cicatrix1 · · Score: 2

      Except that implies that people still play Diablo 2, and that it was ever a good game. LOL!

      --

      I know more than you drink.
    13. Re:MMORPGs by arkanes · · Score: 2

      And they need to study MMORPGs to see how they make it work? Man, our army is in pretty sad shape.

    14. Re:MMORPGs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, if Bush had any brains, he would have pardoned *that* guy instead of those other random people.

  5. Riiiight by MattW · · Score: 5, Funny

    Finally, the age-old question is answered:

    How can we play Everquest all day and get paid for it?

    1. Re:Riiiight by the+unbeliever · · Score: 1

      Player Auctions is your answer.

    2. Re:Riiiight by drunkrussian · · Score: 1

      Heh...I work at a defense agency that does military simulations, and sadly enough, there is in fact a guy who is getting paid to play EQ right now.

  6. Rumsfeld by andyrut · · Score: 1

    "Well, we didn't find Osama but my Human Leiutenant is as level 53!"

    1. Re:Rumsfeld by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could see them getting full support from the mmorpg's company with the companie giving them mod/admin like powers.

    2. Re:Rumsfeld by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I" before "E", except after "C", or when sounding like "ay", as in "neighbor" or "weigh".

    3. Re:Rumsfeld by voudras · · Score: 1

      atheist?

  7. Really? by Malicious · · Score: 1

    Does this make Everquest Gamers Terrorists?

    --
    01101001001000000110000101101101001000000110001001 10000101110100011011010110000101101110
    1. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the people at http://www.mavav.org would probably think so...

    2. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. They are still just virgin shut-ins. The only thing they terrorise is the box of Ding-Dongs next to their computer desk.

  8. Remember folks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ALL GEEKS ARE TERRORISTS!!!

    Yet another reason I feel unloved... Now my neighbours will hate me too!

  9. I wonder.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If PKers will now be called terrorists.

  10. Waste of time and money by TerryAtWork · · Score: 1, Interesting

    They'll pursue this for a while then quit - the false positives will be off the hook.

    The thing is, most MMORG players in the USA are loyal Americans who'd love to help. Spying on them is just buring down the house to roast a pig.

    --
    It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
    1. Re:Waste of time and money by DeltaSigma · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You might read the article.

      If you do, you'll find that they merely wish to observe the social interactions of players on a massive network, as they feel that such networks somewhat mirror the dispersal of Al Quida's terrorist group.

      They're not "spying," so much as they are "spectating."

      I doubt we'll see any "pirates" or "hackers" picked up off of this one... That's really not the Pentagon's job.

    2. Re:Waste of time and money by NerdSlayer · · Score: 2

      They'll pursue this for a while then quit - the false positives will be off the hook.

      The thing is, most MMORG players in the USA are loyal Americans who'd love to help. Spying on them is just buring down the house to roast a pig.


      Ungh, okay, screw read the article... read the summary! They're talking about modeling terrorist networks with MMORGs, not seeking out terrorists who play MMORGs!

    3. Re:Waste of time and money by TerryAtWork · · Score: 2

      I read it and you're right, I should have read it sooner.

      But I must confess that I didn't even try to read it as I assumed it had to be slashdotted.

      --
      It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
    4. Re:Waste of time and money by DeltaSigma · · Score: 1

      A safe assumption, I don't blame you.

      Nice signature by the way.

    5. Re:Waste of time and money by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 2

      Your sig is tooo funny lol

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    6. Re:Waste of time and money by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 2



      Bullshit.

      Why does everyone justify their actions by saying, "because of the terrorists"? They want to study you like rats for market research(just go look at how they research your habits for TV advertisements).

      The US has 30 fucking million "1 metre" satellites(scary detail) to track people, and they still need to do this?

    7. Re:Waste of time and money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      omg lol ur kewl asl?

  11. Doubtful by GodHead · · Score: 3, Funny

    I doubt terrorists have the same immeadiate and direct communication that exists in on-line games. The less communication, the less chance for discovery.

    In any case, I know MMORPG players. The only thing they accomplish in the real world is living in the basement and drinking Dew. Hell set up suspected terrorists with an EQ subscription and the only they they'll blow up in orcs.

    --
    Just wait till some crappy band steals your nic.
    1. Re:Doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the only they they'll blow up in orcs

      Dude! Use the preview button!

  12. Hmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Fsck you, we're in North Temple of Veeshan today."

    "STFU our guild reserved it three months ago!"

    "Piss off!"

    "You piss off!"

    (A random cadre of level 60+ wizards run by, complete with manaburn. "For Innoruuk!" They cast, take out three dragons, and then die to a mobile much lower level than they are.)

    Meanwhile, back at the Bat Office..

    Mr. Powell: Obviously, the Islamic Fundamentalists play Tier'dal Wizards.

  13. The Sims/Bushes by joeszilagyi · · Score: 1

    Following this trend, this makes me want a "Bushes" White House add-on for the Sims.

    --
    Dude, where's my packet?
    1. Re:The Sims/Bushes by Fyz · · Score: 1

      Yeah, DEFINATELY!!!! Oh, you ment "Bushes" as in the president... nevermind..

    2. Re:The Sims/Bushes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Following this trend, this makes me want a "Bushes" White House add-on for the Sims."

      If not just for the daughters.

  14. The real way to beat the Taliban... by craenor · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is to subject them to l337 sp34k all day. U.S. pwnz Bin L4d3n.

  15. Not that crazy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Al-Qaeda is a loosely affiliated network of nodes trying to acheive a similar goal across large distances and online MMORPG is pretty analagous(when speaking in terms of mathematical models). I'm sure there are a few insights to be had.

    -

    1. Re:Not that crazy... by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 2

      So they should study beowulf clusters and the scientific community too?

      Fine with me; anything that will burn off those defense dollars I'm happy with.

      --
      Blearf. Blearf, I say.
    2. Re:Not that crazy... by Alyeska · · Score: 1
      Al-Qaeda is a loosely affiliated network of nodes trying to acheive a similar goal across large distances

      So are family reunions.

      So is the Trans-Alaska Pipeline system.

      So is FedEx's tracking system. Etc.

      The military, I think, just wants to keep an eye on their biggest enemy -- the Intelligent, Questioning Citizen, AKA 'Geek'....

    3. Re:Not that crazy... by pcidevel · · Score: 2

      So are family reunions.

      But on a MMOG, the typical player has some desire to communicate (even when outside of the game) while still remaining relatively anonymous (I know I don't like my real identy to go out over the net). Quite a bit different that family reunions, but quite similar to terrorist organizations.

      So is the Trans-Alaska Pipeline system.

      Uhh, oil != people.

      So is FedEx's tracking system. Etc.

      Interestingly enough, terrorists and MMOG players have to do all of their communication outside of a network designed for that task. The FedEx tracking system is a closed system that generates massive ammounts of revenue to support itself. It's quite a bit different than an Everquest guild organizing for a raid or a group of terrorists communicating plans for blowing up a building. I can see where a group of losely connected amatuers trying to communicate with anonymity while not spending money is much more analogous to terrorist networks than FedEx's tracking system.

      --

      I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!

    4. Re:Not that crazy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The military, I think, just wants to keep an eye on their biggest enemy -- the Intelligent, Questioning Citizen, AKA 'Geek'....

      Not much point in trying to convince you to get over yourself, is there?

      That's right... you are not a paranoid, lonely, wimp loser, you are the biggest enemy of the "Military Industrial Complex."

      I'm guessing you are one of those poeple who uses anonymizer.com just to read the Villiage Voice on-line, aintcha?

    5. Re:Not that crazy... by Alyeska · · Score: 1
      Interestingly enough, terrorists and MMOG players have to do all of their communication outside of a network designed for that task.... It's quite a bit different than an Everquest guild organizing for a raid or a group of terrorists communicating plans for blowing up a building.

      Point being that information systems are information systems. They aren't going to learn anything new by watching a MMORPG that they don't already know.

      "Uhh, oil != people."

      Uhh, no, TAPS=many nodes (pump stations, satellite/microwave/optical comm-operated systems) all hundreds of miles away from each other, coordinated by people using information systems. Just another information system.

      I don't see how watching Evercrack is going to be any different than watching any other coordinated information system.

    6. Re:Not that crazy... by pcidevel · · Score: 2

      I don't see how watching Evercrack is going to be any different than watching any other coordinated information system.

      Because the point isn't that they are watching a coordinated system, but they are watching to see how the system is coordinated on a shoe-string budget by a group of amatuers with no training in how to do the effort and with nothing to gain from the effort. If you can't see the difference between an EQ guild coordinating a weekend raid, and the Alaskan Pipeline, then you lack forsight..

      --

      I thought someone said there was going to be free beer!

    7. Re:Not that crazy... by sql*kitten · · Score: 2

      So they should study beowulf clusters and the scientific community too?

      Neither of those is a good analogy. Beowulf clusters aren't self-organizing, and scientific communities asyncronously pursue open-ended research rather than working towards a specific goal. For example, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things if a professor in Cambridge is a day late posting his article to a journal, but it very much matters if a terrorist in New York doesn't have the van where it's supposed to be at the appointed hour.

      anything that will burn off those defense dollars I'm happy with.

      Either those dollars should be spent on something useful, or they should returned to their rightful owners. What you're saying is that you both want to be taxed and want that money to be wasted!

    8. Re:Not that crazy... by MadFarmAnimalz · · Score: 2

      I don't pay taxes; I'm not American, ma'am :)

      --
      Blearf. Blearf, I say.
  16. hmmm by the_other_one · · Score: 1

    A government paid job playing^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hstudying online games.

    Where do I apply?

    --
    134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
  17. Here's an *idea* by swordboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fight terrorism by addressing the reason *why* these people are driven a level of frustration that would cause them to commit such acts.

    Ask the average Joe on the street (in the US) about why September 11th happened and you'll hear something like, "evil doer". This befuddles me. These people aren't driven by pure evil but rather extreme frustration. Until the root of their frustration is addressed, I wouldn't be surprised if this continues forever.

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    1. Re:Here's an *idea* by spasm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      it's the 'war on terror' concept that really screws with my head - declaring war on a *technique*? way to make sure you never have to stop..

    2. Re:Here's an *idea* by rodgerd · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      For example, see the US government make strides in this direction by Dick Cheney ensuring the US is the only one of more that 100 countries blocking a bid to make drugs more affordable for third world nations.

    3. Re:Here's an *idea* by hellfire · · Score: 1

      Until Americans switch their primary power source for vehicles to something other than Oil I doubt the country will even bother with trying this approach.

      Americans consume a lot of things, especially Oil . The government knows why things are the way they are, they just have a major problem reconciling our needs with the needs of the rest of the world.

      Note: Emphasis added for the logically impaired masses.

      --

      "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

    4. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes... frustration... that must be it.

      It couldn't be any of the other traditional motives for such things, like greed or wrath.

      No, they obviously have just been on hold to the tech support operator too long.

    5. Re:Here's an *idea* by ender81b · · Score: 3, Troll

      These people aren't driven by pure evil but rather extreme frustration

      You forgot to add "and a massive dose of ignorance and intolerance." Of course I just described fanatics of all shapes, sizes, and colors whether it be terrorists, right-wing fundamentalists, or richard stallman (sorry couldn't resist).

    6. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well come on, we both know that the USA is the only country that does research for new drugs. The other countries have nothing to lose.

    7. Re:Here's an *idea* by bargle · · Score: 0, Troll

      Right. Their "frustration" is that we all won't be good little subjugates and convert to worshipping their false moon god in the clothing of the Lord.

      "Convert or die"

      --
      Would you shut up already?
    8. Re:Here's an *idea* by ivan256 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Fight terrorism by addressing the reason *why* these people are driven a level of frustration that would cause them to commit such acts.

      What do you do when one of the reasons these people are driven to frustration is that people of a certain gender are allowed freedoms that are offensive to said terrorists? Repeat that question to yourself and replace "gender" with "religion".

      What do you think the reason is? What's your simple solution?

    9. Re:Here's an *idea* by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      These people aren't driven by pure evil but rather extreme frustration. Until the root of their frustration is addressed, I wouldn't be surprised if this continues forever.

      osama bin laden and his organization wish to advance islamic fundamentalism as the answer to life's problems. he is frustrated in this task by the west because the west stands for a plurality of ideas, not fundamentalism, whether christian, hindu, islamic, jewish, or whatever form of fundamentalism, fundamentalism is not an acceptable basis for a government in the democratic west. that is the root of his frustration. so he attacks the west. and he attacks the west with terror, the surprise killing of civilians. there is the understanding you need. you may pursue further understanding if you like, but on the basis of these obvious truths, we have enough basis to condemn him as evil. "we" not being western christians, or even westerners, but human beings, islamic, christian, western, or otherwise.

      it's still evil.

      and it won't continue forever. it is only an endless cycle of violence to you if you don't believe in progress. progress means getting rid of fundamentally (no pun intended) evil people. if you do not consider someone like osama bin laden evil, whether you make a cursory effort at understanding him, or a ten year doctoral thesis level effort at understanding him, who do you think qualifies?

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    10. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Greed of what? Most (if not all) Muslim extermeists reject the west's materialism.

    11. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to your false wind god?

      Yahweh and Allah are both equally false.

      The day people realize that will be the day that a lot of unspeakable violence comes to an end on this planet.

    12. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't driven to this level of frustration. They drive themselves to it.

      For years, Muslim countries have resisted becoming modern. I can't honestly say what caused this, but my best guess is fear. The rulers and religious leaders always ruled by right of Allah. Now this new thing comes in, its called "Democracy". It threatens to reduce belief in their right to nil. So they resist it, they resist everything that comes out of democratic nations. Fast forward 50-80 years, they have stopped being able to resist it anymore. And, because of their resistance to change, they are some of the poorest countries. So they target the growing unrest by saying that its capitalism's fault, that they tried.

      Now, combine this with religious (I want to say brainwashing, but its not completely true) that has been going on for all this time. Add distrust of western civilization from the crusades (the third most terrible set of acts in human history in my opinion, next to Hitler's views and the type of slavery employed by Americans), and they combine into a huge rage of hate that is spewing out at us.

      It isn't our fault. It's the Islamic leaders. But the United States cannot help people who don't want to be free.want to be free.

    13. Re:Here's an *idea* by a_timid_mouse · · Score: 1

      Correction... it's frustration fueled by radical religious conviction that leads a person to believe that it is desirable and even honorable to die while murdering the "infidel's" innocents.

      You can't write-off the religious aspect. Frustration may spark the hatred, but it is the religious conviction that drives people to commit heinous crimes with no remorse for loss of innocent life whatsoever.

      Religion cuts to the core of who you really are, what you ultimately believe, and what your values are. In the case of the folks in question, I would blame their extreme behavior on frustration fueled and fanned by radical religious belief.

    14. Re:Here's an *idea* by kevcol · · Score: 2

      Hear hear! I mean, really- the Germans, Japanese, British, French, Italians, etc., stopped using Oil in thier vehicles long ago! What has taken the Americans so long?

      Oh, wait. Nevermind.

    15. Re:Here's an *idea* by sean23007 · · Score: 2

      fundamentalism is not an acceptable basis for a government in the democratic west. that is the root of his frustration

      Interestingly enough, that is also the root of George W. Bush's frustration.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    16. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, and "the Germans, Japanese, British, French, Italians, etc." are doing so well, aren't they?

    17. Re:Here's an *idea* by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 2

      The Islamic GAWD is the same as the Christian GAWD which is the same as the Jewish GAWD. I hope you weren't trying to draw a distinction between them.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    18. Re:Here's an *idea* by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      osama bin laden and his organization have reiterated their agenda of militant islamic fundamentalism time and time again.

      george w. bush is the elected leader of a pluralistic democratic country. if he has private religious views that inform his opinions, those views are bound by his advisors, the judicial and legislative branches of government, and the opinion of the american people.

      so not only is your assertion speculative, but even if it were true, it would be pointless.

      so pray tell, what exactly is your point?

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    19. Re:Here's an *idea* by GarryOwen · · Score: 1

      hate to break it to ya, but some of the worse massacres in History were done by extrememly secular states. Example - Stalin in Russia & Mau in China

    20. Re:Here's an *idea* by Dannon · · Score: 2

      Pure frustration wouldn't do it. I've been frustrated to the end of my wits and back again. We've all been.

      The thing is, a segment of the Arabic Muslim population in the Middle East has been indoctrinated into believing that the cause of their frustrations is not their leaders (who are more often than not monarchs, mullahs, and dictators), but Israel (a modern nation with an elected government) and the United States (which is halfway around the world, and spends more of its GNP on charity and aid than almost any other nation around). And they've been taught two other things: One, that the afterlife has no frustrations, and two, that the more 'infidels' you kill on your way to the afterlife, the nicer it is.

      I know that's not an accurate representation of Islam as a whole, but I believe it is an accurate representation of that segment of the Islamic population that breeds suicide bombers and worse.

      We know why they're out to kill and terrorize. They've told us, many times. They tell us every time Hamas or Islamic Jihad takes credit for another slaughtering of civilians in Israel.

      Or haven't you been listening?

      In this case, the root of their frustration is a condition of life imposed upon them by their own 'leaders', and those very same 'leaders' avoid ousting by turning around and telling their people that it's our fault. And you're right, it is a problem that's going to go on until that root is addressed.

      So, how do you suggest 'addressing' the oppression of a people that have been taught to hate us by their oppressors?

      --
      Good judgment comes from experience.
      Experience comes from bad judgment.
    21. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Greed of what? Most (if not all) Muslim extermeists reject the west's materialism.
      Just like I reject sexy girls. Hey, you - I reject you! I would not get laid with you even if you asked me!
    22. Re:Here's an *idea* by Fyz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which probably is exactly what Bush wants... A never ending cold war on an enemy not only remote, but formless and without voice.

      US citizens have an admirable quality of backing their leader in crisis situations, which he can exploit by basically doing whatever he wants...

      Like making a war over oil..

      Or calling anybody who disagrees with him a terrorist..

      Or screwing the environmental issues(which are bad for business) by giving their much-needed funding to the military..

    23. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      :s/elected/appointed/

    24. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I know that's not an accurate representation of Islam as a whole,

      I don't know. It's about as accurate as the rest of the assertions made.

    25. Re:Here's an *idea* by sameb · · Score: 1

      Bush should just watch Buffy. After all, he's trying to kill 'The First'.

      (Did Buffy's speech at the end of last week's episode remind anyone of Bush?)

    26. Re:Here's an *idea* by jfengel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The euphemism "war on terror" is necessary because calling it "war on Islamic terrorists" or "war on Islamic fundamentalists" would get the administration in deep, deep doodoo. Politically, it's necessary to avoid looking like they are opposed to Islam. Muslims around the world already half believe that the US really is out to war on them.

      There was some talk for a while that the War on Terror would apply to anybody using terror techniques, such as the Irish Republican Army, but that's an idea that went nowhere fast. Their opponents, therefore, are primarily Muslims, but not all Muslims.

      So America-bashing and Bush administration-bashing aside (and I'm not a big fan myself, having voted for the other guy), the administration is faced with the fact that a small subset of essentially very good people is committing despicable acts in the name of those good people. These people are afraid of being punished for the sins of a few. Their support is crucial, and the US in general prefers to make friends rather than enemies. This is an incredibly untenable position for the US government. I'm hard pressed to come up with a better name for the effort, even if it is an obvious euphemism.

    27. Re:Here's an *idea* by bargle · · Score: 1

      Actually, it really isn't. You need to pay more attention to the roots of Islam, particularly in the context of pre-Mohammed religion in the region, and the way "Allah" is treated in the Quran versus the Bible or the Talmud.

      Oh yeah, Mohammed was a sick puppy.

      "What's the greatest part about having sex with a nine-year-old?"

      "I don't know, ask Mohammed."

      To bad Ayesha (married at six, consumated at nine) is a matter of historical record. I bet that's one transmission Islam would like to suppress -- much like the horrific treatment of poor young girls in modern "fundamentalist" states.

      --
      Would you shut up already?
    28. Re:Here's an *idea* by garyrich · · Score: 2

      "george w. bush is the elected leader of a pluralistic democratic country. if he has private religious views that inform his opinions, those views are bound by his advisors,"

      Fundamentalist idealoges.

      "the judicial "

      A court stacked with conservatives and about to be loaded with more fundamentalist Bush appointees.

      "and legislative branches of government"

      Which took as the message of the 2002 elections that being Bush's rubber stamp is a vote getter

      "and the opinion of the american people."

      We are doomed.......

      --
      -- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
    29. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Several of of the planet's biggest drug companies are actually European. Of course, ignorance of this fact makes you part of the problem, not the solution, doesn't it?

    30. Re:Here's an *idea* by Fyz · · Score: 1

      The point, maybe, would be that Bush bases his political agenda on private beliefs(religious or economical) and that has great influence on the world, since he is the Chief Executive Officer.

      And while the USA IS a pluralistic democratic nation, Bush is neither.

      Pluralistic? "The only acceptable intercourse is between married folks."

      Democratic? Then why did he get his brother to stop the process of fine counting votes to establish democratic superiority?

      So while it IS extreme, and probably even wrongheaded to compare him with a terrorist monster, they are not diagonally opposite in ideals.

    31. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On a related note, btvs is probably at an all time high of cheesiness and pure undiluted feel-good bullshit right now.
      GODDAMN it sucks.

    32. Re:Here's an *idea* by kevcol · · Score: 2

      Look, the parent to my post implied it was an American problem that they run vehicles primarily on oil. Well, we all do, and automobile manufacturing is a multinational enterprise. Note too that power generation eats up quite a bit of oil as well. Everywhere.

    33. Re:Here's an *idea* by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      you don't like bush. that is ok. i didn't vote for him. i cried when the election went his way so narrowly.

      furthermore, it was great proof of the stability and depth of the american commitment to democratic principles that the country didn't descend into civil war over that election, unlike how other nations might have. a peaceful transfer of power, even when that hotly contested. imagine that blessing.

      but you are rather obtuse and show little understanding of democracy, and it's superior value over other forms of government if you confuse his private views with that of the policy of the united states.

      they are diagonally opposite in ideals.

      us policy (which is what we really are talking about, not the point of view of one man): slow to action (10 years dealing with iraq peacefully), seeking consensus (un agreement, which it got), pained if anything bad happens to civilians (or do you insist on painting american interest as hooting hollering bloodletting cowboys for the fun of it?)

      al qaeda policy: act violently and suddenly out of the agenda of a fringe fundamentalist point of view.

      comparing al qaeda and the us, or even george bush to osama bin laden, no matter what you think of george bush personally, is propaganda at best, and just plain stupid at worst

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    34. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > osama bin laden and his organization wish to advance islamic fundamentalism as the answer to life's problems. he is frustrated in this task by the west... so he attacks the west. and he attacks the west with terror

      My friend, this is true but severely lacking in understanding.

      Bin Laden's interest is indeed in advancing Islamic fundamentalism. However, it is also about advancing pan-Arabism (the uniting of Arab peoples under one rule, an Arab dream for centuries). The West props up corrupt governments (Saudi Arabia) throughout the Middle East because of oil (Saudi Arabia) and bases troops on what Islam claims as holy ground (oh, Saudi Arabia again), and it is for these reasons, he attacked the West. And what is Bin Laden's nationality? Saudi Arabian. And the nationalities of nearly all the 9/11 hijackers? Saudi Arabian.

      Meanwhile, Bush readies his troops to attack Iraq...

    35. Re:Here's an *idea* by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      if you insist on viewing all of the bounds on george w bush the man to be insufficient to filter out his point of view from the actions of the united states, pray tell, what glorious form of government have you thought up that is superior to democracy that satisfies your paranoid schizophrenia? or do you post out of cynical callowness rather than constructive observation? the value of your words should be adjusted accordingly, and that value should be zero in my view if i suppose right about your cynicism.

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    36. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > In this case, the root of their frustration is a condition of life imposed upon them by their own 'leaders', and those very same 'leaders' avoid ousting by turning around and telling their people that it's our fault.

      No no no. These rulers avoid ousting because the West kept/keeps them in power with fat contracts and aid!

      The West drew the lines on the map that created the modern middle east. It built the pumps. It installed friendly governments. It propped up key oil producing governments against the wishes of their own people (Iraq prior to Gullf war 1, Iran prior to Kohemeni, Saudi Arabia up to now).

      The first Gulf War was far more about retaining Saudi Arabia's position as the key regional power than anything else.

    37. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How on earth could Mohammed consummate with a girl aged 9?

      Maybe he got a *VERY* small dick after all ...

    38. Re:Here's an *idea* by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      pan-arabism is wonderful progress. if the us stands in the way of that, it should be severely punished.

      however, you confuse history with present day. history: the us getting into bed with disgusting regimes in the cold war to advance the fight against communism (which we won, but apparently the us gets no points for that in your view). present day: most american opinions and a growing majority of legislators who look at saudi arabia with great distrust. that will filter up to us policy. democracy is slow to anger, but slowness to anger is a good thing, not bad.

      the larger interest should be to reduce suffering of all peoples, american, arab, and israeli. osama bin laden, just as you suggest is interested in pan-arabism, which should reduce suffering, BUT: he wants to do it through sharia law, through theocracy. and this will reduce arab suffering how? so when the us opposes osama bin laden, does it oppose pan-arabism, or militant islamic fundamentalism? emphasis on fundamentalism, not islam. islam is a proud, passionate, beautiful religion, and a majority of muslims will tell you osama bin laden perverts islam for his causes, and does not represent them.

      so now that we understand osama bin laden more thoroughly, with your help, how exactly have we been informed to change us policy on iraq? exactly, we shouldn't change us policy on iraq at all. you have proven nothing except that you would rather empathize with a disgusting terrorist than a stable prosperous, pluralistic democracy.

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    39. Re:Here's an *idea* by IDStewart · · Score: 1
      if you insist on viewing all of the bounds on george w bush the man to be insufficient to filter out his point of view from the actions of the united states, pray tell, what glorious form of government have you thought up that is superior to democracy that satisfies your paranoid schizophrenia?

      Hmm...Constitutional republic seemed to be working pretty well for a while there.

    40. Re:Here's an *idea* by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      :s/insightful/cynical/

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    41. Re:Here's an *idea* by sryx · · Score: 1

      Hey may be we can just get a patent on Terrorism (like Method to instill terror by destructive means) and then we can just sue anyone who is practicing terrorism with out a license! Of course then Amazon will come out with a "1-Click Terrorism" patent and sue me for infringing on their patent.. Wait don't believe me? Have you SEEN some of the dot com patents we have lately?
      Oh what a sad sad world we live in...
      -Jason

    42. Re:Here's an *idea* by alia23 · · Score: 1

      btw not different of what is often done by some priest at present in the USA......

    43. Re:Here's an *idea* by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      and your point is? i'm glad we have moved from wallowing in cynicism to nitpicking on details. rather than oppose rather simple and straightforward observations about the situation we find ourselves in today, why not admit that cynicism is a poor replacement for a conscience and support the americans, british, and others who are about to die so the world is safer for everyone: american, european, iraqi, chinese, the world over. progress is progress is progress. if you insist on viewing action on iraq as nothing like progress, than you have cynically divorced yourself from an understanding that progress can, and does, and will take place in this world. removing saddam hussein, even by force if necessary, can be viewed as nothing more than progress. have a conscience and contribute or at least empathize with those involved in the struggle to make this a better world, don't just sit there as a decadent child of the west in your ivory tower and look down and spit on those in the struggle merely because you lack the conviction or intellectual honesty or bravery to fight the good fight.

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    44. Re:Here's an *idea* by garyrich · · Score: 2

      "if you insist on viewing all of the bounds on george w bush the man to be insufficient to filter out his point of view from the actions of the united states, pray tell, what glorious form of government have you thought up that is superior to democracy that satisfies your paranoid schizophrenia? "

      Democracy? I'm no expert on Switzerland (the only democracy I can think of off the top of my head) but they seem to do OK. You aren't one of those that thinks the US is one, are you? Ideally the US is a republic - which can work pretty well too. Nah, you use too many big words to be that uneducated. "glorius form of government"? hellifiknow. If I get only one bullet I'd reverse the circa 1886 court decision that granted corporations "personhood" and the rights of an individual under the constitution.

      --
      -- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
    45. Re:Here's an *idea* by daigu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How about "war on Al Qaeda"? You can only "win" a war if you can identify the enemy and you can identify objectives - like kill or capture 80% of leadership, reduce cash flows of the network by 90%, eliminate all training facilities, etc. "War on terrorism" is a euphemism like "war on drugs" - which is effectively a war on the freedoms of the American people.

      There was a fairly interesting interview with a group of foriegn policy experts that describe themselves as "realists" on NPR (with Ira Glass?) that make a pretty convincing argument that the very lack of definition of a "war on terror" is undermining the efforts. In the interview, these experts provided a number of interesting facts to support their position. For example, only 40% of the Al Qaeda leadership is in custody and that the network still has the capabilities to deliver devestating style attacks.

      While I do not know if this is true, there seems to be every indication that the current approach is being bungled - part of that is because the objectives (and enemies) are not well-defined.

    46. Re:Here's an *idea* by Mac+Degger · · Score: 2

      And it's posts like these which show how little is understood.

      Thing is, most of the hijackers were Saudi Arabians. Why? Because they're pissed that the US still has a huge force there, ever since the gulf war. Their reasons are more along the lines of "the US is an invading force which has setlled here"...and you know what? By many definitions, they're right. The US barged in and never left. That's one of the reasons behind OBL's crusade, and one of the reasons he gets so many Saudi's involved.

      Religious fundamentalism also gets in there, but that's more of a sugar coating than anything else.

      Oh, and I consider Bush to be funamentally evil, and someone who is too unstable to posses nuclear and biological weapons, too. GWB and OBL...they're just two sides of the same stupidly evil coin.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    47. Re:Here's an *idea* by alia23 · · Score: 1

      forget history? ha, you can bet there are millions of people *around the world* that will give their lives to blow up the US.

      This is the result of years and years of making friends... and NO, stopping the evil comunism is not a valid argument... It's a question of global economic dominance...

      and returning to the topic.... big brother is growing up...no in Russia but in the US... if you read slashdot you can smell about it.

      I REALLY wonder if that words will made me be tracked while browsing inet. Perhaps be included in the terrorist list. Modded down. Who knows?

    48. Re:Here's an *idea* by IDStewart · · Score: 1
      and your point is? i'm glad we have moved from wallowing in cynicism to nitpicking on details.

      While it may seem like nitpicking, there is a fundamental difference between a constitutional republic and a pure democracy. Under a constitutional republic, the will of the majority is tempered by respect for the fundamental rights of the individual (including the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness). Unrestrained democracy is simply populism. The suspension of habeus corpus during the civil war, the internment of Japanese and Italian-Americans during World War II and McCarthyism were all supported by the majority of the electorate.

      why not admit that cynicism is a poor replacement for a conscience and support the americans, british, and others who are about to die so the world is safer for everyone: american, european, iraqi, chinese, the world over.

      I fail to see how an unprovoked act of aggression against a sovereign nation will make the world a safer place (never mind that Congress, the only institution within the federal government authorized to do so, has yet to declare a state of war). If anything, it establishes a dangerous precedent for other nations that may be inclined to take similiar measures against those they view as threats (Russia v. Chechnya, China v. Taiwan, Lebanon v. Israel)

      removing saddam hussein, even by force if necessary, can be viewed as nothing more than progress.

      You and I, sir, apparently have very different ideas of what constitutes progress

      don't just sit there as a decadent child of the west in your ivory tower and look down and spit on those in the struggle merely because you lack the conviction or intellectual honesty or bravery to fight the good fight.

      It is precisely due to the fact that I do not lack a conscience that a speak out against the federal government's continuing match toward empire and tyranny.

      Quite frankly, I find the idea of the United States, with her stealth fighters and daisy cutters engaging in indiscriminate blanket bombardment as fighting the good fight laughable

    49. Re:Here's an *idea* by Fyz · · Score: 1

      You are correct in your analysis of US-Al Qaeda opposition in ideals; Indeed, that is the core of the situation.

      However, I AM talking about Bush, and not the US policy, since the parent of this discussion was comparing Bush to Bin Laden.

      I am not a politician, nor a political analyst, but I deem myself able to understand the basic principles that makes democracy the best we've got. And one of those principles is that the individual vote is sacred. I'm american, but live in Denmark, and here all votes are counted by hand, since this is the only way to be 100% sure about the outcome. Even the fact that Gore got 200000 votes more than Bush isn't as bad as having a voting system that doesn't count right. And having a doubted outcome fine counted and then aborted isn't the prevention of some sort of War of Succesion, it's just the american judicial system, which I (sorry) find to be deeply corrupted.

      It may be a bit ideallistic of you to think that the president doesn't influence US policy. Remember the Clinton Impeachement vote? As far as i recall, there was just a single senator that didn't vote what his party told him to vote(a democrat). That should tell us something about the enormous influence that each body of government and more importantly, each party and their leaders exert over the doings of the US.

      However, i concur with most you have to say about the basic validity of the US' actions. Hey, I was actively seeking a tour of duty to Afganistan for this very reason.

    50. Re:Here's an *idea* by bargle · · Score: 1

      The difference being this:

      1. Catholics do not hold up their priests as prophets.

      2. Most Christians in the United States are not Catholic, and do not recognize the sovoreignity of the Papacy.

      --
      Would you shut up already?
    51. Re:Here's an *idea* by gdanjo · · Score: 1
      Your reasons for calling it the war on terror seem, well, made up. They don't make sense.

      The monkier "war on terror" is a marketing inspired slogan in the same vein as "war on drugs." And I know Ronnie didn't think about whether penicilin would be caught in the cross fire. In marketing terms, there are two focal words here: "war" and "terror."

      "War" seems to be america's favourite word. Whenever anything bad happens, a war on it is declared. It resonates with the americal gun-ho, rambo culture, and gives the message that "we're gonna kill so we don't suffer again."

      "Terror" is chosen for the same reason "drugs" was chosen. It's scary, immediate (ie: doesn't alude to future actions - it's time agnostic), and as beautifully vague as "drugs."

      So you see, the american govornment acts very much like those large companies we all love to hate. They use time-proven marketing double-speak with a little hollywood sprinkled in - and they wonder why we (the outside world) are skeptical of the message.

      Dan ...

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Information wants to be valued.
    52. Re:Here's an *idea* by bargle · · Score: 1

      Atheism legitamizes any action by removing any moral standard but your own. People that do horrible things in the name of the Lord are acting with no others but themselves in mind.

      "Moral Atheists" are merely taking lessons without acknowledging the teacher. Why would a rational atheist act in anyone's interest but his or her own? Is peaceful human interaction then reduced to mere diplomacy, appeasing your neighbor for the moment, since you can't get away with crushing his skull, for now? Is all cooperation merely economy -- is sex and marriage a contract for reproduction?

      Your world seems awfully desperate. ... Unless, of course, you're advocating your own religion, which I'm sure has it's fair share of atrocities, which I'd be happy to point out to you.

      --
      Would you shut up already?
    53. Re:Here's an *idea* by drinkypoo · · Score: 2
      Uh-oh, look out. Better hold it down 'cause they shut you down when you speak from your heart. Especially if you diss RMS... though that's really like invoking you know who around here with how people leap to the defense like they just got pricked in the ass. No, with a pin.

      Now it is worth mentioning that America is probably just as ignorant as anyone else. Just because we have access to media doesn't mean that it's unbiased; even if you assume there ARE unbiased media sources out there, I think it's safe to say that they are not consumed by the average American. They are content to believe what they see on their local news most of the time. A few enlightened individuals (ironically, mostly former soldiers) know that our government is patently full of shit and tells the media what they're allowed to say about a war or police action or what have you, for the most part.

      I do think that your dig at fundies was unnecessary...

      Anyway it really is true that significant slices of these populations feel that the "decadent American life-style" is a sin against god (in whatever form they find it) and that we should die for our offenses. I think it would be stretching things to say that a majority of any population would prefer that "innocent" Americans should be killed, probably close to the same percentage here in the US who think we ought to go "nuke the ragheads" and similar shit I've heard plenty of. Of course, some dick in a turban did try to pull out in front of me in the parking lot at WinCo Foods the other night... kill the bastards!

      But it's true. We run around and shit on the world, we fuck with people to our own ends, and people die; some of our citizens, but many more of other nations'. That is NOT just, and even if we are working in the name of democracy and freedom (I think it's more like money most of the time; right now we're striking a blow for operational freedom more than anything however, clearing some obstacles out of our way so we can go on uncontested.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    54. Re:Here's an *idea* by JenniefromtheShire · · Score: 1

      jfengel, you bring up some excellent points, but I want to point out that the Bush administration, love it or hate it (and TTYTT I'm not a huge fan of the current administration either), has gone WAY out of its way to not only denounce internal-U.S. discrimination and hate crimes against peace-loving Arabs and Muslims, but also has apparently worked hard to rally support from our Arab allies, including the country's leading Arab-American rights group. The recent Trent Lott BS notwithstanding (and also the fact that I disagree with the current pro-War-Against-Iraq climate in Washington), Bush and his peeps do seem like they're striving very hard for an egalitarian, although extremely and often distastefully conservative, climate throughout the U.S. When you sweep away the Trent Lotts from the mix, Bush IMO really isn't trying to push a racist/anti-Muslim agenda...just a pro-power one. (That IMO is really rank and self-serving, but that's beside the point.) IMO, the reason the IRA isn't a target of the U.S. "war on terror" is because you don't see IRA gunmen boarding Aer Lingus planes and flying them into major U.S. landmarks (or even Buckingham Palace, for that matter). This is going to sound really isolationist and self-centered--hell, it probably IS--but why bother picking a fight with peeps who aren't picking fights with us? (emmm...which is why I'm wondering about this whole Iraqi mess to begin with...aside from Bush's need to purge some father-son angst) Truth be told, the Irish Catholic/Protestant conflict is pretty isolated, and has also made measurable (although not perfect) progress since Clinton initiated the Good Friday peace accord in the British Isles. What's going on in Israel/Palestinian Territories now is a huge mess, one partly of our making, which right or wrong is one of the main sources of the terrorist acts against us. So because it involves us more directly, that gives terrorists the, er, "reason," if you will, to target us; and thus gives us justification to go after their asses. Just my $0.02.

    55. Re:Here's an *idea* by susano_otter · · Score: 2
      ...here all votes are counted by hand, since this is the only way to be 100% sure about the outcome.

      Technically, I think the only way to be 100% sure about the outcome would be for you to count all the votes by hand yourself, without making any errors. Counting thousands of entities manually isn't inherently more accurate than counting them mechanically, whatever the Danish government may have told you.

      I imagine that the vaunted superior accuracy of Danish ballot-counting is due more to their QA policies than to their manual counting. Perhaps also the Danes have a strong sense of civic duty, which makes them ideologically more committed to an accurate count than a personally pleasing one. Since machines don't have ideologies, they'd be inferior to Danes in this respect (all other things being equal, of course).

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    56. Re:Here's an *idea* by Apuleius · · Score: 2

      Geez, it isn't rocket science.
      This is a war to establish quite firmly that
      the technique known as terrorism will not work.

    57. Re:Here's an *idea* by Chelloveck · · Score: 2
      Which probably is exactly what Bush wants... A never ending cold war on an enemy not only remote, but formless and without voice.

      I've been saying ever since September 12th that we'll never catch Osama bin Laden. Even if we do catch him, we won't admit to it. He's a name and face for the enemy, and he does the government more good "presumed alive and up to no good" than he does "confirmed dead". After all, if the enemy is dead, why continue the war?

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    58. Re:Here's an *idea* by alia23 · · Score: 1

      they are all just christians the same way you say muslims.... you shouldn't distinguish christians flavors as you judge muslims without so much precision (you are cheating).

      Don't try to convince that chistianity is better than islam... it makes no sense.

      In my opinion they both Bible/Koran are both full of execrable/cruel/nasty behaviours and rules. But if you don't wan't to see it... you'll never see it...

    59. Re:Here's an *idea* by swv3752 · · Score: 2

      Jealousy and fear of losing thier way of life to over simplify. Neutron bomb? There is no simple way to solve this. We have a group fearing the loss of thier culture and are correct to fear this. Slowly they are undergoing cultural erosion. They also see us as a "Great Evil". I only see a sort of death for them, or us. I do not want to see the world under a fundamentalist Islam. I despise thier attitudes towards women and people in general.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    60. Re:Here's an *idea* by bargle · · Score: 1

      Mohammed has universal regard among all of Islam. The Pope and his lieutenants do not.

      Your argument would make sense if that were not the case.

      That being said, my argument isn't about the value of Christianity versus other religions. Instead, I was attempting to explain the rationale of the terrorists to the original poster in this thread (which seems to have gotten lost at some point): Al Qaeda crash airplanes in to buildings because we (being citizens of the United States of all faiths, including atheist and agnostic) are not fundamentalist muslims.

      They've told us as much.

      It doesn't have nearly as much to do with Marxist ideology, the spread of globalism, or whatever else it is people would like to believe.

      --
      Would you shut up already?
    61. Re:Here's an *idea* by bargle · · Score: 1

      The Pope and his lieutenants do not.

      That should read "The Pope and his lieutenants do not have universal regard among Christians.".

      Bad on me for not proofreading

      --
      Would you shut up already?
    62. Re:Here's an *idea* by L0rdJagged · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they could even call it a Jihad on Terror.

    63. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, shit, how can you call him elected if he got less votes than the other guy?

    64. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what - a couple hundred years ago, things weren't much different in Europe.

      Things progressed from there without George W. opening a can of whupass.

      War isn't the only answer, nor is it the best answer (or any answer at all)

    65. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NO, stopping the evil comunism is not a valid argument

      So you'd be perfectly fine if a communist backed regemes rose up in the middle east and after their control of the region was absolue they started to slowly but surly ban islamic institutions like mosques because they stood in the way of total control? Don't laugh Yemem used to be two separate counties (East and West Yemen, one of them communist)

      Don't think the US's fight against communism only benefited the US, there are billion's who have benidfitted from its downfall as a major force in the world.

    66. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's one: Stop flooding the world with MacDonald's and the rest of your tasteless culture.

    67. Re:Here's an *idea* by ViVeLaMe · · Score: 1

      What did americans do when England controlled everything from oversea? When england reaped all the profits, all the land, and so on?
      What do u do when the head of your elected (or not) gov' get murdered by the CIA (see: Nigeria 1976, Angola 1961) for oil reasons, When western companies rape your land or outright kill you (Bophal/Union Carbide anyone? Ooohhh sorry u forgot about that, can't blame u, just a bunch of indians...), when the US try to thwart your fight for freedom (the USA didn't like very much ANC, for exemple)? What do you do when you're *not* a US citizen, unlikely to ever be one, so you can't vote out the politics you don't like? Maybe you could share with all the stupid people out there what you think they could/should do (and, no, becoming US citizens isn't an answer) instead? I'd be glad to read your solution, 'cause i'm no terrorist and i'd like to find a peaceful way to fight :P

      --
      i had a sig, once..
    68. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, actually, it is an aggressive and desperate attempt to keep terrorism from working - it already works pretty well, or we wouldn't be so worried about it. And it scared the bejesus out of America.
      The problem is, it will keep working unless we are willing to harry every person in the world who says the word 'bomb' and buys fertilizer. It isn't practical to stop terrorism without addressing the reasons for people's dissatisfaction with American international policy. Of course, that may not be practical either, but at least it would work if you could figure out how to do it.

    69. Re:Here's an *idea* by Gorm+the+DBA · · Score: 2
      Why would a rational atheist act in anyone's interest but his or her own?

      They wouldn't, necessarily...but, what's your definition of "his own interest"?

      I consider myself a rational atheist, yet I support the government (although not all of it's actions), give money and time to charities of my choosing (the Kidney Foundation for the most part, others as well), and generally don't go walking down the street randomly shooting AK-47s into other people's houses, even if I want their stuff.

      Why? Why would I do any of these things without "God's Word" telling me to/not to?

      Let's see...collective security and a social contract ensures a higher level of safety and a better standard of living for everyone, so government is a good thing.

      The money and time I give to a charity today could result in the cure for a disease that afflicts friends and family members of mine. Maybe not today, but eventually hopefully.

      Again, it's the social contract...if I don't shoot into my neighbor's house, he won't shoot into mine. So my security is enhanced.

      I don't see how I need ten commandments, or a Torah, or whatever, to engage in rational conduct. If anything religion has always struck me as irrational..."You must believe and Worship God...yes, I know, you can't see or hear or touch him...but if you don't, then he will punish you for all eternity". Sounds kinda like my parents telling me I had to stay in bed after dark because otherwise the bogeyman would eat me to me...

    70. Re:Here's an *idea* by Effexor · · Score: 1
      So I can't believe that it is for example wrong to kill small babies unless I have orders from higher up not to do it?

      In other words it is ok to kill babies if your god says "go ahead, I don't mind"? In fact when he encourages it is not only ok, but good to do and evil to not. This does not sound like morality to me, more like "I was just following orders".

      Is the only reason you have not gone out today to rape your neighbour the fact that you weren't in the mood? Or are you saying you would do it but you are afraid of being punished, either here or in some afterlife? Neither sounds like morality to me. In fact if you only do good and avoid bad based on fear of punishment you are simply acting in your own best interst, just like a good little rational atheist.

      And yes, sex and marriage is usually viewed as a contract for reproduction, thus most religions aversion to the idea of homosexual marriage.

      --

      As the air to a bird or the sea to a fish, so is contempt to the contemptible -W.B.

    71. Re:Here's an *idea* by clarkc3 · · Score: 1

      I always have wondered how it could be called a war on terror or even linking it to a 'war on Islmic terrorists/fundamentalists' when Bush has almost completely ignored groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Thats one of the reason I think Bush just is using this so called war to push for his personal agenda in Iraq

    72. Re:Here's an *idea* by jfengel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I wish I could disagree with you on the point about Iraq. They keep claiming to have solid evidence, but have presented exactly none of it to the world. (Does anybody recall what happened to the secret documents they gave to various world leaders which showed why we chose Afghanistan?)

      I understand very well that sources are extremely valuable, and you must protect them. That means that secret documents are usually more secret for the reasons of revealing the source than they are for the actual data they contain.

      Still, this is becoming very disturbing. There have been some very anti-American articles in this thread, and it's behavior like this which encourages such. The government is proposing a war in which the proponents stand to gain very much personally.

      I don't like the Bush administration, but I don't believe that they are monsters, either. I don't believe they would kill probably hundreds of Americans and thousands of Iraqis just for the privilege of making a few million (or billion) on oil. It's a plan which involves too many people, at least one of whom must have some sort of integrity.

      But I do wish that they'd give me some reason for that apparently futile hope.

      [As an aside, having the US own Iraqi oil fields would cement US supremacy, so it is possible that this is part of an overarching plan to secure US power, something which would have better hope of keeping adherents than plain money. But Iraq is far away, and tankers from Iraq to the US would be very vulnerable in case of war. They'd be better off taking over Venezuela or perhaps Mexico. So I tend to discount this theory.]

      As for Hamas and Islamic Jihad, I suspect that they are inextricably linked to al Quaeda. When you fight one you fight the others. Israel has done little of late to cover itself in glory, but they do seem to have the moral high ground over those who blow up school buses (even if that's not saying very much.)

      The adminstration probably feels that it cannot take a stronger side against the enemies of Israel while Israel is only barely better, morally. I believe that very few Muslims actively hate the US strongly enough to be in favor of al Quaeda, but Israel is a different story. It is a major sticking point with most Arabs and Muslims.

      Fighting Hamas and Islamic Jihad is hard, because it's nearly impossible to distinguish between civilians and militants. That's partly because the civilians permit themselves to be used this way, and so the line is very blurred.

      The US "war on terror" does, I believe, cover these groups as well. In general it's a war on the Islamic terrorists; Basque terrorists and Irish terrorists are left out. The remaining Islamic terrorists cover a very wide body, which is all linked together. Money flows from Saddam Hussein to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. But fighting the Palestinians directly is a public relations nightmare, both because of civilian deaths and because it would tip the balance of those who only barely tolerate the US as it stands.

      My opinion is that Israel should force a two-state solution on Palestine, adopting unilaterally plan that most of the non-Arab would would see as fair. When they were attacked from that state, the US would have an easier time helping them fight it, since the non-Arab would would see Israel as having already made its concessions. [Arabs and Muslims are unlikely to see any plan in which Israel still exists as fair.] But for some reason right-wingers in Israel insist on occupying some of the West Bank territory, and will not give it up.

    73. Re:Here's an *idea* by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      I'd be glad to read your solution, 'cause i'm no terrorist and i'd like to find a peaceful way to fight

      There is no peaceful solution that everybody will agree to. That's why it's silly to imply that "if only we acted differently they wouldn't attack us". Of course that's true, and if only they acted differently, we wouldn't fight either. It comes down to culture (and some of those political things play a small part). People don't want to change their way of life. The problem is amplified when there are people who already fight amongst themselves who then are exposed to an external (western) culture. People are willing to die to preserve what they consider the correct way to live, and because they have no control over how most other people live and if some new way of life starts moving closer to them, they are willing to strap a bomb to themselves. Obviously this a generalization that doesn't apply directly in some specific situations, but it's pretty close in most cases. In the long run, the most peaceful solution is likely to kill everybody from one side, but that's obviously not an acceptable solution, so we'll continue to fight. What I'm trying to say (and what I was trying to say in my previous post) is that I don't have a solution, but neither does anybody else (even if they think they do).

    74. Re:Here's an *idea* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know that's not an accurate representation of Islam as a whole



      You're accurate about it. The Qu'ran calls the infidels "kafirs" and exhorts all good muslims to covert or kill them, for it is Allah's way, or no way at all.

  18. Or Maybe Ask The FBI: +1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read this article at ABC News ABC News about the FBI pressured to NOT investigate before 911.

    Sincerely,
    W00t

  19. take arafat by ArchieBunker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He pockets a BILLION dollars in aide money to his many bank accounts and then tells his people they are poor because of the evil west. Since you seem to be in touch with all these extremists please enlighten us why you find joy in having your children exploding in an attempt to hurt others? Notice its nobody middle aged or even old, just young kids that have been tought all their lives to hate the US. Now thats fucked up, using your children as ammunition to fight your war.

    Waiting for your reply.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    1. Re:take arafat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about you come back to us with a cogent argument based on facts instead of trollish crap?

    2. Re:take arafat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Now thats fucked up, using your children as ammunition to fight your war.

      Indeed. Now what was the average of the combat trooper in Vietnam? (Hint: 19).

    3. Re:take arafat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      except they weren't sent off strapped with explosives intent on walking into crowded shopping malls.

    4. Re:take arafat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they were handed assault rifles and sent to burn down villages or die in the jungle. It doesn't make a fucking difference if they blew themselves up or not, they were still kids killing civilians and getting killed, and if you think that just because they weren't using explosives to do it that it's somehow better, you're damn wrong.

    5. Re:take arafat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he's damn right. How dare you equate the two? In Israel/Palestine, the targets are almost always civilian, such as shopping malls, discos, cafes, etc.

  20. The US is getting more Orwellian every day by Thaelon · · Score: 1

    The Spanish American War
    World War I
    War on Poverty
    World War II
    Korean War
    Vietnam War
    War on Drugs
    War on Iraq
    War on Terror
    (War on Iraq again?)

    Sound familiar?

    --

    Question everything

    1. Re:The US is getting more Orwellian every day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the "War for Drugs" at the top of the list, when the US was fighting in China for the opium trade.

    2. Re:The US is getting more Orwellian every day by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

      Uh that was the British Empire.

      --
      Why not fork?
  21. Why do Arabs hate Americans ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    U.S. foreign policy.

    eg. The UN have reported that an estimated 6000 children die of preventable illness and malnutrition in Iraq EVERY MONTH due to a lack of food and medicine. This is attributed directly to the U.S. led trade sanctions against Iraq. 6000 children every month for approx ten years = 720,000 children.

    The U.S. still maintains a military presence in the region and regularly subjects parts of Iraq to aerial bombardment.

    The U.S. publicly suspects Iraq has chemical weapons. I wonder if they are anything like the depleted uranium weapons used by the U.S. against Iraq during the gulf war ?

    And for ten points name the only country ever to use nuclear weapons for purposes other than testing ? America. Certainly some time ago now, but the U.S. is the only country to use nuclear weapons in anger and the vital military target chosen by the govt. of the day ? Two large civilian populations.

    Hooray for America, the single greatest terrorist threat the world has ever faced.

    1. Re:Why do Arabs hate Americans ? by Hi_2k · · Score: 1

      Actuly, the US allows 10% more than needed, but Saddam uses 20% to buy weapons.

      --
      When life gives you crap, Make Crapade.
      Sluggy Freelance.
    2. Re:Why do Arabs hate Americans ? by Quikah · · Score: 2

      The situation has greatly improved since the oil for food program was instituted.

      Recently saw a Frontline episode where a Brit reporter toured Iraq. He went to the hospitals, went to the children's ward. Most of the children were in there for drinking untreated water. He asked the hospital administrator if they were in need of any drugs, nope. He went into a local pharmacy. Well stocked. He wandered the markets, plenty of food.

      --
      Q.
  22. war on terror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's been said that a having a war for peace
    is like fucking for virginity.

    1. Re:war on terror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just don't forget the motto:

      Peace is our proffession.

    2. Re:war on terror by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      someone should smack whoever came up with that and say 'violence begats violence' - always has, always will

  23. Re:Bin Laden's EQ character by Brendan+Byrd · · Score: 2

    They're not looking for Osama bin Laden's online character.

    Still, I can't help but laugh at the thought of it:

    "Sir, we've found him! He's playing EQ right now, under the character 'Jihad' as a Level 60 Shadow Knight!"

    ".....Damn! Look at that...he just 0wn3d that Level 60 Paladin in PvP!"

  24. IN SOVIET RUSSIA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everquest plays YOU!

    Disclaimer: I am a twink of Legacy of Sorrow.

    1. Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      In EverQuest, you play Soviet Russia

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  25. right here asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://public-integrity.org/money.pdf

    enough evidence?

    1. Re:right here asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. What about these children that are supposedly suicide bombing? I've never heard of that (except for that blatant propaganda photo of the baby strapped with explosives).

    2. Re:right here asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think he was referring to people under 18 like teenagers not litteral babies or young children of 5 or 6

  26. Are you on crack or just stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Christian god has a son and his name is Jesus.

    Any god which doesn't have a son called Jesus who was crucified is NOT a Christian god by definition.

    Therefore, Islam and Judaism do NOT refer to the Christian god.

  27. War on Terror bad and good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're right in this instance, a war on Al Qaeda, or on Saddam himself is much better defined.

    But we have wars on techniques all the time.

    I love my kids, but I have war against some of their eating habits.

    I enjoy the developers that work for me, and together we all war against certain coding habits.

    Yes, these are wars that never end.

    So if the root problem is the frustration of a people, a people unused to and uneducated in more acceptable ways to protest, than it is reasonable to have war on a technique, a war on terror. Agree or disagree with the Palestinians -- that's irrelevant for this argument, but just think what would have happened two years ago if the Palestinians en masse had protested using accepted non-violent techniques. Sit-ins, non-violent civil disobedience, etc.

    But you're right, I don't think that that is what Bush means, and I believe that is a loss for us all.

    1. Re:War on Terror bad and good. by IDStewart · · Score: 1
      I love my kids, but I have war against some of their eating habits.

      I'm guessing that you're not launching Hellfire AGM's at Barbie's minivan.

    2. Re:War on Terror bad and good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think that people actually use the word "war" the way you do in your post, then I don't think you've ever met another person, or read anything, or know what the word "war" means. Your post and BS gov't proclimations are the only time I ever see such an abuse of the word "war".

    3. Re:War on Terror bad and good. by ViVeLaMe · · Score: 1

      oh well, i'll bite.
      What would be an acceptable way for an educated 3rd world citizen to protest strongly against, say: USA foreign policies, USA oil companies policies, USA interventions to overthrow regularly elected foreign governments who happen to not follow the US line, and so on?
      For a US citizen, the way is to vote. But for a non-US citizen?
      Part of the problem is globalism. We have globalism of effects (US, or EU, or whatever can have deep effects on foreign countries), yet those countries' citizen can't have a say on those politics which are applied to them. For all practical purposes, it looks very much like a dictatorship. And there aren't many "civilised" ways out of a dictatorship.

      --
      i had a sig, once..
  28. We are at war with Eastasia. by MamasGun · · Score: 1

    We have *always* been at war with Eastasia.

    Eurasia has always been our ally.

    Oceania, Oceania, 'tis for thee...

    --
    "But you've already got a DVD. It lasts forever....In the digital world, we don't need back-ups..."
    -- Jack Valenti
  29. Your Tax Dollars at Work... by TheMooX · · Score: 1

    So now we're paying government employee's to play games? Can I have that job?

  30. Crickey, how stupid is this! by Mac+Degger · · Score: 2

    There is no analogy between everquest and terrorist networks. The later work in a defined organisational structure known as cells. These cells have very specific ways of communicating which guarantee anonymity to the maximum amount of cells.

    Now how does this relate to how people form a group in EQ? Well, it just doesn't. EQ players don't need that form of anonymity. They don't have different cells working together towards the same goal. While I will admit everyone who plays EQ has the same goal of 'getting more xp'...that's not the same thing, is it? You don't need (or have) all these cells interconnected, talking to each other to 'overthrow a system'.

    What the pentagon will find is the mechanics of how a gamne is played...which will bear no reemblance whatsoever to how terrorist cells are organised.

    --
    -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  31. But see, the whole thing is flawed by spudwiser · · Score: 2

    because al-queda as a terror network is a virtual network, while the Rand people are treating it like a video game. i fail to see how a group who's main purpose seems to be to fuck our (in the US) shit up can be described in language remotely similar to everquest et al. i guess you could say that they act like a bunch of 12 year old PKers. maybe they are just pkers and the whole world is a game. *hits tilde* woah.

    --
    .cig - what you do after winning a good flame war
  32. *gets arested after ganking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man now i have to be 10x more careful who i tank in ao, now it could be some fbi dude with not only a bad char but a pair of handcuffs and a screwed up lack backing him.

    "you sir have gankz0red a Fbi officer and are sentanced to 5 weeks helping n00bs in by1 of Omni ent"

    YARG

  33. Laughing by Gleef · · Score: 2

    I can just picture it, the people at the Highlands Group sitting around, clients gone for the recession, playing video games to pass the time. Then one of them goes, "Hey, the Pentagon is spending billions to fight terrorism, let's try to get them to pay us to play these games!"

    And they did.

    --

    ----
    Open mind, insert foot.
  34. A dilemma... by Peterus7 · · Score: 1

    Should I be rolling on the floor laughing or scared out of my mind? God, I knew the government had some way out ideas, but I think they still need to get a clue when it comes to internet stuff. Appoint /. types to be their tech advisors!

  35. Six Degrees of Plastique by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Six Degrees of Separation"

    Oh... All we need is an envelope with a bomb in it.. address it to "Osama" and ask a friend to pass it on. Within five people, he'll have the envelope...

  36. Pass the barf bags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You voted for the other guy?
    Well, your other guy was in charge when Osama and his muhajeddins were in Bosnia right next to US soldiers.
    When saudis were pumping men and arms into the region (where the muslim 'moderate' in charge had written a book saying that Islam can never live in harmony with other social structures)
    When Osama got a a Bosnian Muslim passport in 95-96.
    When Osama was in Kosovo in the late 90's.

    Spare me the US wants to make friends BS.
    The US' main strength is that it creates havoc so as to better profit from it.
    As someone who'se in-laws lost a lot of family on Sept 11, 1973 during the US sponsored military coup and who has lived in south america for a parts of three decades, i find it insulting when this simplistic drivel is spouted.

    And dont ever make the 'other guys; seem like better choices. Carter got a prize but his twit in charge Brzinski was the one who stated in his book that a few lunatic fanatics that they let on the loose is worth the fall os the soviet empire.
    YOU FOLKS CREATED HIM.

    You want to punish someone?
    Line up everyone who had a hand in dealings with the Beaner.

    im sure that would be the single most popular firing squad the world has ever seen.

    zac

  37. Re: Support Addiction + Fight Terrorism! Hurray! by Draigon · · Score: 1

    Let's see... my drugs support terrorism ... but my video game addictions help combat terrorism. Guess that makes us even again.

    --
    -Rabbit
  38. Network Centric Warfare by drunkrussian · · Score: 1

    If you want the full scoop on NCW, some DoD guys wrote an entire book on it.

    Network Centric Warfare: Developing and Leveraging Information Superiority

    I still don't understand it, though. I think the computer network analogy is a good one for conceptual purposes, but I'm not sure that's all there is to it.

  39. terrorist techniques: by Snafoo · · Score: 2


    (1) Bunny-hopping
    (2) Camping
    (3) Hacking the client

    --
    - undoware.ca
  40. IN SOVIET RUSSIA.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU play EVERQUEST.

    Sorry, it had to be done.

  41. Also Sprach Dubya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  42. OT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Delta Force: Land Warrior... rules! I play it nightly online :)

  43. It's focused on C3I issues... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...and the 'flexibility' of a 'network organization'.

    The CoC (Chain of Command) is much 'shorter' with a 'network' or 'cell' based organization. One lead 'cell' or 'network node' for the 'planning boss' and every other 'operations type cell/network node' can communicate/plan/etc. directly with the 'boss cell'.

    A 'shorter' CoC equals a smaller 'decision loop'. One of the primary (perceived) advantages to superior C3I (Command, Coontrol, Communications, and Intelligence - which is really what makes the U.S. very superior on the modern battlefield) is the ability to 'get inside the enemy decision loop' - i.e. the ability to change tactics and objectives based on what the enemy is seen to be attempting and to do so before the enemy sees what the Good Guys are attempting and most importantly to be doing something operationally before the enemy can issue orders thru his CoC in an attempt to thwart the Good Guys. Think of it this way - you're playing Warcraft against your buddy, but there's a 4 min. delay before any of his orders to his units are 'initiated'. Also, when the orders are issued you are given a brief report of what his issued orders are. This is what superior C3I gives you.

    For a much better explanation of what I'm talking about, read 'Every Man a Tiger' by U.S.A.F. Gen. Chuck Horner and Tom Clancy. There's a couple of chapters that show what I am attempting to explain in great detail, but the book explains it far better than I can in a post to '/.'.

    As far as the Good Guys and their CoC - a network type CoC would be great. The basic advantage implied by the article = operations would be controlled by 'node to node' comms as opposed to all changes in operational planning and activites being routed thru a (much slower and in the case of CT type operations and the assets used in CT type operations totally uneccesary) 'traditional military' or 'traditional intelligence agency' CoC.

    In short - desk warrior X would be given updates, but the office of desk warrior X would not longer be a 'required stop' in the CoC.

    One of the reasons CoCs exist is to make sure that no decision is made by someone who lacks the required 'view of the big picture' in terms of 'zoom'. A Lt. on a battlefield could make a decision on something that might look great to him but was a very bad decision when looking at the strategic picture. A simple example - Lt. X is guarding a bridge. Overwheling enemy forces are approaching the bridge. The safest bet for Lt. X is to blow the bridge. He could fall back without blowing the bridge but he'd risk the possibility that his command might be caught and overrun.

    Lt. X is unaware of the big counterattack forming to his rear.

    It is sometimes impractical to inform every Lt. of the big counterattack. So a directive might exist that would say 'Demolition of bridges must be cleared at divisional level'. This insures that the decision to blow any bridge must go thru a CoC that included all Division command 'nodes'.

    In general, the more competent/well informed/independent your command 'nodes' are, the shorter the CoC you can 'get away with' (see importance of 'shorter' CoC above).

    The units in CT warfare are often small teams of individuals, with the only real difference between the 'team leader' and the other members of the team being who is cleared for 'big picture' information. With such units a big CoC is not needed to insure the 'safety of strategic planning'. There is no strategic planning per se. 4 bad guys are in hotel J in Vienna. Should team Z grab them now? Team Z needs an answer before the bad guys finish breakfast. A network style CoC would let Team Z zing this question to the 'big picture command nodes' of every Good Guy CT organization/intelligence service/etc. directly, as opposed to asking the question of the head of CT for the Nation that Team Z belongs to, then the head of CT organization of Nation Z asking the similar offices of several Good Guy Nations, 'thru channels' (read: slowly).

    I'm hoping that made sense. Odds aren't in my favor however. :)

    In short for the last time - keep saying 'Bush sucks' while playing Everquest. RPG players with 'counter-culture' opinions don't target daycare centers with shrapnel-enhanced explosive devices. Everyone who chases bad guys for a living is aware of this.

    There's also some big communications traffic/security/etc. issues (advantages if you don't own Space, COMSATs, etc.) involving 'network style CoCs', but that's not a big deal for the Good Guys. For the bad guys - they have no traditional 'dedicated' 'communications routing node' if they use a 'network style' CoC. Which means that 'comm routing node' (think 'equivalent of the communications security office of WW2 Germany - which was penetrated by Allied intelligence so almost all sensitive comms were compromised by the penetration of 1 agency') doesn't exist. This means that communications have to be attacked the 'hard way' (in very general terms - 'one message at a time'), as opposed to penetrating the communications office and getting a crack at everything sent to everyone by everyone by default. This is one reason why bad guys change cellular phones all the time. Use a new phone every 2 days and maybe your comms aren't being monitored at the source. Unless your cellular phone supplier is penetrated. That would be bad. :)

    Anonymous Cowardly Good Guy

  44. Tax Dollars by airiano · · Score: 1

    Great, now I know what my tax dollars are being used for.

  45. How about REAL life? by theolein · · Score: 2

    When I read batshit insanity like this, it reminds me of the Nazis during their final desperate years of power coming up with some extremely wierd so-called weapons to defeat their enemies, such as the wind cannon, or the assault rifle that could shoot around corners. It also reminds me of the CIA's experiments with LSD on American citizens in the 60's.

    Trying to find patterns in terrorism in a game is so absolutely brainlessly stupid I can't believe that some moron came up with the idea. Real people are infinitely more complex than a game, and real life suffering, oppression and bloodshed can not be simulated in a game, or else people would not be playing UT or Quake.

  46. Aren't they Desperate or what? by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

    Aren't they desperate or what to try something like this???

    They must be really really desperate, afterall Al Qaeda people are 'professional' (but let's say that professional into wrong direction damnit!)

    No, this is not a troll but it really seems to be a very desperate act from desperate people. And afterall Al Qaeda people are professional, otherwise they wouldn't have pulled the thing last year. Although they might not do it for the cash, just for pure idioticy & wrong beliefs. It is not violence which makes the changes nowadays, it's the politics. i just wish that Osama Bin Laden's professionality went to the other way, quite the opposite direction, fighting against terrorism instead of being a terrorists....
    Sigh, can i now go back to play CS, oh Please?

  47. evil doers by cybpunks3 · · Score: 1

    --
    These people aren't driven by pure evil but rather extreme frustration.
    --

    Nobody acts without "reasons". Hitler published an impassioned rationalization for his upcoming genocide in Mein Kampf that, if you read it, sounds oh so similar to the B.S. moral justifications that you hear coming from Arafat, Saudi, or Egyptian officials.

    You might blame the rest of Europe for punishing Germany too much for the rise of Naziism before after WWI. That doesn't absolve Hitler or his followers for the sins of WWII.

    To me, the core of Islamic fundementalism is equally based in anti-semitism as Naziism was, and is nothing for us to sympathize with.

    It only legitimizes these deviant beliefs to try to "understand" them. Since the radical followers of this ideology have as closed minds as any hard-core cult member, it's too late to try to deprogram them, especially when the country they are in is feeding their hatred with a steady dose of hate. All you can hope to do is neutralize their threat to the civilized world to such a degree that they realize on a practical level that they are just not going to get what they want regardless of their degree of sacrifice. And if this has no effect other than creating a slow and protracted ethnic suicide, one suicide bomber after the next, then so be it.

    To reward that behavior with any sort of perceived dignity, sympathies, or undue attention will only further encourage it in a "natural born killers" sort of way. Attention on the overcrowded world stage is what they really want.

    Reducing the equation to "evil doers", as simplistic as it may sound, is indeed the proper tactic, because let's face it, they've already dehumanized us in their eyes.

  48. Quotes from BUSH about Bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    September 13 2001: "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It's our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him."

    March 13 2002: "I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

    1. Re:Quotes from BUSH about Bin Laden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if that made it into his calender

  49. Americans' Taxes by truthsearch · · Score: 2

    And to think my taxes are helping pay for this. Sure my money's being spent in far worse ways, but I can think of so many better places to put it. It still amazes me we pay people to do this stuff.

  50. Not to mention the most powerful EQ spells. . . by Salgak1 · · Score: 1
    . . .are commonly referred to as "nukes". THAT oughta wake up all the Homeland Security and Intelligence types . . . .

    "character x" is planning to nuke "target y". . .

    Just imagine an ECHELON analysis of that. . .

  51. Hummers by Fig,+formerly+A.C. · · Score: 2
    I live less than 0.5 miles from the Hummer plant. They were never anything special to me growing up because of it, and it seems like everyone in this town has one. I'd like to have a decommissioned military model, though (sans guns).

    Oh, and the H2 Hummer is the ugliest thing I've had the misfortune of laying eyes on. Thinking back on it makes me want to stab out my mind's eye.

    --
    Murphy was an optimist.
    1. Re:Hummers by racermd · · Score: 1

      Obtaining an authentic, decommissioned, military Hummer is just about impossible. Popular rumor has it that they're stripped for spare parts, and the frames are sliced to shreds, before being completely decomissioned. Can anyone else here shed any factual light on this?

      Besides, the military versions are beat to all hell during the relatively short life that each of them has, anyway. While good routine and preventative maintenance can drastically extend the life of any vehicle, military use goes a little beyond what most manufacturers consider "extreme duty". I can't imagine that the available military Hummers can be of any decent quality if they're being sold, even though they're the most durable vehicles made today.

      I'll take a stripped-down civillian model and give it some fresh homemade paint (read: flat gray camo colors). Strenthen the entire driveline and add the amphibious kit, and you're just about there! There shouldn't be any need for armor or an 80mm gun mounted to the rear, and I doubt the military would sell any of that stuff to the civillian population, anyway.

      And not that I'd even have a need for a Hummer in the first place, civillian *or* military. I have my 4x4 pickup with decent tires and some good seat-time in bad weather. The Hummer wouldn't add that much to my daily commute, or even my recreational travel needs, unless the apocolypse arrived. Even if it did, would I really have a need for a vehicle as extreme as the Hummer? Probably not. I'll have other things to worry about than how I'm going to get to work in the morning. In short, it's overkill for the transportation needs of most of us. Sure, it would be fun to be able to go just about anywhere on the surface of the earth. But do any of us really have the time, skills, energy, or even desire to do that? And for those that do, why are you not saving your money to really get one and go see the world?

      --
      My sources are unreliable, but their information is fascinating. -- Ashleigh Brilliant
  52. Al Qaeda on Everquest by Cruciform · · Score: 2

    Hezbollah: Can ne1 spare some plat?

    Osama: Yes my brother, Death to America! Do you have the box cutter of holy might? Then to Jihad!

  53. So, now we all know that the secret weapon is... by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 1

    high-level black magic spells.

    --
    Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
  54. A friend of mine did this. by Blaede · · Score: 1

    He was working help desk for the University computer labs. He installed Everquest and played all his time, in between helping people out. He then sold his items on eBay at the end of the summer and bought a car.

    He did all sorts of things on the school's time, like fill out surveys for money, etc.

  55. VIDEO GAME CENSORSHIP SUPPORTS TERRORISM!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take that Joe Lieberman!

  56. next they'll stumble on pron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where the terrorits all gather. increase the budget!