You Can't Kill Terror lyrics

You can destroy an army
You can kill a man
But you can't kill terror
And terror is what I am
Terror your servant as you sturggle to rule
How can you kill terror when you use it as a tool
So when you write the history books remember to omit it
The sickest thing about your race is that you won't admit it

Decapitation, a merciful way for one to quickly die
Just think if they'd slowly plucked out both his eyes
Far better than being buried alive
Think of the babies you buried alive

You can't kill terror
So let's declare war
There's so many dead that we can't keep score
Madness and reason we at once combine
This is a war that can last for all time
The War Against Terror
Sublime!

It's man against monster and only both can lose
Fate is pre-ordained for you, so there's no side to choose
So much like hurricanes you seek to name the cosmic crime
To give a war a name is just a way for you to mark your time
Just think of the babies you buried alive
They haven't quite died

I just got some news from the Central Command
It seems the war didn't go quite as planned
It seems like terror is winning the battle
The humans are killing each other like cattle
The bodies are piled up from Rome to Seattle

Decapitation, a merciful way for one to quickly die
Just think if they'd slowly plucked out both his eyes
Cut off his penis and shoved it in his mouth
Just like they do down south
You can't kill terror

Seems kind of whiny to complain the law of nations, written by softies in pinstripes on the govt payroll, does not support slaughter of softies in pinstripes because they are the govt.

Sucessful guerrillas don't debate the point, you know. I never heard of a Tribunal for Crimes of the Revolution.

Yeah but everybody who thinks like you was NOT killed by a suicide bomb

So you are biased

Seems like "freedom" isn't what they want anyhow

Bin laden blowing up New York so america won't stop his "freedom fight" in arab countries he didn't live in is a big extension of "freedom fight"

I don't vote in British elections
I am oppressed
Bomb the queen?

> Red_Rooster wrote:

> "What the US is fighting is very simple: the INTENDED use of violence and threats AGAINST CIVILIANS to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes"

Ok but tell me this, when the allied powers carpet bombed germany, was that not terrorism? When napalm bombs was used to burn whole forests down in vietnam, was that not terrorism? And also why does it matter if it was intentional or not? The U.S. goes to war for no reason and accidentally drops bombs on civilians and kills them. Terrorists hijack planes and put bombs in subways. Which one is worse? If I was a civilian either way I would be terrorized. The only difference is the U.S. does this in a larger scale.

1: Agreed.  Intentional civilian bombing is bad!  Now, I would argue one exception to this: When, in a utilitarian calculus, one can find:
A: That the civilians lost in an attack are less than what would be saved WITHIN THAT NATION'S POPULATION (so, if more German civilians would be saved by bombing a German civilian factory than had it been left alone, it is just.  Protecting one's own civilians by killing another nation's civilians is not just, because it only creates apprehension by the other nation's population, whereas in the former example, people are more likely to say "you're bad, but they're worse."  After all, if the US were to go into Sudan and stop a massive genocide, yet one bomb accidentally killed a civilian, would we be "just as bad" as the government committing the genocide?), and
2: No alternative method exists to achieve approximately equivalent results.

Now let's go to your charges one at a time:

Vietnam: Agree 100%.  Bad US.  However, question: Does an event that occurred... 40 years ago... define the US today?

German carpet bombing: Hold up!  The German government was conducting a massive genocide against its own civilian population.  Therefore, by stopping the government, the US is creating a net beneficial protection of the German citizenship.
Now, I also have to win that there was no alternative method... but it's simple: Germany's war machine was fueled by its economic growth... you had to hit their economy to stop their growth.
Iraq: You really want to get into the debate of whether Iraq was justified?  Honestly?  Say yes, and I'll bring it.

As for accidental bombs... honestly, you're going to argue that an accidental bomb is the same as an intentional attack?  So if you are driving, and your brakes stall, causing you to accidentally kill someone, you just murdered them?

> 'This also separates terrorists from so-called "freedom fighters."'

Ok so you are saying freedom fighters do not kill civilians? In the conflict of sri lanka vs ltte, LTTE uses suicide bombs and goes into markets and kills 20-30 people at a time. The sri lanka government surrounds 200,000 civilians and starves them to death at a time. What is worse is that the sri lanka government receives LARGE amounts of weapons from the major powers of the world like India and China in the name of 'defeating terrorism.'

Then those people are terrorists who only claim a "freedom fighter" title.  A true "freedom fighter" does not target civilians.  Simple. 

"And one more thing... Who ever said military-level foreign relations WASN'T hypocritical?"

This is true but it frustrates me when a lot of people assume that anyone who uses suicide bombs are terrorists. There is no such thing as a freedom movement to these people. All governments are saints and all non-governmental military forces are demons that need to be wiped out.

Fair enough.  If you can accept that international military relations are a realist issue (that being that each nation is looking out primarily for their own interests, and that, for example, the US promotes democracy primarily because it feels democracy is a tool for peace and better economic benefits, rather than an end in itself), then we're pretty much in agreement in the end. 

People who drive cars are more mighty than pedestrians!

HE WAS RIGHT!

If you are fighting against  government the US wants rid of then of course you're a Freedom fighter.

If you're doing exactly the same against a US supported government then you are a terrorist.

obviously.

I wish I lived under the authority of a dictator and had no right to speak my mind.

I wish women in my country were systematically mutilated.

Red_Rooster is right, and anyone who fights against these evils --ERR, I misspoke, I meant righteous measures to safeguard the power of the Holy--is worse than the people who silence opposing points of view and mutilate their women.

>>You know that the U.S. provides economical and military support to Saudi Arabia...right?<<

The US, like most governments on the globe, messes all kinds of things up. What's your point?

i agree, the people that were intentially targeting civilians in vietnam were terrorists; but that doesnt make the entire US millitary a terrorist organization. the US millitary discourages such actions, not encourage like al-queda does.

Patrick Henry did not go blow up somebody's mom because a king of england didn't ease off the taxes.

Oh and good news for all real freedom lovers!

"COLOMBO, Sri Lanka

Wow you guys understand very little yet you make large sweeping comments like that. They say they will silence their guns because sri lanka, which is a terrorist state, is willing to commit genocide to kill the LTTE. The difference between the tigers and sri lanka is that tigers using suicide bombs and any weapon that they are aloud to get while sri lanka kills on a large scale with help from china, india, russia, pakistan and most western countries. You are saying that sri lanka is justified in its actions against the whole tamil population?

"Oh but but we were TOLD that military solutions to rebellion are impossible!!"

it is impossible. the military solution sri lanka adopted is a genocidal solution. The tamil people i am sure are not willing to go back to the singalese as slaves or second class citizens.

"Kudos to the Singhalese for their stout hearts and brass balls."

brass balls LMAO. go learn the conflict before you show your ignorance. Sri lanka has 75% majority which oppressed the 25% minority. And they get support from all the major countries in the world as previously mentioned and they started using the word "terrorist" to describe ltte just so they can get US support. They were fed BILLIONS of $$ worth of weapons and ammunition from china, india and russia. All with their own goals in mind.

I would like to know how you fight oppression? They tried nonviolent protests for 30 years then violent revolution for 30 years only to be labelled as a terrorist organization. I guess the right wingers in this forum have made it clear that you have 2 choices if u were born as a minority in a society... live as a slave or die as a "terrorist."