| Revision as of 17:39, 13 November 2010 editSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,555,927 editsm Dating comment by 118.160.161.56 - "→Tags: "← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:00, 14 November 2010 edit undoBasil rock (talk | contribs)46 edits →This page should be eliminatedNext edit → | ||
| Line 123: | Line 123: | ||
| This page makes it pretty clear that Misplaced Pages is in no way interested in being an "encyclopedia"; the organization here feels the need to always and shamelessly indulge the most spiteful, contrarian, and reactionary anti-academic sentiments over those which are rooted in fact and a dedication to truth. ] (]) | This page makes it pretty clear that Misplaced Pages is in no way interested in being an "encyclopedia"; the organization here feels the need to always and shamelessly indulge the most spiteful, contrarian, and reactionary anti-academic sentiments over those which are rooted in fact and a dedication to truth. ] (]) | ||
| First: Unless the 192 nations in the world have a page to state sponsored terrorism to put one fro a leading progressive nation shows a POV bias. | |||
| Second defending Nbaka is a joke tag, The Nbaka is a joke to most of the people who are not racist against Jews.] (]) 14:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:00, 14 November 2010
| Skip to table of contents |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United States and state terrorism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30Auto-archiving period: 4 months  |
 | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
| This page is not a forum for general discussion about United States and state terrorism. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about United States and state terrorism at the Reference desk. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United States and state terrorism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30Auto-archiving period: 4 months |
| |
| This box: |
accusations
Isn't it great that when talking about the U.S., it's always accusations, and sources ALWAYS need to be cited, but when accusing other countries, ie Iran, Korea, Iraq, Pakistan, Cuba, Afganistan, it's never an accusation, it's just a done deal with no sources whatsoever. Nice to know we got such an unbiased media.
Also, it's not just leaders of Venezuela, and Nicragua who are accusing America, there are many members of the American intellectual community, former soldiers, random people from throughout the world, including citizens of American ally countries, ie Canada, Saudi Arabia, Britain, Australia, Japan, etc. The list goes on. The only people who refuse to see what America is doing are the right wing extremists. They are also not accusations, but just acknowledging facts, rather than trying to bury them or brush them aside. Accusations are- China is a threat, Venezuela is a threat, Korea is a threat, Afganistan is a threat, Iran is a threat, Iraq has WMD. Those are accusations. Facts are- CIA goes into countries to cause disruption, America sponsors dictators, America supported Bin Laden, America put Sadam in power, America supported Pinochet, America supported Suharto, America supports Israeli attacks on Palestine, America uses white phosphorous on civilians.
9/11
How about adding 9/11 to this topic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.28.104 (talk) 00:08, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Jup, it's long overdue, as finally a mainstream political science journal is treating 9/11 as a possible act of (US) state terrorism, framing "9/11 truth" no longer as conspiracy theories, but as State Crimes Against Democracy (SCAD) -> http://abs.sagepub.com/content/vol53/issue6/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.162.131 (talk) 13:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Does self attacking count as terrorism? 66.183.58.186 (talk) 01:30, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
of course it is, if the executive branch of governments executes parts of its own population. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.162.131 (talk) 20:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Oh Jesus! Conspiraloons. Stick to the real world please! There is zero evidenec of 9/11 being a "false flag!". Yeah, I know I am either "sheeple" or "Mossad!" ZZZ! Get a life! 92.11.174.68 (talk) 08:39, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
@92.11.174.68 - this isn't a foxnews forum posting, this is wikipedia. if there are reliable sources 9/11 should be included. truthers.org have many examples of questionable material they've uncovered directly attributable to major global news services. they should atleast be compiled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.172.13.218 (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Possible reliable sources
- Gareau, Frederick H. (2004). State Terrorism and the United States ISBN 1-84277-535-9. The Four Deuces (talk)
- review of Gareau's book in Social Justice. The Four Deuces (talk)
Just wanted to say...
The article is looking very good, these days. The obstructionists and deletionists who used to run roughshod over all the content, here, appear to have finally been brought to heel. Kudos to all involved, and especially on the more reasonable and academic quality of debate that is currently prevalent on the talk page. Great job, NYCJosh, et al! 114.45.224.186 (talk) 13:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree. Good work guys. This is one of the best articles I've read in Misplaced Pages in a long time. I learned a lot. I found it when I was looking for information about the Atomic Bombings of Japan as an act of State Terrorism from a discussion of that topic in my graduate class today, on the anniversary of that horrible act. Misplaced Pages did not fail to disappoint in providing me with the relevant discussion of the very important topic from this angle, which is not discussed in our mainstream media (but what do you expect from US media?). Anway, Bravo, Misplaced Pages! I think I will have to join and help the project, now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.68.203 (talk) 23:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed. One of the best article in Misplaced Pages. Or, at least one of my favorites. Why is it class C? This should be a featured article. Its so well referenced, full of quality academic sources, and does a fine job at illuminating this very important topic of social discourse within political science and international relations. I suspect that the reason its not a featured article yet has more to do with the politics than anything else.72.164.170.56 (talk) 04:15, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
- It seems the tags should be removed. Including unexplained Sept neutrality tag. Length wise, some sections probably could get their own articles, or be briefly cut, just to make room for atrocities to come ;-( CarolMooreDC (talk) 13:22, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Tags
As has been pointed out repeatedly, many editors have problems with the neutrality, tone, and sourcing of this article. For these reasons, I maintain that the flags should stay. Soxwon (talk) 19:38, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
- The article should restrict itself to scholarly sources discussing the connection between the U.S. and state terrorism. A lot of the sources are news articles, op-eds and books published outside the academic mainstream. Also, a detailed description of incidents that have been desribed as state terrorism is POV, unless there is a consensus that these events are state terrorism. If the article were "Covert actions by the CIA" then it would be different. TFD (talk) 19:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
The tags are bullshit. The article refers to news sources when it seeks to verify the facts of what happened, as reported by the Western press. Where interpretation of these facts occurs, scholarly articles are *always* referenced, and the references provided come from the most respected analysts in this field. All of these objections to the article are entirely without merit: virtually all are either the invention of anti-Castro Cuban ideologues, or of fiercely partisan Israelis who believe that apartheid is OK, or of foolish white people from the US who have a shaky grasp of reality, at best, and at worst, are the sorts of white trash who indulge violent fantasies of the rape and torture of *very* broadly defined "terrorists" or perhaps, in the worst instances, "illegal immigrants".
Remove the tags. The only people keeping these tags in place are nutjob extremists who want to immolate the planet in a great fireball of white-purity. Otherwise, all sane people recognize that this page is strictly factual. 118.160.161.56 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC).
TerrorISM
The correct nouns are 'terrorism' or for the person practising it 'terrorist', the adjectives 'terrorist' or 'terroristic'... The article may look a bit more credible if you use the correct nomenclature.
'Terror' is what the victims experience. 92.11.174.68 (talk) 08:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
- And what the f*!k is this supposed to be addressing?
- Your criticisms of the article might look a bit more credible if you bothered to refer to what you're trying to correct.
- Beyond that, you just sound like a dips*!t knowitall. 118.160.161.56 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:25, 13 November 2010 (UTC).
This page should be eliminated
The U.S has not committed terrorism by any reasonable standard. Just because a terrorist group or a terrorist regime like Iran says the U.S does it is not sufficent.Nbaka is a joke (talk) 21:12, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, let's start another deletion discussion. The tenth, actually. It's fun. Also, there are examples like the Hiroshima and Nagasaki's nuclear bombings that have no relation at all with Iran --83.40.156.35 (talk) 13:37, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
- It does not matter whether or not the U.S. has supported state terrorism but whether there are reliable sources documenting that the accusation has been made. The challenge is to write the article in a neutral way. TFD (talk) 14:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone else here feel that the name "Nbaka" (I.E: "Nabqa") "is a Joke" is inherently POV, non-neutral, and clearly pushing a non-neutral perspective? Also, whatever happened to that attempt to get the bullshit labels removed from the top of this page? Isn't it high time Misplaced Pages acknowledged the level of scholarship and dedication to the neutral presentation of facts that this article represents?
This page makes it pretty clear that Misplaced Pages is in no way interested in being an "encyclopedia"; the organization here feels the need to always and shamelessly indulge the most spiteful, contrarian, and reactionary anti-academic sentiments over those which are rooted in fact and a dedication to truth. 118.160.161.56 (talk) First: Unless the 192 nations in the world have a page to state sponsored terrorism to put one fro a leading progressive nation shows a POV bias.
Second defending Nbaka is a joke tag, The Nbaka is a joke to most of the people who are not racist against Jews.Basil rock (talk) 14:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- C-Class United States articles
- High-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of High-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- Unassessed Crime-related articles
- Unknown-importance Crime-related articles
- Unassessed Terrorism articles
- High-importance Terrorism articles
- Terrorism task force articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics