'Soldier beheaded' in Woolwich machete attack: latest

Quik · May 26, 2013

Fallenangel said:
Maybe because you have a very poor argument?

You argued few pages ago that:
You - Iran, Iraq, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc.
Me - ....And how any of these have to do with the rise of Salafi/Wahhabi movements, for instance?
You -"They have to do with our imperialist foreign policy. That include the rise of Wahhabism in the first place via our "great ally" Saudi Arabia."

Yes, you see the key operator term "INCLUDES" meaning that I mentioned it specifically in the context of our greater imperialist foreign policy. You somehow confused Saudi Arabia's very different reasons with Iraq and Afghanistan. What you did not pick up for some reason however, is that all are the result of American intervention.

or from the post above me:
I wonder what else gives fuel to that fire we call radical Islam. Could it be that the west has been ransacking and destroying the Muslim world for the last 50 years, overthrowing governments and propping up dictators as we did in South America, SouthEast Asia, and everywhere else in the world?*

Again, Saudi Arabia was supported by the US and unfortunately still is, but it began to radicalize from within in mid 20th century before wars, interventions, etc by US.
Hence, the cause for radicalization isn't US foreign/intervention policy - at least not the original one, and again...though, I don't like the house of Saud there are more radical movements inside Saudi Arabia.

So...wanna try and come up with another theory to explain the rise of Wahhabi/Salafi movements?

Fallen.

There is the key word, once again! The reason it has become such a large, international movement and the main export besides oil, is because we have propped up that regime for decades. Saddam could have easily crushed Saudi Arabia, or at least embroiled them both in a long drawn out insurgency. We should never have gotten involved, and our interventions continue to bring misery to our country.

I'm tired of politicians rolling the dice with our kids futures, and sheep like you cheering them on the whole time. Every time they try to play God and "help fix" the Middle East they end up creating disasters and blowback. Just stop ****ing around and stirring the hornets nest already.

Quik · May 26, 2013

Jack Hays said:
Ronald Reagan had a description for people making silly claims like this. He called them "the blame America first crowd." Still fits.

Internet Savvy image creators have come up with amusing images for people like you, including the one with the ostrich putting his head in the sand.

Quik · May 26, 2013

Dr. Chuckles said:
Again, the Taliban didn't start operating until 1994. Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 89

Yes that is correct Einstein. Now, for 400, can you explain why the Taliban came to power AFTER the Soviet Union withdrew, or why they withdrew in the first place?

Quik · May 26, 2013

Dr. Chuckles said:
Further

same book, page 101, Neamatollah Nojumi

Amazing! No way you are this dense...

"This chaotic social and political environment gave rise to a vacuum of leadership and gave momentum to to the appearance of a political force that promised to stop the infighting and further destruction of the country. Led by Mullah Muhammad Omar, the initial taliban group emerged in the southern part of Kandahar province in 1994 as a local response to the former resistance and resistance forces implicated in banditry, brutality against local residents "

And what caused that chaotic social and political environment? Our intervention! Man oh man, I think I have identified the problem. We are like 10 steps ahead of you and so it's too hard for you to keep up.

The Prof · May 26, 2013

afp last saturday, may 18:

Bombs targeting Sunnis, including two near a mosque and one at a funeral procession, killed 67 people in Iraq, officials said, after dozens died in two days of attacks on Shiites.

Bombs targeting Iraqi Sunnis kill 67

Quik · May 26, 2013

Dr. Chuckles said:
3)We withdrew our involvement in Afghanistan after the soviets left. In fact, such is usually faulted for the **** hole it turned into

I've identified the problem.

It's like explaining to a kid why he shouldn't dump oil onto the road. A motorcycle runs into the oil and crashes. You try to explain to the kid how he helped cause the crash. He replies that he didn't cause the biker to go fast, he did that on his own.

Fallenangel · May 26, 2013

Quik said:
Yes, you see the key operator term "INCLUDES" meaning that I mentioned it specifically in the context of our greater imperialist foreign policy. You somehow confused Saudi Arabia's very different reasons with Iraq and Afghanistan. What you did not pick up for some reason however, is that all are the result of American intervention.

There is the key word, once again! The reason it has become such a large, international movement and the main export besides oil, is because we have propped up that regime for decades. Saddam could have easily crushed Saudi Arabia, or at least embroiled them both in a long drawn out insurgency. We should never have gotten involved, and our interventions continue to bring misery to our country.

First, I"ll try to ignore your obviously "very wise" suggestions to me and to US foreign policy makers (last paragraph) and concentrate on your argument.

Second, I did not confuse a thing, I asked you a specific question about specific movements (e.g Wahhabi/Salafi) that represent and support a lot of the current terrorist organisations, and how they we're exactly caused by US intervention.

You - "Iran, Iraq, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, etc."
Me - ....And how any of these have to do with the rise of Salafi/Wahhabi movements, for instance?
You -"They have to do with our imperialist foreign policy. That include the rise of Wahhabism in the first place via our "great ally" Saudi Arabia."

Which I showed you to be false, already twice, the rise of extreme Salafism began before any intervention anywhere - from within Saudi Arabia during mid 20th century, btw these extreme fractions also fought against the house of Saud.
It was only amplified by people who wanted to amplify it and vilify the west, for their political/religious agendas during the later wars etc.

EDIT: It doesn't mean that US should support Saudi Arabia in any way.
However, but to categorically assert like you do, that the only reason for the rise of Muslim extremists is US's intervention and support is, well, bs.

Fallen.

Dr. Chuckles · May 26, 2013

Quik said:
We bombed the **** out of them, did you forget?

bombing people isn't imperialism in any sense

LMFAO! Have you heard of the Soviet War in Afghanistan, the Mujahideen, and the resulting power vacuum that was left after Soviet troops withdrew? Is this some kind of joke? You can't be serious right now right?

What about it? The US withdrew it's funding and influence when the soviets withdrew. Years later, the taliban rose up

[/quote]All over the Middle East. Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Nobody would have approved of the invasion of a European country after 9/11. Muslim country like Iraq? No problem! [/quote]

None of those conflicts involve killing people for being muslim

And what is the "moral" or "ethical" argument you have for killing innocent Muslims? I guess I'm just like 3 steps ahead of you so I will try to slow it down a bit.

can you cite this policy of targeting innocent muslims?

Dr. Chuckles · May 26, 2013

Quik said:
Yes that is correct Einstein. Now, for 400, can you explain why the Taliban came to power AFTER the Soviet Union withdrew, or why they withdrew in the first place?

wait, so now interventionism is a good thing? Again, you're all over the place here, mate

Fallenangel · May 26, 2013

Dr. Chuckles said:
Again, you're all over the place here, mate

^ That pretty much sums-up his posts here so far.

polgara · May 26, 2013

The Prof said:
afp last saturday, may 18:

Bombs targeting Iraqi Sunnis kill 67

They are apparently continuing what they have done for a thousand years...randomly killing anyone who doesn't agree with their interpretation of religion, which influences their politics. :wow: I guess it's easier and more deadly now with modern weaponry.

Good morning, Prof! :2wave:

Dr. Chuckles · May 26, 2013

Quik said:
And what caused that chaotic social and political environment? Our intervention! Man oh man, I think I have identified the problem. We are like 10 steps ahead of you and so it's too hard for you to keep up.

actually the Afghan rural population (85% of the population at the time) were at odds with the urban elite and were resisting their efforts to extend influence and policy from Kabul after the revolution. In fact, the whole warlord culture developed in the late 70's during the revolution

Dr. Chuckles · May 26, 2013

Quik said:
I've identified the problem.

It's like explaining to a kid why he shouldn't dump oil onto the road. A motorcycle runs into the oil and crashes. You try to explain to the kid how he helped cause the crash. He replies that he didn't cause the biker to go fast, he did that on his own.

we took advantage of circumstances in Afghanistan, we didn't create them

Quik · May 26, 2013

Dr. Chuckles said:
we took advantage of circumstances in Afghanistan, we didn't create them

Our intervention caused the Soviet Union to withdraw from Afghanistan, leading to the rise of the Taliban.

Quik · May 26, 2013

Dr. Chuckles said:
actually the Afghan rural population (85% of the population at the time) were at odds with the urban elite and were resisting their efforts to extend influence and policy from Kabul after the revolution. In fact, the whole warlord culture developed in the late 70's during the revolution

And we took sides with the Islamists. Are you noticing a pattern here or do I have to spell it out for you? Interventionism leads to unintended consequences.

Quik · May 26, 2013

Dr. Chuckles said:
wait, so now interventionism is a good thing? Again, you're all over the place here, mate

No silly, how on Earth did you derive that from what I said? Minus five points for you, do not pass go.

I've been saying the same thing all along, that our interventionism around world leads to unintended consequences, which generally affect the American people negatively.

The Prof · May 26, 2013

Good morning, Prof!

good morning, polgara! it is an absolute, sincere pleaasure to see your wonderfully smiling face this beautiful (here in the northern california east bay) morning, you impress me as one of the sunniest and most peacefully disposed individuals anyone is lucky enough to call friend, the prof isn't, he is a pissy old septuagenarian who disdains all personal contact here for the purpose of business, but for a gentleman like you the overplied prof must make exception...

peace and love, sir, keep up the outstanding work

cliff

Quik · May 26, 2013

Dr. Chuckles said:
bombing people isn't imperialism in any sense

Our foreign policy is decidedly imperialist.

What about it? The US withdrew it's funding and influence when the soviets withdrew. Years later, the taliban rose up

And you are unable to connect the dots for some bizarre reason.

The British withdrew from the continent in 1783. The Constitution was ratified 4 years later while the British were gone. Using your pre school logic, I might sit here and say "see! these two events are unrelated!"

None of those conflicts involve killing people for being muslim

Sure they do. If they weren't Muslim, we wouldn't be killing them. Nobody demanded that we invade Europe after 9/11. We demanded Muslim blood, and we got it.

can you cite this policy of targeting innocent muslims?

Sure, Iraq war, Afghanistan, terrorist drone war, etc.

The Prof · May 26, 2013

Like the millions of other ordinary Swedes whom he now sees himself as one of, Mohammed Abbas fears his dream society is now under threat. When he first arrived in Stockholm as refugee from Iran in 1994, the vast Husby council estate where he settled was a mixture of locals and foreigners, a melting pot for what was supposed to be a harmonious, multi-racial paradise.

Two decades on, though, "white flight" has left only one in five of Husby's flats occupied by ethnic Swedes, and many of their immigrant replacements do not seem to share his view that a new life in Swedenis a dream come true. Last week, the neighbourhood erupted into rioting, sparking some of the fiercest urban unrest that Sweden has seen in decades, and a new debate about the success of racial integration.

"In the old days, the neighbourhood was more Swedish and life felt like a dream, but now there are just too many foreigners, and a new generation that has grown up here with just their own culture," he said, gesturing towards the hooded youths milling around in Husby's pedestrianised shopping precinct.

This weekend, after six consecutive nights of rioting, Mr Mohammed was not the only one questioning the Swedish social model's preference for the carrot over the stick. Many Swedes were left asking why a country that prides itself on a generous welfare state, liberal social attitudes and a welcoming attitude towards immigrants should ever have race riots in the first place.

Stockholm riots leave Sweden's dreams of perfect society up in smoke - Telegraph

damn neocons

Dr. Chuckles · May 26, 2013

Quik said:
Our foreign policy is decidedly imperialist.{/quote]

This started when you claimed we had imperialist operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. I responded by asking where is the imperialism in either of those conflicts. You responded by saying we bombed them. I pointed out bombing people isn't imperialism. Your reply is to basically reassert your original premise that I asked you to prove originally.

So, again, you're all over the place

And you are unable to connect the dots for some bizarre reason.

The British withdrew from the continent in 1783. The Constitution was ratified 4 years later while the British were gone. Using your pre school logic, I might sit here and say "see! these two events are unrelated!"

Click to expand...

I never claimed they were unrelated. I was responding to you claiming that such fundamentalist groups are a product of the US overthrowing govt and propping up dictators. I pointed out no such thing was going on when the Taliban formed. Also, as ill conceived as our programs in Afghanistan were, I don't think they fit either of those descriptions. We basically funded and armed an organic and internal resistance movement that was fighting against a a revolutionary govt that was getting arms, funds, and direct troop assitence from the soviets, with the soviets later taking a more active role of direct military intervention

Sure they do. If they weren't Muslim, we wouldn't be killing them. Nobody demanded that we invade Europe after 9/11. We demanded Muslim blood, and we got it.

Click to expand...

Why would we invade Europe after 9/11? How does this account for increased tension towards NK after 9/11?

Sure, Iraq war, Afghanistan, terrorist drone war, etc.

Click to expand...

none of those involve a policy of targeting innocent muslims

Dr. Chuckles · May 26, 2013

Quik said:
I've been saying the same thing all along, that our interventionism around world leads to unintended consequences, which generally affect the American people negatively.

the only reason we got involved in afghanistan was to bog down the soviets.

we were responding to such intervention, and kept it to a much lower degree than the soviets, who ultimately invaded the country

The Prof · May 26, 2013

the next shoe, as predictable as the first

Rigby's killing - and Adebolajo's apparent link to Islamic extremism - has stirred anti-Muslim backlashes across Britain. Police said they arrested three people on suspicion of posting racist tweets ahead of the English Defense League march, and further detained 24 others before and during the protest on suspicion of public drunkenness, vandalism and distributing racist literature. One group of marchers carried a sign that read "Taliban Hunting Club."

About 350 counterdemonstrators who called themselves Newcastle Unites shouted abuse at the marchers, including "Nazi scum off our streets!" The region's Northumbria Police said riot police prevented any direct clashes between the opposed groups.

Meanwhile, the far-right British National Party announced it would rally supporters next weekend on the spot where the young soldier was killed.

"Has the horror of Woolwich woken you up too? ... Join the British resistance," British National Party leader Nick Griffin said in a video address Saturday to supporters announcing his plans for a "Stand Up to Muslim Terror" rally at the scene of the crime, where thousands already have left floral bouquets paying tribute to the soldier.

A group that campaigns against extremism, Faith Matters, said it has received reports of around 150 anti-Muslim hate crimes across Britain since the soldier was killed Wednesday, more than 10 times the usual rate. Its director, Fiyaz Mughal, said he was particularly concerned by how geographically widespread the actions, including street fights and the vandalism of mosques, had become.

"Some of them are quite aggressive, very focused, very aggressive attacks ... against institutions or places where Muslims congregate," he said.

My Way News - Anti-Muslim actions rise in UK over slain soldier

open your eyes, ostriches

The Prof · May 26, 2013

One of two men arrested over the murder of a British soldier in a London street was detained in Kenya in 2010 on suspicion of seeking to train with an al Qaeda-linked group in Somalia, Kenyan police said on Sunday.

Confirmation that Michael Adebolajo was held in Kenya and deported to London will intensify calls for Britain's spy agencies to explain what they knew about the suspect and whether they could have done more to prevent Lee Rigby's killing on Wednesday.

The British parliament's security committee will next week investigate the security services' actions in the run-up to a killing that has put pressure on Prime Minister David Cameron to take a harder line on radicals.

The Nairobi government initially said Adebolajo had never visited Kenya. But on Sunday, Boniface Mwaniki, head of Kenya's anti-terrorism police, said Adebolajo was arrested in November 2010 and deported to Britain.

"He was arrested with a group of five others trying to travel to Somalia to join militant group al Shabaab," he told Reuters.

The Islamist force, which is linked to al Qaeda, wants to impose a strict version of Islamic law across Somalia.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman in London confirmed the arrest and said consular officials had provided assistance.

Spy agencies have come under scrutiny after uncorroborated allegations by a friend of Adebolajo on Friday that intelligence officers tried to recruit him six months ago.

Asked whether the security services had contacted the men, Home Secretary (interior minister) Theresa May told the BBC: "Their job is about gathering intelligence. They do that from a variety of sources and they will do that in a variety of ways. And yes, they will approach individuals from time to time."

A source close to the investigation told Reuters this week that both suspects were known to the MI5 domestic security service. However, neither was thought to pose a serious threat.

Suspected killer of British soldier was held in Kenya | Reuters

Master PO · May 26, 2013

RabidAlpaca said:
First, your quote doesn't even say the Taliban didn't form in 1979, just that they were still a ragtag group of armed men. (Actually it doesn't even mention the Taliban in the quote)

Second, I gave you a picture of Reagan meeting with the Taliban in 1985, I gave you two links, and even a movie made specifically around us supporting the Taliban in the 80's.

Jesus christ, just admit you were wrong instead of trying to claim the entire world is wrong. Unbelievably dishonest.

I don't really care what he did or didn't say. The question is whether the Taliban existed in the 80's. He DID meet with the Taliban in the 80's.

Taliban
(طالبان)
Participant in Civil war in Afghanistan; War in Afghanistan
Flag of the Taliban
A flag used by the Taliban from 1997 to 2001
Active 1979-1994 (assisting mujahideen)
1994–1996 (militia)
1996–2001 (government)
2004–present (insurgency)
Ideology Islamism
Islamic fundamentalism
Takfiri
Strict Sharia law
Pashtun nationalism
Leaders Mullah Mohammed Omar (founder and spiritual leader)[1]
Area of
operations Afghanistan and northwest Pakistan
Strength 45,000 (2001 est.)[2]
11,000 (2008 est.)[3]
36,000 (2010 est.)[4]
Originated as Students of Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam
Allies Haqqani network
Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin
Islamic Emirate of Waziristan
Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
East Turkestan Islamic Movement
Al-Qaeda
Tehreek-e-Nafaz-e-Shariat-e-Mohammadi
Jamaat-e-Islami
Caucasian Front[5]
Opponents Afghanistan Islamic Republic of Afghanistan
International Security Assistance For

The Prof · May 26, 2013

Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal has warned against the danger of Iran's nuclear program to the region's security and said Iran should not threaten its neighbors since countries in the region harbor no ill-intentions to the Islamic Republic.

"We stress the danger of the Iranian nuclear program to the security of the whole region," Prince Saud said Saturday in a joint news conference with Indian External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid in the city of Jiddah.

Turning to Syria, he also that Syrian President Bashar Assad and his regime should have no role in the country's future.

Saudi Arabia announced last week the arrest of 10 more members of an alleged Iranian spy ring.

AP: Saudi Arabia Warns Against Iran's Nuclear Program

damn imperialists

'Soldier beheaded' in Woolwich machete attack: latest

Quik

Quik

Quik

Quik

The Prof

Quik

Fallenangel

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard

Fallenangel

polgara

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard

Quik

Quik

Quik

The Prof

Quik

The Prof

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard

Dr. Chuckles

King Conspiratard

The Prof

The Prof

Master PO

Mixed Government advocate

The Prof

'Soldier beheaded' in Woolwich machete attack: latest

King Conspiratard

King Conspiratard

King Conspiratard

King Conspiratard

King Conspiratard

King Conspiratard

Mixed Government advocate

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency