US Tactics On Terrorism: Have We Gone Too Far?

[MSgt]

40% of Americans are brainwashed enough to think the universe is less than 10,000 years old !
What winds up the Muslims the most to make them see you as Satan is you being in Muslim countries. So the war on terror has become a war of inflamation.

When "40%" of Americans start cheering for Christian Radical as they bomb buildings, skyjack airplanes, take hostages for the release of "political" prisoners, and start blaming another civilization for their problems........it will then become a problem. Until then you are still choosing to trivialize the real issues of the Middle East with insignificant comparisons.


If the US was not in Saudi Arabia, the world would be all screwed up with incosistent oil demands and this civilization would still seek to blame others for their self-inflicted problems and "Global Left" members like yourself would just scrounge for something else to cry about. Try again.

So that's a democracy so why worry then. They'll somehow be kept in check... not that they were in democratic UK. What relevance do Dutch Muslims have to you fighting a war on a false premise in Iraq anyway ?

1. Radical Islam is an exported business. "Apocalyptic" terrosists seek to destroy and kill in other civilizations. Just because they are being raised in the Netherlands, it does not mean they will remain in the Netherlands. Even if they do remain in the Netherlands, they are a threat, because this fanaticism has proven to easily spread to all areas where Muslim populations are in social oppression. If an attack ever occurs in Britian where Netherland Muslims were involved, remember you said.."why worry." Brits felt the same way as Hitler invaded Poland. "It's happening somewhere else so why worry?"

2. What does a "false premise in Iraq" have to do with combatting Radical Islam? You're still stuck in your dire need to complain about issues you can't understand. Right back to the same old garbage. Perhaps we should have invaded Saudi Arabia instead. For some reason, I get the impression that you would just bitch about that too, because combatting Radical Islam is a waste of time. We should just wait even longer for the Middle East to change. Maybe we should wait until this civilization organizes under one Sunni banner and marches into Europe. I guess defending Europe is something you can get behind. We may as well do nothing and accept that we are going to be attacked forever. Even if that means someone you care about. Glass is alway half empty with you. Of course this is expected from people that are full of criticisms and no solutions.

Degrees don't impress me. I'm not kidding. I associate with a large number of swats in my job. Some of the most blinkered idiots I've met have been swats. A large proportion just regurgitate facts but don't think.
Bin Laden has the warrior ethos that you have & is loving you fighting on Muslim land. It stirs up the rabble & helps him to gain their support.
Just like 911 enabled bush to stir up the rabble.... the unthinking unquestioning jingoistic masses so he could sleep walk you into a war on terror in the wrong country.

Oil
Say what you like about these swats. Bush is a pawn of the liers that sexed up WMD intelligence.

Sounds to me like you have personal issues against men of education.....I mean "swats." Maybe you have felt threatened by them. Or maybe you are just a bitter old man. These very few experts mentioned above hold degrees that specialize on the subject. They hold careers that benefit global understandings into this threat. They spend their lives learning and analyzing and all you can do is dismiss them because they are "swats." How sad for you that your insatiable need to bash and be negative leaves you blind. With the wealth of study into this subject, you can't ration with it, so you come back to the mundane "Bush lied about WMD" and "The CIA lied about WMD" montra. Tell us....what are your credentials that would allow you to dismiss these men of specialized education? I mean besides the fact that you are completely ignorant into this world of study, yet have a wealth of ignorant opinion.

Pathetic.

 

[robin]

When "40%" of Americans start cheering for Christian Radical as they bomb buildings, skyjack airplanes, take hostages for the release of "political" prisoners, and start blaming another civilization for their problems........it will then become a problem. Until then you are still choosing to trivialize the real issues of the Middle East with insignificant comparisons.

Sounds like the CIA

1. Radical Islam is an exported business. "Apocalyptic" terrosists seek to destroy and kill in other civilizations. Just because they are being raised in the Netherlands, it does not mean they will remain in the Netherlands. Even if they do remain in the Netherlands, they are a threat, because this fanaticism has proven to easily spread to all areas where Muslim populations are in social oppression. If an attack ever occurs in Britian where Netherland Muslims were involved, remember you said.."why worry." Brits felt the same way as Hitler invaded Poland. "It's happening somewhere else so why worry?"

When did I say Dutch Muslims shouldn't be monitored ?

2. What does a "false premise in Iraq" have to do with combatting Radical Islam? You're still stuck in your dire need to complain about issues you can't understand. Right back to the same old garbage. Perhaps we should have invaded Saudi Arabia instead. For some reason, I get the impression that you would just bitch about that too, because combatting Radical Islam is a waste of time. We should just wait even longer for the Middle East to change. Maybe we should wait until this civilization organizes under one Sunni banner and marches into Europe. I guess defending Europe is something you can get behind. We may as well do nothing and accept that we are going to be attacked forever. Even if that means someone you care about. Glass is alway half empty with you. Of course this is expected from people that are full of criticisms and no solutions.

The approach in N.Pakistan is best where the US & UK assist the Pakistani army with tracking down terrorists. Pakistan has been a major exporter of terror. Iraq has not.

Sounds to me like you have personal issues against men of education.....I mean "swats." Maybe you have felt threatened by them. Or maybe you are just a bitter old man. These very few experts mentioned above hold degrees that specialize on the subject. They hold careers that benefit global understandings into this threat. They spend their lives learning and analyzing and all you can do is dismiss them because they are "swats." How sad for you that your insatiable need to bash and be negative leaves you blind. With the wealth of study into this subject, you can't ration with it, so you come back to the mundane "Bush lied about WMD" and "The CIA lied about WMD" montra. Tell us....what are your credentials that would allow you to dismiss these men of specialized education? I mean besides the fact that you are completely ignorant into this world of study, yet have a wealth of ignorant opinion.

Academics & swats aren't needed. It's easy enough to understand religion is a mind virus & can mutate into a politised radical form. All that is needed is the demographic information. Namely in which mosques & Madrass's is most hatred preached. How many freaking degrees does one need to know that ?
Intelligence is the most important thing, yet it's either distorted by those that follow their own agenda or it's ignored & you know that's a fact yet not once have you admitted that it's a scandal.
The fact Blair got sucked into the escapade in Iraq based on ignoring weapons inspectors & putting spin on the intelligence while either choosing to ignore intelligence about the hate preachers in his own backyard or simply the intelligence wasn't there in the 1st place, speaks for itself.... 57 innocent UK people dead becuase of it.

Intelligence is everything & to distort it or ignore it is thee worst thing a country can do. Your hero Bush would know about that. Look at the 911 intelligence that was ignored or not acted upon.
Yet you have never expressed any concern over this missuse or ignorance of intelligence. You just come out with... 'I'm saying the same old garbage'.
Democracy didn't stop the idiot's that swallowed the politised mutation of Islam in the UK that set off the London bombs ?
They weren't living under a dictator. It's almost an organic process. They caught the infection from hate preachers in UK mosques.
Tell me GY, how democracy can stop a religion mutating into the radical politised form becuase it hasn't in the UK.
None of the preachers of hate in the UK come from Iraq.
How can spending 100's of billions on invading a country that wasn't exporting preachers of hate help ?
For sure they need to be kicked out of UK or locked up or worse, but that isn't easy with our laws as they are. Our laws need to be changed.
Scum like this are the problem http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4609412.stm
This is where the war on terror is.
They are nothing to do with Iraq !

 

[MSgt]

Sounds like the CIA

Yeah..just like the CIA.:roll:

When did I say Dutch Muslims shouldn't be monitored ?

"So that's a democracy so why worry then."

The approach in N.Pakistan is best where the US & UK assist the Pakistani army with tracking down terrorists. Pakistan has been a major exporter of terror. Iraq has not.

...and you know so much about what is going on in Pakistan? Some extremists camps must remain opened and unaware of our attention. Just like in Bosnia. Once again...chasing terrorists around the globe does nothing while the civilization from where their ideologies come from continues to flourish.

Academics & swats aren't needed. It's easy enough to understand religion is a mind virus & can mutate into a politised radical form. All that is needed is the demographic information. Namely in which mosques & Madrass's is most hatred preached. How many freaking degrees does one need to know that ?

It's not the point of holding a degree. It's the point of study instead of sitting on your ass criticizing things you have no experience or real study on, which seperates you from them.

Intelligence is the most important thing, yet it's either distorted by those that follow their own agenda or it's ignored & you know that's a fact yet not once have you admitted that it's a scandal.

What's to admit? It's only a scandal if you view it as such. I agree with the studies and the solutions called for in the Middle East. I agree that the long term threat to America is Radical Islam and this civilization's digressions. So like I have said before..."Whatever got us there." Iraq is very much a part of this "War on Terror." Even Clinton and Bush Sr. knew that Saddam had to go and the Middle East had to change. Bush is simply the one that did it. Strangely, if 9/11 occurred on your soil, I don't think you would have a problem with what these "swats" have been stating for the last 20-30 years regarding the Middle East.

The fact Blair got sucked into the escapade in Iraq based on ignoring weapons inspectors & putting spin on the intelligence while either choosing to ignore intelligence about the hate preachers in his own backyard or simply the intelligence wasn't there in the 1st place, speaks for itself.... 57 innocent UK people dead becuase of it.

Those poor innocent Brits. I guess they would have been spared if we had attacked Saudi Arabia instead. All would have been much better. I believe this was one of your solutions. Isn't this why you continue to whine about the country origins of terrorists as being where we should be militarily? You would have an argument if the bombers in London were Iraqi, but they weren't were they? Perhaps you think Radicals would have left London safe and snug if we instead invaded their Islamic homeland based on a few individuals instead of taking the more wise and tactful route of taking out Saddam and sparking change in the Middle East from there?

Intelligence is everything & to distort it or ignore it is thee worst thing a country can do. Your hero Bush would know about that. Look at the 911 intelligence that was ignored or not acted upon.
Yet you have never expressed any concern over this missuse or ignorance of intelligence. You just come out with... 'I'm saying the same old garbage'.

The intelligence wasn't misused. It was used to do what was necessary. This is the difference between you and me. I am pro-active, while you are reactive. You believe that the inevitable explosion must occur before an action. A true European.

This proves how pathetic your intelligence is on this subject. You bash Bush for ignoring intel prior to 9/11, yet say nothing on Clinton's ignoring of intel for nearly a decade. You also say nothing on how the intel world and the experts have been preaching about a necessary change in the Middle East since the Reagan era. Of course, according to you, Bush invented all of this.:roll:

Democracy didn't stop the idiot's that swallowed the politised mutation of Islam in the UK that set off the London bombs ?
They weren't living under a dictator. It's almost an organic process. They caught the infection from hate preachers in UK mosques.
Tell me GY, how democracy can stop a religion mutating into the radical politised form becuase it hasn't in the UK.
None of the preachers of hate in the UK come from Iraq.

I'm really fighting the urge to completely insult your complete lack of intelligence on this subject. The reason Radical Islam thrives and continues to fester in the Middle East is their oppressive society. Don't think for one second that Radical Islam is a problem in the UK because of one desperate and senseless attack on your soil. That was merely a group of Radicals adhering to the needs of Al-Queda to make a point. I guess you think that the UK is in as much dire straights as Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia?

I have stated and written commentaries on the notion of "Roll Back." This is a belief that was touted about during the Cold War era, but was not carried out well. I believe this notion was ahead of its time and is better suited for today's fight against Radical Islam. This implies that we must engage in an aggressive IO war. One where Radicals are currently winning (you're proof of that.) The spreading of the Arab disease has gone as far as north Africa, South Europe, and west Asia. These are places where dictators are not in control, yet the Arab dogma of blame is affecting the Radical local elements. We must wage this IO war in America, Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. We have to engage Radical Islam on the fringes and work our way in.

How can spending 100's of billions on invading a country that wasn't exporting preachers of hate help ?
For sure they need to be kicked out of UK or locked up or worse, but that isn't easy with our laws as they are. Our laws need to be changed.
Scum like this are the problem http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4609412.stm
This is where the war on terror is.
They are nothing to do with Iraq !

This is just a stupid circle you continue to hammer upon. I'll break it down...

Iraq is a means to an end. Radical Islam is deeply rooted in a society that only sees terror tactics as the only means to effectively change political, economic, social, and religious forms. This is a desperation amongst a mass of oppressed people and satisfying ourselves with a trial here and there will accomplish nothing. The ingredient to the remedy is DEMOCRACY, one where oppression is not the tool of the ruling powers and the people have the ability to seek other avenues to change their lives. The Islamic Radicals around the globe adhere to the concrete brittle teachings that stem from this region. Where could we spark such an endeavor?

1) Iran? - 70 percent of the population is under thirty years old and are disenchanted with their government and Mullahs. They are quite aware that Khomeini brutalized their religion and they want to modernize and embrace a democracy. There is an existing movement.

2) Syria? - Currently, reformist all over the country are being imprisoned or killed by the Baathist Party for their public speakings. They do not want American boots on their soil, but agree with "Bush's" sense of change for the Middle East.

3) Jordan? - Despite us calling them "Ally," they see us as an enemy. However, the Jordanian King has publicly said for years that he wants Jordan to modernize and to become a democratic nation. Since the bombings, the people of Jordan have displayed great anger with extremists in their country and many have stated things like..."I used to support Al-Queda in Iraq because they were fighting our enemies (America and Israel), but since they have been killing Muslims, I do not understand this."

4) Saudi Arabia? - Aside from world oil exports, Saudi Arabia is seen as the birthplace of Islam. I wonder how the Islamic Radicals of the world would feel about that?

5) Iraq? - Controlled by a dictator that no one in the Middle East would lift a finger to help and the people are eager to see him removed.

Anywhere else wouldn't matter, because it is too far removed from the heart of the problem. So those are your choices.

Again....instead of whining about Iraq...why don't you do something completely counter to your tactics and suggest your own ideas over your criticisms. An individual can do both as I have. Keep in mind...simply stating things that are already occurring does not give you credibility. Show us how much more enlightened you are than men who have experienced and men who have spent their lives educating on the subject........

 

[robin]

"So that's a democracy so why worry then."

Becuase according to you in democracies there is no terror problem. That's why you want to democratise Iraq isn't it?
Yet a handful of Muslims in a Dutch democracy & you admit they could still be problematic. So how is making Iraq a democracy going to help then with 15million Muslims there & just 1 million in Holland & you say they could be problematic in Holland where there are a fifteenth as many Muslims as in Iraq & there is democracy in Holland ?
You are admitting democracy doesn't solve the problem.
Especially as I say... Iraq was not an exporter of terrorists. This so called 'sparking a M.East change' crusade in Iraq will not stop the world wide problem.
The London bombers just show that he crusade in Iraq is like trying to solve a wasp problem in your own backgarden by going wasp swatting thousands of miles away in a place that isn't a source of wasps. You just make the wasps there angry & sting 2,000 of your soldiers to death !

...and you know so much about what is going on in Pakistan? Some extremists camps must remain opened and unaware of our attention.

???????

What's to admit? It's only a scandal if you view it as such. I agree with the studies and the solutions called for in the Middle East. I agree that the long term threat to America is Radical Islam and this civilization's digressions. So like I have said before..."Whatever got us there." Iraq is very much a part of this "War on Terror." Even Clinton and Bush Sr. knew that Saddam had to go and the Middle East had to change. Bush is simply the one that did it. Strangely, if 9/11 occurred on your soil, I don't think you would have a problem with what these "swats" have been stating for the last 20-30 years regarding the Middle East.

Bush snr was 70 miles down the Rd from Bagdad in 91. The CIA encouraged the Kurds to uprise. Then did nothing.

Those poor innocent Brits.

Disrespectful indeed.

I guess they would have been spared if we had attacked Saudi Arabia instead.
All would have been much better.
I believe this was one of your solutions.

No
The terrorists need to be dealt with by homeland security. Not on some escapade in a country that didn't spawn them. In fact the Iraqis were the most suppressed people in the MEast & yet didn't export terror. What does that tell you ?

The intelligence wasn't misused. It was used to do what was necessary. This is the difference between you and me. I am pro-active, while you are reactive.

"CIA Kept WMD Info From Bush ... Asked about the discrepancies between what the
CIA says Wilson reported, and what Wilson told the committee, Wilson says," ...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/25/iraq/main560449.shtml

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3911.htm

So according to you hypothesi from scholars should be heeded while real intelligence facts can be ignored or twisted !
You expound the wisdom of heeding advice from academics yet don't give a toss about the CIA misleading Bush !... HA HA HA HA HA HA :lol: :lol:
What kind of contradictory weirdo are you GY ?
A robotic product of an institution.

[This proves how pathetic your intelligence is on this subject. You bash Bush for ignoring intel prior to 9/11, yet say nothing on Clinton's ignoring of intel for nearly a decade. You also say nothing on how the intel world and the experts have been preaching about a necessary change in the Middle East since the Reagan era. Of course, according to you, Bush invented all of this.:roll:

Makes no odds whether its a demo out of line or a republican. I don't bring party politics into it. If someone a liar then the colour of their tie makes no odds. A liar's a liar. You bring party politics into it.... weird or what !

[I'm really fighting the urge to completely insult your complete lack of intelligence on this subject. The reason Radical Islam thrives and continues to fester in the Middle East is their oppressive society.

Oh yes.. people are so suppresed in West London or Yorkshire Mosques :roll:

[Don't think for one second that Radical Islam is a problem in the UK because of one desperate and senseless attack on your soil. That was merely a group of Radicals adhering to the needs of Al-Queda to make a point. I guess you think that the UK is in as much dire straights as Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia?

That's an insane remark !

[I have stated and written commentaries on the notion of "Roll Back." This is a belief that was touted about during the Cold War era, but was not carried out well. I believe this notion was ahead of its time and is better suited for today's fight against Radical Islam. This implies that we must engage in an aggressive IO war. One where Radicals are currently winning (you're proof of that.) The spreading of the Arab disease has gone as far as north Africa, South Europe, and west Asia. These are places where dictators are not in control, yet the Arab dogma of blame is affecting the Radical local elements. We must wage this IO war in America, Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. We have to engage Radical Islam on the fringes and work our way in.

Fly swat ! WTF do yanks so love acronyms ? WTF is IO ?

[This is just a stupid circle you continue to hammer upon. I'll break it down...
Iraq is a means to an end. Radical Islam is deeply rooted in a society that only sees terror tactics as the only means to effectively change political, economic, social, and religious forms. This is a desperation amongst a mass of oppressed people and satisfying ourselves with a trial here and there will accomplish nothing. The ingredient to the remedy is DEMOCRACY, one where oppression is not the tool of the ruling powers and the people have the ability to seek other avenues to change their lives. The Islamic Radicals around the globe adhere to the concrete brittle teachings that stem from this region. Where could we spark such an endeavor?

The only sparks are the ones lighting a tinder of world wide Islam. You said yourself the London bombings are a reprisal for Iraq. So you've shot yourself in the foot there.

[1) Iran? - 70 percent of the population is under thirty years old and are disenchanted with their government and Mullahs. They are quite aware that Khomeini brutalized their religion and they want to modernize and embrace a democracy. There is an existing movement.

2) Syria? - Currently, reformist all over the country are being imprisoned or killed by the Baathist Party for their public speakings. They do not want American boots on their soil, but agree with "Bush's" sense of change for the Middle East.

3) Jordan? - Despite us calling them "Ally," they see us as an enemy. However, the Jordanian King has publicly said for years that he wants Jordan to modernize and to become a democratic nation. Since the bombings, the people of Jordan have displayed great anger with extremists in their country and many have stated things like..."I used to support Al-Queda in Iraq because they were fighting our enemies (America and Israel), but since they have been killing Muslims, I do not understand this."

4) Saudi Arabia? - Aside from world oil exports, Saudi Arabia is seen as the birthplace of Islam. I wonder how the Islamic Radicals of the world would feel about that?

5) Iraq? - Controlled by a dictator that no one in the Middle East would lift a finger to help and the people are eager to see him removed.

Anywhere else wouldn't matter, because it is too far removed from the heart of the problem. So those are your choices.

Again....instead of whining about Iraq...why don't you do something completely counter to your tactics and suggest your own ideas over your criticisms. An individual can do both as I have. Keep in mind...simply stating things that are already occurring does not give you credibility. Show us how much more enlightened you are than men who have experienced and men who have spent their lives educating on the subject........

Ban religion for all I care. Bombing the slime won't solve anything. Islam is a virulent mind virus. The only cure is to kill the lot. Even then some other crock of religious BS would take it's place & start infecting the remaining population.
I'm afraid the mind of the average unthinking human, that's about 90% of the population, is a perfect niche for religious gobbldy gook, rather like a dung heap is an ideal niche for flies.
You can never kill off the world population of rats & you can never kill of the world population of radical Muslims.
Bear this in mind... High explosives don't change minds.

 

[Caine]

Because everytime I mention Democracy, the ignorant masses of Bush bashers come back with a reply...."robot for Bush," because before Bush started saying it on TV, they've never heard about it. It's just a habit that I now put in everytime I say that "Democracy is the ultimate fix."

And... WTF does this have to do with me?

 

[MSgt]

And... WTF does this have to do with me?

Like I said...it's a habit.

 

[MSgt]

[/I]Becuase according to you in democracies there is no terror problem.

You continue to prove how simple you are. Not once have I said this. I (Along with many) said Democracy is the fix....I never said that there is no terror in democracies. We are discussing a wide and massive movement...not individual grievances that use Radical Islam as their guide. There will always be criminals who seek an end through violence. There will always be an individual that becomes so desperate that he will contemplate a terrorist act. The reasons a democratic nation might have a massive Radical movement is that they wish not to antagonize the problem, thus allowing it to fester. We see this in Indonesia. The attack in Bali woke them up.

You would be one of those individuals that expect an immediate closure to such an endeavor. Turning back the tide of oppressive regimes and a religion gone mad will not be accomplished over night - No matter how badly you want it to and no matter how badly you look forward to the next terror attack to "prove" the mission is a failure. The heart of this problem is the Middle East. It being a world wide problem is precisely why the world wide governments must get more involved. Everywhere we are seeing governments afraid to antagonize or, how did you say it..."make them angry." They share your attitude. The London bombing happened, because your government did not want to antagonize the Radical element. Bali happened for the same reasons. 9/11 is also an example of a government not wanting to acknowledge a growing problem. This cowardly insistance that London would have been nice and safe were it not for our actions in Iraq is pathetic. We cannot face this problem without antagonizing the Radical element in every government that refuses to admit their local Radical problems. So far...Australia has done the only right thing.

With your logic in mind, the allied forces should have given up after Normandy, because germany still killed people. For that matter, we should fire all of our police forces, because despite their attempts....crime persists. We should also halt all projects to aid the poor, because no matter what we do...people will be poor.:roll:

???????

Proves my point. Full of critical opinion backed up by ignorance.

No
The terrorists need to be dealt with by homeland security.

Bwahahaha. Typical European. Wait until the threat builds up and knocks on your door.....then homeland security can deal with it. Iraq is a means to an end. I guess your rational is to destroy democracies everywhere and we can all live under brutal dictators. Yeah...that's the fix. Better yet, because the problem is the entire Middle East, maybe we should invade and fix every country in the Middle East causing massive deaths and injuries to all involved...except Iraq. Leave Saddam sitting pretty ritgh smack in the middle of it. :roll:

So according to you hypothesi from scholars should be heeded while real intelligence facts can be ignored or twisted !
You expound the wisdom of heeding advice from academics yet don't give a toss about the CIA misleading Bush !

You really do bore me. You love dancing in circles. As I have stated, I adhere to what the experts say. What agents in the CIA have to say is of no concern to me, nor is any "distorting" of facts to get us into Iraq. Intel is a guide. Intel is used all of the time to allow us to do what is necessary. I look at intel all day. None of it means anything, unless you choose to act upon it. This is a world you do not understand. It is a world that all governments and intel agencies know all too well. Sadly, the majority of their populations are clueless and hang on every shred of intel and every word by politicians that uses this intel to gain an objective. Again, your sense of intelligence is lacking. Like I have said....Because of my studies, I wasn't fooled by anything surrounding Iraq. You were. I will say this...there were and are things found in Iraq that you do not know about...and other countries are implicated.

Makes no odds whether its a demo out of line or a republican. I don't bring party politics into it. If someone a liar then the colour of their tie makes no odds. A liar's a liar. You bring party politics into it.... weird or what !

All politicians are liars. You choose to whine and complain about everything American and Bush. It is a widely known fact that if the next President does a complete 180 with this "War on Terror" you would continue to bitch about something else American....weird or what! The very definition of the "Global Left."

Oh yes.. people are so suppresed in West London or Yorkshire Mosques :roll:

More from a simpleton. How sad that you think the societies in the Middle East are like your society, because of a few mosques and your governments need to ignore their own festering problem. If you've noticed...there is no festering Radical problem in America. Why is that? Never mind...keep blaming your problems on America. It's what the "Global Left" do. They are in keeping with Middle Eastern philosophy.

That's an insane remark !

You're the one trivializing.

Fly swat ! WTF do yanks so love acronyms ? WTF is IO ?

Because scientist and military leadership like to over explain a topic through title, but forget that in conversation, a mouth full of words is unnecessary. They then shorten it to an acronym. In peace and war, the American response to the violent extremism that so damages the Islamic world has been as halting and reactive as it has been reluctant. We simply did not want to get involved more deeply than necessary, but Muslim extremists were and still are determined to remain involved with us. IO is "Information Operation" and it has become a primary war fighting capability and it is considered a military core competency. Another simplified word is "propaganda" and all militaries practice it. It has become a means to achieve an objective through "non-combative" tactics. Individual terrorists and their organizations can be destroyed, but the idealogy and oppression that has contributed to producing Radical Islam cannot be "killed" away. We are currently waging an IO war in many places where Radical Islam is "protected" by governments who do not want to "anger" them. However, because we are not doing all that we can and these governments are hindering us....the Radical are winning with this.

The only sparks are the ones lighting a tinder of world wide Islam. You said yourself the London bombings are a reprisal for Iraq. So you've shot yourself in the foot there.

Actually, it's more of the same. You cannot win a war if you do not fight, and you cannot win a peace through inattention. Again, you complain for an immediate favorable outcome, while expecting the enemy to simply lie down. Maybe some time in the milit5ary would have done you some good. You would have learned that people do fight back. Simply sitting idly by and waiting for an Islamic Army to attack your borders is wreckless. It is suicide to do nothing for fear of antagonizing them. It is foolish to pretend that it isn't a problem as they are killing you. This would be more of that appeasement that Europe is so famous for. You ever wonder why America doesn't have the threats Europe has on our side of the world? Ever wonder why the CIA did things to keep Soviet influence out of our part of the world in SA? Ever wonder why Europe will one day be called Eurabia after the migration of Islamics have completely fractured European governments as they are doing right now? (France as an example). It's because we are not so quick to appease or compromise our securities for a false peace. It's because we are quick to look into the future and take present necessary actions to shape our future.

You can never kill off the world population of rats & you can never kill of the world population of radical Muslims.
Bear this in mind... High explosives don't change minds.

You didn't answer the challenge. This leads me to believe that you simply wish to complain and do not know what to do and are unwilling to study for a solution. Fortunately, their are plenty of scholars and experts who are studying it....and all you can do is complain.

The current adherents to Radical Islam are irrepairable. Killing them as they pick up a rifle is the solution. However, the long term threat is an escalading Radical Islam within the civilization. We cannot afford to wait for the exponentially progressing problem to pick up a rifle. Until they embrace change and alter their fundamental beliefs, which to them would be a direct blasphemy to Allah, they will win in the end. History has seen all religions go through an intense radical period. It is especially dangerous today, because of the technology and because the Qu'ran reads like no other "holy" book. I have stated before....the only thing that can fix the Muslim world is Muslims. This role is reserved for them alone. So far, they aren't lifting a finger. Where does this leave us? We must attempt to change this civilization and the symptoms it has produced. We must give them the opportunities to repair what they have done to themselves. Radical Islam is not a historical cultural thing. On an individual basis...sure, but the father of today's Radical Islam was only executed in 1966 by Egypt. This isn't something that has been going on for centuries.

If we can "never" fix this problem....then what do we do? Become Muslim? Because that is there ultimate goal. Europe is already feeling the impact of a group of people that refuse to assimilate to other cultures.

 

[robin]

9/11 is also an example of a government not wanting to acknowledge a growing problem.

Home security & paying attention to intelligence is what was needed. Not a war in Iraq. The Iraq fly swat won't deal with the flies in your own backyard.
You would have been just as uselessly employed participating in killing 2 million Vietnamese in a war started by the Tonkin gulf ruse where you pretended to be attacked by the Vietcong, just like Hitler pretended to be attacked by the poles as an excuse to start WWII. When you got deservedly booted out of Nam the whole world didn't turn commi did it ?
Just the same in Iraq. You believe you are dealing with an imminent threat from fanatics located in Pakistan, London, Saudi, Eritrea, Morroco etc etc... in fact just about anywhere but Iraq. I can't believe how you seriously think Iraq is the place to fight terror.
In a way it's the Nam thing all over again.
People are fighting you in Iraq is becuase you are there. You made the war. Your getting killed there becuase you made the war. When you leave you will stop being killed. Just like in Nam. You left & people stopped getting killed.
Leave Iraq & it will make no difference to terror. Just like when you got booted out of Nam. It made no difference to world communism.

We have it from you that.. I am stuck in some far away place unlike you in some barracks in the middle of some Iraqi slum or wherever TF you are, so therefore I'm cloistered & don't know anything about what goes on in the 'real' world. Unlike you, I haven't seen corpses in the flesh of those killed by American munitions or by insurgents. I've only seen the results on TV documentaries. So therefore my opinion & knowledge is somehow inferior & second rate to yours.
Now we move on to the next nonsense from you....
Weapons inpectors are people that are on the ground. They aren't surmising about the world whilst stuck on some college campus like the academics you so admire. So their information is primary, it's not secondary or academic. It's the truth of how they found things. They are out in the real world.
Yet whilst you advocate your supposedly 'worldly view' because being in the killing business you see things 1st hand, you for some reason don't support the worldly point of view & evidence of the weapons inpectors who saw things 1st hand, on the ground in Iraq. You dismiss their intelligence as if it were some minor phone call intercept.
You prefer instead to extol academics & disregard information from people in the real world like weapons inspectors. You are happy that the senior weapons inspector I saw interviewed TV was ignored by George Tenet becuase it got a result. That's the most ludicrous contradiction !
You have as much respect for the truth as Joseph Goebbles & presumably about as much intergrity.

What agents in the CIA have to say is of no concern to me, nor is any "distorting" of facts to get us into Iraq."

In other words it was misinterpreted, caveats were ignored, extrapolations were made & weapons inpectors were ignored to suit the agenda of those that wanted a war in Iraq.
Then you say

The intelligence wasn't misused. It was used to do what was necessary. This is the difference between you and me.

When evidence, in other words the truth, is 'used to get a result', then truth is the 1st casualty. But that's fine with you becuase it was 'used to do what was necessary'.... in other words get a result. That result is a war on terror in a country that had nothing to do with 911 & was not an exporter of terror.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20194-2004Feb6.html
"Bush, Aides Ignored CIA Caveats on Iraq
Clear-Cut Assertions Were Made Before Arms Assessment Was Completed
By Walter Pincus and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, February 7, 2004; Page A17
In its fall 2002 campaign to win congressional support for a war against Iraq, President Bush and his top advisers ignored many of the caveats and qualifiers included in the classified report on Saddam Hussein's weapons that CIA Director George J. Tenet defended Thursday.
In fact, they made some of their most unequivocal assertions about unconventional weapons before the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) was completed.

Iraq "is a grave and gathering danger," Bush told the United Nations on Sept. 12, 2002. At the White House two weeks later -- after referring to a British government report that Iraq could launch "a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order" is given -- he went on to say, "Each passing day could be the one on which the Iraqi regime gives anthrax or VX -- nerve gas -- or someday a nuclear weapon to a terrorist ally."
Three weeks later, on the day the NIE was delivered to Congress, Bush told lawmakers in the White House Rose Garden that Iraq's current course was "a threat of unique urgency."
On Thursday, summarizing the NIE's conclusions, Tenet said: "They never said Iraq was an imminent threat."
The administration's prewar comments -- and the more cautious, qualified phrasings of intelligence analysts -- are at the heart of the debate over whether the faulty prewar claims resulted from bad intelligence or exaggeration by top White House officials -- or both.
Former chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay told senators last week that caveats often fall by the wayside "the higher you go up" the bureaucratic chain. At the top, he said, "you read the headlines, you read the summary, you're busy, you've got other things to do."
Administration supporters say Bush, Vice President Cheney and others were simply extrapolating from the comprehensive intelligence provided by Tenet's intelligence community. Critics say Bush and his Cabinet had already decided to go to war, regardless of what the intelligence efforts found.
The controversy, arising during the Democratic presidential primary campaign, has taken on a partisan hue. Some Democrats, however, say they perceived GOP partisanship earlier, when Republicans advocated an invasion of Iraq before the 2002 congressional elections. Bush said on Sept.13, 2002, that he did not think he could explain to voters the position of some Democrats who said Congress should wait for the United Nations to authorize the use of force before giving the president the authority he wanted.
Now that extended efforts to find weapons of mass destruction have proved futile, some are asking why Bush, Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld used unequivocal rhetoric to describe the threat from Iraq when the intelligence on the subject was much more nuanced and subjective.
For example, when Bush on Sept. 24, 2002, repeated the British claim that Iraq's chemical weapons could be activated within 45 minutes, he ignored the fact that U.S. intelligence mistrusted the source and that the claim never appeared in the October 2002 U.S. estimate. "

 

[MSgt]

I can't believe how you seriously think Iraq is the place to fight terror.

Iraq isn't "THE" place to fight terror. When have I ever said this? Are you this insecure that you can't carry on a debate without resorting to simplistic accusations? It's "a" place. Other places are Sudan, Chad, Ethiopia, Morroco, Libya, Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Bosnia, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, and Afghnaistan. Marines and the international community are currently in all these places. I've stated this over and over and over again. And you continue to complain about Iraq as if it is the only thing going on over and over and over again. Get over it. It bores me.

It's simple. You think fighting a "War on Terror" should be spent fighting terrorists only, while the U.S. believes it should also be fought shaping Radical Islams future.

People are fighting you in Iraq is becuase you are there. You made the war. Your getting killed there becuase you made the war. When you leave you will stop being killed. Just like in Nam. You left & people stopped getting killed.
Leave Iraq & it will make no difference to terror. Just like when you got booted out of Nam. It made no difference to world communism.

And you have continued to evade the question. What country should we have attacked where there would be no killing? Perhaps Saudi Arabia? We all no that if we fought a war in a country of your choosing that there would be no killing. Oh yes, I forget...we should not concern ourselves with Radical Islam, because we can't win. Be thankful other men don't easliy lie down.

We have it from you that.. I am stuck in some far away place unlike you in some barracks in the middle of some Iraqi slum or wherever TF you are, so therefore I'm cloistered & don't know anything about what goes on in the 'real' world. Unlike you, I haven't seen corpses in the flesh of those killed by American munitions or by insurgents. I've only seen the results on TV documentaries. So therefore my opinion & knowledge is somehow inferior & second rate to yours.

Dry your eyes. It has nothing to do with where you are or what you do. It has everything to do with study as compared to listening to your TV.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20194-2004Feb6.html
"Bush, Aides Ignored CIA Caveats on Iraq
Clear-Cut Assertions Were Made Before Arms Assessment Was Completed
By Walter Pincus and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, February 7, 2004; Page A17
In its fall 2002 campaign to win congressional support for a war against Iraq, President Bush and his top advisers ignored many of the caveats and qualifiers included in the classified report on Saddam Hussein's weapons that CIA Director George J. Tenet defended Thursday.
In fact, they made some of their most unequivocal assertions about unconventional weapons before the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) was completed.

Iraq "is a grave and gathering danger," Bush told the United Nations on Sept. 12, 2002. At the White House two weeks later -- after referring to a British government report that Iraq could launch "a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order" is given -- he went on to say, "Each passing day could be the one on which the Iraqi regime gives anthrax or VX -- nerve gas -- or someday a nuclear weapon to a terrorist ally."
Three weeks later, on the day the NIE was delivered to Congress, Bush told lawmakers in the White House Rose Garden that Iraq's current course was "a threat of unique urgency."
On Thursday, summarizing the NIE's conclusions, Tenet said: "They never said Iraq was an imminent threat."
The administration's prewar comments -- and the more cautious, qualified phrasings of intelligence analysts -- are at the heart of the debate over whether the faulty prewar claims resulted from bad intelligence or exaggeration by top White House officials -- or both.
Former chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay told senators last week that caveats often fall by the wayside "the higher you go up" the bureaucratic chain. At the top, he said, "you read the headlines, you read the summary, you're busy, you've got other things to do."
Administration supporters say Bush, Vice President Cheney and others were simply extrapolating from the comprehensive intelligence provided by Tenet's intelligence community. Critics say Bush and his Cabinet had already decided to go to war, regardless of what the intelligence efforts found.
The controversy, arising during the Democratic presidential primary campaign, has taken on a partisan hue. Some Democrats, however, say they perceived GOP partisanship earlier, when Republicans advocated an invasion of Iraq before the 2002 congressional elections. Bush said on Sept.13, 2002, that he did not think he could explain to voters the position of some Democrats who said Congress should wait for the United Nations to authorize the use of force before giving the president the authority he wanted.
Now that extended efforts to find weapons of mass destruction have proved futile, some are asking why Bush, Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld used unequivocal rhetoric to describe the threat from Iraq when the intelligence on the subject was much more nuanced and subjective.
For example, when Bush on Sept. 24, 2002, repeated the British claim that Iraq's chemical weapons could be activated within 45 minutes, he ignored the fact that U.S. intelligence mistrusted the source and that the claim never appeared in the October 2002 U.S. estimate. "

....and? Right back to you needing Iraq to have a nuclear bomb to define the threat for you? You continue to show how simple you are to the current problem. You arrest a Cleric in a mosque...problem solved... right?

What Bush said is what Bush said. Doesn't matter. He said and used the intel to get us into Iraq. What ever intel you love to parade around can easily be counteracted with intel that did speak of WMD, so what's the point? And....once again...our findings in Iraq turned up more than you know and implicates other countries.


Why are you so concerned with American business anyway? Not enough to complain about in your own country?

 

[robin]

You know why you are in Iraq. Becuase of shady creatures in the corridors of power pulling the strings behind the likes of Bush & Tennet. Billions of dollars are made out of wars. Arms companies spend millions hiring lobbyists in the Pentagon lobbying for wars & then make billions from them. Pretty good investment eh ?

The cold war was over & It'd been 10 years since desert storm. Bush's build up of bombs was getting just too painfull to bear. He had to go for a good dump on someone & that Saddam guy was so hatin yurr freedoms he was just the job.
You get your rush.. they get their $billions.... everybodys happy.
Apart from the US taxpayer who now owes trillions borrowed from abroad to pay for it.
http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=fs-109-1-77
& just look at the waste
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/05/18/MN251738.DTL

Afganistan where that SOB bin Laden was fine, I can go with that but not Iraq, although when ya'll tried to head em off at the pass he got away anyway.

I won't be wasting time on this **** for a couple of days, Got to fly to Holland for work. I just hope those 50,000 radical Muslims there don't give me any trouble.

 

[MSgt]

You know why you are in Iraq. Becuase of shady creatures in the corridors of power pulling the strings behind the likes of Bush & Tennet. Billions of dollars are made out of wars. Arms companies spend millions hiring lobbyists in the Pentagon lobbying for wars & then make billions from them. Pretty good investment eh ?

The cold war was over & It'd been 10 years since desert storm. Bush's build up of bombs was getting just too painfull to bear. He had to go for a good dump on someone & that Saddam guy was so hatin yurr freedoms he was just the job.
You get your rush.. they get their $billions.... everybodys happy.
Apart from the US taxpayer who now owes trillions borrowed from abroad to pay for it.
http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=fs-109-1-77
& just look at the waste
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/05/18/MN251738.DTL

Afganistan where that SOB bin Laden was fine, I can go with that but not Iraq, although when ya'll tried to head em off at the pass he got away anyway.

I won't be wasting time on this **** for a couple of days, Got to fly to Holland for work. I just hope those 50,000 radical Muslims there don't give me any trouble.

Yeah...it's that simple. Pathetic. And you claim the moral high ground...."Global Left." Who cares how many millions and millions of people no longer live under the control of a brutal dictator. Who cares that Palestinians are no longer funded by Saddam. Who cares that an Arab country has never been allowed to vote on the laws that would govern them. Who cares what is happeneing in the countries surrounding Iraq. ......"It was all about dropping an over inventory of bombs and making money and revenge for Daddy." What a joke. Why do you embarrass yourself so? :roll:

I guess the civillians that died in Afghanistan were OK for you since that was where Bin Ladden was? Maybe we should have attacked all countries where terrorists reside? Who cares how high the death count would have been and how unnecessary it would have been? We have chosen the tactic that will provide a more preservation of life while accomplishing a long term mission to stab at the root of this problem. You complain about 30,000, 50,000, 100,000 (whatever the count is from day to day) dead in Iraq, yet call for the attack of other countries that would have garnished ten times as much and most of those countries would have been far removed from the heart of the problem. This is something a civillian mind can't comprehend, because to you the military is about revenge, after all......Afghanistan was OK. You seem unable to comprehend that Bin Ladden and Al-Queda are not the only terrorist and they are not the only target. Far from it. Over half of the operations globally activated are not about Al-Queda, but they are about Radical Islam and terrorists. Saddam was a terrorist. Perhaps you would be behind Iraq if Hussein payed off Radicals to bomb London. Why was it OK for him to pay off Palestinians to attack Israel? Typical selfish and "self prerserving at the expense of others" attitude of a European. The ability to identify potential threats is what has enabled us to keep our side of the world in a clean state, while Europe continues to appease their enemies into genocides and mayhem.

Europe has devoured American lives and consumed our wealth for the last century. It's funny how the typical whine is about how much money America has "borrowed" from you. I think you just have an inferiority complex and your bashing allows you to cope. It's funny how Europeans do this when ever our sweat and blood is spent on lands that don't concern them. WWI, WWII, Kosovo, Bosnia....all fine. Civillians by the millions have dies in these wars, but as long as they were in the name of saving Europe....its just a poor unfortunate price of doing business. The regressive societies of the Middle East are sick—and contagious— with hatred, jealousy, and congenital disrepair. Whenever the United States is forced to engage cultures whose glory days are behind them, we win, but we often pay a bitter price to the glee of Europeans. America always has done best on frontiers, from our own West through technological frontiers to our pioneering of the society of the future, in which gender, racial, and religious equality increasingly prevail (to the horror of our enemies). But you need to realize that there is not a bright, magical and immediate solution for the darkest region on earth. The Middle East will remain a strategic basket case beyond our lifetimes and the breeding of Radical Islam will exponentially get worse. We will need to remain engaged, but we must be careful not to be consumed. If you are looking for the hope of an immediate victory, look elsewhere.

 

[Crispy]

You know why you are in Iraq. Becuase of shady creatures in the corridors of power pulling the strings behind the likes of Bush & Tennet. Billions of dollars are made out of wars. Arms companies spend millions hiring lobbyists in the Pentagon lobbying for wars & then make billions from them. Pretty good investment eh ?

The cold war was over & It'd been 10 years since desert storm. Bush's build up of bombs was getting just too painfull to bear. He had to go for a good dump on someone & that Saddam guy was so hatin yurr freedoms he was just the job.
You get your rush.. they get their $billions.... everybodys happy.
Apart from the US taxpayer who now owes trillions borrowed from abroad to pay for it.
http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/dpc-new.cfm?doc_name=fs-109-1-77
& just look at the waste
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/05/18/MN251738.DTL

Afganistan where that SOB bin Laden was fine, I can go with that but not Iraq, although when ya'll tried to head em off at the pass he got away anyway.

I won't be wasting time on this **** for a couple of days, Got to fly to Holland for work. I just hope those 50,000 radical Muslims there don't give me any trouble.

You know Robin, I appreciate you not agreeing that Iraq should've been the next front to open in the war on Islamic Extremism. Its arguable that other fronts or approaches could've been taken but, its an extremely shallow point of view to attribute this to some hidden conspiracy tailored to stuff washington insiders' pockets.

I'm not naive enough to believe that Politicians are models of virtue and don't engage in activities that benefit them, and, I'll even concede that the choice of contractors in Iraq (Halliburton being obvious) is a biased choice on the part of the administration, but, its extremely naive of you to reason that this war was conjured up for this purpose.

Do you not realize that for the Republican party this particular war, if it is to fail, will prove to be an act of Suicide by the Administration and Republican party? Do you not realize that the Governments that have supported this war, especially your government, would never tolerate participating in a war percieved to be to the benefit of US capitalism alone?

Also, perhaps you've never worked in a corporation or participated in real business. In the business world, even the business of politics, you choose to outsource your important business to companies you know can get the job done. You outsource to companies you know because, yes, it helps them make money, but, it removes the questionability of the qualifications of the company that you're relying on. This is what business relationships are all about, estabilishing quality relationships with your partners and vendors and choosing companies you know are qualified because of direct experience with their work. This is sensible business practice.

Sure War is a business. Sure companies stand to gain from war. But countries stand to lose just as much from war as they gain. The loss of life, the strain put on government resources and the economy to continue a war over other national priorities, the loss of public support, the loss of international support, the loss of "power" if the war does not turn out as expected. These are all facets of war that stand next to the economic ramifications of war. Your view is naive and adolescent. You see 1/1000th of the full picture and claim it to be law and you refuse to expand your view of this conflict and the world that's made this conflict necessary.

I actually do fault the administration for not educating the public on these concepts and I despise the democratic party for propagating negative rhetoric that feeds views, like yours, that lack the context and clarity to form accurate opinions on what's transpiring in Iraq and in the war on terrorism.

Unfortunately today's situation requires some insight which can't be gained by listening to political rhetoric, thus necessitating a pro-active engagement in aquiring knowlege on all sides of the arguments which you evidently don't choose to do.

In short your view is biased, politically slanted and decidedly un-informed and lends no value to the argument what-so-ever.

 

[Loxd4]

"Love Is War And War Is Love, So All Is Fair In War"
"Auther Unknow"

First of all, how can you go to far in war? Especial when fighting for a good cause.

And just to make sure we don't go to far that why we have "Media" and most inproten "Rules of engagement" and "Rules of War." And who care if we go to far or haven't gone far enough because we all have to die in the end.

 

[robin]

Yeah...it's that simple. Pathetic. And you claim the moral high ground...."Global Left." Who cares how many millions and millions of people no longer live under the control of a brutal dictator. Who cares that Palestinians are no longer funded by Saddam. Who cares that an Arab country has never been allowed to vote on the laws that would govern them. Who cares what is happeneing in the countries surrounding Iraq. ......"It was all about dropping an over inventory of bombs and making money and revenge for Daddy." What a joke. Why do you embarrass yourself so? :roll:

If you are so concerned about dictators then why has the US installed so many ?
You deny defense contracters lobby in the Pentagon for wars ?
They don't do it for the fun of it you know. They spend that money because it gets a result.
WTF has it to do with being left wing anyway. I'm not left wing. It's a simple case of right & wrong... though I guess you wouldn't understand that.

I guess the civillians that died in Afghanistan were OK for you since that was where Bin Ladden was?

Not when one of your cowboy 'the wrong stuff' pilots kill 50 civilians in an Afgan wedding party as just one example of the poor disipline & cowboy mentality of your military compared to other western military forces.

You complain about 30,000, 50,000, 100,000 (whatever the count is from day to day) dead in Iraq, yet call for the attack of other countries that would have garnished ten times as much and most of those countries would have been far removed from the heart of the problem.

Total BS. I described attacking Mulsim countries as 'a fly swat' that inflames the situation so that's not calling for attacks is it. It's the complete opposite of what you claim I said, or don't you understand English ?
Ever thought of a job in US intelligence or is that what you're in ?
'American intelligence'.. a contradiction in terms LOL

This is something a civillian mind can't comprehend, because to you the military is about revenge, after all......Afghanistan was OK. You seem unable to comprehend that Bin Ladden and Al-Queda are not the only terrorist and they are not the only target. Far from it. Over half of the operations globally activated are not about Al-Queda, but they are about Radical Islam and terrorists. Saddam was a terrorist. Perhaps you would be behind Iraq if Hussein payed off Radicals to bomb London. Why was it OK for him to pay off Palestinians to attack Israel?

No.. but has it been right of the USA to arm Israel & take sides in the M East dispute against the Arabs for the last 60 years & all because of influencial propogandising Jews owning the half the film industry & media etc in the USA ?

Typical selfish and "self prerserving at the expense of others" attitude of a European. The ability to identify potential threats is what has enabled us to keep our side of the world in a clean state.

'Clean state' More total BS. NY state didn't look very clean to me after 911. Your side ignored intelligence with the consequence that you had the worst terrorist attack in the form of 911, not to mention WTC attack before that. You don't even have control of or know what goes on in US labs that illegally develope weapons grade Anthrax. Those Anthrax attacks were from an insider. From an American, like McVae... one of your ex military psycos that turned on his own government. Yet you think only Muslims are a threat. Your own freakin beloved fellow Americans are as well !

Europe has devoured American lives and consumed our wealth for the last century. It's funny how the typical whine is about how much money America has "borrowed" from you. I think you just have an inferiority complex and your bashing allows you to cope. It's funny how Europeans do this when ever our sweat and blood is spent on lands that don't concern them. WWII,

You need a history lesson... fool. America waited for Hitler to declare war on it just after Pearl Harbour, before it entered the war against the Nazis so you were hardly doing solely as a favour to us where you ?
Your bonkers mate. You're a waste of time. You're not interested in the truth. You don't give a damn about the fact that the USA has been responsible for millions of deaths by starting countless pointless wars like Vietnam & conflicts in the Americas & overthrowing democracies & installing fascists.
Your only answer is 'more garbage'. Or 'inferiority complex'... that's a new one. Very imaginitive :roll:
Go on have the last word. I'm through with you, you oaf.

 

[ProudAmerican]

Handcuff the government til people die, then you can blame the Republican President for it...

actually its more like

"vote with the president in order to look hawkish during an election year.....then later, change your mind and handcuff the government til people die and blame the republican in charge"

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

You need a history lesson... fool. America waited for Hitler to declare war on it just after Pearl Harbour, before it entered the war against the Nazis so you were hardly doing solely as a favour to us where you ?
Your bonkers mate. You're a waste of time. You're not interested in the truth. You don't give a damn about the fact that the USA has been responsible for millions of deaths by starting countless pointless wars like Vietnam & conflicts in the Americas & overthrowing democracies & installing fascists.
Your only answer is 'more garbage'. Or 'inferiority complex'... that's a new one. Very imaginitive :roll:
Go on have the last word. I'm through with you, you oaf.

Lend Lease ring any bells? Britian and the Soviet Union would have been over run by the Hun if it hadn't been for U.S. military aid prior to our entry into the war. As for the rest of your bullshit it's funny that the colonialist Europeans now lecture the U.S. on our foriegn policy. And if you consider the U.S. defending a Democratic South Vietnam against a totalitarian Communist aggressor to be pointless then you're the one who's bonkers . . . mate.

 

[robin]

Lend Lease ring any bells? Britian and the Soviet Union would have been over run by the Hun if it hadn't been for U.S. military aid prior to our entry into the war. As for the rest of your bullshit it's funny that the colonialist Europeans now lecture the U.S. on our foriegn policy. And if you consider the U.S. defending a Democratic South Vietnam against a totalitarian Communist aggressor to be pointless then you're the one who's bonkers . . . mate.

See if you can educate yourself for a minute... go look up the meaning of the word 'lease'.

Ngo Dinh Diem democratic... ha ha ha ha ha.

 

[mike49]

robin,

Your from the U.K. and screaming at America? Your country is right there with us.

Why in the world would the U.K., when it controlled Iraq install the Sunni's in power when the Shia were the majority? Talk about root problems!

Didn't the U.K. use poison gas on Iraqi's, was it Churchill or someone else?

It seems your own house needs cleaned before attacking anything about the U.S..

Your country is right with us in Iraq and has been from the start. If you were French you may have some standing to criticize, but it seems awkward your take on this. I could see an American taking your position and getting away with it because thats between us, But, your position is wholly outrageous and would be like an American slamming the U.K for Iraq and throwing in past British atrocities as iceing on the cake.

Anyway, lets get to the British atrocities if you'd be so kind to spill your guts.

 

[robin]

robin,

Your from the U.K. and screaming at America? Your country is right there with us.

Why in the world would the U.K., when it controlled Iraq install the Sunni's in power when the Shia were the majority? Talk about root problems!

Didn't the U.K. use poison gas on Iraqi's, was it Churchill or someone else?

It seems your own house needs cleaned before attacking anything about the U.S..

Your country is right with us in Iraq and has been from the start. If you were French you may have some standing to criticize, but it seems awkward your take on this. I could see an American taking your position and getting away with it because thats between us, But, your position is wholly outrageous and would be like an American slamming the U.K for Iraq and throwing in past British atrocities as iceing on the cake.

Anyway, lets get to the British atrocities if you'd be so kind to spill your guts.

Mike
Feel free to spill the beans on British attrocities. Unlike most people here, I dont' discriminate or see bad things in a more favourable light just becuase people that commited those bad deeds happen to originate from or inhabit a similiar location on this planet to myself.
Morality is an absolute thing.
Dresden was wrong, the British bombing of Iraq in the 30's was wrong, the amritsar massacre was wrong etc.
I accept that British colonialism has been the source of many problems.
If we aren't honest with each other at the outset, then we shall never debate. We shall instead simply argue.

 

[mike49]

Mike
Feel free to spill the beans on British attrocities.

I ain't gonna do it.

 

[MSgt]

If you are so concerned about dictators then why has the US installed so many ?
You deny defense contracters lobby in the Pentagon for wars ?
They don't do it for the fun of it you know. They spend that money because it gets a result.
WTF has it to do with being left wing anyway. I'm not left wing. It's a simple case of right & wrong... though I guess you wouldn't understand that.

Not when one of your cowboy 'the wrong stuff' pilots kill 50 civilians in an Afgan wedding party as just one example of the poor disipline & cowboy mentality of your military compared to other western military forces.

Total BS. I described attacking Mulsim countries as 'a fly swat' that inflames the situation so that's not calling for attacks is it. It's the complete opposite of what you claim I said, or don't you understand English ?
Ever thought of a job in US intelligence or is that what you're in ?
'American intelligence'.. a contradiction in terms LOL

No.. but has it been right of the USA to arm Israel & take sides in the M East dispute against the Arabs for the last 60 years & all because of influencial propogandising Jews owning the half the film industry & media etc in the USA ?
'Clean state' More total BS. NY state didn't look very clean to me after 911. Your side ignored intelligence with the consequence that you had the worst terrorist attack in the form of 911, not to mention WTC attack before that. You don't even have control of or know what goes on in US labs that illegally develope weapons grade Anthrax. Those Anthrax attacks were from an insider. From an American, like McVae... one of your ex military psycos that turned on his own government. Yet you think only Muslims are a threat. Your own freakin beloved fellow Americans are as well !

You need a history lesson... fool. America waited for Hitler to declare war on it just after Pearl Harbour, before it entered the war against the Nazis so you were hardly doing solely as a favour to us where you ?
Your bonkers mate. You're a waste of time. You're not interested in the truth. You don't give a damn about the fact that the USA has been responsible for millions of deaths by starting countless pointless wars like Vietnam & conflicts in the Americas & overthrowing democracies & installing fascists.
Your only answer is 'more garbage'. Or 'inferiority complex'... that's a new one. Very imaginitive :roll:
Go on have the last word. I'm through with you, you oaf.

What the CIA did in SA was to keep your garbage on your side of the world. Pinochet was an unfortunate by product. It happens.

There's a whole lot of "everything is about money", anti-semite, evil America, and narrow visioned whining in your post. What in life has made you so bitter?

 

[MSgt]

I ain't gonna do it.

Good for you mike49. Let him enjoy his stooped isolation.