• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

War on Terror is bogus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gandhi>Bush said:
What makes you say that?

Because I believe religion is being used to control people. And I think the odds of people waking up and realizing it any time soon is somewhere between Slim and none, and Slim left town yesterday.
 
The only way to encourage revolution is to kick start some kind of Democracy to where the people have choices. We've done that. We have put the training wheels on with Iraq and it is up to the Iraqi people to make our efforts a success. The governments of Syria and Iran know this. Didn't anyone else find it suspicious that immediately after the bomb attacks in Iran, the Iranian Security Council tells the world that "former Saddam Baathist Party loyalists" did it? And that the bombs occurred in perfect timing with Iranian elections? We've seen this sort of tactic before in these countries. The Difference this time is that they couldn't blame America for it.

The majority of all aid given to Palestinian people have come from the U.S. Their fellow Arab and Muslim countries have only helped them by insisting that Israel is the root of their problems and encouraging the use of violence. It's been us that have been trying to keep the peace, while it's been the Middle East that has incited murder for decades.

The UN is as corrupt and impotent as any organization on Earth. During all of the worlds criticism towards the U.S. about Iraq and bringing up other places we could go with regards to human suffering, the UN has failed to act on those places, yet joined the masses of criticism. The truth is, without U.S. eargings, the UN is stagnate.

The root of the problem in the Middle East is greed and power. Those that have it, horde it. The House of Saud has perfected this art and have used clereks to shove the word of "Allah" in the peoples faces. All anger is focused on Israel and onto America as it's defender. These rent-a-clereks have done their jobs so well, that people strap dynamite to their chests and walk up to innocent civillians from all countries and detonate themselves, believing a great reward from their God. Like Hitler rallying the Germans under one hate towards the Jews, the leaders across the Middle East have practiced the same efforts on Israel. The result is feuding Muslim countries, oppression, legalized brutality, and murder in the name of God.
 
Last edited:
GySgt said:
Like Hitler rallying the Germans under one hate towards the Jews, the leaders across the Middle East have practiced the same efforts on Israel. The result is feuding Muslim countries, oppression, legalized brutality, and murder in the name of God.

Isn't that what the US did during the Cold War, spread hatred and fear of the Communists. McCarthy Witch Trails anyone?

Also didn't Christainity burn "witches" oh yes and Jews as well, also massacred thousands upon thousands of Muslims during the crusades?

Do not direct the imperfections of the human race on one religion.

And just because a country is democratic does not make it good or infallible.

GySgt said:
The root of the problem in the Middle East is greed and power.

I would say that would be the root of the problem with the US as well. Haliburton anyone?

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. :smile: God the world needs another superpower.
 
No, that is not what America did. The Cold War was about nuclear arms and the threat of another country using them against the other. I see how you left out the masses of support against communism given to us by all of Europe and Asia.

The few "witches" burned at the stake by Christian zealots hardly compare to an entire region of crimes against humanity. Your efforts to undermine the mass murder of Americans by comparing them to the isolated "witch" burnings serves terrorism well.

The crusades resulted in a massacre of thousand and thousands of Muslims and Christians alike of which started because of Muslim aggression on Israel. This was more European and Middle Eastern religiously based BS from that region of the world.

Haliburton is one company in the midst of thousands all over the world that is corrupt. Even the EU and UN are self-serving. Like many of your kind, you choose to shed light on only the facts that serve your agenda.

There is no other country in the world that could handle the responsibility or the burden of being a super power. Europe's idea of standing for what is right is waiting until the aggressor marches through their streets pushing their flags in the people's hands and ignoring their own back yard (Bosnia). Russia...well, obviously, they couldn't do it. China....well, they can't even handle North Korea and are waiting for us to do it for them. The only one's left is the Middle East. The UN and Europe will do there best to tolerate and talk until they are red in the face and secretly hope for U.S. military intervention until it is too late and Iran develops their nukes. Maybe then the Middle East can be the super power and stand up for what is right. I really don't think they give a **** for non Muslim states though. You should count your lucky stars that America is the super power and stands in front of tyranny....even when nobody else stands beside them.
 
Last edited:
GarzaUK said:
Isn't that what the US did during the Cold War, spread hatred and fear of the Communists. McCarthy Witch Trails anyone?
I think your attempt at a moral equivalence here is weak and misplaced.

If the Communist USSR was so righteous, why did the subserviant Warsaw Pact nations disengage from it en-mass at the first golden opportunity?

The answer is painfully obvious.
 
GySgt said:
(1) These are militarized thugs that crash airplanes into buildings and blow up civillians as a drastic display of a temper tantrum because we stand between them and the annhialation of another country. This is a war that they started decades ago. We have just been too blind to defend ourselves.

(2) How many more cowardly attacks were American civillians supposed to sustain while America looked the other way through futile acts of diplomacy?

(3) An enemy that is prepared to kill you for being American and a supporter of Israel does not and will not listen to reason. They count on your apologies and patience. You give them an olive branch and they will take it and slap you in the face. You turn the other cheek and you expose to them their next target. Diplomacy was never going to work. For you to say that we should just leave and try to understand their pain is what they are counting on.

(4) I say kill 'em all and let their God rewrd them and let the pascifist cry about them while benifetting from the security it provides. What would be left would be peaceful Muslims and Christians living life just like every where else.

1. Much like the many terrorist who did all those acts you mentioned and more the United States military, CIA and what not has a simply dashing history of only shooting when fired on first. How many times does America have to invade some country half way around the world in "its defense" before everyone puts the pieces together on this one ?

Step 1 - Support someone really bad
Step 2 - Sell him something
Step 3 - Decry to the world how horrid they as you talk about "war" and "defense"

All those "terrorist" who did all those thing could have a million different personal reasons but we know one thing for sure - the US have given every terrorist in the world plenty of reason to be mad.

2. How many cruise missiles do you think it takes to **** off someone ? I know our super duper missiles go the wrong way sometimes and I'm sure all parties involved really appreciate that. Do you think their local paper even cares to mention that it was "a mistake" ? I doubt the family and friends gain any sleep at night because the US is "really sorry".

3.Based upon these things are we to assume Evey future generation of these people (middle east terrorist) will never change ? As we speak reform in the middle east is occurring. Not trust someone because you say, "Diplomacy will never work." isn't a long term solution.

4. Right - because we always only kill the bad guys. Life around the war zone barely changes when the troops and vehicles are roaming about lighting up the 50'cals with explosive rounds. People barely notice (much less care) when electricity, water, TV, radio, mail and what not go out due to the US military "defending" American.

All of these above things does nothing but make love take roots in the hearts of the citizens around the world who are fortunate enough to live in a country the US has made an aggressive military action to wards.

Sorry if you've heard of these things yet, but here it goes :
Operation Northwoods, George Washington University

USS Liberty, History.navy.mil

In June 1965, Liberty began her first deployment, to waters off the west coast of Africa. She carried out several more operations during the next two years, and went to the Mediterranean in 1967. During the "Six-Day War" between Israel and several Arab nations, she was sent to collect electronic intelligence in the eastern Mediterranean.

On the afternoon of 8 June 1967, while in international waters off the Sinai Peninsula, Liberty, though clearly marked as a U.S. Navy ship, was struck by Israeli aircraft. After suffering damage and many personnel casualties from gunfire, rockets and bombs, she was further attacked by three Israeli Navy motor torpedo boats. One torpedo hit her on the starboard side, forward of the superstructure, opening a large hole in her hull.

In all, thirty-four men were killed in the attacks and nearly 170 wounded. Israel subsequently apologized for the incident, explaining that its air and naval forces had mistaken the Liberty for a much smaller Egyptian Navy ship.

More information

This US support for Israel all things considered to me is slightly concerning. You shouldn't let your Navy boys die and do nothing over it because your ally "accidentally" attacked you over and over and over.
 
NoobieDoobieDo said:
This US support for Israel all things considered to me is slightly concerning. You shouldn't let your Navy boys die and do nothing over it because your ally "accidentally" attacked you over and over and over.
The USS Liberty was in an active *theater of war* when this tragedy occured. Israel did indeed apologise for this deadly mistake...

Please remember that unforseen and unfortunate incidents do indeed happen in theatres of active combat. As and example, the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian passenger aircraft while on patrol in the Arabian Sea during the Iran/Iraq War. There are even numerous incidents of fratricide during both the Gulf War and the invasion of Iraq by coalition forces.

Speaking of attacks on US naval vessels, it's strange that you neglected to mention the Al-Queda attack on the USS Cole in Oman which was *premeditated* and *intentional*. But then again, that doesn't seem to coalesce with your implicit agenda.
 
Tashah said:
1. The USS Liberty was in an active *theater of war* when this tragedy occured. Israel did indeed apologise for this deadly mistake...

Please remember that unforseen and unfortunate incidents do indeed happen in theatres of active combat.

2. Speaking of attacks on US naval vessels, it's strange that you neglected to mention the Al-Queda attack on the USS Cole in Oman which was *premeditated* and *intentional*. But then again, that doesn't seem to coalesce with your implicit agenda.

1. The USS Liberty according to the US government and crew on board was clearly marked, surveyed prior to attack and subject to attack for an extended duration of time.

* also , the USS Liberty was the most technologically advanced ships of it's time with very distinctive equipment on the top - not easy to mistake with, in the own words of the US govt, "for a much smaller Egyptian Navy ship."

Israel did it because they feared we'd learn of their impending invasion and try to insert a monkey wrench.

2. Most people with any interest in politics know of the USS Cole story but I've only met approx 4 people who have even heard of the USS Liberty.
 
Last edited:
NoobieDoobieDo said:
Most people with any interest in politics know of the USS Cole story but I've only met approx 4 people who have even heard of the USS Liberty.
Then I suggest that you expand your coterie of associates interested in geopolitics and historicity.
 
Tashah said:
Then I suggest that you expand your coterie of associates interested in geopolitics and historicity.

It's pretty broad.

I talk to a lot of people online in political debate forums such as these.

Very few people know.
 
NoobieDoobieDo said:
It's pretty broad. I talk to a lot of people online in political debate forums such as these. Very few people know.
I also participate in a broad array of political/debate forums. I just think it's a bit odd for you to annunciate in this thread a tragic US/Israel incident that happened *38 years ago*.

For the record, 10 United States government investigations along with 3 Israeli inquiries have deemed the incident an accident that occured in the fog of war.

United States Government Inquiries (Summary Abstracts)

• U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry: June 10-18, 1967 - The attack was a case of mistaken identity. Calm conditions and slow ship speed may have made American flag difficult to identify. No indication the attack was intended against U.S. ship.

• CIA Report: June 13, 1967 - The attack was not made in malice and was a mistake.

• Joint Chiefs of Staff Fact Finding Team (Russ Report): June 9-20, 1967 - Outlined "findings of fact," but did not make any findings about the actual attack.

• Senate Committee on Foreign Relations: 1967 - Secretary of Defense McNamara testified that he supported the conclusion that the attack was not intentional.

• Senate Armed Services Committee: Feb. 1, 1968 - No conclusion. Secretary McNamara makes comparison of attack on Liberty to that on Pueblo with regard to uncertainty about what was happening at the time of the incident.

• House Appropriations Committee: April-May 1968 - US Navy communications "foulup" and no conclusion regarding Israeli actions. Much of this report remains classified.

• House Armed Services Committee: May 10, 1971 - Critical of US Navy communications, no conclusion regarding Israeli actions.

• Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: 1979 - Responding to critical book by Liberty crewman James Ennes, Senate investigation found no merit to his claim attack was intentional.

• National Security Agency: 1981 - Liberty was mistaken for an Egyptian ship as a result of miscalculations and egregious errors by both the US Navy and the IDF.

• House Armed Services Committee: June 1991 - Responding to request from Liberty Veterans Association, Subcommitte on Investigations launched probe that concluded there was no evidence to support allegations made by the Association and no reason for further investigation.

Israeli Government Inquiries (Summary Abstracts)

• Ram Ron Commission: June 12, 1967 - The attack was made "neither maliciously nor in gross negligence", but as the result of a bona fide mistake. Also notes that the Liberty made a mistake as well by carelessly approaching a war area.

• Preliminary Inquiry: July 1967 - There was no malicious intent and no deviation from the standard of reasonable conduct that would justify a court-martial.

• IDF History: 1982 - The attack was a result of an "innocent error."

No doubt the IDF made numerous errors, but so did the US Navy. To illustrate and underscore this critical point, I include this portion of the JCS Report:

There were four (4) messages disseminated during the period of 7-8 June 1967 from higher headquarters to subordinate echelons containing revisions to previous instructions regarding the assigned operating location of USS LIBERTY. Since each of these message transmissions contained instructions for substantially increasing the closet point of approach (CPA) to the UAR and Israel, the receipt of any one of these by the USS LIBERTY would undoubtedly have resulted in the ship's being a greater distance from the scene of action then underway between Israel and the UAR. Although the USS LIBERTY was either an action or an information addressee on each of these directives, there is no evidence available to confirm that the ship's Captain received any of them... The failure of the USS LIBERTY to receive any one of these time-critical revisions to operational directives can be attributed to a combination of (1) human error, (2) high volume of communications traffic, and (3) lack of appreciation of sense of urgency regarding the movement of the LIBERTY.

Report of the JCS Fact Finding Team, "USS Liberty Incident, 8 June 1967," The Joint Chiefs of Staff, Washington, DC, June 18, 1967

In January 2004, the State Department held a conference on the Liberty incident and also released new documents, including CIA memos dated June 13 and June 21, 1967, that say that Israel did not know it was striking an American vessel. The historian for the National Security Agency, David Hatch, said the available evidence "strongly suggested" Israel did not know it was attacking a U.S. ship. Two former U.S. officials, Ernest Castle, the United States Naval Attache at the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv in June 1967, who received the first report of the attack from Israel, and John Hadden, then CIA Chief of Station in Tel Aviv, also agreed with the assessment that the attack on the Liberty was a mistake.

Epilogue: Israel apologized for the tragedy immediately and offered on June 9, 1967 to compensate the victims. Israel ultimately paid nearly $13 million in humanitarian reparations to the United States and to the families of the victims in amounts established by the U.S. State Department. The matter was officially closed between the two governments by an exchange of diplomatic notes on December 17, 1987.

 
Typical.

Ignore the tons of premeditated and malicious attacks made by militant Islamist on our civillians while vomiting the ounces of mistakes made by American retalliations.
 
GySgt said:
Typical.

Ignore the tons of premeditated and malicious attacks made by militant Islamist on our civillians while vomiting the ounces of mistakes made by American retalliations.
What exactly are you referring to here?
The preceding posts refer to an Israeli attack on US ship.

Where're the Islamists and the American mistakes parts.
 
It's the same mentality of placing blame on Israel or America for terrorist attacks against them. This thread was about the "War on Terror". It's all related and it all involves mistakes in war.
 
Tashah said:
1) I just think it's a bit odd for you to annunciate in this thread a tragic US/Israel incident that happened *38 years ago*.

2) For the record, 10 United States government investigations along with 3 Israeli inquiries have deemed the incident an accident that occured in the fog of war.

No doubt the IDF made numerous errors, but so did the US Navy.

1. I bring up the USS Liberty because GySgt made a comment about the United States support of Israel a page back, "An enemy that is prepared to kill you for being American and a supporter of Israel does not and will not listen to reason. "

I believe the USS Liberty attack places in very clear view the US's support of Israel. I can only imagine what may have occurred if it had been a non-ally who "accidental" nearly destroyed our best Intel. ship.

2) Here are some quotes and other bits of information I feel shed light on this subject :

"Never before in the history of the United States Navy has a Navy Board of Inquiry ignored the testimony of American military eyewitnesses and taken, on faith, the word of their attackers.
-- Captain Richard F. Kiepfer, Medical Corps, US Navy (retired), USS Liberty Survivor

"The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack...was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew.... It was our shared belief. . .that the attack. . .could not possibly have been an accident.... I am certain that the Israeli pilots [and] their superiors. . .were well aware that the ship was American."
-- Captain Ward Boston, JAGC, US Navy (retired), senior legal counsel to the US Navy Court of Inquiry

That the attack was deliberate "just wasn't a disputed issue" within the National Security Agency
-- Former NSA Director retired Army Lieutenant General William Odom on 3 March 2003 in an interview for Naval Institute Proceedings

Former NSA/CIA Director Admiral Bobby Inman "flatly rejected" the Cristol/Israeli claims that the attack was an accident
-- 5 March 2003 interview for Naval Institute Proceedings

"I was never satisfied with the Israeli explanation. . . . Through diplomatic channels we refused to accept their explanations. I didn't believe them then, and I don't believe them to this day. The attack was outrageous "
-- US Secretary of State Dean Rusk

"...the board of inquiry (concluded) that the Israelis knew exactly what they were doing in attacking the Liberty."
-- CIA Director Richard Helms

"I can tell you for an absolute certainty (from intercepted communications) that the Israelis knew they were attacking an American ship."
-- NSA Deputy Director Oliver Kirby

"That the Liberty could have been mistaken for the Egyptian supply ship El Quseir is unbelievable"
-- Special Assistant to the President Clark Clifford, in his report to President Lyndon Johnson

"To suggest that they [the IDF] couldn't identify the ship is ... ridiculous. ... Anybody who could not identify the Liberty could not tell the difference between the White House and the Washington Monument."
-- Admiral Thomas Moorer, Chief of Naval Operations and later Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, quoted in The Washington Post, June 15, 1991, p. 14


Moore Commission Findings, OCTOBER 22, 2003

1. That on June 8, 1967, after eight hours of aerial surveillance, Israel launched a two-hour air and naval attack against USS Liberty, the world’s most sophisticated intelligence ship, inflicting 34 dead and 172 wounded American servicemen (a casualty rate of seventy percent, in a crew of 294);

2. That the Israeli air attack lasted approximately 25 minutes, during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on USS Liberty's bridge, and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels;

3. That the torpedo boat attack involved not only the firing of torpedoes, but the machine-gunning of Liberty’s firefighters and stretcher-bearers as they struggled to save their ship and crew; the Israeli torpedo boats later returned to machine-gun at close range three of the Liberty’s life rafts that had been lowered into the water by survivors to rescue the most seriously wounded;

4. That there is compelling evidence that Israel’s attack was a deliberate attempt to destroy an American ship and kill her entire crew;

5. That in attacking USS Liberty, Israel committed acts of murder against American servicemen and an act of war against the United States;

8. That due to the influence of Israel’s powerful supporters in the United States, the White House deliberately covered up the facts of this attack from the American people;

Thomas H. Moorer
Former Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff

General of Marines Raymond G. Davis, USMC, MOH*

Merlin Staring
Rear Admiral Merlin Staring, USN, Ret.,
Former Judge Advocate General of the Navy,

James Akins
Ambassador James Akins, Ret.,
Former United States Ambassador to Saudi Arabia,
 
GySgt said:
Typical.

Ignore the tons of premeditated and malicious attacks made by militant Islamist on our civillians while vomiting the ounces of mistakes made by American retalliations.

I see what you mean. I believe all violence has a cause, most people are good and don't just go off doing some terrorist stuff without some reason regardless of how crazy.

I'd like to point out you used a few important labels :

premeditated and malicious attacks

American retaliations

When a US cruise missile smashes into a village or what ever what is the world to think of it? You and I know it's simply accidents but the US has the best of the best of the best and we brag about it all the time.

So I think when our stuff hits the wrong target not exactly everyone believes it's just a mistake. Given that we have the best stuff and best minds they probably think it was a premeditated and malicious attacks.

So in return they retaliate

Here's another interesting word usage, "Ignore the tons of premeditated and malicious attacks made by militant Islamist on our civilians"

Who do you really think has done more damage (not in figures of dollars) :

The United States Military
or
Islamic Terror

I'm not asking who's the good guy who's the bad guy. Just asking given what we know about history who do you think has caused more death and destruction ?

IMHO I'm pretty sure the US "takes the cake" on this issue.

Looking forward to your response,
Rory
 
Well Rory, you have your presented your ticking points and I have presented mine. I'm fairly sure you and I will have a smashing jolly good time here :) Welcome to Debate Politics!

Shalom ~ Sala'am,
Tashah



 
Tashah said:
Well Rory, you have your presented your ticking points and I have presented mine. I'm fairly sure you and I will have a smashing jolly good time here :) Welcome to Debate Politics!

Shalom ~ Sala'am,
Tashah




Thank you. I will be posting a 'intro' thread about myself somewhere sometimes soon for anyone who's interested.
 
Our "damage" has been inflicted on tyrants and oppressors. Mistakes made by bad equipment and errors in judgements are unfortunate. Our technology enables us to continue to further the advances against fratricide and civillian casualties. Our training has continued to evolve. In a firefight last year in the middle of the street in Fallujah, I witnessed Marines rushing towards their targets firing their weapons with one hand while grabbing civillians and throwing them down with the other. This is America and it's efforts.

The "damage" inflicted by the enemy has always been malicious and devious. They will purposefully seek out a crowd of unsuspecting civillians and detonate bombs. They will use their own people as shields. In Somalia, I witnessed armed militia firing on us us from inside a crowd of protesters. They were holding on to women, preventing us from firing back. This is the effort of the enemy.

There would be no reason for war if the behavior of others were more civilized.
 
GySgt said:
Our "damage" has been inflicted on tyrants and oppressors. Mistakes made by bad equipment and errors in judgements are unfortunate. Our technology enables us to continue to further the advances against fratricide and civillian casualties. Our training has continued to evolve. In a firefight last year in the middle of the street in Fallujah, I witnessed Marines rushing towards their targets firing their weapons with one hand while grabbing civillians and throwing them down with the other. This is America and it's efforts.

The "damage" inflicted by the enemy has always been malicious and devious. They will purposefully seek out a crowd of unsuspecting civillians and detonate bombs. They will use their own people as shields. In Somalia, I witnessed armed militia firing on us us from inside a crowd of protesters. They were holding on to women, preventing us from firing back. This is the effort of the enemy.

There would be no reason for war if the behavior of others were more civilized.

I agree. However when inflicting our damage on tyrants and other undesireables we accidently kill bystanders in the process. They don't care it was an accident, this accounts for some of the terrorist we face.

On the other foot we support dictators and tyrants allowing them to oppress their people then turn the coin over and say they are bad people and that we don't support them and now we must destroy them (in turn accidently killing innocent people).

It's through this turn about that I believe a lot of dislike for America comes from and even more terrorist.
 
Accidentally killing civillians is the price of doing business. It's a price we do not like. That is why we spend so much money developing our technologies so that we can pin point a missile strike or retrieve exact identification of the target. "EPLRS" has been the latest introduction to combat fratricide. It is what allowed us to identify the enemy from the friendlies on the battle field. 90 percent of the deaths in the Gulf War were from fratricide. 90 percent of the deaths in OIF I was from the enemy. We constantly drill "win the hearts and minds" into our Marines. We have done this for years.

None of this consideration has been afforded to us by our enemies. Most of the people that hate America are under educated as to our efforts to avoid friendly and civillian deaths. I'm sure it doesn't ease the minds of many of the affected, but doing nothing at all would be the bigger crime. Doing nothing and isolating ourselves resulted in two World Wars, which caused way more American deaths than it should have if we were there to stop it from steam rolling. Considering the War in the Middle East, we are the only ones that learned a lesson form both World Wars.

American government backing a dictator against a bigger dictator has always been a part of our hypocracy. I wish it wasn't, but sometimes it is necessary. Could you imagine if Iran won the war against Iraq in the 80's? Could you imagine if Iran siezed the entire Middle East and was in charge of the worlds oil supply? That, definately, would have been grounds for the next World War.
 
Last edited:
NoobieDoobieDo said:
I agree. However when inflicting our damage on tyrants and other undesireables we accidently kill bystanders in the process. They don't care it was an accident, this accounts for some of the terrorist we face.

On the other foot we support dictators and tyrants allowing them to oppress their people then turn the coin over and say they are bad people and that we don't support them and now we must destroy them (in turn accidently killing innocent people).

It's through this turn about that I believe a lot of dislike for America comes from and even more terrorist.

When you are the world's lone superpower, you are bound to step on toes and engender dislike from various factions. Unfortunately, there is no getting around this as it goes with the territory. As far as civilian and unintended casualties, I know of no war where this has not occured. This is not meant to be a moralistic excuse. Rather, the sad fact is that civilian casualties are another ugly byproduct of war.

US support for dictators and tyrants was a necessary yet nearsighted vestage of the Cold war era. Perhaps that is slowly changing. Associating with tyrants was/is hypocitical and shameful, and disassociating ourselves will also cause pain and heartache. I know this sounds simplistic, yet the simple truths are often the most profound ones.


 
Tashah said:
When you are the world's lone superpower, you are bound to step on toes and engender dislike from various factions. Unfortunately, there is no getting around this as it goes with the territory. As far as civilian and unintended casualties, I know of no war where this has not occured. This is not meant to be a moralistic excuse. Rather, the sad fact is that civilian casualties are another ugly byproduct of war.

US support for dictators and tyrants was a necessary yet nearsighted vestage of the Cold war era. Perhaps that is slowly changing. Associating with tyrants was/is hypocitical and shameful, and disassociating ourselves will also cause pain and heartache. I know this sounds simplistic, yet the simple truths are often the most profound ones.

I fully understand that there has been no such 'only the bad guys die war'. However , and sorry for repeating - my point is that to the indigenous population of those we attack it matters not that it was an accident or the fog of war.

Beyond this I agree with your post.

However as you know to generalize say, the US's support of Saddam during the Iran war days when we knew he was using WMD (and we helped him) doesn't do the issue justice. I find it beyond ironic that Mr. Rummy was shaking Saddam's hand smiling during these times then all these years later condems the man as if he were Satan.
 
NoobieDoobieDo said:
the US's support of Saddam during the Iran war days when we knew he was using WMD (and we helped him) doesn't do the issue justice. I find it beyond ironic that Mr. Rummy was shaking Saddam's hand smiling during these times then all these years later condems the man as if he were Satan.

The US also propped up the Shah of Iran when it was painfully aware of the brutal excesses of SAVAK (his secret police). The sentient point here is that hindsight is always 20/20. Granted, supporting the Shah (and Saddam) was privately considered to be both hypocritical and distasteful, but also the lesser of numerous alternative evils.

Regretfully, time and place often conspire to dictate a distasteful policy at the expense of moral certitude.

 
Squawker:
We didn't cause terrorism, I don't know why you people want to blame the US. for everything bad that happens in the world. Our government was so nice to the terrorists during the nineties, they even pardoned them. They bombed the World Trade Center, we did nothing, they bombed embassies, we did nothing, they bombed the Cole, we did nothing. Did that stop 9-11? Hell no ! The terrorist cells grew because we did nothing, not because we did something.

Excellent! I couldn't have said it better myself :clap:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom