Hey GySgt,
Can you tell me why you think the US military had to invade Iraq?
Given the fact that Iraq was no threat to the american people or their way of life.
If it is for hegemony (control of oil, military bases, ect), do you think that is morally justifyable?
Do you honestly believe that the administration did not know that Iraq had no feasible WMD program or was much of a threat to it's neighbors at the time of invasion?
thanks
If only Bush could be this honest about his intentions, I might like the guy. Even though he says things I find disgusting, the unflinching candor of how it is said, has to score points on some level. This kind of unbridled honesty is rare!Originally posted by teacher:
Ain't read one word of this thread.
But then being penned by Billo why bother?
Hear's the deal...
We gonna be shooting stupid Arabs in the head for a long time to come.
With any luck, that will keep the mushroom clouds from gracing the skies of our fair nation.
It's the way our future is folks, make no bones about it.
Pretty much it is a race between the civilizing of the freed Arab women and the reeducation of thier male children. That's all. A generation or two from now will it be the free women or the grudge holding old men that influence the young? By then they will have Nukes, plain and simple, nothing we can do to stop that. But you morons can't seem to adress that point, can you?
Better to scream...
"Bush lied".
"Nuh-uh".
"Did too".
Cause that's what the TV tells you to do.
Morons.
Miss me?
ME reaction to Bush's speech...
Reality is not that hard to see when you look for it.
| Moderator's Warning: |
Like who? Why don't you name off these "dictators." Shall America be perfect and snub the French for the ongoing colonies in western Africa? How about our relations with Russia or China? Since they aren't exactly "pillars" of freedom and human rights, why don't we just dismiss their existence? And instead of dealing with the House of Saud, who are currently terrified at the prospect that their creations might control a bordering nation in their future, why don't we instead install the Radical and do business with them?
You see, there is noithing more trustworthy than staring at evil and slapping it. What is trustworthy about staring at evil and defendiung its existence for fear of the troubles that will come by removing it?
This is fact:
Many of the Saudi people see the American forces in Saudi Arabia as protecting the "House of Saud." Out of intellectual habit, American forces ensure that the Radical Base, which ironically has been a side effect creation of the House of Saud, does not interfere with oil demands and as a base in the volatile Middle East.
Now, these people have been fooled by their Saudi leadership and the rent-a-clerics that are shoved in front of microphones about America's role in their society. We are blamed for their lack of education, their lack of employment, and their lack of freedom. But this is a lie. America is the scapegoat of these lords of terror. The Arab culture is a creation by Arabs..not Americans.
I don't deal in "what ifs." Especially when the "what ifs" are unlikely and counter historical facts. Troops in Saudi Arabia are very safe and the very few times they have been targetted it has been by acknowledged terrorists by the Saudi and American government and by the Saudi people. Are you even aware of what is going on in Saudi Arabia since 2003?
I didn't!Originally posted by Tashah:
Billo... You know the rules. Plz do not copy and paste entire articles.
Hey GySgt,
Can you tell me why you think the US military had to invade Iraq?
Given the fact that Iraq was no threat to the american people or their way of life.
If it is for hegemony (control of oil, military bases, ect), do you think that is morally justifyable?
Do you honestly believe that the administration did not know that Iraq had no feasible WMD program or was much of a threat to it's neighbors at the time of invasion?
Self-prescribed? It doomed itself? You must be really delusional if you truly believe that........
So your attempt to make this seem like a disease that stemmed from the religion of the ME is not accurate.
This seems like a good summary of your entire post. Basically:
US enemy = ME civilization
....an ENTIRE civilization?
Is this like a neo-genocidal way of thought?
You fail to define who the enemy are, but you say they are in the millions. You generalize them to be mainly Arab and Muslim, but not everyone of them. This sounds like a hunter that has just entered the woods and firing at anything that moves.
And here's the highlight of your post:
~snip~
How would I like it? That's a pretty presumptious question. Presuming that the US are the ones charged with protecting the entire world! That it is the US's responsiblity to govern the world. That the US should just ASSUME power over all nations, and dictate who is allowed nuclear weapons and who is not, and of course the ones who are allowed to have them will be us!
How about the US actually follow internation laws, and actually participate in international criminal court? The US is a signatory of the Geneva conventions (III), promising to uphold the laws and agreements, but the US never gets prosecuted because we dont participate in international courts. It's a a "yes, we agree to the laws, but no, you can't punish us if we don't follow them" kind of agreement. How about we agree to do this before we engage in ANYTHING international. That way we are accountable for our actions because as of now, there is no justice. No matter who "charged" you with the responsbility of protecting the world from tyranny, you cannnot do justice.
So who exactly "charged" us with this responsibility? The american people? Those who say "protect us from the world" "protect us from those who envy our liberties" "protect those who want to violate freedom"? They have no right to do so.
Lightdemon said:But given these circumstances, religion is very miniscule when it comes to influence. However, that is not to say that religion has no part. It is the rulers and leaders who used religion to make policies, but religion itself does not. So your attempt to make this seem like a disease that stemmed from the religion of the ME is not accurate.
Well it has been you that in this thread and other have talked about the great change of USA towards supporting democracy and the Iraq war as the great kick of while other just standing by and look and supporting dictaturships. But if this switch to supporting democracy is only been done by atacking countries unfriendly towards USA while at the same time USA keep supporting friendly dictatorship it's just seems to be business as usual.
Lightdemon said:So your attempt to make this seem like a disease that stemmed from the religion of the ME is not accurate.
Did America tell the Arab nations to deprive their people of education? Is it America's fault that their isn't one world class university in the region? Was it an American conspiracy that made the Arab oil barons hoard their money from their people? Did we deny them infrastructure? Did we prescribe for them governments through religion? Was it the west that encouraged 14 centuries of hatreds between Shi'ite and Sunni? Was it our schools that taught them a hatred for others? Was it the west that created Islam out of war and maintain a force for violence throughout history to present day?
There problems are very self-prescribed.
What are the problems of the Middle East as far as the social dynamics?
1) A low evaluation of education
2) Restriction of the free flow of information
3) Subjugation of women
4) Adherence to the extended family
Here's just four out of many that are present aspects in failing civilizations throughout history. For a reference, America doesn't have the above problems and we prosper.
The monoploy of religion will always strangle the life blood of a society.
If it is true that absolute power corrupts absolutely, then absolute religion corrupts religion absolutely. And what is the number one killer of religion? "Creativity." Creativity comes from such things like education. A restriction of what is allowed to read also allows the leader his power. Doesn't the continued use of the Qu'ran as the ultimate educational book in the region offer exactly that? And what about the women? How many women are noted in the Qu'ran as being the object of a man's failure? Where are the heroins that deny the brutal "wisdom" of the old cleric? Does a civilization that restricts the contribution of half its population have a chance to compete with the world? And what is the damage inflicted with adhering to the extended clan? We are seeing this in Iraq as Sunni kill Shi'ite and vice versa. We also see this in other places. Countries that cling to the "tribe" will always cheat themselves out of their best possibility, because their best may happen to belong to another tribe.
But let's look at the religions themselves. Christianity didn't come from the harshness of the Old Testament. It was a pacifist movement inspired by Mr. Jesus Christ. Despite troubles along the way, 2000 years later is Christianity a largely pacifist religion? Islam came from the Muhammed who slaughtered infidels into submission. From the non-stop historical violence (with a brief few centuries of stagnation), to today's inspired violence, does Islam reflect its roots?
I'm beginning to think I'm in discussion with a high schooler who hasn't yet achieved the ability to look at his world clearly. Or worse, a Campus veteran not yet hardened by life's realities. Our enemies wear civilian clothing. They subscribe to the teachings of Islam and read the Qu'ran. They believe they are good Muslims. But according to their Muslim victims, they are not good Muslims. These are criminals, but until they pick up a rifle or a bomb, they cannot be easily identified. However, we do have a working tool...
1) Terrorists swim in the sea of Radical Islam.
2) This sea is based on the teachings of Radical Islamic Clerics.
3) Clerics preach/teach at Mosques.
4) Find the Radical Mosques and you’ll find the supporters of Radical Islam.
5) Find the supporters (mosques & funding) and sooner or later you’ll find the terrorists.
And what world do you live in? Are you aware of the position America took after WWII? Was it not America that tried to get away with isolationalism twice and both times we had to send our troops across the ocean to die for our needs to "stay out of it?" After the Japanese were beaten we denied them a military and assumed the position of protector in the East as all the little guys put their little worlds back together. After Germany fell, America assumed the rols of European protector as it parked an army in western Germany and commenced to chase around the Soviet threat wherever it threatened to poke its head. This was all done so that we could referree the world away from another world war. Did Europe fight us? Did Japan fight us? Did any of our allies fight us? Of course not. Because underneath their complaints and superficial cares, they would rather we do it than for them to soil their hands or simply get themselves into another genocidal world war, of which we have to come rescue them.
You see, life isn't about what is and is not fair. It's about preservation. It's about security. Would it be fair to allow third world nations nuclear arms because we do? Of course. But would it be smart? We can trust us. We have proven to the world that they can trust us. All it would take is for an Islamic nation to "lose" a nuclear device and we only discover it after a "martyr" detonates it some where in the world for us not to trust them.
So, it's not such a "presumptious question."
And what international law would this be? The law that preserves a brutal dictator behind "soveriegn" borders? If you are referring to prisoners (or criminals) of war, review your law. Our enemies do not wear uniforms nor fiught under a banner. Therefore they are not afforded the rules governing the Geneva convention. They are also not citizens of the United States. Have any of these Muslims nations tried to claim their own creations? No. We have enetered an age where our laws are not adequate enough for what we face.
Again, I simply ask you what world you live in. Review your history.
No..no...no...no. You made the accusation of our present day dictator support now back it up. Aside from our long time habit of supporting the House of Saud (not a dictator) and our support towards the Pakistani military that maintians the nuclear armed democracy (not a dictator), I am at a loss of what you speak of.
America's use of dictators was a Cold War event and was a European legacy for which European nations continue to this day. Refer to Russia's diplomatic foolishness. And what about France's ongoing colonies in western Africa that maintain control through armed thugs? Of course, we know who was making money under the carpet with Saddam Hussein. And why does Ahmenadejad reach out to Berlin for an ally against America? Even the West's enemies know where the weakness is.
Business as usual? Based on what? History? Of the very few dictators that we did support against the Soviet influence during the Cold War? Seems to me, and correct me if I'm wrong, but America's will to "support" Saddam went out the window after the Iran/Iraq war came to a halt. And after he again invaded a neighboring country in 1990, the American government completely turned it's back. It wasn't until 2003, that America did something after his decade long festering and abuses upon his people through sweetened back door UN deals and under UN sanctions.
The problem with your prescription of the problem is that you are still assuming the US is the one responsible for the clean up job. That the US is so altruistic, that we are just going to 'rescue' these people.
The huge problem with saying that it is self-prescribe is that it lays blame on the wrong culprit. By saying it is self-prescribed, you blame the leader of that country, who you say is responsible for the infrastructure.
Here you show yourself as having superficial beliefs of the Quran. Anyone who has actually studied Islam, or is practicing Islam, knows how incompatible racism and intolerance is with the Islamic belief. Now I dont want to discount all of the things you have just wrote, but the culprit you are blaming again is not correct. And I've said this already, it's not the religion, its the one behind it, who is using religion as a tool. I know you say this as well, but you seem to think that it stems from the religion itself, which is not correct.
Again here you show ignorance of the Islamic faith. Just as how Christianity has morphed into what it is today, so did Islam. Of course you are aware that the early Christians refused to fight, they would not even pick up a sword. But yet today, very few american protestant would be afraid of picking up a gun, in fact, as you well know, we have a law that says it's our right to have a right to bear arms.
This is no different for Islam. Muhammad may have started Islam, but it was not set in stone, neither was Christianity. Both religions change as time changes, as technologies advance, as politics wither and strenthen, as the frequently as the wind blows. When Khalid ibn al-Walik, a great general of the Prophet Muhammad, took over both Persia and the Byzantine Empire, Muhammad allowed these two to practice thier own laws, as well as thier own religions. Converting to Islam was thier choice.
We almost never here that side of the story about Islam, all we here about is Jihad this, and Jihad that. And just as another history lesson for you, Muhammad was not the first to "slaughter infidels into submission", it was the way of life in Arabia. People in that region lived that way because of the very thin resources, people fought over for food and raw materials. Arabs lived thru plundering, this was already in place before Muhammad "slaughtered infidels into submission". This was the way of life. He didn't start it, it was set before he was even born.
Is this way of living wrong or immoral? yes, but only by certain standards. If you lived at that time, it was the only thing to do if you wanted to survive.
Again, your conception of Islam is lacking. You seem to be unable to draw the distinction between Islam and terrorist.
lol, "we can trust us"? I beg to differ. Many Americans do not trust their own govt. Nor should we, because we should remain speculative and check the govt. The govt should be afraid of its people, the people should not be afraid of thier govt.
What does this have to do with anything? If the terrorist is an American we will try him and condemn him (as we have already seen). What do you suppose those who cheer for their martyrs (some behind closed doors) will do? Even in Saudi Arabia (our "friends") it is normal practice for the Royal Family to anually release Radical prisoners, because they fear the uprising of their own creations.So terrorists, are no longer Iraqi, Afghan, Iranian, or even American? That being terrorist, takes away thier national identity?
And your last sentence, is something Dubbya Bush would say, seeing as how he thinks he is above the law. What good is the UN if their laws are useless right?
but a better question would be, what good is the laws created by the UN, when a country does not follow them, and cannot be punished? What good is this organisation if it cannot control it's members?
Is it such a wonder then, that so many countries detest the US? Is it such a surprise?
First of all you can't be serius if you claim that SaudArabia and Pakistan as not being dicatorships and not demorcatic countries. I hope I just misunderstand you else I will sadly go to a personal atacka and say that you are out in space then it comes to your belifes.
Well for starters USA has troops in 120 countries.
And I bet atleast some of those countries are dictators. But hey they are just there for vacation right and in no way you can see there precence there as support of dictators, right?
The United States Army | Operations
Wrong. The US's education system is neither great nor is it the same accross the country. Not only can you not assess the US's education system the same way in every state, in many places, education is just atrocious. Especially in the poor areas. Poor education ~ Poor city/state. This is a very common corrolary in the US.
Restriction of the free flow of information? I guess that's why we have the FCC. And I guess that's why the CIA always withhold evidence/documents from the public. Please dont make it sound as if the First Amendment is a cherished right that is embraced by our govt.
And the subjugation of women? It was only in 1979 that it was made illegal to rape your wife. A man could not be guilty of raping his own wife. Women in the US is far from not being subjugated by men.
Take your own advice, and wake up. The US is not without flaws, far from it. What you really need to do is acknowledge the fact that the US is not as great as it is made out to be. You sould learn to read the propaganda that is so evident in the media, as well as other sources of information that is so widespread like an epidemic.
Bergslagstroll said:Well for starters USA has troops in 120 countries. And I bet atleast some of those countries are dictators. But hey they are just there for vacation right and in no way you can see there precence there as support of dictators, right?
Dhimmi - ahl-dhimmi is "the free non-Muslim subjects living in Muslim countries who, in return for paying the capital tax, enjoyed protection and safety.Here you show yourself as having superficial beliefs of the Quran. Anyone who has actually studied Islam, or is practicing Islam, knows how incompatible racism and intolerance is with the Islamic belief.
Now it is you who does not understand Islam. Sharia law was written within stone, the stone of an archaic cave, it was decreed as dictation verbatum.This is no different for Islam. Muhammad may have started Islam, but it was not set in stone, neither was Christianity.
People do not separate sharia law from Islam, and the accused is clear.Again, your conception of Islam is lacking. You seem to be unable to draw the distinction between Islam and terrorist. And that is what seems to be a huge problem in the US. People cannot separate the two; as if one is the pre-requisite of the other. This is probably why so many civilians are dead because our military cannot see a distinction either.
Democracy without libertarian rights for the individual over the prejudices of the majority is a similar sickness.Again here you show ignorance of the Islamic faith. Just as how Christianity has morphed into what it is today, so did Islam. Of course you are aware that the early Christians refused to fight, they would not even pick up a sword. But yet today, very few american protestant would be afraid of picking up a gun, in fact, as you well know, we have a law that says it's our right to have a right to bear arms.
And according to Bush, they owe US a thank you!There is no need to hide figures about Iraqi civilian casualties. U.N. and Iraqi statistics, though much far away from reality, are more than enough to condemn the perpetrators.
Privately, Iraqi government sources say that since the U.S. invasion Iraq has lost up to 5% of its 30 million people.
It is the kind of calamity perhaps unprecedented in history.
Link here.
Here's some interesting algebra for those that think human lives are just numbers in a math problem...
According to this source, Iraq has lost 5% of it's population of 30,000,000 as a result of the illegal invasion and occupation by the United States of America.
And according to Bush, they owe US a thank you!
Maybe because he hasn't done the math. Or can't do the math. In honor of that, let's do the math...
30,000,000 x .05(5%) = 1,500,000 Dead!
That's twice as much as the Lancet report. The big difference here is these numbers are coming from the Iraqi government!
Thank you my pro-war countryman,
for destroying the heritage of my country!
Here's some interesting algebra for those that think human lives are just numbers in a math problem...
According to this source, Iraq has lost 5% of it's population of 30,000,000 as a result of the illegal invasion and occupation by the United States of America.
And according to Bush, they owe US a thank you!
Maybe because he hasn't done the math. Or can't do the math. In honor of that, let's do the math...
30,000,000 x .05(5%) = 1,500,000 Dead!
That's twice as much as the Lancet report. The big difference here is these numbers are coming from the Iraqi government!
Thank you my pro-war countryman,
for destroying the heritage of my country!
Here's some interesting algebra for those that think human lives are just numbers in a math problem...
According to this source, Iraq has lost 5% of it's population of 30,000,000 as a result of the illegal invasion and occupation by the United States of America.
.... Those that objected to the removal of Hussein's regime on grounds of state soveriegnty (UN law) were the moral descendants of those who looked away from Hitler's crimes (and to the Middle East, he was a Hitler). ...
So that must make those who start wars based upon false premises and pretext decendents of Hitler himself.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?