Anyone want to see the true nature of our enemies?

[Jib 0]

Quote

Quote

There is no reason other than shock value to hack someone's head off with a knife.

Was the US invasion not named "Shock and Awe"?
Of course they're trying to shock you. You certainly tried to shock them.

A show of force is like chopping someone's head off... Yeah, okay.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

>I believe that as long as non-Muslim culture exists, the Muslims will
>be at war with it. What do you think?

Nonsense. Most Muslims have absolutely no problems with other people believing whatever they want. It's the crazies that are the ones who become terrorists. We should go after terrorists, not religions.

The question was actually directed towards Outrager, but, in response:

I work with a guy from Iran. We have talked a good bit about the Shah and politics. My friend did not like the Shah. He likes the theocratic rule less.

Quote

Most Muslims have absolutely no problems with other people believing whatever they want.

In Calif or Florida, I am sure that Muslims are a little more relaxed than in Iran or any other state whose chief political figure is a religious figure also.

I was not speaking of individual Muslims, but the religion-controlled countries. The problem is cultural. They view Western culture as a threat to their culture and morality. I am sure that it is.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

A show of force is like chopping someone's head off... Yeah, okay.

Err yes it is. How's it any different to blowing someones head off?

Or anti-personal mines?

Reality is harsh, so is war. No one ever "wins".

Performance Designs Factory Team

[AdD 1]

Quote

Hmm..... America is also a beacon of hope to many hundreds of millions of people. In case you missed it, these extremeists want you, me, my kids, your family DEAD. We ARE in a global war, YOU can choose to ignore that fact, the killing of these people is just one example. "Nuke the fuckers" is not a rational response and you never heard me say that. Cold determination is.

I have a hard time swallowing this crap. America may be a beacon of hope to those who are blind to its shortcomings, ie Americans, but when you step outside her borders the rest of the world has some fundamental problems with its foreign policy. America has attacked another country every 18 months since 1945. These wars have resulted in countless civilian casualties. There were more women and children killed due to the bombing of Afghanistan than the total number of people who died in 9-11. I am in no way condoning or sympathizing with terrorists of any kind, but to ignore their motivation and simply swallow the official story of "they hate us for our freedom" and to condone this continuing cycle of hatred and violence is completely insane.

The best way to win the war on terror is to stop engaging in it. Stop manufacturing reasons to invade countries that cannot fight back. Stop interfering with foreign governments by installing brutal puppet dictatorships. Stop bombing innocent civilians. These are not unreasonable requests.

Life is ez
On the dz
Every jumper's dream
3 rigs and an airstream

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Stop manufacturing reasons to invade countries that cannot fight back. Stop interfering with foreign governments by installing brutal puppet dictatorships. Stop bombing innocent civilians. These are not unreasonable requests.

But that's what the terrorists want!!!! That's just giving into terrorism!!!!

The overall issue is pretty simple, really. No one wants to be told what to do by someone else. We don't like it and they don't like it. What we need is a time out. Get the hell out of that area. Fine, buy their oil or whatever, but get rid of all western based susidiary companies and military bases in the middle east. Don't let middle easterners immigrate to the west. Pretend we just met each other and start over.

This war and all fo these issue ARE ABOUT OIL. Not about us trying to get it for free or anything that nefarious. But the simple fact that we need it, they have it. They have unstable governments and we are not willing to risk our supply becoming disrupted by their internal disputes. So we try to stabilize the region, but that makes us the intruders and gives them someone besides each other to lash out at.

We have two options. One is to spread freedom and democracy throughout the middle east to remove the instability and our need to interfere in their affairs. That's the Bush tactic.

Problem with that is their society and culture is not ready, willing or able to accept democracy right now. And no matter how much we try to force it down their throats, it's not going to take.

The other option is for us to not care if that region is stable or not. The only way that is going to happen is if we don't need their oil anymore. That's is where we should be concentrating our efforts instead of trying to impose our values and beliefs on a completely foreign culture.

[AdD 1]

Quote

But that's what the terrorists want!!!! That's just giving into terrorism!!!!

Ya, the terrorists would really like it if we stopped killing the people of their countries and supporting those who do. Does the fact that they want it make it unreasonable, I would say not entirely.

Quote

The overall issue is pretty simple, really. No one wants to be told what to do by someone else. We don't like it and they don't like it. What we need is a time out. Get the hell out of that area. Fine, buy their oil or whatever, but get rid of all western based susidiary companies and military bases in the middle east. Don't let middle easterners immigrate to the west. Pretend we just met each other and start over.

This I actually agree with, except the part about immigration which is simply retarded. Immigration is not the problem, don't you know anyone from the middle east? Go out and meet some, they're just like us.

Quote

This war and all fo these issue ARE ABOUT OIL. Not about us trying to get it for free or anything that nefarious. But the simple fact that we need it, they have it. They have unstable governments and we are not willing to risk our supply becoming disrupted by their internal disputes. So we try to stabilize the region, but that makes us the intruders and gives them someone besides each other to lash out at.

This statement is based on a gross misconception of America's involvement in the middle east. We have in fact been destabilizing the region for quite some time. America has used its influence to promote harsh governments which will control the people of the region while doing its bidding and keeping the oil flowing. We supported the government of Iran till the revolution, we supported Saddam through his atrocities until he turned on us, there are many other examples. There has never really been any effort on the part of the US to support democratic gov't anywhere in the middle east to my knowledge. In fact it is the exact opposite.

Quote

We have two options. One is to spread freedom and democracy throughout the middle east to remove the instability and our need to interfere in their affairs. That's the Bush tactic.

Who the f*ck gave America the right to spread democracy by force. If you came to my country after I told you to stay the hell out I'd be up in arms as well.

Quote

Problem with that is their society and culture is not ready, willing or able to accept democracy right now. And no matter how much we try to force it down their throats, it's not going to take.

Of course they are ready to accept it, we just won't let them have it. And like I said before, it is absolutely not the right of the US to force democracy on anyone. By it's very definition democracy is the free choice of the people! Can't you see the hypocrisy in this statement?

Quote

The other option is for us to not care if that region is stable or not. The only way that is going to happen is if we don't need their oil anymore. That's is where we should be concentrating our efforts instead of trying to impose our values and beliefs on a completely foreign culture.

It's their oil, not ours. Just because we need it doesn't mean we have the right to kill them for it, unless you reject everything that America claims to stand for.

I honestly think that you would benefit from looking a little deeper into the actual history of US foreign policy in the middle east. Believe it or not there has been a consistent effort on the part of the US to subvert their freedom and right to self determination in the interest of controlling the region's oil supply. The result is the catastrophy we see there today.

Life is ez
On the dz
Every jumper's dream
3 rigs and an airstream

[PhillyKev 0]

Back up. Read some of my other posts. Than re-interpret this one.

[happythoughts 0]

I don't think that anyone can equate a US hands-off Middle East policy to:

1. Inner peace in the region.
2. An end to Al-Queda attacks outside of the region.

However, I don't think that the US in Iraq has changed a lot. Once the US leaves, the situation will degenerate into deeper tribal/sect/region fighting and more turmoil.

[Rebecca 0]

Isn't peace in the middle east one of the biblical signs of the coming of the apocalypse?

you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' -- well do you, punk?

[PhillyKev 0]

No, that's the point. There wouldn't be peace, which is why we won't be hands off unless we don't need their oil anymore. AQ was on our side against the USSR. Then we became the bad guys and their targets. If by some stroke of magic we could completely extricate ourselves from the M.E. they would find another target.

I don't think this is possible, I'm just stating what I think is the only possible way to "win the war against terror". In other words, it's not able to be won. So maybe we should figure out what the best strategy is to survive it instead of fruitlessly trying to stamp it out.

Quote

Once the US leaves, the situation will degenerate into deeper tribal/sect/region fighting and more turmoil.

Who said we're leaving? I doubt we will for a very very long time.

[Darius11 12]

(this is not a reply to PhillyKev)

Wow reading many of the posts here I can see why we are hated. Fuck I can even understand why we are hated.
Arrogance, blindness, and hate.
It seems it is always ok when we kill innocent people. It is always a mistake WE can afford to make.

What makes you people by you people I mean the ones who are part of the glass parking lot crowd so special? Is your blood redder then other people who are not republicans, or Americans?


Fact We INVADED IRAQ. Any Iraqi who decides to kill our troops is NOT a terrorist but a resistance fighter like it or not.
Just because you feel closer to one side dosen’t change the facts.
Oh and let me add this if you are supporting an occupation force I am sure you will be a target. Turn the tables I know it’s hard to do for some of you but what would you do if you were invaded by an army who has already killed many innocent people.


To all the ones who wanted this war for WMD, freeing the Iraqi people or what ever reason you may think of tomorrow WELCOME TO WAR.
War is rape, genocide, misguided bombs, children dying, people getting there heads cut off, your friends not coming back home, it means never having a home, never meeting your father/mother, it is all things painful and sad. What have we achieved I hope it was worth it for you.

Sorry for the Vent but I am so sick of Ignorance and the lack perspective.
It also sucks that we have this holier then thou attitude.
Grow up so we can all grow old in peace.
Learn to respect all people not just the ones you know or are use to.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[wmw999 2,587]

Sometimes I'd like to see a "hall of posting fame" with posts like this one, NickDG's, and the like.

Of course, everyone would have a different one.

But war is not glorious. It hurts the people you love and the ones you don't indiscriminately.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Botellines 0]

I find something quite ironic. Most people who are pro-gun (not all though) and therefore very touch about their right to defend themselves are also republicans who support this war.
If you are attacked in the middle of the street by someone who tries to rob you and you would shoot him down, wouldn´t you do it with a foreigner who wants to harm your family? Then why cannot you understand that they feel exactly the same way than you. They are reacting exactly the same way you would be reacting if you where in his shoes. Are you a terrorist as well?

[PhillyKev 0]

I think it's because the basic difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives think the worst of others and expect them to proove their worth, and liberals expect the best of people until they proove they're not worthy.

I'm a pro gun liberal. I expect the best from people, but would like to be ready if proven wrong.

[jdhill 0]

Quote

Then why cannot you understand that they feel exactly the same way than you.

I can understand the Iraqi who is opposed to US occupation taking up arms against us... in their mind they are fighting against an invader... that does not mean that we should not countinue to support the Iraqi government in putting them down... But what of the Syrians, Jordanians, Saudis, Iranians who are shooting at the government and US forces, or blowing up car bombs in front of police stations? They are terrorists... Someone else said any Iraqi that picked up arms against the US was a resistance fighter, to that I say BULL SHIT. Some of them are, yes. Others are criminals, or religious fanatics, or terrorists... IMO only those that take up arms for nationalist reason are resistance fighters (and I would even throw former regiem members in this group)... that still doesn't mean that US, or the Iraqi government should not put them, and those that harbor them down.

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[jdhill 0]

Quote

I think it's because the basic difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives think the worst of others and expect them to proove their worth, and liberals expect the best of people until they proove they're not worthy.

I disagree... Many Liberals think that it is the that people cannot provide for themselves, so the goverment must provide for them (entitlement mentality). Conservatives tend to think people have the ability and responsibility to solve their own problems.

Also, being liberal or conservative has nothing in particular to do with party affiliation

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Liberals think that it is the that people cannot provide for themselves, so the goverment must provide for them (entitlement mentality).

that actually sounds more like socialism that liberalism.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[jdhill 0]

It does, but it does fit many liberals in the US.

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[billvon 3,114]

>Liberals think that it is the that people cannot provide for themselves, so
> the goverment must provide for them (entitlement mentality).

I'm a liberal and I think that 99.9% of people can provide for themselves. The remainder (people with genetic impairments etc) should be cared for by their families, but if not, we have a societal obligation to not let them die.

[jdhill 0]

That sounds like a more conservative view... so just for you, Bill, I modified my most to say many liberals

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

The best way to win the war on terror is to stop engaging in it. Stop manufacturing reasons to invade countries that cannot fight back. Stop interfering with foreign governments by installing brutal puppet dictatorships. Stop bombing innocent civilians. These are not unreasonable requests.

Please give us your enlightened solution to the problem of fighting an enemy that hides among civilians. It's like trying to eat the raisins out of an oatmeal cookie without eating any oatmeal. This is the way they fight because they realize it forces us to inadvertently kill "collateral" civilians. Part of their war is making us unpopular for what we have to do in order to fight them.

It's funny, you say that our bombing of innocent civilians causes them to fight us. Why do we bomb the innocent civilians? We never go into countries to CONQUER them -- only to set shit straight when it looks like it is building up to HARM us. In all the time you say we've been "invading" countries, we don't go around ANNEXING them.

You are missing the circularity, here. You say that they attack us because we bomb their civilians, but we only bomb their civilians to get at them for having attacked us! What had we done to Afghanistan before Al Quada and the Taliban orchestrated the 9/11 attacks against us? Did we occupy Afghanistan? Had we been under a campaign of bombing innocent civilians there?

We ARE hated because we are free -- because the religious zealot extremists over there cannot abide it because their religion instructs them to think we are evil for it.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

>Liberals think that it is the that people cannot provide for themselves, so
> the goverment must provide for them (entitlement mentality).

I'm a liberal and I think that 99.9% of people can provide for themselves. The remainder (people with genetic impairments etc) should be cared for by their families, but if not, we have a societal obligation to not let them die.

Do you draw any distinction between "not let them die," and "let the pop out as many babies as they feel like and keep providing more and more assistance"?

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

....They are terrorists... Someone else said any Iraqi that picked up arms against the US was a resistance fighter, to that I say BULL SHIT. Some of them are, yes. Others are criminals, or religious fanatics, or terrorists...

As long as folks show such a mindless opinion, the war will go on.

May The Lord safe me to never meet people thinking like that.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[billvon 3,114]

>Do you draw any distinction between "not let them die," and "let the pop
> out as many babies as they feel like and keep providing more and more
> assistance"?

Let's see -

The "pop out more and more babies" part - completely up to them. Government should have nothing to say about how many kids someone has.

"providing more and more assistance" - we should provide nothing beyond that which keeps them alive. Milk and bread - OK. Oreos, color TV's, gas for their car, movie rentals - no. If they want that stuff they can work for it.

[jdhill 0]

Please elaborate on why you think this is mindless...

Are you suggesting that there are no criminals in Iraq who are shooting at people or kidnapping people for other than nationalistic reasons (say for ransome, monitary gain)?

Are you suggesting that there are no terrorists that are Iraqi? Who are fighting for religious reasons, or at the prompting of other governments (say Iran)?

If you are, you are obviously not quite as worldly as you pretend to be... How can you see anything with your head in the sand?

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke