| Author |
Message |
vitalsigns
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
Posts: 2784
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 7:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Yes, deleted.
Last edited by vitalsigns on Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CHeburashka
Talk Show Host
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Unfortunately, the place didn't become much safer since their arrival... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vic
Talk Show Host
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 298
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have lived in Canada and have been in the United States many times and I like it much more here in Russia. It is more pleasant, the people are warmer and straight forward.
The economic situation in the U.S. is not as good as you think. You are living on Chineese money on low interest rates that you believe will not go up - they will, and when they will, it will get ugly. But I do not want to get into economics.
Yes, Hussein was much much better than what is there now. By attacking and invading a sovreign nation (and ousting Hussein), Bush greatly aided Islamc terrorist organisations, allowing them to spread into Iraq.
Iraq has NOTHING to do with September 11 - read above.
September 11 could have been prevented.
He is spreading terrorism with this "war against terrorism" and spreading hatred against the U.S. around the world.
The U.S. forces has no right to be in Iraq and all actions against them are justified acts.
Vic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vitalsigns
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
Posts: 2784
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, deleted.
Last edited by vitalsigns on Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:51 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vic
Talk Show Host
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 298
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ummm, vitalsigns, Hussein did not put up with bullshit - he executed anyone that would even resemble an extremist (Yeah, I know that you are going to say that he was violating their human rights and stuff like that - I just love the two-sided american way of thinking) In fact he was pretty discriminatory against muslims, which is why no "terrorist" shed a tear when he was taken out. Bush just "gave" round one to the terrorists.
It is not up to you or me? Than who is it up to? Bush? I think it is up to the people living inside Iraq (that sovreign nation that you invaded without any right/purpose/reason/excuse/justification) And they WANT YOU OUT. Silent protests aren't my thing, and in any case, they seem to have the situation more or less under control - the U.S. forces keep taking a fair ammount casualties, they fear what lurks behind every corner, they are nowhere near "crushing the resistance" as they have been promising for almost two years now....I say "keep up the good work". If there was a fund for the liberation of Iraq, I would be donating part of my not so large salary.
I believe that killing ANY soldier of the UNAUTHORISED occupation force is justified. I do not agree with the suicide attacks killing actual innocent civilians (anyone joining the *Iraqi* army, under the command of the occupants is NOT innocent).
Vic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CHeburashka
Talk Show Host
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's a matter of perspective. For an Iraqi that considers his country occupied by American forces, they are not liberators, but enemy forces. This makes the new Iraqi army recruits 'collaborators' with the enemy. If we read back in history: in any western european country attacks on either of those were considered justified in WW2. Using the 'terrorist-word' for anyone who plants a bomb or attacks a target in Iraq, just fits in with the other attempts to justify this war. That's all.
The USA got themselves mixed up in a conflict that is slowly beginning to look more and more like the Vietnam-war, not only in it's train of thought when it comes to mechanisms of justification, but now also in it's military aspects. In a way it's even worse, as in Vietnam there was at least the prospect of a 'stable' communist regime. While not only has the heritage of 5000 years of civilizations, but also 5000 years of conflicts... And you managed to land right in the middle of it. Bravo!
I don't envy you as it's not going to be easy to find a way out of this self-created mess. But it will be necessary. The current situation only fuels the international terrorist treath, instead of it contributing to it's elimination. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vitalsigns
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
Posts: 2784
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, deleted.
Last edited by vitalsigns on Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:51 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xela
VIP
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 781
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vitalsigns,
If Iraqi's are generally united on one thing, then it is that they want the Americans out, except the ones that are employed by them, that is..
I think these days the world sees things for themselves as they are, and no biased media or conniving President swings it for them anymore.
Nevertheless, there is not a single shred of evidence to show that Islamic extremists in the Middle East ever use cocaine. Opium maybe.
BTW Israel disappeared for a long time, and let me assure you King David's policy had very little to do with the fact that she made a comeback.. it was more to do with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the Holocaust.
Time and again, it has been peoples such as the Americans, Persians and Egyptians who have saved the Israelites from extinction, King David managed to surpress Philistine tribes, but if you look at history, any lessons he taught were soon forgotten, almost the moment Islam was born, and that was a long time ago..
(Incidentally almost all the biblical Middle-Eastern countries have remained standing so there is more than a little inaccuracy in your statement there.)
Your support for the American government is admirable though, Vitalsigns. I think every country in the world wishes they could have new settlers such as yourself, but unfortunately in this instance both you and your country are very, very wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vitalsigns
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
Posts: 2784
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 5:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, deleted.
Last edited by vitalsigns on Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xela
VIP
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 781
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
The drug route for cocaine does not pass through the Middle East so historically this drug has never been popular in the region. The claim was originally made by the Bush administration trying to link drug-cartels to Al-Qaeda. It didn't last for long, however, considering Mexico and South America were both not Islamic and on opposite sides of the globe.
Having said that, southern Russia always managed to incorporate certain 'trends' of Europe, so if Beslan militants took cocaine(and no evidence has been found), then it was probably more of a Russian influence, and certainly in relation to the countries you mentioned, would have been the exception rather than the rule.
Your map reference is duly noted, however I still stand by the fact that Israel has not been a country for very long, and that David simply managed to suppress the Philistines(and unite the Hebrews), rather than be the sole cause of the continuation of the Jewish people, and nation.
The map refers to the area which is basically Palestine today(and we all know what 'Palestine' is named after..), thus when you consider how Israel just decreased in size, that analogy quickly becomes rather redundant, I think.
Now, I didn't intend on patronizing you regarding America, Vitalsigns, but your unwavering support leaves me little choice but to make certain conclusions..
I'm sure time will tell.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CHeburashka
Talk Show Host
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Posts: 218
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vitalsigns wrote: | May I ask you questions also?
| Чебурашка wrote: | | It's a matter of perspective. For an Iraqi that considers his country occupied by American forces, they are not liberators, but enemy forces. This makes the new Iraqi army recruits 'collaborators' with the enemy. |
Do you know this for sure? Have you gone to Iraq and spoken to the iraqi people to make an affirmative statement of this sort? Just because the media says something doesn't make it automatically true. What I see, even from the biased media reports, if it was up to the iraqis (the majority of them that is) they would have passed the new constitution real fast. The forces that are interrupting with the process do not come from within Iraq, they are brutal militants, high on cocaine coming from Saudi Arabia, Chechnya and other places. |
They may want the constitution and stable government, but that doesn't mean the American forces are any popular, or American influence in the middle east is appreciated by them. No doubt the elimination of Saddam's regime is a positive side-effect of this operation.
At the same time he has been used by american propaganda though as the archetypical crook to justify the invasion. That smells. Especially if you consider how many of his kind there were, and still are, that were at the best ignored by the west.
(what president signed those documents requesting supplies for Pinochet's concentration camps again?)
| Quote: |
Not really. In the time of King David there were many nations who tried to eliminate Israel. Look what happened. King David eliminated most of them. How? He just kept systematically destroying them. They are no more but Israel is still standing. Real history. (you brought up the 5000 year history, here it is). |
Yes, it's there.. Xela also pointed it out: they're all still there, after all these years. And still fighting each other.. The only difference with David's times, is that they all think they have the same god on their side now. GWB's forces blend in wonderfully :S
--
And the names of the heroes
I's made to memorize
With guns in their hands
And God on their side. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrSpice
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 14 Jul 2003
Posts: 3431
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Xela: What is your solution? How would you fight terrorism? I myself is very sceptical about the effect the Iraq war had on the world terrorism. However, in general one has to be very decisive and never compromise with the terrorists. The way the Britain responded was with resilience and new anti-terrorism laws and that's the way it should be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Celtibero
Just Starting
Joined: 15 Oct 2005
Posts: 5
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Terrorism" is nothing but a form to wage war against an enemy who is much more powerful than you (the Israelis too were "Terrorists" not so long ago, and so have been labelled the South African ANC and many other groups fighting against colonisation in the past). Whether "Terrorism" is legitimate or not I suppose depends on whether you believe it supports a worthy cause or not...
Hideous as they are, I dont think it is fair to say that the goal of Al Quaeda is to convert the world to Islam, nor have this group come into existence out of the blue targeting the americans because they hate democracy ("they hate us because we are free" and all that nonsense). Like it or not this is perceived in much of the world as a colonial war and it is directly related to US policy in the middle east, in particular, the unrelented support for Israel and its heavy handed treatment of the (virtually powerless) palestinians.
Peace,
Celtibero |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vitalsigns
Lounge Wizard
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
Posts: 2784
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2005 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
No comments...
Last edited by vitalsigns on Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:45 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Xela
VIP
Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 781
Location: Shanghai
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Vitalsigns,
You exagerrate the objective of Islamists, and you know it.
Time and again the reasoning has been to get the 'infidel' military out of their territories, and even Al-Qaeda have offered a truce to any nation which remains impartial.
And if you don't believe their words because you claim they are 'terrorists', then allow me to remind you that 'terrorists' in Afghanistan were 'funded'(ie handed money over on a plate with a broad smile) by America.
As was Iraq under Saddam Hussein, not even 20 years ago(in the belief they were the lesser of the two evils).
Not forgetting of course, as was Chechnya during the first conflict(in the belief they were the lesser of the two evils).
Now, what is it they say about two being company..?
To both you and Mr Spice,
How would I suggest an approach to fighting terrorism?
Well, to begin with I would appreciate the fact that this 'war on terror/axis of evils' includes a non-Muslim country(North Korea), so I would immediately drop the 'war on Islamic fundamentalists' moniker, and try thinking a little..
Then, I would take a look at this: http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182
and realize that whatever is going on right now is simply not working.
And then I would begin by showing a little more respect to the Middle-East, before another one of their 'martyrs' comes and blows up my workplace/form of transport/holiday resort etc.
And if they did do this, I wouldn't go and target a whole ethnic group based on a handful of people.
Not unless, of course, I wanted it to happen again.
ps Mr Spice,
Get an idea of what is actually going on in Britain first before speaking. Since the July bombings, Muslims in Britain have a voice that they never had previously, and unfortunately would probably never have had unless such an atrocity had occured.
So comparing the measures we take to that of paranoid factions such as the USA and the Kremlin(which is what I think you were implying), is ridiculous.
Charles Clarke just watered down the new anti-terrorism laws, and if anything, the government is more apprehensive to use these measures at a whim(unlike others), because they know that Muslims in Britain(not Iraq or other) can start creating all sorts of problems over here.
Britain takes a unique approach, and her success is largely contributed to the fact she actually uses her brain.
There lies the difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
