|
British believe Bush is more dangerous than Kim Jong-Il (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Audigy7
Are the people of Iraq better of now than they were before the invasion? Probably so. But they still have to live in terror. They still live in a country where they could be blown up at any time. They still live in a country where they are unsafe to do as they will. They still live in a country where one can be killed for simply being a member of a certain party or a follower of a certain religious affiliation. |
...but isn't that a referendum on the mentality and menace of fascist Islam as a whole? if this is what can happen in the cradle of Arab civilization when peaceful people can't take a dump without wondering whether their entire families could be vaporized for fear of a religion or a murderous secular dictator then what the hell are other moderate countries willing to do about it? what the hell are you willing to do about it? they can't do anything about it if they don't have the strength and resolve to do it. it's the same with any difficult situation.
the funny thing is you never hear anything from the leaders of the other big Arab players like the Saudis for one or Jordan or Egypt or Kuwait or UAE say too much about the alleged "illegitimacy" of the Iraq war. they, of course, realize the stakes at hand all too well and youd think they would be the first to stand up and say "Bush and his illegitamate war for oil and power" if they stood to lose any of it.
it's usually either the the "enlightened" rabble from free, liberal Western democracies, or the countries or persons that foster Islamic terror and kill enlightened rabble from Western Democracies like Iran and Syria.
| quote: | | Does the fact that their lives been marginally improved justify the use of military force? |
no. the fact that they've now been given the potential to be one of the greatest success stories in the history moderate Arab democracy, maybe all democracies justifies the use of military force. thats nothing new given the entire last century of new democracies. |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
...but isn't that a referendum on the mentality and menace of fascist Islam as a whole? if this is what can happen in the cradle of Arab civilization when peaceful people can't take a dump without wondering whether their entire families could be vaporized for fear of a religion or a murderous secular dictator then what the hell are other moderate countries willing to do about it? what the hell are you willing to do about it? |
+1
And somehow, its the US's fault. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
im not arguing iraq here. but whilst we're here, there was nothing wrong with the invasion of afghanistan. completely justified.
im saying that even if someone was conducting a legitimate war, they are, by default, a threat to "peace". |
Actually there was. If any country should have been bombed the out of, it should have been Saudia Araba & Pakistan (I'm guessing you know where the alleged hijackers were from and ISI's funding/training of al-Q, and Mohammad Atta's million dollar, or whatever sum it was, wire transfer from head of ISI, under CIA orders). And the tactics, technology, and means used by the modern states in modern warfare causes far too many civilian causalties to say the least, if not utter disregard for civilian casualties and damage to infrastructure. Cowards bomb civilian/public infrastructre in order to hurt the enemy, not people with ethics, morals, and guts. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by LazFX
+1
And somehow, its the US's fault. |
You really should have said that, since it is. CIA funding & training of Taliban, US support for Saudia Arabia (which translates to supporting Wahabis, the ing nuttiest extremest out there), US installing and arming Sadaam etc. makes it rather obvious who's responsible. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
link |
What exactly are you trying to prove? That Sadaam was a horrible evil dictator (which he was) so the US is somehow doing the Iraqis a favour now? Don't forget who brought him into power and gave him the arms and training that allowed him to commit his heinous crimes in the first place. And have you forgotton about the te uprising against Sadaam that was crushed with help from the US? The Shias would have taken him out if the US wasn't interested in keeping him there. |
|
|
| Lilith |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
You really should have said that, since it is. CIA funding & training of Taliban |
Funding for the Afgan resistance ceased in 1989 when the Soviets cleared out, the Taliban came about around 1993 or so, if you can prove otherwise I'm interested in seeing unbiased documentation.
Not really sticking up for the US, they have backed people like you said, which came around and bit them on the bum on a few occassions.
But thats politics and people, they tend too do that. |
|
|
| _Ocean_Drive_ |
| quote: | Originally posted by HardTranceProd
SOURCE:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1938434,00.html
Also, among America's other allies and neighbors:
- Only 1 in 4 Israelis thinks Bush has the made world "safer"
- The majority of Canadians and Mexicans think he has made the world more dangerous |
I'm another Brit who thinks Bush is more dangerous than KJI. |
|
|
| jonSun |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lilith
Funding for the Afgan resistance ceased in 1989 when the Soviets cleared out, the Taliban came about around 1993 or so, if you can prove otherwise I'm interested in seeing unbiased documentation.
Not really sticking up for the US, they have backed people like you said, which came around and bit them on the bum on a few occassions.
But thats politics and people, they tend too do that. |
I thought the U.S. gave the Taliban like 20 million in 2001. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
no. the fact that they've now been given the potential to be one of the greatest success stories in the history moderate Arab democracy, maybe all democracies justifies the use of military force. thats nothing new given the entire last century of new democracies. |
They would have been given that potential if the current administration had not completely ed up the entire operation. They had one goal in mind, and that was to go to war, and they didn't give a rats ass about the aftermath. They thought the Iraqis would do it themselves, that after decades of living under a totalitarian regime they would just pop up as supporters of a democratic government. They believe they owe nothing to the Iraqis, since they have given them "freedom".
The cause to free Iraq and make it a forward thinking nation in the ME is a noble one, but you're dellusional if you think that is the goal of the people who have gotten us into this mess. |
|
|
| NebulousQ |
| quote: | Originally posted by HardTranceProd
SOURCE:
|
Lol, I love Bush's picture. I wonder how they got some one who usually looks like a bumbling country boy to look some what sinsister. |
|
|
| star-traveller |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
link
SADDAM Hussein's conviction for the massacre of 148 Shiites in 1982 in the Iraqi village of Dujail was the first in an expected series of such trials. It was also only one small episode from the former Iraqi tyrant's blood-soaked years.
...
|
That by no means justify the war in Iraq. Everybody knows that US and Britain were supporting Sadam's regime in the past, I bet they knew at that time that he is not the holiest man on earth.
The UN is responsible to take any measurements against such regimes.
This war was just the US invasion to the Iraq with one goal to conquer this land. It's quite the same as A.Hitler did invading Europe and Russia in during WW2. |
|
|
| star-traveller |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
They would have been given that potential if the current administration had not completely ed up the entire operation. They had one goal in mind, and that was to go to war, and they didn't give a rats ass about the aftermath. They thought the Iraqis would do it themselves, that after decades of living under a totalitarian regime they would just pop up as supporters of a democratic government. They believe they owe nothing to the Iraqis, since they have given them "freedom".
The cause to free Iraq and make it a forward thinking nation in the ME is a noble one, but you're dellusional if you think that is the goal of the people who have gotten us into this mess. |
What is the ing criteria of forward thinking nation ???
What would if some crazy will wake up tomorrow realizing that his own ideology is the right one and invade the US or Europe because he thinks he is freeing up people from the democracy ??
Who gave you the right to decide for other people ? Did Iraqis vote for the democracy ? They didn't even know what is that, they are living with a completely different life.
It reminds me all these church sayings, if you don't pray if will be in hell, if you do that you will be in hell if you do that you will be punished.
Who decides what is the right or wrong ? |
|
|
|
|
