<p>
So its a damn good thing we captured bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri.</p>
<p>Bedhead - I don’t label you an appeaser, but nevertheless think you are wholly wrong in your analysis, and in trying to avoid “simple” answers, have overly complicated the situation. Just as an illustration, I’d make two alternative “modest proposals” to fight terrorism - one at each end of the spectrum. On the one side, we abandon Israel, cut off aid to Israel, remove all our forces from the middle east, declare a caliphate from sea to shining sea, put our women in burkas, remove them from our schools, ban MTV and pray to Mecca five times daily. The terror war would end. On the other end of the spectrum, we make it known that when any terrorist attack occurs, be it a suicide bomber or any other mode of attack, we level the home of the attacker and the homes of all his relatives and arrest and incarcerate all his relatives, for life. Also an effective approach, I think, but who know for sure. We won’t do the former, because we relish our freedom; we won’t do the latter, because we are a civilized people. Nothing in the middle will be effective. Because whether or not we created the new cadre of terrorists in Iraq is ultimately irrelevant. America was attakced by terrorists, including multiple times on American soil, before we invaded Iraq. And these attackers, of the Muhammad Atta brand, or the British medical brand, will be with us until we roll out the prayer mats. I don’t blame rape victims for dressing provocativley, or mugging victims for walking down the wrong streets - I blame the criminals. The U.S. and the British are not responsible for the acts of madmen terrorists.</p>
<p>Bottom line is this is Bush and gangs’ war, what weapons of mess destruction?? These guys started it and very soon they will all be safely walking away from this mess, in the mean time they just have to keep up with the same drum beat while millions of Iraqis suffer along with tens and thousands of young American.</p>
<p>Before Bush started the war, I the average Joe even read the analysis of the aftermess of the war, Bush and gangs must read them too and they still started the war!!!</p>
<p>“America was attakced by terrorists, including multiple times on American soil, before we invaded Iraq.”</p>
<p>America was attacked by NO ONE from Iraq. (We were attacked by folks from Indiana, but I don’t think we laid waste to it…yet.)</p>
<p>
When did France, Germany, Morocco, Jordan, Egypt, Indonesia, Bangladesh, etc., etc. “occupy” “their” lands. Thanks for the lecture on “knowing your enemy” but I think you should take a lesson yourself. Here’s a start:
<a href=“บาคาร่า เว็บคาสิโนออนไลน์ เชื่อถือได้ มั่นคงทางการเงิน จ่ายเงินรางวัลเต็ม”>บาคาร่า เว็บคาสิโนออนไลน์ เชื่อถือได้ มั่นคงทางการเงิน จ่ายเงินรางวัลเต็ม;
Be sure to take a look at the pictures very closely and then try to figure out what these people did to incur the wrath of al Qaida. I’m sure it must have been something very egregious.</p>
<p>
Quite the contrary - I am not implying that in the least. I am saying the opposite - Islam is not a big wall of people amassed against us. It is a relatively small number of extremists who have responded to the siren call of jihad. They have proven by their background (of at least those who have attacked us and other Western targets) that they are NOT the disenfranchised, but rather the middle and upper class - doctors, engineers, millionaires. Once again - you need to follow your own advice and know your enemy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>this is like bad satire</p>
<p>
He was an engineer/urban planner living in Hamburg, Germany. He was the son of an Egyptian attorney. Not exactly part of the oppressed masses.</p>
<p>Exactly. And neither are the highly professional, pro-Western, secular Iraqi professionals and their families driven from their homes as a result of U.S. policy. The poor masses don’t produce terrorists, generally speaking. And, previously, Iraq didn’t produce any either. </p>
<p>Which is why U.S. policy and its figurehead have become such successful recruiting aids for Al-Qaeda. The vast majority of Iraqis - Shia, Sunni, and Kurd, rich and poor, old and young, men and women, religious and secular - all now agree that, after experiencing Americans and our good deeds, it is a good thing to kill us. Not surprising then when some few decide to act upon it.</p>
<p>George Bush is the best friend Osama Bin Laden ever had.</p>
<p>“America was attacked by NO ONE from Iraq. (We were attacked by folks from Indiana, but I don’t think we laid waste to it…yet.)”
Boy, way to miss the point. I am absolutely no defender of the war in Iraq. My point was, and remains, that the Islamofascist terrorists’ designs on the West pre-date Iraq and are unrelated to it. I am deeply troubled by the failure of many Americans to understand that. Or to yield to political correctness and refuse to acknowledge it. Lenin coined the term “Useful Idiots” and I would commend a July 2006 article in American Thinker by Amil Imani, which brings that term to the current world situation. An excerpt:
"It is the Useful Idiot who sanitizes Islam and misguides the populace by saying that the ‘real Islam’ constitutes the main body of the religion; and, that this main body is non—political and moderate. </p>
<p>Regrettably, a large segment of the population goes along with these nonsensical euphemisms depicting Islam because it prefers to believe them. It is less threatening to believe that only a hijacked small segment of Islam is radical or politically driven and that the main body of Islam is indeed moderate and non—political.</p>
<p>But Islam is political to the core. In Islam the mosque and state are one and the same—the mosque is the state. This arrangement goes back to the days of Muhammad himself. Islam is also radical in the extreme. Even the ‘moderate’ Islam is radical in its beliefs as well as its deeds. Muslims believe that all non—Muslims, bar none, are hellfire bound and well—deserve being maltreated compared to believers.</p>
<p>No radical barbaric act of depravity is unthinkable for Muslims in dealing with others. They have destroyed precious statues of Buddha, leveled sacred monuments of other religions, and bulldozed the cemeteries of non—Muslims—a few examples of their utter extreme contempt toward others.</p>
<p>Muslims are radical even in their intrafaith dealings. Various sects and sub—sects pronounce other sects and sub—sects as heretics worthy of death; women are treated as chattel, deprived of many rights; hands are chopped for stealing even a loaf of bread; sexual violation is punished by stoning, and much much more. These are standard day—to—day ways of the mainstream ‘moderate’ Muslims living under the stone—age laws of Sharia. </p>
<p>The lesson is clear. [comment edited out - Mod JEM]<br>
I choose to not be complicit in my own demise.</p>
<p>Jux - “this is like bad satire”. Did my referring to it as a “modest proposal” give it away? Even at Cornell, someone must have read that work.</p>
<p>“Boy, way to miss the point.”</p>
<p>I think you are the one missing the point. $700,000,000 and growing; 180,000 U.S. troops, tens of thousands of casualties, all aimed at preventing the growth of “terrorism” where there wasn’t any to begin with. </p>
<p>If you were given $700,000,000 plus, and 180,000 U.S. troops, and were told there was likely to be more coming, and then told to fight “Islamofascism” (whatever that is), I would frankly trust you to do a better job that the current Prez and his lying group of cronies. </p>
<p>Would you start your fight against “Islamofascism” by invading the largest secular state in the region? (You might as well invade Indiana - it would be cheaper, and you might even have a little bit left over for Florida - where the Islamofascist plane crashers were trained - or for renditioning.)</p>
<p>Not by what they say, but by what they DO, is there a lot of evidence that the Adminstration really believes the “Islamofascism” story at all? In Pakistan, we are about three bullets away from an IslamoNuke. Hear any noise about Pakistan’s nuclear stockpiles lately? When Musharraf gets shot, do you think the incompetents in charge of the military are prepared to invade? :eek:</p>
<p>Mini - I will try one last time, but even my hard head starts to hurt beating it against so thick a wall. I agree completely that the war in Iraq was a mistake. I do not defend it. Period. But Islamic terrorism existed before Iraq was invaded and would exist if Iraq had never been invaded. Bush’s tying of Iraq to 9/11 was untrue; Mini’s tying of the Iraq invasion to world terrorism is equally untrue. Life’s too short to beat this drum any more. Further sayeth I naught.</p>
<p>
Hmmm … I’d say an attempted assassination of a former president and an attempted bombing of American-owned Radio Free Europe in Prague proves malevolent intent towards the US.</p>
<p>“Mini’s tying of the Iraq invasion to world terrorism is equally untrue.”</p>
<p>It is not I, thank you, but our Fearless One who tied the Iraqi invasion to world terrorism, and I think as a result of his actions, he is being proven to be correct.</p>
<p>Best recruiting poster they ever had. They don’t even have to say anything, or translate anything into any language. Just hold up his picture.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So what will we do? I agree we won’t embark on either of these extremes. What I don’t get is people who, in support of democractic institution in these lands, imply that we should move toward the latter. Democracy requires some modicum of what you call civilization to work well. On the other hand, you rhetorical questions and other postings suggest that you think we should be less “civilized” and start the reign of terror. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ah: let’s just give up because all these people want to convert us all to Islam. That’s your plan?</p>
<p>And by the way, the people in a lot of these countries that want nothing more than the power to work towards a secure living for their loved ones aren’t really interested in seeing you and I praying in the direction of Mecca. Though it’s true there are jihadists that want to subjugate these people to their grand designs for Islamic supremacy. The challenge for us is to not drive people who want their lives into alliance with the fringe that wants the new Caliphate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, they aren’t, and that’s something you imputed, not something I implied. But if you are going to be sensible about an approach to any problem, you are better off if you understand what you are up against. It’s really not all that complicated what I wrote. Quite simply, we have to consider the benefits of our activities in that region according to a calculus of well-considered costs and benefits. For the reasons I have stated, according to this calculus, Iraq was a colossal mistake. Apparently on that score we agree. Understanding does not, as you imply, indicate justification.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is this really irrelevant? Wow, are you absolutely careless of your fellow Americans? I would think you’d respect the sacrifice that some Americans have had to make in terms of lives and most others will make in terms of dollars that for us to have a discussion about whether we are investing our efforts, lives, and fortunes into a misadventure that is begetting us more enemies or whether it will actually produce a good outcome for us. For you, these are just details apparently.</p>
<p>By the way, a US extended in a war where soldiers are kept in the war zone for a longer period than in any other modern war will certainly leave us too extended to engage in those things that you are advocating that we are too civilized (or you would say politically correct) to induldge in.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You say this now.</p>
<p>But you said this a post ago:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The notion in your former post is that terrorists are fundamentally motivated by a basic Islamic fundamentalist desire to subjugate Islam. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The 9/11 attackers were largely Saudi and they all had deep religious training, in spite of not being particularly poor. That doesn’t equate them with the Iraqi and Egyptian middle classes. The point is don’t take people who are busy trying to live their lives, strip them of their livelihood, and set them adrift in an environment where people are being recruited to an anti-West jihad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>War’s a b****. I am sure the dead bodies that we leave behind don’t look to our enemies as part of a very noble cause, no matter what we say. Not even in cases when are soldiers have gotten so stressed out from being on the ground under threat of IEDs for more than a year that they get trigger happy against some civilians. </p>
<p>Are you trying to prove to us what we’ve already experienced in our own country that Al Qaeda is full of some butchering freaks? What’s the epiphany here?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Certainly not from you. Uh, Indonesia. Gee, didn’t they attack places where Westerners were gathering? Uh, allies of ours and the Brits. Etc. etc.</p>
<p>Don’t make the people that do these things heroes? Be smart. That’s the point.</p>
<p>Bush and gangs made the war, now how to correct it??</p>
<p>Make friends with Iran and Syria, withdraw from Iraq, let Iran have Iraq, make Kurds independent. Dangle carrots in front of Iran make sure they don’t do stupid things to Israel.</p>
<p>Atomic Jeannie has been out of the bottle long ago, so let Iran have bomb, it’s not a big deal, Pakistan and N. Korea has it right?? Make sure we sleep tight with Iran and make them our partners in crime. Now, let see if we can convince hardline conservatives here in US follow this plan??</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I guess we better attack China. After all, on Bush’s watch, they shot down one of our planes. For instance.</p>
<p>What you are saying was not the pretext for war, and I think you aren’t really so dense that you don’t actually know that. But I am beginning to wonder.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>no, it was just monumentally stupid</p>
<p>most bad satire is overly hyperbolic – just like what you wrote, only you were serious</p>
<p>PS:</p>
<p>“even at cornell”</p>
<p>zing</p>
<p>Bedhead, </p>
<p>I have said nothing that is contradictory nor the implies “that Islam is one big wall of people amassed against us”. How you get that from … “The bottom line is that there will always be an excuse for terrorists to attack us and all of the countries of the world that hold to a view that is non-fundamentalist Islamic.” … is beyond me. I am saying that the terrorists even attack other Muslim countries because they are not “Muslim enough”. It has nothing to do with Islam being a “wall of people amassed against us”. What is amassed against us is the fundamentalist minority of Islam. Get it?</p>
<p>
Oh please!!! The victims here included children that were beheaded!! Are you now equating what the US soldiers do to beheading children? There have been many attacks that have targeted children and school teachers. Please don’t tell me that you have fallen so far over the edge as to say that there is a moral equivalency between targeting al Qaeda (which is what we do) and purposely slaughtering in the most inhuman way women and children (which is what al Qaeda does)? This is what you would leave the country of Iraq to if you had your way.</p>
<p>
Of course not - but to paint Saddam as some saintly leader that was busy watching kids flying kites and minding his own business until big bad Bush attacked him, as mini implies, is ludicrous. There was a reason why, that even after years of war and hardship, the Iraqi people found the conditions after the statue of Saddam fell to be better than what they were when Saddam was in power.</p>