Reply With Quote
Maybe he's just pissed of because we didn't declare fatwa(sp?) on Al Qaeda...... Oh wait
Meh.
You essentially said the same thing 4 times.
I could about how evil the Al Qaeda ideology was all I wanted to, but that wouldn't solve the problem.
Finding the best strategy to fight these guys is too important to leave to pinheads like you who don't understand the underlying fight.
We are not fighting terrorists specifically. We are fighting an idea, and this story shows exactly that.
We put terrorists with this idea in close proximity with people who didn't hold this idea, and give those people a reason to believe that idea.
Sur- ing-prise, the idea spread.
Here is the $64,000 dollar question for you:
What idea are we fighting?
Maybe he's just pissed of because we didn't declare fatwa(sp?) on Al Qaeda...... Oh wait
I will wait for whottt's answer, although I doubt he would give it an honest try.
TelegraphAmerican military intervention in Muslim countries has bred a generation of "angry young men" vulnerable to al-Qa'eda recruitment, a report from a leading security analysis group has said.
The Senlis Council, which has an extensive network of researchers in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia, said frustration with war and unemployment was underpinning the insurgency against western forces.
A survey conducted in Iraq last month found that 46% of young men said they were "angry all the time".
Similar levels of discontent have been detected in Afghanistan, where America has led the Nato coalition for six years and Somalia, which has not recovered from the chaos that led to a brief US intervention in 1991.
...
Condoleezza Rice's special adviser for Iraq, David Satterfield, echoed the Senlis call on Baghdad to start spending the tens of billions of dollars it receives in oil revenue to improve the conditions of its people.
It's funny...
I went into a convenience store today and as I was paying, a homeless man came in...
Said he just heard that because we're burning all the poppies in Afghanistan, the Afghanees can no longer make cocaine and are now joining the Taliban in anger. Said he couldn't believe how ignorant the Bush admin is.
True story...I you not.
He'd fit in well with the libs on this forum.
Too funny. Everyone is wrong.
The reason that they hate us? Because we are foreign. It isn't us specifically that they hate, but foreign intervention. This can all be blamed on the cold war with proxy battles. You know why the people can't rise up against the tyranny? Because at some point in the cold war either the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. armed the government in power to the teeth with the latest military advanced. It's pretty hard to start a revolution when you have sticks and they have AK-47s and T-72s.
Along comes the other faction to arm the people to the teeth. But guess what, some people are pretty bitter about the past and they refuse and become insurgents. The others will be trained and armed and when we pull out they will all be slaughtered for betrayal.
It's pretty hard not to hate the invading forces. If you don't, you end up dead. If the Soviets and the U.S. didn't waste so much time in Korea/Vietnam/Afghanistan/insertCountryHere arming governments, there wouldn't be this mess. Of course you could argue that nuclear war would have broken out without these proxy wars.
Things like trials and arming the Iraqis doesn't matter. They hate us for the past. Sure, some random insurgent group might convert someone because of something today, but that's nothing compared to how many fight us because of their hatred of foreigns arming their tyrannical governments to the teeth, which made their deplorable conditions.
I noticed you didn't answer the question.
What idea are we fighting, genius?
Actually they do matter. Trials end up marking us as different than the repressive regimes that they really hate.
One of the biggest sources of power that the US can wield is simple moral authority. When we do things that undermine this authority, we are basically giving up one of our most important weapons in the fight against this idea.
One of the reasons that terrorists in general ultimately lose virtually every time is precisely because they give up this moral authority. Not because they are killed, because they are simply carriers of an idea, and it is very hard to kill enough people to kill an idea, as dictators around the world know.
I personally don't think unilateral disarmament is a good idea. People like whottt would have us give up one of our most important weapons because of their inability to grasp the underlying reality of what is going on. Their overly simplistic views, as evidenced by the failures of this administration that so obviously share these views, are the reason that we are father behind in the battle than we were on Sep 12, 2001.
Random ...
I'm not going to answer your question. You have a reason you feel...more power to you.
I prefer to stick to arguments of a factual nature...
Instead let me ask you a question that ultimately will prove your own stupidity...
Are there terrorists in Iraq? And by terrorists I mean those deliberately targeting and attempting to intimidate civillians via acts of terrorism, like bombings, suicide bombings, mass killings etc.?
I am not asking you how they got there...I am not asking you if they were there before we went in...
What I am asking is simply, are there terrorists in Iraq?
Yes, or No?
Last edited by whottt; 06-29-2008 at 01:00 PM.
Here's a Zbigniew Brzezinski interview with a French magazine from 1998.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html
woops.The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
Yes, there are.
Ok, then, have it your way.
Is everybody that the US military picks up in sweeps in Iraq guilty of being a terrorist by your definition?
The US military knows what idea we're fighting.
The US intelligence community knows what idea we're fighting.
It is plenty factual to them.
If you can't outline it, then you simply don't understand the conflict, and are no better than a witch doctor trying to fix a broken down truck by "driving the evil spirits out", when all the truck needs is spark plug.
What idea are we fighting?
I'm on neither the Repugnatin whoot side or the other side.
Oh wait, anyone not for the Reich Wing BushOil party is against it?
Okay, on the positive side, is it possible that the Gitmo plan was to put GPS chips in the guys they release, thereby they can track them to Radical Hater hangout spots?
Just askin.
I doubt it.I'm on neither the Repugnatin whoot side or the other side.
Oh wait, anyone not for the Reich Wing BushOil party is against it?
Okay, on the positive side, is it possible that the Gitmo plan was to put GPS chips in the guys they release, thereby they can track them to Radical Hater hangout spots?
Just askin.
The problem with that is that you need a transmitter powerful enough to be tracked from miles away, and small enough so that the goobers don't notice them.
Such a thing is not technically feasible yet, despite what some conspiracy theorists seem to think.
Just curious, ... what was creating them in the 70's, 80's, and 90's?
omg, more opportunities for RandomPropaganda to raise his post count. Here comes 3 to 4 post.
Pollution mostly.
Pretty much the same things creating them now. Despotic governments, the Arab-Israeli conflict, etc.
Today, stupidity has a ready made outlet in the internet so bad ideas are much more "contagious". That is part of our problem.
Thank you. And so you aren't in favor of fighting it...if you voted for Kerry in 04 and are voting for Obama in 08. You aren't in favor of fighting them...you're in favor of giving Iraq to them. It's a simple as that. And if you can give me one example where not fighting it has proven to be effective, please do so...because I promise you, sanctions create more of them than any military action does.
What a horse's ass you are...you have some definition...which I already know I likely don't agree with, regardless of what it is...and I am supposed to guess what you think it is? Or which of the umpteen billion things said and done during hte course of this war, you have singled out as being the ultimate cause?
Just say what you think it is...it's not that I can't think of it, it's that I can think of 50 different things. And I already know I have an entirely different perspective than you...
Because I guarantee you this isn't simply an idea we are fighting.
If I were to narrow it down, for whatever useless reason people feel the need to narrow things down without a good reason to do so, it's not an idea at all, it's an actual condition of life, one that is the cause of just about every conflict in the history of man kind.
And I also assure you that the terrorist movement we fight does not have an infinite pool from which to recruit...it is finite, and it is not invincible.
You throw around words like moral authority and ideliasm and I instantly brand you as a Western Centered idiot...
Becuase I can show you scores of Mid-Eastern leaders that stay in power through nothing other than sheer brutality...with nary a terrorist attack to be seen...inspite of being way more unpopular than the US Government ever will be in the ME, including with the terrorists.
Besides...if you weren't so Western Centered you'd know that morality is a very relative thing....it's not something that can universally defined, and having it, or not, has nothing to do with who wins wars.
Well that's the whole idea behind guerilla warfare now isn't it? That's the whole idea behind terrorism as well.
I mean...if they just got right out in the open and fought, they'd be obliterated now wouldn't they?
Besides...do you have some kind of conclusive evidence that more people are joining the Taliban than the Afghani Army?
Any cause will draw it's share of idiots...
We are fighting "the Al Qaeda ideology" to put it the way the military puts it.
Surely you can sum that up simply in 3 or 4 sentences. It isn't a trick question.
Answer the question.
Is your definition of "terrorist" everybody that the US Army picks up as a "suspect" in its sweeps or not?
Geez is that a letdown...I way way way overestimated you.
Wrong...we aren't fighting an Al Qaeda ideology...not truly. There are 5 or 6 answers I think that would be a truer example of what we are fighting, most notably overpopulation...but an Al Qaeda ideology isn't one of them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions