Yeah, you're going to have to give us a link to that one.
Can you please provide a link, I'm very curious...curious to know why we'd assassinate our own operative.
I always thought the purpose of AQ was to restore the Caliphate and spread it all over the world, as it is Western influence that is destroying the fabric of Muslim society. It's sort of how we fight for "freedom," AQ fights for "religious rule."
Also, they are probably jealous our women shave their pubic hair into sexy designs while their women let that get all forested. That is all.
All I see here is simple regurgitation here of Fox "News" talking points, and no attempt to actually prove the relationship as asked.
Palestinian suicide bombers were not Al Qaeda. Here are your ticket for the Fail Boat, if you hurry you can catch it.
Here is a good quiz question for you... are the mullahs in Iran Wahabbists as well?
I have no doubt that Iraq and AQ had some sympathies for each others' causes, but neither really trusted the other farther than they could throw them.
They only source I could google on this was some unsubstantiated/unsourced blog posts in conservative websites. Hardly a convincing level of proof.
Frankly this begins to smell like the conservative version of a 9-11 conspiracy theory.
I fully doubt they had sympathies for each causes considering OBL trained a group that was working against Iraq inside of Iraq. They only stopped helping them at the request of Sudan although they still funded the group against the Kurds in the north. OBL also spoke out against Sadaam many times.
I meant more along the lines of both Saddam and AQ being mostly "Anti-American".
They were vaguely forced into a "enemy of my enemy" relationship, but the AQ ideology dispises dictators like Saddam, and Saddam dispised them.
As long as Israel is safe and sound, it's a struggle worth struggling for.
They hate us because they are phobic, misogynic and zenophobic...
IOW, they hate us because of our liberalism...read some of Usama and clan's speeches sometimes, they talk about sexuality, having no gods and no morals.
That's why it's tremendously ironic the way the war split went in terms of who supported it and who didn't...if there is a segment of American population they want to behead and slaughter, it's our s, s and atheists..I mean , look at what happens to those people in that part of the world. Want a clip to the 16 year old s being hung in Iran?
Probably aren't too crazy about our decadent hollywood celbrities either...you know, the guys that understand their side of things.
Yet those are the Americans trying to suck them off and be nice to them, which kind of proves their point about why they don't want a segment of the population like that among their numbers....even more to the point when it was pretty much the conservatives attempting to fight for liberalism in that region of the world all the while having to deal with American liberals biting their ankles., and screaming we're the problem, we're the problem, every step of the battle....
I think the liberal battle cry was, death to the Republicans, it's not our problem, let's gtfo, they're savages...etc.
That's why they hate us....because they don't want their society being like that.
IOW they really do hate our freedom, Much like most oppressive regimes do.
As for the leaders' motivation, it's no so much hate as it is power. The leaders look and see them getting their asses kicked by Israel and basically being reduced to third 3rd world inspite of being in the most minerally wealthy region of the entire planet and those with a knowledge of history know that during the time of the Ottoman Empire it was the peak of Muslim civilization and they want to return to that. The return of the Ottoman Empire and a powerful Muslim Superpower able to stand up to the Western and Eastern world powers...and get the West the out of their region of the world.
Last edited by whottt; 09-29-2009 at 12:18 AM.
Like James K. Polk? Been there done that....
It's not really that hard to figure out why they hate us...
" phobic, misogynic and zenophobic"
red-staters and Repugs??
It's just a good thing all those islamic countries are willing to take in Palestinian refugees...
Are you being facetious?
they want more religion in govt and hate gay people...where have I heard that platform before?
Why does Al Qaeda hate us?
I think the question should be broader, to include all Islamic jihadists.
They're ing crazy. We're talking about the kind of people that want to kill over a cartoon of Mohammed. It's really not too hard to be on their list. And we support Israel and share their Judeo-Christian values.
We weren't going to assassinate our own operative. The Northern Resistance in Afghanistan was going to assassinate OBL. The CIA, thru Clinton, told them not to.Can you please provide a link, I'm very curious...curious to know why we'd assassinate our own operative.
I always thought the purpose of AQ was to restore the Caliphate and spread it all over the world, as it is Western influence that is destroying the fabric of Muslim society. It's sort of how we fight for "freedom," AQ fights for "religious rule."
Also, they are probably jealous our women shave their pubic hair into sexy designs while their women let that get all forested. That is all.
Religious rule?So AQ killing, suppressing, raping in the name of their religion is the same as America fighting to give people to live in a free democratic society? How are they similiar?
Al-Qaeda equals Republicans. People protesting taxes equal mobsters. You disagree with healthcare equals racist. No wonder Obama approval ratings keep going down. The media was wrong about Obama being smart. He keeps people like Boutons on his payroll.
We need to hook them up with XBoxes. I know if I was living in a desert, with no entertainment and no fast food, I'd probably start to get the urge to kill someone.
It's similar. Both amount to imposing one's beliefs on others, violently and unbidden. OBL wrecked two skyscapers. We wrecked an entire country that had nothing to do with it.
Which is worse?
So Winehouse. That is far reaching, and you even know that. We wrecked a country? Iraq? Afghanistan? Do you really think that either of those countries were better off before us? Both countries were ruled by a few(Taliban) or one's(Saddam's) beliefs. Saddam killed over a million of his countrymen. I don't know the numbers of Taliban and AQ killing Afghan's but I am almost certain to be higher than American's. These two also don't police their own. America does. No other country, besides England, has held such a high standard for it's own military towards the enemie's civilians. America set up an elected group of their peers. We let their own countrymen create their own laws, based on their culture. Beside the idea of democracy, we did not ins ute anything from our culture. ""Over the years, the United States has sent many of its fine young men and women into great peril to fight for freedom beyond our borders. The only amount of land we have ever asked for in return is enough to bury those that did not return." " -Colin Powell
You are simplifying and forgetting so much more of OBL's mayhem.
Finally, look at our track record. We instilled our democracy on S. Korea, Japan, Germany, the Phillipines, etc. and are they not better off?
Between 15-30000 French civilians were killed in the Normandy campaign in WW2. We 'wrecked' that country trying to free it and is it not better off?
Spurs,
It's not a matter of 'better off' or not.
Do you think that if Europeans took over our country, in order to give us free healthcare, we'd appreciate it?
Better is a relative term. Many of the occupants of the nation think their nation is better than ours, after all.
I agree that the United States has one of the better forms of government out there, but (I believe) Winehole is also questioning our moral authority to go into other countries and forcibly change their government for the better.
Look at it this way: Is it moral to take money from a millionaire to support poorer people? Some people will argue it is; others argue it isn't, and there are legitimate viewpoints on both sides.
Yeah I see yours and whinehouse's point a represenative democracy and a ecclisastic tyrany are moraly relative.
Actually, you obviously missed the whole point.
Tell me Micca, what makes it MORAL to invade another country and change their government through force?
Are you a utilitarianist?
Every waterway in the world is able to be used, for free, because the US protects it. We do this, because our country believes in freedoms. Also we were attacked by these two countries- Iraq and Afghanistan. Now if We attacked England and they went to war and invaded and then won, then they could make us have free healthcare. That is what is so great about America. We can invade, take and conquer any country in the world and we don't. If we do and win, the outcome has always been a more beneficial, healthier, and more successful society.We were attacked by these two countries. It would be immoral for our govt. to not protect us.
Better is a relative term. Many of the occupants of the nation think their nation is better than ours, after all.
I agree that the United States has one of the better forms of government out there, but (I believe) Winehole is also questioning our moral authority to go into other countries and forcibly change their government for the better.
I think it is immoral to take from those who earn and give to those who want. Also it is immoral because "B and C voting that A has to support D" -M. Friedman.Look at it this way: Is it moral to take money from a millionaire to support poorer people? Some people will argue it is; others argue it isn't, and there are legitimate viewpoints on both sides.
I think the difference with govt and private citizens and govt and a foreign govt. is our govt. should be keeping us safe.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote