|
neue regel
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: May 15, 2008, 12:51:46 PM » |
|
Nice of you to admit that we are far from guiltless. Over one hundred years of internationalism has made us enemies across the globe. Talking over killing makes sense to me. We absolutely have done things that our 'leaders' deemed in our national interest. Then again, yea without sin... Does anyone here know why OBL turned his sites on the US? Was it OUR fault he came after us? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-123
Posts: 9,152
|
|
« Reply #16 on: May 15, 2008, 01:10:45 PM » |
|
Nice of you to admit that we are far from guiltless. Over one hundred years of internationalism has made us enemies across the globe. Talking over killing makes sense to me. We absolutely have done things that our 'leaders' deemed in our national interest. Then again, yea without sin... Does anyone here know why OBL turned his sites on the US? Was it OUR fault he came after us? We cynically supported both Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein at one time-in essence building them up. Sort of like Stalin and lend-lease. This country should return to the principals laid forth in George Washington's Farewell Address. OswaldTheOsprey |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2008, 01:15:06 PM » |
|
We cynically supported both Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein at one time-in essence building them up. Sort of like Stalin and lend-lease. This country should return to the principals laid forth in George Washington's Farewell Address. That certainly may be true just as Iran backing the insurgents in Iraq could bite them, too, but there is a very specific reason OBL turned. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-123
Posts: 9,152
|
|
« Reply #18 on: May 15, 2008, 01:30:07 PM » |
|
We cynically supported both Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein at one time-in essence building them up. Sort of like Stalin and lend-lease. This country should return to the principals laid forth in George Washington's Farewell Address. That certainly may be true just as Iran backing the insurgents in Iraq could bite them, too, but there is a very specific reason OBL turned. Then perhaps we should not be trying to run the world. OswaldTheOsprey |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|
Irwin
|
|
« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2008, 02:13:32 PM » |
|
And what has macho posing and bomb throwing accomplished? Hmmm? Terrorism has increased every year since the disaster of this invasion. http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/30/terror.report/index.htmlEven our friends hate us. Osama is nowhere to be found. The war created a new playground for terrorists. In the world of bonehead Bush, there is a fake choice between bombing and talking. How about using ALLL the tools we have, talk when you can and bomb when you need to. Duh. Yeah, by the by, the successes of American troops in Iraq in the last year? It is mostly due to talking, not shooting. This means often talking with the guy shooting at you yesterday. But it works. Take a look. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1572796,00.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Cryptomaniac
Full Member
Karma: +31/-5
Posts: 176
|
|
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2008, 02:47:48 PM » |
|
I think neue is right, this was a jab at Jimmy Carter. I don't think Obama was meant as the target here, maybe I am wrong.
What Bush says isn't completely ridiculous in terms of terrorist groups, but it isn't particularly useful when dealing with nations. I don't have a problem with the US policy not to negotiate with terrorist groups. I don't want to negotiate with Al Qaeda and I don't think we ever should. Hezbollah and Hamas in my opinion fall into the same category.
The problem is when you use that logic to dismiss negotiations with other nations. I am well aware that Iran is far from innocent and they should be made to feel consequences for sponsoring terrorism. However, Iranian leaders in my mind have other things to worry about, like running a nation and being held accountable by the people. This gives us leverage in a negotiation and also makes them more likely to respond favorably. We negotiated with the Soviets, and they were a far greater threat than the Iranians. They were also indirectly responsible for FAR more American deaths than Iran.
It seems to me like Obama has the right idea in regards to Iran. At some point, a line has to be drawn. I am OK with negotiations with Iran, but that does not mean that I would be in favor of negotiations with Hamas, Hezbollah, or Al Qaeda (just to name a few).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #21 on: May 16, 2008, 04:24:50 AM » |
|
Then perhaps we should not be trying to run the world. Unfortunately, someone has to try keep order. Who else is going to to it...the UN? We are the first nation everyone calls when they need help. We are like the parent that the kid wants around only when they need something. Terrorism has increased every year since the disaster of this invasion. 9/11 happened before we went into Iraq. I'm surprised no one has taken up the question of WHY OBL turned his sites on the US. It helps to know history. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #22 on: May 16, 2008, 08:45:05 AM » |
|
These are people who were victims of international interference, international restructuring and super power pissing contests. Some, perhaps. Others have bought into the radical version of Islam. Yeah, it's so surprising to see people we KNOW will overreact... actually overreact... /sarcasm Maybe if we spent some time analysing WHY they do these things we can get a better understanding of what we could do to FIX them. That would make us to blame for THEIR actions. I don't subscribe to that. We are not completely guiltless, I will admit. We ARE to blame. And Britain and the other international powers that come in and compete for oil. And of course, there's Israel, a country everyone else just decided to invent - well, except the people around Israel, anyway. And then there's Afganistan, Iraq and our "war on terror"... Why are we surprised that they're pissed? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
freethinker
|
|
« Reply #23 on: May 16, 2008, 08:56:15 AM » |
|
I'm surprised no one has taken up the question of WHY OBL turned his sites on the US. It helps to know history. US bases in Saudi Arabia |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
NO Third Term For Bush
|
|
|
|
Irwin
|
|
« Reply #24 on: May 16, 2008, 09:22:25 AM » |
|
Then perhaps we should not be trying to run the world. Unfortunately, someone has to try keep order. Who else is going to to it...the UN? We are the first nation everyone calls when they need help. We are like the parent that the kid wants around only when they need something. Terrorism has increased every year since the disaster of this invasion. 9/11 happened before we went into Iraq. I'm surprised no one has taken up the question of WHY OBL turned his sites on the US. It helps to know history. "A classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) contends that the war in Iraq has increased Islamic radicalism, and has made the terror threat around the world worse."http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0925/dailyUpdate.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #25 on: May 16, 2008, 09:40:37 AM » |
|
We ARE to blame. And Britain and the other international powers that come in and compete for oil. And of course, there's Israel, a country everyone else just decided to invent - well, except the people around Israel, anyway.
And then there's Afganistan, Iraq and our "war on terror"...
Why are we surprised that they're pissed?
Competing for oil is not the reason. If we've done anything, it is price manipulation, but that's not the reason either. Afganistan, Iraq and our "war on terror" are not it. US bases in Saudi Arabia This is very, very close but not the gensis. OBL wanted to boot Saddam out of Kuwait himself. Instead, Kuwait turned to us, instead. US troops move in and get the job done with great ease. Boots on the ground on arab soil was the reason OBL turned against us. THAT was the sin we created. He has hit us every since. I'm reading a book right now that has the genesis of all radical islam going back to 1943. An incredible read and one I look forward to finishing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Irwin
|
|
« Reply #26 on: May 16, 2008, 09:50:46 AM » |
|
We ARE to blame. And Britain and the other international powers that come in and compete for oil. And of course, there's Israel, a country everyone else just decided to invent - well, except the people around Israel, anyway.
And then there's Afganistan, Iraq and our "war on terror"...
Why are we surprised that they're pissed?
Competing for oil is not the reason. If we've done anything, it is price manipulation, but that's not the reason either. Afganistan, Iraq and our "war on terror" are not it. US bases in Saudi Arabia This is very, very close but not the gensis. OBL wanted to boot Saddam out of Kuwait himself. Instead, Kuwait turned to us, instead. US troops move in and get the job done with great ease. Boots on the ground on arab soil was the reason OBL turned against us. THAT was the sin we created. He has hit us every since. I'm reading a book right now that has the genesis of all radical islam going back to 1943. An incredible read and one I look forward to finishing. Right. That was Osama's reasoning. First, which shows an Osama/Saddam alliance as ridiculous: Osama hated him as a secularist. Hopefully that book pointed out how many of Iraq's fundamentalists were put to death by Saddam. Now, as far as oil. There would have been no interest in Kuwait or stationing troops in Saudi, without oil. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +197/-195
Posts: 3,662
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #27 on: May 16, 2008, 09:54:38 AM » |
|
Competing for oil is not the reason. If we've done anything, it is price manipulation, but that's not the reason either. Afganistan, Iraq and our "war on terror" are not it. There is no SINGLE reason. There are a multitude of mistakes made by us and them - like some perpetual avalanche. And the "War on Terror" isn't doing anything to curb it. In fact, it's just making it worse. US bases in Saudi Arabia This is very, very close but not the gensis. OBL wanted to boot Saddam out of Kuwait himself. Instead, Kuwait turned to us, instead. US troops move in and get the job done with great ease. Boots on the ground on arab soil was the reason OBL turned against us. THAT was the sin we created. He has hit us every since. I'm reading a book right now that has the genesis of all radical islam going back to 1943. An incredible read and one I look forward to finishing. What's the title? Sounds intresting? I have about 2 more books I need to read myself, but next time I'm at Borders I might pick it up. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #28 on: May 16, 2008, 09:57:13 AM » |
|
There would have been no interest in Kuwait or stationing troops in Saudi, without oil. This is true. Securing open pipes of oil is in the national security interests of the US. That will not change with the next president or likely the one after. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Irwin
|
|
« Reply #29 on: May 16, 2008, 10:10:38 AM » |
|
There would have been no interest in Kuwait or stationing troops in Saudi, without oil. This is true. Securing open pipes of oil is in the national security interests of the US. That will not change with the next president or likely the one after. So to say that our mideast policy is not about oil is simply false. In 1954, the US helped depose a popular elected leader in Iran, Mossadeq. Why? He was going to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian oil company, (the original BP). The company charter was drawn up in the days of colonialism and gave almost all profits to Britain. After the Coup, the Shah was installed. His legacy was very brutal and OUR man was the most hated of Iran. So, we have the hostage crisis, which gives us Afghanistan, Osama, Saddam as a friend, Saddam as an enemy, the Iran/Iraq war, Kuwait, Americans protecting Saudi and we haven't even got to Israel yet. Oh, and yeah, we are going to have to ween ourselves off the stuff, no matter what president comes to office. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
