It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I Once Dreamed of Liberty (Op/Ed)

page: 12
22
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2006 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
But free speech also allows for people to disagree with each other, and this does not mean "oppresion" by any means. What is not alright is the call by some to "strike out", like another member just mentioned in here...to apparently commit any acts of violence. I have seen with my own eyes how protestors resort to throwing things, destroying property etc and then cry that they are in a dictatorship because they are arrested after their displays of violence....


This all began well before Dubya was put on the throne in the coup of 2000. The failed Drug War was the impetus for the beginning of serious encroachments on our personal freedoms. This "war" provided the justification for extension of police powers and an excuse to militarize local police nationally through SWAT and other aggressive and unmarked thugs with a hidden badge. Too many innocent people have died in their own homes thanks to this idiotic enterprise.

And just like the CIA's own involvement in bringing vast quantities of coc aine and other drugs into the USA for their own purposes (funding black op's for one), the government is invested also in their new "War on Terrorism", meaning those in control in the govt. have a need to perpetuate the myth of this debacle for their own twisted purposes.

By ensuring a ready and steady supply of blow, the CIA provides further excuses to perpetuate the failed Drug War. With all this supply how can we possibly stop the war? Similarly, by creating or allowing the rise of terrorism/terrorist type actions on a large scale, the govt. perpetuates the state of fear necessary to make it possible for them to do whatever they wish in the name of the "war." Forget that we have no clear objective in this debacle other than to perpetuate it. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, thank you very much.

The "Drug War" "War on Terrorism" parallel is quite clear whether you choose to examine it or not. Jingoist patriot or jaded liberal, your political ideology matters not a whit when confronting reality. There is dogma and there is reality. Spew whatever rhetoric you want. In the meantime, Bush and his supporters (the elite) are laughing all the way to the bank with your treasury while securing the Arab powers they are aligned with in the Middle East by restricting the flow of oil.

But back to your query, little mouse. The issue of reduced freedoms and whether we know anyone who has been jailed or had their freedoms reduced as a result of the aptly misnamed USA PATRIOT ACT, all you had to do was turn on your television during the GOP convention in NYC in '04. Whether you agree with keeping US citizens blocks from the location of the elected officials of this democracy and in cages, you certainly must agree that jailing in squalid conditions those expressing their First Amendment rights legally and then prosecuting them without legal justification constitutes the exact type of police behavior people in this forum are concerned about.

After all, Bush and Cheney aren't going to arrest us. It will be the local constabulary we will have to worry about in every instance. I know you'll have a knee jerk reaction to this site, but the story is accurate. 1800 citizens arrested during the GOP convention - 91% acquitted - police found to perjure themselves based upon video evidence which completely contradicted testimony which had the testifying officer nowhere in the vicinity of the arrestee he claimed to have arrested - repeatedly. This willingness to perjure is, IMO, a direct result of the 'throw away the key' approach of many officers who believe anyone arrested is guilty of something. Perhaps you agree with this mentality?


www.wsws.org...

[edit on 23-5-2006 by seattlelaw]




posted on May, 23 2006 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Nice opinion, but that is what it is, your opinion.

OK, Lets get the quote straight.

I NEVER said war solved anything.


War solves whatever the victor decides it solves as the victor writes the history. The real question is, is war ever worth the effort. If so, what mistake did we make as a species to create the environment where we felt the need to murder each other to solve it?


Going back a ways, the art of war accelerated the invention of brass, iron and steel. Gunpowder, Kevlar and Plastic. (duponts and all) the 4 wheel drive vehicle, freeze dried food and autonomous assembly. Effective lasers, sonar and the GPS. I could go on but the list is endless.


And how many Einsteins, how many Salks, how many artists, scientists, visionaries were among the millions and millions who died before they had an opportunity to create and make their contribution to the world due to war? Who knows what countless ways our lives would be enriched by the presence of those individuals ... or even their nonexistent offspring?


People die. You can not stop it, I can not stop it. As long as there are people willing to put bombs around children and blow up their own people, war is necessary. In other words, probably forever.


That is a defeatist attitude and not one I would wish any member of my military to hold.


Your idealist world view is great for the classroom, yet no one. NO ONE knows the horror of war better than those that fight it. So RANT on my friend. WHile you were safe in your bed, I have been out there fighting so that people like you can sleep well.


In spite of your implied claim to a superior position in this debate, when it comes to life and death decisions your views are no more meaningful than anyone else breathing in the air and striking a keyboard. Killing another or watching a friend die grants you no moral authority to make such proclamations. And I guarantee you that not one Iraqi or Afghan or American or Brit who has perished in the present conflict has made me sleep any better. Your willingness to murder anyone your govt. tells you to under the ruse of protection of US citizens does not impress me. I have never felt threatened by an Iraqi or an Afghani, but I'm sure we all will in the future thanks to the present policy or lack thereof.


"The tree of liberty must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of patriots."


Perhaps, but make sure you know who needs to do the shedding the blood to feed the tree of liberty. Your lack of concern over who you kill is quite unsettling. Rather than applaud your incurious zealotry I applaud those brave men and women who refuse to kill innocent people for an ignorant and selfish leadership.


"The greatest gift a man can give is to place his mortal body between wars devastation and his beloved home."


Know thine enemy.


"So that people like you may sleep safe in your beds, there are men like me ready to do violence."


Do not kill in my name. Rather, kill in your own and bear the consequences.


"All it takes for EVIL to triumph is for GOOD MEN TO DO NOTHING."


Better to stand still until you know which direction you need to travel to get where you wish to end up. Anything else is foolishness.


"A coward dies a thousand deaths, a brave man tastes of death but once."


Anyone can kill. It takes a brave man to say no to killing when the mob urges him on.


So go ahead and DO NOTHING.
I for one am willing to fight and even die for what I believe in.


And what, exactly, do you believe in besides killing whoever your govt. points your gun at?



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 04:38 AM
link   
seattlelaw:

I don't agree with you on everything, but I'd like to applaud you on this. Well done. You managed to say in two posts what it would have taken me 12 to say. Thank you.

As for the two debating sides here, I think that a compromise should be reached on this. There needs to be a place where we can all come together and admit that each side has things that aren't reasonable. For example, there's one peaceable side that states that everyone should just accept living in peace. That's not likely to happen anytime soon, but I don't believe for a second that we need to just give up on it. There needs to be those around that know how to defend our borders and people, but they don't need to be the world's police. That's not our job. If the people of other countries cannot take care of their own stuff, then they need to be in the situation they're in. We handle our own affairs, and they should handle their's. To meddle in other's affairs makes us look like profiteers, which I guess we are.

To claim that the US is only doing this for the freedom of the US people is nonsense. Nothing has really happened to the US population since 9/11. There is no reason for this war to have dragged on for as long as it has. I think it's time we bring everyone home. Let the peoples of the world deal with their own problems. The only time we should respond is when it's in the interests of our allies.

While we are on the quote wars, I wanted to ressurect a quote I saw earlier and take a better look at it.

"The Tree of Liberty must from time to time be refreshed with the Blood of Patriots."
-Thomas Jefferson

This quote can be taken in two different contexts. One is that patriots need to go abroad and fight for the freedoms of the people occasionally, and the other is that they may need to rise against their government to do the very same. Both are accurate interpretations of the quote, and I would be more than interested if someone could find out what text that came from, and if they could provide a possible link to a source that has it for me. The context would be very interesting to see, and may shed light as to which of the two he was referring to at the time.

I hope that anyone reading this understands that I'm just an average citizen, but I'm not one that'll just sit down and die if terrorists strike a land-assault on my nation. I will stand and die with my brethren as those before me have, and will do so with complete knowledge of my fate. However, it is my solemn belief that everyone should ALWAYS strive for peace, no matter what. Because, without peace, we are nothing.

In this time of war, I ask anyone how much longer will it be before we can all let out a collective sigh of relief to the end of the war? Or will it ever end? At what point do we draw the line and say no more fighting? At what point do we bring everyone home and let the chips fall where they may? How much longer before peace can be reinstated? Why is it that we fight a war that no one can give a good reason for? Why is it that this war isn't yielding the results that we wanted?

The last question there is the only one I can answer. The reason is because the results we were seeking weren't reasonable to begin with. We were after every terrorist. That's an unattainable goal to set. No one will ever get rid of everyone that doesn't like them, because someone always rises to take their place. That's why I say the war won't end.. It's self-perpetuating. I only hope, for the sake of my troops, that they can come home safely, and SOON.

To the troops: We all love you for what you do, even though some of us don't completely agree with it. We just want you to come home safe, that's all.

I thank you all for reading this, as it came straight from my heart.

TheBorg


**MODS**
P.S. Mods, this is a shortened version of my last attempt at this, because when I tried to post, it didn't go. I don't know what's up with that. I lost all of my thoughts that I'd spent an hour preparing in one post with one click. Trying to recoup all of that is impossible. I'll just make backups from now on. Just wanted to apprise you of the situation.

[edit on 24-5-2006 by TheBorg]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 06:14 AM
link   
yea semper thats right I sit safe in my home, until 2 years ago when a 2 bit crack head broke into my home and had a gun to my moms head. Then all the sudden it was take a bat to him or maybe have my mom get raped in our own home. Dont tell me about defending home because its easy to say your defending the people you love when you dont see the gun at their head. Theres a war going on in your own cities, and its not some foreign invador. When that comes up though...your response will be people die and that happens. That we cant save everyone, but as soon as some rich people are in danger or get killed all the sudden we are in another country defending our people.

I tell you what, you go think that because I wont join the military and think war is stupid that when push comes to shove if they weren't here I wouldn't fight. I know better though, and I don't need you to believe that one way or the other because I know what its like to have a gun shot at you, or have some one bust your door down probably ready to kill. So make all the assumptions you want, but Im tired of people dying for nothing.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 08:42 AM
link   
What in the world does that have to do with the government?.....

Sorry if your mom was attacked, but that happens all the time....and it should show you that "not all people are good and some will resort to anything and everything to secure their own happiness, even if it means harming another."

What a convinience that your hatred is now on the government because of the response to terrorism...but where was your hatred of terrorists before the war, when they have been killing western civilians?....

You hating that people are dying is not going to stop people from dying, no matter how much you want it.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 08:57 AM
link   
I think that this is a somewhat strange position that we've ben put in.
Some ask:
"What specific liberties have been lost, and does the average American notice it?" expecting the answer that nothing has really affected them in their daily habits. Then those same people expect everyone to hate 'terrorists', even though most people have never been affected by terrorism, save for the liberties we've lost because of it.

This is where I'm confused. Should we look past the ends of our noses or shouldn't we?



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   
what does it havo do with the government, the government starts the wars. Im not saying we can stop death with peace. Mass murder can be stopped though. Genocide of the human race can be stopped.

"explain genocide, its when we ride on our own kind" (meaning genocide is when we all kill eachother) We are all human, so we are all participating in this genocide when we support war. The only thing war will lead to is extermination. You cant kill an ideal, so in order to stop it you would have to kill every person with the possibility to have such an ideal...and thats everyone.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Right now the American military is fighting "Insurgants" in Iraq. these are just people who have lost all of their freedoms and are now fighting back. They are not terrorists, yet they are being killed in the war on terrorism.

So which side are they on? Are they pro terrorism because they're anti American occupation? Are they anti Freedom because they're anti American occupation. My point is, the same thing Semper has been saying he's off occupying other countries to protect us against, he is doing to others. If that's isn't hypocritical I don't know what is.

Edit:

Originally posted by Semperfortis
Yet, One mans patriot, is another mans terrorist also. Timothy McVey considered himself a patriot.


So what does that make the War on Terror but a war on patriotism. And if that is the case, would that war not continue until there is only one nation to be loyal to? One world government?

[edit on 24-5-2006 by Rasobasi420]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
what does it havo do with the government, the government starts the wars. Im not saying we can stop death with peace. Mass murder can be stopped though. Genocide of the human race can be stopped.


REally?... How do you stop the genocide as the government of Sudan keeps waging it's latest "jihad" against non-Arab blacks?.... The first jihad, 1983-2003, was against non-Muslims, now the second one is against non-Arabs.... Well over 2.6 million people have been killed by the government backed Arab militia...


Originally posted by grimreaper797
"explain genocide, its when we ride on our own kind" (meaning genocide is when we all kill eachother) We are all human, so we are all participating in this genocide when we support war. The only thing war will lead to is extermination. You cant kill an ideal, so in order to stop it you would have to kill every person with the possibility to have such an ideal...and thats everyone.


You obviously don't know what genoicide means.... Genocide is when a group of people, or a government decides to anihilate a race/ethnic group. That';s genocide.. The war in Iraq is not a genocide because the coalition is not purposedly trying to kill civilians. There might be some cases of coalition forces overuseing force, but it is the exception and not the rule.

BTW, you can't either sit back and allow terrorists to attack, or attempt to attack in U.S. soil, or any other western city, without trying to stop them.

The war in Iraq is making terrorists go to Iraq and fight coalition forces there.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Right now the American military is fighting "Insurgants" in Iraq. these are just people who have lost all of their freedoms and are now fighting back. They are not terrorists, yet they are being killed in the war on terrorism.


That's BS, many times has it been proven that the majority of the Iraqi civilians are against the insurgents, and Iraqi civilians have killed insurgents, as well as turned them in to coalition forces...

Iraqi civilians have even died in human stampedes trying to get away from one of the insurgents who supposedly was among them with a bomb. 1,000 people died just because of a rumour of an insurgent among them...


1,000 Iraqis Die in Stampede Over Rumors of Suicide BombBy Robert F. Worth THE NEW YORK TIMES BAGHDAD, IRAQ
1,000 Iraqis Die in Stampede Over Rumors of Suicide Bomb
By Robert F. Worth
THE NEW YORK TIMES


BAGHDAD, IRAQ

More than 950 people were killed and hundreds injured Wednesday morning when rumors of a suicide bomber provoked a frenzied stampede in a procession of Shiite pilgrims as they crossed a bridge in northern Baghdad, government and hospital officials said.


www-tech.mit.edu...



[edit on 24-5-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
That's BS, many times has it been proven that the majority of the Iraqi civilians are against the insurgents, and Iraqi civilians have killed insurgents, as well as turned them in to coalition forces...

Iraqi civilians have even died in human stampedes trying to get away from one of the insurgents who supposedly was among them with a bomb. Over 1,000 people died just because of a rumour of an insurgent among them...


When, and how could it be reliably proven that the majority of Iraqis are against the insurgency? Maybe they're not carrying guns and fighting with them, but I doubt they are against them as much as they are against us.

As for the stampede situation. If I were in a public place, controlled by an occupying army, and there could be a bomb going off that is intended to kill the ocupiers. I'd run, but I'm still in favor of blowing the occupying army out of my town. Maybe you'd prefer they stick around and take over my country, but I wouldn't.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 05:42 PM
link   
muaddib, war is genocide, a big genocide that will only prove successful when the human race is gone. Little made up petty difference like black and white, muslim and none muslim, are just the genocide YOUR thinking of. Every war is part of an on going genocide. The only time the war will be complete and really be over is when we are dead because thats when the genocide will finally end.

Tell me whats the difference between you, me, that arab guy in Sudan, or that jewish guy in Israel? Maybe when we look at eachother we see a difference, but to the people that make the decisions, we are all just numbers. So yea while people are fighting over which "race" is better these guys see nothing more then a number, a statistic. Thats all we are. We aren't so different after all in the end. They are just putting us against eachother. Republican, democrat, black and white, rich people made these things up. Why? Because just like any war, theres a big profit in fighting. Any kind of fighting, two groups fighting with eachother just creates more business. They want to prove they are better, so they spend money on things that support their groups.

We have been doing it in america since the dawn of this nation. Made up difference to put us against eachother so we dont bother to look at them. Guess what you and a terrorist arent any different other then the fact your under one statistic and hes under another, thats all. Whether you die or a terrorist dies doesnt make one bit a difference to the people on top. So while your fighting for their side, Im fighting for mine, humanity.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420

When, and how could it be reliably proven that the majority of Iraqis are against the insurgency? Maybe they're not carrying guns and fighting with them, but I doubt they are against them as much as they are against us.

As for the stampede situation. If I were in a public place, controlled by an occupying army, and there could be a bomb going off that is intended to kill the ocupiers. I'd run, but I'm still in favor of blowing the occupying army out of my town. Maybe you'd prefer they stick around and take over my country, but I wouldn't.



Are you out of your mind?.... The insurgents bombed polling stations because they wanted to stop Iraqi civilians from voting.... and even after all the threats and attacks, millions of Iraqis went to vote...


Iraqi insurgents attack polling stations
(Agencies)
Updated: 2005-01-26 21:06


BAGHDAD, Iraq - Insurgents staged attacks against U.S. forces, schools to be used as polling stations and political party offices on Wednesday, as they pressed a bloody campaign to undermine Iraq's weekend elections. A U.S. Marine transport helicopter crashed in western Iraq.

Three car bombs exploded Wednesday in Riyadh, a tense town north of Baghdad, killing at least five people, including three policemen. One of the car bombs targeted a U.S. convoy but there was no report of casualties, police said.

www.chinadaily.net...


Insurgents Attack Civilians, Polling Stations Ahead of Election

Washington
27 January 2005

Click here to listen to the news in Burmese, 65.4KB.
Click here to listen to the news in Burmese, 65.4KB.


Insurgents in Iraq have killed at least 15 Iraqis and wounded several others today (Thursday) and have attacked several polling stations in their campaign to disrupt Sunday's national elections.

Violence shook the cities of Samarra, Mahmudiyah, Baquba, Kirkuk, Ramadi and Tikrit in the Sunni heartland around Baghdad. Police and hospital officials reported at least 15 civilians, police and security forces killed in bombing and shooting attacks. A U.S. Marine was also killed in action south of Baghdad.

www.voanews.com...

Not to mention that the 5 million Iraqis, Kurds, in northern Iraq are in favour of the coalition, as well as most Iraqis in the south.

BTW, the insurgents are 90% Sunni, which is a minority group of Iraq.


There is no consensus on the precise number of insurgent fighters, but estimates range from a few thousand to more than 50,000. The vast majority of insurgents, probably more than 90 percent, are believed to be Iraqis from the Sunni minority group that largely ruled the country before the fall of Saddam Hussein. But U.S. commanders say that most of the deadliest attacks, and particularly suicide attacks, are committed by foreigners from a range of neighboring countries, including Jordan, Syrian, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Sudan.

www.washingtonpost.com...

Then you have the following facts.


Ordinary Iraqis Wage a Successful Battle Against Insurgents


BAGHDAD, Iraq, March 22 - Ordinary Iraqis rarely strike back at the insurgents who terrorize their country. But just before noon today, a carpenter named Dhia saw a troop of masked gunmen with grenades coming towards his shop and decided he had had enough.

As the gunmen emerged from their cars, Dhia and his young relatives shouldered their own AK-47’s and opened fire, police and witnesses said. In the fierce gun battle that followed, three of the insurgents were killed, and the rest fled just after the police arrived. Two of Dhia’s young nephews and a bystander were injured, the police said.

www.roadstoiraq.com...

If you take a look at the news, even the ones form the middle east, everytime insurgents/terrorists attack, they kill more Iraqi civilians than they kill coalition forces.


BAGHDAD, March 6 -- First they killed the chief of the Naim tribe and his son. Then they killed a top tribal sheik who headed the Fallujah city council. Then they assassinated the leader of the al-Jubur tribe.

And now the reported killers of all these men -- al-Qaeda in Iraq, the insurgent group of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- have a powerful new enemy.

Tribal chiefs in Iraq's western Anbar province and in an area near the northern city of Kirkuk, two regions teeming with insurgents, are vowing to strike back at al-Qaeda in Iraq, a Sunni Arab-led group that is waging war against Sunni tribal leaders who are cooperating with the Iraqi government and the U.S. military. Anbar tribes have formed a militia that has killed 20 insurgents from al-Qaeda in Iraq, leaders said.

Separately, more than 300 tribal chiefs, politicians, clerics, security officials and other community leaders met last week in Hawijah, about 35 miles southwest of Kirkuk, and "declared war" on al-Qaeda in Iraq. In a communique, the participants vowed "the shedding of blood" of anyone involved in "sabotage, killings, kidnappings, targeting police and army, attacking the oil and gas pipelines and their transporters, assassinating the religious and tribal figures, technicians, and doctors."

www.washingtonpost.com...

[edit on 24-5-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Here is another link which will tell you what is happening in Iraq.


The Iraqi newspaper Al Sabah reported this week that in response to attacks by Al Qaeda terrorists against Iraqi police and private citizens in Anbar and Salhaddin province, six Sunni militant/insurgent groups have declared that they will combine their efforts to fight Al Qaeda as the primary enemy of all Iraqis. These same groups had previously targeted Iraqi government and coalition forces, but as part of the increasingly cooperative stance of Sunni leaders who are now negotiating with the United States and the Iraqi interim government, they have acknowledged the political process and are focusing their efforts on what everyone in Iraq now perceives as the real threat, foreign supported terrorists trained and organized by Al Qaeda.

blogcritics.org...

Oh and btw, it appears that things are changing, as insurgent groups are fighting against foreing fighters from Al Qaeda, and there have been meetings with coalition forces and other Iraqi leaders to try to stop the violence and concentrate on killing Al Qaeda.


Iraqi and U.S. Officials in Secret Talks with Iraqi Insurgents

By Lydia Khalil

In their continued effort to curb the Iraqi insurgency and drive a deeper wedge between homegrown Iraqi insurgents and al-Qaeda in Iraq, top U.S. and Iraqi officials announced that they had held secret talks with indigenous Iraqi insurgents over the past several months. Recent statements by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other top al-Qaeda officials heavily criticized the Iraqi political process, revealing a real concern that Iraqi insurgent groups will join the political process instead of contributing to al-Qaeda's mission (al-Jazeera, April 30).

jamestown.org...

Insurgents are also attacking Al Qaeda's terrorists.


Home-Grown Insurgents Battling Al Qaeda

Day to Day, January 12, 2006 · Madeleine Brand talks to New York Times reporter Dexter Filkins about the continuing Iraqi insurgency. According to a story he co-wrote, insurgents from the so-called Islamic Army and from Al Qaeda are clashing among themselves. American and Iraqi officials, Filkins writes, believe they can use the conflict to their advantage.

www.npr.org...



Insurgent groups in one of Iraq's most violent provinces claim that they have purged the region of three quarters of al-Qa'eda's supporters after forming an alliance to force out the foreign fighters.

If true, it would mark a significant victory in the fight against Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the head of al-Qa'eda in Iraq, and could partly explain the considerable drop in suicide bombings in Iraq recently.

"We have killed a number of the Arabs, including Saudis, Egyptians, Syrians, Kuwaitis and Jordanians," said an insurgent representative in the western province of Anbar.

www.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2006/03/11/wirq11.xml



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Okay, well

'Heroes of the Arab world'
Fallujah's resistance is being celebrated in CDs sold in market stalls in Baghdad, Cairo and Damascus. "They are viewed as heroes of the Arab world," Khadim says. A sample lyric from Fallujah singer Sabah al-Janabi: "We are the men defending the town and beheading the enemy. When Fallujah called on us, we rose up and met the challenge."
Fallujah is now run by a shura council of fundamentalist clerics led by Abdullah al-Janabi. The bearded imam's fiery sermons have helped whip up anti-American sentiment. The council has imposed a strict form of Islamic law.
"They are assassinating people they regard as collaborating with Americans," says Sadoun al-Dulame, a former Iraqi exile involved in efforts to find a negotiated settlement.

www.usatoday.com...

As someone once said, one man’s terrorist is another man’s patriot. It seems to me that the major problem is that a few aren’t willing to sit by and allow the US to put in another puppet government. I’m sure many are more than willing to, simply because they want things to go back to ‘normal’. Again, I bring up the point of one world government.

How many people do you think would just keep quiet and accept the siege of this country? How many do you think will be the ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ ruining it for everyone else? I’m sure there will be plenty of news reports then too. All telling you not to fight back.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Okay, well

'Heroes of the Arab world'
Fallujah's resistance is being celebrated in CDs sold in market stalls in Baghdad, Cairo and Damascus. "They are viewed as heroes of the Arab world," Khadim says. A sample lyric from Fallujah singer Sabah al-Janabi: "We are the men defending the town and beheading the enemy. When Fallujah called on us, we rose up and met the challenge."
Fallujah is now run by a shura council of fundamentalist clerics led by Abdullah al-Janabi. The bearded imam's fiery sermons have helped whip up anti-American sentiment. The council has imposed a strict form of Islamic law.
"They are assassinating people they regard as collaborating with Americans," says Sadoun al-Dulame, a former Iraqi exile involved in efforts to find a negotiated settlement.

www.usatoday.com...

As someone once said, one man’s terrorist is another man’s patriot. It seems to me that the major problem is that a few aren’t willing to sit by and allow the US to put in another puppet government. I’m sure many are more than willing to, simply because they want things to go back to ‘normal’. Again, I bring up the point of one world government.

How many people do you think would just keep quiet and accept the siege of this country? How many do you think will be the ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ ruining it for everyone else? I’m sure there will be plenty of news reports then too. All telling you not to fight back.


Yea, and didn't that idiot stand up on Iraq TV and state we were being run out of Iraq as the troops were busting down his doors?

Man it's a shame when intelligent people fall for the terrorist propaganda and then accuse the US of propaganda.
HA, go figure.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 09:45 PM
link   
If theres one thing the government learned from vietnam, its don't let the public know that they are having a hard time winning. Make everyone believe that the people of iraq love you, and that resistance is minimal. The first casualty of war is truth, and the news is what they are talking about.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
If theres one thing the government learned from vietnam, its don't let the public know that they are having a hard time winning. Make everyone believe that the people of iraq love you, and that resistance is minimal. The first casualty of war is truth, and the news is what they are talking about.


We also learned something else from Vietnam.

That the US has a rather unique group of malcontents that do not have the stomach or personal fortitude to do what is right and good in the world. This same group blames the US anytime they attempt to do anything to help downtrodden people. This group spit on our brave men and women on returning from fighting and watching their brothers in arms die.

\We learned that no matter how successful we ever may be, there will always be some that fall for the enemy propaganda. (Jane Fondaites) They will ignore every bit of good news and paste the bad on every TV screen in the country. Call our courageous soldiers, baby killers, war mongers etc.

Yes, we learned you all are out there. We are ashamed that you are, but you are.



posted on May, 24 2006 @ 11:55 PM
link   
If this is so, semperfortis, how do you explain the My Lai Massacre or the 15 Iraqi civilians killed by the Marines? How do you explain the soldiers who had looted the treasures out of the Iraqi museums? What about the treatment in Abu Ghraib and Gitmo? Do you think that these were the acts of "brave men and women"? Should we support these soldiers as patriots too? Or should we view them as malcontents as well?

Or should we turn a blind eye to acts of aggression especially committed in times of battle? Should we look for the higher cause in a war when we know that civilians on foreign soil are being harmed for no good reason?

All I can say is that these comments reflect the two types of people in the world. And depending where you fall, how will you view the actions committed above?

Peaceful people have their place because they think of all the moral implications in the world. They are the ones who care for the sick and wounded; they think of the laws and the ethics behind them; and they are champions for those who cannot fend for themselves. They think about the hungry. They resist any type of battle. They sacrifice themselves for the cause of not confronting another human being for the sake of serenity. Yet, they are most brutalized, looked down upon and scourged humans on earth because of their unwillingness to take the easy path to war. And as a result, they show their bravery in the face of aggression because they are willing to take a stand opposed to the most bloodiest conflict.

War-like people are the ones that act on their aggression as a result of a cause; they are the ones who singularly think that their killing serves a higher purpose without any thought. They employ their special talents of battle on those who are singled out to be the enemy. And of course, they believe that they are sacrificing themselves for the highest significance.

The strange thing is both think that they are patriots. But when the soul of each type of person is weighed, which one will tip to the side in the wrong direction?

[edit on 24-5-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on May, 25 2006 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
.......................

How many people do you think would just keep quiet and accept the siege of this country? How many do you think will be the ‘insurgents’ or ‘terrorists’ ruining it for everyone else? I’m sure there will be plenty of news reports then too. All telling you not to fight back.


Well, you see, the thing is that mostly in these forums you won't see almost anything good being reported, now more than ever, either in Iraq, or the United States. Most people around here seem to want to concentrate only on death and destruction, and want to blame the coalition and the United States for it...

But it is a fact that millions or Iraqis have a better way of life now, after the war than ever before.

Let me give you an example to what is happening in southern Iraq, yet you would have never seen it in these forums unless someone like me would post it.


A history of water problems
In the 1990s access to safe drinking water across Iraq dropped by a third. Now more over 4 million more Iraqis have access to drinking water than before 2003.

Also in the 1990s all sewage systems stopped working. No sewage or wastewater plants were working before 2003 but now 9.6 million more people have access to the sewerage system.

There are few signs of war damage to pipes and other water supply equipment in Southern Iraq. The main causes of supply failure are lack of maintenance, lack of money and looting.

Key facts
The Basra Water Training centre cost £330,000 and will provide training for engineers from all four of Iraq’s southern governorates: Al Basrah, Al Muthanna, Dhi Qar and Maysan.
Basra has 1.5 million citizens. Only 23% have water piped to their homes.
DFID will help provide sustainable sources of drinking water for almost 500,000 more people in Basra by the summer of 2006.
Over 4 million more Iraqis have access to drinking water than before 2003.

www.dfid.gov.uk...

That's on southern Iraq, the same thing is happening in northern Iraq where over 5 million Iraqis live.

Something that happened not too long ago and was never posted in the forums...


Iraqis agree on coalition government

By Mariam Karouny and Fredrik Dahl
REUTERS

May 20, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq – Iraqi leaders have agreed on a national-unity government to be presented to parliament today, officials said, despite failing to reach a compromise on the sensitive defense and interior ministry positions.

The agreement on a grand coalition of Shiites, minority Sunni Arabs and Kurds, which the United States is counting on to halt a slide toward civil war, signaled an end to months of political deadlock after December's elections.

www.signonsandiego.com...

Anyways, I apologize for going off topic, but i hate it when people exagerate and lie.

[edit on 25-5-2006 by Muaddib]



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join