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.

 

Iraq war has made terrorism worse...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 08:20 AM
link   
in other news, a team of respectable scientists have just found startling evidence that the sky may possibly be a shade of blue. in addition to this, tests and studies have also shown that grass is an indisputable shade of green, and there is new evidence to suggest that water may be wet.

news.bbc.co.uk...

seriously though, is this a surprise to anyone? anyone at all?
say you have a house with an abusive authority. neighbors come in and kick the authority out, but then start trashing your place, beating your wife and kids, and randomly killing your family members. they're also stealing your "gold", and inviting other people in the neghborhood to come over and do the same. wouldn't that make you mad too?




posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Worse than what? I guess that little thing called 9/11 was insignificant. How much worse could it be than in the 90's when scores of attacks happened? When was the last attack on American soil since we decided to stop treating these attacks as "law enforcement" issues?

What does it take to turn someone who is not a terrorist into someone who will murder? I submit that it is impossible and that individual was destined to be a killer in the 1st place. It's not like convincing someone to vote for a different political party.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:54 PM
link   
This will go on untill the end of time . It is not possible to negotiate with the Islam crazy because it has not done Isreal any good and it will do us no good. Some things are ment to be if for no other reason to control the world population.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
What does it take to turn someone who is not a terrorist into someone who will murder? I submit that it is impossible and that individual was destined to be a killer in the 1st place.



If an invading nation came into my country, killed my friends and relatives; I can guarantee that I would do everything in my power to resist that invading force. Of course the invading force would label me a terrorist, but I would see myself as a freedom fighter. Sort of depends on your perspective, dosent it?

What would you do!

factfinder38, this isn't about controling population, it's about oil. If we were concerned about overpopulation, we would have invaded China or India, thats where all the people are.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
Worse than what? I guess that little thing called 9/11 was insignificant. How much worse could it be than in the 90's when scores of attacks happened? When was the last attack on American soil since we decided to stop treating these attacks as "law enforcement" issues?

What does it take to turn someone who is not a terrorist into someone who will murder? I submit that it is impossible and that individual was destined to be a killer in the 1st place. It's not like convincing someone to vote for a different political party.


why do people continue to associate Iraq with 9/11?
Bush has already come out and said that the two had no corelation, so why do people continue to still use it as a crutch to justify this war?



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Reuters

The Iraq war gave birth to a new generation of Islamic radicals and the terrorist threat has grown since the September 11 attacks, according to a U.S. intelligence report cited in The New York Times on Saturday.

"The estimate concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to include a new class of 'self-generating' cells inspired by al Qaeda's leadership but without any direct connection to Osama bin Laden or his top lieutenants," the newspaper said.


New York Times

The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document.

The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,’’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.


Washington Post

A 30-page National Intelligence Estimate completed in April cites the “centrality” of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the insurgency that has followed, as the leading inspiration for new Islamic extremist networks and cells that are united by little more than an anti-Western agenda. It concludes that, rather than contributing to eventual victory in the global counterterrorism struggle, the situation in Iraq has worsened the U.S. position, according to officials familiar with the classified document.

Wow, they sure took a LONG time to come up with this!

I mean, it does not take a friggin' Intelligence Expert and sixteen agencies to realize that there is more terrorism since 9-11 or since the invasion of Iraq - and that the War on Terrorism does not eliminate the threat of terrorism, but INCREASES IT!

Actually I have been saying that since 24/6/05:


Bush's War Creates Terror!

You've made us all less safe now, while killing tens of thousands of innocent people, including Americans.

So How many of You do feel Safe-ER since this allaged War on Terror started?

Feel safer when going on Vacations?

Feel safer when travelling with an Airplane?

Feel safer when watching the News with similar headlines each and every day?

Well this sure is interesting, since my old threads from a year ago, are today slowly coming back all over again.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 06:44 AM
link   
""U.S. spy agencies have concluded in a new report that the Iraq war has amplified overall terror threat by giving rise to a new wave of extremism, U.S. mainstream media reported Sunday""

all i can say is

I TOLD YOU SO!!

we INVADED THEM!!
if someone invaded us, we would eventually have EVERYONE fighting with us
to expel the invaders, right??

well that is JUST WHAT THEY ARE DOING

yet our leaders in washington continue
TO LIE RIGHT TO OUR FACES!! and say we are winning this

so now we are f-'d

it will just be a matter of time now until

#1one of theese pissed off countries
infiltrates into our country through mexico with nuclear materials
and sets them off

or

#2 we will end up with our very own BERLIN WALL
nobody, except the executive elite
will be able to come in or go out

and the best part of it all is they knew about this since BEFORE APRIL 2006
that is just when they concluded their report

republicans, and democrats alike,
we need to get all of theese 2-faced jokers OUT of the offices
and elect the oldest-wisest people in this country

heck, bush cant even make a complete sentence
without messing it up,,

he really shows to the rest of the world what us americans are really like!!


i know that if someone killed my kids,
i would end up being a suicide bomber too!!! (no more point to life after that)

and the bulls-'t about "bringing democracy to iraq,,

well what about the CONGO, or SOMALIA????
10-20 times more people are dying over there
they needed our help MORE than the iraqi's do thats a FACT

so what was the REAL REASON?? oil, or money , or instability, or

TO IMPLEMENT "project for a new american century" (P.N.A.C.)

yes folks, us faithful patriotic americans were DUPED into
going to war so our defence department,
could get unlimited funds, and new weapons,
and the bigwhigs could line their pockets while we have to get 2 jobs
just to pay for gas

iraq treats their people BETTER than ours does for us
their government subsidizes their gasoline
it only costs them $0.25 a GALLON

corporate america CANNOT HAVE THAT
there is NO PROFIT IN IT

see how they treat us!!!!!



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 07:13 AM
link   
I agree this so called "war on terror" is creating terrorist's and woe is us if we envade Iran. I cant help but feel in my bones that another so called terror attack is about to happen soon. With all the news reports and many of the posts on this site I have a feeling something is going to happen in Chicago(I have no proof). That would give our Gov the right to make even stricter laws that makes the patriot act pale in comparrison and possibly give them the green light to envade Iran, you know "TPTB" will make the Iranian "terror" connection somehow.

I think if any country was envaded and treated the way we are treating the Iraqi's even the most peace loving people would rise up and fight back with whatever means that are available to them.



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 01:34 AM
link   

why do people continue to associate Iraq with 9/11?



It is relevant in the sense that it changed the way the US deals with islamo-facist terrorists. As of that event, the Bush administration changed from the Clinton approach of law enforcement and only going after terrorists after they did something, to a proactive approach of stopping them premptively. Iraq became a scene of proactivity. It's a laughable and moot point to think that Iraq created more terrorism. 1. We have not had an attack since we went into Iraq, and 2. 9/11 and all the other terrorist attacks Clinton chose not to deal with prove that terrorism already strongly existed to a point where they could, and were willing, to kill 3k+.
Ask the democrats what their alternative options are with reasoning as to how it will prevent future 9/11s...good luck finding anything.

Who cares if there are more terrorists? As long as we are killing them and not having our "commander in chief" sitting around getting BJs from interns, cheating on his wife, and raping woman while terrorists kill our people like during the 90's.



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
It is relevant in the sense that it changed the way the US deals with islamo-facist terrorists.

Firstly - Islamo-Fascism does NOT exsist.

If you roll back your memory a bit, you will find out, that FASCIST countries are mostly Catholic/Christian, and Not Muslim. It is just a New Phrase, used by the current Bushy Administration, to further increase the Fear against an Entire Religion, since this word is basicly making Fascism and Islam ONE - which is just re-opening old WWII wounds to furter manipuleate the population of this world, that Islam is an Enemy of Democracy and the Civilized West.

Furthermore,


Islamofascism

"Islamofascism is nothing but an empty propaganda term. And wartime propaganda is usually, if not always, crafted to produce hysteria, the destruction of any sense of proportion. Such words, undefined and unmeasured, are used by people more interested in making us lose our heads than in keeping their own."




As of that event, the Bush administration changed from the Clinton approach of law enforcement and only going after terrorists after they did something, to a proactive approach of stopping them premptively.

What was this SOMETHING you are talking about?

Weren't the Hijackers of the passenger planes on 9-11 mostly SAUDI ARABIAN? Why have the allmighty and noble Bushy administration attacked Afganistan then? A country that had as much to do with 9-11, as the Eskimos? Were there any Afganis hijacking airplanes? Then, part two - Bushies attacked Iraq; even if Saddam had NO Al-Qaeda connection, he actually Hated and Feared them (ofcourse, since Al-Qaeda is basicly Al-CIA-duh, a creation of Western Intelligence agencies such as NSA, MI6, Mossad and others...) and even these days, mister President himseld ADMITED that Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9-11. He didn't have any WMD's - so what was the Real Reason again?



It's a laughable and moot point to think that Iraq created more terrorism. 1. We have not had an attack since we went into Iraq, and 2. 9/11 and all the other terrorist attacks Clinton chose not to deal with prove that terrorism already strongly existed to a point where they could, and were willing, to kill 3k+.

Who is WE?

You mean ofcourse Yourself, living in Fortress America.

Have you cheked how many Attacks have happened in Other countries?

Or is that none of your concern?

I strongly Suggest you actually READ the Headlines, listed in this Article, and then talk about how War on Terrorism is actually Effective:

Bush War On Terror? More like Bush's War Creates Terror!

But I guess in Your book that counts as a Success.

I would hate to see, what counts as a Failure for You.



Ask the democrats what their alternative options are with reasoning as to how it will prevent future 9/11s...good luck finding anything.

And what exactly did BUSH do to prevent 9-11?

Here is what:

Bush Administration Ignored 9/11 Warnings

Former antiterror adviser says Bush ignored 9/11 warnings

Warning Signs of 9-11 and Intelligence Failures



Who cares if there are more terrorists? As long as we are killing them and not having our "commander in chief" sitting around getting BJs from interns, cheating on his wife, and raping woman while terrorists kill our people like during the 90's.

Wow - now that was a Brilliantly Ignorant Statement.

Who cares if there are more terrorists?

Apprently you do not.

Where did you go on vacation lately?

Have you left your Homeland?

Flew with aircraft?

Visited any Foreign countries?

Been to Europe?

Apparently today, we have even the White House admitting, that Iraq FUELS International Terrorism:


White House admits Iraq fuels extremism

The White House acknowledged Monday that Iraq was among several factors that "fuel the spread of jihadism," but said that winning the war would dishearten potential terrorists.

Spokesman Tony Snow sought to challenge news reports on Sunday about the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq and terrorism, which represents the comprehensive consensus findings of the 16 US intelligence agencies.

"It assesses that a variety of factors, in addition to Iraq, fuel the spread of jihadism, including longstanding social grievances, slowness of the pace of reform, and the use of the Internet," he told reporters.

Meditate on that for a while...



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
1. We have not had an attack since we went into Iraq, and 2. 9/11 and all the other terrorist attacks Clinton chose not to deal with prove that terrorism already strongly existed to a point where they could, and were willing, to kill 3k+.
Who cares if there are more terrorists? As long as we are killing them and not having our "commander in chief" sitting around getting BJs from interns, cheating on his wife, and raping woman while terrorists kill our people like during the 90's.


No, there has not been an attack on America since 9/11. But there have been attacks on other parts of the world, including Bali and London. The London one was a bugger - I know because I was in London on that day. What motivated those cowards with the bombs? Iraq, amongst other things. And the number of attacks in Iraq has gone through the roof. Thousands are dying each month and the fault lines in the country are gaping wider and wider with every passing day. And the strain on the armed forces of both the US and the UK are becoming serious, thanks to the deluded thinking of people like Rumsfeld before the war even started.


As for Clinton and 9/11, can I remind you that he had been out of power for months before the first whispers started about possible terrorist activity in the US. Bush was warned - again and again and again. He did nothing. It happened on his watch, even though he had been warned about bin Laden. Please draw your own conclusions. He Did. Nothing.
Clinton was not the best of human beings, but at least he had an intellectual approach to the issues - ie: he did the research himself sometimes before a briefing. Bush prefers verbal briefings that don't last that long. And he had to have the differences between the three main groups in Iraq explained to him. The man is not intellectually curious. That's a bad trait in a president.

As for the statement about 'who cares if there are more terrorists', I respectfully state, as a citizen of the UK, where we have been dealing with these cowards for years, that you NOT know what you are talking about.



posted on Sep, 27 2006 @ 07:18 AM
link   
Bush has the heart & mind of old crusaders.
Terrorism is an attitude, u can win over it with strategy & force.

Islam is a religion of more than 1.25 billion people, u can never win over.


:hey
o curb the shrubs, don't destroy the crop.





chaudri

[edit on 27/9/2006 by chaudri]



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 01:15 PM
link   
I am glad that there are more of them because it make a bigger target to drop bombs on.
How would you handle the terrorist issue?
1. Maybe we could pay them off?
2. Maybe we should all become Muslims.
3. Sorry but 2 will not work because when they are not fighting Us they fight each other.
4. Stop using their oil. ( this would be great but when your entire country lives off it and every part of life needs it that is kinda stupid thinking).
So what kind of liberal plan can the Democrats come up with because I have herd a lot of complaining but no plan of their own.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by factfinder38
I am glad that there are more of them because it make a bigger target to drop bombs on.
How would you handle the terrorist issue?
1. Maybe we could pay them off?
2. Maybe we should all become Muslims.
3. Sorry but 2 will not work because when they are not fighting Us they fight each other.
4. Stop using their oil. ( this would be great but when your entire country lives off it and every part of life needs it that is kinda stupid thinking).
So what kind of liberal plan can the Democrats come up with because I have herd a lot of complaining but no plan of their own.



a) if it were my issue, it wouldn't exist. 'i' would've never gone into Iraq in the first place. but maybe that's just me.

1. that will only make it worse. look, its bad enough that the American image is as tarnished as it is, and now with this report, coming from ALL 16 of te US' intelligence agencies, not only do we have mud on our faces, but now there's egg there too. bribing your enemies would simply make the US the laughing stock of the world.

2. appeasement never works. give them a little, they'll want a little more.

3. yes. which is why US troops seem to be attacked on a daily basis, hmm?

4. hey, here's an idea...why not invest more into finding other sources of alternative energy? Brazil does it. they grow and refine their own source of fuel. of all the countries around the world, their oil import is one of the lowest.
right. so everyone who happens to disagree with the stance of this war is a liberal. is that the America-hating, baby eating kind or just the joint smoking hippie kind?
what, do 'we' drown puppies too?
sorry to break it to you, but this world doesn't exist in black and white, and i don't suck the anus of any political party. the way i see it, both li(e)berals and con(artists)ervatives are to blame for this cluster eff of a war. if anything they both need to be sent off to the chopping block...



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:30 AM
link   
karby
Good responce, While I do not agree with you on some points, bu I am right there with you on the political party thing. Ihate them all .
Also remember that terrorisim was there long before Iraq and the only way these people will be happy is for everyone to convert to their fourm of Islam.
Mark my words some day our only choice will be to Nuke the Middle East and nothing we do can change that.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Weren't the Hijackers of the passenger planes on 9-11 mostly SAUDI ARABIAN? Why have the allmighty and noble Bushy administration attacked Afganistan then? A country that had as much to do with 9-11, as the Eskimos? Were there any Afganis hijacking airplanes? Then, part two - Bushies attacked Iraq; even if Saddam had NO Al-Qaeda connection, he actually Hated and Feared them (ofcourse, since Al-Qaeda is basicly Al-CIA-duh, a creation of Western Intelligence agencies such as NSA, MI6, Mossad and others...) and even these days, mister President himseld ADMITED that Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9-11. He didn't have any WMD's - so what was the Real Reason again?


That's a slightly ignorant comment, considering that the base of operations for Al Qaeda, the group in which the individuals (bombers) belonged to (that's it, where they trained and more like them WOULD be trained), was in FACT Afghanistan, hence why it was wise to go after them, and if necessary topple the Taliban regime, who seemed to tolerate their presence.


Originally posted by Souljah
Have you cheked how many Attacks have happened in Other countries?


Plenty has happened in the past, especially in the UK who is no stranger to terrorism. In fact we've had much more attacks by the IRA and its dissidents than we've had by Islamic extremists from the 90's to 2001.

London terrror targets :-

news.bbc.co.uk...

I think you'll find only a very few who were alleged to have been carried out by Islamic/Middle Eastern extremists.

It also shows no signs of abaiting soon :-

news.bbc.co.uk...


Originally posted by Souljah
Apparently today, we have even the White House admitting, that Iraq FUELS International Terrorism:


Well no one can deny that the conflict in Iraq has exacerbated the situation, since it has increased the sphere of influence and sympathisers for the terrorists. But there is also problems of ignorance and lack of education, which means there's always a ready supply of personnel. Who's been directly targetting civilians? Certainly not the Coalition. The original aims or motives for Iraq are questionable, i personally think it was the Bush administration's ultimate goal to topple Saddam, hence the haste in which the war was conducted, unfortunately the UK was dragged along for fear of US isolationism which would make the situation much worse and also a sense of duty to 'uphold' i guess the long term friendship between the US & UK.

Now don't mistake the terrorists having heartfelt genuine sincere motives for what they're doing, they don't give a # frankly who they kill. Most of the casualities by far have been ordinary civilian Muslims, who get slaughtered by extremists who claim to fight for their religion! You must acknowledge the idiocy of this. These extremists will take advantage of ANY situation, any grievance so that they can exploit it fully to use for their own twisted ends. Anyone who believes that Al Qaeda sens operatives to trouble spots, purely because they're fighting for liberation is indeed misguided and severly naive.

Peace out.




top topics



 
0

log in

join