Aren't you Americans extremely angry?

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by Hal9000
Muaddib, not to pick on you, but you certainly seem like someone with a conflict of interest.

Really?.... How is that?....

I was referring to the difference in your post and your signature, and meant to say conflicting issues, which I explained later.

Originally posted by Muaddib
It is my opinion that it is people like yourself who keep making claims that "leaving alone Islamic terrorists is going to make everything better in Iraq and the whole world".... That is what will bring the downfall of the U.S. and the world to submit to Sharia law/Islamic extremism...

So now the reason we invaded Iraq is to quell the spread of Islamic extremists? Where there any Islamic extremists threatening to take over Iraq before we invaded? I don’t think so. If it was true that the real reason for the WOT was to stop Islamic extremists, why didn’t we go to Sudan, which you referred to? And when did I ever say we should leave them alone?

Originally posted by Muaddib
The coalition ousted Saddam who was a butcher and killed many of his own people

Yes, we ousted Saddam, after first we treated him as an ally and supplied him with arms when he was at war with Iran, then after Desert Storm we encouraged those people to rise against him, and he responded by gassing them. In other words, we are also partially to blame to that tragedy. It is no wonder these people don’t trust anything we say, even if we are trying to help.

Originally posted by Muaddib
the coalition is in Iraq fighting against inrugents and terrorists who are trying to take control of Iraq...

Sure, now they are after we created a power vacuum and more influence in the region has now shifted to Iran. This would not be happening if we had prepared for this by closing the borders. Most of the insurgents are foreigners and funded by Iran and Syria. The fact is we are giving the extremist a cause and they are recruiting more every day. How is this making us safer?

Originally posted by Muaddib
Iraqis in the northern and southern regions of Iraq, which is where most Iraqis live btw but for some reason those from the left never tell you this, are living in relative peace and they are still thanking the coalition for what they did....

If that is true, that would be welcome news and I would feel better. Maybe you could provide a link.

Originally posted by Muaddib
The quote doesn't say "let's allow atrocities to happen".....in fact it is stating that something must be done, sometimes this "something" means war. War is not pretty and it also brings suffering, but as the quote say I'll rather try something than "not do anything "...

I agree it is better to do something, and in the case of Afghanistan a war was justified, but invading Iraq has only made the problem worse. Even now there are atrocities happening right under our noses in Baghdad. Have you read about the death squads that are roaming around killing collaborators? With this happening, we will not get the cooperation from the citizens. For the immediate future, I think they need more troops in Baghdad.

Originally posted by Muaddib
You and others who think like you have to face the fact that "leaving terrorists alone" is not going to make the problem go away, otherwise 9/11 would have never happened, or the attacks in Britain or the attacks in Madrid, among the hundreds of attacks which are happening all over the world.

Sorry, not true. Bin Ladin and Al Queda did not just one day decide, “hey lets go fly some planes into the WTC”. It was due to the hatred that was bred by our past foreign relations policy in the ME over many years. But I am guessing you already know this. Again, when did I say leave them alone?

Originally posted by Muaddib
You let Islamic extremism run rampart and soon enough there will be more genocides like what has been happening in Sudan where over 2.5 million people have been exterminated by Islamic extremism and millions more have been displaced since 1983...

This is true, but then we should be going after the real Islamic Extremists. We should also be serving under the UN and not as American troops. Otherwise it is an invasion and occupation, which is how the Iraqis see it. I know many don’t have much faith in the UN, but with more support from us that could change.

Originally posted by Muaddib
I am waiting to see what kind of evidence you come up with which proves that I am getting anything from the war in Iraq...

That wasn’t me that said that, but there is plenty of business being generated that defense contractors and other corporations are making plenty of money off this war including from Iraqi Oil.

www.msnbc.msn.com...
www.washingtonpost.com...

But when I say the war in Iraq was for Iraqi oil, I mean that with Sadaam out of the way we will guarantee a more cooperative source of oil that we will be able to deal with in the future. With companies like Halliburton providing services this will help insure a long term source.

I will say that I appreciate your civil reply, and at least you try to provide support for your opinion. This is how issues are supposed to be worked out in this country and not bash each other. I just find it strange that you agree that the reasons for invading Iraq were not the reasons that were sold to Congress and the American public, and this doesn’t seem to bother you.

Well there you have it, a vicious circle where corporate interests and Israeli governmental interests far outweigh any hope of fairness and equality in the Middle East.

It kinda makes you wonder how much we don't know about what went on behind the scenes
during the Iran Contra affair.

Who funded and trained Saddam and BIn Laden in the first place?

Oh and we are completely overlooking one very important fact.

What truths are hidden beneath the sands of Iraq?

What role has organized religion played in all of this?

www.lightstreamers.com...

Remember that little uh "slip-up" by the Pope a few weeks ago?

We are bombing the living daylights out of the cradle of civilization.

No amount of oil could ever be worth what we may have lost in knowledge of mankind itself.

Yeah, I'm angry and disgusted that after all this world has been through, that we refused to give diplomacy enough time to prevent this madness.

If it were not for GREED, the people of Iraq would have become an important ally, in the War On
Ignorance and Deception.





























[edit on 8-10-2006 by FallenFromTheTree]

Originally posted by Hal9000
This is true, but then we should be going after the real Islamic Extremists. We should also be serving under the UN and not as American troops. Otherwise it is an invasion and occupation, which is how the Iraqis see it. I know many don’t have much faith in the UN, but with more support from us that could change.

How about more European, Chinese, or Russian support?

Opps, thats right, both the Chinese and Russians oppose any type UN interference in Sudan, much like they did in the case of Iraq (oil for food scandal, etc) and now with Iran. Ironic, huh? Must have something to do with all that arms selling and resource business deals thats preventing them from seeing the larger scope of things, such as the wholesale exterminating of hordes of people.

When will the other powers, who seek and strive to compete (economically and militarily) with the US, standup and step forward with a 'pair' and offer the lead or their support?

Why the hell does it virtually always have to be put upon the shoulders of the US?
The UN has been looking at the situation in Sudan for how long now without doing nearly anything helpful or useful? Smells more and more like a Kosovo, etc. replay where the UN watches as people are exterminated and the US has to force the issue. How about with Rwanda?! How much longer should the UN continue to wait and watch then talk about it, condemn it, then go back to waiting and watching? Oh wait, we know what they are waiting with baited breath for......for the US to take the lead.

You mention "with more support," and yet, fail to recognize that within the US, as the UN continues to screw up, etc., popular dissent grows against the UN, and with that increasing dissent, support for the UN wanes. There were a number of reasons the US stayed out of the League of Nations, just as there are currently, and have been, a growing number of reasons the US should withdraw from the United Nations. Bet.

[edit on 8-10-2006 by Seekerof]

the government is just as corrupt now as it was before the war
the difference being that now they know what freedoms they can take away from us wihtout anyone noticing

little things like climbing the statue of liberty, liquids on a plane, and the ability to use threat of terrorism as an all powerful "get out of jail free card" to justify everything and anything

people should not be afraid of their governments
governments should be afraid of their people

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by Hal9000
This is true, but then we should be going after the real Islamic Extremists. We should also be serving under the UN and not as American troops. Otherwise it is an invasion and occupation, which is how the Iraqis see it. I know many don’t have much faith in the UN, but with more support from us that could change.

How about more European, Chinese, or Russian support?

Yeah, I hear you Seekerof, and I will admit this is probably not a solution in the near term. Lately the UN seems to be all talk and no action. In fact they are having a hard time finding countries to supply troops to relieve our soldiers in Afghanistan. Then again, I also wonder if the lack of support is possibly because they did not agree with our invading Iraq.

My point was that Iraqis view us as invaders because of the nature of the invasion. Sure it is good that Sadaam is history, but now I think they would like a chance to rule themselves. If we let that happen they will surely split the country and then there will be more conflict. I just don't see things improving there.

Back to the begining, I always knew that the government sources were full of spit, and they managed to get everyone spraying their message all over the wall. Very little of it actually stuck, really just enough to convince die-hards that it was all real ... bias worked. People have mentioned Sudan and every other conflict on this planet in this thread, and I would like to point out that when you have a group of die-hards that have absolute power over their local environment, they will usually do whatever they feel is 'right', and it doesn't matter what the rest of the world thinks unless there is intervention, which happens not-so-often really. What a mess humanity truly is, nothing but tribal wars based on every little thing people can think of.

So Yes, I'm angry, I'm angy at the politicians that sold out the people to the corporations for economic gain, I'm angry at the people that trade their rights for a perceived protection, that settle for a comfy couch, a drink, a big screen TV and an SUV just so they can fit in with the rest of the local tribe of idiots. I'm angry at those that STOP educating themselves and settle for the belief in a superior being and then confuse that belief with the writings of human beings that only seek to control them through their beliefs. People aren't naturally stupid, but damn all, I am angry because people seek to be stupid and complacent just so that they can live like the darn Jones no matter what ethnic, social, religious, or whatever group they belong to.

Originally posted by Seekerof Must have something to do with all that arms selling and resource business deals

China is Sudan's main supplier of military equipment indeed.

China has used the threat of its Security Council veto to stall or dilute UN resolutions on Darfur, saying the situation in Sudan is an internal affair.

While the US maintains partial sanctions against Sudan, China has become the country's biggest trading partner, taking most of its oil exports.

BBC

Besides, Sudan does not seem to be willing to accept any military support from United Nations. Though, the European Union has been heavily lobbying for a strong European military coalition to send to the Darfur region.

One problem though, Sudan does not want any 'white' boots on their territorial, which of course does not mean there should be listened to the Sudanese government, as they apparently are not willing to change the situation.

Speaking on the condition of anonymity because the issue was so sensitive inside NATO, a diplomat said that neither the Sudanese government nor the African Union, which has major responsibility for the existing peacekeeping mission, "want to see white, European troops coming into Sudan."

Herald Tribune

Originally posted by Seekerof
Opps, thats right, both the Chinese and Russians oppose any type UN interference ... much like they did in the case of ... Iran.

Do you say that the Russian and Chinese standpoint is similar to that of the US in issues related to Israel? Russia is constructing in number of nuclear power plants in Iran, while the US supplies Israel with all kind of military equipment, which they use to bomb the hell out of Lebanese and Palestinians, in the name of ''self defense''. I am not going to argue about it with you, but in this perspective there's little difference between Russia and the US.

Originally posted by Seekerof
Why the hell does it virtually always have to be put upon the shoulders of the US?

Hasn't the US always taken the position of dominant leader, especially if it comes down to global issues? Besides, the US is the world's strongest power in terms of military.

Those two facts make it pretty obvious that the US should take responsibility of leading an international coalition to stop the Arabian militants in Sudan and Somalia of committing a genocide and other violent crimes or the a preemptive war against North Korea, which would most definitely have gotten the support from countries that did not support the war on Iraq (France, Germany). If you wonder why many countries did not support the war on Iraq you might question yourself if you are perhaps doing something wrong.

Most people will agree when it comes to the question whether Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator to his people or not, yet the reasons why and in the way how the US did start a war were logically opposed by many.

Personally, I have always admired the US for being an example to other western countries and for the efforts they made to solve conflicts by consensus politics, and so did many (non Americans).

However, what I've been noticing when talking to exchange students from the US, Canada, Germany and many other Western countries is that most others have had this kind of image as well. But since Bush took office the opinion of the US being an example to other countries, this general opinion has changed significantly. Especially the war on Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, International law violation, the secret prisons in Eastern Europe, made people questioning what has happened to the US.

It's implausible that the Bush Administration preaches the necessity of defending the democratic principles we as civilized Westerners stand for, while on the other hand exactly the same Administration violates those principles by committing crimes similar to those of insurgents and rogue states.


[edit on 8-10-2006 by Mdv2]

Originally posted by Jamuhn

Who are you quoting?

Anyway, taking away the freedom of Americans and scaring them with terror warnings does nothing to the Islamic extremists in the world at large, but to show them they have the ability to change our way of life.

[edit on 7-10-2006 by Jamuhn]

Oh i see....so if warning are given about the chatter from Islamic extremism it is jsut the government trying to scare people, but if the govenrment fails to give any warnings and there is an attack it is also the fault of the government for not doing anything about it.....

Originally posted by Muaddib
Oh i see....so if warning are given about the chatter from Islamic extremism it is jsut the government trying to scare people, but if the govenrment fails to give any warnings and there is an attack it is also the fault of the government for not doing anything about it.....

Why does the government have to scare its people to thwart terrorist attacks?

Muaddib,

How do you feel about the supression of education, especially to women in the Islamic culture.

It is my understanding that 80% of the Islamic population is illiterate.

In other words, all they know is what they are being told is true by religious clerics.

What is your view on the separation of religion and government?

Do you think that religious beliefs should be allowed to determine law?

In my perspective, organized religion in all cultures is used to control the massses.

Does the Islamic culture ever question the motives of their own religious leaders?

IF... the United States were to withdraw or reduce U.S. troop involvement
in Iraq, do you feel that the wealth of Iraq would be fairly distributed to the people
of Iraq or would only a small group maintain control, while the general population remained poor?

We know that we are being mislead by corruption in our government.
We know that religion is used as an effective tool to benefit those who seek power and wealth.
Am I to understand that the Islamic culture trusts their leadership beyond question?


In reality it does not matter if you are Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist or any other religious denomination. What matters is how we allow others to determine our fate on this earth.

After all, we are all equal in the eyes of One God, are we not?

Originally posted by Muaddib
Oh i see....so if warning are given about the chatter from Islamic extremism it is jsut the government trying to scare people, but if the govenrment fails to give any warnings and there is an attack it is also the fault of the government for not doing anything about it.....

Thanks for bringing this up. The Bush Administration failed to take an alarming warning indicating that Bin Laden was determined to strike on US soil; commercial airliners were likely to be used serious.

Bush and Rice received a memo concerning hijacking threats prior to 9/11

Furthermore the Bush Administration had the bad habit to relate everything to 9/11. Almost every thread which had terrorism as topic, including ''September 11th''. Obviously, the PR suggested not to use it anymore as I haven't heard Bush saying it as often anymore as he used to do. So deliberately scaring people. In my opinion, yes.

I am doubting the capabilities of a government that does not take such a warning serious.

Even more contradictory is the fact that Rice said she never imagined terrorist would use commercial airliners for such purposes, while she personally read the warning note months before.

I'm angry.

I'm angry over the fact that our government lies to the public every day about almost everything, and when thy get caught, they all bluster about the other party in their soundbites for a week or so and then continue on, without resolving anything, to the next lie and the next bunch of soundbites.

I'm angry over the fact that they just do what they want to, while ignoring not only the views of the public they "represent", but the very fact that the public is there at all.

I'm angry that the Bill of Rights and the Constitution are being shredded and the rights that so many young patriots fought and died for throughout our history are being tossed aside. in the name of security.

I'm angry that the present system forces every issue into a black or white, Republican or Democrat, left or right oversimplification, when every issue is in actuality much more complex.

I'm angry over lots of other stuff, too, that I won't get into right now.

Most of all I'm angry over the fact that the only solution (i.e. throw the bums out), is a moot point due to the fact that anyone even remotely in position to be selected and elected in their place are just more parts of the same machine and it would just be business as usual and we would see no improvement.

I sincerely wish I had an answer to these problems, but as much as I think about them, I can't come up with any viable ideas. I guess I'll just make noise untill the on-coming police state scoops me up with the rest of the noisy people, and no-one hears from any of us again.



[edit on 8-10-2006 by subject x]

Not only is the Bush Cartel lying through their teeth, but Richard Clark called Condi Rice into an emergency meeting explicitly to warn her about Bin Laden, but you know where that went.

None of this makes sense to the average citizen, but it makes perfect sence when your entire family fortune all the way back to Prescott Bush is based on military industrial contracts and the securities investments related to the business of war.

The Bush administration tells us that 9/11 happened due to intelligence failures.

There was no failure, this was a deliberate scheme to justify military industrial profiteering.

Maybe I am wrong with this.. but hear me out.

This anger is good. Hopefully it will be the pain that makes the US change. The problem as I see it though is that in order to peacefully change the system it requires the assistance of the current system to enact new laws and such - however, no person in government will cut their own job, so using this system to create a new system would probably not work.

So how does a country change if the framework to change is in the hands of those that have no interest in it changing?

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree
The Bush administration tells us that 9/11 happened due to intelligence failures.

There was no failure, this was a deliberate scheme to justify military industrial profiteering.

Remove the liberal horse-blinders of ignorance before it is too late.
Intelligence failures were all over the place, blatantly to the extent that they were so obvious that they were written all over the CIA, NSA, and FBI bathroom walls as graffiti.
Ask Tenet if their were no intelligence failures.
Better yet, ask Clinton or Bush if there were no intelligence failures...

[edit on 8-10-2006 by Seekerof]

Seekerof,

Once again you choose to make this a personal attack.

I will grant you that there was an intelligence failure in leadership because they refused to listen to the warnings and there was a lack of inter departmental communication between agencies, but enough people knew what was going on beforehand.

You continue to label me as a LIBERAL without any justification.

I detest corruption and waste in our government on any level regardless of party affiliation.

My father spent 23 years in the USAF retiring after working with the Inspector General's Group
at the Pentagon.

I am far better informed about these matters than you could ever imagine.

Originally posted by FallenFromTheTree

Seekerof,

Once again you choose to make this a personal attack.

I will grant you that there was an intelligence failure in leadership because they refused to listen to the warnings and there was a lack of inter departmental communication between agencies, but enough people knew what was going on beforehand.

You continue to label me as a LIBERAL without any justification.

I detest corruption and waste in our government on any level regardless of party affiliation.

My father spent 23 years in the USAF retiring after working with the Inspector General's Group
at the Pentagon.

I am far better informed about these matters than you could ever imagine.

The one thing I learned after spending 20 years in the military is that our civilian leadership is only interested in appeasing their corporate masters. Which is why we are in the Middle East in the first place. How was Saddam Hussein's takeover of the Kingdom of Kuwait a threat to our country in a military sense? It only shows how short-sighted our politicians had been for 15 years at the time that we were still heavily dependent on Middle Eastern oil supplies after OPEC had put the squeeze on us in 70's. Who was his biggest customers prior to '90? That would the West oil compaines of course. There's been very little investement in developing alternate or new energy sources by the gov't or the private sector. But our so-called energy companies spend more on lobbyists and public relations campaigns then developing new clean sources of energy while pocketing billions in profits from their self created fuel shortages. How are we better off strategically now than we were in '91? The answer is we're not. And now nearly 6000 Americans are dead and well as over 200,000 Iraqi and Afghani citizens to feed the insatiable lust for power of big corporate elites. And you think that it's about who's a liberal or conservative ? They still serve the same masters and its not the greater American public.

You said it mate!

These people who profit from the business of war could care less about our troops or the civilians
or right and wrong or God and Country.

They only worship power and profit from the safety of their corporate chambers.

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
The ME was always friendly to the USA without agression. With so many Middle Easterners living in the USA, how could this not be possible?

Simply by playing fair we could accomplish a great deal. Pakistan, India, NK and Israel all aquired nuke tech illegitemately, submit to no oversight as well as without signing any NPT ..fine then lets not overlook those 4 and reprimand Iran and NK. We need to look at all 5 and reprimand them all equally regardless of their allied status.

Thats how you will get respect..Not by killing people but by stopping the possibility of it through the use of diplomacy and equality.

I agree to this, but there is hypocrisy on both sides. Both the West and the Middle Eastern Countries say one thing and then do another. Everyone says that Isreal is the main point of why there are so many Muslims who are blowing themsleves up. What does Israel have to do with Kashmir? What does Israel have to do with Chechnya? What does Israel have to do with the Philipines? I could go on and on. I think that there is more that lies beneath what is being said. People are using other issues to instigate everyone else into fighting.

The Muslims in the area cannot have Israel exist as a nation because of the Palestinians. They do not care about the Palestinians, even though they say that they do. They just do not want the Palestinians in their lands.

If Mecca would have been lost hundreds of years ago, they would have no problem with reclaiming the land with no thought of the current people who live there. When children are being taught to hate Israel and the West in school, there is a problem. Why do they teach the children songs which have lyrics such as "turn my bones into knives so that I may kill the Jews"?

How will diplomacy stop a brainwashed killer filled with hate?

Yes, our hands are not clean by any means, but neither are their hands. BOTH sides need to admit this before any healing can begin.

we in general are not mad at the world. we are pissed off from 911. that was an attack on innocent people. did saddam and his sons need to be taken down (YES). i agree with that entirely. however i don't feel we need to be there anymore. mission accomplished on that part. time to come home. were not angry. most of us don't agree with the war. we need to keep our ship sharp. a much larger threat is on the horizon. we are the big bully and need to watch our step. every big bully has his day of shame. we (our government) tend to stick our noses where it doesn't belong. but humans in general are war and power hungry i would love to see when this wasn't true. however while there is money, power, weapons and somthing else i wont even mention. this will never happen. were not all bad just don't trust our government.