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.

 

Why Does the Left Try so hard to Justify Terrorists in the Middle East?

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms
 


So I say again, since it's the USA fault for helping fuel the fire, what can we do about? Just allow various 9/11s to happen all over the US because the Muslims fail to educate themselves properly and refuse to get rid of their religious mythology in politics?

At least we try to give these countries a chance at being led to true democracy when leaders before did not want to have anything to do with it!


This idea that we're out there to save the world is just a piece of propaganda that you've been told. We don't care about the world, we only care about the world in which "our" national interest lie - namely oil rich countries. Mexico is right beside us, plenty of Americans are dying from the cartels, and what are we doing? Shipping guns down there to better supply the gangs?

If we got out of middle east interest and let it remain the interest for the countries in the middle east, we'd reduce the target on our backs. We could redistribute our resources to PROTECT ourselves instead of just wildly throwing lives and cash at the symptoms.




posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


As I said before we don't force democracy we allow them to have the choice. Democracy is better than the conditional suppressing Government based on radical islam that they live under currently is it not?


Okay, so last time we install a dictactor. This time we install a democracy because it makes Americans feel good. Do you not see the inconsistancy there? Do you not see the fundamental problem with installing a government by force?



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms
 


Oh yeah because exiting Iraq land worked out so well for the Iraqi people. Al Qaeda or Iran is looking to overthrow the government right now! I don't think it's all America's fault. Al Qaeda will still want to spread Islam around the world with or without our help using any means available to them!



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


Last time I checked they get the right to choose democracy or go back to their crappy dictators.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by JohhnyBGood
This is all about jihad ie war against he infidels until they submit - plus 'politics is war' by the left because the only moral compass they posses is the pursuit of power. So naturally they have become bedfellows, despite Islam being everything the left 'professes' to abhor -it's like thembeing in bed with ultra fundie Christians or Jews for pete's sake!

All the rest is pure Sun Tzu - if you can prevent your enemy from even recognising they have an enemy then the war is a gauranteed win!

As for the 'war on terror' that should have been a one day bombing campaign on Mecca - Islam will only stop attacking the West whilst we have our boot firmly on their necks - sorry if you libs don't find it nuanced enough for you, but boo hoo -the truth is mostly brutally childishly simple!


You're so brainwashed you can't even acknowledge anything outside of this simple little world you've been presented. It's hard to even start responding. I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or really are that ignorant.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


Ok I see, you are convinced this is a holy war with the evil Islamic fundamentalists threatening to put a burka on your daugther head. This is where I excuse myself from this discussion, obviously the Evangelical propaganda kool-aid party was successful.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


Last time I checked they get the right to choose democracy or go back to their crappy dictators.


Just great, our economy goes into the crapper and we lose thousands of lives so that Iraq can choose to possibly go back to another dictactorship. This has to be the most reckless justification in the history of the planet. We are killing ourselves and bankrupting ourselves with a payoff that can't be measured on a nano scale.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


Yes it's unfortunately all in the name of globalization and making sure the world gets the same chances to succeed as Americans do. I don't see what's so bad about democracy. I honestly don't care about the wars but I understand the viewpoint. A lot of people don't want to just sit around while dictators commit horrific crimes against humanity by international law.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


I never justified Americas horrific foreign policy either but I understand it.


You understand it as presented by the neocons. Let's pretend for one second that the neocons are right about all of this, IF the only way to be safe at home is to invade countries, nation build, and piss off and inspire more muslims to join Al Qaeda, something eventually will have to give. We can't keep up this pace forever and we're taxing ourselves out of exhistance, eventually we're going to go bankrupt. As much as I can't stand the democrat idea of turning America into a welfare state, blowing all of that money oversees on warefare has even less payoff for average Americans.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


Yes it's unfortunately all in the name of globalization and making sure the world gets the same chances to succeed as Americans do. I don't see what's so bad about democracy. I honestly don't care about the wars but I understand the viewpoint. A lot of people don't want to just sit around while dictators commit horrific crimes against humanity by international law.



You're trying to twist non-inventional ideas with an idea that democracy is bad. That's not what I'm saying at all. I love democracy, I wish every country in the world would wake up today and realize they love it too. But the idea that what we're doing is worth it because Iraq MIGHT be a democratic state now is reckless.

If ALL we wanted was for more democracies in the middle east, apparantly all we need to do is install internet all over the world. The Arab Spring has a better shot of creating atleast 1 true democracy in the middle east than we can do with trillions of dollars and thousands of lives.


And I hate to see crimes against humanity. I was happy to see Gaddhafi overthrown, no matter what kind of awful oppressive regime ends up coming next in Libya. But it's not America's place to dictate to other countries what to do or how to do it. The people have to want it for themselves. Let the people of that region, and specifically the people of that country, decide what is best for that region and country. As George Washington warned us, avoid these entangling alliances. We have done ourselves no favors by getting into every affair in the middle east, all while telling Mexico to F off. As a proud American, it makes me sick and it tells me exactly where the governments interests really are.
edit on 23-12-2011 by MidnightATL because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


The only problem with your reasoning is that you think the people are a little worse off for having a dictatorship than if they had democracy. That is not the case. There are generations of people who have been taught to hate the US mixed with their own twisted delusional religious mythology. because of all that they hardly have the time or the basic right to question anything that they do. It's all mapped out for them either from tyrannical government or a religious struggle. Let them decide their own fate is not right either because they don't have that choice! The sooner libertarians understand this the better. I'm not saying that neocons are right either but I understand both viewpoints. And the Middle East people are not right



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


The only problem with your reasoning is that you think the people are a little worse off for having a dictatorship than if they had democracy. That is not the case. There are generations of people who have been taught to hate the US mixed with their own twisted delusional religious mythology. because of all that they hardly have the time or the basic right to question anything that they do. It's all mapped out for them either from tyrannical government or a religious struggle. Let them decide their own fate is not right either because they don't have that choice! The sooner libertarians understand this the better. I'm not saying that neocons are right either but I understand both viewpoints. And the Middle East people are not right



I never said Al Qaeda would stop attacking or hating us, all I said was that we'd take the massive target off our backs. Again, we do ourselves no favors justifying the hate these people have for us, giving them new training resources. The resources would be better spent protecting ourselves at home.

And you assume wrong. I've seen the atrocities Sadam Hussein did on his people, but I also keep in mind that we're the assholes who put him in power and sold him the weapons who used to kill his own people. If democracy is what you need to sleep at night and keep on buying into the neocon lines, have at it. But this democracy is installed only because it's convenient. The American government has previously shown that it could care less either way. I guess if a trillion dollars and thousands of American lives is worth it to you so that 1 country can MAYBE have democracy they don't appreciate, while other countries in the middle east are fighting for democracy caused simply by internet and freedom of speech/ideas. America may very well be doomed if we keep on believing and getting off to that line of thinking though.

Like you, I say let them decide their own fate. But if they want democracy, they need to EARN it.



With that, I'm done with this thread. You've ignored 90% of what I've said or asked, like you've done to most people in this thread. You've obviously drunk the kool-aid and couldn't be happier. Hopefully you keep reading ATS and maybe something will eventually wake you up to all this insanity surrounding us. Take care, friend.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


I guess my point is, I remember thinking "why do the terrorist hate us?...

You argue that OBL justified his war on the US because of US bases in Arab countries and US foreign policy towards these Arab countries (in general). You're right that Americans would not be happy if Russia had a base in Texas. But you fail to mention that we made bases in Iraq only after Saddam had continually defied the UN and forced the US to unilaterally act to stop him from further destabilizing the region (remember that Iraq nationalists long felt that Kuwait belonged to Iraq and this led to Iraq attacking Kuwait in August 1990 - keeping in mind that Iraq and Kuwait reserves are 20% of the worlds oil and that this would solve Iraq's debt problems that had accrued during the Iraq/Iran war) and killing more people (it's estimated he killed in excess of 1 million people over the course of his time as president of Iraq) and preventing him from potentially being a terrorist hotbed (there were signs of this). I'm skipping a lot, but in total, we may have built bases elsewhere, and this might have encouraged terrorists like OBL to engage the US on bolder terms, but it was not the US that drew first blood.


I'd like to make an anology. What if a guy shoots a cop in...

Is a great analogy. And at length, I find myself having to agree with you. It's true that we can be filled with blood lust and a single-minded nature and fail to negotiate the twisting turns of reality when in hot pursuit of our target. All true. But sometimes we don't have much choice. If you pull back and let your target escape, then it's claimed you failed and did not do your job. If you succeed in apprehending your target but fail to prevent injuries to innocents then you're claimed to be careless and and so on. But we also have to account for the fact that this is a WAR and not a domestic concern. When we invaded Iraq in 2003, it was openly said among politicians and leaders that this was a WAR. And in wars there's collateral damage. This means innocents will die. So to a large extent, the failure to prevent the deaths of innocents is forgiveable.

There's another thing.

Should we trust soldiers to be critical of their own organization - that supports them?

Go here:
www.psychologicalscience.o rg ...

This leads one to believe that soldiers should not be the ones to oversee the military. This is because they depend on the military for their income AND are under constant threat from outside enemies that threaten the whole of the country and the integrity of the military they serve.

So considering any government branch, we need to have independent committees. For example, if I work for the EPA then I should not be trusted to oversee the EPA. Instead, somebody who's not financially dependent on the EPA must be called in to oversee. This is an independent observer. Of course, there's always the possibility that those instructed to oversee will get in bed with the ones they're supposed to be critical of. And furthermore, if the leadership of these "independent" committees becomes corrupt then who's going to oversee the overseers?
edit on 23-12-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Only a tiny minority of Muslims are terrorists...and no one's trying to justify terrorism. A lot of people (me included) are simply about demonizing an entire people based on the actions of a tiny minority.

A tiny minority in the US are bat# crazy evangelists...but I'd never call the majority of Americans stupid because that tiny minority is.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


So how do they earn it? What the heck does that even mean? They have to earn it??? Oh maybe if they give up on their religion then they will get democracy? They are taught to hate democracy because a few of their corrupt leaders are pissed off at America. when will they ever ask for it?

You don't seem to get the fact that they don't get the same rights as we do. It's a whole different paranoid world over there! So you are happy to see Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi go but you don't want to use force on the Middle East? Someone once said to me that the anti-war crowd still want wars but they are a bit better at hiding it. How do you think they were removed from power? Not from the US sitting idly by!



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by MidnightATL
 


I guess my point is, I remember thinking "why do the terrorist hate us?...

You argue that OBL justified his war on the US because of US bases in Arab countries and US foreign policy towards these Arab countries (in general). You're right that Americans would not be happy if Russia had a base in Texas. But you fail to mention that we made bases in Iraq only after Saddam had continually defied the UN and forced the US to unilaterally act to stop him from further destabilizing the region (remember that Iraq nationalists long felt that Kuwait belonged to Iraq and this led to Iraq attacking Kuwait in August 1990 - keeping in mind that Iraq and Kuwait reserves are 20% of the worlds oil and that this would solve Iraq's debt problems that had accrued during the Iraq/Iran war) and killing more people (it's estimated he killed in excess of 1 million people over the course of his time as president of Iraq) and preventing him from potentially being a terrorist hotbed (there were signs of this). I'm skipping a lot, but in total, we may have built bases in Iraq, and this might have encouraged terrorists like OBL to engage the US on bolder terms, but it was not the US that drew first blood.


I'd like to make an anology. What if a guy shoots a cop in...

Is a great analogy. And at length, I find myself having to agree with you. It's true that we can be filled with blood lust and a single-minded nature and fail to negotiate the twisting turns of reality when in hot pursuit of our target. All true. But sometimes we don't have much choice. If you pull back and let your target escape, then it's claimed you failed and did not do your job. If you succeed in apprehending your target but fail to prevent injuries to innocents then you're claimed to be careless and and so on. But we also have to account for the fact that this is a WAR and not a domestic concern. When we invaded Iraq in 2003, it was openly said among politicians and leaders that this was a WAR. And in wars there's collateral damage. This means innocents will die. So to a large extent, the failure to prevent the deaths of innocents is forgiveable.

There's another thing.

Should we trust soldiers to be critical of their own organization - that supports them?

Go here:
www.psychologicalscience.o rg ...

This leads one to believe that soldiers should not be the ones to oversee the military. This is because they depend on the military for their income AND are under constant threat from outside enemies that threaten the whole of the country and the integrity of the military they serve.

So considering any government branch, we need to have independent committees.
edit on 23-12-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)


Yes At least someone here knows what they are talking about! US got attacked (first) from the extreme Muslims based on their religious mythology. Why is that ok?



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Only a tiny minority of Muslims are terrorists..



The Land of Mecca still chops off peoples heads who are Jewish or carry a bible.

The Jewish religion is a HATE religion because it's based upon a bloodline. If you ain't part of that bloodline you can't join.

The Muslim religion also thinks they are elite and everyone else is dirt.

Both religions are Terrorists responsible for the deaths over the centuries. Christians also have had their religious conquests and killing...


Religion is the true Terrorist. Proof that there ain't no ""God"". We just use Religion to clan together and conquest/kill. It's pretty sick really.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pervius

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Only a tiny minority of Muslims are terrorists..



The Land of Mecca still chops off peoples heads who are Jewish or carry a bible.

The Jewish religion is a HATE religion because it's based upon a bloodline. If you ain't part of that bloodline you can't join.

The Muslim religion also thinks they are elite and everyone else is dirt.

Both religions are Terrorists responsible for the deaths over the centuries. Christians also have had their religious conquests and killing...


Religion is the true Terrorist. Proof that there ain't no ""God"". We just use Religion to clan together and conquest/kill. It's pretty sick really.


You have to be careful when you say religion is evil. Listen to the message, not the mythology and the traditions that's what most people fight over.



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pervius
The Jewish religion is a HATE religion because it's based upon a bloodline. If you ain't part of that bloodline you can't join.


absolute twaddle. utter hogwash.


While the process may be a bit longer and more tedious depending upon the denomination you choose to join, you most certainly CAN.

*hate can be such a blinding thing for some*



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   
It's no secret that the West's unrelentless killing of any Muslim deemed a suspect worthy of death (the key word is "suspect"), together with any collateral deaths deemed worth the prize (never mind that those who are collaterally killed, "taken out", [choose your favorite self-delusional euphemism] might disagree with the assessment that their death is in any way justified), just plays into the radicals' hands and gives them countless converts and consequently immeasurably more aid and support than they could ever hope to muster without the West's aid and support in that manner.
edit on 12/23/2011 by dubiousone because: Spelling and content.




top topics



 
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join