Western Foriegn Policy is not to Blame for Terror Attacks

a reply to: Grambler

Based on this rationale, I assume you think it would be perfectly reasonable for a person in the US to starp a bomb on themselves and blow up some German children because Germany bombed the UK.

Strawman....

The attack on the middle East was viewed as an attack on Islam and That created Radicals from peaceful tribesmen that had their countries destroyed.

Muslims have been killing each other for so many centuries that it has become a habit. All the non-Muslim world has done is get in the way and given them access to the technology to make the killing more efficient.

I say "non Muslim world" because the Soviet Union was a prime meddler alongside the USA during the Cold War, but people tend to forget that. This is why the Middle East and North Africa is awash with Russian-made weapons, from tanks and planes down to the prime killing tool the AK47 and RPG. Of course, the introduction of the smartphone and the internet has just allowed the mediaeval mindset to reach a wider audience and for them to record their brutality and backwardness.

Anyway, the person who pulls the trigger is the person to blame, as is the person who straps a suicide vest to a kid.

Blaming everything on the West is so simplistic and shallow.

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: Grambler

Based on this rationale, I assume you think it would be perfectly reasonable for a person in the US to starp a bomb on themselves and blow up some German children because Germany bombed the UK.

Strawman....

The attack on the middle East was viewed as an attack on Islam and That created Radicals from peaceful tribesmen that had their countries destroyed.

And here your bigotry shows once more. See Muslims must all be viewed as a "tribe", they are inferior to us westerners. Us westerners are individuals that have diverse countries, but all Muslims everywhere are all connected and the same.

The funny thing is you would be the first person screaming "Not all Muslims" when one commits a terror attack.

And again, so are you saying the US attack on the ME is why Boko Haram is raping young African girls. I guess those girls deserve it though, for not overthrowing the US themselves, right?

a reply to: Grambler

and put the blame firmly where it should be, on a radical Islamic ideology.

Thanks for a great thread.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Dont forget that the UK has 3 centuries experience in gaining monopoly access to drugs from the East - or did you think that they're in Afghanistan for the mountainous views.

a reply to: Grambler

Great post. It goes back even further than last few decades. People forget that Muslims sided with Nazi's during WWII. Our own US Navy was founded in response to the Barbary Pirates seizing merchant ships. Heck, even the much maligned Crusades was largely in response to Muslim conquerers.

Muslim countries being aggressive Dothraki backwater savages goes back centuries. Terrorism is nothing new and it is laughable to say it has to do with US foreign policy.

a reply to: Grambler

Another great post - but in all fairness why does Saudi Arabia get a free pass? They should have been the first country to be attacked in the middle East by the western coalitions

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Grambler

Great post. It goes back even further than last few decades. People forget that Muslims sided with Nazi's during WWII. Our own US Navy was founded in response to the Barbary Pirates seizing merchant ships. Heck, even the much maligned Crusades was largely in response to Muslim conquerers.

Muslim countries being aggressive Dothraki backwater savages goes back centuries. Terrorism is nothing new and it is laughable to say it has to do with US foreign policy.

Barbary pirates? Well according to some on this thread, that attack means we should expect all manner of western countries to attack Muslim countries.

An attack on one western country was an attack on the whole tribe, right?

So all of the western attacks were justified on the ME. Just waiting for those others to get iin here and explain how this makes sense.

a reply to: Grambler

Not to get too off topic...

But if the Barbary pirates hadn't acted the way they did, on the shores of their own nations...
They'd have met the same fate as the Native Americans.

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
a reply to: Grambler

Not to get too off topic...

But if the Barbary pirates hadn't acted the way they did, on the shores of their own nations...
They'd have met the same fate as the Native Americans.

Which is why going back in history in a tit for tat is stupid. No culture hasn't been both victim and perpetrator.

But the point I was making is it is absurd to blame an attack on Iraq for terrorists in Africa, and so forth.

originally posted by: Grambler


The answer that many people would give is “Well they feel that they have a kinship to people from those other countries through their religion”.

But this goes against these people’s other point, that Islam has nothing to do with the attacks. Other than religion, why would someone from the UAE throw their lives away killing Germans for the US attacking Afghanistan?

It also seems like a bigoted argument to me. Would the people making this argument even dare for one minute to justify a Western country like say Poland sending civilians to blow themselves up in Egypt because Pakistan attacked France? Of course not. In fact, they would decry Poland as committing war crimes and claim there was no reason for them to attack Egypt.

Now that you mentioned Poland. Poland offered their help to US hours after 9/11 and was one of the largest contributers with military hardware and troops in the illegal invasion of Iraq. Poland, an East European country thousands of miles away from the US participated in the illegal wars led by Us and Uk.
There goes your theory out of the window.
I did not bother reading rest of your OP since you got pretty much everything wrong in the very beginning of it.

a reply to: Grambler

The bigger picture is that it goes back to the carving out Palestine and the Balfour declaration, the creation of Saudi Arabia (Wahhabism) oil concessions, Shah Pahlavi (Iran). A century of disruption by vested interests in the ME. You cannot undo what these people have generationally suffered.

you wrote

THE ARGUMENT The argument goes something like this: The US, and to a lesser degree European countries, have been bombing countries in the Middle East. This has killed many innocent people, and so now people from those areas are angry and deciding to attack the US and Europe in response.

WHERE TERRORIST COME FROM If this were true, then we would expect to see almost all of these terrorist attacks coming from countries that the US and Europe have bombed; Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc.

The Terrorists that started the latest conflagration came from within a privileged group within western circles who didnt bat an eyelid in sacrificing their own country men at 911, 7/7/2005 London, 2002 Bali nightclub bombing.
If you think that the threat of a gold based Dinar by Gadhafi didnt threaten the US Petrodollar and led to the Libyan invasion you have some catching up to do.

This same group of players are still reaping the rewards ie Halliburton, Carlysle Group - the Politicians who led the West to war are their directors and shareholders.

originally posted by: Grambler
If this were true, then we would expect to see almost all of these terrorist attacks coming from countries that the US and Europe have bombed; Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc.

However, when we look at where the attackers are from, we see that startling few of them are from these countries. Countries such as Somalia, Trinidad and Tobago, Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates are where many of these terrorist hail from. Why would people from these countries attack the US and Europe over bombing Libya or Iraq?

There's very little information on the terrorists life stories. I would not trust the mass-media from promoting a pro-war agenda. So the argument you are making assumes the information you get about the terrorists is not engineered. I don't share your delusions and naivete.

We dropped 23,000 bombs on five predominately Muslim countries in 2015. We dropped 28,000 in 2016. It looks like 2017 will be a new record! The US has dropped the most bombs of any country in human history. Just look at this guy in the picture who lost his pregnant wife:

www.latimes.com...

You can't tell me that this guy is not the next guy to strap on a suicide bomb once he shows up in Europe as a refuge. You can make you lame arguments. But in my opinion the Muslims are being radicalized to become extremist by Western foreign policies. There's nothing you are going to say that will change my opinion.

a reply to: Grambler

Sir, you propose that the terrorist groups in reference are self organized and their aims are actually the same they publicly announce. That is utterly false statement! Sir, I will remind you that you are on a conspiracy forum, please do show some respect to the board, by bringing at least a partial geo-political insight when creating such lengthy topics... not just rehearsing what goes around in social medias.

If you ain't liking what I say, I am sure on the MSN board there won't be nasty people like me to bother you with uncomfortable comments.

Anathema.
-Argent

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError

originally posted by: Grambler


The answer that many people would give is “Well they feel that they have a kinship to people from those other countries through their religion”.

But this goes against these people’s other point, that Islam has nothing to do with the attacks. Other than religion, why would someone from the UAE throw their lives away killing Germans for the US attacking Afghanistan?

It also seems like a bigoted argument to me. Would the people making this argument even dare for one minute to justify a Western country like say Poland sending civilians to blow themselves up in Egypt because Pakistan attacked France? Of course not. In fact, they would decry Poland as committing war crimes and claim there was no reason for them to attack Egypt.

Now that you mentioned Poland. Poland offered their help to US hours after 9/11 and was one of the largest contributers with military hardware and troops in the illegal invasion of Iraq. Poland, an East European country thousands of miles away from the US participated in the illegal wars led by Us and Uk.
There goes your theory out of the window.
I did not bother reading rest of your OP since you got pretty much everything wrong in the very beginning of it.

Yep, you are right!

Never mind I specifically mention the exact reasons the terrorists give for attacking which isn't these wars and include things like stopping genocide in East Timor, never mind that I showed that most of the terrorist don't come from Afghanistan or Iraq, never mind I pointed out the terroist kill people in their own countries with no connection to the US.

Oh, can you point out where I remotely mentioned anything that would suggest Poland didn't help the US in their war?

Oh thats right you can't.

You just saw the name Poland, and thought "Yep they are evil so the whole thread is wrong"

Oh, and Hazerdous already brought this exact point up in a much more compelling manner and I gave my answer.

But unlike you, he was willing to read the thread.

But please, go back to your cultural marxist preaching about how the terrorist are noble fighter fighting off tyranny, and how the west deserves everything it gets.

a reply to: Grambler

Boko Haram was a creation of the Nigerian Govt and guess who benefited most from Nigerias oil?

en.wikipedia.org...

Implications and causes of civil war (1966–1970)

Igbo secessionism arose in part from the pogroms in the North that were aimed at Eastern people, most specifically, the Igbo. However, since the southeast encompassed most of the petroleum-rich Niger Delta, the prospect emerged of the Eastern Region gaining self-sufficiency and increasing prosperity. The exclusion of easterners from power caused many in the east to fear that oil revenues would be used to benefit areas in the north and west rather than their own. The desire to accrue profits from oil revenues combined with ethnic tensions acted as a catalyst for the Igbo-spearheaded secession. Additionally, despite his denials in later years, it appears that Ojukwu's insistence on secession at the time was heavily influenced by his knowledge of the extent of the area's oil reserves.[citation neede

Recent evidence has suggested a tax battle waged by American oil companies contributed to the regional and ethnic tensions that would lead to the outbreak of war. It was also during this period that, again thanks to the Americans, the opacity and concomitant corruption of Nigerian oil began to crystallise.[20] However, evidence from leaked US State Department documents have proven that Britain, through Shell-BP,[21] still held the most influence over the Nigerian oil industry at the time the war broke out.[21] The United States declared neutrality, with US Secretary of State Dean Rusk stating that "America is not in a position to take action as Nigeria is an area under British influence,"[21] but nevertheless provided military assistance to the Nigeria government.[21]

a reply to: Grambler


Read the desciption again, you've missed the important part. There are various groups calling themselves whatever they want, but "radical Islamism as a massive, sinister organisation" is a fraud.
Take a closer look at the Daesh fighter 'zealots' in case of doubt. They do drugs, drink coke and don't give a flying crap about islam. In fact, they have as much to do with islam as neocons with christianity.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Grambler
If this were true, then we would expect to see almost all of these terrorist attacks coming from countries that the US and Europe have bombed; Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc.

However, when we look at where the attackers are from, we see that startling few of them are from these countries. Countries such as Somalia, Trinidad and Tobago, Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates are where many of these terrorist hail from. Why would people from these countries attack the US and Europe over bombing Libya or Iraq?

There's very little information on the terrorists life stories. I would not trust the mass-media from promoting a pro-war agenda. So the argument you are making assumes the information you get about the terrorists is not engineered. I don't share your delusions and naivete.

We dropped 23,000 bombs on five predominately Muslim countries in 2015. We dropped 28,000 in 2016. It looks like 2017 will be a new record! The US has dropped the most bombs of any country in human history. Just look at this guy in the picture who lost his pregnant wife:

www.latimes.com...

You can't tell me that this guy is not the next guy to strap on a suicide bomb once he shows up in Europe as a refuge. You can make you lame arguments. But in my opinion the Muslims are being radicalized to become extremist by Western foreign policies.

Of course this man may decide to take revenge. But why do the majority of attacks not come from countries we have bombed? Like Saudi Arabia? How many bombs have we dropped there?

And why do these people rape children in their own countries, and butcher other Muslims? Is this because the US bombs too? It makes no sense.

And while I appreciate your conspiratorial nature, there have been clips of Isis leaders saying they attack because they want a world caliphate. We have Bin ladens own words saying he is angry at things like the US stopping funding the genocide of East Timor.

So again, are you suggesting that this is a lie, or that we should have helped them butcher the people there?

There's nothing you are going to say that will change my opinion.

Spoken like a true zealot!

Your mind is madde up, and you won't let things like facts change that.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Grambler


Read the desciption again, you've missed the important part. There are various groups calling themselves whatever they want, but "radical Islamism as a massive, sinister organisation" is a fraud.
Take a closer look at the Daesh fighter 'zealots' in case of doubt. They do drugs, drink coke and don't give a flying crap about islam. In fact, they have as much to do with islam as neocons with christianity.

Yep, the no true scottsman fallacy.

We know, only great awesome people are truly Islamic!

Only it turns out Isis takes their beliefs staight from the Koran.

originally posted by: Argentbenign
a reply to: Grambler

Sir, you propose that the terrorist groups in reference are self organized and their aims are actually the same they publicly announce. That is utterly false statement! Sir, I will remind you that you are on a conspiracy forum, please do show some respect to the board, by bringing at least a partial geo-political insight when creating such lengthy topics... not just rehearsing what goes around in social medias.

If you ain't liking what I say, I am sure on the MSN board there won't be nasty people like me to bother you with uncomfortable comments.

Anathema.
-Argent

I am not on any social media, sir.

I am sorry that you are someone who can not deal with a different opinion than you, and seeks to have a forum where everyone nods in agreement with you, sir.

I am sorry that it seems as if you believe that the US is always evil and creates all bad things in the world like terrorism, sir.

Perhaps you would like to go back to a university where you can be surrounded by like minded indvidiuals that blame America for everything and censor any differing opinion, sir.