 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
Ya they did fall out of spot with Washington.
They turned on us and showed our enemy status with them in many ways. Think about that while thinking about everything else I have said about them. What that all adds up to is a picture of a government that needed to be overthrown.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
I suppose that would be shooting to high but you guys could have still played some part in helping the situation.
We overthrew the Hussein regime, and the Kurds love us for it.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
Your ceasefire? The Ceasefire was brokered cheafly by US officials but if im not mistaken it was a NATO ceasefire, the US officials who brokered it were on behalf of the wider NATO organazation because the whole thing was a NATO operation. Is that right?
It was a U.N. ceasefire with 12 resolutions. However, the U.N. refused to enforce our ceasefire, and the refusal was wrong and corrupt, so we did it instead.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
Attacked but not by Iraq.....Are you telling me Saddam was plotting to attack America? You say the enemy (Hussein) was trying to target your civilans. So you are saying effectively he was plotting to attack american soil? Hussein and Al Qaeda are not ones to ally with Islamists. The Hussein Dictatorship was Secular and at the time Al Qaeda was mostly wa'habi fundamntalists.
I did not say we knew they were plotting. I am saying they had a high enough likelihood based on their history and positions. They were a major threat.
The Hussein regime may have had a secular domestic government operation, but their international actions were not secular. They funded Palestinian suicide bombings in Israel and supported Hamas and Hezbollah, as in gave them money specifically for their terrorism. Hussein called the U.S. "infidels" and "Satan". They were a suicide bomb terrorist government. If they had offered WMD's to Al Qaeda, Hamas, or Hezbollah or whomever else, how sure are you that they would have turned the offer down? They had a common enemy.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
That is no excuse to destabilize a country. He had soviet ties thats not a big deal either, they shared a border and an a extensive coastline. Thats like asking canada not to have relations with the USA.
Not merely Soviet ties or relations. We had Soviet relations. That is not what I am talking about. He was deemed to be an aider in the Soviet expansion aspirations. Winning the Cold War was more serious than any other thing the world has ever faced, other than the fight against the Nazis. It was the second biggest deal ever. We won it. If you don't like how we did it, that is unfortunate. Hindsight is 20/20, and we did what we thought we had to do. It worked. In the big picture, we were fighting for the ultimate preservation of democracy and the liberation of the Soviet states and of Eastern Europe.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
The british motivation for the Coup was the the Nationalization of the Gas and OIl fields. That was their reason. They enlisted the Americans siting alleged Soviet Ties. But if it was to protect democracy then surely you would have bolstered their democracy in any number of ways like you did with Israel. If any country should have been "sacrificed" then it should have been israel, by allowing its destruction you could have goten unfathonable support from the Arab and Muslim world, incuding Iran givign you guys even more influence to help their countries become democracies.
Like I have said, I am not sure in looking back that the coup was totally necessary. We won the Cold War.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
What i see with the Iran issue is just imperialism, It was a modern day act of Imperialism and your countries are suprised why Iran is so destrustful of the west.
How much longer do you want to talk about this side issue? If the British intelligence was wrong, that sucks, but we did have a Cold War to win, and we did respond to intelligence that a powerful communist expansion leader was running Iran. I don't want to split any more hairs over whether that one move in the second biggest nightmare the world has ever faced was necessary. We won the Cold War. That's all I have to say about that. If you want to start a thread where you bitch about what the U.S. did in Iran decades ago, then do it, but I am tired of addressing this side issue.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
There were plenty of options on the table other then overthrow the guy. It was primarily about the nationalization of the Oil fields and Gas and the alleged soviet ties was just icing on the cake. UM im not sure you realise what Britain was up to at the time. Onother Imperialist action on behalf of Britain was the invasion of Egypt during the Suez crisis. The Egytpains nationalized the Suez Canal and Britian,France and Israel invaded Egypt because they nationalized it. Again onother imperial action, the right of the people of the country and self determination was pushed aside in favour of Business interests. the western reaction of the Suez Crisis was imperialism and the overthrow of Mosadeq in favour of a Dictator Tyrant was imperialism.
It came up during our discussion i guess. The Cold War was not about preserving democracy but was about countering Soviet Influence and Vice Versa it was just a competition for who would be the top dog not about Democracy. During the Cold War the West did very little to protect Democracy especially in the Muslim world. The French handling of Algeria for example, The Suez Crisis, The immigrant jews were given palestine instead of the long estabilished arab majority, The installation of a brutal dictator in Iran by the west, French Colonialism in IndoChina.
If it were not for what the United States did during the Cold War, democracy would not exist on this planet right now. Do you see what I am saying?
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
There would be Whistel blowers, Not possibly everyone could have died or refuse to talk,
At any rate there would have been documents, truck drivers who drove the materials, government workers who had knowledge of it. Remember alot of these people who would have allegedly have knolwedge of WMD's would go to the USA or the UK authorities and give what they know for a Bribe or atleast a Visa to a Western Country. Look read this: http://www.slate.com/id/2083760/ this puts it in better perspective then i possibly can.
The whistles were blown about the existence of the WMD's. The very few who hid the weapons have not blown whistles concerning their locations.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
Every now and then bush gives a speech where he says Saddam had to be stopped and the tryant overthrown to free the iraqi people but if there was ample evidence at all now of WMD's then he would say something about them and how he dis armed him from the WMD's. He is a politican if there was ample evidence of the WMD's or heaven forbid actual WMD's then he would have included in his speeches on why the iraq war was neccesary.
Most people do not understand the WMD issue. They jump to this insane conclusion that because the weapons have not been found, they therefore never existed. Not finding them has made Bush look terrible on the world stage, which was Hussein's goal, so Bush knows that it would be bad politics to even bring up the subject now.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
Its not about a muslim take over of palestine its about a palestinian take over of Palestine. I don't care what the Palestinians do to fight the usurpers, as long as they are fighting them thats A-OK with me. The usurpers brought it upon themselves and it was well known giving Palestine over to the immigrant jews could only be done by force. The American report in my other thread showed the Americans concluded it and i assume the british would have done research too. It was well known that disenfranchizing the Palestinian Muslims and Christians could only be done by force and today the struggle continues because of Western indifference towards arabs.
The struggle continues because of the mentality that what one Israeli Jew does, no matter when it happened, is the responsibility of all Israeli Jews. Your indifference to the deliberate murders of Israeli children who were born in Israel, whose parents were born in Israel, whose grandparents were born in Israel, and who are too young to even know that there is a conflict is the type of mentality I am talking about. That kind of thinking is the problem.
Based on what you are saying, you don't care if a two year old Israeli like I just described is killed and nothing good comes from it. I will never be able to relate to that. I don't understand being that cold toward people because of what their ancestors did, and I will never be able to relate to treating an ethnic group as though it has only one mind. I don't get it at all. I have asked you to explain it to me many times, and at this point I am not even sure you understand what I am saying. Nothing you say ever acknowledges that you even understand my point. I am going to try one more time to illustrate it to you.
When I was in the fourth grade, my teacher would punish the entire class if a few students were too loud during lunch. She knew damn well that I was not one of the ones being too loud, but she would punish me and other innocent students for what some other students did. I would ask her why I had to write lines, and her response would be, "Because the class was too loud." Her reasoning was that I was in the class, and the class was too loud, therefore I was too loud. That is NOT logical reasoning. I will give you another illustration. In the 1960's, John Lennon said that The Beatles were more popular than Jesus Christ. A bunch of fanatical Christians responded to that by burning Beatles records and getting on the radio and telling people to shun The Beatles for what "they" said. The Beatles did not say it. John Lennon said it! It is that type of prejudiced thinking that is the biggest problem in the world. It is not logical, and it is very destructive and terrible.
Do you understand my point at all? You hate what the 1948 Israeli settlers did, and you blame every Jew who is in Israel 60 years later. I am not even close to getting that.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
The israelies are made up of immigrants or the children of immigrants like i have said many many tiems. Atleast 50% of the country only has a family history of 60 or so years in the region. They did not respect the Palestinians and they usurped their land, now is the time for revenge.
People should be held responsible for what their family members of 60 years ago did? Please explain that to me. How is killing people in Israeli Jew group B revenge against people in Israeli Jew group A? Can you answer that? The only thing I can guess is that you are so prejudiced and blinded by your own hatred that they are all the same to you. They are not all the same to reality!
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
The immigrants usupred the land from the Palestinians and now they will pay for it. An immigrant european in 1948 according to you has just as much right to Palestine as does a Palestine with a centuries old family history in the region?
Tonight when you are in bed and about to go to sleep, ponder deeply on the word "they". Do everything within your intellectual abilities to get to the bottom of what that word means... and what it does NOT mean.
If red headed individuals shoot my dog, have I gotten revenge if I shoot red headed individuals other than the ones who shot my dog? "Oh, but 'they' shot my dog." Think really hard about how that concept falls very short of being anything logical. If you can figure it out, please help me spread the word.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
The immigrants usupred the land from the Palestinians and now they will pay for it. An immigrant european in 1948 according to you has just as much right to Palestine as does a Palestine with a centuries old family history in the region?
If you and your parents were born on some land, you are not wrong for being there. Your well established and cultured existence there is understandable. Holding people's ancestry against them is far from understandable. The 1948 take over of land was unjust, just as the same thing now with Palestinian settlers would be unjust. Both are unjust concepts, and the 1948 Jews had the same excuse you are using for exactly the same thing with Palestinians. Same thing in both cases. Both are wrong. However, I blame the U.N. for the 1948 misdeed more than the settlers who accepted what the U.N. gave them. I sure as Hell do not blame Israeli children of 2008 for it. Why do you?
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
I calculated the number for you to put in perspective for you the very little history these people have in the region and how they stole Palestine first by Force with Western made weapons and then by flooding the region with immigrants.
I just boldfaced the word "they". I challenge you to tell me what is illogical about your use of it in that context. Can you tell me?
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
It's not about Muslim rule, i dont like the idea of a theocracy anymore then you do. I want PALESTINIAN rule, and secular rule. The Palestinians shouldn't be able to rule their own land because they are Muslims?
Rule cannot be both Palestianian Muslim and secular. The concept of a Palestinian state is universes away from secular. A secular government would not discriminate based on religion.
 Originally Posted by dragonoverlord
I have no problems with jews being in Palestine but when they forcibly take the land away frm the Majority by means of Arms and then flood the area with immigrants that indeed becomes a problem.
Then be pissed at the individuals who did that, not at their descendants who did absolutely nothing except be raised and continue to live where they were born. Imagine being born and raised in Canada and later in life being told you have to move away because you are the wrong religion or because you have the wrong ancestors. Think really hard about that. Now imagine losing your life over it. Imagine your three small children being blown up at a birthday party over it, and then imagine somebody calling it "revenge" and referring to your children as some group of "they" to which they actually do not belong.
|
|
Bookmarks