Congratulations, Spain - first government to fall because of Iraq, Bush!

by TheOldHippie 102 Replies latest social current

• 

  talesin

  Farkel,

  you said,

  Better late than never, or do you think we shouldn't have done anything about it after 9/11? The problem with arguments such as this is that no matter what was done, you could still find a reason to make them wrong:

  Your point is well-taken, here's a bit of my reasoning.

  The problem is that I don?t see where the invasion of Iraq is addressing terrorism.

  I?m not whining, but criticizing US foreign policy, and questioning the reasons for said policy.

  Here are a couple of what I consider to be pertinent questions:

  Why is the Saudi involvement with 9/11 being swept under the rug?

  Why is Saddam the objective, when he is not involved with Al Quaeda?

  Why have trade sanctions been imposed on the Iraqi people for the last 12 years, thus making economic recovery practically impossible?

  Why is your country not addressing the CAUSES of terrorism? For the past couple of centuries, first the French, then the English, then the Americans have pillaged the wealth of the Golden Triangle. Drugs and Oil are the two things that come to my mind.

  It?s the self-righteous ?we?re saving the world? attitude that bothers me. It seems the world only gets saved when it?s convenient, or when the US itself gets attacked, thus my earlier reference to WWII (no action till Pearl Harbour, although arms were earlier being traded with the Germans, boatloads of Jews turned away ? and don?t get me wrong, Canada too shares in this shame).

  Just food for thought.

  My comments last night were rather vehement, but I really feel that the rabid nationalism displayed by some shows a lack of knowledge of the history of the Middle East and the origins and causes of terrorism.

  Thanks

  talesin

  EDIT: I don't expect you or anyone else to agree with this, but wanted to let you know I'm not a 'whiner', I just disagree with US actions for what I consider are good reasons. It's fine if you disagree, but the subtle put-down of whiner is a shoe that does not fit.
• 

  Phantom Stranger

  Farkel's put-down was not subtle, but other than that quibble, I thought your post is well thought-out and well-said.

  Many believe that a US entry into the Spanish Civil War might have prevented Hitler's expansion into Europe. We don't get to act as if we are high-minded idealists all the time...

  The fundamental reason that the PP lost in Spain was due to the government's clumsy attempts to manipulate the electorate. Other democracies should take note...
• 

  blacksheep

  "Why is your country not addressing the CAUSES of terrorism? For the past couple of centuries, first the French, then the English, then the Americans have pillaged the wealth of the Golden Triangle. Drugs and Oil are the two things that come to my mind."

  And precisely how the US is to address the CAUSES of terrorism?. Let's see. Let's figure out why Islamofacist extremists will willingly destroy, maim, and terrorize innocent citizens, and will go so far as to commit "righteous" suicide in so doing. They believe they will be rewarded by Allah in some afterlife. They hate the American way of life and everything it stands for. They cannot conceive of the idea that a country can maintain a pluralistic society, where Muslims, Jews, Christians, and atheists can live. They cannot grasp the concept of pluralism; they only know "bad" and "good." We and are way of life are "bad"; they and their beliefs are "good."

  What precisely do you think the US can do to gently "assist" terrorists to quit terrorizing.
• 

  Phantom Stranger

  From today's Washington Post:http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040317/175799_1.html

  MADRID, March 16 -- In the first frantic hours after coordinated bomb blasts ripped through several packed commuter trains Thursday morning, the government of outgoing Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar undertook an intense campaign to convince the Spanish public and world opinion-makers that the Basque separatist group ETA had carried out the attacks, which killed 201 people and wounded more than 1,500.

  Beginning immediately after the blasts, Aznar and other officials telephoned journalists, stressing ETA's responsibility and dismissing speculation that Islamic extremists might be involved. Spanish diplomats pushed a hastily drafted resolution blaming ETA through the U.N. Security Council. At an afternoon news conference, when a reporter suggested the possibility of an al Qaeda connection, the interior minister, Angel Acebes, angrily denounced it as "a miserable attempt to disrupt information and confuse people." "There is no doubt that ETA is responsible," Acebes said.

  Within days, that assertion was in tatters, and with it the reputation and fortunes of the ruling party. Suspicion that the government manipulated information -- blaming ETA in order to divert any possible link between the bombings and Aznar's unpopular support for the war in Iraq -- helped fuel the upset victory of the Socialist Workers' Party in Sunday's elections. By then, Islamic extremists linked to al Qaeda had become the focus of the investigation.

  "They cannot conceive of the idea that a country can maintain a pluralistic society..."

  This is obviously a statement of personal belief, not an argument, since no supporting structure is provided for these statements. BS, it seems to me that you are saying that it is impossible for these terrorists to understand others or to be understood by others. So what do you think causes a human child capable of love, empathy, and compassion, to grow up to be a terrorist?
• 

  blacksheep

  "This is obviously a statement of personal belief, not an argument, since no supporting structure is provided for these statements. BS, it seems to me that you are saying that it is impossible for these terrorists to understand others or to be understood by others."

  So you believe that Islamofascists believe that, although they believe in Allah and Islam, that Christianity's okay too? Think back to the video's of Osama. The point he keeps driving home is that the USA and their supporters are the "enemy," what happened on 9/11 was "good", that god will back him in destroying the "enemy", the Western world. Do you see this as religious toleration? What are the track record of so many nations in the middle east in promoting religious toleration? Is not in fact, the OPPOSITE true?

  " So what do you think causes a human child capable of love, empathy, and compassion, to grow up to be a terrorist?"

  I'm not sure. But I question why a nation in the 21st century can be ruled by a group who severely oppresses women, finds them unworthy of education, fit only for reproduction. I suppose rather than appealing to basic human rights in outrage, we should try to "understand" what caused the ruling group to hate women so much in the first place.

  That is precisely your line of reasoning. Find out *why* brutal oppressors actually oppress. Flawed logic.
• 

  talesin

  thanks, PS

  to repeat your question

  blacksheep

  So what do you think causes a human child capable of love, empathy, and compassion, to grow up to be a terrorist?

  also, blacksheep

  They cannot grasp the concept of pluralism; they only know "bad" and "good." We and are way of life are "bad"; they and their beliefs are "good."

  Yes, this sounds familiar and very much like the American point of view.

  and to answer YOUR question,

  What precisely do you think the US can do to gently "assist" terrorists to quit terrorizing.

  First of all, a little education would be in order. WHY and WHEN did anti-US terrorism rear its ugly head? A little historical reading would give you a better comprehension of why we are in such a state right now. I have neither the time nor the inclination to give you a history lesson.

  Why not educate yourself instead of just adopting this kill-em-all attitude, when you clearly have little understanding of the history leading up to these events?

  This 'might makes right' argument is old and tired. The US as well as Britain and France have been interfering in the Middle East for centuries. Motives??? Colonization and greed.

  So maybe the US can 'gently' 'assist' the poor and disenfranchised of the Middle East to have their independence (that is, run their own countries; lest we forget, the US helped Saddam to power) and enjoy the wealth generated by the oil and poppy fields, instead of wanting all the money for itself. Perhaps then, they will stop turning to fundamentalism for a solution to their woes.

  Also, you failed to address my questions ... Why Saddam , what about Al Quaeda, and the Saudis (ie. the terrorists) ?

  It seems that you are more interested in being 'right' than in gaining understanding of the issues, complex as they are - is it just too much work?

  tal

  (this is exhausting, now I remember why I usually stay off these threads )
• 

  Love_Truth

  Here's my take:
  

  - The root cause of problematic terrorism is fundamentalist, radical, Islam. Unlike Christianity, which vocally speaks out against fundamentalist hate groups using the "Christian" banner, mainstream Islam very, very rarely, speaks out against radical fundamentalist Islamists, and so condones and encourages that type of behavior and belief. Which, in turn, causes terrorist events like 9/11, USS Cole, etc.

  -Oil, gold, etc are not the root cause of terrorism (see above). That is an apologetic statement, and puts those who use it in bed with the terrorists.

  -The reasons the US attacked Iraq (rather than Saudi Arabia) were many, indeed. Removing a very oppresive regime for a start. But from the standpoint of combatting terrorism, it was arguably the best target. Consider this- the Middle East's (ME) biggest military airport, easily used to deploy American and allied airstrikes. It's all about Real Estate- strategic location, location, location. It already had a crumbling, easy to take over government, that would create the least stir in overthrowing, of all the ME regimes. It could be used to attract terrorists to a common battleground, and keep the enemy busy there instead of here. It could be used to seperate non-terrorists from terrorists and their sympathyzers. In all of that that it has been successful.

  -Back to my first point. the US and it's allies will have a prescence in Iraq for many decades. Much will be done, with a base there, not only militarily, but psychologically to create a more Western friendly environmemnt through regime change and many other means to stop the spread of radical Islamist cancer that is the root cause of ME originated terrorism.

  I agree that war and politics aren't always (rarely?) "nice". It would be "nice" if Military Powers would stop engaging in the "my enemy's enemy is my friend" tactics, if there were a way to avoid all civilian casualties, etc. But that's the way it's always been throughout history, and I expect it to be that way unless divine intervention is involved.

  Love_Truth- my two cents.
• 

  Phantom Stranger

  Thanks, tal.

  BS, what reasoning of mine are you citing as faulty? I think you have me confused with someone else, or you have misunderstood one of my posts. What argument have I advocated that you have refuted? I think you'll find that my posts have had to with the actual dynamics of the Spanish election...

  How did you come by your encyclopedic understanding of terrorists and the Arab world? You seem to be talking as an authority...
• 

  Farkel

  tal,

  I apologize for calling you a whiner. I know this whole Iraqi thing is an emotional one for most everyone.

  : Why is the Saudi involvement with 9/11 being swept under the rug?

  How could you say that? Everyone knows all of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis.

  : Why is Saddam the objective, when he is not involved with Al Quaeda?

  Because he one of the worst terrorists in the world.

  :Why have trade sanctions been imposed on the Iraqi people for the last 12 years, thus making economic recovery practically impossible?

  The trade sanctions were contingent upon letter UN inspectors into Iraq to find and dispose of weapons of mass destruction. Sadaam kicked them out. He didn't keep his end of the bargain, and so the sanctioned continued.

  : Why is your country not addressing the CAUSES of terrorism?

  Religion is the cause. The Crusades and Inquisition were also acts of terrorism. When someone commits a terrorist act and believes that God not only approves of it, but they will be eternally rewarded for it, it's not an easy thing to "address." You don't negotiate with such people, you don't try to reason with such people. You go out and kill such people.

  : It?s the self-righteous ?we?re saving the world? attitude that bothers me. It seems the world only gets saved when it?s convenient, or when the US itself gets attacked,

  What do you mean by "convenient?" Do you think our President sits around all day and summons his aides to ask, "is today a convenient day to start a war with some Country?"

  We (and our allies) DID save the world: The world is not speaking German. The world is not speaking Japanese. The world is not speaking Russian.

  So, are we better off for "saving the world," or not? Will the Iraqis be better off when their Country is secured and they are free to pursue their dreams?

  Farkel
• 

  Phantom Stranger

  Not sure I agree with that judgement that Islam does not disavow terror...

  Excerpted from the FINAL COMMUNIQUE OF THE NINTH EXTRAORDINARY SESSION OF THE ISLAMIC CONFERENCE OF FOREIGN MINISTERS - DOHA ? STATE OF QATAR 23 RAJAB 1422H (10 OCTOBER 2001)

  http://www.oic-oci.org/english/fm/All%20Download/frmex9.htm

  1 - The Conference strongly condemned the brutal terror acts that befell the United States, caused huge losses in human lives from various nationalities and wreaked tremendous destruction and damage in New York and Washington. It further reaffirmed that these terror acts ran counter to the teachings of the divine religions as well as ethical and human values, stressed the necessity of tracking down the perpetrators of these acts in the light of the results of investigations and bringing them to justice to inflict on them the penalty they deserve, and underscored its support of this effort. In this respect, the Conference expressed its condolences to and sympathy with the people and government of the United States and the families of the victims in these mournful and tragic circumstances.

  3- The Conference stressed that such shameful terror acts are opposed to the tolerant divine message of Islam which spurns aggression, calls for peace, coexistence, tolerance and respect among people, highly prizes the dignity of human life and prohibits killing of the innocent.

  From the article at: http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-09/13/article25.shtml

  DOHA, Qatar, Sept 13 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - Renowned Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi denounced the attacks against civilians in the U.S. Tuesday and encouraged Muslims to donate blood to the victims of the attack.
  
  In response to the bloody attack against civilians in the U.S., Sheikh Yusuf issued a statement Wednesday saying that:
  
  "Our hearts bleed for the attacks that has targeted the World Trade Center [WTC], as well as other institutions in the United States despite our strong oppositions to the American biased policy towards Israel on the military, political and economic fronts.
  
  "Islam, the religion of tolerance, holds the human soul in high esteem, and considers the attack against innocent human beings a grave sin, this is backed by the Qur'anic verse which reads:
  
  Who so ever kills a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he has killed all mankind, and who so ever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind," (Al-Ma'dah:32).
  
  "The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, is reported to have said, 'A believer remains within the scope of his religion as long as he doesn't kill another person illegally'," the prominent scholar said.
  
  He added that haphazard killing where the rough is taken with the smooth and where innocents are killed along with wrongdoers is totally forbidden in Islam.
  
  Even in times of war, Muslims are not allowed to kill anybody save the one who is indulged in face-to-face confrontation with them. They are not allowed to kill women, old persons, children, or even a monk in his religious seclusion.

  From this BBC story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1544955.stm

  Islamic world deplores US losses
  

  The head of al-Azhar in Cairo, one of Sunni Islam's highest religious authority, said attacking innocent people was not courageous, but stupid and would be punished on Judgement Day.

  "It's not courage in any way to kill an innocent person, or to kill thousands of people, including men and women and children," said Sheik Mohammed Sayed ntawi.

  In Lebanon the spiritual leader of the Shia guerrilla group, Hezbollah, called the attacks "barbaric acts".

  He added even though Muslims were opposed to the American Government because of its support for Israel, the American people should not be blamed.