Euler
Senior Member
Cash: $ 76.16
Posts: 404
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
|
| Bush War Speech |
 |
|
Did anyone see the speech last night? What an embarrassment. I cannot believe we have this, this... thing representing the USA.
More lies of 9/11 ties. Bush's own appointed committee debunked the Iraq/9/11 connection, yet here we are back at square zero as Bush peddles the same old DEADLY lies about defending US civilians from Iraqi insurgents.
Never before in the history of Earth have the people of that area engaged in suicide bombing - UNTIL THE US INVADED and OCCUPIED their land and ABUSED the citizens of the sovreign nation of Iraq. This pretty much seals it - the suicide bombers are motivated and encouraged by US occupation.
No plan. No schedule. No respect. Only lies, fear and misdirection. One day they say it's almost over, the next they say it'll take decades.
Decades of bloodshed at 1Billion per week - sound like a feasible expense to you?
---
|
Wed Jun 29, 2005 10:00 pm |
|
|
David Briggs
Senior Member
Cash: $ 57.86
Posts: 289
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
|
1. You cannot re-make another culture in your own image. It is foolish to try, no matter how noble it feels.
2. An insurgency thrives because it is receiving support from the people of the country.
3. It is a trap to keep putting your troops in harm's way so that those who have already been killed will not have died in vain. This is the way you go from 1,700 dead to 50,000 dead.
4. In your quest to defeat an insurgency, you get drawn into expanding the war to a larger region in the mistaken belief that its lifesource lies just beyond the next ridge. (See Lesson #2) The Cambodia and Laos of Viet Nam are the Syria and Iran of this war.
5. Americans who oppose the war are not less patriotic than Americans who support it. They are not trying to hurt the troops. As with Viet Nam, history may very well show such opponents to have been correct all along (despite the revisionism now being put forward that we didn't stay long enough or fight hard enough).
~~David
|
|
Thu Jun 30, 2005 10:08 pm |
|
|
ashraf
Preferred Member
Cash: $ 27.69
Posts: 141
Joined: 24 May 2005
Location: The Middle East
|
You are absolutely correct, Euler
I wish the American people would realize that the terrorism and suicide bombing in Iraq is a direct result of the US millitary occupation. Suicide bombing was never known to the Iraqi culture until the American soldiers stepped on the Iraqi soil.
It seems that some people still don't understand simple physics:
"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."
You can not become free by accepting to be occupied
|
|
Thu Jun 30, 2005 10:59 pm |
|
|
Euler
Senior Member
Cash: $ 76.16
Posts: 404
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
|
David, I agree with everything you said.
I was ready to hear Bush acknowledge mistakes and promise to do his best, to change something, take a different tack, IMPROVE! Instead I heard more of the same delusional fantasy.
|
|
Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:05 pm |
|
|
Euler
Senior Member
Cash: $ 76.16
Posts: 404
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
|
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sarah
"1. You cannot re-make another culture in your own image. It is foolish to try, no matter how noble it feels."
Foolish? Tom Cruise and Scientology seem to be doing well at it. Falun Gung also. Saddam did well at it also.
The US professes to NOT be doing that, but rather to be assisting Iraq with creating their own government. Remember that they did not have a participatory government previously.
Tom Cruise? Do you even know what he's talking about? Falun... it's not even... (sigh) relevant.
The US is imposing Westernism onto the once sovreign people of Iraq. Not just Democracy, but religion, attitude towards life/death/freedom/work - it's a cultural takeover attempt. A very shoddy and poorly planned one at that.
quote:
Originally posted by sarah
"2. An insurgency thrives because it is receiving support from the people of the country."
That's like saying that Al Queda thrived in Afghanistan because they had support within the country. Yes indeed. They paid everyone off. My understanding is that most of the insurgents in Iraq are from Saudi Arabia.
Not just money, the Taliban and AQ had highly compatible ideologies and got along well together.
quote:
Originally posted by sarah
"3. It is a trap to keep putting your troops in harm's way so that those who have already been killed will not have died in vain. This is the way you go from 1,700 dead to 50,000 dead."
By definition, troops are always in harm's way. If we only put our troops where they are safe...ahem...its not a military. Thinking like that loses wars.
Interesting semantical point. However, David's still right. Kerry said it well: If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you do: Stop Digging.
quote:
Originally posted by sarah
"4. In your quest to defeat an insurgency, you get drawn into expanding the war to a larger region in the mistaken belief that its lifesource lies just beyond the next ridge. (See Lesson #2) The Cambodia and Laos of Viet Nam are the Syria and Iran of this war."
No generalization is always true...not even this one. To decide in advance that fighting against an insurgency is hopeless yields defeat by definition.
The Palestinians wanted Israel to believe as you do.... You can't fight an insurgency. Surrender. Israel graciously declined.
Why retreat into semantics? Did you miss his point?
By the way, Israel citizens dragged a small Palestinian boy into the street today and stoned him on camera. There, ready to get back on topic, now? Good.
quote:
Originally posted by sarah
"5. Americans who oppose the war are not less patriotic than Americans who support it. They are not trying to hurt the troops. As with Viet Nam, history may very well show such opponents to have been correct all along (despite the revisionism now being put forward that we didn't stay long enough or fight hard enough)."
I agree. I would also argue the reverse. Americans who support the war are also not less patriotic, nor less intelligent than those who oppose it.
No. This is an intelligence issue. This speaks to a persons capacity to do research, think abstractly, ask questions and come up with independent answers without being led by propaganda. Without being swayed by and spouting logical fallacies.
We are all patriots and some of us are ... stupid. Or as my wife likes to euphemize: some people have relaxed standards for what passes as truth.
|
|
Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:24 pm |
|
|
Euler
Senior Member
Cash: $ 76.16
Posts: 404
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
|
Oh yeah, don't you wish we were actually responding to the terrorists.
Instead of pursuing a War On Terror, we decided to call it quits and go beat up a sovreign, non-fanatical nation weakened by a decade of sanctions with a crazy dictator.
I don't mean to make light of it because we've lost over 1700 of our best and senselessly slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens.
Meanwhile, AQ walks around scott free. Bush says he doesn't care about OBL. Bush says the War on Terror is "unwinnable".
So, no - the US is NOT defending itself. It is making a huge delusional tactical mistake.
|
|
Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:31 pm |
|
|
David Briggs
Senior Member
Cash: $ 57.86
Posts: 289
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
|
"1. You cannot re-make another culture in your own image. It is foolish to try, no matter how noble it feels."
Someone else corrected me about this one. We re-made Japan in our own image. They really had to be crushed into the dirt~~ two nuclear attacks and a post-surrender radio broadcast by Hirohito to admit that he wasn't God~~ but we did accomplish the desired transformation. And it turned out to be pretty successful.
~~David
|
|
Fri Jul 01, 2005 1:26 am |
|
|
ashraf
Preferred Member
Cash: $ 27.69
Posts: 141
Joined: 24 May 2005
Location: The Middle East
|
quote:
Originally posted by sarah
quote:
Originally posted by ashraf
It seems that some people still don't understand simple physics: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."
You are absolutely correct, ashraf. Some people, particularly some extremist groups in the Middle East, don't understand that when you terrorize people, those people respond to defend themselves.
I see. So one of those responses is millitarily occupying a whole country even if the perpetrators were just a few individuals, and even if the country has nothing to do with the reason of the war?.
You can not become free by accepting to be occupied
|
|
Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:54 am |
|
|
ashraf
Preferred Member
Cash: $ 27.69
Posts: 141
Joined: 24 May 2005
Location: The Middle East
|
Sarah,
You apparantely have ignored completely about what I said before about America - or maybe just acting ignorant for the sake of misleading the readers. What I have said and will always say is that I despize like many millions around the world your government foreign policies in the Middle East while at the same time have utmost respect for the achievemt of America in the fields of medicine, science, technology etc.
Your policy makers are the ones to be blamed for the hatred...play hard ball with them instead of running away from the problem.
Learn from history instead of continuously denying the truth. Your government raped Iraq and its resources when it should have pursued the perpetrators of 9/11. And don't please start opening the files of the Second Gulf war. The victims of the depleted Uranium are still a witness of how barbaric your government was.
You can not become free by accepting to be occupied
|
|
Wed Jul 06, 2005 12:44 pm |
|
|
Euler
Senior Member
Cash: $ 76.16
Posts: 404
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
|
|
|
|
Delusional fantasy. Bush's own investigation reported that Saddam had no capacity to strike anywhere after a decade of sanctrions and what with the no-fly zone and all. You're just making up lies!
Saddam brought women's suffrage to Iraq. He brought a somewhat stable SECULAR gov't to Iraq. He built hospitals, roads, Universities, telecom infrastructure. Saddam is solely responsible for what modernization Iraq has today. He was also greedy, paranoid and delusional. He screwed up in Iran. And then in Kuwait. And then he refused to put his citizens first.
You know he thought he had US participation on the Iran thing. And he honestly thought the US would not mind about Kuwait. He became socially irresponsible, and increasingly deluded, especially in the later years.
But think of him in his youth. Bringing Women's suffrage to Iraq. Do you know what that means in a ME nation? No you don't.
It means he wasn't the monster you make him out to be. I'm glad he's out of power, so are millions of others, but you act like he's the antichrist. He wasn't. NONE of the things Bush said turned out true. NONE! As in - NOT ONE.
It's people like you that encourage terrorists by not demanding that the US fight - terrorism. Too bad it's all okay with apologists like you.
|
|
Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:21 pm |
|
|
Andrew
Admin
Cash: $ 460.25
Posts: 1695
Joined: 02 Nov 2003
Location: Texas
|
He may not have been the antichrist, but he was a monster.
He tortured and killed his own people by the dozen.
The 9 merchants who were used as scapegoats for the economy, and had their right arms chopped off and X's tattooed on their foreheads would probably agree.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0414/p03s01-ussc.html
|
|
Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:50 pm |
|
|
akash
First Time Poster
Cash: $ 0.20
Posts: 1
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
|
| War is a Racket and History is His (conqueror's) story? |
|
|
There is no denying it! Whose version of history would you believe?
Do some digging and thinking of your own about all Wars, revolutions and
yes about 9-11 and Iraq war. Also learn about mind control and media manipulation to preserve Corporate Monopoly capitalism and Global centralized Banking of a few in the name of giving freedom via divide and rule Democracy!
Wake up and smell the fresh air for sanity's sake 
http://www.wanttoknow.info
http://www.seek2know.net/article.html
|
|
Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:53 am |
|
|
Euler
Senior Member
Cash: $ 76.16
Posts: 404
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
|
|
|
|
Hey, Saddam was a tough guy. He had to be to rise to his office. As a matter of fact, ALL ME leaders are tough as nails. I won't list them here. They just don't have Gov'ts with MultiTrillion dollar bankrolls trying to demonize them and expose their dirty underwear. You don't want to know about Musharraf's violent past, for example.
As non-puppet ME leaders go, Saddam in his youth, was a great step forward for Iraq. Did he gradually slip into a confused Jacko-type fantasy world of paranoia and delusion, resulting in horrible outcomes for the people of Iraq? You bet. But he was NO threat to US soil. He was NO threat to his neighbors, after Desert Storm. Face it people, the sanctions WORKED.
Why did Saddam need to be so tough? The answer is that in the ME, there are very different cultural attitudes towards goal-seeking and ambition, towards politics and violence - even towards life and death. For whatever reason, these cultural differences exist. The same brutality exists or is latent in every ME leader, in every potential ME leader. They cannot gain the respect of their people without it. These are the people of Hammurabi's Code.
Our protection is not pre-emptive occupation. Our protection is faith in God and forward thinking diplomacy and infiltration.
If you think we are right to stomp over there and impose our cultural value systems upon them, you are as wrong as Cortez "converting" the Aztecs through bloody inquisition for Queen and Country.
If a peaceful way is to be found for the troubled nations of the ME, rest assured THEY will find it. We need to be there to help.
|
|
Tue Jul 12, 2005 4:19 pm |
|
|
Euler
Senior Member
Cash: $ 76.16
Posts: 404
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
|
Sarah, tell you what, you hurl all the insults you can conjure. Meanwhile, I'll continue to tell the truth. If the best you can do is copy and paste irrelevant material, well that speaks for itself, doesn't it?
Saddam wasn't a humane leader. That's not the debate.
I'm telling you Saddam brought Women's Suffrage and Universities and Hospitals to Iraq. That's fact - sorry if it makes you mad.
PS: I don't think "demagogue" means what you think it means. LOL
|
|
Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:03 pm |
|
|
Euler
Senior Member
Cash: $ 76.16
Posts: 404
Joined: 06 Nov 2003
|
|
|
|
OMG LOL. Your ignorance is staggering.
You cannot even keep your Wars straight. And then the hilarious Hitler comparisons... LOL!
Okay, surprise (again) - Reagan's US helped fund Saddam versus Iran... MEANWHILE we funded Iran against Saddam. Get it? That whole situation that you want to compare to Nazi Germany was funded and exacerbated by the USA, the CIA, to be specific. We funded both sides against each other. Brilliant, no? It was an amazingly effective strategy to drain both Iran's and Iraq's resources and power.
Sooo, you've basically compared Hitler to Reagan. LOLOLOL
Kuwait, boy that was crazy. Yep there's no denying. I've read that Saddam didn't think the US would object. I don't understand what went on there. Crazy - and... we stopped it as we should have.
And, I don't know where you get that "appeasement" rhetoric. Are you cutting and pasting from some one elses debate? LOL
Saddam created a SECULAR state smack dab in the mid-east. That's not remarkable to you? Women did not wear Burkas. The went to Universities. They Voted. They held professional and government positions.
I DARE you to find that in Pakistan TODAY, our current best ally in the mid-east.
|
|
Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:39 pm |
|
|
|
