Interesting thought.....

[jdhill 0]

Well your example doesn't fit at all...

Iraq fired on US aircraft enforcing a no-fly zone imposed by the UN... Which was after he invaded his neighbor, and occupied the US embassy, which everyone knows is esentially US soil, and taking the staff hostage, ... "Gulf War II", is really just a continuation of "Gulf War I" since Iraq was in violation of the cease fire agreement from nearly the day it was signed... Even Clinton acted, but only in a limited manner.

Iraq was a prolific supporter of international terrorism... Harboring Abbu Abbass, Abu Musab Zarqawi... paying the families of Palestinians who undertook homicide bombings against Israel...

Oh yeah, and Iraq did shoot the USS Stark back in the 80s

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[billvon 2,473]

>"Gulf War II", is really just a continuation of "Gulf War I" since Iraq was in
> violation of the cease fire agreement from nearly the day it was signed...

Would you use that argument if North Korea lobbed a dirty bomb our way? There was no true "end of the war" there either. But I think everyone understands that the Korean War is over, and that the Iraq invasion was separate from Desert Storm.

>Iraq was a prolific supporter of international terrorism... Harboring Abbu
> Abbass, Abu Musab Zarqawi... paying the families of Palestinians who
> undertook homicide bombings against Israel...

They can't hold a candle to the billions of dollars we gave to Mujahideen terrorists in the 1980's. We sponsored terrorism for our own political reasons; that does not justify 9/11. Similarly, Hussein supported terrorism in several ways; that does not justify us killing 7000 innocent Iraqis.

[jdhill 0]

Quote

But I think everyone understands that the Korean War is over

Civilians may have that view... The military on the DMZ knows quite well that it is only a ceasefire, not peace. The military knew we would eventually invade Iraq... as fun as it would have been to wargame an OPLAN for the invasion of France, the one that is fought most often since 1991 was Iraq, followed by Korea.

Quote

They can't hold a candle to the billions of dollars we gave to Mujahideen terrorists in the 1980's

You mean the one's that fought the Russian Army, right? Did some of those guys go off and do bad things? yes... was our INTENT to support terrorist operations? no... The money and equipment was to fight the Russian MILITARY, not systematically attack civilian populations. There is a difference, Bill.

We have supported insurgencies, but have tried to keep that support to groups that fight their government, not their people.

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

You mean the one's that fought the Russian Army, right? Did some of those guys go off and do bad things? yes... was our INTENT to support terrorist operations? no... The money and equipment was to fight the Russian MILITARY, not systematically attack civilian populations. There is a difference, Bill.

Once again, not in the perception of the populace. Arming terrorists is arming terrorists. Arming oppressive regimes is arming oppressive regimes. Not until we stop picking one bad group over another bad group in order to serve our own selfish interests will that perception of us change. Until we do that, there will be hatred, mistrust and fear of us that breeds terrorists. THAT is the way to win the war on terror.

[jdhill 0]

Quote

Once again, not in the perception of the populace. Arming terrorists is arming terrorists.

What was the perception of the population in the 80s? It was we must do something to stop the USSR, but we are not willing to go to war over it, so arming this band in the mountains who will fight them sounds like a pretty good idea.

What "oppressive regime" are we arming? Is it the Isaelis? They make most of their own weapons. Is it the Saudis? They would just BUY them somewhere else.

Exactly which "selfish interest" are we serving? Is it protecting our oil supply? No, we buy most of our oil from South America... Is it stabilizing a region that has a tremendous effect on the developed world's economies? More likely, but that is not "our own selfish interests".

Its not fear or mistrust bred by our actions, it is hatred and fear propagated by religious extremists.

We could stop supporting Israel tomorrow and it would probably be reported on al Jezzera that we have turned the Israelis loose to kill Palestinians

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[billvon 2,473]

>was our INTENT to support terrorist operations? no...

Hell yes! We wanted terrorists to kill people. How can that not be supporting terrorist operations? That they were russian doesn't matter. If North Korea financed Al Qaeda strikes against South Korea (or against US troops) would you claim that they weren't supporting terrorism since there was a military element?

When you pay terrorists to kill civilians, you're sponsoring terrorism. All the perfume in the world won't make that smell any better.

>We have supported insurgencies, but have tried to keep that support
>to groups that fight their government, not their people.

Iran-Contra, 1980's. US-financed Contras kill an estimated 10,000 Nicaraguan civilians.

Mujahideen, 1980's. US-financed Islamic radicals kill thousands of doctors, teachers and nurses in Afghanistan - primarily because the russians were building schools and hospitals as fast as they could, and the mujahideen wanted them destroyed.

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

What was the perception of the population in the 80s? It was we must do something to stop the USSR, but we are not willing to go to war over it, so arming this band in the mountains who will fight them sounds like a pretty good idea.
***

That was the US perception. I'm talking about the perception of the average middle easterner. Their perception was, the US and USSR are fighting over out territory. We'll play nice with whichever one will help us feed outselves to survive another winter, but they're both evil.

***What "oppressive regime" are we arming? Is it the Isaelis? They make most of their own weapons. Is it the Saudis? They would just BUY them somewhere else.

Yes, it is the Israelis. They are perceived as oppressive to muslims. The House of Saud as well. If your daughter is buying crack from your neighbor, do you say "My neighbor isn't doing anything wrong, she'd just buy it from someone else"?

Quote

Exactly which "selfish interest" are we serving? Is it protecting our oil supply? No, we buy most of our oil from South America...

No we don't. We buy most of our oil from OPEC. OPEC supplies us with the oil that is closes geographically. The price of oil is dependent on supply and demand. If there is instability in the ME, than the price of oil goes up no matter who we buy it from. Are you trying to say that we have no vested interest related to oil in the middle east?

Quote

Is it stabilizing a region that has a tremendous effect on the developed world's economies? More likely, but that is not "our own selfish interests".

First, how have we stabilized the middle east by invading Iraq? And second...yes, that IS our own selfish interest. How else would you describe it?

Quote

Its not fear or mistrust bred by our actions, it is hatred and fear propagated by religious extremists.

Which wouldn't be believed if not for our actions.

[jdhill 0]

Quote

First, how have we stabilized the middle east by invading Iraq?

We havn't yet... but when the guy that on no less than three occations either threatend or invaded his neighbors, mined shipping lanes, sought weapons that could reach beyond his neigbors, and actively encouraged the use of terrorism is replaced with a stable government who is not a threat to the other countries in the region, I'd say that is a step toward stability. Another step will be a settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict...

Quote

yes, that IS our own selfish interest. How else would you describe it?

It is in our interest, yes... but it is also in the interest of European countries, and Asian countries... therefor not selfish.

Quote

Which wouldn't be believed if not for our actions.

Do our actions have an impact? Some, sure, but with the slanted news sources at best, and demagouges at worst we could bomb Israel and it come back as we hit Israel by mistake, we were really aiming at the refugee camp... How much did AJ report on the US helping Muslims in the Balkins? Not much... Those that are suseptable to reruitment by extremists don't vet their news sources, and don't get the news for several sources... they get it from the Mullah down the street...

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[PhillyKev 0]

Ok, you tell me then. Why do people in the middle east hate us? Because we don't invade and overthrow their governments enough, so if we do it more often they'll stop wanting to be terrorists?

You know that we can never ever hunt down and kill every joker that wants to be a terrorist. It's impossible. So tell me, what is the best way to make people want to stop killing us?

[jdhill 0]

Quote

So tell me, what is the best way to make people want to stop killing us?

Lets see... we could develope alternatives to buying oil from OPEC (other types of energy, drill in ANWR)and leave the middle east to burn itself down... but that doesn't solve the global problem and would be "selfish", and I don't think it would work anyway Genocide would work, but that's not PC... Oh wait, I've got it! We should all become muslim... that is what the extremists want, and that is the only thing that might turn their hate elsewhere.

There is no easy or catch all answer... We need a situation where no government tolerates terrorists, and populations don't tolerate it either... sadly I doubt that will ever happen.

[whiney] Why can't we all get along? [/whiney]

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Oh wait, I've got it! We should all become muslim... that is what the extremists want, and that is the only thing that might turn their hate elsewhere.

This statement is so misguided. Tell me, why aren't they targetting El Salvador, Guatemala, Dominican Republci, Jamaica, Ecuador, or Brazil? Those countries are much more predominantly Christian than the US.

[billvon 2,473]

>Oh wait, I've got it! We should all become muslim... that is what the extremists want . . .

Right! Because the Sunnis and Shi'a have always lived in peace.

[storm1977 0]

Well, there are many reasons.
1) we support Isreal.
2) FUndamentalist Islam is deathly affraid of western
influence in their culture. A lot of normal muslims do as well.
Muslims are very religious people who fear that if western culture were brought into their part of the world, it would destroy the value of life. They are a people who for the most part follow a strict set of rules dictated by religion, and western culture would corrupt yonger peoples minds.... and would be an end to their way of life.

It is a culture war as well. Ironically, the same type of culture war exists to some degree in this country.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[PhillyKev 0]

Now that is a more accurate assessment. So if we were to not be in that region exposing them to our culture, would they still hate us and want to kill us?

JDHILL seems to be implying that it doesn't matter what we do or don't do, that muslim extremists want to kill us simply for existing.

[storm1977 0]

Quote

Now that is a more accurate assessment. So if we were to not be in that region exposing them to our culture, would they still hate us and want to kill us?

JDHILL seems to be implying that it doesn't matter what we do or don't do, that muslim extremists want to kill us simply for existing.

Well, I think JD is right.... The Fudamentalists do want us dead no matter what, however, I don't think the "run of the mill" muslim necesarrily feels that way.

I would say though that a lot of the Muslim Clerics do preach about the impending doom of western cultural influence... It is a type of brainwashing being mixed in with religion. Because of teaching like that the "Run of the mill" muslim may look at situations like this and say, " Hey...cleric John was right... The americans are coming"

But let's face it, intelligent people in Iraq know we are not there to "steal their oil" or Take over.... However many people in Iraq are paranoid due to the regime they have had for 30 years, and also due to the influence of some high ranking religious leaders.

It is a fucked up situation, but, with time, hopefully the Iraqi people will realize that they do have the power to shape their future, and things are better and getting that way everyday.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[storm1977 0]

Oh... I forgot to mention that the muslim world too has their fears of westerners taking over confirmed because, let's face it, the media outlets in Iran, and Saudi Arabia and a lot of the middle east say it.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[storm1977 0]

Quote

JDHILL seems to be implying that it doesn't matter what we do or don't do, that muslim extremists want to kill us simply for existing.

PK... THis is why he thinks that:

From the Al Queda Manifesto:

"America is the head of heresy in our modern world, and it leads and infidel democratic regime that is based upon separation of religion and state and on ruling the people by the people vie legislating laws that contradict the way of Allah and permit what Allah has prohibited. This compels the other countries to act in accordance with the same laws in the same ways... and punishes any country that rebels against these laws by besieging it and then boycotting it. By so doing [America] seeks to impose on the world a religion which is not Allah's

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[SkyDekker 1,153]

Quote

Yes, you're right. That's when we have to stand up and fight for what we beleive is right. That's why there will probably always be war.

It is a serious compromise of moral character to avoid doing what you think is right, because someone might not like it.

The question becomes what rights you think you have pushing your moral values on others on their land.

Easy to convince people of the righteousness of a fight when they are upholding the morals in their own house. gets quite a bit more difficult if it is about YOUR morals in some one else's house.

[billvon 2,473]

>t is a serious compromise of moral character to avoid doing what you
> think is right, because someone might not like it.

I agree. And it is an even more serious compromise of moral character to endorse heinous, immoral acts because you feel they might benefit you. It takes a lot of moral character to not take the easy way out, and to stand up for what you believe in. It takes even more to stand up for other's rights.

[AdD 1]

Quote

Well, there are many reasons.
1) we support Isreal.
2) FUndamentalist Islam is deathly affraid of western
influence in their culture. A lot of normal muslims do as well.
Muslims are very religious people who fear that if western culture were brought into their part of the world, it would destroy the value of life. They are a people who for the most part follow a strict set of rules dictated by religion, and western culture would corrupt yonger peoples minds.... and would be an end to their way of life.

It is a culture war as well. Ironically, the same type of culture war exists to some degree in this country.

There is a book called "Good Muslim, Bad Muslim" written by Africa scholar Mahmood Mamdani which completely demolishes #2 and everything you said after it. I wouldn't read it unless you want your political world view turned upside down.

Life is ez
On the dz
Every jumper's dream
3 rigs and an airstream

[Trent 0]

Quote

The question becomes what rights you think you have pushing your moral values on others on their land.

Easy to convince people of the righteousness of a fight when they are upholding the morals in their own house. gets quite a bit more difficult if it is about YOUR morals in some one else's house.

What right did we have to rid the world of Naziism and to push our western democratic values on the Germans? What right did we have standing up to the communist USSR? What right did the North have impressing their federal and anti-slavery views upon the South?

At some point someone said, "What's happening is wrong and we have to do something about it." There were many people in each case that did not want us interfering, but most people will agree that it was the right thing to do.

Remaining in Iraq at this point does not have anything to do with trying to put our morals on the Iraqis. There are millions of Iraqis who want to elect their leaders. Don't think arab states want democracy? Ask the Iranian students and the millions that voted in Afghanistan.


And for Bill....

Quote

I agree. And it is an even more serious compromise of moral character to endorse heinous, immoral acts because you feel they might benefit you. It takes a lot of moral character to not take the easy way out, and to stand up for what you believe in. It takes even more to stand up for other's rights.

So are you standing up for the heinous immoral acts under the Saddam regime? Or are you saying that you commend the US for standing up for the Iraqis that wanted to be rid of their brutal dictator?

Oh, hello again!

[IanHarrop 37]

Quote

The question becomes what rights you think you have pushing your moral values on others on their land.

Native Americans might have intersting thoughts on this question. Seems to me this has been done locally.

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[SkyDekker 1,153]

Quote

What right did we have to rid the world of Naziism and to push our western democratic values on the Germans? What right did we have standing up to the communist USSR? What right did the North have impressing their federal and anti-slavery views upon the South?

Difference is, there was a direct threat in those cases. There is some serious question about that with regards to Iraq.