Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
If I may...; A reply to a cognizant antiIraq argument
Topic Started: May 16 2004, 03:01 PM (441 Views)
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
http://www.ariannaonline.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=10557
http://www.ariannaonline.com/phpBB2/viewto...p=103297#103297

The Jihad in Afghanistan will broaden until the entire world will be conquered because Allah has promised the victory to Islam
Abdullah Azzam


Ah unclejohn ... another quasi-intellectual pontificating endlessly your 'Byrnesian' idiocy to the adoration of other perpetually pompous peacocks who only have a resemblance of intelligence.

"johnny"
 
Military force is one of many different weapons that we can bring to bear in fighting terrorism. It is not, however, the most effective or the most efficient in most cases.

Before September 11th, before anyone recognized there was a war being waged, law enforcement was an important component in that war, but after 9-11 the strategy had to change. Law enforcement is reactive; first a crime must happen before the police can act. Law enforcement cannot act like an army and stop terrorism at the source, before it reaches America's shores.

The stakes are now too high to pretend that every port or harbor and every airport is secure. A free society is too open to cover every entrance into the nation or even police the thousands of miles of borders. The only thing that's can ultimately stop terrorism is stopping it at its source; sometimes the military is a necessary facet in confronting terrorism at its source.

"johnny"
 
Unless a state can be identified as harboring and fostering terrorist activities, a military intervention is probably ineffective. Invading Afghanistan was probably a good idea in a narrow sense. We may have made life difficult, at least for a time, for al-Qaeda. Changing course and invading Iraq was probably counterproductive, if our goal was to combat terrorists.

Is this to imply that nations that support terrorism haven't been identified? Of course not.

State Sponsors of Terrorism
In the immediate area surrounding the Middle East, there are four major state sponsors of terrorism. These state sponsors are nations whose government actively supports terrorist organizations.

Posted Image

Iran
Posted Image
Quote:
 
The State Department calls the Islamic Republic of Iran the world's "most active state sponsor of terrorism." Iran continues to provide funding, weapons, training, and sanctuary to numerous terrorist groups based in the Middle East and elsewhere. But reformist elements in the Iranian leadership and an increasingly discontented public are questioning the country's hard-line policies, rigid fundamentalism, and anti-Western bent. - Source

Iran sponsors Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and has started operations in Iraq supporting Moqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army.

Iraq
Posted Image
Quote:
 
Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship provided headquarters, operating bases, training camps, and other support to terrorist groups fighting the governments of neighboring Turkey and Iran, as well as to hard-line Palestinian groups. During the 1991 Gulf War, Saddam commissioned several failed terrorist attacks on U.S. facilities. The State Department lists Iraq as a state sponsor of terrorism. The question of Iraq’s link to terrorism grew more urgent with Saddam’s suspected determination to develop weapons of mass destruction, which Bush administration officials feared he might share with terrorists who could launch devastating attacks against the United States. - Source

Under Saddam Hussein, Iraq sponsored Hamas. There are elements from both Syria and Iran, and from the former regime who are carrying out terrorism in Iraq.

Sudan
Posted Image
Quote:
 
The country has been on the State Department’s list of states that sponsor terrorism since 1993, and the U.N. Security Council imposed sanctions on Sudan from 1996 to 2001 because of its involvement with terrorism. The Islamist Arab government that controls most of the country—which remains in the throes of a long-running civil war—has provided sanctuary to terrorists, including Osama bin Laden, and has let terrorist groups plan and carry out operations from Sudan. - Source

There is sectarian violence against Christians by the Muslim government in the Sudan.

Syria
Posted Image
Quote:
 
Syria, a secular dictatorship with one of the world’s worst human rights records, has been on the State Department list of countries sponsoring terrorism since the list’s inception in 1979. However, Syria has not been directly involved in terrorist operations since 1986, according to the State Department, and it bars Syria-based groups from launching attacks from Syria or targeting Westerners. But Syria has been involved in numerous past terrorist acts and still supports several terrorist groups. - Source

Syria supports Hamas, Hezbollah and is currently giving free passage into Iraq.

Analysis
The palatable euphemism "state sponsor" is used to describe nations that wage covert wars of attrition against other nations using terrorist organizations. Each of these nations are complicit in organizing and funding terrorism. Any attempt to stop or reduce terrorism must, at the very least, address these four nations for what they are - purveyors of Islamists propaganda who provide bases for training and staging attacks on any nation of their choosing.

In addition to nations that sponsor terrorism, individuals on the Arabian Peninsula provide large amounts of financial and material assistance. This assistance often comes under the aegis of Islam - Clerics and Islamic charities.

Posted Image

To combat these state sponsors, extreme pressure must be brought to bear on the nation diplomatically, economically and/or militarily. Each nation is unique and will require a unique approach, Ultimately the goal being that the political leaders of the Middle East repudiate the individuals and religious figures inciting terrorist acts. As well, the political leaders must repudiate the attitudes that are ultimately used to justify a whole host of violent and inhuman acts towards other peoples; ie: honor killings, rape, infanticide, arranged marriages, homosexual homicide, terrorism, etc, etc. It is an attitude that permeate the whole of Middle Eastern culture, but isn't necessarily spread throughout all Muslim culture. It's something somewhat unique to that region of the planet.

Terrorist Havens
In the immediate area surrounding the Middle East, the State Department has identified six nations or territories as terrorist havens. This is distinct from sponsorship in that the nation-state does not direct national resources toward terrorist organizations, but that does not mean financial and/or material support is not available in these havens. Individual sympathizers will provide terrorist organizations that financial and/or material support.

Posted Image

Afghanistan
Quote:
 
Modern Afghanistan has been in turmoil since the late 1970s. After infighting among ministers who deposed the long-ruling royal family, the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979 and installed a sympathetic regime in the capital, Kabul. Anticommunist Muslim rebels—known as mujahedeen, or holy warriors—received support from the United States and from many Muslim countries, particularly Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Joining the Afghan mujahedeen were several thousand Muslim volunteers from abroad. After the Soviets withdrew in 1989, rival Afghan factions fought a fierce civil war that led to the rise of the Taliban. - Source


Georgia
Quote:
 
Its primary role has been the elimination of foreign fighters who took refuge in the Pankisi Gorge, a lawless area near Georgia’s border with the breakaway Russian republic of Chechnya. Under pressure from Georgian authorities, who were backed up by counterterrorism troops trained by the United States, most of the fighters fled in late 2002. The Georgian government says it now controls the region.

These armed groups included both Chechens and non-Chechens. The Georgian security minister estimated the number of Chechen fighters at more than 1, 000. The group of non-Chechen fighters was widely estimated to number in the low hundreds, and some unknown number of these were reportedly Islamic militants tied to Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda terrorist network. These militants were holed up with the large contingents of armed Chechen separatists and thousands of refugees. - Source


Lebanon
Quote:
 
Terrorist organizations operating in Lebanon include the radical Shiite militia Hezbollah, several Palestinian groups—Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command—as well as the Abu Nidal Organization, al-Jihad, Asbat al-Ansar, the Japanese Red Army, and some local radical Sunni Muslim organizations. Moreover, since the end of its devastating 15-year civil war in 1990, Lebanon—a tiny, mountainous Arab state bordered by Israel, Syria, and the Mediterranean Sea—has been largely controlled by Syria, a state sponsor of terrorism. - Source


Palestinian Authority
Quote:
 
Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the secular al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades—all formally classified as terrorist groups by the U.S. government—operate from the Palestinian-ruled territories governed by Yasir Arafat. The al-Aqsa Brigades are closely tied to Arafat’s own al-Fatah faction. But Israelis and Palestinians differ bitterly over what role Arafat and his regime play in terrorism, and many Palestinians say that violent resistance to Israeli occupation and settlement-building is legitimate.

Israel says it has documents proving that Arafat—who heads the Palestinian Authority (PA), an autonomous government created after Israel partly pulled out of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in return for Palestinian promises to renounce violence—sponsors terrorism. PA leaders insist Arafat is doing all he can to fight terror, but they also say that Israel must restart political talks before a cease-fire can take hold and warn that Israeli attacks have destroyed the very forces Arafat could use to crack down on terrorism. Arafat’s own statements have alternated between belligerence and condemnations of terrorism. - Source


Somalia
Quote:
 
Because Somalia is a chaotic, poor, battle-weary Muslim country with no central government. As Secretary of State Colin Powell has said, "terrorist activity might find some fertile ground there, and we don't want that to happen." Moreover, U.S. government officials say that Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda terrorist network supported Somali radical Islamists, organized training camps in Somalia, and threatened American troops in Somalia who were there on a U.N. humanitarian mission in the early 1990s. - Source


Yemen
Quote:
 
Yemen, located at the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, is a poor Muslim country with a weak central government, armed tribal groups in outlying areas, and porous borders, which makes it fertile ground for terrorists. Its government has tried to help the United States after September 11, and the State Department calls Yemen “an important partner in the campaign against terrorism, providing assistance in the military, diplomatic, and financial arenas.” But experts say that terrorists live in Yemen, sometimes with government approval; Yemen-based corporations are thought to help fund Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda terrorist network; and Yemenis affiliated with al-Qaeda have targeted U.S. interests in Yemen, including the October 2000 bombing of the navy destroyer U.S.S. Cole in the Yemeni port of Aden. U.S. officials say more al-Qaeda attacks against American interests may now be brewing in Yemen. - Source


Analysis
The euphemism "terrorist haven" is used to describe nations with so little control of their own territory that most of their citizens live outside the law. Often these nations appear to sponsor terrorism, but are distinguished from state sponsor only in that the governments of these nations do not provide support to the terrorist organizations.

To combat this, the United States has sought to improve diplomatic ties and sought permission to conduct covert operations with the nations in question. This strategy is best exemplified by the killing of Ali Qaed Senyan and 5 of his associates. In conjunction with Yemeni intelligence, the CIA destroyed the vehicle Senyan was riding in with a Hellfire missile fired from a Predator drone, which had been used to track Senyan some time.

These types of operations continue to this day.

Terrorist Transit
The combination of lax security, state sponsorship and porous borders allow terrorists to effusively move from nation to nation. Very few natural borders exist between Middle Eastern nations, and where a border exists there are those willing to provide safe passage. In mass or individually, movement from Syria to Afghanistan and from Chechnya to Saudi Arabia occurs nearly unchecked. There are Jordanians in Iraq; there are Saudi Arabians and Chechens in Afghanistan and Pakistan; and there are Saudis in the Caucasus.

Posted Image

There's a neophyte principle in chess called "Control the Center" - simply put, you want to dominate the area where the most activity occurs. Look at the above map and let that sink in for awhile.

Terrorist Organizations
To fully appreciate the dynamics of the Middle East, you have to examine the major Islamists terrorist organizations in the region.

Posted Image

al Qaeda
Quote:
 
Al-Qaeda is an international terrorist network led by Osama bin Laden. It seeks to rid Muslim countries of what it sees as the profane influence of the West and replace their governments with fundamentalist Islamic regimes. After al-Qaeda’s September 11, 2001, attacks on America, the United States launched a war in Afghanistan to destroy al-Qaeda’s bases there and overthrow the Taliban, the country’s Muslim fundamentalist rulers who harbored bin Laden and his followers. “Al-Qaeda” is Arabic for “the base.” - Source


Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad
Quote:
 
Hamas is the Palestinians’ major Muslim fundamentalist movement. With an extensive social service network and a terrorist wing that plots suicide bombings in Israel, it is the main opposition to Yasir Arafat’s Palestinian Authority, a determined foe of Israeli-Palestinian peace, and a major player in the current Middle East crisis. Its founder and spiritual leader, Sheik Ahmed Yassin, was killed by an Israeli missile attack on March 22, 2004. - Source


Hezbollah
Quote:
 
Hezbollah is a Lebanese group of Shiite militants that has evolved into a major force in Lebanon's society and politics. It opposes the West, seeks to create a Muslim fundamentalist state modeled on Iran, and is a bitter foe of Israel. The group's name means “party of God.” - Source


Jamaat al-Islamiyya, Egyptian Islamic Jihad
Quote:
 
This Islamist group, also known as the Society of Struggle, is closely tied to Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network and has conducted many armed attacks against Egyptian government targets over the years. Egyptian Islamic Jihad has long maintained a small cadre of loyal militants with specialized skills and training. Operating mainly outside Egypt since the late 1990s, Egyptian Islamic Jihad has, working alongside al-Qaeda, gradually turned its sights toward U.S. targets. - Source


Inter-connections
The inter-connectedness of the various terrorist organizations is the one factor that makes fighting a war against a single one of the organizations most difficult.

Posted Image

al Qaeda
A short list of connected terrorist organizations...
Quote:
 
Egyptian Islamic Jihad
Jamaat Islamiyya (Egypt)
The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group
Islamic Army of Aden (Yemen)
Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad (Kashmir)
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Salafist Group for Call and Combat and the Armed Islamic Group (Algeria)
Abu Sayyaf Group (Malaysia, Philippines)

These groups share al-Qaeda’s Sunni Muslim fundamentalist views. Some terror experts theorize that Al-Qaeda, after the loss of it Afghanistan base, may be increasingly reliant on sympathetic affiliates to carry out it agenda. Intelligence officials and terrorism experts also say that al-Qaeda has stepped up its cooperation on logistics and training with Hezbollah, a radical, Iran-backed Lebanese militia drawn from the minority Shiite strain of Islam. - Source


Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad
The connections between al Qaeda and Hamas tend not to be operational, but organizational.

Quote:
 
As the Lenin of international jihad, Abdullah Azzam didn't invent his movement's ideas, but he furthered them and put them into practice around the world. He constructed the religious ideology for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, recruited Arab mujahideen to implement his vision, and built the international network that his disciple, Osama Bin Laden, would turn into al-Qaida. Azzam applied his ideas in his native Palestine, too, where he served as a founding member of Hamas. After Sept. 11, Americans believed that Bin Laden transformed the world in one swift stroke. But it was Azzam who, years before, laid the groundwork for the current wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East. - Source


Hezbollah
Quote:
 
although the Shiite clerics who rule Iran have a different radical religious outlook than those of the Sunni Muslims of both the al-Qaeda terrorist network and the Taliban, which targeted Shiites in Afghanistan. But Mugniyah did reportedly meet at least once during the 1990s with bin Laden. Moreover, Hezbollah and al-Qaeda have reportedly been cooperating on logistics and training for some operations, according to intelligence officials and some terrorism experts. - Source


Jamaat al-Islamiyya, Egyptian Islamic Jihad
Quote:
 
Egypt’s two largest Islamist terrorist groups are Jamaat al-Islamiyya and Egyptian Islamic Jihad, both of which have important ties to Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda terrorist network. Offshoots of the much older and more grassroots-oriented Muslim Brotherhood, these two groups have been active since the 1970s. They draw young lower- and middle-class followers from the country’s south and from Cairo’s slums. Leaders from both groups fought alongside the Afghan mujahedeen against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. Most Egyptians have expressed revulsion for the groups’ terrorist attacks, which have decimated one of Egypt’s most important sources of income, its tourism industry. - Source


Analysis
Using the funding and materials provided by state sponsors, plus the ties these major terrorist organizations have established between themselves, make combating only one organization difficult. The end result being this, any gains on dismantling one organization is met with the remaining groups taking up the slack.

The only approach to combating these organizations that will work is a broad based initiative akin to how the Justice Department combated the Mafia in America. Often the objective was to target as many of the organizations as possible. If not and only one family was brought down, the others would quickly fill in the void left behind.

Law Enforcement
"johnny"
 
It would seem that intelligence and police techniques involving international cooperation achieve good results in combating terrorists, closing down their safe houses and cutting off their money supplies. This kind of activity is a lot less flashy than bombs and mortars, ut it's also a lot cheaper, and a lot less innocent bystanders get snuffed. The latter is a definite propaganda plus for our side.

No one has suggested that using the military is the only way in which to fight the War on Terror. There is a whole hidden war not seen unless one looks for it. In Chechnya, the Sudan, Saudi Arabia or Jordan, battles on all fronts - military action, police action, and court action - all occur on almost a daily basis. Most of this "hidden war" is not America and American forces, but still the War on Terror.

The strategy for fighting the War on Terrorism is a multifaceted effort and always has been.

The Causes of Terrorism
Like combating terrorism, the root causes are multifaceted.

The Social Situation
As was indicated earlier, the social conditions that bring about terrorism from the Middle East is an attitude toward women, children and the weak that permeates the whole of Middle Eastern culture, but isn't necessarily spread throughout all Muslim culture. This attitude fosters the type inhuman acts towards other peoples -- honor killings, rape, infanticide, arranged marriages, homosexual homicide, terrorism, etc, etc. -- that are so common to the Middle East.

"johnny"
 
In the medium to long term, we have to address the causes of terrorism. Why do terrorists exist? How can we undermine the social conditions that produce and protect them?

Yes, we do, but sadly any attempts to undermine those social conditions are most often met with moral relevancy.

"How dare you judge others culture, and just what right do you have to impose your western values on other cultures?" are the cries coming from so many.

The Economic Situation
The economic problems through the Middle East are closely related to the social problems. Women are not allowed to own land and often not allowed to work, children are exploited, and legal rights for anyone except adult men are nearly non-existent.

"johnny"
 
I suspect that the solution is economic development coupled to the long hard job of strengthening liberal democratic tendencies in the areas of the world most likely to produce terrorists. We are talking decades, perhaps generations for the results to take root, but I think that long-term policy initiatives of this sort are the ultimate way to go.

It is ironic that what Pres. Bush wants to bring about in the Middle East is exactly what is prescribe by this critic.

So many in the west have a hard time wrapping around any strategic plan is the need to include the idea the Muslim cultures need to start accepting personal responsibility for how they've arrived at the point they are now. Many want to blame Jews or the West while ignoring the reality that the foundations for the present socio-economic conditions in the Middle East were laid many years ago before the dismantling of the Ottoman Empire.

The Historical Situation
Any comprehensive strategy for combating terrorism must consider the historical roots for all that is happening today, and not dismiss those historical roots as "ancient history" or as an insignificant aspect of the problem.

For Middle Eastern cultures - and why both the secular and sectarian, while opposed internally show a united front externally - this is about wounded pride of an empire lost and the reacquiring of that empire.

From the beginning...
Less than 100 years after the founding of Islam, it had gone from a religious empire on the Arabian Peninsula to one that covered the entire Middle East.

Posted Image

Over the next 1000 years, Muslim armies spread Islam by the tip of the sword. Sweeping across North Africa and up across to Spain, up through the Balkans and right up to the Gates of Venice, and as far as east as the Philippines, Muslims carved out an empire that truly spanned the globe.

Posted Image

The primary force that turned back the tide were the Crusaders, but it was done at a great cost in life on both sides. Over the next 500 years, there was a steady deconstruction of the Islamic empires, ending with the Ottoman Empire.

"johnny"
 
Here's a related but not identical example of what I'm talking about. At the end of WWII, European leaders deliberately set about, under the aegis of the US, creating the organization that has become the European Union. Their major goal was to make sure that no new war like WWI and WWII could break out in Europe. I would say that they have succeeded over the last half century in reaching that goal. The liberal democratic tendencies are so strong in Europe and the economic interrelations are so essential, that France and Germany could not imagine taking up arms against each other. Europeans look forward to a future of peace and prosperity, despite occasional rough spots along the way.

There is one point were Islamists and Pan-Arabist overlap, and that is the desire to create a greater Arab state. Where the two diverge is that the Pan-Arabist would likely stop at recreating the Ottoman Empire, but the Islamists would want to reconstitute the empire from the glory days of Islam and then some.

Quote:
 
Osama bin Laden’s grudge against Spain goes back a very long time. The Al Qaeda chief has a penchant for historical symbolism, and in the Islamic world few symbols are as resonant as the 15th century downfall of the Muslim empire of Al-Andalus, centered in modern-day Spain. - Source


While the average Persian, Arab, Turk, Kurd or Nubian is probably content with just having a peaceful and fulfilling life, the Islamists and Pan-Arabists are not so content. They will wage their war until their objectives are accomplished, and the West will either ignore this to their own peril or recognize it to bring about an actual solution.

"johnny"
 
The discussion in Europe, now that the former Soviet buffer states are now in the EU, is the next big step. Sometime in the next few years, Turkey will probably become a member of the club. Negotiations have been going on for some years, and the EU has made a number of specific demands, both political and economic, that Turkey must meet in order to qualify for membership.

Turkey is busting its (bleep) to meet the conditions, and in the process, with preferential trade agreements already in place, Turks see a better future shaping up for themselves and their children. They have hope.

Not if France has anything to do with it. There are certain customs and practices in Turkey that make Turkey no better than Saudi Arabia. Honor killings are a prime example.

"johnny"
 
That is the key, I think. Hope. A population that has no hope is a population ripe for nihilism, or terrorism, if you prefer. The problem in much of the Moslem world is that much of the population has no hope for the future. Life seems to be going from bad to worse. Some of it is our fault, since we in the West, not only Americans, have not been able to create an efficient transmission to create wealth and democracy in those countries.

Hope is for fools and dreamers; only action brings about change and that is what is sorely lacking. Very few of the so called 'political leader' on any side has been willing to take action and do the right thing. Instead these leaders opt to do the easy thing. Never in history has the right action been the easy action.

"johnny"
 
The Turkish experiment is important in this respect. The Turks are Moslems, yet they are accomplishing both economic and liberal democratic progress with the help and backing of the EU. They are a potential role model and a sustaining force for liberal democratic forces in other Moslem countries.

Already, before, the Turkish experiment has concluded, France is pushing similar relations with Morocco and Algeria. These two countries are far behind Turkey in many respects, but the populations seem to be quite receptive to what France is proposing. Chirac has been greeted very enthusiastically when he has visited to discuss close relations with Europe.

Turkey is a quasi-democratic nation, but really, is that what the world really needs - merely democratic Islamic cultures? It is not that simple. Most of the time experiments in Islamic democracy devolve into mobocracy, because there's no respect for the individual. What happens is voters, incited by radical cleric, will turn out in mass to vote in a theocratic government that institutes Dhimmi status for non-Muslims, which ultimately is a perpetuation of the social conditions that results in the social conditions the west wants ... needs to eliminate.

"johnny"
 
Even Khadafi, fer chrissakes, has recently visited Europe in an effort to change the dead-end course the Libya had taken.

This statement by johnny drips with irony, because it required a change of heart internally for such an event to occur, and that internal change would not have occurred had it not been for an unyielding, strong-arm and nearly unilateral American foreign policy designed to isolate Libya.

"johnny"
 
These are hopeful signs. We have to understand that what we are fighting in the guise of terrorism is hopelessness that is fed on by religious obscurantism. In some respects it's the same situation that existed in Europe in the Middle-Ages and exists today in the US hinterland where Christian fundamentalists pervert what is best in American culture and politics.

Ah, so you claim that the "US hinterland" is in a state of "hopelessness that is fed on by religious obscurantism". Well, if so, then where is the associated terrorism this situation is supposed to cause? I'm sure you might retort that it's only this way "[in] some respects", but I ask - in what respects? Are women denied the right to own land? Are men allowed to kill their pregnant daughters? Are there laws that allow killings to protect the honor of the family?

That statement by johnny strikes me as a statement that cannot be supported by the facts.

"johnny"
 
While we can afford no compromise with this kind of world outlook, we must find effective ways to eradicate it. War is not the best way, and may well be completely counterproductive. The reactions that we are seeing as a result of our misguided invasion of Iraq seem to support this view.

War may not be the best way, but when there were other avenues available, too many didn't follow those paths out of some misguided sense of fairness. So now war is upon us, because Islamists had the audacity to cross the Atlantic to wage war on the American homeland.

"johnny"
 
So, we should put aside any notion that there is a quick fix to beating terrorism. We should, need to have the patience for a long-term commitment to removing the social conditions that make terrorism an attractive policy. As a nation, we are inclined to think in the short term, but I think we are mature enough to get past that adolescent reaction if the stakes are high enough.

Hello Mr. Kettle, meet Mr. Pot.

No one claimed that the War on Terrorism would be a quick and short fix. Nor has anyone claimed the same about Iraq. But in what epitomizes "short-term thinking" critics have already declared a war lost that has barely been started. This is especially apparent in Iraq.

Using this rational johnny just laid out, can one conclude that South Africa's hard won freedom is a failure due to all the violence still occur in that nation? I think not, but the johnny's argument could be made about most all of Eastern Europe, and large parts of Asia.

But in the end, any strategy to fight terrorism that only focused on Afghanistan and not confront it everywhere else, is doomed to failure.

Posted Image

The flow of support - the financiers - the materials - the propaganda - it's a complex web that can only be torn down the same way any spiders web is brought down - almost all at once and with any means necessary.

As Teddy Roosevelt said, "It is not the critic who counts, nor the man who points out where the strong man stumbled, or where a doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man in the arena whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs, and who comes up short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause. The man who at best knows the triumph of high achievement and who at worst, if he fails, fails while daring greatly, so that his place will never be with those cold timid souls who never knew victory or defeat."

The right thing is never the easy thing, and sometimes the right thing appears impossible.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
That is why I am suggesting the total isolation and indoctrination of the Iraqi people. First off, it separates them from the influx of money, weapons, and terrorists from other countries. Secondly, it will change them as a people. Japan had a similar disdain for the worth of the individual. If you did not succeed in battle or in life, you were without honor and deserved to die. This was a holdover of over a millenia of Bushido culture. However, the United States was able to give the Japanese populace an understanding and respect for human life. This is what I propose we do in Iraq.

Unfortunately, many people do not have the intestinal fortitude for the tactics needed for this to occur. Despite the fact that they involve merely controlling the Iraqis and not slaughtering them by the billions (to paraphrase one person), they don't seem to understand that, unless the Middle Eastern way of thinking is changed, that we will never be at peace with them. The Muslem philosophy is too self-centered and rigid to accept the beliefs of other people. If this did not result in attacks in other countries and the killing of innocents, then I believe the West would be more then willing to let Muslems live in peace. However, the Muslems have shown that they are willing en masse, to support these actions either by providing direct support in the way of money or direct involvement, or indirect support in the way of not working to stop these groups.

This cannot be allowed to continue as it will only mean more terrorist attacks no matter WHAT Western countries do to appease them. That is why any action must not only target the terrorists themselves, but must also target the Muslems themselves. Organizations like Al Quida and Hamas cannot exist without the support of the Muslem population. If you take away their primary source of resources (both human and material), they will quickly dry up and will no longer be a threat to us.

People will say that this is unfair to the Muslem people and that we have no right to impose our ideals on them. However, the Muslems have no right to attack us in this fashion and we certainly have the right to defend the lives of our citizens in whatever way is necessary. If the public cannot stomach what needs to be done to stop the terrorist attacks, then the public should not be outraged when terrorist attacks occur. They occur only because the public held onto unrealistic ideals in an area that they are hardly experianced in, that being combat and war.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
very well put - the war on terror is not a retaliation of 9-11 and al-Qaeda is not our only enemy. Looking at the data you have provided only the nave would claim that the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terror.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
Dandandat
May 16 2004, 03:40 PM
the war on terror is not a retaliation of 9-11 and al-Qaeda is not our only enemy.

is that sarcasm?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
No - why would you think it is? I agree with your findings
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
Dandandat
May 16 2004, 03:49 PM
No - why would you think it is? I agree with your findings

My bad ... I apologize



:sorry:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
I will personally be interested to see the war-bashers' reaction to this once the evidence is right in their face. I personally would never have found all of this information myself. For some reason or another, the facts seem to agree with my statements entirely.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dwayne
Profanity deleted by Hoss
doctortobe
May 16 2004, 04:15 PM
I will personally be interested to see the war-bashers' reaction to this once the evidence is right in their face.  I personally would never have found all of this information myself.  For some reason or another, the facts seem to agree with my statements entirely.

It's really amazing when you step back and take a look at the whole thing and just how obvious all this is.

But I guess its easy to lose sight of the total situation when you zoom into focus on just one thing.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Dwayne
May 16 2004, 05:22 PM
doctortobe
May 16 2004, 04:15 PM
I will personally be interested to see the war-bashers' reaction to this once the evidence is right in their face.  I personally would never have found all of this information myself.  For some reason or another, the facts seem to agree with my statements entirely.

It's really amazing when you step back and take a look at the whole thing and just how obvious all this is.

But I guess its easy to lose sight of the total situation when you zoom into focus on just one thing.

Its funny how the opposition claim that we who are for are not seeing the world in the complexity that it is, yet fail to see past this one operation and look at the war as a whole.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Sgt. Jaggs
Member Avatar
How about a Voyager Movie
Dandandat
May 16 2004, 08:38 PM

Its funny how the opposition claim that we who are for are not seeing the world in the complexity that it is, yet fail to see past this one operation and look at the war as a whole.

That is because they were not the ones who were attacked. The outrage and uncertainty was not shared by people like Somerled, and you can't transfer those feelings in words to make it clear. Bush made it clear. He said'with us, or against us". Our interests are more important than ever, otherwise we would have commitees of PC fanatics strangling our freedom and choking out the American Spirit.(see the U.N.)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
captain_proton_au
Member Avatar
A Robot in Disguise

Woooo, does that qualify as our biggest post ever?

Thank you dwayne, very comprehensive. Looks like about 4-6 hrs work
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Very interesting - but alarmist and sounds like Rumsfeld / Bush Pro-War propoganda.

You failed to mention Kazakistan, Uzbekistan, Bulgaria and Pakestan as sources of funds, equipment, weapons and fighters.

Not to mention very likely links between the Russian Marfia for who international turmoil and warfare and terrorism is a good thing (as it benefits them).

Keep in mind that Ben Laden is a monster that your own CIA and government created (when the USSR occupied Afganistan and he was supported by them).
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Why does DATA sound like propaganda to you? Because it may be true?

Actually, Osama was NOT a creation of the CIA. Sorry, wrong again.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
^^^ What he said

Quote:
 
Keep in mind that Ben Laden is a monster that your own CIA and government created (when the USSR occupied Afganistan and he was supported by them).


A mistake that Bush obviously does not want to repeat. But it seems that those who want to pull out too early, before democracy is properly established would be the ones forgetting this mistake and wanting to repeat it.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
We all saw just how good the intelligence that was used to drum up support for the invasion of Iraq was - It was "rock solid" and "incontravertable" and proved nearly 100% wrong / fabricated / sexed up and just plain completely unreliable .

That was alarmist , so is this stuff.

What makes you think this stuff is any more reliable (given the sources) ?

These being
1. The Council for Foreign Relations (Most of the .... errr? "data" came directly from the propoganda held in their pages) an ultra-right wing lobby group.
2. Christian Science Monitor / Houston Chronicle
3. The SF Chronicle
4. Aljazeerah
5. Islam Online
6. Slade.net (who ever they are)
7. Houston 24hr News ?
8. Boston Times
9. The Indian Express.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus