0
   

US AND THEM: US, UN & Iraq, version 8.0

 
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Aug, 2005 04:01 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
...
The "Nationality and Entry into Israel Law" known as the Citizenship and Family Unification Law denies Israeli citizenship or residency status to the spouses of Israeli citizens who are residents of the West Bank or Gaza.


That seems consistent with Israeli plans to withdraw from Gaza. My guess is that they plan to withdraw from the West Bank as well.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Aug, 2005 04:02 pm
The law cited by Walter was specifically targeted at those Palestinian terrorists who were using Israel's liberal immigration policies to circumvent Israeli security. Admittedly it also punishes non-terrorists as well, but having a few busses loaded with school children along with a few crowded market places blown up, and you tend to develop a different perspective on these things.

The law was never intended to be permanent, but I suspect they will keep renewing it as long as the Israeli people are at risk.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Aug, 2005 10:26 pm
Another change in plans. I don't think this administration talks to Rummy or the generals, because this is another change from statements made just a week ago.

"We're at war. We're facing an enemy that is ruthless. If we put out a (pullout) timetable the enemy would adjust their tactics," Mr Bush said in a speech in Texas.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 03:45 am
Foxfyre wrote:
Your posts would have a lot more clout (and credibility) if you would provide links, CI. Otherwise I think at least some of us just assume they are from non objective and 100% biased sources.

Ehhhmmm.... he DID cite his source. "An article in today's San Jose Mercury News", remember? If you're too lazy to enter the author's and publication's name into Google and find it back yourself, given that CI already told you where exactly you could find it, I think its hardly fair to blame him for that.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 03:46 am
Foxfyre wrote:
The law cited by Walter was specifically targeted at those Palestinian terrorists who were using Israel's liberal immigration policies to circumvent Israeli security. Admittedly it also punishes non-terrorists as well, but having a few busses loaded with school children along with a few crowded market places blown up, and you tend to develop a different perspective on these things.

Perhaps, but that doesnt make your initial statement ("You will note they do not prohibit even the Palestinians from application for citizenship") any less untrue.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 07:11 am
Quote:
Ehhhmmm.... he DID cite his source. "An article in today's San Jose Mercury News", remember? If you're too lazy to enter the author's and publication's name into Google and find it back yourself, given that CI already told you where exactly you could find it, I think its hardly fair to blame him for that.


Ah, okay. So the next time I post something with no title, date, or author, I can ignore the requests for a link and expect the rest of you to take your time to google it up. It is one thing to not have a link and quite another to copy and paste from the original source and not provide one. That was pointed out to me when I first joined A2K and I understood it to be a courtesy to provide links when they were available.

(I wouldn't even have mentioned it had he not prefaced the post with a slam at me.)

Quote:
Perhaps, but that doesnt make your initial statement ("You will note they do not prohibit even the Palestinians from application for citizenship") any less untrue.

There is nothing in the law that prohibits Palestinians from making application for membership. It is a temporary law restrictive for certain Palestinians in certain circumstances only and for a specific reason.

And I wonder why you saw fit to chide me for what you perceived to be inaccuracy on this point, but saw no reason to chide Cyclop for his blatant mistatement on Israeli immigration policy?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 08:48 am
Speaking of Israel, I was thinking what a good thing it was that Israel was going to pull out of some of its settlement but now they are just going to turn around and build some more.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/12296607.htm

Quote:
JERUSALEM - Israel announced plans Thursday to expand a settlement near Jerusalem, its latest effort to consolidate control over parts of the West Bank even as it prepares to withdraw from the Gaza Strip.

The plan to build 72 housing units in the Beitar Illit settlement are liable to put Israel on a collision course with the U.S. government, which opposes settlement expansion. The announcement immediately angered Palestinians, who claim the West Bank as part of a future state.

Housing Ministry spokesman Kobi Bleich said there was a consensus in the Israeli government to expand Betar Illit, a settlement on the outskirts of Jerusalem that is home to 20,000 people.

The announcement came just two weeks before Israel is to pull out of the Gaza Strip, removing all 21 settlements there as well as four isolated enclaves in the West Bank. About 9,000 settlers are to be uprooted from their homes.

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon says his plan will help Israel consolidate control over large settlement blocs where the vast majority of the 240,000 Jewish settlers live.

President Bush has acknowledged that Israel likely will hold on to the major blocs under a final peace settlement. But during a meeting with Sharon this year, Bush said he opposed any new settlement construction, even in existing communities, as a violation of the U.S.-backed "road map" peace plan.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 09:08 am
Quote:
There is nothing in the law that prohibits Palestinians from making application for membership. It is a temporary law restrictive for certain Palestinians in certain circumstances only and for a specific reason.


Dig a little deeper, Fox, and see if you can find the number who have been GRANTED citizenship.

You may be surprised

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 10:01 am
Galloway praises Iraq 'martyrs'
MP George Galloway is being accused of putting UK troops at risk after calling insurgents in Iraq "martyrs".
During a tour of the Middle East, Mr Galloway spoke of "poor Iraqis" using the most basic weapons to write the names of their towns "in the stars".

The Respect MP accused the UK and America of "raping" Baghdad and said the US was losing the war.

Labour MP Eric Joyce said the comments endangered UK troops "in a small way" but Mr Galloway held little influence.


These poor Iraqis ... with the lightest and most basic of weapons - are writing the names of their cities and towns in the stars
George Galloway
Respect MP

Mr Galloway's Respect party stresses that it and the Bethnal Green and Bow MP condemn suicide bombings, whether in London or the Middle East.

Any loss of civilian life is profoundly wrong, says the party, but it blames the US-UK coalition for turning Iraq into a war zone by their invasion.

Mr Galloway claimed the insurgents were ordinary Iraqis defending their country against "foreign invaders".

"It can be said, truly said, that the Iraqi resistance is not just defending Iraq. They are defending all the Arabs and they are defending all the people of the world against American hegemony."

'Martyrs'

In one speech, the MP said: "These poor Iraqis - ragged people, with their sandals, with their Kalashnikovs, with the lightest and most basic of weapons - are writing the names of their cities and towns in the stars, with 145 military operations every day, which has made the country ungovernable.

"We don't know who they are, we don't know their names, we never saw their faces, they don't put up photographs of their martyrs, we don't know the names of their leaders."

Mr Galloway was expelled from the Labour Party over his outspoken remarks about the Iraq war.

He told Syrian Television: "Two of your beautiful daughters are in the hands of foreigners - Jerusalem and Baghdad.

"The foreigners are doing to your daughters as they will.

"The daughters are crying for help and the Arab world is silent. And some of them are collaborating with the rape of these two beautiful Arab daughters."

Troop dangers?

Mr Galloway said Tony Blair's idea of a "war on terrorism" was absurd as terrorism was a tactic, not a strategy.

"It's not the Muslims who are sick. It's Bush and Blair and Berlusconi who are sick. It's not the Muslims who need to be cured. It's the imperialist countries that need to be cured."

Falkirk MP Mr Joyce said Mr Galloway was trying to maximise his infamy in the UK with his latest comments, which would not impress people in the Middle East.

"It clearly puts British troops at greater risk in a small way and that is a pity," he said.

Mr Joyce said the words would at least be seen as encouraging resistance in Iraq and would upset troops' families in the UK.

But he said Mr Galloway was now a "marginal" figure who had limited influence.

'Occupation'

John Rees, national secretary of Respect, told BBC News the Iraqi resistance would not be encouraged to attack UK troops by what British politicians had said.

"Respect and George Galloway have made it plain on a number of occasions that we believe that the people who are putting British troops at risk are the people who have sent them to occupy someone else's country," he said.

Mr Rees said troops' families were often the most vociferous opponents of the Iraq war.

Labour MP Bruce George, former chairman of the Commons defence committee, said UK and US troops would leave Iraq if there was an end to the insurgency waged by remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime and religious fanatics.

The UK wanted to see Iraq's democratically elected government succeed, he said.

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw this week said the UK was part of the security problem in Iraq and things are "not good" in the country.

He said an agreement on the new Iraqi constitution would be a step to reducing UK troops in Iraq.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4744685.stm

Published: 2005/08/04 11:09:46 GMT
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 10:09 am
Interestingly enough, a release from Al Qaeda #2 today blames Blair and the British gov't and then, wow, states the following:

Quote:

Updated: 10:21 a.m. ET Aug. 4, 2005
In a videotape broadcast Thursday, Al-Qaida deputy leader Ayman al-Zawahri said British Prime Minister Tony Blair was to blame for the London bombings and that Blair's support of the U.S.-led war in Iraq would incite further attacks.

"Blair has brought to you destruction in central London, and he will bring more of that, God willing," al-Zawahri said in the tape, while never claiming responsibility for the July 7 bombings. The statement was broadcast on the pan-Arab satellite channel Al-Jazeera.

Referring to the Western nations like Britain that have contributed troops in Iraq, he said: "As to the nations of the crusader alliance, we have offered you a truce if you leave the land of Islam."

"Hasn't Sheik Osama bin Laden told you that you will not dream of security before there is security in Palestine and before all the infidel armies withdraw from the land of Muhammed?" al-Zawahri asked, referring to the leader of the al-Qaida network.

"Our message is clear: you will not be safe until you withdraw from our land, stop stealing our oil and wealth and stop supporting the corrupt rulers," he said.



Let me repost that

Quote:
"Our message is clear: you will not be safe until you withdraw from our land, stop stealing our oil and wealth and stop supporting the corrupt rulers," he said.


Isn't this an indictment of our actions? Where in this does it say that they intend to convert people to Islaam? It doesn't.

My argument stands firm in the face of available evidence; our actions are partially responsible for the situation that we are in.

This is actually a much better situation than the alternative! Why? Because understanding this fact allows us to take a multi-pronged approach to dealing with the problem of Islaamic terrorism. It gives us options, and many of them are worth thinking about; such as 'not supporting corrupt rulers' and 'not stealing oil.'

Am I advocating that we leave the ME poste haste? Of course not! But that doesn't mean we can't make changes in our behaviour that will have a positive impact on the struggle; it doesn't mean that we can't re-examine our behaviour to see if the complaints of the terrorists have merit.

Cheers!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 10:43 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Let me repost that

Quote:
"Our message is clear: you will not be safe until you withdraw from our land, stop stealing our oil and wealth and stop supporting the corrupt rulers," he said.


What is that, straight from the al Queda handbook? The one that instructs its terrorists to lie and claim they have been mistreated in custody and the Koran desecrated? Oh yeah, this guy's a straight-shooter.

And "stealing" at $60+ a barrel? Iraq is on track to bring in $20 billion or more in oil revenue this year. Money that could go towards rebuilding the country's infrastructure, but not all will ... in large part because of the actions of the insurgency/terrorists.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 10:48 am
Quote:
What is that, straight from the al Queda handbook? The one that instructs its terrorists to lie and claim they have been mistreated in custody and the Koran desecrated? Oh yeah, this guy's a straight-shooter.

And "stealing" at $60+ a barrel? Iraq is on track to bring in $20 billion or more in oil revenue this year. Money that could go towards rebuilding the country's infrastructure, but not all will ... in large part because of the actions of the insurgency/terrorists.


What bull!

You think that Iraqis actually get to see any part of that $60/barrell? No way! The revenues of that oil will be stolen by the new bunch the same way they were stolen by the old bunch; corruption and fraud.

Not to mention the US corporations who are all lining up to get a piece of the pie. The fact is that we HAVE been supporting corrupt Rulers in the ME for a long time, and still are today.

If you choose not to believe what they say, fine. But for the purposes of this argument, the only evidence that we have to go off of is the stated goals of the enemy; which this is.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 11:26 am
An interview with a soldier back from Iraq.

Long, but good.

http://www.alternet.org/wiretap/23882/

Quote:
A Soldier Speaks: Zechariah

By Celina R. De Leon, AlterNet. Posted August 4, 2005.

http://www.alternet.org/images/managed/Story+Image_thumb_080405_story.jpg
Zechariah, while he was stationed in Iraq.


Editor's Note: As of August 4, 2005, 1,821 American troops and between 22,500 and 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed in the war in Iraq. Domestically, the bill for the war has reached $204.6 billion.

This is the first in a continued series of profiles of some of the tens of thousands of Iraq War veterans who have come home bearing the scars of battle -- emotional and physical wounds that may never heal unless the nation pays them the attention and care that they deserve. We at AlterNet believe it is the one issue that can and must bring us all together as Americans.

Zechariah, 25, of Lynnwood, Washington, enlisted in the Army when he was 21, and was deployed to Iraq from March 2003 to January 2004 with the 173rd Airborne Brigade as a medic.

Zechariah grew up in a military family; both his mother and father were medics in the Army. Zechariah wanted to work in the medical field as a nurse, but couldn't afford school. So he signed up to be a parachute infantry medic for the job experience, money for school, and a little adventure.

He spoke to AlterNet about the war, his hopes and fears, and the hard road ahead.

What were you told were the reasons for the war in Iraq when you first began your duty?

The only thing that we had really heard was that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction and we were going to go and oust him and find them.

I knew about the gassing of the Kurdish population in northern Iraq and was scared of being attacked while on the ground there with chemical and biological weapons. I highly doubted that they had any type of nuclear weaponry though, so I wasn't worried about that. I think if Saddam had that stuff, he would have shown it off with either a test or public display. He was a pretty arrogant person, in my opinion.

Did your beliefs change once you were participating in the war?

I think my beliefs had changed once we were on the ground. Within days we had seized all of the oil fields in northern Iraq and our primary mission was to protect them. Bush had said this war wasn't about oil, but there I was defending oil fields at all costs in the middle of Iraq. A lot of the piping and workings of the fields had been destroyed by the fleeing army and before we even started to help the people by fixing the power or water supplies, they had construction crews trying to get everything up and running on the oil fields.

They say this war isn't about oil. How about they go and trade places with one of the soldiers that would love to come home, and see what's going on around the oil refineries and see how much work is being put into them and how little is being put into restoring power and water. My brother just got back [from Iraq] and said they still only have power and water for maybe five to six hours out of the day.

I also worked with a lot of the local hospitals. The whole time we were there, the hospitals kept getting worse and worse. They never had any supplies or new machines installed. Even some of the more simple machinery, like X-ray machines, were never replaced. Every time I went into one of the hospitals I almost emptied my aid bag so they could have sterile catheters and needles. I couldn't believe my eyes to see that they were having to reuse these supplies because they couldn't get replacement equipment. They didn't even have soap.

All of this helped me to see where the priorities in this war were. Obviously, not in the people.

How were some of your experiences interacting with local Iraqis?

We lived in a normal house in a neighborhood that was pretty helpful. They always told us that as long as we protected the neighborhood, they would do all they could to help us. Whenever we got attacked, some of the neighbors would normally know where they came from. They also gave us tips whenever they happened to hear of something weird going on. We worked pretty heavily with the Turkmen [Turk] populations and the Kurdish populations. Both were very friendly.

We personally re-supplied three schools in a Turkmen [Turk] neighborhood through family donations and personal contributions for the help they gave us in finding weapons, caches, and insurgent hideouts. They invited our whole platoon to a dinner and dance put on by the school of elementary-age students for our help. My brother said they aren't friendly to U.S. forces anymore. I'm sure we wore out our welcome in the past year.

Did you ever express dissent? Did any soldiers express dissent or not agree with the reasons for the war once they were actively participating in the war?

I never expressed any dissent towards anyone above me or towards a mission. My squad leader and platoon sergeant were both really outspoken people and when a command or operation came down to us, they were really good about saying that was a stupid or suicidal mission and find someone else to do it.

One mission in particular changed even our Company Commander's (CO) views. We were ordered to do a mission that was not Army protocol and would be dangerous if done that way. We were forced to do it and we lost three soldiers in two minutes. After that our CO was very vocal and active in how missions would be done.

Orders would come down from some officer sitting in an office that had never left the wire and had no idea how the city and its people and the insurgents work. After that night, our Commanders and Platoon Sergeant were really good about "making slight" changes to plans so that it would be more safe for their men. They would get in trouble, but it came down to the fact that they planned on seeing their families again.

How did you maintain your strength to finish your service when you found yourself questioning the war?

I questioned the war from the start so the whole thing was hard. Especially after watching one of my really good friends that I had trained day in and day out with for the past three years die while I was trying to do all I could to make sure he made it home to his wife and for what reason? Kyle saved my life that night by taking fire that was intended for me. After Kyle's death, I just counted the days. I didn't really care anymore. I was saddened to know that so many more were going to have to experience what I had done and seen.

Before that, I thought about what I was going to do when I got home. Daydreams, lots and lots of daydreams. I'm really into motorcycles so I read lots of motorcycle magazines and made lists of parts to buy with my pay and mapped out rides that I wanted to take -- anything that would take my mind off of the frustrations of being there.

After six months of being there, I knew that we were fighting a people that would never give up and we could never beat. I didn't blame them either. One of the Turks put it into perspective for me. What if one day, here in Seattle, I looked up and there were Iraqis falling out of the sky in chutes invading the U.S. He asked what I'd do. I thought about it and I'd be doing exactly what they were doing to us over there.

Were you ever informed of an exit strategy while you were on active duty?

An exit strategy? They couldn't even figure out what day we were going home, let alone the whole entire military. We initially went, being told to only take enough supplies for 90 days. Three months later, we were told another month, then another month, and another. Finally, seven months into it, we were told that they had no idea as to when we were going home. At about the 10-month mark, they finally said that we would be doing a full year and the good news was we only had two months left.

This game of when we were going home wreaked havoc on the morale of the troops about as bad as being attacked day in and day out, and living off of MREs [Meals Ready to Eat] for a year -- they have a shelf life of something like 14 years I think.

How do you feel about the need for an exit strategy now?

I still feel just as strong about the need for an exit strategy as before. We are not going to win this war. The longer we are there, the more people are going to join the fight against us. We asked detainees why? Most said because they had lost a family member. So, if we figure that most families are three to four people and every time we kill one insurgent, they recruit two to three new members that may have not hated the U.S. until they lost a family member by their hands. It's the same as if they invaded here. Most households have a weapon in the house. That's millions and millions of weapons and people that are willing to protect their family and country from foreign invaders. They won't give up until we are all gone off of their soil.

Do you remember your feelings on your last day of active duty?

Yes. I still feel them every time the topic of Iraq comes up, or it pops into my mind. I felt elated to have survived, but then I felt guilty for surviving when so many in our unit hadn't made it home. Three of these were personal friends. I sat on the flight out of Iraq and asked why was I chosen to make it and why were these guys not allowed to go home. I thought before I went to Iraq that I would come home feeling like a hero. All I felt on that flight home was shame, guilt, and sadness. I still feel the same a year later.

What do you think about Secretary Rumsfeld's projection that we could be in Iraq for another 12 years?

I think he needs to spend some time over there and see how out of control it has gotten in just two to three years. If he thinks that we are going to somehow magically regain control of that country, he really has no idea as to the severity of the situation over there.

Also, within two to fours years they won't have a large enough army to fight anything with the enlistment and re-enlistment rates that I'm hearing. I got out and I will never go back there. My brother is getting out also because of the mess over there. I took an oath to defend my country when I enlisted. Iraq has nothing to do with defending my country. I didn't sign up to defend someone's personal interests, whatever it may be.

How are you doing now?

I have nightmares almost every night involving Iraq and those that died. I have been working with someone that specializes in war PTSD [Post Traumatic Stress Disorder]. She has helped me understand the dreams and keep them from being triggered. They don't bother me in the daytime anymore. I wake up, think that was another bad dream and then go on with my day. For a couple of months I would only sleep for two to three hours a night and I finally decided I couldn't do this anymore.

I've been going to school knocking out all of the prerequisites for the RN [nursing] program at one of the local community colleges and restoring a vintage VW [Volkswagen] Bug. I should be applying [to go to school] this fall depending on how my summer courses go.

Are you getting the services you need to transition back into civilian life?

Yes, but it is getting harder. For some reason the funding for my PTSD counselor has just been stopped and I have to go and meet with her to figure out what hoops I have to jump through now to get it reactivated again. It's supposed to be free for two years but about every two months things change and it gets cancelled and I have to do something different to go back and meet with her.

Have you been reconnecting with old friends and family members? Do you miss any fellow soldiers you met in Iraq?

I am back here with my family. As to old friends, I've found that I like to keep to myself. There are a few that I see every now and then, but I'd rather just hang out with my brother and my girlfriend who has gone to some of the meetings to understand what's going on with my head at times.

I have heard from a few of my old Army buddies, but it's weird. I can't explain why yet. I just know that when I talked to the guys that were my brothers while in Iraq, I feel like a traitor or ashamed. Being their medic or "doc" was the best feeling in the world, but when soldiers die in your care and my platoon watched as I tried to do what they were counting on me to do, I felt like I lost their respect.

I did do good things. One of the guys I worked on lost his right arm, but had it successfully re-attached and almost full use of it again. But just losing that one in front of everyone made me feel detached from them. I miss them, but I couldn't look them in the eyes or spend an evening drinking with them if I ran into them. I feel like a failure in their eyes, I guess.

Looking back, is there anything you wish you knew, that you weren't told?

I think the hardest thing that I know now that we were never trained for was the loss of friends, and to see them go in front of you. We train as if [we're] machines with no emotions, but once it happens and you see every thing unfold in front of you, with people you know better than your own family, it is really destructive to your emotions and morale. I remember after Kyle was killed, I sat in my sleep space and cried for almost an hour praying that this would end and I was on my way home over and over. I know now that it's easier to work with those that you have no emotional ties [to]. If I had to go back, I would tell the platoon that I got assigned to that I don't want to know anything about you. I'm here as your medic and that's it. It is really hard to work on those you know. I can do a better job of putting you guys back together if I don't know you.

Is there anything you would like to add?

I keep hearing that the troops' morale is high over there. When you have a high-ranking officer standing next to you prepping your answers, it's hard to speak your mind. We weren't allowed to talk to media unless a Major or above was with us to prep our answers and screen certain questions.

I couldn't tell you of a single soldier that was excited to be in Iraq having rockets shot at them and IEDs blowing up their friends on a daily basis. Some of these guys are on their third or fourth tours over there. Do you really think they are excited to be in the 130 degree desert, living off of MREs, missing their children being born, watching friends die, praying they aren't next.

President Bush, like Cheney, obviously has no idea as to what is going on over there and doesn't care. This whole thing about taking the fight to the terrorists has got me mad. He already proved to us and himself that Iraq wasn't a threat and that they had no WMDs and he is still trying to say they were terrorists and we need to stop them. They weren't terrorists until we killed off parts of their family. Now they are terrorists because they have lost something that the U.S. took from them, parts of their families.


Celina R. De Leon is a social justice journalist based in the Bronx, NY.


The money quote

Quote:
. We asked detainees why? Most said because they had lost a family member. So, if we figure that most families are three to four people and every time we kill one insurgent, they recruit two to three new members that may have not hated the U.S. until they lost a family member by their hands. It's the same as if they invaded here. Most households have a weapon in the house. That's millions and millions of weapons and people that are willing to protect their family and country from foreign invaders. They won't give up until we are all gone off of their soil.


It is EXACTLY the same as if we had been invaded. We create our own enemies. This means the conflict cannot be expected to draw to a close through military means, because we can't possibly kill ENOUGH of the enemy; truly a hydra poised against our interests.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 12:18 pm
Cyclo, Exactly the point: We can't kill all the insurgents, because they will continue to grow at the rate we kill their famiy and friends. It's a slow death for all; it'll be simpler to stop all the fighting and leave Iraq - or nuke the place. There is no other solution. That's the reason why the Muslims in the UK are turning to suicide bombers, because they see the unfairness of our war in Iraq, and our continued support of Israel. Anybody in the same situation, whether they be white, black, red or yellow, will end up doing the same thing if they felt so hopeless and voiceless.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 01:04 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
What is that, straight from the al Queda handbook? The one that instructs its terrorists to lie and claim they have been mistreated in custody and the Koran desecrated? Oh yeah, this guy's a straight-shooter.

And "stealing" at $60+ a barrel? Iraq is on track to bring in $20 billion or more in oil revenue this year. Money that could go towards rebuilding the country's infrastructure, but not all will ... in large part because of the actions of the insurgency/terrorists.


What bull!

You think that Iraqis actually get to see any part of that $60/barrell? No way! The revenues of that oil will be stolen by the new bunch the same way they were stolen by the old bunch; corruption and fraud.

Not to mention the US corporations who are all lining up to get a piece of the pie. The fact is that we HAVE been supporting corrupt Rulers in the ME for a long time, and still are today.

If you choose not to believe what they say, fine. But for the purposes of this argument, the only evidence that we have to go off of is the stated goals of the enemy; which this is.

Cycloptichorn


You are equating theft by Iraqis with theft by the US? Talk about bull! The revenue from the sale of Iraqi oil is going to Iraq ... not lining the coffers of the US government. If Iraq is paying US corporations for goods and services, how exactly does that equal "stealing"?

When you bitch about the US "supporting corrupt rulers in the ME," what is your point? Are you claiming Saddam wasn't corrupt? Are you saying the current government is not an improvement?

None of what you are saying is a revelation. You believe whatever the terrorists tell you, because you believe they tell the truth and the US government lies.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 01:18 pm
I believe that when one wants to learn the motivations of the terrorist one might want to listen to them.

They have much less of a reason to lie than any gov't does. What is the point of blowing things up, going to great lengths of trouble, and putting one's life on the line in order to lie about what you are trying to accomplish?

Let's be realistic here; the terrorists aren't stupid. Not in the slightest. And it is a mistake to think that they are. They fully realize that there is no way they will conquer America or Britain or Europe. So, what does that leave their goals as? The ones stated above.

This merely runs foriegn to the Republican 'they hate us and our freedom' line, but it is quite true and backed up by lots of evidence.

Let's partition!

Quote:
You are equating theft by Iraqis with theft by the US? Talk about bull! The revenue from the sale of Iraqi oil is going to Iraq ... not lining the coffers of the US government. If Iraq is paying US corporations for goods and services, how exactly does that equal "stealing"?


The US appoints the Iraq gov't who turns around and grants contracts to US businesses. These contracts are still in place and happen to make a few highly placed Iraqis quite rich through the corruption involved. This equals 'stealing.'

And we aren't even talking just about modern day times. Throughout the history of the ME we have been supporting govt's who steal the resources from their citizens and sell them to us at a very cheap price. This is morally wrong. It is akin to buying stolen goods. They know we do it. We know we do it. But we don't stop doing it. This is a major moral failing on our part.

US corporations have begun the process of inserting themselves into every aspect of Iraqi life, from farming to energy, oil to water production. The amount of money flowing into US shareholder pockets from Iraq in the coming years will be huge (provided it doesn't collapse, that is) and that to many Iraqis equates to 'stealing money.'

Quote:
When you bitch about the US "supporting corrupt rulers in the ME," what is your point? Are you claiming Saddam wasn't corrupt? Are you saying the current government is not an improvement?


Well, my point is we shouldn't be supporting (re: buying oil) from corrupt govt's who do nothing for their people. Yes, Saddam was corrupt, and yes, we supported him a lot in the 80's and even in the 90's through the oil-for-food scam (which, if you've forgotten, has lead back to several American companies. Note that you started hearing a lot less about this from the Righties once that little factiod was discovered) which happened to starve a bunch of people to death simultaneously.

We support the Saud family, Jordon, Kuwait, UAE. All places which the common citizens do not see the fruit of the economic resources doled out by the country to the US for the profit of the rulers. This breeds resentment and hate from the people who live in these countries towards those who buy stolen goods knowingly, ie, the US.

Also, our immense support of Israel, given their massive violations of human decency and UN resolutions, is support of a corrupt gov't as well which I denounce.

Quote:
None of what you are saying is a revelation. You believe whatever the terrorists tell you, because you believe they tell the truth and the US government lies.


The US gov't and military has every reason to lie and is caught lying constantly. You are wearing blinders, Tico. Seriously. The gov't has to answer to the populace and therefore the lies are neccessary in order to further their work; the terrorists answer to noone, rendering the need to lie much less.

You know this as well as I do.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 01:32 pm
Don't think Israel is corrupt?

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/608423.html

According to the World Bank, the only Western nation more corrupt is... Italy.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 01:33 pm
I know you believe terrorists don't lie and the US government does. I know that when terrorists say the US and UK are stealing Iraqi oil, you believe the terrorists. I know you believe that the US has been stealing from ME countries throughout their history. I know you believe that the US' role in attempting to rebuild the Iraqi infrastructure, or any effort by the US over in Iraq, is motivated primarily by greed. I know you blame the US because Saddam starved a lot of his people to death because of his own action. I know you don't like Isreal, one of the US' biggest allies in the world.

I know you probably consider yourself a patriot of the highest order because of all of these beliefs.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 01:36 pm
Quote:
I know you probably consider yourself a patriot of the highest order because of all of these beliefs.


You would be wrong there. Patriotism is over-rated and a short step away from Nationalism. I consider myself to be Cosmopolitan.

Make sure you go read the link in my last post about the massive corruption in Israel. And then do me a favor and catch a plane to Israel and go to Jenin and have a look around and then come back and tell me how great our #1 ally, who is our ally becuase of the 3 BILLION dollars a year in direct aid and more in indirect aid, is.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Aug, 2005 01:49 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:
I know you probably consider yourself a patriot of the highest order because of all of these beliefs.


You would be wrong there. Patriotism is over-rated and a short step away from Nationalism. I consider myself to be Cosmopolitan.

Make sure you go read the link in my last post about the massive corruption in Israel. And then do me a favor and catch a plane to Israel and go to Jenin and have a look around and then come back and tell me how great our #1 ally, who is our ally becuase of the 3 BILLION dollars a year in direct aid and more in indirect aid, is.

Cycloptichorn


I won't argue that you're "cosmopolitan." But you always used to get upset when I questioned your patriotism. It appears you've gotten over that.

Your link didn't speak about "massive corruption" in Israel. It cited to the World Bank index that measured "public perception." Hell, Cyclops, if they asked you, the US would be the lowest on the list. Public perception. lol.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 07/17/2025 at 05:50:10