Asherman wrote:Well, Steve, the fanatical Islamic Movement and its leaders haven't exactly been secretive in their stated goals. Why shouldn't we believe them when they call for the utter destruction of Western Civilization? The United States and Israel get most of their attention, but that doesn't mean that they hate the French, or any other non-Muslim, any less. They've declared their war to be a Holy Crusade that because it's in the Name of Allah, must result in victory for Islam ... no matter what the odds. They are sending young men daily to die killing infidels; that's a sure ticket to paradise, and apparently they have a fair number of takers.
I believe that the 9/11 Operations Teams intended to kill as many infidels as possible, to rally support for a religious war against Western humanistic values, and to demonstrate how powerful they can be. Why do you think that radical Islamic terrorists have been involved in killing operations? Do you really believe that if Israel ceased to exist, that Islamic terrorism would cease? If the United States withdrew entirely within its own borders, do you think that would satisfy the zealots of the Muslim world? Giving in to the demands of any blackmailer or extortionist only validates their notion of superiority and increases their demands.
A while ago the strong hold of Islamic Terrorism was Afghanistan. Now its Iran, with Syria as a henchman. The philosophical foundations for this group of organized criminals are the conservative religious schools paid for by the Saudi Government (using U.S. dollars, we might add). The enemy is prepared to wage a long war, a war of terror and fear. They haven't the slightest compunction against murdering other Muslims, or lying to achieve some small advantage. After all, Allah is on their side and all the rest of us are representatives of Evil. They are "virtuous", we are decadent, promiscuous, worldly and believe that human progress toward a better world is possible. Their reply is that only in the absolute submission to Allah and his sacred words in the Koran has value. For this they would like to return the whole world to the 8th or 9th century CE.
If they prefer a martyr's paradise to the 21st century, fine let's help them to it. If they believe that a dogmatic cleric is a better source of justice to an accused criminal than Anglo-American Law, then let them be judged by our own religious zealots and either beheaded or stoned to death. The thing is, that most Muslims don't subscribe to the franatical views of the religious rulers of Iran, or the Mullah's who preach the destruction of the current Saudi government.
Thanks for your honest appraisal Ash. I'm sure there are some fanatics who dream of a world wide caliphate. They are lunatics. But I really dont think that term applies to the government of Iran, and certainly not its people, 70% of whom are below 30 years old, the majority hold pro-American sentiments. Whilst its true that USUK have dealt Iran a very strong hand such that they can determine the level of violence in Iraq and influence Hamas and Hisbollah against Israel, I dont believe there is a group of mad Mullahs in Tehran secretly plotting the downfall of Western Civilisation. I think they basically want to be left alone...and God knows we have been doing a lot of meddling in the past...all motivated I must add by our strategic dependence on middle east oil.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Asherman wrote:.. but Iran's Islamic goal is to extend their form of Islam over the entire human race. ... Iran is ruled by an "elected" government whose whole power rests with a small number of Clerics with dreams of world domination.
Do you really believe this Ash? Isnt it more likely they just want to be left alone to develop in their own way without threats or bullying from us, always so keen to get our grubby little hands on middle eastern oil?
If Iran really was bent on world domination, I really think we would know this by now.
How long did the Nazi's control Germany before they invaded Poland and made it known they wanted to conquer Europe?
mysteryman wrote:
How long did the Nazi's control Germany before they invaded Poland and made it known they wanted to conquer Europe?
Germany and Nazis are always a good point. Thanks for bringinmg it up again, mm!
(You forgot to mention the Saar district, Danzig, Sudeten German, Austria ... ... all what happened before WWII began with the invasion of Poland.)
Not just the United States, the world depends upon Middle Eastern oil reserves.
Let us suppose that the vast majority of the population of the whole region had a clear choice of Saudi-Iranian Islamic Shira government, and a secular representative government. Which do you suppose would win in a fair plebiscite? If the Mullah's lost, would they peacefully transfer power to a non-religious government in Iran, Arabia, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Jordan, etc.? Would secular governments in those countries likely continue to aid, support and give sanctuary to radical Islamic terrorist organizations? Would secular governments continue to preach the downfall of Israel and the United States as the highest virtue? Would such secular governments remain aloof from the world economy, and use their oil reserves to coerce others? Why would the West, the United States in particular, maintain a large and aggressive military force in the region after the dangers of radical Islamic terrorism was gone, and the region became peaceful and stable? Even though Iran today is quietly supporting our enemies, world concern is centered on Iran's nuclear weapons programs and their outspoken intent to "wipe Israel off the map". If Iran were to abandon its nuclear weapons program today, the risk of outside intervention would go from maybe 1:10 for to 10:1 against.
If theocracy, which it very well might, what outcomes are most likely? Theocracy triumphant would not change in the slightest the world's dependance on oil. The theocracy would have a choice of petroleum policies, what would they be? To supply the world's needs equitably and at a price designed to encourage global stability and peace? Or, to use their power to advance their version of Islam throughout the world? Would they recognize Israels right to exist, and conclude a lasting peace with them? Would they cease supporting international terrorism? Would Al-Quida, Hamas and all the other terrorist organizations cease operations against "infidels"?
Lets imagine that the whole region was at peace, that the oil reserves were available to all the world at reasonable rates, and that radical Islamic terrorist organizations ceased to exist. I believe that those Shira governments would be perfectly safe from outside aggression. Neither the United States nor the world would tolerate actions or policies to upset the stability of the region. Now I'm sure that some here will believe that President Bush is poised to seize perpetual office and scrap the Constitution before the next election. When that doesn't happen, they may argue that the Bush has become the puppet master behind the new Republican Administration. For that crowd, nothing could ever prevent Bush from pursuing his mad dreams of world conquest. Nothing is likely to ever change the minds of those who love conspiracies.
I believe you are guilty of the strawman argument, asherman by this:
Quote:Now I'm sure that some here will believe that President Bush is poised to seize perpetual office and scrap the Constitution before the next election. When that doesn't happen, they may argue that the Bush has become the puppet master behind the new Republican Administration. For that crowd, nothing could ever prevent Bush from pursuing his mad dreams of world conquest. Nothing is likely to ever change the minds of those who love conspiracies.
Simply by putting out those theories of people thinking Bush is going to run for a third term and all the rest you have effectively consigned all honest criticism (of which there really is some) crazy conspiracy theories.
If a person takes an honest look at the New American Century website and consider all the events which has thus far taken place under this administration, it is not such a far fetched idea that these plans have long been in the making. Also, I don't imagine those that have been in the planning of these things imagined they would live forever. They have set the events in motion and they probably expect likeminded individuals to keep on carrying it out.
Hopefully, in the next few election cycles, those likeminded individuals will be weeded out of the control of those kinds of policies which have been put in place and more peace minded rational people will take their place. If not I am not sure how it will all end up.
Like I said above, if you love conspiracy theories, nothing will persuade you otherwise. Its more addictive than heroin, and harder to shed.
I've never, ever suggested that there isn't ample room for criticizing this, or any administration. All men and all governments are flawed and can degenerate into places we don't want to go again. Our system of representative government is designed to prevent that, and it has been working pretty well for over 200 years. Fu Manchu doesn't live in the Executive Mansion disguised as a dim-witted Texan born of plutocratic parents. Nothing will convince some of that, and indeed to abandon such notions would cause the Left to go into cardiac arrest and left with nothing to offer the American electorate (stupid sodds easily misled by bible thumpers and fear-mongering conspirators in the Federal government ... sure).
Moderate Democrats seem to have been kidnapped by the Chicken Littles and Levelers on the extreme Left. Unless, the Democratic middle asserts itself and reclaims the Party, they are going to remain marginal for a long time. Between Pierce and Wilson, the Democrats elected only one President, Grover Cleveland. Andrew Johnson was a Democrat who converted to Lincoln's Union Party and was only elected as V.P. After Wilson, the Democrats didn't win again until FDR and the New Deal. Truman set a high standard, JFK had style, and LBJ was torn between Vietnam and domestic conflict. Carter may be the most saintly of all the Presidents, but he was ineffective. For 40 years the GOP remained dominant, and it may match that record again ... unless the Democratic Party shifts its attention from extremism (in both policies and conspiracy theories), to the direct interests of the American Electorate. By and large the American People feel more comfortable with Republicans at the helm, than with Democrats. Democrats tend to win the Presidency only when the Republican Party drops the ball. Will the GOP be defeated in the next election? I don't think so, but I've been wrong before any number of times.
I recognize and acknowledge that most of the post above is highly partisan. Oh well, so was the post that prompted this one. Strawman! Phew. I make my opinions known, and am just as guilty of overstatement and lapses of logic as anyone else. However, I don't feel the burning need to continually point out the failures in formal logic of others. Formal logic is almost as easily screwed around with as statistics. If I use a strawman arguement, and I don't half as much as I'm accused of, I don't need it pointed out. Make your own arguements sound, and you can defeat my foolishness without the "AHA! Caught you being human!"
Quote: Fu Manchu doesn't live in the Executive Mansion disguised as a dim-witted Texan born of plutocratic parents. Nothing will convince some of that
Nobody on the left believes that Bush is intelligent and hiding it, I guarantee you. We, for the most part, believe he is a puppet, and has been from the beginning when he was recruited to run for President.
There is ample evidence of this.
Cycloptichorn
Just as there is ample evidence that the world is ruled by the Freemasons, or that the Protocols of Zion were the source of both Capitalism and Communism. There are mountains of evidence that a UFO crashed in Roswell back in the 40's and that today's technology is all derived from alien spaceships kept hidden by the government in Nevada. Are those who are pulling Bush's strings the same dark cabal who planned and executed 9/11 to look like it was the work of a group of downtrodden middle easterners? Is this the same group that pulled FDR's strings and plotted Pearl Harbor?
Now I'm not arguing that President Bush is the brightest bulb in the pack, but there have been other Presidents who were even duller. I'm not saying that his administration hasn't made mistakes because error is the norm for complex political life. I'm not arguing that some current policies adopted to deal with a very unusual sort of war don't carry with them certain risks. There is always risk, and never more so than during times of heightened conflict. I am saying that reasonable men, a lot of reasonable men, believe that this administration's policies in the fight against international Islamic terrorism are justified. I don't assert that real crimes haven't occurred in Iraq and elsewhere, but I do insist that this is not abnormal in war. Many believe the war against Saddam was unjustified, I and others strongly disagree. Saddam attacked a peaceful neighbor to steal its oil reserves rather than pay back his loans. Saddam never believed that effective military force would be brought to bear. He promised change, and instead spent over a decade lying and evading his promises never believing that he would someday have to pay the price. He was wrong, and Coalition Forces wiped him and his thugs away. The hope that Iraq could be remade into a better country with more opportunity for everyone has been frustrated by radicals from Iran, Syria, Arabia and the broken forces of the Taliban. These cowardly murderers have done their best to destroy every effort to rebuild Iraq. They hide behind their women's skirts and blow up Iraqi businesses in a campaign of terror. It is true that more Iraqi's have died than American soldiers, but it isn't Americans who are doing the killing, the killings are the proud work of radical Islamic fanatics.
But, according to all the evidence (mostly stories told by leftish partisans) is that George Bush and his puppet masters are entirely to blame. Pick any of the world's many problems and the easy answer is that the GOP and this administration is the cause. Sure and I'd like to get a good deal on the bridges leading into Manhattan Island.
Quote:But, according to all the evidence (mostly stories told by leftish partisans) is that George Bush and his puppet masters are entirely to blame. Pick any of the world's many problems and the easy answer is that the GOP and this administration is the cause. Sure and I'd like to get a good deal on the bridges leading into Manhattan Island.
This is yet another strawman, or as you like to put it, an example of 'you being human.'
Noone on the left is imaging that Bush and his cabinet are the source of every problem in the world. Just that we disagree with the majority of the decisions he and his cabinet have made in response to problems that have arisen, and it has had the effect of making the problems worse instead of better.
Quote:The hope that Iraq could be remade into a better country with more opportunity for everyone has been frustrated by radicals from Iran, Syria, Arabia and the broken forces of the Taliban.
And, of course, you have forgotten, the Iraqis themselves. By far the majority of Insurgents in Iraq are Iraqi, contrary to what the Right-wing peddles here in America.
Cycloptichorn
Quote:Saddam attacked a peaceful neighbor to steal its oil reserves rather than pay back his loans. Saddam never believed that effective military force would be brought to bear. He promised change, and instead spent over a decade lying and evading his promises never believing that he would someday have to pay the price.
We dealt with the invasion of Kuwait in the first gulf war. Also, according to most of the post war WMD reports, Saddam was contained by the UN sanctions.
U.S. 'Almost All Wrong' on Weapons
Quote:The 1991 Persian Gulf War and subsequent U.N. inspections destroyed Iraq's illicit weapons capability and, for the most part, Saddam Hussein did not try to rebuild it, according to an extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq that contradicts nearly every prewar assertion made by top administration officials about Iraq.
(I know that has been shown before, numerous times, but sometimes I just wonder how some people can continue making these same debunked arguments over and over again in the face of facts to contrary. )
revel wrote:(I know that has been shown before, numerous times, but sometimes I just wonder how some people can continue making these same debunked arguments over and over again in the face of facts to contrary. )
They keep making it because it's the only thin thread they have to justify the invasion of Iraq. These poor conservatives just can't accept the fact that Bush used WMD's and 9/11 as a screen to con these poor saps into backing his invasion of Iraq so he could install a government that will kiss our ass.
Bush failed miserably. This whole mess got out of control and is still out of control. These poor dumb idiots are now praying that this abortion of theirs doesn't spread outside of Iraq. If it does oil prices will go through the roof.
Then they'll have to figure out how to put all the blame on Clinton and Kennedy.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Asherman wrote:>>.. but Iran's Islamic goal is to extend their form of Islam over the entire human race. ... Iran is ruled by an "elected" government whose whole power rests with a small number of Clerics with dreams of world domination.
>Do you really believe this Ash? Isnt it more likely they just want to be left alone to develop in their own way without threats or bullying from us, always so keen to get our grubby little hands on middle eastern oil?
>If Iran really was bent on world domination, I really think we would know this by now.
I haven't kept up on this thread, but I thought I'd jump in with this:
I don't know if they are out for world domination, but I think it is quite evident that they are trying to build nuclear weapons and that they plan to make mischief with them once they have them. I think they particularly plan to make mischief against Israel.
My position though is as before: if diplomacy fails to stop them, as I expect it will, our response should be to ditch the Non-Proliferation Treaty and give Israel the capacity to build a nuclear arsenal as sophisticated as that of France or the UK.
If we really do have to take military action against Iran though, a ground invasion to seize the bunkers and blow them up from the inside would be far more preferable than dropping that fallout bomb and contaminating all of southern Asia.
Walter Hinteler wrote:mysteryman wrote:
How long did the Nazi's control Germany before they invaded Poland and made it known they wanted to conquer Europe?
Germany and Nazis are always a good point. Thanks for bringinmg it up again, mm!
(You forgot to mention the Saar district, Danzig, Sudeten German, Austria ... ... all what happened before WWII began with the invasion of Poland.)
The point I was trying to make,which apparently you missed,is that the Nazi's completed their plans without anyone knowing about it,and the world did nothing till they invaded Poland.
Steve said...
Quote:If Iran really was bent on world domination, I really think we would know this by now.
I was trying to show that it happened before,and it could happen again.
I dont think Iran is going to announce to the world that they intend to conquer the world,just like the Nazi's didnt announce to the world that they planned to conquer Europe.
They just acted,and the rest of the world had to play "catch up" to stop them.
Can anyone say for sure,with 100% absolute certainty,that Iran isnt doing the same thing.
mysteryman, it's the PNAC who announced their blueprint for world domination.
blueflame1 wrote:mysteryman, it's the PNAC who announced their blueprint for world domination.
America really hates competition.....
You'd hate for Iran to bomb the livin' bejeezes a sovereign nation, for no apparent reason other than to "protect Iranian interests".
Revel wrote:
The 1991 Persian Gulf War and subsequent U.N. inspections destroyed Iraq's illicit weapons capability and, for the most part, Saddam Hussein did not try to rebuild it, according to an extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq that contradicts nearly every prewar assertion made by top administration officials about Iraq.
Does Revel have access to the "Extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq"? He must be a priviliged person because the people below APPARENTLY DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE REPORT>
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Production/files.porhoretz1205advance.html
The people who apparently did not have access to the report which says, as revel has revealed( no pun intended) were, among others-
In October 2002, the woman who is never wrong< Hillary Rodham Clinton said-
quote
" In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missle delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Queda members."
end of quote
and
ALGORE in September 2002
Quote
"We know that Saddam has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country"
end of quote
and
John Kerry in 2002
quote
"I will be voting to giver the President of the United States the auhority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein becasue I believe that a deadly arsenalof weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our society"
end of quote
Why didn't these people get the message, Mr. Revel?
If there is any structure like the World Trade Center in Canada,. I do fervently hope that Mr. Candidone and his cohorts in Canada are keeping a sharp watch.
from The Chicago Tribune--
QUOTE
"17 Charged in Canadian bomb plot"
Seventeen Canadian residents have been charged with plotting to destroy targets in Ontario with crude but powerful bombs, Canadian Authorities said Saturday. The group took delivery of three tons of ammonium nitrate, a fertilizer that can be transformed into an explosive when combined with fuel oil. Some of the men identified were--Hahim Ahmad 21, Zakaria Amara, 20, Asad Ansari 21, Mohammed Dirie, 22......
Intelligence Officer Luc Portelance said the group's members " appear to have become adherents of a violent ideology inspired by AlQuada."
I do fervently hope and pray, Candidone, that your country Canada never becomes the target of madmen who kill indiscriminately in the name of a twisted fringe of Islam. I can assure you that when 3000 of your countrymen are incinerated without warning, it gives you a special viewpoint.
guilty
