[quote]Mick28 wrote:
orion wrote:
What am I jealous of again?
Because you’re a lonely woman living in a third rate country. Just a guess.[/quote]
I have my cats, thank you.
Kind of like the voices in your head, but much more satisfying emotionally.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
orion wrote:
You kill civilians to achieve your goals, they do the same.
The goal of the terrorist is to kill civilians. Regardless of what you may say, we did not go into Iraq just to kill civilians. If we did, how come so many came out to vote? They clearly thought they were voting for a better future.
Before the invasion, recall seeing video of people marching in suicide vests, the same suicide vests Al-Qaeda and Hamas wear. coincidence? If there were no terrorists in Iraq prior to the invasion, what’s the deal with these vests and how did they suddenly get into the hands of the terrorists?
If there were no terrorists in Iraq before the US invaded, (as your propaganda says) what is the solution: to further attack and kill terrorists, or leave and let the terrorists kill even more civilians? Do you think the mass killings and suicide bombings will magically stop once the US leaves?
[/quote]
First of all the goal of terrorists is not to kill civilians.
It is to spread fear and killing civilians accomplishes that.
Then, after 5 years or so, they probably aquired the super secret exploding vest technology. If you started to look for it now, how long would it take you to build one?
I think if you leave Iraq the tribal structures and organisations will make short work of the terrorists in an extraordinairily bloody manner.
Unlike you they now where they operate from, they can distinguish a Syrian from an Iraqui at a single glance and they do not even try to uphold a civilized decorum.
[quote]The Mage wrote:
orion wrote:
So your main point is that all of this is part of a bigger issue, radical Islam?
Yes, definitely.
And before you say it, if Christian radicals were a similar threat, I would say the same thing about them. In fact radical Christianity was a big part of the dark ages, and I do not want to see another dark ages come in more modern times.
The actions in Waco show that the American government does take these people just as seriously. It’s just that these are such a smaller minority. Most of the Christian radicals just spend their time complaining about homosexuals.
And yes there are radical Jews, again not as big a threat, and more focused on the state of Israel, not the world.
And yes there are Hindu extremists. Though the group I saw reported on looked like a group of morons who did nothing but play army.[/quote]
Plus, all of this radical Islam danger is probably wildly exagerated.
If there are 1,5 billion Muslim and only 1% is hardcore, diehard radical that would mean 15 million people.
Since it is incredibly easy to cause destruction in an open society, where are they?
I´d expect one suicide bomber in the US per day, at least.With 15 million people they could do that indefinitely.
Again, where are they?
Hatred and Fear
by Charley Reese
The poet Robert Burns, watching a louse crawl around a rich woman’s head, was inspired to write a poem that contains a line to the effect that we need to see ourselves as others see us.
I just read a blog by an Arab woman, obviously educated, that is livid with hatred for us for the destruction of Iraq. She dismisses the excuse of those who say they didn’t vote for the present administration.
What follows is a summary. She says: “My problem is you. Your character, your behavior, your haughtiness, arrogance, false pride, denial, collective stupidity and ignorance, your way of life, which I find boring, distasteful and empty. You are ogres of consumerism, greedy, covetous, gluttonous, voracious, jealous, envious. You are nothing, and your nihilism contaminates everything else. You destroy and self-destruct.”
She closes by saying: “Iraq is going down with its past and its future. I can only promise you one thing. However long it may take, we are going to take you down with us.”
We Americans are very good at dismissing critics and criticism. We have such a high opinion of ourselves, we simply can’t believe that normal people can dislike us, much less hate us. We can destroy whole countries, kill millions of people and then naïvely expect that the survivors will welcome us as friends.
The old saying that one reaps what one sows is just an accurate observation of the way human history plays out. We have sown and we are continuing to sow a lot of hatred for ourselves.
War is the most horrible thing one group of people can inflict on another. War destroys lives, homes, families, economies, cultures and the future. It kills and maims and impoverishes. The fallout from war is hatred, and like radioactivity its poison can linger for generations.
The victorious always think their victory will last forever, but the truth is that all victories are temporary. I would not take the lady’s vow of vengeance lightly. She has an ally in that very collective stupidity and ignorance she criticizes.
Anyone who looks at the present leadership, both those in office and those aspiring to office, and feels good about the future is a heck of a lot more optimistic than I am. Corruption, both monetary and intellectual, is so deep and entrenched in our society that it will take a miracle for us to survive it.
Surveying the world, I see very few countries where the people have any reason whatsoever for liking us. They may be powerless at the moment to express their hatred, but power, like victory, is also ephemeral.
“Be careful who you step on, on the way up, because you’re going to meet the same people on the way down.” A character actor and semigangster said that in the 1930s.
One of our faults is that we have been conditioned by television and short political cycles to think in the short term. The truth is we have been players on the stage of history only for an instant. We have won the sprint, but the story of mankind is a marathon.
Should you ever visit Palestine, some Palestinian will almost surely point to the ruins left by the Romans and the Crusaders and say: “Where are they now? It took 200 years to get rid of the Crusaders, but they are gone and we are still here.”
Ask yourself if you would fly to Iraq and, unarmed and unescorted, take a walk through Baghdad proudly displaying an American flag on your lapel. Hatred has a twin brother, and it’s fear. We should stop harming other people so we can live without hatred or fear.
October 2, 2007
[quote]orion wrote:
Then, after 5 years or so, they probably aquired the super secret exploding vest technology. If you started to look for it now, how long would it take you to build one?
I think if you leave Iraq the tribal structures and organisations will make short work of the terrorists in an extraordinairily bloody manner.
[/quote]
Pure speculation.
In another post, you called the terrorists “freedom fighters.” Freedom from who? Under Saddam they had no freedom, they lived under terror. We gave them freedom to choose and now they have a choice to make: Live in a democracy and be an ally of the US, or back the “Freedom fighters” and continue to live in terror.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
orion wrote:
Then, after 5 years or so, they probably aquired the super secret exploding vest technology. If you started to look for it now, how long would it take you to build one?
I think if you leave Iraq the tribal structures and organisations will make short work of the terrorists in an extraordinairily bloody manner.
Pure speculation.
In another post, you called the terrorists “freedom fighters.” Freedom from who? Under Saddam they had no freedom, they lived under terror. We gave them freedom to choose and now they have a choice to make: Live in a democracy and be an ally of the US, or back the “Freedom fighters” and continue to live in terror.[/quote]
I said that not all Iraqui fighters are terrorists, some fight for other motives.
To call them terrorists is simply an attempt to dehumanize them to have no further need to question their motives.
The option you have given them is this:
Obey you at gunpoint or resist. Most obey, some resist.
You cannot force someone to be free. Logically impossible.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
This is shocking!
Another anti-American post from Horion…LOL
When will you guys learn to ignore this austrian turd? Leave her to her cats and her hatred.
[/quote]
Maybe some day, in the far, distant future you will learn that America, the US, the people of America and he government of the US are not one and the same.
Maybe when you have achieved enough in your life to no longer have to inflate your ego artificially by masturbating to Rambo movies.
In case you did not notice, most American citizens are against this war, so how anti-American can I be, sharing the mainstream American point of view?
edit:
And even Rambo rebelled against the America you represent.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Maybe I resent the fact that someone from austria feels compelled to constantly bang away at my government. Even though I don’t agree with everything they do, reading your shit on here daily is just getting old.
So…in the very nicest way…FUCK OFF.
[/quote]
Why do people go on the internet, seek out discussion forums, and then complain about “having” to read someone’s “shit”?
Seriously Mick, you make a good point or two from time to time but the whole “fuck off” internet tough guy act was old a long time ago. Either enjoy the arguing or just stop reading. No one is going to leave just because you put “fuck off” in all caps this time.
[quote]orion wrote:
Ah, re-defining reality the way it best serves your goals.
That was our topic, yes.
So you call them “terrorists”, they call you “infidels”.
You kill civilians to achieve your goals, they do the same.
The difference in your moral absolute, uni-cultural universe is the following:
…
[/quote]
You’re argument doesn’t make much sense to me. The US does not kill civilians in order to achieve our goals. Our enemies do. Let’s at least get the setup right before we move on.
Now, if you believe that intent doesn’t matter because the net result is that civilians will die, that’s reasonable. However, even conceding that to you, I personally prefer liberal democracy to islamic fascism. They are not equivalent to me. You’re absolutely right that given a binary choice between those two I am a moral absolute.
I would prefer to see islamic fascism wiped off of the map than see liberal democracy diminished. I’ll even go further to say that I can live with civilians deaths to achieve that end. And our enemies probably feel the same way. So what?
Is there something wrong with that?
[quote]Moriarty wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Maybe I resent the fact that someone from austria feels compelled to constantly bang away at my government. Even though I don’t agree with everything they do, reading your shit on here daily is just getting old.
So…in the very nicest way…FUCK OFF.
Why do people go on the internet, seek out discussion forums, and then complain about “having” to read someone’s “shit”?
Seriously Mick, you make a good point or two from time to time but the whole “fuck off” internet tough guy act was old a long time ago. Either enjoy the arguing or just stop reading. No one is going to leave just because you put “fuck off” in all caps this time.[/quote]
I might, if he starts to insult DeathtoAmerica, which is the name of my feline companion.
[quote]Moriarty wrote:
orion wrote:
Ah, re-defining reality the way it best serves your goals.
That was our topic, yes.
So you call them “terrorists”, they call you “infidels”.
You kill civilians to achieve your goals, they do the same.
The difference in your moral absolute, uni-cultural universe is the following:
…
You’re argument doesn’t make much sense to me. The US does not kill civilians in order to achieve our goals. Our enemies do. Let’s at least get the setup right before we move on.
Now, if you believe that intent doesn’t matter because the net result is that civilians will die, that’s reasonable. However, even conceding that to you, I personally prefer liberal democracy to islamic fascism. They are not equivalent to me. You’re absolutely right that given a binary choice between those two I am a moral absolute.
I would prefer to see islamic fascism wiped off of the map than see liberal democracy diminished. I’ll even go further to say that I can live with civilians deaths to achieve that end. And our enemies probably feel the same way. So what?
Is there something wrong with that?
[/quote]
Do I have a problem with the war in Afghanistan?
No.
Did the invasion of Iraq anything but destroy the least religious society in the Middle East and further their cause?
No.
Is there something wrong with being able to live with civilian casualities?
Maybe.
Is there something wrong with being able to accept the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians and yet believing to be the good guys?
Absolutely.
Is it possible to “wipe Islamofascism off the map”?
Sure, like drowning algebra or poisoning geometry.
[quote]Moriarty wrote:
orion wrote:
Ah, re-defining reality the way it best serves your goals.
That was our topic, yes.
So you call them “terrorists”, they call you “infidels”.
You kill civilians to achieve your goals, they do the same.
The difference in your moral absolute, uni-cultural universe is the following:
…
You’re argument doesn’t make much sense to me. The US does not kill civilians in order to achieve our goals. Our enemies do. Let’s at least get the setup right before we move on.
Now, if you believe that intent doesn’t matter because the net result is that civilians will die, that’s reasonable. However, even conceding that to you, I personally prefer liberal democracy to islamic fascism. They are not equivalent to me. You’re absolutely right that given a binary choice between those two I am a moral absolute.
I would prefer to see islamic fascism wiped off of the map than see liberal democracy diminished. I’ll even go further to say that I can live with civilians deaths to achieve that end. And our enemies probably feel the same way. So what?
Is there something wrong with that?
[/quote]
The other thing is that 9-11 did nothing to endanger a liberal democracy, the Patriot Act, wiretapping and Guantanamo certainly did.
Should you not defend the rule of the people at home first before you try to export it to another region?
Or is it simply easier for the average American to have brown people killed in his name than to stand up to his government?
[quote]orion wrote:
…
The other thing is that 9-11 did nothing to endanger a liberal democracy,
[/quote]
Yes, mass murder and financial ruin are healthy for a democracy.
We have checks and balances that are working quite well.
It is defended everyday.
Racism? You can do better than that.
[quote]orion wrote:
Do I have a problem with the war in Afghanistan?
No.
[/quote]
Ok.
[quote]orion wrote:
Did the invasion of Iraq anything but destroy the least religious society in the Middle East and further their cause?
No.
[/quote]
That’s your opinion. And it’s irrelevant as far as my comments go.
[quote]orion wrote:
Is there something wrong with being able to live with civilian casualities?
Maybe.
[/quote]
Maybe. Maybe not. Subjective really.
[quote]orion wrote:
Is there something wrong with being able to accept the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians and yet believing to be the good guys?
Absolutely.
[/quote]
What if we don’t believe we’re the “good guys”? What if we just believe we’re establishing a liberal democracy (because that’s the form of society we prefer) and don’t make a value judgment as to whether it is “good” or “bad”. Then is it ok?
[quote]orion wrote:
Is it possible to “wipe Islamofascism off the map”?
Sure, like drowning algebra or poisoning geometry.
[/quote]
Can you clarify this analogy? I’m not sure how a radical form of governance relates to algebra or geometry. We marginalized Communism and Nazism. Why not Islamic Fascism as well?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
…
The other thing is that 9-11 did nothing to endanger a liberal democracy,
Yes, mass murder and financial ruin are healthy for a democracy.
[/quote]
1/10 of each years car deaths, 1/1000 of the US GNP.
So apparently Iraq will not be a democracy?
Compared to what?
Your founders intentions?
Mwuahhhahahhahah, cough, mhwuahahahaha…
When and by whom?
Not racism. Not caring about people who are different than the average American.
[quote]Moriarty wrote:
You’re argument doesn’t make much sense to me. The US does not kill civilians in order to achieve our goals. Our enemies do. Let’s at least get the setup right before we move on. [/quote]
I’m glad you brought this up.
In essence, very few US military personnel goes to Iraq to kill civilians. But some, for whatever reason, end up slaughtering (and I picked the term carefully) innocents on purpose. Others, shoot first and ask questions later (see Blackwater & co).
Those exceptions, exist on the other side as well. They are called Al-Qaeda. Most of the time, people forget that the bulk of “your enemies” in Iraq are nationalists who’d do anything to free their land from the foreign military force.
Most certainly. I can remember a time when the whole world was screaming from the top of it lungs that a catastrophe will ensue from invading Iraq. Did anyone listen?
Agreed. But you’re forgetting that Iraq under Saddam was the most secular country in the region.
Again, I agree. But the deaths should be the result of “the people” of the land determining their destiny. Not some foreign power bullying them at gunpoint.
I’m willing to die for their principles is fine by me. You, on the other hand, are killing for yours. There’s a huge difference which you try to amalgamate with your “civilians deaths”.
Yep. All of the above, plus your most hypocritical support to the Al-Sauds (one of the most repressive human-rights abusing government and nest for “Islamo-fascism”).