Osama bin Laden a terrorist

[sandorski]

US Foreign Policy: This has always puzzled me. You talk to an American and you'll hear various comments about distrust of Government and what not, especially if Guns are mentioned( ), yet when Foreign US Government actions are mentioned you get either Support or a Reason why the Government can't be trusted. It seems to me that a Government can not have 2 faces, 1 shown to its' Domestic audience, the other to its' Foreign audience. Eventually the 2 will become 1, whether the Domestic Face overtakes the Foreign Face or vice-versa remains to be seen.

"Terrorism" as it exists against the US at this time is a response to the Foreign Face of US Policy. From the US side, yes that response is "Terrorist", but from the other side they consider themselves "Freedom Fighters". It should be noted, that it is the US who Influences, Pressures, and even Occupies the lands where Bin Laden and Co come from and not the other way around, their "Freedom"(used as a term of self-determination, but not necessarily through Democratic means) is threatened by US(and Allies) action.

So, does the US have to take whatever the "Terrorists" dish out? No, but if people are Oppressed and lash out against it, using the term "Terrorist" is disingenuous.

 

[Sultan]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Sultan

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Sultan
By reading your comments (and not cad and corn's), is the United States a prime target for future attacks on its soil? Especially since its fighting this so called "War on Terror"?

If the answer is yes, then why do some people blatantly support the acts of agression by US against Iraq (and of some sort against Afghanistan)? The US does have a loooooooong history (as evident by the link Zebo provided) of meddling in the affairs of many a nations. Do Americans really think they are getting safer by these methods?

If the answer is no, I really hope you are right. American interests have been targetted from way back. Examples include taking Americans hostage in Iran, bombings of Kenya's US embassy, attack on US military base in Saudi Arabia and ofcourse the culmination was 9/11.

Maybe instead of blaming these "terrorists" for hating Americas ideals and economic success, people like Cad and Corn should really look into the US sticking their authority where its not welcome.

Who knows, someday the Japanese from Okinawa will rise up, or those from the South Korea or Turkey or Germany, all countries with SIGNIFICANT American military presence. And the Japanese and South Koreans clearly make their hostility against American forces visible.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



"The objective I propose is quite simple to state: to foster the infrastructure of democracy, the system of a free press, unions, political parties, universities, which allows a people to choose their own way to develop their own culture, to reconcile their own differences through peaceful means.

This is not cultural imperialism; it is providing the means for genuine self-determination and protection for diversity. Democracy already flourishes in countries with very different cultures and historical experiences. It would be cultural condescension, or worse, to say that any people prefer dictatorship to democracy. Who would voluntarily choose not to have the right to vote, decide to purchase government propaganda handouts instead of independent newspapers, prefer government to worker-controlled unions, opt for land to be owned by the state instead of those who till it, want government repression of religious liberty, a single political party instead of a free choice, a rigid cultural orthodoxy instead of democratic tolerance and diversity." - Ronald Reagan

I'd agree that we need to mind our own business more, but this world has become a Global economy and there are things that threaten it. We should and will do what is neccessary to promote a better and more peaceful world. We(USA) are not the cause of the terrorists, although some like to claim such, so no - your suggestion (to Corn and I) is based on false pretenses. People will hate us wether we strike back and root them out or not(Cole, first WTC bombing) You can't coddle a terrorist into suddenly liking you...or do you believe that can happen? IMO we can't ignore that these people exist and sit by, just hoping they won't attack us or our interests.

LunyRay answered your question quite nicely, so I don't know why you felt it neccessary to start spouting off about what you percieve Corn or I think.

CkG

First, this thread was having a quite amicable discussion, and I didnt feel it neccessary, nor did I spout off about what I perceive you and Corn think. Problem is you take everything to be confrontational. And you probably will take this as confrontational too

None of what you said has any relevance to this thread. And what has relevance, (We(USA) are not the cause of the terrorists, although some like to claim) is very well proved by We(USA) in posts above.

Please try not to contribute to this thread. I understand you have a quite contrasting viewpoint to many on this forum. You must realize why many people of this forum have an objection to your views.

Then don't mention me What you fail to understand is that our "actions" didn't cause terrorism - it was alive and well without our actions. Doing nothing and sitting by is not the right answer. Do our actions cause us to team with people that someday might be our "enemy"? Sure - it's been that way from the beginning of time. Today's friend it tomorrow's foe.

I find it funny that you got defensive about my post. It wasn't any more confrontational than your post that you used Corn and I in.
"people like Cad and Corn should really look into the US sticking their authority where its not welcome."-YOU Now why would you say such a thing if you didn't "spout off about what I perceive you and Corn think"?

Now again - Luny has explained the reasoning quite well.

CkG

I meant the comment to be introspective, not confrontational.

 

[Pers]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Sultan
By reading your comments (and not cad and corn's), is the United States a prime target for future attacks on its soil? Especially since its fighting this so called "War on Terror"?

If the answer is yes, then why do some people blatantly support the acts of agression by US against Iraq (and of some sort against Afghanistan)? The US does have a loooooooong history (as evident by the link Zebo provided) of meddling in the affairs of many a nations. Do Americans really think they are getting safer by these methods?

If the answer is no, I really hope you are right. American interests have been targetted from way back. Examples include taking Americans hostage in Iran, bombings of Kenya's US embassy, attack on US military base in Saudi Arabia and ofcourse the culmination was 9/11.

Maybe instead of blaming these "terrorists" for hating Americas ideals and economic success, people like Cad and Corn should really look into the US sticking their authority where its not welcome.

Who knows, someday the Japanese from Okinawa will rise up, or those from the South Korea or Turkey or Germany, all countries with SIGNIFICANT American military presence. And the Japanese and South Koreans clearly make their hostility against American forces visible.

"The objective I propose is quite simple to state: to foster the infrastructure of democracy, the system of a free press, unions, political parties, universities, which allows a people to choose their own way to develop their own culture, to reconcile their own differences through peaceful means.

This is not cultural imperialism; it is providing the means for genuine self-determination and protection for diversity. Democracy already flourishes in countries with very different cultures and historical experiences. It would be cultural condescension, or worse, to say that any people prefer dictatorship to democracy. Who would voluntarily choose not to have the right to vote, decide to purchase government propaganda handouts instead of independent newspapers, prefer government to worker-controlled unions, opt for land to be owned by the state instead of those who till it, want government repression of religious liberty, a single political party instead of a free choice, a rigid cultural orthodoxy instead of democratic tolerance and diversity." - Ronald Reagan

I'd agree that we need to mind our own business more, but this world has become a Global economy and there are things that threaten it. We should and will do what is neccessary to promote a better and more peaceful world. We(USA) are not the cause of the terrorists, although some like to claim such, so no - your suggestion (to Corn and I) is based on false pretenses. People will hate us wether we strike back and root them out or not(Cole, first WTC bombing) You can't coddle a terrorist into suddenly liking you...or do you believe that can happen? IMO we can't ignore that these people exist and sit by, just hoping they won't attack us or our interests.

LunyRay answered your question quite nicely, so I don't know why you felt it neccessary to start spouting off about what you percieve Corn or I think.

CkG

i hate you more w/ every post you make. You start off by quoting ronald reagan *shivers*.

the rest of your post translates to this "oh no, the dirty arabs are out to get us because they don't like the way we smell. there is nothing we have done to provoke this hate towards us, other than smelling so damn good. we must take huge barrells of cologne to their countries, pour it on their people so they smell like us. Even though they wont want to and they probably will hate us for it... we shouldn't expect any form of retaliation on their part. they're arabs and dirty, and we know better than they do."

btw...can you fvcking quit winking? no seriously...it's getting weird.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Pers
i hate you more w/ every post you make. You start off by quoting ronald reagan *shivers*.

I :heart: you too Pers.

the rest of your post translates to this "oh no, the dirty arabs are out to get us because they don't like the way we smell. there is nothing we have done to provoke this hate towards us, other than smelling so damn good. we must take huge barrells of cologne to their countries, pour it on their people so they smell like us. Even though they wont want to and they probably will hate us for it... we shouldn't expect any form of retaliation on their part. they're arabs and dirty, and we know better than they do."

Umm - I don't hate Arabs. Where did you get that idea from? It certainly wasn't from my postings here on the board.

btw...can you fvcking quit winking? no seriously...it's getting weird.

Now why would I do that?

"It was leadership here at home that gave us strong American influence abroad, and the collapse of imperial Communism. Great nations have responsibilities to lead, and we should always be cautious of those who would lower our profile, because they might just wind up lowering our flag."-Ronald Reagan

CkG

 

[Pers]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Pers
i hate you more w/ every post you make. You start off by quoting ronald reagan *shivers*.

I :heart: you too Pers.

the rest of your post translates to this "oh no, the dirty arabs are out to get us because they don't like the way we smell. there is nothing we have done to provoke this hate towards us, other than smelling so damn good. we must take huge barrells of cologne to their countries, pour it on their people so they smell like us. Even though they wont want to and they probably will hate us for it... we shouldn't expect any form of retaliation on their part. they're arabs and dirty, and we know better than they do."

Umm - I don't hate Arabs. Where did you get that idea from? It certainly wasn't from my postings here on the board.

btw...can you fvcking quit winking? no seriously...it's getting weird.

Now why would I do that?

"It was leadership here at home that gave us strong American influence abroad, and the collapse of imperial Communism. Great nations have responsibilities to lead, and we should always be cautious of those who would lower our profile, because they might just wind up lowering our flag."-Ronald Reagan

CkG

well i don't hate you - you're kind of hard to hate since you're always smiling. but some of your views make me wanna st@b myself in the eye.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Pers
well i don't hate you - you're kind of hard to hate since you're always smiling. but some of your views make me wanna st@b myself in the eye.

Please don't do that, I'd hate for you to not be able to work anymore(you do have a job right?) because then me and the rest of the American's here would have to support your ass:Q If you are an American citizen anyway.

**Disclaimer**
This was not a jab at those who are blind, disabled, or otherwise unable to work due to physical/mental problems. I just wouldn't want 'ol Pers here to incapacitate himself on my accord thus taking resources away from those who need it.

CkG

 

[Miramonti]

Websters dictionary:

terrorists: those who fight the interests of the US

freedom fighters: those who support the interests of the US

 

[Pers]

Originally posted by: jjsole
Websters dictionary:

terrorists: those who fight the interests of the US

freedom fighters: those who support the interests of the US

good and it only took us two wars to realize this...

tomorrow we'll learn addition

 

[EXman]

I just saw this movie/documentary called Bowling for Columbine.

stopped reading at this point everything else is probably crap! Moore is retard.

 

[Pers]

Originally posted by: EXman

I just saw this movie/documentary called Bowling for Columbine.

stopped reading at this point everything else is probably crap! Moore is retard.

although i agree that moore isn't the smartest man alive....neither is the right's equivalent (limbaugh, robertson, and everyone on fox news.)

 

[PainTrain]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Pers
well i don't hate you - you're kind of hard to hate since you're always smiling. but some of your views make me wanna st@b myself in the eye.

Please don't do that, I'd hate for you to not be able to work anymore(you do have a job right?) because then me and the rest of the American's here would have to support your ass:Q If you are an American citizen anyway.

**Disclaimer**
This was not a jab at those who are blind, disabled, or otherwise unable to work due to physical/mental problems. I just wouldn't want 'ol Pers here to incapacitate himself on my accord thus taking resources away from those who need it.

CkG

The disclaimer is is completely unecessary CAD, you've made your contempt for social support programs plainly evident. Why hide the fact that "good" domestic policy boils down to one thing; how much money you keep in your pocket that the disenfranchised or overburdened don't deserve. Anything to support that interest is acceptable.

You may not need government subsidized healthcare (because the company you work for provides it,) mass transit (because I'm sure you drive around in a big ol' hoss), workers-comp (unless you get carple tunnel from all the damn posts you type here), unemployment aid (unless you get canned for your lack of productivity as a direct reult of your participation on these boards), special education (you're greedy, not stupid), child care (likely to wealthy to need, provided some woman could actually tolerate your belief system), or food stamps (we won't go there) but there are many AMERICANS who do. You can glorify your efforts towards self reliance all you want, but don't judge the trodden until you've walked a mile in their shoes.

Please excuse the interuption in the topic of conversaiton, carry on.

And pers is right quick the friggen winking

 

[DealMonkey]

I hate to interject in this great discussion - but I thought the notion that the CIA trained and/or equipped OBL was debunked? When I think about it, the idea makes perfect sense. It certainly seems like something the CIA would do given OBL's adversary and the timeframe, etc.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: PainTrain
The disclaimer is is completely unecessary CAD, you've made your contempt for social support programs plainly evident. Why hide the fact that "good" domestic policy boils down to one thing; how much money you keep in your pocket that the disenfranchised or overburdened don't deserve. Anything to support that interest is acceptable.

You may not need government subsidized healthcare (because the company you work for provides it,) mass transit (because I'm sure you drive around in a big ol' hoss), workers-comp (unless you get carple tunnel from all the damn posts you type here), unemployment aid (unless you get canned for your lack of productivity as a direct reult of your participation on these boards), special education (you're greedy, not stupid), child care (likely to wealthy to need, provided some woman could actually tolerate your belief system), or food stamps (we won't go there) but there are many AMERICANS who do. You can glorify your efforts towards self reliance all you want, but don't judge the trodden until you've walked a mile in their shoes.

Please excuse the interuption in the topic of conversaiton, carry on.

And pers is right quick the friggen winking

Wrong. I support *SOME* social support programs, but again it's the same "progressive"

chant. "he dislikes SS, he wants old people to starve!!!!"

SS had it's place...you know...in history. Medicare, Medicade, and other social programs serve a purpose but again have run amok in governance. They need to be reformed so they truly help those that can't(not won't) help themselves. Now, I'll leave my comments to that as if you'd actually read what I've posted on this subject you'd know that I don't wish for them all to go away. So, yes - the disclaimer was necessary - precisely because people over-react, just like you did.

PS- I'm married, have 2 kids(2 and 4yrs), and my wife knew my political views before she married me I drive a 1995 Mercury Mystique(Mistake!), my wife's sister is Down Syndrome, Both my wife and I work so I know exactly what daycare costs are. And you obviously haven't read many of my posts before. DealMonkey - you want to fill him in on how far I had to walk to work and how high the hills were - all for mere quarters per day?
PT - give it up already. You can try and try in vain to project viewpoints on me but you continue to fail. Stop while you aren't ahead

*************************

On-topic - DM - I'm not sure what you are trying to say, did someone claim we did, and then someone come and debunk it? All the Afghan stuff has been over shouted by Iraq talk and Bush bashing, and truth be told, I haven't followed the Osama debate as much as I'd like. I guess I could have just said "huh?"

CkG

 

[PainTrain]

Well you certainly don't fit the mold I imagined you in, I'll give you that. But I'm now that much more lost as to where you derive your political leanings, suppose I'll just have to deal with it and call you names once in a while when you say something irritating (kidding)

**edit, dropped the "when"

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: Pers
the friends we have today will be the terrorists of tomorrow. Although they currently practice terrorism...we don't label it that, because we're helping them.

so much for the war on terrorism, eh?

anyway...for the most part, you don't want an american's opinion on this matter. They have become influenced by so many different outlets pushing separate agendas, while manipulating their emotions - they hardly realize what they're talking about anymore.

look at the british reaction towards our 'war on terrorism' for a better perspective.

people like cad and corn will justify conservative ideology no matter how cruel it seems to be.

The problem with Osama and the Taliban was that they were never the US' friends. They hated the US and all it stood for, but the US government didn't see them as a threat but as a way to annoy the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. They'd rather have an enemy of both the USSR and the US next to the USSR, than an even bigger USSR. But, then the Communist government fell, and suddenly the US was left with an enemy who had more time for them.

Imagine if Osama had pissed off Saddam, and Israel would have given Saddam 10 nukes to attack Osama with. Sure, a few would have gone to Osama, but the rest would have been tossed at Israel.

People will of course start to moan here that it was the correct choice at that time, and that Communism is such a bad thing that annoying communists for a short time is worth the WTC deaths.