No, they were targetting Americans in that bombing, what they get is mostly Australians. Other bomb also blows up close to the American Consulate in Bali with minimal result. And thats just the Bali bombing, there're plentiful of other bombing by JI/Al-Qeda in several places in Indonesia which targeted and resulted in Indonesian casualties. Not westerners.
No, they were targetting Americans in that bombing, what they get is mostly Australians. Other bomb also blows up close to the American Consulate in Bali with minimal result. And thats just the Bali bombing, there're plentiful of other bombing by JI/Al-Qeda in several places in Indonesia which targeted and resulted in Indonesian casualties. Not westerners.
Think about it this way. The Iraq war was extremely unpopular in Spain -- most Spanairds were against it. And yet Al-Qaeda specifically targetted these very same people. They did not bomb a government building. Instead they went out of their way to kill as many innocent people (who were probably against the war) as possible. These terrorists are not very nice people.
I think the world as a whole has a better chance against these terrorists if we stood together -- side by side -- instead of other countries standing by the wayside hoping that they will never be targets in the future.
I think the world as a whole has a better chance against these terrorists if we stood together -- side by side -- instead of other countries standing by the wayside hoping that they will never be targets in the future.
Originally posted by: Phokus
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Phokus
Because Turkey and Saudi Arabia let US forces in their countries to invade iraq? It's funny how conservatives are against the UN but all of a sudden, it's a good thing that we have these alliances
Huh? Are you sure? Didn't Turkey's parilment refuse to allow US troops cross Turkish territory to attack Iraq? Also, please show us S.A. let US forces into their country to invade Iraq. I don't remember that part of the build up of forces but it may be right - please show us.
It's funny how the leftists don't understand the differences between the UN and US alliances.
CkG
I'm a leftist? Funny coming from someone who supports the socialist nationalist policies of George Bush!
Saudi Arabia has american military as we speak. I'm not sure if they're being used in the Iraqi war right now, but they've had them since the FIRST gulf war. Turkey did eventually let the american military in (i thought anyway, someone told me they did).
Edit: An there really isn't much difference between UN and US alliances. I don't want to be dragged into ANY alliance. Now whenever one of those other countries enter in a conflict, they have leverage against us. "Well since we supported your war, you have to support ours".
From what I understand, Turkey still hasn't let us in. I think your friend is wrong. I also think Saudia Arabia didn't even let us use our own airport in the 2nd war. We had to base most of our military in Kuwait.
I personally feel a lot better with allies. When 9/11 came I remember feeling very lonely and scared. I remember the feeling of great comfort I had when Great Britain said that it will stand with us in this terrible time.
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Phokus...you are a terrorist's wet dream. Give into their demands so they don't hurt us...you're the one engangering us all you dimwit.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,849
- 6,386
- 126
Why Al Queda attacked Spain, Indonesia, Turkey, and anywhere else is a moot point. The fact that they could attack anything is another matter entirely. Iraq distracted from the real target, Al Queda!
It's like having a bear in your backyard that killed your dog. You grab your gun, fire into the air and the bear scurries off into an undergrowth area where you lose sight of it. You proceed to find the bear and kill it, but along the way you see a dandelion, one that will destroy the yard if you don't get rid of it! With the barrel of the gun you begin digging the abomination out of the ground. Suddenly, the bear pounces on the cat, you aim the gun only to notice the barrel is plugged with sod and soil, before the unplugging is done the bear hides back in the undergrowth. Back to digging, the dandelion needs removed! Your kid comes running out of the house to see what's going on, the bear jumps out and grabs it, damn barrels plugged again, bear hides, dandelion almost dug out can't stop now! Wife comes out, bear pounces, gun plugged, bear hides, dandelion. Bear pounces, gun plugged, CHOMP.......
It's like having a bear in your backyard that killed your dog. You grab your gun, fire into the air and the bear scurries off into an undergrowth area where you lose sight of it. You proceed to find the bear and kill it, but along the way you see a dandelion, one that will destroy the yard if you don't get rid of it! With the barrel of the gun you begin digging the abomination out of the ground. Suddenly, the bear pounces on the cat, you aim the gun only to notice the barrel is plugged with sod and soil, before the unplugging is done the bear hides back in the undergrowth. Back to digging, the dandelion needs removed! Your kid comes running out of the house to see what's going on, the bear jumps out and grabs it, damn barrels plugged again, bear hides, dandelion almost dug out can't stop now! Wife comes out, bear pounces, gun plugged, bear hides, dandelion. Bear pounces, gun plugged, CHOMP.......
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Where is this country "Al Qaeda"? My map at home must be out of date because I can't find an "Al Qaeda" anywhere on it. I suggest you and all the liberals on this board let Rand McNally know that their information is out of date and that there is actually a terrorist country of Al Qaeda. The US government would also find this information useful as it would mean they simply have to attack this country and end the Al Qaeda threat. Frankly, just like you, I'm totally baffled as to why we haven't dropped a bunch of bombs on "Al Qaeda" already.
And yet, it was right on the money.
Placing blame of the criminal on the innocent victim. Lefties love to do that.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,849
- 6,386
- 126
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Where is this country "Al Qaeda"? My map at home must be out of date because I can't find an "Al Qaeda" anywhere on it. I suggest you and all the liberals on this board let Rand McNally know that their information is out of date and that there is actually a terrorist country of Al Qaeda. The US government would also find this information useful as it would mean they simply have to attack this country and end the Al Qaeda threat. Frankly, just like you, I'm totally baffled as to why we haven't dropped a bunch of bombs on "Al Qaeda" already.
Wow, you so ownzed me!!!
Damn, he took the words out of my mouth. Heh, Phokus what would you have done if you where FDR when the japs attack pearl harbor? Simply left?
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Well - I think he might attack Japan(I'll give him the benefit of the doubt) but according to the left's argument now -they probably wouldn't have gone on an excellent adventure in Europe since Europe wasn't responsible for Peal Harbor....
CkG
I think some people are missing the point here. Of course, the terrorists (whether ETA or AQ) are to blame for the attack. In the big picture however, Spain and by extention all of us, are getting sucked into the vicious cycle of violence that plagues both the Israelis and Palestinians. When Israel blasts some rockets into a car carrying a few Hamas members in a crowded area of the West Bank and some innocent Palestinian bystanders end up as "collateral damage," who do you blame the next week when Hamas blows up a market in Tel Aviv? Israel takes a hard line on terrorism too and where does it get them? I'll tell you: An endless cycle of violence with plenty of innocents dying in the crossfire and both sides pointing the finger at one another.
A far better question is how do you stop all of this?
A far better question is how do you stop all of this?
Bowfinger
Lifer
- Nov 17, 2002
- 15,776
- 392
- 126
That's it! Bush isn't a liar after all. It's those devious PNACers. They altered all of Bush's maps, replacing "Iraq" with "al Qaeda". Bush never was any good at Geography.Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Where is this country "Al Qaeda"? My map at home must be out of date because I can't find an "Al Qaeda" anywhere on it. I suggest you and all the liberals on this board let Rand McNally know that their information is out of date and that there is actually a terrorist country of Al Qaeda. The US government would also find this information useful as it would mean they simply have to attack this country and end the Al Qaeda threat. Frankly, just like you, I'm totally baffled as to why we haven't dropped a bunch of bombs on "Al Qaeda" already.
Some people are so incredibly ignorant and naive that it amazes still when I see it, such as the author's premise in starting this thread. What you fail to see, Phokus (and perhaps you should start engaging in the activity suggested by the homonym for your handle), is that al'Qaeda is not aimed solely at the United States. The U.S. is their greatest enemy, yes, but that is simply for the moment because of the power which is present in the United States economically, militarily, and politically. Does that mean with a "victory" over the U.S. that AQ will cease its operations, content in their triumph? Hardly.
The intent of AQ and similar groups, following their brand of Islam known as Wahhabism, is the fundamental destruction of the non-Muslim world, since every non-believer is an enemy of Islam. What does that mean? It means that the US, UK, Spain, France, Japan, and South Africa are all in danger from these people. The US is simply a magnet for the attacks because of its stature, its former presence in the Islamic holy land, its historical animosity with Iran and various terrorist groups, and its support for Israel. The other reasons listed, aside from the US being a secular, non-Muslim state, are used to gain adherents who have different views but the same goal of hurting the West because the enemy of my enemy is my friend. No one ever accused AQ and OBL of being stupid, and since many of those with similar goals (though perhaps not Wahhabists themselves) are radical Muslims, they are among the least "offensive" to the Wahhabists, who might be referred to as "enervators" of religion.
So, is the government of Spain responsible for the attack? No, not any more than the government of the United States is responsible for the attacks of September 11th -- and please let everyone know if you think that's the case because I would love to respond. Did the Spanish government support the US in the GWOT and in OIF (and don't forget the seizure of the North Korean So San)? Yes, the government recognized the inherent danger to its citizens from something as insidious as AQ because it has been on the receiving end of terrorism for quite some time now at the hands of ETA.
The incoming Spanish government wants to pull its troops out of Iraq. In no uncertain terms, that means the terrorists win and only encourages them to attack again, gains adherents who see their success in attacking the "weak" West, and lays out quite clearly the backbone of the Spanish government, which is non-existent. We're all assuming, of course, that AQ is behind this attack. If that is indeed the case, what is the message which the incoming government is sending to ETA? If you attack with enough force, we will surrender. If that isn't the very definition of a dangerous policy, I cannot possibly fathom what is.
The intent of AQ and similar groups, following their brand of Islam known as Wahhabism, is the fundamental destruction of the non-Muslim world, since every non-believer is an enemy of Islam. What does that mean? It means that the US, UK, Spain, France, Japan, and South Africa are all in danger from these people. The US is simply a magnet for the attacks because of its stature, its former presence in the Islamic holy land, its historical animosity with Iran and various terrorist groups, and its support for Israel. The other reasons listed, aside from the US being a secular, non-Muslim state, are used to gain adherents who have different views but the same goal of hurting the West because the enemy of my enemy is my friend. No one ever accused AQ and OBL of being stupid, and since many of those with similar goals (though perhaps not Wahhabists themselves) are radical Muslims, they are among the least "offensive" to the Wahhabists, who might be referred to as "enervators" of religion.
So, is the government of Spain responsible for the attack? No, not any more than the government of the United States is responsible for the attacks of September 11th -- and please let everyone know if you think that's the case because I would love to respond. Did the Spanish government support the US in the GWOT and in OIF (and don't forget the seizure of the North Korean So San)? Yes, the government recognized the inherent danger to its citizens from something as insidious as AQ because it has been on the receiving end of terrorism for quite some time now at the hands of ETA.
The incoming Spanish government wants to pull its troops out of Iraq. In no uncertain terms, that means the terrorists win and only encourages them to attack again, gains adherents who see their success in attacking the "weak" West, and lays out quite clearly the backbone of the Spanish government, which is non-existent. We're all assuming, of course, that AQ is behind this attack. If that is indeed the case, what is the message which the incoming government is sending to ETA? If you attack with enough force, we will surrender. If that isn't the very definition of a dangerous policy, I cannot possibly fathom what is.
You do raise an interesting question. However, if one were to put forth a reasonable idea for bringing terrorism to an end, it would surely assume one thing; that Terrorists listen to reason and logic and would cease slaughtering innocent lives as long as their goals are met. Sounds pretty far-fetched, no?
The fact is, and I think it's pretty clear at this point in history, that terrorism is plague that must be stamped out by all means necessary. Unfortunately, that includes the use of overwhelming force and should also include the worlds support for the eradication of Terrorists, wherever they reside.
Yes, other actions should also be taken, which would help to reduce the long-term terrorist threat, such as quality of life improvements for the underprivileged and the promotion of democracy throughout the world. Those things will help nullify tomorrows terrorist. Todays terrorist must be destroyed as efficiently and as thoroughly as possible.
One of my biggest fears is that we become the next Israel. I believe in both a hard line approach (towards the terrorists) and a good will approach (towards the good Muslims). Terrorists are like cockroaches. When we see one of them -- just kill it.
However we also need to clean up our kitchen so these cockroaches can't breed. We need to solve the Palestinian issue as soon as possible. We need to do this in a way that appears more even-handed than the approach we've taken in the past.
Israel takes too hard line an approach. They won't concede anything until *all* terrorism stops from the Palestintian side -- but that just makes it harder for the good Palestintians to work towards that good.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
This isn't Vietnam. This is about fighting terrorists - not a country. But if you find "Terroristland" on a map - let the gov't know and then let us know - OK?
CkG
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
This isn't Vietnam. This is about fighting terrorists - not a country. But if you find "Terroristland" on a map - let the gov't know and then let us know - OK?
CkG
There was NO proof at all that Iraq had ties with Al Queda. So how was starting the war with Iraq fighting terrorism. It seems more like it encouraged it, and created plenty of recruits for them.
Right CAD?
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
This isn't Vietnam. This is about fighting terrorists - not a country. But if you find "Terroristland" on a map - let the gov't know and then let us know - OK?
CkG
It's about fighting more "ists" When I say we need to attack "Terroristland" then you can call me on it. This time it is terrorists. Then it was communists. The phrasing, rational and apparent message is precisely as with the VN war. Maybe your memory of the time is different than mine. You were around then right? Sure ya were.
I can plainly see the similarity between unending war against the communists and unending war against the terrorists. It's the new "cold war" that our gov't has been looking for. Cad just likes associating Iraq with AQ, even though there's nary a shred of evidence to support that theory. Guess he's just like Bush in that regard.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
This isn't Vietnam. This is about fighting terrorists - not a country. But if you find "Terroristland" on a map - let the gov't know and then let us know - OK?
CkG
There was NO proof at all that Iraq had ties with Al Queda. So how was starting the war with Iraq fighting terrorism. It seems more like it encouraged it, and created plenty of recruits for them.
Right CAD?
Round and round we go. I suggest you read what I've posted before - we've gone over this, but anyway - what is your "solution" then? If you think that starting a War against Saddam encouraged the Al Qaeda(who supposedly hated him) and created plenty of recruits for them - then what is your solution? Ask them before we went in?
Let me guess - "we shouldn't have gone into Iraq" - right? As if that would have prevented Terrorism or Terrorist attacks
Do we have to ask Terrorists before we do anything anywhere? You know - we might make them mad and they might attack us if we do X - so we better not do XGive me a break
CkG
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I can plainly see the similarity between unending war against the communists and unending war against the terrorists. It's the new "cold war" that our gov't has been looking for. Cad just likes associating Iraq with AQ, even though there's nary a shred of evidence to support that theory. Guess he's just like Bush in that regard.
Wrong - your assesment is not based on what I have posted. Thanks for trying to say I'm saying something. Now run along.
CkG
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter