You think your wars are expensive?

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: The Green Bean

Originally posted by: Rainsford
I'm not sure that's the best approach, but I do agree that treating it like an actual war has problems...especially insider your own country.

How many Americans hate muslims based on what they've seen themselves rather than what they see on TV? I think the terms used by your politicians and accepted by ours like "extremism" and "fundamentalism" are causing the majority of us to think you hate muslims. The problem is there are two many bigots on both sides that won't accept that there is a problem with them.

I would say that most Americans have a slight to significantly unfavorable view of Muslims. But, then if we compare Muslim with Western nations we see the have nots and the haves, the countries with what we consider backass laws, poor scientific discovery, oppression, etc. with its antithesis, so is it really surprising that Islam is not well received? It seems in direct contradiction to what many laud the west for.

Well said. And that's where America's claim of being tolerant go down the drain. It's America that has started this cycle of hatred. Yes OBL attacked the twin towers and many other western target over the years but OBL was hated by everyone. Atleast amongst your population, contrary to what you claim you have ignited hatred against us. We are the oppressed. You ask any muslim around the world - progressive, backward, rich, poor, educated or uneducated he is likely to have an unfavorably view of the west. I've been to many countries and am saying it based on experience. And I think are anti-western views are justified. We denounce OBL. You don't denounce your aggressive policies against us.

And the Islam I know is different from what they show you on TV. The ball is in your court and has ever been since WW1. While I probably hate the taliban and their actions more than you, American foreign policy can go to hell.

I have little doubt Muslims are the oppressed. The problem I have is claiming the United States or the West are doing the oppressing. Muslims are oppressed by other Muslims. The sooner Muslims come to this realization the better.

When the West discovered that oil was valuable and that the ME had it, we immediately set out to exploit them. Kermit Roosevelt, installing the Shah, backing Saddam. There is a long list of things the West has done which has no parallel in our society. We abused the crap out of them, and many are alive today that lived through some of those times. This isn't ancient history. NOW, I would agree with you, but the better part of a century of opportunism and oppression by our puppets isn't just going to go away from these people's minds.

The worst of the assfucking happened post WWI when the british and french denied the land arabs fought against the Ottoman Empire. That was 80 years ago. If you can find somebody who actively participated in that more power to you. The Shah of Iran was the last in a line of monarchs dating back thousands of years. Saddam rose to power through the baathists who were modeled after the Nazi party.

Those two examples I provided above were Muslims taking power from western backed regimes and then oppressing muslims.

Colonization really fucked up a lot of the world. However the current crop of Muslim oppressors have a long and jaded history since. The scapegoat of colonization grows weaker and weaker with each passing year imo.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm not excusing whats been happening, however you are minimizing the western role in this much as the muslims are their own part. For example, you mention that the Shah. He got the boot, and and the Iranians elected an alternative. Then Churchill became concerned that the Iranians would want control over their own oil. Churchill then interceded in behalf of BP, and we put a dictator in place. The revolution came about because the Islamicists were the only force which had enough backing to remove him.

Saddam came to power as you say, but remained there just as long as he wasn't too much of an irritant. As you know, we decided it was in OUR best interests to support him over Iran, and the welfare of Iraq wasn't even on the table.

I certainly understand why we did what we did and all nations act in their own best interests, however if you happen actually be living there you wouldn't think these things are irrelevant, quite the contrary.

Again this doesn't absolve what's been done in the ME by the Islamicists, but if one wishes to understand reactions like we see from TGB and by extention milions more, it's good to have a more complete context.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
http://www.dawn.net/wps/wcm/co...eaches+new+heights+aah

To be spending 1/60th of the economy per year on someone else's war is ridiculous. Damn the politicians who for filling their pockets are robbing the country of peace, security, honor and money. About time we tell the Americans: Pay fully for our war or we are out!

Are you insane?

-It is YOUR war. There are terrorists in YOUR country. What did we do to Afghanistan for harboring terrorists? Do you really want us to take the war into our own hands and do the same to you? What America is doing in Pakistan is about as diplomatic as can be. You get all pissy when America goes in and takes our terrorists themselves (which, by the way, means we ARE paying for it), but then you get all whiny that its expensive for you to do yourself! Do you really not see the missing logic there?

-You complain that military aid isn't want you need - but you just posted saying you want us to pay for your war! Seriously, can you frame your argument with any less logic?

-You think nukes are all you need to fight India? What? What in the hell are you talking about?

Wow dude, just wow.

 

[StageLeft]

Not really on topic, but I have to give credit to Green Bean for creating threads that promote very uncommon views and doing it time and time again, not being run out by the frequent negativity he receives. It's not like we see many people here from other countries with wildly different political and cultural systems who post frequently. Chances are that if their reception was often poor they'd simply stop bothering, but he gives an on-the-ground perspective, if only from a single source. Think about all the Iraq threads. Now think about all the Iraqis who actually post on AT giving any input in them. The list is below:

1)

That was it.