Brave Iraqi Freedom Fighters attack New World Order Baghdad HQ

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre


So, as a comparison, if Columbian terrorists attacked Americans, you would go invade Nicaragua beacuse they are part of the "Hispanic swamp"? How logic...

if their orgin was due to the culture and politics of the region, and the best place to begin to change that culture was Nicaragua, then yes. As it happens, we supported democracy in latin America under Jimmy Carter, and democracy has spread throughout the region. Just as democracy has spread through non-Communist east Asia. But it has not spread (with some exceptions) through the greater middle east (morocco to Pakistan). And there has been not merely the absence of democracy, but the absence of rational economic policies. And a general sense of failure and frustration, and turning away from the modern world and towards radical islam. And we have to deal with that.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Defiant
GePap,
"One death is a tragedy, a thousand is a statistic", is the idea you promote, if we fail to let one death move us anymore we are not any better than the terrorists.

Actually terrorist are the sort to which every little thing is a deady insult that must be avenged with blood.

If you do not understand this all the righteous arguments in the world won't convince you, and that is truly too bad, because the next terrorist casualty could be your 3 year old daughter, that's how I think everyday when I argue these points, as if it was my daughter on that bus in Israel.

Oh yes, you are the only one with a family in the whole world, pity you! Iwas in my home in NYC on 9/11, so I don;t need you to tell me about thinking someone I know has been killed in terrorism. I myself don;t think arguing like I might have a personal stake in anything makes sense, becuase somoene with a personal stake is many times the last person who should do somehting, both for their own good and for the greater good.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Oerdin


More likely they thought it might be a car bomb and ran for cover. Maybe you don't no this but the terrorists often have a small event to attract attention (thus getting people to crowd around) then they set off the main blast. They just love that trick.

In any event if a person doesn't want to get shot the solution is very simple. DO AS THE GUY WITH THE GUN TELLS YOU TO DO! Walk slowly, don't make any quick or sudden moves, make sure you are in plain sight & that you look people in the eye (that will make doublely sure they've seen you and will not be surprised). It's common sense but I guess common sense isn't so common or else you wouldn't have idiots refusing to stop at check points and trying to moo through them at 70 mph.

I agree that people driving though check points at 120 km/h are idiots or obviosly try to hide something. But I bet many people are shot just because the Americans can't speak Arabic. I don't mean speak fluent Arabic, just shout the basic roadblock commands.

Each innocent victim will create a terrorist or two.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
Oh, yes and two senators get you? Zip.

Saudi Arabia has been, and is a vital US ally in the region. that has not changed, as least not as long as most of our interest in the area remain unchanged, which they do.

How is it vital? To protect against expansion by Iraq. Check.

To balance against Iran, given that Iraq is in the hands of an adversary. Check.

For oil. Check.

Saudi has been vital. Welcome to the world post April 9.

[GePap]

To keep oilc heap: since Iraq isn;t doing squat with that yet..

Keepoing Iran in check: Iraq is weaker now than ever, more open to Iranin infleunce than before: whoops.

SA was never a buffer to Iraqi expansion: why US forces went there in the first place.

To keep the lid on the Israeli Palestinian front.

Iraq is decades away from replacing SA as a worthwhile ally, assuming it doesn;t fall apart in the meantime.

Sorry, but we need the sauds as much as we ever did today.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Defiant
... the next terrorist casualty could be your 3 year old daughter, that's how I think everyday when I argue these points...

That's how many of the people in Iraq think when they become terrorists. The Americans killed their family for no reason, now they want revenge, even at the cost of their own life. At least according to the military analyst whom I heard on radio news today.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
To keep oilc heap: since Iraq isn;t doing squat with that yet..

Keepoing Iran in check: Iraq is weaker now than ever, more open to Iranin infleunce than before: whoops.

SA was never a buffer to Iraqi expansion: why US forces went there in the first place.

To keep the lid on the Israeli Palestinian front.

Iraq is decades away from replacing SA as a worthwhile ally, assuming it doesn;t fall apart in the meantime.

Sorry, but we need the sauds as much as we ever did today.

f

for the moment. Makes it pretty clear how much of an incentive the Saudis have to see us fail in Iraq though, dont it? One of the reasons when i hear someone comment on Iraq i check for ties to the Saudis.

We need them a little bit less than we did yesterday, and a little bit more than tomorrow.

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre


How is this linked to your statement that VC didn't bomb American cities and my reply that Iraq didn't either. Changing subjects, are we?

If VC pulled off something like 9/11, we would be fighting them to the bitter end. I doubt that even Russians and Chinese would continue supporting them. Even though the Vietnamese had MORE reasons than Al Qaeda to attack us, they didn't and won the sympathy of the American public in the end.

As someone has already pointed out, Iraq, despite its non-involvement in 9/11, is in the same league as all other freaks in Middle East.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Them ragheads are all alike, huh?

So is this a "war on terrorism" or a war on arabs who don't like us, or a war on Islamics who don't believe in the glory of the "American way" or what's the deal?


(note for the PC pukes: the term "raghead" used above is used sarcastically to illustrate a point.)

[Zkribbler]

For any who care, the judge from my courthouse who is over in Baghdad left the hotel about 90 minutes before it was blown up.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Either bring the troops home, or level Baghdad.
Those are the 2 options, as I see it.
Iraqi's need to take some responsibility for what's happening.

In any case, withdrawl from the U.N. is still needed.

Brilliant analysis right there

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre

Each innocent victim will create a terrorist or two.

Does that go for the victims of the terrorists? Are there a bunch of iraqi freelancers hunting the UN bombers now?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
For any who care, the judge from my courthouse who is over in Baghdad left the hotel about 90 minutes before it was blown up.

Too bad so many others were there, though.

[Alexander's Horse]

I hope this tragedy gets across to people that the UN is in the front line, It's not just a bunch of w#nkers at some talkfest in New York.

[Arrian]

I came across this opinion piece in the Lebanon Daily Star, and felt the need to post it. Somebody in the Arab world - with a voice - is digusted. It gives me a faint glimmer of hope.

How did we degenerate to such a terrible extent?
The bombing of the UN headquarters in Iraq on Tuesday raises a range of questions as complex and deep as the angry human emotions that every decent person felt when they first heard the news and saw the television images. The bombing tells us something about the ugly situation in Iraq four months after the war ended, but it also tells us something much more profound and worrying about conditions in the modern Arab world that would permit such things to happen.
The United Nations staff who were killed and injured included some of the finest, most dedicated international civil servants anywhere in the world; they also comprise a large contingent of scrupulously honest and diligent Arab and other Middle Eastern specialists individuals who represent perhaps the most hopeful point of continuous interaction between this region’s chronic conflicts and the international community’s best attempts to resolve them. Killing the finest men and women from the Middle East and the world who serve in incredibly trying situations is an act so degenerate that it defies any rational explanation. It is, first and foremost, a call to all in this region to look deep into our souls, to answer two related questions: How could the societies of the Middle East have deteriorated politically and morally to such a degree that this sort of attack has become routine? And where are the institutions, the forces, and the men and women of the Middle East in religion, politics, education, and thought who should stand in the face of such national deformity and stop the bleeding from generation to generation? The price being paid for the acquiescence and silence of those who should lead with moral and political legitimacy is already too high. The madness of a few among us who would do such deeds as the Baghdad bombing is the tip of an iceberg that permeates the wider circles of our cultures and countries.
The atrocity and terror that have plagued Baghdad recently against Iraqi, other Arab, Western, and now UN targets emanate from a deeper wellspring of criminality that cannot be ended by military means alone, or by foreign intervention. The United Nations is one of the crucial parties that can help to address this sickening trend; the people of the Middle East are more crucial, and they must act now.