13-07-2002 07:28									#91
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Imran, HUH! Ever hear of the Iran/Iraq war?

Yep... Iraq did very well during that time.

Siro: I consider colonization by European powers to be not far from what the Nazis did.

	13-07-2002 08:14									#92
	Remove this text

Imran -colonization in the 1400 - 1900 period maybe.

but what Brittain did to Jewish guerillas in 1945 was hardly nazi.

	13-07-2002 08:15									#93
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Che - in your scenario what is wrong with invading germany, taking down the nazis while young, and then approaching to fix what ever is broken because of versailles?

	13-07-2002 16:49									#94
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Siro, why haven't you commented on this:

Hmmm, I may be nitpicking in your logic, but can't you just pospone invasion? I mean, just give in and see what happends. If the US is still targetted, you can always give the call and bomb Afghanistan/Iraq/Iran/bananaville then. What's the rush? Why should the US be so trigger happy? Yes I know it's the American way to shoot first and ask questions later, but may it not be possible to ask those questions first, and then shoot if needed? Sounds a lot better to me.

	13-07-2002 18:31									#95
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 The heart of this matter is simple, some people want the US to do what they say, and if the US refuses, they will attempt to kill as many as they can. To even attempt to talk to such a bunch is pointless.

It's not just "some" people. An enormous number of people are grossly dissatisfied with American foreign policies, and this is where support for terrorism (or at least indirect support) comes from. If you want to allow such a trend to continue, I say it's a terrible strategic decision.

quote: Next, the matter of US "adressing" the desires of the Islamic man in the street. Ask me if I give a rat's ass what his desires are...

quote: , the fact is the USA is blamed for any problem they may have.

Because the USA is indeed responsible for some of the problems that they have.

quote: For example, our friend Saddam right above me (Love that avatar marky, he looks so happy!) totally disreguarded the cease-fire of 91, and still flaunts it, because sanctions don't bother him personally, but Imran's "man on the arab street" is told the USA is starving babies in Iraq.

Because the USA indeed is starving babies in Iraq.
I know that Saddam doesn't care about his people either, but America certainly isn't helping with those sanctions. With the sanctions in place, America is in essence an accomplice to Saddam, and which accomplice would Arabs want to blame? An Arab leader? Or rich foreigners? After all, they all have a part in this.

quote: The guy that causes the problem draws politcal benifit from it, as amazing as that is. I would care if they brought their complaints to us in a civilized fashion, point by point, but as long as they think murdering us is a good theme for a dance party, no dice.

If they did that, the Americans would listen politely, nod, and move on to more important matters, like impeaching Clinton for his Monica Lewinsky affair, in typical American fashion. US foreign policies in the Middle East haven't changed no matter how many ways Arabs have attempted to voice their concerns.
Which is exactly why they're resorting to other means.

quote: Let's talk about Israel, what right does a man in Saudi Arabia have to tell the US whom it wants to ally with? Who it gives weapons and aid to?

He doesn't. But America has the responsibility to choose its allies wisely, especially if it wants to play fair and "fight for freedom" as it claims it does.

quote: Sorry, as a nation that the US's choice, if Americans don't want that they can tell the government to stop it, but I have yet to see anybody beating down the doors of Congress to do this.

America can go ahead and make whatever foreign policies decisions that it wants, pretending that the rest of the world would behave like sheep. I don't think the results would be pretty.

quote: To say we have to pander to some clown walking the streets of Theran is insane.

I thought America was supposed to represent freedom and justice? Or is it true that American citizens are worth more than non-Americans?

quote: I do agree with some things, like total withdrawl and severing ties with Saudi Arabia, in fact, I would be in favor of severing ties WITH ALL nations that don't give a fig about women's rights, and treat freedom like a joke. Unfortunatly that would mean almost the entire Muslim world, but that's just my opinion (not all of it, and I'm not talking about religion, they can believe what they want, but since they like to treat women like property, I can do without them. And spare me any assinine charge of racism, I don't think I'm better then them as person, or as a people, or through religion, I just find this medieval attitude sickening).

So severing ties would actually help those women get rights. Right right.

quote: On Palestine, I think it was Moomie who hit the nail on the head, if terror ended the state they want would be built overnight, but they will never get by blowing up children and old ladies and calling those bombers martyrs and heros. I think they sure as hell should have a country, damn over-do, but they will never get it this way.

See above point on Saudi Arabia.

quote: One last thing, I realize this seems rather harsh to some, but I have a real F*ck you attitude with people who try to kill me and mine, they can kiss my ass before I'll care what they think, simply because they tried to kill me. I'm funny that way.

Don't you want to find out why they want to kill you, so that there won't be any more from where they came from?
If you really don't want to know, I say that's bad tactics.

quote: Oh, and Imran, if we go by your "The US deserves it" attitude, the USA would be withen it's rights to nuke Mecca, since their lose change was behind terror against the US. After all, they brought it on themselves.

Nuke Mecca indeed!
To quote something from a while back, "if America continues acting in the way it does, it'll soon lose all its allies."
How true.

	13-07-2002 18:59									#96
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan Because the USA indeed is starving babies in Iraq.

Allow me to at least try to introduce a few facts into the debate on this particular point.

But Sulaymaniyah, a city in northern Iraq with approximately 500,000 inhabitants, tells a different story. Indeed, across a crescent-shaped slice of northern Iraq, the picture is the same: The shops are stocked, and the people are eating. Northern Iraq lives under exactly the same international sanctions as the rest of the country. The difference here is that local Kurdish authorities, in conjunction with the United Nations, spend the money they get from the sale of oil. Everywhere else in Iraq, Saddam does. And when local authorities are determined to get food and medicine to their people--instead of, say, reselling these supplies to finance military spending and palace construction--the current sanctions regime works just fine. Or, to put it more bluntly, the United Nations isn't starving Saddam's people. Saddam is.

	13-07-2002 19:17									#97
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

That is, in fact, a poor argument.

Saddam is starving Iraq's people, we all know that as a fact.
The issues in question here, however, is America's involvement in all this.
Are those sanctions helping to feed the people of Iraq?
The answer is, obviously, no.
Are these sanctions helping to topple Saddam and give the Iraqi people better political and economic conditions?
The answer is a most resounding no.
Lastly: Are these sanctions helping to deepen the Iraqi economic problems and the suffering of Iraqis?
The answer is, obviously, yes.
It doesn't matter whether the Kurds are living better because of their own efforts or not, or maybe Saddam is a lot more responsible for the starvation than the USA. The fact remains that, being the most powerful nation of the world, the USA imposes sanctions that don't help the Iraqi people in any conceivable way, and could only serve to deepen their suffering. Which is just one example of many illogical and meaningless American foreign policies.

	13-07-2002 19:28									#98
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by cia Here's the deal. First, why don't all these hard-working terrorists blow up and assasinate the Saudi royal family if they don't like them? A plane or two anyone?

Coz they like the Saudis a lot more than they like Americans, that's for sure.
I wish for once Americans would sit down and wonder why this is so, aside from the inane argument of "they'll all CRAZY!!!"

quote: Second, I say we withdraw our support from the Saudi Royals and let them get whacked. The next terrorist attack on the US will be met with a full-scale invasion and war on Saudi Arabia, followed by occupation. Oil problem solved.

Very nice. In typical imperialistic fashion.
America fighting, once again, for Freedom and Justice!

quote: Third, the damn Iraqi people are starving for two reasons, Hussein wants to spend the money on weapons and their suffering is a political tool of control. Please point to a time when he fed them and they were prosperous before rebutting this with some flippant comment.

No one's questioning whether Saddam's starving his people or not. The question is, is the USA helping Saddam starve his people? The answer is yes.

quote: Fourth, the poor people of the Middle East have now been completely indoctrinated into what to think. Appealing to their higher sensibilities will not work.

In the same way that the Americans have been indoctrinated, no doubt. Appealing to the higher sensibilities of America doesn't really seem to work either, since their policies consist entirely of "Where's the money?" and "we've gotta get back at 'em!"
There isn't much difference between typical American arguments against the Middle East and typical Middle Eastern arguments against the US.

	13-07-2002 19:43									#99
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan That is, in fact, a poor argument.

How so? You're the one that stated that the US and UN were starving the Iraqi people. I presented evidence that this was not so and also called into question Saddam's willingness to provide for his own people.

quote: Saddam is starving Iraq's people, we all know that as a fact.

That isn't what you said. You stated that the US was starving the Iraqi people as if it were fact. Now you wish to change the terms of the debate.

quote: Are those sanctions helping to feed the people of Iraq? The answer is, obviously, no.

That's what the oil for food program is meant to accomplish. Strangely, it only seems to accomplish that goal in areas where the Iraqi government in Bagdad isn't in control.

quote: The fact remains that, being the most powerful nation of the world, the USA imposes sanctions that don't help the Iraqi people in any conceivable way, and could only serve to deepen their suffering.

The sanctions could quite possibly had been lifted years ago had Iraq obeyed the peace agreement that they signed after the end of the Gulf War.

	13-07-2002 20:13									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Ranskaldan , that article , if true (and I believe it to be so , I kinda trust the journal , for some reason ) , is an argument winner.

DD

	13-07-2002 20:17									#101
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan Because the USA indeed is starving babies in Iraq. Allow me to at least try to introduce a few facts into the debate on this particular point.

What that article leaves out is, the UN is the party administrering the program, not Hussein, not the Kurds.

	13-07-2002 20:23									#102
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov Che - in your scenario what is wrong with invading germany, taking down the nazis while young, and then approaching to fix what ever is broken because of versailles?

The problem is that's only a temproary fix. All you do is increase support for the Nazis so that when you finally leave, they come to power. If you fixed the problems, the Nazis wouldn't go away, but their base of support would vanish, and they'd wither to just another nutjub political cult with no influence in German life.

Terrorism is a hydra. Everytime you go after a head, two more spring into place. You cannot kill it without killing the body. Yes, it's gonna try and bite you will you do that, but no one said don't protect yourself.

Go after the disease, not the symptoms!

	13-07-2002 22:27									#103
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Taking this statement as an example. Palestinians know what Israel's demands and concerns are, from the left to right. When extremist Palestinians committ acts of terror, then those elemnts in Israelis society gain more support from mainstream Israelis. Thus, it is in the interest of Palestinians to respond to Israel's legitimate concerns. This would go a long way to ameliorating the support for Sharon and other Israeli extremists. We can all see that this is logical. However, when we turn it around and say that "our" side should stop engaging in the activity that drives the Arab/Moslem mainstream towards exremists, we are accussed of giving in to terror. Rather I like to think we are pulling the rug out from underneath the terrorists. If the mainstream sees we take their concerns seriously, then they will not be drawn to extremists to have their concerns addressed.

You conviniently ignore that there is a difference between stopping to activly seek out helpless civilian targets in order to kill as many as possible - the Pal tactic - and to prevent a dictator with a proven track record of mass murder form acquiring weapons of mass destruction. How would it harm the Pals if they gave up on terror? Not at all. How would it harm the US if it gave up on the Iraqi blockade? NY would go BOOM.

I believe you wouldn't support nuking Mekka during Ramadan claiming the Arabs brought that on themsleves by not listening to our grievances - and that they deserved it because of that.

	13-07-2002 22:30									#104
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: How would it harm the US if it gave up on the Iraqi blockade? NY would go BOOM.

HAHAHA... ah, paranoia.

	13-07-2002 22:43									#105
	The depths to which people go to avoid understanding. Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by moominparatrooper You conviniently ignore that there is a difference between stopping to activly seek out helpless civilian targets in order to kill as many as possible - the Pal tactic - and to prevent a dictator with a proven track record of mass murder form acquiring weapons of mass destruction.

They is a great difference between the two, yes. Palestinian terror has killed maybe as many as 5,000 Israelis in 50 years. The US blockade of Iraq has killed almost a million in 12 years. Not the difference of which you were thinking, however.

quote: How would it harm the Pals if they gave up on terror? Not at all. How would it harm the US if it gave up on the Iraqi blockade? NY would go BOOM.

Right, how's he gonna hit NYC? Oh yeah, give his weapons to Islamic extremists who hate him and are trying to topple him.

quote: I believe you wouldn't support nuking Mekka during Ramadan claiming the Arabs brought that on themsleves by not listening to our grievances - and that they deserved it because of that.

Nuking Mecca during Ramadan would be an act of extremism which few of us support. And yet, would that mean that the concerns that most of us have about Islam are unfounded? According to you, I guess that would.

According to me, the fact that a few violent nuts share some of my goals does not make my goals less valid. Adolph Hitler believed the sky was blue. That doesn't mean it's not blue.

	14-07-2002 04:22									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan It's not just "some" people. An enormous number of people are grossly dissatisfied with American foreign policies, and this is where support for terrorism (or at least indirect support) comes from. If you want to allow such a trend to continue, I say it's a terrible strategic decision.

It is not for someone else to dictate to the US how to conduct it's affaris, and the real truth is most of the "distatisfaction" comes from an extremly effective propaganda campaign carried out in many Muslim nations.
Before you scoff, take a look into this, it is well founded.
Most of their "grivences" are pure bull sh1t.

quote: Because the USA is indeed responsible for some of the problems that they have.

Wrong again, but at least your consistant.
The US is not controling any muslim government, it may do buisness with them but it doesn't control anything.
Unless your a left wing idiot spewwing conspracey theoris, you know this as fact.

quote: Because the USA indeed is starving babies in Iraq. I know that Saddam doesn't care about his people either, but America certainly isn't helping with those sanctions. With the sanctions in place, America is in essence an accomplice to Saddam, and which accomplice would Arabs want to blame? An Arab leader? Or rich foreigners? After all, they all have a part in this.

The solution is simple.
Attack or leave, sanctions are pointless.

quote: If they did that, the Americans would listen politely, nod, and move on to more important matters, like impeaching Clinton for his Monica Lewinsky affair, in typical American fashion. US foreign policies in the Middle East haven't changed no matter how many ways Arabs have attempted to voice their concerns. Which is exactly why they're resorting to other means.

Bullsh1t.
More excuses for inhuman action.
"They don't listen, boo hoo hoo, adul, go blow up a toddler, that will make it better!"

quote: He doesn't. But America has the responsibility to choose its allies wisely, especially if it wants to play fair and "fight for freedom" as it claims it does.

Sorry friend, the world's problems aern't the USA's problems, unless they directly effect the USA.
We aern'y the police of the world, despite several stupid presidents who tried to make us this.

quote: America can go ahead and make whatever foreign policies decisions that it wants, pretending that the rest of the world would behave like sheep. I don't think the results would be pretty.

If things continue as is, the world is setting up a situation where the US will wave all out war, and that won't be the "kid gloves" currently in use, war with smart bombs and trying to avoid all out losses.
It will be "if the world wants to fight dirty, we will also".
That's not as absurd as you may think, every 9/11 brings it closer, and the real losers in such a war will be everybody, but the "rest of the world" won't be here for the end.
That's the world terrorism brings, and appeasement did exactly that in the past, brought on world war.

quote: I thought America was supposed to represent freedom and justice? Or is it true that American citizens are worth more than non-Americans?

Go argue semantics with someone who cares, I'm interested in protecting me and mine, the rest can go hang.

quote: So severing ties would actually help those women get rights. Right right.

Nothing short of all out invasion and replacement of those medival jerks would.
But they can have their world, and we would have ours.

quote: See above point on Saudi Arabia.

You see it.
It isn't the US's job to correct the world's injustice, it's time that people understood they need to fend for themselves.
You want to help them?
Knock yourself out, but not with MY MONEY.

quote: Don't you want to find out why they want to kill you, so that there won't be any more from where they came from? If you really don't want to know, I say that's bad tactics.

I already know why.
They make it very clear.

quote: Nuke Mecca indeed! To quote something from a while back, "if America continues acting in the way it does, it'll soon lose all its allies." How true.

What "allies' would that be?

	14-07-2002 04:37									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

*Ahem*

The US isn't responsible in some instances? Ha!

Iran?

Here we propped up an unpopular ruler because we thought it was in our national interests. Religious extremists use this to spark anti-American zealotry, overthrow the shah and install a theocratic, anti-American regime. Our fault.

Iraq?

Here, in response to our stupidity in Iran, we pump millions of $$ and arms into an autocratic dictator with a penchant for genocide. We then act all shocked when he turns around and invades Kuwait with the army we financed.

Pre-Taliban Afghanistan?

We MADE the Taliban! Once again, creating our own worst messes. We pumped $$ and arms into the Taliban, because we always think the enemy of our enemy (Soviets) is our friend.

The U.S. is constantly shooting itself in the foot by meddling in the affairs of Muslim nations, and that's EXACTLY what we're talking about here in terms of short-sighted foreign policy. We've made ourselves unpopular with Muslim countries on our own.

	14-07-2002 08:13									#108
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Your living in a dream world Boris, saying the same nonsense over and over again.

We didn't quip Saddam, he used RUSSIAN equipment, and always did.
That's the propaganda nonsense I mentioned.

We didn't "prop up" the shah, he was put in power by Britain, instead of a fanatic pro-nazi in the 1940s.
And Iran has been so much better under Islamic hardliners, hasn't it?

They had their freedoms removed one by one by the regime that replaced the "evil" shah.

This is exactly the kind of stupidity I constantly see in these threads, blame for the "evil" US, and zero proof to back it up.

In fact Boris, take a look at this:

http://www.iraniancivilrights.com/main2.htm

This is what happened after the "US puppet" shah was forced out.
If your against US support of the Shah, then your for murder of homosexuals, Zero rights for women, no rights in labor, the list of human rights abuses is endless.

And people like YOU favor pandering to these morons.

	14-07-2002 08:21									#109
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Re the claim that the IRA bombed it way to the peace table: That seems like sophistry to me considering the fact that the British have always been willing to talk to the IRA, but they are not today anymore willing to make concessions to terrorism than they ever have been. The current crop of IRA terrorists have gained nothing more through the use of such tactics than did Michael Collins.

	14-07-2002 09:00									#110
	Re: The depths to which people go to avoid understanding. Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara They is a great difference between the two, yes. Palestinian terror has killed maybe as many as 5,000 Israelis in 50 years. The US blockade of Iraq has killed almost a million in 12 years. Not the difference of which you were thinking, however.

You're losing sight of the reason for the blockade, Hussein's unceasing efforts to conceal his various, still ongoing, NBC weapons programs. Muslims should not forget the fact that the only people who have been victims of his NBC weapons have been Muslims.

If you're going to compare numbers, you should compare the number who have died due to the blockade to the number he murdered in both Iran and Iraq.

	14-07-2002 10:53									#111
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 It is not for someone else to dictate to the US how to conduct it's affaris, and the real truth is most of the "distatisfaction" comes from an extremly effective propaganda campaign carried out in many Muslim nations. Before you scoff, take a look into this, it is well founded. Most of their "grivences" are pure bull sh1t.

Wrong. Propaganda campaigns carried out by governments are merely one part of the general anti-American atmosphere in the ME.

quote: Wrong again, but at least your consistant. The US is not controling any muslim government, it may do buisness with them but it doesn't control anything. Unless your a left wing idiot spewwing conspracey theoris, you know this as fact.

The US doesn't directly control any Muslim government, but US policies nevertheless influence affairs in the ME to an enormous extent, due to the political and economic clout of the US.

quote: The solution is simple. Attack or leave, sanctions are pointless.

Attacking is as pointless as sanctions, and has the added bonus of being even more destructive and inhumane.
I'm not against the use of force when all other means fail, but frankly, are the only possible American foreign policies isolation, sanction, and invasion? It certainly seems that way.

quote: Bullsh1t. More excuses for inhuman action. "They don't listen, boo hoo hoo, adul, go blow up a toddler, that will make it better!"

The American response isn't any better.
Besides, I'm not justifying murder either. I'm saying: find out their motives and solve the problems from there, don't grab a gun and start firing back at the closest moving thing!

quote: Sorry friend, the world's problems aern't the USA's problems, unless they directly effect the USA. We aern'y the police of the world, despite several stupid presidents who tried to make us this.

If so then stop meddling in the world's affairs like the world's your private little zoo, and the world will be thankful for it.

quote: If things continue as is, the world is setting up a situation where the US will wave all out war, and that won't be the "kid gloves" currently in use, war with smart bombs and trying to avoid all out losses.

I hope it won't come to that. But it seems that America will start it.

quote: It will be "if the world wants to fight dirty, we will also". That's not as absurd as you may think, every 9/11 brings it closer, and the real losers in such a war will be everybody, but the "rest of the world" won't be here for the end.

Contrary to what you might think, 9/11 isn't the start of it. It's a retaliatory act. I'm not saying it's therefore justified, but that's what it is, and America must realize that if it wants to solve the terrorism problem.

quote: That's the world terrorism brings, and appeasement did exactly that in the past, brought on world war.

If the Allies had attempted to help the Germans in the 1920's and not punish them instead, WW2 might well have been averted. But the Allies were intent on "getting back at them", and look what happened.... and the Allies certainly haven't learnt their lesson.

quote: Go argue semantics with someone who cares, I'm interested in protecting me and mine, the rest can go hang.

what you're doing certainly isn't protecting thee and thine. It's creating more people who want to kill thee and thine.

quote: Nothing short of all out invasion and replacement of those medival jerks would. But they can have their world, and we would have ours.

We live on the same world, try to get used to that. America's mistake has been to pretend that New York and Mecca are on different planets. Don't you think you should wake up to reality already?

quote: You see it. It isn't the US's job to correct the world's injustice, it's time that people understood they need to fend for themselves. You want to help them? Knock yourself out, but not with MY MONEY.

Fine then. America should become isolationist right away. I don't mind.

quote: I already know why. They make it very clear.

Why do you think they want to kill you? Because they consulted an Ouija board, is that it?

quote: What "allies' would that be?

Maybe you'll have only Britain left in the end. How sad.

	14-07-2002 11:05									#112
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

A little play

Saddam: I'm a rogue, see? I've invaded Kuwait and I'll be a nuisance to the world, especially the USA!

America: stop being so bad or, or, or we'll starve your people!!

Saddam: haha, I could care less.

America: (twiddling thumbs)
(meanwhile, a lot of Iraqis die.)

Saddam: (to servant) get me more foam for my bubble bath.

America: Too bad the Iraqis are dying like that! It's all Saddam's fault! Let's get his people to starve even more, and hope that Saddam gives a damn!

Saddam: (to his people) Look, America's starving you!!!

Iraqis: (dying) Argh! It's true!

Arabs in ME: Iraqis are being murdered by America!

(Terrorist act occurs.)

America: We didn't see this coming! Boohoohoo! Our strategic thinking has been perfect! It's not fair!

(later, somewhere in the future after Afghanistan has been steamrolled)
America: GRRRRR!!!!! Iraq is bad! Let's bomb them!!!

Iraqis: Look! American bombs are falling out of the sky!

America: Haha! Now the Iraqis will like us and they won't attack us any more!!

Iraqis: America is even worse than we thought!

..... (to be continued perhaps, ending in a World War which the Americans have no idea how they helped to start.)

the end

Last edited by ranskaldan on 14-07-2002 at 11:16

	14-07-2002 11:16									#113
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan Wrong. Propaganda campaigns carried out by governments are merely one part of the general anti-American atmosphere in the ME.

The MAIN part.

quote: The US doesn't directly control any Muslim government, but US policies nevertheless influence affairs in the ME to an enormous extent, due to the political and economic clout of the US.

Finally, someone who says they aern't US puppets.
As for influence, it's extremly limited, the muslim world does what it wants.
Our "influence" is basically limited to preventing them from destroying Israel, out side of that, not much.

quote: Attacking is as pointless as sanctions, and has the added bonus of being even more destructive and inhumane. I'm not against the use of force when all other means fail, but frankly, are the only possible American foreign policies isolation, sanction, and invasion? It certainly seems that way.

Invasion is a waste of time, sanctions are also, they can rot is the only sane course.
Europe can handle this problem.

quote: The American response isn't any better. Besides, I'm not justifying murder either. I'm saying: find out their motives and solve the problems from there, don't grab a gun and start firing back at the closest moving thing!

Clinton was trigger happy, Bush isn't, he limited attacks mostly to identifiable targets.
Our responce has been quite effective, despite a lot of blowhard talk, El Quieda has done nothing since their big splash.

quote: If so then stop meddling in the world's affairs like the world's your private little zoo, and the world will be thankful for it.

If you'd stop making it up you go along, I'd be thankful.
Name specific times and places of this "meddling", if you can get past rumor, don't waste my time.
I have no intention of defending your imaginary claims.
Put finger to keyborad and write out this "meddling".
And let me tell you something, Europe did far more "meddling", in a far more nonproductive way then the US ever did, unless you deny colonialism.

quote: I hope it won't come to that. But it seems that America will start it.

If the US keeps getting attacked, it will happen.
Count on it.

quote: Contrary to what you might think, 9/11 isn't the start of it. It's a retaliatory act. I'm not saying it's therefore justified, but that's what it is, and America must realize that if it wants to solve the terrorism problem.

It's retaliation in the mind of a sick little man who may well be dead, but he will have lots of company before long.

quote: If the Allies had attempted to help the Germans in the 1920's and not punish them instead, WW2 might well have been averted. But the Allies were intent on "getting back at them", and look what happened.... and the Allies certainly haven't learnt their lesson.

We didn't fight a world war vs Islam, so such a comparison is pointless.
Add to it that most muslim states are incredibly backwards, a rise to Germany's level is unlikely unless they change internally in a bog way, and that is extremly unlikely.

quote: what you're doing certainly isn't protecting thee and thine. It's creating more people who want to kill thee and thine.

Gitmo is loaded with a clown brigade that thought it was untouchable in Afghanistan, that we couldn't get at them.
Surprise, surprise, we sure did.
The only people who think the Afghan war is a waste of time are the same people who would appease terror and say the only way to end it is to give in to it...oh, I forgot, that's you.

quote: We live on the same world, try to get used to that. America's mistake has been to pretend that New York and Mecca are on different planets. Don't you think you should wake up to reality already?

I live in the real world pally, you obviously don't.
Someone punches me in the face I don't ask them why, hoping they won't do it again.
I knock em on their ass.
The same thing applies with terror, you all have this dopey notion that it's unstoppable, well, guess again, it is stoppable, as we are now seeing it stopped.
Humans are an odd lot, some will fight till the end, most take the safe path, the same is true here, you are letting a relitive handful of fanatics (say 40,000 as a round number) dictate to billions.
How moronic is that?

quote: Fine then. America should become isolationist right away. I don't mind.

Neither do I, the only reason it isn't is because Europe made a butch of the world the last time we tried it.

quote: Why do you think they want to kill you? Because they consulted an Ouija board, is that it?

No, becuase their leaders, both religious and in government tell them we are the enemy.
So simple even you can grasp it.

quote: Maybe you'll have only Britain left in the end. How sad.

And Canada, Mexico, most of South America, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, The Phillipennes, The Russian confederation, South Korea.......Seems only Europe will be up sh1t's creek in that scenario.

	14-07-2002 11:30									#114
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 The MAIN part. Finally, someone who says they aern't US puppets. As for influence, it's extremly limited, the muslim world does what it wants. Our "influence" is basically limited to preventing them from destroying Israel, out side of that, not much.

Actually, they are US allies, which is almost equivalent to US puppets.

quote: Invasion is a waste of time, sanctions are also, they can rot is the only sane course. Europe can handle this problem.

This "they can rot" attitude, coupled with invasion and sanction, is pretty much why America is so universally loathed.

quote: Clinton was trigger happy, Bush isn't, he limited attacks mostly to identifiable targets. Our responce has been quite effective, despite a lot of blowhard talk, El Quieda has done nothing since their big splash.

It's been less than a year. There's more than a year separating the Cole Attack and Sept 11 anyway.
Besides, Al Qaeda (which is how it's spelled) may be in shards, but as they say, the spirit lives on and grows stronger.

quote: If you'd stop making it up you go along, I'd be thankful. Name specific times and places of this "meddling", if you can get past rumor, don't waste my time I have no intention of defending your imaginary claims. Put finfer to keyborad and write out this "meddling".

Support for Israel for instance is a fair amount of meddling. Sanctions on Cuba, on Iraq, and on other countries the US doesn't like. Its strange habit of training and supporting dictators and terrorists who then turns against it. (Saddam comes to mind) All the political intrigue, amphibious assaults, support for one group or another, etc etc in South America. The fiasco of Vietnam.
And don't get me started on the places that America should have gotten involved but didn't. Like Kyoto.
They don't call America the International Policeman for nothing. I call it the International Rogue.

quote: let me tell you something, Europe did far more "meddling", in a far more nonproductive way then the US ever did, unless you deny colonialism. If the US keeps getting attacked, it will happen. Count on it.

So the USA is following Europe in the footsteps of colonialism? How nice.

quote: We didn't fight a world war vs Islam, so such a comparison is pointless. Add to it that most muslim states are incredibly backwards, a rise to Germany's level is unlikely unless they change internally in a bog way, and that is extremly unlikely.

Apparently you have no idea what Germany was like in the 1920's.
It was like the ME today: poor, angry, and extremist. The Allies were contributors, and they reaped what they sowed.

quote:

I share your joy.

quote: Gitmo is loaded with a clown brigade that thought it was untouchable in Afghanistan, that we couldn't get at them. Surprise, surprise, we sure did. The only people who think the Afghan war is a waste of time are the same people who would appease terror and say the only way to end it is to give in to it...oh, I forgot, that's you.

Straw man argument.
I'm not against force if there's no other way that could possibly work.
Unfortunately, in the vast wide world, there are many ways that are slower and more subtle but will work a lot better.

quote: I live in the real world pally, you obviously don't. Someone punches me in the face I don't ask them why, hoping they won't do it again. I knock em on their ass.

Unfortunately, that may work for interpersonal relationships, but certainly not for international relationships.
If a mosquito bites you, you probably should find where they breed, not attempt to swat every single one of the several thousand that approaches.

quote: The same thing applies with terror, you all have this dopey notion that it's unstoppable, well, guess again, it is stoppable, as we are now seeing it stopped.

If you think it's stopped like that, then you're more naive than I thought.

quote: Humans are an odd lot, some will fight till the end, most take the safe path, the same is true here, you are letting a relitive handful of fanatics (say 40,000 as a round number) dictate to billions. How moronic is that?

Yes, and America, so far, has been happily encouraging everyone to fight to the end.
A very wise path.

quote: Neither do I, the only reason it isn't is because Europe made a butch of the world the last time we tried it.

Mmm, and now you're out meddling.

quote: No, becuase their leaders, both religious and in government tell them we are the enemy. So simple even you can grasp it.

Mmmm, and you're sitting aside and allowing it to happen, right?

quote: And Canada, Mexico, most of South America, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, The Phillipennes, The Russian confederation, South Korea.......Seems only Europe will be up sh1t's creek in that scenario.

Don't be so confident. Overconfidence led to Sept 11.

	14-07-2002 12:22									#115
	Inflate your Upload Space

What was the view for the man in the street of the Shah's Iran?

What is the view for the man in the street of Saudi Arabia?

I'm pretty sure I know what the view is for the man in the street of Bagdad.

It makes a certain amount of sense to adjust your behaviour if your behaviour is starting bar brawls.

On the other hand... If you want to support your friend, say an Israeli, and 'they' don't like it... then it is not unreasonable for you to stand up and be counted for your friend. Reasonable people will understand that.

People should distinguish between supporting Israel and supporting the Shah and the Saudi royal family. They are very different things, although a lot of writers would not want you to think so.

When the US supports Israel they are supporting a friend. Reasonable muslims will see that. They won't like it, but they won't go rabid over it. They didn't in the 50's, or 60's or 70's or 80's. It was very late in the 90's that Israel was linked to other issues.

However, if in addition to supporting your friends you support oppressive regimes in muslim countries, then yes they are gonna start hating your guts. They'd start hating your guts even if you had no friends that you support. So the friend has nothing to do with it, and neither does Israel.

It would be good for people in the West to understand that Israel is not the same issue as American or European policy in muslim countries. No matter what some writers would have you believe.

	14-07-2002 13:23									#116
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Perhaps my last post was misunderstood.
I said to take the terrorists and the other ME people at their word.
Do EXACTLY waht they ask for.
HOWEVER,
if there is another terrorisy incident against the American people respond in a clear and overwhelming manner totally out of proportion.
Everyone here admits terrorism against the US is due to their support of corrupt regimes in the ME. So why attack the US when the Saudi government is your enemy? No one answers this fundamental question.
The IRA didn't say that because the US is Britian's ally they should boms the US.
The analogy is like this: your neighbor has a little dog and big dog, and the little dog keeps attacking you, so you go over and kick the big dog because it's the little dog's friend. Figure out what will happen from there.
I am in complete agreement the US should not support dictators or oligarchies.
But if we don'tand are attacked anyway I suppose it's just a little revenge for all the injustices?
So just wait to see what revenge is. America excels at it.

	14-07-2002 13:32									#117
	Re: The depths to which people go to avoid understanding. Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara They is a great difference between the two, yes. Palestinian terror has killed maybe as many as 5,000 Israelis in 50 years. The US blockade of Iraq has killed almost a million in 12 years. Not the difference of which you were thinking, however.

Oh, please. The UN blockade has killed no one. Zero. Ziltch. Food and medical shipments are exempt from the blockade given that they are screened by UN personnel. Saddam won't comply, because he finds this demeaning. He's people dying are a result of his stroking his wounded ego, not of any UN sanctions.

Is this useful for Saddam? You bet. Is it more useful for the West? It depends on the alternative - if the option is dropping the sanctions then yes, if full-scale invation is what we're discussing then I'd agree that would be better still.

quote: quote: How would it harm the Pals if they gave up on terror? Not at all. How would it harm the US if it gave up on the Iraqi blockade? NY would go BOOM.

I'm always amazed to see how many of you Yanks think that mass destruction of your countrymen is something hilarious. I bet you had a party after 911 too?

quote: Right, how's he gonna hit NYC? Oh yeah, give his weapons to Islamic extremists who hate him and are trying to topple him.

That's one option. Giving them the Bomb would insta-raise his stock from evil opponent of Allah's movement to Islam's thirtieenth profet overnight, so that would probably be a good investment for him, yes.

If for some reason that deal doesn't pan out, he can simply have some gentlemen of his own secret police run a simple delivery errand.

quote: quote: I believe you wouldn't support nuking Mekka during Ramadan claiming the Arabs brought that on themsleves by not listening to our grievances - and that they deserved it because of that. Nuking Mecca during Ramadan would be an act of extremism which few of us support.

Indeed. And while there are nutcases who'd applaud that, we are not about to tell the Arabs they need to pander to the wishes of these nutcases lest they offend them and us and provoke us all into bombing them all back to basalt.

But I guess your line of thought is that the Arabs as a people are so darn primitive that we have to be real sensitive not to anger their nutcases, because that would offend them and might even provoke these primitives into terror - which would be our fault, because they're clerarly too inferior to help themseleves?

quote: And yet, would that mean that the concerns that most of us have about Islam are unfounded? According to you, I guess that would.

Valid analogy only if either we complete missunderstood the status of women, democracy, freedom of religion and right to sexuality in the Muslim world, or the West is indeed conspiring behind their backs to bring them down. Which option do you belive?

	14-07-2002 14:00									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by cia So why attack the US when the Saudi government is your enemy

Because it's easier?

And it furthers your intentions of rallying the muslim world behind your cause in a way that attacking the Saudis will not?

So of course America responds with bombs and continues to piss off muslims by backing the Saudis and other offensive regimes in the muslim world. That way you still have the oppression leading to support within your own community and you focus that anger on the only thing in your way.

Winning a revolutionary war is more than about winning battles. No one should have to tell Americans about that. The only problem with this revolution is that it does not stop for many borders. Kinda like... nevermind.

	14-07-2002 14:05									#119
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

The trick throughout history notyoueither, is to always drag a much larger opponent into your domestic squabble with the hope of destabilizing your opposition and rallying your forces. However, this doesn't succeed if you drag someone in with the power to blow your side away and the will to use it. It is only an effective strategy for the large power's tangential attention, not full.

	14-07-2002 14:23									#120
	Put an end to popups!

Do you have the will to use it? Really?

OBL and other are betting not.

Besides, if there were another way, is it not a good thing to examine that way?

I am not advocating appeasement. Far from it. Muslim revolutions in... the Phillipines should be suppressed. Not many will care. Attacks on the West should be answered with force against those responsible and any countries that shield them.

But would it not be better if the people attacking the West lost support and sank into insignificance because the causes that fuel their fires are made obsolete?

It might hurt to stop supporting bad governments in the short term, but how much more will it hurt in the long term to continue propping them up?

The islamic world is telling the West 'enough!' It's been going on for 60 or 100 or 200 years. They now have the money and the fanatics to do something about it. We would do well to consider this.