Leaked intelligence report: what fuels jihadi rage?
Here’s an interesting discussion of the reaction to the partially leaked report of the NIA, widely quoted in the media as saying the Iraqi War has fueled the creation of more terrorists.
It seemsto me to be a tautology that, with an ideology such as Islamist totalitartianism, attempts to fight back would not be expected to damp down terrorism, especially at first. The important fact is that the alternative–failing to fight back–doesn’t discourage terrorism, either; it encouraged it.
If one considers each alternative, the realization is that neither works particularly well in achieving that goal in the short run. And right now, even though five long years have passed since 9/11, that only represents the short run in the war against Islamist totalitarianism, which is the current source of most terrorism today.
In fact, this is a war we’ve been fighting at least since 1979, the year of the Iranian revolution, whether we’ve acknowledged it or not. And the number of terrorists has continued to be fueled. It was fueled by Carter’s pallid reaction to the hostage crisis. It was fueled by appeasing the terrorist Arafat. It was fueled by the 80s and Reagan’s inaction. It was fueled by the 90s and Clinton’s inaction. It was fueled by the sight of the burning WTC towers. It was fueled by the cartoons of Mohammed. It was fueled by–well, you get the idea.
Now of course it turns out that the leaked report didn’t really say exactly what the press purported:
Here’s the relevant bit:
The Iraq conflict has become the cause celebre for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.
Sounds pretty logical to me. Exactly what might be expected. In the short run, terrorists are energized by conflict and the chance to fight the Great Satan. In the long run, if we are victorious, they shouud be discouraged. At least, we think so.
Of course, one could also say that defeat breeds resentment, and that portions of the Islamic world have been brooding about revenge for the ignominy of defeat since their debacle at the Gates of Vienna. Or was it the Battle of Lepanto? Then again, we have the fall of the Ottomon Empire; I seem to recall Osama mentioned that in his post-9/11 vindication message.
The truth seems to be that Islamic totalitarian rage is extraordinarily versatile in its ability to find alternative fuels to stoke its fire.
-and the left persists with their illusion that Abdul the shoe clerk from a back alley in Cairo can walk away from his stall one day and the next be in Iraq, fully trained, equiped, experienced ready to take on the best America has. The Left is still aroused and stimulated by images of Che. You’re damn right the blooded and trained veterans from Kasmir, Afghanistan, Chechnya, West Bank, Lebanon, Gaza, etc. have come to Iraq to die and they have been obliged. These men lead by example and experience and when the body count at Fallujah tallied in around 1500, you can bet your boots that the number of their dead included mostly experieced vets. Their tactics and defenses prove this. They were not romanticized shoe clerks answering the call to action and glory. Attrition is a real bitch when the only reward is some virgins in the sky and genuine replacements are darn hard to come by. Anyone can set up IEDs and kill women in markets and generational blood fueds, religious vendettas and banditry will run their course in due time.
It’s seems senseless to me to worry much about Jihadist rage. Countering with public relations and propaganda(there IS a difference between the two) are impossible since the MSM(the main organ of propaganda) is firmly in the HATE AMERICA corner and the Muslim religious leaders constantly spew hatred of the West in the mosques in their respective countries. The religion, one of the most intrusive that’s ever existed, controls ALL aspects of Muslim life and thought.
Those Muslims that may be moderate are evidently in fear for their lives because we only hear from them occasionally and never from Islamofascist nations like Iran. Since the Jihadists will hate the West no matter what the West does, with the possible exception of Western ‘submission,’ (in which case earning their contempt for weakness seems likely), it seems a waste of energy worry much about Jihadists not ‘liking’ the West.
The West needs to hunt down and kill the terrorists and not agonize about attitudes that cannot be changed.
Rage on. Goesh may rage on as well.
Rage? As in Raptors over Iran perhaps? God! That’s almost poetic, Yamarki, isn’t it? Raging Raptors over Iran – hmmm, I feel in a Haiku mood here – blistered mullah eyes, sun’s last blush in winter skies, I pee on rocky graves – wait! That might not fit the criteria! Perhaps just a plain monologue with flute music in the background? Whatayasay to that, Ymarki lad?
Iran: Seven Women Risk Death by Stoning
September 27, 2006
Amnesty International
Urgent Action
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE131112006
Islamic jurisprudence hard at work.
In the immoral words of former President Clinton, “Ev’erbody does it!”;
Christians going to church do it.
Jews going to shul do it.
Hindus breathing do it.
Waking up alive and not Muslim does it.
WGAS what causes it. The important thing is to end it.
It seems to me that Iraq is essentially a non-issue here, nor is Afghanistan. Bottom line is no ‘reason’ is needed at all. Were it not one of the two named above, hell, it could be Land o Lakes butter or Stanley Steamer carpet cleaners. Anything at all is all that is required to initiate Muslim ‘rage’. It remains, in my humble opinion, a war of culture, of civilizations and the reason, the location, the battle at present matters not. We can fight them there, we can fight them here, bottom line is…we are going to have to fight them. No fuel is necessary, just simply being among ‘the west’ provides all that is needed. The fire is raging and growing day by day. Can it really be so simple as this….they hate us simply for who we are, where we live? Nothing we can do or say matters, no discussion attains change, they percieve us as completely weak and nothing short of a total ass kicking could change that perception. Sadly, overall, a good dose of whoop-ass seems totally out of fashion in this country today.
The only side that has more irrational people than the right, is the left. Not exactly an endorsement of course. Human beings are so flawed, it’s a wonder we ever survived the invention of fire.
Ours not to reason why
Ours but to do and…fight back.
Oh no the big bad islamobogeyman is coming. What a bunch of ignorant fools. Man what crap won’t you religious zealots believe?
The impulse to respond directly to trolls is so strong…must…resist….
“Sadly, overall, a good dose of whoop-ass seems totally out of fashion in this country today.”
Get you ass to Iraq if you want to try your hand at whooping or just admit your a politically motivated coward.
Ymarsakar
Flawed compared to what?
So do we really have to beat them or can we figure out some way for them to “percieve” themselves to have failed?We are masters of the image, of the representation, couldnt we just buy al Jazeera and report that the US has won? Put it in all the papers? Like the Hate America MSM does here?Certainly cheaper than sending the extra hundred or two thousand troops it will take to actually beat them with a total occupation.
Also from the report: “We assess that the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement outweigh it’s vulnerabilities..” underlying factors? are those the same as reasons? I thought they were just genetically programmed to have hate in their heart?
It also says”the Iraqi jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders”,it does not say that they were being shaped anyway, though a few might have been.Since the Iraqi jihad didn’t exist till we started the war, one could say we created the jihad there.But now that we started it ,we have to finish it.Prepare to open thy checkbooks.Prepare for a draft.this could take a while.
“the Hate America MSM”
Couldn’t agree with you more. The MSM in lock-step with BushCo sold America the Iraq invasion and then served it up like it was one of their dysfunctional reality shows. There exists no better example of America hating than that.
“But now that we started it ,we have to finish it.”
Wow does that pass as rational thought on this blog?
Pete, how can I, a supporter of our efforts against your “non-existent” Islamofascism, be both an atheist and a religious zealot?
How does the one exist, yet the other, (Islamofascism), does not?
Read my comment again and respond to it rather than the comment you would like to think I made.
“The truth seems to be that Islamic totalitarian rage is extraordinarily versatile in its ability to find alternative fuels to stoke its fire.”
The truth might actually include one other minor – but particularly combustable fuel – one that has a way of sparking other smaller, tiny fires
Yep – when your troops occupy their land with hundreds of thousands of soldiers; and when your planes are bombing their cities to rubble killing their women and chidren in the hundred of thousands; and of course installing dictatorsfriendly to U.S corporatations( or even just allowing enough local automony to give the stupid back home an impression of just the faintest whif of democracy while we figure a way to oppress the population without having our fingers all over it)while of course the rest of the population starves.
Just a little something that maybe you might want to consider when telling the truly stupid what the ‘truth’ is.
Otherwise they might get really angry.
And having people stupid and angry isn’t really a whole lot of fun….
Yep.
double yep
It’s just around the corner. The next mantras of the right will be: The only good arab is a dead arab. Soon to be followed by: The only good persian is a dead persian. Followed by: The only good liberal is a dead liberal.
Yeh but I guess I should be afraid of the islamobogey man instead right?
“when your troops occupy their land with hundreds of thousands of soldiers; and when your planes are bombing their cities to rubble killing their women and chidren in the hundred of thousands”
The only country do have used planes to bomb a city to rubble, in this century, would be the Taliban’s Afghanistan. Unless perhaps China is getting away with murder behind the UN’s back.
Pete – where’s the body count? I miss your numbers. 40 bodies were recently found with evidence they had been tortured. In actuality, it was a burning Buddhist sort of thing like back in the good old days of Viet Nam – they mutilated themselves in protest over Halliburton playing favorites. Halliburton has a habit of not hiring people from where IEDs and ambushes get set off, or conversely firing people from an area that turns hostile. Don’t you know they pay very high wages, about like you getting $30.00 an hour for flipping burgers at McDonalds, though I know you are a mortician by trade – this is just an analogy here, Pete. Anyway, these 40 suiciders got the wrong press/PR out of it. The Shias tried to blame the Sunnis and visa versa and it ended up, as usual, a blame George sort of scenario. The boys from Halliburton slid through squeaky clean again it seems. HA! HA! Don’t you know there have been some hits made over Halliburton type jobs, Pete? Where ya’ been, lad? You and I compete for a job with fancy clothes, a crafty resume’ and good references and a little inside pull if possible. Hell! They’ll shoot a competitor in the head if he is not of the same tribal or religious group. They are, Pete, a practical people, saving on resume’ paper and clothing expenditures in this manner. The implimentation of Capitalism always brings some chaos but from it comes system and order, rule of Law and upgraded standards of living. Them street urchins are already hawking Coca-Cola and Marlboro, Pete. What else can I say to you, Pete? That God has ordained this? You believe I believe that, don’t you? You are my favorite troll you know. In your rush to justify your fear of Bush, you have failed to read all the news. MSM doesn’t show the traffic jams in Baghdad, do they? Early on there were a few blurbs about that but for some reason such items sort of just faded away. Hmmmm. Did you know that early on in the war there were areas and villages where US troops would go to regroup and rest for a day or so and Iraqis provided security for them? Yep and yep again, Pete. Do you know what went on in these secure staging and rest areas? Women for outstanding pay would wash clothes for GIs. Men providing security were given cash and commodities which they didn’t ask for but which they were given anyway and in turn they sold what they didn’t want to use themselves. Kids were given candy and cigarettes and MREs which they in turn gave to their families and sold to neighbors at a fair price. Pax Americana, baby, pax Americana!
Where do you get such a foolish notion that Liberals will be put against the wall and shot!? Not a bad idea, really ( just kidding for Christ’s sake!) Where would I be without you, Pete? Do you think I only seek to slander you and never consider the merit of what you say? Now Liberals need a swift kick in the ass no doubt, but shooting? Hardly!
That was a touching story — I’m going to go cry somewhere now.
Sock puppet circus!! Who’d a thunk it? And I’m going to vote Democratic now! My mind’s been liberated from its Rovian fog! The clarity of argument and the scintillating reason on display has convinced me that I’ve been wrong, so wrong for lo these many years.
Hallelujah!
Oh, wait…that has religious overtones…
Praise Gaia!
Just a little something that maybe you might want to consider when telling the truly stupid what the ‘truth’ is.
You can tell’em and tell’em over and over but the “truly stupid” will probably never really get it(sigh). But we’ll keep trying in hopes that you and the rest of the anti-American crowd will somehow wise up – it’s our obligation to Truth.
I thought they were just genetically programmed to have hate in their heart?
Naw, it’s not genetics doing the programming – it’s their ‘religion of peace’ that foments their hatred.
Prepare for a draft. this could take a while.
Don’t get your hopes up – thanks to Rumsfeld’s strategy of minimum US troop deployments American military casualties have remained very low in both Afghanistan and Iraq. A draft WOULD be instituted with enthusiasm IF and when the terrorists ever succeeded in pulling off a ‘big one’ in the US. But for now the all-volunteer, small footprint US military is kicking ass in both theaters WITHOUT a draft – thanks all the same.
Ah, the chickenhawk accusation from pete. Didn’t take long for that to happen, did it? Been there, pete, got the t-shirt to prove it. Why don’t you go? Not necessarily as a servicemember, but as a member of an NGO, an aid organization; I ran into plenty of people like that over there who had no real support for the war, but who at the very least were trying to lend a helping hand to ordinary Iraqis. I don’t really expect you’ll do something like that, though. Intellectual cowards such as yourself, who often are the first to throw out accusations of cowardice, are usually physical cowards as well.
goesh wrote:
“-and the left persists with their illusion that Abdul the shoe clerk from a back alley in Cairo can walk away from his stall one day and the next be in Iraq, fully trained, equiped, experienced ready to take on the best America has.”
Forget about Abdul the shoe clerk in Cairo, is it an illusion to think that killing all the “hardened vets” flocking to Iraq won’t do a thing to stop Germaine the carpet-fitter from Buckinghamshire?
Maybe it’s not really rage. Maybe it’s a bloodthirsty lust for power and domination that only looks like rage to us naive Westerners.
Ahmed Rashid, in his 2000 book Taliban, identifies the birth of the jihadi movement at the defeat of the invading Soviets in Afghanistan back in the late 1980s, which was followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union:
That doesn’t sound like anger at US meddling in their affairs. These men are ambitious, not angry. Or at least, any anger they express is anger at being thwarted in their ambitions.
Also see the Honor/Shame dynamic that is active in most of the Muslim world. It’s not the religion, dummy. It’s the culture.
.
I’m wondering, grackle, whether you think German dissidents during Hitler’s imperialist wars(however few there were) were ‘anti-German’ – and whether those people were sadly mistaken about the “Jewish threat”….
What say you grackle?
Were the Nazi’s right – did the Jews become a global menace – was he right to say they were a threat that needed to be eradicated?
Sounds to me like you’d agree with that premise, apparently…
“Ah, the chickenhawk accusation from pete. Didn’t take long for that to happen, did it? Been there, pete, got the t-shirt to prove it. Why don’t you go? Not necessarily as a servicemember, but as a member of an NGO, an aid organization; I ran into plenty of people like that over there who had no real support for the war, but who at the very least were trying to lend a helping hand to ordinary Iraqis. I don’t really expect you’ll do something like that, though. Intellectual cowards such as yourself, who often are the first to throw out accusations of cowardice, are usually physical cowards as well.”
Thats a rather dumb post.
“Intellectual cowards”??
What the hell does that mean?
We’re talking about occupying a country illegally and killing their nationals – and Pete’s talking about those who call for more death and destruction – not about helping Iraqis.
They could help themselves if the U.S wasn’t destroying the country.
Which is what people like you support.
And yes – thats what I said – people like you support the destruction of Iraq.
Because thats what is going on….
Stephen,
Dumb? Perhaps, since I wrote it in deference to you and pete. Though it is not half as dumb as this:
“Which is what people like you support.
And yes – thats what I said – people like you support the destruction of Iraq.”
Actually, I don’t. I speak Arabic, and have spent years working there and other parts of the Middle East. I spent time getting to know average Iraqis, being welcomed into their homes, and doing my best to act as a cultural bridge between them and ourselves. The more negative things I’ve learned about Arab culture have been equally matched (and outweighed) by the truly wonderful aspects of their culture, and I spent my time doing my best to repay their hospitality by helping their new government, in my own small way at least to have a fighting chance at succeeding. All of this, of course, is about 100x what you have done for them with your “enlightened” posts. The fact that you hide behind such ignorant statements above (and your shifting identities) shows that yes, you are an intellectual coward, and yes, a physical one as well. But since you’re speaking “truth to power”, that must make you more noble than the rest of us by default. I’ll end this by quoting you, Stephen:
“…”
Which is probably the most intelligent thing you’ve ever posted here.
One of the reasons Bin Laden gave was the loss of Andalusia.
That is, Sapin. Lost to Isabella and Ferdinand in 1491.
Truly, any reason at all will do, any excuse. And if one doesn’t exist one can be made up.
Mohamed Al Durah.
Missile strikes on ambulances.
cdj – I’m really very glad you’ve experienced Arab culture first hand – so have I for what it’s worth – and that you’ve taken steps to ‘help’ their government have a ‘fighting’ chance to succeed.
Let’s see how long that government lasts the next time there are free elections in Iraq without the prescence of U.S troops and with their own constitution.
so have I for what it’s worth – and that you’ve taken steps to ‘help’ their government have a ‘fighting’ chance to succeed.
Let’s see how long that government lasts the next time there are free elections in Iraq without the prescence of U.S troops and with their own constitution.
I haven’t ‘shifted’ indentities for some time now – and even when I did I made it quite clear that it was me anyway, – but whatever – if that’s your example of ‘intellectual’ cowardice than it shows clearly you are merely a windbag.
I’ll tell you how long – “…”.
I haven’t ‘shifted’ indentities for some time now – and even when I did I made it quite clear that it was me anyway, – but whatever – if that’s your example of ‘intellectual’ cowardice than it shows clearly you are merely a windbag.
By the way – how do you discern that I am a physical coward based on my being an intellectual coward – which, again, you’ve failed to provide a defintion for.
And yes – you do support the destruction of Iraq. Because that it was your goverment has systematically done. Without question.
The invasion and occupation was illegal, immoral and based on lies to the domestic audience. Of that there is no debate.
The country is a complete mess – of that there is no debate either.
If you really cared about Iraq – you would be petitioning your government to withdraw it’s troops immediatly – thats just common sense.
So blow you smoke up someone else’s ass mate – your not going to get away with it with me…
Sorry for the mess of a post, cdj.
But I’m quite sure you’ll figure it out…
And yes – you do support the destruction of Iraq. Because that it was your goverment has systematically done. Without question.
The underlying logic being that if you give your support for a task performed by a person, you are supporting all the ideals and actions of that person.
Then wouldn’t it be absolutely true that you are an avid supporter of terrorism and tyranny, as you share an ideal with the terrorists and tyrants who want the US to stop screwing with the middle east (and various other “their countries”)?
I’m wondering, grackle, whether you think German dissidents during Hitler’s imperialist wars(however few there were) were ‘anti-German’
It’s characteristic of the anti-American crowd’s apparent unwitting penchant for wildly false metaphor that Stephen/Anon/etc./etc. would propose a debate based on the assumption that Bush is the same as Hitler. It gets squeals of delighted agreement on some blogs. I suppose the SS corresponds to the Republicans. Has anyone else noticed that as time goes by Stephen’s comments keep getting more surreal?
“Of that there is no debate.”
“of that there is no debate either.”
…and this is what passes for “debate” with those on the left.
Stephen, there has been incessant “debate” about both of your assertions. The fact that you don’t agree with the contrary position doesn’t mean that it’s wrong or hasn’t been discussed.
That’s what is meant by the term, “intellectual coward”, by the way.
And if anyone wants to run through the archives of DenBeste or Esmay, they will find that all of this has been debated – incessently for the past few years.
The left truly brings no new arguments to the table.
Answer these questions or admit that you are morally bankrupt.
Why did you support the invasion of Iraq?
How can you justify the enormous costs (money, lives, civil rights) of the Iraq Invasion and the continued occupation given that both have simply exacerbated what was, and contiues to be, a relatively small threat to our safety and government?
And if you don’t agree with the assertions implicit in my questions then prove I am wrong. The burden is on you. The burden is on anyone who suggests that we should solve our problems with such enormous unrelenting violence.
The burden is on you. The burden is on anyone who suggests that we should solve our problems with such enormous unrelenting violence.
I concur. I furthermore propose that the burden of proof is on anyone with a sub-genius IQ to prove they are right, when arguing with anyone with a genius-level IQ.
I mean, the probability of people with higher IQs applying correct logic is higher than those with lower IQs, yes? So it makes perfect sense for the ones who have the highest probability of being wrong to prove that they are right, and assume they are wrong if they cannot.
Future historians of WWIII would not debate Saddam’s WMD – was it or wasn’t here at the time of invasion. But they certainly would note all-important Iraq bridgehead for US army in subsequent battles in Syria and Iran.
And of course historians will note how our aggression was met with a swift and
devastating response from the rest of the world.
“our aggression was met with a swift and
devastating response from the rest of the world.”
I’m quaking in my pajamas, Pete, I really am.
Stumbley should quake in his books, the time of the American Republic is nigh over. It’s time for the Empire of America to take over now.
“The Empire of America”
I waded through all this troll nonsense to arrive at what will likely be my biggest laugh of the day. 🙂
I’m quaking, simply quaking.
stumbley,
There is no serious debate.
None.
Yes I know your lot have tried very hard to continue the so-called ‘debate’ justifying the invasion of Iraq, but sane people know the score.
Justin – your analogy is wrong. I don’t support an ‘ideal’ – I’m simply pointing to facts that contradict your ideology.
I don’t support terrorism whether it’s theirs or ours….
Grackle – funny you should ridicule using the Hitler analogy – I’ve heard it upteen times about Islamo-fascism, N.Korea, Iran etc.
But – I’m not drawing a link between Bush and Hitler.
I’m pointing out to you that your argument is the same as used by the Nazis to justify their crimes.
And thats all.
Justin – your analogy is wrong. I don’t support an ‘ideal’ – I’m simply pointing to facts that contradict your ideology.
You don’t want the US to stop screwing in the politics of other sovereign nations? I apologize; it was my incorrect inference.
Out of curiosity, exactly what ideology are you assuming is mine?
Of course I want them to stop ‘meddling ‘ – I actually would prefer it stop committing serious war crimes and stick to the democratic prinicples that, as the leader of the free world, it claims to uphold with such righteous virtuosity.
If that is an ‘ideal’ than we are all in a whole lot of trouble.
That doesn’t mean I side with Islamic terrorists.
Grackle’s ideology is that critics of the war do the country a terrible disservice and that his government is (basically – as long as the debate is framed in a certain way) not to be criticized.
Despite the mountains of evidence that his country is in fact committing serious war crimes, breaches of international law and making the world a much more dangerous place in a most pathological manner.
This is what patiotism is for grackle.
And, that is what I’m assuming is your ideology based on your questioning.
I apologize if I’ve drawn an incorrect inference.
Of course I want them to stop ‘meddling ‘ – I actually would prefer it stop committing serious war crimes and stick to the democratic prinicples that, as the leader of the free world, it claims to uphold with such righteous virtuosity.
If that is an ‘ideal’ than we are all in a whole lot of trouble.
How is that not an ideal (actually several of them)? Self-determination of sovereign nations (the one I’d assumed you held, although your reply is ambiguous as to whether my assumption is correct), following a code of conduct in battle, submitting to the will of the rest of the world over one’s own will, to do as one expects others to do; these are all ideals.
My point was merely that your logic was flawed. I was not making an argument against any cited facts, or attempting to cite facts of my own.
Fair enough.
I suppose I’m incorrectly drawing an assumption that all of us agree on – that sovereign nations have a right to self-determination, that attacking another country unprovoked is wrong, killing people to further a political agenda is wrong, and that lying to further and justify war crimes is wrong.
But then all of us would agree that if a nation did this to us we would say that is wrong.
So logically this is an ideal.
And yet we can all agree that in principle these things are wrong.
We can differ in other areas but I’d say that is a value system that we all share…
Stephen:
We’ll spell it out for you in simple words, so that you might understand, if you’d only take the time to think reasonably:
1. You stated “attacking another country unprovoked is wrong”.
Iraq had been firing on British and American planes covering the “no-fly” zone in Iraq for at least 8 years following Gulf War I. This was in direct contravention of UN resolutions (you believe in UN resolutions, right?). These were acts of WAR. I would hardly call that “unprovoked”. In addition, Saddam was offering $25,000 to families of suicide bombers, to encourage continuation of the practice. Another “provocation.”
2. You stated: “lying to further and justify war crimes is wrong”
Let me refresh your memory as to the definition of a lie:
lie: “to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive”
I believe you’re referring to the fact that ONE (just one of many, by the way, including the “profocations” mentioned above) of the reasons the US attacked Iraq was a belief that Saddam possess WMDs. Since as yet we have not found huge stockpiles of WMDs, the convention wisdom on the left is that President Bush “lied” to mislead us into war. However, virtually EVERY intelligence agency on earth believed that Saddam had WMDs prior to the invasion. These are FACTS, and are incontrovertible. The belief that Saddam had WMDs was reasonable; there was no “intent to deceive” in the President’s decision.
3. You state: “killing people to further a political agenda is wrong”.
Then, Stephen, EVERY war is wrong, including the one that rid the world of Nazism and stopped the holocaust. Saddam was killing Iraqis daily, to “further” his “political agenda”. If that was indeed wrong, we performed a public service by toppling Saddam’s murderous government.
But you don’t really care about logic, facts or “rightess” or “wrongness”. You’re just a troll.
“provocations”
“possessed WMDs”
“conventional wisdom”
PIMF. Sheesh.
I agree, “ … sovereign nations have a right to self-determination … “ as long as they make nice with other nations but if they screw around like Saddam did for several years they need to be deposed – as Saddam was.
I wouldn’t call “self-determination” a “right.” It’s a ‘condition’ that exists if the correct factors are present, such as a viable government, a strong defense system and a healthy respect for other nations. For instance: No “self-determination” should be extended to terror-sponsoring nations like Syria and Iran.
I also agree that … attacking another country unprovoked is wrong …” but of course Saddam was provocative in the extreme so THAT maxim is not applicable in the case of Iraq. It’s already inapplicable to Syria and Iran, since both those nations are meddling in our business and have been doing so for quite awhile. The leaders of both of those nations should look at Afghanistan and Iraq for an insight into their future.
I DON’T agree that “ … killing people to further a political agenda is wrong …” because the phrase could taken for a definition of war and I certainly want any nation of mine to be ready, willing and able to wage war – for one thing it’s a very good way to lure terrorists to areas such as Iraq and Afghanistan so they can be killed.
I also agree “ … that lying to further and justify war crimes is wrong.” That’s why I’m glad that Saddam is on trial. May he receive the justice he deserves.
I also agree that … attacking another country unprovoked is wrong …” but of course Saddam was provocative in the extreme so THAT maxim is not applicable in the case of Iraq. It’s already inapplicable to Syria and Iran, since both those nations are meddling in our business and have been doing so for quite awhile. The leaders of both of those nations should look at Afghanistan and Iraq for an insight into their future.
How exactly are Syria and Iran meddling in ‘your’ business?
How exactly are Syria and Iran meddling in ‘your’ business?
Iran, by using terrorists to wage war against the US and its allies. Syria – the same. The day is coming when these folks will pay the price of using terrorists to wage war by proxy.
Yes I know your lot have tried very hard to continue the so-called ‘debate’ justifying the invasion of Iraq, but sane people know the score.
I don’t think we need a debate about Iraq. At least not with certain people. Not everyone has something to contribute to the debate, the two party system after all.
People should also quake in their boots that iran will get their comeuppance. Well, at Stephen does, because he obviously believes America is ruthless and powerful enough to be hardnosed about Iran. If he isn’t, that is another story entire.
You’re just a troll.
That can’t be true, you know. If stephen is quaking in his boots at America’s power, he can’t be just a troll.
Why don’t you go? Not necessarily as a servicemember, but as a member of an NGO, an aid organization; I ran into plenty of people like that over there who had no real support for the war, but who at the very least were trying to lend a helping hand to ordinary Iraqis.
I suspect Pete would be on the other side. His home boys would strap a bomb to him, that’s why he doesn’t go.
“The truth seems to be that Islamic totalitarian rage is extraordinarily versatile in its ability to find alternative fuels to stoke its fire.”
as is yours neo