RiggoDrill Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 riggo....you're so far off the mark as to belie credibility. oil is a factor - not the prime mover. If oil is not the prime mover, then why did Reagan and Bush Sr. look the other way while Saddam was gassing Iranians and local opponents? We went to war to protect oil in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, not over Saddam's cache of "weapons of mass destruction" Furthermore, questioning my credibility is beside the point. The onus is upon this administration and war hawks like you to justify why we are going to invade a sovereign country without clear provocation and sacrifice the lives of our men and women in service. opposed to any action against Iraq have answered some fundamental questions. what is the threat? how serious is it? and , the kicker, what should be done? there has been a mindless littany of finger pointing Again, the onus is not upon me to "answer fundamental questions". When our soldier's lives (including many of my friends) are at stake, the burden of evidence falls on the shoulders of those who would sacrifice them. You (and this President) have yet to provide sufficient justification for invading a sovereign country without clear provocation Do you believe we should just pre-emptively invade and bomb everyone we perceive to be a possible "terrorist" threat? What are the limits? beyond posturing, what are you doing during this time of crisis? i don't care much what form it takes (be it join the military, national guard, fire department, health care community for crisis response, etc). but it is germane to ask what those who are standing on the sidelines arguiing ends are themselves doing to join the fight: don't be confused about this one - there is a very real threat and it exists globally. it has reached our shores already. if you're not in the fight....participating in any way beyond paying taxes and taking potshots, have the smarts to stand down for a bit until others can eliminate the threat. It is both personally offensive and morally bankrupt to suggest that those who do not stand behind every plan in this so-called "war on terrorism" are somehow unpatriotic. If anything, "standing aside" is a cop-out, an act of cowardice by individuals too afraid to exercise their democratic sovereignty. I am very much a patriot, and I am very concerned about the direction this country is taking. It deeply concerns me that this country, formerly a beacon of freedom and progress, is increasingly becoming an arrogant and aggressive regime that feels it can bomb and invade whomever, whenever. Let's remember that the attacks of 9/11 were committed with little more than laptops, bank transfers and box cutters. Do you honestly believe that we have the resources to hunt down every little bogeyman until the end of time? What are the limits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Originally posted by JackC There are no links to Iraq that I've seen to the 9/11 attacks. Ok, perhaps I'm just being dim. First you bring up Iraq, then you ask this: Here's a question for you. If September 11th could have been avoided but Americans had to give up the right to free speech and the government had the power to search anyone for any reason, would you be in favor? Um ... if the two are unrelated, why are you bringing them both up? When I tried to discuss Iraq, you told me that wasn't what you were talking about. So at your behest I shift my talk to 9/11, and now it's about Iraq again? Figure out what you want to talk about and I'll address the issue as best I can. If, however, you are simply dropping bombs hoping to antagonize the 'Right Wingers' into a mud-slinging contest, just let me know and I'll stop posting. Deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 9/11 and Iraq and whole middle east are all related, in addition to our current world politik view. In the past few years we have managed to anatagonize everyone in the world with our actions, soon enough we will lose support from everywhere. We pull out of the Kyoto treaty and other treaties in the UN which anatagonizes Europe and other countries, we refuse to pay money to UN programs promoting among other things population control which is very necessary if the human race wants to continue to live on this planet. We need to develop friends not piss off everyone in the whole world at us, but Bush can't seem to manage to do that(and I'm not sure Gore would have been any better). The only thing we are managing to do right is make money for our coporations and let criminals screw the little guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 riggo....as i am one who is in the service and has served in the Gulf.....i am so thankful that you are behind the lines worrying over my welfare and those of my buddies. how noble of you!! i personally don't care how you feel about the military. i do feel it is credible to ask, when your country is at risk, what role, however small, one plays in helping to defend it. it is a legitimate question. and one which is open to any number of answers....not necessarily shouldering a rifle or launching precision guided weapons. if you're going to espouse freedom, of whatever stripe, then, it would seem to me, you also have some obligation, in some shape or form, to defend it when it as risk. i'm not cavilling you - just searching for the threshold that defines your personal committment. you or Jack don't like the question, too bad. you're confusing matters - unintentionally i would hope. your statement was that possible actions, in the future, against Iraq, are cnyically motivated by oil contracts with China & France that we desire to foil. My response was that there might be other, more fundamental security risks that go far beyond this simple equation. you have produced no proof whatsoever to support your assertion. let's keep to the here and now. we both read the same newspapers. we can disagree about the nature of the threat; the nature of complicity of the Iraqi government in succoring terrorists now and during the recent war; we can expand planning for removing a scourge from one country into every country (as you have hyperventilated).....and that is your right. there is always more than meets the eye.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 btw....have any of you ever been in the middle east? there has been an expression of deep and profound knnowledge on this board about the arab psyche and i'm just wondering if any of you have been there to validate your beliefs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Actually I have been to the middle east...israel, jordan, the west bank, lebanon...not a very happy place especially now. I have studied a great deal about terrorism and such and also the middle east peace process, so I can speak on these subjects very well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 cool....so you have been in rhyad, seen chop chop block etc., and can speak authoritatively on the mindset of Saudi Arabians and their perceptions of the world, the US, etc.? same for Iraq and Iran? Syria? Yemen? funky...exactly whose support are we going to lose? and should it matter? and why are we losing it? get along is important - until your own security is at stake. i also point out that it would appear that we are getting along better with those who count when it comes to real power (russia, china come to mind). not being combative here - you may have real expertise to bring to the table. what would be your formula for thwarting terrorism? how would you address the problems in palestine? bush doctrine notwithstanding, what is your prescription for dealing with countries who directly or indirectly support terrorism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted July 31, 2002 Author Share Posted July 31, 2002 Originally posted by RiggoDrill If oil is not the prime mover, then why did Reagan and Bush Sr. look the other way while Saddam was gassing Iranians and local opponents? We went to war to protect oil in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, not over Saddam's cache of "weapons of mass destruction" Reagan and Bush Sr did more than "look the other way"! Hell they provided a lot of these weapons to him because they were more concerned with Iran at the time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted July 31, 2002 Author Share Posted July 31, 2002 Henry, Please don't stop posting. You have a clear head. When I said its not a good idea to let the same people who decide there is a war also be the ones who decide its OK to take away rights. Someone said they war was decided by the actions of 9/11 and thus my recent post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Well the arab mindset to the world...... They dislike americans because they view us as being anti-muslim which is untrue. You can find numerous polls conducted in pakistan, saudi arabia etc. that show over 60% of people surveyed have a negative perception of america. I don't necessarily see any active support but tacit support and perception of support sometimes is just as important active support. As much as I hate to admit it we need arab countries because of our dependence on foreign oil, until we solve this problem we will need to keep their tacit support and such. Solutions for terrorism..... Terrorism will never cease to exist but it can be reduced. The question of the palestinian state needs to be resolved. Jerusalem should be set up as an international city because of the convergence of three of four world major religions there. The palestinians need to get a state just so they can shut the f**k up, I don't think they should get one in fact I think they should all be forced into neighboring arab countries or just killed but the reality of situation is that it can't be done that way so a state is the only other solution. The US needs to set up an agency whose only job is to hunt down and assisinate terrorists and perhaps those close to the terrorists. As for nations that support terrorists, the US should suspend all ties with the country, make a public declaration of why they are doing so and then avoid pissing those countries off. Of course if there extremely active support such as the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden than other solutions are a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 henry....be afraid........be very afraid......."you have a clear head".....how wonderfully condescending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 Originally posted by Funkyalligator 9/11 and Iraq and whole middle east are all related, in addition to our current world politik view. In the past few years we have managed to anatagonize everyone in the world with our actions, soon enough we will lose support from everywhere. We pull out of the Kyoto treaty and other treaties in the UN which anatagonizes Europe and other countries, we refuse to pay money to UN programs promoting among other things population control which is very necessary if the human race wants to continue to live on this planet. That's not the first time I've heard the Kyoto treaty and other Bush foreign policy desicions blamed for the 9/11 attacks. We all know these attacks were planned long before Bush took office. IMHO, explaining away the attacks with one's personal distaste for our current President and his foriegn policy agenda is politically opportunistic and extremely innappropriate. We need to develop friends not piss off everyone in the whole world at us, but Bush can't seem to manage to do that(and I'm not sure Gore would have been any better). The only thing we are managing to do right is make money for our coporations and let criminals screw the little guy. I disagree. Letting the Middle East, Europe, or whoever dictate our foreign policy to us because we fear another 9/11 attack is called appeasement. I've never been a big fan of that policy. Oddly, Iraq doesn't feel the need to take that stance. Apparently, they are the only ones with a 'thumb your nose at their freinds, enemies and the UN and get away with it' card. IMHO we should have been rattling our sabre six years ago when they kicked UN inspectors out. Is oil a factor in the region? Sure it is. But I think it's rather naive to think that's the ONLY factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 I'm not saying that kyoto is behind the attacks I'm saying those type of foreign policy decisions are part of the reason for the attack. I highly doubt that Kyoto influenced the terrorist one way or another, I mean look at the environmental damage they caused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Funkyalligator Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 As for appeasement, I don't agree with it either but we are extremely antagonistic with our every action, the world is a smaller place these days and something we do effects everybody else and we need to be aware of this fact and try to compromise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted July 31, 2002 Share Posted July 31, 2002 I'm not saying that kyoto is behind the attacks I'm saying those type of foreign policy decisions are part of the reason for the attack. I highly doubt that Kyoto influenced the terrorist one way or another, I mean look at the environmental damage they caused. Perhaps, but if so I'd say that's about 5% of the reason, with the other 95% being we are dealing with phsycotic nutcases who claim they are 'entitled' to murder 3 million American civilians and 1 million American children. I highly doubt lowering carbon dioxide emissions, or adding falafel to the menu at the McDonalds in Cairo would really change their that sort of attitude. IMHO when you are dealing with people who think they are 'entitled' to ram hi-jacked planes into big buildings killing thousands of people, the time for introspection has long since passed you by. Should we see these attacks as a cause to make a fundamental change in our foreign policy? Maybe, maybe not. But now is not the time. Now is the time to make sure the rest of the world knows in no uncertain terms just what happens to the people who perpetrate and celebrate acts of war against the United States. Trust me, the Arab nations need our business as much as we need their oil. If simply disliking America was all they needed to sever ties, they would have done so long ago. There is a time for worrying about the rest of the world, but there is also a time for the rest of the world to worry about us. Anyway, that's my opinion on all this. Take it or leave it. I have to say it's been fun to stretch my brain a bit, but I'll head back to FedEx now and leave the debate to the truly passionate. After all, we did just sign Gardener, and I have several opinions on the subject to impart to the masses. Later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted August 1, 2002 Share Posted August 1, 2002 jack....there aint gonna be a tail waggin this particular dog....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted August 1, 2002 Share Posted August 1, 2002 for the larger picture....i got carried away myself in my frustration & have returned to state that i do respect the opinions of others (jack, riggo, etc.).......the only thing i want to reinforce is that this is a death struggle of global dimension with a foe one doesn't negotiate with. this is what the president meant when he stated that the war against terrorism would last a long time - and it is a war. the dimensions of this war are of the same magnitude as the WW's in the sense of the objectives of our enemy. the hard/deceptive part to absorb is the nature of this enemy. it's not on tv every day so it is easy to slip into the mindset that there is no threat or a lesser threat. of course we should persue a multidimensional approach to winning this conflict - but armed conflict is going to play a major part. and nations supporting the terrorists are going to have to be held accountable whther we act in concert or unilaterally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackC Posted August 1, 2002 Author Share Posted August 1, 2002 Originally posted by fansince62 for the larger picture....i got carried away myself in my frustration & have returned to state that i do respect the opinions of others (jack, riggo, etc.).......the only thing i want to reinforce is that this is a death struggle of global dimension with a foe one doesn't negotiate with. this is what the president meant when he stated that the war against terrorism would last a long time - and it is a war. the dimensions of this war are of the same magnitude as the WW's in the sense of the objectives of our enemy. the hard/deceptive part to absorb is the nature of this enemy. it's not on tv every day so it is easy to slip into the mindset that there is no threat or a lesser threat. of course we should persue a multidimensional approach to winning this conflict - but armed conflict is going to play a major part. and nations supporting the terrorists are going to have to be held accountable whther we act in concert or unilaterally. I respect others opinions as well. I just think we are over thinking this terrorists thing. Terrorists have been around for a long long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted August 1, 2002 Share Posted August 1, 2002 jack....i dopn't want to be chicken little....but this is on a totally different scale altogether. we have a long ways to go.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.