IRAQ

[Vautrin]

As for the collateral damage, yes, that is probably better than it used to be. But still.

And you can debate that the people or the buildings themselves were the targets. It just "so happened" that there were thousands of people present on 9/11.
It sounds awful, but if you want to apply such a term to one side, you may want to consider it to the other as well.

As always those who are innocent suffer most. Whether it is in war, or political oppression by dictatorial regimes. Or in terror. And that works for people all around the world. Retaliation only perpetuates the vicious cycle.

If Osama is dead, there will be someone else. As long as we do not address the root causes of terror, it will remain in existence. And no amount of bullets and bombs will change that.

[Ayla]

Okay, so I get that you think the US is the big bad wolf and that we deserve all that happens to us, our civilians and military. That's what I get from your posts. If that's not the case then I welcome you to clarify.


However you didn't awnser one question that I really wanted you to...

So you condone the terrorist activites? You think it's right that they killed all those people on 9-11 and in London and Spain? You think it's okay that they hide in their own mosques and that their suicide bombers kill innocents of their own country everyday?

So if the USA is the big bad wolf, perhaps we should pull ALL our funding out of other countries... ALL other countries and see what happens. As much as you seem to dislike the USA, and as much as others may hate us...We do contribute a lot to the world around us. We go above and beyond our call to duty every day.

Yes, I'm biased. I love my country and am proud to say I'm an American. I'm tired of haters trashing our country. Our government isn't perfect and we're all fully aware of this. I ask you to show me a country whose goveremnt is. None of them can keep their noses clean.

[Vautrin]

Is it terrorism, to fight against occupation? If so, okay.

Further question: why is the US allowed to support terrorism against countries, that have not attacked the US?

[Ayla]

Originally Posted by Vautrin

Is it terrorism, to fight against occupation? If so, okay.

It seems you are looking at this as black and white. Black and White doesn't exist...its all shades of gray. The terrorist would attack even if we'd have never went to Iraq. We weren't in Iraq when 9-11 happened. It's not like we went in to take the country and called it the 51st state. We are ultimately helping the people of that country. If you don't agree with it that's fine. You don't have to fight in it and you don't have to pay the taxes that support it.

[Vautrin]

Originally Posted by Ayla

We are ultimately helping the people of that country. .

And terrorists feel they are doing the same thing by committing acts of terror. So who is right? All in all, a vicious cycle.

[Ayla]

Further question: why is the US allowed to support terrorism against countries, that have not attacked the US?

You added that so I didn't previously address this...

What country is the US supporting terorism against that hasn't attacked the USA?

[Ayla]

Originally Posted by Vautrin

And terrorists feel they are doing the same thing by committing acts of terror. So who is right? All in all, a vicious cycle.

A vicious cycle, yes. However the terrorist do this not to help the people of that country but to help themselves complete their own agendas. They do not care about the civilians. They care about the 99 virgins they're getting in heaven (or how ever many it is they claim to get). They care about ousting America so that they can rule through fear.

[darkangelism]

yeah the people that died in the WTC were collateral damage on the part of the terrorists. For us they wre a symbol to go fight terrorists, though i dont think iraq was about terrorists directly, more about him developing weapons that could be used against terrorists or isreal(which is the main reason why the middle east hates us) I do think that they care about their country, its not all about religion, most of the iraqi insurgency is the minority group there that had power under saddam and now will loss it thats why they are fighting.

[Ayla]

Originally Posted by darkangelism

most of the iraqi insurgency is the minority group there that had power under saddam and now will loss it thats why they are fighting.

Exactly...hence....

A vicious cycle, yes. However the terrorist do this not to help the people of that country but to help themselves complete their own agendas. They do not care about the civilians.

They are mad the Saddam legacy is over and now they can't run the country through fear.

[Vautrin]

Originally Posted by Ayla

A vicious cycle, yes. However the terrorist do this not to help the people of that country but to help themselves complete their own agendas. They do not care about the civilians

The 'country' terrorists try to help by their own reasoning is the US. That it is not effective is not a point, and if it is, the lack of effectiveness of US interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan is also an issue to contend with.

Both the US as terrorists are as ineffective as they can be to combat whatever they claim to oppose.

As for the whole WMD (nukes) issue, Israel has them. Pakistan, and India too. Russia has them, and is apparently losing some of those weapons. These are confirmed threats - yet what is the US doing about those threats? What are other countries doing about those threats? Nothing - so we can be quite confident that some madmen may have access to nukes by now.

[Ayla]

So my question, finally, is this.

What was your real problem with the original post? Is it that it was written in the point of view of a patriotic American? Was it that there was no care for the well being of terrorist? Is it that you just disagree with all things American and all things we stand for and against?

[Vautrin]

It is that it promotes vicious cycles of violence and counter-violence. If it came from England, Spain, Indonesia, or the Netherlands, I would have responded in the same way.

And yes, I am also highly disgusted with the Dutch political parties who are pro-torture and such.

[Ayla]

Originally Posted by Vautrin

It is that it promotes vicious cycles of violence and counter-violence. If it came from England, Spain, Indonesia, or the Netherlands, I would have responded in the same way.

And yes, I am also highly disgusted with the Dutch political parties who are pro-torture and such.

Okay so now tell me this...If you were the president of the United States of America, and your country was attacked by terrorist...what would you have done? Would you have said..."Oh just let it go. Maybe they won't do it again." Would you have? I am really very interested in knowing what you would propose the USA to do if not go after the terrorist.

[Vautrin]

If I were the President of the US?

I would start immediate investigations of CIA and FBI archives, to see if in those archives there are a billion and three reasons why someone might have struck at the country I serve. I would figure out who and what the group(s) is / are who attacked the country.

Call in the expertise of people who understand psychology and sociology, and the impact of poverty, violence, relgion, et cetera on a population. Call in of course the people of the secret services to gather information on why things happened, and the names of the people who are behind it. So as to understand why the specific thoughts of such a terrorist group sprang up.

Religious fundamentalism has not always existed in the extents as it exists nowadays. Investigate that (one reason I would never get elected: I take too much of an issue against religious fundamentalism, no matter what religion it comes from).

Now, if it is because of opposition because of a military presence of say Saudi-Arabia, I would wonder why those troops are there, and are not basically Saudi troops (excepting of course the bases where nuclear weapons are stored).

Of course, if a country actively supported terrorist groups (Saudi-Arabia is one of those, but has not been attacked), take a stance on that. Blockade them, economically speaking, if they are not cooperating, and of course seek support from allies. With the US being the most powerful country in the world, it is not hard to manage to get a strong coalition (and which country was opposed to the Afghan war?). Apparently, the US is coming down to such a position with Saudi-Arabia.

Work for ways to lessen presence and influence (force) in such countries, as it does not serve a military purpose; the cold War is over.
Opening countries for democracy, as the US often demands of regimes it opposes, such as Iran. If democracy is holy to the US, the US should be consistent in its demands for democracy. And not when it suits US interests. Egypt has issues with that, Syria has, Iran has, and Saudi-Arabia. To attack two for their lack of democracy makes it obvious the US does not really care about democracy in their foreign policies. And that should change.

Make work of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A conflict where we are highly involved in, and certainly perceived to be supporting Israel in. Of course, not everyone will be happy with whatever solution that is proposed. But the value of freedom and peace must not be underestimated either. For the Palestinians and the Israeli's.

Compensate countries all over the world, for the lack of respect shown to national soveignity (the Chileans were mentioned earlier in the thread, but also El Salvador, amongst others), to restore popular confidence (of the people) in those countries in the US again. If you play it smart, the US industries will be profiting from that as well.

End the unilateralism. US servicemen, politicians et cetera should also be held accountable for their actions, and possibly even prosecuted for crimes against humanity and other war-crimes. Unless of course, the politicians are serving in an official position in Federal governments (similar to other countries).

Have respect for all religions, and promote openness on religious matters.
The less reason people have for hating a country, the more it will be appreciated - and if it is not perceived to be a hypocritical country - there is a lot less reason for people to attack it.

Remember the support after 9/11 for the US was very big worldwide. 4 years later it has crumbled to dust - and business is back at usual. Missed opportunity and I am sad to say that if nothing changes it is waiting for the next disaster.