London explosions

A post of mine copied from the other thread, where I had copied it to from my blogthing.

Ejp414 wrote:     It's going to shock you and awe you, and you're going to think, "My God, what an idiot! Why would he think such a thing? How could he think such a thing? Is he that much of a pathetic stalwart?" It's going to be rough, too—unrehearsed, unplanned, fully without prior thought of exactly how to word these ideas. But here it is and try to bear with it: the London attacks have made me even more firmly against the action taken in Iraq.     "But can't you see that it's not working, that we need more troops?" you might ask. No. Can't you see that it's not working?     What would have happened if Martin Luther King, Jr., had led the blacks who were being terrorized by groups such as the KKK to fight back? What if Gandhi had brought his people in India to arms, plausible considering that native Indians greatly outnumbered the British? More commonly, what would happen if you are insulted, and you throw an insult back?     The fact of the matter is this: there will be retaliation. Years more would have passed before arriving where we are now with the racism problem in the United States had Martin Luther King, Jr., been a militant demagogue. The people of India and the British would have entered into a horrible fight, a rebellion against what was once the greatest empire in the world, and there is no telling how many would have been killed; certainly the British, if the victors, would not slack off on the people whom they had oppressed. Finally, throw an insult back and prepare for a full-fledged argument, the volleying of streams of personal insults, the destruction of relationships for perhaps the rest of time, and possibly a fist-fight or worse!     Someone has to stop the fight, hold their tongue or fist. Look to so many of the saints and great peacemakers of history. Was their contribution greater than the epic conquerors? I believe so—it may be argued that the intent of life is not merely to shape the world but to better it. And are we bettering it? Does it seem that we are, with subway systems collapsing, double-decker buses burning, even the accidental bombings slaughtering families? And do not forget for one moment that soldiers, too, are people. For a truly objective count of the death toll—and I do believe that it is the only way to logically see the situation, objectively—then shouldn't we consider the thousands already killed on both sides of the war?         —But in any case, back to the point: we cannot stop terrorism by the approach that we are taking. Those threatening to partake in suicide attacks are not frightened by a possible death. While a peaceful alternative will take years to be realized and fully implemented, how anyone say that the slow conquering and division of countries we believe to be harboring terrorists will be any more efficient? Only one guarentee is certain: they will continue fighting as long as we do. Religious fanatics have existed for all of time (see The Holy Bible) and will continue to exist despite our efforts. They will again spring up but in other poor countries, possibly even in our own richer countries.     They hate us for several reasons, but one which cannot be denied is that we have combated them, killed their leaders, pushed some of their cells against a wall, and it has all been for good cause, of course. However, as long as we continue to do this, we will only propagate terrorism by justifying their mindwashing propoganda. —Because as human experience tells us, it is difficult to see those justly killing our people as the "good guys," even if they we are actually doing it with good intentions.     But as shown by history, even the greatest empire in the world, if built upon violence, can fall apart when confronted with peace. How long could their propoganda last when they blatantly see that we're not committing any of the acts of which we are accused?     Imitate those who you respect, if you truly do respect them. Jesus Christ, Mahatma Gandhi, Lech Walesa, Jody Williams, and Fridtjof Nansen all promoted peace. Napoleon Bonaparte, Julius Caesar, Adolf Hitler, Genghis Khan, Hannibal, and others did not. Sure, the latter are better known, more interesting, but at the same time, they are responsible for many more deaths than even the terrorists that we spend so many innocent lives to combat. Whom do you choose to imitate?     There is another way, and it is not an easy one. But this isn't very easy, either, I'd say.

Doesn't matter what happens in the World, to who, many here will never understand that this "war" is a War of Cultures, between the West, who values life and liberty, and tries to avoid war, and a radical Islamic movement who see all infidels the "non-believers" civilian or military as legitimate targets in their "Jihad", and a true path to paradise, and see war against the infidel as a true Islamic Duty and fight wars based on thier cultural belief and at the behest of thier religious leaders.

2000years and the only thing that has changed in the Islamic world is the enemy and the method of "Jihad", we here in the west are targets, those in thier world who do not believe thier way are targets (ie the Eygytian Diplomat executed, the beheadings, the intimidation of thier own peoples)and are just a legitimate a target as a western infidel.

For those who still believe we need to stick our heads in a hole, say all the touchy feely sayings, blame Bush for the whole problem, you will never understand even after the next attack, wherever and we can be assured whenever the "Jihad" against the west sees the next opertunity.

Hey EJP if we went to war for "oil" where are the rows of tankers loaded to the brime with "confiscated" Iraqi oil, lined up at our ports, we should be tellin OPEC to pound sand we now have our own by the lefts logic, and OPECs supply/demand of $61.00 a barrel, ha..........


PS Sill no condemnation of the attacks from the Islamic Religious Leaders here in the west, and remmember "logistics" someone has to supply the money, safe houses, infastructure and supply of weapons and material, for these cells to operate in the west....

BTW Dune...these "Jihads" against the west have happened since the Crusades, long, long, long before American involvement or "empire building"(must of been a English Prince "George Bush" in the Crusades, need to keep the Bush tie on the wars no matter what), and Islam themselves have embarked on wars of aggression across thier world for centuries, and have invaded western europe numerous times, so it is not just America's "empire" building, it is a cultural and religious belief of these people, that the "infidel" is the enemy and is a legitamate target military or civilian for death in thier culture, and at the behest of thier Religious Leaders.



Edited by oldsoldier

Believe me, the SAS is already at work in England, taking care of bussiness. And English law, and free press concerns are not an issue on thier handling of "problems".

Ejp414 wrote: choopie911 wrote: hwayhzrd wrote: <p align="center"> <p align="center">Why are we playing cops & robbers in Iraq and accomplishing nothing real? Oil I thought you'd know that Hway. Um, no.

Are you kidding me? Wow

Iraq had no connection to september 11th what-so-ever. Iraq was not a threat to the U.S, and it never, ever claimed to be. You honestly beleive that politics is all about "liberating the oppressed"? Heck no, fuel the economy, and for that we need oil. Now we're just there to mop up what we made a mess of

I know why you wont beleive it, since Fox news says it's all about the terrorists in Iraq.

Choopie, you say there are no terrorists in Iraq, there never were etc. Well Iv'e got news for you, there are, and there were before we ever went in. Saddam saw no issues with letting terrorists hang around Iraq, theres proof he did. He massacres thousands of innocent men, women, and children, his sons freely raped women than killed them, and he certainly did nothing to stop any of it. Now whos in Iraq now?, Terrorists who are there to take over the country, they weren't there before, they aren't fighting for Iraq, they are trying to make us leave so they can take power. Any one saying the infedels are just people trying to get us to leave their countries are just ignorant. The infedels have probably killed more Iraqi citizens than anything else. Ive talked to at least 10 people that have been there, they know whats happening. And give up the "we went for oil" crap, that was just one of the democrats crappy arguments against Bush. We didn't go there for oil. Get it through your think heads.

choopie911 wrote: Ejp414 wrote: choopie911 wrote: hwayhzrd wrote: <p align="center"> <p align="center">Why are we playing cops & robbers in Iraq and accomplishing nothing real? Oil I thought you'd know that Hway. Um, no. Are you kidding me? Wow Iraq had no connection to september 11th what-so-ever. Iraq was not a threat to the U.S, and it never, ever claimed to be. You honestly beleive that politics is all about "liberating the oppressed"? Heck no, fuel the economy, and for that we need oil. Now we're just there to mop up what we made a mess of I know why you wont beleive it, since Fox news says it's all about the terrorists in Iraq.

This war is not about oil. The oil is going to korea and china.

Choopie, tell me, if it was about oil, why are we STILL over $2 per gallon?

Explain that one.

fractus.scud wrote: Choopie, you say there are no terrorists in Iraq, there never were etc. Well Iv'e got news for you, there are, and there were before we ever went in. Saddam saw no issues with letting terrorists hang around Iraq, theres proof he did. He massacres thousands of innocent men, women, and children, his sons freely raped women than killed them, and he certainly did nothing to stop any of it. Now whos in Iraq now?, Terrorists who are there to take over the country, they weren't there before, they aren't fighting for Iraq, they are trying to make us leave so they can take power. Any one saying the infedels are just people trying to get us to leave their countries are just ignorant. The infedels have probably killed more Iraqi citizens than anything else. Ive talked to at least 10 people that have been there, they know whats happening. And give up the "we went for oil" crap, that was just one of the democrats crappy arguments against Bush. We didn't go there for oil. Get it through your think heads.

Don't get me wrong, I KNOW Saddam deserved to go down, he had a terrible government. My friends dad grew up in Iraq, and watched his brother get shot. He had to escape the country and move to canada because they weren't legally aloud to leave.
But if you honestly beleive that oil was not a factor...wow

I know there was terrorists there, but Bush seemed to beleive they were a threat to the U.S. Can you tell me when that was the case? It wasn't, it was convienient for him to link Iraq and Afghanistan, cause Saddam tried to kill his daddy. It's unfinished business, and it's politics. You're not supposed to know the whole story, and you probably won't like it either way.

To OS and Linus (Happy couple): Stop countering the "we invaded for oil" argument with "well, why we have a ton of oil?" Just because it didn't work doesn't mean that wasn't our intent.  Linus, I'm fine with your our soldiers going into other countries thing, if you think that other countries armies should be free to come into our country.  

To DB: On interrogation, I think there should be rights for the POWs. I don't want to be part of a country that burns prisoners to death or starves them to death. Let's not be barbarians like the terrorists. We are the civilized part of the world, ask Tony Blair, and we should lead by example.  

To EJP: Non-violence works wonders in some situations. This is not one of them. We need to be violent with the ones with the ones who attacked us (terrorists) and also stop attacking unrelatd  countries and giving the terrorists more reason to attack us.

Choopie, after the terrorists finsihed off Iraq where would they have gone next, Isreal, the US? who knows. But when countries become full of terrorists, or even run by them they spread. Look at Afghanistan a few years ago, it was flooded with terrorists and run by them, and what happen, Osama who was hiding there planned an attack on us and unfortunately was extremely successful. Even Clinton tried to stop Saddam but didn't.