terrorist threats
- Thread starter 6nanaimo9
- Start date
I can't believe they are going to hand Saddam over to Iraq for trial! Isn't this someone that the War Crimes Tribunal should handle? Like the war criminals in Bosnia were? What is different, the fact that Iraq doesn't belong to the United Nations? I don't get it!!!
The reference to this being a political war was in response to earlier postings about the "strategic tactics" being employed by the coalition of the willing. My point was that without analysing who was winning the global war for "hearts and minds" you would never be able to tell who is coming out ahead in this ideological battle.
Showing some picture does little to contribute to that debate.
The second point "nothing has happened since the first bombs have dropped to change that" was in reference to the world's perception of Bush's reasons for going to war It had nothing to do with the results of the "ground war".
The facts you have stated -- some terrorists killed some Americans, the Americans have deposed a tyrannical leader -- are, or course, beyond dispute but have nothing to do with the debate luckydog and I were having.
Showing some picture does little to contribute to that debate.
The second point "nothing has happened since the first bombs have dropped to change that" was in reference to the world's perception of Bush's reasons for going to war It had nothing to do with the results of the "ground war".
The facts you have stated -- some terrorists killed some Americans, the Americans have deposed a tyrannical leader -- are, or course, beyond dispute but have nothing to do with the debate luckydog and I were having.
This is a great debate and as I said earlier I compliment everyone on their tone. With the exception of some early personal comments in this thread, we have respectfully agreed to disagree.
For the most part the opinion seems to be divided by the 49th parallel and that reflects the political differences between Canada and the US.
We all seem to agree that the terrorist threat is real and the world needs to deal with this threat. I have heard very little opposition to the attacks in Afghanistan. Many nations sent troops there including Canada.
The dispute is over the war in Iraq. Although the US is the major force in Iraq there were many nations that supported this war. France, Germany and Russia were the main objectors and we find in hind sight they were taking billions from the oil for food program and it is obvious to me they had a hidden agenda.
Had they not vetoed the UN resolution presented by Powell the forces going into Iraq would have would have been the same, but the post war transition would have been done by UN forces not US/British forces.
You can argue based on facts learned after the invasion that the US and Britain should not have attacked Iraq. It is my belief at the time that Iraq was a staging grounds for terrorists and they had WMD that would have been used by terrorists to attack the US. There was a real and honest belief that Iraq posed a near term threat to the US. After years of UN resolutions to try and reduce this threat through peaceful means, the US and Britain came to the conclusion that they needed to stop this threat with or without the support of France, Germany and Russia.
You may disagree with my position, and I am sure many of you do. But under 8 years of the Clinton administration’s foreign policy of “Can’t we just all get along”, the result is 9/11. I am very concerned that if Kerry wins the presidency this year, we will once again go back to the Clinton approach to dealing with terrorists. If that happens, the US and the rest of the world will be a more dangerous place.
Side note to CJ Tyler – I agree with you 100% - “I think Canadians have distinguished themselves enough on the battlefield to be above such pot shots.” Many of my relatives fought in WWII in the Canadian forces. I am an American, but every Nov 11 I proudly fly the Red Ensign in front of my house to honor and remember them. I worded my earlier post badly. I said Canada joined Britain late in WWI. What I really meant was all of the allies went to war against Germany late. It should have happened in 1936 or 1937 not 1939. The US did not join until 1941; we too should have joined much earlier. If you fail to learn from history you are destine to repeat your mistakes.
For the most part the opinion seems to be divided by the 49th parallel and that reflects the political differences between Canada and the US.
We all seem to agree that the terrorist threat is real and the world needs to deal with this threat. I have heard very little opposition to the attacks in Afghanistan. Many nations sent troops there including Canada.
The dispute is over the war in Iraq. Although the US is the major force in Iraq there were many nations that supported this war. France, Germany and Russia were the main objectors and we find in hind sight they were taking billions from the oil for food program and it is obvious to me they had a hidden agenda.
Had they not vetoed the UN resolution presented by Powell the forces going into Iraq would have would have been the same, but the post war transition would have been done by UN forces not US/British forces.
You can argue based on facts learned after the invasion that the US and Britain should not have attacked Iraq. It is my belief at the time that Iraq was a staging grounds for terrorists and they had WMD that would have been used by terrorists to attack the US. There was a real and honest belief that Iraq posed a near term threat to the US. After years of UN resolutions to try and reduce this threat through peaceful means, the US and Britain came to the conclusion that they needed to stop this threat with or without the support of France, Germany and Russia.
You may disagree with my position, and I am sure many of you do. But under 8 years of the Clinton administration’s foreign policy of “Can’t we just all get along”, the result is 9/11. I am very concerned that if Kerry wins the presidency this year, we will once again go back to the Clinton approach to dealing with terrorists. If that happens, the US and the rest of the world will be a more dangerous place.
Side note to CJ Tyler – I agree with you 100% - “I think Canadians have distinguished themselves enough on the battlefield to be above such pot shots.” Many of my relatives fought in WWII in the Canadian forces. I am an American, but every Nov 11 I proudly fly the Red Ensign in front of my house to honor and remember them. I worded my earlier post badly. I said Canada joined Britain late in WWI. What I really meant was all of the allies went to war against Germany late. It should have happened in 1936 or 1937 not 1939. The US did not join until 1941; we too should have joined much earlier. If you fail to learn from history you are destine to repeat your mistakes.
On the weekend following 9/11, more Americans were killed by domestic violence and automobile accidents.
Where is the war on abuse of women? Where is the war on automobile manufacturers promoting speed to youth?
Was what happened on 9/11 awful? Absolutely. Unprevoked? Depends on the side of the fence you are on (my side says, unprevoked but I respect all viewpoints).
The only question I would have of those saying the US is all about protecting those under awful regimes that kill their citizens for having an opinion etc., where is the US (Britain, Australia etc.) in Zimbabwe or the literally tens of other hotspots in the world. To not feel that this is about both political idealism (and payback for Dad's errors) and oil is being pretty naive I think.
One thing we Canucks need to ask ourselves though, would we rather have the US on our side or not? It may come to that in coming years/decades if the shape of the world continues to deform in a not impressive fashion.
Where is the war on abuse of women? Where is the war on automobile manufacturers promoting speed to youth?
Was what happened on 9/11 awful? Absolutely. Unprevoked? Depends on the side of the fence you are on (my side says, unprevoked but I respect all viewpoints).
The only question I would have of those saying the US is all about protecting those under awful regimes that kill their citizens for having an opinion etc., where is the US (Britain, Australia etc.) in Zimbabwe or the literally tens of other hotspots in the world. To not feel that this is about both political idealism (and payback for Dad's errors) and oil is being pretty naive I think.
One thing we Canucks need to ask ourselves though, would we rather have the US on our side or not? It may come to that in coming years/decades if the shape of the world continues to deform in a not impressive fashion.
And its very obvious to me that America an the UK had a hidden agenda as well. Everyone seems to think its oil, but Iraq or Saddem Hussein don't own the oil rights in Iraq. Sure he drills for oil and he makes a huge profit but the rights themselves are held by the Arab Union. I think GB has or had something else under his sleeve for attacking Iraq, and it has nothing to do with oil or terrorists. --- Kevluckydog71 said:
Another issue here is that Saddam was bluffing on the WMD issue. If you recall the debates at the time, no country was saying that Saddam did not have WMDs, they were arguing about the best way to get him to give them up. I also recall that no one offered to help the US pay for massive military presence they were maintaining area which was forcing Saddam to allow weapons inspectors in the country. Even then, he continued to play games by delaying them on the road so that by the time they got to a sight, it would be clean. As hind sight has revealed, there wasn't anything to hide, but he just continued to pretend to hide something in order to bluff the world. He didn't count on the US and Britain actually calling his bluff. And by the time he realized they were, it was too late to change policy.
Coincidentally, having Military bases in Iraq would permit the US to strike at any Middle Eastern country without having to go through the formality of getting permission to use another county's airspace, besides, Saudi Arabia with it's monarchy and religous fundamentalism is beginng to be a little embarrassing for US Administrations to keep supporting.
rickoshadows
Coincidentally, having Military bases in Iraq would permit the US to strike at any Middle Eastern country without having to go through the formality of getting permission to use another county's airspace, besides, Saudi Arabia with it's monarchy and religous fundamentalism is beginng to be a little embarrassing for US Administrations to keep supporting.
rickoshadows
Lucky Dog -- you believed the reasons for the war because that is what your administration told you. They lied. They had a grand plan to obtain a friendly staging point in the mideast, contracts for oil (VERY important to Bush and Cheney's family and friends) and a whole lot of other agenda.
They have succeeded by political and military incompetence in riling up the entire Moslem world and guaranteeing "terrorist threats" for years and decades to come. Terrorism CAN'T be fought by military force....
They have succeeded by political and military incompetence in riling up the entire Moslem world and guaranteeing "terrorist threats" for years and decades to come. Terrorism CAN'T be fought by military force....
Luckydog71: Iraq was not a staging ground for terrorists. Saddam had no connection to Al Queda nor the Taliban.
The real staging ground for terrorism was Afghanistan and Pakistan. The American government trained and funded and armed the Taliban to exhaust the Soviet military machine. While covertly defeating the Soviets, the Americans grew monsters out of the very assassins they befriended and armed. As for Pakistan, the CIA has sent training and funds to the Pakistani government for years, and Pakistan has trained terrorists that go out and attack India and provide a supply of terrorist troops to Afghanistan. The US is interested in funding terrorism through Pakistan in order to destabilize the major powers in the region, namely India and Russia. Islamic terrorism helps keep Israel a strong American ally in the region, and keeps the American military-economic complex rich by selling arms to the Israelis. It is a fruitful gamble for America to invest in terrorism and brutal dictators.... but when you fund criminals and gangsters and immoral characters, it comes back to haunt you.
And don't forget Sadaam was funded by the CIA and literally installed into power by the US. There again they did it covertly to get Sadaam into power, and they did it to destabilize the powers in the region, namely Iran.
America has had a long long history of funding brutal dictators, criminals, and supporting terrorism (the death squads of Argentina, Chile, Nicaragua, etc.) to destabilize governments or keeping a population oppressed, etc.
America has no interest in spreading democracy unless it serves their geo-political interest. In the middle east, if democracies were installed today, America would lose the power it has there. It is extremely naive to think that the US somehow stands for justice and freedom and all that. Just look at the historical records, and you will see the bullshit of the talk of Bush.
America thus has no interest in world peace unless it is peace on American terms. The American government today is even more flagrantly throwing its weight around because it is the only super-power left. It dismisses international law (trying to redefine the Geneva convention, contravening Nuclear non-proliferation treaties by creating a "new class" of tactical nukes, contravening that environmental accord - I forget the name just now) and dismisses international institutions like the UN.
As for Islamic terrorism, and any other kind of terrorism aimed at America, I believe it is largely due to the inhumane, imperialistic, covert, and war-like nature of their foreign policies. The US has sewn the seeds of many generations of hatred against it. It is why countries such as Germany and France, etc., have much warmer relations with Arab countries and have interlocking trade deals.
Last point: the US debt has been spiraling out of control. The Euro was already overshadowing the US dollar as the currency with actual value behind it. Starting in 1973, OPEC would accept only either US Dollars or gold for the purchase of oil. As a result, governments around the world began filling up their central banks with US Dollars as the backing of their currency (gold has not backed money in decades). This means that there is high demand for US dollars in the world, driving up the value of American assets relative to the value of foreign assets. It also means that America can manipulate the price of oil it purchases from OPEC by manipulating exchange rates. It also means America exports its debt to other nations because their debt devalues the US dollar, which in turn devalues the currencies of other nations because it is backed by the US dollar. If for some reason the demand for US dollars were to decrease into negative, the US economy would collapse and will not be able to get out the hole.
The out-of-control debt of the US economy these days, and the strength (and debtless) Euro have caused many governments to sell off their deposits of US dollars for Euros. Basically, the US dollar is becoming worthless. In an unprecedented move, Saudi Arabia and Iraq each sold off close to 1/3 of their foreign exchange deposits of US for Euros. One month later, Iraq was invaded.
If the US can not get out of their $500 Billion debt (and projected to be $1 Trillian if the Bush budget were to be fully exercised 4 years from now), the only thing that America has of any value, that has some protection against the devaluing of its currency, is not the export of cars, but the export of arms. So there it is folks, the US is helplessly following in the ways of poorer nations like China is now coming out of - when you are poor, you sell military hardware. The poorer the US gets, the more it will rely on militarization to sustain its power. The more militarization, the more poorer it gets, and the more it needs to sell weapons. With Bush and his favour for war, the US will spin out of control.
The real staging ground for terrorism was Afghanistan and Pakistan. The American government trained and funded and armed the Taliban to exhaust the Soviet military machine. While covertly defeating the Soviets, the Americans grew monsters out of the very assassins they befriended and armed. As for Pakistan, the CIA has sent training and funds to the Pakistani government for years, and Pakistan has trained terrorists that go out and attack India and provide a supply of terrorist troops to Afghanistan. The US is interested in funding terrorism through Pakistan in order to destabilize the major powers in the region, namely India and Russia. Islamic terrorism helps keep Israel a strong American ally in the region, and keeps the American military-economic complex rich by selling arms to the Israelis. It is a fruitful gamble for America to invest in terrorism and brutal dictators.... but when you fund criminals and gangsters and immoral characters, it comes back to haunt you.
And don't forget Sadaam was funded by the CIA and literally installed into power by the US. There again they did it covertly to get Sadaam into power, and they did it to destabilize the powers in the region, namely Iran.
America has had a long long history of funding brutal dictators, criminals, and supporting terrorism (the death squads of Argentina, Chile, Nicaragua, etc.) to destabilize governments or keeping a population oppressed, etc.
America has no interest in spreading democracy unless it serves their geo-political interest. In the middle east, if democracies were installed today, America would lose the power it has there. It is extremely naive to think that the US somehow stands for justice and freedom and all that. Just look at the historical records, and you will see the bullshit of the talk of Bush.
America thus has no interest in world peace unless it is peace on American terms. The American government today is even more flagrantly throwing its weight around because it is the only super-power left. It dismisses international law (trying to redefine the Geneva convention, contravening Nuclear non-proliferation treaties by creating a "new class" of tactical nukes, contravening that environmental accord - I forget the name just now) and dismisses international institutions like the UN.
As for Islamic terrorism, and any other kind of terrorism aimed at America, I believe it is largely due to the inhumane, imperialistic, covert, and war-like nature of their foreign policies. The US has sewn the seeds of many generations of hatred against it. It is why countries such as Germany and France, etc., have much warmer relations with Arab countries and have interlocking trade deals.
Last point: the US debt has been spiraling out of control. The Euro was already overshadowing the US dollar as the currency with actual value behind it. Starting in 1973, OPEC would accept only either US Dollars or gold for the purchase of oil. As a result, governments around the world began filling up their central banks with US Dollars as the backing of their currency (gold has not backed money in decades). This means that there is high demand for US dollars in the world, driving up the value of American assets relative to the value of foreign assets. It also means that America can manipulate the price of oil it purchases from OPEC by manipulating exchange rates. It also means America exports its debt to other nations because their debt devalues the US dollar, which in turn devalues the currencies of other nations because it is backed by the US dollar. If for some reason the demand for US dollars were to decrease into negative, the US economy would collapse and will not be able to get out the hole.
The out-of-control debt of the US economy these days, and the strength (and debtless) Euro have caused many governments to sell off their deposits of US dollars for Euros. Basically, the US dollar is becoming worthless. In an unprecedented move, Saudi Arabia and Iraq each sold off close to 1/3 of their foreign exchange deposits of US for Euros. One month later, Iraq was invaded.
If the US can not get out of their $500 Billion debt (and projected to be $1 Trillian if the Bush budget were to be fully exercised 4 years from now), the only thing that America has of any value, that has some protection against the devaluing of its currency, is not the export of cars, but the export of arms. So there it is folks, the US is helplessly following in the ways of poorer nations like China is now coming out of - when you are poor, you sell military hardware. The poorer the US gets, the more it will rely on militarization to sustain its power. The more militarization, the more poorer it gets, and the more it needs to sell weapons. With Bush and his favour for war, the US will spin out of control.
We could debate our political positions for another 2 weeks and I am sure none of us would be swayed by the others points. What I can tell you is all Americans regardless of political persuasion are very glad we have Canada for a neighbour. (notice my spelling?). We are like brothers, we have our differences but we can always count on each other in time of need.
The most recent example was on 9/11 when the US airports were closed and there were many flights coming from Europe and Asia. No place to land and not enough fuel to turn around and go back.
The Vancouver airport and many other Canadian airports accepted flights that were originally bound for the US. These airplanes may have had additional suicide nuts on board, but Canada jump in without a second thought and help share the load
Vive le Canada Libre!
The most recent example was on 9/11 when the US airports were closed and there were many flights coming from Europe and Asia. No place to land and not enough fuel to turn around and go back.
The Vancouver airport and many other Canadian airports accepted flights that were originally bound for the US. These airplanes may have had additional suicide nuts on board, but Canada jump in without a second thought and help share the load
Vive le Canada Libre!
John Kenneth Galbraith (a famous Canadian-born economist who has lived his adult life and career in the US) has several books on the US economy and its implications for policy. He posited several years ago that because the US is no longer the only economic superpower, but is the only military superpower, the temptation to start throwing its might around will be irresistable.
And whether we support US foreign policies or not, we are affected by them. (Canada is 5th on the Al-Quaeda hit list). To pick up on luckydogs suggestion that we are brothers, this has gone beyond brotherly love. (I lived in the US for many years and was married to an American - generally speaking, I like Americans. I do find them rather naive and self-centered when it comes to world politics, world environment, world anything. And waaaay too much of the attitude "my country right or wrong.") The US stuck their foot in a pile of crap and wants the rest of the world to clean it off. No thanks. Unfortunately, a better analogy might be that the US has knocked down a wasp's nest, and we're all going to get stung as a result.
And whether we support US foreign policies or not, we are affected by them. (Canada is 5th on the Al-Quaeda hit list). To pick up on luckydogs suggestion that we are brothers, this has gone beyond brotherly love. (I lived in the US for many years and was married to an American - generally speaking, I like Americans. I do find them rather naive and self-centered when it comes to world politics, world environment, world anything. And waaaay too much of the attitude "my country right or wrong.") The US stuck their foot in a pile of crap and wants the rest of the world to clean it off. No thanks. Unfortunately, a better analogy might be that the US has knocked down a wasp's nest, and we're all going to get stung as a result.
The world is about to be plunged into chaos, thanks to America's greed-motivated invasion and bumbling in the handling of Iraq. The hole left behind in terms of legitimate governance puts Iraq on the verge of civil war. But what's worse is that the rival religious groups contesting for power in Iraq is beginning to destabilize key spots in the middle east.
1) Shiite assasination attempt of Sunni cleric prompted a Sunni response by terrorist bombing in Karachi, Pakistan.
2) Al-Queda operatives have been mounting frequent offensives against the Saudi government, see largely as complicit to western interests and betrayers of the Arab people. The Saudi government is saying the instability of Iraq as the source of these terrorist attacks, supposedly in order to garner western sympathies and as a bartering chip on the price of oil. Read "The Guardian" article on Saudi promises to western powers about the barrel prices, and the connection to Al-Queda.
As for those still clinging to the belief that the US really wants democratic sovereignty for the Iraqi people, then reflect on this: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1222817,00.html
Turn the tables around and see what outrage would occur from our citizens if we could not put American sex offenders commiting crimes in Canada on trial here.
1) Shiite assasination attempt of Sunni cleric prompted a Sunni response by terrorist bombing in Karachi, Pakistan.
2) Al-Queda operatives have been mounting frequent offensives against the Saudi government, see largely as complicit to western interests and betrayers of the Arab people. The Saudi government is saying the instability of Iraq as the source of these terrorist attacks, supposedly in order to garner western sympathies and as a bartering chip on the price of oil. Read "The Guardian" article on Saudi promises to western powers about the barrel prices, and the connection to Al-Queda.
As for those still clinging to the belief that the US really wants democratic sovereignty for the Iraqi people, then reflect on this: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1222817,00.html
Turn the tables around and see what outrage would occur from our citizens if we could not put American sex offenders commiting crimes in Canada on trial here.
Well said BrainWarner and Jub !!
You have proven that you are very smart and not a LEMMING.
I am afraid USA is going down in the future not by war etc etc but rather by (what they call) NATURE!!
Then israel will follow by WAR.
Cheers.
You have proven that you are very smart and not a LEMMING.
I am afraid USA is going down in the future not by war etc etc but rather by (what they call) NATURE!!
Then israel will follow by WAR.
Cheers.
Thanks to Murphy
... we now know the truth about the WMD.
<img src="http://www.freewebs.com/sushiman69/bush-wmd2.jpg" border="0" alt="">
... we now know the truth about the WMD.
<img src="http://www.freewebs.com/sushiman69/bush-wmd2.jpg" border="0" alt="">
