KrustyKidd

That is not what I believe. It is as falable as any system. However, I'm sure there are many innocent people deliberately killed by so called insurgents and terrorists but there are no innocent people deliberately imprisoned by the US. Now, please answer the question I'm trying to get you to in order to make my point....would you rather be in a US prison or have your head sawed off? If you choose the former then my point is made and the US is , if the latter, please explain your rationale.

Reason why the Libs did worse is an effective method is because the Cons are fixing a lot of the crap the Libs had going. Be patient, they will get to most of it. Took twelve years to screw up so will take at least one to undo Gerry.

They are not POWs as there is no front. It is an ideal, a dream with a broad based vision these people are working towards. The only conection with war is that the tools used are both philosophical and militaristic and, as such require force to provide the detterent to the second part of the formula and protection to what they threaten. The US figured this would move a bit faster than it did, and, that the prisoners had more int than they were able to provide - hence, the need to keep them available for questioning rather than in a UN sanctioned POW camp in Pakistan. The higher fish escaped leaving morons like Jon Lihgn Walker and Kadhr behind to take the fall. And, the US has this target for anti war people sitting there, low key prisoners they cannot release, lots of press attention and, morons pointing out that the US is immoral and so called insurgent and terrorists are almost just in their actions as the US holds people who they cannot under any circumstances allow to go back to either get executed by their home country or fight again those who captured them.

So, who gives more due process, guys taken off a battlefeild in Afganistan with traces of cordite on their hands who are transported and imprisoned at great expense and trouble as they don't fly everybody over, only those most sure of being guilty. Or known journalists, aid wokers, politicians, mayors, soldiers and simply foreign workers who are swept off the streets to have their beheadings shown on video after they are raped, burned, beaten for days and have limbs and didgets cut and pulled off? If you have a choice, which do you pick? I pick the US as the more innocent and benign captors. If you do not, then I sure would like to know what rational you base that on. Beheadings are pretty violent and holding a person prisoner in an air conditioned cell with food and water, who is more than likely guilty is relevently passive in comparisson to the rotten food that hostages are subject to. Therefore, given that your response will be somewhat within the realm of sanity, the US proves that our system is As we all would like to slowly torture these people to show them what they are messing with but we don't. Why? Because there are checks and balances. Wondering, how many hostages have commited suicide? Answer: none. They don't get the chance as they are killed well before they get that opportunity and, they are tied hand and foot with no option to do a 'hunger strike' or whatever. BTW, have you gone onto any Conservative, Militant Islamist sites and told them you think they are wrong to do this stuff to anybody trying to provide help to the Iraqi people? What all did they say when you protesed their treatment of prisoners? Bet you fell for the 'chick with smoke in mouth is far worse than having head cut off' line.

Think you are trying to do the wrong load here. The comment was that the US has to prove there are Simply by not beheading prisoners does that. My reply to the above comment shows that the terrorists and insurgents are so far off the civilized map that this 'proof' being spoken of is only for the western world. Unless of course you feel that beheading hapless aid workers, journalists, policemen and so on is legitimate in any bizarro reality of yours. If that is the case, please enlighten us. If you are only going on with legal semantics to base your case, then I'll buy that and stand down but to say that beheadings, torture of victims by limb amputation and gutting is better than any US system is wrong in my book than anything the US has done. Therefore, the US is morally more in tune with humanity than the so called insurgents and terrorists and therefore has squat to prove except to minor legal points which, only seem to be obeyed by the west.

Then most people would be morons if that were the case. We know that the US does not saw heads off to horrify or deliberately kill civillians, therefore, they are automaticly better than the terrorists and so called insurgents. Unless of course, your 'most people' think that sawing heads off is acceptable behavior.

I look at it from three points, one is the celebration of our country as we do owe our predacessors so much. They carved a sucessful democratic country out of some of the harshest conditions on the planet and, at a time when the Great Powers were trying to grab whatever piece they could. Second, it's a celebration of summer, kicking it off formaly with a party, fireworks and just being together as a country. Third, it's a recognition that we are. All of us are under one roof no matter where we live in our country or abroad. The freedom this holiday gives us is so diverse that not even celebrating it, just kicking back and doing the above barbeque is a glorious celebration. Myself, I'm away from my home this year working out in Alberta but even still, I pause on this day to see the diversity and strength of our past and the hard work and progressiveness of our future, and, go out for a fair share of brews to boot.

Their heads are still on their bodies. Proof enough for most.

Cite your sources, and I will reply with http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5053134.stm The numbers look like they are over 1000 for every month this year, even last year many months had over 1000 civilians dead per month. Also this looks like just the Bahgdad mortuary reporting. What about the other morgues. Under 700?? Again, cite your sources. Answered at Werewolf. You will note that if you are blaming insurgent attacks on the US then the logical rationale is that the deaths to Iranians and Iraqis during the Iraq/Iran war can be attributed to Saddam making the case for regime change and the invasion even stronger as that increases his murders to millions from three hundred thousand. Lonius US foreign policy is a scapegoat used to unify Conservative Islamists. Much like a the Jews provided a unifying focal point for Germany. Millitent Islam has been brewing for eight hundred years, a result of Islamic aherence to medieval mentality and the western world's ability to conquer them with superior technology and free thinking to use their resources and land. The US is hardly the villain when considering the likes of Attila, Germany, Italy, France, England and on and on who's hedgemonic exploits make any US exploits pale in ferosity and humanity compared to them. Tear the above reply to Gosthacked apart then. Gosthacked A bad idea. Very bad. Explained here Why Iraq See, the war on the Taliban took out an immediate threat in Al Qeda. The invasion of Iraq provided SA with a reason and the support (with the US seting up semi permanent bases there) to carry out their operations against AQ. To have invaded SA would have been the exact thing AQ was intent on making sure happened as it surely would have brought the entire Islamic world together even if one were not miltant they would have to join in the fight against the US. The ensuring battle would leave the Conservatives on the side of right and, in control of most of the regimes of the area. Riverwind Small groups of criminals who are all intent on doing the exact same thing in order to realize a common global goal. Very different from muggings here and there. Explained here. It has everything to do with terrorism though. If the elected Afgan government is defeated by Taliban forces composed of foeign Jihadists and whatever warlords they can muster, the incentive to fight terror in any middle eastern country would be zero. This would ultimitely provide the Conservative Wahabbists with a victory as there would be no way in which to prevent the continual errosion of governmental authority. The Jihadists would fill the vacum as sure as night falls. The incentive to put up any form of resistance would vanish - why fight terror if you will never get any support from the west?

When you hurt terrorists what action do you think they will take in defense? Build Habitats for Humanity? Knit quilts for needy children? When under threat they do one thing - kill. Hello! Bout time you figured that one out. You think that war brewing wasn't brewing in 2000? You think OBL had too much time to kill? The war has been brewing for over fifty years for crying out loud. On average, Saddam killed fifteen hundred people a month. The past three years, less than seven hundred a month have died. Your point is crap.

No. The intent was an invasion of the nest itself - Saudi Arabia. The nation that was home to Al Qaeda and was so afraid to take care of that problem that they knew they would someday have to or face destruction themselves. Iraq was the next best option. Making a deal with Saddam to allow US bases in Iraq in return for full resumption of trade and disolution of the no fly zone was the one after. To invade SA was unthinkable as it would have certainly galvanized the Muslim world exactly the way AQ wanted but the royals were afraid to take action as AQ had support from many radical clerics and much of the population. Hence, the human rights changes made in the past few years there. In any case, getting rid of a dictator who is an Aposphate and replacing his regime with a democracy chosen by the people themselves is hardly a terrible thing, especially when the US has actually saved over a hundred thousand lives compared to what the damage Saddam on average caused over the years. Now, with SA knowing the US is there and is capable of entering SA to take care of what they will not, they took care of their problem and continue to do so. So much that the lack of AQ activity in Iraq is conspicuous as next door, they are fighting to remain even an idea, much less a movement and are inable to conduct operatuions abroad. Another thing, with OBL lowering his sights from the ME and attacking America as he ususally goes on and on about, he now moves his sights to a shithole at the horn of ASfrica as his next conquest. Now, you want to have an example of what a massive retalitaion would look like - watch some nuclear tests or those weapons demos on the discovery channel. There is no hint of establishing democracy or anything like it. When the US wises to kill, it can. Afganistan and Iraq were big time kid gloves.

Did. It's hubris. The War on Terror or action against conservative Wahhabism whichever you prefer is a necessary one. To leave it unchecked leaves them full field for their plan to succeed. Anybody that thinks Muslim terrorists only wish to kill themselves and a few people along with them is a moron. There is a whole movement working towards the same goal and, they don't even have to know each other. Just that they are doing their own little part. Weaken already weak governments by agitating the people and turning them against their government by conducting random violence and displaying their govenments inaqbility to protect them, display their power by making western people flinch and, with any luck, combine the entire Muslim world under their organization or movement by creatuing a western Muslim backlash. Incidently, that's one of the reasons why societies are so cautious to finger the culprits in actions such as the recent Toronto arrests and why the mowque vandalism is taken so seriously. To vandalize the mosque plays right into the game plan in a smaller scale. sheesh

No. Their problem is they need to keep the same belief alive that worked from the sixth to the fourteenth century when they were more advance than the rest of the world. Unfortunately, they don't change and, when the rest of the world passed them by, they didn't bother to do any honest self critiquing. Just like today they still do not do that. Conservative Wahhabism is the belief that by returning to the old ways with literal interpretation of islam, that is the way to go. It has nothing to do with uniqueness but rather follopwing and obeying what they belive to be true.

Terrorists domestic and otherwise are not simply 'getting even' for some imagined or real slight. They are working towards the Caliphate. Minimalize the overall movement and others will not join it as it will be a waste of time. As for running 'roughshod' accomplishments as follows; - freeing 31 million people in Afganistan. Allowing them the opportunity to decide their own fate. - freeing 25 million in Iraq. Allowinfg them the opportunity to decide their own fate. - minimalizing the repressive taliban. - disrupting Al Queda and their ability to conduct terrorist attacks. - uniting over 90 countries world wide in a unified counter terrorism effort - providing the support Saudi Arabia required so they could conduct their own house cleaning and anti Al Queda operations within the kingdom. - moved Pakestan away from support for the Taliban - entered into historic direct talks with Iran over Middle Eastern issues - eliminated a viscious dictator - placed other dictators on notice - ended 12 years of UN bungling in Iraq - begun the slow transformation of the ME away from repression to human rights and choice for people Let's give a thought to what the ME would look like post 911 without the US 'running roughshod.' - Saudi Arabia in civil turmoil with terrorist attacks a common occurence. Close to coup - Al Qaeda gaining popular support across the region. - Blix finds no WMDs and sanctions lifted, Saddam now resumes military buildup. - Al Qaeda with full movement also active in Egypt, Dubai, Qatar and Pakestan - Taliban still in power 31 million people living in repression, conducting operations into Pakestan - India threatens nuclear war with Pakestan if Mushariff cannot control terrorists - Al Qaeda conducting western terrorist acts from Afganistan, getting larger with each sucessful operation - Al Qaeda conducting terrorist acts against India to percipitate nuclear war - as momentum grows, so do attacks on western nations as the movement attempts to goad a massive retaliation from the west in order to unify Muslims under their movement

What resources are being wasted because of naming it thus?

Yes, like I said, they wouldn't be spending a lot of money on the people. They failed in the middle ages because the French beat the tar out of them. Your comment about the Sunnis and Shiites is moot. Shiites are a minor player in this movement and do not fit into any Wahhabist plan in any way as they are such a minority in the Muslim world. And, your observation is one reason why Iran actually helped the US so far to varying degrees in Afganistan and Iraq. They wish to see a Wahhabist empire less than we do.

Wrong in this case. They don't want SA, they want the entire ME and beyond. The Caliphate stretched from the Atlantic to the Phillipines, a very large chunk of land and, contains a lot of oil. With the money they would have from oil sales they would have power to do it. The people would be, as per normal, very secondary concerns to them. Then, you or our children would be dealing with conservative Wahhabists with their own country, empire, modern weapons, money and armies rather than a cell here and there. Furthermore, their mission is to convert the world, not stop when they reach a certain liongtitude. Continue what they were doing and failed at in the middle ages.

duplicate

Holy smokes! You really have no clue of what this is about do you? Being directly targeted by a terrorist is not the effect that they are trying to get. Rather, a global Muslim movement seeks to create chaos and disorder amongst former nations of the Caliphate by separating the people from the governments trhough random terorism acts. By demonstrating their power against western nations through acts such as 911, London and the one in Canada, they also separate people from state by saying it is in retaliation for this and 'that.' Once they have a name for themselves as a conservative Muslim movement (which they do in many countries already) they only need to apply pressure to certain countires to make the governments fall and, amidst the chaos, because they are strong and a united front against the west whom is naturally to blame for all the world's ills, they become the preddominent movement in that area. If they can ever take Saudi Arabia, which there was a very real danger of occuring (which incidently was the reason Bush flew the Saudis back to SA immediately after 911 to strengthen the Royal presence in case there was a coup about to happen) they then would have acess to oil and money to legitimize their cause. Oil to trade to thirsty nations for weapons and such. Money to pay for aid to countries which they have destroyed the infastructure of and thus, gain more of a following. Their ultimate goal is not to directly hope to kill you in a bomb blast but to hold influence over your way of life through either you directly or indirectly through trading partners, oil supply, supply of commoditites valued by yourself or just degenerating your quality of life. The Caliphate as I went on about in another thread was the greatest and longest lived empire the world has ever seen. It is a natural vision for all Arabs/Mulims to strive to recreate when they have been downtrodden by a backward religion and ever more advanced civilization fromAttila the Hun to the Dutch, Germans and British for over six hundred years. This movement is religious, cultural and ethnic with a lot of history which is why you have 'home grown' terrorists who may or may not have had any contact with Al Queda. The entire strategy is not complicated and requiring a massive HQ. Rather it's really simple (and strange why so many intelligent people don't understand it preffereing to be like yourself thinking they are simply nuts trying to kill you for something to do) and is akin to the US Ranger's instruction to recruits "Front towards enemy.' This is lunacy and so indicative of an appeasement attitude that it should be a textbook example. Partially and echnicly correct but please, stop trying to shift blame here. The inept police would not had had to do a thing if the terrorists were not there holding everybody hostage. Basicly, it was poor policework in response to terrorism. Not a gentler sort of terrorist.

Uhh? Pretending what will not go away? The fact that terrorism from extremists is going to occur if left unchecked, hence we should not fight them or, did you mean that we should fight them but someplace where we don't make them mad at us. A gentler, more sensitve kind of fighting them. Where exactly do you suggest we engage them to take on a pro active rather than defensive posture if not the Middle East? Mexico?

Give them their damm land and whatever pittence agreed upon and then let them on their own then post border guards around their land. When they need aid, they can sell or borrow like a nation does. If they do good then we can buy off them. If they want to fish commercially, then they can enter into a deal of some kind and pay tariffs or whatever. if they want Canadian goods or US, they can pay taxes for import and export.

Aside from the obvious which is countries like Iran and many other Muslim regimes would more than likely actually use them against Israel as a matter of course or in keeping with the public rhetoric they have carried n with for years, there is the obvious. Iran does not have nuclear weapons. Hence, this is tantamount to me saying that I wish to build a country, then populate it and then, build nuclear weapons so should be taken seriously and, have Israel and all the nations on earth disarm because I, Krusty Kid am somday going to have it together. Iran does not have nukes, and, will never have nukes. If they ever do, the people who will be most surprised will be the Iranian ruling council who will wonder why the Israelis or the US never took them out. So, what I wonder is why Israel shoudl get rid of theirs so Iran will not commence with a program which wil someday bring them to the beginings of a weapons program which will be taken out by missiles and bombs. Now, to be fair and to also illustrate without going into great detail, some fairness, here are some diverse coutnries that I could see and have no problem with in owning nukes; Belgium, Germany, Italy, Australia, Japan, Taiwan, Egypt. The one common thing they have going is that they have not based their polititcal philosophy on killing other people from other nations. Kapiche?

From an article on your link. I don't know what you will think of my opion however, I think it is just and true. I think that Canada should honor their agreements, whatever they were and, whatever it takes. Then treat natives like they were their own nations. If those nations wish roads to and from their properties, then they can pay for them in the form of taxes to the Canadian government. If they wish to have an airport then they can pay for overflights. If they wish to make cigarettes they can and, if they wish to sell them they can and the Canadian govenment can or can not post borg=der guards there to stop the sales from exiting the lands. In short, we are all sick of it same as the natives. We made a deal and that deal sticks even if it is not to our advantage and we wish to change it. We didn't steal the land, we traded for it in a very underhanded way and now, are trying to get out of even that. I say, honor the agreements then, with no support trade and progress can be made with all parties knowing what they have and what they have not. Natives run out of money, well, sell some land or provide a service. Bad drinking water, sell something to buy a purifier with. Far as I'm concerned, natives are on their own once we give them what we said we would.

Well you are correct. It obviously is. And, for good reason. See, cops are instructed to not stir the pot and here, if they said it was related they would be contering what they also had said earlier when they had some guy saying somethng like 'these arrests are not targeting any ethnic group.' Bullshit. Both items. Muslims were trying to conduct an act of terrorism and Muslims were targeted by vandals. Nothing mysterious about any of it and, the cops said and did what they should do.

No offence intended Subey as I'm sure you are well educated, intentioned and read but your point is almost idiotic. That is the equivilent of conservative Wahhabist Terrorists flying aircraft into buildings on 911 because westerners sometimes wear shorts. Eliminate shorts and the West will become Islamic or, at least, adhere better to the law of Allah. You have to try to go a bit deeper than the surface here inorder to understand the true power of terrorism. Once past the initial emotional reaction you see the method and the strategy behind it. The intent of terrorism is not simply to scare the shit out of people but rather to place pressure on governments to protect them. When they cannot as is the probable case, the government is weakend. More terrorism and the government falls and the country can fall into chaos providing an opportunity for certain pre positioned groups or entities with political, religious or even in Al Qaeda's case, both, as well as a racial element thrown in. In order to recreate the middle ages Caliphate, they need mass in the old empire and if you will note, much of the terror takes place in those countries. Europe and the US are targeted in order to provide two things - show their strength and, hopefully provide a right wing backlash from non muslim countries which will, in a defensive measure from the Arab and Muslim street, unite them behind the movement. Terrorism is an effective tool for their end. And, with the Caliphate, there need not be a central and coordinated control unit as it is simply a belief. Mount pressure wherever you can and keep pushing until the already weak and corrupt regimes begin to crumble. Then, provide a coordinated push so they fall and the vacum is taken up with your people.