Iraq Invasion - America's Shame... 10 years on

[Rue]

Once again "Hudson Jones" has responded.

"Hudson Jones" stated and I quote:

"Perhaps at the trial, Saddam would have talked about how it was okay for him to be a murderous, cruel dictator in America's view before it suddenly mattered in order to excuse a war which came to be, based on lies. Maybe he would talk about how U.S. sold chemical weapons to Iraq which were used on its own people and the Iranians. THAT was okay. But suddenly, Saddam decides he doesn't want to be the lapdog, and OH MY GOD HE'S A MONSTER!!!!111"

The above makes no sense. Hussein never acknowledged he was cruel or murderous during his reign of power because he knew he was. He openly stated he was. It was how he ruled. He often gave speeches stating how he admited Joseph stalin's methods used to intimidate the masses and how he followed them. Its completely illogical given that, to suggest he would have denied engaging in murder and intimidation using terror and fear. He openly bragged he did and at one point stated only a brutal man could ever lead such a country.

Secondly if one reviews what was sold to Iraq it was in fact Britain, France and Germany that sold them chemicals not the United States.

"Hudson Jones" then stated:

"U.S.' actions brought Al Qaeda and instability into Iraq. People who try to sell the superficial view that "Iraq had a chance to flourish, but blew it" after Saddam's fall are either completely ignorant or they should not be trusted."

Again the above statement is bizarre let alone illogical. Instability in Iraq commenced the moment it was created. Al Qaeda and predeccesor political Islamic extremist organizations existed in Iraq prior to the British setting up a puppet monarchhy there. To suggest Al Quaeda as "Hudson Jones" has inferred was the only political Islamic terror organization to ever exist in Iraq and only arise after the US invaded is nonsensical. The facts are public and show otherwise. Now as the for the second comment, it is typical of the motus opperandi the operative(s) using the name "Hudson Jones" engages in. The personal attack and smeering of people who disagree with "Hudson Jone's" opinion as dishonest is what this oeprative does. Come on the board and make personal inflammatory comments about the motives of those who express different opinions and it is precisely the kind of smeering I have questioned continuously as uncessary. Is it possible for this operative to engage in a dialogue without calling someone he disagrees with a liar?

I respond directly to this operative's tactics.

I have no idea what this comment from "Hudson Jones" means:

"U.S. had thought so in Saddam's case and other cases around the world. Really."

It makes no sense neither does this one:

"U.S.' actions brought Al Qaeda and instability into Iraq. People who try to sell the superficial view that "Iraq had a chance to flourish, but blew it" after Saddam's fall are either completely ignorant or they should not be trusted."

The above kind of sweeping statements not specific to any one incident or example shows once again how this operative

makes general sweeping assumptions as to the motives of not just one government of the US but many, interchanges these governments and their

foreign policy with "U.S." as the reference just so we can make sure to smeer not just all US governments but all Americans regardless of their actual opinion. Its this kind of simplistic stereotyping of an entire people by interposing the name of their country that I have challenged from the get go with this operative and you will notice his smeers are limited to Americans, Jews and Israelis. I have never seen this operative use it in any other response.

However I have come not to expect any rational discourse from this forum operative, just sweeping subjective opinions without reference.

[Rue]

Saying you approve of Saddam being gone means you essentially approve of the invasion as well. Unless you think a nice small covert assassination would have been in order.

No more than it means you approve of Sadaam's genocide against Kurds or his years of tyranical and brutal mass murder by being against the invasion...or does it....be careful with your attempt to pull what people say out of context...the same can be done with your positions and I am sure you would not appreciate it either.

[Guest American Woman]

No more than it means you approve of Sadaam's genocide against Kurds or his years of tyranical and brutal mass murder by being against the invasion...or does it....be careful with your attempt to pull what people say out of context...the same can be done with your positions and I am sure you would not appreciate it either.

Well said.

[Hudson Jones]

Al Qaeda and predeccesor political Islamic extremist organizations existed in Iraq prior to the British setting up a puppet monarchhy there.

You want to be taken seriously, right?

You do realize that Al Qaeda didn't come to be until the late 80's, right?

[jbg]

I guess this is America's fault too (link, excerpts below):

BAQUBA, Iraq, May 17 (Reuters) - Two bombs exploded outside a Sunni Muslim mosque the Iraqi city of Baquba as worshippers left after Friday prayers, killing at least 43 people in one of the deadliest attacks in a month-long surge in sectarian violence.

Attacks on Sunni and Shi'ite mosques, security forces and Sunni tribal leaders have spread since troops raided a Sunni protest camp near Kirkuk a month ago, and fears are intensifying of a return to all-out Shi'ite-Sunni conflict.

Increasingly sectarian civil war in neighbouring Syria is emboldening Iraqi Sunni insurgents and straining relations between the two Muslim groups in Iraq, where tensions are at their worst since U.S. troops pulled out at the end of 2011.

On Friday, one blast exploded outside the mosque in Baquba, about 50 km (30 miles) northeast of the capital of Baghdad, and a second explosion tore into crowds of people rushing to help victims of the first attack, police said.

Local television showed images of bodies on the ground outside the mosque, pools of blood and scattered shoes of the victims. Police vehicles rushed wounded away from the scene.

"I was about 30 metres (yards) from the first explosion. When the first exploded, I ran to help them, and the second one went off. I saw bodies flying and I had shrapnel in my neck," said Hashim Munjiz, a college student, at the site.

[BubberMiley]

How is it America's fault?

[waldo]

The idea that people are "better off" under a tyrannical dictator because they "keep the people in check" still has me flabbergasted.

that was your country's rationale when it supported Hussein... you know, when Hussein was your country's favoured tyrannical dictator keeping Iran in check.

[waldo]

That's just it. They have freedom - elections vs Saddam.

Ya actually I'll get my info from an Iraqi who actually votes in these elections.

And I won't forget to ask them if the US/coalition invasion and the continued violence is all worth it!

You do that. Go to Iraq and ask an Iraqi.

ask an Iraqi? No problem - for those familiar with the Iraqi blogger Riverbend, she wrote regularly about life in Iraq during the war (2003-2007... right up to the point of becoming one of the 1.5 million Iraqis that sought refuge in Syria).

her blog: Baghdad Burning (all blog entries are archived/readable at the site)

coincident with the 10th anniversary (of America's shame), she resurrected the blog for one additional April 9th "10 years on" entry:

April 9, 2013 marks ten years since the fall of Baghdad. Ten years since the invasion. Since the lives of millions of Iraqis changed forever. It’s difficult to believe. It feels like only yesterday I was sharing day to day activities with the world. I feel obliged today to put my thoughts down on the blog once again, probably for the last time.

In 2003, we were counting our lives in days and weeks. Would we make it to next month? Would we make it through the summer? Some of us did and many of us didn't.

Back in 2003, one year seemed like a lifetime ahead. The idiots said, “Things will improve immediately.” The optimists were giving our occupiers a year, or two… The realists said, “Things won’t improve for at least five years.” And the pessimists? The pessimists said, “It will take ten years. It will take a decade.”

Looking back at the last ten years, what have our occupiers and their Iraqi governments given us in ten years? What have our puppets achieved in this last decade? What have we learned?

We learned a lot.

We learned that while life is not fair, death is even less fair- it takes the good people. Even in death you can be unlucky. Lucky ones die a ‘normal’ death… A familiar death of cancer, or a heart-attack, or stroke. Unlucky ones have to be collected in bits and pieces. Their families trying to bury what can be salvaged and scraped off of streets that have seen so much blood, it is a wonder they are not red.

We learned that you can be floating on a sea of oil, but your people can be destitute. Your city can be an open sewer; your women and children can be eating out of trash dumps and begging for money in foreign lands.

We learned that justice does not prevail in this day and age. Innocent people are persecuted and executed daily. Some of them in courts, some of them in streets, and some of them in the private torture chambers.

We are learning that corruption is the way to go. You want a passport issued? Pay someone. You want a document ratified? Pay someone. You want someone dead? Pay someone.

We learned that it’s not that difficult to make billions disappear.

We are learning that those amenities we took for granted before 2003, you know- the luxuries – electricity, clean water from faucets, walkable streets, safe schools – those are for deserving populations. Those are for people who don’t allow occupiers into their country.

We’re learning that the biggest fans of the occupation (you know who you are, you traitors) eventually leave abroad. And where do they go? The USA, most likely, with the UK a close second. If I were an American, I’d be outraged. After spending so much money and so many lives, I’d expect the minor Chalabis and Malikis and Hashimis of Iraq to, well, stay in Iraq. Invest in their country. I’d stand in passport control and ask them, “Weren’t you happy when we invaded your country? Weren’t you happy we liberated you? Go back. Go back to the country you’re so happy with because now, you’re free!”

We’re learning that militias aren’t particular about who they kill. The easiest thing in the world would be to say that Shia militias kill Sunnis and Sunni militias kill Shia, but that’s not the way it works. That’s too simple.

We’re learning that the leaders don’t make history. Populations don’t make history. Historians don’t write history. News networks do. The Foxes, and CNNs, and BBCs, and Jazeeras of the world make history. They twist and turn things to fit their own private agendas.

We’re learning that the masks are off. No one is ashamed of the hypocrisy anymore. You can be against one country (like Iran), but empowering them somewhere else (like in Iraq). You can claim to be against religious extremism (like in Afghanistan), but promoting religious extremism somewhere else (like in Iraq and Egypt and Syria).

Those who didn’t know it in 2003 are learning (much too late) that an occupation is not the portal to freedom and democracy. The occupiers do not have your best interests at heart.

We are learning that ignorance is the death of civilized societies and that everyone thinks their particular form of fanaticism is acceptable.

We are learning how easy it is to manipulate populations with their own prejudices and that politics and religion never mix, even if a super-power says they should mix.

But it wasn’t all a bad education…

We learned that you sometimes receive kindness when you least expect it. We learned that people often step outside of the stereotypes we build for them and surprise us. We learned and continue to learn that there is strength in numbers and that Iraqis are not easy to oppress. It is a matter of time…

And then there are things we'd like to learn...

Ahmed Chalabi, Iyad Allawi, Ibrahim Jaafari, Tarek Al Hashemi and the rest of the vultures, where are they now? Have they crawled back under their rocks in countries like the USA, the UK, etc.? Where will Maliki be in a year or two? Will he return to Iran or take the millions he made off of killing Iraqis and then seek asylum in some European country? Far away from the angry Iraqi masses…

What about George Bush, Condi, Wolfowitz, and Powell? Will they ever be held accountable for the devastation and the death they wrought in Iraq? Saddam was held accountable for 300,000 Iraqis... Surely someone should be held accountable for the million or so?

Finally, after all is said and done, we shouldn't forget what this was about - making America safer... And are you safer Americans? If you are, why is it that we hear more and more about attacks on your embassies and diplomats? Why is it that you are constantly warned to not go to this country or that one? Is it better now, ten years down the line? Do you feel safer, with hundreds of thousands of Iraqis out of the way (granted half of them were women and children, but children grow up, right?)?

And what happened to Riverbend and my family? I eventually moved from Syria. I moved before the heavy fighting, before it got ugly. That’s how fortunate I was. I moved to another country nearby, stayed almost a year, and then made another move to a third Arab country with the hope that, this time, it’ll stick until… Until when? Even the pessimists aren’t sure anymore. When will things improve? When will be able to live normally? How long will it take?

For those of you who are disappointed reality has reared its ugly head again, go to Fox News, I'm sure they have a reportage that will soothe your conscience.

For those of you who have been asking about me and wondering how I have been doing, I thank you. "Lo khuliyet, qulibet..." Which means "If the world were empty of good people, it would end." I only need to check my emails to know it won't be ending any time soon.

(bold emphasis added by the waldo)

[bush_cheney2004]

What about George W. Bush ? He has a brand spanking new presidential library and museum that proudly displays the whole story.

Saddam doesn't.....

Which U.S. president in this photo DID NOT bomb Iraq ?

Edited May 18, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[eyeball]

The one who said invading Iraq was one of the greatest blunders an American president ever committed. But to his credit, Carter did help instigate the Iraq-Iran War thereby causing the deaths of a million or more human beings.

[waldo]

What about George W. Bush ? He has a brand spanking new presidential library and museum that proudly displays the whole story.

the "whole story"!!! Revisionism at its best! But hey now, I understand your main heeero, Cheney gets dissed through his virtual absence from the library... just as Bush's 'brain', Rove... and Rummy are also ignored! Apparently, there's nothing about the Iraqi freedom to forge close ties with the Iranian theocracy - go figure! Also nothing about the Afghanistan Bush forgot all about... or anything about all the '9/11 warnings' the Bush admin ignored. And imagine no mention of Katrina!

do you know if his favourite "My Pet Goat" book is in the library?

We've had enough Bushes

whaaa!!!!

[bush_cheney2004]

The one who said invading Iraq was one of the greatest blunders an American president ever committed. But to his credit, Carter did help instigate the Iraq-Iran War thereby causing the deaths of a million or more human beings.

Just doing his part as a U.S. president. He got a big library and museum too. The world expects nothing less.

[Rue]

You want to be taken seriously, right?

You do realize that Al Qaeda didn't come to be until the late 80's, right?

Al Quaeda has always existed. Its name has changed as have its actual membersbut it has existed since Islam began. Al Quaeda is but one name for the continuous evolution and continuing reincarnation of political Islamic extremist cells that have operated in Islamic states since Islam began.

Taliban used to be called the Mujahadeen when the Soviets occupied Afghanistan.

The Palestinian Authority used to be called the Palestinian Liberation Organization which in fact was never an organization but a network of cells each with their own leader and name created by the Western press since it was too difficult for them to keep track of them all.

Before its name the word "Fedayeen" was used.

Even Hamas which evolved from the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt may be what you call a new organization but is in fact just a continuous evolution of Sunni extremist groups. They form, break down, re-form.

Their names change but their dedication to interpreting Islam in a literal, fundamentalist manner to condone violence, anti-Westernism and anti-Semitism continues and like the name you give yoursrself on this forum "Hudson Jones"-people know its just a name.

Al Quaeda is nothing more than extremist Muslims. No more no less. The extremists in Malawi with the same name as those in Iraq have little in common other than they both hate the West and quote the Koran. Its just a name the Western press has given both these cells because they can't keep up with the sheer momentum of the continuous changes to these cells.

Any other questions? You take me seriously? Yah right. Do yourself a favour. When you come on this forum don't keep trying to mock what you clearly can't fathom. Try ask what I meant by my statement before you try act smug with your responses.

Its laughable you attempt to mock my being serious when you come on this forum, refer to Israel as a malignancy and call for it to be wiped out.

You come on this forum use words to encourage, condone and incite hatred and mass murder-and then when you are asked to finish what you start and explain which methods you intend to use, you hide from me and won't respond finish what you started. Finish it.

You come on the forum and make direct references to wiping out people but when you are challenged on it you don't respond. Here I am. You want me to be taken seriously? Really. How about you start by showing me how serious you are. Why are you afraid of me that you can't respond directly? Go on finish it. Tell me the methods you are calling on to wipe Israel out.

You going to question taking me seriously when you won't respond directly to what you states? Hah.

Oh but you have a name "Hudson Jones". Should I take that name seriously because it sounds so Caucasian? Hah.

Tell me. Tell us on all the forum. If say your name was not Hudson Jones but say Al Quaeda or Syrian Ministry of Information or Ahmed of Hamas' disinformation unit would you use your real name? Hah.

Names mean nothing. Call yourself whatever you want. Its not your name that has defined you and its not Al Quaeda's name that defines it.

Edited May 18, 2013 by Rue

[waldo]

Names mean nothing. Call yourself whatever you want. Its not your name that has defined you and its not Al Quaeda's name that defines it.

good to know. In keeping with the overwhelming theme of this thread, would you agree that Al Quaeda (or whatever name you'd like to use) didn't exist in Iraq prior to the illegal U.S. invasion?

[Rue]

The organization Al Quaeda is said to have been created by Osama Ben Laden in 1988-1989. In fact the terror cells that were re-named Al Quaeda

existed prior to 1988. Al Quaeda is but one network of these disparate terror cells. The only thing any of them have in common is that they believe they are in a war against Christians and Jews for the world. These cells are run by autonomous leaders each with his own version of Sunni Islam extremism.

Al Quaeda is just a name for a collective of cells know different than Palestinian Liberation Front was. Its a way to make a disparate group of loosely knit political extremist Sunni Muslims easier to follow for the press.

That was and remains the point. Political extremist Muslim terror cells have existed in the Islamic world since it started. They constantly evolve and mutate forming networks and alliances that come and go. They shift as quickly as the sand in the desert does.

This notion that since Al Quaeda was not called that prior to 1988 means it did not exist is b.s. It existed. It was called other names. Its people. its followers existed and practiced terrorism. Their name will continue to change but their agenda and their terror remains as it has over the centuries.

That is the point. So for you geniuses that try portray the Arab world in static, fixed, rigid organizations I challenge you to take the time to stop pontificating about organizations you do not understand. Until you do your homework and follow them as they mutate you don't grasp their significance and impact in a country or region. Their name means sweet phack all. Their continuous influence in alienating and using intimidation to generate

coercive actions and death of the innocent is what counts.

The operative "Hudson Jones" and now you want to play "caught you" with me. Well again finish what you started.

Who do you think Al Quaeda was and is. Where do you think they came from fig leafs? What you think they never existed prior to 1988?

What along comes Al Quaeda and before then all was peachy keen in Iraq?

Here start:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/etc/modern.html

Al Zwahiri was Anwar el Sadat's personal physician. How about you find out his role in the precursor of what became Al Quaeda and the name they used prior to al Quaeda. How about you find out who the Mujahadeen were in Afghanistan and what Ben Laden was doing in Kenya and Al Zwahiri in Sudan before you try play caught you with me.

Al Quaeda is not a fixed organization and never was. It has always worked as a barely connected group of individual extremist cells.

Knock yourself out:

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/al-qaeda-terrorism.html

http://www.pwhce.org/evolutionofalqaeda.html

continued next post

[Rue]

As I stated in numerous posts, one can not even attempt to understand the conflicts that arise in Israel or any of the Arab nations without taking the time to go backwords and trace the origins of today's conflicts.

These conflicts didn't just arise because the US showed up as some of you simplistically would have us believe. Some of you believe you can define a conflict by simply blaming it on the US. What nonsense.

Go look at Iraq before you blame its problems on the US. Take the time to at least understand some of its history.

Iraq is in fact over 10,000 years old. It some say is the heart of civilization and where some rumour the Garden of Eden was.

Are any of you even going to attempt to trace its history and understand the thousands of years of wars it has gone through? I doubt it.

The Ottoman empire (today Turkey) ruled over Iraq until WW1.

During WW1 the OttomanEmpire sided with Germany against Britain and France.

Britain first tried to invade it and was defeated by the Turks at the Siege of Kut in 1915-16.

Once Britain was able to defeat the Turks and Germans it and the French divided up the Middle East using a mandate it procured from the League of Nations. The if set up a Jewish state there which it never did. In fact Britain and France did what they always did, used their mandate to carve up all of the Middle East into puppet kingdoms for the two.

Iraq was created by. Britain as one of 2 "Hashamtie"monarchies, the other of course was Jordan. Two of the Faisal family sons were placed on these thrones as thank yous to that family for helping them defeat the Turks. Eventually Saudi Arabia was donated as the third of those monarchies and France gave itself Syria and Lebanon.

How about you go back and try understand that Britain and France deliberately created a fake crisis between the leaders of the Arab and Jewish worlds so that the two did not form an alliance in the early 1920'sand create two states living peacefully side by side. The British and French knew if the Jews and Arabs formed a peaceful alliance the British and French influence would not be needed.

The succeeded. They lied to the Arab leaders right before the two peoples were about to create two nations leading to their then removing the origins of King Faisal's family forcefully from Syria so as to enable two French puppet states.and the Jordanian and Iraqi puppet states.

Look at the origins of Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia.

Iraq was deliberately created with 3 feuding factions, the Kurds (and Assyrians) on top to the North on the border with Turkey, the Sunnis in the middle, and The Shiites below.

It knew by creating a country with continuous feuds it could rule by divide and conquer. In that respect it was know different then the recipe it tried to cook up in the Belfour declaration with a Jewish state and a Palestinian state within a greater nation to be administered by the British. The French created Lebanon from 3 feuding factions, Sunni, Shiite and Maronite Christian. It created Syria artificially forcing together Alwaites, Sunnis, Kurds, Berbers, Druze, Alawites. In this way it could justify its colonial presence through divide and conquer.

The Iraq you think you know came about in 1921 and then in 1932 the British Mandate officially ended. At that time the Sunnis tried to run it, Esbut there were riots and civil conflict with the Assyrians, Kurds and Shiites. Terrorism and extremism in the name of religion through terror cells existed prior to 1921 and mutated after 1921.

In 1936 there was a military take over, The country went through one violent coup after another. It went from a corrupt, useless, weak King to fascist military dictatorships.

It was a Nazi puppet state until May of 1941.

When it became a UN member in 1945 the Kurdish tried to separate and when they lost they fled to The USSR..

Shortly before it attacked Jewish settlers in Palestine in 1948 to try prevent them from becoming a Jewish state as part of a war started by the Arab League of Nations of which it was a principal member, it was emersed in violent civil unrest exploding in what is called the Al Wathbah uprisinhg.

In 1958 led by Egyptian leader Gamel Nasser's19th Brigade, 3rd division they once and for all got rid of themonarch and installed a brutalmilitary dictatorship based on Nasser'smilitary rule of Egypt which was based on Hitler's regime right down to the uniforms, anti Jewish policies, secret polie (Mukbarat instead of Gestapo) goose stepping, German helmet high boot uniforms and prison camps where political enemies were tortured and used as slave labour and then killed.

Internal wars against Kurds, Assyrians, Christians, Shiite, communists, student activisits, socialists, union leaders, women seeking political rights,homosexuals, continued.

There were numerous underground organizations some engaging in terror others peaceful methods.

Each successive military regime used its Mukbarat and military to run the country. Sadaam Hussein was just another psychopathic megalomaniac who rose to power in the military using his own village's tribe to secure his power and modelling himself on both Hitler and his hero Stalin.

The Bath Party of Iraq that at one point formed an alliance with the Bath Party of Syria and Nasser to form a United Arab Republic was directly modelled on Nazism.

This country was riddled with violence, terror wars and thousands of disparate political cells from the get go and Al Quaeda which in fact came about when Osama Ben Laden was scoffed at by the Mujahadeen of Afghanistan fighting the Soviets created his own cell.

Ben Laden tried to operate as a CIA operative. He was a spoiled rich boy. He ran factories in Kenya and Somalia exploiting black Muslims and treating them like slaves. He was a spoiled rich boy bored with life looking for a cause. The grizzled Mujahaddeen mountain warriors of Iraq wanted nothing to do with this tall, skinny, effeminate Saudi rich boy and there is a misconception he ra the Mujahadeen who then later were called the Taliban. Today's Taliban could be the old Mujahadeen but more likely are a wide range of people who some may not even come from Afghanistan.

Ben Laden operated on his own. He came about because his Saudi father was very close friends with the George Bush family and they used their oil connections with Bush to keep from having him apprehended.

Ben Laden stayed away from Iraq because Hussein openly ridiculed him. So did many Arab leaders we in the West are told he was allied with.

He was protected in Pakistan by their intelligence bureau for assuring Afghanistan continued to be used as a heroin source that could be sent through Pakistan to the West to make the Pakistan military money.

All you have to do is read.

Al Quaeda, the actual Al Quaeda in Iraq today is not the Al Quaeda of Osamaon Ben Laden.It uses the name but would have never allowed him to be their leader. There are cells using this name in Algeria,Morrocco, Tunisia, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, the Philippines, Indonesia. Malaysia, Jordan, Malawi.None of them have anything in common with each other other than they believe the Judeo Christian world of the West is an enemy to destroy and wage war against.

[eyeball]

Al Quaeda, the actual Al Quaeda in Iraq today is not the Al Quaeda of Osamaon Ben Laden.It uses the name but would have never allowed him to be their leader. There are cells using this name in Algeria,Morrocco, Tunisia, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, the Philippines, Indonesia. Malaysia, Jordan, Malawi.None of them have anything in common with each other other than they believe the Judeo Christian world of the West is an enemy to destroy and wage war against.

What you're describing is bin Ladenism. The common goal is to drive the west out because, as you say, we've be diddling in their regions for centuries and they've obviously had enough.

As far as Israel goes...I'm betting Ungava is looking better all the time.

[bush_cheney2004]

What you're describing is bin Ladenism. The common goal is to drive the west out because, as you say, we've be diddling in their regions for centuries and they've obviously had enough.

So is that what First Nations call it too..."bin Ladenism" ?

[eyeball]

I doubt it - but all the same, they probably know an imperial/colonial diddler when they see one too.

[Rue]

What you're describing is bin Ladenism. The common goal is to drive the west out because, as you say, we've be diddling in their regions for centuries and they've obviously had enough.

As far as Israel goes...I'm betting Ungava is looking better all the time.

Yes. But also remember the Muslim Empires had no problems either being invading "colonialists" "diddling" in other countries and regions and imposing their religion on people violently.

So let's just say what goes around comes around.

As for Uganda I think you mean, that was Churchill's idea. Jews immediately rejected that idea precisely because they did not want to go into a country they had no ties to. The whole point of Zionism was to return whence we came precisely so we would not be colonialists.

This notions Jews returning to where we originated makes us colonialist is precisely because the people who parrot this line pretend we never came from the Middle East and simply returned. No they have us leaving the holocaust and being expelled from the Arab world and forced to flee to Israel because we were colonialists not victims of colonialism.

Edited May 20, 2013 by Rue

[eyeball]

Yes. But also remember the Muslim Empires had no problems either being invading "colonialists" "diddling" in other countries and regions and imposing their religion on people violently.

So let's just say what goes around comes around.

Oh I get, our diddling is like blowback for Muslims. What a brilliant twist.

As for Uganda I think you mean, that was Churchill's idea. Jews immediately rejected that idea precisely because they did not want to go into a country they had no ties to. The whole point of Zionism was to return whence we came precisely so we would not be colonialists.

I meant Ungava which I thought was proposed as a homeland for people who simply wanted to escape persecution in Europe, but maybe I was wrong. It's not like Jews were the only one's who felt the need to do that.

This notions Jews returning to where we originated makes us colonialist is precisely because the people who parrot this line pretend we never came from the Middle East and simply returned. No they have us leaving the holocaust and being expelled from the Arab world and forced to flee to Israel because we were colonialists not victims of colonialism.

The only notion I'm really parroting is the one that I hear when other nations that used to exist are advised to get over their defeat and move on. You hear it all the time and it seems to be good enough for everyone else so...

If anything, and judging by the pattern of past European diddling in the ME, creating a new country filled with people with ancient grudges seems like a performance up to the usual par.

[Moonlight Graham]

Al Quaeda has always existed. Its name has changed as have its actual membersbut it has existed since Islam began. Al Quaeda is but one name for the continuous evolution and continuing reincarnation of political Islamic extremist cells that have operated in Islamic states since Islam began.

Taliban used to be called the Mujahadeen when the Soviets occupied Afghanistan.

I get what you're trying to say, but your facts are wrong.

Their names change but their dedication to interpreting Islam in a literal, fundamentalist manner to condone violence, anti-Westernism and anti-Semitism continues and like the name you give yoursrself on this forum "Hudson Jones"-people know its just a name.

Al-Qaeda, at least the key members, don't quite adhere to a "literal" interpretation of Islam. They adhere to an interpretation of Islam that is twisted from its meaning, and use this to reinforce their violence and hateful political beliefs. Those who follow the teaching of Qutbism are following the teachings of Sayyid Qutb's interpretations of Islam, and they are violent and dangerous interpretations.

[GostHacked]

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/bombs-tear-iraqi-capital-killing-60-19266361#.UaO_ZUrRh8E

A coordinated wave of car bombings tore through mostly Shiite areas of Baghdad on Monday, killing at least 66 people and maiming nearly 200 as insurgents step up the bloodshed roiling Iraq.

The attacks in markets and other areas frequented by civilians are the latest sign of a rapid deterioration in security as sectarian tensions are exacerbated by anti-government protests and the war in neighboring Syria grinds on.

More than 450 people have been killed across Iraq in May. Most of the killings came over the past two weeks in the most sustained wave of violence since U.S. troops left in December 2011.

Just another day in paradise.

[Jeff M]

Part of the reason why the chickens came home on 9/11. Their own Ron Paul was a politician that was at least honest enough to admit that! Not that he was good for anything else though. He believes that more chickens will come home still.

[bush_cheney2004]

Part of the reason why the chickens came home on 9/11. Their own Ron Paul was a politician that was at least honest enough to admit that! Not that he was good for anything else though. He believes that more chickens will come home still.

Americans slaughter about 8,000,000,000 chickens per year....then they eat them.