Explosions at the Boston Marathon

[Boges]

Reducing things to the absurd doesn't help your case either, Boges.

The USA, as a purported rule of law country, should have done what other rule of law countries like Cuba, Nicaragua and Korea have done. The latter held war crimes hearings against the USA in New York wherein many Koreans testified to the myriad war crimes of the USA.

The first two countries took the legal route, the one that the USA could have taken which would have prevented the death of many.

In both cases the USA was found guilty of numerous breaches of international law.

So they should have given Osama bin Laden a subpoena? Alright.

BTW back to the topic of the thread. Are you in opposition of how the rule of law handled Tsarnaev?

Edited May 21, 2015 by Boges

[Je suis Omar]

The Saudi government didn't seem upset about it.

You expect a dictatorship that is in cahoots with the USA to piss off the USA. You don't know much about how the USA treats dictators friendly to the USA, do you?

[dre]

As a staging ground and to prevent an impending invasion of that country. Where else was the war to be staged? Syria?

The Saudi government didn't seem upset about it. It's the Muslim Radicals that used it as a justification for 9/11, now that's a different story.

Impending invasion of Saudi Arabia by Iraq? Cite?

[Je suis Omar]

So they should have given Osama bin Laden a subpoena? Alright.

v?

There were negotiations going on between the former close friends of the USA, the Taliban, and the USA. Negotiations that could have settled things without a whole lot of innocent Afghans dying. You seem to be awfully glib about people being murdered by war criminals and terrorists illegally invading their countries.

Why? Why do you offer such unqualified support for war criminals and terrorists?

[Je suis Omar]

Exactly. I'm also pretty sure that the American government wrote the Koran too. And put in all the bad stuff on purpose to make Muslims and Muslim countries do horrible things and be horrible places to live.

Still more, much more, of reducing things to the absurd.

Why are you so intent on providing support and cover to war criminals and terrorists, Shady?

Edited May 21, 2015 by Je suis Omar

[Boges]

http://www.history.com/topics/persian-gulf-war

Though the long-running war between Iran and Iraq had ended in a United Nations-brokered ceasefire in August 1988, by mid-1990 the two states had yet to begin negotiating a permanent peace treaty. When their foreign ministers met in Geneva that July, prospects for peace suddenly seemed bright, as it appeared that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was prepared to dissolve that conflict and return territory that his forces had long occupied. Two weeks later, however, Hussein delivered a speech in which he accused neighboring nation Kuwait of siphoning crude oil from the Ar-Rumaylah oil fields located along their common border. He insisted that Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and cancel out $30 billion of Iraq’s foreign debt, and accused them of conspiring to keep oil prices low in an effort to pander to Western oil-buying nations

In addition to Hussein’s incendiary speech, Iraq had begun amassing troops on Kuwait’s border. Alarmed by these actions, President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt initiated negotiations between Iraq and Kuwait in an effort to avoid intervention by the United States or other powers from outside the Gulf region. Hussein broke off the negotiations after only two hours, and on August 2, 1990 ordered the invasion of Kuwait. Hussein’s assumption that his fellow Arab states would stand by in the face of his invasion of Kuwait, and not call in outside help to stop it, proved to be a miscalculation. Two-thirds of the 21 members of the Arab League condemned Iraq’s act of aggression, and Saudi Arabia’s King Fahd, along with Kuwait’s government-in-exile, turned to the United States and other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) for support.

Perhaps Hussein never planned on invading Saudi Arabia, but there was broad support not just there but amongst other Arab Nations for the West to intervene.

[Boges]

There were negotiations going on between the former close friends of the USA, the Taliban, and the USA. Negotiations that could have settled things without a whole lot of innocent Afghans dying. You seem to be awfully glib about people being murdered by war criminals and terrorists illegally invading their countries.

Why? Why do you offer such unqualified support for war criminals and terrorists?

Did the US not ask the Taliban run government to give up the al Qaeda faction they were harbouring and they refused.

Weren't a lot of innocent Afghans dying under the Taliban?

[Je suis Omar]

Did the US not ask the Taliban run government to give up the al Qaeda faction they were harbouring and they refused.

Weren't a lot of innocent Afghans dying under the Taliban?

Not until the Taliban refused Unocal's plan for a pipeline.

Innocent Afghans ( or any other innocents ) dying has never been a concern for the USA. They were delighted that they could use Afghans as cannon fodder to "give the USSR its own Vietnam".

You still haven't explained why you provide unqualified support for the world's leading war criminals and terrorists.

[Boges]

You still haven't explained why you provide unqualified support for the world's leading war criminals and terrorists.

I don't. I've conceded your points several times, just not all of them. I think that the fact that the US spends more on defence than the next 18 nations combined is horrific and exhibits an unhealthy level of paranoia.

But sort of like how I hate Public Service Unions, it appears your frothing anti-Americanism is just a stand you take to make yourself feel good.

It's not going to change the fact that the US has unchallenged influence on earth. I guess unless China decides to challenge it. Your posts on an internet board aren't going to change that. Just like my posts arguing how Public Service Union are sucking our country dry don't do much.

I do think as a person living in Canada you ignore that a great deal of wealth of this nation is provided by good public relations with the US. So you should, kind of, thank them for your standard of living.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Boges

[Je suis Omar]

http://www.history.com/topics/persian-gulf-war

Perhaps Hussein never planned on invading Saudi Arabia, but there was broad support not just there but amongst other Arab Nations for the West to intervene.

https://msuweb.montclair.edu/~furrg/glaspie.html

Excerpts From Iraqi Document on Meeting with U.S. Envoy

...

GLASPIE: I think I understand this. I have lived here for years. I admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. I know you need funds. We understand that and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.

I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during the late 60's. The instruction we had during this period was that we should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not associated with America. James Baker has directed our official spokesmen to emphasize this instruction. We hope you can solve this problem using any suitable methods via Klibi or via President Mubarak. All that we hope is that these issues are solved quickly. With regard to all of this, can I ask you to see how the issue appears to us?

Edited May 21, 2015 by Je suis Omar

[Je suis Omar]

I do think as a person living in Canada you ignore that a great deal of wealth of this nation is provided by good public relations with the US. So you should, kind of, thank them for your standard of living.

I don't find the "I am only supporting war criminals and terrorists to ensure my personal standard of living remains high" argument particularly compelling.

You deny that you are supporting war criminals and terrorists then you offer up an excuse why doing so is a good idea.

[Boges]

I don't find the "I am only supporting war criminals and terrorists to ensure my personal standard of living remains high" argument particularly compelling.

You deny that you are supporting war criminals and terrorists then you offer up an excuse why doing so is a good idea.

Well you are too, or else you'd be petitioning the Government of Canada to cut off diplomatic relations with the US. . . have you?

Edited May 21, 2015 by Boges

[Je suis Omar]

Well you are too, or else you'd be petitioning the Government of Canada to cut off diplomatic relations with the US. . . have you?

I'm ashamed about what Canada has done, what Canada is doing. But I'm not running around defending the war criminals/terrorists.

In the fullness of time, Boges, in the fullness of time.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Je suis Omar

[Je suis Omar]

As a staging ground and to prevent an impending invasion of that country. Where else was the war to be staged? Syria?

The Saudi government didn't seem upset about it. It's the Muslim Radicals that used it as a justification for 9/11, now that's a different story.

The takeaway portion of this post, Boges, is your last sentence. You, and myriad others go on and on about how the USA was so totally justified in attacking Afghanistan "for 9-11".

"It's the Muslim Radicals" ... .

Consider, truly consider for a moment just how tired folks in the Middle East are from over half a century of British, then American predation on their lands, killing their people, installing and supporting dictators that tortured and brutalized those people.

Y'all know this to be the truth but no one is willing to speak up about the elephant in the room.

You have taken some halting half steps and for that I commend you.

But again, why is revenge and retaliation deemed only the province of western nations?

Especially when it has been the west that has done the most damage, killed the most people, put the most people under the thumbs of pliant USA dictators, stolen the most wealth, ... ?

In any situation similar to this, we, left/right/center, would all be in complete and total agreement - "these people are delusional"!

[bush_cheney2004]

In any situation similar to this, we, left/right/center, would all be in complete and total agreement - "these people are delusional"!

Not at all....there is "total agreement" otherwise.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm ashamed about what Canada has done, what Canada is doing. But I'm not running around defending the war criminals/terrorists.

So you don't pay any taxes in Canada ? You do not vote in local, provincial, or federal elections ? You do not consume American products or services (including those developed by the U.S. "war machine") ? Interesting....

[Argus]

Consider, truly consider for a moment just how tired folks in the Middle East are from over half a century of British, then American predation on their lands, killing their people, installing and supporting dictators that tortured and brutalized those people.

Their lands?

You know, I can't think of a time in history where a Muslim ruler was able to conquer someone else's territory and didn't. I can't think of a time through history where Muslim nations or empires with power didn't seek to constantly expand at the expense of their non-Muslim neighbours. And when they succeeded? Well, most of the time they ordered everyone to convert to Islam or die. That's why places like Egypt and Syria and Lebanon are Muslim today. They used to be Christian. Muslim conquerors pushed into Europe from east and south, and the only thing which stopped them was force of arms.

Fast forward to the present. The worm had turned, in no small measure because what passed for Islamic education became all about Islam, ignoring science and technology. But coming into the twentieth century European rulers began ceding power to locals, creating states like Jordan and Saudi Arabia, and not because they had to either. Egypt regained its independence, and after WW2 the US and its allies gradually pulled back from their colonial roles. The middle east became independent.

Now, was there continuing interference? A continuing effort to influence local rulers? Sure! Great powers seek influence everywhere, and always have. Did Britain interfere in Canada's affairs before and after it became independent? Sure! Did it interfere in American affairs after independence? Sure! Does China interfere in Vietnamese and Thai, and Korean, and Japanese and Burmese affairs and seek influence? Sure! Does Russia interfere in the affairs of other nations? Shamelessly! Do they prop up dictators in the middle east? Yep! Russia and China help support Sudan, and only Russian assistance and support kept Syria's tyrant in power. The Russians have supported and continue to support all manner of nasty revolutionary groups throughout the world. Chinese influence through Africa is growing, and it's ruthless in its use of bribery and violence.

This is the way the world works, and has always worked. Smaller nations can still thrive, depending on just how corrupt, stupid and incompetent their elites are, barring outright invasion such as the Russians engage in at times. It's the misfortune of Muslim peoples in the middle east that their elites happen to be among the stupidest and most corrupt, self-serving and venal in the world, largely caring nothing for the welfare and well-being of their people. Mind you, African elites aren't much better.

But blaming the foreigners who interfere, and only the Western ones, ignores the fact that such behaviour is the norm everywhere and always has been. The fault for the miserable existence of so many Muslims can be attributed much more to their own leadership than to foreigners. Add in the low level of education of most Muslim nations, the profound ignorance and willingness to subsume their own better interests to what they're told is the glory of Allah, and you have a stewpot of bad government and backward societies.

Latin and South American countries have been 'interfered with' by the Americans a lot more than middle east countries, and they're certainly not the backward toilets of religious fanaticism we see from most Muslim regions. True, drugs continue to be a heavy burden on some of those societies, but that's hardly something the US has set up. Likewise, Asian countries which are not Muslim are more stable, and have better governance, despite all attempts at influence from greater powers. Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea and Japan have thrived under US "interference". There is no middle east equivalent, despite the oil wealth.

I have no doubt Muslims feel as though their problems are someone else's fault. God knows their elites have been telling them that for decades. It's the Jews fault, or the Americans fault, or those evil, immoral "westerners". But really, it's their own ignorance and religious fanaticism which is responsible. Nor are these poor, downtrodden people yearning to breath free. Every Muslim nation surveyed would vote in a theocracy if given the chance, likely ones harsher in their violations of human rights than what's there now. The only real opposition to Saudi rule, for instance, comes from those who feel the government is far too liberal!

So don't expect our hearts to bleed for the Muslim masses. It's always been within their power to throw out the bums dangling over them. They let themselves be swayed by doublespeak and religious barbarism and a mentality of "As God wills it" and their bad government continues, and will continue unabated, regardless of western or any other interference or influence.

[Je suis Omar]

Their lands?

.

Yup, their lands.

We have noted that you are an avid supporter of vicious war criminals and terrorists, Argus.

That oughta make your mommy proud.

[Argus]

Yup, their lands.

Now that they've murdered all the Christians that used to live there, you mean?

We have noted that you are an avid supporter of vicious war criminals and terrorists, Argus.

I'm not the one who chose an expression known to be one of sympathy for terrorists as my name here.

That oughta make your mommy proud.

At least I know mine.

[Je suis Omar]

Now that they've murdered all the Christians that used to live there, you mean?

A cite is required.

Do you have any notion of hypocrisy? You provide avid support for the USA, a group of terrorists who stole lands from Native Americans thru a policy of genocide, stole those same lands from the government of the day, another terrorist action.

Then the USA went on a murderous rampage for over two centuries, but they're your kind if people.

And this makes your mommy proud?

[bush_cheney2004]

...Then the USA went on a murderous rampage for over two centuries, but they're your kind if people.

Canada's kind too...#1 trading partner. Building another bridge to Detroit !

[Charles Anthony]

Folks,

Stop making the discussions personal. Anybody who continues with personal jabs will take a brief vacation.

If you need help with that, here is a strategy:

1) ignore the names of your fellow members;

2) pretend that every post but your own was written by 1 single person who is no longer with us but still had something valuable to say;

3) write so that a 3rd party who just happened upon the forum for the 1st time ever and reads your next post as the 1st thing here on MLW may understand whatever value may exist in your post;

4) write to an honest audience.

If you have no interest in smartening up or if you can not understand the problem, I suggest you take a break from the forum and read everybody else. Train yourself to be disciplined enough to read whatever you-perceive-to-be-objectionable of others without exercizing power to respond. We are going to be cracking down on the nitter-nattering and I assure you that many of you will be surprized because a lot of you do it. The thread is temporarily locked.