Iraq and it's Al-Queda problem

[On Guard for Thee]

Why is it faulty ? What makes Canada's existence more legitimate than Israel's ? A queen ?

I started out by commenting on Israel's legitimacy. Going 'round in circles seems rather silly.

[DogOnPorch]

He certainly dud.

No he didn't. You're seeing things.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stephen-harper-s-speech-to-the-israeli-knesset-1.2503902

[Bonam]

The point that you seem to be totally missing is that there are those who would say Israel is a creation of Whitehall and therefore has no right to exist. I think your comparison to Canada and the US is quite faulty.

There are approximately 200 countries around the world, almost all of which came to be in their own unique way, and they all have a "right to exist". This right originates from the fact that they do exist, and that the people of those nations wish for said existence to continue. The only way for a country to lose its right to exist is for its own people to wish for its dissolution, such as the breakup of the Soviet Union.That some would dispute this specifically in the case of Israel says a lot more about those people than it does about Israel.

If one wants to question the legitimacy of the existence of nations based on how they were formed, one might want to start with the US and Canada, which are built on the bones of an entire race of people which has been almost entirely eradicated, the few survivors largely impoverished and relegated to reserves, and still subject to ancient racist laws even in our supposedly modern egalitarian world.

Edited February 2, 2014 by Bonam

[On Guard for Thee]

If you have a reasonable reading skill, then you will be able to seperate the chaff from the seed in the following. He throws in this "denies it's right to exist" as if it equates to disagreeing with it's policy on west bank settlements. "what else can we call criticism" Well we can call it disagreement. That doesn't automatically make it antisemitism, as Harper would have you believe.

Now of course friends, criticism of Israeli government policy is not in and of itself necessarily anti-Semitic, Harper said in the Knesset.

But what else can we call criticism that selectively condemns only the Jewish state and effectively denies its right to exist, to defend itself while systematically ignoring or excusing the violence and oppression all around it?

[On Guard for Thee]

 

There are approximately 200 countries around the world, almost all of which came to be in their own unique way, and they all have a "right to exist". This right originates from the fact that they do exist, and that the people of those nations wish for said existence to continue. The only way for a country to lose its right to exist is for its own people to wish for its dissolution, such as the breakup of the Soviet Union.That some would dispute this specifically in the case of Israel says a lot more about those people than it does about Israel.

If one wants to question the legitimacy of the existence of nations based on how they were formed, one might want to start with the US and Canada, which are built on the bones of an entire race of people which has been almost entirely eradicated, the few survivors largely impoverished and relegated to reserves, and still subject to ancient racist laws even in our supposedly modern egalitarian world.

 

Exactly. Many similarities between Canada and it's aboriginal people and Israel and Palestinians, currently.

[DogOnPorch]

Of course, criticism of Israeli government policy is not in and of itself necessarily anti-Semitic.

But what else can we call criticism that selectively condemns only the Jewish state and effectively denies its right to defend itself, while systematically ignoring - or excusing - the violence and oppression all around it?

What else can we call it when Israel is routinely targeted at the United Nations?

And when Israel remains the only country to be the subject of a permanent agenda item at the regular sessions of its Human Rights Council?

---PM Harper

That's what he actually said...

[DogOnPorch]

   

Exactly. Many similarities between Canada and it's aboriginal people and Israel and Palestinians, currently.

The Palestinian Cause is a fascist movement rooted in the Third Reich and anti-Semitism. Canada...not so much.

[On Guard for Thee]

 

Of course, criticism of Israeli government policy is not in and of itself necessarily anti-Semitic.

But what else can we call criticism that selectively condemns only the Jewish state and effectively denies its right to defend itself, while systematically ignoring - or excusing - the violence and oppression all around it?

What else can we call it when Israel is routinely targeted at the United Nations?

And when Israel remains the only country to be the subject of a permanent agenda item at the regular sessions of its Human Rights Council?

---PM Harper

That's what he actually said...

Sounds to me like you are just reiterating Harper's words. Get it straight please. The criticism is not anything to do with it's (Israel's) right to defend itself. That is one issue. Full stop. OK? Another issue is how it treats the Palestinians. Another issue. Each have significance. If you try to mash the two together both points get missed.

 

[DogOnPorch]

That's verbatim what he said.

[On Guard for Thee]

 

That's verbatim what he said.

 

Part of what he said was "what other than anti semitism" is it if you disagree with some of Israel's policies. He of course jazzed the whole thing up with a lot of malarky about associating disagreement with policy being tantamount to anti semetism. Canada's official policy states that many of the West Bank settlements are illegal. He completely side stepped that reality. Bottom line? I disagree with Israels policy in the West Bank. I am not in any way anti semetic. I'm sure Harper is only flapping his gums once again to try and secure a few votes.

[DogOnPorch]

   

Part of what he said was "what other than anti semitism" is it if you disagree with some of Israel's policies. He of course jazzed the whole thing up with a lot of malarky about associating disagreement with policy being tantamount to anti semetism. Canada's official policy states that many of the West Bank settlements are illegal. He completely side stepped that reality. Bottom line? I disagree with Israels policy in the West Bank. I am not in any way anti semetic. I'm sure Harper is only flapping his gums once again to try and secure a few votes.

Can you post exactly what he said?

As for the West Bank...it was annexed by Jordan in 1949 after Jordan invaded. Not Israel. When the Six Day War happened, Israel begged Jordan to not get involved; but, the response from the King was 'the die is cast' and Jordan attacked anyways. Israel cleaned its clock and then some in under two days. The West Bank fell under Israel's control as a result. Jordan ONLY gave up claim to the WB in 1988. During the period from 1949 to 1967, absolutely NO Palestinian state was entertained. So what do you know of the Arab-Israeli Wars? Why was this? Why didn't the Arabs form the Islamic state of Palestine at that point?

[On Guard for Thee]

 

Can you post exactly what he said?

As for the West Bank...it was annexed by Jordan in 1949 after Jordan invaded. Not Israel. When the Six Day War happened, Israel begged Jordan to not get involved; but, the response from the King was 'the die is cast' and Jordan attacked anyways. Israel cleaned its clock and then some in under two days. The West Bank fell under Israel's control as a result. Jordan ONLY gave up claim to the WB in 1988. During the period from 1949 to 1967, absolutely NO Palestinian state was entertained. So what do you know of the Arab-Israeli Wars? Why was this? Why didn't the Arabs form the Islamic state of Palestine at that point?

 

Because Paestinians were not accepted by any other Arab state. That's another story.

I am certainly not on the side of Islam. Personally the sooner we wake up and ditch all this religious bullshit the sooner we may begin to stop killing each other so much, but that is also another story I guess. Relating stories from 1949 is quite interesting, it does absolutely no good now, except to provide some sort of bogus wall to hide behind. Let's face it. we are all racist people. We have demonstrated that to a fair thee well. Can we possibly do any better or are we just a bunch of pigs who eat each others young?

[DogOnPorch]

No quote from Harper?

The Palestinian Cause was founded by Haj Amin al-Husseini. If you don't know who he was or what his motives were, you're incapable of understanding the Arab-Israeli conflict. The only thing al-Husseini hated as much as the Jews was the Hashemites. He even assassinated Jordan's first King when he sought a separate peace with Israel. Shot dead on the Temple Mount. So when Jordan got control of the WB, they weren't going to give it to the Mufti to further his dreams of a Jew-free state of his own centered on al-Aqsa...which he viewed as his clan's personal connection to Mohammed.

Had the Mufti been executed post-WW2, none of this would have happened. He escaped the noose, however...and ended up back in the Middle East to help run ODESSA and lead the call for war against Israel. Now, why did we (and continue to) give this old Nazi a pass? Is it that he wasn't European? We certainly wouldn't have entertained allowing Himmler or Goering a country of their own post-WW2 free of Jews.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007665

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haj_Amin_al-Husseini

[Charles Anthony]

Guys,

Stop the thread drift.

Ch. A.

[GostHacked]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world/middle_east/

Iraq's prime minister has asked parliament to declare a state of emergency after Islamist militants effectively took control of Mosul.

Nouri Maliki acknowledged "vital areas" of the country's second largest city had been seized.

Overnight, hundreds of armed men seized local government's offices and police stations before taking control of the airport and the army's headquarters.

About 150,000 people are believed to have fled the city.

Sources have told BBC Arabic that they are heading to three towns in the nearby region of Kurdistan where authorities have set up temporary camps for them.

So looks like the US failed to rid Iraq of terrorists. You are going to see the same in Afghanistan soon enough. The war on terror was and is an absolute failure.

[Rue]

Well it was bound to happen. I agree with Ghost on his last post.

If we learned anything from Mao TseTung, its that the tactics he created to win his war and take control of China, and then what the Viet Cong did using his play book is that when you send in a conventional army to fight terrorists or "guerillas" it does not work.

Conventional armed forces require logistics and those logistics as well as their equipment makes them slow and loud and a sitting duck for terrorists.

You can't win by occupying a country with a conventional army. Those soldiers are turned into prison guards and they are not good at that. Soldiers are created to fight a visible enemy not terrorists who hide in civilian disguise .Conventional soldiers don'tlike being security guards or playing hide and seek.

So in a conventional sense yes what the US and its allies did in Iraq or Afghanistan at best has a temporary effect. The moment they go their replacements will not do the trick.

The Iraqi army did what it did in 1949 and every other war its been in, panic and run in the face of conflict. Arab armies do not have good track records. Joking aside they do not make good fighters.

The kind of Arabs that fight well have always been the Beduins, or Arabs brought up on extremist Muslim fundamentalism that fuels their beliefs. Beduins if you have met them are genuine. They control their emotions. They are in touch with the soil and the environment. Their connection to that greater whole makes them very calm and disciplined and focused in war. Muslim fundamentalist extremists truly believe dying is a great thing so that fear of death is just not there.

Western culture has always had an inability to get that. Israel does. That is why when arm chair experts on this forum lecture about how Israel should behave with terrorists its a joke,

Until you live with terrorists and understand how they think and feel, you don't get what fuels them.

They don't follow laws. They have no code of ethics. They live in the moment. Anything and everything is acceptable if its to achieve victory.

The Americans realized in Japan they could not win a war against them fighting conventionally with a land invasion on Japan. They would have been bogged down fighting guerillas hiding in terrain with caves and tunnels. Millions would have died both civilian and soldiers on both sides.

So Truman did the unthinkable he dropped the bombs depending on the psychological impact to shock and awe that Japanese extremist belief that life has no value and is expendable. That sheer horror of atomic fall out did prove that life had value to Japanese. They learned through horror life has value.

In this present time, terrorists do not face that extreme response. The West will not use such psychological war. Terrorists exploit the double standard of being able to violate every law on the planet while the world demands the anti-terrorists follow the law. It creates an uneven battle field that can not be won.

So the only solution is to not engage in civilian war. You create elite, fast moving commando units that attack quickly then just as quickly exit quickly and you depend on surprise. You use the fear created by your speed and ability to strike at any time and any place quickly to keep terrorists off base. You strategically kill off their alpha males or leaders creating leadership vacuums.

You also do not compete with their philosophy. You simply show your alternative and the best way to do that is by music, food, clothing and other visible signs of the benefit of being allowed to be individual.

The world is plugged into cell phones and the internet. The message of music, clothes, food, goes right to the next generation competing with Muslim fundamentalist thought for the hearts and minds of the youth who can go terrorist or choose non violence.

The way to win hearts and minds is to provide work and charity services.

The US made a mistake in Iraq by shutting out its people from the rebuilding process and giving Haliburton a complete monopoly.

The US made a mistake sending in more private soldiers than conventional ones who then operated above the law and terrorized Iraqi civilians.

The US Armed Forces were not the problem it was the contracted Haliburton private army and the plethora of civilians hired as CIA consultants.

They had no loyalty to the US and only loyalty to their pay cheques..

As for Afghanistan, it was not a war that could be won. At best you can occupy small portions of land that have no mountains temporarily.

Its an ungovernable nation. The geography prevents conventional occupation.

I think Israel has shown the only effective way to deal with terrorists is to move in and out fast with commando elite forces.

The future lies in units like the US Navy Seals, SAS and other elite commando units not conventional armies.

It requires a lot more training and a lot more screening because to find people who can match such a profile.

As for the Canadian Armed Forces, or the United States Armed forces or any other the other armed forces that did what they did, they are to be respected. They were given impossible missions and did them with dignity and honour.

If there has been failure its been with the politicians who would not listen to them.

Had Bush and Chaney listed to their armed force generals there would have been no occupation in Iraq or attempt to occupy Afghanistan.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Rue

[GostHacked]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/11/world/meast/iraq-violence/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

(CNN) -- A day after taking over Iraq's second-largest city, Mosul, militants gained nearly complete control of the northern city of Tikrit, witnesses in the city and police officials in neighboring Samarra told CNN.

Heavy fighting erupted inside Tikrit -- the hometown of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein -- as the military tried to regain control of the city, the sources and a police official in Baghdad said.

According to the witnesses in Tikrit and the Samarra police officials, two police stations in Tikrit had been set on fire and a military base taken over by militants, who are believed to be from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, an al Qaeda splinter group also known as ISIS and ISIL.

Mission Accomplished. Apparently hundreds of thousands are getting out of those two cities.

Edited June 11, 2014 by GostHacked

[monty16]

The Iraqi people aren't willing to live under US occupation. The US is finding that colonialism of the British style won't work in Iraq. It didn't work in Iran either so that was a reason to make Iran the evil enemy.

Terrorism can always be traced back to a cause of revenge. For that reason we need to come to understand them as freedom fighters.

Saddam maintained control over the differing factions within his country and made Iraq prosperous. The only thing missing was Western access to Iraq's oil which can keep the price per barrel down to affordable levels for have-not countries such as the US.

[Black Dog]

The Iraqi people aren't willing to live under US occupation. The US is finding that colonialism of the British style won't work in Iraq. It didn't work in Iran either so that was a reason to make Iran the evil enemy.

The U.S. hasn't occupied Iraq for three years.

Terrorism can always be traced back to a cause of revenge. For that reason we need to come to understand them as freedom fighters.

There's no way you're not a troll account.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Black Dog

[Big Guy]

I think that the biggest difference between a terrorist or a freedom fighter is if you end up on the winning or losing side.

A few years ago, an individual was condemned and denounced as a terrorist because he was an active member of the ANC – an organization responsible for many deaths in South AFRICA. He narrowly escaped execution and was thrown into jail for life. Eventually Nelson Mandela was released and was presented with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993.

At about the same time in Algeria, there was the head of the Zionist underground group called the “Irgun”. The Irgun was classified by the British authorities as well as several Jewish organizations, such as the Jewish Agency, Haganah and Histadrut, as a terrorist organization. This individual was directly linked to stringing up some Algerian police in a public square. He was labelled as an international terrorist and hunted by Interpol.

This same individual became Prime Minister of Israel in 1977 and served until 1983. Menachem Begin was also presented with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1978.

[dre]

Saddam brought the violence to Iraq.

LOL

[dre]

I think that the biggest difference between a terrorist or a freedom fighter is if you end up on the winning or losing side.

A few years ago, an individual was condemned and denounced as a terrorist because he was an active member of the ANC – an organization responsible for many deaths in South AFRICA. He narrowly escaped execution and was thrown into jail for life. Eventually Nelson Mandela was released and was presented with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993.

At about the same time in Algeria, there was the head of the Zionist underground group called the “Irgun”. The Irgun was classified by the British authorities as well as several Jewish organizations, such as the Jewish Agency, Haganah and Histadrut, as a terrorist organization. This individual was directly linked to stringing up some Algerian police in a public square. He was labelled as an international terrorist and hunted by Interpol.

This same individual became Prime Minister of Israel in 1977 and served until 1983. Menachem Begin was also presented with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1978.

I dont even think terrorism is a real word anymore. It used to mean the use of fear to achieve a political goal... problem is that definition would apply to most nation-states involved as well.

Its basically become a universal epithet for everything bad... sorta like the term fascism.

[monty16]

The U.S. hasn't occupied Iraq for three years.

There's no way you're not a troll account.

The US is still occupying Iraq. It will increase it's occupation numbers dependent on need. Or, it will maintain the façade of non-occupation by using drones or by bombing from 30,000'.

[monty16]

I think that the biggest difference between a terrorist or a freedom fighter is if you end up on the winning or losing side.

A few years ago, an individual was condemned and denounced as a terrorist because he was an active member of the ANC – an organization responsible for many deaths in South AFRICA. He narrowly escaped execution and was thrown into jail for life. Eventually Nelson Mandela was released and was presented with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993.

At about the same time in Algeria, there was the head of the Zionist underground group called the “Irgun”. The Irgun was classified by the British authorities as well as several Jewish organizations, such as the Jewish Agency, Haganah and Histadrut, as a terrorist organization. This individual was directly linked to stringing up some Algerian police in a public square. He was labelled as an international terrorist and hunted by Interpol.

This same individual became Prime Minister of Israel in 1977 and served until 1983. Menachem Begin was also presented with the Nobel Peace Prize in 1978.

Well said! Maybe it will reach the lemmings who still believe that 'terrorist' is a term used for those you oppose and 'freedom fighter' is a term used for those fighting on your side. It's never been anything else!

[monty16]

Latest news, the Iraqi defence forces are packing up and leaving. The US propaganda says that they are afrid of getting killed by the freedom fighters but we don't have to buy that. They're most likely siding with the forces who are intent in taking their country back from the occupiers.