PDA

View Full Version : Us Policy Spawns World Terrorist Force.



Billy_Dean
09-08-2003, 07:56 AM
......................................

Time's cover story on "The Crescent of Crisis" ended with the following observation: "In the long run there may even be targets of opportunity for the West created by ferment within the crescent. Islam is undoubtedly compatible with socialism, but it is inimical to atheistic Communism. The Soviet Union is already the world's fifth largest Muslim nation. By the year 2000, the huge Islamic populations in the border republics may outnumber Russia's now dominant Slavs. From Islamic democracies on Russia's southern tier, a zealous Koranic evangelism might sweep across the border into these politically repressed Soviet states, creating problems for the Kremlin.... Whatever the solution, there is a clear need for the U.S. to recapture what Kissinger calls 'the geopolitical momentum.' That more than anything else will help maintain order in the crescent of crisis."

Fifteen years later, when some of the very Afghani mujahideen who had given Moscow a bloody nose were turned loose as an international terrorist force, carrying out some of their most heinous crimes on the streets of America (including at the front gate of the CIA headquarters), a senior CIA officer who had played a central role in the Afghan War admitted to New York Times reporter Tim Weiner that, back in the late 1970s and early '80s, when the United States first began pouring in billions of dollars in aid to the Afghans, it had never occurred to anyone inside U.S. intelligence that the program would blow back in such a bloody fashion. Charles G. Cogan, the CIA's operations chief for the Near East and South Asia from 1979-84, told Weiner: "It's quite a shock. The hypothesis that the mujahideen would come to the United States and commit terrorist actions did not enter into our universe of thinking at the time. We were totally preoccupied with the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. It is a significant unintended consequence."

Replaying the 'Great Game'
Maybe it was unintended in Washington and Langley, but not so elsewhere. Such American naiveté was anticipated in London, where British intelligence had a 200-year history of playing what Rudyard Kipling had dubbed the "Great Game" across the steppes of Central Asia, and where Islam had been probed, prodded, and profiled by the British East India Company, and by the successor British India Office's Arab Bureau, since the time of James Mill, and, later, Lawrence of Arabia.

Great Britain jealously guarded its Great Game, and, at times, fiercely fought to keep the United States out of the picture.

In 1944, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had gone so far as to assert that Afghanistan was "denied territory" to the Americans, when President Franklin Roosevelt dispatched his most trusted military aide, Gen. Patrick Hurley, to Kabul to get a first-hand picture of how Afghanistan might be drawn into FDR's vision of a postwar decolonized world. British intelligence did everything short of assassinating Hurley to prevent him from successfully reaching the Afghan capital. When Hurley did finally get to Kabul and spend four days with the king and senior government officials, he made such a lasting impression that the Afghanis immediately declared themselves anxious to forge a partnership with the Americans, whom they saw as totally different from the two imperial Great Game rivals, England and Russia, who had kept the country in a state of enforced backwardness and poverty for half a century, preventing the construction of even a railroad or a paved highway. Senior British military officials, based out of the Northwest Frontier Province across the border in Pakistan, had, however, put their stamp of approval on the production of vast crops of opium poppy in the rich mountains of Afghanistan, and had facilitated the processing and distribution of that opium in the South Asian and Chinese markets.

With the death of FDR, Afghanistan's vision of economic partnership with America died as well. Once again, Afghanistan fell into the category of denied territory for the United States.
...............................



This article, in full, and other such articles can be found at the address below. I cannot share the whole Inteligence Review with you, you have to become a member to access that.

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/1995/2241...ansi_intro.html (http://www.larouchepub.com/other/1995/2241_afghansi_intro.html)


http://www.larouchepub.com/eirtoc/1995/eir...irtoc_2241.html (http://www.larouchepub.com/eirtoc/1995/eirtoc_2241.html)


Archives: http://www.larouchepub.com/eirtoc/index.html



:ph34r:

MagicNakor
09-08-2003, 08:59 AM
What, may I ask, are you trying to point out by posting articles almost ten years old?

:ninja:

nikita69
09-08-2003, 09:07 AM
and?

Billy_Dean
09-08-2003, 09:19 AM
If you would read the whole article, and other related articles, you would not have to ask that question.

Nothing happens in isolation. The root cause of today's terrorist "problems" goes back not just 10 years, but far further.

My point is this, all the blame for today's terrorism is being laid, by the west, on "Islamists". This "shadowy" group of people apparantly just popped up out of nowhere and decided to become terrorists, to destroy our culture and our way of life. That view has been posted on this forum very recently.

The West does not credit these people with any cause for complaint at the way they have been treated for centuries. Yet, from their point of view, we are concieved by them to be far worse than they are by us. We have slaughtered millions of them, millions! We have raped their countries, stolen their resources, prevented their progress in the world, and denied them basic human rights.

Unless these issues are addressed, they will continue striking fear into our populations. How many more 911's can we take? These are people just like us, human beings, it's time we treated them as such.


:ph34r:

nikita69
09-08-2003, 09:53 AM
try this post, kinda the same Muslim Terrorists (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=63940) topic

MagicNakor
09-08-2003, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by Billy_Dean@8 September 2003 - 10:19
If you would read the whole article, and other related articles, you would not have to ask that question.
I had. And I'm still not certain on why you posted this in the first place.

Hitler wouldn't have risen to power if there were no sausage in Germany.

:ninja:

Billy_Dean
09-08-2003, 12:53 PM
Maybe you should turn your computer off and stick with The Simpsons then.

echidna
09-08-2003, 04:26 PM
i find it funny that referring to the current disaster as blow back is meant to soften the blow
if there had been no henry kissinger in the white house thousands of americans, cambodians, laotians and vietnamese would probably not have died violently as they did from US ordinance or the feeble resistance against it (in laos and cambodia this was even without Congressional say-so)
kissinger and others in many US government positions are so worried by their potential culpability that they will not ratify an international criminal court
'they hate us because we are free' bullshit not even americans should believe that crap :: they hate you because of the death and poverty your nation has brought to so much of the earth in the last half century

MagicNakor
09-08-2003, 11:13 PM
Playing revisionist history can be fun. However, here especially, it is an excerise in futility, as a number of people who are so vehement about playing that game have very little historical understanding. Posting an old article and reiterating what it stated does not, unfortunately, show any deeper understanding of the issue at hand.

If you're going to take up arms against the root of the problem, you'll have to speak to Urban II.

:ninja:

evilbagpuss
09-08-2003, 11:28 PM
@MagicNakor

Could you be more specific?

MagicNakor
09-08-2003, 11:45 PM
Pope Urban II was the one who ordered the first Crusade. ;) Although, without the pleas from Emperor Alexius I Comnenus (of the Byzantine Empire), it may not have occurred. Of course it goes on for a bit, as crusades are wont to do, and eventually was deemed a success, as Jerusalem was indeed captured.

:ninja:

evilbagpuss
09-09-2003, 12:14 AM
Originally posted by MagicNakor
Pope Urban II was the one who ordered the first Crusade.  Although, without the pleas from Emperor Alexius I Comnenus (of the Byzantine Empire), it may not have occurred. Of course it goes on for a bit, as crusades are wont to do, and eventually was deemed a success, as Jerusalem was indeed captured.


I cant see any connection between the article, this thread and the crusades.

I guess its because I disagree with you on the premise that the crusades are the root of todays problems with Islamic terrorism. I dont think we need to go back any further than 2 hundred years at an absolute maximum to understand that issue.

HeavyMetalParkingLot
09-09-2003, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by echidna@8 September 2003 - 16:26
they hate you because of the death and poverty your nation has brought to so much of the earth in the last half century
so everyone should hate europe for doing the same for hundreds of years?

evilbagpuss
09-09-2003, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by HeavyMetalParkingLot
so everyone should hate europe for doing the same for hundreds of years?

Well they do actually. Europe is just as much of a target as the US is. No one is saying they should they are just saying they do.

HeavyMetalParkingLot
09-09-2003, 12:54 AM
you know, i'm not trying to piss people off or anything, but shouldn't people really open their eyes? instead of saying "damn americans building macdonalds everywhere in the world now", shouldn't they be more worried about things like in africa, were they rape BABIES because the think having sex with a virgin will cure their AIDS.

lynx
09-09-2003, 01:19 AM
Some might say perhaps americans should worry about conditions in Africa, instead of building McDonald's all over the world. :rolleyes:

evilbagpuss
09-09-2003, 01:19 AM
@HMP

As I understand it.. for them its not about the US building McDonalds everywhere. Its about the US supporting Gvts in their countries which oppress them, US support for Israel etc.

e.g The US sold Saddam Hussein poison gas in the 1980's knowing full well what kind of 'man' he was.

Also look into what the CIA did in Iran in the 1950s and you'll see that this is about much more serious stuff than McDonalds.

Everose
09-09-2003, 03:13 AM
I agree Evilbagpuss.

But I also don't believe 'America' is building McDonalds all over. Individual American Citizens may be.......but this is not funded in any way by the American Tax Dollars.

clocker
09-09-2003, 03:29 AM
Originally posted by Neverose@8 September 2003 - 21:13
I agree Evilbagpuss.

But I also don't believe 'America' is building McDonalds all over. Individual American Citizens may be.......but this is not funded in any way by the American Tax Dollars.
I guess you missed the last meeting Neverose.

Individual American Citizens are just a front for the CIA.

What better way to pass secret information than in the lettuce of a Big Mac?

noname12
09-09-2003, 03:33 AM
At the end of the day every one seeks to be left alone to live there own lives, there are only 2 problems in this whole mess that would stop every thing if solved, 1. Israel 2. American Military bases in the mid east (i know they where invited to come)
Ask any Hardcore muslim he will tell you the only reason "extremists" (wrong term) get support is because of the fact America and Britain keep giving weapons to Israel, and money, the media and politicians are biased and most muslim youths feel they have no voices so are futher pushed to people like Osama bin ladin, where the youths believe he listens and relates to them. i mean come on look at the news even i am sickened by it, so imagine what the muslims feel, a bus of Israeli's blown up is a shocking disgusting tragedy, an entire building of palestinian civilains blown up all you hear from the news is "eh, a couple of pali's dead... no big deal aslong as the Israeli's werent hurt" :P (news report may have been exagerated by me) this has nothing to do with hundreds of years back, its about now, be fair in the israeli = palestinian situation, stop getting involved with mid-east business and most likely we'd be left alone, the biggest example is Iran, Iran hasnt done anything to America, they pose no threat, they fund Hizbullah who are military and only target Military troops, and yet America and Britian insist on calling them a Terrorist nation and accuse them of being in legue with Al qaida and stuff, i mean for god's sake there shi'ite Muslims, Al Qaida kills shi'ite muslims they wouldnt enter Iran even if they had to :P

so in summary, live and let live, America stops building macdonalds everywhere, Mid-easterns stop throwing camel bombs at us and lets carry on with living in peace, (fat chance)
:D

clocker
09-09-2003, 03:50 AM
Noname 12,

Did I read you right?

We let Israel go down the tubes and remove all US military presence in the MidEast and that will solve the problem?

Ha!

evilbagpuss
09-09-2003, 04:00 AM
@neverose

The McDonalds issue is so irrelevant I didnt even bother to make the "US building McDonalds" sentence precise. Of course the US Gvt isnt building the restaurants, Im pretty surprised I have to clarify it.

@clocker

Nice try.. but this thread looks like its going to be pretty civilised in spite of your 'tactics'

@noname

You've hit the nail on the head. Extremists need support from the moderates. Over the years Western 'foreign policy' has expanded this moderate support by making the ordinary people more and more desperate.

The sooner people grasp that concept the better... but I guess its easier to think we are the 'goodies' and they are the 'baddies'.

noname12
09-09-2003, 04:02 AM
goes to clocker:
lol the terrorist problem yep, war in the mid east, probably not but who cares, they can look after them selves, they did that in the crusades :D and your suggesting we stay and run there lives for them, sounds like democracy working at its best :lol: if they claim there over thier because of terrorism then whats the problem? leave and its over, if they have a different motive then there pretty much inviting "terrorists" to attack them, hell they should hand them free plane tickets. Palestinians deserve there own borders, they where there first unless we are going to use the bible as evidence which no one seems to believe in until it comes to israel :lol: everything comes at a price, stay in the mid-east then expect "terrorism" to stay a problem leave and no problemo.
Comes down to whats more important lives or what ever motive they have. Besides as far as i know America "should" leave now saddam is gone, well according to the original idea, but i doubt they will.
Oh well, doesnt really matter does it, nothing we say is going to change anything :lol: might aswell keep our seat belts on and see where this ride takes us

evilbagpuss
09-09-2003, 04:06 AM
Originally posted by clocker
Noname 12,

Did I read you right?

We let Israel go down the tubes and remove all US military presence in the MidEast and that will solve the problem?

Ha!

You've made your views clear in other threads clocker.

A dead Palestinian civilian means nothing to you. A dead Israeli civilian is a tragedy.

Perhaps if 'we' started applying the same rules and standards to both sides then 'we' may not be in such a mess?

clocker
09-09-2003, 04:14 AM
Originally posted by evilbagpuss@8 September 2003 - 22:00


@clocker

Nice try.. but this thread looks like its going to be pretty civilised in spite of your 'tactics'

@noname

You've hit the nail on the head.
What tactics might that be, EBP?

I simply condensed noname12's post down to the two essential points ( which, apparently, you agree with) and expressed my opinion of them.

evilbagpuss
09-09-2003, 04:29 AM
Originally posted by clocker+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>What tactics might that be, EBP?

I simply condensed noname12&#39;s post down to the two essential points ( which, apparently, you agree with) and expressed my opinion of them. [/b]

Tactics = your amusing lettuce remark. I should try the same attitude in the 9/11 thread and see how that goes down with you.

Getting back to the more serious point let me show you your tactics....


Originally posted by clocker@
We let Israel go down the tubes

<!--QuoteBegin-noname
imagine what the muslims feel, a bus of Israeli&#39;s blown up is a shocking disgusting tragedy, an entire building of palestinian civilains blown up all you hear from the news is "eh, a couple of pali&#39;s dead... no big deal aslong as the Israeli&#39;s werent hurt"&nbsp; (news report may have been exagerated by me) this has nothing to do with hundreds of years back, its about now, be fair in the israeli = palestinian situation[/quote]

condensed? Twisted more like...

I&#39;ve argued this "be fair" point with you in relation to Israel before. For some reason you find it highly offensive.

Billy_Dean
09-09-2003, 04:34 AM
I think what Clocker is really after is a serious debate on the issues involving Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately he&#39;s too one-eyed to listen or consider other people&#39;s point of view. Anyone who can&#39;t see that Sharon is doing all he can to scupper any peace deal with the Palestinians, must have a serious flaw in their concept of reality.
Yesterday&#39;s announcement by Sharon that Israel will eliminate the Hamas leadership was surely designed to prolong this conflict, and signal to the Palestinians that Israel has no stomach for peace. Unfortunately the politics of Israel, with it&#39;s disjointed and diverse political structure is a serious barrier to finding a solution. The ultra-right wing "religious" parties, (and I use that term loosely), have absolutely no interest whatsoever in peace, indeed, their stated aim is to rid the whole of Palestine of Palestinians.
The biggest joke of all is the idea that the Palestinians were "offered" a homeland years ago. The truth is, the Israelis "offered" to steal only a certain percentage of their land, not all of it.
There is a way out of this, Israel to withdraw to 1967 borders, settlers given the choice of moving back to Israel or living under Palestinian control, and serious efforts, with western help, to resettle the millions of Palestinian refugees.
The problem here, of course, is that Israel doesn&#39;t want peace, after all, they are "Gods Chosen People" aren&#39;t they?


:ph34r:

lynx
09-09-2003, 04:37 AM
Why not let Israel go down the tubes. I for one am sick to death of hearing about the poor settlers only wanting to make a life for themselves. Face facts - they want to make a life for themselves on someone else&#39;s land, which is the major cause of the conflict. We also here stories that the Palestinians say that these settlers have stolen the Palestinians land, as in these areas being part of occupied territories. The stories are often phrased to give the impression that the Palestinians are protesting about the occupying forces. This is not the case. The truth is that in many cases the settlers have literally stolen the land from Palestinians. Stir up a little trouble which causes a backlash, the Israeli army comes along and flattens the buildings with its tanks, the residents have to find somewhere else to stay and when they come back they find a Jewish settlement has sprung up on their property, protected by the Israeli army.

I&#39;m sure that the majority of Israeli&#39;s are decent people, but if they don&#39;t or won&#39;t control the minority who are deliberately stirring up trouble then they are as much to blame. In this respect they are like the majority of decent Germans who said and did nothing to prevent the Holocaust in Nazi Germany.

Billy_Dean
09-09-2003, 04:51 AM
Well said Lynx.



:ph34r:

clocker
09-09-2003, 05:24 AM
Originally posted by evilbagpuss@8 September 2003 - 22:29

Tactics = your amusing lettuce remark. I should try the same attitude in the 9/11 thread and see how that goes down with you.


I have NO idea what you are referring to.
"Lettuce remark"?

I think what Clocker is really after is a serious debate on the issues involving Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately he&#39;s too one-eyed to listen or consider other people&#39;s point of view.

No, what Clocker is after is a serious debate about the points in this thread.


You&#39;ve made your views clear in other threads clocker.

A dead Palestinian civilian means nothing to you. A dead Israeli civilian is a tragedy.

That little bit of slander is completely unsupported by any post of mine in this forum.


i mean come on look at the news even i am sickened by it, so imagine what the muslims feel, a bus of Israeli&#39;s blown up is a shocking disgusting tragedy, an entire building of palestinian civilains blown up all you hear from the news is "eh, a couple of pali&#39;s dead... no big deal aslong as the Israeli&#39;s werent hurt"&nbsp; (news report may have been exagerated by me)

EBP, I didn&#39;t have to "twist" the meaning of this post.
It started out twisted.

All in all I find the whole concept that, if we were to walk away from the Middle East everything would be fine, to be hopelessly naive and simplistic.

Iran hasn&#39;t done anything to the US? They pose no threat? ALL they do is fund Hezbollah?

Again HA&#33;

noname12
09-09-2003, 05:32 AM
lol i dont know why every one is making this so personal i mean come on for gods sake take it easy, and clocker yeah they do pose no threat, as any country go looking for a fight and they will, leave them alone they will not say a word, the propaganda against Iran is unbelievable, Iran has done nothing, poses no threats, infact has made no threats other then if america attacks we are ready to defend our selves, for the love of god if some one accuses america of being an axis of evil and says they may take steps against them they would invade them so fast no one would no about it :P yet Iran is all calm done nothing saying nothing, and it was infact america who started on Iran with a little terrorism of its own supplying saddam with weapons, Inteligence and money and allowing him to use the WMD they look for so much right now against iranian cities... hmmm... whos the threat?
Iran has done nothing to deserve this treatment, funny how it become such a hot target when Islam was put in its name :lol: :P

I am not looking for a fight or to make this personal just wish to swap ideas and gain new ones, if you wish to insult (which you havnt done, thanks :) ) or something then leave me out of it... i am very sensative :( :lol:

evilbagpuss
09-09-2003, 05:42 AM
Originally posted by clocker+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I have NO idea what you are referring to.
"Lettuce remark"?[/b]


Originally posted by clocker+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>What better way to pass secret information than in the lettuce of a Big Mac?
[/b]

Do you find amnesia to be a big problem? Or let me guess.. you cant remember? :P


Originally posted by clocker
No, what Clocker is after is a serious debate about the points in this thread.

OK. Unfair treatment of Palestinians backed up by the USA for over 30 years leading to support for Islamic extremists. Discuss.

The "points in this thread" were there all the time btw you just chose to ignore them. Look at the previous 3 posts before yours (lynx + Billy Dean) if you think you can handle them.


Originally posted by clocker


Originally posted by evilbagpuss

You&#39;ve made your views clear in other threads clocker.

A dead Palestinian civilian means nothing to you. A dead Israeli civilian is a tragedy.

That little bit of slander is completely unsupported by any post of mine in this forum.

lol, definitely amnesia.

http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showto...pic=34731&st=45 (http://www.klboard.ath.cx/index.php?showtopic=34731&st=45)

The above link involves me saying you shouldnt regularly kill innocent civilians in the war against terror. You nearly lose the plot and have a heart attack. You seem unaware of the situation with terrorists in Ireland and Spain where they DONT kill innocent civilians in the process. The only explanation is that the death of innocent Palestinian&#39;s means nothing to you. I&#39;ve yet to see you condemn it <_<

<!--QuoteBegin-clocker@
EBP, I didn&#39;t have to "twist" the meaning of this post.
It started out twisted[/quote]

I&#39;ve just explained this to you... so for the 2nd time. You said he wanted total withdrawal of US support for Israel. I pointed out that he like many if us want FAIR TREATMENT. ie. not blatant favouritism and support of Israeli atrocities.

<!--QuoteBegin-clocker
All in all I find the whole concept that, if we were to walk away from the Middle East everything would be fine, to be hopelessly naive and simplistic[/quote]

See above.. and.. instead of swinging wildly from one extreme to the other why dont we get back to the consensus.

Fair treatment for the Palestinians.

When you&#39;ve dealt with that you can move onto the issue of the settlers and all the other valid points that myself, lynx and others have raised.. Thats assuming you want to have a rational debate and not a mud slinging match.

Lets try and remember that this thread is about what causes Islamic terrorism.

clocker
09-09-2003, 06:04 AM
Originally posted by noname12@8 September 2003 - 23:32
clocker yeah they do pose no threat, as any country go looking for a fight and they will, leave them alone they will not say a word, the propaganda against Iran is unbelievable, Iran has done nothing, poses no threats, infact has made no threats other then if america attacks we are ready to defend our selves, for the love of god if some one accuses america of being an axis of evil and says they may take steps against them they would invade them so fast no one would no about it :P yet Iran is all calm done nothing saying nothing,
In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.
Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.
U.S. officials say Iran supported and inspired the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 U.S. servicemen.

Billy_Dean
09-09-2003, 06:44 AM
OK, I apologise if it appears I am attacking anyone in particular, that was not my intention.

However, if you cannot see the point of this thread, you&#39;re not looking for one. It should be quite obvious: WE, the western nations, are more wrong than they are, simple. It&#39;s time we owned up and started to clean our mess up.

As for Iran, look at it historically. Britain, with American collusion, overthrew the Iranian regime and installed the Shah. He was an arsehole to the people, who eventually kicked him out. How were they supposed to feel? You don&#39;t think they were entitled to hold a grudge? Then please explain America&#39;s policy towards Cuba for me&#33;

There is a solution to all this conflict, unfortunately it seems the West isn&#39;t willing to go down that path.

EDIT: As an afterthought, "observers", as you call them, blamed Libya for the Munich nightclub bombing, later found to have been Syria, and with no proof whatsoever, the US military bombed Libya, killing Gadhaffi&#39;s 12 month old son. Was HE entitled to hold a grudge? And did the US then bomb Syria?


:ph34r:

noname12
09-09-2003, 06:51 AM
in the years of the shah rule in iran the americans through the embasy ofcourse gave his opresive government every support they could, even though he arrested, tortured, murdered alot of the shi&#39;ite muslims, a wellknown fact.. well to my iranian friends anyway is that before the revolution the CIA helped the shah supress the growing (whats the word) dis-content? well support for Ayetollah Khomaini and so on, so.... ummm whats your point? :P
second Salman rushdie is a Religious thing and has nothing to do with america... lol propaganda machine
American colenel hes a soldier, if this is referring to the time america had a base in south lebenon or something then sounds to me like they shouldnt have been there, military VS military, Iran hasnt openly attacked america only america in lands that are Islamic and ask for its help. again 1996 bombings of US military not civilians and secondly i find it really hard to believe because Saudi and Iran have not had the best of relations considering Saudi is run by the Wahabite&#39;s and Iran by the Shi&#39;ites and Wahabites consider the shi&#39;ites infedels and should be exacuted and so on, Iran couldnt operate in saudi even if it wanted to and i dont see how because iranians arent even allowed inside saudi only in time for pilgrimage and even then there movemnts are limited to the holy cities... unless Al qaida or wahabites accepted funding from Shi&#39;ites and support which sounds very odd to me.
But Iran did help in the truck bombing of the US base in occupied lebenon which seems fair to me considering its occupied land and all :P :)
none of this really shows me Iran is a threat, Leb and Iran are allies even the christian government of Leb call them there allies so just as america gets military support from England, Leb gets support from Iran... alls fair in love and war (apparently this only goes for the West&#39;s military :lol: )

echidna
09-09-2003, 08:13 AM
i don&#39;t think that the history of the crusades has no impact on the perception of the west in the middle east,
but i think that the history of US intervention in the region and the results of that intervention since the end of WWII have much greater impact on the perception of the west in the middle east.
there seems to be a blindness for these strings of history in much of the voiced american opinion, failure to account for the american involvement in afghanistan, egypt, iran, lebanon, saudi arabia, turkey not to mention israel/palestine negates the plausibility of most of these explanations.
i fear this retards US foreign policy and our discussion of it for the foreseeable future.

ilw
09-09-2003, 09:23 AM
I agree with Clocker in so far as, anyone considering an isolationist policy towards the Middle East is seriously naive.
Also Iran could potentially be a very serious threat as it is building a nuclear reprocessing plants.

Billy_Dean
09-09-2003, 09:57 AM
I&#39;d be interested to know when Clocker and ILW think the US should invade China? And North Korea? And Pakistan? And India?

Or can they fight back??


EDIT: Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders... But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it..~Buddha

It&#39;s easy to copy these things, seems to be far harder for some people to understand them&#33;&#33;


:ph34r:

ilw
09-09-2003, 10:10 AM
OK i&#39;ll make it really simple for you, since u seem to try and guess (wrongly) what people are saying when they don&#39;t wholly agree with u, Iran COULD be a serious threat. Just like any nuclear power COULD be a serious threat. I was merely answering those people who are under the impression that Iran is a minor militarily power and so far away that it doesn&#39;t pose a threat.
NB If anyone is about to point out that nuclear reprocessing is for power generation then i suggest you do your homework.

Billy_Dean
09-09-2003, 11:51 AM
And I&#39;m merely pointing out that the United States is very good at attacking countries that "Pose" a threat, but not too keen to attack countries that can actually fight back. North Korea does all the things these other, muslim, countries are accused of, and more. They openly support terrorism, supply weapons to terrorist organisations, and to countries where UN arms embargos stand. They have developed nuclear weapons, threatened to use them on their neighbours .... etc, etc.. Why does the US not attack them?? Could it have anything to do with getting their butts kicked by the Chinese last time they tried?? They got an armistace agreement last time on the threat of using nuclear wepons, that won&#39;t work this time will it?

The US is a bully&#33;&#33; Look at their record. Cuba is a good example&#33;

If the United Nations is a good idea, we should use it, if it isn&#39;t we should get rid of it, or reform it. No-one appointed the US as the world&#39;s policeman.


:ph34r:

noname12
09-09-2003, 09:01 PM
Friends, to me what is against logic is your views, what is the need to stay in the middle east? the saudi, yemeni, omani, Emirates, Kuwaiti, Jordanian, even Syiran (to some extent) law system arrests those who have involvements with Al Qaida.
Iran does the same :lol: Iraq is no longer a threat, Israel has enough weapons to look after its self, Egypt has become a western state more then an Arabic state, Libya is as much a threat to america as my little finger, there is no point in staying other then alteria motives.
Again Iran poses no threat, if you come at me with a knife if i have a gun i will use it, if leave me alone then i wont use a weapon, and as for salman rushdia Iran has lifted the price on his head. Iran is run by an Islamic government, and Ayetollah Khamana&#39;i has more power to control things then Khatami, and according to the rules you cannot engage in a war unless self defence and if you look at the evidence the people america has trouble from is the extreme Wahabites, i personally have not heard of any Shi&#39;ite groups sponsered by Iran throw threats at any western country and they dont even threaten civilians, asfor nukes, America has more devistating weapons, By the time Iran could be capable even though there not aiming for it but by the time they are capable of handling nukes the west would have weapons more devastating, the fact comes down to Iran wants to become a major power and the west doesnt like it, to them a threat is just being there with the capability of defending its self. As i have said Iran hasnt made anythreat hell even when the 9/11 happened Khatami and Khamana&#39;i sent letters of condolences and Khaman&#39;i gave an hour lecture condeming the act.
America would us any excuse to hit Iran... why would they push Saddam to start a war with them in the early 80&#39;s when the nation has barly been born? The west made the first hit and Iran hasnt done nothing in return even though they have the right to atleast warn america to stay out of there face :lol:
It seems the thing that is feared is the ideology rather then the weaponry.... we all know that most of the top dogs consider Islam itself a threat to "there way of life", i wouldnt be suprised if this whole thing is about destroying a faith rather then a power.
but hey why should we care right? it doesnt affect our ways....
:P :lol:

Rat Faced
09-10-2003, 01:29 AM
Originally posted by clocker+9 September 2003 - 06:04--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker &#064; 9 September 2003 - 06:04)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-noname12@8 September 2003 - 23:32
clocker yeah they do pose no threat, as any country go looking for a fight and they will, leave them alone they will not say a word, the propaganda against Iran is unbelievable, Iran has done nothing, poses no threats, infact has made no threats other then if america attacks we are ready to defend our selves, for the love of god if some one accuses america of being an axis of evil and says they may take steps against them they would invade them so fast no one would no about it :P yet Iran is all calm done nothing saying nothing,
In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.
Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.
Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.
U.S. officials say Iran supported and inspired the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 U.S. servicemen. [/b][/quote]

In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days.


These are individuals....students, not the Iranian Government.



Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.


The US Intelligence had prior knowledge of 9/11, Syria offered to track Terrorists and the US Government didnt want the info, etc etc.

......if no one listens, you cant then blame them for not telling.


Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.


Until 1952 or sth (repeal of the witchcraft laws) you could still burn a witch at the stake in UK.

Look to your own laws.... not all those old Religion Based ones are Repealed. So you cant blame them for following what, to them, is a Religious Law.

It wasnt THAT long ago, that Missouri encouraged people to shoot Mormons.


U.S. officials say Iran supported and inspired the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 U.S. servicemen.

Want us to start naming the Groups the US Government support/have supported?

Bet I can name a LOT more that US Government have supported, than you can what Iranian Government has.

But even more specifically:


U.S. officials say

Like they say WMD in Iraq that could be deployed within 45minutes?

Tons of the stuff, and they know EXACTLY where it is.....yeh, right.

"US Officials say" has lost a lot of credibility lately.





FACT:

Iran was starting to enter the world stage again, after its self imposed seclusion since the Shah was overthrown, and its Islamic Government came to power. It was relaxing the Islamic Laws etc etc....

Then along comes back mouth Bush naming them "Axis of Evil"......

Result: Withdrawn once again from the world stage and tightened up on Islamic Law........Doh, score another one for blunderhead in the Whitehouse.