Forum

September 11, 2001: Why WE Must Fight
 
Forum index / Life in general
Goto page: [« Previous] 1, 2, 3, 4 [Next »]
Post reply | Create new thread
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 01:25:06
Realphilip747
The Bible explains the wonders of nature, God created it! Nice and simple explination
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 03:06:48
Small-Talker
Congratulations to Bac on summing up five years of Global history in just a few short sentences and with the sincerity and bias of a baptist minister. "Let us remember", "Let us think", "Let us pray", "Our fellow man...". I can't help but wonder whether or not you stole most of your post from the sermon your minister (or whoever) gave to you last Sunday.

My thoughts on the whole subject: the day itself has become nothing more than a notch on a calendar for people to spend 5 minutes thinking about how sad they are for the 2,700 people who died that day, while the rest of the year most of these same people are pissed off when thinking about the minimal 50,000 others who died in the follow-up, and that's because people are aware that the world no longer revolves around 9/11. What happened was sad, totally unnecessary and a pointless waste of life, but so too is the current situation in Iraq. What the world revolves around now are the lies and bullshitting of idiotic politicians and fanatics who don't give a fuck and who lost touch with the real world long before they ever came into power. Aside from those pictures of "chemical weapon-manufacturing" plants in the middle of the Iraqi desert, I still fail to see how Saddam was capable of even attempting to threaten the US, and what his "taking down" achieves for any American, or anyone else for that matter. And on the other side, you have idiot fundamentalists who have found they have to do very little work in recruiting people thanks to the equally idiotic actions of their "oppressors" (as they like to put it).

Osama Bin-Laden is scum, but equally so are those who run around screaming "U-S-Aaay!", having no idea what true patriotism is (i.e., any process or activity which benefits or helps the running of the normal, day-to-day lives of your fellow country-men - and not just an unbridled belief that your country is better than any/everywhere else). Anyone who wishes to harm another human being is scum - and that goes for both sides. "You must kill the killers, before they kill you" is not the type of approach any sane-minded human being can have to life. In his mind and in the minds of his followers, Bin-Laden is right. Likewise, in the eyes of many, what George W. Bush is doing is right. In my mind, it is simply two forms of extremely violent fundamentalism clashing, resulting in the many deaths of innocent civilians. As an atheist I have a strong belief that all activity which revolves solely around the needs of the religious is fundamentally corrupt and incompatible with all notions of common-sense our evolution has granted us. What's going on now was always bound to happen - ever since the day the first religious doctrine was written. But if people were intelligent enough to realise that the True God created the universe, and that they have neither the voice nor the intelligence capacity to speak for God, then all of this would be over. The True God created the universe. We'll never do anything that's even remotely on par. Thus, God is far greater than us. It's the constant sense of the dumbing-down of our God that has led to all of this: and in the words of Bart Simpson - "If you get hit, it's your own fault."

And on that note, I bid this topic farewell. Previously, I would have stuck around, but since the last batch of political topics here, I've realised that I don't actually care to read about the political or religious beliefs of people who rise their faces from the swamp only when there is a religious or political topic around. You may have read mine and may wish to respond, but I never asked you to read mine in the first place.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 04:05:32
Shobar
Karlf wrote:
Shobar, by many standards, Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Kingdom are not modern civilised societies. It is of course ironic that the Western world deals with the three of them differently: occupation/liberation, confrontation and cooperation respectively...

But for me modern civilisation involves human rights and all sorts of equality and tolerance (religious, ethnic, gender, political).

Have a look at the 1948 UN declaration of human rights, which claims to be universal:
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

Check off the articles against the reality and you can see which societies are closer to being civilised. Most have a long way to go and some also have to admit their hypocrisy.

This also answers part of my earlier questions: these universal rights are what we should all be fighting for.

Karlf, so by your standard the modern civilized societies must follow 1948 UN declaration of human rights so I want to know which country that follow this regulation strictly so can be labeled as modern civilized societies?
From East to West, there are countries that violate the declaration, there are countries that was violated it and might do it again in the future.
I have no problem with the declaration, I think it’s beautiful and I’m pretty sure any sane person won’t disagree with the declaration.
Yes, by the standard of 1948 UN declaration Afghanistan was and still violated some items, Iran and Saudi also but before someone cheers by this fact the question still remained which country that able to fully implement that standard and so can be labeled as modern civilized societies?....I’d like to move there for sure

Strange, a poster wrote that the human right regulation is very Judeo-Christian ideal while I don’t see it that way and the fact indeed shows that a country such US that based on Judeo-Christian very much failed badly to implement it and moreover keep support a racist country so called Israel, strange isn’t it?
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 05:13:09
Realphilip747
Hey Shobar,

what do you think of countries that keep palestinians in refugee camps that dont allow them to leave and dont allow them to become citizens of that country. And just keep them in those camps in squalor and poverty.

And what do you think of countries that do allow Palestinians to become citizens and have full rights?
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 06:06:31
Shobar
^
Answer
Q1: Violating human right
Q2: Not violating human right

Now my question: what makes/who makes Palestinians expelled from their homeland and become refugee and unable to gain their basic human right, right to return?
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 06:32:01
Bac
Hey,
I didn't mean to waste so much time to get back to this, but it's been an insane week at work...
It'll be hard to sum up responses to all the posts. (In fact, I don't think I'll ever be able to...)

karlf wrote:
Just a few questions: what are we fighting for and what do we want to win at the end of it?

Count me in for ending mindless violence, especially violence based on twisted religious misinterprations. This must be resisted, but can violence detroy violence? I doubt it.


Well, first, I think it's pretty clear what we're fighting for. Keep this in mind: Afghanistan under Taliban rule is the model for the way of life that Bin Laden and his type want for the world. That is their vision. I doubt anyone in this forum wants that. If anyone does, then they can say "Goodbye, Cardigans, internet, etc."

You doubt the ability of violence to solve an issue, but you should think about it. Of course, it's preferrable to solve disputes without violence. But to think we can solve all disputes without any force is unrealistic. Violence solved Hitler. Violence solved legalized slavery in America. Violence solved Iraq's invasion into Kuwait. The list goes on and on...
karlf wrote:

You tell us our enemies have understood hardship and sacrifice but I can't see any of us giving up our way of life, even when threatened with death and destruction. Everyone clings to what they've got and denies any need to change, even as the planet burns up irrespective of terrorism.


Obviously, many Americans have given up plenty in order to protect our liberty as well as their own. That why thousands have American soldiers have already given their lives to the cause as we have since this nation was formed. It is precisely their sacrifices that allow us to cling to our way of life.

karlf wrote:

If our actions and words are not steps to peace and instead they lead us to war, we are going backwards. I want to remove the reasons that turns Yorkshiremen into bombers and rich Saudis into evil masterminds and Texan cowboys into world crusaders and British leaders into poodles. Your proverb is true, Bac, we have too many raging fools.

We are losing the force for good within each of us and we all conspire to destroy harmony on earth.


Karl, I would love to remove all those reasons that are part of the human condition that lead to evil actions. You and I don't have that ability. And in the meantime, what do we do while Rome is burning? And if we stand around and do nothing while evil runs over the world, then we are indeed all raging fools.

Beeblebrox wrote:
If everyone who wants to fight, go to war, kill people, place bombs in all kinds of places and destroy in general terms actually did it themselves there would be less problems in the world. The problem is they seem to find a way around to send someone else, which obviously makes things easier, except for the poor bastards who actually do something.

I see and hear many talk the talk, but very few walk the walk.


Well, the one's that are doing it are doing it themselves. Yes, it is easier to talk, nonetheless, it's worth discussing. Just because one isn't in the war itself - does not mean one can't be objective speak about the war.

Posthuman wrote:
You are right about one thing,maybe you should think about WHY (that assult had happen in the first place).
And,you really think that there is only one "reasonably" answer?So,you will accept it and give the same response? "I will fight you back"? 'Cause "We must win" has to mean that.And it also mean that someone has to lose. I mean,ok,life is life,that happens everywhere (not that it's good that it happens),but if I understand well,you say then that you and I are equal "me and you=you and me" Ok.That's nice.We are all the same. And that is not only about America.. ok.
But,if you hurt 'me' than we are not longer the same,and it's not alright anymore. If you say that we all should fight back,I may hurt you back.And it will not be nice anymore. No you=me unity anymore.


Yes, I believe that I fully understand why the attack happened. They don't like us. We are a pain in their side because we represent the biggest obstacle to them having a Taliban-style government for the world. If we let them, then big time good-bye to women's rights and even many basic rights for men as well. That is the fight.
If you don't think so, then look at what Afghanistan was like under Taliban rule. That country was run by Bin Laden and Mullah Omar (mostly Bin Laden.)

That is what they want for you, for us.

I'm talking about making sacrifices so we won't be victims. And sacrifice doesn't even have to be human life, it can be giving up some comfort. But believe me, this is no game. This is about how we and our children will live in the future.
Either we face it now or they will.

Posthuman wrote:
Oh this is the most "I can't believe you're saying this" part.
"Fight/kill and pray" ??!!! Are you serious?
"I will destory you,but don't worry,I will pray for you,pray for your soul to go to heaven" . Is that so?

I am really sorry if I sound sarcastic (maybe 'cause I am?),but I can barely see any sence in what you're saying here..
Or I 'pray' I got you all wrong..?


Well, this might be a bit hard for you to understand, but praying for someone and protecting yourself is not a contradiction. I would pray for someone who robbed me even as I testify against them in court. If someone is shooting at me, then I hope that I would say a prayer for their soul even as I attempt to defend myself. It is possible to care about someone else's soul while not wanting to let them kill me at the same time.

Mishoto: Haven't seen it, but I would be interested in seeing it for the perspective.

xxkellyxx wrote:
As for the larger problem...I don't personally believe that terrorism can defeat terrorism.
3,000 lives is a lot of lives lost. Many more than 3,000 civilians have been killed in Iraq during the US and UK occupation of the country. Maybe some believe that the difference is that one set of deaths are intentional while the other are accidental, merely a negative side effect to a necessary war. I doubt that the friends and relatives of the dead can or will make such a distinction....
.... (and I rarely get involved in these debates anymore for the reasons Bac's disclaimed stated. I hope this discussion remains on topic!).


Hehe- you are brave as I am to get involved, kelly! :-)
You say that they will not be able to make a distinction between the intentional act and accidental. I believe they can, but certainly not everyone one will and they will let their emotion dictate how they react. A case in point is Cindy Sheehan who hates the war on terror. And the relatives of many, many soldiers on the other side of the coin who understand that in war - death will happen.
If you can tell the difference between day and night, then you can see the difference between the war on terrorism and terrorism itself.

Shobar:
Ahhh... well, read some of my other responses. I think I've answered most of your points. Of course, the loss of innocent life in Afghanistan and Iraq is terrible. The problem is that Bin Laden and other terrorists are being given protection by many people in the nations we invaded. Stop protecting them. Stop assisting them. And we will have no reason to invade these places.
I don't believe our invasion can be challenged on any grounds anywhere that it was somehow "illegal". The U.S. is an independant nation and not bound by any so-called world court.
And if you can point out where Bush lied regarding the lead-up to the Iraq war, then please do.

Fjallrav:
I think one of the main reasons people don't get this whole "war on terror" is that many people see things only in the short term. I'm talking about the long term consequences of fooling around while we let these nut jobs get away with murder.
Iraq is part of a long term goal to destroy terrorism (admittedly, wiping it out completely may be impossible, but we can at least make it less fruitful) While Nazi's still exist, for example, they aren't running entire nations (well, except that Islamo-nazi in Iran, I suppose.)

Small-Talker:
oh...thanks... I knew it was futile! ;-)
Well, I know you may not bother to read this and I know you didn't ask me to read yours in the first place, as you say (although, I didn't ask you to read mine either, so I'm not sure what your point is) although, I gather you enjoyed it. And no I didn't pull those phrases from any particular sermon, but now that you mention it - it does sound like one! I know you don't care for the simplification of the issue, but frankly, the root issue is not that complex. It just isn't.

While what you say is very much in line with others here and I disagree with most of what you said. At least, you have the ability to voice your opinion and give you respect. Under Osama's vision of the world, I doubt you'd be given the same courtesy.

All:
Let me offer another simple illustration:
Let's say we simply allow Islamic terrorists to take over the world. (Just try to imagine with me here...)

Can anyone imagine a Cardigans concert (just as one simple example that we all appreciate here) under Taliban or Al-Qaeda rule?
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 07:44:43
Shobar
^
I don't think Taliban were able to export what they believe to the rest of the world even to all Muslim they will fail because that kinda thinking is minority and bare you in mind they kinda model in fact violating Islam.
You are right that they don't like US but you are wrong saying that they don't like you because "a pain in their side because we represent the biggest obstacle to them having a Taliban-style government for the world", if you continue to believe that cause then you decide to blind yourself.
Read this article Full transcript of bin Ladin's speech so you might be enlightened about why people like Osama dare to fight US.
You want me to prove you that Bush is a lair, what about WMD in Iraq as a first motive to invade it? Where is it?

Btw, Rome was burn because Nero burnt it.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 13:01:24
Realphilip747
Hey Shobar

Thanks for answering my question

Countries that dont allow Palestinians to be citizens and kept in refugee camps are:
Lebanon
Syria
Jordan has refugee camps as well, but do allow palestinian to be citizens, but that is only because they are mainly palestinian in that coountry.

A Few Countries that Allow Palestinanians to be citizens are:
United States
Israel

Have a nice day
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 14:38:35
Shobar
Philip, I don't remember ask your help to list which country that do/don't allow Palestinian refugees become it's citizen...and you don't need to tell me about that coz I've know the list already.
BTW, why you don't listed Arab Saudi, Kuwait, Egypt? Is it you are shame coz intimate relationship between your government and those countries? Be fair Philip...

Israel gives Palestinian refugee citizenship? In full right?! Do a bit research before you say something silly like this, will you?

Now I repeat my question that you decide to ignore: what makes/who makes Palestinians expelled from their homeland and become refugee and unable to gain their basic human right, right to return?

Have a nice day to you too.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-14 22:01:02
Realphilip747
Shobar

shouldnt the US and Israel get a bit of thanks from you or an aknowledgement that they are doing what most middle eastern countries refuse to do?

dont you think it is hypocritical of the middle eastern countries to criticize the US and Israel about their foreign policy when they will not allow palestinians who are muslims like the to move around freely and have the option to get full rights.

You want the short lesson that I have posted before? Israel was created after WW2 to help Jews get a homeland. Great Briatin controlled the land on which Israel stands now. The UN, GB and France (which was trying to shed its anti-Jewish reputation) agreed that Jews should return to their ancestral homeland which is where Israel stands now. The majority of the Arbs left and were encouraged to leave by their so-caleld bretheren (which are the same ones who keep them in camps) to leav and not get contaminated by the jews. They thought it would be easy to defeat the Jews and rid them, when it is quite the opposite.

The Muslims that stayed are the ones that live peacefully and enjoy full rights in Israel, they even hold elected posts. When the PLO demanded that Muslims now living in Israel return to the West Bank and Gaza and live under the PLO, many refused and were frightened by the prospects of living under the PLO.

RIght of return cannot work and will not be permitted. The amount of people that left have grown many times more, and if allowed to return with their children and grandchildren would become the majority and Israel would become the minority and cease to exist. They would live under terrible conditions.

For example the Zoroastrians, once the majority religion in Iran and Afghanistan, has now dwindled under Muslim rule to 2% and unexistant in Afghanistan.

Might I askw hat happened to the Billions of dollars gievn to the PLO by the Americans and the EU? Oh thats right it is sitting in the swiss bank accounts of the late arafat and his buddies, rather than the palestinians. Should they not be condemned?

Have a great day
Author
Posted on 2006-09-15 11:56:07
karlf
Bac, nice attempt to summarize but I think Shobar's right to point out that a Taliban world model is not what the majority of Muslims want, just like a lot of the Western world don't want, for example, to live in a completely laissez-faire capitalist society.

And the biggest majority in the world doesn't want the rich to screw the poor. Bin Laden is rich and he screws the poor deluded fools who follow him into violence. Bush and Blair send our soldiers to sacrifice so that we don't have to change the way we live - because we still haven't made any sacrifice in the way we live, which involves exploitation of the rest of the world.

For your simple illustration, you don't have to imagine to know that in today's Taliban-free world only a small fraction of the population can even think of affording to go to a Cardigans concert?
Author
Posted on 2006-09-15 13:14:27
karlf
Shobar, the UN declaration is an aspiration not a reality, but surely the closer we get to it, the closer we are to being a civilised species. It's pretty clear that some countries ignore the declaration completely, while others are hypocritical in supporting it.

It's interesting to note that the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights is based on the UN declaration, with a Court to back it up (http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR). I doesn't make European countries a paradise of rights but it's a start. Note for example, some limitations to civil liberties proposed by the UK government run against the Convention (which the UK has signed up to). In the name of freedom, we have to limit freedoms...

Philip, I understood the concept of universal rights arose from the Enlightenment, which, amongst other things, released people from Church-dominated obscurantism. I don't see it as a particular Judeo-Christian concept, especially not in the modern world.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-15 17:13:25
Posthuman
Bac wrote:
Yes, I believe that I fully understand why the attack happened. They don't like us. We are a pain in their side because we represent the biggest obstacle to them having a Taliban-style government for the world. If we let them, then big time good-bye to women's rights and even many basic rights for men as well. That is the fight.


Yes,I see.. I don't think you understood me.I'm not supporting those attacks,like any other attack on human life,I just don't like they way you use word 'fight'.
And the way you try to present the "problem" 'we' or 'them',and 'their way of government' and 'our way',is the biggest problem I think.It's either,them (Taliban-style government) or us (me and others not in the first group).While many people in the world disagree even with they way America's trying to 'solve' the problem.
And those are mostly people who felt on their skin how it feels when You try to help.
I agree with Karlf,saying that world is not that pretty,even before the attack,what is considered as a 'normal' style of life,in some parts of the world,that is a luxury.Yes,and even the Cardigans concert.
So,people will always try to get what's best for them (and their family) ,THEN they may think about other people,in the world.But JUST think,it's easy to give advices from a safe distance,in your chair.


Bac wrote:
The problem is that Bin Laden and other terrorists are being given protection by many people in the nations we invaded. Stop protecting them. Stop assisting them. And we will have no reason to invade these places.

For example this. People who simply live in those states does not necessarily have to be for those people who are judged for some crime. Great majority of people isn't. But it seems that America's government do think opposite. And IF those 'terrorists and other in the same group' are still in their own country,those who are helping them are the ones from their organizations.Like in every country,president has his people around him.So,in this case it's the same.Or not even,maybe less,'cause many can refuse to protect refugee.
You can't blame ordinary people for that.Trust me,THEY know best how is to be living under their rule.And if that would mean that their life can continue,they would give away that man,even if they don't believe in Your court.Life is more important than ideology to ordinary people.
America's government doesn't believe in that,and so the whole country has to suffer for that one man.



Bac wrote:
Well, this might be a bit hard for you to understand, but praying for someone and protecting yourself is not a contradiction. I would pray for someone who robbed me even as I testify against them in court. If someone is shooting at me, then I hope that I would say a prayer for their soul even as I attempt to defend myself. It is possible to care about someone else's soul while not wanting to let them kill me at the same time.


Well I don't know why you think it could be hard for me to understand this.. (?) If I don't agree doesn't have to mean I can't understand.
I really don't want to say my opinion about this here,simply 'cause I respect your opinion (maybe more when I see that you truly believe in that),and I certainly don't want to convince anyone that what I think is the only right thing to believe in,and faith,how will you believe/in what, to me,is optional,as long as you believe,it can't be wrong,hope is healthy,it's positive,it makes you look in the future.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-16 03:16:00
Shobar
Philip wrote:
shouldnt the US and Israel get a bit of thanks from you or an aknowledgement that they are doing what most middle eastern countries refuse to do?

Well sure, big thanks to US and Israel for ruin the life of Palestinian people, thanks to Zionist Israel that steal Palestinian homeland and thanks to US that facilitated Israel to do the dirty job.

Quote:
dont you think it is hypocritical of the middle eastern countries to criticize the US and Israel about their foreign policy when they will not allow palestinians who are muslims like the to move around freely and have the option to get full rights.

This isn’t about religion at all, this is about politic, most of the Arab leader are corrupt as we’ve already know and yet a country such US still having close relationship with such leader. BTW, why you always associate Arab with Muslim? Arab not just Muslim, there are lots of Arab Christians, pagans, Jews…etc, etc.

Quote:
You want the short lesson that I have posted before? Israel was created after WW2 to help Jews get a homeland. Great Briatin controlled the land on which Israel stands now. The UN, GB and France (which was trying to shed its anti-Jewish reputation) agreed that Jews should return to their ancestral homeland which is where Israel stands now. The majority of the Arbs left and were encouraged to leave by their so-caleld bretheren (which are the same ones who keep them in camps) to leav and not get contaminated by the jews. They thought it would be easy to defeat the Jews and rid them, when it is quite the opposite.

I don’t need your twisted short lesson, thank you.
In fact I want to tell you the true lesson, Jew is a tribe without land, by their religious duty, Judaism, they should be wandered around until their own messiah come.
They don’t have original homeland, the Jerusalem and some of it surrounding they got through war and then Jews occupied it and make settlement then they expelled again…in old time it was normal.
Jews were safe and protected under Muslim ruler back then before they plan/start to steal Palestinian homeland, the place where Jews feel unsafe are where Christian is dominant and rule the country, why?, because Christian think Jews killed their god…a kinda twisted believe though, God can be killed? Yeah right!
Do you think it’s fair to trying to solve your own problem just by give the problem to someone else? It was European that made mistake and the Palestinian/Arab who was done nothing must responsible and lost their homeland, is it fair?
Anyway, I believe that Israel has the right to exist but I don’t believe that they have the right to steal and kill, just give back area that Zionist Israel steal from Palestinian and Arab and it will solve one problem over there.

Quote:
The Muslims that stayed are the ones that live peacefully and enjoy full rights in Israel, they even hold elected posts. When the PLO demanded that Muslims now living in Israel return to the West Bank and Gaza and live under the PLO, many refused and were frightened by the prospects of living under the PLO.

Hahahaha…I ask you to do a bit research about this before and I guess you just ignore it, aren’t you? Even the Arab Jews feel as a second class citizen in Israel.


Quote:
RIght of return cannot work and will not be permitted. The amount of people that left have grown many times more, and if allowed to return with their children and grandchildren would become the majority and Israel would become the minority and cease to exist. They would live under terrible conditions.

How on earth such wild assumption “Israel would become the minority and cease to exist” arise? You allow Zionist Israel to steal and when Palestinian asked for justice for their stolen land you just ‘play dead’.

Quote:
For example the Zoroastrians, once the majority religion in Iran and Afghanistan, has now dwindled under Muslim rule to 2% and unexistant in Afghanistan.

Hahahahaha…It’s not Muslim rule mistake if some Zoroastrians wants to be Muslim, is that you are blame Muslim also if lots of your fellow US citizen happened reverted/converted to Islam? Remember Islam is spreading fast in the US Finding and choose the better option is really important in this life, Philip…

Quote:
Might I askw hat happened to the Billions of dollars gievn to the PLO by the Americans and the EU? Oh thats right it is sitting in the swiss bank accounts of the late arafat and his buddies, rather than the palestinians. Should they not be condemned?

I won’t condemn the one who bravely defend their homeland from stealer such Zionist Israel. I’d rather condemned the trouble maker who steal Palestinian land, that would be fair for my standard.
BTW, the late Arafat was not guilty until the court said so.

Actually, you are not directly answer my question but yeah I can see that you are trying to divert the answer…The question is simple and it request simple answer that you still decide to ignore.
Anyway, I can see that this would be going in circle again so please don’t reply my post as this is off-topic to the thread.

Have a great day to you too.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-16 03:56:23
Shobar
karlf wrote:
Shobar, the UN declaration is an aspiration not a reality, but surely the closer we get to it, the closer we are to being a civilised species. It's pretty clear that some countries ignore the declaration completely, while others are hypocritical in supporting it.

Yeah, in reality no country able to fully implemented such standard, I think civilized really is not in a permanent definition, your ancestor used to sail all around the world and meet people who naked or half naked and they used to call such people uncivilized now nakedness become such behavior in your society and you call it freedom of expression.

Quote:
It's interesting to note that the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights is based on the UN declaration, with a Court to back it up (http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR). I doesn't make European countries a paradise of rights but it's a start. Note for example, some limitations to civil liberties proposed by the UK government run against the Convention (which the UK has signed up to). In the name of freedom, we have to limit freedoms...

Thanks for the information. Thanks God that there is a site such Human Right Watch, you better visit it and look for yourself whether European is better then the rest of nations.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-16 05:12:13
Realphilip747
Whats the point of dialogue when you wont even try and have an open mind, everything i say, you say is twisted and lies, well could you ever consider that everything or somethings you know are wrong and you have been lied to? Or do you believe that everything you know or is told to you is true?
Author
Posted on 2006-09-16 05:48:50
Realphilip747
So where did the money go? where did all the money that the Americans and Europeans give to the PLO go? Billions were given, yet the west bank and Gaza are showing no improvements. Where?

I answered your question shobar, you asked who expelled them. I gave you an swer to why.

Simple math will answer your question about jews becoming a minority. If there are 8 million palestinians and only 6 million jews simple math shows that 8 is more than 6,
Author
Posted on 2006-09-16 06:58:09
Bac
Shobar:
I'm sure the Taliban style muslims are in the minority, for the moment, but that doesn't mean they don't pose a danger to the rest of the world, including Islam itself.
The fact that you'd offer me a speech made by Bin Laden to justify terrorism. A speech from the man, himself.

In it, he denies that he hates freedom and yet is responsible for propping up the Taliban in Afghanistan. I sure hope that they will never be able to export these beliefs, but they will continue to do so if we don't stop them.

Bin Laden also points out that the Lebanon invasion of 1982 was the catalyst for his war on us. Forgiving the fact that Israel has certainly had it's own reasons for invading Lebanon and combating terrorism over the years, people need to not be fooled into believing that this man is some kind of pluralist who will happily live side-by-side with the U.S. if we simply stop supporting Israel.
Read:
Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden

As for WMDs, first of all, the fact that every world intelligence agency believed that Saddam had WMDs, proves that Bush didn't lie. In order to lie, Bush would have to have known that he had no WMDs.

And, obviously, WMDs have been found, but just because they haven't been "stockpiles" or old and not as dangerous, then it's overlooked by most of the world media. Plus, there are the audio tapes of Saddam discussing with his aides the WMDS that they had.

As far as where most of them are now, at least one former Iraqi official claims they were flown to Syria using cargo jets. Whether or not we will ever know exactly where they all went remains to be seen, but it's clear that at least through 1998, he had plenty of WMDs. So there you go.

"Btw, Rome was burn because Nero burnt it. " <-- I was merely using a metaphor.

Karlf:
It doesn't matter if it's the model the majority of muslims want. It matters that it's the model a bunch of nut-jobs want.

Maybe "a lot of the Western world don't want, for example, to live in a completely laissez-faire capitalist society", but that's not relevant to the problem. Sweden, for example, has a democracy, but you're right, they aren't exactly the same as the U.S.
However, we aren't invading Sweden because they have a broad social welfare program. And they aren't sending planes into tall buildings in the U.S. But Al-Qaeda is. That makes a world of difference to me.

Again, I've talked about the sacrifices that people here in this country make. And yes, Bush and Blair send soldiers out to do their job. That's us making sacrifices. You're speaking as if us (the civilians) and the soldiers are completely different groups. My father was in the U.S. army in the Vietnam War, my grand-father in World War II and, while I've never served in the millitary - I know plenty who do.
They have familes just like you and me and just like some of the people we have to fight - they aren't robots. They know exactly what they're doing. They all know there is a chance they could die. That's a risk. That's a sacrifice.

How are we exploiting the rest of the world and who do you mean by "we"?

As for the Cardigans example, I'm not talking about what can be afforded, I'm talking about what is allowed. I can't afford lots of things, but that's my problem as an individual. No one is keeping me from that. I can achieve that in a free society like the U.S.A., but not in Bin Laden's world.

Posthuman:
We'll, I understand that many people don't like to hear about "us and them". Everyone wants the world to be seen in terms of "we're all human" or "one world" or something of that sort. Wouldn't that be nice? Sure. But that's not reality.

John Lennon wanted everyone to "imagine" an ideal world (well, his ideal anyway - although he's not the only one - haha). I mean, I like Lennon, but that song is about fantasy and idealism. It sounds sweet, but it's a bit silly if you actually think about it.

Yeah, we should try to make it as good a place as we can, but as long as their are people trying to ruin it for you and me, we'll need armies, police, firemen and doctors.

As far as the Cardigans concert, see what I wrote for karl.

As for the good people in Afghanistan and Iraq, I agree this is a very sad thing. No one here is cheering the death of these innocent casualties of war. And I understand that most of these people don't support Taliban, but the Taliban are there, so that's where we have to go. I know that it would be very hard for the people to rise up and overthrow a dictator like Saddam Hussein or Fidel Castro when they rule the country by such a big iron fist. So I don't blame them for this, but I do blame the rulers and it's unfortunate that they put their people in harm's way.

Quote:
Well I don't know why you think it could be hard for me to understand this.. (?) If I don't agree doesn't have to mean I can't understand.


The reason, I thought that you couldn't understand it is because you wrote:
Quote:
I can barely see any sence in what you're saying here..


So, at least you understand even though you don't agree. And, that's fine, we don't have to get into the subject of religion too deeply here. I'm glad that so far this debate hasn't become too mean.

People who have seen me on here for years know that I don't just write this stuff to anger people. I'm a true believer (right or wrong.) And I still said it even though I knew 95% of the people in this forum would disagree.

And while I don't speak for all Americans or free people, I think that my point of view is shared by millions of people and something that people should at least hear. It helps us to at least understand each other. But then there are those that one can listen to and even understand them, but then you have to say, "No! You're crazy!" (For example, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Hussein, Bin Laden, etc.) And then, sometimes what they say becomes reality and you do have to deal with it. Sad, but true.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-16 09:47:56
Shobar
Bac wrote:
I'm sure the Taliban style muslims are in the minority, for the moment, but that doesn't mean they don't pose a danger to the rest of the world, including Islam itself.

It will always become minority as it violated some teaching in Islam itself that believed by the majority Muslims.

Quote:
The fact that you'd offer me a speech made by Bin Laden to justify terrorism. A speech from the man, himself.

I show the OBL speech to counter your wrong reason why OBL attack US, it’s is a prove that your claim "a pain in their side because we represent the biggest obstacle to them having a Taliban-style government for the world" is wrong refuted by OBL himself.

Quote:
In it, he denies that he hates freedom and yet is responsible for propping up the Taliban in Afghanistan. I sure hope that they will never be able to export these beliefs, but they will continue to do so if we don't stop them.

OBL said: “We fight because we are free men who don't sleep under oppression. We want to restore freedom to our nation, just as you lay waste to our nation. So shall we lay waste to yours.”
I think it’s pretty clear statement. What he meant by oppression in here is regarding nation like what Israeli/US done to Palestine and some Arab nation not about Taliban oppression to women/human right.
Well actually we can educate Taliban not to violate human right without gun, it takes times indeed, but I’m sure it will work unless you need badly to secure the oil pipelines though

Quote:
Bin Laden also points out that the Lebanon invasion of 1982 was the catalyst for his war on us. Forgiving the fact that Israel has certainly had it's own reasons for invading Lebanon and combating terrorism over the years, people need to not be fooled into believing that this man is some kind of pluralist who will happily live side-by-side with the U.S. if we simply stop supporting Israel.
Read:
Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama bin Laden

I believe people also not to be fooled into believing that Israel/US legitimate to murder ‘by accident’ innocent civilians and destroy public infrastructure in Lebanon prior to Israel invasion 1982, and people also not to be fooled into believing that Palestinian don’t have the right to seek justice and get their stolen homeland.
I haven’t read that book, can you let me know the online version so I can read?

Quote:
As for WMDs, first of all, the fact that every world intelligence agency believed that Saddam had WMDs, proves that Bush didn't lie. In order to lie, Bush would have to have known that he had no WMDs.

Any so called intelligence who said that Saddam had WMDs but still after 3 years passed still haven’t found any are liar. Bush turn to be a liar because he said that lies though he want to believe the info’s from so called intelligence is true.
And Bush also a liar when he said the first reason to attack Iraq was WMDs threat meanwhile his best friend Dick Cheney said “President Bush would have ordered an invasion of Iraq even if the CIA had told him that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction”.

BTW, this is what I call real deal intelligence:
In an interview with Reuters, former weapons inspector David Kay is asked about the WMDs. He opines:
1)"I don't think they existed. I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and those were a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them. I think the best evidence is that they did not resume large-scale production, and that's what we're really talking about, is large stockpiles, not the small. Large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the period after '95."

2)During a joint press conference at Elysee Palace with President George W Bush, French President Jacques Chirac declares: "I have always said that I had no information that would lead me to believe that there were, or were not, for that matter, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That's a fact. All the information available to us at that time and on that subject did not allow us to take a stand or to reach any conclusion, which is why I said to President Bush that I, personally, was incapable of saying whether or not there were weapons of mass destruction."

Quote:
And, obviously, WMDs have been found, but just because they haven't been "stockpiles" or old and not as dangerous, then it's overlooked by most of the world media. Plus, there are the audio tapes of Saddam discussing with his aides the WMDS that they had.
As far as where most of them are now, at least one former Iraqi official claims they were flown to Syria using cargo jets. Whether or not we will ever know exactly where they all went remains to be seen, but it's clear that at least through 1998, he had plenty of WMDs. So there you go.

Let me know if you success to find/…..[cough]plant[/cough] the WMDs, will you?

Quote:
"Btw, Rome was burn because Nero burnt it. " <-- I was merely using a metaphor.

Yeah…so did I
Author
Posted on 2006-09-16 12:35:18
Posthuman
Bac wrote:

We'll, I understand that many people don't like to hear about "us and them". Everyone wants the world to be seen in terms of "we're all human" or "one world" or something of that sort. Wouldn't that be nice? Sure. But that's not reality.




Bac wrote:
John Lennon wanted everyone to "imagine" an ideal world (well, his ideal anyway - although he's not the only one - haha). I mean, I like Lennon, but that song is about fantasy and idealism. It sounds sweet, but it's a bit silly if you actually think about it.



Bac wrote:
The reason, I thought that you couldn't understand it is because you wrote:
Quote:
I can barely see any sence in what you're saying here..



The reason I wrote that was that I tried to make sense between some oppposite things you said,contadictions..
We are all gods children,in theory (?),but,in the real life,you will give me the answer, "well,this is life,you have to fight to survive (even if that means that some innocent people will die along that way)" ?
I mean,I know,life is life,if someone like me said that,I wouldn't be surprised,but from so religious person..
That was always fascinating me,how all that is so optional in real life.
Some parts of religion I will never be ready to accept.(ok,never say never ;) ) Mostly,'cause it's not in 'peace' with my views on life,life in general.


You are right,this is so not for discussion,so,for my part,feel free not to answer on this
Author
Posted on 2006-09-18 14:16:00
Mishto
quick point.....i didn't want to read thru all of this but from what i scanned thru.

it's not an either or situation...there's grey area. If you don't invade and bomb the bejeezus out of their countries......there are other ways to fight terrorism...as a matter of fact the recent foiled plots show that there are better methods.

People against invading countries are not necessarily for just sitting back and letting them do whatever they want.

simply put.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-18 15:34:02
Realphilip747
im not sure how we couldve gone into Afghanistan, without invading, we asked them to give up Osama, they didnt and said hell no we wont give him up so we went in and in the process making life better for the people.

Especially the oppressed women and gays.

Yes there are diff ways to combat, but its a combination, not just diplomacy, it must be used in conjunction. We are giving diplomacy a chance in Iran right now as with N. Korea as well, lets see if it takes us anyway at all
Author
Posted on 2006-09-18 16:42:30
Mishto
ummm yeah. what you said philip.

"Many people outside the country believe that Afghan women and girls have had their rights restored. It's just not true. Women and girls are still being abused, harassed, and threatened all over Afghanistan, often by government troops and officials."
Zama Coursen-Neff
Co-author of the report and counsel to the Children's Rights Division of Human Rights Watch
----

#1) you are forgetting that we asked them to hand over osama, they asked us for proof that osama did it, we either couldn't provide that proof or were offended by the fact they didn't comply and told them to hand him over or face consequences. They didn't hand them over...they faced the consequences...osama is still out there taunting us.

#2) there's more ways than Diplomacy and Invasion......
-----------------

it's like plan A didn't work so you're going well look at the benefits of our screwup.

what's going on in iraq that was totally unrelated to the terrorism we responded to.....another example of planA didn't work out so let's beef up on talk of progress and life without saddam being so much better.......but probably much like the above report........things are probably worse than they appear for the actual citizens of the country whom we rarely hear about in our press.
Author
Posted on 2006-09-18 19:15:54
Realphilip747
well one cannot change the minds of brutal people overnight, but atleast they have some rights restored and are progressing that way, now maybe if they did away with islamic laws in that country they would enjoy total rights.

Osama confessed on video tape that he did it, but I guess it mustve been doctored would be the answer they wouldve given (much as shobar claims everything i say or hear is distorted by the western media. Then what would you do then. Strange that on one hand you point out and say that women's rights have not been restored as of yet, yet you seem to think if we handed them proof they would actually comply. Thisis a regime that beat women if their ankles showed. A regime that beheaded Gays, and muslims who converted to Christianity and you seem to think they can be reasoned with.

Strange that you say we are only using diplomacy because force alone didnt work for iraq, strange that we are now trying diplomacy, that the liberals now say we must take action and not diplomacy. Which way do you want it? Diplomacy or force, please make up your minds.

Might I remind people that Iraq had 12 years to comply to UN resolutions but thumbed its nose at all the time, shot at US and British planes everyday, attempted to assasinate President Bush when he was going to Kuwait, Sent 25,000 for every successful suicide bomber in Iraq.

Allowed Zarkawi to set up training camps in iraq, and czech intelligence still stands by that mohammed atta met up with iraqi diplomats before 9/11.

Invading Iraq was a good move, rather than two maniacal dictators presiding over oil reserves, there is only 1.

Im sre you will try and bat down every point i have in here, but I didnt feel like just letting you depart with your "points" and have people consider them gospel
Author
Posted on 2006-09-18 19:35:03
Mishto
I wanted to respond to this before i read the rest of your post.

Osama confessed on video tape that he did it, but I guess it mustve been doctored would be the answer they wouldve given (much as shobar claims everything i say or hear is distorted by the western media

---initially he denied involvement.....only later.....maybe even after the invasion did he confess to his involvement. That to me sounds fishy as it is........for the simple reason that when would a terrorist group not take responsibility for their action? It's part of what they do....blow something up and then tell the world we did it because of X.
Goto page: [« Previous] 1, 2, 3, 4 [Next »]
Moderators: Antoine, Assaf, Oleg, daniel_o
 
 
Betatest: Forum search engine
 
Forum jump