Printable View
Comparisons have to be used when discussing with Lyle as he runs all around the playground. Israel is very relevant to the deviating argument Lyle is making. Likewise, you can justify Palestinian resistance against the Israeli's, but to a lesser extent Muslims living in the UK. Again, it would have some grounds based on past grievances.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Trite, boring and predictable.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongIsrael is surrounded by Arab & Persian states which wish to see it wiped off the map....they defend their territory. You're the daft oneQuote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Israel is the known invader of several surrounding borders and is the leading terrorist threat in the region.
Yeah because you always hear so much about Israeli suicide bombers. Miles we get it, you're an anti-Semite.Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfTrite, boring and predictable.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongIsrael is surrounded by Arab & Persian states which wish to see it wiped off the map....they defend their territory. You're the daft oneQuote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Israel is the known invader of several surrounding borders and is the leading terrorist threat in the region.
Hey remember that time Israel flew planes into the WTC? Or that time when an Israeli National assassinated Benazir Bhutto and another assassinated Robert F. Kennedy. Oh or the planes the Israelis blew up or hijacked or the time when they killed all the Palestinian Olympians in Munich?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzWhat a stupid thing to say. Do you really think that States and countries around the world that have the death penalty are free from murder ? Do you think having the death penalty in place would have stopped people blowing up a London Bus On which they sat? Do you really think that two guys callously and cowardly murdering an unarmed soldier or somebody stabbing an unarmed Grandad to death are the result of not having capital punishment ? What you are in effect arguing is that the guilt for these heinous acts somehow rests on the British people for abolishing hanging.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Probably the root cause of your problems.
The death penalty is a deterrent, Sherlock.
de·ter·rent
/diˈtərənt/
Noun
A thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from some act.
Adjective
Able or intended to deter.
Note the word "discourages", instead of "eliminates."
Try to keep up, gramps.
It's not going to deter somebody who wishes to die as a martyr though is it ? Do you actually have to be so patronising in every single post that you have ever made since the day that you were born or will you not possibly concede that sometimes you may actually be able to learn something rather than demonstrate how far up the wall you can piss ?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzWhat a stupid thing to say. Do you really think that States and countries around the world that have the death penalty are free from murder ? Do you think having the death penalty in place would have stopped people blowing up a London Bus On which they sat? Do you really think that two guys callously and cowardly murdering an unarmed soldier or somebody stabbing an unarmed Grandad to death are the result of not having capital punishment ? What you are in effect arguing is that the guilt for these heinous acts somehow rests on the British people for abolishing hanging.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Probably the root cause of your problems.
The death penalty is a deterrent, Sherlock.
de·ter·rent
/diˈtərənt/
Noun
A thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from some act.
Adjective
Able or intended to deter.
Note the word "discourages", instead of "eliminates."
Try to keep up, gramps.
We used to have the death penalty but we have not executed anyone since 1964.
There have been many occasions when I've thought the death penalty would be appropriate though.
If people want to die as martyrs we should oblige them.
How is it everyone else in the world seems to be able to get along with everyone else but the hardcore Muslims just don't want any part of it?
Sad but true.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
The thing with religon is the interpretation of things.
Everyone on this forum could read the bible and interpret it a different way.
In the same way some seem to read the quran and interprete things that result in the things we see today.
Somewhere along the line someone is lying as no God would justify these actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
:rolleyes: he was run over, they then got out and hacked him. How would a gun have helped..
I agree mate and I have never said innocent Muslims need to bear the responsibility or pay for their actions that is taking what Im suggesting to an extreme and what you are trying to wage (peace for the innocent) to another.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
What Im saying is they (the Muslims) need to address this problem themselves within their own Mosques. We cant do that legally.
Honestly Greenbeanz we all know exactly where this is being taught from dont we?
I think its time to nip it in the seed right where it is being placed into these young mens hearts and minds?
You know who put the idea in their heads and so do I.
They are who the Muslim community need to go after and they need to excommunicate them totally.
Then those types cant hide in between the innocent ones.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sqeo95PZQMQuote:
Originally Posted by ryanmanEnglish Defence League.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
A far-right facist group.
On the political spectrum they are to the right of the BNP.
or these folks at 0.54
Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongYou're late to this discussion the majority of Iraqi civilians killed during the war were killed by their own people in the Shia vs Sunni fighting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Here's for the hard of understanding - they're fighting amongst themselves - USA/UK christians going in killing people is like you arguing with family and some douche wading in trying to boss you all about, you close ranks on the intruder and try to get them the fuck out.
These are murderers who killed an innocent man, forget anything else, this should not be lost in any political debate.
No politics in what im suggesting mate. I just think it obvious who within (A nice religion) is teaching their young to go out and do these things. Has to be stopped right there at the mouth and the youth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
How else can it be done?
Or do we just wait for their next installment?
I see your point we are taking Iraq and the blame game again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Master has hit the nail on the head, murderers that what they are,! and a very nasty one's at thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Master
no ifs or buts or whys , just cold blooded murderers.
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Simple as that. Lets see what prison sentance they both receive for this.
Probably life.
Good behaviour cuts it in half to15 years.
Haha, you're joking mate. They will get indefinate sentences. Or a minimum of 30 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by impExactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Simple as that. Lets see what prison sentance they both receive for this.
Probably life.
Good behaviour cuts it in half to15 years.
let them stay in a prison and they will end up radicalising other prisoners
this.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanmanHaha, you're joking mate. They will get indefinate sentences. Or a minimum of 30 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by impExactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Simple as that. Lets see what prison sentance they both receive for this.
Probably life.
Good behaviour cuts it in half to15 years.
not sure about that. Prisoners have their own code.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
OK I mean its not as if it hasn't happened beforeQuote:
Originally Posted by Howlin Mad Missynot sure about that. Prisoners have their own code.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
You never know.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanmanHaha, you're joking mate. They will get indefinate sentences. Or a minimum of 30 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by impExactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Simple as that. Lets see what prison sentance they both receive for this.
Probably life.
Good behaviour cuts it in half to15 years.
Its not like they robbed a bank.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
It's a gift. ;)
BTW, that wasn't too "non-committal", was it?
Interesting article on the topic
Ayaan Hirsi Ali: The Problem of Muslim Leadership - WSJ.com
You sir, are an eternal optimist.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanmanHaha, you're joking mate. They will get indefinate sentences. Or a minimum of 30 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by impExactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Simple as that. Lets see what prison sentance they both receive for this.
Probably life.
Good behaviour cuts it in half to15 years.
They should probably just pass these 2 guys to the EDL. That way the EDL stop rioting against innocent people and get to deliver the justice they want.
Although thinking they'd stop there probably makes me a bit of an optimist.
There is no way this will be a 'life reduced to 15 years' sentence. No way. That's just Daily Mail talk.Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnYou sir, are an eternal optimist.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanmanHaha, you're joking mate. They will get indefinate sentences. Or a minimum of 30 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by impExactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
Simple as that. Lets see what prison sentance they both receive for this.
Probably life.
Good behaviour cuts it in half to15 years.
They should probably just pass these 2 guys to the EDL. That way the EDL stop rioting against innocent people and get to deliver the justice they want.
Although thinking they'd stop there probably makes me a bit of an optimist.
Terror police called in after prison warden stabbed in attack 'inspired by Woolwich murder' - TelegraphQuote:
Originally Posted by Howlin Mad Missynot sure about that. Prisoners have their own code.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
....hmmmmm? What was that you were saying about prisoners having their own "code" or some such nonsense???
Right, and these guys are liberal lefties?Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongCAIR has ties to several terrorist organizations (:o I'm shocked) so says DEMOCRATS Chuck Schumer & Dick DurbinQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
The late Seifeldin Ashmawy, publisher of the New Jersey-based Voice of Peace, called CAIR the champion of "extremists whose views do not represent Islam."
Randall ("Ismail") Royer, an American convert to Islam, served as CAIR's communications specialist and civil rights coordinator; today he sits in jail on terrorism-related charges. In June 2003, Royer and ten other young men, ages 23 to 35, known as the "Virginia jihad group," were indicted on forty-one counts of "conspiracy to train for and participate in a violent jihad overseas."
Ghassan Elashi, Bassam Khafagi and other terrorists have worked for CAIR
CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as "the sworn enemy," finding this depiction offensive to Muslims. CAIR also leapt to bin Laden's defense, denying his responsibility for the twin East African embassy bombings.
More broadly, TheReligionofPeace.com website pointed out that "of the more than 3100 fatal Islamic terror attacks committed in the last four years, we have only seen CAIR specifically condemn 18."
In 1998, CAIR co-hosted an event at which an Egyptian Islamist leader, Wagdi Ghunaym, declared Jews to be the "descendants of the apes."
But I'm sure you'll brush these off as mere coincidences :rolleyes:
I thought the UN was a joke that was irrelevant and we shouldn't take seriously about anything?Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongSaddam Hussein's Defiance of United Nations ResolutionsQuote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Saddam Hussein knowingly and repeatedly violated the law......oh I'm sorry what were you saying recently about the UN saying it was an "illegal" war?
The Bin Laden mission was done well.....would have rather he been taken alive and worked over for information, but whatever what's done is done.
Now Anwar Al Awlaki and his son being murdered is something that irks me because despite what a total shitbag that guy was he was an American citizen and we all have the right to a fair trial.
As for the murderers of that British soldier, shoot....them....dead.....they had weapons and were threatening war, shoot them....problem solved.
But hey, let's not quibble about abject hypocrisy over everything whenever it suits you. Let's say UN resolutions actually count for something and breaking them requires action to enforce them (although not in Israel's case, obviously.)
The problem you have here is that only George Bush believed that Saddam had broken UN resolutions and any kind of sanction was necessary. The rest of the world believed an entirly new UN resolution was needed to legitimise any military action against Iraq. And so did George Bush! Initially anyway, until it was clear he wasn't going to get one at which point he went against the wishes of most of the rest of the world and illegally invaded Iraq.
Tuesday, March 18, 2003 War looms as Bush issues final warning
By Dana Milbank and Mike Allen
Washington Post
WASHINGTON — President Bush vowed yesterday to attack Iraq with the "full force and might" of the U.S. military if Saddam Hussein does not flee within 48 hours, setting the nation on an almost certain course to war.
Bush delivered the ultimatum hours after his administration earlier in the day admitted failure in its months-long effort to win the blessing of the U.N. Security Council to forcibly disarm the Iraqi leader. The United Nations ordered its inspectors and humanitarian personnel out of Iraq, and Bush urged foreign nationals to leave the country immediately.
[...]
Earlier in the day, British and U.S. diplomats, facing certain defeat on the Security Council, withdrew a resolution that would have cleared the way for war. Though Bush on Sunday vowed another day of "working the phones," it quickly became clear that as many as 11 of 15 council members remained opposed and the effort was abandoned by 10 a.m.
The withdrawal of the resolution without a vote was a double climb-down for Bush. On Feb. 22, he had predicted victory at the United Nations, and on March 6 he said he wanted a vote regardless of the outcome.
[...]
Bush defiantly asserted a right to attack Iraq, even without sanction from the Security Council. "The United States of America has the sovereign authority to use force in assuring its own national security," he said. "The United States and our allies are authorized to use force in ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. This is not a question of authority. It is a question of will."
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2003/Mar/18/ln/ln11a.html
And don't forget this was all bullshit anyway. This was a war to get access to the world's second biggest oil reserve for US oil companies.
And it's that kind of thing that pisses Muslims off and causes them to bomb your skyscrapers, sporting events etc.
Yes that is exactly who they endear themselves to, correct. Huma Abedin (a former worker for IMMA Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs run by Abdullah Omar Nasseef who is a finaceer of terrorists) married former Democrat Rep. & current NYC mayoral candidate Anthony Wiener and she was also a top aide to former Sec. of State Hilary Clinton.....so yes I would say the hardcore Muslims are using the naivety of the Democrat/Liberal politicians who will do anything to get a vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingRight, and these guys are liberal lefties?Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongCAIR has ties to several terrorist organizations (:o I'm shocked) so says DEMOCRATS Chuck Schumer & Dick DurbinQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
The late Seifeldin Ashmawy, publisher of the New Jersey-based Voice of Peace, called CAIR the champion of "extremists whose views do not represent Islam."
Randall ("Ismail") Royer, an American convert to Islam, served as CAIR's communications specialist and civil rights coordinator; today he sits in jail on terrorism-related charges. In June 2003, Royer and ten other young men, ages 23 to 35, known as the "Virginia jihad group," were indicted on forty-one counts of "conspiracy to train for and participate in a violent jihad overseas."
Ghassan Elashi, Bassam Khafagi and other terrorists have worked for CAIR
CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as "the sworn enemy," finding this depiction offensive to Muslims. CAIR also leapt to bin Laden's defense, denying his responsibility for the twin East African embassy bombings.
More broadly, TheReligionofPeace.com website pointed out that "of the more than 3100 fatal Islamic terror attacks committed in the last four years, we have only seen CAIR specifically condemn 18."
In 1998, CAIR co-hosted an event at which an Egyptian Islamist leader, Wagdi Ghunaym, declared Jews to be the "descendants of the apes."
But I'm sure you'll brush these off as mere coincidences :rolleyes:
Well done Kirkland in making excuses for the cowardly barbarous murder of civilians. You can't legitimise 9/11 by saying killing civilians is the fault of anyone but those who carried it out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongYes that is exactly who they endear themselves to, correct. Huma Abedin (a former worker for IMMA Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs run by Abdullah Omar Nasseef who is a finaceer of terrorists) married former Democrat Rep. & current NYC mayoral candidate Anthony Wiener and she was also a top aide to former Sec. of State Hilary Clinton.....so yes I would say the hardcore Muslims are using the naivety of the Democrat/Liberal politicians who will do anything to get a vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingRight, and these guys are liberal lefties?Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongCAIR has ties to several terrorist organizations (:o I'm shocked) so says DEMOCRATS Chuck Schumer & Dick DurbinQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
The late Seifeldin Ashmawy, publisher of the New Jersey-based Voice of Peace, called CAIR the champion of "extremists whose views do not represent Islam."
Randall ("Ismail") Royer, an American convert to Islam, served as CAIR's communications specialist and civil rights coordinator; today he sits in jail on terrorism-related charges. In June 2003, Royer and ten other young men, ages 23 to 35, known as the "Virginia jihad group," were indicted on forty-one counts of "conspiracy to train for and participate in a violent jihad overseas."
Ghassan Elashi, Bassam Khafagi and other terrorists have worked for CAIR
CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as "the sworn enemy," finding this depiction offensive to Muslims. CAIR also leapt to bin Laden's defense, denying his responsibility for the twin East African embassy bombings.
More broadly, TheReligionofPeace.com website pointed out that "of the more than 3100 fatal Islamic terror attacks committed in the last four years, we have only seen CAIR specifically condemn 18."
In 1998, CAIR co-hosted an event at which an Egyptian Islamist leader, Wagdi Ghunaym, declared Jews to be the "descendants of the apes."
But I'm sure you'll brush these off as mere coincidences :rolleyes:
Hang on a minute. Your original argument, for want of a better word, was basically bashing liberals for apologising for and justifying Muslim terrorism. Now you're saying that somebody Muslim who worked for another Muslim married a Democrat and this somehow gives "hardcore Muslims" leverage on the American political system in some way? That's an impressive argument even for you.
I'm not making an excuse for anything or trying to justify anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Let's say me and you are going to a football match. We're seated outside a pub before the game enjoying a glass of chilled chablis and watching the world go by. On the other side of the street X, a big bugger in stylish blue polyester, is walking down the street. Y, a smaller man clad in red ployester, is walking the other way. As they come up to each other X punches Y right in the dish. Y falls to the ground, gets up, takes a knife out of his pocket and stabs Y with it, killing him instantly.
Now lter we're talking about the incident. I say to you that if X hadn't punched Y in the face in the first place then he'd never have been stabbed and killed. I might also comment on the nature of violent acts begetting further violence. I see this as reasonable speculation about the incident and violent acts in general. Neither of these two arguments negates the fact that the stabbing was a reprehensible act of murder, excuses it or justifies it in any way.
I'm saying some hardline Muslims are taking advantage of liberal doctrines like: tolerance, always playing the race card, always playing the victim, not believing in an American culture OR believing that America is evil....yes the Muslims love the blame America first crowd and yes the Democrats ARE that crowd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
EDL will not stop there. They have an agenda against all Muslims and ultimately against all non-whites. They are full of hatred and violence who thrive on spreading lies and animosity. In fact they are very close to the thing they proclaim they hate the most which is extremist Muslims.
I would not be surprised if they work hand in hand with one another to get to their respective goals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingI'm not making an excuse for anything or trying to justify anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Let's say me and you are going to a football match. We're seated outside a pub before the game enjoying a glass of chilled chablis and watching the world go by. On the other side of the street X, a big bugger in stylish blue polyester, is walking down the street. Y, a smaller man clad in red ployester, is walking the other way. As they come up to each other X punches Y right in the dish. Y falls to the ground, gets up, takes a knife out of his pocket and stabs Y with it, killing him instantly.
Now lter we're talking about the incident. I say to you that if X hadn't punched Y in the face in the first place then he'd never have been stabbed and killed. I might also comment on the nature of violent acts begetting further violence. I see this as reasonable speculation about the incident and violent acts in general. Neither of these two arguments negates the fact that the stabbing was a reprehensible act of murder, excuses it or justifies it in any way.
" And it's that kind of thing that pisses Muslims off and causes them to bomb your skyscrapers, sporting events etc."
Those people had an agenda. That agenda was not to draw attention to an injustice suffered by innocent civilians at the hands of indiscriminate carpet bombing by allied forces. Their agenda was the propagation of extremist ideology and the glorification of violence. So clever is this agenda that you and thousands of well meaning people like yourself have now been used to propagate it. To call them Muslim, and this is where both you and Lyle agree, is to further heap insult onto the civilian victims of extremism who would not raise their hand in violence.
Miles who like yourself, I would in many instances defer to as having superior knowledge on politics, economy and history comes to the same conclusion as you and it surprises me considering his distaste for religion. These same religious extremists are often responsible for agitation and the escalation of sectarian violence within Muslim countries. Their war is not just with Britain,America and the West but with moderates in their own countries who would condone the mutilation of women, the burning of books and the execution of ethnic groups they deem to not be pious or totalitarian enough in enforcing their own twisted brand of religion.
If we are really interested in justice then how hypocritical is it to enjoy the benefits of living in a flawed but basically decent democratic society and then turn our eyes away from those whose own liberties are trampled on by despotic leaders who seek to persecute and wipe out those who seek nothing more than the human rights we hold dear ? You can pretend that the Iraq war was all about Oil but that is a gross over simplification and misrepresentation of a conflict prompted by much more than that and at it's heart represented a universalism and willingness to stand alongside others who wished for nothing more than the opportunity to aspire to liberal ideals.
The Left has let down many oppressed people in these conflicts by deluding themselves into thinking that groups like the Taliban can be reasoned with or that the victims of such nutjobs should be allowed to remain subjugated in order to ease their own uncomfortable feelings about the harsh bloody realities of liberation. I say this as somebody who I consider to be way farther to the left than either yourself or Miles. Pacifism does not work and the kind of socialism that busies itself only with the interests of it's own members due to something as arbitrary as nationality is acting in a far more self interested way than the most hard hearted of Capitalists.
What you're calling liberal doctrines are just a bunch of nonsense. Tolerance is an American doctrine and Republicans and conservatives have been playing the race card and complaining of being victims for decades now. Liberals were responsible for the Civil Rights Act for instance and conservatives by and large were the racist scumbags who didn't want equal rights for non-whites. And when the Act was passed conservatives have done nothing but whine and cry about how liberals are slowly destroying America. Just like you complain about Obama destroying America. So your lot are basically full-time racists/professional victims. And now that the white majority can't win elections that cult of victimhood is becoming overwhelming for some, isn't it Lyle?Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongI'm saying some hardline Muslims are taking advantage of liberal doctrines like: tolerance, always playing the race card, always playing the victim, not believing in an American culture OR believing that America is evil....yes the Muslims love the blame America first crowd and yes the Democrats ARE that crowd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
But let's assume that they're true. How are these hardline Muslims taking advantage of these liberal doctrines?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingI'm not making an excuse for anything or trying to justify anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Let's say me and you are going to a football match. We're seated outside a pub before the game enjoying a glass of chilled chablis and watching the world go by. On the other side of the street X, a big bugger in stylish blue polyester, is walking down the street. Y, a smaller man clad in red ployester, is walking the other way. As they come up to each other X punches Y right in the dish. Y falls to the ground, gets up, takes a knife out of his pocket and stabs Y with it, killing him instantly.
Now lter we're talking about the incident. I say to you that if X hadn't punched Y in the face in the first place then he'd never have been stabbed and killed. I might also comment on the nature of violent acts begetting further violence. I see this as reasonable speculation about the incident and violent acts in general. Neither of these two arguments negates the fact that the stabbing was a reprehensible act of murder, excuses it or justifies it in any way.
" And it's that kind of thing that pisses Muslims off and causes them to bomb your skyscrapers, sporting events etc."
Those people had an agenda. That agenda was not to draw attention to an injustice suffered by innocent civilians at the hands of indiscriminate carpet bombing by allied forces. Their agenda was the propagation of extremist ideology and the glorification of violence. So clever is this agenda that you and thousands of well meaning people like yourself have now been used to propagate it. To call them Muslim, and this is where both you and Lyle agree, is to further heap insult onto the civilian victims of extremism who would not raise their hand in violence.
Miles who like yourself, I would in many instances defer to as having superior knowledge on politics, economy and history comes to the same conclusion as you and it surprises me considering his distaste for religion. These same religious extremists are often responsible for agitation and the escalation of sectarian violence within Muslim countries. Their war is not just with Britain,America and the West but with moderates in their own countries who would condone the mutilation of women, the burning of books and the execution of ethnic groups they deem to not be pious or totalitarian enough in enforcing their own twisted brand of religion.
If we are really interested in justice then how hypocritical is it to enjoy the benefits of living in a flawed but basically decent democratic society and then turn our eyes away from those whose own liberties are trampled on by despotic leaders who seek to persecute and wipe out those who seek nothing more than the human rights we hold dear ? You can pretend that the Iraq war was all about Oil but that is a gross over simplification and misrepresentation of a conflict prompted by much more than that and at it's heart represented a universalism and willingness to stand alongside others who wished for nothing more than the opportunity to aspire to liberal ideals.
The Left has let down many oppressed people in these conflicts by deluding themselves into thinking that groups like the Taliban can be reasoned with or that the victims of such nutjobs should be allowed to remain subjugated in order to ease their own uncomfortable feelings about the harsh bloody realities of liberation. I say this as somebody who I consider to be way farther to the left than either yourself or Miles. Pacifism does not work and the kind of socialism that busies itself only with the interests of it's own members due to something as arbitrary as nationality is acting in a far more self interested way than the most hard hearted of Capitalists.
This is a whole bunch of different arguments to what you were originally on about. And you'relike Lyle in ascribing straw man arguments about liberal and lefties. Whichliberals think the Taliban can be reasoned with?
There's no pretend about it. Iraq was entirely down to it having the world's second-largest oil reserve under its sands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Five countries in the Arabian desert have more thanhalf the world's easily recoverable oil. If it was five coutries around the Sahara desert then a quater of America's foreign firepower would be clustered round those countries, America would be propping up those dictatorships and anytime one of those dictators fell out with America they'd become a credible threat to the national security of the United States.
It's not just a crazy leftie like me who thinks the Iraq war was all about oil. The current US Secretary of Defence thinks it was. The former Chairman of the Federal Reserve thinks it was. And the former top US General running the occupation in Iraq thinks it was.
Hagel: War for Oil | The Weekly Standard
Just clivk and listen for a couple of minutes, it's cued up right to the rlevant bit : EDIT : it is now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sd2JseupXQ&t=21m45s
And in a few years when oil hits two or four hundred dollars a barrel and fucks advanced economies up and countries start threatening each other over supplies it'll become crystal clear to everybody just why we went into Iraq. Almost everybody.