Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: 9/11: 10 years on .....


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/14/2011 5:53:08 PM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline 		Like most folks who are evaluating the costs of war from a safe distance, you've forgotten that wars require the sacrifice of lives and that the commanders at the time do not have 20/20 hindsight.

"It is clear from everything you wrote you will seek out any excuse and swallow any morsal of propaganda to justify massive attacks upon civilian population centers. You contradict your previous assertion that we nuked those cities "to show em." Either they were significant military targets or we committed acts of terror to instill fear and sap civilian morale. Obviously, you use the former argument to obfuscate the reality of the war crimes committed against innocent civilians."

There was a running tension between American's such as Eaker who espoused precision bombing and the English strategic bombing force led by Arthur Harris (apparently he disliked the nickname "bomber"). While their relationships were collegial and even warm, there was definitely a difference of opinion. Harris disliked any specific targets- he thought that they were panaceas- especially because the German war machine did not collapse as quickly as hoped. His response- if the Germans have sown the wind, they will now reap the whirlwind. Basically, do unto the Germans what they did to the English, but multiplied. Was this terrorism? Well, the Germans termed the bomber crews Terrorflieger, so you know where they stood, but these were the same folks that thought that shoveling Jews, Poles, Gypsies, gays, and mentally retarded into ovens was just peachy.

Harris was quite happy burning out cities. The US focused on smaller targets such as factories- but there were times when the weather didn't permit visual bombing so they used the same navigational aids as the English- and hoped that the bombs did some good. When the war was over, the Strategic Bombing Survey evaluated things- and discovered that one panacea target- oil- had done the trick. However, this was all with the benefit of hindsight, and Harris decisions were reviewed by the people in the gov't running the show- Churchill had to approve.

I've laid all this out- because while you complain that I conflated the goals of military targets with targeting civilian morale, it's clear that both were goals of strategic bombing- the doctrine of which evolved over time.

When bombing Japan- the precision attacks didn't do so hot- the weather over Japan was brutal, people didn't know about the jet stream and B-29 losses were high. So Curtis LeMay came in from Europe, and adopted Harris's tactics- the B-29s went in low, at night, with lots of incendiaries and they began burning out Japanese cities.

Yes, I know that the Emperor of Japan was Hirohito. However, his younger brother, Prince Takamatsu was the liason with the military, Hirohito was pretty far removed from the decisions of the war, although he did give his blessing for its start.

In terms of using the nukes-the idea that we'd wait for Japan after 4 years of war to finally decide to surrender is ridiculous due to economics, political pressure internally, and yeah, the Russians did declare war, somewhat akin to the Italians deciding to stab the French in the back- except the Russians were never friendly with the Japanese. Do you think the US would have stood around, keeping so many of its men in the military waiting for Japan to surrender? Don't think so- which meant either invasion or nuking. Nuking saved US lives- and probably Japanese lives as well. Why don't the Japanese get to take some responsibility for their actions? They're not exactly innocent here. Let me suggest that you check your facts before proposing unrealistic alternatives from the armchair comfort of hindsight.

Since every time we've tried to do peace by unilaterally disarming, we find ourselves at the mercy of some tin pot dictator with delusions of grandeur- it's clear that pacifism doesn't work. At the end of the day, there are monsters out there, that have to be put down, otherwise, lots of innocent folks die. Sorry- that's the choice in the real world. Anything else is just a fantasy.

With all that being said- there's a world of difference between a state bent on warfare, and a bunch of criminals out of a James Bond movie who just want to kill a lot of people for fun- a la 9/11. I doubt that OBL had any ideas beyond blowing up the buildings- what was he hoping to accomplish other than the morass that we waded into?

Sam


< Message edited by samboct -- 9/14/2011 5:56:16 PM >

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/14/2011 6:14:27 PM   
Aneirin


Posts: 6121
Joined: 3/18/2006
From: Tamaris
Status: offline 		Well, seeing as it is ten years on, an article from the anti war perspective;

What 9/11 wrought; The Bush Legacy by P.J Buchanan

And some stuff from the UK guardian Newspaper

Perhaps if you inside the mess can't see what is going on seek those on the outside looking in.

_____________________________

Everything we are is the result of what we have thought, the mind is everything, what we think, we become - Guatama Buddha

Conservatism is distrust of people tempered by fear - William Gladstone

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/14/2011 7:52:34 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

But since when did I support a military, i.e. large scale invasion of either Iraq or Afghanistan? I've been against the Iraq invasion from the get go knowing that the claims of chem/bio weapons were pure fantasy. Afghanistan has been a sinkhole for any country that tries to do anything to improve the place. Seems to me that you have me mixed up with somebody else, although even your own post acknowledges that I was against the Iraq war.

However, let's look at your claim that the military invention solves nothing

Samboct,

1. My claim is not " that the military invention solves nothing". My claim is that a purely military counter-terrorist strategy is doomed to failure. Further, until the underlying political factors are addressed, it's unlikely any counter-terrorist strategy will succeed. Iraq and Afghanistan are prime examples of purely military strategies failing in the region under examination for the reasons I've stated.
So a great deal of your post doesn't address my position at all. The conventional warfare references seem quite irrelevant to me.

2. That aside, you seem to be agreeing that military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan has been futile. Yet previously you have criticised what you call a policy of "appeasement", that you have insisted I have been promoting.

This leaves me at a loss as to what you are actually suggesting.

You nominate Libya as good example of US military action. I agree - the US's policy in Libya has been to support local revolutionaries politically logistically and to a very limited extent militarily. It has been successful to date, with minimal outlay and zero casualties. Sadly for this discussion, Libya wasn't a terrorist situation so its direct relevance is limited.

So bearing mind your claim that "appeasement" (whatever that means) won't work, and your seeming agreement that purely military interventions don't work either, what exactly are you suggesting? What is your proposal for a successful counter-terrorist strategy?

This:
quote:


From my perspective, there's the military goal, and then the political goal of nation building. They're actually separate actions, so don't blame the failures of nation building on the military goals. It may be wise to not invade a country if you're going to get stuck with an impossible nation building task, but I'm not so sure the removal of strong men followed by chaos is such a terrible outcome, although that's a separate debate....However, if you hogtie the military, then you run the risk of some guy like Hitler running amok and enslaving people. In short, we do need a military- we just have to be far more cautious in its use. Our US military is too large- something our founding fathers warned us against, because it encourages us to get into unwinnable wars with the idea that we still can take care of something important. I think how we've handled Libya is a much better demonstration of the utility of military intervention. Had their been a home grown revolt against Saddam, the limited support, i.e. air cover, would have been my vote there as well.


seems rather vague to me. While it contains some useful insights, I don't see the outlines of a successful counter-terrorist strategy there.

Here's mine. I have all along insisted that addressing the underlying political factors that give rise to terrorism must be at the heart of any counter-terrorist strategy (which could include a concurrent military component). The main goal is isolating/separating terrorists from their support base on which they rely totally. This is a proven successful counter-terrorist strategy.

I'm looking forward to hearing a specific outline of your idea of a successful counter-terrorist strategy, and relevant reasons why you feel the strategy I've outlined shouldn't be pursued.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 9/14/2011 7:54:27 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/15/2011 5:44:26 AM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline 		OK Tweak, I'll bite-

1) Getting OBL seems to have been utterly removed from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Plain old fashioned detective work found him, and the force needed to take him out was a couple of platoons.

2) Making the assumption that we actually had some reason to be in Iraq or Afghanistan, then nation building does the following:

a) improves the lives of the average citizen. This can include roads, hospitals, schools and other infrastructure.
b) does not promote warfare with anybody else.

I suspect we agree on this point- its effectively changing the political equation around your presence. The people there have to be grateful or at least desirous of your help. I've heard stories about how copper pipe mysteriously vanished in Iraq, until the military people stationed there explained to the villagers that it was intended to help rebuild their plumbing- and then it miraculously appeared the next morning. Working in a region where thievery is common makes nation building very expensive. Note- in Germany post WWII, this kind of thievery was a lot less common than Iraq, but there was still a flourishing black market. Iraq and Afghanistan are sinkholes for this reason.

We've spend more on nation building in Afghanistan than their GDP. This is why you don't invade countries like that. I have no idea on where India stands with all this, but it seems like they'd have a vested interest.

Where we disagree....giving in to the terrorist demands to do something about the state of Israel. There need to be strings attached to the nation building- you don't get hospitals, schools and roads if you're going to go attack another country. What you need to do is show that the villages who've decided to be peaceful get goodies, those that want to kill people, don't. Hence your arguments about Israel are irrelevant to the nation building that needs to take place. From a US perspective, getting Israel to change its borders would probably be cheaper than polishing the manure that is Afghanistan to try and make a diamond. Iraq is something of a different story- it used to be a functional country, even with Gawddam running the place, but the principal is the same. First rule of nation building- worry about what goes on in your own country. What the hell have Jews in Israel got to do with whether or not a village in Iraq has a doc and running water, or whether a shopkeeper can count on supplies to run a business?

The US is actually pretty good at nation building- we did a great job post WWII. But even prior to that, during the 1920s and 30s when we were getting involved in some brushfire wars in Central and South America, we often did some nation building then too. Being a soldier often meant that you weren't carrying a rifle, you were using a hoe to plant crops. Unfortunately, with so few people in this country involved in agriculture, a bunch of those skills need to be taught to our own guys first.

Klar?


Sam


(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/16/2011 5:31:46 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline 		Here's an extract from Chris Hedges' "A Decade After 9/11: We Are What We Loathe". It makes the point I've been trying to make from an American perspective.

"We make sense of the present only through the lens of the past, as the French philosopher Maurice Halbwachs pointed out, recognizing that “our conceptions of the past are affected by the mental images we employ to solve present problems, so that collective memory is essentially a reconstruction of the past in the light of the present. … Memory needs continuous feeding from collective sources and is sustained by social and moral props.”

There would soon, however, be another reaction. Those of us who were close to the epicenters of the 9/11 attacks would primarily grieve and mourn. Those who had some distance would indulge in the growing nationalist cant and calls for blood that would soon triumph over reason and sanity. Nationalism was a disease I knew intimately as a war correspondent. It is anti-thought. It is primarily about self-exaltation. The flip side of nationalism is always racism, the dehumanization of the enemy and all who appear to question the cause. The plague of nationalism began almost immediately. My son, who was 11, asked me what the difference was between cars flying small American flags and cars flying large American flags.

“The people with the really big flags are the really big assholes,” I told him.

The dead in the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania were used to sanctify the state’s lust for war. To question the rush to war became to dishonor our martyrs. Those of us who knew that the attacks were rooted in the long night of humiliation and suffering inflicted by Israel on the Palestinians, the imposition of our military bases in the Middle East and in the brutal Arab dictatorships that we funded and supported became apostates. We became defenders of the indefensible. We were apologists, as Christopher Hitchens shouted at me on a stage in Berkeley, “for suicide bombers.”

Because few cared to examine our activities in the Muslim world, the attacks became certified as incomprehensible by the state and its lap dogs, the press. Those who carried out the attacks were branded as rising out of a culture and religion that was at best primitive and probably evil. The Quran—although it forbids suicide as well as the murder of women and children—was painted as a manual for fanaticism and terror. The attackers embodied the titanic clash of civilizations, the cosmic battle under way between good and evil, the forces of light and darkness. Images of the planes crashing into the towers and heroic rescuers emerging from the rubble were played and replayed. We were deluged with painful stories of the survivors and victims. The deaths and falling towers became iconographic. The ceremonies of remembrance were skillfully hijacked by the purveyors of war and hatred. They became vehicles to justify doing to others what had been done to us. And as innocents died here, soon other innocents began to die in the Muslim world. A life for a life. Murder for murder. Death for death. Terror for terror."



The full piece by Hedges is well worth reading and can be found here.

_____________________________



(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/16/2011 5:40:36 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline 		At least your true to form, fawning over a socialist and anti-Semite.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/16/2011 6:56:01 PM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline 		Tweak-

Seems to me that Hedges falls into the same trap as he accuses the rest of us have fallen into...depersonalizing your enemy. Look at his exchange with his 11 y.o. boy. His response to the kid's question about the size of flags-"well, they're assholes". That seems to be using a very broad brush to tar a lot of people who merely have a different viewpoint. That's a real demonstration of tolerance to a child....

I found his elitism and arrogance breathtaking- there are many of us in the US that were against invading Iraq, scratching our heads as to what the connection between Iraq and Al Qaida was...

Sam

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 2:35:54 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline 		fr

I have to laugh every time I hear the words "Al Queada", since its literal translation is "Data Base".

It was the CIA database of the US sanctioned Mujahadein fighters.

Osama's database gang!  

Nope I dont fall for that shit, next!  LOL  


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 2:38:49 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

At least your true to form, fawning over a socialist and anti-Semite.


and you are an antimuslimist bigot


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 2:45:49 PM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

At least your true to form, fawning over a socialist and anti-Semite.


and you are an antimuslimist bigot



And youre a proven fraud. "Data Base" LMAO. What a fucking maroon.

_____________________________

Hear the lark
and harken
to the barking of the dogfox,
gone to ground.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 2:53:33 PM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

At least your true to form, fawning over a socialist and anti-Semite.


and you are an antimuslimist bigot



And youre a proven fraud. "Data Base" LMAO. What a fucking maroon.

How sweet: "Duelling Trolljos".
*hums theme from Deliverance*

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 5:30:01 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

At least your true to form, fawning over a socialist and anti-Semite.


and you are an antimuslimist bigot



And youre a proven fraud. "Data Base" LMAO. What a fucking maroon.

How sweet: "Duelling Trolljos".
*hums theme from Deliverance*


yeh a well known liar and all around bullshitter claiming someone is a fraud, *hums theme from Deliverance* with ya.


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 9:24:27 PM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline
quote:

10 years on, what has been achieved?
Well there's all that oil in Iraq....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_A_2XPLN4M


_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 10:48:20 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline 		its about keeping the money in the hands of the few so they take over a country in the name of democracy and force them to sell it and pretend they have no fucking idea why everyone hates us.

well they are shitting in their panties now because everyone who has tried this get 1000 times output than what they put in so their fucking rip off days are numbers.

When you have infinite power you dont need any of that shit you can make amoung lube oil from garbage if you need it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSHl1TSctrk

these are kids, getting it done!


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to Arpig)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 10:51:02 PM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

there are many of us in the US that were against invading Iraq, scratching our heads as to what the connection between Iraq and Al Qaida was...


There are many people around the world, including me, who share your scepticism about the motives for invading Iraq, who also fail to see any connection between AQ and Iraq, or between Iraq and 9/11.

It's rarely mentioned nowadays, but among the original (c1995) reasons advanced by the neo-cons for the invasion of Iraq was the goal of eliminating a leading anti-Zionist force in the region and making the region more sympathetic to Israel. While this reason has little appeal to any one other than a confirmed Zionist, it was central to the neo-cons's thinking. The neo-cons seemed to be under the delusion that the Arab peoples were more sympathetic to Israel than their then leaders. As we're currently discovering the opposite is true. But then the truth is so often the opposite of the neo-con and far Right BS talked about the region.

It's worth noting that this insane idea was advanced years before 9/11. The horrors of 9/11 provided the excuse that allowed the neo-cons to realise their disastrous fantasy. Rumsfeld, for example, advocating bombing Iraq on the day that the towers were destroyed. This whole debacle is just one example of how US interests are subjugated to Israeli interests by the Zionist lobby in the US:

"[T]he test of every policy the Administration develops in the Middle East is whether it is consistent with the goal of ensuring Israel’s future as a secure, Jewish, democratic state. That is a commitment that runs as a common thread through our entire government, even while approaching the U.S.-Israel relationship and regional challenges from a variety of perspectives.
This test explains our extraordinary security cooperation, our stand against the delegitimization of Israel, our efforts on Iran, our response to the Arab Spring, and our efforts[sic] on Israeli-Palestinian peace. "
US Ambassador to Israel Shapiro 9/6/2011 (full text available here)

If, as you've repeatedly stated, you're unable to understand the linkages between events in the ME, that's about as clear and succinct a statement of them as you're likely to see.


< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 9/17/2011 11:07:44 PM >

_____________________________



(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/17/2011 11:04:31 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

there are many of us in the US that were against invading Iraq, scratching our heads as to what the connection between Iraq and Al Qaida was...


There are many people around the world, including me, who share your scepticism about the motives for invading Iraq, who also fail to see any connection between AQ and Iraq, or between Iraq and 9/11.

It's rarely mentioned nowadays, but among the original (c1995) reasons advanced by the neo-cons for the invasion of Iraq was the goal of eliminating a leading anti-Zionist force in the region and making the region more sympathetic to Israel. While this reason has little appeal to any one other than a confirmed Zionist, it was central to the neo-cons's thinking. The neo-cons seemed to be under the delusion that the Arab peoples were more sympathetic to Israel than their then leaders. As we're currently discovering the opposite is true. But then the truth is so often the opposite of the neo-con and far Right BS talked about the region.

It's worth noting that this insane idea was advanced years before 9/11. The horrors of 9/11 provided the excuse that allowed the neo-cons to realise their disastrous fantasy. Rumsfeld, for example, advocating bombing Iraq on the day that the towers were destroyed. This whole debacle is just one example of how US interests are subjugated to Israeli interests by the Zionist lobby in the US:

"[T]he test of every policy the Administration develops in the Middle East is whether it is consistent with the goal of ensuring Israel’s future as a secure, Jewish, democratic state.

yep that part we get :)



I guess htey dont have the "establishment of religion" clause.

That is a commitment that runs as a common thread through our entire government, even while approaching the U.S.-Israel relationship and regional challenges from a variety of perspectives.
This test explains our extraordinary security cooperation, our stand against the delegitimization of Israel, our efforts on Iran, our response to the Arab Spring, and our efforts[sic] on Israeli-Palestinian peace. "
US Ambassador to Israel Shapiro 9/6/2011 (full text available here)

If you're unable to see the linkages between events in the ME, that's about as clear and succinct a statement of them as you're likely to see.



yep they are legit because we have bigger guns than they do! 

 Its the deMOBratic way!

Hell america shits on it own people, who can expect any different anywhere else. 

< Message edited by Real0ne -- 9/17/2011 11:06:30 PM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/19/2011 5:25:25 AM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline 		"This whole debacle is just one example of how US interests are subjugated to Israeli interests by the Zionist lobby in the US"

Tweak-

Good grief! What kind of twaddle is neo-zionist conspiracy? Have you ever seen a conspiracy theory that held water for 5 minutes?

Most Jews in the US are in New York- heck, New York used to have a larger Jewish population than Israel and for all I know, it still does. Does NY have any Senators that are Republican? OK, they've now got a few congressman in that bloc- but really....Bush lost this region of the country big time, and that was an administration that heavily rewarded most of its supporters. (Actually the fundamentalist christians that supported Bush heavily got bupkes, but that's another thread.)

The reasons that the US supports Israel are numerous:

1) There's oil in the Mideast that's vital to the global economy at this point.
2) The countries with oil have capriciously raised the price of oil, and cut off supply- witness the 1973 oil embargo.
3) All of the countries with oil have a culture where they play both ends against the middle. Who built the Aswan dam in Egypt? You may note the large quantities of FSU/Russian supplied arms in the armed forces of Eqypt, Jordan, Iraq, etc.
4) The only solid ally in the region that the US has is Israel-which unfortunately doesn't have oil. I mean really, we're supporting the only patch of desert in that region without the bloody black stuff! How whacko is that?
5) Yes, there are US Jews that support the country that are politically connected, but the US as a whole supports Israel.
6) Israeli/US technology links go far beyond oil. Stem cell therapies are being developed at the Weizman Institute in Israel which does world class science- per capita, Israel may be winning more Nobel prizes than nearly everyone. Arab science institutes are hamstrung by religion and even with nice facilities and funding, have delivered little. Think that the US and Israel might have some cultural connections too?

From a US standpoint, Israel has economic ties to the US, hung by its accords, and has never made overtures to either Russia or China. None of the Arab states can make that claim. If Israel did not exist, or would be less powerful militarily, the oil producing states would quickly tell the US and the rest of the world to take a long walk off a short pier.

The idea that the US invaded Iraq post 9/11 due to Israeli pressure or Jewish pressure in this country is laughable. The invasion of Iraq has far more to do with a son trying to impress his daddy than anything else.


Sam

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/19/2011 6:15:20 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

The idea that the US invaded Iraq post 9/11 due to Israeli pressure or Jewish pressure in this country is laughable. The invasion of Iraq has far more to do with a son trying to impress his daddy than anything else.


Please don't distort my words. I specifically attributed that to the neo-cons. Why do you distort things?

Ever heard of AIPAC? Check it out. That is the vehicle for Zionist domination of your body politic.

They are the people who cause you to act against your own best interests, to support c 6 million in a region of hundreds of millions, who earn you the approbation the rest of the world feels about US support for Israel.

Whether you choose to ignore reality and believe the Zionist fairy story or listen to what the rest of the world has been telling you for decades is up to you. Your country your choice and if you make the wrong choices - then the consequences are all yours too. That's one lesson of 9/11 as it's widely seen outside the US. If you're unable or unwilling to face up to it - that's your choice too.

As you clearly don't want to listen, there's no point in telling you any more is there?

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 9/19/2011 6:17:18 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/19/2011 8:16:21 AM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline 		Tweak

The quote above was your words. I'm not a mind reader and at this point, I'm just confused. On one hand you say the following:

"It's rarely mentioned nowadays, but among the original (c1995) reasons advanced by the neo-cons for the invasion of Iraq was the goal of eliminating a leading anti-Zionist force in the region and making the region more sympathetic to Israel. While this reason has little appeal to any one other than a confirmed Zionist, it was central to the neo-cons's thinking. The neo-cons seemed to be under the delusion that the Arab peoples were more sympathetic to Israel than their then leaders."

Are you suggesting that the neo cons are confirmed Zionists? Or do the neo cons think that Arabs were supportive of Israel? Seems to me that you're arguing that the nutty neocons came up with an idea to invade Iraq back in 1995, but that this wacko idea was palatable because the US is subjugated to Zionist interests...

I find both of these statements to be laughable- even the neo cons aren't that delusional to think that Arabs like Israel, and the neo cons have definitely decided for political reasons to be uber supportive of Israel. And it's perhaps even more farfetched to claim that the US is a tool of Israel with no interests of its own.

That's how I read your above post.

I found that Tom Friedman's recent editorial in the NY Times summed up my viewpoint as well: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/18/opinion/sunday/friedman-israel-adrift-at-sea-alone.html?src=me&ref=general


Sam

< Message edited by samboct -- 9/19/2011 8:17:31 AM >

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... - 9/19/2011 8:55:28 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

Are you suggesting that the neo cons are confirmed Zionists? Or do the neo cons think that Arabs were supportive of Israel? Seems to me that you're arguing that the nutty neocons came up with an idea to invade Iraq back in 1995, but that this wacko idea was palatable because the US is subjugated to Zionist interests..


I suggested that one of the motivations underlying the neo-con project re-draw the map of the ME was to advantage Israel, quite different to the nonsense you are suggesting I said.

You will find a detailed account of the neo-con-Likud/Zionist alignment here:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/09/03/the-bush-neo-cons-and-israel/

You'll find the 1998 neo-con statement calling for the invasion of Iraq here:
http://www.iraqwatch.org/perspectives/rumsfeld-openletter.htm

Note the signatories - including Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz Feith, Perle, Armitage, Bolton, etc - all intransigent hawks on Israel and aligned with Likud. It's seems your memory doesn't extend as far back as those days. Mine does (even if I got the year wrong) The 'benefits' to Israel were clearly articulated by those people up to and after the Iraq invasion, and widely discussed in the media too.

It makes a lot more sense than relying on Bush The Dumber's Oedipal neuroses.

_____________________________



(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: 9/11: 10 years on ..... Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 [7] 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109