Suicide Bomb in Fuzhou, China (1 Viewer)

[heybraham]

Yes, based on false pretences if you're a wishy washy. But in the real world, it wasn't based on false pretences

yes, the 'mistake' of wmds was simply a convulted excuse hiding an ulterior motive for the war.

Why would the media portray the perspective of the terrorists when they are so utterly pathetic?

ever heard of the neccesity of 'hearing both sides of the argument'? any compromise on this necessity can be classified as ignorance.

It's western prerogative, and we aren't changing for some grease bag. We are immoral and proud of it. They can go and live in the stone age, i don't care. But don't expect us to fall down with them.

if the stone age is devoid of demonstrable exploitation on everything, including humanity itself (and obviously less taxes ), then count me in.

If there were no pathetic insurgents, the US would have no reason to fight, and there would be no deaths, whether they were mistake deaths or not. There would be not one single death in Iraq.

remember the day the war started and the us bombed iraq 'targetting' the military sites? not only was the strike an illegal maneuver,as it had commenced before the war was declared to begin, but it had also killed a number of civilians. there goes your argument...not one single death in iraq...righttttt

 

[supercharged]

The death of the 100,000 iraqi citizens is solely from the actions of insurgents, and insurgents alone. If there were no pathetic insurgents, the US would have no reason to fight, and there would be no deaths, whether they were mistake deaths or not. There would be not one single death in Iraq.

Plenty have also been shot or blown up by American forces or private security contractors. Anyway how can you expect no-one to fight? Just let the Americans barge in and install a US leaning government, plus let the oilfields be sold off to American oil firms with 'no bid' contracts?

 

[Sepulchres]

The fact of the matter is that the insurgency was inflicted by the invasion of US and this knowledge was well within their intelligence. So, they invaded anticipating resistance but they are yet to overcome this resitance well after 3 years of the commencement of this war. If they were so ill-equipped and the full extent of this intelligence was not confirmed, why was the war given the green light? According to Rumsfeld, this invasion was s'posed to cause minimal collateral damage and the death toll is 25000 and still climbing. He was wrong, as was Bush. So, it comes down to this, US is responsible for every Iraqi death as it is their absolute responsibility to protect the Iraqi civilians and preserve what is now a "democracy."

 

[supercharged]

As long as insurgents keep their bombings against American troops in battlefields like Iraq, no one really minds them. It's only when idiot 'sympathisers' go and bomb unrelated innocent cilivians in non combat zones like Madrid or London, that give people the major shits.

American troops blowing up your people? Fine, go and blow up American troops then. Don't touch anyone else.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Yes unfortunately the insurgency seems to be taking a policy of "the ends justify the means".

 

[Sepulchres]

But no one has said what the ultimate goal is of the insurgents?

Do they really expect the US to leave and let them install their own government there?

No, they don't have a real aim, other than to kill every foreigner.

If you havnt noticed, there have been a _LOT_ more Iraqi deaths due to the insurgency than foreigners.

Do they expect US to leave? Of course, who in Iraq doesnt.

Is it likely? No.

Do they still have an aim? Yes they do. An aim remains so, irrespective of the outcome or the possible likelihood of the outcome, well in this case anyway. Lets just say that the insurgents are obliviously determined to drive out the US.

 

[Sepulchres]

And they are doing this because they are loyal patriotic citizens, who are doing it for the good of their own country.. Right?

No, actaually they are doing this because they cannot stand Westerners occupying their land. Whether or not this is in the best interests of the country is another matter.

 

[supercharged]

We gave peace a chance. WE GOT 9/11.

Oh shit that's the most stupid statement I've ever seen.

So prior to 9/11, you actually believe America didn't have a "everything is our business" and "America is GOD" approach to foreign policy?

 

[supercharged]

No you're right. The US stupidly went in an bombed Serbia in defence of Muslims. How stupid of them.

We gave hippy peace a chance, and 9/11 is how we were repayed.

Who is this "we"? Are you an American?

btw America didn't bomb Serbia in defence of muslims. Why would America care if 'xxx-number' of muslim Albanians get killed? Are they going to vote against the President in the next election or have any effect on the US?

America bombed the crap out of Serbia, so that the anti-US/NATO leaning Serbian government would be defeated and overthrown, and a new US/NATO friendly lapdog government installed. It's called eliminating one's enemies and increasing one's sphere of influence.

 

[Sepulchres]

They can't stand foreigners occupying their land?
They feel that the foreigners are threatening their culture... Their way of life? Their religion?
Their ideals?

Ah, yes thats the idea.

Oh.. Really? I'm not at all sure how they could feel that. Why aren't you classifying them as racist, instead of idolising them? ohhhh because you ARE a muslim? oh right. Of COURSE its ok for them to go killing the American invaders, but if an Australian even so much as mentions that we are being threatened by Islam.. MY GOD you better fucking call them a racist or something!?

Heh, comparing apples with oranges are we? Iraq is being occupied by the US military for about 3 years with guns et al. That is not the case in Australia. Case dismissed.

Actually, i suppose that there is a difference. The invasion of Iraq is classified as illegal, when actually, your invasion is quite legimate, as a half-wit worked in the immigration department & majorly f**ked up.

lol. Some invasion it is huh. We're coming to get you. Watch out. Booyah.

 

[heybraham]

No you're right. The US stupidly went in an bombed Serbia in defence of Muslims. How stupid of them.

We gave hippy peace a chance, and 9/11 is how we were repayed.

i don't remember giving hippy peace a chance.

"fuck peace. peace is for noobs. terrorists are sub-human scum, how can u make peace with them. making peace with terrorists is like beastiality. it's just wrong." - the western governments

 

[Comrade nathan]

Here is a book that lists every occasion the US has intervened in some way or another in the affairs of other countries. Some resulting in death. The list begins at 1947.

http://www.killinghope.org/

 

[tempco]

Here is a book that lists every occasion the US has intervened in some way or another in the affairs of other countries. Some resulting in death. The list begins at 1947.

http://www.killinghope.org/

i want that book.

 

[Comrade nathan]

By peace, i don't mean abstinance from war (as that will never happen with man) i mean being a foolish hippy centered society.

I don't really know what you mean. I don't think the US society has ever been like that. After Veitnam due to the inability to stop the Veit Cong public pressure grew at home. As the war continued public opinion swayed more to opposing the war.

After the defeat, US policy of war changed to covert action rather then full invasion, up untill 1991.

So while it appeared the US was not at war with anyone, they were fighting in every continent.

And the US in the majority of cases has intervened in the interests of stability.

I dont agree, i believe they did it for their own economic interests. For instance they have intervened in countries whos leaders were elected. The most known example is Chile with Salvador Allende. This is common all over Latin america, were leftist governments were in power and the US intervened resulting in less stability and civil.

Also in regard to Cuba, which has had a stable country, with a set back with the collapse of the USSR. Though we find attempt after attempt of the US to try and destablise the country. The US even had a medical and literacy program that they were going to impose when they remove the Communist Party of Cuba, which Fidel often mocks, since Cuba has a higher literacy rate then the US and medical services to all.

So in all cases the US regardless if the situation was stable or instable had put US intentions over the country they were "annexing".

 

[supercharged]

Compare the 90s with the 19th century, or even the 1950's. We did give peace a chance, and september the 11th was how we were rewarded.

STFU with this "we" business. 9/11 was in New York, NOT Sydney

What peace? When has there ever been peace? Conflicts happen around the world all the time, many sponsored by larger hidden interests in furthering their 'geo-political' objectives.

 

[Iron]

I think the 'we' point is meant to mean that your use of the term is offensive to the majority of people who clearly think different to you.
I.e it's highly arrogant and wrong to claim to speak for everyone

 

[Iron]

No i meant 'We' as in nation-states that make up western civilisation.

All your posts are full of references to 'we'.

 

[Comrade nathan]

I think America is rich and powerfull enough to not have to go and do it for their own interests.

America is rich an powerfull because they do such things as stop leftist movements in other countries so they can install neo-liberal governments.

They rely on the third world for their high standard of living. If they allow 3rd world countries to nationalise their resources then they would not have access to cheap labour and resources.

Just how is liberating another country, doing it for their own interests?

They have liberated no country. Look Haiti, thats a prime example of US imperialism. Look the Contras in Nicaragua, look what happen to Chile. You can go tell the families of Latin America they were liberated.

Obviously if they interfered in a country, they had a worthwhile reason to.

Excactly, to keep the living standards of the ruling class and the middle class of the US.

That they are forced to work against their will etc.

No thats wrong. For instance in 1998 more then 60 000 doctors were working over seas, in some of the most poorest countries. Now these people had many chances to leave and seek asylum and make their way to the US.

And even if it does have a higher literacy rate, what can be done with it?

For a 3rd world country its quite amazing what they can do with so little.

The bottom of the US still has more of an oppurtunity in life with freedom than the smartest of the Cubans under communism.

Bullshit. The lumpen proletariat rarely move up any ladder of succes. The bottom of the US many end up dead, or sick and poor.


Anti Americanism is growing through the Middle East and Latin America. In Latin America any party which proposes to remove US influence military or economically are gaining more then ever votes in elections.

In Iraq the resistence has not died down, and every party proposed to remove the US military. So even the people who voted, voted to remove the US.

These are the people who have been "liberated" by the US, they are showing their thanks with bullets, morters, and a growing market in body bags.

 

[supercharged]

We, as in the western world. We gave the non western world a chance, and we were spat in the face.

There has been peace.. As i said, compare the 90's, with the 50's.

I think America is rich and powerfull enough to not have to go and do it for their own interests. Just how is liberating another country, doing it for their own interests? What could they possibly get from Vietnam or else where? The middle east, yes the oil is a good lie, as it does seem tempting to steal the oil.. But wrong! Not only are you influenced by left propaganda, but you know its propaganda and you love it and you go along with it, just because you hate America.

So according to you the western world = America?
Not every country in the western world is America's bitch, countries such as France, Germany, New Zealand are well known examples

How did 9/11 slap them in the face? They don't really give two hoots because they aren't Americans.

And how is the 90's supposed to be more peaceful than the 50's? Sure no big Korean War but the Gulf war, Balkans conflicts, Rwanda genocide spring in as bloody replacements.

What's this liberation you speak of? Who has been 'liberated'? Does 'liberation' mean your country gets bombed out, government overthrown and a new leadership installed by GOD (America)?

America's war in Vietnam was supposedly about 'liberating' or preventing a pro-US government in South Vietnam from a northern communist takeover. However most Americans now realise that going into the Vietnam war was an unwinnable mistake.

Why shouldn't Vietnam become an anti-US, communist country if that's what they want? It's their own choice and their own country. America tried to 'liberate' them to prop up America strategic interests, and they got their arses burnt by the Vietnamese people.

 

[Sepulchres]

I think America is rich and powerfull enough to not have to go and do it for their own interests. Just how is liberating another country, doing it for their own interests? What could they possibly get from Vietnam or else where? The middle east, yes the oil is a good lie, as it does seem tempting to steal the oil.. But wrong! Not only are you influenced by left propaganda, but you know its propaganda and you love it and you go along with it, just because you hate America.

lol. That seems rather ironic coming from you cause you are like the ultimate free thinker who isnt influenced by propaganda one bit.