P2P-Zone  

Go Back   P2P-Zone > Political Asylum
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Political Asylum Publicly Debate Politics, War, Media.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 16-03-04, 05:25 PM   #21
Sinner
--------------------
 
Sinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,379
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by theknife
go reread my post - what i'm saying is that invading a country to get at a terrorist underground movement is an enourmous misplacement of resources, because a)you create enourmous good will for the terrorists, b) the terrorists simply resurface elsewhere and c) your resources are bogged down for years doing things like nation-building and peace keeping.


I read your post again and I still say you have no clue what you are talking about when you group the IRA with the rest of those groups. The IRA were and are not a terrorist undergroud movement. If you say they are then you will also have to say the British Government the largest working terrorist group in the world with Irsael a close second.

Quote:
are we winning? how do you quantify that? in terms of net number of terrorists, i'd bet there are more now than there were two years ago. in terms of terrorists attacks, there have been more large scale attacks in the last year (e.g. Bali, Turkey, Madrid) than in previous three years, with the obvious exception of 9/11. saying we're winning because 9/11 hasn't happened again is fallacy because you can't prove a negative correlation.
More large scale attacks? You are ignoring the Clinton years then right? The USA warned Bali about an attack and they ignored it, Turkey has always had problems, and Madrid is to bad, all are heartbreaking events. How many Americans were killed in these attacks? There has not been a large scale attack on an American target. Not even a soft target, and don't get me wrong, the terrorist are planning one, we are just going to have to have faith in the Government to stop it.

Quote:
two and 1/2 years into the "war on terror", the only pertinent question is this: "is the world a safer place than it was before 9/11?" if the answer is no, than it might be a good idea to re-examine the strategy, no?
No. two and 1/2 years and you want to throw in the towel? How many years did it take after the American Revolution before there was peace? We will win this war. 2 1/2 years is nothing.....
__________________
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend

Last edited by Sinner : 16-03-04 at 05:40 PM.
Sinner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-03-04, 05:46 PM   #22
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Sinner


No. two and 1/2 years and you want to throw in the towel? How many years did it take after the American Revolution before there was peace? We will win this war. 2 1/2 years is nothing.....
heh, i remember a week into the war in Iraq people with knifes mindset were shouting that the war was a failure because we hadn't won yet so i don't read too much into their doomsaying.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-03-04, 06:58 PM   #23
theknife
my name is Ranking Fullstop
 
theknife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by span
heh, i remember a week into the war in Iraq people with knifes mindset were shouting that the war was a failure because we hadn't won yet so i don't read too much into their doomsaying.
you don't read much, period - and neither does Sinner. the only issue i'm talking about here is whether the war in Iraq has been an effective strategy in the war on terror. you guys seems to have a little trouble grasping the thread here...

Sinner got a little side-tracked by my use of the IRA as an example. your pals in the White House consider them a terrorist group, but the one-man's-terrorist-is-another-man's-freedom-fighter argument is a whole 'nother thread.

the point remains: while the war in Iraq has was sold to the world as a strategic necessity in the war on terror, to date, there is only evidence to the contrary.
theknife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-03-04, 08:12 PM   #24
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by theknife

the point remains: while the war in Iraq has was sold to the world as a strategic necessity in the war on terror, to date, there is only evidence to the contrary.
Report: Saddam Harbored Terrorists Who Killed Americans

Saddam Hussein supplied financial support, training and shelter for an array of deadly terrorist organizations right up until the onset of the Iraq war a year ago, including such notorious groups as Hamas, Ansar al-Islam, the Palestinian Liberation Front, the Abu Nidal Organization and the Arab Liberation Front, according to a comprehensive report released by the Hudson Institute.

Titled "Saddam's Philanthropy of Terror," the report details the role played by terrorists supported by Saddam's regime in an array of infamous attacks that have killed hundreds of American citizens both inside and outside the U.S. before and after the Sept. 11 attacks - including the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro, the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the Palestinian Intifada.

Compiled by Deroy Murdock, a Senior Fellow with the Atlas Economic Research Foundation in Fairfax, Va., and columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service, the report chronicles Saddam's support for:

# Abdul Rahman Yasin, who was indicted for mixing the chemicals for the bomb used in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six New Yorkers and injured over 1,000. Yasin fled to Baghdad after the attack, where he was given sanctuary and lived for years afterward.

# Khala Khadar al-Salahat, a top Palestinian deputy to Abu Nidal, who reportedly furnished Libyan agents with the Semtex explosive used to blow up Pan Am Flight 103 in December 1988. The attack killed all 259 passengers, including 189 Americans. Al-Salahat was in Baghdad last April and was taken into custody by U.S. Marines.

# Abu Nidal, whose terror organization is credited with dozens of attacks that killed over 400 people, including 10 Americans, and wounding 788 more. Nidal lived in Baghdad from 1999 till August 2002, when he was found shot to death in his state-supplied home.

# Abu Abbas, who masterminded the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro cruise ship, during which wheelchair-bound American Leon Klinghoffer was pushed over the side to his death. U.S. troops captured Abbas in Baghdad on April 14, 2003. He died in U.S. custody last week.

# Abu Musab al Zarqawi, who ran an Ansar al-Islam terrorist training camp in northern Iraq and reportedly arranged the October 2002 assassination of U.S. diplomat Lawrence Foley in Jordan. Al Zarqawi is still at large.

# Ramzi Yousef, who entered the U.S. on an Iraqi passport and was the architect of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing as well as Operation Bojinka, a foiled plot to explode 12 U.S. airliners over the Pacific. Bojinka was later adopted by Yousef's cousin Khalid Shaikh Mohammed as the blueprint for the Sept. 11 attacks.

Arrested in Pakistan in 1995, Yousef is currently serving a triple life sentence in Colorado's Supermax federal lockup.

# Mahmoud Besharat, the Palestinian businessman who traveled to Baghdad in March 2002 to collect funding from Saddam for the Palestinian Intifada. Besharat and others disbursed the funds in payments of $10,000 to $25,000 to West Bank families of terrorists who died trying to kill Israelis.

After Saddam announced his Intifada reward plan, 28 Palestinian homicide bombers killed 211 Israelis in attacks that also killed 12 Americans. A total of 1,209 people were injured.

For more details on Saddam Hussein's sponsorship of the terrorist networks that killed hundreds of innocent U.S. citizens, go to: http://www.hudson.org/files/publicat...damarticle.pdf

link
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-03-04, 09:16 PM   #25
theknife
my name is Ranking Fullstop
 
theknife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Promontorium Tremendum
Posts: 4,391
Default

the Hudson report fits my contention nicely - every terrorist incident listed is credited to people who were terrorists before they ever got to Iraq. the incidents listed occurred independently of Iraq, without any established cause-and-effect relationship. no question, Iraq would be a stop on the Wide World Of Terror tour, but should it be the main event? in terms of getting a return on our investment in the war on terror, the cost/benefit relationship remains quite thin.


the question remains: 550 + dead American soldiers and hundreds of billions of dollars later, has the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq reduced terrorism and made the world a safer place?

not yet.
theknife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-03-04, 10:46 PM   #26
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by theknife
the Hudson report fits my contention nicely - every terrorist incident listed is credited to people who were terrorists before they ever got to Iraq. the incidents listed occurred independently of Iraq, without any established cause-and-effect relationship. no question, Iraq would be a stop on the Wide World Of Terror tour, but should it be the main event? in terms of getting a return on our investment in the war on terror, the cost/benefit relationship remains quite thin.


the question remains: 550 + dead American soldiers and hundreds of billions of dollars later, has the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq reduced terrorism and made the world a safer place?

not yet.
eh, my belief is you gotta start somewhere, why not start with the guy that has shown a propensity for being rather open to terrorists and in fact commited terrorists acts through his infiitada funding? it's better than wondering around aimlessly hoping something falls in your lap which seemed to be Clinton's strategy and would likely be Kerry's.

it may be cold to say but if those 550 lives somehow, through some Kevin Bacon 6 degrees of seperation, stops another 3000 American lives from being lost then it was all worth it.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-03-04, 03:03 AM   #27
floydian slip
===\/------/\===
 
floydian slip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,704
Default

I wonder what the world thinks about having American Troops in these many countries:
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Antigua
Argentina
Azerbaijan
Australia
Austria
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belgium
Belize
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Bulgaria
Burma
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Chad
Chile
China
Columbia
Congo
Costa Rica
Cote D'lvoire
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Guinea
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iraq
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Jamaica
Japan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Liberia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Malaysia
Malta
Mexico
Mongolia
Morocco
Mozambique
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua Niger
Nigeria
North Korea
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia and Montenegro
Singapore
Sierra Leone
Slovenia
Spain
South Africa
South Korea
Sri Lanka
Suriname
Syria
Sweden
Switzerland
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Venezuela
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance8.html
floydian slip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-03-04, 05:56 AM   #28
span
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,260
Default

most of those countries probably have less than 20 troops in country, plus the troops wouldn't be there if those countries governments didn't want them there.
span is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-03-04, 10:28 AM   #29
Sinner
--------------------
 
Sinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,379
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by theknife
you don't read much, period - and neither does Sinner. the only issue i'm talking about here is whether the war in Iraq has been an effective strategy in the war on terror. you guys seems to have a little trouble grasping the thread here...

Sinner got a little side-tracked by my use of the IRA as an example. your pals in the White House consider them a terrorist group, but the one-man's-terrorist-is-another-man's-freedom-fighter argument is a whole 'nother thread.

the point remains: while the war in Iraq has was sold to the world as a strategic necessity in the war on terror, to date, there is only evidence to the contrary.


Your crystal ball is wrong knife...I do read....so do you by the looks of it, to bad you read a bunch of non-sense and buy into it.

Your link doesn't work (http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/tgp/rira.htm), but I notice it says RIRA in it. If you had any idea at all on what you were taking about you would know the RIRA and the IRA are two different groups.


EDIT---- I am not going to say the IRA never used violence because we have, but to say the IRA is a terrorist movement is darn right retarded.

Little quote from a PPS doc...\


There is a perception that the IRA and other paramilitaries have used mindless violence. That is very far from the truth. The violence has always been used for a purpose.

And, simply put, violence is used as a communicative dimension. It is saying to the state or to government, "We are here. You have to talk to us. If we have to bomb our way to a negotiating table, we will." So, very rarely do you get examples of mindless violence in the Northern Ireland context.

And when you look at the type of violence, over time it has changed. Because the violence was a classic example of armed propaganda. Sometimes car bombs would be used, which would be simply about causing as much economic destruction as possible, as making Northern Ireland so expensive for the British exchequer that there would be a demand for the British to withdraw. Or they would target British soldiers. There always was the belief that the death of one British soldier was worth at least, in propaganda terms, ten policemen from Northern Ireland, because in Britain itself, the British mainland, the demand to get out would grow.

--It is worth pointing out that Belfast, for example, never became Beirut. There was a control to most of the violence. Before the violence occurred, there were usually plenty of warnings. Very rarely could you put your finger and say that innocent people were targeted deliberately.

They were very conscious in their propaganda of how they sold their violence. They were always conscious they had to bring their people with them.
__________________
The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend

Last edited by Sinner : 17-03-04 at 10:59 AM.
Sinner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-03-04, 07:53 PM   #30
Mazer
Earthbound misfit
 
Mazer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Moses Lake, Washington
Posts: 2,563
Default

I agree with span here, we had to start somewhere and if anything the war in Iraq served a utilitarian need: Saddam was himself a terrorist against his own people and millions of people are safer now that he's in custody, and a large fraction of those people are Americans. I find it interesting that many Iraqis are mad that we haven't executed him already, instead of keeping him in prison. But anyway, we finished what we started in '91 because we couldn't have rightly turned our collective back on Iraq while trying to fight terrorism elsewhere. Now the military has done its part to ensure our security; that success was incrimental, and now it's time to use other tatics to fight on other fronts in further incriments.
Mazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© www.p2p-zone.com - Napsterites - 2000 - 2024 (Contact grm1@iinet.net.au for all admin enquiries)