|
Post by desertfox on Feb 9, 2004 21:01:24 GMT -5
Is the U.S. policy in the Middle East Helping or hurting the war on terror?
|
|
|
Post by desertfox on Feb 10, 2004 16:38:18 GMT -5
When I talk about policy I mean U.S. War in Iraq, U.S. Support for Israel, U.S. support for the saudi royal family, ect.......... Are these stances affecting the way that poeple of the Middle East and the World View the United States?
|
|
jk
Novice
Posts: 84
|
Post by jk on Feb 10, 2004 17:20:13 GMT -5
In personal opinion, i believe that the us should keep it's nose out of other peoples business. They are playing a game that no one really wants them to play. My stance on the Isreal issue is that the palestineans should get their country back. They were there first before the west shunted them aside to make room for their unwanted people. For most of it's history Europe has been an anti-semetic place. It finally saw a way to get rid of its unwanted people by moving people taht they liked even less. I know that Europe didn't really move the Muslem out of isreal but the fact that europe was moving in so many jews made the palestineans uncomfortable like their country was being taken over by foreigners. Sure the jewish culture then claims that they were really there first and this is the land that god promised Abraham for them. The muslems also have their ancient claims to the land. Either way it isnt the United State's problem. The only way that they will have peace is if they work it out for themselves. The US doesnt know what it is to live in that situation all of your life, being brought up to think the other group is evil. The US doesnt understand the deep wounds that run through the bloody peoples. No bandaid that the us offers is going to stint the bleeding. The jews and the muslems need to figure out their own cure. The fact that the US is butting in in that mess also gives other Arabs to dislike the US even if for no better reason than that the US is helping the jews.
|
|
Fish
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by Fish on Feb 10, 2004 19:17:44 GMT -5
In general we don't have any business in other people's countries. But I dont see how invading Iraq cant be helping the war on terror. Even without evidence of weapons of mass destruction, we knew that at least saddam was killing people in his own country. That sounds like terrorism to me. And everybody remembers when the terrorists flew our planes into our buildings. About the Jews, I really dont think we ever should have gotten involved. The UN messed everything up from the beginning when they re-partitioned the land. The Jews left for a long time, longer than anybody alive can remember. The Palestinians should be able to stay. I don't consider myself anti-semetic, but it does seem that the Jews have pissed other people off for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by JustPeachE on Feb 10, 2004 19:51:16 GMT -5
I dont think the US has any right invading iraq. Yes, it is terrible what Sadam was doing to his own people but its not right for us to send soldiers over there. Those are lives that are being risked for another countries affairs. And as far as the Isreal/Palistine issue Im not really sure which side to take. We had this discussion in World Cultures when we learned about the region
|
|
|
Post by JustPeachE on Feb 10, 2004 19:58:29 GMT -5
Sorry...I wasnt really done. I accidently posted it, so now ill just finish up, lol. The Jews say they deserve the land because it was theirs in biblical times. I dont think anything with government or politics should be based on religion so this point doesnt really sit well with me. But a good point they make is about the halocaust. They claim that one the biggest reasons Hitler was able to kill so many Jews is because they didnt have a homeland and an army for defense. They feel that if they would have had their own land with an army that so many lives wouldnt have been taken. The Palestinians feel that they deserve the land because it was unrightfully taken from them. I think I might agree with the Palestinians a little more on this issue. I mean if one day I was just forced to up and leave my home because a bunch of people feel that the bible entitles them to my land Id be pretty...well...to put it frankly pissed off. So I dont know...I really think the UN should just butt out for once and let other country deal with their own problems...
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyJihadFace on Feb 12, 2004 20:13:50 GMT -5
And everybody remembers when the terrorists flew our planes into our buildings. Al Queda and Iraq are two different things. Saddam and Osama are two different people. I don't understand why people are making this connection, there isn't one. Bush, however did mention that there may be some tie between the two of them, which was later said to be false by intelligence officials. Sounds like ol GW wanted some support for invading a country, and the public bought it. whats funny about all of this is that i was pro-Iraqi war when it happened and believed everything bush spat out.
|
|
|
Post by Colliohn on Feb 15, 2004 23:43:26 GMT -5
John, my son... you have much to learn about being anti-establishment. PS: Jesus died for you, I love USA, God Bless America
|
|
|
Post by desertfox on Feb 16, 2004 22:36:34 GMT -5
John are you saying that Iraq was better off with Saddam? Was liberating millions of opressed people bad foreign policy?
|
|
|
Post by Colliohn on Feb 17, 2004 0:04:20 GMT -5
John are you saying that Iraq was better off with Saddam? Was liberating millions of opressed people bad foreign policy? ***Liberating millions of oppressed non-American people. And desertfox, you are evading the real meaning of his post. He is saying that our Presdient LIED to us, just so he could fulfull a vendetta. Oh, and I don't see where he says either of the things you are asking if he said.
|
|
|
Post by desertfox on Feb 17, 2004 21:27:57 GMT -5
Collion with thinking like that we should have just left the jews in the concentration camps. The WMD's have yet to be found, but that doesn't mean that they don't exsist. The vast oil fields in Iraq should have been reason enough for invasion!!!
|
|
|
Post by JustPeachE on Feb 17, 2004 21:38:53 GMT -5
I really dont think this should be compared to the Jews in the concentration camps, it has nothing to do with it. This is a completely different situation.
|
|
|
Post by Colliohn on Feb 17, 2004 21:46:57 GMT -5
Collion with thinking like that we should have just left the jews in the concentration camps. The WMD's have yet to be found, but that doesn't mean that they don't exsist. The vast oil fields in Iraq should have been reason enough for invasion!!! Wait, and now you're saying the oil was a good enough reason, and that the supposed nukes, and all the crap saddam did being put to a stop was just an incidental bonus...? And yes, you are right. We still have about 5% of a country the size of California left to check, so there could definately be WMD hiding in that last little bit up in the mountains where no roads lead and there hasn't been a human inhabitant in forever.
|
|
jk
Novice
Posts: 84
|
Post by jk on Feb 18, 2004 23:24:26 GMT -5
I really dont think this should be compared to the Jews in the concentration camps, it has nothing to do with it. This is a completely different situation. It does however resemble that of the jews in the concentration camps. Mean person killing his own people that he's supposed to be protecting. Hitler killed jews with horrible chemicals. Saddam bombed kurds with horrible chemicals. There are parrallels in the stories but saddam was no where near dominating europe. Im not sure where i stand on the whole issue being right or wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Nostradanus on Feb 19, 2004 17:07:48 GMT -5
Like him or not, Hitler was an extremely smart man/leader/military strategist. Hitler had control of most of Europe, parts of africa, and asia, and he was gay. Saddam is by no means a Hitler, had it not been for america getting involved in WWII, he might have taken over the world, and if not, the war would have lasted for a lot longer, and a lot more people would have died. If america did not go into Iraq.....uhhh, we'd have 87 billion dollars in pocket change to throw into...uh i don't know, education. And a bunch of muslims would still be pissed at their muslim dictator. Did i mention hitler was gay?...anyway, im just saying, hitler and saddam are by no means comparable in the sence of what they have done to deserve American Intervention. My tone may lead you to believe im not pro-iraq. well, i actually am, i think we shoulda killed saddam back in 91, when we actually had a good reason (kuwait). But 2003 will do just fine too. The only way that we can ever be rid of terrorist threat is to pull a hitler and exterminate all the muslims, or we can throw up a tent next door and give them a little taste of democracy. The basic deal is, we are a lot better off than the majority of muslims living in the middle east, our life is pretty damn easy compared to them, and when they are sitting there, taking a shit in a cold dark room, and they think about americans, pooping in well lit, comfy bathrooms, with running water, they get pissed off. Poverty breeds hate for the wealthy the only way they will ever not hate us, is if they join us, in the "first world". So iraq to me is a step in that direction, no matter how shitty it seems at the moment. yeah so we spent a shitload of money and 500 some americans have died. well shit, american highways kill 10,000 people a year, cigarettes can claim another 50,000. PEOPLE DIE, its a fact of life, don't use it as an excuse not to do whats "right" if it saves my children from worrying about terrorism, then by golly, it fucking worth it.
KILL WHITEY!!!
ps, hitler was a homo
|
|