China arming insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan

2

Comments

  • OutOfBreath
    OutOfBreath Posts: 1,804
    Well, weapons always come from somewhere. And China aint too picky since they aren't directly involved. I think the US should tiptoe very quietly around that one, all the time the US is the by far largest producer and distributor of weapons in the world....

    Of course, I'd be all for both of them stopping that shit, and everyone else too, but dont think it'll happen anytime soon

    *puts on Masters Of War"

    Peace
    Dan
    "YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death

    "Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
  • ArmsinaV
    ArmsinaV Posts: 108
    Well, there is certainly a war going on in the mind of Radical Islamists. It's widespread and been going on for years. Whether you want to call it a War on Terror or whatever, denying it is naive and dangerous.

    The sad truth is this: It will take another massive attack on US soil for everyone (politicians, activists, citizens) to really prioritize and figure out how to fight Radical Islam. The War in Iraq was a horrible mistake and miscalculation in several ways. But neither never going in or leaving ASAP is going to end the threat the West faces. If we leave (which we will in the near future), the Islamists will claim victory and promote it in their propaganda as the triumph of Allah over the cowardly infidels. If we never went in, the same radicals would have been just as focused on attacking the West.

    The US needs to empower dissidents in Iran/Syria as much as possible without compromising their national support. The Solidarity movement there is encouraging. As far as China is concerned, I'd say Bush is selling us out. He's a globalist who compromises the Free Market by leaving the borders open - which creates illegally cheap labor and lowers wages/takes away American jobs. It's only a matter of time before someone smuggles a WMD across that border somehow and uses it on US soil, as well.

    Secure the borders now, George.
    2000: Lubbock; 2003: OKC, Dallas, San Antonio; 2006: Los Angeles II, San Diego; 2008: Atlanta (EV Solo); 2012: Dallas (EV Solo); 2013: Dallas; 2014: Tulsa; 2018: Wrigley I
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    There is no war on terrorism. I hate to quote John Edwards but it's just a fucking bumper sticker. How can we be fighting a war against terrorism when we harbor and provide a safe haven for terrorists here, see Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carilles? How can we be fighting a war against terrorism when we continue to befriend and protect a country that finances terrorism? How can we be fighting a war agaisnt terrorism when we maje excuses for a country that arms the very people that our killing our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan?

    The war on terror is this generation's war on drugs. It's a fucking slogan to get the country all nationalistic and onboard with the government's agenda.

    You make the point that we may not be fighting this war appropriately, but you like Edwards don't make the case that indeed this is not a war.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    NCfan wrote:
    You make the point that we may not be fighting this war appropriately, but you like Edwards don't make the case that indeed this is not a war.

    It's not a conventional war. Terrorism is an ideal and you can't fight that with tanks and bombs. The onlt way to defeat terrorism is to cut off it's supply of loyal jihadist and you sure as hell aren't going to get that done when you kill 7 children while trying to take out some Al Qaida leader.

    So I stand by my statement and I feel that I have made my case that this is not a war. We maybe going at it as it was a war and as long as we continue to do that we will fail.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    This thread brings up something to mind... China is going to be the world's superpower in the next few decades. They have the people, they have the economy, they are building the army - and they have an agenda just like anybody else in the world.

    To me, this only underscores the importance of "being the world's police" as many on this board would say. It is imperative that we use the few remaining decades we have left to exert our influence on the word.

    That means going into Darfur with troops, seeing Iraq through, seeing Afghanistan through. Putting pressure on countries like Iran and Syria. Checking groups like Hamas and Hezbollah at every turn until they denounce the use of terrorism.

    Becuause folks, if history is any indicator, the Chinese aren't going to give one fuck about these rouge countries or groups unless they threaten their business interest. Look at the human rights record of China....

    America believes in helping people fight for a democratic process in their land, and we should continue to show that by becoming involved as much as we can sustain - until one day we cannot. Then these people will truly be left to fend for themselves.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    NCfan wrote:
    This thread brings up something to mind... China is going to be the world's superpower in the next few decades. They have the people, they have the economy, they are building the army - and they have an agenda just like anybody else in the world.

    To me, this only underscores the importance of "being the world's police" as many on this board would say. It is imperative that we use the few remaining decades we have left to exert our influence on the word.

    That means going into Darfur with troops, seeing Iraq through, seeing Afghanistan through. Putting pressure on countries like Iran and Syria. Checking groups like Hamas and Hezbollah at every turn until they denounce the use of terrorism.

    Becuause folks, if history is any indicator, the Chinese aren't going to give one fuck about these rouge countries or groups unless they threaten their business interest. Look at the human rights record of China....

    America believes in helping people fight for a democratic process in their land, and we should continue to show that by becoming involved as much as we can sustain - until one day we cannot. Then these people will truly be left to fend for themselves.

    What gives us the right to exert our influence onto the world. It's that attitude and action that has caused so much hatred for us in the Middle East. Instead maybe we should mind our own business.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    It's not a conventional war. Terrorism is an ideal and you can't fight that with tanks and bombs. The onlt way to defeat terrorism is to cut off it's supply of loyal jihadist and you sure as hell aren't going to get that done when you kill 7 children while trying to take out some Al Qaida leader.

    So I stand by my statement and I feel that I have made my case that this is not a war. We maybe going at it as it was a war and as long as we continue to do that we will fail.

    Terrorism is no more an ideal than launching a 2 million dollar cruise missle is an ideal. The ideal we are fighting is radical Islam. And this brand of faith can, just like any other militant faith that has sprung up and become extinct in the face of progress, can be fought and defeated as well.

    The way to defeat it is to restore order, and a rule of law that is suitable for a decent, liberal society. The way to achieve this is through a stable governement that settles disputes through political discourse as opposed to bloodshed. As history has shown, the only way to establish that kind of society, that kind of government is through fighting those that oppose it - this means using the military. We are fighting now in the hopes that we will never have to fight again.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    NCfan wrote:
    Terrorism is no more an ideal than launching a 2 million dollar cruise missle is an ideal. The ideal we are fighting is radical Islam. And this brand of faith can, just like any other militant faith that has sprung up and become extinct in the face of progress, can be fought and defeated as well.

    The way to defeat it is to restore order, and a rule of law that is suitable for a decent, liberal society. The way to achieve this is through a stable governement that settles disputes through political discourse as opposed to bloodshed. As history has shown, the only way to establish that kind of society, that kind of government is through fighting those that oppose it - this means using the military. We are fighting now in the hopes that we will never have to fight again.

    How can you expect democracy from a country or a people who hate each other.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    What gives us the right to exert our influence onto the world. It's that attitude and action that has caused so much hatred for us in the Middle East. Instead maybe we should mind our own business.

    What gives Iran the right to exert their influence on Iraq, Syria and Lebanon? What gives Al Qaida the right to exert their influence on the world? What gives the Taliban the right to enslave Afghanistan to their firebrand religion? What gives North Korea the right to fire missles over Japan?

    The reality is they have the right, becuase in each case the only thing stopping them is their own self-restraint. It is obvious that groups like these, and others around the world do not respect the liberal, civil societies abound the world. They do not give creedence to laws. They do not recogonize the balance that you and I respect.

    We are in a perverbial race, that you are in denial about. I know it sucks, but if we do not participate, if we do not exert our influence - they others are going to continue on. They aren't going to quit just becuase we do!
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    How can you expect democracy from a country or a people who hate each other.

    I don't "expect it" but I believe it is possible becuase most people, most citizens of Iraq do not hate each other. That is what you would be made to believe by the media, but as we all know on this board - it is only a small fraction of the population that have taken up arms.

    If you are an Iraqi living in Baghdad and you need food - you go to the market. If you need supplies, you go to the store. If you want to continue your education, you go to school. Yes, in certain areas this is just too risky. But in many, many areas it is the norm. Absolutely, there are enormous security problems in Iraq - but these are not the same conditions when one thinks about warfare.

    If a suicide bomber kills 75 people as today, it garners front page headlines in the same mannor that the invasion of Iwo Jima would have 62 years ago. People are made to believe that Iraq is a lost cuase.

    The jihadist aren't fight to defeat us, they are only fighting to make us quit - to give up - to lose our will. They know that is all they have to do. If the world was united in securing Iraq, hell if just the US could muster what it took to stand behind the effort - this would be a very, VERY different conflict!
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    NCfan wrote:
    What gives Iran the right to exert their influence on Iraq, Syria and Lebanon? What gives Al Qaida the right to exert their influence on the world? What gives the Taliban the right to enslave Afghanistan to their firebrand religion? What gives North Korea the right to fire missles over Japan?

    The reality is they have the right, becuase in each case the only thing stopping them is their own self-restraint. It is obvious that groups like these, and others around the world do not respect the liberal, civil societies abound the world. They do not give creedence to laws. They do not recogonize the balance that you and I respect.

    We are in a perverbial race, that you are in denial about. I know it sucks, but if we do not participate, if we do not exert our influence - they others are going to continue on. They aren't going to quit just becuase we do!

    There are diplomatic ways of dealing with many of the people you mentioned, not all, without having them bend over and grab their ankles for us. That is the problem you think that every last country on this planet has to be a democracy and that we should cram it down their throats wether they like it or not because we know what is best for everyone. That is just not the case. Not everyone out there wants to be like us, not everyone deserves to have a democracy. I hate to say it but there are some countries that need the firm hand of a dictator to keep the peace.

    It is my belief that you are the one in denial and are refusing to see that the world is not American. What works here does not always work in every corner of the globe. If you take aq nice long look at history our attempts to Americanize some countries has failed miserably. I have nothing agaisnt promoting democracy but I am completely against brutally forcing it on a society and that seems to be the course of action we prefer to use and you support and will fail every time.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • Flannel Shirt
    Flannel Shirt Posts: 1,021
    mammasan wrote:
    What gives us the right to exert our influence onto the world. It's that attitude and action that has caused so much hatred for us in the Middle East. Instead maybe we should mind our own business.
    BINGO!
    mammasan wrote:
    How can you expect democracy from a country or a people who hate each other.
    We're trying one out here in the United States, arent we? ;)
    All that's sacred, comes from youth....dedications, naive and true.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    NCfan wrote:
    I don't "expect it" but I believe it is possible becuase most people, most citizens of Iraq do not hate each other. That is what you would be made to believe by the media, but as we all know on this board - it is only a small fraction of the population that have taken up arms.

    If you are an Iraqi living in Baghdad and you need food - you go to the market. If you need supplies, you go to the store. If you want to continue your education, you go to school. Yes, in certain areas this is just too risky. But in many, many areas it is the norm. Absolutely, there are enormous security problems in Iraq - but these are not the same conditions when one thinks about warfare.

    If a suicide bomber kills 75 people as today, it garners front page headlines in the same mannor that the invasion of Iwo Jima would have 62 years ago. People are made to believe that Iraq is a lost cuase.

    The jihadist aren't fight to defeat us, they are only fighting to make us quit - to give up - to lose our will. They know that is all they have to do. If the world was united in securing Iraq, hell if just the US could muster what it took to stand behind the effort - this would be a very, VERY different conflict!

    The jihadist aren't even the problem in Iraq. Sunni and Shias are both getting sick and tired of the foreign jihadist killing Iraqis. the problem is the hatred between Shia and Sunni. By simply placing at the feet of the jihadist is ignoring the larger issue. Our own assessment of Iraq, the Iraq Study group Report, mentions that Jihadist constitute a very small portion of the violence in Iraq and the majority is Sunni militia and/or Sunni/Baathist insurgents. You people need to stop trying to paint Iraq as part of the "War on Terrorism". Jihadist are not the problem there. the problem is a country where a good portion of the people don't want us there and a portion hate each other. Yes the majority may not feel this way but there are enough that due that peace and stability will not come untill one side wins.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    There are diplomatic ways of dealing with many of the people you mentioned, not all, without having them bend over and grab their ankles for us. That is the problem you think that every last country on this planet has to be a democracy and that we should cram it down their throats wether they like it or not because we know what is best for everyone. That is just not the case. Not everyone out there wants to be like us, not everyone deserves to have a democracy. I hate to say it but there are some countries that need the firm hand of a dictator to keep the peace.

    It is my belief that you are the one in denial and are refusing to see that the world is not American. What works here does not always work in every corner of the globe. If you take aq nice long look at history our attempts to Americanize some countries has failed miserably. I have nothing agaisnt promoting democracy but I am completely against brutally forcing it on a society and that seems to be the course of action we prefer to use and you support and will fail every time.

    I agree there are dimplomatic means, and we are exercising them with many countries all across the world. We are negotiating with Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, China, Russia, Venezuala, Cuba, Pakistan, the list is long...

    Yes, I do believe that eventually every country on earth should be a democracy, and I beleive that different countries are ready for it at different times. Just becuase we may have tried and failed in the past, does not mean it was wrong. Surely, you don't buy into that rationale.

    And please if you would, list any country above that we are "cramming" democracy down their throat. I mean who are we "brutally" forcing democracy on? Yeah okay, we brutally kicked the shit out of Saddam Huesein and anybody in his army or his Bathist party that fought for him. But we are hardly "brutally" forcing democracy on the Iraqi people.

    By your post above, you would have us all believe the US "brutally" rounded up innocent Iraqi's and bullied them to the polls three times!

    FORCING democracy is hardly the course of action the US takes. It is in fact rare that we send troops to a foreign land to fight for democracy. And when we do it doesn't fail "every time". See what the reaction you would get telling that to Albanians, Kosovars, Georgians, Lebonese, Japanese, Italians, Germans, etc....

    Perhaps the Middle East is not ripe for democratic change. I think we all shared that sentiment going into this war regardless if you supported it or not. But I also think we would all agree that 9/11 sped things up a bit. Maybe it forced us to act prematurely. But just becuase we are there now, does not mean what we are doing is wrong, bad, incorrect....

    Ya know maybe Pearl Harbor sped things up with Japan... Yes Japan attacked us and not Iraq. But let's be realist here and admit that we were justified in declaring war the next day on Germany and Italy though they had not fired a shot at us... But had we failed against Japan, would we had been wrong to fight them?

    Deomcracy is not an "American" beleif. It is not an isloated phenomenon of Western and now Eastern Europe. It is a universal, HUMAN endeavor. It is just as much a human right to live under a democratic government as it is to have the freedom of speech. And in most cases it is presicly a democratic government that is the provider and supoorter of basic human rights.

    I think you buy too much into the argument of people around the would that say "we don't want democracy". Of COURSE they do.... ALL people want it at some point - but it is an evolution to get there.
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    The jihadist aren't even the problem in Iraq. Sunni and Shias are both getting sick and tired of the foreign jihadist killing Iraqis. the problem is the hatred between Shia and Sunni. By simply placing at the feet of the jihadist is ignoring the larger issue. Our own assessment of Iraq, the Iraq Study group Report, mentions that Jihadist constitute a very small portion of the violence in Iraq and the majority is Sunni militia and/or Sunni/Baathist insurgents. You people need to stop trying to paint Iraq as part of the "War on Terrorism". Jihadist are not the problem there. the problem is a country where a good portion of the people don't want us there and a portion hate each other. Yes the majority may not feel this way but there are enough that due that peace and stability will not come untill one side wins.

    Look the Jihadist ARE a problem in Iraq and a BIG problem at that. They are such a big problem that as you mention above - other Muslim militias are fighting against them now.

    I'm not trying to chalk all the bad problems in Iraq up to insurgents. Surely any reasonable person knows that the big issue in Iraq is the divide between the Sunnis and Shia. It is THE biggest problem in Iraq, and maybe it, especially now with other countries such as Iran arming these groups and hardly a drop of international support for the American initiative, is a fight we cannot win.

    But I say given the proper stragety, resources and commitment - we can theoretically stablize Iraq enough over time to allow moderate politicians to take office that are interested in a compromise. This isn't the same as the Palestinian/Isreali conflict. I think there is a compromise to be made. It will just take the right environment to develop the leadership necessary to find it.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    NCfan wrote:
    Ya know maybe Pearl Harbor sped things up with Japan... Yes Japan attacked us and not Iraq. But let's be realist here and admit that we were justified in declaring war the next day on Germany and Italy though they had not fired a shot at us... But had we failed against Japan, would we had been wrong to fight them?

    Just to correct you Germany & Italy declared war on us first on December 12th. The following day in response to Germany and Italy's declaration we declare war on both of them. So the analogy doesn't really work there.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    Just to correct you Germany & Italy declared war on us first on December 12th. The following day in response to Germany and Italy's declaration we declare war on both of them. So the analogy doesn't really work there.

    Thanks for the correction.
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    Just to correct you Germany & Italy declared war on us first on December 12th. The following day in response to Germany and Italy's declaration we declare war on both of them. So the analogy doesn't really work there.

    It works in as much that the Jihadist, the radical Muslims have declared - and quite formally I might add - war against the United States and other democratic nations across the globe. And becuase you dislike the nomenclature of "the war on terror" you deny that we are even at odds with these groups - or at least to the point of taking up arms against them or supporting the effort to eradicate them where ever they might hide.

    If there ever was a political maneuver, it is John Edwards trying to call out the Bush administration for taking advantage of not only the American people, but persecuting others around the world under the banner of "the war on terror".
  • NCfan
    NCfan Posts: 945
    mammasan wrote:
    Just to correct you Germany & Italy declared war on us first on December 12th. The following day in response to Germany and Italy's declaration we declare war on both of them. So the analogy doesn't really work there.

    You are arguing over semantics - as if we didn't prepare or know that declaring war on Japan would de facto bring us into the European theater we were already ankle depp in of what had by that point truly become a global war.

    The friend or your enemey is your enemy at least on some level. And Saddam was clearly about as anti-American as you can get and had proven he was capable of mass murder. And reasonable person would assume he would support the same for America given the chance. And after all, wasn't this what the war was about - not giving him the chance?
  • gabers
    gabers Posts: 2,787
    Bottom line is that if this is true, that the Chinese government has knowledge of or a direct role in arms shipments to Iran and/or "insurgents" in Afghanistan/Iraq, then we must fucking do something! If this is the case, economic sanctions should be the very least we should do. The thought that we're losing two to three soldiers a day to these arms, let alone what losses the Iraqis themselves have sustained, are truly unbelievable. If so, China should be at the very top of the "Axis of Evil", whatever that is. Fuck Iran, China is a bigger threat. They're not too big to be spanked, either.

Categories