Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat

Obi Once

WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?hp&ex=1159156800&en=22b7a0941b08007f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Not the best news on sunday morning..

Blanche

They could have asked a number of people here and elsewhere and gotten the same results for free or cheaper than what it cost American taxpayers.

prism

how anyone any place (not to mention the entire Bush administration) could be stupid enough to have thought that things would turn out otherwise is what's truely mind boggling. you can't wipe out terrorism, but you can certainly piss off more people into taking it up...


alot of people i know (myself included) are reading this and saying NO FUCKING SHIT!!!


it took this long for for them to come out with the obvious?

darkcrow

Obi Once wrote:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?hp&ex=1159156800&en=22b7a0941b08007f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Not the best news on sunday morning..

no shit! millions of people around the world said that before iraq was invaded.

Obi Once

It doenst take a degree in logic to figure out that a country occupied will grow resistance, but in the muslim world this grows in to even less pretty things..

Abuskedti

Obi Once wrote:

It doenst take a degree in logic to figure out that a country occupied will grow resistance, but in the muslim world this grows in to even less pretty things..

This kind of thinking contributes to our country's ability to elect an ignorant president.

We had a lady cut the fetus from a pregnant woman and kill her three children.
We've had people dragging gays behind their truck
People beat the homeless with baseball bats

I can go on and on with examples of significantly unpretty things American's have done, and we have security.

Muslims are people just as valuable and just as good as us. Any other view will define us and define them. We are as good as we want to be - and our good reflects back at us through everyone else, as does our evil.

enharmonic

I still think that we should demand formal impeachment proceeings based on the FACT that we invaded a sovereign nation on a hunch. We've slaughtered over 40,000 innocent Iraqi civilians...yet we're putting Saddam on trial for crimes against humanity??? That's simply fucked up.

I have little to no faith in our leadership at this point. They've damaged the trust that I put in them as a voter to do the right things for America. More to the point, I am sickened and disgusted by this Administration's insistance on invoking 9/11 to justify every ridiculous decision they have made over thelast 5 years...and I'm not alone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1OA2wHcBt4

Abuskedti

enharmonic wrote:

I still think that we should demand formal impeachment proceeings based on the FACT that we invaded a sovereign nation on a hunch. We've slaughtered over 40,000 innocent Iraqi civilians...yet we're putting Saddam on trial for crimes against humanity??? That's simply fucked up.

I have little to no faith in our leadership at this point. They've damaged the trust that I put in them as a voter to do the right things for America. More to the point, I am sickened and disgusted by this Administration's insistance on invoking 9/11 to justify every ridiculous decision they have made over thelast 5 years...and I'm not alone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1OA2wHcBt4

we continue to forget the innocent Iraqi soldiers we slaughtered. They were people like you and me with families. Our crime is much larger than just 40,000 civilians - which itself is evil beyond imagination.

enharmonic

A soldier is not innocent. They go into military service with the full knowledge that they will have to kill or be killed.

Abuskedti

enharmonic wrote:

A soldier is not innocent. They go into military service with the full knowledge that they will have to kill or be killed.

A soldier is innocent. Tell that to the mother of some of our boys that died in Iraq or Afghanistan. Thats silliness. A military is a necessary thing in the world today. It should be to fight crime and defend ourselves. The fact that it is used otherwise does not change the fact that a Military is an absolute necessity - and those serving are as innocent as anyone - whether they world at Wal-Mart, Dell, or in a Rock band.

robbie

enharmonic wrote:

I still think that we should demand formal impeachment proceeings based on the FACT that we invaded a sovereign nation on a hunch. We've slaughtered over 40,000 innocent Iraqi civilians...yet we're putting Saddam on trial for crimes against humanity??? That's simply fucked up.

I have little to no faith in our leadership at this point. They've damaged the trust that I put in them as a voter to do the right things for America. More to the point, I am sickened and disgusted by this Administration's insistance on invoking 9/11 to justify every ridiculous decision they have made over thelast 5 years...and I'm not alone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1OA2wHcBt4

but george W's approval rating keeps climbing. it is astonishing how truly stupid the american public is. absolutely shocking.

JaneNY

Obi Once wrote:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?hp&ex=1159156800&en=22b7a0941b08007f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Not the best news on sunday morning..

The sad part is to me (and not a small amount of others) it is not news. Many people knew this would happen. You go to their place, piss people off, what do you get? Pissed off people who hate you and want to fight back. Its not that complicated.

The real problem now is how to fix it, or at least make it better and defuse some of the hatred. We've only got one planet and we all have to live on it.

Obi Once

Abuskedti wrote:

Obi Once wrote:

It doenst take a degree in logic to figure out that a country occupied will grow resistance, but in the muslim world this grows in to even less pretty things..

This kind of thinking contributes to our country's ability to elect an ignorant president.

Muslims are people just as valuable and just as good as us. Any other view will define us and define them. We are as good as we want to be - and our good reflects back at us through everyone else, as does our evil.

What i meant were things like the Al Qaida like groups that flourishes from the situation, I in no way treid to imply Muslims or better or worse beings.

Abuskedti wrote:

We had a lady cut the fetus from a pregnant woman and kill her three children.
We've had people dragging gays behind their truck
People beat the homeless with baseball bats

I know, the media here reports this too

enharmonic

Abuskedti wrote:

A soldier is innocent. Tell that to the mother of some of our boys that died in Iraq or Afghanistan. Thats silliness. A military is a necessary thing in the world today. It should be to fight crime and defend ourselves. The fact that it is used otherwise does not change the fact that a Military is an absolute necessity - and those serving are as innocent as anyone - whether they world at Wal-Mart, Dell, or in a Rock band.

Keep the heart strings and rhetoric out of it. You don't go into the military to learn how to paint happy trees.

Necessity does not preclude innocence or guilt. If the purpose of a military is to defend a country, defending oneself is an innocent act. Otherwise, you're killing people, and the blood of the innocent is on your hands.

Abuskedti

enharmonic wrote:

Keep the heart strings and rhetoric out of it. You don't go into the military to learn how to paint happy trees.

Necessity does not preclude innocence or guilt. If the purpose of a military is to defend a country, defending oneself is an innocent act. Otherwise, you're killing people, and the blood of the innocent is on your hands.

I went into the military for a job. I have a family and kids. I never learned to kill anyone. I know many pilots - they love to fly. They also understand that they are there to defend our nation - and may be called upon to fight for our country.

They believe in our country and all it stands for. They understand that mistakes are made, but for the most part, we are a democracy and the military is run by elected officials. The people have chosen George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld to make these decisions - and the people of our country still support these decision makers.

It is not the place of a pilot to question these things in the heat of battle - but to have faith in the people to make the right decisions before starting a battle.

It is the responsibility of the people to stop this if it is wrong.

It is cowardly and misguided to place guilt on the military man carrying out the will of the people after he has swarn to in good faith -
the people are not living up to their responsibility and cowardly projecting their failure, shame and guilt on the most innocent and richeous of all - those on the front lines dying every day and waiting faithfully for the people to sort out these problems - as opposed to throwing fuel on them.

enharmonic

Abuskedti wrote:

I went into the military for a job. I have a family and kids. I never learned to kill anyone. I know many pilots - they love to fly. They also understand that they are there to defend our nation - and may be called upon to fight for our country.

They believe in our country and all it stands for. They understand that mistakes are made, but for the most part, we are a democracy and the military is run by elected officials. The people have chosen George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld to make these decisions - and the people of our country still support these decision makers.

It is not the place of a pilot to question these things in the heat of battle - but to have faith in the people to make the right decisions before starting a battle.

It is the responsibility of the people to stop this if it is wrong.

It is cowardly and misguided to place guilt on the military man carrying out the will of the people after he has swarn to in good faith -
the people are not living up to their responsibility and cowardly projecting their failure, shame and guilt on the most innocent and richeous of all - those on the front lines dying every day and waiting faithfully for the people to sort out these problems - as opposed to throwing fuel on them.

Did you get that out of a book or something? Let's see...

1. The People did not choose Donald Rumsfeld.
2. You never learned how to fire a weapon at a target in basic training? Even if you did, there's nothing wrong with firing at a target in defense of your country...but what are we defending in Iraq?
3. Do those same pilots believe in following orders when the entire justification for those orders was based on a lie? It is my understanding that a soldier does not have to carry out an order, on the ground that it is unreasonable, if he can invoke protection of the fundamental right to freedom of conscience. The protection afforded by Article 4(1) is not overridden by the fundamental right to recognition as a conscientious objector (Article 4(3)). A decision of conscience is any serious moral (i.e. relating to 'good' and 'bad') decision which an individual in a particular situation regards as a binding inner duty, making it impossible for him to act against it without serious moral distress.

So, tell me how a decision to invade a country based on the LIE of WMD translates into sound moral decisions of military leadership, and demands the obedience of any soldier who realizes that they were lied to in order to forward an energy agenda?

4. "It is not the place of a pilot to question these things in the heat of battle - but to have faith in the people to make the right decisions before starting a battle."

I call bullshit. SeeArticle 4(1) and 4(3).

5. That whole last part about cowardly this and that...I disagree. It is patriotic to challenge the misuse and abuse of our miltary men and women. They did not make the sacrifice of their lives for people like Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc so that these power brokers can forward their own political and economic agenda's at the expense of tens of thousands of lives. It is pattently repulsive that you would suggest that anyting but blind loyalty and obedience is somehow cowardice. A coward can also hide behind his or her orders!

We all see what happens to good soldiers who were only following orders at Abu Ghraib. They got court marshalled, while the assholes who gave the orders get a pass.

Abuskedti

enharmonic wrote:

Did you get that out of a book or something? Let's see...

1. The People did not choose Donald Rumsfeld.
2. You never learned how to fire a weapon at a target in basic training? Even if you did, there's nothing wrong with firing at a target in defense of your country...but what are we defending in Iraq?
3. Do those same pilots believe in following orders when the entire justification for those orders was based on a lie? It is my understanding that a soldier does not have to carry out an order, on the ground that it is unreasonable, if he can invoke protection of the fundamental right to freedom of conscience. The protection afforded by Article 4(1) is not overridden by the fundamental right to recognition as a conscientious objector (Article 4(3)). A decision of conscience is any serious moral (i.e. relating to 'good' and 'bad') decision which an individual in a particular situation regards as a binding inner duty, making it impossible for him to act against it without serious moral distress.

So, tell me how a decision to invade a country based on the LIE of WMD translates into sound moral decisions of military leadership, and demands the obedience of any soldier who realizes that they were lied to in order to forward an energy agenda?

4. "It is not the place of a pilot to question these things in the heat of battle - but to have faith in the people to make the right decisions before starting a battle."

I call bullshit. SeeArticle 4(1) and 4(3).

5. That whole last part about cowardly this and that...I disagree. It is patriotic to challenge the misuse and abuse of our miltary men and women. They did not make the sacrifice of their lives for people like Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc so that these power brokers can forward their own political and economic agenda's at the expense of tens of thousands of lives. It is pattently repulsive that you would suggest that anyting but blind loyalty and obedience is somehow cowardice. A coward can also hide behind his or her orders!

We all see what happens to good soldiers who were only following orders at Abu Ghraib. They got court marshalled, while the assholes who gave the orders get a pass.

this country has laws ... the laws are the result of the democratic process. As was the hiring of Donald Rumsfeld - the authority was given to our elected president.

there is nothing - anwhere that says a military man does not have to follow orders that are "unreasonable". He does not have to follow orders that are unlawful.

you go ahead and blame those ordered by our laws, and elected leaders and their staff. The people on the ground are risking their lives for this country - and giving their lives for this country because the country asked. If the country had half their integrity, they'd all be home right now.

enharmonic

Sorry, no one in Iraq is defending the USA. They're defending the oil. No Iraqi's were on those planes on 9/11. No Iraqi's have ever attacked mainland America. Saudi Nationals have...why aren't we there? Well, the Bush family's close ties to the Saudi royal family for one.

We went in their waving our cock because we couldn't get Bin Ladin. The assertion that we are somehow defending America by invading Iraq is a ridiculous argument.

PaperPlates

I could use some oil

prism

PaperPlates wrote:

I could use some oil

tin man? is that You?

inmytree

Obi Once wrote:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?hp&ex=1159156800&en=22b7a0941b08007f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Not the best news on sunday morning..

stay the course...stay the course...resolve, resolve!!

I wonder, why do the American Intelligence Agencies hate America and "freedom", don't they know this information will only embolden the tar-or-iests...

jlew24asu

its time to bring the boys home.

Cosmo

Only an idiot would declare a war on something so ambiguous... War on Poverty, War on Drugs, War on Terror... there is not going to be a clear victory, therefore, there will never be an end. It becomes a money pit that feeds on itself and becomes an entity onto itself.
How are we ever going to declare a victory? Seriously, does anyone believe terrorism will end in their lifetime?

Obi Once

inmytree wrote:

stay the course...stay the course...resolve, resolve!!

I wonder, why do the American Intelligence Agencies hate America and "freedom", don't they know this information will only embolden the tar-or-iests...

Lies, lies, lies... I wonder how long this administration can keep on telling lies and fooling the people who ellect them.

Cosmo wrote:

How are we ever going to declare a victory? Seriously, does anyone believe terrorism will end in their lifetime?

A way terrorism might ever end is when hunger is gone, people have equal opportunities and rights. The money spend is this war could have helped the world quite some steps ahead.

RainDog

enharmonic wrote:

Sorry, no one in Iraq is defending the USA. They're defending the oil. No Iraqi's were on those planes on 9/11. No Iraqi's have ever attacked mainland America. Saudi Nationals have...why aren't we there? Well, the Bush family's close ties to the Saudi royal family for one.

We went in their waving our cock because we couldn't get Bin Ladin. The assertion that we are somehow defending America by invading Iraq is a ridiculous argument.

I agree with everything you wrote here. However, that doesn't translate into the standard military recruit being at fault (well, except for maybe the ones that voted for this administration ). I suppose "innocent" might not be the right word; but in order for a military to function, those in the military must follow orders. And those orders come from a civilian government elected by the population.

Otherwise, what would you have the military do, say "No"? The military personnel who disagree with the current administration should have every right to talk about it; and you have every right to try and convice people not to sign up. But as soon as the military says "No," they've taken the first step toward a coup, and I don't think anyone wants that.

Cosmo

Obi Once wrote:

Lies, lies, lies... I wonder how long this administration can keep on telling lies and fooling the people who ellect them.

A way terrorism might ever end is when hunger is gone, people have equal opportunities and rights. The money spend is this war could have helped the world quite some steps ahead.

...
That is WAAAY beyond the comprehension of the Bush administration and its supporters. They don't want to give aid to the hungry, because they feel that these free loaders are just looking for a hand-out... yet, 500 Billion Tax dollars spend, stolen or lost is no big deal... because its a War, man.