why did they attack us?

Collin

"Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

This is from the FBI site. You'd think 9/11 would be mentioned.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Simple....they want McDonalds.

Stone Is God

Sludge Factory wrote:

I haven't heard about that one before, but it makes it very interesting, that's for sure.

Can't remember if I read it or saw it on TV.

Stone Is God

Sludge Factory wrote:

I haven't heard about that one before, but it makes it very interesting, that's for sure.

From Wilki:

Bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia in 1990 as a hero of jihad, who along with his Arab legion, "had brought down the mighty superpower" of the Soviet Union.[47] However, during this time Iraq invaded Kuwait and Laden met the Sultan, and told him not to depend on non-Muslim troops and offered to help defend Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden was rebuffed and publicly denounced Saudi Arabia's dependence on US military. Bin Laden's criticism of the Saudi monarchy led the government to attempt to silence him.

I could have swore it was Kuwait that he met with but I guess I was wrong about that.

Sludge Factory

Stone Is God wrote:

From Wilki:

Bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia in 1990 as a hero of jihad, who along with his Arab legion, "had brought down the mighty superpower" of the Soviet Union.[47] However, during this time Iraq invaded Kuwait and Laden met the Sultan, and told him not to depend on non-Muslim troops and offered to help defend Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden was rebuffed and publicly denounced Saudi Arabia's dependence on US military. Bin Laden's criticism of the Saudi monarchy led the government to attempt to silence him.

I could have swore it was Kuwait that he met with but I guess I was wrong about that.

Why do you think Saudi Arabia rebuffed him?

slightofjeff

Sludge Factory wrote:

Why do you think Saudi Arabia rebuffed him?

The United States has airplanes.

Stone Is God

Sludge Factory wrote:

Why do you think Saudi Arabia rebuffed him?

Probably because it was a wiser choice to side with the American forces it their mind. I found this:

In 1990-91, King Fahd played a key role before and during the Gulf war. King Fahd's action also consolidated the coalition of forces against Iraq and helped define the tone of the operation as a multilateral effort to reestablish the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Kuwait. Acting as a rallying point and personal spokesman for the coalition, King Fahd helped bring together his nation's GCC allies, Western allies, and Arab allies, as well as nonaligned nations from Africa and the emerging democracies of eastern Europe. He used his influence as Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques to persuade other Arab and Islamic nations to join the coalition.

It was probably just a nice, quick no thanks but in OBL's mind it goes against everything he believes for a Muslim country to accept help from non Muslims.

They hate everything that we're about.

It's a shame so much attention was diverted from what he did and so much focus is paid to the "Mistake in Iraq'. The real threat is still out there. The way we look around the world just plays into the views of him and helps him with getting young Arabs to believe what he thinks is right.

They should have not stopped until they found him. We were moving in the right direction before Iraq.

ledvedderman

DPrival78 wrote:

why did they attack us?

I'm pretty sure we got attacked because of Rolands fascination with Mary Carey movies

Sludge Factory

slightofjeff wrote:

The United States has airplanes.

Okay, we certainly do. What I meant, though, was what difference did it make who helped out in that situation. Either way the goal was the same, wasn't it?

Stone Is God

Sludge Factory wrote:

Okay, we certainly do. What I meant, though, was what difference did it make who helped out in that situation. Either way the goal was the same, wasn't it?

When it boils down to it, yes, but in the eyes of extremists and their theory of jihad, no.

I also pulled this out of Wilki too:

The events of the Gulf War fueled additional Islamic extremism. The change of face by Hussein's secular regime did little to draw support from Islamist groups. This action combined with the Saudi Arabian alliance with the United States and Saudi Arabia being seen as being on the same side of Israel dramatically eroded that regime's legitimacy. Activity of Islamist groups against the Saudi regime increased dramatically. The presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia, the invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent blockade were some of the grievances listed by Osama bin Laden in his 1998 Fatwa.

In part to win back favour with Islamist groups, Saudi Arabia greatly increased funding to those that would support the regime. Throughout the newly independent states of Central Asia the Saudis paid for the distribution of millions of Qur'ans and the building of hundreds of mosques for extremist groups. In Afghanistan the Saudi regime became a leading patron of the Taliban in that nation's civil war, and one of the few foreign countries to officially recognize the government.


Funny how many of the hijackers on 9/11 were Saudis, 15 to be exact.

slightofjeff

Sludge Factory wrote:

Okay, we certainly do. What I meant, though, was what difference did it make who helped out in that situation. Either way the goal was the same, wasn't it?

That's just my smarmy way of saying that, to Saudi Arabia, the world's largest military power looked like a much stronger ally than a rag-tag bunch of mercenaries.

But the airplane thing is a serious point: at that juncture, nobody was preparing for an invasion of Iraq. Just a nice, effective carpet bombing. Osama wasn't going to be able to pull that off, you know, without an air force.

Stone Is God

slightofjeff wrote:

That's just my smarmy way of saying that, to Saudi Arabia, the world's largest military power looked like a much stronger ally than a rag-tag bunch of mercenaries.

But the airplane thing is a serious point: at that juncture, nobody was preparing for an invasion of Iraq. Just a nice, effective carpet bombing. Osama wasn't going to be able to pull that off, you know, without an air force.

Exactly. They wanted a quick end to the war, not a 7 year one.

Coming back to life

It was because of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Both of which happened after 9/11, you understand...

jlew24asu

Coming back to life wrote:

It was because of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Both of which happened after 9/11, you understand...

cool sig

MakingWaves

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Osama said in a video after the attacks that it was a direct response to US intervention in the Arab world. Specificaly, for longstanding US policy agression towards the Iraqis and the Palestinians.

I'm not judging the comments.
Simply telling you what Osama himself is on tape saying.

Translation: "We're coming over there, because you are over here."

You are exactly right. The you fucked with me now we are gonna fuck with you story.

This really isn't that difficult to see people. We have been fucking with their part of the world too long and someone with a shit load of money and a big following got tired of it.

Coming back to life

We should just pull out and fuck em, maybe tighten up on immigration while we're at it. re the sig it was nicked from another poster either on here or rm

Abuskedti

DPrival78 wrote:

... or are we not supposed to talk about it?

the 9/11 commission dodge questions about al qaeda's motivations.. why?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1bm2GPoFfg

Because there is no they! We allow them to wage war on terrorists... What the fuck is a terrorist? there are no terrorists.... a blank check written by the angry american... very very sad

Danimal

Abuskedti wrote:

Because there is no they! We allow them to wage war on terrorists... What the fuck is a terrorist? there are no terrorists.... a blank check written by the angry american... very very sad

Did you say there are no terrorists?

sponger

One thing I've never understood about suicide bombers is why they are so hard up for 1000 virgins. Wouldn't they want to bang women who are more experienced at having sex? If it were up to me, I'd want women who knew every trick in the book. Since diseases are not a part of the afterworld, I don't see anything wrong with, say, 1000 prostitutes.

Is it that they think sex is unclean, and so they want women who aren't "dirty"? Or is it that they are so insecure about their sexual performance that they're hoping virgins won't know the difference when they're being screwed by some guy who wouldn't know how to use his pecker even if Allah's forgiveness depended on it?

After all, that is the part of the world where female genital mutilation was once widely practiced. Not so much these days, but it kind of makes you wonder about the mentality over there when it comes to sex. Virgins and clitoris-less vaginas? No thanks. They might as well be honest about their intentions and ask for 1000 pre-pubescent middle-schoolers when they reach the gates of their so-called after-life.

slightofjeff

sponger wrote:

One thing I've never understood about suicide bombers is why they are so hard up for 1000 virgins. Wouldn't they want to bang women who are more experienced at having sex? If it were up to me, I'd want women who knew every trick in the book. Since diseases are not a part of the afterworld, I don't see anything wrong with, say, 1000 prostitutes.

You ever see that Family Guy where the suicide bomber gets to heaven, and his virgins are actually male geeks watching Star Trek and playing Dungeons and Dragons and shit? Man, that was hilarious.