Karbala Pilgrimmage

[Man Of Kent]

Those damned Americans :mad:

Now they've made it possible for the first Shia Pilgrimmage to Karbala in 25 years.

Damn them and their relgious tolerance...

[monocrat]

I see nothing wrong in there being an Islamic state in Iraq (as elements of the Shi'a population seem to demand). Would a liberal democracy be any better?

[pnjsurferpoet]

Damn them and their relgious tolerance...


blahaaaaaaaaaaa. You cracked me up. :lol:

[Aladdin]

Ahhh... the old trick of illegally invading a country for your own, selfish reasons and then telling the world "but look what we've achieved". An invalid argument that only serves to justify the invader country's actions.

Yes, Iraq is better off without Saddam. Still doesn't make this war acceptable.

The US (and the world) would be better off without Dubya in power. Would you sanction a war on the US to achieve regime change?

[Greenhat]

Aladdin,

Somehow I can imagine you making the same arguments in 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941 and right up through 1945...

Really doesn't matter, does it? You don't have any say in the matter.

[pnjsurferpoet]

The US (and the world) would be better off without Dubya in power.

Aladdin.

We'd be left to the Muslim perverts who offer up their young as human sacrifices. We haven't gone far enough. We need to give Syria and Iran a choice: either make the call for Jihad illegal as it is in Russia and now the UK, or we use our special ops troops to assinate the Muslim clerics calling for Jihad.

[Simbelyne]

Originally posted by pnjsurferpoet
Aladdin.

We'd be left to the Muslim perverts who offer up their young as human sacrifices. We haven't gone far enough. We need to give Syria and Iran a choice: either make the call for Jihad illegal as it is in Russia and now the UK, or we use our special ops troops to assinate the Muslim clerics calling for Jihad.

Well maybe if you stopped killingh them they might stop killing you?

Ever thought how you might break the circle of violence rather than perpetuate it?

[pnjsurferpoet]

We did allow this perverted take on the Muslim religion to grow. It came under the banner that It's all good. They have the right to believe what they want.


They murdered our military people in the Middle East and then made the VERY BIG mistake of killing innocents in America. The time of the Muslim extremist, perverts, is over with.

[Aladdin]

Originally posted by Greenhat
Aladdin,

Somehow I can imagine you making the same arguments in 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941 and right up through 1945...


And I somehow had imagined you were intelligent enough to discard comparisons between piss-poor Saddam Hussein and the Nazi regime as the pathetic bollocks they are.

But I see you are as easily deceived as many of your fellow citizens.

[Man Of Kent]

Originally posted by Aladdin
And I somehow had imagined you were intelligent enough to discard comparisons between piss-poor Saddam Hussein and the Nazi regime as the pathetic bollocks they are.

I think that the point being made is that you can say the same thing "So Germany is better off without Hitler etc" as you can about Saddam. No direct comparison between the two has been made.

Fact is Iraq is better off without Saddam. And he would still be there if the US had done what you wanted.

Whatever reasons the US may have had in going to war they have achieved a level of freedom which the Iraqis haven't seen for over 25 years. Dismiss that if you will, but by the looks of things the Iraqis won't. And it's their opinion which really counts.

[Clandestine]

Except when that opinion opposes American intentions and plans for the country. Then it is dismissed or, in the words of Rumsfeld, "not recognised". ;)

[The Matadore]

The US has tried to be accomodating , nice and polite to the Muslim world , look what they got in return - 9/11.

The US has to root out the cancer of religious extermism , it must show the Arab world that it will no longer be tolerated.

This new blunt way of dealing with them is excellent.

Either stop these terrorists yourself , or we'll do it for you.

[Aladdin]

The US has tried to be accomodating , nice and polite to the Muslim world , look what they got in return - 9/11.

:rolleyes:

[Clandestine]

Revisionism of our foreign policy history in the ME looms large in the authoritarian environment of Bush's America today.

Matabdore, you would do yourself a world of good by doing some in depth research into matters before spouting presumtpuous nonsense such as the above.

The governing principle of our long running ME policy has been duplicity and that is what layed the fertile soil for 9/11.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Clandestine

The governing principle of our long running ME policy has been duplicity and that is what layed the fertile soil for 9/11.

What BS. If duplicity was the issue, why wasn't Saudi Arabia itself attacked? Syria? France? Britain? Germany? Russia?

Maybe because they aren't the biggest target out there.

A little more research on what makes terrorists tick instead of the transference of your own ideas and assumptions might assist you in not making such an ass of yourself.

Terrorism has NOTHING to do with US policies. It never has, and it never will.

Terrorism has everything to do with power and hate. If the policies were different, the US would be hated for those policies. Because the policies are just an excuse, and always have been.

Just as they were for terrorism against the Egyptians, the Romans, the French, the Russians and the British...oh, and the Israelis too...

[Aladdin]

Every terrorist has an agenda Greenie, you should know that. And the agendas of bucket loads of Arab or Muslim terrorists are dictated by the disgraceful appeasement and protectionism of the Israeli government by the US.

Do you think that might have something to do with the US being targeted?

[Simbelyne]

Originally posted by Greenhat
What BS. If duplicity was the issue, why wasn't Saudi Arabia itself attacked? Syria? France? Britain? Germany? Russia?

Maybe because they aren't the biggest target out there.

A little more research on what makes terrorists tick instead of the transference of your own ideas and assumptions might assist you in not making such an ass of yourself.

Terrorism has NOTHING to do with US policies. It never has, and it never will.

Terrorism has everything to do with power and hate. If the policies were different, the US would be hated for those policies. Because the policies are just an excuse, and always have been.

Just as they were for terrorism against the Egyptians, the Romans, the French, the Russians and the British...oh, and the Israelis too...

So if the US and Israel stopped murdering Palestinians like cattle then the suicide bombers would carry on?

That is comblete BS.

[Greenhat]

Editorial (http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/73858.htm)

The author of that column has a bit more expertise in the area than I do, but from my observations and experience in the middle-east, I agree with his points. Yes, suicide bombers will continue. Yes, fingers will continue to be pointed at the United States. No matter what.

You don't think so? Go visit. Stay a while, learn the culture. Join a terrorist group and listen to what they teach and how they teach it.

Or just read the studies on terrorism done by Scotland Yard, the FBI and Interpol.

Power and hatred. That is the fuel. Not causes.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Aladdin
Every terrorist has an agenda Greenie, you should know that. And the agendas of bucket loads of Arab or Muslim terrorists are dictated by the disgraceful appeasement and protectionism of the Israeli government by the US.

Do you think that might have something to do with the US being targeted?

Not one fucking thing. But then again, I actually deal with terrorists, and aren't making judgements without any data.

[Simbelyne]

Even were a Palestinian government to behave with flawless integrity, terrorists would simply stage their operations from Lebanon or elsewhere. The key fact that Western advocates for the Palestinian cause refuse to recognize is that the terrorism directed toward Israel is only superficially about Palestinian independence. At its core, it is about the old passion for killing Jews.

The old passion for killing jews? Complete BS. Only the seriously radical muslims are like that. Thats like saying that slaughtering Palestinians is the the jews indulging their 'old passion' for killing arabs.

[Simbelyne]

Originally posted by Simbelyne
The old passion for killing jews? Complete BS. Only the seriously radical muslims are like that. Thats like saying that slaughtering Palestinians is the the jews indulging their 'old passion' for killing arabs.

(of whom sharon could be cited as a radical jew)

[BlackArab]

Let's not forget the state of Israel was partially achieved through terrorism against the British. The actions of the terrorists while not condoned can be understood. We may never achieve a terrorist free world but that doesn't stop us from addressing the reasons for terrorism.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by BlackArab
Let's not forget the state of Israel was partially achieved through terrorism against the British. The actions of the terrorists while not condoned can be understood. We may never achieve a terrorist free world but that doesn't stop us from addressing the reasons for terrorism.

Such as what? Bombing a hotel that was used as a military headquarters?

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Greenhat
Such as what? Bombing a hotel that was used as a military headquarters?

which particular incident are you refering to?

[Greenhat]

Actually, I'm asking for you to support your accusations.

[BlackArab]

http://www.cdiss.org/terror_1940s.htm

I see you know what I mean already. Not accusations just facts.

[Greenhat]

Well, of the whole list, I find 3 by Jews that I would consider terrorism, and 6 by Jews that I would consider not to be terrorism.

Unfortunately, the site fails to give a definition of terrorism that it uses in compiling this list.

[BlackArab]

Greenhat, I'm not accusing the jews of being the only ones to have used terrorism. The stern/irgun history is well documented as you know. I would never say that that was the only factor which got them the state of Israel thats just an example I used.

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Greenhat
Well, of the whole list, I find 3 by Jews that I would consider terrorism, and 6 by Jews that I would consider not to be terrorism.

Unfortunately, the site fails to give a definition of terrorism that it uses in compiling this list.


Another thing. Defining terrorism is a little difficult as we all have different views on what constitues a terrorist. Can you imagine asking the question in Belfast or Palestine where half the population would have vastly different answers to the other half?

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by BlackArab
Another thing. Defining terrorism is a little difficult as we all have different views on what constitues a terrorist. Can you imagine asking the question in Belfast or Palestine where half the population would have vastly different answers to the other half?

Sorry, I disagree. It is this claim that allows people to make the ridiculous statement that "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter".

[Simbelyne]

Originally posted by Greenhat
"one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter".

Very true. Che Guevara is the embodiment of that phrase.

[Dear Wendy]

Originally posted by Greenhat
Sorry, I disagree. It is this claim that allows people to make the ridiculous statement that "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter".

A Danish journalist even had the nerve to use a headline as "suicide bomber saves the peace", about Israel not retaliating after the suicide bomb in the Dolfinarium.

[Simbelyne]

Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
A Danish journalist even had the nerve to use a headline as "suicide bomber saves the peace", about Israel not retaliating after the suicide bomb in the Dolfinarium.

Saves the peace? Not sure I understand?

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Simbelyne
Very true. Che Guevara is the embodiment of that phrase.

Ah, yes. Dr. Ernesto Guevara. A man who oversaw the murder of numerous Cubans and then attempted to incite revolutions in Africa and Bolivia. Both of which he was a total failure at.

I wouldn't quote "Che" too much. He is a romantacized criminal and nothing more.

[Dear Wendy]

Originally posted by Simbelyne
Saves the peace? Not sure I understand?

Was translating directly from Danish :) Ensures the peace would maybe be better in the context.
What he meant was that peace would be the outcome, since Israel wouldn't retaliate, and then supposedly the Palestinians wouldn't continue their terror either.

As if.

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Greenhat
Ah, yes. Dr. Ernesto Guevara. A man who oversaw the murder of numerous Cubans and then attempted to incite revolutions in Africa and Bolivia. Both of which he was a total failure at.

I wouldn't quote "Che" too much. He is a romantacized criminal and nothing more.

EXACTLY! to you he is a 'romantacized criminal' and revolutionary failure to others an inspiration and hero.

Ridiculous as it may seem to you 'one mans freedom fighter IS a another man's terrorist'

[Simbelyne]

Originally posted by Greenhat
I wouldn't quote "Che" too much. He is a romantacized criminal and nothing more.

As I say - 'One mans terrorist is another's freedom fighter'!

[Greenhat]

Whose freedom did he fight for?

How much do you actually know about Dr. Ernesto Guevara?

An inspiration? To do what? FAIL? Because that is what he was good at, and that alone.

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Greenhat
Whose freedom did he fight for?

How much do you actually know about Dr. Ernesto Guevara?

An inspiration? To do what? FAIL? Because that is what he was good at, and that alone.


Don't want to get into an argument about Che as the point I'm trying to make concerns the differences in peoples perceptions generally.

[Greenhat]

Perceptions aren't realities.

[BlackArab]

Originally posted by Greenhat
Perceptions aren't realities.



True. In a different context I wonder how many people discover that on a Sunday morning once sober!