Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The reason I pointed out about why the Sunni extremist movement attacks the U.S. is because of what the U.S. does in the Middle East, whether it is supporting regimes as brutal as ISIS (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Eygpt), intervening needlessly in Middle Eastern affairs (Syria, Libya, Iraq, Eygpt), or involving itself needlessly in its conflicts (Israel/Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Sudan/South Sudan, etc...).
Best thing we can do is leave them alone, get out of the Middle East, stop supporting their regimes, and get rid of the Israelis. Going back into Iraq will only result in another victory for the Mujaheddin, and putting the U.S. in a religious conflict between Sunni/Shi'a/other religious groups. Once the U.S. leaves the Middle East the Jihad will focus on governments in the region (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Israel). OBL and Anwar Al-Alaki state repeatedly that they attack the U.S. for what we do, not reestablishing the caliphate, we vote early in Iowa, we drink beer, women in the workplace, etc...
Bottom line we should not go back into Iraq, and we should let the cards fall where they may for the nations there.
so you think the answer is to allow the entire region, to include eastern Europe to be taken over by these extremists???
you do understand this is really no different from the first crusades where the extremist islamics invaded and destroyed must of the 'known' world...they even crossed over in to spain and Italy in Europe
so as many people say....are we socially responsible to stop this, or do we become the enslaved
so you think the answer is to allow the entire region, to include eastern Europe to be taken over by these extremists???
you do understand this is really no different from the first crusades where the extremist islamics invaded and destroyed must of the 'known' world...they even crossed over in to spain and Italy in Europe
so as many people say....are we socially responsible to stop this, or do we become the enslaved
No, this is entirely different than the crusades. Do you see this extremists attacking Switzerland? The reason the Islamic movement fights against us is because of what the U.S. does in the Middle East for the reasons described in the previous comment of mine.
Indonesia is a majority Muslim country, yet does anyone ever hear of Indonesia trying to attack Australia.
No, we are not responsible for stopping what is going on in the Middle East, if they decide to try to destroy Turkmenistan (A dictatorship) it is irrelevant to the U.S. national security, or interests. Going back into Iraq will motivate more Muslims in the Middle East and the West to join groups like ISIS to fight the U.S. intervention in the Middle East. The U.S. motivates its own enemy and going back to Iraq will only fuel the Islamists motivations to attack the U.S./Allies even more.
Even if the U.S. decides to do what you wanted the draft would have to reinstated, as the military now is too small. It is too late now to eliminate the Jihad, however the U.S. can get out of the Jihads bulls eye by adjusting U.S. foreign policy to get them to no longer be interested in the U.S. as a target.
Michael Scheuer, former CIA head of the Bin Laden unit talks about this.
No, this is entirely different than the crusades. Do you see this extremists attacking Switzerland? The reason the Islamic movement fights against us is because of what the U.S. does in the Middle East for the reasons described in the previous comment of mine.
Indonesia is a majority Muslim country, yet does anyone ever hear of Indonesia trying to attack Australia.
No, we are not responsible for stopping what is going on in the Middle East, if they decide to try to destroy Turkmenistan (A dictatorship) it is irrelevant to the U.S. national security, or interests. Going back into Iraq will motivate more Muslims in the Middle East and the West to join groups like ISIS to fight the U.S. intervention in the Middle East. The U.S. motivates its own enemy and going back to Iraq will only fuel the Islamists motivations to attack the U.S./Allies even more.
Even if the U.S. decides to do what you wanted the draft would have to reinstated, as the military now is too small. It is too late now to eliminate the Jihad, however the U.S. can get out of the Jihads bulls eye by adjusting U.S. foreign policy to get them to no longer be interested in the U.S. as a target.
Michael Scheuer, former CIA head of the Bin Laden unit talks about this.
its not about the USA being involved...their motive is CONVERT ALL, or destroy all
during the first crusades the islamics got as far as Switzerland
Quote:
To the south, resurgent Islamic empires projected their power across the Mediterranean. Southern France was occupied and from there Muslim armies advanced into Switzerland, occupying the mountain passes around Geneva and levying tolls for travel in and out of Western Europe. The Aghlabids in Algeria captured Sicily and mounted raids into the heart of Italy. In the 10th century, Abdur Rahman III of Spain captured the islands of the western Mediterranean while the Fatimids under Muiz occupied those in the central Mediterranean.
isis has even said that sunni Saudi Arabia is ''too westernized ''
sunnis(orthodox islamics ) have a large population in turkey, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, boznia, chad, Cyprus , Djibouti , Egypt, Ethiopia , Gambia, guinea , iran, Iraq, Jordan , Kosovo , Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan , Lebanon, Libya , morocco , oman, Pakistan, the gaza strip, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, somolia, sudan, sierra Leone , Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan , UAE, yeman
this isn't about the USA being involved in the middle east....its about an extremist religion trying to ''convert the world''
its not about the USA being involved...their motive is CONVERT ALL, or destroy all
during the first crusades the islamics got as far as Switzerland
isis has even said that sunni Saudi Arabia is ''too westernized ''
sunnis(orthodox islamics ) have a large population in turkey, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, boznia, chad, Cyprus , Djibouti , Egypt, Ethiopia , Gambia, guinea , iran, Iraq, Jordan , Kosovo , Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan , Lebanon, Libya , morocco , oman, Pakistan, the gaza strip, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, somolia, sudan, sierra Leone , Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Turkmenistan , UAE, yeman
this isn't about the USA being involved in the middle east....its about an extremist religion trying to ''convert the world''
No, if you read Bin Laden's declaration of war against the U.S. it is about what the U.S. does. This is what has motivated the Jihad to attack the U.S., your assertion that the U.S. is being attacked for no reason is absurd. This has everything to do with U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, and its intervention there for its dictators, intervening in its conflicts unnecessarily, and unlimited backing to the Israelis.
Think about it if another country tried to impose its government, culture, and values on you that went against yours wouldn't you fight against it. That is what the U.S. has been doing in the Middle East, and along with supporting its dictators, violating their sovereignty(Syria, Libya, Pakistan, Iran)and the alliance with the Israelis in the Israel/Palestine conflict is what motivates the Jihad against the U.S. Not this nonsense with the caliphate.
Regarding the Islamist expansion that is what every empire tries to do, whether its the Romans, British, French, Mongolian, etc..., they try to expand. Christianity did the exact same thing in Europe using the Roman Empire, and later the Holy Roman Empire.
uhm..bin ladens dec of war was NOT solely against the USA
again...the way they think is convert or die...
It was against others, I was talking about why Bin Laden was declaring it against the U.S. In it he specifically mentions U.S. occupation if the Islamic Holy land on the Arab Peninsula in Saudi Arabia, not because the U.S. is not an Islamic country. It has to do with what the U.S. does in the Middle East.
"It should not be hidden from you that the people of Islam had suffered from aggression, iniquity and injustice imposed on them by the Zionist-Crusaders alliance and their collaborators; to the extent that the Muslims blood became the cheapest and their wealth as loot in the hands of the enemies. Their blood was spilled in Palestine and Iraq. The horrifying pictures of the massacre of Qana, in Lebanon are still fresh in our memory. Massacres in Tajakestan, Burma, Cashmere, Assam, Philippine, Fatani, Ogadin, Somalia, Erithria, Chechnia and in Bosnia-Herzegovina took place, massacres that send shivers in the body and shake the conscience. All of this and the world watch and hear, and not only didn’t respond to these atrocities, but also with a clear conspiracy between the USA and its’ allies and under the cover of the iniquitous United Nations, the dispossessed people were even prevented from obtaining arms to defend themselves."
In this it specifically talks about U.S. foreign policy, and its support for Israel. When Bin Laden mentions the Jews he is referring to Israel. Supporting this is his referring to the Qana massacre in Lebanon during the war Israel started there when they invaded in the 1980s.
" All false claims and propaganda about “Human Rights†were hammered down and exposed by the massacres that took place against the Muslims in every part of the world.
Referring to U.S. support to dictatorships in the Middle East that oppress Muslims there (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Yemen's dictator, Egypt's military dictatorship under Mumbarak the U.S. supported, which makes the U.S. hypocritical to say it is a force for freedom and democracy around the world when it is supporting/has supported terrible regimes.
"the American crusader forces- to occupy the land for the longest of years. The crusader forces became the main cause of our disastrous condition, particularly in the economical aspect of it due to the unjustified heavy spending on these forces. As a result of the policy imposed on the country, especially in the field of oil industry where production is restricted or expanded and prices are fixed to suit the American economy ignoring the economy of the country. Expensive deals were imposed on the country to purchase arms. People asking what is the justification for the very existence of the regime then?"
Bin Laden refers more to U.S. support of dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, other oil rich Middle Eastern countries for the oil. In 1953 the U.S. and allies overthrew Iran's democratically elected government for oil, and installed the Shah to allow cheap access to it. The blow back came in 1979 with the Islamic revolution/Taking of hostages in the Tehran Embassy. In the 1980-1988 Iraq/Iran War the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein, even while he was gassing his own people and the Iranians with Chemical Warfare.
He also illegally overthrew the Honduran government in July 2009.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3
But did any of the countries Obama bombed not deserve it?
That's a deflection and you're showing your Liberal Hypocritical Double Standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3
Did Obama lie to the American people to attack a country?
Yes....all of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3
The fact is republicans lied about Iraq, attacked Iraq for nothing, killed 100,000+ innocent Iraqi people, killed 1,000's of US soldiers for nothing, wasted $900 billion dollars in Iraq, and turned Iraq into the ISIS homeland.
It was for something.....it was for your Way of Life, your Life-Style and your Standard of Living.
The Standard of Living declined with the introduction of the Euro.
Imagine how much further it will decline when Japan and China introduce their unified currency.
The simple fact that you have not voluntarily lowered your Standard of Living is proof you support Bush's policies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3
And my point is republicans never said a negative word while or after GW Bush did the above things.
I'm not a Republican, but I have and still do criticize Bush, as do Republicans.
I even criticized Bush publicly at universities around the US for his blatant violations of international treaties, while drumming up support for the Detainees.
What did you do?
Nothing. You whined a lot, but didn't actually expend even an iota of energy.
That's probably because you were taking full advantage of the benefits of Bush's invasion of Iraq.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3
But as soon as Obama gets in office republicans attacked him like a pack of wolves for the 4 Americans killed in Benghazi (and Benghazi was not even Obama's fault.)
You just lied.
Obama was elected in 2008. Benghazi was in 2012.
It was Obama's fault.
Who was coordinating the sale and transfer of weapons to Syrian rebels via Turkey?
Bush? Um, no sorry, Bush was at his ranch because he wasn't president.
Obama was president. Obama was over-seeing the sale and transfer of weapons to Syria via Turkey.
Obama told Stevens to leave the safety and security of US Embassy Mission Tripoli and go to crap-hole Benghazi to meet with the Turkish Delegation.
You know.....low-profile stuff....out-of-the-way of prying eyes who might suspect that Obama is selling/transferring weapons to Syria via Turkey.
Since you're so good at counting, why don't you tell us the total number of US diplomatic missions that were attacked during the period September 10-11, before the attack on Benghazi?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3
These anti-Obama threads are not about reality, justice, or helping America. They are childlike, insane, misguided, illogical political attacks (to make democrats look bad by using lies, spin, manipulation, and childlike insanity.)
Benghazi was an intelligence failure by the Obama Administration.
Count the number of US diplomatic missions that were attacked. Oh, that's right....you're afraid of the Truth.
By 2:00 AM on the morning of September 11 --- 17 hours before Stevens was killed -- how many US diplomatic missions had been attacked?
Had I been president, I would have immediately ordered all diplomatic activities to cease, and specifically for Stevens to remain in safety at the embassy mission in Tripoli.
If it was a matter of National Security that Stevens meet with the Turkish Delegation, then I would have change the location to Tripoli, or if still held at Benghazi, I would have alerted Commander 173rd Airborne Brigade in Vincenza, Italy to have battalion on stand-by with a fires battery, and had the base commander at Aviano Air Base put aircraft on CAP with CAS load-out.
But then, I'm smarter than Obama ever could be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chad3
The point of this thread is Obama told America he would get out of Iraq, and now he wants to put more US soldiers in Iraq (that's 1 lie.)
Why did Obama try to negotiate a SOFA to keep US troops in Iraq through 2016?
Ooops....
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter
Doesn't matter what Iraqis wanted in their own country?
Well, they wanted to sell their oil and other commodities exclusively in Euros.
If ISIS takes over the government and starts selling oil in Euros, then Obama will claim ISIS has WMD and you have invade, just like Bush did.
Sounds like a slow Vietnam style build up of troops and a losing proposition for the Prez.
He should have kept troops there a few years ago to hold what we won.
No, he should have taken them out like he did AND THEN STAYED OUT. I read this is going to cost 5 billion. Lord, knows we have better things to do with 5 billion than prop up some lazy Arabs who won't fight for their own country. We spent nearly 10 years "advising and training" and equipping these losers already. They deserve to have their heads lopped off by ISIS if they won't stand up for themselves and do their own fighting. Arabs are like the welfare class we have in the US. As long as you keep giving them stuff, they will never do anything but ask for more. Cut them off and let them fend for themselves and maybe, just maybe they will actually break out of their dependency.
Instead of finishing it in the right manner Obama has brought us into this mess for a second time.
Pretty much made the first time null & void with a high price paid with gains thrown to the trash heap.
Now it's a much larger uphill battle.
First-time was already null and void and there were no gains.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
