Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

liberating sudan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
    I'm curious. Why should I care? Why should I endorse a military action? Let them fight it out by themselves. Now a quarantine of arms I would consider.
    They need to grow up for themselves, and show that they can lead themselves.

    What is the purpouse of taking out one tyran just to be replaced by another ?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Paul Edwards View Post
      I thought of something else. I only need "democratic imperialism" to be implemented at this stage in world history. I am happy for the Sudanese to have universal adult suffrage at this moment, and NATO could do that. It will probably take decades to assess the direction that democratic Sudan is heading, and after that period of time we can decide whether we need to reinvade and put specific Sudanese in charge of the government, or forcibly change the education system or anything else that may be required. I don't know if NATO can do that or whether we need another 9/11 in America, done by Sudanese this time, to reform or nuke Sudan. I am worried that the Americans will nuke Sudan instead of giving our Sudanese ideological allies a chance to carry out their own selective genocide. If America intends to simply use nukes then I'd rather they assist with a "selective genocide" IN ADVANCE of another 9/11.

      Why do "you" support Sisi in Egypt ? Where is "democracy" in Egypt ?

      Cant you see that you have 5000 faces, not 2.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Paul Edwards View Post
        I don't believe that NATO/West only ever acts in self-interest. I believe that western governments genuinely care about the welfare of others, which is why they send food aid to Africa and sent troops to Somalia and Haiti. Sudan would be another humanitarian intervention. Besides which, we do have interests there. It is in our interests, as a response to 9/11, to have more Muslim democracies so that we can see whether Muslims can be reformed rather than needing to be genocided. It is also part of geostrategy to have Sudan converted into an allied democracy.

        Thank you. This is really motivating for us.

        Actually, you cant be a democrat/liberal (with secular tought) and a muslim at the same time. So what you re saying is full scale clash of civilisations.

        وَلَن تَرۡضَىٰ عَنكَ ٱلۡيَهُودُ وَلَا ٱلنَّصَٰرَىٰ حَتَّىٰ تَتَّبِعَ مِلَّتَهُمۡۗ قُلۡ إِنَّ هُدَى ٱللَّهِ هُوَ ٱلۡهُدَىٰۗ وَلَئِنِ ٱتَّبَعۡتَ أَهۡوَآءَهُم بَعۡدَ ٱلَّذِي جَآءَكَ مِنَ ٱلۡعِلۡمِ مَا لَكَ مِنَ ٱللَّهِ مِن وَلِيّٖ وَلَا نَصِيرٍ


        And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion. Say, "Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance." If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have against Allah no protector or helper.

        -Sure Al-Baqarah, Vers 120



        If we succeed in waking up 10% of muslims , since they sleep and do nothing, you ll lose this one Jimmy.
        Last edited by Daud; 21 Jun 19, 01:38.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post

          They can be considered the periphery of Europe, what happens there has direct effect on neighbouring states, Sudan ? Hardly….



          Libya was hardly a "humanitarian intervention", and indeed one could wonder if the Serbs started negociding Muslims today, if anyone would care to act.

          2019 is not 1990.



          That would nice yes, but considered unrealistic imho, at most should the situation deteriorate there you could see limited bilateral action genre Mali, not full blown NATO invasion.

          Also with Trump in the White House, NATO is pretty much dead in the water, short of Russian invasion no one is going to send national troops abroad with him in command.

          The US lobbied to put the Syria/Iraq operation against IS under the NATO flag, don't know if that ever actually happened - I doubt it ?

          Edit,

          A compromise was reached apparently, NATO "joined" the existing US coalition in a supporting role..



          https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a7755751.html

          This is so true ! Kyle Scot, american ambassador in Serbia showed some interesting pictures.


          If we read stuff between the rows then:


          "If you serbs distance yourselves from Russia, it would be perfectly fine for us if you kill your muslim neighbours"
          Attached Files

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Daud View Post
            "If you serbs distance yourselves from Russia, it would be perfectly fine for us if you kill your muslim neighbours"
            Well it would never be "perfectly OK" and for sure various national governments and the EU in particular would try to calm the situation.

            But would NATO go to war again as it did in 1995 and 1999, and how would public reaction be ? Hard to tell..

            My guess is no.
            Lambert of Montaigu - Crusader.

            Bolgios - Mercenary Game.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Daud View Post
              Ah, really ?

              Isil would force Islam on US population even if they need to kill 90% of your population, so your clique are the same type of mentals. Everything you touch turns into filth. Actually people like you are the reason of their existance, and of Al Qaeda too.
              Absolutely. This is why we have a war. A clash of ideologies. And it goes beyond just government to government conflict. Thanks to OBL, we now need to fight every single individual, including yourself, with an opposing ideology. Not necessarily with weapons, but with debate like we are having now.

              How much of of them are guilty for 9 11 and how much of them already died ?
              The Iraqis were never directly guilty for 9/11. They were just meant to be the smartest Arabs on the planet (written in Egypt, published in Lebanon, read in Iraq), so that was the best chance we had of standing up an Arab democracy. There were a LOT of people, including Arabs, who said it was impossible for the Arabs to have democracy. The same thing used to be said of the ethnic Chinese prior to Taiwan becoming a beautiful democracy. Anyway, whatever number of Iraqis died so that their country could be FREE is a blood price to be paid by patriots. If Australia was under a cruel dictator that was able to abduct and rape my daughter, I would be willing to sacrifice 90% of my country to have the dictator overthrown. At the Alamo they sacrificed 100%. The Russians sacrificed 20 million people in WW2 and didn't even get freedom at the end of it. The Iraqis ended up sacrificing 1% of their population, and almost all of that was due to Muslims killing Muslims, not anything the coalition did.

              Who gives you the right to force your ideology ( + with the cost of KILLING 90% of population)
              What gave Saddam the right to force his ideology onto the Iraqi people? I am forcing the *Iraqi people's* (not mine) ideology onto the *government*, via democracy. The *people* are free to vote for whoever they want. Although if they vote for jihad on the West we will THEN need to force a non-jihad ideology on the people. Due to the right of self-defense. But that fortunately never happened. Not even a bus timetable was forced onto the Iraqi people, and I am happy with that for now. They have opened up freedom of speech so now I (and others) can negotiate with the Iraqi people for long-term peace.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Daud View Post
                Why do "you" support Sisi in Egypt ? Where is "democracy" in Egypt ?
                In the case of Egypt, it is the *people* who are the problem, so democracy can't work. There needs to be reeducation of the people so that they are more like Iraq and voting for reasonable governments.

                Perhaps it would be helpful if you understood your enemy, ie me. I support rational, humanist, non-subjugating government *in that order*. Rational means you can't vote for communism or Islamic rule as there is no rational basis for that (another term is "separation of church and state"). Humanist means you can't implement laws that prevent people from changing religions. Until such time as the Egyptian people are able to vote in rational, humanist governments, it makes sense to leave a dictatorship there instead. But the Egyptian dictator is not carrying out sufficient reforms of the population so when we've finished dealing with enemy *governments*, we'll probably knock over Egypt too and implement NATO colonial rule or something like that. That is the correct response to 4/5 of the 9/11 hijackers being Egyptian - reform the Egyptian people. And we now have Iraq as an example so that we can say "you need to look like those Arab Muslims over there". THAT is why Iraq was so crucial. To provide a template. It had NOTHING to do with oil. And the best people to dismiss the myth of Saddam being an "Arab hero" were the Iraqi people who had to suffer under this "hero".

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Paul Edwards View Post
                  Absolutely. This is why we have a war. A clash of ideologies. And it goes beyond just government to government conflict. Thanks to OBL, we now need to fight every single individual, including yourself, with an opposing ideology. Not necessarily with weapons, but with debate like we are having now.


                  The Iraqis were never directly guilty for 9/11. They were just meant to be the smartest Arabs on the planet (written in Egypt, published in Lebanon, read in Iraq), so that was the best chance we had of standing up an Arab democracy. There were a LOT of people, including Arabs, who said it was impossible for the Arabs to have democracy. The same thing used to be said of the ethnic Chinese prior to Taiwan becoming a beautiful democracy. Anyway, whatever number of Iraqis died so that their country could be FREE is a blood price to be paid by patriots. If Australia was under a cruel dictator that was able to abduct and rape my daughter, I would be willing to sacrifice 90% of my country to have the dictator overthrown. At the Alamo they sacrificed 100%. The Russians sacrificed 20 million people in WW2 and didn't even get freedom at the end of it. The Iraqis ended up sacrificing 1% of their population, and almost all of that was due to Muslims killing Muslims, not anything the coalition did.


                  What gave Saddam the right to force his ideology onto the Iraqi people? I am forcing the *Iraqi people's* (not mine) ideology onto the *government*, via democracy. The *people* are free to vote for whoever they want. Although if they vote for jihad on the West we will THEN need to force a non-jihad ideology on the people. Due to the right of self-defense. But that fortunately never happened. Not even a bus timetable was forced onto the Iraqi people, and I am happy with that for now. They have opened up freedom of speech so now I (and others) can negotiate with the Iraqi people for long-term peace.

                  This is not Hollywood. You re speaking about american Rambos saving the world narrative. Its fairy tale.

                  First, you need 2 for a tango. Why didnt Al Qaida attacked Brasil or other "chiristian " state ? Tell me, why US ? Start with non-conditional support to f zionist state.

                  You re part of the problem, you still holding the grip ( slowing their progress) and plunder for petro-dollar/ holding Suez. It was always that way. Are arabs blessed or forsaken for having resources we need to ask ourselves.

                  You re the part of the problem on individual level too. You re just player2 in this game. You have same mentality as islamists who think that only way is conflict and only way of wining is war/jihad.

                  Narrow minds are dangerous.
                  Last edited by Daud; 21 Jun 19, 06:03.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Snowygerry View Post

                    Well it would never be "perfectly OK" and for sure various national governments and the EU in particular would try to calm the situation.

                    But would NATO go to war again as it did in 1995 and 1999, and how would public reaction be ? Hard to tell..

                    My guess is no.
                    There is a big political fight about ANP of Bosnia and their membership in Nato. Serbs blocking it.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Daud View Post
                      Actually, you cant be a democrat/liberal (with secular tought) and a muslim at the same time.
                      That is not quite true. One of the Iraqi bloggers pointed me to the Mu'tazilah sect of Islam, and I decided to convert from atheism to Mu'tazilah. So I am a Muslim with secular thought. I think people like Mithal Al-Alusi are too, even though he's Sunni. Not every Muslim subscribes to your belief system. That's why there is intra-Muslim violence.

                      So what you re saying is full scale clash of civilisations.
                      Yes, Osama did something amazing by forcing a worldwide ideological clash down to the individual level.

                      If we succeed in waking up 10% of muslims , since they sleep and do nothing, you ll lose this one Jimmy.
                      If Muslims woke up they would be like Mithal Al-Alusi. BTW, you may be interested in the Arabic writing at the top here:

                      http://mutazilah.org/index_religion.htm

                      I spent a lot of time with an Arab Muslim Iraqi blogger to nail down that Arabic writing so that you could understand where your ideological enemy is coming from.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Paul Edwards View Post
                        That is not quite true. One of the Iraqi bloggers pointed me to the Mu'tazilah sect of Islam, and I decided to convert from atheism to Mu'tazilah. So I am a Muslim with secular thought. I think people like Mithal Al-Alusi are too, even though he's Sunni. Not every Muslim subscribes to your belief system. That's why there is intra-Muslim violence.


                        Yes, Osama did something amazing by forcing a worldwide ideological clash down to the individual level.


                        If Muslims woke up they would be like Mithal Al-Alusi. BTW, you may be interested in the Arabic writing at the top here:

                        http://mutazilah.org/index_religion.htm

                        I spent a lot of time with an Arab Muslim Iraqi blogger to nail down that Arabic writing so that you could understand where your ideological enemy is coming from.
                        Mua tazilah held the power. First they lost ideological battle and now they live only in history.

                        If you have secular tought you reject God as a judge - so you reject part of Quran ( Tewhid Uluhiyyah) and thats why you cant be muslim.

                        About democracy as a model of chosing a government/leader - there isnt problem.

                        2)
                        Osama was relevant only to minor group of asocial people. Noone of mainstream muslims care about you or US and are not blood thirsty people calling for genocide as you do.

                        3)

                        when i mentioned wake up call i didnt meant fight (only) then overall progress in all ways and sciences. It must start with proper mindset, then industrialize.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Daud View Post
                          This is not Hollywood. You re speaking about american Rambos saving the world narrative. Its fairy tale.
                          The fairy tale was a large bunch of terrorists bringing down the WTC. That stunned a lot of people. Now we're living in a fairy tale where Muslims give their lives to kill Americans in the hope that that will somehow restore the Caliphate. This is not a sane war. No-one in the West could imagine having a religious war in 2001. We are fighting the insanity of Islamists.

                          First, you need 2 for a tango. Why didnt Al Qaida attacked Brasil or other "chiristian " state ? Tell me, why US ? Start with non-conditional support to f zionist state.
                          And here we have part of the ideological clash. Like Mithal Al-Alusi who addressed the Israeli parliament, I support the liberal democracy of Israel. And even though I'm Australian, I see the US as the greatest actor on the world stage, even on a per-capita basis. I would give my life FOR America, not to KILL Americans.

                          You re part of the problem, you still holding the grip ( slowing their progress) and plunder for petro-dollar/ holding Suez. It was always that way. Are arabs blessed or forsaken for having resources we need to ask ourselves.
                          This has nothing to do with oil. If you think it is you just don't know your enemy very well.

                          You re the part of the problem on individual level too. You re just player2 in this game. You have same mentality as islamists who think that only way is conflict and only way of wining is war/jihad.
                          Not quite true. I believe that freedom of speech will cause Islam to reform. But in order to get freedom of speech in places like Iraq, war was the most sensible option. If you want to say that that makes me the same as Islamists, so be it, I don't care. You may as well say that I'm male, just like most jihadists.

                          Narrow minds are dangerous.
                          You're the one who imagines an oil motive with absolutely zero evidence. You might want to watch this too:

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUCwCgthp_E

                          That's an insider spilling the beans. He doesn't mention oil once, even though he was against the liberation of Iraq.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Daud View Post
                            Mua tazilah held the power. First they lost ideological battle and now they live only in history.
                            They no longer only live in history, and the ideological battle can still be won. Note that Vietnam is capitalist now, so America effectively won the war against communism in Vietnam after all.

                            If you have secular tought you reject God as a judge - so you reject part of Quran ( Tewhid Uluhiyyah) and thats why you cant be muslim.
                            That's your opinion as a religious bigot. I'm an anti-religious-bigot. And in my opinion I can self-identify as a Muslim regardless of you calling me takfir.

                            Noone of mainstream muslims care about you or US and are not blood thirsty people calling for genocide as you do.
                            They instead called for Saddam to remain dictator of Iraq instead of supporting a US liberation, so they are my ideological enemy and need to be defeated. Note that approximately 85% of Afghans supported the US liberating Afghanistan, so they're not really ideological enemies. They trusted kaffirs more than their own dictator.

                            when i mentioned wake up call i didnt meant fight (only) then overall progress in all ways and sciences. It must start with proper mindset, then industrialize.
                            A proper mindset is to become either Mu'tazilite or atheist or deist. You're part of the problem.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              So you arming the kurds only because you have a good heart

                              If you want to force some western model ( democracy) to muslim people you re the same as islamists, just second side of a coin.

                              Forcing somethig will bring just blood. Being myself orthodox muslim, i would never force Islam to noone, it would bring just hatred.

                              Islam will never reform to fit your, or Trumps wishes.

                              You, and islamists, need to f*** off from people.


                              Last edited by Daud; 21 Jun 19, 06:32.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Daud View Post
                                So you arming the kurds only because you have a good heart
                                The West has a good heart. We did a good thing in Syria, just like everywhere else we go.

                                If you want to force some western model ( democracy) to muslim people you re the same as islamists, just second side of a coin.
                                No, democracy is the ONLY thing that is NOT forced. It is YOU who wanted Saddam to force his model (Saddam is a genius leader) onto Muslim people.

                                Forcing somethig will bring just blood.
                                Yes, Saddam forcing his views onto the Iraqi people brought blood. We ended his ability to spill any more blood.

                                Being myself orthodox muslim, i would never force Islam to noone, it would bring just hatred.
                                Mohammad forced Islam onto lots of people. Do you condemn Mohammad? Do you condemn him for enslaving women and raping him and then writing in 33:50 that God says it is OK to rape slaves?

                                Islam will never reform to fit your, or Trumps wishes.
                                Christianity reformed. I see no technical barrier to reforming Islam. And if it can't be reformed it needs to be eliminated. But not right now. First we need to do what is geostrategic which is to defeat enemy *governments* like Iran.

                                You, and islamists, need to f*** off from people.
                                No, YOU need to reform.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X