Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

By coincidence, or by design?

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

  • By coincidence, or by design?

    Take a look at the recent US involvements across the world, and draw your own conclusions - in each instance, one group has been present, often in the majority, and generally claiming that they were being victimized. Observe:

    Persian Gulf War: Muslim, with conflict between Sunni and Shia, also a repressive despot who represses all sectors but his own, and even his to some degree.;

    Somalia: predominantly Muslim, populace systematically victimized by competing warlords;

    Bosnia: large Muslim population, with significant Croatian and Serbian enclaves. Though Muslims claim "ethnic cleansing", evidence indicates that all three groups are guilty of crimes against humanity;


    Kosovo: Muslim majority. Again, though Kosovars have suffered significant inhumanities, the Kosovo Liberation Army is shown to be every bit as ruthless and bloodthirsty as the Serbians;

    Afghanistan: Predominantly Muslim, with a harsh and brutal fundamentalist regime (Taliban), a hold-over from war against the Soviets. Most groups, ethnic, religious, and social, suffer repression and inhumanity under the Taliban. After their ouster, the Taliban return to terrorist activity, assassinating Afghan members of government, military leaders and on a number of occasions attempt to assassinate President Hamid Karzai. Also engage in some indiscriminate bombings;

    Iraq: Predominantly Muslim and as noted in Persian Gulf above. Hussein regime is nominally Muslim, and he represses the majority Shia, and other groups. After his fall, many terrorist acts occur, most groups claim to be fighting "jihad" , though it is known that Hussein released many violent criminals before he fell, and unknown numbers of foreign terroists also enter the country from all directions. A more long-term flashpoint also exists, the Israeli-Palestine conflict. Our virtual rubber stamp support for Israel has poisoned our relations with many nations. While Israel has, certainly, suffered terribly at the hands of terror groups and Muslim nations, they have been the architects of heavy-handed policies themselves.

    Is it a mere coincidence that, since 1990, we have been fighting with, and against, Muslims. Is there a grand design behind all this. Possibly a person or group is trying to inflame the Muslim populace against the West, to be whipped into a frenzy and unleashed? Who would and could do this? Prince Abdullah, the heir apparent in Saudi Arabia, is known to favor strict Islamic Fundamentalism, and places little or no value on relations with the west. It is only his father's health that stands between him and the throne. Next, we have the Iranian Islamic Republic. It is no secret that they wish to spread Shia Islam far and wide, by any means possible. Despite some pretense to moderation, it is still the Fundamentalist Islamic regime that seized power in 1979. OBL and al-Qaeda? To be quite honest, such a supposition gives him entirely too much credit. He will never be much more than a street-corner thug, if a well-financed one. Could there be an alliance of Muslim extremists? Certainly. from North Africa, the Middle East, the Central Asian Republics and Chechnya, Pakistan, Indonesia (the world's largest Muslim nation), Philippines, and the Muslim diaspora of Europe, North America and elsewhere.

    It is no more true to declare all Arabs/Muslims "terrorists" than it is to declare all Germans Nazis, Russians Communists, or Spaniards Fascists. Regrettably, though, some great number of extremists have hijacked their culture and their religion to justify their cowardly and destructive acts. It is for time to reveal the true face of the extremists who claim to act in the name of Allah. We must not only observe, but be moved to action against the extremists. One noted that Islam will prevail, because the West has free speech, and the Muslims will use it against them. We would do well to heed this and act before it is too late.

    Please note that this is not an incitement to violence, repression, disposession or other illegal, immoral or anti-social acts.
    Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
    (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

  • #2
    I don't know if it's a grand "masterplan", more of an inevitability.

    Over the last decade or so we've all started hearing phrases like "global village" and "globalisation" being bandied around (although this talk seems to have dried up a bit since September the 11th). It's inevitable that as we all get "closer", as trade links increase and the world gets "smaller", there is going to be a clash of cultures - even civilisations. That's what we are seeing, it's the inevitable crunching together of two religions - and there are obviously some who don't like it.

    Just my view anyway.

    Dr. S.
    Imagine a ball of iron, the size of the sun. And once a year a tiny sparrow brushes its surface with the tip of its wing. And when that ball of iron, the size of the sun, is worn away to nothing, your punishment will barely have begun.

    www.sinisterincorporated.co.uk

    www.tabletown.co.uk

    Comment


    • #3
      I think we've just decided that African and Middle Eastern dictatorships are liabilities and need to go now that we don't need their strongmen supporting us against the Big Red anymore. Besides, they're an easier target than Central and South American dictators that we really can't do too much about lest we be called the 'Big Bully in the North'...which we already are anyway sometimes...
      If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by chrisvalla
        I think we've just decided that African and Middle Eastern dictatorships are liabilities and need to go now that we don't need their strongmen supporting us against the Big Red anymore. Besides, they're an easier target than Central and South American dictators that we really can't do too much about lest we be called the 'Big Bully in the North'...which we already are anyway sometimes...
        So you are postulating the opposite view of Hogdriver? He was suggesting that it's a conspiracy of Muslims (for want of a better phrase) - you are suggesting that the aggression is flowing the other way?

        Dr. S.
        Imagine a ball of iron, the size of the sun. And once a year a tiny sparrow brushes its surface with the tip of its wing. And when that ball of iron, the size of the sun, is worn away to nothing, your punishment will barely have begun.

        www.sinisterincorporated.co.uk

        www.tabletown.co.uk

        Comment


        • #5
          There's lots of Anti-Western hostility within the Muslim world on it's own that wants pro-Western-royalty removed. We've helped keep those semi-corrupt (and outright corrupt) governments in power through economic and military means because we needed them for one reason or another. Now that their usefullness is waning, it's time to go back to our 'real selves' and ask those monarchies to give into democratic will, something we barely paid lip service to since the 60s.

          I think whats happening is that we've tamed, neutered, or befriended all of Europe (and the Americas sans Cuba) and now that they're all democracies (of some sort), it's time to move onto the Muslim Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia. East Asia (with some noted exceptions) is democratic enough for us, so we're leaving it alone (wouldn't want to play in China sandbox now would we?).

          We're trying to bring in democracy by force, and it's just not a good way of doing it IMO. It's something that has to be internally over a period of time (over a generational time scale not a yealy one), and certainly not in one President's term, or even two or three. Naturally, we're going to butt heads with those who don't understand it, don't want it, and don't want us there.

          Granted, they will strike out at us at home, but that's their only weapon since they can't meet us on the conventional battlefield and have any chance of doing more than giving us a bloody nose. If we go looking for trouble, we'll find it, even if we're trying to do some good in the process.
          If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by chrisvalla
            There's lots of Anti-Western hostility within the Muslim world on it's own that wants pro-Western-royalty removed. We've helped keep those semi-corrupt (and outright corrupt) governments in power through economic and military means because we needed them for one reason or another. Now that their usefullness is waning, it's time to go back to our 'real selves' and ask those monarchies to give into democratic will, something we barely paid lip service to since the 60s.

            I think whats happening is that we've tamed, neutered, or befriended all of Europe (and the Americas sans Cuba) and now that they're all democracies (of some sort), it's time to move onto the Muslim Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia. East Asia (with some noted exceptions) is democratic enough for us, so we're leaving it alone (wouldn't want to play in China sandbox now would we?).

            We're trying to bring in democracy by force, and it's just not a good way of doing it IMO. It's something that has to be internally over a period of time (over a generational time scale not a yealy one), and certainly not in one President's term, or even two or three. Naturally, we're going to butt heads with those who don't understand it, don't want it, and don't want us there.

            Granted, they will strike out at us at home, but that's their only weapon since they can't meet us on the conventional battlefield and have any chance of doing more than giving us a bloody nose. If we go looking for trouble, we'll find it, even if we're trying to do some good in the process.
            Firstly, Cuba is no more a threat than a Girl Scout Troop. The have no even remotely new equipment, their troops are of questionable quality, training, morale or integrity. Even on their own soil, probably at least 25% will [email protected]# their pants and run after the first bullet.

            Next, we have suggested to each of the Arab states with which we have relations to begin some level of democratization, without ANY success. The following is a rundown:

            Saudi Arabia - absolute fundamentalist Muslim monarchy.

            Kuwait - absolute monarchy, moderate Muslim influence.

            Oman - absolute monarchy, moderate Muslim influence.

            Bahrain - monarchy with elected assembly (but may be dissolved), reasonably tolerant.

            UAE - monarchy with elected assembly.

            Yemen - Officially elected government, in fact power exercised by those who have power (military, political, economic)

            Jordan - monarchy with elected assembly. Probably the closest to democracy in the region

            Egypt - military regime, repressive of fundamentalist groups, who assassinated Mubarak's predecessor, Anwar Sadat.

            Lebanon - to all intents and purposes, a puppet of the Syrian regime, and has been for decades.

            Syria - no extensive connection to the US. Current leader Bashar Assad inherited power form his father, long-time "President" Hafez al-Assad. Autocratic, though Assad has enacted some superficial reforms.
            Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
            (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

            Comment


            • #7
              I decided to take a look at these countries through Freedom House (www.freedomhouse.org), a think tank that rates countries on two factors, civil liberties and political rights (each from 1 to 7, 1 being the most free). Generally, most academics using FH rate a 10 as the minimum level of democracy, with a combined score of 3 (I believe, I'd have to double check that one) being the maximum level for a consolidated democracy.

              Saudi Arabia - Not free (one of the worst countries in the world in terms of freedoms, rating a 14)

              Kuwait - Partly free (According to freedom house it rates a combined score of 9, where 10 is the accepted level of democracy).

              Oman - Not free (11)

              Bahrain - Partly free (FH score of 10 - minimum democracy)

              UAE - Not free (12)

              Yemen - Minimum democracy (10)

              Jordan - Partly free (FH score of 10)

              Egypt - Not free (12)

              Lebanon - Not free (11)

              Syria - Not free (14)

              For those interested, only 8 countries rate at the worst level (14). Those nations are: North Korea (gee, didn't see that one coming did you?), Saudi Arabia, Syria, Burma, Cuba, Libya, Sudan, and Turkmenistan
              “To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against that liberty of conscience which is one of the foundations of American life.”

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: By coincidence, or by design?

                Originally posted by hogdriver
                Take a look at the recent US involvements across the world, and draw your own conclusions - in each instance, one group has been present, often in the majority, and generally claiming that they were being victimized. Observe:

                Persian Gulf War: Muslim, with conflict between Sunni and Shia, also a repressive despot who represses all sectors but his own, and even his to some degree.;

                Somalia: predominantly Muslim, populace systematically victimized by competing warlords;

                Bosnia: large Muslim population, with significant Croatian and Serbian enclaves. Though Muslims claim "ethnic cleansing", evidence indicates that all three groups are guilty of crimes against humanity;


                Kosovo: Muslim majority. Again, though Kosovars have suffered significant inhumanities, the Kosovo Liberation Army is shown to be every bit as ruthless and bloodthirsty as the Serbians;

                Afghanistan: Predominantly Muslim, with a harsh and brutal fundamentalist regime (Taliban), a hold-over from war against the Soviets. Most groups, ethnic, religious, and social, suffer repression and inhumanity under the Taliban. After their ouster, the Taliban return to terrorist activity, assassinating Afghan members of government, military leaders and on a number of occasions attempt to assassinate President Hamid Karzai. Also engage in some indiscriminate bombings;

                Iraq: Predominantly Muslim and as noted in Persian Gulf above. Hussein regime is nominally Muslim, and he represses the majority Shia, and other groups. After his fall, many terrorist acts occur, most groups claim to be fighting "jihad" , though it is known that Hussein released many violent criminals before he fell, and unknown numbers of foreign terroists also enter the country from all directions. A more long-term flashpoint also exists, the Israeli-Palestine conflict. Our virtual rubber stamp support for Israel has poisoned our relations with many nations. While Israel has, certainly, suffered terribly at the hands of terror groups and Muslim nations, they have been the architects of heavy-handed policies themselves.

                Is it a mere coincidence that, since 1990, we have been fighting with, and against, Muslims. Is there a grand design behind all this. Possibly a person or group is trying to inflame the Muslim populace against the West, to be whipped into a frenzy and unleashed? Who would and could do this? Prince Abdullah, the heir apparent in Saudi Arabia, is known to favor strict Islamic Fundamentalism, and places little or no value on relations with the west. It is only his father's health that stands between him and the throne. Next, we have the Iranian Islamic Republic. It is no secret that they wish to spread Shia Islam far and wide, by any means possible. Despite some pretense to moderation, it is still the Fundamentalist Islamic regime that seized power in 1979. OBL and al-Qaeda? To be quite honest, such a supposition gives him entirely too much credit. He will never be much more than a street-corner thug, if a well-financed one. Could there be an alliance of Muslim extremists? Certainly. from North Africa, the Middle East, the Central Asian Republics and Chechnya, Pakistan, Indonesia (the world's largest Muslim nation), Philippines, and the Muslim diaspora of Europe, North America and elsewhere.

                It is no more true to declare all Arabs/Muslims "terrorists" than it is to declare all Germans Nazis, Russians Communists, or Spaniards Fascists. Regrettably, though, some great number of extremists have hijacked their culture and their religion to justify their cowardly and destructive acts. It is for time to reveal the true face of the extremists who claim to act in the name of Allah. We must not only observe, but be moved to action against the extremists. One noted that Islam will prevail, because the West has free speech, and the Muslims will use it against them. We would do well to heed this and act before it is too late.

                Please note that this is not an incitement to violence, repression, disposession or other illegal, immoral or anti-social acts.

                But I thought Islam is a peacefull religien, when are people going to wake up and stop beleaving the line of crap they are being told and start seeing this? Americans are so dam stupid.

                Comment


                • #9
                  [
                  Granted, they will strike out at us at home, but that's their only weapon since they can't meet us on the conventional battlefield and have any chance of doing more than giving us a bloody nose. If we go looking for trouble, we'll find it, even if we're trying to do some good in the process. [/B][/QUOTE]


                  Giving us a bloody nose my god they killed 3000 Americans and you call that a bloody nose what happens when they start nucking our citys and killing millions no we must keep the fight over there and go after them there rather then have them come here and kill us all. Beleave me they can do alot more than give us a bloody nose:nonono:

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    3300 is a bloody nose; a cheap one-time all-out hook when we weren't expecting it (not unlike Pearl Harbor - conspiracy theories aside) to 'send a message' that the Atlantic and Pacific can't protect us, nothing more. I'd say we've recovered and (for most people) gone on with our lives, just like we should. Anything less, and they've won (which they have in a way already).

                    When they really want to bring the war to our doorstep, we'll know... and you're right, it probably won't be a bloody nose next time.
                    If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

                    Comment

                    Latest Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X