IRAQ vs USA/UK

[doh_boy]

heh that was my point, I was trying to point out the thinking of doing it that way. sorry if it wasn't apparent. That is one of my main worries, if we do it that way we will get more enemys than will anyway. :/

 

[nath]

My bad. Probably. Friday. Tired. & other misc excuses for lack of basic reading skills.

 

[Tom]

I minority of Muslims think we're going to war because we don't like their religion. The majority think it's more to do with power. A minority of Christians honestly couldn't give a shit. The majority think it's more to do with power.

I think thats the real difference here.

Iraq isn't an Islamic regime, I'd like to see passages in the Koran that include beating your fellow citizens on the bottom of their feet.

Saddam Hussein is a pretend Muslim.

 

[stu]

Originally posted by xane
Bin Laden, and Arab Islam, has no real support from other Islamic countries, as they too have been victims of fundementalist policies, so attempts are made to expand the Arabic Islamic view into a general Islamic view encompassing every one of the billion plus muslims on the planet - guess what - it ain't gonna happen.

Arab Islamic views do not represent global Islamic views, any more than, as you say, the IRA and Christianity.

Sorry, but again you're totally confusing two things, and you're also using utterly incorrect evidence to back up your argument. Saying that all Arabs are fundamentalists is incredibly ignorant. "Arab" Islam is no different to "non-Arab" Islam - it's based on the five pillars. Nowhere in any sane person's interpretation of the Qu'ran does it say "you shall fly planes into buildings and kill civilians, because that's what Allah wants you to do". Fundamentalists - be they Muslim, Christian, or Jewish, are a law unto themselves. Fundamentalist Christians have been responsible for the kind of atrocities that make September 11th look like a grand day out. If all Arabs were the kind of west-hating bloodthirsty psychopaths that you seem to suggest they are, why are we "liberating" the Iraqi people? They're all arabs, they're all muslims, so surely they must all want to blow up the United States?

Afghanistan was a prime example of extremist Arabic Islam whipping up hatred, the traditional Islam of Afghanistan is not like that at all.

Most of the Taliban were not Arabs - they were Pakistanis and other non-Arab muslims from that area. The Taliban emerged from extremist factions within the Pakistani secret police force (which, incidentally, was CIA trained and funded).

That the Arab nations have failed to soundly renounce his genocidal views is an atrocity in itself. What would any western country do if it had a sizeable population supporting the genocidal elimination of any ethnic group, would it ignore it, having experienced the ugly spectre of genocide first hand, do you think the western nations would let it happen again ?

The IRA carried out a campaign of attacking civilians for around forty years, both in Ireland and in mainland UK. And yet up until September 11th, the IRA openly campaigned and collected in the United States. The administrations knew about it, and (with the exception of Clinton) none of them made a single effort to do anything about it. They not only did not renounce the IRA, they allowed them to continue fundraising and recruiting openly within the country. Many Irish Americans openly sympathised with the IRA.

Think harder before you pick your examples.

 

[stu]

Originally posted by Tom[SHOTTEH]
Israel might get some serious stick for ignoring UN resolutions, but you should all bear in mind that it was the Arab countries around Israel that 'started it'.

OK firstly, if you're going to quote a source, best not to pick one which is so obviously insanely biased:

"This page is maintained by Rabbi Joseph Katz"

Secondly, take a look at the history books. How the Arabs "started it" I'm not sure, given that Israel didn't exist until after the 2nd World War. The establishment of the Israeli state actually began following the first world war, and the invasion of Palestine (yes, contrary to what your dear Rabbi would have you believe it did exist, check a map of the time) by the British to remove the Turks of the Ottoman Empire (who were on the German side). Prior to this, Palestine was essentially a multi-cultural melting-pot - indiginous Arabs, Jews (although indiginous Jews), Europeans, Turks, and various other nationalities all lived quite happily together in Palestine. Let me say it again - Israel *did not exist*. Israelis *did not exist*. The vast majority of 1st generation Israelis were *not* Middle Eastern - they came from Germany, Poland, Eastern Europe, and the USSR. It might also interest you to know that the Zionists (ie the movement that established the state of Israel) did all they could to get rid of both Muslims *and* Jews indiginous to Palestine.

 

[xane]

stu,

I did not claim all Arabs are fundamentalists, I said that fundamentalism, especially the sort that is anti-western, has a lot of sympathy in the Arab nations.

Elsewhere there is not much support, even amongst the radicals. The Taliban were not actually that anti-western, but there were certainly Arabs amongst them, bin Laden included, that were trying to make it so.

Islam varies as much as, if not more than, Christianity, just as there are Catholics and Prodestants, Islam has Shi'ite and Sunni, and in each country the "flavour" of Islam is radically different, from the harsh Shi'i law of Wahabbi Islam in Saudi, to the more relaxed kind found in Pakistan.

Arabic Islam is a minority, but they have all the religious centres, consequently they have a much greater influence that is sometimes resented by other Islamic nations. You have to separate the religious aspect of Islam with the cultural aspect, the latter varies widely around the world, but there seems to be a widely accepted belief that Arab culture is the "true" Islam.

And I certainly don't make any excuses for Christian fundamentalists.

P.S. I used IRA in the same context you did in the previous post, think again

 

[xane]

Originally posted by stu
Let me say it again - Israel *did not exist*. Israelis *did not exist*.

Neither did most of the Arab countries either, including Iraq.

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by stu
OK firstly, if you're going to quote a source, best not to pick one which is so obviously insanely biased:

err I think insanely is a rather extreme word to use to describe a pretty factual account.

Secondly, take a look at the history books. How the Arabs "started it" I'm not sure, given that Israel didn't exist until after the 2nd World War.

Nobody is doubting that, although Judaism predates Islam by quite a few years. It wasn't Israel that attacked its neighbours without provocation. BTW, you would do well to bear in mind that Israel (the state) historically precedes Palaestina.

The establishment of the Israeli state actually began following the first world war, and the invasion of Palestine (yes, contrary to what your dear Rabbi would have you believe it did exist, check a map of the time) by the British to remove the Turks of the Ottoman Empire (who were on the German side).

I never said it didn't exist, and neither did the author. I know a little bit of the history of the region, and I knew all of this.

Let me say it again - Israel *did not exist*. Israelis *did not exist*. The vast majority of 1st generation Israelis were *not* Middle Eastern - they came from Germany, Poland, Eastern Europe, and the USSR. It might also interest you to know that the Zionists (ie the movement that established the state of Israel) did all they could to get rid of both Muslims *and* Jews indiginous to Palestine. [/B]

Israel didn't exist, but after 6 million Jews were killed in such a short space of time, I don't think anybody could dispute their claim for a homeland. Ever heard of Moses?

Call me thick, but its quite simple to me. Jews gassed. Jews want a home. Allies finally give them a home. Arabs invade and take some land. Arabs wait a few years, decide to take a bit more. Jews kick arse. Jews keep the land, and build on it. 'Palestinians' (who are they exactly?) whinge and cry. Nutters with bombs blow themselves up. Israel fights back.

Now whats so hard to understand about that?

BTW try this: http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm#Modern History

 

[doh_boy]

Originally posted by xane
Neither did most of the Arab countries either, including Iraq.

aye the british made iraq but the people who made up the country were there. They weren't refugees from another place put into place without any thought for the people living there. A-la israel.

 

[doh_boy]

Originally posted by Tom[SHOTTEH]
Call me thick, but its quite simple to me. Jews gassed. Jews want a home. Allies finally give them a home. Arabs invade and take some land. Arabs wait a few years, decide to take a bit more. Jews kick arse. Jews keep the land, and build on it. 'Palestinians' (who are they exactly?) whinge and cry. Nutters with bombs blow themselves up. Israel fights back.

Allies finally give them a home.

Which just happend to belong to someone else. :/

Arabs invade

more 'try to get back what was theirs for as long as they can remember.


Israel fights back.

...and nick more land...and more land....and more land...until the palestinian villiages are little islands in between unfriendly israeli territory. They cannot come and go freely and the borders are strictly controlled.

The point about the situation in palestine is that both sides are doing wrong but the israelis aren't being punished for it. This has been allowed to happen because the palestinian state is not respected enough.

 

[Tom]

Yes, the land belonged to the British Empire. Or at least, it had a mandate to rule it, from the League of Nations.

'Try to get back what was theirs'? Jews were living there long before the Arabs even discovered Islam. Its a complicated situation, but the utter refusal of any of the surrounding Arab states to recognise, or even negotitate with Israel, has done more harm than the Zionist movement.

Remember, one of the stated aims of the PLO is 'The destruction of Israel'.

Also remember that to be Jewish does not automatically make you a Zionist.

Oh, and why should Israel negotiate with Arafat, a man who personally advocates suicide bombings?

Anyway, I won't ramble on further, I'm pretty much at the end of my knowledge on the subject.

 

[stu]

I wrote a massive reply to this, but got bored.

All I'll say is I can recommend you read a book called "One Palestine, Complete" by Tom Segev.

 

[Perplex]

Originally posted by Daffeh
oh sorry, we're not in your perfect world are we Nath

the main opposition in the Arab nations are due to their religious beliefs

You really are very, very ignorant. Learn a little about the world,. and the Islamic faith, then come back and comment. U grade for you child, try harder next time

 

[Daffeh]

ok so there arent bands of people coming from other countries wanting to fight the Coalition cos they think its a War Against Islam


but of course i heard that on the news so obviously its all PROPAGANDA



now why would they come and fight if religion had nothing to do with it?


maybe all of you should get rid of the whole Anti-American complex u all seem to have

 

[Nos-]

Keep digging motherfucker!

 

[Daffeh]

wow what a reply!

so u actually gonna come back with something?

or just try and put me down?

 

[Daffeh]

Originally posted by Nos-
Keep digging motherfucker!

oh and lovely u dont agree with me, so u call me names

very grown up eh

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by Daffeh
maybe all of you should get rid of the whole Anti-American complex u all seem to have

I don't have an anti-American complex, but I do have an anti-stupidity complex.

 

[Daffeh]

whats so stupid about claiming that certain groups fighting the Coalition are doing so purely based on their religious belief's?

 

[Embattle]

My favourite conflict of the day:

Iraq's Information Minister Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf ................; denies allegations that Iraqi soldiers are disguising themselves as civilians.

Iraq says an army officer carried out the suicide bombing that killed four US soldiers near Najaf.

 

[Furr]

This all boils down to:

EMPIRE - Be with us or die

 

[Munkey-]

Originally posted by nath
You can't just start a war that shitloads of iraqi's didn't want, and expect them to die in it because it's their country.

Now thats the most ignorant comment I've heard in a while. A large number of Iraqis do want to be free from the politcial and social constraints emplaced upon them by Saddam. I know a few Iraqi people in my school and I, mistakenly, thought that they would be against the war, considering nearly all the arabs in the school are anti-american. They said that although they hadnt grown up in Iraq itself, their parents still commented upon the political system in Iraq in such a way that it has imprinted it upon their head.

Amusing conversation between one iraqi, a bengali, an egyptian and myself during chemistry.

Egyptian: I would much rather have Saddam in place than Bush.
Iraqi: What? Why the fuck would you want that?
E: For the main reason that although they both have WoMD, Saddam wouldnt push the button
Me: How the hell would you know he wouldnt/
E: Well. Theres America with its technology, vast economic base and the such. Then theres Iraq which has obsolite technology and is being invaded by the Americans. Obvisouly Iraq has nothing left to lose and Saddam knows he is doomed.
I: What? You just totally contradicted yourself! You just said that he's got nothing to lose, thus making him more inclined to firing them! America has everything to lose
M: Yeah, if America fired WoMD at a country without justified and reasonable provacation, the rest of the world would pounce upon them in a flash.
E: But thats the point! Saddam knows he's going .......

i cant be arsed. But you get the jist

Now then, if somebody would please just get the point i've been trying to make for the past 4 pages or so.

I think Saddam should be removed. Yet I think the ulterior motives for the war are more threatening in the long term, particularly considering who put him and various others in place at the first. I can already see the vultures flying overhead.

and the other consequences for world security and integrity are at doubt as well, seeing as the UN can be easily ignored.

Anyway, my two cents

 

[rynnor]

Originally posted by Tom[SHOTTEH]
Call me thick, but its quite simple to me. Jews gassed. Jews want a home. Allies finally give them a home. Arabs invade and take some land. Arabs wait a few years, decide to take a bit more. Jews kick arse. Jews keep the land, and build on it. 'Palestinians' (who are they exactly?) whinge and cry. Nutters with bombs blow themselves up. Israel fights back.[/url]

Hmm lots of innacuracies today - where to start...

Nobody gave Israel to the Jewish people - there was a lot of sympathy for them at the end of WW2 and the movement to found a new state of Israel had been around since the previous century though few people believed it would happen.

Israeli terrorists killed a lot of civilians and effectively made the state ungovernable so the brits pulled out - during british rule the area was (for the holy land) pretty stable and all faiths had un-fettered access to Jerusalem - regardless I dont think the UK would have stayed there long term since it has no real interest there.

When the state of Israel was founded they displaced most of the native Arabs who were living there - nobody can really justify this action and it has been a prime cause of the trouble ever since.

Friendly states such as the US pushed the international community to recognise Israel as a sovereign state and most did although obviously not the Arab states who were unsurprisingly unimpressed.

Wars were fought but with heavy funding from the US Israel sucessfully defended itself.

Later it began to illegally expand by creating new jewish communities in palasteinian lands - these were often attacked and were finally used as justification for the occupation of Palastein.

Faced with an occupying army palasteinians seek to do what the Israeli's did to the brits half a century before - make the cost of governing the land too high through terrorism.

Simplified a bit but broadly true.

Today all but a couple of the extreme Arab states recognise Israel and its right to exist - Israel itself is basically bankrupt - its major tourist industry is in tatters and the costs of mounting the occupation are high - only continued aid from the US allows the state to survive - in its own interest it must find a way to peacefully co-exist with its neighbours.

 

[rynnor]

Originally posted by Tom[SHOTTEH]
Yes, the land belonged to the British Empire. Or at least, it had a mandate to rule it, from the League of Nations.

'Try to get back what was theirs'? Jews were living there long before the Arabs even discovered Islam. Its a complicated situation, but the utter refusal of any of the surrounding Arab states to recognise, or even negotitate with Israel, has done more harm than the Zionist movement.

Remember, one of the stated aims of the PLO is 'The destruction of Israel'.

Also remember that to be Jewish does not automatically make you a Zionist.

Oh, and why should Israel negotiate with Arafat, a man who personally advocates suicide bombings?

Anyway, I won't ramble on further, I'm pretty much at the end of my knowledge on the subject.

Lots of people were living in the lands that became Israel for a coupla thousand years - some of them were jews, some christian etc.etc. - some pre-dated the jewish faith.

Its hard to justify displacing people because you think a coupla thousand years ago your people lived there - on that basis the welsh should probably kick the english back to france and the non-native americans would have to quit the USA...

Your source is out of date - pretty much all the Arab states recognise Israels right to exist - I think Iraq is the last one that didn't.

The PLO are extremists - extremists often have a poor grip on reality - the only reason they are supported at all is the occupying jewish army in palastine.

I agree with the next bit - its also true to say that being Jewish doesnt automatically mean you support the actions of the Israeli state.

Finally I'm pretty sure Arafat has spoken out against suicide bombings although his position doesn't allow him much room to maneuver while his people feel so much anger to the occupying forces.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by Munkey-
I think Saddam should be removed. Yet I think the ulterior motives for the war are more threatening in the long term, particularly considering who put him and various others in place at the first.

There were ulterior motives for leaving him in power too.

 

[Ash!]

like what?

 

[Ash!]

Originally posted by Daffeh
whats so stupid about claiming that certain groups fighting the Coalition are doing so purely based on their religious belief's?

Daffeh
your talking a load of bollox to be honest. Try reading a bit of History and Sociology. Even try googling Karl Marx and "Religion is the opiate of the people" At a very base level, yes maybe but the further up the ladder you go its more to do with politics, money, greed et al that uses religion to control people

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by widow-maker
like what?

Iraq was the lesser of two evils, namely, Iran.

 

[xane]

The whole "who was there first" argument is meaningless.

None of the Arabic states had any sort of autonomy until the end of WW1 and the defeat of the Ottoman empire, it was at this time that proposals were put in place to (re-)establish Arab rule of the region, the mandate of the region was split between the British and the French.

The concept of a Jewish and Arab states had been in the minds of supporters for many years, going back to the early 1800's, the chance now existed for those plans to become a reality. For the Jews it was an escape from the rising tide of anti-semitism beginning with the eastern european pogroms of the late 1800's, for the Arabs it was a return to the "classical" days of pre-Ottoman rule and the golden years of Islamic culture.

Different groups lobbied the British (who were put in charge of the "carve up" by the LoN), mainly associated with tribal families who held some sort of power. The Zionists were also lobbying, they also got a piece of the land, this was not done under the Arab's noses either, but virtually with their blessing (see the Feisal-Weismann Agreement).

The British and French made a huge f*ckups in administering the region, promises had been made to gain support from Arab groups during WW1, some of these promises were either reneged or could not be met. The French government virtually considered their mandate to be a new colony. Both Jew and Arab groups were victims of these errors, if anything it united them in a common cause, to wrestle control from the colonial powers.

So what happened ? How did the Jewish and Arab states depart from this happy state of affairs into all out bloodshed and religious hatred ?

Answers on a postcard.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by widow-maker
like what?

Like the contracts signed in the late 1990's with French, Russian and Chinese companies for Iraqi oilfields once the sanctions were relaxed.