Understanding terrorism

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by richlevy

We can raid all the houses and caves in Iraq, but have still failed to lower the number of terrorist attacks.

Fox News reported this week that the number of terrorist attacks in Iraq has dropped for the third month straight. The number is down by about a quarter from three months ago, but the bangs are getting bigger. Fox also remarked that they didn't know whether it was us or them -- Rump Saddamites losing steam or the calm before another storm?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

It's imperialism if you're determined to stay and exact tribute from the resulting subjects. Absent staying...

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

It's imperialism if you're determined to stay and exact tribute from the resulting subjects. Absent staying...

We're building the biggest embassy in the world there, and I doubt the military bases we're building are temporary. As for tribute, we'll see.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Monkey, the solidest and most objective evidence out there is that our Middle East policy is not and never was all about oil. Israel? Nary a drop that didn't get there by tanker. We had an army sitting atop the Rumaila Field, which is the biggest of Iraq's oilfields. We drove off it, packed up and went home. Didn't even pump barrel one for a souvenir. I believe and credit that solid and objective evidence. Being immunized against conspiracy theory, I don't get sucked in by the kind of thing you're believing in.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Monkey, the solidest and most objective evidence out there is that our Middle East policy is not and never was all about oil.

I'm glad you put the word "all" in there. Because otherwise it would have been one of the most ridiculous things you've said, and that's saying a lot. As it is, with the "all" in there, you essentially said nothing.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

I'm glad you put the word "all" in there. Because otherwise it would have been one of the most ridiculous things you've said, and that's saying a lot. As it is, with the "all" in there, you essentially said nothing.

Codswallop. I finished the thought in the rest of that post. You are being extremely dishonest. That should not satisfy you.

[bargalunan]

When US bring democracy in other countries :

Mossadegh prime minister was elected in Iran in 1952 and wanted to nationalize petrol.
Eisenhower said something like “ eliminate the problem called Mossadegh and get our petrol back “ (french translation…)
CIA organized communist bomb attacks, riots (operation Ajax) in order to raise the Shah to power and his prime minister nazi general Fazlollah Zahédi (his political police : Savak highly influenced by Gestapo)
Mossadegh died in prison in 1967.

Salvator Allende was elected president of Chile in 1970, CIA raised dictator Pinochet in 1973.
Salvator Allende was executed in 1973.

Hugo Chavez is elected in Venezuela (petrol). US always try to eliminate this president who invests his petrol benefits for his country.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Is elected in Iran in august 2005 and launch again a civil nuclear program (that could lead to military program ?…)
When there will be no more petrol in Iran, what kind of energy will this country be allowed to use ? If western countries were Iran, what would they do ? They’ll also try to anticipate future. I know may be he isn’t a saint, I just keep occidental logic.
What will GW Bush decide ? He’s waiting for the first reason to declare war in end August or beginning September 2005 ! US military bases have already been set around Iran (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kirghistan, Ouzbékistan, Irak, Koweït and Qatar) for months.

(It would be also ironical that US let now Irak attack Koweit since Irak is under US political control : the 02 aug 2005 Irakian deputies declared Koweit was infringing Irak/Koweit border line. I just make a free nightmare without any evidence of this intention ! But the last time it happened, Saddam Hussein overran Koweit.

GW Bush lost the election in Florida in 2000 and was declared president by the Supreme court (justice) with members named by G W Bush’s father.
Bush declared war to Irak and Afghanistan, change their governments without catching Ben Laden, without finding links between Irak and Ben Laden, without finding mass destruction weapons in Irak.
US own civil and military nuclear. US launched a program of miniaturised nuclear bombs “mini-nukes”. And remember what is the only country that used nuclear weapon in history ?

Recalling WW2 :
Before the nuclear bombing, unlike other Japanese cities, Hiroshima and Nagasaki had never been attacked by US because it would have altered the results in order to establish liable statistics of the nuclear efficiency !! (French and British TV broadcast last week)
Japan had already decided to surrender before Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and US leaders knew all about that. Thanks to Little Boy and Fat Man, Japan will surrender to US and not to URSS ! Thus Japan became under US control and not URSS control.
Tokyo 70.000, Hiroshima 140.000, Nagasaki 70.000 at the end 1945. Multiply per 2 after for the two last ones victims of radiations.

We should do something to bring democracy and freedom in United States !

After
- a century of oil pillage in middle east, by the western world (France, GB as well),
- manipulations in order to keep these Arabian countries divided, and thus keep the power
(you can extend to Asia, Africa and South America). French and British are also responsible in having cutting the border lines throw ethnic people according to their economical interests, and divide these new countries in several different ethnic trends.
Divide in order to rule !
- years of food blockade in Irak,
I don’t think virgins are necessary to motivate people to become terrorists and fight against US ! (French members of Resistance were seen like terrorists in WW2.)

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

It's imperialism if you're determined to stay and exact tribute from the resulting subjects. Absent staying...

When the domination is obvious, people have an easy objective to fight (some French against nazis…). When you put a puppet, stemmed for this country, you command it, and you control the main companies, it’s less easy for folks to react. But this country is still under your control. It will follow your orders and interests.

For example it’s also useful to control countries producing petrol in order to keep dollar as the main international trade money… Otherwise it would lead to an economical breaking down
that threatens US (and the world) because economically they aren’t really so mighty. Look at the economical deficit.

Originally Posted by Cyclefrance

No doubt the US intended/intends to make the US and world a safer place through its actions, but the effect has produced and continues to produce something else.

I often agree with you, but in this case I doubt whether it’s true: Just look at the results. Leaders aren’t crazy in their logic (but humanely, emotionally they are), I think they want these effects.

Originally Posted by Cyclefrance

Give a man a good enough reason (stimulus) to react and he will - the harsher the reason the stronger the reaction.

I agree 500%. It’s the reason they act like this with several stages (economical crisis, food blockade… à reaction (terrorist, war) à action (war that you are surely going to win) to get the power justified as being seen as victim of terrorism)
For exemple : US iron and petrol blockade against Japan before WW2, food blockade against Irak before Gulf War (hundred thousand civil victims)………..

After war Iran / Irak, Irak was ruined. But Saddam could be an important force in Middle East. US incited Koweit to provoke it in extracting oil at the border line and in requiring repayment of military help. US promised with ambassador April Glaspie that US wouldn’t interfere because before British decolonisation Koweit was part of Irak. à Saddam attacked Koweit à US Gulf war 1

When you want a result, create the problem that your result will resolve ! Thus the population will accept it and thank you !

I think in politic there’s no friend, no enemy, only just interests. Just look back at history.

I disagree with countries politic not people.

Bye

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by bargalunan

When US bring democracy in other countries :

Don't forget all of Europe in this list.

How'd that work out, BTW?

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Don't forget all of Europe in this list.

Except spain.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I think in politic there’s no friend, no enemy, only just interests. Just look back at history.

You know, that's one of the wisest things I've ever heard(read), are you sure you're French?

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by bargalunan

GW Bush lost the election in Florida in 2000 and was declared president by the Supreme court (justice) with members named by G W Bush’s father.

Right, except for the "lost the election" part. The vote re-counters in Florida continued counting for the hell of it even once the Supreme Court told them the results would be ignored. They determined that even after the recount, Bush did in fact win Florida.

He did not receive a majority of the popular vote, to be sure, but that is not how our election system works. He is not the first president to win with less of the popular vote than his opponent.

But don't feel bad, most of the American media ignored that part of the story too.

[bargalunan]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Don't forget all of Europe in this list.

I really don’t forget Europe. Sorry if you’ve understood that in my post. I’ve mentioned some examples and used words like “western world”. Meanwhile I think US are the most active nowadays. Aren’t they ? It’s the privilege of the world champions.
If you want some more about France :
- France responsible of genocide in Madagascar in 1947 : 300.000 dead people.
- France made war in Algeria (1954-1962) : about 300.000 Algerians dead
- Mitterrand was chosen in 1990 to negociate peace with Saddam Hussein before Gulf War 1. Saddam Hussein answered positively and accepted to free the hostages. After suddenly Mitterrand closed negotiations (to join US point of view) and the war began. : > 100.000 dead
- France and Mitterrand (I hate this man) responsible of genocide in Rwanda in 1994 : 800.000 dead Tutsis.
- …..

We can easily find others for England, Russia…

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

are you sure you're French?

Sure I’m French. May be I was an American in a former life ! :p
But I’ve forgotten a lot of my English when I was in heaven.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by bargalunan

I really don’t forget Europe. Sorry if you’ve understood that in my post.

You misunderstood me.

I mean:

When listing all the countries that the US brought freedom and democracy to, don't forget Europe.

I'm not talking about WW2. I know it has been too long to expect leftover gratitude for that.

I'm talking about the cold war and the events of the last 20 years.

Meanwhile I think US are the most active nowadays. Aren’t they ? It’s the privilege of the world champions.

And the responsibility.

[Happy Monkey]

What was the thought that you finished? That Israel is also a major influence on our Middle Eastern foreign policy? Thanks for the heads up. That you found an example of a time we didn't out-and-out take oil during a war? The whole Iraq/Kuwait war was about the Rumaila oil feild.

[Undertoad]

Cyc, that's good karma by you, stating up front that you don't have all the answers. I don't either.

I don't think Israel/Palestine is the root of any of this. I think it's just the most visible flashpoint. It fails to explain things like Bali and Chechnya.

I don't think negotiation works at all because I think the other side sees it as a point of weakness. In 1999 Clinton worked with Arafat to come to a negotiated agreement on the problem. He was offered more than he'd ever been offered before. His answer was to turn it all down and return home and start the most recent intifada. "They are talking, they must be at the end of their rope, it's time to attack!"