About terrorism and Saudi Arabia

[Dowding]

You wouldn't find many Protestants in the IRA, Naso...

There was even a Catholic priest who was directly involved in one bombing.

[Naso]

Awww, c'mon Dowding, I know there's a lot of religion in Ireland struggle, but you have to admit there's quite a difference.



Or you want to reduce IRA fighters as a "fanatic religious warriors" ?

C'mon, pommie!

[Tumor]

Originally posted by GScholz

Tumor, what the hell are you babbling about? Please make sense.

With that, I rest my case and leave it to the jury.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by GScholz
No, not do what the terrorists wants, but the people whom they draw their support from.

Ever heard of the Baader-Meinhof gang or the Red Brigades?

You're missing a very important note here.  "Extremist Fundamentalist Muslim".  I'll let you figure out what those 3 words mean, and also let you figure out why it would make no difference what the West did.

[Monk]

Originally posted by GScholz
No, not do what the terrorists wants, but the people whom they draw their support from.

Ever heard of the Baader-Meinhof gang or the Red Brigades?

The RAF just sort of died out,  they were not very well supported by anyone really.

give ya a little idea.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/baader-meinhof.shtml

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by GScholz
I have and you're right, it has nothing to do with this thread or the war on terror. That you are rebuilding Iraq is one thing, fighting terrorism is another.

One of the reasons the "root cause" of terror people give for arab support of OBL etc. is the US suport of opressive regimes like that of Saudi Arabia or Iraq in the past that kept their people poor and frightened. Would not removing a tyrant like Saddam and implementing a process of Iraqi self determination and economic revitalization and freedom of expression not be exactly what you called for as a tactic to fight terrorism?

[Lance]

:::chuckles::: Tactically brilliant?  More like tacitly stupid, or at least negligent.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Lance
:::chuckles::: Tactically brilliant?  More like tacitly stupid, or at least negligent.

Okay, drop the politics, and pretend its a board game or computer game (This is the only thing you cans could probably relate to).  You're on this Island far away from your enemies.  The enemy is funding terrorists to go to your island and terrorize your population.  You invade one of the countries that are your enemy who want to see you dead as well.  They just happen to border 3 or 4 other rogue nations that also want to see you dead, even though one of these nations is considered "friendly"...they may still be financing your destruction via a 3rd party.  Now, you're neighbors.  You can keep a closer eye on these nations, and..they bring the fight to your newly conquered nation, not your island.  Not only that, but there is no more threat of vital oil not flowing in and out of the area.

Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.

[Naso]

Even if this disgust me ( * ) I agree with Ripsnort on this.






( * ) = joking joking joking

[Rude]

Originally posted by GScholz
Depends on your goals don't it? If the goal is to fight terrorism invading Iraq was two steps backwards, but we both know the goal is not to fight terrorism ... don't we?

You're an idiot and prove it everytime you post here.

[Lance]

Heh, now that you are begrudgingly allowing that Saudi Arabia could *gasp* sponsor terrorism, you really have to reach to keep yourself convinced that its okay to let them off for their part in making 9/11 happen, Rip.  How is it impossible to fight our war in Iraq while also holding the Saudi’s responsible for their hand in funding terrorist groups?  Specifically, their financing of Al Qaeda leading up to 9/11?  It is not.  

You can throw out all of your post but the last sentence, as your tactically brilliant move is not co-dependent on covering up the Saudi’s involvement with Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.  All you have left is the desire for cheap oil prices.  No big surprise there, beamer boy.

[Rude]

Originally posted by GScholz
I am sure you serve your country with pride, and if the call were made I am sure you would answer it with honor, however that is inconsequential ... you can't fight terrorism with an army. No one has ever won a war against terrorism, the only way to defeat terrorists are to rob them of their public support. That is what terrorism is all about ... public opinion and public support.

You are wrong that they only want blood; they have very clearly defined goals.



OBL said that in a statement after 9/11, very clear goals (demands).

I commend you for your service to your nation and for your enthusiasm to fight in this war, but even if you were called to arms in Iraq you would not get the chance to fight a war. You would be a target, and if you were to experience hostile action it would be in the form of a roadside bomb or another form of ambush. Terrorists do not fight wars on a battlefield, they fight a war of public opinion.

The war on (Middle Eastern) terrorism is a war you cannot possibly win as long as you continue to have a military presence in the region, continue to "meddle" in Middle Eastern affairs, and continue to support Israel. I know you won't stop doing those three things (with the possible exception of Israel) because the region is immensely important to your economy, so unless you somehow manage to turn the Arab public opinion in your favor you will never ever win this war, and I can't see any way that you can do that. It will be a perpetual conflict until such time as you realize that your national interests in the region isn't worth the sacrifice you have to pay in lives and personal security.

Sleep well Sir.

Terrorists do not fight wars on a battlefield, they fight a war of public opinion.

I suppose you would refer to the innocent killing of Iraqi's by these terrorist....fosters public support I suppose.

I was waiting for your mention of Isreal.

This country has never wanted to harm innocent people anywhere...never has that been our goal. Your methods of appeasement brought what peace? Give me solid examples of what changed in Palestine thru the decade of the 90's. Answer...you cannot.

As to the region holding economic concerns for the US....I suppose Germany is immune to the same concerns?

You spout a socialist stew and always have....best to just get over it as nothing you say here will matter in the least as to what the US does or does not do.

BTW....your countires method of wielding success with terrorists is to oblidge them and ignore them....wouldn't want to take a stand and actually face their wrath? Best to just appease them.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Lance
Heh, now that you are begrudgingly allowing that Saudi Arabia could *gasp* sponsor terrorism, you really have to reach to keep yourself convinced that its okay to let them off for their part in making 9/11 happen, Rip.  How is it impossible to fight our war in Iraq while also holding the Saudi’s responsible for their hand in funding terrorist groups?  Specifically, their financing of Al Qaeda leading up to 9/11?  It is not.  

You can throw out all of your post but the last sentence, as your tactically brilliant move is not co-dependent on covering up the Saudi’s involvement with Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.  All you have left is the desire for cheap oil prices.  No big surprise there, beamer boy.

Oh! Didn't know you did not consume any oil! Guess what, steroid boy, everything you use today will have oil-based plastic in it.  And, the BMW gets 30 mpg, whats your car get?

[Naso]

Originally posted by Rude
IAs to the region holding economic concerns for the US....I suppose Germany is immune to the same concerns?

Psst Rude, he is not German.

[Rude]

Originally posted by Naso
Psst Rude, he is not German.

See....that's why I should just stay out of the OClub altogether....thanks for the heads up:)

I do maintain my socialist accusations however:)