iraq uprising

[Skuzzy]

Hristo, re-read what I said.  You want to put words in my mouth too.  Do you think 9/11 was out fault Hristo?  Looking at your response alludes to that, so I thought I would ask so I could understand your perspective better.

You guys want to have a discussion, then ask questions if you do not understand, but putting words in someones mouth that were never stated just wastes time.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Sixpence
When you said backing away, I took it as the situation in Iraq. Sorry if I misunderstood.

[Skuzzy]

Originally posted by Sixpence
When you said backing away, I took it as the situation in Iraq. Sorry if I misunderstood.

No problem Sixpence.  For the record, I think going after Iraq was not the right thing to do at this moment in time.
However, I believe that it was inevitable due to the support of terrorists Iraq has appeared to afford.

[Wolfala]

Originally posted by MoRphEuS

I watched those towers fall, not on TV mind you, but from miles away. Nothing has ever affected me more than that day and those hours.

I lost 3 friends that day. Point is - they are playing the classic insurgency role - as long as we can agree on that point. And the only way to deal with that in prior engagements throughout history has been somewhat akin to a form of draconian revenge on the part of the conquerer. The gloves have not come off yet...and I fear the day they do is when we have lost complete control.

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
However, I believe that it was inevitable due to the support of terrorists Iraq has appeared to afford.

Thing about that is, there are more countries seriously supporting terrorists - above and beyond what Saddam ever would - that we will not touch. Iran, Syria, hell - Palestine.

If we are serious about this "War on Terror"ism, then those countries should be preceeding Iraq. However, if its decided to take them out too, we'll be out of men aged 18-25 real quick.

Not really directed at you Skuzzy, just felt like responding to that line that many have stated.
-SW

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
No problem Sixpence.  For the record, I think going after Iraq was not the right thing to do at this moment in time.
However, I believe that it was inevitable due to the support of terrorists Iraq has appeared to afford.

What bothers me more than anything is the real cause of 9/11, OBL, has become an afterthought, and I can't understand why. Why is that scum is allowed to live his life is beyond me, if he dies of natural causes I will feel that justice will never be done. Not only did he cause over 3000 American deaths, it sparked a war that has cost 10,000 civilian Iraqi lives(although the muslim world will never see it that way).

[Hristo]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
Hristo, re-read what I said.  You want to put words in my mouth too.  Do you think 9/11 was out fault Hristo?  Looking at your response alludes to that, so I thought I would ask so I could understand your perspective better.

You guys want to have a discussion, then ask questions if you do not understand, but putting words in someones mouth that were never stated just wastes time.

Sorry if I misunderstood. Don't want to put words in your mouth, think my own are enough.

9/11 was a terrorist act and a crime against humanity. I never disputed that. The ones responsible should be brought to justice. Afghanistan action was legitimate, IMO and I never was against it.

But whose fault was it, I'm not so eager to decide. This in no way makes the ones who did it less criminal and terrorist, but you got to ask yourself why every militant in Middle East has US as its target. Surely it was not so 50 years go.

Did Islam become more aggressive ? Did it become a sort of militant religion ? In my opinion - no. Sure there are fundamentalist militants, but so happens with every religion.

IMO, the problem is oil. Everyone wants to put their hands on it and it makes more and more problems over there. And some see a way to solve them thru terrorist means.

Iraq, IMO, was totally unnecessary. Sure, it had a dictator reluctant to obey UN resolutions. But since 1991 he has been confined to his own country and wasn't harming anyone except his own countrymen - just like every other dictator on this planet. So far there have been no 9/11 ties confirmed, no WMDs found and Saddam being oppressive to his own people seem to have been only reason for invasion, at least when you go listen to wht Rummy or Gen. Myers say.

[Skuzzy]

I agree Wulfe.  I think Iraq was going to on the list, as it were, but there are far worse countries/elements that should have been addressed first, if we are to be taken seriously about the declaration of war on terrorism.

Getting a little off topic here.  

I spoke my piece about that building and I stand by it.

[Skuzzy]

Thank you Hristo, that helps.

The world, power, corruption, and many other elements that make up the mire of entangled relationships are not constant.  There is always flucuations.
A little known German dictator decided to start a war once.  No reason for him to attack who he did, but it happened.

The United States is a large target.  Being the number one power n the world for quite some time made it a fat target.  Too fat maybe.  We can spend years citing what may have been the right thing or the wrong thing to do.
In the end we are here.  Hindsight is a great tool, to be used to keep from making the same mistakes over and over again and using the good things learned.
9/11 should have never happened.  It could have been prevented, through numerous means, but in the end, it was just a most unimaginable occurence.
No matter what we do, we can never right that wrong.  However, maybe we can slow it from happening again.  Notice, I did not give absolute closure to this.  Terrorism will exist as long as men are alive on this planet.  It cannot be erradicated, but we should be able to quell it a bit.
When I say 'we', in this context, I am speaking of the world, not just the United States.  No country should have to suffer a 9/11.

How it is being addressed is a good topic for another discussion, providing it can be kept civil, as this one has wandered a bit.

[Nilsen]

Capt. Pork..

You said:

"Because Finland and Jamaica are ineffectual. Nobody cares enough to care enough. "

Do you mean that you don't care or people in general? (outside those countries)

[straffo]

I think that the problem is not the validity or not of the target regarded from a military perspective.
Actually it was a valid target just because the place was bombed.

The problem is more political or the perception the local population will have of the event .

You can read the event as :
-showing the determination of the US troop
-yet another destroyed building full of target
or more likely as it will be in lot of mosquee during the friday sermon :
-yet another "barbaric" US attack on a sanctified muslim place.

So military speaking it was ok but politicaly ...hahem ... not so good IMO, it's certainly also why there was people inside, muslims love martyrs and are not affraid of creating new martyrs...

[Pongo]

I believe that Iraq had no signifigant participation in Terrorist acts..they certainly have never been accused of any by the US. Using that as a justification for the invasion and implying that they should have been invaded just after other countries were invaded is really really an increadable statement.
There was no justification for the invasion..accept that.

Is sky news a responsible news source?
hope not

[Pongo]

The troops have to shoot thier enemies..period. Bit of good press for the insurgents but who cares..you have to fight them where they are.

[bullett308]

Originally posted by Hristo


9/11 was a terrorist act and a crime against humanity. I never disputed that. The ones responsible should be brought to justice.

Yep and a german judge just set free the only man convicted for the 9-11 crime.



Hamburg court frees 9/11 suspect

Wednesday, April 7, 2004 Posted: 9:01 AM EDT (1301 GMT)
   
El Motassadeq had been only September 11 suspect convicted.
   
Story Tools
   
   
   
RELATED
• 9/11 defendant asks for release
• Retrial ordered for 9/11 suspect
• Profile:  Mounir el Motassadeq
YOUR E-MAIL ALERTS
Acts of terror
September 11 attacks
Mounir el Motassadeq
or Create your own
Manage alerts | What is this?

HAMBURG, Germany (CNN) -- The only suspect convicted in the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States has been released from a German jail, pending a retrial.

A Hamburg court Wednesday ordered the release of Mounir El Motassadeq, 30, after he was granted a mistrial last month.

El Motassadeq was released on condition he remain in Hamburg and report to police twice a week.

A new trial is scheduled to begin June 16.

In a statement, the court said El Motassadeq "is no longer an urgent suspect in the charge of accomplice to murder, but only as a member of a terrorist organization."

The Moroccan had been serving a maximum 15-year prison term in Hamburg since a court convicted him in February 2003.

However, an appeals court ruled March 4 that El Motassadeq was denied a fair trial because the U.S. government refused access to a key witness in its custody.

El Motassadeq consistently denied the charges during his three-and-a-half-month trial.

He was found guilty of providing logistical support for the Hamburg al Qaeda cell that included lead September 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta, who piloted one of the two airliners that crashed into the World Trade Center in New York.

His lawyers asked the appeals court for acquittal or a retrial, alleging their client was wrongly convicted because the United States refused to allow court testimony by Ramzi Binalshibh, thought to be the Hamburg cell's key contact with al Qaeda.

Binalshibh was captured in Pakistan on the first anniversary of the September 11 attacks and is in U.S. custody.

-- CNN's Berlin Bureau Chief Stephanie Halasz contributed to this report.

[senna]

If the insurgents are going to attack US coalition military installations, then they should be able to at least shoot back at the attackers.