Author Topic: Bin Laden offers truce to European States (Read 6111 times)

Maniac · « **Reply #45 on:** April 15, 2004, 05:32:32 AM »

Ok, Ok,

Description of Hortlund so far : Retard, Warmonger and Pacifist

Ping · « **Reply #46 on:** April 15, 2004, 05:35:32 AM »

Maniac, now we just need to ask Bush and Blair,
"Do you have your exit buddy?"

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #47 on:** April 15, 2004, 05:37:44 AM »

I was wondering when that would come up...

They voted out a president percieved to be weak, retreating and innefective and replaced him with a brash agressive brash reublican called Ronald Reagan who went on to win the cold war...

Carter is an increibly decent human being, perhaps too decent to be president and it showed in his weak policies...

Spain on the other hand voted in a guy whom promised to retreat from the war and give into the terrorists demands.

Plus we have to remember that in 1980 timeframe there was a much much bigger concern with the soviet union, remember the cold war? Which was a much bigger priority to the USA and the western world than islamic radicalism.

For example take the Beirut bombing where Reagan did pull out after the big attacks on our troops. I dont like that he did that, but the cold war was perhaps a priority and american people wanted out. I feel that was poor decision, maybe we could have saved lebanon and prevented many bad long term things in the region.

Now we really have one focus in the west that is the war on terror. Iraq is a central part of that in US strategy for the long run in establishing a new atmosphere of democracy in mid east. It would be unfortunate and short sighted for spain or the USA to pull out, and just let the few crazies dominate 23 million iraqis through intimidation.

Nilsen · « **Reply #48 on:** April 15, 2004, 05:42:38 AM »

I can agree with you Grunherz.

Jimmy Carter is man that i have a deep respect for. He is one of Americas truly great.

-edited because of major typo-

Maniac · « **Reply #49 on:** April 15, 2004, 05:43:36 AM »

Edit : Why bother

Ping · « **Reply #50 on:** April 15, 2004, 05:47:06 AM »

Good points Grun, but consider this.
If Reagan wise wise enough to pull out of Beirut to focus on the real or perceived threat of the Cold War, shouldn't Bush consider the same tactic in the War on Terror?
Is it not possible that Iraq being a central part of his policy is flawed, in error?

Hortlund · « **Reply #51 on:** April 15, 2004, 05:56:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maniac
Warmonger and Pacifist

Heh, you really arent that bright are you? btw its spelled "just" not "djust".

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #52 on:** April 15, 2004, 05:56:16 AM »

Why is Iraq part of war on terror?

The hope, the gamble, the long term objective of IOraq is to establish a democratic country in the middle of the mid east which is hoped to positively influence the region in the long term towards liberalization and democratization.

Remember, many people said after 911 that we should focus on the "root causes" of terrorism which were described to be opression, poverty, lack of democracy etc etc.

Saddam's UN/WMD misbehavior gave us an opening to try to change one big country and make it free, democratic and prosperous.

Iraq is a country of 23 million people. 23 million people who want to live, who want to see their kids go to school and be doxctors. Iraqis are sophisticated well educated people. They want freedom.

The vast majority of iraqis support the usa. What about the fighting, yiou ask? The usa coalition has some 150,000 soldiers
in country. Do you think that number could resistt millions of iraqis? No.

So who is ressating.

Saddam people.
Sunni crazys and Al Qaeda.
Al-Sadr people.

What are these three groups offering?

We know the saddam system and what it offers.

We know what al qaeda liked and supported in afghanstan.

Al-Sadr? He used his gangs to intimidate aid works and stop them from helping HIS OWN SUPPORTERS. Just so he could increse their misery and builkd discontent.

So all three are offering opression, poverty, and lack of democracy to the iraqi people.

Those are exactly the root causes of terror as people like to say.

Saddam offered them, and we dfeated him.
We are not going to let the current ones win eather.

Thats what we're fighting for in iraq now.

Maniac · « **Reply #53 on:** April 15, 2004, 06:00:05 AM »

Quote

Heh, you really arent that bright are you? btw its spelled "just" not "djust".

You are the one thats not that bright... i typed the following :

"Description of Hortlund so far : Retard, Warmonger and Pacifist"

Whats wrong with that?

Ping · « **Reply #54 on:** April 15, 2004, 06:02:26 AM »

Will respond later..late for work.

Hortlund · « **Reply #55 on:** April 15, 2004, 06:10:04 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maniac

Whats wrong with that?

Warmonger and pacifist are eachothers complete opposites, if you are one you cannot be the other. Its impossible to be both at the same time. Get it?

Maniac · « **Reply #56 on:** April 15, 2004, 06:14:43 AM »

Quote

Get it?

YES I GET IT!!! But you still dont get it!!!

I typed :"Description of Hortlund so far : Retard, Warmonger and Pacifist"

You understand? like a sum of all the descriptions of You in this thread!

Get it?

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #57 on:** April 15, 2004, 06:32:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Why is Iraq part of war on terror?

The hope, the gamble, the long term objective of Iraq is to establish a democratic country in the middle of the mid east which is hoped to positively influence the region in the long term towards liberalization and democratization.

What gamble ?
Sorry Grünherz, but how naive can someone be ?
To get rid of Saddam is one thing, but to try to establish
a instant democracy in a for thousand years islamic region
is so laughable, sorry this is joke.
Only Iraqis itself can build this, and if at all i doubt it they are even
interested into real democracy, they are maybe happy SH is gone,
but Islam will stay Islam no matter ho long you try to bend it into
a different direction. No wonder there is 0% support from iraqis
to the US.
But if this is your country main goil you should be prepaired,
like you said "long term objective" for minimum XXX years.

Oh btw look at Israel, they still try to establish something
and how far are they away from theyr goals?

R
Gh0stFT

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #58 on:** April 15, 2004, 06:38:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gh0stFT
What gamble ?
Sorry Grünherz, but how naive can someone be ?
To get rid of Saddam is one thing, but to try to establish
a instant democracy in a for thousand years islamic region
is so laughable, sorry this is joke.
Only Iraqis itself can build this, and if at all i doubt it they are even
interested into real democracy, they are maybe happy SH is gone,
but Islam will stay Islam no matter ho long you try to bend it into
a different direction. No wonder there is 0% support from iraqis
to the US.
But if this is your country main goil you should be prepaired,
like you said "long term objective" for minimum XXX years.

Oh btw look at Israel, they still try to establish something
and how far are they away from theyr goals?

R
Gh0stFT

I agree islamic ragheads are incapable of democracy and freedom, we should just nuke them.

In fact they are just like black people, who could never be fully responsible free citizens in America. I say string em all up!!

So I ask you, how racist and ignorant can you be?

I see little has changed in the vaterland, really after all, why should it have? Germans are war mongering hun racists with no tradition of democracy and centuries of militirism... No hope for them... They could never change, they dont want democracy, why even try to help them? Kill em all..

I'm sorry to be attacking you personally now ghost but seeing such a satement coming from a post ww2 german citizen is really shocking. Are you really that lacking in perspective and a sense of just waht yiur country went through? Is it ignorance of the fcats? Is it racism towards arabs?

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #59 on:** April 15, 2004, 06:44:34 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gh0stFT
No wonder there is 0% support from iraqis
to the US.

from an ABCNEWS poll in Iraq, which was co-sponsored by the German network ARD, the BBC and NHK in Japan, with sampling and field work by Oxford Research International of Oxford, England:

U.S.-Led Invasion Views

Right: Sunni Arabs 24% Shiite Arabs 51% Kurds 87%
Wrong: Sunni Arabs 63 Shiite Arabs 35 Kurds 9
Liberated Iraq: Sunni Arabs 21 Shiite Arabs 43 Kurds 82
Humiliated Iraq: Sunni Arabs 66 Shiite Arabs 37 Kurds 11

Attacks on Coalition Forces

Acceptable: Sunni Arabs 36% Shiite Arabs 12% Kurds 2%
Unacceptable: Sunni Arabs 57 Shiite Arabs 85 Kurds 96
Coalition Should Leave Now: Sunni Arabs 29 Shiite Arabs 12 Kurds 2

Looks like you may have to rethink your premise Gh0stFT...