War on ____

[WeAreTheLastMen]

Originally Posted by Cipher

As for people in 'that part of the world': if it was not for the propping up of dictators by the CIA, there would have been no Islamic Revolution, the House of Saud would have collapsed, and no one would be trying to overthrow Housni Mubarak as he would be long dead. If they have always been that way, name a terrorist attack against us before, I dunno, 1953 when Pahlavi Shah was put into power in Iran?

I agree. I just read a very informative book on the subject (All the Shah's Men) and I'm appalled at the extent to which everyone in the media and politics is willing to completely dismiss this part of our history.

[razoredge]

or anyone dismissing the history of the area

[razoredge]

Originally Posted by WeAreTheLastMen

Including, apparently, me, since I can see a good goddamn lot for them to cry about, and a lot of reasons for them to hate the west. They're pretty close to the reasons I hate the west, actually, except our families to die as a result. Theirs do.

That said, I don't think any grievance is worth the loss of a life.

you not seeing what I am talking about but that is not it.
------------------------------------------------
it seems they do feel its all worth the loss of life

[Fenrisúlfr]

I, for one, believe that western culture has discounted the role of the blood-feud. Ours has delegated the responsibility to bring to justice one who has wronged one's self to the state, often the same entity that has wronged one to begin with (as that is what they usually do). An eye for an eye does not make the world blind, but rather serves as an example to those who would themselves blind others.

Thus, it is right that they seek their pound of flesh, for it is right that the farmer be made to reap what he has sown.

[razoredge]

Originally Posted by Cipher

Thus, it is right that they seek their pound of flesh, for it is right that the farmer be made to reap what he has sown.

Not sure but if your talking about the middle east here, which pound of flesh is that ? That of innocent foreign civilians who have no more power over their government and corporate interests than they do... or those that gain power and repressed them ?

[Fenrisúlfr]

Some argue that as a result of the government being elected, that it places responsibility upon all citizens of a (pseudo-)democratic nation for the wrongs committed by its government. I would argue that the the president, being commander-in-chief of the armed forces, should be assigned responsibility, along with the chain of command down to the one ordered to commit whatever act must be avenged.

Islamic jurisprudence dictates that the elderly, the women and the children be spared the toil of war, though certain exceptions have been made:

Originally Posted by Bin Laden

It is not hidden from you that the enemy intentionally takes up positions in the midst of the Muslims, for them to be human shields for him. And here I emphasize to my brothers the Mujahideen to beware of expanding the issue of al-Tatarrus, and to make sure that their operations targeting the enemies are regulated by the regulations of the Shari’ah and as far as possible from the Muslims.

It is reasonable to allow for collateral damage in the event one's enemy uses as its modus operandi one that specifically places it amongst civilians in the aforementioned manner.
In stark contrast, Madeline Albright said that the effects of the Iraqi embargo justified the deaths of half a million Iraqi civilians, and Iraq never attacked the US until the invasion in 1991...who is uncivilized now?

[razoredge]

whoever it was that didnt adhere to the terms of the embargo and watched their people die

[Fenrisúlfr]

Whichever entity or entities put Saddam into power in 1963 (hint: not the Iraqi people) and then gave him weapons to use against the people of Iran during the 1980-88 war is just as culpable if not a thousand times more so.

[razoredge]

Iraq had an embargo on the Kurds, also slaughtered them for a spell, the UN stepped up. Then there was much secular unrest... and here I thought that was just a problem with big bad white Christian America... the unrest here is just so brutal.. go figure... I wonder if everything would be alright if they just got along and stopped all the crazy shit.... and that is a question that will never be answered, because they never will.

[Fenrisúlfr]

That is partly why the Ottomans had Iraq split into three provinces: to keep them from each-others' throats. To an extent, it has been this way ever since the emergence of the Safavid dynasty and its subsequent clash with the Ottomans. Methinks it is crazy as well, though keep in mind: Islam has been political in nature since its inception, partly on account of the context in which the Qu'ran was written, and just as here where religion is used for political purposes, so too is it used for such ends there.

[razoredge]

Qasim overthrew his proceeding government as well... but then he made friends with Russia... not a popular idea in 63... of course we'll just ignore the locating of missles in Cuba, cause its seperate... maybe... then Sadam was alledged to be supported by CIA Kennedy... but then CIA was alledged to be behind the killing of Kennedy as well... sounds like alot of cold war bullshit to me... of course the US was the ONLY player.......