Originally posted by Kuniworth:
Its correct that USA partly is the target because the support to Israel but thats not the only reason. Its also important to remember that during the last decades the US supported not only Mujahedin and the talibans against the russian, also IRAQ power was built up by american miltary aid. Why??? Because it suited US economic interests and was anti-Iranish.
We were fighting the Cold War when we helped the Mujahedeen.
Iran's fundamentalist regime was extremely anti-US and began supporting terrorism. We sought to help those who could block Iran's desire to extend their brand of Islam to its neighbors.
In what way do the rich world help the poor people in afghanistan after the soviet retreat?
The UN has been there for years trying to help, despite the problems they have with the Taliban (Taliban doesn't want women to work for example), and we've partially supported that aid. The problem Afghans have is not with the US, but with a violently extremist Islamic fundamentalist government which lacks much concern for its own people. It is unconcerned with the millions of Afghans who've fled the country in the last couple of years to refugee camps in Pakistan and Iran. It is more interested in destroying the remainder of resistance to it, and more concerned with destroying Buddhist's statues than feeding its own people. They were cynically letting the UN do the job they themselves should have been doing.
Why was the US so anxious to help Kuwait?
Oil. I never liked our involvement there, but if Saddam really had been planning to go after Saudi Arabia or Oman or others, then we had no choice. If we would develop our own energy sources we wouldn't be so dependent on oil.
Ok. You could then begin with paying up the debts you owe to United Nations.
We are but only when the UN starts improving its bueracracy so it isn't wasting so much money. This happened awhile back, we are paying back the debt now.
You think the debt will make that much difference in the Third World? We're not talking about a couple of billion dollars here, and we're not the only ones in arrears with the UN.
Ed, I will never give in on this one. The U.N-blocade of Iraq much intiated by america has caused 2 million children and women dead!
Ok, remain a mouthpiece for Saddam Hussein. This operation is not soley controlled by the US, its by the UN, and the UN could end it if security council members wanted to do so. They have not dropped the sanctions because Saddam refuses to do the things it needs to do under UN resolutions. If there were major countries opposed to this, the US could be forced to back down.
As for the problems in Iraq, these are the result of Saddam's utter lack of concern for his own people. It is in his best interests to see his own people suffering because he can then invite foreigners in and show them the misery and say its all the fault of the US and the UN, and some gullible people believe this. From the very beginning Saddam had the opportunity to sell oil for the things his people need. There was no restriction on this. Saddam could have stopped the suffering AT ANY TIME. He and his family prefer to use this opportunity to make money in smuggling operations, instead of helping his own people. So I don't buy Saddam's theory of what is the real problem here, a story you've apparently swallowed hook, line, and sinker.
Saddam Hussein regain power and his military is beeing built up to the old levels.
Ask yourself how Saddam could be rebuilding his army despite the sanctions against him. Ask yourself what the money he's spending on rebuilding his military could do for his own people. Ask yourself why he's opposed to a change in the way that sanctions work to help his own people but strengthen the sanctions against the things he wants to get. Ask yourself why in the world Iraq would have a "baby milk plant" whose employees are wearing uniforms written in ENGLISH. That was one example of how Saddam was cynically trying to deceive the world during the conflict. Why do you accept what Iraq says without suspecting that it may be a lie. Think about it Kuniworth. Think.
The Israel-matter is delicate. But let us never forget who the weak part is. Palestinian youth is throwing rocks against israelian tanks and helicopters. USA could pressure Israel harder but unfortunately to little. So the conflict rages on...how do you intend to solve it? The hardline that Sharon supports have been tried before and never worked.
Palestinian youth throwing rocks is no longer the conflict that is happening. From the very beginning the Palestinain Authority has been using its weapons in their attacks on Israel. Most of the fighting now is in the form of gun battles with armed Palestinians. The Palestinian youth have a completely twisted sense of history, because the extremists make sure the youth are taught to think of things their way. Given that, what can be done?
on...how do you intend to solve it? The hardline that Sharon supports have been tried before and never worked.
Why do you assume it is the US's responsibility to stop this? Why do you assume its the Israelis who must compromise and not the Palestinians? The Palestinians are demanding things they know Israel can't give. Only a fool believes the Israelis would sacrifice their ability to protect themselves against a military attack in order to get just a promise from the Palestinians that the violence will stop.
They cheer because they see their enemy feeling the same pain they do every day. Yes its outrageous but ask your self WHY is always the USA the main target? You cant for all the penny in the world say that your actions in the middle-east only been done for freedom and peace.
Who else is as close to Israel as the US is? Like I said, they attack us because we are a friend to Israel.
Israel is willing to negotiate because the US is pressuring them to. Israel is not the 53rd State in the American Union however, we can pressure them but that doesn't mean they'll listen to us.
Why don't we talk about the actions in the Middle East by Arafat's Palestinian Authority, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, and the Hezbollah that have "been done for freedom and peace". Your position is hypocritical Kuniworth. The US is not responsible for all the world's ills.
Your attack on me follows much of your earlier aggresive posts against others in this forum. Im NOT anti-US on the contrary!!! But why the hell can´t you see that something is very wrong here. And believe it or not much of the blame lays not only at arabic dictators but also on USA.
Your implied accusation that the US deliberately targets civilians is responsible for my "attack". You should not be surprised when Americans react angrily to your insults. There's a lot of things that are very wrong, but that doesn't justify terrorist attacks. Ramming hijacked US planes into US skyscrapers is not going to make Israel surrender to the Arab world nor will it make us force Israel to surrender.
What is wrong is the bizarre belief that terrorism will lead to peace. It won't, it leads to the victims reinforcing their original position, and uniting in opposition to whatever the terrorists are demanding. The other bizarre belief is that the US can singlehandedly end the Middle East violence by forcing Israel to accept a plan that destroys its ability to protect itself.
If the talibans not step down the US will be in war with them. You can of course do some surgical strikes but that will most likely also kill innocents. Thats what happened in 1998 and that will happen now.
If you'd listen to what the West is saying you'd know surgical strikes will not be the only response. In fact, airstrikes alone will not only not be the sole response, but may never happen at all. There is likey to be ground actions to get Laden or the Taliban leadership that protects him.
As for the innocents, yes, some die when war occurs. War is messy, thats why everyone wants to avoid it. We do not target innocents however Kuniworth, despite your warped idea of how we think, and by the way, the 5,000 in New York were innocents too.
Sure som bad crooks will die but the terrible taliban state will remain. You´re dreaming if you dont realise this.
Putting an end to the Taliban state is not our goal. At the moment, we're interested in getting bin Laden, not destroying the Taliban or invading and occupying Afghanistan. If the Taliban try to protect him, then they will get themselves killed, and may force us to go after the Taliban's leadership in addition to bin Laden, but that doesn't mean we're going to try to take Afghanistan from the Taliban.
Besides, why are you so sure its a dream? We could go in and destroy the Taliban if they chose to confront us using conventional tactics, or they could slip into the hills and fight as guerillas, in which case we turn it over the Northern Alliance and let them deal with the rest of the Taliban.
I know a lot of moslems. Most of them are non-hating people who wants to live in peace. But violence feeds violence.
I know a lot of muslims are non-hating as well. So what do you think Israel and the US should do in response to terrorists? Just turn the other cheek? That didn't help the Jews of Europe during Hitler's reign. Israel learned from that reality. They know you can only survive as a country surrounded by enemies by attacking anyone who attacks you. Sometimes force must be met by force. So yes, violence will be met by violence, the terrorists of the world do not give us an alternative.
Over the last 50 years the gap between the rich world and the poor world has steadily increased.
We are well aware of the gap here too.
If you dont agree that social misery and starving feeds disappointment and hatred I see no point discussing.
Yes, some will look for someone to blame for their own poor position, that is common. That does not lead to terrorism in every case though.
Besides, the Palestinians are not starving, they are not in a misery like the population of Sudan for example. In fact, they were very well off in '48 yet there was terrorism then too, on both sides even, and the Jews of Palestine at that time were not in a horrible situation either.
The point beeing that it is harder to commit terrorist-actions against a friend that tries to help you not bomb you. All terrorist-experts Ive heard have agreed on this - why don´t you Ed?
They don't consider us a friend Kuniworth. The terrorists attacking Israel want its destruction. That is not going to happen. So trying to befriend these people will only get you stabbed in the back.
And please provide proof that every terrorist expert believes that turning the other cheek would work. That's bull. I've seen quite a few terrorist experts on TV since Tuesday, and they are not saying what you claim.
We all got a responsible, so does Sweden. But beeing the nr 1 super-power of the world more should be expected from you.
What should we be expected to do? We spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year for humanitarian efforts, in foriegn aid, or to help other countries strive towards a better economic position through investments. However, WE CANNOT HELP THE WHOLE WORLD, no matter how rich you think we are Kuniworth. Money alone will not bring the Third World up to our level. For many of them, there are other reasons why they are part of the Third World.
Yes but why do they commit this kind of action. Why is the terrorist attacks against USA steadily increasing? Just a coincidence?
Of course not, how many times do I have to tell you, WE ARE A TARGET BECAUSE WE ARE A FRIEND TO ISRAEL. The only foreign terrorists attacking us are doing so because of Israel.
[ September 17, 2001: Message edited by: Ed Cogburn ]</p>