Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Al Quaeda had no links to Saddam, and Saddam had no links to Al Quaeda. That is noi surprise, becasue both were natural enemies indeed, for Saddam represented - like the Saudi regime - what Bin Laden called to fight against in corrupted Islamic regimes. There was a short sniffing between the two at some time, followed by the disillusioned conclusion that they still did not love each other at all. Iraq has had no hands in 9/11. Saudi Arabia did, the one with which the Bush clan is so very close befriended with. So close that representatives from Saudi Arabia who were guests of the Bushs at the time the towers got hit, were helped by the Bushs to leave the country before the FBI could question them. "War on terror", is a war against wepaons and tools, "terror" in this case. Would you say WWII was a war against submarines? Tanks? Planes? Hardly. I assume you still would prefer to say that WWII was a war against the Third Reich and Imperial Japan, who both made use of these weapons and tools. The issue thus is who makes use of the tool of terror, for what reason, what is he motivated by: this somebody is who the war is on. The answer is: Islamic ideology, the demands of Quran and Sharia for superior reign of Islam over all world, Bin Laden's declaration of war against the corrupted Saudi elite and the big Satan, America. Afghanistan gets destabilised by Pakistan that wants to improve its position against a possible war with India. It also gets destablised by Iran that wants it because the US wanted it. Iraq gets destablised by inner ethnical hate, and a power struggle between Shias and Sunnis, Iran and Saudi Arabia, Kurds in the North and any central government, and thus Turkey that does not want a strong Turkish faction in Iraq. The big winner in this game is Iran. The formal excuse that the government gave to the public over launchign an attack on Iraq was that it had biological and nuclear wepaons of mass destruction, it was said: "We know they have them and we know where they are." Original quote end. But as I said, the war was planned and accepted by the socalled Neocons already a decade before that - when WMD and war on terror had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with it. When WMD were not found, we have seen a series of repalcmeent ecuses being tried, who also did not hold theirt ground. It finally ended with something "But we killed Saddam, isn't that not already reason enough?" - Sorry. There is a difference between a reason, and an excuse made in order to get away with it. The strategic power balance has shifted in the region, against the US and in favour of Iran. The US military'S reputation suffered dearly, so did the prestige of the US, with its nimbus of being "invincible" (especially after Iraq 92) neutralised. The longterm benefit will be earned by Iran, Iran and then by Iran again. Iran is the big winner. And they know it. So, two lost wars later: was it worth it? My answer is a clear No. And Afghanistan: when the Soviets were fought by the Taliban back then, they got support from Islamic legionaires from other countries, the socalled Green Legion. Afghjnais did not like them for the most. However, Legionaires, Taliban and fighters from othe rfactions all said that now they fight to overturn the Russians, and tomorrow the whole world. Today, Taliban spokesman say the same again, that the fight is about bringing Islam to all the world. Well. Hallelujah. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
I do not really believe that Iran will be the winner, after all.
certainly not the people in short terms, but also not the religious leaders in long terms. As it was said before (by MH ?) seeing the western techniques and freedom, the "religious" leaders (indeed it is all about power, and the best religious pretext is just an excuse for poor dictatorship) will have a hard time to sweep it all under the carpet, with mobile phones with cameras, internet and seeing what happened in Libya, Egypt, and now in Syria. @Skybird i'd propose to just talk to some "islamists", or better just people living in Germany as muslims and not being religiously or otherwise radical in any respect. There should be enough in Berlin to ask or talk to. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nice. Quote:
What was it you wanted to tell me about "speaking to Muslims?" It'S the ideology. It'S the regional patriarchalic culture. What some Muslim says, does not chnage that. Can you imagine how often someobdy in thos forum told me in the past ten years "Hey, but I know a friendly Muslim who lives in the flat at the end of my floor"? Can you imagine how tiresome it is that one refers to ideology, or history, or content of religious law - and gets met by a superficial reply like this? "I know somebody who lives down the floor, and I like him." Well. Fine. Nice. I'm not impressed. I drank tea in houses of Muslim hosts inj Turkey and Iran and was treated very nicely in Iran (mostly), and polite but ery cold in Turkey (mostly). And one minute lkater I got told how proud I should be that my German people have killed so many Jews. Or that aid of a mullah in Teheran that my boss back then interviewed in another hall. We sat on the balcony, and he asked me about myself and back then I still was wearing that stupid stamp on my forehead "Buddhist", and he jzust nodded and did noit eat me alive. He then reflected nicely about joy and freedom and the meaning of life in Islam - and how good it serves a man' s chance for later entering paradise if he bans the evil in women by whipping them frequently. Nice! Again refer you - all - to comparing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. If then you think that terms like freedom and tolerance have the same meaning in Islam as in our culture, I cannot help you. Wait, you are lucky, you speak German. In German I have a link for such a comparison at hand: http://www.citizentimes.eu/2012/03/2...chte-im-islam/ Say good-bye to free speech, free opinion, humanism, equal rights, equality for women. The flag of the prophet must fly above everything. |
Quote:
Quote:
But please don't relate the tale of the one legged terrorist you couldn't find even though he was a "KNOWN not SUSPECTED terrorist" Quote:
You do know who the goverment is and you do know where they were based and you do know that the Obama rejected the Sofa agreement because SCIRI handed the negotiations over to Iran for agreement. Did someone mention sarcasm?:woot: Quote:
Quote:
Did you just look at the pretty colours on your globe? Quote:
Maybe you should count another border, one of your allies who is happy to slaughter those kurds you think people don't know about:yep:and that happens to be the only border where you have relatively safe bases. It seems you are well out of your depth I must say though, I am almost amazed that you manage to introduce all these angles into an almost entirely unrelated topic, it does suggest that the mess that was Iraq has problems settling in your stomach and causing you problems of a digestive nature, but its Ok I think most people understand that and will treat you gently like I have. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
When reading this thread a memory came up
Sometime in the late 80'ies I was studying industrial electrician and under that time I meet many people and one of them came from Iran He told me that no muslem will ever work with Americans or it's allied and if they do they will lie and decieve He also told me that one day All muslem countries will be one again as they were under Muhammad "It's going to happen and then America and it's allied will get what they deserve" (can't remember the exact wordframe) I found out late that he was a radical muslem Markus |
Quote:
Moot point? times and dates young man, you brought it up in a topic that it had bugger all to do with, now try and prove your point. Oh sorry you was just talking bolloxwasn't you:yep: Quote:
Quote:
Well done mein herr. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Well, this thread went south from the last time I read it.
|
Quote:
Yeah that is a strange globe I'm using that shows Iran on the border of Afghanistan and Iraq, isn't it. Very strange. Ought to get a refund on that globe and get a new one, even though it will still show Iran in the middle of Afghanistan and Iraq. Maybe I ought to just do away with the globe and get a map. Perhaps the outdated Michelin road map will work. Oh wait, that still shows Iran on the border of Afghanistan and Iraq. Dang. Cartographers must be stupid, huh. You're right, Siam (Thailand) borders Iran and has a bunch of US military troops and equipment in it. |
Quote:
--Hermann Göring |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.