Islam: a Plan for World Domination?

[Nagishkaw 510]

Well, don't you just know everything?

Put yourself in a position where you have to make an extremely hard decision. A decision where regardless of your choice, the outcome will cause death. For example, you are engaged by enemies who have backed themselves up to a school. What do you do?

Of course civilian casualties occur, its a sad reality of war. Any chance the enemy can, they will force you into a position to injure civilians. Then they twist the events out of context in an attempt to gain support.

If the media was sooo biased in our favor, why did they broadcast the Haditha killings, what about the five soldiers charged in the rape and murder of that 14 year old girl, Abu Ghraib, I can keep going. So don't worry, the media is not with-holding any of the horrible things from you.

i dont have to put myself in such a position, and nobody would if we had better diplomacy...if we made an attempt to understand and speak with the people on the other side of the fence, rather than blowing up their cities in an effort to tell them what is best FOR THEM, then we wouldnt have to be at war right now, or ever

who are the 'enemies' that have backed themselves into a school? because im pretty sure that if people with tanks came into my country and started blowing things up, that they would kinda, sorta resemble terrorists

As long as brave young men such as Matt are putting THEIR lives on the line today for your tomorrow, I would say you are right....You don't HAVE to put yourself in such a position.

Talk is cheap.

[smoke20 0]

OH BS! 911 was a terrorist attack carried out by extremist nutbags. why "because the west will not submit to islamic law". i believe that is osama & the boys justification for murder & terror.

the bottom line is that people arent just crazy...they dont just blow up buildings for no reason...yea theyre a little nuts for killing themselves, but our soldiers also commit to 'dying for freedom' and other such ideals when they go to war, dont they? it might be difficult to understand, but these people actually have reasons for their feelings toward this country...they didnt just wake up one morning and decide that they hate america

maybe they have reasons (###### up & twisted as they are). on 9-11 they killed 3000 people that have nothing to do with their issues w/ the US. how can you justify that?

[Stabu 0]

Put yourself in a position where you have to make an extremely hard decision. A decision where regardless of your choice, the outcome will cause death. For example, you are engaged by enemies who have backed themselves up to a school. What do you do?

Of course civilian casualties occur, its a sad reality of war. Any chance the enemy can, they will force you into a position to injure civilians. Then they twist the events out of context in an attempt to gain support.

If the media was sooo biased in our favor, why did they broadcast the Haditha killings, what about the five soldiers charged in the rape and murder of that 14 year old girl, Abu Ghraib, I can keep going. So don't worry, the media is not with-holding any of the horrible things from you.

While I do agree that media bias is real and the media is mostly on the left, as this study found out, I would clime that this is only the case because the media tends to be for the government, always. Of course there is a strong risk of being deluded by the hostile media effect I would still argue that the media in the US has been more for the wars than against them (even if the media have been more against the wars elsewhere).

What comes to hard decisions well... most of the hard decisions made could have been avoided by not going into Iraq. It was an unnecessary, unconstitutional war that had nothign to do with the War on Terriers. I understand the urge to go to afghanistan sicne it had Terriers but there where now Terriers in Iraq before the US steped in. Saddam is and was a mad man but he never possessed a real threath. He could have had a nucular weapon yes, but that's far off the fact that the soviets had 40,000 and the US won the cold war without attacking them a single time. That is because communism is a flawed unworkable economic system. Iraq and Iran have very socialistic (islamist) economies and they don't work either. Irans inflation runs in hundreds of percentages per anno. That kind of a monetary system with price controlls is unsustainable and the whole country will go broke very soon. Only rich countries, like the US, have the money to wage war. Poor countries, like Iraq and Iran, can't really wage wars since they don't have any reseources for it. Thus the US remains forever agressive while the rest just practice bad economics...

[mRx 16]

i dont have to put myself in such a position, and nobody would if we had better diplomacy...if we made an attempt to understand and speak with the people on the other side of the fence, rather than blowing up their cities in an effort to tell them what is best FOR THEM, then we wouldnt have to be at war right now, or ever

who are the 'enemies' that have backed themselves into a school? because im pretty sure that if people with tanks came into my country and started blowing things up, that they would kinda, sorta resemble terrorists

So the Iraqi people we're better off under the Saddam regime? What is better for them? Living in fear under a cruel dictator or the chance of freedom? This is becoming a very unpopular war. But, I believe in our mission here. I believe in our Commander in Chief as well. President Bush said what he was going to do. He has been following through with his word ever since. The war began in the beginning of 2004, and when was he re-elected? So obviously, enough people believed in the mission as well. But now, the bandwagon has done a total 180.

I won't deny that this is a very complicated situation, but if we just pack up and leave now, the whole country will crumble. AQ will slither back in with numerous other Islamofacsist groups and they will fire off weapons in the sky, and proclaim victory. And in about 2-3 years, they will do something dumb, and we will have to come back here, and start all over again.

[Heracles 417]

i guess you missed the IMO. i don't see the US killing kids & innocent civilians (unless chicken sh!ts are using the as shields) nor have i heard the US or UK denounce everyone as the devil who doesn't carry the same religious views they do. care to point out who if not the US that gives more aid to the rest of the world than anyone else? and if life is so grand elsewhere & the US is so bad, ####### are you doing here?

i was waiting for that comment...i wasnt aware that in order to live in a country one must agree with every action that country has ever taken...i believe in being critical of the US and its policies because that is, afterall, one of the fundamental rights which we are allowed in this fine nation...isnt it? if we just sit back and eat up what is spoonfed to us by the biased media then we will end up with no rights whatsoever, and that sadly is a fact

you dont see the US killing innocent kids and civilians because the media is too biased to show those sorts of things...you think that no innocent people are being harmed in iraq and afghanistan? how many times do you see footage of these wars on the evening news? and i mean, real footage, not just of some reporter standing somewhere within the borders of iraq...one of the reasons that vietnam became such an issue was because of the news broadcastings of the violence that was going on at the time...the difference between this war and that one is that now the media knows it cannot show these sorts of things...

you have your opinion, and i have mine...that doesnt mean i dont have the same right to live here as you, my friend.

So what should the US do? They are damned if the do, damned if they don't.

The only mistake the US made with Vietnam, Iraq Afghanistan etc is not going all the way. You cannot win a war trying to minimize civilian loses. Its war. Therefore it is a case of go hard or go home.

It is really easy to focus on the bad stuff that the Us has been scapegoated for while ignoring anything good it has done or that has come from it. For Example, When the Serbs where butchering the ###### out of Croatians and Bosnians it was the US who saved them.

[DeadPoolX 9]

you dont see the US killing innocent kids and civilians because the media is too biased to show those sorts of things...you think that no innocent people are being harmed in iraq and afghanistan? how many times do you see footage of these wars on the evening news? and i mean, real footage, not just of some reporter standing somewhere within the borders of iraq...one of the reasons that vietnam became such an issue was because of the news broadcastings of the violence that was going on at the time...the difference between this war and that one is that now the media knows it cannot show these sorts of things...

you have your opinion, and i have mine...that doesnt mean i dont have the same right to live here as you, my friend.

While I absolutely agree you have the right to live here in the U.S. (so long as you're legal) and the freedom to speak your mind without fear of reprisal, I must disagree on some points here. To make things easier to read, I think I shall start with the civilian casualty topic and move on from there...

Has the United States accidentally killed civilians? Yes, it has. It has done so in every war. Of course, so has every single military in the history of mankind! There has never been a war where civilians come out unharmed. That's the unfortunate truth. However, the U.S. makes every attempt to limit unnecessary loss of life. Sometimes it can't be helped -- if you've warned civilians to stay clear of the area before you start bombing and a few decide to get in your way, you'll never know until it's too late. They were warned to stay out; if they can't or won't follow directions when it could mean their life (or the lives of their loved ones), then the U.S. military can't realistically be held accountable for them. There's a huge difference between accidentally killing a civilian in a firefight or a bombing run and intentionally mowing one down.

In addition, the soldiers of today something called "asymmetric warfare" which means you don't know who the enemy is until they are firing on you. For centuries, wars were fought between professional soldiers who wore uniforms, so it was fairly simple to tell who was who and what side they were on. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the enemy does not wear a uniform; he wears the same outfit as the civilian does, so U.S. soldier needs to be on constant alert, because that seemingly innocent man purchasing fruit at the market could suddenly turn around and fire at the soldier with an AK-47.

This sort of combat -- where anybody, at any time, anywhere, could be your enemy -- eventually takes its toll on the soldier and he begins to wear down, both physically and mentally. Some soldiers might even get to the point where they consider everyone "an enemy," which might not be a bad idea for safety reasons, but could lead to accidental shootings of civilians.

Now... about the Vietnam War and media coverage: the media coverage today is far superior, much more in-depth, and a great deal more invasive than it ever was during the Vietnam era. Furthermore, with today's technological advances (and multiple media outlets), there's a higher degree of reporting accuracy, the latter of which was terrible while Vietnam was going on.

The news would only report negative stories (that sounds familiar), but to compound problems, it would also deliver incorrect information. While it's a commonly held belief that the United States lost the Vietnam War, it's not so cut-and-dry. Militarily-speaking, the the Vietnam War was an outstanding success for the United States -- we didn't lose a single battle. Yes, even the Tet Offensive (which was originally reported on-air as a loss for the U.S.) was won by American forces, but many Americans today still believe otherwise due to the media's influence.

So, if the military did such an outstanding job, why did the U.S. military eventually pull out? The problem was that the United States lacked the necessary support from the South Vietnamese (whom we were supposed to be helping, but they didn't want us there and saw us as intruders instead of liberators) and from most Americans in general (whom the government and the military was supposed be protecting, but Americans didn't feel this way as they saw young men drafted against their will and come home in coffins), without which, the war could not be won. No war can be won if there isn't sufficient support for the effort in the first place, regardless of how fantastic the military is in battle.

do you really think your life will be better if the world has warm fuzzy feeling about the US gov't?

yes i do, because then attacks like those which happened on 9/11 wouldnt have ever happened

I don't really believe that. I think, perhaps, there might be less "America bashing" in certain places across the globe if the U.S. were a bit friendlier in it's foreign policy, but overall, I have a feeling that those truly hate the United States (and everything it stands for) would hate us no matter what we did -- unless we curled up and died. Some people just despise those who're different or won't conform to their ways of thinking or doing things. We have people like that right here in the U.S., so it's definitely not a isolated to the Middle-East. It just so happens that a large number of extremists from that area of the world, all of whom believe that they are right and that the U.S. and the west in general, should either do as they see fit or "die like dogs."

Unfortunately, there really isn't an easy solution to it all. If there was, I'm sure someone would've thought of it. They'd probably try running for President -- or at least, do something to become famous (or better yet, rich).

Edited September 10, 2007 by DeadPoolX

[Stabu 0]

As long as brave young men such as Matt are putting THEIR lives on the line today for your tomorrow, I would say you are right....You don't HAVE to put yourself in such a position.

Talk is cheap.

While I really don't like to argue against Matt, since he is after all in a place where I wouldn't dare to go even if forced by a gun, I would still like to point out the other side of the coin. First of all, all soliders in the US army are currently mercenaries. They get paid a load of tax free money to kill. While I'm a complete wuss myself, I would consider such a job unethical. If those soldiers wouldn't go there for free, they would go there because they would be drafted to go there. Draft is temporary slavery. Talk is cheap yes, but all those who try to engage in it are silenced and ridiculed as being anti-American or unpatriotic espeically in the US.

Btw. guess who I quote:

"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

...it's of course Hermann Göring, who else.

[Heracles 417]

my post was called "the most arrogant and ignorant statement ive ever heard".

actually i didnt say that, read a little more carefully and you'll see...

'one of the fundamental problems between the us and many middle eastern countries is that these countries will not submit to our way of life...we want to go in there and tell them how to live, when they have been doing it for centuries...america is a baby and to think that we know better than them is the most arrogant and ignorant statement ive ever heard'

to clarify, i was saying that when we go into other countries and try and impose our way of life upon other people, it is the most arrogant thing we could possibly be doing, especially since we are such a young nation and have not seen the struggle that almost every other nation has had to face at some point in their history...IMO, i do think that your first comment conveys an arrogant attitude, but it is certainly not the most arrogant thing ive ever heard...

It's not hard to see the "we know what's best for you" attitude underlying the policies. Similarly its not hard to see how people would be irritated by that...

It sure as hell worked in Germany and Japan.. Now one of the greatest nations in the world..

[Stabu 0]

(Double post sorry, erazed this one)

Edited September 10, 2007 by Stabu

[Heracles 417]

try checking out where the US ranks as far as standard of living is concerned, you might be surprised

While I agree with you on basically everything else, regarding this little bit I strongly disagree. The most common and the most objective used measurement for livingstandard is the PPP adjusted GDP per capita level. In this list US is fourth ($43,444) after Luxembourg 80,471, Ireland 44,087 and Norway 43,574. Even on that list both Luxembourg and Norway could be excluded since Luxembourg is wealthy only because it has a tiny population and banking activities. Norway is on top because of oil the real living standard in there isn't that high in my opinnion (I've visited Norway several times before). Ireland beats the US regardless. Countries such as the UK, Finland, Sweden or Germany are 1/3 poorer than the US for example.

But yes, I strongly agree that the US is mainly hated because of its foreing policy. That's about the only thing in the US that I really really dislike (I dislike several other minor things, but that's the only major thing I disslike). Not only does the US wage war against everybody, it also wages a war against things such as narcotics and it continues to occupy countries such as Germany, South Korea, Denmark or Italy even if it's been many decades since any of these countries has needed the help from the US or been a threath to the US. The US foreing policy could be summarized easily by saying: eternal war always.

But still, I would like to point out that the intellectuals in Europe and else where may hate the US also becaus of it's freedoms. But the intellectuals are always miserable anywhere anyway except in totalitarian countries like North Korea or Cuba.

I think this is where we all should agree that the US should get out of those nations and keep to themselves. Their security is their problem and should not be that of the American taxpayers..

[Heracles 417]

i fail to see where the US is trying to get middle eastern countries to submit to our way of life.

well basically, they have a way of life that is very different than ours...many people view the US backing of israel (yes it does come back to this is many ways) as a way to provide themselves with economic influence in the middle east (a region that they have previously had little to no influence in)...it can also be said that these wars (as there have been several) that the US insists on waging in the middle east are a way for them to destroy the infrastructure of these countries and then impose upon them a new type of economy and government to 'rebuild' the country (namely 'democracy' and capitalism)...by instituing such political systems, they place figurehead leaders in power who will support their capitalist agenda and allow them to pass legislation in support of it as well...the economic part is easy, once they have control of the government...i mean its easy to see that the recently rich oil countries are much more americanized than the other middle eastern countries...you can also notice that we dont wage wars with countries upon which we have some economic dependency (cough, oil, cough)...if you do the research, you will find that the majority of the hijackers involved with the attacks on 9/11 were from saudi arabia...are we at war with saudi arabia? as far as i know, nope...theres a reason for everything

oh shoot, now theyre gonna black bag me

Why do people say that about Saudi Arabia. Okay we will wage a war on them because of x individuals. Now, will Democrats support it?

Israel is America's friend and they have every right to help them out. It seems many in the world have a problem with that. Therfore they want to dictate what and who America should back with their money.

PS I understand what you are saying though since a lot of people overseas have similar views.

Edited September 10, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Dan J 277]

i fail to see where the US is trying to get middle eastern countries to submit to our way of life.

well basically, they have a way of life that is very different than ours...many people view the US backing of israel (yes it does come back to this is many ways) as a way to provide themselves with economic influence in the middle east (a region that they have previously had little to no influence in)...it can also be said that these wars (as there have been several) that the US insists on waging in the middle east are a way for them to destroy the infrastructure of these countries and then impose upon them a new type of economy and government to 'rebuild' the country (namely 'democracy' and capitalism)...by instituing such political systems, they place figurehead leaders in power who will support their capitalist agenda and allow them to pass legislation in support of it as well...the economic part is easy, once they have control of the government...i mean its easy to see that the recently rich oil countries are much more americanized than the other middle eastern countries...you can also notice that we dont wage wars with countries upon which we have some economic dependency (cough, oil, cough)...if you do the research, you will find that the majority of the hijackers involved with the attacks on 9/11 were from saudi arabia...are we at war with saudi arabia? as far as i know, nope...theres a reason for everything

oh shoot, now theyre gonna black bag me

Why do people say that about Saudi Arabia. Okay we will wage a war on them because of x individuals. Now, will Democrats support it?

Israel is America's friend and they have every right to help them out. It seems many in the world have a problem with that. Therfore they want to dictate what and who America should back with their money.

PS I understand what you are saying though since a lot of people overseas have similar views.

Thats pretty much why we went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Israel is a ####### child, they are causing more instability in the region than any other country. They can pretty much get away with doing anything they want since they have the US watching them.

[Heracles 417]

first of all i don't care if the world resents the US for its foreign polices. they are meant to protect American intrest noone elses.

do you really think your life will be better if the world has warm fuzzy feeling about the US gov't? as far as iran/contra sometimes you have to get in bed w/ the enemy.(we're doing it now w/ the afgan drug lords & sunni resistence in iraq) we need to have avenues to pursue later, weather we like it or understand it, it part of life.

Well that's essentially what its about. As far as that goes however, it is a rather short-sighted and arrogant view; and indeed rather ironic given that you already said you're tired of people 'bashing the US' as though this happens for no reason whatsoever. What's that - "I don't care what other people think so long as I don't have to hear about it?"

how bout im tired of hearing people benefiting from the US foreign policy bashing the US gov't for protecting their interest. & i'm tired of Americans saying we are wrong for protecting ourselves.

110% agree. No one seems to have a problem when Russia or China or anyone else for that matter looks after their own interests but always condemn the US.

I know why this is such a mess for the US. Most other country's business and agenda is discussed behind closed doors; where it remains. Whereas in the US everything is broadcast for anyone to see. Same goes with the strategies in Iraq. I understand what this country was founded on etc but there comes a point where people have to realize this is not the 18th century. Most other countries do not allow the media to publish their every move daily. Can you imagine a company doing this? They would be bankrupted quickly as all of their competitors would know exactly what they are doing.

[Heracles 417]

Thats pretty much why we went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Israel is a ####### child, they are causing more instability in the region than any other country. They can pretty much get away with doing anything they want since they have the US watching them.

Do you think if Israel completely left that region they would have peace? I think history suggests otherwise..

[mRx 16]

As long as brave young men such as Matt are putting THEIR lives on the line today for your tomorrow, I would say you are right....You don't HAVE to put yourself in such a position.

Talk is cheap.

While I really don't like to argue against Matt, since he is after all in a place where I wouldn't dare to go even if forced by a gun, I would still like to point out the other side of the coin. First of all, all soliders in the US army are currently mercenaries. They get paid a load of tax free money to kill.

Oh boy, where do I start? First, a merc is a person who is not a part of an organization that is directly involved in a conflict. A merc involves himself for monetary reasons. That alone would prove your entire statement false. All US soldiers that are here are a part of the US govt., therefor directly involved in the conflict, and not mercs.

Secondly, let me tell you about how absurdly grossly overpayed I am. I am an E-4, I have been in for 4 years. I work 80 hours a week, on extreme weeks, over 90. After calculations, I figured that I make roughly about 11-12 dollars an hour, or about what a shift manager at Mcdonalds makes. That is including all my entitlements, (hostile fire/imminent danger pay, hardship duty pay, separation pay.)

So you will have to take another look at the other side of that coin, because saying we are overpayed mercs holds no merit.