Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Iraq Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Americans must respect Islam
salaam al-aqaaid    5/13/2004 10:18:35 AM
The outrageous atrocities commited by Americans at the Abu al-Grayyib prison complex speaks to a need for the United States Americans to give sensetivity training to its entire military so that they will no longer offind Muslims with the contemptious use of women as prison guards and unsavery adiction to homosexual pornographies. These things are offinsive to the Muslims community. Have you no shame? You must remove all women and homosexuals from contact with Muslim prisoners. This is offinsive.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
sanman    RE:Cult of the warrior    10/20/2004 9:40:15 AM
Elcid, the Iran-Iraq was prior to the Gulf War which devastated Iraq's military capabilities. Where are those WMDs now? Please display them for me. Nextly, Iraq is nowhere near the danger that Iran and North Korea pose with their WMD programs. They are way ahead. Why would you go after the guy who's driving 10mph over the speed limit while ignoring the ones racing 100mph faster than that? By going after Saddam first and putting US troops into Iraq, you gave Iran tremendous leverage over the US. Sistani, Sadr and the Shiite two-thirds majority of Iraq's population have ethnic ties to Iran. Uncle Sam is standing on a Persian Rug that Iran has a firm grip on. And they could yank that rug out from under the US at any time. That's why they have the US in a tight spot. US forces are so bogged down and so overstretched in Iraq as it is, that they couldn't mount an effective invasion of Iran without turning the whole region into a cauldron. Meanwhile, if N Korea decides to bail out its sinking economy by proliferating far and wide, I don't see how the US is going to stop it. The N Korean problem certainly seems to give China a big lever on the US also. So I don't see how Saddam was the main pressing concern over all the others.
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Cult of the warrior    10/20/2004 12:14:13 PM
sanman wrote: "By going after Saddam first and putting US troops into Iraq, you gave Iran tremendous leverage over the US." Or, alternatively, with US troops on the border of Iran, we gave ourselves tremendous leverage over Iran. Interesting that you don't see that aspect to it. sanman wrote: "Where are those WMDs now? Please display them for me." Read the Duelfur Report, which clearly displays the existence of WMD's, the capability and wherewithal to produce more, and the production, in limited quantities of ricin, mustard gas and other chemical weapons and ongoing research into production of Anthrax useable for biowar. sanman wrote: "The N Korean problem certainly seems to give China a big lever on the US also." Once again you never see the alternative. NK is a threat to China, South Korea and Japan. Those three countries have a vested interest in controlling NK nuclear proliferation. The US needs to work with those countries, not unilaterally. Aside from that, are you suggesting that we should not have been militarily involved in Iraq because it distracted us from focusing militarily on North Korea?
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:mike_golf   10/20/2004 12:21:37 PM
sanman wrote: "The US could easily support the local ethnic sovereignty for the Pashtuns, the Tajiks and the Uzbeks, who are the historic communities of the region. This pan-Islamist fanaticism was only brought in by the Arabs." And this would have done what in 2001 exactly? In what way could we have used this to not have to support Pakistan and still remove the Taliban from power and bring weapons to bear on al-Qaeda sanctuaries? How would we continue to isolate the Taliban and al-Qaeda on the Afghan-Paki border? sanman wrote: "The other alternative is a return to power of the old Communist elements, with US support." I thought you were Mr. "The US should support democracy no matter what"? sanman wrote: "The US doesn't seem to have a plan beyond introducing elections." The US plan is to allow the people of Afghanistan, without being dominated by Wahabi extremists, to determine what their government will be, rather than impose a government on them. Come on Mr. Democracy, isn't that the right way to do things? By the way, recognizing that the terrorists can ultimately wear down the US, the idea is to get Afghanistan to the point where they can defend themselves and then remove a standing US presence there. Your alternative appears to be the US imposing our will on the Afghani's.
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    Sanman   10/20/2004 12:26:10 PM
One more thing. You made an argument that the US was shortsighted and made a poor choice in allying with the USSR during WWII. What alternative do you offer that would have defeated Germany and Italy?
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    A Textbook Example of Islamo-Fascism at Work - in the Textbooks   10/20/2004 1:44:56 PM
With shades of 1984 and Stalinist revisionism thrown in for bad measure: From Frontpagemag.com: http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15592 swhitebull
 
Quote    Reply

timon_phocas    RE:Musharraf - sanman   10/20/2004 3:59:50 PM
sanman, I was responding to your statement: ...Musharraf came to power because because their army is unwilling to let go from a policy of jihadist expansionism, even if it means tossing out an elected civilian govt... What I wanted to say, and probably did not say clearly enough, was that the action of the civilian government (whether it was trying to placate the military or not) very nearly triggered an open war with India. This would have been disasterous to Pakistan. And it caused a publicly humiliating retreat. Musharraf commended the ISI. He has been less jehadist and less reckless than the civilian regime he replaced. Perhaps it's one of those "Only Nixon could go to China" phenomena.
 
Quote    Reply

timon_phocas    RE:Musharraf - sanman   10/20/2004 4:06:36 PM
..He is an ally only because the US is using a combination of coercion and bribery to get him to cooperate... I would really love for all of our allies to be Jeffersonian, small "d", democrats. I would be ecstatic if they all allied themselves to us out of altruistic idealism. I don't expect this to happen any time soom. As a mattrer of fact, I don't think it will happen until the Messiah sets foot on the Mount of Olives, walks across the valley to the Temple Mount and puts up a large sign that reads, "Under New Management." Until them, I expect that many allies will have to be bribed and coerced. Pakistan among them.
 
Quote    Reply

timon_phocas    RE:ethnic mini-states?    10/20/2004 4:14:58 PM
...The US could easily support the local ethnic sovereignty for the Pashtuns, the Tajiks and the Uzbeks, who are the historic communities of the region... This would set off more wars as the Dari, Pushtuns, Uzbeks, Tajdjiks (and lord knows who else) sought to carve out little mini-states, probably with the help of ethnic homeland states. It's bad enough now, don't start more wars. ...This pan-Islamist fanaticism was only brought in by the Arabs... No The Ottomon Turks made the same kinds of claims. It is common to all Islamists who want to re-establish the Caliphate.
 
Quote    Reply

elcid    RE:Cult of the warrior    10/20/2004 5:44:02 PM
Iraq never got nuclear weapons, but it never renounced them in fact either. It reduced its development program to 405 men and moved it to Lybia. It fell into our hands in the last year. Iraq never made effective biological weapons - although possibly Saddam didn't know that - and we certainly didn't know that. We knew Iraq had technical help - a warhead for delivery by ballistic missile and a bw agent from PRC - but we didn't know they never were able to duplicate the weapon. Saddam used this capability to bluff us in 1991 - to shut down the offensive prematurely - and we had every reason to think it was real. [See The Gathering Storm, Yale University Press]. Iraqi chemicals were burried in the desert or shipped to Syria. Jordan just intercepted some of them en route to an attack and put the perpetrators on TV for you to see. If you wish to examine the weapons, tell me when you are able to go to Jordan?
 
Quote    Reply

elcid    RE:Cult of the warrior    10/20/2004 5:45:10 PM
You have it backwards about Iran. We could not invade the place - especially if we were not in Iraq. Being in Iraq gives us leverage over Iran, not the other way around. Iran might take over Iraq otherwise.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics