A Pathetic democracy!!! (11 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
OP

ReBeL

The Jackal
Jan 14, 2005
22,871
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #141
    Enron said:
    I shouldn't have gotten involved in this discussion. Since I am an American I understand I am the devil's advocate in this talk. But let me ask you this if the UN is the USA's puppet, how many UN troops have died in Iraq? If the UN was a puppet they would have agreed to go to war in Iraq and US soldiers wouldn't be the only ones dying for a dumb reason. The truth is any country can go to war with another country and the UN cant really do anything about it, that is not because the UN is a puppet but because the UN doesn't really do the whole stopping wars thing. They do the 1 million Rawandans have died, but we got all the white folks out so now that the Afrikans have made our job easy so lets go in and "keep the peace" thing.
    UN is a toy, mate...

    A disgusting toy that can't be useful to anybody except Kofi Anan's pocket...
     

    Buy on AliExpress.com

    WΏΏdy?

    Senior Member
    Dec 23, 2005
    14,997
    peace enron :D,the devil's advocate...

    i might have used to wrong term {puppet}...though i am not well informed abt these authorities i was just wondering this...UN have no authority to stop war,agreed. US attacks iraq without UN's concent and get away with it,then why do they impose sanctions on iraq when they attack kuwait??
     

    scorpion10

    Crusader of Justice
    Jul 28, 2005
    110
    Erik said:
    I used the children issue as an example. I could dissect the whole article, but I'm not going to. This is juventuz.com and nobody would pay much attention to it.

    Racism people seem to ignore? Indeed. The article was drenched in it, yet you hailed it..?
    Racism? Thats pretty funny! I didn't you could be racist against your own race. The article was about rasicm maybe thats why it was drenched in it.
     

    GordoDeCentral

    Diez
    Moderator
    Apr 14, 2005
    69,443
    Erik said:
    I would argue Bin Laden's motives are strongly religious and I base my opinion on what I know of that particular part of history. His strong involvement in the Soviet-Afghan war was frequently marked by religious statements indicating he saw it as a war of Muslims vs Atheists (the Soviet regime being famous for denouncing all religions). His tolerance of American involvement in the Middle East in that time (think in terms of helping Saddam Hussain maintain his position) was quite likely based on a situation where he realised help was needed and where he chose to side with the lesser of two evils. The atheist Soviets clearly being worse than the Christian Americans, who at least believed in the same God, be it that they followed a different prophecy.

    When the Soviet empire collapsed, Bin Laden adopted a new strategy in order to bring (his version of) Islam to absolute power. The atheists (Soviets) were now defeated, the next step was to defeat the last remaining superpower not directly on the side of Muslims; Christian America. I would base that on his outings, which focus on a very strong religious foundation to his struggles and declared wars, as opposed to outings of a very different kind made by European terrorist organisations such as ETA. In other words: where ETA would use words such as 'oppressed', Bin Laden would be more eager to use terms along the lines of 'oppressed Muslims'.

    Said verbalisations lead me to conclude that Bin Laden's convictions are based upon religious convinctions, as opposed to convictions found in ETA, the IRA and other European organisations that would never make more of religion than just one of many aspects of their struggle, instead of the single fundamental aspect.

    Your conclusions, though well-thought and interesting, are simply false. Bin Laden started his antagonistic stance right before the first golf war; when Saudi Arabia appealed to US help to deal with Iraq. He thought that the problem ought to be solved in-house(amongst arabs). But after the end of the war, the military bases and forces remained in the peninsula to the dismay of Ossama and other prominent wahhabis. And his constant appeal to kick american forces out (regardless of the means) actually turned out to be the reason why he was asked to leave SA. This clearly establishes the motives and the cause-effect domino to ensue.

    On the subject of the IRA, their claim was as religious as any, I wonder how many protestants were in their ranks.
    And ETA is on the grounds of national origin/culture whcich could easily be interchanged with religion and identity.

    In no way are these struggle to be compared side by side, but they definitely share an inherent trait of fighting(armed) for what they believe in.
     

    scorpion10

    Crusader of Justice
    Jul 28, 2005
    110
    un altro alex said:
    what the bloody 'ell are you going on about. firstly, i repeat they were given the land mistakenly by Britain, who was at the time controlling it on the part of the LON (i.e. the did NOT invade it).
    secondly, it is not the israeli politicians who are being hit by the terroristic attacks, but the innocent and often poor people.
    and thirdly, how about a persercute your entire race? treat you like a dog, burn your family in an oven, or have them shot in an execution row as though they were just another piece of dirt. will you be all joyful about it?

    remember, politicians' actions often do not represent the true feelings of their people. punishing them for them is even worse.
    Maybe you should read this. It's from a U.S. Peace activist (Rachel Corrie) who was murdered and runover by Israeli tanks because she stood in the way of those cowards about to destroy a innocent family's home. Thats terrorism. Wouldnt you say?

    I thought a lot about what you said on the phone about Palestinian violence not helping the situation. Sixty thousand workers from Rafah worked in Israel two years ago. Now only 600 can go to Israel for jobs. Of these 600, many have moved, because the three checkpoints between here and Ashkelon (the closest city in Israel) make what used to be a 40-minute drive, now a 12-hour or impassible journey. In addition, what Rafah identified in 1999 as sources of economic growth are all completely destroyed - the Gaza international airport (runways demolished, totally closed); the border for trade with Egypt (now with a giant Israeli sniper tower in the middle of the crossing); access to the ocean (completely cut off in the last two years by a checkpoint and the Gush Katif settlement). The count of homes destroyed in Rafah since the beginning of this intifada is up around 600, by and large people with no connection to the resistance but who happen to live along the border. I think it is maybe official now that Rafah is the poorest place in the world. There used to be a middle class here - recently. We also get reports that in the past, Gazan flower shipments to Europe were delayed for two weeks at the Erez crossing for security inspections. You can imagine the value of two-week-old cut flowers in the European market, so that market dried up. And then the bulldozers come and take out people's vegetable farms and gardens. What is left for people? Tell me if you can think of anything. I can't.

    If any of us had our lives and welfare completely strangled, lived with children in a shrinking place where we knew, because of previous experience, that soldiers and tanks and bulldozers could come for us at any moment and destroy all the greenhouses that we had been cultivating for however long, and did this while some of us were beaten and held captive with 149 other people for several hours - do you think we might try to use somewhat violent means to protect whatever fragments remained? I think about this especially when I see orchards and greenhouses and fruit trees destroyed - just years of care and cultivation. I think about you and how long it takes to make things grow and what a labour of love it is. I really think, in a similar situation, most people would defend themselves as best they could. I think Uncle Craig would. I think probably Grandma would. I think I would.

    You asked me about non-violent resistance.
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,253
    Altair said:
    No, i meant you referred to that land as his country i.e palestine. I'm sure you're aware thats what the whole conflict is about.
    I understand that. I also am familiar with the Palestinian cause and the want to be their own country. I also know that the path of violence that has been going on and off for the last 50 years hasn't gotten them their freedom.
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,253
    poisonwoody said:
    peace enron :D,the devil's advocate...

    i might have used to wrong term {puppet}...though i am not well informed abt these authorities i was just wondering this...UN have no authority to stop war,agreed. US attacks iraq without UN's concent and get away with it,then why do they impose sanctions on iraq when they attack kuwait??
    Because Kuwait was one of the richest countries in the world. Its the same reason the UN did nothing during the Rawanda conflict and has done nothing about Darfar, yet rushed to the scene to save the Balkans. (no offense to anyone from that area)
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,253
    ReBeL said:
    UN is a toy, mate...

    A disgusting toy that can't be useful to anybody except Kofi Anan's pocket...
    The UN is not a toy. Its a mediocre world governing organization that only helps causes it benefits from, just like my country. Except they aren't as powerful as they think they are. The UN isnt a toy, the fact is that Europe just doesn't care as is the mindset of most of the world that isn't experiencing some sort of tragedy.
     

    The Pado

    Filthy Gobbo
    Jul 12, 2002
    9,939
    Enron said:
    Because Kuwait is one of the richest countries in the world. Its the same reason the UN did nothing during the Rawanda conflict and has done nothing about Darfar, yet rushed to the scene to save the Balkans. (no offense to anyone from that area)
    You mean WAS one of the richest, Saddam destroyed a lot of that.
     
    May 4, 2004
    11,622
    Enron said:
    I understand that. I also am familiar with the Palestinian cause and the want to be their own country. I also know that the path of violence that has been going on and off for the last 50 years hasn't gotten them their freedom.
    yet...
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,253
    Juve_Kosova said:
    Good word choice my friend. Yet. What a word. It means at this time. Lets see here, this skirmish has been going on for almost 60 years and Palestinians don't have a country. Which they deserve. It seems that YET has been going on for quite a while. Maybe if Hamas and other groups quite with the YETS, maybe some progress could be made. Don't get me wrong, I think Palestine deserves their own country but until bad apples quit looking for YET it won't happen. The only way to have a Palestinian state is a liberal US president and the end of violence.
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,253
    Altair said:
    the jews said "YET" for 2000 years, simple fact is arabs/muslims will never give up the Dome. The dome, and to a lesser extent the refugee problem are the biggest hurdle in this issue.
    All I am saying is that violence begetts more violence. And that is not the way to solve problems. More freedom has been accomplished through Civil Disobedience than a suicide bomb.
     
    OP

    ReBeL

    The Jackal
    Jan 14, 2005
    22,871
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #158
    Enron said:
    I understand that. I also am familiar with the Palestinian cause and the want to be their own country. I also know that the path of violence that has been going on and off for the last 50 years hasn't gotten them their freedom.
    To be more accurate....

    1948: Occupation...

    1965: Resistance began (Very old ways of bombs and guns)...

    1970-1985: Useless fights with other regimes in the region...

    1987-1991: First Intifadha (Only by stones)...

    1993-2000: Fake Peace process...

    2000-2004: Second Intifada (Extensive use of martyr bombings)...

    So, look how much Palestinians used violence...
     

    GordoDeCentral

    Diez
    Moderator
    Apr 14, 2005
    69,443
    btw i am not defending suicide bombing, simply rectifying certain false assumptions made here.
    How can palestinians who are kicked out of their homes, caged in camps, entrenched within confines of a 40 ft wall civilly disobey Israel?
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,253
    ReBeL said:
    To be more accurate....

    1948: Occupation...

    1965: Resistance began (Very old ways of bombs and guns)...

    1970-1985: Useless fights with other regimes in the region...

    1987-1991: First Intifadha (Only by stones)...

    1993-2000: Fake Peace process...

    2000-2004: Second Intifada (Extensive use of martyr bombings)...

    So, look how much Palestinians used violence...
    Most people know all this. Whats your point?
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 10)