|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 11:50 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Bush created even more so called terrorists by invading Iraq
More than this?
This also happened during the 90's what was the problem then?
| Quote: |
Al-Qaeda camps 'trained 70,000'
Thousands are said to have joined al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan
Some 70,000 people received weapons training and religious instruction in al-Qaeda camps, German police say.
The claim came at the retrial of Mounir al-Motassadek, a Moroccan man accused of involvement in the 9/11 attacks, which were partly planned in Germany |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4146969.stm
| Quote: |
| and killing innocent people |
right Saddam wouldn't kill anymore
| Quote: |
Saddam Hussein's government may have executed 61,000 Baghdad residents, a figure much higher than previously believed, a new study suggests.
The bloodiest massacres of Saddam's 23-year presidency occurred in Iraq's Kurdish north and Shi'ite Muslim south, but the Gallup Baghdad Survey data indicates the brutality also extended into the capital.
The survey asked 1178 Baghdad residents in August and September whether a member of their household had been executed by Saddam's regime, with 6.6 per cent saying yes.
The polling firm took metropolitan Baghdad's population of 6.39 million people, and average household size of 6.9 people, to calculate that 61,000 people were executed during Saddam's rule.
Past estimates were in the low tens of thousands. Most are believed to have been buried in mass graves.
The US-led occupation authority in Iraq has said at least 300,000 people were buried in mass graves in Iraq.
Human rights officials put the number closer to 500,000, and some Iraqi political parties estimate more than 1 million people were executed.
. |
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/09/1070732211173.html?from=storyrhs
That is what Saddam did in the last 20 years what was he (and his sons to) over the next 30?
| Quote: |
| and he invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. |
But the mideast the way it is did have to do with 9-11.
| Quote: |
| Majority of the people that are fighting are not Terrorists, because targeting U.S. forces because you are against occupation is not terrorism |
.
Really how is targeting other ethnic groups not terrorism.?
How about trying to stop elections cause you can't win?
Besides fighting to defend the Bathist agenda is criminal.
How about
| Quote: |
The U.S. creates terrorists everyday because of their foreign policy, just look at 9/11 and the London bombings. |
Just look at the Bali bombings what was that about?
Anyway you don't understand what Al Qaida fights for.
Al Qaida fights for the Caliphate, and to kill off other relgions.
| Quote: |
al-Qa'ida (The Base)
Qadat al-Jihad
Islamic Army for the Liberation of the Holy Places
World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders
Islamic Salvation Foundation
Usama bin Laden Network
Al-Qa'ida is multi-national, with members from numerous countries and with a worldwide presence. Senior leaders in the organization are also senior leaders in other terrorist organizations, including those designated by the Department of State as foreign terrorist organizations, such as the Egyptian al-Gama'at al-Islamiyya and the Egyptian al-Jihad. Al-Qa'ida seeks a global radicalization of existing Islamic groups and the creation of radical Islamic groups where none exist.
Al-Qa'ida supports Muslim fighters in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Kosovo. It also trains members of terrorist organizations from such diverse countries as the Philippines, Algeria, and Eritrea.
Al-Qa'ida's goal is to "unite all Muslims and to establish a government which follows the rule of the Caliphs." Bin Laden has stated that the only way to establish the Caliphate is by force. Al-Qa'ida's goal, therefore, is to overthrow nearly all Muslim governments, which are viewed as corrupt, to drive Western influence from those countries, and eventually to abolish state boundaries. |
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ladin.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ronin
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Bush created even more so called terrorists by invading Iraq
More than this?
This also happened during the 90's what was the problem then?
| Quote: |
Al-Qaeda camps 'trained 70,000'
Thousands are said to have joined al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan
Some 70,000 people received weapons training and religious instruction in al-Qaeda camps, German police say.
The claim came at the retrial of Mounir al-Motassadek, a Moroccan man accused of involvement in the 9/11 attacks, which were partly planned in Germany |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4146969.stm
| Quote: |
| and killing innocent people |
right Saddam wouldn't kill anymore
| Quote: |
Saddam Hussein's government may have executed 61,000 Baghdad residents, a figure much higher than previously believed, a new study suggests.
The bloodiest massacres of Saddam's 23-year presidency occurred in Iraq's Kurdish north and Shi'ite Muslim south, but the Gallup Baghdad Survey data indicates the brutality also extended into the capital.
The survey asked 1178 Baghdad residents in August and September whether a member of their household had been executed by Saddam's regime, with 6.6 per cent saying yes.
The polling firm took metropolitan Baghdad's population of 6.39 million people, and average household size of 6.9 people, to calculate that 61,000 people were executed during Saddam's rule.
Past estimates were in the low tens of thousands. Most are believed to have been buried in mass graves.
The US-led occupation authority in Iraq has said at least 300,000 people were buried in mass graves in Iraq.
Human rights officials put the number closer to 500,000, and some Iraqi political parties estimate more than 1 million people were executed.
. |
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/09/1070732211173.html?from=storyrhs
That is what Saddam did in the last 20 years what was he (and his sons to) over the next 30?
| Quote: |
| and he invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. |
But the mideast the way it is did have to do with 9-11.
| Quote: |
| Majority of the people that are fighting are not Terrorists, because targeting U.S. forces because you are against occupation is not terrorism |
.
Really how is targeting other ethnic groups not terrorism.?
How about trying to stop elections cause you can't win?
Besides fighting to defend the Bathist agenda is criminal.
How about
| Quote: |
The U.S. creates terrorists everyday because of their foreign policy, just look at 9/11 and the London bombings. |
Just look at the Bali bombings what was that about?
Anyway you don't understand what Al Qaida fights for.
Al Qaida fights for the Caliphate, and to kill off other relgions.
| Quote: |
al-Qa'ida (The Base)
Qadat al-Jihad
Islamic Army for the Liberation of the Holy Places
World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders
Islamic Salvation Foundation
Usama bin Laden Network
Al-Qa'ida is multi-national, with members from numerous countries and with a worldwide presence. Senior leaders in the organization are also senior leaders in other terrorist organizations, including those designated by the Department of State as foreign terrorist organizations, such as the Egyptian al-Gama'at al-Islamiyya and the Egyptian al-Jihad. Al-Qa'ida seeks a global radicalization of existing Islamic groups and the creation of radical Islamic groups where none exist.
Al-Qa'ida supports Muslim fighters in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Kosovo. It also trains members of terrorist organizations from such diverse countries as the Philippines, Algeria, and Eritrea.
Al-Qa'ida's goal is to "unite all Muslims and to establish a government which follows the rule of the Caliphs." Bin Laden has stated that the only way to establish the Caliphate is by force. Al-Qa'ida's goal, therefore, is to overthrow nearly all Muslim governments, which are viewed as corrupt, to drive Western influence from those countries, and eventually to abolish state boundaries. |
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ladin.htm |
I expected the same blind drivel about the Bali bombings, but need you not forget why these things happen it is because of U.S. foreign policy. And also U.S. helped Saddam build his chemical weapons that killed thousands and did nothing to stop him. If the U.S. was so bent on stopping Saddam they would have done that in the first gulf war. And also ummm BIN LADEN IS NOT IN IRAQ! So therefore the U.S. invaded the wrong country. I said targeting U.S. military is not terrorism and the U.S. intentionally targets innocent civilians and then blames it on the so called terrorists to try and get the Iraq's on their side because they are loosing this war big time! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I expected the same blind drivel about the Bali bombings, but need you not forget why these things happen it is because of U.S. foreign policy |
.
What are you talking about?
You mean like defending muslim Kurds against from Saddam, or muslims in Kosovo from Slobidan.
| Quote: |
| And also U.S. helped Saddam build his chemical weapons that killed thousands and did nothing to stop him. |
The US allowed Saddam to buy duel use stuff that any nation could buy. and the biggest suppliers of weapons to Saddam were Russia, France and Germany,
Besides the US supported Saddam but only cause he was fighting another mass killer the Ayatollah Khomeni.
| Quote: |
Khomeini fatwa 'led to killing of 30,000 in Iran'
By Christina Lamb, Diplomatic Correspondent
(Filed: 04/02/2001)
CHILDREN as young as 13 were hanged from cranes, six at a time, in a barbaric two-month purge of Iran's prisons on the direct orders of Ayatollah Khomeini, according to a new book by his former deputy.
More than 30,000 political prisoners were executed in the 1988 massacre - a far larger number than previously suspected. Secret documents smuggled out of Iran reveal that, because of the large numbers of necks to be broken, prisoners were loaded onto forklift trucks in groups of six and hanged from cranes in half-hourly intervals.
Gruesome details are contained in the memoirs of Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, The Memoirs of Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, one of the founders of the Islamic regime. He was once considered Khomeini's anointed successor, but was deposed for his outspokenness, and is now under house arrest in the holy city of Qom.
Published privately last month after attempts by the regime to suppress it, the revelations have prompted demands from Iranian exiles for those involved to be tried for crimes against humanity. The most damning of the letters and documents published in the book is Khomeini's fatwa decree calling for all Mojahedin (as opponents of the Iranian regime are known) to be killed. |
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/02/04/wiran04.xml
| Quote: |
| If the U.S. was so bent on stopping Saddam they would have done that in the first gulf war. |
Yes but then the US found out that the mideast was a threat to the US.
| Quote: |
| And also ummm BIN LADEN IS NOT IN IRAQ! So therefore the U.S. invaded the wrong country. |
the mideast is a threat to the US.
The regimes , clerics and elites there teach hate and incite violence.
anyway if Bathists , Khomeni lovers are Bin Laden followers are all fascist bigots.That is what they are about.
| Quote: |
I said targeting U.S. military is not terrorism |
really , if the Kurds want US forces in their area and the insurgents attack are they justified?
| Quote: |
| and the U.S. intentionally targets innocent civilians and then blames it on the so called terrorists to try and get the Iraq's on their side because they are loosing this war big time! |
any proof?
Anyway there are posters on this board that support the insurgents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
I NEVER said that Iraqi was the homeland of terrorism. Stop twisting my words. I said IT WAS THE HOMELAND OF TERRORISTS WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE INSURGENCY.
|
Huh? Here is your quote, in context:
| Quote: |
| (1) Actually what they appear to be saying is that terrorism is a given. There will always be terrorists. Therefore it is better that they fight terrorism in a foreign country rather than in America. I don't think anyone is saying that it is a good thing that there are terrorists in Iraq per se. Iraq is a hotbed of terrorism. Not only homegrown but also foreign terrorists. It is a better thing to take the fight to the terrorists' homeland rather than wait for them to take the fight to ours, wouldn't you say? |
I don't see anything there specifiying "involved in the insurgency". Of course, they are involved in the insurgency now, AS A RESULT of Rumsfeld et al's stated policy of luring terrorists to Iraq. But the point is those terrorists(according to Rumsfeld's theory) would not be in Iraq without the invasion.
| Quote: |
| Would you rather the government face terrorists in Iraq or in YOUR country? |
(2) Sure, I'd rather deal with the terrorists in Iraq than in my own country. But is that an ethical policy? Let's say during the late 1960s, Canada had invaded St Pierre and Miquelon, with the stated justification of luring the FLQ to the islands, in order get them blowing up mailboxes and killing security guards somewhere other than Montreal. A lot of Canada might have LIKED that policy, but it sure as hell wouldn't say much about Pierre Trudeau's regard for the people of St. Pierre and Miquelon. And I would consider it quite ironic(though perhaps not an outright contradiction) if Trudeau or his supporters were to turn around and chastise people who opposed the invasion for being insufficently outraged about the terrorist atrocities on St Pierre and Miquelon. |
1. I mentioned Iraq twice in that quote. I was talking about Iraq. Obviously when I mentioned "homeland" I meant Iraq.
2. What policy are you talking about? I don't think Bush and company invaded Iraq with the goal of "luring" terrorists there. Like I said before though if terrorists are going to come somewhere, better Iraq than Canada or America. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| I NEVER said that Iraqi was the homeland of terrorism. Stop twisting my words. I said IT WAS THE HOMELAND OF TERRORISTS WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE INSURGENCY. |
Actually, *this* is what you said, and given teh context of the article, ofthe thread and your own text, I have to agree this can only be interpreted in the way OTOH interpreted it. It may not have been what you meant to say, but you did say it:
| Quote: |
| It is a better thing to take the fight to the terrorists' homeland |
I think we all understand your clarification, but OTOH wasn't twisting your words. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ronin wrote: |
| Bush created even more so called terrorists by invading Iraq and killing innocent people and he invaded a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Majority of the people that are fighting are not Terrorists, because targeting U.S. forces because you are against occupation is not terrorism. |
This is a point I've been trying to make by saying one man's terrorist is anothe man's freedom fighter. Too many people ignore the fact that many of these "insurgents" are there because the US invaded Iraq with no legal, ethical or moral grounds to do so.
Ah, but it's so much easier to get people riled up with fervent patriotism than to admit you created the mess yourself and need the nation to support your adventurism despite that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Too many people ignore the fact that many of these "insurgents" are there because the US invaded Iraq with no legal, ethical or moral grounds to do so. |
Right many of these insurgents were helping Saddam Hussein oppress Kurds and Shias.
Legal sure. Saddam never gave up his war.
Moral . Saddam Hussein killed 300,000 over the last 20 years would have killed even more if not contained by the US. What was he (and his sons too) going to do over the next 50?
Anyone who opposes US actions in Iraq on moral grounds is either ignorant or disingenuous. There is zero moral case against invading Iraq.
One more thing if you attack other ethnic groups , try to stop elections taht you know you can't win and fight or defend the Bathist system then you can't be a freedom fighter. What does that make the insurgents - Terrorists.
[quote]
| Quote: |
| Ah, but it's so much easier to get people riled up with fervent patriotism than to admit you created the mess yourself and need the nation to support your adventurism despite that. |
Well if mideast regimes , clerics , media and elites don't teach hate , incite violence , plan terror or fund Al Qaida then they US won't bother them. All they have to do is give up their war. If they don't then the US is justified in doing nearly anything and everything to force them to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| I NEVER said that Iraqi was the homeland of terrorism. Stop twisting my words. I said IT WAS THE HOMELAND OF TERRORISTS WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE INSURGENCY. |
Actually, *this* is what you said, and given teh context of the article, ofthe thread and your own text, I have to agree this can only be interpreted in the way OTOH interpreted it. It may not have been what you meant to say, but you did say it:
| Quote: |
| It is a better thing to take the fight to the terrorists' homeland |
I think we all understand your clarification, but OTOH wasn't twisting your words. |
There is a clear difference between (A) "the homeland of TERRORISM" and (B) "the terrorists' homeland" As an English teacher you should know this.
They are NOT interchangeable terms, and if someone says I said A when I said B then yes they are twisting my words. They may not have meant to, but that's what they are doing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
[This is a point I've been trying to make by saying one man's terrorist is anothe man's freedom fighter. Too many people ignore the fact that many of these "insurgents" are there because the US invaded Iraq with no legal, ethical or moral grounds to do so.
. |
Actually many of these insurgents are there because they are trying to seize power. If the U.S were to leave tomorrow, they would try to overthrow the elected government which (like it or not) was elected by Iraqis, not the U.S. and is legitimate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| I NEVER said that Iraqi was the homeland of terrorism. Stop twisting my words. I said IT WAS THE HOMELAND OF TERRORISTS WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE INSURGENCY. |
Actually, *this* is what you said, and given teh context of the article, ofthe thread and your own text, I have to agree this can only be interpreted in the way OTOH interpreted it. It may not have been what you meant to say, but you did say it:
| Quote: |
| It is a better thing to take the fight to the terrorists' homeland |
I think we all understand your clarification, but OTOH wasn't twisting your words. |
There is a clear difference between (A) "the homeland of TERRORISM" and (B) "the terrorists' homeland" As an English teacher you should know this.
They are NOT interchangeable terms, and if someone says I said A when I said B then yes they are twisting my words. They may not have meant to, but that's what they are doing. |
The only country under discussion was Iraq, which mitigates your comments above, unless you meant it regionally, which waas not and has not been clear. The semantics really aren't important... I'd rather discuss the issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| If the U.S were to leave tomorrow, they would try to overthrow the elected government which (like it or not) was elected by Iraqis, not the U.S. and is legitimate. |
Certainly there are people there doing what they're doin for myriad reasons. That is a given. I am only trying to point out it is simplistic and incorrect to say they are all terrorists in the sense that most people mean it.
As for the legitimacy of the government: that is a matter of opinion. For a devout, nee, extremist Musim, that would not be the case. They would think 1. the current government is not the result of Iraqi action, it is the result of US invasion; Iraqi's voted, but they did not create the conditions in which the vote occurred 2. any secular/democratic goverment is against Islamic Law; only one headed by a religious leader, as in Iran, is legitimate.
My point is not and never has been that what is happening in Iraq is right, only that you are best able to solve a problem if you understand your opponent. Shrilliing "Terrorist! Terrorist!" does not show an understanding of th opponent. Bush and everyone else involved need to think a little more deeply on the subject. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
UM:
I didn't claim that you said "the homeland of terrorism" as opposed to the "homeland of terrorists". I said right from the start that you said "the homeland of terrorists". My original quote is in the middle of page 8:
| Quote: |
True or not, it does kind of contradict your unqualified statement that Iraq is the "homeland" of terrorists.
|
And here is your original statement:
| Quote: |
It is a better thing to take the fight to the terrorists' homeland rather than wait for them to take the fight to ours, wouldn't you say?
|
So where is the distortion you are alleging?
The use of the phrase "take the fight to the terrorists homeland" implies that the terrorists who have been wreaking havoc all over the world are from Iraq. If this were true, then the "flypaper" strategy might have a small modicum of ethical merit, because at least you'd be fighting the battle in the country that gave rise to the terrorists in the first place. However, since Iraq has produced relatively few of the international terrorists, and since Rumsfeld et al claim that FOREIGN terrorists are moving into Iraq, I can only assume that the point of the"flypaper" strategy is to lure terrorists from OUTSIDE Iraq into Iraq for a showdown with coalition forces. As such, I am quite unimpressed with the crocodile tears Rumsfeld et al are shedding for the Iraqi victims of terrorism, and reject any calls from those people and their apologists that I publically condemn terrorism in Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
On the other hand,
Who's pic in for the avatar? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On the other hand,
Who's pic in for the avatar? |
Mary McCarthy, American writer.
Fetching, isn't she? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
On the other hand,
Who's pic in for the avatar? |
Mary McCarthy, American writer.
Fetching, isn't she? |
More haunting. For some reason it seemd vaguely familiar... guess not. Ah... just came to me... a passing resemblance to Anne Frank, no? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
