|
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 |
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:15 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I didn;t say that the US created AQ. I said
| Quote: |
American involvement in the region can not be discounted when it comes to the creation of those enitiies.
|
If you are highly involved in a region for that long, that seems obvious. It is one of AQ's stated goals to remove american prescence in the region, therefore american prescence in the region is one of the reasons for their existence.
| Quote: |
| I don't know of any event there which was particularly unjustified. |
what has justified got to do with it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JMO wrote: |
Yea it doesn't contradict what I said.
I'm not saying that AQ are justified in what they do, nor the taliban. But US foreign poicy is one of the reasons for their existence. Simple as that really. |
I'm an isolationist. Stay home and let them kill eachother. I could seriously care less at this point.
BUT. muslims have been forming reactionary gangs that terrorize other muslims and non-muslims alike for about 1000 years prior to the USA hanging out in Kuwait. I'm not so sure that a withdrawal from the region would at all lead to less radicalization. It seems that, as in Turkey, Indonesia and Egypt, only a strong military-style government can keep islam calm.
Also, to be very historically accurate, this current wave of nonsense started with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan AND the American smack-around of an elected dude in Iran. Credit where credit is due.
The USA should leave. But they will just turn their guns on eachother when/if they do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="JMO"]I
| Quote: |
American involvement in the region can not be discounted when it comes to the creation of those enitiies.
|
How did US involvement cause such entities to come into existence?
| Quote: |
If you are highly involved in a region for that long, that seems obvious. It is one of AQ's stated goals to remove american prescence in the region, therefore american prescence in the region is one of the reasons for their existence. |
US Korea , Japan
necessary, not sufficient,
AQ blames the US for supporting China's , india's and Russia's "oppression " of muslims. the US has nothing to do with that.
anyway their goals is to stop the us from having trade , or diplomatic relations with nations who they don't approve of.
| Quote: |
| what has justified got to do with it? |
Well if something is not justified then someone has a legit grievance. and the reverse is true.
for example AQ did not like the US going into Somalia to stop people from starving to death. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| How did US involvement cause such entities to come into existence? |
If you are denying that 50 years of american involvement has nothing to do with the creation of entities such as AQ, then you are delusional.
I didn;t say they solely caused the creation, I said this
| Quote: |
| American involvement in the region can not be discounted when it comes to the creation of those enitiies |
| Quote: |
Well if something is not justified then someone has a legit grievance. and the reverse is true.
|
This has nothing to do with it. I'm not debating what is just or not, all I am saying is that american foreign policy in the middle east has consequences. The formation of groups such as AQ whilst not solely a consequence of this, it still plays a role.
We can debate whether american foreign policy is justified another time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Also, to be very historically accurate, this current wave of nonsense started with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan AND the American smack-around of an elected dude in Iran. Credit where credit is due.
|
True.
| Quote: |
| The USA should leave. But they will just turn their guns on eachother when/if they do. |
And..really America is not the world's mom, let them solve their own problems. I'm pretty sure they'll do a better job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="JMO"][q
| Quote: |
If you are denying that 50 years of american involvement has nothing to do with the creation of entities such as AQ, then you are delusional.
I didn;t say they solely caused the creation, I said this |
Wouldn't it it be helpful to tell us how it did?.
| Quote: |
| American involvement in the region can not be discounted when it comes to the creation of those enitiies |
| Quote: |
This has nothing to do with it. I'm not debating what is just or not, all I am saying is that american foreign policy in the middle east has consequences. The formation of groups such as AQ whilst not solely a consequence of this, it still plays a role. |
Well I think we would all like to know how this works.
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:24 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| And..really America is not the world's mom, let them solve their own problems. I'm pretty sure they'll do a better job. |
That is great except the US economy needs oil so it is not in the interest of the US to let someone like Saddam have a great say in the US economy by invading Kuwait
Also groups like AQ will attack the US if the US has diplomatic relations with countires they don't approve of or if the US has trade with nations they don't approve of or votes at the UN in ways they don't approve of.
Also AQ's goals go far beyond the mideast. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee"]
| JMO wrote: |
[q
| Quote: |
If you are denying that 50 years of american involvement has nothing to do with the creation of entities such as AQ, then you are delusional.
I didn;t say they solely caused the creation, I said this |
Wouldn't it it be helpful to tell us how it did?.
| Quote: |
| American involvement in the region can not be discounted when it comes to the creation of those enitiies |
| Quote: |
This has nothing to do with it. I'm not debating what is just or not, all I am saying is that american foreign policy in the middle east has consequences. The formation of groups such as AQ whilst not solely a consequence of this, it still plays a role. |
Why not tell us what they are? |
A stated goal of AQ is to remove the american troops on Saudi soil. Thats a reason for their existence right there. They grew out of a resistance to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan but this is their current goal.
The cumulation of 50 years of involvement in a region has effects. Not one of their actions could be pointed out as a direct cause but they build up.
Do you deny that there is any effect of the american involvement in the middle east that could have caused/or created the environment for organisations like AQ?
Really, it's just logical. It doesn't mean you hate america joo, it's ok to say that sometimes there are unintended consequences. You don't have to come down from your moral high ground. Somalia,,,lol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="JMO"][
| Quote: |
A stated goal of AQ is to remove the american troops on Saudi soil. Thats a reason for their existence right there. They grew out of a resistance to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan but this is their current goal. |
The US removed forces from Saudi Arabia. Their current goal is the Caliphate.
| Quote: |
al-Qa'ida (The Base)
Qa멼dat 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.
Description
Established by Usama Bin Ladin in the late 1980s to bring together Arabs who fought in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. Helped finance, recruit, transport, and train Sunni Islamic extremists for the Afghan resistance. Current goal is to establish a pan-Islamic Caliphate throughout the world by working with allied Islamic extremist groups to overthrow regimes it deems 뱊on-Islamic� and expelling Westerners and non-Muslims from Muslim countries뻪articularly Saudi Arabia. Issued statement under banner of 뱓he World Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders� in February 1998, saying it was the duty of all Muslims to kill US citizens뾠ivilian or military뾞nd their allies everywhere. Merged with Egyptian Islamic Jihad (Al-Jihad) in June 2001. |
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ladin.htm
Their future goal might be more than that.
The cumulation of 50 years of involvement in a region has effects. Not one of their actions could be pointed out as a direct cause but they build up.
| Quote: |
Do you deny that there is any effect of the american involvement in the middle east that could have caused/or created the environment for organisations like AQ?
|
I think there are alot of causes. I think the way the mideast is created the environment for AQ.
There are many causes for the way the mideast is now.
The cold war was one of them.
European colonialism is another.
The influence of European fascism And communism are other reasons
I think there are a lot of reasons for the existence of AQ and Hizzbollah.
But I would really like someone to show the extent of US responsibility. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fair enough, that was all I was saying. I'm not the guy to tell you the extent of american responsibility, just saying that there is american responsibility.
Now I'm getting back to the Notredame game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
idonojacs
Joined: 07 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry if this was already mentioned, but didn't the U.S. create and train Al Queda, or what was to become Al Queda, to fight the Soviet Union after it invaded Afghanistan?
And didn't the U.S. originally fund and train Osama bin Laden for the same reason?
And didn't the U.S. fund and train and arm Sadam Husein with, among other things, chemical weapons, to fight the fundamentalists in Iran?
But that is ancient history.
Being of a suspicious mind, sometimes I can't help wondering if the Republican led administration might not want to keep Al Queda going because the never ending threat of terrorism seems to benefit the Republican Party, not to mention Republican corporate cronies getting also sorts of juicy contracts off this soon to be $1 trillion war.
Now, I would assume that capturing Osama bin Laden would have been a good thing for George Bush's political career. But when you consider the grossly incompetent way the chase was handled when they apparently had him trapped in Afghanistan early on, delegating the operation to Afghanis of questionable loyalty, it makes you wonder. It was about as astute as the Korean missionaries hiring a Taliban bus driver.
But by now, capturing Osama bin Laden wouldn't solve anything, and might just be an embarrassment to the Bush administration. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
idonojacs
Joined: 07 Jun 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmmm. Let's see now.
| Quote: |
| Osama bin Laden explained the origin of the term in a videotaped interview with al Jazeera journalist Tayseer Alouni in October 2001:� The name 'al-Qaeda' was established a long time ago by mere chance. The late Abu Ebeida El-Banashiri established the training camps for our mujahedeen against Russia's terrorism. We used to call the training camp al-Qaeda. The name stayed.[19] |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Queda
More:
| Quote: |
Jihad in Afghanistan
Main article: Soviet war in Afghanistan
The origins of the group can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan. The United States viewed the conflict in Afghanistan as an integral part of the Cold War struggle, and the American funds channeled through the Pakistani intelligence services supported native Afghan mujahedeen against Soviet occupation in a CIA program called Operation Cyclone.[36][37]
At the same time, a growing number of foreign Arab mujahedeen (also called Afghan Arabs) joined the jihad against the Afghan Marxist regime, facilitated by international organizations, particularly the Maktab al-Khidamat,[38] whose funds came from individual Muslims, particularly wealthy Saudis who were approached by Osama bin Laden.[39]
Whether US aid to Afghan mujahedeen also extended to foreign Arab fighters, such as groups affiliated with Osama bin Laden, remains a matter of some dispute.
Former Foreign Secretary and Leader of the House of Commons Robin Cook, writing for the Guardian, spoke of al-Qaeda as an unintentional product of Western interests:
Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by Western security agencies. Throughout the 80s, he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organization would turn its attention to the west.[40]
Bin Laden has been called "one of the CIA's best weapons customers,"[41] and the U.S. support for the Afghan Mujihadeen "the model for state-sponsored terrorism."[42]
The U.S. government maintains that they supported only the indigenous mujahedeen, and that bin Laden's participation in the conflict was unrelated to CIA programs. Al-Qaeda's leader Ayman al-Zawahiri says much the same thing in his book Knights Under the Prophet's Banner.[43] The U.S. was actively recruiting internationally for Muslim radicals. Sheik Abul Rahman, one of the conspirators in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, was allowed to come to the U.S. to recruit Arab-Americans to fight in Afghanistan against the Soviets.[44]
CNN journalist Peter Bergen, known for conducting the first television interview with Osama bin Laden in 1997, has stated
The story about bin Laden and the CIA -- that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden -- is simply a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn't have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently. The real story here is the CIA did not understand who Osama was until 1996, when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.[45]
Monte Palmer, senior fellow at the al-Ahram Center for Strategic Studies in Cairo, reconciles these opposing views: "It now appears that the American-sponsored jihad in Afghanistan was the first step in transforming the jihadist movements of Egypt, Iran, and Pakistan into an international network capable of challenging the United States. A coalescing of the jihadist movement would have occurred with or without Afghanistan, but the Afghan experience accelerated this process by years if not decades."[46]
The Afghan Mujahedeen of the 1980's have been alleged to be the inspiration for terrorist groups in nations such as Indonesia, the Philippians, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Chechnya, and the former Yugoslavia. [47] It is alleged that many of the Arab Mujahedin who gained combat experience in Afghanistan were later involved in terrorist acts against the U.S. The perpetrators of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 allegedly used a manual allegedly written by the CIA for the Mujihadeen fighters in Afghanistan on how to make explosives. [48] |
As to Sadam, you have to remember back to Ayatollah Khomeini and the American hostages in Iran. America sold Sadam some mighty sweet weapons to fight Iran, but apparently Sadam bought them on credit, getting stuck with a war debt of $75 billion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadam_Husein
| Quote: |
Iran-Iraq War
See also: Iran-Iraq War
In 1979 Iran's Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was overthrown by the Islamic Revolution, thus giving way to an Islamic republic led by the Ayatollah Khomeini. The influence of revolutionary Shi'ite Islam grew apace in the region, particularly in countries with large Shi'ite populations, especially Iraq. Saddam feared that radical Islamic ideas�hostile to his secular rule�were rapidly spreading inside his country among the majority Shi'ite population.
There had also been bitter enmity between Saddam and Khomeini since the 1970s. Khomeini, having been exiled from Iran in 1964, took up residence in Iraq, at the Shi'ite holy city of An Najaf. There he involved himself with Iraqi Shi'ites and developed a strong, worldwide religious and political following. Under pressure from the Shah, who had agreed to a rapprochement between Iraq and Iran in 1975, Saddam agreed to expel Khomeini in 1978. After the Islamic Revolution, Khomeini perhaps regarded toppling Saddam's government as a goal second only to consolidating power in Iran.
After Khomeini gained power, skirmishes between Iraq and revolutionary Iran occurred for ten months over the sovereignty of the disputed Shatt al-Arab waterway, which divides the two countries. Iraq and Iran entered into open warfare on September 22, 1980. The pretext for hostilities with Iran was this territorial dispute, but the war was more likely an attempt by Saddam, supported by both the United States and the Soviet Union, to have Iraq form a bulwark against the expansion of radical Iranian-style revolution.
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Richard Murphy, visiting Iraq in 1986, explains Iran-Contra scandal to him.
In the first days of the war, there was heavy ground fighting around strategic ports as Iraq launched an attack on Iran's oil-rich, Arab-populated province of Khuzestan. After making some initial gains, Iraq's troops began to suffer losses from human-wave attacks by Iran. By 1982 Iraq was looking for ways to end the war. At this point, Saddam asked his ministers for candid advice. Health Minister Riyadh Ibrahim suggested that Saddam temporarily step down to promote peace negotiations. Ibrahim�s chopped up body was delivered to his wife the next day.[22]
Iraq quickly found itself bogged down in one of the longest and most destructive wars of attrition of the twentieth century, with atrocities committed on both sides. During the war, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian forces and Kurdish separatists. On March 16, 1988 Iraqi troops, on orders from Saddam to stop a Kurdish uprising, attacked the Kurdish town of Halabjah with a mix of poison gas and nerve agents killing 5,000 people, mostly women and children. (see Halabja poison gas attack) Dissenting opinions dispute the numbers and have said the incident was actually a battle in the Iran�Iraq war where chemical weapons were used on both sides and a significant portion of the fatalities were caused by the Iranian weapons.
Saddam reached out to other Arab governments for cash and political support. The Iranians, hoping to bring down Saddam's secular government and instigate a Shi'ite rebellion in Iraq, refused a cease-fire until 1988.
The bloody eight-year war ended in a stalemate. There were hundreds of thousands of casualties with estimates of up to one million dead for both sides total. Both economies, previously healthy and expanding, were left in ruins.
Iraq was also stuck with a war debt of roughly $75 billion. Borrowing money from the U.S. was making Iraq dependent on outside loans, embarrassing a leader who had sought to define Arab nationalism. Saddam also borrowed a tremendous amount of money from other Arab states during the 1980s to fight Iran. Faced with rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure, Saddam desperately sought out cash once again, this time for postwar reconstruction. |
There's an old expression that comes to mind:
With friends like these, who needs enemies? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="idonojacs"]Sorry if this was already mentioned, but didn't the U.S. create and train Al Queda, or what was to become Al Queda, to fight the Soviet Union after it invaded Afghanistan?
| Quote: |
And didn't the U.S. originally fund and train Osama bin Laden for the same reason? |
False
he US created AQ?
:
| Quote: |
However, Peter Bergen, a CNN journalist and adjunct professor who is known for conducting the first television interview with Osama bin Laden in 1997, rejected Cook's notion, stating on August 15, 2006, the following:
that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden�is simply a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn't have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently. The real story here is the CIA didn't really have a clue about who this guy was until 1996 when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.37]
Pakistani Brigadier Mohammad Yousaf, who ran ISI's Afghan operation between 1983 and 1987, emphasizes that the CIA funded and supported the mujahideen indirectly:
It was always galling to the Americans, and I can understand their point of view, that although they paid the piper they could not call the tune. The CIA supported the mujahideen by spending the taxpayers' money, billions of dollars of it over the years, on buying arms, ammunition, and equipment. It was their secret arms procurement branch that was kept busy. It was, however, a cardinal rule of Pakistan's policy that no Americans ever become involved with the distribution of funds or arms once they arrived in the country. No Americans ever trained or had direct contact with the mujahideen, and no American official ever went inside Afghanistan.[38]
Other sources also dispute the notion that the CIA had any contact with non-Afghan mujahideen.[39]
For a while Osama worked at the Services Office working with Abdullah Azzam on Jihad Magazine, a magazine that gave information about the war with the soviets and interviewed mujahideen. As time passed, Aymen Al Zawahiri encouraged Osama to split away from Abdullah Azzam. Although Osama and the other Afghan Arabs were considered a minor "sideshow" in the war, Osama did establish a camp in Afghanistan, and with other volunteers fought the Soviets and Marxist Afghan troops. One of his most significant battles was the battle of Jaji, which was not a major fight, but it earned him a reputation as a fighter. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden
| Quote: |
And didn't the U.S. fund and train and arm Sadam Husein with, among other things, chemical weapons, to fight the fundamentalists in Iran? |
The US gave Saddam chemical weapons?
at any rate
But that is ancient history. [quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JMO
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Location: Daegu
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| But that is ancient history |
No such thing. Until people realise this, lots more people will die. Learn from your history people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| America sold Sadam some mighty sweet weapons to fight Iran |
what weapons ? |
|
| 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
