The US War - Five Years On

[Uncle Timmy]

So Timmy, if we pay them to no longer terroize us, want the US Fed Gov't and therefore all US taxpayers, be considered as helping terrorists, and thereby our entire country be in breach of US Law? Sounds just like the story of the US Banana companies paying off terrorists in South America to "protect" their field workers. Practical, perhaps, but in violation of US Law.

What terrorists did I advocate paying off? Money for Palestinian or Afghani development? You would have to hold the position that ALL Palestinians or Afghanis are terrorists.

Besides, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Just look up where the money that supported the Irish Republican Army's terrorist activities against the British in Northern Ireland came from. Thank goodness England didn't have such strict laws regarding Terrorist Supporting Nations during the 70's or those Irish Catholics in Chicago would have earned the whole US on Britain's blacklist.

 

[Mango]

Yeah, I think I have sent this thread on a bit of a tangent.

But I did start out by commenting on the Freidman article; and nothing has yet changed my mind that America's Energy-Achille's Heal represents a far greater potential threat to our national security than terrorism.

And so, the justification for Iraq, based on terrorism issues (as Freidman does) is mute if you conclude that a) Our dependance on the uninterupted flow of foreign oil is our primary national security and b) the Iraq War has destabilized and threatens the source of that oil.

We're all about tangents here, and it was a excellent tangent. You obviously have a great deal of knowledge having lived in the Middle East and your plan makes sense albeit holes, but what plan doesn't?
My concern would be our 51st State Israel. Cutting off funds from them would be extremely difficult wouldn't it?

On a side note, I just learned that US citizens can run for public office in Israel and not forego their US citizenship.

 

[Uncle Timmy]

My concern would be our 51st State Israel. Cutting off funds from them would be extremely difficult wouldn't it?

Actually, I never lived in the middle east - I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.



What I?m really advocating is an aggressive, hardline stance on a comprehensive peace plan between Arabs and Israelis.

If we conclude that this is in the US national interest (I believe it is) then we have to be prepared to yank every chain we?ve got. It is OUR money afterall.

My sense is that it will take a whole lot of back door threats, arm twisting, and eye gouging to get the parties to agree.

(If I were Bush, I would quietly tell both parties that either they agree to split East and West Jerusalem between the two of them and put the Old City Center under shared, or International control - or we will simply nuke the place and then NOBODY gets it. Okay, well clearly I wouldn?t really advocate that but it is kind of indicative of the sort of pressure that will be needed.)

 

[Smiling JOe]

-We ‘pay off’ this new government to the tune of 5-12 billion a year so they will act in American interests. This is similar to the existing US relationship with Egypt. They don’t challenge our regional interests and we get to base forces at one or two key bases in country to maintain a regional military presence. The new gov’t officials will be fat and happy with American dollars and will work aggressively to maintain the status quo.
-We turn a blind eye to the ugly reality of how the new Sunni gov’t re-instates order in the country.

These would be the terrorists to which I am referring. If we are paying them to not be terrorists acting against us, aren't you suggesting that they would be terrorists if we didn't pay them?


I hear you regarding the terrorists vs freedom fighter. Now days in the US, the Gov't can hold indefinitely, anyone whom they accuse of being a terrorist. Thinking back only a few decades, many of the civil rights leaders would fall into this category of terrorists, although they were fighting for freedom. Makes me wonder a bit about the hidden loss of our freedoms as we knew them. Next thing you know, we will not be able to state our thoughts regarding the gov't or politicians.

 

[Smiling JOe]

What I?m really advocating is an aggressive, hardline stance on a comprehensive peace plan between Arabs and Israelis.

:funn: Sorry, I just thought that statement to be funny. I think you might have better success at convincing floridagirl that you don't get AIDS from mosquitos, and that doesn't look like it will be happening in my lifetime.

 

[6thGen]

Timmy,
Let me recap a few things.

I made the point that you have no idea who the Iraqi citizens blame for the problems in the country. You posted an opinion poll of American citizens that states that many Americans do not believe there was a connection between Saddam and 9/11. Um, what? That has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about. As for the connection, I never said he had a connection to 9/11. I said he harbored terrorists. Again, that?s not disputed, but it?s not what we were talking about.

I pointed out that current opinion polls may not be the best way to govern and that history shows that opinion changes as perspective is added, so it?s best to do the right thing now, even if it doesn?t fly with the hippies. You pointed out three lessons that I should learn from. The first two prove that violent subjugation of intended colonies doesn?t work. You could have added the American Revolution and saved some time, but that is not the point. While the first two examples are all well and good, can you please explain what the Iraq war has to do with colonialism? For the 3rd situation, you know the Brits were never seriously attacked, and that Palestine was never the focus, right? You could use that as an example of splitting up Iraq, but I think I?m giving you a little too much credit there given your propensity for non sequiturs.

I pointed out that the numbers of MidEast oil are lower than most believe and that it is a relatively small percentage. I cited two major suppliers and showed that we don?t get much in supply from that region. You posted the actual numbers, which back up my argument, and don?t give any consideration to alternative countries making up difference. Did I miss anything?

 

[Bob]

Actually, I never lived in the middle east - I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.



What I?m really advocating is an aggressive, hardline stance on a comprehensive peace plan between Arabs and Israelis.

If we conclude that this is in the US national interest (I believe it is) then we have to be prepared to yank every chain we?ve got. It is OUR money afterall.

My sense is that it will take a whole lot of back door threats, arm twisting, and eye gouging to get the parties to agree.

(If I were Bush, I would quietly tell both parties that either they agree to split East and West Jerusalem between the two of them and put the Old City Center under shared, or International control - or we will simply nuke the place and then NOBODY gets it. Okay, well clearly I wouldn?t really advocate that but it is kind of indicative of the sort of pressure that will be needed.)

This will never happen, because Israel has undue influence in this country much to our detriment sometimes. Oil is the key here, as innovating our way free of foreign oil will allow us to hit the proverbial "ignore" button.

 

[Bob]

Timmy,
Let me recap a few things.

I made the point that you have no idea who the Iraqi citizens blame for the problems in the country. You posted an opinion poll of American citizens that states that many Americans do not believe there was a connection between Saddam and 9/11. Um, what? That has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about. As for the connection, I never said he had a connection to 9/11. I said he harbored terrorists. Again, that?s not disputed, but it?s not what we were talking about.

I pointed out that current opinion polls may not be the best way to govern and that history shows that opinion changes as perspective is added, so it?s best to do the right thing now, even if it doesn?t fly with the hippies. You pointed out three lessons that I should learn from. The first two prove that violent subjugation of intended colonies doesn?t work. You could have added the American Revolution and saved some time, but that is not the point. While the first two examples are all well and good, can you please explain what the Iraq war has to do with colonialism? For the 3rd situation, you know the Brits were never seriously attacked, and that Palestine was never the focus, right? You could use that as an example of splitting up Iraq, but I think I?m giving you a little too much credit there given your propensity for non sequiturs.

I pointed out that the numbers of MidEast oil are lower than most believe and that it is a relatively small percentage. I cited two major suppliers and showed that we don?t get much in supply from that region. You posted the actual numbers, which back up my argument, and don?t give any consideration to alternative countries making up difference. Did I miss anything?

Uncle Timmy, there's no give and take here, but relentless baiting. 6thGen, I respect your right to not be swayed in the face of disaster.

 

[Mango]

This will never happen, because Israel has undue influence in this country much to our detriment sometimes. Oil is the key here, as innovating our way free of foreign oil will allow us to hit the proverbial "ignore" button.

Please explain Bob. My understanding is a large percentage of the funds we give Israel is for them to buy weapons from the United States.
Who has the influence in this scenario?

 

[30A Skunkape]

These would be the terrorists to which I am referring. If we are paying them to not be terrorists acting against us, aren't you suggesting that they would be terrorists if we didn't pay them?
[/SIZE][/FONT]

I hear you regarding the terrorists vs freedom fighter. Now days in the US, the Gov't can hold indefinitely, anyone whom they accuse of being a terrorist. Thinking back only a few decades, many of the civil rights leaders would fall into this category of terrorists, although they were fighting for freedom. Makes me wonder a bit about the hidden loss of our freedoms as we knew them. Next thing you know, we will not be able to state our thoughts regarding the gov't or politicians.

I might be wrong, but I think US citizens enjoy the legal rights granted by the Constitution unless they are enemy combatants...I know, I know, 'they' can tag anyone an enemy combatant, but I wonder how many innocent citizens have had that tag applied and whisked off to parts unknown. I am guessing not too many, but I could be wrong.