We are the World

A political reason for driving a car into a crowded street and blowing it up killing innocent Iraqi's on purpose?

Please enlighten me...

Bet all you want ceci, you would lose.

And of course they have a reason, they want the entire world, starting with their own country to live under their strict religious guidelines and if they don't, they kill them.

Read the Quran

Semper

Islam is not the entire answer to why they do it. You know it.

Insurgents act because they are suppressed by the system. When they act out, they do it because they want to be heard because historically and politically they haven't been. And it has to do with contested territory and what has been done in the name of colonialism to make it so.


Your answer is only connected to the party line of the neo-cons. Dr. Rice, Mr. Blair, Mr. Bush, Mr. Rumsfeld and others supportive of the present administration always blame it on Islam. Nothing more. It's as if they are in denial of the history and politics of the Middle East.


[edit on 5-8-2006 by ceci2006]

And Ceci, yours in a denial of the truth and a strange acceptance to fall into the news media trap.

Strange because I find you highly intelligent otherwise.

Read the Quran, it explains in detail why they do they killings, and also reveals the reason they are so brutal about it.

I just spent the past week reading the entire thing, it will enlighten you to say the least.

Semper

Semper, I've read the Quran. Thank you for suggesting, though. Reading it might be enlightening about the religion, but it still does not answer the more political, historical and cultural answers pertaining to the reasons why insurgents do this.

I asked for a reason besides Islam why insurgents do the things they do. It does not mean that you are wrong. And it does not mean I watch too much television news. I simply asked a question.

Btw, I also asked for a comparison between the abuse, torture and killing of Iraqi civilians by Mr. Saddam and Mr. Bush. I would think that they are pretty much the same. After all, both leaders violated the Geneva Convention.



[edit on 5-8-2006 by ceci2006]

I am not sure there is a reason other than the most strict interpretation of the Quran. I can't answer if there is another. I have never heard one that makes any real sense.

Of course there is the Anti American everything group that wants to blame all of the worlds woes on us. They routinely proclaim the insurgents are only doing this because we are there. The problem with that is they have been beheading people for centuries and using terrorism as the ends to a means way before we got in the fray. ie. Israel

That type of rhetoric is easy to spout and emotionally acceptable also easily supported by the main stream press to sell papers. The problem is, any thinking individual that will look beyond that mindless chatter, can see there are far deeper and far more historical as well as religious reasons.

I'm not relegating that position to any sort of dismissal, just eluding to the fact that anyone that cares to research should be able to more accurately understand the intricacies of the actions of those few fanatics. This instead of just carte' blanch saying, "It is all America's fault." That is a "cop" out and should only be used by those not willing to understand the religious and historical significance of what is happening.

Semper

The Kuran has been around for centuries. Terrorist activity on this scale has not. Therefore, the Kuran is NOT the reason why the terrorist activity is being done; otherwise, it would not be anything new. Q.E.D.

Iraqis are angry at the U.S. because of Saddam Hussein, ultimately. After all, we supported him and helped him keep power for many years, just as we supported other tyrants there and elsewhere who were willing to serve our corporations' profits and/or our "national interests." Saddam actually did both. He sold us oil at reasonable rates with preferential treatment, and he also did nasty things to the Iranians, who had done some nasty things to us in retaliation for the nasty things we did to them in overthrowing their elected government and installing the Shah as an absolute monarch.

So really, asking for a comparison between Saddam's murders and those perpetrated by the current U.S. supported government isn't quite on target, since Saddam was also supported by the U.S. in his time.

We turned against Saddam because he stopped cooperating and started being a pain, but given that history, I think Iraqis can be excused for skepticism about our benign intentions in their country. And that includes those who are glad that Saddam is gone.

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks

^^^said^^^

What gives Bush the right to cause such pain as that? What gives him the right?:shk:

September 11, 2001..... there is your answer.

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
September 11, 2001..... there is your answer.

That doesn't make sense to me. Care to connect the dots and show how what's happening in Iraq relates to 9/11?

Or are you saying that, since we took it on the chin on that date, we have a right to slaughter anyone, anywhere, forever? That logic might satisfy a two-year-old having a tantrum, but as an adult I find it somewhat lacking.

Id have to agree two steps.... 9/11 is and was a terrible act... but it isn't a blank check for violence against any who oppose us.

we shouldn't be nation building.... that is not our function.... if we had been asked in either by the people or by the UN that would have been different....

Unfortunately we have made the area even more unstable and to completely pull out now may further destabilize the region...

The Kuran has been around for centuries. Terrorist activity on this scale has not. Therefore, the Kuran is NOT the reason why the terrorist activity is being done; otherwise, it would not be anything new. Q.E.D.

WHAT????? Research man, that's the answer...

While it is impossible to definitively ascertain when it was first used, that which we today call terrorism traces its roots back at least some 2,000 years. Moreover, today’s terrorism has, in some respects come full circle, with many of its contemporary practitioners motivated by religious convictions – something which drove many of their earliest predecessors. It has also, in the generally accepted usage of the word, often possessed a political dimension. This has colored much of the discourse surrounding terrorism ‑ a phenomenon which is, according to Paul R. Pillar, ‘a challenge to be managed, not solved.’[ii]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Adherents of other religions also resorted to methods which might today be termed terrorism, such as the Assassins – an 11th century offshoot of a Shia Muslim sect known as the Ismailis. Like the Zealots-Sicari, the Assassins were also given to stabbing their victims (generally politicians or clerics who refused to adopt the purified version of Islam they were forcibly spreading) in broad daylight.[v] The Assassins ‑ whose name gave us the modern term but literally meant ‘hashish-eater’ ‑ a reference to the ritualistic drug-taking they were (perhaps falsely) rumored to indulge in prior to undertaking missions – also used their actions to send a message.[vi] Often, the Assassins’ deeds were carried out at religious sites on holy days – a tactic intended to publicize their cause and incite others to it. Like many religiously inspired terrorists today, they also viewed their deaths on such operations as sacrificial and a guarantor that they would enter paradise.
www.cdi.org...

HE SHOOTS! HE SCORES!

Semper

Do post like this do anything except insite a 2 side bashing of eachother which does not lead to any progress on the issue at hand but only to inflame the board and make the 2 sides ("pro war" "peace lovers") hate eachother even more?

Anyways, the hunted and the hunter thing...

If we used a civilized manor of rationality and we said no more war, what is to stop the other side from begining a war? .. or is it that you think that is America does not instigate a war, the war won't actually happen... that we some how of such influence over other peoples line of thought?

Lets say we do get rid of war.. infact lets say we fulfill many peoples dreams here on the board and disband the entire US military except the reserves just incase we are attacked (which we can't be because we don't have an army!) - that makes sense right?

Ok, no more army.. but then in the Blakans a surbian uprising begins, and an inflamed hatred against Muslims spreads like wildfire, within weeks a new dictator rises from this uprising and ethnic cleansing is once again released amoung the people.. thousands upon thousands are slaughterd, raped, pillaged, entire cities burned.

Meanwhile with no more American army to keep peace, Pakistan and India go to war, Turky begins a massacre of Kurds and Armenians while in Israel they go to war with nearly all her neighbors.

But we here in America have no army, we don't go to war against Dictators like we used to because it "hurt people" .. so we watch and suddenly people begin thinking "Hey, we are the largest most powerful country in the world, we could do something!" ... but that would hurt something, and America can't go to war because that for some reason according to some is the actual reason attrocities are comited to begin with.

War will never cease, it will never end. We may or may not be "keeping the peace" who knows, 30-40 years from now the Middle East could be a thriving democracy with good education, low unemployment and no more radical Islam, or it could be a dusty wasteland like it is.

Originally posted by mikesingh
The two faces of humanity.
I found it profoundly touching seeing the exprssion of the Iraqi.
And expressions speak louder than words.

simple aslong as the US population can get cheap fuel for the monster of cars i doubt they would care about the humon costs
i doubt even 40% of americans knows what happens out side their house/country

[edit on 5-8-2006 by bodrul]

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Anyways, the hunted and the hunter thing...

If we used a civilized manor of rationality and we said no more war, what is to stop the other side from begining a war? .. or is it that you think that is America does not instigate a war, the war won't actually happen... that we some how of such influence over other peoples line of thought?

Lets say we do get rid of war.. infact lets say we fulfill many peoples dreams here on the board and disband the entire US military except the reserves just incase we are attacked (which we can't be because we don't have an army!) - that makes sense right?

Ok, no more army.. but then in the Blakans a surbian uprising begins, and an inflamed hatred against Muslims spreads like wildfire, within weeks a new dictator rises from this uprising and ethnic cleansing is once again released amoung the people.. thousands upon thousands are slaughterd, raped, pillaged, entire cities burned.

Meanwhile with no more American army to keep peace, Pakistan and India go to war, Turky begins a massacre of Kurds and Armenians while in Israel they go to war with nearly all her neighbors.

But we here in America have no army, we don't go to war against Dictators like we used to because it "hurt people" .. so we watch and suddenly people begin thinking "Hey, we are the largest most powerful country in the world, we could do something!" ... but that would hurt something, and America can't go to war because that for some reason according to some is the actual reason attrocities are comited to begin with.

War will never cease, it will never end. We may or may not be "keeping the peace" who knows, 30-40 years from now the Middle East could be a thriving democracy with good education, low unemployment and no more radical Islam, or it could be a dusty wasteland like it is.

You just got the WATS from me!!!!

OUTSTANDING

Semper

Originally posted by Two Steps Forward
Iraqis are angry at the U.S. because of Saddam Hussein, ultimately. After all, we supported him and helped him keep power for many years, just as we supported other tyrants there and elsewhere who were willing to serve our corporations' profits and/or our "national interests."

If that were true then why are the Sunnis the ones who hate the occupation forces the most?

The Shiites and Kurds are the ones who suffered the most under Saddam while the Sunnis benfitted from his rule.
The Kurds somewhat like the US and the Shiites don't hate the US as much as the Sunnis.

I think the Sunnis are just angry that the Shiites now have power and that's why they keep blowing them up.
The rivalry between the two goes way back.

I agree 100 percent with AceOfBase.

And here goes the anti-american band wagon again. Full of propaganda, distortions, and exagerrations......

the hunter....




the hunted....

wheres the proof.... not trying to derail thread.. but wheres the prrof above poster.... there is none.... back to our already scheduled program

Originally posted by Elsenorpompom
wheres the proof.... not trying to derail thread.. but wheres the prrof above poster.... there is none.... back to our already scheduled program

well, you see, in osamas confessions, the identities of the hijackers, and the 2 buildings that aren't f***ing there anymore.

seeing as how the topic is under debate, you can kiss my ass if you want me to bow to your theory. YOU prove it.