OT: intense iraqi blog today

[jun_erh]

graphic pics and words (http://hammorabi.blogspot.com/)

like Stern said on 9/11 "We knew something like this was going to happen"

[Christopher M]

I love the juxtaposition between reading Kung Lek's rants about the US in Iraq and reading an Iraqi's thoughts on the matter.

[David Jamieson]

I love u too CM :D

Now let's have some more of your rants, i thought you had given up for a while. lol

cheers

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
Now let's have some more of your rants

Sure. What would you like to discuss?

[Toby]

Originally posted by Christopher M
I love the juxtaposition between reading Kung Lek's rants about the US in Iraq and reading an Iraqi's thoughts on the matter.
I'll bite ;). How does the US presence help stop events like this? Or does it exacerbate them? What does this have to do with Saddam Hussein and the "grave danger" to America that he presented?

Hows that? :D

[Christopher M]

Well; none of that related to my initial remark.

But if you just want my opinions on those issues as an unrelated matter: I think the US presence exacerbates those problems and Mr. Hussein never presented a grave danger to America specifically.

[David Jamieson]

That is an intense blog. Who ever posted that is extremely angry about the attack on the shia muslims in Karbala the other day.

Although, it is hard to say who did this act. It is grievous to be sure and as shocking as the bombing videos of the Israeli bus.

But shocking with images doesn't make the situation any more or less justified. It doesn't make the West responsible for taking care of thoise problems either.

The people of the middle east are going to need to find a way to deal with their issues without us. It would be nice if the societies "normalized" and we could trade with them freely for the oil and petroleum we need instead of us having such an heavy handed influenec over what is done in those countries where the west has effectively been running interference for goig onto 100 years.

Lawrenece of Arabia is gone, It is time for us to get out of the region and let the people sort it out for themselves without interference and military aid.

All cultural relativity aside, peace will come a whole lot quicker if the foreign armies were not there.

That's my rant, take it for what it's worth.

cheers

[Christopher M]

Aha. I never said the US should maintain a military occupation of the middle east - I merely implied that you* say very different things about the American involvement in Iraq than people living there say.

* and I was unfairly picking on you by way of example; as, of course, this would be true of many people.

[David Jamieson]

I make no such implications, nor was i even referencing your post CM.

The "people"(plural) living there is actually in this case a "person" who is fighting mad and wants anyone to wreak the terror on the perps who commited this attrocity.

How does that make him or her different? I mean as far as intent goes?

It is in their best interest that the west entirely leaves them to their own devices. I would imagine that eventually and afetr thousands upon thousands of deaths and casulties eventually they would have an established form of culture there that is brought on par with the rest fo the world.

after all, they aren' all frothing at the mouth idiots bent with rage and hatred for infidels now are they?

regards

[Christopher M]

As a good, old-fashioned conservative, I'm quick to agree with you on this point.

The neoconservatives strongly endorse permanent military occupation, though; and not just in Iraq. So perhaps we should not hold our breath.

[SanSoo Student]

But aren't some religious fanatics responsible for creating more "frothing at the mouth idiots bent with rage and hatred", because some of the naturally ambiguous parts of the Koran are interpreted in a way that advocates terrorism...enlighten me if I'm wrong. :confused:

[David Jamieson]

first to cm- I am a libertarian and although i do believe that we should help where we can, we shouldn't force our "help" on others. We should respond to a believable democratic request.

But in the meantime, I believe we should let the middle east work there own problems out and what remains will be what the rest of teh world can deal with, good bad or indifferent, it is culturally relative and we have no business telling them how to run their country (ies).

second to san soo- so long as they are not bringing it to your door, it doesn't matter what religious text inspires what religious zealot to commit what act. Christians have commited as many attrocities as have jews, muslims, atheists and you name it.

Religion needs to be removed from the education system entirely here and fanatical wings of any religion need to be put down in the free world. Sorry if I offend anyone, but I'll be screwed if you think that violence against innocents will get you to heaven, appease your god or what have you. I would rather see the problem crushed in the immediate future on the home base.

Provided there is solid evidence that these groups be they christian, muslim or jew are indeed carrying out actions that are a definitive threat to the civilian population of my country.

A good example is the AlQuaeda recruiters who pass out video tapes in teh mosques in Montreal and Toronto, these guys need a smack down and to get their arses kicked into the ocean.

In the same respect, we could get rid of the neo cons for the same plotting and schemeing to bring harm to our nation and it's people in order to forward their agenda and grab power.

Starting with Richard Perle and David Frum I would start filling the bottom of the ocean forthwith :D

hope I've made myself perfectly clear that I am just as furious asthe next sane person about this, but it ain't black and white and teh problem isn't JUST on one side.

Spring cleaning is required and hey! It's spring!

cheers

[Christopher M]

If we hold him to his word, Bush would have agreed with you before he met Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfield, and Rove. Like Buchanan, he campaigned on, and based his early political career on, the idea is non-interventionist government and isolationist foreign policy.

Somehow, they sold him on this different worldview though. And I think I know how - because it's far more seductive then we give it credit.

In fact, the second two-thirds of your post reads exactly like the kind of speech Rove would have given Bush to sway him.

[fragbot]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
All cultural relativity aside, peace will come a whole lot quicker if the foreign armies were not there.

Do you have an iota of persuasive argument to back that up?

Or, more appropriately, how would it occur?

I'd suggest that there'd be intense civil unrest (making now look like child's play) followed by a winner-take-all style dictatorship.

Put another way, do this small gedanden experiment:

1) the "foreign armies" packed up and left tomorrow

Would it be more or less stable in:

a) 3 months
b) 12 months
c) 2 years
d) 5 years
e) 10 years

I'd say it's obvious the answer's less in *every* instance. Perhaps you have a compelling argument to the contrary.

[David Jamieson]

fragbot-

how bout this, does firestone tell goodyear it's business?

here's my point, we don't belong in the crapstorm that is the middle east and we should stay out of it and let it resolve itself.

we should bar the sale of arms to the region both directly and through proxy, we should not buy or sell to any of those countries until they, on their own can bring about some form of reasonable structure within themselves and with their neighbours.

what the heck are we all worried about them over there for anyway?

everyday I get up and hear on the news, palestein this, israeli that, iraqi, iranian, etc, etc. Those countries need to iron out their differences without dragging others into it and on top of it all, we can get along just fine without their oil.

Frankly we need those countries in their current state like we need a hole in our heads and so long as the west keeps interefering with them they will never come to any resolution. Why treat them any differently than we treat African interior countries or asian countries? Or Russia? Or China? Or Anywhere? NOrmalized relations are the only thing of any value and to be in this constant BS with the middle east is totally a waste of time imo.

Why not let THEM make the effort in bringing their business to the table if they want to have their sovereign nation is where I'm coming from.

If they can't do it and remain in civil strife forever, oh well, too bad that's evolution for ya.

-o\_

[SanSoo Student]

Kung Lek...

What are your views on our Nation-Building of Iraq? Are the foreshadowing of events and terrorism leading to another Vietnam, in you opinion?

[David Jamieson]

In my opinion, saddam's iraq was an example of "nation building" as you put it. seeing as he was fully supported by the american government up to his invasion of Kuwait, which sort of spotlighted the entire fiasco that was coming.

so, wanting to get everyone invoved, the ensuing gulf war 1 was a clean up war to get american arms and armorment out of there and to cut ties with their man who was now a little more than blind with power that he had been given by all his pals in the G7 - G8.

The french, The Americans, The germans, The Russians and a few others in smaller ways were pretty much wholly responsible for the Baathist regime and all the stuff that Bush goes on about as "evil" this and what not was no longer serving the masters who emplaced it there with saddam and empowered him.

saddam got drunk, (with power given to him), became an embarrassment through his actions that followed and now it's a real mess.

The whole country would have been better off if the British had never installed a royal family in the first place. Sovereign nation they have never had the chance to be a sovereign nation. It's pretty safe to say that the Bedouin peoples of the region never had a clue about oil or borders until the blatant interference from the west. In particular the British, but since the rise of OPEC, It's been Americas prerogative to mess around with each country in the region in a variety of ways.

It is surprising how Al Qaeda is actually Saudi based and Egyptian in many respects, but Iraq gets pinned with it blatantly by Bush in a huge act of dis-info!

Never mind the problems in Israel (read another berlin wall going up and daily killing with hellfire missiles followed by retaliations with suicide bombers - in short, total insanity from both sides)

Syria and Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Yemen, Iran, All of these countries haven't had much say in their destinies since Napoleon (a frenchman from corsica). their rich history has been overshadowed by all this oil and strife, greed wealth, power, and an influx of weaponry unmatched just about anywhere in the world.

If I could wave a magic wand, I would get everyone out of the area entirely. In reality what we are seeing is a continuation of a war that has had a duration of almost 1000 years now. the crusades and in my opinion, although we are being told it's about terror and oil and various other things, it is fundamentally about a clash of civilizations and the political ideologies that are warring here are so far out that many would never believe the reasons why this stuff is happening.

But that's the thinking that happens when you become powerful and insulated from teh realities of everyday life. On both sides, mad people run amok and they do it with yours and my tax dollars.

anyway, blah blah blah, rant rant rant, what good will it do, the world hasn't changed in all my life and it will probably end in nuclear holocaust, disease and famine for us all. Collapse IS imminent especially when the foundational beliefs are apocolyptic to begin with.

:rolleyes:

-o\_

[Internal Boxer]

"until the blatant interference from the west. In particular the British, but since the rise of OPEC, It's been Americas prerogative to mess around with each country in the region in a variety of ways."

Ahh yes a few hundred years of global dominance screwing up the world, hope others will learn from our mistakes....oops too late!!!

[David Jamieson]

lol. It's true.

Madness, it's all madness!

pulled back and forth with lies and deceptions are we. IN truth it matters not one iota what the average work a day joe and sally think.

The powers that be have always been doing what they see fit. It doesn't matter what the peasants think. At least, not until they revolt, but now that we have plentiful fat and sugar (cake) and lots of mind numbing TV and all sorts of social distraction, the chances of an uprising based on political ideology in teh west is as close to null as it will ever be.

Thank you to the sane folks in the Michigan Militia, the Alberta Freeman's society and others though for keeping it real despite all this nuttiness in our current social structure. :D It will be these small groups who rebuild it after the collapse occurs. Let's just hope that we really will get a fresh start and we don't return to the social structure that we have now, which is failing miserably for so many of the people in the world.

-o\_

[jun_erh]

kung lek- you are full of... completely unrealistic solutions. your vague reference to a Berlin wall in Israel would be infuriating if you weren't so obviously unintelligent.

[David Jamieson]

:rolleyes: what ever jun, and I suppose you are on top of it all and are well informed?

if so, what are you posting propoganda here for?

ya weirdo :D

[jun_erh]

you thought that page was propaganda?

[David Jamieson]

while the page contains pictures of real life tragedy, the message is propaganda my friend.

For instance, has anyone taken responsibility for the attacks? Who commited the acts? So far, the killers are shadows and there are no definites, so to say it is definitely someone at this point as has been stated in the post means it IS propaganda. Not to mention all the other highly biased and opinionated rant about the 7th or 8th century dude who is persecuted, the greatness of bremer and the badness of the UN. Please, do you think we are 8 years old here and can't read for ourselves? Should we just buy into that rant immediately and without question????

For all you or I know it could have been any number of forces that coimmited the act.

What is your definition of propaganda?:mad:

[PaulH]

Wow, Et tu, Kung Lek!

All Iraqis know but you...
I know that this means nothing to you, but today I really lost my complete respect for your sense of judgment. This is so unreal. Very dissapointed!

Regards,
PH

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
The whole country would have been better off if the British had never installed a royal family in the first place. Sovereign nation they have never had the chance to be a sovereign nation.

It's more complicated than that. Iraq is one of those cases where an arbitrary border has put together people who oughtn't be together, and divided those that should.


It is surprising how Al Qaeda is actually Saudi based and Egyptian in many respects, but Iraq gets pinned with it blatantly by Bush in a huge act of dis-info!

Well, no. It's actually Afghani based, and they did hit Afghanistan.



... but I gotta agree with the others, calling an Iraqi wrestling with the tragedy in his life 'propaganda' in implicit comparison to your armchair theorizing on the matter is a little hard to stomach.

[David Jamieson]

whatever guys :rolleyes:

a guy who is dealing with troubles in his life? uh, he's talking about stuff from more than 1000 years ago.

he's peppering his post with appeals to the US to take care of what he percieves as his problem.

geez guys, did you actually read that???

Doesn't sound like it. You think Iraqis should be at each others throats instead of being concerned with the fact they are an occupied country that has had it's chain yanked from the get go of their nation?

Chris, the British installed the Royal family in Iraq. Look it up, it's a historical fact. Various members were killed off with teh crown prince eventually being dragged dead through the streets. It's all quite well documented.

Saddam came to power by murdering quite a few people on his way to the top. He was further entrenched in power with teh aid of Britain and The US and Germany and France.

Osama bin Laden is a Saudi, The taliban and al Quaeda are two different things, you're getting your orgs mixed up dude.

Al Qaeda is primarily a Saudi organization same as the hijackers in 911 were pretty much each and every one saudi. The Afghani mujahadeen are not AlQuaeda. In fact they no longer exist since the Soviet collapse except in small cells perhaps here and there where you have old guys and formers clinging to there hero days when Osama led them with his cia backed doings during the war there with the soviets.

But it has spead significantly with the growing support from other radical groups throughout the near eastern and far eastern world. Particularly amongst the muslim faithful.

It's really not that hard to cut through the dis-info and mis-info in regards to a lot of this stuff going on.

What next the sunni become oppressed by the shia in Iraq? Last time i looked at morals and ethics, two wrongs didn't make a right and the thinking "might is right" is nearly criminal in it's egrigiousness.

Paul, I wasn't looking for your respect. I don't even know you and I certainly don't seem to agree with your perspective.

regards boys, get reading! get knowing and get yer heads out of your @sses
:mad:

and, here http://www.mvp-seattle.org/pages/pageFascism.htm

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/011004Hasty/011004hasty.html

:D

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
a guy who is dealing with troubles in his life? uh, he's talking about stuff from more than 1000 years ago.

Those bodies looked a little fresher to me...


he's peppering his post with appeals to the US to take care of what he percieves as his problem.

Indeed. Hence the dramatic difference I noted in between his opinions and yours.


Chris, the British installed the Royal family in Iraq.

Did I claim otherwise somewhere?


Osama bin Laden is a Saudi, The taliban and al Quaeda are two different things, you're getting your orgs mixed up dude.

No I'm not. The roots of Al Qaeda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_qaeda) are in the Afghani Mujahedeen, and Afghanistan continued as their training grounds and base of operation, insofar as there was one.


It's really not that hard to cut through the dis-info and mis-info in regards to a lot of this stuff going on.

I tend to agree with you; but then I'm confused as to the origin of all your mistakes.


get yer heads out of your @sses

You sound like Tao Yin here. Good job.

[David Jamieson]

I'm confused as to the origin of all your mistakes.

riiiiiight

because osama (a saudi) used afghanistan as a training ground that means that afghanis are alqaeda?


The mujahadeen was a cia organization fronted by bin Laden and his buddies. trained by the cia and armed by them. Afghanistan has been a wasteland for more than 25 years now.

The members of AlQuaeda are fom all over the Muslim world (including the US and Canada and Britain and everywhere else).

so because al Quaeda grew out of the mujahadeen, by your reasoning, we could technically say that Al Quaeda is an American Organization.

The primary members (even by the reckoning of the link you provided Chris are saudis and egyptians, but ultimately al quaeda is a worldwide organization with members residing everywhere including the USA)

Anyway, it's probably not the most important point of contention.

Again I would ask did you read the post? You are speaking of teh attacks in karbala pics, but keep scrolling down to where the rant changes to the Imam and goes on and on about Mohammed's Grandson.

This hate is ethnic, and if the iraqis knew what was "going on" they wouldn't have had Saddam as a president for so long, they wouldn't "drag their royal prince through the streets" and they wouldn't be occupied by the British and US forces today. If not for a whole lot of factors Iraq would be a sovereign nation today free to do business with the rest of the world.

Anyway, if we don't all get pressed down under fascist regimes or get blown to smithereens in a nuclear holocaust, I imagine some of the truth may make it out yet.

Read that second link i posted, it asks some pretty interesting questions. Granted it is from an extreme side, it still asks a few compelling questions that probably need to be answered too.

cheers

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
because osama (a saudi) used afghanistan as a training ground that means that afghanis are alqaeda?

I didn't say "Afghanis are Al Qaeda," now did I? Please; these misattributions seem to be a regular error of yours.

I said precisely: "[Al Qaeda] is actually Afghani based." Since the centralized infrastructure of Al Qaeda was in Afghanistan, this is an entirely reasonable comment. Moreover, the context of this remark concerned your allegation that American military deployments were not related to the aforementioned Al Qaeda infrastructure. So, pointing out Afghanistan's relationship to Al Qaeda infrastucture was entirely germane, given American military action there.


so because al Quaeda grew out of the mujahadeen, by your reasoning, we could technically say that Al Quaeda is an American Organization.

Sure, if Al Qaeda has grown out of an American movement and had their centralized infrastructure in America, I would be quite confident calling them American. This isn't the case though.


Again I would ask did you read the post?

Yes. Clearly - since I referenced its contents.

[Mika]

Man, this thread is so weird...man...this board draws in some of the most *interesting* characters....

KL, /thumbs/ and a whole lot of other smilies this board does not have :)

The other people on page 2: umm....what...exactly...are...you...saying? Where's the real support? Do you just act on *feelings*? Whose feelings are those, anyway? THAT is the question you should ponder...

Not trying to flame or anything, just maybe make someone pause and wonder for a moment...logic over emotions type of deal.

//mika

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Mika
Where's the real support?

Umm... for what?

[PaulH]

Kung Lek,

I read your paranoid conspiracy. I see where you come from and how it affects your thinking. Bien, I suppose that it is quite difficult for one who is that paranoid to see simple things in black and white. Where is that rabbit in the hat? The author was definitely wrong about the Viet Nam war. No conspiracy there. If there ever is a conspiracy, there was a mystery why millions of boat people continuing to flee Viet Nam and drowned in the ocean's bottom in their desperate and perilous plights. The way I look at it is "Evil triumps when good men do nothing". I hope it will not be too late for the Iraqis. It takes strong committed men to confront the great evils of today in the age of terrorism and nuclear threats - maniacs like Bin Laden and Saddam. Called them "fascists" or any other unsavory names if you like, it won't change the facts that the world has been better and safer today thanks to the decisive acts of the few who proactively fight them head on. The main problem with liberals today is they prefer to do nothing while the world and civilizations are crumbling all around them until it is too late to do anything about it. This I call the greatest conspiracy of them all! I don't hate liberals. Most of my friends are liberals as a matter of facts, but they are dead wrong on the vital issues like you! Ha! Ha! 0\_

[David Jamieson]

:rolleyes:

read your own post again paul.

lol

[PaulH]

I see that you note quite rightly my liberal streak in the creative construction of the English spellings and grammars. Thanks! I'll have to be a little more paranoid about this on my next post! Ha! Ha! 0\_

[David Jamieson]

i don't give a rats @ss about spelling and grammar Paul.

It's your content that you should take a look at.

At the least, it is , well, bemusing.:rolleyes:

anyway, this all doesn't make a lick of difference, in the end, I'll keep my views as you may yours.

good day to you.
regards

[jun_erh]

while the page contains pictures of real life tragedy, the message is propaganda my friend.

you are very stupid


Osama bin Laden is a Saudi, The taliban and al Quaeda are two different things, you're getting your orgs mixed up dude.

when clinton tried to bomb Osama Bin Laden it was in afghanistan. Al queda and the taliban are not at all mutually exclusive organizations, bot are home to islamic fundamentalists. you are very very stupid



Saddam came to power by murdering quite a few people on his way to the top. He was further entrenched in power with teh aid of Britain and The US and Germany and France.

I am no longer the grnadmaster of the obvious. congratulations. you are very very very stupid

[David Jamieson]

"you are stupid"

lol.

typical rebuttal of someone who doesn't really know what to make of something.

the Al Quaeda members who crashed the planes into the wtc all lived in the US. Most of them came from Saudi Arabia originally.


Anyway, whatever jun, i suppose you are brilliant then.:rolleyes:

[PaulH]

Kung Lek,

If I differ with you, it is because of the Humpty Dumpties in this world. You know how it goes:

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall;
And all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty Dumpty together again.

Regards,
PH

[David Jamieson]

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall;
And all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty Dumpty together again

geez Paul, you don't even know the nursery Rhyme.

wtf is that supposed to mean...actually, wait, forget I asked. lol