We are already at war with Iran

Discussion in 'Politics' started by aaronman, Jun 3, 2009.

  1. Oooooh, the smoke and mirrors tactics, quoting abbhorations from the old testament in order to divert attention from the cruelty of the quran.

    Two wrongs do not make a right you know.

    First things first, I am not a defender of the bible. You can quote bible verses to me until you run out of steam, I will not attempt to justify them.

    But there is a difference in the two. Wheras the bible do tell of atroceties, it do not teach it as doctrine, something to be followed. The quran do.

    Furthermore, apart from some fringe lunatics, jews and christians do not act on those verses. Islamists on the other hand, do. And islamists are not the fringe in islam, it is the vocal force that represent islam.

    I see very little "moderate" muslims crying out against the atroceties carried out in the name of islam. Whenever some christian lunatic do an atrocity however, more moderate christians almost step over eachother to distance themselves from it.

    Furthermore, you won't find christian terrorcells plotting nefarious plots agains innocent civilians in muslim countries. You do find however a plethora of terrorcells of the islamist kind doing all kinds of jihad against the first and best infidels they can strike at. Quoting the quran in the aftermath as justification when they brag about their misdeeds.

    Strange how islam lends itself so readily to terror. No other religion do.

    And aaronman, you are wrong to think this is a conflict between the west and islam only. Hindus of India suffer as well under islamist threat of terror. Buddhist all over Asia do to.

    What have ever buddhist done against muslims to incite such hatred?

    You think the conflict is economic/political, because that is how we westerners see the world. That is not how the true believers of islam see the world. They could care less. Let us not forget, that most terrorist acts done by muslims in the west, are done by well educated and by no-means materially suffering fanatics. They were given every and all chances and ability to do well in our society, but they rejected it, instead blowing themselves and innocents up in the name of holy war. Jihad.

    The muslim world is not the only one we in the west have fucked around with. India was as much colonized as Iran or the Arabian peninsula. Yet, you've never read of Hindu terrorbombings against Europe or the US, have you?

    And India/Hindus is almost as big as the muslim world, and do not posess the oil-wealth the muslim world do.

    The difference is in the religion, the culture. India embraced the best of our culture, whilst keeping their cultural traits in a modernized form so as to be a partner in the world of politics and economics.

    The muslim world by and large did no such thing. They blame all their misery on external forces, ignoring the elephant in the room. That their backwardsness and poverty is due to their (religious) leaders that keep all the wealth to themselves and keep the population at large as serfs.

    All due to the sad stranglehold that the fascism that is islam holds over its populace. They need to break free from their spell, and work on their own societies. Not try to ruin ours.
     

  2. While that is technically correct, anti-semitism in todays vernacular refers to jews alone.


    Wow. You really proved your ignorance regarding the history of Islam here.... While the Quran does mention Christians and Jews as better than pagans because they are "people of the book", you need to look up the word dhimmi. Muslims throughout history have slaughtered various ethnic groups including Christians and Jews. If you think the what the Quran says equates to literally what Muslims have done, you are sooooo blind.
    Zylark is incredibly correct, +rep to him
     
  3. It's no smoke and mirror tactic. I'm no more of a justifier of the violent parts of the Qur'an than you are the violent parts of the Bible. And you are wrong that it is "doctrine" in the muslim world while not in the Jewish/christian nations. We have more wars, more genocides, and more secret coups and blood-baths than any muslim nation(Many of the muslim genocides were pushed forward by Western outlets).

    And we don't need "terrorcells" as you put it. We have a powerful military that is willing to do the same things that you say the "terrorists" want to. The use of the word terrorist is only a way to discredit people's beliefs without actually listening to the causes of those beliefs. Small bands of Geurilla fighters are the only way to fight a massive, technical army. Hell, look at American history. We did the same things and we were called terrorists and pirates by the british.

    As far as the Indian example, yes there was. They bombed and kidnapped as many British as the Muslims do Westerners in general. You just weren't alive when it was happening. Colonization of India(which had much more versatile and useful resources than the middle east), however, ended a while (albeit, corporate control is still there) back while the exploitation of the Middle East is still going on.

    And as far as the Buddhists, they are no innocents either. Buddhist history is just as violent as any other religion.

    And why do you feel that the Arabs and Persians need to be a part of the "global economy?" They obviously don't want to. They've been resisiting it as far back as Alexander. Globalization is no new force like modern capitalists want you to believe. The West has been wanting to trade with the East and vice versa throughout human history.
     


  4. Islam was built on international trade. The Middle East in general is perhaps the general culture MOST associated with commerce.
     


  5. And if you think that what the Bible says equates literally to what Christians have done, you are sooooo blind. The only reason Christianity is the large religion that it is is because the brutal Catholics broke up the "black masses" of non-catholic christians in the early days. They drug them into the streets, killed them and burnt their books. Then, once they had a solidified "Orthodox" empire, through conquests they took all of Europe, killing anyone that refused "to accept Jesus in their hearts." As the Christian leaders said: "spread the word by either the book or the sword." The only reason most of the people who are christian are christian is because their ancestors were enslaved and forced to send their children to Missions are have them and their entire family killed.

    Quite the religion, huh?
     

  6. And if you think there aren't comparable issues in Islam, then you are obviously not reading enough.

    The difference in this analogy is when you talk about TODAY you cant compare them.
     
  7. There are comparable issues in Islam and I have never argued that there wasn't. You're the ones who are refusing to see the comparable issues in the Western world.

    And the problem is that the analogy still works perfectly well today. I'm sorry that our leaders do all of their craziness behind closed doors and disguise all of their conquests as speading the global economy and promoting democracy. I could care less what the rhetoric of a given group is, its their actions that matter, and clearly we are just as blood-thirsty as them still.
     
  8. #49 Zylark, Jun 12, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 13, 2009
    I won't take it in order, but by what pops into my head first...

    Umm, exactly how, by any means, do any nation or power practice "neo-colonialism" towards Iran?

    And if I am not much mistaken, India got its freedom exactly the same time middle-east nations did from UK and French colonial rule in the aftermath of WW2 in 1947-49. Hell, Iran was more or less independent long before that. Sure, in India as in the middle east, there were movements against the colonials.

    But yet, the Hindu did not continue the fight after gaining independence, did they?

    By your standards, the Hindu Indians have a good reason to commit terror against us. And if they do, you will make excuses for them. Because, you know, like, it's our fault for being bad in the past.

    Riiiiiiiight.

    Tell me once more why it is OK for Islamist fascist fundies to terrorize anyone?!

    Are we forgetting what they stand for? It is not freedom. It is enslavement. Especially for their women.

    You blew up parts of downtown London? I missed that in history class. And you continued to blow up various horse-carriages and curiers of the royal post office some 60 years after gaining independence?

    Iran and other islamist nations have their freedom. They have great wealth too, but yet their population are mostly living in great deprivation. Tell me that is our fault?!

    Well, you're dodging the question. I did not ask you if the buddhists were flawless, what I did ask you, is what the buddhists have done to incite such hatred in islam that it warrants abject terrorism against them?

    Not least, how you do not see the pattern? Islam picks a fight with all not muslim. It is their history through 1400 years. It is all conquest by sword. Unlike say buddhism, which was much persuation by contemplation and fusing of meeting cultures. Where one took the good from both, and not insisted that one was entirely superior to the other.

    Thank you, I know very well what they believe. What totalitarian system they endorse. What genocidal ambitions they have. I say no thank you, don't need that kool-aid.

    How about you? Like your women subdued do you? Death sentence for thinking freely, much less actually speaking freely?

    I'm sorry, are you saying the military kill innocents at will, where there is no military target to allow a level of risk to civilians?

    How many military were in the WTC towers? Or in the London subways and buses that got blown up? The Madrid trains or Bali nightclubs? Or the Mumbai Hotel?


    But they do not go after military targets, do they?! They go for civilian targets. This is not the vietcong. They had the balls to stand up to the US army. The islamist have no such equiptment. They are more comfortable terrorizing their own and not least, civilians anywhere.

    Well good then. but if so, why did you bring it up to begin with, if not to imply that "look, the bible reeks too, so that excuse the shit in the quran!"


    No I'm not. The quran is quite explicit in this regard, and as is proven by islamic history, it is an ideology of conquest by means of war. It is all about submission (literal translation of islam by the way) and oppression. Fascist, evil, borg like mentality. Nothing akin to our culture post the enlightenment.

    Yes, the oil-rich countries in the middle east do not want to trade with us. Yes, quite. I see now. They do not want to utilize their resource wealth, we force them to...

    Are you reading what you write?

    We are talking about independent countries that can do whatever the hell they please short of being belligerant. Their domestic situation is a fucking shambles due to their feudal system. Though, by no means is it their fault, oh no, it must be someone elses.

    And yet, they literally flow over with petro-dollars. And these countries are oppressed by us how?

    If the people of these countries had any say, they'd rid themselves of their oppressors long ago. Especially so in Iran, a great people that alas have slipped back to the dark ages by means of a vocal minority transfixing a terrified majority.

    We should help the people of Iran to be free once again. Not make excuses for their oppressors.
     

  9. No Im not.


    No, the analogy ends when you consider the Inquisition doesnt happen today but jihad does. And no, fighting terrorists and Saddam Hussein doesnt equate to blowing up innocent civilians ON PURPOSE or stifling freedom like fundamental islam does.
     
  10. #51 EbencoyE, Jun 14, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 14, 2009
    Well, ignoring the state-sponsored terrorism that is occurring right now that this thread was created about here are some other things throughout history:

    2007-
    USA takes Iranian power station workers hostage in Iraq. (Aug 2007)
    USA threatens Iran with military action.
    USA imposes sanctions on Iran's military.
    USA takes 5 Iranian diplomats hostage in Iraq. (Jan 2007)
    2002-
    USA threatens Iran with regime change.
    1995-
    USA imposes sanctions on Iran.
    1988-
    USA bombs oil facilities in Iran.
    USA warship shoots down Iranian passenger plane killing 286 people.
    1987-
    USA seizes Iranian ship in international waters.
    1980-
    USA and UK arm Iraq when it invades Iran.
    USA fails to back UN condemnation of invasion.
    1957-
    USA sets up and trains Shah's secret police, SAVAK.
    1953-
    UK and USA remove democratically elected government and replace with dictator (The Shah of Iran).
    1945-
    Departure of foreign troops but no compensation as previously promised.
    1941-42-
    UK, USA and Russia occupy Iran and exile the king, placing his son on the throne.
    1920's and 30's-
    UK control of Iran's oil.
    UK pressure on the king of Iran to exclude other powers from development.

    Granted, a lot of this stuff is history but such things are not easily forgotten, especially when similar acts are taking place today. Obama has already played the WMD card with Iran and continues to stick his nose into places it doesn't belong.

    I applaud him for bringing light to one of those events I mentioned (the overthrow of the democratic Iranian government in 1953) and extending his hand to the muslim world in an act of forgivness, but just because he's taking a different approach (only somewhat as words are just words), it doesn't mean it's not imperialism.

    The Hindus have good reason to commit terror against us? No, I don't think so. It is the muslims in India that are economically disadvantaged and prosecuted and whose homeland (Kashmir) has been continuously under attack by the majorly Hindu nation of India - an ally of the western world. They are not fighting us because of PAST colonialization, they are fighting us because of what is happening TODAY.



    Who said it was OK? I don't believe anyone is saying that, just merely pointing out the reasons WHY they are doing it to people who are obviously very naive and sheltered to not already realize it..

    The better question is why do you think its OK for American and western imperialists to terrorize anyone and police the world as if it is their domain, Americanizing everything they can and protecting business interests to get the most resources and profits possible out of these Islamic nations? Fundamentalist muslims may be crazy and extreme, but this is the price you pay when you try to take advantage of such principaled and dedicated peoples.

    People thought the Cold War against communism was bad (a godless fairly unprinicpled philosophy), this war against Islamic tradition and culture is going to be (and already is) 50 times worse.

    That's a nice opinion of yours.. (one I don't necessarily disagree with, however I'm sure a muslim probably would) but what about your opinion deems it to be acceptable for the western world to impose our own vision of society and our own moral standards and culture onto their people?

    Earlier you asked what kind of neo-colonialization has been taken agaisnt Iran... well what further proof do you need than your very own quote? Their society may seem archaic to us, but I fail to see how that gives us reason to try and control and change them? Not that I actually think we are, as it is most likely just a coverup to expanded business and military interests in the region. Considering we have installed authoritarian dictators in power in Iran before, I highly doubt our government could give a rats ass how people are treated in any middle eastern country, except for the ones we have invaded maybe in order to make us look like "freedom fighters". :rolleyes:

    When the U.S. makes allies in foreign countries, who do they ally with? The government or the people? Who profits from big businesses coming into their nations and collecting the resources? The government that allowed it, or the people who never had a say?

    Do you think the rebels in Nigeria fighting the federal government and the western oil corporations are fighting, kidnapping, and "terrorizing" because of religious reasons and blind hate? It's because the government sold out and the ruling class elites take all the wealth from the exploitation of their country, while the rest of their countrymen live in poverty and they have resorted to their final means of survival. Does that make violence OK? No, violence is never ok in my opinion, but it is understandable at times. These people have to resort to illegal and violent activities because it is the only way they can stay competitive with the ever growing multinational machine that their own government is a part of.



    To me it sounds like you have already drank it. Do you honestly get all this stuff just from a religion? They are not just fundamental religious people, they are fundamental religious people pushed to the edge which makes them extremely dangerous. Now, you can keep fighting them if you want and supporting this never ending and pointless war, but I choose to be the wiser and would rather leave them be. The U.S. is not the world's police force, in fact we tend to just make things worse and put our own people in more and more danger with every step we take.


    And where are the military in the Palestinian refugee camp, or any other western occupied nation? Oh right, those hospitals and schools are training centers for "terrorists" :rolleyes: nevermind the fact that the people fighting and standing up for themselves ARE the civilians.

    [​IMG]


    Really? Because I'm pretty sure soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan have to worry about "insurgent" (another great tagname for anyone who sticks up for themselves and their homelands) attacks every day. I don't deny that they attack civilians as well (just as the imperialists do) but when you're from a small impoverish third world country and your "military" is a bunch of angry farmers, business owners, workers, teachers, etc with a few guns a very little money, how else do you expect to bring any amount of damage at all to a giant imperialist global military-industrial system run by the world's richest nations that exists for the sole purpose of wiping out any dissenters anywhere on the planet? And people like you eat right out of the hand of the propaganda completely ignoring who controls the world's resources, the media, and practically culture as a whole.

    You, just like our soldiers, believe we're doing some kind of "justice" for the world, protecting ourselves when we're really just making ourselves LESS safe, and fighting for good even though that good is just western industries that employ the United States and other governments as henchmen to expand the corporate interests of the richest 0.1 percentile of the world.






    Wrong, they very much want to utilize their own resources. That's the entire point. They wish to keep their resources and/or the profits they make from it for THEMSELVES, not hand them over to greedy multinational corporations while their own government gets mild compensation that they keep for themselves while leaving their people out to dry.

    Why do you think so many South American nations such as Ecuador, Venezuela, and Bolivia have begun to stand up to American imperialism and keep their profits and resources for themselves rather than pay outrageous debts, and pander to American industries?


    Really? Because the problems you seem to have with so many of these nations that choose to isolate themselves from the western world makes me think otherwise. Obviously they CAN'T or we wouldn't even be talking about them.

    I've already explained this quite a few times, but just to get the point across: They are oppressed by us (the western world and it's corporations/foreign policies) which work along with their own government to do just that. Take China for example. Why do you think people in Bejing live great Americanized consumer-based lifestyles, yet the workers on farms and factories throughout the rest of the country feel the effects of their totalitarian reality by living in mud huts and working for pennies? This is not a nation v.s. nation war. Not even religion v.s. progessivism. It is two international culturally divided classes fighting one another. One that reaps the benefits of corporate profiteering and western imperialism, and another that feels it's effects.

    And what do you think they're trying to do in most cases? Who do you think these "terrorists", "rebels", and "insurgents" are? These same people, by the way, that in many cases were once SUPPORTED BY THE UNITED STATES to fight the Soviet Union's and the "evil communist east's" version of the exact same thing we're doing today..

    Sounds kind of like... every other nation in the world? Again, I still fail to realize why this gives us the right to wrestle the country from their isolationist state.

    Have fun with that. I'll be getting the fuck out of dodge so I'm not grouped in with you other lunatics and made a target by the portion of the world that actually chooses to resist western imperialism.
     

  11. WRong. 14% of those in the arab world have cars despite having the majority of the oil in the world. The wealth disparity is their own governments fault.


    Wrong. Money from the CIA funneled through the Pakistani ISI to local Afghan freedom fighters in no way, shape, or form went to fund terrorists, but went to fight Soviets in the Cold War. Big difference, if you cant see it, then you dont deserve to be talking about it.



    OWNED.
     
  12. #53 DaleGribble, Jun 14, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 14, 2009
    Kashmir is not the homeland of Indian Muslims. Not at all....

    You should reevaluate your RIDICULOUS use of the word terrorism in that paragraph. If you can't see the difference you are a fool.

    Who's imposing what? The goal of Iranian Islam is to spread the intolerant anti-freedom version of Islam to the rest of the world.....
    Iraq is an example of how that is wrong.
    ANd the US doesnt care about their society (I do, since Iranian society is sharia and HORRIBLE) but they care about their nuclear program and the ensureity they will use it.







    yep, ignoring problems usually makes them go away.

    yeah, civilians defending themselves by blowing up school buses and ambulances.

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Dale, all you have are short oneliners and sarcasm to prove your point. It's really anti-intellectual and I wish you put more thought into your posts, especially the ones in rebuttal to such a well thought out opinion.

    The fact that your media chooses to point to the school bus and ambulance bombings is no coincidence, it's glorifying the Israeli efforts and sadly, apparently it's working on some.
     


  14. More civilians killed by US military than by "insurgents"

    Yeah, US military defending democracy, peace, and freedoms by blowing up hospitals and residential districts

    [​IMG]
     

  15. Its also anti-intellectual to formulate these opinions on incorrect rhetoric, which I attempt to debunk. TBH its the flat out fallacies and ridiculous assertions that get me tired of trying to explain, and this is a forum, I dont need to have footnotes to anything. I think I make myself clear and anyone with an understanding of the situation would at least comprehend my viewpoints. I think if you look back in the thread, both Zylark and I have proven coherent arguments in numerous lengthy posts. It takes A LOT of effort.




    I guess it isnt clear that "zionist" supporters are far outnumbered in this thread... Im not justifying either side, just trying to balance it out. Ive said that repeatedly.


    Raoul, if you dont understand how that happens, you need to read the article more carefully. Not to mention the clear difference in that terrorists TRY to kill innocents, whereas the US military has its hands tied behind its back in efforts to try NOT to kill innocents by rules of engagement, the nature of terrorist warfare, and the fact that they are fighting an enemy without a uniform. Unfortunately terrorists love to hide in mosques and behind women and children, literally, to make headlines.
     
  16. #57 CannabisInCanada, Jun 14, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 14, 2009
    Good response man, cheers! :smoke:

    I'm still kinda offended by the sarcasm in that post I was referring to, especially the fail picture. How do you think all these people are recruited? To stand up against the oppressors, it is because of the occupation!
     
  17. It's not terrorist warfare. It's guerilla warfare. Something that every single outnumbered, outgunned side of any conflict in history resorts to. And every time in history, the larger more technical army has called the oppostition "terrorists." It's the saying that it is the intolerable islam that causes it is all I'm arguing against here. Plain and simple. Every religion is intolerable if the words are adhered too.
     
  18. Again, the analogy isnt the same. Guerilla warfare doesnt include purposely attacking civilians. That is why they are two different words.
     
  19. #60 Raoul Duke II, Jun 14, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 14, 2009
    No, most of the history of geurilla warfare includes attacking both the military and civilians. The difference is time. Contemporaries call them terrorists, history calls them geurillas.

    EDIT: Ethical dimensions of geurilla warfare
     

Share This Page