Apparently you didn't watch the invasion, when the USA news services were broadcasting the bombing of Baghdad, during which a huge number of civilians died. Or are you suggesting that blowing them up with bombs is somehow less horrible that using knives? Do I need to post a few pictures of the splattered body-parts from the bombings, to remind people? How about that kid Ali with his arms missing?Greg Bernhardt said:When did I miss the part where we kidnap iraqi civs and then taped their beheading?
Your friend's exemplify the exact reasoning that we don't much care what the rest of the world has to say to us. We receive the same hatred no matter what. And it's ironic that it too is highly numbing.Shahil said:Firstly, what happened was quite disgusting and I can never ever say that anybody deserved it!
However, I'd like to point out the initial reaction of a couple of my friends (anti-war but they ain't into politics so we could call them the general public.)
When we heard the news on the radio this morning, my friends laughed and said that the Americans deserved it!
Adam said:Apparently you didn't watch the invasion, when the USA news services were broadcasting the bombing of Baghdad, during which a huge number of civilians died. Or are you suggesting that blowing them up with bombs is somehow less horrible that using knives? Do I need to post a few pictures of the splattered body-parts from the bombings, to remind people? How about that kid Ali with his arms missing?
Adam i think youve just shown your distorted view of todays reality. Today, when an Iraqi civilian is killed or undressed, it appears on frontpages around the world. When an American is beheaded, he might have deserved it AND, perhaps the Americans will learn from it (perhaps they now suddenly have empathy). BUT (mentioned lastly) this beheading is wrong.Adam said:Yes, it is indeed horrible. For those of you feeling anger and hatred, remember, this is what Iraqis feel about all the dead Iraqis.
Before you go loony and scream "Anti-American!", no, I do not approve of such acts. And before you whinge about me making political points out of a death, well, everyone has been doing that for months in this political forum.
- The act is horrible.
- The act is just as horrible as every other death resulting from this illegal war.
- All those deaths are wrong.
- Hopefully those who did not previously empathise with the anger of some Iraqis (over 8,000 of them were killed, remember) may now do so.
Holding true to your user text I see.Adam said:And I'm glad you think those thousands of Iraqi civilians had pleasant, acceptable deaths.
You're assuming they want us to leave. While most Iraqi insurgents do want us to leave, I'm not certain Al Qaeda shares that goal, despite their protestations. The longer we are there, the more secular Sunni's will abandon the Baathists and join fundamentalist Sunni movements, like Al Qaeda.selfAdjoint said:And it was about the stupidest thing they could do. If they had just let us stew in our own Abu Ghreb juices, we might have wound up going away sooner. But now the US population that was beginning to turn against the war will accept the countervailing horrors as a wash and the Bush administration will weather the crisis and forge on with their impossible dream.
Napoleon: "It was worse than a crime, it was a blunder!"
Are you saying the man deserved it? I'm quite sure I didn't say that.When an American is beheaded, he might have deserved it AND, perhaps the Americans will learn from it (perhaps they now suddenly have empathy). BUT (mentioned lastly) this beheading is wrong.
You can expect whatever you like. Your expectations have nothing to do with me.Adam, if you really think this beheading is wrong i expect nothing less from you then 25 threads about it in the following weeks and reference to it in every post you make.
1) It is no worse than other deaths. They are all horrible, and unecessary.What i suspect tho is that you and other regulars will wisp this away saying things like... this death is no worse than all others... its wrong but not suprising... maybe they learn from it... this is caused by Gitmo....
How would seeing Americans abuse POWs create more empathy toward Americans? When the Americans cut off an Iraqis head, maybe you will get empathy for the American doing it? How in allahs name did you even think this beheading video would increase our empathy for Iraqis?Maybe YOU will learn something from what the Americans do in Gitmo and Abu ghraib, so you will have some empathy for the Americans again.
On what evidence to you base the assertion that it was a lie?In the video, these terrorists say they offered an exchange with Abu graib prisoners. A lie to divide you.
Actually I'm surprised that the US military in Iraq kept the man there against his will. I believe the parents are also quite upset about that.No doubt some of you regulars will become even more pissed off at the Americans for not exchanging innocent iraqi prisoners with this American.
1) On what do you base the assertion that it is a conspiracy theory?Its one of the many vague conspiracy theories that clouds your mind and feeds your anger.
Which part exactly is a lie? The existence of Abu Graib? Odd, since the soldiers stationed there, and starring in the pictures, admit to what happened.In the video, these terrorists mention the abuse in abu graib. A lie to divide you.
Before Bush, that chap was alive. So were 8,000+ Iraqi civilians. Simple enough.Do you seriously think this wouldnt have happened if the abuse pictures werent released? This kind of thing happened before Iraq, before Afghanistan ,before 911, and BEFORE BUSH.
1) On what evidence to you base the assertion that it was a lie?In the video, these terrorists mention "other prisons" where abuse (might) go on. A lie to divide you, and seeing Pelas begin about Gitmo, it seems to have worked.
I can not believe how many unsupported assertions you're making.I cannot believe how youre being played by the media and these false claims and conspiracy theories evrywhere.
An ad hominem now? If you really are a student, start paying attention in your classes.I think Towsend said it right in his other post: you opened your mind so far that it fell out.
1) Did I once suggest you should have empathy for the man weilding the knife?Empathy for the enemy does not make them right.
Wow. More assumptions. You're doing well. Upon what do you abse these latest assumptions?I have no doubt i have far greater understanding of the enemy than you Adam, but i also understand the American side, a side you should explore before opening your mouth.
:rofl: :rofl: you've got to be kidding me Adam. I know you can do better than that! Really!Adam said:Before Bush, that chap was alive. So were 8,000+ Iraqi civilians. Simple enough.
So it's reverse psychology??Njorl said:You're assuming they want us to leave. While most Iraqi insurgents do want us to leave, I'm not certain Al Qaeda shares that goal, despite their protestations. The longer we are there, the more secular Sunni's will abandon the Baathists and join fundamentalist Sunni movements, like Al Qaeda.
Mr. Mohammed seems to think our strategy is good.Chicago, L.A. towers were next targets
By Paul Martin
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
LONDON — Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, al Qaeda's purported operations chief, has told U.S. interrogators that the group had been planning attacks on the Library Tower in Los Angeles and the Sears Tower in Chicago on the heels of the September 11, 2001, terror strikes.
Those plans were aborted mainly because of the decisive U.S. response to the New York and Washington attacks, which disrupted the terrorist organization's plans so thoroughly that it could not proceed, according to transcripts of his conversations with interrogators.
Mohammed told interrogators that he and Ramzi Yousuf, his nephew who was behind an earlier attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, had leafed through almanacs of American skyscrapers when planning the first operation.
"We were looking for symbols of economic might," he told his captors.
He specifically mentioned as potential targets the Library Tower in Los Angeles, which was "blown up" in the film "Independence Day," and the Sears Tower in Chicago.
A British newspaper over the weekend published a detailed account that it said was taken from transcripts of the interrogation of Mohammed, who was captured last year in Pakistan.
The transcripts are prefaced with a warning that Mohammed, the most senior al Qaeda member yet to be caught, "has been known to withhold information or deliberately mislead."
According to the transcript, Mohammed has maintained that Zacarias Moussaoui, the French-Moroccan facing trial in the United States as the "20th hijacker," had been sent to a flight school in Minnesota to train for a West Coast attack.
That would buttress Moussaoui's contention that he is improperly charged with participation in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, because he was preparing for a different al Qaeda operation.
The new transcripts confirm an earlier report by the Associated Press that al Qaeda originally had planned to crash hijacked airliners into targets on both coasts.
The London Sunday Times said the transcripts covered interrogations conducted during a period of four months after a bleary-eyed Mohammed was captured in a pre-dawn raid a little more than a year ago.
The confessions reveal that planning for the September 11 attacks started much earlier and was more elaborate than previously thought.
"The original plan was for a two-pronged attack with five targets on the East Coast of America and five on the West Coast," he told interrogators, according to the transcript.
"We talked about hitting California as it was America's richest state, and [al Qaeda leader Osama] bin Laden had talked about economic targets."
He is reported to have said that bin Laden, who like Mohammed had studied engineering, vetoed simultaneous coast-to-coast attacks, arguing that "it would be too difficult to synchronize."
Mohammed then decided to conduct two waves of attacks, hitting the East Coast first and following up with a second series of attacks.
"Osama had said the second wave should focus on the West Coast," he reportedly said.
But the terrorists seem to have been surprised by the strength of the American reaction to the September 11 attacks.
"Afterwards, we never got time to catch our breath, we were immediately on the run," Mohammed is quoted as saying.
Al Qaeda's communications network was severely disrupted, he said. Operatives could no longer use satellite phones and had to rely on couriers, although they continued to use Internet chat rooms.
"Before September 11, we could dispatch operatives with the expectation of follow-up contact, but after October 7 [when U.S. bombing started in Afghanistan], that changed 180 degrees. There was no longer a war room ... and operatives had more autonomy."
Mohammed told interrogators that he remained in Pakistan for 10 days after September 11, 2001, then went to Afghanistan to find bin Laden.
When he was captured in March last year in the home of a microbiologist in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, the 37-year-old was unshaven and wearing a baggy vest.
The interrogation reports also indicate that Mohammed had introduced bin Laden to Hambali, the Indonesian militant accused in the terror attack that killed more than 200 people in Bali, Indonesia, in October 2002.
Mohammed was running a hostel filtering al Qaeda recruits in Peshawar, Pakistan, when he scouted Hambali, whose real name is Riduan Ismuddin and who ran the Islamist group Jemaah Islamiyah in Asia.
Later, Mohammed moved to Karachi, Pakistan. There, posing as a businessman importing holy water from Mecca, Saudi Arabia, he acted as a fund-raiser and intermediary between militants and sponsors in the Gulf.
His first planned anti-American attack was Operation Bojinka (Serbo-Croatian for "big bang") — a plot to blow up 12 U.S. airliners over the Pacific.
Yousuf and Hambali were involved in the scheme, which failed when the conspirators' Manila bomb factory caught fire. The men fled to Pakistan, where Yousuf was arrested.
Osama once said, he would lure the Americans into the middle east and engage them there (easier to engage them there than in the USA). Perhaps the foreign fighters in Iraq want the Americans to stay so they can keep attacking them. But if the Americans plant a new gov in Iraq, they lose a possible new war room. If i was a terrorist, i would be very confused and blow myself upphatmonky said:So it's reverse psychology??
Mr. Mohammed seems to think our strategy is good.
What better argument can there be than lives and deaths?phatmonky said::rofl: :rofl: you've got to be kidding me Adam. I know you can do better than that! Really!
In other words, your entire previous post was demonstrated to be nothing, completely empty, and you can't support your assertions.studentx said:Adam your desperately twisting it into a bewildered future strawman. Out of respect for all terrorist victims, i will let you go this time