Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Good god, we are screwed out of our minds (maybe)

  1. Aug 22, 2004 #1
    "NAJAF, Iraq (Reuters) - A senior commander of Shi'ite militants holed up inside a Najaf shrine said the wall of the mosque was hit by U.S. fire on Sunday night.

    Sheikh Ahmed al-Sheibani, who is also a top adviser to radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, said it was hit during fighting.

    It was not immediately possible to confirm the accusation independently. Serious damage to the shrine would enrage millions of Shi'ites around the world and give Sadr political ammunition in his rebellion against U.S. troops."

    The shrine they're talking about is that Imam Ali one, god I hope this is wrong or not as bad as it seems...

    God ****it **** George Bush, how many more radical anti-american muslims does he want to spawn...
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 23, 2004
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 23, 2004 #2
    Can anyone detect the mindset of the Middle East? Where is the logic?

    You try to hold the US responsible for damage to the shrine.

    There would be no possible damage to the shrine if shi’ite militants in rebellion against their new government did not use it as a fort.

    How sacred is the shrine to the militants if they put the shrine in danger. It does not seem to be more important than there desire for power.
  4. Aug 23, 2004 #3
    As many as he can. The more hatred he generates, the more people he can force to act against the USA, the more he can use those acts as justifications for whatever he wants to do.
  5. Aug 23, 2004 #4
    Your statement is stupid and indefensible. And I don't mean partly stupid. I mean s-t-u-p-i-d.
  6. Aug 23, 2004 #5
    You have either lost all reason or have been reading the newspapers.

    If you can control your hate you would be able to see that Iraq is going very well. Does that disturb you?

    There is no basic principal involved with the militants. It is a simple reach for power. As in any country you can not let a small group control everyone else. If they had the people behind them they would join the political process.
  7. Aug 23, 2004 #6
    I have no hatred.
  8. Aug 23, 2004 #7
    its getting a bit childish now Adam.
  9. Aug 23, 2004 #8
    Ad hominems? Yay. I'll come back when/if someone manages to post something relevent and supported.
  10. Aug 23, 2004 #9
    slap your parents for me. I have suggested before you stay out of these conversations untill you are old enough to discuss here. Your ad hominems against Bush are getting tiresome
  11. Aug 23, 2004 #10
    For all we know they bombed the place themselves. It's propaganda until there is proof.
  12. Aug 23, 2004 #11
    So, Artman... Are they:
    • Religious fanatics who kill to get into heaven, and would never even consider blowing up their own holy sites?
    • Basic thugs who are quite happy to blow up their religious sites, and have no religious zealotry at all?
    • Something else?
  13. Aug 23, 2004 #12
    Adam you must have missed the news a few days ago. They had rigged the mosque with explosives and threatened to blow themselves up if the Americans or Iraqis attack it.
  14. Aug 23, 2004 #13


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    It is so disturbing that the Shiite population (apparently - unless the media is distorting that) doesn't see these terrorists for what they are. This is almost exactly like using human shields and should be considered a crime against Islam.
  15. Aug 23, 2004 #14

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The Bush war on terror. This is why we need someone smarter than a C student at the helm.
  16. Aug 23, 2004 #15
    I think I have to go with "Something else". They are people involved in a war, Adam. If they thought it would gather them support to blow up the wall of a religious shrine and blame the americans, they may do it. To allow a building to be a martyr is a cheap sacrifice compared to human deaths.

    It's just propaganda until there is proof. I approach news from both sides of the war this way.
  17. Aug 23, 2004 #16
    is there any actual damage to the structure? how bad is it? where is this damge on the structure its self? any large bang or quake could seem like damage to someone inside even though they did not actualy see it. as stated above, the guys inside would have a lot to gain if the building was damaged but it would just make things ahrder for american forces, so the guys inside might jump the gun

    maybe this is the subject for another topic but why can the coaliltion forces not full the building with tear gas or use some other form of non-lethal attack? still sacrilage?
  18. Aug 23, 2004 #17
    >The Bush war on terror. This is why we need someone smarter than a C student at the helm.<

    That C student has the foresight to see what you are unable to comprehend.

    The key to terror is the stability of the Middle East. Only the US has the will and the ability.

    You can not allow a society that is living in the dark ages to be allowed to have nuclear weapons. You criticize Bush for taking action but without someone taking action Saddum would have had nuclear weapons in 1998.

    If the UN made resolutions and they were not enforced the UN would be out of business today. GW saved the UN.

    If the nations of the world are not able to enforce keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands in the Middle East every country in the ME would be developing NW. The next test is Iran lets hear how you plan to solve that one. Why don’t you just ask them nicely not to make NW? Thank God for GW and thank God he understands Geopolitics.
  19. Aug 23, 2004 #18
    The world is a bad place, but I have to agree with adam that australia, usa, and uk are especially bad in the past and present. I think usa gets the prize though. I don't even watch television anymore.
  20. Aug 23, 2004 #19
    Actually, I believe Ivan was saying that we needed someone smarter than GWB to effectively fight the war on terror, but I could be wrong.

    How do you think GWB would deal with Iran? We're already digging very deep into our military reserves, how would you propose we fight a war in three countries at a time when 2 is already a huge stretch, and we don't have nearly enough troops in the 2 current ones?
  21. Aug 23, 2004 #20


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

    Damn Newton, now I've got to wipe all this Coke off my monitor !!
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook