This is an opportunity to strike Iraq - Don Rumsfeld, 911

  • #26
123
1
Originall Al qaida is a fictitious terrorist group, invented by CIA,Mossad,M15,etc.
There might exist now some offshots of BIG SCARY :wink: Al qaida,but guys.. please, we are not that stupid.
 
  • #27
vanesch
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
5,028
16
russ_watters said:
I'm really surprised you didn't hear about it - Saddam was quite open in his award money for the families of suicide bombers.
The US is also quite open about the award of money for Iraels (non-suicide) bombers...

First of all, whether you call the Palestinian action groups "terrorists" or "patriot resistance fighters" is a matter of point of view. I would like to see you reacting when you've been living since childhood in refugee camps, regularly bombed by the Israeli army. But the main point is that Saddam gave money to wives and children. So that was apparently sufficient reason to go and bomb the country. But the Gulf states gave MUCH MORE money, not only to the Palestinian resistance, but also to Ben Laden and consorts. So why take on Saddam then, and not, say, the royal family of Wahabites first ?

You cannot but agree that these are fake reasons to wage a war.
 
  • #28
123
1
russ_watters said:
Certainly: A quick google: http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1199662004 [Broken] A similar cache of documents was taken, IIRC, from Arafats headquarters a couple of years ago - it shows the link from the other side.
Yeah! documents provided by the way of Mossad to gullible western news agencies.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #29
Gonzolo
russ_watters said:
That's true, but the point is that we didn't enter WWII in response to that. We should have, but we didn't. It took a largely unrelated incident to prompt action against Germany.
With the Pearl Harbour attack, and knowing that Germany and Japan were allied, the US was much more justified in entering the war, and gained much more sympathy. Whether the US should have entered the war before or not is a matter of debate. The Japan attack was somewhat unrelated, but it did squeeze the US in the uncomfortable position of being sqeezed from both sides, by countries who were known to be allied. Germany alone probably didn't pose much threat.


russ_watters said:
Clarification: he didn't support Al Queda - his support for other Arab terrorist organizations was quite well documented.
Thanks for the link.
 
  • #30
russ_watters
Mentor
19,856
6,276
vanesch said:
The US is also quite open about the award of money for Iraels (non-suicide) bombers...
So?
First of all, whether you call the Palestinian action groups "terrorists" or "patriot resistance fighters" is a matter of point of view.
Only if you reject the existence of an objective definition of "terrorism." I'll grant you, though, that it appears the supporters of terrorists do exactly that. I'm more precise with my word usage - as is the law.

tumor, clearly, rational debate is not possible with you on this subject. I have no response for those posts.
 
  • #31
vanesch
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
5,028
16
russ_watters said:
So? Only if you reject the existence of an objective definition of "terrorism." I'll grant you, though, that it appears the supporters of terrorists do exactly that. I'm more precise with my word usage - as is the law.
Well, terrorists attack civilian targets of a country to establish terror within the population, as a means of realising their political agenda.
Resistance fighters are a non-formal army which fights the nation which occupies/attacks their people/nation/...
Palestinians do both: they attack the civil population of Israel, but their political agenda is the liberation of their people from Israeli occupation. This is something completely different, as, say, the Communist Cells who bombed subway stations and supermarkets in Western Europe in the 80-ies in order to establish a communist agenda (and were actually a small group of deluded individuals).
Now, I know very well that in recent history, the Palestinians didn't do "the right thing", which is: accept to live as respected second-class civilians in another country, namely Israel.
And I know that the violence has escaladed between the two communities, without it being possible to indicate which one is right, and which one is wrong. But you have kids throwing rocks at tanks, airplanes bombing tent camps, ... This is mistreating a whole population. If you're born as a Palestinian kid, the future isn't very bright for you, and you shouldn't be surprised that the only thing such a kid, when it is 17 years old, desires, is to kill off jews and doesn't mind dying in doing so. This is not a "political ideal" he tries to impose upon the terrified Israeli population ; it is revenge for what has been done to his people. So is that a bad bad terrorist, or someone who fights a hopeless fight for his people ? It is not so clear.
That doesn't mean that I agree with blowing up busses and so on. But what else can they do ? What's the perspective of the life of a "good Palestinian" ?
 
  • #32
356
3
Tumor it's MI5 not M15 (which might be a rifle)
 
  • #33
Gonzolo
MI5 : Military Intelligence 5, which is actually a civilian organisation (like CIA).

I think MI6 is the actual military version.
 

Related Threads on This is an opportunity to strike Iraq - Don Rumsfeld, 911

  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
66
Views
7K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
3K
Top