US image worsens

*Originally posted by Rashak Mani *
For people in Iraq and Afghanistan and many other places the USA has meddled the images of death and destruction are different from what you saw in 9/11 ? They are being killed and maimed just the same… or their lives arent worth much ?

I’m sure you are aware that the USA actively works to minimize civilian damage. The pack of fools that we are fighting does not. This is a war, and people will die (duh). As an example, a high percentage of the bombs we dropped over Iraq, were so called smart bombs. We could have opted for the cheap way out, and dropped %100 “dumb” bombs, but since we are a sincere, caring people, we didn’t. A war has been declared on us, and we will fight back, destroy the enemies, and win, as usual.

The USA and Israel have absolutely nothing to do with the dour economic and political situation your complaining about ? They have by no means done anything to interfere ?

Well, Israel merely “exists”, which in itself is a great cause of hatred in that primitive part of the world. I place the blame on the brainwashed idiots who engage in their hateful ways.

And I’ve never said that the US has never made any mistakes or bad choices in the past, all countries have.

But, if somebody is looking for a war, then they will certainly get one.
:smiley:

You disregard too lightly the suffering caused . You dismiss it like its just a detail.... lives and livelihood being but smallish things in a global revenge scheme. The USA dropped heavy bombs in civilian areas in Baghdad... technology or not civilians get killed. Making euphemisms like "collateral damage" and compassionate killing wont change that. 

Israel doesnt merely exist... it was created in 1947. It has been maintained and financed heavily by the US for decades. Once again you dismiss the causes of said "war"... are US lives to be sacrificed for Israel ? Israel freely bombs their neighbors and Bush supports them with american blood and dollars ? You speak of hateful ways... and I see americans acting in revengeful ways. Not much difference. Is it pride your defending or your country or Israel ? 

If the US feels so superior... why are they acting in knee jerk ways ? Why do they so easily dismiss diplomacy and so easily engage in military means ? Is militarism the mark of a superior civilization ? Might is right ?

Roosvelt talked of speaking softly and carrying a big stick... Bush speaks loudly and just keeps using that big stick. Which of these do you think is a better man ?

The USA should be way better than this.... and it was...

We are at war, diplomacy is a waste of time until the enemy capitulates fully, then we can talk. Last I heard, the enemy has not capitulated, therefore we will continue with the war, until they have all capitulated or until they are all dead/out of commission.

The USA is doing exactly the right thing, imo, however not as much as I’d like to see done, but there’s always tommorow.

:smiley:

Smilies and all… are you sure this is a “war” ? Do you see troops marching your way ? This isnt a war by any regular means. Do you think that if the police formed an army and marched into gangland that drugs wouldnt be sold anymore ?

How hard is it too see that any diplomacy is better than none. Or do you think the great powers of the past never did any diplomacy ? Last I heard even in real wars its good to have allies…

We have many allies, which is evidenced by all the countries which have supported us in Afghanistan & Iraq, not to mention the support which we have with from countries across the globe, in wiping out and eliminating the terrorist scum.

There are certain countries who do not really support us, and that is their perrogative. They shouldn’t expect our help, if they were ever to need it, as that is our perrogative also.

I never said having allies is not a good thing, but if the effect of having certain allies, is actually dampening your own efforts in fighting the war, then those sort of “allies” are not needed.

The smilie you put in my quote was your own fabrication. I didn’t have any yellow smilie, or any smile at all at the end of that sentence.

Daisy Cutter:

Well, even if most of us “only” saw 9/11 on a TV screen, that doesn’t make it any less real, or make it have any less of an emotional impact. I may live in Chicago, but my father and stepmother both work just across the bridge, in Brooklyn, and had WTC debris raining down on them that day. They both commute every morning underneath the WTC, on the subway, and saw the columns of people streaming across the bridge on foot as they tried to get home afterward, and were calling me in a panic, as they weren’t immediately able to locate my then-12-year-old brother because of erratic telephone service. It took a good few days before I was able to account for all friends and loved ones in the area.

Dad, as part of his job, was required to be on-site at the WTC after the first bombing; he is one of the people responsible for making sure the subways are running again as soon as possible. Close college friends of mine work across the street from the WTC, in the AMEX building, and a couple of blocks away; one of them saw the planes hit while rushing to work. As an NYU alum, my graduating class lost a number of people. As soon as I knew my father was safe, I ran downtown again to donate blood (and spent the next two days lying half-conscious on the couch, remembering why I don’t donate blood anymore). So please cut the sanctimonious bullshit that if we weren’t personally killed or injured, we aren’t allowed to have an opinion about 9/11.

And who, exactly, is “the enemy” in your view? All Muslims? All Iraqis and Afghans, Muslim or not? Kill ‘em all and let God sort ’em out? Who is the mysterious “they” who have “triggered a war”? Hint: look in the mirror.

The government report was written after some field work, polls and thinking by a bunch of pretty competent and intelligent people and they come to conclusions diametrically opposed to Daisy Cutter. That should tell you something.

And the lies continue.

So, Saddam was going to give the WMD which he didn’t have to terrorists and he could, one day, may be, conceivably, possibly have done something awful. The lies continue and it is not that the Muslims of the world are not buying them, it is that the American public is not buying them either and so, the White House tries a new “public relations” campaign. Maybe they should try to stop the lying.

Well, I could have gone to see Rice in person…I’m glad I didn’t waste the time and money.

You can read her full remarks (and lots of other interesting stuff) at:

http://www.globalchicago.org/reports/reports_ccfr.asp

The overwhelming historical evidence is that military action against sovereign nations, occuption by lethal force, and a system to crush any opposing philosophy, are the things which create terrorism.

I don’t know what’s more sad, people who blindly believe in a government that kills to impose it’s doctrine on other nations, or people who believe that they have “allies” even as a huge preponderance of evidence proves otherwise. Perhaps the most sad is the self-important way we view human life as ong as it’s outside our “gated community”.

How would you feel if I were to refer to the victims of 9/11 as “collateral damage from a surgical strike?” I mean, after all, only two devices were used, they achieved their objective, and less people died on that day than during the Iraq invasion. Much less unintended damage occurred, and the consequences were staggering. In the context of a war against corruption, as is the stated ideology behind the Islam extremist movement, what is 3,000 lives compared to countless tens of thousands ruined or ended by centuries of military domination? It’s “collateral damage” by definition, only we tend to resent that particular phrase when the “collateral” is our families instead of some “would-be terrorist”. Any justification that we can use to strike pre-emptively against another nation, based on our indoctrinated belief that they pose a danger to us, can surely be used by our “enemy” in the same context. In a sense, our pre-emption is all the proof they need.

Throughout the last few decades, it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that various American (yes, and MANY other)administrations have overtly and covertly supported criminal and terrorist activity resulting in thousands of innocent lives being lost. This isn’t in question, but the “justifications” for it always are.

America is becoming the most feared nation on the planet…not the most respected. If you can’t see the signifigance of that detail then perhaps it is time for this particular empire to go the way of the dodo. Don’t worry, the collapse always comes from within… America’s end won’t be military, it’ll just litigate itself out of existence.

I’m way more terrified of the recent revelation of an underlying elitist and fascist mentality in the US than I am of any other singular ideological trait. Last night on an informal American BBS I first hear the word “extermination” applied as a possible solution to anti-Americanism. Now what final solution does that remind you of and how does this philosophy differ from Germany in the late 30’s? The disturbing part was that the notion of final solution wasn’t expunged from the debate. It was considered as being as valid as any of the other viewpoints.

Does the fact that any of us have expensive weaponry to use in conquest, or the fact that we are seemingly blinded by a slobbering sycophantic media complex somehow immunize us against the reality of uncountable innocent deaths at ANY of our nations’ hands? Nope.

Blood stains American hands just as it does any other militaristic empire’s hands. It would appear that there is a surplus of affordable rose-colored glasses available, however, in the USA, so perhaps the blood isn’t as visible. Why don’t you stamp out the vermin in your midst before crying foul at other nations?

You beat an innocent nation near to death, poisoned it, and now you’re raping what’s left of the corpse. If there are any people in that nation or from that nation capable of striking back at innocent American lives, I can honestly say I wouldn’t blame them.
They would only be repaying in kind. America started this one by using 9/11 as an excuse, don’t forget that. You could have gone after the perps, but instead you went after fresh meat for Exxon. No rhetoric will change that, and not even the mighty American media can erase it.

The main enemy are the islamic terrorists and their supporters. I could care less how many there are of them out there. They are wrong, they are evil, and they will be defeated, and they deserve to die. And I don’t care if they are muslim or not. There’s good muslims around, and there are evil ones around, just like in every other faith. In WW2, our main enemies happened to be German, Japanese etc. That didn’t stop us from killing them and defeating them. It appears that in 2003, our main enemies happen to be islamic terrorists, and they will also be defeated/killed, just like their evil counterparts in WW2.

And I don’t quite get your “look in the mirror” comment. So bin laden didn’t like American troops stationed in Suadi Arabia, so he murders thousands of American civilians ? Big deal, who gives a rats ass about what that mass murdering idiot thinks. The only solution to deal with those kind of people, is exactly what we are doing now. Hunt them down and kill/capture them.

Our foreign policy will not be dictated to us by a bunch of goons sleeping in caves. Nor will we be blackmailed by anybody or any other country. The terrorists believe that they can intimidate people with their primitive methods, though it is quite the opposite. They are the ones currently hiding, probably wetting their pants, while we are seeking them out, so that they may meet our form for American justice. A daisy cutter dropped on their heads is a good form for justice.

:stuck_out_tongue:

This is a spiral of confrontation which can only escalate unless it is defused. Look at the Israeli - Palestinian conflict. It is the same dinamic and look where it’s going. Kill the terrorists and a few sympathisers and bystanders for good measure. . . and you are just making more terrorists. That is what’s happening in the Muslim world.

The allegations may be true or not but the fact is that Iraqis will believe them before they believe in the goodness of the Americans.

Sailor, that mosque incident which you speak of changes nothing.

That imam dude, who got taken into custody was alleged to have stored illegal weapons, so who cares what his 2000 or so followers believe ? They are wrong. If the allegations are correct (Which they probably are. I believe the US military before I will believe a bunch of religiously, misguided people), then those 2000 followers are in the wrong, and they should get their act together quickly. Of course there are going to be some disgruntled, misguided people along the way. Hopefully, they will change their ways, for their own good.

I also think the conflict will escalate, as a matter of fact I see no other solution. I want the conflict to escalate, something I have made clear in my postings. Things will get uglier before they get prettier. That is the nature of war, and this war is far from over. When the enemy capitulates, the war will be over, not before.

And right there, you’ve confirmed why I believe you don’t get it. For 40 years after 1940 the USA played a global chess game with the USSR during the Cold War by propping up US sponsored “spots” to counter Soviet sponsored spots. Even Iraq herself was a target of such efforts with the CIA propping up shitty regimes in both Iraq and Iran during the 1950’s and 1960’s.

In no small way, THAT is what’s coming back to bite you on the ass now in 2003. It’s not happening because those guys just got bored and decided to start punching the USA in the nose for something to do. It’s the end result of years of foolish meddling.

And that, there, exemplifies the inherent ignorance in your position. How, in all honesty, do you think Israel manages to continue existing? Just how many times in the last 35 years has the USA used her power of veto in the UN to quash resolutions which would have forced Israel to change her behavior? By extension, the USA has now become a valid target BECAUSE of her continued support of Israel. And Israel has continued to make some very dubious decisions this past 20 years.

The nature of this fight is such that guerilla tactics will increasingly be taken to you, not just in the Middle East. In time, we’ll start seeing suicide bombers walking onto buses in downtown New York. And suicide bombers walking into crowded restaurants in Times Square on Saturday nights.

Daisy Cutter? When that happens, you can scream and rant and huff and puff all you want about crushing “them” with all your bombs and all your “military might” - but if Britain learnt one lesson out of the IRA bombing campaign in the 1970’s - it’s this. Eventually, you’re gonna have to get off your high horse and negotiate. Eventually, people like you are gonna have to actually make an effort and look beyond the nice comfy Monday Night Football telecasts and actually soak up all the meddling and double standards which the USA has foolsihly bought into in faraway lands this past 50 years.

Because slowly, increasingly, the fight is being taken to you - on US soil, and 9/11 is sadly, only the opening salvo. For years now, the US has reneged on agreements - even something as simple as reneging on a textiles free trade agreement with Pakistan after the Afghanistan invasion is the sort of stuff I’m talking about. It’s a blatant case of the world’s remaining superpower foolishly partaking in a sustained display of “Do as I say, not as I do…”

Now you can respond with “N’yah N’yah - big deal - we can get away with coz we’re Number One!” - but ultimately, you won’t get away with it. The suicide bombers will start coming to US streets - not just Tel Aviv.

*Originally posted by Boo Boo Foo *
And right there, you’ve confirmed why I believe you don’t get it. For 40 years after 1940 the USA played a global chess game with the USSR during the Cold War by propping up US sponsored “spots” to counter Soviet sponsored spots. Even Iraq herself was a target of such efforts with the CIA propping up shitty regimes in both Iraq and Iran during the 1950’s and 1960’s.

Well, I am aware of something called the cold war. USSR at that time = evil. USA = good. We weren’t the ones starving out whole cities, or erecting walls, and confiscating other countries. We were doing it to stop a very legitimate threat. For decades, our forces have protected Western Europe from the commie threat, just like our forces in South Korea are protecting those people, from the threat to their north. There is no doubt that our presence in Western Europe has served as a deterrance against the formerly evil regime known as the soviet union. Today, they are basically our allies, and on our side in this war.

In no small way, THAT is what’s coming back to bite you on the ass now in 2003. It’s not happening because those guys just got bored and decided to start punching the USA in the nose for something to do. It’s the end result of years of foolish meddling.

Yes, damned if you do, damned if you don’t. The USA will get criticized regardless, either for medling too much, or for inaction, depending upon the situation. Had most of Europe today been under communist control, things would look very different in the world, I would assume.

**And that, there, exemplifies the inherent ignorance in your position. How, in all honesty, do you think Israel manages to continue existing? **

Israel exists because of one main reason. They are stronger than their enemies, which have time and time sought out destruction of that state. These enemies have also, time and time again, gotten their asses kicked. These enemies still seek destruction of the state of Israel. USA sides with Israel because - Israel = good - - - - enemies of Israel = evil simple as that.

The nature of this fight is such that guerilla tactics will increasingly be taken to you, not just in the Middle East. In time, we’ll start seeing suicide bombers walking onto buses in downtown New York. And suicide bombers walking into crowded restaurants in Times Square on Saturday nights.

If this happens, which is not at all unlikely, then we will deal with it, when the time comes. If it happens in any widespread, significant form, than something ala the japanese internment camps in ww2 might be a good idea.

But you’re still not recognising the core issue Daisy Cutter. You’re not adressing the “why it would happen”. You seem to have this belief that actions are taking place in the Middle East and in Indonesia and South East Asia in isolation - as though they’re coming out of nowhere.

The core issue is inequity. The core issue is injustice, and allowing endemic poverty and corruption and a lack of human rights to propagate itself in places where the bitter militantism finds it’s most fertile soil.

To combat such militantism with purely a reactive military response does nothing to address the root causes. And those root causes are amplified by such statements like yours which would argue that the billions of people out there who have shitty lives are resigned to them having to put up with their fate - whilst ignoring that those same people look to people like yourself as living the high life while they live in pure shit.

Ultimately, fixing the inequity of wealth in this world is the true fight to take one. Not internment. Your position is purely a reactive one, and it does nothing to understand, let alone fix, the “why?”.

When I look around, I see both people who are far richer than I am, along with people who are also poorer than I am. Such is life.

These people who you speak of, which are poor, are in that circumstance, because of their ridiculous, corrupt, fundamentalist, overly restrictive societies, which preach hatred and intolerance. They will always remain poor, as long as their governments are a primitive joke. Doesn’t take an Einstein to figure that one out. If they are smart, they will eventually revolt or whatever, but their situation will not improve as long as those backwards governments are in place. I’d like to see most of the arab world toppled, as far as governements are concerned. Of course, introducing a “democratic”, economically successful government, doesn’t really seem to be what many people want either. (see Iraq) So, which is it ? Do they want to live miserable lives under restrictive governments, or do they want to join the modern world. They can’t have it both ways really. “Boohoo, I’m so poor, and I live in a dirt hut, but I still would like to live under a brutal dictatorship, and I don’t want anything to do with the capitalism coming from the great satan, which will improve my quality of life” :stuck_out_tongue:

Also, the poor argument doesn’t really fly, as I previously stated. The terrorists are often privilged, and involved in higher education.

Anyhow, no matter how poor one is, it doesn’t give anybody the right to resort to massmurdering a bunch of innocents. Bin laden, now there’s a real poor fellow.

:dubious:

Nonetheless, you’ve confirmed how little you’re prepared to accomodate the reality of this world in which we live. You see, ultimately those poor downtrodden masses who you speak so contemptuously of, they blame the likes of YOU for their lot in life. They blame YOU for sponsoring Israel. They blame YOU for keeping the Middle East in the state that it is. They blame YOU for trying to stifle Islam. They blame YOU for making the world a heathen, immoral, corrupt world.

And it doesn’t matter what the truth is, what counts is the perception. And in those countries where all the militants are ramping up their battle plans, the perception is what counts. You can argue on this messageboard how “righteous” your position is - but the end game is to remove the fertile soil for the bitterness - and that’s what you’re failing to address.

By merely looking upon those in life who are less fortunate than yourself with nothing but contempt, you are inadvertently propagating the endless cycle. By consciously choosing to dismiss what the people in these countries think, you’re simply inviting further and further attacks until the point is finally rammed home - namely, stop exploiting the rest of the world and giving very little back. That’s their point. It doesn’t matter if their point is a mistruth, what counts is that it’s the propaganda which is ALREADY goind down in those parts of the world.

By reacting to their actions militarily, you’re hoping (rather foolishly) that the propaganda will stop - and it won’t.

The reality is that we (all of us in the Western World - not just you Americans alone) have to stop the propaganda to stop the militant actions - not the other way around. But that requires a very healthy sense of magnanimity - a quality which doesn’t come easily to most people.

Well, we will just have to disagree I suppose.

I do think right/wrong are relevant to the issues at hand. The propaganda comes from those very same governments that those very people live under. If those misinformed/brainwashed people choose to act out their hatred against the west, instead of their own corrupt regimes, then it is our right and duty to act against this.

We will obviously not continue to allow terrorist supporting, backwards countries to wage war against the west, while we sit back and pretend that there is little we can do about it. There is plenty we can do, which is evidenced by our recent excursions into a few countries. More countries will follow soon, I hope.

So, if you agree that these people are in the wrong, and there is a terrible propaganda going on, which is misleading these people, then I would assume that you would agree with me, that we must do everything we can to topple these regimes, and replace them with modern, democratic regimes ?

I’d agree that that the environment for manipulating human misery the wrong way has to change - certainly. But I would counsel against the “toppling” option - simply because the old philosophy about winning friends and influencing people argues that a far more long lasting result is achieved by convincing someone that they should WANT to do what you’d like - as averse to forcing them to do it.

To this end, every Western country has the right to defend itself - that’s a given. But it’s also in OUR interests to raise the living standards, and the overall prospects for prosperity amongst the shitholes of this world - because ultimately we’ll have friends in those places who’ll respect us, which is much more preferable than having enemies who wish to get even.

Hence, it’s my considered opinion that the forces for change should be brokered somewhat similar to seeing a planted seed develop into a fully grown tree. In many respects, toppling a regime brings so much acrimony with it that the potential for building a better society is also destroyed along with the regime.

So, to slowly work towards helping a given society evolve into the sort of place you’d like them to be is probably more preferable.

But there’s something else too. Take Australia’s relationship with Pakistan for instance. We regularly play international cricket fixtures with the Paki’s and those guys just love their cricket - they’re nuts about it. As a result, there’s a certain begrudging warmth and respect that the Pakistani population has towards both England and Australia.

One of the the problems that the USA has is that she is so disconnected from the rest of the world at a cultural level. Sporting contact is an incredibly important thing. It allows nation states to peacefully enter into combat without anyone getting hurt - and most importantly, it expedites a channel of communication.

Australia, and a lot of countires similar to Australia play a shitload of regular sporting contests with other nation states from all around the world over a wide range of sports - and an awful lot of dialogue and common goodwill engenders from such things.

The USA is very detached from the world at a sporting level. If you weren’t so detached, you’d be surprised how much warmer your countrymen would be received on many occasions.