What do al-quieda actually want?
- Thread starter julian2002
- Start date
julian2002
Muper Soderator
merlin,
playing devils advocate here are your views based on the obviously biased western reporting? if so are you not just being manipulated? of course the same could be said of those unfortunates (from our point of view) who are duped into strapping 50 kilos of c4 to themselves and walking onto a crowded bus.
i origionally asked the question because the initial response to the horror of 11/9 (i refuse to go american with the date - sorry) was to bomb the crap out of another country - little or no discussion or diplomacy just a knee jerk reaction.
the situation in iraq is slightly more complex as iraq was in breach of numerous un resolutions and was willfully obstructing the search for wmd. from a human rights point of view i'm in favour of the removal of saddam however i think the aftermath has been handled horribly and it's plain that the seeds of the next war are being sown there, wether willfully or through incompetance i don;t know though.
all this talk about jesus too, if everyone followed his main message (and bhuddas, mohomet's, et al) of 'be nice to each other' the world would be a much nicer place. i'm not a particualrly religeous person but i do agree with that.
cheers
julian
playing devils advocate here are your views based on the obviously biased western reporting? if so are you not just being manipulated? of course the same could be said of those unfortunates (from our point of view) who are duped into strapping 50 kilos of c4 to themselves and walking onto a crowded bus.
i origionally asked the question because the initial response to the horror of 11/9 (i refuse to go american with the date - sorry) was to bomb the crap out of another country - little or no discussion or diplomacy just a knee jerk reaction.
the situation in iraq is slightly more complex as iraq was in breach of numerous un resolutions and was willfully obstructing the search for wmd. from a human rights point of view i'm in favour of the removal of saddam however i think the aftermath has been handled horribly and it's plain that the seeds of the next war are being sown there, wether willfully or through incompetance i don;t know though.
all this talk about jesus too, if everyone followed his main message (and bhuddas, mohomet's, et al) of 'be nice to each other' the world would be a much nicer place. i'm not a particualrly religeous person but i do agree with that.
cheers
julian
Dev
Moderator
Hi Julian,
I (along with millions others) don't believe 9/11 had anything to do with Iraq or Saddam Hussein except provide Bush with an excuse to invade Iraq. I just find the phrase war on terror laughable. In my view Bush IS the terror. How can someone like him become the President of the most powerful country in the world? That is what I find terrifying.
Tones has, as always, posted some very thought provoking comments. I'd like to ask just one simple question though. Why did no one protest when certain Islamic states (such as Indonesia) were committing attrocities against non-muslims, forcing them to convert to Islam?
I (along with millions others) don't believe 9/11 had anything to do with Iraq or Saddam Hussein except provide Bush with an excuse to invade Iraq. I just find the phrase war on terror laughable. In my view Bush IS the terror. How can someone like him become the President of the most powerful country in the world? That is what I find terrifying.
Tones has, as always, posted some very thought provoking comments. I'd like to ask just one simple question though. Why did no one protest when certain Islamic states (such as Indonesia) were committing attrocities against non-muslims, forcing them to convert to Islam?
Julian,
I apreciate my comments may cause offence (nothing new there!), but having spent many years looking for solutions, I really cannot see one. And I'm not taking sides, so please don't take my comments as being anti Muslim.
To debate the issue is likely to cause further offence, it is very easy to be misconstrued over the internet, so if you don't mind I will leave any further discourse for face to face conversation.
I apreciate my comments may cause offence (nothing new there!), but having spent many years looking for solutions, I really cannot see one. And I'm not taking sides, so please don't take my comments as being anti Muslim.
To debate the issue is likely to cause further offence, it is very easy to be misconstrued over the internet, so if you don't mind I will leave any further discourse for face to face conversation.
I agree with that. Bush is an idiot. He'll be ousted at the next presidential election, that I have no doubt. He and bliar have made themselves look foolish over that. All they have done is unsettled the whole country, and that has cost the taxpayer thousands, and for what?
Bob McC
living the life of Riley
What do al-quieda actually want?
Someone to spell their name right perhaps?
Bob
Someone to spell their name right perhaps?
Bob
Lt Cdr Data
om
I can see where merlin is coming from, wipe everyone out, would solve one problem, but lots of innocents would also die.
And that is precisely what they are fighting for, to stop the west wanting to wipe them out.
Al-quaeda don't seem to have a discernable agenda. they just seem to want to kill people who don't give 2 hoots as to what they do, who don't know them, don't have anything against them.
they kill women, children, fathers, muslims, christians, everyone without reason, just cos they want to. Some of them appear to be normal people, too. And what does it achieve?, just broken lives. pain, suffering. It won't get them what they want, if anything.
What is the right punishment for 200 lives gone for ever? how can you give justice? maybe torture is right for these sub human creatures.harsh words, if there is no heaven, no hell, no punishment, thats it, end 200 peoples lives, hopes dreams....sad beyond words
bizarrely, they think they will get 12 virgins in heaven for killing people. Innocent people not opposed to them, muslims, too.
They are truly backward, and deserve to be strung up in the centre of Madrid to let the people at them.
Cowards, too, slinging bomb vests on people who could be taken up in the moment, and then remotely detonate them from a safe distance. they should do the job themselves.
Blair could look really isolated if Bush goes...
And that is precisely what they are fighting for, to stop the west wanting to wipe them out.
Al-quaeda don't seem to have a discernable agenda. they just seem to want to kill people who don't give 2 hoots as to what they do, who don't know them, don't have anything against them.
they kill women, children, fathers, muslims, christians, everyone without reason, just cos they want to. Some of them appear to be normal people, too. And what does it achieve?, just broken lives. pain, suffering. It won't get them what they want, if anything.
What is the right punishment for 200 lives gone for ever? how can you give justice? maybe torture is right for these sub human creatures.harsh words, if there is no heaven, no hell, no punishment, thats it, end 200 peoples lives, hopes dreams....sad beyond words
bizarrely, they think they will get 12 virgins in heaven for killing people. Innocent people not opposed to them, muslims, too.
They are truly backward, and deserve to be strung up in the centre of Madrid to let the people at them.
Cowards, too, slinging bomb vests on people who could be taken up in the moment, and then remotely detonate them from a safe distance. they should do the job themselves.
Blair could look really isolated if Bush goes...
Last edited by a moderator:
TonyL
Club Krautrock Plinque
Don't loose sight of the fact that the Iraqi civilian death toll at the hands of the US coalition is currently well over 10,000, and I hate to think how many people died in Afghanistan. In the terror stakes George Bush makes Al-Qaeda look like small fry.
Tony.
joel
Shaman of Signals
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2003
- Messages
- 1,650
- Reaction score
- 0
Well, that isn't true. Bin Laden was "best mates" with the evil thugs who ran Afghanistan for several years (helped into power by the West in the "battle" with Communism, of course). These were the people, let's not forget, who turned beheading, death by firing squad and ritual mutilation into a national sport - in fact the only sport.
In any case, Saddam Hussein beat everyone else into a cocked hat in terms of sheer terror.
This is the 10th anniversary of the Hutu massacre in Rwanda. An event we in the West sat back and did nothing about, except try to negotiate a "ceasefire" for...
Reading some of the posts in this thread reminds me of how easy it is to slip into the comforting simplicities of bloody barbarity - from the comfort of the armchair perhaps, but all things, good or bad start from an idea.
tones
compulsive cantater
Dev, did they actually do this? I ask because I have never heard of this (but then I've never heard lots of things). Indonesia is the world's largest Moslem country, but the country is basically secular in government. One of its main tourist attractions, the island of Bali, is, I believe, Hindu, and remains thus. And no matter what atrocities the Indonesian Army perpetrated in East Timor, one of them was not trying to convert the locals from Roman Catholicism.
Malaysia is ardently and officially Moslem - it is a crime to try to convert a Moslem. However, it is not a crime to be other than a Moslem, and there are substantial minorities of other religions in Malaysia. Islam is basically a tolerant religion, as is Christianity, but unfortunately one-eyed fanatics with an exclusive knowledge of the truth are the same everywhere.
Having said that, there have been instances of forced conversions, e.g. in Africa (e.g., Sudan), but this is exceptional, to the best of my (little) knowledge.
Last edited by a moderator:
sideshowbob
Trisha
There is some evidence of this, but not state-sponsored (in fact, quite the opposite to the best of my knowledge).
-- Ian
Dev
Moderator
I could have worded that a lot better. Malaysia and Indonesia were multi religious not that long ago with large Hindu and Buddist population. As far as I know in Indonesia there were cases of forced conversions and/or preferential treatment for Muslims, which indirectly forced even more people to convert. Afghanistan is another example of driving out other religions. However Iran and Iraq are good examples of how the general Muslim population is tolerant of other faiths. Perhaps not lately after the war!, but in the past I've known people from these countries and they were very friendly.
Dare I point out how laws are biased against non-Muslims in some of the middle eastern countries?
However, my point was that yes, any anti Al-Quida (however it's spelt!) comment is taken as anti Islam when it's not meant to be, but when any atrocity is committed in the name of Islam, it is not condemned as forcefully.
Dare I point out how laws are biased against non-Muslims in some of the middle eastern countries?
However, my point was that yes, any anti Al-Quida (however it's spelt!) comment is taken as anti Islam when it's not meant to be, but when any atrocity is committed in the name of Islam, it is not condemned as forcefully.
Last edited by a moderator:
Lt Cdr Data
om
10,000 sounds far too high for me.
The difference is that one would hope the allies don't aim to get civilian casualties, and express regret when they do, the terrorists do aim to kill just for the sake of it.
If bush is a terrorist of any kind, he is covert and not a 'direct killer', more as a byproduct.
Its a matter of intent. There is a difference.
Something in the paper made me laugh the other day, a council is not putting back the statue of a pig for fear its going to offend muslims!!
Try asking a muslim government not to put up a statue, see what response you would get!!
I was in Cairo not long ago, and heard the Muslim call to prayer, if I found it non compatible with my religion, I wouldn't dream of telling them what to do, that is their way, and I accpet and tolerate that.
The extremes of political correctness. It all has to be both ways equal.
One of the solutions is that the Imams and clerics have to speak out and preach peace and tolerance, as their followers treat them with godlike status.
The difference is that one would hope the allies don't aim to get civilian casualties, and express regret when they do, the terrorists do aim to kill just for the sake of it.
If bush is a terrorist of any kind, he is covert and not a 'direct killer', more as a byproduct.
Its a matter of intent. There is a difference.
Something in the paper made me laugh the other day, a council is not putting back the statue of a pig for fear its going to offend muslims!!
Try asking a muslim government not to put up a statue, see what response you would get!!
I was in Cairo not long ago, and heard the Muslim call to prayer, if I found it non compatible with my religion, I wouldn't dream of telling them what to do, that is their way, and I accpet and tolerate that.
The extremes of political correctness. It all has to be both ways equal.
One of the solutions is that the Imams and clerics have to speak out and preach peace and tolerance, as their followers treat them with godlike status.
Last edited by a moderator:
sideshowbob
Trisha
Having just finished reading Dick Clarke's book, it's very obvious that the al Qaeda threat was ignored for many years. Clarke suggests that this is evidence that the US administation under-estimated them, but the fact is that they were largely an irrelevancy for a long time - a small group of violent fanatics, yes, but with minimal support amongst the wider Muslim world.
What's changed that? Why do al Qaeda appear as freedom fighters to large numbers of Muslims who wouldn't themselves commit acts of violence?
The answer is politics. Palestine, Afghanistan, and, now, the stupid Iraq war. If you want to inflame a holy war between Muslims and non-Muslims, you do what Bush did, and invade Iraq (a country that, as Clarke makes clear, the administration knew offered no terrorist threat to the US), instead of concentrating on stabilising Afghanistan.
Violent lunatics will always exist, in a tiny minority, whether they be Christian lunatics like the Oklahoma bombers, or Muslim lunatics like al Qaeda. The lunatics only gain genuinely popular support when the political issues that cause disquiet are left unresolved. Sort out those issues equitably, and the popular base for al Qaeda will melt away.
-- Ian
What's changed that? Why do al Qaeda appear as freedom fighters to large numbers of Muslims who wouldn't themselves commit acts of violence?
The answer is politics. Palestine, Afghanistan, and, now, the stupid Iraq war. If you want to inflame a holy war between Muslims and non-Muslims, you do what Bush did, and invade Iraq (a country that, as Clarke makes clear, the administration knew offered no terrorist threat to the US), instead of concentrating on stabilising Afghanistan.
Violent lunatics will always exist, in a tiny minority, whether they be Christian lunatics like the Oklahoma bombers, or Muslim lunatics like al Qaeda. The lunatics only gain genuinely popular support when the political issues that cause disquiet are left unresolved. Sort out those issues equitably, and the popular base for al Qaeda will melt away.
-- Ian
Last edited by a moderator:
Forgive me for jumping in on a thread here, but unless I'm mistaken, didn't the CPA launch a Hellfire missile from helicopter gunships into a Mosque during prayer-time yesterday? Regardless as to whatever actions 'provoked' this response from the CPA, a Hellfire rocket is anything but discriminate in it's killing abilities.
Again, apologies for jumping in on the thread but thought this little published fact might be of interest.
All the best,
Goomer.
Lt Cdr Data
om
The difference is that in Iraq a lot of the Muslims are wrongly attributing it as an Imperialist occupation by a hostile force to Islam, whereas its not that at all.
They just want to fight and kill, Iraq will be rightly returned to its people presently.
Its not as thought we are trying to stamp out Islam there, rape and butcher its women, and kill all the children, although, I accept regrettably it does happen.
As to the assassination of terrorist leaders, I do have sympathy for it in the sense that these people are causing death to innocents ordering attacks, you are under threat, you have to retailate and defend yourself. If someone is attacking you, you take out the 'brains' that's military strategy.
incidentally, it is horribly wrong to be in someone else's country, and kill their innocent people. No wonder some of them hate it.
Though it could be worse if there was ciil war, alas, sometimes we can not choose between evils.
They just want to fight and kill, Iraq will be rightly returned to its people presently.
Its not as thought we are trying to stamp out Islam there, rape and butcher its women, and kill all the children, although, I accept regrettably it does happen.
As to the assassination of terrorist leaders, I do have sympathy for it in the sense that these people are causing death to innocents ordering attacks, you are under threat, you have to retailate and defend yourself. If someone is attacking you, you take out the 'brains' that's military strategy.
incidentally, it is horribly wrong to be in someone else's country, and kill their innocent people. No wonder some of them hate it.
Though it could be worse if there was ciil war, alas, sometimes we can not choose between evils.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry, Data, I wasn't referring to Israel, but to helicopter attacks by the CPA in Falluja yesterday. The report of the Hellfire rocket launch on the mosque there came from a US journalist being interviewed live from Falluja on 'PM' yesterday. His tone of voice, when speaking of the use of this rocket, can only be described, to my ears at least, as incredulous.
All the best,
Goomer.
