Turkey

[Darth Cypher]

Ok, so because I support the War on Terrorism and am serving my country to do my part, I'm not a decent soldier? Well, if I go to war and make it back I'll remember to shield my face from the spit like what happened in Vietnam.

ANYHOW, about Afganistan. Bush made no false statements and told the truth that it would be a long, drawn out war/process to fight and root out terrorism. You have to remember, this war is not a conventional war like in open fields or urban combat or whatever. These are people who do not wear uniforms to establish thier affilition. They can pose as a normal civilian. These people blend in with the normal populace, even in our own borders too. Thier accounts are frozen too making it difficult to fund thier operations.

bin laden is in hidding and is pressed to carry out many if any terrorist attacks. That is a step in the right direction. He has cells all over the world and the whole world is rooting them out. But it will be very hard to do that unless we jail up every single person of Arab decent and that isn't going to happen. We are literally trying to find a needle in a haystack.

[taranaki]

Originally posted by dolla_bill0913
Great Ideas, because that is the only way there will ever be peace. It only takes one person to start a war. So if everyone has to be put in jail so a war doesnt happen, then I guess so be it. You make up this stupid list of all these people you want to blame for terrorism and war, but you dont give any other options for us to avoid war. If you dont like the idea of putting threats to a peaceful world behind bars, what do you think we should do?

A stupid list?I don't think so.It quite clearly identifies Americans who have endorsed and supported terrorism,and you don't have any valid arguments to deny my point,so you choose to abuse it.

I really do like the idea of puting threats to a peaceful world behind bars.George Bush would be top of my list.However,there is no civilised juristiction on this planet that allows for pre-emptive justice.Nobody gets locked up on the basis that they might commit a crime sometime in the future.This is one of the core reasons that this war is so unpopular.If the U.S. government made a statistical analysis of serial killers and decided to detain every citizen that fitted the profile 'just in case' they turned out to be deranged,there would be an outcry.The notion that the U.S. can just invade the Middle East looking for people who might pose an unspecified threat at some unspecified place some unspecified time in the future is abhorrent to the rest of the free world.The U.S.constitution isn't worth a damn if the President won't apply its principles to ever human on the planet.

[dolla_bill0913]

I guess you never heard of sarcasim. As for your list do any of those people have any nuclear or biological weapons that they can kill millions with by just pushing a button. I dont think so. Every person on that list, has nothing to worry about because under the constitution you have the right to bear arms. Meaning guns, not missles made for mass distruction. Not to mention those people dont go around threatening other people. So like I said its a stupid list. Who would compare any of those to Saddam, sure not me.

[taranaki]

Originally posted by dolla_bill0913
I guess you never heard of sarcasim. As for your list do any of those people have any nuclear or biological weapons that they can kill millions with by just pushing a button. I dont think so. Every person on that list, has nothing to worry about because under the constitution you have the right to bear arms. Meaning guns, not missles made for mass distruction. Not to mention those people dont go around threatening other people. So like I said its a stupid list. Who would compare any of those to Saddam, sure not me.

One point at a time.
1/Yes,Ihave heard of sarcasm,and I'm intelligent enough to spell it,too.
2/Terrorism isn't ALWAYS about nuclear weapons,as demonstrated by Sept.11
3/NOBODY has come up with any evidence that Iraq is nuclear-capable.
4/"under the constitution everybody has the right to bear arms"has absolutely no relation to providing weapons and funding to terrorists operating on the other side of the world.
5/Noraid sends weapons and money to IRA terrorists who have murdered hundreds of civilians in bomb attacks,what are they,Boy Scouts?THEY ARE CRIMINALS YOU MORON!

6/If you are not prepared to compare Saddam to the list that I supplied[which is kind of stupid,because he's actually on that list],then you are not preparedacknowledge that the groups listed have been actively engaged in terrorism.Which makes you a hypocrite.

[dolla_bill0913]

Here we go: 1)sorry I spelled a word wrong, Im sure you are always perfect. 2)So what you are saying is it is ok if saddam kills a couple thousand people, as long as he doesnt do it using a nuke. 3) Just because he doesnt have an atomic bomb, doesnt mean he doesnt have nuclear weapons, ever heard of A DIRTY BOMB? 4)What does this have to do with this thread, Do you know what off topic means.5) How old are you because there is no need for name calling, come on grow up a little.6) Now lets get back to the topic, Turkey, the country that is afraid of saddam, but I dont think turkey really cares about anyone on your list. They are just afraid of saddam and thats why they came to the UN to ask for protection. Yes your list has some people that arnt :angel:'s , but they are small fish compared to someone like Saddam.

[Cbass]

Originally posted by dolla_bill0913
Remeber Turkey went to the UN looking for protection from Iraq, not the U.S.. When one country is afraid of another something is wrong. Not to mention that Iraq can be linked to terrorist, so wouldnt that make it like any other country, where terrorests are being found and arrested. Shouldnt Saddam be arrested for supporting terrorists, or is it O.K. for him to do it and noone else.

1) Turkey went to NATO, not the UN.

2) Turkey was bribed with a near $30 billion dollar package to help the US invade Iraq, and part of that help is to ask NATO to protect Turkey. Protect, fine, use Turkey as a launching point for a second front? That doesn't sound much like protection to me.

3) Iraq has NO links to terrorists. If there was any such link, Colin Powell would have flogged them before the UN, instead of coming up with grainy photographs that could have been taken in Texas, a facility run by the Kurds reported to be a chemical weapons training camp, whatever that is, and a dossier of decade old British student papers.

If you want to nail a country for supporting terrorism, look more closely at the United States, and their history of supporting terrorism to support foreign interests.

[Darth Cypher]

Please, I suppose you are going to say that the US funds the IRA too????? Think about THAT one for a minute. No links, no sources, just think about it. Why would we fund a terrorist organization that is fighting our biggest ally. If people on the internet "know" this as a "fact" then rest assured the UK knows about it. Yet, they are still our ally. Explain that one to me.

The Mujahadeen (sp?). We fought a common enemy. So what? They wanted the Russians out of thier country and we helped them out (yes, even for our own ends, it was the Cold War after all). Once again, so what? It's not like the "

yes

[Darth Cypher]

Please, I suppose you are going to say that the US funds the IRA too????? Think about THAT one for a minute. No links, no sources, just think about it. Why would we fund a terrorist organization that is fighting our biggest ally. If people on the internet "know" this as a "fact" then rest assured the UK knows about it. Yet, they are still our ally. Explain that one to me.

The Mujahadeen (sp?). We fought a common enemy. So what? They wanted the Russians out of thier country and we helped them out (yes, even for our own ends, it was the Cold War after all). Once again, so what? It's not like the tactic wasn't used against us a couple of times. But nobody complains about that one since the tactics were used against the US.

I know there are other examples out there but these are all I can think of now (can't stay online too long). If you have others, we can discuss it.

Now why would we stop terrorists, yet fight them? That makes no sense to me. Yeah, we have done some shady things but to support terrorism is stepping over the line.

But that's ok because from what I have seen from a lot of people lately is that the US SOMEHOW has gotten more "evil" than terrorists. SOMEHOW, we got switched from a superpower to "Imperialists" and terrorists somehow got switched to "freedom fighters". I know the US is not perfect but we are not as evil as people make us out to be.

And saddam has harbored international terrorists before. Once again, the deal we made with him was to fight Iran (our common enemy) and to stop harboring international terrorists. Yes, this is back in the 80s but still, he does deal with them. Not saying he is dealing with al-quada, not saying he isn't either. But given his track record, would you put it past him?

[Darth Cypher]

Sorry about the post and a half. Computer messed up.

[Cbass]

Originally posted by Darth Cypher
Please, I suppose you are going to say that the US funds the IRA too????? Think about THAT one for a minute. No links, no sources, just think about it. Why would we fund a terrorist organization that is fighting our biggest ally. If people on the internet "know" this as a "fact" then rest assured the UK knows about it. Yet, they are still our ally. Explain that one to me.

No, the US government didn't fund the IRA, an organization of US citizens did, and the FBI was aware of this.

Originally posted by Darth Cypher


The Mujahadeen (sp?). We fought a common enemy. So what? They wanted the Russians out of thier country and we helped them out (yes, even for our own ends, it was the Cold War after all). Once again, so what? It's not like the tactic wasn't used against us a couple of times. But nobody complains about that one since the tactics were used against the US.

I don't think ithis is really relative to the discussion here, other than the fact that the Mujahadeen were freedom fighters against the Russians, and terrorists against the US.

Originally posted by Darth Cypher

But that's ok because from what I have seen from a lot of people lately is that the US SOMEHOW has gotten more "evil" than terrorists. SOMEHOW, we got switched from a superpower to "Imperialists" and terrorists somehow got switched to "freedom fighters". I know the US is not perfect but we are not as evil as people make us out to be.

The US has not "switched" at all, the US is the same country to the rest of the world as it ever was, it's just that suddenly, Americans are paying attention to the fact that a considerable number of people wish to see Americans die, and even greater numbers dislike the US with a passion.

Terrorists are still despised by the rest of the world, it's just that suddenly they're not that distant to Americans. It's easy to ignore terrorists when they're far away, attacking embassies in countries you couldn't find on a map, it's much more difficult when they are blowing up buildings in the centre of your country's political heartland.

[Darth Cypher]

I brought the Mujahadeen up because they eventually became the taliban. I have heard many times that this is a terrorist organization that we funded. Which is not the case, we never funded thier terrorist functions except to fight the Russians (and that was against military targets).

I have heard of individual contributions to the IRA but again, I hear a lot of how the gov't funds it.

I know I get irate a little in these discussions. I am not surprised that people hate us. Everyone is going to have someone for whatever reason. What surprises me is the reasons and some of them are like:

[dolla_bill0913]

Originally posted by Cbass


If you want to nail a country for supporting terrorism, look more closely at the United States, and their history of supporting terrorism to support foreign interests.

You say the US supports terrorism here but this taken from the North Korea thread, you are saying the US doesnt give out support or aid.>(The level of aid that the US provides compared to the wealth they possess is sickening. The US provided $15 billion last year in foreign aid, and most of that was supplying weaons. A full third of that figure was supporting Israel alone, a wealthy nation with no need for aid. In Canada, we are not much better, at 2.2 billion a year, but the US is a country 10 times our population, and is economicly much stronger. Canada, a smaller, poorer nation, gives 0.5% of our GNP as foreign aid. The US figure is something closer to .08%, and most of that is again, giving weapons to countries like Israel. Please stop acting as if the US is some benevolent country that goes around supporting the world, it's quite disheartening.) So which is it do they support the world and aid terrorism or do they not support the world and aid No One. You seem confused.

[Cbass]

Originally posted by dolla_bill0913
You say the US supports terrorism here but this taken from the North Korea thread, you are saying the US doesnt give out support or aid.>(The level of aid that the US provides compared to the wealth they possess is sickening. The US provided $15 billion last year in foreign aid, and most of that was supplying weaons. A full third of that figure was supporting Israel alone, a wealthy nation with no need for aid. In Canada, we are not much better, at 2.2 billion a year, but the US is a country 10 times our population, and is economicly much stronger. Canada, a smaller, poorer nation, gives 0.5% of our GNP as foreign aid. The US figure is something closer to .08%, and most of that is again, giving weapons to countries like Israel. Please stop acting as if the US is some benevolent country that goes around supporting the world, it's quite disheartening.) So which is it do they support the world and aid terrorism or do they not support the world and aid No One. You seem confused.

I would say you seem confused, much more than I. My point there is that the US gives out the least foreign relative to their population, and even moreso their economic means, and then Americans preach about how they are so generous with foreign aid. A full 1/4 of that "foreign aid" is military spending on Israel. This is completely irrelevant to this discussion, and I'm not sure WHY you brought it up.

I know you love your country, and I love mine, if my country was doing the same things that the US is, I'd have a hard time believing it myself. The fact is though, that the US has been doing these things. The US doesn't play fair, and a lot of people around the world object to that.

[dolla_bill0913]

I am confused, because you make me confused. I dont care if you hate the U.S and are in love with Saddam, you have the right to have what ever opinion you want. I just dont get why you say one thing to back up one of your opinions, even though it may go against something you said somewhere else on the forum.

[1985_BMW318i]

Its because he cannot prove what he's saying. He believes everything he's seen in his local schoolboy newspaper. I myself have been out on the front against tyrants. Saddam for one. Why others from countries other then the US choose to tell us how to think is beyond me. They go by their highly biased news and do not have the true facts. Time will prove that once again the US will be the one who came to a peoples rescue. Excuse me, I meant to say the US and our Allies because after the fact we'll have alot of Allies,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,again