Scoffers
Well-known member
Simster said:
No way Simster, sorry I disagree , from an Al Qaeda point of view, September 11 was largely influenced by American policy in Afghanistan, the legality of the wars are only important for the Western world.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
US criticises Spain
- Thread starter The Large One
- Start date
No way Simster, sorry I disagree , from an Al Qaeda point of view, September 11 was largely influenced by American policy in Afghanistan, the legality of the wars are only important for the Western world.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
I can only suppose that their ultimate objective is to convert all western "infidels" to their Islamic way of thinking - by that I mean the extremists, I do not aim that at all Islam. If they are looking to achieve this through the destabilisation of Western governments, by causing divisions within western alliances, and by turning people against their own governments, then so far it seems to be working pretty well.Man of Harveys said:
Dandyman
In London village.
fatbadger said:
A point that some of our American friends are also making. The link below was sent to me by a friend in Santa Monica is 100% American and 100% anti-Bush.
www.moveon.com
London Irish
Well-known member
Easy 10 said:
Sorry, Easy, again I have a different take on this.
The objectives of Al Quada are pretty straighforward, driving western armies and cultural influence from Arab lands, and imposing fundamentalist Taliban-style Islamic governments on these nations. Frankly, I'm not sure AQ give two shits about converting all Albion fans to Islam.
I regard the election of sensible western governments like the Spanish socialists as a big DEFEAT for extremist Islamic groups like AQ.
The biggest recruiting sergeant for AQ has been the blundering policy of the Bush neoconservative imperialists, who have no policy whatsoever towards the Arab world other than propping up an array of disgusting despostic regimes like those in Saudi and Kuwait, getting rid of former flunkeys like Saddam who can no longer be relied on to follow orders, while arming the Isrealis to carry on their genocidal attacks on the Palestinians.
Many Arabs have been driven into tacit support for AQ as a response to this appalling contempt for the Arab world.
Bush may have killed a lot of Taliban and AQ operatives but at the same time he has swelled political sympathy among the wider Arab populations for this tiny Islamic sectarian group almost ten-thousand-fold. Such a US policy permanently reproduces "terrorism" and if Bush is not defeated in November, the next decade will see bombings in the west become a permanent feature of our political landscape. Meanwhile, the crock of sh1te called the "war on terrorism" will carry on doing precisely what it has been doing for the last 3 years, a convenient excuse for a massive growth of American world power while breeding "terrorists" in their thousands.
The best hope we have of defeating AQ is to elect progressive western governments like the Spanish government who will attempt to offer Arab people a better choice than supporting a royal despot or a bomber.
It is only by driving Arab opinion away from AQ will the bombers ever be marginalised and defeated. Only an alliance of progressive western governments that deals with the terrible plight of the Palestinians and encourages the development of democracy throughout the Arab world can solve the huge political rift between the west and the Arab peoples.
Jambo Seagull
Well-known member
Spot on London Irish. If Bush wins in November, God help us all.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Can't argue with any of that London Irish. Ever thought of running for office ?
fatbadger
New member
Spot on, London Irish.
fatbadger
New member
Easy 10 said:
If he, did the Bush administration and the right-wing press would just accuse him of being an appeaser.
Raphael Meade
Well-known member
just read this on bbci...
A statement claiming to come from al-Qaeda has warned of imminent terrorist attacks in Britain and other countries.
The statement e-mailed to Arab news organisations on Wednesday night was signed by a group which said it carried out attacks in Madrid and Istanbul.
It warned the UK, Australia and Saudi Arabia that a "brigade of death" was targeting them and other countries.
But it also said it was freezing its operations in Spain as a reward for the new government's stance on Iraq.
Spain's prime minister-elect, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, has said he will pull Spain's 1,300 troops out of Iraq unless the UN intervenes.
--------------------------------------
cheeky f***ing bastards....
peoples thoughts?
A statement claiming to come from al-Qaeda has warned of imminent terrorist attacks in Britain and other countries.
The statement e-mailed to Arab news organisations on Wednesday night was signed by a group which said it carried out attacks in Madrid and Istanbul.
It warned the UK, Australia and Saudi Arabia that a "brigade of death" was targeting them and other countries.
But it also said it was freezing its operations in Spain as a reward for the new government's stance on Iraq.
Spain's prime minister-elect, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, has said he will pull Spain's 1,300 troops out of Iraq unless the UN intervenes.
--------------------------------------
cheeky f***ing bastards....
peoples thoughts?
Last edited:
bhaexpress
New member
Well siad LI, spot on.
Albion Dan
Banned
London Irish that is a quality post that anybody would find it hard to argue against.
Scary that so much in the future now depends on the US voting public.
Scary that so much in the future now depends on the US voting public.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,712
The American reaction is irritating - the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism are separate, so why does pulling troops out of Iraq amount to appeasement re. terrorism? Anyway, there aren't any WMD and Saddam is under lock and key.
There will be no peace until the terrorists and despots are dealt with by UN troops and international law, and I support the stance of the new Spanish government.
We will soon have atrocities here and they will divide public opinion. In time people will stop siding with the US and realise that the only solution is a strong, pro-active UN, not this reactive, divided, lily-livered organisation we have at present.
I think we should kick out Kofi Annan as Secretary-General and install Martin Johnson.
There will be no peace until the terrorists and despots are dealt with by UN troops and international law, and I support the stance of the new Spanish government.
We will soon have atrocities here and they will divide public opinion. In time people will stop siding with the US and realise that the only solution is a strong, pro-active UN, not this reactive, divided, lily-livered organisation we have at present.
I think we should kick out Kofi Annan as Secretary-General and install Martin Johnson.
Sorrel
Well-known member
The only thing I would say against what London Irish said is I think that in the USA it will be possible for the government there to avoid another terrorist attack if it continues its current policies.
My opinion is that there is such a culture of paranoia in the USA right now that they may well be able to stop any major (on the size of the Spanish bombing) attack from happening. I don't think that's the case in Europe, but a very conservative American government probably can stop terrorism affecting mainland America.
In that case, I do wonder if that would be enough (given the paranoid status of much of the population) for people to think it's worth electing Bush again. If there are no attacks on the USA, then as far as they are concerned he's doing a good job. I would prefer a different president, but I'm not convinced there'll be one.
My opinion is that there is such a culture of paranoia in the USA right now that they may well be able to stop any major (on the size of the Spanish bombing) attack from happening. I don't think that's the case in Europe, but a very conservative American government probably can stop terrorism affecting mainland America.
In that case, I do wonder if that would be enough (given the paranoid status of much of the population) for people to think it's worth electing Bush again. If there are no attacks on the USA, then as far as they are concerned he's doing a good job. I would prefer a different president, but I'm not convinced there'll be one.
Eastleigh Seagull
Member
Sorry but this whole 'Bush is responsible for what is happening with AQ' is crap of the worst kind and only serves to hinder any solution, if Kerry wins you think this situation will change - No. The aim of these people is to create a Muslin world of the worst possible kind, one built on fear that suppresses any kind of human rights, particularly those of women. Any advances that have been made in the Islamic world will be removed and the whole area will resort back to Afghanistan under the Taliban.
Whether or not Bush wins will make no difference whatsoever to the threat we currently face. Sure we can debate the best way to tackle the threat but there is really only one way to defeat them. It is not Northern Ireland where although they were fanatical negotiation was possible. I completely agree that the UN should become much stronger and if it was then the US will be more willing to engage through the UN but while you have a farcical situation like Libya chairing the Human Rights Commission the UN will remain an utter irrelevance when it comes to important matters.
Indeed going further down the line perhaps people should really start looking to the route cause of the terrorist problem - countries like Saudi that live a completely irreligious life and then out of guilt donate huge sums of money directly to the terrorists and then indirectly to them through the madrassa system.
Whether or not Bush wins will make no difference whatsoever to the threat we currently face. Sure we can debate the best way to tackle the threat but there is really only one way to defeat them. It is not Northern Ireland where although they were fanatical negotiation was possible. I completely agree that the UN should become much stronger and if it was then the US will be more willing to engage through the UN but while you have a farcical situation like Libya chairing the Human Rights Commission the UN will remain an utter irrelevance when it comes to important matters.
Indeed going further down the line perhaps people should really start looking to the route cause of the terrorist problem - countries like Saudi that live a completely irreligious life and then out of guilt donate huge sums of money directly to the terrorists and then indirectly to them through the madrassa system.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 31,712
I think that there could be a significant change in US foreign policy if Kerry became president (once she finishes her stint as Queen Of The Jungle)...
Jambo Seagull
Well-known member
You are quite right about AQ's aims. The point LI made eloquently is that Bush has created a situation where many, many more Muslims are now being recruited by AQ as a DIRECT response to Bush's completely irresponsible and cavalier foreign policy. Therefore Bush has made a situation which was difficult but just about under control 100 times worse. If he gets another 4 years I shudder to think what further escalations there will be.
perth seagull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 5,487
The Bush administration is the most arrogant, two-faced, hypocritical government I have seen in the Western world. They have got no idea how to conduct diplomacy or pursue a sensible foreign policy and merely provoke wars and aggravate international tension. If we were still in the Cold War you could pretty much say good bye to this planet. We would have been wiped out by nuclear calamity early in Bush's term.
Compare the way Bush has pursued his policy in the Middle East to the way the Clinton administration went about achieving its objectives in the Balkans. Completely different, Clinton opened avenues of communication and negotiation and in the end was successful. Bush acts like a warlord and alienates the whole world including the majority of his allies (bar a few countries like the UK of course).
If Kerry won the Presidency, I think that it would make a huge difference and he would work towards pursing a more sensible method of achieving America's objectives.
For the Bush administration to criticise Madrid is arrogance to the extreme. Imagine if every other power decided to pull out of Iraq and leave the Yanks alone to sort out their own mess that they've gotten themselves into? They should be grateful that they have allies to support them in their dubious engineered conflicts. This is not a war of the West versus Islam, but America's own - and America only, NOT the West, NOT the UK (despite what Blair would tell us) NOT anyone else. It has nothing to do with Spain, Britain and there isn't any legitimate reason why we should be involved in Iraq.
We are oblidged to aid them in Afghanistan under the NATO treaty. Iraq is a whole seperate issue. I pray that John Kerry wins the election and then we can go back to the good old Clinton-dominated 1990s when people thought that international relations was "boring" and "too quiet".
Compare the way Bush has pursued his policy in the Middle East to the way the Clinton administration went about achieving its objectives in the Balkans. Completely different, Clinton opened avenues of communication and negotiation and in the end was successful. Bush acts like a warlord and alienates the whole world including the majority of his allies (bar a few countries like the UK of course).
If Kerry won the Presidency, I think that it would make a huge difference and he would work towards pursing a more sensible method of achieving America's objectives.
For the Bush administration to criticise Madrid is arrogance to the extreme. Imagine if every other power decided to pull out of Iraq and leave the Yanks alone to sort out their own mess that they've gotten themselves into? They should be grateful that they have allies to support them in their dubious engineered conflicts. This is not a war of the West versus Islam, but America's own - and America only, NOT the West, NOT the UK (despite what Blair would tell us) NOT anyone else. It has nothing to do with Spain, Britain and there isn't any legitimate reason why we should be involved in Iraq.
We are oblidged to aid them in Afghanistan under the NATO treaty. Iraq is a whole seperate issue. I pray that John Kerry wins the election and then we can go back to the good old Clinton-dominated 1990s when people thought that international relations was "boring" and "too quiet".
Last edited:
US Seagull
Well-known member
This looks like a good thread, but join it late I don't really have time to read the whole thing. I just wanted to add by two cents worth:
I don't think it really matters one jot whether the Spainish "gave in to terrorist" when the elected the socialists. I personally don't think they did because for a start polls before elections have been known to be dramatically wrong in the past (so no real way of knowing if there really was a swing), turn out was very high (which usually kills the pre-election polls anyway), and most voters seem to be pissed that their government had lied to them and tried to exploit the bombing (although perhaps damage control would be fairer that exploit). But none of this really matters. What matters is do the terrorist think they influenced the election in a way that was favorable to them. If they do think that, regardless of whether they are right or wrong, we will no doubt see more attacks, and that is scary.
I don't think it really matters one jot whether the Spainish "gave in to terrorist" when the elected the socialists. I personally don't think they did because for a start polls before elections have been known to be dramatically wrong in the past (so no real way of knowing if there really was a swing), turn out was very high (which usually kills the pre-election polls anyway), and most voters seem to be pissed that their government had lied to them and tried to exploit the bombing (although perhaps damage control would be fairer that exploit). But none of this really matters. What matters is do the terrorist think they influenced the election in a way that was favorable to them. If they do think that, regardless of whether they are right or wrong, we will no doubt see more attacks, and that is scary.
US Seagull
Well-known member
Another point. I don't think it's actually enough for AQ to say the Spainish out of Iraq. OBL would ultimately like to see the Spainish out or Spain too. Many radical muslims consider the time of the moorish occupation of the Iberian peninsular as the halycon days of Islam and fell the loss of Spain started a decline that continues to this day.