Just saying "of course" doesnt' make it true.

Are they killing innocent people. Yes - you can't deny that. But they have maintained their nation in the face of numberically overwhelming odds (heavily supported by us, I know) for 50 years. What they are doing seems to be working.

What they are doing is responding in kind to attacks, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. The Muslim world seems to respect that. What we do is try to be nice and hope every one like us. That doesn't seem to work. The USS Kohl got bombed because we didn't post an srmed security detail because we didn't want to be "provocative". That seems to be seen as weakness.

Could Israel work harder for peace? Probably. But what they are doing seems to work.



Actually, I do kind of agree with this statement.



We don't need a reason to stay. We are trying to get out. Our reason is to keep the region stable and deny it to terrorists who would use it as a staging area. We just can't find a way to stabilize a region that is destroying itself.



Staying requires money, not oil. We are going through $8 billion a month, and the economy is still growing. Anybody want to debate about Republican economic policy?



Oil secures the world's economy, not just ours. I don't see Europeans on horseback, and I don't see European forces in Iraq. If Europe thinks that oil is not important maybe they should stop importing it. I do see French and German companies making money helping Iraq pump oil. But we're the bad guys?



Actually, as long as the economy is running I don't care who is blowing up who. Since we have had a military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq there have been no terrorist activities in the US. That is the point of the military - to protect the nation.

The Iraqis are killing each other - and will continue after we leave. If Iraqis cintinue to blow each other up after we have pulled our troops out will you then complain that we aren't providing humanitarian aid? Or will you accept those deaths as a form of political self-determination?



Why in God's green Earth would I care about a European poll? Europeans have lived under a peace provided by the US military and NATO since WW2. During that time they haven't spent their tax dollars on bombs and guns and tanks - we did. They didn't go to Kosovo - we did.

I have argued against isolationism and I disagree with that stance. But imagine what would happen to Europe in about 5 years if we left. Do you think the existing European militaries could keep the peace? They can't keeping the Muslim rioters out of their streets now. It would be a free-for-all...

I would say the most dangerous people are the bleeding heart liberals who want to hold hands and sing "Kumbaya" and hope for peace. It's a great goal, but the woods are full of monsters. Someone needs to guard the wall.

hear hear, It just seems so simple when you put it like that.



If it were that ingenious, then we wouldn't be calling him " too dumb to tie his own shoes" we would be saying, "wow , against all the odd, Bush has pulled off a triumph in Iraq, How well their doing, Isn't there happiness a tribute to a mastermind of world leadership."

But were not, were saying "Bush is a major architect in one of the worst blunders in American and British foreign policy" and whats worse, we all know it,.
Please explain what has been so cleverly covered up, at least then my shame would be hidden with it.

Please, no more, we in Europe have had enough with "we saved you in WWII. but you can't possible be saying you're saving us from Al Qaeda and home grown terrorists also. Get a grip.

The death toll says all about American successes against terrorism, even Oklahoma dwarfs anything in Europe. So if it's that help we need, please don't bother.

What unbelievable arrogance. possible even megalomania.

Marcus.

Just me being a pig-headed American.

But I'll ask you the question directly - are Europeans taking any action against Al Qaeda? Maybe you are and I am unaware. Or maybe you don't feel as threatened as I do - I could be paraniod.

Maybe you feel that you can co-exist and that we are taking the wrong course. What do you think?

who amongst all the peoples of the world are dying alongside americans in iraq and Afghanistan. If it isn't us in Europe then who.

Like i said, arrogance, you can't even acknowledge the people who die with your countrymen.
If you ignored your fellow American dead like you ignore the British, then I'm sure you would have many arguments on your hands from your own countrymen.



As for this, please read my original thread.



I would hope we could, but things seem to have gone way too far for that.
If I had the answers to that, then I wouldn't be asking questions here.


Sorry, this is not a cop out, I#m just as baffled as our leaders on how to proceed.

I think bush is extremely corrupt. He has thrown the U.S. into war, which is extremely unpopular. He has been the reason for the deaths of thousands of American soldiers

He has also refused to sign the Kyoto treaty which will probably save the world from global warming. Meanwhile, the U.S. continues to dump 1/4 of the worlds emission into the atmosphere. Kyoto limits the amount you can put into the air.

He has created that stupid "No child left behind act that requires schools to do testing every year, with stupid rules. The testing is also real stressful  

It is also the fault of his cronies too, like dystopic said

So get rid of BUSh!

To clarify my thoughts.

I have always believed that the "war on terror" had to happen in some way,
The invasion of Afghanistan was essential to world peace, it sent an undeniable message that we in the west stand together and defy terrorism and any attack upon us and our allies.

But this war has been allowed to fall into the hands of men who don't care about this.

They have their own agendas and lie to convince us that their war is ours.

They connive and use rhetoric of treason to coerce us into acquiescence.

These are shameful acts. To use such horrific events as 911 and the July bombings to push forward a lie is despicable.

Therefore they have lost my support. This is not to say the troops in this war, whether they be American, British, or any other nations, have lost my support, These brave men and women die for this lie with honour, I can never dismiss this loyalty and sacrifice.

Marcus.

It's a mindset, not the puppets we need to replace.

I think I have lost my way here,, It seems like many threads are converging,

Sorry I meant you to read my post from "the kidnapping of my fear"

here's the Link but i guess you've already read it.

Sorry again.

The main reason is to keep countries liek Saudi Arabea happy, nothing more.



Erm, partially true. It was essentially the spread of democracy, UN, and the EU that kept the region stable.



Actual, I think its Cheney. Now in a paper he wrote to the Pentagon he said that the only way to stimulate the economy and to bring more funding to the military it would be necessary for an event the magnitude of Pearl Harbor to occur to encourage millitary build up rivaling that of the Cold War days.

It hasnt exactly worked, but eh.



Thats true, European agencies have the highest rate of captured terrorists.

Okay, so first of(and I am not a bush defender) Bush didnt want the war as much as Congress did. However, it was mostly his fault that the war was so poorly coordinated.

Next the Kyoto protocol is a joke.

Recent temperature drops have proven to help the world more then Kyoto woudl have in 2 decades.

Not to mention its compelete inefficiency. It doesnt put into account the amount of wilderness in a country, doesnt aknowledge the existence of polution reduction programs already active. It is highly favorible to developing nations and poorer countires, some are even exempt. Europeans can preaty much ignore it because it contradicts quite a few EU laws.

Saudi Arabia, this is possible as long as America admits Saudi Arabia owns the dollar. look at the oil dollar, opec owns that. looks bad for America.




you seem proud. please explain more. why does irrational warmongering has your support?


facts at last



America now spreads democracy to Europe, this is moronic.
I think you should learn some history , Archimedes first hypothesized on the theories of true democracy and after him many years later came Aristotle .

But what the hell, America was first by minus, well probably 2000 years.
congratulations, America is late and deluded again.

I was browsing the older comments and found the above!

It is interesting that in the Bible God refers to us as 'creatures of time'. So if we are creatures of time as humans, then it is easy to conclude that we are no longer bound by time when we die. So if when we die and are no longer bound by time therefore if somone goes to hell forever, forever would pass by in an instant! Just a thought?

I do have to 'apologize' for the sometimes seemingly ignorant comments of my 'fellow countrymen' as these are the views of the minority (I HOPE) among us. It is unfortunate that the 'majority' sits back and says nothing, stuck in the grind that is called 'middle class'. All we can do is tread water and try to stay afloat as our once great country is dragged into third world status at the hands of the few 'rich' Americans who could care less what they destroy so long as they stay wealthy.
Obviously I HAVE read 'most' of my history and yes, the Greeks were the first to come up with and implement 'democracy'... even though they too were quite arrogant, believing they were superior to all others, as I said somewhere else... I think... .
But I guess then we, the US, could be construed to be acting as the ancient Greeks did with regards to the 'rest of the world'.
Oh, and just to say, even though I am an American I believe what our forefathers did to the Native Americans was wrong. Our country was taken, acre by acre, with deceit and violence, oppression and mass starvations. This was not the way to build a country. I know it sounds like a 'romantics' point of view but seriously, regardless of other civilizations in the past, I wouldn't think that the foundation or cornerstone for something which holds itself in such high esteem should be based on the blood of the innocent. Just my opinion of course.

Greek democracy was rather different than our notion of it: only landed men could vote, which was essentially a misogynistic plutocracy or feudal oligarchy by our standards.



Stormbringer, I'd like to recommend a book to you - if you haven't read it already (not because I think you need more education, but because I think you'd enjoy the read).

A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn.

Not in the least, rather I wondered why these 'papers' were kept from the public since 1999, and why the government still witholds over 6,000 tapes from 911.



Yes, but I ment to other regions like Germany and Eastern Europe, and even Britain wasnt the greatest example of a democracy back then.



Erm, no our economy is actually at the highest point in years and the term 'third' world is very old fashioned and is no longer accurate, it more of a political term anyhow.

the term "third world" was coined in the 50s. i think it was a parallel to the history of condition of Paris, but it rapidly took on the meaning: not part of either the first (U.S.-led capitalist) or second (Soviet-led communist) worlds. it also carries a meaning of a country where conditions are very bad, which is still an accurate description.

but two other alternatives i've heard are developed/developing, and global north/global south.

As far as I know, the last non-US troops are British and Tony Blaire has stated that they are planning to pull them out by mid-July. That just leaves US soldiers, which is why I am arrogant, I guess.

With all due respect and I don't want to start a flame war, I think that Americans don't see that Europe feels threatened. We are criticized for being in Iraq and we see trains blowing up in London and Madrid and we wonder where the outcry is. We see some British marines being taken prisoner by some towelheads in a rowboat - while one of Her Majesty's warships is standing by - and they apologize for bothering the Iraqis. And we wonder if anyone has any determination.

Yes, I'm an American. And I'm not sure that what we are doing is right. But I don't see any other nation or organization (where's the sainted UN?) doing any thing at all. And I don't want my kids kneeling to face towards Mecca every morning...

shouldn't be based on the blood... damn typos get me every time!
And thanks for the link Dystopic... the book looks very interesting and I will definitely have to check it out.

Wow... a little 'extreme' there Oz? Good point though, but I doubt that would happen. Just like the Iraqi's, we would probably engage in a form of guerilla warfare to protect our communities from an outside threat... no?

And where does it say thi do you know or are you just pulling this from memory do you know that this is true or has your mind been decieved about what the bible does and does not say Mysikmind. DO NOT SPEAK UNLESS YOU KNOW FOR CERTAIN.Even paltry attempt to verfi your opion next time will be much attecapted.   Check every thing do not always believe what you hear is truth it will lead you down they wrong path

That's right up there with
"If God is all-powerful, then can he make a rock that is so big he himself can't lift it?"

Greenfrog, I don't presume to know what God knows or means. I don't think my dogs understand that I go to work or what I do there. They just know that I love them and protect them and provide for them.

Which is all I really know about God. The rest is just faith.

"For now we see through a glass darkly, but then all will be clear.."
That's from Corinthians, isn't it? I didn't look up the quote.

We aren't supposed to know or fully understand God's plan. So we shouldn't be so quick to judge people with other views.

And its not polite.

Get your facts straightened out. 911 is the worst of all the terrorist attacks, the fatalities in Europe due to terrorist bombings is still dwarfed by that incident.

Second of all it was Iran, not Iraq and the same thing happened to us in the 70s so I wouldnt be so high and mighty

How about this... if God is all powerful, how come he can make imperfect human beings?
The answer that allows a perfect creation of God to become imperfect is 'free will'. Why is it that an all powerful God can unable to save them? Once again, 'free will'.... Well God did do the impossible to save us actually, it wasn't much, all he did was die for us!

"If God is all-powerful, then can he make a rock that is so big he himself can't lift it?"

The best answer being that God isn't so dumb as to ever consider doing something so pointless.

I am an agnostic myself, but I always thought that was a stupid question.