We Are All Spaniards

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:28R4c.9172$_w.267371@attbi_s53...
I don't agree, Jay. I doubt the perpetrators of the explosions in
Madrid
give
a damn what the Spaniards think of them. Do you think they expected
their
actions to endear them?

If not to rally men to their cause, for what purpose then?

To rally people against their cause. If they can force the "enemy" into
lashing
out against some state or culture, their cause gets furthered as more and
more
people of those states get affected by the invasion by the foreign state.

Ultimately, this is about who is in control. Without the masses, the
terrorists lose.

Unfortunately, nothing rallies the masses like an (offten seen as
unprovoked)
attack from a foreign state.

Paul

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:hzj6c.35852$po.317804@attbi_s52...
"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...
We are in a religious war. We didn't choose it, but we've got it.

I think you are misinterpreting Dan's proclamation. We are in a "religious
war" of the terrorist's choosing -- not our own.

I am arguing that the terrorists are not fighting a religious war, but
a political one.

What I percieve is that a lot of people in the US can't face that they
are the target because that would mean they did something to deserve
it, and that seems to be unthinkable.

Your logic escapes me. How does blowing up innocents on trains in Spain,
blowing up innocents in a night club in Bali, and blowing up innocents in a
hotel in Baghdad punish the U.S.? And how did those people "deserve" it?
If the tenuous connection is "they're all allied with the U.S." well, by
your logic this conflict will have to escalate shortly into a world war.

You actually think the rest of the world is allied to the US??? You
must be kidding, right? Tell me, how many terrorist attacks have you
seen on Swizerland? Oh, but they are a democracy, aren't they? They
are a "western nation", aren't they? They share your values, don't
they? They treat their women as equals, don't they?

And I wouldn't call it a "tenuous connection". It is exactly what
Al-Quaeda says they're doing, and it is exactly what they *are* doing.
But it doesn't matter, people in the US just don't want to see it.
They cannot see themselves as "the bad guys", no matter how many
millions in the world scream in despair. Of course I am not saying the
terrorists are the good guys, but they *are* rational, and they *have*
a motive, and no, it has nothing to do with religion, as much as the
US is rational about this war, and they have a motive, and no, it has
nothing to do with freedom. Both the religion and the freedom
"motives" are nothing but propaganda on both sides. You chose to
believe it. Did you also buy the WMD argument?

More importantly, nothing you have said should dissuade anyone from feeling
total and utter contempt for the animals who have perpetrated these
atrocities -- against ALL of humanity.

Of course not!!!!!!!!!!! As much as I hate what the US has done to so
many countries, I felt absolutely horrified when WTC happened, and I
also felt terribly sorry for the Spaniards, and I totally adhere to
your original statement "We Are All Spaniards"!!! Terrorists attack
innocent people, regardless what their governments have done, and they
DONT deserve it!

I am not by any means trying to justify terrorism, I am only trying
explain what I percieve is a very narrow and self-centerd view of what
is happening. and that this view is causing more harm than good.

"Alex" wrote in message
om...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:8Ej6c.35875$po.318662@attbi_s52...
But if you are so caritative that you want to help the world, what
about sending AIDS drugs and food to Africa? It would be much cheaper
and it would help many more people without killing anyone. So tell me,
why is the US not doing this? I'll tell you: because it isn't in the
interest of the US economic powers (read defense, oil, and
reconstruction bussinesses).

Guess again. The Bush Administration has proposed increasing aid to
Africa
several times. This proposal has been met with overwhelming apathy by
Congress and the American electorate -- with good reason, IMHO.

The reason we don't excited about helping Africa anymore is because they
seem to have no interest in helping themselves.

In a very real sense, and in the eyes of many Americans, the Somali
warlords
of Mogadishu sealed that continent's fate.

Is that so? Why, then, are the brave american soldiers not fighting these
warlords?


We did or should I say 2 ex-presidents ordered the US Military, in a very
half-ass way, to do just that. A number of troops got their ass handed to
them. The prevailing read on the US people's opinion at the time was Africa
can just implode. This is probability a pretty accurate judgment.

I always find it interesting that people who think the US shouldn't get
involved in foreign entanglements jump at the idea of us helping countries
where we don't have a damn thing to gain.

20 to 30 years from now everybody (US, EU) can go in and pick over the
ashes.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:xU66c.32731$1p.498199@attbi_s54...
You know, it is that "and our other allies" part that bothers me. The
infamous "either you are with us, or you are against us" BS. Reality
is rarely black and white. Zapatero said he will withdraw his forces
from Irak. Will you stand with Spain after that? Will the victims
still deserve your sympathy? Or will the mother of that student who
was blown to bits become your instant enemy?

Welcome to the world. The Islamofascists leave little wiggle room on this
subject.

Sorry, I lost you here...

As far as I'm concerned, the victims will always deserve our sympathy. All
the more so after their government ceases to be our ally.

Ok, I'm glad you think that way.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

Most Palestinians came from Jordon...when they were kicked out.


Jordanians ARE Palestinians.

I, for one, do not blame the Palestinians for fighting for their land.

Unfortunately the Palestinians don't have any land. Never did. Israel
did not kick the Palestinians out of present day Israel.

Not only that, but there really is NO SUCH thing as the Palestinian people.
They are Arabs. Period.



www.Rosspilot.com

"Alex" wrote in message
om...
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:8Ej6c.35875$po.318662@attbi_s52...
But if you are so caritative that you want to help the world, what
about sending AIDS drugs and food to Africa? It would be much cheaper
and it would help many more people without killing anyone. So tell me,
why is the US not doing this? I'll tell you: because it isn't in the
interest of the US economic powers (read defense, oil, and
reconstruction bussinesses).

Guess again. The Bush Administration has proposed increasing aid to
Africa
several times. This proposal has been met with overwhelming apathy by
Congress and the American electorate -- with good reason, IMHO.

The reason we don't excited about helping Africa anymore is because they
seem to have no interest in helping themselves.

In a very real sense, and in the eyes of many Americans, the Somali
warlords
of Mogadishu sealed that continent's fate.

Is that so? Why, then, are the brave american soldiers not fighting these
warlords?

Because there is no oil or any other economic reason to do so.

Hi Tom,

And what could we have done with that intelligence?

arrest the would-be pilots before they board the plane?

I would guess you realize it's not like in the James Bond movies,
and
for
information to be even moderately accurate is a bonus.

what are the various agencies there for, if not to provide
information
enabling such arrests?

Who is the arresting officer? The World Police Department?

Why? The terrorists boarded the planes in the US.

I appreciate that it's not an easy job. Yet in
case of 9/11 it was found later, that such information was
available.

And if it was? Send the Iraqi Secret Police to make the arrests?

see above.

The terrorists have spent prolonged time in Germany and the US.

Afghanistan was justified in my view, given that the taliban
openly supported OBL, only the job was not finished (yet
again!).

What would "finish" that job in your view?

To be honest, I don't know. Support in establishing a stable form
of
gouvernment and also development, I suppose. It is a very difficult
job, that's for sure, but noone said it would be easy.

Well, how do we begin to "establish a stable from of government"?

BTW, recall that it took 6-8 years to get Japan and Germany back on
their
feet after WW2.

Yes exactly. That's what I would call a finished Job and I'm very
grateful for that.

They supplied equipment, training, military intelligence,
possibly
funding.

Did they? I haven't read about any finds that back up that claim.
Wouldn't we know about that, given the short supply of WMDs as
justification for the war?

It's out there...just not in the mainstream media.

For example, two of the 9/11 terrorists met with the head of Iraqi
Intelligence shortly before they came to the US.


But even if this was the case: We should have much rather invaded
Saudi
Arabia if that was our motivation.

With the resistance we had going into an obvious target like Iraq,
how much
more resistance would there have been going into Saudi Arabia?

Go after a secondary target, when the main support for Al Quaida comes
from somewhere else? You really believe that this is going to help
much?

For Iraq, the US was the hurdle to his domination of the region;
for
the
Islamic fundelemtalists, it was our open, free and "immoral,
infidel"
society.

Yes, I agree with that.

With all the hot air about 9/11 being based on various grievances
about US
policy, it's "funny" that all their spokesmen said it was NOT the
case.

I'm obviously not a spokesman. I never blamed US policy for terrorism
in that way. While it is true, that these "grievances" are felt by some
Arabs, I certainly don't consider them justified. Unfortunately, if
played rightly by people like OBL, they can nonetheless be turned into
a burning desire to kill and hurt. Anything that will increase those
feelings, how unjustified they may be, will play right into OBLs hands.

I still believe that the war on Iraq did if anything raise the threat
of terrorism. Not because it was not in some way justifyable by the way
Saddam ridiculed the UN over the last 10 years and uncertainty about
his military potential, but because it humiliated the Arabs yet again,
while not significantly hurting the supplies of OBL.

In short, they hate our liberty, our prosperity and our
immorality --see the
thread about Brittany Spears :~)

Again, there is a lot of truth in that :-)

regards,
Friedrich

--
for personal email please remove "entfernen." from my adress

"Wdtabor" wrote:
Actually, it's all about Brittany Spears.

Their sons, and worse, their daughters, think Brittany is cool.

So that's it: they're fighting against mediocrity and bad taste. I may
change my sympathies.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)

"Wdtabor" wrote:
We look at the movement of Islamofascism as the enemy, and not
just individual governments. Under that view, Iraq is a legitimate
strategic target. Iraq did not topple the WTC, but ...Taking Iraq
first minimzes the number of Moslems we will have to kill to win
this war.

I find this argument illogical. Before the war, Saddam had radical
Islamists, "Islamofascists," to use your word, under tighter control
than in any other predominantly Muslim country - hell, he was
exterminating them. Now, the lid is off: we have handed the the
radicals a golden opportunity. They are already taking full advantage of
it by organizing and proselytizing masses of followers, something
unthinkable before the invasion. All this was foreseeable. The invasion
was folly; our enemies have been much enriched by it.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)