« BACK TO FORUM
 Author |
 Post
|
 |
|
Anu maheshwari
Joined: Jun 14, 2005
Posts: 1148 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female & 27
Country: India
Province/State: Maharashtra
City: Pune
|
The Fear Factor
March 17, 2006 - 02:12 AM
|
|
every time i try to form a good opinion about the US govt. i get to read some news which holds me back.
is the US govt displaying a lack of understanding regarding the situation in the rest of the world.
why does it seem that they are living in a perpetual fear of being bombed....as if the whole world has nothing better to do ...
the Iranians , north koreans, iraqi's, chinese , russians all have internal problems and problems of terrorism...but their foreign policy is not exclusively focussed on conducting pre-emptive strikes against all who dont walk along them.
check out this report;
US backs first-strike attack plan
President Bush has consistently backed the pre-emptive doctrine
The US will not shy away from attacking regimes it considers hostile, or groups it believes have nuclear or chemical weapons, the White House has confirmed.
In the first restatement of national security strategy since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the US singles out Iran as the greatest single current danger.
The new policy backs the policy of pre-emptive war first issued in 2002, and criticised since the Iraq war.
But it stresses that the US aims to spread democracy through diplomacy.
The new strategy also highlights a string of other global issues of concern to the US, such as the spread of Aids, the threat of pandemic flu and the prospect of natural and environmental disasters.
National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley is due to make a speech launching the new strategy on Thursday.
Other key points include:
Stressing US preference for "transformational diplomacy" and coalition building, but not necessarily within United Nations or Nato frameworks
Criticising the lack of democratic freedoms in Russia and China
Branding Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez a "demagogue" aiming to destabilise the region
Urging Palestinian radical group Hamas to recognise Israel, renounce violence and disarm.
Seven despots
The substance of the revised strategy focuses on the challenges facing the US in the wake of the Iraq war.
In a nod to previous high-level foreign policy statements, which singled out individual countries as potential enemies of the US, the new document highlights seven "despotic" states.
They are: North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Belarus, Burma and Zimbabwe.
The policy of the US, according to the opening words of the 49-page document, is "to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world".
These motives underpin US policy towards the continuing stand-off over Iran's nuclear programme, the document says.
But it stresses that continuing diplomatic efforts must succeed if confrontation is to be avoided, vowing to take "all necessary measures" to protect US interests against Iran.
'Bush doctrine'
The new document, overseen and approved by Mr Bush, leaves the so-called "Bush doctrine" of pre-emptive war largely unchanged.
Before 2002 the US largely focused on the deterrence and containment of unfriendly states.
However, likening the current international situation to the early years of the Cold War, the new document insists on the right of the US to protect its interests using force.
"If necessary, however, under long-standing principles of self-defence, we do not rule out use of force before attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack," it says.
"When the consequences of an attack with WMD [weapons of mass destruction] are potentially so devastating, we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialise."
WMDs WMDs WMDs....the only place where the US government can be sure of finding the WMDs is the USA itself.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
A. Tsang
Joined: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 126 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 36
Country: New Zealand
Province/State: Auckland
City: Auckland
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 25, 2006 - 03:07 AM
|
|
>WMDs WMDs WMDs....the only place where the US government can
>be sure of finding the WMDs is the USA itself.
They should b able to find some in China. If USA think is necessary, however, under long-standing principles of self-defence, would American use of force before attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack?
This is what China is concerning. Will USA join Japan & Taiwan to fight against mainland China?
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Arslan Jumaniyazov
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 1358 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 32
Country: Turkmenistan
Province/State: Dashoguz
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 26, 2006 - 01:56 AM
|
|
Originally posted by indyeahn
it's high time the U S of A stopped being an international watchdog.the question is who is going to watch the americans.im sure they must be having WMD's but no one has the courage to tell them so.why is everyone so in awe of the americans.what are they anyway huh?...GODS or something.as if it's their birth right to interfere in other's business.
indyeahn,
It's not that nobody tells America to get rid of WMD or at least decrease her ominous stockpile of WMD. It's just America doesn't care about what others say. They just don't listen to. One retired CIA agent called it Imperial Hubris. What can you do about that?
Just ten days ago, Foreign Affairs, a mouthpiece of Council on Forein Relations, published an article, which argues that in 10 years the US will have total primacy over Russia. The article claims that even now the US can wipe out Russia's nuclear forces within 15 minutes in the first attack (one may ask: if you have such a primacy over Russia even now, why do you need to go on with your program that will allow you to have TOTAL primacy over Russia in 10 years if you are only concerned with self-defense?).
Of course, the claim is too bold and highly questionable. But what is the reason behind publishing such an ominous article? What the hell the Council on Foreign Relations is thinking about? Do they want Russia to increase the military spending? Well, they are already doing it.
Arslan
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Anu maheshwari
Joined: Jun 14, 2005
Posts: 1148 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
 Virtual Volunteer
Gender & Age: Female, 27
Country: India
Province/State: Maharashtra
City: Pune
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 26, 2006 - 02:46 AM
|
|
with all possible good intentions( to fight terrorism, protect americans from outsiders, preserve democracy, bring peace( sic) etc etc) it seems that the US government manages to press all the wrong buttons...pushing all others over the edge...if they carry on like this ....i can think of only one future ;
that is hundred years from now an alien species might be studying the causes of the destruction of the human race and the planet earth...and they might stumble on to atomic weopons(WMDs) all over the planet with US seals on them.
either one really paranoid prez must have fired the nukes to trigger the catastrophe...
or somecrazy guy must have got hold of the controls and released the nukes.
there can be no other possibilty as no one has the cpacity to destroy the planet except the US govt. we all should be afraid of them in that case ...shouldnt we ? but some how one doesnt want to think of such bad things...
they are notthat bad after all...but it seems they are just ignorant...they have 10% knowledge and 90% assumptions ,predictions and possibilities...
look at this report ( more lies );
March 25, 2006 -- The Pentagon's role as a source of media disinformation. First it was the Office of Northern Gulf Affairs, which morphed into the Office of Special Plans. Both served as conduits for neo-con propaganda spewed forth by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), Heritage Foundation, Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), the Hudson Institute, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), among others prior to the invasion of Iraq.
Now the Pentagon has issued an "unclassified report" stating that in the lead up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Russia obtained war plans and planned U.S. troop movements from “inside the American Central Command.” The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) denied the charge, stating that "similar, baseless accusations concerning Russia’s intelligence have been made more than once."
The Pentagon cited as its source two captured Iraqi documents that describe Russian penetration of the US Central Command in Qatar. However, the Pentagon's story later changed. The revised story stated the Russian obtained the war plans from signals intelligence intercepts of pre-war U.S. military communications. In either case, the citing of "captured" Iraqi documents has been used in the past to falsely implicate various anti-war international politicians with being in league with Saddam's "Oil for Food" program. Many of these "captured" documents were forgeries emanating from notorious Iraqi con man Ahmad Chalabi. Bogus Niger government documents were forged by a neo-con cabal based in Rome, Washington, and Jerusalem to justify an attack on Iraq based on non-existent weapons of mass destruction. The information contained in the two "secret" Iraqi documents could have been obtained from any number of open sources, including Jane's Defence Weekly. The "sic" appearing next to "special forces unit 'Papa'" in the purported Iraqi documents is a clue to a forgery. The standard NATO/DoD phonetic code for the letter "P" is "Papa." Why the authors would indicate a possible misspelling of Papa in the document is curious unless its because the real authors include some of our most noted neo-con draft dodgers who are unfamiliar with U.S. and NATO military nomenclatures. The two secret Iraqi documents are handwritten and contain no official government seal or stamps, another clear indication of a forgery.
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/
now the US Govt is creating the same build up it created before Iraq...how can we ever believe this after iraq? the US intelligence has just lost its credibilty after the iraq fiasco!
AP: Iran Amassing Military Equipment
Friday, March 25, 2005
VIENNA, Austria — Iran is quietly building a stockpile of thousands of high-tech small arms and other military equipment — from armor-piercing snipers' rifles to night-vision goggles — through legal weapons deals and a U.N. anti-drug program, according to an internal U.N. document, arms dealers and Western diplomats.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,151558,00.html
Blah Blah blah ...WMDs WMDs WMDs...all those small weopens couldnt possibily reach america. the more probable scenario would be that the war if it happens would befought on the iranian soil and it would be grazed to the ground , an entire generation wiped out, no food , no light, no water, just a lot of toxic waste....
a paradise lost forever....( The garden of Eden ws actually supposed to be somewhere in Mesopotamia , which is modern day Iran)....
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 26, 2006 - 02:47 AM
|
|
"it's high time the U S of A stopped being an international watchdog."
like who? the Russians? Chinese? Europeans? - none are up to the task and none are more trustworthy.
people take for granted that the US does things like, say, patrol the international waterways to police piracy - so international trade can continue unfettered.
This is an added strain to the US taxpayer and citizen, and no one even bothers to say "thank you"
As for if US will back Japan and Taiwan against China - let us pray it never comes to that.
I am not certain how far US will go to protect Taiwan, diplomatically to be sure - perhaps arming them - but a direct confrontation with China???
a for Japan - the Treaty which ended WW2 provides that we ensure their security, they cannot develop a military, so we are obligated.
I agree that he 7 nations mentioned are despotic - I would not like to see war with any of them but I am in favor of subverting their regeimes and re-inforce pro-democracy groups inside those countries with information and funding.
I think the pre-emptive policy is troubling, in Bush's hands, if say Clinton was the one putting forth the policy I would find it far less troubling because I trust him more to use it judiciously.
I just don't trust Bush, and I am concerned he might use such a policy to suck us into another war - rather than as a way of protecting the country.
In fact if Clinton had a strike first policy he might have taken out Bin Laden on the 2 occations he had the chance, and 9/11 could have been avoided.
anuriandima84 - please recognise that the WMD issue is a serious one for us - because there are terrorists who without question would like to blow up New York - midtown manhattan is a prime target - and it is my hometown, after watching 9/11 with my bare eyes it is very difficult to discount such a possibility.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Anu maheshwari
Joined: Jun 14, 2005
Posts: 1148 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Virtual Volunteer
Gender & Age: Female, 27
Country: India
Province/State: Maharashtra
City: Pune
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 26, 2006 - 04:29 AM
|
|
Originally posted by luke
[B
anuriandima84 - please recognise that the WMD issue is a serious one for us - because there are terrorists who without question would like to blow up New York - midtown manhattan is a prime target - and it is my hometown, after watching 9/11 with my bare eyes it is very difficult to discount such a possibility.
[/B]
yes Luke !
it is serious for us too!
so why doesnt US government stop producing them....and waste the tax payers money on them?
I think the present US government is a major threat to global peace if it carries on its war propaganda at this pace....within yrs of grazing two countries ...it is moving on to the third one...
what if it moves to north korea ,then china, what next ? the logical conclusion would be the planet , wouldnt it be?
yes im scared of WMDs...very very scared ...more than you...
i have lived in Kashmir for some years... saw the Public relations office next to our school go up in smoke one fine day...teachers locked us in the classroom for that day so that we dotn come out and panic...i ws one of the unfortunate ones in playground who actually saw the whole thing...it was scary...people crying and wailing...
but nobody bombed pakistan next day did they!
nobody did anything...because we know war is never a solution...violence begets violence!
911 was wrong...lot of things are wrong...i lost mychildhood buddy who enlisted in the indian army and got posted to kargil and died there ...he didnt even want to join the army...his parents told him it was a good andrespectable job ..so he left his MBA to join the army and died...i saw his parents laying the wreath atthememorial service...i saw it on TV...nobody had even told me...it was shocking ....it was wrong !!!
whatever the reasons lot of things are wrong...and war is definitely without any doubts WRONG...
USA is just selfish now...it is reordering the whole world to make it safer for USA..but making a mess of the whole thing...and now the whole world is becoming a dangerous place to be...
we all have a life...let us think of living before we think of dying...
US government is the biggest threat to itself...nobody else!
ciao
Anu
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 26, 2006 - 07:57 AM
|
|
anuriandima84
If the war with Russia didn't happen, I don't think the war with China will - for the same reason - because war between those 2 powers would be maddness.
But I do expect tension to be raised because I think china will begin to become more imperialist as it becomes more powerful - Tiawan physically, maybe more later - and economic imperialism throughout the region - this happens naturally as they ascend to superpower dominance.
Why do you imagine we will start another war?? As a matter of a serious question.
The US is set in opposition to certain countries yes - but it always has been - it is possible to oppose countries like Iran and North Korea without matters escalating to war.
Your country has been staring the Pakistani's in the eye with nuclear weapons - this also is a risk to global security - presently there is a low grade conflict between Indian and Muslim forces backed by Pakistan in Kashmire But you have not entered into open war.
Bush does not have support enough in the US to begin another conflict.
He is still trying to explain to people why we went into Iraq in the first place - support for that war is now about 30%.
Bush's approval ratings are about 32% he is clearly losing the public and will soon be a lame duck. The real question is if the Democrates can take back Congress in November.
I think you do not understand American domestic politics -
Anyway - as for Iran - I think alot of it is what they will do - right now they seem very hostile. It is possible we could get drawn into conflict with them.
But I think everyone understands that this would not be desirable - and I don't hear any politicians talking about it serious - at the moment.
I will tell you that when Iran talks about destroying Israel and denying the Hollocaust it draws alot of animosity in the American public - Because they are clearly threatening to radically escalate the Israeli/Arab conflict.
Any direct conflict between Israel and Iran would be catostrophic and over very quickly - this is why it must be avoided at all costs.
As for understanding acts of terrorism more deeply than I do - perhaps I did not explain.
I was in New York on 9/11. You are talking about about a Public Relations building - I watched 2 110 story massive buildings collapse - with THOUSANDS of people inside them.
I walked on Ground Zero the next day, and volunteered, and gave blood.
I have friends who lost their parents. I had a pregnant friend who lost her husband.
So please understand - New York is obviously a target - its my hometown.
I appreciate that "alot of things are wrong" - but but I need you to appreciate that obliteration of New York is not just "some thing that is wrong" - it is a CATASTROPHY.
There is little question that this is the ardent desire of a number of terrorist organizations.
Also - do you really fault us for knocking out the Taliban?
Going into Iraq - Bush Cheany Rummy - made a mess of it - no question.
Which is basically the conclusion most Americans have reached at this point - which is why I cannot imagine us being drawn into more confict than now.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
agnivo chakrabarty
Joined: Mar 24, 2006
Posts: 14 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 25
Country:
City: Kolkata
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 26, 2006 - 10:22 AM
|
|
it's high time the U S of A stopped being an international watchdog.the question is who is going to watch the americans.im sure they must be having WMD's but no one has the courage to tell them so.why is everyone so in awe of the americans.what are they anyway huh?...GODS or something.as if it's their birth right to interfere in other's business.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 27, 2006 - 03:11 AM
|
|
Sorry - didn't see your post
anuriandima84 - as I said, you obviously do not understand American domestic politics very well.
Bush has the lowest approval ratings of any President since Nixon before he was forced to resign.
He has fallen and he can't get up - he is busy trying to maintain some kind of support for the Iraq war - suppot for war with Iran is basically none-existant
But like I said, alot of it depends on Iran - it is figures like their president who are driving Americans who DO NOT want another war to say "well we might have to"
As much as another war is not desirable - the idea of Iran having nuclear weapons...
Regardless any conflict with Iran (and I think it is a ways from happening regardless) would not be like the one in Iraq - there would be no occupation - it would be air-strikes on their nuclear facilities.
"President Bush has the rights to follow his words without being stopped" - anuriandima84
as I said - you simply don't understand how America works.
to begin - the army is strethed as far as it is going to go. Bush can't start another war because he simply does not have the troops.
That is part of what is driving this - part of the reason Iran is being so bold is that they can do the math - they can see how stretched we are.
in order to pick a fight with Iran - Bush would have institute a DRAFT - which he flat does not have the support for, congress would never support it.
especially this year as it is an election year - and next we might well have a different congress.
"As for the Iranian prez’s support to Hamas , after coming to power Hamas hasn’t declared an all open war against Israel, has it?" - anuriandima84
I am not talking about Hamas.
of course they have not declared open war with Israel - they would get their ass kicked - they would if they thought the had the stregnth, but they know they do not.
this is about Iran getting nuclear weapons - I am not going to bother posting some quotes from Iranian leaders talking about what they would like to do with those weapons (fire them at Israel) but they have made public statements to that effect - and the President recently talked about "wiping Israel off the map" -
and he was only re-iterating the position of the Ayatollah.
"(Hamas) has actually contained terrorism on its part." - anuriandima84
uh-huh. Watch, in the next month they are going to start releasing prisoners with records of committing terrorism in Israel.
Wht they will do is "condemn" terrorism on the one hand while supporting it on the other - oldest trick in the book.
The Hamas's incoming interior minister has already declared that he will not arrest people who commit terrorism against the Israelis - which is a basic obligation under all the peace agreements signed thus far.
we'll see how well they contain terrorism - right now I am not too optimistic.
That bit about Ahmadinejad "relishing" peace made for some entertaining reading - if they want peace then why are they enriching uranium? Why are they protecting Bin Laden's nefew? why are they recruiting and training members of Islamic Jihad throughout the world - including against India?
Clinton should have done more in Afghanistan - clearly the Taliban were oppressive and haboring a vast terrorist infrastructure. As for using it to divert from Lewinsky - I have heard that charge thrown around but don't buy it - you could say the same thing about anything he did in his second term.
As for Kerry - he definatly had a different approach. I think his thinking on Iraq was simply that we were enguaged and could not pull out because it carried greater risks then staying involved.
I think this group ofDemocrates would be more judicious in the use of military power -
That does not mean that Democrates will not oppose people like Saddam, Kim Jung Il, or Ahmadinejad - the whole country is opposed to such people.
And frankly I think we SHOULD be opposed to such people - but the question is how you oppose them. The US has alot of levers it can push.
"But I am also 100% sure that India would be the last on the planet to ever use it." - anuriandima84
I don't have a problem with India having the technology - that is why I support nuclear co-operation between our two countries.
But that said - the reason you guys got nukes was because Pakistan was getting Nukes.
If Iran gets them it will be a different matter all together - you see if they get them, the whole neighborhood will want them - the Saudis, Egyptians, Jordanians, Kuwaities - you name it, all the Sunni's who are afraid of Iran will start to develop nukes - then you will live in a much more dangerous neighborhood - and India might be singing a different tune.
"Iran (they are a democracy, a shade different but still democratic)" - anuriandima84
nonsense - they barred over 2500 candidates from running from office - almost the entire list of reform candidates were not even allowed to run for office.
how is that democratic??
That is not "democracy of a different shade" - that is agingin clerics holding on to power by barring the opposition from runing for office.
"So why doesn’t the US govt leave Israel and Palestine to resolve their own disputes instead of arming Israel and waiting for the opposition to do nothing. " - anuriandima84
because they would never settle them - an outside arbritrator must be used, not just the US alone - but the quartet. Someone must HOLD the parties to the agrements that they sign.
Also - perhaps you don't understand - Israel's army has been developed to fight multiple Arab armies at once - it has had to deal with as many as 5 adversaries at once in the past and so now its military is geared to handle this.
If you are seeing the conflict there solely in terms of the Israelis and Palestinians you are looking at it the wrong way - The Israelis I assure you, and America too, sees it as a conflict between Israel and the Arab world - the Palestinians are simply the most accute dimension right now.
As this brewing conflict with Iran demonstraites - Israel has to be geared to handle greater threats then just the Palestinains.
Anyway look - I do not want to see war with Iran - and I am not in favor - right now. That could change depending on what the Iranians do - they have to stop enriching uranium - they have a right to nuclear power - not weapons.
As for evidence -
what is CLEAR is that the Iranians havebeen lying about their program - and that they used the negotiations with the Europeans as an opportunity to secretly move their program forward - as was recently admitted by the previous Iranian negotiator.
I will tell you this - IF any kind of military conflict emerges with Iran - it will be with the backing of Europeans.
But I don't think we are there yet.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
A. Tsang
Joined: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 126 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 36
Country: New Zealand
Province/State: Auckland
City: Auckland
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 27, 2006 - 04:03 AM
|
|
>"If necessary, however, under long-standing principles of
>self-defence, we do not rule out use of force before attacks
>occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place
>of the enemy's attack,"
Does that mean US want to legitimate the act of "Pick a fight"?
What I can tell is, Chinese don't want war. My father-in-law once join the People Libration Army (Mainland China Amry) told me about in garrison in Fuzhou 1973, observing the Taiwan airforce.
As I know China is using everykind of bluffing try to tone down Taiwan's President CHEN Sui-ban's pro-independent's ideology. The funny thing is more bluffing actually give more booast to President CHEN's popularity. I wonder if mainland China learn a lesson or there r undertable deals with CHEN for this "Political Saga".
My father-in-law told me if China want to use military force to annex Taiwan & Hong Kong, they should already do that long time ago.
In my opinion, China doesn't need to use any weapon or military operation. There r enough Chinese people to flood any part of the world.
I believe China government is getting furious sometimes that being pick on. Sedimantal Chinese do not like head-to-head confrontations, demonstrations & hot debates.
Do not attempt to use conventional Western method to change China (and middle east). Be nice to Chinese students studying overseas. Be nice to Chinese migrants living overseas. Be nice and good to one Chinese, he / she will pass the message of love & tolerance to the heart of the country and the network of Chinese around the world.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Anu maheshwari
Joined: Jun 14, 2005
Posts: 1148 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Virtual Volunteer
Gender & Age: Female, 27
Country: India
Province/State: Maharashtra
City: Pune
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 27, 2006 - 12:54 PM
|
|
Originally posted by luke
Why do you imagine we will start another war?? As a matter of a serious question.
Since 9/11, US government has always followed up on its words regarding aggression. Whenever there was a possibility of war they actually did go to war. So my imagination is not far fetched here. It could be very well a premonition here!
Originally posted by luke
The US is set in opposition to certain countries yes - but it always has been - it is possible to oppose countries like Iran and North Korea without matters escalating to war.
...
I will tell you that when Iran talks about destroying Israel and denying the Hollocaust it draws alot of animosity in the American public - Because they are clearly threatening to radically escalate the Israeli/Arab conflict.
Well you seem to be downplaying the effect of the rhetoric of war coming from the oval office but exaggerate the same thing coming out of the Iranian President!
Iranian president is not even the ultimate authority in Iran. He could be very well overruled by the supreme leader anytime but President Bush has the rights to follow his words without being stopped like he did with Iraq. The decision on Iraq was I presume “Unilateral”. The American opposition and the public seem to protest only after the catastrophe has occurred.
As for the Iranian prez’s support to Hamas , after coming to power Hamas hasn’t declared an all open war against Israel, has it? . It hasn’t recognized Israel as a matter of ideology but it has actually contained terrorism on its part.
The only news that gets out is the one that the US media wants the world to read …. Well the Iranian Prez on other occasions has also emphasized his commitment to world peace like the US president appears to do everyday…
“President reiterates commitment to helping establish int'l peace, security
Khorramabad, Lorestan Prov, March 9, IRNA
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday relished on the thought of a peaceful and secure world and reiterated Iran's commitment to making this a reality. Ahmadinejad, who arrived in Kouhdasht city Thursday morning on the second day of a two-day visit of this western province, was speaking before a crowd of local officials and residents of the city. "We should help bring peace, tranquility and security to the world and for a reign of justice, peace and security in every nation. “Iranians are not used to bullying and will not also surrender to bullying. The Iranian nation has just one slogan: "Nuclear energy is the Iranian nation's inalianable right." "Certain powers think that by holding meetings they can force the Iranian nation to capitulate. “But the era of bullying has passed and real power is in the hands of nations," the president said. He said his government was determined to see the country progress and gave the government's assurance of support to the people and their problems”
Originally posted by luke
Your country has been staring the Pakistani's in the eye with nuclear weapons - this also is a risk to global security - presently there is a low grade conflict between Indian and Muslim forces backed by Pakistan in Kashmire But you have not entered into open war.
The question of India starting a war seems to be a joke!
We have been on the side of tolerance since time unknown. It is against our foreign policy. It just doesn’t support aggression. I am against nuclear proliferation from the core of my being…so I condemn the acquisition of nukes. But I am also 100% sure that India would be the last on the planet to ever use it.
BTW you said ‘low’ grade conflict …if thousands of people dying every year on a consistent basis is low grade then I think you have a separate dictionary. There is real tension in Kashmir valley but the Indian government has the patience to resolve the issue through talks. Open aggression against Pakistan is just not there in the picture. It will only create more trouble because citizens on both sides are dead against it. Pakistanis are not our enemies they are family, it is history that has created this trouble between us. Firstly, the ‘Divide and Rule’ policy followed by the British colonizers and secondly, the ruthless and selfish ambition of our leaders at the time of independence.
Originally posted by luke
Bush does not have support enough in the US to begin another conflict.
He is still trying to explain to people why we went into Iraq in the first place - support for that war is now about 30%.
Bush's approval ratings are about 32% he is clearly losing the public and will soon be a lame duck. The real question is if the Democrates can take back Congress in November.
Well if Mr. Clinton can use Afghanistan to divert attention from his personal life then I am really scared to see what the next democrat has in store for the world. Even Kerry didn’t oppose the Iraq war. He didn’t even offer an alternative; he just supported Bush on the issue.
Originally posted by luke
I think you do not understand American domestic politics -
I might not but I do have a clear sight to see the affects on rest of the world. Moreover I think the US Govt lacks a clear insight into the politics of the rest of the world especially the Middle East.
Nobody likes to be bossed around especially a ‘democratic’ nation like Iran (they are a democracy, a shade different but still democratic).
Even India doesn’t like interference in the Indo-Pak issue which is an internal matter for the countries involved to resolve. So why doesn’t the US govt leave Israel and Palestine to resolve their own disputes instead of arming Israel and waiting for the opposition to do nothing.
Originally posted by luke
As for understanding acts of terrorism more deeply than I do - perhaps I did not explain.
I never said I understand them 'better' than you or anybody else. It is you who are making the claims.
There are people in Israel, Palestine,India, Iraq and Afghanistan who live through it everyday. I really salute them for what they manage to go through everyday.
Originally posted by luke
I was in New York on 9/11. You are talking about about a Public Relations building - I watched 2 110 story massive buildings collapse - with THOUSANDS of people inside them.
I walked on Ground Zero the next day, and volunteered, and gave blood.
I have friends who lost their parents. I had a pregnant friend who lost her husband.
So please understand - New York is obviously a target - its my hometown.
I appreciate that "alot of things are wrong" - but but I need you to appreciate that obliteration of New York is not just "some thing that is wrong" - it is a CATASTROPHY.
911 was a catastrophe but are you implying that people dying in your hometown is a more catastrophic event then people dying anywhere else. It is a personal issue for you but so it is for the rest of the world( i know it is hard for you but you must also try to understand that it is equally difficult for others). For an Indian, for an Iraqi, for an Israeli, for an Afghan, for a Muslim, for a Hindu, for a Christian …..We lose a part of ourselves when we lose someone we love…..
US woke up to the pain and hurt after 911, and look how it reacted!
The same happens everyday in other parts of the world but no other government is razing cities!
Originally posted by luke
There is little question that this is the ardent desire of a number of terrorist organizations.
Also - do you really fault us for knocking out the Taliban?
“Terrorist” organizations not elected governments!
Taliban was a terrorist organization so the attack against them can be justified but the same logic cannot be applied to Iran … especially when all that the US government has, as evidence -- ‘contrived and fake data’ and presumptions.
Originally posted by luke
Going into Iraq - Bush Cheany Rummy - made a mess of it - no question.
A mess!!! Oh yes they did!
But now it is too late, isn’t it!
That’s why I think it is better to shout out loud against any possible US aggression before it happens. The world would be doing a great favour to the US government by sparing them such moments of embarrassment again in future!
regards,
Anu
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 27, 2006 - 12:55 PM
|
|
not suggesting anyone shouldn't be nice to the Chinese -
I don't know if I can agree that China will not find itself getting tangled into wars.
If there really have a totally peaceful agenda why how their military spending been increasing at the highest rate in the world?
The military build up is definately one of the factors raising tensions with Tiawan.
Anyway we'll see - I can't imagine anyone (including the US) getting into a direct confrontation with China.
but superpowers are ALWAYS imperialist to different degrees - China's imperialism can already be felt in Africa where they are propping up despotic regeimes like the Sudanese for virtue of their oil.
This will only increase as they ascend to power.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Anu maheshwari
Joined: Jun 14, 2005
Posts: 1148 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Virtual Volunteer
Gender & Age: Female, 27
Country: India
Province/State: Maharashtra
City: Pune
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 28, 2006 - 01:52 AM
|
|
Originally posted by luke
because they would never settle them - an outside arbritrator must be used, not just the US alone - but the quartet. Someone must HOLD the parties to the agrements that they sign.
Also - perhaps you don't understand - Israel's army has been developed to fight multiple Arab armies at once - it has had to deal with as many as 5 adversaries at once in the past and so now its military is geared to handle this.
If you are seeing the conflict there solely in terms of the Israelis and Palestinians you are looking at it the wrong way - The Israelis I assure you, and America too, sees it as a conflict between Israel and the Arab world - the Palestinians are simply the most accute dimension right now.
As this brewing conflict with Iran demonstraites - Israel has to be geared to handle greater threats then just the Palestinains.
hey luke !
i would definitely reply in detail to your post later as i am kinda caught up in something urgent today.
but for the time being i have three things to say!
firstly Hamas has agreed to talk to the quartet regarding the crisis but now the quartet is blocking their approach with their own pre-conditions...
India would have never achieved the cease fire with Pakistan if it hadn't overlooked preconditions like pakistan stopping all assistance to the terrorist camps in POK etc...
the quartet should at least hear what Hamas have to offer! or Can they suggest any other way to resolve the conflict?pressure tactics never work in the middle east , infact they actually add oil to the fire.
secondly,
It is assuring to hear that Mr. Bush wouldn’t be able to garner enough support to march his troops into another country but at the same time the possibility of launching air strikes against Iranian “Nuclear” facility is quite unsettling.
Thirdly,
I have a question for you here.
Why do you support Israel?
You said it was not Israel against Palestine but Israel against the ‘Arab’ World (are you referring to the Arab countries? If yes, then Iran is definitely excluded ;-)).
Again I think Jews in USA have a very strong lobby and hence have the power to influence American foreign policy regarding Israel. but why do they support israel's cause, ---'religion' , 'history'....
If so, judging by the same parameter… the support from the Arab world to the Palestinian cause should not be an alarming thing!
and also what do u mean israel has to be geared for facing threats..with American support, the entire middle east could vanish into thin air..so what 'victims' are you talkin about...palestine population suffers equally because of this...
Personally I believe that we should let bygones be bygones…Israel has already been created and any idea to relocate millions of Israelites to a new place sounds utterly preposterous.
Both sides involved should now come to a realization that compromise is the only solution…but it is definitely not goin to be an easy task to achieve…and active confrontation would be an invitation for quick doom for both and for the world… but no amount of pressure tactics from the white house will ever achieve any positive response from the middle east...that is for sure!
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Arslan Jumaniyazov
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 1358 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 32
Country: Turkmenistan
Province/State: Dashoguz
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 28, 2006 - 02:24 AM
|
|
Originally posted by luke
not suggesting anyone shouldn't be nice to the Chinese -
I don't know if I can agree that China will not find itself getting tangled into wars.
If there really have a totally peaceful agenda why how their military spending been increasing at the highest rate in the world?
That's a good question, Luke. I agree. But I am wondering whether you can pose the same question regarding your country. The Chinese military spending pales in comparison with the US military spending. Excluding the costs of Afghanistan and Iraq wars, US spending is close to half a trillion. Why do you need that, Luke?
Chinese mounting military spending causes suspicion, no question about that. However, it should not be ignored that the Chinese may be responding to Washington just like the Russians.
suppot for war with Iran is basically none-existant
I wish it was true, but I am not sure about it. Look at the polls:
57% Americans support military action in Iran
By Greg Miller, Times Staff Writer
Published: January 27 2006 15:22 | Last updated: January 27 2006 15:22
https://registration.ft.com/registration/barrier?referer=http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=AMSA,AMSA:2006-12,AMSA:en&q=57%25+support+military+action&location=http%3A//news.ft.com/cms/s/821b8e1c-8f47-11da-b430-0000779e2340.html
WASHINGTON - Despite persistent disillusionment with the war in Iraq, a majority of Americans supports taking military action against Iran if that country continues to produce material that can be used to develop nuclear weapons, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found.
The poll, conducted Sunday through Wednesday, found that 57% of Americans favor military intervention if Iran's Islamic government pursues a program that could enable it to build nuclear arms.
Arslan
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Lieberman
Joined: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 3007 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 33
Country: United States
Province/State: California
|
Re: The Fear Factor
March 28, 2006 - 02:58 AM
|
|
anuriandima84 -
Hamas either has to change its stripes - or be made to fail - but the US and Europe plainly cannot give Hamas money that will only be used to run a terrorist campeign.
I think you should read an article in today's Aljazeera - as I said - they are talking "peace" to the West - but domestically they sing a differnt tune
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/1A014B78-768C-4775-B28F-297DD4A3C2DB.htm
Hamas adopted a strident tone after its cabinet won approval in the Palestinian parliament, with one MP declaring "jihad is our way".
The parliament, dominated by members of the Islamist group, approved the cabinet line-up by 71 to 36 on Tuesday.
The cabinet was expected to be sworn in on Wednesday by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president whose long-dominant Fatah faction refused to join the new government.
Chanting "God is Greatest" after the vote, Hamas parliamentarians hugged and kissed Ismail Haniyeh, their prime minister-designate, who vowed to not to abandon the fight against Israel.
One Hamas MP, Hamed Bitawi, said: "The Koran is our constitution, Jihad is our way, and death for the sake of God is our highest aspiration."
His comments stood in contrast to a more conciliatory speech by Haniyeh on Monday in which he stressed the new government's push for peace and dialogue.
The earlier speech drew fire from some MPs for not stressing resistance.
the article goes on - but you can just read it.
As for the quartet hearing what Hamas has to offer - let me ask you, if their offer does not include recognition ofr Israel - what is the point?
A "long term truce" is not going to interest the Israelis because the Palestinians will just build up and attack them later.
"Why do you support Israel?" - anuriandima84
Why shouldn't I? At this point I support peace. I do not see Hamas as helpful.
But to answer your question more fully - because I know Israelis - I have been there, I have spent time talking to the older generation who actually fought in those wars.
and basically because I understand Jewish history.
if it is more correct we can say "between Israel and the Muslim world"
The Jews again find themselves surrounded by alot of people who want to kill them - they are under threat -
just before this they were surrounded in Europe by people who wanted to kill them - and succeeded. - in fact this was the reason many went into the sparsely populated desert and laid down roots.
Perhaps you do not understand what it is like to be under threat like that for basically the whole century - but in Europe Jews were VERY peaceful, perhaps too easily rounded up onto trucks.
There comes a point where a group is almost pushed to extinction - where they draw a line in the sand and take hold a gun - and refuse to go quietly into the night.
I am Jewish - and this is my history - and those in Israel are the survivors - we in America have it easy, most of our ancestors got out early - or had the monsy to escape Europe ad cross an ocean - not everyone could cross an ocean - and many of those Israelis are from places like Poland.
Those are the survivors - we have a saying "never again"
this does not mean I support everything Israel does - Sharon did alot of things I did not support at all.
I think the IDF needs reforming and there needs to be more decipline.
Basically I think they should go back to 1967 - and if they want to keep those two big settlement blocks then they should give the Palestinians an equivelant amount of land somewhere else on the boarder.
hope you can understand - there is a woman you should talk to who had to escape Poland, came to an empty desert - she didn't take anyone elses land - she managed to buy a little peice of her own - and she met a man, and worked the land - and they took up guns to defend themselves from the larger Arab community and to protect themselves from the Bedouins.
You see the real narrative of this story is not of course the Israeli version - but it is not the Palestinian version either.
The Palestinians have had many opportunities to coompromise - they have rejected them and chosen war insteaed - 48 being the most obvious example
As for why most Americans support Israel - in part it is because of a very successful Jewish community here in America, one which has not caused trouble but rather been nothing but beneficial to the larger community. One which was a force in the struggle for Civil Rights - this is why Martin Luther King for instance supported Israel.
If you want to call it a lobby - go ahead, but that misunderstands the truth - support for Israel is much deeper than that.
There is also the fact that Israel is a democracy in a part of the world where there is none, because they treat women and within their boarders minorities - better than any other country in the regoin.
There is also a very strong support of Israel among the religious Christians - this hit home at the last Christmas service I went to with my Grandparents - you were in a Church, and the word Israel was on the moniters half the time.
The Hollocaust is a major part of Amerifcan education of world history - in part because our soldiers liberated alot of the death camps.
there is more to it obviously - Israel is one the most technological societies in the world - alot of medicines, biotechs, communications etc come out of there - my brother used to work in the Commerce Department they called the Israelis the most "educated work force on the planet"
Now this support does not extend to all of Israel's actions - there are plenty of policies that people disagree with - but when Americans hear a racist like Ahmadinejad talking about "wiping them out" it stiffens American's backbones and they say "hold it right there!"
But also it would be a mistake to see AMerican adversion to Iran Nuclear weapons simply in the context of Israel - the whole Western World is VERY concenred about it because of their support for international terrorism.
We are worried about it for our own sakes.
"with American support, the entire middle east could vanish into thin air" - anuriandima84
I think you do not fully understand the History here - the US was not a major supporter really until the 60's - in fact the US had an arms embargo on Israel until 1962.
Basically Israel won 48 and 67 with French support as the French were against Egypt in that period.
But also the arms embargos forced Israel to create a domestic military industry.
As for American support - the US has NEVER used troops to protect the Israelis - EVER - in 1973 they re-armed them in the middle of the conflict.
so Israel is not counting on that kind of protection - and frankly they are not counting on anyone but themselves.
'"Both sides involved should now come to a realization that compromise is the only solution"
obviously - I am not saying we shouldn't talk to Hamas - I am just pessimistic because I have talked to their members before and they are like brainwashed - they beleive everything on religious grounds and they are very radical - so it is almost impossible to get them to see the virtue of compromise.
This next year Hamas is going to go about dismantling agreements that Israel and Palestine have already agreed to.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
|
Display posts from:
|
|
Home
Community
