American Occupation



  • http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/04/16/mosul_dead030416

    This is one side. There are others, of course.
    debate.



  • Gimme a break, they interview one guy (who probably has ties to Saddam) and we’re supposed to feel sympathic to him? :roll:

    Where’s the proof that our marines killed anybody? It’s almost as hoaky as that “stray missile” that supposedly crashed into an Iraqi market…



  • @Deviant:Scripter:

    Gimme a break, they interview one guy (who probably has ties to Saddam) and we’re supposed to feel sympathic to him? :roll:

    Where’s the proof that our marines killed anybody? It’s almost as hoaky as that “stray missile” that supposedly crashed into an Iraqi market…

    I think that the point is not that there are people who are pro-Saddam so much as that the hair-triggers of US guns are still mowing down civies.
    And yes, i feel sorry for the cops trying to protect people who are getting killed by an occupying army.



  • If that story came from another source besides the CBC I’d take it more serioulsy.
    The CBC is a anti-American station if there ever was one.
    They are absolutley brutal.



  • I think that the point is not that there are people who are pro-Saddam so much as that the hair-triggers of US guns are still mowing down civies.

    I’m sorry, but I think you’re buying right into their propoganda. I noticed they had absolutely ZERO proof to backup the claim that Marines were killing civilians. Let me see something besides a dead body that could have easily been killed by Iraqis or Iraqi soldiers, and I might feel a little more sympathetic.



  • I think the fact that we are employing Saddam’s old police force is a sign that we aren’t as clean as Bush says in there.



  • Here’s a story I’m sure the CBC won’t cover.

    http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,183437,00.html



  • Muslims do not tolerate non-Muslims ruling over them, look at what happened in Lebanon in 1982.



  • There’s a definitive difference between “liberating” and “ruling over.” There’s no evidence to suggest we’re involved with the latter, and everything pointing to the fact that we intend to allow the Iraqi population to choose their own leader.



  • Muslims do not tolerate non-Muslims ruling over them, look at what happened in Lebanon in 1982.

    Such anti-Muslim sentiment. No people like being occupied, which includes the Israeli-American occupation of Lebanon. Personally, if your in the military occupying a country, the gloves are off. Not that I want people to die, but there is nothing wrong with people resisting occupation. Its how our country came to be. The Muslim factor has nothing to do with it, as the Jewish religion has nothing to do with the Israeli attrocities, nor does the Hindu religion have any real influence over whats happening in Kashmir.

    Its not the specific Religion which causes conflict, its the idea of Religion in general. Suicide bombers and people like them have been motivated by every major religion in history. Christian zealots willing to give their life for their god, the Hebrews resisting Roman occupation (commonly refered to as the first “terrorists”), ect.



  • Yanny, Emugod it was NOT showing anti-Muslim sentiment when he stated that. Don’t pull out the racist or anti-muslim card here. It is well and widely documented that from a socio-religious point of view, Muslims tend to chaffe more at ‘foreign occupation’ then others. We rarely see Hindus, Christians, Jews or other major religions as angry at the mere presence of ‘friendly’ foreign troops. Combine that with the percentage of ‘devout religious types’ and it creates a situation one ought to be particularily careful. To say men and women are different is NOT to be sexist. To say there are differences in willingness to put up with the presence of foreign troops is not racist.

    Mr. Ghoul, I watch the CBC a great deal and I don’t think the news is anti-american. I am sure they show more negative stories about the US then CNN, but again CNN recently admited to not making public many stories they had via-a-vis Iraq in order to keep their useless talking heads in Baghdad. CNN, the most trusted news organisation…. yeah right, says them only. Any story that negatively impacts Canada will be shown on CBC, since 90% or so of our foreign trade is with the US, guess who is in the negative news columns alot? I dare you to cite anybody in the Canadian media who is 1/2 as anti-American as Pat Buchanon is anti-Canadian. Now, we have some anti-Americans in Canuck government, but I am happy to say that when Paul Martin is annoited without election as the new Prime Minister then he will clean out all the anti-American idiots in Gov who threatens the average joes quality of living.

    BB, not logged in again!



  • . We rarely see Hindus, Christians, Jews or other major religions as angry at the mere presence of ‘friendly’ foreign troops.

    I was refering to his reference to the occupation of Lebanon. And yes, this anti Muslim sentiment I see growing in the United States and elsewhere is Racist. Emugod specifically pointed out Muslims in his statement.



  • So Yanny, if I point out that Italians like pasta am I being racist? If I point out the Irish tend to be over-represented in the Irish Repulican Army is that racist? Al-Qaeda tends to have more muslims than Hindus, oh boy, better send out the polictical correctness police….

    American sentiment has nothing to do with Emugod. Since they have nothing to do with each other, why did you mention that versus some other irrelevant fact like sugar is sweet.

    So you are saying the bombing of US marines in Lebanon was NOTHING to do with muslim sentiment about the so-called “US occupation force”. Really? Any facts to back up that wild statement that flies in the face of all kinds of documented facts? As usual you offer nothing but your own feelings as fact. Tsk, tsk. You’re such a smart person, it’s a shame you don’t spend a few minutes to back up your opinions with some references.

    The word jihad is somewhat unique to Muslims. It seems the opposite and rather more noble that crusade. I hope you don’t think me racist to point out a difference.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1603178.stm

    BB



  • Your saying that saying “Muslims resist occupation more than any other group” is a fact, than your simple wrong. The group under the harshest occupation (Palestine) are simple in the spotlight.

    The Irish employed similar tactics, language, and motive in Northern Ireland, where they were being occupied by England. Are they Muslims? No. Are they resisting occupation just the same? Yes.

    The Hebrews in first century Rome terrorized Roman civilians, poisoned the rivers and wells, killed Roman Government officals, burning down Roman settlements, and committing suicide in mass numbers. Were they Muslim? No.

    Muslims who do commit acts and claim they are doing it for Islaam are either a) Misinformed (brainwashed by people with ill intent) or b) lieing. Never in the history of the religion has any Muslim movement gone this far. Just as Reverend Falwell’s following do not represent Christians, these people do not represent Muslims.



  • Just out of curiosity, name one successful country who’s majority of people are muslim…? I’m having trouble thinking of one.



  • Define Successful.



  • The religion muslims practice has special sections for telling the faithful to resist occupation not only in your country but in other ‘occupied muslim countries’. This is more true of that religion then the religion of christians. I am not saying it is right or wrong, moral or immoral. To note this fact is not to be racist. This is a fact dispite your claims to the countrary. Emugod pointed this out as a difference, Yanny, you are the one who is trying to trump this up into a racist attack that it is not. shrugs.

    As for defince successful, do you really need it defined to you? The tactict of answering a question with a question is tiring.

    Try this, take any measure of success you want and rank the muslim countries in order and take the top 5 and post them. Now compare the lot of their average citizens with the lot of the average european or north american or many in the asia-pacific rim. The leaders of most muslim countries have done a great dis-service to their citizens.

    BB



  • Thanks BB, that’s what I was eventually getting at. 😛



  • Heres an attempt:

    As of today:

    1. Turkey (Democracy, not badly off)
    2. Indonesia (Democracy, fairly well off)
    3. Pakistan (Militarily and Economically well off despite brutal despot)
    4. Saudi Arabia (Rich as hell, even brutaller rulers)
    5. Kuwait (Rich, not-so-bad despot)

    Of course, comparing Muslim countries to the west is flawed. The West is in it’s prime right now. The west is not doing so well because they are Christian. Religion has nothing to do with it. I can look back in history to times where the situation was reversed, as I already have in other threads and I will not bore you by typing it out again. Saying “Muslims resist occupation” is erroneous because everyone resists occupation.



  • The west is not doing so well because they are Christian.

    Huh?



  • @BigBlocky:

    So Yanny, if I point out that Italians like pasta am I being racist? If I point out the Irish tend to be over-represented in the Irish Repulican Army is that racist? Al-Qaeda tends to have more muslims than Hindus, oh boy, better send out the polictical correctness police….

    American sentiment has nothing to do with Emugod. Since they have nothing to do with each other, why did you mention that versus some other irrelevant fact like sugar is sweet.

    @BigBlocky:

    I am not saying it is right or wrong, moral or immoral. To note this fact is not to be racist. This is a fact dispite your claims to the countrary. Emugod pointed this out as a difference, Yanny, you are the one who is trying to trump this up into a racist attack that it is not. shrugs.

    I think this is sailing in very dangerous waters. Even a message that is “only stating facts” can deliver anotehr message of personal opinion in there (as frequently seen and done on this board by IMHO all of us).

    Why is this dangerous? Because you quickly can provoke “over-reaction” and over-use of political correctness. But then, can there be over-use if you (personally) feel that the provoking statement is such incorrect that you want to correct it?

    Just remember the thread/discussion i started with SUD the otehr day: I “just noted facts”, and SUD -though not denying all the facts- argued that the implication that followed noting only these facts and no others is incorrect.

    Just my 2 €-cent….



  • Quote:
    The west is not doing so well because they are Christian.

    Huh?

    I believe you misread me. To reword it, “The West is not doing well as a result of being Christian”



  • I believe you misread me. To reword it, “The West is not doing well as a result of being Christian”

    Okay, I guess I heard you correctly then. However, the part I’m confused about is, how is the West not doing so well?



  • I think he means the West is doing well not as a result of being Christian.



  • Is it that hard…

    Christianity is not the cause or a factor in the West’s greatness.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 7
  • 40
  • 3
  • 37
  • 32
  • 15
  • 3
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

58
Online

14.9k
Users

35.7k
Topics

1.5m
Posts