Iraq: Conflict and Hope: Part 1: In Time 9/11 Just a Number

[dealmeidaable]

Hitchens was handsomely paid to take that position on the war.

[ketsan]

@dealmeidaable Then his position should be easy to refute and the ad hominem would be unnecessary.

[Jazzdog40]

@dealmeidaable-An outrageous claim. Cite documents to prove it/

[dealmeidaable]

What did Saddam Hussein and Iraq have to do with the attack on 9/11?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. This doc does a disservice to anyone who watches and believe it.

Also 9/11 will NEVER be just a number.

[ntripp]

I am to varying degrees an anarchist, a socialist, and a Democrat; and I support this message.

[deeppurple28]

American Foreign policy is what produced some of the biggest terrorists in the world! America Loves providing Rebels with money to fight Proxy Wars! You know, like they are doing in Iran!

[seraph101]

A plot so evil huh? What about american imperialism murdering millions around the world for decades upon decades? Stop crying about 9/11 like it's the worst even to ever happen.

[jamalak74u]

dont forget hiroshima, US. 911 is nothing compare to hiroshima and the other city i forgot the name of.

[apacolypticus]

@jamalak74u Obviously a history buff. The bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not terrorist actions. We had declared war on Japan. This was not some heinous surprise attack on an innocent nation. Also, the case has been made many tines before that the nuclear bombings in Japan saved many more lives, American and Japanese, than it ended. It ended a terribly wasteful war, and removed from power a megalomaniac who was ordering his subjects into suicide rather than American liberation.

[jamalak74u]

@apacolypticus the Americans declared a war with the Japanese army not civilians. US army dropped the nuclear bomb on poor civilians. i would have agreed if the US army dropped the bomb on the soldiers, but unarmed civilians! come on only a coward would do that to poor people. by the way i am not saying anything bad about 9 11 I know it was terrible thing to happen but its still unclear who did it. i mean who could hijack a plane from Middle east and crash it into twin towers without refuelling?

[NotAG4yName]

@jamalak74u The other city was nagasaki and that was during wartime and was done by president truman against the advice of his generals as a political move to show the soviets what we had....you also seem to forget the bombing raids done daily on other german and japanese citys throughout the war some of which actually killed more people then the atomic bombs

[seraph101]

@NotAG4yName The bombs were dropped after Japan had lost, basically.  There was no need. It was a terrorist act. Fuck 9/11, that was during war time, since the USA is in constant conflict somewhere in the world.

[NotAG4yName]

@seraph101 dude japan was ready to fight to the bitter end even after the bombs had been dropped...there were members of the war cabinet who tried to pull a coup after the first bomb dropped because they knew the emperor was going to surrender the next day...you or i cannot possibly comprehend what it was like to fight against an enemy so fanatical and terrifying...they dont care if they die just as long as they kill you...the nukes werent justified in hindsight but its understandable

[seraph101]

@NotAG4yName Please wake up and read what Chomsky and Pilger have to say about this. It's a historical fact that Japan could not fight on even if they would have wanted to. The A bombs were acts of terrorism.

[NotAG4yName]

@seraph101 i dont give a fuck what either of them have to say because they werent there and didnt bleed through the pacific campaign with the marines...dont try to change the past...the atomic bomb being used in anger for the first time was a lesson for the whole world and one the japanese learned well...they pushed past theocratic beliefs and developed one of the most advanced countries on the planet

[u565717]

Propaganda

[l3lip]

@u565717

I know, right?

Whatever evidence coming out against the mainstream opinion that the Iraq war was a COMPLETE and whole fiasco is "propaganda".

Don't let others do the thinking for you so much.

[equsnarnd]

I looked and found nothing of any substance. George Galloway and Noam Chomsky are not serious or credible sources for anything. So perhaps you can supply me with a url that has some substance or stand by my charge that you're just blowing hot air.

[funnyapples1]

i'm usually against the conservatives or the right but in this particular issue i agree with my freedom-loving opponents. it's good to see a smart intelligent documentary from the right. thx for the upload.

[blackoil911]

lol usa ignored the un regulations and rules'''

no weapons of mass destruction was found in iraq''''''

usa only invaded iraq becuz it was a mismatch , also to kill alot of arab people to make the american people happy.

[equsnarnd]

@blackoil911 That's not true that no WMD was found. Did they find nuclear weapons stockpiled? No.  But that wasn't the mandate. They did find WMD and that the Iraqi's had been lying. If you think otherwise than you are a victim of the Left controlled US mass media who acted as though not finding stockpiles of nuclear weapons meant that no WMD's were found.

[blackoil911]

@equsnarnd

omg your such a idiot!!!!

any university levelled person will easily proclaim

the invasion was inregards to oil u fucking IdIOT!!!

usa economy went down the drain

and iraq is right under the top 5 of having huge muther fcuking oil reserves next to canada russia and saudi'''

NO fucking weapons of mast destruction were found u fucking idiot

!!!

ur own people voted agaisnt the war look what happened

bush just didnt care , it was basically a goverment control'

[equsnarnd]

@blackoil911 You seem to think swearing and name calling substitutes for intellect. But I'll ask one more time. Prove it. How much oil did we get? How much Iraq oil did we simply take? If we fought a war for oil then we should have a lot of it. Where is it? And WMD were found or were you thinking they were going to find massive stockpiles of nuclear bombs and not finding that can declare no WMD!

[blackoil911]

@equsnarnd

nope no weapons of Mass destrution were found

also its obvious , u retard that usa took the oil''' any normal person will agree to this

the goverment doesnt need to make a big public announcement of stealing iraqs oil DUH u silly fool

[equsnarnd]

@blackoil911 Just what I figured - you don't know squat. A lot of hot air.

[87fg]

The Bush administration was full of hot air, when it stated that Saddam was going to attack America. There was no threat from Iraq. The invasion only increased the power of Iran in the region and created instability. The war was a major mistake and damaged America's image in the international community.

[equsnarnd]

@87fg There were many reasons to go after Saddam. Sounds to me like you're just looking for an excuse to Bash Bush. You're entitled to an opinion no matter how ill advised. Listen to all the utube clips on Iraq with Christopher Hitchens. Otherwise spare me the stupid Bush Bashing as I'm totally disinterested in it.

[87fg]

Saddam was a Cold War ally whom the US used to contain Iran in the 1980s.Removing him only created a power void in the Middle East. North Korea was more of a threat than Saddam could ever hope to be.The Bush administration deserves to be criticized, just like any other administration.

[zatoichi1969]

@equsnarnd Life is totally disinterested in you equsretard. You horse molester.

[equsnarnd]

@zatoichi1969 Ouch! That really hurt. Wow - you are one tough asshole. Guess I better give up now. Guess your intellect is towering. Must be all of...98. Don't feel badly about that - puts you right in the middle of the majority. A solid member of the mediocre majority with the limp wristed views of a left wing progressive who whines at the universe, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa­aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. Life is unfair waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa­aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

[zatoichi1969]

@equsnarnd You are just another brainless, right wing, blowhard, warhawk. Dont feel bad. there are plenty of sisterfucking white trash on the right and at the tea baggers express rallys to keep you company. I realize that it small penis syndrome. 2 inches and under. Dont feel badly about that all racist have small penises. that includes all right wingers conservativesKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII­IIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL­. I dont have enough power and money KIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLL­LLLLLLL!!!!!!!!

[87fg]

Haliburton was the major looter of oil. The Bush family and the Saudi royals got the most from the spoils of war.These two families own oil companies, so the invasion was a business venture. This was a war of geopolitical subjugation not liberation.

[equsnarnd]

@87fg And you can document this. Not just with SWAG but with actual hard evidence because if you can't then it's just a lot of hot air.

[87fg]

Armed Madhouse by Greg Palast explains that Iraq's reserves of oil could produce more than Saudi Arabia. They wanted to eliminate an economic threat. The US has the desire to control natural resources, before China rises. Their consumption will surpass ours, because of their population. Like I said before geopolitics is at work on the international stage.

[equsnarnd]

@87fg Conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen. Without evidence you have nothing but paranoia which doesn't make you wrong but not being wrong without being able to prove your case is just as effective as being wrong. Unless your an investigative journalist who has the resources to put this together. Otherwise I'd listen to every clip on utube on the war done by Christopher Hitchens who does have the resources and connections.

[87fg]

The National Security Archive has compiled declassifed documents that prove the wrong doing of the Bush administration. This is not a conspiracy theory regime change has been neoconservative policy.

[87fg]

Iraq is worse off now. Infastructure is damaged, uemployment is high, and sectarian violence is out of control. Kurds still face racial discrimination.Bush said during the election of 2000 America should not get involved in nation-building. That was a major vacillation.

[Re5Publica]

@87fg A kurd is the president, and kurds have a very large degree of autonomy in the north.

I hate people who credit Saddam 4 keeping order in the country pre-war, but don't credit his supporters for ripping it apart post-war. Do u honestly believe no baath party supporters blew up cars in markets, & tried 2 stop a shia-majority government from being voted into office? In that cause, al-Qaeda & Baathists had common cause. The insurgency was just further proof that Saddam needed to be deposed.

[paradoarify]

@Re5Publica Yeah, the regime was designed to survive its own collapse.

[Re5Publica]

@paradoarify Documents found after the invasion, which are compiled in a study made for the pentagon called: "The Iraqi Perspectives Project - Saddam And Terrorism" show that he recruited suicide bombers as early as 2001 from among supporters of his party, and he asked that their volunteer forms be signed "preferably in their own blood". Anyone who says there were no suicide bombers in Iraq before 2003 are either ignorant or lying.

[87fg]

The Saddam Al-Qaeda link was false. He was not a political Islamist, but a secular Pan-arab nationalist. That link was nothing more than a lie that came from the Bush administration. Saddam had Abu Nidal under house arrest.

[paradoarify]

@87fg That's really not true. They weren't working together but Saddam was trying hard to get jihad fighters to come into his country so that they could provide the violence that he could no longer afford because of the sanctions. He praised osama after nine eleven when even some members of al qaida thought that osama went to far.

[87fg]

He had the force of the Saddam Fedayeen and his army. Saddam did not need terrorists because he created his own.The sanctions only hurt the people of Iraq, not Saadam's grip on power. Osama would did not like Saadam any way because he is the type of leader he wants to deposed. Osama Bin Laden has an intense hatred of secular regimes and monarchies of the Middle East. What you are stating is not political reality.

[Re5Publica]

@87fg Iraqi intelligence agents met with Osama bin Laden in the 90s (fact), because Osama was helping Egyptian Islamic Jihad in Sudan to overthrow the Egyptian government, and Saddam Hussein was also supporting Egyptian Islamic Jihad (who were political islamists). Saddam supported jihadist groups, it's proven by Iraqi documents detained after the invasion. If you want to know what senior members of Egyptian Islamic Jihad are doing today, take a look at who makes up the al-Qaeda leadership.

[87fg]

The CIA provided aid to mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion. That does not make America supportive of Jihad. Your point lacks cogency. Iraq had nothing to do with the War on Terror. There is no proof of Saddam supporting theocratic movements. The Muslim Brotherhood is more of threat than Islamic Jihad, because it has numerous branches in the Middle East. The US does not even list the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.

[Re5Publica]

@87fg Egyptian Islamic Jihad was a theocratic movement, it's former leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is now Al-Qaeda's second-in-command.

Saddam was a prolific supporter of terrorism, one example would be his support of palestinian suicide bombers whose families would receive money from Saddam for carrying out attacks.

The Muslim Brotherhood is not a terrorist organization, they haven't as an organization committed terrorist acts, but they're nonetheless an islamic supremacist organization.

[87fg]

The Muslim Brotherhood was involved in the Anwar Sadat assassination. Yes, it is a terrorist organization. The only reason Saddam was supportive of the Palestinian liberation struggle was because Yasir Arafat was the only Arab leader to support his invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Saddam was merely manipulating the political situation. The "supporter of Terrorism" claim is invalid. Every state has used some form of terrorism on its population or other countries.

[87fg]

Zawahiri was inspired by one of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood known as Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966). He provided the ideological basis for political Islamism.If Qutb never developed these ideas, Zawahiri would have been historically insignificant. That's why Egypt banned the Muslim Brotherhood, because of their involvement in terrorism.

[87fg]

The whole notion of a War on Terror is just ludicrous. You cannot declare war on a military tactic. Does a war on guerrilla warfare seem winnable? It is not due to the fact it is a tactic of an armed group. America was never a free country and the Iraq War has proven this. Civil liberties are under attack and the power of the government is being abused.

[Re5Publica]

@87fg They thought the name "War On Islamic terrorists", would be offensive to Muslims. The Bush doctrine is very clear, the U.S. will fight terrorists, and the states that back them (through funds, or by providing bases for training, or weapons, etc.)

Canada declared Martial law over a kidnapping and one murder. The U.S. did not even after the pentagon was struck and 3000 americans killed. If you're trying to portray America as a reactionary police state, you must think we're all ignorant.

[87fg]

The Bush administration killed more Muslims and Arabs in the military interventions from 2001 to 2009. The Patriot Act is unconstitutional, the writ of habeas corpus is suspended, and Americans are facing wire tapping by the government. That's not freedom. The Bush Doctrine is nothing more than incognito imperialism. Since 1945 America has basically been at war with the Third World.

[Re5Publica]

@87fg America also killed more German & Japanese civilians than vice versa. What's your point?

And it was Egyptian Islamic Jihad who killed Sadat.

The fact that Zawahiri used to be a Muslim brother, doesn't mean he still is. I used to be a marxist.

There's an islamic movement in Nigeria that targets the infamously extremist Wahhabis because they're not anti-western, and violent enough.

It's true fanatics from Ikwahn have found their way into terrorism, but after leaving the group.

[87fg]

The point is that there is no such thing as a "just war." There were no weapons of mass destruction, no terrorist networks, or theocratic movements in Iraq. Islamic Jihad and the Muslim Brotherhood were both involved in the murder of Sadat. The members were imprisoned and were exiled to Afghanistan in hopes they would be killed in the Soviet invasion. The Afghan Arabs did not only consist of volunteers, but criminals. The United States had no right to invade Iraq.

[87fg]

The Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad have similar goals, but with every ideology there are factions. Marxism is a great example. There were trotskyists, Maoist, Leninist, and other socialist experiments around the globe. The fact of the matter is ideology changes and so do individuals. Zawahiri wanted to see the dream of Qutb become a political reality.

[Re5Publica]

@87fg "In a meeting in the Sudan we agreed to renew our relations with the Islamic

Jihad Organization in Egypt. Our information on the group is as follows:

It was established in 1979.

Its goal is to apply the Islamic shari' a law and establish Islamic

rule.

It is considered one of the most brutal Egyptian organizations. It

carried out numerous successful operations, including the assassination

of Sadat." - Iraqi Perspectives Project: Saddam & Terrorism

[87fg]

The truth is that the Muslim Brotherhood is helpful to them. Saddam used terrorism against his own population, not the United States. Like I stated before the invasion was a waste of time and lives. America just equates terrorism with Arabs and Islam, which demonstrates its racism and religious intolerance.

[Re5Publica]

@87fg !? First you call a non-violent Arab Muslim political party terrorists, and say the U.S. doesn't consider them terrorists, and then you call the U.S. racists for considering arabs and Muslims terrorists? Your arguments are just way to skitzophrenic for me to argue against. You just want to slander the U.S. no matter the facts. If there's anyone who is prejudiced it's certainly you.

[87fg]

I'm not prejudiced it's the Republican Party. Bush clearly wanted a war on Muslims and Arabs. I don't hate my country, I live here for goodness sakes. I just do not approve of nation building or being told lies by my government. The Muslim Brotherhood is not non-violent. Islam is not the problem here. Religion is a threat to freedom and rational thought.

[GaiusIuliusTaberna]

@87fg um no... Bush said half a dozen times that Islam was a religion of peace and that this was not in any way a war on Islam... and I say that as someone who is most likely going to reelect Obama, (the GOP seem to have flopped on the war making Obama the tough on terror choice) and was just about to criticize this film, (for making left wing opponents to Saddam Hussein and this body bag peace movement look... well like neo cons... I'm getting quite sick of being conflated with them.)

[87fg]

The USA has attacked more Muslim countries since 2001. Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and CIA operations in Yemen. Now the USA and NATO are at war with Libya. Stop ignoring the truth. The US is no friend to the Muslim world.

[BelfastAtheist]

@87fg

The fact that they're ''Muslim Countries'' is irrelevant - incidentaly, I disagree with allocating regional identities from religion. It's as Christopher Hitchens says in this documentary (He makes use of a rather prescient Orwell excert to do) - you're one of those people who doesn't care what the People who *live* in the Countries that he feels adequate enough to speak for, have to say. It doesn't even come up, does it? Considerable amounts of Pakistanis disagree with your notions.

[87fg]

The fact that the US invades countries based on their religion is evidence of bigotry. It is very relevant. Pakistanis despise their current government, not political Islamists. Then there is the part of the population who are just pro-military in Pakistan. Innocent people are killed in drone attacks and act as if that's okay. Your ethics are warped.

[BelfastAtheist]

@87fg

If you wan't to snidely accuse others of ''ignoring the truth'', then you should make sure you actually know the truth yourself. The real truth is, the Taliban are largely a Pakistani invention who are sponsored by the Pakistani State at every level. Anyone who doesn't know about the Pakistan-Afghanistan connection is not erudite when it comes to Middle-Eastern Politics, at all

As for Yemen, virtually the entire Yemeni Population *loathes* Al-Quada and supports action against them.

[87fg]

The Pakistani ISI did contribute to the creation of the Taliban. Yet, the Saudi monarchy gave huge financial support and also developed the Afghan Arabs (armed Islamist fighting groups). The CIA armed the Al-qaeda in the Soviet-Afghan War. The truth hurts my friend. The attacks of 9/11 were blowback from US intelligence operations.

[BelfastAtheist]

@87fg

Well.. evidently your 'truth' is very different to mine. Christopher Hitchens, though he does not state it in this documentary - rather effectively I would think, dissects Chomskyite talk of how all (almost all, in Chomsky's case) Jihadist terrorism is a backlash from American operations. In the words of Hitch ''To what injustice was Mister Bin Laden subject to?' Were the CIA oppressing his fellow Yemenis in 1998? Were they oppressing Pakistan in 1998? No, and no.

[87fg]

Well, I'm using facts Belfast. Your "truth" is an academic theory constructed by Samuel P. Huntington known as the clash of civilizations. This "truth" does not explain the complex function and role of history, politics, and sociological issues in the Middle East. The US supports the monarchies and authoritarian regimes in the region. as a result, someone like Abdullah ali Saleh can get weapons and money from the West.

[JulixHartley]

@87fg if they get weapons and money, what do we get?

[87fg]

We get oil and military bases.

[JulixHartley]

@87fg so power (weapons) and money for power (military) and money (oil)? hm... I guess that makes sense... :-S scary shit

[dopplereffeckt675]

@87fg

If I was you pal I would stick to weightlifting and stay clear of politics.............

[87fg]

Every free citizen should be politically active, unless you support fascism and militarism.

[BelfastAtheist]

@87fg

If these Countries were even sympathetic to Jihadist Terrorism (Saddam Hussein was, incidentally.. he harboured many wanted Terrorists in Baghdad - I can prove this to you in 5 seconds, Abu Nidal for example.. who Western Forces eventually found and killed in a firefight).

But they're not - Afghanistan for one, *loathes* the Taliban and would *never* let them get back into power, that's not to say all Afghani Tribal elders are Pro-American in regards to Security.. many are though.

[87fg]

Nidal was under house arrest during the regime. Afghanistan is in a state of warlordism and by all accounts a failed state. There is not one Taliban, but multiple armed Talibans. Most people are vexed at US occupation.

[BelfastAtheist]

@87fg

Yemen isn't begging for CIA activities to end, as you appear to believe. Some Afghani Tribal elders still don't like Americans (Liberating a Country, does not destroy an ideoalogy..) alas, such is life. America are on their way out - if you're seriously advocating immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq (Who suffered a string of 30 Al-Quada in Mesopotamia suicide attacks a few weeks ago, all in one day) or Afghanistan where the British Council was stormed less than a Month ago, go ahead.

[87fg]

President Saleh wants the CIA there so he can remain in power. Yemen is also a country divided by race and religion. Islamism has become a popular ideology, because of military intervention. During periods of uncertainty people turn to extremist convictions out of anger and fear. The fear for the people of the Middle East is military action by the West.

[BelfastAtheist]

@87fg

Your self-pity is unwarranted, the United States are (In regards to *at least* Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq) responsible for lifting two of the Worlds most despicable regimes, both of which sponsored Jihadist Terrorism. Do you even *care* what the WOMEN of Afghanistan think of American troops? Of course you don't. Do you care what my Family in Iraq has to say about them? Do you even read the polls of public opinion in Baghdad? No.. it doesn't even come up!

[87fg]

Iraqis have limited security, healthcare, and destroyed infrastructure. Terrorism is just a part of life there and this misery is directly linked to US military operations. I don't see people trying to move to Iraq anytime soon. Yes, I do care about human life, but you don't.

[87fg]

A black man is president in the United States and that does not mean racism is defeated. Average Kurds still suffer poverty and unemployment. Iran's power has increased ever since the invasion.Al-Qaeda was not in Iraq until after the invasion. They came to Iraq from Pakistan,Afghanistan, and Yemen. Iraq is a complete mess because of the invasion.

[samsonlovesyou]

No mention of the US sponsored terrorist atrocities in Cuba, I see.

[equsnarnd]

@samsonlovesyou Care to delineate or is it sufficient just to shoot off your mouth?

[samsonlovesyou]

@equsnarnd Sufficient to shoot off my mouth, because I can tell from your comment that you're not a person prepared to listen to reason.

However, if you seek information for your own interest, I shouldn't leave you in the lurch. There's an internet search tool called "Google" (dot com) which you can use. I would recommend that you try entering words such as "us terrorism in cuba", or something along those lines. Maybe "acts of terrorism" could be slipped in and so on.

Happy hunting.

[samsonlovesyou]

@equsnarnd Of, and try "Operation Northwoods", for something specific. Good luck.

[sexymalcom1970]

The others are terrorist incidents but you can clearly see a prolonged foreign policy misadveture which the US started and is now suffering the side effects of decades of international bullying. Idiots and the braindead will continue to blame radical islam etc. The reality is simple politics that constitutes imperialism, military expansion and its clearly in the name of globalisation.

[EasyEs]

So your President Bush in September 2001, please give me a detailed foreign policy agenda. Your so enlightened its selfish of you to be wasting your foreign policy expertise on you tube, when there is such a dire need of your enlightened opinion.

[EasyEs]

Bin Laden and AQ are anger over our refusal to allow East Timor descend into an Islamic state, so they hate us for that I don't think being nice is going to change things.

[jimbo1490]

It's pretty well accepted that the Sunni extremist group we call 'Al Quaeda' formed and prospered because of two key events:

1) the ascension of their hated rival the Shia via the Iranian revolution and 2) The Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan. Without these two events, no 'Al Quaeda'.

Of course once they 'won' in Afghanistan, they didn't just all pack up and go home, they found new targets for their anger and hatred.

They had no love for Clinton and don't have any for Obama, either.

[sexymalcom1970]

youve presented the facts to support misguided foreign policy adventures.

[sexymalcom1970]

MOGADISHU! another stupid foreign policy debarcle by the imperialistic US. The lessons of beiruit werent learnt. Civil wars are internal and shouldnt have external powers manipulation. The casualties where US army rangers and marines, once more military not terrorist.

Khobar towers housed the usaf, 19 airmen killed 300+ injured another military target

Taliban where the govt of afghanstan and had western support. The neocons courted the regime inregards to theTrans-Afghanistan Pipeline

[EasyEs]

"MOGADISHU! another stupid foreign policy debacle by the imperialistic US"  way to show your hand, wow don't break your arm patting yourself on the back for your superior research and perspective.

[sexymalcom1970]

not superior research but obvious facts usually misrepresented for propaganda reasons. i was just explaning the obvious pattern of misguided foreign policy adventures that are now being considered as radical islamic terrorism.

[EasyEs]

I think you meant something completely different they what you wrote, it doesn't make sense when you read it aloud. We all make mistakes. However what about Al-qeada propaganda, they are no idiots they know how to exploit people in the west who will always be willing to excuse their actions, they know how to fight a multifaceted war. Maybe you would see this conflict differently if you read the Al qeada reader by Dr Raymond Ibrahim. I certainly changed my opinion which was similar to yours.

[sexymalcom1970]

Yes i did, im no sympathiser of radical islamic fundamentalism, terrorism or whatever you choose to call it. I am however aware that most conflicts are different in nature and reasons for armed movements differs by continent. The threat isnt as significant as the media presents. Evidence to this fact is that they cant even get into govts in islamic nations.

[sexymalcom1970]

Lockerbie the first real terrorist activity mentioned in your list. According to some sources it was a revenge attack for the downing of an iranian passenger airline by the uss Vincennes where 290 CIVILIANS where killed. This was classified as a mistake but could be concrued as terrorism.

Kuwait has always been part of iraq just study history it became independent in the 1960s due to British manipulation in the region. That is a simple by product of colonialism

[sexymalcom1970]

iran hostage crisis. Us meddling caused that and none of the hostages where hurt. The only casualties were from a pathetic rescue attempt and self inflicted.

Beiruit bombings. The US intefered in a civil war and was siding certain factions. The real villian was reagen and the stupid republican warmongers who loved meddling in others domestic affairs. Casualties and target was military. Attacking Marines is an act of warfare not terrorism

[w0bbl3r]

in your info, you state the pan-am flight over england in 88.

was that the lockerbie bombing of the flight?

i live in the middle of england, and remember that very clearly. the plane exploded above the small town of lockerbie (but wasnt it scotland, not england?), and the whole town saw it come down in peices, with no survivors.

apart from the SAS storming of the london embassy in the early 80's, this was my first real memory of such horrific, barbaric acts against freedom and civilisation

[w0bbl3r]

i think that 9/11 is already just a number.

did you know that there are people in NEW YORK of all places, who dont even know what DATE the attacks took place on.

how insane is that?

when asked, people have said "hmm, im sure it was summer, but i remember it being late summer/early fall, so i think it was october or so", and "oh, i know, it was in july".

people are fucking ignorant, arent they?

[chc1818]

Unbelievable Series, well done man.

[punktum8]

Where is the rest???

"Iraq Conflict and Hope: Part 6", and so on.

pleace post them, if you can. It is a very interesting and iluminating program, so it is very sad that the end is missing.