I'm not familiar with the aims that you claim Saudi Arabia had in the region. Saudi Arabia's aims were to keep oil prices high so they could keep making money. The U.S invasion of Iraq resulted in even higher oil prices, which I'm sure the Saudis were quite content with. Also, who should be in control of Iraq's oil? It wasn't up to Bush to decide. That attitude is extremely arrogant and is exactly why the West in general is so hated in that region. and is precisely what has radicalized the area.
The attempted annexation of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union has much more to do with that radicalization than free, albeit (naturally) imperfect elections in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Terrorism isn't caused by fighting against it, though I do think fighting against it causes extreme anger. What people do with that anger, however, is their responsibility. (one they share with their governments, who tend to indoctrinate their people with propaganda, on both sides of any conflict)
I absolutely agree with you, fighting against terrorism does not necessarily cause more of it, but going into an unjust war based on lies does, as it did in this case. Yes, there were cases of terrorism by Al Qaeda BEFORE September 11th, but the majority of them happened AFTER. What going into a country under false pretenses does is inspire further radicalism or jihad against perceived injustices perpetrated by the West.
"further radicalism or jihad against perceived injustices perpetrated by the West."
The problem is Islam has been trying to invade the West until their bloody imperial adventurisms were stopped at the gates of Vienna on September 11, 1683. So these "injustices" which you speak of has absolutely NOTHING to do with us, but EVERYTHING to do with them.
Oh yeah, like the West propping up dictatorships throughout the region, and invading other countries while poor people in those countries suffer and die for tactical reasons is just pure, pleasant fuzzy kittens on rainbows and liberty the tip of a 5000 lb bomb is pure, unadulterated happy-happy utopian justice. Extremists are scum. The West have to stop giving everyday PEOPLE reasons for being driven into the open their open arms. These people and their suffering is REAL, and has to do with us.
Quit it with the conspiracy theories and sadomasochism. If these poor people are bearing the full-brunt of Western imperialism, why don't you go help them by offering your warrior services in the service of their jihad? Why don't you mention the wars of Islamic conquests from the 8th - 16th centuries when the Muslims were, coincidentally, in the position of power? Why don't you mention the utopian justice of Sharia Law, the apotheosis of Islamic jurisprudence? All you have in your debating
arsenal is "The West is root cause of all the suffering in the Middle East" which is RIDICULOUS given elections of anti-American regimes all across the Middle East, many of which the US has not even touched with its military arsenal. But wait the US is probably behind the lack of religious freedoms in Saudi Arabia, the lack of women's rights in Iran, the disaster in Sudan and Somalia, the growth of the terrorism in Pakistan, the segregated education system under the Taliban.
conspiracy theories? You call the United States having propped up dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan a conspiracy theory? The monarchy in Saudi Arabia is and Musharraf of Pakistan was a dictatorship. These are facts. Also, the export of ultra orthodox Wahabism from Saudi Arabia into Afghanistan to defeat the Soviets (and finding its way into pakistan) through American encouragement has more to do with the West than you realize in THIS century, and not the 16th.
Well again, you skirt around the edges avoiding the root cause of the problem. You talk about history, so let's talk go back to antiquity. You've given me facts, I've given you the truth about how Islam throughout its entire history has expanded entirely through the means of war and conquest. About how Saudi Arabia, the cradle of Islamic civilization, a place of hell for human rights, freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Yes, the US helped the jihadis against the Soviets, but that
doesn't change the fact that Saudi Arabia has been a breeding ground for terrorists since 638 (which by the way is not even Muslim land, it was Christian land before). It also doesn't help how you don't mention the laughable fallacy of the hajis fighting the very people (the Americans) who helped them push the Soviets out of their homeland. In which case, I have no idea why you keep referring to the West (U.S.) when the East (USSR) has a role to play in this too.
I'm not skirting around anything. If you want to talk about history, do you think Christian nations have always been great? Through the long history of Christianity, it has only relatively recently matured and begun to respect human rights. What were the witch hunts, crusades, and involvement in wars and European colonial empires? And all of this originated in "Christian" nations and from diff branches of Christianity. The most extreme branches of Islam don't apply to for all or most Muslims.
So much for not being Muslim your so damned predictable you recycle the same Muslim garbage about Christians and their cursades, colonialism. Try again, if you Christians nations are so bad, can I please know why you are living in Canada? Have Christian nations been great? Of course. Compared to backward Islamic countries that is bereft of human rights, where every Muslim nation bordering a non-Muslim nation has a war going on, where the Turkish Empire tried to invade Europe twice.
First, I'm not Muslim. I'm just trying to be fair. Something you might try. Look at Turkey TODAY. It's a SECULAR country. I love Canada, but you talking about what Turkey did in the past and comparing it to today's Turks is as fair as ascribing Canada's Chinese head tax, treatment of aboriginal people, and list of preferred (white,Northern European) and non-preferred (everybody else) immigrants to today's Canadians. Your views are leading you to the same old tired and predictable fear and hate.
Dude what the FUCK are you even talking about? Your the only one stirring up the fascist fear-mongering here with your typical sadomasoshism, double-standards and blind-sighted myopia. You keep referring to how Christian history isn't great, but if it isn't, then I'm not sure what Islamic history is. The point I'm trying to make is the hypocrisy you blatantly commit when you point first to the "atrocities"
Wesern nations commit, but totally turn the blindspot when it comes to Islam and their legacy of death and destruction. You want speak of fairness, you want fairness? Go and complain about the human rights abuses in Iran, Egypt, Syria and Turkey. Go and moan about the persecution of minorities in Indonesia and Malaysia. Go and harangue the Taliban and ask why they didn't let women go to school. Go and bitch about how in Islam, the Qu'ran is beyond criticism.
"fascist fear-mongering"? If someone saying that Western (and some other) nations need to stop going into say, Iraq, and bombing that crap out of the place elicits some kind of fear in you, then I can't help you. As for double standards, Iran's Mullah's are dicks, but look a little bit at how they got there. Syria, I agree. They're bad for human rights, but if you're presenting Turkey and Indonesia as gross violators of human rights, then I doubt you know what you're talking about.
Yeah ur right Indonesia and Turkey aren't gross violators of human rights...on some planet in another galaxy far far away. Fact check: Indonesian gunmen murders Christians on June 11, 2008 while they are praying at a church. Fact check: Turkey elects an Islamic head of state on August 28, 2007 so so much for separation of church and state. Now if the massacre of non-Muslims and persecution of women and gays don't scare you, then I can't help the fact that you are brain-dead.
And secondly, so the hell what if I live in Canada? Then I'm supposed to hate Muslims like you do and not allowed to be fair? You're using history to justify saying Muslims have always been bad. I've used history to tell you that the Christian world hasn't been so great either. The Islamic world is indeed far from perfect, but you can't use that to justify going in there, blowing stuff up, and generally mistreating its people. This is what gives the mad Mullahs their ammunition.
There's nothing wrong with living in Canada, but you do mention the idea of treating others fairly, which you fail to do by not mentioning the plight that non-Muslims suffer every day of the living calender, persecuted for no other reason than having committed crime of being a non-Muslim. Then you have the temerity to tell me Christian killing Muslim give Mullahs their ammunition, but anybody with half a brain will tell you that Muslims massacring Jews at Banu Qurayza @ 627 have the same effect.
You're actually citing the crusades? Would you prefer that Europe still be conquered by the Moorish (Muslim) invaders? That statement ALONE makes you lose ANY credibility.
Islamic radicals are an irrational, and real danger to the world, and they are responsible for themselves. But what I am saying is the West has to own up to their actions throughout the 20th century and stop helping turn otherwise moderate people more extreme. Also, if I'm saying that war is bad, and you're saying that all muslims are foaming-at the-mouth-crazy, maybe it's you who should be offering your "warrior services" to defeat them.
Spain, Great Britain, Indonesia, India, Egypt, and Morocco have all been hit after by Islamic terrorists. Yes, there were terror attacks before 9/11, but these took place afterwards. If you want more proof of the what Ive just mentioned, just look at how many terror attacks have either been carried out, or attempted by so-called home-grown terrorists in the U.K., U.S., Canada, Germany, Australia to mention a few.
They needed Christopher Hitchens in this debate, to shoot down Jenkins' and Weisberg's arguments, particularly about terrorism; it's not state-sponsored? How about Zarqawi working out of Iraq? Or Abu Nidal? Or Ahmed Yassin?
A couple of simple questions to that: how many terrorists were there in Iraq before the U.S invasion? Not that many according to your answer. How many were there after the U.S. invasion? I like Hitchens a lot, but that's something that any reasonable person can not agree with him over. According to that logic, the U.S. should have done something similar to Saudi Arabia long before Iraq.
How many terrorists were there before the invasion? There's really no way of knowing precisely because of Saddam Hussein's repressive regime, but we do know about Ansar-al-Islam, the terrorist organization operating out of Iraq during Saddam's regime, and it's quite probable that, as terrorists work in packs, like wolves, the three people I mentioned didn't work alone. Any invasion of a country will result in terrorist groups forming,
And yes, I agree, the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia is questionable, but would you rather have had Bush in charge of the world's oil or Saddam Hussein? The choice is clear in my mind. More to the point, many of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, but they weren't envoys of the Saudi Arabian government. Additionally, let's not forget that Saudi Arabian interests in the region WERE set back by the invasion of Iraq.
In my opinion, the important issue is that through the invasion of Iraq the region and the world became a much more dangerous place. Ansar-al-Islam, a Kurdish separatist group, cannot be argued to have posed a serious threat to the U.S. It posed more of a threat to Saddam Hussein, and cannot be argued that it was supported by his regime in any significant way. He distrusted the group, as well as Ahmed Yassin, which is why Saddam assassinated him. These are poor excuses to INVADE a country.
The region and the world aren't necessarily more dangerous with the invasion; let's not forget that the 1993 WTC bombing and 9/11 occurred BEFORE the invasion of Iraq. What would have happened if the U.S. hadn't invaded Iraq? Hussein would still be in power, terrorizing his people and the region, burning the oil wells, and trying to annex other countries (like Kuwait). That's not good for the region is it?
Furthermore, although Im not a Muslim myself, the radicalization of Islam of has been taking place throughout the 20th century from the Middle East to Persia. The radicalization of this religion has been a reaction to this. The Iraq war is just an extension of this. The point is that the war did far more harm than good, and further radicalized the region and its inhabitants.
According to a news outlet called Kurdmedia, Zarqawi was part of the Ansar enclave in 2002 and 2003; this demonstrates a clear link, if only at the very least, in financial terms, to Al-Qaida.
Furthermore, Yassin was murdered by an Israeli helicopter gunship in 2004. Nidal was murdered by Saddam Hussein, probably to avoid the international community thinking that there were operational links between them, as attempted with Rahman Yasin, who helped make the bombs used in the 1993 WTC bombing.
Saddam was terrorizing and killing his own people, I don't agree with all the aspects of the execution of the war, but I'm inclined to believe that it was right to oust him. Concerning Saudi Arabia, I was talking about their influence in the region, which was diminished by the invasion of Iraq.
I'm not asking who's decision it was, I'm asking who you would prefer to be in charge.
Oil prices are not completely controlled by Saudi Arabia, other factors also come into play.
Looks like Rove was right about Pakistan...
ZombieLincoln666 1 month ago
Is that woman at 0:30 single?
rollotwomassey 2 years ago
@rollotwomassey
she's a kristol plant, SE Cupp
nubbs 1 year ago
@nubbs C Cup indeed! Kristol you magnificent bastard!
rollotwomassey 1 year ago
I'm not familiar with the aims that you claim Saudi Arabia had in the region. Saudi Arabia's aims were to keep oil prices high so they could keep making money. The U.S invasion of Iraq resulted in even higher oil prices, which I'm sure the Saudis were quite content with. Also, who should be in control of Iraq's oil? It wasn't up to Bush to decide. That attitude is extremely arrogant and is exactly why the West in general is so hated in that region. and is precisely what has radicalized the area.
stama9 3 years ago
The attempted annexation of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union has much more to do with that radicalization than free, albeit (naturally) imperfect elections in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Terrorism isn't caused by fighting against it, though I do think fighting against it causes extreme anger. What people do with that anger, however, is their responsibility. (one they share with their governments, who tend to indoctrinate their people with propaganda, on both sides of any conflict)
masudrules 3 years ago
I absolutely agree with you, fighting against terrorism does not necessarily cause more of it, but going into an unjust war based on lies does, as it did in this case. Yes, there were cases of terrorism by Al Qaeda BEFORE September 11th, but the majority of them happened AFTER. What going into a country under false pretenses does is inspire further radicalism or jihad against perceived injustices perpetrated by the West.
stama9 3 years ago
"further radicalism or jihad against perceived injustices perpetrated by the West."
The problem is Islam has been trying to invade the West until their bloody imperial adventurisms were stopped at the gates of Vienna on September 11, 1683. So these "injustices" which you speak of has absolutely NOTHING to do with us, but EVERYTHING to do with them.
CarringtonVilla 3 years ago
Oh yeah, like the West propping up dictatorships throughout the region, and invading other countries while poor people in those countries suffer and die for tactical reasons is just pure, pleasant fuzzy kittens on rainbows and liberty the tip of a 5000 lb bomb is pure, unadulterated happy-happy utopian justice. Extremists are scum. The West have to stop giving everyday PEOPLE reasons for being driven into the open their open arms. These people and their suffering is REAL, and has to do with us.
stama9 3 years ago
Quit it with the conspiracy theories and sadomasochism. If these poor people are bearing the full-brunt of Western imperialism, why don't you go help them by offering your warrior services in the service of their jihad? Why don't you mention the wars of Islamic conquests from the 8th - 16th centuries when the Muslims were, coincidentally, in the position of power? Why don't you mention the utopian justice of Sharia Law, the apotheosis of Islamic jurisprudence? All you have in your debating
CarringtonVilla 3 years ago
arsenal is "The West is root cause of all the suffering in the Middle East" which is RIDICULOUS given elections of anti-American regimes all across the Middle East, many of which the US has not even touched with its military arsenal. But wait the US is probably behind the lack of religious freedoms in Saudi Arabia, the lack of women's rights in Iran, the disaster in Sudan and Somalia, the growth of the terrorism in Pakistan, the segregated education system under the Taliban.
CarringtonVilla 3 years ago
conspiracy theories? You call the United States having propped up dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan a conspiracy theory? The monarchy in Saudi Arabia is and Musharraf of Pakistan was a dictatorship. These are facts. Also, the export of ultra orthodox Wahabism from Saudi Arabia into Afghanistan to defeat the Soviets (and finding its way into pakistan) through American encouragement has more to do with the West than you realize in THIS century, and not the 16th.
stama9 3 years ago
Well again, you skirt around the edges avoiding the root cause of the problem. You talk about history, so let's talk go back to antiquity. You've given me facts, I've given you the truth about how Islam throughout its entire history has expanded entirely through the means of war and conquest. About how Saudi Arabia, the cradle of Islamic civilization, a place of hell for human rights, freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Yes, the US helped the jihadis against the Soviets, but that
CarringtonVilla 3 years ago
doesn't change the fact that Saudi Arabia has been a breeding ground for terrorists since 638 (which by the way is not even Muslim land, it was Christian land before). It also doesn't help how you don't mention the laughable fallacy of the hajis fighting the very people (the Americans) who helped them push the Soviets out of their homeland. In which case, I have no idea why you keep referring to the West (U.S.) when the East (USSR) has a role to play in this too.
CarringtonVilla 3 years ago
I'm not skirting around anything. If you want to talk about history, do you think Christian nations have always been great? Through the long history of Christianity, it has only relatively recently matured and begun to respect human rights. What were the witch hunts, crusades, and involvement in wars and European colonial empires? And all of this originated in "Christian" nations and from diff branches of Christianity. The most extreme branches of Islam don't apply to for all or most Muslims.
stama9 3 years ago
So much for not being Muslim your so damned predictable you recycle the same Muslim garbage about Christians and their cursades, colonialism. Try again, if you Christians nations are so bad, can I please know why you are living in Canada? Have Christian nations been great? Of course. Compared to backward Islamic countries that is bereft of human rights, where every Muslim nation bordering a non-Muslim nation has a war going on, where the Turkish Empire tried to invade Europe twice.
CarringtonVilla 3 years ago
First, I'm not Muslim. I'm just trying to be fair. Something you might try. Look at Turkey TODAY. It's a SECULAR country. I love Canada, but you talking about what Turkey did in the past and comparing it to today's Turks is as fair as ascribing Canada's Chinese head tax, treatment of aboriginal people, and list of preferred (white,Northern European) and non-preferred (everybody else) immigrants to today's Canadians. Your views are leading you to the same old tired and predictable fear and hate.
stama9 3 years ago
"Your views are leading you to the same
old tired and predictable fear and hate."
Dude what the FUCK are you even talking about? Your the only one stirring up the fascist fear-mongering here with your typical sadomasoshism, double-standards and blind-sighted myopia. You keep referring to how Christian history isn't great, but if it isn't, then I'm not sure what Islamic history is. The point I'm trying to make is the hypocrisy you blatantly commit when you point first to the "atrocities"
CarringtonVilla 3 years ago 4
Wesern nations commit, but totally turn the blindspot when it comes to Islam and their legacy of death and destruction. You want speak of fairness, you want fairness? Go and complain about the human rights abuses in Iran, Egypt, Syria and Turkey. Go and moan about the persecution of minorities in Indonesia and Malaysia. Go and harangue the Taliban and ask why they didn't let women go to school. Go and bitch about how in Islam, the Qu'ran is beyond criticism.
CarringtonVilla 3 years ago 4
"fascist fear-mongering"? If someone saying that Western (and some other) nations need to stop going into say, Iraq, and bombing that crap out of the place elicits some kind of fear in you, then I can't help you. As for double standards, Iran's Mullah's are dicks, but look a little bit at how they got there. Syria, I agree. They're bad for human rights, but if you're presenting Turkey and Indonesia as gross violators of human rights, then I doubt you know what you're talking about.
stama9 3 years ago
Yeah ur right Indonesia and Turkey aren't gross violators of human rights...on some planet in another galaxy far far away. Fact check: Indonesian gunmen murders Christians on June 11, 2008 while they are praying at a church. Fact check: Turkey elects an Islamic head of state on August 28, 2007 so so much for separation of church and state. Now if the massacre of non-Muslims and persecution of women and gays don't scare you, then I can't help the fact that you are brain-dead.
CarringtonVilla 2 years ago
And secondly, so the hell what if I live in Canada? Then I'm supposed to hate Muslims like you do and not allowed to be fair? You're using history to justify saying Muslims have always been bad. I've used history to tell you that the Christian world hasn't been so great either. The Islamic world is indeed far from perfect, but you can't use that to justify going in there, blowing stuff up, and generally mistreating its people. This is what gives the mad Mullahs their ammunition.
stama9 3 years ago
There's nothing wrong with living in Canada, but you do mention the idea of treating others fairly, which you fail to do by not mentioning the plight that non-Muslims suffer every day of the living calender, persecuted for no other reason than having committed crime of being a non-Muslim. Then you have the temerity to tell me Christian killing Muslim give Mullahs their ammunition, but anybody with half a brain will tell you that Muslims massacring Jews at Banu Qurayza @ 627 have the same effect.
CarringtonVilla 2 years ago
You're actually citing the crusades? Would you prefer that Europe still be conquered by the Moorish (Muslim) invaders? That statement ALONE makes you lose ANY credibility.
mawst 2 years ago
Islamic radicals are an irrational, and real danger to the world, and they are responsible for themselves. But what I am saying is the West has to own up to their actions throughout the 20th century and stop helping turn otherwise moderate people more extreme. Also, if I'm saying that war is bad, and you're saying that all muslims are foaming-at the-mouth-crazy, maybe it's you who should be offering your "warrior services" to defeat them.
stama9 3 years ago
Spain, Great Britain, Indonesia, India, Egypt, and Morocco have all been hit after by Islamic terrorists. Yes, there were terror attacks before 9/11, but these took place afterwards. If you want more proof of the what Ive just mentioned, just look at how many terror attacks have either been carried out, or attempted by so-called home-grown terrorists in the U.K., U.S., Canada, Germany, Australia to mention a few.
stama9 3 years ago
They needed Christopher Hitchens in this debate, to shoot down Jenkins' and Weisberg's arguments, particularly about terrorism; it's not state-sponsored? How about Zarqawi working out of Iraq? Or Abu Nidal? Or Ahmed Yassin?
masudrules 3 years ago
A couple of simple questions to that: how many terrorists were there in Iraq before the U.S invasion? Not that many according to your answer. How many were there after the U.S. invasion? I like Hitchens a lot, but that's something that any reasonable person can not agree with him over. According to that logic, the U.S. should have done something similar to Saudi Arabia long before Iraq.
stama9 3 years ago
How many terrorists were there before the invasion? There's really no way of knowing precisely because of Saddam Hussein's repressive regime, but we do know about Ansar-al-Islam, the terrorist organization operating out of Iraq during Saddam's regime, and it's quite probable that, as terrorists work in packs, like wolves, the three people I mentioned didn't work alone. Any invasion of a country will result in terrorist groups forming,
masudrules 3 years ago
And yes, I agree, the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia is questionable, but would you rather have had Bush in charge of the world's oil or Saddam Hussein? The choice is clear in my mind. More to the point, many of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, but they weren't envoys of the Saudi Arabian government. Additionally, let's not forget that Saudi Arabian interests in the region WERE set back by the invasion of Iraq.
masudrules 3 years ago
In my opinion, the important issue is that through the invasion of Iraq the region and the world became a much more dangerous place. Ansar-al-Islam, a Kurdish separatist group, cannot be argued to have posed a serious threat to the U.S. It posed more of a threat to Saddam Hussein, and cannot be argued that it was supported by his regime in any significant way. He distrusted the group, as well as Ahmed Yassin, which is why Saddam assassinated him. These are poor excuses to INVADE a country.
stama9 3 years ago
The region and the world aren't necessarily more dangerous with the invasion; let's not forget that the 1993 WTC bombing and 9/11 occurred BEFORE the invasion of Iraq. What would have happened if the U.S. hadn't invaded Iraq? Hussein would still be in power, terrorizing his people and the region, burning the oil wells, and trying to annex other countries (like Kuwait). That's not good for the region is it?
masudrules 3 years ago
Furthermore, although Im not a Muslim myself, the radicalization of Islam of has been taking place throughout the 20th century from the Middle East to Persia. The radicalization of this religion has been a reaction to this. The Iraq war is just an extension of this. The point is that the war did far more harm than good, and further radicalized the region and its inhabitants.
stama9 3 years ago
According to a news outlet called Kurdmedia, Zarqawi was part of the Ansar enclave in 2002 and 2003; this demonstrates a clear link, if only at the very least, in financial terms, to Al-Qaida.
Furthermore, Yassin was murdered by an Israeli helicopter gunship in 2004. Nidal was murdered by Saddam Hussein, probably to avoid the international community thinking that there were operational links between them, as attempted with Rahman Yasin, who helped make the bombs used in the 1993 WTC bombing.
masudrules 3 years ago
Saddam was terrorizing and killing his own people, I don't agree with all the aspects of the execution of the war, but I'm inclined to believe that it was right to oust him. Concerning Saudi Arabia, I was talking about their influence in the region, which was diminished by the invasion of Iraq.
I'm not asking who's decision it was, I'm asking who you would prefer to be in charge.
Oil prices are not completely controlled by Saudi Arabia, other factors also come into play.
masudrules 3 years ago
Bush et al (including those in this debate) knew that. This invasion was a strategic move that was thought of well before September 11th.
stama9 3 years ago