Message from the terrorists

[burner69]

What do you guys make of this? I found it very interesting; revealing perhaps.

I'm not using this to bring about yet another anti-US thread (yes, even I'm getting sick of it now), I'd just like to know people's opinions on it. From my point of view this declaration of war is a little more honest than the coalition's war cry, what do you lot think?

Discuss:

Islamic Jihad Army - A message in English - "We are simple people who chose principles over fear." Propaganda or disinformation? You decide.



By The media platoon of the Islamic Jihad Army.
Republished from Information Clearing House


Rush transcript-

Title: Communiqué Number 6
———————————————————————————
People of the world! These words come to you from those who up to the day of the invasion were struggling to survive under the sanctions imposed by the criminal regimes of the U.S. and Britain .

We are simple people who chose principles over fear.

We have suffered crimes and sanctions, which we consider the true weapons of mass destruction.

Years and years of agony and despair, while the condemned UN traded with our oil revenues in the name of world stability and peace.

Over two million innocents died waiting for a light at the end of a tunnel that only ended with the occupation of our country and the theft of our resources.



After the crimes of the administrations of the U.S and Britain in Iraq , we have chosen our future. The future of every resistance struggle ever in the history of man.

It is our duty, as well as our right, to fight back the occupying forces, which their nations will be held morally and economically responsible; for what their elected governments have destroyed and stolen from our land.

We have not crossed the oceans and seas to occupy Britain or the U.S. nor are we responsible for 9/11. These are only a few of the lies that these criminals present to cover their true plans for the control of the energy resources of the world, in face of a growing China and a strong unified Europe . It is Ironic that the Iraqi’s are to bear the full face of this large and growing conflict on behalf of the rest of this sleeping world.

We thank all those, including those of Britain and the U.S., who took to the streets in protest against this war and against Globalism. We also thank France, Germany and other states for their position, which least to say are considered wise and balanced, til now.

Today, we call on you again.

We do not require arms or fighters, for we have plenty.

We ask you to form a world wide front against war and sanctions. A front that is governed by the wise and knowing. A front that will bring reform and order. New institutions that would replace the now corrupt.

Stop using the U.S. dollar, use the Euro or a basket of currencies. Reduce or halt your consumption of British and U.S. products. Put an end to Zionism before it ends the world. Educate those in doubt of the true nature of this conflict and do not believe their media for their casualties are far higher than they admit.

We only wish we had more cameras to show the world their true defeat.

The enemy is on the run. They are in fear of a resistance movement they can not see nor predict.

We, now choose when, where, and how to strike. And as our ancestors drew the first sparks of civilization, we will redefine the word “conquest.“

Today we write a new chapter in the arts of urban warfare.

Know that by helping the Iraqi people you are helping yourselves, for tomorrow may bring the same destruction to you.

In helping the Iraqi people does not mean dealing for the Americans for a few contracts here and there. You must continue to isolate their strategy.

This conflict is no longer considered a localized war. Nor can the world remain hostage to the never-ending and regenerated fear that the American people suffer from in general.

We will pin them here in Iraq to drain their resources, manpower, and their will to fight. We will make them spend as much as they steal, if not more.

We will disrupt, then halt the flow of our stolen oil, thus, rendering their plans useless.

And the earlier a movement is born, the earlier their fall will be.

And to the American soldiers we say, you can also choose to fight tyranny with us. Lay down your weapons, and seek refuge in our mosques, churches and homes. We will protect you. And we will get you out of Iraq , as we have done with a few others before you.

Go back to your homes, families, and loved ones. This is not your war. Nor are you fighting for a true cause in Iraq.

And to George W. Bush, we say, “You have asked us to ‘Bring it on’, and so have we. Like never expected. Have you another challenge?”



Peace

 

[Icarusintel]

Glad to hear they don;t mind dying for a cause that will not win

 

[Cole]

George W. Bush should challenge them to get up a charity to make me rich and get me 1 billion $ by the end of the year!

 

[GhostFox]

And to George W. Bush, we say, “You have asked us to ‘Bring it on’, and so have we. Like never expected. Have you another challenge?"

If by "so we have" they mean "fell for the bait", then I agree with them on that part.

 

[burner69]

If by "so we have" they mean "fell for the bait", then I agree with them on that part.

Oh come on GhostFox, I was hoping from more from you. We're forever at eachothers throats, but I respect you in that you do know what you're talking about - your opinion would interest me.

Surely you have more to say about this rather than picking up on a small aspect of it and using it to belittle the insurgents (can you tell I voted liberal weiner in that poll, I'm telling people not to bully insurgents) but seriously, I'd be interested to know about what you make of the whole thing.

 

[Zorrander001]

It is a misguided soul that creates disorder and mayhem where there is, for the first time in a very long time, the opportunity for real peace. They are motivated by hate, and no good can come of actions motivated by hate and the will to bring only death. This is the true face of evil.

 

[GhostFox]

On my first point, it was serious.

Before the war in Iraq the biggest problem in dealing with terrorism is that is was so spread out, it was hard to make any meaningful dent in their operation.

Now that the terrorists are filling Iraq, on a good day more of them get killed then in a year previously. That is the thing the terrorists aren't telling you. That they are losing manpower at an alarming rate.

Was Bush's plan to draw terrorists together in Iraq in order to crush them? I have no idea. Is that the effect? So far it has been working pretty well. Most "insurgents" killed in Iraq are foriegn born terrorists. Whether a deliberate plan or a by-product no one may ever know. But the end result means a world that is a whole lot safer.


Do you see how my point relates to the whole article? The new "kinder, more gentle terrorist" is a product of them losing the war. They know they are suffering losses too great, so they are trying to change their public image in order to buy time to get their orginization back together.

The exact moment I knew the Bush was winning was win OBL released his tape before the election and all but telling the American people that if they voted in Kerry, he'll leave the US alone. This is a man who has realized he picked a fight with the wrong country, and is now furiously trying to get out of it with anything left. The PH - 9/11 analogy becomes more apt every day. PH cost Japan an empire, and 9/11 cost muslim extremists their place on the planet.

 

[burner69]

Or are we in fact just drawing out people opposed to the coalitions actions, labelling them terrorists, and then killing them?

Is the statements calls to end "war and sanctions" asking for world peace? Or is it trying to make us drop our defenses so they can attack?

Can we believe anything we're told from either side's figureheads?

Sorry bout all the questions.

 

[Raziaar]

Put an end to Zionism before it ends the world.

These people can't even make a statement without adding to it their racist hatreds towards the jewish people, whom they consider ALL to be zionist somehow. They're just racists.

The other aspects of their statement didn't make much sense either. Its just propganda bullshit.

And to the American soldiers we say, you can also choose to fight tyranny with us. Lay down your weapons, and seek refuge in our mosques, churches and homes. We will protect you. And we will get you out of Iraq , as we have done with a few others before you.

If they were willing to slaughter innocent people who were sympathetic to their cause as well as a member of their religion, there's no doubt they'd slaughter any americans who put down their arms and went into an area of their choosing. These people slaughter their own who are for them, they'll especially slaughter any white guys who are sympathetic to them too.

 

[Hercules331]

I cant wait till I get over there and kick some of that terrorist ass. All bullshit that message was.

 

[Tr0n]

I cant wait till I get over there and kick some of that terrorist ass. All bullshit that message was.

Yes I can't wait till you get over there ether.

 

[GhostFox]

Or are we in fact just drawing out people opposed to the coalitions actions, labelling them terrorists, and then killing them?

Most of them are trained terrorists from various orginizations. And as to the "others", they earned their terrorist badge once they started blowing up Iraqi civillians. Death is a merciful response to their actions.

Is the statements calls to end "war and sanctions" asking for world peace? Or is it trying to make us drop our defenses so they can attack?

I'd say more like "leave us alone for a while so we can rebuild, and then wipe out all infidels." The only world of peace that can exist for them is one which all who do not believe as they do have been exterminated.

Can we believe anything we're told from either side's figureheads?

Obviously I'd trust the leader of any democratic coutry over any terrorist, however that doesn't mean you should take every word as implicit truth either. When you take their words and put them into the context of all the information you have access to, and use a little common sense, you can usually figure out most of it.

 

[Kommie]

I cant wait till I get over there and kick some of that terrorist ass. All bullshit that message was.

Go now, young grasshoper, go now!

 

[jondy]

Yes I can't wait till you get over there ether.

Heh, good call :dozey:

 

[KoreBolteR]

omg, are the terrorists trying to soften out hearts with thier bullshit?

they are the disease to this world. X@

 

[kirovman]

Hey, whoever plays the PR game best wins.

With violence you'll win the battle maybe, but with diplomacy you'll win much more.

 

[Razor]

On my first point, it was serious.

Before the war in Iraq the biggest problem in dealing with terrorism is that is was so spread out, it was hard to make any meaningful dent in their operation.

Now that the terrorists are filling Iraq, on a good day more of them get killed then in a year previously. That is the thing the terrorists aren't telling you. That they are losing manpower at an alarming rate.

Was Bush's plan to draw terrorists together in Iraq in order to crush them? I have no idea. Is that the effect? So far it has been working pretty well. Most "insurgents" killed in Iraq are foriegn born terrorists. Whether a deliberate plan or a by-product no one may ever know. But the end result means a world that is a whole lot safer.


Do you see how my point relates to the whole article? The new "kinder, more gentle terrorist" is a product of them losing the war. They know they are suffering losses too great, so they are trying to change their public image in order to buy time to get their orginization back together.

The exact moment I knew the Bush was winning was win OBL released his tape before the election and all but telling the American people that if they voted in Kerry, he'll leave the US alone. This is a man who has realized he picked a fight with the wrong country, and is now furiously trying to get out of it with anything left. The PH - 9/11 analogy becomes more apt every day. PH cost Japan an empire, and 9/11 cost muslim extremists their place on the planet.

With every terrorist killer, two more people join their cause. The war on terror will never have any victories, it will just keep on moving from country to country, with more terrorists and insurgents brought into the fray. There are people willing to kill Americans, British, Japanese, etc soldiers in Iraq, and then there are people willing to do the same if they went to Iran, if they went to North Korea...etc, etc, etc. The war on terror won't stop with democracy in Iraq, nor will it stop with democracy in Iran or anywhere else, to stop terrorism, you need to curb the hearts and the minds of the future "freedom fighters" to a point where, if not all of them, most of them would not be able to find any real cause for them to die for.

 

[KoreBolteR]

the majority of people in this world want the terrorists to win anyway, this message is just to get more support. even if they are murderers, rapist, kidnapping, suicide bombing whores.

the more they try to make out like they are "freedom fighters" the more support they get.

 

[RZAL]

On my first point, it was serious.

Before the war in Iraq the biggest problem in dealing with terrorism is that is was so spread out, it was hard to make any meaningful dent in their operation.

Now that the terrorists are filling Iraq, on a good day more of them get killed then in a year previously. That is the thing the terrorists aren't telling you. That they are losing manpower at an alarming rate.

Was Bush's plan to draw terrorists together in Iraq in order to crush them? I have no idea. Is that the effect? So far it has been working pretty well. Most "insurgents" killed in Iraq are foriegn born terrorists. Whether a deliberate plan or a by-product no one may ever know. But the end result means a world that is a whole lot safer.

I have seen this tactic used before. Not saying I totally agree with the ideology but it does have merits. Ask your self, do you want this behavior spread out over a larger area or do you want it localized?

Do you see how my point relates to the whole article? The new "kinder, more gentle terrorist" is a product of them losing the war. They know they are suffering losses too great, so they are trying to change their public image in order to buy time to get their orginization back together.

The exact moment I knew the Bush was winning was win OBL released his tape before the election and all but telling the American people that if they voted in Kerry, he'll leave the US alone. This is a man who has realized he picked a fight with the wrong country, and is now furiously trying to get out of it with anything left. The PH - 9/11 analogy becomes more apt every day. PH cost Japan an empire, and 9/11 cost muslim extremists their place on the planet.

It could be they are learning to use the propaganda tool.

 

[burner69]

I find it quite interesting to see the polar views of people here. Saying that this message is pure lies, propaganda (which much of it probably is) and then going on to talk about they're "all terrorists" "they are all motivated by hate... this is the true face of evil."

Perhaps there reall is no evil in the world. I for one do not believe these people use car bombs, or are fighting the coalition because they are 'evil' or 'jealous' or whatever, they believe what they're doing is right - and they have good reason to.

Just, par example, the idea of killing innocents.
If an insurgant car bomb attacking a military target detonates killing some coalition members, and civilians - we are told about how they have no regard for human life, and are evil.
Yet when the coalition's heavy bombing campaign kills civilians it "happens in war" and is "unavoidable".

Like GhostFox said, I think looking at the propaganda from the enemy, and comparing it to the speeches Bush and Blair makes, its easy to see how effectively the propaganda machine works.

 

[RZAL]

I find it quite interesting to see the polar views of people here. Saying that this message is pure lies, propaganda (which much of it probably is) and then going on to talk about they're "all terrorists" "they are all motivated by hate... this is the true face of evil.".

True, propaganda can be lies or it can simply be what the word means…. propaganda: The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause. The short definition is “discredit your opponent in the form of communication”.

Perhaps there reall is no evil in the world. I for one do not believe these people use car bombs, or are fighting the coalition because they are 'evil' or 'jealous' or whatever, they believe what they're doing is right - and they have good reason to

Just, par example, the idea of killing innocents.
If an insurgant car bomb attacking a military target detonates killing some coalition members, and civilians - we are told about how they have no regard for human life, and are evil.
Yet when the coalition's heavy bombing campaign kills civilians it "happens in war" and is "unavoidable".

I’m not touching this one.

Like GhostFox said, I think looking at the propaganda from the enemy, and comparing it to the speeches Bush and Blair makes, its easy to see how effectively the propaganda machine works.

Yep, that’s why its used.

 

[Razor]

I find it quite interesting to see the polar views of people here. Saying that this message is pure lies, propaganda (which much of it probably is) and then going on to talk about they're "all terrorists" "they are all motivated by hate... this is the true face of evil."

Perhaps there reall is no evil in the world. I for one do not believe these people use car bombs, or are fighting the coalition because they are 'evil' or 'jealous' or whatever, they believe what they're doing is right - and they have good reason to.

Just, par example, the idea of killing innocents.
If an insurgant car bomb attacking a military target detonates killing some coalition members, and civilians - we are told about how they have no regard for human life, and are evil.
Yet when the coalition's heavy bombing campaign kills civilians it "happens in war" and is "unavoidable".

Like GhostFox said, I think looking at the propaganda from the enemy, and comparing it to the speeches Bush and Blair makes, its easy to see how effectively the propaganda machine works.

How do you look at "freedom fighters" who don't target military complexes though, such as the Palestinian terrorists who jump on school buses and blow themselves up? George Bush might be a man with an unseen agenda, but he would never purposely blow up a school bus full of children.

 

[burner69]

How do you look at "freedom fighters" who don't target military complexes though, such as the Palestinian terrorists who jump on school buses and blow themselves up? George Bush might be a man with an unseen agenda, but he would never purposely blow up a school bus full of children.

Firstly, I haven't seen anything about people just jumping on buses and detonating bombs - I'm not saying it hasn't happened, I just can't comment. I did hear about a hostage situation in which a school bus was destroyed, but it was due to something going wrong... I dunno.

What you have to understand is these people are doing these horrible acts for a reason. They are attacking the new Iraqi police because they see them as being controlled by the invading army - they are the enemy. Same for pretty much every attack I've heard about. They may believe in an afterlife, but they don't waste their lives attacking targets that wouldn't do them any good to attack.

Also the people who do use these methods are not in the majority over there. The idea that we're dealing with one 'terrorist' enemy is as idotic and potentially dangerous as labelling all illicit drugs under one category and telling people to 'just say no'. Generalising when it comes to issues like this is something Bush suffers from, and it is evident many people have fallen for it - believing the whole war in Iraq to be taking place between the coalition and swarms of religious fanatics with bombs strapped to them. (Inicidently, I'm not implying you're like that).

Again, we can compare the school bus incident to innocents killed in war. While we're saying 'Bush would never blow up a bus ful lof children', some Iraqi lads are saying that the insurgants would never launch artillery strikes on civilian houses.

 

[Razor]

Firstly, I haven't seen anything about people just jumping on buses and detonating bombs - I'm not saying it hasn't happened, I just can't comment. I did hear about a hostage situation in which a school bus was destroyed, but it was due to something going wrong... I dunno.

What you have to understand is these people are doing these horrible acts for a reason. They are attacking the new Iraqi police because they see them as being controlled by the invading army - they are the enemy. Same for pretty much every attack I've heard about. They may believe in an afterlife, but they don't waste their lives attacking targets that wouldn't do them any good to attack.

Also the people who do use these methods are not in the majority over there. The idea that we're dealing with one 'terrorist' enemy is as idotic and potentially dangerous as labelling all illicit drugs under one category and telling people to 'just say no'. Generalising when it comes to issues like this is something Bush suffers from, and it is evident many people have fallen for it - believing the whole war in Iraq to be taking place between the coalition and swarms of religious fanatics with bombs strapped to them. (Inicidently, I'm not implying you're like that).

Again, we can compare the school bus incident to innocents killed in war. While we're saying 'Bush would never blow up a bus ful lof children', some Iraqi lads are saying that the insurgants would never launch artillery strikes on civilian houses.

I agree that the Insurgents/terrorists/freedom fighters/etc, etc, etc, can't be labeled under one big group like Bush does, but you have to question whose wishes they are following and what their motives are.

But i don't believe that any Iraqi government will have the full support of the Iraqi people until all factions and parties in Iraq have embraced the idea of democracy, which might take a while, are all equally represented, which would be very soon after they embrace democracy, and when the Iraqi government can prove to the Iraqi people and the world community as a whole that it has Iraq's best interests at heart and not the multi-billionaire American Oil tycoons, or the multi-billionaire Saudi Oil tycoons, etc.

However, due to the very sensationalistic western media and their biased, the western people are not getting a true indication of anything at all going on in Iraq now, or through the whole war. Not sure how it is like over in America, or the rest of the world for that matter, but in England, the tabloids only cater for the people who want to see American/English soldiers torturing Iraqi civilians with their "exclusive" images, half of which turn out to be fake anyway, and the numerous bombings and killings. There are any news reports about how the water supply, health care, education system, electricity supply, even oil, as well, is doing over in Iraq and how real Iraqis' are coping after the war.

 

[satch919]

I cant wait till I get over there and kick some of that terrorist ass. All bullshit that message was.

Are you going to feel the same way once the bullets start flying? Or maybe your outlook will change when you see someone blown apart with their guts and brains hanging out.

Jesus Christ, its a war-zone, not a videogame.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Perhaps there reall is no evil in the world. I for one do not believe these people use car bombs, or are fighting the coalition because they are 'evil' or 'jealous' or whatever, they believe what they're doing is right

they are fighting the coalition by killing innocent civilians.. you know kids and women etc... i have no sympathy for people who kill innocents on purpose. so in a way, yes they are evil.

they believe what they are doing is right because their leaders brainwash them , u know "allah loves middle easterners, hates westerners, kill west and be praised by allah. how can they even think that is true, allah doesnt even exist.

and they have a good reason to.

what is that reason? to make iraq a safer place? if it wasnt for them, iraqi people would be fearless and elections could go on and iraq would have a brighter future, so if the terrorists win, what will happen then?

/me sees more tyrant killing, totalitarian rule by the terrorists, making the iraqi people live in fear.

 

[kirovman]

how can they even think that is true, allah doesnt even exist.

LOL, have you never learnt about religious tolerance?

By saying Allah doesn't exist you are basically writing off the whole religion of Islam.

In Islam, Allah = God.

And how do you know Allah doesn't exist? Are you privillaged to some information the rest of us aren't? Do you have a special communication channel with the almighty?

If not, it's safe to say that it's a matter of opinion, not fact.

As for killing innocents, I agree with you, it should not be tolerated, but I believe there are better ways of solving the problem rather than just with weapons.

 

[KoreBolteR]

LOL, have you never learnt about religious tolerance?

By saying Allah doesn't exist you are basically writing off the whole religion of Islam.

In Islam, Allah = God.

And how do you know Allah doesn't exist? Are you privillaged to some information the rest of us aren't? Do you have a special communication channel with the almighty?

If not, it's safe to say that it's a matter of opinion, not fact.

like i said, give me some video evidence or pictures of him, then i will believe he exists. as till then, hes just like santa claus and the toothfairy... . not real.

jus made up by some whacky guys.

 

[burner69]

they are fighting the coalition by killing innocent civilians.. you know kids and women etc... i have no sympathy for people who kill innocents on purpose. so in a way, yes they are evil.

Mostly untrue. Most innocents killed by the enemy have been bystanders close to their targets. I could equally turn around and say that the coalition are killing innocents on purpose, after all, there are lots of dead innocents. But I won't, what I'm saying is that the vast majority of people there are not out to kill the civilian population.

they believe what they are doing is right because their leaders brainwash them , u know "allah loves middle easterners, hates westerners, kill west and be praised by allah. how can they even think that is true, allah doesnt even exist.

Like we've been brainwashed into thinking they all think that? They don't at all, while most are religious, the people we're fighting have watched the coalition invade their country and see them as an invading enemy. And why not? They've stormed in with very little reason to, they've killed civilians, they've captured and tortured people, they've placed sanctions against them for profit, and are looking at getting their resources. Let me ask you, if a country did that to the UK, would you fight against it?
Also you cannot say Allah doesn't exist, that is extremely big-headed of you to suggest that an extremely popular religion is just 'wrong'.

what is that reason? to make iraq a safer place? if it wasnt for them, iraqi people would be fearless and elections could go on and iraq would have a brighter future, so if the terrorists win, what will happen then?

/me sees more tyrant killing, totalitarian rule by the terrorists, making the iraqi people live in fear.

To get the invading army out, who just so happen to be a long term enemy of them.

No, if it wasn't for them the US would have walked in, taken the country, and walked out. You cannot just stroll in and take control of a country without opposition. You have to understand that the US, and I believe the UK have done a lot of awful things to the Middle Eastern population, including Iraq - it would be like Saddam invading England and declaring that Blair has WMDs, capturing him then enforcing his 'better' method of rule.

Please stop generalising the enemy we're fighting into the category of innocent killing, bomb wearing, religious fanatic.

 

[kirovman]

Ok, well personally I agree with you, but I'm just saying if you go around telling everyone that is your view, you are going to make a lot of people unhappy.

Same as if you told Christians the bible is a load of BS, or everything. They believe in faith in something which is unprovable. Or something.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Mostly untrue. Most innocents killed by the enemy have been bystanders close to their targets. I could equally turn around and say that the coalition are killing innocents on purpose, after all, there are lots of dead innocents. But I won't, what I'm saying is that the vast majority of people there are not out to kill the civilian population..

hmm, there might not even be as much dead civilians as you think, im sorry to bring this up again, but the terrorists could easily make something up like "coalition kill children", or the media could twist the story. simple.

no not the vast majority of people, the terrorists who put bombs under civilian cars, and blow thelves up in the name of allah.

Like we've been brainwashed into thinking they all think that? They don't at all, while most are religious, the people we're fighting have watched the coalition invade their country and see them as an invading enemy. And why not? They've stormed in with very little reason to, they've killed civilians, they've captured and tortured people, they've placed sanctions against them for profit, and are looking at getting their resources. Let me ask you, if a country did that to the UK, would you fight against it?

did i say "the vast majority have been brainwashed"?, nope.
i said they, reffurring to the terrorists.

an invading enemy that freed them from an evil tyrant that didnt even let them "be free" without executing them

once they did free them from saddam, the terrorists stepped in. you expect the coalition should leave when there are ruthless killers running around, it would be mayhem. now the coalition are fighting them to protect the iraqi people, and let there be a reasonable election, so that iraq can go on to a better future.

if it happened to the UK yes i would fight against it, but thats because we already have a good system. we have no terrorists running round on a large organised scale, and no tyrant like saddam running us. u can see my point. if people invaded us, it wouldnt be for the better, it would be for the worse.

Also you cannot say Allah doesn't exist, that is extremely big-headed of you to suggest that an extremely popular religion is just 'wrong'.

.. why cant i?
i have my own opinion, just because a lot of people in the world believe in a person who has never actually been "proven alive". should i believe in him?

no human in the world has an idea of what is out there. imo. :angel:

then call all religious people in the world "big-headed", because if there is a person who is christian, he obviously thinks islam or buddhism is 'wrong'. personally, as you can tell i am not religious.

i'd like to add i hate people who try and force you to join them. people who try to convert you to believe in thier religion. it just pisses me off. lol.

No, if it wasn't for them the US would have walked in, taken the country, and walked out. You cannot just stroll in and take control of a country without opposition. You have to understand that the US, and I believe the UK have done a lot of awful things to the Middle Eastern population, including Iraq - it would be like Saddam invading England and declaring that Blair has WMDs, capturing him then enforcing his 'better' method of rule.

u cannot compare the two.
if blair killed millions of his own people, and had terrorist like government officials by his side, not too mention, the 2 murderous, raping sons, then id agree for some other country to come in and sort it out, especially if it was someone like the US.

when you say the US and UK have done awful things, your right. but it isnt far as much as what saddam and the terorists have done to that country, because of them thier country cannot become a democratic, free nation in the future, even tho it will take time. because of the terrorists, it might never happen for iraq now. .

Please stop generalising the enemy we're fighting into the category of innocent killing, bomb wearing, religious fanatic.

ok if you stop generalising the enemy were fighting into the category of lovely , fighting for thier country, herotic, people. and calling them "insurgents" is just as bad as caling them "freedom fighters". imo. :E

 

[Nofuture]

I haven´t read all thread, but I´d like to point one aspect.

Some people are being called terrorists, but indeed they aren´t any.

E.g. I´ve seen a broadcast about Chechen women blowing up Russians. There was showed a story about a young girl, about 20 years old, a very beautiful one. Russians killed her beloved brother, who was abot 16 years old and a civilian. On his body there were signs of tortures.
In her suicide note she wrote about not being able any more to live under danger of beiing killed, raped, tortured, she couldn´t live any more hearing tanks on the streets, and she coudn´t live without her brother. So she decided to go to Moscow and to blow herself, taking some Russians with her to deaf, reminding the world of the war on Chechen.

So young, so extraordinary beautiful, but so extraordinary sad.

If you push people into corner doing horrible things to them, they pay you back.

Was she a terrorist? Without any doubts not!
I would even say, she was a hero.


You can relate the same to a mother who lost her son when Americans pushed him into a river. If she decided to blow up some Americans not being able to cope with her lost, would she be a terrorist? Definitely not.

 

[GhostFox]

what I'm saying is that the vast majority of people there are not out to kill the civilian population.

That is factually incorrect. The is the modus operandi of terrorists is specifically targetting civillians.

Why? You kill people in the millitary, and people deal with it. That is their job after all.

When you kill civillians, it inflicts terror upon the populace. The definition of terrorist states

n : the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians

Being a terrorist takes two things. Not only just killing civillians, but also the intention of killing them to reach your goal.

You cannot kill this to any actions where civillians are collateral damage. It is regretable amount other things, but being a terrorist (at least the modern definition) requires you to specifically target civillians.

 

[GhostFox]

Was she a terrorist?

Unless she targeted to millitary forces who killed her brother, then yes she is a terrorist. By your logic, if I lost a loved one in 9/11, it is ok for me to go around killing random muslims, whether or not they were involved. In fact if I did you'd even label me a hero.

Without any doubts not!I would even say, she was a hero.

Do you glorify all terrorists just or specific ones?

 

[burner69]

hmm, there might not even be as much dead civilians as you think, im sorry to bring this up again, but the terrorists could easily make something up like "coalition kill children", or the media could twist the story. simple.

Minimum Iraqi civilian death toll I believe is at 14'000. During the first Gulf War it was somewhere around 20'000. It's a well known fact that our actions have killed more innocents than the 'terrorists' actions. I just don't like it how we can say that we are allowed to do it because we're fighting an enemy, but when the insurgants fight their enemy and innocents are killed its always on purpose, because, it's not.

Not to say that sometimes they don't do it on purpose, but certainly not all the time.

no not the vast majority of people, the terrorists who put bombs under civilian cars, and blow thelves up in the name of allah.

You're missing the point. People who do this have no heavy weapons, and this is the only way to strike a hard blow at the invaders - they're doing it because they're being invaded, and are fighting these invaders. They don't trust the coalition, and with good reason.

did i say "the vast majority have been brainwashed"?, nope.
i said they, reffurring to the terrorists.

But you've been calling everyone we're fighting over there terrorists, they're not. That's my problem. No doubt that the fanatics over there are 'brainwashed' to at least some degree, but the fact is we're not dealing with fanatics all the time, or even most of the time - it's people who've watched us invade with very little legitimate cause, and are responding to that.

an invading enemy that freed them from an evil tyrant that didnt even let them "be free" without executing them

once they did free them from saddam, the terrorists stepped in. you expect the coalition should leave when there are ruthless killers running around, it would be mayhem. now the coalition are fighting them to protect the iraqi people, and let there be a reasonable election, so that iraq can go on to a better future.

Yes, it would be mayhem - but not in the way you seem to be implying. You think that they will continue to drive car bombs at civilians? For what reason? They're achieving nothing.
They are doing this in response to the coalition's invasion Attacking their own people will not get them anywhere.

if it happened to the UK yes i would fight against it, but thats because we already have a good system. we have no terrorists running round on a large organised scale, and no tyrant like saddam running us. u can see my point. if people invaded us, it wouldnt be for the better, it would be for the worse.

Iraq has a large organised terror network? News to me.
They have many groups of differing opinions operating generally independently against the coalition's invasion.
Saddam was evil, no doubt, but Iraq has good reason to fight against the coalition - western policies have resulted in far more deaths than Saddam ever caused. Lesser of two evils? Saddam is, in many people's eyes over there.

.. why cant i?
i have my own opinion, just because a lot of people in the world believe in a person who has never actually been "proven alive". should i believe in him?

no human in the world has an idea of what is out there. imo. :angel:

then call all religious people in the world "big-headed", because if there is a person who is christian, he obviously thinks islam or buddhism is 'wrong'. personally, as you can tell i am not religious.

i'd like to add i hate people who try and force you to join them. people who try to convert you to believe in thier religion. it just pisses me off. lol.

My problem was that your argument was that these people are killing themselves for something that's so obviously wrong. To them it's not, so that argument held no water, and made you sound a little arrogant.
Yeah, I'm agnostic, amusingly because it fits in with human logic. We don't know anything about a God, but we can't prove there isn't one. If you want my honest opinion I'm very very certain there is no God, no higher being - but I just don't dismiss the idea.

u cannot compare the two.
if blair killed millions of his own people, and had terrorist like government officials by his side, not too mention, the 2 murderous, raping sons, then id agree for some other country to come in and sort it out, especially if it was someone like the US.

Again, many people over there see the coaltion as worse than Saddam - so far, statistically, they're achieving that. If people didn't think that they wouldn't be risking their lives fighting against them.

when you say the US and UK have done awful things, your right. but it isnt far as much as what saddam and the terorists have done to that country, because of them thier country cannot become a democratic, free nation in the future, even tho it will take time. because of the terrorists, it might never happen for iraq now. .

It's all opinion. While Saddams methods were far more barbaric, the west has caused MUCH more damage to that country than Saddam. In fact some people saw him as an excellent leader because he basically told the west to f**k off with his actions.

And you CANNOT FORCE DEMOCRACY ON A COUNTRY. Clearly too many people are a) Anti-west (so we should not be the ones to make them a democracy) b) Caught up in the countries old ideals (Just as if a socialist nation invaded and overthrew our government saying there's is better, the enemy would be those crazy people with those old archaic capitilist ideals in their head)

ok if you stop generalising the enemy were fighting into the category of lovely , fighting for thier country, herotic, people. and calling them "insurgents" is just as bad as caling them "freedom fighters". imo. :E

I don't like either side of this war, but in the same breath, I don't hate any of them. I hate some actions from both sides.
What I'm trying to do here is address the problem people have in labelling the enemy as terrorists, which many clearly aren't. They're using unconventional methods to attack an enemy that they rightly percieve as such - which, by the way, does not make them terrorists.

Once we get over this idea that the enemy we're fighting aren't all crazy terrorists with no motivation to fight other than the fact they've been brainwashed with stupid ideas, we stand a much better chance of achieving peace over there. As it stands we're not catering for a significant proportion of people's views, which, in a democracy, is essential.

Incidently, take a look at anti Japanese propaganda from WW2, it's similar to what's happening here. "The Japanese ways of thinking are thousands of years behind our own, except when it comes to weapons, which they all treasure and love to use".

 

[GhostFox]

it's people who've watched us invade with very little legitimate cause, and are responding to that.

That is incorrect. It is foreign terrorists or Iraqi muslims who have been brainwashed by corrupt clierics. You don't have Joe Iraqi blowing up a Baghdad fruit market becuase he disagrees with the reasons for the US invasion. I mean come on. Sure, you might have some who think they are "defending Iraq", but if that was really true why do they mainly target Iraqi's, and why haven't they stopped now that Iraq has a democratically elected govt?

Could it be that it was just a convienent cover for their extremism? Hmmmmmmm....

 

[kirovman]

That is incorrect. It is foreign terrorists or Iraqi muslims who have been brainwashed by corrupt clierics. You don't have Joe Iraqi blowing up a Baghdad fruit market becuase he disagrees with the reasons for the US invasion. I mean come on. Sure, you might have some who think they are "defending Iraq", but if that was really true why do they mainly target Iraqi's, and why haven't they stopped now that Iraq has a democratically elected govt?

Could it be that it was just a convienent cover for their extremism? Hmmmmmmm....

Because they believe the democratically elected government is a farce and puppet show put on display by the west.

 

[Nofuture]

Unless she targeted to millitary forces who killed her brother, then yes she is a terrorist?

A political gain in this case is not really dominant. She wasn´t a terrorist.

By your logic, if I lost a loved one in 9/11, it is ok for me to go around killing random muslims, whether or not they were involved. In fact if I did you'd even label me a hero.?

Oh really, you can´t compare 9/11 and living under teribble war for years, under war which doesn´t ends.

I should call you a hero? Not even in your dreams

Do you glorify all terrorists just or specific ones?

Yes, it is a very specific case. People aren´t only figures on some statistics. You can´t generalise everything.

One who sees this particular story, the horrible, terrible evil (especially deliberately killing, raping, torturing of random civilians), which Russians have done to this nation (btw, to many other nations too :flame: ), the story about this frightened but also brave girl, could really start to think, it would be the best to kill so many Russians as possible. Is this right? Unfortunately people aren´t perfect.

 

[burner69]

That is incorrect. It is foreign terrorists or Iraqi muslims who have been brainwashed by corrupt clierics. You don't have Joe Iraqi blowing up a Baghdad fruit market becuase he disagrees with the reasons for the US invasion. I mean come on. Sure, you might have some who think they are "defending Iraq", but if that was really true why do they mainly target Iraqi's, and why haven't they stopped now that Iraq has a democratically elected govt?

Could it be that it was just a convienent cover for their extremism? Hmmmmmmm....

Many of those coming in from other countries see Iraq as the begginning of the West's attempt to take hold of the middle east. I can certainly see why they think that.

And I swear I must be reading different news to everyone else. Every story bar perhaps 5 I've read about suicide bombers in the last few months have been targetting military sites, or the coalition controlled Iraqi police force.

I think a lot of it's down to individual interpretation, but just because people are extremists doesn't mean they don't have cause to attack. Or do you think they do it just to get a kick out of it?

 

[burner69]

A political gain in this case is not really dominant. She wasn´t a terrorist.

Oh really, you can´t compare 9/11 and living under teribble war for years, under war which doesn´t ends.

I should call you a hero? Not even in your dreams

Yes, it is a very specific case. People aren´t only figures on some statistics. You can´t generalise everything.

One who sees this particular story, the horrible, terrible evil (especially deliberately killing, raping, torturing of random civilians), which Russians have done to this nation (btw, to many other nations too :flame: ), the story about this frightened but also brave girl, could really start to think, it would be the best to kill so many Russians as possible. Is this right? Unfortunately people aren´t perfect.

While I agree slightly with a little of what you're saying, it's still condoning the whole "eye for an eye" ideal, which I don't agree with (See my death penalty thread).
Extreme situations can lead to extreme actions though, I don't doubt she felt she was doing the right thing.