Suicide Attack in Pakistan kills Benazir Bhutto

[AKIRA]

Killing thousands more of innocent people will certainly solve the problem. Great ****ing idea. *Insert sarcasm tag here*

I was saying that as one of those "we'll give you a taste of your own medicine and see how you like it" sayings...fool

 

[Acepilotf14]

We don't do that in Iraq. That's genocide.
In fact, they likely kill themselves more than we kill them.

 

[No Limit]

I was saying that as one of those "we'll give you a taste of your own medicine and see how you like it" sayings...fool

I know exactly what you were saying. I want to know how killing thousands more of innocent people is going to improve anything.

We don't do that in Iraq. That's genocide.
In fact, they likely kill themselves more than we kill them.

We knew exactly what would happen in Iraq when we went in there, we are responsible for everything that is happening there.

 

[Acepilotf14]

But they blew up our building. So they started it.

 

[Irksome]

Killing more people means fewer people around to be pissed off at the fact that we're killing a lot of people.

Flawless.

/sarcasm

 

[repiV]

We knew exactly what would happen in Iraq when we went in there, we are responsible for everything that is happening there.

That's just as absurd as it ever was.

By your own logic, actually, it's all Al Qaeda's fault - they knew what would happen when they launched a terrorist attack on US soil. How far back can you shift the blame? Watch this space...

And serial killers aren't the ones who should be punished - it's those evil bastards who twisted their minds who should be locked up.

Jeez.

 

[99.vikram]

But they blew up our building. So they started it.

Iraq had nothing to do with it.

 

[TerminatorT850]

I m a Pakistani & I hate my country. Its is going to dogs. The stupid radical, fundamentalists wont let the moderate people live in the country. They want to forcibly impose their laws. They want to exterminate non-muslims. I'm a muslim but I love to live in harmony, not like these suicide bomber fascists. Too hell with this country. This country wont let anybody gr88 survive.

 

[No Limit]

That's just as absurd as it ever was.

By your own logic, actually, it's all Al Qaeda's fault - they knew what would happen when they launched a terrorist attack on US soil. How far back can you shift the blame? Watch this space...

And serial killers aren't the ones who should be punished - it's those evil bastards who twisted their minds who should be locked up.

Jeez.

Um, Iraq was in the planning stages before 9/11. But that's besides the point. The point is that Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the idiots running our government knew that if we went in to Iraq the country would blow up in to a civil war. Since we knew this how are we not responsible for what has happened?

 

[No Limit]

But they blew up our building. So they started it.

Can you please explain a little more of what you are talking about? Are you saying Iraq bombed our buildings? That Pakistan bombed our buildings? That the entire muslim population bombed our buildings?

 

[repiV]

Um, Iraq was in the planning stages before 9/11. But that's besides the point. The point is that Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the idiots running our government knew that if we went in to Iraq the country would blow up in to a civil war. Since we knew this how are we not responsible for what has happened?

Everyone knows there will be consequences to their actions - it doesn't mean that you can blame the actions of one group on the people that pissed them off.
Why do I only ever see you guys using that line against groups you oppose? I've never seen any of you blame the Palestinians for the war in Lebanon, due to their incessant rocket attacks against civilian targets. No, that was all Israel's fault - even though their hand genuinely was forced.
Nobody forced the savages in Iraq to start suicide bombing each other.

On a sidenote, it's interesting to note that India and Pakistan were once a single country, and which is now the vastly more successful nation of the two. Kinda throws the whole "Islam doesn't retard societies" theory into the water.

 

[PvtRyan]

Everyone knows there will be consequences to their actions - it doesn't mean that you can blame the actions of one group on the people that pissed them off.
Why do I only ever see you guys using that line against groups you oppose? I've never seen any of you blame the Palestinians for the war in Lebanon, due to their incessant rocket attacks against civilian targets. No, that was all Israel's fault - even though their hand genuinely was forced.
Nobody forced the savages in Iraq to start suicide bombing each other.

On a sidenote, it's interesting to note that India and Pakistan were once a single country, and which is now the vastly more successful nation of the two. Kinda throws the whole "Islam doesn't retard societies" theory into the water.

You were saying?
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h7dYyZ_U_GGd_dSGEqEvFP_omf-AD8TPP2880

 

[repiV]

You were saying?
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h7dYyZ_U_GGd_dSGEqEvFP_omf-AD8TPP2880

Gee, some morons burnt down a few houses. That really compares to institutionalised, widespread Islamic extremism, and invalidates the point that India is far more successful than Pakistan in every way.

 

[No Limit]

Everyone knows there will be consequences to their actions - it doesn't mean that you can blame the actions of one group on the people that pissed them off.
Why do I only ever see you guys using that line against groups you oppose? I've never seen any of you blame the Palestinians for the war in Lebanon, due to their incessant rocket attacks against civilian targets. No, that was all Israel's fault - even though their hand genuinely was forced.
Nobody forced the savages in Iraq to start suicide bombing each other.

Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, and all those idiots knew that a civil war would break out and destablize the country. They didn't think it might happen, they knew it would happen. Cheney in 94 said this was the main reason they didn't remove Saddam in the first gulf war. They (we) share responsibility for adding the spark that started that fire. Im not sure what part of that you do not agree with.

On a sidenote, it's interesting to note that India and Pakistan were once a single country, and which is now the vastly more successful nation of the two. Kinda throws the whole "Islam doesn't retard societies" theory into the water.

I do not claim to know the history of Pakistan or India. But I think you have a tendency to totally over simplify things. You say one is muslim the other one isn't so if one is better off it must be related to religion and nothing else when there are hundreds of other economic, political, and domestic issues that come in to play. The southwest united states and mexico used to be one country, one is very well off the other one isn't. Do you think there is only one simple explaination for that fact?

 

[Eejit]

There's been murders going on in the Middle East for over four ****ing thousand years.

Far more killings than in this country.

amagad, murder!
What exactly are you talking about? Murder happens everywhere, always has and probably always will.
Or by 'murder' do you mean war? What about when american soldiers kill is that murder too?
Perhaps you mean terrorism? But that hasn't been around for four millenia...

 

[repiV]

Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, and all those idiots knew that a civil war would break out and destablize the country. They didn't think it might happen, they knew it would happen. Cheney in 94 said this was the main reason they didn't remove Saddam in the first gulf war. They (we) share responsibility for adding the spark that started that fire. Im not sure what part of that you do not agree with.

Yes, they share the responsibility for adding the spark - but that's not what you said and have claimed repeatedly; namely, that the US and co. are wholly responsible for everything that happens in Iraq.
The vast majority of the responsibility for the civil war falls on the shoulders of those participating in it. It's their fault.

I don't recall you ever making an admission that the Palestinians were wrong in the Lebanon war either, despite inciting the war by indiscriminately targeting civilians, and forcing Israel to inflict vast civilian casualties by hiding out amongst the civilian population and using bystanders as human shields.
They knew Israel would lose the PR war just by making a move to stop the attacks, they incited Israel to go to war and draw condemnation from the whole world for the civilian casualties which Hezbollah made unavoidable. They intentionally won popular support from civilian death.
Far worse crimes. Yet still you lay all the blame on Israel. I take your point that leaders must consider all the implications of their actions before committing to a decision, but you're only applying this principle unevenly, as and when it suits your agenda.

I do not claim to know the history of Pakistan or India. But I think you have a tendency to totally over simplify things. You say one is muslim the other one isn't so if one is better off it must be related to religion and nothing else when there are hundreds of other economic, political, and domestic issues that come in to play. The southwest united states and mexico used to be one country, one is very well off the other one isn't. Do you think there is only one simple explaination for that fact?

The explanation is that the southwest US has since become incorporated into the cultural and economic system of the US, a model that is proven to work very well. It's sociological and economic mechanisms and cultural attitudes that decide a nation's success or failure - barring short-term issues like war and so on.
India's system of secular democracy and rising industry is far superior to Pakistan's system of sharia law and religious oppression. I mean, one of the biggest flaws of British and American society is rampant anti-intellectualism - I can only imagine where we would be if it were cool to be smart (perhaps the largest reason behind the success of Jews). Here we have a society that is not only anti-intellectual, but anti-rational and anti-initiative to the extreme. And a country in a never-ending state of unrest and turmoil can never hope to accomplish anything. No wonder it fails.

 

[No Limit]

Yes, they share the responsibility for adding the spark - but that's not what you said and have claimed repeatedly; namely, that the US and co. are wholly responsible for everything that happens in Iraq.
The vast majority of the responsibility for the civil war falls on the shoulders of those participating in it. It's their fault.

I don't recall you ever making an admission that the Palestinians were wrong in the Lebanon war either, despite inciting the war by indiscriminately targeting civilians, and forcing Israel to inflict vast civilian casualties by hiding out amongst the civilian population and using bystanders as human shields.
They knew Israel would lose the PR war just by making a move to stop the attacks, they incited Israel to go to war and draw condemnation from the whole world for the civilian casualties which Hezbollah made unavoidable. They intentionally won popular support from civilian death.
Far worse crimes. Yet still you lay all the blame on Israel. I take your point that leaders must consider all the implications of their actions before committing to a decision, but you're only applying this principle unevenly, as and when it suits your agenda.

I'm really not that great with analogies but if you have 2 pitbulls with a fence between them and you remove that fence you can not later claim that the dogs are mostly responsible for killing each other when in fact you are the one that is responsible.

We discussed the Lebanon conflict in great detail last summer when all that shit was happening, I don't see a reason to get in to that again. I addressed all of that in those discussions, if you feel you want to bring this topic back by all means make a new thread on it. I will say this, if you want to compare the actions of Israel to that of crazy fundamental muslims I am not going to stop you, go for it. Maybe this will be something we can agree on.

The explanation is that the southwest US has since become incorporated into the cultural and economic system of the US, a model that is proven to work very well. It's sociological and economic mechanisms and cultural attitudes that decide a nation's success or failure - barring short-term issues like war and so on.

Ok fair enough, it was a bad comparisson on my part. I'll give you another one, how would you explain the economic boom of saudi arabia?

And again, I am not trying to disagree with you that their religion had nothing to do with it. But it would be silly to try and simplify the situation by saying religion is the only factor. Could it be the biggest, it could. But I am too lazy to do the research right now and personally I don't think you did any research before making that claim.

 

[repiV]

I'm really not that great with analogies but if you have 2 pitbulls with a fence between them and you remove that fence you can not later claim that the dogs are mostly responsible for killing each other when in fact you are the one that is responsible.

Iraqis aren't pitbulls. They're quite capable of making their own ethical choices in life, and while outside influences can make their plans viable, they cannot make the decisions for them.
It's a sad indictment of Iraqi society that they needed a brutal dictator to keep things in order, and to me these events prove only that Iraq is not deserving of any of our lives or resources. Despite our intentions, we did do good things over there, but clearly they do not deserve any help on our part.
Noone in the West is at fault for what's happening there now, our actions merely made it possible for them to fight their ancient battles once again. The fall of Saddam in any other way could have set the same events in motion. Only now our soldiers are taking bullets in retribution for the actions of other Iraqis.

We discussed the Lebanon conflict in great detail last summer when all that shit was happening, I don't see a reason to get in to that again. I addressed all of that in those discussions, if you feel you want to bring this topic back by all means make a new thread on it. I will say this, if you want to compare the actions of Israel to that of crazy fundamental muslims I am not going to stop you, go for it. Maybe this will be something we can agree on.

I'm merely pointing out that your standpoints on both issues combined are hypocritical. It's like you're trying to score points against the big bad West, rather than assess the situation rationally.

Ok fair enough, it was a bad comparisson on my part. I'll give you another one, how would you explain the economic boom of saudi arabia?

Extensive oil wealth combined with an oligarchy which makes cunning business decisions and forges alliances amongst powerful nations for the benefit only of the rulers. Fundamentalist Islam in Saudi Arabia merely keeps the rest of the population from getting their hands on this wealth, or indeed contributing to society as a whole.
Saudi Arabia will be destitute and under severe threat as soon as the oil runs out, as the rulers are concerned only with enjoying the boom while it lasts, rather than ensuring their own self-sufficiency - and once the oil is gone, we will have no more use for them. It's entirely conceivable we will pummel them into the ground.
Saudi Arabia is the Paris Hilton of the world. The writing is on the wall for them.

And again, I am not trying to disagree with you that their religion had nothing to do with it. But it would be silly to try and simplify the situation by saying religion is the only factor. Could it be the biggest, it could. But I am too lazy to do the research right now and personally I don't think you did any research before making that claim.

You're overlooking the fact that Islam is not just a religion. It's a political standpoint, a culture and an entire way of life. The Islamic way of life precludes economic success, liberty or democracy. It's the anti-thesis of all the sociological progress we have made in these last few hundred years.
From a sociological perspective, Islam is not the equivalent of Christianity. It's the equivalent of the American way.

 

[redruM]

Pakistan is not considered to be part of the middle east, but sometimes may be included you ignorant retards. :hmph:

Fixed.

 

[Jerry_111]

90% of the people in the middle east want to kill people?

You're an idiot. Seriously.

Considering that's its only a small percentage of a small percentage of shiites who want to go to those extremes, he's not an idiot -- he's a retard.

Are the majority of Christians worldwide hardcore evangelicals?

 

[No Limit]

Iraqis aren't pitbulls. They're quite capable of making their own ethical choices in life, and while outside influences can make their plans viable, they cannot make the decisions for them.

Dogs, just like people, can be trained. If you train a dog his entire life to kill that dog will kill. If you train (teach) a person throughout their entire life to hate someone they will hate them with a passion, enough to kill them.

It's a sad indictment of Iraqi society that they needed a brutal dictator to keep things in order, and to me these events prove only that Iraq is not deserving of any of our lives or resources. Despite our intentions, we did do good things over there, but clearly they do not deserve any help on our part.

You seem to be implying that we had the intention of helping the Iraqis when we went in there. You did not dispute what I said about us knowing we would spark a civil war. So if you are not disputing this how can you possibly claim our intentions were to help them?

And you keep assuming that most Iraqis, at least the ones that aren't dead from this idiotic war, are radical. I am going to throw out a number out of my ass. Lets pretend there have been 10,000 suicide bombings since the war started which is around 10 a day. I think this is way too much but since I'm too lazy to look it up I think you will agree its a fair number. That's less than .05 of a percent of the 20 million people that live(d) there. So why do you continue to imply everyone there is is related to terrorists?

I'm merely pointing out that your standpoints on both issues combined are hypocritical. It's like you're trying to score points against the big bad West, rather than assess the situation rationally.

I'm was being very rational with my simple point, a point you didn't really dispute. Yet we are now on the 3rd page of this discussion because you want to call me hypocritical. If you actually go back through my discussions on the topic you will see me very critical of Israel but in those same discussions you will see I never lay the blame on them alone.

Extensive oil wealth combined with an oligarchy which makes cunning business decisions and forges alliances amongst powerful nations for the benefit only of the rulers. Fundamentalist Islam in Saudi Arabia merely keeps the rest of the population from getting their hands on this wealth, or indeed contributing to society as a whole.

I will add this to the small list of things we actually agree on. But remember, they are able to do this with help from the west. Not that I see a way not to help them do this, they sit on 75% of the world's oil reserves.

Saudi Arabia will be destitute and under severe threat as soon as the oil runs out, as the rulers are concerned only with enjoying the boom while it lasts, rather than ensuring their own self-sufficiency - and once the oil is gone, we will have no more use for them. It's entirely conceivable we will pummel them into the ground.
Saudi Arabia is the Paris Hilton of the world. The writing is on the wall for them.

This is not true at all. They are investing billions in to an alternative economy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Saudi_Arabia

The petroleum sector accounts for roughly 75% of budget revenues, 45% of GDP, and 90% of export earnings. About 40% of GDP comes from the private sector. Roughly five and a half million foreign workers play an important role in the Saudi economy, for example, in the oil and service sectors. The government is encouraging private sector growth to lessen the kingdom's dependence on oil and increase employment opportunities for the swelling Saudi population. The government has begun to permit private sector and foreign investor participation in the power generation and telecom sectors. As part of its effort to attract foreign investment and diversify the economy, Saudi Arabia acceded to the WTO in 2005 after many years of negotiations. With high oil revenues enabling the government to post large budget surpluses, Riyadh has been able to substantially boost spending on job training and education, infrastructure development, and government salaries.

As I said we both agree that they are not doing much to help the average person share the wealth of the oil, but they are certainly doing a lot to make sure that when the oil runs low they will have a strong alternative economy and from everything I've read and watched they are very successful in doing this.

You're overlooking the fact that Islam is not just a religion. It's a political standpoint, a culture and an entire way of life. The Islamic way of life precludes economic success, liberty or democracy. It's the anti-thesis of all the sociological progress we have made in these last few hundred years.
From a sociological perspective, Islam is not the equivalent of Christianity. It's the equivalent of the American way.

We have had this discussion a million times and I am not going to get in to this again because we will get no where. But you have a guy that posted here who lives in Pakistan and is a muslim, why don't you ask him how he feels about spreading Islam to the world. It will be good for you. Don't worry, he can't blow you up over the internet (I kid, I kid).

 

[K e r b e r o s]

That's just as absurd as it ever was.

By your own logic, actually, it's all Al Qaeda's fault - they knew what would happen when they launched a terrorist attack on US soil. How far back can you shift the blame? Watch this space...

And serial killers aren't the ones who should be punished - it's those evil bastards who twisted their minds who should be locked up.
Jeez.

I don't think Bin Laden had that much foresight -- but I will say you do have a point, highlighted in red.

 

[Emporius]

Today is a dark day for Pakistan. She was one of the greatest hopes for the country.

 

[bbson john]

Pakistan is not in the middle east, you ignorant retards. :hmph:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/LocationPakistan.svg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/13/GreaterMiddleEast1.png

 

[Acepilotf14]

I believe you just got owned, vikram.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Sad, but not surprising that she was murdered.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

I believe you just got owned, vikram.

Excuse him for knowing basic geography.

 

[Jintor]

There goes stability.

 

[Saturos]

I m a Pakistani & I hate my country. Its is going to dogs. The stupid radical, fundamentalists wont let the moderate people live in the country. They want to forcibly impose their laws. They want to exterminate non-muslims. I'm a muslim but I love to live in harmony, not like these suicide bomber fascists. Too hell with this country. This country wont let anybody gr88 survive.

You don't live there now do you? If so, for the sake of your sanity, I'd leave ASAP if I were you.

 

[Nemesis6]

The guy who killed her was not the first that week... Before him came...

A 15-year-old boy with a dynamite and shrapnel suicide bomb -

POLICE in Pakistan have stopped a 15-year-old boy they say was carrying a bomb made of dynamite and nails from gettnig into a rally by opposition leader Benazir Bhutto.

The boy got past the first of four security checkpoints set up outside the rally in the northwestern city of Peshawar but was caught at the second, said police officer Rahim Shah, according to the Associated Press.

In October, suicide bombers struck a parade celebrating Ms Bhutto's return from exile, killing more than 140 people in the southern city of Karachi.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22975025-23109,00.html

Now, if he just wanted... Hold on, if "they" just wanted to kill her, why exactly did they pack nails into it?

The Religion of Peace -- George W. calls it -- at work: Going out with a bang? Take as many as you can with you, even if that isn't your "objective".

EDIT: Channel 4's report on it -
youtube.com/watch?v=2WPtVBPJVLA

 

[99.vikram]

I believe you just got owned, vikram.

Any reputed source treats Pakistan as part of asia. It's politics has always dealt with asian countries.
This link shows clearly that ONLY the G8 treat Pakistan as part of the middle east.

Also,

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan,is a country in South Asia, marking the region where South Asia converges with Central Asia and the Middle East.

As I said, ignorant retards.

 

[Man|-|unter]

Islam, religion of peace!

Indeed!

 

[nurizeko]

Musharraf has nothing to lose, it's already slipping away from him fast. This move gives him everything - And he has the perfect excuse - Blame it on terrorists. Just like America.

I blame him.

Wow...you managed to point the finger quicker then anyone.

In another forum I visit regularly, there is a process to these type of threads.

First the local leader type who no-one likes gets fingered, even though it makes no sense seeing as he would blatantly get fingered by the reactive masses anyway, and then, they blame AMERICAN.

I love how America gets fingered in every assassination of some politician who was popular with a majority, or at least a vocal minority.

Seriously, I'm not even American and I certainly hold no love for US foreign policy, but in a country where politics are based off of personal loyalties, popularities, tribal connections and so on, all it takes is one individual who doesn't like a politician to create the risk of assasination.

ONE.

I think its unlikely Musharraf orchestrated it, and even less likely the US was involved.

In fact, to my understanding, she was the west's Pakistani darling.

There's been murders going on in the Middle East for over four ****ing thousand years.

Far more killings than in this country.

Yeah but your country was born in a traitorous murderous uprising against your fellow Britons and loyal subjects of his Majesty and the crown, turning on brother and sister who did not share your fanatical revolutionary zealotry.


See how people can turn things round there?.

The West is just as guilty of a nice long history of complete disrespect for human life, you can wrap it in patriotism and defense of the realm, and all that, but at the end of the day, us whiteys are just as good at being evil wankers as anyone.

It just so happens that the Middle east, Africa, and the developing world in general is lagging behind our apparent supposed enlightenment, though its easy not to be quick to violence and religious fervor when we live in parts of the world that have everything.

Though if your point is that Religion should be forgotten as the primitive spreading of willful ignorance, I agree, but thats another thread for another day.

Racism is something that won't ever be abolished as long as we're different. I don't really see any reason to give a crap about it.
Just because you think you're not racist doesn't mean you aren't. We've all had racist thoughts.

I used to feel slightly apprehensive when in the vicinity of a black man and felt guilty until I realized it was because of the fear of being accused of being racist or something and not generally knowing where to look and all that stuff dumb punk kids easily fear, for example, I actually believed I would die if I bit my nails so far down my finger bled, because someone told me so.

Once I got old enough and wise enough to realize I wouldn't be hung, drawn and quartered for looking at a black man in passing, and generally I understood the concept of race and all that better, I actually found I wasn't bothered at all.


Most apparent racism, as you think people feel, is probably more to do with the fear of being labeled as such, then genuine fear and dislike of coloured peoples.

Or perhaps I am just some weird breed of human being that see's other human beings for what they are, HUMAN, but go figure I am an oddball like that.

 

[mastag]

People who say, "but Islam is a religion of peace, they just misrepresent it".

Yeah, shut up.

If such a large percent of muslims are fanatics and war mongers, then maybe you are the misrepresentatives.

 

[Eejit]

Ok, show me statistics of percentages...

 

[Apocalypse89]

I haven't read this beyond the first page, but...

Why people get in an uproar whenever somebody on these forums trash talks the Middle East is beyond me.

They're savages.

Yeah. I'm a savage, and so are all my friends, families, and peers. Despite the fact that the only explosions I've ever seen are fireworks, and all the female members of my family have an education, drive their own cars, work wherever they want and wear whatever they desire.

I bet all Americans are cowboys who shoot anything that moves, wants to steal everyone's oil, and want to convert the rest of the world to Christianity. Because that's about as accurate as your opinion on a region that you've never even seen for yourself, and only know about it by typing "terrorists" into Google from your comfy computer thousands of miles away.

 

[No Limit]

People who say, "but Islam is a religion of peace, they just misrepresent it".

Yeah, shut up.

If such a large percent of muslims are fanatics and war mongers, then maybe you are the misrepresentatives.

What percentage are you talking about? You've had 2 muslims in this thread alone, both extremely moderate. So you are shooting 0 for 2 as it stands right now, where do you people get this bullshit that its a large percentage?

 

[ericms]

Honestly, from their point of view it very much looks as if The West is trying to "dominate the world," occupying around 130 nations with 700 bases overseas. Bhutto, who was corrupt herself, looked to be a further extension of this dominance from their perspective. Anyway, here are some excerpts from an interview with Robert Pape, a professor of political science who culled together most all data about suicide terrorism dating back to 1980. I thought many of you would find it interesting.

TAC: So if Islamic fundamentalism is not necessarily a key variable behind these groups, what is?

RP: The central fact is that overwhelmingly suicide-terrorist attacks are not driven by religion as much as they are by a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland. From Lebanon to Sri Lanka to Chechnya to Kashmir to the West Bank, every major suicide-terrorist campaign?over 95 percent of all the incidents?has had as its central objective to compel a democratic state to withdraw.

TAC: That would seem to run contrary to a view that one heard during the American election campaign, put forth by people who favor Bush?s policy. That is, we need to fight the terrorists over there, so we don?t have to fight them here.

RP: Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us.

Since 1990, the United States has stationed tens of thousands of ground troops on the Arabian Peninsula, and that is the main mobilization appeal of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. People who make the argument that it is a good thing to have them attacking us over there are missing that suicide terrorism is not a supply-limited phenomenon where there are just a few hundred around the world willing to do it because they are religious fanatics. It is a demand-driven phenomenon. That is, it is driven by the presence of foreign forces on the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland. The operation in Iraq has stimulated suicide terrorism and has given suicide terrorism a new lease on life.

TAC: If we were to back up a little bit before the invasion of Iraq to what happened before 9/11, what was the nature of the agitprop that Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda were putting out to attract people?

RP: Osama bin Laden?s speeches and sermons run 40 and 50 pages long. They begin by calling tremendous attention to the presence of tens of thousands of American combat forces on the Arabian Peninsula.

In 1996, he went on to say that there was a grand plan by the United States?that the Americans were going to use combat forces to conquer Iraq, break it into three pieces, give a piece of it to Israel so that Israel could enlarge its country, and then do the same thing to Saudi Arabia. As you can see, we are fulfilling his prediction, which is of tremendous help in his mobilization appeals.

TAC: If you were to break down causal factors, how much weight would you put on a cultural rejection of the West and how much weight on the presence of American troops on Muslim territory?

RP: The evidence shows that the presence of American troops is clearly the pivotal factor driving suicide terrorism.

If Islamic fundamentalism were the pivotal factor, then we should see some of the largest Islamic fundamentalist countries in the world, like Iran, which has 70 million people?three times the population of Iraq and three times the population of Saudi Arabia?with some of the most active groups in suicide terrorism against the United States. However, there has never been an al-Qaeda suicide terrorist from Iran, and we have no evidence that there are any suicide terrorists in Iraq from Iran.

Sudan is a country of 21 million people. Its government is extremely Islamic fundamentalist. The ideology of Sudan was so congenial to Osama bin Laden that he spent three years in Sudan in the 1990s. Yet there has never been an al-Qaeda suicide terrorist from Sudan.

I have the first complete set of data on every al-Qaeda suicide terrorist from 1995 to early 2004, and they are not from some of the largest Islamic fundamentalist countries in the world. Two thirds are from the countries where the United States has stationed heavy combat troops since 1990.

Another point in this regard is Iraq itself. Before our invasion, Iraq never had a suicide-terrorist attack in its history. Never. Since our invasion, suicide terrorism has been escalating rapidly with 20 attacks in 2003, 48 in 2004, and over 50 in just the first five months of 2005. Every year that the United States has stationed 150,000 combat troops in Iraq, suicide terrorism has doubled.

TAC: Do we know who is committing suicide terrorism in Iraq? Are they primarily Iraqis or walk-ins from other countries in the region?

RP: Our best information at the moment is that the Iraqi suicide terrorists are coming from two groups?Iraqi Sunnis and Saudis?the two populations most vulnerable to transformation by the presence of large American combat troops on the Arabian Peninsula. This is perfectly consistent with the strategic logic of suicide terrorism.

TAC: Has the next generation of anti-American suicide terrorists already been created? Is it too late to wind this down, even assuming your analysis is correct and we could de-occupy Iraq?

RP: Many people worry that once a large number of suicide terrorists have acted that it is impossible to wind it down. The history of the last 20 years, however, shows the opposite. Once the occupying forces withdraw from the homeland territory of the terrorists, they often stop?and often on a dime.

In Lebanon, for instance, there were 41 suicide-terrorist attacks from 1982 to 1986, and after the U.S. withdrew its forces, France withdrew its forces, and then Israel withdrew to just that six-mile buffer zone of Lebanon, they virtually ceased. They didn?t completely stop, but there was no campaign of suicide terrorism. Once Israel withdrew from the vast bulk of Lebanese territory, the suicide terrorists did not follow Israel to Tel Aviv.

This is also the pattern of the second Intifada with the Palestinians. As Israel is at least promising to withdraw from Palestinian-controlled territory (in addition to some other factors), there has been a decline of that ferocious suicide-terrorist campaign. This is just more evidence that withdrawal of military forces really does diminish the ability of the terrorist leaders to recruit more suicide terrorists.

That doesn?t mean that the existing suicide terrorists will not want to keep going. I am not saying that Osama bin Laden would turn over a new leaf and suddenly vote for George Bush. There will be a tiny number of people who are still committed to the cause, but the real issue is not whether Osama bin Laden exists. It is whether anybody listens to him. That is what needs to come to an end for Americans to be safe from suicide terrorism.

 

[bbson john]

Any reputed source treats Pakistan as part of asia. It's politics has always dealt with asian countries.
This link shows clearly that ONLY the G8 treat Pakistan as part of the middle east.

As I said, ignorant retards.

That whether Pakistan should be regarded as in the Middle-East is arguable. The geographical interpretation varies from different news networks, i.e. western and eastern news network.

What makes you a real retards is that you state that Pakistan is a part of Asia, as an argument for your stance. The fact is that almost the whole "converged Middle-east" is WITHIN Asia. Israel, Palestine, Egypt, etc are in Asia. Being an Asian country does not contradict being a Middle-East country. YOU are a real ignorant retard as YOU think that Asia and Middle-East are mutually exclusive. You mean that there exists the eighth continent called "the Middle-East". seriously, wtf?

I won't disagree with you if you use other definition of the Middle-East, since I know there are others. And yours definition is used more extensively. But the way you call others "retards" are really annoying. I must put that word back to you.

Respect others points of view.

p.s. You real think "only" G8. First, G8 is not small at all. Second there are other places use G8's definition except G8 itself.

 

[Solaris]

Find a reputable source that says it's in the middle east please.