Iran 'behind Green Zone attack'

[Scott Free]

That would do a lot of damage, I guess that would tell if the rest of the world had a backbone then. Tanking the dollar would be enough to bring her to her knees. The stock market was the first thing they protected on 911. Cut off her oil and she dies. Not a shot fired, except along the Canadian border when we have to be with the majority or we get the same punishment.

And that is part of the problem. The USA is close to bankruptcy and they need a new bubble fast; there really is no better bubble than world war. If the world struck back it would play into their hands but just like Nazi Germany we may have no choice. I think the world needs to punish people who capitalize on war. Once the USA is destroyed the wealthy should be sought out, their finances scrutinized and if found to have been generated by war profit, executed.

I sometimes see Americans traveling abroad to wear something to identify themselves as Canadians. I really wish they wouldn't do that. They may wear a patch but inside they still act American, to somebody who doesn't know any better they may start to think that is how all Canadians act.

I wouldn't worry about it. There are actually millions of really great people in the USA and if they wanted to pretend to be Canadian I wouldn't have a problem with that. They wouldn't hurt our rep one bit. As for the others, I think it is pretty obvious they aren't really Canadians isn't it? I hope so.

 

[MHz]

Sending them into a radiation zone for 60 years would work for me, as long as there were about a million that got sent there. Why should be money-changers sit back on their loot from the war and just a very few get punished. Those family lines would die out, their off-spring would me too fuked up for reproduction.

Why put effort into the US before undoing the damage they did too others?

Why not let it wither, their goods would be welcome elsewhere, maybe even some people who can pay in real good, like oil. By the time it ran out they would be self-sufficient through other technologies.

By that time America might have rediscovered fire.

 

[MHz]

That all nice and fine that there are millions that are 'caring'. I'll bet that's a real comfort to those looking down some actual barrels. The promises those 'caring people' make to the world is"Just wait till the next election, we'll show him who the boss is." In the mean time there is a few years before the election and a few years after until things could be implemented. That isn't helping the people who get hurt in that space of time. At election time, things don't change, same promise, same result, not one thing changes. So when to they actually show to the world that they are caring people, Can't do it today, the price of gas just went up $0.01.

 

[Scott Free]

Sending them into a radiation zone for 60 years would work for me, as long as there were about a million that got sent there. Why should be money-changers sit back on their loot from the war and just a very few get punished. Those family lines would die out, their off-spring would me too fuked up for reproduction.

Why put effort into the US before undoing the damage they did too others?

Why not let it wither, their goods would be welcome elsewhere, maybe even some people who can pay in real good, like oil. By the time it ran out they would be self-sufficient through other technologies.

By that time America might have rediscovered fire.

My sense of justice is only that liberty and dignity should be restored to the victim. Anything more is revenge and only adds to the problem. I don't believe in punitive punishment I only believe in restoring order. If dignity and liberty can only be restored by someones death then so be it. If we need to take someones money and execute them to safeguard the world from their rabid appetite then so be it.

Iraq's liberty can easily be restored if the imperialists are forced to leave. Iraqi dignity has not been too damaged IMO. Individually it has been and personal compensation should be meted out. They are the cradle of civilization and a very honourable people and this terrible act of aggression hasn't taken a shred of dignity from them. It has, however, destroyed their enemies dignity though few seem to know it. I think the USA should be forced to give up a portion of its GDP (30-50%) until Iraq is rebuilt.

 

[Scott Free]

That all nice and fine that there are millions that are 'caring'. I'll bet that's a real comfort to those looking down some actual barrels. The promises those 'caring people' make to the world is"Just wait till the next election, we'll show him who the boss is." In the mean time there is a few years before the election and a few years after until things could be implemented.

That's true, however, I feel that way about us being in Afghanistan. Where does that leave me?

 

[MHz]

Good question.

At least we aren't on the bull-horn 24/7 calling for more of the same on somebody else. I'm pretty sure if Canadians did the actual planning of their role it would have included a few Tim Horton's.

 

[Praxius]

No, you are mistaken, no one in AMerica wants to be invovled in another conflict, and part of the reason is that none of the countries that we considered our allies have stuck with us,

That's because your allies, or most of them, have brains and will not risk their people over claims and another country telling them to "Trust Us" ~ No Evidence = No Support for a War.

Just because you're self proclaimed "Leaders of the Free World" doesn't mean we have to snap sh*t everytime you guys want to go off and kill something..... esspecially when you're frggin lying to us.

the few who have such and Britain, AUstralia, and Poland, have stood strong but are not enough. If the Iranian gov't is manufacturing weapons being fired upon Us forces then the Iranian govt should be held accountable either for supplying the weapons or for a leak in their system

That is.... if the Iraqi government, being democratic now, decides they should be held accountable for their actions in their country. Iraq isn't the US.... Iraq is still for Iraqis. You are in their country as reluctant guests. If you're getting pegged by weapons supplied by Iran, which are in the hands of home grown patiots of Iraq who want you out of their country..... then it's Iraq you still have to worry about, don't go blame shifting Iran for your problems in Iraq.

Don't forget, China not too long ago made a huge arms deal with Iraq which went behind the back of the US (Due to the low quality and out dated weapons which were too slow to arrive to supply the Iraqi soldiers.) I imagine soon some of those weapons will be found in conflicts through Iraq too.... and eventually the US will start blaming China for the weapons being supplied.

Don't forget about how many weapons that were actually supplied by the US which just "Disappeared" into thin air a while back...... I wonder who has all those weapons and why we don't hear about cases of those weapons found during conflicts?

190,000 US weapons feared missing in Iraq
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-10-29-missing-weapons_x.htm

More than 190,000 AK-47 assault rifles and pistols distributed to Iraqi forces by the US are missing, feared fallen into the hands of insurgents, a congressional watchdog warned today.


The highest previous estimate of missing weapons was 14,000, but a new report from the government accountability office (GAO) said US military officials did not know what had happened to 30% of the weapons the US had given to Iraqi forces since 2004.
"They really have no idea where they are," Rachel Stohl, a senior analyst at the Centre for Defence Information, told the Washington Post, which reported the GAO's findings. "It likely means that the United States is unintentionally providing weapons to bad actors."

So before you guys start blowing up another nation in regards to supplying the enemy, how about you guys start looking into your own accountability in this problem?

 

[MikeyDB]

How about the fact that AMERICA STARTED THIS WAR!

How can you blame/defend the Iranians even IF they have supplied arms and materiel to the insurgents in Iraq?

America is the sole perpetrator of this conflict and when a "general" starts whining about the mess they're in....well it looks good on them.

America decided to use war and brutality against the Iraqi people, just as America decided that making noises about brining Bin Laden to "justice" in Afghanistan demanded action in that nation....

America has declared war on the NON-Israeli people of the Middle East.

Why shouldn't they be fighting back?

 

[MHz]

That is.... if the Iraqi government, being democratic now, decides they should be held accountable for their actions in their country. Iraq isn't the US.... Iraq is still for Iraqis. You are in their country as reluctant guests. If you're getting pegged by weapons supplied by Iran, which are in the hands of home grown patiots of Iraq who want you out of their country..... then it's Iraq you still have to worry about, don't go blame shifting Iran for your problems in Iraq.

Do you really believe that? I would think a truly free democracy would be able to decide who is allowed to do reconstruction, who is to provide security and, most important, what they accept as their constitution. The US one favors big biz with 40 year contracts with the majority of the profits going to the share-holders of those companies. I don't recall a constitution like the one that Venezuela has making the rounds, one that puts most of the profits in the hands of the common people.

 

[Praxius]

How about the fact that AMERICA STARTED THIS WAR!

How can you blame/defend the Iranians even IF they have supplied arms and materiel to the insurgents in Iraq?

America is the sole perpetrator of this conflict and when a "general" starts whining about the mess they're in....well it looks good on them.

America decided to use war and brutality against the Iraqi people, just as America decided that making noises about brining Bin Laden to "justice" in Afghanistan demanded action in that nation....

America has declared war on the NON-Israeli people of the Middle East.

Why shouldn't they be fighting back?

They should be fighting back and have every right to do so. I don't shed one tear for any fallen soldier in Iraq because they brought it on themselves.

I keep hearing the threat that if the US leaves, Iraq will goto hell and there would be more killings..... the only reason there are groups killing one another right now, is because they all want the US out of their country and they blame one group over another for supporting the US and making the US stay longer and longer. All at the same time, the US plays it off as the groups trying to kill one another because their mindless savages who are killing in the name of their god. Well so too is the US, since this all started as Bush's "Holy Crusade" ~ He started this religious aspect of the war, now suck it up and deal with it.

The US is complaining that people are blowing themselves up in cars and bomb vests and how savage and primitive it is...... when the British Empire complained about the American colonists fighting Guerrilla style combat, hiding in the treelines, not standing in line to get shot 3 feet away from the enemy like gentlemen normally do...... your enemy is fighting in a manner in which you are not prepared for, so you bitch and moan complaining they're not acting like soldiers and more like terrorists / traitors of the Empire.

I don't suppose anybody remembers how the British Empire treated capture colonists? Very similarlly to how the US is treating those they deem are terrorists..... stripping them of their basic rights, treating them like animals, scum of the earth, torturing them to repent or accept what they did was wrong.

Americans fought a long and bloody battle against this sort of thing, and now here we are, Americans doing the exact same things they originally opposed.

Ironic if you ask me.

 

[Praxius]

Do you really believe that? I would think a truly free democracy would be able to decide who is allowed to do reconstruction, who is to provide security and, most important, what they accept as their constitution. The US one favors big biz with 40 year contracts with the majority of the profits going to the share-holders of those companies. I don't recall a constitution like the one that Venezuela has making the rounds, one that puts most of the profits in the hands of the common people.

Nope, I don't believe that, because if I did and it was true, I imagine the US would have been booted out years ago.

 

[jimmoyer]

I keep hearing the threat that if the US leaves, Iraq will goto hell and there would be more killings..... the only reason there are groups killing one another right now, is because they all want the US out of their country and they blame one group over another for supporting the US and making the US stay longer and longer. All at the same time, the US plays it off as the groups trying to kill one another because their mindless savages who are killing in the name of their god. Well so too is the US, since this all started as Bush's "Holy Crusade" ~ He started this religious aspect of the war, now suck it up and deal with it.
--------------------------------Praxius----------------------------------------------------------------

The only reason that both groups are killing each other is because both want the US troops out of Iraq ?

Does this serve your bias ?

Or is the truth a little more involved such as a 1000 year history of enmity between the Sunni and Shia ?

Both groups may want the US out, but your explanation of them killing each other cheapens who they are and why they fight each other.

And lately many of the local Sunni have welcomed US support to stop their own Sunni foreigners of al Qaeda from killing their own people.

Even those who hate the US or its policy, are just as wrong in their understanding of Iraq as the US is, although for different reasons and for different biases.

Because you're right about the overall blundering stupidity of President Bush, does not mean you are so accurate about some major particulars of this area you say you are observing.

We should guard against one truth blinding us from other particular truths that stand side by side the truth that interests our attention.

And if a certain truth interests our attention because it engages our bias we should then be even more wary in looking at this truth.

 

[MikeyDB]

Jimmoyer

Greetin's dude!

While the oppression of Saddam Hussein existed, relative prosperity also existed. Now you may argue that golden palaces for his and his family's personal use isn't demonstration of a fair or equitable prosperity...but if you factor in an examination of the wealthiest one percent of Americans compared to the well-being and quality of life of the remaining 99% there might be a few similarities that stand out....

Tribalism that see's the Kurds vs. Iraq or conflict in Kosovo or Taiwan vs China...the components of all hostilities share many comonalities.

Until the interests of the wealthiest and most powerful nation on earth gets involved!

We are living with the legacy of wealth and power throughout the Israeli Palestinian conflict...we are living with the legacy of power and wealth when it comes to American invaision of Iraq....we are living with the outcomes produced by the wealthy and powerful in Haiti, Jamaica, East Timor, Indonesia, anywhere you care to examine where tribes are pitted against tribes be that Nigeria or well...anywhere in the world where the "interests" consumer-ethos of the west has manipulated social principles to achieve particular outcomes.

We can spend our time blaming Saddam Hussein for invading Kuwait, but the Kurds and the oil revenues of Kuwait were "significant" factors when the United States became involved.
Divorcing our appreciation for the impact of a focused greed on the maelstrom of political cultural and ethnic conflict that swirls around us..... have these issues been served by the interference of the United States..(and others) or have they become less likely to be resolved in peace without bloodshed and carnage?

 

[Praxius]

The only reason that both groups are killing each other is because both want the US troops out of Iraq ?

Does this serve your bias ?

Or is the truth a little more involved such as a 1000 year history of enmity between the Sunni and Shia ?

It is both, but seriously, we all know they've been devided for quite a long time.... yet they were not at each other's throats like they are today. Now why do you suppose that is? What triggered this?

There's a devision between the Christian faith as well..... Northren Ireland had a little stint with that themselves. Do you remember what actually triggered the bloodshed?

Both groups may want the US out, but your explanation of them killing each other cheapens who they are and why they fight each other.

It doesn't cheapen who they are, it identifies the main problem that's fueling their divisions which already exist...... it also identifies the excuses the US continues to use to justify being in Iraq.... which is truly all about keeping some leverage on oil in Iraq. If the US pulls out now, you lose all chances of getting your grubby hands on their oil. You also lose your chances at gaining a functioning Democratic nation smack dab in the middle of Muslim nations (For instability purposes in the future.)

Playing off the Iraqi's divisions and claiming they're incapable of working through their problems themselves Cheapens who they are.... not the other way around.

And lately many of the local Sunni have welcomed US support to stop their own Sunni foreigners of al Qaeda from killing their own people.

Or another way of looking at it is they've decided that the quickest way for the US to leave their country is to co-operate with the US, to get the US to see things are as they planned, leave, and then change back..... but see, that's also why there will always and forever be a US presence in Iraq no matter what happens..... it's to look out for your own best interests, not theirs.... regardless of what it does to the Iraqi people.

Even those who hate the US or its policy, are just as wrong in their understanding of Iraq as the US is, although for different reasons and for different biases.

Because you're right about the overall blundering stupidity of President Bush, does not mean you are so accurate about some major particulars of this area you say you are observing.

It's all connected to one thing or another. Reasons for one thing, fuel the fire for other reasons. Once you learn to connect each one, trace back where what started what and when, you can find the route of the major problems and possibly how to solve them. I'm fully aware that Sunnis and Shia have been bickering back and forth with one another..... this is what has been exploited in order for this sham of an invasion to continue.

 

[Avro]

We should guard against one truth blinding us from other particular truths that stand side by side the truth that interests our attention.

And if a certain truth interests our attention because it engages our bias we should then be even more wary in looking at this truth.

Uh.....yeah.

So you should have seen Bush was full of crap to start this disatrous conflict for no reason and that Saddam despite being an asshole had the country under control and when it was ready it would have brought about change on it's own instead of typical failed nation building.

 

[MHz]

Neither Kuwait nor Saudi is democratic, they are Monarchs, that doesn't seem to be an issue to anybody. Kuwait tried democracy, they went back to what it was before. The US didn't mind setting up Iran to be a military dictatorship, nor do they mind that same thing in Pakistan. The only thing consistent about US foreign policy 1s that it is inconsistent.

 

[Avro]

Neither Kuwait nor Saudi is democratic, they are Monarchs, that doesn't seem to be an issue to anybody. Kuwait tried democracy, they went back to what it was before. The US didn't mind setting up Iran to be a military dictatorship, nor do they mind that same thing in Pakistan. The only thing consistent about US foreign policy 1s that it is inconsistent.

The U.S. and the West like dictatorships who listen and obey orders.

 

[MHz]

They also like that on the home turf also, of course those under a dictator know they are under one, our democracies put up an illusion that we have a choice, in reality the same group has different faces but policy remains the same.

 

[Scott Free]

Capitalism has a love affair with fascism. Fascism is extremely profitable to corporations once they have achieved a certain size and begin searching for policies that wouldn't be palatable in a real functioning democracy.

A new type of "democracy" called US style democracy, which is really corporatism masked, has found favour with the monied and political elite because of its propensity to corruption. In essence "American style democracy" is even worse than fascism but few people will comprehend this since it hasn't been horrifically demonstrated yet (it has been but not to "us" ask an Iraqi about the merits of ASD), because it changes a nations constituents from the population to the corporation and does so without the population knowing it. It provides a pseudo freedom acceptable so long as the masses have cheap pizza to stuff in their faces, beer to wash it down with and a retarded game show, sport or sitcom to watch.

We truly have turned into nations of swine.

 

[Praxius]

Capitalism has a love affair with fascism. Fascism is extremely profitable to corporations once they have achieved a certain size and begin searching for policies that wouldn't be palatable in a real functioning democracy.

A new type of "democracy" called US style democracy, which is really corporatism masked, has found favour with the monied and political elite because of its propensity to corruption. In essence "American style democracy" is even worse than fascism but few people will comprehend this since it hasn't been horrifically demonstrated yet (it has been but not to "us" ask an Iraqi about the merits of ASD), because it changes a nations constituents from the population to the corporation and does so without the population knowing it. It provides a pseudo freedom acceptable so long as the masses have cheap pizza to stuff in their faces, beer to wash it down with and a retarded game show, sport or sitcom to watch.

We truly have turned into nations of swine.

Pretty much yeah.... then again when someone brings up a concept or idea that removes this corruption and US Style "Democracy" you're instantly labeled either a communist, socialist, or a fascist.... basically anything but Democratic to make you sound like an evil bastard for thinking outside of their box. Then everybody hears those words, thinks it's true, then forgets the new idea and goes back to their trough in front of the TV.