The illusion of innocence

toiletduck

/off topic

The Corinthian wrote:

Actually it didn't:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4484237.stm

You appear to be demonstrating the topic of this thread.

:rolleyes: i was actually refering to the 80's and 90's when iraq DID have wmd's.

Are you suggesting that the families of suicide bombers are terrorists? Reminds me of the old gag about suspects being innocent until proved Irish.

no of course not, but giving money to the families could definitely be interpreted as an incentive to terrorists, dont forget that a lot of palesitians are pi$$ poor.

DadaKopf

Many other Middle Eastern states did the same - like Egypt, who receives vast amounts of military aid and one quarter of the African aid budget from the USA.

The Corinthian

toiletduck wrote:

:rolleyes: i was actually refering to the 80's and 90's when iraq DID have wmd's.

Isn’t that being a little disingenuous with the facts? You make a statement of fact from the 1980’s along side other, more recent, claims and then you’re confused that your meaning has been misconstrued?

It’s easy to see how a case for war could be constructed as a result:

US: Let’s invade Iraq.
UN: Why?
US: Because they’ve been known to have WMD.
(US invades)
UN: Where are the WMD?
US: Oh, we meant they used to have them...

no of course not, but giving money to the families could definitely be interpreted as an incentive to terrorists, dont forget that a lot of palesitians are pi$$ poor.

I’d probably agree with you were it not for Israel’s policy of bulldozing the homes of the families of suicide bombers. Of course, I’m not saying that Saddam was a philanthropist, but I would as a result think your claim that he was promoting terrorism to be rather exaggerated.

iregk

Ok i've kind of stayed out of this but thought right I'll throw in my two cents. The thing is its all about money and manipulation. The first casualty of war is the truth.

Sure we like to think the soldiers are targets but its not that clear cut in iraq. The western US media like to paint this picture of a war happening and huge fighting going on. In reality this is not the case. The degree to which the US public has been brain washed is unreal. In a recent survey by an independant news paper (washington post or journal one or the other) 80% of americans thought Sadam was responsible for 9/11 and that he and OBL were best mates!

Translate this to their soldiers and its the same. Reading an article before that had an interview with a soldier heading into Iraq and his comments were amazing. "I just want to get in there and get my nose dirty and get some revenge for 9/11" says the brave gi. As the reported said: "but you know iraq had nothing to do wtih 9/11" soldier:"well thats over my head, ive been told they did so thats what i believe!"

How much more ignorant can you get. Americans like to think they have one of the worlds greatest democracies when in fact they are the worlds largest distatorship. When your in a country that tells you what to look like, what to eat, what to think and what to say and then you have the balls to say you enjoy great freedom. Yes American of course you do.

toiletduck

The Corinthian wrote:

Isn’t that being a little disingenuous with the facts? You make a statement of fact from the 1980’s along side other, more recent, claims and then you’re confused that your meaning has been misconstrued?

my original comment was a response to a statement "that most americans believe iraq had WMD's."I was merely pointing out that they did.

I’d probably agree with you were it not for Israel’s policy of bulldozing the homes of the families of suicide bombers.

i would think this policy is to diswade suicide bombers i.e. you cant punish them after the attack, but you can punish their family. (im not condoning or condemning the policy, merely pointing out the rationale as i see it.)

Of course, I’m not saying that Saddam was a philanthropist, but I would as a result think your claim that he was promoting terrorism to be rather exaggerated.

well why give the money if your not promoting terrorism?

iregk wrote:

Americans like to think they have one of the worlds greatest democracies when in fact they are the worlds largest distatorship. When your in a country that tells you what to look like, what to eat, what to think and what to say and then you have the balls to say you enjoy great freedom.

the US isn't a dictatorship or did i just imagine the elctions in november?
here in ireland, we're told what to think (constant ad's against racism, for recycling etc.), what we should eat (ad's for healthy eating etc.). What do you mean by "what to look like?"

DadaKopf

well why give the money if your not promoting terrorism?

Apart from resisting Israeli aggression, Hamas also runs health and other community services - I could easily imagine giving money to Hamas would at least be as much a form of humanitarian aid as well as aid to violence. And clearly, there's political capital to be gained by the regimes donating the money.

The Corinthian

toiletduck wrote:

my original comment was a response to a statement "that most americans believe iraq had WMD's."I was merely pointing out that they did.

Fair enough.

i would think this policy is to diswade suicide bombers i.e. you cant punish them after the attack, but you can punish their family. (im not condoning or condemning the policy, merely pointing out the rationale as i see it.)

I understand the rational, but were the UK to have done the same to the families of IRA bombers and the Irish government responded by giving them financial aid, would this necessarily be encouraging terrorism?

well why give the money if your not promoting terrorism?

To garner support in the Arab World during a period where Arab governments were largely isolating Iraq.

the US isn't a dictatorship or did i just imagine the elctions in november?

An election does not a democracy make.

toiletduck

The Corinthian wrote:

I understand the rational, but were the UK to have done the same to the families of IRA bombers and the Irish government responded by giving them financial aid, would this necessarily be encouraging terrorism?

not really applicble her because the IRA didnt use suicide bombers and so if they were caught, they would be punished. but to answer you're question, yes i would consider it supporting terrorism.

To garner support in the Arab World during a period where Arab governments were largely isolating Iraq.

agreed but it also promoted terrorism imo.

An election does not a democracy make.

true, but if believe america is a dictaorship please point out how this is.

iregk

Duck, (seemed easier than calling your toilet!) by no stretch did you imagine the elections in november, but on the same token you never seen a fair democratic election either. What you seen was what CNN, NBC etc.. told you was happening.

What none of these mentioned as they are all owned by sections of the same group that own the bush family is that either way the outcome was going to be the same. Bush or Kerry. These two apparently at logger heads candidates are part of the same group, society and club. They work to the same goals and they are both puppets. It made no difference which one took the election as effectively the US people were voting for the very same unseen people that hold the real power in the US. Bust and Kerry are puppets creating the illusion of a democratically elected president. The last runner not from this group was Al Gore and well even though he won the election who took office?

Thats a hell of a democracy. Yeah you all voted for him but we are still putting this guy in power so take it like the bitch you are!!! I'm not saying ireland is somehow immune to all of this, we are not we are very much on the same patch but not to the same degree as the US.

toiletduck

iregk wrote:

They work to the same goals and they are both puppets.

who is the puppet-master(s) in your opinion?

iregk

In my opinion the puppet masters are shape shifting reptilians... hahaha just kidding. They are those lovely corporate moguls of the Illuminati...

solas

*thud*