Pray for Iraq?

They kill more fellow Muslims in their homeland than they do Western targets in Europe / the West. What part of foreign policy makes these targets? Their ideology is not to fight foreign policy, it's about religion, their warped interpretation of the Quran and forcing these views on everybody else.

 

I'm really don't buy into the conspiracy theories, not just the 9/11 conspiracies but in general.

 

You think this is about 9/11? The western allies were at Iraq when I was a nipper. 1991 wasn't it? 9/11 gave the US and their allies an opportunity to finally do what Bush Snr couldn't. Take Iraq for all its worth. And then Afghan. And Libya. Namely, gold, oil and the drugs.

9/11 was an inside job, a joint US and Saudi operation, conspiracy theorists tell us.

Whatever you believe, the actions of our governments are no better than the likes of ISIS.

I find what's happened in Iraq, Brussels, Paris, all over the place, I find it appalling. But so do I feel appalled at our country dropping bombs on countries killing thousands of innocent people. Thousands. Not a hundred.

'the death of one is a tragedy, the death of a million is such a shame'

 

Andy, where did I say this was about 9/11? I didn't. The 1991 Iraq war was completely justified and while I agree with you about the second Iraq war I don't agree about Afghanistan or Syria.

 

Too many of these minutes silences , they are pointless and they mean nothing .

They devalue the only silence that does really matter which is remembrance day.

 

Seriously mate, you need to do some reading.

The issue didn't start on 9/11, the west foreign policy didn't change at that point, it was already in process.

I agree, there are loads of conspiracy theories that muddy the water, but if you dig deep enough you will see evidence that proves the West involvement in the Middle East years and years before 9/11. Its a fact, not conspiracy. Check out the Hilary Clinton emails, check out the anonymous website, check out wiki leaks. The info is out there, if you want to spend a little time researching.

I'm not trying to be patronising here btw mate, but somewhere in the middle of the far right media and the loony lefty conspiracy theories is the truth. We have systematically destroyed countries and cultures, and without a shadow of doubt the aim has always been oil. Terrorism is a disgraceful act, but so is the foreign policy of the vast majority of Nato countries x 1000.

 

It's my opinion, how could I be speaking for everybody ?

 

I didn't say that foreign policy was a conspiracy, I said that I didn't believe the conspiracy theories about 9/11. I know that some point to foreign policy as a factor behind the rise of groups like ISIS and I accept the removal of dictatorships in an unstable region can create a vacuum where groups like these can be created and prosper. What I don't accept is the opinion that foreign policy is the sole, or even primary, reason that creates their ideology and the evil that they become synonymous with.

 

But it is, without our foreign policies, there wouldn't be an ISIS. An ISIS funded and armed by our Governments. It is a fact, not a conspiracy that the US have been handing arms to ISIS even in the last few months. They are trying to utilise ISIS to get rid of Assad. There is a proposed Gas pipeline that needs to go through Syria, Assad is against it, because he is in bed with Russia. Russia oppose it because it would collapse the Russian economy as there would be no need for the west to buy from the Gazproms of this world.

Before ISIS it was Al Qaeda, who again were funded by the US to fight the Russians in Afghanistan, years before 9/11. Why do you think the Russians were there? They are all fighting for the same oil.

 

I think you're missing my point. I'm not questioning the rise of ISIS or Al Qaeda although I do think that there are other factors - I know about Tiwad and Jihad, the forerunner to Al Qaeda in Iraq, led by the now deceased Abu musab al-zarqawi. There is no conspiracy about this, there is opinion, some that I agree with, some I don't.

I'm aware of the arming of the Syrian rebels who became ISIS but I've not seen any irrefutable evidence that this is still happening.

My point about conspiracy was in response to a claim that 9/11 was an inside job. I don't believe it was, and I've seen nothing to convince me otherwise.

I also challenged the assertion that foreign policy was to blame for the atrocities carried out by these groups and while we can debate their creation all day long, the fact remains that what they do is not politically based but is rooted in evil, hatred, intolerance and the desire to enforce their warped interpretation of how we should life on the entire world. They kill more Muslims than non Muslims, a fact which dispels any doubt as to their real ideology and intent.

 

I'm also not convinced that the 9/11 atrocities were an inside job, although I wouldn't rule it out, as absurd as it is. Are the people at ISIS crazed lunatics? yes of course they are. I'm not standing up for them, but the point being, we were in Iraq a long way before 9/11, although you have written in an earlier post that Iraq was after, it wasn't, the 2nd invasion yes, but the first one No.

We have been systematically destroying that region for the last 2 decades.

If I am honest, although I think I wonder how we would react to an invasion by foreigners, who made our own country and rubbled desert? I would imagine we'd have groups of militant armies formed to fight the invaders, who would stop at nothing to fight our corner.

Like I said I think any act of terrorism is abhorrent, I just think that we have created the vacuum and then we get all uppity when the wounded dog bites back.

 

The conspiracy theory I'm aware of is the FBI knew the terrorists and knew they were planning an incident and did very little to infiltrate for reasons being that a terrorist incident on USA soil would give the govt and its lobbyists Carte Blanche in the middle east.
I don't think for one second they knew the extent as to what was really going to happen.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPrmBcU0cEI

 

Of course I haven't discounted the first Gulf war from my opinion but as I said, the first war was seen as completely justified, even in the Muslim world (many of them joined us in the coalition), so I'm unconvinced that any influence in the creation of these groups can justifiably be traced back to this.

The part I'm unconvinced about is that the terrorists form a very small proportion of the population in the region and do not speak for either the majority or the religion, despite their belief that they do, so part of me thinks that the problem is far complex than foreign policy.

My thoughts on the invasions are that I'd have welcomed invasion one but not invasion two. Would I be inclined to attack civilians under similar circumstances? I honestly don't know, I really hope I'd have the strength of mind and character to not be radicalised into believing a warped ideology in the same way I find the views of extreme groups abhorrent now.

I'm not conceited enough to say I know this for certain because until you wear another man's shoes you don't know what you'd do, however I do know that the majority of Muslims don't subscribe to these beliefs or support the actions of these terrorists and so that still leads me back to my opinion that if it was solely foreign policy to blame then there'd be significantly more joining the ranks to attack us.

Does foreign policy give these groups a legitimacy in their own minds? Yes I believe it possibly does but nothing can justify the beheading of civilians, the stoning of the disabled and the gay, the mass murder of other religious groups and countless other acts of barbarity that commonplace in these places.

 

That was the first attack on the trade centres years earlier where the FBI knew in advance and decided to allow it togo ahead. An Arab informant/undercover terrorist for the fbi who was the main 'inside guy' in the run up to the attack was recorded afterwards arguing with his boss at the fbi, questioning the decision to let it go ahead and saying the FBI supervisor "mesed it up" by not using the previously suggested fake powder. That's a documented but little known fact by the way, not a theory.

9/11 the only FACTS known are that the people identified as hijackers were NOT on the planes. The fact they are still alive and can prove they weren't in America that day is evidence of such. It is also a fact that the department of defences's pathologist report lists identities of all remains found using DNA analysis but found NO Arab remains at the pentagon. The Arab pilot named is one of those proven to be still alive by the way.

Whatever happened on 9/11 there is only one thing we can be sure of and that is that the named hijackers did not hijack the planes but somebody somewhere went to a hell of a lot of effort to make sure that it looked like they did. Whether that was the fbi and American authorities or an unknown third party I have no idea but it certainly wasn't the named hijackers

 

Like Saudi? The country we're in bed with.

Nutkins has nailed all the points better than I did when pissed last night. But I will make the point of clearing up the 9/11 conspiracy bit. I didn't claim it. I said "conspiracy theorists tell us". I'm not sure what really happened, but that attack paved the way for the US and their allies to finally take Iraq. Who had nothing to do with 9/11. Saudi terrorists were said to have done it. Bin-Laden was blamed. The US flew his family out of America on the day all flights were grounded. Saudi make up about 20% of the US economy. Their embassy in the states is massively protected, you can't even film on that street.

So why didn't 'we' attack Saudi? Why Iraq? Conspiracy theories aren't needed to answer that.

Afghan and Libya went the same way as Iraq.


Pakistan were said to be hiding Bin-Laden for years. The US tell us they somehow got into their airspace undetected and took him out. The most wanted man on the planet was shot on the spot. Not captured. Weird that. Especially when you consider the lengths they went to, to show the world "we've got Saddam" before having him executed, which was even filmed on camera. I'd have expected em to capture Osama, put him on trial, show the world "we've got Osama". But apparently not.
He died years before he was murdered in Pakistan anyway, conspiracy theorists tell us. And journalists.



What the likes of ISIS, Al-Qaeda and the IRA even in their time do/did is ******* barbaric and usually done in cowardly manners. Religion definitely a huge driving factor in their madness. But our nations have slaughtered far, far, far more innocents, invaded nations, raped them, and even in doing so, our nations people haven't benefited. We're paying more than ever for most things. It's all about greed, power and keeping the status quo at the very top of the world's control dashboard. Some call em the Illuminati, and that's another bloody conspiracy theory. But it's clear that most men in so-called power, actually aren't. They're merely puppets controlled by others. And money is the root of all evil. So the saying goes. Even in religious wars. Money talks.

I know I'm probably seen as a loony lefty, but in reality I'm just not easily led and I like folk and the idea of everybody getting on or at least allowing others to get on with their own lives accordingly. It seems the world has always been like this though, where war, death, money and power dominate. Maybe I am a looney for having the audacity to want a more fairer and peaceful society.

 

Andy, I can't give a good reason for the apparent tolerance we show towards Saudi Arabia when compared with other regions, likewise the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe. Well I could and I'd bet if we both were to write down our theories they wouldn't be a million miles apart.

In respect of the differences between the capture of Saddam and the killing of Bin Laden, I'm not going to pretend I know the whole truth but I would say that having spent nine years in the Army I do know that the circumstances surrounding both were extremely different and so different tactics would have been necessary. Thinking about the two based purely on the facts given to us I think it is more than plausible that killing Bin Laden was probably the only option.

As I said, I don't know for certain if there were more sinister aspects to consider but that's not because I choose to ignore them, it's just that I don't think they are either plausible or have enough evidence to give them credence. I'm open minded enough to change my opinion if there were the facts to consider them further.

We may not share the same views politically but we certainly share the same desire for a fair and peaceful society.

 

And now this...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...public-park-in-eastern-pakistan-a6955366.html

 

Is there a fence anywhere on earth that Mario hasn't sat on?