Bin laden

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Saddam Hussain: Tick

Osama Bin Laden: Tick

Justin Bieber:...

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

So capturing him is worse than killing him in your books?

 

I don't quite understand what you mean.

Regarding priests you said, yep i understand that and i agree with you.

Because people all beleive different things, it's why we end up in this stupid mess in the first place - you should be able to help people without having to be a follower of god and his saviour and all that bollox

Bin laden deserved to die, he killed innocent people, for beleif that his religion was supreme to every other one's

 

Aren't they all like that though

 

yup i completely agree, it's just a big circle

 

Bush's policies and those of other american imperialists have probably killed more people than everyone else combined in the last 50 years.

What do you think 'collateral damage' is ? Its innocent dead civilian women and children, these are non combatants, why should they die horrible deaths ? Why should an independent sovereign nation like Iraq be subject to another nation just because it has the largest reserves of sweet crude oil ? Why should it be subject to a unilateral 'pre-emptive strike', notice the language, that is the invasion and occupation by a foreign power.

Look at the pictures of the dead bodies in Iraq, use independent media sources, look at wiki-leaks, look at what Haliburton and Blackwater have done, the whole thing stinks.

The other day I was in the Vietnam war museum in Ho Chi Minh city, there were protests then, didn't stop them dropping tons of bombs and toxic chemicals on them, babies are still born with brain damage, missing limbs, cancer etc. In Iraq many women now cannot have children because of contamination of groundwater, probably by depleted uranium. These are real provable war crimes instigated by a nation.

I've yet to seen any real connections between Iraq, 911 and Bin Laden, in fact they probably knew he was in Pakistan all along, just they have nuclear weapons, so they can't push them around like Iraq and Afghanistan, its no wonder small countries want nukes.

Go read/watch some stuff by Noam Chomsky at the very least.

 

BBC News - LIVE: Osama Bin Laden dead

Things like this make me wonder...

 

Last I heard he and his wife were unarmed, but they were still both shot, also one of his servants was captured.

 

Yup, there's never going to be a war without civilian casualties - it goes without saying.

But if places like afghanistan/iraq never had troops go in, then the terrorism situation would be off the scale, we'd surely be looking at bigger and much worse problems, even now, considering it's almost 10 years since it all happened.

The fact that when the 7/7 bombings occured, there were normal civilians and people celebrating in the streets burning english flags does my head in - it's not just the extremists that have this beleif but also other random civilians aswell.

And what about the complete and utter ****s over here, who go to a dead soldiers funeral, and hold up pickets saying Burn in hell, british soldiers must die. That whole poppy burning incident just makes me think **** it, pull all the troops out - let them battle all the corrupt leaders and taliban themselves - the whole reason we went to their ****ed up country was to try and help them, if we didn't they'd be screwed anyway cos they'd still have Saddam Hussain in power, and the taliban would still be killing innocent people.

This is why i personally think religion is a load of bollox, it started all of it.

Even over here, not a day goes past i walk into Bristol town centre on lunch there's some bloke preaching christianity, and if we don't listen to him "Our souls will burn in hell and you will die" - actual quote from what he says, wtf is that about?

Screw Pakistan and our governments £650 million gift, how can a criminal as notorious as bin laden be in a hideout just 800 yards away from a military facility!? i can think of better things to spend it on in the UK sorting our messed up country out.

I accept my views are strong, and probably come across quite harsh, but it's my opinion

 

Yes but what was the reason for war ? Do the ends justify the means ?

How can you know that ? Both regimes were relatively stable, despite being rather bad dictatorships largely set up by US foreign policy and the CIA. Most of the 911 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, which is also a US sponsored autocracy.

Don't you think civilian casulaties and occupation of foreign lands are likely to breed more terrorists for future generations ? Have you looked at virtually every terrorist group in history, the IRA, ETA, etc these groups normally form when a people are oppressed, murdered, have their lands stolen, initially they often have little else left but to turn to terrorism against larger stronger aggressors. Just when the ruling powers like them they are freedom fighters, like the french resistance, Mujahideen in Afganistan, otherwise they are terrorists. Lots other interesting examples in south america over last 50 years too.

I have yet to research 7/7, but it in no way justifies a war in Iraq or Afghanistan from what I understand, I believe these were mainly UK citizens. You are not going to stop radicalisation by invading countries and killing Muslims, see above.

They are not our countries, nobody asked us to go, its a job for diplomacy and at most UN peace keepers.

You have to try to see past the propaganda and media control, these people have a right to be angry, their countries were invaded and their people murdered. The soldiers had no business being there and non corrupt politicians would not have sent them.

Saddam Hussain was the US's boy, 'He may be a bastard but he's our bastard', they backed his war against Iran, they backed him murdering the Kurds, only when he refused to sell them cheap Oil did they decide to invade, despite being attacked once by Bush senior he still defended his and his countries position and refused cheap Oil. That is why they invaded again.

The Vietnam war was over minerals, they decided several years before they needed to control the region. They hate Hugo Chávez because he uses his countries Oil to help his people, it goes on and on, just read up on US foreign policy for the last 50 years.

That is what the media want you to think, most Muslims don't hate most Christians and vice versa. This is not the middle ages (who sacked Constantinople? yes it was corrupt leaders, propaganda and mob rule then too, see the pattern?). The tensions largely relate to US backed support of Israel and their wish to control the worlds Oil reserves.

I agree in a secular state, and also in regulation of noise pollution, that applies to both Muslim calls to prayer, mad monks with mega phones in the high street, and church bells. Possibly church bells once on Sunday in the UK as tradition maybe. Still also have to balance democracy and freedom of speech.

Yes it probably was some sort of bribe, thats how the world really works, remember the defence scam with the Saudis buying our jets ? Thats without all the dodgy US deals in Iraq, and state sponsored military. Funny how we have free markets, but that the states normally heavilly invovled ?

Appreciate your views, open debate is one way to get out of this mess.

 

try this :-
War and Globalization - The Truth Behind September 11 (9/11)

At least the internet provides some of the truth...

 

Will have a look when i get some time, am off to spain on sunday for a week, but will check it out when i get home, looks intersting

 

This ones also pretty good...

The New American Century .mpg

Details the pipeline they wanted and did build in Afghanistan.

 

What exactly is wrong with the United States looking out for it's own interests and ultimately, some interests that are of vital importance to the United Kingdom as well?

I personally look at the United States and think they have the right idea. If you want to be competitive, you have to compete. If you want to lead. You have to lead.

Europe is a relic with a few exceptions whilst China purchases its interests in Africa. I don't understand why in the UK we have this mentality of "You shouldn't put anything in your own interests, don't be selfish". It's the same mentality that means if you buy a Lamborghini, every ****** in the UK sits there slagging it off and the drunks jump on the bonnet. Where as in America, they look at it and think "I could own one of them".

It's called survival, we all bitch about the UK sinking, but then we bitch about doing anything remotely in our best interests.

 

Well yes thats why we helped them, BP is an english Oil company, Ageis is an English Mercency company, etc.

Doesn't make killing innocents any less wrong.

Nothing wrong with that, thats why we have commerce and the rule of law, diplomacy etc, its 'legal' or ethical war, people still suffer sure, but generally they are starved to death rather than blown up...

The UK absolutely has a dog in this fight, France still has interests in Africa, the UN and international diplomats know all this stuff, they have done all along, they knew it was US imperialism thats why they didn't back the US. They know geo-politics, its their job and they have multi-million dollar spy agencies to keep them informed.

China is nearing super power status, however they spend less than one quarter what the US does on defence, over the next few years they will be struggling to meet food and energy demands for their population despite their one child policy. Thats why they went into Tibet, thats why they are interested in Africa.

Europe has a shrinking population, our food and energy problems are much smaller than Chinas.

I totally disagree, winning a gold medal at the olympics is good, doing it on drugs is bad. These are ultimatley questions of morality and justice. If you believe money and the trinkets it buys is a goal in itself I guess theres not much to talk about.

If I make a dollar, while killing a child, poisoning a lake, corrupting laws, is it a 'good dollar' ? If I require state subsidies of hundreds of dollars does it make sense ? What if thousands of dollars would be required just to attempt to fix the damage ?

Now multiply that by 400 billion dollars, the annual defense budget of the US...

What if your water was poisonous ? What if your skin was burnt off ? What if your family was dead ? What if your land was covered in mines ? If I gave you a Lamborghini would it be 'alright' ?

Its not survival for us as we are not at any great risk, we are comfortable, we are rich, we have everything in excess. The US and the EU have grain mountains, wine mountians, years of beef in deep freeze, etc. The only difference in the first world is if corporations make a decent profit or an obscene profit.

Its the survival of the the rich elite they care about not you or me. They kill their own citizens almost as readilly as citizens of other countries.

Survival to me is not the murder of innocents that have nothing, in some cases living on less than a dollar a day, while we watch sky/fox TV and eat fast food in hundred thousand pound houses...

 

This is quite possibly the most ill-considered, childish thing I've ever read on here. If you don't see anything wrong with the US 'looking after its own interests' by bombing countries back to the stone age with the implicit aim of getting their own corporations (and by 'their own' I mean corporations whose influence stretches right through the American political system) to rebuild everything (and being paid handsomely for it), or killing thousands of completely innocent civilians simply to get at the oil their country produces, then you have the reasoning, intellect and morals of a child.

It's pretty easy to 'lead' when you can wipe any opposition to you off the face of the Earth in the blink of an eye.

 

what have i started!

 

Well, in all honesty, this thread was never going to go to a happy place, was it...

 

I sometimes wonder should we be so hard on America? I don't totally agree with what they are doing in foreign policy, and they should maybe leave these countries alone, and people should be able to live their own way of life.

But when I read about this 'New World Order' of Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex etc I cannot help but think there are far worse regimes such as communism such as Russia suffered under or Fascism such as Germany suffered under. By comparison the US lead world seems positively benign. We are basically lead by a corrupt financial system but its not as bad as a system with no respect at all for human rights and which kills million of people to keep itself in power.

We CAN be too hard on America when we look at the alternatives. For example in China human rights are not really respected.

 

Yeah totally. All that would end up happening is that people would get kidnapped, the kidnappers would ask for him to be released and when we said no the kidnapped people would get killed.

We dont need to interogate him anyway, we know what he did, we know where the taliban are so he should be killed.

Its all our fault anyway (US and UK) for selling him weapons and out dodgy foreign policy.