Thread: Al-Quida invokes to assist Syrian rebels in a "violent jihad"

Islamic fundamentalism also believes most people need food to survive. Does that mean we must support starvation? Just because al-Qaeda approves of something doesn't mean we must automatically disapprove of it.

Originally Posted by John Drake

Islamic fundamentalism also believes most people need food to survive. Does that mean we must support starvation? Just because al-Qaeda approves of something doesn't mean we must automatically disapprove of it.

I think that my signature shows, what will happen in Syria, if the rebels would beat the legitimate army of Syria.
It is exactly the opposite of liberation.

Looks like to me that the US has a choice between stepping into one pile of horse shit, or one pile of camel shit Regardless of which pile we decided to step, its still shit. That seems to be our choices with these uprisings.

Originally Posted by Bleipriester

I think that my signature shows, what will happen in Syria, if the rebels would beat the legitimate army of Syria.
It is exactly the opposite of liberation.

Given Syria's history of governmental human rights abuses to this point (and stretching back 20 or 30 year), and the human rights abuses that immediately commence once Arabs/Muslims are liberated from beneath oppressive governments, the only logical conclusion one can form is that Arabs/Muslims are fucking savages.

Given that conclusion, who really gives a shit what happens to them?

We should act in our best interest with no regard for them because they have such little regard for themselves.

Well since Russia is arming the war criminal govt, and AQ wants to help the rebels, id say this is a good war to stay out of. Let the UN be the face of this.

Originally Posted by soot

Given Syria's history of governmental human rights abuses to this point (and stretching back 20 or 30 year), and the human rights abuses that immediately commence once Arabs/Muslims are liberated from beneath oppressive governments, the only logical conclusion one can form is that Arabs/Muslims are fucking savages.

Given that conclusion, who really gives a shit what happens to them?

We should act in our best interest with no regard for them because they have such little regard for themselves.

Our best interest is a stable region. Assad guarantees a stable region. And the Syrian people has recently voted a new constitution.
The fact that the enemies of Assad, Gadaffi, Mubarak and others are also the enemies of the west, is well ignored. Europe and also Israel does not need to be surrounded by Sharia-States, whereas some important European nations currently risk to become Sharia-States themselves.

What a waste of human potential oppressive dictators cause.

Originally Posted by Bleipriester

Our best interest is a stable region. Assad guarantees a stable region. And the Syrian people has recently voted a new constitution.
The fact that the enemies of Assad, Gadaffi, Mubarak and others are also the enemies of the west, is well ignored. Europe and also Israel does not need to be surrounded by Sharia-States, whereas some important European nations currently risk to become Sharia-States themselves.

I disagree over the long-run.

The "enemies of the West" aren't the enemies of the West because we have cheesburgers and they don't. They aren't even the the enemies of the West because greedy Western capitalists are now selling those cheeseburgers in the ME.

The "enemies of the West" are the enemies of the West because because for the past 70-ish years we've proped up and then supported oppressive dictatorial regimes in their countries who talk to us out of one side of their face and then use our direct foreign aid to build Madrasahs where virulent Imams preach hatred of the West in order to divert anger away from oppressive dictatorial regimes and toward "The great Satan".

Our fucked up foreign policy in respect to the Arab/Muslim world doesn't help but the people on the street don't really see that, as they're too busy living in squalor, avoiding secret police, and attending Mosques where the students of the aforementioned Madrasahs are preaching hate.

When the populations of those Arab/Muslim shitholes tear down the oppressive dictatorial regimes that have been oppressing and dictating to them they automatically inherit a new hobby: figuring out how to run their shitty little countries.

It is my belief that we can currently look at Islamic hatred of the west as being propped atop a three-legged stool. One leg is the oppressive dictatorial regimes, another is Western support for those regimes, the third are the Madrasahs.

By allowing (and appretnly even facilitating) the populations of these countries as they rebel we're helping them kick two of those three legs out from beneath the stool.

Essentially, they're becoming unwitting allies in the GWOT. They're fighting for themselves, but they're fighting against the things that gave them (arguably, legitimate) reasons to hate us.

Kinda hard to convince people that "the West" is the problem when "the West" has nothing to do with you.

As far as European nations becoming Sharia-States is concerned, it'll only happen if Europe lets it happen.

I don't see it happening, but if it does Europe has nobody to blame but Europeans.

Syria, Eqypt, and Tunisia being "ruled" by Syrians, Eqyptians, and Tunisians really doesn't have any bearing on any of that and doesn't present any more of a problem for Europe than the current state of affairs in the Arab/Muslim world.

As far as Israel is concerned, not my fault, not my problem, don't understand why the United States wastes one red cent supporting that shithole. In my opinion we should have let the Arabs run them into the Med before they got nuclear weapons.

By the way, thanks Germany for foisting Israel on the world. Your little period of ethnic/religious cleansing is like the shitty gift that keeps on giving.

Originally Posted by Bleipriester

I think that my signature shows, what will happen in Syria, if the rebels would beat the legitimate army of Syria.
It is exactly the opposite of liberation.

Depends on what you mean by liberation. If you mean letting the same elites who are presently fucking us over too stay in charge then I guess we should support Assad. If you mean the radical concept of letting the people who live there run the country as they want instead of for the benefits of our upper classes then maybe not. OTOH, you DO have some merit on your side; Assad is not winning any humanitarian awards right now but he hasn't been a Saddam, Qaddafi or even an Ayatollah....maybe it's best we just sit this one out and then give our blessing to whoever wins. It's not like we don't have other things to do with our money or our soldiers don't have other plans for their lives.

Originally Posted by soot

I disagree over the long-run.

The "enemies of the West" aren't the enemies of the West because we have cheesburgers and they don't. They aren't even the the enemies of the West because greedy Western capitalists are now selling those cheeseburgers in the ME.

The "enemies of the West" are the enemies of the West because because for the past 70-ish years we've proped up and then supported oppressive dictatorial regimes in their countries who talk to us out of one side of their face and then use our direct foreign aid to build Madrasahs where virulent Imams preach hatred of the West in order to divert anger away from oppressive dictatorial regimes and toward "The great Satan".

Our fucked up foreign policy in respect to the Arab/Muslim world doesn't help but the people on the street don't really see that, as they're too busy living in squalor, avoiding secret police, and attending Mosques where the students of the aforementioned Madrasahs are preaching hate.

When the populations of those Arab/Muslim shitholes tear down the oppressive dictatorial regimes that have been oppressing and dictating to them they automatically inherit a new hobby: figuring out how to run their shitty little countries.

It is my belief that we can currently look at Islamic hatred of the west as being propped atop a three-legged stool. One leg is the oppressive dictatorial regimes, another is Western support for those regimes, the third are the Madrasahs.

By allowing (and appretnly even facilitating) the populations of these countries as they rebel we're helping them kick two of those three legs out from beneath the stool.

Essentially, they're becoming unwitting allies in the GWOT. They're fighting for themselves, but they're fighting against the things that gave them (arguably, legitimate) reasons to hate us.

Kinda hard to convince people that "the West" is the problem when "the West" has nothing to do with you.

As far as European nations becoming Sharia-States is concerned, it'll only happen if Europe lets it happen.

I don't see it happening, but if it does Europe has nobody to blame but Europeans.

Syria, Eqypt, and Tunisia being "ruled" by Syrians, Eqyptians, and Tunisians really doesn't have any bearing on any of that and doesn't present any more of a problem for Europe than the current state of affairs in the Arab/Muslim world.

As far as Israel is concerned, not my fault, not my problem, don't understand why the United States wastes one red cent supporting that shithole. In my opinion we should have let the Arabs run them into the Med before they got nuclear weapons.

By the way, thanks Germany for foisting Israel on the world. Your little period of ethnic/religious cleansing is like the shitty gift that keeps on giving.

The only real damned shame I can see about the AS is that the main and most oppressive nation supporting the most hatred of us by far is our staunchest ally in the area outside of Israel, the Sauds.

JD,
Specifically, how are the Saudis our allies?

Well, they let us use their country to stage our invasion of Iraq, so I believe that makes them military allies, at least in that war. They have also been quite cooperative with us about al-Qaeda, which they outlawed and sentenced all members of to death before 9/11 even though it was, and may remain, largely composed of (former) Saudi citizens . In return we instantly let all of bin Laden's relatives go home immediately after 9/11 (we didn't ask them to go, they wanted to)

We also made the largest sale of weapons in US history to them in 2010. I don't know if they are formal allies but I would characterize our relationship with them as being the friendliest we have with any nation in the ME outside of Israel.

Oh, and btw, I said our relationship is with the Sauds, not the Saudis...my understanding is that a Saudi is a citizen of Saudi Arabia, while a Saud is part of the Royal Family. It's an important difference, at least when we talk about their relationships with other countries, as the Royal Family loved to come to Bush's Barbecues, while the citizens regard America as the source of most of the world's problems (although most of them actually like Americans as individuals)

Originally Posted by John Drake

Well, they let us use their country to stage our invasion of Iraq, so I believe that makes them military allies, at least in that war. They have also been quite cooperative with us about al-Qaeda, which they outlawed and sentenced all members of to death before 9/11 even though it was, and may remain, largely composed of (former) Saudi citizens . In return we instantly let all of bin Laden's relatives go home immediately after 9/11 (we didn't ask them to go, they wanted to)

We also made the largest sale of weapons in US history to them in 2010. I don't know if they are formal allies but I would characterize our relationship with them as being the friendliest we have with any nation in the ME outside of Israel.

Now all we have to do is get them to televise our version of Sesame Street.

Originally Posted by USCitizen

Now all we have to do is get them to televise our version of Sesame Street.

And Lets Make A Deal...you're not really an American unless you've screamed at Wayne Brady while wearing a bunny suit.