Updates from Afghanistan

[b0unce]

300000-600000 dead muslims (depending on your source). I feel much safer now. I'm sure all their relatives will appreciate the fact they died for democracy, though.

Hasn't both US and UK govenments now admitted that the threat of terrorists attacks increased significantly after invading iraq? Not that most of us really needed to be told that.

Re-quoting this. If there is any evidence to the claims that US/UK are admitting this, I would like to know.

http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&q=ira ... arch&meta=
plenty of reporting there re:USA saying it.

I'm almost certain Fony Blair said it too, will post anything I might find

[Olga]

I'm just trying to make sure I've got this right from the first alarmist bullshit post to here. So, the west has apparently killed millions of innocent men women & children in the middle east pissing off millions and millions of middle easterners. But it would be alarmist bullshit to think that they'd like to see the west take a nuke to the face or receive another 9/11? That makes no sense whatsoever. I'm almost afraid to ask, but what exactly is the logic here? The West kills a few more million innocent people and their families will want to what? Start sending the US n UK flowers and candy? <loads of sarcasm of course> Doesn't sound like alarmist bullshit at all. Sounds like Bush and his gang have screwed up the middle east so bad & pissed off so many people, that another huge 9/11 type attack is going to be inevitable at this point.

[b0unce]

I'm just trying to make sure I've got this right from the first alarmist bullshit post to here. So, the west has apparently killed millions of innocent men women & children in the middle east pissing off millions and millions of middle easterners. But it would be alarmist bullshit to think that they'd like to see the west take a nuke to the face or receive another 9/11? That makes no sense whatsoever. I'm almost afraid to ask, but what exactly is the logic here? The West kills a few more million innocent people and their families will want to what? Start sending the US n UK flowers and candy? <loads of sarcasm of course> Doesn't sound like alarmist bullshit at all. Sounds like Bush and his gang have screwed up the middle east so bad & pissed off so many people, that another huge 9/11 type attack is going to be inevitable at this point.

heh, funny post.
if you want to keep it logical and sensible, it's interesting that you would finish by calling 9/11 a huge attack. Seems more like a puny act of desperate retaliation.
So puny in fact, it boggles the mind that they would knowingly fan the flames so much for so little. Hmmm...I wonder...
.

carry on

[Homebelly]

[
lads, lads, lads
let's not forget the widely reported deaths of over HALF A MILLION children (close to a million civilian deaths in total) due to the sanctions placed on iraq leading up to the invasion.

Ohhhh say can you SEEEEEE....from the dawn's early liiiiight...

With out a doubt. You could probably even argue that the sanctions where the real start of the invasion. In this light they then become a preemptive tactic to weaken the countries economy and foster decent in the population so that the people then blame their government for their lack of well maintained utilities or available essentials.
I think this was part of the thinking behind the initial PR of the invasion where by we where told the coalition forces would be welcomed as liberators. I guess the evidence has shown that didn't turn out quite so well.

[jashic]

With out a doubt. You could probably even argue that the sanctions where the real start of the invasion. In this light they then become a preemptive tactic to weaken the countries economy and foster decent in the population so that the people then blame their government for their lack of well maintained utilities or available essentials.

You are right, we should have sent Saddam Hussein flowers each time he ignored 17 UN resolutions. Plant him a garden while we're at it. You sir, have no concept of politics, diplomacy or world affairs.

[Kirb]

I love it when people use the 'Saddam defied UN resolutions' argument.

In case you weren't aware, both the US and Israel are in defiance of a number of UN resolutions right now and in the past.

I guess someone should bomb/invade us.

But we don't have to follow the UN because we're the good guys, right?

You sir, are alarmingly ignorant, or a troll. Thank you.

[Kirb]

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20021028/zunes

[b0unce]

With out a doubt. You could probably even argue that the sanctions where the real start of the invasion. In this light they then become a preemptive tactic to weaken the countries economy and foster decent in the population so that the people then blame their government for their lack of well maintained utilities or available essentials.

You are right, we should have sent Saddam Hussein flowers each time he ignored 17 UN resolutions. Plant him a garden while we're at it. You sir, have no concept of politics, diplomacy or world affairs.

you sir are the one with no concept 'politics,diplomacy or world affairs', you are living in a bubble if you think the USA don't traditionally bully the UN council members into doing their bidding and voting for USA's interests, plus the abuse of vetoes. Besides, all these people who refer to the UN as some kind of force of truthful righteousness are rarely, if ever, the same people disgusted by Israel's total disdain for the UN and the geneva convention. Why is that ? If you're so into world law, seems Israel would be one of the worst offenders.

did big Ole Saddam ignore 17 resolutions ?
awwwwww, nevermind flowers...why not give him $8 million a day, just like Israel.

well here's just two cursory lists I just found to illustrate this point, one of the resolutions made against Israel, ignored most of the time. And the other is a list of vetoes USA made in favour of israel:
Check links for more detail
http://www.jatonyc.org/UNresolutions.html




Palestinian Refugees have the right to return to their homes in Israel.

General Assembly Resolution 194, Dec. 11, 1948



"Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible."



Israel's occupation of Palestine is Illegal.

Security Council Resolution 242, Nov. 22, 1967



Calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories occupied in the war that year and "the acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."



Israel's settlements in Palestine are Illegal.

Security Council Resolution 446, March 22, 1979



"Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East."



Palestinian have the right to Self-Determination.

General Assembly Resolution 3236, November 22, 1974



Affirms "the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine...to self-determination without external interference" and "to national independence and sovereignty."



Reaffirmation of a Palestinian State

Security Council Resolution 1397, March 12, 2002



Affirms "a vision of a region where two states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders."



Also see:



UN General Assembly Resolution 181 - the 1947 Partition plan of Palestine and the creation of Israel.


More UN Resolutions on Israel, 1955-1992

Resolution 106: condemns Israel for Gaza raid.

Resolution 111: condemns Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people.

Resolution 127: recommends Israel suspend its no-man's zone' in Jerusalem.

Resolution 162: urges Israel to comply with UN decisions.

Resolution 171: determines flagrant violations by Israel in its attack on Syria.

Resolution 228: censures Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control.

Resolution 237: urges Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees.

Resolution 248: condemns Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan.

Resolution 250: calls on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem.

Resolution 251: deeply deplores Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250.

Resolution 252: declares invalid Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital.

Resolution 256: condemns Israeli raids on Jordan as flagrant violation.

Resolution 259: deplores Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation.

Resolution 262: condemns Israel for attack on Beirut airport.

Resolution 265: condemns Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan.

Resolution 267: censures Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem.

Resolution 270: condemns Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon.

Resolution 271: condemns Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem.

Resolution 279: demands withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon.

Resolution 280: condemns Israeli's attacks against Lebanon.

Resolution 285: demands immediate Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon.

Resolution 298: deplores Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem.

Resolution 313: demands that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon.

Resolution 316: condemns Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon.

Resolution 317: deplores Israel's refusal to release.

Resolution 332: condemns Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon.

Resolution 337: condemns Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty.

Resolution 347: condemns Israeli attacks on Lebanon.

Resolution 425: calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon.

Resolution 427: calls on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.

Resolution 444: deplores Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces.

Resolution 446: determines that Israeli settlements are a serious obstruction to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention

Resolution 450: calls on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon.

Resolution 452: calls on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories.

Resolution 465: deplores Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist its settlements program.

Resolution 467: strongly deplores Israel's military intervention in Lebanon.

Resolution 468: calls on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return.

Resolution 469: strongly deplores Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians.

Resolution 471: expresses deep concern at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Resolution 476: reiterates that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are null and void.

Resolution 478: censures (Israel) in the strongest terms for its claim to Jerusalem in its Basic Law.

Resolution 484: declares it imperative that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors.

Resolution 487: strongly condemns Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility.

Resolution 497: decides that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights

is null and void and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith.

Resolution 498: calls on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon.

Resolution 501: calls on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops.

Resolution 509: demands that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon.

Resolution 515: demands that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in.

Resolution 517: censures Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon.

Resolution 518: demands that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon.

Resolution 520: condemns Israel's attack into West Beirut.

Resolution 573: condemns Israel vigorously for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters.

Resolution 587: takes note of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw.

Resolution 592: strongly deplores the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops.

Resolution 605: strongly deplores Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians.

Resolution 607: calls on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Resolution 608: deeply regrets that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians.

Resolution 636: deeply regrets Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.

Resolution 641: deplores Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians.

Resolution 672: condemns Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram Al-Sharif/Temple Mount.

Resolution 673: deplores Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations.

Resolution 681: deplores Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians.

Resolution 694: deplores Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.

Resolution 726: strongly condemns Israel's deportation of Palestinians.

Resolution 799: strongly condemns Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.




and you can find a list of vetoes USA made in favour of israel up as far as 2006 here:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... etoes.html





when you look back on it, you'd be forgiven for concluding that the UN just looks like a 2nd prong of oppression (toothless at best), the 1st being military. You could argue the 3rd is economic.

UN ?

lol

[Tone Deft]

flashback - nothing ever came of the puppy tossing Marine.

meh, the puppy probably deserved it.

[b0unce]

I love it when people use the 'Saddam defied UN resolutions' argument.

In case you weren't aware, both the US and Israel are in defiance of a number of UN resolutions right now and in the past.

I guess someone should bomb/invade us.

But we don't have to follow the UN because we're the good guys, right?

You sir, are alarmingly ignorant, or a troll. Thank you.

fucking exactly.

[Homebelly]

I'm just trying to make sure I've got this right from the first alarmist bullshit post to here. So, the west has apparently killed millions of innocent men women & children in the middle east pissing off millions and millions of middle easterners. But it would be alarmist bullshit to think that they'd like to see the west take a nuke to the face or receive another 9/11? That makes no sense whatsoever. I'm almost afraid to ask, but what exactly is the logic here? The West kills a few more million innocent people and their families will want to what? Start sending the US n UK flowers and candy? <loads of sarcasm of course> Doesn't sound like alarmist bullshit at all. Sounds like Bush and his gang have screwed up the middle east so bad & pissed off so many people, that another huge 9/11 type attack is going to be inevitable at this point.

So what would be your opinion be on fixing this mess?

[b0unce]

[
lads, lads, lads
let's not forget the widely reported deaths of over HALF A MILLION children (close to a million civilian deaths in total) due to the sanctions placed on iraq leading up to the invasion.

Ohhhh say can you SEEEEEE....from the dawn's early liiiiight...

With out a doubt. You could probably even argue that the sanctions where the real start of the invasion. In this light they then become a preemptive tactic to weaken the countries economy and foster decent in the population so that the people then blame their government for their lack of well maintained utilities or available essentials.
I think this was part of the thinking behind the initial PR of the invasion where by we where told the coalition forces would be welcomed as liberators. I guess the evidence has shown that didn't turn out quite so well.

indeed.
you could also argue that Saddam choosing to sell iraqi oil in euros (2000) was a major catalyst. the oil was worth 17-20% more to iraq like this PLUS the federal reserve couldn't just print the money to buy it. What was the first thing USA did when they seizied control of iraq ? That's right, they started selling iraqi oil in dollars again.

Iran also sell oil in euros, and they've set up this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Oil_Bourse

posted twice, but what the hell.

[Homebelly]

[
lads, lads, lads
let's not forget the widely reported deaths of over HALF A MILLION children (close to a million civilian deaths in total) due to the sanctions placed on iraq leading up to the invasion.

Ohhhh say can you SEEEEEE....from the dawn's early liiiiight...

With out a doubt. You could probably even argue that the sanctions where the real start of the invasion. In this light they then become a preemptive tactic to weaken the countries economy and foster decent in the population so that the people then blame their government for their lack of well maintained utilities or available essentials.
I think this was part of the thinking behind the initial PR of the invasion where by we where told the coalition forces would be welcomed as liberators. I guess the evidence has shown that didn't turn out quite so well.

indeed.
you could also argue that Saddam choosing to sell iraqi oil in euros (2000) was a major catalyst. the oil was worth 17-20% more to iraq like this PLUS the federal reserve couldn't just print the money to buy it. What was the first thing USA did when they seizied control of iraq ? That's right, they started selling iraqi oil in dollars again.

Iran also sell oil in euros, and they've set up this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Oil_Bourse

posted twice, but what the hell.

I'm in no doubt that this was probably the biggest part of the motivation. As to the Iranian oil bourse, i'm not sure that it is actually trading crude oil yet, isn't it just trading oil based products such as plastics and agricultural chemical's? If i'm right then i would guess that the real shit will hit the fan when they do start trading crude through the Bourse for Euro's. On that note i've been watching this whole idea of the NAFTA and it's connection to the possibility of the Amero coming in as right now i can only really imagine the US economy being able to continuing in it's present form and being able to compete with the EU only if it forms a union of it's own with Canada and Mexico. If that goes down i would imagine that the ociania countries would be next to form some kind of union.
NZ has already signed a free trade with China. Australia is playing with the idea of taking over aspects of some of the smaller pacific economies. I think this is the way it's going to go. I'm not sure where i stand on al of this at the moment. My great fear is that i might end up seeing NZ lose it's agricultural diversity and become the fruit and vegetable market of the south pacific. At this point though every thing becomes speculation as i am no where near clever enough to be an arm chair economist.

As to how all of this relates to the middle east.
None of those countries have any thing to offer any of the major economies in the US/EU other than oil. All of the worlds major economies are oil based and ill prepared to replace that aspect. I think what we are watching in the middle east right now is a crash sale. I think there is little doubt that we have reached, or are reaching peak as far as cheap oil is concerned so I'm of the opinion that this is the last dash where by every one is trying to shore up while they can while just try to give them selves the time to figure out what to do next.

[Machinesworking]

I'm just trying to make sure I've got this right from the first alarmist bullshit post to here. So, the west has apparently killed millions of innocent men women & children in the middle east pissing off millions and millions of middle easterners. But it would be alarmist bullshit to think that they'd like to see the west take a nuke to the face or receive another 9/11? That makes no sense whatsoever. I'm almost afraid to ask, but what exactly is the logic here? The West kills a few more million innocent people and their families will want to what? Start sending the US n UK flowers and candy? <loads of sarcasm of course> Doesn't sound like alarmist bullshit at all. Sounds like Bush and his gang have screwed up the middle east so bad & pissed off so many people, that another huge 9/11 type attack is going to be inevitable at this point.

So what would be your opinion be on fixing this mess?

Ok I'm curious too? I don't disagree with what you're saying here Olga, but war, and more war, plus no concessions is how we got in this mess, what is your answer for how to get out?

My answer is to make the fuck sure it's not McCain in the White house, but that's short term, Obama isn't looking like he'll do much but probably once in office concede to the military etc. and keep a presence in Iraq.
Fucking goddamn re-elect the peanut farmer Carter, he's meeting with Hamas, which is intelligent. At least know your enemy, all this BS shunning is retarded.

[Homebelly]

I can't remember if it was this thread, or another one where we discussed suicide bombings and some one made the observation that these are only attributed to Islam.
I found this article that explains its a wee bit of a bigger issue and not quite as simple as that.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terroris ... 11-14.html

I found it quite interesting.