Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Laughing Sam's Dice on May 30, 2007, 01:01:13 PM
-
Hypothetical situation-
An imperialistic country invades the U.S. claiming they believe our president has access to weapons of mass destruction and will use them against their country. They also claim that they will liberate us from the evil tyrant. While they are here, they just so happen to take over our primary natural resource and have their companies come in to manage that resource. During their four year occupation, they continue to kill U.S. citizens who oppose their occupation. They claim that the puppet government they set up is legitimate, and any U.S. citizens who are against that government are labeled as terrorists and insurgents.
Personally, your father was detained and humilitated by this invading army, your mother has been a nervous wreck for years, your dog has been missing since one of the days of bombing and gunfire in your neighborhood. Your grandmother suffered a heart attack and died after her city was bombed. You don't know the whereabouts of your best friend. You and your family have very little to eat. Your freedom of movement is restricted and you need permission to travel.
What would you do?
How should the world see you? If you fight the invading army, should you be seen as a terrorist/insurgent? Should you believe that the invading army is there for your best interest and you should hold no grudge against them despite their abuses.
How would you expect the children who grow up in this situation to view the invading country? Do you think they might have a legitimate reason to hate their occupiers, and to organize and attack that country when they are old enough? What has the invading country created in the experiences of the kids who were subjected to this war?
-
Did the US government invade say..Canada..gas Michigan...torture folks from Mississippi..support terrorists in Northern Ireland..threaten to invade Mexico?
-
Hypothetical situation-
An imperialistic country invades the U.S. claiming they believe our president has access to weapons of mass destruction and will use them against their country. They also claim that they will liberate us from the evil tyrant. While they are here, they just so happen to take over our primary natural resource and have their companies come in to manage that resource. During their four year occupation, they continue to kill U.S. citizens who oppose their occupation. They claim that the puppet government they set up is legitimate, and any U.S. citizens who are against that government are labeled as terrorists and insurgents.
Personally, your father was detained and humilitated by this invading army, your mother has been a nervous wreck for years, your dog has been missing since one of the days of bombing and gunfire in your neighborhood. Your grandmother suffered a heart attack and died after her city was bombed. You don't know the whereabouts of your best friend. You and your family have very little to eat. Your freedom of movement is restricted and you need permission to travel.
What would you do?
How should the world see you? If you fight the invading army, should you be seen as a terrorist/insurgent? Should you believe that the invading army is there for your best interest and you should hold no grudge against them despite their abuses.
How would you expect the children who grow up in this situation to view the invading country? Do you think they might have a legitimate reason to hate their occupiers, and to organize and attack that country when they are old enough? What has the invading country created in the experiences of the kids who were subjected to this war?
since it will never happen, I could care less...however, you have fallacies in your story so why not point them out...we are not at war with Iraq, nor are we fighting Iraqis. We are simply using their country as a battle front against terrorists instead of using our own. We have't stolen their natural resource, actually for the first time in years we have restored the profits to the people of the country instead of to one individual who used all of the profits to create chemical weapons to use on them. We are paying them for the oil in other words. We aren't labeling the Iraqi people as insurgents, we are calling the insurgents...insurgents.
-
Hypothetical situation-
What would you do?
I'd become a US insurgent.
-
Did the US government invade say..Canada..gas Michigan...torture folks from Mississippi..support terrorists in Northern Ireland..threaten to invade Mexico?
lol. Guess that blows up this exercise. :)
-
It's funny... anyone who supports the war will refuse to answer this question!!
-
It's funny... anyone who supports the war will refuse to answer this question!!
guess you missed mine.....if we were at war with Iraq I could see apoint to his question...but since we aren't
-
we are not at war with Iraq, nor are we fighting Iraqis.
Okay, so there is no war, and the killing of Iraqis is not fighting Iraqis. That must be special military logic.
We are simply using their country as a battle front against terrorists instead of using our own.
Who are the "terrorists?" The people who fight the U.S.? That's one of the points of the scenario.
We created an increased number of anti-U.S. fighers by our invasion- something we had no right to do.
We have't stolen their natural resource, actually for the first time in years we have restored the profits to the people of the country instead of to one individual who used all of the profits to create chemical weapons to use on them. We are paying them for the oil in other words.
Which militiary-approved literature are you referring to that is showing that Haliburton is giving the money to the Iraqi people.
Naive.
We aren't labeling the Iraqi people as insurgents, we are calling the insurgents...insurgents.
Clue- "insurgent" is a label that we place on Iraqi people who do not want us in their country.
-
since it will never happen, I could care less...however, you have fallacies in your story so why not point them out...we are not at war with Iraq, nor are we fighting Iraqis. We are simply using their country as a battle front against terrorists instead of using our own. We have't stolen their natural resource, actually for the first time in years we have restored the profits to the people of the country instead of to one individual who used all of the profits to create chemical weapons to use on them. We are paying them for the oil in other words. We aren't labeling the Iraqi people as insurgents, we are calling the insurgents...insurgents.
We are fighting Iraqis. The insurgency is comprised largley of Iraqi Shia, Iraqi Sunni, Iraqi Bathist, Iraqi Nationalists with a very small segment of foreign fighters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_insurgency#Composition
We are commandeering their resources. This law legalizes PSAs (production sharing agreements) in Iraq. Iraq will be the only country in the middle east with such contracts privatising Iraqi oil and giving foreign companies crazy rates of profit that may reach to more than three fourth of the general revenue. http://www.mediachannel.org/wordpress/2007/02/20/leaked-iraq-oil-law-document/
-
So from what I read of the groupsl they focus on....One is Iran linked, one is left over Saddam loyalists, one is Al-Sadr's militia, a communist group, and foreign insurgents.
So the mojority of the insurgency is non Iraqi. The fighting iraqis don't represent the average Iraqi.
-
So from what I read of the groupsl they focus on....One is Iran linked, one is left over Saddam loyalists, one is Al-Sadr's militia, a communist group, and foreign insurgents.
So the mojority of the insurgency is non Iraqi. The fighting iraqis don't represent the average Iraqi.
"From what you've read" That says a lot. I suppose you think the Iraqis are just sitting quietly in their homes rooting for the U.S. "liberators" to stop the other foreign invaders. ::)
-
"From what you've read" That says a lot. I suppose you think the Iraqis are just sitting quietly in their homes rooting for the U.S. "liberators" to stop the other foreign invaders. ::)
I was refering to his link...however from my time spent there (can you say that) they are rooting for us to help restore peace. The average Iraqi knows what we bring to their country.
-
So from what I read of the groupsl they focus on....One is Iran linked, one is left over Saddam loyalists, one is Al-Sadr's militia, a communist group, and foreign insurgents.
So the mojority of the insurgency is non Iraqi. The fighting iraqis don't represent the average Iraqi.
You are mistaken.
The Insurgents are overwhelmingly Iraqi citizens.
While it is not known how many of those resisting the U.S. occupation in Iraq are from outside the country, it is generally agreed that foreign fighters make up a very small percentage of the insurgency. Major General Joseph Taluto, head of the 42nd Infantry Division, said that "99.9 per cent" of captured insurgents are Iraqi.
The estimate has been confirmed by the Pentagon's own figures; in one analysis of over 1000 insurgents captured in Fallujah, only 15 were non-Iraqi. Source: wikipedia Iraqi Insurgency composition
-
The average Iraqi knows what we bring to their country.
Civil war, death, corporate theft, neo-conservative political failure...
yeah, I'm sure they're rooting for us.
-
The Insurgents are overwhelmingly Iraqi citizens.
Don't buy into the propaganda label of "insurgent," or "terrorist." They are citizens defending their country from an invading/occupying army.
-
Civil war, death, corporate theft, neo-conservative political failure...
yeah, I'm sure they're rooting for us.
Have you been there??? hmmm I'm guessing not....keep surfing the internet nerd...
-
You are mistaken.
The Insurgents are overwhelmingly Iraqi citizens.
While it is not known how many of those resisting the U.S. occupation in Iraq are from outside the country, it is generally agreed that foreign fighters make up a very small percentage of the insurgency. Major General Joseph Taluto, head of the 42nd Infantry Division, said that "99.9 per cent" of captured insurgents are Iraqi.
The estimate has been confirmed by the Pentagon's own figures; in one analysis of over 1000 insurgents captured in Fallujah, only 15 were non-Iraqi.
so your first link was wrong?
-
Don't buy into the propaganda label of "insurgent," or "terrorist." They are citizens defending their country from an invading/occupying army.
I get what you are saying and I do agree with you. But sometimes in the interest of rhetoric, I will use terminology provisionally.
-
Have you been there??? hmmm I'm guessing not....keep surfing the internet nerd...
Strapping on a gun and invading a country isn't the greatest background to base your implied claim of "knowledgeable world traveler."
-
so your first link was wrong?
How so?
-
Strapping on a gun and invading a country isn't the greatest background to base your implied claim of "knowledgeable world traveler."
I've had dinner with the average Iraqi...I know what is truly going on with the majority of that countries people
-
I get what you are saying and I do agree with you. But sometimes in the interest of rhetoric, I will use terminology provisionally.
The price for that convenience is supporting the socially constructed belief that the Iraqis fighting U.S. forces are "illegitimate."
-
I've had dinner with the average Iraqi...I know what is truly going on with the majority of that countries people
Your anecdotal evidence counts for something. But everybody else in the universe outside of the Bush Administration knows that the insurgency is composed of Iraqi people.
-
I've had dinner with the average Iraqi...I know what is truly going on with the majority of that countries people
Cotton candy for dessert?
-
Your anecdotal evidence counts for something. But everybody else in the universe outside of the Bush Administration knows that the insurgency is composed of Iraqi people.
What I am saying is the insurgency isn't representative of the average Iraqi, Like the people in Sadr's militia...they are Iraqi, but are followers of a mad man that sees this as his one chance to become the new saddam....
-
Cotton candy for dessert?
again..I can't help that your inmature mind can't grasp that there are good things going on in Iraq...just keep being negative nancy and only look at the bad things...your life won't get better so why would you think someone elses would.....
-
What I am saying is the insurgency isn't representative of the average Iraqi, Like the people in Sadr's militia...they are Iraqi, but are followers of a mad man that sees this as his one chance to become the new saddam....
I'm not saying that some of them are good people. I'm just pointing out that they are Iraqi citizens.
-
again..I can't help that your inmature mind can't grasp that there are good things going on in Iraq...just keep being negative nancy and only look at the bad things
Hilarious! Just like a Nazi soldier pointing out the good things that were being done in the country he invaded.
-
I'm not saying that some of them are good people. I'm just pointing out that they are Iraqi citizens.
and I agree with you, but really decker...we are not at war with Iraq.....
-
and I agree with you, but really decker...we are not at war with Iraq.....
We attacked Iraq and destroyed the Hussein administration.
By all valid accounts, the insurgency is made up of Iraqi people.
If we are not fighting the Iraqi people, who are we fighting?
We are fighting Iraq b/c we are fighting Iraqi people whom we've called insurgents.
True, some Al Qaeda was drawn to Iraq to take potshots at our soldiers, but that doesn't change the fundamental makeup of the battles between US soldiers and Iraqi insurgents.
-
We attacked Iraq and destroyed the Hussein administration.
By all valid accounts, the insurgency is made up of Iraqi people.
If we are not fighting the Iraqi people, who are we fighting?
We are fighting Iraq b/c we are fighting Iraqi people whom we've called insurgents.
True, some Al Qaeda was drawn to Iraq to take potshots at our soldiers, but that doesn't change the fundamental makeup of the battles between US soldiers and Iraqi insurgents.
but in your other link, of the 7 groupd they detailed, only 2 were fichting for "iraq"....how is that majority?
-
Hilarious! Just like a Nazi soldier pointing out the good things that were being done in the country he invaded.
Not alot of schools built or supplies handed out in POland during the war.
-
Hilarious! Just like a Nazi soldier pointing out the good things that were being done in the country he invaded.
Can someone please put the troll back in his cage?
-
but in your other link, of the 7 groupd they detailed, only 2 were fichting for "iraq"....how is that majority?
This information should clear up any question then:
Iraqi Insurgents
A breakdown of estimates by the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit
Unemployed, Poor 30 percent
Criminals, Thugs 30 - 35 percent
Former Baath Party
or Military Personnel 20 percent
Ethno-religious Fighters 10 percent
Foreign Fighters 5 percent
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/27/eveningnews/main669892.shtml
Before the invasion, Iraq was not an ally of Al Qaeda. President Bush made overtures to the US public stating otherwise. That was dishonest.
The US attacked Iraq, deposed its government and became an occupying force.
The Middle East is a powder keg largely b/c of the military occupation of Palestine by Israel.
That is a 40 year occupation with violent attacks going on to this day.
Here is the lesson that the Bush Administration failed to learn from that:
Rule by a foreign military occupation force, no matter how well intentioned, is inherently anti-democratic and the people of the occupied territory will never tolerate that.