Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Current Events
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Politics : Current Events
Message Icon Topic: American Troops in Iraq Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 16 Next >>
Author Message
b95000
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1328
Quote b95000 Replybullet Posted: 17 November 2005 at 5:45pm
Originally posted by Whisper

No one can deny the existence of certain criminal elements in the Muslim world, but the percentage is no larger or smaller than criminal elements elsewhere in the world. We just need to see how these elements have been aided and abetted by oppressive policies.

B: I will not deny any of this.  I will add a unique aspect of the criminal elements within the Muslim world.  They are willing to go to EXTREME measures in their criminality...not even the mafioso, as brutal as they have been or the Cosa Nostra in Italy or the Japanese mafia, et al, ever slaughtered children asking for candy or shot children in the back (Beslan).  Such brutality and horror is unique to groups like Nazi Germany, American abortionists, and certain way, way out of bounds Muslim extremists...that's the party they keep and, shockingly, as shocking I suppose as Hitler's feigned faith in Christ, in the blessed Name of God!

Let's take Kashmir for an instance. The Brits sold it to the Dogras for a mere Rs.7.5 millions! (as if it were a part of their mother's dowry)

B: Yes, very strange.  Things like this have happened in history.  For instance the selling of Manhattan Island for pittance and the selling by the French of the Louisiana Territory - a huge swath across the Mississippi River valley in the central and southern US for $37 million.

The kashmiris have been an independent sovereign country for ages before the Brits moved in - but the potbellied impotent White Hall mandarins attached it to India.

B: I think the divvying up of the known world by the colonizers was/is unconscienable.

The Kashmiris rose in fullscale rebellion. The world Community promised them their Right of Self Determination through a plebesite! Now that was in 1948. They have been waiting ever since for us to fulfill our promise with them.

B: Sorry, not as familiar with this - what plebesite was promised?

Would you blame them if they chose to take it all in their own hands at some stage?

We see a similar, in fact, far worse thing in Palestine.

B: The question always arises as to what is more valuable - our land, our pride, or our children?  I'm not saying people need to give up their cultures or their land...but somehow the peoples of the world do need to figure out a way to get along and to allow their competing interests to not destroy the next generation with hatred.  Wouldn't you agree to that?

Placing US troops in Saudi Arabia was a mistake to put it mildly. How else would OBL rise to the status of a global Muslim hero?

B: You tell me Sasha - how has this happened - at all - regardless, especially with all the Muslims killed by AQ over the years?  This level of regard for this man is bizarre by any measure...and yet I think most Muslims - 95% or more if I were to venture to guess - either hate him or think him a non sequitur and are just trying to live their lives.  Do you really think he's risen to the status of some global Muslim hero?

Injustice, far more than anything else, is the breeding ground of terror and death cultists. It's very easy to take a life. It is extremely hard to lay one's own on the line.

B: This is absolutely true...We need people in all cultures willing to do this...no less in the non-Muslim world than in the Muslim world...people who have become fat and happy (many Americans) often find this difficult.  That said this country is not devoid of sacrificial heroes - and I'm not talking just about the military personnel who are fighting, by and large, for an understanding about their kids future (so, they're fighting for their families) - I'm talking about average everyday heroes and heroines that do lay their lives down either literally or sacrificially in serving their fellow human beings and in bringing about lasting and peaceful change (through things like economic development missions, education, health care and generally nuturing the human family in countries across the globe.)  These are the Mother Theresas and the like, and her equivalents across all the communities of families across the earth.

Peace must however, be established for this sort of thing to flourish...without an established and maintained peace - you can forget about this happening to any larger and effective extent.

We culture suicide bombers by denying them justice and human considerations.

B: I don't believe there is EVER justification for taking the lives of those you supposedly are fighting 'the system' for...to take the lives of the poor whilst fighting the rich is indeed the greatest tragedy - or, to deliberately take the lives of children - how can this be justified?

Once we back off of that criminality - the discussion can more easily be enjoined about 'just war' and 'just jihad' (I started a string months ago asking what 'just jihad' or 'just war' consisted of).  But until we can agree that shooting kids in the back and blowing up poor mothers in markets is a heinous crime - we've got a non-starter...the defenders of such actions are just fighting for the rights of criminals and thugs and murderers at that point.

Bruce
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
IP IP Logged
Whisper
Male Other
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 25 July 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4752
Quote Whisper Replybullet Posted: 17 November 2005 at 11:20pm

B: Sorry, not as familiar with this - what plebesite was promised?
UN resolved to hold a plebesite if the Kashmiris stopped fighting - that was in the first half of 1 9 4 8.

B: You tell me Sasha - how has this happened - at all - regardless, especially with all the Muslims killed by AQ over the years?

He was a nobody before the troops were positioned in Suadia. Even Pentagon realised that and that is also one of the reasons for attacking Iraq - to use it as the primary Anglo-American Mid East garrison. Time seems to indicate that won't work out the way it's planned.

IP IP Logged
Sign*Reader
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3352
Quote Sign*Reader Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 1:00am
Attention b95000 & community: I don't need to comment now . It is all yours to rip murtha--go at it.
I will follow you-- 

  Hawk Democrat Calls for Immediate Pullout

John Murtha, a Vietnam Veteran, Voted for Invasion of Iraq

By LIZ SIDOTI, AP

WASHINGTON (Nov. 17) - One of Congress' most hawkish and influential Democrats called Thursday for an immediate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, sparking bitter and personal salvos from both sides in a growing Capitol Hill uproar over President Bush's war policies.

"It's time to bring them home," said Rep. John Murtha, a decorated Vietnam combat veteran, choking back tears during remarks to reporters. "Our military has accomplished its mission and done its duty."

The comments by the Pennsylvania lawmaker, who has spent three decades in the House, hold particular weight because he is close to many military commanders and has enormous credibility with his colleagues on defense issues. He voted for the war in 2002, and remains the top Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.

"Our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency. They are united against U.S. forces and we have become a catalyst for violence," he said. "The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion."

In a biting response, Republicans criticized Murtha's position as one of abandonment and surrender and accused Democrats of playing politics with the war and recklessly pushing a "cut and run" strategy.

"They want us to retreat. They want us to wave the white flag of surrender to the terrorists of the world," said House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.

Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, a 29-year Air Force veteran who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam for nearly seven years, called Murtha's position unconscionable and irresponsible. "We've got to support our troops to the hilt and see this mission through," he said.

Underscoring the rising emotions of the war debate, Murtha uncharacteristically responded to Vice President Dick Cheney's comments this week that Democrats were spouting "one of the most dishonest and reprehensible charges" about the Bush administration's use of intelligence before the war.

"I like guys who've never been there that criticize us who've been there," said Murtha, a former Marine. "I like that. I like guys who got five deferments and never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done."

Referring to Bush, Murtha added, "I resent the fact, on Veterans Day, he criticized Democrats for criticizing them."

The White House fired back from Busan, South Korea, where Bush was meeting with Asian leaders.

"Congressman Murtha is a respected veteran and politician who has a record of supporting a strong America," said White House press secretary Scott McClellan. "So it is baffling that he is endorsing the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic Party."

"The eve of an historic democratic election in Iraq is not the time to surrender to the terrorists," McClellan said. "After seeing his statement, we remain baffled - nowhere does he explain how retreating from Iraq makes America safer."

Murtha once worked closely with the vice president when Cheney was defense secretary. During Vietnam, Bush served stateside in the National Guard while Cheney's five deferments kept him out of the service entirely.

Just two days earlier, the GOP-controlled Senate defeated a Democratic push for Bush to lay out a timetable for withdrawal. Spotlighting mushrooming questions from both parties about the war, though, the chamber then approved a statement that 2006 should be a significant year in which conditions are created for the phased withdrawal of U.S. forces.

Murtha estimated that all U.S. troops could be pulled out within six months. He introduced a resolution Thursday that would force the president to call back the military, but it was unclear when, or if, either GOP-run chamber of Congress would vote on it.

On the Senate floor Thursday, Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called on President Bush and the White House to stop what he called an orchestrated attack campaign.

"It's a weak, spineless display of politics at a time of war," said Reid, who spoke while Bush was in Asia.

The rhetorical dueling came in a week in which Bush and other top administration officials lashed out at war critics, saying they advocate a strategy that will only embolden the insurgency.

Some Senate Democrats have already laid out plans for bringing home U.S. troops. Other House Democrats have called for the military to pull out, but none has Murtha's clout on military issues.

With a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts, Murtha retired from the Marine Corps reserves as a colonel in 1990 after 37 years as a Marine, only a few years longer than he's been in Congress. Elected in 1974, Murtha has become known as an authority on national security whose advice was sought out by Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

Murtha's shift from an early war backer to a critic advocating withdrawal reflects plummeting public support for a war that has cost more than $200 billion and led to the deaths of more than 2,000 U.S. troops.

Known as a friend and champion of officers at the Pentagon and in the war zone, it is widely believed in Congress that Murtha often speaks for those in uniform and could be echoing what U.S. commanders in the field and in the Pentagon are saying privately about the conflict.

Murtha, who normally shuns the spotlight, said he spoke out because he has grown increasingly troubled by the war and has a constitutional and moral obligation to speak for the troops.

But Republicans said Murtha does not represent the views of U.S. troops or military leaders.

"This falloff of support among Democratic ranks is not shared by the war-fighting forces. It's not shared by our troops," said Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

Several times a year, Murtha travels to Iraq to assess the war on the ground, and sometimes he just calls up generals to get firsthand accounts.

His voice cracked and tears filled his eyes as he related stories of one of his visits to wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington.

One man, he said, was blinded and lost both his hands but had been denied a Purple Heart because friendly fire caused his injuries.

"I met with the commandant. I said, 'If you don't give him a Purple Heart, I'll give him one of mine.' And they gave him a Purple Heart," said Murtha, who has two.Clap

11-17-05 22:10 EST

 


Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.
IP IP Logged
Angela
 Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2555
Quote Angela Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 7:49am

I was on my way here to post this article.  Rep. Murtha is from the district in Pennsylvania where I grew up.  I have voted for the man.  I have met the man.  If he says its time to get out and that the leadership is incompetent.  We should listen.  He's very active with the Pennsylvania Veterans and he's a good man.  The president is losing this war on two fronts.  He's not gaining anything by being there and he's losing what respect the US had as a humanitarian country that helps in a time of need. 

A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll this week said 63 percent of Americans oppose Bush's handling of the Iraq war, and 52 percent say troops should be pulled out now or within 12 months.

The question becomes....other than hoping and asking Men like Murtha to speak for us.  What can the average American (not Amreeki) do?  We aren't barbaric enough to start strapping bombs to ourselfs and targeting Washington cause we don't agree.   What are we to do, to show that the average American is a good person with a good heart? 

IP IP Logged
Whisper
Male Other
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 25 July 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4752
Quote Whisper Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 9:34am
Angela, Amreeki is simply American in Farsi and few other languages. It doesn't carry any negative sense at all. I have always used it to emphasise Afghan feel, not for any other reason.

Edited by Whisper
IP IP Logged
b95000
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1328
Quote b95000 Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 1:54pm
Originally posted by Angela

I was on my way here to post this article.  Rep. Murtha is from the district in Pennsylvania where I grew up.  I have voted for the man.  I have met the man.  If he says its time to get out and that the leadership is incompetent.  We should listen.  He's very active with the Pennsylvania Veterans and he's a good man.  The president is losing this war on two fronts.  He's not gaining anything by being there and he's losing what respect the US had as a humanitarian country that helps in a time of need. 

A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll this week said 63 percent of Americans oppose Bush's handling of the Iraq war, and 52 percent say troops should be pulled out now or within 12 months.

The question becomes....other than hoping and asking Men like Murtha to speak for us.  What can the average American (not Amreeki) do?  We aren't barbaric enough to start strapping bombs to ourselfs and targeting Washington cause we don't agree.   What are we to do, to show that the average American is a good person with a good heart? 



Do you really think the forces should pull out ahead of the parliamentary elections for permanent government?  That's what Murtha suggested - by using the words "immediate redeployment" he suggests that the US should begin drawing forces down before the elections..if he did NOT mean that he should have said so.
Bruce
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
IP IP Logged
Angela
 Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2555
Quote Angela Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 1:59pm

Its my understanding that elections are to be in the month of December.  The shear number of troops we have there would require a strategic and steady pull out.  It would not be.  "Hey boys, we're going home, flight leaves tomorrow."   But, once the elections are over, I don't think we should have more than a few training troops left to help the Iraqi police and guards with their training, and then they need pulled too.  Because we've fallen into a trap.

They don't like us there, they kill us, we stay to fight the insurgents, which gives them more recruits to kill us, which means we have to stay longer to hunt them....and the cycle continues.  Once the elections are over in December, we have no need of being there.  Period.

The Geneva Convention requires we rebuild a country we invade, but if they don't want us there, then we need to leave.  Iraq is not the 51st state, once they have their own government.  They have every right to expect us out of there.  Iraq is not ours, it belongs to the Iraqi people.  If they want to continue to bomb each other, its their problem not ours.  The insurgents cannot blame the deaths of innocent men and women in prayer at a mosque on the US.  They will have to face the fact they are killing muslims for their own agenda.  We need out of there so the Iraqi people can get on with their lives.

 



Edited by Angela
IP IP Logged
b95000
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1328
Quote b95000 Replybullet Posted: 18 November 2005 at 2:24pm
Fine.  However, to say "immediate redeployment" again emboldens the terrorists ahead of one of the more important events - that is - the election of the permanent government - that will portend to ultimate success for all in Iraq.  I can respect Murtha while disagreeing with his assessment, choice of words and timing...why not say these things just after the election?

As to the US getting out - that was/is the plan..

That said, I acknowledge the incredibly hard and sacrificial work of all Iraqis and Americans who have labored for a free Iraq.


Edited by b95000
Bruce
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 16 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com