BF2S Forums Is peace in the ME inconvenient?

JahManRed wrote:

The middle east is being made such a mess of that one would think they were doing it on purpose.

The war on terror can never be won. The hawks knew it, that's why they wanted it. The money keeps rolling into a few rich men's pockets at the top while its paid for with Coalition and Arab lives. And its never ending. Meanwhile we are all being lead to believe that we will be much safer if our civil liberties are taken from us to protect us from Osama. Personally I am beginning to believe the WOT is a convenient way to usher in police states in USA and UK.

The biggest question you asked was, where is Osama?
I think the lack of effort employed to bring him to justice speaks volumes. Saddam who posed no threat to the west was hunted down vigorously and we all had nightly updates from the white house on the hunt for Saddam like he had his finger on the button. Osama....................nothing, not a word, not a press conference. While he continues to spout propaganda all over the world via the Internet. The only answer to that question is that the Bush Inc. does not want to catch him. And the reason for this has to be so dark I don't even want to think about it.

First thing I've ever agreed on you with.... ever. Damn.

JahManRed wrote:
The middle east is being made such a mess of that one would think they were doing it on purpose.

The war on terror can never be won. The hawks knew it, that's why they wanted it. The money keeps rolling into a few rich men's pockets at the top while its paid for with Coalition and Arab lives. And its never ending. Meanwhile we are all being lead to believe that we will be much safer if our civil liberties are taken from us to protect us from Osama. Personally I am beginning to believe the WOT is a convenient way to usher in police states in USA and UK.

The biggest question you asked was, where is Osama?
I think the lack of effort employed to bring him to justice speaks volumes. Saddam who posed no threat to the west was hunted down vigorously and we all had nightly updates from the white house on the hunt for Saddam like he had his finger on the button. Osama....................nothing, not a word, not a press conference. While he continues to spout propaganda all over the world via the Internet. The only answer to that question is that the Bush Inc. does not want to catch him. And the reason for this has to be so dark I don't even want to think about it.

Damn right.
Bin Laden was allowed to escape from Afghanistan and is pulled out and rattled every time the Republicans need to adjust the opinion polls.
But crikey, even the Americans are beginning to realise what living in the military-industrial complex means.

The US doesn't want peace in the middle east, it wants never-ending conflict to drive the oil profits, the arms sales and an ever-ready excuse to kill arabs on behalf of Israel.

ATG wrote:

JahManRed wrote:

The middle east is being made such a mess of that one would think they were doing it on purpose.

The war on terror can never be won. The hawks knew it, that's why they wanted it. The money keeps rolling into a few rich men's pockets at the top while its paid for with Coalition and Arab lives. And its never ending. Meanwhile we are all being lead to believe that we will be much safer if our civil liberties are taken from us to protect us from Osama. Personally I am beginning to believe the WOT is a convenient way to usher in police states in USA and UK.

The biggest question you asked was, where is Osama?
I think the lack of effort employed to bring him to justice speaks volumes. Saddam who posed no threat to the west was hunted down vigorously and we all had nightly updates from the white house on the hunt for Saddam like he had his finger on the button. Osama....................nothing, not a word, not a press conference. While he continues to spout propaganda all over the world via the Internet. The only answer to that question is that the Bush Inc. does not want to catch him. And the reason for this has to be so dark I don't even want to think about it.

They don't want to catch him.
Getting OBL would lead to a chorus of voices demanding we gtfo of there. The ME under Bush and the neocons is like Hotel California;
You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave.

Naaaa they want to catch them. This conspiracy would require entire branches of the military to be in on it. Shit.. when we couldn't find him we found substitutes.

Kmarion wrote:

The thing is we have oil sitting right off our coast in the Gulf of Mexico. We have environmentalist who have lobbied to prevent drilling in some of the areas "hotspots". Meanwhile China, Russia, and Cuba all just renewed their leases to drill their. It's mind boggling.

Well, Florida has a rule that doesn't allow oil rigs within a certain range of the coast, because it detracts from the tourism industry.  I've asked some of my oil clients if tourism is the main reason, and they say its the only reason.  The environmentalism issues can be avoided although it takes longer (pretty much a direct quote).

But, there's lots of oil on sitting in deep water - deep in the Gulf that companies are beginning to go after since its becoming more economically viable.

Pug wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

The thing is we have oil sitting right off our coast in the Gulf of Mexico. We have environmentalist who have lobbied to prevent drilling in some of the areas "hotspots". Meanwhile China, Russia, and Cuba all just renewed their leases to drill their. It's mind boggling.

Well, Florida has a rule that doesn't allow oil rigs within a certain range of the coast, because it detracts from the tourism industry.  I've asked some of my oil clients if tourism is the main reason, and they say its the only reason.  The environmentalism issues can be avoided although it takes longer (pretty much a direct quote).

But, there's lots of oil on sitting in deep water - deep in the Gulf that companies are beginning to go after since its becoming more economically viable.

Not an eyesore issue @ over 100 miles offshore. Its what could happen to our beaches in an offshore drilling accident. China is drilling closer to our coast than we are right now, just off the Florida keys. That is a major tourist destination. China is less concerned with spills as well. They lack the proper environmental cleanup equipment.

sergeriver wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

ATG wrote:

They don't want to catch him.
Getting OBL would lead to a chorus of voices demanding we gtfo of there. The ME under Bush and the neocons is like Hotel California;
You can check out any time you want, but you can never leave.

Naaaa they want to catch them. This conspiracy would require entire branches of the military to be in on it. Shit.. when we couldn't find him we found substitutes.

Maybe they know they can't catch him.

Didnt Bhuto say shortly before she was assasinated that they got him, yet the Americans where not coming out with that news as they needed him as a sort of boogey man to substantiate the whole war on terror thing.  Personally, I think that make sense, as much as I appreciate the difficulty of finding one man in such an enviroment, with the drive those boys had to find him after 9/11, I dont see him out running the worlds biggest man hunt (least on his own anyway).

Martyn

JahManRed wrote:

The middle east is being made such a mess of that one would think they were doing it on purpose.

The war on terror can never be won. The hawks knew it, that's why they wanted it. The money keeps rolling into a few rich men's pockets at the top while its paid for with Coalition and Arab lives. And its never ending. Meanwhile we are all being lead to believe that we will be much safer if our civil liberties are taken from us to protect us from Osama. Personally I am beginning to believe the WOT is a convenient way to usher in police states in USA and UK.

What?  Usher in police states in USA in UK... Did you see Bush doing that?  Did you see him trying to quell the media after every slanderous, erroneous news story?  In your mind what type of Government supports police states?  Communism maybe? Dictators?  Didn't Bush remove a dictator?  And since communism is left wing stuff, and looking at voting records which party consistently takes more rights and freedoms from the people and transfers them to the state?  It sure as shit ain't the Republican party. 

JahManRed wrote:

The biggest question you asked was, where is Osama?
I think the lack of effort employed to bring him to justice speaks volumes. Saddam who posed no threat to the west was hunted down vigorously and we all had nightly updates from the white house on the hunt for Saddam like he had his finger on the button. Osama....................nothing, not a word, not a press conference. While he continues to spout propaganda all over the world via the Internet. The only answer to that question is that the Bush Inc. does not want to catch him. And the reason for this has to be so dark I don't even want to think about it.

Oh, just because Saddam was captured (he was hated by his own people which kinda makes it hard to hide) and OBL hasn't been yet (I personally think he's dead) doesn't automatically mean Bush has some dark sinister unthinkable reason.  I know you need it there to make you feel better about hating Bush, but dang man.  Bush is actually a man of character.  Why the fuck do you think he being so hated wouldn't want to catch Bin Laden.  It'd be his fucking legacy, and his democrat's pedestal poll numbers would skyrocket again.

sergeriver wrote:

Questions:
-Are these countries taking any benefit from this situation?
-Why there isn't peace in the ME?
-Is peace in the ME inconvenient?

1.) You said it yourself. The countries benefiting are those with oil.
2.) Why isn't there peace in the ME? They're all freakin' jingoist jihadists. No but really, I'm sure it stems from the former colonial rule especially the Arab-Israeli conflict.
3.) I wouldn't say it is inconvenient but I'm sure it'll take a long long time before it ever happens. Northern Africa is far too trigger happy and has proven time after time to be a ticking bomb. I'm sure it would definitely be convenient for many parties if they made peace. Tbh explain why it would be inconvenient.

Last edited by ..teddy..jimmy (2008-05-21 08:10:33)

it's inconvenient for the islamists...who will they cry death to xxxx in that case?

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

it's inconvenient for the islamists...who will they cry death to xxxx in that case?

tru dat

S.Lythberg wrote:

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

it's inconvenient for the islamists...who will they cry death to xxxx in that case?

Peace is inconvenient for both the islamists and israel.

The only thing keeping terrorism alive is the lack of jobs due to the violence, and the only thing legitimizing israel is the violence of its enemies

Read the sum of all fears, a peaceful solution is bad for both sides political interests.

i don't think that the rampant unemployment is really due to the violence but more rather due to the ineptitude and corruption of the arab regimes.

israel's legitimacy is proven by what they have made of their country in the past 60 years.  eden now vs desert backwater in the past.  name some arab countries that have done anything industrious other than sell what came out of the ground.  fact...the arabs cannot master tech, eschew hard work and blame all their problems on the US and Israel.

JahManRed wrote:

Yeah I see Bush doing it. The patriot act (even its name suggests to appose it makes you unpatriotic), the military’s Total Information Awareness Program to create comprehensive data profiles on citizens, the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens, the proposed use of military commissions, the status of detainees held in Guantanamo Bay and reports of use of torture.
Yeah Bush removed a dictator. So why isn't he in:Sudan, North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, Burma, Zimbabwe Uzbekistan? While cossing up to Pakistan dictatorship who harbour Al Queda? If you think the middle east affair is a righteous mission to free oppressed people then you are delusional.
"communism is left wing stuff" LOL yeah that explains it. So the Democrats, by your definition are Left wing, so they are like Communists? Seams anyone who questions the state, particularly one run by a right wing republican party is a Communist to you. BTW the democrats are center right by European standards. I see no difference TBH. Clinton liked to start wars too.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

During WWII we had camps here in the US where Japanese-Americans (yes grade "A" US citizens) were rounded up.  I'd say we've made progress since then wouldn't you?  To address Guantanamo Bay's finest... I guess the military should have shot the fuckers and not taken any prisoners.  You say its inhumane to keep them there like that, but look what their comrads did to US POW's and then answer the question again

The UK detainees who were recently release without charge after years in Gito should have been shot? You don't believe in trials. Just shot anyone you suspect as being a terrorist? Labeling and killing Innocent civilians only creates more terrorists and multiplies the problem.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

So how many of those dictators you listed above is the US responsible for putting installing?  Shit, any time your country feels like making a positive contribution to humanity and the advancement of the human race instead of sitting on your laurels bitching at ones who do... You all ready started a list, I promise I won't object to any of them... All kidding aside...

Installing dictators? You should have a look at the past 50 years of the history of south America. You want a list of US installed and/or supported dictators? Here you go:
Augusto Pinochet Chili
The Shah of Iran
Col. Hugo Banzer Bolivia
Gen. Branco Brazil
Noriega, your bound to have heard of him?

My country is Northern Ireland, which is in the UK. Whats your point?

Personally I hate to see the UK military marauding around the middle east. Iraqi and Afghanistan are not going well. Afghanistan supplying half the world with heron. The Taliban are operating all over the country, with some parts being no go area. Iraqi is a haven for international terrorists and the whole situation is breading a new generation of Jihadists. Personally I wish the UK army would stay the fuck at home and funnel the billions wasted in the ME on sorting out the NHS, here at home. The people of the ME would be better off for it as well as UK citizens.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

As to the no difference in left=communism and your euro scale..  You, no offense meant, wouldn't see a difference between Hill and Obo and your center right by euro standards.  Your society is way different than mine.  You pay much more in taxes for the government to take care of you from birth to death.  You are fine with that?  I'm not.  I can take care of myself thank you very much.  I believe in hard work and reward.  I don't want my government managing any more aspects of my life than they currently do.  Hillarey and Osama don't think that the average American is competent enough to effectively manage their own life.  They think the government can do it better for you -that in essence is socialism/communism.  This is evident in their proposed plans and policy

I am no fan of centralised government either. Personally I am frustrated with the nanny state in the UK. Personally I pay £50 on every £30 000 I take in. I am a business owner and provide a service not a product, so last year I paid under £100 in tax. I am encouraged to employ and help the economy. The UK economy is very like the USA's. I work hard and employ some people, I get rewarded. I get free health care, which I will admit is failing. I have always said all or nothing. Proper socialism or proper capitalism. We are stuck somewhere in the middle and it doesn't work.

JahManRed wrote:

It doesn't prove their is any dark sinister plot. But you have to ask yourself, with the hundreds of thousands of troops and trillions of dollars being pumped into wars which were spring boarded of 9/11, that some visible efforts would be made to catch the guy who planned and funded it?
I don't need to feel better about hating Bush. My hate levels are just fine and I am comfortable with them, thanks very much. As is half of the population of America and most of the rest of the planet. Bush is a man of character, I agree on that point. Its decisions and actions tho that make any politician, charisma helps. But like Tony Blair the charisma usually hides the fact that he's fucking the country up while everyone mesmerized by his grin.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

OK we didn't ask for 9/11.  Visible efforts have been made to catch OBL and many more have happened unbeknown to you or me.  I bit my lip when Bush made MD claims, he should have stuck with the failure to comply with UN resolutions.  Bottom line is that Saddam had to go.  Do you support evil dictators who murder 100's of thousands of their own citizens?  Hell, there shouldn't even be a justification needed in getting that guy out regardless of who was sitting in the Oval Office.
As to being mesmerized by his grin... I think you described Obama there not Bush

The Iraqi people as we can see are fiercely tribal divided society. Arab culture is different to Christian western society. Saddam was brutal, but he held the country together. The administration was warned by experts they employ that it would happen and they ignored them. They had their eye on the oil and strategic location and not on the people of Iraqi. The Iraqi and all the Arab nations in the middle east should be allowed to evolve over time as we did and over throw their dictator and create their own destiny. It wouldn't have taken long as they would be drooling at the mouth at all the shinny consumables. China are moving forward after the consumer utopia, the ME could have been next, if they had been left alone. Again, if it was all about freeing the Iraqi people as you say then their are plenty of other candidates out their being ignored.