Category: News and Views
My message to you is about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and how to end them. I did not intend to speak to you about this because this issue has already
been decided. Only metal breaks metal, and our situation, thank God, is only getting better and better, while your situation is the opposite of that.
But I plan to speak about the repeated errors your President Bush has committed in comments on the results of your polls that show an overwhelming majority
of you want the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. But he (Bush) has opposed this wish and said that withdrawing troops sends the wrong message to
opponents, that it is better to fight them (bin Laden's followers) on their land than their fighting us (Americans) on our land.
I can reply to these errors by saying that war in Iraq is raging with no let-up, and operations in Afghanistan are escalating in our favor, thank God, and
Pentagon figures show the number of your dead and wounded is increasing not to mention the massive material losses, the destruction of the soldiers' morale
there and the rise in cases of suicide among them. So you can imagine the state of psychological breakdown that afflicts a soldier as he gathers the remains
of his colleagues after they stepped on land mines that tore them apart. After this situation the soldier is caught between two hard options. He either
refuses to leave his military camp on patrols and is therefore dogged by ruthless punishments enacted by the Vietnam Butcher (U.S. army) or he gets destroyed
by the mines. This puts him under psychological pressure, fear and humiliation while his nation is ignorant of that (what is going on). The soldier has
no solution except to commit suicide. That is a strong message to you, written by his soul, blood and pain, to save what can be saved from this hell. The
solution is in your hands if you care about them (the soldiers).
The news of our brother mujahideen (holy warriors) is different from what the Pentagon publishes. They (the news of mujahideen) and what the media report
is the truth of what is happening on the ground. And what deepens the doubt over the White House's information is the fact that it targets the media reporting
the truth from the ground. And it has appeared lately, supported by documents, that the butcher of freedom in the world (Bush) had decided to bomb the
headquarters of the Al-Jazeera in Qatar after bombing its offices in Kabul and Baghdad.
On another issue, jihad (holy war) is ongoing, thank God, despite all the oppressive measures adopted by the U.S Army and its agents (which is) to a point
where there is no difference between this criminality and Saddam's criminality, as it has reached the degree of raping women and taking them as hostages
instead of their husbands.
As for torturing men, they have used burning chemical acids and drills on their joints. And when they give up on (interrogating) them, they sometimes use
the drills on their heads until they die. Read, if you will, the reports of the horrors in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo prisons.
And I say that, despite all the barbaric methods, they have not broken the fierceness of the resistance. The mujahideen, thank God, are increasing in number
and strength - so much so that reports point to the ultimate failure and defeat of the unlucky quartet of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Declaring
this defeat is just a matter of time, depending partly on how much the American people know of the size of this tragedy. The sensible people realize that
Bush does not have a plan to make his alleged victory in Iraq come true.
And if you compare the small number of dead on the day that Bush announced the end of major operations in that fake, ridiculous show aboard the aircraft
carrier with the tenfold number of dead and wounded who were killed in the smaller operations, you would know the truth of what I say. This is that Bush
and his administration do not have the will or the ability to get out of Iraq for their own private, suspect reasons.
And so to return to the issue, I say that results of polls please those who are sensible, and Bush's opposition to them is a mistake. The reality shows
that the war against America and its allies has not been limited to Iraq as he (Bush) claims. Iraq has become a point of attraction and restorer of (our)
energies. At the same time, the mujahideen (holy warriors), with God's grace, have managed repeatedly to penetrate all security measures adopted by the
unjust allied countries. The proof of that is the explosions you have seen in the capitals of the European nations who are in this aggressive coalition.
The delay in similar operations happening in America has not been because of failure to break through your security measures. The operations are under
preparation and you will see them in your homes the minute they are through (with preparations), with God's permission.
Based on what has been said, this shows the errors of Bush's statement - the one that slipped from him - which is at the heart of polls calling for withdrawing
the troops. It is better that we (Americans) don't fight Muslims on their lands and that they don't fight us on ours.
We don't mind offering you a long-term truce on fair conditions that we adhere to. We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat. So both sides
can enjoy security and stability under this truce so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been destroyed in this war. There is no shame in this
solution, which prevents the wasting of billions of dollars that have gone to those with influence and merchants of war in America who have supported Bush's
election campaign with billions of dollars - which lets us understand the insistence by Bush and his gang to carry on with war.
If you (Americans) are sincere in your desire for peace and security, we have answered you. And if Bush decides to carry on with his lies and oppression,
then it would be useful for you to read the book "Rogue State," which states in its introduction: "If I were president, I would stop the attacks on the
United States: First I would give an apology to all the widows and orphans and those who were tortured. Then I would announce that American interference
in the nations of the world has ended once and for all."
Finally, I say that war will go either in our favor or yours. If it is the former, it means your loss and your shame forever, and it is headed in this course.
If it is the latter, read history! We are people who do not stand for injustice and we will seek revenge all our lives. The nights and days will not pass
without us taking vengeance like on Sept. 11, God permitting. Your minds will be troubled and your lives embittered. As for us, we have nothing to lose.
A swimmer in the ocean does not fear the rain. You have occupied our lands, offended our honor and dignity and let out our blood and stolen our money and
destroyed our houses and played with our security and we will give you the same treatment.
You have tried to prevent us from leading a dignified life, but you will not be able to prevent us from a dignified death. Failing to carry out jihad, which
is called for in our religion, is a sin. The best death to us is under the shadows of swords. Don't let your strength and modern arms fool you. They win
a few battles but lose the war. Patience and steadfastness are much better. We were patient in fighting the Soviet Union with simple weapons for 10 years
and we bled their economy and now they are nothing.
In that there is a lesson for you.
Well I can say that this is somewhat what i agree with. first of all the vietnam war was one of the biggest things i had seen as a mistake. But then again there are many things which people consider being good and bad at the same time. I just have to say that this writing what somewhat hypocritically pious.
The vietnam war is something that 1. never should havehappened and 2. australia shouldn't have gotten involved in it.
For some reason Australia seems to get itself into these situations by taking the side of a major power of the world.
However our neighbours compose of many islamic nations, and our standing in their opinion has decreased over the last cupple of years.
hmmm, i wonder why?
What a lot of people seem to forget is that a lot of abuses of human rights are being committed behind closed doors. Many australians ignore the fact that one of our own citizens was victim to this.
Also the fact that america seems to have complete disregard for any religion other than one that follows the bible is, to me a display of their narrow mindedness. It verges on immaturety when you hear of american troops eurinating or making prisoners of war masterbate in front of the koran. And this is what our prime minister is supporting?
I think the point about the soviet union is absolutely correct. they are still dealing with the collapse of their government and will be for a long time to come.
I don't want any part of the United States of australia thanks so much and if that makes me a subversive then so be it.
FBI agents should know that asio has a file on me so i'm not that hard to find.
I wish i could contact him to ask one thing why people who would never hurt anyone why the kids the people like most of us who wish bush were dead and to beg him to listen to souls like mine
Well, the comparison between the vietnam and iraq wars is a rather interesting one.The one thing both of these conflicts have in common, in my opinion, is that we have no clue what the hell we're doing in Iraq, and the situation in Vietnam was the same. There are a lot of differences, however. First of all, the emeny in Vietnam was supplied and protected by a major power: the Soviet Union. Oh yeah, and how about China? North Korea? Also, the Iraqees are not one big culture, but many small cultures unlike the Vietnamese. What does this mean? Well, it means that because of this, the US lead forces there are going to face a civil war. The one key similarity that these 2 conflicts is a critical one, because it is the difference between success and failure. Think of this on a much smaller scale. If u decide to go to school and never even think about the future. What will most likely happen? Well, u may very well finish school, but you will probably find out that because U had no objective in mind, u did all of that hard work for nothing. I honestly don't think what the US is doing is any better than this jihad. Besides, don't all of these countries have enough problems at home? Starvation? Homelessness? Outsourcing of jobs? Oh wait, Daddy Bush doesn't care about those. And, according to his son, this is God's will. Well, gess what? According to the talaban and it's allies, it's god's will that they fight back. So, as u can see, what George Bush and company are doing is no better.
As for whether I would accept or decline this? Well, I don't think I would have ever been retarted enough to get my country in to this in the first place.
yep
Metallica I hate to shatter your good intentions but as you are female, and women are unimportant in islam, Bin Laden wouldn't listen..which is his loss.
Firstly on the Vietnamese War and how it connects to the War in Iraq. Americans seem to turn against any campaign if it doesn't all go well, and if they cared about other people outside America like those poor Vietnamese who were all scrambling for places on aircraft out of Vietnam at the end of the Vietnam war they'd think differently. Secondly, When September 11 happened, America wasn't on the ground in Iraq or Afghanistan. It's interesting that noone has bothered to challenge what Bin Laden is saying, and I find it very hypocritical for free people who value their own freedom to not be actively trying to ensure the freedom of others. Obviously anyone who values freedom wants every dictatorial regime out of power. Back to Bin Laden specifically though, Al-Qaeda didn't distroy the Soviet Union at all and nor did he. Without the help of America, that war would probably have been lost. Surely if people condemn America and its allies going into other countries, they should if they're not hypocrites condemn our rescuing of the Kosovo albanians who were being expelled and killed in Kosovo. Going to Kuwait, and Boznia was also wrong by their logic. Now to the present because it's far more important. Now obviously the message is going to blame the terrorism on America for going into Iraq, that's because quite a lot of people are stupid and Bin Laden realising this knows it'll put more pressure on the regime of America. He's been prooved right so far, in fact Al-Qaeda decided the Spannish election. The taliban and Al-Qaeda human rights abuses though include the burning down of schools because girls are being taught there and the blowing up of people just because they apply for a job. Al-Qaeda have invaded Iraq as well as America otherwise there'd be no foreign fighters there, still that's been overlooked by everyone except me of course. There's no point in pursuing a policy of peace because unless its on the terms of Al-qaeda, it won't be achieved. People are prepared to cause a lot of suffering for the cause of tyranny. However when anyone tries to fight these people and defend freedom, like America did in Afghanistan, they are condemned. The intentions of Al-Qaeda as anyone with a brain will know, extend beyond Afghanistan and Iraq. Not only do they want Israel to be whiped off the map, but they seek the restoration of the Islamic Empire. They are fascists, and so if we think it was right for Britain and France to declare war on Germany in 1939, it can only be right for all free people across the world to support the distruction of fascism. Of course the War on Iraq was carried out for reasons other than freedom, and we could discuss that, but if we do we play in to the hands of Al-Qaeda who use that to their advantage and use it to get our minds away from the main issue which is a matter of whether or not the world should be dominated by Islam. If Al-Qaeda were acting in the interests of Iraqis, then they wouldn't be blowing a group of morning shiites up at a funeral. They don't care about the Iraqi people either, except those who want an Islamic state. They also wouldn't attack muslims in Jordan and Pakistan either. Islamic Extremists also wouldn't kill a load of children at Beslan when they knew that their would be consequences for Muslims in Russia. Al-Qaeda, is the most evil thing in the world right now, so to be distracted on criticising Australia, America, the UK etc is stupid as you'll all realise if al-qaeda wins, and if they do, it'll be the fault of the people in free countries who spent more time focusing on the faults of the democratically elected world rather than the faults of the tyranical governments. It's not silly to talk of an Al-qaeda victory, there is a brilliant c hance that it'l be achieved. The Iraq war is definitely not going the right way, that's why there are extremists in their parliament.
yet, is it right for religions such as christianity to dominate the world? if we're not careful, people will be being burnt at the steak for teaching the theory of evolution.
ok, while i agree that some forms of islam are extreme and violent, i can't overlook the fact that all religions have blood on there hands and none can be excused of this. Also, i don't think islam would overtake the world, i don't see how it could, we are all caught up in a sort of stailmate where everyone is afraid to act because the people who they act against are most likely going to have the power to defend themselves, if the americans were really that concerned about ridding the world of nuclear weapons then they would be taking the same actions as they are in iraq in north korea, who are basically putting their hand up and begging someone to do it.
also america would not be developing more weapons.
whilst i don't agree with the extremist methods, i can't possibly agree with the methods of the bush government. Also, lets not forget that the Arabs have good reason to have something against western society. In exchange for helping the allys winworld war 1, they were promised the return of certain lands as part of the deal. this deal included israile.
however, when the war was over, the muslams were put at the back of the queue.
I can agree with louie on this and yet see the others too I am not saying I agree with him necessarily i am saying maybe he is right on some of this maybe he has a point
I agree with post 10, there is a stalemate and it will last for a long time. It is quite possible and I do in fact believe that the reason that America hasn't gone into North Korea is because of the fear America, South Korea and Japan all have of what North Korea may hae done in response. Yes all religions do have blood on their hands, especially Christianity and Islam. Everyone has to realise that the War on Terror is very likely going to be one of the longest wars being fought to have involved developed democracies. The one thing which may eventually tip it in the favour of developed democracies is if China is brought into the equasion by Al-Qaeda who aren't happy about China ruling a predominantly Muslim province. What Al-Qaeda do quite cleverly is make all sorts of small issues which all involve Muslims into one big issue about Islam and how none-Muslims treat Muslims. That's why they have foreign fighters from Indonesia who originally only cared about localised conflicts between Muslims and Christians. The danger of attacking other Muslims for Al-qaeda, and another great danger which may lead to its downfall, is that Al-qaeda has alienated Muslims. These Muslims in the middle East because of sectarian divisions may turn on Al-qaeda and if they all were united in their hostility towards the organisation, that would be a significant problem for it. The bad thing about it all is that eventually, the world could be in such a state that people from all sides see blowing themselves up as the only way, and all of the above could only be a result of Al-qaeda not being finished off quickly enough. The organisation shouldn't be underestimated by anyone, especially since those who don't learn from history enable it to be repeated.
Exactly, Louisiana. All religions have lots of blood on their hands. Also, there are many people living in similar, if not worse conditions in Africa. If it's all about protecting inocent people, why aren't these countries doing more for them? The reason is because they don't benifit from doing this. If countries such as the democratic republic of Congo had as much oil as does the middle east, I can assure u western society would be 100 times more willing to help them out.
mg, who is it that you actually agree with? i understand that you can see my point, but, as for the "he" who are you talking about, tww or bin laden? it's not really specific and a little misleading.
I agree with most of what's said in post 12. however, i'll be interested to see how things go after the next election. in the u.s and what things are like once many middle eastern countries stop pandering to american demands for oil.
/Well it's not just America now going looking for oil, China is now doing the same and is making a deal with Saudi Arabia. Oil is a tool that the dictators in the Middle East have been able to use for too long to maintain power. The Middle-Eastern people don't like the fact that their regimes are taking all the money and therefore not having to be accountable to them, and they don't like Americ a because it assists this process. I think they see the extremists as an alternative. They think Al-Qaeda may overthrow all these regimes, which is true, but all these regimes will simply be replaced with one bigger regime. I remember an interview involving George Bush and His opponent from the Democrats in which the guy from the Democrats said, that he'd oppose every dictator and he'd stop trading with any of them. It would be nice if all developed democracies did that, but unfortunately, we live in a world now where what we don't take, China will have so if we stop trading with certain governments, they just have to look towards China which doesn't care about the human rights of its own citizens, never mind anyone elses. Now of course, the Democrats have become more anti-war, and unfortunately, I think they're currently adopting positions in quite a lot of cases just to oppose the government, and so the two parties are playing politics instead of independently reaching their conclusions about what they thought. The UN has been in the Democratic Republic Of Congo, and America tried to get into Somarlia. It was thrown back in the faces of these intervining organisations, because as sad as it is, some groups of people are only interested in war, and we're so obsessed with a nicely nicely attitude that we don't allow ourselves the option of completely enhiolating the lot.
that is because many of us have conciences, and anialating the lot of them would really have an affect on us. Because, when it comes down to it, that's wrong. and, if the u.s was to go into some of the countries of africa, you have to ask yourself, would things really change? would there economy really be better?I think you only have to look at the economy of cuate to get your answer. I'm not saying that America has always done the wrong thing, if they had done in iraq and cuate what they did for the japanese after world war two then they might just actually make things better for those countries. but, america is ruled by different people these days and no one seems to be interested in doing that.
What I meant was, that the people who are only interested in war, need to be taken out of the equasion, not te rest of the populations of their countries, they won't stop the killing unless they are made to. America isn't as keen to rebuild economies as it was after WW2, but I think part of that desire was the fear that if they didn't, those places would go communist. Perhaps the rising of China maybe a good thing in that respect. If there is real competition internationally between the ideologies, America may once again, start repairing damaged economies if it goes to liberate a country for whatever reason. It may be once again the case, that America has no choice.
agreed, but, do they see that? do they know that to truely stop this fighting they have to put these countries on the map when it comes to economy? I think you only have to look at how much the americans care about the sacred or precious places in iraq to answer that questio,n.
Before the war in iraq began the americans were given a list of the important historical and cultural places of iraq that must be protected. the last item on that list was the oil fields, it was 16th on the list. it was the only thing that the americans protected.
Even if America realised that they need to rebuild the Middle East and transform it like they did Japan and Germany, there's a lot of countries there, 22 in he Arab League, a lot of African and Asian countries too. America can't be expected to repair all these places. If all the developed democracies were willing to form a union or coalition which took responsiblity for the task, ten it may be more possible. The UN can't be depended on. Despite the fact that it's the world governing body, it can't govern the world, it's afraid of leaving its troops in Iretrea because of security concerns. If they can't maintain stability in small underdeveloped poor backward countries like that, what future does it have? One attack on its building in Iraq and its hole team pulls out? It's too weak, and is worse than the League Of Nations. The only thing which keeps it going at all is the fact that nations can't withdraw from it.
While I have not traveled to Africa, a co-worker of mine visited it in the mid 1970s, during the height of colonial rule. While no argument can be made but that there were widespread abuses of civil liberties as well as racial discrimination, there was relative peace and stability. Under colonial governance, people enjoyed a general expectation of safety as they traversed the continent. I contrast this with a documentary I recently saw converning the present situation and recent civil war in the nation of Liberia, founded by the united states in the early 19th century as a destination for the repatriation of freed slaves back to Africa. In this documentary, the capital city had been over run by children and adolescents, wielding automatic weapons and other implements, killing and torturing anyone who happened to be in their way or unknown to them. This torture most noteably included genital amputations, with the severed body parts subsequently displayed as trophies of conquest. I think that the suggestion that some oversight on the part of those of greater civility could restore order, at a high price. Observing the world today has lead me to reconsider my original position that that price was too high. Perhaps the people who lead Russia's 1917 revolution were correct in their assessment that the world is not yet ready for true liberty. Perhaps the losses of freedom and the compromise of civil liberty that we must all endure is in a certain sense our just deserts for our collective stewardship of the world and of humanity.
We who have liberty in Europe, North America, and Australia/New Zealand are able to cope with it. In fact, not only did African nations used to be colonies but Canada, the US, Australia New Zealand and the Irish Republic once were under rule from London. These places haven't fallen under dictatorships, and there's not been an internal war with the exception of the American Civil war in any of those X colonies. Maybe the people of other colonies were ready for freedom and indepenedence. However, I think that there should have been better transition towards independence and those responsible for not making sure there was are not only the politicians in those areas, but the Europeans who tried to hold on to them too. When African nations became independent, they should have been left in a position to be dependent on themselves, and as prosperus as European nations. Nigeria has a lot of oil and enough to make all its people rich, however, wealth isn't divided properly. Maybe there should be a new branch of the UN which if it finds any government guilty of inflicting poverty on its people, should be able to have the permission of the UN security council to send troops into that country, to put a UN administration into that country until it's developed, and then to hold elections to replace that administration with a national government which continues down the same path. Obviously the UN government of that country would be responsible for bringing prosperity to the people, and stability to the nation. It would have to listen to the peoples concerns, act in their interests and be accountable to them
I do not agree with the war in Iraq. I do think though that someone should have done something to stop saddam's totalitarrian torture machine. Osama Ben Lodden is a sick bastard and to see him dead would be a start to breaking the back of Alkieda for good. How dare he talk about abuse of human rights when he is the one at the top who was ultimetly respponsible for many deaths of innocent people, 9 11 being one of these events. Why doesn't the cowardly mother fucker come out of his underground cave and show himself to the world. He is not serious about a truce. He, and the rest of the extremists are out for blood and they need to be stopped by any means possible. Anybody who willingly takes innocent lives should loose their human rights. The idea of vendetta and eye for an eye etc seems to be a big deal to this prick so he and all of his extremist pals should hang out in a building so that the allies can send a remote controlled plane or two into the thing and blow them sky high. It's a less painful fate than they'd deserve but it'd be a start to ending this problem. And I hope that when Ben Lodden and Saddam die, as well as the rest, that Ala sends them straight to hell. End of rant and I am giving no appoligies. And no, I did not vote for Bush thank you very much.