Former Terrorist Calls Out Islam and Western "Progressives" for Enabling Terrorism

[bbobb]

You are correct. There's also the fact that we operate under a flag and fight as lawful combatants, openly bearing arms with uniform and rank clearly displayed.

Except when we, you know, fund the despots that we want in power secretly and supply them with weapons.

Or when we, oh I don't know, send the CIA in to assassinate people we don't like.

We are not perfect, not in the least.

[SpoDaddy]

Some of the things people have done in this country's name are indefensible - I'm not going to say we're bad all the time, but if we were to weigh the suffering, I'd say it's teetering close to even at this point (what with us destabilizing a whole region even more...)

Why do you assign all the blame for Iraq on America and none of it on the terrorists that are blowing up retirement villages and schoolbuses? We've certainly fucked up the war but we're fighting to stabilize it and make things better; the terrorists are fighting to make it worse. Yes, America and Al Qaeda both kill people, but the reasons, methods, and targets are completely different.

[icarusfall]

Dude nigga, seriously? We shouldn't even be there. The whole mess is our fault in every way.

[SpoDaddy]

It's not our fault that Al Qaeda is murdering innocent civilians. Your insistence to the contrary belies your true motivations.

[icarusfall]

It's our fault Iraq has turned into the state it has. It wasn't a picnic before, but it's much worse now. This isn't just from me talking either - I've got friends in the service who were over there and talked with the locals. You think the politicians get the real story when they visit? Not even close. That's all been scouted.

Also: Your insistence that Al-Qaeda are the only game in town who's mowing down the locals is disingenuous at best. There are scores of groups fighting for legion of reasons.

[Tigana]

It was actually those damn english. Fuck those sons of bitches imho.

[youandwhosearmy]

Why do you assign all the blame for Iraq on America and none of it on the terrorists that are blowing up retirement villages and schoolbuses? We've certainly fucked up the war but we're fighting to stabilize it and make things better; the terrorists are fighting to make it worse. Yes, America and Al Qaeda both kill people, but the reasons, methods, and targets are completely different.

I was on your side till you said this shit.

They assign blame on America because America made the decision to completely destabilize one of the only moderately stablized (re: under some kind of control) muslim region's of the world on the border of Iran and Syria while the groups that attacked us were hiding and running away from us in Afghanistan dwindling in numbers. Since then the opposite of everything this administration said would happen, has happened.

The invasion was and still is without any good, justifiable reason, and that kind of oversight in the perceived image the United States is broadcasting to the rest of the world, sparks a lot more people showing a lot more sympathy than they should be for our enemies.

Are we as bad as Al Qaeda? No.
Are we responsible for them having any kind of influence in Iraq at all? Yes.
Does the rest of the world know we aren't as bad as Al Qaeda? There are nations now (Muslim nations) whose popluation ain't too sure anymore...

Our wasted good will with those who sympathized with us after 9/11 is the ultimate Al Qaeda "I told you so" recruiting tool. Too bad hindsight makes no difference in this case. Your argument like so many others that want this to work and be perceived as good and just is lost for one reason...

You assume simply because you and the people that agree with you understand our intentions, that our enemies, our allies, and those not privy to the knowledge and reassurances you have, understand our intentions. And when your fighting to quell civil unrest in a nation where a good 50% of the population hates you being there, intentions are EVERYTHING. All this can be perceived by our enemies, our allies, and most certainly the people in Iraq. To them indeed, we must look like a drunken stepfather running around yanking our belt out of our pants to give the bad little boy a good lashing, except we never felt it necessary to explain to his little brother why he needs the lashing. We just assumed the rest of the world would get it, and the people in Iraq wouldn't mind.

Good Thinking.

[bbobb]

It's not our fault that Al Qaeda is murdering innocent civilians. Your insistence to the contrary belies your true motivations.

It's our fault that they're in Iraq killing innocent civilians.

They weren't there before.

[SpoDaddy]

Your insistence that Al-Qaeda are the only game in town who's mowing down the locals is disingenuous at best. There are scores of groups fighting for legion of reasons.

I never insisted any such thing; I was responding to your silly comparison of America to Al Qaeda.

As for destabilizing Iraq, it was in the process of falling apart before we even arrived. Here's a quote from Ali Allawi's book (a guy that's been in the middle of everything and is no fan of the occupation of his country):

"When the Coalition arrived in Baghdad on 9 April, 2003, it found a fractured and brutalized society, presided over by a fearful, heavily armed minority. The post-9/11 jihadi culture that was subsequently to plague Iraq was just beginning to take root. The institutions of the state were moribund; the state exhausted. The ideology that had held Ba'athist rule together had decayed beyond repair. The state removed the elements that kept a vigorous Shi'a identity alive in parallel to a Sunni-dominated state. Nationalizations, emigration and expulsions destroyed the Shi'a mercantilist class; the state monopoly on education, publishing and the media removed the cultural underpinnings of Shi'a life. When the state embarked on the mass killings after the 1991 uprisings, Iraq became hopelessly compromised in the minds of most Shi'a."

Iraq was about to tear itself apart whether we went in or not. It was no longer stable under Hussein as it was even 10 years earlier. Our going in and bungling the entire operation has simply accelerated the collapse by a few years. Now we have to help rebuild it.

[youandwhosearmy]

I never insisted any such thing; I was responding to your silly comparison of America to Al Qaeda.

As for destabilizing Iraq, it was in the process of falling apart before we even arrived. Here's a quote from Ali Allawi's book (a guy that's been in the middle of everything and is no fan of the occupation of his country):

"When the Coalition arrived in Baghdad on 9 April, 2003, it found a fractured and brutalized society, presided over by a fearful, heavily armed minority. The post-9/11 jihadi culture that was subsequently to plague Iraq was just beginning to take root. The institutions of the state were moribund; the state exhausted. The ideology that had held Ba'athist rule together had decayed beyond repair. The state removed the elements that kept a vigorous Shi'a identity alive in parallel to a Sunni-dominated state. Nationalizations, emigration and expulsions destroyed the Shi'a mercantilist class; the state monopoly on education, publishing and the media removed the cultural underpinnings of Shi'a life. When the state embarked on the mass killings after the 1991 uprisings, Iraq became hopelessly compromised in the minds of most Shi'a."

Iraq was about to tear itself apart whether we went in or not. It was no longer stable under Hussein as it was even 10 years earlier. Our going in and bungling the entire operation has simply accelerated the collapse by a few years. Now we have to help rebuild it.

Then why wasn't that the reason we went to war?

Your missing my point about intentions Spo. Missing it big time.