But what kind of response is justified? If attacking another country is acceptable can other countries respond by attacking the US?
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Museums you've been to, would recommend, or want to go to?
Can the War on Terror Be Won?
- Thread starter Syndyre
- Start date
War. Yeah if the U.S attcked them unprovoked
Do you think the U.S should just have accepted Pearl Harbour and not declared war on Japan?
Attacking Afghanistan was more than justified. If they're justified in attacking the US, yes, but then they need to be prepared to face the consequences of that action.
mercurial
MyBB Legend
the problem i have with war is the innocent and unnessary civilian casualties. i don't like war period.
i still can't understand why we have war. i mean are we not past those days where we can't control our anger and greed? does money really mean that much to some people?
i still can't understand why we have war. i mean are we not past those days where we can't control our anger and greed? does money really mean that much to some people?
I don't like doing a lot of chores but that doesn't mean they don't have to be done. There is always going to by war whether you like it or not. Why? because there are evil people in this world. Just like there are violent criminals who require violence to stop. Unfortunately some criminals control nations or have millions who follow their ideology.
And then the US needs to be prepared to face the consequences of attacking Afghanistan, and so on. It makes attacks against US targets justified as retaliation for the people they killed in Afghanistan.
Except that the US was attacked first, they didn't initiate it.
mercurial
MyBB Legend
but we all know now that the "evidence" that all these wars were based on were bullcrap, so in effect, all the wars were based on false pretences.
We do? 9/11 seemed like a pretty real pretence to me.
You can add the first WTC bombing, African embassy bombings and the attack on the USS Cole.
LoneGunman
Expert Member
oh dear, the conspiracy theorists waggle 9/11 yet again as a justification for the 'war of terror'
This is ignorant and utterly unjustified.. Why do I say this?
let's look at the alleged hijackers - according to the 911 Commissions' own info:
Mohamed Atta grows up in Cairo, Egypt.
Marwan Alshehhi is from Ras al-Khaimah Emirate in the United Arab Emirates.
Ziad Jarrah is from Beirut, Lebanon.
Hani Hanjour is from Taif, near Mecca in Saudi Arabia.
Nawaf and Salem Alhazmi are from Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulaziz Alomari is from south-western Saudi Arabia.
Mohand Alshehri is from Tanooma in Asir Province, Saudi Arabia.
Hamza Alghamdi is from Baha Province, Saudi Arabia.
Fayez Ahmed Banihammad is from the United Arab Emirates.
Maqed Mojed is from Annakhil, near Medina in western Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed Alhaznawi is from Hera, Baha Province. (Saudi Arabia)
Ahmed Alnami is from Abha, Asir Province. (Saudi Arabia)
Wail Alshehi and Waleed Alshehri are from Khamis Mushayt in Asir Province, southwestern Saudi Arabia.
I think you can see which country SHOULD have been invaded and attacked.
Instead, the country that has rigid Islamic fundamentalist laws, very retro beliefs about women, and which happens to have oil and business connections with the Neocons in power in the US, remains untouched.
So stop reciting PR propaganda about 911, while talking about the war of terror.
If there was any real connection between 911 and the current US moves, they'd have invaded Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. (I mention Pakistan given that Pakistan's head of intelligence is linked to the 911 hijackers. There again, its Intelligence services are deeply linked to CIA, and are probably just tame dogs, following its orders.)
Do some research - there's cross referenced and verifiable info available, not the garbage of recycled scare articles, something that was covered some time back in mainstream media, that the US army was deliberately placing fake news in overseas media, in order to provide 'justification' for its actions.
This is ignorant and utterly unjustified.. Why do I say this?
let's look at the alleged hijackers - according to the 911 Commissions' own info:
Mohamed Atta grows up in Cairo, Egypt.
Marwan Alshehhi is from Ras al-Khaimah Emirate in the United Arab Emirates.
Ziad Jarrah is from Beirut, Lebanon.
Hani Hanjour is from Taif, near Mecca in Saudi Arabia.
Nawaf and Salem Alhazmi are from Mecca, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulaziz Alomari is from south-western Saudi Arabia.
Mohand Alshehri is from Tanooma in Asir Province, Saudi Arabia.
Hamza Alghamdi is from Baha Province, Saudi Arabia.
Fayez Ahmed Banihammad is from the United Arab Emirates.
Maqed Mojed is from Annakhil, near Medina in western Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed Alhaznawi is from Hera, Baha Province. (Saudi Arabia)
Ahmed Alnami is from Abha, Asir Province. (Saudi Arabia)
Wail Alshehi and Waleed Alshehri are from Khamis Mushayt in Asir Province, southwestern Saudi Arabia.
I think you can see which country SHOULD have been invaded and attacked.
Instead, the country that has rigid Islamic fundamentalist laws, very retro beliefs about women, and which happens to have oil and business connections with the Neocons in power in the US, remains untouched.
So stop reciting PR propaganda about 911, while talking about the war of terror.
If there was any real connection between 911 and the current US moves, they'd have invaded Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. (I mention Pakistan given that Pakistan's head of intelligence is linked to the 911 hijackers. There again, its Intelligence services are deeply linked to CIA, and are probably just tame dogs, following its orders.)
Do some research - there's cross referenced and verifiable info available, not the garbage of recycled scare articles, something that was covered some time back in mainstream media, that the US army was deliberately placing fake news in overseas media, in order to provide 'justification' for its actions.
Last edited:
I'm no fan of Saudi and I do think they have a lot to answer for but if Al Qaeda was using Afghanistan as a base of operations with the full support of the Taliban does that not make the Taliban responsible. I know you don't believe Al Qaeda caused 9/11, but assuming they did.
What is Saudi Arabia's involvement in terrorism? I don't know if there is any evidence, but it does raise questions about the choice of who to attack and why.
Would the USA hand over a member of their government or military forces? Let's say someone wanted to prosecute Kissinger for his various war crimes?
I think the Taliban should never have been allowed to take power, certainly not to retain it, but why should they as a foreign government simply acquiesce to the demands of the US? I mean ignoring the fact that the US has significant military power and is known for their willingness to attack other countries.
Were they attacked first? This is a messy situation and fingers can be pointed in all directions. Arab people in the middle east, with good reason, see the US as the aggressor. The US also no problem attacking civilian targets, simply claiming they are being used for military purposes. Something that we may or may not be able to verify. The same for Israel - I don't care who they claim is hiding amongst civilians, they still show they're willing to kill as many civilians as necessary while they attempt to kill their enemies. If I was a Palestinian living with the threat of them killing me or my family or destroying my food and water supplies, all with US support, I'd hate both of them, and would see those attacking them as doing the right thing.
I don't think there's any evidence of direct involvement but they unashamedly and vigorously promote Wahhabism which probably contributes to terrorism at least indirectly.
Well 9/11 did precede the Afghanistan air strikes and invasion. The US & Israel may end up killing civilians in the course of their operations but that's very different to terrorist suicide bombers who deliberately target civilians.
trek_mambo
Senior Member
9/11 was a way to win the public and the world over into overthrowing Middle-Eastern Governments one by one. The intention to do so existed long before 9/11:
It started with the Cold War
Iranian Hostage Rescue "Desert One" or "Operation Eagle Claw"
1980 (April 25)
Hostage Rescue & Inter-State Conflict
Iran
"Operation Earnest Will"
1987-1988
Inter-State War
Iran
Second Persian Gulf War "Operation Desert Storm"
1991
Inter-State War
Iraq
"No-Fly Zone" War
1991-2003
Inter-State War
Iraq
U.S. Embassy bombings and strikes on Afghanistan and Sudan (The bin Laden War)
August, 1998
Terrorist Conflict
"Desert Fox" Campaign (part of U.S./Iraq Conflict)
December, 1998
Inter-State War
Iraq
Attack on the USS Cole
October 12, 2000
Terrorist Conflict
Terrorists associated with Osama bin Laden
9/11
The War Against Terror & Iraq War
So before 9/11 there was a hell of a lot of hostility between the US and the Middle East.
The question should be this... What is America's Motive?
First the Motive was the Cold War... Fighting Communism (we swallowed this one, we have been brainwashed enough to believe it was a worthy cause)
Then their was a period between the Cold War (or when it was clearly being Won) and '9/11 justification'.*
After 9/11 the Motive seemingly was TWAT and eradicating Terrorism.
*The Persian War and all the conflicts in the middle east prior 9/11 and towards of end Cold War had no real motive... I mean No real Terrorism concerns, no real Communism concerns... So why were they bombing the living **** out of the Middle East?
America seems to be fighting a lot and the reasons they go to war always seem stupid i.e. War on Terror and Communism both are ridiculously broad reasons to go and die for... the one you are fighting imaginary Arabs in caves and the other you are fighting everyone that doesn't like their paycheck the way you get it.
America is evil, and the war in the middle east is nothing new, they have been doing this for years... so if you support them then you need to justify every single war they have fought... personally I don't support people who claim to be Blessed by God yet plunder innocent children who speak a funky language.
It started with the Cold War
Iranian Hostage Rescue "Desert One" or "Operation Eagle Claw"
1980 (April 25)
Hostage Rescue & Inter-State Conflict
Iran
"Operation Earnest Will"
1987-1988
Inter-State War
Iran
Second Persian Gulf War "Operation Desert Storm"
1991
Inter-State War
Iraq
"No-Fly Zone" War
1991-2003
Inter-State War
Iraq
U.S. Embassy bombings and strikes on Afghanistan and Sudan (The bin Laden War)
August, 1998
Terrorist Conflict
"Desert Fox" Campaign (part of U.S./Iraq Conflict)
December, 1998
Inter-State War
Iraq
Attack on the USS Cole
October 12, 2000
Terrorist Conflict
Terrorists associated with Osama bin Laden
9/11
The War Against Terror & Iraq War
So before 9/11 there was a hell of a lot of hostility between the US and the Middle East.
The question should be this... What is America's Motive?
First the Motive was the Cold War... Fighting Communism (we swallowed this one, we have been brainwashed enough to believe it was a worthy cause)
Then their was a period between the Cold War (or when it was clearly being Won) and '9/11 justification'.*
After 9/11 the Motive seemingly was TWAT and eradicating Terrorism.
*The Persian War and all the conflicts in the middle east prior 9/11 and towards of end Cold War had no real motive... I mean No real Terrorism concerns, no real Communism concerns... So why were they bombing the living **** out of the Middle East?
America seems to be fighting a lot and the reasons they go to war always seem stupid i.e. War on Terror and Communism both are ridiculously broad reasons to go and die for... the one you are fighting imaginary Arabs in caves and the other you are fighting everyone that doesn't like their paycheck the way you get it.
America is evil, and the war in the middle east is nothing new, they have been doing this for years... so if you support them then you need to justify every single war they have fought... personally I don't support people who claim to be Blessed by God yet plunder innocent children who speak a funky language.
Xarog
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2006
- Messages
- 19,038
- Reaction score
- 175
What about the fact that practically half the supposed hijackers are still alive?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hijackers.html
The US demanded that the Taliban hand over suspects. The only response the Taliban made was to ask for evidence of their guilt. Do you honestly expect, say, South Africa, to extradite people living inside its borders just because Zimbabwe says, "hey, we think those guys are criminals."?
Had the US actually supplied the evidence, things would be different. But they didn't and the Taliban refusal was entirely legitimate under international law. The US further violated international law, and its obligations as a UN member by invading Afghanistan, another UN member.
