DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Terrorism is aided by Iraq war : U.S. is losing

**Slonopotam845** · 02-24-2006, 07:00 AM

Originally posted by Hierophant
Even tho you are making reasonable points you loose credibility with these arrogant remarks. well arrogant yourself.
i said that because it's only from US source that I heard this reasonning. I'm afraid I have to repeat terrorism does not work like that. Wether I say it respectfully or not, it's the same conclusion.

No, invading iraq is not the panacea to "vaporize" all existing terrorists who will all come running at US troops in Iraq like lemmings.

Even Rumsfled ended up realizing that "Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?". No you are not.

And one of the best way is just to stop torturing and humiliating iraqis. It just drives them mad and it's inevitable they seek vengeance.

The very best way to go at terrorism is to FIRST establish a just peace between israel and palestine, because the main root cause in there (OK you have two now with iraq).
Precisely the opposite of what the Bush administration did.

Originally posted by Hierophant
At first glance, your point certainly seems logical, but it misses a few important details. Aah "important details"?

Originally posted by Hierophant
First you assume that education can solve this problem. I do agree, that education is probably the most important weapon. I'm not too sure I talked about education. Why not?

Originally posted by Hierophant
any effective education is actually going to take generations. But you do have to take into account, that any attempt to 'educate' is immediately seen as part of the 'war on islam' mm I don't really think you can 'educate' like that.

I'd simply say you can create conditions where you do not consistently provocate arabs and muslems. The opposite of invading iraq, as a matter of fact.
I support the invasion of afghanistan, though for reasons I explained before. But invading iraq is not a solution. The solution is providing the conditions for freedom and development in the arab world.
(And that's why Europe contributes much more to rebuilding afghanistan than the US... as for iraq, like Powell said "you break it, you own it").

Originally posted by Hierophant
It would be much like if the english speaking world decided to educate the french that the french language is no longer needed. just don't try that.

We've already been subjected by Bush to the threat that "we should support the invasion of iraq or be with the terrorists". Now I don't think we want to be "educated" the way you said either

btw I hope you remember Condy said her intentions are to "punish France". For me I keep that in mind when thinking how the US plan to 'educate' me.

I repeat: france and europe did not oppose the invasion of iraq just for the sake of it, but mostly because it was the worst thing to do (well it depend which side you look on, for ben laden it was the *best* thing bush could do).

Originally posted by Hierophant
One could assert that by giving into the demands of the islamists, that the 'war on terrorism' could be done with. no way.

02-24-2006, 07:00 AM	#5
Slonopotam845 Join Date Jan 2006 Posts 5,251 Senior Member	Originally posted by Hierophant Even tho you are making reasonable points you loose credibility with these arrogant remarks. well arrogant yourself. i said that because it's only from US source that I heard this reasonning. I'm afraid I have to repeat terrorism does not work like that. Wether I say it respectfully or not, it's the same conclusion. No, invading iraq is not the panacea to "vaporize" all existing terrorists who will all come running at US troops in Iraq like lemmings. Even Rumsfled ended up realizing that "Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?". No you are not. And one of the best way is just to stop torturing and humiliating iraqis. It just drives them mad and it's inevitable they seek vengeance. The very best way to go at terrorism is to FIRST establish a just peace between israel and palestine, because the main root cause in there (OK you have two now with iraq). Precisely the opposite of what the Bush administration did. Originally posted by Hierophant At first glance, your point certainly seems logical, but it misses a few important details. Aah "important details"? Originally posted by Hierophant First you assume that education can solve this problem. I do agree, that education is probably the most important weapon. I'm not too sure I talked about education. Why not? Originally posted by Hierophant any effective education is actually going to take generations. But you do have to take into account, that any attempt to 'educate' is immediately seen as part of the 'war on islam' mm I don't really think you can 'educate' like that. I'd simply say you can create conditions where you do not consistently provocate arabs and muslems. The opposite of invading iraq, as a matter of fact. I support the invasion of afghanistan, though for reasons I explained before. But invading iraq is not a solution. The solution is providing the conditions for freedom and development in the arab world. (And that's why Europe contributes much more to rebuilding afghanistan than the US... as for iraq, like Powell said "you break it, you own it"). Originally posted by Hierophant It would be much like if the english speaking world decided to educate the french that the french language is no longer needed. just don't try that. We've already been subjected by Bush to the threat that "we should support the invasion of iraq or be with the terrorists". Now I don't think we want to be "educated" the way you said either btw I hope you remember Condy said her intentions are to "punish France". For me I keep that in mind when thinking how the US plan to 'educate' me. I repeat: france and europe did not oppose the invasion of iraq just for the sake of it, but mostly because it was the worst thing to do (well it depend which side you look on, for ben laden it was the best thing bush could do). Originally posted by Hierophant One could assert that by giving into the demands of the islamists, that the 'war on terrorism' could be done with. no way.
	Quote