U.S. foreign policy

[fiddy]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=db0_1450439588

[UK2K]

Very biased reporting.

Not a single suicide attack in Iraq before 2003? I call bullshit.

And since 2003, there's been this massive increase in deaths from terrorism? It's not terrorism, it's tribes that hate each other slaughtering one another because there's no government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack

Bet you if you asked ^them^ if life was better before, you'd get a resounding 'No'.

There was a lot less violence in the colonies before the Revolutionary War too, that doesn't mean it was better before the war than after.

[fiddy]

I've watched lots of programs from the ME, most analysts/scholars agrees that terrorism was basically close to non-existatest prior to U.S.' war on terror.

[UK2K]

I've watched lots of programs from the ME, most analysts/scholars agrees that terrorism was basically close to non-existatest prior to U.S.' war on terror.

Because if you were anything but what Sadaam said you were, you were getting gassed.

There was probably low crime and low violence in Germany under Hitler too.

[QUOTE]Israel April 6, 1994 – Afula Bus suicide bombing killing 8 wounding 55.
Israel April 13, 1994 – Hadera bus station suicide bombing. killing 5 wounding 30.
Argentina July 18, 1994 – Buenos Aires Jewish Center AMIA bombing. killing 85 wounding 300.
United KingdomIsrael July 26, 1994 – The 1994 London Israeli Embassy attack. 20 injured.
Israel October 19, 1994 – The Dizengoff Street bus bombing was a Hamas suicide attack on a passenger bus driving down Dizengoff Street in Tel Aviv. 22 killed 50 injured.
Israel November 11, 1994 – Netzarim Junction bicycle bombing killing 3 and wounding 12.
AlgeriaFrance December 24, 1994 – Air France Flight 8969 hijacking in Algiers by 3 members of Armed Islamic Group of Algeria and another terrorist. 7 killed including 4 hijackers, 25 injured.[6]
Israel January 22, 1995 – The Beit Lid suicide bombing was a suicide attack by Palestinian Islamic Jihad. 20 dead 69 injured.
Algeria January 30, 1995 – A car bomb exploded outside of a police station. 42 dead and 286 injured.[7][8]
India July 20, 1995 – A bomb on a motor scooter exploded at a marketplace in Jammu. Harkat-ul-Ansar claimed responsibility for the bombing. at least 17 killed 100+ injured.[9]
Israel July 24, 1995 – The Ramat Gan bus bombing was a suicide attack by Hamas. 6 dead 33 injured.
France July 25-October 17, 1995 – The 1995 Paris M

[fiddy]

Because if you were anything but what Sadaam said you were, you were getting gassed.


And kurds, shiits,and sunnies co-existed somewhat happily. Now Iraq is gone and probably will split in 2-3 parts. No Iraq, Syria or Libya on that list?



Many of the attacks in the 2000's and 2010's weren't even directed at the US and had nothing to do with US policy.

They're cave people blowing each other up.
Absolutely incorrect, when Saddam was ousted, a pro-Shiite government was installed in Iraq, which started prosecuting Sunnies. Sunnies became terrorists, thats a direct consequence of the U.S. policy.

[UK2K]

And kurds, shiits,and sunnies co-existed somewhat happily. Now Iraq is gone and probably will split in 2-3 parts. No Iraq, Syria or Libya on that list?

All three of those countries had leaders that sponsored terrorist groups. The groups they sponsored were in charge, and being supported by the government, in control. There were no groups able to oppose the government sponsored terror groups, since they had the money, and weapons, and military, on their side.

Again, there was less violence in Egypt before Moses led his people away, that doesn't mean life was better.

Because Hitler held Germany together with ruthless oppression doesn't mean life was more awesome during his reign than after.

And by the way, you are comparing terrorism pre-2001 to terrorism now. 15 years ago, it wasn't easy to travel from place to place like it is now. You didn't have social media, and internet wasn't being widely used.

Your comparing apples to oranges. It's a different time now.


Absolutely incorrect, when Saddam was ousted, a pro-Shiite government was installed in Iraq, which started prosecuting Sunnies. Sunnies became terrorists, thats a direct consequence of the U.S. policy.

And before, it was the other way around. So what's your point?


Post-1980[edit]
See also: Iran–Iraq War

Damage to a mosque in Khoramshahr, Iran
Following this period, Sunni–Shia strife has seen a major upturn, particularly in Iraq and Pakistan. Many explain the bloodshed as the work of conspiracies by outside forces—"the forces of hegemony and Zionism which aim to weaken [Arabs]" (Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Yusuf al-Qaradawi),[78] unspecified "enemies" (Iran president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad),[79] or "oppressive pressure by the imperialist front." (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad).[80]


The Shia suffered indirect and direct persecution under post-colonial Iraqi governments since 1932, erupting into full-scale rebellions in 1935 and 1936. Shias were also persecuted during the Ba'ath Party rule, especially under Saddam Hussein. It is said that every Shia clerical family of note in Iraq had tales of torture and murder to recount.[98] In 1969 the son of Iraq's highest Shia Ayatollah Muhsin al-Hakim was arrested and allegedly tortured. From 1979-1983 Saddam's regime executed 48 major Shia clerics in Iraq.[99] They included Shia leader Mohammad Baqir al-Sadr and his sister. Tens of thousands of Iranians and Arabs of Iranian origin were expelled in 1979 and 1980 and a further 75,000 in 1989.[100]

[KevinNYC]

Not a single suicide attack in Iraq before 2003? I call bullshit.
Based on what? Edit: The list you give is not Iraq.

Saddam had a very, very intrusive security service and didn't have active Wahhabi terror cells.

The US has only two suicide bombings take place 9/11 and some guy in Texas crashing a plane into the IRS building.


And since 2003, there's been this massive increase in deaths from terrorism? It's not terrorism, it's tribes that hate each other slaughtering one another because there's no government.
Market and Mosque bombings and the bombing of the UN building, and things that are not open warfare are classified as terrorism. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorist_incidents_in_Iraq_in_2005)

[Dresta]

You're both kinda wrong: there was still plenty of terrorism prior to the Iraq invasion, and Islamic terrorism was a growing problem already. That's why it took brutal dictators to keep them under some kind of control in the first place.

[UK2K]

Based on what?

Saddam had a very, very intrusive security service and didn't have active Wahhabi terror cells.

Common sense. There has always been violence in the Middle East. Always and forever. See above.


The US has only two suicide bombings take place 9/11 and some guy in Texas crashing a plane into the IRS building.


Market and Mosque bombings and the bombing of the UN building, and things that are not open warfare are classified as terrorism. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorist_incidents_in_Iraq_in_2005)

You can call it what you want, but if it's 'terrorism' now, it was terrorism before, so the statistic is still false.

[fiddy]

All three of those countries had leaders that sponsored terrorist groups. The groups they sponsored were in charge, and being supported by the government, in control. There were no groups able to oppose the government sponsored terror groups, since they had the money, and weapons, and military, on their side.

Again, there was less violence in Egypt before Moses led his people away, that doesn't mean life was better.

Because Hitler held Germany together with ruthless oppression doesn't mean life was more awesome during his reign than after.

And by the way, you are comparing terrorism pre-2001 to terrorism now. 15 years ago, it wasn't easy to travel from place to place like it is now. You didn't have social media, and internet wasn't being widely used.

Your comparing apples to oranges. It's a different time now.



And before, it was the other way around. So what's your point?


Which terrorist group they supported?
You are drawing some ridiculous/totally irrelevant comparisons. Germany was just fine under Hitler, it was demonized later.

Pre-2003 Iraq was better, get your shit straight homie

[NumberSix]

I've watched lots of programs from the ME, most analysts/scholars agrees that terrorism was basically close to non-existatest prior to U.S.' war on terror.
Was 9/11 before or after the war on terror? :confusedshrug:

[fiddy]

You're both kinda wrong: there was still plenty of terrorism prior to the Iraq invasion, and Islamic terrorism was a growing problem already. That's why it took brutal dictators to keep them under some kind of control in the first place.
An estimate i have seen cited between 10k-20k terrorist in the whole region at around 2001, while the biggest producer of terrorism was none other than U.S. buddy SA

[UK2K]

Which terrorist group they supported?
You are drawing some ridiculous/totally irrelevant comparisons. Germany was just fine under Hitler, it was demonized later.

Pre-2003 Iraq was better, get your shit straight homie

According to who? Sadaam's people? I bet it was.

Not to anyone else though.

Again, in your opinion, life was 'better' prior to the Revolutionary War too. Little violence, big government there to keep everyone in check, keep everyone in line. That doesn't make it better.

Ask any woman (in a free area) if their life is better? All the people I talked to in Afghanistan, face to face, told me our arrival was the best thing to ever happen to them. And you read some report about the number of violent incidents and then draw conclusions?

[GIF REACTION]

Indecisiveness is the crux of this problem

Fight the "terror"

Yet let it come into your borders?

Why does it seem like governments don't have any actual longterm plans

Russia is one of the few countries that really knows who it is, thanks to Putin

[fiddy]

According to who? Sadaam's people? I bet it was.

Not to anyone else though.

Again, in your opinion, life was 'better' prior to the Revolutionary War too. Little violence, big government there to keep everyone in check, keep everyone in line. That doesn't make it better.

Ask any woman (in a free area) if their life is better? All the people I talked to in Afghanistan, face to face, told me our arrival was the best thing to ever happen to them. And you read some report about the number of violent incidents and then draw conclusions?
Bruh you are ignorant, Afghanistan is still a broken place. And again you are drawing an irrelevant comparison between Iraq and Afghanistan, and you are telling me that im comparing Oranges and Apples? Big government is bad? Really? U.S. is conducting mass surveillance and is moving in direction to monitor every step of your life, while everything non-PC is censored. You are all tangled in the lies and hypocrisy of your own government. If you want to know whats going on in the ME, you should look for source from there, not CNN.

[KevinNYC]

Common sense. There has always been violence in the Middle East. Always and forever. See above.

You can call it what you want, but if it's 'terrorism' now, it was terrorism before, so the statistic is still false.

This is completely illogical. You gave a list of a certain type of violence in places that are not Iraq to prove something in Iraq.

Not logical and not common sense either.

Violence in the middle east does not equal suicide bombings which is a specific form of violence and relatively new. They are also usually associated with specific campaigns or groups. In WWII you had kamikazes, but since then. You saw it in Lebanon, in Israel. Sri Lanka terrorists was the leaders for quite a while. You did not see it in Afghanistan in the 1980's even though there was a war there and Al Qaeda formed during that war. The 1993 WTC bombing was not a suicide attack. Al Qaeda's first suicide bomb was in 1995 just 8 years before the Iraq war.

It was and is a fairly rare form of violence. Especially before the millenium.

https://aoav.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/suicide-attacks-graph2.png

[UK2K]

Bruh you are ignorant, Afghanistan is still a broken place. And again you are drawing an irrelevant comparison between Iraq and Afghanistan, and you are telling me that im comparing Oranges and Apples? Big government is bad? Really? U.S. is conducting mass surveillance and is moving in direction to monitor every step of your life, while everything non-PC is censored. You are all tangled in the lies and hypocrisy of your own government. If you want to know whats going on in the ME, you should look for source from there, not CNN.

You can call Afghanistan what you want. When I was there not that long ago, the people there called it a fresh start. They told me themselves.

I don't know where you're going with the rest of your post, two seconds ago we were talking about violence in the ME before the US invasion of Iraq, so why are we not still talking about that? What was the point you were trying to make?

You keep saying Iraq pre-03 was better. Ok, how? For who? I know it wasn't better for the Kurds. Or women. Or anybody who was not an adult male loyal to Sadaam. So who else was it better for?

You're acting like Iraq was a sweet place to live and then the US came and ****ed it all up. I've got news for you, it was sweet for a few, but when the Kurds were choking down poisonous gas, I don't think they'd agree with you.

[UK2K]

This is completely illogical. You gave a list of a certain type of violence in places that are not Iraq to prove something in Iraq.

Not logical and not common sense either.

Violence in the middle east does not equal suicide bombings which is a specific form of violence and relatively new. They are also usually associated with specific campaigns or groups. In WWII you had kamikazes, but since then. You saw it in Lebanon, in Israel. Sri Lanka terrorists was the leaders for quite a while. You did not see it in Afghanistan in the 1980's even though there was a war there and Al Qaeda formed during that war. The 1993 WTC bombing was not a suicide attack. Al Qaeda's first suicide bomb was in 1995 just 8 years before the Iraq war.

It was and is a fairly rare form of violence. Especially before the millenium.

https://aoav.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/suicide-attacks-graph2.png

****ing Kevin... can you not read?

He said violence in the ME was practically non existent. Go back and read dipshit.

[fiddy]

You can call Afghanistan what you want. When I was there not that long ago, the people there called it a fresh start. They told me themselves.

So that must be the reason half of the refugees that enter my country are Afghani? On top of that ISIS is taking over the Taliban, once every U.S. soldier is gone, guess whats going to happen?

Kurds, you say? Look what is your buddy Turkey doing to Kurds in their own country, the year is 2015 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=705_1450405151

BTW WHO gave Saddam the chemical weapons? The west :roll: Hypocrisy again


****ing Kevin... can you not read?

He said violence in the ME was practically non existent. Go back and read dipshit.
I said "close to non-existatest", reading comprehension my friend.

[GIF REACTION]

This is completely illogical. You gave a list of a certain type of violence in places that are not Iraq to prove something in Iraq.

Not logical and not common sense either.

Violence in the middle east does not equal suicide bombings which is a specific form of violence and relatively new. They are also usually associated with specific campaigns or groups. In WWII you had kamikazes, but since then. You saw it in Lebanon, in Israel. Sri Lanka terrorists was the leaders for quite a while. You did not see it in Afghanistan in the 1980's even though there was a war there and Al Qaeda formed during that war. The 1993 WTC bombing was not a suicide attack. Al Qaeda's first suicide bomb was in 1995 just 8 years before the Iraq war.

It was and is a fairly rare form of violence. Especially before the millenium.

https://aoav.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/suicide-attacks-graph2.png
I think something might have happened in 2003. I don't know. Not sure. Something might have happened. Hmmmmmm

[KevinNYC]

****ing Kevin... can you not read?

He said violence in the ME was practically non existent. Go back and read dipshit.
Still referring to your statement.
Not a single suicide attack in Iraq before 2003? I call bullshit.

Which you said was backed up by common sense.

[KevinNYC]

Fiddy, what was afghanistan like for the previous 20 years ?

[brownmamba00]

Divide and conquer

Just look at Libya it was one of the top countries in Africa under Khaddafis rule but the West did him dirty the same way they did with Saddam when they lost control over him.

[UK2K]

So that must be the reason half of the refugees that enter my country are Afghani? On top of that ISIS is taking over the Taliban, once every U.S. soldier is gone, guess whats going to happen?

Then they either stand up for themselves, or they don't. At this point, whether the Afghan Army wants to defend the Afghan people is on them, not us.


Kurds, you say? Look what is your buddy Turkey doing to Kurds in their own country, the year is 2015 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=705_1450405151

I was never friends with Turkey.


BTW WHO gave Saddam the chemical weapons? The west :roll: Hypocrisy again
So that means we forced him to use them? If I gave you a gun, and you took the gun and shot up a nursing home, who gets charged?



I said "close to non-existatest", reading comprehension my friend.

Ok, what's your idea of 'close to non-existent'? (You spelled it wrong now, twice). Cause I've shown you that, even in a time before global travel was so simple and the design and availability of explosives wasn't as widely available as it is now, there was still 'terror' attacks all the time.

And if it wasn't Dickface McGoo blowing himself up, it was your leader shooting missiles at you. If you think that's better, ok then.

[UK2K]

Still referring to your statement.
Not a single suicide attack in Iraq before 2003? I call bullshit.

Which you said was backed up by common sense.

Just kidding, I stand corrected.

[KevinNYC]

:cheers:
Just kidding, I stand corrected.

[Dresta]

This is completely illogical. You gave a list of a certain type of violence in places that are not Iraq to prove something in Iraq.

Not logical and not common sense either.

Violence in the middle east does not equal suicide bombings which is a specific form of violence and relatively new. They are also usually associated with specific campaigns or groups. In WWII you had kamikazes, but since then. You saw it in Lebanon, in Israel. Sri Lanka terrorists was the leaders for quite a while. You did not see it in Afghanistan in the 1980's even though there was a war there and Al Qaeda formed during that war. The 1993 WTC bombing was not a suicide attack. Al Qaeda's first suicide bomb was in 1995 just 8 years before the Iraq war.

It was and is a fairly rare form of violence. Especially before the millenium.

https://aoav.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/suicide-attacks-graph2.pngYeah, as i said: it was already trending that way, but the Iraq invasion massively accelerated the process (as did the attempts to topple Assad and Gaddafi).

[UK2K]

Yeah, as i said: it was already trending that way, but the Iraq invasion massively accelerated the process (as did the attempts to topple Assad and Gaddafi).

The removal of power from the oppressive governments accelerated the process.

Without a, 'big dog', in charge, people were willing to combat oppression. If the US government vanished right now, you would have hundreds of groups banding together to fight it out for power.

What happened when the Kurds tried to rise up under Sadaam? They were smashed. That's how he kept them in check. Now though, he's not around to gas them, so now they will fight to protect themselves.

[KevinNYC]

but the West did him dirty

Do you remember when the Libyan intervention happened? It happened after the UN Security Council passed a resolution Ghaddafi said he would honor a ceasefire, but actually kept bombing the rebels.

How many of these Security members are the West?

Bosnia

[KevinNYC]

on a related note the Libyans just formed a unity government which is hopeful.

https://img.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_1484w/2010-2019/Wires/Online/2015-12-17/AP/Images/MoroccoLibyaPeaceTalks-0dc7d.jpg?uuid=ax7lVqTgEeWDGL2MrtjFiA

[fiddy]

I was never friends with Turkey.

Well, i dont see your government demonizing Turkey, or any intentions of kicking them out of NATO.



So that means we forced him to use them? If I gave you a gun, and you took the gun and shot up a nursing home, who gets charged?
Well, your government used the fake excuse of WMD to wage an illegal war and invade Iraq, while it had previously provided them with of means of mass extermination, how does make any sense is beyond me.



(You spelled it wrong now, twice).
Sure about that?



Ok, what's your idea of 'close to non-existent'? Cause I've shown you that, even in a time before global travel was so simple and the design and availability of explosives wasn't as widely available as it is now, there was still 'terror' attacks all the time.
No there werent. Wide availability of explosives... while your government gave 500 million in military aid to.... terrorist in Syria


Fiddy, what was afghanistan like for the previous 20 years ?
They were run by terrorist, which were sponsored by the U.S. via Saudi Arabia via Pakistan during the USSR Afghanistan war?

[fiddy]

The removal of power from the oppressive governments accelerated the process.

Without a, 'big dog', in charge, people were willing to combat oppression. If the US government vanished right now, you would have hundreds of groups banding together to fight it out for power.

What happened when the Kurds tried to rise up under Sadaam? They were smashed. That's how he kept them in check. Now though, he's not around to gas them, so now they will fight to protect themselves.

They will fight for their independence, which Turkey wont like at all. Saddam kept the country in check and people were used to the status quo and doing relatively fine.

[UK2K]

They will fight for their independence, which Turkey wont like at all. Saddam kept the country in check and people were used to the status quo and doing relatively fine.
Sadaam's people were doing relatively fine you mean? I agree.

[MMKM]

They will fight for their independence, which Turkey wont like at all. Saddam kept the country in check and people were used to the status quo and doing relatively fine.

By "kept the country in check" you mean he used chemical weapons on his people? Just clarifying