Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    "Illegal torture of hundreds of innocent middle easterners"? Can you hear yourself?

    What are you saying? That Ahmed, busy one morning opening his sewing macine repair shop is picked up for absolutely no reason by a marine snatch squad, handcuffed, blindfolded, and driven to a secluded cell, where he has electrodes attached to his balls......just for a laugh?

    Do you have any evidence at all to support this or do you just like typing the first thing that comen into your head?
    OK, I admit I'm getting a bit passionate about this and I'm maybe exaggerating a bit, and I'm sorry for that. I seem to be one of the last few remaining anti-war people in my group of friends so I can take it a bit too far. I apologise for getting a bit too involved. That said, a little respect wouldn't go amiss.
    I'm not saying that random people are picked up and electrocuted - you're putting words in my mouth. What I'm saying is, the US army's definition of "suspicious", when talking about a person, is very broad, and if they think someone knows something that they want to know then they will do pretty much anything to find that out.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by suspicious_fish)
    OK, I admit I'm getting a bit passionate about this and I'm maybe exaggerating a bit, and I'm sorry for that. I seem to be one of the last few remaining anti-war people in my group of friends so I can take it a bit too far. I apologise for getting a bit too involved. That said, a little respect wouldn't go amiss.
    I'm not saying that random people are picked up and electrocuted - you're putting words in my mouth. What I'm saying is, the US army's definition of "suspicious", when talking about a person, is very broad, and if they think someone knows something that they want to know then they will do pretty much anything to find that out.
    No, you're not saying that "random people are picked up and electrocuted" but you arev saying that hundreds of innocent people are being detained and tortured. How do you know?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    No, you're not saying that "random people are picked up and electrocuted" but you arev saying that hundreds of innocent people are being detained and tortured. How do you know?
    There were reports of it around the time that went largely ignored. I can't rememeber which papers - this was almost a year ago - but I remember reading them and being horrified.
    I'm not just making this up.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    hey look guys im half american and i dont appriciate that mabby the president was born with his head halfway up its arse but all that **** about depleated uranium waepons SO WHAT YOUD DONT ****IN SHOOT SUM1 SO THEY CAN GET BACK UP AND SAY OH SORRY OLD CHAP SHOULD I OF STAYED ON THE FLOOR AND PRETENDED TO DIE so stop bein such a bunch of fools
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anarchy Heaven)
    hey look guys im half american and i dont appriciate that mabby the president was born with his head halfway up its arse but all that **** about depleated uranium waepons SO WHAT YOUD DONT ****IN SHOOT SUM1 SO THEY CAN GET BACK UP AND SAY OH SORRY OLD CHAP SHOULD I OF STAYED ON THE FLOOR AND PRETENDED TO DIE so stop bein such a bunch of fools
    What we're discussing is whether it was right for people to fire the bullets in the first place.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This is absolutely appalling...

    America is a liberal country which promotes freedom of speech and expression, freedom of religion, free market values, the spread of democracy, equality between sexes and races, the rule of law, equality of opportunity, accountablity in politics, representative voting systems, anti-corruption legislation, wealth on the basis of merit.... and, as you all must know, the list is endless...

    Consider this when you try to argue that America is wrong to invade middle-eastern countries. Of those qualities listed above, there is not a single one that the former Iraq did not categorically oppose. And furthermore, while I am prepared to accept most aspects of culture, the islamic traditions across the middle east of religious supremecy, theocracy and autocracty, illiberalism, male domincance over females (to the extent that they must cover their faces in public), state-sponsored terrorism, torture, oppression, illegality of any anti-government action, pre-established classes of citizens, monoploies, state control..... come on, this list is also endless....

    While it is fine to criticise certain policies, it is absolutely unacceptable to criticise the role that the US plays in the world. I challenge any of you to come up with the same criticisms in fifty years time when China is the biggest superpower in the world, and the kind American values which currently exist in our soceities are oppressed by an all powerful government which is not accountable to anyone. You are wholly hypocritical to criticise America and still embrace democracy and all of our values at the same time. It is not an exageration to say that the most positive factor in our lives is that the USA is the world's sole superpower. Furthermore, I actively encourage the forceful spread of democracy and liberalism while we it still remains the most powerful ideology in the world.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tomhitchings)
    This is absolutely appalling...

    America is a liberal country which promotes freedom of speech and expression, freedom of religion, free market values, the spread of democracy, equality between sexes and races, the rule of law, equality of opportunity, accountablity in politics, representative voting systems, anti-corruption legislation, wealth on the basis of merit.... and, as you all must know, the list is endless...

    Consider this when you try to argue that America is wrong to invade middle-eastern countries. Of those qualities listed above, there is not a single one that the former Iraq did not categorically oppose. And furthermore, while I am prepared to accept most aspects of culture, the islamic traditions across the middle east of religious supremecy, theocracy and autocracty, illiberalism, male domincance over females (to the extent that they must cover their faces in public), state-sponsored terrorism, torture, oppression, illegality of any anti-government action, pre-established classes of citizens, monoploies, state control..... come on, this list is also endless....

    While it is fine to criticise certain policies, it is absolutely unacceptable to criticise the role that the US plays in the world. I challenge any of you to come up with the same criticisms in fifty years time when China is the biggest superpower in the world, and the kind American values which currently exist in our soceities are oppressed by an all powerful government which is not accountable to anyone. You are wholly hypocritical to criticise America and still embrace democracy and all of our values at the same time. It is not an exageration to say that the most positive factor in our lives is that the USA is the world's sole superpower. Furthermore, I actively encourage the forceful spread of democracy and liberalism while we it still remains the most powerful ideology in the world.
    An impressive speech! It's good to see someone thinking hard about this stuff, and you make a very good argument.
    I think maybe I've come across wrong in this whole thing; I do not believe America to be evil in any way and I do agree with (almost) all of the values you list above, and I'm not criticising them wholesale, but I AM criticising their foreign policy.
    I do NOT believe America to be the most positive influence on our lives. Whilst they have undoubtedly been good, American imperialism, like British imperialism before it, has been responsible for the mass squashing of many cultures, and in order for some to realise the American Dream, countless others must suffer greatly. This may be a criticism of capitalism and the free market in general, but I bring it up here because America is based on those values, and their living as they do has had global influence that the majority of Americans, in my experience, choose to ignore.

    This is a very, VERY important point: if you read nothing else here read this: theocracy, autocracty, illiberalism, male domincance over females and all the other things you state are NOT Islamic traditions. This is a GRAVE error, and one frequently made. Although I'm not a Muslim myself I have studied Islam at length, and true Islam actively condemns all of those things, especially male dominance over women; it is explicitly stated in the Qu'ran that women and men are equal. Please understand this!! NOTHING you list in that second paragraph is endorsed by Islam.
    Because Islam is the religion enforced on that area by the government, people often assume that everything that goes on there must be controlled by that religion. That is not true; Saddam's dictatorship enforced all those things you listed, and Islam; Islam does not enforce those things in any way.

    The distinction between democracy and America is one that must be made; you can be democratic without being American, so you can embrace democracy without embracing America; this is what I do.

    As for enforcing democracy on people who do not want it..... I'm undecided. To me it seems arrogant to assume that our system of government is superior to all others, and more than obnoxious to violently impose that on another nation, but I know that there are arguments to be made for it. I have to think more about it before coming down on one side.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Then how do you explain the fact that in a lot of countries where those things are prevalent, Islam is the official religion? Are you saying they aren't linked in the slightest?
    I wouldn't go so far as to say that they are unlinked. But read on.
    There are parts of Islam that are quite militant and so appeal to dictators, or those who wish to achieve drastic political ends. If you have a popultion of very religious believers and then tell them that what you are ordering them to do is a part of that religion, then they are likely to go along with you. It can be hard to verify the truth of what religious texts actually say if your country is very poor and many people are illiterate.
    There are also parts of Islam that it is easy to deliberately misinterpret if you wish to supress a particular group. For example, the Qur'an says that men and women are equal in spirit and intellect, but have distincet roles. It then goes on to describe those roles, but not in a lot of detail, so someone with a particular end could fill in those details with whatever suits them.
    It is also worth considering that often the dictatorship comes first, and then Islam is enforced.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Islam says the only laws are those written in the Koran.
    Not true. Both the Qu’ran and the Hadith state that for a Muslim, the laws of the country they live in come before Islamic laws, eg in Islam you can pracrise bigamy, but NOT if the country you live in forbids it.
    Scuse me being slow, bloody busy server....
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vertago)
    all war sucks! im american, but i have to admit almost everything said on this thread it true! sad, but true! the US has its reasons tho....
    Thank you vertago, you seem to understand that the power which america has gained has corrupted it and ultimately caused it to think it has the right the police the world with impunity.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Well that makes sense if the bigamy law was established after Islam was introduced to that country, or if a Muslim moved to a non-Islamic country. But, if a country is founded on strict Islam that law won't be enforced surely.
    I'm not sure I understand..... the bigamy law was established along with the rest of the laws of Islam, in 622 AD.
    Few countries are founded on strict Islamic laws, although some countries do have similiar laws, and in those countries it's likely that bigamy would be part of civil law too.
    Does that help? I don't think I understood.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wiwarin_mir)
    Thank you vertago, you seem to understand that the power which america has gained has corrupted it and ultimately caused it to think it has the right the police the world with impunity.
    A bit simplistic, surely?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Good point. Maybe America should start saying "oh **** em all....not our problem"

    Makes sense to me (and probably the hundreds of American families who have lost a family member fighting for the liberty of a country thousands of miles away)

    Mind you, of course if America did do that people would soon start bleating about how the most powerful nation on earth failed to intervene to stop genocide in this country/that country.
    true! note WW2 and WW1, but perhaps this is a different scale. if the iraqi people has requested that sadam be taken out, fair doos.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ]{ingnik)
    true! note WW2 and WW1, but perhaps this is a different scale. if the iraqi people has requested that sadam be taken out, fair doos.
    Oh come on, america doesn't do things for the the benifit of other countries, they do everything for themselves, to safeguard their interests. The vietnamese didn't ask for the americans to intervene, nor the the koreans, they went in anyway.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wiwarin_mir)
    Oh come on, america doesn't do things for the the benifit of other countries, they do everything for themselves, to safeguard their interests. The vietnamese didn't ask for the americans to intervene, nor the the koreans, they went in anyway.
    oh absolutely, which is why the war in iraq was compltely unjustified seeing as they didnt even have evidence sufficient for an attack. what im saying is, america could justify or perhaps excuse the war if the iraqis HAD asked, which of course, they didnt.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ]{ingnik)
    oh absolutely, which is why the war in iraq was compltely unjustified seeing as they didnt even have evidence sufficient for an attack. what im saying is, america could justify or perhaps excuse the war if the iraqis HAD asked, which of course, they didnt.
    Well what do you expect froma country which tries to surpress any nuclear or biological weaponary other than their own.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by piginapoke)
    Name a country that does things purely for the benefit of other countries.
    Well, the fact that countries were not doing things for their own benifit at the start of world war 1, many countries got sucked into it, simply because of treaties.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fred0202)
    If he was "barbaric", I would welcome it.
    yeah lol y wouldn't u want that?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wiwarin_mir)
    Oh come on, america doesn't do things for the the benifit of other countries, they do everything for themselves, to safeguard their interests. The vietnamese didn't ask for the americans to intervene, nor the the koreans, they went in anyway.
    oh yeah we didn't start war on terror to protect the world, join WW2 to stop communism in europe, (and beat japan) try Help south vietnam from being totally communist yeah we have never helped anyone b4 :rolleyes:

    Also u say something needs to be done about america. I am sick of being steriotyped. America has a whole does not support all this war, its Bsuh and his government. Your preching to the converted.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Whilst i agree with the jist of your other arguments and general anti-american military-industrial complex rants, i feel as i a resident of Northern Ireland i must dispute your claims of american backing of the IRA.
    Whilst it cannot be doubted that Irish American support has, and continues to bankroll Sinn Féin/IRA this represents only a small amount of the total section of the america who considers itself to be of Irish heritage (an estimated 23 million), there has never been any evidence to show funding of theIRA by any American Government.
    In fact if you study the history of the revolutinary conflict you will see that the very foundations of the IRA were established in Paris and America in 1858 with the foundation of the Fenian movement and the IRB (Irish republican brotherhood), throughout the second half of the 19th century the flow of irish immigrants conspired to increase support and in 1867 there were plans being made for demobbed Irish soldiers from the Union army to return to Ireland to fight for Irish Independence.
    Indeed the irony of this whole situation is that the roots of this mentality lie in An Granta Mór (The Great Famine) of 1845-51 which left a generation of Irishmen embittered about the British and their response to the Famine, indeed those such as John Mitchel have argued that 'God sent the potato blight but the British created the famine' seeing it as an engineered genocide. Many of these people left Ireland for a better life in America with an idealised view of Ireland and a deep hatred of it's British opressors, this in turn transformed itself into support for the revolutionary forms of nationalism.
    At the Paris Peace conference of 1919 Woodrow Wilson rejected Ireland's plea for a hearing and its right to sef determination, conspiring to support with Lloyd George and his duplicitous Irish policies. This was demonstrated what a farce Wilson's 14 points really where and show that they only applied to the defeated.
    In more recent times Sinn Féin politicians have regularly been denied visas for travel in america for fear that they will use it to illicitly fund the IRA, they have also tried a number or IRA members in recent years for arms smuggling and on an interesting side note the CIA compiled a specific file on John Lennon to investgate claims he was funding the IRA. To claim that America has funded the IRA is not only untrue but is also hurtful to all those who have been affected by a conflict which already has more than enough untruths, claims and counterclaims.
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.