Forum Thread

The Manchester bombing


Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 30 of 40 Prev 1 2 3 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    JC -- Yes I also agree with you as Islam is largely practiced in the USA. They're called "modernists" as opposed to fundamentalists. Furthermore, their "interpretation" of the Qur'an is largely taken from that part written by Muhammad while in Mecca...a period of peaceful tranquility which was reflected in his writings. The Medina Qur'an written in a more violent time reflects harsher "interpretation" contradicting the words written in the earlier Mecca writings. This is no different than the Bible which has many inconsistencies and contradictions throughout and resulting in so many different denominations of Christianity.

    However, in Saudi Arabia, you will not find any modernists, at least not publicly. To push the modernist view is blasphemy subject to lashings or death. Their ancient version of Islam is called Wahhabism. I've talked about it elsewhere.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Again Jared, I have to correct you: The US invaded Afghanistan as well Iraq, Vietnam, Korea, Syria, sent troops to: Lybia, Cuba, Somalia. Yemen, Mali and lots of other nations. NATO was dragged into later by the US because of the "existing protection agreements" of both the US and NATO. Thus an total lie that NATO invaded Afghanistan. Let's be very clear NATO has never invaded countries or started wars since its start up after WWII. Only England invaded the Falklands; but England is as nuts as they are here, so that is expected.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: Again Jared, I have to correct you: The US invaded Afghanistan as well Iraq, Vietnam, Korea, Syria, sent troops to: Lybia, Cuba, Somalia. Yemen, Mali and lots of other nations. NATO was dragged into later by the US because of the "existing protection agreements" of both the US and NATO. Thus an total lie that NATO invaded Afghanistan. Let's be very clear NATO has never invaded countries or started wars since its start up after WWII. Only England invaded the Falklands; but England is as nuts as they are here, so that is expected.

    I don't want to get in an "I'm right, you're wrong off" with you, but you're just flat out wrong.

    The International Security Assistance Force was a NATO led operation that had the full backing of the UN Security Council and was responsible for training the Afghan security forces, rebuilding the country, and fighting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

    I was against the Iraq War, wasn't alive for Vietnam and Korea, and was against sending ground troops into Syria (which, by the way, Obama did not do.)

    Libya was another NATO!!! led operation, Cuba was well before I was born (and another country that Obama began engaging with), Somalia was another UN sanctioned operation, Yemen is another failed state that America is in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation, and Operation Serval was actually a French led operation in Mali.


    I think you forget that I was against the Iraq War before it was cool to be against the Iraq War. You know who I started following during those days? A young state senator from Illinois who was ardently against the war. Not many people in this country are able to say that the first person they ever voted for was Barack Obama...to be a United States Senator from Illinois.

    You might call me young and naive, but it was my generation that had to go off and fight in those far off lands. I was lucky enough to not have to go because we didn't have a draft and my parents were wealthy enough to make it so I could go to college without having to sign up for the military or the National Guard.

    This is why you frustrate me. I'm not an idiot who doesn't understand history or modern day events. I would have been against the Korean and Vietnam conflicts if I were alive and I would have been for the Cuban military blockade if I were alive in 1962. I was and still am against sending ground troops into Syria and I was and still am against the Iraq War.

    Just because we disagree on certain things doesn't mean I'm some blabbering idiot who doesn't know what I'm talking about.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Dock, thanks you are correct. NATO on their own never invaded any countries. Also their role was an supporting role, never an attacking role. In all cases it was the US who took the lead and asked the assistance of NATO. Everything was indeed under direct US command. Sorry Jared you are dead wrong.

    Like I said all of the invasions as well military actions were orchestrated by the US; not NATO. The European countries certainly are not interested to start wars all over; the US is.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Why do we always get into a religion discussion when some one from the Muslim faith does a mass murder , but we never talk about religion when some right wing nut job blows up some clinic or the OKC building? Isn't Christianity just as deadly as any other religion? Catholicism has issues. Maybe we should ban all religions and that would bring us peace. Or just promote the he k out of Buddism , they don't seem violent ,unless ,I just haven't learned yet about how they can be violent also , but I doubt it.

    The fat idiot has nothing to do with the murder of 22 children or the rest. He is busy trying to survive a nine day vacation .

    I'm for banning religion.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote: Dates are important concerning NATO, ISAF, UK and the USA.

    Yes. Dates are important. So is doing more research than copying and pasting a Wikipedia article.

    What you might have not noticed is that you actually proved my point. The ISAF was a NATO led operation conducted between December 20, 2001 and December 28, 2014. Their original mandate was to secure the capital city of Kabul and help establish the new Afghan government. Their mandate was expanded in 2003 to include all of Afghanistan.

    This was the first time in NATO's history where they invoked Article 5 of the treaty. They did so on September 12, 2001.

    This is why it's important to dig deeper than just copying and pasting things. Wikipedia is a good for many things, but taking whatever is said on a Wikipedia page without verifying what you're reading leads to believe things that aren't accurate.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: Dock, thanks you are correct. NATO on their own never invaded any countries. Also their role was an supporting role, never an attacking role. In all cases it was the US who took the lead and asked the assistance of NATO. Everything was indeed under direct US command. Sorry Jared you are dead wrong.

    This is just simply not true. NATO invoked Article 5 on September 12, 2001. Their leading role in Afghanistan was sanctioned by a UN mandate on December 20, 2001 and ended on December 28, 2014.

    I know it's impossible for you to accept this, but the awesome thing about facts is that they are just that - facts.

    Dutch Wrote: Like I said all of the invasions as well military actions were orchestrated by the US; not NATO. The European countries certainly are not interested to start wars all over; the US is.

    You really seem to have very little knowledge of what NATO is or what they have done since their inception in 1949. I'd encourage you to read up on all of their operations throughout their 60 plus year history and then come back and tell me if you still believe they are some US puppet.


  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Maindawg Wrote: Why do we always get into a religion discussion when some one from the Muslim faith does a mass murder , but we never talk about religion when some right wing nut job blows up some clinic or the OKC building? Isn't Christianity just as deadly as any other religion?

    Yes, Christianity is just as deadly as any other religion. Judaism ranks right up there too. But for whatever reason (I wonder what it can be!), Islam is the only religion where we use the word terrorism when a mass murder takes place.

    It's true that blowing yourself up in a crowded theater is an act of terrorism, but so is indiscriminately slaughtering 28 elementary school children. It's true that flying planes into skyscrapers is an act of terrorism, but so is stealing a religions holy land and putting its inhabitants under apartheid like conditions.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote: Please give us a link providing proof that NATO invaded a nation, I'd like to read about it. I did a Google search and no results were found: countries nato has invaded

    NATO Operations and missions: past and present

    Invade: (of an armed force or its commander) enter (a country or region) so as to subjugate or occupy it.

    NATO forces invaded Afghanistan and occupied its capitol city for a decade.

    NATO forces invaded Kosovo (with 4,500 soldiers still there!) in June 1999.

    NATO forces invaded Macedonia in 2001.

    Need I go on?


    One persons peace keeping is another persons invasion. A peace keeping mission requires an armed foreign entity to forcibly occupy lands. Occupying a land is part of the literal definition of invasion.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote: Securing a city or province is hardly an invasion. If you read the wiki part that I posted, it states that in October of 2001, operation enduring freedom was launched by the USA and the UK, it wasn't till December 2001 when NATO launched ISAF to secure Kabul, that's 2 months later.

    Yes it is! How is sending tens of thousands of armed personnel into the capital city of a county not an invasion?! That's akin to saying the Allied Forces didn't invade Germany during WWII because all they were really trying to do was secure Berlin.

    Words have meaning and definitions matter.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I think NATO is a powerful group that knows who butters their bread. I believe they follow the leader and they do what powerful influential members suggest. NATO doesn't attack countries, The USA does.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    T,J. and Dock; thanks for setting things straight. Indeed when the UN was still used as an " regulator" in conflicts, sure then NATO may have sent people as an UN did direct. Since the US has actually "dumped" the UN and uses their "power" (read arrogance) as they wish all around the world, the UN has become worthless. The other fact which Jared nor Trump does not seem to understand is that NATO "helps" the US in all their stupid "war" efforts, which cost the EU lots of money and resources. Thus when is the US going to pay for these services??? The EU did not ask for all these invasions and wars. The "agreement' says that the one party only is committed to help if the other party is "attacked". Since not one country "attacked/invaded" the US, then officially NATO does not have to help the US with their initiated wars and conflicts. Thus Trump should keep his big mouth shut about NATO and start paying them and thanking them; not the other way around.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Yes Dock again that is exactly the case; let alone what we are still spending there as well Afghanistan, Millions per day. Also the cost for NATO is awful high, but never an thank you. I guess Trumps new budget does not account for those continuous wars either.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The fact is that Trump's insane, warmongering foreign policy is the same as past administrations because of the influence of the Military Industrial Complex and AIPAC and the result of these criminal warmongering policies is whole countries being devastated, 100's of thousands of innocent children, women and men being slaughtered and millions of refugees being created and it is my opinion that all those funding, supporting and involved in these wars should be tried for war crimes.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: Yes Dock again that is exactly the case; let alone what we are still spending there as well Afghanistan, Millions per day. Also the cost for NATO is awful high, but never an thank you. I guess Trumps new budget does not account for those continuous wars either.
    What's really odd about this attack is that authorities have said that the perp was on their radar (watch list) jeeze louise, if they knew about him, they must have known his associates too, when that broke on the news, I had a WTF? moment.