From 9/11 to the Arab Spring

[topcat 0]

10 years on from 9/11 today, the Arab spring and capture of Bin Laden bookending the decade perfectly and Hitch's writings are always worth a read. Think he has a book out too.

 

10 years on from 9/11 will be the 9th of November you cock!

No its not, the event happened in the US and therefore retains their method of dates, not ours. It was planned by Bin Laden to fall on this date so 9/11 would be used to describe it.

 

Anyway, fuck off back to Sunderland you shit-licking mackem prick.

 

 

don't live in sunderland you abuse riddled big mouthed fuckwit!

You're still a mackem cunt though.

 

The BBC call it 9/11 so given you called me a cock for referring to a cultural event how the most British of corporations refers to it, that makes you a deserving target for some honest abuse.

 

oh well then - all hail the BBC that most venerable of institutions for getting all americanised - why dont you nip down the 7-11 and buy some tampons and dry your fukkin eyes!

Aye, like i'm the one thats been through 3 boxes of Kleenex this weekend. 36,000 for Chelsea, Gyan prefers to play in an actual desert rather than a cultural one and bottom 3 by the end of the day. One box each.

 

 

don't live there and don't support them either you daft twat! better get your fkin tampons back out ya dobber!

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

The Empire fundamentally deserved a response against it, as an idea it was just wrong. How is blowing up people who had nothing to do with the Empire a relevant response? It's not. There's no excuse, it's not deserved. The IRA killed two kids outside McDonald's here, for what? How should people respond? Well look at someone like Parnell. That's how to do it, although he suffered the same proclivity for clunge as MLK and that finished him in Ireland.

 

Genuine question here, as I have no idea about this. What has been the response, in terms of terrorism, against the Belgian empire? That was supposedly the most brutal of the European empires, from what I've heard.

[PaddockLad 14585]

It doesn't surprise me that people want to kill Moore. He was very famous at that point, and he's quite an annoying bloke. All famous people seem to have utter nutters who want to kill them, of course that will be amplified if you go on the Oscars and start all that kerfuffle. Equally he'll have been celebrated in other parts of the country. I don't like Moore, though some of his film work is good. His books are terrible. He's one of those blokes who you just look at and want to shoot, like Adrian Chiles and Big Brother contestants.

 

Don't you need folk like Moore though to be the antidote to the other foaming mouthed nutters in the US media who oppose everything he says though?....the best ("truest"?)way of thinking about these things is to pick and choose valid points from both sides. Going into Afghanistan could be justified in 2001, going into Iraq the following year was fuckin lunacy iyam.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

It doesn't surprise me that people want to kill Moore. He was very famous at that point, and he's quite an annoying bloke. All famous people seem to have utter nutters who want to kill them, of course that will be amplified if you go on the Oscars and start all that kerfuffle. Equally he'll have been celebrated in other parts of the country. I don't like Moore, though some of his film work is good. His books are terrible. He's one of those blokes who you just look at and want to shoot, like Adrian Chiles and Big Brother contestants.

The bit i quoted was just to give anecdotal support to the idea that Americans on the whole probably think Iraq was a mistake.

 

Yeah, probably. There's a problem with the level of discourse surrounding the conflict, and you can include Afghanistan in that. That's why Hitchens is really good, because he has raised the level of discourse, or at least made an attempt at it.

[ChezGiven 0]

@bungdan Dan Murphy

Using the low-end estimate of 110,000 dead civilians in Iraq war, Iraq has suffered a "9/11" once every 83 days since March '03.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

@bungdan Dan Murphy

Using the low-end estimate of 110,000 dead civilians in Iraq war, Iraq has suffered a "9/11" once every 83 days since March '03.

 

Saddam Hussein killed up to 100,000 civilians over a period of 3 years when he instigated a genocide of the Kurds, because he didn't like them.

 

Your turn again in civilian death top trumps.

Edited September 11, 2011 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt

[Park Life 70]

@bungdan Dan Murphy

Using the low-end estimate of 110,000 dead civilians in Iraq war, Iraq has suffered a "9/11" once every 83 days since March '03.

 

Saddam Hussein killed up to 100,000 civilians on a whim over a period of 3 years when he instigated a genocide of the Kurds.

 

Your turn again in civilian death top trumps.

 

Yeah it's alright cause someone else did badderer.

 

If you're including the 10 yr embargo of medicine and food its around half a million inc many children.

Edited September 11, 2011 by Park Life

[NJS 3978]

The Empire fundamentally deserved a response against it, as an idea it was just wrong. How is blowing up people who had nothing to do with the Empire a relevant response? It's not. There's no excuse, it's not deserved. The IRA killed two kids outside McDonald's here, for what? How should people respond? Well look at someone like Parnell. That's how to do it, although he suffered the same proclivity for clunge as MLK and that finished him in Ireland.

 

Genuine question here, as I have no idea about this. What has been the response, in terms of terrorism, against the Belgian empire? That was supposedly the most brutal of the European empires, from what I've heard.

 

I don't think the idea of an empire is wrong per se though I suppose historically subjugation has been a common theme. Some of the more "noble" claims for the British Empire are quite desirable imo though a lot of them only really took hold post independence. I don't cling to the idea that all cultures should be celebrated and respected no matter how shitty they are and the idea of a "superior" ideal isn't bad. I guess in reality though you couldn't have the imposition of cultures without some brutality - its the degree of acceptable brutality and subjugation that is debatable. I do remember reading that the Mongols despite their reputation, never imposed any religion on their conquests - interesting in the sense that but for an untimely death, they would have conquered Western Europe which would have led to a different age.

 

Of course the ideal form of resistance to oppression is the Parnell/Ghandi/MLK model but I can understand from a simple human nature pov how people like Mandela could become convinced that terrorism is the only way out no matter how immoral "on the ground".

[ChezGiven 0]

@bungdan Dan Murphy

Using the low-end estimate of 110,000 dead civilians in Iraq war, Iraq has suffered a "9/11" once every 83 days since March '03.

 

Saddam Hussein killed up to 100,000 civilians over a period of 3 years when he instigated a genocide of the Kurds, because he didn't like them.

 

Your turn again in civilian death top trumps.

@bungdan Dan Murphy

 

Adjusted for population, the social impact is more like a 9/11 in Iraq every 18 days.

 

 

Its not a laughing matter

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Well, non-violent resistance doesn't always work, that's true. Ghandi recommended the Jews try it with Hitler. Not so sure about that one, oy-yoy-yoy.

 

It's not like non-violent resistance and terrorism are the only two options though is it.

[Park Life 70]

Well, non-violent resistance doesn't always work, that's true. Ghandi recommended the Jews try it with Hitler. Not so sure about that one, oy-yoy-yoy.

 

It's not like non-violent resistance and terrorism are the only two options though is it.

 

SA was brought down primarily by sanctions.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

@bungdan Dan Murphy

Using the low-end estimate of 110,000 dead civilians in Iraq war, Iraq has suffered a "9/11" once every 83 days since March '03.

 

Saddam Hussein killed up to 100,000 civilians over a period of 3 years when he instigated a genocide of the Kurds, because he didn't like them.

 

Your turn again in civilian death top trumps.

@bungdan Dan Murphy

 

Adjusted for population, the social impact is more like a 9/11 in Iraq every 18 days.

 

 

Its not a laughing matter

 

Well it's ironic really because I assume that bloke is inferring the Americans have inflicted these '9/11's when in actual fact Al Quaeda forces have been responsible for a lot of the deaths. Of course what is never taken into consideration is the impact of several decades of totalitarian rule to the point where the society was a disaster waiting to happen, that's without the influence of Iran stirring up sectarian violence and Al Quaeda using it as a launching pad, having been flushed out of Afghanistan. Without the coalition there who knows how bad it would have got, it could have been another Ruanda (in the aftermath of Hussein's death).

Edited September 11, 2011 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt

[Park Life 70]

@bungdan Dan Murphy

Using the low-end estimate of 110,000 dead civilians in Iraq war, Iraq has suffered a "9/11" once every 83 days since March '03.

 

Saddam Hussein killed up to 100,000 civilians over a period of 3 years when he instigated a genocide of the Kurds, because he didn't like them.

 

Your turn again in civilian death top trumps.

@bungdan Dan Murphy

 

Adjusted for population, the social impact is more like a 9/11 in Iraq every 18 days.

 

 

Its not a laughing matter

 

Well it's ironic really because I assume that bloke is inferring the Americans have inflicted these '9/11's when in actual fact Al Quaeda forces have been responsible for a lot of the deaths. Of course what is never taken into consideration is the impact of several decades of totalitarian rule to the point where the society was a disaster waiting to happen, that's without the influence of Iran stirring up sectarian violence and Al Quaeda using it as a launching pad, having been flushed out of Afghanistan. Without the coalition there who knows how bad it would have got, it could have been another Ruanda (in the aftermath of Hussein's death).

 

Utter bollocks.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

What do you suppose would have happened after Hussein died Parky?

[Park Life 70]

What do you suppose would have happened after Hussein died Parky?

 

My longish post just dissapeared into an 'IPS DRIVE ERROR'....(Leazes has eaten it).

[Park Life 70]

What do you suppose would have happened after Hussein died Parky?

 

They would have sold bits of his beard for bread and medicine.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

What do you suppose would have happened after Hussein died Parky?

 

They would have sold bits of his beard for bread and medicine.

 

utter bollocks.

 

Oh no, wait, even better:

 

ZANY.

Edited September 11, 2011 by Kevin S. Assilleekunt

[Park Life 70]

What do you suppose would have happened after Hussein died Parky?

 

They would have sold bits of his beard for bread and medicine.

 

utter bollocks.

 

Oh no, wait, even better:

 

ZANY.

 

That's your monika fish face.

[Park Life 70]

The main group of the resistence in Iraq were the ex-soldiers once they were fired (a catastrophic descision by Paul Bremer).

 

Read at least one book on Iraq before you start talking shit about it.

[NJS 3978]

Well it's ironic really because I assume that bloke is inferring the Americans have inflicted these '9/11's when in actual fact Al Quaeda forces have been responsible for a lot of the deaths. Of course what is never taken into consideration is the impact of several decades of totalitarian rule to the point where the society was a disaster waiting to happen, that's without the influence of Iran stirring up sectarian violence and Al Quaeda using it as a launching pad, having been flushed out of Afghanistan. Without the coalition there who knows how bad it would have got, it could have been another Ruanda (in the aftermath of Hussein's death).

 

As a namby-pamby Leftie I fucking hate it when bollocks like "Bush and Blair killed a million Iraqis" is spouted. They certainly caused the shitpot (with obvious help from Saddam) but the notion that Western forces killed that number is shite. Seems like you can't mention the factional terrorism.

[Park Life 70]

Well it's ironic really because I assume that bloke is inferring the Americans have inflicted these '9/11's when in actual fact Al Quaeda forces have been responsible for a lot of the deaths. Of course what is never taken into consideration is the impact of several decades of totalitarian rule to the point where the society was a disaster waiting to happen, that's without the influence of Iran stirring up sectarian violence and Al Quaeda using it as a launching pad, having been flushed out of Afghanistan. Without the coalition there who knows how bad it would have got, it could have been another Ruanda (in the aftermath of Hussein's death).

 

As a namby-pamby Leftie I fucking hate it when bollocks like "Bush and Blair killed a million Iraqis" is spouted. They certainly caused the shitpot (with obvious help from Saddam) but the notion that Western forces killed that number is shite. Seems like you can't mention the factional terrorism.

 

Iran supported the shia in northern Iraq. What did anybody expext them to do sit back and grow daisies?

 

And the shia never had any links with Al Kidder.

 

And Iraq had 0 to do with 9/11.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

The main group of the resistence in Iraq were the ex-soldiers once they were fired (a catastrophic descision by Paul Bremer).

 

Read at least one book on Iraq before you start talking shit about it.

 

There's a counter argument by historians that the army was disintegrating anyway, I don't buy it fully, probably a mixture of both scenarios. What the fuck has that got to do with the question you have refused (you're incapable) to answer? You have just derailed a good thread until NJS has responded again, stay out of these threads until you've taken your meds, schlappschwanz.

[Park Life 70]

Iraq was a fictonal country created primarily by the British and once the totalitarian rule of SH was over it was bound to break up along sectarian lines. It's as simple as that.

[Park Life 70]

The main group of the resistence in Iraq were the ex-soldiers once they were fired (a catastrophic descision by Paul Bremer).

 

Read at least one book on Iraq before you start talking shit about it.

 

There's a counter argument by historians that the army was disintegrating anyway, I don't buy it fully, probably a mixture of both scenarios. What the fuck has that got to do with the question you have refused (you're incapable) to answer? You have just derailed a good thread until NJS has responded again, stay out of these threads until you've taken your meds, schlappschwanz.

 

I know you get moody when the Sunny Delight runs out.

 

The insurgency was primarily run by ex-officers from the old army and ex-soldiers with no money to feed their children. They knew where the arms caches were and they knew how to organise. The other wing was shia hit squads armed by Iran and a tiny tiny proportion was other arabs and Pakistanis and so on...Jihadding it.

Again, fuck all to do with Al Kidder in the scheme of things.

Edited September 11, 2011 by Park Life

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Well it's ironic really because I assume that bloke is inferring the Americans have inflicted these '9/11's when in actual fact Al Quaeda forces have been responsible for a lot of the deaths. Of course what is never taken into consideration is the impact of several decades of totalitarian rule to the point where the society was a disaster waiting to happen, that's without the influence of Iran stirring up sectarian violence and Al Quaeda using it as a launching pad, having been flushed out of Afghanistan. Without the coalition there who knows how bad it would have got, it could have been another Ruanda (in the aftermath of Hussein's death).

 

As a namby-pamby Leftie I fucking hate it when bollocks like "Bush and Blair killed a million Iraqis" is spouted. They certainly caused the shitpot (with obvious help from Saddam) but the notion that Western forces killed that number is shite. Seems like you can't mention the factional terrorism.

 

Aye, that's what prompted me to read further about Iraq, even about Saddam Hussein and his rise/reign. People shouting, "Hey mannn, Bush and Blair have the bloood of millions of innocent Iraqis on their hands just for OILLL MANNN. Not in my nammeee duddeee." I wasn't aware that they went to war on behalf of your name, you idiotic hippie numbskull.