Video of Iraqi Insurgent being interogatted

And by the definition of terrorism above as stated in US documents, how is the US NOT a supporter of terrorists? How is it that we "destroyed" the klan, yet they still exist? How is it that the FBI attacked the klan, yet no lynchings were prosecuted, even as many lynchers took photos next to the lynched person and made postcards? While I feel deeply grateful for being an American, and feel that the US has one of the freest governments in the world, I would be wrong in not pointing out those unjust and heinous acts committed by the US government. Who are we to exercise some supreme authority over other governments, overthrow elected leaders because they are deemed as a threat to our hegemony, destroy the sovereignty of other nations, and resort to support of murderous insurrections and coups?

---

"The plain and painful truth is that on any reasonable definition of terrorism, taken literally, the United States and its friends are the major supporters, sponsers, and perpetrators of terrorist incidents in the world today...many, probably most, significant instances of terrorism are supported, if not organized, by the U.S., its partners, and their client states" (George 1991:1-2).

So if we are so evil and our government is so corrupt, then why are you not fighting against it?Why do you feel grateful for "being an America", part of a murderous soceity killing and oppressing people all over the world, spreading violence and terrorism? Is that some sort of sicko feeling? grateful to be on the side winning, beating down poor people and oppressing them horribly?Why do you feel so grateful for that?

Typical bait and switch. You still haven't replied to the question of what constitutes a "Primary supporter of Terrorism".As far as fighting against this government, why should I need to fight against it (I assume you mean violently)? First, it has yet to come to that level of despotism. Second, thankfully they haven't taken my right to vote away from me. Third, I can do the research and have the resources available to make those decisions I consider to be moral and just. Last, and not least, I abhor violence. While I understand the necessity of violent action especially in self-defense, I would prefer to take the route of compassion and compromise. I appreciate what the founders of this government had in mind when they created the constitution. While I recognize that our form of government can be a strong force for good, I am not so naive to believe that it is perfect (ie. not corrupt) or necessarily the "best" form of government. There are a lot of problems that we, as a 'free' society, need to work on. The power of corporations in our government is one.Can I not be grateful for what I have, yet hope for something better?It is slightly offensive to me that you feel I should just be grateful about this government and keep my mouth shut? Do I have no right to protest?This message has been edited by DBlevins, 08-27-2005 11:28 PM

---

"The plain and painful truth is that on any reasonable definition of terrorism, taken literally, the United States and its friends are the major supporters, sponsers, and perpetrators of terrorist incidents in the world today...many, probably most, significant instances of terrorism are supported, if not organized, by the U.S., its partners, and their client states" (George 1991:1-2).

I never said you should keep your mouth shut. It is slightly offensive to me that you hold the same views towards America as myself in the sense that it can be a force for good and evil, and yet somehow come off as holier than thou and hurl accusations towards me.Go back and read my posts. I don't have time to argue against your straw-man.

Do you even understand the term strawman?

Perhaps I have gotten the wrong impression. If so, I apologize. I had read your posts as a condemnation of my position toward what this government does and has been doing. This seemed to me to be implying that I should be greatful for what I have and to be silent about the wrongs.I'm not sure how you think I would come out as holier than thou? I never said I was better than you or anyone else. I presented my opinion and was looking for an answer from you concerning your definition of what constitutes a "Primary supporter of terror". As of yet, you haven't presented any definition from which we can continue the debate.I have reread your posts and I apologize if I wrongly accused you.Shall we continue? I look forward to your definition.

---

"The plain and painful truth is that on any reasonable definition of terrorism, taken literally, the United States and its friends are the major supporters, sponsers, and perpetrators of terrorist incidents in the world today...many, probably most, significant instances of terrorism are supported, if not organized, by the U.S., its partners, and their client states" (George 1991:1-2).

The lone superpower.If you are going to list the negatives, why not list the positives?

---

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

Being the lone superpower does not justify abusing our power by acting as the world bully. If fact it behooves us to use our power wisely or we will lose respect. We can afford to not be loved in the world, we cannot afford to not be respected. The world will not respect a superpower who engages in foolish uses of power just because we can. Furthermore, being a superpower is not the same as being all powerful. Vietnam should have taught us that. It wasn't another superpower that defeated us in Vietnam. It was our own hubris in intervening in a civil war. Unfortunately our leaders are repeating many of the Vietnam mistakes in Iraq. Too bad for us, Iraq, and the world. NO one wins except the terrorists. Do you seriously think the terrorists were sorry that we invaded Iraq or that they would be happy to see us leave?This message has been edited by deerbreh, 08-29-2005 12:21 PM

Again, if you are going to lable us as a big bully, why don't you show the other side of the coin for all the US has done for the world? I don't care what the UN thinks about us. I don't care what a french politician thinks about us. I do care that my daughter can board an airplane in the future without fear of it being highjacked and flown into a building.People don't respect weakness and comprimise. They respect strength and force. They may not like us, but they'll respect the fact that we put foot to ass when we said we would (unlike the 14 other times Saddam broke UN resolutions)and other governments will take us seriously when we put them on notice. Got any facts to back that up?This message has been edited by Tal, 08-29-2005 01:40 PM

---

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

In that case you should look at some of the opinion polls showing respect for the US has dived since Bush came to power and the country "got tough".Also you could look at opinion polls in countries where the US has used most force - Iraq and Afghanistan for example. If you are right, respect for the US should be higher in Iraq and Afghanistan than in countries like France or Italy where the US has been compromising more.The polls tell a very different story. People don't respect people who kick the shit out of them.mick

Still believe in polls eh?I thought you might have learned your lesson after 2000.I am sure the pollsters asked the leaders of countries hostile to the US about their opinions.I'm sure that poll said, "Yes, they hate the US, but they respect that if they step out of line, the US will kick their door in."I'm sure those polls exist.Oh...you were talking about the polls in the US?Link the polls!This message has been edited by Tal, 08-29-2005 02:29 PM

---

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

sadly, yes. i still believe in polls.

quote:

---

Main Entry: 1poll
Pronunciation: 'pOl
Function: noun

​

4 a (1) : the casting or recording of the votes of a body of persons (2) : a counting of votes cast b : the place where votes are cast or recorded -- usually used in plural c : the period of time during which votes may be cast at an election d : the total number of votes recorded

---

i am a democrat. i believe in democracy:

​

quote:

---

Main Entry: democracy
Pronunciation: di-'m-kr&-sE
Function: noun

​

1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

---

​

polls are the heart of democracy. they are the voice of the people, and the votes cast. i believe in polls, and this is one thing i will fight to the death for.

​

[added by edit] it is a sad day when the "lesson" to be learned is that peoples' voice doesn't matter, and that the polls are moot. and it is a sad day when people who claim to promote american freedoms do not stand for this basic and supposedly inalienable right, in favor of a regime "elected" in a court of law -- and THEN have the audacity to complain about judical activism as if it's something.

​

This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 08-29-2005 02:40 PM

​

---

אָרַח

Maybe I didn't clarify my point. I don't think the pollsters ask most of their questions in a totally objective way. Most are skewed to support the pollster's bias.I believe TradesportsYou want to know what people really believe? Have them put their money where their mouth is. Tradesports correctly predicted the 2004 elections:

Put stock in your opinion, and you'll see what people REALLY think. Not some pollster.

---

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein

Yes.1) Not being truthful to the American people about the reason for the war, not being truthful about the progress of the war, not being truthful about what constitutes "victory".2) Mistaking body counts of enemy dead for progress without accounting for how many enemy/potential enemy actually exist.3) Mistaking territory held for progress when fighting insurgents.4) Little understanding of the enemy, where their support is coming from, and how many enemy actually exist as well as how many supporters the enemy has in country as well as in surrounding countries.5) No plan for victory and really no idea of what constitutes victory.6) Civilian and military leadership not listening to commanders on the ground.7) Meaningless talk about "democracy" while supporting leaders who are anything but democrats.8) Not recognizing the civil war aspects of the conflict.9) Not recognizing that we are an occupying army and that we will always be viewed as such as long as we are there.10) No viable plan for training an Iraqi army and police force. It does no good to train people and in fact does harm if we don't know whether they are with us or with the insurgents.