Spot the difference

I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner.

I have never despaired as much as I do today. Th World is being fucked in every level by those fuckers (Blair and Bush). Everything they have done since sept 11th has been to make the world a far more dangerous place

Is that the reason, mastronikolas? Is it Blair's following of Bush? I seem to recall an al Qaeda attack in France that was stopped by police work just recently. It was part of the same attack that was broken up in the UK and Spain, where the groups had the raisin poison. Since France is fighting against the US, it doesn't seem as though being anti-US, pro-Middle East is the answer.

Al Qaeda wants the west dead. It wants the Judeo-Christian world to be subverted under the thumb of the Muslim world. This is merely a continuation of the conflict between these spheres that has been going on for over 1000 years. Actually, there is a really good book on the subject by the foremost Middle Eastern scholar in the world, Bernard Lewis. It's called What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response.

Raisin poison? Sounds yummy.

There is a growing sentiment for Western nations to band together and wipe out Islam.

I won't focus on the links between al Qaeda and Iraq, because they don't matter to some people, and others don't believe them. Instead, I will focus on why attacking Iraq could lessen terrorist attacks.
1. Iraq currently gives 25,000 dollars to the families of members of Hezbollah, Hamas, and al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade who blow themselves up. Getting rid of this monetary incentive may lessen the number of suicide bombings, although it will not stop it all together.
2. One of the biggest problems al Qaeda has with us (besides the fact we are infidels) is that we have troops in the holy land. Unlike a lot of Muslims, he sees the entire Arabian Penninsula as holy, not just Mecca and Medina. Get our troops out of there (via moving them to Iraq), and that issue goes away.
3. Saddam Hussein is an outcast in the Arab world. He is a secular leader, and everyone knows he's not a nice guy. If we are serious about taking him out, we will have support from the Arabs (in fact, we do have their support) even though there will most likely be protests from their citizens. They will take the protests as long as the war is prosecuted blitzkrieg-style. The primary concern of the Arabs is the citizens. If we get in there and it turns out to be Gulf War I #2, a lot of those concerns will dissipate.
One way or another, our best move will be to move troops out of Saudi Arabia. It probably won't stop al Qaeda, but it could very well slow down the recruiting process.

Really? Do you have a link or something? I'd like to see what they have to say.

Find the thread by Clarence Beaks about the Conservative PAC convention Cheney spoke at where they sold bumper stickers reading No Islam = No Terrorists.

Hmmm...there are 2800 people who might disagree.

Maybe not stop, but it will make a lot of difference. That's one of the main things that got him riled up. I don't think he had much of a problem with us until we put troops there.

So this Conservative PAC, it speaks for the majority of the west?

Whatever...

Personally, I think the religion of Islam is without merit as a peaceful religion. If my sources are correct the word itself basically stands for "subjugation", not of the individual to god, but of the masses to Islam itself.

Plus, with their rules against women, etc...

And the ridiculous nature of it's historical origions.

Fuck them, I'm against most religions anyway. However, anybody who claims that Islam is a religion of peace is either lying or practicing a diluted and corrupted version of Islam.

This happens with all religions. Hell, Buddhism isn't even a religion, it's a philosophy. Is it now a religion? Yes. Why? Because it was corrupted over time by people with an agenda. Buddha was just some guy who had a plan, but now he's glorified as being holy by many. Total bullshit.

I think it is, but Wahabbiism has corrupted the view over the past hundred years or so.

It's no accident that bin Laden and his ilk are products of Wahabbiism.

I think as long as the situation in Iraq remains the same, the attention of the world stays away from the oppressive regimes of the Arabian Penninsula. What can we do to the Saudis, other than allow them to cut off the lifeblood of the world? When Saddam is gone, the path will be opened to reforming Saudi Arabia because they will not be able to hold oil over our heads as a WMD (which, in all reality, it is) - the excess from Iraq (an increase of around 4.5 bbs a day), combined with increased Soviet output and Venesuela coming back on line will marginalize them to some degree.

Every conservative has almost completely ignored mastronikolas's point, and he is not the first to bring it up. You push these people too far (and man, Arab's have been pushed for a long time now, from imperialism to the cold war) and this nation will become Israel. We will have a bomb blowing up on every corner. The easiest way to do that is to increase our presence in that region. You think "liberating" Iraq is going to help us? Also, if Bush says the Iraqi oil is the Iraqi people's oil...and this is not a war about oil...than how can we do have the right to do anything with it? I guess thats irrelevant.

Saddam has a stranglehold on his people now, unless we make Iraq a military state after he is taken out, Iraq'll be worse than even Afghanistan. Plus it is large and close enough to spill over throughout the Middle East.

I don't see how that would be the case. Arabs have been pushed, all the way back to the crusades, but they have also pushed back all the way back to the crusades. This has been an epic clash of cultures, and it isn't something that will be solved by doing nothing. Again, I site Bernard Lewis as an authority on this issue. A protracted increased presence would be problematic, however, looking at the US plan for Iraq, we would not have a major force in there for too terribly long - just long enough to help the Iraqis establish the rule of law and a functioning, stable government. Afterward, we probably would have troops stationed in Iraq, but compensating for this would be no troops in Saudi Arabia, where the holy sites and therefore biggest beefs are.
<strong> How are we doing anything with the oil? Iraq makes contracts with various oil companies to get the oil to world markets, there are no restrictions on how much oil they pump, and they can get (at $30/barrel) $180 million a day at capacity to rebuild society. That's also oil that is out on the world market, smoothing out any problems we might have with other Arab states (the Saudis). Iraq will be a US military state, but the military will withdraw slowly as democratic institutions are tested, proven stable, and become the norm. See what we did in Japan and Europe post World War II for an example.