The little light bulb goes on...

[280plus]

Furthermore. I just heard Obama and Baghdad have agreed to a 16 month timetable for withdrawal of our troops. The previous administration had said 2010. Let's do the math, 16 months from now it'll be ohhh, 2010. Where is the big difference?  A little fancy rewording? Politics as usual baby, Nothing has "changed".

[280plus]

The Russians, the Russians are placing nuke tipped missles somewhere (sorry can't recall) in order to be able to defeat any missle defense systems that might become available in the area. Didn't the Russians just endorse Obama? And this country elected him? Smooth move people. 

[Manedwolf]

The Russians, the Russians are placing nuke tipped missles somewhere (sorry can't recall) in order to be able to defeat any missle defense systems that might become available in the area. Didn't the Russians just endorse Obama? And this country elected him? Smooth move people. 

Chess.

[roo_ster]

Chess.

Yep, & BHO is not even up to speed on checkers.

[Antibubba]

"We should all just hug, I'm all about a hug.  No one can want to kill you when you hug them."

Were you at least able to explain to her that, as she is a woman, they would not allow her to shake hands with them, let alone be hugged?

Gah.  Stupid is stupid.

[griz]

I submit that we are still an occupying force despite the fact that we consider our actions there to be benevolent.  We did go in with an army, caught and prosocuted their (admittedly self appointed) leader, and haven't left yet.  As a counterpoint, if Canada invaded Vermont, would it be an occupation if most Canadians and a third of Vermonters thought they were doing the right thing?

[Manedwolf]

I submit that we are still an occupying force despite the fact that we consider our actions there to be benevolent.  We did go in with an army, caught and prosocuted their (admittedly self appointed) leader, and haven't left yet.  As a counterpoint, if Canada invaded Vermont, would it be an occupation if most Canadians and a third of Vermonters thought they were doing the right thing?

That apples to oranges comparison has been soundly debunked and defenestrated so damned long ago it's not even funny. I can't BELIEVE someone would be so out of touch as to trot that out again. Jesus H. Christ... 

[seeker_two]

I submit that we are still an occupying force.....

I just wish we'd ACT like one....where the heck are our reparations ('cause I don't want to pay for nation-building no matter what President is in office), free-flowing oil, al-Sadr's head on a pike as an example of non-cooperation, and our permanent military superbase?....

[griz]

That apples to oranges comparison has been soundly debunked and defenestrated so damned long ago it's not even funny. I can't BELIEVE someone would be so out of touch as to trot that out again. Jesus H. Christ... 

Perhaps you could provide a link to the defenestration.  Kinda hard to respond when all you're really saying is I'm out of touch.

[280plus]

I submit that we are still an occupying force

It all depends how you want to define the term or phrase "occupying force". Literally, yes, we are occupying space in these places but for their immediate gain, not ours. Our gain is perceived to be the long term goal of stability in the region. Big difference there.

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

The US has troops in Germany and Italy.  Does that mean we're occupying those countries, too?

 

[280plus]

Why yes it does, someone has to keep those facist bastards in line. 

[GigaBuist]

The US has troops in Germany and Italy.  Does that mean we're occupying those countries, too?

 

I wonder what would happen if the citizenry over there started blowing up soldiers.

[De Selby]

If I'm not mistaken there are those who interpret their Koran as reading just that. That Islam must be forced upon those who refuse to believe or they must be killed. So maybe not ALL of them are acting specifically on this but there are those out there who are. Don't forget the guys running around caning their women because they may have shown a bit more skin than thought to be appropriate. Don't think for a secong they wouldn't want to come here and impose that same sort of rule on us Westerners. Just because we are there doesn't make us an occupying force.

Well, there might be some muslims who say that, but certainly Bin Laden has never (at least in public) made the case that the Quran requires converting everyone to Islam.  His theological argument is that, as long as the land of muslims is occupied, he has a right to attack anywhere in the world in response.  I have never found a single speech, writing, or document by an Al Qaeda figure or any other terrorist that claims the whole world must be made Muslim by force.

[Gewehr98]

I think the whole thing was a mistake, and Saddam shouldn't have been executed by their government.  As the insurgency rose, we should've pardoned the dictator, put him back into power, and along with Uday and Qusay the= three of them could have resumed feeding people head-first into chipper shredders.  The Iraqi people who personally thanked me for deposing the old bird when I spent my government-paid vacation over there?  Screw 'em, it's obvious they weren't sincere anyway. 

Then Muqtada "Roundboy" al-Sadr could see how his little Mahdi Army would fare against the reinstated Ba'ath regime, since he was a virtual nobody before the Coalition Provisional Authority. Nature abhors a vacuum, and all that...

[280plus]

  I have never found a single speech, writing, or document by an Al Qaeda figure or any other terrorist that claims the whole world must be made Muslim by force.

Then you ain't seen everything I'd guess. And again we go back to how you want to define the word "occupy". Obviously Bin Laden has his and it doesn't coincide with mine, at least when it's attached to the word "forces" anyways.

[Manedwolf]

I have never found a single speech, writing, or document by an Al Qaeda figure or any other terrorist that claims the whole world must be made Muslim by force.

That happens when you selectively deny things you don't like being faced with, yes. You just say it doesn't exist, and voila!, it doesn't. Right?

[De Selby]

I'd be happy for anyone to show me the bin laden writing, speech, or any communication whatsoever wherein he says "the Quran commands me to kill everyone who isn't Muslim and convert the whole world."  Indeed, in most of his speeches he says specifically that his terrorism is justified by "occupations" and that he isn't attacking places like Sweden (that's his example country) because Sweden doesn't have an army in Arab countries.

Like I said though, I'm open to disproof.  If anyone knows of the communication where this "kill everyone who isn't muslim" theology is stated, I'll be the first to read it.

[De Selby]

Then you ain't seen everything I'd guess. And again we go back to how you want to define the word "occupy". Obviously Bin Laden has his and it doesn't coincide with mine, at least when it's attached to the word "forces" anyways.

Bin Laden cites specifically the 1991 war, military aid to Israel, and the presence of uniformed troops on the Arabian peninsula.  He doesn't give general criteria; probably hasn't thought it through that far.  Instead, he mentions some specific incident in all of the speeches that he gives to "justify" his murder campaign.

The man is clearly a murderer.  That doesn't mean, however, that any statement about his intentions is true.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Like I said though, I'm open to disproof.  If anyone knows of the communication where this "kill everyone who isn't muslim" theology is stated, I'll be the first to read it.


and extra points if its not of wnd or newsmax

[griz]

Found this:

According to Hague law:

Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised.

In other words, an armed force is considered in charge if it is, in fact, in charge. Once the occupying force can no longer control the territory, it is no longer an occupying force and is once again simply "the enemy." An occupying force has the absolute responsibility of providing for the basic needs of the people under its control, including food, clothing, shelter, medical attention, and the maintenance of law and order. An occupying force cannot just sit by as occupied territories are looted -- in almost all cases, the laws that were in place in the territory before occupation are still in place after occupation. It is only the enforcer that has changed.

Source: http://science.howstuffworks.com/rules-of-war4.htm

So if you accept the rules of the Geneva Convention we at least were and occupying force until we threw out the leaders, and weather we are now or not is determined by the will of the people of Iraq.

[280plus]

Like I said though, I'm open to disproof.  If anyone knows of the communication where this "kill everyone who isn't muslim" theology is stated, I'll be the first to read it.

First off, I never said it was specifically Bin Laden that has said this and unfortunately I can't go back and locate something I saw  probably a couple years ago but I definitely remember the Koran being quoted from in terms relating to justfying the Jihad that has been declared. It basically stated that unbelievers are infidel and if they can't be converted they should be killed and this is what at least SOME of our enemies are using to justify their actions. If anyone here knows the Koran at all I'm sure they can locate the passage for us.

[280plus]

So if you accept the rules of the Geneva Convention we at least were and occupying force until we threw out the leaders, and weather we are now or not is determined by the will of the people of Iraq.

Yes and as far as we know the Iraqi people, or the majority of them, are ok with our being there and want us to stay at least another 16 months to help maintain order. The Afghanis, apparently, are too. Bin Laden is using the term "occupying forces" to try and indicate that we are somehow hostile to the populations of those countries, when in fact we are not. He's twisting the term to fit his propaganda needs in order to further his goal, which is basically to induce his followers to kill as many of us as they can. 

[K Frame]

Odd that they get so teechy about supposed repression at the hands of infidels when they have the "how to" manual of their own... And have done so.



"Slay them wherever ye find them and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter." - 2:191


O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends; they are friends of each other. Those of you who make them his friends is one of them. God does not guide an unjust people. - 5:54


Fight against them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme.

[Iain]

Mike, please, you know better.

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loves not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if they cease, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevails justice and faith in God; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression" (2:190-193).

Is that quite what it seems to be?

1 Samuel 17 v 46 "... the LORD will deliver you into my hands, and I'll strike you down and cut off your head... "

Only that is David speaking to Goliath. Context is everything.