Should america be bombed because of its invasion of iraq?
-
Some opinions and ideas on another thread made me realise that some people may think that because the US has taken millitary action in the islamic lands of afghanistan and iraq on two occasions recently,that it would be justified to bomb the US to take out the bush administration,or to cause retaliatory damage to the democracies that sanctioned these conflicts....This would also make 9-11,madrid and 7-7 possibly justified,as those countries had a hand in the aformentioned miiltary conflicts......I disagree totally....
What do the members say and why...? -
peace
if the US has the right to attack other countries, other countries (unfortunately for me) have a right to attack the US. And I'm sure that if the Afghanis or the Iraqis could have, they would have.
But why do you disagree?
It's good not to disagree with terrorism. That is killing of innocents. But if the US wants to start a WAR against another country, then they have the right to strike back. And since the country attacking first dictates the rules of the war (I suppose), and since the US has killed innocent civilians, the other country would have a right to do so too. I don't agree with "an eye for an eye" but that's what's fair. -
enquirer wrote
Some opinions and ideas on another thread....how many opinions and ideas in all?....by the time u posted there? -)
phoenix1 wrote
I don't agree with "an eye for an eye" but that's what's fair.does that mean u dont agree with being fair?....kidding -)
-
Salam.
USA attacked Afghanistan and Iraq and yes, then those countries have the right to attack USA in order to defend themselves but maybe it would be better not to return fire in a way of killing innocent Americans.
After all, innocent Americans, ordinary citizens are not the ones to blame or attack, what Iraq and Afgahanistan have the right is this attack CIA headquarters, Pentagon and other MILITARY installations, because atatcking a business building doesn't make sense becasue people such as lawyers, teachers .... etc., have nothing to do with this war.Eye for eye.
I think it's much better to be the bigger man and take the high road.
If the so called "terrorists" want to attack USA again, God forbid, they should attack only the military places or any other bases where soldiers are. In the war you fight soldiers not civilians.No offence to my American friends here.
Salam. -
Peace,
IMO... do the countries, invaded and attacked, have the right to retaliate, yes. Do I believe they should attack in the US/UK? No. I do believe, however, that they should do all in their power to push them out of their respective territories, by any and all means necessary.
-
Salam,
I think it's a BIG MISTAKE to attack US because that is what Bush wants, He wants a third world war.
-
swedenmajidah wrote
...because that is what Bush wants, He wants a third world war.i would say that's the last thing the terrorist would want...a full out war....he is more comfortable hiding behind alibis! (-
no sis...a world war is the last thing any american....with american interests(?).....would wish for...and ditto for bush...not in america's interest...but his own! -S
-
Salam,
I think it's a BIG MISTAKE to attack US because that is what Bush wants, He wants a third world war.Salam.
I agree.
I think Bush would like the terrorist to do anything, to provoke him so that he can have a really good reason to use all his soldeirs against "the bad guys".Salam.
-
Peace
We are commanded by the God to DEFEND ourselves. We are also commanded not to become aggressors. Therefore, an attack of any kind is unjustified. Violence is only used to the point where the particular aggressor stops attacking and leaves us in peace. Any more than that, and we run the risk of becoming the aggressive, arrogant opressors.
-
?Chickens Come Home To Roost? - Malcolm X
America's reason for invading Afghanistan was, Afghanistan's government (Taliban) was harboring Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, who were at the time alleged to be behind the 9-1-1 terror attacks (they had not taken responsibility for 9-1-1 until later). America's reasons for invading Iraq were Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Saddam defied the international world by denying weapons inspectors access to their alleged WMD arsenal, and Saddam committed war crimes against his own people and Iran during the Iran-Iraq war.
What America ignores however, is its role in the strengthening of Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, and Saddam. The US supported Osama bin Laden militarily and financially in driving the Soviet Union's military out of Afghanistan. George W. Bush was even a business partner of Osama's brother-in-law prior to Bush becoming President. As recently as 2001 (the year of 9-1-1) the US provided the Taliban with significant financial aide. This despite the oppressive practices of the Taliban, which the US was well aware of. The US sided with Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war by providing Iraq/Saddam with military intelligence and the chemical/biological weapons which were first used on the Iranian military and later on Iraqi citizens.
Prior to invading Afghanistan, the US demanded that the Taliban turn over Osama and al-Qaeda. The Taliban responded by asking for proof of their involvement in 9-1-1, which the US refused to provide. Now I don't like or endorse the Taliban, but they did what any government, including the US, would and should do, if one of its citizens was accused of a crime by another country and extradition was requested. They asked for proof. The US responded to this request of the Taliban by invading Afghanistan. In the process, thousands of innocent Afghanistan citizens were killed and Osama bin Laden/al-Qaeda escaped. The US was morally and legally wrong for this action.
The US invaded Iraq under the false pretense of Iraqi possession of WMD. We now know Iraq had no significant WMD's. So, this invasion was also immoral and illegal. Then, to make matters worse, they deposed Iraq's government and military and even had a major role in the hanging of Saddam. Saddam was accused of, tried for, convicted of, and executed for war crimes, which included the use of chemical/biological weapons. The very weapons Iraq acquired from the US. The US made sure these facts were not allowed in Saddam's trial. The US was morally and legally wrong for these actions.
Whatever comes back to the US for its immoral and illegal actions was earned by the US Government. I am not a terrorist or a supporter of terrorism. This is simply a case of "chickens coming home to roost".
Siddiq
The Chickens have come home to roost!
-
Salam.
USA attacked Afghanistan and Iraq and yes, then those countries have the right to attack USA in order to defend themselves but maybe it would be better not to return fire in a way of killing innocent Americans.
After all, innocent Americans, ordinary citizens are not the ones to blame or attack, what Iraq and Afgahanistan have the right is this attack CIA headquarters, Pentagon and other MILITARY installations, because atatcking a business building doesn't make sense becasue people such as lawyers, teachers .... etc., have nothing to do with this war.Eye for eye.
I think it's much better to be the bigger man and take the high road.
If the so called "terrorists" want to attack USA again, God forbid, they should attack only the military places or any other bases where soldiers are. In the war you fight soldiers not civilians.No offence to my American friends here.
Salam.I'm agreeing with Alen, the people have a right to defend themselves, but should only attack military targets. It is hard to find the true cause of the war or who is responsible, this war is dating back to the crusades and no one fighting is willing to talk which leads children into the war which just prolongs it.
I guess what I'm say is that both sides are equally responsible for this conflict, attempting to stop this war in one moment will just get it reignited. It will take a while of negotiantions to settle this. All we can do now is hope that the next generation is smart enough to end it.