world

Major Iraq city falls to Qaida-linked militants

60 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2014 AFP

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

60 Comments
Login to comment

So Al Qaeda is taking over Fallujah, so what else is new?? What are we supposed to expect?? Bush, both Sr and Jr did their best in messing up Iraq, all hell brakes loose and we are supposed to be surprised?? This is all part of a broader plan, to distabalize the Middle East, keep oil prices high and gets who will be laughing all the way to the bank $$$??

7 ( +11 / -4 )

America got tired of Iraq and was deceived to pack the tent for Afghanistan under the Teflon Obama. Well, the results are in: unending fiasco in Egypt, Syrian crisis that might spell to Lebanon, Iran, and now Iraq...what next? Iraq is a vital spot for stability in the region, not Afghanistan that soon will run over by the Taliban after Obama packs the tent again. War should be avoided at all cost, but policy miscalculation would bear grave consequences with no ending of bloodshed.

-11 ( +6 / -17 )

What about the Arab Spring and democracy and freedom spreading throughout the Middle East? /sarcasm.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"Obama packs the tent again. War should be avoided at all cost, but policy miscalculation would bear grave consequences with no ending of bloodshed."

The majority of US people support withdrawing from Iraq. Congress supports withdrawal AND the US military signed off and put forth the withdrawal strategy.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Mr.OBAMA is trying to get US troops the hell out of crap places in the world that idiot Bush Senior and Junior got us bogged down in!!!!!!!! Nice try Bgood!!

5 ( +10 / -5 )

Mr.OBAMA is trying to get US troops the hell out of crap places in the world that idiot Bush Senior and Junior got us bogged down in!!!!!!!! Nice try Bgood!!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

USA USA USA, Mission accomplished! Whoops!

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Just have them install another dictator, then go in and flatten the cities with air strikes.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

@Bgood41, so the mess in the Middle East is all Prssident Obama's fault???????? Ever hear of Bush Senior amd Junior!!!

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Seems to me the only really stable country in the ME is Iran. Yes, the axis of evil Iran. Obama and his team would do well to keep the communication lines open with Iran. And perhaps, just perhaps, America might start to learn that invading and bombing countries, trying to impose your will and virtues uninvited on other peoples, is not the way to go. Iraq was a stable country before the US invaded. If democratising Iraq was the reason to invade (not for the oil of course and the fictional WMD) , then I guess Saudi should be up next.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

How many young Americans did Bush, Cheney,Rumsfeld send off to their deaths to defend Fallujah? It's all been a waste, hasn't it.

Remember, they promised us that the "surge" of 2007 had consolidated the power of the Iraqi government and military. They were liars and they were wrong.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

America got tired of Iraq....

It is vital to remember that Obama had negotiated hard for a continued American presence with force status conditions similar to those in Japan but was rebuffed. You seem to be suggesting that Obama should have left American troops there with no legal status.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Pretend it's Syria and you won't really care anymore.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

The US oil and military industry gift that keeps on giving.

@JeffLee

How many young Americans did Bush, Cheney,Rumsfeld send off to their deaths to defend Fallujah? It's all been a waste, hasn't it.

Defend Fallujah?? When is destroying a town with depleted uranium an act of defence? Might not we also want to remember the many more people of Iraq who have been killed for corporate profit?

4 ( +9 / -5 )

Great job in 'liberating' Iraq huh?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

"USA USA USA, Mission accomplished! Whoops!"

"Great job in 'liberating' Iraq huh?"

Let's see if anyone else can fix Iraq. How about China, which has the world's biggest army? No? Russia? No? Germany? No? Next door neighbors Syria or Iran? Nah...

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

What most of you posters don't understand is the USA did what they had to do! You can't stop religious fanatics, you can't stop a religious war those people will just have to fight like dogs until they realize Allah is the same GOD.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz etc. What a complete mess they made of that region. 100,000s dead, al-Qaida firmly entrenched (not in Iraq before), other countries in the region becoming increasing unstable.

If you know your history, the USA has been engaged in phoney wars dating back to the Spanish American War (Which - The United States did quite well out of and gained several island possessions including Cuba, Puerto Rico, Guam and the Philippine islands. However, the USA did poorly in The Vietnam War and has had mixed results from the phoney invasion of Iraq. We should also remember that the CIA has been secretly killing political opponents and over throwing democratically elected governments for decades. September 11 - 1973 in Chile is text book example.

Back in Iraq, yes, the oil resources (still heavy protected and supported by US backed militias, Iraqi special forces and private contractors) were secured for mostly US companies. However TEAM BUSH/CHENEY clearly underestimated what would happen on the ground once Saddam was removed. The now meek and mild Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki, is almost as repressive as Saddam, curbing freedom of the press, arresting political opposition leaders etc. But little press is given to this.

They opened a can of worms, which turned out to be a barrel of multi headed snakes. There is no putting those snakes back in the barrel. But that does not matter to them, they and the US forces are long gone. The only people who have to worry about them are the poor people who live there and cannot "get out".

Under Saddam, the local population received very little benefit from the countries vast oil reserves, just as they receive none today. But has a local stall owner famously stated in an interview a few years back. "I hated Saddam, but at least under him we had running water and electricity and there were no extremists going around killing everyone, sometimes at random"

Yet, even after all of this, the US was recently "considering" the use of force against Syria. And really, would good would that do? Hundreds of people killed by more US missiles. Great propaganda material for extremists and the Syrian government. On the only positive note, perhaps maybe the US citizens have learnt that just like in Iraq, there is no black and white in Syria, no good guys verses bad guys. The idiotic "your either with us or against us" line is for morons. Its not a western movie. This is real life and there are a million shades of grey.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

In reference to invading Iraq, I remember Colin Powell saying, "If you break it, it's yours".

Wel ,the the U.S. looked over its shoulder, made sure the shop staff was busy, put the broken country back on the shelf and walked out the door.

Probably what I'd do if I could get away with it.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

"But as a local stall owner famously stated in an interview a few years back. "I hated Saddam, but at least under him we had running water and electricity and there were no extremists going around killing everyone, sometimes at random"

Yes,things in Iraq were definitely better under the hated Saddam, heck, what's a few thousand Kurds gassed to death, a long war with Iran that killed hundreds of thosands, an invasion of Kuwait, no freedom...

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

@Serrano

They are not my words. They were the words of a local stall owner in Bagdad. I know this actually hard to believe, but actually day to day life for the normal Iraqi was better under Saddam. A very sad indictment of the current state of affairs.

And yes THANK YOU for pointing out the terrible fate suffered by the Kurds as a result of their support for the US in first "Gulf War". The supported the US and despite US promises support them, the US forces withdrew knowing full well what would happen to them. This was also why the Kurds were so reluctant and slow to support the BUSH/CHENEY team in the second Iraq war.

This, however, is not the first time the US has been responsible for engaging local populations and communities to support their "agenda" only to leave them to their fate once the US enviably "pulls out". The most visible example of this sort of "tactic" is what happened to the Hmong people in Cambodia / Vietnam during the Vietnam war. Recruited, trained and abandoned by the CIA "Special Activities Division" to fight a "secret war" in Vietnam. Just like the Kurds, the result was their near annihilation. In fact the USA eventually were forced to resettle 10,000's of Hmong into the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hmong_people

The Iran - Iraq war was engaged and orchestrated by the CIA as (payback for the US Embassy Hostage crisis and an attempt "regime change" back to a US friendlier "regime" - Think oil reserves). The Iraq Iran war (Sept 1980) started approximately 10 months after the hostage crisis began (Nov 1979) and 5 months after the US realised their "Standard Negotiations" were clearly not going to go anywhere with religious fanatics. i.e.: They could not buy nor kill them. This event along with the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in Dec 1979 (Where the United States would later establish, fund and train al-Qaida) marked the beginning of the current "modern age" of religious fanaticism.

If you need a visual reminder of any of this, you only have to watch the video of Rumsfield meeting with Saddam right in the middle of the war in 1983. Not only does Rumsfield praise Saddam as a "great Allay", but also assisted in supplying Iraq with components and materials to build and manufacture chemical weapons, which were used extensively in that war. These same plants manufactured the chemical weapons that were used against the Kurds and were later (reluctantly) decommissioned after the first gulf war.

Ironically, it was the remnants of these chemical weapons plants that BUSH/CHENEY/RUMSFIELD used as a reason for the second invasion of Iraq. This were the whole "Weapons of Mass Destruction" line was born. I watched Colin Powell's now infamous UN speech and presentation back in 2003. I clearly remember saying to myself during it - " This is complete BS / propaganda". It was clearly "The Gulf of Tonkin" all over again.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

This was also why the Kurds were so reluctant and slow to support the BUSH/CHENEY team in the second Iraq war.

LOL!

The Iran - Iraq war was engaged and orchestrated by the CIA

LOL!

Back in Iraq, yes, the oil resources were secured for mostly US companies.

LOL!

I could go on, but obviously you have a pre-written narrative and we're just the audience for this particular day. There are arguments for and against the invasion, both compelling, but you're a bit over the top for rational conversation.

But please, continue. I've responded so it's time for Part III of your speech.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

@SuperLib

This was also why the Kurds were so reluctant and slow to support the BUSH/CHENEY team in the second Iraq war. - LOL Laugh Out Loud. - Hilarious. I'm sure the Kurds thought so to.

"There are arguments for invasion" Yes, but unfortunately no rational or justifiable ones. Unless you are a follow and believer of Fox News.

Anyway, whats the point, back to watching cats on Youtube.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

The irony here is that Al Qaeda had almost no presence in Iraq before Bush & co decided to invade - with one of the reasons given being to destroy the (then non-existent) Al Qaeda forces in Iraq. Now the country is becoming an Al Qaeda stronghold. Just one more reason why Bush was the worst president ever. Also a reason why countries shouldn't make 'pre-emptive strikes'.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

we live in interesting times....

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The US really made a mess of this country, didn't they?

There would have been FAR less bloodshed if they had just let Hussein get on with it.

After all, he had NOTHING to do with 9/11 or any terrorism.

Bush and Cheney lied and bulls**tted the US into laying that country and hundreds of thousands of innocents to waste.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Sad how Obama has turned out to be a total disaster of a president for the states.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

If by that you mean the best president in decades, then yes, he's awesome.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

However TEAM BUSH/CHENEY clearly underestimated what would happen on the ground once Saddam was removed.

I don't think they underestimated anything. They knew exactly what would happened, and planned for it.

A few days after 911, I was tutoring a student at my university in History. We got to talking about the attack (false flag IMO), I told her then that the US will be attacking Iraq. It wasn't difficult to understand they way these psychopaths think. I made it a point to watch Colin Powell on C-Span deliver his speech to the UN about Iraq's chemical weapons. I just had to watch "The Big Lie" live.

Obama, Bush, etc. They're all the same. Until my country, the US, wakes up to the evil that our corporate/wall street/Federal Reserve/ $$$$$$government is, nothing will change. They'll keep hitting Ctrl-P until it all falls apart. Then, I hope, I'll be able to again, be proud of my country. Happy New Year all

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Because there was no "strongman" like Saddam to keep folks in line? Or could it possibly be the fact that the sunni and Shiites can't pull up their big boy britches in their fight for power over each other to focus on uniting against the Islamists.... A house divided against itself will fall. There is no confidence in them because they can't pull together and protect their country for all of them instead of just one side or the other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Have you heard of "order through chaos"? If not, look it up. Although Iraq had its own repressive government, at least it was functional and predictable. But those serving the financial interests got us into wars for the sake of fleecing the US Government of billions, (if not trillions), of dollars. The price of oil went up sky high. It was all planned actions just like General Wesley Clark stated. Hear it from his own words: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8YtF76s-yM

2 ( +2 / -0 )

An interesting side note. A couple of key factors in radicalising al-Qaida against the west and in particular the US, happened when the Russians pulled out of Afghanistan (1989) and al-Qaida awoke to find that the CIA support had suddenly disappeared along with the supply of weapons and money. They also would discover that within 9 months US troops and CIA advisors had been deployed and stationed in Saudi Arabia (Operation Desert Shield and then later through Operation Southern Watch), not that far from Islam's holiest sites - Medina and Mecca. Although religious fanaticism had been growing steadily in the region, mostly thanks to Iran's influence (since the return of Ayatollah Khomeini, in 1979) and Israel's wars of incursion (starting with Lebanon in 82), I don't think anyone in the west (US in particular) really understood the impact of all those "snaps and photos" that the US troops stationed there would have. Seeing photos of US service women (in particular) standing unveiled (in some cases barely clothed) in front of Islam's holiest sites was only destined to radicalise thousands, if not hundreds of thousands. Remember, we are talking about a society where woman are not even allowed to drive or walk the streets unaccompanied by a male.

US troops remained stationed in Saudi Arabia until 2003. CIA and military advisors remain.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Come and listen to a story about a man named Jed

A poor mountaineer, barely kept his family fed,

Then one day he was shootin at some food,

And up through the ground came a bubblin crude.

Oil that is, black gold, Texas tea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Al Qaida was non-existent in Iraq until America came in and forced democracy on them.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Not to defend the Iraq invasion but who could have predicted the outcome? It is so easy to play the blame game in retrospect.

For the Obama supporters here....has the region improved or declined in the last five years? Add Libya to Obama's resume also.

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Over 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed in the past 10 years.

Almost 4,500 US soldiers.

About 300 coalition soldiers.

All for what?

All based on a lie the US sold to others. Still no WMDs to be found.

It would be pretty hard not to call it a crime.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Not to defend the Iraq invasion but who could have predicted the outcome? It is so easy to play the blame game in retrospect.

It was easy to play it ahead of time too. The whole reason for invading Iraq was because they 'definitely had chemical weapons'. The weapons instructors were in Iraq, and being given unfettered access, but because they weren't finding the ultimately non-existent chemical weapons, the US was claiming that they were hiding them from the inspectors. So they decided to invade unilaterally, without the backing of the UN. All based on lies.

So this is karma. The US invaded a sovereign nation who had not attacked them, based on lies, and then left behind a crap-hole that is now becoming a bastion of the enemy of the US. If that's not karma then I don't know what is. And Americans wonder why their country is so hated in the world. Well this is just one example of many.

For the Obama supporters here....has the region improved or declined in the last five years?

Well the Americans have left Iraq, so that's a definite improvement. However if you extend that timeline to 13 years, then Iraq is much, much worse off. And it's all the fault of the US, because they panicked when 9/11 happened, and then went on to do the exact same thing to another country that was done to them - invaded without provocation and without justification.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Not to defend the Iraq invasion but who could have predicted the outcome? It is so easy to play the blame game in retrospect.

Even easier to duck responsibility after the fact, apparently.

Who could have predicted the outcome? Oh, please! There were so many indicators that the rush to war was a disaster in the making. It's not like we didn't have so many civil conflicts, even relatively recent ones - Northern Ireland, Yugoslavia etc. - and Iraq's own modern history to learn from and clue us to what could happen.

If, like Serrano, you cheerled the rush to invade and occupy Iraq, whether you're a Republican or Democrat, you have a share of responsibility - for the 4,487 dead servicemen, the destroyed families, the tens of billions of treasure squandered, the years lost opportunity for

Bush - responsible (but not single-handedly) for perhaps the worst strategic mistake in U.S. history.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Bush! Dick Cheney and Donny Rumsfeld and they are classy guys! With lots of blood on their hands!!

4 ( +5 / -1 )

9/11 triggered the Afghanistan occupation. Which is a stalemate. I for one was satisfied with the bombings only for the Bin Laden supporters. The Taliban did not attack USA. A US occupation was not nessasarry.

Iraq....I never wanted that and I always suspected it was a deal with Israel to invade. Israel has a lot of influence in the USA. Sadam Husein was a terrible dictator. It seems the peoples in that part of the world need brutal dictator leadership sad to say. Qadaffi maintained control in Libya. Syria, Egypt, and Yemen were not the hotbeds they are today.

Obama has done nothing to improve the reagion. It has clearly became more unstable. I am surprised Afghanistan is still occupied. As I see it nothing is gained by prolonging an exit.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Mark

Not to defend the Iraq invasion but who could have predicted the outcome?

The outcome was predicted in many books and articles before and after the invasion.

The Taliban offered to give up Bin laden if the US could show proof of his hand in the attack. The US declined and invaded. Like I said, understanding these psychopaths is easy. 911 was a false flag.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Stanngerland: The whole reason for invading Iraq was because they 'definitely had chemical weapons'. The weapons instructors were in Iraq, and being given unfettered access, but because they weren't finding the ultimately non-existent chemical weapons, the US was claiming that they were hiding them from the inspectors. So they decided to invade unilaterally, without the backing of the UN. All based on lies.

False narrative that has been told so many times it's been accepted as fact. Saddam had a duty to verify that he had destroyed his chemical weapons. He did not. He played a cat and mouse game with the UN because he didn't want Iran to see that he had completely disarmed. Even the head UN weapons inspector thought Iraq still had WMDs at the start of the war.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Fallujah? Really not a surprise considering how the people of Fallujah were treated by U.S. troops in 2003, as in being shot to death for violating curfew and throwing some rocks. So lots of them have joined or helped or are at least neutral to America's arch-enemy al-Qaida. Would have to be to take the city. Not overly surprised.

How many young Americans did Bush, Cheney,Rumsfeld send off to their deaths to defend Fallujah? It's all been a waste, hasn't it.

Oh yeah, JeffLee. Those poor, poor young Americans who voluntarily signed up to fight America's wars of aggression, as if the history of Vietnam War were a state secret they had no idea about. Yeah, never mind all those dead civilian men women and children. Its those poor, sweet young war volunteers we need to lament, especially the ones who shot people to death for violating curfew in their own country, and city of Fallujah.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

So, how did that introduction of democracy work out, Mr. Bush? When will our politicians learn that removing a secular dictator from an islamic country does not bring "democracy", it brings the islamist zealots to power.

A leasson that Obama should have learned from the disastrous failurs of his support for the string of "Arab spring" revolts which brought the Muslim Brotherhood aka Al Quaeda to power all over North Africa. But like Bush, he has learned nothing. The West continues the same folly.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Thanks, GWB! Iraq was anything but ideal before the illegal invasion, but now it's pretty clear it did absolutely nothing good for the nation. Glad you can sit at the ranch and pretend you had nothing to do with it when you were the cause.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

What is going on in Iraq has nothing to do with todays out come this would have happened whether or not the US went in these are religious nuts people would have died anyways all you posters blaming the US and ranting and going off the subject if you really want to blame a country blame Saudia Arabia thats where all that involves come from from the 911 bombers all the way to Osama bin Laden all Arabs stop readting intto all the blah blah blah and pointing the blame these are religious nuts I dare any of you to go public and curse the Koran and I bet you would have to run for your life. Again this is all about religion and that is one thing you cannot kill.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

"Thanks, GWB! Iraq was anything but ideal before the illegal invasion, but now it's pretty clear it did absolutely nothing good for the nation"

I dunno, no more crippling U.N. sanctions, no more wars against their neighbors Kuwait or Iran, free elections have been held...

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Since we all know that Bush and Cheney are the criminals who brought about the Iraq massacre (I still can't call it a war), and the continuing violence in this country, how come they haven't been held responsible?

Their crimes fill thick books, yet they are still free.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

With Saddam, Iraq was a mess not under US control. Now it is a mess under US control. Results for the population: nil, result for the oil hungry US: positive.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

"With Saddam, Iraq was a mess not under US control. Now it is a mess under US control."

Newsflash for Open Minded - Iraq is not under U.S. control.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Look on the bright side, the American public and American President have learned a blood lesson from Bush administration on both wars of Iraq and Afghan - the supreme military might of the US can’t and won’t necessarily aid American influence in a long run. In addition, the falling American soldiers and the deaths of hundreds and thousands of innocent civilians were sacrificed for almost nothing; the sole winner was the defense complex.

Hopefully, Japanese government led by hawkish Abe would act prudently on the issues of territorial disputes with Japanese neighboring counties.

Two things are proved to be true after Iraqi and Afghanistan wars. 1.War is hell. 2. Any American presidents after Bush will think twice before getting involved in a large scaled armed commitment.

The implication for Japan is that Abe’s high hope for American’s defense treaty commitment might not be delivered at the time Japan really needs. So, working on peace and commerce is far better route to choose that to prepare for a shadaw war.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@SerranoJ - I dunno, no more crippling U.N. sanctions, no more wars against their neighbors Kuwait

Kuwait City was originally part of what is now called modern day "Iraq" - Southern Basra back then. It was curved and divided up by the British after the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WW1. This was done partly due to the endless supply of oil reserves being discovered there, but mainly because the British did not trust the tribes / factions north of Basra and by establishing Kuwait as a separate state limited those from the north from having any real access (i.e.: land) to the gulf. In short they wanted to eliminate any potential threat to British naval power in the gulf from remnants or factions still loyal to the Ottomans that might possibly re-emerge. Iraq's invasion of Kuwait is a lot more complicated than simply tribal blood lines. A major factor was that Kuwait funded Iraq's war against Iran (The Persians - it's all tribal) by paying the USA (and others) in oil for arms deals. While all the time running up a huge tab which in the end it presented to Iraq and asked to be paid. Things went down hill from there.

The French did the same with Syria. The cut off a prime piece of land called Lebanon. Every wondered why there is such a huge Syria influence in Lebanon? Well thats because deep down it was originally part of Syria. Religion was the key factor here. Lots of pockets of Christians - partly based on the travels of Jesus. Bloody civil wars and sectarian violence made the headlines for years. Add the US and Israel into the mix, and you get embassy bombings, wars of incursion and the formation of Hezbollah (backed by Iran), who are now also fighting in Syria on the side of the Syria Government.

What people and governments in the west simply do not understand is that everything in the region is run on bloodline and tribal affiliations. Just remember a British civil servant once sat down with a map of Arabia, had a cup of tea, took out a wooden ruler and divided up the whole region to suit the "western powers" of the day.

Similar to what the communists did. They created a country called Yugoslavia comprising of various ethnic groups who basically hated each other. It all work fine as long as the strong man (Tito- he was pretty clever actually) ruled with an iron fist. As soon has he passed away, it turned into chaos and ethnic cleansing. Now we have Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia etc.

The real problem in the middle east is that there are all these "made up countries" established by an English civil servant (Yes including Palestine / Israel) full of people who just don't get on.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Janes, the "importance" of conflicts in the Middle East is ranked by how much rich Westerners can point the finger at each other. The same goes for the rest of the world. That's why this thread on Iraq gets more posts than all other conflicts combined: you can put the US in your sights. There aren't many fingers to point in Syria so it's largely ignored while more die there than in Iraq with no end in sight. Africa is the worst....millions dead but Westerners can't place blame on each other so talking about it is of no use.

Your posts make sense only when we think of Middle Easterners as children who are not responsible for their own actions. Apparently "hundreds of thousands" of Arabs were "radicalized" by pictures of women in front of holy sites without being covered from head to toe. That's your way of stripping them of responsibility for their actions: we caused it. I'm guessing that for every excessive Arab/Persian action you can explain it as a reaction to something that we've done. You think of them as children that are never responsible. Or worse, you think of them as people who so easily turn to radicalism that we need to walk on eggshells around them. In your eyes every Muslim must be very close to crossing the line into terrorism.

They kill each other on a daily basis with bombs because that's what they do and that's what they teach their children. It's not because Israel is involved in Lebanon. A vast majority of Muslim violence is against other Muslims but that is pushed aside while you talk about the CIA. I'm guessing the current violence in Lebanon worries you since there's no direct path to the US or Israel. You'll need time to create a narrative but my guess is you'll succeed in the end.

Guys like you come and go. Soon you'll be off to a new board to "educate" the masses about the evils of the West.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

"Your posts make sense only when we think of Middle Easterners as children who are not responsible for their own actions."

I think its more like he has a grasp of human psychology 101. You cannot raise a person in hell and expect him to be an angel at 18. The British did all they could to ensure those people never stop trying to kill one another. You sit there and expect them pull themselves up by the boot straps. But every time they begin to smarten up, a western country comes in to reset the clock to zero. Iran had gotten a fine democracy going, so the CIA went in to muck it up with Operation Ajax. America invaded Iraq and had every opportunity to reverse the meddling of the British and divide Iraq along tribal lines. But America didn't because that would risk too much stability and empowerment. which would be counter to U.S. oil and power interests.

Once more, you cannot raise a person in hell and expect them to become an angel at 18. Thus, feuds are hard to stop. Also, throw any person into a panic situation and watch civilized behavior fly out the window.

I don' t think you understand people. The greedy power brokers of the West do, or they have people who do on the payroll.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You cannot raise a person in hell and expect him to be an angel at 18.

Then don't raise people in hell. Educate them. You are responsible for your own actions.

The British did all they could to ensure those people never stop trying to kill one another.

They kill each other every day. Stop blaming other people.

Iran had gotten a fine democracy going

But...but....but......they can't handle democracy. Right?

But America didn't because that would risk too much stability and empowerment. which would be counter to U.S. oil and power interests.

Ah, so it's the Americans. And the Brits. And the oil companies. And the military-industrial complex. And the Israelis. Everyone but the Arabs/Persians.

Like I said.....rich Westerners only care about conflicts that they can use to call out each other. That's why Iraq is front page and Syria is ignored. If you can't blame the Western governments that you hate then you ignore the deaths.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@SuperLib

I think anyone with common sense can look at Iraq and say the current mess "they" are in was completely avoidable. Sensible normal people in the world should be angry about this. If for nothing else, so at least we can have a chance at being aware and of the warning signs that lead to these kinds of events. 100,00's needlessly killed and the US suffered terribly as well. It was a lose-lose outcome for all except the select few companies and individuals that profited from the war.

I do not condone nor make no excuses for ANYONE who uses or promotes violence. Why would I. But if you don't think that pictures of US service women flashing their breasts in front of Mecca or pictures of US service women pulling around naked male prisoners with dog leads and collars (i.e.: Abu Ghraib prison) are not going to radicalise people, then there is something wrong with your view of the world.

You should feel threatened or "guilty" about it, this is not a finger pointing exercise. Western powers and companies have always and are still meddling in the Middle East, Africa (Central) or South America. This is not "my opinion" this is history, fact, even you can search wiki-pedia surely.

We just lucky the US government does not spy on its citizens and Google "does no evil".

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I'm just sitting back and reading the usual suspects whining and..... yaaaawn making EVERY excuse to blame Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld and yet, these guys NEVER set foot in Iraq, let alone fight in a war, but all of a sudden, they come on JT try to argue points as if they know better how military policy and tactics work and they so why are they not working in the pentagon, what do you guys know that General Petraeus doesn't? Liberals always have this, we know better than ANY conservative, especially when it comes to national security! I won't even go into the social welfare of the country! Obama is Leaving Afghanistan and Iraq without any supporting security forces to oversee the transitions of the trained military and to ensure that the insurgency doesn't come back, but has he done that? No, quite the opposite, he decided to pack up, leave while these countries are in their fragile states just hope for the best that these people can take care of themselves, in other words, cut and run! This president is in charge, Afghanistan is HIS war, the war we should have been fighting and now what? The turn of events are mostly caused by the sectarian uprisings, but liberals as usual don't want to blame this president, even though, he's been in office for almost 6 years, it's not Obama's fault it never is, NEVER The man is impervious to corruption, because He IS the anointed one. Please continue with your vitriol and fantasy condemnation of the previous administration and give high marks to our president, the same president that won a Nobel for....nothing but bring himself. I'll continue to read and laugh at the one-sided hollow comments.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

JanesBlonde: But if you don't think that pictures of US service women flashing their breasts in front of Mecca or pictures of US service women pulling around naked male prisoners with dog leads and collars (i.e.: Abu Ghraib prison) are not going to radicalise people, then there is something wrong with your view of the world.

Does the West play a part? I'm sure we do. But to ignore the structured nature of radical Islam and instead talk about pictures is insulting to both the West and Muslims. You're trying to solve a puzzle with a handful of pieces and telling people it's a complete picture.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

They kill each other every day. Stop blaming other people.

Everybody did at one time. Some of us were lucky enough to escape meddling meddlers and put a stop to it. Even then it was not easy. Not remotely. After the American Civil War (Americans killing Americans, every day) America was pretty much left alone to build a secure republic, the idea of which trickled into Europe, got reversed with two world wars, but is not firmly set in Europe. This road has not be easy at all. Having powerful meddlers would have made it impossible. America could have broken Europe as easy at it helped make it. But if they had broken Europe, I am sure you would blame the Europeans.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@bass4funk - At the end of the day this is NOT an American - Republican / Democrat Party issue. Bushes, Obama's, they are all cut from the same cloth. So please spare us the US centric Liberal / Conservative debate ... you might be surprised to learn the world only sees the actions of American through its Foreign Policy. Obama clearly has a lot of blood on his hands as well, he is just craftier about it and not a dumb Texan smart ass who cannot string a sentence together. Under the Obama administration, unilateral drone strikes around the world by the US have increased by over 2000% and these are just the reported one. He may not be as obvious a target as Bush, but he is still carrying out the same agenda. Only decreasing number of Americans, still polarised and blinded by their 2 party state loyalties cannot see this. Bush and Obama work for the same masters, which is clearly not the majority of the US population. Otherwise as the richest company in the world, you wouldn't have the worst first world health care system and highest prison incarnation rate in the world.

@SuperLib - Only a very small minority of hard core Islamic extremists are actually driven by religion. The majority of the groups are simply fighting for power, money, land, resources etc. Nothing more. A lot of them are nothing more than organised crime outfits and should be treated and dealt with as such. Others are genuinely fighting for their communities and lives. The problem is, that is is sometimes hard to tell which is which. Last time I checked the news Syria was not being "ignored", in fact it has been on the front pages of the news for months.

The US lead invasion upset the delicate balance in the region and now we have a real war going in the middle east. It is a war within Islam. A war between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. It is an credibly nasty war that has been shimming for a long time. The main power players are Iran and Saudi Arabia. Violent acts against the west are only a small side show. One killed American generates more news than 300 dead Iraqis, sad but true. I believe that western "powers" will not get involved in any direct way in this escalating conflict, basically because they cannot trust anyone and it would do no good at all. Afghanistan and Iraq has clearly taught the west this. Thats not to say that the west is not supplying arms, more and intel to selected groups, because they are.

As I pointed out in my first post. There are clear good or bad guys in this regional conflict. Its a mess, a nasty mess. Containment and reductions in the violence is unfortunately the best we can hope for.

Lets move on.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites