Al Qaeda and what the problem really is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liamon

Sorry, I just happened to be under the impression that the English, Russians and French had been involved in the development of the region for hundreds of years.
Clearly, I was wrong........

---

Just as there were Arabs invading Europe over the past 1000 years. Aye, Europeans created a right oul mess over there, but the present problem has been created by the US.
The problems created by European colonial powers in the area have largely gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Except for that whole Israel/Palestine thing...

---

Fair enough, but the also yanks had a part to play in the creation of Israel, and they are the ones now solely responsible for keeping the state of Israel going.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

I know the League of Nations and subsequently the UN mandated the British actions, but wouldn't blame the Yanks for sowing the seeds of the problems, even if they have contributed heavily to the troubles in more recent times.

---

I know the Brits had the mandate, but the US supported the creation of Israel. And they're the ones now holding the state together. Israel, in its current state, is not viable in the long term. Without US military aid the state would collapse. In that regard, I think it's fair to say that's now America's mess.

Most Western countries supported the creation of Israel. Can't blame the US for that.
As for the long term viability of the Israeli state, as long as thye've got nukes, they should be ok. Sad, but true.

This isn't America's mess, it's the mess created by Europe, USA and the middle east. To simply blame the US requires a very simplistic view of a complex problem.

Having said that, I think everyone recognises the contribution the US has made to this problem over many decades (blocking UN resoultions, etc.).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liamon

...as long as thye've got nukes, they should be ok. Sad, but true...

---

Yeah when was the last time the US made any statements about Israels secret nuke programme? Suppose be hard for them to highlight it when they gave them their starter kit...

The US has virtually ensured that nay country on their hit list will attemopt to develop nukes to save themselves. US doesn't attack North Korea cos they got nukes & attacks Iraq which didn't have any...

:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by liamon

Having said that, I think everyone recognises the contribution the US has made to this problem over many decades (blocking UN resoultions, etc.).

---

I think America has to accept the majority of the blame for the current situation. If they weren't involved and it was left to Europe, a stable, peaceful Israel could have been created long ago.
The US constantly blocks the majority of attempts to pass resolutions condemning Israel in the UN Security Council.

Here is a list of UN Resolutions which Israel is currently in violation of.

1955-1992:

* Resolution 106: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid"

* Resolution 111: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"

* Resolution 127: ". . . 'recommends' Israel suspend its 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem"

* Resolution 162: ". . . 'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions"

* Resolution 171: ". . . determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria"

* Resolution 228: ". . . 'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"

* Resolution 237: ". . . 'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"

* Resolution 248: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"

* Resolution 250: ". . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem"

* Resolution 251: ". . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"

* Resolution 252: ". . . 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"

* Resolution 256: ". . . 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation""

* Resolution 259: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"

* Resolution 262: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport"

* Resolution 265: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"

* Resolution 267: ". . . 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"

* Resolution 270: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon"

* Resolution 271: ". . . 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem"

* Resolution 279: ". . . 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"

* Resolution 280: ". . . 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon"

* Resolution 285: ". . . 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"

* Resolution 298: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem"

* Resolution 313: ". . . 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"

* Resolution 316: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"

* Resolution 317: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon"

* Resolution 332: ". . . 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon"

* Resolution 337: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty"

* Resolution 347: ". . . 'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon"

* Resolution 425: ". . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"

* Resolution 427: ". . . 'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon'

* Resolution 444: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"

* Resolution 446: ". . . 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"

* Resolution 450: ". . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"

* Resolution 452: ". . . 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"

* Resolution 465: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program"

* Resolution 467: ". . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon"

* Resolution 468: ". . . 'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"

* Resolution 469: ". . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians"

* Resolution 471: ". . . 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"

* Resolution 476: ". . . 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'"

* Resolution 478: ". . . 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'"

* Resolution 484: ". . . 'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"

* Resolution 487: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's nuclear facility"

* Resolution 497: ". . . 'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith"

* Resolution 498: ". . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"

* Resolution 501: ". . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"

* Resolution 509: ". . . 'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon"

* Resolution 515: ". . . 'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"

* Resolution 517: ". . . 'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"

* Resolution 518: ". . . 'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon"

* Resolution 520: ". . . 'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut"

* Resolution 573: ". . . 'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters

* Resolution 587: ". . . 'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"

* Resolution 592: ". . . 'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops"

* Resolution 605: ". . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians

* Resolution 607: ". . . 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention

* Resolution 608: ". . . 'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"

* Resolution 636: ". . . 'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians

* Resolution 641: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians

* Resolution 672: ". . . 'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount

* Resolution 673: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations

* Resolution 681: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians

* Resolution 694: ". . . 'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return

* Resolution 726: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians

* Resolution 799: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.

THE FOLLOWING ARE THE RESOLUTIONS VETOED BY THE UNITED STATES DURING THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER, 1972, TO MAY, 1990 TO PROTECT ISRAEL FROM COUNCIL CRITICISM:

* . . . condemned Israel's attack against Southern Lebanon and Syria..."

* . . . affirmed the rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, statehood and equal protections. . . "

* . . . condemned Israel's air strikes and attacks in southern Lebanon and its murder of innocent civilians. . . "

* . . . called for self-determination of Palestinian people. . . "

* . . deplored Israel's altering of the status of Jerusalem, which is recognised as an international city by most world nations and the United Nations . . . "

* . . . affirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people . . . "

* . . . endorsed self-determination for the Palestinian people . . . "

* . . . demanded Israel's withdrawal from the Golan Heights . . . "

* . . . condemned Israel's mistreatment of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip and its refusal to abide by the Geneva convention protocols of civilized nations.

* . . . condemned an Israeli soldier who shot eleven Moslem worshippers at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount near Al-Aqsa Mosque in the Old City of Jerusalem. . . "

* . . . urged sanctions against Israel if it did not withdraw from its invasion of Lebanon ... "

* . . . urged sanctions against Israel if it did not withdraw from its invasion of Beirut. . . "

* . . . urged cutoff of economic aid to Israel if it refused to withdraw from its occupation of Lebanon. . . "

* . . . condemned continued Israeli settlements in occupied territories in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, denouncing them as an obstacle to peace. . . "

* . . . deplores Israel's brutal massacre of Arabs in Lebanon and urges its withdrawal. . . "

* . . . condemned Israeli brutality in southern Lebanon and denounced the Israeli 'Iron Fist' policy of repression. . . "

* . . . denounced Israel's violation of human rights in the occupied territories. . . "

* . . . deplored Israel's violence in southern Lebanon. . . "

* . . . deplored Israel's activities in occupied Arab East Jerusalem that threatened the sanctity of Muslim holy sites. . . "

* . . . condemned Israel's hijacking of a Libyan passenger airplane. . . "

* . . . deplored Israel's attacks against Lebanon and its measures and practices against the civilian population of Lebanon. . . "

* . . . called on Israel to abandon its policies against the Palestinian intifada that violated the rights of occupied Palestinians, to abide by the Fourth Geneva Conventions, and to formalise a leading role for the United Nations in future peace negotiations. . . "

* . . . urged Israel to accept back deported Palestinians, condemned Israel's shooting of civilians, called on Israel to uphold the Fourth Geneva Convention, and called for a peace settlement under UN auspices. . . "

* . . . condemned Israel's . . incursion into Lebanon. . . "

* . . . deplored Israel's . . . commando raids on Lebanon. . . "

* . . . deplored Israel's repression of the Palestinian intifada and called on Israel to respect the human rights of the Palestinians. . . "

* . . . deplored Israel's violation of the human rights of the Palestinians. . . "

* . . . demanded that Israel return property confiscated from Palestinians during a tax protest and allow a fact-finding mission to observe Israel's crackdown on the Palestinian intifada . . . "

* . . . called for a fact-finding mission on abuses against Palestinians in Israeli-occupied lands. . .

* . . . resolution to create a commission and send three security council members to Rishon Lezion, where an Israeli gunmen shot down seven Palestinian workers. . .

*. . . confirmed that the expropriation of land by Israel in East Jerusalem is invalid and in violation of relevant Security Council resolutions and provisions of the Fourth Geneva convention; expressed support of peace process, including the Declaration of Principles. . .

*. . . called upon Israeli authorities to refrain from all actions or measures, including settlement activities. . .

*. . . demanded that Israel cease construction of the settlement in east Jerusalem (called Jabal Abu Ghneim by the Palestinians and Har Homa by Israel), as well as all the other Israeli settlement activity in the occupied territories

* . . . called for UN Observers Force in West Bank, Gaza

*. . . Condemned acts of terror, demanded an end to violence and the establishment of a monitoring mechanism to bring in observers. . .

*. . . comdemned killing by Israeli forces of several UN employees and the destruction of the World Food Programme (WFP) warehouse. . .

*. . . demanded that Israel halt threats to expel Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. . .

*. . . seeked to bar Israel from extending security fence. . .

*. . . condemned Israel for killing Ahmed Yassin. . .

--------------------------

The facts speak for themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

I mean, if Israel was in violation of a 1000 resolutions, it doesn't mean that bin Laden is entitled to kill innocent civilians across the globe. Ireland has broken plenty of EU regulations and ECHR rulings in its time, including those relating to Human Rights, and yet I would not expect the murder of thousands of Irish people in terrorist attacks to be a legitimate response...

---

[this thread and the Israeli 'peace plan' one seem to mingle together a lot]

I'm angry enough looking at those resolutions. I can only imagine what it does to Arabs. It doesn't excuse what Bin Laden does, but it's entirely understandable why he does what he does.
It would be very naive of the US to think it can act like that and no suffer the consquences. The way I look at it, the US have to coming to them (again), and I will find it hard to have any sympathy when it happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

I mean, if Israel was in violation of a 1000 resolutions, it doesn't mean that bin Laden is entitled to kill innocent civilians across the globe.

---

it doesn't mean he's entitled to, no-one is. but it does explain why.

Was it not said that Bloody Sunday was the best recruitment campaign the Provisional IRA ever had? Would they have had such widespread support if that awful day hadn't happened? Now imagine that going on, on an even greater scale and imagine living where its happening and looking at the UN and all the so-called democratic countries of the world for protection only to be told that YOU are the terrorist. That is why Bin Laden exists

Conor- read what I said will ya. I am not saying, and never have said, that any of this was acceptable. What I will continue to say is that I understand what drives people to do these deplorable things. The problem with US foreign policy is that they always ask "who" instead of "why". Israel the same. Look at this weekend and the week before last- they blow up the leader of Hamas. You tell me- does that achieve anything? All it does is create more support. If you blow one guy up, another guy comes in- whats the plan, keep going until you've killed every single palestinian? because if they keep this up, every single palestinian WILL support Hamas before long. And the US is making exactly the same mistakes, but on a much bigger scale, and THAT is why Bin Laden continues to get support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Yes, but was the Omagh Bombing acceptable or understandable then? I mean, it was a terrorist response to years of conflict which featured barbarity such as Bloody Sunday.

---

Just to correct ye there, Conor. The RUC made a ******** of dealing with the Omagh bomb. The intention of the RIRA was not kill all those people, but get some publicity. The RUC was told the bomb was 100m from the courthouse, and ended up moving everyone 100m from the courthouse. RIRA members, realising where people had been moved to, telephoned another warning telling them again that it was 100m from the courthouse. It was ignored. If the RIRA wanted to kill people, they'd wouldn't have choosen Omagh.

(BTW, not defending their actions, before ye start)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

I know you keep saying it's not acceptable but understandable. For me, it is neither acceptable nor understandable. I do not understand why someone would want to wipe out 3,000 innocent civilians on the other side of the world. Incidentally, why is Israel's 'blowing up' to be distinguished from bin Laden's 'blowing up'? Could your argument not work in exact reverse ie. that bin Laden's actions only creates more and more anti-Muslim hatred and that is why the Bush got such support?

---

I understand. Sometimes I feel like going out and blowing up a British Army base or one of their stupid armoured cars. Occupation creates hatred and resentment. Some people take this out in the form of violence. I totally understand why.

Bin Laden's action shouldn't create hatred, it should make people ask 'why'. Unfortunately, Americans seem to be taking their time about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

ICould your argument not work in exact reverse ie. that bin Laden's actions only creates more and more anti-Muslim hatred and that is why the Bush got such support?

---

Yes it could. But we were discussing Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, hence I was talking about it in reference to them. I fail to see why you don't think its understandable. Its human nature in its most basic, primal form- if a guy goes and burns your house down, you'll want to go and do the same to him*. Thats what I mean by understandable.


*- obviously if it happened here we'd go to the law-enforcement agencies and have the guy prosecuted and punished, but seeing as the worlds equivalent of a law enforcement agency (the UN and international criminal court) are just ignored or blocked by the US and Israel anytime they criticise or attempt to do something, the only alternative is revenge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Yes, but again we must remind ourselves that the US was not in occupation of any country on September 11th 2001. The invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq were (perverse) reactions to that event, and did not precede it.

---

They have bases in Saudi, and the Saudi royal family would not still be in power oppressing its people without American support- tantamount to occupation in my eyes anyway. Their support for Israel (economic, military and political) is just as good as occupation as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Then you completely understand the US reaction to 9/11?

Just checking that you apply the same principles to all sides and you're not just being anti-American and trying to rationalise that...

---

I've never once denied being anti-american. I abhor just about everything the USA stands for right now. I do understand that their reaction to 11/9 was to lash out, but if they are supposed to be the democratic country, shining example to the world of the way to live etc., they should have been able to exercise some restraint. I can even accept the fact that they went into Afghanistan to get rid of the Taliban, but there was no reason for them to go into Iraq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davros

About time,Europeans across the board created their own campaign v.both extremes....& threw out all their Muslim fundamentalists & US.'Political'/military bases & interests.Wishful thinking ,I know but after the Cold War....I for one am sick of this'world' struggle being played out on the streets of Europe...not that I wish it on other hapless regions.

---

Extremely wishful thinking, davros. Unfortunately the domination of the world by the US will not change unless a new economic power emerges. Looking down the line, I think China and India could be such powers.
If Europe is to work as a counter-balance to the US, we need to integrate ourselves more fully. That is, move from the confederal system of the present EU, to a federal one.

The power of the US has come about because of its economic power. Whoever has the most money rules. That's the way the capitalist system works.

The problem in a nutshell is that you have islamic fundamentalists on one side and christian/neo-con fundamentalists on the other. europe is caught in the middle and for some reason seems to think that siding with the christian/neo-con fundamentalists is a better option. I don't like the idea of siding with any fundamentalists. Fundementalism is dangerous and its at the root of all this death and destruction

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davros

Appreciate the Economic connection.....Maybe Europe should Boycott all US consumer goods & dissuade its citizens' to travel there,as with the Arab world...though the Oil connection complicates matters.

---

We can't boycott US goods. The EU and the US have the largest trading relationship in the world. We depend on each other too much.
Besides, I think that would go down really bad politically.

Éanna, I don't think religion is the problem here, it's merely an excuse. I think it's basically an economic problem. The Middle East has oil. The US needs that oil, and it prepared to go to war to get it at a lower price. There's also the fact that those in power in the US are interested in making their friends some more power (Halliburton, Chevon, etc). A war for oil in the Middle East, fought with billions of dollars of weapons from their friends' corporations, is an easy way to make some money.
The US fundementalists couldn't give a damn about other nations and their religions. What's it to them? For the same token, Bin Laden wouldn't give a damn about the US if the US didn't invade an Arab country (or support Israel). If the US kept to itself, he'd be grand to let them do so.

For anyone thats interested...An alternative US foreign policy...

George Soros Open Society Institute

A lot of what is being discussed here regarding the US current policies are valid for the current time. But cast your mind back to September 10, 2001. That was a different world back then. Sure enough, the US supported governments like Israel and give billions of dollars to Egypt every year and has bases in Saudi Arabia. But does the fact of having bases in Saudi Arabia make Osama go click, "ok theres a reason to attack them"? I don't think so. USA has more bases in countries such as the UK, Germany, South Korea etc than they have in Saudi Arabia. Israel would collapse if they didnt have the support of the US, but noone else does support them. Israel are a close allie of the US and the jewish community in the US will always be such a factor that there will always have to be support. As for the Palestinians, they are like what the jews were for hundreds of years; a people without a country.

Heres another angle. The Arab countries are seriously lagging behind the Western and other Asian countries in terms of technology, education and development. This website ( http://www.ebusinessforum.com/index....nd&doc_id=6868 ) shows how there are only 18 computers per 1000 people in the arab countries compared to 78 globally and only 1.6% of people have internet access compared to 79% in the US. Also, only 368 patents have been issues all Arab countries between 1980 and 2000 compared to South Korea(16,300) and Israel (7,652). The oil boom of the 20th century in the middle east has masked many fundmental problems that people have there. Look at Israel, they have turned many barren parts of the country for agricultural use and are quite advanced technologically. Ture, they get a lot of support from the US, but it is the people there who made made it work. In the other Arab countries, I think that many have become so p-ssed off and desperate that they are willing to change anything and listen to someone who needs their help.