Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
najaf_canada

The Majahideen attcked bus stations and hospitel

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

khorasani

I am going to try and keep this short.

Armed militias that are not a part of the government are not legitimate but renegades. The fact that they exist simpl is a result of the gov'ts weakness.

My question was what percentage of these dogs are Iraqi citizens?

Statistics lie and liars use statistics. If you wish to count every shot or rock thrown at an American to be an attack than the majority would be against Americans. But let's call an attack one that results in death and destruction. Well than the overwhelming majority are against Iraqi civilian to include people going to mosques, people standing in line to get jobs, beheading civilian hostages on video tape, murdering children getting candy, setting off car bombs in a series to also kill the care givers, I think you get the idea don't you?

These people are getting their weapons from outside sources. Just the bulk of the ammunition is enormous let alone the weapons themselves. Having the weapon is the easy part but being kept supplied is a whole different animal. Have you ever been in the military?, if so you would know this.

I asked who are they fighting for. They are not fighting for Iraq because Iraq has a gov't that the citizens elected. Let me repeat that. They are not fighting for Iraq because there is an Iraqi gov't elected by the people and they have their own army.

Don't you think the gov't of Iraq should repressent all its citizens. Isn't that a fundamental reason for gov't? Or do you think the largest religious sect should be in control? How did the Shia like it when the Sunni were in control?

But you know what? What ever is talked about here and Iraq today is goiong to make no difference. A Constitution is going to make no difference. Because when the US leaves this mess it has created Iraq is going to have a three way civil war similar to the Balkans. A brutal bloody mess. And the end result will be another dictator ruling the country.

This kid Sadr gets no credit for what his father and uncle did. He's got money thats all. I would think you would be upset with him for defiling that mosque and graveyard.

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

korsani- hahaha dude you missed this

T]he most detailed and interesting claim that a Western power sponsored fundamentalist Islam is the elaborate plot devised by Turkish Sunni Muslims to explain how the British government in the early 1700s planted a spy named Hempher who conceived of and spread the Wahhabi doctrine

you should read the whole book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dont think its only Sunnis...

There were many Shias who supported Saddam and worked for him.

of course, but his supporters are mainly sunni. who would dispute that?

Well I believe that Sayed Sader and his forces (i admit there were and probably still are some criminals and baathis who came in to the mehdy army, but no army is free from munafiqeen, even the Prophets army had them) are a legitamite force and there is no record of them attacking civilians.

no civilians died in falluja?

There are many Iraqis in Iraq who have taken up arms and are fighting Americans only.

What percentage of those fighting the Americans are legitmate (targeting americans only and not citizens)?

the americans are there as security. It isn't legitmate to attack them. Nor is killing civilians in the process of attacking americans legitamate. This is savagery, to talk about killing this and that.

What are they fighting against?

They are fighting against the American presence in Iraq. America is an invading force in Iraq, and they are there to plunder Iraq.

the US has spent 200 billion on this war. it's the insurgents who are plundering us. who says "plunder" in this day and age anyway.

I have made my stance clear on the issue in other posts. I personaly adhere to Ayatullah Seestanis method of dealing with the current problems.

that contradicts everything you've said thusfar.

Make sure that strong Iraqi military forces are secured that can protect our cities borders from baathi/criminal attacks which are aimed at destroying the shias.

I thought they were only attacking americans?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

I guess ill be adressing 3 differnt posts.. so here goes.

korsani- hahaha dude you missed this

QUOTE

T]he most detailed and interesting claim that a Western power sponsored fundamentalist Islam is the elaborate plot devised by Turkish Sunni Muslims to explain how the British government in the early 1700s planted a spy named Hempher who conceived of and spread the Wahhabi doctrine

you should read the whole book.

The article says that this theory was developed by some turks. How ever it doesnt disporve it nor does it show how it was made up. It brings no counter claims to the table.. and DUDE I didnt miss the part :)

Oh by the way..an article is not a book lol (Im just messing with you).

Armed militias that are not a part of the government are not legitimate but renegades. The fact that they exist simpl is a result of the gov'ts weakness.

My question was what percentage of these dogs are Iraqi citizens?

How can any one know specificly what percentage are Iraqi citizens, did they do a census of all the people in Iraq involved in any type of fighting?

Again you call them dogs when there are people who are fighting because they dont want to be abused by Americans.

But let's call an attack one that results in death and destruction. Well than the overwhelming majority are against Iraqi civilian to include people going to mosques, people standing in line to get jobs, beheading civilian hostages on video tape, murdering children getting candy, setting off car bombs in a series to also kill the care givers, I think you get the idea don't you?

I have already made it crystal clear that I am one hundred percent against those types of attacks and believe that the people doing them are horrible criminals of the worst kind.

I asked who are they fighting for. They are not fighting for Iraq because Iraq has a gov't that the citizens elected. Let me repeat that. They are not fighting for Iraq because there is an Iraqi gov't elected by the people and they have their own army.

I believe they are fighting for Iraq and the muslim Ummah because they are working to make sure that the Americans leave Iraq as soon as possible, I believe that the Americans are not there to do any good, and was against the invasion, so to me if they left yesterday it would of been too late.

They may not be sanctioned by the government but I dont believe that the new Iraqi government is explicitly against this (the religous memebers, including the shia part of the government).

I am not talking about the attacks on civilians every human being in the world is against those and against the Attacks that are against Americans but lead to the deaths of inocent Iraqis as well becuase of complete disregard for human life.

Don't you think the gov't of Iraq should repressent all its citizens. Isn't that a fundamental reason for gov't? Or do you think the largest religious sect should be in control? How did the Shia like it when the Sunni were in control?

I absolutly believe that the Iraqi government should repersent all its citizens. I never said other wise. I believe the largest sect though should have the most say.

I my self am an Iraqi and an Iraqi Kurd, and more over I am a Shia Kurd (we make up less than 3% of the kurdish population at most) at that. I am not really in favor of what the kurds want how ever I am not looking to stop them from ataining it (the autonomy).

I think the constitutional process is going well.

I will say this again, I believe the constitutional process is a good thing, and it is going well.

How ever I am against the American troops in Iraq, and I am for getting them out.

They are commiting atrocities there.

I hold this view because I believe that this is what Ayatullah Seestani believes (i am not speaking on his behalf this is just in my opinion).

He is for the elections and constitutional process and is against the American Troops there (again in my opinion, based on his actions).

And so I stand firmly with that view.

These people are getting their weapons from outside sources. Just the bulk of the ammunition is enormous let alone the weapons themselves. Having the weapon is the easy part but being kept supplied is a whole different animal. Have you ever been in the military?, if so you would know this.

I believe that the people who are hitting civilians and hiting americans with disregard to civilians are criminals. I believe that they are most likley getting their amunitions and wepons from outside sources. Most likley Syria or Jordan, as well as from left over Baathi stockpiles.

The ones who are citizens of Iraq and just fighting against the Americans (like the mehdy army) I doubt are getting their wepons and amunition from out side sources.

I alredy refernced to the 91 uprising in Iraq to show how that is possible (shias had wepons to fight with).

This kid Sadr gets no credit for what his father and uncle did. He's got money thats all. I would think you would be upset with him for defiling that mosque and graveyard.

The defiling of the masjid and the grave yard and other parts of najaf were an unfortunate event.

Do I hold him responsible though?

No not entirely, it takes two to tango..and all they were doing was defending their country.

But I do believe that they were acting a bit reckless.

QUOTE

Dont think its only Sunnis...

There were many Shias who supported Saddam and worked for him.

of course, but his supporters are mainly sunni. who would dispute that?

I make a point of making sure that I never blaim Sunnis completly. Many people on this site are unfortunatly blaiming sunnis for every problem that faces muslims.

They have even gone to the extent of saying Saddam Hussain was sunni.. (he wasnt even muslim).

Its Ironic that the kurds (who are majority sunni) were the first to begin fighting against the Baath party in 73.

Also one of the first groups of people that were targeted by the baath party were a Sunni scholars who tried to stand up to them.

Here is a list of some that were executed.

The killing of Sunni religious leaders such as

Abdul Aziz Al Badri the Imam of Dragh district mosque in Baghdad in 1969

Al Shaikh Nadhum Al Asi from Ubaid tribe in Northern Iraq

Al Shiakh Al Shahrazori

Al Shaikh Umar Shaqlawa

Al Shiakh Rami Al Kirkukly

Al Shiakh Mohamad Shafeeq Al Badri

Abdul Ghani Shindala

http://www.sciri.btinternet.co.uk/English/...dam_crimes.html

I am not defending any criminals (shias or sunnis) I just dont want to label any one group as any thing, because this will only lead to secretatian hatred and in-fighting.

QUOTE

Well I believe that Sayed Sader and his forces (i admit there were and probably still are some criminals and baathis who came in to the mehdy army, but no army is free from munafiqeen, even the Prophets army had them) are a legitamite force and there is no record of them attacking civilians.

no civilians died in falluja?

I said there is no record of them attacking civilians and there is no record of them attacking civilians.

If you would like to disprove me please go ahead and show me other wise.

The mehdy Army was fighting in the south any way.

Falujah was a differnt story all together.

QUOTE

There are many Iraqis in Iraq who have taken up arms and are fighting Americans only.

What percentage of those fighting the Americans are legitmate (targeting americans only and not citizens)?

the americans are there as security. It isn't legitmate to attack them. Nor is killing civilians in the process of attacking americans legitamate. This is savagery, to talk about killing this and that.

The Americans are not there as a security force (perhaps to secure the oil fields while haliburton and others fill their pockets and cut cheney in on them).

I never ever stated that killing civilians in the process of attacking Americansi is legitamte. You are not even reading my posts.. I have stated the complete oppasite.

Fighting off an ocupied force is a legitmate form of resistance.

QUOTE

What are they fighting against?

They are fighting against the American presence in Iraq. America is an invading force in Iraq, and they are there to plunder Iraq.

the US has spent 200 billion on this war. it's the insurgents who are plundering us. who says "plunder" in this day and age anyway.

Does the soviet Union ring a bell?

They would go and set up tons of proxy wars, invade countries and pay for it all by their countries economy. They would plunder those countries.. do what ever it is they need to do in them (set up their own political puppets..ect).

They would take what they earned line their own pockets (the kgb and the other criminals in charce of their operations). And the Russian economy was basicly bled dry.

If you want to blaim any one for plundering your Economy blaim Bush and his cronies.

You can do a google search in to how much money in iraq is "un acounted for".

(gee I wonder where it all goes).

QUOTE

I have made my stance clear on the issue in other posts. I personaly adhere to Ayatullah Seestanis method of dealing with the current problems.

that contradicts everything you've said thusfar.

How is it contradictory?

QUOTE

Make sure that strong Iraqi military forces are secured that can protect our cities borders from baathi/criminal attacks which are aimed at destroying the shias.

I thought they were only attacking americans?

Not one time any where on this board have I ever ever ever defended the baathis and other assorted criminals who are killing civilians, either directly or because they have no regaurd for human life.

I have only said that those who are targeting americans and americans only are practicing a legetimate form of resistance against an occuping army.

I have explicitly stated that the baathis/criminals are the ones doing these acts (killing inocent civilians) and that I am 100% against them and their actions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you really believe that story about "hempher"? Do you understand what a conspiracy theory is? and that article comes from a book called "the hidden hand" which, again, you should really read.

Besides, if you really believe that wahabi was started by a spy ( :lol: ) why are you supporting the insurgency which is obviously not only largely comporised of wahabis of but largely influenced by wahabi beliefs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

Besides, if you really believe that wahabi was started by a spy ( laugh.gif ) why are you supporting the insurgency which is obviously not only largely comporised of wahabis of but largely influenced by wahabi beliefs?

I have stated it about a thousand times and I will state it again, I have said that those who are targeting american troops in an effort to get them out of Iraq are fighting a legitimate form of resistance.

I my self abide by the non violent form of resistance that Ayatullah Seestani is propigating.

Any one who killis inocent people either on purpose or because of a lack of regard for human life, I do not support at all. I believe they are Kaffirs, and are most likley Baathis and other Criminals.

which is obviously not only largely comporised of wahabis of but largely influenced by wahabi beliefs?

Sayed Sadir is not a wahhabi nor even a sunni and his Mehdy Army is one of the specific groups whom I say are fighting a legitmate form of resistance.

Actualy most muslims who fight around the world, arnt eve Wahhabis.

In the book My Jihad, a guy (I dont recall his name) who is now working for the U.S government talks about the world wide Mujahideen that he spent time with as an undercover cia operative.

He says by his estamites there are around 50,000 strict mujahideen who travel the world just to fight off any type of agression that comes about against Muslims.

Most of them are in chechniya (im guessing that many have come in to Iraq now).

They have some extreme beliefs among them, how ever the majority of them are not Wahhabi.

Generaly these Mujahideen are people who follow sufi beliefs, which is some thing that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab made kufir on.

Usama Bin Laden is often called a wahabi but in reality he follows a belief that is rooted in sufisim.

These days wahhabisim is just a blanket term people keep using.

In any case, I am not saying I support all of these people. I am just stating facts so that may be you can understand the situation better.

I have made my beliefs and stance clear in other posts..you seem to not read them correctly or some thing because you keep acusing me of the same things over and over.

Edited by khorasani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you really believe that story about "hempher"?  Do you understand what a conspiracy theory is?  and that article comes from a book called "the hidden hand" which, again, you should really read. 

Besides, if you really believe that wahabi was started by a spy ( :lol: ) why are you supporting the insurgency which is obviously not only largely comporised of wahabis of but largely influenced by wahabi beliefs?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok NOW, WE REALLY NEED TO KNOW: IS THE INSURGENCY BEING DRIVEN BY WAHABBIS OR FORMER REGIME ELEMENTS? WE NEED TO KNOW AND THIS TIME ... PLEASE ONE ANSWER! CAN SOMEONE CALL BUSH AND GET THE LATEST!!!

THEY CALLED THE RESISTANCE IN LEBANON (AGAINST ISRAELI OCCUPATION) MANY NAMES BUT WE STOOD WITH THEM.

IF THE INSURGENCY WAS LARGELY WAHABIS LED BY ZARQAWI ET. AL., IRAQ WOULD BE IN FLAMES RIGHT NOW BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THESE PEOPLE ARE CAPABLE OF.

DO YOU KNOW THAT IT WAS JAISH MUHAMMAD (SUPPOSEDLY "FORMER REGIME ELEMENTS") WHO FOUGHT OFF ZARQAWI GROUP IN RAMADI WHEN THEY TRIED TO EXPEL THE SHIA POPULATION OUT. OF COURSE YOU DID NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL THE SAME ... BUNCH OF WAHABIS WHO EITHER SHOULD BE ELIMINATED (PREFERABLY WITH THE US ARMY DOING THE JOB) OR PUT IN THEIR PLACES.

THEY MAY NOT OBJECT TO A CONSTITUTION BECAUSE AS WE ALL KNOW THEY ARE NOT IRAQIS ... THEY CAN GO BACK TO SAUDI ... AS MATTER OF FACT SADR CAN GO TO SAUDI BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW HE IS A SHIA WAHHABI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any islamic extremist is a natural, if not literal, ally of wahabism. You think the wahabis and the mujahadeen in afghanistan didn't get along?

the mujahadeen are professional terrorists. At least khalid sheikh muhammed admitted this, sparing us the insult to out intelligence with the beheading for Allah silliness.

They even offered to defend saud arabia against saddam in 91, which the saudis rejected.

Edited by Lester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

Rafeh why do you keep posting things in caps..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are absolutely right ... May be an unfortunate personality trait ... Looking at it, it is more difficult to read. It may be that, psychologically for me, it is the equivalent of shouting ... But thanks for bringing it up

(salam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

any islamic extremist is a natural, if not literal, ally of wahabism. You think the wahabis and the mujahadeen in afghanistan didn't get along?

The first part of your post isnt true because, the Taliban and other groups in Pakistan as well as India follow the Deobandi school of thought which is a breeding ground for taliban style extermists. The deobandi school though, is an enmey of the Wahhabis and they condem them.

As far as wahhabis in Afghanistan go.. I dont believe that the actual wahhabi school of thought was that previlent there.

The Mujahideen in Afghanistan didnt get along at all. They fought for years and years after the Russians left afghanistan.

The taliban fought against the Northern Alliance for years.

The norther alliance is always beeing made out to be like this great force that was good for the people but even Afghans acknowldge that the Norther Alliance were just as extreme as the Taliban and did just as many attrocities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
any islamic extremist is a natural, if not literal, ally of wahabism.  You think the wahabis and the mujahadeen in afghanistan didn't get along? 

the mujahadeen are professional terrorists.  At least khalid sheikh muhammed admitted this, sparing us the insult to out intelligence with the beheading for Allah silliness.

They even offered to defend saud arabia against saddam in 91, which the saudis rejected.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

- Hezbollah was called "islamic extremist"

- Many Shias (and Sunnis) fought in the Jihad in Afghanistan. They are not Taliban or wahhabis

- Many Shias (and Sunnis - mostly Arabs) fought in Bosnia. They were referred to as Mujahids. Iran and Saudi were both instrumental in keeping the Bosnian government alive (money + weapons + volunteers). They actually bribed croatia to allow supplies to reach the Muslims

- In the first Chechnyan war, both Sunnis and Shias supported the struggle to Muslims there

- Hezbollah trains, arms and fund Sunni Palestinians (and to that matter christian Palestinians)

--- should i continue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

Hezbollah was called "islamic extremist"

- Many Shias (and Sunnis) fought in the Jihad in Afghanistan. They are not Taliban or wahhabis

- Many Shias (and Sunnis - mostly Arabs) fought in Bosnia. They were referred to as Mujahids. Iran and Saudi were both instrumental in keeping the Bosnian government alive (money + weapons + volunteers). They actually bribed croatia to allow supplies to reach the Muslims

- In the first Chechnyan war, both Sunnis and Shias supported the struggle to Muslims there

- Hezbollah trains, arms and fund Sunni Palestinians (and to that matter christian Palestinians)

That is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are blaming this on the Mujahideen groups straight away without any evidence. They did the same with the bombing of those 30 children a few weeks ago. When the slander was broadcast, the Mujahideen groups released a joint statement condemning the bombing, but it didnt matter because the Slanderers had already spread their venom.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

:dry: Very true, but nobody seems to investigate these matters properly. Also there is no free press in Iraq so what can one believe?

Edited by Demosthenes2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Many Shias (and Sunnis) fought in the Jihad in Afghanistan. They are not Taliban or wahhabis

the ones who stayed were.

-

Many Shias (and Sunnis - mostly Arabs) fought in Bosnia. They were referred to as Mujahids. Iran and Saudi were both instrumental in keeping the Bosnian government alive (money + weapons + volunteers). They actually bribed croatia to allow supplies to reach the Muslims

- In the first Chechnyan war, both Sunnis and Shias supported the struggle to Muslims there

so did the US!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

so did the US!

Ive never heard of American troops being sent to chechniya.. although there are many records of CIA agents going in to chechniya to infiltrate jihadist circles.

As far as Bosnia goes, when the U.S got there the blood shed only got worse (what does that tell you).

Besides that I think you may want to read this article....

http://www.oz.net/~vvawai/sw/sw33/pgs_03-0...ose-bosnia.html

(read the whole thing)

And here is a very interesting thing taken from the New York times regaurding the bosinan war crimes tribunal...

An article in the March 2, 1996 New York Times, p.3, entitled "GI's in Bosnia Shun Hunt for War Crimes Suspects", tells an appalling story. Contrast the following two statements to get the full nuance. The first is a pronouncement made last November by our President, lead manipulator and beneficiary of "the society of the spectacle":

We have an obligation to carry forward the lessons of Nuremberg. Those accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide must be brought to justice. There must be peace for justice to prevail, but there must be justice when peace prevails.

The next quote is from an unidentified Pentagon official, explaining why US troops in Bosnia will not attempt to arrest war criminals indicted by the UN tribunal:

We will take these people into custody if they surrender to us, preferably with their hands up over their heads, or maybe if they're turned in by someone else....I can't imagine it would happen any other way. No matter how much people might want us to arrest war criminals, we have a much bigger mission in Bosnia.

But it is hard to imagine what. Imagine a U.S. army spokesman, during the occupation of Germany after World War II, announcing that known Nazi murderers would be allowed to circulate freely because of a bigger mission. Obviously, prosecution of Bosnian murderers is considered inconvenient or embarassing by the U.S. and by NATO in general, despite the commitment of all parties to the Dayton accords that war criminals would be arrested and tried. (See also the New York Times for January 20, 1996, p. 6, "NATO Backs Off Helping Bosnia War Crimes Panel.")

http://www.spectacle.org/596/us.html

I sure hope you read these and educate your self.

May be this time you wont just reply to my posts with out even reading every thing I write (which you seem to do all the time).

Edited by khorasani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah Clinton didn't help any muslims in Bosnia. You sound like a neo con. and no, I wasn't implying the US fought with the chechens. I don't think they'd really need any of our hi tech equipment and so forth to hold little kids hostage and make them drink their own pee.

I don't read your articles because you are HEMPHER the BRITISH SPY :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

There is no reason to debate with some one like you. You are an ignorant individual who refused to even read the other side of the argument.

I don't read your articles because you are HEMPHER the BRITISH SPY

Its unfortunate that some one comes to a discussion board to discuss things and doesn?t even want to hear or read the other side of the story.

Honestly Lester I have not even seen you defend one... not even one of your claims with any sources.

You have never even backed up any thing you have said, and as is evident with all the posts of mine you reply to, you don't even make an effort to read what the other side is saying.

Do you know what that's called?

It?s called IGNORANCE.

You have shown time and time again that you don't even possess the smallest understanding of any of the matters in Iraq or the Muslim world.

You stated that Saddam Hussain over threw King Feisal.

You were saying that the Mehdy Army was in Fallujah killing civilians.

And have made other completely baseless and ignorant remarks.

So Lester I say to you, who tells me "I don't want to read any of your articles", that I am completely done dealing with an ignoramus like you.

Edited by khorasani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

khorasani,

After careful consideration I have concluded that you live in an entirely different world than 90% of the rest of the people on this planet.

Your statement about more bloodshed after the US and Nato started action to prevent Serbiam genocide is incredulous. In fact the US and Nato should have been involved years earlier because Europe stood by and did nothing.

Please cite 5 of these many reports of the CIA sending agents into Chech. And please no articles where the writter says there have been reports of such things.

Let's talk about the US being forced to close their air base in Uzbekistan. Please take me through the convoluted story of why Uzk took such action. Popular belief is that the reason being the US criticism of the Uzb slaughtering Muslim protestors and the US advising Keirg. not to return the refugees who escaped. But of course this can't be true.

I guess what really happened is that the CIA promoted the protestors to take to the streets so the Uzbeks would shoot them. This serves the US purposes in two ways. It killed a bunch of Muslims who we hate and are at war with and our condemnation of the murders and seeking to protect the refugees makes the US look good in the eyes of some MUslims. So how about it? Is this the real story?

Peace

Edited by satyaban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
khorasani,

After careful consideration I have concluded that you live in an entirely different world than 90% of the rest of the people on this planet.

Your statement about more bloodshed after the US and Nato started action to prevent Serbiam genocide is incredulous. In fact the US and Nato should have been involved years earlier because Europe stood by and did nothing.

Please cite 5 of these many reports of the CIA sending agents into Chech. And please no articles where the writter says there have been reports of such things.

Let's talk about the US being forced to close their air base in Uzbekistan. Please take me through the convoluted story of why Uzk took such action. Popular belief is that the reason being the US criticism of the Uzb slaughtering Muslim protest0rs and the US advising Azerb. not to return the refugees who escaped. But of course this can't be true.

I guess what really happened is that the CIA promoted the protestors to take to the streets so the Uzbeks would shoot them. This serves the US purposes in two ways. It killed a bunch of Muslims who we hate and are at war with and our condemnation of the murders and seeking to protect the refugees makes the US look good in the eyes of some MUslims. So how about it? Is this the real story?

Peace

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How about being embarrassed to withdraw. Protesters demanding democracy massacred, can't call the leader your buddy now, can you ? (Not after going to war for democracy in Iraq).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about being embarrassed to withdraw. Protesters demanding democracy massacred, can't call the leader your buddy now, can you ? (Not after going to war for democracy in Iraq).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What? :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...