Started? Air Raid Sirens Over Baghdad

[riddled-with-fun 0]

...according to foxnews.com

[Bowler 0]

About 0230GMT, eyewitnesses reported air raid sirens and flashes of light over Baghdad, but there has so far been no sign of bombing, and it could be a false alarm.

 

Acording to bbc.co.uk

[Fattwins 0]

Bush will announce war around 10 oclock eastern time. again inocent people will suffer, there has to be a better way. When people fight it only creates hate. How many people have fought someone? Afterwards can you really be friends. I have never had that happen in my life

[damian 0]

it was a cruise missile attack.

[echineko 1]

[damian 0]

the japanese guy who sits next to me said "this day is the same as when japan attacked pearl harbour"

 

(echineko - I am not picking on you in this post)

[RayInJapan 0]

I hope you set him straight db. If not, give me his cell phone number so my wife can explain a little of Japanese history to him.

 

This is not the same situation. The Japanese attacked the US and then continued on with Guam, Saipan, the Marianas, the Phillipines, were already in Chinea and Korea, and wanted Australia too. The only goal of this coalition is to remove Saddam, his WMD, and his government so they cannot proliferate terror any longer.

 

For those who think its wrong for the US to go in to remove a dictator without them being an immediate threat to the US - its not the first time. We did it with Noriega in Panama, did it in Yugoslavia, and now we're going to do it again in Iraq.

 

Innocent civilian casualties caused by US/coalition forces will be minimal as long as they don't resist. People need to point the blame where it belongs - with Saddam and his use of his civilian population as human shields to protect his military. I'm betting he will even slaughter innocent people in order to blame the US, so whatever it takes to get him out is good for me.

 

The end will justify the means because in the end, the Iraqi people will be freed from one of the most repressive regimes the world has ever known. This guy kills his own family, uses chemical weapons against his own people, and redirects aid away from his own people just to make their suffering appear horrible so he can blame the US. The guy pays the families of homicide bombers, and allows known terrorists to walk the streets of baghdad freely.

 

The US has always protected the weak. This time however, not only are we protecting the weak, we are pre-empting potential harm to the US. They don't need to send an ICBM our way in order to hurt us. If you don't believe that - watch the movie "the sum of all fears". Smuggling a nuke or something else harmful isn't as difficult as you might think.

 

The war on terrorism did not end with the fall of the Taliban. No one claimed the war on terrorism would be short. Once Iraq falls, then for all practicle purposes, our need for bases in the middle east should go away, especially if Iran turns over a new leaf.

 

If some of you disagree with me - so be it. But before you develop your final opininion, put yourself in the twin towers for a moment, or in the night clubs in Bali, on a bus in Isreal, or a theater in Moscow. Life here in Japan is relatively safe at the moment, but what if you were in one of those "wrong places at the wrong time", would you have the same opinion?

[Ocean11 0]

 

So Iran, NK, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, China and all the rest are going to be liberated next then? Because if that really is the logic and the truth of the matter, then surely they will.

 

All the times the US has gone after dictators, it has followed US refusal to cooperate with the UN to get them out by other means. Never has enough time been allowed for a method to be found before the goddamn US has waved its magic wand and killed a load of people. The ends don't justify the means.

 

You swallow a lot of lies Ray, and you pass 'em straight on.

[damian 0]

I told him that it is very different from Perl Harbour as there are no Camels in Hawaii.

[confused 0]

RayInJapan

 

Can you answer this for me - why did the War On Terrorism start with 9-11, and not before?

 

I'm from New York by the way, not that it makes much difference.

[RayInJapan 0]

db - as usual, you crack me up. I think that line is better than Oceans line on the dolphins.

 

OC - I swallow a lot of lies? I speak from experience - hands on experience. What do you speak from? As far as I know, you're from the UK, and live here in Japan. What qualifies you to dictate to me or anyone else what is right and what is wrong? The fact you're good at using google? I don't think so. I'll give you that you are qualified to speak on the history of the UK, but unless you've spent some of your grown up years living in America, you have no clue what it actually means to be an American.

 

Iran and Cuba have neither been a threat to the US, nor have they been ultra repressive regimes like Milosavic, Noriega, the Taliban and Saddam.

NK? If the US were the blood thirsty vampires everyone makes us out to be, we would have nailed them long ago despite the fact millions of S.Koreans would die. But we aren't, and have shown great restraint over the years despite many of its acts of agression such as the tree chopping incident, the USS Pueblo etc. China - they have never been a direct threat to the US, although I'm not sure why we stood by and watched Tienimen (sp) Square happen with no ramifications on our part. SA - Again, not an extremely repressive regime - not as free as the US, UK, Australia etc, but they don't go around executing or poison gassing innocent people who disagree with their gov't. I don't particularly care for their attitude - and if we had proof of their involvement in 9-11, their time will come too.

 

Confused - the global war on terrorism started because organized, significant terrorism finally reached America. Prior to that, international terrorism was focused on the US military, Embassies, and other interests overseas. We've always had homegrown terrorism (OKC, abortion clinics, the Atlanta Olympics), but nothing on the scale of 9-11. The war on terrorism also didn't start sooner because Clinton was the president. He did squat when the WTC was bombed in 93, did squat when the US embassies in Africa were bombed in 98, did nothing when the Cole was bombed.

 

When will the war on terrorism end? Thats up to those who think terrorism is a means to an end...

[RayInJapan 0]

One more thing OC - please - show me and the everyone else when/where the US has killed a "load of people". While you're doing a search on google to find the answer, do a search to find when we've saved millions too. You can use the following keywords to help in your search: Somalia, Kosovo, Bosnia, ROK, Kuwait, West Berlin, China, Phillipines, France, Australia as a start.

[confused 0]

Still a little confused with that there, RayInJapan. There was terrorism well before Mr Clinton was in office too. And well before 911. The world is not just the US, you know.

 

Before 911, was all other terrorism just "not important" because it was "not US"???

[wakaran 1]

 Quote:

....you have no clue what it actually means to be an American.

While I usually enjoy reading your comments in general, RayInJapan, you may well think about dropping cringe-inducing comments like that if you want people to read your posts in any seriousness at all.

Just an idea.

[Ocean11 0]

Ray, as most of my news and comment comes via US channels, I'd have to say that I have a good understanding of how Americans think. You don't credit me with enough alertness. Would you like me to tell that you couldn't possibly understand what's going on in Japan because you're not Japanese?

 

As for your 'google' jibe, I think that's your problem, not mine. You have the most superficial knowledge of all the past events you talk about. Personally I'd much rather have lived in Yugoslavia under Milosevic that in Iran if we're talking repressive. If you want to understand the US role in Yugoslavia you could start by reading The Fall of Yugoslavia by Misha Glenny. You might find out a few things about Milosevic while you're at it. Having fought in the 1st Gulf War does not mean that you understand it or even know much about it.

 

It's actually comical that all the countries you mention have been more of a threat to the US than Iraq at one time or another. As for why the US hasn't attacked these other countries, and why the US did nothing about Tiananmen, you're going to have look further than US benign restraint to find your answer.

 

As for what's happening in Britain, it's encouraging that politicians are leaving the government out of concern for the legality of the basis of war. But you wouldn't understand that because you've never lived in Britain.

[damian 0]

I will back Ray on that call.

 

I think his call and the following two of many many others are all fair:

 

...understands what it means to be Australian.

 

.....understand what it means to be an Eskimo.

[DrEvil 0]

Started. Oh well. Funny how as soon as it starts they start telling us that it might "take longer than thought", quite contrary to what they have been saying the past 3 months. Funny, that.

[RayInJapan 0]

Confused - Yes, prior to 9-11, there was terrorism in the world. But 9-11 was the first act of terrorism that killed thousands of people. The US is not alone in the war on terrorism. Post 9-11, the majority of the worlds governments decided together that enough is enough. Memories fade quickly though, and the farther we get from the horror that 9-11 produced, the smaller the threat of global terrorism seems.

 

Wakaran - the part you quoted was aimed at OC. He seems to take great pleasure in taking every opportunity to knock the US and its people. My point to him was that unless he's spent considerable time in the US, he can't understand us as well as he thinks, the same as I can't possibly understand what it means to be a Palestinian cause I havent' been there. He once said Americans learn their own history from watching Hollywood movies. He just said he's learned what he knows about Americans from watching US television. Kinda hypocritical if you ask me.

 

Oc - Its obvious to many you are quite intelligent, your post on the venus line was well written. You seem to take great pride however in attacking anyone who challenges you. You asked if I could understand Japan? To a certain extend, of course I can - I live here. Being here in person is not the same as seeing it on the news. I'll admit I've never been to Iran, nor do I personally know anyone who has, so its possible they are in fact more repressive than Yugo. But the US military is a small community, and though I've never been there, I have many friends who have walked the streets of Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania, and Sarajevo trying to keep the peace after the US said, enough is enough - no more killing. And when Milosovic said "screw you", we put him in his place and he's now standing trial for crimes against humanity.

 

There are over 30 other wars going on around the world at the moment, yet almost no one is protesting or chanting "give peace a chance" and crying over the innocent lives lost in them.

 

I gather its because "damn you Peru" doesn't have the same ring as "down with Bush".

[nzlegend 1]

Iraqs has allegedly fired some SCUDS.....interesting as they were banned by the UN resolution....."oops deary me" sayes Saddam to his Republican Guard " where did those come from"?

.."Little Hansie Blix mustnt have founded these ones..silly little fool his was".

 

The war has started so lets all get behind the Coalition, stop bickering and hope its ends as quickly as possible and the evil, f***wit Hussein can get his just desserts and rot in hell.

[confused 0]

 Quote:

But 9-11 was the first act of terrorism that killed thousands of people

Really? Is that right? So at what number does it become OK to fight back? 10? 100? 500? 1000? Or what?

No. I think it had everything to do with the fact that it was on US soil. That is why.

O11's style may not be my favorite (but his posts are always a good read!), but his points are on the whole very valid.

Again, let me point out once more that I am from New York.

[confused 0]

Kamoshika, I thought I read in another thread that you were all for open discussions? So what's all this 'stop bickering' business then?

 

[RayInJapan 0]

Confused - the first WTC attack in 93 was on US soil, but the reality was it was no where near as horrific.

 

You're correct about everyones opinion counting. Debate is healthy, and necessary. What I despise is when folks take it to a personal level.

[Ocean11 0]

> trying to keep the peace after the US said, enough is enough - no more killing.

 

Ray, that is a gross oversimplification. Before the last Gulf War and before the major horrors went down in the Balkans, the countries of the region were working hard to find peaceful solutions. Often their efforts were not reported, were under-reported, or were totally mis-reported, so that a great many people had no idea about it. In these cases, they looked to the US for diplomatic support and they most certainly did not receive it. Why? Largely contempt on the part of the US government towards the countries involved (including the UK in the Balkans affair).

 

In the Balkans and the Gulf, there was every chance that local diplomacy would work. However, the US didn't give it a chance and intervened militarily, with horrible consequences (under-reported) in both cases (Americans killing people of the region and creating circumstances where they are more likely to kill each other). This is exactly the same as is happening now.

 

Now lest you go accusing me of being anti-American or getting personal, I haven't said anything personal about you Ray. As for being anti-American, I'm not. I don't approve of American foreign policy and the attitudes of Americans that support it, which is not to be anti-American. And I wouldn't normally harp on about it unless somebody was loudly singing the virtues of those policies. And that person was you Ray.

 

Finally, there's no hypocrisy involved in saying that getting your history from films is wrong and then saying one gets an understanding of a culture from watching its films, reading its books, and absorbing its media. S'apples n' oranges that is. If I was to do a course in 'American studies' at a university, that is exactly what the curriculum would involve.

[RayInJapan 0]

This is an internet forum, not a think tank, so over-simplification is somewhat required. We don't have the space to produce pages of documentation in order to prove/disprove a point. I remember one person lamenting having to read long documents in order to develop an opinion, so doing so wouldn't help anyway.

 

You disagree with US Foreign policy, take every opportunity to voice that disagreement, and then get upset cause someone dares to challenge you? You said your proud of those in the British gov't who are resigning because of their beliefs. I actually applaud their actions, because they are putting their money where their mouth is so to speak. Standing up for their convictions despite the fact they know it may hurt them politically and financially. Though I disagree with them politically, I say good on them. Thats what living in a free society is all about, thats what I believe America is all about, and thats a big part of why I've spent 23 years in the military. Freedom is a precious thing I want everyone to have...

 

Using the net to discuss hot topics is difficult at best so I guess the best thing to say at this point is "we agree to disagree".

[nzlegend 1]

 Quote:

Originally posted by confused:
Kamoshika, I thought I read in another thread that you were all for open discussions? So what's all this 'stop bickering' business then?

typed in haste...regretted for a lifetime.
anyway such issues can strongly divide people / friends who were previousy civil and courteous to eachother. A case in point was when I was a Junior high School Student, or Intermediate School student to be more precise, back in the late '80's I had a good rapport with Mr X teacher, he was a top bloke. There was another teacher Mrs Y who never spoke to and ignored Mr X , so one day I said why does Mrs Y act so snobbishly and rudely to you?. Mr X told me that in the late 1970's they had been good friends and their families too, but in 1981 there had been the South Afican Rugby tour of New Zealand. A still isolated Apartheid South Africa had been invited to play Rugby the #1 game in both countries and a way of life for some people. There were massive protests and demostrations about this and it divided the country. Some said its just sport, the best teams in the world playing eachother, others said its the racial issues we cant let them in to play Rugby, we'd be condoning Apartheid
Anyway Mrs Y was a leftwinger and staunchly against the tour, Mr X loved Rugby and said let them play, dont involve sport in politics. The staffroom at school was bitterly divided and some of those teachers to that day still didnt give one another the time of day.

So lets respect eachothers views and beliefs and not get too acrimoious, because this is an awesome forum here at SJ, lets not end up like Mr X and Mrs Y. lets Agree to disagree