Malala has won the Nobel Peace Prize – and it’s about time | Warrior Forum - The #1 Digital Marketing Forum & Marketplace

Kay King

10 years ago

I agree - two awards this year and both of them made SENSE!

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

Your comfort zone is where your dreams go to die.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9586534].message }}

discrat

10 years ago

What an extraordinary young woman !

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Nothing to see here including a Sig so just move on :)

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9586778].message }}

Lex Gabriel 10 years ago

Originally Posted by discrat

What an extraordinary young woman !

Extraordinary and beyond. Truly deserved prize
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9586807].message }}

Jonathan 2.0

Banned 10 years ago

Originally Posted by discrat

What an extraordinary young woman !

Amen. : )

Extraordinary on many levels.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"Each problem has hidden in it an opportunity so powerful that it literally dwarfs the problem. The greatest success stories were created by people who recognized a problem and turned it into an opportunity."―Joseph Sugarman

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588628].message }}

The Niche Man

10 years ago

Talk about a natural, a born prodigy, gifted ... yet still humble.
See that Hollywood brats. That's the way a "real" child star acts!

She's like a Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King and Ghadi rolled into one. And one important thing she has in common with those icons, she's living her life to the fullest ...but she's not afraid to die for her cause.

She's like, "Taliban who"? That's Gansta in my opinion.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Download "Free 80 Page E-Book"
"201 Ways To Live Better On Less Money".
"Because The Easiest Way To Make Money is ... ... By Saving Some First!"

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9589108].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

New Nobel Peace Prize Winner to Obama: U.S. Drone Attacks Fuel Terrorism | Ben Swann Truth In Media

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590347].message }}

HeySal

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

New Nobel Peace Prize Winner to Obama: U.S. Drone Attacks Fuel Terrorism | Ben Swann Truth In Media

I'm sure they do. However - she's naive in thinking sociopaths can be stopped via logic. Tyrants are sociopaths. They don't respond to normal logic -- or emotion. The only way to stop one is to stop him/her. Period.

The Taliban fooled her countrymen into accepting their "leadership", and once they had power they started slaughtering people - her words, not mine. Whether we attack or not -- those people are either going to walk on eggshells to please their masters and be completely enslaved, or someone's going to get rid of the sociopaths that took over her region. That's about all there is to it. I believe she's right, though - education is a key factor in stopping new waves of terrorists/tyrants. You still have to scrub the old ones or that education is not going to be forthcoming - and if it is, it will be nothing but an education of "allowed" propaganda.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590411].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I'm sure they do. However - she's naive in thinking sociopaths can be stopped via logic. Tyrants are sociopaths. They don't respond to normal logic -- or emotion. The only way to stop one is to stop him/her. Period.

The Taliban fooled her countrymen into accepting their "leadership", and once they had power they started slaughtering people - her words, not mine. Whether we attack or not -- those people are either going to walk on eggshells to please their masters and be completely enslaved, or someone's going to get rid of the sociopaths that took over her region. That's about all there is to it. I believe she's right, though - education is a key factor in stopping new waves of terrorists/tyrants. You still have to scrub the old ones or that education is not going to be forthcoming - and if it is, it will be nothing but an education of "allowed" propaganda.

You missed her whole point Sal. What she is saying is the drone killings are turning the people there that are suppose to be on our side against us. Other people living in that region have said the same thing. Our drone killings of innocent people simply create more people who support and join the Taliban, it's a freakin recruitment tool for them.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590475].message }}

HeySal

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

You missed her whole point Sal. What she is saying is the drone killings are turning the people there that are suppose to be on our side against us. Other people living in that region have said the same thing. Our drone killings of innocent people simply create more people who support and join the Taliban, it's a freakin recruitment tool for them.

Sorry - ill thought out response. I was responding more to her not understanding that these people won't just go away.

Yeah - if our drones were just hitting terrorists, I think they'd be thrilled with us. Unfortunately, too many innocents are being slaughtered for our efforts to be advantageous to us. I can't imagine how it would feel to have to be afraid of every plane, etc that you see in the sky -- or to lose your children and have the country that killed them have only "oops" as a response.

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590521].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Sorry - ill thought out response. I was responding more to her not understanding that these people won't just go away.

Yeah - if our drones were just hitting terrorists, I think they'd be thrilled with us. Unfortunately, too many innocents are being slaughtered for our efforts to be advantageous to us. I can't imagine how it would feel to have to be afraid of every plane, etc that you see in the sky -- or to lose your children and have the country that killed them have only "oops" as a response.

Remember also Sal the Taliban was formed when Russia invaded Afghanistan. Then we called them "freedom fighters" and covertly supported them. They didn't become "terrorists" until they tried getting us out of their country also. There is every little we do in the Middle East that doesn't promote and grow "terrorism".
I don't support what the Taliban, Al Queda, or ISIS does, but I know who the real villain is over there. You know if we would stop killing people and trying to manipulate governments over there that would be nice

[ 1 ] Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590540].message }}

HeySal

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Remember also Sal the Taliban was formed when Russia invaded Afghanistan. Then we called them "freedom fighters" and covertly supported them. They didn't become "terrorists" until they tried getting us out of their country also. There is every little we do in the Middle East that doesn't promote and grow "terrorism".
I don't support what the Taliban, Al Queda, or ISIS does, but I know who the real villain is over there. You know if we would stop killing people and trying to manipulate governments over there that would be nice

It would be nice if we'd just butt out of everyone else's business and let them handle their own countries. Our leaders are too greed sick and sociopathic to allow that to happen. I'd love to see the Hague step in and prosecute at least half of those arrogant self-stricken *******s we have at the top right now.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590565].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Remember also Sal the Taliban was formed when Russia invaded Afghanistan. Then we called them "freedom fighters" and covertly supported them.

You might be thinking of the Mujahedeen who were formed during the Russian Afghanistan war. The Taliban was formed in Afghanistan in 1994, five years after The USSR left Afghanistan. The Taliban was mostly supported by Pakistan, not the US.

The Taliban during their rule committed massacres against civilians, kept food from getting to 160,000 starving people for political reasons and committed ethnic cleansing. They were terrorists before 2001 when the US got involved.

[ 3 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591818].message }}

Richard Van

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Remember also Sal the Taliban was formed when Russia invaded Afghanistan. Then we called them "freedom fighters" and covertly supported them. They didn't become "terrorists" until they tried getting us out of their country also. There is every little we do in the Middle East that doesn't promote and grow "terrorism".
I don't support what the Taliban, Al Queda, or ISIS does, but I know who the real villain is over there. You know if we would stop killing people and trying to manipulate governments over there that would be nice

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

You might be thinking of the Mujahedeen who were formed during the Russian Afghanistan war. The Taliban was formed in Afghanistan in 1994, five years after The USSR left Afghanistan. The Taliban was mostly supported by Pakistan, not the US.

The Taliban during their rule committed massacres against civilians, kept food from getting to 160,000 starving people for political reasons and committed ethnic cleansing. They were terrorists before 2001 when the US got involved.

I think it's actually a bit of both.

The Taliban movement traces its origin to the Pakistani-trained mujahideen in northern Pakistan, during the Soviet war in Afghanistan

I believe it's origins were in Pakistan, they were the Pakistanis mujahideen that were also fighting the Russians. When the Russians left the Taliban were the strongest of the mujahideen groups and fairly quickly went about either beating or forcing other groups to join them. One group they couldn't convince was the Northern Alliance who are also mujahideen.

Mujahideen literally means "People doing Jihad"

[ 2 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Wibble, bark, my old man's a mushroom etc...

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591841].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

From the wiki article Richard: "The most often-repeated story and the Taliban's own story of how Mullah Omar first mobilized his followers is that in the spring of 1994..."

The Taliban weren't formed yet when the USSR left. When they talk about the origin starting back in the previous decade a big part of that is the involvement of Pakistan.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9591934].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

They were terrorists before 2001 when the US got involved.

Well if you want to nit pic, the US was involved in Afghanistan long before 2001.

Michael Johns, the former Heritage Foundation foreign policy analyst and White House speechwriter to President George H. W. Bush, stated that "the Reagan-led effort to support freedom fighters resisting Soviet oppression led successfully to the first major military defeat of the Soviet Union... Sending the Red Army packing from Afghanistan proved one of the single most important contributing factors in one of history's most profoundly positive and important developments.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_ac...in_Afghanistan

None of which changes the fact of what Malala and others from that region have said about the drone strikes killing innocent people and turning them against the US and siding up with the Taliban.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592032].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

This is an older article, but the man from Yemen is saying the same thing as Malala.

In al-Muslimi's estimation, "the killing of innocent civilians by U.S. missiles in Yemen is helping to destabilize my country and create an environment from which AQAP benefits." They use innocents killed by drone strikes as a recruiting tool and rely on the impression drones create that America is at war with all Yemenis. One little boy, whose father was killed in a drone strike, carries a picture of a plane in his pocket and says he wants revenge against his father's killer, "America." Drone strikes "are the face of America to many Yemenis," he reports. "If America is providing economic, social and humanitarian assistance to Yemen, the vast majority of the Yemeni people know nothing about it. Everyone in Yemen, however, knows about America and its drones." This Yemeni Man Loves America, Hates al-Qaeda, and Says Drone Strikes Make Them Stronger - The Atlantic

Thanks

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592144].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Well if you want to nit pic, the US was involved in Afghanistan long before 2001.

Yes, we funded them as did Saudi Arabia, Britain, Egypt, Iran, and China. We didn't train them or even have direct contact.

None of which changes the fact of what Malala and others from that region have said about the drone strikes killing innocent people and turning them against the US and siding up with the Taliban.

There are those who in Pakistan who think differently about this than her also. First of all, despite what the Pakistan government says in public they gave approval for drone use.

Ex-Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf acknowledged his government secretly signed off on U.S. drone strikes, the first time a top past or present Pakistani official has admitted publicly to such a deal.

Ex-Pakistani leader admits secret deal with U.S. on drone strikes - CNN.com

Some Pakistanis support the drone strikes:

On Wednesday, a governing party representative said there was some public support in Pakistan for U.S. missile attacks on suspected militants.
"There is a segment in the country who support the drone attacks, and they feel that drone attacks have been helpful in eliminating many of the militants," Pakistan People's Party spokeswoman Fauzia Wahab said...

A U.S. diplomat, based in Peshawar near the border territories, mentions in a 2008 cable a meeting he had with a senior official whose name is redacted. The official "said he wanted to say in an unofficial capacity that he and many others could accept Predator strikes as they were surgical and clearly hitting high value targets. He mentioned that fear among the local populace in areas where the strikes have been occurring was lessening because 'everyone knew that they only hit the house or location of very bad people.'"...

It seems that Pakistan saw the drone attacks as so effective, it wanted some of its own. At a meeting in Islamabad in June 2009 attended by then-U.S. National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones, President Asif Ali Zardari "made repeated pleas for drones to be 'put in Pakistan's hands'

WikiLeaks: Pakistan quietly approved drone attacks, U.S. special units - CNN.com

According to a public opinion survey conducted between November 2008 and January 2009 by the Pakistani Aryana Institute for Regional Research and Advocacy, approximately half of the respondents considered drone strikes in Federally Administered Tribal Areas accurate and approximately the same number of respondents said that the strikes did not lead to anti-American sentiment and were effective in damaging the militants...

"We need to wake up to the reality that the enemy has grown very strong in the years we temporized and tried to do deals with them. Clearly, we need allies in this fight. Howling at the moon is not going to get us the cooperation we so desperately need. A solid case can be made for more drone attacks, not less." ~ Irfan Husain, Pakistan journalist...

In October 2013, the Economist found support among locals for the drone attacks as protection against the militants, claiming no civilians were killed this year.

Drone attacks in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"At the same time, however, I also hear about the drone attacks attacking the extremists and I also hear about top al-Qaida officials or, you know, top Taliban officials being assassinated by the drone attacks. So I'm affected in a way that because terrorism affects my life personally, I have my kids growing up here. I am very vulnerable to terrorist attacks every time I go out in the city or do anything.

Whenever I hear about an attack on the top al-Qaida or the top Taliban groups, it's something that I feel like something's happening to counter this new kind of war, you know, that we're facing, which is not a war where we face armies, but we're facing a war - you know, this more pervasive kind of enemy that hides in caves and comes out and attacks our shops and public places...

We have to ask the right questions. When we say, are we against drones or for it, it doesn't simply mean that are you for the deaths that are happening because of the drone attacks, or are you against them. You know, the civilian casualties is what I'm talking about. It's not as simple as that. I see it in a way that drones are something - it is a weaponry that is a precision weapon, that is something going to probably stay in the future." ~ Aisha Sarwari, Islamabad-based journalist.

Do Pakistanis Support U.S. Drone Attacks? : NPR

To find out how Pakistanis think about drones after living under their shadow for nearly a decade, I recently spent a month travelling to Pakistan’s large cities and small villages -- places where most people’s concerns revolve around their day-to-day struggle to make ends meet. Talk to them, and you will find that the monolithic view in the West that all Pakistanis are enraged by drone strikes is inaccurate. In fact, further north -- closer to the areas that bear the brunt of the strikes -- it is not uncommon to encounter strong support for them.

Why Some Pakistanis Support Drone Strikes | Foreign Affairs

As far as Drones being used as a recruitment tool for the Taliban, I'm sure there is some truth to that. However, when you consider that, according to the United Nations, the Taliban were responsible for 76% of civilian casualties in Afghanistan in 2009, 75% in 2010, 80% in 2011 and 80% in 2012, you have to realize the Taliban aren't all that loved either. Plus, the Taliban target civilians and these drone attacks don't.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592256].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Yes, we funded them as did Saudi Arabia, Britain, Egypt, Iran, and China. We didn't train them or even have direct contact.

There are those who in Pakistan who think differently about this than her also. First of all, despite what the Pakistan government says in public they gave approval for drone use.

Ex-Pakistani leader admits secret deal with U.S. on drone strikes - CNN.com

Some Pakistanis support the drone strikes:

WikiLeaks: Pakistan quietly approved drone attacks, U.S. special units - CNN.com

Drone attacks in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do Pakistanis Support U.S. Drone Attacks? : NPR

Why Some Pakistanis Support Drone Strikes | Foreign Affairs

As far as Drones being used as a recruitment tool for the Taliban, I'm sure there is some truth to that. However, when you consider that, according to the United Nations, the Taliban were responsible for 76% of civilian casualties in Afghanistan in 2009, 75% in 2010, 80% in 2011 and 80% in 2012, you have to realize the Taliban aren't all that loved either. Plus, the Taliban target civilians and these drone attacks don't.

So government officials there support the drone strikes, no surprise.
If you don't mind I'll take the words of two common people who have lived through the strikes over politicians that profit from them.
Try convincing Malala, Farea al-Muslimi, and others who have lost family members or witnessed innocent people killed by them how good they are.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592386].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

So government officials there support the drone strikes, no surprise.
If you don't mind I'll take the words of two common people who have lived through the strikes over politicians that profit from them.
Try convincing Malala, Farea al-Muslimi, and others who have lost family members or witnessed innocent people killed by them how good they are.

You obviously didn't read all that I posted.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592437].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

You obviously didn't read all that I posted.

I didn't read them fully, but I noticed in every article they stated their governments supported the drone strikes even if they originally did so covertly.
I also don't buy into the argument that just because we don't target civilians with the strikes that makes them ok. We still kill civilians with them and weather it's on purpose or not, that's still wrong.
The bottom line is our foreign policy (and that of other outside nations like Russia) in the Middle East is what has caused the problems there and our current foreign policy there is only making it worse.
Do we have more or less terrorist groups there now? Since we've increased the drone strikes have the groups diminished or have they become more violent?
We invaded Iraq then pulled our troops out, is that country better off?
Is Yemen better off now after all the drone strikes there?
Show me just one aspect of our Middle East foreign policy that has brought peace to the area.
Look at the current policy with ISIS. We're outraged that they have beheaded a few people and are determined to wipe them out. Yet one of our allies in that has beheaded more people in a moth then ISIS has ever.

While the beheading of ISIS captives James Foley and Steven Sotloff provoked global outrage, human rights groups decry the limited international attention given to Saudi Arabia's use of decapitation even for nonviolent crimes -- a punishment so routine that Deera Square in Riyadh is sometimes referred to as "Chop Chop Square."
U.S. President Barack Obama failed to raise "a single human rights issue" with Riyadh during his trip to Saudi Arabia in March, said Adam Coogle, a Middle East researcher at HRW. Secretary of State John Kerry was in Saudi Arabia on Thursday to discuss U.S. strategy to combat Islamic State fighters in the region. In press briefings ahead of the trip, there were no indication that the issue of human rights would be brought up.
"There are a lot of interests at play in the U.S.-Saudi relationship, including economic and geostrategic issues as well as counterterrorism," Coogle said. "Unfortunately, the U.S. prioritized these other interests over using its close relationship to push the Saudi government to make human rights reforms."
Coogle said Saudi Arabia executes, on average, about 100 people a year, most via beheading, noting that the kingdom orders the death penalty as the sentence for a number of nonviolent offenses, including drug crimes, adultery and practices it deems witchcraft.
Beheadings remain integral part of Saudi justice system | Al Jazeera America

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9592635].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

I also don't buy into the argument that just because we don't target civilians with the strikes that makes them ok. We still kill civilians with them and weather it's on purpose or not, that's still wrong.

Another difference between the US and the terrorists besides the fact that we don't target and try to kill civilians, is that we have taken steps to avoid killing civilians while using drones by using smaller missiles, using unarmed mini drones for further surveillance and adopting more rules.

I agree any civilian death is terrible and not "ok", but one of the reasons to use drones is because they are widely acknowledged to be the weapon that kills the smallest percentage of civilians. You brought up the Iraq war, which you know from our earlier conversations is something I consider a huge mistake. In that war, where we put boots on the ground and bombed the hell out of the country using more traditional and larger weapons the resulting civilian deaths is estimated at at least 190,000, with millions of refugees.

Pakistan has estimated 6% of the deaths from drones were civilians. Compare that to the number and percentage of civilian deaths in other wars: WW2 40% to 67% estimated civilian deaths for a total of approximately 45,000,000. In the Korean, Vietnam, and Balkan Wars, the percentages are approximately 70%, 31%, and 45% respectively.

I not really pro drones but what are the alternatives? As the Islamabad journalist Aisha Sarwari said in one of the articles I linked to "When we say, are we against drones or for it, it doesn't simply mean that are you for the deaths that are happening because of the drone attacks, or are you against them. You know, the civilian casualties is what I'm talking about. It's not as simple as that. I see it in a way that drones are something - it is a weaponry that is a precision weapon, that is something going to probably stay in the future."

The only alternatives are to use more traditional weapons and boots on the ground or do nothing militarily. As Pakistan journalist Irfan Husain said "We need to wake up to the reality that the enemy has grown very strong in the years we temporized and tried to do deals with them. Clearly, we need allies in this fight. Howling at the moon is not going to get us the cooperation we so desperately need."

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595132].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Another difference between the US and the terrorists besides the fact that we don't target and try to kill civilians, is that we have taken steps to avoid killing civilians while using drones by using smaller missiles, using unarmed mini drones for further surveillance and adopting more rules.

I agree any civilian death is terrible and not "ok", but one of the reasons to use drones is because they are widely acknowledged to be the weapon that kills the smallest percentage of civilians. You brought up the Iraq war, which you know from our earlier conversations is something I consider a huge mistake. In that war, where we put boots on the ground and bombed the hell out of the country using more traditional and larger weapons the resulting civilian deaths is estimated at at least 190,000, with millions of refugees.

Pakistan has estimated 6% of the deaths from drones were civilians. Compare that to the number and percentage of civilian deaths in other wars: WW2 40% to 67% estimated civilian deaths for a total of approximately 45,000,000. In the Korean, Vietnam, and Balkan Wars, the percentages are approximately 70%, 31%, and 45% respectively.

I not really pro drones but what are the alternatives? As the Islamabad journalist Aisha Sarwari said in one of the articles I linked to "When we say, are we against drones or for it, it doesn't simply mean that are you for the deaths that are happening because of the drone attacks, or are you against them. You know, the civilian casualties is what I'm talking about. It's not as simple as that. I see it in a way that drones are something - it is a weaponry that is a precision weapon, that is something going to probably stay in the future."

The only alternatives are to use more traditional weapons and boots on the ground or do nothing militarily. As Pakistan journalist Irfan Husain said "We need to wake up to the reality that the enemy has grown very strong in the years we temporized and tried to do deals with them. Clearly, we need allies in this fight. Howling at the moon is not going to get us the cooperation we so desperately need."

I think the alternative is to stop killing people in the name of peace. We need to recognize that our current policy is not working and does not benefit us or the countries we are involved with military action in. When I say current I don't just mean this administrations policy, but the policy we have had for years.
Like I said you can't find anything positive that our foreign policy concerning the Middle East has accomplished. In fact our policies have done nothing over there but turn more people against us.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595186].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

I think the alternative is to stop killing people in the name of peace. We need to recognize that our current policy is not working and does not benefit us or the countries we are involved with military action in. When I say current I don't just mean this administrations policy, but the policy we have had for years.
Like I said you can't find anything positive that our foreign policy concerning the Middle East has accomplished. In fact our policies have done nothing over there but turn more people against us.

We can't go back and change what we did in the past Thom. I agree we made many mistakes but just ignoring Al Qaeda, Isis and the Taliban doesn't seem to be something most think is a good idea. In the case of Isis, you mentioned the beheadings of Americans. 99.9% of their killing has been of other Muslims and non Americans. It's estimated 9,343 civilians were killed in Iraq between Jan and September, mostly by Isis. In Syria it is estimated there are almost 200,000 deaths with many of these being civilian. Many coming from Assad and also Isis. I'm not sure how these deaths are the US's fault.

While I acknowledge past mistakes we have made, what exactly were we doing in 2001 to warrant the attacks on us? We weren't in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda and Suddam Hussein were not allies. We weren't killing people. The Taliban and Al Qaeda were though. Just doing nothing doesn't seem like much of an option at this point.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595274].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

By the way, here's another quote from Malala that's not getting much coverage in the media. She made this last year in a message to the 32nd Congress of Pakistani Marxists:

First of all I'd like to thank The Struggle and the IMT [International Marxist Tendency] for giving me a chance to speak last year at their Summer Marxist School in Swat and also for introducing me to Marxism and Socialism. I just want to say that in terms of education, as well as other problems in Pakistan, it is high time that we did something to tackle them ourselves. It's important to take the initiative. We cannot wait around for any one else to come and do it. Why are we waiting for someone else to come and fix things? Why aren't we doing it ourselves?

I would like to send my heartfelt greetings to the congress. I am convinced Socialism is the only answer and I urge all comrades to take this struggle to a victorious conclusion. Only this will free us from the chains of bigotry and exploitation.

Thanks

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595304].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

We can't go back and change what we did in the past Thom. I agree we made many mistakes but just ignoring Al Qaeda, Isis and the Taliban doesn't seem to be something most think is a good idea. In the case of Isis, you mentioned the beheadings of Americans. 99.9% of their killing has been of other Muslims and non Americans. It's estimated 9,343 civilians were killed in Iraq between Jan and September, mostly by Isis. In Syria it is estimated there are almost 200,000 deaths with many of these being civilian. Many coming from Assad and also Isis. I'm not sure how these deaths are the US's fault.

While I acknowledge past mistakes we have made, what exactly were we doing in 2001 to warrant the attacks on us? We weren't in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda and Suddam Hussein were not allies. We weren't killing people. The Taliban and Al Qaeda were though. Just doing nothing doesn't seem like much of an option at this point.

Like I already mentioned a couple times one of our biggest allies there routinely beheads and executes it's citizens for minor non-violent crimes, which we simply ignore.
You're right we can't undo the damage we have already done over there, but why continue in the same vein?
Do you seriously believe we did nothing in the Middle East before the 9/11 attack? Tim we have been meddling in their affairs for at least the past 60 years and that's if you don't count our military support (as in weapons and money) we've given to Israel.
Did Hussein ever attack us? Just because he wasn't our allie is a reason to invade his country? That seems to be our policy over there. If a country doesn't want us to manipulate them, they are classified as enemies. Look at Iran and Syria as examples.
When we install governments in a country (like we did in Iran with the Shah) and those governments kill it's people and steals their countries resources for our gain, then yes we are killing people. We are not innocent at all. When we supply Israel with military aide so they can commit genocide, then yeas we are killing people.
I didn't say we should do nothing, what I said is what we have been doing is not working, again show me just one positive effect of our current Middle East Policy, just one.
As for socialism, yeah that worked so well in The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, didn't it?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595401].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

In case you've forgotten Tim. The reasons behind the 9/11 attacks.

U.S. support of Israel
Support for the "attacks against Muslims" in Somalia
Support of Russian "atrocities against Muslims" in Chechnya
Support of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan
Support of Indian "oppression against Muslims" in Kashmir
The presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia
The sanctions against Iraq
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595495].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

In case you've forgotten Tim. The reasons behind the 9/11 attacks.

Didn't forget and still don't think these reasons warranted the attacks. Should we have stopped supporting Israel because Bin Laden was anti Israel? Should we have left Saudi Arabia sooner? Saudi Arabia allowed us to be there. We didn't put the Royal family in power. They have been around since before the US was formed. Iraq deserved sanctions after invading Kuwait.

Bin Laden was a sociopathic mass murderer who laughed at the idea of thousands of our citizens dying in the world trade centers. I don't think we should base our foreign policy on his thoughts and opinions.

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595827].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Didn't forget and still don't think these reasons warranted the attacks. Should we have stopped supporting Israel because Bin Laden was anti Israel? Should we have left Saudi Arabia sooner? Saudi Arabia allowed us to be there. We didn't put the Royal family in power. They have been around since before the US was formed. Iraq deserved sanctions after invading Kuwait.

Bin Laden was a sociopathic mass murderer who laughed at the idea of thousands of our citizens dying in the world trade centers. I don't think we should base our foreign policy on his thoughts and opinions.

No we shouldn't base our policies on his decisions, but we need to recognize that our policies formed them.
I don't get what you're trying to say about Saudi Arabia. It's not like we invaded them. They allow us to have bases there because they are our ally in the Middle East. This is also the country that beheads it's citizens for things like witchcraft.
As for Israel, check out some of the UN resolutions against them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._and_Palestine
From 69 "Condemns Israeli "violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms" in the occupied territories"
From 1990 "condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount."

What you and many others don't get is it's our continued involvement over there that creates the frustration that causes people to go over the edge.
Just look at Saudi Arabia, it is nothing more then a brutal monarchy. Just from that, what do you think the people over there think of us when they know we are friends of that monarchy and have done nothing but cover our eyes over the daily atrocities that happen there. Saudi has a flat out terrible human rights record. Yet this is a country the president recently bragged about being our ally in the bombings in Syria. By the way do you think our allies in the bombings are doing it because of ISIS? Think again.
Crude Oil and the Syrian Conflict

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595901].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

This is also the country that beheads it's citizens for things like witchcraft.

Well, I'm not in favor of capital punishment no matter what the technique is. I think I would rather be beheaded that given an injection that takes 30 minutes to kill me.

Regarding Saudi Arabia: There aren't many democracies in the middle east. Most are/were brutal monarchies and dictatorships.

What you and many others don't get is it's our continued involvement over there that creates the frustration that causes people to go over the edge.

I guess that is what happened with ISIS huh? They went nutts because we support Israel and Saudi Arabia is an ally. That's why they kill so many of their fellow muslims? Doesn't make sense Thom.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596098].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Well, I'm not in favor of capital punishment no matter what the technique is. I think I would rather be beheaded that given an injection that takes 30 minutes to kill me.

Regarding Saudi Arabia: There aren't many democracies in the middle east. Most are/were brutal monarchies and dictatorships.

I guess that is what happened with ISIS huh? They went nutts because we support Israel and Saudi Arabia is an ally. That's why they kill so many of their fellow muslims? Doesn't make sense Thom.

Wow that's your answer for being beheaded for witchcraft and other non violent crimes?

So because there aren't many democracies there we should be allies with brutal monarchs, yeah that makes sense

Didn't ISIS start as a rebel group fighting Ashad? What they basically are is a political organization using religion as a front. Their goal was to set up a state. Which they have done. They have also formed a government for that state and have an army. So like any invading army they will kill who they perceive to be the enemy.
Why do you think they are targeting the US as an enemy? Because they don't like our freedom?
With our foreign policy of suppling support to Iraq and other countries over there it seems like our policies are why they are angry with us.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596148].message }}

TimPhelan

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Wow that's your answer for being beheaded for witchcraft and other non violent crimes?

Thom, shit like that happens all over the world. The bottom line Saudi Arabia isn't beheading amercian journalists and promising to keep doing that. Plus, ISIS is killing people by the thousands for no other reason than they are in the way. The issue isn't beheadings. You say Saudi Arabia has beheaded more people than ISIS, but that isn't the issue. They, ISIS, are killing thousands and thousands of innocent people. Mostly by shooting them.

Why do you think they are targeting the US as an enemy? Because they don't like our freedom?
With our foreign policy of suppling support to Iraq and other countries over there it seems like our policies are why they are angry with us.

They started killing US civilians after we started bombing them. So yes, it was our policy of bombing them that made them target us. lol

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Over 50 Dating

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596222].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by TimPhelan

Thom, shit like that happens all over the world. The bottom line Saudi Arabia isn't beheading amercian journalists and promising to keep doing that. Plus, ISIS is killing people by the thousands for no other reason than they are in the way. The issue isn't beheadings. You say Saudi Arabia has beheaded more people than ISIS, but that isn't the issue. They, ISIS, are killing thousands and thousands of innocent people. Mostly by shooting them.

They started killing US civilians after we started bombing them. So yes, it was our policy of bombing them that made them target us. lol

I get it, peoples lives are only important if they're American.
Apparently it's a numbers game also. It's alright if an ally kills innocent people because, you know they don't kill as many as ISIS.

You really don't see how our policies in the Middle East cause the hatred towards us over there or is it that you don't care?
So I guess as far as you're concerned we should just continue on the same path in the Middle East that we have been on all these years. Eventually we'll just kill them all so it will work out in the long run.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596252].message }}

whateverpedia 10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

Eventually we'll just kill them all so it will work out in the long run.

Assuming that "they" don't kill "us" first of course.
- Thanks
Signature

Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
So that blind people can hate them as well.
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596334].message }}

HeySal

10 years ago

YAY. This is an incredible person. Now if she can only encourage about 7 billion others to be just as incredible, maybe we can get this world rolling in the right direction again.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9586896].message }}

HN Banned 10 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588224].message }}
- TimPhelan 10 years ago
  
  [DELETED]
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588294].message }}
- mattschymanga 10 years ago
  
  [DELETED]
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588364].message }}

joe golfer

10 years ago

Saw her give a speech on TV - wow! Such poise, power and presence. This girl is special.

Thanks

Signature

Marketing is not a battle of products. It is a battle of perceptions.
- Jack Trout

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9588558].message }}

MarvyDery

10 years ago

Originally Posted by ppcmanager

No questions about this one - truly deserving.

CNN News Link:

Malala has won the Nobel Peace Prize

The Daily Show: Extended Interview: Malala Yousafzai - YouTube

yes she truly deserves the award. Keep the fire burning Malala!

Thanks

Signature

Xcitement Hub | Ghana Info | Tech Tips

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9590455].message }}

Shkoczhek

10 years ago

She totally deserved that nobel prize imho, her foreing policy is really accurate!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9595222].message }}

HeySal

10 years ago

Right now in the middle east there are groups forming that are picking off ISIS (and whatever other names they go by) fighters a couple at a time. ISIS is getting nervous and their men are starting to be seen only in groups.

This is the way it needs to go. Get rid of the tyrants and their warriors and leave the people alone. ALL countries should just ignore the middle east and let them go back to fighting among themselves. They've been doing that for over a thousand years. Let em pick each other off if that's the way they want to live, they can do that just as well as anyone else can, so lets just leave, ignore them and let them have at it.

As far as oil - the US just became the largest producer. We don't need them. Cut them off until they learn to behave like humans - and lets start to act like humans ourselves. Drone bombing civilians isn't cutting that one. You don't drop bombs on civilians then wonder why the hell they can't stand the very word "American". We're terrorists.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596076].message }}

ThomM

10 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Right now in the middle east there are groups forming that are picking off ISIS (and whatever other names they go by) fighters a couple at a time. ISIS is getting nervous and their men are starting to be seen only in groups.

This is the way it needs to go. Get rid of the tyrants and their warriors and leave the people alone. ALL countries should just ignore the middle east and let them go back to fighting among themselves. They've been doing that for over a thousand years. Let em pick each other off if that's the way they want to live, they can do that just as well as anyone else can, so lets just leave, ignore them and let them have at it.

As far as oil - the US just became the largest producer. We don't need them. Cut them off until they learn to behave like humans - and lets start to act like humans ourselves. Drone bombing civilians isn't cutting that one. You don't drop bombs on civilians then wonder why the hell they can't stand the very word "American". We're terrorists.

They should be taking care of their own problems. Like you said they've been doing that long before we came along.
Of course if we where out of it the terrorist would loose a big chunk of their weapon supplies and wouldn't be the threat they are currently.Isis jihadis using captured arms and troop carriers from US and Saudis | World news | The Guardian
The purpose of the pipeline through Syria is so they can force Russia out of the Eastern Europe natural gas market.
Naturally that would be a huge benefit the the Ukraine gas company that Biden's son works for.
It's Totally Normal That Joe Biden's Son Works for a Ukrainian Energy Company - The Wire

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
Getting old ain't for sissy's
As you are I was, as I am you will be
You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596116].message }}

TimPhelan 10 years ago

Originally Posted by ThomM

The purpose of the pipeline through Syria is so they can force Russia out of the Eastern Europe natural gas market.

It would just give them more competition and less profits. They would still do ok.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
Over 50 Dating
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596211].message }}
- ThomM 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  It would just give them more competition and less profits. They would still do ok.
  
  Right so we should just bomb a country that doesn't want the pipeline going through it and they won't mind. After all it's just for competition
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
  Getting old ain't for sissy's
  As you are I was, as I am you will be
  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596258].message }}
  
  TimPhelan 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by ThomM
  
  Right so we should just bomb a country that doesn't want the pipeline going through it and they won't mind. After all it's just for competition
  
  It isn't all as simple as you think it is. I understand the past but also understand the realities of the situation.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  Over 50 Dating
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596288].message }}
  
  ThomM 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by TimPhelan
  
  It isn't all as simple as you think it is. I understand the past but also understand the realities of the situation.
  
  Really and what are the realities of the situation?
  Cause what I've been talking about ARE the realities of our policies.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Life: Nature's way of keeping meat fresh
  Getting old ain't for sissy's
  As you are I was, as I am you will be
  You can't fix stupid, but you can always out smart it.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596291].message }}
  
  The Niche Man 10 years ago
  
  Wow! Whatever happen to Malala and the Nobel Peace Prize discussion?
  The vibe is a lot different from when I was last here.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Download "Free 80 Page E-Book"
  "201 Ways To Live Better On Less Money".
  "Because The Easiest Way To Make Money is ... ... By Saving Some First!"
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596335].message }}
  
  whateverpedia 10 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by The Niche Man
  
  The vibe is a lot different from when I was last here.
  
  The Off Topic Forum has a habit of going <ahem> off topic.
  
  [ 1 ] Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Why do garden gnomes smell so bad?
  So that blind people can hate them as well.
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9596353].message }}

KelvinStiles

9 years ago

I absolutely agree that the Nobel Peace Prize for Malala is truly deserving.
Not only this award but the countless awards she achieved due to her struggle by spreading the message of peace and love all around the world.
Being a young girl, she is still unstoppable and even a bullet couldn't stop her. Much respect for her. Have a look at her life journey, full of both troubles and achievements!
Malala's Journey: From a Pakistani School Girl to a Global Peace Icon | Visual.ly

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9700469].message }}

Malala has won the Nobel Peace Prize - and it's about time

Trending Topics

Infographic: How B2B marketers on LinkedIn can maximise their efforts for better audience reach

Any thoughts on golf's latest phenom...Scottie Scheffler??

What's the Best IM-Related Skill to Learn Today That Can Help in the Future?

best high quality crypto traffic.

Really Good Cloud Storage Affiliate programs.