Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Has the 100 year Jihad (war) begun ... ???

Jump to new
qldfrog said:
it is funny, well actually sad, how Luutzu managed to play again his story of:
these poor muslims (or should I say refugees? I am confused) are killing the infidels as they have seen their country bombed out by the US/russia/you name itt;
after an attack in Mali, he managed to put the blame on the west getting rid of kadhafi;
Unique!!!!
sadly, the attackers were most probably Nigerians led who have never been bombed by any western country, but that should not stop a good story, so let's make one.
Just in case the obvious was too easy to see?
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't know where Mali is. I assume it's near Libya.

I don't make these stuff up. I can find the link to that interview if you like.

And I didn't blame the latest attack in Mali on the West, I didn't read into it. What I said was that when Gadafi was being bombed, his weapons cache was taken by some terrorist group in Mali; that group was then being chased/bombed by Western powers and the weapons they got dispersed with it.

There's a report by Turse last week showing how US has a bunch of bases in Africa, and through drones or with partners were involved in some 600 operations last year. That's the first I heard of it, but anyway.
 
qldfrog said:
it is funny, well actually sad, how Luutzu managed to play again his story of:
these poor muslims (or should I say refugees? I am confused) are killing the infidels as they have seen their country bombed out by the US/russia/you name itt;
after an attack in Mali, he managed to put the blame on the west getting rid of kadhafi;
Unique!!!!
sadly, the attackers were most probably Nigerians led who have never been bombed by any western country, but that should not stop a good story, so let's make one.
Just in case the obvious was too easy to see?
Click to expand...

Nick Turse said it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks Luutzu, I was pulling my hair out when the west starting toppling Khadafi:
a conspiracy theory would easily see that as a way for the US to eliminate Europe as a major world player: with the "refugees" now allowed to travel from Africa to Europe unchallenged, no better way to win an economic/power war unless the refugees are an economic chance with diversity, etc the road to nirvana: you should watch/read the rubbish european news can play:banghead:

but believe me, this area has not waited the Lybian collapse to have weapons like the ones needed in such raids:
you have an AK 47 to go herding your sheep there;
a jet being down by a missile in the coming months could indeed be linked to the fall, but not such attack.

Mali is mostly a desert saharian country with no border with Lybia, more on the west side 700lm or so with no sea access, nordering Niger which itself is under an islamic insurection.Not much for Mali except a big migrant population which send back money to the family from mainly France.

We are in a war, and sadly many see it that way among radical islamist, not so many in the west;
And the war is NOT IS/daesh, al qaeda or whatever will be next, it is a belief war similar to the ideology war of the 50's but much cruder and with as much propaganda (on both side I agree).

Funny how Paris attacks and their 400 victims is blamed on IS whereas I am not aware of any attacker being non european born, from muslim emigration background indeed, but born and bred in Europe.
Not a nice thing to say as this wipes out both the argument ofdrone bombing, etc but also should face politician with the complete failure of emigration, education and integration policies.The result in my opinion (and I am not the owner of truth there) of a welfare and victimisation ,mindset with rampant unemployment .Policies resulting from both right/left sides of politics, at leat in countries I am knowledgeable aka France/Belgium and to a lesser extent Germany/UK
 
qldfrog said:
has anyone any feedback on the link:http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/21/opinion/saudi-arabia-an-isis-that-has-made-it.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

I do :D

The article itself is pretty pedestrian. Somewhat xenophobic with the usual Islamic culture being bad and horrible, just like Daesh/ISIS and other terrorists. In terms of geopolitics and history, the author hasn't a clue... or some clue but it's a childish belief that politicians say what they mean and mean what they say.. .and shock horror the US isn't being honest in it fights against ISIS yet it shake hands with the Saudis. I mean... maybe I should be paid writing these stuff.

Sure, Saudi Arabia is not a progressive state; Sure its Sheikhs and Princes and all the Royals are nasty... that's what happen when you have absolute power and a lot of cash and no one can challenge you.

Same with Saddam, the Taliban, Gaddafi and all the other authoritarian regimes - they are all nasty, not open to anything progressive, freedom of speech is what they say only. It's what Lord Acton once observed: absolute power corrupts absolutely.

So the article going on about how bad the Saudi is, how they're as nasty as ISIS is and only difference is the Saudis has made it, has established its State. Of course that's the case. Then the author got a bit surprised that the US/West shake hands with the Saudis but want to fight ISIS...

I'm no authority on the Saudis or ISIS or the ME, just watch a bit of docos and interviews so here am just repeating what all those hours comes to teach me.

After WW2, the US took control of colonies the British and French empires could no longer afford to control or are too important for the US to leave in the hand of anyone else.

So French and British territories in the ME and Africa were carved up, maps redrawn... France was left with most of North West Africa but the British ME was taken over by Uncle Sam with certain parts given to British interests as a minority shareholder. So Iran, the Gulf States, Iraq etc.... the Brits got some share in it with the US but... BUT Saudi Arabia belong entirely to the US.

Roosevelt told Churchill so... don't mess with Saudi Arabia, it's ours. Why? Not for the fisheries or the pearl. Oil.

So when management changed hands, the US kept the British strategy of having an Arab Fascade with the al Sauds as the tyrants doing all their crazy Islamic stuff, parading as though they actually own the place etc... as long as Joint Ventures and military bases and control of the black gold are in the hand of uncle sam, all is sweet.

The same tactics, with a few slight variations are done throughout the ME and Africa by all the major powers (mainly US, France, Britain) with the Soviets doing its parts to ruin the plans in Africa and the Stans countries.

So all the de-colonisation effort, the pro-democracy and secular movements in all these Arab states rose up after WW2, they were quickly quashed. CIA and special ops boots were on the ground but Arab shoes were doing the kicking. So dictators were supported and propped up, parliamentary democracies like Iran were tolerated until its president decided he ought to demand higher tax on his country's oil, he was overthrown and the Shah was put back into power [interesting to note that the Shah's father was deposed and the parliament was set up, but that didn't worked out so the dumbest, weakest son was put in and it worked until the Islamic revolution in 1979 [?]]...

So across the ME and the world... when socially progressive leaders can't be convinced to see the errors of their ways, can't be bought off... they get replaced by someone else who can. When the ones that replaced them are getting too comfortable with their place in the world and doesn't like to listen and do things like wanting to trade with China or Russia or float their oil on a different exchange under a different currency (Libya, Iraq)... their country got liberated from them.

So even I know this stuff, now... and for some columnist to be surprised.. well he can't be a serious expert on the subject. I mean, there is nothing schizophrenic about what the West is doing in terms of fighting terrorism and getting in bed with the Saudis and other dictators. It's just what you do as imperial powers.

----------

So you set up puppets, let them build their Churches or Temples and a few palaces and stadiums or whatever... as long as they contract your corporations to do the building, all is sweet. Then when they aren't planning stupid useless stuff like skating ring in a desert they can sign off on oil deals at "reasonable" prices, and with those profits you tell them to buy billions and billions of weapons your other corporations also have. That's how you take everything.

So for the author to talk about ISIS and terrorism as fighting a culture when they should be fighting the patrons of those culture and Islamic teachings... what? seriously?

Heard that saudi arabia funded a large portion of what then became ISIS, and yes, also heard their Wahabi schools and religious leaders they funded churn out a lot of unfriendly terrorists. But it's done with US knowledge and permission... whether the US missed the true reason for these funding or not, that's beyond my little head.

Who knows, maybe the US thought those groups were moderate and could counter the others in Iraq and elsewhere; maybe the Saudi went along with that vision but really plan to get rid of its master through these terrorists... history will tell.

In terms of him claiming that ISIS parents are Saudi Arabia and the invasion of Iraq [US/UK's fault then?], and that it's cultural and killing terrorists will just make new ones because they all read the same book... what the?

Yea, people tend not to like liberators putting boots on their ancestral land and setting up their Constitution and have "elections" that divides this sect and that sect. Also, people don't like to be fired and have no hope of ever finding work to feed their family... and when they're generals and military officers and soldiers of the previous regime, they tend to put up a fight for "liberation". Then on top of that, why do you fire all public servants who know how to operate power stations and sewage systems, or who teaches?
 
I'm very disappointed to hear Malcolm Turnbull describe the Paris attackers as "godless ISIL murderers".

Whether one is religious or not and if religious whether one agrees with their version of Islam or not, describing them as godless is simply moronic and since Turnbull is by no means a moron, one can only attribute the comment to political correctness gone mad. Failure to even recognise the primary motivation of ISIL bodes ill for any attempt to defeat them, either militarily or philosophically.
 
bellenuit said:
I'm very disappointed to hear Malcolm Turnbull describe the Paris attackers as "godless ISIL murderers".

Whether one is religious or not and if religious whether one agrees with their version of Islam or not, describing them as godless is simply moronic and since Turnbull is by no means a moron, one can only attribute the comment to political correctness gone mad. Failure to even recognise the primary motivation of ISIL bodes ill for any attempt to defeat them, either militarily or philosophically.
Click to expand...

Maybe Turnbull has the naive belief that God is good, ISIS are not, therefore ISIS is Godless.

Depends on how you view God, or not as the case may be.
 
SirRumpole said:
I'm not going to bother reading it because it's obviously true, as anyone who remembers "Death of a Princess" (not Diana) will know.

The Saudis are one of the most repressive regimes in the world, along with South Korea and Iran. They do a lot of business though and that's why people hold their noses and take their money.
Click to expand...

I think you mean North Korea - the other third spoke in the axis of evil. You welcome :)

The overseas Viets don't much like the South Korean though... a lot of them goes to Vietnam, pay a couple thousand dollars to those match-making services who then pay a couple hundred dollars to some poor Vnese young adult girls to be "married".

Got the girl over then kept them as a maid, not a wife. And there are stories of sexual abuses by the entire male member of the family. There are a lot of sick people in the world.

Then there are Viet girls who married seemingly nice Viet boys or older widower, then systematically set out to cheat, find younger target... divorced, get half his stuff and bring the family over.

Then there are capitalists.

I think God might exists but ran away scared of what He had created. Better disown these little homicidal monkies before the other Gods found out.
 
SirRumpole said:
I'm not going to bother reading it because it's obviously true, as anyone who remembers "Death of a Princess" (not Diana) will know.

The Saudis are one of the most repressive regimes in the world, along with South Korea and Iran. They do a lot of business though and that's why people hold their noses and take their money.
Click to expand...
It is more/also on the way they are spreading their radical version in the west and why the Islam of the past has been replaced by a medieval deranged view of the world;
I see so many papers or opinion blaming IS, palestinian conflict, bombing in afghanistan, irak and soon syria as the reason of the extremism, yet rhe reason is so simple and obvious;
When I say Islam is to blame, I am torched down.
It is , that version of islam is, the trouble is that it is spreading like a wildfire and is no more a minority view.The petro dollars can buy the masses

The west should not bomb IS to stop the integrists, they should bomb Riad (not that it would solve much in either case);
The only positive with that story is that I believe sooner or later, these fanatics will actually turn against their masters, the corrupt leaders of S.A, Qatar etc
 
qldfrog said:
It is more/also on the way they are spreading their radical version in the west and why the Islam of the past has been replaced by a medieval deranged view of the world;
I see so many papers or opinion blaming IS, palestinian conflict, bombing in afghanistan, irak and soon syria as the reason of the extremism, yet rhe reason is so simple and obvious;
When I say Islam is to blame, I am torched down.
It is , that version of islam is, the trouble is that it is spreading like a wildfire and is no more a minority view.The petro dollars can buy the masses

The west should not bomb IS to stop the integrists, they should bomb Riad (not that it would solve much in either case);
The only positive with that story is that I believe sooner or later, these fanatics will actually turn against their masters, the corrupt leaders of S.A, Qatar etc
Click to expand...

If you believe Islam is to blame, just like if you believe anything else or want to argue any other point of view, you will have to make a convincing case to support it.

If Radical Islam, as opposed to normal Islam, is to blame... First, what is "radical" Islam? Extreme rightwing crazy religious Islam? What percentage of Muslims are radicals? How come they all seem to be radical in places where there are power vacuums and/or foreigners on their land and/or when they're being bombed?

If Islam is to blame, why aren't all Muslims terrorists?

If a Muslim is too "extreme" regarding his/her devotion to Islam... ie. too religious... Why aren't Islamic scholars violent and terrorists?


I think, given what happen in Paris and France this year, that you are searching for answers. These kind of journey will take time and will be easier for outsiders... but yea, it's not going to be easy, particularly if you read the opinion pieces or news coverage from our sold out Fourth Estate. The alternative views may prove hard to swallow... and somewhere in between you may have a mental breakdown before any conclusion is reached.

As journalist Greenwall (Snowden case) said, the first to blame for Paris is of course ISIS... there is no justification for killing people. So there's no issue there. Once you pass that, then ask why did they do it? What drive people to commit mass murder, blew themselves up?

Islam? Can't be because not all Muslims do that kind of stuff. So Islam and what else? Stupid things young people just do?


As other smarter people have said... religion is simply a tool to unite the various different people into a tribe, into a single people. Once you get people to read the same book, follow the same rituals... they become one, or at least are easier to be convinced that they are one and share the same interests.

So Islam did the unifying for these terrorists... Did Islam then tell them to go murder the French? Or threaten Americans? Or murder the Russian tourists?
 
Wysiwyg said:
An American pitbull and a chihuahua are both dogs and one is more likely to attack than the other but we don't consider all dogs dangerous. ;)
Click to expand...

That could be taken in so many ways... So is the American Pittbull the terrorists or the Eagle? haha

To paraphrase Han Fei Tzu: animals, dogs and beasts; when threatened and cornered will claw and bite back. How then will not Man?


Again, don't take these arm chair discussions as excuse for terrorism or violence. They are merely to try to get us to see if there are reasons or causes other than the official narratives, or reasons beyond our own prejudices and misinformation. Again, with all the reasonable justifications in the world, no violence is ever justifiable.

It's understandable that political leaders all act surprised and innocent - they're all psychotic and will sell their mother if it get them another term in office; that and some of them may very well be clueless... But we somewhat sane people shouldn't make sweeping comments as though history only begin when things happen to us.
 
luutzu said:
But we somewhat sane people shouldn't make sweeping comments as though history only begin when things happen to us.
Click to expand...
To defend any behavior, review of history will provide a justification/reason/excuse for what happens in present time. Killing civilians because ...... killing terrorists because ......

Terrorist versus the world. No pity for the under dog.
 

Similar threads

kahuna1
Iran Is not Iraq
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
11K
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
Kimosabi
The PRE-PLANNED Financial/Economic 911 of 2008
2
Replies
38
Views
8K
Hanuman
H
R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
sptrawler
R
IRAQ: the Big (neo) Con
Replies
1
Views
5K
basilio
basilio
R
Deception: use + abuse of information by governments + terrorists
Replies
2
Views
4K
reichstag911
R
Top