It's complete sovereignty.
Osama Bin Laden is Dead
- Thread starter SciWriter
- Start date
It's complete sovereignty.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
And yet they don't see the Dalai Lama as an actual threat only a symbolic threat which is something you cannot say about Laden. The Dalai Lama didn't want his people to fight which is why he left as a refugee with his people when some of his followers chose to stay and fight. The Chinese do react violently against archaic religions but it happens to be their own internal muslim separatists. Bin Laden was known to be guilty by most including his own accounts and Bin Laden wasn't held in high-esteem like the beloved Dalai Lama.
Just because you cannot discern the difference doesn't mean there isn't one.
No that is not the definition of war. Executing unarmed men is not war. War is declared against states not individuals. No matter how much Americans like to think otherwise.
Still, it will be interesting to see how this proceeds. After the US adopted secret prisons, so did Europe - for political targets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_site
I suspect, there will be a whole new market out there for extrajudicial assassinations now that it is legal to do so - I don't think people have realised what a watershed this execution is, it is the first time the US has publicly admitted to an assassination in another country and called it legal.
You mean we couldn't kill Hitler unless he was brandishing a gun?
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Would you be surprised if she pulled an Ahmadinejad and denied the holocaust all together? I mean they're all Jews after all and probably lied and concocted the whole thing so they could steal Palestine from under the feet of its population.
What proof do you have of the number of deaths? Hitler never killed anyone himself so he's innocent etc.
You didn't kill Hitler, did you? And even the Nazis stood trial even if they manipulated the legal system to convict them on retroactively applied laws. Ah the good ole days
Another interesting facet to this whole farce is that European countries which are officially against the death penalty and extrajudicial assassinations have yet to remark on these two facets of Osama's execution.
Its hard to predict where this leads. But it will be interesting to see how it unfolds.
Another interesting facet to this whole farce is that European countries which are officially against the death penalty and extrajudicial assassinations have yet to remark on these two facets of Osama's execution.
Its hard to predict where this leads. But it will be interesting to see how it unfolds.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
You don't know that they would not have killed him if they had found him first. And its pretty safe to believe that they would have done so with or without a trial.
Are you saying that China holds the Dalai Lama in esteem? Or that followers of bin Laden are less influenced by him than followers of Dalai Lama are by his Lamaism?
I would take even bets that the Lama is as popular with China as bin Laden with the US
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
No but the world does. A dead Dalai Lama would not go down well which is why the South African government never killed Mandela.
No. This is why those who follow Bin Laden and act out on their beliefs can expect to be on the West's hit-list.
Lanaism?
Actually the Chinese people as well as its government no longer worry about the Dalai Lama. He did after all say
By Abhishek Madhukar
DHARAMSALA, India | Thu Mar 10, 2011 2:37pm EST
(Reuters) - The Dalai Lama said on Thursday he would step down as Tibet's political leader, a move seen as transforming the government-in-exile into a more assertive and democratic body in the face of Chinese pressure.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/10/us-india-dalailama-idUSTRE7290UK20110310
Maybe we should have applied to Pakistan for extradition of Bin Laden? I'm sure they would have sent some cops around to check on that, maybe take him into protective custody until the legal issues were worked out.
No SAM, we have more than feeling. We have thousands of dead bodies. That is fact, that is reality and much more than a "feeling".
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Why would they do that when they have been denying his presence in the country and going so far as to allow Pakistani newspaper articles to proclaim him dead? Give notice and Osama would have been moved in a day. They didn't ask for cooperation because they didn't trust them.
Last edited:
Would that excuse work for Iraq or Afghanistan or any place where American money and weapons has led to thousands of bodies?
Would you accept kill teams that targeted American political targets and took their wives and kids into secret custody?
I think your timeline is wrong. To me Christian, Jewish, Hindu, and Islamic fundamentalism and extremism all rose in strength during the 1980s and 19990s. I think this was a backlash to the changes of the 1960s and 1970s in including the sexual revolution and changing gender relations and the rise of an increasingly urbanized world in which everybody became anonymous which allowed crime and impoliteness to rise. The pace of the world became faster and the rules became unclear as tradition lost it's control and community was replaced by more anonymous urban sprawl. The people of the urban areas as always acted like they are superior and more sophisticated than rural people which the rural people always resent even as the rural people often adopt the cultural changes coming from the cities.
The chaos of too fast change disturbed and angered many people. Many people wanted order and wanted to repress chaos. But chaos can only be suppressed if you also suppress freedom.
By about 1980 it became clear that the liberal idealism of the 1960s and 1970s was failing to deliver on it's promises in both the developed and undeveloped nations. People in the 1980s rejected liberal idealism. Some turned to materialism and became yuppies. Others turned to religious fundamentalism to try to suppress their own confusion.
Islamc fundamentalism did become more militarized than Christan, Jewish, and Hindu Fundamentalism but this is because this Islamic fundamentalism was arising in nations that were militarily controlled. While in the USA we debate and call each other names when fundamentalists and antifundamentaists oppose each other in most Islamic countries people could not feel safe behaving that way. Blaming Islam for the the fact that Islamic nations were not democratic has some validity but blaming the intrigues of the Western powers has similar validity.
Now if a person wanted to decide who to blame for their nations failings, their religion or foreign governments it would certainly feel better to blame the foreign government.
In the 1980s the west backed the Islamic extremists against the Soviets in Afghanistan. For the Soviets the certainly felt attacked by Islam. The Soviets soldiers in their mind were in Afghanistan to help the moderate intelligent Afghans defend themselves from Islamic tribal nut jobs stirred up and funded by the USA and Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
Just because the West was not attacked by militarized Islamic extremism in the 1980s does not mean that Islamic extremism was not attacking anybody.
Israel backed Islamic extremists in the 1970s when they thought that liberal idealist pan-Arab nationalism was their enemy but by 2000 Israel was backing the corrupted hollow shell of the of the old liberal idealist pan-Arab nationalists against the Islamic extremists that Israel not considered to be a more dangerous enemy.
The Chechen war was both an nationalist ethnic war for independence and and Islamic war.
Syria's crack down on the Muslim Brotherhood and others in 1982 was a response to the Syrian government's fear of Islamic extremism. Syria killed about 15,000 people in the "Hama Massacre". If the Muslim Brotherhood had brought a Salafiist take over of Syria how many Alawites would they have killed? Salafiists consider Alawites to be heretics. It is amazing that the Assads being an Alawites have managed to hold power.
Saddam was another dictator suppressing Islamic extremism. Mubarak and Ghaddafy suppresed the Islamic extremists.
The Islamic fundamentalists won the Algerian election in 1991 but were repressed and stopped by a coup from taking power. The Algerian government killed perhaps 80,000 people putting down Islamic extremism and or putting down democracy in the 1990s with the full support of the Western governments. This is well before 9-11.
When Saddam invaded Kuwait there was not an Islamic or anti-Islamic side to that. Al Qaeda and most of the Islamic Extremists we think about other than Iran are Suni. After the "liberation" of Kuwait back to the hands of it's dictator of Bush the 1st called for an Iraqi uprising and then changed his mind when he saw that the uprising was Shia rather than the internal Baath (sort of neo-Nazi) party coup that he wanted. Bush the 1st's actions in permitting Saddam to crush the Shia revolt helped the Suni's stay in power but those sort of neo-Nazi Suni's while unabashedly Islamic where not Islamic enough for the Suni extremists who wanted wanted a strict religious order to eradicate chaos confusion and immorality just and Christian, Jewish, and Hindu extremists want a strict religious order to eradicate chaos confusion and immorality.
But 30 years is enough. I think we can all see now that religious extremism no more brings and end to chaos confusion and immorality than liberal idealism brings and end to stupidity, cruelty, poverty, and inequality.
Religious extremism was already passing it's peak of appeal when 9-11 happened. Islamic extremism was just a part of the global trend towards religious extremism. The extra militarization of Islamic extremism was mostly a result of the people in those nations being militarily repressed.
Go Egyptians, keep fighting for your freedom. Don't let the generals give you anything other than real democracy. If Egypt gets real democracy it will come to Libya and Syria and Bahrain and Iraq also. I don't think Iraq has real Democracy yet. I don't thin that the US government likes real democracy. I think the US government would prefer weak manipulatable semi-democracies.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
The bodies in Afghanistan and Iraq came after and is a direct result of the dead bodies left after Bin Laden's violence, not before. We didn't give a rat's ass about Afghanistan before the fact and Iraq is a different bag all together.
Wives and kids of mob bosses can even be taken into custody for the purposes of gathering information and they are generally released after the fact.
Thats patently untrue.
Perhaps we are seeing the future of what war will be like. Kill teams are an improvement over indiscriminate attacks on civilians at any rate - and they put countries like the US and guerrilas like Osama on the same even playing field
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
@Niraka
Go back and look at the beginning of the exchange with Spidey, it begins in post#908 page 46. We were not referring to radical fundamentalism in general but whether Zarqawi, Al Qaeda and Saddam were in cahoots. My argument is that Zarqawi and religious fundamentalism was a direct fall-out of the US invasion after Saddam had been ousted and not before.
Go back and look at the beginning of the exchange with Spidey, it begins in post#908 page 46. We were not referring to radical fundamentalism in general but whether Zarqawi, Al Qaeda and Saddam were in cahoots. My argument is that Zarqawi and religious fundamentalism was a direct fall-out of the US invasion after Saddam had been ousted and not before.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Well? What is untrue? You know very well you have to tell me what you find at fault and outline exactly what the truth is from your point of view.
As for the last statement I have said all along that you don't fight terrorists by full flung wars but quietly from behind the scenes which would entail black-ops, CIA, Mossad style operations.
Off-topic: Ever see the film Munich?
You said: We didn't give a rat's ass about Afghanistan before the fact and Iraq is a different bag all together.
That is patently untrue. History did not begin on 9/11. Without American support the religious fundamentalists would never have gained power in Afghanistan - nor would Iraq be ruled by a puppet dictator.
Strangely enough, I first thought of that film when I heard of Osama's execution. There is a scene in the film where after the Israeli hit team kills the Palestinians, an Israeli diplomat gets murdered and one of the Israeli hit men says: now we are having a conversation.