Bin Laden offers Americans truce

[Rainbow]

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exe...A1A9678D922.htm

"In response to the substance of the polls in the US, which indicate that Americans do not want to fight Muslims on Muslim land, nor do they want Muslims to fight them on their land, we do not mind offering a long-term truce based on just conditions that we will stick to. "We are a nation that Allah banned from lying and stabbing others in the back, hence both parties of the truce will enjoy stability and security to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, which were destroyed by war. "There is no problem in this solution, but it will prevent hundreds of billions from going to influential people and war lords in America -those who supported Bush's electoral campaign– and from this, we can understand Bush and his gang's insistence on continuing the war." Addressing Americans again, he said: "If your desire for peace, stability and reconciliation was true, here we have given you the answer to your call."

Yet another mentally impaired's intellectual masterpiece.

Is there anybody that can rent (at least) that man a decent watch, please ?
It seems he has some time-lapse problems, not to mention his "offer" itself.

[grandpa]

Quote by: SlantedFacts Imperialism? It looks more like a version of Globalism.

Imperilism doesn ot contradict globalism, does it?

Quote by: SlantedFacts It is really interesting how much rhetorical anti - American jargon is flung around our nation. A lot of Americans will always spurn this destructive anti-patriotic attitude.

That's funny--it seems the so-called "patriotic attiude" is the one that's been leading to destruction throughout human history. I doubt any society'd fall apart for rejecting the artifice of nationalism.

Quote by: SlantedFacts It is one thing to attack the process - but one should always respect the foundations that have allowed this country to thrive and grow to this point.

Yes, one should always respect powerfull illusions that lead to violent foreign entanglements. How else can we "win" in the game of life if we refused to be chess pieces?

Quote by: SlantedFacts BUT - Some Americans have become too pompous to RESPECT and HONOR the foundations of such a great nation.

Pompous means: "Characterized by excessive self-esteem or exaggerated dignity; pretentious:." That sounds a hell of a lot to me like nationalism. Why is it taboo to not like waving flags and nationalistic parades? Well, because such spectacles are pompous.
Nevermind that goosestepping looks absolutely ridiculous....

Quote by: SlantedFacts An anti-national attitude does nothing to repair nor strengthen a failing system - it JUST continues to destroy like a cancer!

What exactly am I destroying with my attitude? Now, my tax dollars are certainly destroying stuff all ovr the globe, but my attitude?

Quote by: SlantedFacts BUT . . . I am certain that those who do it - know damn well and good what their objective is!

What is my objective?

Grandpa h.

[thatoneguy00]

well we wouldn't be over there helping them if they knew how to do it. lets face it, we leave and they will be back in the same situation they were in before we got there

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: rmnunez Truce offer http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...1A9678D922.htm

I have a problem with this. CNN mentioned that we couldn't exactly trust him to stick to his words. we know that his conditions sound good, but if it were coming from someone other than a person who is working with Al-Quada (I never could spell that word.), that would be true. the problem is, we know Al-Quaida, and I don't think we can trust him. if he wanted a truce, he could have sent it in a video, instead of on an audio message. I want to be able to see who I am trusting.

[rmnunez]

The truce offer is nonesuch, its just a rant. The fundamental problem is whether to take the offer at face value. I don't think OBL can be trusted, also see the advantages to Al Qaeda if the offer were taken up; US withdrawal from a place where they clash with Al Qaeda elements (giving the impression of their victory) while offering no assurances their terrorist activities and planning (in Iraq or not) would effectively stop.

Conspiracy theorists speculate on the timing of this offer. They note Bush is in a slump, suggest his administration may be bargaining for Patriot Act renewal and may need something to encourage ratification, this truce offer would serve that purpose.

[brien]

Quote by: SlantedFacts Interesting - LBJ shut up the USS Liberty story! . . . but What did your comment have to do with the comment you quoted which says: Fact Is - Someone has to stabilize the region or these tribal wars will continue for generations to come.

Not in the job decription in the US Constitution. Let those who benefit from the stabilization do the work. The US is NOT welcome there, nor should the US be there militarily. It is a waste of human lives and BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of US TAXPAYERS money. Money that would better serve us at home converting our idiotic dependency on oil over to fossil fuel alternatives, such as hydorgen or ethanol, and the delivery systems of those fuels for automobiles. Money that would serve the construction of an "inner city to suburbia" transportation infastructure for light rail systems, and the conversion from home heating oil to alternative heating systems for buildings like geothermal grids that supply heat from the earth to heat those buildings. Furthermore, a entire system of inner city street cars needs to be reinstated to eliminate the grid lock of automobiles in the city. The Automobile industry eliminated the street cars from our cities and now it is time to reinstate them. Cars should discouraged in cities though expensive tolls that support mass transportation. The streets should be returned to the above surface transportation. Autos could park in lots outside the city, and those lots could be served by a light rail system that delivered the people to the street car and current subway systems.

The US will spend BILLIONS and BILLIONS to rebuild the infastructure of IRAQ to attempt to ensure political stabilization from a war we shouldn't have been involved in intially. This is INSANE. We could have used this money here at home to improve our own infastructure and for the above alternatives I cited. Yet, we get involved in a war that perpetuates our dependence upon OIL and HOPE that the regimes that we leave behind will be friendly to the US. This is a FARCE. Look at Hamas. This is the result of democratic elections and the US refuses to live with the results.

In summary, the US should be directing its efforts inward to eliminate its dependence on foreign petroleum rather than sepnding its money, and its youth, upon illegal wars that generate hostility and resentment from other cultures abroad. The US should direct its efforts to strengthening its borders from foreign attack that surely is going to come from those who have vowed to attack America. We are squandering our resources abroad while sleeping here at home. This is where the real dangers lie, not in some foreign land whose only interest we have is their natural resource called oil.

[rcne]

Quote by: rmnunez The truce offer is nonesuch, its just a rant. The fundamental problem is whether to take the offer at face value. I don't think OBL can be trusted, also see the advantages to Al Qaeda if the offer were taken up; US withdrawal from a place where they clash with Al Qaeda elements (giving the impression of their victory) while offering no assurances their terrorist activities and planning (in Iraq or not) would effectively stop. ............

Thats what I thought, he is willing to establish a long term stable Muslim government in Afghanistan and Iraq, if you Westerners pull out....

Or else we'll kill you Zionist loving dogs on your own shores......oh yeah - and Death to America..

Does he actually still control Al-Qaeda??, I think not. File it under a rant..

[rmnunez]

rcne, I wonder where you derive OBL intends to establish a Muslim government anywhere, let alone a stable one in Afghanistan or Iraq, with or without westerners. OBL's rants have been interpreted by the critical left to suggest he wants the US, EU, westerners and non-muslims out of Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq and/or all currently or formerly Muslim countries. He is also said to want Palestine free of Israelis, United Statians, EUros, westerners or non-muslims. Some say OBL wants to restore an international caliphate (Muslim system of religious rule) to make war on infidels. But I don't know of any initiative from him to establish any sort of government anywhere.

[grandpa]

Quote by: rmnunez rcne, I wonder where you derive OBL intends to establish a Muslim government anywhere, let alone a stable one in Afghanistan or Iraq, with or without westerners. OBL's rants have been interpreted by the critical left to suggest he wants the US, EU, westerners and non-muslims out of Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iraq and/or all currently or formerly Muslim countries.

That is Bin Laden's position. It's not just the opinion of the left or the right--it's a fact indicated by any Al-Qaeda-related speech, to the best of my knowledge.

Grandpa h.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: grandpa That is Bin Laden's position. It's not just the opinion of the left or the right--it's a fact indicated by any Al-Qaeda-related speech, to the best of my knowledge. Grandpa h.

the question posed by CNN, along with their answer to it:
can we trust Bin Laden?
answer: no.
posted the day the tape showed up on live television coverage.

[grandpa]

Quote by: dthmstr254 the question posed by CNN, along with their answer to it: can we trust Bin Laden? answer: no. posted the day the tape showed up on live television coverage.

Still, it does not negate the idea of pulling the US out of the Middle East.

Grandpa h.

[rmnunez]

That is Bin Laden's position. It's not just the opinion of the left or the right--it's a fact indicated by any Al-Qaeda-related speech, to the best of my knowledge.

Yes, we can establish OBL wants the foreigners gone from Muslim lands, presumably foreigners are simply all non-Muslims and these would include United Statians and other westerners. He has said so himself, even non-critical lefties grasp this and we all know Afghanistan and Iraq are Muslim lands. What I question is the conclusion OBL wants to establish an Islamic government in either Iraq or Afghanistan.

OBL has a history since his CIA days. He has advocated erradication of infidels from Muslim lands from the outset. I think we can even establish an expanding concern; the Palestinian plight, US military deployments in Saudi Arabia (Kuwait and Gulf States), intervention in Afghanistan and now Iraq, after Somalia with threats to Iran and Syria suggest the theme. Nowhere is there anything about a Muslim government, I suspect this is a given since they'll be governing Muslims.

My take on OBL's goal is the reestablishment of a PanArabic or Muslim caliphate of sorts. He needs to secure an alliance with at least one Muslim government which finds itself inspired by his vision. That government, would need to repudiate all things foreign to share OBL's mission, sort of like the Taliban but with more control and power over the entire country. Such a government would necessarily be quite unpleasant by any comparison with existing Muslim governments everywhere, hence not very stable. Then OBL needs to construct something like the Iranian "Supreme Rulership" with an international application and a religious premise that the repressive beholden and unstable government perfectly fits into.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: grandpa Still, it does not negate the idea of pulling the US out of the Middle East. Grandpa h.

and what if Al quaeda is still big enough to take back over Iraq? send more troops back and restart this war? we know what they want, now, why would they want us to pull out? it's basic survival training, you know what you have, now what do you need? we have Al Quaeda's purported truce offer and their history of lying. we need the motives behind the truce.

[rmnunez]

The truce is aimed at buying time and relieving pressure. There have been significant inroads against Islamic fundamentalist-inspired terrorists in the EU and US, lots better control over suspicious finances (despite the indeterminate status of the detainees in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and whatever other secret locations).

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: rmnunez The truce is aimed at buying time and relieving pressure. There have been significant inroads against Islamic fundamentalist-inspired terrorists in the EU and US, lots better control over suspicious finances (despite the indeterminate status of the detainees in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and whatever other secret locations).

if you are implying that it is aimed at buying time for us, I wouldn't do it. we have no clue how strong Al Quaeda truly is, so what if they are strong enough to take back Iraq and force it back into submission. Iraq is not ready to defend itself, and we should not leave until the job is done. Iraq will be battle-ready before we leave. when you start something, you be damn sure you are gonna finish it.

[grandpa]

Quote by: rmnunez Yes, we can establish OBL wants the foreigners gone from Muslim lands, presumably foreigners are simply all non-Muslims and these would include United Statians and other westerners. He has said so himself, even non-critical lefties grasp this and we all know Afghanistan and Iraq are Muslim lands.

Well, Iraq was certainly not Muslim enough by OBL's standards. Tariq Aziz, for example, was Saddam's right hand man and he was a Christian.

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

Quote by: dthmstr254 and what if Al quaeda is still big enough to take back over Iraq? send more troops back and restart this war? we know what they want, now, why would they want us to pull out? it's basic survival training, you know what you have, now what do you need? we have Al Quaeda's purported truce offer and their history of lying. we need the motives behind the truce.

Well, I wouln't call them complete liars. I don't think they've denied what they stand for. They would likely admit what they believe about women and Islamic law in general.

But I personally think we should pull out of the Middle East anyway. It's obviously bad sex in a terrible relationship.

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

Quote by: dthmstr254 if you are implying that it is aimed at buying time for us, I wouldn't do it. we have no clue how strong Al Quaeda truly is, so what if they are strong enough to take back Iraq and force it back into submission. Iraq is not ready to defend itself, and we should not leave until the job is done. Iraq will be battle-ready before we leave. when you start something, you be damn sure you are gonna finish it.

I do undrstand that basic principle, and that if one is going to do something it should be done right. But what would "doing it right" entail? Obviously any mistakes we made (and will make) will simply be shrugged at or not acknowledged at all. So what are your thoughts on this?

Grandpa h.

[dthmstr254]

Quote by: grandpa Well, I wouln't call them complete liars. I don't think they've denied what they stand for. They would likely admit what they believe about women and Islamic law in general. But I personally think we should pull out of the Middle East anyway. It's obviously bad sex in a terrible relationship. Grandpa h.

oh, so instead of preparing the Iraqis, you think we should leave them out there in the middle of hostile (to democracy anyway) territory, where an army the size of a single brigade could take control of the country again for dictatorship, leaving the Iraqis no choice? they voted for their constitution, now we need to give them the ability to protect it. like I said, start a job, then finish the job.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: dthmstr254 like I said, start a job, then finish the job.

Sorta like Okinawa?