US Policy in the Middle East and North Africa

[Lmarc]

May 19, 2011: Obama explains his US policy for Middle East and North Africa. This thread is devoted to discussion of these policies. Among several points, below are a few points he made:

- Recognizes the great changes over the last 6 months
- Will remove troops from Middle East by July
- Intends to secure Israeli/Palestinian peace
- US does not pursue own interests at others' expense
- US aren't only ones involved in helping others (recognizes others' efforts)
- Actions of Syrian regime have been condemned by US
- Iranian government is hypocritical
- Iraq will be mighty if it stays current course; if so, US will support them
- US must reach out beyond the elites, "particularly [to] young people"
- All religions should be of equal importance and tolerance to each other.
- Women are due as much opportunity as men, in all cultures
- $1 billion devoted to help Egypt with their Democracy
- Trade effort will be launched into Middle East and North Africa
- Acknowledges too little progress made in Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
- Israeli/Palestinian borders should be based on 1967 model.

A few quotes I picked out in listening to his speech:

"We do not simply hold a stake in the stability of nations, but in the self-determination of individuals"

"We have a chance to pursue the world as it should be"

"The Syrian people have shown their courage in demanding a transition to Democracy. [The Syrian ruler] has a choice... he can support that transition, or get out of the way."

"We will use technology to connect with and listen to the voices of the people"

"We will support...the right of journalists to be heard"

"Ultimately, the legitimacy of governments will depend on [the well-educated citizen]"

"A nation will never achieve its full potential when more than half their population is prevented from reaching THEIR potential" (reference to womens' rights)

"Entrepreneurs are brimming with new ideas, but corruption prevents them from profiting from those ideas"

"We think it's important to focus on trade, not just aid; to focus on investment, not just assistance"

"Israel must be able to defend itself, by itself, against any threat"

.....

With this said, let conversation commence!

[Ilyich Valken]

Personally, it all seems like just another speech to try and save face. We're already in debt, yet we're pledging money to other companies to help them? Not to mention that Israel and Palestine has been fighting for God knows how long, and nothing's come from it, US involvement or not.

It's just another breakable "We're gonna do all of this to help not only us but others!" that I will continue to doubt until something's actually done about it.

I personally think we need to stay out of the Middle East for the time being, and solve our own damn problems first.

[Daxter]

May 19, 2011: Obama explains his US policy for Middle East and North Africa. This thread is devoted to discussion of these policies. Among several points, below are a few points he made:

- Recognizes the great changes over the last 6 months
- Will remove troops from Middle East by July
- Intends to secure Israeli/Palestinian peace
- US does not pursue own interests at others' expense
- US aren't only ones involved in helping others (recognizes others' efforts)
- Actions of Syrian regime have been condemned by US
- Iranian government is hypocritical
- Iraq will be mighty if it stays current course; if so, US will support them
- US must reach out beyond the elites, "particularly [to] young people"
- All religions should be of equal importance and tolerance to each other.
- Women are due as much opportunity as men, in all cultures
- $1 billion devoted to help Egypt with their Democracy
- Trade effort will be launched into Middle East and North Africa
- Acknowledges too little progress made in Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
- Israeli/Palestinian borders should be based on 1967 model.

A few quotes I picked out in listening to his speech:

"We do not simply hold a stake in the stability of nations, but in the self-determination of individuals"

"We have a chance to pursue the world as it should be"

"The Syrian people have shown their courage in demanding a transition to Democracy. [The Syrian ruler] has a choice... he can support that transition, or get out of the way."

"We will use technology to connect with and listen to the voices of the people"

"We will support...the right of journalists to be heard"

"Ultimately, the legitimacy of governments will depend on [the well-educated citizen]"

"A nation will never achieve its full potential when more than half their population is prevented from reaching THEIR potential" (reference to womens' rights)

"Entrepreneurs are brimming with new ideas, but corruption prevents them from profiting from those ideas"

"We think it's important to focus on trade, not just aid; to focus on investment, not just assistance"

"Israel must be able to defend itself, by itself, against any threat"

.....

With this said, let conversation commence!

-No clue what change he's referring to other than Osama bin Laden.
-Is a lie, have a cousin deploying in July and a friend deploying in November.
-Why is Palestine and Israel our problem? As long as they don't aim missiles at us, let them settle their own stuff. Tired of us trying to be the worlds big brother.
-It's obvious looking at how much we spend.
-Why are we helping others? Let them help themselves, we have our own list of problems.
-Take that Syria! We condemn you! Ugh..
-Yeah, they're hypocritical, so is our government. Big shocker there that politicians the .gov are going to lie and be hypocritical.
-Iraq will stay a **** hole, the police there still can't wipe their own ass let alone be a new super power.
-Again, why? The elite people are the ones that work to be elite, why should we reach out to younger lazy people that don't want to put any work into anything. Unless he's talking elites like the Rockefeller's or what not, in which case I kind of agree...
-I have no clue why religion is even an issue, as far as I'm concerned it shouldn't even be brought to the table. It's like a scab, if you ignore it, it'll go away. You pick at it, it'll get worse. Except there are always little bugs getting into the scab that is religion making it stay around longer..
-Okay, I somewhat agree. Equal opportunity being the point. Not "equal-opportunity-when-it-fits-me-best". If you can get the EQUAL part down, then sure I have no problem with it.
-Allright! Let's give a billion dollars that we do not have to Egypt so they can fix themself! Are you kidding me?
-Who cares?
-Israel/Palestine borders should be none of our business.. AT ALL. That's between them.



"Israel must be able to defend itself, by itself, against any threat"

Cool, let them start learning how to do that now. Especially since they aren't doing **** for us except for attacking our ships and having their spies try and steal secrets from us. Screw them.

[Jokersvirus]

Its all talk until I see action. "Actions of Syrian regime have been condemned by US" <--- That is a given since Syria is a State supporter of terrorism so anything they do has been condemned.
What kinda annoys me is that 1 billion dollars given to Egypt to help them out, why not use that money to help better the US and give them support in other means or what not. We need to stop giving money out to our allies at the drop of a hat, because I Do not know of a time in history where Egypt has helped out the US, and if there is a time they have please link an article that I can read on. We help out alot of countries but I just dont see a time they have came to our aid when we needed money so I dont see the two way street that this should be.
Trade Effort in the middle east and north Africa? What parts because if we arent carefully that trade will go to terrorist groups.

I didnt listen to the speech I was working and trying with all my might to not pass out during.

[paecmaker]

Hmm, 1 billion dollars to egypt. How much of those money will accually help the egyptian people. 90% of the money will probably be in the hands of corrupted guys.

And how do they intend of securing the peace of palestina and israel, sending the army in?

[Daxter]

sending the army in

I hope not.

[Lmarc]

To my understanding, $1 billion has not been given to Egypt, but it's more of an incentive, like a "if you continue working toward democracy, we'll try to help out, up to $1 billion". While I agree that it's a selfless generosity whose costs will outweigh benefits, if it indeed IS an incentive, then Obama can be subjective to what he allows when, not bound to any particular oath.

As far as the Israel/Palestine conflict, there's a huge religious implication behind the state of Israel. Radical Christians are eager to call today 'the end times' (like they did with Hitler and any other big issues of oppression), and the constant difficulty imposed upon Israel goes to feed that fire. I don't know enough of the cultures of Israel or Palestine to talk about that, but it seems to be a war (and thus a goal) of principle more than practicality.

On the topic of religion, it sounds like a theoretical super-answer to provide equal opportunities to all religions, but much of the Islam faith is very intolerant to the 'infidels' (non-Islam), and one of the core Christian principles is that Jesus is THE ONLY way to salvation. So I'm interested to see what efforts can be implemented to disable these two foundational intolerances, as both religions will be compromising something of their core beliefs in allowing it.

[Exentenzed]

This thread is devoted to discussion of these policies.

Wrong forum perhaps?

I dont intend to be a douche, but I've noticed more and more non-gaming related topics popping up on this Gamers forum.

I didnt have much problems with that, untill they started to become more common than the gaming related ones.

When i log on to this forum i do so to discuss games.
Just saying.

[Ilyich Valken]

Wrong forum perhaps?

I dont intend to be a douche, but I've noticed more and more non-gaming related topics popping up on this Gamers forum.

I didnt have much problems with that, untill they started to become more common than the gaming related ones.

When i log on to this forum i do so to discuss games.
Just saying.

"Serious News
Discuss Serious News all around the country and the world. If you have funny stories and news, please post in the Jokes section. Serious news only."
Name of the board.

[Lmarc]

Exentenzed: While the forum IS indeed Gamers-oriented, this particular thread is devoted to "serious news", hence the title. There are no specific boundaries restricting topics, aptly noted by the sub-category's name of "post anything".

However, if this stuff is appearing outside in the gamer-focused threads, then I whole-heartedly share your sentiments.

[Jayhmmz]

GF is a forum especially for gamers, to discuss what gamers want, whenever the gamers want to - as long as it's ethical and the gamer is abiding by the rules.

[Saph]

I love Obama, and I think his heart is in the right place, and if people would stop getting in his way and let him be the president he tries to be, I think the actions that all the sceptics are *****ing about will be given promptly.

HOWEVER!

I both agree and disagree with pulling out of the middle east.

I agree cause: People are dieing, and we're not really getting anywhere, and what we do achieve, is not worth several young men and women getting maimed or killed.
I also think we need to lay low for awhile after such a huge hit as Osama Bin Laden. After you score a goal you retreat for awhile, get your act together, and then try again when things look good. Right now you can't afford the 1 billion bucks to Egypt, and Obama can't afford the scrutiny if what is said above is true, and that people ARE actually shipping out in july and november.
On the other hand, it could be that measures havn't been taken yet, guys. I don't see how a president can stand infront of the entire nation and lie, especially Obama, Obama has never lied, he just havn't had the resources to do what he promisses, because over half the nation defies him.
So I believe that the people who ship out in july and november will probably be cancelled before they leave, I don't see any other alternative.

I disagree because: We risk giving them free roam of the place without the US, atleast quite abit since the US are not the only ones there, I dont think?
That's really the only reason why I disagree. I still feel there're people there who needs to be kept under watch, and without the US there, it'll be that much more difficult to do so.

[Jokersvirus]

We have no right to be there, we got the person weve been after for 10 years being in the middle east anymore is just showing those people we are trying to act all big and bad. Which isnt a good image to try and show off.
We should pull out and if the time goes where they attack us again we will go back in and do what we have too.

I found it extremely funny Obama wants to secure peace between Israeli/Palestinian. Ya he is out of his mind theyve been at war for too long the likelyhood they would get along is the same as a snowball lasting in hell.

[paecmaker]

Yeah Israel and the muslim coutries around have been fighting since the state was born. They all want jerusalem so its very far from a solution. To even get close Israel need to stop building houses on palestinian soil and if not take away the wall, atleast do it easier for muslims to go though, today its like a ghetto.

Hamas need to stop the radicals from shooting rockets into israel and israel need to stop airstriking palestina. The best thing is if Israel could fund building up the industrial things in palestina again.

[Jokersvirus]

Hamas is the radicals firing rockets into israel. and they wont stop until either they get what they want.

Saph, I know you support Obama and say he cant do half of anything he says because the nation is preventing him. I wish I could help you see that isnt the case just because the American people dont like him does not make his job harder. He has had the power from the get go to pull out our troops never has.

Also After watching "Killing Bin Laden" Some experts say an attack is a logical course of thinking for the American people however the terrorist might not do such a thing because they do not know the type of intelligence that was gathered from all the harddrives that were at Bin ladens compound.

[Daxter]

We have no right to be there, we got the person weve been after for 10 years being in the middle east anymore is just showing those people we are trying to act all big and bad..

We're there to hunt down terrorists, not just the main guy. The reason they have leadership and a hierarchy is so they can continue without the #1 guy. Yeah we got bin Laden, cool. Time to get the others. IMO.

[Jokersvirus]

Why get the other terrorist organizations? They have not attacked us AQ is the biggest threat and if you go after other terrorist organizations that will open up a can of worms that we dont want open. Terrorist are bad and all but just because you take out a leader doesnt really prove anything because someone deadlier, crazier, and with more intent will take over.
Its kinda why we arent all world police on everyone when hunting terrorist because the government understands we would be asking for alot of trouble.

[Lmarc]

It seemed quite possible that since being in the area for 10 years, other issues and problems could be discovered and acknowledged. Is it so unheard of to remain to address those problems?

However, I do agree that Obama needs to reiterate our goal of what the US is trying to accomplish over there. But, I believe he did so in this latest speech. I encourage you all to actually read or listen to what he actually said before bashing it.

Don't read me wrong, I'm not fully advocating Obama, but what I DO advocate is knowing what you're against before claiming to be against it.

[Jayhmmz]

Yeah we got bin Laden, cool.

Or did we? ;)

[Jokersvirus]

If there are unheard problems that affect the U.S. directly yes address but if not we have no reason to be there, Lmarc. Our goal was Bin Laden its the entire reason we went in there, than Saddam had to open his mouth and talk stupid and we got him too even though we couldnt find any evidence of WMDs we still knocked him down a peg or two. The time has come for the US to stop caring about everyone else and to fix everything within the US before we start holding everyone else's hand.

[Saph]

We should pull out and if the time goes where they attack us again we will go back in and do what we have too.

Tell that to the 100s, maybe even 1000s of families who had their loved one(s) blown to smitherines by the terrorist attack.

Another reason why I disagree with pulling out: If we pull out, they get the elbow room they need to make another attack, and if we go back in if they attack?...Well, It'd be too late for the possibly 1000s of casualties, and if as much as 1 person dies for it, thats a life wasted, even if we push back in, the damage is done.


Or did we? ;)

From what I've seen, man, I think it's pretty universally agreed upon that Usama is in fact dead.

[Jokersvirus]

So the families who have lost loved ones want the US army to stay in the middle east and keep fighting a war we can not win? The thing you have to understand is this. We killed OBL but that means alot to families but also means nothing because someone else will take over... It dont matter if we kill 100s of terrorist there will be 1000s to take their place. The best defense against terrorist attacks is intelligence and we have the CIA and other agencies doing intelligence gathering on terrorist. Our mission is completed no reason to allow more soliders to die.


They have the elbow room right now to plot terrorist attacks because how simple is it to put on a bomb vest walk into a store and go boom? doesnt take much plotting beyond just getting the vest to work properly. Like I said intelligence gathering is the best way to prevent that and just the amount of intelligence being gathered daily on terrorists alone I would say is miles long and we will never know about it. Also, in a post I made earlier the information gathered from OBL's compound had alot of great information, even information on attacks he was planning on the railroad system and experts believe they wont chance an attack because they dont know what information was recovered.

[paecmaker]

I say that the best thing to fight terrorism is education. Al caida uses poor people and lie to them, they belive their lies and think that they truly will come to heaven with 72 virgins if they bomb themselves. Its against Islam and most islams know it. If they could learn the TRUE way of islam(non violence and so on) it can maybe be calmer.

It is said that the pen is mightier than the sword, and in this case it is maybe partially true. We might not be able to take away the leaders but we can however take away their soldiers.

[Jokersvirus]

Paec they are extremist they believe there way of islam is the true way for all to follow. you cant take away their soldiers they have an unlimited supply of soldiers.

[paecmaker]

Its only the leaders that are the true extremists, the normal footsoldier is living in a lie. They have been mis guided by radicals. If we can prevent it from the beginning the amount of soldiers will be much less tahn unlimited.

[Jokersvirus]

I dont foresee that ever happening. Soldiers might be living in a lie but its a lie they are willing to give their lives for and that is a level of dedication that is impossible to break.

[paecmaker]

I think with the death of UBL we have gotten a small step toward that goal. He was a major player in Al qaida and the death of him was a morale lower. There are also many examples of kids that was going to be suicide bombers but in a way or another regretted their thing. One kid did it on his own and others got help but it can work.

It may take long time and be hard but its already begun with the starts of REAL schools in aghanistan.

[Jokersvirus]

The death of OBL didnt drop morale gave terrorist more of a reason to step up attacks against the US. His a Martyr now, everyone will commit attacks in his name. You talk about educating the kids educate them to do what? If you try to educate them about islam and you talk about it in a negative light that is punishable by death over there. You cant win that war dont care how you try the war against terrorist will be a never ending one. There is no correct answer on trying to fix or prevent people from joining. You can tell them your beliefs are wrong that is not islam, but people who do that wont ever be seen alive again.
This is a way of life for people over there, not everyone, but people who are extremist will not be turned on their own people. Like i said they have a very very high dedication level over there, they are willing to die for their beliefs.

[Lmarc]

This is where I wave the flag declaring my ignorance on the issue, but aren't we doing things over there regarding the government also? Isn't there more we're focusing on than stopping terrorism? Sure that was a core, and perhaps even primary, value, but I was always under the impression that we were more than just anti-terrorist enforcers over there.

[Jokersvirus]

Yes, weve been trying to help them have a democratic system, however that isnt really sitting well, which is seen by all the terrorist attacks during the elections and what have you. This is what fueled terrorist even more because in their eyes we were forcing our way of life onto them which Bin Laden has peached for years would happen if they didnt take a stand against the US. For a while the primary focus was Anti terrorism enforcement and what have you, the democratic system took place a little while after. If Im not mistaken some of the government officials over there asked for our help to make it happen, might be wrong.

[Lmarc]

So while the anti-terrorism motive may have taken a blow what with Osama being defeated, there seems to be reasonable motives elsewhere to justify our presence.

Question is whether or not these motives outweigh their costs.

[Jokersvirus]

If you speak about helping out the governments I dont think we should. The more we help other governments to become like the US the more we will be hated and what not. Governments need to make change on their own and if they cant ask for assistance what should be done, not have the US do it for them and what not.

Ive said it before we got what we wanted out of the Middle east we really have no reason to be there anymore.

[Lmarc]

Hmmm. I suppose there will be people to hate us no matter what we do. So is public opinion really a reason to stay or to leave? Do you think that the government SHOULD be a more democratic kind of structure? I mean democracy has its own faults, I know, but that seems to be the US's ultimate goal.

(PS: My questions are unless specified open to everyone. Though I'm definitely up to hearing from you JV :) )

[paecmaker]

I say that the country need to be a democrocy on its own terms, look in egypt/libya and the other countries there. The people want a democracy abnd its not forced by any western countries. We are just heloping them gain the goal by keeping a no fly zone and attack any soldiers shooting at the people(in libya, Buts its bad in syria to)

If we come and go there and make it a democracy from our terms radicals will use it against us and we will have to fight terrorism like in Iraq. If the nation threaten us in a bad(really bad) way we can attack it and if the people then want a democracy we will help them.

[Jokersvirus]

I agree with Paec, if they revolt and the people want to change the country I think we should step in and offer assistance we shouldnt however try in anyway shape, or form to change another country's government without them directly wanting to change or the people revolting. It just goes back to the Who are we to world police everyone.
The biggest thing we need to do is not try and police the world I hate that we do that we are a Super Power however I dont think its justifiable to sit there and try and control everyone else for the good of our nation. Seems a little like what Saddam did to his people, and I thought we were better than that.

[Lmarc]

Perhaps it was just that since we had a reason to be in (Osama), our governmental goals were more hands on than say with Libya, Egypt, etc. You both have great points, though.

But is the resistance more well-equipped/resourceful/intelligent or any other advantage where we're at versus Libya, for example, that would prevent a similar fate as seen in Libya if we indeed did withdraw?

I'm not particularly in support of the war (though I have the utmost support for those fighting in it. Don't get me wrong.), but I always like to consider the other sides of things.

[Jokersvirus]

The thing about the resistance is that you dont have to have more resources, be the most well equipped etc. If you have the desire to make change open and you have alot of people who are willing to do the same change will happen. I like to think about to Nam where the US went up against an enemy who was less equipped but did everything in their power to prevent the US from invading or what not. Thats how i see it.

[Lmarc]

All right. So then is there in your opinion then a stronger ________ (whatever makes 'em tick) in the Iraq/Afghanistan resistance than there is in the Libyan/Egyptian one, and coinciding a weaker _______ (whatever holds a society together) in the Iraq/Afghanistan culture?

My point is that if we just up and leave, falling back to a more passive assistance, on the surface we will be just as involved, or lack thereof, as we are in Libya, but given the context and the culture, I don't see Iraq and Afghanistan just falling into such a stereotype so easily. They are, and will be, a different situation.

Obama needs to decide whether we run the risk of exposing that different side, unknown as it is, or if we stay on as we are, theoretically suppressing this unknown.

[Saph]

Lmarc makes a good point. It's a pretty darned difficult situation.

Personally though, I think that it is smarter if we stick around for now. Leaving will just result in more deaths I'm afraid.

And I think Paec has a point on Page 3 of this thread.

I do believe that it has been proven that Violence is not the answer to this problem. I mean seriously, if we kill off UBL, we get another one, and it'll probably take 10 years+ to find him, and once we do, another person takes over, and so on and so forth, it is a never ending cycle, as there're just as many people ready to take the mantle of leadership as there're people ready to take up arms for a twisted and sick version of a perfectly peaceful religion.

If we kill 100 terrorists, 200 will join to avenge the death of their family member, be it son, brother, grandfather, father, uncle, whatever. And those 200 die, another 400 will take their place, 400 becomes 800, 800 becomes 1600 etc etc. We all know that it'd happen, it's like fighting a Hydra. Thou severs a head, two shall sprout anew.

If we bomb the **** out of it, we'll be labeled as monsters, and probably result in a 3rd world war.

If we terrorize them in return? Well, then its a he said she said scenario, which never goes well.


No, I seriously don't think that violence is the answer. This time, fire cannot be fought with fire, it'll just make the flame higher. I think we need to find ourselves a good big ol' bucket of cold water and pour over the whole damned pile of ****. Now what that bucket of water is, or where to find it? I do not know, I'm not the leader of a country, but I can see an endless loop of death and destruction when I see one.

I say we work on finding a better, less murderous solution, instead of working on ways to kill them faster.

[Jokersvirus]

All right. So then is there in your opinion then a stronger ________ (whatever makes 'em tick) in the Iraq/Afghanistan resistance than there is in the Libyan/Egyptian one, and coinciding a weaker _______ (whatever holds a society together) in the Iraq/Afghanistan culture?

My point is that if we just up and leave, falling back to a more passive assistance, on the surface we will be just as involved, or lack thereof, as we are in Libya, but given the context and the culture, I don't see Iraq and Afghanistan just falling into such a stereotype so easily. They are, and will be, a different situation.

Obama needs to decide whether we run the risk of exposing that different side, unknown as it is, or if we stay on as we are, theoretically suppressing this unknown.

I would say that in Iraw and Afganistan there is a stronger loyalty of the local people to live their lives without American involvement. I dont think there is a weaker anything within their society. I just think they are tired of us being around. We shouldnt be involved in the government at all it just goes back to the whole making us look like we are trying to take over the world.


Lmarc makes a good point. It's a pretty darned difficult situation.

Personally though, I think that it is smarter if we stick around for now. Leaving will just result in more deaths I'm afraid.

And I think Paec has a point on Page 3 of this thread.

I do believe that it has been proven that Violence is not the answer to this problem. I mean seriously, if we kill off UBL, we get another one, and it'll probably take 10 years+ to find him, and once we do, another person takes over, and so on and so forth, it is a never ending cycle, as there're just as many people ready to take the mantle of leadership as there're people ready to take up arms for a twisted and sick version of a perfectly peaceful religion.

If we kill 100 terrorists, 200 will join to avenge the death of their family member, be it son, brother, grandfather, father, uncle, whatever. And those 200 die, another 400 will take their place, 400 becomes 800, 800 becomes 1600 etc etc. We all know that it'd happen, it's like fighting a Hydra. Thou severs a head, two shall sprout anew.

If we bomb the **** out of it, we'll be labeled as monsters, and probably result in a 3rd world war.

If we terrorize them in return? Well, then its a he said she said scenario, which never goes well.


No, I seriously don't think that violence is the answer. This time, fire cannot be fought with fire, it'll just make the flame higher. I think we need to find ourselves a good big ol' bucket of cold water and pour over the whole damned pile of ****. Now what that bucket of water is, or where to find it? I do not know, I'm not the leader of a country, but I can see an endless loop of death and destruction when I see one.

I say we work on finding a better, less murderous solution, instead of working on ways to kill them faster.

If we stick around longer the ideals of "America is trying to control us will get stronger and stronger. I wouldnt be surprised if they arent the most popular ideals around those countries. There is already someone who took over OBL spot, Number 2 "The Doctor." I made the point already that killing one terrorist 2 more will take its spot. And since Americans killed OBL one of the most idolized person the more America sticks around the more recruitment there will be, there will already be an increase in recruitment but America being there will surely double it. In a way we are terrorizing them, we invaded their country looking for one person, we killed their brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, daughters, sons etc, we are monsters in their eyes, not everyone, but we look as if we started this and we love the taste of blood. Best way to think of it is like this, You work for the parking authority someone comes in screaming and yelling wanting their vehicle back you are blamed for it getting towed and what not. That is how it truly is an Unknown number of them dont care that OBL attacked us but they care about that we invaded their country and now we are the terrorist.

Violence is never the answer however to the extremist it is always the answer and we have no choice but to fight fire with fire. You cant reason with a terrorist Saph as much as a non violent solution would be very much welcomed you can not reason with them. I have a friend who is a Marine Sniper who is at my school with me, a very good friend of mine, he will tell you that we cant reason with them, the extremist dont care about anything but their own advancement of their beliefs. We are the enemy and they wont stop until they believe with their hearts that we are no longer trying to take over the world.

[paecmaker]

How many of the terrorist are the TRUE extremists, the real guys sits in the back and just control the cannon fodder. The cannon fodder however is mostly relatives of victims from missiles and shootouts. I dont say we should leave, I only say that we need a change of tactics.

I dont say it was wrong to invade Iraq in the first place but the soldiers where not trained for a situation of fighting a guerilla hiding in the poulation.

The army aint the solution for the problem, for example you cant hit a nail with a sledgehammer without collateral damage, you need a smaller hammer.

[Jokersvirus]

All of them are true extremist, they are believe that western culture needs to die out, that we are the enemy and to allow Allah to come back and save the world we must all die. Its more or less a fact if someone joins a terrorist organization it can be concluded they are an extremist, they are willing to kill themselves to kill others, kill innocent people. Who else with logical reasoning would conclude that bringing change is best when innocent people are dying in the name of Allah?

The leaders give orders and allow the foot soldiers to die, its no different than the civil war if you think about it North vs south both were extremist and both killed each other and other until one side won and change occured. That is what the extremist want change... in the form of America destroyed and a perfect Muslim society created in their eyes. They are willing to kill themselves, Paec just to help make a complete muslim world happen.
The problem is, the army has to be the solution. You cant reason with terrorist as i said before they fight with fire and we must fight with fire in return.