posted
I don't understand why they would behead a Japanese person, of all people.
quote: Though Japan's constitution bans the country's troops from engaging in combat, Tokyo backed the U.S. case for invasion and sent some 1,000 troops to Iraq and neighboring countries to help reconstruction efforts.
quote:"It's a fact that if Japan had not dispatched troops, this incident would not have happened. I will strongly push ... so that it is not extended and the troops are withdrawn," said Democratic Party leader Katsuya Okada. He had opposed sending the troops, who are on a non-combat mission to supply clean water and medical aid and fix roads and schools.
quote:Japanese officials said fingerprint tests proved a decapitated body, wrapped in an American flag, found in Baghdad was that of backpacker Shosei Koda, who had been held by al-Qaeda-linked militants demanding Tokyo withdraw its 500 troops from the southern city of Samawah.
I guess I can see capturing hostages of countries with military troops in Iraq. But why capture and try to persuade people whose sole purpose is to help rebuild to leave?
Is it all some evil plan to make the undermine the US on the global scheme?
posted
Maybe they simply despise foreigners and wish death on anyone associated with America.
For now, of course. Assuming they won, they wouldn't just turn their guns into plowshares-there's always someone next in line up against the bloody wall.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
kaioshin00, we don't get it partly because we are not the intended audience, like rap being nonsensical to most middle-class white people.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because they don't want Japan to help rebuild. Japan is not a country in the Middle East. It should not stick it's nose in other people's business.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
because if Iraq is rebuilt, the terrorists will loose power. The average Iraqi is going to be a lot less likely to work against the USA if they have running water and power. The best way for the terrorists to make those in Iraq hate the USA is to kill those that are rebuilding. Of course they run the risk of turning Iraqi's against them (which I have heard is happening on a small scale) but I guess they don't think that far ahead.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because if they can force Japan to leave, they can undermine our already small-- and, according to some, shrinking-- coalition.
I really hate to mention it, but someone on Hatrack was right when they mentioned the fact that we simply can't keep our credibilty in rebuilding Iraq when nations are leaving rather than joining. If the terrorists can continue to ensure that nations leave Iraq because of the violence rather than aid in its reconstruction, they can do more damage than a direct attack on the troops ever would.
The only people that matter are the people of the US and the people of Iraq and there are factions in each with whom the rebuilding effort will never have credibility and there are factions who will always support the effort.
Most of the TERRORISTS (insurgent is just a sterilized word) are not Iraqis but foreigners trying to destroy the freedom we've brought to the people of Iraq. A Free Iraq is very bad for Iran and Al Qaeda.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I normally sneer at comparisons to Vietnam, this is one topic that I think it is totally valid. Remember how the US public and soldiers were baffled by the the resentment of the South Vietnamese? After all, you were only there to help them!
Try to understand! Nobody likes foreign troops on their soil, especially when they are part of an occupying force!
Maybe if Americans had experience with actual invasions, you wouldn't be so surprised when your conquered foes resent your continued presence?
The "terrorists" make sense. You're the ones that baffle the world.
Posts: 1515 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Most of the TERRORISTS (insurgent is just a sterilized word) are not Iraqis but foreigners
Pixiest.
Whether most are foreigners is very debatable. If you'd said many I'd agree.
Foust has a point. A friend who's a political nut like me posed a hypothetical: what if the US had a leader who became a horrible tyrant, as bad or worse as Saddam, made himself Prez for life, etc. How do you think many Americans would react if a foreign power invaded to "liberate" us? And then occupied the US for an indefinite period and started building permanent military bases?
Don't you think many Americans, after some initial gratitude, would take up arms in an insurgency to drive out the invader?? I sure think we would.Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Remember, this is the same group that blew up Christian Churches of their own Iraqi countrymen....simply for being Chaldean Christians. Regardless of having a presence in the country that predates Islam by 400+ years.
These people are NOT rational when it comes to their religion. They want ALL foreigners out of the country. Any and all. (Unless you are a Muslim actively and militarily engaged in fighting for and instituting a Sharian Islamic Government based on Wahabbist principles and beliefs.)
Unless you are a Jordanian named Zarqawi.
It's Kafir Foreigners being Bad.
And "Believer" Foreigners being Good.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Foust has a point. A friend who's a political nut like me posed a hypothetical: what if the US had a leader who became a horrible tyrant, as bad or worse as Saddam, made himself Prez for life, etc. How do you think many Americans would react if a foreign power invaded to "liberate" us? And then occupied the US for an indefinite period and started building permanent military bases?
You'd have the American Civil War of the 1860's.
Posts: 1533 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:You'd have the American Civil War of the 1860's.
"The US had a leader who became a horrible tyrant, as bad or worse as Saddam, made himself Prez for life, etc." during the American Civil War? Which leader was that?
Posts: 1810 | Registered: Jan 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I forgot to add to my hypothetical: although the nation claims to want to leave eventually, they build the world's biggest embassy. Kind of a mixed message.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: The only people that matter are the people of the US and the people of Iraq
Americans are not the only one's in Iraq trying to help rebuild it - as the point of this thread makes clear - there are other coalition countries still trying to assist in Iraq and they aren't planning on pulling out e.g. Britain.
One of the scariest things right now is the threat that Kerry will start pulling out US troops if he is elected leaving other countries troops high and dry. This is in view of the fact that Britain has just last week sent troops into the outlying areas of Baghdad at US military requests to assist in their efforts to stop the terrorists.
Margaret Hassan is being held hostage right now, she has joint British and Iraqi nationality having married an Iraqi and lived there for 30 years. She heads up the operations in Iraq for Care International providing humanitarian aid and has worked for them since 1991. They are targeting anyone who can be used to try to diminish the coalitions efforts. She was kidnapped only 11 days after Kenneth Biggley, a British Civil Engineer was beheaded by terrorists after he and two Americans were kidnapped.
These kidnappers are plain evil and don't care about what happens to Iraq - they may say they do but it's a lie - they're murders who are taking every opportunity to exploit their own personal agenda's whether they are part of a terrorist group like "al-Tawhid and Jihad" or groups of disgruntled Saddam Hussain supporters who want to return to controlling the country.
Then you have the hundreds of Iraqi's who are being kidnapped by smaller groups who are only after money.
Nothing about war or terrorism makes sense and I'd be even more concerned if it did.
Posts: 394 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, Foust, assuming the right circumstances (say, four years from now, Bush hijacks the military and stages a coup), I'd support any invaders who weren't blatantly worse, and it's hard for me to imagine anyone not doing so. I suppose I'm just weird.
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:While I normally sneer at comparisons to Vietnam, this is one topic that I think it is totally valid. Remember how the US public and soldiers were baffled by the the resentment of the South Vietnamese? After all, you were only there to help them!
You're right to normally sneer at comparisons to Vietnam, but I think you missed another correct time to do so. In Vietnam, we were there both in opposition to a brutal, ruthless communist government and also in support of a corrupt, ruthless and brutal South Vietnamese government. We also didn't do much to clean up the South's government act, either, so it's quite understandable that many South Vietnamese would be cheesed off at us-even though I'd be very interested to get a poll on where they'd rather be now.
Not so in Iraq. In Iraq, the brutal, corrupt, ruthless government is the one we kicked out.
quote:Maybe if Americans had experience with actual invasions, you wouldn't be so surprised when your conquered foes resent your continued presence?
The "terrorists" make sense. You're the ones that baffle the world.
The Iraqis may not be overflowing with love for American troops on the ground, but that doesn't mean they want them to leave yet, either. And I'm sorry we have little experience with actual invasions. We'll just have to rely on the experience we do have: cleaning up other nations which have been invaded.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh, many people in America believe some or all of our own government is corrupt. (Some of us would agree with the brutal and ruthless as well, but we are just crazy. ) Why would you expect Iraqis to believe otherwise about an occupying nation that is bringing over lots of its own companies to help "rebuild"? Even if our intentions were/are entirely pure, there is no real reason for Iraqis to believe that. Perception is not reality, but it might as well be.
Posts: 281 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
) Why would you expect Iraqis to believe otherwise about an occupying nation that is bringing over lots of its own companies to help "rebuild"? Even if our intentions were/are entirely pure, there is no real reason for Iraqis to believe that. Perception is not reality, but it might as well be.
