as has already been stated quite unequivocally on this forum, and as reflected around the world, the US considers itself to be the one and only superpower with an almost god given right to police any country at anytime. so, my next question is, which ethnic/religious group is it about to invade next, so that all other countries will know which new terrorist threat they are facing. perhaps communist extremists loyal to the northern korean regime, or shi'ite muslim extremists loyal to iran. would be nice for those countries who have already suffered terrorist attacks due to america's expansionist policies to have some forewarning at least. and before we all jump on the 'lets blame the muslims' wagon, perhaps it would be worth noting that if the arab states formed a superpower and decided to meddle in US affairs i daresay there would be plenty of disgruntled americans ready to form their own extremist groups.
You're right, it's not islams fault for breeding maniacs, it's our fault for trying to keep them under control.
Statistics on terrorism over the period US started to "..considers itself to be the one and only superpower with an almost god given right to police any country at anytime....." to make the right conclusion is it good or bad. I want to see Facts.
here are the facts - vietnam israel afghanistan iraq probably missed a few out there, including south american countries 'san salvador' etc. so is this a glowing record for the US?
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2115832,00.html http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2115832,00.html
So when we are attacked, don't respond with bombs and bullets, instead we should respond with hugs and kisses? Maybe some therapy sessions to learn about their feelings? Seems to be working like a charm for the EU.
i think that you will find that acts of terrorism carried out by islamic groups against western targets do not predate western intervention in the middle east, and instead of constantly blaming groups of muslims for targeting westerners perhaps the time has come to try to deal with the cause. however, at this present time the US seems only to want to deal with the end result, fighting the resulting violence with even more violence. the recent 'iraqi commission report' headed by lord ashdown and baronness jay, suggested that at some point the west has to actually talk with the terrorists, no matter how difficult and uneasy an option that is. otherwise unrest in the middle east will continue to escalate. this has been done in northern ireland, thanks to the 'good friday agreement', and i believe can be done again, though it will be three times as difficult, the effort will be worth it. so, yes the US has the military might and financial muscle, but not the diplomatic know how or negotiating skills to solve this problem. blowing up a problem doesn't get rid of it. and that is why the US is not suited to police this world, and a more empowered version of the UN is.
unequivocally? Bullshit thats your opinion. opinion again You havn't asked a question yet you just vomited your BS opinion so far. The U.S. has invaded a religious and or ethnic group? bwahhaaa.....you are an idiot. We around the world pretty much know who will be doing terrorist attacks. Its been going on for many many decades (centuries actually) and it is Islamic radicals. I have a feeling you only started keeping up with world events the past 2 years or so? Uhhh.....can you say Radical Islam in the Middle East, control of over the vast majority of the Earths fossil fuels and attempts to take over world piece by piece by force? is that superpower enough? 911? WTC bombing in 92? belief they must rule the world including the US? etc etc etc. Tooo late! They already F'd up! Biyeeee.......
I would hope so, but you can't stop everything single attack but you can defeat many plans of attack.
in response to your remarks Twalker, when i stated that there were those on this forum who has stated unequivocally that the US was the best nation to police the world i was referring to a previous thread about the US policing the world, when for the most part US members were unequivocally in support of the US policing the world, that is not my opinion and never will be but overwhelmingly theirs. if you check the thread you might have some idea where i am coming from. as muslim terrorists, they don't have the monopoly on terror and never have had. the first terrorists to be called 'terrorists' in the middle east where those zionists fighting the british for control of palestine back in the forties. they would hang british officials, pack their insides with explosives, then detonate the explosives once the british forces came to find the missing officials. nice eh. and back when the anc where fighting apartheid i remember mandela and his cronies being labelled terroritsts, not freedom fighters. also the IRA as far as i can remember were not muslim, and they inflicted their own type of terrorism on the british mainland for over thirty years, covertly backed i might add by allies in america who were happy to call these terrorists 'freedom fighters', and equally happy to ignore the fact that thousands would be slaughtered over the years as a result of their freedom fighting. not that i ever agreed with the british army being in northern ireland, after all it is ireland not britain, but then i am not from the US so i do question my government's actions in other people's countries. i have never on this forum stated at any time that i have a problem with the people who live in the US, many of my friends and relatives are living there, and i know what a great place it is to live in, but you cannot support an administration that believes in pre-emptive strikes against any country, it is jus so morally wrong that i am surprised we are even discussing this. and i am as much against al quaida and any other extremist group in the middle east as anyone else, but their existence is in no small part down to the intervention of western governments, britain inlcluded, in their countries affairs. historically we could go right back to britains colonisation of large chunks of the middle east and the partitioning of the area after the fall of the ottoman empire, but i am hoping that you will have got the point.