Rice unveils plan to send $billions in military aid to Middle East

[mbthegreat]

most IRA terrorists came from Ireland, most IRA money came from the USA, does that make Ireland and the US members of the axel of evil?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by mbthegreat

most IRA terrorists came from Ireland, most IRA money came from the USA, does that make Ireland and the US members of the axel of evil?

If the Irish would have waged a holy terror war in several different nations and their government secretly promoted a hidden agenda to culturally overtake other nations, and if the money would have been come from members of the US government and the political dynasties like for example the Bushs and Kennedys - yes.

[mbthegreat]

Well, it was a "holy war" I suppose, the route of the problem is religion, so there is that count, the IRA was the militarised arm of Sinn Féin, the repbulican political party, although they didn't make a secret of it, so I don't know if that counts. Its stated aim was to overthrow northen Ireland and set up a unified state, so yeah it was using violence to take over other nations (or in this case a part of another nation).

Money did come from big people within the states, and the American government has never recognised it as a terrorist organisation, which could be seen as tantamount to supporting it.


Therefore the USA and EIRE are now members or mbthegreat's "Axel of evil doesers"

[Heibges]

When the United States initially deployed the M1A2, the only bought enough to equip on battalion. They sold hundreds to the Saudis, Egyptians, and Kuwaitis just ot keep the factories open.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by mbthegreat

Well, it was a "holy war" I suppose, the route of the problem is religion, so there is that count, the IRA was the militarised arm of Sinn Féin, the repbulican political party, although they didn't make a secret of it, so I don't know if that counts. Its stated aim was to overthrow northen Ireland and set up a unified state, so yeah it was using violence to take over other nations (or in this case a part of another nation).

Money did come from big people within the states, and the American government has never recognised it as a terrorist organisation, which could be seen as tantamount to supporting it.


Therefore the USA and EIRE are now members or mbthegreat's "Axel of evil doesers"

No it does not compare. The US government never supported openly or hiddenly the IRA, and never helped them by money or information to blow up British soldiers and Irish civilians. Also, the IRA never followed the cause of turning Europe and America Irish, and they never were a threat to do so to Germany or France or Asia or you name it. Also, the IRA had a political goal concenring the British and Ireland, they did not follow a way to establish their relgion in other parts of the world, nor did they base on a religious figure that had told them they must subjugate other nations that had nothing to do with Ireland at all. It was a local conflict along the break lines of an old religious rivalry of the local residents in that region.

You try too hard to construct a parallel so that you can use it for the comparison you want to give here, but your constr,ruction is bent, and not tight, so that it does not hold together.

[Hakahura]

So in the 80's the IRA never operated and carried sucessful attacks in Germany or Holland? What short memories some people have!

The IRA certainly was and to some extent still is a terrorist organisation.
Lets not forget since the start of the recent troubles back at the end of the 60's early 70's the IRA has been reponsible for more deaths than took place on September 11th.

[Chock]

I think you might be mixing up some other paramilitary organisations that exist in Ireland, most of whom have added to that figure.

Over 3,650 people have been killed as a result of the (stupidly named) 'troubles'. But of that figure, many were not as a result of IRA action. You have to factor in numerous other groups, splinter groups, plus the British Army (who've shot quite a few people themselves). Just off the top of my head you have the Ulster Volunteer Force, Loyalist Volunteer Force, Ulster Defence Association, Ulster Freedom Fighters, Red Hand Defenders, Red Hand Commandos, The Orange Volunteers, The Irish National Liberation Army, The Provisional IRA, The Continuity Irish Republican Army, The Real IRA. And probably The I Can't Believe It's Not The Real IRA and the People's Front of Judea too.

The IRA have indeed killed a lot of people, but to suggest that only the IRA are responsible for the death toll in the troubles is misleading.

The troubles in Ireland are not a simple affair. Much of it, for example, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the religion and the nationalist desires it often hides under, and is more about a drug-dealing turf war in many areas.

Chock

[Tchocky]

Spot on, Chock.

As for the topic - Oh, great. I suppose soon we'll be hearing about how volatile the region is, with many heavily armed states......etc
This is a great idea, arm everyone to the teeth to restore a balance. hooray.

[mbthegreat]

it's the Merican way! Freemenmoxy at any price

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Greed wins over reason -

Indeed.

[TteFAboB]

That's just enough money to hire Chuck Norris for one hour, which should suffice for him to go from country to country fixing each and every one of them, from top to bottom, in every aspect.

[Lurchi]

The secular government of Saudi Arabia is probably next to be overthrown by radical islamic elements. At least this will happen when there is no oil anymore and the resulting poverty of the masses will lead to a radicalization. Selling actual weapons to them looks like a great risk - especially regarding Israel.

Is this what Eisenhower warned of in his farewell address: America's politics in the iron gripe of the Military-Industrial complex? Maybe the whole Iraq war was also motivated by them? At least the MIC is probably the only one who profits from this disaster every single day, with rising stocks ...

Reminds me of Krupp - war is certainly a big business

[AntEater]

Secular government?
In Saudi Arabia?
This country is ruled by a medieval style monarchy! Every minister is a member of the ruling family, while the King styles himself protector of Mekka and Medina.
Women have practically no rights, Christian religion is publically banned and until recently, it was forbidden to take pictures of people (now you can if they consent).
Not to mention rather cruel punishments like beheading, stoning and chopping off hands. And of course they use their fellow muslims from poorer countries as quasi slave labour.
The Quran is the Saudi constitution, nothing else.
There is absolutely NOTHING secular about the current government of Saudi Arabia. The one thing why there won't be a fundamentalist turnover in Saudi Arabia is that the country is allready as islamic as it gets. Osama bin Laden can be regarded as a social revolutionary for his own country
The country may be friendly to the US, but that is foreign politics. Internally, Saudi is far worse than Iran, comparable to Taliban Afghanistan.
But sale of advanced weapons to SA perhaps won't do much harm, as the ineptitude of the SA military is legendary. Not so much the ineptitude but rather the lazyness of the genuine Arabs to do the more dirty aspects of soldiering like maintenance or digging. Without western maintenance specialists, the air force would be grounded within weeks, for example. Also recently I read a story about german NBC troops training Saudis. For the night, the Saudi unit was to dig in in the desert. The german instructors dug themselves in but the Saudis did not move: "Arabs don't dig"; they declared, pulled out their cellphones and after a few hours, some busloads of Filipinos, Indonesians and Pakistanis came and started digging....
:rotfl:

[Lurchi]

Mmmh, looks that you are right. I was probably blinded by the excessive (western) lifestyle of the leading caste.

On the other hand i still think that the Saudi government is regarded as secular by islamic extremists: It's connection to the west and the presence of U.S. troops within its borders makes them to traitors as it profanes the holy sites - Bin Laden used this "argument" to justify the Sept. 11 attacks.

[Skybird]

SA - secular? That the Saudi kind of Islamism (Wahabitism) is of a slightly different colour does not mean that they are less extreme and dangerous than al quaeda from whose perspective they are looking non-Islamic and Westernized indeed. and the new king is far more anti-West than the previous one was.

The point is - both AQ und SA are dangerous, and both are aggressive concerning the spreading of Islam, and fight against us. Saudi "culture centres" and first of all the King Fahd-academy in Germany are under close observation by the Bundesverfassungsschutz who rates the activities of these centres as highly dangerous and hostile to the constitution and recommends to shut them down, since years. Of course, no politicians has the guts to follow that advice. It is also no secret that you find plenty of Saudi money in the financing in international Islamic terrorism. They are probably the top financier of international terrorism, even before Iran. AQ is hostile to SA (and Bin laden has been since long, too) for from there reölatoive position, like Lurchi said just above, looks too western-style, and too secular, and concerning Islamic laws and rules: too corrupt (offedning the responsibility of guarding the holy places Mekka and Medina by that), and too soft and un-islamic.

If somebody thinks this is just to finance that kind of terror organizations that are fighting Iran-funded terror groups, then the real scope of the challenge so far has not been correctly identified by him.