[url="http://headlines.sify.com/15news3.html"]http://headlines.sify.com/15news3.html[/url]
The link is not archived so here is the article as well.
Prove Laden's role, Islamic nations tell US
There are growing signs that support for the US-led war on terrorism is wavering in the Muslim world as it waits for concrete proof of Osama bin Laden's alleged complicity in the attacks on New York and Washington.
US Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Sunday that the evidence fingering bin Laden would be made public soon, but with US forces already massing for an expected strike on Afghanistan, patience in many Muslim nations is wearing thin.
"We will put before the world, the American people, a persuasive case that there will be no doubt when that case is presented that it is al Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, who has been responsible" for the attacks, Powell said on the ABC network.
But officials in Pakistan say the only information they have received from the United States on bin Laden's links to terrorism has been related to the 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
To date, nothing solid has been communicated regarding evidence collected on the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon.
The Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which has sheltered bin Laden since 1996, has said it would be willing to consider putting the Saudi-born dissident on trial if the United States provided convincing evidence of his guilt.
Washington has firmly rejected the Taliban's stance, insisting that it hand bin Laden into US custody immediately or face the consequences.
At the same time the US authorities have fended off the requests for evidence, citing the importance of discretion in conducting its investigation into the terrorist atrocities.
The initial outpouring of sympathy from the Muslim world for the victims of the attacks on the United States has in recent days been replaced by a concern bordering on hostility over the scope of the planned retaliation.
Former Pakistan foreign minister Sartaj Aziz said on Sunday the issue of evidence was crucial, given US preparations for military action against Afghanistan and possible reprisals against targets in other Muslim countries.
Given the religious sensitivities inherent in the current crisis, Aziz said the United States ought to present its findings to some international judicial body before unleashing its military machine.
He pointed out that a thick dossier had been compiled against former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic prior to his transfer to the UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague.
Arab League chief Amr Mussa warned in Jordan on Sunday that US strikes against any Arab states would be unacceptable.
"There are different ways of fighting against terrorism and it must be the subject of consultations" among Arab countries, the head of the 22-country grouping told reporters.
"Clearly, we would never accept a strike against an Arab country, no matter what the circumstances," he said.
Meanwhile, the Gulf monarchies said Sunday that the United States must clearly define the framework of the proposed war on terrorism, also pledging their support for efforts to track down the perpetrators of the attacks.
"Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states are ready to take part in any action in a communal framework with well-defined objectives," Bahrain's Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammad bin Mubarak al-Khalifa said at the closed-door Gulf foreign ministers' meeting in the Saudi city of Jeddah.
Pakistan foreign ministry spokesman Riaz Mohammad Khan also underlined the need for Washington to take the world into its confidence.
"We have said, and many world leaders have said, that evidence should be shared with the international community," Khan said.
Pakistani officials have commented in private on the fact that arrests arising out of the US investigation so far have mostly been of people linked to Arab networks in West Asia, and have questioned when concrete proof will emerge of a direct link with bin Laden.
According to Aziz, the "war frenzy" emanating from Washington was seen by many Muslim countries as carrying an anti-Islamic bias, despite assurances from the US administration that its enemy was terrorism and not Islam.
The accusations the United States has levelled against the Taliban in Afghanistan and regimes in other Muslim countries suspected of harbouring terrorists were "very, very serious," Aziz said.
"If this is pursued, it will force countries and groups to polarise along religious lines," he added.
=============================================
This is an indian site so it is a little obsessed with pakistan, but it makes a valid point that all the nations need and want proof.
Support for the US not what it should be
Islamic World Warns of Backlash, U.S. Forces Deploy
[url="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010924/wl/attack_reaction_dc_1.html"]http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010924/wl/attack_reaction_dc_1.html[/url]
[url="http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010924/wl/attack_reaction_dc_1.html"]http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010924/wl/attack_reaction_dc_1.html[/url]
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? - Khalil Gibran
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
Got this from one of the pakistani sites i visit.
It is a mixture of various articles and news items.
=============================================
------------------------------------------------
WHAT COALITION?
On Friday (21/9/01), the Financial Times wrote:
"The US and Britain are to take military action BY THEMSELVES against Osama
bin Laden, prime suspect behind last week's terrorist atrocities, and his
protectors in Afghanistan... the military operation should be undertaken
largely, perhaps wholly, BY THEIR OWN FORCES." [end of quote from FT -
emphasis added]
Perhaps all those other nations in America's "crusade" would just complicate
things. What's more likely is that the coalition of multiple nations who we
were initially told were eager to engage in this American "crusade" has
evaporated, indeed, probably never existed in the first place. Perhaps the
price just isn't worth paying. And what is the entrance-fee to join the war?
Quite simple, as Kim Holmes (Vice President of The Heritage Foundation, USA)
put it: "... the price of entry must be unreserved support for America's
political and military objectives to eradicate terrorism." Only two days
after replying positively to Bush's rallying call, several European
countries and Russia quickly qualified their backing.
Not surprisingly, GERMANY and ITALY never did sign on. Both countries
declared that they are not going to participate in the war planned by the
USA against Afghanistan. Refer to [url="http://kavkaz.org/english/news/2001/09/20/news1.htm"]http://kavkaz.org/english/news/2001/09/20/news1.htm[/url]
SAUDI ARABIA has refused to allow the United States to stage or command
offensive air operations from Saudi air bases.
Refer to [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6731-2001Sep21.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6731-2001Sep21.html[/url]
FRANCE signalled that it would not automatically support military action.
"Our humane, political and functional solidarity [with the US] does not
deprive us of our sovereignty and freedom to make up our own minds," the
French prime minister, Lionel Jospin, maintained. (Guardian Newspaper, UK,
15/9/01)
RUSSIA, in contrast to initial enthusiastic support, is now adamant that it
will not participate in any "revenge'' attacks. Russia is making it clear
that it will not back an American invasion of Afghanistan from bases in the
former Soviet Central Asia.
Refer to [url="http://news.independent.co.uk/world/russia/story.jsp?story=94140"]http://news.independent.co.uk/world/russia/story.jsp?story=94140[/url] [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausrussia09142001.htm"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausrussia09142001.htm[/url]
IRAN said it would never agree to U.S. warplanes using its airspace to
attack neighbouring Afghanistan. "We will never allow American airplanes to
use Iranian airspace to attack Afghanistan," said Foreign Ministry spokesman
Hamid Reza.
Refe to [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausiransky09202001.htm"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausiransky09202001.htm[/url]
IRAQ, naturally, condemned U.S. threats of war to avenge last week's suicide
attacks, saying Washington did not have enough evidence to identify those
who carried them out.
Refer to [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausiraq09182001.htm"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausiraq09182001.htm[/url]
CHINA would not say if it might permit its airspace to be used for U.S.
retaliation, though such a prospect seems highly unlikely.
Refer to [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/auschina09182001.htm"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/auschina09182001.htm[/url]
AUSTRIA has already stated categorically that Austrian soldiers would not
become involved in military action because that is banned by the
constitution. However, the use of Austrian airspace has not been ruled out.
BELARUS did not join Russia and other European nations in observing a moment
of silence last week, and some officials said the terror attacks had been
prompted by arrogant U.S. policies toward the rest of the world.
YUGOSLAVIA, in view of the recent 1999 NATO air war, has not openly
supported a possible U.S. campaign against suspected perpetrators.
PAKISTAN has said it has no plans to follow the example of the United Arab
Emirates and cut diplomatic ties with the Taleban. No doubt, Bush's
subsequent decision to waive sanctions against Pakistan, introduced when
Pakistan and India conducted nuclear tests in 1998, will be seen as a
desperate attempt to gain Pakistan's unconditional support and calm its
citizens. As yet, Pakistan, remains the "missing" link in the not-so-grand
coalition.
Refer to [url="http://argument.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/story.jsp?story=94965"]http://argument.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/story.jsp?story=94965[/url]
The enthusiasm to get into Bush's crusade has cooled. Having painted himself
into a corner with his war-rhetoric, and needing to distract the American
people from an economy that was poised for a melt-down long before the
attacks on the World Trade Towers, Bush will have to move forward, trying to
put the best face on it that he can.
------------------------------------------------
Sources and further reading:
Guardian Newspaper - Cracks appear in coalition [url="http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,552410,00.html"]http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,552410,00.html[/url]
Boston Herald - Reaction by Country [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/reaction_by_country.html"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/reaction_by_country.html[/url]
What Really Happended - New! Coalition? We Don' Need no Stinkin' Coalition! [url="http://www.whatreallyhappened.com"]http://www.whatreallyhappened.com[/url]
The Heritage Foundation - Beware of Constraints Imposed by International
Coalition [url="http://www.heritage.org/library/backgrounder/bg1473.html"]http://www.heritage.org/library/backgrounder/bg1473.html[/url]
The URL for the full Financial Times article is: [url="http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT37PMCDWRC&live=true&useoverridetemplate=ZZZ99ZVV70C&tagid=FTDO9DHMZJC"]http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT37PMCDWRC&live=true&useoverridetemplate=ZZZ99ZVV70C&tagid=FTDO9DHMZJC[/url]
=============================================
I do hope the links work.
It is a mixture of various articles and news items.
=============================================
------------------------------------------------
WHAT COALITION?
On Friday (21/9/01), the Financial Times wrote:
"The US and Britain are to take military action BY THEMSELVES against Osama
bin Laden, prime suspect behind last week's terrorist atrocities, and his
protectors in Afghanistan... the military operation should be undertaken
largely, perhaps wholly, BY THEIR OWN FORCES." [end of quote from FT -
emphasis added]
Perhaps all those other nations in America's "crusade" would just complicate
things. What's more likely is that the coalition of multiple nations who we
were initially told were eager to engage in this American "crusade" has
evaporated, indeed, probably never existed in the first place. Perhaps the
price just isn't worth paying. And what is the entrance-fee to join the war?
Quite simple, as Kim Holmes (Vice President of The Heritage Foundation, USA)
put it: "... the price of entry must be unreserved support for America's
political and military objectives to eradicate terrorism." Only two days
after replying positively to Bush's rallying call, several European
countries and Russia quickly qualified their backing.
Not surprisingly, GERMANY and ITALY never did sign on. Both countries
declared that they are not going to participate in the war planned by the
USA against Afghanistan. Refer to [url="http://kavkaz.org/english/news/2001/09/20/news1.htm"]http://kavkaz.org/english/news/2001/09/20/news1.htm[/url]
SAUDI ARABIA has refused to allow the United States to stage or command
offensive air operations from Saudi air bases.
Refer to [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6731-2001Sep21.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6731-2001Sep21.html[/url]
FRANCE signalled that it would not automatically support military action.
"Our humane, political and functional solidarity [with the US] does not
deprive us of our sovereignty and freedom to make up our own minds," the
French prime minister, Lionel Jospin, maintained. (Guardian Newspaper, UK,
15/9/01)
RUSSIA, in contrast to initial enthusiastic support, is now adamant that it
will not participate in any "revenge'' attacks. Russia is making it clear
that it will not back an American invasion of Afghanistan from bases in the
former Soviet Central Asia.
Refer to [url="http://news.independent.co.uk/world/russia/story.jsp?story=94140"]http://news.independent.co.uk/world/russia/story.jsp?story=94140[/url] [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausrussia09142001.htm"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausrussia09142001.htm[/url]
IRAN said it would never agree to U.S. warplanes using its airspace to
attack neighbouring Afghanistan. "We will never allow American airplanes to
use Iranian airspace to attack Afghanistan," said Foreign Ministry spokesman
Hamid Reza.
Refe to [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausiransky09202001.htm"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausiransky09202001.htm[/url]
IRAQ, naturally, condemned U.S. threats of war to avenge last week's suicide
attacks, saying Washington did not have enough evidence to identify those
who carried them out.
Refer to [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausiraq09182001.htm"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/ausiraq09182001.htm[/url]
CHINA would not say if it might permit its airspace to be used for U.S.
retaliation, though such a prospect seems highly unlikely.
Refer to [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/auschina09182001.htm"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/world_reaction/auschina09182001.htm[/url]
AUSTRIA has already stated categorically that Austrian soldiers would not
become involved in military action because that is banned by the
constitution. However, the use of Austrian airspace has not been ruled out.
BELARUS did not join Russia and other European nations in observing a moment
of silence last week, and some officials said the terror attacks had been
prompted by arrogant U.S. policies toward the rest of the world.
YUGOSLAVIA, in view of the recent 1999 NATO air war, has not openly
supported a possible U.S. campaign against suspected perpetrators.
PAKISTAN has said it has no plans to follow the example of the United Arab
Emirates and cut diplomatic ties with the Taleban. No doubt, Bush's
subsequent decision to waive sanctions against Pakistan, introduced when
Pakistan and India conducted nuclear tests in 1998, will be seen as a
desperate attempt to gain Pakistan's unconditional support and calm its
citizens. As yet, Pakistan, remains the "missing" link in the not-so-grand
coalition.
Refer to [url="http://argument.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/story.jsp?story=94965"]http://argument.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/story.jsp?story=94965[/url]
The enthusiasm to get into Bush's crusade has cooled. Having painted himself
into a corner with his war-rhetoric, and needing to distract the American
people from an economy that was poised for a melt-down long before the
attacks on the World Trade Towers, Bush will have to move forward, trying to
put the best face on it that he can.
------------------------------------------------
Sources and further reading:
Guardian Newspaper - Cracks appear in coalition [url="http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,552410,00.html"]http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,552410,00.html[/url]
Boston Herald - Reaction by Country [url="http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/reaction_by_country.html"]http://www.bostonherald.com/attack/reaction_by_country.html[/url]
What Really Happended - New! Coalition? We Don' Need no Stinkin' Coalition! [url="http://www.whatreallyhappened.com"]http://www.whatreallyhappened.com[/url]
The Heritage Foundation - Beware of Constraints Imposed by International
Coalition [url="http://www.heritage.org/library/backgrounder/bg1473.html"]http://www.heritage.org/library/backgrounder/bg1473.html[/url]
The URL for the full Financial Times article is: [url="http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT37PMCDWRC&live=true&useoverridetemplate=ZZZ99ZVV70C&tagid=FTDO9DHMZJC"]http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT37PMCDWRC&live=true&useoverridetemplate=ZZZ99ZVV70C&tagid=FTDO9DHMZJC[/url]
=============================================
I do hope the links work.
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? - Khalil Gibran
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
Too late. The radical groups already view this as a US vs. Islam war - it won't matter who gets involved. Check their web sites.Originally posted by Fas:
<STRONG>The US would have a much easier time with a vast military coliation to justify its attack on Afghanistan.
If most of the european nations were to provide the US with military aid, to many of the fundementalists it won't be a US vs them war.</STRONG>
There's nothing a little poison couldn't cure...
What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, ... to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if he people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security.
What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, ... to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if he people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security.
-
Happy Evil
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 11:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
- Contact:
Bush's crusade??? You need to rethink that statement my freind. Lets break your summary down...Originally posted by Fas:
<STRONG>
...The enthusiasm to get into Bush's crusade has cooled. Having painted himself
into a corner with his war-rhetoric, and needing to distract the American
people from an economy that was poised for a melt-down long before the
attacks on the World Trade Towers, Bush will have to move forward, trying to
put the best face on it that he can.
</STRONG>
1."..Bushes crusade..".
Was WWII FDR's crusade??? You make it sound like he is the instigator.
2."..enthusiasm....has cooled."
Maybe, we should not expect anyone except NATO allies to back us up. What would be expected of the US if this would have happened in Germany or Japan???
3."...Having painted himself
into a corner with his war-rhetoric..."
Who painted who into a corner? This seems like another case of someone saying the americans deserve this for some reason or another.
4."...and needing to distract the American
people from an economy that was poised for a melt-down long before the
attacks on the World Trade Towers.."
Really? Oh yeah, the old "Wag the Dog" scenario.
5."...Bush will have to move forward, trying
to put the best face on it that he can."
It seems like your backing off your position with this one.
I'm not real sure what you mean.
I'm also not sure what your motivation is for the above summary of the US and its president. You accuse Bush of "distracting" the US citizens with "war-rhetoric" away from an economy on the verge of a "melt-down" is crap.
I'm sure Bush would much rather deal with the economy than some backward-ass fundamentalist who thinks all religions and beliefs are wrong except his.
He kills people. Justifying these acts within his religion.
Its time for countries on the fence to decide. An act of war is an act of war. Its time to pick your friends. Difficult? Yes.
I propose the "painting himself into a corner" you profess is representative of the american people right now. We do not need global approval to proceed with protecting ourselves from future attacks and exacting justice for deeds already done.
Finally, I would ask you to clearly state what you would do if you were Bush. Hmmmmm??
@Fas: Thanks a lot for posting all the links! 
I believe I was the person who asked you in the first place to post links to other newssites than the standard US/European sites. I watch or read BBC every day, often also CNN, CBS, ACB and Sky (and Swedish newspapers, of course).
I think it very important to take in information from different sources. My travelling over the world has made me realise how biased most media are, both culturally and politically. I was travelling around both during the Chernobyl meltdown and the Gulf war, and news in different countries reported very different aspects and selected different facts.
So, thanks again Fas, I'm very pleased you post the links.
I believe I was the person who asked you in the first place to post links to other newssites than the standard US/European sites. I watch or read BBC every day, often also CNN, CBS, ACB and Sky (and Swedish newspapers, of course). I think it very important to take in information from different sources. My travelling over the world has made me realise how biased most media are, both culturally and politically. I was travelling around both during the Chernobyl meltdown and the Gulf war, and news in different countries reported very different aspects and selected different facts.
So, thanks again Fas, I'm very pleased you post the links.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
I'm not going to comment on the debate between you and FAS here, but Bush actually used the word "crusade" in a speech, and this, I believe, was not the best choice of word during the circumstances.Originally posted by Happy Evil:
<STRONG>Bush's crusade???
1."..Bushes crusade..".
Was WWII FDR's crusade??? You make it sound like he is the instigator.
</STRONG>
Probably president Bush meant "crusade" as synonymous with "mission", but you can imagine the reaction in the Muslim world when Bush use the heavily loaded word crusade.
From BBC:
President Bush has therefore caused some surprise in describing the war on terrorism as a crusade.
It is a word full of historical resonance in Europe and the Middle East: the mediaeval crusades were wars against Muslims to seize control of Christian holy sites in Jerusalem.
One diplomat in London commented that Mr Bush needed a crash course in European history.
Btw, MPO is that it's very good that the US is clearly is seeking and getting international support for the action. Of course there are some extremists who wants to view this as a Christian v Muslim war, or a US v Muslim was, but those elements are on both sides, and they will never disappear completely, not even if all countries that have condemned the terrorist attack would send troops.
IMO the extremists on both sides are also feeding off each other. For every American/European who screams "nuke Afghanistan" there will be a Muslim responding with screaming "jihad" and vice versa.
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
-
Yshania
- Posts: 8572
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 10:00 pm
- Location: Some Girls Wander By Mistake
- Contact:
Some excerpts from AOL News:
US BOOSTED AS OLD ENEMY PLEDGES TO HELP
AOL Live: Chat to CNN's Nic Robertson
Jihad: Resist 'Crusader', urges bin Laden
By Vladimir Isachenkov ,The Associated Press
America has welcomed Russian offers of support for US military action, including the use of former Soviet airbases.
Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, said he was "very pleased" with the offer of help made by Russian President Vladmiir Putin
Putin on Monday opened his airspace to humanitarian flights by the anti-terrorist coalition led by the United States and said Central Asia governments had not ruled out the use of their air bases for Washington-led military action against Afghanistan.
In a speech on national television, he also said Russia would intensify its support of Afghan opposition forces fighting the Taliban in the northeast of that country and was prepared to supply them with weapons and military equipment,
``We have coordinated this position with our allies among the Central Asian states. They share this position and do not rule out providing the use of their airfields,'' Putin said.
The address from the Kremlin marked Putin's most specific outline of steps his country plans to take to help the United States after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. The speech came two days after Putin spent an hour on the phone with President Bush.
Putin's speech signals the Kremlin's readiness to openly help the United States in its drive to capture Osama bin Laden, the Saudi born Islamic fundamentalist that Washington holds responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11. Use of air bases in Central Asia - considered under Moscow's sphere of influence - are believed key to the effort against bin Laden and terrorist camps he operates in neighboring Afghanistan.
``We are broadening cooperation with the internationally recognized government of Afghanistan headed by Mr. Rabbani and will render additional aid to its armed forces in the form of the supply of weapons and military equipment,'' Putin said.
Putin was referring to the government-in-exile of President Burhanuddin Rabbani, who was ousted by the Taliban. The Russians already have been helping the Afghan opposition, which controls about 5 percent of the territory of Afghanistan, by allowing helicopters to fly in and out of Tajikistan, where the Rabbani forces pick up supplies.
Meanwhile Monday, Kazakstan's president said his nation was ready to offer airspace and military bases for an anti-terrorist coalition.
``We've already given our general agreement that we'll provide all necessary support. But there has been no concrete request yet,'' President Nursultan Nazarbayev told a news conference in the Kazak capital Astana.
Of the five former Soviet republics in Central Asia, Kazakstan is the farthest from Afghanistan, the target of potential retaliatory strikes for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States. Washington has expressed more interest in using bases in Uzbekistan or Tajikistan, which border Afghanistan.
The Central Asian nations and Russia - which wields considerable influence in the region - publicly had given conflicting signals about whether they will provide military assistance to the United States.
The Russian Interfax news agency, quoting unidentified sources, said three U.S. Air Force transport planes had arrived in Uzbekistan this weekend carrying about 200 U.S. troops and reconnaissance equipment. Russia's RTR television also reported the arrival of U.S. forces in Uzbekistan.
But Uzbek Defense Ministry spokesman Bakhtiar Shakirov denied Monday that any U.S. planes had landed in Uzbekistan, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported.
At the same time, ITAR-Tass cited a witness saying he saw two large planes which looked like U.S. C-130 Hercules transports landing at a military field near Tashkent.
A spokesman for the U.S. Embassy in the Uzbek capital, Tashkent, refused to comment on the reports. Secretary of State Colin Powell, asked in an interview on ABC on Sunday whether troops had landed in Uzbekistan, said ``not to my knowledge.''
There were also unconfirmed media reports that U.S. forces had landed at an air base in Tajikistan. Officials would not immediately comment on the reports.
The northern alliance forces led by Rabbani, and now promised increased Russian support, are made up of the same rebel fighters that battled Soviet forces and finally defeated them in 1989. But Russia sees the Afghan opposition as the best bet for defeating the Taliban and preventing the spread of Islamic fundamentalism into Central Asia and Chechnya in the Caucuses region far to the west.
Putin also said a Pentagon delegation was due in Moscow late next week to discuss possible military action against the Taliban, though he ruled out Russian participation in such a campaign.
The Russian leader did not indicate if Moscow would give direct military assistance or troops to any U.S. operation. He did say, however, that Moscow would be ready to help in search-and-rescue operations.
Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov later said Washington had already requested - and been provided with - intelligence on international terrorist groups and their bases.
Since the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Putin had remained noncommittal in public about Russia's strategy on possible U.S. strikes on Afghanistan, whose Taliban rulers refuse to hand over prime suspect Osama bin Laden and his fighters to the United States. Russia's cooperation is crucial, especially if an operation is staged from Central Asia.
Putin has said that Russia is ready for wide cooperation with the United States but other officials have indicated Moscow would not offer troops for any U.S. military action - and would not welcome any unilateral decisions by the United States.
In his speech Monday, Putin also called for greater reliance on international organizations such as the United Nations and its Security Council in determining what steps to take against international terrorism.
``Other, deeper forms of cooperation between Russia and participants in the anti-terrorist operation are possible. The depth and character of this cooperation will directly depend on the general level and quality of our relations with these countries and on mutual understanding in the sphere of fighting international terrorism,'' Putin said
**************************************
Japan sending envoy to Pakistan to show support
ISLAMABAD, Sept 25 (Reuters) - A special envoy of Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi will arrive on Wednesday to support Pakistan for joining the fight against "terrorism," the Japanese embassy said on Tuesday.
It said in a statement Senior Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Seiken Sugiura will give a letter from Koizumi to Pakistani military ruler General Pervez Musharraf on Thursaday "conveying Japan's support to Pakistan and explaining details of economic assistance measures."
Sugiura will hold talks with Pakistani Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar and Finance Minister Shaukat Aziz on Wednesday.
"Japan has highly valued Pakistan's decision to cooperate with the efforts of the international community to combat terrorism," the embassy said.
Pakistan has pledge full support to the U.S.-led campaign to track down Afghan-based Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, the prime U.S. suspect in the devastating September 11 attacks in New York and Washington.
Last week, Japan announced $40 million in emergency aid for Pakistan and said it was considering lifting economic sanctions imposed on Pakistan and India after their tit-for-tat nuclear tests in May 1998.
**********************************
UN preparing for 1.5 mln refugees from Afghanistan
PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Sept 25 (Reuters) - The United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) said on Tuesday it was preparing for an exodus of over 1.5 million Afghans to neighbouring countries.
UNHCR spokesman Yousuf Hassan said nearly one million refugees could arrive in Pakistan and nearly half a million in Iran. Plans were underway in Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan to accommodate a further 150,000.
"The UNHCR is planning for an expected 1.5 million Afghans fleeing into neighbouring countries," he said.
The agency said tens of thousands of Afghans were on the move inside the country to try to avoid threatened U.S. strikes against Osama bin laden and his Taliban protectors.
********************************
Iraqi Kurd group says fighting Islamist rivals
By Steve Bryant
ISTANBUL, Sept 25 (Reuters) - An Iraqi Kurdish group said on Tuesday it had been involved in heavy fighting in northern Iraq with enemies it described as Islamists with links to Afghanistan. The perceived threat from Islamist groups in northern Iraq has helped promote a process of reconciliation between the two main Kurdish groups running the enclave, which broke away from Iraqi government control after the 1991 Gulf War.
Both groups, once bitter rivals, describe the Islamist forces as "terrorists" and have vowed to cooperate against them. Further details of the "Islamist" groups were not available.
The United States, which regularly sends out air patrols over northern Iraq to enforce a no-fly zone against Baghdad's military, has long sponsored talks between the two groups, aiming to build northern Iraq into a united bulwark against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
One of the Kurdish groups, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), said on Tuesday its "peshmerga" fighters had clashed with Islamist forces around the town of Halabja in the east of northern Iraq, close to the Iranian border.
"There has been some tension and clashes between the PUK and Islamic fundamentalists in a region controlled by the PUK," a senior PUK source told Reuters across the border in Turkey.
Local media reports said there had been casualties on both sides and at least two PUK fighters had died. The fighting follows weekend clashes in which more than 20 PUK guerrillas were reported by Kurdish media to have been killed.
The reports could not be independently confirmed.
Foreign observers tracking northern Iraq also said it was hard to confirm media reports that have linked the Islamist forces to Afghan-based militant Osama bin Laden, Washington's prime suspect for this month's attacks on the United States.
The PUK source declined to comment on any bin Laden link: "But we do have evidence that they have links to Afghanistan."
The leader of the second main northern Iraqi Kurdish group, Massoud Barzani, earlier in the week drew parallels between the conflict with the Islamists there and possible U.S. strikes on Afghanistan in a bid to destroy bin Laden's organisation.
"We announce that we will cooperate with all other parties, in particular the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, as we do not want Kurdistan to be a base for terrorism and terrorists," Barzani told a local assembly meeting late last week.
Barzani's Kurdistan Democratic Party holds the Islamist forces responsible for the killing in February of Fransu Hariria, who was governor of the city of Erbil and a senior official in the party.
(Additional reporting by Ferit Demir in Tunceli, Turkey
********************************
Britain to show Iran some attack evidence
By Jon Hemming
TEHRAN, Sept 25 (Reuters) - Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said on a landmark visit to Iran on Tuesday that Britain would show Tehran evidence about the attacks on the United States.
It indicated a new openness in a long troubled relationship.
Straw, on the first visit by a British foreign minister since the 1979 Islamic revolution, added after talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi that Britain was seeking "advice" from Tehran about neighbouring Afghanistan.
Washington is pursuing Saudi-born militant Osama bin Laden, who it believes is being sheltered by Afghanistan's ruling Taliban and is its prime suspect for the September 11 attacks.
"Iran is an important source of advice on Afghanistan," Straw told reporters.
"We discussed the approach needed to deal with terrorism and the need to reduce the environment in which terrorists operate."
Straw said he told Kharrazi that London, Washington's close ally, was ready to show Tehran evidence of bin Laden's role.
"We would share what we could, confidentially," he said.
"But I dont think anyone is in much serious doubt about the guilt of Osama bin Laden."
Iran was quick to condemn the attacks, pleasing many in the West who hope for a new cooperation with Tehran. But many conservative Iranians see possible U.S. action in Afghanistan as evidence Washington aims to expand its influence in the region.
Iran has welcomed a "war" on terrorism but says it must be undertaken by the United Nations and not unilaterally. It has also said it will play no part in armed action against Muslims.
"Military action can only be taken with a broad international consensus, otherwise any military action will have the opposite effect and only lead to the death of innocent civilians," Kharrazi said.
"We must not allow (the crisis) to bring different civilisations into conflict and divide the world."
Straw said Kharrazi had also been concerned about a rise in anti-Muslim feeling in the West in response to the attacks.
PROBLEMS IN ISRAEL
Even as he sought to improve ties with Iran, Straw was embroiled in a diplomatic spat with Israel, where sources in Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's office said he would not meet Straw because of what they said they called anti-Israel remarks.
Straw, due to visit Israel later on Tuesday, said he still hoped to meet Sharon despite Israeli anger over a statement in which Straw said: "I understand that one of the factors which helps breed terrorism is the anger which many people in this region feel at events over the years in Palestine."
U.S. officials are said to be divided over whether the crisis could bring an opening for a new relationship with Iran. Both countries have problems with the Taliban.
But the United States still has problems with Iran because it considers it a sponsor of what it calls terrorism, backing Lebanese and Palestinian groups battling Israel.
Iran strongly denies it supports terrorism.
Straw denied reports suggesting he was carrying a message from Washington to Iran's leaders, who have had no diplomatic relations with the United States since the 1979 revolution.
Straw said he was not asking Iran for military involvement in any assault on Afghanistan. But he added: "I provided added background to the feelings in the United States about the scale of the atrocities and the prospect of military action."
Straw also announced Britain would provide another 650,000 pounds ($950,000) to Iran to help it fight drug trafficking, in addition to 4 million pounds ($5.9 million) already provided.
($1-.6843 Pound)
US BOOSTED AS OLD ENEMY PLEDGES TO HELP
AOL Live: Chat to CNN's Nic Robertson
Jihad: Resist 'Crusader', urges bin Laden
By Vladimir Isachenkov ,The Associated Press
America has welcomed Russian offers of support for US military action, including the use of former Soviet airbases.
Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, said he was "very pleased" with the offer of help made by Russian President Vladmiir Putin
Putin on Monday opened his airspace to humanitarian flights by the anti-terrorist coalition led by the United States and said Central Asia governments had not ruled out the use of their air bases for Washington-led military action against Afghanistan.
In a speech on national television, he also said Russia would intensify its support of Afghan opposition forces fighting the Taliban in the northeast of that country and was prepared to supply them with weapons and military equipment,
``We have coordinated this position with our allies among the Central Asian states. They share this position and do not rule out providing the use of their airfields,'' Putin said.
The address from the Kremlin marked Putin's most specific outline of steps his country plans to take to help the United States after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. The speech came two days after Putin spent an hour on the phone with President Bush.
Putin's speech signals the Kremlin's readiness to openly help the United States in its drive to capture Osama bin Laden, the Saudi born Islamic fundamentalist that Washington holds responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11. Use of air bases in Central Asia - considered under Moscow's sphere of influence - are believed key to the effort against bin Laden and terrorist camps he operates in neighboring Afghanistan.
``We are broadening cooperation with the internationally recognized government of Afghanistan headed by Mr. Rabbani and will render additional aid to its armed forces in the form of the supply of weapons and military equipment,'' Putin said.
Putin was referring to the government-in-exile of President Burhanuddin Rabbani, who was ousted by the Taliban. The Russians already have been helping the Afghan opposition, which controls about 5 percent of the territory of Afghanistan, by allowing helicopters to fly in and out of Tajikistan, where the Rabbani forces pick up supplies.
Meanwhile Monday, Kazakstan's president said his nation was ready to offer airspace and military bases for an anti-terrorist coalition.
``We've already given our general agreement that we'll provide all necessary support. But there has been no concrete request yet,'' President Nursultan Nazarbayev told a news conference in the Kazak capital Astana.
Of the five former Soviet republics in Central Asia, Kazakstan is the farthest from Afghanistan, the target of potential retaliatory strikes for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States. Washington has expressed more interest in using bases in Uzbekistan or Tajikistan, which border Afghanistan.
The Central Asian nations and Russia - which wields considerable influence in the region - publicly had given conflicting signals about whether they will provide military assistance to the United States.
The Russian Interfax news agency, quoting unidentified sources, said three U.S. Air Force transport planes had arrived in Uzbekistan this weekend carrying about 200 U.S. troops and reconnaissance equipment. Russia's RTR television also reported the arrival of U.S. forces in Uzbekistan.
But Uzbek Defense Ministry spokesman Bakhtiar Shakirov denied Monday that any U.S. planes had landed in Uzbekistan, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported.
At the same time, ITAR-Tass cited a witness saying he saw two large planes which looked like U.S. C-130 Hercules transports landing at a military field near Tashkent.
A spokesman for the U.S. Embassy in the Uzbek capital, Tashkent, refused to comment on the reports. Secretary of State Colin Powell, asked in an interview on ABC on Sunday whether troops had landed in Uzbekistan, said ``not to my knowledge.''
There were also unconfirmed media reports that U.S. forces had landed at an air base in Tajikistan. Officials would not immediately comment on the reports.
The northern alliance forces led by Rabbani, and now promised increased Russian support, are made up of the same rebel fighters that battled Soviet forces and finally defeated them in 1989. But Russia sees the Afghan opposition as the best bet for defeating the Taliban and preventing the spread of Islamic fundamentalism into Central Asia and Chechnya in the Caucuses region far to the west.
Putin also said a Pentagon delegation was due in Moscow late next week to discuss possible military action against the Taliban, though he ruled out Russian participation in such a campaign.
The Russian leader did not indicate if Moscow would give direct military assistance or troops to any U.S. operation. He did say, however, that Moscow would be ready to help in search-and-rescue operations.
Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov later said Washington had already requested - and been provided with - intelligence on international terrorist groups and their bases.
Since the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Putin had remained noncommittal in public about Russia's strategy on possible U.S. strikes on Afghanistan, whose Taliban rulers refuse to hand over prime suspect Osama bin Laden and his fighters to the United States. Russia's cooperation is crucial, especially if an operation is staged from Central Asia.
Putin has said that Russia is ready for wide cooperation with the United States but other officials have indicated Moscow would not offer troops for any U.S. military action - and would not welcome any unilateral decisions by the United States.
In his speech Monday, Putin also called for greater reliance on international organizations such as the United Nations and its Security Council in determining what steps to take against international terrorism.
``Other, deeper forms of cooperation between Russia and participants in the anti-terrorist operation are possible. The depth and character of this cooperation will directly depend on the general level and quality of our relations with these countries and on mutual understanding in the sphere of fighting international terrorism,'' Putin said
**************************************
Japan sending envoy to Pakistan to show support
ISLAMABAD, Sept 25 (Reuters) - A special envoy of Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi will arrive on Wednesday to support Pakistan for joining the fight against "terrorism," the Japanese embassy said on Tuesday.
It said in a statement Senior Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Seiken Sugiura will give a letter from Koizumi to Pakistani military ruler General Pervez Musharraf on Thursaday "conveying Japan's support to Pakistan and explaining details of economic assistance measures."
Sugiura will hold talks with Pakistani Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar and Finance Minister Shaukat Aziz on Wednesday.
"Japan has highly valued Pakistan's decision to cooperate with the efforts of the international community to combat terrorism," the embassy said.
Pakistan has pledge full support to the U.S.-led campaign to track down Afghan-based Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, the prime U.S. suspect in the devastating September 11 attacks in New York and Washington.
Last week, Japan announced $40 million in emergency aid for Pakistan and said it was considering lifting economic sanctions imposed on Pakistan and India after their tit-for-tat nuclear tests in May 1998.
**********************************
UN preparing for 1.5 mln refugees from Afghanistan
PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Sept 25 (Reuters) - The United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) said on Tuesday it was preparing for an exodus of over 1.5 million Afghans to neighbouring countries.
UNHCR spokesman Yousuf Hassan said nearly one million refugees could arrive in Pakistan and nearly half a million in Iran. Plans were underway in Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan to accommodate a further 150,000.
"The UNHCR is planning for an expected 1.5 million Afghans fleeing into neighbouring countries," he said.
The agency said tens of thousands of Afghans were on the move inside the country to try to avoid threatened U.S. strikes against Osama bin laden and his Taliban protectors.
********************************
Iraqi Kurd group says fighting Islamist rivals
By Steve Bryant
ISTANBUL, Sept 25 (Reuters) - An Iraqi Kurdish group said on Tuesday it had been involved in heavy fighting in northern Iraq with enemies it described as Islamists with links to Afghanistan. The perceived threat from Islamist groups in northern Iraq has helped promote a process of reconciliation between the two main Kurdish groups running the enclave, which broke away from Iraqi government control after the 1991 Gulf War.
Both groups, once bitter rivals, describe the Islamist forces as "terrorists" and have vowed to cooperate against them. Further details of the "Islamist" groups were not available.
The United States, which regularly sends out air patrols over northern Iraq to enforce a no-fly zone against Baghdad's military, has long sponsored talks between the two groups, aiming to build northern Iraq into a united bulwark against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
One of the Kurdish groups, the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK), said on Tuesday its "peshmerga" fighters had clashed with Islamist forces around the town of Halabja in the east of northern Iraq, close to the Iranian border.
"There has been some tension and clashes between the PUK and Islamic fundamentalists in a region controlled by the PUK," a senior PUK source told Reuters across the border in Turkey.
Local media reports said there had been casualties on both sides and at least two PUK fighters had died. The fighting follows weekend clashes in which more than 20 PUK guerrillas were reported by Kurdish media to have been killed.
The reports could not be independently confirmed.
Foreign observers tracking northern Iraq also said it was hard to confirm media reports that have linked the Islamist forces to Afghan-based militant Osama bin Laden, Washington's prime suspect for this month's attacks on the United States.
The PUK source declined to comment on any bin Laden link: "But we do have evidence that they have links to Afghanistan."
The leader of the second main northern Iraqi Kurdish group, Massoud Barzani, earlier in the week drew parallels between the conflict with the Islamists there and possible U.S. strikes on Afghanistan in a bid to destroy bin Laden's organisation.
"We announce that we will cooperate with all other parties, in particular the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, as we do not want Kurdistan to be a base for terrorism and terrorists," Barzani told a local assembly meeting late last week.
Barzani's Kurdistan Democratic Party holds the Islamist forces responsible for the killing in February of Fransu Hariria, who was governor of the city of Erbil and a senior official in the party.
(Additional reporting by Ferit Demir in Tunceli, Turkey
********************************
Britain to show Iran some attack evidence
By Jon Hemming
TEHRAN, Sept 25 (Reuters) - Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said on a landmark visit to Iran on Tuesday that Britain would show Tehran evidence about the attacks on the United States.
It indicated a new openness in a long troubled relationship.
Straw, on the first visit by a British foreign minister since the 1979 Islamic revolution, added after talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi that Britain was seeking "advice" from Tehran about neighbouring Afghanistan.
Washington is pursuing Saudi-born militant Osama bin Laden, who it believes is being sheltered by Afghanistan's ruling Taliban and is its prime suspect for the September 11 attacks.
"Iran is an important source of advice on Afghanistan," Straw told reporters.
"We discussed the approach needed to deal with terrorism and the need to reduce the environment in which terrorists operate."
Straw said he told Kharrazi that London, Washington's close ally, was ready to show Tehran evidence of bin Laden's role.
"We would share what we could, confidentially," he said.
"But I dont think anyone is in much serious doubt about the guilt of Osama bin Laden."
Iran was quick to condemn the attacks, pleasing many in the West who hope for a new cooperation with Tehran. But many conservative Iranians see possible U.S. action in Afghanistan as evidence Washington aims to expand its influence in the region.
Iran has welcomed a "war" on terrorism but says it must be undertaken by the United Nations and not unilaterally. It has also said it will play no part in armed action against Muslims.
"Military action can only be taken with a broad international consensus, otherwise any military action will have the opposite effect and only lead to the death of innocent civilians," Kharrazi said.
"We must not allow (the crisis) to bring different civilisations into conflict and divide the world."
Straw said Kharrazi had also been concerned about a rise in anti-Muslim feeling in the West in response to the attacks.
PROBLEMS IN ISRAEL
Even as he sought to improve ties with Iran, Straw was embroiled in a diplomatic spat with Israel, where sources in Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's office said he would not meet Straw because of what they said they called anti-Israel remarks.
Straw, due to visit Israel later on Tuesday, said he still hoped to meet Sharon despite Israeli anger over a statement in which Straw said: "I understand that one of the factors which helps breed terrorism is the anger which many people in this region feel at events over the years in Palestine."
U.S. officials are said to be divided over whether the crisis could bring an opening for a new relationship with Iran. Both countries have problems with the Taliban.
But the United States still has problems with Iran because it considers it a sponsor of what it calls terrorism, backing Lebanese and Palestinian groups battling Israel.
Iran strongly denies it supports terrorism.
Straw denied reports suggesting he was carrying a message from Washington to Iran's leaders, who have had no diplomatic relations with the United States since the 1979 revolution.
Straw said he was not asking Iran for military involvement in any assault on Afghanistan. But he added: "I provided added background to the feelings in the United States about the scale of the atrocities and the prospect of military action."
Straw also announced Britain would provide another 650,000 pounds ($950,000) to Iran to help it fight drug trafficking, in addition to 4 million pounds ($5.9 million) already provided.
($1-.6843 Pound)
Parachute for sale, like new! Never opened!
Guinness, black goes with everything.
Guinness, black goes with everything.
-
Happy Evil
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 11:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
- Contact:
Let me start by saying ...I would never support any "Nuke Afghanistan" rehetoric or actions. Also, any support from the rest of the world would surely be welcomed but should not dictate how the US responds. Do you as nation want to be in bed with the US or the terrorists?? Seems like a simple question.Originally posted by C Elegans:
<STRONG>I'm not going to comment on the debate between you and FAS here, but Bush actually used the word "crusade" in a speech, and this, I believe, was not the best choice of word during the circumstances.
Probably president Bush meant "crusade" as synonymous with "mission", but you can imagine the reaction in the Muslim world when Bush use the heavily loaded word crusade.
From BBC:
President Bush has therefore caused some surprise in describing the war on terrorism as a crusade.
It is a word full of historical resonance in Europe and the Middle East: the mediaeval crusades were wars against Muslims to seize control of Christian holy sites in Jerusalem.
One diplomat in London commented that Mr Bush needed a crash course in European history.
Btw, MPO is that it's very good that the US is clearly is seeking and getting international support for the action. Of course there are some extremists who wants to view this as a Christian v Muslim war, or a US v Muslim was, but those elements are on both sides, and they will never disappear completely, not even if all countries that have condemned the terrorist attack would send troops.
IMO the extremists on both sides are also feeding off each other. For every American/European who screams "nuke Afghanistan" there will be a Muslim responding with screaming "jihad" and vice versa.</STRONG>
With all due respect to you Mrs. Elgans, I will not accept any attempts to blame the US for these attacks.
The critique of the use of the word "crusade", IMHO, simply illustrates the splitting of hairs by the media.
Bush also used the words "act of war" which are much stronger and broader than "crusade" yet lack the same romantic and historical quality.
I am also getting the "Boy who cried wolf" effect with the word "Jihad".
Oh, I am terrified! Its a Jihad!!!!
WHoooooHoooo!! yet another holy war.
Must be the third one this month.
What the US supports, or does not support, does not justify the violence against the US citizens in this case.
Fas has posted some veiled anti-american rehetoric, here and elsewhere, and that is fine. Fas needs to know it will not be posted uncontested.
I will ask Fas like I ask everyone in this matter...
What would you do if you were G.W. Bush??
Anyone??
Happy evil instead of picking a fight or assuming something read the post again.
These are all articles.
Not my words.
I just post the news don't shot the messenger.
You can get extremely pro-US news from CNN and US papers.
It is good to see what the rest of the world thinks.
Also that quote you have i believe is from the FT a extremely respectable Newspaper from England.
As i did a complete copy and paste from a pakistani news site.
Those aren't my views.
So if you have a problem you can take it up with the writer of the article which is not me!
My comments about the US aren't hidden.
If you want to know my opinion just ask.
I am just posting articles from varuous non-us websites.
These are all articles.
Not my words.
I just post the news don't shot the messenger.
You can get extremely pro-US news from CNN and US papers.
It is good to see what the rest of the world thinks.
Also that quote you have i believe is from the FT a extremely respectable Newspaper from England.
As i did a complete copy and paste from a pakistani news site.
Those aren't my views.
So if you have a problem you can take it up with the writer of the article which is not me!
My comments about the US aren't hidden.
If you want to know my opinion just ask.
I am just posting articles from varuous non-us websites.
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? - Khalil Gibran
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
I don't see why the US has to provide proof that it was Bin Laden that attacked the WTC. Right now that proof is all most likely all classified, and they can't give it out without also giving out sources and contacts. The US has given out proof that Bin Laden was responsible for the 1998 Embassy bombings. This is a war on Terrorism, not just a war on those who attacked the WTC. Why didn't Afghanistan hand over Bin Laden long ago?
Now this is the law of the jungle - as old and as true as the sky; And the wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the wolf that shall break it must die. As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk the law runneth forward and back - For the strength of the pack is the wolf, and the strength of the wolf is the pack"
- Rudyard Kipling, Second Jungle Book
- Rudyard Kipling, Second Jungle Book
</STRONG>Originally posted by Happy Evil:
<STRONG>Let me start by saying ...I would never support any "Nuke Afghanistan" rehetoric or actions.
I was not referring to you here, I was referring to extreme elements on both sides, and how these elements add fuel to each other's hate.
</STRONG><STRONG>With all due respect to you Mrs. Elgans, I will not accept any attempts to blame the US for these attacks.
Excuse me HE, but you totally confuse me here. Who was talking about blaming the US for the terrorist attacks? Or are you trying to imply that I blame the US?
</STRONG><STRONG>The critique of the use of the word "crusade", IMHO, simply illustrates the splitting of hairs by the media.
You might think it's hair splitting, but unfortunately some groups and people in the Muslim world does not share this view.
Personally, I probably wouldn't have reacted to Bush choice of word myself, if it wasn't for the fact that the news showed some reactions on his speech from people in the Arab world. I think the word "crusade" carry a heavy historical loading, and I still think it was unfortunate that Bush used this particular word.
My answer to what I think Bush should do, is in Eminem's "What should pres Bush do next".<STRONG>Fas has posted some veiled anti-american rehetoric, here and elsewhere, and that is fine. Fas needs to know it will not be posted uncontested.
I will ask Fas like I ask everyone in this matter...
What would you do if you were G.W. Bush??
</STRONG>
Regarding Fas, I think you are reading too much into his comments when you accuse him of posting anti-american material. Fas is providing us with links and articles from different media. Aren't you confusing the content of some of the articles with the content of Fas own opinions?
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
Just my thoughts: I think the aim of the speach was to stress and affirm the international coalition, and in this context, Canada is sort of "taken for granted" as a neighbour. Of course the UK is also a very close ally to the US historically, but the mention of the UK might have been a special courtesy to Blair, who was in fact sitting in the audience. I'm not pretending I can read Bush's thoughts here, I'm just guessing why Canada wasn't mentioned.Originally posted by Aegis:
<STRONG>I'm actually refering to Bush's address the other day. Canada didn't get mentioned once.</STRONG>
"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the latter ignorance." - Hippocrates
Moderator of Planescape: Torment, Diablo I & II and Dungeon Siege forums
-
Happy Evil
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 11:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
- Contact:
I will check it out thanks.Originally posted by C Elegans:
<STRONG>My answer to what I think Bush should do, is in Eminem's "What should pres Bush do next". </STRONG>
@C Elgans- No, I dont think you blame the US.
I think worrying what the muslims think about the word-play belittles and sidesteps the real issues.
Fas's original summary, that I addressed above, was where I got the impression he was trying to blame Bush. That rhetoric is the same type of stuff you read about the US's unpopular foreign policy justifying the attacks.
Some mumbo-jumbo about distracting the americans attention away from the economy.
Also posted by C.Elgans.
"Regarding Fas, I think you are reading too much into his comments when you accuse him of posting anti-american material. Fas is providing us with links and articles from different media. Aren't you confusing the content of some of the articles with the content of Fas own opinions?"
(sorry, I still dont know how to break up quotes with the bars. Duh.)
anyway...
No, I dont think so.("...Aren't you confusing the ...")
Its just my impression of Fas's position.
A position he is certainly entitled to.
I'm sure the current state of affairs are amplifying my sensitivity and responses to him, but I dont feel they are misguided at all.
His posting of "america will get its butt kicked in Afhganistan", in another thread, is not exactly soothing to my anger.
I think he can express his concerns with a little more tact as maybe could I.
[ 09-26-2001: Message edited by: Happy Evil ]
Happy evil, i chose those words specifically, as i think it would be Vietnam all over again.
Now if i had said that you would have a hit on me right now!
Now if i had said that you would have a hit on me right now!
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? - Khalil Gibran
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
-
Happy Evil
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 11:00 pm
- Location: Dallas
- Contact:
Your right, it is a mess.Originally posted by Fas:
<STRONG>Happy evil, i chose those words specifically, as i think it would be Vietnam all over again.
Now if i had said that you would have a hit on me right now!
I'm sure it will get even worse.
I do not want to see our sons and daughters die as well as anyone else.
I learned a long time a go you cannot please everyone and that is OK.
Variety is the spice of life and that includes people and their opinions.
I wish we could discuss the insanely(sp?) difficult middle east problems without the events in NY.
I would never "hit on" anyone except to protect life & property.
Cynical and opinionated yes. Violent no.
So fire away.
Just know when you compare the US military to
the Soviet military its not an Apples to Apples comparison.
Military stuff?
what would you like to discuss?
Logistics?
Plans?
Equipement?
commando units?
what would you like to discuss?
Logistics?
Plans?
Equipement?
commando units?
For what is it to die but to stand naked in the wind and to melt into the sun? - Khalil Gibran
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill
"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!" - Winston Churchill