6 ms·

I blame Bush for declaring war in the middle east for what happened in Paris. Not Edward Snowden. Note how the government also uses times like these to rush th

by Sealy 11y ago

I blame Bush for declaring war in the middle east for what happened in Paris. Not Edward Snowden. Note how the government also uses times like these to rush through new policies around privacy. Did phone tapping stop the US from preventing 9/11? No.

kleiba 11y ago
Well, some argue that if not the war itself then some of the decisions made by the US in Iraq in the aftermath of the war helped forming ISIS, such as, dismantling the Iraqi army [1]. [1] http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/did-george-w-bush-create-isis http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/did-george-w-bush-cr...
atmosx 11y ago
Not only Bush, the entire western political class: https://twitter.com/LatuffCartoons/status/665541417763123200 https://twitter.com/LatuffCartoons/status/665541417763123200
chroma 11y ago
> I blame Bush for declaring war in the middle east for what happened in Paris. Not Edward Snowden. Wait, what? It's been almost seven years since Bush left office. 100% of the blame rests on the men who donned suicide vests and massacred innocent Parisians. It doesn't matter how horrific US foreign policy is. Responding by killing a bunch of French civilians is not even remotely reasonable. Seriously, how does someone go from "US foreign policy killed my countrymen" to "let's slaughter random French people"?
- hV7en 11y ago
  Rationally predicting that N people will try to do terrible things is definitely not the same as condoning the people who have done terrible things [aside: this emotive conflation may partly explain why western media are serially unable to analyze or reflect on the root causes of terrible events]. Predicting that the civil wars in Iraq and Syria would give a fertile ground for extremism to develop is no leap, and certainly doesn't condone it, and focusing on the guilt of specific extremists in each case won't teach us anything either.
- 0xFFC 11y ago
  7 year? Do you understand geopolitical consequences has time interval ? you invade a country , okay? you should expect whole generation of terrorist who want you dead not tomorrow , 20 year later . 7 year I would say is so small time in things like these.
  - omonra 11y ago
    I don't think Bush invaded France.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- chroma 11y ago
  Note: I'm replying to myself because superuser2 deleted his comment just before I finished mine[1]. I put a decent amount of effort into my reply, so I'd rather not let it go to waste. > I don't know. Let's ask President Obama why he bombed a hospital and gunned down survivors as they ran away. Western foreign policy kills innocent people. Sometimes they're angry enough about it to kill you right back. If you're talking about the Kunduz incident, your statement is absurd. Obama didn't know about the airstrike until afterwards. More importantly: US forces didn't intend to kill civilians. They mistakenly believed the building was being used by Taliban to fire upon coalition forces. It was a huge fuck-up. There is a big investigation. People will probably go to jail over it. Everyone involved agrees it's a tragedy. Now contrast that to the Paris attacks. These deaths weren't an accident or collateral damage. The fanatics intended to kill as many innocent civilians as possible. They would have killed more if they'd had the ability to do so. And notice the difference in reactions. After the hospital bombing, no Americans celebrated in the streets. Even the most hawkish politicians expressed their sadness at the tragedy. If you read Obama's statement, it's nothing but apologetic.[2] Now read the Islamic State's statement on the Paris attacks.[3] They praise the attackers and promise more to come. The two sides cannot be more different. You should feel ashamed for your equivocation. 1. Screenshots of me trying to reply and failing: http://imgur.com/a/daFeB http://imgur.com/a/daFeB 2. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/10/03/statement-president-casualties-kunduz https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/10/03/state... 3. https://ent.siteintelgroup.com/Statements/is-claims-paris-attacks-warns-operation-is-first-of-the-storm.html https://ent.siteintelgroup.com/Statements/is-claims-paris-at...
- Sealy 11y ago
  > Responding by killing a bunch of French civilians is not even remotely reasonable I agree, as was the US dropping the A Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. "Not even remotely reasonable" especially when the victims numbered in the tens of thousands. Innocent women and children included.

by Sealy 11y ago

kleiba 11y ago

Well, some argue that if not the war itself then some of the decisions made by the US in Iraq in the aftermath of the war helped forming ISIS, such as, dismantling the Iraqi army [1]. [1] http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/did-george-w-bush-create-isis http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/did-george-w-bush-cr...

atmosx 11y ago

Not only Bush, the entire western political class: https://twitter.com/LatuffCartoons/status/665541417763123200 https://twitter.com/LatuffCartoons/status/665541417763123200

chroma 11y ago

> I blame Bush for declaring war in the middle east for what happened in Paris. Not Edward Snowden. Wait, what? It's been almost seven years since Bush left office. 100% of the blame rests on the men who donned suicide vests and massacred innocent Parisians. It doesn't matter how horrific US foreign policy is. Responding by killing a bunch of French civilians is not even remotely reasonable. Seriously, how does someone go from "US foreign policy killed my countrymen" to "let's slaughter random French people"?

hV7en 11y ago
Rationally predicting that N people will try to do terrible things is definitely not the same as condoning the people who have done terrible things [aside: this emotive conflation may partly explain why western media are serially unable to analyze or reflect on the root causes of terrible events]. Predicting that the civil wars in Iraq and Syria would give a fertile ground for extremism to develop is no leap, and certainly doesn't condone it, and focusing on the guilt of specific extremists in each case won't teach us anything either.
0xFFC 11y ago
7 year? Do you understand geopolitical consequences has time interval ? you invade a country , okay? you should expect whole generation of terrorist who want you dead not tomorrow , 20 year later . 7 year I would say is so small time in things like these.
- omonra 11y ago
  I don't think Bush invaded France.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
chroma 11y ago
Note: I'm replying to myself because superuser2 deleted his comment just before I finished mine[1]. I put a decent amount of effort into my reply, so I'd rather not let it go to waste. > I don't know. Let's ask President Obama why he bombed a hospital and gunned down survivors as they ran away. Western foreign policy kills innocent people. Sometimes they're angry enough about it to kill you right back. If you're talking about the Kunduz incident, your statement is absurd. Obama didn't know about the airstrike until afterwards. More importantly: US forces didn't intend to kill civilians. They mistakenly believed the building was being used by Taliban to fire upon coalition forces. It was a huge fuck-up. There is a big investigation. People will probably go to jail over it. Everyone involved agrees it's a tragedy. Now contrast that to the Paris attacks. These deaths weren't an accident or collateral damage. The fanatics intended to kill as many innocent civilians as possible. They would have killed more if they'd had the ability to do so. And notice the difference in reactions. After the hospital bombing, no Americans celebrated in the streets. Even the most hawkish politicians expressed their sadness at the tragedy. If you read Obama's statement, it's nothing but apologetic.[2] Now read the Islamic State's statement on the Paris attacks.[3] They praise the attackers and promise more to come. The two sides cannot be more different. You should feel ashamed for your equivocation. 1. Screenshots of me trying to reply and failing: http://imgur.com/a/daFeB http://imgur.com/a/daFeB 2. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/10/03/statement-president-casualties-kunduz https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/10/03/state... 3. https://ent.siteintelgroup.com/Statements/is-claims-paris-attacks-warns-operation-is-first-of-the-storm.html https://ent.siteintelgroup.com/Statements/is-claims-paris-at...
Sealy 11y ago
> Responding by killing a bunch of French civilians is not even remotely reasonable I agree, as was the US dropping the A Bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. "Not even remotely reasonable" especially when the victims numbered in the tens of thousands. Innocent women and children included.