Text 1646, 101 rader
Skriven 2007-03-09 11:10:59 av alexander koryagin
     Kommentar till en text av PETER COGGON (1:123/140)
Ärende: Re: Have I written  [2/2]
=================================
message from valid local sender)
From: "alexander koryagin" <koryagin@erec.ru>

Hi, PETER COGGON! How are you?
"Re: Have I written  [2/2]"

 AK>> Because there is no Al-Queda in Iran for a while, and there is some
 AK>> law and order. By the way it is just another occasion to think do
 AK>> America needs Al-quaeda in Iran also.

 PC>   The Al-Queda wasn't in Iran before, because Iraq and Iran were at
 PC> war, and there was no point, as they wanted to engage the USA.
 PC> After the USA was in Iraq, as mentioned, Iran became a way or route
 PC> to Iraq, and for the reason stated.

Imho Al-Queda is younger than Iraq-Iran war. The true reason is the Al-queda
as I heard is the Sunni branch of Islam, whereas Iran represents the Shia
branch. But common enemy makes it easy to form very strange unions. You can
remember the union of the USSR and the US against Hitler. So if will be the
war in Iran we most certainly will see the uniting Iran + Al-Queda.

 AK>> As for Afganistan Bush began the war with Taliban, although it had not
 AK>> been a terrorist organization; it just refused to give up Ben Laden to
 AK>> America. Was it an easy task for Taliban to catch Ben Laden and
 AK>> extradite him? Who knows, but for example general Mladich so far
 AK>> cannot be caught by pro-western government of Serbia, which wants to
 AK>> do it.

 PC>   The Taliban supported enemys of the US.  That was all they needed to
 PC> go in.

It is a fiction that US can win the war in Afganistan. Bush does not read
the books of history when he thinks that it is possible to win such a war.
Just opposite - the invasion in Afganistan provides best agitation among
moslems to join Al-Queda. Only MINORITY Afgan people are supporting the US.
If it had not been so they would have defeated Taliban without US.

 AK>> But Americans nevertheless, began the war against the people who had
 AK>> done nothing to them. In such a way America had got two wars, any of
 AK>> them were connected with the safety of the country and they forced the
 AK>> anti-american forces to unite although, before Bush most of them had
 AK>> been anti-american just in words. So Bush rather can be considered as
 AK>> the main proliferator of terrorism than the main fighter against it.

 PC>    Well I agree with most you have said, but then 911 gave Mr. Bush
 PC> an open game to do what he wanted, and have the voters behind him.
 PC> They call it ratings....but now lately there are many voices telling
 PC> him to get out of these countrys.

Yea, the 911. May be some day somebody will recollects why the wonderful
sunny planet suddenly became a nightmare. But 911 was not the first trigger
of events. As for support of Bush I can say it is very known factor when
people support the man who put the country in war. Just because this man is
saying simple words about how he will help his people in such dramatic time.
But the main skill of the politician is not helping people during the war
but prevent the war.

 PC>    Terrorism has been with us since the first hijacking in 1968
 PC> and with every terrorist act it has been coming closer and closer
 PC> to North America.
 PC>    How can you talk to a terrorist?

First of all I would say, that if there are thousands terrorists in the
world - something wrong in the definition of the terrorism. I think some
forces use the situation and are trying to solve their own tasks. In the US
it is the total control of people. Most of the people on the West think
about in very lop-sided way. For example they may be sincerily indignant
that HAMAS does not want to recognize the Israel. But they will never guess
to ask had the Israel recognized the independent Palestine country? Every
serious problem always has two sides. Because the fight (espesially endless)
is always a contact of two forces. Most dangerous error - to fight with
closed eyes.

Secondly I have to mention that terrorists are pressing on our human
qualities. They think that the human life is most high value for Western
civilisation. It is impossible to say "you are wrong" and we will never
negotiate with you even if our children were in your hands. In such a case
our morals (the core of civilisation) became inferior. West did a lot of
mistakes especially at the Middle East; from the beginning it put the stake
on force - the dead end in modern politics and the endless source of
violence. For if modern jews are acting as ancient ones (to conquer
Palestine as God-promised land) they must, to be successful, to repeat all
actions which were done in the Bible. I mean to slaughter all enimies by
order from heaven after the conquest. But it is impossible now. For them it
is as hard to do as to understand God's will - why they were expelled from
Palestine, although it is obvious that it was not the reward for their
piety.

PC> Anyhow ... you now have a friend in Canada.

Nice to hear it.

[...Enter's pressed. It's too late to cry.]
Bye PETER!
Alexander
fido7.english-tutor 2007



--- ifmail v.2.15dev5.3
 * Origin: Demos online service (2:5020/400)