Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ Happy
No, he just wants to harm Westerners. So we've gone from someone who did nothing to Westerners to someone who only wants to target Westerners and their supporters and who doesn't mind killing a few Iraqis on the way. The US has actually created what they set out to destroy. Is that a step in the right direction?
Whether he's in charge of the country or not or is able to invade Kuwait is irrelevant.
|
DJ Happy, are you suggesting that Zarqawi did not want to harm westerners before the Iraq war? 'Cause that's bullocks - he was a major Al-Qaida figure before, so it's not like the war suddenly changed his mind. The US did not create Zarqawi and his band of merry men; the Iraq war gave Zarqawi a stage to play on. I'd say he would've gone on killing Westerners in other countries had the US not attacked. And that he's not in charge of a country is pretty damn relevant - it means he's unable to kill as many people as he might have otherwise.
Quote:
Yes, they gave it a global stage and in the eyes of many impressionable young men, they gave his cause a very persuasive justification. Youths from all around the region are pouring into Iraq to follow him. He couldn't have hoped for a more impactful recruitment campaign than this invasion. How is this helping to defeat terrorism?
|
The young men would have been angry anyway, or are you forgetting the US-backed sanctions that killed thousands of innocent Muslim babies, and the US-backed no-fly-zones that killed many brave Muslim soldiers? Extremists don't need a reason to hate, just an excuse, *any* excuse.
Quote:
Give him time. Saddam had decades to "do his thing." Let's talk about this 10 years from now when we can really see who was worse.
|
Yes, when Zarqawi is able to kill millions of innocent civilians instead of dozens, we'll talk again. But I think you're giving the man too much credit - I think he'll be dead pretty damn soon, killed by the Iraqis he's "liberating".