Tension rises between US and Philippines

Gizzard

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2004/07/22/story158208.html

American foreign policy about to alienate more allies.

beer enigma

I dont see this so as so much 'American foreign policy' as the gross selfishness & stupidity of the Phillipines Government.

To accede to any terrorsist demand in this way can only put numerous lives at risk right across the Middle East & send out a clear signal that if you want change, try the kidnap & murder routine.

Kone

"Ricciardone told Filipino reporters at his Manila residence late yesterday that he wasn’t being recalled, but did not rule out consequences as a result of the Philippines’ withdrawal."

Fúckwits!

BattleBoar

I agree with Andip on this one.

The US and its allies say the Philippines’ decision to withdraw its 51-member contingent in Iraq a month ahead of schedule, as demanded by insurgents who had threatened to behead a captive Filipino truck driver, would encourage more terrorism and endanger other members of the US-led coalition.

No one can really deny this point. The capitulation will almost certainly make this tactic far more likely to be used. Additionally, I wonder if the Al Queda elements in the Philippines might not try this tactic there now that it's been proven effective.

Gizzard

Originally posted by Andip
I dont see this so as so much 'American foreign policy' as the gross selfishness & stupidity of the Phillipines Government.

To accede to any terrorsist demand in this way can only put numerous lives at risk right across the Middle East & send out a clear signal that if you want change, try the kidnap & murder routine.

terrorests?, hands up who bombed civilian cities in Iraq, oh that would be the international terrorist Bush, theyre country is occupied by foreign powers, Phillipines made the smart move not collaborating with monster bush

Lemming

Originally posted by BattleBoar

No one can really deny this point. The capitulation will almost certainly make this tactic far more likely to be used. Additionally, I wonder if the Al Queda elements in the Philippines might not try this tactic there now that it's been proven effective.

bear in mind that the Philippines were due to withdraw anyway. All that happened is that it was pushed forward by a month.

beer enigma

terrorests?, hands up who bombed civilian cities in Iraq, oh that would be the international terrorist Bush

Couldn't agree more Gizzard, but still think the Phillipino Govt. have set a very dangerous precedent....

BattleBoar

Originally posted by Gizzard
terrorests?, hands up who bombed civilian cities in Iraq, oh that would be the international terrorist Bush, theyre country is occupied by foreign powers, Phillipines made the smart move not collaborating with monster bush

Do 'freedom fighters' cut off the heads of philippino truck drivers? I don't have a problem with the Philippines not cooperating with Bush. I don't have a problem if they want to get their troops out. I DO have a problem with pulling the troops out in direct response to a terrorist demand because it means all the other civilians in Iraq (who weren't fighting anybody, mind you, but rather helping to rebuild the country) will be in much more danger.

Fudger

tell that to the guy who was about to have his head chopped off Andip !

Americans are the biggest bullies and obviously guilty of occupation of countries by force. That is terrorism.

Now they also want a go at Iran AGAIN they had Saddam do it for them the last time. (handy set up there). If they are so into 'liberation' why are they not in Sudan ?

The Phillipines are right and hopefully more will follow suit. Its an american war for the american dollar..........

Gizzard

Do 'freedom fighters' cut off the heads of philippino truck drivers? I don't have a problem with the Philippines not cooperating with Bush. I don't have a problem if they want to get their troops out. I DO have a problem with pulling the troops out in direct response to a terrorist demand because it means all the other civilians in Iraq (who weren't fighting anybody, mind you, but rather helping to rebuild the country) will be in much more danger.

Yes to be honest I dont like this beheading business at all, its barbaric, they should express their frustration in other ways, the problem is even if they attack the us army, the soldies dont have a clue why theyre there and are largely innocent. its all just a big mess, and the world in a much more dangerious place, and I blame Bush

beer enigma

My point is that the Phillipino reaction has far wider consequences than just the American incursions. I'm in no way supporting the American aggression in Iraq, let alone any threat to Iran.

I AM against all forms of terrorism (American included) and feel that the precedence now set will have recriminations in all wars globally, whether its the Israeli/Palestine troubles, the Indonesian civil troubles brewing or the ETA position in Spain, this is a dangerous landmark

gaelic cowboy

There chickening out simple as that basically they are caving in to terrorists which means the Phillipines own homegrown AQ clones must be jumping for joy right now.
I really think if you joined up for Iraq then you should see it out after as they were part of the coalition who caused this terrorism it behoves them to stay and sort it out not run like spain did.

Lemming

Originally posted by gaelic cowboy
There chickening out simple as that basically they are caving in to terrorists which means the Phillipines own homegrown AQ clones must be jumping for joy right now.
I really think if you joined up for Iraq then you should see it out after as they were part of the coalition who caused this terrorism it behoves them to stay and sort it out not run like spain did.

The Philippines were due to pull out ANYWAY gaelic cowboy. They were to withdraw within a month. They moved that forward by a month to save the life of one of their citizens.

What would that extra month have accomplished given that they were to be withdrawn anyway and would have spent much of that month getting logistics ready to depart.

BattleBoar

Originally posted by gaelic cowboy
There chickening out simple as that basically they are caving in to terrorists which means the Phillipines own homegrown AQ clones must be jumping for joy right now.
I really think if you joined up for Iraq then you should see it out after as they were part of the coalition who caused this terrorism it behoves them to stay and sort it out not run like spain did.

No doubt Spain's actions made the world much more dangerous for citizens of the countries that have troops in Iraq, yes, but at least Spain *could* argue that the new government was going to pull troops out of Iraq anyway. There's no way Aroyo can sidestep this one. It's just incredibly shortsighted, and as you said, the Al Queda elements back in the Philippines must be ecstatic - "now we finally have a way to get the government to back down to demands; start cutting civilian's heads off until they listen"

BattleBoar

Originally posted by Lemming
The Philippines were due to pull out ANYWAY gaelic cowboy. They were to withdraw within a month. They moved that forward by a month to save the life of one of their citizens.

What would that extra month have accomplished given that they were to be withdrawn anyway and would have spent much of that month getting logistics ready to depart.

Yes they were due to pull out anyway, but they accellerated that hugely in *direct* response to the terrorist actions. If they had started the accelleration process prior to the guy getting kidnapped, there would be no problem and they could say that they were in the process anyway, but their plans didnt call for full withdrawl for another month and a bit. The problem is that they directly changed their plans due to what the terrorists told them to do, and in so doing, made themselves and all other citizens who work for a company of government rebuilding Iraq bigger targets.

Basically, I agree with the decision to leave Bush's ill-advised mess, it's the manner and circumstances of their departure I have a problem with. In the end, this is going to cost a lot of innocent people their heads.

Fudger

i don't think countries just decided either to join the war or not it was more of a case join or america won't trade with you in the future. especially the smaller countries. Look at us, making some nice money when those planes land in shannon and use our air space. i can't see bertie telling bush to feck off.

not to flog a dead donkey but that little phrase 'weapons of mass destruction" where they at ? The only way they might of had chemicals etc would have been because the americans sold it to them in the first place.

The war in Iraq is illegal.

The americans are out to take over the entire middle east. Saudi are in the bag and Israel and now they have Iraq, Afgan and about to go for Iran AGAIN. What about those poor f*ckers in Sudan there is worse than chopped heads(not that that isn't crazy and sick) going on there. When it comes to chopping stuff off, that is the way these countries operate. Hands, limbs heads etc are chopped of. The americans drop a bomb from 2 miles up in the sky its the same thing. Kids and adults in Iraq are loosing their hands limbs heads from bombing by the americans. You can't justify the war in iraq and to try to is just being stupid.

Its a mess the whole bloody thing.

ionapaul

Originally posted by Fudger
The war in Iraq is illegal.

...What about those poor f*ckers in Sudan there is worse than chopped heads(not that that isn't crazy and sick) going on there.

Considering they invaded a sovereign nation, I'm not surprised it was illegal! No matter what the UN could have said, it still would have been illegal. I think the only thing that matters is the morality of the action, whether it was a right or wrong thing to do. The law can be a real ass at the best of times in any case!

Qn: What the f*ck are we (Ireland) or our allies in EU doing about stopping the situation in Sudan? Did we (Ireland) do anything about stopping the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo?

BlitzKrieg

Qn: What the f*ck are we (Ireland) or our allies in EU doing about stopping the situation in Sudan? Did we (Ireland) do anything about stopping the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo?

No but we were one of the first (if not the first) to stand up for east timor...

Fudger

I agree about Sudan etc as in what did and aren't we (ireland) & the EU doing about it.

This is where it gets a little two fold though. There is a direct responsibility on the super powers (america) to ensure stability in the world and to protect the world from destroying itself environmentally and econonically because they have the muscle to do it. Which has me whinning that america should be doing something. Its just that americas view (well bush's) is very hazed by the green of the american dollar, but the EU should be seen to be doing something agreed. There does have to be respect for america for certain past conflicts etc but they did do very well econonically from the resultant outcomes. America doesn't seem, correction doesn't have a definable foreign policy.

Quote from some hick american about Iraq & Saddam "kick his ass & grap the gas".

Obviously there is no OIL in Sudan just millions of people being murdered. There are obviously two different types of liberation in americas eyes. Ok yes liberate iraq as Bush pitched it (for the wrong reason) but they must also liberate any other country that is suffering. Its blatent lying. Its either the whole hog or nothing not nit picking oil rich countries.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Lemming
The Philippines were due to pull out ANYWAY gaelic cowboy. They were to withdraw within a month. They moved that forward by a month to save the life of one of their citizens.

Unfortunately, such an action to save the life of one of their citizens will encourage in further hostage taking and execution. That’s the problem with appeasement of blackmail.

Let’s face it, these terrorists/freedom fighters/insurgents/whatever aren’t dumb; they’re not taking hostages simply because it give them a hard on (although this may be a consideration), they’re doing because it gets results. Let me put it this way:

“Terrorism. n. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.”

If it doesn’t get results, then it stops being a viable tactic. So, one Philipino may have been saved at the cost of a few more other innocents in the future. Good one.

Fudger

these terrorists/freedom fighters/insurgents/whatever

i gather you are refering to the americans

this is all the americans fault not the Philippines making.

If it doesn’t get results, then it stops being a viable tactic.

Bush could learn from that theory..................:D

ionapaul

Originally posted by BlitzKrieg
No but we were one of the first (if not the first) to stand up for east timor...

The US has 'stood up' for Sudan in condemning the violence and inequality there, too. Should they intervene militarily? Don't think they can (army is stretched as it is) or have the will to do so. Ireland's not going to do f*ck all either. And if there was serious money to be made dealing with their government, we'd be ok with that too - that is the way (sadly) of the world. We sold enough beef to the dictators of the world when it was profitable to do so.

Gizzard

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Unfortunately, such an action to save the life of one of their citizens will encourage in further hostage taking and execution. That’s the problem with appeasement of blackmail.

Let’s face it, these terrorists/freedom fighters/insurgents/whatever aren’t dumb; they’re not taking hostages simply because it give them a hard on (although this may be a consideration), they’re doing because it gets results. Let me put it this way:

“Terrorism. n. The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.”

If it doesn’t get results, then it stops being a viable tactic. So, one Philipino may have been saved at the cost of a few more other innocents in the future. Good one.

anyone working there in league with usa being handed contracts by them is no way an innocent, usa administration are terrists on a global scale, so its terrorists vs terrorists, with so called innocent cetting caught in between

Fudger

Should they intervene militarily? Don't think they can (army is stretched as it is) or have the will to do so.

Yes they should. I disagree about the army numbers being stretched though. If they go that route why are they starting to have a go at Iran then? They are def going to go in there, thats a certain. If they can do that, then they should be in Sudan.

BUMP!

Should they intervene militarily? Don't think they can (army is stretched as it is) or have the will to do so.

Should America intervene? Not to my mind anyway. They've proved they cant handle this kind of operation and tbh most of the world distrusts them now and so would seek alterior motives. I kind of though that this was the kind of situation the UN should be dealing with (and I know the American military is part of that). The problem with the UN is that by the time the UN's buraucracy (spelling?????) is done there'll be no-one left alive (and so no problem anymore??).

People should be asking the UN why aren't they intervening forcefully and swiftly and ensuring this kind of situation doesn't happen again.

Fudger

it should be a goodwill gesture from america after giving the UN and the world the two fingers over iraq.

If sudan hit oil tomorrow you can bet your ass the americans would be in there like a shot "we will smoke them out"

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Fudger
this is all the americans fault not the Philippines making. D

Such utter crap. The Philippines sent troops to Iraq, so they can hardly be counted as innocent bystanders. Nonetheless, regardless of whether you are or were in favour or against the war, such obvious appeasement is a highly irresponsible policy.

Bush could learn from that theory..................:D

Indeed he could, but that’s not what we’re discussing.

Originally posted by Gizzard
anyone working there in league with usa being handed contracts by them is no way an innocent, usa administration are terrists on a global scale, so its terrorists vs terrorists, with so called innocent cetting caught in between

Oddly, this is the reasoning used by Al-Qaeda. Of course, it can be (and is) stretched further to argue that any civilian involved in the commerce of a belligerent nation is a valid target as the taxes generated will in part turn to military use - hence the justification for the 9/11 and Madrid bombings. They’re so-called innocent too.

I’m amused to see you agree with basic terrorist philosophy.

Fudger

Such utter crap. The Philippines sent troops to Iraq, so they can hardly be counted as innocent bystanders. Nonetheless, regardless of whether you are or were in favour or against the war, such obvious appeasement is a highly irresponsible policy.

If you read it proparly you will see i haven't said they are innocent. My point is that they where not the instigators of this war. Its americans baby and they can't start dropping it now. True with regards to the Philippines if you lie with dogs you get up with fleas, but the Philippines used as a scape goat now for protecting its own is cheap coming from america with regards to this illegal war. How may iraq's have the Philippines army killed ? what is their role in this war ? Honestly I have no idea and would appreciate if someone could clarify !

cleareyed

this is all the americans fault not the Philippines making

The Philippine govt. have their own problems with muslim terrorists. They have, by their actions in withdrawing from Iraq, shown them the way to win.
I find it difficult to see why the US is to blame for everything. Islamic fundamentalism is completely undemocratic and opposed to basic Western beliefs about equality. If the US denies Iraqis the right to elect their own government then they are no better than Sadamm and Al qeda etc. But until then I support them.

ChipZilla

Originally posted by Andip
Couldn't agree more Gizzard, but still think the Phillipino Govt. have set a very dangerous precedent....

Did Spain not set a dangerous precedent by 'bowing to terrrorists' first :dunno: ?

Fudger

So would you say that the americans are "terrorists/freedom fighters/insurgents/whatever" ? Sounds like the americans are running the country as a dictator. You support the americans in their actions and policy in this war cleareyed or just certain bits of it ?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Fudger
If you read it proparly you will see i haven't said they are innocent. My point is that they where not the instigators of this war. Its americans baby and they can't start dropping it now. True with regards to the Philippines if you lie with dogs you get up with fleas, but the Philippines used as a scape goat now for protecting its own is cheap coming from america with regards to this illegal war. How may iraq's have the Philippines army killed ? what is their role in this war ? Honestly I have no idea and would appreciate if someone could clarify !

Completely irrelevant. Again, the point is not whether the war was justified or not, or frankly whether it’s the fault of any one or group of nations, but whether a policy of appeasement or what can be construed as appeasement is responsible.

For example, the Madrid was quickly followed by a shock election win by the Spanish socialists and their announcement to immediately withdraw from Iraq. Regardless of the new government’s election manifest, they should not have been seen to capitulate so soon after the bombing. Indeed, what better justification to plant a few bombs in Rome, Warsaw or London do you need if you want to change a nation’s policy?

The same goes for the hostage taking - where is it written that a hostage must be taken in Iraq, after all Paul Johnson wasn’t in Iraq, he was in Saudi Arabia - or at least his head is. If threatening to decapitate a hostage gets another country to accede to your demands, does it really matter where you get them?

Unfortunately, giving in to blackmail only guarantees one thing, that the blackmailer will come round again.

So would you say that the americans are "terrorists/freedom fighters/insurgents/whatever" ? Sounds like the americans are running the country as a dictator. You support the americans in their actions and policy in this war cleareyed or just certain bits of it ?

Whether the war is justified or not is completely irrelevant - that’s why I used all of the terms. Whether we should encourage repetition of such acts as hostage taking or bombings is not.

Sparks

I'm not sure, TC, if there's a moral distinction between "Give me what I want or I'll cut this guys head off" and "Give us what we want or we'll bomb you back to the stone age".
Of course, there is a legal distinction - the former is terrorism, the latter is unilateral peacekeeping action - but morally, it's a lot less clear-cut.

However, that's a side issue, as you've said. What is not a side issue is the fact that the Phillipino government is responsible for the safety of Phillipinos. Not Americans. And likewise for the US government, as they've shown time and again with the ICC. So if the Phillipino government acts to save a Phillipino life in a way that contravenes US government policy and US philosophy, that's a problem for the US to resolve with itself, not a reason for the Phillipino's to start allowing their citizens to be executed in order to maintain solidarity with the US in the execution of an illegal occupation.

To be frank, all this hullabaloo is just the US realising that if it only ever looks out for #1, other countries will do so as well, and that means that at some point, the US may be inconvienenced as a result.

beer enigma

And so it continues.......

Headless body found in Iraqi river
22/07/2004 - 14:55:08

Iraqi police have found a decapitated body in an orange jump-suit on the banks of the Tigris River north of Baghdad.

The identity of the body, discovered last night in Beiji, 155 miles north of the Iraqi capital, was not immediately clear, police said.

Bulgaria said it was investigating whether it was one of two of its citizens seized by militants loyal to an al-Qaida ally.

Another headless body in an orange jump-suit was found in the Tigris in the same area earlier this month. It has yet to be identified.

Fudger

well said sparks.

i have to disagree with "irrelevant" TC, the issue that america went into iraq gave the two fingers to the UN and the world is a major relevant factor as to why most people couldn't give a flying feck about the americans and the situation that they are now in and hence have no sympathy or agreement with the americans on any other policy or actions they undertake ie: having a go at the Philippines. I would agree to an extent that giving into a blackmailer is not the way to do business but where do you draw a line ? How many heads have to roll before it is ended. When the oil runs out or what ? You cannot say that the bombs in Madrid etc would have happended if the americans had not inserged into iraq, therefore once again american policy has cost innocent lives again. The Philippines have obviously come to the conclusion that its better to withdraw (still no idea what they where doing there) and that they are satisfied that their decision is the right one and they will deal with whatever consequences on their domestic front if any in the future. America are bullying the Philippines to stay in the war ? do we want the war to keep going ?

Moriarty

Sparks, the point being made isn't just that it's not in the US' intrests, it's that the phillipino governments actions have been directly against it's own intrests. They have (possibly) saved one of their citizens lives today, but they've undoubtedly condemned more of their own citizens to death because of their actions.

Even using your supposition that a government should only care about it's own citizens (which, as an aside, I don't subscribe to), this action flys directly in the face of it. The Philipino government has only succeded in making life more dangerous for every philipino at home and abroad.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by Sparks
I'm not sure, TC, if there's a moral distinction between "Give me what I want or I'll cut this guys head off" and "Give us what we want or we'll bomb you back to the stone age".

I have not at any stage attempted to make any such distinction, which is, incidentally, pretty irrelevant to the question of giving in to blackmail.

However, that's a side issue, as you've said. What is not a side issue is the fact that the Phillipino government is responsible for the safety of Phillipinos. Not Americans. And likewise for the US government, as they've shown time and again with the ICC. So if the Phillipino government acts to save a Phillipino life in a way that contravenes US government policy and US philosophy, that's a problem for the US to resolve with itself, not a reason for the Phillipino's to start allowing it's citizens to be executed in order to maintain solidarity with the US in the execution of an illegal occupation.

Other that the fact that it does show scant regard for not only Americans but for numerous other countries, including the UK, Italy, Poland, Ukraine, Australia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Japan and Thailand. Additionally it places the Philippines in a position whereby it has shown itself willing to capitulate - a dangerous position to promote if you’ve already got homegrown terrorism.

Not to mention the diplomatic backlash - would you now trust the Spanish government to maintain any agreements made in a previous administration? Quite a few nations would think twice before saying yes now.

If you want to be Machiavellian about it, allowing a citizen to be executed has little to do with maintaining solidarity with the US in the execution of an illegal occupation, and more to do with discouraging the future execution of one’s citizens.

To be frank, all this hullabaloo is just the US realising that if it only ever looks out for #1, other countries will do so as well, and that means that at some point, the US may be inconvienenced as a result.

It amazes me how people cannot see beyond their desire to see the Yanks get a bloody nose. Indeed, were the tables turned and the US was attempting to bully, yet another, nation into capitulation - no doubt you would all be falling over each other to condemn such appeasement.

Fudger

True but that is the Philippines Gov't decision "but that’s not what we’re discussing" as TC has previously pointed out when we strayed of the topic of 'Tension rises between US and Philippines' Moriarty.

BUMP!

Regardless of the new government’s election manifest, they should not have been seen to capitulate so soon after the bombing.

I work with a load of spanish lads and I asked them about this at the time. They all told me that the election was effectively a foregone conclusion with or without the bombing. The spanish people wanted nothing to do with Iraq and that mixed with other issues is why there was a govt change. What were they supposed to do - go back on their election manifesto and stay for a while? There was no capitulation - they just acted on their promises (unlike some leaders we could mention).

Actually I think the bombing may have acted the other way IF the govt at the time didn't blatantly lie to the public.

And as for the Philipinnes withdrawal - you have to ask yourself if, when they got involved, they knew all the facts. If not then they were totally justified in getting the hell outa dodge. Still shouldn't have bowed to terrorists I think. But then again they may have decided that this (what they probably now understand to be) illegal war wasn't worth the life of a single philipinno national!!

vorbis

tc does have a point. The mere mention of America is provoking rather irrational thoughts, they're responsible for every bad thing in the world. Blaming them for the Sudan. Thats rich considering all that Europe has done to help. Not to mention the Arab League of which Sudan is a member. they recently praised Sudan and have offered no condemmation of the atrocities.

Phillipine's shoud have thought this out properly. The terrorists back home will be starting the behading strategy pretty soon I think.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by BUMP!
I work with a load of spanish lads and I asked them about this at the time. They all told me that the election was effectively a foregone conclusion with or without the bombing.

You asked a group of guys under the age of 35 living in another country what was going to happen in the election and you take their word for it? I suggest you check out the accuracy of some of the polls here if you want to take that kind of data at face value.

The spanish people wanted nothing to do with Iraq and that mixed with other issues is why there was a govt change. What were they supposed to do - go back on their election manifesto and stay for a while?

Rather than appearing to give in to a terrorist act, they could have made a defiant refusal, announced that they were going to review the situation with reference to the handover and then declared their intention to pull out two or three months later.

There was no capitulation - they just acted on their promises (unlike some leaders we could mention).

Looked like a capitulation, TBH, and that’s really all you need to encourage such tactics. That’s all that matters.

Actually I think the bombing may have acted the other way IF the govt at the time didn't blatantly lie to the public.

I’m not actually criticizing the election of the Socialist in Spain, or even their choice to pull out, just their rash decision to do so straight away.

And as for the Philipinnes withdrawal - you have to ask yourself if, when they got involved, they knew all the facts. If not then they were totally justified in getting the hell outa dodge.

I’m not criticizing their decision to leave Iraq. Only their decision to do so a month early as a capitulation to blackmail demands.

Still shouldn't have bowed to terrorists I think. But then again they may have decided that this (what they probably now understand to be) illegal war wasn't worth the life of a single philipinno national!!

It will now most likely cost the lives of many more, including Philipinos – or had you forgotten that they have their own home grown terrorists?