I would agree with you that Al Qaeda is crappy, if it weren’t downright so dangerous.

Firstly, the fundamentalist leaders are very skilled at brainwashing its followers.

Osama bin Laden, I’m sure you already know,is from a well-to-do family, and fond of the life of wine and women, before he became a radical.Al Hambali, the pseudonym of the operative who led the Jakarta and Bali bombings, is a British-educated professor who was also converted during regular visits to Indonesia from Malaysia. Only today, a friend emailed me a story about two young Indonesia fishermen, simple and poor but carefree, until the fundamentalists got to them - and in less than a year, they became suicide bombers.

As for your comment that `their religion harms others who don’t believe’: I also disagree. All terrorists are Muslims, but not all Muslims are terrorists.

While I disagree with Bush on the Iraq war, one good thing he did after 9/11 was to distance the terrorist and Arab connection, and kept Arab-Americans, from harm. This would just have led to a more vicious cycle everywhere.

http://english.chosun.com/w21d.....30003.html

hmm… I wonder what they mean when they say “anti state activities”? Does this mean if some Sri Lankan 3 D workers stage a protest with Korean trade unions, protesting new immigration policies will be considered an “anti state activity”? I understand this is in response to a direct threat of terrorism but this is very dubious and dangerous.

You are wrong there, non korean. Korea already had a base in Naseriya with 600 men peace keeping battalion. The 3000 troops are just additions to what was already there.

Iraqis were “not alone” in fighting what he called the US occupation of their country, the tape also said.

“Attack the missions of the United States, the UK, Australia and Norway and their interests, companies and employees. Turn the ground beneath their feet into an inferno and kick them out of your countries,” said the tape.

“The crusaders and the Jews only understand the language of murder, bloodshed … and of the burning towers,” he said referring to New York’s World Trade Center twin towers, leveled by suicide plane hijackers on September 11, 2001.

“Know that you are not alone in this battle. Your mujahideen brothers are following the enemies as well and are lying in wait for them.”
Now, we all know why the other three were on that list, but Norway? Well, as another blogger I was chatting with pointed out yesterday:
Norwegian special forces are still helping hunt al-Qaida and Taliban forces in Afghanistan, and newspaper VG cited an “intelligence source” as saying Norwegian forces and fighter jets in Afghanistan “had clearly hit the terrorist network, directly and hard”.

The Norwegian Defense Intelligence Service (FO/E) has also played an active role in aiding US colleagues, VG reported. The newspaper also speculated that the death of al-Zawahri’s wife and three daughters in a bomb attack on Kandahar might have some links to Norwegian efforts in Afghanistan.
Yeah, I could see how that might reserve a special place in al-Zawahri’s heart for Norway.

That said I didn?€™t say it is not a fun topic to debate???

There are many countries not on the Al Qaeda list.
Where is Italy on this list? Will they whine to get on the Al Qaeda list? Will any of the countries not on the list whine about not being on the list? To my knowledge Bush didn?€™t mention over 20 countries?€™ contributions to the fight on terror and only Korea whined about it.

Lets not forget Russia. Yes they are not in Iraq but Chechnya is considered a major battle ground for Al Qaeda. Why are they not on the list?

The Jews are not in Iraq or Afghanistan but hey throw them into the mix to drum up the hate. Showing the list is more political than anything factual as if we couldn?€™t tell from the allegations of invading countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

Why put Norway, Korea, Japan, and France on the list? Al Qaeda thinks they might be able to scare and influence these countries.

No arguments from me about the Korean government’s badly handled Iraq troop dispatch. But to be fair, they had to battle the stubborn violent lefties like the Hankyoreh, the DLP, the Hanchongryon ( a big percentage of Roh’s political base) who were threatning to start a massive civil disobediency revolt. In the end, the ROK government did the right thing by clamping down a temporary news blackout and sending in the troops. At least they got that part right eventhough they may have mishandled the case from the start. If you condemn their mishandlings, you should be fair enough to acknowledge them that they did the right thing when they did not give into terrorist demands.

3000 troops volunteered for Iraq (actually 16 times more if you count those who didn’t get picked). As I understand it, many of them have expressed regret that their main mission isn’t combat. Is it a fair presumtion that ALL of them are doing this to only further their careers? And if every one of them have this same motive, and as long as they serve their country with honor, so what?

If Koreans are mercenaries then what are all the recruits in the US army with poor family backgrounds who essentially joined the military for economic opportunities including free education and big signing bonuses? Aren’t they mercenaries too? Did they all join the army to fight in Iraq? Why is it that the US military is right now having a serious problem recruiting and is now seriously considering a military draft? Come on, not everyone is going to be that football star who gives up a lucrative pro career to go to Iraq and get killed in battle.

It doesn’t matter if they are from the US or from Korea, I say give people their credit if they volunteer to go into a dangerous area thereby risking their lives. Whether they be from America or Korea, they shouldn’t be called ‘mercenaries’.