You know GG; with all due respect this is low. Basically you present a promotional film with one very dedicated individual who believes what he is doing is right. If you question the war, you question him. Right- Wrong. I don't care how many dedicated individuals you present it do not change any of the following: 1: The case for war was based upon fraud ulent information. 1: a Sadham had no WMD's and Scott Ritter and Joseph Wilson (who I might add are just as dedicated as this man) were demonized for questioning the mantra. 1:b There was no link between Al Queda and Sadham Hussein. In fact Sadham killed the Al Queda members in Iraq (as he murdered anyone else he considered a threat to his reign)
2: Iraq is or was not a real country but three provinces that were created by a group of British and French diplomats after WWI (Sykes-Picot Agreement) There was never any real national unity and as soon as Sadham was removed, all hell would break loose)The same scenario came to fruition in Yugoslavia after Marshal Tito died.
3: While Sadham was a murderer and a despot, he had a secular government where women had rights and there was a middle class and a first world intra structure. Since the US occupation women's rights have eroded, the middle class has vanished and the intra structure crumbling.
It is disgusting to me to promote these dedicated men and women and hide the failures of this adminisitration behind them. Everyone here "supports the troops" Every here acknowledges their dedication and bravery. But that is separate from the heinous lies and decit forced upon the American people. You should be ashamed
"a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason."
Posts: 1944 | Location: Beautiful New Paltz, NY | Registered: 04 July 2006
I don't care how many dedicated individuals you present it doesnt' change any of the foloowing: 1: The case for war was based upon fradulent information.
I would say possibly bad intelligence which existed during the Clinton administration which Saddam could have helped to correct if he had cooperated with weapons inspectors.
quote:
1:a Sadham had no WMD's and Scott Ritter and Joseph Wilson (who I might add are just as dedicated as this man) were demonized for questioning the mantra.
Joe Wilson is a political hack whose only involvement is doing a poor job attempting to connect Saddam to yellow cake in Nigeria.
Scott Ritter is a pedophile who was unsuccessful in any meaningful inspections in Iraq and could have headed off the war if he had done his work properly.
quote:
1:b There was no link between Al Queda and Sadham Hussein. IN fact Sadham killed the Al Queda members in Iraq (as he murdered anyone else he considred a threat to his reign)
There was no link between Saddam and 9/11 but the 9/11 commission documented communication between Saddam and AlQueda.
quote:
2: Iraq is or was not a real country but three provinces that were created by a group of British and French diplomats after WWI (Sykes-Picot Agreement) There was never any real national unity and as soon as Sadham was removed, all hell would break loose)The same scenatio came to fruition in Yougoslavia after Marshal Tito died.
It was one country under Saddam although he was violent in keeping it together. If you want to go back in history, you can go back to Mesopotamia and look at their boundaries. You don't prove anything by doing it however.
quote:
3: While Sadham was a murderer and a despot, he had a secular government where women had rights and there was a middle class and a first world intrastructure. Since the US occupation weomen's rights have erroded, the middle class has vanished and the intrastructure crumbling.
You are right about a form of women's rights although women weren't granted the same rights as men. If you call shared misery a middle class you'd be right about that too. The truth is that Iraq was made up of Bedouins, a privileged upper cast and everyone else. Iraqi blogs that I read don't speak favorably about Iraq's infrastructure either before the war or after it. They never have had first world infrastructure.
quote:
It is disgusting to me to promote these dedicated men and women and hide the failures of this administration behind them. Everyone here "supports the troops" Every here acknowledges their dedication and bravery. But that is separate from the heinous lies and decit thrusted upon the American people. You should be ashamed
You support the troops because the lesson from Vietnam was that many returning troops were treated disrespectfully and that creates bad press. To support the troops you have to understand that they are given a mission, they volunteer their service and believe in their cause. If they don't they leave. GG supports the troops and shows it. Your support is lip service and nothing more.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
Posts: 8264 | Location: Fl | Registered: 05 July 2001
James Leo, click on "from the troops" upper right side of bar for more interviews. And while you are at it, peruse the whole of "Operation Iraqi Freedom".
We bring the troops home and we fight the war on terror on American soil. Is that what you desire?
Do you want another Cambodia and another Vietnam - a blood bath happened in these countries because we did NOT GET THE JOB DONE!
What happened to the will to win? We have not won a war since the WWII. What happened to correct reporting and non-biased contrived anti-Americanism. How much effect does the Michael Moores have on our media?
What about believing what Islamofascists are proclaiming to the world - infidels are to be either dead or slaves. Which one are you opting for?
Get serious and recognize we have an enemy and increasing its strength each day.
Democrats twice voted to support the invasion. You cannot put the blame on the Bush Admininstration only. Bipartisanly it was known the formidable threat growing and it is well recorded. You want reminders?
quote:
with all due respect this is low.
What's LOW is terrorism's encouragement by the lack of will to win the war. You think they are not listening on their i-pods how devisive Americans are and unwilling to fight their evil? American troops VOLUNTEER sometimes 3 times because they believe in what is being done in Iraq is good.
Media fails to report their testimonies. You must be afraid to hear their them - that it??
quote:
There was no link between Al Queda and Sadham Hussein.
Hillary is on record and others stating otherwise. It was well recorded that weapons and training was going on in Iraq. Why was Suddam uncooperative with UN inspectors if not these to hide? Now Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is repeating the same resistance. Will we ever learn?
quote:
In fact Sadham killed the Al Queda members in Iraq (as he murdered anyone else he considered a threat to his reign)
Really. I never heard that. Then was it his intention to live peacefully thereafter?
quote:
There was never any real national unity and as soon as Sadham was removed, all hell would break loose)
I would love to see you reason that with Iraqis who witnessed so many atrocities to families by the Hilter tyrant. Want a list of these?
quote:
he had a secular government where women had rights and there was a middle class and a first world intra structure.
JamesLeo - it's Sunday and I'll be careful on my language. Who are YOU kiddin'
Please, and tell me about his goodness.
quote:
Since the US occupation women's rights have eroded, the middle class has vanished and the intra structure crumbling.
That's so bad --- that's sooo disgustingly
quote:
It is disgusting to me to promote these dedicated men and women and hide the failures of this adminisitration behind them.
WE all need to hear what the troops are saying. I have my issues with Pres. Bush.
quote:
Everyone here "supports the troops"
The troops find it difficult to hear the slander against their Commander & Chief. Likewise the enemy loves the hatefulness and emboldens them and increases danger to our troops. Doesn't that only make sense? The media loves to tell the numbers of deaths and even show enemy fire killing our troops. Their great recruiters for terrorism, don't you think?
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
The troops find it difficult to hear the slander against their Commander & Chief.
slander is falsehood, not fact. I'm sure they were happy to hear "Bring 'em on" from one that's never done anything himself in his life, never fought his own fight, in his life, and failed at everything he's ever done or tried throughout his life.
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
Joserf Goebbels is alive and well in right wing Amerika: "Tell a lie loud enough and loud enough, and people will believe its true". Thom it right The Parallels between Nazi Germany and the USA today are striking! _______________________________________________ Joe Wilson is a political hack whose only involvement is doing a poor job attempting to connect Saddam to yellow cake in Nigeria And the Libby Trial: thats not really going on http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Libby-and-Chenehttp: Valarie Plame was "outed" as a CIA operative in direct reptribution for Wilson's speaking out
Scott Ritter is a pedophile who was unsuccessful in any meaningful inspections in Iraq and could have headed off the war if he had done his work properly. ______________________________________________ The case against ritter was "adjourned in contemplation of dismissal" and the record was sealed http://www.warblogging.com/archives/000457.php Sounds like retributon to me! You can't dispute Wilson or Ritter's evidence so you have to smear them personally. ______________________________________________ You support the troops because the lesson from Vietnam was that many returning troops were treated disrespectfully and that creates bad press. To support the troops you have to understand that they are given a mission, they volunteer their service and believe in their cause. If they don't they leave. GG supports the troops and shows it. Your support is lip service and nothing more
More smears: You know nothing about me. Who I am and what I have done or where I have been. I never was involved in Vietnam Demonstrations. Well, actually I went to one and one arsehole started burning the American Flag, I felt very uneasy and left being my father is a Purple Heart WWII veteran (he thought Vietnam was unjustified as well!)
I am just curious: are these the latest Rush Limbaugh/O'Reilly/Glen Beck talking points You guys are good at this You are so god damn good. In the meantime keep spinning keep telling the same stories over and over again. The probmem is the Truth, like the Russian Army tanks crashing throgh the gates of Berlin, is out of the bottle and Chenny and all his henchmen cannot put it back.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: bill king,
"a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason."
Posts: 1944 | Location: Beautiful New Paltz, NY | Registered: 04 July 2006
That's not true, I know what you write. You claim to support the troops but what you really support is having the troops agree with your view of the security of America and their families. It's not comfortable for you because most of them don't agree with you.
quote:
I am just curious: are these the latest Rush Limbaugh/O'Reilly/Glen Beck talking points
No, this is just the way I see the world. I wish we hadn't gone to Iraq but we did. Now that we are there, we need to leave the right way, with a stable Iraqi government that has the ability to defend itself from Iran. No easy way to do that but anything less will be a disaster for the world.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
Posts: 8264 | Location: Fl | Registered: 05 July 2001
No, this is just the way I see the world. I wish we hadn't gone to Iraq but we did. Now that we are there, we need to leave the right way, with a stable Iraqi government that has the ability to defend itself from Iran. No easy way to do that but anything less will be a disaster for the world.
My beliefs are my beliefs The troops have their opinons and I resepct them. I have donated blood and sent phone cards so they can call their families. I don't bragg about it because I belive acts like these are personal and not just a way to earn points. As for Iran, thats goiong to be a challange as many of the Shia are sympathic to Iran as the Sunis were sympathic to the Baathists. I resent the fact that more troops have to die to satisfy Chenney's ego. You want to know the real reason we are in Iraq? Not Oil. This was some peverted neo-con free market experiment link Both Thom and writer Naomi Klein have proposed this and there is a good body of evidence to support this. BTW: I never advocated an immediate pull out. What I have called for are hearing to expose the liars who exploited the tragedy of 9/11 to get us there in the first place. Also, you want to support the troops. If you have time, please visit a VA hospital and you will see how well the troops are supported. I have they deserve better health care than the VA is providing.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: bill king,
"a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason."
Posts: 1944 | Location: Beautiful New Paltz, NY | Registered: 04 July 2006
Now that we are there, we need to leave the right way, with a stable Iraqi government that has the ability to defend itself from Iran. No easy way to do that but anything less will be a disaster for the world.
I've listened to this spiel from you and others, and I've looked carefully at what's going on. And I ask:
If what your government does to achieve that goal creates the opposite affect, and if the very presence of U.S. troops occupying another country is itself both the fuel and the catalyst, how do you solve that paradox, Don? You demand we fix it, but it looks more like the cure that kills. You have merely created a self referentially true tautology. The result is a conundrum.
I would say an enigma wrapped in a conundrum. Invading Iraq was the biggest blunder this country has ever made in my opinion. If we leave now, I would imagine that Iran would annex Iraq in a few short months, creating the worlds largest oil monopoly. I believe this would be unsettling to world markets and the UN would sanction the removal of Iran from Iraq like they did when Iraq invaded Kuwait. This means we would have to start this whole mess over again and be in a worse position than we are now. The situation sucks but I can only see one way out.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
Posts: 8264 | Location: Fl | Registered: 05 July 2001
We might have to consider Partitioning the country and having the majority of our troops stationed in the Kurdish areas. They are welcomed there and they could be easily redeployed if the need should arise. Wesley Clark actually did a very good job managing the situation in Yugoslavia. No American soldier was killed Believe it or nor the situations are similar and maybe some of the lessons learned in the Balkins can be applied to Iraq.
"a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason."
Posts: 1944 | Location: Beautiful New Paltz, NY | Registered: 04 July 2006
If we leave now, I would imagine that Iran would annex Iraq in a few short months, creating the worlds largest oil monopoly. I believe this would be unsettling to world markets and the UN would sanction the removal of Iran from Iraq like they did when Iraq invaded Kuwait.
I doubt it. Iran wouldn't have just the inept U.S. to administration to deal with, it would have the rest of the world, which also wants its oil.
This is the globe's most fundamentally important geostrategic region. Iran is being twisted to look like it's only one thing, but there are many forces at work in Iran. The president is a barking toothless terrier with no administrative power to back up his yaps. Iran people want prosperity as well. Step back and look at who is the big gorilla on the block that wants power.
U.S. policy is aimed at its own self destruction, that's where it is taking its own people. The other major powers are going to watch U.S. go down in flames, and with no sense of remorse, and why should they feel anything else? The U.S. citizens have allowed the "biggest blunder this country has ever made" to occur, meanwhile isolating itself in many ways from world opinion in the process. Even a Russian President has the sense to see the U.S. has abandoned its democratic principles in this Middle East project.
The solution to this problem will be a easing back on pride and a call to the rest of the world to bail the U.S. out of its mess, but they'll want to because it will bail everyone else out at the same time.
James, I believe that you see the war in terms of a National crisis and not an international problem centered on energy, which is what it is. Partitioning the country so domestic tension in Iraq lessens only creates an easier target for foreign invasion.
Yugoslavia wasn't sitting on a pool of money waiting to be pumped to the surface. That was a much easier situation to manage.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
Posts: 8264 | Location: Fl | Registered: 05 July 2001
Yugoslavia wasn't sitting on a pool of money waiting to be pumped to the surface. That was a much easier situation to manage
Thats painfully true but still. There was terrible ethnic and religious tensions and we were able to keep the peace and prevent Milosevitch (spelling) from comitting any more mass murders. If it is an international problem then it will require an international solution. The sad part for me is we have competent professioal individuals in the Military and perhaps elsewhere who are capable of solving these problems. Dwight D. Eisenhower managed the rebuliding of Germany and kept the water running, the garbadge colleciton etc. during the American occupation after Germany surrendered. He must be turning in his grave now with this mismanagment
"a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom. But the tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason."
Posts: 1944 | Location: Beautiful New Paltz, NY | Registered: 04 July 2006
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
Originally posted by BrentBozo: GG posted: "Do you want another Cambodia and another Vietnam - a blood bath happened in these countries because we did NOT GET THE JOB DONE!"
GG: tell me who Lon Nol was (and don't look it up).
Also, tell me who the brothers Nhu were, and Van Minh, General Khanh, Thieu & Ky.
If you don't knows these historical figures, don't tell us what happened in SE Asia.
Brent, I admit that I do not know these names.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Brent, here is one for you. What do these names have in common?
Danny Pearl, Nick Berg, Paul Johnson, So. Korean/Kim Sun II ** ** * * * * * ** * * * * * *
One talk show host I listen to begins his program with another voice saying, "Why Can't We All Get Along?"
It appears to me that Democrats define themselves by "What They Oppose" only.
Please tell me just what DO Dems support to strenthen the UNITED STATES of American? All I hear is what is hated about Pres. George Bush and his admininstration?
What are the Democrat's plans to strengthen patriotism/ the Nation / to protect the civilization as we know it?
Does the party intend to win the next election by criticisms only?
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Please tell me just what DO Dems support to strenthen the UNITED STATES of American? All I hear is what is hated about Pres. George Bush and his admininstration?
You just answered your own question. Getting rid of everything Bush stands for would strengthen this country immeasurably.
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
GG posted: "Danny Pearl, Nick Berg, Paul Johnson, So. Korean/Kim Sun II"
Is it that they're all dead? (I don't know who Paul Johnson was).
Anyway, if you're interested enough to allude to the (alleged) history of the SE Asian conflict, perhaps some reading about it would be in order. I assure the people I mentioned are prominent in the history.
I doubt it. Iran wouldn't have just the inept U.S. to administration to deal with, it would have the rest of the world, which also wants its oil.
This is the globe's most fundamentally important geostrategic region. Iran is being twisted to look like it's only one thing, but there are many forces at work in Iran.
Ren, I might believe you if it weren't for the religious makeup of Bagdad and the fact that Iraq and Iran have already had at each other. War between the two countries is the reason each have such large militaries.
There is one issue you bring up that is interesting. We have gained a reputation, through Gulf One and Two and Afghanistan as a nation that is willing to apply force in it's own national interests. This gives us some measure of clout there intimidation is the most effective diplomatic tool.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
Posts: 8264 | Location: Fl | Registered: 05 July 2001
We have gained a reputation, through Gulf One and Two and Afghanistan as a nation that is willing to apply force in it's own national interests.
Own national interests? or to the highest bidder, or to the Halliburton interests, and the multitude of the military-indusrial-complex, and mercenaries awarded contracts, paid up front, for their work in the middle east. [funeral and mortuary franchises might do well if they learned the cultural method of grieving...don't think they do embalming]
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
I doubt it. Iran wouldn't have just the inept U.S. to administration to deal with, it would have the rest of the world, which also wants its oil.
This is the globe's most fundamentally important geostrategic region. Iran is being twisted to look like it's only one thing, but there are many forces at work in Iran.
Ren, I might believe you if it weren't for the religious makeup of Bagdad and the fact that Iraq and Iran have already had at each other. War between the two countries is the reason each have such large militaries.
There is one issue you bring up that is interesting. We have gained a reputation, through Gulf One and Two and Afghanistan as a nation that is willing to apply force in it's own national interests. This gives us some measure of clout there intimidation is the most effective diplomatic tool.
I haven't any interest in getting you to believe anything, Don. I'm merely pointing out what I have seen from looking into it. And I have a big picture geopolitical map I'm drawing and redrawing in my mind of forces at work.
One simple basic strategic feature is that the current global economy runs on oil. The heart of that movement of the supply of that important resource is in the Strategic Ellipse, the center of which is Iran and Iraq. The big picture map involves making sure the supply is secure for the global economy. Iran is a market player. It commands perhaps the most strategic location in the entire strategic elipse and it's well aware of that. International diplomacy and market forces are the dominant factors in securing that global energy need. Resorting to force as the U.S. has, is also a strategic factor, but the results of that strategy have contributed much more to what is going on now in terms of impending disruption than diplomacy and market forces. This is the kind of information one uses in doing strategic thinking.
Don: We have gained a reputation, through Gulf One and Two and Afghanistan as a nation that is willing to apply force in it's own national interests. This gives us some measure of clout there intimidation is the most effective diplomatic tool.
I believe you have just expressed the basic pax americana attitude that has led to some 750 U.S. bases around the planet, and the reasoning for the desire to install permanent bases in Iraq, especially now that the U.S. has had its bases kicked out of Saudi Arabia -- bin Laden's home country, and the presence of which is supposed to have been one of his prime motivations for the terrorist acts against the U.S. Another term for what you've expressed is "theatrical militarism." It's really the functional driver in what is being discussed as the U.S. movement towards a global imperialism. The neocons have taken that attitude, in combination with 911, and put it on steroids. Unfortunately the result is, the Middle East has now witnessed the omnipotence of U.S. power reduced to a theatrical tragedy act. The only true shock and awe power the U.S. has left as a viable threat is its air power. Anti insurgency tactics, despite years of study, are apparently quite some ways off from achieving a military solution as an effective intimidation tool. One of the primary reasons is the essentials of military tactics themselves. We learned this in Vietnam. The primary tactic in any military action is to hold the initiative. Make the enemy react. Insurgency, by its very nature, being an in-country strategy against a superior invading force, has some clear advantages in seizing the initiative. What we find is that now U.S. forces are in a reactive position, not an initiatory position as they were at the beginning, when they quickly dismantled the government. Blunders made at the outset by Paul Bremer and others have made that virtually impossible to reverse now. The military knew they did not want to get bogged down in the cities. It is now bogged down in the cities. This so called genius, General Petreas, who's just been put in charge should be well aware of that, special ops is his focus. He's a soldier, he's been asked by his commander in chief to do a job. He has not guaranteed he's got solutions. He's probably gambling he won't damage his career. Everyone knows it's a mess.
Remember this lesson from Vietnam. All military actions are political in the end, you can be dominant and win battles, but all the insurgency has to do is survive. The population of 27 million Iraqis has been deeply stirred. There are enough varieties of insurgency to last many lifetimes now. Polls indicate more than 80% of the population resents the occupation. The chances of stablizing it with force and keeping it stablized are slim to none. I'm sure they are aware of that in the upper echelons of this administration. Cheney has stated the U.S. will be there for decades.
It's time to rethink this, and that's what the Baker study was about. One of the conclusions of that study was that the U.S. needs to go back to an emphasis on diplomatic solutions. The Bush administration, unfortunately, remains fixated on the belief that it still can solve the problem with intimidation and force. What they are going to be taking apart in Bagdad with this latest intimidation strategy are the very intricate and patched together ways the factions with their militias have managed to put up protections from other factions. The angers, the feuds, will remain.
You refered to the religious make up of the Middle East as an argument of some kind to indicate a need to remain, if those differences in make up is supposed to be something we can arbitrate with an occupying force. The religious composition of the Middle East is complex, it's close interrelationship with politics something foreign to me. I suspect just as foreign to you and most of us here in the U.S. It's also ancient. For a people, ignorant of that complexity, to be over there messing with how they figure out how to live with one another is obvious folly, simply look and see. Does a religious/political complexity exist as a feature? Of course. Are we seeing solutions to it by applying force?
Don: War between the two countries is the reason each have such large militaries.
Well, that statement hardly offers much of a basis for any sort of argument to stay the course and finish the job. Israel is certainly one of the reasons Iran has a large military as well. Saddam Husein as a Baathist, a Syrian/Iraqi based political party, was another. His emergence as a CIA connected strong man in that party led to its militarization in the Seventies. His attack on Iran, with U.S. support, was supposedly stimulated by territorial dispute. Territory dispute is also similar, in a sense, to his attack on Kuwait, which was drilling sideways into Iraq territory to steal its oil. So it's not a blanket simple statement to say they have big militaries because they attack each other. Now the international community has reason more than ever to be involved, due to the strategic location for the global economy's primary energy resource, and the situation has been changed dramatically. There are many likely reasons to imagine why the predominantly Shi'ite population of Iraq could find diplomatic solutions to exist as a non combatant neighbor with Iran. The international community could be extremely helpful in this regard. Russia and China especially have strong interests in seeing peace in the region. The problem I see in much of the thinking about this is the use of flat, blanket historical statements of abstracted facts such as yours, that are unable to reflect and adjust to the complexity of changing processes without someone coming along and revealing what's under the surface. Unfortunately, much of what gets out to the public in the form of news is in that form.
Do you understand the make up of what is the Shi'ite population of the two geopolitical entities we call Iran and Iraq? I don't entirely, but I am now aware that there are factions within factions, and some in Iran are positively connected to some in Iraq, and some aren't. Let me offer you something to consider from a Middle East scholar who lived and studied there, and who is fluent with several versions of Arabic:
George Bush: It has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah - a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.
Juan Cole: The major Shiite religious parties with long histories of anti-American rhetoric and activity are the Islamic Call or Da'wa Party and the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq. Both of these Shiite religious parties are now allies of Bush. The Iraqi Da'wa actually helped to form the Lebanese Hizbullah in the early 1980s. A major figure in its Damascus bureau at that time was Nuri al-Maliki, now the Prime Minister of Iraq and a Bush ally. Al-Maliki supported Hizbullah versus Israel in the war last summer. The Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq is headed by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who is close to the Iranian regime but whom Bush hosted in the White House on Dec. 4.
So if these Iraqi Shiite parties and militias can be brought in from the cold, why is it that Bush demonizes and essentializes other Shiite groups that are equally capable of changing their policies given the right incentives?
As for the Lebanese Hizbullah, it was formed in 1984 and so was not responsible for the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut. That was carried about by the Islamic Amal faction of Abbas al-Musawi. Elements of the latter may have later joined Hizbullah.
Hizbullah's energies have not been put into killing Americans during the past two decades, but rather into getting the Israelis back out of their country. In fact, it isn't clear that the Lebanese Hizbullah has done anything to the US for 20 years.
It is arguably the Israeli invasion and military occupation of south Lebanon that created Hizbullah in the first place. Prior to that, the southern Lebanese Shiites weren't very political and often were pro-Israel.
This latest flurry of news to try to make it look like "Iran" is working as a politically cohesive entity to arm "insurgents" in Iraq is filled with confused information and associations that very few people have enough understanding to unravel. Looking at the complexity of the situation, that's entirely understandable. The solution to the lack of understanding that comes from that complexity that's being applied is not understandable to rational adults who try. I know that the administration does have access to the scholarly community and what it knows. I know people who are consultants in universities who are called in to provide the kind of knowledge Juan Cole just applied to George Bush's confused statements above. One has to wonder why, or even if the administration is confused. One of the benefits of looking into this deeply for oneself is the ability to raise questions of that nature. With regards to the latest in Adminstration propaganda about Iran: there's the fact that most of the insurgents who have been killing U.S. soldiers with the roadside explosives are Sunni, not Shi'ites, and Sunnis and Shi' Iranians are not pals.
You can look for yourself, its all in how you want to organize what you see. Force as diplomacy in that environment is like gasoline. People have memories about wrongs done that last centuries. More future centuries of memories are being added every day now. It doesn't take a PhD in Middle East studies to figure that out.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: /rén,
Another reason to make Iran the new enemy, and portrayed threat, is the administration's lack of diplomatic skill, either plainly incompetant, or ignorantly distrusting of diplomacy in general [I believe he thinks it shows weakness, kina like beating a child to show who's in charge, 'respect me or I'll bomb you']. He's been successful though as establishing in the international community that he's nuts, so better deal with him or else... puppets on parade shows rice ignoring, denying, then distorting diplomatic measures since '03, much the same as 'no one knew about terrorists and airplanes'. btw, saudis are sunni.
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
bill king, You did not respond to my questions and possibly I need to clarify them. I'll try one more time and than I'll drop it.
What do you forsee as the "leaven of the Democrats" if they win the next presidential election?
What might you propose history will record?
Sustaining American "citizenship" appears to be questionable, to whom is the US intended, IYO?
How will our culture change?
"leaven of the democrats" huh? That a flowerful way of trying to pinpoint or pigeonhole what exactly the Democratic party intends to do.
I don't think you truly appreciate the magnitude of the hole the republics have dug us into. It's very deep and it will require a superhuman effort to dig ourselves out, without causing an economic avalanche.
There is so much wrong, that to answer your question would make a good doctoral thesis.
let me just scratch the surface with the following...
1. fire all regulators appointed by Bush who were previously lobbyists for the industries they now regulate...
quote:
President Bush has installed more than 100 top officials who were once lobbyists, attorneys or spokespeople for the industries they oversee.
Feast on what I gave you so far GG there is tons more...
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
Originally posted by douglaslee: Another reason to make Iran the new enemy, and portrayed threat, is the administration's lack of diplomatic skill, either plainly incompetant, or ignorantly distrusting of diplomacy in general [I believe he thinks it shows weakness, kina like beating a child to show who's in charge, 'respect me or I'll bomb you']. He's been successful though as establishing in the international community that he's nuts, so better deal with him or else... puppets on parade shows rice ignoring, denying, then distorting diplomatic measures since '03, much the same as 'no one knew about terrorists and airplanes'. btw, saudis are sunni.
Here's an educated guess about the Iranian produced EFP's (Explosively Formed Penetrators) that are being paraded around the news today as part of an ongoing effort to demonize Iran and excuse this ineptitude in the diplomatic branch of the administration:
quote:
The US statement was that less than a quarter of the total US casualties were as a result of these Iranian EFPs.
That equates to roughly 60 of the 265 total. Therefore 2/3 of the Baghdad city US KIAs (60/90) were caused by these Iran-produced EFPs, the implication being that they are all attacks by Shia militia.
But, we don't hear anything like 2/3rds of attacks in Baghdad are by Shia militia. Indeed, this issue continues to be very strange.
How about this as a hypothetical partial explanation. They are produced in Iran, shipped to the Badr Brigade in Iraq who stockpile them for later use. Lots of them then end up on the ubiquitous Iraqi arms black market, and most of them then end up with Sunni insurgents in Baghdad. For some reason (maybe less financial means or a result of competing factions) they don't get to Sunnis in Anbar (The Marines have reported no sign of EFPs in Anbar). I don't konw if this makes any sense, but very little does in this matter."
Another article exposing the logical fallacies in the administration's rhetoric about the EFP's (Explosively Formed Penetrators):
quote:
The U.S. stance on the military capabilities of Iraqis today is the exact opposite of its position four years ago. Then, Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair claimed Iraqis were technically advanced enough to produce long-range missiles and to be close to producing a nuclear device.
Washington is now saying Iraqis are too backward to produce an effective roadside bomb and must seek Iranian help.
----
It is likely that Shiite militias have received weapons and money from Iran and possible the Sunni insurgents have received some aid, but most Iraqi men possess weapons. Many millions of them received military training under Saddam Hussein. His well supplied arsenals were all looted after his fall. No specialist on Iraq believes that Iran has ever been a serious promoter of the Sunni insurgency.
The evidence against Iran is even more insubstantial than the faked or mistaken evidence for Iraqi WMDs disseminated by the United States and Britain in 2002 and 2003. The allegations appear to be full of exaggerations. Few Abrams tanks have been destroyed. It implies the Shiites have been at war with the U.S., when in fact they are controlled by parties which make up the Iraqi government.
Ren, this is also from your link [I've had Cole on my tool bar for some time]
quote:
It isn't plausible that something could be made in Tehran but not in a workshop in Baghdad; Iraq is an advanced society. And, how much is left from one of those charges afterwards, that you could tell where it came from? This is the same US military that mistakenly attacked a Shiite Husayniya (mourning hall for the martyred grandson of the Prophet) as a death squad safe house, and then announced that they did not know if it was a Sunni or Shiite edifice. They also apparently don't necessarily know whether they are in Sunni or Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad, or how to judge the likelihood that a shaped charge was set by a Sunni Arab guerrilla as opposed to the Shiite militias. I.e. it isn't necessary to deny that some Iranian weapons are getting in to conclude that they are a tiny proportion of the problem.
And, of course, if US troops weren't in Iraq, they wouldn't be being killed by anyone's shaped charges. posted by Juan @ 2/12/2007 06:27:00 AM
That last statement doesn't seem too complicated to me.
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
Ren: It's time to rethink this, and that's what the Baker study was about. One of the conclusions of that study was that the U.S. needs to go back to an emphasis on diplomatic solutions. The Bush administration, unfortunately, remains fixated on the belief that it still can solve the problem with intimidation and force. What they are going to be taking apart in Bagdad with this latest intimidation strategy are the very intricate and patched together ways the factions with their militias have managed to put up protections from other factions. The angers, the feuds, will remain.
Thanks for the analysis, Ren. That's a wow.
--------------------------------------------------------------- "if you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got." ---------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 6804 | Location: usa | Registered: 09 February 2006
Soldiers work with Iraqis to stop corruption 03 February 2007 Story and photo by Spc. Joshua R. Ford 3rd Brigade Combat Team 82nd Airborne Division Public Affairs
The Gulf Region Division is established on the shoulders of U.S. Army Corps of Engineer organizations and individuals who are serving or have served in the South West Asia theater and those who have supported them from throughout the world.
Months before the regime of Saddam Hussein fell in 2003, Army Engineers, civilian and military, were on the ground, first in Kuwait and then in Iraq, addressing engineering challenges.
Many Corps division and district employees formed initial task force teams in oil and electricity, as well as forward engineering support teams, operating throughout the entire theater, to assess projects, develop courses of action, and initiate contracts during the early days of reconstruction.
Their success was crucial in the effort to secure a new and reliable, operating government as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. On Jan. 25, 2004, these individual engineering efforts were brought under one command with the formation of the Gulf Region Division.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Soldiers work with Iraqis to stop corruption 03 February 2007 Story and photo by Spc. Joshua R. Ford 3rd Brigade Combat Team 82nd Airborne Division Public Affairs
Stop the corruption?
quote:
Helping Iraqis stem the corruption that was commonplace during Saddam Hussein’s reign often goes hand in hand with that mission.
Only this time it isn't the Iraqi's doing the corruption, although it is their money being stolen. 12 billion in cash on pallets, to be exact. One would think that if the money was entrusted to the US for distribution that they would claim responsibility and immediately reimburse the Iraqis for any unaccounted for funds. HAHA Think again!
Can you guess what happens when the Iraqis try to do something about this corruption themselves?
Well the US installed a Chicago businessman as the minister of energy and he was charged with misappropriating 2 billion dollars. So the Iraqis threw him in jail. Then a US commando squad of contractors busts him out of jail and spirits him off to the humble surroundings of Dubai, when he cuts a deal with the US government that he can come home free of aany charges being brought against him.
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
Yesterday's HEADLINES in many major newspapers parroted the claims that Iran was arming Iraq insurgents. Today I find that the top U.S. general, Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staffs, has articulated his doubts:
JAKARTA, Indonesia Feb 13, 2007 (AP)— The top U.S. military officer said Tuesday the discovery that roadside bombs in Iraq contained material made in Iran does not necessarily mean the Iranian government was involved in supplying insurgents.
Funny thing is, it doesn't show up in any of the major newspaper headlines I found it in yesterday.
How did the public get the erroneous connection between 911 and Saddam Hussein, when the President claims he never specifically made that connection? Or the strong belief in the WMD issue?
Interesting analysis of that question offered today on Democracy Now!:
So that is what journalism is, contrary to what Michael Gordon says. It’s putting the story in perspective, pointing out that the guerrilla movement, whatever you want to call it, in Iraq is broad-based, it’s dominated by Sunni, not by Shia.
And the most damning omission in the story, if you want to talk about overall perspective, is complete lack of perspective on who’s fighting whom, who’s shooting at whom in Iraq. Does the Iranian government really have an interest in destabilizing what’s now a Shiite-dominated government? Doesn't make any sense. If it does make sense to the administration that the Iranians want to destabilize a Shiite-dominated government, when they’re a Shiite-ruled nation, then they should explain it. But there's no logic to it, and there’s just this massive omission.
Before I can decide IF I should proceed with my question to you "what do you foresee as the leaven of the democrats", and your response to date of that question, I want to explain that I have experienced you to be a fair and protective moderator, and that you have a strong sense of goodness. That said, I need to ask you if
quote:
That's it...I'm starting to get angry now!
- quote by you is directed towards the question I asked or directed towards the issues?
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
quote by you is directed towards the question I asked or directed towards the issues?
At the issues, of course. I don't agree with a lot of what you have to say, but unlike a lot of those morons in Washington, I think your heart is in the right place. Everytime I try to list all the bad things Bush and the republics have done to this country, I reach a point of outrage overload and cannot finish. Having become interested in politics since Gore became Clinton's runnung mate (Earth in the Balance was a great book and still is) I have witnessed the trashing of everything good that America stood for by the GOP and it has had a cumulative effect. Fortunately the pendulum is swinging the other way now and it's like a pressure-cooker letting off steam.
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
This message has been edited. Last edited by: bill king,
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
Tomgram: Roger Morris, Donald Rumsfeld's Long March
At a press conference at NATO Headquarters in Brussels in June 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld famously said: "Now what is the message there? The message is that there are no 'knowns.' There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. So when we do the best we can and we pull all this information together, and we then say well that's basically what we see as the situation, that is really only the known knowns and the known unknowns. And each year, we discover a few more of those unknown unknowns."
Strangely enough, Rumsfeld's own career, which catches so much of the political history that has led us into our present catastrophe, qualifies -- or at least did until today -- as either a "known unknown" or even one of those mystifying "unknown unknowns."
But I see he had a consultant for his muse--
quote:
Miss Alabama I would not live forever because we should not live forever, because if we were supposed to live forever then we would live forever, but we cannot live forever, which is why I would not live forever. Responding to a question in the 1994 Miss USA contest
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
bill king, do you know of a good moderator I could report the hyjacking of this thread's topic?
GG,
Sometimes threads will travel light years from their origional topic, but so long as there is dialog by two or more parties that's fine.
Speaking of dialog, I believe you asked me a question, which I answered and you were going to respond to...
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
Speaking of dialog, I believe you asked me a question, which I answered and you were going to respond to...
see first post in "GLOBALIZATION". My response took a turn because of what I thought was of greater importance to us as Americans and also because of this thread's topic. I've retained my notes to each major concern you had and did not know just where to respond.
Yes, I was going to challenge you on each point (and not necessarily because they are NOT important)but also to reason with you on why you chose these. Are they actually the major issues that are disarming American's citizenship?
But see that post and I look for your response.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Iraqis celebrate school reopening Friday, 26 January 2007
An Iraqi policeman gives thumbs up to Iraqi children during a school opening in Baghdad, Jan. 10, 2007. .. A neighborhood north of Ramadi celebrated the reopening of a school Tuesday. ..
"We're making progress day after day," said 1st Lt. Stuart Barnes, civil affairs team leader, Company B, 486th Civil Affairs Battalion. Barnes said school attendance proves the increase in stability there. ..
U.S. Forces and Iraqi troops cooperated with the Adhamiyah district council to deliver clothes, toys, vitamins and toiletries to more than 500 residents.
“Soccer balls and comic books were especially popular with the children . . The Iraqi police were very helpful today. They provided security and helped distribute the humanitarian assistance bags."
The humanitarian assistance drop is part of a U.S.-Iraqi effort to reduce sectarian violence and help bring security to Baghdad. ..
Polar Bears find weapons cache along banks of Euphrates River Multi-National Division – Baghdad PAO
YUSUFIYAH— Baghdad troops found and seized a weapons cache west of Yusufiyah, Iraq Friday.
Soldiers from the 4th Battalion, 31st Infantry Regiment “Polar Bears,” 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division (Light Infantry) found the cache along the backs of the Euphrates River.
The cache, included a recoilless rifle round rigged as an improvised explosive device, a propane tank, an artillery round of unknown caliber filled with homemade explosives, a pressure plate triggering device, two directional charge IEDs, a spool of wire, two fully-loaded 30-round AK-47 magazines and two feet of detonation cord.
An explosive ordnance team conducted a controlled detonation of the weapons at the site. source
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Yes, I was going to challenge you on each point (and not necessarily because they are NOT important)but also to reason with you on why you chose these. Are they actually the major issues that are disarming American's citizenship?
I don't know about disarming, if anything the citizenry could use a little disarming. what I am talking about is destruction. The steady destruction of our way of life freedom and democracy by a few greedy individuals who are so consumed with getting richer that they are willing to destroy the country in the process.
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
Please, not in this thread, it just won't fit the title.
Ok, but only because it's your thread.
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
Hey GG.... There is no such thing as an "Islamo-fascist".
Do you want to know who is a fascist? The very man you voted for, and the political party you belong to. Projection just isn't going to work anymore. Also, the real terrorists alread live in this country. They are all the idiots claiming liberals are treasonous while taking a dump on the Constitution and ripping off the working class all in the name of a god they never understood. What next will the GOP use for political expendiency? Maybe a brain-dead woma.... ooooops.... they already did that. Yes, such heroic soldiers, all to be sacrificed for the GOP's power trip. How speshuullll.
There is a purpose to my art, I just haven't figured out that purpose yet.
Hey GG.... There is no such thing as an "Islamo-fascist".
quote:
Some people can’t bear to hear the word “Islam” associated with “fascism,” no matter whom it describes. As for “fascism,” why not use this word to refer to those radicals bent on subjecting the world to their ideology, by whatever means necessary? As for “Islam,” what else do you call religious imams who encourage suicidal jihadists to take innocent lives and promise them the eternal gratitude of a heaven filled with virgins?
Nonetheless, I’m ultimately in favor of the term “Islamic fascism” because it helps people understand the gist of what we’re up against in a way that the “war on terror” never could. ..
The major advantage of using the terms “Islamic fascism” or “Islamofascism” is that it fairly accurately describes the ideology we face.
Sawdust posted this, way back in the thread: "I would say possibly bad intelligence which existed during the Clinton administration which Saddam could have helped to correct if he had cooperated with weapons inspectors."
Of course it was Bill Clinton who "yanked" (if you'll pardon the expression, as Clinton is from Arkansas) the inspectors out of Iraq, prior to the "Desert Fox" operation.
Sawdust also posted, also way back: "Invading Iraq was the biggest blunder this country has ever made in my opinion."
I agree with you on this, Sawdust. Strategically, this has been the U.S.'s biggesrt mistake.
What to do? If we give the U.S. the benefit of the doubt as having benign motives (which would preclude the Iraq PSAs on oil and also permanent basing of U.S. troops in Iraq), we could say the U.S.'s reason for staying is to prevent the possibilty of open warfare between Iran and the Sunni Gulf states, incl. Saudi, which could end up with the Straits of Hormuz being blocked and then the price of oil is who-kmows-what?
So, here's what the U.S. needs to do: publicly rebuke the permanent-basing of U.S. troops in Iraq and also rebuke the PSAs (of course these won't happen but they should happen).
And then immediately call for a summit including the heads of Iran and all the Gulf states. Declare negotiations open-ended until rapproachment is reached as regards fate/support of Sunni in Iraq and the Kurdish question. Keep this going as the focus of U.S. diplomacy for however long it takes.
If any satisfactory result could come of these negotiations then the oil will flow at the market rste.
Sensible suggestion although I doubt if it would be a goer at present but who knows what the future holds? Perhaps international diplomacy will have it's turn at some stage.
Like you say the US would have to be 'humbled' in some way for this to happen though. Admit mistakes and work towards a regional outcome. Not sure I can see this happening with the current administration but I'd sure like to be surprised.
When the world is run by fools it is the duty of intelligence to disobey
Posts: 1723 | Location: Perth, Australia | Registered: 02 August 2001
Never, I repeat never negotiate with evil because good always looses.
Of course. The answer is to become more evil than evil and just wipe it out with extreme violence and predjudice.
Just like Jesus would do.
See "Let Us Reason" discussion thread. Pope Benedict the XVI has attempted to reason with
the world of Manuel II Paleolgus quotation, “God does not love blood and violence and violence is against the nature of God and against the nature of man".
Unfortunately, the detested quotation was exploited and created more upheavals of violence and deaths.
quote:
Perhaps international diplomacy will have it's turn at some stage.
Who better understands the centuries of Muslim uprisings than the Catholic Church?
quote:
Admit mistakes and work towards a regional outcome
You have to come to the conclusion that the US is considered the number one enemy because the US is the strongest of all nations. Americans who want to compromise "FREEDOM" are embarrassed for the success of this nation and blame the US for its growth and strength.
Call it communism, socialism, marxism, feminism, environmentalism, the bottom line is defeat the US!!
I DID NOT SAY AMERICANS are without errors.
quote:
Admit mistakes and work towards a regional outcome
Yes, by not supporting the US troops who know the value of rebuilding Iraq, at the expense of their own lives.while the murthas, reids, and the pelosies win power by ACCEPTING DEFEAT! and with certainty genocide/a blood bath beyond proportion will begin.
How merciful is that??? Who's next?? We have a spreading formidable enemy who knows not how to reason.
Reason never straps bombs onto women and children. Reason never flies planes into buildings killing 3000 without warning. Reason never proclaims to the world to RULE OVER IT and kill any who oppose.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Our US troops believe in the mission and the Democrats DO NOT. Our US troops are voluntarily enlisting and RE-enlisting. These troops unlike what Kerry wants you to believe are highly credible intelligent qualified people.
Let them do their job and stop the 17 point check list before they can REact to the enemy. Stop the many attorneys that hold investigations everytime a US soldier uses their weapons. Our soldiers are getting killed because they CANNOT do their job properly in order to complete the mission Their MISSION means success and liberty for the free world and the Democrats have not understood.
* * * * * * * * Without traditional regular moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere.
Posts: 6275 | Location: Maine | Registered: 31 December 2005
Their MISSION means success and liberty for the free world and the Democrats have not understood.
Of course it is.
And you'll bomb the freedom right into them yeah whether they asked for it or not? Bringing mid west US style democracy to an Islamic nation by force.
You seem to be missing a fundamental flaw in that freedom logic.
Personally I'd have more respect if they just admitted they were protecting American (and their own) interests in the region rather than the holier than thou freedom bullshit.
When the world is run by fools it is the duty of intelligence to disobey
Posts: 1723 | Location: Perth, Australia | Registered: 02 August 2001
Our US troops believe in the mission and the Democrats DO NOT
What mission?, Or which mission? This week's?, this year's?, this month's?, or is it the one already accomplished as posted on the aircraft carrier when bush got to dress up in his war costume. The mission was always to get bush elected PERIOD [note I didn't say re-elected, you have to win once to be 're-elected'}
Blaise Pascal Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. Pensees
Posts: 2917 | Location: Sverige | Registered: 21 June 2005
Could you site a source other than the right wing propaganda you just did? You know, like credible sources without such a political bias and such a bad history on misinforming the public. After the last six years I would assume you know that source has no credibility, but hey, providing a link looks so official.
There IS NO SUCH THING AS ISLAMO-FASCISM. It's a fabricated term right wing goofballs use to demonize the Islamic faith and justify our military prescense in the middle east. It's origins go are "SAID" to go back to 1978.
quote:
Origins and usage
According to Roger Scruton of the Wall Street Journal , the term was introduced by the French Marxist Maxime Rodinson to describe the Iranian Revolution of 1978[4].
The origins of the term are unclear but appear to date back to an article which was published on September 8, 1990 in The Independent. In the article, "Construing Islam as a language," Malise Ruthven wrote:
“ Nevertheless there is what might be called a political problem affecting the Muslim world. In contrast to the heirs of some other non-Western traditions, including Hinduism, Shintoism and Buddhism, Islamic societies seem to have found it particularly hard to institutionalise divergences politically: authoritarian government, not to say Islamo-fascism, is the rule rather than the exception from Morocco to Pakistan. ”
On the other hand, Albert Scardino of the The Guardian attributes the term to an article by Muslim scholar Khalid Duran in the Washington Times, where he used it to describe the push by some Islamist clerics to "impose religious orthodoxy on the state and the citizenry".[5]
Michael Savage, host of the U.S. nationally syndicated radio show, the Savage Nation, has repeatedly maintained on his radio show that he had coined the term "islamofascism." The related term, Islamic fascism, was adopted by journalists including Stephen Schwartz[6] and Christopher Hitchens, who intended it to refer to Islamist extremists, including terrorist groups such as al Qaeda, although he more often tends to use the phrases "theocratic fascism" or "fascism with an Islamic face" (a play on Susan Sontag's phrase "fascism with a human face", referring to the declaration of martial law in Poland in 1981). [7]
Funny how the term was so readily adopted by the fascists/right wingers in our own country. Transparent....
When losing an argument, spin, spin, spin....
There is a purpose to my art, I just haven't figured out that purpose yet.
How merciful is that??? Who's next?? We have a spreading formidable enemy who knows not how to reason.
Reason never straps bombs onto women and children. Reason never flies planes into buildings killing 3000 without warning. Reason never proclaims to the world to RULE OVER IT and kill any who oppose.
GG, your 'reason' has dropped 3000 lb bombs on women and children. it has also killed tens of thousands of innocents. 'reason' has also caused a civil war to erupt
----------------- "Reason never proclaims to the world to RULE OVER IT and kill any who oppose."
actually, thats false GG. 'reason' or the united states in your mind, threatens every country with an opposing view, opinion, or form of government. after 911, members of the bush administration threatened pakistans with "bombardment back into the stone age" if they did not cooperate. when france denounced the iraq war, all of a sudden the administration declares "freedom fries". dont like this nation, 'reason' just places sanctions on it (which only hurts the people of that nation, not its government). ya, 'reason' sure sounds alot like the enemies you were describing --------------------
'reason' or the us, has never actually attempted to "reason" with anyone. the united states NEVER had a pre emptive policy in its entire existance until bush showed up.
'reason' tried to "reason" with the UN, until they decieded it wasnt the best action to take. this made 'reason' angry and it invaded a nation to secure oil fields.
now 'reason' is trying to "reason" with iran and on a lesser note, north korea. but 'reasons' "reasonings" are just a prelude to another unnessessary war which billions of dollars and thousands of lives will be needlessly thrown away. all in the name of 'reason' (or is it "reason")?
------------------------------------------ debating conservatives is easy. so easy, even a caveman can do it!
"if this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck lot easier, just so long as im the dictator" -GWB Dec 18,2002
Posts: 1614 | Location: ft myers florida area | Registered: 23 September 2006
i think so brent. i also think the fact that the pentagon extending tours of duties also qualifies somewhat. because people still on a tour cannot leave in the middle of the mission, even if their contract has expired. they must wait for the tour of duty to end. just another way to prohibit someone from completing their contract and going home. sounds alot like slavery or an indentured servant to me.
------------------------------------------ debating conservatives is easy. so easy, even a caveman can do it!
"if this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck lot easier, just so long as im the dictator" -GWB Dec 18,2002
Posts: 1614 | Location: ft myers florida area | Registered: 23 September 2006
The real treason. Our maimed soldiers are living in cockroach infested ghettos back here in the states.
Oh my God. While the Republicans were posturing all week about how the Democrats hate the troops, the Sunday Washington Post takes a look at how the Bush administration and the Republican congress have been treating our hurt and maimed troops back here in the US: in cockroach infested ghettos .
It is absolutely sickening. Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi should lock the Congress down until every single one of these problems is finally fixed.
Behind the door of Army Spec. Jeremy Duncan's room, part of the wall is torn and hangs in the air, weighted down with black mold. When the wounded combat engineer stands in his shower and looks up, he can see the bathtub on the floor above through a rotted hole. The entire building, constructed between the world wars, often smells like greasy carry-out. Signs of neglect are everywhere: mouse droppings, belly-up cockroaches, stained carpets, cheap mattresses.
This is the world of Building 18, not the kind of place where Duncan expected to recover when he was evacuated to Walter Reed Army Medical Center from Iraq last February with a broken neck and a shredded left ear, nearly dead from blood loss. But the old lodge, just outside the gates of the hospital and five miles up the road from the White House, has housed hundreds of maimed soldiers recuperating from injuries suffered in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The GOP is setting itself up for huge election losses in the next 4 years. When you deliberately go against the majority will of the American poeple, however distant that will may be from your agenda, then you are doomed as an elected official.
Notice how happy the troops are in Seahawkfan's cartoon with Hillary's failure. The cartoon should really have a bunch of fat GOP pigs, with corporate lapel buttons and cash protruding from their pockets, ripping up the resolution.
"These things which man purports to admire-the noble, the brilliant, the splendid-these are the very things he cannot tolerate when he finds them."-----Mark Clifton
Posts: 5565 | Location: hoffman estates il | Registered: 01 April 2003
Individuals are legally responsible for their views. Messages or parts of messages may be quoted or read on the radio, or reprinted in Thom's books and other materials.
Read-Only Topic
