lowing
Banned
+1,662|6853|USA

Ikarti wrote:

RicardoBlanco wrote:

Firstly, I'd say you'd be in a minority if you thought the war was going well. Secondly, I never implied the american losses were exhorbitent, just suprising considering how much you're spending there and how it's supposedly under control.

I still fail to see how British motorway deaths have any relevance. Precisely how many americans should die before the war is, according to you, going badly?
Enough where we're stretched so thin we can't repulse the combined forces of the marauding Mexican and Canadian armies. Cuba will probably try and take Miami while they're at it.
I didn't know we had a problem with illegal Canadians in our country.
What do you mean Cuba WILL try and take Miami, they already took it in the 80's.
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6911|Wilmington, DE, US
i'm not talking about immigrants, I'm talking about the canadian tugboat dropping off mounties on our shores, and when the Mexican airforce drops tacos on our cities
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7039

Bubbalo wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

So they killed him but kept him in cold storage and made a phone call to the Coalition Forces?

"  Come pick him up !  "

I believe if they had killed them they would have destroyed his body and any evidence of it rather giving the Coalition even a hollow victory. I just doesn't make sense. any thoughts on this ?

I believe Bin Laden is so committed to his cause he has probably made detailed prearrangement's for such an event I know I would if  I were him.
I've already clarified this.  But then, you don't ever seem to read a thread before posting..............
I read it, Here it is in its entirety. please high lite the " explanation "from  your Original Post below, it appears absent "

Bubbalo wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

Their number two man was taken out.
There's evidence to suggest that Zarqawi had been offed before the US caught him, which would make sense (if he was no longer so important, he was unlikely to have been well hidden).
So were does it explain above why his body wasn't hidden to prevent Free Iraqi Forces and The Coalition from exploiting a Hollow victory ?
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6758

Darth_Fleder wrote:

RicardoBlanco wrote:

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Well, let's put this in a little perspective. In the three years since the inception of the war, more than 10,000 people have died in traffic accidents in Britain alone. Compare that to the fact the Iraqi army and subsequent insurgency have only been able to inflict 1/4 that damage in a deliberate armed conflict.

http://trb.org/news/search_news.asp?q_aw=Casualties
You guys have spent BILLIONS on the conflict and your government has just approved BILLIONS more. I see little improvement in the situation and notice how many Iraqis, both military and civilian, you've managed to kill in the process; talk about splash damage! As far as I know the insurgents get limited funding, certainly not on the scale of the US army so TBO they're making you look bad.

http://usliberals.about.com/od/homeland … umbers.htm

I can't see how British traffic death statistics are relevant in any way.
OK Ricardo, let me make it simple for you. Based on your assertion that the war is going badly because "the fact that the americans are getting nailed everyday by a small minority of ill trained insurgents.. " you imply that somehow the insurgency is inflicting a exorbitantly high casualty rate upon the U.S. In contrast to this, the traffic statistics show that far more people are dying on British motorways by accident than are being caused deliberately by an armed and hostile insurgency. As for your'splash damage' claim, obviously you didn't read my response to CameronPoe above.

CameronPoe wrote:

I'm not talking about how needless the waste of American life is Darth. Again you have me wrong. I couldn't care less about the lives of people I don't know personally. I don't think anybody does if they were truly honest with themselves. They may feign sorrow for a few hours but once the headline has drifted into obscurity I hardly think they'll be remembering said fatality's anniversary!
Well, Cameron, it is interesting watching you hop from one foot to another on issues. Going back to your earlier comment on numbers...

CameronPoe wrote:

It's not the numbers that matter. It's the needlessness of it all.
I found you making this statement...

CameronPoe wrote:

Didn't the US death toll just pass 2500 today or yesterday?
in the Happy death of Zarqawi post. As to your 'needless' comment, perhaps you should choose your words a little more carefully because it is certainly difficult NOT to infer that you are bemoaning the needless loss of life.

CameronPoe wrote:

I'm talking about the need for the US to have entered into a war with them. Nations need to be responsible for their own destiny - not have their destiny handed to them by some foreign power. Ireland won their independence with no external help and the destiny of our country has remained very much in our hands. The people of Iraq would one day have rose up against tyranny, freed themselves and created a coutry of their choosing. The toppling of Saddam seems to me to have been premature as Iraq has now descended into a state of chaos and death as bad if not worse than it was under Saddam.
My friends in Baghdad were no friend of Saddam that's for sure but from the outset they believed this US intervention to be a zionist intervention and an oil grab.

Countries evolve - you can't force evolution. USA: STAY OUT of other countries politics!!
Iraq and Saddam lost the right of self-determination with the decision to invade Kuwait, Cameron. They were a defeated agressor nation and 11 years of diplomacy was failing by Saddam's failure to live up to the resolutions of the U.N. and from the illegal and amoral behaviour of some of the principal members of the Security council.

For someone that thinks that foreigners shouldn't meddle in others politics, you sure take a great interest in ours.
1) The original number retort (2500, etc.) was a petty jibe aimed at childish remarks made by others - the number itself is of no signifigance to me and is meaningless in itself really. You have pulled that response from one conversation and applied it, out of context, to another. The fact that the number is largely insignificant doesn't preclude me from using it in arguments.
2) Your arrogance with respect to Iraq astounds me, 'Iraq ... lost the right of self-determination'. They could easily be mistaken for the words of a traditional committed imperialist. You aren't capable of self-determining so now it's time for US-determination? Such pomposity. The US is thousands of miles away from this sandy little desert state. What the fuck has the US got to do with Iraq? Let's not forget the stated reason the US went in - because Saddam supposedly had WMD. The intelligence upon which this assertion was based was incredibly weak which leads one to conclude that ulteriour, less savoury, motives played a part in the decision to go to war. In any event they went to war and found nothing. Having got into Iraq on false pretences they could then say 'Sorry we were wrong but let's fix Iraq' - fixing Iraq to their own personal specifications (or rather US-Israeli specifications).
3) The decision to go to war in Iraq had nothing to do with whether amoral activities were going on with respect to the 'oil for food' program. Some US companies were involved in this too so the US isn't exactly white as snow. The contravention of international law by many countries is deplorable but has nothing to do with whether or not war was justified and wasn't an issue at the time. I can only guess from your viewpoints that you enjoy watching FOX news from time to time, a 'Fair & Balanced' news corporation. I myself read everything from Al Jazeera to Haaretz, including El País, Le Monde, La Prensa, BCC, RTE, FOX and CNN to gain a wider prespective. I also check out the 'Project for the New American Century' website to see how plans for the 'American Empire' are coming along. It's quite shocking that top US politicians would publicly declare their desire to take over the world!
4) Darth - I didn't realise EXPRESSING AN OPINION equated to MEDDLING IN SOMEONES POLITICS. I never realised how influential I am - maybe I should shut my mouth. LOL. I'll criticise foulplay wherever I see it, expecially when it involves exploitation and imperialism. I don't want to see the emergence of a 'Fourth Reich' potentially destroying the planet.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-18 12:53:27)

lowing
Banned
+1,662|6853|USA

Horseman 77 wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

So they killed him but kept him in cold storage and made a phone call to the Coalition Forces?

"  Come pick him up !  "

I believe if they had killed them they would have destroyed his body and any evidence of it rather giving the Coalition even a hollow victory. I just doesn't make sense. any thoughts on this ?

I believe Bin Laden is so committed to his cause he has probably made detailed prearrangement's for such an event I know I would if  I were him.
I've already clarified this.  But then, you don't ever seem to read a thread before posting..............
I read it, Here it is in its entirety. please high lite the " explanation "from  your Original Post below, it appears absent "

Bubbalo wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

Their number two man was taken out.
There's evidence to suggest that Zarqawi had been offed before the US caught him, which would make sense (if he was no longer so important, he was unlikely to have been well hidden).
So were does it explain above why his body wasn't hidden to prevent Free Iraqi Forces and The Coalition from exploiting a Hollow victory ?
FREE IRAQI FORCES.......GOD DAMN, I LIKE THE SOUND OF THAT!!!!  I think I will start calling it what it really is....A FREE IRAQ.
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6856
Free means not occupied.
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7039
....Flushes Twice.....

Lets talk about the Future !

What is the position of Free Iraq's leader called " Prime Minister, President "?
What will his role be? are there term limits? Are they a Parliament ? Does anyone know yet.

He seems competent and confident. These people have been through some tough times, I doubt they will wet their pants over some scumbags killing unarmed people in a house of worship. ( or a bomb on a train ) Remember that Rapist they hung from a Crane. lol.. Due process at its swiftest.

These people treat criminals " Harshly " They will know what to do with terrorists and Saddam's old cronies.
and it won't be " Shudder " panties on the head. I pity the terrorists when The Coalition leaves.

Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-06-18 16:59:45)

lowing
Banned
+1,662|6853|USA

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

Free means not occupied.
We have bases in England, does that mean we occupy it?..We are there in cooperation of the new FREE IRAQI GOVT.
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|7009|Orlando, FL - Age 43

CameronPoe wrote:

1) The original number retort (2500, etc.) was a petty jibe aimed at childish remarks made by others - the number itself is of no signifigance to me and is meaningless in itself really. You have pulled that response from one conversation and applied it, out of context, to another. The fact that the number is largely insignificant doesn't preclude me from using it in arguments.
Just like the "Brace yourself for the aftermath of vengeance' comment? It sounds more like how kids make stupid statements and try to retract them by claiming "I was just kidding". Also, bashing it as an insignificant number does preclude you from using it in arguments if you expect to be taken seriously, Cameron. You can't have it both ways.

CameronPoe wrote:

... LOL. I'll criticise foulplay wherever I see it, expecially when it involves exploitation and imperialism. I don't want to see the emergence of a 'Fourth Reich' potentially destroying the planet.
Yes, Cameron, I can see where your fears of an American 'Fourth Reich' stem from as you gallivant around the globe. You hail from Western Europe right? There I am sure you have seen close-up evidence of the death camps that the dreaded Americans have set up where rounded up political opponents and 'sub-human' non-Americans are sent. Jack-booted American stormtroopers relentlessly hunting down citizens like yourself who disagree with our policies. The slave labor camps spread throughout the region. You have doubtlessly witnessed American tanks rolling through Berlin and Paris when these puppet governments fail to do our bidding. You no doubt see firsthand our European and Asian vassal states in economic ruin as the U.S. sucks the wealth from them in economic tribute. Having to endure waves of U.S. colonists leaving the U.S. seeking lebensraum. You no doubt see evidence of the U.S. continuing the same policy in Afghanistan and Iraq. How frightening it must be to think that those two countries may end up ravaged and exploited like Germany and Japan.

And you wonder why I sound condescending in my replies to you.
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6911|Wilmington, DE, US

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Yes, Cameron, I can see where your fears of an American 'Fourth Reich' stem from as you gallivant around the globe. You hail from Western Europe right? There I am sure you have seen close-up evidence of the death camps that the dreaded Americans have set up where rounded up political opponents and 'sub-human' non-Americans are sent. Jack-booted American stormtroopers relentlessly hunting down citizens like yourself who disagree with our policies. The slave labor camps spread throughout the region. You have doubtlessly witnessed American tanks rolling through Berlin and Paris when these puppet governments fail to do our bidding. You no doubt see firsthand our European and Asian vassal states in economic ruin as the U.S. sucks the wealth from them in economic tribute. Having to endure waves of U.S. colonists leaving the U.S. seeking lebensraum. You no doubt see evidence of the U.S. continuing the same policy in Afghanistan and Iraq. How frightening it must be to think that those two countries may end up ravaged and exploited like Germany and Japan.
That's the most retarded thing I've ever read. And don't try to take that to your credit for being sarcastic. The fact that you think that sarcasm illustrates a point is so flawed.
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|7009|Orlando, FL - Age 43

Ikarti wrote:

That's the most retarded thing I've ever read. And don't try to take that to your credit for being sarcastic. The fact that you think that sarcasm illustrates a point is so flawed.
That's pretty funny coming from you, Ikarti.

Ikarti in http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pid=470957#p470957  wrote:

I think .50 cal should be ok as long as its only used on US troops.

Ikarti in http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pid=470957#p470957  wrote:

The troops deserve every IED they get.
I rest my case.

Last edited by Darth_Fleder (2006-06-19 11:58:03)

UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6856

lowing wrote:

UnOriginalNuttah wrote:

Free means not occupied.
We have bases in England, does that mean we occupy it?..We are there in cooperation of the new FREE IRAQI GOVT.
http://www.iraqoccupationfocus.org.uk/
Ikarti
Banned - for ever.
+231|6911|Wilmington, DE, US

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Ikarti wrote:

That's the most retarded thing I've ever read. And don't try to take that to your credit for being sarcastic. The fact that you think that sarcasm illustrates a point is so flawed.
That's pretty funny coming from you, Ikarti.

Ikarti in http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?pid=470957#p470957  wrote:

I think .50 cal should be ok as long as its only used on US troops.
I rest my case.
I guess you're in favor of supporting our degenerates then. You're just not getting it.
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|7009|Orlando, FL - Age 43

Horseman 77 wrote:

....Flushes Twice.....

Lets talk about the Future !

These people treat criminals " Harshly " They will know what to do with terrorists and Saddam's old cronies.
and it won't be " Shudder " panties on the head. I pity the terrorists when The Coalition leaves.
Good new on this front as well...

aljazeera wrote:

Prosecutor seeks death for Saddam

Monday 19 June 2006 7:45 AM GMT

The chief prosecutor in the trial of Saddam Hussein on Monday demanded the death penalty for the ousted Iraqi president and two other defendants.

"We demand the maximum punishment for Saddam, (his half-brother) Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti and (former vice president) Taha Yassin Ramadan," Jaafar al-Mussawi said in court as he rested the prosecution case.

Saddam smiled from the dock as the prosecutor called for him to be sent to the gallows.

The prosecutor asked that charges be dropped against defendant Mohammed Azzam Azzawi, a former official of Saddam's ruling Baath party with responsibility for the Dujail area, and that he be released.

Al-Mussawi asked the court to show leniency to three other local Baath party officials - Ali Daeh Ali, Abdullah Khadem Ruweid and his son Mezhar Abdullah Ruweid.

The prosecutor said he would leave it to the court to decide on the appropriate punishment for Awad Ahmed al-Bander, the former chief judge of the revolutionary court and deputy head of Saddam's office.

Adjourned
The trial was adjourned until July 10 when the defence team will make its closing arguments. The five-judge panel is then expected to recess the court to consider its verdicts.

Saddam Hussein and seven former members of his government all face charges of crimes against humanity.

The charges relate to the deaths of 148 Shia civilians in the town of Dujail, following a bloody crackdown after an assassination attempt on the former Iraqi leader in 1982.

All eight defendants were in the dock for Monday's hearing,  although some of the defence lawyers were absent.

You can find this article at:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ … BA72FB.htm
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|7009|Orlando, FL - Age 43

Franklin Raff wrote:

I have seen the enemy ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: April 14, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern



By Franklin Raff

https://img502.imageshack.us/img502/9797/raff5zf.jpg


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

An Iraqi officer of significant rank approached my translator as I quietly took notes near the banks of the Euphrates River, at a combat observation post named COP Dunlop. He knew I was an embedded American. He had a sense, perhaps, that I was a sympathetic soul, and he wanted to pass along an urgent message.

We shook hands and exchanged pleasantries. I learned he was an educated and successful man, an accomplished soldier, and quite knowledgeable about the affairs of the world. He had served under Saddam. He openly spoke about the likelihood of corruption in the new Iraqi Ministry of Defense. We spoke about black-market arms trading, ancient smuggling routes, and the problem of porous borders.

We even discussed personal matters, and the question of his taking a second wife. (I told him the one about a thousand pair of panty-hose hanging from King Solomon's shower-curtain.) We had a reasonably long and genuine conversation about matters of importance to all men. And at a certain moment, he grew a little uneasy and blurted out what he had wanted to say from the beginning:


Why do you people not tell our story? Why do you not say what is going on? Why do you come to our country and see what is happening, you see the schools and the hospitals and you see the markets and you eat with Sunni and Shia soldiers – everybody eats together, everybody works together –you see that Saddam is gone forever and we are free to speak and complain.

You see we are working and eating together and fighting together – Sunni and Shia – you see what we are building here, you see the votes we make as one people. Then you say to the world about a great war and horrible things and how we are all killing each other? We are not animals! We are Iraqis. Look around you! Look!



Non-English speaking Iraqis are distressed and disheartened by American media bias. Many feel personally offended by what they read in translation and hear of in the foreign press. I am not talking about press information and public affairs officers. I am not talking about coalition soldiers (though every one I spoke with on the subject was equally frustrated.) I am talking about Arabic-speaking Iraqis. They see a difference between what we're seeing and what we're saying. What does that tell you about the extent of our problem?


I was truly "downrange" in Iraq, embedded in Baghdad, Sadr City, Fallujah, and a series of remote combat outposts and forward operations bases in the Sunni Triangle. I spent much of my time in areas that were in immediate transition or wholly controlled by Iraqi forces. I wanted to get dirty, and I wanted to see the worst of it.

I was entirely too close to a vehicle-borne IED – intended, possibly, to destroy my party – which tragically killed a U.S. Marine and a young Iraqi boy. I trampled through a mass of depleted uranium, breathed the squalor of a Saddam-era slum, slept uneasily through the bursts of an urban gunfight, and dined on the partially-cooked head of a sheep. But these are not my most disturbing recollections.

Civil unrest is distasteful and at times gruesome, but in much of the Middle East it is an abiding condition. The scenes that flicker in my mind seem graver than the filth, disorder, and sorrow that have been a part of Iraq's dramatic transition. And now that I have returned to Washington, as memories play alongside my daily media intake, they combine to create an increasingly gloomy montage.

It was hilarious at the time. So funny, in fact, I nearly wept. I will never forget the sight of my colleague, a well-known, market-leading radio reporter feverishly clutching his satellite phone as a Chinook transport helicopter flew by, half a mile or so away. He was standing right beside me as he dialed through the time zones to go "live from Iraq":


We're right in the middle of the action! I'm sorry ... I can't hear you! There's a Blackhawk landing right behind me! I can't quite describe what's going on! This is unbelievable!


At the time, you see, we were just outside an Embassy chow hall, quietly discussing the weather. We had just eaten a magnificent lunch. In this combat reporter's trembling right hand was the target of his desperate screams, the satellite phone – his listeners' link to the horror and chaos of war, the sweat and tears, the booming, blood-shod tragedy of it all. And in his left hand – I swear it – a chocolate milkshake.

There is plenty of bombast in the green zone. "On the scene" excitement breeds hyperbole, and many reporters are pretentious and boastful to begin with. There's no need to name names: Most folks can smell manure wrapped in newsprint, no matter who does the wrapping. But I quietly curse when I think of all the self-styled Ernie Pyles in their Baghdad hotel rooms, staring out over the city skyline, giving you news "from the front."

Let me tell you what has become somewhat of a running joke among coalition soldiers. It is evening, and a boom is heard in the distance. Some foreign fighter has blown himself up, and maybe he's taken one of ours with him. Maybe it's an IED. Or it might be an attack on one of our new electrical transformers, engineered to dishearten and confuse Iraqi citizens by depriving them of a nights' electricity. Nobody knows yet, but that doesn't really matter.

Our journalist, "on the line" in his cushy suite, scrambles to the balcony. He sees a puff of dust on the horizon, shivers in the cool night air and the intensity of the moment, and turns down CNN on the television. He e-mails his editor about these explosive developments and then, with a cool beer in hand, begins writing about a great and desperate war. Brothers in the crosshairs. A rag-tag insurrection, gaining momentum in dramatic increments. A few historical references. A scribbled, out-of-context comment overheard in the mess hall. A line or two from some radical imam, if a desirable translation can be found. Bingo: It's a front-page story.

Embedded news-gatherers – even those with military experience, as was the case with me and my immediate company – are essentially expensive luggage. We take up valuable space. We are unarmed, untrained, generally unfit, and we tend to get in the way. We are valuable targets for the border-hopping, media-crazed murderers who seek instability and chaos. But this isn't what irritates our defenders. What bothers them is that when we put pen to paper, we tend to stab them squarely in the back by misrepresenting and over-dramatizing our experiences. It is no wonder a "PRESS" tag will get you a few hairy eyeballs in the field: There's a general consensus that we are liars.

The lies aren't relegated to firsthand reports. I listen to NPR every morning. I read the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, and scan any number of online media. As a lifelong and moderately accomplished student of war history and of the works (and memoranda) of men like Sergei Eisenstein and Josef Goebbels, I have been keenly aware of an increasing use of elemental propaganda techniques and tactics in "mainstream" reporting on the war.

Good news from Iraq, for instance, is systematically, if delicately, prefaced with the indication of a biased source. I am almost certain there is a standing order at outfits like NPR's "Morning Edition" to compromise positive stories with selections from an arsenal of useful poll numbers. For good measure, the stories are often relegated to commentary segments of the program, in order to lend a casual and dismissive air to core information.

Let's use, for example, the fact that Sunni, Shia and Kurdish leaders are organizing innumerable micro-summits to resolve their tribal differences in the name of national unity. Participation is nearly 100 percent, negotiations are largely fruitful, and leaders from local imams on up want to reiterate to the press, just like our Iraqi officer did, that despite isolated attacks and foreign insurgent activity, there is no "civil war" going on. So the Pentagon releases selections from this tapestry of reassuring stories in the standard manner along with requisite sound-bytes, interview opportunities, and raw statistics. The news is verifiable, rich in human interest, and undeniably positive. Here's how it plays on "Morning Edition":


The president has admitted he was wrong about WMD, and now, according to the White House, Shia and Sunni leaders are evidently trying to work together to try and quell the burgeoning civil war. Approval ratings for the Bush administration and the war are at an all-time low, so the question is: What's behind these last-ditch efforts, and can they possibly succeed? Joining me to discuss this is NPR senior news analyst Cokie Roberts ...


In the minds of those who do not recognize the telltale signs of subversive delivery, the desired effect is achieved.

This effect – to convince the world that Iraq is a hopeless and violent wasteland, heartbreaking evidence, even, of a trigger-happy cowboy's hubris – is compounded and reaffirmed day after day, as biased and exaggerated reports reverberate through and within thousands of local and syndicated media outlets. As George Orwell explained in his dystopian novel "1984," "If all records told the same tale – then the lie passed into history and became truth."

I wanted to confess to my new friend, the Iraqi officer at COP Dunlop, that we have an autocracy in America that has never been deposed – an imperious corps of convenience-isolationists with short memories and powerful imaginations. I wanted to explain that though there are hardly any soldiers among them, they rule the thoughts and actions of legions of citizens.

I wanted to tell him about our media elite, about how "if it bleeds, it leads," about our 24-hour news cycle, and about the "Journal of Record" and its endless struggle to embarrass and discredit our president. I wanted to tell him that the same folks who tell us they're giving the world "all the news that's fit to print" are the same ones who deep-sixed Babi Yar and ignored the Holocaust, the same ones who bury stories about Saddam's mass graves and "spike" Iraqi efforts to show us the awe-inspiring progress they have made.

I wanted to acknowledge that too many Americans lack the fortitude and patience to stand behind our new Iraqi allies as they forge a new nation. I wanted to explain that certain powerful Americans feel we didn't find quite enough chemical, nuclear and biological weapons to make our multinational effort worthwhile – no matter what we have, in fact, found; no matter what the Iraqis witnessed, no matter our soldiers' experiences and testimony, no matter Iraq's success thus far.

I wanted to tell him that not all media people are liars. But I knew that my thoughts were too complicated to make it through translation. I knew that when I returned to America, the words "civil war" would be plastered all over the mainstream media, just as they were when I left. So I held my tongue.

I returned to what I expected. All the hotshot analysts and commentators are speculating, with that requisite gravitas, about the "roots" of civil war.

I was there. I was in some miserable places, but I saw a miracle every day. I saw a lot of smiles, a lot of hope, and a lot of pride in that traumatized country. I saw a remarkably fraternal affection between Iraqi and coalition soldiers. I saw bustling markets, busy streets, and peaceful demonstrations. I believe I may have witnessed a pivotal time in the infancy of a vibrant, freedom-loving ally in the Middle East.

I did not see a civil war. I did not see the beginnings of a civil war. But I did learn a thing or two about the "roots" of this civil war: Iraq's civil war has been engineered, in no small part, from the comfort of a Baghdad hotel room. It is catalyzed by minor exaggerations, partial facts, and propagandistic suppressions. It will escalate, over time and across media, as minor mistruths beget outright lies, until the truth itself begins to change.

As our new Iraqi allies become discouraged by what they see in the world news, and as they start losing hope, they may abandon their dreams once and for all. Our media's dark prophecies will then have fulfilled themselves. Then, and tragically, Iraqi and coalition pleas for "truth" may finally be silenced.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6758

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Yes, Cameron, I can see where your fears of an American 'Fourth Reich' stem from as you gallivant around the globe. You hail from Western Europe right? There I am sure you have seen close-up evidence of the death camps that the dreaded Americans have set up where rounded up political opponents and 'sub-human' non-Americans are sent. Jack-booted American stormtroopers relentlessly hunting down citizens like yourself who disagree with our policies. The slave labor camps spread throughout the region. You have doubtlessly witnessed American tanks rolling through Berlin and Paris when these puppet governments fail to do our bidding. You no doubt see firsthand our European and Asian vassal states in economic ruin as the U.S. sucks the wealth from them in economic tribute. Having to endure waves of U.S. colonists leaving the U.S. seeking lebensraum. You no doubt see evidence of the U.S. continuing the same policy in Afghanistan and Iraq. How frightening it must be to think that those two countries may end up ravaged and exploited like Germany and Japan.
Nice one yet again you ignorant neo-con. You have ridiculed yourself by attempting to ridicule what I posted by exaggerating what I said and reading into it what you wanted to rather than trying to understand my position. You really are quite the intellectual.
The current US administration is by no means an evil entity bent on the kind of things Hitler did. However I'll point out the following:
A) The adminstration is demonising muslims. Hitler demonised the jews.
B) I've been to Latin America several times, where the US has destroyed the economy of several countries. I've seen the kind of influence the US has had on the region - vast gulfs between the rich and the desparately poor as a consequence of economic exploitation of certain countries. It's quite sad. I'm going to Cuba in September for the first time too so I'll report back on the effect of US sanction there when I return. Cuba  is a special case however, not to be lumped in with the rest of Latin America. 
C) I find it strange you choose 'concentration camps' as a way of jokingly rebutting my comments given the existence of Guantanamo Bay detention camp and the prison at Abu Ghraib. None as extreme as Auschwitz admittedly but both an abhorration in these modern enlightened times we live in.
D) The current erosion of civil liberties, the 'Patriot' act (pure Orwellian name for the act I might add!), in the US could possibly be the first step towards a police state. Who knows? I bet nobody predicted what would happen in by 1938 in Germany.
E) For lebensraum read natural resources and the economic exploitation of weaker countries. Poor or weak countries throw themselves at US corporations, 'Exploit us, please!' - a grave mistake in most cases. Profits get repatriated and the country goes under as soon as the corporation finds some even poorer country! Self-sufficiency is the key not imported jobs. On the subject of oil: No oil, No power. Less oil, less power/influence. The US won't fade away to the next king of the world, China, currently sucking the oilwells dry, without a fight. As such, it will try and gain control over this resource by hook or by crook.
F) I'll give you $50 if Iraq or Afghanistan look anything like Japan or Germany in 50 years!!!! Laughable. So laughable. What is the US government gonna do? Stop all spending on US infrastructure and utilities to fund it? Hahahaha. In Afghanistan all that is under control is the greater Kabul area and other small pockets of that vast country. Nothing there has really changed. You see the problem is the US helped rebuild Japan and Germany WITHOUT ANY RESISTANCE FROM THE LOCALS. I harldy think the same applies in Iraq or Afghanistan!!! The US will leave with its tail between its legs like the russkies did after 10 years (and the US themselves did in Vietnam).

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-19 13:27:16)

Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7039
my man is a world travler it seems
=OBS= EstebanRey
Member
+256|6753|Oxford, England, UK, EU, Earth
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|7009|Orlando, FL - Age 43

CameronPoe wrote:

Nice one yet again you ignorant neo-con. You have ridiculed yourself by attempting to ridicule what I posted by exaggerating what I said and reading into it what you wanted to rather than trying to understand my position. You really are quite the intellectual.
How ironic it is that YOU are accusing ME of being close-minded, priceless. I do understand your position and vehemently disagree with it.

CameronPoe wrote:

The current US administration is by no means an evil entity bent on the kind of things Hitler did. However I'll point out the following:
A) The adminstration is demonising muslims. Hitler demonised the jews.
Only half correct.

G.W. Bush in 2001 wrote:

...The terrorists practice a fringe form of Islamic extremism that has been rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics -- a fringe movement that perverts the peaceful teachings of Islam.  The terrorists' directive commands them to kill Christians and Jews, to kill all Americans, and make no distinction among military and civilians, including women and children...

...I also want to speak tonight directly to Muslims throughout the world.  We respect your faith.  It's practiced freely by many millions of Americans, and by millions more in countries that America counts as friends.  Its teachings are good and peaceful, and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah.  The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself.  The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends; it is not our many Arab friends.  Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists, and every government that supports them...

G.W. Bush in 2005 wrote:

...Some call this evil Islamic radicalism; others, militant Jihadism; still others, Islamo-fascism. Whatever it's called, this ideology is very different from the religion of Islam. This form of radicalism exploits Islam to serve a violent, political vision: the establishment, by terrorism and subversion and insurgency, of a totalitarian empire that denies all political and religious freedom. These extremists distort the idea of jihad into a call for terrorist murder against Christians and Jews and Hindus -- and also against Muslims from other traditions, who they regard as heretics...

...Like the ideology of communism, Islamic radicalism is elitist, led by a self-appointed vanguard that presumes to speak for the Muslim masses...

Bush again wrote:

America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country.  Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads.  And they need to be treated with respect.  In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.
Contrast those statements to this....

Hitler, Salzburg, 1920 wrote:

For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated.  Don't be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus.  Don't think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis.  This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst
Comparing the two in the same breath is pure sophistry. Speaking of demonizing, aren't you trying to exactly that to the current administration in your post?

You know, it would be nice if you could at least get a few facts right before you go off half-cocked.

CameronPoe wrote:

C) I find it strange you choose 'concentration camps' as a way of jokingly rebutting my comments given the existence of Guantanamo Bay detention camp and the prison at Abu Ghraib. None as extreme as Auschwitz admittedly but both an abhorration in these modern enlightened times we live in.
Again, pure sophistry on your part. In one breath you you say they don't compare, in the next you do. In a truly 'modern and enlightened time' such a ridiclous statement would not be tolerated. 

CameronPoe wrote:

D) The current erosion of civil liberties, the 'Patriot' act (pure Orwellian name for the act I might add!), in the US could possibly be the first step towards a police state. Who knows? I bet nobody predicted what would happen in by 1938 in Germany.
Pure fearmongering and speculation on your part. I have living relatives who were in Germany and lived through the Nazi era and I assure you that they knew what was coming by 1938.

CameronPoe wrote:

E) For lebensraum read natural resources and the economic exploitation of weaker countries. Poor or weak countries throw themselves at US corporations, 'Exploit us, please!' - a grave mistake in most cases. Profits get repatriated and the country goes under as soon as the corporation finds some even poorer country! Self-sufficiency is the key not imported jobs. On the subject of oil: No oil, No power. Less oil, less power/influence. The US won't fade away to the next king of the world, China, currently sucking the oilwells dry, without a fight. As such, it will try and gain control over this resource by hook or by crook.
Congratulations Cameron, you understand the strategic nature of oil, something well understood since before WWII. It is a vital resource for Europe as well, Cameron. Your whole jet-setting lifestyle depends upon it. Another attempt to demonize 'evil' US corporations. China may or may not be the next 'king of the world' that remains to be seen. But if they should ever ascend to that, my bet is that your grandchildren will rue the day.

CameronPoe wrote:

F) I'll give you $50 if Iraq or Afghanistan look anything like Japan or Germany in 50 years!!!! Laughable. So laughable. What is the US government gonna do? Stop all spending on US infrastructure and utilities to fund it? Hahahaha.
You seem to have little faith in the Afghani and Iraqi people Cameron...why is that?

CameronPoe wrote:

In Afghanistan all that is under control is the greater Kabul area and other small pockets of that vast country. Nothing there has really changed. You see the problem is the US helped rebuild Japan and Germany WITHOUT ANY RESISTANCE FROM THE LOCALS. I harldy think the same applies in Iraq or Afghanistan!!! The US will leave with its tail between its legs like the russkies did after 10 years (and the US themselves did in Vietnam).
You wish....NATO is set to take over peacekeeping in a couple of weeks...or hadn't you heard? Or is that what constitutes 'leaving with our tails between our legs'?

You know Cameron, you seem like an otherwise intelligent young man, but you show an amazing propensity for regurgitating the pablum being fed to you on YOUR opinion pages. You need to try and get past all that cac capaill and truly think about what you are saying.

=OBS= EstebanRey wrote:

it is goinng badly

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle … 096660.stm
No, the fact that there is action being taken into the matter shows the contrary.



p.s. Nice editing job Cameron....your post changed quite a bit in the time it took to get home from work. And BTW, if I found Ikarti to be one of my supporters, I would be seriously worried about my positions.

Last edited by Darth_Fleder (2006-06-19 20:08:48)

JohnnyBlanco
Member
+44|6773|England
Darth, you seem adament on defending the war in Iraq but seem to forget it was completely unjustified. Bush has admitted there were never any WMD so since then the war has been one great big fuckup rectification exercise, so no the war is not going well. Dumbass.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6758
Okay Darth lets read my original quote again:

CameronPoe wrote:

The current US administration is by no means an evil entity bent on the kind of things Hitler did.
I then presented a couple of examples one might regard as similarities between the two adminstrations.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Speaking of demonizing, aren't you trying to exactly that to the current administration in your post?
'Demonizing' or, more accurately, criticising the political policies of a particular government doesn't really compare with the demonisation of the adherents of a particular faith. Bush rhetoric is meaningless - the man says one thing and does the other. I find it strange you select a reformed alcoholic christian zealot who dragged his country into war on false pretences to act as your example of peace and love between all religions! Didn't he once describe his foray into the middle east a 'crusade'? Must have been a Freudian slip ... oops!

Darth_Fleder wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

C) I find it strange you choose 'concentration camps' as a way of jokingly rebutting my comments given the existence of Guantanamo Bay detention camp and the prison at Abu Ghraib. None as extreme as Auschwitz admittedly but both an abhorration in these modern enlightened times we live in.
Again, pure sophistry on your part. In one breath you you say they don't compare, in the next you do. In a truly 'modern and enlightened time' such a ridiclous statement would not be tolerated.
Again you overlook the fact that I am stating similarities. The fact that one is worse than the other is of no consequence. You seemed to suggest in an earlier post that the US was pure as driven snow when it came to human rights with your 'Fourth Reich' rebuttal. I am just stating why that is not the case.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

D) The current erosion of civil liberties, the 'Patriot' act (pure Orwellian name for the act I might add!), in the US could possibly be the first step towards a police state. Who knows? I bet nobody predicted what would happen by 1938 in Germany.
Pure fearmongering and speculation on your part. I have living relatives who were in Germany and lived through the Nazi era and I assure you that they knew what was coming by 1938.
Were they in the Nazi party or something?

Darth_Fleder wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

E) For lebensraum read natural resources and the economic exploitation of weaker countries. Poor or weak countries throw themselves at US corporations, 'Exploit us, please!' - a grave mistake in most cases. Profits get repatriated and the country goes under as soon as the corporation finds some even poorer country! Self-sufficiency is the key not imported jobs. On the subject of oil: No oil, No power. Less oil, less power/influence. The US won't fade away to the next king of the world, China, currently sucking the oilwells dry, without a fight. As such, it will try and gain control over this resource by hook or by crook.
Congratulations Cameron, you understand the strategic nature of oil, something well understood since before WWII. It is a vital resource for Europe as well, Cameron. Your whole jet-setting lifestyle depends upon it. Another attempt to demonize 'evil' US corporations. China may or may not be the next 'king of the world' that remains to be seen. But if they should ever ascend to that, my bet is that your grandchildren will rue the day.
The vast majority of Europe, although no saint in the past, isn't putting their childrens necks on the line killing people in some far off land just so we can scoot around in some 6 litre behemoth. And at least China appear to be relatively isolationist.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

In Afghanistan all that is under control is the greater Kabul area and other small pockets of that vast country. Nothing there has really changed. You see the problem is the US helped rebuild Japan and Germany WITHOUT ANY RESISTANCE FROM THE LOCALS. I harldy think the same applies in Iraq or Afghanistan!!! The US will leave with its tail between its legs like the russkies did after 10 years (and the US themselves did in Vietnam).
You wish....NATO is set to take over peacekeeping in a couple of weeks...or hadn't you heard? Or is that what constitutes 'leaving with our tails between our legs'?
We'll obviously have to agree to disagree on this one. If you believe those countries are co-operating wholeheartedly in their reconstruction then that's a difference we just will not be able to bridge.
NATO are coming - my GOD!! Hallelujiah. Our problems are over! Are NATO coming to Iraq too? I can't wait.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

p.s. Nice editing job Cameron....your post changed quite a bit in the time it took to get home from work. And BTW, if I found Ikarti to be one of my supporters, I would be seriously worried about my positions.
Cheers Darth. I didn't realise editing was frowned upon. I won't edit in future then. Instead I'll take about 10 hours mulling over my response like some people. I have far more than Ikarti supporting my viewpoints based on karma pos's. Very few seem to be endorsing your view publicly in this thread actually. You better get onto Major_Spittle & Cougar - the bastions of rational thought!!

PS Darth - that copy and paste post above: when are you gonna quit with that? That's just an account of someone's opinion. Plenty of opinions to the contrary from out in Iraq could also be posted but it would get us nowhere in a proper debate. Try relying solely on your own opinions, with maybe a couple of quotes from others thrown in to demonstrate a point. Don't just post a page of somebody else's thoughts.

PPS +1 for the correct use of Irish. You even used the tuisil ginéide grammatical form for capall (horse) correctly!!

Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-06-20 04:20:36)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6803|132 and Bush

I read the topic and each post.There are many respectable opinions but that's all they are. I do think you must support the troops and not demoralize them. These soldiers are dieing everyday to try to give Iraqi's the freedoms we all enjoy. We have the luxury of these freedoms in these very forums. Openly criticize Saddam's government while he was in power in Iraq and you and your family would have paid severely. I  for one am glad he was removed. Does that mean the US should have invaded ? Not in my opinion. Unless there was an imminent clear threat to the US it is not legal per US policy to invade another country. I remind you in the USA only congress can declare war so I feel this does not fall on one man. It was voted on and approved.  I have to agree with finishing with what we started though. This means ensuring that the Iraqi's can manage on their own.

Is the war going well? Some day's yes and some no. Unless you are a soldier deployed in Iraq you can only guess. We go by what is chosen to be shown to us, both good and bad.(Media)

Good debate guys.
History will tell us the answer to this topic. That is the only real answer here.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Darth_Fleder
Mod from the Church of the Painful Truth
+533|7009|Orlando, FL - Age 43

CameronPoe wrote:

Okay Darth lets read my original quote again:

CameronPoe wrote:

The current US administration is by no means an evil entity bent on the kind of things Hitler did.
I then presented a couple of examples one might regard as similarities between the two adminstrations.
I know what you were trying to do. First of you prefaced your remarks with a fall-back position so when the fallaciousness of your premise was pointed out, you could revert back to...

CameronPoe wrote:

Okay Darth lets read my original quote again:

CameronPoe wrote:

The current US administration is by no means an evil entity bent on the kind of things Hitler did.
The intent of such an argument is still to leave an impression in a readers mind that there is a greater connection or similarity. Otherwise, what relevance does it have to conversation?

CameronPoe wrote:

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Speaking of demonizing, aren't you trying to exactly that to the current administration in your post?
'Demonizing' or, more accurately, criticising the political policies of a particular government doesn't really compare with the demonisation of the adherents of a particular faith. Bush rhetoric is meaningless - the man says one thing and does the other. I find it strange you select a reformed alcoholic christian zealot who dragged his country into war on false pretences to act as your example of peace and love between all religions! Didn't he once describe his foray into the middle east a 'crusade'? Must have been a Freudian slip ... oops!
By trying to find similarities between G.W. Bush and Hitler, you are trying to demonize, not simply criticizing. Bush's rhetoric does pass the test on this issue, I see no evidence to point to the contrary. I have many Muslim friends here in this country who could attest to the same.

Bush a zealot...not hardly. It's funny how anyone just professing the Christian faith anymore automatically makes them a zealot. You don't drink, Cameron from bonny Eire? As to your 'peace and love' comments, he is damned if he doesn't or damned if he does in your book. Just who is the zealot here, Cameron? You really need to examine yourself for you show all the traits of being one. Unwilling to listen to reason, distorting the truth for your cause...etc. I have poked so many holes in your arguments and yet still you rail and refuse to give ground. And before you try spinning that back onto me (which I know is twirling in that little head of yours), I have issues with Bush as well, but they are not based upon emotion or on the distortions from which your hatred comes.

cru·sade (kru-sad)  A vigorous concerted movement for a cause or against an abuse.
Now admittedly, not the best choice of words, given the circumstances, but given the fact that it was a one time incident and there is no rhetoric constantly alluding to a "Holy War" against all Islam, not worthy of too much attention.


CameronPoe wrote:

Darth_Fleder wrote:

Again, pure sophistry on your part. In one breath you you say they don't compare, in the next you do. In a truly 'modern and enlightened time' such a ridiculous statement would not be tolerated.
Again you overlook the fact that I am stating similarities. The fact that one is worse than the other is of no consequence. You seemed to suggest in an earlier post that the US was pure as driven snow when it came to human rights with your 'Fourth Reich' rebuttal. I am just stating why that is not the case.
It's sophistry Cameron, the only similarities that they share is that they are places where people are detained.

CameronPoe wrote:

The vast majority of Europe, although no saint in the past, isn't putting their childrens necks on the line killing people in some far off land just so we can scoot around in some 6 litre behemoth.
What a ridiculous assertion. You just don't stop, do you? Why is petrol so expensive in Europe, Cammie? Taxes! Not us driving our SUV's.

CSM wrote:

In Britain, the government takes 75 percent, and raises taxes by 5 percent above inflation every year (though it has forgone this year's rise in view of rocketing oil prices, and the French government has promised tax rebates this year to taxi drivers, truckers, fishermen, and others who depend heavily on gasoline.) On August 8, for example, the price of gas in the US, without taxes, would be $2.17, instead of $2.56; in Britain, it would be $1.97, instead of $6.06.
Just because you people let yourselves to taxed into oblivion is no reason to lash out at us.

CameronPoe wrote:

And at least China appear to be relatively isolationist.
They also don't have a history of being staunch allies of the U.K.

CameronPoe wrote:

We'll obviously have to agree to disagree on this one. If you believe those countries are co-operating wholeheartedly in their reconstruction then that's a difference we just will not be able to bridge.
NATO are coming - my GOD!! Hallelujiah. Our problems are over! Are NATO coming to Iraq too? I can't wait.
In this I think there was a disconnect in what you think I was replying to. 'You wish' was directed at the "US will leave with it's tail like the Russkies" comment. Which I would like to point out again, does the NATO takeover constitute the "US running with their tails between their legs"?

You are prone to making prognostications that turn out to false. You might try being right for a change.

As for not seeming to have much conservative support, with nearly 1500 views I am sure that more than a few have looked in and seen that I have situation more than well in hand.

+1 to you Cameron for proper use of the Karma system. Far too often to I see people who want to neg for having a difference of opinion or a desire to argue with anonymity. You are one of the few who I have argued with that has given me a +1 during the debate.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6758

Darth_Fleder wrote:

The intent of such an argument is still to leave an impression in a readers mind that there is a greater connection or similarity. Otherwise, what relevance does it have to conversation?
The intent of what I stated was to show that there are similarities, pure and simple. If that leaves a particular impression in a readers mind then that's their problem. The 'fall-back' position as you put it is my view and still holds as do my subsequent related comments. To hold both sets of viewpoints is fine as they are not mutually exclusive.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

By trying to find similarities between G.W. Bush and Hitler, you are trying to demonize, not simply criticizing. Bush's rhetoric does pass the test on this issue, I see no evidence to point to the contrary. I have many Muslim friends here in this country who could attest to the same.

Bush a zealot...not hardly. It's funny how anyone just professing the Christian faith anymore automatically makes them a zealot. You don't drink, Cameron from bonny Eire? As to your 'peace and love' comments, he is damned if he doesn't or damned if he does in your book. Just who is the zealot here, Cameron? You really need to examine yourself for you show all the traits of being one. Unwilling to listen to reason, distorting the truth for your cause...etc. I have poked so many holes in your arguments and yet still you rail and refuse to give ground. And before you try spinning that back onto me (which I know is twirling in that little head of yours), I have issues with Bush as well, but they are not based upon emotion or on the distortions from which your hatred comes.

cru·sade (kru-sad)  A vigorous concerted movement for a cause or against an abuse.
Now admittedly, not the best choice of words, given the circumstances, but given the fact that it was a one time incident and there is no rhetoric constantly alluding to a "Holy War" against all Islam, not worthy of too much attention.
Zealous? You are equally as zealous in defending a needless war in Iraq initiated in an unjust manner, without the backing of the international community. If you present an argument that is rational on a particular matter I will have no problem conceding the fact. However, you haven't yet said anything to convince me of how your viewpoint is as valid or more valid than mine.

The demonisation of muslims is more the fault of western media rather than the government. I will concede that my original point about the adminstration demonising them was incorrect. The media is at fault for creating an atmosphere of fear and suspicion of anyone wearing a burqa or sporting islamic garb. Depictions of muslims as 'the bad guys' in movies have become prevalent and outrageous misinterpretaions of the preachings of Islam seem to now be regarded as fact by the proles of the west. The only thing that could be responsible for such widely held misconceptions is the media.

I hold to my view that Bush is a religious zealot. He never misses an opportunity to mention 'God', despite being the head of a secular nation. His support base is the bible belt and for good reason. Personally I don't think religion should play any part whatsoever in politics.

I have no hatred, Darth. You mistake me for some kind of an extremist. Just because I hold views that are at odds with yours don't try and 'demonise' me!

Darth_Fleder wrote:

It's sophistry Cameron, the only similarities that they share is that they are places where people are detained.
If you want to make light of the fact that people are being tortured then that's your prerogative.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

What a ridiculous assertion. You just don't stop, do you? Why is petrol so expensive in Europe, Cammie? Taxes! Not us driving our SUV's.
I don't quite get what you're driving at here (pardon the pun). Your comment doesn't seem to have any connection to the comment I made. I know exactly why petrol is so expensive here. Mainly taxes. What's your point? The comment I made pertained to the American pursuit of oil resources and the wealth and influence they generate and how it is sad that US citizens needlessly die in the pursuit of said resources. This viewpoint stems from my belief that the US did not go to war in Iraq for altruistic reasons or reason of self-defence but in the interests of oil and Israeli security.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

In this I think there was a disconnect in what you think I was replying to. 'You wish' was directed at the "US will leave with it's tail like the Russkies" comment. Which I would like to point out again, does the NATO takeover constitute the "US running with their tails between their legs"?
What difference will NATO make? The US haven't made much progress with much of Afghanistan still under the control of roaming warlords. What can NATO do that the US hasn't bneen able to already? The conflict/'reconstruction' project is ongoing - we won't be seeing any 'tails between legs' for a good while yet. By 'tails between legs' I mean that there will be a withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan without any tangible and considerable improvements having been achieved with respect to the situation there. The Taliban have just been replaced with a band of warlords and a powerless central government.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

As for not seeming to have much conservative support, with nearly 1500 views I am sure that more than a few have looked in and seen that I have situation more than well in hand.
I could use the same exact argument to say that many people who hold my point of view have looked in and seen that I have the situation more than well in hand.

Darth_Fleder wrote:

+1 to you Cameron for proper use of the Karma system. Far too often to I see people who want to neg for having a difference of opinion or a desire to argue with anonymity. You are one of the few who I have argued with that has given me a +1 during the debate.
Cheers. I give credit where credit is due. To do otherwise would just be childish.
Jeopardia_Ferdy
Member
+5|6741

herrr_smity wrote:

Major_Spittle wrote:

The only good commie is a dead commie.
the only good capitalist is a dead capitalist
and the only thing better than a dead capitalist,
is a dying capitalist who tells u where to find his money

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard