Last edited by ATG (2006-10-08 22:55:05)
lol, good stab at speculation at why we're there fellow Aussie .Cold Fussion wrote:
Yes 3 regions. Unleaded, premium and ultimate.
agreed, although, from my research I find that the original borders of iraq had less to do with european agenda and more to do with european ignorance of the regional cultures.CameronPoe wrote:
Exactly what was desired in the first place by the powers that be and, more importantly, by Israel. I agree that the original borders were arbitrary bullshit though.
yup. sad. the problems of the middle east are all due to the fact that the entire region lacks any serious roots of political culture embedded in its history. for the most part, it has been one tyrant after the other that rules and the amount of people who belong to the poorer groups of the population deeply outnumber any resemblance of a middle class. with out a strong vibrant middle class, a democracy will never succeed.PuckMercury wrote:
what borders aren't arbitrary bullshit when you think about it? I mean, other than those on rivers or mountain ranges, who's to say what is arbitrary and what is decisive? I imagine these 3 regions are eerily similar to the borders of the previous North/South no fly zones.
There lies an inherant problem in giving a total choice to people who have never known choice. There are a few problems actually. Namely - they may not want to choose. There comes a whole host of responsibilities and accountabilities you must assume when you choose. Secondly, they may not choose what the actuators of choice would have wanted ... which may include choosing to remove their choice ...
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2006-10-10 08:50:48)
This my friends is exactly why Iraq NEEDS to have a full-on civil war to sort out this mess once and for all. Few nations are born out of 'peaceful agitation'.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
yup. sad. the problems of the middle east are all due to the fact that the entire region lacks any serious roots of political culture embedded in its history. for the most part, it has been one tyrant after the other that rules and the amount of people who belong to the poorer groups of the population deeply outnumber any resemblance of a middle class. with out a strong vibrant middle class, a democracy will never succeed.PuckMercury wrote:
what borders aren't arbitrary bullshit when you think about it? I mean, other than those on rivers or mountain ranges, who's to say what is arbitrary and what is decisive? I imagine these 3 regions are eerily similar to the borders of the previous North/South no fly zones.
There lies an inherant problem in giving a total choice to people who have never known choice. There are a few problems actually. Namely - they may not want to choose. There comes a whole host of responsibilities and accountabilities you must assume when you choose. Secondly, they may not choose what the actuators of choice would have wanted ... which may include choosing to remove their choice ...
ive said this a few times before, a quote from some jordanian government intelligence official "Democracy in the middle east is like toilet paper, one time use then you throw it away."
Last edited by CameronPoe (2006-10-10 08:53:24)
Me think about the Berlin wall.ATG wrote:
It could be that its time to rethink the borders imposed by European interests after WW1.
i would agree but I just cant find myself to. I feel like I have a personal stake in the success of OIF and I really really really really really really really really dont wanna see Iraqi's dying and bleeding every day. I love iraqis and I want that place to succeed with as little amount of people suffering.PuckMercury wrote:
I agree with CamPoe, we need to pull out and let them beat the hell out of each other. We have no business there anymore. The arguement also rages over whether or not we ever did. But without decending in to THAT again, you can't force people to think like you or to think that the way you think is good. To each their own. There is nothing really wrong with a dictatorship given a benevolent dictator. Each system has its' benefits and drawbacks. To try and step in and say, "Alright, on the count of 3 - think for yourself and legeslate every aspect of your existence ... 1, 2, 3, GO!" is utter folley, and I think we're seeing that on a painfully explicit scale right now
Last edited by IRONCHEF (2006-10-10 10:06:06)
I agree that it'd be nice to not have the suffering and be able to bypass it, but I think there is a lot to be said for the "process".GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
i would agree but I just cant find myself to. I feel like I have a personal stake in the success of OIF and I really really really really really really really really dont wanna see Iraqi's dying and bleeding every day. I love iraqis and I want that place to succeed with as little amount of people suffering.
sadr wasnt in fallujah, he was in najaf.IRONCHEF wrote:
A 3-way division would be a good idea..if any of those in Iraq fighting actually gave a shit about settling for land. Since none of them are thinking rationally about dividing their land, this is an irrelevent idea. This provisional government (that incognito little group who think they're running the country) will not be able to talk turkey (no pun intended) until warfare has ceased.
Warfare will decide any division if necessary. And I doubt Moqtada al Sadr has sat down with any of the government leaders lately. Oh, by the way, get used to his name as he'll be the main terrorist we'll be warring with because BUSH, yes, BUSH and his suckass war secretary did NOT capture and kill him in Fallujah when they had the chance. Now he's probably the biggest shi'ite warlord in Iraq now..he has the biggest army too.
my friend. i was in iraq fighting sadr and his mahdi militia. the mahdi militia had NOTHING TO DO WITH FALLUJAH. the insurgents in fallujah were sunni's. cmon man, dont argue this fact with somebody whos been there done that and got the tshirt.IRONCHEF wrote:
Negative. Sadr and his mehdi army have fought us troops in many cities, chiefly in Fallujah where he gained alot of political clout having survived the first big US offensive in Fallujah.