Re: OT - Recent War Ads tie Iraq to 9/11

Lone Haranguer wrote:

Robert Allison wrote:

Lone Haranguer wrote:

Robert Allison wrote:



You're position is that democrats would support the war if a dem were the Prez. Your "proof" is that past dem administrations that were involved in wars were supported by dems. Ergo, if I can find one democrat that did not support a dem POTUS war, then you would be wrong. OK.

By 1967,



Bzzzzt! By that time we had been in Vietnam a long time; we now have Republicans speaking out against the war in Iraq so your claim that Republicans are in lock step is obviously false.

In order to prove your point you'd have to find Democrats who wouldn't support JFK or LBJ when we first sent troops to Vietnam.


Mike McMillan, David Schuster, Stuart Owens, and Kyle Tripp. All democrats that were against the deployment of troops to Viet Nam. All Quakers by the way.

Quakers don't count since they oppose ALL military actions.

Quakers don't count, democrats don't count, lets see,...whats left? Republicans? What does count? Since this point is on your terms, tell me what the answer is so I can answer like you want me to.


Anyone who acted in any way to end the Viet Nam war was a hero.



So you're a Jane Fonda fan... This explains a lot.


She is well preserved for her age and she has made some good movies. I really liked On Golden Pond, but she just had a small part in that. Now, Barbarella! That was a movie. Actually, it was horrible, but she was hot in it. Monster in law had some good moments, but my wife liked it better than I did. I liked Klute and the China Syndrome. I don't know if you could say that I am a fan, but she has some talent.


Which she used to further propaganda of our enemies.

The enemies being Bill Clinton.

That includes antiwar demonstrators such as John Kerry,

who, BTW, was a democrat that opposed the democratic president LBJs war in VN.



Kerry only jumped on board when he thought it would put him in public office.


It may have seemed that way, but his heart was really in it. For some odd reason, almost all republicans just hate him.


A total phony. Volunteered for a year in Vietnam and bugged out on phony Purple Hearts that he hand carried through.


So you bought into the Swift boat stuff, huh? What am I saying, of course you would. That is the kind of evidence that you like. (Evidence that makes good ol' Bill look bad, or any democrat for that matter.)

Have you seen the Moveon.org ad? That would be right up your alley, except it is by democrats. Same reasoning though.


I did the same.

No surprise there. As a proud employer of illegal aliens, we didn't expect you to have any behavioral standards.


Behavioral standards. That is one of those terms like; family values. Charles Manson had family values, they just weren't the same as mine.


How about his behavioral standards? They the same as yours? You both condone breaking the law; we know that.

Lets see, eat, breathe, work, sleep. Same as most humans.

DOJ reports are not hypothetical situations.


They can be. I was involved in a discussion where we were talking about some possible reports that could come from the justice department. They were hypothetical DOJ reports.


The one we were discussing was department investigators condemning the head of their own department. A pretty risky endeavor in government service. We know Reno indicted and prosecuted a federal DA who blew the whistle on her lies to Congress.

I don't remember discussing any DoJ reports.


Do you know how many different tribes there are in Anbar province?


No, but I do know something that is more relevant to what is happening there.

http://www.smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2007/08/anatomy-of-a-tribal-revolt/

That is exactly what I was talking about. The various tribes will band together and form temporary alliances that serve to resist a common enemy such as Al Qaeda and probably the US troops after Al Q is dealt with. Fascinating to watch history repeat itself.

So if Warner is against our involvement in Iraq, that disproves your rubber stamp claim?


Since you bring up Iraq, what percentage of the population are Shia? Isn't it about 65%? That would leave about 30% as Sunni, with the rest being Kurds and a few other peoples. Do you think that Iraq could be partitioned and would that calm down the sectarian violence?


Only if oil and other resources are evenly divided. However Iran would easily take over such a divided country, giving them even more control of the world's oil supply.

Why would Iran want to take over Iraq?

Nonsense is what it is.



Translation: You won't debate any points that prove you are wrong. Got it.


What if we brought in the UN and could convince the neighbors of Iraq to help out with training and policing so that the Iraqis could feel more comfortable with people of their own faith helping them. I admit that with Bush in office, it would probably not be achievable because no one trusts him or wants to help him in any way, but what about after he leaves? That time isn't too far away.


Did you see the welcome he got in Albania by Muslims?

He might be able to get Albania to attack them.

Translation: I can't refute the claims so bring in the money ploy.


I see what you mean. But the Iranians have already offered to help train Iraqi forces and they have a good relationship with the Shia, so if the sectarian distrust could assuaged on the part of the Sunnis, they could at least be helpful.


Would you let a coyote guard your chickens?

Do they have coyotes in Iraq?

Translation: Can't debate so have to change the subject.


Well, the Iranians are kind of devoted to their religion, but there are many secular aspects to their country and their people are secular in many ways, although that has been declining in recent years. They are in some ways trying to appear more secular, but in reality it is still an Islamic state. The president, who in reality has very little power, says some outlandish things, but he also says some things that make a lot of sense. Did you read his letter to Bush?


Many Iranians gladly adopted Western ways when the Shah was in power. They had to give them up when the Ayatollah's took power but many would like to return to that society.

Yes, the people of Iran are more western than the administration would have you believe. They got that taste and they don't want to go back. The Ayatollahs don't like it and do what they can to quash the western trends, but once you have tasted something you like it is hard to forget. That is why I think the youth of Iran would be somewhat of a help with Iraq. And vice versa. They could help to introduce western influence to the Iraqis and have it come from a similar culture, rather than from the enemy.


Gee! No refutation and no request for cash.... Are you going to look it up?


What I mean about the tribal nature and their lack of a history of centralized gov't. is that they are very difficult to unite except in small groups. Very clannish in that aspect. When the British were helping them to put together an uprising against the Turks, it is well documented about the extreme lack of desire to band together even for a cause that would make their lives better.

Translation: Speechless.


The history of Iraq shows how tribal alot of their people are. This is less true in the cities, but in the countryside it still holds true to this day. Anbar province is a prime example of the tribal nature. They resist centralized rule and instead, prefer to have local control over small, or in some cases large, areas of land. Regional feuds often last for centuries and stealing from neighboring tribes is considered to be normal activity.


All societies were once tribal or clannish in nature. They moved on.

Not in Iraq and not in many of the Bedouins of other Islamic cultures. Their remoteness and migratory nature make them hard to rule. The Ottoman empire was able to retain rule over them for so long because they basically just let them be. The tribes really don't care who or what is in power over the nation as long as they are left alone to self rule as they have for centuries. They are even willing to pay tribute to the national gov't if it doesn't become too greedy.

OK, you have won me over. She WAS responsible for the justice department.



And the debacle at Waco. Just admit it; it won't kill you.


How hard do you think it is going to be to get all of those tribal leaders to cede their control to a centralized government? No matter how benevolent it may be (and I don't see much benevolence happening in Bagdad) they aren't going to want to give up control and their followers won't want to have a leader far away in a big city.


All in good time. Korea was extremely primitive in 1950 and look how far they've come.

Iraq and much of the arabian peninsula is not that primitive. They have a pretty modern society, it is just extremely different from what westerners are used to. Remember, Allah is in everything, and a Muslims primary purpose is to serve Allah in everything that he does. It is not like Christianity where it is pretty much a sunday thing. To us it may appear primitive, but it is very sophisticated and complex.

Of running the most corrupt justice department in history.


The justice department! That is another thing. Sunnis don't want to be held to Shia justice and vice versa. How is that going to work out? I still think that partition may be a solution, but I am still not sure.


Ethnic cleansing would be the rule, like in Kosovo.

It already is. There are very few unsegregated neigborhoods in any of the cities in Iraq. The ones that weren't killed, left to keep from being killed. The roadblocks are there to keep Shias out of Sunni neighborhoods and vice versa.

Still trying to divert? It's not working.


Diversion of funds, corruption, all normal operating procedure to them right now. It going to be hard to develope any trust from the citizens while that is going on. The people just want to be able to have water and electricity.


Saddam had deliberately let the infrastructure run down so he could make a good case against UN sanctions. Did you ever note what happened to many of the former colonies in Africa when the natives took over?

The Baathists ran most things in Iraq and when they fled because they feared revenge, it left no one to manage the infrastructure.

Patton had to hire Nazis to keep his part of Germany functioning and got in trouble with Ike over it.

Most of the Baathists are still there, just unable to function in a helpful manner due to de Baathification. The people knew that to find work, they had to be Baathists, so they became Baathists, it is the Iraqi way. The ones that ran away were not the common workers or the professionals, it was the true Baathists, the minions of Saddam. They did fear for their safety and with good reason. The teachers and engineers are there unless they left for reasons of security from the chaos. However, due to the policies of the Provisional Authority, they were not allowed to work. Smart huh? Shows how a true understanding of the situation could have helped to keep Iraq from being where it is now. They are still not allowed to work, although even the Bush administration has finally figured this out and may be about to reinstate their ability to work.


Can't compete without hiring illegals? Maybe you should find an honest job?


You know you are right! The borders are so porous now and records are either nonexistant, spotty, or lost that knowing who belongs where is going to be a nightmare. Migration of the citizens has further complicated this, because so many people have relocated that no one knows who belongs and who doesn't.


A national ID card based on a certified birth certificate, corroborated by county clerks would be a good start.

First you have to have county clerks and then you have to have records and then you have to be able to retrieve records. They don't even have electricity much of the time.

Rent out your wife and daughters if you need money.


Jobs are a big issue. I am going to look into how many locals are being used for the reconstruction of the country. How much good will would come from letting Iraqis rebuild their own country? How much would it mean to the self esteem of the unemployed. Instead of bringing in these big american companies to reap obscene profits, let the Iraqis get paid. It is their country after all.


I'm sure the American companies would hire anyone they could rely on and not have to pay those big salaries.

How many Iraqi companies are making billions of dollars and paying big money to Iraqi workers? That would be the way to rebuild the country, employ the millions of unemployed, AND introduce profitable capitalism to the people of Iraq. That works better than just telling them how good it is. The last numbers that I saw was that fewer than 30,000 Iraqis were employed in the reconstruction efforts.

And Waco.


It is pronounced Basra. The south is reported to be in the control of mafia types, but I think that that may be the western interpretation of simple tribal control. It is not what we in the west are used to seeing as examples of community leaders, but it is normal in Iraq.


Also Chicago and many other large cities.

Chicago has Islamic tribal chiefs authorized by local Imams controlling large swaths of both cities and the countryside?


I haven't worked since 1989 but I could manage to find a few bucks. Maybe you would travel to Arizona and put a new roof coating on?
The house is 4 years old now, maybe it needs it.


I already do charity work with Habitat for Humanity. I bet you could find some people to do it over there, though. You said you spoke spanish?


Enough to get my roof done. We once had Spanish friends spend a month with us in MN and they spoke zero English. Never had a communications problem.

Do you want to carry on the rest of this conversation in Spanish? Necesito practicar espanol todo el tiempo. Si, no use, no tiene.

I doubt the Iraqis would be interested in coming all that way for just one small job, no matter what the unemployment rate is over there.


If I could get them here, they'd do the job for nothing.

Although, Bush promised asylum to any Iraqis that were in danger due to their collaboration with US forces, fewer than 1,000 have been allowed to come here. 30,000 have applied. May take awhile, but I will bet they will want something for it.

You can't seem to find anything that upholds your point of view. I find mountains of proof while you come empty-handed and keep asking for money to fund your research.

If you can't play the game, why even take a seat?


Facts you can't deal with.


It is hard to deal with at times, but I know that he is going to be gone in just a year and five months, so I think the country may survive. That is unless he decides to invade Canada or something.


Lots of oil. It would connect us to Alaska without passing through a foreign country. Pretty wimpy military establishment.

Tell Bush and he can get the Albanians to partner up and become the coaliton of the insane.

The problem is taking Canada and having to take Quebec as part of the deal. Not worth it.

Give it to the Albanians.


He is sure

starting to sound the war trumpets over Iran, but he has so little credibility now that that is not going to happen. Don't worry so much.


I worry very little. No point in it.

Totally agree.

Once you have refuted the historical record I furnished; you can talk about your need for money.
LZ


I told you I don't need any money, that was just a misunderstanding. As for the historical record, that is exactly what I intend to do some reading about. If the Kurds do decide to form a separate Kurdish state, I am interested in what regions could be encompassed by that. I know that Turkey is really worried about it and they have a lot of troops on the border right now. That is a little twist that I haven't been paying enough attention to. Thanks for bringing it up.

At one time we thought Turkey was a useful part of NATO because of their proximity to the USSR. They haven't paid their way though and caused more problems than they solved.
LZ

Kind of like Iraq.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: why USA is a regime
    ... It was the USA who consistently vetoed resolutions to ... The UN's mandate in Iraq prior to the USA invasion was not to teach Saddam's ... Hussein refused Oil-For-Food in 1991 and waited until the country was in ruins ... resistance in Iraq is not from local Iraqis, ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: computer simulation
    ... since he never ran the country. ... Bush has treated the Iraqis like children. ... you need to see the validity of the Iraq war. ... So it's okay for us to oppress the Iraqis, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: OT: Freedom of the Press
    ... Americans before we invaded Iraq. ... The Iraqis now recognize AQ ... AQ flooded into the country after the demise of Saddam, ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: OT - Recent War Ads tie Iraq to 9/11
    ... Ergo, if I can find one democrat that did not support a dem POTUS war, then you would be wrong. ... Since you bring up Iraq, what percentage of the population are Shia? ... Well, the Iranians are kind of devoted to their religion, but there are many secular aspects to their country and their people are secular in many ways, although that has been declining in recent years. ... They resist centralized rule and instead, prefer to have local control over small, or in some cases large, areas of land. ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: computer simulation
    ... since he never ran the country. ... Bush has treated the Iraqis like children. ... you need to see the validity of the Iraq war. ... No, there's only 20,000 subjugators. ...
    (talk.origins)