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

Lone Haranguer wrote:
Robert Allison wrote:

Then Bush is a big improvement over the Clinton years. They lied about everything from day one so I never believed a word they said. Their lies about Waco alone totaled up to more lies than we have heard since Nixon left office.

Differing opinions, differing conclusions.

They share the same religion, customs for the most part. They are a fairly stable country in the middle east that shares a border with them and should have an interest in stabilizing or at least helping to stabilize their neighbor.




You've got to be kidding. The Iranians trying to de-stabilize Iraq is one of the prime reasons Hussein attacked Iran.



But Saddam is gone. And now the americans are there.



Doesn't change the fact that Iran prefers an unstable and weak Iraq.


I don't think that is a fact. I think that Iran prefers an Iraq that is not controlled by people they don't like.


Which is anyone except an Iranian Ayatollah.

Or any Shia leader.

They still have

issues with the west, but not with the people of Iraq.



Rxcept the Sunnis and Kurds.


Not so much the Kurds, but they have issues with the Sunnis as all Shia do, especially the ones in Iraq.


The Iranians are having problems with their own Kurdish minority.

There is always problems between religions when religion is incorporated into the legal system.

They probably don't want a bunch more

refugees streaming into their country with no place to live and no way to make a living. Plus they understand them alot better than we do and speak the same language.




Some Shiia may. The primary language of Iran is Farsi (Persian) while the primary language in Iraq is Arabic.



But the only language that is authorized to be used by Imams to study the Quran is Arabic. Most muslims learn arabic to some degree in order to study their religion. All advanced studies are in arabic. It is the only accepted language for Islam. So even though the primary language may be different, they share the same religious language. And the two languages aren't that different to begin with.



So all Muslims in Indonesia, Pakistan and the Philippines learn Arabic?
I don't buy it.


Not necessarily. If they want to study the Quran, and enter a Madrassa school, then they must learn arabic. If they are devout muslims, they are supposed to, but not all do. It is kind of like priests had to learn Latin if they wanted to be priests. In Islam, legal experts are experts in Sharia and the interpretation of the Quran and the stories about Mohammed. This is ONLY taught in arabic. So, to just be a muslim, it is not really necessary but it is encouraged.


So your statement that Iranians and Iraqis speak the same language was just hogwash. If it's just the Imams, you should stick to just Imams.

Sorry for confusing you. No it is not just the Imams. There are 74 different languages spoken in Iran. Farsi is one of them and is the official language. Arabic is the official language of Islam. Most of the Iranians can speak at least a passable arabic because that is what is spoken at the Mosques.

Arabic, Gulf Spoken
A language of Iraq

ISO 639-3: afb
Population 40,000 in Iraq. Population total all countries: 2,338,600.
Region In and around Zubair and on the Fau Peninsula. Also spoken in Bahrain, Iran, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Yemen.

From this site:

http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=afb

In other parts of the world such as indonesia, fewer people learn arabic, but in the middle east, it is very common.

You and they may think tribalism hasn't hurt them or their prospects but that would be true only if they plan on never leaving their tribal surroundings.

They will be increasingly isolated from their more advanced brothers.



Which is exactly what they want to do. Isolation is another trait of the Islamic people. The Burkha is an example of one of the ways that they try to isolate themselves even when out in public. They do not believe that adventurism is appropriate according to the Quran. Living simply, without outside influences and living a righteous life is the goal. They do not seek to be modern.



You haven't met the Turks living in Germany or the Chechens in Russia.
Even the Albanians and Kosovars prefer driving Mercedes cars, not a horse and buggy.


Mercedes are a common car in Europe and the middle east, even in eastern asia. Plus, Turkey is a secular country and the citizens do not live under Islamic law by the government. The people of Iraq do not necessarily drive buggies either, but they don't want western ways to permeate their culture. It is sinful to them.


Mercedes are a modern and luxurious form of transportation. You said above that Muslims do not want to be modern. You're spinning top has gotten away again.

Modern in the sense of capitalist or permissive as in democratic. They do not want to allow choice to become pervasive. It is against their religion. They do want electricity, cars, trains. These things are not what I call modern. They have been around for a hundred years. They aren't Amish, they are Muslims.

Once again, sorry for confusing you.

On the contrary, they seek to

remain simple. This is the basis for the animosity that the terrorists have for the west. The west wants everyone to be like the west, and the muslims want nothing at all to be like the west. This is the basis for this entire conflict.



I disagree. A cornerstone of the Muslim religion is the subservience of women. Democracy would give too many rights to women and would also cause the Imams to lose too much power. It's the Imams who are driving this fight and always has been.


Well of course it is the Imams. They lead the people in everything. And the people follow. Their allegiance is first to the religion, then to the country. If there is a conflict, they go to the Imams to reconcile it, not the gov't.


So an honest statement would have been that the Imams don't want Western influences, because we KNOW that the PEOPLE of Iran and Pakistan have adopted many Western ways.

No, an honest statement would be that devout muslims don't want western influences. The youth of Iran and Pakistan are breaking with tradition and desire SOME western THINGS.

So, nothing. I have many things that I like about republicans.




Of course. They make more sense than Democrats.



On some things, yes.

I share

more of a link with the Presidents plan for immigration than most republicans do. I believe in smaller government. I believe in the right to own weapons. I think that true conservatism like Barry Goldwater preached would be good for this country.

I part with them in the overall tone that modern day conservatives have and with preaching one thing while doing another. I believe in choice for women. I believe that government has a role in doing some things for society.

I don't hate them at all. I have a lot in common with many republican ideas. That is why I have to be an independant. I probably share more with the democratic ideals than republican, but there is no candidate so far that I can support on every issue. There never has been.

Splitting your ideals between two parties doesn't make one an Independent. It makes you
a part timer of both parties. An independent would have ideas of their own.



I do. Perhaps you would understand where I am coming from if I state it differently. I have ideas that I have developed over the years. Democrats agree with some of my ideas and republicans agree with some of my ideas. Neither party would be MY choice, but they are all we have. I have to choose which candidate most closely supports what I believe in and vote accordingly.



Join the club. After Clinton, I could never support another Democrat. They proved to be a party that supports their criminals whereas the Republicans ask their criminals to leave town.


Every party has criminals.


See above.

And I never have seen what was so wrong with

Clinton. He made some pretty stupid mistakes, but nothing that affected my life in any bad way.


Then you don't give a *** for this country.

Incorrect assumption. Or a lie.

That would explain all the phony IDs and SS numbers, right?




Make a hoop and they will jump through it.




So they can avoid answering the question.



What question? About the IDs and SS #s? That is an answer. If you put obstacles in front of them, they will go over, under, around or through them.



You said you only had to ask them if they are illegals or not. We know that's a lie or they wouldn't be carrying false IDs.


I have never asked any of them if they are illegal aliens. That would be a bit vulgar,


The law requires it. You don't seem to be anyone troubled by scruples about the law. Which is probably why you are a Clinton fan.

You are saying that the law requires me to walk up to mexicans and ask them if they are US citizens?

I usually ask them where they live and they are glad to

tell me. I have visited several of them down in Mexico. Who doesn't like to talk about where they are from? They carry fake IDs and SS#s to give to employers that ask for them. If we get a national ID card, they will probably carry fake national ID cards.


We have the technology to make them tamper proof. All it needs is a chip that has to be verified at a national database.

I would rather see a guest worker program that removes the need for a new beaurocracy in government. Make them legal and solve all the problems that results from them being illegal.

When I am working around mexicans, I always ask where they are from. It is interesting and I like to find places in Mexico to visit that are not tourist traps, or are relatively unknown. And after talking to them, I will know someone from there to boot.

I have been on many, many jobs where immigration agents raided the place and carried off whoever they could catch. The mexicans that were caught, never lied about being illegal. They never offered documents to agents unless they were legal. They just use those fake documents because employers have to check to cover their asses. If they don't have them, they can't work at some places, any more.


It's the law and has been for 20 years.

And it is about time we do something about it. What we have now is ridiculous and meaningless.

There was no law against hiring

illegal aliens until 1986.





A lot have crossed the border since then.




How would one know that for sure. Is it that some go back and others come in? Are all the ones that are here, staying and new ones are adding to their numbers? I don't see that because they come and go almost like geese.




Maybe in your area. Further north they don't bother returning to Mexico. Too risky. They might lose their jobs.


That isn't the case down here. They can always find jobs, we have a worker shortage.


I'm talking permanent type jobs that even furnish medical coverage, not hiring off street corners.

So am I.

Down here, it is pretty much an accepted fact that the work force is going to diminish during the winter months.



Over Christmas maybe.


Almost universally over christmas. In the past few years, the increased attention to the border security has started to cause some of them to stay here because they are worried about getting back and the coyotes are charging more and more money to bring people across. So more are staying.


That's what I said.

Ok, then we agree.

I still know migrant workers here, but most of them are legals.



Legals don't run for the bushes when ICE shows up.


I haven't seen ICE anywhere except in the news for maybe 15 years or so. At least not on jobsites. I have some friends in ICE, but most of them live in Brownsville, TX. There are not many agents up here. No terrorists entering the country around here, so no need.


Terrorists usually check in with you, huh? What a dork...

One of my old friends is now Agent in Charge of ICE at Brownsville. His name is Mike Hinojosa. Talking to him, we discussed his work and he said that since 9/11, first INS, then under restructuring, ICE, the entire focus of work has changed. No more illegal aliens. It is terrorists that they are looking for now.

Based on that, if you are not at a major entry point for international travel such as a border, then you may not see many ICE agents. I haven't seen anyone at all come in through jobsites, so I assume that terrorists don't come in through jobsites. Therefore, no ICE.

Sorry to confuse you with that statement. I should have known that you did not have that information.

I have trouble with what is reported in the press. I see what they are saying, but I also see first hand what is going on in the real world on a daily basis. When I hear that there is a crisis, I look around and see that things are the same way they have been for my whole life. What crisis?




A crisis that we have 12 million people running loose in this country and we have no idea who they really are.


The crisis started here when they passed the law against hiring them.




The crisis started when we allowed them to enter our country without a harsh punishment similar to what Mexico does to illegal entry by Americans. We should enforce reciprocity in treatment of illegal aliens. Mexico screams about mistreatment of their citizens; have you ever spoken to an American's experience if caught in Mexico illegally?



How do you get into Mexico illegally? It is so easy to enter Mexico that I can't imagine anyone trying to be there any other way. If we are going to enforce reciprocity, then we have to make it just as easy to get into the US.



It's easy to enter but don't get caught. Compare getting caught in Mexico without auto insurance when you are involved in an accident compared to what happens in the U.S. to a Mexican who doesn't have ANY insurance, is here illegally and has no driver's license. He can opt to return to Mexico, not so with a Gringo in Mexico. He's going to pay fines or bribes to return to the U.S.

I think your dishonest streak is showing.


Isn't that the normal procedure in Mexico? It has been my whole life. Since I grew up in Brownsville, everyone went to Mexico to party because you did not have to be 18 to drink. I had a tab at 3 different bars in Matamoros when I was 15. Plus there were other benefits. I had confrontations with the law numerous times in the late 60s early 70s. When you had an accident, you asked if the officer could deliver your "fine" to the officials for you. Give them your "fine" and you were on your way. I liked it alot better than all the court appearances, insurance costs going up, paperwork. Much simpler. Always carry some money for fines when in Mexico.


Since you started bribing people at age 15, I can see where you make a good Democrat.

Yeah, I guess I should have just said no and gone to jail. That would have made me a good republican.

I got thrown in jail in Matamoros once. Spent three days in jail for having my shirt unbuttoned too far down (remember the disco dress code?). I think that the only reason that I went to jail then was because it happened right across the street from the international bridge and the mexican customs officers were watching. If it had been anywhere else, I would have just had to pay the "fine". Cost me $80.00 to get out.

The situation has deteriorated to the point where noone feels safe anymore.




Yet the Iraqis have not shown the courage to clean up their own neighborhoods.



They are supposed to wait for Halliburton to do it.



More DNC bull***. Halliburton made their greatest profits when they got no-bid contracts in Bosnia and Kosovo during the Clinton years.


I guess there are no native workers there either.


None that have the skills needed. It's no accident that Halliburton is called on when expertise is needed in a hurry. Weren't they called on to put out the fires in the Kuwaiti oil fields? They'd still be burning if we had waited for the locals to take care of them.

How did the refineries and bridges, roads, pipelines, etc. get there in the first place, then?

Have you seen how the troops dress when they go out? Most

Iraqis don't have that kind of protection. It ain't safe out there.




It's the Iraqi's fault that they have let things reach that stage.



That is true. Yet it is exactly what those of us that studied the situation before the invasion, knew would be the case. I didn't want our country to be involved in such a mess. This is not something that we can do anything about.



Clinton was warned about aiding the Kosovars too and declared that we had no intention of allowing Kosovo to become independent. Of course it was just another Clinton lie. Independence was the goal all along.


I did not know that Kosovo is now an independent state. That had to have happened in the last few hours, because I have not heard of it. I will have to look it up.


I said it was always the goal, which is a fact. In today's news:

"The European Union and the United States are sympathetic to a UN plan calling for ""supervised independence"" that would formalize Kosovo's breakaway status, but Belgrade -- backed by historic ally Russia -- is staunchly opposing that."

IOW, independence is only a formality; it's been a breakaway province since we helped kick out the Serbs.

The bombing of Serbia alienated the Russians and that stupid move by Clinton will cost us dearly in the long term.

How is an independent Kosovo a threat to us? Why do you see threats everywhere?

You don't win wars if everyone just wants to be safe. Who would ever go out into harm's way if just biding one's time brought the same result?




Well, eventually someone will win, either the Shias (and my money is on them) or the Sunnis. Since violence is being suppressed by the american presence, it is just going to take longer for it all to shake out. Either that or there will be a national reconciliation and I am not looking for that to happen real soon. I hope for it, but it isn't looking very good.




So the Iraqis are getting exactly what they deserve. They can make their country safe any time they want, just by foregoing their revenge.



Just like you could probably do more good if you would give up your hatred of Clinton.



In that case I won't be trying to do any good until Clinton departs this planet.


Neither will the Iraqis. They have more of a reason to hang onto their hatred than you do. Blood is thicker than politics.


They're all the same blood, except for the Kurds, who are pretty much minding their own business although they have more reason to hate the Sunnis than anyone.

And if left alone, an equilibrium will eventually emerge.

I was reading about a Shia representative in the parliament. She was talking about how she wanted reconciliation, but didn't believe that it could be achieved unless the Sunnis came and admitted that they were wrong and apologized to the Shias. To paraphrase her statement; They have killed our people,...how can we ever get past that?




There are still white people living in South Africa. This would not be true if the blacks were still trying to get even for past injustices.

Northern Ireland is going through a reconciliation process also.



The blacks in SA made it a point to reconcile with the whites and chose to forgive them for what they did. It was a plan set in place by the president and a way to move forward. They are not Iraqis and neither are the Irish. Different cultures. And most definitively different religions.



"They have killed our people,....how can we ever get past that?"

Same thing applies.


According to Iraqi tribal justice, if a person kills a member of your tribe, you must kill a member of his, if not him. It is part of their religion.


If it was part of their religion then the same applies to Muslims here in the U.S. We better get rid of them. Unless you meant primitive beliefs in getting revenge. You could find the same in Sicily and Rwanda.

Primitive is a good word. It has been in effect for about 1400 years. So, primitive to modern.

I have tried to interpret the news reports and reconcile what they are saying with what I know about Arabs in general and Iraqis in particular. From what I can gather, what they are calling thugs are simply tribal leaders. They don't have a grasp on the tribal nature of the country.

Why do you think they are thugs?




Tribal leaders can also be thugs. If they act like thugs, that's what they are.



Yes, they can be, but usually they are community leaders. They just lead differently than what you are used to seeing. That may lead to the mistaken conclusion that they are thugs.



If it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.


Well then, they are tribal leaders, because that is what they sound like to me.


Tribal leaders who happen to be thugs or thugs who also happen to be tribal leaders?


Tribal leaders that happen to be tribal leaders. To anyone who doesn't understand the dynamics in Iraq they may appear to be thugs, but that is a misunderstanding of the situation.

That is what I meant by MOST westerers

don't see the corollation between tribal rule and democratic politicians. They both understand the situation on a local level and therefore have more insight into how things should be done, and what is customary. Isn't that what you mean?





It boils down to what the law allows them to get away with.




From the reports that I have seen, they are the law.




Exactly. When Democratic mayors run a major city, you can usually count on a higher crime rate. They go easy on their constituents which include the criminal elements.



Well, if muslims shouldn't run the cities, who should?



So their particular clan gets the plum jobs and the power. Exactly what Saddam did and look how much hatred it built up. You want the same thing to continue?

Sounds like you would prefer Saddam back in power. I imagine most Democrats would. They are more comfortable with evil as long as it doesn't threaten their political power.


The south is almost entirely Shia. Each village or each neighborhood has a mosque and the leaders of the village or neighborhood look to the religious leaders for guidance. It is not the leaders that seize power, they already have it. It is just the way it is over there.


Japan and Germany were a certain way too but we didn't accept that way.

Well, if the Iraqis sign a surrender agreement, we could probably force them to change, too.

Not necessarily. Things would be alot better if there were another like Saddam that could get things under control. If there were such a person that could be a "benevolent dictator", then things could come together pretty quickly. I don't see any of those that have enough trust from enough of the Iraqis to be able to ascend to power. Plus the US is there and would not allow it. Sadr is the most logical successor, but he tried and decided it would be better to wait until we leave. He is the most respected leader in Iraq right now.


Had they taken my advice we would have bumped him off anonymously while things were still in an uproar and blamed it on Al Qaeda.


We are going to have to wait until the civil war plays itself out or until something else occurs which settles things down. So, no...Saddam had to go. I wish it could have been a revolt from within and we didn't have anything to do with it. That would have been much better.


We wished that ever since the Gulf War but wishing doesn't accomplish much.

Neither did the Iraq war.

Other than that one distinction, I don't see much else that the two have in common.





The dictatorship of power.




That is true. And they do NOT want to give it up. Their entire history shows that they would rather die first.




Sounds like the Daley family in Chicago.



I doubt that even the Daley family would be willing to REALLY die rather than stay in power.



Power is their reason for living.


Do you know them well?


Just their reputation.


I used to live out that way and we have a Swedish and German community just a few miles from where I live now. Often eat at the Walburg Restaurant and Biergarten

http://www.walburgrestaurant.com/

I just haven't picked up any yet. I am really more interested in learning Mandarin if I can find a teacher. Arabic would be good, too.




The AF wanted to send me to language school at Syracuse University to learn Russian and Chinese but I declined. I was stubborn and they finally gave up.



I love different languages. I wish I could speak several. It is one of my goals to learn at least six languages.

They could easily pass laws preventing that. When we lived in Spain, foreigners could not own property. I think now that they've joined the EU, foreigners are buying land like crazy and driven prices out of sight.




I got the impression that they were happy (at first) to have someone with some money come in and get some commerce started, but bad management has led to the entire country being owned by foreign business. That seems to be happening right here in our country, too. Something I have thought about a lot. Our Tollways here in central TX are owned by a Spanish company and our commuter rail will be operated by a Swiss company.




Americans must consider them more risky or less profitable than other investments.



I have not been able to find out, yet, why the contracts did not go to americans.



Offering bribes could get them into trouble.


Offering who bribes?


The Albanians who make business ventures possible.

Why would they need to offer bribes, and to who?

So have I and so do I. Maybe we are more alike than I thought. I don't want to believe that.

We are all the result of our life experiences. My 21 years in the AF, travel and living in a variety of places have all contributed to the opinions I've formed. Since the winter of '87-'88 I've spent half the year somewhere between Texas to California so I've got a pretty good idea of what goes on in border communities. I've attended AF schools with foreign students from Germany, France and Iran and taught Spanish airmen how to run a rawinsonde unit.. Almost got a similar job in Brazil based on that experience.
LZ



I did quite a bit of traveling when I was younger. Mostly in the US, but I did live for a short while in Mexico. I have lived from Alaska to Florida and in most of the states south and west of the line between those two states. Haven't spent much time in the north east at all. I have lived in the fifth ward in Houston (a black ghetto), in a $1,000,000 home in Alaska, on the beach in south Texas. I have lived with illegal aliens in a garage apartment. I lived on the streets during the early 70s and moved from crash pad to crash pad. Worked on shrimp boats, as a lumberjack, took flying lessons, smuggled pot across the Rio Grande. I have lived a varied life. I read at least one book every week, sometimes more. And I am only 53.

I retired from the AF at 38 and completely retired at 55. Joined the AF in 1951 and have been traveling ever since. Always was a heavy reader and still average 2 books a week and spend a lot of time at the keyboard doing research.
LZ


What are you reading now?


A murder mystery. My lightweight reading since we turned in all our library books in preparation for leaving Monday.
LZ

Read anything interesting lately? I would recommend: A Man in Full and A History of the Arab Peoples. Yellow Dog is not very good and I haven't gotten very far in the other one.

I would also recommend:

The Occupation of Iraq: Winning the War, Losing the Peace
Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq
The Iraq Study Group Report
The Imperial Life in the Emerald City
Iraq in Fragments
Modern Iran: Roots and Results of Revolution
Iran: A People Interrupted

And for fun:
Sometimes a Great Notion
Mother Night
Seven Pillars of Wisdom

Me: 1)Yellow Dog, 2)A history of the Arab Peoples, 3)A man in Full, and finally 4) A history of Texas and Texans.



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

Loading