Quote from Pabst:
The safety of the Iraqi people rests in their own hands. No one else.
Compare the attitude of Iraq's warring Muslims to that of Parisian's in WWll. Paris was divided between Nazi sympathizers (the Vichy government was pro-Hitler) and the resistance fighters who incidently were Communists. Was it a fatal gesture for one to sit in a cafe'? Or to ride the Metro? Of course not. Because the French realized that just because one is at war doesn't give excuse to civil disobedience let alone the wanton murder of civilians.
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
I guess we can count on the democrat media to roll out one of these every week from now to the election. Last week was the NEI leaked report that we were told concluded that Iraq had made terrorism worse, when the actual document was considerably more circumspect. And by now, we know the drill. 60 Minutes, which used to be journalism of a sort, is used to shill a book by some liberal writer that just happens to be published by Simon & Shuster, which is owned by CBS. Then the next week, Katie Couric will devote considerable time to the "news" that 60 Minutes had a story on the book. Talk about a circle jerk. I just hope they are able save time for more in depth reporting about macaca and Sen. Allen's jewish grandfather.
As the election gets closer and there is less time to refute this mudslinging, the charges will get more outlandish. Remember Rather-gate? Hey, maybe Allen's great grandfather was a muslim slave trader?
Quote from Pabst:
We only lose an average of three soldiers per day. (In WWll we lost an average of 400 soldiers each day!)
Many of those deaths occur in multiple fatality incidents.
So either Woodward's figures are exaggerated or the effectiveness of the insurgents attacks are miniscule compared to their effort.
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
Bush opened up Pandora's box. Not the Iraqi people on their own.
Had they really wanted a revolution, they would have had one.
The blood is on Bush's hands...
Quote from Pabst:
This my biggest fundamental difference with you. I believe that personal responsibility within a society is the key to an enlightened culture. Certainly laws are an integral part of enforcing individuals to do right. Without doubt many of us would commit evil acts if they weren't punishable. But at the end of the day it's the universality of morality that keeps segments of society from slipping into wanton violence.
It's not "whitey" who's the cause of American blacks living in a century and a half of lawless squaller. And it's not the presence of American troops in Iraq causing Shiites to blow up Sunni's and Sunni's to kidnap and execute Shiites. To borrow one of those slogans of the Democrats, "It's the culture, stupid."
There's little about the invasion of Iraq that would intrinsically cause mayhem in most societies. Especially given that Iraq was under virtual marshal law with Saddam. This is akin to TRIBAL warfare. How fucking primative.
It's like trading. If your long and the stock breaks badly after an earnings report, was the break "caused" by earnings. No. The break was caused by sellers! Only participants can move prices. We've all seen a solid company with great long term prospects shake off the news of a bad quarter with barely a downtick. Good stocks endure. Shit stocks look for an excuse to get hammered. Well, Iraq is a shit stock. The people are shit. Pretty much ANY culture with a predominance of Muslims is a powder keg. That friends, ain't the fault of the United States. Or Israel. Or anyone except those who kill in the name of God.
Quote from Pabst:
There's little about the invasion of Iraq that would intrinsically cause mayhem in most societies. Especially given that Iraq was under virtual marshal law with Saddam. This is akin to TRIBAL warfare. How fucking primative.
I
Points that reflect my views very nicely. I agree totally but that Reagan, imo, wasn't incompetent. He was lucky though. The fall of the wall partially fell into his lap. (Which inaccurately, the neocons love to give him all the credit for)Quote from Artie21:
This is true, and we are now responsible for wantonly uncorking those tribal brutal forces.
However admirable and visionary are the Bush administration's ambitions for the Iraq and the Middle East, we must recognize that Bush has been grossly incompetent in his management of America in Iraq. Furthermore, it is time that we set aside partisan bickering (our own form of primitive tribalism) and
call our leaders to account.
Bush cannot manage Iraq, he has no political capital left, he cannot get enough troops, he has divided the Congress and the American people.It is time to look beyond his failed administration.
Not since the height of the cold war has
the American public been so steeped in despair, fear, and pessimism, feelings which the current rulers have exploited to maintain their hold on power.
Even Reagan, an incompetent executive with bold aims, brought optimism to the people.
I would gladly vote for any candidate from any party that would give me confidence for a new course, a healthy economy, a safe future for my children,
fiscal responsibility, and a responsible foreign policy.
Quote from ktmexc20:
Points that reflect my views very nicely. I agree totally but that Reagan, imo, wasn't incompetent. He was lucky though. The fall of the wall partially fell into his lap. (Which inaccurately, the neocons love to give him all the credit for)
The soviet union was already crumbling from within and Poland (I think it was) was the first to take action and seize upon it. Admittedly though, his intentions of "star wars" did shake the ability of the soviet union's military budget and was the last straw to brake the camels back. He then followed that up admirably by negotiations with Gorbichov. An optimistic point in time, no doubt.