Smart Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Yes, of course there are abuses and mistakes and general incompetence on both sides but the base fact is that we are arguing current American politics, all of that muckraking really has no bearing on the day to day existance of our troops or Iraqi's at this point... 'The sins of the father...' and all that. My point is as it always has been... people around here argue issues that are past. Very few people here can actually look forward to the arguments to come, instead we endless rehash decisions that have already been made. I realize that this isn't Iraqi news but marginally related, so tell me when or where anybody here predicted this, or even acknowledged it's possiblity... Palestinian Police Fire On Hamas Militants VOA News 28 Aug 2003, 17:24 UTC Palestinian police have fired at Hamas militants who shot rockets from northern Gaza toward an Israeli town. Separately, the Palestinian Authority says it has frozen the bank accounts of several Islamic charities linked to militant groups. It was not clear if the moves were part of an attempt by the Palestinian government to crack down on militants as demanded under the international "road map" peace plan. One of the rockets fired by Hamas Thursday reached the Israeli coastal town of Ashkelon. There were no injuries or damage, but Israeli authorities said it was the first time a Palestinian missile has landed inside a major Israeli city. Palestinian security sources say police shot at the militants, who sped away in a car as police tried to arrest them. Israeli troops and bulldozers later entered northern Gaza and knocked down trees the militants had used as cover. The Palestinian freeze on the accounts of militant-linked charities was ordered Sunday, but came to light Thursday when hundreds of Palestinians tried to pick up support checks from the charities at Gaza City banks. Charities affected by the order include al-Mujma Al-Islami, which gave birth in the 1980s to the militant group Hamas. Israel has long insisted that Palestinian leaders take action against the militant groups as a condition for moving ahead with regional peace efforts. On Wednesday, the White House dismissed Palestinian President Yasser Arafat's call for Palestinian militant groups to reinstate their ceasefire and halt renewed attacks against Israel. A White House spokeswoman said it is more important for Palestinians to take actions to dismantle terrorist organizations and networks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Originally posted by !@#$% While they are happy to be liberated, they said they don't want U.S. troops to be occupiers. Well, we can't just walk away and leave a power vacuum... Why don't I ever hear you talking about any propsed Iraqi government? How come nobody here can talk about ANY Iraqi candidate with the fluid refernces we flip off about the California recall? BECAUSE NOBODY HERE KNOWS OR SEEMS TO BE EDUCATING THEMSELVES IN TO THAT END. The war is a done deal, the occupation even more so... Won't SOMEBODY answer my question of last December, Who's the next leader? Why should or shouldn't he be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 what i'm getting at is america's future role. how long will we continue with the imperialism and the domination? sure, its current, but it is part of a disturbing trend in the country's future.. what happens when the military is overextended (it already is) and something deadly serious warranting immediate attention happens, and our guys are harried and battle-weary?? or the war gets brought here? this is the future i'm talking about. what the fuck are we gonna do about all the militants we created by killing too many innocents? fuck it. i'm finished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Originally posted by Smart Well, we can't just walk away and leave a power vacuum... Why don't I ever hear you talking about any propsed Iraqi government? How come nobody here can talk about ANY Iraqi candidate with the fluid refernces we flip off about the California recall? BECAUSE NOBODY HERE KNOWS OR SEEMS TO BE EDUCATING THEMSELVES IN TO THAT END. The war is a done deal, the occupation even more so... Won't SOMEBODY answer my question of last December, Who's the next leader? Why should or shouldn't he be? government? why the fuck should i have an answer? I WAS ASKING THAT BEFORE THE WAR the only people capable of taking charge seem to be religious leaders. is that something even worth discussing? because it seems america and britain would never endorse that. bottom line..the UN needs to take over, with NATO and follow a bosnia style reorganization, policing, stabilization etc all the good candidates got killed by sadaam a long time ago ok. now i'm really finished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 well, let's start a thread and talk about that... we aren't the only people killing innocents. There is a belief that because we are bigger and more technologically advanced than many countries that we should act or behave in a certain manner that defies the basic political sciences laid down before the Roman Empire. These things aren't going to change, they will only go through periods of greater and lesser popularity. It is every concerned citizen's duty to try to extend the length of whichever period he finds most palatable. Believe it or not, I'm on your side in all this but I find most of the rhetoric espoused by both sides disgusting. There is an old saying, "Those who fail to heed the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them." I have postulated another; "We don't learn from histories lessons". Things don't get much better or worse but remain generally the same, it's nice to think that the entire universe will someday be pacified but when I see my friend's 3 year old punch his 16mo old brother for no reason other than spite; I'm reminded that there is no changing the human condition. These things are natural and to be expected, it's all about how we deal with it after the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Originally posted by !@#$% government? why the fuck should i have an answer? I WAS ASKING THAT BEFORE THE WAR ... and I admired you for it at the time, I asked that as well but the war was a foregone conclusion in November, yet here we sit wallowing in ignorance 10 months laterm, Neither of us possesing the answers to the questions we asked then.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Originally posted by !@#$% bottom line..the UN needs to take over, with NATO and follow a bosnia style reorganization, policing, stabilization etc I also agree with this but... NATO historically works exclusively in Europe. The UN would be a fabulous ally in the reconstruction but their rules of engagement have led to the slaughter of US troops in sevral theatres. I don't think raising our death toll is the answer either. I'm actually more concerned about the fiscal monopoly we are exerting over the reconstruction with Bechtel and Halliburton leading the way, I would rather see a worldwide consortium to oversee that aspect than I would another organization taking over combat/police operations. Unfortunately the American plan is in place and switching that would cost time, lives and money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaBar2 Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 Poop Man Bob The number of American who are presently armed with hunting rifles, and are licensed to hunt numbers 31 million. That is approximately 17 times as many armed civilians as members of all the American armed forces. I am not sure exactly how many police officers we have, but let's just guess, and double the total forces available to the government to 3.6 million soldiers and police officers. That lowers the odds to only about 8.6 to one. This is somewhat of a straw man argument, because obviously, not every police officer supports confiscation of firearms and One World Government, and obviously not every deer hunter is willing to defend his freedom with his rifle. Also, there is no guarantee that only the deer hunters would defend the Constitution, since there are over 70 million American firearms owners, and they own over 270 million firearms. But the 31 million figure is good, because it is a quantifiable figure, as it comes from the tax rolls of gun owners who purchased a hunting license. Adherents of the radical right wing, who are convinced that the government is already compromised and thoroughly infiltrated by people who support surrender of American sovereignity to the U.N. (I disagree--there are plenty of One Worlders in the government, but also plenty of patriots) often say that they fear the Marine Corps because it is the only branch of the armed forces not constitutionally prohibited from assuming Federal law enforcement duties (because the USMC is not a part of the Army, which IS prohibited from Federal law enforcement duty, but is instead a part of the Navy Department. The Navy is not prohibited from Federal law enforcement duty--one reason why, when the Federal government was trying to solve Ku Klux Klan murders in Mississippi, they used NAVY SAILORS for ground searches.) This fear is misplaced. The Marines that I knew loathe and despise any idea that smacks of One World/ U.N. control over any part of American life. It is exceedingly unlikely that Marines would willingly participate in gun confiscation, although a test questionaire given to a unit of young Marines in 1996 (in which 32% agreed they would do it if ordered to do so) caused a huge uproar in the Corps, and the results of the questionaire were suppressed from the news media. Many of the members of the Texas militia movement that I knew are former Marines. They form one of the most adamantly patriotic groups within the militia movement, and probably are the most proficient and experienced members. They still have contacts within the Marine Corps itself, and with retired Marines and Marine Reservists. (This is true of Army veterans as well.) Of the men I knew, they are also the members of the militia who tend to have the greatest combat logistics resources. They would most definately be willing to fight if it appeared that some group or another had managed to abrogate the Constitution. I do not believe that Marines will ever let themselves be used to undermine the Second Amendment. The Navy lacks the training, and the Army (and Air Force) is constitutionally prohibited from doing so, even if they were willing, which I seriously doubt. Of course, I suppose if some nefarious political element wished to round-file the Constitution, they wouldn't be impeded by a little thing like whether or not their actions were constitutional. It's a little bit like the Right's irrational concern about whether or not American flags in Federal courtrooms have gold fringe around them or not (this allegedly means that "admiralty law" is in force in that courtroom--more hocus-pocus.) Or the assertion that if a defendant doesn't enter inside the little fence inside a courtroom that the Judge has to let him defend himself---there are some certifiably delusional people within every political and social movement. (The Right has these nutballs, the Left has people who lay down in front of tanks, and climb up into trees to "save" the environment. What can I say? GOOFY IS GOOFY. If I have to deal with a tank, I hope it will be with a fucking anti-tank rocket, LOL. But like they say in TCM, "Maybe we can't fight a Hind-D, but helicopter gunship pilots got to go get a beer sometime. And when they do, we'll be waiting for them.") The ruling elite doesn't really wish to destroy the middle class. They want to manipulate them into further becoming the beast of burden for the elite's financial and social plans. Globalization just dovetails splendidly with their vision of themselves as "citizens of the world." Instead of just the poor drones in their own countries that are available to be entrapped, they now feel free to entrap everybody everywhere. And wouldn't it just be great if the masses were disarmed? No more worries about the peasants attacking the castle. Every time in history that a government has disarmed the population successfully, genocide follows as sure as the night follows sunset. I do not believe that we can trust Government, any government. They ALL contain elements that could become tyrannical if not checked by the force of the People. If you believe that people will generally act in what they perceive to be their own best interests (and I do believe that) and they are armed, they will not permit tyranny to blossom. I could be wrong, of course. But I don't think so. As for immigrants liking guns, I don't know where you live, but in Texas, immigrants love the shit out of guns. When I go down to the gun range, it looks like Take A Foreigner To The Range Day. And the two most popular rifles among Mexican immigrants are the "arre quince" (AR-15) and the "corne de chivo" (ram's horn--AK-47, from the curved AK magazine.) In pistols, they like them big: .45's, 9mm's, .38 Supers, .357 Magnums, .44 Magnums, etc. .22 rifles and pistols, and single-shot shotguns are for "export" back to poor relatives in Mexico. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoter Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 just a little reminder:when going to war the u.s. asked other nations to go in iraq with them for combat.during the combat a geneva convention (including several nations)was held to discuss the future of iraq and the iraqi refugees.no american representative was present at the event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TEARZ Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 i posted a long ass reply to this and lost it all. main issues: looking ahead to the future iraq democracy built on police repression foreign occupation infrastructure built to serve foreign interests "choosing" an iraqi leader the problematic idea of "follow through" with this extremely flawed and ill-defined mission the last one was perhaps the most important. like browner said, i just can't believe that intelligent people who hated the war now feel that it's imperative that we follow dubya's plan? wtf? it's time to engage "the international community" to figure some of this shit out; hopefully the next leader of this nation will understand that, that other nations will be sympathetic to our previous asshole regime and be willing to engage with us, and things will start to clean up even slightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BROWNer Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 smart, have you some links related to anybody that may be being groomed for leadership??? it's possible i'm not looking in the right places or hard enough, but...i haven't seen really much of anything regarding this issue in main and/or independant media. i have heard references to certain clerics and such, but nothing solid, you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 well, there's Dr Adnan Pachachi, and Ahmed Chalabi, Nizar Al-Khazraji, (though I believe he's currently under indictment in Denmark for war crimes against the Kurds)... All these guys are exiles though, I'm not too hip on who might be available from inside Iraq... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoter Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 whoever's gonna be the easiest puppet for georgy boy to play with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaBar2 Posted August 30, 2003 Share Posted August 30, 2003 Once again---IRAQ IS OCCUPIED. Their opinion about who should be leader matters no more than whoever the average Nazi would have preferred to govern Germany, or whatever person the average Japanese would have preferred to govern Japan during the Occupation of Japan. What they need to do is stop causing any chaos, allow an interim government to take it's position, and then work to vote in their choice in a democratic, free, and fair election. Twenty years from now, they will be our allies and we will all be driving Iraqi Segways. Maybe they have enough sense to see this, and maybe not. It would not surprise me to find out that we will need ten or fifteen years of education and practice a democratic republicanism before they are able to hold elections without brawls, riots and tribal warfare. You guys think American racism is a problem, but it can't even touch tribalism and ethnic hatred in the Third World for viciousness, violence and plain old hatred. If we were smart, they would re-define nations around tribal geographical areas, so that every nation included just one tribe. European colonialism screwed things up seriously by drawing national boundaries without regard to tribal territories. It was stupid. The colonies would have been much easier to administer if they only included one tribe. But what can you do? Europeans thought they knew everything back then, and they still think that. Nothing has changed, especially irrational tribalist hatred in Africa and the Middle East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.