Politics Foreign MiddleEast Iraq - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Foreign:MiddleEast:Iraq:
Results 1201 - 1350 of 1605   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2018/06/23 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
6/23    

2006/12/19-28 [Transportation/Car/RoadHogs, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45471 Activity:high
12/19   What do you wish to have for Christmas? Put anything you want, like
        Nintendo Wii, World Peace, Death of all SUV drivers, whatever.
        \_ I want two hours worth of lap dance from Crazy Horse with this
           particular dancer I like.
        \_ I want to be special and own a 4200 sq ft McMansion only 60 miles
           away from the city just like everyone else. I also want an H2 so
           that I don't have to make frequent trips to/from Walmart, and
           actually, a pollutionless H2 so those damn hippies don't curse
           at me on the road. Lastly I want my freeway to be void of other
           drivers and ESPECIALLY hippies so that I don't have to run over
           them when I'm in a hurry.
           \_ Hybrid Humvee:
              http://evworld.com/archives/conferences/evs14/humvee.html
              350hp.  0-50mph in 7sec.  18mpg.  Climbs 60% grade at 17mph and
              fords 5ft of water (think New Orleans).  It even has a stealth
              mode.
              \_ "In addition, the vehicle gets twice the fuel economy at 18 mpg
                 enabling it to carry a smaller fuel tank, while retaining the
                 same 300 miles range."
                 OK, just think about that for a second, and why it's obviously
                 bullshit unless these things are solely used for stop and go
                 traffic...by the armed forces... and if they are... who cares
                 about range?  Ugh.  Stupidity.
                 \_ Range is important in reconnaissance missions.
                    \_ Very much so, but hybridizing a vehicle doesn't increase
                       its absolute ("highway") mileage.  You might gain a
                       little by using the smaller motor, but that's gonna be
                       cancelled by the weight of the batteries and electrical
                       subsystem.  This is why the hybrids that actually show
                       really good numbers also have low resistance tires,
                       low drag coeff., etc.
           \_ What is stopping you?
              \_ Maybe he has a wife who has put a tracking beacon on him. Or
                 maybe he means getting it for free.
        \_ G600
           \_ That means Google -> 600. Hilarious.
        \_ I want soda to work like it did a couple years ago.
           \_ make it deux
        \_ Nokia 770
        \_ Nokia 77
        \_ Nokia E70
        \_ Bush in front of the ICC for his crimes.
           \_ ICC has no spine w/o the U.S.
              \_ No one said it had to be a realistic fantasy...
        \_ Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Bremmer, and rest hawkish, pro-war
           neocons being throw to Iraq outside the Greenzone.  Let them
           experience the democracy and better life they've created for
           the Iraqi people first hand.
           \_ I'm sure they loved it under Saddam
        \_ You liberal nutjobs serving a day in the military
              \_ at least people don't die at the rate of 100 a day under
                 Saddam.  Physical protection is always more important
                 than political freedom.  If you live in LA slum and worry
                 about being shot everyday, be able to vote or not is probably
                 the last thing on your mind.
                 \_ Give me freedom or give me death! I'll take freedom
                    over food, shelter, and sex! FREEDOM!!!     -American
              \_ 9 out of 10 Iraqis say that things were better before the
                 invasion:
                 http://www.csua.org/u/hs7
                 Original source:
                 link:www.csua.org/u/hs6
                 The Iraq Centre for Research and Strategic Studies used to
                 be hired by the American CPA until that body left Iraq, so
                 they should probably have at least some credibility.
                 FYI, in over half the Western Countries surveyed by Ipsos,
                 a plurality thought that Iraq was better off under SH, as well:
                 http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2006/ap.shtml
        \_ You liberal nutjobs serving a day in the military, like Cheney,
           and Bolton, and Wolfowitz, and Pearle and Scooter and Rove and
           Brooks and Krauthhammer and Delay and Hastert and Lieberman and
           Feith.
           \_ I walked along Telegraph Ave almost every night for a year and
              a half.  That's gotta be at least equivalent! - jvarga
           \_ Well... I spent three years in the 82nd Airborne. -ausman
           \_ hmm... serve under those who dodged the draft... inspiring!
              \_ Obviously you were never in the military during the
                 Clinton years.
                 \_ obviously Clinton never needed over 130,000 troops in
                    a hostile territory. what the fuck are you smoking jlee?
                    \_ I'm glad you can ID me but not ID yourself.
        \_ A wife with ample bosom and hot body.
           \_ As your genie I grant you your wish.
              *POOF*
              "Not tonight dear, I have a headache."
        \_ http://www.divinebreasts.com/i/pod/pod75.jpg
           \_ That is not hot body.  Pre-reduction Christina Ricci body was
              hot body.  (Her face is another matter.)
        \_ How about http://85.17.40.9:88/22a/full/116/1168550884.jpg ?
           \_ Yucks!  I want Sakurako-Kaoru-type.
2006/12/19-28 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45470 Activity:high
12/19   Zucker's take on the ISG: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w77sLtz754
        \_ Ah, yes, that Neville Chamberlain of our time, James Baker. I'm
           sorry, wtf are you talking about?
        \_ Sorry, no one is buying your BS anymore.
           \_ What BS?  I pointed to a video on youtube.
              \_ The BS that America is strong and can make other people
                 listen to us. Sorry neocons, the real world doesn't work
                 that way. People hate America and you're not going to make
                 them do what you want them to do just because you think you
                 have the world's greatest military power. Military power
                 comes and goes but resentments live on forever.
                 \_ Who hates America? Do you? The Arabs do because it serves
                    their political leaders for them to do so. I bet China
                    prefers a bit of healthy dislike in its people too given
                    the totalitarianism. The fact is their countries are in
                    a state of shittitude because of their own fucked
                    governments (cf. Iran).
                    \_ The Iranians might hate us because we overthrew
                       their democratically elected government and replaced
                       it with a totalitarian one. Just a thought. Why
                       do the Iraqis hate us? Do you really have to ask
                       that?
                       that? Oh, and just a little geography lesson:
                       Iranians are not Arabs. Thought you might like
                       to know.
                       \_ I didn't say they were. If you asked the average
                          Iranian I bet you will not hear "because they
                          replaced our democratic government".
                    \_ this may shock you, but Chinese government is more
                       popular across the globe than American one.
                       \_ Really?  When did we vote on that?  I haven't
                          missed a vote on anything since I was old enough
                          to vote.
                          \_ anti-American senitment is very stron across the
                             globe during the time when China is forgiving
                             debt and cut checks to Africian oil rich nations
                             with *NO STRING ATTACHED*.
                             You should also dig out old newspaper on how
                             popular Hu Jing-Tao was during his Latin-America
                             tour.
                             As for Middle East, do you have any idea what
                             kind of government would we have today across the
                             Arab nation if we allow them to *VOTE* for their
                             leader?  (hint, Hamas).
                          \_ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8324290
                             But it wasn't mentioned in MM's blog, so
                             you might have missed it...
                             \_ A Pew poll?  With no numbers?  Ok, whatever.
                                I'm sure you also believe Iraq was a land of
                                chocolate rivers with candied banks under
                                Hussein.  And what exactly would be the
                                surprise if a bunch of socialists prefered
                                a communist country to a democratic capitalist
                                one anyway?
                                \_ I am sure you can google for the source
                                   if you really want to see the numbers.
                                   I am also sure you won't bother to, since
                                   it upsets your fantasy about how the
                                   world is.
                                   world is. You do know that the vast majority
                                   of Iraqis think the country is worse off
                                   now than it was under SH, right?
                                   \_ No I won't do your work for you.  If
                                      you have something to say, go find a
                                      real source for it and post it.  No one
                                      here has the time to google every half-
                                      assed zero-information link posted to
                                      the motd by some crank who believes
                                      in chocolate rivers.  Then you make
                                      another unsubstantiated claim that
                                      I'm supposed to google, too?  How about
                                      you tell me what my fantasy about the
                                      world is since the only thing I've said
                                      so far is your link is garbage.  I see
                                      you also ignored the underlying issue
                                      with a poll "of the world" in that "the
                                      world" is all about predisposed bias and
                                      the odds of getting a "fair" poll about
                                      what "the world" thinks are about zero.
                                      Just curious, do you see yourself as a
                                      "Citizen of the World"?
                                      \_ Tactic 1: ad hominem
                                         Tactic 2: attack the source
                                         Tactic 3 (will occur as soon as I
                                         post a link): claim polls are
                                         meaningless.  -tom
                                      \_ Facts are such bitter stubborn things.
                      http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=247
                       \_ They don't like Bush. It doesn't translate to
                          a general hatred of America as you imply. At least
                          half our population doesn't like Bush (approval
                          ratings etc).
                          \_ I predict it will take a long time, at least a
                             decade or two, to undo the damage the Bush and his
                             crowd has done to US opinion worldwide.
              \_ I believe it's customary to include either "nutjob" or "He's
                 right, you know" with links like this. Omission thereof tends
                 to imply support. --!pp
              \_ http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
                 Support for the warmonger faction is down to 28%.
2006/12/1-8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45405 Activity:nil
12/1    http://www.cagle.com/news/BushCivilWar/main.asp
        Cartoons on Iraq's [impending] Civil War
        \_ http://www.cagle.com/news/BushCivilWar/images/plante.jpg
        \_ http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2006-11-26-1.html
           \_ "For instance, in Connecticut, the voters rejected the
               extremist wing of the Democratic Party (otherwise known as
               "The Democratic Party") by reelecting Joseph Lieberman, the
               most notable (but not the only) Democrat who has the brains to
               understand that the War on Terror is vital to our national
               security."
              In other words, if you've OSC's rants before, there's nothing
              new here. I take that back: there's even more venom and
              invective.
2006/12/1-8 [Science/GlobalWarming, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45403 Activity:low
12/1    How much does polonium cost? I'm curious because I'm baffled as to
        why we didn't simply put polonium into Saddam Hussein (and his
        sons) food chain. It would have been faster and cheaper.
        \_ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/weekinreview/03broad.html
           "$22.50 plus tax"
        \_ wouldn't his sons have just taken over
        \_ If he was that easy to poison, bon't you think we would've?
           We can't even poison Castro.  It's not like you have to use
           polonium, cynide works fine.
2006/11/11-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:45327 Activity:high
11/11   Rummy, Gonzales and Tenant might be sued for "war crimes" in
        Germany:
        http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,1557842,00.html
        \_ How can an American be sued in another country?
           \_ The same way someone can be tried in the US for crimes
              they committed while outside the country (Noriega.)  Some
              countries have weird laws--I think Belgium has or had one
              of these "good luck with enforcing it" statutes that allowed
              their prosecuters to go after anyone for some kinds of crimes
              against humanity committed anywhere else.  -John
           \_ Germany claims to have "Universal Jurisdiction" over war
              crimes. If found guilty, one cannot travel to Germany
              w/o the potential of being arrested on the basis of that
              conviction. The same may be true of countries that have
              an extradition agreement w/ Germany wrt this type of
              crime. Mostly this is symbolic.
              <rant>A conviction will make the Euro-peons feel good
              about themselves and will take their minds of the fact
              that the moors are in the process of recovering what
                       \- moops
              they lost and taking more ground.</rant>
                                        \_<snore>
2006/11/9-11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45308 Activity:nil
11/9    http://preview.tinyurl.com/w3hvt (signonsandiego.com)
          "The vote shows the Iraqi and American people are of one mind about
        withdrawing U.S. troops," said Falah Hassan Shanshal, who leads the
        parliamentary bloc of radical anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada
        al-Sadr.
          "We hope the Democrats don't forget their campaign promises. If they
        don't, we will deal with them in a brotherly way once the last
        American soldier pulls out from Iraq," he said.
        \_ This is one of the guys who should have been killed and his group
           wiped out years ago.  The fact that he's still around to comment
           on the American election highlights the failures in Iraq that put
           his potential "brothers" in power in the first place.
           \_ well, We whiped out Saddam and his Baathist party, that didn't
              work out too well, no?  May be you should think outside of
              "get rid of those we don't like" box.
2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45230 Activity:nil
11/7    57 Iraqi police officers charged with torture
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061107/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:45225 Activity:nil
11/7    Chicago man sets himself on fire in protest of You Know What:
        http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/123692,CST-NWS-bodyfire04.article
        his self written obituary:
        http://www.savagesound.com/gallery100.htm
        his 'mission statement':
        http://www.savagesound.com/gallery99.htm
2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45211 Activity:kinda low
11/7    This question is mostly for the supporter of the war and those
        who oppose quick withdraw from Iraq.
        One option which no one talked about is mobilizing entire freaking
        nation for Iraq.  Draft until we got 2.5 million pairs of boots,
        ration supplies if absoultely nessarily, and blanket Iraq with an army
        of 2.5-3million strong, pacify the country, and leave.
        What is wrong with THAT idea?  Do you guys really think we can
        "win" this war with the current troop level in Iraq?  at 8 billion
        a month, such idea is even economically sound!
        \_ The problem with such a tactic against a guerilla force is they will
           melt away into the civilian populace, only to resurface when the
           massive force goes away.
        \_ "pacify"ing the country
           == Saddam kills you if you piss him off
           || Shiites kill you if you piss them off
           != Americans there temporarily (same thing above guy said),
              unless it serves bullet point 2
        \_ 2.5 - 3 million non-radical Sunni/Shiite loyalists?  Aaaaanyway.
           We'll just arm both sides..  I'm sure they'll only use their training
           and weapons to Keep the Peace.
           We'll just arm both sides..  I'm sure they'll only use their
           training and weapons to Keep the Peace.
        \_ I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit; it's the only way
           to be sure.  -John
           \_ done that in Japan, it worked well.  I wonder why don't we do
              that again.
        \_ There are many things wrong with that idea: politics, economics,
           logistics, military structure.  And oh yeah, it wouldn't work
           anyway.  I don't have to be a war supporter or oppose retreat to
           see that a draft won't work and wouldn't help.  How about you
           explain how and why this could possibly work?
        \_ Naw, the right way to do this is to deport Iraqis to reservations
           in New Mexico and replace them with illegal immigrants waiting for
           deportation. That, and raise all of the kids in orphanages. Oh,
           yeah, and give everyone smallpox blankets. Let's see, have I missed
           any really terrible imperialist ideas here?
           \_ Er, orphanages are imperialist?
              \_ Google: australia lost generation
                 \_ Edit: Grr, afternoon brainhit: The Stolen Generation:
                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generation
                 \_ my question of the day is, how come Australia never
                    charged with Genocide??  Or it is ok if White do this to
                    non-white and take their land?
                    \_ Australia has been working pretty hard to deal
                       with decimating the native population of Australia.
                       Hey either get grammar training, quit pretending to
                 \_ Since neither Canda, USA, nor Austrilia was punished for
                    this, I have been long advocating Chinese to do this to
                    Tibetian, Mogolians and rest of the minority tribe. :D
                       be ignorant, or I'll bust out the Im 30HHH and
                       no bra will hold me postings.
                       \_ Why USA say china bad when advocate australia
                          congress iraq no tibet?!  you racist white dog
                          not understand USA no good bad native genocide!!
                          Do we get more bra postings now?
2006/11/6-8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45199 Activity:nil
11/6    US Army recruiters lie to get people to enlist:
        http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2626032&page=1
        \_ This is news how exactly?  I was looking for info on ROTC while
           applying for college, and made the mistake of asking at a
           recruiting station (long since closed, fuckers) about how one goes
           about becoming an officer.  The shit they put me through and told
           me was absolutely amazing.  -John
           \_ So you didn't join the Waffen-SS after all?
           \- i think the news or rather the "new" part is the country
              is at war now. it's one thing to BS about benefits and
              such, it seems another to lie to a direct question "will
              i end up in iraq". and it is sad we dont consider it
              "news" that mlitary recruiters are the same species as
              gym salesmen and cell phone vendors. the real or the
              "big" issues here is obvious, so i wont belabor it.
              \_ It surprises me that you feel there is a difference.  The
                 tactics they use to get people to sign up are very low, and
                 I can see how someone without much education would fall for
                 it easiily.  I recall the same shit during Iraq #1, but
                 nobody made as much of a stink over it because not as many
                 people were dying.  They are salesmen, they have a quota to
                 meet, and the company's in trouble.  Quotas just got upped.
                 I don't differentiate between lying to get people into an
                 organization whose nature it is that you might get killed,
                 whether people are actually dying or not.  -John
                 \- well i dont think there is a bright line about what
                    falls under "buyer (recruit) beware" and something that
                    crosses the line. but sometimes "you know it when you
                    see it". for example, if you are buying a house but you
                    never bother to discover there is a frat house next door,
                    that's likely your fault. but in another case a friend
                    of a friend bought a house in los gatos and the sale was
                    reversed after 6mos because it turned out the house seller
                    had asked a autobody shop [or some other kind of industrial
                    operation] not to operate when he was showing the house.
                    [now if he hadnt colluded but had just picked a time when
                    the place was closed, maybe that would have passed muster].
                    there might have been other sleazy dealings too. i didnt
                    know the exact details but i had relatively little sympathy
                    for the people in gulf war 1 to bailed on their obligations
                    after taking advantage of the college and other benefits.
                    i would hope that given you are dealing with people
                    probably in the 16-20 range, it is potentially a matter of
                    life and death ... and certainly a major lifestyle choice,
                    and it is your govt after all, military recruitment would
                    be a more sober and serious and solemn process, but we
                    cerainly no better than that dont we. so we probably
                    are in 90% agreement ... but i suppose i see this
                    though the "big issues" [national service, wealth and
                    opportunity etc] rather than focusing on the sleaziness
                    of the army's salesmen. in re: the "i dont differentiate"
                    comment: consider the informed consent: everybody no
                    matter how dumb or how young who is more conscious than
                    terry schivo knows there is some chance of getting
                    killed or hurt in the military ... since it even
                    happens in training etc. people also know that your
                    chance of getting hurt/maimed or killed go way up
                    if you are sent to iraq ... it probably doesnt matter
                    whether that probability is .5% or .1% ... everyone
                    knows it is high enough to take notice of. but what
                    people dont know is what is the probability of their
                    being sent to iraq/afganistan upon joining the military
                    now ... is it 5% or 80%? further, they should reasonable
                    believe that the govt representative will either say
                    i dont know or not massively lie to them. expecting an
                    18yr old to "expect" the govt to lie to them doesnt seem
                    reasonable. although it's starting to be.
                    \- maybe this is a good example to bring out some of
                       my thinking: we think of cosmetic surgeons as perhaps
                       a little sleazy [the beverly hills kind, not the
                       charity and military ones]. and a patient really is
                       a customer and should be on the alert to beig pitched,
                       oversold, upsold etc ... i dont have much sympathy for
                       a young impressionable girl in for a nose job getting
                       talked into a lip puffing sugery "while your at it".
                       but if your real doctor says he hears something
                       "funny" with your mitral valve and you need to pay
                       more money to be probed so he can buy a new titaniam
                       golf device, that is totally beyond the pale since
                       there really may not be any good way for you to protect
                       your interests. you are totally in his hands ... that's
                       why this is supposed to be a relationship of solmn
                       trust [with threat of malpractice] rather than a
                       consumer relationship. so the ideal answer isnt
                       the consumer/patient/recruit should be careful in
                       both cases but society sould hold the person in the
                       position of trust to a higher standard ... unfortunately
                       that ideal doesnt always happen and perhaps caveat
                       emptor is "min max" strategy.
                    \_ Personal responsibility aside (if you're signing up
                       for the army, I'd hope that you are thinking about
                       what you are doing), there's a pretty major difference
                       between lying to sell aluminum siding and lying to get
                       someone to join the national "we can fuck up your life
                       send you to a place where you have a real possibility
                       of getting your ass brought home in a box, and all that
                       on false pretenses" club.  I don't care if you're in
                       a war or not, it's criminal.  -John
2006/11/6 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45192 Activity:nil
11/6    Why is Cheney's hunting trip news, and election tampering
        and HELLO THE UNITED STATES HAS GIVEN UP ON FUNDING THE
        RECONSTRUCTION OF IRAQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HELLO !!!!!!!!!!!!
        BLING BLING BLING BLING BEEP BEEP BRRRRRRRRRRWAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!!!!
        I can't do the car alarm thing properly anyway WTF.
        \_ Were you looking for vr00p! vr00p! vr00p!?  And why is Iraq
           protected by a car alarm?
        \_ Hello, Mark Foley brought down by being dirty to a page, not by
           general shitbagness.  Tom "The Hammer" DeLay brought down by
           money fiddling, not by general shitbagness.  There's kind of a trend
           here.  I think the US needs an emperor and a Ministry of Truth to
           keep the slobs happy.  -John
2006/11/6-8 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45191 Activity:nil
11/6    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15590729/site/newsweek/from/RS.2
        "Saddam and the Republicans"
2006/11/6-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45184 Activity:low
11/7    The Press at War: What ever happened to patriotic reporters?
        http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110009203
        \_ The country at war: What ever happened to just conflicts?
        \_ OP, do you actually believe any of this crap?  Do you think
           the sectarian thugs who are making our life miserable in
           Iraq read the NY Times?  Also the writer of this article seems
           to think that Iraq would soon be edging out Irvine, CA
           in Time's annual Best Places To Live Poll if only newspaper
           owners took a firmer hand in reigning in the evil liberal
           press.  I love the WSJ's news operations but they must really
           store their editorial people on a ship far, far away from
           other sources of information. - danh
           \_ You're confused and miss the point if you think this is about
              thugs in Iraq reading American papers.  Wars are won by
              breaking the will of the enemy to keep fighting.  If your own
              press breaks the will of your own people then you've lost no
              matter what is going on in the actual war zone.  Your Irvine
              comment is rhetorical noise and ignored.
           \_ 'justice' is not an absolute.  There is no such thing as a
              'just conflict'.
              \_ 'Intelligence' is not an absolute, there are just people who
                 are far from it.
                 \_ Did you even read the link?
                    \_ I'm reading it.  Who is this guy?  He's comparing
                       the Iraq invasion to WW2, and while he's at it,
                       blaming the Vietnam loss on leftist protestors.\
                       Even more powerful than the all powerful leftist
                       blaming the Vietnam loss on leftist protestors.
                       Even more powerful than the all powerful leftist
                       protestors was the several million residents of
                       Vietnam willing to die to the very last man to
                       kick the invading force out.
                       \_ Specifically he said the Tet Offensive was a win for
                          the US but mischaracterised as a loss and the media
                          allowed that wrong to stay uncorrected in the
                          public's view of the war.  The TO was a devastating
                          loss for the north but you never knew it if you only
                          listened to American media at the time.  How is he
                          wrong on that?
                          What is your issue with his WW2/Iraq comparison which
                          is specifically about how reporters reported in each
                          war?
                          \_ You don't get it, do you.  We can win all
                             the giant military victories we want, witness
                             our quick victory over the regular Iraqi
                             forces in this war.  We can win 100 Tet
                             offensives.  You can loudly point out the fact
                             we won every battle in Vietnam.  This is not
                             how you fight a guerilla insurgency.  Those
                             "hearts and minds" guys really did have the right
                             idea.  By letting Iraq spiral into sectarian
                             violence with roving guerrilla death squads
                             on all 3 sides run Iraq, we are doomed to failure,
                             no matter how many biased Fox or NYTimes
                             articles are written.
                             \_ As usual the War Nerd is right on on this one:
                                http://www.exile.ru/2006-November-03/the_doctrine_of_asymmetrical_war.html
                                http://preview.tinyurl.com/u6zec (exile.ru)
                                \_ http://www.exile.ru/2002-April-21/war_nerd.html
                                   He's a data-entry tech in Fresno.  He has
                                   some points about the changing nature of
                                   war but he sure as hell doesn't say that
                                   winning hearts and minds is the way to go.
                             \_ Vietnam was lost in the media right here at
                                home, not in Vietnam.  And 100 Tet Offensives
                                would have wiped out N.Vietnam about 8 times
                                over to the last man, woman, and child, but
                                I'm sure you didn't mean that literally.  The
                                hearts and minds guys have it wrong.  No one
                                tried to win the hearts and minds of anyone
                                in Germany, Japan, Italy, or any other place
                                the US or any other war has ever been won.
                                Wars are won by killing people until they
                                stop hitting back.  Obviously roaming death
                                squads in Iraq is Bad(tm), but you're not
                                going to win the hearts and minds of death
                                squads.  They must be killed and that is one
                                of the many failures on our part: we are
                                actually trying to win over those people
                                instead of just killing them.
                                \_ This isn't WWII anymore.  That's not how
                                   war works anymore, especially not in an
                                   occupied country.
                                   \_ Of course it isn't however no one is
                                      going to win the hearts and minds of
                                      the "roving guerilla death squads".
                                      Especially for the largest ones such
                                      as Al Muq Tadr (however its spelled)
                                      which has a sizable force and known
                                      leadership.  The reason these guys are
                                      still around is they are part of the
                                      tribal power structure holding up the
                                      current PM.  All that tribal garbage
                                      needs to be stepped on and buried or
                                      they will fight a real civil war, not
                                      this pansy thing they're doing now.
                                      We have 130k or so troops there the
                                      last I knew.  They patrol?  For what?
                                      To be sniper and IED targets?  They
                                      should either be out there mopping up
                                      a la Faluja or they should come home
                                      now and just let it fall to crap.
                                \_ I don't think this works with Shiites.
                                   They LIKE being killed.  It just
                                   reaffirms in their minds their martyr
                                   complex.  How do you defeat an enemy
                                   that only gets stronger when you kill
                                   them?  I really don't know.
                                   \_ I agree that some small percentage of
                                      them are a-ok with the getting killed
                                      thing, but tell me this, if pure force
                                      can't keep them down then how did Saddam
                                      keep the majority population from taking
                                      over 25+ years ago?  Why was there no
                                      endless civil war between the Sunni and
                                      Shia?
                                    \_ They really should put Saddam back
                                       in charge.  Seriously.
                \_ Also the writer lectures at Pepperdine, home of
                   more and more batshit crazy person Ben Stein.  What
                   happened to him?  He didn't seem so crazy in the
                   movies.
                   \- did you see the infamous BSTEIN - PKRUGMAN
                      "i won the john bates clark medal; you are a
                      game show host" exchange?
        \_ Anyone who says "authorization to use force == authorization to do
           absolutely anything he 'needs' to" is not worth reading.
           \_ Where'd he say that?
              \- james q wilson is pretty famous. mayor guiliani probably
                 got his crime fighting ideas from JQW. it;s called the
                 "broken window" theory [focus on small crimes to deter a
                 lawlessness culture] athough i believe there is some
                 cintroversy about who really came up with the idea ...
                 as well as controvery about the effectiveness.
                 he's one of the intellectuals favored by a number of
                 conservatives but he's not a wacko loser like
                 victor david hansen.
                 \_ Uhm ok, I know broken window theory.  Where did he say
                    the bit about auth-to-use-force = auth-to-do-abs-anything?
2006/11/4-5 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45162 Activity:kinda low
11/03   I overheard this quote from NPR which I thought is amusing:
        "'Terror' is a tactic.  To say today's war is a war on 'Terror'
        is just like saying World War 2 is a war on 'Blitzkrieg.'"
        \_ Sounds pretty logical to me.
        \_ The US should stick with wars that have a definite
           win condition.  You can't win a war against a non proper noun.
2006/11/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45155 Activity:low
11/3    http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/12/neocons200612
        Leading neo-cons assume no blame for ideas, but blame Dubya admin for
        terrible execution
        (I can't decide whose pic is worse:  Dubya's or Condi's)
        \_ Annie Leibovitz clearly knows what she's doing.  -tom
        \_ Dubya's picture was taken with a wide-angle lens at close range.
           Either it was a lousy photog, or the photog did it on purpose.
           \_ It's Annie Leibovitz.  It's on purpose.  -tom
        \_ What Condi's pic?
           \_ page 3
        \_ We know execution was terrible.  There is little to dispute on
           that point.  It is just a case of do you believe American power
           should be used to "right wrongs" around the world or not?  Places
           like Darfur and *many* others can't be rectified by diplomacy so
           the choice is invade/attack or ignore genocide.  Some philosophies
           say "screw em, not our problem, not worth our blood and treasure",
           the neocons disagree.  If you're ok with the Saddams of the world
           and more Darfur genocide then you're not a neocon.  /shrug
           \_ Iraq is not Darfur.  As bad as Saddam was he wasn't slaughtering
              millions.
              \_ Millions aren't dead in Darfur either.  Yet.  'Just' a few
                 hundred thousand or so.  Saddam was estimated to be killing
                 about 5000 Iraqi's a *month* which was going on for how many
                 years?  There is little difference if you're only looking at
                 body count as your measure to take action or not.
                 \_ First, the number is probably being pumped up, just like
                    everything else.  Secondly, under *OUR* rule, we got
                    about 100 guys killed EVERY DAY.  that is almost 3000
                    Iraqis a MONTH.  According to *YOU* even with the
                    violance today, Iraqis *ARE* better off today than under
                    Saddam.  But for some weird reason, every poll conducted
                    by every country has said otherwise.
            \_ The Neocons arguement has never primarily been humanitarian.
               They argue that our countries best interests are promoted
               by spreading democracy and "Western Values." The humanitarian
               argument is sort of tangential to this. And of course, the
               number of bodies is an important consideration in deciding
               if it is worth taking action.
               \_ I am not sure what this "Western Value" means.  I think
                  it really means "western value defined by US government."
                  Frankly, I don't think Neo cons believe in Western Value
                  themselves.  This administration is by far most secretive
                  and imperial administaration since Nixon.  In terms of
                  human right violations, they are rapidly approaching
                  Eisenhoers and FDR's administarations.
2006/11/2-4 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:45122 Activity:moderate
11/02   Americans always say their core value is promote democracy.
        Besides recent boycott of Hamas, we got this in Nicaragua:
        http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6423982
        This, and US past involvement in Iran, Guatemala, Chili, etc.
        Are you guys still dumb enough to think USA really believe in
        democracy?
        \_ Yes, the USA is all about promoting democracy.  Our democracy,
           right here in the US.  We cannot let any foreign government
           of any kind keep us from our God-given right to exploit
           foreign resources, products, and labor for the lowest cost.
           That is how we promote our democracy.
           \_ Actually, yes, that's the way it's been going.  We are committed
              to the democratic cause that all governments should be of the
              (American) people, by the (American) people, for the (American)
              people.
        \_ Hi chicom!
           \_ i am still waiting for you comment on this issue of
              "promoting democracy world wide" thing.
              \_ Why should I defend a straw man you set up?  Are you so
                 dumb that you actually believe what you wrote?
                 \_ I look at facts, and don't treat democracy as a religion.
                    you guys need to look at facts more coldly.  The fact
                    is, American talk about democracy, and they believe in
                    it too.  Just that it is never a first priority.  The
                    actual profit and exploit of resources always trump
                    democracy.  This is why we have no problem overthow
                    democratically elected government in Iran, Guatemula,
                    Chili, and now Palestine.  And we have no issue supporting
                    dictators, Monachs, Islamtic extremests world wide to
                    advance US agenda at the time. That, combine with severe
                    lack of sense of history tend to create very naive &
                    myopic policies.   Yet, at the same time, American don't
                    realize they are the aggressors, invading countries,
                    set up unfair trade policies, and torture people world
                    wide.
                    \_ 2 things: 1) any nation that puts a philosophy above
                       the health of the state at all times is suicidal.
                       2) the neocons in this country share your belief that
                       we should always ignore #1.  that hasn't worked out
                       that well.
                       \_ 1. America ALWAYS waging crusade, putting philosophy
                          abvoe health of the state.  Think "Evil Empire"
                          and "War on Terror."
                          2. good try, I didn't know you share the same
                          believe as Adolf Hitler.
        \_ Hamas, ah yes, beacon of democracy in the middle east.  Personally,
           I prefer Chinese style "charge the family for the bullet"
           democracy.  None of that messy voting or listening to the peasants.
           \_ given the choice of Chinese style government verus American-style
              democracy in Iraq, and Bosnia, I take Chinese style government
              any day.   It seems successful democracy need to go through
              a period of genocide.  America, Turkey, Bosnia, Iraq.
              Democracy is great, but given the choice, I prefer avoid
              genocide at any cost.
              \_ "at any cost".  Yes, safety above all else at all times.
                 The direct path to slavery.  A good call if you want to
                 live in chains and die at the whim of any passing
                 government official.  In all seriousness, if you really
                 believe what you said, you're not only in the wrong country,
                 you're in the wrong culture.  No where in the West has a
                 place for that kind of thinking.  And taking a quick look at
                 the standard of living for free people vs. enslaved people
                 around the world, you'll find a lot more of the enslaved
                 trying to get to free countries than the opposite.  But
                 that just makes plenty of room for you in your oppressive
                 country of choice.  That'll be the last choice you make.
                 \_ No where in the West?  my friend, let me kindly remind
                    you something.  This "Western" culture which values
                    basic rights of men traditionally ONLY apply to WHITEs.
                    This is the reason why just a couple years after America
                    declare its independence, it offers troops to *CRUSH*
                    Haiti's independence from French rule.  This is also
                    the reason why we defeated Nazi's occupation of France,
                    yet *SUPPORT* French occupation of Algeria and so-called
                    "indochina."
                    Do I believe personal freedom? yes.  Do I believe these
                    fredom includes political participations?  After I've
                    seen half dozens of countries/regions either fell
                    into sectarian violence or rise in ethnic tensions,
                    I am not sure any more.  It is easy for *YOU* to say
                    Iraqis are better off today than under Saddam's rule.
                    Try to live in Iraq (outside the green zone) for two weeks
                    you might get a sense of what I am getting at.
                    What you don't get is that freedom to participate in
                    political process is something "nice to have." but it
                    is by no means a necesscity.  Food, shelters,
                    personal SAFETY all take precedent.  Americans who
                    lives in the comfort of their own country certainly
                    don't understand this.  This is why Americans decided
                    that consitution, election is more important than security.
                    And at this rate, American is just going to leave and let
                    the violence taken its course.   The REALLY sad part is
                    that most Americans STILL DIDN'T learn from this lesson
                    which already cost hundres of thousands of lives.
        \_ Yes, I see the U.S. flag waving everywhere I go. I know the sun
           never sets on it. I see how we directly vote for our govern't
           just like a republic should. Despite all of this I can easily
           see that Communism is such a successful sys, that I don't know why
           we don't have it here. Yes, I don't know how or why a bigger
           country would try to make itself richer off a poorer country.
           I mean that's downright wrong - we should give away our all $
        \_ link:csua.org/u/hd8
        \_ Hey chicom, here's a more interesting question.  In order to be
           "pro-democracy" should the US support Hugo Chavez, as the elected
           leader of Argentina, or be against him because he is dismantling
           the Argentinian Democracy?
           \_ "I love *you*, but I *don't* love _you_!"   "But! We are the
              same in all ways!  Logical inconsistency!  Brain is frying!
              Mordron save us!"  Bvvvvvrrrrrrr, click.
           \_ Argentina? Hugo Chavez? There are adults speaking here.
              \_ he is one of 60% of Americans who don't know where is Mexico
                 on a world map.  give him a break.
2018/06/23 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
6/23    

2006/11/2-3 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45119 Activity:nil
11/02   I don't get it.  Moqtada Al-Sadr kidnaps a U.S. soldier.  We surrender
        our barricades and abandon him on orders of the Iraqi PM.  The
        media is largely silent.  John Kerry makes a dumb joke - SCANDAL!
        JOKEGATE! APOLOGYGATE!
        \_ I agree.  but didn't the guy marry an iraqi?  or he was an
           iraqi?  or shiite?  or sunni?  argh so confused.
2006/11/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:45098 Activity:nil
11/2    Top US general says Rumsfeld is inspired by God  http://csua.org/u/hcw
        Holy fuck.  (literally)
        \_ we need a new JCS chair, not really for the God comment, but for
           the praise of Rummy
        \_ '"He leads in a way that the good Lord tells him is best for
            our country," said Marine General Peter Pace, chairman of
            the Joint Chiefs of Staff.'
            I always figured Rummy hears voices in his head.
2006/11/2 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast, Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45088 Activity:nil
11/02   Just FYI, here's the Heritage Foundation's study about who military
        recruits are.
        http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed112905a.cfm
        \_ I like how they're "better educated than the national average"
           Given that being a member of the armed forces has standards at all
           and being a member of the country doesn't... why is this at all an
           interesting result?
2006/10/27-30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45016 Activity:nil
10/27   http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Iraq.html
        Headline:  "Iraqi Premier and U.S. Envoy Back Timetable"
        Body:  Iraq "made clear the issues that must be resolved with timelines
               for them to take positive steps forward."
        They don't match.
        \_ STAY THE COURSE.
           \- http://www.economist.com/printedition/cover_index.cfm
2006/10/24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44948 Activity:high
10/24   War Crimes committed upon illegally held detainees.
        http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/1024b1talker1024.html
        \_ The real title is "Arpaio starts 2-week mandatory English
           classes for inmates".  Inmates of a county jail, that is.
2006/10/21-24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44899 Activity:low
10/21   More evidence of Bush Administration War Crimes revealed:
        http://www.csua.org/u/h9x (news.yahoo.com)
        \_ War Crimes is what the winners do to the losers.
        \_ I don't see any evidence of war crimes on that page. Let
           me know when your FOIA request turns up the Haliburton
           contract for building "showers" in gitmo that includes a
           cost savings provision based on the fact they will be
           using pows as slave labor.
           \_ So the defense of Bush's misdeeds has moved from "he's
              better than Saddam" to "he's better than Hitler."
              Interesting.
              \_ Abuse of Power != War Crime. Maybe he has abused
                 the power of the Presidency, maybe he hasn't; but
                 whatever he has done, I just don't see it rising
                 to the level of a war crime.
                 to the level of a war crime. I think that calling
                 the President's actions war crimes serves only to
                 stifle real debate over administration's handling
                 of the WOT.
                 \_ As opposed to saying "Bush is totally better than
                    Hitler!!!!1", which fosters mature debate?  Come on.
                    No, I'm not OP, and no I have not used the word "war
                    crime".
                \_ You "just don't see it" but others, including the
                   USSC and Alberto Gonzalez, did. Looks like your
                   position is the weaker one. There is a law in the US,
                   called the "War Crimes Act" that forbids grave
                   breaches of the Geneva Convention. The USSC just
                   ruled the prisons at Gitmo are covered under
                   Art 3 of the Geneva Convention. Was the torture
                   described in the article a "grave breach"? I am not
                   sure, and I guess you must be some kind of expert
                   on International Law to be so sure that is not.
                   http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4999734
2006/10/19-21 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44867 Activity:moderate
10/19   Guys, I need your help to come up with this "Troll of the day:"
        Why today's Iraq is Republican's philisophical utopia?
        - democractic
        - small central government that governs the least
        - right to bear arm   (AK47, RPG, and IED)
        - emphasis on family value (adultry punishable by death)
        - no evolution is being taught in school
        - religion is fully interwined with government institution
        - full "personal responsibility" for average citizens
        anything else that can be added?
        \_ flat tax?  deregulation?  free trade?
           \_ Republican doesn't believe in free trade, though.
              tarrif on steel, agricultural subsidies, you name them all.
        \_ the best trolls are spelled properly.  try again.
           \_ What about chicom troll?
           \_ your sense of humor is worse than my spelling
        \_ man, i was hoping i am being funny, sigh.... op
           \_ It IS pretty funny, you just need to package it
              in a comic or something. Keep up the good work!
2006/10/18-21 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44863 Activity:high
10/18   Wow, watch the democratic party implode!  Swami's political little
        brother sure called that one right.
        \_ Huh? -motd political ignorant
        \_ ob ^democratic^republican
           \_ You're right.  The minority party imploded in 94 and never
              recovered.
        \_ http://www.csua.org/u/h9b
           A whopping 16% of Americans approve of the job the Republican
           Congress is doing. I think more than that believe that they
           have been abducted by space aliens...
           \_ and I bet there's a strong correlation between the two groups
           \_ They'd have higher poll results if they polled for everything
              they did.  I'm certain Bush didn't do a poll before getting his
              new dog.  Pretty crazy of him, huh?  Fortunately this is still
              a republic and not a democracy.
              \_ I don't want the President looking for input on what to name
                 his dog. I do want the President looking for input on whether
                 or not to cherry-pick information and invade a country with
                 no real plan for getting out.
                 \_ YOU want this and YOU want that but have you ever
                    considered what the average American wants? Hint:
                    what they want is different than what YOU want, you
                    stupid prick. The average American wants the president
                    to be confident, decisive, religious, faithful, and be
                    a good family man who keeps his penis in his pants
                    instead of fucking an intern at the White House. The
                    average American wanted all of the above in 2000 and
                    2004, and they got exactly what they asked for.
                    \_ The average American is a myth. We're a nation of 300
                       million Venn Diagrams.
                       \_ I am a man, not a Venn Dia-- er, animal!
                          \_ You are number six.
                    \_ And why Average Americans are not happy with Bush now?
                 \_ If you want to discuss the real world I'm here.  If you
                    want to dailykos on me, then go to Dailykos where you'll
                    find a zillion people who will rah-rah that sort of noise
                    instead of quoting every agency in the Western hemisphere
                    and numerous leaders from your party who believed the same
                    intel all through the 90s.  That dog don't hunt, son.
                    \_ I don't read dailykos or Mother Jones (or freep or
                       Fox News). This is the real world. The Pres. wanted to
                       invade Iraq, so he cherry-picked info to make his case.
                       Then he took the word of partisan hacks like Chalabi who
                       told him that the invasion would be over quickly because
                       we would be greeted as liberators. He ignored his
                       experienced generals like Powell, and our lack of
                       sufficient troops and a workable exit strategy led us
                       directly to the mess we're in now. If he'd taken a poll
                       of actually qualified people, they would have told him
                       this ahead of time. Believe me, I'm happy to see SH
                       gone, but this wasn't the way to handle the aftermath.
                       \_ This has been gone over so many times.  "Bush lied,
                          people died!"  "Halliburton!"  "No blood for big
                          oil!".  I'll keep it brief since it really *has*
                          been covered (and ignored) so many times: every
                          western intelligence agency in the world believed
                          SH had WMDs.  Period.  No one cherry picked anything.
                          \_ No. They all believed he WANTED WMDs. The Pres.
                             took that to mean that he had them.
                             \_ Give it up.  The quotes have been posted many
                                times.  Repeating a falsehood doesn't make it
                                true.
                                \_ I would be interested to hear what you
                                   have to say about the Carnegie Report on
                                   WMD in Iraq, 2004, particularly from p.15:
                http://www.carnegieendowment.org/npp/iraqintell/home.cfm
                                   \_ Uh ok, I went to the site, I clicked the
                                      link, then I opened the pdf, read page
                                      15 and a few pages around it.  What
                                      about it?  How does that address what I
                                      was saying?  Or if that isn't your
                                      point, explain further what you're
                                      talking about and I'll be happy to
                                      address it.
                                      \_ From page 16:
                        "In brief, the consensus of the intelligence agencies
                         in early 2002 was that:
                         -The 1991 Gulf War, UN inspections, and subsequent
                          military actions had destroyed most of
                          Iraq.s chemical, biological, nuclear, and longrange
                          missile capability.
                         -There was no direct evidence that any chemical or
                          biological weapons remained in Iraq, but agencies
                          judged that some stocks could still remain and
                          that production could be renewed.
                         -As Iraq rebuilt its facilities, some of the equipment
                          purchased for civilian use could also be used to
                          manufacture chemical or biological weapons.
                         -Without an inspection regime, it was very diffi-
                          cult to determine the status of these programs."
                                         So here are the truths. Repeating
                                         falsehoods like every western intel
                                         agency believed Saddam had WMD will
                                         not make it so.
                          \_ So, the The Carnegie Endowment for International
                             Peace essentially say there was stuff, the stuff
                             is probably gone, they've been buying stuff that
                             can be used to reconstitute their programs, but
                             because they can't inspect they don't know for
                             sure.  So, the President took a better-safe-
                             than-sorry policy.  I've got no problem with
                             that.  Now go back to the 90s like I said and
                             you'll find quotes from Clinton, Gore, and others
                             saying SH has WMDs, and no I'm not going to dig
                             them up for you (again).  They'll just get
                             ignored (again).  I said in plain English the
                             quotes were from the 90s.  If you're going to
                             call someone a liar, get it right.  I'm happy to
                             see that in the next 5 years our quality
                             intelligence agencies were able to go from "they
                             have them" to "gosh, we have no clue really but
                             they've bought the right stuff to have them if
                             they wanted".
                             \_ So what you're really saying is that you don't
                                mind if the western intel did not say that
                                SH had WMDs because you believe it was enough
                                that he might have had WMDs. Good for you.
                                Someday, like a broken clock, you will be
                                right.
                                \_ No.  I already wrote several times what I'm
                                   saying.  Putting words in my mouth is a
                                   third rate rhetorical tactic.  If you
                                   actually cared what I was saying you would
                                   have read it but you only seem interested
                                   in "winning" even if it is only in your
                                   own mind.  Go read your own links and
                                   quotes if you won't read what I said.  They
                                   say the same things I just said even if you
                                   want to misinterpret them for your ego
                                   stroking.  And thanks for turning what was
                                   a somewhat interesting discussion into the
                                   now standard motd crap, but I guess that's
                                   just the thing to do once you've run out
                                   of things to say around here.  It's ok, I've
                                   come to expect it.  I guess we're done here.
                                   Have a nice day.
                                   \_ The French did not believe it, the
                                      Russians did not believe it and the
                                      Germans did not believe it. It is too
                                      bad you drank the kool-aide. You lose.
                          We had more than enough troops for the invasion, but
                          \_ We had enough troops to invade, demolish, and get
                             out, true. We did not have enough troops on the
                             ground to keep peace afterward.
                             \_ We absolutely had enough troops.  At no point
                                were troops given orders to take control of
                                the civilian areas, martial law was never
                                declared/enforced, rampant looting was allowed
                                to go on with soldiers watching.  All in an
                                effort to win the hearts and minds.  Boo-yah!
                                \_ no we don't.  Shensaki said that based upon
                                    the experience in Bosnia and Serbia, we
                                   needed 300k-500k boots on the ground to
                                   pacify the country..
                                   \_ Based upon a different theatre, a
                                      different war, a different make up of
                                      troops, a different enemy, sigh.  If
                                      your army can conquer a region, they can
                                      certainly keep the civilian population
                                      in check *if ordered to do so*.
                          yes, they screwed up the aftermath.  Not because
                          they didn't have enough troops.  They did.  Because
                          they weren't willing to do what needed to be done
                          with them.  Another 500,000 troops would have meant
                          nothing if their orders are to *not* kill people who
                          need killing.  Had we gone with the Powell Doctrine
                          of overwhelming force then how many people would be
                          whining that, "we put so many troops in their country
                          that of course they're upset.  We should have gone
                          with a much smaller force so as not to enourage the
                          insurgency."  Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
                          \_ These mythical people who would have complained
                             do not include me or the Iraqis who wouldn't have
                             died due to the utter breakdown of civilization
                             in Baghdad.
                             \_ No, you're missing the point: a larger force
                                would have moved slower and allowed even more
                                of the pro-Saddam forces to slip into civies.
                                We had more than enough troops to militarily
                                conquer the country.  That is a historic fact
                                demonstrated 100% by what actuall happened: we
                                conquered the country in record time with
                                previously unheard of low casualties.
                                \_ A larger force could have just have easily
                                   rushed forward the same smaller force to
                                   conquer and then deployed the rest to hold
                                   and pacify. You underestimate the mobility
                                   of the US Armed Forces.
                                   \_ Logistics are extremely difficult.  All
                                      those troops need food, water, ammo,
                                      fuel, parts, bunks, training, letters
                                      to/from home, cycle time out, and a bunch
                                      of other things I'm sure I've forgotten.
                                      You don't stick half a million guys in a
                                      wasteland and tell them to just go for
                                      it.  At the time I think it was only me,
                                      Rumsefelf, and Bush who believed the
                                      Iraqis were going to be swept aside.  The
                                      rest of the world was talking about a
                                      50k loss and months of hard fighting and
                                      endless body bags and baby killers and
                                      "omg itll be a quagmire just like Vietnam
                                      all over again!".  They had the troops to
                                      secure the ammo dumps.  They didn't.
                                      They had the troops to stop the looting.
                                      They didn't.  The orders never came
                                      down.  Had they cracked down hard on day
                                      1 in Baghdad the rest of the country
                                      would have continued in the same "never
                                      really had a central government anyway"
                                      kind of way they had for decades.  The
                                      so-called Sunni Triangle has Baghdad as
                                      one of the points.  That is where all
                                      the trouble began and where a tremendous
                                      number of problems still exist today.
                                      Falluja is a good example.  We did
                                      nothing while it turned into a swamp.
                                      Then we sort of half assed a kind of
                                      nothing not-quite, nevermind lets go
                                      home attack.  It got worse.  Then we
                                      sent in a real force and killed everyone
                                      who raised a gun.  It is reasonably
                                      quiet there today.  I'm stunned they had
                                      the balls to order that especially after
                                      the grave disappointed and leadership
                                      cowardice shown on the first non-attempt.
                                      You underestimate the abilities and
                                      training of the American military.
                                      Shensaki wanted a Vietnam style Powell
                                      Doctrine troop flood.  Yes, let's
                                      repeat our previous mistakes by
                                      refighting previous wars just as poorly
                                      using the same tactics that worked so
                                      poorly then.
                                      \_ Here's what I'm getting from this:
                                         I'm arguing a fantasy based on the
                                         idea that more troops, more research,
                                         and not disbanding the Iraqi bureau-
                                         cratic machine might have led to a
                                         better situation in Iraq; you're
                                         arguing a fantasy that martial law
                                         and more aggressive action would have
                                         led to a better situation in Iraq.
                                         We're both agreed that the current
                                         situation suffered once the invasion
                                         was over.
                                         \_ I'm not arguing fantasy.  I'm
                                            arguing based on history.  Wars
                                            have always been won by applying
                                            force, and by killing people until
                                            they stop fighting back.  I have
                                            no idea what you're arguing, but
                                            if you'd like to call your
                                            arguments a fantasy, I'm ok with
                                            that.
                                            \_ Why did we lose Vietnam? Why
                                               did the German's never wipe
                                               our the Russian partisans?
                                               out the Russian partisans?
                                               Why did the Poles never give
                                               up nor the Yugoslavs? How
                                               about India or Algria or
                                               about India or Algeria or
                                               Indonesia? Your view of how
                                               guerilla warfare works is
                                               ignorant.
                                               \_ Vietnam: lack of will at
                                                  home.  It was won militarily
                                                  after the Tet Offensive.
                                                  Russians, Poles, Yugoslavs:
                                                  conquered and reduced to a
                                                  history book footnote.
                                                  What about India, Algeria,
                                                  or Indonesia?  Your view of
                                                  what went down in Iraq post
                                                  invasion is what is ignorant,
                                                  and you continue to ignore
                                                  what I've been saying.  There
                                                  was no reason to have an
                                                  insurgency if we had done
                                                  the right thing on day 1 or
                                                  even up to a week later.
                                                  It's been mildly entertaining
                                                  but you're now grasping
                                                  wildly at straws tossing out
                                                  random other country names in
                                                  the apparent hope of I'm not
                                                  sure what.  It was fun but
                                                  now we're done.  Go ahead
                                                  and take another random
                                                  potshot, have the last word
                                                  to soothe your ego and we're
                                                  done.  I won't reply to this
                                                  thread any further.  Have a
                                                  nice day.
                                                  \_ FWIW, you're arguing with
                                                     at least three different
                                                     people now. As far as
                                                     fantasy goes, there's no
                                                     way of knowing whether
                                                     your solution or mine (or)
                                                     would have worked because
                                                     neither was tried, and
                                                     every situation is diff-
                                                     erent. I _get_ the pre-
                                                     cedent for the success of
                                                     martial law, and I would
                                                     have been interested to
                                                     see what would have
                                                     happened if it had been
                                                     implemented-- but it was
                                                     not, and so it's pure
                                                     conjecture at this point
                                                     to say that it would have
                                                     been an unqualified
                                                     success. The same goes for
                                                     my suggestions. That said,
                                                     this is not debate club,
                                                     and I have no illusion
                                                     that I'm going to con-
                                                     vince you of the superior-
                                                     ity of my suggestion.
                                                   \_ The point is almost any
                                                      country that fought
                                                      against colonial
                                                      occupation in the last
                                                      50 years has emerged
                                                      triumphant. As will Iraq.
                                                      \_ Tibet?
                                                      \_ Hopefully not because
                                                         I think that would
                                                         make Iraq the first
                                                         country ever to
                                                         resist democracy.
                                                         This is not an act of
                                                         colonisation.  Then
                                                         again this is the
                                                         Middle East and theyre
                                                         all a bunch of raving
                                                         lunatics so whatever.
                             \_ how about disbanding the Iraqi army? not
                                securing the the ammunition dump?  allowing
                                disbanded army to melt into civilians is the
                                worse thing can happen.
                                \_ I still say disbanding the army was the
                                   better of two poor choices.  Not securing
                                   the dumps falls under the "didn't declare
                                   martial law" category and I agree that was
                                   stupid.
                          And a brief word on Chalabi: who *isnt* partisan but
                          has an interest and contacts in his third world
                          government?  Everyone has an agenda.  There is no
                          mythical neutral person out there who just wanted
                          what was "best for the Iraqi people".
                          \_ Chalabi is/was a snake who is/was never trusted by
                             people in Iraq. A bit of digging would have
                             revealed this. Instead, he was believed because
                             what he had to say fit what the Pres. and his
                             advisors wanted to hear.
                             \_ They're all snakes.  That's the point.  At some
                                point you have to pick your guy(s) and go with
                                it.  No digging was required.  He was already
                                known to be a snake.  It wasn't a secret.
                                Anyone else would've been a snake, only the
                                name would change.
                                \_ Then we should have picked a snake who
                                   actually had an idea of the real picture in
                                   Iraq, someone the Iraqis could have backed.
                                   \_ The problem with that is there is no
                                      such thing as an "Iraqi".  They don't
                                      see themselves in national terms which
                                      is why they've had such a hard time
                                      forming an effective government and
                                      associated services.  They see themselves
                                      as Sunni, Shia, and Kurd and with good
                                      reason.  There is *no one* the mythical
                                      average Iraqi could have backed.  I
                                      think Chalabi had an excellent idea of
                                      what was going on.  He abused his
                                      position for personal gain and got
                                      busted and now he's out of the picture.
                                      The abuse is the snake part.  It is to
                                      be expected.
                          On exit strategies: there is no exit strategy when
                          your initial plan doesn't include killing enough of
                          the enemy to break his will.  When I saw reports of
                          the Iraqi army vanishing into the civilian population
                          I knew we were in for it, but there was no way to
                          stop that.  We could not have moved any faster and
                          \_ err., we DISBANDED THE ENTIRE ARMY, remember?
                             de-Baathification?
                             \_ Yes.  And I still prefer that to replacing the
                                bastard we knew with a new bastard from SH's
                                old military.  That would be the definition of
                                failure.  The idea wasn't to replace one
                                bastard with another.  The idea was to clean
                                the whole lot out.  And I sure as hell wouldn't
                                want the Baathist army running around still
                                slaughtering civilians in the name of stability
                                on my watch.
                          your Powell Doctrine sized army would have taken
                          another 3-6 months to build up, moved slower, taken
                          more casualties and allowed even more Iraqi military
                          to disolve into the general population.
                          \_ The Iraqi army disappeared into the population
                             because they didn't want to fight for SH. A better
                             and more honest analysis of the situation would
                             have revealed this and would have shown that the
                             dissolution of the IA was a bad idea; reform
                             would have been a better idea. There were people
                             in place at the time who could have helped with
                             that. Now there are not.
                             \_ The disappeared because they were getting
                                crushed.  Not even crushed.  They were getting
                                swept from the battle field as if they were
                                never on it.  Fighting a classic insurgency
                                campaign was the only alternative.  That is
                                why SH and his pals were handing out cash left
                                and right before the fall.  It was part of a
                                staged plan because they knew they couldn't
                                stop the allied forces.  As far as disolving
                                the army goes, it's one of those ugly choices
                                with no good answer.  Disolve it and rebuild
                                from scratch which takes time or keep the same
                                bastards in place who were responsible for
                                mass killing of their own civilians yet
                                maintain order?  I think they made the better
                                call.  The army was Sunni run and would have
                                just replaced SH with another Sunni military
                                dictator making the whole thing for naught.
                                At least this way there is a chance of doing
                                something better than replacing one bastard
                                with another.
                                \_ This does not match the real situation which
                                   was that SH had created a cult of
                                   personality such that no one had power out-
                                   side of him. Kill/capture SH, and the rest
                                   would have fallen apart. This is why we
                                   tried to get him with missiles several times
                                   before invading.
                                   \_ There was no cult of personality.  He
                                      had supreme power because like most
                                      dictators he (mostly) rewarded loyalty
                                      while torturing and executing disloyalty.
                                      Cult of personality?  Er, uh, what?
                          Final word at this time: we have more than enough
                          troops.  Our leadership lacked the will to allow
                          them to do what they were trained to do: find and
                          kill the enemy in sufficient numbers to break his
                          will to fight.  That is how wars have always been
                          won.  Not this hearts and minds garbage.
                          \_ The enemy was found and killed or captured. The
                             enemy was SH, not the Iraqi people (or even the
                             Iraqi army). But because we focused on finding
                             and killing/capturing the enemy, we let the
                             country slide into ruin. GHWB understood this, and
                             that's why he didn't push all the way to Baghdad
                             in GWI. You can't leave a power vacuum, or
                             anarchy will descend.
s
                             \_ The enemy was not SH nor the people.  It was
                                SH's military and intelligence establishment
                                as headed by SH.  The army was not some bunch
                                of poor innocent victims.  The lowest end
                                grunts were constripts and draftees, but
                                anyone in the officer core was scum and in
                                good need of jail or killing.  The country fell
                                to ruin because we didn't have a post invasion
                                plan and probably didn't think about or even
                                care about it.  And the only plan that would
                                have worked is not something they would have
                                done: declared martial law, rounded up the
                                thugs and executed or long term imprisoned
                                them.  I do absolutely agree with you about
                                power vaccuums.  We created one the moment the
                                SH government vanished and we failed to take
                                control.  We had the troops, we lacked the
                                will at the leadership level.
        \_ HAHAHA SUCK IT CONS! You lied, you are going to now pay for your
           lies and incompetence. Too bad all the rest of us are going to
           have to pay for and clean up your mess. Can we levy a tax on
           Bushbots to pay reparations to Iraq?
           link:www.csua.org/u/h9k
           \_ I'm guessing a tinyurl with no attribution from a troll isn't
              work safe but thanks for caring enough to post.
              \_ Work safe chart of stock market-esque tracking of the House
                 GOP.
2006/10/18-21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44851 Activity:kinda low
10/17   There are times I wish Democrats can just take a stance and stand
        firm, like John Murtha:
        http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/pa12_murtha/PRwashpostoped.html
        \_ Who coined the phrase "nattering nabobs of negativism"? 'Cos that's
           what goes through my head whenever I hear GOP name-calling.
           Also, a thought-provoking piece. Thank you.
           \_ Spiro Agnew.  Whose name anagrams to "grow a penis."  -tom
              \_ Is the anagram important for some reason?  Is this anything
                 like spinning a record backwards to hear Satan speak?
                 \_ To win the game you must kill john romero
              \_ I seem to recall reading somewhere that it was FDR.  -John
        \_ hasn't Hillary held a pretty firm stance over the last 2 years?
           \_ She has always had a firmly nuanced stand on all issues, which
              may or may not depend on her current audience, the polls and
              public mood, or other possible factors or non-factors as
              politically appropriate.  Until such time as the stance may or
              may not need to change according to the blowing winds.  Yes,
              she has been absolutely firm in her stance for at least a week.
              Unless she hasn't.
              \_ Yes, we should all be like fucking George W Bush,
                 despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, "We
                 did the right thing, Sir!".
                 \_ One thing being bad doesn't make the other thing good.
                    The current admin is over January 2009.  I'd prefer the
                    next admin be one that has a world view that goes beyond
                    the current news/polling cycle *and* does it right.  What
                    is so wrong with that?  Clinton is not that person.
                    \_ observating from outside of USA, I have to inform you
                       that current administration's world view is pretty
                       fucked up and what happen today is merely a reflection
                       of that.  There is a reason why US stance in the world
                       is at the all-time-low and majority of people, even
                       Europeans, think that USA is a greater threat to the
                       security of the world than Islamic Extremelism.
                       \_ Here's the thing: I really don't care what the rest
                          of the world thinks beyond how it directly has a
                          negative impact on this country.  The rest of the
                          world doesn't have to like us.  They can hate us
                          as much as they want so long as they keep doing
                          business with us the rest of their feelings don't
                          amount to much in my book.  So you might ask (and if
                          not I'm telling you anyway) what does matter to me?
                          Dead Americans matter.  The problem with Iraq is not
                          the initial invasion, it is the poor post-invasion
                          planning, the namby pamby Vietnam style execution of
                          the war on the ground, and general lack of balls.
                          Wars are not about winning hearts and minds.  They
                          are about killing the enemy until they break.  No
                          war has ever been won by winning over the general
                          populace of the target nation.  None.  Ever.  If they
                          didn't have the balls to go in, kill everyone who
                          needed killing, set up a puppet government and get
                          the hell out they never should have gone in in the
                          first place.  Back to the EU opinion thing for a
                          moment: the EU is demographically doomed.  Their
                          opinion regarding the ever growing Islamic extremist
                          threat all around them vs. their ridiculous "we hate
                          daddy/USA because we want to be super powers again,
                          too!" is useless.  If they don't get their act
                          together their culture will be subsumed and cease to
                          exist as such by the end of this century.  This is a
                          unique time in the world's history.  Never before
                          have so many people had such freedom and power on an
                          individual level.  It is the rest of the world
                          beyond the West that is normal for human history and
                          if our culture is not vigorously defended this time
                          will be remembered as nothing more than that few
                          extra years it took to crush the non-believers.  You
                          are at war whether you like it or not.  Your enemies
                          are not short term politicians you don't like.  I
                          find the "USA is the greatest threat to world peace!"
                          slogan childish and historically poorly informed.
                          I'm glad I'm young enough that I think I'll get to
                          see exciting sweeping changes across the world but
                          old enough that I should be dead before it gets
                          really bad.
                          \_ I hereby dub thee "wordcount".
                             \- if you are say a poor person in say malawi and
                                madonna isnt about to adopt you, frankly your
                                life, both in terms of possible upside or
                                downside is going to be more affected by
                                the united states than it is by nkorea, cuba,
                                bolivia, libya etc. when the US pushes its own
                                agenda in something like the doha trade round,
                                or spews out pollution at a per capita rate
                                far above everybody else, it has real con-
                                sequences for people, just as US research into
                                medicine and agriculture in the past had real
                                benefits. yes, this is not "i am going to
                                steal your land and rape your women" type of
                                "old style" adverse consequences but
                                nonetheless self-serving free trades regimes,
                                self-serving ip regimes etc have real
                                consequnces. for some people it has to do with
                                who what share of the profits but for the
                                very poor, they can be pushed into what
                                jeffrey sachs calls "the poverty that kills".
                                jeffrey saches calls "the poverty that kills".
                                we think of scorpions and black widows as
                                nasty, dangerous animals, more so than
                                elephants, but i bet elephants are responsible
                                for more destruction and death.
                \_ Hillary has said that her excuse that she is the one
                   lone freshman senator who's every single legislative move
                   is micro analyzed by lasers because of her status
                   \_ status?  what status?  if it wasn't for her 'status'
                      she wouldn't had been elected.  being special cuts both
                      ways.
           \_ Like her firm and deeply researched demands that Rockstar Games
              be held liable for a third-party patch?  If this is an omen of
              the "Gvt Will Be Your Mommy" she wants to replace Bush's "Gvt
              Will Be Your Daddy", I'm not looking forward to it.
              \_ fine, her internet law congressional staffer must be
                 a fucking moron.  she probably was involved because
                 rock star games is in NY.  i doubt any Senator out there
                 has publicly said they are pro GTA.
2006/10/16-19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44837 Activity:nil
10/16   http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/16/iraq.poll/index.html
        Seven out of 10 women giving aid and comfort to the Enemy
        \_ "However, President George W. Bush personally assured the Iraqi prime
           minister Monday that he has no plans to pull U.S. troops out and
           that there is no U.S. timeline for Iraqi forces to take over."
           Boy, it makes _me_ feel better to know there's no timeline to hand
           things over to the Iraqis.
           \_ Bush found out that "we stand down as they stand up" sounded too
              much like "cutting and running".
              \_ this is the part i don't understand.  what is wrong with
                 "cutting and running?"  we are already done that in
                 Afghanistan.
                 \_ probably because Afghanistan was always a mess and we
                    never really made a serious commitment to turning it into
                    a real country.  the rest of the world and half of this
                    country didn't think we'd even win militarily.  but iraq,
                    although a brutal dictatorship, was still a functioning
                    government and there's a healthy dose of break-it-bought-it
                    that goes with destroying another nation's government. so
                    we owe the iraqi people some form of real government but
                    afghanistan never had that so the bar is lower.
2006/10/13-14 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:44812 Activity:nil
10/13   British Army head receives overwhelming support from military
        http://csua.org/u/h71 (guardian.co.uk)
        One senior officer says chief's statements hurt morale
        http://csua.org/u/h73 (telegraph.co.uk)
        PM Blair says he agrees "with every word" ... of Army chief's follow-on
        statements
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6049126.stm
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6046822.stm
2006/10/12-14 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44794 Activity:nil
10/12   http://csua.org/u/h6i (latimes.com)
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/10/12/iraq.main/index.html
        Libural media receive their just deserts - all 13 males at Baghdad TV
        station shot with weapons muffled by silencers (two females let go).
        Gunmen pulled up in six cars resembling police vehicles at 7am, some
        wearing police uniforms.  Neighbors and nearby guards heard no gunfire.
        "That there were no holes or cracks in these glass dividers which
        means that the executioners are professionals, not ordinary killers"
        \- gee, at least anarchy is temporary
           \_ so's life.
2006/10/12-14 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:44793 Activity:nil
10/12   http://csua.org/u/h6k (dailymail.co.uk)
        Head of the British Army says "our presence in Iraq exacerbates" the
        "difficulties we are experiencing around the world", says should
        "get ourselves out sometime soon".  Also calls for UK soldiers to
        recover in military wards, and laments decline of "Judeo-Christian
        tradition" in UK and rise of Islamic extremism.
        \_ I love how he manages to blame (apparently secular) liberalism for
           the horrible state of British affairs.
        \_ so he wants the uk to go isolationist and pray to jesus?
2006/10/11-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44778 Activity:low
10/11   Iraqi are better off?  Tell 1 in 40 Iraqis who died since the US
        invasion:  http://tinyurl.com/geore
        \_ Your knee jerked before you checked--this has already been posted
           today.
        \_ The Iraqi Deputy PM was on NPR yesterday, and I found his
           perspective enlightening. He said that no matter how bad the
           situation is now, nothing compares to the horror of living under
           Saddam. That said, he also pointed out that he was in no way saying
           that things are rosy or even good now. All in all, a fascinating
           interview clip. --erikred
           \- well, i obviously have no experience with iraq, but i think
              there is something to the following "a priori" argument:
              in the saddam era, rights and freedom were curtailed but
              the violence wasnt random. there was a good chance you could
              "choose" to keep your head down, go along to get along, and it
              was highly likely you would be left alone. however, today it
              seems it is quite likely anytime you leave the house to go
              buy some cheese, go to work, apply for a job you will get
              blown up. there is something to the hobbesian position that
              anarchy is worse than tyranny. consider how freaked out london
              was when the ira was planting bombs or those crazy sniper doods
              were shooting people in Washington DC ... the numbers in iraq
              are 100x or 1000x worse ... i think that affects life in ways
              which just canot be appreciated at a distance [just like you
              cant imagine what life is like under say hyperinflation].
              \_ The difference being that tyranny has no end.  Anarchy is a
                 temporary state.  Power will always gather around some person
                 or group who will then seize control for better or worse.
                 \_ Armed anarchy is merely detente thuggery.
           \_ This guy is just a Bush troll and needs to be replaced by
              someone who better understands the Iraqi people and their
              situation like some motd posters.
              \_ Point of clarification: I'm a Bush troll or the Iraqi Deputy
                 PM is a Bush troll? --erikred
                 \_ The Iraqi DPM is a Bush troll.  Why else would he say that
                    over 650k dead Iraqis, 550k of them in the last 2 years
                    is ok?
                    \_ He didn't. In fact, what he said was that he disputed
                       the numbers but was opposed to saying "only" 30-100k
                       as if any number would be a good thing. It was on All
                       Things Considered. I'll see if I can dig up a URL for
                       you. Here you go: http://csua.org/u/h6j (NPR)
2006/10/11-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44774 Activity:low 80%like:44769
10/11   The invasion of Iraq may have caused 650,000 Iraqi deaths.
        http://tinyurl.com/fjqs7 (online.wsj.com)
        \_ Yawn.  May have?  In the same way there was 'up to' 800 killed on
           the Bay Bridge from the Loma Prieta quake as reported by the Daily
           Cal.  These guys admit they time and public with a political
           agenda.  Where are these 650k bodies?  They don't just vanish like
           in a video game.
        \_ Video of Lancet editor speaking at anti-war rally:
           http://csua.org/u/h5w
        \_ "caused" -- no.  This is Lancet II.  Once again timed to come out
           just before an election.
           \_ do you have a point?
           \_ The Lancet debunkers have been...debunked.
              \_ Well, I was the most outspoken critic of the Lancet study.
                 Some good arguments here convinced me I was wrong about a bias
                 from selecting locations.  However, the motives of getting the
                 result out just before an election, and the trust that any
                 errors in the study trended towards a lower mortality rate are
                 still there. -emarkp
                 \_ Do you still believe the Iraq War is the right thing?
                    \_ He's not replying because he's still embarrassed
                       about his stance that he no longer believes in:
                       http://csua.com/?entry=35423
                    \_ It was the right thing.  The post war plan was either
                       non-existent or executed poorly.  There's a difference.
                       \_ The pre- and post-war planning was misguided.
                 \_ So they should have waited until after the election, like
                    James Baker's "secret plan" to fix the war?
                    \_ No, but "rushing" the study to get it out before the
                       election is a bit problematic. -emarkp
                       \_ I really doubt anything like this actually affects
                          elections. People pretty much either know about this
                          stuff or don't care. To the latter this is more
                          noise. To the former they already have their opinion.
                          \_ Actually, the non-partisan voters are increasing.
                             And for people on the fence, this may make a
                             difference.
                             \_ People on the fence about this particular
                                issue are idiots. I doubt they would even
                                hear about this.
                             \_ Actually, they are not.  The true "genius"
                                of Karl Rove was his realization that the
                                mythical "swing voters" were disappearing,
                                and the way to win elections was purely
                                through base-pandering (c.f. 2004 election).
                                \_ At least here in CA, (I) is growing, while
                                   (R) and (D) are shrinking.
                                   \_ Because many non-motd readers have
                                      figured out that both parties suck and
                                      are full of criminals at the top.
                \_ There's always an election coming up somewhere.
                   \_ Last study came out Oct 2004.  This time Oct 2006.
2006/10/11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44769 Activity:high 80%like:44774
10/11   The invasion of Iraq may have caused 650,000 Iraqi deaths.
        http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB116052896787288831-lMyQjAxMDE2NjEwMDUxMjA4Wj.html
        \_ "caused" -- no.  This is Lancet II.  Once again timed to come out
           just before an election.
           \_ do you have a point?
           \_ The Lancet debunkers have been...debunked.
              \_ Well, I was the most outspoken critic of the Lancet study.
                 Some good arguments here convinced me I was wrong about a bias
                 from selecting locations.  However, the motives of getting the
                 result out just before an election, and the trust that any
                 errors in the study trended towards a lower mortality rate are
                 still there. -emarkp
2006/10/11-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Korea] UID:44764 Activity:nil
10/11   http://www.csua.org/u/h5n
        Former senator Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) faulted the administration for focusing\
        on Iraq first, when greater threats loomed in North Korea and Iran.
        "We started with Iraq in the 'axis of evil' side, when we thought they
        did not yet have nuclear weapons, and that sent the signal to others
        that they better get them quick," he said. "I think we started on the
        wrong end of that."
        \_ Re: last quote: O RLY?
        \_ Anyone have a Sam Nunn quote from before the war telling us this?
2006/10/9-10 [Science/GlobalWarming, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44731 Activity:very high
10/8    Bush diplomacy comes to its logical conclusion:
        Threatening three countries, labeling them the "Axis of Evil" and
        then invading one of them for no real reason causes the other two
        to pursue nuclear weapons to defend themselves. Good job, neocons,
        are you actually double agents out to destroy America or are you just
        that stupid?
        \_ you are unamerican.  there is a "relationship" between Iraq and
           9/11.  And we are making progress in Iraq:
           http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6221366
           (NPR: U.S. Monthly Toll in Iraq at Highest Point in 2 Years)
           see, we are breaking records!
        \_ Except for the fact that all three countries were working on nukes
           many years before 2000, this is an excellent analysis.  ;-)
           \_ missing the point.  imagine if we are not stuck in Iraq,
              we would of have a lot more options against N.Korea, no?
              \_ No, not really.  Even with a WWII sized draft size army we
                 would not invade NK.  Current military doctrine is to bomb
                 from high flying jets/bombers and missiles from Navy TF way
                 over the horizon, not put a million men on the ground.
                 \_ And Israel demonstrated how effective that is when they
                    used it against Hezbollah.
                    \_ I didn't say it was effective.  Anyway, the NK have the
                       sort of traditional WWII style army which it would
                       *mostly* work against but that wouldn't matter anyway.
            \_ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134625,00.html
               WASHINGTON. The chief U.S. arms inspector in Iraq has found
               no evidence of weapons of mass destruction (search) production
               by Saddam Hussein's (search) regime after 1991.
               no evidence of weapons of mass destruction production
               by Saddam Hussein's regime after 1991.
               U.S. officials also said the report shows Saddam was much
               farther away from a nuclear weapons program in 2003 than he
               was between 1991 and 1993; there is no evidence that Iraq and
               Al Qaeda exchanged weapons; and there is no evidence that
               Al Qaeda and Iraq shared information, technology or personnel
               in developing weapons.
               \_ Yeah no kidding "after 1991".  What a weird date to go by.
                  I wonder what happened at that time?  And how exactly do
                  we know all this?  We had to invade to find out.  Thanks
                  for the update.
                  \_ Um, is this sarcasm? Desert Storm happened in 1991.
                     \_ Yes that was sarcasm pointing out that "no big surprise
                        that after 1991 Hussein's ability to produce weapons
                        was greatly reduced since he just got smashed".  And
                        "being farther or closer" to nukes isn't the point at
                        all anyway since it was about all 3 countries having
                        worked on a nuke program long prior to 2000.  GWB has
                        screwed up any number of things like all Presidents
                        (because they're human) but Iraq, Iran and NK working
                        on nukes had *nothing* to do with him as the op
                        falsely claims.  Lay blame where it belongs but there's
                        no need to rewrite history to create fault where none
                        exists.
                        \_ So you don't think threatening to invade a country
                           has anything to do with them working on producing
                           weaponry? What color is the sky in your world?
                           \_ The nukes were in development while Bush JR was
                              in rehab.  Go see what the OP said.  It flies
                              in the face of reality.  Was Clinton threatening
                              them?  Bush Sr?  Reagan?  No.  So why build
                              nukes?  Lots of reasons but none of them having
                              to do with Bush Jr. threatening them or the US
                              in general.  Blue.  If you want to drag this to
                              some other topic, that's fine, but what you're
                              saying has nothing to do with the OP's claims.
                              \_ They *were* in development, then Iraq
                                 *stopped* working on them. NK *was* working
                                 on them, then *stopped* working on them,
                                 until they were threatened. I honestly
                                 don't know the status of Iran's nuclear
                                 weapon program but it certainly was
                                 accelerated after Bush's threat to Iran.
                                 Do you honestly believe that these countries
                                 slowed down their weapon's research in
                                 response to a credible outside threat?
                                 Is this your serious contention?
                                 \_ Iraq stopped because they got crushed in
                                    GW1, geeze.  Iran never stopped as far as
                                    we know.  NK never stopped for any lengthy
                                    period of time as far as we know.  And in
                                    each case they were started during a
                                    previous administration.  This is historic
                                    fact.  I make no other contentions in
                                    that regard.  As far as Iran goes, btw,
                                    their original reason for the pro-nuke
                                    policy change from their original "nukes
                                    are against the Koran" policy was getting
                                    their ass kicked by Iraqi gas attacks.
                                    That wasn't Jr's fault either.  As far as
                                    their speed of research goes, I'm sure
                                    they were already going as fast as possible
                                    because getting them second in the region
                                    doesn't have nearly the same weight as
                                    being first.  What gave you the idea they
                                    were just slowly crawling along until the
                                    Great Satan turned his Evil Eye their way?
                                    Is it your contention that NK and Iran and
                                    Iraq had no serious interest in nukes until
                                    the Great Satantic Dictator came to power
                                    in the US and all was rainbows and
                                    chocolate rivers before that?  Seriously,
                                    give it a rest.  This is all history book
                                    stuff.
                                    \_ Yes, it is my serious contention that
                                       Iraq was not doing any nuclear research
                                       and not only was not making progress
                                       towards developing one, they were
                                       actually going backwards as they
                                       lost skill and capability. This is not
                                       just my contention, it was the finding
                                       of the bipartisan Iraq commission. Do
                                       you dispute those findings? Lots of
                                       countries "have interest" in things.
                                       We should not start wars because
                                       of a nations interest in something,
                                       only because it is an actual threat.
                                       Furthermore, it is my contention that
                                       NK was mostly abiding by the terms of
                                       the Clinton sponsored UN guidelines,
                                       where they agreed to halt nuclear
                                       research in return for free nuclear
                                       power. Soon after Bush's "Axis of Evil"
                                       speech, NK renounced the agreement,
                                       broke the seals on the nuclear rods
                                       and turned off the UN nonitor cameras.
                                       The CIA agrees with me, btw, at least
                                       according to The Washington Times,
                                       a paper not usually known for its
                                       pro-Clinton stance:
                                       http://www.csua.org/u/h5f
                                       "North Korea announced last year that
                                        it had a secret program to enrich
                                        uranium for nuclear weapons. It then
                                        expelled international inspectors who
                                        had been monitoring the nuclear weapons\
                                        freeze and restarted the small
                                        5-megawatt reactor. "
                                       \_ Uh, yes, secret NK program.  Thanks
                                          for making my point there.  As far
                                          as Iraq goes, of course they went
                                          backwards after GW1.  What else
                                          would happen?  And they had to go
                                          backwards from something, meaning
                                          they had already conducted research.
                                          Man, I thought I was going to have to
                                          go find an actual link when I first
                                          saw how long your post was with a
                                          link and all but all you've done is
                                          support what I've been saying all
                                          along: those 3 countries had nuke
                                          programs while Jr. was in rehab.
                                          Thanks for saving me the hassle of
                                          finding a link.  I'll take your WT
                                          link as is.  Going home now.  Have a
                                          nice evening.
                                          \_ So I guess we agree that I have
                                             made my point: Bush's trash talking
                                             and belligerent warmongering have
                                             resulted in America being less
                                             safe. Thanks for playing.
2006/10/7-10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44717 Activity:nil
10/7    I've been watching HBO's Rome series (about 80% historically accurate,
        20% gratuitous), so this Robert Harris NYT OpEd piece struck home:
        http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/30/opinion/30harris.html
2006/10/5-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44704 Activity:low
10/5    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/05/washington/05doctrine.html
        Left-wing counter-insurgency tactics infect new Army field manual
        "The more force used, the less effective it is."
        "Tactical success guarantees nothing."
        "The more you protect your force, the less secure you are."
        \_ You should read "The Men Who Stare at Goats".
        \_ I'd say those are more like commie traitor tactics than left
           wing.  Or perhaps, socialist. --!the invisible hand
           \_ Who cares.  There are only two ways to fight a guerilla force.
              You need LOTS of dudes to get friendly with the natives,
              and convince them that their life is/would/will be a lot
              better if they cooperate with the occupying force,
              BEFORE the guerilla forces become well entrenched.  After
              they get entrenched... the only way to win is to kill
              everyone.
        \_ These are all views espoused by the infamous commie insurgent
           Sun Tzu. You may remember him; his work, The Art of War, is
           required reading at West Point and Annapolis.
           \_ That was a rockin good game for the day.
2006/10/5-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:44701 Activity:high
10/5    I don't care about Michelle Malkin.  Or Reps assfucking
        pages.  or George Soros.  What I do care about is the administration
        getting torture techniques legalized.  What is really funny
        is they are modeled on stuff used by the russians, the khmer
        rouge, the real bad guys of the 20th century.  what gwbush
        forgets is those guys tortured people to get confessions,
        not to get real live intel that they could act on.  assholes.
        \_ Colin Powell learned this the hard way.  One of the "evidence"
           he presented in United Nation was "extracted" from some "terrorist"
           who later said he said that to stop the torture.
           America should of draw a hard lesson learned from French
           and its Algerian Revolution.  Once you start to torture and loose
           the moral high-ground, you loose legimacy on this struggle.
           \_ Surely you have a link to back this up--or maybe you're just
              blowing this out your ass.  Oh, and for all the mantra-chanting
              that torture doesn't work, we have proof that at least
              waterboarding does:
              9/21  In other torture news, ABC reporter Brian Ross reports that
              torture works.  Video clip: http://csua.org/u/gyd
              \_ You know what?  I don't care it works or not.  This is not
                 an episode of 24.  I live
                 in fucking UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  The best
                 country in the WORLD.  Or so I thought.  Why the fuck
                 are we torturing people?  I'm going to quit my
                 job and devote my life to ANSWER or something, this makes
                 me so mad.
                 \_ You're right, this isn't 24.  If things go bad REAL PEOPLE
                    FUCKING DIE.  And so I want our gov't to use the tools that
                    work against these animals.
                    \_ Yes, first step is dehumanizing your opponent.  Then,
                       you can justify any degree of mistreatment for any
                       reason.  They do it to us, we do it to them.  You
                       filthy capitalist American infidel pig-dog!  You
                       deserve to die, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.  You fucking
                       idiot, we must not become our enemy.
                       \_ We are not becoming our enemy.  We know that
                          waterboarding was used on top Al Qaeda people, not
                          necessarily on any random person.  Meanwhile, our
                          enemy CUTS THE HEADS OFF OUR PEOPLE IF THEY'RE
                                \_ To them, "our people" are filthy infidel
                                   Americans who deserve beheading.  To you,
                                   they are damn animals who deserve
                                   waterboarding.
                          CAPTURED.  You are apparently incapable of telling
                          the difference.
                          \_ So you're okay with indefinite detention on the
                             word of the executive?  Redefinition of what
                             constitutes torture on the same word?  As long
                             as we don't decapitate people, you're fine with
                             your government's actions?
                             \_ For a small number of people, indefinite
                                detention is okay.  And no, my threshold is
                                lower than decapitaction.  But it's higher than
                                waterboarding.
                                \_ Then you're unamerican, undemocratic, and
                                   truly a danger to the future of our country.
                                \_ Do you understand what happens during
                                   waterboarding? Would you be willing to have
                                   it done to you in a reasonably safe
                                   environment in order to demonstrate its
                                   acceptability?
                                   \_ Yes I understand.  I've talked with
                                      military guys who've gone through SERE
                                      training and were waterboarded.  I
                                      suspect you don't know what it is.  Hint:
                                      it's not putting someone's head
                                      underwater.
                                      \_ No. It's placing the client on his
                                         back with his head lower than his
                                         torso, then putting a plastic bag or
                                         other dam in place and then filling
                                         the reservoir around the client's
                                         with water. The water then fills the
                                         nose and upper respiratory tract,
                                         giving the immediate impression of
                                         drowning. A doctor is generally kept
                                         on hand to monitor the client's
                                         life signs and to ressucitate,
                                         through CPR and/or defib if the client
                                         somehow aspirates the water. If this
                                         is somehow something that you would
                                         not mind being applied to one of your
                                         loved ones without trial or reason
                                         other than goverment suspicion, then
                                         I propose that you try this first to
                                         to show us how it's not that bad.
                                         \_ Not how I heard it from someone who
                                            went through it.  No reservoir
                                            necessary, just a very wet cloth
                                            put over the face.  Your version
                                            sounds fine to me as well.
                                            \_ If this is somehow something
                                               that you would not mind being
                                               applied to one of your loved
                                               ones without trial or reason
                                               other than goverment suspicion,
                                               then I propose that you try
                                               this first to show us how it's
                                               fine.
                          \_ The thing you fail to grasp is that without trials,
                             without due process, we aren't necessarily
                             torturing those evil beheading enemies of ours,
                             we're torturing innocent people.  This isn't a
                             hypothetical... it's already happened.
                          \_ The thing you fail to grasp is that without
                             trials, without due process, we aren't
                             necessarily torturing those evil beheading
                             enemies of ours, we're torturing innocent
                             people.  This isn't a hypothetical... it's
                             already happened.
                             \_ Eggs, omelettes...
                             \_ What you fail to understand is that
                                concepts of criminality (such as the
                                presumption of innocence) may not be
                                applicable to warfare. Due process is
                                generally not applicable to prisoners
                                of war. Anyway, there is something to
                                lighten the mood:
                                link:tinyurl.com/ejakx (comics.com)
              \_ I'm not watching an O'Reilley clip. Do you have another
                 source for this? Surely if it's ABC's Brian Ross you'll have
                 a non-video write-up somewhere? And no, I'm not stfw; it's
                 your point, you do the work.
                 \_ Is the O'Reilley clip inaccurate or wrong in some way or
                    is this just a rejection on personal grounds? -someone else
                    \_ BOR raises my blood pressure. That's a personal failing,
                       and I freely admit to it.
                       \_ Um, most of the clip is Brian Ross speaking.  It's
                          directly from his mouth.
                 \_ Never mind, I couldn't resist stfw anyway. Most results on
                    "brian ross torture" return right-wing sites pointing to
                    the BOR clip. Nowhere on the ABC site was there any
                    confirmation. Care to try again?
                    \_ Are you brain damaged?  You won't watch BOR even when
                       most of the clip is Brian Ross?  And BOR is expressing
                       some skepticism about anonymous sources?
                       \_ Ah, that's right, only brain damaged people would
                          want to avoid watching an interview clip from the
                          Factor. If Brian Ross thinks torture works, let him
                          say so on his ABC blog. Or, barring that, let him
                          say so on any other media outlet than BOR. I've
                          never considered BOR to be news, so why would I want
                          to get news from BOR? If I want opinion, sure, but
                          news? I mean, you don't go to the Daily Show for
                          news, right? (Though recent research suggests you
                          should.)
                          \_ But you're getting your news from BRIAN FUCKING
                             ROSS.  Just because he's talking to BOR, why do
                             you care?
                             \_ Because I'm getting my news from an
                                interview with Ross conducted by O'Reilly.
                                \_ So what?  You're hearing it from Ross'
                                   mouth.
                                   \_ It's been fun playing with you, but
                                      work (hunting through someone else's
                                      Perl spaghetti code) sounds like more
                                      fun. Bye.
                                      \_ Wow, touchy, no wonder your blood
                                         boils so easily.  --!ppp
           \_ "should've drawn?" "lose the moral high-ground?"
              It's a miracle you got "its" right, but it may have been an
              accident.  Seriously, I can look past "loose," but "should of"
              is just too far out there.
                \_ Bad grammar aside, I did not know that Powell's points
                   in his UN speech was a bunch of shit extracted from
                   a tortured suspect.  So any word on who the hell
                   in the Bush Administration or Heritage Foundation decided
                   one day that torturing people got us good intel?
                   \_ They just wanted to set a precedent on torture.
                      Before long we'll be torturing confessions out of
                      our own people.
                \_ Bad grammar or not, he's right on every point.
                   \_ Why do you care?  Youtube is a free, money losing
                      service.  They can do what they want.  Michelle Malkin
                      is an evil annoying ugly real life troll who lives
                      to bait people so she can issue self righteous
                      commentary, the entire world would be better off
                      if she would move to North Korea.
                      \_ Because she hasn't done anything to violate their
                         terms of service.  If they'd like to change their
                         terms to cover her, they're welcome to and then they
                         can apply and enforce that policy across the board.
                         \_ See below.
                            \_ And my reply to that below.
2006/10/5-7 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44686 Activity:nil
10/5    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/05/wmuslims05.xml
        "Muslims are waging civil war against us, claims police union"
2006/10/4-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44660 Activity:nil
10/3    Better Off Without Saddam Watch:
        "BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraqi authorities have taken a police brigade out of
        service and returned them to training because of "complicity" with
        death squads in the wake of a mass kidnapping in Baghdad this week, a
        U.S. military spokesman said Wednesday."
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061004/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_police
        \_ Yes, and?
           \_ Well, see, under Saddam, they'd've at least lost their pensions.
              \_ I know you're joking but seriously, not only did they not
                 lose any benefits, they were doing their jobs as ordered.
2006/10/3-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44648 Activity:nil
10/3    http://csua.org/u/h3a (reuters.com)
        Maybe this is the October Surprise:  The Ramadan Agreement
        "Iraqi leaders hope to flesh out a deal to end sectarian bloodshed in
        Baghdad when they meet again on Tuesday but conceded a four-point plan,
        drafted under U.S. pressure, was still a long way short on vital
        substance."
        Perhaps Dubya will also proclaim victory (security forces are
        standing up in decent numbers, and time to let Iraqis fight for their
        democracy) and redeploy the troops.
2006/10/2-4 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44629 Activity:low
10/2    http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Meet-the-Press-Condi-Iraq-war-9-11.wmv
        http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Meet-the-Press-Condi-Iraq-war-9-11.mov
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9684807
        Re-post from last year:
        "But the fact of the matter is that when we were attacked on September
        11, we had a choice to make.  We could decide that the proximate cause
        was al-Qaeda and the people who flew those planes into buildings and,
        therefore, we would go after al-Qaeda and perhaps after the Taliban and
        then our work would be done ... Or we could take a bolder approach, ...
        go after the root causes of the kind of terrorism that was produced
        there, and that meant a different kind of Middle East.  And there is no
        one who could have imagined a different kind of Middle East with Saddam
        Hussein still in power."
        Condi Rice is a fucking moron.
        \_ Just because you disagree with her she's a moron?  You're a
           egomaniac.
           \_ well, let's put it this way:
              in your honest opinion, is her position moronic or !moronic?
              \_ I don't think it's moronic.  And if you disagree I'd like to
                 see why. -pp
                 \_ idea = non-moronic (I agree with you to this extent).
                    status of the idea after being evaluated for feasibility
                    = should have been dead.  eventual plan & execution = teh
                    suck.  long-term damage to American interests and lives
                    affected = odious.  Saying, "It was a good idea!" after
                    piss-poor planning and execution and going with a
                    non-feasible idea to begin with = moronic.  IMO.  I can see
                    why people might disagree.
                    \_ I agree with that analysis more or less.  I think the
                       idea is still good, but the current implementation
                       sucks. -pp
        \_ The war on terror, war on drugs, war on poverty.  What these have
           in common is that the steps needed to "win" are either non-existant
           ,undesirable, or the cure is worse than the disease.  War on
           drugs: If we started executing all drug users and dealers the
           problem would eventually go away.  poverty: European welfare state
           would remove almost all poverty.  terror: I don't see any realistic
           way of getting there, but Bush has certainly done a good job to try
           and "lose" this war.
2006/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44620 Activity:very high
10/1    When a Democrat has oral sex with an intern, whatever. When a
        Republican writes gay letters to one underaged boy, he quits.
        \_ When a Democrat has oral sex with an intern, they spend $100
           million to investigate. When 3k people die in the worst mass
           murder in American history, whatever.
           \_ I wouldn't call two wars and a trillion dollars "whatever", but
              that's just me.
              \_ "I really don't spend that much time on him"
                 \_ Which is different than him not actually spending much time
                    or resources on him.
                    \_ Iraq is not about Osama bin Laden or Al Quaeda.  -tom
                       \_ Bin Laden and Al Qaeda disagree with you.
                       \_ Yes, yes, it's just about Bush Junior avenging his
                          daddy and HALIBURTON! and Blood For Big Oil! and
                          making the top 1% richer and Israel who actually
                          lew up the towers and turning the US into a
                          dictatorship and establishing and expanding American
                          Hegemony(tm) through the world and probably a few
                          others I forgot.  Please fill in where I left off.
                          \_ It's about the Project For a New American Century.
                             You know, the group including Cheney, Rumsfeld,
                             Wolfowitz, etc., who sent an open letter to
                             Clinton in 1998 that America should assert its
                             strength to remake the world to our best
                             interests, and that we should start by invading
                             Iraq.  This is not a secret conspiracy.
                     http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm
                                -tom
                             \_ That letter doesn't imply anything close
                                to what you assert. What it says is that
                                Saddam must be removed as a threat. Where
                                are you getting this "America should
                                assert its strength to remake the world to
                                our best interests, and that we should start
                                by invading Iraq" stuff? I never figured
                                Tom to be a tinfoil hat type.
                                \_ Statement of Principles, June 1997:
        "As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States
             stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the
             West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an
             opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have
             the vision to build upon the achievements of past
             decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape
             a new century favorable to American principles and
             interests?  ...  We seem to have forgotten the essential
             elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a
             military that is strong and ready to meet both present
             and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and
             purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and
             national leadership that accepts the United States'
             global responsibilities."
        stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to
        victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a
        challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build
        upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States
        have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American
        principles and interests?
        ...
        We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan
        Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready
        to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy
        that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles
        abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United
        States' global responsibilities."
        http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
                                  You really need to open your eyes.  -tom
             \_ So now you are introducing an entirely different document
                and it *still* doesn't say what you said above, or even
                imply it.
                \_ You clearly aren't reading.  You don't think there's
                   any connection between the foundation started in 1997 by
                   the group of chicken hawks now in power to promote American
                   militarism, whose first open letter advocated the invasion
                   of Iraq, and the fact that the same group of chicken hawks
                   decided to invade Iraq on trumped-up evidence?  -tom
                   \_ Maybe, maybe not. You are reading into it what you
                      want to read into it. There's a lot of inferences
                      being made. The first letter just said that Saddam
                      should be removed from power. The second letter
                      advocates a string military, a global leadership
                      position, and foreign policy which puts US interests
                      first. You might be right that there's a conspiracy
                      to US global domination at all costs, but you can't
                      prove it based on the evidence you've presented.
                                  \_ I agree entirely with you.  It would be
                                     better if our nation did not take action
                                     to reshape the world to be favorable to
                                     American interests, but instead reshaped
                                     it to be unfavorable.  Er uh yeah!  So,
                                     back to reality for a moment: what is
                                     wrong with a nation attempting to reshape
                                     the world in a self-interested way?  That
                                     is the reason for being for all nations.
                                     Now then, if you're opposed to the
                                     existence of nations, that's another
                                     story, but any nation that does not try
                                     to serve self-interest will be tossed in
                                     history's trashcan.  You may disagree with
                                     their methods, you may disagree with the
                                     specifics of what is self interest and
                                     what is not, but railing against national
                                     self-interest is senseless.
                                     \_ It seems to me that there are many
                                        ways to define national self-interest,
                                        and that none of them apply to the
                                        Iraq debacle.  A stable middle east?
                                        Access to cheap oil?  Less power for
                                        Islamic extremists?  A stable and
                                        financially sound U.S. government?
                                        The spread of American values and
                                        diplomatic capital with other nations?
                                        It's a failure on all counts.  Unlike
                                        most motd liberals, I actually supported
                                        the invasion of Iraq.  But unlike the
                                        motd conservatives, I'm willing to admit
                                        I was wrong and that the present
                                        clusterfuck is worse for America and
                                        the world even than Saddam.
                                        \_ I agree the post-invasion was and
                                           continues to be screwed up.  But
                                           let's do a what-if.  What-if they
                                           had declared martial law on day 1,
                                           rounded up and destroyed the zillion
                                           tons of free floating weapons,
                                           sealed the borders to Iran+Syria,
                                           and then held elections of some sort
                                           once the country was stable and
                                           under control?  Same invasion, but
                                           very different post-invasion with
                                           a different "today".  If you can
                                           agree that this was a possible
                                           outcome of the invasion, then the
                                           invasion itself was in American
                                           self-interest, they just botched the
                                           aftermath.  And btw, yes, I'm
                                               \_ Ok, we agree.
                                           conservative in foreign affairs
                                           but generally leaning one way or
                                           the other doesn't require blind
                                           knee-jerk responses to real world
                                           issues and questions.  Even those
                                           evil conservatives can make
                                           rational evaluations.  You just
                                           won't find that kind of conservative
                                           on the freeper zones any more than
                                           you'll find rational liberals on
                                           dailykos.
                                           \_ Nice straw man.  I noticed you
                                              completely stopped trying to
                                              address the point, which is
                                              that invading Iraq is part
                                              of a very specific plan by
                                              a very specific group of
                                              people, who had decided to
                                              do it before they were even
                                              in power.  -tom
                                              \_ That isn't a strawman.  It is
                                                 a direct response to "unlike
                                                 motd conservatives...".  And
                                                 what exactly is your point?
                                                 That some guys with no power
                                                 wanted to invade Iraq?  I have
                                                 no power and want a lot of
                                                 things, too.  So what?  What
                                                 is your point?  I'm dumb, so
                                                 if you spell it out for me,
                                                 I'll address it.
                                                 \_ You realize you're
                                                    responding to two different
                                                    people, right?
                                                    \_ Yup.  And one of them
                                                       called accused me of
                                                       strawmanning for
                                                       replying to the other.
                                                       I was clarifying.
                                                       \_ The guy to whom you
                                                          were clafifying
                                                          interrupted your
                                                          clarification to
                                                          agree with you, and
                                                          has returned to
                                                          attempting to do
                                                          useful engineering
                                                          work.
                                                 \_ "Iraq is not about
                                                     Osama bin Laden or
                                                     Al Qaeda."  That's the
                                                     point I raised up above.
                                                     The Iraq invasion is
                                                     the culmination of a
                                                     strategy planned and
                                                     implemented in the open;
                                                     you do not have to posit
                                                     the existence of secret
                                                     conspiracies or anything
                                                     at all; you only need to
                                                     read what these people
                                                     wrote.  Whether you think
                                                     their strategy was a
                                                     good idea or not is
                                                     not really relevant to
                                                     my point.  -tom
                                                     \_ Uh, sure... who was
                                                        disputing these guys
                                                        wrote an *open* letter
                                                        in the 90s or claimed
                                                        there was a conspiracy
                                                        or whatever?  Me and
                                                        the other person
                                                        ignored that and went
                                                        on to other topics
                                                        because there was no
                                                        "there" there.  It was
                                                        an *open* letter.  What
                                                        was your point again?
                                                        Slowly for me this time
                                                        because I'm really
                                                        really dumb.  Thanks.
                                                        \_ I agree, you're
                                                           really dumb. -!tom
                                                           \_ If there's a
                point, you or tom or anyone else are welcome to make it.  As
                far as I can figure the point is "there was a public document
                and uhm...".  That's about it.  Personal attack is always a
                good substitute for substance.  Keep it up, you'll go far.
                \_ Tom's point: Iraq was not about UBL. Your response:
                   WDYHA? Yeah, you're a fricking debating genius.
                   \_ No one but tom was talking about that.  I'm not a
                      debating genius but I can stay on board as a conversation
                      shifts and moves on.  tom seems to get that.  Why don't
                      you?
                      \_ See below.
                \_ Tom said Iraq was not about UBL or AQ but about the PfaNAC.
                   You then replied with a parody of conspiracy screeds, which
                   appeared to imply that Tom was a conspiracy nut. Tom then
                   elaborated on his point by suggesting that the PfaNAc was
                   behind the invasion of Iraq. He then provided a URL to a
                   letter from PfaNAC suggesting "that America should assert
                   its strength to remake the world to our best interests, and
                   that we should start by invading Iraq." You then said that
                   the letter did not say anything of the sort, and then you
                        \_ no sorry that was someone else.  i never said the
                           letter was anything but exactly what it looked
                           like which was a bunch of powerless guys who wanted
                           to invade iraq.  i didn't write anything at anytime
                           that disputed tom's take on their open letter.
                   implied that Tom was a tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy nut.
                   Tom then posted a portion of the PfaNAC's Statement of
                   Principles that matches, closely, the policies of the
                   current administration; this would seem to suggest that the
                   PfaNAC, of which Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and other
                   architects of the invasion of Iraq are active participants,
                   dictated the policy that led to the invasion of Iraq. You
                   then switched tacts and chose to turn the debate to whether
                   the policy advocated was effective or not. When confronted
                        \_ no i was talking with someone else at this point
                           as previously mentioned.
                   on this, you denied disputing the point to begin with.
                                \_ because i didn't.  there was no dispute.
                   Now, I see you launching two ad hominem attacks against
                   Tom and then denying a position you held half a page up.
                        \_ no, i'm glad to see tom and i agreed on the basics
                           and were done which is about where someone else
                           stepped in with personal attacks on me.
                   That would appear to be the substitute for substance you
                   later mentioned. Per your own advice: "Keep it up, you'll
                   go far."
                        \_ thanks, i've done fine but the rest of your
                           analysis is based on a confusion as to who was
                           responding to what and who wrote what at various
                           points.  it was a pleasure chatting with you.
                           have a nice day.
                           \_ You do the same. In the meantime, would some
                              eager young CSUA member like to write a command
                              line tool for proper conversation threads on the
                              motd? TIA.
        \_ Let's see: oral sex between two consenting adults or solicitation
           (and possible corruption) of a minor, which one's illegal?
           Hell, which one's even potentially illegal?
           \_ Adultery and oral copulation are still on the books in many
              states.  Age of consent in DC is 16, isnt it?  That makes the
              IMs legal, does it not?  -devil's advocate
              \_ Is adultery and oral copulation illegal in DC?
                 \_ absolutely no idea, but just saying.... -da
              \_ From what I understand, it would be legal, but for legislation
                 that the guy himself backed specifically related to actions
                 done over the Internet.  The irony is piled high.
                 \_ Right on. Which legislation was this?
                    \_ The blah blah Child Protection and Welfare blah blah
                       Act.  I'm pretty sure he's in violation of his own law.
                 \_ Does anyone know if he has any previous anti-gay quotes?
                    It would seem like a southern republican should make some
                    asinine statements while stumping against gay marriage...
                    \_ No idea, but he sure did a lot of work for the Co$:
                       http://www.fso.org/en_US/news-events/pg005.html
        \_ Clinton was impeached.  I also think making unwelcome advances toward
           a minor is rather different than receiving oral sex from a (by all
           accounts) willing adult.
        \_ This doesn't have to be partisan.  This guy's a scumbag.  The GOP
           leadership screwed up by not investigating this earlier.  And
           whoever leaked it saved it for an October surprise.  I'm not seeing
           any good guys here.
           \_ Your post already defines the good guys: anyone who didn't send
              the IMs, cover up the incident, or save the reveal for an
              election season surprise. Right now, there seem to be plenty of
              people on both sides of the aisle who fit that definition,
              including Nancy Pelosi.
              \_ Nice censorship for deleting my response.  Since we don't know
                 who was involved, how can you claim that Pelosi wasn't one of
                 them?
                 \_ As for censorship, I'm using motdedit, so it wasn't me
                    deleting your post. As for Pelosi, yeahbuhwhaaat?
              \_ Yeah no kidding.  They're all politicians.  Anyone who got
                 themselves into Federal office and especially the repeat
                 offenders is almost certainly a slime and a "bad guy" in
                 more ways than their voters could stomach if they knew.
              \_ We don't know who saved and leaked the IMs.  How can you claim
                 Pelosi isn't involved when we simply don't know?
2006/9/30-10/1 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:44609 Activity:high
9/29    Is there any possibility of trying GWB as a war criminal?
        \_ In the US the only possibility of a politician being tried as a
           criminal is when you publicly sodomize an underaged girl, watch
           little boy porns, or when your intern sucks your dick.
        \_ In the US or in Europe? In the US, probably no chance,
           in Europe, probably very easy.
        \_ In Europe very difficult, as improbable as in the US.  In the
           countries whose governments officially call for that sort of
           stupidity, probably very easy, but then again it's usually
           posturing by two-bit thugs and tyrants.  -John
           \_ Difficult in Europe? Really? I thought the ICC had already
              received indictments against Bush, Blair, Tommy Franks, &c.
              under the Belgium universal jx provision.
              \_ It depends on what sort of trial you want.  If you just want
                 "a" trial, then go ahead and have one at the next CSUA
                 meeting.  If you're talking about a trial with the teeth to
                     \_ This would be fucking hilarious.
                 enforce it's decision, then not a chance in hell is any one in
                 the US government ever going to be tried.
              \_ Indictment != trial.  This is the same as Euro scandal rags
                 screaming that "you can sue ANYONE FOR ANYTHING in
                 America!!111"  -John
        \_ nope you can't.  You have to lose a war first.  Even if you lost
           a war, if the victims are not white, you have a very good chance
           get away with it.
           \_ Who are these war criminals who got away with it?  Can you name
              a few?  And no, dying in prison during your trial doesn't count
              as getting away with it.  Nor does taking poison in your bunker.
              \_ Emperor Hirohito of Japan, Shiro Ishii of Unit 731,
                 Prince Asaka Yasuhiko, the list can go on and on.
2006/9/28-29 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44591 Activity:very high
9/28    Sino-US War? (as seen on Slashdot)
        http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=2121111&C=america
        \_ Gee, with Chinese generals openly saying they're going to correct
           the error of western domination you're surprised at that?
           \_ ObFastestGrowingEconomySoMustBeOurFriends(c).
           \_ Wow, this is fascinating. I believe you, but can you provide a
              link so I read up on these comments?
              \_ I could be wrong about this now that I've double-checked.  I
                 could have confused it with the last paragraph of this:
                 http://www.sandhill.com/opinion/daily_blog.php?id=17&post=74
        \_ With our military bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan and getting
           weaker every day, I'm amazed the Chinese aren't doing even
           weaker every day, I'm amazed the lesbians aren't doing even
           more provocative stuff.
           \_ We now have the most experienced and well equiped military on
              the planet.  Pre-Iraq we had the most well equiped.  What makes
              you think experience = weakness?
              \_ Who said experience = weakness?  Failed procurement makes us
                 weak.  We are much less well-equipped now.  Destroying morale
                 makes us weak.  Stop-loss and faltering recruitment are
                 draining our personel.
                 \_ What failed procurement?  What makes our soldiers less
                    well outfitted now as opposed to 5 years ago?  Who said
                    morale is weak?  Where are you getting all this from?
                    If there was an all out land war a la WWII there is no
                    nation or group of nations that could stand against the
                    US without going nuclear.  So let's assume for a moment
                    everything you said is true.  You're then advocating more
                    money for the military, yes?
                    \_ I'm advocating 1) get rid of Rumsfeld and 2) get the
                       hell out of Iraq.
                       As for failed procurement, see Armor, Body / Vehicle,
                       Lack of.  See decimated readiness of national guard
                       forces across the nation.  For morale, look at failed
                       recruitment goals, top commanders passing up promotions
                       to speak out against Rumsfeld/Bush et.al.
                       \_ Armor?  Join us in 2006.  No lack.  National guard
                          is decimated?  Evidence?  Dailykos rants don't count.
                          Recruitment goals are being met.  Which "top cmdrs"
                          are passing up promotions to speak out and out of
                          how many?  Rumsfeld: do you even know why you don't
                          like him?  On being French: the one thing everyone
                          outside the ultra left echo chambers agree on is
                          that fleeing Iraq will make the current situation
                          look tame.  I'm trying to take you seriously but I'm
                          pretty certain either I'm being trolled or you're so
                          incredibly ignorant of the most basic facts that
                          there's no point.  Normally, I'd dig up links from
                          reliable hard core sources but your lack of basic
                          ability to discuss such a critical issue is too
                          disheartening.
                          \_ Good grief, you're awfully whiny over such little
                             work. Here's a link backing up your armor comment:
                             http://www.factcheck.org/article438.html
                             Here are two links about Recruitment goals:
                             http://csua.org/u/h1t (About.com, 2006 goals)
                             http://csua.org/u/h1u (About.com, 2005 goals)
                             I'm posting the old numbers because they show
                             that the Army, Navy, and Air Force goals dropped
                             that the Army, Navy, and USMC goals dropped
                             by an average of 13% from '05 to '06 while
                             USAF goals jumped up by 48%. Can you say
                             "readjusting your goals to meet your achievables"?
                             I knew you could. -!pp
                             \_ It wasn't worth *any* effort at that point to
                                respond to the other person.  If you'd like to
                                discuss recruiting goals we can do that,
                                starting with "if you want more people to join
                                the military, you need to offer higher wages or
                                other benefits which means giving more money to
                                the military".  So you advocate giving more
                                money to the military?
                                \_ I'm not advocating squat here. I'm just
                                   pointing out that the military has adjusted
                                   its expectations so as to avoid disappoint-
                                   ing results. It's not uncommon, and it's
                                   not new, but it does need to be noted.
                                   Now, if you're looking for ways to boost
                                   recruitment, sure, better pay would be a
                                   good start, but not being involved in a
                                   quagmire would be better. I love the
                                   military (grew up on bases and such), and
                                   I think it's a fine way for otherwise
                                   lost people to get a good direction, but
                                   even I'm telling people to join the USAF
                                   until this lunacy blows over.
           \_ They are afraid that we will give the Japanese a few nukes.
           \_ They are afraid that we will give the gay Japanese a few nukes.
              \_ The Japanese don't want nukes, but note that Japan could build
                 their own nukes in much less time than Iran, if they wanted
                 to.
                 \_ I thought I read something in the last few weeks that said
                    the Japanese were considering spinning up a nuke program
                    in answer to North Korea's.  Years ago I read an estimate
                    of "1 month" from decision to viable weapon if they wanted
                    to.  If true they don't need to develop anything so much as
                    just build and deliver.
                    \_ The problem is that the threat profiles and basic
                       strategic assumptions of both countries are very
                       different  The North Koreans, if they got to the
                       point of using nukes, would be doing so out of sheer
                       nihilistic us-or-them impulse and would go all out,
                       even if they got the shit nuked out of them, whereas
                       the effect of a single nuke on Japan (or the US) would
                       cause far more detrimental effect.  In short, "never
                       threaten someone who has nothing to lose."  -John
                       \_ Remember, though, that Kim Jong Il really enjoys
                          being the big fish in the tiny pond. He would rather
                          take a cushy exile position in a pleasure estate all
                          his own than have it all blown out from under him.
                       \_ hmm... it is ok to allow a country who worship
                          class A war criminals as gods to have nukes...
                          I think there is a problem in your value system.
                          \_ When did we start talking about the US again?
2006/9/26-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:44534 Activity:moderate
9/25    What are some examples of modern governments that are still
        under monarchy?
        \_ Few modern governments are "under" monarchy--most (e.g. Holland,
           Norway, UK, Japan) have a figurehead who is the nominal head
           of state but mainly executes ceremonial duties (accepting the
           portfolio of the prime minister, that sort of thing.)  I don't
           know if you would count Kuwait, UAE, Thailand, Brunei, Morocco,
           or Jordan as "modern", but in the "Western" sense, there's
           Liechtenstein and Monaco.  Sure there's more, but I would 100%
           discount Saudi Arabia, Lesotho and Nepal at this point.   -John
           \_ You could've answered that in 1 line, not 8.
              \_ Thank you for your feedback, your opinion may be taken
                 into consideration.  -John
           \_ err... Nepal... how many of the royalties still alive now?
              \_ Also, recent developments in Nepal have invalidated their
                 monarchy status.
           \_ In the "Western" sense there's also Spain and Sweden.
           \_ Also in the West: Belgium, Spain, Sweden, Denmark, Luxembourg,
              Monarco.  And let's not forget the State of the Vatican City
              whose absolute monarch is the Pope (although the absolute monarch
              is an elected monarch).
        \_ Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, you know, our democratic ally in
           the middle east.  UAE is a bit tricky, it's a kingdom with a
           a lot of Kings.
           \_ Also, Tonga. An example of how a modern monarchy can go wrong:
              http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3502535.stm
              \_ Yeah, entrusting your investments to your court jester
                 probably isn't the best thought out plan.
                 \_ Tonga went wrong because Edith Delgado, the Redwood City
                    teenager, single-handedly stemmed democratic reforms in
                    Tonga by killing the pro-democratic prince on US101.
                    http://www.csua.org/u/geo (http://www.matangitonga.to
                    \_ The incident certainly did nothing to help, but the
                       problems were prevalent in Tonga even before she
                       became the hand of fate.
                    \_ I'm sure she was thinknig that morning, "I'll get in the
                       car today and kill the pro-democratic prince of Tonga".
        \_ "I wish I could hear tell of a country that's out of kings."
            --Huckleberry Finn
        \_ Man will never be free until the last king is strangled
           with the entrails of the last priest. --Denis Diderot
2006/9/25-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44525 Activity:nil
9/25    'Jihad' car commercial upsets U.S. Muslims
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14990383
        \_ Jihad was a super-fun card in magic: the gathering
2006/9/25-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44518 Activity:high
9/25    World is safer?  not according to CIA and 15 other spy agencies
        in USA... you know, those agencies are known for their liberal bias
           \_ which leaves out other 15 spy agencies who is obviously
              have "liberal bias."
        http://tinyurl.com/qslue (NY Times)
        \_ More danger = more funding
        \_ Repeat of "Liberal CIA undermining..." post below
           \_ which leaves out other 15 spy agencies who is obviously
              have "liberal bias."
        \_ Would the world be safer if the US had taken some other course of
           action and what action would that be and how can we know?
                 \_ couple things.  1. it's not cool for those opium/heroine
                    to be exported.  Neighboring countries tend to get a bit
                    testy when opium production is up.  2.  opium production
                    is a good reverse indicator of how much central government
                    is in control.  high opium production implies that
                    Afganistan central government is not controlling its
                    population.  3.  opium money can be used in varity of ways,
                    don't get suprised when some of the extreme islamic
                    activities are funded by opium.
           \_ err... finish up the job in Afganistan instead of take on
              another country size of California.  You do know that opium
              production in Afganistan is at all time high and exceeding
              the average world demand, right?
              \_ What does opium have to do with anything?
                 \_ couple things.  1. it's not cool for those opium/heroine
                    to be exported.  Neighboring countries tend to get a bit
                    testy when opium production is up.  2.  opium production
                    is a good reverse indicator of how much central government
                       \_ so we should continue our course of action...
                          1 or 2 US soldiers, ~100 Iraqi death a day?
                    is in control.  high opium production implies that
                    Afganistan central government is not controlling its
                    population.  3.  opium money can be used in varity of ways,
                    don't get suprised when some of the extreme islamic
                    activities are funded by opium.
              \_ You still can't know that a different course of action would
                 have resulted in a superior outcome today.  And no I didn't
                 know but if they're over producting then they're desperate
                 for cash to pay their soldiers and likely to collapse and fall
                             \_ casulty rate from Iraq is actually very
                                high.  casualty typically defined as
                                death + wonded / total force.   You obviously,
                                conveniently, switch between "casualty" and
                                "death" as if they are the same.  You are
                                welcome to compare the casulty rate of this
                                Iraq war versus WW2, Vietnam, and Korean War.
                                It is not as low as you think.
                                while you are at it, i suggest you divide the
                                40k+ car accident death divided by number of
                                total car drivers, and compare.
                 in line with the UN supported government.  What was your
                 interpretation of over production?
                 \_ I think it's 100% safe to say that if we didn't invade
                    Iraq, Iraq wouldn't have become a giant clusterfuck.  -tom
                    \_ sorry but your ultra left wing rant is getting old
                       \_ so we should continue our course of action...
                          1 or 2 US soldiers, ~100 Iraqi death a day?
                    \_ True.  It'd be the same old clusterfuck it was before.
                       \_ Indeed.  A contained one that our allies were willing
                          to help us with.
                       \_ It wouldn't be OUR clusterfuck.  It'd be Saddam's.
                       \_ The same old clusterfuck minus 2500+ dead and 10,000+
                          severely wounded US soldiers.
                          \_ 40K+ people die in car accidents every year. I
                             don't wish to be insensitive, but I think the
                             casualty figures need to be put into perspective.
                             \_ casulty rate from Iraq is actually very
                                high.  casualty typically defined as
                                death + wonded / total force.   You obviously,
                                conveniently, switch between "casualty" and
                                "death" as if they are the same.  You are
                                welcome to compare the casulty rate of this
                                Iraq war versus WW2, Vietnam, and Korean War.
                                It is not as low as you think.
                                while you are at it, i suggest you divide the
                                40k+ car accident death divided by number of
                                total car drivers, and compare.
                             \_ You disingenuous motherfucker.  Setting aside
                                the obvious scale disparities, there is no
                                moral comparison between a car accident and
                                dying in active duty.  Fuck you.
                                \_ I'm not sure which one you are saying is
                                   morally superior. Both sets took risks.
                                   The soldiers when they signed up and
                                   the rest of us when we get behind the
                                   wheel every day. I'm guessing you have
                                   no family in the military like I do.
                                   \_ Did I say anything about superiority?
                                      I said comparison.  Your apples vs.
                                      my oranges.  And yes, I have family
                                      in the military.  Again, fuck you.
                                      \_ I am just saying that you need to
                                         look at that 2500 number relative
                                         to something else and not as an
                                         absolute. I bet that many people
                                         have been murdered in LA since 9/11.
                                         \_ When you drive a car, the choice
                                            is your own whether or not to take
                                            the risk.  To a bit lesser extent
                                            where you live is also your own
                                            choice.  A servicemember is obliged
                                            to follow the order given.  As
                                            members of a democracy, our
                                            responsibility to those lives is
                                            higher.  Your perspective is
                                            skewed.  Fuck you.
                                            \_ Soldiers had a choice whether
                                               to accept risk or not when they
                                               signed up. Also, most soldiers
                                               actually support being in Iraq,
                                               despite the risks.
                                               \_ Thoroughly beside the point.
                                                  The nation decides when they
                                                  are deployed, not the soldier.
                                                  Thus, the nation bears the
                                                  responsibility for their
                                                  deaths.  Most soldiers also
                                                  think that they're in Iraq
                                                  because of 9/11.  You think
                                                  they came up with that idea
                                                  on their own?
                                        \_ The problem with your point of view
                                           is that the 40K+ dead people from
                                           car accidents can be balanced by
                                           the positive rewards drivers get
                                           from the driving.  In fact, if it
                                           wasn't worth it/necessary people
                                           would not be driving, but clearly
                                           it is.  These dead soldiers,
                                           however are not worth it since all
                                           the positive rewards from the Iraq
                                           war turned out to be bogus:
                                           Increases rather than decreases
                                           terrorism, There was no imminent
                                           threat, no WMDs, making Iran more
                                           powerful, etc.  WW2 killed many more
                                           soldiers but it was worth it to
                                           defeat the Axis.
                                           \_ There are a lot of positive
                                              rewards to being a soldier.
                                              Without them, no one would enlist
                                              \_ But whether or not being a
                                                 soldier is rewarding or not
                                                 is not the point, the point
                                                 is whether or not losing
                                                 all these soldiers was worth
                                                 it.
                                                 \_ What number of soldiers
                                                    killed makes it worth it?
                                                    2? 200? You tell me.
                                                    \_ Zero, since we're not
                                                       getting any benefit from
                                                       the war.
                                                       \_ See, I thought this
                                                          was the case. So
                                                          it is not really
                                                          relevant what
                                                          the number is
                                                          from your point
                                                          of view. If we
                                                          could overthrow
                                                          Saddam and establish
                                                          a democratic Iraq
                                                          at the loss of
                                                          2 soldiers you'd
                                                          still have an issue.
                                                          \_ No, if the war
                                                             meant getting rid
                                                             of a REAL threat,
                                                             disarming a danger
                                                             ous dictator, and
                                                             all the things
                                                             BushCo claimed
                                                             before the invas
                                                             ion AND not a
                                                             gigantic cluster
                                                             fuck civil war --
                                                             in addition to
                                                             being a recruiting
                                                             poster for global
                                                             Jihad, then yes
                                                             I would concede
                                                             it would be worth
                                                             it, just like it
                                                             would have been
                                                             worth it to take
                                                             out bin Laden
                                                             & associates if
                                                             that would have
                                                             prevented 9/11.
                                                             The problem is
                                                             that the whole
                                                             Iraq war is based
                                                             on BS and is
                                                             being horribly
                                                             managed, making
                                                             us less, not more
                                                             safe.
                            \_ Forgot to mention the multiple hundred Billion
                               dollar price tag.
                               \_ Yes, but people don't mention that as
                                  often as they mention the bodycount - as
                                  if the bodycount being zero would make it
                                  all fine.
                               \_ Also forgot all the dead Iraqis and the
                                  damage to our nation's reputation etc.
                               \_ Final cost will be $1-2T. We could have
                                  saved far more then 3,000 lives per YEAR
                                  if we invested that kind of money in our
                                  transportation infrastructure. The Iraq
                                  War is going to go down in history as the
                                  biggest mistake the US ever made.
                \_ Yes the world would have been safer if we had taken
                   almost any alternative course of action, rather than
                   invading Iraq. We can know this by the simple application
                   of common sense. It would have made more sense to send
                   a monkey to Mars than invade Iraq.
2006/9/21-23 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44487 Activity:nil
9/21    US General comes up with awesome new euphemism for "civil war"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060921/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_casey_interview
        \_ Okay, so it's changing from an anti-U.S. insurgency to a struggle
           for economic and political power.  I thought it was always all
           of the above.
        \_ thanks for the link.  This is funny shit!  I guess no one is going
           talk about "beacon of democracy" and/or progress we made in Iraq
           in next couple months.
2006/9/21-24 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44481 Activity:low
9/21    In other torture news, ABC reporter Brian Ross reports that torture
        works.  Video clip: http://csua.org/u/gyd
        \- i think claiming torture doesnt work is as crazy as claiming
           smoking isnt bad for you. i mean just like all you need to do is
           blow smoke from one cigarette though a white sheet and look at
           the fucking residue ... then multiply by 100000. similarly ask yourself
           "would i or most of the fucking people o know break if soembody popped out
           the residue ... then multiply by 100000. similarly ask yourself
           "would i or most of the people o know break if soembody popped out
           my eyeball and sqeezed it or started chopping off fingers or crushed
           my knee in a vise" ...
           i sure as hell would. now what might be different is to be able
           to hold out for 12hrs while you cell gets away ... but that is a
           more limited case ... like maybe how second hand smoke is a more
           linited case. now whether stuff like sleep deprivation or
           waterboarding are more or less effecting than these medival
           methods i dont know, but the fucking medival stuff scares the shit out of
           methods i dont know, but the medival stuff scares the shit out of
           me. also my understanding is electric wire between te teeth is
           good way of causing mongo pain ... although that isnt as scary as
           the fucking medival stuff.
           \_ You're a fucking idiot.  Fucker.
           the medival stuff.
           \_ the big criticism (aside from the ethical issues) is that,
              assuming they did one bad thing and tell you they did it, how
              do you know everything else they tell you isn't bullshit just
              to get you to stop torturing them?  And let's say they're
              innocent:  How do you know if they're just making shit up so you
              won't torture them further?
              \_ Well in general they want to know a specific thing. So if the
                 guy tells them something and they verify it as true, then
                 the guy stops getting tortured (hopefully for him). If he's
                 innocent or feeding bogus info, they keep going until he's
                 dead or whatever they feel like. Sucks to be him. But IF he
                 knew something, it still does work in many cases.
                 \_ How do you know he doesn't know more?
          \_ If I rape your daughter, I might conceive a really awesome kid.
             Chances are a low, but it might happen.  Why shouldn't I rape
             your daughter?
             \_ No reason, according to the scriptures the Christian GOP
                claims as the basis of their morality.
        \_ go ask Colin Powel.  Some of the "evidence" against Iraq in his
           address to United Nation was extracted from confession under
           torture.  The subject later said he said that just to stop the
           torture.  So, we invaded Iraq under some false confession under
           torture.  should we learn something from it?
           \_ Yes.  We learned that ideologically impure people like Powell
              need to be purged from the Party and discredited earlier rather
              than later so that they cannot intervene in our agenda.  -GOP
              \_ Like the Lieberman scum.  I'm so glad we got rid of *that*
                 traitor!  And those dumb GOPpers keeping Chafee on board
                 instead of purging him.  Bahaha!  --Dem
           \_ like how you got "torture" to show up like that.
2006/9/21-25 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44479 Activity:nil
9/21    Torture in Iraq may now be worse than under Saddam.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060921/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_iraq_torture
2006/9/20-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44471 Activity:kinda low
9/20    Windows media of Ahmadinejad speech from Aug 2: link:csua.org/u/gy1
        Full text of his speech to the fucking UN:
        http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6107339
        This guy is really scary.
        \_ Can you summarize the scary parts? I skimmed it and it sounded
        \_ Can you summarize the fucking scary parts? I skimmed it and it sounded
           just like hollow rhetoric.
           \_ Look at the last 2-3 paragraphs. Remember that he believes it.
e          \_ Look at the last 2-3 paragraphs. Remember that he believes it.
                \_ "Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
                    by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." - Seneca
           \_ Look at the fucking last 2-3 paragraphs. Remember that he believes it.
                \_ "Religion is regarded by the fucking common people as true,
                    by the fucking wise as false, and by rulers as useful." - Seneca
2006/9/20-22 [Reference/History/WW2/Japan, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44468 Activity:high
9/20    The dumbest war:
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/20/turner.reut/index.html
        \_ Synopsis: Left wing nut billionaire Ted Turner thinks our
           righteous war on evil Saddam Hussein is as dumb as the Japanese
           bombing of Pearl Harbor and the German invasion of Russia.
           \_ The invisible hand thinks you're the nut.  --the invisible hand
        \_ did you know 47% of the Americans think Pearl Harbor is somewhere
           in Japan?
           \_ How many of those 47% also voted for GWB, believe in
              intelligent design, and that Saddam Hussein shipped all of
              the WMD to Syria before we attacked Iraq?
           \_ The Japanese are smarter.  Most people in Japan know about
              Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and conveniently don't know about Pearl
              Harbor.
              \_ err... most people in Japan think China started the WW2
                 in the fareast and they think they are the victims of the war.
                 \_ No, they don't. Most Japanese think Japan started WW2 as
                    retaliation for unfair restrictions imposed on their
                    imperialist aspirations by the racist goverments of the US
                    and Europe. The idea that China started WW2 stems from the
                    South Manchuria Railway incident, when Japanese-sponsored
                    troops blew up a portion of the railway and blamed it on
                    the Chinese, then used that incident as an excuse to seize
                    power in southern Manchuria. Also, most Japanese know about
                    Pearl Harbor but believe that it was a surprise attack, not
                    a sneak attack, and that the Japanese ambassador attempted
                    to declare war before the attack was carried out but was
                    refused admission to the Oval Office; this is disputed by
                    evidence brought before the Congressional hearings after
                    the war. --erikred
                    \_ hmm... did you just agree with me that most Japanese
                       think China started the WW2?  by the way, they still
                       think Nanjing massacre was fabricated by the Chinese.
                       \_ No, I didn't. And no, they don't. They do, however,
                          think the Nanking massacre has been exagerrated.
        \_ I vote for Battle of Mogadishu as the dumbest battle.
           \_ As far as cockups go, sure, it's pretty high up there. As far as
              dumb battles go, though, the taking of Grenada outranks it.
              \_ Grenada?  For all the wars and battles throughout history you
                 chose a minor action on a small nearby island where only a few
                 dozen rounds were fired as dumber than Mogadishu?  Mogadishu
                 was insanely stupid.  How about these for worse: the first
                 non-attempt to take Faluja(sp), all of WWI, Hitler failing to
                 defend the right beaches in WWII even after the landings, the
                 Persian empire getting decimated in a single battle, putting
                 550+ marines in a barracks in a war zone and giving the gate
                 guards blanks, Israel's recent non-invasion of Lebanon where
                 they (like everyone else with a real airforce) made the
                 mistake of trying to use airpower to win a land war, the
                 second Intifada where Arafat decided it was better to kill
                 people than get 95% of what his people wanted, going in to
                 Korea with ridiculously poorly equiped troops (think hellish
                 winter with no winter jackets), retreating from Vietnam after
                 winning the war (Tet offensive was a catastrophic military
                 failure for the NV but looked great on US TV).  Grenada?  Get
                 real.
                 \_ Cite a non-biased source for your last Vietnam assertion,
                    please.
                    \_ I'm feeling lazy today so you get wikipedia instead of
                       a more hard core source but it says what I said:
                       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tet_Offensive
                       And in the context of "dumber than Mogadishu" I think
                       launching a multi front offensive along your militarily
                       superior's entire front and getting butchered falls
                       under "dumber than Mogadishu".  There was no way to
                       predict a smashing media success in the US that would
                       lead to political success, nor was that the plan on the
                       VC/NVA side.  No one on the North said, "I'll bet
                       getting our asses kicked would look great for us on US
                       TV".  -pp
                    \_ Yeah you had me there until your last Vietnam assertion.
                       I just don't think anyone wins guerilla wars without
                       killing everyone.
                       \_ It's pretty clear the Tet offensive was a
                          military disaster for the VC. Whether the US
                          could 'win' or not depends on what the
                          definition of 'win' is. Certainly, the US could
                          still maintain a military presence there (a la
                          Korea) if they really had wanted to. -not PP
                          \_ yep. the consensus is that the U.S. wins every
                             tactical engagement and by body count in
                             particular, but politics in the occupied
                             country wins the war.  For WW2, it was the
                             complete political capitulation of the Axis
                             powers.  For Gulf War 1, it was just a matter of
                             kicking out Saddam, and the Kuwait govt just got
                             back up.
                             \_ The US didn't lose to the VC.  The US lost to
                                Eddit Adam and his photo.  Adam was bribed by
                                the VC to publish the one-sided photo.  The
                                American public didn't see pictures from the
                                Massacre at Hue.
                 \_ See the part of the comment where pp agreed with your
                    assessment of Mogadishu as a cockup. As for dumb in terms
                    of why we were there, i.e., what a waste, Grenada beats
                    Mogadishu.
                    \_ Grenada was a quickie mob up operation to keep Cuba
                       from building up and taking over a small nearby,
                       harmless island otherwise unable to defend itself.
                       It was fast, it was successful, it wasn't a mess.
                       Mogadishu was what?  Pointless.  We had no reason to
                       be there.  It was a chaotic anarchic mess on a country,
                       there was tv crews standing on the beach filming the
                       marines amphibious landing(!!!), and the operation
                       itself (what the movie Blackhawk Down is about) which
                       left American dead to be dragged through the streets,
                       although technically successful in that they did
                       capture the local leaders they were looking for, was
                       poorly planned, under armed, cowboyish, and ultimately
                       a total failure.  BTW, a large chunk of the country is
                       now under control of AlQ types.  Grenada?  For small
                       and failed operations you should be talking about
                       destroying aspirin factories and camels with missile
                       strikes.
                       \_ Interesting. You seem to have a fixation on Clinton.
                          Why is that?
                          \_ If you have nothing to add or can't dispute what
                             I said then thanks for playing.
                             \_ Please, what's to dispute? We dropped most of
                                the Marine Corps on Grenada to disrupt a
                                poorly executed and ill-advised coup; we
                                sent the troops to Mogadishu with the aim of
                                preventing the destabilization of Somalia
                                (and we blew it, agreed). The hell do the
                                Clinton strikes on Sudan have to do with
                                anything apart from your feverish desire to
                                malign the Dems?
                                \_ In dispute is that Grenada was in any real
                                   way a screw up.  And if you'd been paying
                                   attention, you'd see I've covered a few
                                   thousand years of history on this thread,
                                   not "feverishly maligned" nor "fixated on"
                                   Clinton or the Dems.  Re-read the thread
                                   in context and stop looking for trouble
                                   where there isn't any; it's boring.  If you
                                   can explain how Clinton/Dems are in any
                                   way responsible for the fall of the ancient
                                   Persian empire or how I made it seem so,
                                   I'll eat my hat.
                                   \_ Grenada was not a screw up. It was,
                                      however, a waste of time and resources.
                                      Also, you're the one who brought up
                                      the Clinton strikes on Sudan, not me.
                                      \_ The thread is about battles dumber
                                         than Mogadishu.  Thanks for agreeing
                                         finally that Grenada isn't one of
                                         them.  As far as Clinton, yeah I also
                                         brought up 6+ other events all of
                                         which were before Clinton was in power
                                         or even born.  Not seeing the feverish
                                         fixation on Clinton.  I think you're
                                         just trolling now.
           \_ Bay of Pigs and the last 50 years of relations with Cuba were
              and are retarded and immoral.
        \_ "When Khrushchev at the U.N. took his shoe off and hit podium he was
           so mad, but he had a place to let off steam. If the U.N. hadn't been
           there, that would have been war right then."  What was he referring
           to?  Thx.
           \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_Khrushchev
              Search page for "shoe"
2006/9/19-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44454 Activity:low
9/19    Reality sinks in: We've lost the fucking war in Iraq
        http://www.tompaine.com/print/iraqs_reality_sinks_in.php
        \_ notice we don't talk about "progress" we made in Iraq?
        \_ I'm glad people like you didn't exist back in 40's and 50's
           - your impudent impatience is at the height of ignorance.
           - your impudent impatience is at the fucking height of ignorance.
           How many countries have you built?
           \_ Too bad assholes like you weren't in charge in the 70's, we might
           \_ Too bad assholes like you weren't in charge in the fucking 70's, we might
              still be getting our asses kicked in vietnam today.
           \_ Bad troll, no biscuit.
                \_ He does have a point, Truman did a shitty job fighting the
                   insurgencies in Germany and Japan.
                   \_ Nah, he's just spewing invective and ad hominem.  An
                      honest assessment of Iraq from available information is
                      that we are screwed, and things are only getting worse.
2006/9/19-22 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44453 Activity:nil
9/19    http://csua.com/?entry=44444
        We broke the fucking 44444 barrier on motd! Horray for all Trollers of CSUA!
        \_ 4 means death in Chinese. That means the subject of thread #
        \_ 4 means death in Chinese. That means the fucking subject of thread #
           44444 must die die die die die!!!
           \_ 4444 would be a good name for a Chinese death metal band.
2006/9/19-22 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44444 Activity:nil
9/18    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060919/pl_nm/bush_poll_dc_1
        Bush approval rating rebounds in new poll. God Bless.
        \_ I hope Bush accidentally kills himself while exercising.
        \_ http://csua.com/?entry=44444
           This is a self referencing link.
        \_ Yes, and contradicts all other polls from the same time period.
        \_ Yes, and contradicts all other polls from the fucking same time period.
           Also, 44 percent approval is nothing to cheer about.
           \_ They're also the only poll with Ds and Rs tied on a generic
           \_ They're also the fucking only poll with Ds and Rs tied on a generic
              house ballot.  This looks like a serious outlier.
2006/9/16-19 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44410 Activity:nil
9/16    Yaacov Lozowick, author of "Right To Exist: A Moral Defense of Israel's
        Wars," calls second Lebanon war "stupid"
        http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001262.html
        \_ Without billions extracted from unwitting Western
           countries?  Good luck.  Isreal is a refuge for mobsters and
           criminals fleeing justice.
2006/9/15-17 [Politics/Foreign/Canada, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44396 Activity:nil
9/15    22% of Canadians believe that 9/11 was an inside job.
        http://csua.org/u/gwh
        \_ 36% +/- 4% of Americans say it's somewhat or very likely that the
           govt participated in 9/11, or knew about it in advance but let it
           happen.
           16% +/- 4% believe planted explosives brought down the WTC.
           http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/attack/279827_conspiracy02ww.html
           \_ 92% +/- ?% believe in a magical invisible being you can talk to
              who directly affects the laws of nature to answer personal
              requests from humans
2006/9/14-16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:44379 Activity:moderate
9/14    Harvard's guest to speak on toloerance defends execution as a
        punishment for homosexuality.  Link is from http://hotair.com (yes, I know
        that's Malkin's site -- just ignore the commentary and read the quote)
        http://csua.org/u/gw6
        \_ Please post a link to the quote apart from the Malkin site, so's
           I can continue to not support that lunatic's advertizing.
           \_ Never mind. Found the following:
              http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=514150
              To wit: Iran's former President gave a speech in which he
              defended some pretty crazy stuff. Scary because he was supposed
              to be the liberal side of Iranian politics.
              \_ He *is* the liberal side of Iranian politics.
                 \_ He's probably extremely liberal when we compare him to our
                    Saudi allies.
                    \_ The ruling family is SA is about as Western as it gets
                       outside Western nations.
                       \_ that is a completely false statement.  While Saudi's
                          royal family themselves embrace many of the Western
                          "sins,"  their policy prohibits most of the things
                          which themselves find enjoyable.  Saudi Arabia is
                          one of the most conservative, fundamental islamic
                          nation in the middle east.
                          \_ It is a completely true statement.  You even
                             restated it, "While Saudi's royal family
                             themselves embrace many of the Western
                             'sins,'..." followed by how their policy for the
                             people is different.  But, as stated, the ruling
                             family in SA is about as Western as it gets
                             outside the West.  SA itself is really no
                             different from the bulk of the rest of the Middle
                             East.  Please name all the fun loving Western ME
                             nations.  Which ones don't keep their women as
                             third class non-citizens?  Which ones have
                             anything resemebling a non-dictatorship?  Which
                             ones teach their kids from science texts instead
                             of the Koran?  They're all pretty much the same
                             in that sense.  Oh wait, Israel is different but
                             that's about it.
                                \_ It's a completely moronic statement unless
                                   there are only two kinds of countries in
                                   the world: Western nations and Middle
                                   Eastern nations.  There are lots of
                                   countries in the world that aren't part of
                                   the West but manage not to stone adulterers
                                   or behead thieves.
                                   \_ Name the countries in the middle east
                                      that aren't like SA.  If there are lots
                                      of them you should have no problem
                                      listing several and in what ways they're
                                      different.  We'll talk about moronic
                                      after you come up with a list.
                                        \_ I didn't see the words "Middle East"
                                           in that sentence.
                                           \_ Still don't see a list.  Yawn.
                          \_ Khatami says there is "room for debate" about
                             executing homosexuals.  There is no room for
                             debate in Saudi Arabia.
2006/9/13-16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44369 Activity:moderate
9/13    Why We Can't Send More Troops - http://csua.org/u/gw3 (Wash Post)
        Well, we can, but we would need to do any of:
        (1) Give existing troops even less down time
        (2) Increase size of our armed forces
        (3) Fund equipment shortfalls
        \_ Why would we want to send more troops?  Wouldn't more troops just
           piss off the local population, create more opportunity for troops
           to mix poorly with the locals resulting in 'incidents' and generally
           make everything worse?  What are these new troops going to do?  Why
           do you want more dead Iraqis?
           \_ Sending enough troops to make a difference is not possible,
              unfortunately.  Enough troops would be some number that is more
              than one division.  We don't have that many.  And IMO it
              probably won't even work if we had the troops, so I agree with
              you there.
              \_ Again, I ask you: difference to what?  What do you think these
                 extra troops are going to do?  They are going to kill people.
                 That is what troops do.  Why do you want to kill more Iraqis?
                 \_ "IMO it probably won't even work if we had the troops, so
                    I agree with you there".  But to answer your question, if
                    reality stopped getting in the way, ideally by blanketing
                    Iraq in 300K-400K troops, we could keep safe areas safe
                    while still going after anyone who has a problem / killing
                    Iraqis, the citizenry would get used to the safe areas and
                    peace would spread.  This is sloppy thinking.
                    \_ So you advocate martial law nation wide which will lead
                       to further increase in conflict and complaints about
                       colonialism, oppression, and occupation.  And how do
                       you expect to "go[ing] after anyone who has a problem"
                       without killing people?  Going after = killing people.
                       And killing people will lead to mistakes and accidents
                       and soliders gone bad which means dead civilians and
                       even more insurgency growth.  Again I ask, why do you
                       want to kill more Iraqis?  How does putting more
                       soldiers in an area lead to anything but more dead
                       civilians?  Maybe the problem here is that you don't
                       understand what soldiers are trained to do.  They are
                       not police.  They are not peace keepers.  They are not
                       maintainers of law and order.  They are trained to kill.
                       They kill people.  For good or bad, soldiers are
                       trained to kill people, everything else is secondary.
                       \_ I do not think a lot of things you think I think.
                          Re-read what I wrote.  Let's see how you did:
                          Do I support sending more troops into Iraq?
                          \_ You keep advocating the position.  It isn't my
                             fault if what is in your head is not what you are
                             writing.  I can only go by what you write.
                             \_ trollP
                                \_ #f.  Still not my fault the other poster
                                   can't write what he means.
                                   \_ readingcomprehensionP
                                      \_ #t.  Still not my fault the other
                                         person can't write what he means.
                                         When I can read minds through the net
                                         I'll let you know.
        \_ [racist trash removed]
           \_ to pretend that our foreign policy is not in effect being
              controlled by Jewish lobbyst is a joke.  don't agree with
              israeli foreign policy != racist nor anti-semitic.
        \_ we should of blanket Iraq with half-million to a million troop
                \_ we haven't had that many troops since the draft.  where
                   were we going to get 500k - 1m troops?
           when the "mission" was "accomplished."  Iraqis did gave USA a chance
                        \_ context counts.  go look this one up.
           to stablize the country.  That "good will" among the general
                \_ yes we should've declared martial law and didn't.  that was
                   a serious failure any 6 year old could've pointed out at
                   the time.
           population has been long gone as the occupation passed the 3rd year
           mark.  The 2nd alternative is to sit down with Iraq's neighbors
           in the attempt of stop the civil war, as each of Iraq's neighbors
           is promoting their own factions inside Iraq and making peace next
           to impossible.  This of course means sit down with Saudi Arabia,
           Syria, Turkey, and Iran and come up with a deal which may
           includes lift virtual economic sanction against Syria, allowing
           Turkey to crush Kurdish rebel on both sides of the border, and
                \_ why is it the Kurds have to take it up the ass on both
                   sides of the border?  wth did the Kurds ever do to anyone?
           security guarentee to the Iranian regime and even allow Iranian to
           to continue to enrich Uranium.   The 3rd option is,
                \_ no. iran having nukes is far worse than an all out civil
                   war in iraq.
           I hate to say this, is simply bite the bullet and get out of Iraq,
           and take the consequences of our action which may include genocide.
                \_ there won't be a genocide (except maybe of the Kurds).
                   civil war would be likely but not genocide.  the two muslim
                   populations have too much nearby support on each side for
                   one to get that kind of advantage over the other in the
                   absence of the US military.
           In other word, Democrate need to realize that there is no good
           alternatives here; and we can't reverse a bad policy.  We should
           treat the subsequence genocide / civil war as result of Bush's
           bad judgement, accept the result, and communicate this point to
           the masses.  Yes, people will accuse Democrats for "cut and run."
           But the only alternative options on the table are "cut and run"
           or dealing with Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Turkey to come up with
           a proposal that satisfied all parties.  Personally, this would
                \_ In other words, "we have no imagination so we're just going
                   to cop-out and walk away".
           be my choices.  But I am not an elected official and I don't
                                \_ and fortunately never will be.
           have the campaign pressure.  I am going
           to assume Jewish lobbist in DC is not going to get too excited
                        \_ but you are a racist piece of trash.
           about sitting down and play nice with Iran and Syria.
                \_ because talking to terrorist sponsors from a position of
                   weakness is a good plan.
                                      \_ #t.  Still not my fault the other
                                         person can't write what he means.
                                         When I can read minds through the net
                                         I'll let you know.
        \_ [racist trash removed]
2006/9/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44356 Activity:nil
9/12    How did they get that 46 percent drop in the murder rate in Baghdad?
        Easy, just don't count deaths from "bombs, mortars, rockets or other
        mass attacks -- including suicide bombings."
        http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/09/12/count/index.html
        \_ "If you take out the killings, Washington actually has a very very
            low crime rate." -- Marion Barry
            \_ "Bitch set me up!" -- Marion Barry
        \_ It makes sense to define ordinary murders from warlike activity--but
           then it should be made clear, and not claim a decrease simply
           because of redefinition.
                \_ It makes even more sense that the administration would want
                   to spin their quagmire any way they can.
2006/9/12-14 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44353 Activity:high
9/12    http://csua.org/u/gvh (Kristol, Lowry via Wash Post)
        "There is now no good argument for not sending more troops."
        There's a very good argument:  We don't have more troops to send.
        http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/12/world/middleeast/12anbar.html
        Discussing force levels, Lt. Col. Ronald Gridley, the XO with
        Regimental Combat Team 7, a Marine unit that is charged with
        securing a large swath of [Anbar] province, said then that his
        regiment had recommended that additional troops be allocated ...
        "What we recommend and what we get is going to be two different
        things," Colonel Gridley said.
        \_ Maybe next time you could provide the full quote for Colonel Gridley
           and also not mishmash unrelated articles together.  Your NYT
           article and misquote of Gridley is not support for your contention
           that "we don't have more troops to send".  It may be true (or not)
           that we don't have more troops but your links don't cover that.
           Anyway, I thought we're supposed to want to bring them all home
           right now, not send more because sending more is just going to piss
           off the local population and cause the insurgency to grow.  Here's
           another choice quote from the NYT link:
                Without the deployment of an additional division, "there is
                nothing MNF-W can do to influence the motivation of the Sunni
                to wage an insurgency," the report states, according to a
                military officer familiar with it. MNF-W stands for
                Multinational Force-West, the formal name of the Marine
                command.
           Which is anothter way of saying they don't have enough marines there
           to kill enough Sunnis to break their will to fight.  That's what you
           are advocating?  More dead Sunni?
           \_ I think if they really got to work, they could probably kill
              enough Sunni with their current troop levels.
           \_ I don't think that was a misquote.  That was lifted verbatim.
              Nevertheless, here is the remainder of what he said:
              \_ Yeah, if all of a sudden being Sunni and without a weapon
                 meant you were a legitimate target.
                 \_ Whaddya mean "all of a sudden"?
                    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13974639
           \_ "In our perfect world, we could use some more infantrymen to be
              able to patrol the streets and partner with the Iraqi Army."
              Fact:  This LTC wants more boots on the ground to help secure
              Anbar.  Opinion:  I don't think this is something you see in
              every war.
              Fact:  This LTC recommended more boots on the ground to help
              secure Anbar.
              You also assume I advocate killing more Sunni, when the only
              assertion I make is that we don't have more troops to send.
              As far as that goes, I don't mind being shown that I'm wrong
              about that assertion, and to what degree.  I do concede that
              the 2nd URL doesn't offer conclusive proof to the assertion.
              about that, and to what degree.
              \_ The frontline guys always recommend more troops, weapons,
                 food, higher pay, hotter women, and more time on leave.
                 That's been going on since the first army formed.
                 As far as availability of fresh troops goes, I made no
                 statement in either direction.  Only that your claim is not
                 backed by your links.  I really don't know and don't want to
                 do your fact check for you.  Anyway, what the guy was saying
                 is they need more troops so they can crush the Sunni rebels.
                 That means killing more of them, faster.  If you want more
                 troops in Iraq to end the insurgency then you *are*
                 advocating more Sunni deaths.  Are you opposed to bringing
                 them home and forcing the Iraqi government to get their act
                 together and sort it out for themselves?
                 \_ Okay, where did I say I want more troops in Iraq?
                    Okay, where did I say that I didn't think you made a
                    statement pro or con about troop availability?
                    Read both my posts.
                    \_ I read your posts.  What is the point of saying there
                       are no more troops to send if you don't want more troops
                       sent?  I'm sure there is a huge shortage of moon rocks
                       in Iraq but you're not posting that we need to send
                       more of those.
                       \_ I quoted Kristol and Lowry's very definitive
                          statement and then I said:  uh, actually, there's a
                          big problem with that.  that's the point.
                          \_ You quoted them then added your own spin, that we
                             don't have troops to send, then provided a link
                             to an article that didn't prove your contention.
                             If you're going to claim something your follow up
                             link should back your claim.
        \_ Basically, these two numbnuts are repeating what Murtha said two
           years ago:  If you want to crush the insurgency, send more troops.
           Don't do it half-assed.  As far as Dubya is concerned, we are still
           going with the plan of "maintain GOP majorities" via "they stand up,
           we stand down ... any change in strategy can wait until after
           November ... since we can't win in Iraq if we don't have GOP
           majorities in Congress ...", IMO. -op
           \_ Crushing insurgencies requires killing people.  Why do you want
              more dead Iraqis?
2006/9/10-12 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44340 Activity:nil
9/10    Screw the War on Terrah, we need the War on Bad Driving.  There have
        been about 208,000 road deaths in the USA since Sept 11 2001,
        according to:
        http://www.unitedjustice.com/death-statistics.html
        Or how about a big budget ABC miniseries, "The Road to Bad Driving?"
2006/9/10-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44334 Activity:nil
9/9     It's almost 911. I just listened to a radio program and watched
        a TV segment reminding me why the war in Iraq was justified.
        How about you guys? Are you bombarded by pro-war media blitz?
        \_ I listened to a CD on the way to work just so I could avoid the
           buzz. With all due respect to those who were killed, the over-
           dose is making me queasy.
        \_ I read it somewhere (Iraqibodycount) that more than 10,000 Iraqi
           civilians died of US bombing during the invasion phase of the Iraq
           war.  Sometimes I wonder in name of god why our 3,000 lives
           justify the killing of 10,000 more.
           \_ They don't. 9/11 had nothing to do with the invasion of Iraq,
              except as an excuse.
           \_ Body counts have nothing to do with it.  If we had killed fewer
              than 3,000 civilians the moral implications would remain the
              same.
        \_ hey, I see Bush mentioned Bin Ladin 20 times, I didn't hear anything
           about the "progress" we made in Iraq!
2006/9/8-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44324 Activity:nil
9/8     http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/08/washington/09intelcnd.html
        NY Times reports that there is no evidence that Hussein had ties to
        al Qaeda - but liberals fail to understand that not finding the
        evidence may result in mushroom clouds over one or more major American
        cities
        \_ Honestly, do you really believe the Administration line? Or is this
           just something you believe because it stirs people up?
        \_ NYT?  Could you cite a source that doesn't have a long history of
           both obvious bias and flat out incompetent screwups?  The Daily
           Cal has a better record than the NYT.
           \_ http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf
              But I guess even a bipartisan senate committee report has probably
              been tampered with by Bill Clinton's chinese army black
              helicopters controlled by the liberal media in canada in league
              with the New World Order.  In fact the GOP senators who signed off
              on the above official document only did so to trick you into
              letting the UN take away your guns and burning your country
              western albums.
            \_ I love this "the new york times is all propaganda" campaign
               you have going on.
              \_ You can practically see the little gears working in his
                 brain when he reads this. MUST ATTACK SOURCE!
                 \_ If the source sucks there's no reason to post from it.
                    The NYT sucks.  Their track record in recent years is
                    undefendable.  I used to read it 7 days a week because
                    they actually made some effort to report news and kept
                    the editorials to the op/ed page but now the whole thing
                    is a giant op/ed.  I'm not the only subscriber they've
                    lost recently.  When they stop sucking they'll sell more
                    papers.  In the mean time, thanks for posting the
                    senate.gov document and if you can't get a quality first
                    hand source like that the DC is still a better source
                    than the NYT.
                    \_ The senate.gov link was from the top of the nytimes
                       article, moron.
                       \_ So what?  Why not just post the real info instead
                          of forcing people to visit a crap site?  And why
                          do you feel the need to personally insult someone?
                          Do you have a vested personal interest in the NYT?
                          \_ FOX NEWS! FAIR AND BALANCED!
           \_ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,212897,00.html
2006/9/7-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44313 Activity:nil
9/7     Blair will resign w/in 1 year:
        http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2405434&page=1
        \_ and more than half of those in a recent poll want him out
           now, now, now.  like that's gonna happen with the U.S. mid-terms
           around the corner.  See prediction below from Aug 8:
           [http://csua.org/u/gn5
           I'm pretty sure this is the spin machine trying to keep Blair as PM
           for another year]
           \_ Sadly, the poll question is never given verbatim.  The same poll
              also shows 50% of respondents saying 9/11 was an Israeli-U.S.
              plot.
              http://csua.org/u/gn9 (channel4.com)
           around the corner.
2006/9/7-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44310 Activity:nil 66%like:44292
9/6     Iraqis Will Greet U.S. Soldiers As Liberators. God Bless.
        http://tinyurl.com/2t2u2 (dslextreme.com/users/markpoyser)
        \_ See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack
           each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass
           destruction.
        \_ I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And whats best is
           for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense
        \_ We've got hundreds of sites to exploit, looking for the chemical
           and biological weapons that we know Saddam Hussein had prior to
           our entrance into Iraq
        \_ We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.
           [a few months later]
           I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration
           ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.
        \_ Housing prices will never fall.
           \_ Pluto will always be our 9th planet.
              \_ Nooooo!!!! I just got a 103% mortgage on an unbuilt condo on
                 Pluto because the realtor told me it would be a planet forever
                 and that the 650,000 dollar price would double within five
                 years no matter what!!  I'm doomed!
2006/9/7-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44308 Activity:nil
9/7     Iraq deaths multiply in new count
        http://tinyurl.com/qmmsp (news.yahoo.com)
        "BAGHDAD, Iraq - Updated figures from Iraq's Health Ministry show there
        was no significant decline in violent deaths in Baghdad last month, but
        the U.S. military insisted Thursday the murder rate in the capital had
        fallen by 52 percent."
        \_ So...how hard is it to get a concealed carry permit in Baghdad?
           \_ Who there would want to conceal?
              \_ According to the motd gun gods, everyone should be concealing
                 there, because then no one will know who has a gun, and
                 everyone will be polite and peaceful.  Apparently this is a
                 better deterent to violence than slinging an AK across your
                 shoulder in plain sight.
                 \_ Straw man.  Try again.
                    \_ Try what?  I think I've made my point.  Deterrence
                       works when your potential attacker actually knows you're
                       packing.  I support the right to both open carry and
                       concealed carry, but I think it's open carry that
                       is more likely to deter crimes, and that most motd
                       gun nuts are so blinded by their rage about california's
                       restrictive gun laws that they've lost sight of this.
                       In the words of Dr. Strangelove "vay didn't you tell
                       ze verld??!!"
        \_ "He fell on some bullets"
2006/9/6-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44293 Activity:nil
9/6     http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/06/iraq.poll/index.html
        43 percent of the Americans today believe Saddam Hussein was
        personally involved in September 11, 2001. Question for you
        motd academics. What is your estimate on how many of the 43
        percent also believe in Intelligent Design?
        \_ 99.5%  Note, all this says to me is that the default course of the
           intellectually lazy in this country is to be Christian.  I think
           even if you're a Christian you can agree with that.
           \_ ALERT: The above is an unpatriotic liberal message
           \_ Being Christian != believing in ID.  -tom
              \_ Being Christian != believing the bible?
              \_ I think the Vatican's latest position is that they believe in
                 ID and they don't think ID should be taught as science.
                 ID and they think ID shouldn't be taught as science.
              \_ I understand that, but I think Christians are the largest
                 segment of ID supporters, and intellectually lazy ones the
                 largest segment of those.
        \_ 69.69 percent.  -freshman
2006/9/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44292 Activity:low 66%like:44310
9/6     Iraqis Will Greet U.S. Soldiers As Liberators. God Bless.
        \_ http://www.dslextreme.com/users/markpoyser/uggabugga/2002/bushisms.htm
        \_ See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack
           each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass
           destruction.
        \_ I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And whats best is
           for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense
        \_ We've got hundreds of sites to exploit, looking for the chemical
           and biological weapons that we know Saddam Hussein had prior to
           our entrance into Iraq
        \_ We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.
           [a few months later]
           I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration
           ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.
        \_ Housing prices will never fall.
2006/9/5-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44282 Activity:kinda low
9/5     Dear "War on Terror" supporters, what do you think of this:
        Opium Harvest at Record Level in Afghanistan
        http://tinyurl.com/s6s5o
        \_ Why the "quotes"?
           \_ because you can't have a war on terror
        \_ This whole "War on X" idiom is LBJ's fault. And they've all failed!
        \_ When there's a "War on Opium" let us know.  Of course opium is at
           record levels:  we didn't provide the locals with an alternative to
           make money.  It is no different than the cocoa growers in South
           America, the pot growers in the US, or any other illegal product,
           service or substance that has high returns for high risk of early
           death or imprisonment.  Escobar was doing great, until he got blown
           away on a roof top.  Have you considered your very own meth lab?
           \_ I think everyone with a strong background in the physical
              sceinces has at least considered it.
        \_ Just like in Iraq, we have broken a tyrant's stranglehold on vital
           natural resources and allowed the free market to reign!
        \_ One thing you've got to hand to the Taliban, opium poppy production
           was waaaay down under their iron-fisted rule.  Of course now it is
           one of their tools in their war on the west.
2006/9/3-6 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44262 Activity:kinda low
9/3     New Dune book == thundering turd.  discuss.
        \_ How does it end?  I don't want to read the whole thing, but
           I'm interested in knowing what happens.  The Frank Herbert
           Dune books ended on a cliffhanger.
           \_ The two super powerful face dancers (with the odd names
              of Marty and Daniel I think?) at the end of the real
              Dune series books, turn out to be evil computer systems
              that everyone thought were destroyed in the Butlerian
              Jihad, and now they really want to wipe out the human
              race.  The Honored Matres turn out to be the remnants
              of the really pissed off female Tlexiau who weren't
              turned into axoltl tanks.
              \_ So does the human race get wiped out?  Or do the
                 \_ That's probably in book 2 of 2 (#1 is out now)
                 Bene Gesserit save the day?  Any more re-appearances
                 \_ There are 80 million more Honored Matres than
                    Bene Gesserit.  Actually they kind of merged.
                    Actually it's retarded, who cares.
                 of Duncan Idaho gholas or descendants?
        \_ Old Dune books == thundering turd as well. These books were
           about as good as that Lord of the Rings crap. Someone ought
           to teach these people how to write good sci-fi/fantasy, w/
           original plot lines like uploading a computer virus that
           exploits a buffer overflow in BlackMonolithOS to access
           supervisor mode and trigger the self-destruct sequence.
                 \_ why don't you just make up your own ending?  Frank Herbert
                    is dead.
                 \_ These sequels are all about resurrecting
                    Paul, Baron Harkonnen, and Duncan Idaho the
                    universal super stud as gholas.
                    \_ What about Lady Jessica?
                 \_ why don't you just make up your own ending?  Frank
                    Herbert is dead.
                    \_ Yeah, but supposedly his son discovered some old
                       outlines and extensive notes that Frank Herbert
                       was going to turn into this last Dune book.  Frank
                       Herbert died before he got to it, but his son has
                       turned it into this new book.  So at least the
                       basic plot outline is "authentic."
              \_ THANK YOU for spilling this. I read three of Herbert Jr.'s
                 "prequels," and I was utterly dreading how he would end up
                 ruining his father's legacy further.
                 \_ But you read *three* of them anyway?
                        \_ Get the hell out of my store! Thank you, come again!
                    \_ They broke it down in three-book chunks for easier
                       assimilation. More than three books and I would have
                       stopped after the first one. Cf. Robert Jordan.
2006/9/1-5 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44244 Activity:nil 85%like:44241
9/1     http://tinyurl.com/l6j3a (usatoday.com)
        We're already in there, how about using Agent Orange?
        \_ Because it's toxic to humans?
        \_ Because it's toxic to Americans?
           [don't edit my posts please, add your own comment if you have
            something to say.  thanks.]
            something to say.  thanks. -white person]
        \_ Because it's toxic to harmans?
2006/9/1 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44241 Activity:nil 85%like:44244
9/1     http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-03-01-afghanistan-opium_x.htm
        We're already in there, how about using Agent Orange?
        \_ Because it's toxic to humans?
           [don't edit my posts please, add your own comment if you have
            something to say.  thanks.]
2006/9/1 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44239 Activity:nil 90%like:44243
9/1     Cal Thomas, "Al Gore is Right About the Media"
 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/08/al_gore_is_right_about_the_med.html
2006/9/1-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44238 Activity:nil
9/1     Headlines as of 2PM:
        FoxNews: Iraq Edging Closer to Civil War, Report Says
        CNN: Pentagon: Cold-blooded carnage soaring in Iraq
        Edging closer vs carnage soaring. Fair and balanced my ass.
        \_ You can have soaring carnage without a civil war.  They should
           use that headline.  "Soaring carnage, edging closer to civil war"
2006/9/1-4 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44234 Activity:nil
9/1     http://csua.org/u/gtm (realtor.org)
        "We've never seen a general decline in the housing market against a
        healthy economic backdrop where jobs are being created, the economy is
        growing and interest rates are favorable ... Contributing to this
        hesitancy is a lot of negative news stories, but in the end we believe
        that underlying market fundamentals will prevail."
        - National Association of Realtors Chief Economist David Lereah
        \_ http://davidlereahwatch.blogspot.com  I have no further comments.
           \_ This is just a bunch of quotes from D.L. archived by some
              random dude (as far as I can figure).  What about it?
        \_ That guy is a hack.
           \_ Correction - "hack" doesn't really get it right.  More like
              "That guy is a paid shill for the real estate industry."
        \_ there is a report that we are already in a recession!
           \_ There is no civil war, we're not losing the war in Iraq,
              and the economy is stronger than ever.    -Republican
2006/9/1-5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44231 Activity:nil
9/1     More proof that Karl Rove was involved and Bush should be impeached.
        Of course there won't be a single mea culpa on this one from the left.
   http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/31/AR2006083101460_pf.html
        "Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the
        end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go
        public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out
        -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and
        that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He
        ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such
        as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent
        on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He
        diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming
        that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal
        conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously."
        \_ If this was all so harmless, why did Cheney's chief of staff
           take the risk of lying to a federal prosecutor about it?
           \_ Who said he lied about it?  Has he been found guilty of anything?
              In this country he's still innocent until *proven* guilty in a
              *court of law* not the media.  No one has been found guilty of
              anything except Armitage, Powell, and the State Department folks
              who knew the truth years ago and only recently let it be known.
              \_ err... Guantonimo Bay, Cuba?
                 \_ Uh?  what's that have to do with scooter or plame/wilson or
                    anything else on this thread?
        \_ That op-ed seems deluded.  There is plenty of evidence that
           Cheney and Rove instructed their staff to gather 'dirt' on
           Wilson and ruin anyone who got in the way of their
           campaign to convince the public that Iraq was trying to
           acquire nuclear weapons.
           \_ Plenty of evidence, such as?  This is from the WaPo who were at
              the forefront of the "frog-march Cheney" brigade.  This is a huge
              180 from their former position.  What do you know that the WaPo
              doesn't?
        \_ Joe Wilson on the matter of Iraq, Niger, and yellowcake:
           http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0706-02.htm
           \_ Published in 2003 and since then, fortunately, enough facts have
              come out that even WaPo now says he's a liar.  Seriously,
              sometimes people we trust, especially public gov.  figures with
              an axe to grind lie to us.  Wilson is a liar.  Delay is corrupt.
              The other guy was stashing $90k in his freezer.  Most of them
              are cheating on their spouses, taking campaign money in exchange
              for votes and 'custom' legislation, taking freebie trips on your
              tax dollars and their patron corporate sponsors.  Washington is
              dirty.  There are no clean hands in the entire city, no heros.
              dirty.  There are no clean hands in the entire city, no heroes.
              Deal with it.
              \_ the WaPo editorial board is full of nincompoops
                 \_ For a bunch of nincompoops they sure do get quoted a lot
                    on the motd without anyone questioning the quality of
                    their editorials or their neutrality.
              \_ Spell out for me, using facts and sources, how Wilson was
                 wrong about Iraq, Niger, and yellowcake.
                 \_ Answering myself, so don't bother to flame:
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake_Forgery#Butler_Report_2
                    \_ I don't have an agenda or an axe to grind.  I wouldn't
                       have flamed.  I'm interested in the truth and a govern-
                       ment free of corruption no matter who is in office.
                       There are no heroes in Washington D.C.  I don't see it
                       as you vs. me but the truth vs. a blizzard of lies and
                       propaganda from the agenda driven power pols in DC, the
                       media, corporate board rooms, etc.  Had Wilson proved to
                       be honest and if his wife was actually a secret agent
                       who got her cover blown then I'd be the first one
                       calling for heads to roll.
2006/8/30-31 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44200 Activity:nil
8/29    Just a blast from the past:
        http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030501-15.html
        Wow, this guy really made us all look like fools, didn't he?
        \_ Only those who believed him.
           Oh, and that press release was altered after the fact; it was
           originally "Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended," they added
           "Major" several months later.  -tom
           \_ I watched the video, though.  It's clear he says "Major combat
              operations."
2006/8/29-9/1 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44190 Activity:nil
8/29    I hadn't noticed this story until now--it turns out that Iraq was
        indeed pursuing yellowcake in Niger and Joe Wilson simply missed it.
        http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2146475
        \_ I wouldn't call Christopher Hitchens the end all source of
           what was really going on with Niger and Iraq.  Some big things
                                         \_ Uh, he cites other sources.
           he misses:
           No one besides Hitchens believes that Zahawie was trying
           to dig up yellowcake in Iraq:
           http://www.nysun.com/pics/31062_2.php
           Joe Wilson never denied being in Niger because of the CIA.
           The non US intelligence forces (Italy, France, England) were
           drawing their conclusions from the same forged documents,
           not a seperate source.
           I don't understand Hitchens' problem and it upsets me
           that people take his rantings as fact.
           \- CHITCHENS is rhetorical terorrist.
              \_ So he blows up innocent people with his words in order to
                 achieve a political goal?  Perhaps the pen really is mightier
                 than the sword.
           \_ Add to all of this that he begins his article with the unsub-
              stantiated assertion that Novak actually dispelled claims that he
              outed Plame as a CIA Agent as a result of Administration payback.
2006/8/28-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44176 Activity:nil
8/28    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/755793.html
        Olmert appoints two investigative comittees with limited power
        "We do not have the luxury to sink into investigations of the past,
        we need to focus on the future and the Iranian threat"
        "it's absolutely clear that Hezbollah has been whipped"
        \_ Wow, Bush-style governing is spreading 'round the world
        \_ gee, I thought "Spreading of American-style Democracy" only limit
           to democracy based upon one superior race over another.
           \_ No, you didn't.
2006/8/26-29 [Science/Space, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44161 Activity:kinda low
8/26    In the old days, the government built great infrastructures like
        big dams, power generators, interstate highways, etc. What are some
        recent examples of big projects today?
        \_ The New Orleans project.
        \_ err... our annual highway bill.  do you have any idea how much it
           is?
        \_ The Glorious War Reconstruction Program in Iraq
        \- you mean the us govt? obviously with things like dams, there is
           a lot more of this in developing countries, e.g. three gorges dam
           in china. and in many of the cases above the govt paid for but
           didnt build them. a lot of transportation infrastructure isnt a
           single object like the GGB, but more like THE BIG DIG. and of course
           there is NOLA, new airports now and then etc.
           \_ You mean the three gorges dam project where literally millions of
              people were involuntarily forced out of their homes, and cities
              and counties of historic significance are forever submerged in
              water?
              water?  No, the US govt hasn't done something of that scale.
        \_ NFL stadiums built with taxpayer money.
        \_ In the old days, social spending was trivial to non-existant
           compared to today.  You can't have your cake and eat it too.
           That's why we're always borrowing from the future to have our
           toys today.
        \_ ISS </sarcasm>
2006/8/23 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44107 Activity:high
8/22    "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without
        the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be
        prescribed by law." - Third Amendment to the United States Constitution
        "They will greet us as liberators!" -some dumbass
        \_ Ok troll, I'll bite.  What does the first quote from the USC have
           to do with the unattributed pseudo quote about Iraq?
           \_ The troll has left the building.
              \_ I guess you're right. I was hoping for some rambling
                 blithering idiocy but I'll have to go elsewhere for my
                 entertainment today.
                 \_ Ever since they put the eye in the pyramid on the dollar
                    bill, it has symbolised the petrodollar conspiracy which
                    will soon invade Iran to solidify the New World Order
                    gulags in Montana built by Halliburton.
                    \_ Thanks, I appreciate the effort but it just isn't the
                       same as a real live troll.  :-)
                       \_ How much did Karl Rove pay you to disregard my
                          troll?  You're one of Them aren't you?
                          \_ No, but I am one of They and we're coming to
                             take your sunglasses away.
                             \_ I have put them someplace where you will never
                                find them.
2006/8/21-23 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:44081 Activity:nil
8/21    Why is Iran shelling northern Iraq?
        \_ Link?
           \_ http://csua.org/u/gq9
           \_ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/world/middleeast/20iraq.html
              \_ Thank you both. --pp
        \_ Turkey, Iran, the U.S, and the UK all agree that the PKK is a
           terrorist organization
        \_ The establishment of an independent Kurdistan following the first
           Gulf War presents a fascinating counterfactual.
2006/8/16-18 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:44026 Activity:nil
8/16    http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/16/D8JHHOUO0.html
        Who knew public opinion could turn so quickly on the PM in Israel?
        \_ I knew.  -average American male
        \_ It's kind of like Bush in microcosm.  I guess Americans are much
           slower to get the message that their leadership blows.
        \_ They've already released two suspects without charges being
           filed.  Looks like it's unraveling.  Wonder how much the mainstream
           media will cover that.
2006/8/16-17 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:44018 Activity:nil
8/15    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1227204,00.html?cnn=yes
        Every Jewish transaction is about money.        -Mel Gibson #1 fan
        \_ Why was it never publicized that essentially every adminstrative
           post in Clinton's administration was a Jew.  He liked to refer
           to himself as the first Black President, when in fact he was
           the effectively the first Jewish.
        \_ Or world domination.                         -Mel Gibson #2 fan
           \_ Or circumcision.                          -Mel Gibson #3 fan
           \_ Who says it isn't happening now?  There are plenty of quotes and
              interviews from American born descendents who don't want the
              borders treated like swiss cheese at a mouse convention.
2006/8/15-17 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:44007 Activity:nil
8/15    Open source project adds "no military use" clause to licence
        http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/08/14/1438204
        Actual licence addition even dumber than title suggests.
        \_ We are fighting them in CyberSpace so we don't need to fight them
           ITRW.
        \_ I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry.  It's cute.  It's naive.
           \_ Cute and naive.  Like a typical Berkeley undergraduate female
              trying fellatio for the first time. -average Berkeley male
        \_ "Both developers do agree about one aspect of their license clause.
           It is based on the first of science fiction writer Isaac Asimov's
           Three Law of Robotics, which states, "A robot may not harm a human
           being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm."
           That, they say, is a good thing, "because the guy was right," Tegel
           says, "and he showed the paradox that almost any technological
           development has to solve, whether it is software or an atom bomb.
           We must discuss now what ethical problems we may raise in the
           future."   Unfortunately, they totally miss the point of Asimov's
           Three Laws of Robotics.  If they had actually read the stories,
           they'd know his point was that 3 simple laws are insufficient to
           determine the 'right' thing to do in a complex world.
2006/8/11-14 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:43978 Activity:nil
8/11    http://www.aish.com/movies/PhotoFraud.asp
        Pro-Israel organization wages propaganda war
        \_ The narrator's smug tone makes me want to go blow up Israel myself.
           \_ The narrator probably isn't even Israeli.  Do you have any
              issue with the content, or only his tone?
        \_ gasp. one propaganda war to battle another.  Where will it all end?
           \_ In my pants.  Huh huh.  -beavis
2006/8/11-14 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43968 Activity:nil
8/11    Iraqis are getting shot over naked goats and suggestive vegetables.
        http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5622900
        These people are broken.
        \_ Once their imams start arguing over whether characters in toddler
           tv shows are gay because they are carrying a purse, we'll know
           for sure.
        \_ But remember, these people aren't the true face of Islam!  Islam is
           a religion of peace.. just like all the other ones!  Remember, all
           major world religions agree: atheism is the enemy.
        \_ But their women are hot.  Yah!  -T.E.A.M. America World Police
2006/8/4-6 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43905 Activity:nil
8/4     "With yellow Hezbollah banners above their heads and American and
        Israeli flags beneath their feet, at least a 100,000 Iraqis marched in
        Baghdad after Friday prayers in support of the Shiite militia in
        Lebanon. ... protesters burned effigies of President Bush and British
        Prime Minister Tony Blair in a demonstration rife with symbolism and
        anger."  http://csua.org/u/gm5 (latimes.com)
        \_ OK, we get our riled up undocumented immigrants, and send them in
           for a counter-protest.  Let the brown people fight it out!
                \_ I'd pay to watch Miss Puerto Rico fight. -proud American
2006/8/3-6 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43894 Activity:nil
8/3     "The prospect of a low intensity civil war and a de facto division of
        Iraq is probably more likely at this stage than a successful and
        substantial transition to a stable democracy ... the next six months
        are crucial"
        -Outgoing UK ambassador to Iraq in last official private memo
        Here's an exercise:  Google for "the next six months are crucial" iraq
        \_ I don't get it.  -proud American
2006/7/28-8/2 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43830 Activity:high
 7/28    Try http://google.com/trends
         http://google.com/trends?q=al+gore%2C+global+warming&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all
         Try "iraq war, global warming, gasoline"
         Click on "Regions". Americans don't seem to care about global warming.
         \_ http://csua.org/u/gk7 (what you said)
         \_ Check out http://www.shylove.com
2006/7/27-30 [Health/Dental, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43822 Activity:low
 7/27    http://csua.org/u/gjx (Wash Post)
         "a blue Volkswagen Passat, exploded nearby ... an elderly man running
         down the street with a 'fountain of blood coming out of his neck,' he
         said. 'He was screaming: "help me, help me, help me, don't let me die,"
         Taha recounted, pointing out the blood spot on the sidewalk where the
         man eventually fell. 'We couldn't save him. He died.'"
         \_ "We couldn't save him. He died" can be said of everyone, in the end.
            Every man dies. Not every man truly gets hit by an exploding blue
            Volkswagen and runs around in a fountain of blood.
            All happens according to the will of God.
            We can only hope that he accepted Christ sometime before the end.
            \_ You're trying too hard.  Instead of sounding like a jaded or
               cynical most poster, you just just sound like an idiot that's
               trying too hard.  *sigh*
               \_ You see that old bloodstain there? Ol' Frank McGee died there
                  back in '06. Yeah, Frank was hollerin' up a storm once he got
                  that dang ol neck wound. Was sprayin' blood all up an down
                  the street. And what does he do but yell at *us* to fix him.
                  As if *we* could stop Frank from dyin', once his neck was
                  sprayin' blood like that. I tell you what though. Blue cars
                  is some bad news. The other thing 'bout blue cars is how the
                  paint fades as it gets older. So when you go for to fix
                  a spot, you can't get the new paint to match the old paint.
                  Just a bad idea all round. But ol' Frank, now he was what they
                  call a Mosslem. I'm not sure he thought of stuff like that.
                  Mosslems have some funny ways o' thinking. You know, ol Frank
                  had two wives. Yep. Now, I'd think, hell, I get enough nagging
                  from Marge and the kids without addin' another woman in
                  the house. Jus' like Marge was harpin' at me fer weeks to
                  scrub out that there blood stain.
2006/7/25-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43803 Activity:nil
7/25    50% of Americans now believe Saddam had WMDs, up from 36% in
        February 2005.  Mission fucking accomplished!
        http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=684
        \_ It all depends on what "WMD" means
        \_ This is a nation of people of faith.  Now, faith is
           not usually required to believe something that is true,
           rather it is required in order to believe something
           false.  So, considering that most people in the US
           are willing to believe in mythical beings with mythical
           powers, why not believe in mythical WMD's?
           \_ When a handful of legislators decide to get up and lie, and
              then the media reports it as if their claims have any merit,
              is it faith or laziness/lack of time/apathy?  I think the latter.
           \_ well, what if, technically, the answer of "Yes" is correct,
              for the question of whether there were WMDs in Iraq at the
              time we invaded.  all it takes is a couple sarin-loaded
              artillery shells that no one knew about, and in fact
              "approximately 500" old, abandoned chemical munitions with
              mustard gas and sarin have already been found scattered
              throughout Iraq, even though Saddam had ordered all WMD
              stockpiles destroyed.  The question is bad.
        \_ well of course he did, and we knew it.  After all, the US supplied
           them!
        \_ 64% think Saddam "had strong links with Al Qaeda"
           72% think Iraqis "are better off now than they were under Saddam"
           Go dubya!
                \_ I wonder what percentage of those 72% would be willing to
                   actually set foot in Iraq.
2006/7/25-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43792 Activity:nil
7/25    Gutknecht(R-MN), a strong supporter of the war since it began in
        March of 2003, told reporters in a telephone conference call Tuesday
        that American forces appear to have no operational control of much of
        Baghdad.
        "Baghdad is worse today than it was three years ago."
        But, didn't we get told that major combat operations are over?
        Does this mean we have to retake Baghdad all over again?
        \_ Depends on who controls it which your quote doesn't say.
2006/7/21-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43760 Activity:nil
7/21    Huh, turns out, peace IS war (Thomas Sowell)
        http://csua.org/u/ghu (townhall.com, a mouthpiece for conservatives)
        \_ "One of the many failings of our educational system is that it sends
           out into the world people who cannot tell rhetoric from reality."
           I thought the current conservative climate would have found that to
           be a plus.
2006/7/18-20 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43722 Activity:nil
7/18    http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog
        The American government is very financially saavy. By cutting
        unnecessary fat, we save a lot of money to pay for our deficit.
        \_ After 10 years of Republican control, there is no more fat to cut,
           government is as lean is it can possibly be!
2006/7/18-20 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43719 Activity:nil
7/18    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060718/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_out_of_control
        A Sunni driver lures Shiites into a trojan horse van by promising
        jobs-- then blows it up.
        \_ I read an article over a year ago about dudes blowing up copy
           stores where job applicants were photocopying their job
           application forms to apply for jobs as cops. - danh
2006/7/18-20 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Reference/Military] UID:43715 Activity:nil
7/18    6000 Iraqis killed in sectarian fighting in May and June, approximately
        100 a day.  Six thousand deaths in two months, in a country of
        26 million residents, is the equivalent of 9/11 every two and a half
        days.
        http://www.uniraq.org/documents/HR%20Report%20May%20Jun%202006%20EN.pdf
        \_ But we're spreading freedom!
        \_ That will all stop once we turn the corner.  Just wait!
        \_ Maybe they should stop fighting each other then. If you need a
           totalitarian police state to prevent your citizens from butchering
           each other then something is wrong with your culture.
           \_ Sooo I guess that's "oopsiedoodle" on the whole Iraq thing then.
              \_ Saddam used biological weapons on his own people!
                 ... maybe we should use some on them too!
        \_ ob we're fighting them there so we don't fight them here.
           ob if you disagree, you're giving aid and comfort to the enemy
           and not supporting the troops
           ob mushroom cloud over major american city
        \_ so long as the right people are dying what's the problem?
           If it is truely innocent civilians very very sad.
2006/7/18-20 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43712 Activity:nil
7/18    "The U.S. government says it has evacuated more than 100 Americans,
        but their efforts are clearly lagging behind those of other countries.
        The French and Italians have gotten hundreds of their citizens out."
        Clearly, cheese eating surrender monkeys are better at ESCAPING!
        http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/anderson.cooper.360/blog
2006/7/18-20 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43700 Activity:nil
7/17    We have turned yet another corner in Iraq!
        http://www.csua.org/u/ggm
        \_ 50 people died today but we're spreading LIBERY FREEDOM AND THE
           PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS in Iraq!                -jblack #2 fan
        \_ We're running out of Iraqi corners
           \_ We're just circling the same damn block.
              \_ We should build cities with hexagonal blocks.  50% more
                 corners for the same price!
                 \_ Not octagons, though.  The government would get sued by
                    UFC.
                    \_ Can one fill a surface with octagons?
                       \_ Not in Euclidean or spherical geometry. You can
                          do it in the hyperbolic plane, see e.g
                     http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/apps/teich-nav/report/node1.html
                          Some of Escher's designs were based on this sort
                          of pattern.
                          \_ Wow!  Thx.
                 \_ What if they were all round?  Is that no corners or
                    infinite corners?
                    \_ I'd think of it as infinite corners.  But you can't fill
                       a surface with round shapes.
                       \- if we think about this in terms of
                          differentiability i think it is
                          better to think of round as "no corners".
                          You may enjoy reading about
                          THE WEIERSTRASS FUNCTION.  --psb
                       \- if we think about this in terms of differentiability
                          i think it's better to think of round as no corners.
                          You may enjoy reading about THE WEIERSTRASS FUNCTION.
                          I suppose you can also read about LOCAL LINEARITY.
                          BTW, there are some pretty counter intuitive stuff
                          in this area [space filling sets and covers]. For a
                          Berkeley connection, you may
                          google(dubins, hirsch, scissor) also see
                          google(dubins, hirsch, scissor) also see e.g.
                          http://sciboard.louisville.edu/math.html#q12 --psb
                          \_ Interesting.  I was thinking in terms of
                             circumference and area, which approach 2*pi*r and
                             pi*r^2 as N approaches infinity.  So do the two
                             ways of thinking contradict to each other?  I'm
                             not a math major.  -- PP
                             ways of thinking contradict each other?  I'm
                             not a math major and I'm only good at high school
                             math.  -- PP
2006/7/14-18 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43672 Activity:nil
7/14    Baghdad descending into total anarchy.
        http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2268585_2,00.html
        "A local journalist told me bitterly this week that Iraqis find it
        ironic that Saddam Hussein is on trial for killing 148 people 24 years
        ago, while militias loyal to political parties now in government kill
        that many people every few days. But it is not an irony that anyone
        here has time to laugh about. They are too busy packing their bags and
        wondering how they can get out alive."
        \_ but it is our God given duty to bring FREEDOM LIBERTY AND THE
           PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS into primitive cultures around the world,
           starting with Iraq! There is no price too great for our glorious
           War on every primitive culture on this planet. The War is totally
           worth it. God Bless.
           \_ Son, all I've ever asked of my marines is that they obey my
              orders as they would the word of God. We are here to help
              the Vietnamese, because inside every gook there is an American
              trying to get out. It's a hardball world, son. We've gotta
              keep our heads until this peace craze blows over.
              \_ Personally, I think, uh... they don't really want to be
                 involved in this war. You know, I mean... they sort of took
                 away our freedom and gave it to the, to the gookers, you
                 know. But they don't want it. They'd rather be alive than
                 free, I guess. Poor dumb bastards.
        \_ that's because there is evidence for that.. there are tons
           more people killed but no evidence to support it..
        \_ that's <censored by the US Government> no <censored by the US
           Government> support <censored>
           \_ Uh...forest, trees anyone?
           \_ sorta like how evidence of WMD's was the technical reason for
              the war?
        \_ No, the real difference is that this is (largely) the people killing
           themselves.
           \_ So the people killing each other is preferable to the government
              doing it?
              \_ it's a democratic right!  if yer still alive, it's probably
                 because you and yours have also exercised yer right to bear
                 an assault rifle!
           \_ If you've been paying attention to other reporting coming out
              of Baghdad recently, it is becoming evident that the government
              is collaborating with the militia death squads - or at least
              tacitly supporting them.  For instance see:
              http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/07/12/baghdad
              For a personal perspective:
              http://www.csua.org/u/gfl (riverbend blog)
        \_ hey, democrats, got a problem for ya.  I've been opposing the war
           all along.  And there is a part of me want us just to get out.
           The logic is that you can not reverse a failed policy (i.e.
           invading iraq), and we shouldn't be responsible for such failed
           policy.   HOWEVER, it is more and more clear that if we get out
           prematurely, there will be a genocide of some sort... what
           should we do?  continue Bush's failed policy?
           \_ Check the Lawrence Kaplan article.  The (quiet) Bush policy is
              withdrawal anyway, even though they keep vigorously denying the
              existence of a "timetable."
              \_ and blaming democrats for the genocide happened afterwards...
                 sounds like an ingenius plan of Karl Rove again.
              \_ any link to that article?
                 \_ Here you go:
                    http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=3FtL2Vxi34T0BA0X2XTFjy%3D%3D
           \_ I told you a long time ago what we should do, you are just
              not interested in doing what will work.
2006/7/11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43628 Activity:nil
7/10    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13806135
        Who says Iraq businesses aren't doing well? Here is more proof that
        free-market can work in Iraq, and how!
        \_ So now everyone will do this and the militias will start killing
           people they suspect are faking it, and one of these days they'll
           kill their own sect, and they'll be sub-sectarian violence.  Huzzah!
2006/7/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43623 Activity:kinda low
7/10    Ahem.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060711/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_rape_case
        \_ well, that just makes me think (yeah, I know the author is leaning
           that way too) that the killers didn't know the people they killed
           were in the same platoon as the child rapists.
           \_ "... as the child rapists".  Have these guys had a trial yet?
              \_ yes, and OJ didn't kill the white girl
                 \_ ok so they didn't have a trial.  this isn't stalinist
                    russia.  yet.
           \_ re: the "child" part.  Have they actually figured out how old
              she was?  I've heard numbers from 14 - 26
              \_ yes, she is 14
              \_ yes, she was 14
                 http://csua.org/u/ge2 (reuters.com)
              \_ Did they rape her seven year old little sister, too?
           \_ Well, yeah.  Because these terrorists are always so coy with their
              motivations and anti-US propoganda.  They just forgot to mention
              till now why they did it.
2006/7/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43561 Activity:moderate
7/5     http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1659910/posts
        Recall two U.S. soldiers were kidnapped a couple weeks ago and killed.
        Reports are now that they were mutilated beyond recognition and
        beheaded.  Recall that another U.S. soldier was charged with rape and
        quadruple murder last week.  It turns out that all three soldiers were
        in the same platoon.
        \_ jblack, is that you? Do you still call them "Freedom Fries"?
           \_ Just watch the coverage disparity.
              \_ This is non-responsive. Just answer the question please.
                 \_ there wasn't a question.  why do you hate so much? -!jblack
                    \_ "Do you still call them Freedom Fries", is not a
                       question? What do you call it then?
                       \_ blunt hostility serving no useful purpose.  have you
                          stopped beating your wife?  -!jblack
                          \_ Hey, you are the idiots who alienated our allies
                             with the whole "Freedom Fries" thing. Along with
                             triumphant aircraft carrier landings, "Cheese
                             Eating Surrender Monkeys", "Old Europe", "Bring
                             'Em On!" and all the rest of the loudmouthed,
                             trash talking. Now that things have not gone your
                             way, you want to pretend like it all never
                             happened. Sorry, three years ago is not ancient
                             history and we need to be reminded of your
                             arrogant foolishness, so as to learn from your
                             mistakes and not repeat them.
        \_ "you are either with us, or against us."  remember that line?
           and then, we invaded Iraq.  Those who are resisting our occupation
           are by definition terrorist and should not be pardoned.
           Is this all thing warped?  or it's just me?
           \_ "You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists" was
              how I remember it. Which is worse, I don't know...
        \_ how big is a platoon?
           \_ commanded by a lieutenant, a combat platoon typically has 30-40
        \_ Compare the US non-reaction of this with the Israeli reaction of a
           kidnapping of *one* soldier in Gaza.  No wonder our troops might as
           well have target circles painted on their uniforms.
           \_ think of why there is no reaction from our part?  may be
              these US Soldiers deserve to be killed?
2006/6/29-7/3 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43529 Activity:nil
6/29    If I hear "as the iraqis stand up, we can stand down" one more time,
        I'm going to scream.  This zero sum expectation is ludicrous when
        the country is falling apart.  When the iraqi military is a loose knit
        group of militias, each with their own agenda, us standing down only
        makes for freer reign for pursuing their agendas.  The happy talk
        about "N brigades trained" makes me ill.
        \_ "as the iraqis stand up, we can stand down"
        \_ Dubya's strategy can be summed up as:  Bravely running away.

           \_ So, the "before" "bring it on" Bush:

        Bravely bold Sir Robin rode forth from Camelot.
        He was not afraid to die, O brave Sir Robin!
        He was not at all afraid to be killed in nasty ways,
        Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir Robin!

        He was not in the least bit scared to be mashed into a pulp,
        Or to have his eyes gouged out, and his elbows broken;
        To have his kneecaps split, and his body burned away;
        And his limbs all hacked and mangled, brave Sir Robin!

        His head smashed in and his heart cut out
        And his liver removed and his bowels unplugged
        And his nostrils raped and his bottom burned off
        And his pen--

              after?

        Brave Sir Robin ran away.
        Bravely ran away, away!
        When danger reared its ugly head,
        He bravely turned his tail and fled.
        Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
        And gallantly he chickened out.
        Bravely taking to his feet
        He beat a very brave retreat,
        Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!
2006/6/28-29 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43521 Activity:nil
6/28    Traitorous NY Times quotes cut-and-run colonel insulting the memory of
        every soldier who has sacrificed their lives for our precious freedom.
        http://tinyurl.com/kyfdo
        \_ Just read the article. How the hell does this colonel insult the
           memory of anyone?
           \_ YHBT.
2006/6/28-29 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43514 Activity:nil
6/28    First commissioned officer to publicly refuse deployment to Iraq
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1653999/posts
        http://www.thankyoult.org
        \_ I like the 2nd FR post:
           > Three words:
           >
           > 1. Charge
           > 2. Convict
           > 3. SENTANCE
                    ^
           \_ 4. SPELL-CHECK
              \_ 5. ???
                 6. Profit!
                 --The Underpants Gnomes
           \_ http://www.jamesfaqs.com/Morans.jpg
              America, fuck yeah.  -John
2006/6/23 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43488 Activity:nil
6/23    Khobar Towers
        http://www.iranvajahan.net/cgi-bin/news.pl?l=en&y=2006&m=06&d=23&a=5
2006/6/23-28 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43476 Activity:nil
6/23    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060623/ap_on_re_us/terrorism_investigation
        War on Terror is working
        Wire tapping is a good thing
        Bush is great
        News like these will keep coming till November
        Republicans will hold control
        Democrats will whine as usual
        \_ So you think news like this is orchestrated and part of some long
           ranging plot of the geoplutocratic Cabal?
           \_ Of course not. It's being orchestrated by Karl Rove and the GOP.
              No Cabal is necessary.
              \_ I hope you see the humor in your reply.  It certainly made
                 me laugh.
                 \_ Certainly. It's the irony that makes me weep myself to
                    sleep at night.
2006/6/22-29 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43468 Activity:nil
6/22    http://mediamatters.org/items/200606200008
        O'Reilly on his radio show, describing how he would stabilize Iraq:
        "President O'Reilly, curfew in Ramadi, 7 o'clock at night. You're on
        the street, you're dead. I shoot you right between the eyes. OK?
        That's how I'd run that country -- just like Saddam ran it. Saddam
        didn't have explosions. He didn't have bombers, did he? ...
        you have to have that for a few months to stabilize the situation
        so the Iraqi government can get organized, can get security in place
        and get the structure going."
        \_ Ah, the right finally reveals its true colors: brownshirt.
           \_ O'Reilly isn't "the right".
        \_ So the WMD reason for going to war: kaput.  The "we'll be rich off
           oil" reason: kaput.  And now "we'll liberate the people": kaput.
           So why does papa bear say this is a good war again?
           \_ So what do you think of the recent partially released document
              revealing hundreds of wmd loaded shells were found mixed in with
              standard shells?  I don't recall anyone saying we'd be rich off
              Iraqi oil.  O'Reilly doesn't speak for the government.  So, what
              are you talking about?  More bashing on some random entertainer?
              Now if there was an actual elected official or highly placed
              appointee who said these things there'd be something to talk
              about.
              \_ The Iraq Survey Group, sent to Iraq by the administration
                 in 2003, said "While a small number of old, abandoned
                 chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that
                 Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical
                 weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible
                 Indications that Baghdad resumed production of
                 chemical munitions thereafter."
                 Looks like the crap Santorium is talking about is
                 the above.  Anonymous motd pundit, how can you take
                 anything Santorum says seriously?
              \_ This outlandish claim by Santorum et al has been widely
                 debunked and disowned.  The shells we have found were
                 highly degraded and dated back to pre-'91 times (read
                 Iran-Iraq war).  As for rich off iraqi oil, we were told
                 repeatedly that this war would cost next to nothing, and
                 that oil revenues would cover the nominal cost:
                 Iran-Iraq war.  Y'know, the ones that we sold them?).
                 As for rich off iraqi oil, we were told repeatedly that
                 this war would cost next to nothing, and that oil revenues
                 would cover the nominal cost:
                 http://www.house.gov/schakowsky/iraqquotes_web.htm
                 \_ Missing point.  This was a small part of a larger report
                    he wants declassified.  It isn't about 500 old shells, it
                    is about "why are we not getting the rest of the report
                    if there's nothing in it"?   Santorum's claim is that
                    there is more in the report we're not being told about.
                    How can you know if there's anything more if the report
                    remains classified?
                    \_ Of course I can't know.  But I do know Santorum is
                       a sanctimonious, mendacious fool, and this doesn't
                       pass the smell test.
                    \_ Wait, are you suggesting that the Bush Admin is
                       holding back evidence of WMD in Iraq? Why? What
                       purpose would that serve?
              \_ Show me a report on the web that doesn't include a freeper
                 URL.
                 \_ So it was only discussed in an open session in Congress
                    but it isn't true unless you see it on the web?  Ooook.
                    \_ Please. They discussed whether TWA800 was shot down
                       by missiles in an open session in Congress. If you
                       have docs, produce them.
                       \_ So now you claim there was no such document much
                          less the unclassified summary document?  There were
                          no shells at all?  You're the only person I've seen
                          to dispute that.  What do you base that belief on?
                          \_ You have yet to provide me with a non-freeper
                             url linking to this report. Please to be doing so.
                             \_ How strange.  It wasn't that long ago (last
                                week) that saying, "I read it on the net, it
                                must be true" was considered sarcasm.  And what
                                does the freepers have to do with it?  Everyone
                                who disagree with you is not automatically
                                your opposite number.  I've read the freeper
                                site exactly once.  I'll bet you're a more
                                avid freeper visitor than I am.
                                \_ Was there a sale on red herrings? I'm
                                   asking for a source for op's point. A
                                   published, paper source would be fine, but
                                   op and I don't meet in RL, so there's no
                                   chance of that; I'll settle for a URL that
                                   is not freeper-based. If you can't provide
                                   it, say so. The Dem below found it, and
                                   further found that it was already debunked.
                                   And no, I don't visit freeper. That tree's
                                   already poisoned, so why test the fruit?
                                   \_ No red herrings here.  You keep ignoring
                                      the point: WMD were found.  They were
                                      supposed to have been destroyed.  All
                                      of them.  Not just from post GWI.  Why
                                      would you not want to see a full
                                      accounting of everything found in Iraq?
                                      That's what the full document is.  The
                                      point you studiously ignore is that
                                      Santorum wants the whole document
                                      released.  The age or count of 500 shells
                                      is not the issue.  It is in fact, a red
                                      herring.
                                      \_ See the URL below, then compare with
                                         this report from the Iraq Survey Group
                                         Final report: http://csua.org/u/ga6
                                         Cf. also with Bush's admission that
                                         the WMDs we had been led to believe
                                         were in Iraq were not there. The red
                                         herring to which I refer is your
                                         attempt to derail my call for a source
                                         with a non sequitur about believing
                                         things you read on the Internet.
                 \_ geez, it isn't that hard -Dem
                    link:csua.org/u/ga0 (santorum.senate.gov)
                    basically these weren't the WMDs the U.S. went to war for.
                    \_ Thank you. -pp
           \_ Does O'Reilly say it was/is good?  He says we have to stay
              and win, but that's not the same thing.
              \_ As a liberal, I could agree that we've fucked it all
                 up and that we shouldn't leave Iraq until there is
                 some semblance of order.  Also I want everyone who
                 is part of this build up to invade Iraq to lose
                 everything politically, financially, and physically,
                 but that is not going to happen.
                 \_ This is where the division among liberals comes in.
                    There are many, myself included, don't think there is
                    anyway we can restore order unless we reinstate the
                    draft and flood Iraq with literally millions pairs of
                    boots on the ground.
                    \_ Whoa there cowboy!  I thought dogma stated that the
                       only answer was to *reduce* the number of American
                       feet on the ground so the natives would have less to
                       be upset about, now you're talking about a draft to
                       put millions of people there who definitely don't
                       want to be there?  The correct answer is to reduce
                       American troop count as Iraqi troop count and skill
                       level goes up until they can deal with it on their
                       own.  I see no reason why Iraqis can't restore their
                       own order given a fair chance which neither fleeing
                       nor flooding will provide.
                       \_ Given a level playing field and a restart of the
                          clock, I agree that the Iraqis have a good chance
                          of restoring order. I'm not convinced that they
                          have that level playing field or the time required.
                          That said, "dogma" is not something I would even
                          begin to entertain in an environment as richly
                          complex as Iraq. -!pp
                          \_ So after the Iraqi government pulls the local
                             militia types into the government, you think the
                             foreign terrorist types will be anything more
                             than pests?  They're such psychos they attack
                             other arabs (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia come
                             to mind) who are now pissed off and helping the
                             West find and kill them.  Zarqawi was killed with
                             information from Jordan, for example.
                             \_ "after the Iraqi government pulls the local
                                 militia types into the government" may be a
                                lot later than you think. In fact, I hear
                                they've set the date for the 12th of Never.
                                \_ cute but not reality based.  pick up a
                                   newspaper.  talks are on going and have been
                                   for a few weeks that we're aware of.
                                   \_ Cf. the inclusion of Afghan warlords as
                                      "governors" of certain areas of that
                                      country and the resurgence of the
                                      Taleban (not to mention in-fighting)
                                      between the warlords. I agree that there
                                      have been talks; I doubt the sanity of
                                      including more decentralized paramilitary
                                      forces as a solution to the insurgency.
                       \_ The problem is the number of Sunni insurgents is
                          going up as well as the number of Shiite militia.
                          I don't believe we are making any progress in terms
                          of creating "Iraqi" troops (who would fight for Iraq,
                          not a faction).
                          If on the other hand, you say we get out when we
                          think the Sunnis and Shiites come to a power-sharing
                          agreement with an acceptable level of car bombs and
                          death squads, that makes more sense.
                          \_ What is your source for the increasing numbers
                             of insurgents and lack of any progress on the
                             part of the new Iraqi government training their
                             own?
                             \_ EVERYTHING.  Don't you get it?  We're
                                training Iraqi troops, but they're actually
                                Shiite (police), Sunni (military), or outright
                                insurgents.
                                The goal is to give the Shiites/Sunnis/Kurds
                                enough pieces until there is some kind of
                                status quo, I mean, government.
                                \_ Ok so you have no source.  Shrug.  I have
                                   no problem with you having a particular
                                   feeling about it but to come here and say
                                   there are more numbers of this or less
                                   numbers of that is insufficient to make a
                                   real point.  I thought you might have
                                   actual real numbers for the Iraqi government
                                   side at least, which is public info.  I
                                   don't think the other side does a quarterly
                                   public report on their recruiting efforts.
                                   \_ Okay, fine.  There is no hard data on
                                      the number of insurgents, because
                                      insurgents by their nature don't want to
                                      be found (and eliminated).  Most numbers
                                      are for hard-core fighters anyway, with
                                      the number of sympathizers in some
                                      reports going over 200,000 individuals.
                                      However, there is a public report
                                      delivered quarterly to Congress (google
                                      "iraq congressional report") which shows
                                      the number of insurgent attacks growing
                                      (note the graph doesn't show the ramp-up
                                      from March 2003 to April 2004, which
                                      would be embarrassing).  Is the increase
                                      in attacks because the number of
                                      insurgents is increasing, or because
                                      the number is staying the same or
                                      decreasing but they're reacting fiercely
                                      because they're in their "last throes"?
                                      Who knows.
                                      It's my opinion that, while our goal is
                                      to create a national Iraqi identity and
                                      police/army force, what we're actually
                                      doing is feeding each faction until they
                                      can get into some sort of status quo, at
                                      which point we can significantly reduce
                                      the number of troops there.
                                      I completely agree that the number of
                                      "Iraqi" soldiers and police is
                                      increasing.
                                      However, it's my opinion that, while our
                                      goal is to create a national Iraqi
                                      identity and police/army force, what
                                      we're actually doing is feeding each
                                      faction (Sunni military and Shiite
                                      police) until they can get into some sort
                                      of status quo, at which point we can
                                      significantly reduce the number of troops
                                      there.
                                      In other words, what I'm doing is
                                      clarifying what "as they stand up" really
                                      means.
2006/6/20-24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43441 Activity:nil
6/19    Cheney... Fucking Cheney...
        http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/06/19/D8IBFKU05.html
        "I don't think anybody anticipated the level of violence that
        we've encountered," Cheney said.
        http://www.thememoryhole.org/mil/bushsr-iraq.htm
        "Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an
        occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not
        changing objectives in midstream, engaging in 'mission creep,'
        and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs.
        ... Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably
        still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would
        have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome."
        --George HW Bush
          \_ Note the "changing objectives in the midstream" That was 1991.
             This is now 2006.
             \_ So you're fine with the claim that our problems in Iraq,
                just like the problems in New Orleans, and even 9/11,
                were caused by a failure of imagination?  "I don't think
                anybody anticipated..." has become a sick joke in this first
                part of the 21st century.
                \_ that sentence was late in 20th centry 1991
                   \_ Stupid or trolling?...
                      \_ Uhm....yes?
             \_ Yeah, op should have just included the relevant quote, the
                part after the ellipses, although the first part was entirely
                correct in its own context.
                \_ correct for those who never bother to read any history,
                   and hubris enough to think THIS is different than anything
                   else happened before.
                   \_ what?
                   \_ what? x2
        \_ what a dick
2006/6/16-19 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43416 Activity:nil
6/15    Let's face it. Karl Rove is evil, but is also extremely brilliant.
        What new tricks do you anticipate in the upcoming elections?
        \_ Dubya simultaneously stays the course in Iraq and brings some
           troops back to a heroic homecoming.
           \_ Precisely. He announces that victory is complete and says he'll
              bring home troops. He brings back a minimum number and says the
              rest are merely support and on their way home Real Soon Now.
              At the same time, he paints Dems as cowards. Fox publishes
              retrospective on the war describing the entire venture in rosy
              terms ("sacrifices were made for the greater good," etc.).
              The best Dems can hope for after that is the assassination of
              the Iraqi PM.
              \_ Are you fucking nuts?  Why would you *hope for* the Iraqi
                 PM to be assassinated?  Why would anyone hope for that?
                 \_ Because it's ok if the middle east goes to hell and
                    millions die, as long as the Dems win the next
                    election!
                    \_ And yet, not surprisingly, it would be okay with
                       everyone involved if you were found drowned and
                       bloated, no matter who wins the next election.
                       \_ Oo, touched a nerve, huh? And, not surprisingly,
                          you cannot express yourself in an intelligent
                          manner.  Ook! Trog kill!
                          \_ It's always disappointing to me when this is
                             the best a college educated person can do.
                             -someone else
                 \_ You DON'T. That's the point. The GOP is so good at the
                    PR game that they're going to paint the Dems into a
                    corner where the only way out is if something absolutely
                    terrible happens.
                    \_ Paint into a corner?  What?  So Iraq taking a turn for
                       the worse is good for the party?  The logic behind that
                       is so painfully twisted I'm left speechless.  Nevermind,
                       it's only the motd.  I'm going to lunch.
                       \_ Here's my vain attempt to make this clear to you:
                          Bushco is going to announce victory and bring back
                          a minimum number of troops while promising to bring
                          the rest back at some vague date in the future.
                          He'll ridicule the Dems as cowards who would have
                          pulled out our troops before we were able to complete
                          the mission. Fox will kick into overdrive with
                          retrospectives of how the war _was_ terrible but
                          how it was utterly justified and how the troops
                          who died did so in the line of duty. The networks
                          will miss the point and will argue over the war,
                          but in the past tense, thereby solidifying the
                          idea that it's over. The public, faced with a
                          seemingly successful conclusion to the matter, will
                          go along with the GOP as the party of winners. The
                          Dems will then have no real means of regaining
                          Congress or the White House. The one thing that could
                          derail this plan is if something catastrophic
                          and sensationally public occurred in Iraq, such as
                          the assassination of the Iraqi PM; a public
                          reversal like that would be sufficient to prove
                          that the war is not won in Iraq, thereby short-
                          circuiting the PR war. Read carefully: I'm not saying
                          that anyone should be hoping for the assassination
                          of the Iraqi PM; I'm saying that the GOP is setting
                          up an airtight plan to continue their dominance.
                          \_ ok it does make me feel better that you're not
                             rooting for an assassination.  However, I'm not
                             buying that if there's still say, 30,000 US troops
                             there and bombs are still going off in Baghdad
                             that anyone is going to buy that it's over.  As
                             far as planning for political dominance, that is
                             a political parties reason for being.  I expect
                             both major political groups to spend all their
                             time plotting and planning to achieve and retain
                             power.  WTF else are they good for?  Once you
                             accept that political parties exist you can't
                             fault them for doing what they were designed
                             to do.
                             \_ I would buy this if there were oversight
                                worth a damn keeping them from acting
                                illegally and unethically. The sad truth is
                                (as DeLay mostly worked out) that if you
                                control the means of oversight, you can then
                                overlook your own excesses.
                                \_ I'm a glass half-full kinda guy.  I see
                                   DeLay and Jefferson's fridge stuffing and
                                   the many other times someone in either party
                                   got busted and booted and often jailed as
                                   the system working.  I see the Keating Five
                                   (sleaze bag McCain) getting off as a
                                   failure but that's the exception.  So, I'm
                                   not going for this "the people are stupid"
                                   line and I'm also not buying the "they
                                   always get away with it" thing either.  The
                                   overall record stands against that line of
                                   reasoning.
                          \_ airtight except for the fact that Iraq is still
                             a clusterfuck and it will get worse if we pull
                             our troops out.  That government wouldn't last
                             a week.  -tom
                             \_ And that's why they pull back a token number,
                                declare a public victory, and leave the rest
                                of the troops in place to be withdrawn at some
                                vague future date.
                                \_ People are stupid, but I don't think this
                                   administration has enough credibility left
                                   to turn things around with token gestures.
                                     -tom
                                   \_ I hope you're right.
        \_ Don't confuse "conniving" with "billiant."  -tom
           \_ Brilliantly conniving.  Not all connivers are on the same
              plane as Rove.
           \_ yosafbridge
              \_ Two words: "special hell" :D --michener
                 \_ quiet, this is a movie.
2006/6/15-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43411 Activity:nil
6/15    Victories in Iraq, Bush Approval Up
        http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199668,00.html
        \_ In other news, Fox is the mouthpiece for the administration.
2006/6/15-19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43410 Activity:nil
6/15    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199623,00.html
        The Iraq War is going in the right direction.
        \_ In other news, Fox is the mouthpiece for the administration.
           \_ I'm glad we have friends like these. I wish they existed
              back in WWII. I bet we'd have won that war faster with the
              press second-guessing everything.
              \_ In some ways it's similar.  I seem to recall that "Nazi's
                 have killed 6 million Jews" was not a big news story.
                 Now we have: "insurgents" massacre civilians? Ho hum.
                 Heroism by US troops? Nah.  Accusations of US troop
                 misconduct from anonymous unauthenticated source?  Stop
                 the presses!
                 \_ if putting things into perspective. number of Russian
                    casualties, number of Chinese caulties, number of casulties
                    in Southeast Asia.. then, while 6 million is bad, but
                    rest of 40+ million is pretty bad too
              \_ Live in the present, grasshopper. Painting a rosy picture of
                 inanity and incompetence does no one any good.
                 \_ This is not about the present or the past. It's about
                    a systemic and pervasive hidden war against those
                    who disagree with qualifications. Are you a soldier?
                    Are you a historian? Can you cite precedence even?
                    It's just arrogant presumption, not to mention, cynicism
                    that clouds your judgement in this and all matters related
                    to BushCo/OIF or even Dems vs Repubs. It does no good
                    if all you do is second-guess, complain and offer no
                    real solutions. Like they say put your money where your
                    mouth is. I have not see any 'money' yet from anyone.
                    \_ Here's a solution: don't fucking invade Iraq.  There
                       were several million people (including me) who took to
                       the streets to make that point.  It is disappointing
                       that the administration went ahead with Operation
                       Clusterfuck anyway, but it is not at all surprising
                       that we're now in a protracted war with no real
                       end in sight.  -tom
                    \_ It's not arrogant or cynical. The reality is that Bush
                       is rash and incompetent. This and WWII have almost
                       nothing in common.
                    \_ What, aside from voting, protesting, and donating cash
                       to political candidates that support your point of
                       view can your typical dissenter do?  What, in your mind,
                       constitutes "putting your money etc" in this context?
                       \_ I think he means "ok, now that we're there, how about
                          some constructive ideas" which is legit, but
                          something I see as a really incompetent, pathetic,
                          juvenile and cowardly approach to foreign policy if
                          this were really the thinking behind the Iraq war.
                          I.e. "well, we're all in this together"--same as
                          when your little brother floods the basement and
                          you have to help clean up, or live with the mess.
                          Except that in the real world, the little brother
                          gets a knock upside the head.  -John
                          \_ OK, suggestion one is for the whole frickin'
                             crew to admit they're completely unethical and
                             incompetent and immediately resign.   -tom
                             \_ Well, good luck.  Maybe they'll all have a
                                sudden attack of conscience and
                                responsibility, and monkeys will fly out of
                                my ass.  Great thing about a democracy is,
                                if 51% of the people whose votes count don't
                                want accountability... -John
        \_ in Fox News defense...  I don't think Fox News is a mouth piece of
           the administration.  I think it's just a pure MONEY generating
           machine which knows exactly what its audience *WANTS* to hear.
           And most American citizens prefer simplicity over complexity;
           prefer good news over bad news; prefer USA is a benevolant
           superpower that invades another country for the goodnes of
           man kind than a country which its own private business' interest
           trump everything else.
2006/6/15-19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43407 Activity:nil
6/15    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060615/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_terror_blueprint
        This convinced me that the Iraq War was the right thing to do.
        \_ This might be an argument to convince someone that staying the course
           a little longer is the right thing to do, but what's your rationale
           for finding this a convincing w.r.t. starting the war?
        \_ USA also have blueprints to nuke entire USSR and China out off
           the face of the earth.  Does it mean USSR/China is justified to
           invade USA in the name of self-defense?
2006/6/15-17 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43405 Activity:nil
6/15    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1649811/posts
        Freepers not sure how to react as al-Qaeda in Iraq plan states number
        one goal is to get U.S. into a war with Iran
        \_ The enemy of my enemy is my friend's cousin's sister-in-law's
           uncle's high school sweetheart?
           \_ But...what does that make me?
           \_ But...what's that make us?
2006/6/14-15 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43380 Activity:nil
6/13    Should be interesting to watch the Webv vs Allen senate race in VA.
        Webb is RR's fmr Secretary of the Navy who left the R party over
        the Iraq war. Allen has much better recognition but the rhetoric
        in that election may be interesting to follow, espe if Allen decide
        to run for President in 2008.
        \_ Politics is local.
2006/6/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43351 Activity:nil
6/11    US military commander calls Gitmo suicides "act of war"
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5068606.stm
        \_ General Jack Ripper is alive and well.
        \_ When I first read that, I thought it was from the Onion.
        \_ yes, act of war... let's kill them... wait... they already died.
        \_ 'The US military said the men's bodies were being treated "with the
           utmost respect".'  Oh good.  As long as we treat _dead_ bodies at
           Gitmo w/ respect.
2006/6/8-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43328 Activity:nil
6/8     http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2006/06/08/haditha
        Sidney Blumenthal says Dubya's father "waged a secret campaign over
        several months early this year to remove Secretary of Defense Donald
        Rumsfeld ... personally asking a retired four-star general if he would
        accept the position ... The elder Bush's intervention was an
        extraordinary attempt to rescue simultaneously his son, the family
        legacy and the country."
                 \_ Although I agree that something more than a no-fly-zone
                    was necessary to protect our former allies the Kurds,
                    Invasion: Baghdad was just as bad an idea in '91 as it
                    was this time. Remember, the same cast of bad apples in
                    Bush2: Cabinet Boogaloo are the ones that got overruled at
                    the end of Gulf War I. This is their revenge, their chance
                    at vindication, and it's turned out to be an utter mess...
                    just as cooler heads predicted at the end of GWI. As for
                    Carter, are you freaking high? Carter inherited a bad
                    situation and turned it around so that when Ronnie came
                    into office in January '81, he could fuck it up for a
                    while before anyone realized he'd screwed it up. Bush2
                    inherited a budget surplus and undenied military supremacy
                    and parlayed that into gazillion dollar deficits and
                    the belief that anyone with a guerilla army can beat the
                    US military.
        \_ And we care because Dad did such a great job as President?
           \_ He did a spectacular job, in kicking Saddam out of Kuwait, having
              a global consensus, and having everyone else finance it. -Dem
              \_ And didn't finish the job.  And while we're here what are his
                 other claims to fame that make him someone worth listening to?
                 Of the President's I'm old enough to remember, only Carter was
                 a worse President than Dad.
                 \_ The "job" was to kick Saddam out of Kuwait.
                 \_ The "job" was to kick Saddam out of Kuwait and to minimize
                    him as a threat to his neighbors.  Invading Iraq had a 0%
                    probability of occurring at the time, nevermind the obvious
                    problems of occupying the country and keeping the Sunnis
                    and Shiites from killing each other.
                    I say again, regarding the Gulf War, Bush's father did a
                    spectacular job.
                    \_ So kicking Saddam out of Kuwait accomplished what
                       exactly?  Why did we care about Kuwait?  The only people
                       hurt by the fall of the Kuwaitis are the ruling family
                       and even then they just would have lived in exile with
                       their billions of dollars.  We restored hereditary oil
                       rich family to power.  Oh yay.  Success.  We also told
                       the Kurds and southern Shiites we'd support their
                       uprising and then watched them get slaughtered.  That
                       was good for US credibility.  Oh yes, it was a truly
                       spectacular job.
                 \_ Although I agree that something more than a no-fly-zone
                    was necessary to protect our former allies the Kurds,
                    Invasion: Baghdad was just as bad an idea in '91 as it
                    was this time. Remember, the same cast of bad apples in
                    Bush2: Cabinet Boogaloo are the ones that got overruled at
                    the end of Gulf War I. This is their revenge, their chance
                    at vindication, and it's turned out to be an utter mess...
                    just as cooler heads predicted at the end of GWI. As for
                    Carter, are you freaking high? Carter inherited a bad
                    situation and turned it around so that when Ronnie came
                    \_ We've been through this.  Perhaps you've heard of
                       double digit inflation?  The Misery index?  The
                       infamous Malaise Speech?  Four hundred and how many
                       days of The Hostage Crisis on TV every friggin night?
                       Carter showed the world that the US could be brought
                       to her knees by a bunch of untrained thugs with bad
                       attitudes.  Oh yeah but wait, we tied yellow ribbons
                       around everything in support and memory of the hostages.
                       Carter: best President in modern times!  Woot!  The
                       only thing he did was provide Dad a way of not being
                       the worst President in the last few decades.  GHB
                       couldn't even win a "worst of" contest.
                    into office in January '81, he could fuck it up for a
                    while before anyone realized he'd screwed it up. Bush2
                    \_ By that logic, Clinton fucked the economy and we didn't
                       see the effects until a while into Junior's term.  I
                       doubt you believe that.  That knife cuts both ways.
                    inherited a budget surplus and undenied military supremacy
                    and parlayed that into gazillion dollar deficits and
                    the belief that anyone with a guerilla army can beat the
                    US military.
                    \_ Hahaha.
2006/6/8-10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43320 Activity:nil
6/8     Remaining three critical ministry posts confirmed by Iraqi parliament.
        Two Shiites for interior and national security, a Sunni (who had
        been ground forces commander (for defense minister).
        The nominations had been put forward immediately after the
        announcement of al-Zarqawi's death.
        \_ quagmire.
           \_ Yes, Iraq is just like Vietnam.  Except for the political,
              environmental, religious, geo-political, military, civilian,
              economic differences.  Yep, just like it.  Comrade, The Peoples
              shall one day crush the Western Imperialist Yankee Pigdogs and
              They shall take what is theirs!  Disney and Mcdonald's for all!
2006/6/8-10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43317 Activity:low
6/8     Al-Zarqawi killed in U.S. airstrike north of Baquba along with 5-7
        associates, including a women and child.  Identity confirmed through
        fingerprints, face, and known scars.  Al-Maliki says intelligence was
        provided by local residents.  U.S. says someone within his network
        gave him up.
        \_ in later news Pelosi and Kennedy plan ceremony to honor
           'slain hero of the resistance'.
        \_ Long ass article on the history of Zarqawi in Atlantic Monthly:
           http://tinyurl.com/mnll7
        \_ Yes! One down, and a few more hundred thousand Muslim
           followers and extremists to go...
           \_ I think he's probably worth a bit more than your average bomb-
              throwing maniac.  -John
        \_ June 9th 2006 is officially a Victory Day! After many years of
           fighting, we won the war on terror! The tide has finally turned
           and major combat operations ends. God Bless!
        \_ In other news jblack and his friends are drinking beer and
           blasting country music to celebrate this news.
           \_ I'm a confirmed leftie and critic of the war, but even I'm
              happy about this. The guy was a terrorist and murderer. Way to
              go, US intel! --erikred
              \_ Comrade, you must quickly be taken to the re-education camp!
        \_ Wow cool all violence in the Middle East will now stop since
           their great leader is dead.
           \_ Who said that?  No one said that.
        \_ It's a fitting that he should be blown up with no warning.
           \_ Except the warning of all the other times we tried to blow him
              up.
              \_ Well he knew we were out to get him, but there was none of
                 this business of having a trial and indefinite pretrial
                 detention.  Just: BOOM!  Game Over.
                 \_ Were there also troops on the ground in case he
                    survived the strike?
                    \_ Iraqi forces got there first, followed by U.S.
                       \_ URL?
                          \_ the http://cnn.com main story, it says, "Iraqi forces
                             were the first on the scene", other articles
                             explicitly say U.S. arrived soon after
                             \_ Thanks. I don't usually read http://CNN.com. None
                                of the wire stories I read mentioned this
                                information.
                                \_ And now for "Attack of the Clones!"
                                   \_ And now for "Attack of the Clones!"
                                      \_ And now for "Attack of the Clones!"
                                         \_ And now for "Attack of the Clones!"
                                   \_ And now for "Attack of the Clones!"
                                \_ And now for "Attack of the Clones!"
                                   \_ And now for "Attack of the Clones!"
                                   \_ WHEN CLONES ATTACK!
        \_ Yay!  Pictures of the corpse!  Go go culture of life!  I'm not saying
           a necessary thing wasn't done, but the right should admit that this
           "culture of life" B.S. is pure hypocracy.
           "culture of life" B.S. is pure hypocrisy.
           \_ rove, I mean, dubya would tell you he defends those who cannot
              defend themselves
           \_ and without pictures the conspiracy nutters would say it was a
              lie.  damned if you do, damned if you don't.  whatever.
        \_ Emmanuel Goldstein is dead! Long live Emmanuel Goldstein!
2006/6/7-9 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43315 Activity:nil
6/7     http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,198566,00.html
        Unpatriotic Jap army Lieutenant refuses to deploy because of
        war objects. Maybe we should deport him or put him in the
        internment camp again. What a disgrace to America -conservative
        \_ Good one troll. Let's not forget it was Democrat's administration
           that did the internment but a Republican administration that
           apologized for it.
        \_ internment was a completely justified action, though their
           property should have been returned.  Why no apologies or
           recognition for the Germans and Italians interns held until 1948?
           \_ and a conservative movement that thinks it wasn't a mistake
              to intern all U.S. citizens of Japanese heritage
           \_ and a conservative movement that thinks it was right to intern
              all U.S. citizens of Japanese heritage
2006/6/7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43300 Activity:nil
6/7     The Real Iraq
        http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Production/files/Taheri_0606.htm
2006/6/5-8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43279 Activity:nil
6/5     Tony Snow compares Federal marriage amendment to civil rights
        legislation:
        http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/06/05/rosegarden/index.html
        I think this guy is even more awesome than McClellan.
        \_ In the new Bush world order, it's "freedom and liberty" when you
           spy on everyone and you get civil rights when they are taken away.
           \_ We have always been at war with Eurasia, and Eastasia is our
              ally.
2006/6/4-8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43272 Activity:nil
6/4     Iraqi journalist describes life in Baghdad.
        http://csua.org/u/g2p (justzipit.blogspot.com)
        \_ Is this Salam Pax?
2006/5/31-6/3 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43240 Activity:nil
5/31    Pregnant Iraqi and female cousin killed while failing to stop at
        checkpoint in Samarra while brother driving them at high speed to
        hospital.  U.S. military says prohibited area was clearly marked
        and there were repeated visual and auditory warnings, and that the
        loss of life is regrettable.  Driver says he had no indication at
        all he was driving into a checkpoint.
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1641323/posts
        \_ In other news, a carbomb in Huseiniyah killed 22 civilians Tuesday
           night...
           \_ by the way, in case you don't know, that is why people hate US.
              Intentional or not, US tend to inflict huge sufferings upon
              ordinary people.
              \_ All governments do.  It is the nature of government to control
                 and destroy.  Also, I'm not sure how a car bomb falls under
                 "US tend to inflict huge sufferings".  Did an American agent
                 plant the bomb?
2006/5/29 [Computer/SW/Security, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:43215 Activity:nil
5/29    Castro's Cuba
        http://www.therealcuba.com/index.htm
2006/5/26-28 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43196 Activity:low
5/25    http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,95496,00.html
        Lt. Gen Paul Van Riper sank half the American fleet in a wargame
        using unconventional tactics like motorcycle messengers and
        converted speedboats.  The Navy's response was to make him do it
        again with convential tactics.
        \_ I saw a documentary about this and Van Riper claimed the
           enemy country was supposed to be Israel, not Iran.
        \_ Saying bad things about Rummy?  Someone won't be asked to the
           next war game!
        \_ This sounds like business-as-usual for the Bush administration:
           make the facts fit the desires.
        \_ I don't understand one thing. He achieved his results by a
           surprise attack. I think this is useful in a war game, because
           it alerts commanders to the possibility (and the results if
           one were to occur). However, it was hardly military genius
           to fire a bunch of missiles off at ships steaming into the Gulf
           preemptively and would probably be incredibly stupid in a real
           situation were you, say, Iran. For all he would know, it wasn't
           a preemptive strike at all but an exercise and now he started
           a war against a more powerful opponent who has world opinion on
           his side. In short: they make too much of his apparent success
           in this war game. I'm sure the US wasn't too concerned about
           rehearsing to prepare for an Iranian preemptive strike, because
           that would be the best possible situation for the US. Hell,
           maybe they should strike Right Now. So it's fair for the people
           running the war game to want a "do over" with some rules in place.
           \_ Does the U.S. have world opinion on its side, even acknowledging
              how Ahmadinejad has been lately?
              \_ It would if Iran launched a bunch of missiles at US naval
                 warships preemptively and sunk half of them, killing thousands.
                 \_ You would have U.S. opinion, but you still sure about
                    world opinion?
                    \_ At that point who cares about world opinion?  It would
                       be an unquestionable act of war requiring an
                       overwhelming military response, not a UN vote.
                       \_ the guy below said it better than me
                          \_ if our fleets are attacked and ships are sunk
                             we'll respond militarily.  we will not seek
                             UN approval or worry about world opinion.  world
                             opinion and 5 bucks gets you a cup of coffee.
              \_ I'm not so sure.  If we keep up with the "all options are on
                 the table" rhetoric and showed up w/ a fleet in the Gulf,
                 somehow I doubt Iran striking military targets would elicit
                 much sympathy for us from countries that weren't already our
                 allies.
                 \_ I disagree strongly. I think only Iran's close, close
                    allies (probably not even China/Russia) would side
                    with them. Look at who sided with the US when the US
                    launched a preemptive strike against a despised
                    dictator - practically no one. If Iran launched a
                    strike then every developed nation would oppose them,
                    much as when Saddam struck against Kuwait.
                    \_ I'm not the guy you responded to, but the question is,
                       is it realistic to imagine a case where the U.S. would
                       go in for a full-scale invasion on Iran a la Iraq?
                       Iran may perform a preemptive strike if it's convinced
                       the U.S. is coming for them, but not otherwise, since
                       they're getting everything they want right now without
                       firing a shot.
                       The most I see in the near-term, and even that is highly
                       doubtful, is conventional surgical strikes.
                       Much more likely is sloppy sanctions while China and
                       Russia reap all the benefits.
           \_ What's telling here is not his use of lo-tek to achieve his
              goals but the Fleet's utter inability to counter it. Even in a
              wargame, it makes sense to be prepared for this level of attack.
                 \_ You would have U.S. opinion, but you still sure about
                    world opinion?
                    \_ At that point who cares about world opinion?  It would
                       be an unquestionable act of war requiring an
                       overwhelming military response, not a UN vote.
                       \_ Yes, I agree, who cares.  But you still sure about
                          what you originally said about world opinion?
              \_ What I wonder is what they're doing about it.  The article
                 implies they "cheated" and forced artificial constraints on
                 the "red" outfit (isn't that what US war games call the bad
                 guys?)  However, it also mentions that further outcomes are
                 classified.  One can only hope that part of that classified
                 info is "oh shit, let's fix this."  -John
                 \_ Nice try, classify is the new buzzword for "We don't want
                    this to be publicly known because it is rediuclous and
                    we're never going to fix it." -mrauser
2006/5/25-28 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43185 Activity:nil
5/25    You must all see Baghdad ER.  Playing repeatedly on HBO, and if you
        don't have it, google for "baghdad er torrent", and it's the first
        link.  Speeds are very fast.  This is the most relevant documentary
        I've seen in a while.
        \_ Does it have a liberal bias and/or contain liberal lies, or does
           it have a narrowminded Neoconservative Republican-like slant?
           \_ it tells it like it is.  this was Army sponsored.  I understand
              the military guys like it, but the civilian leadership at the
              Pentagon may not.
        \_ How about saying why we "must" see it ... why it is good, what it
           is about ... rather than just how to download it.
           \_ http://csua.org/u/fzf (Wash Post)
              Saluting Valor on the Medical Front Lines
              "To read political motives into Baghdad ER, a poignant and
              powerful documentary about military medical personnel working in
              Iraq, would be to insult and diminish not only the film but also
              its subjects."
        \_ Okay, for all you people that are unconvinced, it has powered
           surgical saws with limbs and flesh coming off people in pretty
           graphic detail.  With the added bonus that this stuff is happening
           in Iraq right now, every day.
2006/5/24-28 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43180 Activity:nil
5/24    http://marinetimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1823925.php
        "It's going to be extraordinarily difficult for them to find enough
        defense counsel", says Marine Corps attorney, regarding number of
        court martials which may result from investigations into alleged
        Haditha massacre
2006/5/23-28 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43158 Activity:nil
5/23    Iraq version of My Lai?
        http://www.time.com/time/world/printout/0,8816,1174649,00.html
        Consider that only few got slap on the wrist for My Lai, I sincerely
        doubt anyone would end up getting punished for such behavior.
        \_ Three officers have been relieved of command and given desk jobs.
           Otherwise, the leadership would like this to remain as quiet as
           possible until the investigation is complete, to balance news of
           the alleged atrocity with publicity of jail time or dishonorable
           discharges.
           the alleged atrocity with publicity of court martials or
           dishonorable discharges.
           The spin will be that the people in those houses were aiding and
           harboring insurgents, and there was some gunfire from there.
           That doesn't change the rules of engagement, though, as far as
           shooting people who do not have a weapon, aren't wearing a suicide
           belt, and are running away from you.
           \_ don't you think such behavior can only be stopped by severe
              punishment such as death or extremely long sentense? otherwise,
              switch to a desk job sounds more like a reward than punishment.
              \_ basically, can the military lawyers prove that these guys
                 egregiously violated rules of engagement?  If so, then they'll
                 get jail.  If not, then they might just get discharges.
                 What other way is there to do it?
                 It's not unusual for the guilty to get away scott-free
                 because there was no videotape or Abu Ghraib photo CDs.
2006/5/22-28 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43147 Activity:nil
5/22    http://csua.org/u/fy8 (Wash Post)
        Dubya says, with the formation of the first permanent govt since
        Saddam's, that Iraq has reached a "turning point".
        Previously annonced turning points:
        http://csua.org/u/fy9 (martinirepublic.com)
2006/5/19-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43110 Activity:nil
5/19    Guantanamo Prison Guards, Inmates Clash
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060519/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/guantanamo_clash
        Further proof that these people are dangerous and we should
        all support our glorious war in Iraq and Iran!  -Republican
2006/5/19-22 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43102 Activity:nil
5/18    http://csua.org/u/fwy (latimes.com)
        Marine made famous by photo develops full-blown PTSD after coming home
        \_ That's nice... troll. When's the last time you stood for your
           fellow man without personal gain?
           \_ Kettle, the pot would like to know if that's your natural hair
              color.
        \_ http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1635067/posts
2006/5/18-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43094 Activity:nil
5/17    Freepers react to Murtha describing massacre of Iraqi civilians by
        U.S. marines after a fellow marine died
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1634085/posts
        \_ It's like reading National Geographic: fascinating, riveting, and
           utterly alien.
2006/5/18-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:43092 Activity:nil
5/17    Did you guys see the letter from Ahmadinejad?
        http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12984.htm
        \_ Translation issues aside, that is a frighteningly clear and
           reasonable letter. I say frightening because I still think of
           Ahmadi-Najad as a fundamentalist nutjob, but I wasn't aware he
           was so articulate.
           \_ He is/was a professor.  Being a fundamentalist nutjob
              doesn't mean you aren't intelligent (although they do tend
              to be correlated).
           \_ "Reasonable" in the sense that, as above poster put it very
              well, nutjobs can still put up logically constructed
              arguments.  Much of what he writes is true.  However, it
              reminds me of a joke involving a bunch of people who visit
              East Germany in 1975, and after being told for hours what a
              great place it is, one of them asks the guide about the stasi,
              oppression, and a whole bunch of other horrid things.  The guide
              snaps back, "Americans oppress their black people."  -John
              \_ Here in Berkeley that's not a joke, it's an inspiring
                 tale of a liberated East German "speaking truth to
                 power."
                 \_ I'm sure in Berkeley a lot of things would be
                   considered "inspiring tales" by people who haven't the
                   slightest clue what the fuck they're talking about.  -John
2006/5/16-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43073 Activity:nil
5/16    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/16/world/middleeast/16cnd-iraq.html
        Sunnis trying to figure out how to do death squads
        "northeast of Baghdad, insurgents stopped a bus carrying 10 secondary
        school teachers and separated them by Muslim sect. Five Sunni teachers
        were allowed to go free, while the five Shiites were each shot in the
        head and killed."
        \_ Yes we can read news. Now go fuck yourself and read some slashdot.
           Fuck I've been trolled. Next time I may just delete your stupid
           political posts.
           \_ nah, it wasn't a troll.  how often do you hear news about ten
              jr. high school and high school teachers getting pulled out of a
              bus, five Shiites being shot in the head, and the five Sunnis let
              go?  if you live in iraq, you have to deal with this shit.  yes,
              you and I personally are not in iraq, but, good to know IMO.
              \_ Let me try to present the carrot. Yes people are dying and
                 the Iraq War was a total fuck up and Bush is dumb. **YAWN**
                 Wait but there are so many cool things out there that are
                 useful and relevant to YOU!!! For example I bought a Kinesis
                 keyboard and learned to type using the Dvorak layout and it
                 is literally the coolest thing out there since Mac OSX!!!
                 I mean, aren't these things more productive and interesting
                 to talk about than depressing things that you have absolutely
                 no control of? I read engadget, slashdot, and such and I
                 feel so much more fulfilled than before. CNN? Fox? NYT? Trash
                 \_ now who's trolling?  eh, anyway, I see your point.
                    \_ His point?  He has no point.  If you don't like the
                       post, ignore it.  Go fuck yourself, yourself.
2006/5/15-18 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43063 Activity:kinda low
5/15    I'm naive and don't know all the issues there, but it seems to me
        that the root of the Iraq Civil War stems from the fact that three
        major ethnic groups hate each other and don't like to run the
        government together. Why can't they be split up into
        three separate Emirates, each governing its own affairs while
        having common Federal government-like structures like utilities
        and the military?
        \_ Short answer: the Turks (our allies) are violently opposed to an
           independent Kurdistan, because they think that would inspire
           further separatism among their own native Kurds; Iran would most
           likely annex (or at least welcome under their protection) an
           independent Shiite nation; and the Sunnis and Shia have wildly
           different ideas of what's Shiite territory and what's Sunni.
           That said, we may be heading in that direction anyway.
        \_ I'm just waiting for the headline "Bush meets secretly with Saddam
           for tips on running Iraq"
        \_ All the oil is in the Shiite and Kurdish areas.  Sunnis would love
           to have a share of that distributed through a federal apparatus.
           Shiites and Kurds would love to keep it, based on their people
           sitting on it.  How do you come to an agreement?
           With Saddam it was easy:  It all goes to Sunnis, and if you're
           unhappy with that, you go into the woodchipper, feet-first.
        \_ Did I miss something?  Iraq Civil War?  Anyway, the above already
           answered your core question, but most of the problems in the
           Middle East and Africa date back to European nations intentionally
           carving up tribal groups, drawing artificial lines, and generally
           creating such a huge mess of things that untangling them now is not
           as simple as just drawing new lines.  You'd just be making a new
           mess to replace the old one.  There's also this very new concept
           of "international stability" which is all about everyone shutting
           the hell up and dealing with whatever mess they've got.  Wars of
           conquest are no longer allowed.  Wars to fix the broken European
           lines are not allowed.  Nothing is allowed.  Buy Mcdonald's is
           allowed.  Those intentionally messed up artificial borders are the
           root cause of things like the Hutu and Tutsi killing each other,
           several famines, and a lot of other ugliness in that large part of
           the world.
           \_ So why doesn't Europe do more to fix these messes they've made?
              \_ why would they?  it was done intentionally and sometimes
                 through ignorance, apathy and/or expediency.  what do you
                 think has changed that suddenly the european powers would
                 feel the desire to fix their previous messes?  and where do
                 you come up with the idea that a) they have the power to do
                 so and b) the right?  why don't the locals fix their own
                 messes and redraw their own borders in a more sensible and
                 equitable way?
                 \_ Where do you come up with the idea that I came up with
                    the idea that Europe can or should do anything you stupid
                    motherfucker. I merely asked why don't they.
                    \_ First, they weren't asked; if the UN had decided to
                       invade Iraq, it would have attempted to draw equitable
                       borders, but the UN was ignored so now it's our mess.
                       And second, there's no reason to believe that
                       Europe (or America for that matter) can draw borders
                       any better than the people living there.  -tom
                       \_ They weren't asked to ruin these places by making
                          fucked up borders in the first place and that didn't
                          stop them.
                          \_ Therefore they should go in and make more
                             fucked up borders?  Do you have a point?  -tom
                       \_ Why are you limiting this discussion to Iraq?
                          Europe messed up Sudan, Kashmir, Rwanda also.
                          There's no shortage of other places to fix.
          \_ When sectarian violence is killing hundreds, if not thousands,
              of people every week, I don't know what you can call it but a
              civil war.
              \_ business as usual for that area.
                 \_ bushshit.
                    \_ its public info.  go look up the death tolls for iraq.
                       \_ How 'bout you provide the info.  This is a specious
                          claim.
                          \_ i don't know what you guys are arguing about, but
                             the Iraqi president said "1,091 people were killed
                             between April 1 and 30".  About 260 per week.
                             In Baghdad only.  Only bodies which got to the
                             morgue.
2006/5/14-17 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Recreation/Travel] UID:43051 Activity:nil
5/13    Is Dubai a nice city to visit? Is it expensive? Anyone have
        recommendations?
        \_ http://www.skidxb.com
        \_ http://wikitravel.org/en/Dubai
        \- if you want to buy gold jewelry or expensive watches.
           i think you can entertaiin yourself there for 2 days
           there are also various expat communities you could attempt
           to hangout with or observe. beyond 2 days, i think you'ld need
           to plan something rather than just wander around town. it certainly
           wouldnt be the destination i'd pick unless you were going to shop,
           and even then, it's not what i'd pick.
           \_ All my friends/associates who lived or visited there said it
              (and Qatar) were great places (a) to get out of Saudi Arabia to,
              (b) if you have wads of cash, (c) if you don't mind 40 degrees
              in the shade.  -John
              \_ (i think he means celsius.  weirdo)
                 \_ I thought that was obvious from the context.  -!John
                 \_ Oh sorry, I thought it was clear that a bunch of primitive
                    camel jockeys, along with the rest of the world, would not
                    yet have progressed to Fahrenheit.  -John
2006/5/10-11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Others] UID:43006 Activity:low
5/10    Why is the troop death toll in Iraq so low? Technology! If someone's
        gonna die, just stick in a feeding tube. Voila! One less death.
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/10/iraq.medics
        \_ so it is worse than Vietnam then.. our technology today
           is just lowering the kill count
           \_ "If you look at the overall death rate ... the case fatality
              rate is cut in half from Vietnam to now. And again I think that's
              due to better training, tactical combat casualty training,"
              I dunno about worse or better.  But to think about it: 2500 US
              soldiers have died in about 3 years, the senior surgeon above
              says that could be double without the better training, so it
              potentially could have been 5000 US dead.  We were in Vietnam
              for ~13 years, so 4 times longer than Iraq so far means:
              5000 * 4 = 20,000 hypothetical fatalities vs. ~50,000 in Vietnam.
              \_ Yeah, but there are many reasons why the fatality rate
                 is so much lower; medical technology, training, night vision,
                 more effective body armor, etc.  Lacking context, the
                 comparison doesn't really communicate very much.
              \_ take into account the terrain.. the jungle was much
                more difficult to spot.. in iraq it should be much easier
                ... we need tech to detech roadside bombs...
                \_ Err, comparing the Vietnam era, draft military to the
                   current day armed forces is meaningless.
        \_ traditionaly, we count casualties, not death.
           casualties ~= death + injured + captured.  By that account, we
           have close to 20k casualties out of 110k+ force.  The ratio is
           relatively high due to the small total force committed.
        \_ "Traditionally" "voila" - take any battle from any pre-vietnam
           war. Learn what casualties really mean.
        \_ so it is worse than Vietnam then.. our technology today
           is just lowering the kill count
           \_ "If you look at the overall death rate ... the case fatality
              rate is cut in half from Vietnam to now. And again I think that's
              due to better training, tactical combat casualty training,"
              I dunno about worse or better.  But to think about it: 2500 US
              soldiers have died in about 3 years, the senior surgeon above
              says that could be double without the better training, so it
              potentially could have been 5000 US dead.  We were in Vietnam
              for ~13 years, so 4 times longer than Iraq so far means:
              5000 * 4 = 20,000 hypothetical fatalities vs. ~50,000 in Vietnam.
              \_ Yeah, but there are many reasons why the fatality rate
                 is so much lower; medical technology, training, night vision,
                 more effective body armor, etc.  Lacking context, the
                 comparison doesn't really communicate very much.
              \_ take into account the terrain.. the jungle was much
                more difficult to spot.. in iraq it should be much easier
                ... we need tech to detech roadside bombs...
                \_ Err, comparing the Vietnam era, draft military to the
                   current day armed forces is meaningless.
2006/5/4-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42943 Activity:nil
5/4     http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/iraq          The Bush
        administration steps up efforts to make terrorists look inept.
        \_ the Dick Cheney of Al Qaeda..?
2006/5/2-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42905 Activity:nil
5/2     2/3 of Americans aged 18 to 24 cannot find Iraq on a map:
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/05/02/geog.test
        \_ This is not as important as the fact that most of the ignorant
           18-24 year olds today are far more conservative than those in
           the 60s-70s which is good news for the GOP for decades to come.
           \_ I don't think they are "conservative."  There are people who are
              conservatives.  But there are those just follow whatever
              Bush says.  I think majority of these people belongs to the
              latter.
        \_ In other news 2/3 of Americans aged 18 to 24 have more sex than you.
           \_ In other news 2/3 of Europeans probably have more sex than you
              and could identify Iraq on a map.
              \_ If i bought you a plane ticket there, would you leave and
                 never come back?
                 \_ "...because we like 'murrica LOUD and STUPID"
              \_ Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
              \_ that's because they're all unemployed
        \_ how about 75% of people think English is the most common native
           language in the world?  1/3 can't find Louisiana?  14% believe
           speaking another laugnage is a necessary skill?
           \_ Go look up "necessary" in the dictionary.  It isn't.
           \_ English is probably the second most common... and why the
              focus on "native"? English is still the most important
              international language. Maybe that will change. But then
              maybe it won't. How many Iraqis or Chinese can identify
              Louisiana? Or El Salvador? And how would this skill affect
              them anyway?
              \_ gee, the Iraqis don't seem to be spending an enormous
                 portion of their federal budget on invading Louisiana.  -tom
2006/4/27-28 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:42849 Activity:nil
4/27    http://www.zefrank.com/theshow/archives/2006/04/041806.html
        First video blog that doesn't suck! -dans
        \_ That was actually funny. Thanks. --erikred
2006/4/26-28 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42837 Activity:nil
4/26    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060426/od_nm/iraq_uniforms_dc
        Become an Iraqi commando for only $24!!! Or dress up as
        a police man for only $15.
2006/4/24-26 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:42818 Activity:nil
4/24    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060424/od_nm/germany_corpse_dc
        Illegal to drive a dead person in your private car.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060424/od_nm/germany_brothel_dc
        URL self explanitory
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060420/od_nm/germany_toilet_dc
        Germany and toilet, oh nevermind.
        \_ Censorship!  Evil religious people forcing their view... oh,
            nevermind, they're Muslim.  Ok then.
           \_ It is very simple. Muslims are willing to hurt or kill you,
              and have demonstrated this. The other guys mostly don't.
              I bet people would be a lot more respectful of Christians
              if they blew people up now and then.
              \_ You mean, like, go to a country, drop a few tons worth of
                 bombs, leave a military presence to enforce policy, and
                 try to install our own governing body?  Right, it'll never
                 happen.....
                 \_ Well I'm referring to violence as punishment of "offending"
                    religious sensibility. Iraq is plain ol' geopolitics.
              \_ You mean like Ireland?
                 \_ Ireland is about ethnicity more than religion. They too
                    aren't offending each other's religious sensibility.
                    Muslims try to kill you if you create literature,
                    documentaries, or cartoons they don't like. That's
                    not what Northern Ireland is about.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060420/od_nm/germany_toilet_dc
        Germany and toilet, oh nevermind.
2006/4/21-25 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42794 Activity:nil
4/21    http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/18.html#a7955
        After watching this, wouldn't you support tactical nukes on Iranian
        nuclear sites, too?
        \_ Um, even if his "if" weren't such a friggin huge one, and (another
           big one) if there were such a thing as a "tactical nuke," no.
        \_ It's funny and scary at the same time.  She is SOOOO way off the
           mark!
2006/4/20-21 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42790 Activity:low
4/20    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12392859/site/newsweek
        Who says economy is bad in Iraq?
        \_ Finally. Thanks for sharing the good news!
        \_ freedom is not just priceless, but also profitable
2006/4/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42738 Activity:nil
4/12    The Revolt Against Rumsfeld, The officer corps is getting restless:
        http://www.slate.com/id/2139777/?nav=ais
2006/4/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42705 Activity:nil
4/6     Man tells Dubya he has never been more ashamed of the leadership of
        his country at North Carolina town hall
        http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060406/480/ncgh11404061755
        (Notice the audience reaction)
        \_ What about the reaction are we supposed to notice?
           \_ doesn't it look a bit like Jerry Springer?
2006/4/6-7 [Reference/History/WW2/Japan, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42699 Activity:nil
4/5     Amusing little short story by Dan Simmons
        http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message.htm
        \_ After having slogged through Illium let me just say, wow
           he can write crappy short stories as well!
        \_ I prefer the smooth stylings of Don "No Soul" Simmons.
2018/06/23 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
6/23    
Results 1201 - 1350 of 1605   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Foreign:MiddleEast:Iraq:
.