Politics Foreign MiddleEast Iraq - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Foreign:MiddleEast:Iraq:
Results 1351 - 1500 of 1605   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2017/12/16 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/16   

2008/2/8-10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49098 Activity:nil
2/8     American Woman in Saudi Arabia receives reality check
        http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,329605,00.html
        \_ some things to notice:
           1) this is from fox news.  What do you think their angle is?
              \_ Your fox paranoia is amusing. It's not the only outlet
                 reporting it.
           2) she goes home to her "compound"... and she's in finance.
              clueless?
           3) incoming collision from... Starbucks!  Yay nation of Starbucks!!
        \_ Can OP fix the link above please?
           \_ Fixed.  The URL does not need shortening.
2008/2/8-11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49096 Activity:moderate
2/8     i kind of liked Romney.  oh well.
        \_ I called him an idiot at first because of his "political act". But
           accepting that as part of politics, I certainly liked him much
           more than McCain. Romney has more real leadership experience, and
           McCain seems kind of unstable. And too war happy and egotistical.
        \_ I like Fred Thompson ... 's wife.
           \_ I didnt find it shocking he wasn't insanely anti abortion
              and gay crushing when he was governor of Mass.
        \_ Voting for democrats is SURRENDER TO TERROR
           \_ I just saw that.  Ok I don't like him anymore.  what
              a moron.
              \_ Ditto, ok that reinforces my original assessment. Of
                 course, this too could be a political act. Whatever,
                 moron it is. Occam's razor.
              \_ I winced too, but since both Dem canidates are planning to
                 surrender in Iraq, it's probably actually correct.
                 \_ 1. Iraq was never about the "War On Terror".
                    2. Going into war without clear goals (or constantly
                       moving your goals about) is a plan for disaster.  This
                       was a war of choice, but there was no good reason or
                       plan.  Pulling out is admitting that.  You can't "win"
                       a war like that.
                    3. Isreal lost a lot of face because they lost a war.
                       Making that even more clear would have just made things
                       worse.  Sometimes you need to pull back and regroup.
                       Throwing good after bad just makes things worse.
                    4. Getting out of Iraq is the first step to actually
                       solving the issues at hand.
                    \_ 1. It wasn't at the beginning, but it sure is now.  Or
                          haven't you noticed the terrorist trying to take over
                          the place?
                       2. I agree, but this too has changed.
                          http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/09/AR2008020902666.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR
                          http://csua.org/u/kqr (Wash. Post)
                          (And actually hasn't been true for some time.)
                       3. meh
                       4. This relies on 1 and 2, which were false.
                 \_ Surrendering generally requires an actual identified enemy
                    to surrender to. We could bomb everyone there until they
                    stopped moving, but what is the point? It's not a war so
                    much as a giant security problem. The enemies are living
                    in the same society as the one you're supposedly
                    protecting, you can't win a "war" like that. You have to
                    take drastic internal police-state measures.
                    \_ I agree with you technically, but the whole world would
                       interpret pull-out as surrender, so the technical
                       difference hardly seems important.  Especially since
                       things are actually going pretty well now.
                       \_ Insofar as we embrace binary positions, yes, this
                          will be seen as a surrender. In reality, it will
                          simply be a repudiation of the Bush Admin's legacy.
                          \_ Remember Isreal and Hezbollah just a year ago?
                             That little pull-out move increased Hezbollah's
                             stature a lot. Whether we "embrace binary
                             positions" or not doesn't make a whole lot of
                             difference to how it looks on the world stage.
                             \_ Hey, do you still call them "Freedom Fries"?
                                \_ Can't win rationally huh?
                                   \_ You can't talk a man rationally out of
                                      a position that he didn't use reason
                                      to get himself into in the first place.
                                      \_ As if anyone gets political positions
                                         using reason. -- ilyas
                             \_ Our enemy in Iraq is not just AQiI; it's a
                                number of Sunni insurgents, some of them
                                home-grown, as well as collateral damage from
                                Shi-ite militias. Hezbollah gets bragging points
                                in Lebanon because it's the only player fight-
                                ing Israel at the time. War was declared; sides
                                were chosen/drawn; one team left the field;
                                "win" (by which I mean bragging rights, not an
                                actual victory) by forfeiture: Hezbollah. Not
                                that Israel really had a choice at that point.
                                Shi-ite militias. Hezbollah gets bragging
                                points in Lebanon because it's the only player
                                fighting Israel at the time. War was declared;
                                sides were chosen/drawn; one team left the
                                field; "win" (by which I mean bragging rights,
                                not an actual victory) by forfeiture:
                                Hezbollah. Not that Israel really had a choice
                                at that point.
                       \_ No, the world will interpret pull-out as a sign that
                          the grown-ups are finally back in charge in Washington
                          at least until we elect the next round of wing-nuts.
                          the grown-ups are finally back in charge in
                          Washington at least until we elect the next round of
                          wing-nuts.
                          \_ World >> Europe
        \_ I kind of like Fred Thompson's wife.  Oh well.
        \_ "San Franciscan style left wing is not MAINSTREAM America"
2008/2/4-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49057 Activity:nil
2/4     N Korea: nuke, WMD, supernotes
        Iraq: nothing
        We're barking on the wrong tree man.
        \_ N Korea is backed by ChiCom.  Iraq is not really backed by Russia.
           We're barking on the weaker tree.
           \_ 2 other considerations, no matter what me do, NK could
              successfully blow up a lot of SK before we won.  Iraq is mostly
              flat sand, which is easy to invade.  Iran is mountainous.
              \_ Also, Iran is 3x larger than Iraq. Good luck pacifying that.
2008/1/28-2/2 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49026 Activity:nil
1/28    The Iraq War has become Bush's pet project.
        \_ And like most children, he lacks the mental cohesion and maturity
           to understand the responsibility of having a pet, and it's doomed
           to die a horrible death from neglect.
           \_ Why did you have to feed the trolls?  He didn't even bother to
              post a url.
              \_ Sorry, feeding the what now?
2008/1/24-31 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49001 Activity:nil
1/24    What a surprise, most (90%) of the insurgents in Iraq aren't Iraqis
        http://csua.org/u/kjz
        \_ Doesn't it say 90% of the suicide bombers are foriegn, not of all
           insurgents.  In fact, I think insurgent is the wrong name for these
           guys.  Terrorist really is more apt.
2008/1/22-31 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48990 Activity:nil
1/22    Study: Bush, officials made false statements prior to war
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080123/ap_on_go_pr_wh/misinformation_study
        In other news, sky still blue!
        \_ 935 false statements in two years is a lot of false statements, even
           for a President.
2008/1/18-23 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48969 Activity:nil
1/18    Some slides of how violence has decreased in Iraq, from General Raymond
        Odierno's briefing yesterday.
        http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/01/019573.php
        \_ Hey, did you guys ever find those WMD you were looking for there?
        \_ JAMA says over 150k civilian deaths. I guess if you kill enough
           people, the killing with eventually stop, eh?
           http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/NEJMp0709003
2008/1/16-18 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48952 Activity:nil
1/16    Here's an amusing piece: "Ten Recurring Economic Fallacies"
        http://www.mises.org/story/1568
        \_ He does well up until his final paragraphs, where he goes off
           the rails.
           \_ Yeah, I actually stopped reading there. -op
2008/1/14-16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48943 Activity:nil
1/14    Saudi Arabia to buy $20B weapons package (including JDAM kits) and to
        re-invest in CitiGroup.  Israel had objected to JDAM sales, but backed
        off after $30B grants secured into next decade.  USA USA USA!!!
2008/1/10-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48928 Activity:moderate
1/10    reiffin is full of shit.
        \_ Most of us are. -dans
           \_ I'm mostly water -eric
                \_ So is shit.
        \_ Funny that you'd say that now since I haven't posted anything
           exciting in months.  Please go troll someone who cares.
           \_ How is that War in Iraq working out? Did you guys ever find
              the WMD you kept harping on about?
              \_ Trollboy, you're barking up the wrong tree.  Your troll
                 score is: 0.
                 \_ Actually it is one. Well, what happened to it? Did
                    it get buried in the Syrian desert somewhere? Didn't
                    you tell us that "even the French" believed that SH
                    has WMD? Where is your Mea Culpa?
2008/1/7-11 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48898 Activity:nil
1/7     Whoops.  War with Iran is getting closer.
        http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8U17HM80&show_article=1
        \_ Someone set us up the bomb!
        \_ Yawn.  We shot down a friggin civilian airliner and didn't end up
           in a war.  Our guys and their guys are shooting each other on both
           sides of the land border.  We didn't get in a war.
2017/12/16 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/16   

2007/12/6-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48753 Activity:kinda low
12/6    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22126293
        Violence is down. Bush's war is almost over!!!
        \_ Ignorance is Strength!
        \_ How is the delivery of power going? How about oil exports? I believe
           these reports more than the heavily massaged numbers on civilian
           casualties.
           \_ If they were 110% you'd find something else to whine about.  The
              country is a mess from 3 wars, 10 years of sanctions, and
              decades of destructive government.  It won't be fixed for years.
2007/12/5-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48746 Activity:nil
12/5    Ride Bike!  In Fallujah!
        http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/11/28/2103148.htm?section=world
2007/12/1-6 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48727 Activity:moderate
12/1    "Iraqis may offer US deal to stay longer"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us
        What?  They don't want UN or multinational presence but they want
        the US?
        \_ Republican controlled media lies.  Only diplomacy through the UN
           can stop the continued worsening of the situation which is now in
           a state of full fledged civil war.
           \_ Nothing can stop the continued worsening of the situation.
              It's going to get worse before it gets better.
              \_ That was sarcasm, sorry.  I thought everyone would
                 understand that.  Next time I'll label it.  You're unaware
                 that violence in Iraq and Baghdad in particular has dropped
                 like a rock?  "Oh but they still don't have a political
                 resolution!!!"  Yeah, neither does the U.S. Congress for our
                 own governing needs.  It's insane to ask that the Iraqis do
                 any better politically than we're doing, which is very poorly,
                 since both parties lack leaders.
                 \_ It would be nice if: 1) their police were not moonlighting
                    as insurgents, 2) their politicians were at least
                    pretending not to  be corrupt and take bribes, and
                    3) well, I'll settle for 1) and 2) above.
                    \_ 1) they're getting shot like the rest of the insurgents,
                       2) yeah it would be nice if we didn't have people in
                          Congress right now with $90k stuffed in their freezer.
                          Congress right now with $90k stuffed in their
                          freezer.
                       3) well, I'll settle for just 2) for now.
                       \_ It remains remarkable to me that you cannot see a
                          a difference between a system where bribes are taken
                          w/o impunity and a system where allegations of
                          corruption are investigated and the guilty parties
                          are indicted.
                          \_ Oh, he can see the difference. He is just being
                             disingenuous.
                             \_ Oh really?  Did Mr. Fridge get indicted?  Is
                                he out of office?  Is he in prison?  Did I
                                miss a news cycle?
                                \_ Yes he got indicted.  His trial is set to
                                   start Jan 16.  His lawyers are asking for
                                   an extension, but it's coming... Sheesh..
                                   http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/rep.-jefferson-wants-trial-delayed-2007-12-05.html
                                   How many times have we covered this?
                                \_ http://csua.com/?entry=46846 He gets his
                                   say in court. When they convict him, call
                                   us.
2007/11/26-30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48694 Activity:nil
11/26   Dang, that bride is fugly (Iraq: terror suspects caught in wedding)
        http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/11/26/iraq.bride/index.html
        \_ I think she's a man.
2007/11/26-29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48692 Activity:nil
11/25   Is Waterboarding torture?
        http://www.csua.org/u/k2i (The Week)
        \_ Apparently, Tasers are.  At that point, anything is torture.
           \_ The USSC said tasers are torture? When did they say that?
              \_ No, SCOTUS didn't say that. Google the news for tasers and
                 torture.
           \_ Tasers can be torture.  When police use tasers one a restrained
              subject, as punishment, they are using tasers as torture
              devices.
                \_ In this same vein, so are car batteries, hammers,
                   whatever....
                   \_ Umm, those are regularly used as torture devices.
                      Or would you be happy if police regularly smashed
                      people in the hand with a hammer for not doing what
                      they say?
              \_ So when a prisoner is escorted to court with a taser belt, and
                 it's used to zap him if he gets out of line, you'd say it's a
                 torture device?
                 \_ If it is used to zap him if he attacks someone, probably
                    not.  If it is used to make someone do something that
                    could be done without the use of pain, yes, it is
                    torture.  And that's what tasers have become to some
                    law enforcement, ways of getting people to kowtow
                    instantly.  That's torture.
                    \_ I thought torture was inflicting pain to get
                       information, not to get them to comply.  What about
                       beating someone with batons if they won't fall in line?
                       \_ That's pretty obvious torture.  It's part of ruling
                          by fear.  And it is what our police departments are
                          rapidly becoming, forces of fear.
                          \_ It is not torture the way the Geneva Convention
                             defines torture. There has to be a lot more to
                             it than that, like permanent damage.
                             \_ This is not a testable distinction if you
                                include psychological damage. -- ilyas
2007/11/26-30 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48691 Activity:high
11/26   http://csua.org/u/k2n  (Washington Times)
        Islamic terrorists target Army base -- in Arizona
        "Fort officials changed security measures after sources warned that
        possibly 60 Afghan and Iraqi terrorists were to be smuggled into the
        U.S. through underground tunnels with high-powered weapons to attack
        the Arizona Army base, according to multiple confidential law
        enforcement documents obtained by The Washington Times."
        \_ It's also possible an army of elephant commandos has been training
           in the amazon for generations to wipe humanity off the face of
           the earth and get back at us for those damn pianos.  (Hint, the
           Washington Times is one step removed from The Star but with More
           Moonie.)
           \_ I've been reading Sara Carter's stuff since before she was with
              the times.  She's a good reporter.  And while I might accuse a
              major paper of spin (I'm looking at you NYTimes), I wouldn't
              reject it as a basic record of fact.  I'm sorry you reject news
              sources that don't fit your agenda. -op
              \_ You just accused the New York Times of spin.  It's had some
                 pretty blatant failures of editorial control, e.g. Jason
                 Blair, Judith Miller, and it is not without bias, but to
                 claim that it spins stories is stretching it a bit, don't you
                 think? -dans
                 \_ No.  Not at all.  PP was kind to the NYT.  --someone else
                    \_ How so?  Care to cite an example of egregious spin in a
                       news story on the part of the NYT? -dans
                       \_ Pick up a copy.  They used to have the news pages
                          read reasonably straight and kept the editorials to
                          the op/ed page.  No more and not for many years.
                          IMO it changed sometime in the mid 90s.  Now the
                          NYT is unreadable.  I used to read it cover to cover
                          every day.
                          \_ If it's so bad, it should be easy to provide one
                             example.  Please cite one. -dans
                             \_ It is, and if it was anyone else asking, I'd
                                provide examples.
                                \_ The Plaintiff rests. -dans
                          \_ Are you the same guy asking for proof that the
                             Washington Times is biased?
                             \_ No.  All newspapers are biased.  I don't need
                                proof of that.
                                \_ Everything is biased.  An interesting
                                   question to ponder is what would lack of
                                   bias even look like. -- ilyas
              \_ Do you read Front Page Mag and NewsMax and consider them
                 "sources of fact" as well?
                 \_ I get all my truth from Kos and DU.
           \_ UPI picked it up--do you distrust them too?
              \_ UPI and Washington Times have the same owner, dumbfuck.
                 \_ Didn't know that, pottymouth.
                    \_ Then we can safely ignore your opinion on media sources.
                       \_ Do you have any evidence at all that the owner has
                          had a negative influence on the truthfulness of the
                          stories they publish?  Or you just hate the owner
                          and assume?
                          \_ "Fifteen years ago, when the world was
                             adrift on the stormy waves of the Cold
                             War, I established The Washington Times
                             to fulfill God's desperate desire to save
                             this world."  --Rev Sun Yung Moon
                             \_ That's nice.  Do you have any evidence that
                                the owner has had a negative influence at all
                                or you just hate the owner?
                                \_ That quote is evidence.  Do you have any
                                   counterevidence.  Don't be disingenuous, it
                                   defeats the purpose of discussion.  Hint:
                                   the goal is not to win the argument, the
                                   goal is to maybe learn something. -dans, !pp
                                   \_ A quote is not evidence that the owner
                                      has had any effect.  Hint: the goal is
                                      not to win the argument, the goal is to
                                      maybe learn something.  I'm still
                                      waiting for any evidence, not innuendo,
                                      that their news is negatively influenced
                                      by their owner no matter how nutty he
                                      may be.
                                      \_ Evidence: They're reporting complete
                                         nonsense about immigrant terrorists.
                                         And they report complete nonsense
                                         all the time.  And their owner
                                         says so.  Why would the Moonies
                                         be dumping billions of dollars
                                         into this paper if not to push
                                         their own agenda?  The prima
                                         facie evidence is that it's a paper
                                         run by nutjobs with an agenda.  -tom
                                         \_ Several papers have been busted
                                            in recent years publishing flat
                                            out incorrect stories or even lies.
                                            This is the only one moonie owned.
                                            Correlation != causation and all
                                            that.
                                      \_ I'm not sure how you parse intent as
                                         innuendo.  Intent is not rock-solid,
                                         slam-dunk evidence, but it is,
                                         nonetheless, evidence.  Seriously,
                                         quit being a douche. -dans
                                         \_ Thank you for bringing this
                                            discussion to a new low.  It is
                                            responses like this that turn me
                                            off from bothering to try to give
                                            you researched respones to your
                                            queries such as the NYT one above
                                            because you're just not mature
                                            enough to have this sort of
                                            discussion.  You called me a
                                            douche, because you got frustrated
                                            that I wouldn't just back down
                                            because you're pushy and unwilling
                                            to support your claims in any real
                                            way.  This isn't HS or a freshman
                                            dorm chat.  "Douche", indeed.
                                            \_ Blah blah blah, wah, wah.  Let
                                               me translate pp's post for the
                                               audience at home: "I can't argue
                                               my point on merit so I'll
                                               politely dodge the issue,
                                               refuse to provide evidence for
                                               my points, and say my
                                               opponent's evidence 'doesn't
                                               count', all while pretending to
                                               participate in the discussion
                                               in good faith.  But if the
                                               opposition bluntly calls me on
                                               my shit, and points out that I
                                               am being a disingenuous
                                               fuckhead, then the opposition
                                               is being juvenile." -dans
                          \_ "The Washington Times will become the
                             instrument in spreading the truth about
                             God to the world." --ibid
                             \_ As above, same question.
                          \_ Other than that they have about 50 people total
                             staff, no original reporting, and mainly put out
                             short summaries of stories from other "sources"
                             that are nearly always, dunh da dunh, the
                             Washington Times?  Nope.  You suck at this game.
                             \_ No original reporting?  Sara Carter has done
                                some of the best investigative reporting I've
                                seen.
                                \_ I was clearly speaking specifically about
                                   UPI.  You really really suck at this game.
                                   \_ Clear to who? It wasn't clear to me. -!pp
                                      \_ Then you're an idiot too, but I doubt
                                         you're !pp.
                                         \_ Oh, you're crazy, that explains a
                                            lot.
                                   \_ Crystal clear to me.  Do you read?  Can
                                      you read?  Do you have thumbs?  SHOW ME
                                      YOUR THUMBS!!! -dans
                                \_ Can you give me some specific examples? Now
                                   I am curious, what a motd-rightwinger thinks
                                   is an example of good reporting. -!pp
                                   I am curious to see what a motd-rightwinger
                                   thinks is an example of good reporting. -!pp
            \_ Let's just say that if the Washington Times is the originating
               source they have a pretty high burden of proof.  That article
               had absolutly nothing to back itself up.  I'll wait till I see
               something real before giving it any cred whatsoever.
               \_ What media sources do you give 'cred' to when they publish
                  poorly sourced stories?
                  \_ The Economist, the IHT, maybe WashPo, WSJ news pages before
                     it became a Murdoch tool. -!pp
                  \_ The Economist, the IHT, maybe WashPo, WSJ news pages
                     before it became a Murdoch tool. -!pp
                     before it became a Murdoch tool. How about you? -!pp
                     \_ You give 'cred' to the WaPo?  Wow....
                        \_ What do you give 'cred' to? WashPo is the largest
                           source of unsourced articles, because of the way
                           Washington DC works. Often you cannot get good
                           inside the beltway news any other way. WashPo is
                           also politically moderate, more or less. I am not
                           saying it is perfect, but it is a much better than
                           average newspaper. Not in the same league as the
                           others I listed though.
                           \_ I don't give free 'cred' to any media source.
                              If you're not sourced you're no better than
                              Drudge.  I read Drudge.  I find him amusing.
                              He sometimes even gets a story right.  That
                              doesn't mean he has any credibility.
                              \_ All of those sources have a better track
                              \_ All of those papers have a better track
                                 record then Drudge.
                     \_ I'm not a regular WSJ reader, but I generally respect
                        the news pages.  I'm not ready to write it off just
                        because Murdoch purchased it, but am definitely
                        waiting to see what happens.  My list also includes
                        the New York Times, The Economist, and the Christian
                        Science Monitor. -dans
         \- if you are going to bother to infiltrate the US, isnt it kind of
            odd to go after a "hard target" like an AZ army base.
            \_ Not if it has intel info you want.  Sounds like a better
               target than Walmart, dont you think?  And better PR value, too.
        \_ http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/213456.php
           "FBI: Widely reported terrorist threat to Fort Huachuca unfounded"
           As noted, the Washington Times has zero credibility.  -tom
           \_ Oh, so you trust the FBI more than the Times?  Okay then.
              \_ Yeah, the FBI has real incentive to downplay terrorist
                 threats, because, uh, well, no they don't.  -tom
2007/11/17 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48651 Activity:nil
11/17   Operation Falluja
2007/11/14-17 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48637 Activity:nil
11/14   the kholes on Fox News and http://foxnews.com are pumping this story a
        a lot today:
        http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311644,00.html
        without mentioning the 250+ Marines who died in this bombing:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Beirut_barracks_bombing
        What the hell is wrong with people?
        \_ Shut up and eat your Freedom Fries.
        \_ Okay, I'll bite.  What is a 'khole'?
           \_ If you do a bunch of ketamine, you temporarily go into this
              disassociative zone known as a 'k hole'.  It's hard to
              describe, think of it as being a 2 dimensional being in
              a 3 dimensional world.  That's pretty close.
              \_ And then Carl Sagan appears.
2007/11/8-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48578 Activity:nil
11/8    Ron Paul on patriotism
        http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul388.html
2007/11/4-8 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48531 Activity:moderate
11/4    So, how about that Hillary/Huma Abedin sex scandal LAT is sitting on?
        \_ Rovian tactics won't work this time.
        \_ Man, I though Huma was a Saudi intelligence agent. You mean she
           is a Saudi-Isreali lipstick lesbian double agent? Where on The
           Free Republic did you read that?
        \_ Have you been reading Drudge again?
           \_ I read Drudge.  I've yet to see any mention of any Hillary
              related sex stories.  OP is just trolling, thus no URL.
              \_ But you haven't been reading THE FREE REPUBLIC!
                 \_ No, I don't read the freepers, true.  I'm still waiting
                    for a link from *any* source.  This is just a bad troll.
                    \_ I googled and found some Freeper links. Want those?
                       \_ No but if the freepers link to a non-freeper site
                          then yes.
2007/11/2-8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48526 Activity:nil
11/2    The War On The Unexpected
        http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_war_on_the.html
2007/11/2 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48522 Activity:nil
11/2    "Secret source of phony Iraq intel outed"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071102/ap_on_go_ot/us_iraq_curveball
2007/11/2 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:48520 Activity:nil
11/2    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071102/ap_on_go_ot/us_iraq_curveball
2007/10/31-11/2 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:48498 Activity:nil
10/31   Ex-CIA analyst Larry Johnson on one reason for intelligence failures
        http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/oct/30/one_reason_for_intelligence_failures
2007/10/30-11/2 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48482 Activity:nil
10/29   This is an old article from NY Times a couple days ago. I find it
        extremely interesting and a bit surprised no one mentioned about it.
        This is an article about how Kurdish extremist were fighting against
        IRAN (not Turkey) and it seems that this Kurdish extremist group,
        P.J.A.K has US' blessing to do so.
        http://csua.org/u/jv0
        I think US just find its way to pick a fight against Iran: continue
        to encourage PJAK to conduct raid against Iran, when Iran respond, we
        can say Iran attack Iraq and thus we need to go all out again Iran in
        self defense... this is getting better and better every day.
        \_ Of course Iran is messing around in Iraq.  I don't know why we are
           so surprised.  If China invaded Mexico, you can bet we would have
           all kinds of covert ops going on down there stirring shit up.
           \_ Who said anyone is surprised?  Pissed off that Iranians and
              their proxies are killing Americans?  Yes.  Surprised?  No.
              \_ Are you less pissed off that Syrian and Saudi proxies are
                 killing Americans? Also, your assertion that Iranians are
                 attacking Americans is utterly baseless.
           \_ Er, no, we'd have very overt ops going on down there. We really
              don't like having other world powers mucking about in our
              continent, at least not militarily.
              \_ I agree with you.  I just don't think it should be a shock
                 at all that Iran might be messing around in Iraq.  They
                 are next door to Iraq.  Iran is 90 percent Shiite.  Iraq
                 is 60 percent Shiite.  All of the holy shiite shrines are
                 in Iraq.
                 \_ Agreed. Also: no surprise that Turkey intends to pursue
                    PKK across the border, that Saudi Arabia is funding Sunni
                    groups, and that Syria is smuggling weapons in.
                    \_ All entirely predicatable before the first shot was
                       fired. Someone is going to fill the vacuum left by SH.
                       \_ All the more reason to believe that there will be a
                          kind of detente if the US steps out of Iraq. The
                          powers that be in the region will _not_ allow each
                          other to step in.
                          \_ Detente?  You base this on what?
                             \_ On the unenlightened self-interest of the
                                powers in the region. None of them want the
                                pie so much as they want the rest to stay out.
                 \_ So you think the entire region can be reduced to population
                    percentage by religion?  That's the only factor?
                    \_ I am not pp, but as Iran is the only Shi'ite power in
                       the region and is dominated by a Shi'ite theocracy, I'd
                       say this works in this context.
                       \_ No, that's too simple.  Iraq is much more heavily
                          tribal than religious.  Iran is dominated by a
                          theocracy but the people are not all walking lock
                          step with hand on Koran every day.  Far far far far
                          too simple.  Thinking like that is no better than
                          the 'theyll greet us with flowers' plan.
                          \_ I agree with you that Iran is not in lock-step:
                             it's arguable that the main theocracy and the
                             President have diametrically opposed goals, and
                             the populace, particularly the students, isn't
                             really happy with either of them at the moment.
                             However, I agree with pp that it's not surprising
                             that Iran is interested/involved in Iraq. The
                             theocratic elements are, it turns out, primarily
                             motivated by sympathy with (and the opportunity
                             to manipulate) the Shiite population in Iraq; the
                             intel folks don't want yet another Sunni nation
                             on their border; and the Pres. wants anything to
                             distract the people from the promises he hasn't
                             followed through on. I think I get what you're
                             saying, though: Shia population as a percentage
                             of Iraqi population is not the end-all reason
                             behind Iranian interest, no?
2007/10/29-11/1 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48477 Activity:nil 66%like:48510
10/29   ride bike!
        http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/10/29/international/i002207D82.DTL
2007/10/29-11/1 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48471 Activity:nil
10/29   http://nadshot.com
2007/10/24-26 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48435 Activity:high
10/24   A trillion dollars here, a trillion dollars there, pretty soon
        you are talking about real money:
        http://www.csua.org/u/jt4 (Yahoo News)
        \_ We would have saved zillions of dollars if we'd just gone home
           in 1945 and didn't leave our shores or open any bases.
           \_ Because after WWII we were still fighting a bloody ugly
              war surrounded by ethnic cleansing (actually my understanding
              is everything has pretty much been cleansed by now) while
              a civil war raged around us.  This isn't WWII in any way
              shape or form, and trying to compare the two proves you are
              a fucking moron.
              \_ I wasn't comparing the two.  Assuming so "proves you are a
                 fucking moron".  It is a factual statement that if we went
                 isolationist we'd save money.
           \_ Yeah, we probably have spent too much on defense over the years,
              considering the few risks we have, but I don't think we should
              have completely abandoned all our overseas bases. Do you?
              \_ Maybe.  Why not?  Why are we still in Korea, Germany, 'the
                 former Yugoslav republics', Britain, Japan, Cuba, and I
                 really don't know how many other places?
                 \_ Iraq.
                 \_ Iraq, Qatar, Yemen, maybe Saudi Arabia.
                    \_ Not Saudi Arabia. And they say UBL didn't win.
                    \_ Yes, those too, thanks.  Anyway, to the person a few
                       posts up: why don't you think we should have
                       completely abandoned all our overseas bases?  The
                       point of a military base is to project military power.
                       Why do you want to project power all over the world?
                       What benefit is there to the US?
                       \_ We need a few naval bases, so that we can keep
                          shipping lanes open and refuel our navy and
                          project enough air power to protect them on
                          patrol. Our economy depends too much on trade
                          to ignore shipping lanes. Not much more than that.
        \_ Wow, that is $100k per Iraqi.
           \_ War costs are generally not measured in head count.
              \_ Maybe they should be.
2007/10/22-24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48414 Activity:nil
10/22   The Surge is working!
        http://www.csua.org/u/jsc
        \_ This article has been ignored by jewish controlled liberal
           media outlets                                -jblack #2 fan
2007/10/17-19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48342 Activity:nil
10/17   Best headline ever
        http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/5220416.html
        "Cemetery feels pinch as violence drops"
        \_ There's always a downside to war.  Now the grave digger's union
           is complaining about insufficient death toll.  What next?  Enemy
           files discrimination lawsuit?  "TERRORISTS SAY US ARMY TARGETS
           THEM!  FILES SUIT IN 9TH CIRCUIT!"
           \_ We should start executing politicans and lawyers to make
              up thelack.
2007/10/15-18 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48332 Activity:moderate
10/15   Republicans working on the "Stab In The Back Myth"
        for use after our defeat in Iraq:
        http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/06/0081080
        \_ More at:
           http://www.thenation.com/doc/20071015/alterman
        \_ that sounds like traitor talk to me!
        \_ It is funny to watch the Right in full on paranoid melt-down mode.
           Just wait until after Commander-In-Chief Hillary Rodham Clinton
           is inaugurated!
           \_ will the hills be far enough a place to head for?
           \_ Oh boy, utopia, 4-8 more years of corruption, law breaking, lies
              and *-gate scandals along with the troops staying in Iraq past
              2013.  Can't wait.  Sounds like an American success story.
              \_ Fortunately, Bush can't run again, Cheney won't run, and
                 BushCo has made it extraordinarily unlikely that a Repub
                 will win, so the problem is solved!
                 \_ Uh yeah, like I said.  Elect Clinton to get 4-8 more years
                    of corruption, lies, *gate and troops in Iraq past 2013.
                    \_ If Hillary can figure out how to get fellated in the
                       Oval Office, more power to her.
              \_ Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
                 We won't get fooled again!
        \_ Looks like the Sanchez speech was all part of the mythos building:
           http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_disgruntled_general
           \_ No, the article in your link is about "Sanchez was an idiot and
              he's bitter so this is him moaning and griping about his failures
              and blaming everyone but himself".
2007/10/15-17 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48319 Activity:low
10/15   Things you may not have read about Sanchez's comments:
        1) "The American military finds itself in an intractable situation ...
        America has no choice but to continue our efforts in Iraq,"
        2) "What is clear to me is that you are perpetuating the corrosive
        partisan politics that is destroying our country and killing our
        service members who are at war. My assessment is that your profession,
        to some, has strayed from these ethical standards and allowed external
        agendas to manipulate what the American public sees on TV, reads in
        newspapers and what they see on the Web," Sanchez said.
        http://www.fairandbalanced.com/story/0,2933,301676,00.html
        \_ Did he say this to a Fox News reporter?
           \_ In his speech to the Military Reporters and Editors Association
              in Washington, D.C., on Friday....
        \_ I love the lefties who censor the URL.  Shows their hypocrisy so
              \_ Yes, I know, I was making a joke. Even funnier that he said
                 it to a bunch of Stars and Stripe's reporters.
           \_ Full transcript
              http://www.militaryreporters.org/sanchez_101207.html
        \_ I love the commies who censor the URL.  Shows their hypocrisy so
           well.
           \_ Sup jblack, long time no motd!
              \_ I'm not jblack. -pp
2007/10/15-19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:48318 Activity:kinda low
10/15   Gotta love it when liars (CAIR) are exposed:
        http://csua.org/u/jqe
        \_ Links to Little Green Footballs, promoting paranoia and anti-
           Islamic sentiment so you don't have to.
           \_ The link has a scan of a check to CAIR, and quoting a statement
              from CAIR denying it.  Do you claim that they're faking it?
              \_ No, I object to you posting partisan links without posting
                 the full URL or, barring that, identifying the source. I'm not
                 saying that no one should read Freeper or LGF or WashTimes or
                 Townhall, I'm just saying that you should give people an
                 opportunity to know what the source is before they click the
                 link. I'd do it before I sent you to Media Matters or MoveOn
                 or even the New York Times.
                 \_ I only shortened to the link because it was over 80
                    columns.  It's not a porn site.
                    \_ Don't be disingenuous.  It takes less than four
                       seconds to write a useful descriptive comment. -dans,!PP
                       \_ So anyway, is Cair lying or not?  -someone else
                          \_ So anyway, is op being disingenuous or not?
                          \_ I neither know nor care.  Were you failing to
                             make a point or just following in the OP's proud
                             disingenuous footsteps? -dans
                             \_ Funny.  I see it the exact opposite way.  I
                                don't care if the OP is disingenous or not
                                because it doesn't matter.  It matters a lot
                                more when a monied lobbying group lies.  That
                                is what I care about.  They either did or did
                                not.  Which is it?  -!op
                                \_ Dunno about dans, but for me the issue isn't
                                   the pristine integrity of the org, rather
                                   the good that they do.
                                   \_ My thinking tends to be similar, though
                                      for different reasons.  My working
                                      assumption is that virtually all
                                      politicians and/or political
                                      organizations are, to some extent,
                                      dirty or corrupt.  Want to take CAIR to
                                      task?  More power to you, but don't
                                      discriminate.  Take every dirty
                                      organization/politician, regardless of
                                      political ideology, to task. -dans
                                      \_ I'm opposed to all dirty orgs.  The
                                         op posted a link about this particular
                                         one so that is the topic.  Did they or
                                         did they not lie?  And as far as the
                                         'good' that CAIR does, I'd be most
                                         impressed to see a list of their
                                         positive accomplishments for this
                                         country.  Given their foreign cash
                                         sources, past statements, and ties
                                         to anti-American foreign orgs I don't
                                         think the plus column for CAIR is
                                         very long.
                                         \_ If you're opposed to all dirty
                                            orgs, who do you like, then?
                                            \_ Pet rescue.  Money for children
                                               of vets killed/injured in war
                                               to go to college.  Children's
                                               reading book donation programs.
                                               A few others.  CAIR doesn't
                                               make the list of 'good' orgs by
                                               any measure.  There are *no*
                                               good political orgs I'm aware
                                               of.  I'm surprised you couldn't
                                               think of a clean non-profit org.
                                            \_ The Catholic Church
                                               \_ Mother Teresa: corrupt,
                                                  malignant dwarf. -Hitchens
                                               \_ Re: The Holocaust: oops.
                                                  But, no, really the Pope has
                                                  a direct line to God who is
                                                  infallible.
                                                  Re: Widespread sexual abuse
                                                  of children at the hands of
                                                  priests: Oops.  We'll just
                                                  sweep this under the rug
                                                  because it would really suck
                                                  if people sued us. -dans
2007/10/10-12 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48283 Activity:nil
10/10   Pelosi vs. the anti-war activists
        http://csua.org/u/jp0
2007/10/2-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Reference/History/WW2] UID:48224 Activity:moderate
10/2    Check this out, it's awesome:
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21105586
        Ratio of wounded in action to killed in action:
        WW2: 1 killed to 2.40 wounded
        Vietnam: 1 to 3.12
        Current: 1 to 8.3
        \_ All Hail Western Medical Science!  Amen!
           \_ If you stick a tube in a vegetable, it'll be alive
              indefinitely. Case in point... the veggy woman case.
        \_ A lot more soldiers get wounded than before?  "Ouch, I just got
           poked by that cactus and my pinky is bleeding.  I'm out of the
           mission."
           \_ No, it is really because doctors can patch up and save the lives
              of soldiers with all sorts of gruesome wounds that would have
              been certain death in Vietnam or WW2.  Same thing for Vietnam
              vs. WW2.  If you go back to the Civil War, things we consider
              a scratch or minor wound would be almost certain death.
              \_ Advances in medicine certainly helped a lot, but it's not the
                 only thing going on.  For one thing, the ammunition size
                 has decreased over the years (we used to use 7.62 rounds in
                 our assault rifles).  The decrease was driven by limits on
                 soldier carrying capacity (as soldiers were called upon to
                 carry more and more equipment), by the fact that the
                 crucial thing is to disable, not kill, and by noting that
                 most engagements were fought at distances where larger
                 rounds were not necessary to achieve decent ballistics.
                   -- ilyas
                 \_ Uhm... ok *our* rounds are smaller but doesn't it really
                    matter what the *other* guys are using?  I suspect your
                    typical AlQ/Iraqi/Whatever gun toter is not carrying the
                    same load as an American solider in combat.
                    \_ The russians moved to a similar smaller round (which
                       is what the AK-74 fires).  There are still a lot of
                       AK-47s in circulation in Iraq, of course.  My point is,
                       the reduced fatalities are not due to medical advances
                       alone, but the changing realities of modern engagements.
                         -- ilyas
                       \_ "Alone"? No.  But a huge and seriously major part of
                          the reason why more solider survive combat wounds?
                          Absolutely.  Think of the Civil War era.  Shoot one
                          of those poor no-medical-bastards with a round of
                          any size you like.  The odds that what we now think
                          of as a simple infection kills them is extremely
                          high.  It doesn't matter how big a wound.  Medicine
                          gets better every year and what used to mean death
                          is now a routine fix.
           \_ Let's not let justified loathing of the war diminsh the
              achievements of the people fighting to keep our soldiers alive.
              I'm against the war, but I think the advances in medicine have
              been amazing and laudable.
              \_ I don't think anyone was dimishing medicines achievements.
                 Without them there'd be a lot more dead soldiers and others.
2007/10/1-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48217 Activity:moderate
10/01   Military deaths way down for the last few months.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071001/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
        \_ This is great news. Maybe the surge really is working.
           \_ Not sure if you're trolling or not, but just in case...
              The Iraqi insurgents aren't stupid.  They're just lying low
              until we leave, so they can really start killing off
              $RIVAL_SECT.  It doesn't matter if we're there or not. I guess
              it matters as in if we're there, we lose soldiers or they
              horribly maimed for no reason.
              \_ So if our being there reduces the death totals don't we have
                 a moral obligation to stay?
           \_ yeah, who cares if Iraqies are dying
              \_ If you had RTFA, you'd see Iraqi deaths are down too, moron.
                 "More dramatic, however, was the decline in Iraqi civilian,
                 police and military deaths."
                 \_ Unfortunately there was an 2000% increase in the number
                    of Iraqis who "slipped in the bathtub"
                    \_ There are bathtubs in Iraqi home?  I thought it was a
                       third world country.
                       \_ It's a post-apocalyptic third world country. They
                          used to have all sorts of amenities. Now they have
                          the remnants.
                       \_ Did no one pick up on the "if you get shot in the
                          face it's ok" killing reclassification reference?
                          \_ I'm not ok being shot in the face, thanks though.
2007/9/29-10/5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48212 Activity:nil
9/29    The country is just kicking the wounded Vets to the curb:
        http://www.csua.org/u/jm6
2007/9/29-10/5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48211 Activity:high
9/29    Someone was asking about Sameer. He is at Quantico right now,
        just starting OCS. I am sure he would appreciate your letters. -ausman
        http://www.creativedestruction.com/blog
        \_ As someone who has met Sameer but never really knew him that
           well: WHY?
           \_ My theory is that he's convinced that the government needs
              to change, and badly.  However, the people with the most
              credibility and ability to change the government are those
              who have risked their lives in service to this country.
              I think his long-term plan is to honorably serve, and then
              return and work for political change.
           \_ Perhaps 9/11 convinced him of the urgent need to defend his
              country. -- ilyas
              \_ Or maybe all that money made him really lose his mind.
                 Also he wanted something to do with his life since he doesn't
                 have to work anymore.
                 \_ Are you implying you must be insane to join the military
                    without economic duress? -- ilyas
                    \_ Nope.  I am implying Sameer went insane.
                       \_ Isn't Sameer gay?
                       \_ In this case it's just a non sequitur insult.
                          I salute you sir, you make the motd a better place.
                       Actually I'm not implying.  I STATE:
                       Sameer went insane.
                       \_ I don't know Sameer, how did he go insane?
           \_ He talked about WHY in his blog a while back. Check the archives.
              \_ This appears to be the relevant post.  Wow.  I totally respect
                 him.  http://www.creativedestruction.com/archives/2006_04.html
                 \_ and more in http://www.creativedestruction.com/archives/2006_05.html
                 \_ I don't make a habit of reading his blog (or any blog
                    for that matter). His reasons sound pretty selfish. He
                    should have just gotten a dog if he wanted to feel
                    needed.
                    \_ Here on the motd we can show the selfish pricks like
                       Sameer how it's done!
                    \_ Wow.  You're a dick! -dans
                       \_ A realist. There's no point going over there to
                          get killed. We dont need another Pat Tillman.
                          When people do dumb things someone has to say so.
                          \_ Ok, I'll volunteer.  Your post is dumb, dick.
                             \_ Yes, because the best way for Sameer to
                                benefit the USA is to be KIA in Iraq.
                                \_ To join the chorus, you are fucking
                                   retarded. -- someone else
                                \_ The best way for Sameer (or anyone who wants
                                   to help) to benefit the USA is to get the
                                   training needed to lead US troops in Iraq
                                   and work to _keep_ them from getting KIA.
        \_ I do not think any skills Sameer acquired while getting extremely
           wealthy in the dot com glory days will translate well into our
           glorious quagmire in Iraq.  As the above poster says, Sameer
           should have just gotten a dog if he wants to be needed.
           \_ There's a big need for IT type of personelle
              \_ Sameer is certainly not going to OCS to contribute
                 IT services for the tar pit war effort.
        \_ seriously, I read his blog and don't fault him for his reasons, or
           the tenacity to get him where he is, in spite of being well over
           normal cutoff recruitment age.  hat's off to him!  -ERic
           \_ I think early 30s is not over the cutoff age these days
              \_ Me thinks he just needs to get laid and settle down.
                 Less complaints, less bitching, more homey.
              \_ At least according to his blog, it is for the Marines.  The
                 army has raised their cutoff age, apparently the maries have
                 not.
              \_ read the damn blog, he talks about it there.  29 is the cutoff
                 for Marines OCS, though exemptions can be gotten on an
                 individual basis, as Sameer has gotten. Cutoff for other
                 branches of the military is up in the low 40's now.  If you
                 want the exact details talk to a recruiter. -Eric
2007/9/27-10/2 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48200 Activity:high
9/27    After last night's debates, it looks like the leading candidates
        are all in favor of keeping the war going until the end of their
        first term.  I don't know who to vote for anymore.
        \_ Romney!
        \_ the reality is that Republicans are going to loose the election
           in 2008.  They are doing everything they can to drag the war until
           end of Bush's 2nd term.  When Democrat pull the troops, Republicans
           can righteously accusing Democrats "cut and run."
           \_ Oh please, do you have any idea what the Democrats are all
              saying?  They will *not* pull the troops.  That is the whole
              point.  There is no one to vote for!
              \_ I'm still throwing support to Biden, even though he has
                 no chance of being nominated.
                 \_ As long as a majority of people support the crummy media
                    created candidates because the better ones "don't stand
                    a chance" we'll get what we deserve.  I always vote for
                    who I want, not who I'm told I should be.  If more people
                    were like us we'd have better government.
              \_ If elected, "I would have combat troops out of Iraq in
                 about nine months," Edwards said. That seems pretty
                 unambiguous to me.
                 \_ Nope.  Go check his response in the most recent debate.
                    Here it is and I'll grant it is close but no cigar, esp.
                    the way he starts off in answer to "2013" as a target
                    date.  He gets an "A" for effort though as the one
                    closest to saying he'll actually end the war for real.

                        MR. RUSSERT: Senator Edwards, will you commit that at
                        the end of your first term, in 2013, all U.S. troops
                        will be out of Iraq?

                        MR. EDWARDS: I cannot make that commitment. I -- well,
                        I can tell you what I would do as president. If I --
                        when I'm sworn into office come January of 2009, if
                        there are in fact, as General Petraeus suggests,
                        100,000 American troops on the ground in Iraq, I will
                        immediately draw down 40 (thousand) to 50,000 troops
                        and, over the course of the next several months,
                        continue to bring our combat troops out of Iraq until
                        all of our combat troops are in fact out of Iraq.

                        I think the problem is, and it's what you've just
                        heard discussed, is, we will maintain an embassy in
                        Baghdad. That embassy has to be protected. We will
                        probably have humanitarian workers in Iraq. Those
                        humanitarian workers have to be protected. I think
                        somewhere in the neighborhood of a brigade of troops
                        will be necessary to accomplish that -- 3,500 to 5,000
                        troops.

                        But I do say -- I want to add to things I just heard.
                        I think that it's true that everyone up here wants to
                        take a responsible course to end the war in Iraq.
                        There are, however, differences between us, and those
                        differences need to be made aware. Good people have
                        differences about this issue. For example, I heard
                        Senator Clinton say on Sunday that she wants to
                        continue combat missions in Iraq. To me, that's a
                        continuation of the war. I do not think we should
                        continue combat missions in Iraq, and when I'm on a
                        stage with the Republican nominee come the fall of
                        2008, I'm going to make it clear that I'm for ending
                        the war. And the debate will be between a Democrat who
                        wants to bring the war to an end, get all American
                        combat troops out of Iraq, and a Republican who wants
                        to continue the war.
                        \_ Just like he said then, the choice will be between
                           a Republican who intends to continue the war and
                           a Democrat who intends to end it. I guess at that
                           point you can make your choice who to vote for.
                           That is assuming that he wins the nomination (a
                           big big unlikely assumption, I admit, but one
                           big unlikely assumption, I admit, but one
                           that should make you want to support his campaign
                           if you want to actually end the war).
                           \_ No, the choice will be between one party that
                              says they will stay there to continue the war
                              and the other party that kinda sorta say they'll
                              be there but like if maybe uhm eventually ya
                              know it is sorta hard and I don't like your tone
                              asking me all these hard theoretical questions
                              so please don't ask me anything until I'm
                              President party that will also continue the war.
                              \_ That will be true if Hillary wins the
                                 nomination, as is likely. I disagree with
                                 your interpretation of what Edwards said.
                                 \_ He was asked directly if he'd pledge to
                                    have them all out by 2013.  He said no.
                                    What is there to interpret?  I could have
                                    been a motd jerk and just gave you the
                                    first line but I gave the full quote.
                                    He won't promise to have them all out
                                    by *2013* which is *4* full years after
                                    he would take office.
                                    \_ He said he would pull 98% of them,
                                       which is good enough to me. I don't
                                       see why you want to leave the embassy
                                       unguarded. Do you think he should promise
                                       to pull the Marines from the Embassy
                                       walls as well?
                                       \_ Oh goodie then we can have another
                                          reenactment of the Iranian embassy
                                          take over because we left too small
                                          a contingent for the role they have
                                          been assigned protecting the embassy
                                          and the humanitarian workers all over
                                          the country in the middle of a huge
                                          civil war.  Brilliant.  More half-
                                          assed measures for the cameras.
                                          \_ The Iranian Embassy takeover was
                                             supported by the Islamic Rev. AQ
                                             in Iraq is not supported by
                                             Iraqis or the govt. Your example
                                             does not work.
                                             \_ Are you on the right thread?
                                                WTH are you talking about?
                                                This thread at this point was
                                                about how many troops Edwards
                                                would leave in Iraq and what
                                                mission they would have, such
                                                as protecting the US Emb from
                                                *any* hostiles.
                                                \_ Do you hold your breath
                                                   until you pass out and then
                                                   type randomly on the key-
                                                   board? You invoked the Iran
                                                   Embassy as though something
                                                   of that nature could take
                                                   place in a country that did
                                                   not explicity support such
                                                   actions. No matter how bad
                                                   Iraq gets, it will not be
                                                   that country. Stop fear-
                                                   mongering.
2007/9/27-10/2 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48197 Activity:high
9/26    Another win for the Constitution and another blow to the Bush Admin:
        http://www.csua.org/u/jll (Yahoo News)
        \_ The Bush admin is dead.  Who cares?  Look to the future, don't
           dwell on the past.  Do you have any idea what the front runners in
           both parties are saying about this?
           \_ unfortuantely, Bush is not dead.  He is threating veto on the
              spending bill if it exceed its limit.  Rubber stamp Democrats
              for some reason doesn't want to put Iraq war spending as part of
              of the spending bill.  They should just cut the war funding
              completely if things are not going their way.
              \_ Bush is dead.  He vetos.  So what?  The Democrats are not
                 rubber stamps for the war.  The reason they keep funding it
                 is because they want us to stay there.  They should do a lot
                 of things but I don't put weight on what they should do, I
                 look at what they've actually done, which is fund the war to
                 every penny Bush has asked.  Anyway, none of this means
                 anything either way since the Democrats are doing nothing
                 different from what Bush has been doing.
                       \_ what is your proposal, then?  we have 70-100 Iraqi
                          civilians dies every day, ~4 million (out of total
                          of 20+ million) displaced internally and externally.
                          So, obviously we are not making this peaceful right
                          now.  My ears are all yours.
                          \_ What was unclear?  We leave Iraq.  Unfortunately
                             our leadership in the Congress is too pathetic
                             and cowardly to do what we put them there to
                             do.  Or more likely, I believe that *want* us
                             to stay there.  They aren't putting up *any*
                             sort of fight against Bush, an unpopular lame
                             duck President.  I can only conclude they want
                             us in Iraq.  They = Democrats, if that was
                             unclear.
                             \_ If you think the Dems are pathetic and cowardly
                                for not "putting up *any* sort of fight
                                against Bush," and are thus unworthy of office,
                                that must mean that you think the GOP are
                                murderous traitors who ought to be hanged, yes?
                                \_ Hanged?  No.  We don't hang politicians for
                                   failed policy.  Out of office?  Sure, of
                                   course.  That is the nature of our system.
                                   But I don't see the Dems saying they'll do
                                   anything substantially different if they
                                   have the executive office and they own both
                                   the house and senate and have done nothing.
                                   They aren't even very good at doing nothing.
                                   \_ Hyperbole aside, you've seen that the
                                      GOP are criminally negligent and corrupt.
                                      Surely even Do Nothing would be a better
                                      polict than the current polciy of
                                      screwing the American people over.
                 \_ The reason they keep funding it is because they're scared
                    of the punditry saying "they abandoned the troops in the
                    field."  This is of course bullshit, and they'll need to
                    find their voices and spines and change that meme.  But IMO
                    they are obliged now to cut off the funding.  There is no
                    other way for them to end it.  And until they get up the
                    courage to do so, more soldiers and civilians continue to
                    die.
                    \_ Whereas when the troops leave Iraq, it will instantly
                       become peaceful?  Pass me some of what you're smoking!
                       \_ what is your proposal, then?  we have 70-100 Iraqi
                             \_ some sort of "final solution?"
                          civilians dies every day, ~4 million (out of total
                          of 20+ million) displaced internally and externally.
                          So, obviously we are not making this peaceful right
                          now.  My ears are all yours.
                          \_ Stop cut n pasting.  Say something new or don't
                             bother posting.
                       \_ Oh, no, Iraqis will continue to see violence, and
                          that's on our heads.  But our troops leaving now
                          or 10 years from now won't change that.  I'm speaking
                          specifically of the US's cost in blood and treasure.
                          We need to attack the issue with other approaches.
                          It will be a long road as Bush has ignored all other
                          approaches, failing to lay any groundwork
                          diplomatcally/politically, but them's the breaks.
                          \_ There is no need if we TRY to spread diseases
                             like Cholera. The military should consider that
                             as a cheap and effective option.
                             \_ Or we could send in the CIA to spread crack.
                          \_ I love how casually you predict the next 10 years.
                             Here's another possibility.  In 10 years, Al
                             Qaeda has taken over Iraq, used the oil revenue to
                             get biological and nuclear weapons, and erased a
                             US city.  See, we can all play that game.
                             \_ That may be true but in 30 years they'll
                                be commercialized and embrace everything
                                Western just like Vietnam it is now.
                                \_ And at the cost of only one major US port
                                   city!  A good deal at twice the price!
                                   Maybe it'll be a smaller port city like
                                   San Francisco or Oakland....
                                   \_ I can live with that.
                                      \_ Lemme guess, you don't live anywhere
                                         near SF?
                             \_ Since Al Qaeda is very unpopular amongst the
                                Iraqi people, it is hard to imagine how they
                                could possibly "take over" Iraq. Try to
                                imagine something with a greater chance of
                                likelyhood, like Iran taking over Iraq.
                                \_ That is already happening.
                                \_ How popular was Saddam with the Iraqi
                                   people?
                                   \_ Are you saying that we are funding AQ?
                                   \_ SH was extremely popular with one tribe,
                                      one that represented about 20% of the
                                      Iraqi people. AQ has no such inherent
                                      power base. The Shi'ites hate them
                                      and the Sunni in Iraq have turned
                                      against them.
                                      \_ The Sunni aren't a tribe.  They're
                                         a religious branch of Islam.  Saddam's
                                         tribe was in Tikrit and the areas
                                         immediately around Tikrit.  I agree
                                         with the rest of what you said.
2007/9/25-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48185 Activity:high
9/24    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20974791
        Cholera outbreak in Iraq spreading. Maybe we don't need to fight
        Al Qaeda anymore. MANIFEST DESTINY!
        \_ We're going back in time!
        \_ Ok, I'm bored, I'll bite.  What, if anything, does manifest
           destiny have to do with cholera in Iraq?  I'm figuring pretty
           much nothing but you thought it sounded good.
           \_ I think the OP is making a joke comparing the US's current
              imperialist pursuits in iraq to its previous imperialist
              pursuits in north america ... manifest destiny was
              achieved partially because native americans died out
              (small pox, etc) ... so if the iraqi population things out
              due to disease our job their will be easier. har har
              \_ Hmm, ok, except what we're doing in Iraq is not imperialism.
                 \_ yes I understand that, you understand that, but the
                    average Muslim in the middle east does NOT understand
                    that. Many are pissed at what they perceive as
                    a hostile occupation, fueling hatred and their
                    reasonings for attacking us. Just because you have
                    a full understanding of the situation from YOUR
                    perspective, does not make your opinion valid.
                    Fucking dumb shit.
                    \_ Nothing you just said has anything at all to do with
                       cholera, manifest destiny, or anything else on this
                       thread.  And you call me a dumbshit?  Ok.  Whatever.
                       \_ Idiot.
                                                        -Trollee
                       \_ Idiot.                                -troller
                          \_ Your truly brilliant reply has made your case in
                             a way that allows no further response.  There is
                             just nothing to be said to your laser sharp wit
                             and clear command of the language and issues at
                             hand.  I salute your intellectual mastery!
                                                        -Trollee
                             \_ Congrats, you've been trolled. BRILLIANT!
                                                                -troller
                                \_ Uhm, duh, it's the motd.   Everyone is
                                   a troll.  And if you're smart enough to
                                   read this, you're smart enough to see I
                                   replied in the first place due to boredom
                                   and willingness to bite.  How did a mouth
                                   breather like you manage to login?
                                                        -Trollee
                                   \_ Dude, you're fucking smart. Keep it up.
                                                                -troller
                                      \_ Surprised Trollee hasn't
                                         written back  !troller !op
                 If it was then we're the *worst* imperialists in all of
                 \_ Muslims think we ARE the worst imperialists in the world.
                 recorded history.  Real imperialists would have simply
                 flattened the place, turned it into a giant military base,
                 enacted permanent martial law, had a 100% American military
                 governing body, etc.  But ok, I guess it makes optroll happy
                 to make shit up or something.
                 \_ Let me guess, you don't "get" The Onion's humor
                    either, do you?
                    \_ I "get" the onion.  I "get" the onion so much that I
                       can tell this is nothing like the onion.  You know
                       why this is different?  Because the onion is *funny*.
                  \_ No that is not what a "real imperialist" would have
                     done at all. Read up on the history of the British
                     Empire in Iraq. We actually have tried to more or less
                     convert Iraq into a US economic colony and failed. Our
                     methods are not that different from what England tried
                     100 years ago. Those that do not learn from history...
                     \_ We are not converting Iraq. We simply wanted a
                        regime change.
2007/9/24-26 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48162 Activity:nil 88%like:48150
9/22    How George Bush became the new Saddam
        http://urltea.com/1khy (macleans.ca)
        \_ And I was called nutty for suggesting we should wish SH back.
           It looks this is (roughly) US policy.
           \_ This was a great article but it says nothing like you seem
              to think it says.  You should read the whole thing instead
              of just looking at the title and the pretty picture at the
              top of each page.
2007/9/23-26 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48158 Activity:nil
9/23    Why I Have A Little Crush on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
        http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/23/83652/6735
        \_ YHBT
2007/9/22-24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48150 Activity:nil 88%like:48162
9/22    How George Bush became the new Saddam
        http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070920_100442_7900&source=srch&page=1
2007/9/20-22 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48126 Activity:nil
9/20    Independent journalist in Anbar, interesting
        Part 1: http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001514.html
        Part 2: http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001517.html
        \_ Anyone who appears on the Wall Street Journal opinion page,
           Front Page Mag AND the National Review I automatically
           dismiss as a fucking idiot.
           \_ I was hoping this was Michael J Totten porn but its
              not: http://suicidegirls.com/interviews/Bushs+War
        \_ Who is this person and why do we care?
        \_ I tend to discount anyone who believes that Zaquarwi
           wasn't a US MILITARY FAKE MEDIA construct.  he was just
           one dude, he did not control all terror in Iraq.
2007/9/18-22 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48105 Activity:nil
9/18    http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/index.html
        Iraq: 3783 deaths, 27,848 wounded.
        Question: How much does it cost for each death (payment for burial,
        family, ceremoney, etc) vs. treat for the wounded (doctor's
        bills, shrinks, compensation packages, etc)?
        \_ Are you trying to make the case that we should let the wounded
           die because it is cheaper?
2007/9/14-22 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48073 Activity:moderate
9/14    So, exactly what did the surge accomplish again?
        http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=9804115
        My feeling is that Republican just want to drag this until
        2009 and blame Democrats for "loosing the war."
        \_ It accomplished exactly what it was intended to accomplish:
           it lined the pockets of the defence contractors, all who
           donate to the GOP.
           \_ Are you kidding? Most large companies donate to both
              parties. It only makes sense to do so.
              \_ Do you really think that defense contractos donate the
                 same amount to both parties? How about oil companies?
                 \_ Dunno if they donate the same amount or not, but I'm
                    quite sure they donate to both parties.
                    \_ Easy enough to look up:
                       http://www.csua.org/u/jk9
                       Big Oil: 3:1 Republican, 4:1 recently
                       http://www.csua.org/u/jka
                       Defence: 60:40 GOP, 2:1 lately
                       The latter actually surprised me a bit, I thought that
                       it would be more one sided.
        \_ It used to be that the timeline for ending a war was "when we've
           won".  Now it seems like the timeline is "we haven't won and this
           is really frustrating so let's just call it a day and go home and
           pretend it never happened".  The tactics, strategies, equipment,
           man power levels, focus, and diplomatic efforts may all be wrong
           and require a complete change of plan but retreating because we're
           and re
Elsewhere in the programme, we meet glamour model Lucy Pinder, whose breasts hav\
e made her famous. With contracts to the Daily Star and Nuts magazine, Lucy has\
made a name for herself using her body quire a complete change of plan s got a b\
rain as well as a pair of  The programme follows Lucy on a shoot for Nuts and he\
ars what life is like when you have some of the most famous breasts in the nation.

Also on Wednesday, model Jo talks about how her attitude towards her breasts cha\
nged dramatically after she had her baby, and Gemma explains what life is like w\
hen you have to spend up 800 a year on hiding an embarrassing nipple problem.

to boobs!Shebut retreating because we're
           and but retreating because we're
           "bored of this war and it's no fun!" is detrimental to our long
           term standing in the world and our ability in the future for
           generations to apply non-military pressure to accomplish our
           national goals.  No one follows a loser or a quitter.  The war has
           become so political that no one in DC seems to care about the
           consequences anymore.  It has become a faxed memo talking points
           political item.  How sad for all of us.
           \_ The war was a mistake. If you make a mistake, the thing to do
              is stop making it, not stubbornly keep doing it because you
              are worried about pride and saving face. This whole thing has
              already damaged our standing in the world. Talk about
              consequences? What is your definition of "winning"?
              \_ "The thing to do is stop making it": far too trivial an
                 answer.  The answer is to finish what you started, not get
                 bored and go because it is annoying.  We'll never win by
                 my definition.  Our leaders (in both parties) are too gutless
                 to do what needs to be done.  I read an interview with Powell
                 a few days ago where he said we should have shot a bunch of
                 looters on day one as a lesson to the rest.  I'm with Powell.
                 \_ You still haven't answered the question as to what it
                    would mean for us to win.
                    \_ Win = defeat your enemies.  In this case that would
                       mean closing the borders with Syria and Iraq to cut
                       off support and crushing groups such as the 'mahdi
                       army'.  Once your enemies are defeated you can talk
                       about diplomatic solutions among the rational people
                       who remain.  While these groups exist and still think
                       they can get more from fighting instead of talking
                       there can be no diplomatic solution to anything.  War
                       is about breaking the will of your enemy to continue
                       fighting, which we haven't even *tried* to do yet.
                       That might get a bunch of folks into a tizzy and we
                       can't have folks in a tizzy, can we?
                       \_ Fighting it the way you want to fight it would require
                          many more men that the military has. I don't think
                          there is any way you are going to sell a draft,
                          especially at this point. And even if you could, I
                          don't think it would work, since it basically requires
                          breaking the Iraqi will to have an indepedent
                          government. It didn't work in Vietnam, why would it
                          work here? Iraq has a long history of defeating
                          colonial powers, you know.
                          \_ We're not colonizing, we're SETTING IT FREE!!!
                             Give me freedom or give me death!     -Neocon
                             \_ How about choking to death on some Freedom
                                Fries?
                 \_ You CAN'T finish it. That's the fucking point.
                    \_ In your opinion.  Fighting it like we have, you are
                       correct since we haven't been fighting, which includes
                       the surge in recent months.
                 \_ Whether Iraq should have been invaded or not is
                    neither here nor there. What people need to focus on
                    is the fact that we *are* there. Now what? Packing up
                    and going home is not a good solution, so what are the
                    other options?
                    \_ The only other option I can think of is to arm some
                       Saddam Hussein like strong man and let him kill as
                       many Kurds and Shi'ites as he needs to keep the
                       country together. Too bad we killed SH, eh?
                       \_ Then it is a good thing you're not making any
                          decisions.
                          \_ Yes, far better to listen to you and blow $1T,\
                             3k lost lives, 30k maimed and our credibility
                          \_ Yes, far better to listen to you and blow $1T,
                             3k lost lives, 30k maimed and our credibility
                             on a pointless invasion. I notice you haven't
                             been able to come up with any withdrawal strategy.
                             It is either the one I came up with or an out
                             and out civil war, which will be worse, and
                             just end up with the same kind of strongman
                             in the end anyway. Oh, and I warned that the
                             invasion of Iraq would most likely result in
                             a civil war there *before* the invasion. So yes,
                             it is a "good thing" that I am not making any
                             decisions.
                             \_ Stop focusing on the past. What's done is
                                done. Who cares about what you warned
                                against? So your withdrawal options are
                                what again? And what options are there
                                other than withdrawal, if any? Dems like
                                to say "I told you so". Fair enough. Now
                                they want to lead the country, so what's
                                the plan? Most of what I hear is BS that
                                panders to the "I told you so"'s in hopes
                                of getting elected. I'd like to hear some
                                real plans. So far my favorite is the
                                Biden-Gelb plan, which basically calls for
                                splitting Iraq up and guaranteeing the
                                Sunnis a share of oil profits. I think the
                                people who want our troops out of Iraq now
                                are thinking with their hearts and not
                                their minds.
                                \_ Actually, I think we should do the same
                                   thing I suggested two years ago and it
                                   starts with impeaching Bush and handing
                                   him over to an International War Crimes
                                   Tribunal. But I am sure you are not
                                   interested in hearing it again, so I
                                   won't bother. Any "solution" that doesn't
                                   start out with hat in hand to the Iranians,
                                   Turks, Syrians and Saudis is just a big
                                   waste of time. You stilll are dreaming of
                                   waste of time. You still are dreaming of
                                   victory, when what you should be doing is
                                   trying to cut your losses. Okay, I just
                                   looked up the Biden-Gelb plan and it at
                                   least recognizes the idea that the US needs
                                   to engage Iraqi neighbors to have a hope
                                   of a chance of success. But that chance that
                                   Bush is going to effectively engage Iran is
                                   nill. Maybe the next President will, though.
                                   read the Biden-Gelb plan and I think it
                                   focuses on the important points, which
                                   are recognizing the inevitable need to
                                   draw in and get the support from Iraq's
                                   neighbors. I still think you are stuck
                                   in fantasyland though.
                                   nil. Maybe the next President will, though.
                                   \_ Vote for Biden. People should stop
                                      wasting their time with Hillary and
                                      Obama. They are probably the 3rd and
                                      4th best candidates the Dems have
                                      but they have NAME RECOGNITION. The Dems
                                      suck and I have low expectations for
                                      the next President.
                                      \_ Joe "never met a credit card company
                                         I wouldn't fellate" Biden?  Seriously,
                                         Biden can't get the base.  Without
                                         primary voters, you can't get the
                                         nom.
                                         \_ I understand that, but I still
                                            think he is the best man for
                                            the job.
                                      \_ I like Biden quite a bit, mostly just
                                         from watching him at the debates, but
                                         I don't think he has a chance. But
                                         my candidate (Edwards) doesn't have
                                         much of a chance either.
                                         \_ Edwards leads the pack in Iowa.
                                            Or, had for a while... It's neck
                                            and neck, apparently.
                                         \_ I don't think he has a chance
                                            either and that's too bad. Why
                                            is everyone all over Hillary?
2007/9/13-14 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48046 Activity:high
9/13    Since we invaded Iraq, there are more than 2million refugees fled
        the country.  My questions to you all are:
        1. do you think we the Americans has a moral obgligation for taken
        care of by settling them in US?
        2. if you don't like the idea of allowing them settle in US, would
        you think we have the moral obgligation to pay countries who do?

        We have generated a huge proportion of refugees (something like 1 in
        4 Iraqis are displaced since American intervention.  I am just a bit
        curious why this topic never bought up anywhere.
        \_ Who says they want to come to the US? Who says they aren't happier
           moving to tribal areas with people more like themselves?  Who says
           we haven't helped any of these people?  Some urls would help.
           \_ US doesn't issue Visa to Iraqis, not even those who have gotten
              themselves in trouble by translations, etc.
              \_ Can they get AmEx instead?
        \_ How much should Al Qaeda pay to relocate the refugees?
           \_ how does it relevent?  Al Qaeda didn't create this mess.
2007/9/11-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48019 Activity:nil 52%like:48006
9/11    "Allo!  My name is Diego Montoya!  And these are my underpants!"
        http://xrl.us/5xn8  [hey the url fit in 80 columns, why shrink it
        and destroy the source address?  -op]
2007/9/11-12 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48015 Activity:kinda low
9/11    The War On Terror is like herpes.  Not going away ever.
        Deal.
        \_ Ridiculous. The WoT is a fiction, like the War on Drugs. Once
           people wake up to the idea that you can be alert and not paranoid,
           this "War" will implode.
           \_ Nah, too many GOP donors are sucking on the public teat to
              ever let a moneymaker like WoT ever go away entirely. Just
              like the idiotic "war on drugs" the people raking in public
              dough will drag it out indefinitely.
        \_ Heh, a troll op followed by a trollicious reply which hooked
           another troll.  You earned the Triple Troll Whammy Award!
           \_ And you of course, are not a troll, so no T4 award...
              \_ No, I'm commenting on the trolliciousness of the whole thing
                 which makes you and me meta-trolls.  If I were commenting on
                 a baseball game that does not make me a baseball player.
2007/9/11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48006 Activity:nil 100%like:48001 52%like:48019
9/11    "Allo!  My name is Diego Montoya!  And these are my underpants!"
        http://xrl.us/5xn8
2007/9/11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:48001 Activity:nil 100%like:48006
9/11    "Allo!  My name is Diego Montoya!  And these are my underpants!"
        http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2430913.ece
2007/9/7-10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47940 Activity:moderate
9/7     Hey dipstick, thanks for nuking a link to a very thoughtful essay.
        Let's try again.
        "The Capitalist Threat," by George Soros.
        http://www.theatlantic.com/ideastour/philanthropy/soros-full.mhtml
        \_ Maybe you could add a summary or something?
           \_ I did that the first time and it was immediately nuked.  Let's
              try again.
        \_ OH hey, this is the famous "relexivity" essay. I thought I
           recognized it. Yes, this is a very interesting idea from
           Soros, but not light reading.
        \_ Essays sometimes say more about the author than the subject matter.
           We don't have good models for how real economies work, but we also
           don't have good models of income redistribution, or more generally
           good models of how to intervene in a society effectively to achieve
           given ends.  A smart man once said that best way to help society
           isn't to crusade for a given cause but to work on eliminating
           biases in oneself.  Otherwise you run the risk of dismissing a
           distressing truth as 'too absurd to be true,' for example. -- ilyas
           \_ Yeah, I remember in 2003 when I said that Bush had presented
              no evidence that Saddam Hussein had WMD and was dismissed as
              being "too absurd to be true."
           \_ My way or the highway, pal!  You're clearly just a <insert
              random insult>.
           \_ Yes, I remember suggesting that there was no evidence that Saddam
              Hussein had WMD before the war and being dismissed as "too
              absurd to be true."
2007/9/7-10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47933 Activity:low
9/7     Bush didn't lie, he just deliberately squelched any information
        that didn't support his pre-determined agenda:
        http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06/bush_wmd
        \_ "Sidney Blumenthal served as assistant and senior adviser to Bill
           Clinton from August 1997 until January 2001."  Tell me what Karl
           Rove writes about Clinton.  Yeah, like I trust that guy.
        \_ ...the hell? Is Blumenthal reading the motd?
        \_ I think this is treason and people involved should be tried.
2007/9/6 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47907 Activity:insanely high
9/6     The surge numbers are a scam
        http://xrl.us/5ouu (WashPo)
        \_ I thought I had a cool URL shortener, but yours adds
           the name of the <title>.  Cool!
        \_ It's all a scam.  Giving the troop buildup a stupid name
           "THE SURGE" was stupid.  It's all stupid.  Goddamit.
        \_ "Opponents of the war would only be happy with Iraq if every day
           ended in a rainbow and everyone was crapping gum drops."
           \_ Why are you in favor of tooth decay?  Why do you hate teeth?
           \_ Who are you quoting there, yourself?
              \_ Quoting because I liked the statement.  Not sourcing it
                 because no one here cares who it is.
2007/9/4-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47893 Activity:low
9/4     Do you think one of the 7 out of 11 Iraq war surge benchmarks
        they met is 'end all violence' or 'restore 100 percent power' ?
        \_ it make sense.  afterall, we demand PLO to "end all violence"
           and insist that since there are still attacks in Israel,
           PLO most of sanctioned it.  According to that logic, we sanctioned
           all these violence in Iraq too.  :)
        \_ "The Iraqi government is "dysfunctional" and has met only three
           of the 18 benchmarks laid out by Congress for gauging its efforts
           on political reconciliation, according to a new independent report
           on Iraq by the Government Accountability Office." How do you get
           7 out of 11 from that?
           \_ Bush-math: count the 4 that have been partially met, even if
              only 1% of criteria have been met. Kind of like how calling cards
              count minutes used.
              \_ even then it's 7 out of 18.  -tom
                 \_ "I cannot let this go by, the old-style Washington
                     politics, trying to scare you with phony numbers." -GWB
        \_ Does anyone even know what those benchmarks are and if they are
           meaningful anymore given the current situation?
2007/8/31-9/3 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47864 Activity:kinda low
8/31    motd armchair historians, what do you think of bush's
        recent speech comparing Iraq to Vietnam?
        http://www.back-to-iraq.com/2007/08/dien-bien-fool.php
        \_ I think everyone who screamed "quagmire!" is just as stupid as
           everyone who thinks leaving Iraq now will lead to millions of dead
           like the killing fields in Cambodia.  Iraq != Vietnam in that
           sense.  The problem with leaving is that (once again) we will have
           meddled in something and put the lives of many locals on the line
           who trusted us and then fucked them by leaving.  Each time we do
           that we lose face and credibility around the world making
           diplomatic efforts much much harder since we continue to build up a
           history of our word having no value.  You break it, you bought it,
           you gotta fix it.
           \_ The problem is that it does not seem to matter if we stick around
              or not; we're not capable of fixing the situation. If we leave
              now rather than later, we will lose less American lives in the
              inevitable violence and the Iraqis may actually have a chance of
              getting things going on their own faster.
              \- everytime bush deals with a (living) historian, the historian
                 has to school/disown/disclaim BUSHCO. YMWTGF "john dower",
                 "alistair horne" etc.
              \_ An anonymous French politician recently agreed with you that
                 the only way Iraq would see peace would be if the US left
                 and let them slaughter each other until one side 'won' and
                 then we/whoever could assist them in 'diplomatically'
                 resolving their problems after the shooting stops.  Of course
                 at that point you have one side butchered, but hey, that's
                 ok, right, since they're not Americans.  Right?  No.  The
                 right thing to do is stick around for a while now that their
                 tribal leaders (this is a heavily tribal society unlike
                 Vietnam) have figured out that AlQ is bad news.  Places that
                 were deadly a year ago are now quiet and no more dangerous
                 than say, Oakland, is today.
                 \_ And how many trillions of taxpayer dollars and how many
                    thousands of American lives do we need to spend until we
                    get to your Iraq utopia?
                    \_ Strawman: No one said utopia.  Iraq was never a utopia.
                       How much blood and treasure you ask?  You tell me what
                       you think it is worth for the nation to have yet another
                       failure where we specifically abandon our local allies
                       to yet another mass murder event.  Each time we do that
                       we lose credibility around the world and encourage our
                       enemies.  Especially if we left right now when it looks
                       like things have finally turned in our favor with new
                       leadership and tactics and the tribes turning our way.
                       Nothing is so American these days like snatching defeat
                       from the jaws of victory.
                       \_ You guys have been claiming victory is right around
                          the corner for about four years now. You will have
                          to excuse me for not buying the bullshit anymore.
                          Remember when Reagan left Lebanon after the
                          Beirut bombings? Too bad Bush is no Ronald Reagan.
        \_ I think Bush is very much like Johnson.
2007/8/30-9/3 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47834 Activity:high
8/30    A Burning Man participant was found dead this morning, hanging
        from the inside of a two-story high tent, according to Mark
        Pirtle, special agent in charge for the Bureau of Land Managment.
        The apparent suicide would be the festival's first in its 21 year
        history, Pirtle said.
        \_ Am I alone in thinking that Burning Man is retarded?
           \_ No.
           \_ Definitely not.
           \_ Nope.
           \_ You are certainly not the only person who has never been there
              and knows practically nothing about it who has a very strong
              opinion about it.
              \_ I'm sure you've been to Guantanamo, Iraq, Darfur, and
                 a Billy Graham Crusade, right?
              \_ I'm sure you've been to Guantanamo, Iraq, Darfur, and a
                 Billy Graham Crusade, right? Or not, since you deleted
                 this comment.
                 \_ How much of my tax payer dollars are being spend on
                    Burning Man? I think the Billy Graham Crusade is just dandy,
                    btw. If people want to spend their own time and money doing
                    things like that, that make them happy, more power to them.
                    And no *I* did not delete this comment. More than two people
                    Burning Man? I think the Billy Graham Crusade is just
                    dandy btw. If people want to spend their own time
                    and money doing things like that, that make them
                    happy, more power to them. And no *I* did not delete
                    this comment. More than two people
                    use the motd, believe it or not.
                    \_ How much does it cost to clean up the environment after
                       they leave?  What is the cost to the local communities
                       to lock up all their stuff and keep their kids inside?
                       (Yes they steal shit from the locals).  Who pays for
                       the cops and emergency services in the area to work
                       overtime?  Just some good clean fun, kids, all free!
                       \_ Just like I said, the people who know the least about
                          what they are talking about, have the strongest
                          opinions. BLM inspects after the event to make sure
                          it is totally clean. Dozens of volunteers stay for
                          months until it is cleaned up. BM LLC pays for every
                          dollar of police, fire and emergency service time.
                          Any other misconceptions you want cleared up?
              \_ Thousands of people show up in the desert, run around naked,
                 take a lot of drugs, have sex with random people for a week,
                 don't bathe, burn a giant 'man', then drive home in their
                 SUVs leaving behind (literally) tons of garbage in the
                 environment for the locals and government to deal with.
                 What was the cool part that I missed?
                 \_ You dont leave your garbage out there.  You take it
                    with you.  so often that means leaving it in a dumpster
                    in Reno, but you dont leave it out in the desert.
                    Actually I'm down with you spreading FUD about burning
                    man that it sucks, it keeps idiots like you from
                    showing up.  please continue!
                    \_ Don't worry. I won't go. I might work to stop BM,
                       though! Enjoy it while it lasts!
                 \_ I don't think a lot of sex goes on at Burning Man.
                    Maybe you might try it once, then you figure out
                    that having sex at Burning Man is terrible and should
                    not be attempted by anyone.
                    \_ Ok, so thousands of dirty people in the desert naked
                       taking a lot of drugs, not getting laid, burning the
                       'man' and leaving a huge mess behind.  I'm still
                       looking for the cool part.
                       \_ Where can I find pix of naked people in BM?
                          \_ google.  Or just go next year.
                 \_ Better for people like you to stay away, since you already
                    know everything anyway. -Been to BM six times
                  \_ Wow, you are such an expert, glad to know you already
                     know everything that 45k people do over a weeks time,
                     even though your only knowledge is through the media.
                    \_ Don't worry. I won't go. I might work to stop BM,
                       though! Enjoy it while it lasts!
                    \_ I've yet to see a single person post anything about
                       BM being anything more than described: smelly people
                       taking drugs for a week, leaving a huge mess behind.
                       If you'd like to correct that 'misunderstanding', please
                       do.  And oh yeah, there's people doing 'art' and
                       'expressing their freedom'.  Sorry, can't forget that.
                       \_ Nope. No desire to encourage fools to come at all.
                          Please stay away.
                       \_ Stupid smelly hippies enjoying Burning Man:
                          http://www.csua.org/u/jfl
                          \_ Just because they are old doesn't prove anything.
2007/8/30-31 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47818 Activity:nil
8/30    http://tinyurl.com/ypcpb4 (washingtonpost.com)
        The GAO hates America, wants terrorists to follow us home, and
        encourages mushroom clouds over major U.S. cities
2007/8/15-20 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47620 Activity:kinda low
8/14    Torture: Not only illegal and immoral, it just doesn't work:
        http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/07/torture200707
        \_ unfortunately it takes until near the bottom of the last page to
           actually get to anyone saying it doesn't work.  couldn't you have
           just quoted those 2 lines and saved us from reading 3.98 pages that
           didn't back up your statement?  [I like when my posts get deleted.
           That way I know I hit a nerve.  Keep up the censorship.]
           \_ "It was an extraordinary success story. But it was one that
               would evaporate with the arrival of the C.I.A's interrogation
               team." Paragraph four. But who's counting?
               \_ That is not the same as saying "it doesn't work".  That is
                  saying the FBI was there using a method that was apparently
                  working and then the CIA showed up and used a different
                  method.  It doesn't say the CIA method didn't work.  He may
                  have had nothing more to say.  It may be a technique that
                  was not effective on this one person.  The only place in the
                  article that makes a general claim for the failure of the
                  CIA's technique was the 2 lines 3/4s down on the last page.
                  So who is counting?  I am.  You're seeing what you want to
                  see.  I am not making the case either way for torture
                  working or not: I don't know, it isn't my field (thankfully),
                  but this article doesn't say what you say it says until the
                  2 lines on page 4.  My point?  Quote the 2 lines or change
                  your post to match what your article says.
                  \_ Almost the entire article is a case of making evidence
                     for the statement that torture does not work as an
                     intelligence gathering tool. I could quote paragraph
                     after paragraph, but that would still not change your
                     mind about what you think you read. This is a very
                     common rhetorical technique: build a case for a
                     statement and then make it at the end of the essay.
                     Simply stating it does not have the same effect (for what
                     I hope are obvious reasons).
                     \_ The entire article is about what happened re: the one
                        guy once the CIA showed up.  You could quote the whole
                        thing but you won't be quoting anything that says that
                        the CIA method does not work in the general case until
                        3/4s down page 4.  If they had presented more than one
                        case, made a general claim for dozens (or however many)
                        cases where it failed, or something then sure, I'd
                        buy it, but this article does not say what you say it
                        says except for the 2 sentences as noted.
        \_ Or it does:  http://csua.com/2006/09/21/#44481
        \_ Torture works just fine. -- ilyas
           \_ you should ask Colin Powell for that.  he paid dearly.
              \_ Your grammar sucks.  Why should you live?
2007/8/4-22 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47532 Activity:nil
8/4     O'Hanlan and Pollack rapidly backpedal from their op-ed
        http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/11682.html
        \_ Liberal media, my ass.
2007/8/2-3 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47517 Activity:nil
8/2     One Trillion dollars later, the water is running out,
        the electricity is off 22 hours a day, and still no
        apology from the war's cheerleaders:
        http://www.csua.org/u/j9i
        \_ at least oh nevermind i'm too depressed to taunt anyone.
        \_ "Could" cost.  Not has cost.  And please stop referring to
           "economistsview".  It's more of a crackpot site than Michelle
           Malkin.
        \_ But the cost of FREEDOM is PRICELESS! Give me FREEDOM or
           give me DEATH! FREEDOM!                      -Republican
           \_ Except in the case of Pakistan or Saudi Arabia where we're
              just fine with a despotic government. Same with China really.
2007/8/1-3 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:47504 Activity:nil
8/1     http://www.csua.org/u/j99
        Hope on the Battlefield
        by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
        Military leaders know a secret: The vast majority of people are
        overwhelmingly reluctant to take a human life.
2007/8/1-3 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47503 Activity:nil 75%like:47501
8/1     Because of this increase in cooperation from local Iraqis in
        confronting al-Qaeda and other extremist groups, the number of weapons
        caches seized in Iraq has increased dramatically, already at 3,700 in
        the first 7 months of 2007. Only 2,726 terrorist and insurgent weapons
        caches were removed from circulation in all 2006.
        http://csua.org/u/j96
        \_ Wonder how much of that weaponry came from us.
           http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,144661,00.html
2007/8/1-3 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47492 Activity:nil
8/1     "Democracy is hard"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070801/ts_nm/iraq_dc_25
2007/7/30-8/3 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47469 Activity:moderate
7/30    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/opinion/30pollack.html
        A War We Just Might Win
        Never expected that title on the nytimes op-ed page.
        \_ Are you high?  The NyTimes has been shilling for this clusterfuck
           since before it started (c.f. Judith Miller onwards).  See
           Glenn Greenwald for a good response to this shite:
           http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/07/30/brookings
           \_ The constant leaking of secret memos underminig the war is what
              has led me to that opinion, not anything that might make me high.
              -op
              \_ What's different here is that Kenneth M. Pollack is not
                 usually a hawk or a fan of current policy in Iraq. Cf. his
                 article on Securing the Gulf in Foreign Affairs magazine.
                 (Easily Googleable.) That said, this op-ed remains at odds
                 with most of what you read from my man, Juan Cole. -!pp
              \_ One of the main responsibilities of The Press in a
                 democracy is to keep the people informed about what their
                 government is doing, Bush Administration claims to be able
                 to classify everything under the sun notwithstanding.
                 \_ It is one thing to say we have secret prisons, it is
                    another to announce which countries they're in causing
                    diplomatic problems and yet another to print the tail
                    numbers of the planes which puts lives at risk for no
                    reason.  There are degrees to things.  Mindlessly printing
                    everything just because you can is irresponsible.  The
                    story can get out without details that can get people
                    killed.
                    \_ Announcing which countries they were in was precisely
                       the correct thing to do. The govt. that sanctioned the
                       prisons was not about to abandon the project or admit
                       wrongdoing; political pressure from other govts. is a
                       a fine and measured response. Printing the tail
                       numbers of the planes bespeaks a greater problem than
                       merely negligence of journalistic integrity: it says we
                       do not have people in the intel business who know how
                       to carry out illicit operations. I don't know about you,
                       but that level of incompetence scares the hell out of
                       me. Best not to be conducting black ops in foreign
                       countries, I suppose, but at least have the decency not
                       to get caught.
                       \_ So you think all the journalists who were aware of
                          various activities over the last umtpeen decades
                          should have published everything they discovered just
                          as a 'lesson' to our intel agencies?  Wacky.
                          \_ You are responding to someone different than the
                             pp, btw. I personally think everything except the
                             tail numbers was fine, because when first
                             confronted with the accusations, the WH response
                             was to deny and stonewall, remember? Publishing
                             the countries added veracity to the charges.
                             Putting CIA agents life at risk was stepping
                             over the line, imho, but not illegal.
                             over the line, imho, but not illegal. Good job
                             changing the topic from the NYTs constant pre-war
                             cheerleading to the Freeper talking points though,
                             I congratulate you on your verbal judo.
                         \_ WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!  DUBYA EMM DEEEES!!!!
                             \_ I'm ok with publishing about foreign prisons.
                                I'm not entirely ok with naming foreign
                                countries as that can create a bigger mess
                                than the prisons themselves and I don't think
                                the media has the brains required to figure
                                out when publishing can do more damage than
                                the thing they're reporting on.  I'm entirely
                                not ok with tail numbers.  There is absolutely
                                no reason for that.  It isn't news.  I didn't
                                comment either way on whether it is legal or
                                not.  I think it is stupid whether or not it
                                is legal and it is not newsworthy or fit to
                                print, as they say.  BTW, I came into this
                                a few posts after we left the NYT pre-war
                                reporting behind so I can't take credit for
                                the direction of the thread to where we are
                                now.
                                \_ The government should have admitted what
                                   they were doing.  When the government
                                   denies denies denies you have to step up
                                   the level of proof.  If the people in charge
                                   had actually stepped up and said, yes, we
                                   are doing this, then you wouldn't have seen
                                   as much details in the papers.
                                   \_ So anything a reporter finds out and
                                      publishes, the government should just
                                      go ahead and spill the whole story even
                                      if it puts American and allied lives
                                      at risk.  Whatever.
                                      \_ Setting aside the plane numbers,
                                         explain to me how exposing the illegal
                                         kidnapping program put American and
                                         allied lives at risk.
                                      \_ In general, the government is
                                         accountable to The People, yes. I know
                                         for some reason the GOP has lost sight
                                         of this fundamental principle, but I
                                         still hold out hope that the "small
                                         government" types will regain control
                                         of their party.
                                         \_ Uh, no. The whole point of
                                            the R party is to preach
                                            COMMUNITY and SELF RELIANCE.
                                            Localized interest for
                                            greater good. You liburals
                                            just don't get it.
                                            \_ No, the R party is based on
                                               large national debts.
                                \_ I would say we are 95%+ in agreement.
        \_ Compare Pollock's parroting of the official line with statements
           from the general who is actually training the Iraqi troops:
           http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0727/p01s01-wome.html
2007/7/24-28 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47400 Activity:low
7/24    We could have won the war in Iraq if $PRESIDENTIAL_ELECTION_WINNER_2009
        had the guts to see the war through to its conclusion.
        \_ Remember, no one will vote for Hillary or a Scary Black Man, so the
           Republicans already have the election sewed up!
           \_ I'd vote for Obama even though I don't agree with a lot of his
              policies simply because he doesn't come across as a lying
              power mad criminal scumbag with a multi-decade record of lying,
              fraud, theft, and abuse.
              \_ Maybe he just hides it well. Care to describe HRC's
                 fraud/theft/abuse? Every politician lies. I bet you also
                 lie.
                \_ I think he's too young to have committed any major
                   crimes already.
                \_ At this point you seriously want me to make a list of HRCs
                   frauds and abuses?  You're completely unaware of them, huh?
                   You were born and raised in some foreign land?
                   \_ Well you could just put one or two of the most important
                      instances, as you see it. Because no, I'm not aware of
                      it. I have better things to do than follow the life of
                      this woman so closely. Are you referring to the
                      whitewater shit?
                      \_ Frankly, outside of freeper and Ditto Head circles,
                         I don't think anyone is aware of these allegations.
                         The American public sure isn't.
                         \_ So you believe that they haven't been aired or
                            that only people on the right are politically
                            aware enough to know what is going on?  Certainly
                            a great number of her 'events' got MSM air time
                            so you must think only the right wing knows what
                            is going on.  Weird.
                            \_ And yet, you still post no substance.
2007/7/19-21 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47338 Activity:moderate
7/19    hey wall cranky conservatives:  give Ted Rall a read.  Don't
        worry, I doubt he will change your mind about anything:
        http://csua.org/u/j6o
        So now my question is: why do you think this is?  Why does the
        media listen to the rabid right wing, who are at this point batting
        .000, and never to the so-called "liberals," who, because they
        based their Iraq war opinions on fact rather than wishful thinking,
        were right?  Why is that?  conjecture about human nature welcomed.
        \_ You think Ted Rall is somehow new on the scene?  I just read
           DK when I want to see that stuff.  I get everything all at once
           on a single long page on every current topic.
        \_ I think for one thing he's mischaracterizing all conservatives as
           "radical right Bushists" and you're doing the same calling people
           "rabid right wing".
        \_ The so-called "liberal" media is owned and controlled by big
           dollar corporate interests.
           \_ Which still spews out liberal propoganda on a continuous 24x7
              cycle.
              \_ Uh huh. That is why the NY Times, the Washington Post, the
                 Atlantic Monthly, Fox News, etc all ran 100% pro-war articles
                 Atlantic Monthly, Fox News, etc all ran pro-war stories
                 in the months leading up to the Iraq War. Or is that all
                 an example of "liberal" propaganda, in your worldview?
                 http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=22437
                 \_ Of course they did.  You have no idea why, huh?  It is
                    not the VRWC.  It is because everyone in the media, in
                    government, etc believed the intelligence reports that
                    going back several years all said SH had WMD and was
                    involved with AQ.  I'm sure the tin foil paranoia thing
                    makes for a better story though and really gets your
                    blood boiling.  Remember, always assume evil when
                    ignorance or incompetence will do.
        \_ I see I have underestimated the uselessness of the MOTD.  not
           only are there no comments about this, somehow editors have
           attempted to un-ask the question.            -op
           \_ No, you posted a useless Ted Rall link.  GIGO.  Everyone here has
              too much clue, no matter their political beliefs, to take TR
              seriously or waste precious bits downloading his junk.  Dailykos
              is a much more efficient source if you want to read that side of
              things.
2007/7/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47326 Activity:high
7/17    we haven't argued about the latest useless congressional
        gesture to pull america out of Iraq and deny the simple fact
        we're gonna be there for the next 60 years like Korea/West Bank/
        Japan, is everyone on vacation?
        \_ It's 7/18 now btw
        \_ We're in the West Bank?
        \_ How about Vietnam. Iraq is more like Vietnam, at least so far...
           \_ And our troops are still there! Oh, wait....
           \_ How long were US troops in Vietnam?
              \_ Zero days after we decided to pull out.
        \_ just pointing out israel is still in the west bank.
           \_ And despite your ZOG fantasies, US != Israel.
                \_ sorry.  didnt explain.  when Israel invaded west bank
                   they said they'd only stay a short time.  They're still
                   there, much to everyone involved's pain.
                   \_ Ye-es, but WE are not THEM.
                      \_ I agree, but I'm using an example from history.
                         \_ Why *that* example, then?  How about how the
                            Gaulic tribes are *still* in France 1500 years
                            later!  The bastards!  Save France for the French!
                            Kill the Gaulic invaders!
                            \_ you probably mean "gallic" or "gaulish"
                               \_ garlic
                               \_ Why do you hate the French?  We must save
                                  France!
        \_ All we are asking for is an up or down vote.
        \_ Why is it "useless"? Let me guess, you are a war supporter...
           \_ Am not war supporter.  I just think we're going to be in
              Iraq F O R E V E R.
              \_ I think President Hillary Rodham Clinton will have us out
                 in less than six months after she takes office. We shall see.
                 \_ You won't see.  She's not getting elected.
                    \_ And if she does get elected she won't be able to
                       get the US out in 6 months.
                       \_ That's true, too.  She isn't exactly pushing hard on
                          the "get the troops out now" agenda.
                          \_ Not according to all the right wing newspapers.
                             I think she is just tacking to the center and
                             will get bowled over by events, after she wins.
                             http://www.nysun.com/article/55102
                             \_ "... after she wins".  You're trolling or
                                drunk.  I don't care what left/right wing
                                newspapers say she says.  I read what she
                                says.
                    \_ Really? Who is going to win in her stead?
                       "None of the above?"
                       \_ My dog.  Anyone with a heart beat, age 35+.  Charles
                          Manson.  Rowdy Roddy Piper.  Anyone.
                          \_ Are you the same guy who predicted that we would
                             find WMD in Iraq? Just wondering, because I am
                             predicting that Hillary will not get beaten
                             by a Republican. BTW, I predicted that we would
                             *not* find WMD in Iraq, so my record is pretty
                             good.
                             curious how good your track record is.
                             \_ No.  But given the lack of serious effort put
                                into controlling the country after the attack
                                started and all the trucks rolling in various
                                directions before I wouldn't be at all
                                surprised if we hear in 30 years they were
                                there and the Bush admin decided it was less
                                stupid to have invaded and not found them than
                                invaded and let them slip away.  Now then, if
                                it was Roddy Piper vs. my dog, it'd be a really
                                interesting race.  Piper still has a lot of
                                wrestling fans, but my dog can speak English
                                better so he's going to win all 3 debates.
                             \_ The US is not ready for a female President,
                                especially a polarizing one like Clinton.
                                The Dems should push hard to make sure she
                                does not get the nomination, because if
                                she does (or if Obama does) then I predict
                                another Republican win. I have always
                                voted Democrat for President (even though I am
                                a 'decline to state') but I would not vote
                                for Hilary Clinton. I would vote for Bill,
                                though.
                 \_ Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've
                    constructed.
2007/7/10-11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics] UID:47243 Activity:nil
7/10    See Michael Moore's hissyfit on CNN!
        http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=2823
        \_ MM?  Who cares?
2007/7/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47230 Activity:low
7/8     Looks like the US is finally, actually, going to start turning
        the corner in Iraq:
        http://www.csua.org/u/j3l
        \_ ummmm, your title is rather misleading.
           \_ more or less misleading than when Cheney told us that?
2007/7/3-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47156 Activity:nil
7/3     http://csua.org/u/j2u
        Steep drop in civilian deaths reported in Iraq
        \_ Meanwhile, steep increase in "Al Qaeda" deaths. Hmmmm.
2007/7/3-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:47153 Activity:kinda low
7/2     So the bombers in England were doctors. Popular leftist wisdom is
        that Muslims are desperate because of the poor conditions they
        live in and their lack of education. If only we worked hard to
        improve their conditions, then they would not grow up to be suicide
        bombers, goes the thinking, because they would have something to
        live for. Now that MDs are blowing themselves up can we at least
        begin to consider that perhaps religious wars are not rational?
        \_ Popular leftist wisdom is that religious people are nutters,
           not that Muslim's are desperate because they are poor. Did you
           invent that straw man all by yourself?
           \_ Actually, I've heard many people (including my law profs) say
              that if there was more prosperity for the ordinary people in
              the middle east there would be less suicide bombings, &c. and
              thus the sol'n to the problem is to improve conditions over
              there for (i.e. create a middle class, to promote stability).
              I do not know what the factual, historic or economic theory
              basis is for this assertion, but I have heard it before from
              self-described "lefties." -!op
              \_ Isn't that the neocon argument? If we just give them the
                 trappings of US-style capitalism, they will luv us forever
                 and want to be just like us?
                 \_ You forgot the part where we knock the shit out of them
                    first to show them who's best.
                 \_ No, it isn't.  The left isn't saying they need our
                    economic system, just our prosperity.
                    \_ I guess you're right, although that makes no sense at
                       all. -!pp
                       \_ It makes sense if you believe that there are other
                          ways to achieve economic prosperity.
                          \_ Sure, but name one that's proven to work as well.
                             \_ It depends a lot on what you mean by "well"
                                and what you mean by "our economic system."
                                Does a Scandanavian-style mixed economy count?
                                How about a State authoritarian Singapore style
                                model? And not that I am prepared to defend it,
                                but there are plenty of people on the left who
                                think that State socialism is the way to go.
                                Many, many (probably most people worldwide) are
                                more interested in creating a base level of
                                prosperity for everyone, not just a mass of
                                phenomenal wealth for the top 1%. The US model
                                is not widely emulated for a reason.
                                \_ *Every* country has a top 1% with phenomal
                                   wealth.  Good luck changing that.  It would
                                   be a first in world history if it happened.
                                   \_ Uh, Cuba?
                                      \_ Looked at relatively, especially Cuba.
                                         \_ Any evidence for this statement?
                                            Everyone I know who has been to
                                            Cuba says otherwise, but maybe you
                                            have some hard facts to back up
                                            your opinion.
                                            \_ Oddly enough, I don't have
                                               Fidel's tax returns in front of
                                               me. Why don't you go ahead and
                                               tell us what "everyone [you]
                                               know who has been to Cuba says"?
                                               \_ They say that the standard
                                                  of living is very flat and
                                                  that no one lives
                                                  ostentatiously. They also say
                                                  that the hospitals are
                                                  missing every other light bulb
                                                  to save electricity.
                                                  \_ Did they travel in the
                                                     same circles as Castro and
                                                     that tier? I'll grant you
                                                     that it's flat for most,
                                                     but if Fidel needs the
                                                     latest/greatest tech for
                                                     his health, the slope is
                                                     steep.
                                   \_ Do you think the distribution of wealth
                                      is the same world-wide? Look at this
                                      graphical representation:
                                      http://www.lcurve.org
                                      In the US, the top 0.1% makes 8% of the
                                      overall income, in Sweden it is 1%. So
                                      I guess it depends on what you mean by
                                      "phenomenal". 10X average is a lot, but
                                      much less phenomenal than 80X, right?
                                      \_ 10X is phenomenal.  80X is too and
                                         doesn't make 10X any less so.  Would
                                         you think 10X your salary was
                                         phenomenal or just 'a lot' because
                                         it wasn't 80X?
                                         \_ I think 10X average salary is merely
                                            "a lot." At this point it is merely
                                            semantics.
                                            \_ So if you got 10X your current
                                               you wouldn't think that was
                                               phenomenal?  Okey dokey.  Not
                                               much to be said to that when 10X
                                               is the difference between doing
                                               well enough and being able to
                                               retire early doing whatever you
                                               want with your life while
                                               you're still young enough to
                                               do it after only a few years of
                                               10X.
                                               \_ I am already making 5X median
                                                  income, so no, doubling my
                                                  salary wouldn't really change
                                                  my life that much. You aren't
                                                  paying much attention to the
                                                  words you are using. And no,
                                                  even if my salary doubled, I
                                                  wouldn't be able to retire
                                                  soon.
              \_ Is your law professor a "leftist"?
           \- i think you also have to consider the thesis "there are things
              that matter to people other than job prospects" ... having your
              "homeland" under somebody elsese rule seems to be a good way to
              get people upset, for example. i am not too familar with what's
              under the hood of japanese suicider bombers [how willing they
              were etc], but at least it cant be glibly chalked up to
              religion, let alone islam. i dunno the socioeconomic status of
              the IRA, but they clearly werent desperately poor [not suicide
              bombers, but terrorists and willing to die (see eg BOBBY SANDS,
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1981_Irish_Hunger_Strike  I dont
              think all the TAMIL TIGER suicide bombers are in desperate
              straits financially. So consider looking at the "dual"
              ... rather than focusing on what one person being a suicide
              bomber says about him, what does a steady availability of them
              say about how fucked up things must be. I think usually there
              are better structural explanations for many things than the
              vague cultural ones [like the talk in the 8-s about "asian
              capitalism" ... hey guess what, the japanese economy looks
              different from the US one probably more because of corporate
              structure laws and finance laws, not these vague "harmony and
              patience" arguments ... the german economy also looks
              different, in part because they have firm level unions.
              finally, the islamic suicide bombers phenomena may just be
              testimony to a sosophisticated and expert system of brainwashing,
              like JIM JONES, DKORESH etc. Anyway, the most on point suggestion
              I have is YMWTGF(alan krueger terrorism). i am not saying
              islam nor general life conditions play no role, but it is
              more complicated than that.
              bomber says about him, what does a steady availability (and
              climbing income of the candidates) of them say about how fucked
              up things must be. I think usually there are better structural
              explanations for many things than the vague cultural ones [like
              the talk in the 80s about "asian capitalism" ... hey guess
              what, the japanese economy looks different from the US one
              probably more because of corporate structure laws and finance
              laws, not these vague "harmony and patience" arguments ... the
              german economy also looks different, in part because they have
              firm level unions.  finally, the islamic suicide bombers
              phenomena may just be testimony to a sophisticated and expert
              system of brainwashing, like JIM JONES, DKORESH etc. Anyway,
              the most on point suggestion I have is YMWTGF(ALAN KRUEGER
              terrorism). i am not saying islam nor general life conditions
              play no role, but it is more complicated than that.
              \- http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i39/39b01001.htm --psb
                 \_ So George Bush is a leftist now. This explains much.
        \_ This has been in doubt for some time: http://csua.org/u/j2r
           (Boston Globe article on book by Robert A. Pape). However, it's
           common sense that Muslim Fundamentalist groups are attractive to
           the disenfranchised, particularly in our ally countries (like
           Egypt and Saudi Arabia) where odds of bettering your situation
           through the status quo are vanishingly slim. Cf. Islamic Rev. in
           Iran.
           \_ And because SA and E are dictatorships it is a good idea to
              bomb Americans and Europeans?  I'm not following this line of
              thought.
              \_ Sorry, no, not my point. My point is that we still need to
                 promote good economics and democratic politics in these
                 countries if we don't want them to get taken over by religious
                 fanatics.
        \_ Anyone who seriously makes this claim (about Islamic radicals)
           hasn't spent much time studying or thinking about it. The leadership
           of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and
           the Wahhabiists in Saudi Arabia are all educated, mostly middle
           class men. Now it might be true that they find themselves
           marginalized and with little opportunity to change their lot, but
           they are certainly not starving and not even poor, by their
           countries standards. Palestine is kind of a different story,
           but don't you think that not having jobs, having your freedom
           of movement and your right of statehood taken away might tend
           to breed resentment?
           \_ No one has a 'right of statehood'.  Nations have always come and
              gone based on the (mis)fortunes of war, disease, natural
              disasters, etc.
              \_ Your opinion is in disagreement with the Universal Declaration
                 of Human Rights and the UN, but I guess you are entitled to
                 it. Who else in the world does not have citizenship rights?
                 People don't neccesarily have the right to the state that
                 they want, but everyone has the right to citizenship.
                 \_ That's a 'right' on paper.  It is not a natural right.  And
                    it is not my opinion that countries come and go, it is
                    historical fact.  Maybe you meant something else.
                    \_ The right to citizenship comes and goes? I don't think
                       so, but I guess if you want to bring back slavery, you
                       are welcome to it.
                       \_ No.  The existence of nations/states.  And no, most
                          conquered people were not historically made citizens
                          of the conquering state.  When the Maya fell apart
                          due to disease or whatever it was, there was no
                          replacement state.  If you lived behind the Iron
                          Curtain I guess you were a citizen of something but
                          that didn't come with any rights.  If you were born
                          in this country not that long ago as an Eskimo or
                          continental Native America, then no you weren't a
                          citizen.  And no, slavery is not the only alternative
                          to citizenship as I just demonstrated.
           \_ Stating it like that reminds me of the old historical cycle,
              middle class wants to be upper class so convinces lower class to
              fight for them.  Sometimes the middle class succeeds and trades
              places with the upper class, but the lower class stays at the
              bottom.
              \_ More like lowest classes rebel after being starved out, make
                 some idiot king and things are better for a short time until
                 they have to do it all over again.  Elected systems of
                 government implicitly acknowledge this cycle by giving the
                 people a non-bloody way to turn over the government every
                 so often.  That's why you'll *never* see a revolution in this
                 country or any other elective government system.
                 \_ Well, yes, elections _and_ a degree of complacency brought
                    about by a pretty good standard of living even for the
                    poor. The Upper Class would do well to remember that the
                    distance between Harlem and the Upper East Side is really
                    negligible-- and the distance between Compton and Beverly
                    Hills even more so.
                    \- See "great wall of grosse pointe" aka alter rd.
2007/6/26-28 [Politics/Domestic/Immigration, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47078 Activity:nil
6/26    Another RINO joins the Defeatocrats:
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1856687/posts
        \_ How long will the conversion process take for every Republican
           to become a "RINO"?
2007/6/25 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47062 Activity:nil
6/25    From Matt Taibibibib
        Q: How long will it take for the Democrat hopefuls to realize that they\
        cannot simply pull out of Iraq?

        A: I saw an old episode of “Homicide: Life on the Street” on the Sle\
uth     channel the other night. In it a highly annoying Vince D’Onofrio\
        falls between a subway car and the subway platform and he gets
        stuck there, with the train basically holding his guts in. The
        medics come in and they look at him and realize that if they move
        the train at all, his guts are going to fall out and he’s going to
        die.    But if they do nothing, he’s going to slowly lose blood
        pressure and die. Either way, he’s going to die. Iraq is
        Vince D’Onofrio. It doesn’t overact as much, but it’s just as
        fucked. The bloodbath is coming as soon as we leave, whether that’s\
        now or 20 years from now. But I’d be interested to hear your
        argument explaining how things are going to improve by
        us staying and spending a billion bucks a day or whatever playing
        Play Station in air conditioned trailers behind twenty-foot walls
        while Iraqis have six hours of electricity and pee into buckets and
        get their throats slit as soon as night falls. You’re probably
        right, a few more years of that, and this Sunni-Shia hatred
        thing will pass.
2007/6/25-28 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47059 Activity:high
6/25    Why do we keep hearing about how we're fighting "Al Qaeda" in Iraq?
        My understanding is that there are at least three competing groups of
        Sunni guerillas: "Al Qaeda in Iraq," Salafi Jihadists, and ex-Baathists.
        At any given time, it seems that these three different groups are
        referred to as "Al Qaeda."
        \_ You want to read my man Juan Cole: http://juancole.com
        \_ We are fighting Al-Queda probably 2 percent of the time.  The\
           rest of them are virulent american hating <IRAQI FACTION
        \_ We are fighting Al-Queda probably 2 percent of the time.  The
           rest of them are virulent american hating <IRAQI FACTION
           THAT HAS HATED THE OTHER GUY FOR LAST FIFTY YEARS>.
        \_ This is what the Sunnis and Shiites should do
           http://img.7chan.org/jb/src/118195646798.jpg
           \_ What, get breast implants?
           \_ Hot!
        \_ Two reasons: 1) The American public is lazy and bored with the war
           and wants it made simple for them. 2) The Bush Administration has
           deliberately spread falsehoods about the operation from the start.
           Why would they stop now?
        \_ We're fighting them there so that we don't have to fight them
           here! God bless.
           \_ This reminds of the Vietnam-era helicopter gunner who was asked
              how he could shoot women and children. He replied, "It's easy,
              you just don't lead them as much."
              \_ That was a line from a fucking movie dude.
                 \_ Based on an actual line as quoted by a correspondent.
                    See "Dispatches" by Michael Herr.
                    \- I thought In Pharaoh's Army was a better VN book.
                    \- I thought IN PHARAOH'S ARMY was a better VN book.
                       \_ A different experience written for different
                          reasons. I thought that IPA's description of life on
                          a boat was scarier than the description of VN.
              \_ Sidenote: Does a gunner actually need to lead when shooting a
                 human being?  Bullets from mounted guns travel much much
                 faster than human can run.  It's not like when a figher plane
                 shoots at another figher plane.
                 \_ I guess it would depend on how close the gunner was to
                    the target.
2007/6/20-24 [Reference/History/WW2/Germany, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47024 Activity:very high
6/20    Clint Eastwood's twin Iwo Jima movies triggered island name change.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070620/ap_on_re_as/japan_iwo_jima
        \_ Of course, the proper romanji is "ioutou" or "ioujima."  Can't
           they get anything right?
        \_ more like they are reverting it to original name, and Iwo Jima
           was just a mistaken name brought about in WWII that stuck.
        \_ I find it intersting that with all the fuss over the Iraq war losses
           they are about just over half what the US lost just in the battle
           of Iwo Jima.
           \_ I find it interesting that you confuse an asymentrical war
              of choice entered on false principles and no exit strategy
              with a provoked war involving several major powers.
              \_ Exit strategy?  War has only one exit strategy: kill the
                 enemy until they stop fighting back.
           \_ yeah, and those 200K dead Iraqis are just a rounding error.
              \_ what we see reported daily is the 3000-odd US deaths. If the
                 Iraqi casualties are reported, its usualy an afterthought.
                 \_ if we are doing this right, US casualties is about
                    20,000.  Consider that we only got less than 120,000
                    troops, US casualty rate is a bit high.
              \_ We don't count Germans and Japanese when we talk about WWII
                 losses, either.
                 \_ WWII was not an asymmetrical war.  -tom
                    \_ Well, it sort of was -- The USSR suffered something like
                       9 million military casualties and 16 million civilian
                       casualties, but the were on our side.
                       \_ Asymmetric warfare refers to the power of the actors,
                          not the number of civilian casualites.  -tom
                          \_ USSR utilized asymmetric warfare tricks in
                             territories conquered by the Germans by using
                             'partisans.'
                          \_ You think the 'actors' were equally powered?  Yes,
                             that is why Polish troops charged German tanks on
                             horses with lances.  Read a book some time.
                             \_ If Germany was so much more powerful than the Soviet
                                Union, why did they lose the war?
                             \_ If Germany was so much more powerful than the
                                Soviet Union, why did they lose the war?
                                \_ Hitler was a bad general, the Germans were
                                   fighting on multiple fronts, the US had
                                   a huge industrial base and was effectively
                                   immune from attack, the Russians destroyed
                                   everything as they retreated, the Russians
                                   were able to use&build industrial capacity
                                   in the far east well out of German range
                                   and ship weapons, etc to the front on
                                   trains.  Is that enough reasons?
                             \_ They did no such thing.  This was a "ha ha
                                stupid Polacks" propaganda story in Germany
                                after the 18th Uhlans demolished a German
                                infantry concentration at Krojarty.  They
                                retreated when German tanks moved up.  Read a
                                book some time.  -John
                                \_ Sounds like you got that from the unsourced
                                   wikipedia article.  Got a URL?
                                   \_ Actually, no.  There was a good
                                      description with sources on one of the
                                      military history boards I read  If you
                                      are interested, contact me and I will dig
                                      it up when I have a moment.  -John
                             \_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Krojanty
                                \_ Ahem: "This article does not cite any
                                   references or sources.  Please help improve
                                   this article by adding citations to
                                   reliable sources. (help, get involved!)
                                   Any material not supported by sources may
                                   be challenged and removed at any time.
                                   This article has been tagged since March
                                   2007."  This article is no better than me
                                   writing my own article saying it was
                                   Martians on magic brooms who followed their
                                   noble leader, Elvis, a Great Warrior from
                                   the future, into battle to defeat the
                                   Nazis.
                                   \_ OK, where's your reference for
                                      the Polish charging tanks with
                                      lances?
                        \_ Lots of reasons.  My theory is the Germans
                           eventually fell to the power of the Russian
                           Human Wave Attack, and the industrial output
                           of the United States was able to prop up and fuel
                           the Russians so they could concentrate on more
                           important things like flinging themselves into
                           battle with the Germans.  Thanks, Russian people!
                           You rule.  The Brits helped a little, the French
                           were too dazed from WW1, and I dunno what Italy
                           was doing but trying to pave Ethiopia.
                                \_ Watch some History Channel. More powerful
                                   does not always win. See American War for
                                   Independence.
                           \_ Lots of people seem to underestimate USSR's
                              industrial output, as did Hitler. USSR got
                              a lot of US stuff but even at the war's start
                              they had a huge number of tanks for example.
                              \_ T-34!!!
                           \_ US industry and fuel helped, but not as much as
                              the Americans would like to believe.  Personally,
                              I think the biggest turning point in the war was
                              when the Soviet leadership decided to actually
                              fight, move everything beyond the Urals, etc.
                              Western non-involvement would have pushed
                              the storming of Berlin off by a year or two.
                              Germany was fighting a hopeless war in the East.
                              A modern industrialized nation in the 21st
                              century can't seem to be able to pacify a country
                              many times smaller than USSR.  What hope did
                              Germany have?  Especially after they started
                              shooting civilians, and antagonized the native
                              population even more (!?) than Stalin himself.
                               -- ilyas
                              \_ If they had ignored Stalingrad and gone after
                                 Moscow, and not been diverted to Greece
                                 earlier in the year, I think they could have
                                 broken the Soviet government. They didn't
                                 want to occupy all of it anyway, just annex
                                 a big chunk of lebensraum. Still kind of a
                                 long shot. And Germany losing the air war
                                 in the west was critical.
                                 I think small groups of people today have
                                 better ways of terrorism than was
                                 available in the 40's. Iraq is also a
                                 limited case: the US does not take ruthless
                                 measures against the population. Hitler
                                 could have forcefully expelled huge numbers
                                 of people to alleviate these kinds of
                                 problems. Finland etc. would have managed
                                 their own zones as well.
                                 Also, I don't think the Russians were as
                                 suicidally zealous as Islamic militants.
                                 \_ So there you have it. The Greeks won
                                    WW II by beating back the Italians. It is
                                    pretty much what the Greeks have always
                                    claimed. Glad to see someone
                                    acknowledge it! --dim (Greek)
                                    \_ As a Greek I implore you to not claim
                                       yourself as a Greek, ever, again.
                                       The last thing we need is a dim-
                                       witted guy who claims to be a Greek
                                 \_ Napoleon took Moscow.  So what?  You can't
                                    win a war against Russia really, if Russia
                                    still has the will to fight.  Germany
                                    simply had no way to control the sheer
                                    territory involved.  Even in the
                                    occupied parts of Russia, there were
                                    huge parts where German soldiers simply
                                    dared not go. -- ilyas
                                   \_ Hmm. They "won" in WW1, sort of. They
                                      had a good chance at defeating the
                                      main military forces, if they acted
                                      fast enough. Controlling the actual
                                      land wouldn't be important except for
                                      supply lines...
                                      Look what happened to millions of
                                      Germans after the war, and what was
                                      happening to Poland, and most of the
                                      Palestinians. It's not like Iraq
                                      where you can't tell who's who and
                                      anybody might blow you up with a bomb
                                      made out of consumer electronics.
                                      \_ Germans got favorable terms vs.
                                         Russia in WW1 because Lenin thought
                                         it was prudent to get out of the war
                                         to consolidate power.  The leadership
                                         didn't have the will to fight since
                                         they had bigger fish to try -- it
                                         took a quite extraordinary period
                                         of history for Germany to walk
                                         of history for a country to walk
                                         away from a 'land war in Asia'.
                                         Russia did employ 'terrorist
                                         methods' extensively vs the Germans
                                         in WWII.  It was a very effective
                                         tactic due to the differences in
                                         technology, manpower, and land
                                         sizes involved. -- ilyas
                                         sizes involved.  Additional food
                                         for thought: I heard that the two
                                         worst winters on record in Russia
                                         happened in 1812 and 1943.  -- ilyas
        \_ I wish there was a HD version of the history channel.  I think
           the bbc has 'THE WORLD AT WAR'?  maybe i'll go buy it.  love
           the war.  love the MAIL CALL.  I heard the mail call say
           that our b52 bombings convinced the north vietnamese to sue
           for peace.... i think it was actually a secret message from
           Mao that did that.  I'm too apathetic to write them a letter
           and complain.
2007/6/19-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47011 Activity:nil
6/19    Rudy Giuliani failed to show up for single meeting of Iraq Study Group
        because of fundraising commitments.  He was ejected from the panel.
        Media basically ignores story.
        http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-usrudy0619,0,2577021,print.story
        \_ The media ignores it for the same reason they love McCain.  They're

           both on the left side of the (R) party.  This isn't rocket science.
        \_ is he only Republican who has not been to Iraq?
           \_ Don't know, but the media seems to LUUUUURVE Rudy in a way
              they do with no other candidate.  I wonder if we should start
              calling him "Free Ride Rudy."
              \_ So I guess you missed the discussion about his position on
                 abortion?
                 \_ Nope.  They pretty much lurved him for that too.  Look,
                    if anyone else was running as the "WAR ON TERRAH"
                    candidate, and it came out that they blew off ALL
                    meetings about Iraq to raise money, their campaign
                    would likely be over...especially with all these
                    other Rs eager to prove they're "tougher than Bush."
                    But not for Free Ride Rudy!
        \_ In other news, Free Ride Rudy's SC campaign chairman indicted
           for conspiracy to distribute cocaine:
           http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/ravenel-indictment
2007/6/19-21 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47007 Activity:nil
6/19    Just FYI, there was a question about when "the surge" would be complete
        (at full strength).  Apparently the buildup finished last week, and the
        first major campaign begins this week.
        \_ It's all a sham.  We're not leaving Iraq.  EVER.
           \_ Just like Japan, Germany, South Korea, etc.?
                \_ and those are the success stories!
           \_ Comparing those three with Iraq is intellectual dishonesty at
              its purest.
              \_ Yes because we actually fought in those places.  We're not
                 fighting in Iraq.  Just getting troops killed with no real
                 mission.
        \_ I thought they already started moving into AlQ controlled areas of
           the city a few days ago?  Close enough I guess.  Anyway, I've
           already read media reports saying the surge has failed and Reid has
           said it was a failure so let's can the whole thing.
           \_ We should give it at least 2 more Friedman units to fail.
           \_ http://www.csua.org/u/iyw (Failed States Index)
              Hey, with just a bit more effort we can get Iraq to number one!
2007/6/15-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46964 Activity:nil
6/15    Has the Bush Administration finally and completely lost it?
        http://tikkun.org/rabbilernerarticles/neocon/document_view
        \_ I believe it.  We're not leaving Iraq.  Anyone who believes
           otherwise is naive.
           \_ I know it seems like it will never happen, but we're supposed
              to get a new president in 18 months.  Anybody from either party
              has got to be better than this gang of jackals.
        \_ as an American, I would say we just leave and cut our losses.
           We are not serious about solving iraq's problem anyway.  We might
           as well just go home and repair the damage to our arm forces in the
           past couple years.   And yes, I stand by my statement about we are
           not serious about solving Iraqi problem.   Everything we do in
           Iraq since we invaded it has everything to do about our internal
           politics than anything else.  Otherwise, we've be forming alliances
           with *ALL* Iraqi neighbors to come up with something agreeable.
2007/6/10-13 [Politics/Foreign, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46903 Activity:nil
6/10    Colin Powell joins the chorus asking to shut down Gitmo:
        http://www.csua.org/u/ivw
        \_ Please clarify - he is not talking about the base, just the
           prison. We need the base to invade Cuba when Fidel keels over
           \_ Please drop the intentional obtuseness.
2007/6/7-10 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46874 Activity:nil
6/6     Wait, how is Bush so dumb that he's managing to help bring the
        BLOODY COLD WAR BACK!  Like we need this now...
        \- this has been going on for a long time. YMWTFG "bush, stephen
           cohen, russia, cold war). also bush is probably stupid enough he
           actually may thing ABM might work ... it's just a matter of
           ironing out some engineering problems, as opposed to cynically
           supporting it for pork-type reasons.
        \_ Cold War was a good war.
        \_ Russia is in no position to "bring the BLOODY COLD WAR BACK!".  You
           know YELLING IN ALL CAPS! doesn't make your point stronger, right?
           Russia's economy is slightly smaller than Mexico's at last count.
           Their military is a wreck, most of their brighter scientists moved
           to Western countries.  Putin is making the mandatory noises to keep
           his generals and ultra-right nationalists happy, nothing more.
           \_ Ohh, believe me, Russia can REALLY screw up the world if it
              choose to... buy simpley selling their weapon to people in Iraq,
              for example.
           \_ My question of the day is... where do we get all these money
              from?   Aren't we suppose to allocate resources to fight a war?
2007/6/6-10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46872 Activity:kinda low
6/6     WTF? Does Romney have even the faintest idea what a "null set" is?
        http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0706/05/se.01.html
        \_ I think it's more shocking that he apparently doesn't know that
           the IAEA inspectors were, y'know, in Iraq.
           \_ Let's be honest, Saddam did not fully open his country.  Yes, the
              inspectors were there, but Saddam was at least attempting to make
              it look like he was running a shell game.  I think it was for
              Iraqi domestic reasons, but he was not fully open.
              \_ You're wrong, and your president is a liar.
                 http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,895882,00.html
                 Or maybe Saddam got to Blix! Maybe he was brainwashed into
                 saying that Iraq was complying...  Maybe we ignored him
                 because we knew the spaceslugs had taken over his mind!
                 \_ You read this and see, "Iraq is clean".  I read this (I
                    read the whole thing, did you?) and see several specific
                    on-going violations as well as tons of bio/chemicals that
                    Iraq claims were unilaterally destroyed with no
                    documentation as well as numerous comments regarding long
                    term lack of cooperation on Iraq's part spanning many
                    years.  Blix does not say Iraq is complying (as you
                    claim).  He says Iraq has started to work with Blix's
                    people and gives examples such as reducing the
                    "minder:inspector ratio" from 5:1 to 1:1.  Not exactly the
                    kind of stuff that leads one to believe "Iraq is
                    complying".  But whatever, DailyKOS awaits your endless
                    wisdom on these matters.  But maybe you're right.  After
                    we found Saddam but no WMD we should have said we were
                    sorry, reinstated him, left, and sent flowers and cash.
                    \_ In the words of Judith Miller, "We were proved fucking
                       right."  There were no weapons.  The inspectors were
                       in.  They were getting the job done.  They were pulled
                       out so we could stop bombing.  The claims Romney et al
                       make are false.
                       \_ What?  RTFA.  A does not imply B.
                          \_ In October 2002, Blix came out and said "Iraq
                             better behave with this round of inspections."
                             In Feb 2003, he says "They seem to be behaving."
                             Bush et al run around saying "HE'S NOT COMPLYING."
                             They then say "GET THE FUCK OUT, WE'Z GON' BOM!"
                             When the weapons are found not to be there, they
                             say "Well, it doesn't matter.. We went in because
                             he wouldn't let the inspectors in."  No shit,
                             "they seem to be behaving" doesn't mean "they're
                             clean".  But now we know "they were clean".
                             And we know those who could have told us so were
                             ignored because we wanted our fucking war.
                             Romney says the inspectors were not allowed in.
                             You say that he really meant "yeah they let them
                             in, but they didn't <i>let them in."  You're both
                             wrong.  Romney's a liar.  You're stupid.
                             \_ Yeah, I spent 100 hours (no joke) trying to
                                make this point in the months leading up
                                to the war, only to be called all kinds
                                of names on the motd. It is nice to be
                                vindicated and the GOP is going to go down
                                in flames in 2008 if they can't figure out
                                a way to distance themselves from this
                                utter and complete failure in Iraq.
                    \_ DITTOHEAD BULLETIN..."MOONBAT" IS OUT...NEW OPPONENT
                       BELITTLEMENT POLICY IS TO TELL THEM TO GO BACK TO
                       DAILYKOS...THIS IS NOT A DRILL.
                       Just a note.  Back when Rummy was "doing a fabulous
                       job," he said "We know where [the WMDs] are."  The
                       claim wasn't that Saddam was being evasive, or that
                       we thought there might be something fishy going on,
                       THE CLAIM WAS THAT WE KNEW WHERE THE WMDs WERE.  Which
                       we didn't.  -tom
                       \_ Barking Moonbat to you. Because the Bushies are all
                          so.... moderate. It is the rest of you that are
                          extremists.
                       \_ Sheesh tom, speaking of shell games... At least try
                          to stay on topic.
                       \_ So the WMDs weren't there.  Either the intel was
                          wrong or they were moved.  Either way the Blix report
                          does not say what the above poster says it says. The
                          rest of your post is your standard personal attack
                          drivel, as expected.
                          \_ Either the intel was wrong, or they were moved,
                             OR RUMSFELD WAS 100% FULL OF SHIT.  -tom
                             \_ Uhm, yeah.  Why do you bother?  What does this
                                have to do with Blix's report or really,
                                anything at all?  Rumsfeld isn't even
                                mentioned on this thread until you brought him
                                up.  Off your meds?
                                \_ "We know where they are.  They're in
                                   the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and
                                   East, West, North and South somewhat."
                                   - Donald Rumsfeld
                                   "I never said we know where the weapons
                                   are."
                                   - Donald Rumsfeld
                                \_ ALERT...ALERT..."OFF YOUR MEDS" WAS
                                   DEPRECATED AS AN INSULT AFTER THE GREAT
                                   HONORABLE RUSH LIMBAUGH WAS CAUGHT USING
                                   PRESCRIPTION DRUGS...PLEASE CEASE AND
                                   DESIST USING THIS TERM IMMEDIATELY.
                                   DITTOHEAD CENTRAL, OUT.
        \_ I think he means there's no sensible answer to the question.
2007/6/1-4 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46816 Activity:nil
6/1     Sunnis revolt against al-Qaida
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070531/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
        \_ Iraq the Model says, "Well, not so much."
           http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/2007/05/red-on-red-in-amiriyah.html
           (Note: that this is a blog by an Iraqi, but has been often accused
            of being a fake put up by a Bushite.)
2007/5/31-6/4 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46803 Activity:nil
5/31    How long till the HL mods show up with it?
        http://www.csua.org/u/ite
2007/5/30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46796 Activity:nil
5/30    Baghdad has always been at war with Oceania:
        http://img394.imageshack.us/img394/5859/previewbustyyounggirls2pn.jpg
2007/5/30-6/4 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46792 Activity:kinda low
5/30    Just like we said, Bush refuses to commit to a timeline for
        leaving Iraq because he plans to *never* leave:
        http://www.csua.org/u/it2
        \_ I'm a bleeding heart liberal.  I don't think we're ever
           leaving Iraq.
           \_ We finally left the Philipines, so I wouldn't say never, but...
           \_ Right after we leave Bosnia, South Korea, Germany, Britain, and
              Japan.  I miss any important ones?
              \_ Cuba, Hawaii, Utah, Spanish Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico,
                 The Confederacy...
                 \_ Thanks, I knew there were a lot more.  I was just
                    thinking more modern times but you added a bunch of
                    good ones.  I'm not sure The South counts but maybe
                    some people living there would disagree.
                    \_ If you're gonna count Utah, Hawaii, and Florida, you
                       may as well count the who dang country.
                       \_ No, your understanding of history is weak. Utah,
                          Hawaii, Florida (and Texas) were forcably annexed.
                          Not true for all of the nation.
              \_ Do you really want me to list all of the countries that
              \_ Do you really want me to list all of t he countries that
                 America has stationed troops in where they are no longer there?
                 Mine is bigger than yours...
                 America has stationed troops in where they are no longer
                 there? Mine is bigger than yours...
                 \_ Oh thank God we actually left more countries than we still
                    have troops in years or even decades after a conflict has
                    ended.  You had a point?
        \_ We'll leave Iraq when the oil is all gone...
2007/5/29-6/1 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46780 Activity:nil
5/29    Kiowa shot down by machine-gun fire, two Bradleys on QRF sent to
        recover bodies taken out by road-side bombs, 8 U.S. soldiers killed.
        http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/29/iraq.main/index.html
        \_ "Black Hawk Down"
2007/5/28-31 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46776 Activity:nil
5/28    Anti-war critic loses son in Iraq.  Dad is a professor of intl
        relations, was officer in Vietnam War, West Point grad, and got
        Ph.D. in U.S. diplomacy from Princeton.
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1834549/posts
        http://tinyurl.com/22fsh2 (washingtonpost.com)
        \_ sad, but nothing new.  Lots of these pro-war guys, including
           policy makers, are talking tough, but not willing to risk their
           lives when it's their turn.  Through out the history, war munggers
           tend to be the chicken shit.
           \_ How is an anti-war critic a pro-war guy?
2007/5/27-31 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46773 Activity:high
5/27    "But in a world saturated with selfhood, where every death is by
        definition a death in vain, the notion of sacrifice today
        provokes puzzlement more often than admiration." from a WSJ
        op-ed (which I didn't/couldn't read)
        After seeing tonight's 60 Minutes, I think this applies to the whole
        country.
        Unless you have had a loved one in harm's way, felt that
        dread and loneliless for 15 months, the resulting pride when
        it's all over is unfathomable to anyone who hasn't gone
        through that anguish (or served themselves).
        \_ huh?
           \_ 60Min piece was about an Iowa National Guard unit in Iraq. They
              lost a couple guys, but you also saw the effect it had on their
              family at home. The point is that military personnel and their
              families are bearing the entire burden of this war. Whether you
              "support the troops" or not, it doesn't matter because the vast
              majority of the nation has nothing at risk.
              When you've felt that risk, and then it's all over, the pride
              and awe you feel about their service is unimaginable to someone
              who hasn't. Maybe if a larger cross section of the country had
              something at risk, then there would be more common ground. So
              we could disagree, but with respect for each other.  Instead
              the military folk feel like they have to support the President
              at any cost, because the other side are peaceniks who call those
              who serve stupid (which I have personally witnessed).
              \_ that is why I've been arguing that we either reinstate the
                 draft or not invade Iraq at all.  Even before we invaded
                 Iraq, something like 70% of US population support the war.
                 I suspect if husbands/sons/daughters need to be part of the
                 war, then, the support would be a lot less.   In the end
                 we are loosing this war mostly because Bush knew he could
                 never won a popular support of the war if bulk of population
                 has to make sacrafice.  That is why he pitched the war as
                 quick, cheap and few blood are required.   Since entire
                 war was fought under false pretense, I am arguing that there
                 is nothing wrong for people gotten sick and tire of it, and
                 cut our loses and focus on places where that actually matters.
                 \_ The 'war' part of the war was quick and cheap.  They
                    screwed up the aftermath having had no plan for the post-
                    conquer part.  Please don't confuse the two.  And what
                    we're doing now is hardly a war.  Our troops go on patrol,
                    get shot at, get blown up, and go back to base.  Repeat
                    the next day.
                    \_ The 'war' part of the war led inexorably to this
                       aftermath.  This was predicted, lied about, and finally
                       ignored by those who wanted it.  It's not "confusing
                       the two" to bring it up.
                       \_ Duh.  Yes without an invasion there wouldn't be a
                          post-invasion period.  Sheesh.  Now then back here
                          in Reality World: if they had a post-invasion plan
                          we wouldn't be here, if they declared martial law
                          and took real control of the country on day one, we
                          wouldn't be here, if they allowed the troops who
                          have been there for years to actually engage the
                          enemy and use their training we wouldn't be here.
                          \_ I think your burden of proof on this statement
                             is higher than you can cash in.  These are big
                             ifs with even bigger assumptions behind them.
                             As sold, this whole exercise was a gigantic
                             nation-building effort.  However, this is something
                             we've never figured out how to do.  I submit
                             that the post-invasion plan was offered and
                             summarily rejected.  They don't want it actually
                             stable.  In a more stable country, the funds we
                             dump in there might be accounted for.  We might
                             not be able to strongarm them into passing
                             production sharing agreements with the oil
                             companies.  In short, we couldn't steal as much
                             as we can now.  This is why you can't separate
                             the two and say "if only".
              \_ I would not risk my life to fight in Iraq unless I was forced
                 to do so. I don't believe in an afterlife. Maybe all those
                 religious people should go fight, since they have nothing to
                 lose. They say >90% of the US is religious. All religions
                            \- maybe by beliefs, but not by actions.
                 teach that death is basically fine. Or actually more than
                 fine... something to look forward to. So then: why should
                 any of them give a shit?
                 \_ Because they don't teach that death is fine or good for
                    starters.  And the draft the other people are asking for
                    is the 'forced to do so' part.
                    \_ death -> heaven, virgins, nirvana etc -> yippee
                       \_ ignorant and silly simplification -> meaningless
                          drivel -> wasted bits
                          \_ So all you can offer is the "you're wrong"
                             argument. Thanks for playing. By the way,
                             your assertions are ignorant, meaningless, and
                             silly. And wasted drivel. Wow I feel better now!
                             \_ No.  I offer the obvious: you made a gross and
                                negligent over reaching and ignorant assumption
                                about a) all religions and b) all religious
                                people and then reached an obviously false
                                conclusion that religious people should all
                                want to die.  "Thanks for playing" as they say.
                                I understand that hating all religious people
                                is a form of religion on the motd, but that
                                doesn't make for a sound logical argument.  And
                                for the record, I'm not religious, so don't
                                bother going there.
                                \_ I didn't say I hate all religous people and
                                   didn't say they all want to die. Are you
                                   mildly retarded perhaps? The underlying
                                        \_ Are you?  What did you add to this
                                           by resorting to lame personal
                                           attack?  All it shows is your
                                           frustration with your inability to
                                           debate with facts and details.
                                           School yard level insult is what
                                           not-very-bright people fall back on
                                           when they're unable to make their
                                           point.  In your case, you don't
                                           have one so it is understandable.
                                           \_ I completely agree. Look at your
                                              first reply in this thread and
                                              note the adjectives employed.
                                              The personal dig here is that
                                              you repeatedly put words in
                                              my mouth.
                                           \_ Communist!
                                   point is clear and your posturing doesn't
                                   address it. The vast majority of religious
                                   people are Christian in this country. Is
                                   it not true that Christianity teaches that
                                   we have "eternal souls" and good people
                                   go to "a better place"? (and/or achieve
                                   eternal life, the specifics are irrelevant)
                                   \_ Sigh, still missing the obvious.  Just
                                      because they say good people go to
                                      Heaven and all that doesn't mean they
                                      advocate suicide.  Since you mention
                                      Christians specifically, no, it is a sin
                                      to kill yourself.  Again, you take a tiny
                                      shred of knowledge and over extend it to
                                      a false general case and then misapply
                                      your own false determination of how
                                      Christians (or others) should be to
                                      determine (again falsely) that any Good
                                      Christians should be in favor of death,
                                      suicide, etc, etc.  I'm pretty sure no
                                      one here is so blindly hateful of
                                      religious people that they actually
                                      believe what you're saying, thus you
                                      must be a troll.  I'm done.  Did you
                                      have fun trolling me?
                                      \_ Did I say anything about suicides?
                                         No. Why are you talking about suicide?
                                         I see a trend in your "debate" style.
        \- http://www.slate.com/id/2154856
           \_ I did not have the Bush twins in mind. I was thinking of us. -op
2007/5/23-26 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46732 Activity:moderate
5/23    Since the surge, is there anyway we can find oout rather sectarian
        killings in Bagdad has decreased or not?  IMHO, it is the decrease
        of sectarian killings among Iraqis, not decrease in US troop casualties
        that indicates the success of operation.
        \_ The surge is still happening.
           \_ Is there a scheduled end date for the surge, or does even
              asking that question give aid and comfort to the enemy?
              \_ Why do you hate... oh fuck it...
                 \_ I'm not sure what the point is to answering questions from
                    ignorant people who have already made up their minds but
                    whatever.  It isn't an act of treason or America-hating but
                    simple stupidity.
                    \_ Anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant? Interesting
                       worldview.
                       \_ No.  But anyone like the op who clearly knows
                          nothing about the details of an event but has already
                          formed an opinion is ignorant as well as not very
                          bright.
              \_ It's supposed to be complete this summer, with the generals
                 evaluating its success or failure in September.
        \_ The whole 'surge' thing is silly.  The evil fucks bombing
           the shit out of each other can just hold back for a bit
           while this 'surge' thing is happening and everyone will
           be happy.  We should either pull out now or commit
           massive resources to Iraq, 20k more troops is not going to
           accomplish anything.
           \_ The point is to clear them out of the city, establish real
              security, and earn the trust of the people.  That way it is
              much harder for them to return.  Given a choice of daily bombings
              vs. going safely about their lives most people will choose a
              normal life and turn in the thugs.  What did you think the point
              was?
              \_ It's a great idea, but the execution misses the point: we
                 needed more troops at the beginning and a better strategy than
                 just more bodies now.
                 \_ I agree that they screwed the pooch on day 1 but we're now
                    where we are.  Instead of General Petrous(sp?) surge plan
                    what would you suggest that would improve safety, suppress
                    or eliminate thugs and eventually allow us to leave
                    without leaving the country in a real civil war?  If we
                    walk away now the current level of violence will look like
                    a game of candyland.  Complete elimination of all violence
                    won't happen.  The most pacifistic EU countries still have
                    violent crime, but it can be reduced to more civilized
                    levels.
                    \_ I think the whole entrenched thug thing is a thousand
                       years of the 70 percent Shiite/20 percent Sunni/10
                       percent Kurd hatred mix.  They all hate each other.  The
                       US presence there doesn't make them hate each other any
                       less, or more.  We just can't win this huge entrenched
                       guerilla war.  We don't have a magic time machine.  We
                       also have no way of deciding when we have 'won'.  So
                       either we should pull out NOW, or flood the fucking
                       country with armed force, aid, and us state dept
                       personnel for the next 20 years.  we've really fucked
                       up.
                       \_ Despite what the media tells you most guerilla wars
                          are won by the government side, historically.  What
                          we lack isn't men or aid or state department
                          flunkies.  It is the will to win.  Our politicians
                          are no longer leaders, they are more concerned with
                          the next election cycle and the polls than doing
                          what needs to be done.  And I mean our entire
                          government, not anyone from either of the silly
                          parties.
                        \_ What is this 'Will to win'?  Do you mean 'kill
                           huge swaths of the population, civilian and guerilla,
                           and by default killing all the insurgents'?  That's the only way
                           I can think of historically of the gov winning
                           a guerilla war.  I agree with you then, we do
                           not have 'the will to win'.   I mean really, this is
                           pissing me off.  What is 'the will to win'?
                    \_ It is not at all clear that the U.S. presence in Iraq
                       is reducing the violence there.  The reason we're not
                       leaving is that we're afraid that our sham government
                       will be overthrown and replaced with something
                       opposed to the U.S.  -tom
                       \_ Why do you think it's a sham government?
                          \_ Which part of Iraq outside of the Green Zone cares
                             about that the government has to say?
                             \_ All of it.  Which part doesn't?
                                \_ I don't agree.  I think the areas of the country
                                   where all of the car bombings go off feel
                                   the Iraqi gov is not protecting them.
                    \_ The guys who are saying this are the same ones who
                       told us that Iraq would be a "cakewalk" and that
                       Saddam Hussein had WMD. I am not sure why you are
                       still listening to them, given their track record
                       so far on Iraq.
                       \_ It was a cake walk.  He probably did or at least had
                          the capacity to have them again in a few months of
                          free trade.  Because General P. wrote the book on
                          modern guerilla warfare based on real world
                          experience and doesn't have a track record so far on
                          Iraq.  What are you talking about?  Do you even know?
2007/5/23-24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46729 Activity:nil
5/23    http://tinyurl.com/36mxpa (latimes.com)
        A day in the life of U.S. soldiers patrolling west Baghdad
2007/5/22-24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46722 Activity:nil
5/22    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/316612_secondsurge22.html
        Yes, definitely a surge.  Definitely.  Definitely.  Definitely
        not an escalation.  Definitely.
        \_ When do we get another Aircraft Carrier landing?
2007/5/21-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46713 Activity:low
5/19    I think Carter was a wimp.  I read the blackhawk down guy book and
        I think he tried to form a reasonable response to the Iran hostage
        crisis, but he just couldn't get it together.  Whether it was
        the incoming Reagan administration's fault, remains a conspiracy
        buff's dream.  That being said, the Iraq War fuckup is like
        8 million times worse.  Goddamn Bush.
        \_ I'm sorry to see what I figured for a weak troll get any responses,
           although I think you're probably half of them.
        \_ Hey, don't worry, Carter is already backpedaling
           http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18759682
           Carter said, "They were maybe careless or misinterpreted." He said
           he "certainly was not talking personally about any president.
           \_ Which of course means he's just senile.
              \_ Weird, I dont think he was harsh enough.  The Bush
                 administration should be run out off office with flaming
                 pitchforks and driven into the sea.
                 \_ just try him for treason after he get out of office.
                    \_ Before or after he's moved to his new ranch in
                       Argentina?  Oops..  Sorry, it's in Paraguay.
        \_ You mean "In The Company Of Heroes"?
2007/5/18-22 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46687 Activity:high
5/18    To the troll who was asking me why I was for the war in Iraq, why don't
        you ask Senator Clinon?  Just in case you wanted to know, here's her
        speech:
        http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
        \_ Why? Are you saying you would vote for her?
        \_ Commander-In-Chief Hillary Rodham Clinton.
           Doesn't it have a melodious sound?
           Oh, btw, she is against it now. Why haven't you changed your tune?
           \_ It'll never happen.  She wouldn't even be in the race much less
              considered a serious contender if she wasn't a MSM beloved
              Clinton.  So many long for the return of the Bill Clinton days
              they'd support anything with his name even though she's nothing
              like him.  Out here in the real world she has negative ratings
              so high that there's no way she can win the Presidency and they
              only get worse for her as she pisses off the left.  The right
              already knows her while the left continues to figure it out more
              each day.
              \_ The Right has had her on its list of hated people since WJC
                 got elected. They know what they want to think of her, nothing
                 more. She's a lot more than a feminazi caricature, and you
                 wrong yourself to miss that.
                 \_ Why do you feel the need to put words in my mouth?  I
                    never described her as little "more than a feminazi
                    caricature".  If you can't reply to what was said, please
                    don't.  You completely ignore my comments on the number of
                    people on the left who have learned to dislike her while
                    inventing something from whole cloth I didn't say.
                    \_ If the comment does not apply to you, don't take it as
                       such. However, many on the right have her pegged as a
                       feminazi caricature, and she's much more than that.
                       \_ I think if you spend your time arguing someone is
                          'more than just a feminazi' you have already lost
                          the image war.
                          \_ You know, it's surreal conversations like this
                             that remind me why I don't bother with Usenet
                             anymore. *shrug* It's the Right that's written
                             her off as a FemiNazi. Among people who think
                             (read: non-dittoheads), labels like that just
                             stick.
              \_ Are you the same guy who predicted that the Iraq War would
                 be a good idea?
                 \_ aaron?
                 \_ No.  I think when they didn't declare martial law on day 1
                    it was over.  Everything that happened after that as Iraq's
                    situation spiraled down was stupid.  And calling it a War
                    is just wrong at least as far as our troops are concerned.
                    They aren't fighting anyone.  They go on patrols, they get
                    shot at a lot, sometimes roadside bombs go off.  There are
                    near zero efforts to find and go after any of the various
                    forces trying to destabilize the country (for political
                    reasons).  I know you were just being snarky but I figured
                    I'd give you a real answer anyway.
                    \_ Not entirely being snarky. Just pointing out the fact
                       that the Right Wing Oracle seems to be broken these
                       days, so the fact that Republicans are all 100%
                       convinced that Hillary is "unelectable" doesn't
                       neccessarily mean that this is so.
              \_ Read it and weep:
                 link:www.csua.org/u/iqc
                 \_ don't be stupid.
                    \_ TradeSports has been pretty on target with most
                       of its predictions. Do you have a better
                       prediction market?
                       \_ So that was a tradesports link? It doesn't work for
                          me now. I just looked on there and they have Hillary
                          at 40:100 to win. I thought Obama had a much better
                          chance. They also have Gore on there. I guess Gore
                          might join late. Gore vs. Clinton? I have no idea
                          how he'd do. I think he could win the presidency.
                          The problem with him is he has associated himself with
                          a controversial issue. Someone like Giuliani is bland
                          as white bread. You can't really complain about him
                          because all he says is he likes lower taxes and all
                          the usual bullshit. He's probably corrupt but the
                          American people don't care about that. He looks like
                          he's in the mafia (omg racist).
2007/5/17-19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46678 Activity:kinda low
5/17    emarkp, why did you support the Iraq War?       -anonymous coward
        \_ Hi troll!  Why are you using the past tense? -emarkp
           \_ Ok, very well. Why do you still support the Iraq War?
                                                -!op, anon coward #2
              \_ Hi troll #2!  I doubt I can say anything you haven't heard.
                 -emarkp
2007/5/16-19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46663 Activity:kinda low
5/16    Why do we have a war czar?  The U.S. hasn't had one for as long as I
        can remember.  Isn't it POTUS -> SecDef -> CENTCOM -> Iraq/Afghanistan?
        Is it that Dubya cannot handle Bob Gates' gayness?
        \_ It's "Execution Manager" now. John Stewart has a good explaination:
           http://www.devilducky.com/media/60890
        \_ Commandering is hard.  Bush is tired.
        \_ Maybe because the POTUS needs to deal with the whole world?  Having
           a close aide on it 24/7 makes sense.
           \_ But that's the SecDef.
           \- it's the same thing as the intelligence czar ... that is what
              the DCI is supposed to have been.
              the DCI is supposed to have been. "this is a 3star operating
              in a 4star environment" --LPANETTA
        \_ Not only is this guy a 3-star, but he's active duty - i.e., they
           couldn't find any person fool enough to volunteer for the job, so
           they ordered someone to do it.
        \_ Because Bush can't tie his own fucking shoelaces, let along
           be the commander of the executive branch.
           \_ You misunderstand: the War Czar will simply be another layer to
              insulate the CinC from having to take responsibility for a
              failed military policy.
              \_ Manager Training 101: Find a patsy to throw under the bus.
              \_ I'd put it slightly differently: This looks more like an
                 attempt to blame the military for a failed *political*
                 policy.
                 \_ Which is how Iraq is being fought, as politics not as a
                    war which is why it is a mess.
                 \_ Well put. -pp
2007/5/15-17 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46650 Activity:nil
5/15    This is a followup message to http://csua.com/?entry=39155
        How is your brother doing?
        \_ No comment? I'm guessing both of the brothers are now serving
           in Iraq and have not been able to access csua. Either that,
           or they're killed.
2007/5/15-17 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46638 Activity:nil
5/15    Iraqi army shows you how to hold an assault rifle
        http://tinyurl.com/2arlu2 (news.yahoo.com)
        http://news.yahoo.com/photo/070512/481/bag11705121526
        http://news.yahoo.com/photo/070512/481/bag11305121525
        \_ Almost as good as Zarqawi using the machine gun.
        \_ Our marines hold assault rifles that way as well in some
           situations.  Like close quarter combat, I believe.
        \_ Since when are assault rifles belt fed?  2/3 of those
            pictures show 'machine guns'
2007/5/14-16 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46631 Activity:high
5/14    I hear there are soldiers captured in Iraq by Al Qaeda.  But Barbara
        Boxer and Nancy Pelosi tell me that Al Qaeda isn't in Iraq, and that
        the war in Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terroism.  How can
        that be?
        \_ Al Qaeda out-sourced the jobs to Iraq amid rising health-care costs
           and growing influences from labor unions in Afghanistan.
           \_ Few jobs are harder than being a strike breaker in Afghanistan.
              The last I heard the strike breakers went on strike due to low
              wages and poor health care plans.
        \_ What else do the voices in your head tell you?
           \_ Which part do you think are voices in my head?
              \_ You have a URL where Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi tell you
                 this right?
                 \_ Here's Pelosi:
   http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Pelosi_Its_sad_Bush_blaming_Iraqi_1128.html
                    http://urltea.com/k25 (rawstory.com)
                    \_ But wait, you said Pelosi told you that there were
                       no Al Qaeda in Iraq, but she says that they are there.
                       Are you hallucinating again?
                       \_ House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told
                          reporters on Wednesday that she feels it is "sad"
                          that President Bush continues to blame Iraqi
                          insurgent violence on al Qaeda.

                          "My thoughts on the president's representations are
                          well-known," Pelosi said. "The 9/11 Commission
                          dismissed that notion a long time ago and I feel sad
                          that the president is resorting to it again."
                          \_ "What proportion of the Sunni resistance do you
                              think al Qaeda in Iraq is responsible for? It's
                              a handy tag, but in reality is it 10 percent,
                              50 percent of what we would loosely call Sunni
                              resistance or insurgency?" -Pelosi
                              You really have a reading comprehension problem.
                              \_ No, that was the question a reporter asked the
                                 spokesman.  I think you have the problem.
                                 \_ Fair enough, but you still haven't given
                                    me a quote where Pelosi denies the
                                    existence of Al Qaeda in Iraq.
                                    \_ Try reading.
                                        \_ I read the article, it says we
                                           shouldn't blame the violence on
                                           Al Queda because most of it is
                                           sectarian.  How is it possible to
                                           interpret Pelosi's statement
                                           and come out with "there is no Al
                                           Queda" in Iraq? Show us your balloon
                                           animal twisting skills ...
                    And Boxer:
                    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/21/lkl.01.html
                    \_ Where exactly does she say that there are no Al Qaeda
                       in Iraq?
                       \_ "I think the reason so many of us feel strongly that
                       we need to change what's going on in Iraq is, we need to
                       free up some resources to get back to getting al Qaeda.
                       You know, the other side keeps saying the war on terror
                       is the war in Iraq. Not true."
                          we need to change what's going on in Iraq is, we need
                          to free up some resources to get back to getting al
                          Qaeda.  You know, the other side keeps saying the war
                          on terror is the war in Iraq. Not true."
                          \_ that doesn't say there are no al qaeda in Iraq.
        \_ I think fuckers have kidnapped our soldiers.  Do I think it's
           "al-queda"?
        \_ I think fuckers have kidnapped our soldiers.  Do I think it's "al-queda"?
           Doubt it.  Al-Queda would have thought a less stupid name than
           "Al-queda in Iraq".  It's probably Shiites or Sunnis who ALREADY
           LIVED IN IRAQ WHO HATED EACH OTHER FOR DECADES BUT SADDAM KEPT
           THEM QUIET.  fuck.
           THEM QUIET.  fuck.  I wish the Mormon Necro-Bot would lay waste
           to the Sunni Triangle.
           \_ Saddam didn't 'keep them quiet'.  He butchered them but you knew
              that, trollboy.
        \_ If the difference between Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda in Iraq confuses
           you, you probably missed the variable declarations. Research harder.
2007/5/14-16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46616 Activity:nil
5/13    Say, speaking of irony, who was head of Public Policy at Chevron when
        it was paying kickbacks to SADDAM under the UN Oil-for-Food program?
        Way to go, Condie!
        http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10741.html
        \_ What's so ironic about members of the Bush administration being
           consistently corrupt?
           \- http://www.theonion.com/content/node/43901
           \_ Does it bother you at all the Pelosi is stuffing public cash
              into her family's businesses?  Or DiFi has been doing the same
              for her husband's?
              \_ Yes, yes, yes, when you have enough evidence, contact your
                 local Bush-appointed US Attorney who will almost certainly
                 leap to indict. Oh, wait, you have no evidence of wrong-
                 doing? Well, don't let that stop you making accusations!
2007/5/8-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46562 Activity:high
5/8     Fairly incompetent terrorist plot to attack Fort Dix foiled.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070508/ap_on_re_us/fort_dix_plot
        \_ Thank goodness torturing suspects in gitmo, warrantless spying on
           terrorists, and the Patriot act yielded valuable intel which
           allowed the government to catch these guys!
           \_ There's a point to be made but "warrantless spying on terrorists"
              is probably not the message you were looking for.
        \_ Isn't this an ideal time to raise the terror alert to orange?
           What? You mean the sheeple see through it now? What about
           the scary Canadian spy coins???
           http://www.csua.org/u/ink
           \_ Terror alerts only happen right before elections.
        \_ To op: Nice editorial.  People would have thought Cho was
           incompetent before he killed 32 students.  Oh, and 3 of the guys
           were in the country illegally.
           \_ Oh, I wasn't trying to say it wasn't a good thing to stop them.
              I'm very happy they caught these bozos, as they probably would
              have succeeded in killing a few people.  Nevertheless, the plan
              was pretty incompetent.  For one thing, Cho didn't attack an
              army base. -op
              \_ Bringing their videos to a store wasn't the smartest move but
                 beyond that, they were training, they had weapons, they had
                 jihadi propaganda videos, they had scouted out the base and
                 if some video clerk hadn't reported them this would have been
                 headlines about an attack that killed X many American soldiers
                 on an American military base on American soil.  You don't
                 think that would have had the impact they were looking for?
                 \_ I can't speak for the impact, but they can't have had
                    many weapons. "The six were arrested Monday night trying to
                    buy AK-47 assault weapons, M-16s and other weapons from an
                    FBI informant."  And they had unrealistic expectations
                    '"You hit four, five or six Humvees and light the whole
                      place (up) and retreat completely without any losses."'
                    Incompentents can still kill people, it's not hard.
                    \_ Missing the point.  They don't have to kill hundreds or
                       even a dozen.  Or any.  Just launching the attack would
                       get them what they're looking for.  They are terrorists,
                       not a formal army looking to seize territory.
                       \_ What do you think they are "looking for"? Another
                          irrational over-response by the American people?
                          \_ Yes.  And a propaganda victory.  What else do
                             terrorists want?  They can't win any sort of
                             conventional fight so what else can they do?
                             \_ Well, they are "winning" in Iraq and
                                Afghanistan, aren't they? If they can convince
                                the US to start enough silly pointless wars,
                                they can win for real.
                                \_ No one is winning in Iraq or Afghanistan,
                                   so no they aren't.  And no, they can never
                                   win for real.  It is just an endless
                                   stream of nicks and cuts that wear down
                                   society.  Unless you're one of the people
                                   who thinks that an internal movement of
                                   Muslims are going to rise up in this country
                                   and take over or something like that.  If so
                                   then we're done because I don't have time
                                   right now to talk with crazy people.  If not
                                   then I'm still here.
                                   \_ Even Bin Laden does not have "overthrow
                                      the American government and replace it
                                      with a Muslim theocracy" as one of his
                                        \_ You're kidding?  Go read some of
                                           the English versions of the various
                                           terrorist web sites.  The long term
                                           goal is stated quite clearly as
                                           nothing more than world domination.
                                      stated goals. The general goals of Al
                                      Qaeda have been to drive the infidel
                                      from the Holy Land (check), drive the
                                      infidel from Iraq (checking), and drive
                                      the infidel from Isreal. They also want
                                        \_ You forgot that whole bit about once
                                           a land is Muslim land it is always
                                           Muslim land.  You might want to talk
                                           to Spain about how they're looking
                                           forward to being 'rescued' from the
                                           evil West after they rejoin The
                                           Grand Caliphate.
                                      to replace the secular governments of
                                      various Muslim states with theocracies.
                                      The idea that they even want to occupy
                                      America is just a fantasy cooked up by
                                      Coulterites to scare the sheeple.
                                        \_ I don't read Coulter.  I read and
                                           listen to what the various bin laden
                                           types are actually saying and they
                                           say what their goals are quite
                                           loudly and clearly.  It's about
                                           taking over the world and nothing
                                           less.  Now then, given that, I still
                                           don't believe there is some sort of
                                           large scale conspiracy among
                                           American Muslims you'll find in
                                           Coulterite style op/eds, but the
                                           foreign extremist types absolutely
                                           have world domination as their long
                                           term goal.
                                           \_ Sure, a few very isolated and
                                              very weak extremists have as
                                              their goal "world domination."
                                              So do a lot of extremist, kooky,
                                              powerless groups. The only way
                                              you give them power is by paying
                                              too much attention to them. Show
                                              me the Bin Laden statement where
                                              he claims "world domination" as
                                              a goal. You cannot because he
                                              does not.
                                 \_ I bet to differ. Plenty of people are
                                    'winning' in Iraq.  In fact it looks like
                                    the political aims of just about fucking
                                    everyone in the world EXCEPT THE UNITED
                                    STATES is winning in Iraq.  Remember when
                                    people were interviewed that Bin Laden
                                    told them it would be really funny
                                    if he could taunt the United States into
                                    getting into an unwinnable war that would
                                    overextend its resources?  REALLY FUCKING
                                    FUNNY.
                                    \_ Mission Accomplished!
                                    \_ Please elaborate on who is winning and
                                       in what way.  The Suni who once ruled
                                       the country are reduced to pathetic
                                       road side bombings.  The Shia now sort
                                       of rule the country but in a very weak
                                       way and various Shia leaders get blown
                                       up every day.  The Iranians are looking
                                       desperately for an 'in' but the best
                                       they could pull off was capturing and
                                       humiliating some British navy people.
                                       The Saudis had the Americans move a
                                       bunch of military bases to other nearby
                                       countries or further out in the sand
                                       which is sum-zero.  The Syrians get a
                                       minor perverse pleasure in driving thugs
                                       to the Iraqi border but aren't getting
                                       any real benefit.  The Turks now have a
                                       semi-autonomous Kurdish state on their
                                       border which is the last thing they
                                       wanted.  Ah yes, we have found a winner.
                                       The Kurds now have a semi-autonomous
                                       state.  Ok, you're right, someone is
                                       winning in Iraq.  It's the Kurds who
                                       finally have peace and freedom after
                                       decades of abusive near-genocidal policy
                                       from both Hussein and the Turks.
                                       \_ The Iranians are clearly the regional
                                          winners, because one of their enemies,
                                          one that had fought two wars with them
                                          and had blocked their expansiion, is
                                          now eliminated. The Iraq War has
                                          clearly shifted regional power to
                                          the Iranian/Shi'ite block, which
                                          is agreed upon by most foreign
                                          analysts. Many of predicted that
                                          analysts. Many of us predicted that
                                          this would be the outcome of the US
                                          lead invasion of Iraq, so it's not
                                          led invasion of Iraq, so it's not
                                          like we didn't try to warn you...
        \_ Unsealed complaint against Mohammed Ibrahim Shnewer containing
           details of the arrest:
           http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~erikred/01_07_mj_02045_JS.pdf
2007/5/8-12 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46561 Activity:nil
5/8     new War Nerd:
        http://www.exile.ru/2007-May-04/war_nerd.html
        "So the likely winner of a war like this is an up-n-coming world
        economic power that has been investing in its own economy while we
        blow a trillion - yep, a trillion - dollars on nothing. Not hard
        to figure out who the likely suspects are here.
        China understands that an army is most effective when kept penned
        in and on parade, rather than riding around a hostile, far-away country.
        The answer to "Who won Iraq?" is Iran in the short run, and in the
        long run, China and India."
        \_ Actually China's army/military doesn't sit around doing nothing.
           They spend a lot of time stomping on rioters across the country,
           mostly peasants in rural areas upset at being treated like peasants.
           Old joke: The Soviets and Chinese go to war.  On the first day the
           Russians capture 100 million Chinese.  On the second day they
           capture another 100 million Chinese.  On the third day the Chinese
           rally and the Russians only capture 50 million Chinese.  On the
           fourth day the Russians counter attack with great success and
           capture 250 million Chinese.  On the fifth day the Russians
           surrender.
           \_ Yeah and India does a lot of foot stomping on the Kashmir border.
              I do think we've thrown over a trillion into a giant rathole.
              I don't understand how the Bush administration avoids being
              hounded from power by armed pitchfork bearing mobs.
              \_ rent Idiocracy
           \_ I am not sure which part of it is supposed to be funny..
              \_ It's a joke, son.
           \_ "During the Damansky Island incident the Chinese military
               developed three main strategies: The Great Offensive, The Small
               Retreat, and Infiltration by Small Groups of One to Two Million
               Across the Border."
               \_ What was the futuristic war book (could be by Dean Ng?)
                  that had the Wall of Lenin?  Also, brings to mind the line
                  about "1 billion Chinamen" in Red Dawn... -John
           \_ Note also that the PLA spends a lot of time putting down
              insurgents in the Uighur-populated Northwest.
2007/5/3-5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46520 Activity:nil
5/3     After six years of "you are either with us or you are with
        the terrorists" the Bush Administration discovers diplomacy.
        Better late than never, I suppose:
        http://www.csua.org/u/ilp
2007/5/1-4 [Science/Space, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46496 Activity:nil
5/1     Mission Accomplished!
        \_ The war in Iraq was always about getting rid of Castro!
2007/4/25-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46445 Activity:kinda low
4/24    How Nigerian scammers provided the "proof" Bush needed
        to justify the war he wanted so badly:
        http://www.csua.org/u/ik0
        \_ Like the lawyer said at the end of Robocop 2: "Don't worry Sir, I'll
           find the proof, whether it exists or not"
        \_ this is the part I don't understand.  Democrat could of just cut the
           funding and blame Bush for *EVERYTHING* But I don't see they are
           doing that right now.
           \_ It's politics.  The democrats are walking a fine line between the
              far left anti-war folks who put them in power last fall and the
              reality of knowing that if we bailed on Iraq right now or any
              time soon, the current situation will look like a trip to
              disneyland.  And they'll get blamed for not 'staying the course'.
              What's going on now is a low to low-moderate scale 'event' where
              you have a few thousand folks planting bombs or doing hit n run
              attacks with mortars or sometimes a suicide attack.  They are not
              doing enough to topple the US propped government which slowly
              grows stronger each day, but no one is doing that much to really
              stop them.  'Stay the course' will eventually result in a stable
              (for the region) mostly democratic government but only while
              we're there.  It will be a very weak government for many years.
              Leaving will be an anarchic bloodbath.  Cutting funds will lead
              directly to that bloodbath and the dems don't want to get
              blamed for that.
                \_ the "far left anti-war folks" AKA 60-70% of Americans
              \_ Most Americans could care less what happens in Iraq, as long
                 as no more taxpayers dollars are spent there.
2007/4/24-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46439 Activity:moderate
4/24    http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1614000,00.html
        Iraqi Oil: More Plentiful Than Thought, 215 billion barrels, or
        double only second to Saudi Arabia, and more than Iran at 136
        billion barrels of oil. So much for oil shortage. Time to fulfill
        your American dream by buying that big house 45 miles away from
        the city and the SUV you've always dreamed of having!
        \_ We pumped up 10% of all the oil consumed since the dawn of the
           age of oil during the first Bush term.  During the second Bush
           term, we will pump up 10% of all known reserves.
           \_ I suppose you know what the core of the earth is made of too?
              Or are you citing unnamed sources, or you 'just know'?
        \_ Do we really want to put more money in the hands of muslims?
           Let's break the oil habit already, fer chrissake.
           \_ I just laughed  when US was lecturing China about how China
              shouldn't be dealing with Nigeria and Sudan.
           \_ Every President from Nixon on has said this.  And during the
              Presidency of every President since Nixon we've gotten more
              dependent on imports.  Actually doing something about it
              will mean the kind of sacrifices by the American people that
              will get any politician who actually tries to implement them
              carried out of town on a rail.  So instead the system will
              collapse and we will elect a constant stream of more and more
              maniacal tyrants who promise to fix the energy problems.
              \_ C'mon, a "maniacal tyrant" persuaded us into a war with
                 Iraq, a country which never harmed us.  Granted, he did
                 that by lying to us.  How hard could it be to persuade
                 us to provide incentives, implemented on a gradual basis,
                 toward moving us to oil-independence?  Everyone knows
                 oil is running out.  Just look at gas prices.  Everyone
                 knows that we're headed for a collapse.  I doubt a
                 politician who says, "it's time to prepare for the
                 inevitable--this new gasoline tax will provide incentive
                 to moving to renewable transport fuels.  And BTW,
                 to reduce the impact on the poor, we're reducing the
                 income tax, so you shouldn't be paying any more overall."
                 \_ Poor people don't pay income tax.  Reduce the payroll
                    tax instead.
                    \_ I read that only 33% of adults pay income tax now.
                       That is scary for those of us who are paying into
                       the system.
                       \_ Where did you read this? I am skeptical.
                       \_ That seems hard to believe.  The majority of
                          Americans do pay more in payroll tax than in
                          income tax, however, a fact usually conveniently
                          left out by people who advocate income tax
                          taxcuts.
                          \_ I didn't say 'payroll tax'. However, that
                             just covers entitlements. I read it in that
                             rag called the Wall Street Journal. The
                             article is called "The Taxpaying Minority".
                             http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14434
                             It says something like 40% of taxpayers pay
                             92% of the taxes. 33% pay none at all and
                             the rest pay so little as to be almost nothing.
                             \_ First you say that only 33% pay payroll tax,
                                now you say that 33% pay none at all. Which
                                one is it???
                                \_ Huh?
                                   \_ "I read that only 33% of adults pay
                                      income tax now." "33% pay none at all..."
                                      Which one is it? You do understand that
                                      these do statements do not say the same
                                      thing, right?
                                      \_ First one was from memory. Second
                                         from the article. Just read it
                                         and see. The gist the article
                                         makes, from what I remember, is
                                         that some people pay more than
                                         "none at all" but it is so small
                                         as to be almost nothing.
                                         \_ Thanks for clarifying. The poor
                                            pay a disproportionate amount
                                            of sales, gasoline and use
                                            taxes as a percentage of income,
                                            so only talking about "income"
                                            tax is a misapprehension. Actually,
                                            when the WSJ does it, it is a
                                            deliberate attempt to distort
                                            the truth.
                                            \_ Sure, they do pay more in
                                               proportion, but (except for
                                               gasoline) those are state
                                               taxes.
                             \_ Ok, 33% pay none at all-- does that include
                                children, old people, and disabled?
                                \_ Obviously.
                             \_ If you look at all taxes we have basically
                                a flat tax, with each quintile paying almost
                                the same percent of their income in taxes.
                                However, since the very top has so much more
                                income than everyone else it makes sense they
                                are paying most of the taxes.  That doesn't
                                show the top is being taxed unfairly, it shows
                                that the bottom is getting screwed.
                                \_ I never said it was unfair. I am just
                                   saying that the tax base is eroding.
                                   \_ As the gap widens between the top tier
                                      and the rest of us also-rans, it would
                                      be more accurate to say that a smaller
                                      number of people are continuing to pay
                                      enormous (yet still not necessarily
                                      unfair) amounts into the tax base. It's
                                      so much eroding as it is becoming
                                      proportionately uber-relevant. -!pp
2007/4/24-26 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46432 Activity:low
4/24    http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/23/iraq.main/index.html
        Diyala province, truck bombs (two 30-ton dump trucks) kill 9 U.S.
        soldiers at small patrol base, five hospitalized.  (IIRC, the last
        major non-mortar attack that penetrated a U.S. base was the cafeteria
        one.)  God forbid we see more of these.
        \_ While it sounds bad, it may be a shift in tactic by the resistance
           from sectarian killings to US military.  *IF* there is a big drop
           in sectarian killings in Bagdad during this time, this may actually
           meant the "surge" is "working" in the sense that it stopped the
           secartian killings.  Of course, if the data shows that secartian
           killing has no significance in reduction, then, all these means
           that the resistence is getting stronger and bolder.
        \_ Or it just means that fighting an insurgency is a long dirty ugly
           battle with few easy clear cut victories.  Looking at any one single
           day and saying "it means this" or "it means that" in either
           direction is just guessing.
2007/4/21-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46400 Activity:nil
4/20    2003 - Mission Accomplished
        2004 - We Have Turned A Corner
        2005 - Insurgency In Its Last Throes
        2006 - Leaving Iraq Now Would Be A Disaster
        2007 - The Direction Of The Fight Is Beginning To Shift
        2008 - ???
        \_ 2008 - Halliburton profit down 48%. CEO resigns.
           \_ Don't bet on that one.
        2009 - The war was lost under the a Democrat administration!
2007/4/18-21 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46357 Activity:nil
4/18    Support our troops: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cAChVVVZaM
        \_ I thought it was one of those busty-wife-flashing-boobs-for-husband-
           in-Iraq video.
           in-Iraq video.  Too bad.
2007/4/16-18 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46321 Activity:nil
4/16    Pelosi at 53% approval.  By way of comparison, Gingrinch maxed out
        at 41%.
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_041607.html
        \_ Polls re: people we don't vote for: yawn.
2007/4/12-16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46284 Activity:nil
4/12    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/13/world/middleeast/13iraq.html
        "a policeman opening the passenger door of the truck, seeing a mass of
        wires and batteries, and running away.  Ten minutes later the bomb
        exploded, so powerfully that it killed six people some distance away,
        sent several cars careening into the river and destroyed 65 percent to
        75 percent of the steel structure."
        \_ That policeman should be put in jail.
           \_ Was he on the bomb squad? If not, probably not.
2007/4/11-15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46257 Activity:nil
4/11    Nobody wants to be the Czar:
        http://www.csua.org/u/ifz
        \_ that's weird, I thought all these neo-Cons would flock to the
           position by now.
        \_ Maybe they'd have better luck if they changed the title to Warlord.
        \_ I do.  How much does it pay?  Can I telecommute?
           \_ Everyone else has been phoning it in, so why not?
              \- The press and public should just start referring to
                 CHENEY as the WAR CZAR..
2007/4/7-10 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46231 Activity:high
4/7     "These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about
        this slaughter in Darfur forever - and they still haven't finished.
        The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like
        genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA?"
        --Ann Coulter
        http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/printer_friendly.cgi?article=177
        \_ If you pay attention to Ann Coulter, you lose.
           \_ She's obnoxious but the people getting slaughtered in Darfur
              wouldn't tell you they'd prefer to be completely ignored instead
              of having AC as their advocate.  The last I checked several
              months ago, the UN committee on subcommittees on human rights
              violations and definitions was still was working on arranging
              a time to meet at some time in the far future to discuss the
              possibility of defining 'genocide'.  After deciding what a
              genocide *is* they would then setup other meetings in the
              future to decide if Darfur met that standard.  And *then* they
              would have to arrange a meeting later to decide if they should
              pass a note higher up the committee chain on whether or not to
              recommend what, if anything, the main body of the UN should say
              in a nasty note.  I'm not kidding.  Darfur: a real genocide
              taking place every day right now and no one but AC and her ilk
              gives a shit.  How sad is that?  I didn't read the link (I don't
              read AC) but to say we should ignore Darfur because AC is
              bringing it up is sickening.
              \_ An impressive strawman.  -tom
              \_ If you read AC's drivel, you would realize how foolish you are.
                 She is hardly their advocate.
                 \_ I said I don't read her.  Fine, she's not their advocate.
                    So that leaves no one as their advocate which still doesn't
                    seem to bother anyone and is still sickening.
        \_ not totally sure what you are talking about.  I see editorials
           and news reports about what is happening in Darfur
           in Time, NY Times, now and then in the Chronicle, mostly
           in the NY Times.
        \_ Anne Coulter "cares" about Darfur because it allows her to put down
           the UN.  It's like SNL skit where Christopher Walken played the
           French embassador during the beginning of the Iraq war where he
           said "We aren't pro-Iraq, we're just anti-American"
           \_ So you don't like her motives.  That's fine.  So who *is*
              speaking out about Darfur who has motives you like?  And why
              does it matter *why* she's talking about it so long as it is
              talked about and not forgotten?  And hey, wouldn't it be nice if
              someone actually, well, ya know... *did* something about it?
2007/4/6-10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:46221 Activity:high
4/6     Lebanese minster thanks Pelosi for her visit to Syria:
        "Her visit was a godsend to an isolated and beleaguered regime," says a
        Lebanese minister. "The Syrian regime, which had been thinking of
        bowing to international pressure, is now reassured: All it has to do is
        to wait until Pelosi's party takes over the White House in 2009."
        http://csua.org/u/ien
        \_ YA!!! now they can openly support terrorism in 2009!!
        \_ Yeah, that unsourced quote in a NY Post op-ed piece doesn't sound
           the least bit made up to me.
           \_ Now wait a second.  Are you accusing the Post of fabricating a
              quote from a Lebanese minster?
              \_ If pp's not, I am. -!pp
        \_ "...the region's current trend toward reform and liberalization
            would largely come to a halt." Typical delusional neocon
            fantasizing. Does he mean the election of Hamas, the civil war
            in Iraq, the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan or Iran's recent
            advances toward nuclear weapons and more belligerent attitude
            toward The West? Perhaps he means Mubarak's cancelling of
            elections and outlawing of opposition parties in Egypt. The author
            should just put on a flight suit and declare "Mission Accomplished!"
            \_ You forgot Lebanon's missile attacks on Isreal, and Isreal's
               subsequent invasion.  -tom
            \_ Just an FYI, Iran has not stopped working on their nuke program
               since it started ~20 years ago, nor has their attitude changed
               in the least since 1979.  The Taliban also dates back for about
               20 years also.  Mubarak has always been a thug but "he's *our*
               thug!" so it's ok.  And in additon to what tom added, you also
               forgot Intifada I and II which was the first time anyone
               strapped a bomb onto a child.  At no time *ever* in recorded
               history has the middle east ever been civilised or any less
               basket-casey than it is today.
               \_ Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the Kamikaze in WWII.
                  The Middle East was quite stable under Ottoman Empire rule.
                  \_ Are you suggesting that the Japanese strapped bombs onto
                     children and used them as kamikaze pilots? 'Cos I just
                     want to be clear on this before I call you an idiot.
                     \- re: "first time anyone ever strapped a bomb on to a
                        child" ... that's not correct. in the vietnam war,
                        is is supposed to have happened. also comparable things
                        happened like standing children in the middle of roads
                        so convoys/trucks would stop and could be attacked
                        [first they tried it with cattle, but later "escalated"
                        to people]. i dont recall if this has happened in the
                        sri lankan conflict ... certainly teenagers were
                        involved, not sure about young children. has it not
                        occurred to you instead of taking this only as a
                        lesson about "what kinds of degenerates are these"
                        that the take away might be "things are pretty fucked
                        up for people who'd resort to this kind of thing."
                     \_ There are documented cases of 16 year old Kamikaze
                        pilots. Sorry reality is such a bummer to you.
                        \_ Congratulations: you're half right, so you're only
                           half an idiot.
                        \_ Uh oh, you found other times where kids were
                           strapped to bombs and pointed.  Yeah, that makes
                           it ok in the middle east, too.  Ok, thanks for
                           the correction.  I'll mentally remove that from
                           my list of middle east insanity.  Glad you found
                           the trees.  Seen the forest yet?
2007/4/6-10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46219 Activity:nil
4/6     Cheney still prattling on about Al Qaida and Saddam
        http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002961.php
        \_ Why do you hate America?
2007/3/28-31 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46126 Activity:nil
3/27    Majority of Iraqis say life better under Saddam Hussein:
        http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8881663
2007/3/28-31 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46125 Activity:nil
3/27    http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/03/27/iraq.torturesuit/index.html
        BAHAHAHA you Liburals lost!
        \_ "Despite the horrifying torture allegations," wrote U.S. District
            Judge Thomas Hogan in a 58-page opinion, "the plaintiffs lack
            standing to pursue a declaratory judgment against the defendants."
            2/10 on the troll scale.  As a layman it's clear that this case was
            brought to make a statement, and would be thrown out for lack of
            standing.  I assure you the lawyers for the plaintiffs were well
            aware of this.  And 'liburals', seriously, are you twelve? -dans
2007/3/28-31 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46121 Activity:nil
3/27    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17819626/site/newsweek
        Over 800 unpatriotic soldiers deserted the army in 2006.
        \_ Our "volunteers" are being turned into conscripts.  "OK, you've
           served your time and several tours in Iraq.  You can go home
           now....  Oh, WAIT!  We still need you.  You have to continue
           serving indefinitely."
2007/3/27-29 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46108 Activity:high
3/26    War Nerd reviews 300 and Victor Hansen
        http://www.exile.ru/2007-March-23/war_nerd.html
        \_ Spot on, thanks for this.
           \- one point about this: yeah, athens should be given their
              due in the case of the persian wars, but if you are going to
              talk about contemporary lessons, the pel war is much more
              relevant. and there the lesson is: eventhough the "athenian
              way of life" was far more appealing than the spartan, athenian
              high handedness and power was a greater threat to many of
              their neighbors. nobody is inspired by north korea, but
              NK doesnt affect say how their govt wants to spend their tax
              dollars [anti-drug measures, ip enforcement etc]. the pel
              war ushers in "the fall of the athenian empire". Let's hope
              Iraq is not America's "Sicily" ... "the athenians responded
              first in anger and then in fear. first they lashed out at th
              politcians who had proposed and argued for the Sicilian
              expeditions (Thycydides bitterly remarks, "as if they had
              not voted for it by themselves"); the were furious with the
              seers who had predicted success. Next, they grieved over men
              lost in Sicily. Finally, they feared for their own safety
              when they calculated their own losses and te enemy's gains ...
              Athens' allies ... would not surely rebel ... they exaggerated
              the enemy's capacity to take effective action, but they had good
              reason for concern over the condition of Athens and its ability
              to carry on the war. The most obvious problem was manpower ..."
              --Donald Kagan, via psb
           \- one point about this: yeah, athens should be given their due in
              the case of the persian wars, but if you are going to talk about
              contemporary lessons, the pel war is much more relevant. and
              there the lesson is: eventhough the "athenian way of life" was
              far more appealing than the spartan, athenian high handedness
              and power was a greater threat to many of their neighbors.
              nobody is inspired by north korea, but NK doesnt affect say how
              their govt wants to spend their tax dollars [anti-drug measures,
              ip enforcement, susidies etc]. the pel war ushers in "the fall
              of the athenian empire". Let's hope Iraq is not America's
              "Sicily" ... "the Athenians responded first in anger and then in
              fear. first they lashed out at th politcians who had proposed
              and argued for the Sicilian expeditions (Thycydides bitterly
              remarks, "as if they had not voted for it by themselves"); the
              were furious with the seers who had predicted success. Next,
              they grieved over men lost in Sicily. Finally, they feared for
              their own safety when they calculated their own losses and te
              enemy's gains ...  Athens' allies ... would now surely rebel
              ... they exaggerated the enemy's capacity to take effective
              action, but they had good reason for concern over the condition
              of Athens and its ability to carry on the war. The most obvious
              problem was manpower ..."
              --Donald Kagan, via psb [see http://www.amazon.com/dp/0801499844]
              \_ So you think that if the US decides to pull out from Iraq and
                 the country falls to chaos, our allies (UK, Israel, Canada,
                 Germany, etc) are going to turn on us and attack?  What?
                 \_ We have already lost some of our Cheese-Eating Surrender
                    Monkey allies, but we are likely to lose more.
                    \_ Which allies?  And have they turned on us a la Athens
                       and are now gearing up to attack us?
                       \_ France, Turkey, Egypt, to a lesser extent
                          the EU and Saudi Arabia. No, they are probably not
                          gearing up to attack us, but they will co-operate
                          less with us in the future and are already lining
                          up alliances with our rivals. So we are definitely
                          in a weaker position geopolitically. I am surprised
                          that this is news to you.
                          \_ France: independent at best.  The ultimate self-
                                interested nation.  (I've no problem with that,
                                it is just how they are).
                             Egypt: An ally?  Are you nuts?  We pay them a few
                                billion a year to not attack Israel.  They're
                                a cold war era 'our bastards are better than
                                their bastards' dictatorship who has a piss
                                poor record of supporting the US at the UN (for
                                example).
                             Turkey: a matter of self-interest.  They have
                                Kurdish terrorists/freedom-fighters who want to
                                break away and a free Kurdistan in northern
                                Iraq is the last thing they want to see.  Are
                                they kicking us out of the country?  Are they
                                asking us to do anything in particular?  What
                                exactly is Turkey doing that gives you the
                                willies?
                             If these are the 'allies' we're losing due to
                             American foreign policy (and I disagree they were
                             allies in the first place or that the
                             relationships have changed *at all* then we have
                             ***nothing*** to worry about in the "oh n0es~! our
                             allies are turning on us!!11" sense.  I'm
                             surprised you see these nations as 'allies'.  They
                             are on-again off-again self-interested parties,
                             like all nations.  They semi-rationally determine
                             what is in the best interests of their leaders,
                             (not necessarily their nations) and do whatever
                             that is until such time as some other greater
                             self-interest emerges.
        \_ I haven't even seen this movie, but I'm not sure I believe it was
           made by neo-cons.  Was it financed by Cheny or something?
           \_ Does it say it was made by neocons?  I think the author
              was saying neo-cons point to the movie and cheer about how
              the movie shows the good, fascist, strong, 'democratic?'
              disciplined Spartans (american proxies) triumph over
              the unwashed ninja move boy-loving hordes.  I can easily
                                        \_ There was no Persian boy-loving
                                           going on in the movie.
              believe the not so bright will see this movie and think it
              represents Greek history accurately, and that you can
              derive some sort of parallel between the Greeks then and
              the American War On Terror.  Victor Hansen has written
              many nationally printed columns about how wonderful 300
              is, which is pretty amusing since Hansen is a classics
              professor and should know this period of history very well.
              \_ It's a movie made from a friggin' comic book!  It has nothing
                 to do with anything.  It is entertainment.  The entire world
                 is not some sort of allegory for Iraq or US Hegemony or any
                 such thing.  C-O-M-I-C B-O-O-K!!!  sheesh.
              \_ From the rant "The only reason this thing got made is that it
                 makes good anti-Iran propaganda..."
                 makes good anti-Iran propaganda...[big cut]...Now the neocons
                 have gone so over the deep end of delusional thinking that
                 they've resorted to fantasizing about Sparta...These diehard
                 neocons have gone insane because there's no way they can
                 argue for an invasion of Iran any more."
                 He seems pretty sure that this is some neocon conspiracy.
                 I agree with the above guy, it's just a comic book movie, war
                 nerd should get over it.  Besides, there are probably far
                 more people who believe in Michael Moore's fantasy
                 documentaries.
2007/3/26-29 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46101 Activity:low
3/26    This is a good read, though it's a long article,
        how the US has no plans to 'rescue' our Iraqi
        allies when we eventually leave Iraq:
        http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/26/070326fa_fact_packer?printable=true
        \_ Isn't the idea that we leave when they are ready to fully control
           their own country so they don't need rescue?
           \_ Right.  I am opposed to the war, always have been, but I
              completely agree with you.  I really don't think there is
              any way the 3 factions in Iraq will stop bombing each
              other while we are occupying Iraq.  Maybe they'll keep
              bombing each other when we're gone, who knows, but we're
              not helping.  One of the interesting points of the above
              article is that the Iraqis who work with us are not
              well treated by the US, are considered traitors by other
              Iraqis, and will be killed when we leave (and they're getting
              killed right now).  The Bush administration has no plans
              to evacuate them eventually because that would be admitting
              that they made a mistake.  I'm also available to start
              making analogies to the Vietnam and Korean war if you wish.
              Too bad there is not some all powerful figure left like
              Mao to tell people what to do.
                \_ Other Bush admin ideas: it will be a cakewalk, the war
                   will last maybe 6 months, the war will pay for itself, the
                   war will cost MAYBE $60 billion, imminent threat, WMDs,
                   mushroom clouds, we will be welcomed as liberators ...
                   did I miss any?
                   \_ Which has nothing to do with this thread.  If you'd like
                      to stay on topic, feel free.
2007/3/26-29 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46100 Activity:nil
3/26    Lots of people I love to hate on here:
        http://www.radaronline.com/features/2007/01/betting_on_iraq_1.php
        \_ Amusing, story, but I find it hard to characterize Thomas Friedman
           as pro-Iraq war. -dans
           \_ Erm, how exactly would you characterize him if not "pro-war"?
              He's the preeminent "give it six more months"er.
           \_ You don't think so?  I remember the whole 'invading
              Iraq will be a grand roll of the dice!  Good show!'
              column.
              \_ Yeah, I remember that column two, but didn't exactly read it
                 as a ringing endorsement of going to war.  Could be that I'm
                 not weighting that column as much as the rest of his oeuvre.
                 -dans
                 \_ Revisionist
                    \_ Who me?  How about entitled to my fucking opinion.
                       You're welcome to have your own.  If you want to peg
                       something as revisionist, how about the original
                       article, which states that, "Because conservative
                       pundits generally acted as a well-coordinated bloc,
                       more or less interchangeable, all four of our hawks are
                       moderates or liberals who might have been important
                       opponents of the war..."  So, in effect, the
                       conservative pundits were all pro-war and all wrong,
                       but they don't deserve to be taken to task for their
                       opinions because they were wrong together!  Awesome!
                       -dans
                       \_ Thou dost protest too much
                          \_ #t -dans
           \_ it depends on what the meaning of "pro" is
              (you two obviously have different meanings)
        \_ Don't hate the playa, hate the game.
2007/3/25-29 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iran, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:46088 Activity:kinda low
3/25    http://www.csua.org/u/ib9
        Iran says they have signed confessions from the Brit soldiers to
        "to aggression into the Islamic Republic of Iran's waters" and that
        they'll trade them for Iranian spies captured in Iraq.
        Will this be an Archduke Ferdinand moment?
        \_ This situation is beyond crazy. Has anyone seen analysis that
           clearly shows whose territorial waters these sailors were caught in?
        \_ No, Bush would clearly love to "double down" in Iran, but his
           hands are tied now. Two years ago, this would have meant war.
           \_ These are british soldiers, not americans.
              \_ And?
                 \_ And?
              \_ British->NATO->US, says Bush.
        \_ Who exactly is "Iran" and what did they say?
        \_ Wonder how the Brits'll react?  Freeze Iranian funds?  The
           Iranians are pretty clearly in the wrong.
           \_ how about grabbing an iranian vessell from iranian waters, taking
              the crew prisoner, and claiming they are all spies with signed
              confessions.
           \_ Are you sure that the Brits were not in Iranian waters? All I have
              seen are "he said - she saids" claims. I assume the Brits
           \_ Are you sure that the Brits were not in Iranian waters? All I
              have seen are "he said - she said" claims. I assume the Brits
              will escalate until the Iranians back down. We shall see.
              \_ There is concensus.  They were in Iraqi waters.
              \_ 3/27 Update:
                 http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070327/wl_nm/iran_dc
                "Blair's spokesman said the next step London could take would
                be to publish proof, in the form of global satellite
                positioning (GPS) records, that the sailors had not entered
                Iranian waters."
                But of course Iran could claim that the GPS records are fake.
                BTW, if Margaret Thatcher were still the PM, the Brits would be
                planning to nuke Iran by now.
                \_ At least sending the fleet in that direction, but Briton
                   doesn't have much of a fleet anymore.
2007/3/24-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46086 Activity:low
3/24    Whoa:
        http://3quarksdaily.blogs.com/3quarksdaily/2007/03/donald_knuth_wr.html
        http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/rice.html
        \_ Wow I can't believe an intellectual would write something like
           that. In fact he sounds just like my grandpa. It's obvious that
           the old fart's getting older and angrier. I guess everyone
           becomes like when they get old.
           \_ What is wrong with his letter? It is direct, accurate and
              to the point. Not elequent enough for a Lit prof to be sure
              to the point. Not eloquent enough for a Lit prof to be sure
              but we are talking a CS professor. I give him a solid A.
2007/3/23-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46063 Activity:nil
3/23    "Iran nabs British sailors in Iraq waters"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070323/ap_on_re_eu/british_troops_iran
        War against Iran is coming.
        \_ War is coming because Iran just committed an act of war?
2007/3/18-20 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46007 Activity:high
3/18    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1530762.ece
        MOST Iraqis believe life is better for them now than it was under
        Saddam Hussein, according to a British opinion poll published today.
        Only 27% think there is a civil war in Iraq, compared with 61% who do
        not, according to the survey carried out last month.
        \_ 49% is not a majority, no matter how hard you warmongers spin it:
           http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1530526.ece
           Find those WMD yet?
           \_ The same article says majority (in fact says 2-1) and also says
              49%.  Bad writing or bad numbers? -op
              \_ Bad writing.  They're adding together the 49% who say
                 it's better now with the 16% who say they're equal.  -tom
                 \_ No, it is not bad writing, it is called "lying with
                    statistics."
        \_ Funny, the poll done by a non-biased set of news agencies pants
           the exact opposite picture:
           http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070319/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_poll_2
2007/3/13-17 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45953 Activity:moderate
3/13    Victor Hanson loves '300', unsurprisingly:
        http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson101106.html
        I still don't think the Spartans were that 'free',
        perhaps driven, disciplined, manly, into men,
        very manly manly manly, but 'free'?  nah.
        \_ I thoroughly enjoyed the movie and still agree with you. It was a
           Spartan tale told by a Spartan to Spartans.
           \_ Yeah I find the movie fun on a gruesome, fun, manly
              men doing manly things level.  People who read deep
              political themes into the movie make me sad.
        \_ Gayest. Movie. Ever.
              \- on a contemporary note, worth reading the "putatively
                 about the Persians, but not really" play "The Persians"
                 [n.b. the wikipedia article about this play is not good].
                 but once again, for a really amazing work of politcs and
                 history, with great bearing on contemporary events, rush
                 forward to events 150yrs laterm and read Thucydides "great
                 work for all time", History of the Peloponnesian War.
                 The story of the "fall of Athens" is interesting ... how
                 do the "enlightened" athenians alienate their neighbors and
                 allies when their enemies are led by a bunch of freakish,
                 fascist. Hmm, it's almost like "what does the US have to
                 for there to be any competition in a paropaganda war
                 with a bunch of crazies who behead people on tv".
                 \_ It's more complicated than that and pre-dates the Bush
                    admin by a few decades or more.  If you'd like to discuss
                    we can start a new thread starting with European colonial
                    activity in the Middle East and India/Pakistan/Afghanistan
                    over the last few hundred years, the decline of European
                    powers as world powers post WWII/during the Cold War, the
                    West's greatly increasing need for energy out-pacing supply
                    growth and the recategorization of terrorists as freedom
                    fighters in various places over time.  Then again,
                    nevermind, even the cliff notes of the cliff notes are too
                    long for the motd.
                    \- your comments dont make any sense as a response or
                       reaction to mine. or really on their own. i was making
                       \_ I was responding to your last sentence or two.
                       a specific narrow point: athens, the enlightened side
                       in the "judgement of history", were in some sense the
                       bad guys because of the "arrogance of power" ...
                       [do you know what happened "after" the pel war?]
                       john dryden wrote:
                       "When the chosen people grew too strong
                       "The rightful cause at length became the wrong.
                       At least in the case of the trojan war, there were
                       good an bad guys on both sides. while in the case
                       of the pel war, the leaders of the other side,
                       the spartans, was kind of a freakish society.
                       today, none of these people who say thinks like
                       "the us is the greatest threat to world peace"
                       actually are pro-north korea or the the islamic
                       fundamentalists, but the they are more likely to
                       be affected by us actions ... not belgian style
                       harsh colonialism, but control of the free trade
                       agenda, framing the debate on many other issue etc.
                       and dramatic events like abu graib have accelerated
                       \_ I don't think abu graib was dramatic.  I think it
                          was overly hyped to be much more dramatic than it
                          was and was used as a proxy for the secret prisons
                          the more hard core sorts are taken to but no one has
                          real information about but which may (or may not)
                          have 'dramatic events' taking place inside.
                       this and have eroded some of the good will from
                       us work in the green revolution, medical science
                       etc. yes, the selective choice of labels such as
                       who is a freedom fighter and a terrorist, who are
                       friendly and unaccetable dictators, who can have nukes
                       etc is an example of this agenda control.
                       \_ That sort of agenda control goes both ways.  If you
                          look at the EU press and what a number of their
                          politicos are saying you'd think Hamas was an
                          oppressed movement of farmers having their figs
                          stolen in the night while Hezbollah were a bunch of
                          pacifist nuns doing the good works of The Peoples,
                          while the US and allies are world wide villains
                          and the worst sort of evil imaginable.  It's naively
                          laughable stuff but plenty believe it.  This change
                          in perception is relatively new dating back to only
                          the early 90s.  Prior to that groups like the PLO
                          were always described as terrorist organizations.
                          The PLO hasn't changed.  Only the names.  Overall,
                          though, I agree with what you're saying.  There's
                          just so much more to it and really the motd isn't
                          a great place for a discussion that would do the
                          topic justice.
                          \- BTW, by agenda control i dont mean (just)
                             how you spin things [the freedom fighter vs
                             terroist issue]. i mean literally agenda
                             control at meetings for say the doha trade
                             round ... "the most important trade problem
                             today is software and dvd piracy and the pro-
                             death forces who want to remove longer terms
                             for medical patents and micky mouse copyright".
                             \_ Ah, I see.  I'll buy that.  No one likes when
                                someone bigger pushes their agenda.  And that's
                                \- not to mention double standards.
                                   \_ That's the whole point of being bigger.
                                      When you are that much more powerful,
                                      the negotiations are not among equals
                                      but more about how much the little guy
                                      is _allowed_ to have.  It is the nature
                                      of power, especially in international
                                      affairs.  No one likes being the little
                                      guy and doubly so if they were once the
                                      big time colonial power who owned and
                                      stripped a large chunk of the planet at
                                      the tip of a sword or rifle barrel.
                                      \- yes, i have read the melian dialog
                                         too. and i also know what happened
                                         to athens in the coming decades.
                                         some of the countries being dealt
                                         with high-handedly are not "little
                                         guys", e.g. china. they us
                                         expendiently switches between "we're
                                         right because we are good" and "might
                                         makes right". so start getting ready
                                         for more "fuck yous" from the
                                         international community. it will
                                         be interesting to see how the us
                                         deals with negotiations about cost
                                         bearing on global warming, how they
                                         react to things like china setting
                                         up bilateral deal rather than the
                                         "unversalist" approach of GATT/WTO
                                         etc.
                                         \_ I wasn't really going for the
                                            melian dialogs but they did have
                                            a point.  As far as the non-little
                                            guys go, if they get big enough,
                                            such as the USSR during the cold
                                            war, you just get bi-lateral talks
                                            among equals, as expected.  If they
                                            are small, then the US is back to
                                            melian style dialog, as expected.
                                            There's no such thing as a unified
                                            international community.  There are
                                            nations that have shared goals, but
                                            no further than that.  It is always
                                            possible to pick off member states
                                            of a larger coalition, setting up
                                            favorable side deals, etc.  I see
                                            no problem.  At worst, as I said,
                                            you deal with other large entities
                                            with the respect they've earned as
                                            equals or nearly so.  What is so
                                            horrible about that?  Are you
                                            predicting some sort of Great Down
                                            Fall of the Evil US when we have to
                                            deal with others as equals?  US
                                            power is relatively new to the
                                            planet.  Pre-WW2 the US was a joke
                                            on the world stage.  We didn't have
                                            a military of any note, any serious
                                            industrial capacity, or much of
                                            anything else going on.  What we
                                            did have was a whole lot of
                                            potential which was seen in WW2 to
                                            today.
                                The Mickey Mouse Copyright Act to you, pal!
                                We're now at what?  75 years after the death
                                of the author?  100?  How long ago did Walt
                                die?
                                \_ Geez, he died in 12/1966: 40 years.
        \_ "The Persians bring with them exotic beasts like a rhinoceros and
            elephant, and the leader of the Immortals fights Leonidas in a
            duel (which the Greeks knew as monomachia)."
           No, he doesn't. Was Hanson actually paying attention?
           \- in a bit of a coincidence, professor delong has blurb on
              the peloponnesian war (where the melian dialog comes from):
               http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2007/03/history_as_trag.html
              the parts quoting thucydides are worth readings [remind
              you of anything? ... bushco, darth cheney, john kerry],
              the stuff on kagan is probably not so interesting if you
              are not familar with him or his 4vol "standard" work on
              the pel war, it's leadup and aftermath.
              kagan is kinda crazy .. he's an ultra rightwinger at yale
              and was considered sort of a hazard and loose canon ...
              who had to be removed form various committees etc.
               harvard:harvey mansfield::yale:donald kagan.
              if you are interested in international politics, thucydides
              is well-worth reading. inspite of being 2400 yrs old ... before
              nukes, before even nation states, before global reach of
              nations ... but still many deep lessons about might and right,
              bandwagoning vs balancing [if you are a minor power, do you
              ally with #1 or #2], alliance management, preventative war,
              relative vs absolute gains, balance of threat theory, the
              importance of individuals vs "historical forces", fog of war,
              hawks and doves and domestic politics, ideology and the enemy
              law in war ... and the writing is amazing [thuycidides is
              supposed ot be one of the absolute hardest to read in the
              original tho ... very difficult greek ... it's even "greek"
              to a lot of people who know some greek.] it's also an amazing
              story at just a plot level ... the tide keeps turning as things
              go wrong, leaders die at the wrong time etc.
              \_ new post about kagan:
                 http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2007/03/your_onestopsho.html
2007/3/12-14 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45940 Activity:nil
3/12    Cheney secretly converted to Shiite Islam decades ago.
        It's the only explanation for his efforts to destabilize
        Iraq.  When Iraq collapses Iran will dominate it politically,
        economically, and militarily.
        \_ The Tehranian Candidate!
        \_ God bless the Holy Dick.
2007/3/7-10 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45896 Activity:nil
3/7     RIP Captain America
        http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/story/503132p-424376c.html
        \_ This is part of Marvel's stupendously boring and stupid
           series 'Civil War'.  Comic book fans will react by making
           even more fun of Civil War.  It's stupid.  Marvel comics suck.
           Sometimes the occasionaly actual good movie gets made from
           a Marvel comic book, like Spiderman and The Punisher.
           \_ The Punisher?  Which version?
           \_ Actually the current Brubaker run on Daredevl is excellent.
              I haven't read Bendis' run that preceded it, but I heard it's
              also good, and I dig Powers so I'll probably give it a look.
              -dans
2007/3/5-7 [Science/GlobalWarming, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45884 Activity:nil
3/5     Saudi oil production drops 8% in 2006
        http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2325
2007/3/5-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45876 Activity:kinda low
3/5     Lancet Article re 650K Iraqi deaths may be inaccurate:
        http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1469636.ece
        \_ Still waiting for someone else to do an actual scientific study
           that indicates otherwise. So far, all we have seen are politically
           based claims that the numbers "just can't be."
           \_ So, I can make any claim I want, and I don't have to prove it,
              nor show how my methods work, and I can be in contradiction to
              other established authorities, but my claim has to be refuted
              by an actual scientific study rather than just dismissed? Would
              you put your faith in my new revolutionary diamond manufacturing
              plant and invest in it without some kind of proof?  Why're you
              so eager to believe in this guy? [reformatted - formatd]
                 \_ Making any claim they want and not having to prove it
                    works for Intelligent Design and Global Warming.
              \_ Are you claiming, yet again, that the Lancet study "didn't
                 show their work"?  Or did you misparse the previous poster,
                 and are also speaking against J. Random Economist's claims
                 about the Lancet's study?
              \_ Your claims are false. The study was peer reviewed by a
                 respected medical editorial board, probably the most respected
                 editorial board in medicine. The critics have been anonymous
                 cranks (like yourself) and politically motivated bloggers
                 with no knowledge of how the scientific process works. It
                 is revealing who you side with. Granted, Dr. Spagat is an
                 expert and he disputes some of the techniques used. This sort
                 of thing is how good science is done. One disagreement by
                 a stastician does not invalidate the whole study. The Lancet
                 study is actually one of the most carefully reviewed studies
                 in the history of medicine. So yes, until there is some
                 hard science disputing their findings, I am going to continue
                 to be skeptical of politically motivated critics. Why are you
                 so determined to dispute their findings?
                 so determined to dispute their findings? -!dans
                 \_ My issue with the 650k is that it is the top end number and
                    gets quoted as a factual known-good this-is-it number.  The
                    original paper published a range of X to Y but we only hear
                    Y.  The truth is likely in the middle.  IIRC the earlier
                    study they did was ~8000 bottom end to 100k top end and
                    we heard only the 100k.  Yet official number at the time
                    were already higher than their bottom end number.  So how
                    can the high end number be any more trust worthy?  The
                    truth is much more likely much lower than the oft quoted
                    650k.  This is not to say 200k or whatever deaths are good,
                    but it makes me question the motives of anyone quoting the
                    650k as fact and not merely the top end of a statistical
                    range.  --someone else
                    \_ Saying "The HMM aggregate of the range from 650k
                       to 300k" is too much for a news article.
                    \_ You are misinformed.  Go read the study and return.
                    \_ The study estimates between 393K and 943K deaths.  -tom
                       \- just out of curioisity to the critics of the
                          study: do you have any "guesses" about what
                          you think the casualty numbers might be?
                          also, say it is 2x to high ... and the number is
                          say 300k, does that affect your thinking about
                          how things have unfolded? obviously there is a
                          difference between say 50k dealth in vietnam and
                          <3.8k in iraq, but I'm not sure what the different
                          policy consequences are between 300k and 650k.
                          [in no way to make light of the very large difference
                          in cost to iraqi people ... but again the social
                          aftermath of ww2 was very diff in the us vs.
                          russia, germany, france etc]
                    \_ Actually, the original study had a 95% confidence
                       interval from 8k to 192k IIRC, making 100k the center of
                       the peak. -emarkp
                       \_ I recall 8 to 100 but I'll go look it up.  Thanks for
                          the correction.
2007/2/28 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45838 Activity:high
2/28    Quick quiz:  Which kills more Americans?
        A) Insurgents in Iraq attacking US soldiers
        B) Illegal Aliens in the US committing murder
        C) Wankers on the motd and other media sources creating overtly
           slanted, self-serving shill quizzes to make their points using
           dishonest and bad rhetorical techniques.
        http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/homeland.php?id=737771
        \_ It depends on what your definition of "more" is.
           We've had this discussion before.  You're very clearly
           an idiot.
        \_ Our laws governing automotive safety are as every bit as
           retarded as our foreign policy in the Middle East. Both
           need our attention and some solution. What makes Iraq
           particularly important is that it's putting an enormous
           strain on our resources (economically and militarily).
        \_ You're right, if we moved every single soldier from Iraq,
           Japan, Korea, Germany and Cuba to the Mexican border,
           we might stop all illegal immigration.  Kill.
           \_ That wasn't something I was suggesting. Try again. -op
              \_ It's about a sensical as your quiz. -!pp
                 \_ Or not. -op
        \_ Hey!  Thanks to the asshole who chnaged my post. choice B) is
           supposed to be Illegal Aliens committing murder.
        \_ I like how when lefties here don't like facts, they hide them.
2007/2/23-27 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45810 Activity:nil
2/23    UCD Law Review Symposium on 4th Amend. Search & Seizure law:
        http://www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=8048
        http://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/2007symposium
        \_ If anybody here has EBOLA, please go to this and lick JOHN YOO.
2007/2/23 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45809 Activity:nil
2/23    http://www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=8048
2007/2/23 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45803 Activity:nil
2/23    http://www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=8048
Event Focuses on Surveillance, Wiretapping, Terrorism

February 21, 2007

John Yoo -- who spearheaded the Bush administration's legal response
to the 2001 terrorist attacks -- and other constitutional scholars
will debate the National Security Agency's surveillance program,
warrantless phone wiretapping and the war on terror at UC Davis March
9.

The event, titled "Katz v. U.S: 40 Years Later -- From Warrantless
Wiretaps to the War on Terror," will focus on how the U.S. Supreme
Court's landmark "search and seizure" decision in Katz applies in a
modern age of global terrorism.

The UC Davis Law Review and the School of Law will host the free,
public event. The program runs from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. in the Wilkins
Moot Court Room of King Hall on the UC Davis campus.

"The issue of warrantless wiretaps and personal privacy has resurfaced
from under the current NSA surveillance program," said David
Richardson, editor-in-chief of the law review. "This symposium will
allow some of the greatest legal minds in the country to discuss both
sides of this controversy."

Jennifer Chacon, a UC Davis professor of law and faculty adviser to
the event, said, "Growing concerns over crime and terrorism in the
United States have sparked a national conversation about the
trade-offs between individual privacy and security."

"Read against a modern backdrop," she added, "the case of Katz v.
United States provides an ideal framework for discussing privacy
expectations, effective law enforcement and anti-terrorism
strategies."

In Katz, the court ruled that the Fourth Amendment protects "people,
not places" and provides protection of a "reasonable expectation of
privacy," effectively curtailing the use of warrantless wiretaps by
law enforcement agencies.

John Yoo, now a UC Berkeley law professor, and Glenn Sulmasy of the
U.S. Coast Guard Academy, will co-present a paper questioning the
viability of Katz in the war on terror in a session at 2:45 p.m. Yoo
served as a deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal
Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice from 2001 to 2003.

Sessions are as follows: "Katz in Context: Privacy, Policing
Homosexuality and Enforcing Social Norms," 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.;
"Katz: Rights and Remedies," 12:45 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.; "Katz in the Age
of International Crime and Terrorism," 2:45 p.m. to 4:15 p.m.; and
closing remarks, 4:15 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Celebrating its 40th anniversary, the law review ranks in the top 50
most cited legal periodicals in the United States. Each year it hosts
a symposium on current legal topics.
2007/2/19-20 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45774 Activity:nil
2/19    " .a disastrous and unnecessary war.."
        http://tinyurl.com/2r8apw (The Week Magazine)
2007/2/17-18 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45758 Activity:nil
2/16    Iraq insurgency in 'last throes,' Cheney says
        http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/30/cheney.iraq
2007/2/13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45731 Activity:nil
2/13    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq8jlA7meHQ
        Hank Hill Speaks Up About Bush and the Iraq War
2007/2/9-12 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Others] UID:45697 Activity:low
2/9     On August 2nd, the USS Maddox was attacked by three North Vietnamese
        P-4 patrol boats 28 miles away from the North Vietnamese coast in
        international waters...
        http://csua.org/u/i0x
        \_ Huh?
        \_ Excuse me, which tree-hugging hippie commune did fall out of?
           Iraq is not Vietnam. And North Vietnam is not Iran.
           \_ I think Iran is 100x worse than Vietnam.  Our oil was not
              under Vietnam.  Goddamn Bush!
              \_ Yeah, how stupid of him was it to put all our oil under
                 Iran?  Why didn't he put our oil under Texas or Alaska
                 or something?
                 \_ Because his Saudi oil masters wouldn't let him.
                    "We are merely exchanging long protein strings. If you can
                     think of a simpler way, I'd like to hear it."
                    \_ Well that was stupid to put the oil under Saudi Arabia
                       then, wasn't it?
2007/2/5-8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45659 Activity:kinda low
2/5     Boredcast Message from 'psb': Sun Feb  4 17:16:42 2007
        as brad delong might say:
        run over krauthhammer now:
        http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTFhZGJiNWZjNzk2Zjg3N2YzODhmZDY0YWI3N2RiMmE=
                (btw, i didnt put this in the motd. although i do think
                krauthhammer is a human cockroach --psb)
        \_ Okay, I've read the article--don't see much of a problem. Any other
           opinions you recommend killing people over?
           \_ I think fuckwits who take things too literally should be forced
              to swallow drano.
              \- there is at least one sloda user who has consumed drano.
                 (i am not kidding)
        \_ What about it?  He's stuck on drawing artificial lines between
           groups, as if all Shia should be on the same side and give him a
           nice little easy to write article about the Sunni/Shia war with
           some nice sound bites thrown in about what other countries support
           which side.  He's only an article writer.  He doesn't actually
           know (or have to) know anything.
           \_ Should he be killed?
              \_ Of course not.  He's just an opinion writer.  He gets paid
                 to write stuff other people will re-post elsewhere to increase
                 hit counts and ad revenues.  He is doing his job and harming
                 no one.
                 \_ Peddling hate hurts no one? Tell that to all the Iraqis
                    dead by sectarian violence.
                    \_ Please quote a few lines of "hate" with context.  And
                       generally, yes, even if he was a hate peddler, it hurts
                       no one because he has no power or influence.
        \_ Many of us warned his ilk that civil war would be the inevitable
           outcome of breaking up the "strong center" in Iraq. The arrogant
           neocons ignored us, as they ignored most of the world's warnings.
           Now blood is on their hands and they want to deny responsibility
           for it. Bullshit. These guys are just as responsible for the
           upcoming deaths of millions as Stalin was for starving the Kulaks.
           \_ I believe the problem wasn't taking out Saddam but having no
              real post-Saddam plan.  I became very concerned when the invasion
              part was over and they didn't declare martial law and mop up.
              I'm not sure what they did for those first few precious weeks but
              I think everything was lost right there.
              \_ Considering the very long history of Sunni-Shi'ite violence
                 I don't think it would have mattered. Just maybe we could
                 have replaced one strongman with another. In any case, hubris
                 led to the neocons and those in power to not have a contingency
                 plan.
                 \_ The Sunni and Shia live in neighboring countries and as
                    neighbors within countries all over the middle east without
                    killing each other on a daily basis.  There is no reason
                    to believe that only a mass murderer like Hussein could
                    keep that in check.  Or actually, no, he didn't try, he
                    was Sunni and was butching about 5,000 Sunni a month for
                    decades.
2007/1/30-2/1 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:45614 Activity:nil
1/29    This is wickedly fucked up (dead man's sperm to impregnate a woman
        he never met):
        http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/29/israel.deadmansperm.ap
2007/1/7-16 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45540 Activity:nil
1/11   21,500 more troops, yay!!! Let's kill all the bad people!
        \_ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16576547
           Pentagon wants 92,000 more. "Failure is not an option."
           \_ Where are they gonna got 92,000 more when recruitment is down?
        \_ hmm, I recall that we have roughly 20,000 casualties (3000 dead, rest
           of them wounded).  If anything, this "surge" is nothing but
           replenishment for the casualties, no?
        \_ for once, I actually *AGREE* with Bush that we need a "surge."
           however, I really think we should use this "surge" in Afghanistan
           instead of Iraq.  These 20k soldiers would probably made a big
           differences in Afghanistan.
2007/1/7-16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:45531 Activity:nil
1/14    Guys, I am a bit nervous.  I think we are going to attack Iran next...
        Well, in a way, we've already did.  Last time I checked, embassy is
        considered as sovereign territory of a nation. As we have raided the
        Iranian embassy in Iraq, we are in effect attack Iran territory.
        http://www.payvand.com/news/07/jan/1131.html
        Under normal circumstances, this would considered as an act of war.
        On top of this, we are moving a carrier strike group to Persian Golf.
        http://csua.org/u/hvx
        I am no military expert, but my knowledge tells me that carrier strike
        group is not the best tool to fight insurgency in Iraq.
        \_ That wasn't an embassy.  Although if it was an embassy that
           would just be karmic anyway.
           \_ I just think Bush's secret plan B is to escalate the war with
              Iran.
        \_ Bring it on!
        \_ Hey, you mean like we were supposed to have a military draft in
           2006?
           \_ if we were doing things right, we supposed to have a draft in
              2003, blanked Iraq with one million draftees, commit entire nation
              into this Iraqii mess.  Then again, may be you still think the
              war is going well.   I am still waiting to see that beacon of
              democracy in the middle east.
              2003, blanked Iraq with one million draftees, commit entire
              nation into this Iraqii mess.  Then again, may be you still
              think the war is going well.   I am still waiting to see that
              beacon of democracy in the middle east.
        \_ There have been numerous connections between the Iraq insurgency and
           Syria & Iran (weapons, personnel, etc.).  Stopping Iran from
           supplying weapons could very well help fighting the insurgents.
           \_ This is true. However, invading/waging war on Iran with the
              forces currently available to us is not likely to produce the
              result of "stopping Iran from supplying weapons" in the long run,
              unless we swallowed our pride and asked for help from Syria in
              pacifying Iraq. And hell, if we're going to go that route, why
              not just negotiate with Iran in the first place?
2006/12/29-30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45515 Activity:high
12/29   I personally don't know anyone who supports Bush's War in Iraq. However
        according to the polls 35% of the Americans still do.  WHO ARE THESE
        PEOPLE? What do they do? Where do they live? What are they like?
        \_ People like that exist everywhere. Emarkp is a fine example.
           Is your sample based in San Francisco or nearby academia?
           If so I wouldn't be surprised.
        \_ You /do/ realize the bias of polling people you know, right? -emarkp
           \_ The OP does not or wouldn't have posed the question.
        \_ 28%
        \_ consider how many people voted for Bush in 2004, why you are
           surprise?
2006/12/29-30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45514 Activity:very high
12/29   R.I.H. Saddam Hussein
        \_ Hope GWB joins him soon.
        \_ YES! Death to all tyrants in the world! Now there will be peace
`               \_ E_SICSEMPERTYRANNIS
           and harmony in the middle east again, where Shiites and Sunnis
           will hold hands and celebrate. We can now bring the troops back.
           We won the war! Hoooray!
           \_ No one ever said excuting Saddam would bring peace to anyone.
        \_ Perhaps you mean R.I.G. or R.I.I.? R.I.T.?
        \_ in that regard, Bush also deserve to go to hell too, right?
           hundreds of thousands of people died since the invasion.
           \_ You're going to quote the top end figure from the Lancet
              study as if it was fact?  Why not quote the bottom end?  Or
              the average?  Or the median?
2006/12/27-30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45504 Activity:nil
12/26   The panic and confusion were as great as if it had been the City
        and  not the  camp that  was invested.   The consul  Nautius was
        summoned home,  but as  he did nothing  equal to  the emergency,
        they decided  to appoint a Dictator to  retrieve the threatening
        position  of  affairs.    By  universal  consent  L.   Quinctius
        Cincinnatus was called to the office ... The novelty and mystery
        of the thing drew the  attention of the plebs towards him whilst
        those who  knew nothing  of the plot  asked what  disturbance or
        sudden outbreak  of war  called for the  supreme authority  of a
        Dictator  or required  Quinctius, after  reaching  his eightieth
        year, to assume the  government of the republic.  Servilius, the
        Master of the Horse, was despatched by the Dictator ... with the
        message: "The Dictator summons you."
                 --History of Rome, Book III, IV
                   Titus Livy
2006/12/26-30 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:45495 Activity:nil
12/26   http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/12/26/news/military.php
        "It's the French Foreign Legion for me!"
2006/12/20-23 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45482 Activity:high
12/20   More attempts to track down the elusive "Capt. Hussein"
        http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006579.htm
        \_ she's pretty hot, I'll convert to a Republican to screw her.
        \_ I haven't read the above url, but I've read a lot of MM urls,
           and she is a troll of the highest order.  Doesn't contribute
           anything, is thin skinned, isn't particularly witty, I'm
           just not gonna do it anymore.  Even Andrew Sullivan
           and Pat Buchanan make points that I can agree with
           now and then.  MM should be ejected into the sun.
           \_ "Written by fools to be read by imbeciles."
           \_ Wow, I'm glad you're so damn open-minded.  The post is about
              trying to track down the fake Cap. Hussein.  It's not nearly as
              much opinion as simple investigation.
              \_ It doesn't even matter.  CNN/AP/Reuters/NBC/etc have been
                 busted making up stories or twisting the truth so many times
                 it isn't possible to read their stories as anything more
                 than that anymore: stories.  This Captain Hussein thing is
                 just one more in a long long long list of lies.
                 \_ Do the voices tell you to do things? -dans
        \_ I'm trying to figure out the desired end result here.  So you
           and MM are saying that someone is deliberately exaggerating
           the number of violent incidents around Baghdad?  Is that it?
           I happen to think that it's all underreported.  I think there
           are tons of violent incidents in Baghdad and the surrounding
           areas that are a result of sectarian civil whatever the hell
           you want to call it violence, and a lot of horrible things
           happen but it's not reported, since reporters cannot safely
           travel anywhere in Iraq.  It all sucks.  MM sucks.
           \_ The desired end result is that the media report the truth, not
              report what they think or want the truth to be even if they
              sometimes guess right. No one is denying there are deaths,
              death squads, violence, etc.
              \_ This Hussein thing must be under my radar.  I scan
                 paper copies of the Chronicle, NY Times, and WSJ nearly
                 every day and I've never heard of it.
                 \_ Exactly.  Look at your news sources.
                    \_ All right smart guy, I try to stay informed.  I read.
                       I read the above 3 papers.  I watch Fox to get a good
                       chuckle now and then.  WHAT SHOULD I BE READING?
                       Your fucking retarded MM blog?  Or maybe Little
                       Green Footballs?  The WSJ, if you ignore the editorial
                       page, is one of the finest news sources around.
                       \_ It isn't "my fucking retarded MM blog".  Anyway, I
                          don't think it matters what _you_ read.  Your mind
                          is set.  Read whatever reinforces whatever you
                          already want to believe and be happy.
                       \_ I actually don't know why anyone would object to that
                          list. Though the Chron is one of the most biased rags
                          I've ever seen.  -op
                       \_ Actually, it doesn't even really qualify as a blog
                          since she doesn't allow any reader comments. More
                          of a self-published amateur diary.
                          \_ She used to... but then people started posting
                             naked penii redirects all over her pages.  She should
                             have hired a right wing CAPTCHA dude.
                             naked penii redirects all over her pages. She
                             should have hired a right wing CAPTCHA dude.
                             \_ The plural of Penis is not Penii.
           \_ The stories citing this mythical Capt Hussein are invariably the
              most extreme examples.  The story about people throwing kerosene
              on worshippers leaving a mosque and lighting them on fire as
              Iraqi police were watching for instance. -op
              \_ You are right, MM is so fair and balanced and unbiased,
                 I am glad you showed me the light. I can now stop wasting
                 my time reading the WSJ, NYT, The Economist, The Week and
                 all that other MSM trash and just get all my information
                 about the outside world from the brilliant and beautiful
                 MM.
                 \_ I haven't been saying anything about your reading choices.
                    But you're not responding to the points about Hussein. -op
                    \_ Points were made about Hussein in this thread?  I don't
                       see any. -dans
2006/12/19-23 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45476 Activity:nil
12/19   http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061219/ts_nm/iraq_usa_army_suicides_dc_1
        Will Fox News report that the number of homicides is up?
2017/12/16 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/16   
Results 1351 - 1500 of 1605   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Foreign:MiddleEast:Iraq:
.