Craven - Need Your Prediction

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=76

BUSH'S TREE DUMMIES
BUSH'S TREE DUMMIES
Pondering the quality of America's leadership
By BumbleBeeBoogie


A Parliament of stately Owls
with feathered gray goatees
clustered on the branches
of their mighty wisdom trees.

They stared in muffled silence
as dusk crept 'cross the ground
to cloak the woods in darkness
thinking avian thoughts profound.

The savants among them pondered
the myths entrenched so deep
about their night time vigils
when they never seemed to sleep.

Why do their solemn visages
make silly humans on the earth
think the owl's night time hootings
have wondrous, sagacious worth?

Stick to your day job.

BBB
I posted this 2/23/03:

A friend asked for my opinion about US foreign policy. I've had to think the subject through to muddled inconclusive conclusions. I've been pulled in several directions as events unfold. It seems to me there are several scenarios one can identify as the real reasons for the Bush Administration's Iraq war impetus. Take your choice or add more of your own:

Legitimate concerns about Hussein's store of weapons of mass destruction; primarily regarding their possible sale to international terrorist organizations. (The same concern also applies to North Korea with a different approach to resolving the more likely threat.)

Controlling Iraqi oil fields and weaken OPEC. Use Iraqi oil profits to pay for the war and any occupation-restoration-humanitarian financial expenses in both Iraq and in Afghanistan.

Diverting US attention away from Osama bin Laden during the US 2002 mid-term elections and the failure to find him and to destroy his organization. We know where Hussein is while we don't have a clue to bin Laden's whereabouts.

Karl Rove's 2002 mid-term election campaign strategy to rally voters to support President Bush and his party to gain control of the US Senate - the strategy may have simply gotten out of control once initiated. Don't be surprised to see the same "wag the dog" ruse again in 2004's presidential election. The US has a history of supporting war-time presidents.

Same reasons as above, but to divert US citizen attention away from devastated economy, corporate corruption, failed foreign and domestic policies---all to assure election of Republicans to regain control of the Senate and the reelection of Bush the Second in 2004. Retaining Republican power is the impetus behind everything being done.

Retaliation against Saddam Hussein for trying to kill George the First.

Bush the Second is just a new breed of meglomanic with imperialistic Napleonistic traits. One wonders if he will crown himself as savior of the world despite his (and Ronald Reagan's) Christian Fundamentalist belief in apocalypticism. The following site is of interest: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/apocalypse/.

I could go on and on, but it is 1:10 in the morning and my brain goes into hibernation after midnight.

BBB

The last sentence explains the entire post.

Let's wait for the real muse.

BBB
I posted this March 11. 2003:

I've often wondered why the Bush Administration and many previous US administrations have failed foreign policy in many areas of the world. It seemed to me to be a dangerous lack of understanding of the underlying tribal societies in these world areas. The following site presents an excellent treatise on modern and ancient tribal societies. ---BBB
----------------------------------

http://www.historyexplained.com/index.php/ebook/main/1/event=read

"After World War II when the imperial age ended, most of the colonists returned home, and the native people suddenly found themselves to be citizens of brand new nations. In Europe most nation-states arose through a long, violent revolutionary process. In the colonial world statehood came relatively quickly. Unfortunately, the modern revolution from traditional society to a market economy nation-state does not happen that easily. In many cases, the newly independent countries were modern nations in name only. In reality they were still predominantly tribal or aristocratic societies. These countries are now squarely in the middle of the very long and difficult revolutionary process that will eventually convert them into modern nation-states."

"Hereditary monarchs and aristocrats cannot successfully rule a modern nation-state. The monarchy either becomes a ceremonial position or it is ended altogether. All of this takes time. No society has ever transitioned from an aristocratic state to a fully operational nation-state within a single generation. Some things change through a slow, relatively peaceful process of reform and evolution. Other things change through a bloody process of civil war and revolution. That is how the process of nation building has always operated in the past, and that is how it will continue to operate in the future."

What is your point, TROLL???

I predict the following events if the US attacks Iraq
I posted this March 13, 2003. I've added in ( ) whether or not I was right or wrong.

I predict the following events if the US attacks Iraq:

Saddam Hussein will do the same thing that he did when George the First attacked Iraq. Hussein had a plane ready to fly him and his family out of Iraq to safety if the liberating forces came too close. He sabotaged the oil fields of Kuwait. He launched scud missles against Israel.

Hussein will flee Iraq if threatened. (I got this wrong)

Hussein will sabotage Iraq's oil fields. He will no longer be able to skim off billions of dollars from oil sales stolen from the Iraqi people---so he has no incentive to protect the oil fields, but he can temporarily prevent the US and other invaders from oil profits. (I got this one right)

Hussein MAY launch missles against Israel and the invading forces. They may be conventional weapons or mass-destruction weapons, depending on whether or not he can deploy them fast enough to avoid prior detection by the US and their destruction by air. (I got this one wrong)

I got all of the following right

If Iraq's current government falls, we will see a repeat of what happened to the former Yugoslovia and the Balkans and, currently, in Afghanistan. Nationalist, Tribal and religious sect fighting in a civil war.

Before long, the US will tire of the trouble and costs involved and will desert the Iraqi people just as they have deserted other populations, most recently in Afghanistan and the Iraqi Kurds.

Terrorist attacks against the US and it's allies will increase.

The US economy will be devastated by the costs of this war and the subsequent years of trying to resolve the conflicts in the Middle East and in Iraq.

North Korea will feel more threatened by US attack as a result of the war against Iraq---leading to dangerous games of chest-beating.

More and more politically unstable tribal-based nations will attempt to obtain nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction with which to threaten their enemies and imperilistic powers.

BumbleBeeBoogie

The only chest beating I see is BBB's.

I don't understand her need to validate her existence in a thread asking a completely different, and new, question.

BBB
Perhaps other A2Kers can retrieve their posts about their concerns and predictions regarding the terrible idea of invading Iraq. It would be interesting to remember them.

BBB

Best decision ever. Bush has guts. You don't.

Some people simply exude stupidity.

I'd also be interested in reading/hearing Craven's predictions for the upcoming season.

He's definitely watching what's going on - his occasional posts in politics make that clear.

What's worse is that they actually think they're smart, and often have so called "scholars" in acadamia who will back them up. Our educational system is a failure from bottom to top.

<Pulls up a chair>

I would be interested in Craven's take. To me, it boils down to, do we want the most failed policies in history to be extended indefinitely, or do we want some relief? Hard to predict if enough Americans will see through the brain washing process and make the right move.

cjhsa, why are you being such an asshole?

Excuse me. The only asshole here is the troll BBB.

I didn't t hink he was being an @$$. or a ****. I was surprised to see BBB posting a barage of stuff that was totally not what was asked for though. Not to mention the thread title asks a for specific person's response.

I kept watching this to see what else she was going to post that was irrelevant to the thread title.

It makes me think about the post I made this morning really. Her actions.