THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ VI

Quote:

...If the American electorate, knowing what it knows and, above all, having seen what it has seen, proceeds to reelect George W. Bush in November, the moderating distinction between the American administration and the American people will be eroded or perhaps erased -- with what violent consequences no one can predict.

Before discussing the concrete repercussions of anti-Americanism in Europe and the Middle East, I want to pause briefly to say a word about a famous phrase of Machiavelli's, frequently cited by neoconservatives in the run-up to the Iraq war, that "it is better to be feared than loved." This quotation is interesting mostly for what it omits. For Machiavelli quickly went on to add: "It is worst of all to be hated." People who fear us, for the most part, will dare not harm us. But fear, according to Machiavelli, works too slowly on the human spirit to obstruct the effects of the searing hatred that drives men immediately and impulsively to furious action. The administration is wrong, therefore, to believe that it can easily scare people into abandoning their plots to injure Americans. U.S. shows of force invariably provoke rage; and this rage, in turn, often overrides the trepidation that our military superiority instills...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/06/17/anti_americanism/index.html

0 Replies

McGentrix wanna cracker? :wink: Laughing

0 Replies

Sorry, a crime of opportunity. My humble apologies.

0 Replies

So far all responses have shied away from addressing any of the points I have that CLEARLY shows that there is indeed a link between Iraq and al Qaeda.

Why is that you guys can't defend the statements that your side keeps making?

0 Replies

McG - bipartisan Commssion Question

I don'tv know, looks like equal footing to me - decisions, decisions. Blinded by the right, everthings gonna be alright. Today we obfuscate, tomorrow belongs to me.....

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

"Suppose the western powers occupying Iraq were largely to withdraw ... little is ventured, precious little is gained, but, as a result, not much is reported either."

Suppose the US were to make a total withdrawal from the entire Middle East and bring all of our military back home to the US. This would leave the Middle East Oil in the ground and reduce or eliminate the amount of oil revenues available to finance the TMM. A side effect of this will be to reduce US oil consumption and thereby increase the number of Americans dependent on government charity (i.e., entitlements).

We could then probably wait about two to three years until the TMM got themselves adequately organized using such funds as they could borrow/extort from Israel, France and Russia. Then the TMM could simultaneously attack multiple cities throughout the US. These attacks, despite our then totally home based military, would result in the murder and maiming of hundreds of thousands of Americans. This in turn would probably result in a total collapse of the US economy and starvation of those surviving the TMM attack for lack of the ability of the US government to tax/borrow enough money to cover the increasing demands on government charity.

The up side, of course, is that the rest of the world would no longer envy, resent and hate Americans. They would henceforth simply pity them. This state of affairs would continue until such time as the TMM do to the rest of the world what they did to the US. The upside of that of course is what remained of the human race at that point would all be equally miserable.

0 Replies

Quote:

Ashcroft should arrest Rumps - a true criminal if there ever was one.....

0 Replies

InfraBlue wrote:

Your are right, ican, the Zionist Ashkenazi conquered Palestine, they defeated and subdued by force of arms, they maimed and murdered to gain dominion over Palestine, and in your mind there is legitimacy in that.

There you go again mis-stating my position. My position is that the Palestinian Arabs have no higher claim to Palestine than do any other people descended from conquerors of Palestine. I explicitly agreed with your expressed desire that all of Palestine be governed by one government. I inferred that you meant that such government would secure equal suffrage for all inhabitants present and future.

The rest of your diatribe below is more repetition of your same old BS about conquerors for me are more equal than conquerors for you. Wake up man! They are all rotter mentalities. The problem is, and has been for the last 56 years, how to evolve a society relatively free of such rotter mentalities.

bah humbug wrote:

The law of the jungle

...

For a taste of this mentality in the modern day read any of steissd's posts here on A2K on the Arab Jews in Israel.

0 Replies

"White House misled world about Saddam"

This is the headline for the lead story in The Independent today.

And there are lots more interesting reports inside.

Nuremberg-style trials for messrs Bush and Blair?

0 Replies

BillW wrote:

McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN

I don'tv know, looks like equal footing to me - decisions, decisions. Blinded by the right, everthings gonna be alright. Today we obfuscate, tomorrow belongs to me.....

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Quote:
...If the American electorate, knowing what it knows and, above all, having seen what it has seen, proceeds to reelect George W. Bush in November, the moderating distinction between the American administration and the American people will be eroded or perhaps erased -- with what violent consequences no one can predict.

There is another possibility. If a majority/plurality of the American electorate, knowing what it knows and, above all, having seen what it has seen, heard what it has heard, read what it has read, studied what it has studied, experienced what it has experienced, proceeds to reelect George W. Bush in November, that majority/plurality electorate will have demonstrated that they have a keener sense of truth than do the minority of the American electorate. They will have demonstrated their ability to better distinquish fact from fiction, reality from delusion, truth from propaganda.

Or, the majority/plurality of the American electorate could simply perceive their choice to be the lousey choice between dumb and dumber, and decide to stick with dumb. Is it more rational to pick dumber just because so many others hate dumb? I don't think so.

0 Replies

Thank goodness the choice is between dumb and a return to intelligence, the choice is easy Exclamation

Then again, you guys don't like choice - only being told what to do........

0 Replies

..tomorrow belongs to me.......

0 Replies

Bush Insists on Saddam Relationship with Al-Qaeda

1 hour, 1 minute ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) on Thursday insisted Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) had a relationship with al-Qaeda but said his administration never asserted that the former Iraqi president had a role in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq (news - web sites) and Saddam and al-Qaeda is because there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda," Bush told reporters after a meeting with his Cabinet.

"This administration never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and al-Qaeda. We did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda," the Republican president said.

"There were numerous contacts between the two," he added, citing reports of a Sudan meeting between al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) and Iraqi intelligence officers.

His remarks came a day after the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on Washington and New York reported that there was no evidence to support claims of a working relationship between Saddam and the militant network blamed for the attacks that killed 3,000 people.

0 Replies

It's conflation, plain and simple.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I've heard Bush say there was a connection between Saddam and al Qaeda, then no connection between Saddam and al Qaeda. He now says there was. Is anybody else out there confused?

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN
McG - bipartisan Commssion AIN'T BIPARTISAN

Ehmm ... "bipartisan" seems to be an easy enough concept to grasp ... includes people from both parties ... the 9/11 Commission does include people from both parties ... in equal numbers. So whats your point here, exactly, ican?

0 Replies

tomorrow belongs to me...... :sad:

0 Replies

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ VI

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know