THE US, THE UN AND THE IRAQIS THEMSELVES, V. 7.0

cicerone imposter wrote:

Just for emphasis. Quote, "Iraq officials reject US election proposal. Idea of 'special' seats for Sunnis called 'unacceptable' interference."

How about that? I didn't know puppets could reject the string pulling of their masters. Confused

Oh, yeah,.. that's right... They can't. Idea

Revel: That story was no kind of response to our discussion but interesting nonetheless. I would agree that the majority of Muslims are looking down at us with distrust. They'd be fools not to considering our past behavior and Bush's idiotic stance on the Israeli/Palestine issue. That in no way means they're ready to start shooting at us. Make the distinction already, will ya?

Your story correctly points out the hypocrisy in our position towards the Saudis but seems not to understand that a democratic Iraq is an important step towards ending the economic power the Royal Saudis have over us. We don't seek to steal anything meaning we are perfectly willing to pay market price for our resources. For this reason, we have no need to maintain a stronghold over Iraq like Saddam. It is my hope that in time this will be demonstrated sufficiently, and dying with this misconception about the U.S., will be the hatred of same. Being a country rich with natural resources, Iraq should flourish in the world market and be the envy of their little corner of the world. I hope we continue to push the Saddam-like-A-holes off the planet and replace them with democracies. Even if we don't; the world will still be short one oppressive monster and 25 million people will be the better for it.

0 Replies

Quote:

What do you hope to accomplish by denying the vile acts of these murderers anyway? Rolling Eyes

What do you hope to accomplish by saying that I am denying what you describe as 'vile acts'? Do you ever substantiate your accusations?

0 Replies

Gelisgesti wrote:

Quote:
What do you hope to accomplish by denying the vile acts of these murderers anyway? Rolling Eyes

What do you hope to accomplish by saying that I am denying what you describe as 'vile acts'?

What I describe as vile acts? Shocked

Dude, what is your problem? Anyway:

I wrote:

Nor will they fight for the insurgents (who punish those who refuse to help them in the most despicable ways, btw).

YOU wrote:

You have it ass backwards ... The insurgents, aka Iraqis, don't 'punish those who refuse to help them' .... they punish those that help the occupiers.

In this statement, you are clearly denying that the insurgents have punished those who refuse to help them. You can't really need my help finding an example of insurgents punishing innocent Iraqis. No one is that stupid. Rolling Eyes

Gelisgesti wrote:

Do you ever substantiate your accusations?

Yep.

I ask again: What do you hope to accomplish by denying the vile acts of these murderers anyway?

0 Replies

Bill. I accept that you think that most of the general iraqi insurgents are not actively helping the insurgents but they do not like us either. (i think you think the last?) I disagree just simply because of what the Iraqi expert said in my previous article about how they couldn't be sucessful if they didn't have so much support from the local people. I am willing to let it go at that.

Anyway, a while back you was going on and on about how anyone would want to be free from Islamic slavery as you put it. In the

Quote:

"strategic communications" report, written this autumn by the Defence Science Board for Pentagon supremo Donald Rumsfeld

he said the following:

Quote:

0 Replies

revel wrote:

US admits the war for ‘hearts and minds’ in Iraq is now lost

Pentagon report reveals catalogue of failure
By Neil Mackay, Investigations Editor

revel,
What parts of this report, if any, do you disagree with?

What parts of this report, if any, do you think are irrelevant to whether we should stay or leave Iraq?

revel,
Do you agree with these two quoted paragraphs?

Do you think them relevant to whether we stay or leave Iraq?

Quote:

The report says that the US is now engaged in a “global and generational struggle of ideas” which it is rapidly losing. In order to reverse the trend, the US must make “strategic communication” – which includes the dissemination of propaganda and the running of military psychological operations – an integral part of national security. The document says that “Presidential leadership” is needed in this “ideas war” and warns against “arrogance, opportunism and double standards”.

“We face a war on terrorism,” the report says, “intensified conflict with Islam, and insurgency in Iraq. Worldwide anger and discontent are directed at America’s tarnished credibility and ways the US pursues its goals. There is a consensus that America’s power to persuade is in a state of crisis.” More than 90% of the populations of some Muslims countries, such as Saudi Arabia, are opposed to US policies.

0 Replies

Revel, how can you not make the distinction between someone not liking you and someone who is actively trying to hurt you? If every single person in Iraq hated our guts, that, in itself, would not be preventing the rebuilding of the infrastructure. Only the minority who IS willing to pick up a gun or worse against us is preventing the rebuilding from taking place.

Quote:

"Thus when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypo crisy.

Not believing our actions are true, is hardly the same as preferring not to have self-determination, Revel. The first is a matter of opinion; the second is a matter of idiotic fanaticism. That's no fine line. :wink:

0 Replies

Saying, "We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those that harbor them," is one thing, a full scale invasion of a country in which there was an indirect connection between an isolated group of local terrorists and "the terrorists who committed these acts" is another. A full scale invasion based on these pretexts was not necessary.

The instigative and incitant statement,"Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists, and every nation that supports them," is not evidence of a "nexus" between Saddam and al Qaeda. It scared you and a lot of other people, ican, but evidence of a "nexus" it is not.

That the Iraqis "should keep us there as long as it takes for them alone to achieve the ability to control a/o exterminate the removed, mass murdering, former Iraqi govt. and their current allies" is a prime pretext for our occupation of Iraq.

0 Replies

au1929 wrote:

posted December 27, 2004, updated 11:30 p.m.

Iraq officials reject US election proposal

Idea of 'special' seats for Sunnis called 'unacceptable' interference.

by Tom Regan | csmonitor.com

A proposal floated by the US government and several prominient US senators Sunday to 'adjust' the outcome of next month's election in Iraq to ensure more Sunni representation has been rejected by the Iraq Electoral Commission (IEC). The Daily Star of Lebanon reports that IEC spokesman Farid Ayyar described the US proposal as "unacceptable" interference, saying: "Who wins, wins. That is the way it is. That is the way it will be in the election."

does anyone know who the "prominent" senators that backed this are?

0 Replies

Quote:

I ask again: What do you hope to accomplish by denying the vile acts of these murderers anyway?

Again acccusations without substance, accuse me of defending the vile acts.
Please quote me accurately .... no inferences, direct statements
When did I and what did I say? What were the 'vile acts' I defended?
What do you base your accusations on?

0 Replies

Gelisgesti wrote:

Quote:
I ask again: What do you hope to accomplish by denying the vile acts of these murderers anyway?

Again acccusations without substance, accuse me of defending the vile acts.
Please quote me accurately .... no inferences, direct statements
When did I and what did I say? What were the 'vile acts' I defended?
What do you base your accusations on?

I did quote you accurately in my last post.

[size=18][b]YOU[/b][/size] wrote:

The insurgents, aka Iraqis, don't 'punish those who refuse to help them'

Every literate person with access to a newspaper in the last year knows that's straight BS, your dance not withstanding.

Meanwhile, Bin Ladin released a new tape telling the insurgents to listen to the murderous bastard Zarqawi and to treat ALL voters as infidels.

Your position is as untenable as it is foolish and I'm bored with whatever game you think you are playing.
Good night.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Gelisgesti wrote:
Quote:
I ask again: What do you hope to accomplish by denying the vile acts of these murderers anyway?

Again acccusations without substance, accuse me of defending the vile acts.
Please quote me accurately .... no inferences, direct statements
When did I and what did I say? What were the 'vile acts' I defended?
What do you base your accusations on?

I did quote you accurately in my last post.

[size=18][b]YOU[/b][/size] wrote:
The insurgents, aka Iraqis, don't 'punish those who refuse to help them'

Every literate person with access to a newspaper in the last year knows that's straight BS, your dance not withstanding.

Meanwhile, Bin Ladin released a new tape telling the insurgents to listen to the murderous bastard Zarqawi and to treat ALL voters as infidels.

Your position is as untenable as it is foolish and I'm bored with whatever game you think you are playing.
Good night.

Just as I thought. All a half quote does is destroy context.
your quote of me

Quote:

. The insurgents, aka Iraqis, don't 'punish those who refuse to help them' ....

Wat I actualy said

Quote:

. The insurgents, aka Iraqis, don't 'punish those who refuse to help them' .... they punish those that help the occupiers.

Sounds a lot diferent .

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

McTag wrote:
In other words, how independent can the US afford to let the new Iraqi regime be?

Puppet?
Nope. IMHO, if a duly elected Iraqi government asks us to leave, we do.

There goes another pink elephant right past my skyscraper window.

I see BTW that an Osama tape is published today which says that all Iraqis who vote in this election should be considered infidels.
This is one fraught election.

I still think the US administration will consider any government "duly elected" when they get a government they can do business with. Otherwise, the government will be considered by them not to be "duly elected". We shall see.

0 Replies

Bugger Bin Laden - but this is bad news about the Sunnis:

Sunni Party Pulls Out of Iraq Vote As Doubts Grow

By Karl Vick
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, December 28, 2004; Page A01

BAGHDAD, Dec. 27 -- The largest political party representing Iraq's Sunni Muslim minority announced Monday that it would drop out of the Jan. 30 election, dealing a fresh blow to the vote's credibility on the same day the top Shiite Muslim candidate survived a car bombing.

The withdrawal of the Iraqi Islamic Party, combined with the assassination attempt on cleric Abdul Aziz Hakim, heightened concerns that the parliamentary election may produce a lopsided result, further alienating Sunni areas where the armed insurgency is growing.

The need for adequate Sunni participation has become a central issue a month before the election, seen by the United States and Iraq's interim leadership as pivotal to creating a stable government. On Monday, Osama bin Laden, the al Qaeda leader, added his voice to those of Sunni clerics urging Iraqis to boycott the ballot, saying "anyone who takes part in this election consciously and willingly is an infidel."

Bin Laden issued the warning in an audiotape aired on the al-Jazeera satellite television network. In Washington, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell encouraged "all Sunnis and all Sunni leaders to join in this effort, to say no to terrorism, no to murder and yes to democracy."

But voter registration in Sunni areas has lagged far behind registration in other parts of Iraq, according to Iraq's top election official, Hussain Hindawi. Voters have not been able to register at all in Anbar province, home to the restive cities of Fallujah and Ramadi. Candidates have proved scarce as well: The 41 openings on Anbar's proposed provincial council have drawn only 50 candidates..............

Full story here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28323-2004Dec27.html?nav=rss_world

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

Bugger Bin Laden - but this is bad news about the Sunnis:

Sunni Party Pulls Out of Iraq Vote As Doubts Grow.... On Monday, Osama bin Laden, the al Qaeda leader, added his voice to those of Sunni clerics urging Iraqis to boycott the ballot, saying "anyone who takes part in this election consciously and willingly is an infidel."

Unfortunately Bin Laden and his idealogues still seem to be big players in the unfolding saga.

Saddam and his Ba'ath Party were from the ranks of the Sunni minority, were they not- and the Shiite majority are likely to be more swayed by fundamentalism.
If the Sunnis won't take part, and the Shias are being told not to take part by Bin Laden and others because it would be playing into the hands of the invaders- Who does that leave? This is indeed one fraught election. Sad

Importantly, the result will be open to interpretation, sadly. Which might not be the worst of all possible outcome for the US and allies, come to think of it. But we will still have to keep putting men and materials in, for an unspecified time.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Revel, how can you not make the distinction between someone not liking you and someone who is actively trying to hurt you? If every single person in Iraq hated our guts, that, in itself, would not be preventing the rebuilding of the infrastructure. Only the minority who IS willing to pick up a gun or worse against us is preventing the rebuilding from taking place.

bill, i said the reason i believe the iraqi general population is helping the insurgents is because they are so sucessful, another iraq expert shares that opinion. i did not say the reason i believe it is because iraqi's don't like us as you keep harping on. i think that them not liking us is the reason they are helping the insrgents, not the proof.

Quote:
"Thus when American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypo crisy.

Not believing our actions are true, is hardly the same as preferring not to have self-determination, Revel.

i am sure that like anyone else iraqi's would prefer to have self determination. they just might think they are not going to get it with the americans based on our performance since the end of major combat-so called.

The first is a matter of opinion; the second is a matter of idiotic fanaticism. That's no fine line. :wink:

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

dlowan wrote:
Bugger Bin Laden - but this is bad news about the Sunnis:

Sunni Party Pulls Out of Iraq Vote As Doubts Grow.... On Monday, Osama bin Laden, the al Qaeda leader, added his voice to those of Sunni clerics urging Iraqis to boycott the ballot, saying "anyone who takes part in this election consciously and willingly is an infidel."

Unfortunately Bin Laden and his idealogues still seem to be big players in the unfolding saga.

Saddam and his Ba'ath Party were from the ranks of the Sunni minority, were they not- and the Shiite majority are likely to be more swayed by fundamentalism.
If the Sunnis won't take part, and the Shias are being told not to take part by Bin Laden and others because it would be playing into the hands of the invaders- Who does that leave? This is indeed one fraught election.

Importantly, the result will be open to interpretation, sadly. Which might not be the worst of all possible outcome for the US and allies, come to think of it. But we will still have to keep putting men and materials in, for an unspecified time.

That supposedly intelligent human beings managed to get into a mess like this with open eyes is something history will grapple with for generations.

It is a sad commentary on the state of being of the leadership of a country with the kind of weapons we have at our disposal.

The thing I cannot understand is how there still are pockets of people around the world who still trust us. I can easily understand how 75% to 80% of the folks in your country, for instance, have an unfavorable impression of how we are conducting ourselves...but how on earth can 20% to 25% still have a favorable impression on that question?

What in hell are they thinking about?

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

revel wrote:

revel,
What parts of this report, if any, do you disagree with?

What parts of this report, if any, do you think are irrelevant to whether we should stay or leave Iraq?

revel,
Do you agree with these two quoted paragraphs?

Do you think them relevant to whether we stay or leave Iraq?

Quote:
The report says that the US is now engaged in a "global and generational struggle of ideas" which it is rapidly losing. In order to reverse the trend, the US must make "strategic communication" - which includes the dissemination of propaganda and the running of military psychological operations - an integral part of national security. The document says that "Presidential leadership" is needed in this "ideas war" and warns against "arrogance, opportunism and double standards"

Rumsfeld see truth telling as propaganda, I am not sure what is meant by "military psychological operations." So until I know I am not going to go my usual route and just guess what it means and base my opinions on that. (starting to learn)

"We face a war on terrorism," the report says, "intensified conflict with Islam, and insurgency in Iraq. Worldwide anger and discontent are directed at America's tarnished credibility and ways the US pursues its goals. There is a consensus that America's power to persuade is in a state of crisis." More than 90% of the populations of some Muslims countries, such as Saudi Arabia, are opposed to US policies.

Those are just obvious statements of fact that are not really in dispute.

Quote:

THE Pentagon has admitted that the war on terror and the invasion and occupation of Iraq have increased support for al-Qaeda, made ordinary Muslims hate the US and caused a global backlash against America because of the "self-serving hypocrisy" of George W Bush's administration over the Middle East.
The mea culpa is contained in a shockingly frank "strategic communications" report, written this autumn by the Defence Science Board for Pentagon supremo Donald Rumsfeld.

On "the war of ideas or the struggle for hearts and minds", the report says, "American efforts have not only failed, they may also have achieved the opposite of what they intended".

Do you agree that the iraq war has had the opposite of what was intended?

If you do what makes you think staying to do more of the same is going to help change that situation?

Rumsfeld solution is to fight the battle of words as though they have not been attempting to do that all along. That is his problem in a nutshell, he thinks it is a battle of words rather than the Iraqi people living in the mess we have created and coming to their own conclusions and beliefs.

Do I think all this relevant to whether we pull out after the elections regardless of how it turns out? Before Bin Laden got in the picture because of the colossal screw-up of the whole Iraq war and its aftermath, I would have said yes, we should get out and let the Iraqi's work it out on their own.

Now we can't.

0 Replies

revel wrote:

Do I think all this relevant to whether we pull out after the elections regardless of how it turns out? Before Bin Laden got in the picture because of the colossal screw-up of the whole Iraq war and its aftermath, I would have said yes, we should get out and let the Iraqi's work it out on their own.

Now we can't.

Oh, yes we can.

Perhaps you mean, we shouldn't....but even that, I suggest, is wrong.

We should pull out immediately.

Unfortunately...I think we will stick around and cause lots more trouble...get lots more people killed and maimed...and spend lots more money that could better be used elsewhere.

And then we will pull out.

As the guy in the television commercial might say: BRILLIANT!

0 Replies

It would be good to see someone of Al Sistani's stature come out and say Bin Laden is just wrong. Vote for your future.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

It would be good to see someone of Al Sistani's stature come out and say Bin Laden is just wrong. Vote for your future.

Yeah...he should tell them to vote the way your American occupiers want you to vote.

America knows what is in your best interests.

That ought to increase his standing among the Iraqis!

Jesus Christ...do you have to prove you can think as simplistically as possible to become an American conservative...or is it just an accident of the confluence?

0 Replies

THE US, THE UN AND THE IRAQIS THEMSELVES, V. 7.0

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know