0
   

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

 
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:40 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
It's likely pleasurable to whistle in the dark but sometimes it bites one in the ass. I don't believe Bush is that happy about being re-elected. Now, as Bill Maher has stated, he has to clean up his own mess. What fools these mortals be. Puck must be glaring down on the Bush adminstration as the epitome of the Shakesperean tragedy.


I always thought bill Maher gave Bush too much credit for caring about the messes he creates. As long as we can have some kind of elections in Iraq, he will just call it another victory regardless of the state Iraq is in.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 03:11 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Ok Frank...

Where's the opposing army we fought in Vietnam?
Where's the jungle the enemy hid in?
Where's the world power supplying arms and ammo to the opposing army?
Where's the divide between the armies?
Where's the threat to democracy?
Where's the huge death toll?
Where's the crowd's of people spitting on our soldiers?
Where's the enemy supply lines?
Where's the draft?
Where's the support for the enemy from outside nations?
Which part of Iraq can US forces not operate in?
Where are the enemy POW camps?

War is hell. Every war can be compared to the next and there will always be comparisons made. But to keep using the Vietnam battle cry is nothing more than a false sentiment that tries to bolster oppostion to the war.


Dream on, McG. I know you kneejerk types have got to back your handlers...and I compliment you on being willing to do it so often.

In any case, I have acknowledge that many of the petty little bullshyt items that you have listed are not the same.

But I have also posted McNamara's 11 points of similarity...and they are certainly more telling than "where is the jungle!"

Go back an look 'em over.

You eventually see that I am right.

Unfortuantely, I suspect that will only happen for ideologues like you when our troops have to fight their way out of Iraq in what is damn near certain to be another humiliating defeat.

We'll see.

During the last months of Vietnam...people like you were still in their dream world.

Yet one more similarity.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 03:43 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Ok Frank...

Where's the opposing army we fought in Vietnam?
Where's the jungle the enemy hid in?
Where's the world power supplying arms and ammo to the opposing army?
Where's the divide between the armies?
Where's the threat to democracy?
Where's the huge death toll?
Where's the crowd's of people spitting on our soldiers?
Where's the enemy supply lines?
Where's the draft?
Where's the support for the enemy from outside nations?
Which part of Iraq can US forces not operate in?
Where are the enemy POW camps?

War is hell. Every war can be compared to the next and there will always be comparisons made. But to keep using the Vietnam battle cry is nothing more than a false sentiment that tries to bolster oppostion to the war.


Dream on, McG. I know you kneejerk types have got to back your handlers...and I compliment you on being willing to do it so often.

In any case, I have acknowledge that many of the petty little bullshyt items that you have listed are not the same.

But I have also posted McNamara's 11 points of similarity...and they are certainly more telling than "where is the jungle!"

Go back an look 'em over.

You eventually see that I am right.

Unfortuantely, I suspect that will only happen for ideologues like you when our troops have to fight their way out of Iraq in what is damn near certain to be another humiliating defeat.

We'll see.

During the last months of Vietnam...people like you were still in their dream world.

Yet one more similarity.


The 11 points have been discussed and found wanting.

You want to find similarities so you do, yet you ignore the vast differences as "petty little bullshyt items".
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 04:01 pm
Yes...because they are.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 05:26 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Ok Frank...

Where's the opposing army we fought in Vietnam?
Where's the jungle the enemy hid in?
Where's the world power supplying arms and ammo to the opposing army?
Where's the divide between the armies?
Where's the threat to democracy?
Where's the huge death toll?
Where's the crowd's of people spitting on our soldiers?
Where's the enemy supply lines?
Where's the draft?
Where's the support for the enemy from outside nations?
Which part of Iraq can US forces not operate in?
Where are the enemy POW camps?

War is hell. Every war can be compared to the next and there will always be comparisons made. But to keep using the Vietnam battle cry is nothing more than a false sentiment that tries to bolster oppostion to the war.


Clear something up for me McG ..... if, as you say, thereis no comparison between Nam and Iraq, how would a comparing of the two change an anti war person to a pro war person? I'm confused, what would be the mechanism at work.....
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 05:31 pm
Gelisgesti wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Ok Frank...

Where's the opposing army we fought in Vietnam?
Where's the jungle the enemy hid in?
Where's the world power supplying arms and ammo to the opposing army?
Where's the divide between the armies?
Where's the threat to democracy?
Where's the huge death toll?
Where's the crowd's of people spitting on our soldiers?
Where's the enemy supply lines?
Where's the draft?
Where's the support for the enemy from outside nations?
Which part of Iraq can US forces not operate in?
Where are the enemy POW camps?

War is hell. Every war can be compared to the next and there will always be comparisons made. But to keep using the Vietnam battle cry is nothing more than a false sentiment that tries to bolster oppostion to the war.


Clear something up for me McG ..... if, as you say, thereis no comparison between Nam and Iraq, how would a comparing of the two change an anti war person to a pro war person? I'm confused, what would be the mechanism at work.....


Hmmmm.... I don't recall saying there is no comparison.

Does that clear it up for you?
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 05:53 pm
OK, let me put you down for 'on the fence' I was/remain cloudy on the stement " But to keep using the Vietnam battle cry is nothing more than a false sentiment that tries to bolster oppostion to the war."
How does that work?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:03 pm
The war in Vietnam is considered a loss for America in it's history of war. Many things went wrong and many in America did not support the war. I am sure you know why we were in Vietnam and can understand that none of those reason fit our current war.

Vietnam has become a symbol for failure on a grand scale that included thousands of US military dead and a draft to fight a war that should not have been fought according to many.

When you run around screaming "IRAQ IS ANOTHER VIETNAM!!!" then you are trying to spread the same negativity that surrounds Vietnam against our efforts in Iraq.

They are not the same war, despite the occasional similarity. The glaring differences over ride any similarity and anyone claiming Iraq is another Vietnam is doing nothing more than to use the memory of Vietnam to cast dispersions on the War in Iraq.

What's next? Spitting on the soldiers returning home?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:09 pm
McGentrix wrote:
The war in Vietnam is considered a loss for America in it's history of war. Many things went wrong and many in America did not support the war. I am sure you know why we were in Vietnam and can understand that none of those reason fit our current war.

Vietnam has become a symbol for failure on a grand scale that included thousands of US military dead and a draft to fight a war that should not have been fought according to many.

When you run around screaming "IRAQ IS ANOTHER VIETNAM!!!" then you are trying to spread the same negativity that surrounds Vietnam against our efforts in Iraq.

They are not the same war, despite the occasional similarity. The glaring differences over ride any similarity and anyone claiming Iraq is another Vietnam is doing nothing more than to use the memory of Vietnam to cast dispersions on the War in Iraq.

What's next? Spitting on the soldiers returning home?


McG...

...people running around shouting "THIS WAR IS NOT ANOTHER VIETNAM"...are trying to avoid the same realities that administrations back in the Vietnam era tried to avoid.

You can think whatever you want. But I think we have set ourselves up for another disasterous defeat...and this time we are doing it with our eyes wide open.

Back then, at least we had the excuse that it had never happened before...and had no reason to suspect it would.

This war DOES meet the significant points raised by Robert McNamara about our mistakes in Vietnam...and every indication is that we are heading in that same direction.

But you keep on cheerleading for this inept administration.

You are very, very good at it...and you are entertaining.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:13 pm
Oops...forgot to address the "What's next? Spitting on the soldiers returning home?"

Nope.

I don't think there will be any of that from our side.

Lemme ask you a question though:

If this disaster ends the way some of us dread that it will...when we finally admit we screwed up and evacuate our troops in another abject defeat...are you guys gonna play that same silly song "We woulda won if you people had only backed us?"
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:22 pm
When the free people of Iraq have a democratically elected government and are finally out from under the 35 year reign of terror Saddam and the Baatist party held them under, will you then decide that the effort was worth it?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:29 pm
Ya mean to tell us the 35 year reign of terror and occupation of the US is our goal?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:31 pm
McGentrix wrote:
When the free people of Iraq have a democratically elected government and are finally out from under the 35 year reign of terror Saddam and the Baatist party held them under, will you then decide that the effort was worth it?



You are a dreamer.

That is lovely!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:42 pm
'No election' for parts of Iraq

Officers saw their colleagues killed in Tikrit
Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi has admitted for the first time that violence will prevent some parts of Iraq voting in this month's election.
"There are some pockets that will not participate in the election, but they are not large," he said.

He spoke on a day when at least 15 people were killed across the country.

At least six police officers died in Tikrit, seven Iraqis were killed in a roadside attack south of Baghdad, and at least two died in a bomb in Samarra.

Iraq's interim government has announced it has set aside $2.2bn of this year's budget to strengthen the security forces, who will be responsible for maintaining order on polling day, 30 January.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:48 pm
The US, with one of the greatest democracies in the history of the world has regular low voter turnout. Does that mean our government isn't freely elected?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:55 pm
Comparing apples and oranges never work, unless you're only looking for fruit.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 07:38 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
If this disaster ends the way some of us dread that it will...when we finally admit we screwed up and evacuate our troops in another abject defeat...are you guys gonna play that same silly song "We woulda won if you people had only backed us?"
Not me! I'll be too busy running for the hills just like the rest of the animals. Crying or Very sad

By the way, there are in Iraq, approximately 25 million Iraqis plus an unknown number of pretend Iraqis. If there are 13 million qualified voters in Iraq, how many would you guess will actually vote January 30th?
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 10:22 pm
McG, why is the voter turnout so low in this greatest of all democracies?

If anything distinguishes a democracy, surely it is participation by an informed and committed electorate. So what's up?

Could the problem be that most folks in this country do not see much difference between the parties nor do they see likelihood of change in the system whether they vote or not?

Tyranny of the majority? Complacency? Why don't we vote (the we is not I...the we is editorial we...)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 10:31 pm
Why people do not vote; one explanation. http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2003/09/12.html
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 10:38 pm
Thanks, c.i. I'll ponder that site. I wonder if aging democracies have anything in common with post-Christian societies, such as those of Europe?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 08/20/2025 at 10:32:40