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

Yeah, polls say this and polls say that ... four out of five Iraqis report holding a negative view of the U.S. occupation authority and of coalition forces, according to a new poll conducted for the occupation authority, and that 80 percent of the Iraqis questioned reported a lack of confidence in the Coalition Provisional Authority, and 82 percent said they disapprove of the U.S. and allied militaries in Iraq.
Where's the poll that says a majority of the Iraqi people want the US to leave now? The fact that more than 58% of the registerd Iraqi voters risked being murdered by the TASOIDs (i.e., Those Attempting Subversion Of Iraqi Democracy) is an unmistakeable declaration by the Iraqi people that they want a democracy of their own design. Iraqis know that their only chance to obtain what they want is to rid themselves of TASOIDs. They also know that despite their disapproval of US capabilities, they need the US to stay until they themselves are fully capable of ridding themselves of TASOIDs.

Your determinations of my characterizations of what the Iraqi people want amount to nothing, ican, save vacuous bluster. By the way: Our current administration, through its manipulation of misinformation and its manipulation of the collective national paranoia, has lead me to distrust it, and your blind devotion to it has lead me to believe that you are a manipulable, feebleminded victim of its brainwashing propaganda.

It is plainly obvious that your speculations are based on what you're pulling straight out of your own rectum, ican, and nowhere else.
You, InfraBlue, stupidly judge me by your own behavior with your own rectum and its source of your own speculations.
The CIA director himself contradicts your speculations as to the nature of the insurgency in Iraq.[/URL] "Islamic extremists are exploiting the Iraqi conflict to recruit new anti-U.S. jihadists," CIA Director Porter Goss told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Now that too is just plain stupid. The CIA does no such thing. The fact that "Islamic extremists are exploiting the Iraqi conflict to recruit new anti-U.S. jihadists" does not contradict the CIA's other claims about the nature of what are popularly called insurgents and I call TASOIDs (i.e., Those Attempting Subversion of Iraqi Democracy):
1. The largest portion of TASOIDs are secular Baathists.
2. A large part of the relatively small al Qaeda portion of TASOIDs came into Iraq from the existing ranks of al Qaeda based outside of Iraq.
3. "Islamic extremists" have been exploiting the harboring of Islamic extremists in several countries "to recruit new anti-U.S. jihadists" since before 1996--that is, since well before 2003 when the US invaded Iraq.

I'm sure you can pull the poll that says a majority of the Iraqi people want the US to leave now out of the region you pull your other "polls," ican.
You can, but I can't

I agree that the Iraqi people that they want a democracy of their own design.

Where do you get you knowledge of what the Iraqis "know," upon which you base your assertions, ican. It seems to me you pull it from the same regions you pull your "polls."
It's called reasoning, Infrablue. Unlike you, the ability of the Iraqi people to reason comes from their brains. They are not stupid. They know now--and have said as much by saying "don't dessert us now"--that they cannot now achieve a democracy of their own design without us in Iraq to help them control TASOIDs. Sooner or later, preferably sooner, the Iraqis will be able to do a better job of securing their own democracy than we can. Then they will ask us to leave--they have said as much by saying "don't desert us now".

"It's called reasoning, Infrablue. Unlike you, the ability of the Iraqi people to reason comes from their brains"

Ican, here you said, "very few [al Qaeda] are new recruits subsequent to the Iraq invasion."

Here, the CIA director states, ""Islamic extremists are exploiting the Iraqi conflict to recruit new anti-U.S. jihadists."

Your rationalizations and red-herring strawmen do not negate the fact that the CIA itself contradicts what you had written in that statement.

ican said

Quote:

"It's called reasoning, Infrablue. Unlike you, the ability of the Iraqi people to reason comes from their brains"

ican, I think you are pushing the limits of the TOS why not push just a tiny bit more?

It is plainly obvious that your speculations are based on what you're pulling straight out of your own rectum, ican, and nowhere else.

You, InfraBlue, stupidly judge me by your own behavior with your own rectum and its source of your own speculations.

Where do you get you knowledge of what the Iraqis "know," upon which you base your assertions, ican. It seems to me you pull it from the same regions you pull your "polls."

It's called reasoning, Infrablue. Unlike you, the ability of the Iraqi people to reason comes from their brains

Why would the CIA make mention of an increase of new recruits if it was merely "a few," ican?
I don't know the CIA's reason and neither do you. My guess is that any increase in the rate of recruits--few to many--the CIA considers notewothy.

The CIA thought that the numbers were significant enough to report that al Qaeda was recruiting more jihadists, more significant than "a few." Duh.
That's just another of your speculations. My question to you is what do you think that increase (few or many) implies. Why do you think it important? Why did you bring it up?

Your critical points are, yet again, ican, based on assumptions, rationalizations, and leaps of logic.
That's just another of your speculations. I think more than one declaration of war, followed by more than one act of war, followed by additional declarations and threats of acts of war, followed by additional acts of war, irrefutably implies that the declarers and threateners intend to murder the objects of their declarations and threats.

because I seldom read this forum and it doesn't matter who does it, it's ugly and un-necessary. I think both of you are out of bounds in this regard.