It appears as though we will get our way!

How do you suppose the mothers of the dead American and British Marines feel today?

COMMENT:

Horrible. And I feel horrible for them. I also feel horrible for the mothers and fathers of all the Iraqis who have been killed.

What is your point?

You have to ask?

NH - I don't get your point either.

Misadventure or not it apparently accomplished something that needed doing. I have no doubt that all the nations that are now berating the US including the UN will soon be climbing on the band wagon. My greatest joy will be to see France get cut off at the ankles.

COMMENT:

My point exactly, Goldie.

You don't seem to see the danger in using expediency to get rid of a problem. But that is not the way our country is supposed to work.

By doing what we are doing -- the way we are doing it -- we are spitting on the values we pretend to be protecting.

We are giving up more than the Saddam Husseins of the world could possibly have wrested from us.

What a sad excuse for leaders we have in Washington right now.

How sad it is to see otherwise intelligent people abetting the destruction these minor leaguers are wreaking on our country.

Frank
I am not nor have I ever been in a unilateral attack on Iraq. But neither have I been in favor of the stance taken by the "United Nations" They both Bush and the UN are not worth a tinkers damn. I was just making the comment that the misadventure appears to be turning out as a positive, at least to this point. Was also commenting that IMO the nations, or should I call them good time Charlie's who are so against this mission will soon be climbing on the bandwagon and clamoring for their piece of the action. Remember everyone loves a winner.

Goldie

Well, I'll agree that there will be some climbing on the bandwagon. And I'll even agree that at first glance -- and without considering future implications -- it looks like things are going well.

I acknowledged that in my introductory remarks -- we will get our way.

But just as there will be people climbing on the bandwagon now -- there will be repercussions from this mess that in my estimation will make whatever short-term victory and elation we get from this war -- seem like glory that would better never to have been experienced.

We are thinking short-term gain here. The long term costs - financial, in loss of respect and prestige and trust -- will wipe those gains out and put huge negatives in their place.

Or at least, that is my opinion.

Goldie? Goldie?

Now, au1929 hasn't raised the issue, but this doesn't seem appropriate to a2k, though common on other sites.


Please read Especially the bottom line.

roger i totally agree but i might add this applies to EVERYONE

Roger

What are you saying?

Agree, dys.

Frank, I'm saying the use of Goldie as a sobriquet for au is not appropriate to the forum. Is that unclear?

Roger

If you are insinuating that there is something wrong with my using "Goldie" to address au1929, I can assure you that it is not intended as an insult in any way.

Over in Abuzz -- just about everyone calls au1929 Goldie. au=gold.

It simply seems more natural than calling him/her au1929.

To me that sounds like I'm addressing a robot.

*****

au1929

I hope you have not taken offense to my use of Goldie. After several interactions with a person using a screen name like yours, I often ask for a name to use so that I can address the person respectfully.

I most assuredly did not mean any insult.

Since I saw others referring to you that way in Abuzz, I thought perhaps you had initiated the convention in some way. I honestly thought it a sign of respect.

If you would prefer to be called au1929, I will certain comply.

I don't want this complicating our discussions.

I know what you mean, Frank. I've seen that and much worse on abuzz. For what it is worth, he has stated on this forum that the Au is month of August, with 1929 being year of birth.

How do I say this? When Goldie instead of au was first used on the abuzz I admittedly was disturbed However, after thinking it over I decided not to make an issue. Why because the first person who used it was the one of the more annoying members on the Abuzz. I knew full well if he knew it was annoying what his and some others reaction would be, they would use it to antagonize. Therefore I chose to ignore it. I have more than once been tempted to request that it not be used however have always thought better of it. Some times discretion is the better part of valor.
Roger thank you for bringing it up

I don't know, what do we really want? And so far not many have been climbing on the bandwagon - if anything, they seem to be backing off. Maybe we don't look like such winners to them?

Tonight I heard David Brooks - the republican Friday night speaker on the PBS Lehrer show - say that this was a political war. He also was dubious about the longer-term result, and didn't seem to think that we would get that many cheerleaders afterwards. First time I heard him express doubts.

And the Turkish army in Kurd country? Incurring the wrath of the US? Oh my.

mama
Yes, I heard Brooks as well. I actually am fond of this fellow, as he can think (and does speak) independently which is fairly rare for a right side pundit.

His reservation was a profound one, I think. If I can paraphrase, he was concerned that a very easy win in this war, combined with the novel situation of a single world power being so overwhelmingly stronger than anyone else, may open the door to dangerous temptations.

This is no small concern of many of us, and it is why we have used the term 'hubris' in the context of this war and it's unilateral initiation. Power can, and does corrupt.

mama

Sorry for the cynicism, but what has the US traded for overflight permission? On Slate, one of the writers there has been keeping a daily column directed specifically to keeping an eye betrayal of the Kurds.

Blatham - I don't know, and I do find the Slate articles interesting.

This whole Turkish - Kurd situation has been going on for a long time without us. And I also found it interesting that all those billions weren't enough to get the Turks to agree to let us have troops there. Somehow, despite our vast military might, it seems that there are some more important things in the world to some people. Some see the EU as a future. Of course we traded something - that's a given. It's just that it seems a two time betrayal of the Kurds.

In a cookbook, of all things, I found some fascinating anecdotal history of Kurds and Turks. One was bloodier than the other. In the light of all these happenings, I think often of the story of Pandora's box.

Arrogance, hubris, Pandora's box. What are we unleashing on the world? What kind of victory will this be? Has this administration taken the first steps to a decline of a superpower?

I remember reading about the Crimean war, and how the British officers and their wives and families would take picnics to the hills so they coul watch the battles. That's sort of what I'm feeling now. I find I cannot keep watching the incessant droning of CNN and the other stations. Thank God for Judge Judy.

Au - I always thought your name was somehow connected to gold, also. And I guess many things on abuzz hardened us. My name, which was given me by my older daughter, and refers only to my status and name, (although at this point abuela - which means grandma - would work as well) certainly leant itself to some peculiar constructions. So, having lived through what they did to my name, I would certainly agree that you are entitled to whatever name you like.