Syria Next?

Yes, it is, dys.


Ever try it?

mirror broken max?

I suspect not only do you not care "if they think we are bullies" -- I think you also don't care if we actually are bullies.

I care. I love this country and want to see it act like an adult, responsible country. Apparently that is not especially important to you.



No wonder you support Bush. You sound like him. (Take my word for it, Max, I did not mean that as a compliment.)





Nice try. No cigar.

Cigar?

Why bring up Clinton, frank?

The main error in approach of the liberals is as follows: they assume that the rogue regime are sensitive to diplomatic handling of their behavior. In fact, they are not. They are the real bullies, and as any bully, they can be restrained by the enforcer that is not scared of their brawling abilities. When the rogue regimes do what they do, the left-wingers complain from time to time on human rights violation on the territory of such countries. But when the global sheriff comes to put end to the dangerous mess, the same people suddenly become defenders of "sovereign" right of the rogue regimes to do inside their countries anything they want. They have learnt one mantra: "White imperialism is wrong", and apply this mantra to cases that have nothing to do with either Whites or imperialism.

Steissd says
then Steissd says that liberals say
sounds like emperialism to me

steissd

At least, I believe that most Iraquians will join a protestant church (or become Roman Catholic), since most of these churches are strongly against the war. (If they really are forced to convert, I mean.)

(The last declaration against the war signed by:
from Europe:
Rev. Dr Konrad Raiser, general secretary of the World Council of Churches
Rev. Dr Keith Clements, general secretary of the Council of European Churches
Präses Manfred Kock, president of the Council of the Evangelischen Kirche in Deutschland (EKD)
Bishop Dr. Walter Klaiber, head of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Christlicher Kirchen in Deutschland (ACK) and Evangelical-Methodist Church (Germany)
Rev. Dr Jean-Arnold de Clermont, president of the Protestant Federation of France
Bishop Mag. Herwig Sturm, Evangelical Church of the Augsburg and Helvetic Confessions in Austria
Rev. Thomas Wipf, president of the Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches
Bishop Jonas Jonson, Bishop of the Church of Sweden, and Rev. Kjell Jonasson, Church of Sweden
Rev. Canon Dr Trond Bakkevig, Church of Norway
Archbishop Jukka Parma, Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland
Bishop Karsten Nissen, Evangelical Lutheran Church in Denmark
Dr. Alison Elliot, Church of Scotland and Churches Together in Scotland (ACTS)
Rev Arie W. van der Plas, Reformed Churches in the Netherlands and Uniting Protestant Churches in the Netherlands
Archbishop Feofan, Russian Orthodox Church, Archbishop of Berlin and Germany
Bishop Athanasius of Achaja, Church of Greece
Mr. Thor-Arne Präis, director of Action by Churches Together (ACT) International, Geneva

from the Middle East Council of Churches:
Rev. Dr. Nuhad Daoud Tomeh, representing the General Secretariat of the Middle East Council of Churches

from the National Council of Churches USA:
Dr. Bob Edgar, general secretary, National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA
James Winkler, general secretary, General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church, USA
Rev. Dr Rebecca Larson, executive director, Division for Church and Society, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, USA )

Well, the war is over, so now any church may be against the war. Why should Iraqis be forced to convert? I think, they will see all the advantages of the way of life their conquerors brought with them, and this way of life results from their being a part of the Christian civilization. And when they see all the advantages, they maybe will reject their false beliefs and become Christians.

This was a declaration, signed by the named churches on April, 5.

Fine that you admit that Iraq was conquered and not liberated.

OK, it was. It got what it deserved. If Saddam behaved another way, this could be avoided.

so the evil thought of us liberals that Bush wanted to conquer Iraq and his constant denial by stating that he only wanted to liberate Iraq has now been admitted to indeed be conquering?

This is the same. In order to liberate Iraq from Saddam's regime it is necessary at first to conquer it, then to modify its society, and to leave only when establishmant of predictable and pro-American government is guaranteed.

steissd

You've made some really astonishing responses before.

This tops all.

the surgery was successful, unfortunately the patient died.

The patient (Iraq) did not die. He was lobotomized, I agree; this will make him less dangerous.

Lobotomy should be more widely used, don't you think?

If the US had the sense, they would say to Syria: we can be buddies. We'll guarnatee cheap oil for you like we do Israel and all you have to do is destroy any really nasty weapons, establish democracy, respect women and play nice privately and publicly you can continue to spew anti-American cliches. Wouldn't that just save everyone a lot of trouble?

dys: It might survive if you take the pillow off it's face.

May. 4, 2003
Editorial: End 'plausible deniability'


In a classic Yiddish folktale, a rabbi advises a poor man who complains of overcrowding to bring his goat inside the house. Though puzzled, he goes along with bringing animal after animal inside. The rabbi's logic is finally revealed when he tells the man to remove all the animals, leaving a seemingly spacious house behind. Perhaps there is an Arabic version of this story, because Syrian President Bashar Assad seems to know it well. For years, Syria's strategy has been simple, foisting on the West as many "goats" as possible, so that when the international community complains, one can be removed and the diplomatic pressure along with it. The list of Syrian misdeeds is so long it is hard to know where to begin: occupying Lebanon, dealing in drugs, providing a weapons gateway for Hizbullah, hosting Palestinian terrorists, and crushing domestic dissidents. In the context of the war on Iraq, Assad threw in a few more goats: opening a sanctions-busting pipeline for Iraqi oil and, during and after the war, hiding Iraqi regime figures and, perhaps, Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. So when US Secretary of State Colin Powell arrived in Damascus this weekend, Assad had a choice of goats to offer his visitor. On leaving, Powell noted with satisfaction that Assad had been forthcoming, and news reports indicate that he was promised that the Damascus offices of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other groups would be closed. As of yesterday, the Telegraph reported that all these offices were open as usual. As one man armed with an assault rifle at Hamas headquarters put it, "We are working as normal." Making and breaking promises to Americans is business as usual for Syria, which committed to Powell two years ago to shut down the oil pipeline to Iraq and did not. There is also a history of Syria opening and closing terrorist offices, and making symbolic withdrawals from Lebanon, as needed to release momentary diplomatic pressure. So none of this is surprising, except that Powell, by going to Damascus in the first place, is not showing signs that the rules of the game have really changed. For years, Syria has been a master of the game that all the rogue states of the region, including Iraq, Iran, and Libya, had played: the game of plausible deniability. According to the old rules of the game, these nations could support terrorism with the ample knowledge of the world, and the State Department could list them as "terrorist-supporting states," but little would come of it as long as the regimes denied what they were doing. The whole idea of the war against the terror network was to change the rules of this game. US President George W. Bush once again laid out the new rules in his excellent speech aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln: "Any person, organization, or government that supports, protects, or harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent, and equally guilty of terrorist crimes. Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups and seeks or possesses weapons of mass destruction is a grave danger to the civilized world and will be confronted." The significance of Bush throwing down the gauntlet again in this fashion, after the liberation of Iraq, should not be minimized. These words, combined with the actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, themselves change the context of the game. But each rogue leader must now ask himself, "Will the US really apply these new rules to me, or can I just throw out a goat or two and be left alone?" Before 9/11, the US played along with the plausible deniability game, because it knew that if it fully exposed the terror network, it would have to confront the rogue states. Bush has clearly ended this coyness, which cost America so dearly. But now that the US has changed the rules both declaratively and with concrete actions, a separate danger has arisen: maintaining credibility. Bush has rightly set the standard very high, but if countries like Syria do not come into line, all the rogues will take notice. Syria must now do much more than close a few offices and boot out a few wanted Iraqis that's playing by the old rules. Now, if US credibility is not to be eroded, Syria must shut down its support for terrorism entirely, including the planeloads of weapons that flow to Hizbullah via Damascus, and the blocking of the deployment of the Lebanese army on Israel's border, displacing Hizbullah. Even a total end to support for terror would only begin to ameliorate Syria's sins. Lebanon would still be occupied and the Syrian people still oppressed. But it would be a start. It would also be no more than what Turkey demanded and received regarding the PKK terrorists that tormented Ankara, following the massing of the Turkish army on the Syrian border. There is little doubt that Damascus has taken note of the American divisions in Iraq, not to mention their mobility. The only question is whether Syria can continue its rogue behavior without being paid a visit.